| Q-1. | Which of the following components of Tech Prep is formally stated in writing in a mission statement, proposal, policy, plan, marketing brochure, or other official document(s) as the focus of your consortium's Tech Prep initiative? |
| Tech Prep Component | YES | NO |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Common core curriculum in math, science, and communications (including applied academics) and technologies leading to an associate degree, certificate, or apprenticeship in a career field (n=393) | 91.9% | 8.1% |
| 2. New teaching methods such as cooperative learning appropriate for varied student needs and learning styles (n=385) | 71.9% | 28.1% |
| 3. Integrated academic and vocational curriculum (n=390) | 95.6% | 4.4% |
| 4. Alternative learner assessment (e.g., performance assessment, portfolios) (n=185) | 60.5% | 39.5% |
| 5. Career guidance including career awareness and exploration (n=393) | 93.6% | 6.4% |
| 6. Formal articulation agreements to create 2+2 program-area course sequences between secondary and postsecondary schools (n=391) | 96.4% | 3.6% |
| 7. Work-based learning experiences (e.g., youth apprenticeships, cooperative education, school academies) (n=384) | 67.7% | 32.3% |
| 8. Employment assistance & job placement services (n=380) | 46.8% | 53.2% |
| 9. Equal access to the full range of Tech Prep for special populations (n=393) | 91.9% | 8.1% |
| 10. Preparatory services for all participants in Tech Prep (n=377) | 78.5% | 21.5% |
| 11. Joint in-service training for teachers from the entire consortium (n=388) | 89.9% | 10.1% |
| 12. Training programs for counselors designed to enable them to recruit students and ensure they complete programs and obtain employment (n=388) | 82.5% | 17.5% |
| 13. Collaboration between educators and employers to enhance education (n=385) | 92.5% | 7.5% |
| 14. Marketing of Tech Prep programs (n=386) | 87.0% | 13.0% |
| 15. Other responses: Internships, work experience, mentorships; program evaluation; curriculum articulation, alignment, applied academics, common core, integration; adult bridge programs; career development, pathways, centers. (n=45) | ||
| Note: | Due to the omission of response categories for item 4, the findings for this category are likely to under represent actual activity. Therefore, readers are urged to interpret and report statistics related to alternative learner assessment cautiously. |
| Q-2. | There are many reasons to implement Tech Prep. Briefly state the one primary goal of your Tech Prep initiative. | |
| 36% | Workforce, technology, and career preparation | |
| 17% | Reform secondary education | |
| 16% | Reach student groups | |
| 13% | Continue to postsecondary education | |
| 13% | Options beyond high school | |
| 5% | Other goals | |
| Q-3. | During the 1992-93 academic year, which of the following types of committees or teams operated (e.g., held meetings, developed policy) in your Tech Prep consortium? (Circle all that apply.) (n=397) |
| Committee or Team Type | YES | NO |
| 1. Executive committee/Governing board | 77.6% | 22.4% |
| 2. Advisory committee | 74.8% | 25.2% |
| 3. Planning | 72.3% | 27.7% |
| 4. Curriculum | 86.4% | 13.6% |
| 5. Evaluation | 36.8% | 63.2% |
| 6. Promotion/marketing | 60.7% | 39.3% |
| 7. Staff development | 68.3% | 31.7% |
| 8. Counseling/guidance | 63.5% | 36.5% |
| 9. Business/industry collaboration | 70.0% | 30.0% |
| 10. Implementation | 45.1% | 54.9% |
| 11. Other responses: Steering committee, leadership, administration, applied academics, special populations/needs, maintenance, career awareness/guidance, integration, school to work. | 11.3% | 88.7% |
| Q-4. | Did your consortium have site-based committees or teams at participating secondary and postsecondary school in the consortium during the 1992-93 academic year? (Circle one response.) (n=395) | |
| 43.5% | YES, at some schools | |
| 27.3% | YES, at all schools | |
| 18.2% | NO, but plans call for site-based committees/teams in the future | |
| 6.8% | NO, and there are no plans for site-based committees/teams in the future | |
| 4.1% | Other | |
| Q-5. | Which of the following class rank percentiles best describes the primary target group(s) of students for your Tech Prep initiative? (Circle all that apply.) (n=389) | |
| 45.5% | 25th-75th | |
| 23.0% | 50th-75th | |
| 10.5% | All percentiles | |
| 5.9% | 25th-50th | |
| 5.6% | 25th-100th | |
| 1.8% | 50-100th | |
| 3.8% | 0-75th | |
| 1.5% | Other | |
| 1.0% | 75th-100th | |
| 0.8% | 0-25th | |
| Q-6. | During the 1992-93 academic year, which vocational education program areas were part of the Tech Prep curriculum reform efforts? (Circle all that apply.) (n=397) |
Vocational Program Areas YES NO 1. Agriculture 27.7% 72.3% 2. Business and Office 79.3% 20.7% 3. Health Occupations 50.6% 49.4% 4. Marketing/distributive education 31.5% 68.5% 5. Occupational Home Economics 22.7% 77.3% 6. Consumer and Homemaking 13.6% 86.4% 7. Trade & Industrial 61.0% 39.0% 8. Industrial Technology Education 57.9% 42.1% 9. Other 16.1% 83.9%
| Q-7. | During the 1992-93 academic year, which of the following represent(s) the focus of Tech Prep curriculum reform efforts that occurred in your consortium at the secondary and postsecondary levels? (Circle all that apply.) |
| Curriculum Reform Effort | At the secondary level during '92-93? |
At the postsecondary level during '92-93? |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | Yes | No | |
| Supplement existing vocational-technical courses with academic content (n=368/305) | 76.1% | 23.9% | 42.6% | 57.4% |
| Supplement existing academic courses with vocational-technical content (n=369/297) | 72.1% | 27.9% | 34.3% | 65.7% |
| Add applied academic courses (commercially- or locally-developed) to the existing curriculum (n=381/305) | 86.4% | 13.6% | 37.7% | 62.3% |
| Replace parts of the existing curriculum with applied academic courses (commercially- or locally-developed) (n=375/298) | 77.9% | 22.1% | 29.9% | 70.1% |
| Coordinate academic and vocational-technical courses by sequencing and reinforcing related content, often through block scheduling (n=368/300) | 56.5% | 43.5% | 32.0% | 68.0% |
| Provide interdisciplinary courses combining vocational-technical and academic content (e.g., History of Work) (n=364/301) | 37.4% | 62.6% | 22.3% | 77.7% |
| Organize academic and vocational-technical courses around occupational/ career clusters (n=373/310) | 68.9% | 31.1% | 51.6% | 48.4% |
| Provide academies combining courses from vocational-technical areas and math, science, communications, and other academic areas (n=363/296) | 39.9% | 60.1% | 23.3% | 76.7% |
| Articulate academic program-area course sequences between the secondary and postsecondary levels (n=368/331) | 69.6% | 30.4% | 69.2% | 30.8% |
| Articulate vocational-technical program-area course sequences between the secondary and postsecondary levels (n=382/335) | 89.5% | 10.5% | 88.1% | 11.9% |
| Add advanced-skills courses to the existing curriculum (n=355/306) | 40.6% | 59.4% | 35.3% | 64.7% |
| Provide work-based learning outside the formal structure of schools as a significant portion of student learning (e.g., internship, apprenticeship) (n=366/309) | 46.2% | 53.8% | 39.8% | 60.2% |
| Other responses: Transitional courses at postsecondary level, core curriculum/competencies, add/incorporate SCANS, develop TQM component; infuse career skills in state-mandated curricula, enhance student assessment Career Awareness; youth apprenticeship, work experience; language remediation assistance; align secondary curriculum; improve technical associate degree; DACUM. (n=32) | ||||
| Q-8. | Which educational reforms were implemented in any participating secondary or postsecondary schools in your Tech Prep consortium during the 1992-93 academic year? (Circle all that apply.) |
YES NO 1. America 2000 initiative 39.3% 60.7% 2. Secondary school reforms (e.g., Coalition of Essential Schools, Effective Schools) 42.6% 57.4% 3. Postsecondary/higher education reforms (e.g., multicultural, general education reform) 28.0% 72.0% 4. School-to-work transition reforms (e.g., youth apprenticeship, school academies) 38.3% 61.7% 5. Total Quality Management (TQM) (e.g., quality improvement, employee involvement) 41.6% 58.4% 6. Other responses: Integration, SCANS, SREB, Beacon School initiative, outcomes-based education, cooperative learning, State reform initiatives, competency-based education, Quality schools, cooperative work experience, site-based management. 15.6% 84.4%
| Q-9. | Tech Prep could impact secondary and postsecondary students in many different ways. Review the following list of student outcomes and indicate the level of priority that your Tech Prep consortium gives to each outcome. (Circle 9 only if the outcome is Not Applicable (NA) to your Tech Prep initiative.) |
| Student Outcome | Level of Priority (Circle the one best response) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Very Low | Low | Moderate | High | Very High | NA | |
| Improved knowledge and skills in English/communications (n=392) | 0.0% | 1.0% | 8.9% | 35.7% | 53.8% | 0.5% |
| Increased interpersonal skills (e.g., team & leadership skills) (n=392) | 0.0% | 1.8% | 15.8% | 39.0% | 42.6% | 0.8% |
| Increased problem solving, thinking, and reasoning skills (n=393) | 0.0% | 1.3% | 2.8% | 33.3% | 61.8% | 0.8% |
| Improved knowledge and skills in math (n=394) | 0.3% | 0.3% | 5.1% | 30.2% | 63.7% | 0.5% |
| Improved knowledge and skills in science (n=393) | 0.5% | 1.3% | 9.7% | 36.4% | 51.7% | 0.5% |
| Increased knowledge and skills in vocational-technical areas (n=393) | 0.3% | 0.8% | 7.9% | 37.7% | 52.9% | 0.5% |
| Increased self esteem (n=394) | 0.5% | 2.0% | 24.1% | 39.6% | 32.5% | 1.3% |
| Increased motivation for learning (n=392) | 0.0% | 0.8% | 11.2% | 39.3% | 48.0% | 0.8% |
| Improved employability skills and work readiness (n=394) | 0.3% | 1.0% | 4.1% | 33.2% | 60.9% | 0.5% |
| Increased awareness of and interest in technical careers (n=392) | 0.5% | 0.8% | 6.4% | 38.8% | 53.3% | 0.3% |
| Increased secondary school completion rate (n=392) | 0.5% | 2.0% | 15.1% | 33.2% | 47.7% | 1.5% |
| Increased matriculation from secondary to postsecondary levels (n=393) | 0.3% | 0.5% | 7.6% | 35.4% | 55.5% | 0.8% |
| Increased postsecondary school completion rate (n=394) | 1.0% | 2.8% | 18.8% | 37.1% | 36.5% | 3.8% |
| Increased matriculation from two-year to four-year college (n=390) | 2.6% | 14.4% | 39.5% | 25.4% | 11.5% | 6.7% |
| Increased job placement rate (n=392) | 0.8% | 4.3% | 21.7% | 39.0% | 30.6% | 3.6% |
| Increased employability in high-wage jobs (n=392) | 0.5% | 2.3% | 20.4% | 40.1% | 32.9% | 3.8% |
| Increased satisfaction of students/graduates with jobs (n=392) | 0.8% | 4.1% | 21.4% | 37.5% | 32.7% | 3.6% |
| Q-10. | Thinking about your overall experience with Tech Prep implementation thus far, how would you describe support for Tech Prep from the following interest groups? (Circle 9 only if the interest group is Not Applicable (NA) to your Tech Prep initiative.) |
Interest Group Level of Support
(Circle the one best response)Poor Fair Good Excellent NA Academic faculty (n=394) 4.3% 30.5% 43.7% 21.1% 0.5% Vocational faculty (n=395) 1.3% 8.9% 38.5% 51.1% 0.3% Counselors (n=395) 5.3% 26.1% 43.0% 25.1% 0.5% Local secondary administrators (n=395) 2.5% 17.0% 41.3% 39.2% 0.0% Local two-year postsecondary administrators (n=395) 1.5% 11.4% 36.2% 50.4% 0.5% Business/industry representatives (n=394) 2.3% 10.2% 37.6% 47.2% 2.8% Labor union representatives (n=386) 7.5% 13.7% 13.2% 11.9% 53.6% State agency personnel (n=393) 2.5% 9.2% 30.3% 53.7% 4.3% Four-year college/university personnel (n=391) 20.2% 25.6% 23.0% 6.9% 24.3% Secondary school board members (n=393) 3.6% 20.6% 39.1% 31.2% 5.6% College trustees (n=387) 9.3% 14.5% 24.3% 20.2% 31.8% Students (n=391) 2.0% 14.6% 48.3% 25.3% 9.7% Parents (n=388) 2.3% 20.4% 48.5% 19.1% 9.8%