The dominant providers of education and training in the sub-baccalaureate labor market are community colleges and technical institutes. There are, of course, other providers, though they figure much less prominently among employers. Short-term job training programs like JTPA and the JOBS program for welfare recipients train some individuals, particularly for clerical occupations, some computer-related positions, and sometimes craft work; but their programs are so short that they generally prepare individuals for the least-skilled positions, not for middle-skilled jobs.[40] Not surprisingly, then, none of the employers we interviewed in any of the four labor markets mentioned these job training programs as sources of potential employees. Similarly, proprietary schools did not loom especially large in these four areas. Employers generally had mixed feelings about these providers; several condemned them as charlatans, though a very few had established good working relations with specific proprietary schools. In Frankton, a particular area vocational school was widely known; and in the Cotooli area, the vocational high schools--which students attend full-time for two or three years, with half of each school day devoted to vocational courses--have substantial reputations; but aside from these cases, community colleges are the most prominent providers of education and training.
Community colleges are themselves quite varied institutions with some students attending in order to transfer, others needing remediation before they continue their education, some taking avocational courses, and with an undetermined number there as "experimenters" trying to determine whether postsecondary education might be appropriate for them (Manski, 1989), and some there for clearly occupational purposes. In the latter group, some students are relatively young and seeking to enter the labor market for the first time. A larger number are older and are enrolled either for retraining, particularly in cases where they have been laid off from a previous position, or for training to upgrade their skills. Most community colleges also provide contract education to specific firms, and most of that can also be considered upgrade training. While some community colleges ask entering students about their reasons for attending, the results are not necessarily reliable because so many students have unclear or shifting objectives or pursue a mix of courses. However, it is relatively clear that community colleges have become predominantly vocational institutions[41] even though the balance of purpose varies from institution to institution.
Even though the intentions of the majority of community college students are largely vocational, in practice they are often more remedial institutions, with even the courses appearing in vocational departments really serving the purpose of teaching very basic skills and information. Virtually every community college now offers remedial courses, with estimates of the fraction of community college students needing remediation ranging from twenty-five to fifty to seventy-eight percent in the Tennessee system (see the evidence summarized in Grubb, Kalman, Castellano, Brown, & Bradby, 1991, pp. 18-19). The dean of occupational education at Rosefield City College estimated that seventy percent of occupational students need remediation in basic skills, and--in response to employers claiming a greater need for basic skills--he developed a Tech Prep program of reading, writing, mathematics, computer familiarization, introduction to the world of work, and introduction to tools and materials for these students. As a response to the deficiencies of students and the demands of employers for adequate basic skills, such a response seems admirable; but it also clarifies the extent to which ostensibly occupational programs are mislabeled.
Another difficulty with characterizing community college students is that relatively few complete entire programs (Grubb, 1989) even though most community colleges and technical institutes are careful about structuring both certificate and associate degree programs with sequences of vocational courses and related academic coursework. Instead, the typical pattern is to accumulate several vocational courses, perhaps with some supporting academic (and potentially remedial) coursework (Grubb, 1989).[42] For employers as well as those trying to assess the effectiveness of community colleges the prevalence of noncompleters makes it difficult to know how much education a community college student has received.
Community colleges maintain connections to employers in many different ways, at least potentially providing a way for both the institutions and their students to get more information about employment opportunities. However, there is a great deal of variation in the way these connections operate, so in practice, some institutions do little to help their students make the transition into the labor market.
[40] For example, a well-known community-based organization in Palmdale--probably one of the best providers of short-term job training--includes programs in electronics and in machining for JTPA and JOBS clients. However, the electronics programs prepare individuals for assembly-line positions assembling computer components; the machining program also places individuals in jobs paying so little--five to six dollars an hour--that they are are likely to be entry-level assembly line positions.
[41] According to the NPSAS of 1990 (see footnote 3 on page 5 of this document), sixty percent of students in community colleges declared themselves to be vocational students. This proportion has declined slightly from the 1986-1987 survey when it was sixty-eight percent, possibly because of increases in remedial and ESL courses.
[42] Within community colleges, a convention has developed that students who appear to be "dropouts" have entered in order to fill in specific gaps in their preparation and have left college for employment as soon as their needs are met; those who appear to be "dropouts" are therefore completers. However, there is no empirical support for this assertion; if it were true, those with a few community college courses would have higher earnings than individuals with high school diplomas only--contrary to the empirical results. See results from the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) in Grubb (1992b). Kane and Rouse (1992) find somewhat greater benefits to community college enrollment for noncompleters, but their results reflect wage rates rather than annual earnings and are consistent with occupational programs that place individuals in jobs with high wage rates but intermittent employment.