preparing a 21 st century workforce the role of cte james r. stone iii director national research...
TRANSCRIPT
Preparing a 21st Century Workforce
The Role of CTE
James R. Stone III Director
National Research Center for CTE
Today’s Agenda
• A context for the discussion
–Workforce realities
–Education reform realities
• Two CTE based strategies
The work reported herein was supported under the National Dissemination for Career and Technical Education, PR/Award (No. VO51A990004) and /or under the National Research Center for Career and Technical Education, PR/Award (No. VO51A990006) as administered by the Office of Vocational and Adult Education, U. S. Department of Education.
However, the contents do not necessarily represent the positions or policies of the Office of Vocational and Adult Education or the U. S. Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government.
Disclaimer:
What does it take to obtain good jobs (Myth or Reality)?
“…regardless if students go on to college or into the workforce after graduation, they still need the same knowledge and skills, particularly in English and mathematics. At a minimum, high school course requirements need to cover four years of rigorous English and four years of math…” (American Diploma Project)
What the data show…
• 94% of workers reported using math on the job, but, only1
– 22% reported math “higher” than basic– 19% reported using “Algebra 1”– 9% reported using “Algebra 2”
• Among upper level white collar workers1
– 30% reported using math up to Algebra 1– 14% reported using math up to Algebra 2
• Less than 5% of workers make extensive use of Algebra 2, Trigonometry, Calculus, or Geometry on the job2
1. M. J. Handel survey of 2300 employees cited in “What Kind of Math Matters” Education Week, June 12 2007
2. Carnevale & Desrochers cited in “What Kind of Math Matters” Education Week, June 12 2007
The Fallacy of Composition: What is true for the individual will also be true
for the large group or society as a whole.
(Cappelli, 2008)
The Problem: 2 Perspectives• …to right these workplace problems, policy makers
are looking in the wrong direction…paying attention to skills workers really need to succeed, not on an assumed set of skills that may not be so critical after all . . . Robert Lerman (2008)
• “…the unfortunate tendency has been for educators to assume that the changing economy simply requires more education, resulting in the misguided belief that all students should attend college. ..The result has been a well-meaning but misguided college-for-all attitude among educators and students. (Rosenbaum, 2002)
Jobs & Education: A Growing Mismatch
0
5
10
15
20
25
30 % of 1996-7Graduateswith BA orgraddegrees(1)% of Jobsestimated torequire 4-yeardegree orhigher(2)
(1) Current Population Survey (2000)
(2) Bureau of Labor Statistics (2002)
This would (and some argue has) lower the price of an educated worker (Cappelli, 2008) Or, downward occupational mobility
More Rhetoric…
• By 2015 [the country needs to] double the number of bachelor’s degrees awarded annually to U.S. students in science, math, and engineering. (National Summit on Competitiveness 2005)
• High school students in the U.S. perform well below those in other industrialized nations in the fields of mathematics and science … [and thus we need to make] STEM education a national priority. (Council on Competitiveness 2004).
Based on Urban Myths
• India & China are producing more engineers than U.S.
US=222,000; India=215,000; China=352,000*
• We are not graduating enough engineers
S&E wages have actually declined in real terms and unemployment rates have increased**
* Duke University Study, 2006; **Rand, 2006;
What the data show…
• S&E occupations make up only about one-twentieth of all workers
• The education system produces qualified graduates far in excess of demand-Each year there are more than three times as many S&E four-year college graduates as S&E job openings Urban Institute, 2007.
• 435,000 U.S. citizens and permanent residents a year graduated with bachelor's, master's, and doctoral degrees in science and engineering. . . there were about 150,000 jobs added annually to the science and engineering workforce.
http://www.businessweek.com/print/smallbiz/content/oct2007/sb20071025_827398.htm
The Real Labor Opportunity
Middle Skill Occupations
Fastest Growing Jobs - 2016
Real employment opportunities: 45% growth in Middle Skill Occupations (164 Million Workers by 2016)
Labor Market Skill Distribution - 2016
Jobs and Education: What is RequiredMost Significant Source of Education and Training
Total Jobs
2016 (thousands)
Total Job Change
2006-2016
% of New Job Growth 2006-
2016
Percentage of Total Jobs in
2016
First professional degree
2,202 356 1.9 1.3
Doctoral degree 2,535 594 3.1 1.5
Master’s degree 2,552 407 2.2 1.6
Bachelor’s or higher + 7,582 1,081 5.7 4.6
Bachelor’s degree 20,378 3,335 17.6 12.4
Associate degree 6,770 1,361 7.2 4.1
PS vocational award 9,316 1,398 7.4 5.7
Work related occupation 12,119 1,061 5.6 7.4
Long-term OJT 11,980 954 5.0 7.3
Moderate-term OJT 31,421 2,464 13.0 19.1
Short-term OJT 57,699 5,916 31.3 35.1
Total 164,554 18,927 100.0 100.0
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2006. http://www.bls.gov/oes/home.htm
Middle Skill Occupations (B.A./B.S. NOT Required)
OccupationAir Traffic ControllerStorage and distribution managerTransportation managerNon-retail sales managerForest fire fighting/prevention supervisorMunicipal fire fighting/prevention supervisorReal estate brokerElevator installers and repairerDental hygienist Immigration and Customs inspectorCommercial pilot
Salary102,30066,60066,60059,30058,92058,90258,72058,71058,35053,99053,870
Farr, M. & Shatkin, L. (2006) The 300 Best Jobs That Don't Require a Four-Year Degree. (US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics)
What Employers Really Need
What are Employers not Getting?
What are the real school problems?
• A high and rising drop out rate
• Students who graduate are lacking in basic math and science skills
• Most students think they are going to college but do not prepare for it or any other possible future
Getting kids ready for success requires a focus on:
• Engagement – attending school and completing (graduating) high school
• Achievement – academic (and technical) course taking; grades, test scores
• Transition – to postsecondary education without the need for remediation; and to the workplace.
% of 9th Graders who complete High School
68%
Source: One-Third of a Nation (ETS, 2005)
Utah?81%
When do they leave?
Month at which dropout occurred
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
2 5 8 11 14 17 20 23 26 29 32 35 38 41 44 47 50 53 56 59
Month of Dropout
9th grade 10th grade 11th grade 12th grade 5th year
Plank, 2005
81% of dropouts said “real world learning” may have influenced
them to stay in school
Bridgeland, et al - Gates Foundation Report, 2005
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
CTE/Academic course-taking ratio
Pro
bab
ility
of
dro
po
ut
Tests & GPA 1 s.d. below grand means Tests & GPA at grand means Tests & GPA 1 s.d. above grand means
CTE and School EngagementRecent NRC Research
The Assumption: To be college and work ready, students need to complete a rigorous sequence of courses:
• In math:– Four courses– Content equivalent to
Algebra I and II, Geometry, and a fourth course such as Statistics or Pre-calculus
• In English:– Four courses– Content equivalent to
four years of grade-level English or higher (i.e., honors or AP English)
What has the 4x4 Achieved (NAEP Scores 17 Year Olds)
250255260265270275280285290295300
1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004
Sca
le S
core
Source: NAEP 2004 Trends in Academic Progress.
Note: Long-Term Trends NAEP
12.9 Academic
Credits
19 Academic
Credits
NAEP Science Scores 17 Year Olds
305 296 290 283 288 290 294 294 296 295
150
175
200
225
250
275
300
325
350
Scal
e Sc
ore
Year
1.5 Science Credits
2.1 Science Credits
3.2 Science Credits
HS Achievement In Math
280
285
290
295
300
305
310
315
1986 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004
Sca
le S
core
Source: NAEP 2004 Trends in Academic Progress and NAEP 1999 Trends in Academic Progress.
Note: Long-Term Trends NAEP
1.7 Math
Credits
3.6 math
credits2.4
Math Credits
One approach
Math-in-CTE: An “evidenced based approach” to improving academic
performance of CTE students
Focus of the Study
• Does enhancing the CTE curriculum with math increase math skills of CTE students?
• Can we infuse enough math into CTE curricula to meaningfully enhance the academic skills of CTE participants (Perkins IV Core Indicator)
• Without reducing technical skill development
• What works?
Key Features
• Random assignment of teachers to experimental or control condition
• Five simultaneous study replications• Three measures of math skills (applied,
traditional, college placement)• Focus of the experimental intervention was
naturally occurring math (embedded in curriculum)
• A model of Curriculum Integration• A new model for Professional Development
National Research Center
AutoTech BusEd IT
Experimental
Control
Experimental
Control
Experimental
Control
Ag P&T Health
Experimental
Control
Experimental
Control
Sample 2004-05: 69 Experimental CTE/Math teams and 80 Control CTE Teachers
Total sample: 3,000 students*
5 Simultaneous Replications
Study Design: Participants
Participants
• Experimental CTE teacher
• Math teacher
• Control CTE teacher
Primary Role
• Implement the math enhancements
• Provide support for the CTE teacher
• Teach their regular curriculum (health, auto tech, ag, business/mkt, IT)
Measuring Math & Technical Skill Achievement
• Global math assessments
• Technical skill or occupational knowledge assessment
• General, grade level tests (Terra Nova, AccuPlacer, WorkKeys)
• NOCTI, AYES, MarkED
The Experimental Treatment
• Professional Development
• The Pedagogy
Professional Development
• CTE-Math Teacher Teams; occupational focus
• Curriculum mapping• Scope and Sequence• “Lesson Plan” Development• On going collaboration CTE and math
teachers
Curriculum Maps
• Begin with CTE Content
• Create “map” for the school year
• Align map with planned curriculum for the year (scope & sequence)
Auto Tech – Electrical (partial)
Lesson Topic CTE Concepts Math ConceptsNCTM
Standards
Voltage, Current, Resistance and Ohm’s Law
Voltage, Current, Resistance and Ohm’s Law
Whole numbers; decimals and fractions (adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing); solving linear equations; ratio proportion; system of equations; metric to metric conversions; metric prefixes; reading and writing percents
N8, N9, A2, M0, M1, P15, P16
Series and Parallel Circuits
Series and Parallel Circuits
Decimals and fractions (adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing); solving linear equations; ratio proportion; system of equations; metric to metric conversions; substituting data into formulas; working with reciprocals
N8, N9, A7, A8, A9, A11, P2, P15
Electrical Components
Electrical Components
Solving linear equations; percents; temperature; comparing numbers; linear measurement
N8, N9, A2, M0, M1, P2, P15
Health Occupations (partial)Health
Standards Identification
Health Skill Mathematics Content
Standards
State Content Standard
Analyze methods for the control of disease.
Prognosis and diagnosis
Body planesRange of motionPharmacy
calculations (for pharmacy techs
Solve linear equations Read and interpret
graphs and chartsProblem solving
involving statistical data
Ratio and Proportion
1.2 Students describe the relationships among variables, predict what will happen to one variable as another variable is changed, analyze natural variation and sources of variability to compare patterns of change.
Analyze changes in body systems as they relate to disease, disorder and wellness
Cultures and sensitivity
Lab techniquesBlood sugar and
user failure versus accurate sample collection
C & S of wounds, collection contamination process and outcome
Calculate time, temperature, mass measurement and compare to known standards
Interpretation of measurement results
Calculate accurate measurement in both metric and English units
2.3 Students compare attributes of two objects or of one object with a standard (unit) and analyze situations to determine what measurement(s) should be made and to what level of precision
What we tested: The Seven Elements Pedagogy
1. Introduce the CTE lesson
2. Assess students’ math awareness
3. Work through the embedded example
4. Work through related, contextual examples
5. Work through traditional math examples
6. Students demonstrate understanding
7. Formal assessment
Perkins IV: Required Activity
• Professional Development – Cannot be “1-day or
short-term”– Currency – Integration/rigor– Meet levels of
performance– Coordinated with title II of
ESEA
Math-in-CTE Professional Development“Year-at-a-Glance”
July-Aug Sept-Nov Dec-Feb Mar-May June
Teach Lessons
2 Days Professional Development
5 Days Professional Development
2 Days Professional Development
Teach Lessons Teach Lessons
I Day Wrap-upCelebration
On-going monitoring of teacher progress
Analysis
C XPost Test Spring
Terra Nova Accuplacer WorkKeys Skills Tests
Difference in Math Achievement
Pre Test Fall
Terra Nova
What we found: All CTEx vs All CTEcPost test % correct controlling for pre-test
30
40
50
60
Terra Nova Accuplacer Work Keys
Experimental Control
50thpercentile
71st
C Group
0 50th 100th
X Group
Magnitude of Treatment Effect – Effect Size
Ter
ra N
ova
the average percentile standing of the average treated (or experimental) participant relative to the average untreated (or control) participant
Acc
up
lace
r
67th
Carnegie Learning Corporation Cognitive Tutor Algebra I d=.22
Does Enhancing Math in CTE
Affect Technical Skill Development?
NO!
What we found: Time invested in Math Enhancements• Average of 18.55 hours across all
sites devoted to math enhanced lessons (not just math but math in the context of CTE)
• Assume a 180 days in a school year; one hour per class per day
• Average CTE class time investment = 10.3%
Power of the New Professional Development Model
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Math teacherPartners
ExperimentalCTE Teachers
Control CTETeachers
Math in CTE Use 1 Year Later
Old Model PD
New Model
PD
Total Surprise!
Replicating the Math-in-CTE Model:Core Principles
A. Develop and sustain a community of practice
B. Begin with the CTE curriculum and not with the math curriculum
C. Understand math as essential workplace skill
D. Maximize the math in CTE curricula
E. CTE teachers are teachers of “math-in-CTE” NOT math teachers
Final thoughts: Math-in-CTE
• A powerful, evidence based strategy for improving math skills of students;
• A way but not THE way to help high school students master math
(other approaches – NY BOCES)• Not a substitute for traditional math
courses• Lab for mastering what many students
learn but don’t understand• Will not fix all your math problems
Perkins IV – Programs of Study – Another Strategy
Include . . . • Coherent and rigorous content • Aligned with challenging academic standards and
relevant career and technical content;• in a coordinated, non-duplicative progression of
courses that align secondary education with postsecondary education . . . to adequately prepare students to succeed in postsecondary education;
• Lead to an industry-recognized credential or certificate at the postsecondary level, or an associate or baccalaureate degree.
CTE: What do we know?
• CTE keeps kids in school
• CTE helps kids focus their PS education plans
• CTE is an economic benefit to participants and to states
• CTE-based structures can affect achievement and transition of youth to college and work, but
• Can CTE help students master academics?
