Summary: June 7, 2002

Day 5 Topic: Workforce Preparation and Business Linkages

Moderators Helie and Ford introduced today's topic and posed several questions to elicit participants' opinions about Workforce Preparation and Business Linkages. Today's panelists are Vicki L. Barber, Jim Lawson, Bruce McPherson and David Rattray.

Note: Postings on today's topic that appeared on the Web site by 8:00 PM Pacific time are included in this summary.

1. Should California monitor students' success in making the transition from formal education to gainful employment? Why or why not? Should this be a part of the accountability system in a Master Plan? How could this monitoring be done?

   • Most participants agreed that measuring transition success is important. Employability is a better measurement of educational success than academic testing.
   • Measuring accountability for programs and delivery systems must be based on their mission and target population. The Plan should outline general parameters of accountability, leaving state governing agencies to define the particulars.
   • Other participants expressed concern about this type of measurement citing difficulty in ensuring that an indicator would be fairly applied, feasible, and reasonable in costs; difficulty in agreeing upon a definition of "successful transition"; and the indirect connection between education-to-employment in some fields (e.g., arts, humanities).
   • However, if the state wants to facilitate a successful transition to the workforce, they could monitor and provide funds for vocational training as well as create academic standards. The idea of program funding contingent on program performance was suggested.
   • Suggestions for monitoring students' success included the existing Performance Based Accountability system; a survey of several work areas each year in which companies are asked about their needs and employees are asked about their preparation, successes and problems; by confidentially collecting information at the institutional level; getting labor market data from businesses; enhanced school reporting and data entry to an anonymous publicly available database.
   • Clear reliable data on what happens to people in the labor market after school is needed so programs can improve based on feedback, the public and policy makers can know if they are getting what they are paying for, and program managers are accountable for linking their programs to the labor market.
   • If we do not know where our students go after school, we cannot possibly design a program to prepare them for that. Currently the focus is on college prep, in spite of the fact that less than 30% of students actually complete any postsecondary education program.
   • The Plan needs to use education to prepare children to face the reality that most new jobs in the coming decade will pay less than $10.00 an hour, in spite of the growing demand for high-skilled, tech-savvy workers.

2. Should educational institutions integrate career preparation in their curricula for all students, including academic courses? What are the best ways to prepare students for their working lives? Can "real world" applications be included in all curricula? What preparation would teachers need to implement this change? How can school and work be better aligned?

   • A preponderance of respondents agreed the Plan needs to address job training programs. All students need workforce preparation skills, which many believe cannot be obtained through a simple "integration into academic" strategy.
   • Others believe integrating practical skills into academic courses is adequate. Schools should integrate career preparation in their curricula for all students, including academic courses. Applied academics are one of the best ways to prepare students for work. The more we create "real world" experiences for students and focus on relevancy, the more long-lasting learning will occur.
   • Concern was expressed that the current Plan pushes college-bound curriculum at the expense of Career Technical Education at the secondary level. The intense focus on college prep seems unjustified. While we need to improve education, attempting to do it by removing technology and career education is unacceptable. Good accountable Technology Education programs can provide meaning and context to make academics relevant.
   • Several suggestions were made to support workforce preparation skills: incentives for business and industry to collaborate with schools to provide "real world" experiences (e.g., job shadowing, on-site classes, internships); bringing technology teachers into the workplace, obtaining resources from the business community; Junior Achievement, diplomas that differentiate a range of accomplishments and mastery of academic and vocational skills; business internships for educators; strong, well-integrated technology education; community college programs that combine on-the-job training with academic skills; high school career pathway programs.
   • While internships do motivate, show relevance and build a sense of validity, they do not teach technical knowledge and skills the way technology education does.

3. The draft Plan suggests partnerships with business. How would this help students in their transition to work? What are the challenges businesses will face as they partner with schools, colleges, and universities? What are the challenges for the educational institutions? What are the conditions needed to establish successful partnerships?

   • Students and educators benefit through work-based learning (e.g., internships, job shadowing, field trips), school-based learning (e.g., classroom speakers), project based learning, and mentors etc. Students benefit from having curriculum and its application current with respect to the labor market.
   • Partnerships provide an opportunity for students to apply what they learn to real life/work situations, to be productive and competitive in the labor market, to explore different fields and career options, to identify the environment in which they are most comfortable. This will help employers with retention and reduce ramp up time and training expense.
   • Participants cited several challenges: inadequate staffing and expertise to develop or maintain partnerships, dramatically different cultures of educational and private sector, and the potentially overwhelming number of schools approaching businesses.
   • To help reduce teacher resistance, we need to package the partnership from the perspective of making the curriculum come alive, relevance for students, and building a connection.
   • Building the connection between a standards-based curriculum and the world of work can actually generate higher student performance and community support.
   • Communication must be fostered between education and business. There needs to be coordination within the education community so that not every school individually seeks to build a partnership with local business. Schools need to give appropriate recognition to the participating businesses.
   • Successful partnerships need administrative support and adequate funds for teacher preparation and staff development.
   • Many participants think of schools as "preparing the workforce" for business. If the vision is this directed, the creative arts are left out. There needs to be more exposure to broad areas of learning, rather than narrower training modes.
   • Partnerships with business should be limited to supporting schools financially and with technical assistance.
   • The Plan needs to give the Career and Technical training and academic courses equal importance; support business linkages wherein industry and education work hand-in-hand in "work scholarship programs", which serve "at risk" students; and enhance the current adult continuing education system.
   • Plan must call for new partnership between industry and education to (1) develop career/technical curriculum, (2) fund local Chambers of Commerce, (3) mobilize industry's desire to reach out to "at risk" youth, via mentoring and tutoring, (4) foster parental support programs, (5) clarify and amplify Tech Prep efforts, (6) highlight need for professional development, (7) promote renewed commitment to provide a quality education--academic and career--to ALL students, (8) recognize the gender inequity in the workforce as it relates to NTO's (Non-traditional Occupations).
   • The Master Plan should promote access, program coordination, alignment and operational efficiencies, without the significant disruption likely to result from placing the governance of adult continuing ed under the community college system. Moving adult ed out of the high schools and into the community college campuses would further erode the ITE system.
   • Concern was expressed about increased emphasis on the traditional A-G track. Career and technical education and A-G need not be mutually exclusive. They can be integrated allowing the student flexibility and choice and more than just one pathway to success.
   • The Plan must clearly define the meaning of the terms it uses (e.g., instructional technology, computer applications, computer technology, technology). "Technology" as used in these dialogues is a misnomer. It is mostly being used to refer to programs that teach how to use computers, not including tech literacy, integration of computers into the curriculum, how computers work or technological subjects other than computers.

While this summary contains the highlights from the many ideas that were offered, far more comprehensive information may be found in the discussion archives. We highly recommend that you read the original postings to discover the full richness of the discussion. We suggest you chose the Thread viewing option.

Background summaries, daily topics, questions and background information are available from the Agenda page and the Briefing Book.

Monday, June 10 will focus on School Readiness.

I welcome your comments on the summaries.

Sally Hedman
Reporter