The Number of States Counting Career Readiness Has More than Doubled Since 2014

March 19th, 2019

In a strong signal of support for Career Technical Education (CTE) and career readiness in high school, 40 states are now measuring career readiness in their state or federal high school accountability systems. Fewer than half as many – 17 – were measuring career readiness just five years ago.

The sophistication and design of the measures has evolved as well, and many states are working to intentionally link their accountability systems with high-quality career pathways.

That’s according to a new analysis from Advance CTE, Education Strategy Group, Achieve and the Council of Chief State School Officers. The report, the third edition in the Making Career Readiness Count series, uses a four-pronged framework that was developed by an expert workgroup and outlined in the report Destination Known: Valuing College AND Career Readiness in State Accountability Systems  to categorize how states are measuring college and career readiness.

The four categories used in the analysis provide a blueprint for states to develop and evolve rigorous measures. They each outline three levels that build upon one another, from Fundamental, to Advanced and Exceptional. The categories are:

  • Progress toward Post-High School Credential: Student demonstration of successful progress toward credentials of value beyond high school.
  • Co-curricular Learning and Leadership Experiences: Student completion of state-defined co-curricular experience(s) aligned to students’ academic and career plans.
  • Assessment of Readiness: Students scoring at the college- and career-ready level on assessment(s) that are validated by higher education and industry.
  • Transitions beyond High School: Successful student transition includes placement into postsecondary education, training or the workforce within 12 months of graduation.

Overall, the most common measure used across the states is Assessment of Readiness, with thirty states and the District of Columbia valuing experiences that are aligned with the Destination Known recommendations. Another 12 states include out of sequence measures that are aligned with this indicator but do not include the Fundamental measure, attainment of state-defined college- and career-ready level on a high school summative assessment. The vast majority of states counted under the Assessment of Readiness category are measuring industry-recognized credential attainment.

Another commonly used measure is Progress Toward Post-High School Credential. Seventeen states and the District of Columbia include measures aligned with the Destination Known recommendations, and another 22 states include out of sequence indicators. A number of states include either pathway completion or dual enrollment coursework in their accountability plans without requiring that experience to be accompanied by the completion of a state-defined college- and career-ready course of study, which is the Fundamental measurement in this category.

Twelve states include a Co-Curricular Learning and Leadership Experiences measure in their state or federal accountability systems, often looking at work-based learning participation. Eight states include information on Transitions Beyond High School, reporting either postsecondary enrollment or postsecondary enrollment without the need for remediation.

With all of the progress states have made, there is still room to strengthen and improve measures of career readiness. For example, states should be explicit about how career readiness components – such as work-based learning, industry-recognized credentials and dual enrollment – align to each other and to a students’ career pathways. They should also be transparent with their data and put thought and care into designing accountability systems that value and encourage the experiences that are best aligned with the outcomes they want for students. These and other opportunities are discussed in the report, Making Career Readiness Count 3.0.

The even harder work ahead is to support all students in their preparation for and transition to college, career and life. Regardless of the path students choose to pursue, they need to be transition ready. State and federal accountability systems can and should be used to highlight areas for improvement and connect programs and students with the supports they need to be successful.

Austin Estes, Senior Policy Associate

How to Prepare for the Future of Work

March 5th, 2019

Economists and futurists no longer ask what the future of work will look like, but rather when it will come and how disruptive it will be. Automation, artificial intelligence and other technological advancements are in the workplace today. Some say that innovations should be embraced and, like technological advancements in the past, the average American, and the economy as a whole, will be better off. Others issue dire warnings that automation and robotics will render many occupations obsolete and displace millions of American workers.

So which is it? The rose or the thorns?

The answer is, it’s complicated. According to the World Economic Forum, automation is expected to displace 75 million workers around the world by 2022. That’s a staggering sum — and in just four years. But the same report predicts that 133 million jobs will be created during the same period. What is almost certain is that, in the next few years, the world economy — and by extension, the American workforce — will experience a significant transformation as businesses adopt new technologies and American workers adapt and reskill to fill new jobs.

A new study out of the Boston University School of Law illuminates potential impacts of automation by examining survey data for non-financial private firms in the Netherlands. The researchers obtained data on automation expenditures for more than 36,000 firms over a 16 year period, from 2000 to 2016, in order to measure the effects of automation on employment and wages.

The researchers estimate that wages decreased for incumbent workers by about 8.2 percent over five years as a result of automation. However, recent hires experienced no wage loss and even earned 4.4 percent higher income over five years. It follows that the impact of automation will be more severe for older, more experienced workers, who at best will experience shifts in their day to day tasks and at worst will need to pursue further education, training and credentials to adapt.

For policymakers and economists, this begs the question: can anything be done to prepare for automation and new technology in the workplace?

The Brookings Institute recommends five actions to prepare for the future of work:

  • Embrace growth and technology, which will encourage firms to step up hiring and training new workers as the economy heats up;  
  • Promote a constant learning mindset by expanding traditional education, reducing the financial burden for skill attainment, and fostering employer-sponsored learning opportunities;
  • Facilitate a smoother adjustment by investing in career counseling, retraining opportunities and unemployment support for displaced workers;
  • Reduce hardships for workers who are struggling through the expansion of state and federal safety net programs;
  • Mitigate harsh local impacts by expanding support to vulnerable regions and communities that may be hardest hit.

Automation and artificial intelligence in the workplace will augment human skill and improve productivity. New technologies like autonomous vehicles and voice recognition will make it easier for all individuals — particularly individuals with disabilities — to access work and participate in civil society. But the future of work will likely bring with it disruption and displacement, and this burden will be disproportionately borne by workers in particular industries, occupations and geographic regions. Federal, state and local policymakers should consider clear strategies to prepare for the future of work. The time to act is now.

Research Roundup

Meanwhile, here is the latest roundup of research and data related to Career Technical Education (CTE):

  • There’s a racial gap in CTE enrollment. The National Center for Education Statistics reports that, according to high school transcript data, white students earned more (3.2) CTE credits on average than black (2.9), Hispanic (2.6), Asian (2.2) and mixed race (2.9) students.
  • The American Association of Community Colleges developed an infographic based on a recent Pew Research Center study that depicts the different post-high school plans of today’s teens. One notable takeaway: 12 percent of teens plan to attend a two-year college and 4 percent plan to attend a technical or vocational school after high school. 
  • Skills training is pretty popular with American voters. According to polling from ALG Research, with support from the National Skills Coalition, 93 percent of likely 2020 voters support increasing investments in skills and technical training.
  • It’s not just you — CTE is getting more popular. The American Enterprise Institute looked at media mentions of CTE between 2012 and 2018 and found that the number of articles mentioning CTE has increased by more than a hundredfold in that time.

Austin Estes, Senior Policy Associate

Work-based Learning is Predictive of Future Job Quality, According to New Study

December 10th, 2018

The Brookings Institution looks at employment outcomes for low-income learners

It’s a question that has puzzled education researchers for decades: what is the right mix of experiences in early adolescence that is most predictive of future career success and lifelong learning?

For the longest time, the rule of thumb has been “get a bachelor’s degree and you’ll get a good job.” But we know that there are other experiences on the path to a four-year degree (such as participating in work-based learning or earning an industry-recognized credential) that are just as powerful in preparing learners for their future careers. What are these experiences? And how should they be delivered to maximize learner outcomes?

New research from the Brookings Institution sheds a little bit of light on this question. The study looks at different factors that are correlated with economic success among 29-year-olds from “disadvantaged” backgrounds. The study finds that:

  • Participating in work-based learning is correlated with attainment of “high-quality” jobs later in life
  • Working (and earning high wages) at a young age predicts higher job quality in adulthood
  • Earning credentials is still the biggest predictor of career success, but sub-baccalaureate credentials are also important

Specifically, the researchers find that participating in “relationship-focused CTE” (a term they use to refer to work-based learning and other activities where students interact with industry mentors) is significantly related to higher job quality scores at age 29. This would seem to suggest that building relationships with industry mentors and completing work-based learning at an early age can help learners, particularly low-income learners, get a leg up on their careers. While the data do not provide a full picture of the quality of work-based learning in the study, the evidence is promising.

For the purpose of the study, the researchers define “disadvantaged adolescents” as those who, when they were between the ages of 12 and 18, had a family income equal to or less than 200 percent of the federal poverty line; did not have a parent with more than a high school education; had a mother who was a teenager when her first child was born; or whose family received public assistance. They defined job quality based on four factors: earnings, benefits, hours of work and job satisfaction.

CTE Research Roundup

  • In a new research brief, MDRC summarizes findings from studies of three different career-focused learning programs: New York City’s Young Adult Internship Program (YAIP), YouthBuild and Year Up. Using a random assignment research design, the researchers find significant positive wage increases for completers of each program.
  • JFF explores how the scope and length of Registered Apprenticeships can vary and poses the question: Are apprenticeships the next stackable credential?
  • The NewDeal Forum Working Group, a national network of state and local leaders, published recommendations for policymakers to help the economy adapt to the future of work. The report includes recommendations for skill development and workforce training; modernizing the social safety net; and supporting entrepreneurship, innovation and access.  
  • Mathematica Policy Research shares an update on new partnerships and research focused on pathways to postsecondary education, including an examination of free tuition programs for adult learners, a study of the Better Careers initiative in California, and research into community college career planning through the Working Student Success Network. Keep an eye out for future research.
  • A new study from JFF looks at Maine’s proficiency-based education system and finds some promising early results. According to the study, high school students who received a medium amount of exposure to proficiency-based education had significantly higher reported engagement; however, exposure to proficiency-based education was negatively correlated with SAT scores.

Austin Estes, Senior Policy Associate

Free College: A Brief Policy History

September 24th, 2018

Advance CTE will be writing a series of blog posts profiling the policies and practices of free college in the United States. This post will explore the history of the movement toward free college. Check back for blogs on the challenges, successful practices and future of free college.

College affordability, or lack of affordability, is one of the most pressing problem in the world of higher education. Free postsecondary education has long been a topic of conversation, and various models have been piloted at the state and local levels. The Atlantic’s “Debt Free” article explains that this idea was given renewed national attention when former President Barack Obama addressed the topic in his 2015 State of the Union speech. In particular, President Obama advocated that the place to start implementing such policies was in community colleges. Afterward, with the upcoming presidential election campaigns underway, the conversation of free college remained part of many candidates dialogue. Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), for example, was a vocal advocate.

Some state higher education institutions previously held free college policies, but found that model unsustainable over time. TIME’s piece, “What Happened When American States Tried Providing Tuition-Free College,” profiled some such examples:

  • For decades, the University of Florida was free for in-state students to attend. Around 1959, “registration and instructional fees” began to be instated and in 1969 full tuition was imposed;
  • The City University of New York system did not have tuition fees for students until 1976; and  
  • When the University of California (UC) system was started in 1868, free admission and tuition for in-state students was ensured. The California State and community-college systems decided the same. However, in 1960, California’s Master Plan for Higher Education allowed for students to be charged certain fees. In 1970, students were charged an “educational fee,” which has increased over time.. From that point on, California continuously decreased the amount of funding towards high education. In 2004-2005, UC allocated only 16 percent of funding to higher education compared to 32 percent in 1974.  

A main driver behind institutions pulling back on free college practices has to do with the significant increase in enrollment, as reported by the National Bureau of Economic Research. Whereas in the 1909-1910 school year only 355,000 of Americans 19-24 years old (2.9 percent of those in that age bracket) enrolled in higher education, by 2012 that number increased to 31.4 million (41 percent). At the same time, state and local funding for public colleges and universities decreased. Just from 2008-2016, overall state dollar allocation across the country to institutions of higher education has declined by 16 percent. If free college policies were put in place at the founding of an institution, the combination of increased enrollment and decreased state and local funding made the model unsustainable.

Meredith Hills, Policy Associate

Joint Paper Promoting Collaboration in STEM Education Released

August 28th, 2018

All too often, policy conversations concerning science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) happen separately from conversations related to Career Technical Education (CTE). Recently, Advance CTE partnered with the Association of State Supervisors of Mathematics, Council of State Science Supervisors, and International Technology and Engineering Educators Association to release STEM4: The Power of Collaboration for Change to highlight the importance of collaborating and coordinating strategically in these areas.

The document notes that, despite an abundance of initiatives and efforts, our nation is not achieving its goals in preparing students for college majors or careers in STEM and offers three main principles to drive and implement outstanding STEM education research and practices:

Principle 1: STEM education should advance the learning of each individual STEM discipline.

Principle 2: STEM education should provide logical and authentic connections between and across the individual STEM disciplines.

Principle 3: STEM education should serve as a bridge to STEM careers.

Each principle is accompanied by a set of recommended actions that may be taken to shift toward access to and equity in STEM preparedness that is felt to be crucial.

The paper is the product of an organized and coordinated effort among the leadership of our respective organizations to address the challenges faced when implementing STEM education and providing access to the knowledge, skills, and career pathways necessary for all students, particularly those in underserved populations.

To read the document, click here.

Ashleigh McFadden, State Policy Manager

New Research Sheds Light on the Value of Credentials, Dual Credit and Apprenticeships

August 23rd, 2018

It is common knowledge that earning a postsecondary credential, particularly in a high-skill, high-wage, in-demand industry, can help learners land good jobs. But how do learners get there? New research sheds light on the different pathways learners take to get to a good job and the economic returns of credential attainment.

$224 million a year. That’s how much more money the most recent cohort of graduates from Tennessee public colleges and universities can expect to make every year compared to non-credential holders. That figure comes from a new report published by the Tennessee Department of Economic and Community Development in June. The report attributes much of the wage gains to the impact of community and technical colleges across Tennessee.

While a postsecondary credential pays a premium for graduates, many learners work through college. In fact, according to a new brief from the National Center for Education Statistics, 32 percent of students at public 2-year colleges worked full-time while enrolled in the 2011-12 school year. The study also finds that students were more likely to complete a degree if they worked 20 hours or less a week compared to students who worked full time or did not work at all. The study did not say whether or not these students were working in fields related to their program of study, however.

Learners can start working on their postsecondary credential even before they graduate high school. New research from the University of Texas system shows just how much of an impact dual enrollment has for Texas students. According to the study, dual credit students had higher college graduation rates and higher GPAs than their peers. And students who entered the University of Texas system with credits from both Advanced Placement and dual credit classes were five times as likely as their peers to graduate in four years.

Yet learners often do not complete their credential at their initial institution. According to the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center, 38 percent – or 1,069,243 students – in the fall 2011 cohort transferred within six years. The study also revealed this startling statistic: only 5.6 percent of transfers from two-year colleges leave with a certificate or associate degree.

Postsecondary credentials reinforce the technical and academic skills learners will exercise in their future careers. But employers often look for candidates with a more rounded skill set that can only be learned through experience. A new survey from Bloomberg Next finds that 43 percent of employers say new recruits lack the soft skills to be effective, skills like teamwork, critical thinking and adaptability.

One way to build these skills is through work-based learning experiences like internships and apprenticeships. Adults in the U.S. are increasingly recognizing the value of apprenticeships. The American Staffing Association reports that 94 percent of Americans say that apprenticeships are helpful in leading to a new career and 62 percent even think apprenticeships make people more employable than going to college.

At any rate, learners have multiple pathways to lifelong career success – be it through an apprenticeship, a two-year college or a four-year university – and should be empowered to choose the path that is right for them.

Austin Estes, Senior Policy Associate

Making the Most of Outcomes-based Funding: Aligning Postsecondary Funding with Labor Market Needs

August 14th, 2018

One of the smartest investments state policymakers can make is in postsecondary education. As the economy moves towards more specialized, technology-based industries, learners will need education and training beyond high school to fill the jobs of tomorrow. Today, the ticket to the middle class, and the key ingredient for a thriving state economy, is a strong system of higher education.

Yet, this system is not as efficient as it could be. Three out of every four students who enroll in a public, two-year college do not graduate with a degree or certificate within three years. Whether due to financial or family circumstances, lack of clarity about future career goals, or poor academic preparation, too many students are getting saddled with debt and nothing to show for it.

In recent years states have led renewed efforts to improve student outcomes by restructuring postsecondary funding formulas. This approach, known as performance-based or outcomes-based funding, aims to align state dollars with outcomes that support learner success and economic growth, including progress toward and attainment of a postsecondary credential.

As of Fiscal Year 2016, 30 states were either implementing or developing outcomes-based funding formulas for postsecondary education, though two-year institutions were included in the funding formula in only 22 states. While the widespread enthusiasm for accountability and alignment in higher education funding is remarkable, states vary considerably in their degree of commitment. According to HCM strategies, which published a national scan of outcomes-based funding formulas, only four states (OH, NV, ND and TN) in FY2016 distributed more than 20 percent of state funds to postsecondary institutions based on outcomes.

In 2017, the State Higher Education Executive Officers Association (SHEEO) reported that a little more than half of the revenues for postsecondary institutions came from state appropriations (the remaining funding came from local appropriations (6.4 percent) and tuition revenues (43.3 percent)). This gives state policymakers a powerful lever to incentivize change in institutions of higher education.

And, while evidence in support of outcomes-based funding is mixed, positive results have been documented in states with more sophisticated funding systems:

  • After enacting a new funding formula in 2014-15, the Wisconsin Technical College System documented a 5 percentage point increase in graduates employed in jobs related to their field of study and a 7 percent increase in the number of degrees awarded.  
  • In Tennessee, after the state enacted a new funding formula in 2011, researchers noted a significant impact on the likelihood of graduating with an associate degree in three years,  completing certifications, and accumulating 12 and 24 credits.
  • After the Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges enacted the Student Achievement Initiative, researchers documented an increase in the number of short-term certificates issued, though attainment of associate degrees remained flat.

Many states have learned from these lessons and either modified existing or adopted new outcomes-based funding formulas to apply best practices. Arkansas is one such state. In 2016, the state legislature passed HB1209, directing the Higher Education Coordinating Board to design a productivity-based funding formula for state colleges and universities. The formula, which will be used to determine how the Higher Education Coordinating Board distributes general revenue for two-year and four-year institutions,  includes three dimensions:

  • Effectiveness (weighted at 80 percent): measures credential attainment, progression, transfer and gateway course success.
  • Affordability (20 percent): measures time to degree and credits at completion.
  • Adjustments and efficiency (+/- 2 percent): includes adjustments for rural schools, research-based institutions, etc.

What is notable about Arkansas’ approach is the use of best practices to incentivize credentials with labor market value and encourage equitable access.

The points an institution receives in the formula for credential attainment are multiplied if the credentials are in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) or state-defined “high-demand” fields. Qualifying fields are designated by the the Arkansas Department of Higher Education and the Department of Workforce Services. The multiplier for STEM degrees is 3 points; the multiplier for degrees in high-demand fields is 1.5 points.

The formula also includes adjustments for historically underserved students by race, income, age and academic proficiency. For certain elements of the formula — such as credential attainment or progression — the point value is increase by 29 percent for each student meeting these criteria.

While it is too early to tell the impact of these changes, Arkansas’ productivity index aims to improve postsecondary outcomes by aligning state funding with labor market needs and encouraging institutions to support historically underserved populations.

Austin Estes, Senior Policy Associate

Advance CTE Releases Report on Postsecondary CTE Program Quality

August 1st, 2018

With the majority of “good jobs” that pay a family-sustaining wage requiring at least some college education — such as a technical certificate, associate degree, bachelor’s degree or another credential of value — ensuring the existence of high-quality postsecondary Career Technical Education (CTE) programs and pathways is more important than ever before in preparing learners for high-skill, high-wage and high-demand careers.  

Although postsecondary programs are typically considered to be the purview of individual institutions, supported by academic freedom and local control, states have an important role to play in ensuring that each learner has access to only high-quality and relevant programs, notably by leveraging program approval and program evaluation policies and processes. Today, Advance CTE released Driving Quality in Postsecondary CTE: Approval and Evaluation Policies, a report that explores how states are leveraging this role to ensure quality.

Without question, states and postsecondary systems and institutions face unique challenges and opportunities in the quest to ensure program quality and relevance. These challenges include a variety of governance and delivery models, state and federal requirements, and multiple layers of program approval through regional and occupation-specific accreditors. At the same time, states, systems and institutions have meaningful opportunities to support and fund those programs that are best serving learners and their communities’ workforce needs.

Advance CTE’s report also explores a few specific state examples:

  • In Wisconsin, the Technical College System (WTCS) uses its statutory authority to review and approve all postsecondary programs in two phases: concept, where the system office and then the State Board review program foundations, including labor market justification, and program, where the system office and State Board review program curriculum. WTCS also suspends as many associate degree programs as it approves, so that programs that no longer have labor market relevance and/or quality outcomes are phased out and newer programs with higher quality and more relevance are adequately supported.
  • The California Community Colleges system is the largest system of higher education in the nation, with 114 colleges serving 2.1 million students. In 2004 the Chancellor’s Office developed what is now called the California Community Colleges Curriculum Committee (CCCCC) to coordinate efforts between local and statewide curriculum processes and work on program and course approval and evaluation. Through the CCCCC, the state has been working to delegate some of the responsibility of program approval and evaluation to individual institutions, but with policy guidance from a thorough and robust handbook. In this way, the system is working to reduce the burden on colleges while still maintaining quality of programs.
  • The Florida College System (FCS) and State Board of Education (SBOE) work together to ease the burden of program approval processes by designing and validating curriculum frameworks at the state level. These frameworks involve input from numerous industry partners and content experts and list key standards and benchmarks that programs must meet. Once a curriculum framework has been approved by the SBOE, other FCS institutions may apply the framework to new programs and are not required to undergo an approval process. Most FCS institutions start programs by using an existing framework, allowing them to start their program more quickly and avoid a lengthy approval process.

Check out Advance CTE’s report to learn more about ensuring quality in postsecondary CTE programs.

Ashleigh McFadden, State Policy Manager

More Evidence Demonstrates How Postsecondary Credentials Can Help Learners Unlock Career Opportunities

June 11th, 2018

Earning a credential of value is still the surest path to success for American workers. A recent New America poll released last month finds that 80 percent of American adults believe there are more opportunities for those who pursue education after high school, compared to 14 percent who think it is better to enter the workforce right away.

For adult learners, the connection between education and careers is even more important. According to Public Agenda, 71 percent of adult prospective students — those who are actively working to go back to school — say that their primary motivation is either to get ahead in their current career or to get the skills they need to start a new career.

Studying the return on investment for credential earners can be quite an undertaking, however, considering the vast number and types of credentials on the market today. Credential Engine, a nonprofit dedicated to counting and cataloging every credential, estimated in April that there are more than 330,000 individual credentials available in the United States today, and only a fraction of them are available at four-year institutions. That count includes nearly 67,000 postsecondary certificates, 13,600 Registered Apprenticeships and 5,400 certifications.

It is well understood that a university education can improve career opportunities. But where to start? Does major matter? And what is the return on investment for other sub-baccalaureate credentials like associate degrees, postsecondary certificates and industry certifications?

More Advanced Credentials Lead to Higher Earnings, but Field of Study Matters

With so many credentials on the market, how can learners navigate the education marketplace and find the credential that best suits their career interests and economic goals?

New research out of the Georgetown Center for Education and the Workforce helps us begin to demystify the credential marketplace.

The report finds that, while median income rises with more advanced credentials, the field of study matters a lot. A bachelor’s degree in architecture and engineering, for example, will land you a median salary of $85,000, far above the $46,000 median salary for education majors. Further, less education can even lead to higher earnings, depending on the field of study. Associate degree holders who study science, technology, mathematics and engineering (STEM) earn a median salary $13,000 higher than workers with bachelor’s degrees in psychology & social work. Certainly, credentials help learners unlock career success and earn a family sustaining wage, but field of study is far more important than level of education.  

A separate Georgetown study puts a magnifying glass up to one particular type of credential,  postsecondary certifications, examining earnings for individuals who earned a certification at an Oregon community college. The study finds that, on average, certification earners experienced a 19 percent increase in earnings. And Pell students experience an even larger premium, more than 50 percent of their wages prior to enrollment, further demonstrating the power of short-term certifications to provide an on-ramp to a sustainable career.

How Can States Help Learners Navigate the Credential Environment?

As the universe of postsecondary credentials continues to grow, learners will need support and guidance to help determine which credentials to pursue and where to pursue them. Already, a number of states have developed protocols to review, verify and publish a list of high-quality, industry-recognized credentials for secondary and postsecondary students. A new 50-state scan from the Workforce Data Quality Campaign finds that 30 states identify or plan to identify credentials of value at the state level. However, only 23 states report that they analyze employment and earnings outcomes and only 21 seek regular employer input.

If credentials are going to deliver on their promise, the credentialing system must be transparent and learners must be able to know which credentials are valued in the marketplace and recognized by employers. It is important for states to set up systems to regularly gather and put to use employer input. The evidence is encouraging, but there is still a lot of work to do to help demystify the credentialing marketplace and empower learners to achieve their career goals.

To learn more about credentials of value or state strategies to promote high-quality credentials, visit the Learning that Works Resource Center.

Austin Estes, Senior Policy Associate

Washington State Offers Recommendations for CTE and Workforce Alignment

April 30th, 2018

In 2015 Washington carried out the State Auditor’s review of Washington’s workforce development system. This report was published as part of a series that focuses on audit results in relation to CTE. The audit brought to light that the current CTE classes in Washington’s public schools have the potential to be more closely connected with the state’s labor market.

The following four areas of improvement are discussed, with the guiding goal of closing the skills gap and expanding educational experiences for students:

  • Improve career guidance given to students, and provide it in a classroom setting beginning in the 7th or 8th grade;
  • Strengthen employer engagement to better align CTE programs and courses with high-wage industry-needed skills;
  • Update the list of high-demand programs, strengthen the review of local labor demand data and clarify laws to help reduce the skills gap and
  • Expand the number of CTE dual-credit opportunities to increase the number of pathways from high school to college.

Four state agencies in Washington administer CTE programs, and this report highlights the importance of inter-agency coordination in order to deliver the best outcomes for students and the business community.

Leveraging the Every Student Succeeds Act to Improve Educational Services in Juvenile Justice Facilities

A report by the American Youth Policy Forum details the ways in which the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) provides an opportunity for states to implement accountability measures that ensure incarcerated youth in long-term juvenile justice facilities can pursue education pathways that lead to positive workforce outcomes. Instances of successful accountability measures in Indiana, Florida and Massachusetts are highlighted.

The following three priorities for states are addressed:

  • Data collection and information sharing between state and local education and juvenile justice agencies;
  • An Accountability system that includes educational services within long-term juvenile justice facilities and
  • Measures to hold these educational programs and schools accountable.

States have the chance to utilize ESSA in a way that will better the educational and workforce projections for those in long-term juvenile justice facilities. CTE opportunities have gained attention from juvenile justice facilities as an avenue for youth to successful educational and workforce outcomes. Policymakers and educators can work together to implement an accountability system that emphasizes such educational programs.

Odds and Ends

The Education Commission of the States released three Policy Snapshots in response to the persistent challenge of teacher shortages. These Snapshots cover the following strategies to strengthen the teacher pipeline:


The American Youth Policy Forum shared
a brief on opportunities for alignment with ESSA and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act that would promote college and career readiness for all students.

The Center for American Progress explored the relationship between college, career and life readiness and high school graduation requirements. Their report analyzes the following questions:

  • Are high school graduation requirements for a standard, nonadvanced diploma aligned with requirements for admission to the state’s public university system?
  • Are high school graduation requirements aligned with college and career readiness benchmarks and indicators of a “well-rounded” education – one that includes coursework and other educational experiences in, among other topics, computer science, engineering, health, music and technology?

 

Series

Archives

1