accountability by wuxiangyu


									Perkins Accountability

 Core Indicators

Definitions & Methodology
  Perkins Accountability
The global economy we are now in has
policymakers, educators, business, and
industry leaders all focused upon
strengthening the United States for
competition in this new arena.

Towards this end, career education must
now provide people with the needed
assistance and skills to realize the
opportunities and meet the challenges of
the international workplace.
Accountability is taking a bigger role

 Are the academics and career and technical skills of
  career education postsecondary students being more
  fully developed?

 Are these students being assisted in meeting higher,
  more rigorous standards?

 Are these students being prepared for high skill, high
  wage, or high demand occupations in current or
  emerging professions; or further education?
        CTE Concentrator

 A postsecondary/adult student who: (1) completes
  at least 12 academic or CTE credits within a single
  program area sequence that is comprised of 12 or
  more academic and technical credits and
  terminates in the award of an industry-recognized
  credential, a certificate, or a degree; or

 (2) completes a short-term CTE program
  sequence of less than 12 credit units that
  terminates in an industry-recognized credential, a
  certificate, or a degree.
        CTE Participant

A postsecondary/adult student who has
earned one (1) or more credits in any
CTE program area.
     Postsecondary Indicators

   1P1: Technical Skill Attainment
   2P1: Credential, Certificate, or Diploma
   3P1: Student Retention or Transfer
   4P1: Student Placement
   5P1: Nontraditional Participation
   5P2: Nontraditional Completion
1P1: Technical Skill Attainment

       Number of CTE concentrators who
       passed technical skill assessments that
       are aligned with industry-recognized
       standards if available and appropriate,
       during the reporting year.
1P1: Technical Skill Attainment

      Going for the Gold

   Any external, third-party
 assessment that objectively
measures student attainment of
  industry recognized skills,
appropriate to the educational
 level of CTE concentrators.
             Gold Standard Includes

   National/International credentialing or certification
   State credentialing of licensing exams (e.g.
   State developed exam tied to industry standards
   Industry-developed exam for occupations
    specialties (e.g. Certified Executive Chef)
   Third party-exams measuring technical skills (NOCTI)
                             E-Mail Sent to John Haigh
                                    February 27, 2008
                                             3:51 P.M.

In Michigan, we are able to get information at the gold
level for certain programs but not others. We are
proposing that we report on those for which we can
currently get information. Our plan outlines how we
will add to this each year. Is this okay?
E-Mail Sent From John Haigh
February 28, 2008
8:48 a.m.

                  E-mail sent to Sharon Head
                                    8:53 a.m.

Should we report on all concentrators
even though different measures may
              be used
 (e.g. bronze and gold combined)?
E-mail from Sharon Head
               8:55 a.m.

      States should not report
      on the bronze and
      gold combined method.

     Currently, the focus is
     1P1: Technical Skill Attainment

   States must maintain an ‘approved’ list
   Any test that meets the third-party standard
   Any test that assesses industry-standards

   Colleges can use different tests

        Valid and Reliable
        Measuring students and not tests
 1P1: Technical Skill Attainment
       Going for the Gold

        Assessment Timeline

 College’s ability to get 3rd party assessment
  results (based upon MODAC survey)

 Number of awards conferred – greatest impact

 Programs selected represent 37.89% of awards
  conferred during 2006-07
  1P1: Technical Skill Attainment

           Going for the Gold

 Proposed timeline distributed
  and discussed at MCCDEC

 Builds upon each year by adding programs

 Can still be modified
1P1: Technical Skill Attainment

Security and Protective Services

      43.0102 Corrections
      43.0103 Criminal Justice/Law
       Enforcement Administration
      43.0107 Criminal Justice/Police Science
      43.0202 Fire Services Administration
      43.0203 Fire Science/Firefighting
1P1: Technical Skill Attainment
              Health Related

        51.0601 Dental Assisting/Assistant
        51.0602 Dental Hygiene/Hygienist

   51.0801   Medical/Clinical Assistant
   51.0803   Occupational Therapist Assistant
   51.0805   Pharmacy Technician/Assistant
   51.0904   Emergency Medical Technology
   51.0907   Medical Radiological Tech/Science
1P1: Technical Skill Attainment

              Health Related

   51.0908    Respiratory Care Therapy/Therapist
   51.0909    Surgical Technology/Technologist
   51.0911    Radiological Technology/Science
   51.1004    Clinical/Medical Laboratory Technician
   51.1008    Histological Technician
   51.1601    NURSING (RN)
   51.1613    NURSING (LPN)
   51.1614    Nurse/Nursing Assistant/Aide
1P1: Technical Skill Attainment

        Business Management, Marketing
         and Related Support Services

 52.0901 Hospitality Administration/
         Management, General [HRA]
                        Assessment Timeline

100%                                                       99.81%    100%

90%          N = 16,175

70%                                              66.78%
50%                46.28%





        Baseline   2007-08   2008-09   2009-10   2010-11   2011-12   2012-13
                    Assessment Timeline
                   (Number of Programs)
 N = 245


P                                            Rolling Percent
  0.60                                                             55.10%
t                                                                           44.90%
a                                                    40.82%
g                                   29.80%
         8.57%      13.06%                                     14.29%

         2007-08      2008-09     2009-10          2010-11       2011-12      2012-13

NSWG (Next Steps Work Group)

State Career and Technical Education
Directors and others who share an interest
in the effective implementation of Perkins
Accountability activities.

Monthly conference calls are held for the
group to discuss issues related to
accountability and performance
    Priority for NSWG in 2008

         Occupational Licensure

David Stevens (University of Baltimore) was
invited to present the major findings of his
recently published report based upon input
from a handful of states that have experience
with procuring data on such licenses and on
industry certifications.
         The report concluded:
Such licenses generally meet the
 Perkins IV accountability criteria
High validity
Passable reliability (given geographic
 challenges especially reciprocity),
Typically high agreement with industry
 standards (in most, but not all cases)
 Low quality of timely data availability
  The report also concluded:

 A national approach is not feasible;
 Each state will need to find its best
  way of utilizing this approach;
 There are reasons for increased
  credentialing importance that go beyond
  the technical skill proficiency indicator;
 He expects to see an increase in the
  number of occupations covered.
         Technical Skill Taskforce
            [National Initiative]
 In process is the development of a master plan for
  technical skill assessments.

 A vision for a national assessment system comprising
  of a test item bank has been drafted by a small task

 This will be reviewed by a group of state CTE
  directors and a survey of all states.

 States and test developers will be convened in
  March/April and a feasibility and design report
  composed thereafter.
Validity and Reliability Checklist Taskforce

  To develop a checklist for use by OVAE staff
   when reviewing accountability portion of state
  This will enable them to relay better information to
   policy staff, who determines whether to accept
   the plan as is.
  The members strongly recommended that a
   product be developed by the taskforce that states
   can use.
  Checklist should be different for secondary and
2P1: Credential, Certificate, or Diploma

  Number of CTE concentrators
  who received an industry-
  recognized credential, a
  certificate, or a degree and left
  postsecondary education
  during the reporting year.
2P1: Credential, Certificate, or Diploma

      A “leaver” is defined as a student who is no
      longer enrolled in any postsecondary institution.

      Students who are no longer enrolled at your
      institution should be counted as retained only
      if you can verify the student’s enrollment at
      any other postsecondary institution
2P1: Credential, Certificate, or Diploma

   Students who did not receive an award
   (i.e., certificate or degree) from your college,
   but did receive an industry-recognized
   credential can be counted if data are
   available directly from the credentialing entity.
3P1: Student Retention or Transfer

  Percent of CTE concentrators who
  remained enrolled in their original
  postsecondary institution

  or transferred to another 2- or 4-year
  postsecondary institution

   but did not earn an industry-recognized credential,
  a certificate, or a degree in the previous reporting
      4P1: Student Placement

                 Number/Percent of CTE
                 concentrators who were

         placed or retained in
         military service or
         apprenticeship programs
in the 2nd quarter following the
program year in which they left
postsecondary education
       4P1: Student Placement

Do not include award recipients or other CTE
concentrators who are still enrolled at your institution,
in another postsecondary institution as identified by a
student tracking service, or in another postsecondary
institution as indicated by survey responses.

Do not include students identified as leavers who
indicate via survey responses that they are not
employed and are not seeking employment.
5P1: Nontraditional Participation

  Percent of CTE participants from
  underrepresented gender groups who
  participated (were enrolled) in a program that
  leads to employment in nontraditional fields
  during the reporting year.
 5P2: Nontraditional Completion

Number/Percent of CTE concentrators
from underrepresented gender groups who
completed a program that leads to
employment in nontraditional fields during
the reporting year.
        Non-Traditional Programs

 Listing put together by NAPE (National Alliance
  for Partnerships in Equity)

 Will remain stable for the entire period of the

               High Wage, High Skill,
             High Demand Occupations

This Perkins IV legislation encourages individual
states to develop their own, precise definitions of
these terms for program applications.
Occupational Supply Demand System

  Developed by a national consortium under a grant
  from the U. S. Dept. of Labor to Georgia State
  University's Georgia Career Information Center
  (GCIC) in collaboration with the Georgia Department
  of Labor. GCIC continues to host, update, and make
  refinements to the OSDS.

  4 states have included information
  [Ohio, Georgia, Montana, Oregon]
 Occupational Supply Demand System

 Combines national and state-level occupational
  characteristics, projections, wage trends, and
  industry employment (demand) with postsecondary
  graduation data (supply) for analysis of labor
  markets and training options.

 OSDS helps business and industrial analysts,
  program planners, workforce administrators and
  others determine labor availability and training
  programs offerings based on the supply demand
High Wage, High Skill, or High Demand

       Driven by Occupations
       Crosswalk Between CIP Codes and SOC codes
        Some CIP Code programs train students for
  more than 1 occupation
       Complete Crosswalk can be found at
       Hope to have the Program Inventory
        High Demand Occupations

More than an average employment growth rate
of 7.7% (reported by Michigan Dept of Labor for
all occupations, 2004-2014), or above the
median annual openings (67).
            High Wage Occupations

           Occupations paying at or above the
           median hourly wage of $15.86 or the
           mean annual wage of $41,230 or more
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational
Employment and Wage Estimates, 2006) .
      High Skill Occupations

Minimum educational requirement of postsecondary
training or those occupations with long-term on-the-
job training or related work experience as a minimum
educational requirement, and postsecondary training
or above as a competitive educational requirement.

Many of these occupations may also be defined in
terms of the Occupational Information Network
(O*Net) System, as occupations which could require
at least some college. (O*Net OnLine at
    Perkins IV Core Indicators

 Data for 2007-08 will be collected in the
  Fall (May have to modify due date for

 It will be collected at the program level

           Special Populations

           Tech Prep
         Locals Do Have Options

 Colleges can accept state levels or negotiate
 different targets with the State

Part 4 of the Annual Application, Accountability, has
been updated to allow colleges to either accept or
reject the state proposed levels

If rejects state levels, the college must provide the
level it would like to aim for along with supporting

Targets are negotiated at 2-year intervals
If a local fails to meet the adjusted level for a
                 24 month period:

   The state may withhold all or part of the local’s

   If a state withholds funds from a local program,
   it must use them to provide, through
   alternative arrangements, services and
   activities to students within the area served by
   the local program.
               Work in Progress

   Nothing is carved in stone
   Anything can still be modified
   Reliability and Validity will be an on-going
    issue throughout the legislation
   It will take a few years to refine our core
    indicator data
   Contact Information

Rhonda Burke, Higher Education

To top