The Minnesota Post-Secondary Enrollment Options Program

The Minnesota Post-Secondary Enrollment Options Program: Does Participation in Dual Enrollment Programs Help High School Students Attain Career and Technical Education Majors and Degrees in College?

Pradeep Kotamraju System Director, Perkins Minnesota State Colleges and Universities

Contact Information 500 Wells Fargo Place 30 E. 7th Street St. Paul MN 55101-4946 [email protected] Tel No: 651-282-5569

Paper Submitted for publication to the Community College Journal of Research and Practice, May 2005. 1

I. Introduction

Seeking reform in education is nothing new. The calls for public education stressing core competencies, developing market niches, and generally becoming more accountable have become increasingly loud and have been coming from all quarters for several years, mostly recently from the National Governors Association and State Higher Education Executive Officers (NGA, 2005; SHEEO, 2005). A few years back, calls arose mainly because of growing work force shortages of skilled workers in newly emerging industries (AACC, 1997; National Alliance of Business, 2000). However, with the recent softening in the U.S. economy, the calls are coming from those who have become more emphatic about greater performance and efficient management of publicly funded institutions (MnSCU, 2002; U.S. Department of Education, 2002). Advocates of efficiency in education increasingly want any future educational spending to be tied to results as evidenced by the 2002 No Child Left Behind legislation ( http://www.nochildleftbehind.gov ) The implicit criticism lies in the notion that the learning outcomes at public education institutions do not correlate well with what industry needs in the newly emerging 21st century workplace. Even when students met the growing technical work force needs of industry, there was, and still is, a high and increased level of dissatisfaction about their work readiness skills, and much of it attributed to a general under-preparedness within the high school curricula (Lynch, 2000; MnSCU, 2003; National Commission on the High School Senior Year, 2001).

To tackle directly the general lack of preparedness among high school students to enter post-secondary institutions or the workplace, a multi-pronged research and recommendation strategy for reforming public education, which had begun as far back as the early 1980s, began to achieve consensus in the late 1990s: . Under-preparedness of students required a new emphasis on the standards-based education and a more rigorous testing of all K-12 students. Standards-based education would emphasize core academics such as mathematics, science and the language arts, including reading and writing (Austin and Mahlman 2002; Bishop, Mane, and Bishop 2001; Bottoms, Fox and New, 2000;Chartrand 2000; Marzano and Kendall 1996, 1998). . Educational institutions (P-16) were channeled into emphasizing, within publicly funded programs, improved learner outcomes i.e. meeting specific and a priori determined standard and simultaneously achieve efficiency in management in these publicly funded programs (NGA, 2004, SHEEO, 2005). . Both academic standards and skills-based curricula would be integrated into an organizing system of assessment, credentialing, transfer, and articulation that recognized not just academic degrees, diplomas, and certificates but other types of learning, including work-based and other contextual experiences (National Council of Workforce Education 2002; Vars and Beane 2000; Wills 2002; Wonacott 2000). . Growing US competitive disadvantage meant educational institutions needed to graduate students capable of joining a workforce that would meet the emerging needs of the 21st economy. Skills-based curricula, specifically in those occupations that industry has deemed critical for an optimally functioning new economy, needed to become more widespread within public education (Education Development Center 2000; Galvin 1999; Losh 2000; National Skills Standards Board 2000).

To be sure, even while accountability in education continues to be discussed and debated (AACU, 2002; U.S. Department of Education 2002), policy action is expected to move forward as impending reauthorization of several pieces of federal legislation—Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Act of 1998 (Perkins III), Workforce Investment Act (WIA), Temporary Assistance to Needy Families

1 2 (TANF). These reauthorization efforts are being focused toward meeting customer (read skilled employee for businesses for workforce legislation and well-prepared students and efficiently running secondary and post-secondary institutions for education legislation) needs. The common element that underlies these reauthorization efforts appears to be an increased demand on public education to become more accountable to all its stakeholders, but particularly to its majority customer base i.e. students, new and incumbent workers. However, whatever the final form of these various federal legislative initiatives, education systems and work force-related agencies must reinforce what was begun in the last round of legislative action: the expectation of developing accountability systems and regimes that increasingly intertwine learning with work, and where, increasing achievement, greater opportunities, and varied options will simply not be just a choice; they must be objectively based outcomes that work.

Perkins III is a federal program focusing on career and technical education (CTE) delivered within the secondary and post-secondary education system. The Act’s primary purpose has been to promote reform, innovation, accountability and continuous improvement within CTE by focusing on improving student achievement and preparing students for further learning and entry into high skill high wage careers. The goals of Perkins III are summarized as follows: • Improving the academic skills of students in CTE by making their learning an integral part of high school and college curricula • Strengthening connections between secondary and postsecondary education with Tech Prep as the primary incubator for new ideas, strategies and methods for promoting high school to college transitions • Preparing individuals for occupations in demand that pay family-supporting wages by requiring the concentration and completion of post-secondary certificates, diplomas and degrees • Using data for decision making to invest in high quality local programming

Many of the above goals have been translated into successful activities and programs (for example, the Secondary Technical Education Program (STEP) in Minnesota) within several states. Also, research over the past several years at the CTE student and program level is beginning to show the successful improvements, particularly if the students have specific education goals in mind and the programs are focused on not only academic knowledge improvement but increasing technical skills as well (Castellano, Stringfield and Stone, 2002). Much criticism has been directed at the actual performance of the Perkins, and particularly Tech Prep, programs (NAVE, 2004; OMB, 2004). In the context of this presentation, the criticism centers on Perkins being unable to account for the success with which CTE students have transitioned from high school to college, and when they do, to what extent such students enter college with the appropriate level of preparation. Focusing on the students that have been directly impacted by the Perkins III Act, this paper seeks to redress this perception.

This paper specifically addresses the following question: do dual enrollment programs improve career and technical education (CTE) student academic performance and technical skill development once students transition from high school into college? Using standard statistical techniques, data from the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities Integrated Student Record System (ISRS) data is extracted, and a database developed, for analyzing the performance, as measured by college cumulative grade point average (GPA) of students involved in the Post-Secondary Enrollment Options (PSEO) program in Minnesota, particularly those enrolled as Perkins students at two-year colleges. The paper is divided into the following sections. With Section I being this Introduction, Section II highlights some of the issues that have confronted different states with regard to dual enrollment programs (Dual enrollment programs). Section III describes briefly the Post-Secondary Enrollment Options (PSEO) program in Minnesota and presents some basic data and results from an earlier study (Kotamraju, 2004). Section

2 3 IV outlines the methodology used for the paper. Section V summarized the results obtained. Section VI provides study conclusions and future directions of the research.

II. Dual Enrollment Programs and Polices in Minnesota: Data, Access and Quality Issues

There is wide variation in how dual enrollment programs are structured across the states (Boswell, 2001; Bailey and Karp, 2005; Karp et. al, 2004; Robertson, Chapman and Gaskin, 2001). Karp et al (2004) have summarized the different ways in which states structure, set policy, and monitor their dual enrollment programs. The authors of this Federal Department of Education funded report identify 10 different features, some or all of which are present in different states. These features include target population; admission requirements; location; student mix; the faculty qualifications; course content; method of teaching; credit earning; program intensity; funding; and state mandates. As outlined below, Minnesota has many of these features within its dual enrollment programs (Minnesota State Colleges and Universities, 2001). For Minnesota, these ten features can be categorized around three sets of emerging issues1 and these are taken up below.

The first set relates to program mix and intensity. Major stumbling blocks in optimizing the program mix and intensity appears to be course content and equivalency between high school and college curricula; and the credentials of the high school instructor to teach college-level courses; and the ability of the student to carry the credits universally. Also, if the course is taught at the high school itself, and if the college or university is unable to be part of the supervisory process, there is greater reluctance on the part of the college because of their inability to judge the quality of teaching.

The second set of issues relates to the financial and distribution mechanism of state and local funds used in providing education to high school students desiring to take college-level courses. At the secondary level, where funds generally follow the student to where he or she is being taught there is a reluctance of relinquishing much needed funds. Moreover, the requirement of having classes of sufficient size and scope, particularly in non-metropolitan and rural areas, where teaching and other resources are much tighter, the insufficiency of financial resources becomes a disincentive when high schools want to offer college-level courses. At the post-secondary level, the effort and cost of following up on such students is usually not sufficiently covered by the total state funds the college receives. As indicated below both secondary and post-secondary institutions within Minnesota are seeking ways in which to maximize the use of PSEO financial resources through innovative program structures.2

The third set of issues, and the one directly related to this paper, relates to “transcripting” the dual enrollment credits once a student has successfully the program. Multiple efforts to resolve the credit transfer issue between the secondary and postsecondary levels on a broad basis remain unresolved. Most credit transfer occurs on a program-to-program basis, for example, Tech Prep articulation agreements. In general, other than PSEO, the burden for including the college credits taken by high school students as part of their official transcripts is placed upon the individual students seeking the credit transfer even if an articulation agreement between the sending high school and receiving college might exist. Even if the student is able to have the credits placed on his or her transcript, what credit gets counted towards varies across programs and institutions. Also, even if high schools and colleges locally or regionally are willing to share unit record information and put in place credit “transcripting”

1 These same set of issues have also emerged elsewhere such as within Tech Prep. However, they usually are discussed within the context of articulation agreements commonly seen in Tech Prep programs. 2 One school district and Minnesota and a local two-year college have pooled the state funds for the dual enrollment program into a commonly held pot and split it three ways. The innovative part of this approach appears to be the allocation of a third of the common funds towards general program development and assistance. 3 4 agreements, state laws prevent the sharing of the personal information of high school students, particularly to agencies outside the secondary school system. Finally, failure to accept these “college in the high school” credits even after the student has successful completed coursework within an articulated program sometimes leads to “wastage” of private and public resources despite the good intentions with which the dual enrollment program was proposed.

Minnesota has for some time been able to address the above issues that are now confronting many school districts and post-secondary institutions across the United States by having established the Post- Secondary Enrollment Options (PSEO) program as far back as 1985. Described by Boswell (2001) as a model program, the ability of any PSEO high school student in Minnesota to receive a college transcript provides state policymakers and researchers just-in-time information regarding the progress of such students and be able to judge their relative performance both while taking college courses while in high school as well as their performance in college once they enter as full-fledged students. Using the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities Integrated Student Record System (ISRS), a profile of PSEO students has been developed and analyzing the extent to which PSEO students make transitions from high school to college and beyond have begun. Additionally, a recent effort within the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities ISRS data has been to create a single unified Perkins database for all Perkins- eligible colleges. The ability to access the unified Perkins database has led to several new avenues for continuous improvement and research-based analysis of student performance and achievement. This paper combines the Perkins database with the PSEO database to attempt at making the case for the value-added contribution of CTE towards improving student achievement. The next section briefly outlines the Minnesota PSEO program.

III. The Minnesota Post-Secondary Enrollment Option Program

In 1985, Minnesota was the very first state to legislatively put in place a dual enrollment program called Post-Secondary Enrollment Option (PSEO) Program. Figure 1 schematically shows high school to college transitions in Minnesota. As can be seen in Figure 1, the primary difference between Tech Prep and PSEO is that under PSEO high school students receive transcripted college credits while they are still attending high school. Such a provision does not exist under Tech Prep3. This paper focuses exclusively on the PSEO program.

Enacted as a Minnesota Statute, PSEO was defined as program in which qualified high school students in the 11th or 12th grades were permitted to enroll in college courses at any post-secondary institution in Minnesota. The PSEO law was continuously being refined and they related to student and parent notification, program finance, and contractual agreements. In 1992, Minnesota legislature permitted secondary school districts to enter into direct contracts with post-secondary institutions rather than a direct payment from the State Department of Education. High school students enroll at a college or a university and took college or university courses and received secondary and post-secondary credit. The college or university courses, taught by a post-secondary faculty, could be completed on a college or university campus, at a high school, or at another location (PSEO); or the college or university course is taught by a high school teacher, mentored by post-secondary faculty, at the high school (concurrent enrollment).

With the official 1995 merger of the two separate two-year college systems (community colleges and technical colleges) and the state universities into the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities (MnSCU) system, one of the first policies enacted by the Board of Trustees was the PSEO policy. The

3 The fact that Tech Prep credits are not shown on an official transcript within the MnSCU system lead to an undercount of the full extent of dual enrollment program activity in Minnesota. 4 5 MnSCU PSEO policy had an expectation that “students shall be admitted according to criteria that promotes progress through college-level course work and augments their continued academic growth

F i g u r e 1 : H i g h S c h o o l T o C o l l e g e T r a n s i t i o n : T h e D u a l E n r o l l m e n t M o d e l I n M i n n e s o t a Post-Secondary Concurrent Tech Enrollment Options (PSEO) Enrollment Prep

MN Statute Perkins Federal Law Board Policy Program Articulation Agreements MN Department Contractual of Education Arrangements

College/University College/University High School Courses Offered at Courses Offered at Courses Equivalent to College/University High School College Courses

Transcripting Credits for College/University Courses Tech Prep Taken by High School Students Certificates

5 6 consistent with board policies and system procedures.” Criteria for admission included meeting admissions standards that test the ability of high school students to perform college work. Generally speaking, to be a PSEO student, the high school class rank or score on a nationally normed- reference assessment test is at least in the upper 50 percent. A variant of the PSEO program that has developed more recently but is gaining much more in popularity is Concurrent Enrollment Programs (CEP). Under this variant of the Minnesota PSEO program, courses offered must be college-level, offered in the high school and approved by the post-secondary institution’s curriculum process. High school instructors must be approved both by the post-secondary and secondary institution and must have a post-secondary mentor. PSEO and non-PSEO students cannot be enrolled in the same high school class, but if they are placed in the same class, PSEO students must be the majority.

Funding for PSEO flows to postsecondary institutions from two sources: (1) either the Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) or local school districts, and (2) the legislature in the form of partial enrollment-based funding. In FY 2004, MDE spent nearly $22 million to support high school students who earned college credits at MnSCU institutions. While this investment reflects significant savings for students and parents for college credits earned at no cost to them, it results in a loss to MnSCU because the state funding formula provides only half the full-year equivalent (FYE) enrollment funding for PSEO students that it provides for “regular” college students. The loss to MnSCU annually in recent years is approximately $6 million. In addition, state tuition dollars are allocated at a single rate that does not recognize differing costs by institutional type and size. Increasingly, colleges/universities and school districts are entering intro contractual arrangements to cover the costs of PSEO in ways that better meet the needs of both entities.

Data and information on PSEO participation indicates the following:

 An estimated 21,000 high school students (approximately one-sixth of 11th and 12th graders) in Minnesota participated in PSEO in FY 2004. Of these, about one-third took courses on college or university campuses and two-thirds through off-campus courses (primarily through concurrent enrollment).  Concurrent enrollment is the fastest-growing means for students to participate in PSEO. Some students and administrators prefer this approach. For students, it saves travel time and keeps them among their peers and able to participate fully in a variety of school activities. Administrators and teachers value it as a means to keep some of their best students on-site at the high school; in addition, the cost negotiated with a college or university is usually less than the cost of student participation in on-campus PSEO courses.  MnSCU is the dominant provider of college credits to Minnesota high school juniors and seniors. In FY 2004, 16,830 students were enrolled in PSEO courses in a system college or university. This represents 80% of the total student enrollment in PSEO that year. As is true of PSEO statewide, approximately one-third were enrolled in courses offered on a college or university campus and approximately two-thirds were taking courses offered according to agreements (most often concurrent enrollment courses).  For students ready to pursue college coursework, PSEO provides learning opportunities beyond what some high schools can offer and allows them to “jump-start” a college education. A small but growing number of students are graduating from high school with enough credits to also earn a two- year degree. These opportunities are consistent with those being discussed as means to make the late high school years more meaningful and engaging for students, including the recent recommendations of the Citizens League of Minnesota (2004).  It is clear that some PSEO students lack the skills and habits necessary to be successful in a college setting and/or in a college-level course. This becomes especially problematic when failing a PSEO 6 7 course results in a failure to graduate from high school. Colleges and universities have developed special orientations and other services to help students understand and meet PSEO expectations. MnSCU has placed a priority on collecting information about best practices in student advising and other approaches to enhancing the success of PSEO students and on sharing that information with all MnSCU institutions.  The rapid growth of PSEO, and particularly of concurrent enrollment programs (CEP), has created new challenges to ensuring quality and advancing students’ academic achievement. MnSCU is currently working in partnership with the University of Minnesota to assess satisfaction with concurrent enrollment programs, track the effectiveness of programs, and share best practices among CEP providers. To the extent appropriate, the standards established by the National Association of Concurrent Enrollment Partnerships are being used to guide Minnesota practices.

In an earlier study by this author (Kotamraju, 2004), further information about PSEO students and their course taking activity, as it relates to technical and academic courses, either exclusively or in combination (see methodology section for details on course taking activity determination) is shown in the figures below. The following conclusions were obtained: • PSEO students in Perkins-eligible programs are a very small proportion of the PSEO student population but they take a higher yearly credit load than PSEO students that are not Perkins- eligible • A significant proportion of PSEO students, corresponding credit hours, and FYEs, are enrolled in BOTH LAGS and CTE courses, with substantially fewer students, fewer corresponding credit hours and fewer FYEs in CTE ONLY courses • While total number of students, corresponding credit hours and FYEs are about the same regardless of institutional type, the distribution among the three forms of course taking is different in the college than in the university. • CTE ONLY courses is a very small proportion all around but is slightly higher in the colleges • The annual credit load of students taking BOTH LAGS and CTE4 courses is two to three times what it is for the students taking LAGS ONLY courses or students just taking CTE ONLY courses. • The split between course taking that includes BOTH LAGS and CTE courses and course taking that involves taking LAGS ONLY courses is about even in the colleges, but at the university level, LAGS ONLY course taking is twice as much as course taking involving BOTH LAGS and CTE courses.

This paper extends the above study but concentrates only on colleges, all of whom are Perkins-eligible institutions. The data analysis is also refined further and more sophisticated statistical analysis applied to judge relative performance (GPAs) of students with the PSEO experience with those students not having such experience. Although still controversial, the use of GPA as a measure of performance has long been established tradition in education research, particularly in the area of transfer and admissions (Higgins and Kastinas, 1999; Kim, 2002; Perfetto, 2002; Townsend, 2002). While similar studies are beginning to emerge as interest and focus in dual enrollment programs national begins to expand, currently, a perfunctory survey of the literature indicated that there were only a few that used an applied empirical approach. Puyear et. al. (2002) quotes several studies from Arizona that showed comparison between students in dual enrollment programs with those that were not participating in such programs using follow-up studies. The gist of the conclusion from a review of these Arizona studies appears to be that students enrolled in dual enrollment programs in Arizona have higher high school graduation rates, more likely to attend post-secondary institutions and have higher GPAs. This study, it is hoped will be

4 See Methodology section for definitions of LAGS ONLY, CTE ONLY and BOTH LAGS and CTE 7 8 one of the first in a long line of empirical research in the area of dual enrollment programs. The next section discusses the methodology for the study.

8 9 F i g u r e 2 : P r o f i l i n g P S E O S t u d e n t s 2 0 0 3 • Overall: – Male=36.7%; Female=63.3% – White=94.0%; Minority= 6.0% (known values) – 17 Yr-Olds=16.5%; 18 Yr-Olds=50.8%; 19 Yr-Olds=32.7%1 – Four-Year University=27.6%; Two-Year College=73.4% – Among all PSEO students, 1.3% (204) leave with a post- secondary credential • Two-Year Colleges: – Male=39.6%; Female=60.1% – White=94.0%; Minority= 6.0% (known values) – 17 Yr-Olds=16.5%; 18 Yr-Olds=50.6%; 19 Yr-Olds=32.9%1 • Four-Year University: – Male=36.1%; Female=63.9% – White=94.0%; Minority= 6.0% (known values) – 17 Yr-Olds=16.5%; 18 Yr-Olds=51.2%; 19 Yr-Olds=32.3%1

1. Known values with 17-Yr Olds includes Ages 14,15,16; and, 19-Yr Olds includes Age 20 F i g u r e 3 : F i g u r e 4 : P S E O S t u d e n t s E n g a g e d i n P S E O S t u d e n t s E n g a g e d i n C T E - R e l a t e d 1 C o u r s e s C T E - R e l a t e d 1 C o u r s e s

Students Per Institution FY2003 FYE/ Institution FY2003

160 6 0 0 140 5 0 0 120 Both Types 100 Non-Technical 4 0 0 B o t h T y p e s 80 N o n - T e c h n ic a l Technical 3 0 0 T e c h n i c a l 60 A l l P S E O S t u d e n t s 40 All PSEO Students 2 0 0 20 10 0 0

0 College University All Institutions College University All Institutions

1. Courses in CIPs that have been assigned to the one of the 16 career clusters 1. Courses in CIPs that have been assigned to the one of the 16 career clusters as determined by the Federal department of Education as determined by the Federal department of Education F i g u r e 5 : P S E O S t u d e n t s E n g a g e d i n C T E - R e l a t e d 1 C o u r s e s

Credits/ Student FY2003

1 8 B o t h T y p e s N o n - T e c h n i c a l 1 2 T e c h n i c a l 6 A l l P S E O S t u d e n t s

0 College University All Institutions

1. Courses in CIPs that have been assigned to the one of the 16 career clusters as determined by the Federal department of Education

9 10 Source: Kotamraju 2004

III. Methodology

The Integrated Student Record System (ISRS) of the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities System is the primary source of all student information. A variety of student data and other information are inputted in to ISRS at the institution and campus level. This data then is combined into a series of Oracle-based production tables, which are then summarized in two ways: • A series of tables, known as the replicated tables, are periodically produced and updated for use by a variety of staff and constituent groups within the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities System • Known as the Oracle Warehouse tables, and powered by a Hyperion-Brio interface, a second set of summary tables are produced by staff at the Office of Chancellor, Minnesota State Colleges and Universities to be used both at the System level, as well at the individual institution level for compliance, analysis, strategy and decision-making.

This study uses ISRS to combine three different data tables, each containing data on one of three elements of this study. In essence this study takes information on students enrolled in Post-Secondary Enrollment Options (PSEO), combines it with course information taken both as a PSEO student as well as a full-fledged college student. The third set of data that interfaces with the PSEO information data and the course taking data is the Perkins Brio database, which identifies information about the involvement of two-year college students within the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities in Perkins-related activities. Hence this study is restricted to PSEO students attending two-year colleges within the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system.

The following steps were undertaken to create a data set and make it ready for analysis. The steps are: 1. High school students taking college courses as PSEO students are identified. These students took classes, while they were in 11th and 12th grades, anytime during the two academic years 1999-2000 and 2000-2001, after which these students graduated from high school in Summer 2001. Besides pertinent demographic information, the specific data on cumulative grade point average (GPA) was extracted. 2. The PSEO students were matched up to course-taking data for the academic years 1999-2000 and 2000-2001. The courses taken by these students were either classified as career and technical (CTE) or liberal arts & general studies (LAGS). Each PSEO student is then identified as either taking LAGS ONLY, BOTH LAGS and CTE, and, CTE ONLY. 3. The identified PSEO students were then matched up to student data available for the academic years 2001-2002, 2002-2003 and 2003-2004. The PSEO students included in the study: a. Attended the same two-year college as full-fledged college students in which they were taking college courses as high school students; and, b. Entered as full-fledged college students in the Fall 2001 and were taking courses anytime during the three academic years between Fall 2001 and Spring 2004. 4. To set up the control groups (see below for specific description), the same criteria (described in (2) above), was also applied to those college students who never had the PSEO experience. Also, from the entire sample, for both the PSEO students as well as the control group students, students that took developmental courses in college were excluded. A total of 3,639 students were included in the sample for this study, and of the 3,639 students, 461 students had PSEO experience. 5. The PSEO students and the control group students were then matched up to the Perkins Brio data. The purpose here was to identify the Perkins status of each student in the data used in the

10 11 analysis. Students within the Perkins database not classified as Perkins were further subdivided into those having a degree (Not Perkins Completer) and those yet to receive a degree (No Degree Not Perkins). 6. For both the PSEO students and the control group, the following variables were used in the analysis: a. Student ID b. PSEO Experience (Yes or No) c. Gender d. Minority Status e. Cumulative GPA f. PSEO GPA g. PSEO Course Type (LAGS ONLY, BOTH LAGS and CTE, and, CTE ONLY) h. Degree Received5 (Yes or No) i. Adjusted Perkins Status

7. As indicated in a previous section, there are very few minority students participating in the PSEO program, and therefore the analysis in this paper is restricted only to gender differences. Further, since the focus of the paper is to examine the participation of career and technical students in PSEO programs, the distribution of student performance by adjusted Perkins status is crossed with gender.

V. Summary of Results

The following can be said, in the aggregate, of the study sample: . Of the 3,639 students, nearly 13 percent (461 students) took PSEO courses while in high school. About 54% of the 461 students received a degree with about 46% had no received degree. . Of the total students with PSEO experience, men made up 43% and women made up 57%. Perkins students made up 59% and the remaining 41% were non-Perkins students. . Of those receiving a degree, 52% were Perkins students and 48% were non-Perkins; of those having no received degree, one-third was non-Perkins and the remaining two-thirds were Perkins. . When distributing the number of students by PSEO course type, 45% are students who enrolled Liberal Arts and General Studies courses (LAGS ONLY6). 42% enrolled in both Career and Technical Education (CTE7) courses (BOTH LAGS and CTE); and, the remaining 13% enrolled in CTE ONLY courses.

Tables 1-4 below are obtained when cross-tabulating degree status with course type for students with PSEO experience, which is further broken by gender and Perkins status. Tables 5 show the results from the analysis of variance tests that were done to test the differences in PSEO GPAs among different course taking types cross-tabulated by gender. Table 6 shows analysis of variance results that were done to test the differences in cumulative GPAs between student with or without PSEO experience and cross-tabulated by Perkins status. Tables 7 shows the results from the analysis of variance tests which were done to test differences in cumulative GPAs across different course taking types, and results were obtained when different course taking types were cross-tabulated by Perkins status. Presented below is a summary of the information shown in Table 1-7.

5Received degree implies that the students in the sample leave with a post-secondary award anytime during the period of study (FY2002-2004). Students in the sample classified as having no received degree indicates that the ISRS data does not show a post-secondary award for such students during this time period. 6 LAGS also includes courses students take in Science and Mathematics. 7 CTE courses generally are courses in applied subjects, usually offered in the 16 career cluster areas 11 12

Table 1: Percent Distribution of PSEO Course Taking By Degree Received and by Gender

% Within PSEO Course Type % within DEGREE 60.0% 80.0% LAGS Only 70.0% 50.0% Male No Deg Both LAGS and CTE 60.0% 40.0% Male Yes Deg 50.0% CTE Only 30.0% 40.0% Female No Deg 30.0% 20.0% 20.0% Female Yes Deg 10.0% 10.0%

0.0% 0.0%

LAGS Only Both LAGS and CTE CTE Only No Deg Male Yes Deg Male No Deg Female Yes Deg Female

Measure of Association between PSEO Course Type and Degree Received: Male- Chi-Square Value 7.6 (Stat. Sig. at 5% Level) Female- Chi-Square Value 6.7 (Stat. Sig. at 5% Level)

Table 2: Percent Distribution of PSEO Course Taking by Degree Received and by Perkins Status

% Within PSEO Course Type % Within DEGREE 80.0% 80.0% LAGS Only No Perkins No Deg 70.0% 70.0% Both LAGS and CTE 60.0% 60.0% CTE Only No Perkins Yes Deg 50.0% 50.0% 40.0% 40.0% 30.0% 30.0% Yes Perkins No Deg 20.0% 20.0% 10.0% 10.0% Yes Perkins Yes Deg 0.0% 0.0% No Perkins No No Perkins Yes Yes Perkins No Yes Perkins Yes LAGS Only Both LAGS and CTE Only CTE Deg Deg Deg Deg

Measure of Association between PSEO Course Type and Degree Received: No Perkins- Chi-Square Value 2.4 (Stat. Sig. Not Significant) Yes Perkins- Chi-Square Value 26.8 (Stat. Sig. at 1% Level)

Variation of Degree Received within PSEO Course Type by Gender (Table 1) - For both male and female students taking LAGS ONLY courses, not having a received degree has a relative higher percentage than those having received a degree

12 13 - For both male and female students taking BOTH LAGS and CTE courses, the percentages for those with received degrees is relatively higher but spread between received degrees and no received degrees is larger for males than females - For both male and female students taking CTE ONLY courses, the percentages for those with received degrees is significantly higher but here the spread between received degrees and no received degrees is larger for females than males

Variation of PSEO Course Type within Degree Status by Gender (Table 1) - For either gender, for those without received degrees, PSEO students taking exclusively LAGS courses were in relatively higher proportions than the other two course types. Males and females took BOTH LAGS and CTE courses in about the same proportions, but male students had a relatively higher proportion of CTE ONLY courses while female students had relatively higher percentages of LAGS ONLY courses - For either gender, for those with received degrees, PSEO students taking exclusively BOTH CTE and LAGS courses were in relatively higher proportions than the other two course types. However, for males, the proportion of CTE ONLY courses is about the same as that of LAGS ONLY courses, but for females, the proportion of CTE ONLY courses is much smaller than that of LAGS ONLY courses.

Implications • All students that had no received degrees take LAGS ONLY courses in greater proportion than the other course types. • Students with received degrees are more likely to have taken BOTH LAGS and CTE courses than the other two course types. • When the other two course types are chosen, women students are more likely to take LAGS ONLY courses while men students are more likely to take CTE ONLY courses. • When students take BOTH LAGS and CTE courses, it appears men have a relatively higher proportion of received degrees than women. On the other hand, when CTE ONLY courses are taken, women have a relatively higher proportion of received degrees than men.

Variation of PSEO Course Type within Degree Status by Perkins Status (Table 2) - Students with no received degrees who do not focus on Perkins took relatively more LAGS ONLY courses but those with received degrees took BOTH CTE and LAGS courses in relatively higher proportions.

- Perkins students with no received degree took LAGS ONLY courses the most, and CTE ONLY courses the least, with BOTH LAGS and CTE courses falling in the middle.

- For Perkins students having received degrees, LAGS ONLY courses, in percentage terms, is the least in value, and CTE the most in value, with BOTH CTE and LAGS falling in the middle.

Variation of Degree Received within PSEO Course Type by Perkins Status (Table 2) - For those students taking LAGS ONLY courses, Perkins students not having received degrees has a relative higher percentage than those having received degrees for Perkins students but the percentages reverse when looking at non-Perkins students

13 14 - For those students taking BOTH LAGS and CTE courses, the percentages for those with received degrees is higher for both Perkins and non-Perkins students but the gap is much smaller for Perkins students - Not surprisingly for students taking CTE ONLY courses in high school the percentage of Perkins students with received degrees far exceed those Perkins students that have no received degrees

Implications • When students taking LAGS ONLY courses, the most likely group to have no received degree is a Perkins student, but when the Perkins student takes a BOTH LAGS and CTE courses, they are more likely to receive a degree • Perkins and non-Perkins students with received degrees appear to take the PSEO course type that best suits their future college plans. Non-Perkins students take LAGS ONLY courses and Perkins students take CTE ONLY courses.

To determine if there exists a linear association between PSEO course type and degree received a chi- square test is conducted. When the relationship is tested separately for males and females, the result is statistically significant at the five percent level. Finally, when tested for Perkins and non-Perkins students separately, the relationship between PSEO course type and degree received is not statistically significant for non-Perkins students but it is, at the one percent level, for Perkins students.

Variation of Degree Status within PSEO Experience by Gender (Table 3) - For either gender, for those without the PSEO experience, received degrees are in higher proportions. However, the difference between received and no received degrees is quite small, but larger for females than males. - For either gender, for those with the PSEO experience, students with received degrees are in higher proportions. However, the relative difference between received and no received degrees is quite small, but larger for males than females.

Variation of PSEO Experience within Degree Status by Gender (Table 3)

- For either gender, for those without received degrees, the percentage of students with PSEO experience is relatively smaller, but for those with received degrees this percentage is higher

Implications • Both male and female students with received degrees are more likely to have PSEO experience that those with no received degrees. • However, men have a stronger likelihood to have received degrees if they have the PSEO experience. • Among those without PSEO experience, women are more likely to have received degrees

Variation of Degree Status within PSEO Experience by Perkins Status (Table 4) - For those non-Perkins students without the PSEO experience, the percentage of students without received degrees is in higher proportions than those students having received degrees. However, for Perkins students, these respective relative percentages are about the same. - For non-Perkins students with the PSEO experience, those with received degrees are in higher proportions than those non-Perkins students without the PSEO experience. However,

14 15 the difference between the relative percentages for received and for no received degrees for Perkins students is small. -

15 16 Table 3: Percent Distribution of PSEO Experience by Degree Received and by Gender

% within PSEO Experience % within DEGREE

100.0% 70.0% 90.0% 60.0% 80.0% 50.0% 70.0% Male No Deg 60.0% 40.0% No PSEO Male Yes Deg 50.0% 30.0% Yes PSEO Female No Deg 40.0% Female Yes Deg 20.0% 30.0% 10.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% No Deg Yes No Deg Yes 0.0% Male Deg Female Deg No PSEO Yes PSEO Male Female

Measure of Association between PSEO Experience and Degree Received: Male- Chi-Square Value 11.3 (Stat. Sig. at 1% Level) Female- Chi-Square Value 23.2 (Stat. Sig. at 1% Level)

Table 4: Percent Distribution of PSEO Experience By Degree Received and by Perkins Status

% within PSEO Experience % within DEGREE

100.0% 80.0% 90.0% 70.0% 80.0% 60.0% No Perkins 70.0% No Deg 50.0% 60.0% No Perkins No PSEO Yes Deg 40.0% 50.0% Yes PSEO Yes Perkins 30.0% 40.0% No Deg Yes Perkins 30.0% 20.0% Yes Deg 20.0% 10.0%

10.0% 0.0% No No Yes Yes 0.0% Perkins Perkins Perkins Perkins No PSEO Yes PSEO No Deg Yes Deg No Deg Yes Deg

Measure of Association between PSEO Experience and Degree Received: No Perkins- Chi-Square Value 63.9 (One Percent Level) Yes Perkins- Chi-Square Value 2.0 (Stat. Sig. Not Significant)

Variation of PSEO Experience within Degree Status by Perkins Status (Table 4)

- For both Perkins and non-Perkins students, the proportions of students with received degrees that have the PSEO experience is higher than those students that did not have such an experience. - Whether it is for students with received degrees or for those without received degrees, the gap between the percentage with PSEO experience and those without is substantial for non- Perkins students. - For Perkins students, whether they have a received degree or not, the gap between the percentage with PSEO experience and those without is small.

Implications • For non-Perkins students, there appears to be a relationship between degree received and PSEO course experience, and for those with PSEO experience, there is no association between PSEO course type and degree received. • However, for Perkins students, there appears to be no association between degree received and PSEO experience, but when they do have the PSEO experience there is an association between PSEO course type and degree received.

To determine if there exists a linear association between PSEO experience and degree received a chi- square test is conducted. For male and female students tested separately, the relationship between PSEO experience and degree received is statistically significant at the one percent level. Also, for non-Perkins students, a statistically significant relationship (at the one percent level) exists between the students’ PSEO experience and degreed received. However, there is no such statistical significance observed when tested for Perkins students separately.

Mean Differences in PSEO GPAs between PSEO Course Types (Table 5) . Overall, it appears that PSEO students who took CTE ONLY courses have the highest mean GPA. The other two course types have identical mean GPAs. . For males, those who took CTE ONLY courses have the highest mean GPA, those who took LAGS ONLY courses have the lowest mean GPA, with the mean GPA of those students who took BOTH LAGS and CTE courses falling in between. . For females, the three mean GPAs for the three different course types are in reverse order to that of males. . It should be noted that the spread in the mean GPAs by course types is much wider for males than it is for females. . The differences in mean GPAs by PSEO course type are not statistically significant, at an overall level, or by gender.

Implications • When comparing means PSEO GPAs of students with PSEO experience across different PSEO course types, there is no apparent (statistical) difference in the means. • Mean PSEO GPAs vary much more widely for men than women and the highest GPA for them is when they take CTE ONLY courses; for women, the highest GPA appears to be when they take LAGS ONLY courses.

Table 5: Average PSEO GPA by PSEO Course Taking by Gender 2002-2004

Type of Mean Mean Std. Dev. N F-Value F-Significance PSEO Course Taken Difference LAGS Only 3.03 0.708 126 Both LAGS and CTE 3.00 0.642 119 0.03 Female CTE Only 2.98 0.690 17 0.05 0.02 0.088 Not Significant All PSEO 3.01 0.675 262 LAGS Only 2.83 0.656 67 Both LAGS and CTE 2.92 0.662 91 (-)0.09 Male CTE Only 3.10 0.627 41 (-)0.27 (-)0.18 2.090 Not Significant All PSEO 2.93 0.656 199 LAGS Only 2.96 0.695 193 All PSEO Both LAGS and CTE 2.96 0.650 210 0.00 Students CTE Only 3.06 0.642 58 (-)0.10 (-)0.10 0.568 Not Significant All PSEO 2.98 0.668 461

Table 6: Average College Cumulative GPA by PSEO Experience and by Perkins Status: All Students 2002-2004

Type of Perkins Status Mean Std. Dev. N F-Value F-Significance PSEO Course Taken None Taken 1.94 1.051 406 Non-Degreed All PSEO 2.82 0.612 73 49.069 One Percent Level Not Perkins All Courses 2.07 1.046 479

None Taken 1.88 0.994 904 Perkins All PSEO 2.55 0.806 85 36.792 One Percent Level Participant All Courses 1.93 0.997 989

None Taken 2.47 0.674 561 Perkins All PSEO 2.45 0.679 55 0.052 Not Significant Concentrator All Courses 2.47 0.674 616 None Taken 3.17 0.483 1137 Perkins All PSEO 3.15 0.464 130 0.229 Not Significant Completer All Courses 3.17 0.481 1267

None Taken 3.30 0.446 170 Degreed Not All PSEO 3.20 0.434 118 3.602 Ten Percent Level Perkins All Courses 3.26 0.443 288

None Taken 2.53 0.974 3178 All Statuses All PSEO 2.92 0.655 461 69.410 One Percent Level All Courses 2.58 0.948 3639

18 19 Mean Differences in College Cumulative GPA

PSEO Experience and Perkins Status (Table 6) . In general, students with the PSEO experience have a higher mean GPA than those students that never had the experience. . However, the difference in mean GPAs between those with, and those without, the PSEO experience, narrows as the student increases his or her focus on CTE and approaches degree completion. . For non-degree non-Perkins students, the mean differences are statistically significant at the one percent level and are statistically significant at the ten percent level for non-Perkins degreed students. . The mean differences in GPA are statistically significant at the one-percent level for Perkins participants but are not statistically significant for Perkins concentrators and completers.

PSEO Course Type Taking and Perkins Status (Table 7)

. Overall, there appears to be a statistically significant difference (at the one percent level) between mean GPAs across different PSEO course types. However, post-hoc tests indicate that the difference is due to pair-wise mean differences (statistically significant at the one percent level) between the PSEO course type “None Taken” and with each of the other three course types. . The difference in mean GPAs across course types seems to be strongest for non-degreed non- Perkins students and for Perkins participants. For both non-degreed non-Perkins and Perkins participants, there is a statistically significant difference (at the one percent level) between the mean GPAs across the three different PSEO course types. . Among students that are classified as either non-degreed non-Perkins or Perkins participants, the post-hoc statistical tests indicate that the pair-wise mean differences between “None Taken” and “LAGS ONLY” and between “None Taken” and “BOTH CTE and LAGS” are statistically significant at the one percent level.

Implications • The mean cumulative GPAs of students with PSEO experience is higher (and statistically significant) than the mean cumulative GPAs of students without PSEO experience. • The difference in mean GPAs between those with, and those without, the PSEO experience narrows as the student increases his or her focus on CTE and approaches degree completion. • The overall differences in cumulative mean GPA can be attributed to the pair-wise mean GPA differences between students not taking any PSEO courses and those students taking LAGS ONLY courses and BOTH LAGS and CTE courses.

Table 7: Average College Cumulative GPA by PSEO Course Taking and by Perkins Status: All Students 2002-2004

Type of Perkins Status Mean Std. Dev. N Mean Difference F-Value PSEO Course Taken None Taken 1.94 1.051 406 (-)0.95*** Non-Degreed LAGS Only 2.89 0.648 49 Not Perkins Both LAGS and CTE 2.69 0.517 24 (-)0.75*** 0.20 24.862*** CTE Only All Courses 2.07 1.046 479

None Taken 1.88 0.994 904 Perkins LAGS Only 2.63 0.800 48 (-)0.75*** Both LAGS and CTE 2.53 0.746 33 (-)0.65*** 0.10 13.472*** Participant CTE Only 1.68 1.050 4 0.20 0.95 0.950 All Courses 1.93 0.997 989

None Taken 2.47 0.674 561 Perkins LAGS Only 2.24 0.674 10 0.23 Both LAGS and CTE 2.45 0.697 31 0.02 (-)0.21 0.557 Concentrator CTE Only 2.60 0.651 14 (-)0.13 (-)0.36 All Courses 2.47 0.674 616

None Taken 3.17 0.483 1137 Perkins LAGS Only 3.14 0.428 20 0.03 Both LAGS and CTE 3.20 0.472 70 (-)0.06 (-)0.06 0.595 Completer CTE Only 3.08 0.467 40 0.09 0.06 0.120 All Courses 3.17 0.481 1267

None Taken 3.30 0.446 170 Degreed Not LAGS Only 3.23 0.378 66 0.07 Both LAGS and CTE 3.17 0.498 52 0.13 0.06 2.110 Perkins CTE Only All Courses 3.26 0.443 288

None Taken 2.53 0.974 3178 LAGS Only (-)0.41*** All Statuses 2.94 0.657 193 Both LAGS and CTE 2.92 0.650 210 (-)0.39*** 0.02 23.206*** CTE Only 2.87 0.673 58 (-)0.34*** 0.07 0.050 All Courses 2.58 0.948 3639 *** Significant at One Percent Level; ** Significant at Five Percent Level; * Significant at Ten Percent Level

VI. Conclusions and Further Research

Increased attention is being paid to high to school college transitions. The heightened attention has been the direct result and outgrowth of the general dissatisfaction about the management and effectiveness of public funded education and workforce development programs. In general, it has been reported by some that high school, in general, and career and technical education in particular, has failed to substantially increase student achievement for all students, and more to the thrust of this presentation, the ability of high school students to come better prepared to enter post-secondary institutions.

There now exists a pervasive feeling among a variety of groups that when high school students are given greater opportunities to participate in college, specifically by enrolling in courses through dual enrollment programs, they not only become better prepared for completing post-secondary work, but also are ready and able to enter the workforce. Among the variety of dual enrollment programs in the nation, the Minnesota Post-Secondary Enrollment Options (PSEO) program has been in existence for nearly two decades. The PSEO program is legislatively mandated and the different post-secondary systems within Minnesota have implemented policies and procedures that permit secondary students to dual enroll in a college or university before they graduate from high school and leave with a transcript from a post-secondary institution. While there are a number of issues confronting the Minnesota PSEO program, the general consensus has been that the program is working reasonably well as witnessed by the fact that one-sixth of 11th and 12th graders participated in the program in 2004.

This study takes a sample of Minnesota high school students who had the PSEO experience between Fall 1999 and Spring 2001, observes their course taking patterns (either exclusively academic courses, exclusively career and technical courses, or a combination of the two) as PSEO students, entered the two-year institutions within the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities System in the Fall 2001, and moved towards attaining a credential or not (received degree or not) anytime during Fall 2001 and Spring 2004. A control group of students that did not have the PSEO experience but were in all other ways similar to the PSEO students was also chosen. A total of 3,639 students were included in the sample, of which 13% (461) had the PSEO experience. The PSEO students and the control group students are matched up to the Perkins Brio data in order to identify the Perkins status of the study sample. Students within the Perkins database not classified as Perkins are further subdivided into those having a degree (Not Perkins Degree Received) and those yet to receive a degree (No Degree Not Perkins).

Simply taking academic courses exclusively does not by itself lead to higher receiving of degrees (in fact it is lower in this study specifically for Perkins students). However, it is possible that such students have a four-year university degree as their eventual goal and just do not “pick up” the two-year degree along the way. It appears that men have a greater likelihood to graduate if they took a combination of academic and technical courses in the PSEO program; when women took technical courses in their PSEO program, they were also more likely to graduate. In general, a combination of technical and academic courses leads to a higher probability of graduation than if the PSEO student took either exclusively academic or exclusively technical courses. The gender differences among PSEO course taking and subsequent college program choice nevertheless warrants further investigation.

Both Perkins and non-Perkins students who had received degrees during the time period under consideration appear to be choosing PSEO coursework that suits their future college plans. On the other hand, not having any technical courses during the PSEO experience in high school may imply that Perkins students are playing “catch up” once they choose a career and technical major in college.

For non-Perkins students, the PSEO experience is more likely to lead to a received degree but the variation in PSEO coursework has no impact on receiving a degree. On the other hand, Perkins students with the PSEO experience appear to receive the degree at rates similar to those without the experience. However, among those Perkins students with PSEO experience, the PSEO course type is strongly associated with receiving a degree.

The primary conclusion of this study appears to be the following. Students with the PSEO experience tend to have higher mean GPAs than those without the experience. However, the differences appear to be early in the student’s college career. In other words, PSEO students may have a “head start” but these early gains are dissipated once the student concentrates on CTE and moves closer towards receiving a degree. Nevertheless, the “head start” is critical if it means that when high school students encounter the right combination of academic and technical courses, whether it is within the PSEO experience or within the secondary system itself, the early success in college goes a long way in ensuring that all students, but especially Perkins students, will continue towards completing their college program of study and leave with a post-secondary credential.

There are many avenues for further research. Besides investigating specific gender differences among PSEO course taking and future career and technical education program choice, the entire sub-sample of not receiving degrees has to be closely examined, particularly asking the question as to why such students failed to receive in degree “in time” despite the PSEO experience and the focus on academic coursework. Another possibility could be to look at specific PSEO course taking patterns such as a combination of Math and Science. Additionally, focusing on specific career clusters such as health care could shed light more precisely on specific course patterns student might follow within the PSEO program.

A still another area would be to look at the “head start” phenomenon which PSEO students encounter and why that “head start” dissipates as the students’ college career progresses. Finally, the present study does not look at varying levels of credit load within the PSEO coursework itself and subsequent college credit load. It would be interesting to examine the impact of credit load patterns, separate from GPA. The study also does not look at patterns of entry and exits into the PSEO program itself and also the comparative patterns of exit (prior to degree completion) between PSEO and non-PSEO students, and whether the PSEO experience minimizes these patterns of exits. While the study described in this paper is limited in its scope, it does point towards the need for more extensively analyzing dual enrollment participation, particularly for career and technical education, especially when under Perkins reauthorization the emphasis is focused on the development of career pathways as a means for effective high school to college transition.

References American Association of Community Colleges. Developing the World’s Best Workforce: An Agenda for America’s Community Colleges. Executive Summary. Washington, DC: AACC, 1997. Association of American Colleges and Universities (AACU).2002. Greater Expectations National Panel. Washington D.C. Available from World Wide Web: http://www.greaterexpectations.org. Austin, James T., and Mahlman, Robert A. High-Stakes Testing: Implications for Career and Technical Education. Highlight Zone: Research @ Work no. 7. Columbus: National Dissemination Center for Career and Technical Education, the Ohio State University, 2002. http://www.nccte.org/publications/infosynthesis/highlightzone/highlight07/index.asp Bailey, T. and M. Karp, Dual Enrollment Programs. Community College Journal, December 2004/January 2005, Volume 75, Issue 3. pp. 9-11, Washington, DC. Bishop, J.; Mane, F.; and Bishop, M. Is Standards-Based Reform Working? ….and for Whom? Working Paper 01-11. Ithaca: Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies, School of Industrial Relations, Cornell University, 2001. Boswell, Katherine, “State Policy and Post-secondary Enrollment Options: Creating Seamless Systems,” IN Systems for Offering Concurrent Enrollment at High Schools and Community Colleges, Robertson et al., New Directions for Community Colleges, no.113, Volume XXIX (1), Spring 2001, pp. 7-14. Bottoms, Gene, Fox, Joanna Hornig; and New, Thomas. The 2000 “High Schools That Work” Assessment: Improving Urban High Schools. High Schools That Work Research Brief. Atlanta, GA: Southern Regional Education Board, 2000. (ED 462 518) Castellano, Marisa; Stringfield, Samuel; and Stone, James R. III Career and Technical Education Reforms and Comprehensive School Reforms in High Schools and Community Colleges: Their Impact on Educational Outcomes for At-Risk Youth. St. Paul: National Research Center for Career and Technical Education, University of Minnesota, March 2002 (ED 461 720) http://www.nccte.org/publications/infosynthesis/r&dreport/CTE%20Rfrms_Stringfield.pdf Chartrand, Anne. “Whose Standards Are They, Anyway?” 2000. (ED 458 297) Education Development Center Inc. “Validation Study of IT Career Clusters Core Standards.” Report. IT Career Clusters Initiative. Newton, MA: EDC, October 2000. Citizens League of Minnesota, Trouble on the Horizon: Growing Demand and Competition, Limited Resources & Changing Demographics in Higher Education, The 2004 Report on Higher Education in Minnesota, November 2004. Galvin, John. “Education’s Response to the Information Technology Worker Shortage.” Newton, MA: Education Development Corporation Inc., 1999. Higgins, Steven C. and Stephen G. Katsinas, “The Relationship between Environmental Conditions and Transfer Rates of Selected Rural Community Colleges,” Community College Review, 1999, 27(2), pp.1- 25. Karp, M., T. Bailey, K. Hughes and B. J. Fermin, State Dual Enrollment Policies: Addressing Access and Quality. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Vocational and Adult Education, 2004. Available from World Wide Web: http:// www.ed.gov/pubs/edpubs.htlml. Kim, Karen A., Trends and Issues in Transfer, Eric Digest, 2002. ED 456869. Kotamraju, Pradeep; High School to College Transitions: Career and Technical Education as a Focus of High School Students Enrolled in MN Post-Secondary Enrollment Options; Paper presented at the Association of Institutional Research Upper Midwest; November, 2004, Minneapolis, Minnesota

Losh, Charles L. Using National and State Skill Standards for Vocational-Technical Education Curriculum Development. Information Series No. 383. Columbus: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult,

23 24 Career, and Vocational Education, Center on Education and Training and Employment, the Ohio State University. 2000. (ED 440 295) http://ericacve.org/majorpubs.asp Lynch, Richard L. “High School Career and Technical Education for the First Decade of the 21st Century.” Journal of Vocational Education Research 25, no. 2 (2000): 155-198. Marzano, Robert J., and Kendall, John S. The Fall and Rise of Standards-Based Education. NASBE Issues in Brief. Aurora, CO: Mid-continent Regional Education Laboratory, Inc.; and Washington, DC: National Association of State Boards of Education, 1996. (ED 398 643) Marzano, Robert J., and Kendall, John S. Awash in a Sea of Standards. Aurora, CO: Mid-continent Regional Education Laboratory, Inc., 1998. http://www.mcrel.org/products/standards/awash.pdf Minnesota Statutes 2004, 124D.09. Available from World Wide Web: http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/stats/124D/09.html Minnesota State Colleges and Universities, Board Policies, 2004, Chapter 3-Educational Policies. 3.5 Post-secondary Enrollment Options (PSEO) Program. Available from World Wide Web: http://www.mnscu.edu/Policies/35.html. Minnesota State Colleges and Universities Board of Trustees. Accountability Measures: A Report to the Minnesota Legislature. St. Paul: MnSCU, February 2002. Minnesota State Colleges and Universities, Office of Internal Auditing, Post-Secondary Enrollment Options Program, July 17, 2001. National Alliance of Business. A Nation of Opportunity: Building America's 21st Century Workforce. Washington, DC: NAB, 2000b. (ED 442 971) National Commission on the High School Senior Year, Raising Our Sights: No High School Senior Left Behind, Final Report, October 2001. National Council of Workforce Education, “How Should Quality in Technical Education Be Defined?” Presented at the American Association of Community Colleges Annual Convention, April 2002. National Governors Association, An Action Agenda for Improving America’s High Schools, 2005 National Education Summit on High Schools, 2005. National Skill Standards Board. Built to Work—A Common Framework for Skill Standards. Washington, DC: NSSB, 2000. (ED 448 269) http://www.nssb.org/btw.pdf Office of Management and Budget, “The Program Assessment Rating Tool: What Constitutes Strong Evidence of a Program’s Effectiveness,” The White House, 2004. http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/part/2004_program_eval.pdf Perfetto, Greg, “Predicting Academic Success in the Admission Process: Placing an Empirical Approach in a Larger Process,” College Board Review, no. 196. pp. 30-35. Puyear Donald E., Linda M. Thor and Karen L. Mills, “Concurrent Enrollment in Arizona: Encouraging Success in High School,” IN Systems for Offering Concurrent Enrollment at High Schools and Community Colleges, Robertson et al., New Directions for Community Colleges, no.113, Volume XXIX (1), Spring 2001, pp. 33-41. Robertson, Piedad F., Brian G. Chapman and Fred Gaskin (eds.) Systems for Offering Concurrent Enrollment at High Schools and Community Colleges, New Directions for Community Colleges, no.113, Volume XXIX (1), Spring 2001. State Higher Education Executive Officers, Accountability for Better Results: A National Imperative on Higher Education, National Commission on Accountability in Higher Education, March 2005. The Teaching Commission, 2004. Teaching at Risk: A Call to Action. Available from World Wide Web: http://www.theteachingcommission.org. Townsend, Barbara K., “Transfer Rates: A Problematic Criterion for Measuring the Community College,” New Directions for Community Colleges, Spring 2002, pp.13-23. U.S. Department of Education. Preparing America’s Future: The High School Symposium. Washington, DC: USDE, April 2002. http://www.ed.gov/offices/OVAE/HS/commisspap.html

24 25 U.S. Department of Education. National Assessment of Vocational Education, Final Report to Congress.2004. http://www.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/sectech/nave/navefinal.pdf Vars, Gordon F., and Beane, James A. Integrative Curriculum in a Standards-Based World. ERIC Digest. Champaign: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education, University of Illinois, 2000. (ED 441 618) http://ericeece.org/pubs/digests/2000/vars00.html Wills, Joan. “Promoting New Seals of Endorsements in Career Technical Education.” Washington, DC: National Association of State Directors of Career Technical Education Consortium, 2002. Wonacott, Michael E. Standards: An Embarrassment of Riches. In Brief No. 4. Columbus: National Dissemination Center for Career and Technical Education, the Ohio State University, 2000a. (ED 446 237) http://www.nccte.org/publications/infosynthesis/in-brief/in-brief04/index.asp