Running head: A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… i
A Case Study of the Conversion to Full-time Vocational Education in Delaware
G. Gerald Lamey
Wilmington University
A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of
Wilmington University in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education
in Innovation and Leadership
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… ii
Dedication
I am dedicating my dissertation to my wife, Debbie Lamey, and our five wonderful children: Morgan, Carter, Paige, Elyse, and Griffin. I would like to thank them for all their love and support, and for allowing me to, “stay in the race.” Throughout my career, my wife and family have supported my efforts and dreams. They have made sacrifices to allow me to complete my dream of earning my doctorate. Because of their support, I am proud to say that this study was completed and my doctorate has been achieved.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… iii
Acknowledgements
I would like to take this opportunity to thank those who have influenced me, both in the work of this study, and throughout my educational career.
I would like to thank Dr. Lewis Atkinson who was my principal advisor for this study.
His guidance and patience enabled me to persevere and create this document.
I would also like to thank Dr. Joe Deardorff, who was the Dean of Doctoral Studies when
I began the program, for his encouragement to pursue my doctorate; Dr. Joe Crossen, who was my second reader and always offered help and support; Mrs. Terri Villa, who I shared the fabulous journey of building a new school with, Dr. Debbie Zych, who provided me with valuable resources and encouraged me to keep working; and Dr. Dan Pritchard who supported me throughout the process.
The members of cohort XVI have been an outstanding group of friends and supporters. I thank them for all their help and all the laughs.
I would like to thank my outside reader, Dr. Steven Godowsky, who not only provided me with information and materials for my topic; he has provided me with leadership and guidance throughout my career.
I would like to thank Dr. George Frunzi, Dr. Karen Hutchinson, Dr. Gene Bottoms, Dr.
Dennis Loftus, Mr. Chuck Moses, and Dr. Gareth Hoachlander for their highly informative interviews.
Lastly, I would like to thank my mother for all her support throughout my life.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… iv
Table of Contents
Dedication……………………………………………..…………………………………………..ii
Acknowledgments……………………………..…………..……………………………………..iii
Table of Contents……………………………...………………………………………………….iv
Abstract……………………………………………………….……………………………..…...vii
Chapter I Introduction………………………………………… …………………….……….1
Statement of Problem………………………………….………..5
Purpose of the Study……………………………………………5
Need for the Study…………………………………………...…6
Research Themes…………………………...……………..……6
Definition of Terms………………………………………..……6
II Review of Literature………………………………………………..……………..8
Inclusion Criteria………………………………………….……8
History of Vocational Education in the United States of
America…………………………………………………..…….8
History of Vocational Education in Delaware…………..……27
The Governor’s Task Force on Vocational Education…….…38
Shared-Time versus Full-Time Vocational High Schools in Delaware An
Assessment………………………………………………...…45
Great Expectations Five Years of Progress at Delaware’s Comprehensive
Vocational High Schools………………………..……………53
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… v
III. Methodology……………………………………………………………………..56
Research Design………………………………………….….…56
Participants………………………………………………….….58
Instrumentation………………………………………………...59
Data Collection……………………………………………...…59
IV. Results……………………………………………………………………………60
Introduction……………………………………………………60
Case Study 1 (Dr. George Frunzi)…………………………..…61
Case Study 2 (Dr. Karen Hutchinson)……………………....…65
Case Study 3 (Dr. Gene Bottoms)…………………………..…68
Case Study 4 (Dr. Dennis Loftus)……………………………..71
Case Study 5 (Mr. Chuck Moses)…………………………..…76
Case Study 6 (Dr. Gareth Hoachlander)………………………79
V. Discussion and Implications……………………………………………………..84
Implications………………………………………………...…84
Limitations…………………………………………………....86
Recommendations for Future Research………………………87
References………………………………………………………………………..89
Appendix…………………………………………………………………………94
A. (Interview with Dr. George Frunzi)
B. (Interview with Dr. Karen Hutchinson)
C. (Interview with Dr. Gene Bottoms)
D. (Interview with Dr. Dennis Loftus) A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… vi
E. (Interview with Mr. Chuck Moses)
F. (Interview with Dr. Gareth Hoachlander)
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… vii
Abstract
In the 1980s, attendance at shared-time vocational schools in New Castle, Kent, and
Sussex Counties had declined approximately 40%. This phenomenon was attributed to several factors, which included transportation issues, scheduling issues, increased graduation requirements, special education services, and vocational funding. To address these concerns, two key reports were conducted that helped change the landscape of vocational education in
Delaware.
In 1986, Governor Michael N. Castle signed an Executive Order appointing a task force to study vocational education in Delaware Public Schools. The 28 member task force was instructed to conduct a thorough review of vocational education throughout the state, with the focus on high schools but with attention as well to what happens preceding and following a student’s high school years. The task force reported concluded that, shared-time schools in
Delaware face a serious problem that can be solved only through major change. They recommended that the state convert their shared-time vocational facilities to full-time vocational facilities.
In 1989, the Delaware State Board of Education requested an independent assessment to convert Delaware’s two shared-time area vocational schools, one in Kent County and one in
Sussex County, into full-time vocational high schools. This report addressed eight factors it believed were responsible for the statistical decline in shared-time enrollment. While the committee felt all eight factors played a role in the decline in enrollment in shared-time schools, they felt that the biggest obstacle was state funding, and that moving forward with plans to convert these shared-time facilities to full-time facilities was recommended and warranted. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… viii
This case study used interviews to gather information from six educational leaders involved in the conversion process and analyzed their perspectives on the success and failures of
Delaware’s conversion from shared-time vocational schools to full-time vocational schools A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 1
A Case Study of the Conversion to Full-time Vocational Education in Delaware
Chapter I: Introduction
Vocational Education in the United States was the product of an extended evolutionary process that can be traced back to early colonial times. The program of vocational education, as we know it today, had its origin in the early part of the twentieth century. This coincided with the development of programs in the public schools such as manual training, commercial training, domestic science, and agriculture (Gordon, 1998).
Federal support for vocational education began with the Smith-Hughes Act of 1917. Two lawmakers from Georgia, Senator Hoke Smith and Representative Dudley Mays Hughes, were responsible for this historic bill, which established vocational education as a federal program
(Gordon, 1998).
From 1917 to 1963 the basic elements of Federal vocational-technical education did not change. In 1963 Congress passed the Vocational Education Act of 1963, designating segments of money for specific purposes in an effort to expand influence over State programs (Hayward,
1993).
Beginning in the mid-1980s, another wave of school reform arose based on the belief that previous legislation had not gone far enough to improve education for all students. The Carl D.
Perkins Vocational Act of 1984, known as the Perkins Act had two interrelated goals, one economic and one social. The economic goal was to improve the skills of the labor force, and the social goal was to provide equal opportunities to vocational education for students with special needs (Gordon, 1998).
In 1990, Congress reauthorized the Carl D Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology
Education Act of 1990 (Perkins II). Perkins II emphasized the integration of vocational-technical A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 2 and academic education and articulation between the secondary and postsecondary levels as embodied in the provisions for technical preparation (tech prep) and public-private partnerships
(Hayward, 1993).
In 1998, Congress reauthorized Perkins III, which challenged educators to prepare more students with the contemporary education they would need to work successfully in the ever- changing, technologically sophisticated, and internationally competitive workplaces. In essence, the workplace called for an increasingly educated work force for the 21st century.
Perkins IV was reauthorized by Congress in 2006. It was the result of a multi-year process in which Congress and the Administration squared off over a number of widely varying policy options. In the end, the enacted legislation maintained a federal funding stream designated solely for career and technical education programs, while building upon and strengthening the existing Career and Technical Education (CTE) accountability system and emphasizing activities to ease the transition of students from secondary into postsecondary education programs.
Vocational education in Delaware can be traced back to early colonial days. In 1682,
Delaware became part of the province of Pennsylvania and was included in William Penn’s frame of government which directed that all children twelve years of age were to be taught some useful trade or skill to the end that, “the poor may work to live, and the rich if they become poor may not want” (Nead, 1897).
The first legislation passed by the national government that supported vocational education in Delaware was The Morrill Act for Land-Grant Institutions of 1862. The primary purpose of the Act was to promote, “the liberal and practical education of the industrial classes in pursuits and professions of living.” The Act granted 30,000 acres of land to each state for each A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 3 senator and representative in Congress (Gordon, 1999). Delaware, having two senators and one representative, was entitled to 90,000 acres of land.
However, assent was not given until March 14, 1867. The cause of the delay was probably the need for suitable buildings for college purposes and the financial condition of the state (Powell, 1893). The Delaware legislature accepted the proposition of the trustees and
Delaware College became the beneficiary under the Act of Congress of 1862 (Powell, 1893).
Following the passage of the Smith-Hughes Act of 1917, Delaware adopted a new school code in 1919. This new code, as recommended by the state legislative commission of 1917, spelled out the responsibilities of the state for vocational education.
With the exception of Fletcher Brown Vocational High School in Wilmington, which opened in 1938, Delaware’s vocational instruction prior to the 1960s took place mostly within traditional comprehensive high schools. During the decade of the 1960s, Delaware initiated a system of technical high schools in which students spent half their day receiving academic instruction at their home high school and the other half receiving vocational instruction at a technical high school in each county.
Present-day vocational-technical schooling in Delaware began in New Castle County with the establishment of the New Castle County Vocational-Technical School District in 1966 through legislative action. Delcastle Technical High School became operational in the 1969-70 school year as the first new vocational high school in northern Delaware since the construction of the aforementioned Fletcher Brown Vocational-Technical School (Quality Vocational
Education Report, 1984).
In 1986, Governor Michael N. Castle appointed the Governor’s Vocational Education
Task Force. The governor instructed the task force to conduct a thorough review of vocational A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 4 education throughout the state, with the focus on high schools, but with attention as well to what happens preceding and following student’s high school years. The task force was instructed to not only identify problems, but also to provide a blueprint for corrections. Task force members were selected from all parts of the state and from varied backgrounds. The twenty-eight member group included two teachers, two district superintendents and other officials; a district school board president and school board member; a state senator and a representative; a college president; two state cabinet officers; a Superior Court judge; and businessmen and women from construction, manufacturing, banking, and other industries.
The task force believed that significant changes were required in vocational education delivery systems and financing arrangements. They recommended that some changes could happen immediately, such as, making full-time vocational-technical programs available to more students, and changing the accounting and reporting procedures to assure that funds approved for vocational students are spent in authorized vocational programs.
In June 1989, the Delaware State Board of Education requested an independent assessment of proposals to convert Delaware’s two shared-time area vocational schools, one in
Kent County and one in Sussex County, into full-time vocational high schools. In response to the
State Board’s action, the Delaware Department of Public Instruction contracted the National
Center for Research in Vocational Education at the University of California, Berkeley, to conduct a study of shared-time versus full-time schools in Delaware (Hoachlander, 1989).
This report focused primarily on the implications of shared-time versus full-time facilities for improving the educational opportunities of high school students. The report identified six areas of focus including: what is best for students; conversion costs; curriculum design; staffing, A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 5 financial and programmatic impact on sending school districts; and probable effects on local labor markets and community well-being (Hoachlander, 1989).
In 1995, a report was sponsored by the Delaware Advisory Council on Career and
Vocational Education to examine the effectiveness of Delaware’s five full-time comprehensive vocational technical high schools from 1990 to 1995.
In 1990, Delaware became the only state with a system of full-time comprehensive vocational technical high schools. The decision to create America’s first statewide system of full- time technical education, combined with the raising of student expectations, significantly strengthened Delaware’s five vocational schools and provided Delaware students with an excellent option for career and educational preparation (Perry, 1995).
Statement of the Problem
Two important reports in 1986 (The Governor’s Task Force on Vocational Education) and 1990 (Shared-Time versus Full-Time Vocational High Schools in Delaware: An
Assessment) transformed Delaware’s vocational system from a shared-time vocational educational system into the country’s first full-time vocational educational system. Twenty-two years have passed since this transformation from shared-time status to full-time status, how did educational leaders adopt and implement these changes, and what have been the effects of these changes on Delaware’s vocational and comprehensive high schools.
Purpose of Study
The purpose of this study is to gather information about the perspectives of key educational leaders directly involved in, and affected by the transformation of Delaware’s vocational schools from a shared-time status to a full-time status. This study will examine the A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 6 effectiveness of the transformation of Delaware’s vocational schools based on two reports recommending the conversion from shared-time to full-time status.
Need for the Study
In the state of Delaware (2012), there are thirty comprehensive high schools, eight charter high schools, and six full-time vocational high schools. With the increased competition for students and funding, public schools and charter schools are looking at offering vocational/technical programs as a way of attracting students. This study will examine the history of vocational education in Delaware with a focus on the past twenty-two years and the impact full-time vocational education has had on schools. Lessons learned from this research will explain how Delaware’s vocational school system developed and grew into a popular choice for
Delaware students.
Research Theme
The researcher will examine the following research themes: What are the perspectives of a selected group of educational leaders directly involved in the decision to convert Delaware’s shared-time vocational-technical schools to full-time vocational-technical schools in the late
1980s and early 1990s? Have the perspectives of educational leaders changed in the twenty-two years since the implementation of full-time vocational schools? Have the recommendations made in The Governor’s Task Force on Vocational Education (1986), and Shared-Time versus Full-
Time Vocational Education in Delaware: An Assessment (1990) been fulfilled? What is the future of vocational education in Delaware?
Definition of Terms
For the purpose of this research, these definitions will apply to the following terms: A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 7
Vocational Education. Organized educational programs offering a sequence of courses that are directly related to the preparation of individuals in paid or unpaid employment and in current or emerging occupations requiring other than a baccalaureate or advanced degree
(Gordon, 1998).
Shared-Time High School. Students take their academic classes in their “home high school,” where they also may participate in extracurricular activities, and they take vocational course at the area (shared-time) school (Hoachlander, 1990).
Comprehensive High School. A high school designed to meet the needs and interests of all students under one roof by providing a general core curriculum enriched with a broad range of academic and non-academic activities (Hoachlander, 1990).
Education Act. Makes available to the states federal funds for education (Mobley, 1964).
Set-Asides. The designation of portions of Federal money for specific purposes
(Hayward, 1993).
Cooperative Education. When students spend a portion of their day working in real- world jobs related to their vocational course of study, under teacher supervision (Task Force,
1986).
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 8
Chapter II: Review of the Literature
Inclusion Criteria
An initial review of the available literature was conducted through EBSCOhost and
JSTOR search engines. Abstracts and articles were retrieved through searches on several databases including: Academic Search Premier, Education Research Complete, Educational
Resource Information Center (ERIC), MasterFile Premier, Middle Search Plus, Primary Search,
Tests in Print, WorldCat, Education Research Index, UMI ProQuest Digital Dissertations, and
Google. Key search words used were vocational education, career and technical education,
Smith-Hughes Act, Carl D. Perkins, federal vocational legislation, Southern Regional Education
Board, Delaware Vocational Education, Tech Prep, share-time vocational schools, comprehensive vocational schools, Delcastle Technical High School, Howard School of
Technology, Paul M. Hodgson Vocational and Technical High School, St. Georges Technical
High School, Polytech High School, Sussex Technical High School, A Nation at Risk, High
Schools that Work, and No Child Left Behind.
This review began with a research of articles describing the history of vocational education in the United States of America. I then focused my search on federal legislation that impacted vocational education. Finally, I examined articles and artifacts related to the history of vocational education in the state of Delaware, focusing on Delaware’s conversion from shared- time vocational schools to full-time vocational schools.
History of Vocational Education in the United States of America.
Apprenticeship Programs. Vocational Education in the United States can be traced back to colonial times. According to Barlow (1976), students were prepared for work in three ways.
The first was organized apprenticeship. The two organized apprenticeship types were voluntary A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 9 and involuntary-that provided apprentices, whether boys or girls, with five basic elements: (1) food, clothing, and shelter; (2) religious instruction; (3) general education; (4) instruction in a trade or occupation; and (5) the mysteries of the trade (related subjects). These apprenticeship programs varied from five to 10 years. A second way of preparing students for work was in a mother-daughter, or father-son relationship in which the fundamentals of a trade or occupation were taught to children in the family. The third was the pick-up method, were a student learned by observation and imitation, but with little actual instruction.
These early methods of vocational training declined in the late colonial period and were dealt its heaviest blow with the emergence of the Industrial Revolution in the nineteenth century.
According to Gordon (1998), the reasons for its decline included the following: (1) large groups succeeded small forces of labor. Each group was trained to work in a specific task or operation,
(2) scattered industries became centralized, (3) industry developed so many subdivisions that training was both expensive and useless, (4) indenture laws gradually became ineffective, (5) many trades became overcrowded because of the large numbers of apprentices who were allowed to learn them, (6) wages were kept very low, (7) young helpers were taught not simply by the technique of some single process but by the “arts and mysteries of a craft”, and (8) the development of the free public elementary schools. Since the apprenticeship system was unable to supply the subsequent demand for trained workers, the stage was set for new forms of education to emerge.
Lyceum Movement. Early in the 19th century, the lyceum movement sprung up as a result of the Industrial Revolution. According to Fithian (2000), the first lyceum was founded in
1826 in Millbury, Massachusetts, by Josiah Holbrook, a teacher and lecture. Holbrook intended the lyceum to be a local study group that met at weekly intervals. Each lyceum was to contribute A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 10 to the spread of learning, especially of the natural sciences. In communities hungry for knowledge, the idea caught fire and soon expanded to include home-talent productions of essays, discussions, debates, and lectures. A major topic in early years was the establishment of public schools. Lyceums flourished up to the American Civil War and thereafter blended indistinguishably into the Chautauqua Movement.
The Manual Training Movement. The Manual Training movement was the precursor to the vocational training programs in our schools today. First used in the United States in the
1870s in the training of engineers, the movement spread rapidly to general public education.
According to Westerink (2009), Manual training emphasized the intellectual and social development associated with the practical training of the hand and the eye. In its most basic sense, manual training was the teaching of both wood and metal working, with the accompanying argument that this teaching improved perception, observation, practical judgment, visual accuracy, manual dexterity and taught students the power of doing things instead of merely thinking about them, talking about them, and writing about them. Manual training was not, however, intended to teach a specific trade. This was perceived as too narrow and intellectually limiting for a general education. Manual training would instead be an enhancement to the traditional curriculum, not a replacement, and would thereby help achieve the full development and potential of the individual. The student would learn to skillfully use tools in drafting, mechanics, wood or metalworking and then would be able to transfer this knowledge to almost any kind of tool or setting.
The first school designed to provide this type of education was the Worcester Polytechnic
Institute at Worcester, Massachusetts, which opened in 1868 (Bennett, 1926). The curriculum A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 11 combined theoretical classes with production work in laboratories, so that students completing the program would be ready for jobs without an apprenticeship period (Walter, 1993).
As the manual training movement grew, pressure to make it available to all students as part of the public school system also grew. Advocates in favor of including manual training in the public high schools stressed the general nature of the skills developed and the relationship to the academic study of the basic sciences. Critics of the manual training movement argued that manual training did not belong in the schools and if introduced would hinder students’ intellectual and moral development. Debate centered on whether schools should respond to the pressures of the industrial society’s desire to have students prepared in specialized skill areas.
Despite continued opposition, by the end of the decade manual training had won its prominence in the schools. By 1900, 100 cities provided it in high schools. The direct benefits of occupational skills as opposed to the remote values associated with completing a liberal education "through the hand" began to have a greater appeal. In the years following, manual training became more subject centered, required the completion of specific exercises and was oriented to skill development (Westerink, 2009).
Perhaps the greatest contribution of the manual training movement was its effect on the perception of what could or should be taught in public schools. This spread of manual training signaled the beginning of a shift from the belief that the ideal high school curriculum was one which was devoted solely to college preparation, to one which also reflected the need to prepare students for a variety of career options requiring less than college-level preparation. Coupled with the growing specialization of jobs, this broadening of the high school curriculum also pointed out that young people needed assistance in choosing which of the many career paths to follow (Walter, 1993). A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 12
Twentieth Century. Miller (1985) characterized public education in the United States at the turn of the twentieth century as ill suited and unattractive to the majority of young people who needed, but did not receive, preparation for work.
Schools in the first decade of the twentieth century held to the beliefs of a liberal education. Preparation for college was the intended outcome, an outcome serving fewer than ten percent of the population.
At the same time, opportunities to work were very attractive to those youth who saw little value in further schooling. For those who chose to leave school for the workforce, there had been little or no preparation for work. Fewer than 10% of the 17 year olds received a high school diploma (Miller, 1985). By modern standards, 90% of the population were high school dropouts or had never attended high school. Typically, youth left the public schools by the age of 14, and less than half of these completed the sixth grade.
Schools did not adequately serve the needs of youth. The Commission on National Aid to
Vocational Education (1914) stressed how public education was falling short. The equality of opportunity in education was not afforded to the masses of children. Although the schools were freely open to every child, the goals and purposes of the schools were such that a majority of the children were unable to take advantage of schooling beyond a certain grade, and hence did not secure, at public expense, a preparation for their work in life. The Commission held that the schools were planned for only the few who were preparing for college rather than the large number who would go into industry (Miller, 1985).
Advocates of vocational education in the public schools believed that vocational education would make the schools more democratic. “The American school will truly become democratic,” said Prosser, “when we learn to train all kinds of men, in all kinds of ways, for all A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 13 kinds of things: (1913, p. 406). It was hoped that establishing vocational training as an alternative for those who were leaving schools at 14 years of age would, extend general education, provide a reason for the continued school attendance of more persons 14 years of age and older, and democratize education (Miller, 1985).
In his 1907 address to Congress, President Theodore Roosevelt urged major school reform that would provide industrial education in urban centers and agriculture education in rural areas.
A powerful alliance supporting federal funding for vocational education was formed in
1910 when the American Federation of Labor (AFL), who had long opposed such programs as discriminatory, lent its approval to the National Association of Manufacturers' (NAM) promotion of trade instruction in schools. Formed in 1895, one of NAM's first projects was to investigate how education might provide a more effective means to help American manufacturers compete in expanding international markets.
The AFL joined the vocational reform movement believing its participation would help protect working-class interests by providing them with a voice at the table on education policy development with the emerging industrial economy. The strength of the combined lobby influenced Congress in 1914 to authorize President Woodrow Wilson to appoint a commission to study whether federal aid to vocational education was warranted. Charles Prosser, a student of social efficiency advocate David Snedden, was principal author of the commission's report to
Congress. Prosser considered separately administered, and narrowly focused, vocational training as the best available way to help nonacademic students secure employment after completing high school. In its final report to Congress, the commission chaired by Georgia Senator Hoke Smith A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 14 declared an urgent social and educational need of vocational training in public schools (Gordon,
1998).
National Policy. The creation of a National policy on vocational education was in response to multiple concerns. First, vocational education was seen by the Congress as an integral element in building a strong workforce as part of the overall national defense strategy.
Also, following the turn of the century, the reduction in child labor and the continuing immigration of manual laborers and their children created a pool of youth determined to have secondary education. Business leaders decried the shortage of skilled labor; they complained that the factory system had largely destroyed apprenticeship as a source of skilled labor. Finally, the start of World War I cut off a traditional source of the highest skills…highly skilled artisan immigrants from Europe (Hayward, 1993).
The following indicates the extent of these needs:
“There is a great and crying need of providing vocational education . . . for every part of the United States-to conserve and develop our resources; to promote a more productive and prosperous agriculture; to prevent the waste of human labor; to supplement apprenticeship; to increase the wage- earning power of our productive workers; to meet the increasing demand for trained workmen; to offset the increased cost of living. Vocational education is therefore needed as a wise business investment for this Nation, because our national prosperity and happiness are at stake and our position in the markets of the world cannot otherwise be maintained” (Report of the Commission on National Aid to Vocational Education, 1914).
Both labor and business felt it made sense to establish a network of free-standing vocational schools, each with a bias toward a particular industry. However, both business and labor feared the consequences should such schools become dominated by one or the other group.
Therefore both agreed upon the incorporation of vocational programs into conventional secondary schools as less hazardous to the ongoing agendas of their respective organizations. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 15
Both parties saw comprehensive high schools as neutral ground. At this early date, many in the labor movement voiced the fear that differentiation of schooling into academic and vocational tracks would accentuate stratification of society (Hayward, 1993).
As it turned out, the comprehensive secondary schools of educational reformists’ dreams, with very few exceptions, were comprehensive in name only. Most schools gradually evolved into the United States version of a “dual system,” consisting of one track for students who planned to enter postsecondary institutions and one for students who were preparing for the world of work (Hayward, 1993).
The Smith-Hughes Act of 1917. The Constitution of the United States makes no provision for federal support or control of education. However, the federal government has considered vocational education in the national interest to provide federal legislation in support of vocational education (Gordon, 1998).
The Smith-Hughes Act of 1917, introduced in the Senate by Hoke Smith, and in the
House by the late Dudley M. Hughes, both of Georgia, was the first vocational education act.
This Act made available to the states Federal funds for vocational education below college level and set the precedent for subsequent vocational-education legislation. $7.2 million was allotted annually for the promotion of vocational education in agriculture, trade and industrial education, and home economics. The program was administered by the Federal Board for Vocational
Education, comprised of the Secretaries of Agriculture, Commerce, and Labor; the
Commissioner of Education; and three citizens representing agriculture, labor, and manufacturing and commerce. To participate in the programs, the states had to create a state board for vocational education, prepare a state plan showing the programs they intended, make an annual report to the Federal Board showing the work done and the funds received and A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 16 expended, and provide programs only in publicly supervised or controlled schools. The money was allocated to the states on a ratio basis. The agricultural-education allotment was made on the basis of a state’s rural population in relation to the total rural population in the United States. The allocation of money for trade and industrial and home economics education was on the basis of a state’s urban population in relation to the total urban population. The total population was used as the basis for distributing the teacher-training funds (Mobley, 1964).
The Smith-Hughes Act emphasized separatism from the classical curriculum and called for a new one that would better meet the needs of the children of the working class. However, this fostered the establishment of an instructionally segregated system. Several specific elements of the Act contributed to the isolation of vocational education from other parts of the comprehensive high school curriculum. For example, in order to receive federal funds under
Smith-Hughes, each state was required to establish a state board for vocational education. This in turn fostered the notion of vocational education as separate from academic education (Gordon,
1998).
In addition to separate state boards, the act also established separate funds, teacher preparation, certification, students, and a separate and segregated curriculum. The Federal Board mandated the 50-25-25 rule: 50% of students’ time in shop work, 25% in closely related subjects, and 25% in academic courses (Wonacott, 2003). The intent was to separate vocational students from those in the classical curriculum and prepare them well for the factories, farms, and homes of the era.
The ultimate effect of the Act, although never stated explicitly, was to identify certain students and teachers as “vocational,” and to protect the salaries of the latter through reserving for them certain amounts of Federal money matched by State and local contributions. One may A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 17 reasonably assume that the authorities saw programs of practical instruction so endangered from a dominant “academic elite” that they required protection from Federal law. The end result, however, was to segregate academic teachers and students from vocational teachers and students and to strengthen the social alienation that early critics of these steps had feared (Hayward,
1993).
The policies and positions taken by the Congress in their enactment of Smith-Hughes have been extraordinarily powerful forces in determining the current status of vocational education. Remarkably, these central segregating and separating provisions have proven to be largely impervious to change in spite of the large-scale shifts in emphasis which, have occurred since its original enactment. In fact, these provisions were later augmented and reinforced by subsequent actions (Hayward, 1993).
The George Acts. It is significant in the legislative history of vocational education that in six Senate terms, Walter F. George sponsored every federal act for vocational education following the Smith-Hughes law of 1917. These are the George-Reed, George-Ellzey, George-
Deen and George-Barden Acts. Senator George’s efforts culminated in vocational education funds totaling more than $40,000,000 for fiscal 1958 alone (Gordon, 1998).
George-Reed Act of 1929. The George-Reed Act authorized an increase of $1 million annually for four years to expand vocational education in agriculture and home economics. The administration of this Act were similar to the provisions of the Smith-Hughes Act with the following exceptions: (1) agriculture education funds were allotted on the basis of farm population rather than rural population, (2) home economics funds were allotted on the basis of rural population rather than urban, and (3) the George-Reed Act was an authorization for funds
(no dollar amount specified by the government), whereas Smith-Hughes Act was an A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 18 appropriation (Congress and the President state the amount of money that will be spent on federal programs). (Gordon, 1998).
George-Ellzey Act of 1934. The George-Ellzey Act replaced the temporary George-Reed
Act and authorized $3 million annually for three years, to be apportioned equally in agriculture, home economics, trade, and industrial education.
George-Deen Act of 1936. This Act provided $14 million a year for vocational education in agriculture, home economics, trade, and industrial education. This Act was significant because marketing occupations were recognized for the first time. Money was also authorized for teacher education programs (Gordon, 1998).
George-Barden Act of 1946. This Act was actually an amendment to the George-Deen
Act and superseded it by authorizing an increase from $14 million to $29 million. One of the major factors contributing to this legislation was the need to provide a means for thousands of returning World War II veterans to acquire employable skills in a rapidly expanding economy
(Gordon, 1998).
By 1956, the Health Amendments Act was added to the George-Barden Act. This Act allotted $5 million annually for five years to be used specifically for practical-nursing programs.
Vocational Education Act of 1963. A significant change in federal policy and direction began in the early 1960s with passage of the Vocational Education Act of 1963. The federal government stepped up influence over state plans by including set-asides, most predominantly to serve poor and disabled persons and youth in economically depressed communities who had academic, socioeconomic, or other disadvantages that prevented them from succeeding in regular vocational education programs (Lynch, 2000). Mason, Furtado, and Husted (1989) reported that A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 19 for the first time, vocational education was mandated to meet the needs of individual students and not just the employment needs of industry, a significant change in the law.
This legislation did not stipulate funds for the various vocational education services; instead it stipulated them for particular types and ages of persons. 90% of the authorized funds were to be allotted to the states on the basis of formulas. The formula that was used required that
50% of the allotted funds be used for the 15 to 19 age group, 20% for the 20 to 25 age group,
15% for the 25 to 65 age group, and five percent for all groups regardless of age (Gordon, 1998).
The 1963 Act stated its concern for the poor and the handicapped, which resulted in a major policy shift. The 1968 and 1976 Educational Amendments would build powerfully on the tentative statements of social objectives in the 1963 Act (Gordon, 1998).
Vocational Education Amendments of 1968. The Vocational Education Act of 1963 was amended in October of 1968. These changes are referred to as the Vocational Education
Amendments of 1968. The Vocational Education Amendments of 1968 replaced all previous federal legislation for vocational education except the Smith-Hughes Act, which was retained for sentimental reasons as the first legislation passed by the federal government for secondary vocational education (Gordon, 1998).
The purpose of the 1968 amendments was to provide access for all citizens to appropriate training and retraining. The major differences from the 1963 Act were that the 1968 amendments emphasized vocational education in postsecondary schools and broadened the definition of vocational education to bring it closer to general education. The 1968 Act authorized the appropriations of millions of dollars for vocational education in an attempt to find solutions to the nation’s social and economic problems. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 20
Vocational Education Amendments of 1976. Congress added several new clauses to its declaration of purpose in the 1976 vocational amendments. One new purpose was to ensure that states improve their planning by involving a wide range of agencies and making use of all available resources for vocational education. Another purpose was to assist states in overcoming sex discrimination and sex stereotyping in their vocational education programs (Gordon, 1998).
Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Act of 1984. The Carl D. Perkins Vocational
Education Act of 1984, amended the Vocational Education Act of 1963, and replaced the amendments of 1968 and 1976. The Perkins Act contained two main objectives: (1) to improve the skills of the labor force and prepare adults for job opportunities and (2) better services and increased access to vocational education for students with special needs (Lynch, 2000).
The law states that individuals who are members of special populations (including individuals with disabilities) must be provided with equal access to recruitment, enrollment, and placement activities in vocational education. In addition, these individuals must be provided with equal access to the full range of vocational education programs available to others, including occupationally specific courses of study, cooperative education, apprenticeship programs, and, to the extent practical, comprehensive guidance and counseling services. Under the law, vocational educational planning should be coordinated among public agencies, including vocational education, special education, and the state vocational rehabilitation agencies. The provision of vocational education to youth with disabilities should be monitored to ensure that such education is consistent with objectives stated in the student's IEP.
The two goals were unclear, given the realities of American education. The first goal of improving the skills of the labor force is only a small portion of the overall effort needed to improve productivity in the American work force. The second goal is strongly distributional. If A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 21 members of special populations are to gain access to high quality vocational education, two things must be done. First, the disadvantaged or handicapped persons need to be provided with competence to meet the academic prerequisites of rigorous vocational programs. Second, the programs available to them must be raised to a high standard of performance. Many programs did not meet these criteria (Hayward, 1993).
Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act of 1990. On
September 25, 1990, President George Bush signed into law the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and
Applied Technology Act, often referred to as Perkins II. The new name, Vocational and Applied
Technology Education, signaled congressional interest in emphasizing the application of the academic and vocational skills necessary to work in a global technologically advanced society.
The Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act of 1990 amend and extend the Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Act of 1984. The preamble for this act states:
“It is the purpose of this Act to make the United States more competitive in the world economy by developing more fully the academic and occupational skills of all segments of the population.
This purpose will primarily be achieved through concentrating resources on improving educational programs leading to academic and occupational skill competencies needed to work in a technologically advanced society.” For the first time in Federal vocational legislation, emphasis was placed on academic as well as occupational skills (Hayward, 1993).
For the first time, the act was directed toward “all segments of the population.” Congress, in enacting Perkins II, set the stage for a three-pronged approach for better workforce preparation. Perkins II emphasizes: (1) integration of academic and vocational education, (2) articulation between segments of education engaged in workforce preparation—epitomized by A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 22 congressional support for Tech Prep, and (3) closer linkages between school and work (Gordon,
1998).
There were two reasons the Act called for integration of academic and vocational studies.
First, the community of employers suggested that their newly-hired workers were deficient in academic skills. This would result in a negative effect in those high performance workplaces, upon which the future competitiveness of the American economy is thought to rest. The second argument in favor of integration held that the majority of secondary students failed to acquire transferable academic skills because of the lack of appropriate pedagogical practice. The assumption was made that the majority of students would better acquire those kinds of academic skills useful in the high performance workplace if pedagogical practice emphasized “contextual learning,” relating theoretical concepts to the solution of practical problems. Therefore, the policy position was to incorporate academic content into the programs of applied instruction and using applied instruction techniques to impart academic content (Hayward, 1993).
Tech Prep. Tech Prep, which began in the early 1980s as a small, locally driven high school improvement strategy, grew into a major national strategy for improving students' academic knowledge and technical skills. As defined in the Carl D. Perkins Educational Act
(Perkins II), Tech Prep is a sequenced program of study that combines at least two years of secondary and two years of postsecondary education. It is designed to help students gain academic knowledge and technical skills, while often earning college credit for their secondary coursework. Programs are intended to lead to an associate's degree or a certificate in a specific career field, and ultimately, to high wage, high skill employment or advanced postsecondary training (OVAE, 2009). A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 23
To date, roughly 47% of the nation's high schools (or 7,400 high schools) offer one or more Tech Prep programs. Nearly every community and technical college in the nation participates in a Tech Prep consortium, as do many four-year colleges and universities, private businesses, and employer and union organizations (OVAE, 2009).
School-to-Work Opportunities Act (STWOA) of 1994. The federal School to Work
Opportunities Act (STWOA) was enacted as Public Law 103-239 on May 4, 1994 to create coherent systems that link school-based learning characterized by career awareness and exploration, high academic standards, and career majors to work-based learning including planned programs of work experience, workplace mentoring, and programs of study that lead to industry recognized credentials. These two types of learning were to be linked through connecting activities such as drawing on trained professionals at school and work sites to counsel and work with students and employers, assisting with job placement, and linking students with other community services and continuing education. Activities were to begin no later than the seventh grade, continue through high school, and culminate in postsecondary training or education and, ultimately, in productive employment.
STWOA was funded with $1.8 billion in federal investments. It was a “sunset” Act in that funds were appropriated beginning in 1994, rolled out to the 50 states, Washington, DC, and
Puerto Rico over a period of seven years, and then ended. The Act was not renewed. STWOA was administered jointly by the federal Departments of Education and Labor with the national office headquartered in Washington, DC until its closure in 2001 (Hughes, Bailey & Mechur,
2001).
Carl D. Perkins Act of 1998. Signed into law on October 31, 1998, the Carl D. Perkins
Vocational and Technical Education Act of 1998, known as Perkins III, lays out a new vision of A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 24 vocational and technical education for the 21st century. The central goals of this new vision were improving student achievement and preparing students for postsecondary education, further learning, and careers.
Perkins III continued the essence of Perkins II and the “program improvement” component of Perkins I. The federal focus was on developing academic, vocational, and technical skills of students through high standards and linking secondary and postsecondary programs. Much of the specific language setting aside a percentage of funds or actual dollars for special populations was removed. States were to provide services to special populations to help them succeed in high-quality vocational education programs, but the federal government did not dictate what those services would be. The federal government, however, did require each state to provide data on four core indicators of performance: (1) attainment of academic and vocational/technical proficiencies; (2) attainment of a secondary degree or General Educational
Development certificate, proficiency credential in conjunction with a secondary diploma, and a postsecondary degree or credential; (3) placement in, retention in, and completion of postsecondary education or advanced training, placement in military service, or placement or retention in employment; and (4) participation in and completion of programs that lead to nontraditional training and employment (Lynch, 2000).
With the enactment of Perkins III, the federal government had come almost full circle with the direction of vocational education. The post-turn-of-the-century legislation was enacted to prepare more students with the type of education it was thought they would need to run farms and factories in the twentieth century. However, Perkins III challenged educators to prepare more students with the contemporary education they would need to work successfully in the ever changing, technologically sophisticated, and internationally competitive workplaces. In essence, A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 25 the workplace called for an increasingly educated workforce for the 21st century. The major difference was that as a society it was no longer economically sound to track and separate students into those with only a classical curriculum and those with only a vocational curriculum or with relatively narrow, job-specific skills. Both the head and the hands and the theoretical and applied would be needed by most students in most workplaces at some point in their lives
(Lynch, 2000).
Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Improvement Act of 2006. The
Perkins Act of 2006 (Perkins IV) is the result of a multi-year process in which Congress and the
Administration squared off over a number of widely varying policy options. In the end, the enacted legislation maintained a federal funding stream designated solely for career and technical education (CTE) programs, while building upon and strengthening the existing CTE accountability system and emphasizing activities to ease the transition of students from secondary into postsecondary education programs.
Funded at a little over $1.3 billion, the Perkins Act is very small in comparison to other federal education programs such as $12.8 billion for Title I of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act/No Child Left Behind Act and $11.8 billion for the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (U.S. Department of Education, 2008). A 2001 estimate found that federal vocational grants amounted to about five percent of local spending on secondary vocational education programs and about two percent of spending at the postsecondary level (Silverberg,
2004). Still, Perkins funds are the only federal funds designated for career and technical education services, and as such, the requirements of the law put a minimum set of standards in place that influence how all state and local funds are spent of CTE programs (Meeder, 2008). A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 26
Under Perkins IV, states have the responsibility to create and/or recognize a series of new
CTE (Career and Technical Education has replaced the name Vocational Education) offerings called “CTE Programs of Study.” Programs of Study include a subset of the general types of
CTE courses that are typically offered at high schools, regional CTE schools and community and technical colleges (Meeder, 2008).
What makes Programs of Study distinctive from generic CTE is that each Program is meant to be a cohesive offering of academic courses paired with CTE courses. In the past, high school students often chose CTE courses without considering the academic courses necessary to pursue the career field at the postsecondary level, and select academic courses without making a connection to any area of career interest.
Under Perkins IV, local recipients are held accountable for the achievement of individual students in a series of performance indicators, while the previous version of the Perkins Act only held the state accountable for aggregated results.
There are separate indicators set by the state for secondary and postsecondary education providers. High School programs must measure academic achievement and high school graduation; technical skill attainment; and transitions to college, employment or the military.
Postsecondary indicators include technical skill attainment; program retention and completion; and transitions to further postsecondary education, the military and employment. Both secondary and postsecondary programs are also accountable for “non-traditional” participation and completion, meaning the percentage of young men and women that participate in and complete a
CTE program in which their gender is underrepresented significantly (Meeder, 2008).
For high school academic achievement, Perkins requires states to use indicators that are already established by the state through the accountability system under the No Child Left A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 27
Behind (NCLB), focusing on achievement in math and English Language Arts and high school graduation rates. Otherwise, the Perkins Act gives states the authority to establish their own performance indicators (Meeder, 2008).
The law also required new measurements for technical skill attainment, using assessment instruments that were “valid and reliable,” and based upon industry-recognized standards. If the state does not use industry-based credentials for some or all of its programs, it must develop another assessment mechanism and justify that the assessment process meets the criteria for validity and reliability. These new guidelines caused many states to upgrade their CTE standards, or to develop these standards for the first time (Meeder, 2008).
History of Vocational Education in Delaware
Colonial Times. Vocational education in Delaware can be traced back to early colonial days during the rule of the Duke of York from 1664 to 1682. His laws include the directive that:
the constable and overseers are strictly required to admonish the inhabitants of instructing their children and servants in matters of religion and the laws of the county and that the parents and masters to bring up their children and apprentice in some honest lawful calling, labor or employment (Nead, 1897).
In 1682, Delaware became part of the province of Pennsylvania and was included in William
Penn’s frame of government, which directed that all children twelve years of age were to be taught some useful trade or skill to the end that the poor may work to live, and the rich if they become poor may not want (Nead, 1897).
According to Fee (1938), religious groups took a leading role in education and apprenticeship as a form of training for children. Fee (1938) refers to Philadelphia and the
Quakers as the heirs of the English legal traditions in dealing with the regulations of apprenticeship. Fee illustrates the operation of Quaker practices when he refers to:
One apprenticed by the Philadelphia Quarterly Meeting in 1682 for ten years A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 28
…apprentice to be educated in the “Art of Mystery of Husbandry” …another at the age of four years to learn the trade of a weaver … agreement to devote four meetings a year to the education and establishment of Quaker youths … the function of the committee was to protect the interest of the orphan … establishment of a supervised elementary form of vocational guidance and coordination (parent, apprentice, master, and religion)
Writings of Penn indicate the importance that he attached to “public” schools, the “useful sciences,” and “laudable inventions” in the development of a new land and a new society. Penn seemed to recognize that preparation of an individual for a “useful trade or skill,” is a worthwhile type of insurance for his future independence and the protection of a society (Powell, 1893).
Delaware Legislation Early 1800’s. In framing the Constitution of Delaware in 1792 the people charged the General Assembly upon the subject of popular education. The legislature was directed to provide by law “for establishing schools and promoting the arts and sciences.”
While the people were requesting education, it was not heeded by the legislature that first met under the new constitution. But four years afterwards, February 9, 1796, an Act was passed by the legislature with the following provisions: That the money paid into the State Treasury on account of marriage and tavern licenses is applied, under the direction of the Legislature, for establishing schools in the state (Hodgson, 1965).
Act of 1817. This Act, which started a fund for establishing free schools in Delaware, was not disturbed until 1817, when it had increased to an amount sufficient enough to yield an available income (Hodgson, 1965). Accordingly an Act was passed, February 1817, giving each county one thousand dollars to furnish instruction, to the children of poor parents, in reading, writing, and arithmetic. This Act was in force for several years, yet it did not meet the approval of the people. Governor Cochran of Delaware in one of his messages says:
It is not surprising that a provision which invited an independent people to have their children schooled as paupers proved a failure. Perhaps the best fruit of this effort was that it excited a widespread discontent, which A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 29
served to quicken interest in the subject, provoking discussion and stimulating to an earnest effort a better matured and more efficient system (Weeks, 1917).
Act of 1821. In 1821, the first provision was made for public taxation for education. It authorized the use of public funds for the support of Sunday schools. These were not actually
Sunday schools for religious instruction as they are known today, but they were to use the
Sabbath for working boys who could not attend any other day and who should provide instruction in secular learning by paid teachers (Weeks, 1917). Under this Act, in 1829, nineteen schools were established (Powell, 1893).
The Free School Act of 1829. The Free School Act of 1829 is now considered to be the actual start of Delaware’s Public School System. Under the provisions of the Act, the levy court appointed five commissioners in each county to divide it into school districts. The Act also ruled that state funds were to be provided to each school district, and that no school would be given more money than the amount raised by voters in that district. Subjects to be taught were:
“Reading, writing, arithmetic, and English grammar and such other branches of knowledge as the committee might deem necessary to be taught in the district.” Each school was to be opened the first Monday in November and continued as long as money permitted. It was free to all white children. The school committee was authorized to regulate the government of the school (Weeks,
1917).
Act of 1861. The Act of 1861 decided for all time that no child could, by vote of the district, be deprived of the opportunity to secure a common school education (Powell, 1893). It also provided for a definite, uniform and minimum tax levy for schools.
Morrill Act of 1862. The Morrill Act for Land-Grant Institutions of 1862 was the first legislation passed by the national government to support vocational education. The primary A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 30 purpose of the Act was to promote the liberal and practical education of the industrial classes in pursuits and professions of living. The Act granted 30,000 acres of land to each state for each senator and representative in Congress (Gordon, 1999).
Delaware, having two senators and one representative, was entitled to 90,000 acres of land. The funds arising from the sale of land were to be invested in State, United States, or some other safe stocks, at not less than five percent interest, and the money so invested should constitute a perpetual fund, the capital of which should remain forever undiminished.
However, assent was not given until March 14, 1867. The cause of the delay was probably the need for suitable buildings for college purposes and the financial condition of the state (Powell, 1893). The legislature accepted the proposition of the trustees and Delaware
College became the beneficiary under the Act of Congress of 1862 (Powell, 1893).
The New School Law of 1875, (Delaware). The Law of 1875 stated, “A State
Superintendent is, by the law, to be appointed annually by the governor, to hold his office one year or until his successor shall in like manner be appointed.” The law also formed a State Board of Education, which included the president of Delaware College, Secretary of State, State
Auditor, and State Superintendent. In addition to these administrative reforms, teachers were now required to have a certificate signed by the State Superintendent, and countersigned by the county treasurer (Powell, 1893).
The first State Superintendent under the new law was James H. Groves, who served from
1875 to 1882. He proved to be a well-equipped, enthusiastic officer, and a very important factor in the success of the new law. In his first annual report, Superintendent Groves sated:
I am happy to state after witnessing the working of our new system for one full year and a part of the second that there is marked change for the better in our public schools. The old idea of keeping school is being supplanted by the new better plan of teaching school. A genuine A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 31
interest in public education is gradually but persistently overcoming any lingering prejudice of the new order of things (Weeks, 1917, p. 85) . The Law of 1887. The Law of 1887 abolished the offices of State and Assistant State
Superintendent. Under provisions of the new law, the governor appointed three county superintendents. The three appointed county superintendents were: Herman Bessey for New
Castle County, Levin Irving Handing for Kent County, and James H. Ward for Sussex County.
These three individuals joined the Secretary of State, and president of Delaware College to form the State School Board (Powell, 1893).
The Law of 1907. Although State Superintendent James H. Groves, in the 1880’s and
State Superintendent Albert N. Raub in the 1890’s, opposed a compulsory school attendance law, such a law was passed for the first time in 1907. The law provided that children between the ages of seven and fourteen should attend a day school in which the common English branches were taught at least five months each year (Weeks, 1917).
Delaware’s School Code 1919. In 1917 the federal government passed its first
Vocational Education Act called the Smith-Hughes Act. This Act was significant in that it marked the first time the federal government placed an importance on vocational education.
Delaware followed suit and adopted a new school code in 1919. This new code, as recommended by the state legislative commission of 1917, spelled out the responsibilities of the state for vocational education:
The State Board of Education is authorized, empowered, directed, and required along with the State Commissioner of Education in cooperation with the Federal Board of Vocational Education in the administration of the provisions of the Smith-Hughes Vocational Education Act. The State of Delaware accepts the benefits of this Act passed by the Senate and the congress assembled entitled an “Act to Provide for Cooperation with the State in the promotion of such education in agriculture and the trades and industries; to provide for the cooperation with the State in the preparation of teachers of vocational subjects; and to appropriate money and regulate A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 32
its expenditure and will observe and comply with all requirements of said Act and the state treasurer is herby designated as custodian of any funds accruing to the state from the aforesaid Act (Delaware School Code, 1919).
In Wilmington, the first cooperative part-time vocational classes were organized under the provisions of the Smith-Hughes Act and with the aid of cash and equipment donated by the
Delaware Manufacturers Association. The Wilmington High School conducted day and evening and part-time classes for industrial apprentices (History of Education in Delaware).
1926. In 1926 Wilmington High School’s commercial department was placed on a vocational basis. At the same time, the classes in five different trades held for 120 pupils in the attic of the Wilmington High School, were transferred to an old school renamed the Wilmington
Trade School (History of Education in Delaware).
1935. In 1935, a committee was appointed to make a report on the needs for buildings and facilities in Wilmington. The result of this study was the construction of the H. Fletcher
Brown Vocational School built in Wilmington to serve the state. The school was named in honor of H. Fletcher Brown, a previous member of the State Board of Education who is referred as one who through his extreme understanding, foresight, and unselfish, philanthropic participation brought the school into reality. Funds for the building, equipment and grounds were donated by two former members of the State Board of Education, H. Fletcher Brown, and Pierre S. DuPont
(Hodgson, 1965).
In 1938, the Brown Vocational School opened in Wilmington, built by private funds at no cost to the taxpayers. The school offered a program of twelve skilled trades and occupations.
Brown Vocational served greater Wilmington for 31 years, producing a generation of craftsmen, artisans and beauticians. Brown Vocational closed in 1969 to make way for the larger, A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 33 technologically up-to-date suburban Delcastle Technical High School, which opened in the fall of 1970.
1939. In 1939, a survey of rural Delaware was made to determine a feasible plan for making available trade and industrial education to youth in rural sections of the state (Hodgson,
1965).
1941. The Delaware Legislature appropriated $50,000 for a trade school for “colored” in
Eastern Sussex County, but no further action was ever recorded (Hodgson, 1965).
1944. In May of 1944, the State Board of Education received a bequest of funds from the will of the late H. Fletcher Brown for the purpose of establishing a vocational high school or high schools in Kent and/or Sussex County. On the same date, H. V. Holloway, Superintendent of Public Instruction, named a post-war Vocational Education Committee, which reported “that the first steps would be to make a survey as to the location of pupils and trades involved
(Hodgson, 1965).
A special eighteen person committee of industrialists, agriculturalists, professional educators, and the President of the State Federation of Women’s Clubs was named by the State
Board of Education at their September, 1944 meeting. The committee’s purpose as stated was:
“to assist in making a survey of reactions in Kent and Sussex counties for the purpose of locating trade schools made possible by the will of H. Fletcher Brown.” The Board at their next month’s meeting, October, 1944, authorized the investment of the money from the Brown bequest and indicated they did not foresee that: “any or all will be actually spent for considerable time.” This special committee, with a slight change in personnel, gave a progress report at the July, 1945 meeting of the State Board:
R.W. Heim, the State Director of Vocational Education, and A. B. Anderson, the State Supervisor of Trades and Industries, made a full report of the findings A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 34
and gave their recommendations as to the type of schools needed to meet the needs indicated by the survey.
A later report indicated that:
On April 18, 1946, the State Board selected the neighborhood of Georgetown as the location for the school for colored students and the neighborhood of Milford as the location for the school for white students. Since that time definite sites have been purchased….Due to limited funds available and the very high present cost of construction, it is difficult to say just when construction of school can be begun (Holloway, 1945).
The State Superintendent of Public Instruction also pointed out in his 1947 report the area and location of need:
Vocational education has expanded in effectiveness and one may point with pride to accomplishments in the area. But the vocational opportunities for boys and girls outside of Wilmington are severely restricted. Very little opportunity exists for vocational training in the two lower counties of the state (Miller, 1947).
The investigation revealed that parts of the funds from the Brown bequest had been spent to purchase sites and cover some of the costs of constructing a school building in Sussex County and that the balance would be used for additional vocational facilities in Sussex and Kent
County. Following all of the studies and their recommendations, the only application was the construction of a comprehensive high school for “Negros” in Sussex County. The studies may, however, have influenced the thinking relative to vocational education and resulted in more favorable reaction from the leaders in the state (Hodgson, 1965).
1954. In 1954, the Governor and State Superintendent of Public Instruction comment on the degree of development and acceptance attained by education in general and vocational education in particular. They also suggest that certain areas were still inadequate and needed further development. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 35
Commenting on thirty-five years of vocational education in Delaware, Governor J. Caleb
Boggs, voiced his educational philosophy and suggested the need for its further application:
One of the greatest responsibilities and wisest investments of our society is education. Vocational education is essential and an integral part of Delaware’s program of education. It is broad and comprehensive and includes selected organized experiences which prepare an individual for responsibility as a useful and self-supporting citizen.
Vocational education is intended for everyone in our democracy and primarily dedicated to the purpose of preparing people, youth, and adults, for profitable and efficient employment. It must be education for living and preparation for earning a living. Both are important and necessary as education cannot be measured in terms of credits, diplomas, or degrees.
Delaware citizens are proud of their programs of vocational education which covers the following fields of service—agriculture, homemaking, business, distributive education, trades, and industries, rehabilitation, and guidance. However, the vocational offerings in trades and industries in certain areas are still inadequate and I trust that I can have a part in assisting the further development of this program in lower Delaware during my term of office (Boggs, 1954).
In the same publication, George R. Miller, Jr., State Superintendent of Public Instruction, recognized the accomplishments of vocational education but stressed the need for broader opportunities and continuous growth by stating a point of view that: …everyone who needs and wants vocational training in the public schools should have the opportunity…(Miller, 1954).
1955. In 1955, the Advisory Committee on Vocational Needs in Kent and Sussex
Counties was reactivated and at their reorganization meeting, a review of the 1945 survey was given. A release given by the Journal Every-Evening, a leading newspaper, reemphasized the need for action by stating that:
. . . the point is made in connection with the new survey that the time seems long overdue that the State Board of Vocational Education should make renewed efforts toward the fulfillment of a great need that was uppermost in Mr. Brown’s mind when he provided so liberally in his will for expanded vocational A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 36
training opportunities. It has also been developed by the committee and the vocational education officials that labor and management alike with many private citizens have expressed deep concern and some disappointment regarding the absence of immediate plans for providing for the white segment of the population on terms comparable to what have already been provided for Negros. [Reference is made here to the Jason Comprehensive School previously built for Negro students in Sussex County and the William Henry Comprehensive School in Kent County.] The administrators and representatives from the State Department of Public Instruction included George R. Miller, Jr., State Superintendent, R. W. Heim, Assistant Superintendent for Secondary Education, and A. B. Anderson, State Director of Trades and Industries. It was pointed out that the committee was being reactivated at the recommendation of the “State Vocational Advisory Committee on Trades and Industries” to the State Board of Vocational Education and that their recommendation was that immediate steps be taken to recheck the 1945 survey of Kent and Sussex Counties, with the view of getting underway, as soon as possible, a building program for trade and industrial education (Journal Every Evening, 1955).
Following discussion of existing conditions, changes, and trends the committee unanimously agreed that another survey should be conducted to determine the vocational needs at the present time (Hodgson, 1965).
The plan of this proposed study to determine the need for further development of vocational studies in Kent and Sussex counties was presented to the committee and approved by them. George R. Miller, Jr., State Superintendent of Public Instruction indicated his approval by stating that he would request the school administrators of the two counties to cooperate in making the local surveys (Hodgson, 1965).
1960s. With the exception of Fletcher Brown Vocational High School in Wilmington,
Delaware’s vocational instruction prior to the 1960s took place mostly within traditional comprehensive high schools. During the decade of the 1960s, Delaware initiated a system of shared-time technical high schools in which students spent half their day receiving academic A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 37 instruction at their home comprehensive high school (based on residence) and the other half receiving vocational instruction at a technical high school.
In 1961, Sussex Vocational-Technical High School and Kent Vocational-Technical High
School opened as shared-time schools to provide vocational education and service Sussex and
Kent County. In each county the area school operated as an independent school district, with its own school board and taxing authority, serving secondary school students attending high schools in other districts in the county. Students received their academic courses in their “home high school,” and their vocational courses at the area school (Hoachlander, 1989).
For many years this arrangement worked well in Delaware. Enrollment at the area schools grew steadily throughout the 1960s and early 1970s. For example, enrollment at Sussex
County Vo-Tech grew from 335 in 1962 to 1,353 in 1978. However, by the end of the 1980s enrollment in the area schools had declined by more than 40% from its peak in the mid 1970s
(Hoachlander, 1989).
Present-day vocational-technical schooling began in New Castle County with the establishment of the New Castle County Vocational-Technical School District in 1966 by means of legislative action. The Delcastle Technical High School became operational in the 1969-70 school year as the first new vocational high school in northern Delaware since the construction of the Fletcher Brown Vocational-Technical School over 30 years previously (Quality
Vocational Education Report, 1984).
1970s. Howard Comprehensive High School opened in 1928 as a high school for blacks; at the time, it was the only such public school in the state. It was built through the generosity of
Pierre S. DuPont, and is located on Wilmington’s East Side overlooking the historic Brandywine
River. In September 1975, many changes took place at the Howard complex. The Howard A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 38
Comprehensive High School became the Howard Career Center, and in essence, became a truly vocational high school (Report of the Howard Career Center Task Force, 1990).
In 1976, the Paul M. Hodgson Vocational-Technical High School opened as a shared- time facility to provide vocational training for high school students in New Castle County, who returned to their home school for their academic courses. Paul M. Hodgson operated under the auspices of the former Newark School District (Quality Vocational Education Report, 1984).
The three vocational-technical high schools in New Castle County operated independently and competitively under the administration of three separate school districts. It was not until July 1, 1978, when Governor Pierre S. DuPont, IV and both Houses of the General
Assembly, passed House Bill 22, which created a county-wide vocational school system under the control of the New Castle County Vocational-Technical School District (Quality Vocational
Education Report, 1984).
The Governor’s Task Force On Vocational Education
The Governor’s Vocational Education Task Force was appointed by Governor Michael
N. Castle in February of 1986. Task force members were selected from all parts of the state and from varied backgrounds. The twenty-eight member group included two teachers, two district superintendents and other officials; a district school board head and school board member; a state senator and a representative; a college president; two state cabinet officers; a Superior Court judge; and businessmen and women from construction, manufacturing, banking, and other industries. The chairman of the committee was Charles E. Welch.
The governor instructed the task force to conduct a thorough review of vocational education throughout the state, with the focus on high schools, but with attention as well to what A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 39 happens preceding and following student’s high school years. The task force was instructed to not only identify problems, but also to provide a blueprint for corrections.
At the time of the study, vocational offerings were provided by all twenty-five district high schools in Delaware, by two fulltime vocational schools (Delcastle High School and
Howard Career Center), and by four shared-time vocational schools (Hodgson Vocational
Technical High School, Kent Vocational Technical School Woodside, Kent Vocational
Technical School, and Sussex Vocational Technical High School). These programs offered training in a variety of diverse careers such as agriculture, electronics, computers, retailing, finance, insurance, construction, manufacturing, and small business management.
The task force collected data through visits to schools; through discussions with parents, students, teachers, school administrators, employers, and others; and through public hearings in the three counties of the state. All groups in the state with an interest in education were invited to present their views, and many groups responded through meetings or in written responses.
Surveys were conducted, and research files and experiences of organizations interested in vocational education were accessed. Background information was obtained from states with well-developed vocational education programs including: Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania,
Virginia, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, California, and Texas.
The overarching question for the task force was this: Does vocational education work? Does the secondary school system in Delaware provide the right kinds of programs, in the right places for the people who need and want those programs, and do so with reasonable efficiency and quality (Task, 1986, p.1).
In terms of specifics, the task force was asked to consider the following questions:
1. Do vocational programs match labor-market needs, or are schools training people for jobs
that do not exist? A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 40
2. Is there coordination between the traditional, comprehensive high schools (which spend
seventy percent of the vocational budget) and the schools specializing in vocational
programs (labeled in this report as vocational-technical, or vo-tech schools)? Is there
unneeded and perhaps costly duplication in their programs?
3. What are the merits of various systems through which vocational programs are made
available? What are the advantages or disadvantages of vocational courses in
comprehensive high schools, in vo-tech schools which students attend fulltime, and in vo-
tech schools which students attend half time?
4. Does the financing system work properly?
5. Is Delaware going to need additional facilities for vocational education? If so, when and
at what price tag? Should the state expand vocational offerings in schools run by the local
districts, in new or expanded stand-alone vo-tech schools, or in both?
6. Are students with disabilities or other special problems able to get vocational education if
they want it? Is there equal access? Are programs tailored to their needs?
There were ten findings reached by the task force:
1. The System Does Work
The report begins by declaring that vocational education is a system that works. Students
who successfully complete vocational programs are able to find jobs, keep them, and
advance in their careers. Students who want to advance beyond high school are given the
opportunity to build the necessary credentials. About 25 percent of vo-ed graduates enroll in
college or choose other post-secondary training of some kind (Task Force, 1986).
Vo-ed is also identified as a valuable resource for many students with handicaps and
learning problems. Since vocational programs mix theory with practice, and incorporate large A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 41
blocks of instructional time, special needs students receive the support and hands-on
experience enhancing their opportunity for success.
2. There is widespread support for Vocational Education
At the time of the study, vocational education was supported by an annual budget of more
than $40 million dollars, about 70% of it from state sources. The task force received no
recommendations for cutting back vo-ed spending. The reported also cited a survey that 80%
of the people in Delaware thought that vocational education opportunities should be
increased (Task Force, 1986).
3. A “We-They” syndrome divides “academic” and “vocational” education.
According to the task force, this syndrome was the top issue they encountered, and in
their judgment, unless it was resolved nothing else in their report would make much
difference.
The task force felt that the problem seemed to reflect old biases that stereotyped
vocational education and its students as “second class” or “losers.” More broadly, the “we-
they” syndrome stemmed from a competition for students. As high school enrollments
declined throughout the state from 1980 through 1986, this created a “range war” between
comprehensive high schools and vo-tech schools.
This dispute was often driven by money, if “they” get it, “we” don’t. The state’s
vocational financing system was set up by House Bill 509, which set forth formulas based on
the numbers of students in approved vocational programs.
While the funding system made sense in many ways, it had several negative effects. One
was that it invited schools to put a “vo-ed” label on programs whether they deserved it or not.
Another was that it rewarded schools to continue vocational programs that had outlived their A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 42
usefulness. Worst of all, the 509 funding turned some students into pawns. They were treated
as sacrificial units on a game board being moved from one program to another in order to
attain vocational funding for their school and district.
It was also clear to the task force those area relationships between local school districts
and vocational schools had disintegrated. Cooperation had given way to tension. The report
stated that, in New Castle County, some comprehensive schools were accused of trying to
use vocational schools as “dumping grounds” for students they no longer wanted. The county
vocational schools, in turn, were accused of trying to “take only the best” and send back to
the local districts any student who misbehave or was unsuccessful (Task Force, 1986).
4. Split Administrative Structures Add to Tensions and Problems.
The structure of the school boards that control vocational schools and the boards that
control comprehensive high schools are set up in two distinctively different ways.
Comprehensive high schools report to elected school boards. The vocational schools are
governed by appointive boards, one in each county, whose members are appointed by the
governor. Therefore, the boards were not accountable to one another and there was little
coordination among them.
5. Schools lack needed flexibility.
Tracking systems that locked students into academic, general, or vocational tracks,
without allowance for change, were identified by the task force as a weakness across the
board. They cited that all ninth graders are not ready to choose a track; some who do will
surely change their minds; and some parents, teachers and counselors will err in their
appraisals of what individual students will want and can do. In addition, vocational tracks are A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 43
so tightly bound by required courses that it is impossible for students to change gears unless
they want to spend an additional year in high school.
The task force also highlighted that vocational facilities are underused, often standing
idle on evenings, weekends, and in the summer. The committee felt that there were
opportunities for more extensive use of these facilities, such as remedial programs for
students, and training or retraining programs for adults.
6. There is a strong need for more and better counseling.
Counseling was seen as a weakness, with the majority of counseling being seen as too
little and too late. Many counselors admitted this situation, and reported that they were weak
in the vocational area, being more attuned to counseling college bound students. Also, few of
the counselors came from careers in business and industry, as do many vocational teachers,
and admitted that they knew little about the vocational programs into which they were
placing students.
7. Students with special problems need special help, but do not get enough of it.
The task force identified special education as an area where vocational education could
be more effective if given a chance. The fact that Delaware’s special education per pupil cost
was among the top in the nation, yet its special education students in shared-time vocational
programs were being short changed was described as “ridiculous.”
The state’s funding system provided extra dollars for “Special Education” students.
However, shared-time vocational special education students received no “extras.” The
student: teacher ratio remained the same in the shared-time programs; there was no
adjustment, the additional money stayed with the comprehensive high school. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 44
8. Shared-time schools in Delaware face a serious problem that can be solved only through
major change.
With all four of Delaware’s shared-time vocational schools experiencing declining
enrollments, while their fulltime vocational counterparts are overcrowded and turning
applications away, the task force concluded that the idea behind shared-time schools may
have passed.
One major problem in shared-time vocational schools was the time used for the double
busing required to take students to and from both schools (a shared-time student stands to
lose the equivalent of one full semester during the high school years). This meant that there
was little time for electives when students included graduation requirements and vocational
courses.
As mentioned earlier, a state financing system which rewards districts for keeping
students within their own buildings, and penalizes them if students “escape” to a shared-time
vocational facility establishes a shared-time system destined for failure. This funding system
known as the 0.5 Deduct has long been controversial. It mandates that when students attend
an area shared-time school, the home school loses money that the sending district would
otherwise receive if the students remained in their home high schools. This in turn fosters the
“we-they” syndrome mentioned earlier.
The task force concluded that there was no way that shared-time schools could remain
effective in either cost or educational terms, for a period of 5 to 10 more years from the date
of the report. They recommend that it is time in the northern segment of the state to move
toward fulltime vocational education. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 45
9. Vo-ed students, like others, need a strong background in mathematics, science, and
communications.
A concern brought to light by the task force was the exempting or watered-down versions
of courses in vocational schools. The task force concluded that academic skills were just as
important for vocational students as for anyone else, including college-bound students. They
stressed that without a solid foundation in the basics; graduates would not qualify for the
more advanced jobs of today. The task force strongly recommended that graduation
requirements, as measured by competency, should be the same for all students.
10. The need for vo-ed programs will increase.
The task force concluded its findings by stating that the need for vocational programs will
increase. While much had been made of the need for highly educated people to keep the state
and national economies competitive, that most new jobs created by economic growth will not
require college degrees.
The task force states: “people all over the state have been sending us one message, in
dozens of ways: They want the educational system to put the needs of students first. They do
not think in terms of vocational education, the system is doing that job as well as it could and
should.
Shared-Time versus Full-Time Vocational High Schools in Delaware: An Assessment
In June 1989, the Delaware State Board of Education requested an independent
assessment of proposals to convert Delaware’s two shared-time area vocational schools, one
in Kent County and one in Sussex County, into full-time vocational high schools. In response
to the State Board’s action, the Delaware Department of Public Instruction contracted the
National Center for Research in Vocational Education at the University of California, A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 46
Berkeley, to conduct a study of shared-time versus full-time schools in Delaware
(Hoachlander, 1989).
In August 1989, the study staff met with the President of the Delaware State Board of
Education, the State Superintendent of Education, and staff from the Department of Public
Instruction to define the scope of the study. In September 1989, the study staff interviewed
all superintendents of public schools in Kent and Sussex counties as well as the two
superintendents of the shared-time facilities. In addition, the study staff visited the New
Castle County Vocational Technical School District. Finally, the study staff reviewed all
documents about converting shared-time facilities produced after the recommendation was
formally proposed in the December 1986 report of the Governor’s Task Force on Vocational
Education (Hoachlander, 1989).
This report focused primarily on the implications of shared-time versus full-time facilities
for improving the educational opportunities of high school students. The report identified six
areas of focus including: what is best for students; conversion costs; curriculum design;
staffing, financial and programmatic impact on sending school districts; and probable effects
on local labor markets and community well-being (Hoachlander, 1989).
The report was divided into four sections. The first section examined the current
operating conditions of the shared-time facilities in Kent and Sussex counties. The second
section examined the major issues related to converting shared-time area schools into full-
time vocational schools. The third section analyzed the potential impact of converting to full-
time schools on sending school districts. Finally, the fourth section offered concluding
comments. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 47
The commission makes it clear in its opening remarks in the report that there is “nothing
inherently superior about either a shared-time or a full-time approach to vocational education
(Hoachlander, 1989, p. 2). However, it does state, that in Delaware the approach for
providing vocational education in Kent and Sussex counties through shared-time facilities
was not working, and recommends a conversion from shared-time facilities to full-time
facilities (Hoachlander, 1989).
Shared-time vocational schools have operated in Kent and Sussex counties since the early
1960s. Each school operated as an independent school district, with its own school board and
taxing authority. The schools served the secondary school students attending high school in
the other districts in the county. This arrangement appeared to have worked well throughout
the 1960s and early 1970s. However, beginning in 1980 enrollment began to decline, and by
1989 enrollment was down more than 40% from its peak in 1978. This decline was similar in
both counties (Hoachlander, 1989).
The report addressed eight factors it believed were responsible for this statistical decline.
The factors it identified were: Increased graduation requirements; Higher rates of students
failing required courses; Structure of the curriculum; Lack of communication and integration
between sending schools and area schools; Structure of the funding system; Transportation
conflicts; Inadequate attention to extracurricular activities; and Incompatible governance
structures.
While the committee felt all eight factors played a role in the decline of shared-time area
schools in Delaware, they felt that the biggest obstacle was the state funding system. The
state funding system mandated that when students attend an area school (shared-time), the
home school loses money that the sending district would otherwise receive if the students A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 48
remained in their home schools. This process is known as the 0.5 deduct, and required 40%
of one regular unit for every one-half unit of attendance at an area school (Plan, 1990). The
rationale for this policy is that sending districts’ costs are reduced if they do not have
students for the entire school day. Nevertheless, this procedure created an incentive for
districts to discourage students from attending an area school. The committee highlighted,
that this environment created a “win/lose” atmosphere, with attendance at one school being
perceived as money lost from another school.
Faced with a variety of problems making shared-time schools increasingly unworkable in
Kent and Sussex counties, the study presented eight strategies to restore shared-time
operations and meet the needs of secondary schools students. Here are the eight highlighted
in the study:
1. The current governance structure must be altered to foster better coordination
and cooperation. The committee felt that for this to happen, serious consideration
should be given to consolidate all secondary education under a single county
board of education, responsible for all comprehensive high schools, as well as the
shared-time school in each county.
2. Barring the adoption of a single countywide school district for all secondary
education, the fiscal disincentive to participate in shared-time area schools
should be reduced substantially or eliminated entirely. The competition for
students between sending districts and area schools needs to be eliminated. This
atmosphere does not foster coordination and cooperation, and in fact, creates an
environment of distrust. Area schools were intended to supplement the program of A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 49
the sending schools; they were not designed to provide a full secondary school
program.
3. The state should consider mandating a uniform school calendar and school day.
This would reduce long-standing conflicts over course scheduling, holidays and
special events, and school start times.
4. The curriculum at the shared-time area schools should be redesigned, in
combination with curriculum redesign at home high schools, so that programs at
the shared-time schools may be completed in two years or less. The report
recommended that attendance at shared-time schools should be reduced from 3-4
year programs to a two-year junior/senior program. The committee felt that this
would allow more students to complete the program.
5. The state should undertake a major effort to improve the integration of
curriculum at area schools with academic and vocational curriculum at the home
high schools. A recommendation was made that state standards for program
completion should be expanded to include academic and vocational courses.
6. The state should require in-service on integrating academic and vocational
education curricula and should provide time for ongoing communication between
academic and vocational teachers. Provisions for in-service training should be
incorporated into the uniform school calendar.
7. After the vocational curriculum of area and sending schools has been thoroughly
reviewed and modified, the state should designate vocational courses that may be
substituted for required courses that students fail. The committee felt that A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 50
students should have alternative approaches to repeating failed courses through
vocational offerings that specialize in applied learning concepts.
8. The state should conduct a study of transportation and scheduling for
shared-time schools including practices in other states. The study felt that
strategies for increasing flexibility in scheduling, reducing transportation time,
and eliminating credit loss needed to be explored at a greater level.
In section II of the report, the committee acknowledged that the shared-time area
schools in Kent and Sussex counties were faced with a number of intractable
problems. And even if some of the most serious problems could be rectified, a few
difficulties intrinsic to any shared-time program would remain. Therefore the
committee felt that moving forward with plans to convert these shared-time facilities
to full-time facilities was recommended and warranted.
In order to make this conversion a reality, the study focused on two sets of issues:
1. What would be the educational benefits of a full-time vocational school? 2. What
are the major issues surrounding implementation of full-time schools, and how might
these be addressed?
The committee felt that converting to full-time schools presented an opportunity
to take a bold, new approach toward improving secondary education for all students.
That it was an opportunity to be at the forefront of integrating academic and
vocational education, as well as, an opportunity to adopt a new attitude about
vocational education and the importance of applied learning for all students –
regardless of their postsecondary aspirations (Hoachlander, 1989). A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 51
For conversion to be successful, the committee felt that there were a number of
implementation issues that needed to be addressed. First and foremost, a strategic
plan for converting each school had to be developed. That plan had to clearly
articulate the vision the school is seeking to create, the steps it will take to get there,
and the overall costs. The study recognized that both Sussex and Kent had developed
proposals, however, the committee felt that both plans needed to be developed
further.
The study did present an estimated cost of $11 million, for converting both Sussex
Vo-Tech and Kent County Vo-Tech to full-time status. That figure represented the
costs for constructing new facilities to accommodate approximately 1,000 students at
each site, as well as, the costs for additional classroom facilities, science labs,
libraries, auditoriums, gyms, playing fields, and expanded cafeterias.
In regards to the admission policy for potential students, the study recommended
an open admission policy, and in schools in which applicants exceeded the number of
places, admission should be conducted by lottery. The committee reinforced this
belief by stating, “If one of the advantages of converting to full-time schools is
stimulating healthy, fair competition between the full-time vocational schools and the
other high schools, then it is important that both parties play by the same rules. The
home high schools cannot be selective about whom they admit. Neither should the
full-time vocational high schools” (Hoachlander, 1989, p. 28).
The report also addressed the distribution of state aid. It recommended that the
converted full-time schools should not be treated any differently from those in other
districts for purposes of distributing state and federal aid. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 52
Section III in the study looked specifically at the impact this conversion would
have on the enrollment and finances of the comprehensive high schools in Kent and
Sussex counties. The committee conducted a series of simulations using a simplified
version of the unit funding system in Delaware.
The first simulation was designed to evaluate how local district enrollments
would be affected as enrollments at the full-time vocational high schools increased.
This model estimated student population for the years 1990-91 and 1995-96 and
measured the impact enrollment growth at the secondary level would have on the
distribution of units. The first simulation concluded that if 1,000 students were
enrolled at each full-time vocational school, population growth in Kent and in Sussex
counties would not be sufficient to compensate the local districts for their enrollment
losses.
In the second simulation, the study examined how enrollments in the vocational
high schools shift as the population of the counties change. It was found that the lack
of growth in concentrated districts had little effect on the number of units allocated to
the vo-techs (Hoachlander, 1989).
The third simulation examined how the proportion of students from each sending
district attending the vo-tech would have to change to produce capacity enrollments at
each vocational school. The simulation produced results showing that for enrollments
of 1,000 students, Kent Vo-tech would have to enroll 16% of all the secondary
students in the county and Sussex Vo-tech would have to enroll 17% of their county
students to generate capacity enrollments. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 53
Section IV of the report offered an overview of its findings throughout the first
three sections of the report. In conclusion, the committee stated,
“Conversion to full-time, however, is not a guaranteed improvement. We believe that conversion offers the state some exciting opportunities to improve both vocational and academic education for high school students. Conversion is a chance to develop model schools that can help to improve secondary education statewide. However, if these opportunities are to be realized, the state must forcefully articulate a vision that promotes integration of academics and vocational education and that encourages innovation in physical design, curriculum, and methods of teaching. Otherwise, conversion will do little more than simply move students around to eliminate transportation and scheduling inconveniences (Hoachlander, 1989, pp. 54, 55).”
Great Expectations: Five Years of Progress at Delaware’s Comprehensive Vocational-
Technical High Schools (1995)
In 1995, a report was sponsored by the Delaware Advisory Council on Career and
Vocational Education to examine the effectiveness of Delaware’s five full-time
comprehensive vocational technical high schools from 1990 to 1995. Delcastle
Technical High School, Paul M. Hodgson Vocational Technical High School and
Howard High School of Technology makeup the New Castle County Vocational
School District. Polytech School District has one high school that serves Kent
County, and Sussex Technical School District also has one high school for Sussex
County.
In 1990, Delaware became the first state with a system of full-time
comprehensive vocational technical high schools. The two events that spurred this
were the decision by the State Board of Education and General Assembly to create
the nation’s only statewide system of full-time comprehensive vocational-technical
high schools and the decision by the three vocational technical school districts to A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 54
collaborate in order to dramatically raise expectations for student performance (Perry,
1995).
The Great Expectations 1995 report listed the following outcomes of the two 1990
decisions:
1. Applications increased; almost one third of Delaware’s public school eighth
graders apply to attend Delaware’s vocational-technical high schools.
2. Declining enrollments were replaced by healthy growth. Almost five thousand
students are enrolled in grades 9 through 12 in Delaware’s vocational-technical
high schools. In addition, approximately 7,000 adults participate in various basic
education and work-related programs.
3. Academic achievement is improving; large proportions of technical high school
graduates go on to full-time jobs, college, or postsecondary training.
The decision to create America’s first statewide system of full-time technical
education, combined with the raising of student expectations, significantly strengthened
Delaware’s five vocational schools and provided Delaware students with an excellent
option for career and educational preparation (Perry, 1995).
While the report acknowledged this success, it also warned that expectations would
continue to change with the times. It also stressed that our technical high schools must
remain current with the needs of Delaware employers and the standards for admission to
postsecondary institutions.
In summary, Gene Bottoms of the Southern Regional Educational Board (SREB) put
it this way:
“The five high schools in Delaware are pacesetting high schools. They’re not perfect, but they’ve done as much or more than any A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 55
high schools to raise expectations, change what teachers teach and how teachers teach, get teachers to work together, get parents involved, and build a climate of continuous improvement” (Perry, 1995)
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 56
Chapter III: Methodology
Research Design
The six individuals chosen for this case study were each involved in the negotiations, planning, and implementation of Delaware’s conversion from shared-time vocational high schools to full-time vocational high schools. Each individual played a pivotal role in the transition and outcome of this conversion. These interviews examined their individual perspectives in comparison to each other on the conversion and impact of Delaware’s shared- time vocational schools to full-time vocational schools.
According to Gay, Mills, and Airasian (2006), qualitative research is the collection, analysis, and interpretation of comprehensive narrative and visual data in order to gain insights into a particular phenomenon of interest. This means that qualitative researchers do not accept the view of a stable, coherent, uniform world. They believe that all meaning is situated in a particular perspective or context, and because different people and groups often have different perspectives and contexts, there are many different meanings in the world, none of which is necessarily more valid or true than another.
Qualitative research involves the studied use and collection of a variety of empirical materials such as case studies, personal experiences, introspective, life story, interview, observational, historical, and visual texts.
For this study, the researcher chose to use a case study format as the research design. This case study focused on the history of career and technical (vocational) education in the state of
Delaware, and the effects two key reports, the 1986 Governor’s Task Force on Vocational
Education in Delaware, and the 1990 report by Gareth E. Hoaclander and John E. Tuna, Shared- time versus Full-Time Vocational High Schools in Delaware: An Assessment, have had since A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 57 their implementation twenty plus years ago. This case study focused on the effects of these two studies through the perspectives of key educational leaders and policy makers. After interviewing these individuals to gain their perspectives on career and technical education, the researcher was able to gain unique insight into each subject’s personal perceptions of key events in the history of Delaware education, and how these two reports have influenced and changed career and technical education.
Prior to implementing this case study, the researcher had to determine if the topic addressed would be an intrinsic case, instrumental case, or collective case study design (Miller &
Salkind, 2002).
This researcher chose to interview each subject in the case study. In relation to qualitative research, per Gay, Mills, and Airasian (2006) interviewing has a number of unique advantages and disadvantages. It can produce in-depth data; on the other hand, it can be expensive and time consuming. It is most effective when asking questions that cannot be structured into a multiple- choice format, such as questions of a personal nature or those that require lengthy responses.
Other interview options are available; including the group interview, telephone interview, and self-administered questionnaires (Miller & Salkind, 2002). Interviews can be structured, semi-structured, or unstructured (Gay, Mills, and Airasian, 2006). They can be used to gather opinions, for therapeutic reasons, or to produce data for academic analysis. An interview can also be a one-time, brief exchange over the telephone, or it can take place over multiple sessions
(Gay, Mills, and Airasian, 2006).
For the purpose of this study, five face-to-face unstructured interviews, and one phone interview, were held to compare and contrast different perspectives on past and present outcomes of vocational education in Delaware. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 58
The questions that were asked created a bridge of understanding between person and report, between content and form as well as (background) information and (personal) experience.
This flexible approach allowed for a conversational approach to uncovering how each of the participants viewed the transformation and the results of converting Delaware’s shared-time vocational schools to full-time vocational school status. The interview allows the individual participant to tell a story from his or her perspective and from his or her own construct or paradigm. The experiences of the participants will be critical to the outcome of the study. The purpose of the interview will be to understand “the lived experience of other people and the meaning they make of that experience” (Seidman, 2006).
Each interviewee was asked five questions related to the following research themes:
1. What was the environment surrounding vocational education in the mid to late 1980s?
2. What support was available or offered for the conversion from shared-time to full-time
vocational high schools?
3. What resistance/obstacles did you or your group experience as you explored and
ultimately transitioned from shared-time status to full-time status?
4. The “Governor’s Task Force” discussed a syndrome identified as “We-They Syndrome,”
explain this syndrome and its impact on the conversion process.
5. It has been twenty-four years since the Governor’s Task Force recommended converting
Delaware’s shared-time vocational schools to full-time status. Has the recommendation
proved to be a success? If so, how? In what ways was it unsuccessful?
Participants.
The participants for this study included educational leaders who conceived the transformation of Delaware’s shared-time vocational schools to a statewide system of fully A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 59 comprehensive vocational high schools, implemented the transformation to full-time status, and/or who have experienced the results of the transformation from a shared-time status to a full- time status. The participants were chosen because of their special experience, particular competence, or their current role at their district or school.
Instrumentation
As part of ethical considerations and mandates enforced by the Human Subjects
Review Committee, each research participant was provided with a consent form to sign. The consent form will explain the purpose of the study, volunteer participation, the benefits and risks, the freedom to ask questions, and the system for data collection. Gay, Mills, and Airasian (2006) stated, that care should be used when interviewing someone. Data collection methods such as interviews, debriefings, and the like bring the researcher and participants in close, personal contact. The closeness between participants and researcher helps to provide deep and rich data, but it may also create unconscious influences that raise issues for objectivity and data interpretation.
Data Collection
The data collection instruments used in this study were semi-structured interview protocols with open-ended questions; The Governor’s Task Force Report; Shared-Time versus Full-Time
Vocational High Schools in Delaware: An Assessment; National Center for Research in
Vocational Education Study; and documents obtained from the New Castle County Vocational
School District.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 60
Chapter IV: Results Introduction
Chapter IV will focus on the effects of two studies conducted in the late 1980s and early
1990s (1986 Governor’s Task Force on Vocational Education in Delaware, and the 1990 report by Gareth E. Hoachlander and John E. Tuna, Shared-time versus Full-Time Vocational High
Schools in Delaware: An Assessment), and their impact on Delaware’s conversion from shared- time vocational education to full-time vocational education. The six individuals interviewed in this case study were each heavily involved in the negotiations, planning, and implementation of
Delaware’s conversion from shared-time vocational high schools to full-time vocational high schools. Each individual played a pivotal role in the transition and outcome of this conversion.
These interviews examined their individual perspectives in comparison to each other on the conversion and impact of Delaware’s shared-time vocational schools to full-time vocational schools. The following six individuals were selected to be interviewed: Dr. George Frunzi, Dr.
Karen Hutchinson, Dr. Gene Bottoms, Dr. Dennis Loftus, Chuck Moses, and Dr. Gareth
Hoachlander. Each interviewee was asked five questions related to the following research themes:
1. What was the environment surrounding vocational education in the mid to late 1980s?
2. What support was available or offered for the conversion from shared-time to full-time
vocational high schools?
3. What resistance/obstacles did you or your group experience as you explored and
ultimately transitioned from shared-time status to full-time status?
4. The “Governor’s Task Force” discussed a syndrome identified as “We-They Syndrome,”
explain this syndrome and its impact on the conversion process. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 61
5. It has been twenty-four years since the Governor’s Task Force recommended converting
Delaware’s shared-time vocational schools to full-time status. Has the recommendation
proved to be a success? If so, how? In what ways was it unsuccessful?
Interview #1 (Dr. George Frunzi, former Superintendent Sussex Technical High School, adjunct professor)
The interview with Dr. Frunzi was conducted on January 20, 2011 at approximately
4:15 p.m. Dr. Frunzi is currently an adjunct professor for Wesley University. Dr. Frunzi began his educational career in Delaware in 1971 when he started teaching full-time at Wesley College.
In 1981, he moved to Wilmington College and remained there until he returned to Wesley to develop a graduate MBA program. In 1988 Dr. Frunzi became the assistant superintendent of the shared-time Sussex Vocational Technical High School, and in 1991, Dr. Frunzi was the superintendent of the new full-time Sussex County vocational school, Sussex Technical High
School (Sussex Tech).
Dr. Frunzi explained the climate of vocational education in the mid to late 1980s, as one that was drastically changing. He cited several factors including, low test scores (test administered by the Southern Regional Education Board in 17 states), declining enrollment in both full-time and shared-time facilities, and lack of cooperation from the sending comprehensive school districts. He explained that shared-time facilities presented many obstacles to students. Since Sussex County was a large county, students who opted for shared- time programs would spend up to four hours in travel time between their two schools and home.
He also stated, “The kid feels like a fish out of water; you’ll always miss half of something because you’re at the other place half the day.” This was especially true with extracurricular activities. Dr. Frunzi felt that students and parents were being forced to make a decision between A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 62 extracurricular activities and vocational/technical education. That the variety of schedules and dismissal times made it close to impossible for students in afternoon shared-time programs to participate in sports and organizations at their sending school. This he felt was a major deterrent to the shared-time programs in Sussex County.
With the decline in enrollment, and the variety of other problems the shared-time program at Sussex was facing, Dr. Frunzi felt conversion to full-time was the only viable solution. In order to make this conversion, Dr. Frunzi knew that he would have to make a strong argument. He was passionate about his cause, and stated, “I made presentations…If there was a group of two standing on a corner someplace; I made a presentation to them. I’m serious about the necessity for full-time.”
Dr. Frunzi described that he also had support from the small businesses in Sussex
County. That while they didn’t have a strong legion of businesses like exists in New Castle
County, the small business community in Sussex County was supportive. However, he felt that the legislators of Sussex County were divided. The problem Dr. Frunzi felt was that, “Vo-tech, especially in Sussex County, we were everybody’s district, but we’re nobody’s district.” He felt that some legislators could not be objective when exploring this conversion. That they could only see the negatives of a full-time vocational school, how it could impact their comprehensive school district’s funding, enrollment, and athletics.
In order to address these concerns, Dr. Frunzi described how he formed a committee. The committee included an assortment of individuals including former Milford superintendent Chuck
Moses, former assistant state superintendent Jim Sparks, business leaders, teachers, parents, community leaders, and a few state legislators. In Dr. Frunzi’s opinion, this committee helped his platform gain momentum by highlighting the problems caused by the shared-time process, as A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 63 well as exposing groups throughout the community to the possibilities of a full-time vocational system in Sussex County. And in 1988, the Delaware State Board of Education felt that a study was needed. The Board solicited input from two national experts on vocational education, Dr.
Gary Hoachlander and Dr. Gene Bottoms.
Dr. Frunzi explained that both Dr. Hoachlander and Dr. Bottoms recommended conversion from shared-time to full-time status. However, he noted that both felt that to just go full-time for the sake of going full-time would be foolish. It was their contention that Sussex had the opportunity to adopt practices that could help develop a premiere system. This included the adoption of an integrated curriculum and block scheduling. In order to implement these “best practices,” Dr. Frunzi explained that he traveled to several national model high schools to get a firsthand look at these “best practices.” Using this new information, allowed Dr. Frunzi to hire and recruit staff whose pedagogical beliefs matched those of the school. Dr. Frunzi described the process this way, “we were getting such play in the newspapers and talking about creative this, that, and the other thing. And our salary schedule was higher than the regular school districts.
We got so lucky when it got time, the best teachers in the world applied. And they were so hungry to be creative, and get a chance to be creative, and they came in and blew the roof off.”
While Dr. Frunzi recognized that Dr. Hoachlander’s report made sense, and provided the state with a plan for conversion, when questioned about the impact of the Governor’s Task Force report, he stated, “The ’86 report was a nothing report. I mean, it did nothing. They gave lip service—they had no teeth to it.” He followed this statement by also recognizing that Dr.
Bottoms’ contributions were very influential in Sussex’s conversion to full-time status.
Dr. Frunzi described the “we-they” syndrome discussed in both the Governor’ Task
Force Report, and Dr. Hoachlander’s report as “a pity.” He explained that it has been twenty-one A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 64 years and it still hasn’t gone away, that during his tenure, after the first three or four years, it settled down a little, but never did go away. He made a point, that in Kent County, Caesar
Rodney was adverse to the idea from the start, that the thought of losing athletes to Polytech was a contributing factor. He explained that Caesar Rodney refused to allow Polytech to visit eight graders, denied them information pertaining to admissions, and when possible humiliated them on the athletic fields. Dr. Frunzi also explained how this mindset carried over to the comprehensive districts in Sussex County. He gave an example of how a legislator from Laurel,
Biff Lee, questioned how Sussex Tech was able to purchase new uniforms and scoreboard.
Dr. Frunzi also addressed these conflicts later in the interview when he explained Sussex
Tech’s “Myth Night.” This was a night when Dr. Frunzi and Sussex Tech would address the myths about vocational education and specifically the educational experience at Sussex Tech. He stated that the other districts would perpetrate these “myths” to parents of prospective students, things that would, “scare the hell out of them.” For example, “You won’t be able to go to college—they won’t be able to go to a real college. They won’t be able to go here. They won’t be able to do this. They won’t be able to do that. They won’t have bona fide teachers and that kind of thing.” He followed this by stating, “That the biggest problem was coaches holding, making concerted efforts to hold their athletes back.” “Myth Night” was not only an opportunity address the myths, it was also an opportunity to espouse on the many accomplishments of Sussex
Tech.
Dr. Frunzi highlighted many of these accomplishments in his interview including, being named a “Blue Ribbon School,” a national school of excellence, a model school for the Southern
Regional Educational Board (SREB), a state championship football team, students who attended A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 65
West Point, and teachers who were lauded by the SREB. In his opinion, the conversion from a shared-time vocational high school to a full-time vocational high school was a huge success.
Interview #2 (Dr. Karen Hutchinson, member of Governor’s Task Force on Vocational
Education, Education Associate for Agriscience Delaware Department of Education)
The interview with Dr. Hutchinson was conducted on February 15, 2011 at approximately 3:30 p.m. at the Collette Center in Dover, Delaware. Dr. Hutchinson is currently the Education Associate for Agriscience for the Delaware Department of Education. She began her educational career in 1979, when she was an Agriscience teacher at Woodbridge High
School. She taught there for ten years at Woodbridge High School, and it was during this time when she was a member of the Governor’s Task Force on Vocational Education. Dr. Hutchinson followed her tenure at Woodbridge High School, by moving to Polytech High School. Though her tenure at Polytech was short, three years, she was there during the conversion from shared- time to full-time. Dr. Hutchinson then moved, in 1992, to her current position with the Delaware
Department of Education.
In Dr. Hutchinson’s assessment, vocational education in the late 1980s was experiencing a decrease in enrollment, and students who did not want to leave their sending schools. She stated that these circumstances were the impetus of what drove the formation of the Governor’s
Task Force on Vocational Education.
As a member of the Governor’s Task Force, Dr. Hutchinson remembered that the task force consisted mainly of business people. That it was a real broad based committee and that they, “were looking at how to – they saw the value of vocational education or career and technical education and it was what do we do to help support, bring up the enrollment in these schools, how do we make changes so that they’re more relevant.” This is in contradiction to what A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 66
Dr. Frunzi and Dr. Loftus believed. They felt that the only real solution to make vocational education relevant was to convert shared-time vocational programs to full-time vocational programs.
Dr. Hutchinson stated that there was some political support, but much of it was just support to do the study. She did however state, “the committee was very much aware that whatever findings we came out with had to be acceptable politically across a pretty broad spectrum. So, as we were developing the final report that was taken into consideration a great deal that anything that was done too radically the whole work of the commission would probably be – wouldn’t be paid attention to, the critical pieces had to happen if there was anything too controversial in there. So we tried to keep that in mind as we worked through it.”
In regards to the task force, Dr. Hutchinson remembered little opposition. She felt that any opposition would’ve been earlier when they started the shared-time vocational centers. Her feeling was that these centers pulled programs out of the comprehensive high schools, and that would have an impact on funding. She also stated, “I think it was fairly early that people really didn’t look at what other ramifications might happen down the road.”
As a member of Polytech during the conversion from shared-time to full-time, and a current member of the DDOE, Dr. Hutchinson commented on what resistance she has witnessed or experienced. “What we see now is some of the resistance is more about how do the – because not it’s hot trying to get more kids in to keep their enrollment up, it’s how do we decide which students come because we have more applications than we can fulfill. I think part of the resistance then comes from the sending schools how do you make the decision of who comes.
Some of our kids who really could benefit from it don’t get into the school.” Dr. Hutchinson also stated that she felt “high stakes testing” was an element, as to which kids were being selected for A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 67 admission to vocational schools. She feels that because of these circumstances, “the dynamics of the cooperation have changed pretty dramatically.”
Within the task force committee, Dr. Hutchinson felt that there was little resistance to conversion. She did mention that, “one model that came out that people on the committee supported, but politically would not have gone is the suggestion that they not be separate districts. But you look at the overall educational systems and maybe Sussex County should be one school system with your full-time career tech center, everybody being the same that one district. So, then you didn’t have the competition for students because you’re one district.” While this idea had support within the committee, Dr. Hutchinson felt that politically it would be interpreted as school consolidation, and this would cause such controversy that none of the other recommendations would be considered. Therefore it came off the table.
Dr. Hutchinson also mentioned that when discussing the “we-they” syndrome mentioned in the task force’s report, some of the discussion focused on how students of shared-time facilities didn’t feel a part of either place. That they were going to the vocational centers so they didn’t feel completely a part of their sending school. Another concern at the time of conversion was the quality of student the vocational centers were getting. Dr. Hutchinson described, “at the time the vo-techs weren’t getting the kind of what you’d call the cream of the crop or what schools consider the cream of the crop.” While this has been reversed in recent years, Dr.
Hutchinson felt that when students attend either school, including for athletic purposes, has an impact on the “we-they” syndrome.
When asked if the Governor’s Task Force recommendation for conversion has been a success, and in what ways has it been unsuccessful, Dr. Hutchinson responded, “Well, I think it has been a success. Now I would say the success has now – because of the success and really one A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 68 of the main reasons was what we do to get the numbers up in the career and tech centers. If you measure by that, it’s been a success. Where we have – I think we have had some challenges is fewer kids now can maybe fewer kids are getting the benefit of some of just the pure career and tech options that they had at one time.”
Interview #3 (Dr. Gene Bottoms, Director Southern Regional Education Board)
The interview with Dr. Bottoms was conducted on March 17, 2011 at approximately 1:00 p.m. at Howard High School of Technology in Wilmington, Delaware. Dr. Bottoms has served as Director of the Southern Regional Education Board's High Schools That Work initiative since
1987. High Schools That Work is the largest effort in America to improve high schools for career-bound students. The program involves over 1,100 high schools in 26 states. In 1997, Dr.
Bottoms was promoted to Senior Vice President of the Southern Regional Education Board.
Prior to joining the Southern Regional Education Board, Dr. Bottoms served as Executive
Director of the American Vocational Association, where he emphasized academics as an integral part of vocational education at the secondary and postsecondary levels. He also served as
Director of Educational Improvement for the Georgia Department of Education for 13 years, overseeing improvement efforts in both vocational and academic education. Dr. Bottoms began his educational career as a teacher, guidance counselor, and school principal.
Dr. Bottoms recalled that his involvement with Delaware Vocational Education began in the late 1980s when he was invited to a directors meeting, by the Delaware State Director of
Education, Tom Welch. At this meeting, Dr. Bottoms recalls meeting Dr. Dennis Loftus, who at the time was the superintendent of the New Castle County Vocational School District. Dr.
Bottoms described that this initial meeting led to Delaware becoming one of the first states outside a Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) state to join the “High Schools that Work A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 69
(HSTW)” effort. He also explained how his group began working with Polytech and Sussex
Tech while they were still shared-time facilities. Dr. Bottoms explained that his group did assessments of both shared-time facilities, and their scores were among the lowest in the HSTW network. He stated, “those schools joined our network in the early ‘90s before they were converted over, and I jokingly tell them they were among the two lowest achieving schools in our network.”
In the early 1990s Dr. Bottoms recalls being invited to speak to the Delaware State Board of Education about reform efforts for high schools. One of the agenda items was whether or not to convert Polytech and Sussex Tech from shared-time status to full-time status. Dr. Bottoms remembers that he made a presentation to the board, and the board chairman looked at the superintendents from Polytech and Sussex Tech and said, “Fellows, are you all committed to implementing this if we approve you all going full-time? I think the only way we’re going to approve it full-time is if you guys implement this design.” Dr. Bottoms believes that because of this deal with Polytech and Sussex Tech, their commitment to the HSTW network was much greater than that of the New Castle County Vocational School District, as well as other schools across the country. He followed this by saying, “The two southern districts are nationally known now for the quality of their work and what they do. They really did accelerate learning.”
While Delaware was in the process of converting its shared-time schools to full-time schools, Dr. Bottoms described the educational environment in the late ‘80s as, “an environment of do we really need it – current technical education.” That nationally, there was not a lot of support for vocational education, though the field had gone through two decades of growth. But in the early ‘90s, Dr. Bottom described a shift in thinking, he stated, “you began to get, in the early 90s, a shift to improve kids academically. So Career and Technical Education (CTE) was A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 70 necessarily seen as a way to do that. That in the early ‘90s, CTE was not out on the forefront, and we put it back on the forefront by joining quality CTE with quality academic studies.”
It was Dr. Bottoms’ opinion that while a shift was beginning nationally in the early ‘90s, there was some resistance in Delaware pertaining to Polytech and Sussex Tech’s conversion to full-time status. But with the problems associated with shared-time facilities such as declining enrollment, little support at the home high schools, “general track” curriculum, and wasted instructional time on transportation, Dr. Bottoms felt, “students couldn’t be taught on two different campuses.”
Dr. Bottoms believes that, while conversion from shared-time to full-time status caused some resistance and still does today, its success for students is evident. He states,
“What I see different is the quality of experience kids are getting. They had – teachers are committed to teaching these kids a side academic core. They put together structure with academic to CTE teachers met weekly to joint planning. They put in a failsafe system for kids who are not getting it. You had to go and get special extra help in coaching. They brought you in the summer schools if you were not getting it. You had to do a tough senior project. In other words, they basically said these students and parents – you come here – we’re going to hold to high standards. We’re not about failing you – but you’re going to have to make an effort. And that’s what parents are looking for. So what they’ve done is create a quality – it seems to me that what they’ve done is create a quality learning experience for students. I think what the tragedy is that some of the country’s high schools haven’t learned the lesson. Maybe it’s because these high schools are still sorting kids into those who can and those who cannot. Many of the classes they are very boring, not well taught. Nobody believes they can learn very much. And they literally ought to be pushing to add the kind of CTE programs to those schools that could add meaning and purpose. And many of them are doing that. So I think it’s a great success story. It is a success story that runs something like this. When adults in the building decide the kids can learn, they create challenging learning experiences that have meaning for kids. They walk the extra mile with them. The kids have a goal and see a connection. The kids are going to learn. Opportunities are going to go up. That’s what they create.”
While Dr. Bottoms’ overall feeling is that Delaware’s conversion to full-time vocational high schools was a success, his only criticism is that the vocational schools in New Castle A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 71
County did not go far enough in providing a more accelerated learning experience. He states, “as
I look at this district here, I think that you’ve added – you’ve got four schools now and the specialized technical high schools, and I think the challenge for this district is to look at how do you take the students you’re taking, and how do you provide a more accelerated learning experience? How do you link these two things together better? How do you get a system of extra help to raise support kids and begin to realize that your students can achieve an even higher level? And so I think it, in part, the dream of 20 years ago has been certainly realized to a great extent in the two. But I think you have a potential here in this district to achieve that dream to a fuller level. Does that make any sense?”
Interview #4 (Dr. Dennis Loftus, former Superintendent New Castle County Vocational
Technical School District, Director Delaware Academy for School Leadership)
The interview with Dr. Dennis Loftus was conducted on March 21, 2011 at approximately 1:00 p.m. at St. Georges Technical High School in Middletown, Delaware. Dr.
Loftus recently retired from his position as the director of the Delaware Academy for School
Leadership (DASL). Prior to that position, Dr. Loftus served as the Superintendent of the New
Castle County Vocational Technical School District. Dr. Loftus also held positions at Delaware
Technical and Community College, as well as the Delaware Department of Education (DOE).
It was through his work at DOE that Dr. Loftus became involved with Vocational
Education. After serving three years as the State Supervisor for Business and Office Education,
Dr. Loftus accepted a position as Dean of Adult and Continuing Education at Delaware
Technical and Community College and helped “build” the Terry Campus. In 1978, Dr. Loftus was contacted by Conrad Shuman, Superintendent of the New Castle County Vocational and
Technical School District, in regards to an Assistant Superintendent position. Dr. Loftus A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 72 explained that Superintendent Shuman recruited him to oversee the operations and financial management of the New Castle County Vocational and Technical School District which was in the process of merging into one consolidated district with three high schools (Delcastle, Howard, and Hodgson).
Immediately upon accepting his new position, Dr. Loftus described how on his first day at his new position, the court ordered desegregation among the New Castle County School
Districts. This happened in conjunction with the consolidation of the two full time and one shared-time vocational schools in New Castle County. Dr. Loftus explained that his purpose was to make this consolidation work operationally, and to utilize his political and DOE relationships to garner support.
According to Dr. Loftus, there was disagreement over the direction vocational education should follow in the early and mid 1980s. In his role as assistant superintendent, Dr. Loftus established a task force that included local business leaders, politicians, and district personnel.
The purpose of the task force was to explore the merit of converting Hodgson Vocational
Technical High School from shared-time to full time. To give the task force credibility, Dr.
Loftus brought in Dr. Gareth Hoachlander to make a presentation. Dr. Hoachlander had just completed a study (Shared-time versus Full-Time Vocational High Schools in Delaware: An
Assessment), in 1990, on the pros and cons of conversion from shared-time vocational schools to full time vocational schools in Sussex County. Dr. Loftus explained that Dr. Hoachlander’s report helped the conversion idea gain credibility.
Dr. Hoachlander’s report identified many of the struggles that shared-time facilities were facing. Dr. Loftus explained that Hodgson was experiencing these same struggles which resulted in declining enrollments. Several of the factors he identified included problems with A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 73 transportation to and from Hodgson, difficulty with scheduling, minimum graduation requirements test, school identity, and support from the comprehensive school districts.
Dr. Loftus explained his connection with the Delaware Legislature as one that he felt comfortable navigating. His ability to work within the system of the legislature allowed Dr.
Loftus to advance the agenda for conversion from shared-time vocational high schools to full- time vocational high schools. It also provided him with the platform to advocate or rebut legislation that could impact vocational education. In addition, it gave him access to many important Delaware business leaders. This became important when former Governor Michael
Castle proposed changing the way vocational education was funded in Delaware. Dr. Loftus described the scenario as, “And so Castle was going to change the point-five deduct, a system that allows schools to receive additional funding based on vocational units. And it was going to cost us $2 million, $3 million, which was big money at the time. And I had like 350 of these guys now, pretty faithful, business guys. So I write a letter, and I tell them that I just came from this meeting with the governor in the budget office. We’ll lose 40 some people. We’re going to lose $2 million. And it has an impact on you, because I’m going to have to cut some programs if
I have to do that. All the school districts are telling’ him “That’s what you should do. Cut the 509 stuff.” And so here’s what I need you to do. If you believe that’s the wrong direction to go, you need to call the governor, and you need to tell him that. And you need to tell him why. You need to tell him how it’s going to impact your business, how it’s going to impact your future with your course. If you agree with the governor, you need to call and tell him that too. Right? And then you need to call your representatives and your senators. And you need to make sure they hear the same story from you the governor did. Right? And here are their numbers.” After a day and a half, Dr. Loftus explained that he received a call from Governor Castle saying, “Call them off. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 74
Call them off. They’re flooding our—call them off.” This led to another meeting with the former governor and budget director. At the meeting, Dr. Loftus explained that the governor came in and said, “I want to make a deal. Have you called your dogs off yet?” Dr. Loftus explained that an understanding was reached and that the change in funding was now a “dead issue.”
Dr. Loftus also described how the New Castle County Vocational Technical School
District attracted quality students and avoided being a “dumping ground” for low achieving students. He explained that the district ran “open houses,” and weeklong summer technology camps. He felt that once potential students were exposed to the vocational schools, their chance of attending increased dramatically. He described this phenomenon when talking about the technology camps, “And so we would survey these kids when they would come. And we’d be lucky if two percent of the kids were coming’ to the vo-tech. By the end of the two weeks, 60 percent of them thought they were coming’ to vo-tech.”
When addressing the criticism that the vocational schools were only accepting the best students, Dr. Loftus felt that the schools in New Castle County did not face the same degree of criticism that Sussex Tech and Poly Tech were facing. He described an incident in which he was called to a hearing at the State Senate. He explained that he made a presentation that highlighted how his district was admitting students, and how they had the lowest dropout rate in the state. He also explained how his district worked with other districts in New Castle County to admit students that were struggling in their “home” school. He also explained that he told his coaches not to recruit athletes. He did follow up on this statement by saying, “That doesn’t mean parents still don’t want their kids associated with successful coaches and that.” Dr. Loftus understood that if his district employed “well known” successful coaches, it would attract potential student athletes. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 75
Dr. Loftus felt that one of the biggest obstacles that his district faced with conversion was the divide between vocational and academic. He stated that when he joined the district in 1978,
“the vocational teachers were really the power. They saw themselves as; this school was their domain. People don’t come here for English. They don’t come here for math or science. And if they had kids in their shops that were athletes, and the team was good, they liked that. And you would see a good portion of them at ball games and things like that.”
To address this concern, Dr. Loftus described that the district would send teams of vocational and academic teachers to retreats to work together on developing two or three school- wide goals. That he would empower his principals to cultivate an environment that excited the people within their buildings. He also mentioned that he and the district consulted with Dr. Gene
Bottoms and the Southern Regional Educational Board (SREB). Dr. Bottoms provided insight and assistance with the academic and vocational integration. The district also became an active member in the SREB and received national recognition. Dr. Loftus highlighted such an incident, explaining how he received a call from the New York Times requesting an opportunity to do a story on the New Castle County Vocational Technical School District. He went on to say it was one of the proudest moments of his career. He explained that the New York Times received three recommendations, from national vocational leaders and organizations, to do a story on NCCVT
School District. Dr. Loftus felt that these initiatives and recognition helped create an energy level that supported a collaborative environment that the district continued to work on throughout his tenure.
When asked if he felt that the conversion from shared-time to full-time has been successful, Dr. Loftus responded by saying, “I considered it a success in probably the mid- nineties to 2000. In my view today, I think the vocational school should go on a completely A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 76 different direction. And so, I don’t see that happening for a while. But if it were me, I think there’s an overload of information and perception today that suggests that everybody just about needs a college degree. Okay? Even though we don’t know what 40 percent of those jobs are going to be? And even though we know that currently, today, 20 percent of our folks with college degrees are either underemployed or not employed. On the other hand, we have a statewide system in Del Tech and Community Colleges, which constantly gets beat up. They have a program in which anybody can go to their school. Take any course. And get to tell their friends they’re going to Del Tech and Community College, even though they may be taking a remedial course. And it’s not until they reach a certain proficiency level do they what they call matriculate into a program. I think we ought to blend the vocational schools and the community college system. So that maybe you could transfer over between the two units without losing athletic eligibility. But both of our systems could become much more efficient out of the blending of that stuff.” Dr. Loftus felt that an articulation between vocational schools and community colleges is a concept that would benefit both programs as well as students. He explained that students have been placed in a rigid structure of education (ex: 12 years to graduate), and assessment, but that students would benefit from a structure that met their individual needs.
The interview concluded with Dr. Loftus explaining that the reason he left the New
Castle County Vocational Technical School District was to allow, “Some people to have a chance to run the train.” He also thanked me for allowing him to tell, “Some war stories.”
Interview #5 (Mr. Chuck Moses, former Superintendent of Milford School District).
The interview with Mr. Chuck Moses was conducted on September 26, 2011 at approximately
4:00 p.m. at his residence in Milford, Delaware. Mr. Moses began his educational career in 1955 A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 77 in rural Pennsylvania when he became a mid-year teaching replacement. After two and a half years, Mr. Moses transferred to another district in Pennsylvania to teach Geography. At this time, he began taking courses to earn his Master’s Degree in school guidance at Pennsylvania State
University. He concluded his guidance certification at Indiana State Teachers College and began a counseling job at the Gateway School in Monroeville, Pennsylvania. After ten years as a guidance counselor, Mr. Moses was named Director of Pupil Services. In 1970, at the bequest of a former superintendent, Mr. Moses moved to Delaware to accept a similar position with an emphasis in Special Education. While in Delaware, Mr. Moses continued his postgraduate course work earning certification as a school psychologist. In addition to his role as Director of Pupil
Services, Mr. Moses accepted the position of Director of Personnel. In 1983, Milford’s
Superintendent Position opened, and the Milford School Board recruited Mr. Moses. After initially declining their offer, Mr. Moses accepted the Superintendent position and remained there until his retirement in 1996.
In Mr. Moses tenure as Superintendent of a comprehensive high school, he described the environment surrounding vocational education in the late 1980s as, “When it was proposed to go from shared-time to full-time, I happened to agree with the proposal to go to a full-time program, largely because there was a lot of time being wasted. The kids that were going into the vocational program were kids that needed that type of an education. I was on some committee, and we had some meetings, as I recall, and when they talked about the regular subjects that students would have, they talked about having mathematics geared to the vocational programs and the like. So I thought, well, the children that are going to the program, the programs at that time, these were programs where they needed to be there full-time and not waste about an hour and a half every day on the bus going back or forth and having lunch. It was a nightmare dealing with five or six A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 78 different school districts. So I was – I had a very favorable response to it. I can’t say that happened with every school district. It wasn’t, but I was favorable.”
Mr. Moses explained that in the Milford School District, they had a little different perspective on vocational education, due to the fact that they already had a “diversified occupation program.” He described several vocational programs based in the Milford School
District at that time including, a hotel/motel management program, a service station program, a small motor repair program, and a food service program. He described these programs as, “So we had that type of program for even students that were – that didn’t go to the vocational school, and then at a higher level you had the vocational school, and I just saw this as a continuum for children to be able to go into it. We didn’t have enough kids to go into the occupational part of the program in any one specific area.” He also stated that at the time, Milford was still a growing district, and didn’t think the vocational conversion would have that much of an impact on them.
When discussing the “We-They Syndrome,” Mr. Moses described at as not much of a factor for Milford at the time. When asked if it was a concern, Mr. Moses stated, “No, because it wasn’t presented to us, and we weren’t smart enough to ask the question. Whether or not we thought it was a continuation of going from shared-time to full-time, the programs were not going to be that different. Wrong. What I do know that has happened is that the programs have changed dramatically to more of a technical high school. The students that are going there are the cream of the crop. They’re taking students at the top. We never dreamt that would happen.”
When asked if the conversion from shared-time vocational schools to full-time vocational schools was a success, Mr. Moses responded, “Well, it’s been a success. You have to say that it’s been a success. If you look at the programs that they have, the kids that they’re getting, and the end results, you can’t find, you can’t dispute the test scores, the scores kids are getting, the fact A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 79 that Sussex has been a blue ribbon or whatever you call them school. I know that’s – you have to really get a lot of work in, get a good public relations program and rate the programs and so on. I know that you have to have that, and I think the loss comes to the youngster who really wants to go into the trades, because the electrician that always works for me here can’t find people.”
Interview #6 (Dr. Gareth Hoachlander, President of ConnectEd: The California
Center for College and Career). The interview with Dr. Gareth Hoachlander was conducted on
January 31, 2012 at approximately 4:00 p.m. The interview was conducted via a phone conversation since Dr. Hoachlander resides and is employed in California. Dr. Hoachlander is president of ConnectEd: The California Center for College and Career. ConnectEd is dedicated to advancing practice, policy, and research designed to help young people prepare for college and career – both goals and not one or the other. Beginning his career in 1966 as a brakeman for the Western Maryland Railroad, Dr. Hoachlander has devoted most of his professional life to helping young people learn by doing. Widely known for his expertise in career and technical education and many other aspects of elementary, secondary, and postsecondary education, Dr.
Hoachlander has consulted extensively for the U.S. Department of Education, state departments of education, local school districts, foundations, and a variety of other clients. Dr. Hoachlander is also Chairman of MPR Associates, Inc., and educational research and development organization, and is also one of the country’s leading policy analysts for the U.S. Department of Education. Dr.
Hoachlander earned a BA degree in 1970 from Princeton University and holds Master’s and PhD degrees from the Department of City and Regional Planning, University of California, Berkeley.
In the mid to late 1980s Dr. Hoachlander recalled that there had been a lot of success with the full-time vocational high schools in New Castle County. He felt that there was concern with the way vocational education was practiced in the comprehensive and shared-time facilities. He A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 80 explained, “I think there was concern that vocational education, as it was practiced in comprehensive high schools, was not of the same level of sort of technical rigor, there weren’t the same kind of connections to the rest of the academic curriculum. And then there were the area schools in Kent County and Sussex, where again I think the general feeling was that those were not providing the kind of quality that folks would like to see.”
Dr. Hoachlander became involved with Delaware Vocational Education when the
President of the Delaware State Board of Education, Paul Fine, commissioned Dr. Hoachlander and his group to conduct a study on vocational education in Delaware. This study, which was mentioned in several of my interviews, looked at the pros and cons of shared-time and full-time vocational education in Sussex and Kent Counties. Dr. Hoachlander stated that he felt that the
Delaware Department of Education was supportive of his study and that after visiting many of the comprehensive schools in Delaware, that they as a whole were supportive. The only concerns of the comprehensive high schools that Dr. Hoachlander related were, “there were concerns about their losing students to the newly-formed, full-time high schools. One of the biggest concerns that some people had was they were going to lose athletes. I think people were serious about that; it was sort of unfortunate that that was the – one of the primary concerns. I think, you know, and then losing, in effect, students and the dollars that come with those students to schools was a concern.”
Dr. Hoachlander also added that his role was to do an analysis. It was not to develop the political support for conversion. He stated that the support for conversion happened after he submitted the report to the State Board, and the state decided to move ahead. Dr. Hoachlander said, “I certainly was not involved in building the political will to do conversions in Sussex and A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 81
Kent. George (Frunzi) and Dennis (Loftus) would be much better sources of information about that.”
When asked what kind of impact he felt his study had on Delaware’s vocational education environment, Dr. Hoachlander replied, “I think that it provided the kind of analysis that Paul
(Fine) and others needed to really make the kind of case for the benefits of converting the shared-time schools. And I think there were others, like George Frunzi, who also used the findings of the report to help build the political support, particularly in Sussex County. So, yeah,
I think that the – I think the report had a major role to play.”
When asked about Delaware’s decision to convert its shared-time vocational facilities to full- time vocational facilities, Dr. Hoachlander stated, “I wasn’t surprised, and yeah, I did feel it was the right choice. I mean, I think on balance – yeah, we tried to – we tried to present as an objective a case for both shared-time and full-time. But I know in – in presenting it to the State
Board, when they sort of pushed us for, “Okay, how do you come down on this,” we were pretty clear that from our perspective, full-time was the preferred way to go. And I think, you know, obviously, most other people felt that as well.”
Dr. Hoachlander reflected on some of the concerns conversion to full-time status may cause. He said, “I think there were some concerns that certainly I had. Because Sussex Tech and
– well, and this is really true of all of the full-time schools – because they can be selective in sort of who attends, and I – I did, from time to time, worry that some if not all of the schools were discouraging some kids from attending who either they didn’t have the grades, or they didn’t have the attendance records, or the disciplinary records. And I think on the part of some to the comprehensive high schools there may have been some resentment about that – may still be today, I don’t know; it’s been so – again, I haven’t been there in a long time – that the technical A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 82 high schools had the ability to screen out students that the comprehensive high schools had to accept.” Mr. Moses also expressed this concern.
Dr. Hoachlander also described the way the vocational school boards were selected by the governor as, “One of the things that I found most interesting was that the boards of the technical school districts were appointed by the governor, rather than elected locally. And I think that created – it helped to isolate the technical districts from a lot of the local politics and craziness that sometimes besets local school boards.”
When Dr. Hoachlander was asked if he felt that Delaware’s conversion was a success, he stated, “So, obviously I haven’t visited these schools in the last, oh, five or six year at least. So, I would – but I would say as of, you know, early 2000, I think absolutely, and especially to what was there before.” Dr. Hoachlander mentioned Sussex Tech being named a “Blue Ribbon” school as “pretty amazing.” He also highlighted Sussex Tech’s academic and technical integration, “But they, I think, made really extraordinary progress in integrating academic and technical education, really helping students make the connections between math and science and
English and social studies and real-world application. They introduced pathways long before that was sort of popular.”
When describing what he felt was unsuccessful, Dr. Hoachlander highlighted Delcastle
Technical High School as having a too narrow pathway of study. He described it as, “Well, I sometimes worried that, you know, particularly, I would say, at Delcastle at the time, that the way that they sort of defined programs of study or pathways was in some instances a little too narrow, a little bit too traditional. I think that they could have sort of reached farther than they did to design a program of study that would appeal to students of all abilities. I think there was a tendency to sort of aim for the middle half, that is students in sort of the 25th to 75th percentile A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 83 academically, and presume that the higher-achieving kids, this really wasn’t appropriate for them.” Dr. Bottoms also described the vocational schools in New Castle County of having a too narrow scope, and not following the same lead as Sussex Tech.
Dr. Hoachlander continued with this theme of “broader pathways” when he explained what the future held for vocational education. He said, “I think the trend is toward career academies – theme-based small-learning communities. Here in the work that we’re doing here in
California around what we call Link Learning, Pathways to College and Career Success, is emphasizing that the – creating venues of eight to ten pathways in school districts, many of which operate in comprehensive high schools through what we call California Partnership
Academies, or Career Academies, again, theme-based, small-learning communities, and organizing those pathways around sort of major industry themes like digital media arts, or architecture construction and engineering, biomedical and health science, information technology, hospitality and tourism.”
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 84
Chapter V: Discussion and Implications
The purpose of this qualitative research design was to present a case study to capture educational stakeholder’s perspectives on the conversion from shared-time vocational high schools to full-time vocational high schools in Delaware.
What are the perspectives of a select group of educators and educational consultants who were directly involved in the early 1990s conversion from shared-time vocational schools to full- time vocational schools in New Castle, Kent, and Sussex County, Delaware? As recorded in the case studies, some research participants felt that the decision to convert shared-time vocational schools to full-time vocational schools was a necessity due to a changing educational climate and a drop in shared-time student enrollment. Another perspective felt that there was a need to improve vocational education by increasing rigor and academic/vocational integration. That a conversion from shared-time to full-time presented a great opportunity to increase student achievement, and make students college and career ready. Other research participants felt that the conversion was needed, but that the result was not as expected.
Have the perspectives of a select group of educators in Delaware changed over the 20+ years since the conversion of shared-time vocational high schools to full-time vocational high schools in New Castle, Kent, and Sussex Counties. Based on the interviews, the researcher concluded that the conversion to full-time status was a success. That the full-time vocational schools in Delaware have served as a local and national model.
Implications
The conversion from shared-time vocational high schools to full-time vocational high schools solved many of the problems associated with shared-time schools in the mid to early
1990s. The vocational school enrollments increased, students weren’t losing valuable instruction A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 85 time transporting from one school to another, and vocational schools were able to integrate curriculum and increase rigor. In the years following the conversion to full-time status, the vocational schools became recognized as top schools within the state of Delaware. Competition for students and athletes between vocational schools and district comprehensive schools began to surface. Vocational schools were accused of having a selective admission process and of recruiting top athletes.
The researcher believes that competition between district schools and vocational schools only intensified when President George W. Bush introduced the No Child Left Behind Act of
2001. This act required all schools receiving federal funding to administer a statewide- standardized test annually to all students. Schools would be required to meet Adequate Yearly
Progress (AYP) targets or risk sanctions. The researcher believes that in an effort to attract top academic students and meet AYP standards, vocational schools added technical career pathways such as Biotechnology, Chemistry Laboratory, Aerospace Science, Computer Engineering
Technology, Athletic Health Care, and Computer Network Administration.
As vocational schools increased their academic rigor and offered more high tech career programs, the comprehensive high schools sought ways to retain their highest achieving students.
Comprehensive schools began to question the vocational schools admission process, funding formula, and overall school mission. Comprehensive schools accused the vocational schools of an admission process that eliminated low achieving students, and limiting special education students. The researcher believes that many comprehensive school districts felt that the vocational districts changed their mission of providing vocational education and trades to all students. To a mission that provided high tech training to a limited population of high achieving students. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 86
In 2006, the Delaware State Board of Education adopted more rigorous graduation requirements. According to Regulation 505, beginning with the graduating class of 2011, a public school student shall be granted a State of Delaware Diploma when such student has successfully completed a minimum of twenty-two credits including three credits in a Career
Pathway. The Career Pathway requirement can be filled by completing either a Career and
Technical Education (CTE) Pathway, an Academically-Focused Career (AFC) Pathway or a combination of the two (Integrated Career Pathway).
This legislation required comprehensive districts to offer a career and technical pathway to its students. The researcher believes that some of the comprehensive districts saw this as a way to compete with the vocational districts. For example, the culinary arts program at William
Penn High School and McKean High School, are in direct competition with the culinary arts programs offered at the vocational schools in New Castle County. In addition, some of the comprehensive school districts are not assisting students in the vocational admission process.
The researcher believes that both the comprehensive districts and vocational districts have begun to morph into a combination of the two districts and ideologies. The vocational districts have added honors and advanced placement classes, while the comprehensive high schools have added career pathways. The researcher believes that as long as both districts are compared to each other in standardized testing, there will continue to be competition for students. Which will result in the adoption of successful programs and practices.
Limitations
A limitation of this study was the inability of this researcher to interview other educators who were part of the conversion from shared-time vocational schools to full-time vocational schools. Also, the researcher only interviewed one individual who was an administrator in the A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 87 comprehensive school district at that time. The researcher also found that some individuals were not clear on some of the items that transpired over twenty years ago. In addition, this study only looked at conversions in the State of Delaware.
Recommendations for Further Research
Title 14 Education Delaware Administrative Code Regulation 505 High School
Graduation Requirements and Diplomas, requires all high school students to successfully complete three credits of pre-planned and sequential courses in a Career Pathway of their choice.
As of 2013, there are 108 different Career Pathways being offered, including Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Math. As well as programs in Animal Science, Structures,
Certified Nursing Assistant, and Culinary Arts. The introduction and requirements of these various pathways directly competes with many of the career programs offered at the various vocational schools. Future research will need to analyze the impact these Career Pathways has on the enrollment at the six-vocational/technical high schools.
The Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act is the federal law that funds
Career and Technical Education. Currently, the Perkins Act provides approximately 1.13 billion dollars per fiscal year to be shared among states. Over the past ten years, reduced funding has been requested for Perkins IV and the Perkins Act as previously authorized. If this funding is reduced or eliminated what impact will it have on vocational education throughout the country, and specifically in Delaware?
As vocational education requirements and programs continue to evolve throughout the country, these programs need to be evaluated for effectiveness, and feasibility. Researchers need to compare our current schools and programs with successful models from other regions of the A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 88 country and the world to ensure that we are providing the best Career and Technical education possible.
This study solicited the opinions and experiences related to individuals who were educational leaders during Delaware’s conversion from shared-time vocational schools to full- time vocational schools. I feel that it would be valuable to replicate this study interviewing current educational leaders to gain their perspective twenty plus years since conversion.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 89
References
Arnold, W.M. (1964). Vocational education: Its role today. The New Look in Vocational
Education 3(5), 163-166. Retrieved December 11, 2009, from JSTOR database.
Barlow, M.L. (1976). Independent action. American Vocational Journal, 51(5), 31-40.
Retrieved November , from JSTOR database.
Bennett, C.A. (1926). The merger wins unanimously at Des Moines. Industrial Education
Magazine, 28(11), 353.
Boggs, J.C. (1954). Guest editorial. American Vocational Journal XXIX. p. 2.
Department of Public Instruction Division of Vocational Education. (1968). Delaware’s state
plan for vocational education under the vocational education amendments of 1968.
Retrieved from Newark Public Library D 373.24.
Fee, E. (1938). The origin and growth of vocational industrial education in Philadelphia to
1917. Philadelphia, PA:Westbrook Publishing Company.
Fithian, D. (2000, April). The lyceum movement: A revolution in American education. Women
in Literature. Retrieved January 13, 2010, from
http://community.tncc.edu/faculty/longt/Friendshipbook/LyceumMovement.htm
Gay, L., Mills, G.E., & Airasian, P. (2006). Educational research competencies for analysis
and applications. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.
Gold, M. (1951). Working to learn. New York, NY: Columbia University.
Gordon, H.R.D. (1998). The history and growth of vocational education in America. Neeeham
Heights, MA.: Allyn & Bacon. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 90
Gordon, H.R.D. (2009). Vocational and technical education – current trends, preparation of
teachers, international context. Retrieved November 24, 2009, from
http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/2536/Vocational -Technical-Education.html
Governor’s Task Force on Vocational Education. (1986, December). Vocational education in
Delaware.
Hayward, G.C. (1993). Vocational-technical education: Major reforms and debates 1917 –
present. Washington, DC.: U.S. Department of Education Office of Vocational Education
and Adult Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 369 959)
Retrieved November 24, 2009, from ERIC database.
Hoachlander, E.G., Tuma, J.E. (1989). Shared-time versus full-time vocational high schools in
Delaware: An assessment. National Center for Research in Vocational Education,
Hodgson, P. (1965). Industrial and business education in Delaware. PhD dissertation,
Department of Education, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
Holloway, H.V. (1944). Annual report. Dover, DE: State Board of Education.
Hughes, K.L., Bailey, T.R., & Mechur, M.J. (2001). Making a difference in education: A
research report to America. New York: Institute on Education and the Economy.
Teachers College, Columbia University. School-to-Work Opportunities Act of 1994,
Volume 20 (1994).
Hyslop-Margison, E.J. (1999). An assessment of the historical arguments in vocational
education reform. U.S. Department of Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. ED 435 825) Retrieved November 24, 2009, from ERIC database.
Journal Every Evening (1955). November 23, 1955. M. Film S39. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 91
Lee, G.C. (1963). The Morrill Act and education. British Journal of Educational Studies, 12(1),
19-40. Retrieved December 10, 2009, from JSTOR database.
Lynch, R.L. (2000). New directions for high school career and technical education in the 21st
century. Adult, Career, and Vocational Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. ED 444 037) Retrieved January 7, 2010, from ERIC database.
Madden, K. C. (1969). History of Education in Delaware. Dover, DE: Delaware State
Department of Public Instruction.
Mason, Furtado, & Husted (1989). The quality of vocational education. Retrieved January 22,
2010 from http://www2.ed.gov/pubs/VoEd/Chapter2/Part3.html.
Meeder, H. (2008). The perkins act of 2006: Connecting career and technical education with the
college and career readiness agenda. American Diploma Project Network. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED 435 825) Retrieved November 24, 2009, from
ERIC database.
Miller, G.R. (1947). Annual report. Dover, DE: State Board of Education.
Miller, G.R. (1954). Guest editorial. American Vocational Journal XXIX. p. 2.
Miller, M.D. (1985). Principles and a philosophy for vocational education. Columbus, OH: The
National Center for Research in vocational Education.
Miller, D.C., & Salkind, N.J. (2002). Handbook of research design & social measurement (6th
edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Mobley, M.D. (1964). A review of federal vocational-education legislation 1862-1963. The New
Look in Vocational Education 3(5). Retrieved December 16, 2009, from JSTOR
database. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 92
Nead, G., & McCamant, T. (1897). Duke of York’s book of laws, 1676 – 1682: Charter and laws
of the Province of Pennsylvania, 1682 – 1700. Harrisburg, PA: Lane S. Hart.
Office of Vocational Adult Education (2009). Carl D. Perkins vocational and technical
education act of 2006. Washington, DC.: U.S. Department of Education.
Perry, C. (1995). Delaware schools take off. Vocational Education Journal 70(8). (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. EJ513037) Retrieved November 24, 2009, from
ERIC database.
Perry, C. (1998). A review of gap analysis recommendations as they relate to current and
planned initiatives. The Delaware Council on Career and Vocational Education.
Perry, C. (1995). Great expectations: Five years of progress at Delaware’s comprehensive
vocational-technical high schools. Baltimore, MD: Perry.
Powell, L. (1893). History of education in Delaware. Washington, DC.: Government Printing
Office.
Prosser, C.A. (1913). The meaning of industrial education. Vocational Education, 401-410.
Quality Vocational Education Report. (1984). An investment in the future of New Castle County.
Dover, DE: Delaware State Board of Education.
Report of the Commission on National Aid to Vocational Education (1914). Washington, DC.:
Washington Government Printing Office.
Report of the Howard Career Center Task Force II (1993). Making Howard Career Center
America’s model urban vocational-technical high school. Wilmington, DE: New Castle
County Vocational-Technical School District. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 93
Report of the Strategic Planning Task Force (1997). Findings and recommendations on the
district’s progress in meeting strategic goals. Wilmington, DE: Board of Education New
Castle County Vocational Technical School District.
Silverberg, M., Warner, E., Fong, M., & Goodwin, D. (2004). National assessment of vocational
education: Final report to Congress: Executive summary. Washington, DC.: U.S.
Department of Education.
Southern Regional Education Board. (2002). Case study: Polytech High School, Woodside,
Delaware. [Brochure]. Atlanta, GA.
Southern Regional Education Board. (1997). Case study: Sussex Technical High School,
Georgetown, Delaware. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 462 566)
Retrieved November 24, 2009, from ERIC database.
Walter, R.A. (1993). Vocational education in the 1990’s. Ann Arbor, MI: Prakken Publications,
Inc.
Weeks, S.B. (1917). History of public school education in Delaware. Washington, DC.:
Government Printing Office.
Welch, C.E. (1990, April). Howard in the 1990’s. Wilmington, DE: Submitted to the Board of
Education New Castle County Vocational Technical School District.
Westerink, D. (2004). Manual training movement. University of Notre Dame. Retrieved January
22, 2010, from http://nd.edu/~rbarger/www7/manualtr.html
Wonacott, M.E. (2003). History and evolution of vocational and career-technical education.
Columbus, OH: Center on Education and Training for Employment. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED 482 359) Retrieved December 10, 2009, from ERIC
database. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 94
Appendix A
Interview with Dr. George Frunzi
Frunzi: We both bought new homes and we moved in within a day of each other and we
both had educational interests and sports interests and so forth and we have been
friends ever since ’71 and quite frankly, we had a hell of a good time. But the
school districts, New Castle and Sussex Tech, I mean, we took them to levels that
people never dreamed of in the state of Delaware, as far as vocational. It was the
class in the nation, no question about it. And Gene Bottoms would back that up
so, you can ask him.
Lamey: Right. I—
Frunzi: We had a great time.
Lamey: I was very fortunate to end up in that district myself, you know? I had two
brothers graduate from Delcastle, but, you know, I didn’t know a whole lot about
the district but once I got in and was employed there and was able to coach there,
I loved it. And I wanted to stay there. That’s why I went back to the Vocational
district and Dr. Loftus was a huge… I mean, he did so many great things because
my perspective was New Castle County so… But, let me begin. Today’s date is
January 20th, 2011 and the interview is being conducted here at Wesley College in
New Castle. My interview will have ten questions, but, obviously, feel free to
give me whatever added information that you can, surrounding Delaware’s A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 95
conversion from share-time vocational schools to full-time vocational schools.
Today I am interviewing Dr. Frunzi. You told me a little bit about your
background now, and Dennis, but what is your background? Kind of lead me
through with Sussex Tech up through superintendent. How did you get started?
Frunzi: Uhm, I’m originally from Philadelphia. Moved to Delaware in September 1971
and started teaching at Wesley College full-time. From Wesley I went to
Wilmington College, at the time, Wilmington University now, and at the time—
this is 1981… ’82—I should mention that I was at Wesley when it was a two-year
school, and I don’t know if you knew that it was a two-year school. It was a two-
year school from its inception in 1870-something until 1976 and I’m the one that
changed it to a four-year school. So, it was two year and I introduced the four-
year program and/in Business Administration, I chaired that program, and I ran
that program. And I wanted to start an MBA program. Wesley indicted there was
no downstate market for graduate education. So, I was doing some teaching in
Wilmington Colleges’ program MBA upstate and, at the time, Audrey, the
president, who’s retired now. Audrey Doberstein had said, “You know, we know
you wanted to start a program at Wesley, maybe you want to come with us full-
time and think about bringing our MBA program downstate. You could then
introduce it in Kent and Sussex County. We want to start some campuses down
there, and you could run them. So, I ran the two campuses in Sussex and Kent
County. And the Wesley Program took off, Wilmington College Program took
off, and a board member at Sussex Tech was aware that the days of shared-time A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 96
looked like they were numbered. And was aware of what I had done at
Wilmington College and building the programs there and at Wesley and sort of
spoke with me saying, “We think shortly down the line, we may be needing to do
some converting and developing some programs and things that you have done in
the past. We have an assistant superintendent opening; perhaps you’d show
interest in that and maybe function in that capacity for a few years. Get a lay of
the land and then, you know, we’ll certainly see what we can do to get you to be
the superintendent, when the current superintendent retires.” He was about sixty-
something years of age at that time. He retired in ’88, I became the
superintendent. So, in ’88 I became the superintendent and ’91 we converted to
full-time. September 1991, a little over three hundred students came into Sussex
Tech, at that time, as full-time students. The first year, we operated with 300 full-
time students, freshmen and sophomore, and maybe 100 and something students
who were juniors and seniors, but they were shared-time students. So they had
physically spent half the day at their home district, whatever that was, and then
the other half day with us. So that is what 1991 was like; we had combination
full-time and shared-time. The next year we brought in another group of
freshman, we had 3 years of full-time students, and that kind of gave us the lag
time we needed to build because we didn’t have the facilities. We didn’t have the
gymnasium, and of course we were starting basketball teams, and football teams,
and so forth. So, it was quite a—
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 97
Lamey: I remember those early teams, and you had an outstanding football season early
on.
Frunzi: We did. We actually won the—
Lamey: Yeah, I remember. I was coaching at Hodgson.
Frunzi: Yeah, well, we were Division II, at that time, downstate and we beat Middletown
for the title. It was our third year in. It was the first year that we had seniors and
that was the first year that we played teams in the county because they couldn’t
wait to get their hands on us; they were not in favor of the conversion to full-time.
We had decided we would wait until our kids were seniors, then we would play
them. And beat them.
Lamey: That kind of leads into some of my questions. My first question is: what was the
environment surrounding vocational education, in the mid to late ‘80’s and early
‘90’s, generally speaking in Delaware and then, more specifically, you can
probably share with Sussex and Kent County what it was because it was a little
different.
Frunzi: The situation in Kent was very, very similar with just a few differences. In
Sussex, I think it was the mid ‘80’s that gave rise to the need for a conversion to
full-time. You’re familiar with the point-five deduct? A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 98
Lamey: Mhm.
Frunzi: Well, the point-five deduct served its purpose in terms of, at least, keeping both
the financial, where with all the vocational technical district intact, as well with
all of the homes districts. But the home districts, what they did—and I’m just
going to tell you this and you can soften it or not soften it—but superintendents in
the Sussex, you’ll see in some of the things that I tell you, they just didn’t give a
damn about students. All they cared about was their own district, the money in
their district, the number of students they had in their district. What shared-time
became, in about ’84, ’85, ’86, the district realized that the point-five deduct
really only applied to a regular student. It didn’t really apply to a special
education student. So, depending on what the kids’ spec. ed. category was, you
know, the kid was in an 8-1, 10-1, 12-1, you know, whatever the kids’ category
was… They sent one kid over, it was just .5 deduct. So all you really had to do
was just take almost all of your special ed. kids and send them over to the
vocational school for half the day, you basically keep the lion share of the money
because spec ed. money doesn’t travel with the kid that stays at the home district.
Their money was such that they were able to hire additional teachers and so forth
and all they did was send over spec ed. kids, criminals-to-be, who were criminals,
and so forth. The face of the student body at the vocational technical school began
to drastically change, 1980, ’81, ’82, ’83. And here, this’ll give you an idea of A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 99
how bad it was: we became part of the SREB, and I know you’re familiar with
that.
Lamey: Right, right.
Frunzi: We started working with Gene Bottoms in ’87 and ’88 and the testing that he did,
we became a member of SREB and our share-time kids from the other districts,
this was before we were full-time, our share-time took the tests that SREB gave in
English, Math, and Science. There were, at that time, 17 states/members of the
SREB. I’m really happy to tell you that the very last district, in terms of scoring,
the lowest district, was our district. I feel no need to apologize for that, we were
shared-time. So that tells you how well the districts were doing in English, Math,
and Science, and the quality of kids they were sending. So, the worst, the lowest
number. I might tell you that 3 years after full-time, we had the highest number.
So, we made a little turnaround. Just a little turnaround. So, the environment was
such that our numbers kept going down, the districts kept slightly going up
because all they were essentially doing was sending special ed. kids. So, their
enrollment was really not being endangered by sending over kids, but we were
essentially getting kids with little to no talent. And I guess, particularly at that
time, it started. The days of the old Shade Tree Mechanic were over. You know,
that you’re just going to pull up the hood of a car and I’ll change the oil and work
with this wrench and screwdriver, cars were beginning to be comprised of
computers. You needed to be an electrician; you needed to be a computer. You A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 100
look at the Chilton’s manual for repairing cars; you needed to have a 13th grade
reading level. Well, we weren’t seeing kids that were even close to being. Plus,
our enrollment was dwindling. We had a high of 1,300 and some odd kids—79 or
80, something like that—and in ’86 or ’87 we 650-700 kids so enrollment just cut
in half. In many cases, most of the programs were one-teacher programs. So, I
mean, every year it was like, “What kind of dismemberment are we going to
experience now? What program is it going to be?” And we had no choice, so we
began to raise the question; we, maybe, need to look into full-time. But for a
variety of other reasons, we started to explore, Sussex County especially. This is
particularly true in Sussex County, a bit more in Kent, but not so much in New
Castle, because it’s a big county, Sussex is a big county. You look at the
southernmost portion of the Indian River School district, which is almost in
Maryland—its west of Cape Henlopen, East of Delmar, and it’s almost in
Maryland—well, a kid that was a share-time kid from Indian River High School
would get on the bus in the morning, travel about 45-50 minutes to Indian River
High School. If he or she was coming to Tech in the morning, get off that bus and
get on the Tech bus and travel another 50 minutes to come to—The school days,
two hours long and the kids been on the bus for two hours, so then it’s going to be
an hour home, back to the district at noon time, and then another hour. The kid
spent four hours on a bus. So, you know, bus time is certainly not instruction
time. Simple as that. Plus, the kid feels like a fish out of water; you’ll always miss
half of something because you’re at the other place half the day. If you wanted to
play football at Indian River, you really couldn’t come to Tech in the afternoon. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 101
We would dismiss at ten of three, by the time the kid got back, it was three-thirty,
football practice started at three-fifteen. Coaches don’t like interruption, you
know, you want to get started with practice and the kids are dwindling in late so,
you know, you’re just not going to Tech at that’s all there was to it. So, you now
have other factors interfering with the kids’ choice and a parents’ choice to go to
the technical school for a career. “I want to play football, I want to play
basketball, I want to be a cheerleader, I want to be whatever.” Well, all those
things started, you know, 3:10, you know how it is. So, a combination of that: bus
time, coming last in testing. I mean, what kind of an education was taking place?
And plus, any good kid that would show interest would get talked out of coming
by --. So, we knew what was happening so it became a case of, we’re going to
lodge an attempt to become full-time. So that’s kind of what the environment was
like.
Lamey: That’s great because that leads right into my next question because what I wanted
to ask next was: what support did you receive in moving forward with this
conversion? So, you kind of told me about the environment at that time and
obviously you and other people felt that it was a need to move from shared-time
because of all the things that you mentioned; what support did you receive, and
when I’m asking that—
Frunzi: From the other districts?
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 102
Lamey: Well, from anyone. Was there political support for you to move forward? What
really helped, ‘cause one person saying “we want to do it,” that’s someone saying
it, but to actually make it happen, usually—
Frunzi: The argument was strong. I made presentations… If there was a group of two
standing on a corner someplace, I made a presentation to them. I’m serious about
the necessity for full-time.
Lamey: Now, who were your other supporters? People within Sussex Tech?
Frunzi: Business. Business.
Lamey: Business leaders?
Frunzi: Business leaders supported it, but we don’t have a strong legion of businesses like
exists in New Castle County.
Lamey: We had a lot of support to do that.
Frunzi: We had support, but it’s largely all small businesses. But they were supportive.
Legislatures were and weren’t. The problem with VoTech, especially in Sussex
County, we were everybody’s district, but we’re nobody’s district. So I put
together a committee. And Chuck Moses was the superintendent of Milford, at the A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 103
time, and Chuck is a gentleman. He’s a gentleman and a true educator. And he
truly was interested in what is best for kids. And asked Chuck to be on the
committee. I mean, it was a blue ribbon committee. Jim Sparks was on the
committee from DOE. Do you remember Jim?
Lamey: No, but I’ve heard the name.
Frunzi: You’ve heard the name. I mean, he was, at the time, he was assistant state
superintendent. Jim was on the committee, had a couple other people from DOE
(Department of Ed), at the time. On the committee: Chuck Moses, business
people, teachers, parents, community leaders, and others. See, once you start
looking at: ‘here’s what happened test wise’ (SREB) and ‘if this was your son,
would you like him spending four hours a day on the bus? Would you like your
son to have to make a choice’—“I really want to pursue computers or something
in the technical area, but I want to play football and since that’s going to be a
disrupting factor”-- Would you want your kid to make a choice in his education
based on some other factor? And would you want to make the choice as a parent
and have the school talk the kid out of it on grounds that are—and the arguments
started getting out there and it started getting out there and it began to pick up
momentum. And I had a couple legislatures on the committee also. There were
ones that I judged to be fair, you know, who didn’t come in with a preconceived
decision; “I’m going to look at this and see what it’s worth.” Some of the
legislatures—and I’ll mention names and you can put them in or take them out— A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 104
see, somebody like Biff Lee, who’s still a legislature in Laurel, see, he graduated
Laurel, he was the big football star at Laurel, and the idea of athletes leaving
Laurel and coming to Sussex Tech was something he could never live with. I
mean, I could never put him on the committee; he’d never be objective. He
wouldn’t look at any, and still doesn’t. And so, even worse, he was a referee. I
mean, I got to the point I had to ask the referees association to not assign him to
any of our games. Mysterious clips, you know, just— nobody near anybody if
there was a penalty at a critical point in the game. I had to get him out of there.
So, I mean, that’s kind of what the environment was like, but the momentum
started to pick up. But quite frankly, the momentum really picked up. And in 1988
when this started, the state Board of Education was a powerful group. It’s not
anymore, but it was then. And it really did make policy and so forth. And Paul
Fine was the president of the State Board, at the time, and I don’t think he was in
favor of the idea, but our argument was a damn good... you know, even he said,
“You know, I got to look at this” and he gave it a fair shot. See, and he basically
said, “Maybe it’s a little over my head so we really need to study.” So, that’s how
Gary and Gene Bottoms… ‘cause Gene was involved with that also. We were
working with Gene and the State Board was working with Gary and we continued
to work with Gary after that. I mean, he’s a gem. So, maybe that sequencing is
making some sense.
Lamey: The next question, which leads into that, what resistance did you or your groups
receive as you explored the conversion from share-time to full-time? A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 105
Frunzi: The strongest resistance was from the school districts themselves. And you would
think superintendents would be educators, and you would think they would care
about kids, but they talked kids out of coming and particularly if anybody was an
athlete, tried to talk them out of it. It’s just, we hit the ground running. I mean,
they just had no idea what was going to happen in terms of our recruiting effort. I
mean, we had professional advertisements that were on cable. They were so slick,
I mean, they were so damn slick. I’ve got some of them, but it was like the 2001
theme *hums tune* and we had decided we were going to market the word “tech.”
You know, like, I don’t like North Carolina, but when you say “Carolina”
everybody knows what you’re talking—
Lamey: Right, right.
Frunzi: It’s not South Carolina, it’s not North Carolina State, it’s, you know, North
Carolina Chapel Hill. We had decided “tech” is going to have that meaning, you
know? “Tech, tech, tech” and we’re just going to drill it. And we were so slick;
our advertisements, our people, were just so sharp with the ads. And we put ads
throughout the county and you could do that with cable TV. We could just
advertise—
Lamey: Right, right.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 106
Frunzi: —and they weren’t ready for that. And we had a whole presentation and there was
an agreement made on the books. As you know, every student in the state of
Delaware has the right to go to Vocational Technical School and must be given
adequate information so as to make the choice. So, I had that, and I built on that.
You know, you got to give me the names of your eighth graders. So he gave me
the names of the eighth graders, and they were saying, “Well, how do we know
you aren’t going to take all of our kids?” I said, “Oh, we’ll make an agreement.
We’ll just operate with twenty percent, we’ll never take more than twenty percent,
from your district, but you’ve got to give us the eighth grade list and you have to
allow our admissions marketing person to come into your school, to make a
presentation to your kids, to invite them over. Because if you don’t the only kids
that aren’t going to come are, you know—there’s going to be discrimination
because kids that, if we just had a Saturday program, kids that can’t drive, parents
that can’t drive/don’t/work, you know, we’re not going to get a true picture. We
could run the risk of a discrimination civil rights issue, and that scared them. So,
the first several years we operated—and I’ll never forget the first day, Jerry, the
day that my life turned around. You know, after going through this for three
years, I mean, to tell you that I got beat up by the legislature, by districts; it didn’t
matter. I’ll just never forget the first day that we got out to all of the districts and
then the applications were to be sent in. And the first day, our admissions guy
came back from the post office with a bag, he was like Santa Claus; it was all
applications. And he dumped them out and there were like four hundred and
something applications. I said, “God, we did it. We did it.” And the other day I’ll A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 107
ever forget, the first day of school, 1991, I brought out a wooden chair in the
lobby and I set it there at 7 o’clock in the morning and I sat there. I said, “I just
want to see the first full-time kid walk through the front door. And I’m going to
look at the kid, and he’s not going to know what the hell I’m doing sitting here,
but I just want to see him walk through the door.”
Lamey: Right. That’s great.
Frunzi: But, resistance, yeah, absolutely. I mean, particularly from the districts—they just
tried to talk and when we hit a jury, we really hit it. My god, we had the president
of the United States—
Lamey: Oh, yeah, you guys have done amazing things. I mean really.
Frunzi: When we hit it, we got on a roll; National School of Excellence, blue ribbon,
green ribbon, every color ribbon you could imagine.
Lamey: And it’s still flying high.
Frunzi: And there’s now issues again.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 108
Lamey: I know. I’ve seen that, which concerns all of us in the VoTech. My next question
is, I don’t know that you mentioned this or not, but did you or your group look at
any other full-time vocational models, or full-time, prior to your conversion?
Frunzi: Yeah. We first started working with Gene Bottoms. Then, Gene and Gary, both of
them together, working with both groups. And it was Genes’ contention, and this
would be with both he and Gary, the idea, you know, your arguments are both
absolutely correct, but to just go full-time for the sake of going full-time would be
foolish. And they really said to State Board, “this is what should happen: they
should go full-time, but don’t make the decision to just go full-time. There are
some models out there, there are some practices out there, and you got an
opportunity to put all those practices together and really develop a premiere
system.” So, Gary said, you know, there’s integrated curriculum, and I didn’t
even know what integrated curriculum was in 1990. And he sent me to a school
district in Northern—Woodland, California. And he said, “It isn’t the whole high
school that’s integrated, it’s just the science department. You need to go look at
what they’re doing in the science department.” So, in integrated they had kids in
technical programs in that school, but just as if—well, you know what integrated
is. I don’t have to explain it to you. But there was no school that was doing a
complete—and it was just that. See, and then he said, “Block scheduling” and
“There are a couple schools that are trying a chunk of block scheduling.” And he
sent me to New York. He said, “You got to go see what Brooklyn Tech is doing
up in New—.” And, you know, they sent me to all these places. And quite A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 109
frankly, the State Board really gave me a travel budget so that I could take
principles and other—so we could get a look at this and then come back and say,
“How do we put this into effect?” You know, I mean, we sat in rooms just like
this saying, “Great. So Woodland High is doing what with the science
department; we got to do this across the board.” You know, then we got to find
teachers. We’ve never had an academic teacher work at the school, they were all
just technical. So, we got to find teachers. Then, we got to explain to them what
integrated is, and then think of the curriculum job, that’s in the front of us, for
them to teach. It’s just interviewing and finding teachers that want to do this, you
know, it’s— But, we were getting such play in the newspapers and talking about
creative this, that, and the other thing. And our salary schedule was higher than
the regular school districts. We got so lucky when it got time, the best teachers in
the world applied. And they were so hungry to be creative, and get a chance to be
creative, and they came in and blew the roof off.
Lamey: Were the other districts… did that cause some conflict? Were you taking other
teachers?
Frunzi: Absolutely. Only their best ones, as I reminded them. Yeah, only your best ones.
‘Cause, I mean, they were just robbing us blind for the first number of years;
shared-time, with not sending kids over and so forth. It was a pleasure to have the
teachers just leave to join us, it was just fantastic. And we even got some teachers A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 110
from New Castle County. We got teachers from Christiana, at the time, that
became our lead.
Lamey: Yeah. Because that always was an issue in our district, still is. You know, that
teachers want to come over because the way that VoTech runs. You mentioned
some of this, so you don’t have to repeat any of it, but a question was: did you
base any of your decisions for conversion on either the 1986 governor’s task force
report or the 1989 Hoachlanders report? Obviously you said that you did because
you worked with Gary…
Frunzi: The ’86 report was a nothing report. I mean, it did nothing. And our
superintendent was on it at the time, Jim Phillips, was the superintendent before
me and they, I mean, they essentially didn’t do anything.
Lamey: Okay.
Frunzi: They gave lip service—
Lamey: They had no teeth to it…
Frunzi: Had no teeth. No nothing. No. But Gary Hoachlander, I mean, Gary, Garys’ made
sense.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 111
Lamey: So that was the kind of thing that gave you the backing—
Frunzi. Yeah. So once in eighty—yeah… I mean, Gary’s report, you know, it should be
full-time and the arguments logged are good, but don’t go full-time for the sake of
going full-time, you know? Look into integrated curriculum, blocked scheduling.
Look into a series of practices that will enable you to establish a premiere system.
That’s what you want to do and you got a chance to do that.
Lamey: Were there any other reports that I didn’t mention that you—
Frunzi: Yeah, Gene Bottoms. Gene was working with the board at the beginning, too and
he submitted something, I can’t remember just what it was, but they had worked
with him also. But he was very supportive.
Lamey: He’s been involved with our district.
Frunzi: Yeah. Well, see, and that’s what gave rise to the whole match up, you know, with
all of us working with… you know. We got Dennis involved quickly. See, and
Dennis, you know, I had some luck with Wesley—the program exploded—some
luck with Wilmington College and Dennis knew my background with marketing,
I mean, that’s what I do and so forth. I mean, and Dennis said, “You know, we got
a chance here.” And, you know, Dennis and I, we just hooked up and, I mean, we
had it all going. I mean with Tom Sharp in the legislature, Bill would come up, I A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 112
mean, we’d just hand it to Tom and he’d say, “This bill will turn up when the
Earth ends.” You know, what we would do without Tom?
Lamey: Right. He was a very powerful person.
Frunzi: See, and I had a representative’s son working for me, I had another reps wife
working for the district. So, I wasn’t ready to make the move, actually have a
legislature himself or herself, but I had the wife of one, the son of one, and a
cousin of somebody else. I mean, George Bunning and…so I had the people I
needed. Plus I had the granddaughter of, of course, the president of the senate,
before Tom Sharp was Richard Cordrey and I had his grandson/granddaughter in
the school.
Lamey: That’s a student.
Frunzi: And he was a major supporter of ours. So we had it going politically, we had it
going academically. You know, we became a blue ribbon school. Dennis, you
guys won the—hell was the…?
Lamey: The red book thing; principle of excellence.
Frunzi: Yeah, but you won another thing… the quality award.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 113
Lamey: Right, right, right.
Frunzi: And then it was us with this, and then you with that. It was just one thing after
another.
Lamey: They’re powerful.
Frunzi: One thing after another.
Lamey: One of the things that I identified in my readings when they mentioned this, and
you’ve mentioned this so, again, I don’t know if there’s anything you want to add
to it because my question was: the we-they syndrome. And you talked about that;
the battle between comprehensive and the vocational schools about what’s, you
know, we-they versus each other. Obviously, and my question was: did you
experience it? But you’ve already told me that you definitely experienced. That
was one of the biggest—
Frunzi: And it still, and it still hadn’t gone away and it’s twenty-one years. And it hasn’t
gone away. I mean, it’s a pity. It’s a pity. And—
Lamey: Did you see a change throughout your tenure?
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 114
Frunzi: Yeah, it got quiet. It got quiet. After about three/four years, they settled down and,
you know chief school officers, man, and they’d say, you know, “they got so
many issues to deal with. So many people are after education in general. Isn’t it
about time we forget? It’s over. You know, this is the way we operate, you know?
The whole state, you know? Let’s wake up, you know?” And it got quiet, but it
obviously didn’t go away. See, I think what’s interesting, and you got to look into
this, this statement: the district in Kent County that never accepted the idea of
Kent County Vo-Tech becoming PolyTech was Caesar Rodney. And they were
just adverse to the idea from the start, the thought of loosing athletes and students
and so forth. Bill Bach was the superintendent, at the time, and David Robinson
was the high school principle. They refused to let Polytech come in to visit eighth
graders, they refused to give them lists and so forth. And Jeff hired their assistant
football coach as their head full-time, Leonard (?). See and Tom brought some
freshman and JV kids over immediately and it just antagonized the relationship.
But David Robinson then became the superintendent and the hatred continued. In
one case, they played PolyTech in football. I mean, this is a disgrace. They beat
PolyTech—this would’ve been about maybe ’93—seventy three-nothing was the
score and when the score was sixty six-nothing, the starters were still in there and
they’re still throwing the ball with like two minutes to go, and its sixty six-
nothing. Humiliating kids is not the answer. But, David Robinson: David retires
and David moves to the beach. And George Smith was the superintendent at Cape
and he ran into some problems; he left. They couldn’t find a superintendent so an
interim superintendent was hired; David Robinson. So, he’s the one that started all A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 115
of this damn— instead of coming in, “what can I do to make this district better,”
it’s the same old thing.
Lamey: Yeah, right.
Frunzi: See, it’s now given rise and he’s riling up everybody. We never had a good
relationship with Indian River; they’re bizarre, they’re bizarre, positively bizarre.
Their board, their thinking is like 1952. I mean, they still think Eisenhower’s the
president down there, honestly, in the throes of Indian River. And so, they’re
joining efforts with him and Seaford was surprised, I mean (?) Ought to have a
little more savvy than that. But, and again, whatever you decide to do, I’m telling
you, this is the truth.
Lamey: No, no. I and I’m just an interviewer, but I follow that and I’ve seen some of the
things, obviously, you’re mentioning.
Frunzi: The other issue: they would complain. They want a level playing field, they have
to go out and pass a referendum, but we just go to the legislature. And I remember
saying to them on a number of occasions, “If you like our system, why don’t you
change yours? Leave me alone.”
Lamey: Right, right.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 116
Frunzi: I mean, quit trying to change mine. There’s a reason why this functions this way,
you know? But it’s not like I don’t like what you have so, therefore, I’m going to
take it away from you. I mean, it’s, it’s childish.
Lamey: That’s a good answer.
Frunzi: It’s childish, you know? But they haven’t changed. They’re still functioning that
way.
Lamey: And that’s—my next question is exactly what you just talked about, so, but, I was
going to ask: how did the leadership of the comprehensive high schools of
Delaware respond to your conversion? And, obviously, most of them, most of
them were negative…
Frunzi: They were. And in the early ninety’s/mid-ninety’s, we became a national school
of excellence. We became a blue ribbon school, governors’ school, we were
everything.
Lamey: Right. Sussex Tech now is number one Charter.
Frunzi: Yeah, getting all kind of print. And several people at the Department of Ed said to
the people at Indian River and Cape Henlopen and so forth, “Why don’t you go
over and see what they’re doing?” And see, they couldn’t, they couldn’t lower A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 117
themselves to do that, you know? To go to the “VoTech,” you know? Because
they would say it as if it’s lowly. And that was another reason; we wanted to get
“vocational” out of it. Hodgson’s always kept—
Lamey: Yeah, the “VoTech.”
Frunzi: —the “vo” in there, and Howard, of course, “technology,” Delcastle and
so forth. But I wanted to elevate it. I wanted to elevate it. And I remember saying
to our faculty, “Someday, you know, we’re going to be turning kids away.” This
is when we had six hundred kids and we were begging kids to come over. So,
“someday we’re going to be turning kids away. Just stay with this. We’re going to
win this battle.” And we did.
Lamey: Right, right. You mentioned some of these, but what obstacles were the most
difficult for you and your group to overcome as you moved forward? Was there
anything that stood out?
Frunzi: When we were full-time or getting to be full-time?
Lamey: Getting to be full-time and was there anything in specific once you became full-
time that you felt like, ‘Holy cow, we’re going to overcome this,’ or…?
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 118
Frunzi: No. Once we became full-time, most of the obstacles; we didn’t get cooperation,
but we always believed this: you know, nobody’s ever done, you know, ‘cross the
board integration. Nobody’s done ‘cross the board block scheduling. Nobody’s
done it, but we’re going to be the first to do it. And my phone bill—I mean, I was
talking to Gene Bottoms so often and Gary Hoachlander, you know, with
questions? You know, “we’re going to do this. We’re going to do it.” And we did.
And we did. There were the little things with the districts not showing
cooperation, but we firmly believed: if we do this and do this right, there’ll come
a time when we don’t need to go into the schools. Our reputation will be such that
we’ll attract kids. And that’s exactly what happened. I mean, we believed this at
the beginning so…
Lamey: Right.
Frunzi: The obstacles were in ’88, ’89, and ’90, when our friends at the neighboring
school districts would go to their legislature. See, the odd thing is, the legislature
was our legislature, but it was a legislature from Cape Henlopen area, felt
obligated to the Cape Henlopen school district. And, of course, Biff Lee will
always be loyal to Laurel.
Lamey: Right.
Frunzi: You know? That’s his district. But he’s our representative too. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 119
Lamey: Right because you have the county.
Frunzi: Exactly, but he never saw it that way and still doesn’t. And I remember him
saying to me, after we had just pounded Laurel, which just gave me great delight,
you know? He said, “Well, you guys got a lot of money, really shows in those
new uniforms.” I said, “You know, Biff, I had a hell of time trying to find old,
used uniforms; we decided to get new ones. I said, “You know, I don’t
remember— I didn’t see you here two Saturdays ago.” “Uh, what was here two
Saturdays ago?” I said, “A car wash. We washed about six hundred cars, and with
the money, we bought jerseys. That’s what you just saw in that game out there.
Those kids had their names on the back.” “We don’t have the money.” I said,
“Well, you know, our parents sewed them on the back and paid for that.” So, but I
don’t see any other issue. You know we had a—and I don’t know if—were you
ever in our gym?
Lamey: Oh, yeah.
Frunzi: Did you see the scoreboard that we had?
Lamey: Uh-huh.
Frunzi: Hanging in the back? A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 120
Lamey: Yeah!
Frunzi: Well, they made some statement,”In the excessive amount of money, that
scoreboard must be worth two-three hundred thousand dollars and to be wasting
that money…” I saw that in a paper. I mean, I just couldn’t wait to put the ad, you
know, to put the article and the corresponding answer to that. I said, “actually, the
scoreboard, we estimate, to be worth three hundred and ten thousand dollars.’ I
said, “Not two hundred and some.” I said, “The interesting thing is, if you look on
each of the corners of the scoreboard, you’ll see the Pepsi-Cola sign.” And we had
decided we would talk to Pepsi, Coke, and 7-Up to see if they were interested in
advertising and buying the scoreboard. And so, as it turns out, Pepsi gave us the
best deal. They paid for that scoreboard, as well as the one that will be put up in
the football field and the baseball field. It’s a shame the other districts just sit on
their butts and don’t do anything but complain.”
Lamey: No, you’re right. You’re right. I mean, we—
Frunzi: So, we always thought—
Lamey: It’s a battle.
Frunzi: —techies were a little bit sharper, you know? But, whatever. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 121
Lamey: This kind of leads me toward the end, but it’s been twe— further off, twenty one
years, for you, since you converted from the shared-time to full-time.
Frunzi: Yup.
Lamey: Has this process, or the recommendation by Hoachlander and the governor’s task
force, has it proved to be successful? And if so how?
Frunzi: Positively. I mean, look at the quality of the technical education; a technical
school, it’s a blue ribbon school. A technical school, it’s a national school of
excellence, and it’s conceivably won every award. A model school for SREB. The
quality technical graduates, the reading level, math skills, critical thinking skills
that they have are second-none. And it’s a result of the conversion to full-time.
Had stayed the way that is was, they’d be back at being last at the testing just like
they were.
Lamey: In anyways was it unsuccessful? Is any of the criticisms that some of these other
districts throw out, is there any merit to any of the things, or is there anything, in
your opinion, that was unsuccessful from converting?
Frunzi: No, I mean, the criticisms; there’s more—the price per student at a technical
school, you know, allocation per kid is higher than it is at a regular school district A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 122
and I couldn’t agree more. But unfortunately auto technology equipment/auto
body equipment is pretty expensive stuff and that’s the reason why, you know?
And to allege and lodge that argument is pretty unrealistic, on their part. It just
demonstrates complete misunderstanding and, you know, lack of knowledge.
But…
Lamey: Is there anything else? Any other stories or little anecdotal things that come back
as you think about this conversion that you’d want to share that we didn’t talk
about? Is there anything that— I mean, obviously you’re an expert on it; you’ve
lived it, you moved it forward and your reputation and your schools reputation is
well known. Is there anything that, you know, that you would think I wouldn’t be
able to report about in my case study that maybe we didn’t talk about today?
Frunzi: Well, I’ll just tell you that I think the print that we got telling the story about the
things that we wanted to do, the creative things that we were going to try, gave us
the belief that if we ever got all the right people together at the same place, we
could really make some exciting things happen. And we collectively made some
exciting things happen and those things are still happening and it’s a joy to
continue to see them happen. But I think, you know, there were a couple days
that—like I tell you, watching the first kid walk in the door, I still can see it now
even though its twenty one years later. And the first graduation was a—the first
graduation. And I remember saying to those kids, “You really want to come here
bad because they told you we wouldn’t have real English teachers, they told you A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 123
we wouldn’t have real football teams, they told you this won’t be a real education,
this would just be a bogus education, and so forth. And, you must’ve really
wanted to come here. And then they told you we wouldn’t have a football team,
and that we wouldn’t have this and that.” I said, ‘I can’t even continue with my
very brief speech because it’s like seven o’clock at night in June, the sun is
glistening down off your championship football ring... I can’t quite concentrate.”
Kids start laughing and applauding. “And plus, you couldn’t go to college.” And I
start naming schools that some of them were going to.
Lamey: Right.
Frunzi: “You won’t be able to go to a real college.” But it got better. We had what—the
districts would tell parents, they’d scare the hell out of them, you know? “You
won’t be able to send your kids—they won’t be able to go to a real college. They
won’t be able to go here. They won’t be able to do this. They won’t be able to do
that. “We had what we called Myth Night. M-Y-T-H, myth night. And we invited
all the parents over of students that were showing interest in coming and we
called it Myth Night. And we said, “We know that you’re hearing things from
your school district—. “ We termed them myths. “You know, why you don’t want
to send your son and daughter here.” We said, “I think the first one they’re telling
you that you can’t to a real college. Is that—?” And they’re shaking their head. I
said, “Well, I’m happy. I’m happy to introduce—“ And I introduce a mother and
father and they walk up and they said, “Well, they told our son that also. He A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 124
graduated two years ago…” We had a big screen up, several hundred parents.
“Here is our son in full military regalia at the Military Academy of West Point.
We think that’s a real college. They told him he couldn’t do this and he couldn’t
do that. Matter of fact, ‘he couldn’t even run on a cross country team.’ He won
several awards here on a cross country team. We need for you to understand
underneath that uniform he wears one of his Sussex Tech Cross Country T-shirts
everyday for inspiration. We think West Point’s real.” So he says now, “Now
they’re also telling you that we don’t have bona fide teachers and that kind of
thing.” And we had Gene Bottoms report, he had a write up about the English
department that he put them on a parallel with any English teaching group in the
country and indicated the things that they were doing. And we introduced the
English teachers and their undergraduate degrees from the University of Delaware
and they’re Masters Degrees from the University of Maryland, you know,
wherever it’s from. We think that they’re prepared. “Another myth…” and it was
just one myth after another. We had to do those things.
Lamey: Right.
Frunzi: It’s a shame, but we had to do those things. But eventually, by the time ’96/’97,
probably the biggest problem was coaches holding, making concerted efforts to
hold their athletes back. And we particularly saw that at Sussex Central because
that’s right—
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 125
Lamey: Right, right, right. You’re right across from each other. I’m sure that was always
interesting.
Frunzi: And I don’t know if you were following it, but when Brian Polk—remember
Brian Polk played basketball?
Lamey: Yeah! Yeah!
Frunzi: That’s when we made the final four and came up to University of Delaware
Lamey: I know Jerry Kobaska.
Frunzi: Jerry was the coach. Jerry’s at Wesley, he’s coaching Wesley now. Just saw him
yesterday. Jerry’s the best coach, you know, I mean, there was. And I’ll tell you, I
mean, the incredible thing: at Hodgson, Lou—
Lamey: Bender?
Frunzi: Lou Bender. When Lou coached, I mean, Jerry, they were—
Lamey: Yeah.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 126
Frunzi: I mean, somebody would be coming up from Sussex County to play Lou, or
somebody would be coming down from New Castle to play us. And then Jerry
would call Lou, or Lou would call Jerry, you know? “What do we need to know?”
And he got like a twelve hour (?) report: here’s how to take them apart. And they
played each other about the third or fourth game, and they said, “We want to play
each other.” So, we each find out where we are, you know, like what changes
we—you know? And we’re going to go at each other, you know? And
somebody’s going to win, but we’re going to learn from this and, you know, I
mean, they were—
Lamey: Yeah.
Frunzi: —close as hell and still are. They gave each other coaching.
Lamey: Those are good guys. His assistant, Frenchy, I don’t know if you know him, he’s
coaching at St. Georges.
Frunzi: Now, I was with Lou Bender at Dennis’. No, I was with Dennis and I was at Lou
Benders… I went to Villanova. April 1st, 1985 I was at Lou Benders house
watching Villanova play Georgetown because the very next day Dennis and I
were off to Las Vegas to a tournament and instead of driving up in the morning, I
came up, stayed overnight with Dennis, and Lou invited us over to watch the
game over there. So, I mean, we do. I mean, Lou was— A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 127
Lamey: He’s a legend
Frunzi: He was one of us as far as we were concerned.
Lamey: Right. That kind of—how about with the VoTech? I mean, I know you’re—did
you guys work all together? I mean, with Poly as well? Sussex Poly and New
Castle County. Was that a good relationship?
Frunzi: New Castle and Sussex was… couldn’t have been closer. Dennis and I, are you
kidding?
Lamey: And was Polly in that mix?
Frunzi: Anything we learned, like, was given to Dennis, minutes after we learned it and
anything learned was given to us and Dennis was down looking at--- because he
can’t look at our block schedule--- we were out looking at other things, I mean,
the trips that we made… Poly Tech… I’ll tell you when you turn that off.
Lamey: Okay. Well, then, actually that’s all the questions I’ve had.
Frunzi; But I’ll tell you interestingly enough, you know, knowing that Joe Crossen and
Lou and who else?
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 128
Lamey: Dr. Atkinson and Joe.
Frunzi: Lou and Joe. See, I mean, Joe went through this. He was the superintendent at
Capital, at the time—capital school district—when the conversion took place.
Although, Joe, being the gentleman that he is, you know, didn’t interfere. And
Lou Atkinson, quite frankly, could have been the superintendent at Kent VoTech,
as it was called at the time. Joe Orlando retired and in about ‘86/’87 and Lou was
the first choice and offered the position and Lou turned it down. See, and at the
time, things looked bad for VoTech. I mean, their numbers were dropping, our
numbers were dropping, and I guess Lou said, “I don’t know about this.”
Lamey: Right.
Frunzi: So he didn’t take the position. And I think he was working at Del Tech at the time
and then shortly thereafter he went over to the department DPI, or DOE at the
time, but Lou could’ve been. He could’ve been. If Lou had been at Kent when
Dennis and I were, we could’ve taken on the world.
Lamey: Right.
Frunzi: And would’ve.
Lamey: You guys pretty much kind of did anyway A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 129
Frunzi: And won. I’m serious, I’m serious.
Lamey: Well, I want to thank you for your time and this has been a great—
Frunzi: My pleasure.
Lamey: —body of knowledge.
Frunzi: And if you think of something else, you got my phone number.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 130
Appendix B
Interview with Dr. Karen Hutchinson
Lamey: So what I would like is – I'm sorry.
Dr. Hutchinson: That's okay.
Lamey: I have a series of 10 questions that I'd like to ask you and then since you
were part of that Governor's task force I'm really hoping that you can give
me a little background and any interesting story that you may think about
that I didn't even ask you about that was part of that whole process as our
whole State emerged into – from share time to full-time.
So, today's date is February 15, 2011. The interview is being conducted at
the Collette Center in Dover. As I said the interview will consist of 10
questions surrounding Dover's conversion from share time vocation
schools to full-time vocational schools.
Today I'm interviewing Dr. Hutchinson who is part of DOE. First off, Dr.
Hutchinson, if you could give me some of your background that – career
choices or occupations that you've held, different departments that you
may have held.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 131
Dr. Hutchinson: Okay. Started teaching Agri-Science in Delaware in 1979. I taught at
Woodbridge High School for 10 years and it was when I was a teacher that
I was a part of the Governor's task force. And then I was at Poly Tech for
three years, one year when they were share time and two years after. So, I
was there when they were converting from the share time to the full time.
Lamey: Oh, that's great. So, you had that experience of being a teacher going
through it?
Dr. Hutchinson: Yes, and then I came to the Department in the fall of 1992 as the
Education Associate for Agri-Science and that's where I am now.
Lamey: Great. Well, thank you. I too, also, I was teaching at Ho – well, I just got
hired at Hodgson, when had become a full-time school. I was just getting
in and it just converted over. So, it was an interesting time for us. And in
New Castle County, I'm sure is the same as Kent County. That'll lead me
to my first question, what was the environment surrounding vocational
education in the mid to late 1980's and early '90's? What was happening
with vocational education?
Dr. Hutchinson: Well, the early part and before it came full-time, when it was the shared-
time what they were seeing was a decreased enrollment and mainly
students not wanting to leave their sending schools, and so that's part of A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 132
what drove the Governor's task force was the declining enrollment in the
vo-tech school and what needed to happen.
Lamey: Did you see that happening at Kent – at Poly where you guys were?
Dr. Hutchinson: Yes.
Lamey: Uh-huh. What support did you receive in moving forward from the
conversion from shared-time to full-time? Was there political support?
Was there business support? What kind of support was pushing that or
was it just educational people saying we needed to make this move?
Dr. Hutchinson: The task force consisted mainly of business people. I know there were
people from the banking industries and some of the other areas.
[Crosstalk]
Dr. Hutchinson: Yes, in fact, I was trying to find my copy of it and I can't find it anywhere.
So I'm glad that you have a copy. So it was a real broad based committee
and they were looking at how to – they saw the value of vocational
education or career and technical education and it was what do we do to
help support, bring up the enrollment in these schools, how do we make
changes so that they're more relevant. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 133
So that was really a discussion that started with Governor Castle at the
time to put this task force together to look at how to support the programs,
which I thought that was coming from outside.
Lamey: Did he actually take any role in it or did he just name you guys?
Dr. Hutchinson: He pretty much named the committee and appointed the chairperson who
ended up at – within a year or so after having chaired this committee
became president of the state board association. So, he was appointed to
serve as the President of the State School Board, which then helped move
some of the things forward.
Lamey: How about politically? Did you sense – was there any political
movement with that? Did they support it or was – really you guys didn't
feel anything other than Governor Castle? There was no like, was there
local politicians?
Dr. Hutchinson: There was some support. Of course, it was a support to do the study. And
so the committee was very much aware that whatever findings we came
out with had to be acceptable politically across a pretty broad spectrum.
So, as we were developing the final report that was taken into
consideration a great deal that anything that was done too radically the A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 134
whole work of the commission would probably be – wouldn't be paid
attention to, the critical pieces had to happen if there was anything too
controversial in there. So we tried to keep that in mind as we worked
through it.
Lamey: That kind of leads to my next question, what resistance did you or your
group receive as you explored this conversion? Or maybe you didn't
receive any, did you feel resistance? But are people opposed to this idea?
Dr. Hutchinson: It's funny, I can't remember back. I don't think there was a whole lot of
opposition to it. I think more of the opposition would've been earlier
when they started the vo-tech centers period as the shared-time, which is
what the late '60's that they began. Because that pulled programs out of
the comprehensive high schools weren't here, we were just trying to figure
out the best way to get kids so they could take advantage of it.
There was already funding that was coming from the comprehensive
schools that the vo-tech schools got and that .5 deduct and all of that for
the kids coming. So, there wasn't a huge amount of financial issues at that
point. And I think it was fairly early that people really didn't look at what
other ramifications might happen down the road.
Lamey: So, early on you didn't sense any of that? A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 135
Dr. Hutchinson: No.
Lamey: How about later, as it progressed as the change happened? And you were
at Poly and you've been in vocational education.
Dr. Hutchinson: What we see now is some of the resistance is more about how do the –
because now it's not trying to get more kids in to keep their enrollment up,
it’s how do we decide which students come because we have more
applications than we can fulfill. I think part of the resistance then comes
from the sending schools how do you make the decision of who comes.
Some of our kids who really could benefit from it don't get into the school.
And we're getting questions now actually even from our current Governor
as to how we can provide more career and technical education experiences
for kids since a large number can't get into the career center. So, it's
almost full circle how do we expand it in the comprehensive schools now
to help serve more kids.
Lamey: That's funny, that's a good term coming full circle, because you're right
back in the conversion it was how can we provide these, and now there's
so many looking for that opportunity as well in New Castle County, we
face the same thing. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 136
Dr. Hutchinson: Right, and I think at one point the kids that were choosing to go to the
career and tech – well, we didn't have the high stakes testing. That's
added a whole new element to it as to which kids are you taking out of my
school and putting in your school and so there's – I think because of some
of the things that have happened since then the dynamics of the
cooperation have changed pretty dramatically.
Lamey: Did you or your task force look at any full-time vocational school models
prior to your recommendations?
Dr. Hutchinson: We did. We did do some visitations at shared-time and full-time.
Lamey: And did you guys use that to help make your decisions?
Dr. Hutchinson: Yes, there definitely were some visits and some research done and that did
help. And one of the biggest concerns was the loss of instructional time
that kids that had to ride the bus back and forth basically were losing at
least a period if not more of instructional time a day depending on where
they were coming from. That was one of the probably the biggest
considerations.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 137
Lamey: You kind of already touched on this, but we talked about resistance but
was there any resistance amongst the group of you that was working
together or was it a pretty cohesive group or did some people think well
maybe we shouldn't go full-time within your own group of that committee
that task force committee?
Dr. Hutchinson: Not a whole lot. I think most people came to the conclusion that for
students that was the best way. It's interesting and I've talked to people
about this, probably one of the models that came out that people on the
committee supported, but politically would not have gone is the
suggestion that they not be separate districts.
But you look at the overall educational systems and maybe Sussex County
should be one school system with your full-time career tech center
everybody being the same that one district. So, then you didn't have the
competition for students because you're one district. That one had some
support on the committee, but that was one of those that people said,
politically you do that, you're talking school consolidation and all of that
and no one would look at any other recommendations, they would just see
that consolidation piece and say, forget it.
Lamey: That's interesting.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 138
Dr. Hutchinson: So, that came off the table.
Lamey: One of the things, I know you're familiar with this but one of the things
that was mentioned in this report was the We-They Syndrome. How have
you seen that syndrome? Was a part of – obviously you guys mention it
in your report, kind of in our dialogue here we've talked a little bit about
that, anything you want to add to that, the We-They Syndrome? I know
that talks a little bit about finances and money and also what kids are
you're taking and what kids you're not taking.
Dr. Hutchinson: Right. That's the biggest part right now. Part of what we discussed too
back then was the kids that came to our shared-time didn't feel a part of
either place completely. They were going to the vo-tech centers so they
didn't feel completely a part of their sending school. They may still
participate in athletics and some, but sometimes that was even difficult.
So it was hard for the kids to really feel like they had a place either place,
you know, those were some of the thinking.
The We- They always comes into consideration, because of the financial,
the choice of which kids are coming, at that time the vo-techs weren't
getting the kind of what you'd call the cream of the crop or what schools
consider the cream of the crop. So, there wasn't a whole lot of A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 139
competition for the kids there now. That's changing and the whole athletic
part has added a whole new dimension to the We– They.
Lamey: No doubt. How did the leadership – and I'm not sure if you're familiar
with some of the leadership, but of the comprehensive not the vo-tech high
schools and don't respond to your report. Because this was going to
change how things operate for them, somewhat – maybe – you kind of
mentioned earlier, maybe they didn't see the big picture down the road but
did you feel anything, did they respond to your report, were they positive
or negative? Did you get any kind of feedback from let's say the
superintendent from Milford or from Dover or I mean Capital or any of
those places?
Dr. Hutchinson: You know I don't remember. We actually went and visited some of the
career and tech offerings in the comprehensive schools. So, we did do
some visits to comprehensive schools too. I don't remember a huge
amount of – they were all – the funding wasn't going to make a huge
amount of difference because now you couldn't take kids in the morning
and afternoon, you were just taking one set of kids. So, funding wise it
wasn't going to make a huge amount of difference.
Part of where – we got into – politically there became some issues in that
there was legislation at one time, which actually has just changed within A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 140
the last five years or so that said, that programs that were offered in the
vo-tech schools could not be duplicated in the comprehensive schools.
That's where we started getting some push back and resistance because –
and that was legislation, we didn't have anything to do with – if it is in a
comprehensive – if it's in vo-tech center, we can't get enough kids in, how
come we can't start a program in our school? And that's, I think, that's
when we started running into a few more difficulties, politically. But that
legislation was changed a few years ago.
Lamey: You kind of addressed this a little also, but what obstacles were the most
difficult for you or your group as you moved forward with your
recommendations? Did you face any obstacles? Did you feel there were
any roadblocks out there?
Dr. Hutchinson: Well, this was going to be a whole different change of what the system
had been. So that in itself, how do you even turn these schools from
shared-time to full time and the funding how do you – the schools are
funded differently, the school boards are chosen differently. How do you
mesh the two systems and that's still a question today.
So, those are still roadblocks that haven't actually been addressed
completely. Certainly, as far as transportation and those sorts of things
that actually became easier instead of more difficult. The biggest A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 141
roadblocks were how's the funding the going to work, how do you pick the
kids that come in. Which when it first happened it wasn't a big deal,
because there weren't that many kids choosing.
Lamey: Yeah recently that's even become a –
Dr. Hutchinson: Yeah that's become a –
Lamey: That's a hot topic.
Dr. Hutchinson: That's the hot topic.
Lamey: It's been 24 years roughly since the task force recommended converting
Delaware's shared-time vocational schools to full-time status. Has this
recommendation proved to be a success and if so how?
Dr. Hutchinson: Well, I think it has been a success. Now I would say the success has now
– because of the success and really one of the main reasons was what we
do to get the numbers up in the career and tech centers. If you measure by
that, it's been a success. Where we have – I think we have had some
challenges is fewer kids now can maybe fewer kids are getting the benefit
of some of just the pure career and tech options that they had at one time.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 142
So, now that's a new challenge that we're having to address. So, if you
measure was it successful but did we get the numbers up in the schools
which was one of the big challenges. Yeah, it's been very successful.
Lamey: My next question, part of that was you kind of answered that, in what
ways was it unsuccessful?
Dr. Hutchinson: Again, I think probably – one, because now the schools were going after
some of the same students we have lost some of the more traditional trade
and industry careers. Because those careers weren't the areas that were
attracting the kids to the program so there was that whole thing. So, I
think that's been a loss so now we're in the process of how do we build
those back up, because those are areas where kids are still finding
employment but we don't have the training opportunities for some of the
more traditional trades.
So, I think we lost some of the more traditional trades – that was mine –
by the model that's a shared-time and because of the kids that everybody
wants and I think part of that is maybe not so much the model of going
from shared-time to full time but some of the things that have been added
since then and the high stakes testing, the states standards all of the
different pieces that have come in since then.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 143
Lamey: Do you think it's been different in the three counties or do you think it's
been pretty much faced the same types of things? Do you think maybe
Sussex is maybe a little bit different from there or Kent?
Dr. Hutchinson: I think it's been a little bit different in the counties. I think Kent and
Sussex a little more similar and there aren't a whole lot of other private
school options or options for kids outside their comprehensive schools.
There are not a lot of private schools for kids to choose from and so some
of the vo-tech centers have become an option. If you don't want to go to
your comprehensive school, here is an option to go to this one. Now
charter schools have helped that some, they aren't anywhere near the
number of charter schools in Kent or Sussex. In New Castle you probably
have greater choice in charter schools and private schools. And so, the
pull on those kids is a little bit different than it has been in Kent and
Sussex.
Lamey: Great. Are there any interesting stories that you'd like to share that we
didn't talk about or that happened during that time where this
transformation or anything that I didn't ask you that you'd like to share
with me that may be beneficial for fellow people looking at a conversion
or vocational education?
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 144
Dr. Hutchinson: Well, having gone through being at Kent Vo-tech – we went from shared-
time to full time and having being at a comprehensive school before I
went there. I kind of understood some of the dynamics that would
probably start happening. I don't know that a lot of the teachers in the
shared-time understood. When the kids were at the shared-time schools,
they were in their classes and they were in, it was VICA at the time,
VICA, those were their choices. And so the kids participated in those
activities.
Now as it was being converted and went to the full-time, you've got a
demand on the kids. Now that was so different that I think in the
transition period that was a little bit difficult for some of the shop teachers.
Now the kids could participate in athletics and they could participate in
different classes. You had the whole dynamics the academics had you fit
those in and what drives these schools, is it the academics or is it the
career and tech? And I think you still have some of those questions that
aren't completely answered.
Lamey: Well, that concludes the 10 questions I had and I appreciate your time. I
know you're busy and how I'm going to plan how to use this is, I'll
transcribe what you said and then Dr. Atkinson, I'm sure you know Lou.
Dr. Hutchinson: Yes. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 145
Lamey: Is my adviser and I'm working with him and Joe Crossen and so then I'll –
Dr. Hutchinson: Both have been bosses of mine at some point.
Lamey: So, I'll go through it with them and then I'll include it in my report if
you're okay with that.
Dr. Hutchinson: That's fine.
Lamey: Great. Well, thank you for your time. I appreciate it.
[End of Audio]
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 146
Appendix C
Interview with Dr. Gene Bottoms
Dr. Bottoms: David, right?
Jerry Lamey: My name’s Jerry.
Dr. Bottoms: Ah, Jerry. I’m sorry.
Jerry Lamey: That’s – that’s quite all right.
Dr. Bottoms: What’s your last name?
Jerry Lamey: Lamey. L-A-M-E-Y. I’ll tell you a little bit about myself. I’m an
assistant principal at St. Georges. I don’t know how familiar you are with
St. Georges. I know you’re familiar with our district, but St. Georges is
the newest Vo-Tech in our district, and this is our fifth year. So I’m an
assistant principal down at St. Georges, and ah, but I worked many years
at Hodgson. I started out as a phys ed teacher, health teacher –
Dr. Bottoms: At Hodgson?
Jerry Lamey: Hodgson, yes. And then became athletic director, was a football coach,
wrestling coach, did all that kind of stuff. And then long story short, A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 147
moved over to administration. I worked at George Read Middle School in
Colonial School District and then came back to our district as an assistant
principal. So it’s – and I’m a big fan of vocational ed. And really, that’s
what – that’s why I’ve asked for this opportunity. Again, I would like to
thank you. I know you’re busy, and very sought after. So when I heard
that you were coming up here, Lew Atkinson is my advisor.
Dr. Bottoms: Lew is?
Jerry Lamey: Yeah, Lew is. And through him and Joe Crossen and several people – Dr.
Loftus says hello by the way.
Dr. Bottoms: Is he still – is he still working?
Jerry Lamey: I’m interviewing Dr. Loftus on Monday. He just retired from DASL,
which was an organization through University of Delaware, and he’s
currently retired, and he was away and he’s back now. He was, I think,
down in South Carolina, and so I have an interview with Dr. Lofus on
Monday. I interviewed Dr. Frunzi, who I know you know Dr. Frunzi as
well, a few weeks ago. And so when Dr. Godowsky had said that you
were coming, I was hoping I could get an opportunity to interview you.
Dr. Bottoms: What’s George doing now? A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 148
Jerry Lamey: He’s a – he works for – not Wilmington University, what’s the – he works
for a university – I’m trying to remember the name of it now. They do a
lot of online courses –
Dr. Bottoms: Yeah.
Jerry Lamey: and they have a session where they meet like once a week but they do a lot
of online –
Dr. Bottoms: He teaches.
Jerry Lamey: Does classwork, and he teaches. So he was with – I think with
Wilmington University for a while, but he’s out of that. Dr. Deardorff was
with the – Wilmington University and he just left this past year. So – and
again, as I’ve said, I know you’ve had a long history with our district and
with vocational ed in Delaware.
What I’m looking at is I’m looking how vocational in Delaware – kind of
a history of it, and how it changed really in the late ‘80s, early ‘90s when –
I don’t know – I don’t know if you’re familiar with the governor’s task
force. Our governor back then, Mike Castle, put a task force together to
make – made 15 recommendations for Delaware, and one of the big ones A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 149
was converting from shared-time to full-time school. So I was hoping that
I could ask you some questions about that time period and the conversion,
and your opinion and how SREB also was involved.
Dr. Bottoms: Okay.
Jerry Lamey: Okay. First of all today’s date is March 17th, 2011, and the interview is
being conducted at Howard High School interviewing Dr. Bottoms who is
a vice president of SREB?
Dr. Bottoms: Right.
Jerry Lamey: Dr. Bottoms, a little bit about your background and SREB, if you could
share a little bit about that so that I can ask – to have that information.
Dr. Bottoms: Yep. Well, I’ve been around a long time, Jerry. The – I’ll finish up my 54
years at the end of this year. This work here – trying to improve high
schools joining academic and CTE together, we started about ’87 SREB.
Prior to that I was with the National Vocational Organization in
Washington, and helped write that 684 legislation that laid the foundation
of trying to join academic and CTE together. Before that, I had a long
history with the State of Georgia. The – I’m not sure I know that much
about the – I know you had a study. This district here, I gather, went to A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 150
full-time vocational schools earlier. And I don’t know if they ever had
shared-time centers here or not. But there was a study on the two southern
districts –
Jerry Lamey: Right.
Dr. Bottoms: Kent and Sussex, they contracted with a fellow out of California named
Gary Hoachlander to look at the pros and cons of going to a full-time
setting. And Gary had made a rather compelling case to convert the
schools to full-time but there, I guess, some resistance to that by some
folks in the educational community.
The – those two schools joined our network in the early ‘90s before they
were converted over, and I jokingly tell them they were among the two
lowest achieving schools in our network.
But somewhere around ’90 or ’91, I was in the State and someone asked
me to speak to the State Board of Education about our reform with high
schools, and I did. But on the agenda that day was whether or not to
convert those two schools to full-time or leave it shared-time. And I
presented the concept to the Board and I remember the Board Chairman
said – looked to the two superintendents which was Jeff and George, says,
“Fellows? Are you all committed to implementing this if we approve you A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 151
all going full-time?” He basically said to them, “I think the only way
we’re going to approve it full-time if you guys implement this design.”
And that was the – that – that was kind of the deal that got made between
the Board and the two southern superintendents that they would take this
design seriously, as the “High Schools that Work” design. And they
probably have implemented it much more deeper than the schools that
were across the country, and they get very positive results.
This district was already in the full-time schools. They didn’t have that
kind of mandate, so this district has never quite implemented the “High
Schools that Work” design to the depth that they did in the two southern
districts. And of course the two southern districts are nationally known
now for the quality of their work and what they do, and some claim they
make – claim students, as I look at Kent Polytech does, they seem to take
people on a pretty straightforward basis, and they have – they just do a
great job with their kids when they get them there. That they –
Jerry Lamey: Both schools have been tremendous.
Dr. Bottoms: Yeah, they have a – they have made high schools that were deeply – that’s
part of the culture of the school. They really have done it well.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 152
Jerry Lamey: Right. Well, some of those questions that I have, you kind of even
touched on right there. What was the – and – Hodgson, was shared time
in our district prior to like early ‘80s. it converted in ’90, ’91, because
with my first teaching job was when Hodgson just converted.
Dr. Bottoms: Yeah.
Jerry Lamey: So it – it was part of the old Newark District, actually, then became part of
the vocational district and converted. But you’re right, because Dr. Frunzi
mentioned a lot about “High Schools that Work”, and SREB, and the
influence it had for him and for Sussex Tech which, you know, all the
schools – and I’m hoping to interview Jeff Adams as well.
What was the environment surrounding voc – vocational education in the
late ‘80s, early ‘90s? Was it – was it the environment that was pushing
this type of change or was Delaware more in the front of that?
Dr. Bottoms: No, the – the environment in the late ‘80s and early ‘90s was an
environment do we really need it – current technical education. That was
a – that was a real big question, what role they’d have to play. It was –
there was the – nationally not a very supportive environment though the
field had gone through two decades of pretty good growth. [Background
noise] And they met some high – high expectations for the field. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 153
But you began to get, in the early ‘90’s, a shift to improve kids
academically. So CTE was necessarily seen as a way to do that, although
there were some great high schools across the country that historically had
joined very solid academic studies with career studies. And those were
good schools – had high graduation rates, high achievement rates,
prepared kids for a double purpose.
So part of our work at the Southern Regional Education Board which
started in the mid ‘80s while I was still in Washington, and to look at the
role the CTE can play in broader high school reform. And that’s how –
that gave birth to “High Schools that Work”, and so our role at the Board
has been, over the years, just to literally show that you can make high
schools far more purposeful. You can get more kids to college and career-
ready if you join the college-ready core with quality CTE together. And
that movement has influenced an awful lot of policies in states after states,
and today CTE is very popular.
Now, some would probably advocate that the kind of CTE that wouldn’t
prepare kids for a double purpose – that’s not where we’ve been at the
organization. But the – getting back specifically to your question – in the
early ‘90s, CTE was not out on the forefront, and we put it back on the
forefront by joining quality CTE with quality academic studies. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 154
Jerry Lamey: Great! You mentioned that you worked with Kent and Sussex. How did
you guys get initially involved with Delaware? Did someone seek you or
was it just – I mean how to SREB did – was those – did those districts or
did our district start it, or was it? Because you had a major influence, as
you mentioned. And what support, and how did you become involved
with our state?
Dr. Bottoms: Well, I think your state director invited me over at that time. The guy –
the name was Tom – I can’t remember Tom’s last name.
Jerry Lamey: Was it Welch?
Dr. Bottoms: Tom Welch – he’s a real large fellow. And a lot of the state were getting
involved with us. And Tom, at the State Director’s meeting, had picked
up, and I think Tom invited me in. And I met with – I guess at the time I
met Dennis, and Dennis invited me somewhere. Dennis invited me to
come up here and speak to a group on Saturday. He was trying to
refurbish this building here, and Business Group, I taught with them, and
they were his Board, and they had real interest. So Dennis kind of became
a leader in getting the state involved with “High Schools that Work”. Tom
had come around and decided he wanted to get involved, and so they
become a part of the effort. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 155
They’re one of the first states outside a SREB state to join the “High
Schools that Work” effort, when they convey themselves, and we were
just in the process of learning how to do things at that time. And so when
the other two schools became full-time, we – the first assessment we did
was either ’90 or ’91. They were – we assessed their shared-time kids.
They were not getting much back at the home school. It was pretty tragic.
But they were the two lowest achieving schools in our network at that
time.
Jerry Lamey: ______.
Dr. Bottoms: Maybe they were among the two highest.
Jerry Lamey: It’s not like – because Dr. Frunzi told me the same story. He was saying
how low they really were.
Dr. Bottoms: Yeah, that was – and so we worked with them, and over the year
[Background noise] and we – those two schools really followed the script.
They and never quite – Dennis and them never quite followed the script to
the same degree here. They just had a – you want – each school kind of
developed its own signature program. And they did some nice things here.
We had them Delcastle – had a nice integration project going on. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 156
Hodgson had the senior project. Henry had kind of a portfolio strategy
here, as I remember. But what was missing – they never committed to
teaching the more demanding academic course. And they never really did
get the integration across the curriculum in these schools as they did in the
others.
In other words, the other two schools really did accelerate learning. They
put in the kind of ninth grade design you’re talking about here now Kent
and Sussex did two decades ago. So your kids were not ready in getting
them up. So then when – and such – when Dennis left the district progress
in terms of “High Schools that Work”, kind of faded from the scene.
Jerry Lamey: Humm.
Dr. Bottoms: And this was – I made a visit back in the district in January to see if I
couldn’t revitalize things, and I think maybe that’s going to happen.
Jerry Lamey: Good, great. Did – in your workings – see one of the things more when I
was talking with local people, when we talk about the conversions, that
there was some resistance. There was some political resistance. There
was some resistance from some comprehensive high schools.
Dr. Bottoms: Yes. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 157
Jerry Lamey: Did you sense any of that, or were you ever in – was that part of what you
had to deal with as you helped with these groups?
Dr. Bottoms: Well, the – there was resistance, but what happened to the two southern
schools – first, their enrollment was declining. Secondly, the home high
school was not doing anything to support the kids very well academically.
That was – what they were getting there was the old general track
curriculum which was not going to be therapy for the advanced in the
workplace. So the academics totally disconnect. They were wasting a lot
of time on buses. And it was obvious that they were using the two centers
to send some kids that they were not very intrigued with, but they were
still decent kids because they’d been taught very well, but you can’t be
taught on two different campuses.
Jerry Lamey: Um hmm.
Dr. Bottoms: And so yes, there – and that issue is still alive in your state.
Jerry Lamey: That’s right.
Dr. Bottoms: It’s still very much alive.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 158
Jerry Lamey: That’s one of my questions of that – is identified here as a “We-They
Syndrome.” And you know, that whole thing of, are they taking our good
students, and how’s funding for vocational and even that whole issue of
between comprehensive and vocational schools, especially with
accountability and state testing. If you know that the Vo-Tech is taking
certain students and what do you – what’s your feeling on that whole type
of?
Dr. Bottoms: Well I do not know if the student population that they’re getting has
changed. I know there’s special population students in both schools.
There may be some evidence that one school may be more than the other
is doing some more creaming. But they’ve taken kids – seem to be taking
kids on a lottery basis. And there may be some evidence that they’re
getting a little bit different mix of kids than they originally have gotten.
But when I go in the schools, I’m not sure I see that difference.
What I see different is the quality of experience kids are getting. They had
– teachers are committed to teaching these kids a side academic core.
They put together structure with academic to CTE teachers met weekly to
joint planning. They put in a failsafe system for kids who are not getting
it. You had to go and get special extra help in coaching. They brought
you in the summer schools if you were not getting it. You had to do a
tough senior project. In other words, they basically said these students and A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 159
parents – you come here – we’re going to hold to high standards. We’re
not about failing you – but you’re going to have to make an effort. And
that’s what parents are looking for. So what they’ve done is create a
quality – it seems to me that what they’ve done is create a quality learning
experience for students.
I think what the tragedy is that some of the country’s high schools haven’t
learned the lesson. Maybe it’s because these high schools are still sorting
kids into those who can and those who cannot. Many of the classes they
are very boring, not well taught. Nobody believes they can learn very
much. And they literally ought to be pushing to add the kind of CTE
programs to those schools that could add meaning and purpose. And
many of them are doing that.
Jerry Lamey: Um hmm.
Dr. Bottoms: So I think it’s a great success story. It is a success story that runs
something like this. When adults in the building decide the kids can learn,
they create challenging learning experiences that have meaning for kids.
They walk the extra mile with them. The kids have a goal and see a
connection. The kids are going to learn. Opportunities are going to go up.
That’s what they create.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 160
Now you have created an old vocational program that says we’re going to
continue to teach the low level academics to you. We’re going to give you
low vocational skills, but most important is we want to hire you. We’re
going to give you a place to hang out for four years. Now I’ve seen some
of those kinds of programs too. What they decided to do – look, we’re
going to prepare you for a double purpose. When you walk out of our
place you’re going to be prepared for further study of some type, or you’ll
be prepared for work.
Jerry Lamey: Right.
Dr. Bottoms: And they’ve done a great job. And that’s what parents want. I think the
big lesson here is, is to look at what these schools have done to figure out
how you create that same kind of learning culture in all schools.
Jerry Lamey: I agree. I agree. What are the things that your group has recently started,
I think, because I was reading it was in 2007 an initiative called
“Technology Centers that Work.”
Dr. Bottoms: Yes.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 161
Jerry Lamey: And not – I’m not very familiar with it, but I understand that I think it also
works with shared-time centers. Could you explain a little bit about that,
and is there a trend to go back to more shared-time centers or is that?
Dr. Bottoms: There’s no trend to go back to them. When we started our work in states
like Pennsylvania and Oklahoma, and even Kentucky, the first people who
joined high schools that worked were often the directors of those centers
and they joined them in collaboration with a home high school. Now over
the years, the high schools that were modeling fall into much more a place
for the comforts of high schools. So you have about a thousand of those
shared-time centers in the country, and they were no longer participating
in our network. They were pretty much – they looked like they did in
1970.
Some of them had not revitalized their programs. They were teaching in
pretty much the old pedagogy manner. Just technical skills and not
integrating the academics into them. And so we think those schools are
great resources, were under developed. So, we developed technology
centers that work to do a couple things.
One, we wanted to improve the quality of learning in those centers, both
the technical learning and the imbedding of academics in those
curriculum, then hopefully improve the relationship with the home high A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 162
school. But secondly, we wanted to begin to plant the seeds that maybe
some of those centers could become choice schools out of technical high
schools. Now, in Kentucky they’ve just sent a team over to visit Kent. A
local school district is going to take over one of their state centers, and
they’re going to work to convert it into a full-time technical high school.
And so we hope that that possibility will begin to emerge because you still
have the problem of kids on buses.
Jerry Lamey: Um hmm.
Dr. Bottoms: You even have less time than you had 20 years ago because of the
graduation requirements. And, but now states like Oklahoma have figured
out how to embed the academics into their curriculum so kids earn more
than two academic credits at the center, so that helps take part of the load
off. We wanted teams of teachers in those schools to start coming
together and talking to each other. They’re pretty soloed. And so many of
the schools have organized those centers around four or five broad clusters
so the teams of teachers can begin to share and work together and have
conversations.
So we started working with many of them, they were a series of silos – or
a series of one-room schools. And they didn’t talk to each other, and there
was no overall school culture. So we thought the schools could be greatly A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 163
improved. We felt that they needed an advocate, and they needed to be
highlighted. And that’s what we’ve been trying to do with the centers.
Jerry Lamey: So the – so the SREB then – I mean I think that’s a great idea because I
agree, they’re probably sitting on an island a lot of them feel like. But one
of the things you would recommend as a group is to see – you would like
to see them convert to a full-time vocational –
Dr. Bottoms: Well, I’d like to see their state create policies, a set of policies – conditions
under which they can convert to full-time, it would be very positive. And
you guys got certain things going for you here in this state that other
people can’t duplicate. You’re not going to duplicate a system where the
governor’s going to appoint them on the Board, so you’re now going to
create several Boards for them.
And secondly they – you have tax limiting authorities to some extent.
That’s not going to happen this day and age, but you can create some
conditions where there can be some kind of oversight committee of these
centers to make sure that they do not just become places that local schools
send all their troublemakers to, but rather they become places that students
and parents choose to come to rather than being sentenced to. Now there’s
a real big difference.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 164
It doesn’t bother me that troublemakers choose to go to – to a center with
a purpose in mind. If they have been sentenced to come here that’s not a –
it’s very difficult to get good learning at that point in time.
Jerry Lamey: That’s a great point. Finally, in the 24 years since we had our task force
recommendation and when – 1987 when SREB and “High Schools that
Work” out of – had your influence, recommending converting Delaware’s
shared-time to full-time, do you believe that this has been a success? You
kind of stated that –
Dr. Bottoms: Yeah.
Jerry Lamey: but do you think that this has, you know, in this time gap and now that
you’ve had a chance to reflect and you’ve been involved with Sussex and
Kent [Background noise] what’s your feeling on the whole process from
start to finish that’s been a success, and in what ways. And if it hasn’t
been a success, what failures do you think we’ve made along the way?
Dr. Bottoms: Well, I think both Kent and Sussex –I know there’s some arguments and
issues as you think about Sussex and I think both of them have
demonstrated that if you create a learning environment that’s accelerated,
high quality CTE, teachers begin to plan across the curriculum – every kid
is connected to an adult – have a goal in mind. There is a system support A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 165
– we’re going to hold you to high standards but we’re going to require you
to do the work till you get it right, with great parent involvement, I think it
validates the fact that you can graduate 95 and 98 percent of the folks.
You can graduate folks prepared for a double purpose; some form of other
study as well as some credential for the work place. So I think they’ve
been a great success in that context. And they could – and it is something
that’s skillable. It can be done in other places. I think the great
shortcoming for the state is that these have never been used well enough
as a – as illustration of what comprehensive high schools could do.
And there’s never been that set of policy set forth for comprehensive high
schools to also create focused programs of studies, and with these
dimensions. Rather than them being envious of or say they’ve missed
their mission, which I don’t think they have, the lessons of what they’ve
accomplished – there’s not been a willingness to apply those lessons at
other places – period.
Now – so I think that part’s been a success.
Then – as I look at this district here, I think that you’ve added – you’ve
got four schools now and the specialized technical high schools, and I
think the challenge for this district is to look at how do you take the A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 166
students you’re taking, and how do you provide a more accelerated
learning experience? How do you link these two things together better?
How do you get a system of extra help to raise support kids and begin to
realize that your students can achieve an even higher level.
And so I think it, in part, the dream of 20 years ago has been certainly
realized to a great extent in the two. But I think you have a potential here
in this district to achieve that dream to a fuller level. Does that make any
sense?
Jerry Lamey: Yes, yes.
Dr. Bottoms: And – because I – we ought to have six exemplary high schools in this
state, but that takes a faculty coming together. Now, they had one
advantage, and they did the first job of it. In some ways, you know, now
you’ve got a low performance school. You’re supposed to let half the
faculty go. Then you get a new principal.
Jerry Lamey: Right.
Dr. Bottoms: They had no faculty, so they literally went out and hired people – hired
some good people who were willing to work in that kind of setting –
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 167
Jerry Lamey: Right, right.
Dr. Bottoms: So they – the people they hired came into those settings with the idea that
they were going to team up with each other. Now, and you never had that
– you never could start over with that regard here. But this district has
great potential. You’ve got a great set of schools, but when I look at the
data for the district, there’s still another plateau.
Jerry Lamey: Um hmm.
Dr. Bottoms: And that’s not to criticize. It’s just simply saying that you have the
potential to go another level. We under estimate – we can often put caps
on kids. Now some will argue that the role of this kind of institution is not
to prepare kids for a double purpose. Your true role is to prepare kids for
work. Well, I can’t accept that. It’s not for me to decide who, at the ninth
grade, is going to end up in a craft trade at one level, or who’s going to
end up as an engineering automobile, or who’s going to end up with a
social degree out of the field.
What I’ve always thought the purpose of high school was to maximize the
broadest possible options for the individual, and employers will take care
of themselves. But you’ve got students in this district, in this school, who A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 168
come here with a dream of going on for further study. And many of them
are going on further studies in the career fields they’re in here because
every career field here has a ladder. You can be an architect, civil
engineer and come out of these programs so do I think all of them will?
No, but you ought to teach as though you’re going to make – make it
possible for every youngster to maximize the maximum potential that they
may have.
And – but sometimes we get the notion that, well, this is school. If you go
there you’re only going to be prepared for “X.” And the truth of the
matter is that “X” has a “Y” just above it; a “Z” just above that. All the
same career field.
Jerry Lamey: That’s well said. I agree.
Dr. Bottoms: And so that’s – but you can get a notion to cap some things.
Jerry Lamey: I – I agree. I think you make a great point there, and obviously, well said
in that what the goal should be for all schools is to give kids the best
opportunities and you –
Dr. Bottoms: Two-thirds of jobs will require some education beyond high school. Some
form of credential. Two-thirds. That’s where we’re going. And there are A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 169
certain jobs you prepare for here. Now they got to go abroad. And they’ll
– and their career ladder us out of those fields. Their career ladder is to
the two-year schools. But you also have folks who leave these institutions
and go to four-year schools.
Jerry Lamey: Um hmm.
Dr. Bottoms: And do quite well.
Jerry Lamey: Well I’d like to thank you. I know you’re busy.
Dr. Bottoms: All right, ______.
Jerry Lamey: And thank you for taking the time.
Dr. Bottoms: Well, you need – you need to clean that up now before you print that out
verbatim.
Jerry Lamey: I will clean it up and if you’d like me to send you –
Dr. Bottoms: Yeah, I’d like to see a draft of it before you put it out, if you don’t mind.
Jerry Lamey: No problem. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 170
Dr. Bottoms: I may make somebody upset with what I said there. I’ll probably need to
clean some of that up.
Jerry Lamey: [Chuckle]
[End of Audio]
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 171
Appendix D
Interview with Dr. Dennis Loftus
Lamey: What was the environment surrounding vocational education in the mid to
late 80’s?
Dr. Loftus: I think the catalyst for it all was in 88-89 when the board fired Shuman,
and we went through probably 10 months of turmoil.
Lamey: So do you think the catalyst was our district making the first move, and
that’s what allowed Kent and Sussex to follow?
Dr. Loftus: Yes, we were the lead. And all the school districts up here wanted to
dissolve the vocational school and get rid of the board and end up having
boards like they do up in New York where each of the school districts has
representatives on the board. And that’s kind of famous, that means every
school district gets x number of slots and you put all the kids who you
don’t believe work there, here.
Lamey: How did we fight that from happening?
Dr. Loftus: I think that didn’t happen because of me. I was the youngest person to
become a state supervisor in the state of Delaware; I was the State A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 172
Supervisor for Business and Office Education at 26. I spent about 3 years
there, and then I went to Delaware Tech Community College and helped
build the Terry campus. I was the second administrator they hired there.
And then Shuman just got hired, the district had some financial trouble
and they got rid of Harry Stefan, who was the first State Superintendent.
Harry was a bright, sharp guy. So Shuman calls me, we had worked
together at the State Department before I went over to Del Tech. He
wasn’t the strongest finance guy, and I was very good at finance, so he
said to me, “Look, I have an assistant superintendent position open, I’d
like you to consider coming to the district and doing it. They’re going to
let Jack work one more year to transition because we got into financial
trouble and we wanted to make sure we got somebody with some kind of
finance background. Would you consider coming?” I said, “yes, but what
would my role be?” He said, “well, you’re going to be the operations guy,
you’ve got to run everything. I’m going to do legislature, the Board wants
to consolidate.” So that’s how I got there in ’78. My first day on the job is
the court ordered deseg? . So we now have Howard, Hodgson and
Delcastle and nobody has a clue what the operations manual looks like and
how to do anything. But because of those experiences, I think people
trusted me, people respected me, but I had a lot of friends in high places.
John Ryan was Bill King’s deputy; John Ryan and I were like blood
brothers. And Jim Sparks and Bill Keen, and Jack Nicholson and that
whole group that were the real leadership people at the department. When A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 173
I was there earlier, before I went to Del Tech, I was like their son, because
I am 20-30 years younger than anybody in the department.
Dr. Loftus: And I remember going to see Ken Madden, Paul Weatherly takes me to
dinner at an ADA convention, wants me to join the team at Terry Campus.
I’m feeling’ uncomfortable as hell. It’s the first time in my life anybody
ever tried to recruit me for anything.
And so I’m feeling’ so bad about it, I go see Ken Madden. And Ken had
this thing, routine, where he was always one of the first guys there. So if
you wanted to see him, you just waited in the parking lot until he pulled
up. Then you could go in, and he’d go, “Hey, how you doing’ young
man?”
I’m going’, ______. Wonder if I could come up and see you
sometime this week. And he said, “I’ll call down. We’ll find some time
for it.” So later in the day, you’d get a call. Dr. Madden will see you
now.
So you run upstairs. So I tell him, I said, “I’m embarrassed to tell you
this, but,” I said, “last week when I was at this conference, I got invited by
Mr. Weatherly to go to dinner. I didn’t have a clue what we were talking
about. But he wants me to become his dean of adult and continuing
education at Del Tech.” A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 174
Lamey: Okay.
Dr. Loftus: “Well, what are you going to do,” he says. Well, I thought I’d ask you.
He said, “Dennis, my wife and I talk about you occasionally.” I said,
“Really? Am I that bad?” [Laughter] He says, “Oh, no, no.” He said, “I
changed all the rules for you. You were the only guy that got to come in
the department without a master’s degree. You have to get your master’s.
That’s your requirement to keep your job.”
But he said, “You know what? You think differently. You’re fearless.”
But he said, “Here’s the problem we have with you. You have never
supervised anybody. You’re in a role, where you don’t have any staff.
You influence people. And let me tell you, you wrote the 509 law with
the two chairs of the House and Senate education committee.
“You go to the schools, these guys are doing’ anything you tell them to do
because they’re convinced you know this thing, and you’re showing’ them
how to get more money. You have a great future. But you haven’t
supervised anybody. You need to take that job with Del Tech, because
you’re now going to have a group of people you supervise. And you need
that on your resume to be able to move forward. And if it doesn’t work A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 175
out, you come on back here, because I’ll hire you any day of the week
you’re available.”
I said, I’m really feeling’ good. So then I say to him – it shows you how
green I was – “Could I get you to write a letter of reference?” [Laughter]
I’m like ______. I’m going to call Weatherly personally. Yes, I’ll write a
letter for you. But I’m going to call Paul personally. He’s a good friend
of mine. So that’s how I go there.
So anyway, I had this established thing.
Lamey: Right.
Dr. Loftus: So with all the huffing’ and puffing’, and I stayed and lived in Kent
County for two years, because in Del Tech, we had our own legislative,
for each of our campuses by the county. And I had the Kent County guys
pretty well locked up in my pocket. So when they were pushing’ for the
consolidation, the board said, “Would you consider living’ down there for
another year? Cause we’re going to push this legislation.”
So in ’77, I came out six months early, and we worked in 70,001, were I
became assistant, and I basically spent time helping the lobby to pass the
consolidation of the vocational schools here in New Castle County. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 176
And then I helped negotiate the deal with the court so we could do the
voluntary deseg. So for all Fregaly and Christian – and Christian was the
only one that really played you straight. Everybody else would knife you
in the back. He was just a real straight shooter.
They all kind of knew of me or knew me. And so it would be like well,
they could convince the legislature to do this dirty deed. But we needed to
be careful. And so then, by this time, I now have this Fregaly holds the
plug on Claymont, like I’m telling you.
So my first thing is I got to do the taskforce. Well now, Christ, I got 30 of
the top business leaders helpin’ the district, and a couple of – we must
have had five or six politicians working’ in the district at that time. I just
kind of coordinated what they did. And so by that time, then it was like,
hell, nobody’s comin’ after us. And then cause now you got to go through
Chuck Welsh. And well, this was his baby.
Lamey: Right.
Dr. Loftus: And then we started doing’ what they wanted us to do. Well, now
everybody wanted to be on the wagon.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 177
Lamey: Right.
Dr. Loftus: So that’s going’ nowhere. And so that way, then, that’s when they got to
bring Hoachlander in. He’s got to write a report and say, “Do it.” Cause
they got to get these other guys jacked up.
Lamey: But you guys knew you were going to do this. You brought Hoachlander
to give it some more –
Dr. Loftus: No, Hoachlander did that. And that’s when I went to the board. Because
Hoachlander wrote the report.
Lamey: Okay.
Dr. Loftus: And of course, part of it was looking’ at the cost of what we did, and I
asked him, conversion and all that. And then that’s when – and I went.
He had recommended the go visit like 10 schools. And across the country,
were top-drawer, vocational schools. And so I go to the board, and I tell
the board I want to go on that trip with Kent and Sussex. And they’ll let
me go.
The district has to pay my expenses. Cause we’re not part of that study.
But, my vision is that if they’re going to look at the top vocational schools A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 178
in the country, that’s who we should benchmark ourselves with. And so I
want to be able to go see those schools personally, with this crowd.
Look at that, and then come back with a suggestion on how we become
better. And so that’s how they buy into the deal. So then when I get back,
I give them a report of where we go and what we’re doing. And then I’m
convinced that we are going to be able to benchmark ourselves, the best in
the country, in the next four years.
And here’s what we got to do. We got to join SREB. I want to hire
Hoachlander. Because I want to be able to bring him in and let him
honestly and openly write this report on our growth and what we’re doing.
And so that’s how I contracted with Gary to do that.
Lamey: Now, how did you guys know or at what point did you know that Hodgson
had a change from share time to full time? Cause I never really – I came
in right as the conversion happened. But ...
Dr. Loftus: Well, we knew that way back.
Lamey: You just ...
Dr. Loftus: Well, no. But here’s – A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 179
Lamey: Because Delcastle was already full time. Was Hodgson losing enrollment
numbers?
Dr. Loftus: Oh big time.
Lamey: And so you just ...
Dr. Loftus: Big time. What was happening is that somewhere in the very late ‘80s,
one of Mike Castle’s thing was they –
Lamey: This task force report.
Dr. Loftus: They put in these minimum requirements. And you had to pass this test,
that was almost like a ninth-grade exam. But you had to pass it before you
could graduate. Well, what would happen, particularly at Hodgson, kids
would go over their shared time. And they wouldn’t pass the academic
test, because they just loved the vocational stuff. They goof off during it.
So it was only unless you were an athlete you needed to stay to keep some
kind of eligibility.
This was when it was shared. Well, then what would happen is by the
time the counselors would pick you up your junior year, they would call A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 180
you in and say, “Oh my god. You didn’t pass this. You didn’t pass this
test. You’re not going to be able to graduate.”
And then the schools would play this game where they would have the
AM and PM buses. And they would do this. They would supposedly do
this in a way in which it made it extremely difficult for some of the kids to
be able to get the academic courses they needed to meet this graduation
requirement and still get over for the vocational training.
So we would start out with large numbers in the exploratory, in the tenth
grade course. And by the junior/senior year, we would have less than half
the class size there because of this issue. So, what you really had was we
were turning’ away kids. And then we were seeing’ this shift in going’ to
full time because at that time, because again, the way some of the kids got
treated in schools.
It was like the kid didn’t have a school to call their own. We didn’t count
you at Brandywine because you were only here half time. And on the
vocational. So it was like these kids were lost in limbo. And so we started
seeing’, and it wasn’t anything we were really doing at the time.
But I remember, I was the assistant who developed the conversation. And
Al Jones, who was the president of the board at Newark and Bill Keen was A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 181
on the board, but Bill was the state superintendent. But he was still on the
board at Newark.
Al, there was no damn way that school’s going to get converted. More
importantly, that’s their school. And so James and I do all the numbers.
And then it’s decided I’m going to be the guy who makes the pitch.
And so I remember an old guy. You don’t know Randy Boyles. It was
like the secondary director of education for the state of Delaware. And
Randy and I played on a softball team together. And so we have the
dinner at Hodgson. We bring all the board people from New Castle
County and the state department people.
And Nelson Freedly has got a list of rebuttals he’s going to throw out at
the end. And I knew Nelson from the advisory council days. And so but
Randy’s kind of a surprise. Cause I’m kinda looking’ over the list earlier
in the day on who’s going to be there, and he wasn’t on there.
So next thing I know, Hell, he’s sitting’ at our table during dinner. And I
said, “Ah, I didn’t see your name on the list.” “Oh,” he said. “This is the
hottest ticket in town.” I said, “Really?” He said yeah. He said, “They’ve
been working’ to rebut this for a month.”
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 182
I said, “Really? Is that right?” I said, “We haven’t even been working on
it that long.” “Oh,” he said. “Yeah.” He said, “You know, Al Jones and
George, they’re not going to let this happen.” And those were back in the
days when you could smoke. Everybody smoked.
So if you were in a room for ten minutes with smokers, you couldn’t see
out of the other side of the room. [Laughter] And Randy was a
nonsmoker. He used to complain about the smoke. We said, “Randy,
when I get up there, five minutes into my presentation, you’re going to be
able to see the guys on the other side of the room. These guys are going to
be gas out.” I know you’re good. He said, “But, what happened?”
I’m saying’, “Randy, count on it.” And I get up, and I started throwing’
numbers and showing’ what’s happening. The changes the schools have
used in their schedules to allow these kids to come. That is waste of
dollars, taxpayer dollars. And the waste of dollars through kids not
completing the programs – and these are vocational programs.
So the state is already recognized. Sometimes it takes three times as much
money just to provide the supplies for these programs. So for you to do
that, and then the kids drop out, and they aren’t droppingg’ out because
they don’t want the program or that they aren’t good in the program.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 183
They’re dropping’ out because they haven’t satisfied the academic
requirements. And some people believe you’re playing’ games on how
you schedule those academic requirements at the school to prohibit those
kids from coming here. And so then, we go through that, and we do a
thing.
And then I close by using a – George and I, for years after this, became
really good friends over this. I get a quote from his – he submits a report
to the Newark school board when they build Hodgson. And his point was
that no educator should ever use as an excuse that if kids won’t benefit
from this, we shouldn’t find a way of providing and enhancing those
opportunities.
And so my last slide is this quote, from George. Right? He – I thought he
was going to have a stroke. And he gets up, and he claims that’s not his
words. And he can do it. And he’s a very religious guy. And he’s like
just on the brink of cussing. We just caught him so surprised.
And it was one of the few times in my life where I had enough decorum to
just let that slide. And say, “Now we’re going to pass out copies of this
report to you. Want you to study that. And probably another time, we
need to sit down and work on a path forward. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 184
But we think we’ve made the case, and we’re going to be sharing this
document with the legislature tomorrow.”
So now, these guys are cut off at the knees. And so then George comes up
afterwards, and he is like in my face.
Lamey: And this is George ...?
Dr. Loftus: Kirk.
Lamey: Kirk. Okay.
Dr. Loftus: Just so ... and I’m telling’ him, “George, here’s the book.” You can tell,
he – but now he’s too far. It was just like – and what I learned out of that
is you never want to be so big in your career you can’t admit when you’re
wrong, right?
Lamey: Mm-hmm.
Dr. Loftus: Because we just outfoxed him, right, and used his own words against what
these guys were going to tell us why we shouldn’t do what the hell we
were going to do. And so it took about a year before he would speak to A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 185
me. But then the other thing that I did that most people didn’t know at the
time is I told you John Ryan and I were great friends.
Well, Willy was the politician. Ryan was the thinker. Willy never solved
a problem. Ryan solved all the problems. And so he would go to Ryan,
and say, “Al Jones is on my ass. We can’t let this happen.” And John
would tell him “You don’t stand a chance.”
And so I would go take John for drinks. Cause John always wanted to be
one to solve your problems for you. And I’d say, “John, how would you
do this?” Well, I’d do this, I’d do this, I’d do that. So then when I bring
plan Back, Christ, it’s 90 percent John’s imprint all over the plan, right?
Because he shared a lot of background experience, where I had no
experience to know. And so then when it’s all over with, and it goes
through, cause we have the legislative locked. We have all the union.
Christ. And most of these educators couldn’t go to the legislature to get a
drink of water let alone pass a bill.
So the issue always was - later, we’d laugh. And Willie would go, “I
can’t –
Lamey: Who’s Willie? A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 186
Dr. Loftus: Willie Wilkie.
Lamey: Okay.
Dr. Loftus: “I can’t believe you guys suckered us like that.” [Laughter] I said,
“Suckered you? Really? I wouldn’t. How the hell would we sucker
this?” I would go tell John, “I’m thinking’ of doing’ this. How would you
do that?” “He said that?” “You knew John does all that heavy thinking’
for me.”
I’m going’, “And he’s a very good friend of mine, and he’s a lot of heavy
thinking.” [Laughter] So we had more fun. And then when I became
superintendent, in ’89, I think, one of the first things I did – and then Ray
Christian get on board, by the way. So I said to Ray, I said, “You know,
we have this thing with me and George. I’d like to invite you and George
to have lunch at Hodgson and see how Hodgson looks now that it’s
converted and so forth.”
And yeah. He said, “That’d be great.” He said, “George and I are good
friends.” I’m saying, “Well, I’m going to call him, but I may need you.”
And so sure enough, Kirk would come over after that and did that every
year for about six years. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 187
And we go to the same church. But he would always kid me after that.
He said, “When you pulled that book out,” [Laughter] He said, “You
don’t know how many times at night I would roll over and think about
that. And you would pull the book out and say, ‘Yeah, Dr. Kirk. Here’s
exactly and here’s what the slide looks like. I think that’s word for
word.’” [Laughter]
Lamey: That’s great. That’s a great story. [Laughter] So then, it couldn’t ...
Dr. Loftus: And –
Lamey: And then the legislature ..
Dr. Loftus: The legislature put money. And then the next thing was, see, that’s when
George and Jeff wanted to move forward. And so they had to bring
Hoachlander in to get that done, so they could move forward and start
pushing’ the other schools.
Lamey: And you think they faced the same type of stuff that you faced up here?
Do you think that – I mean, I don’t know if you’re as familiar, but did they
face the same?
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 188
Dr. Loftus: The same noise. But it was all fait accompli. I mean, they knew, Fine
liked George, he didn’t like Jeff as much as he liked George. And then he
would call me a lot, because he was saying, you know, because at that
particular point in time, you got to remember one other thing that
happened. The state ran into a little financial trouble, like they do.
And Castle, and I had made us put all these – now that the business guys
were all like selling’ the math and all this shit [Beep], so I disbanded all
the advisory committees. And put new people on the committees. Only I
picked the people. So the constructor, they could recommend people. But
what would happen is we were finding – shit, we were buying’ equipment
that was obsolete. And big-ticket stuff.
Lamey: Right.
Dr. Loftus: You know. And then it impacted, because you didn’t have money to do
things for athletics or something else. So anyway. I threw everybody off.
People I trusted, I put on. But then I would go to the different heads of the
unions and the businesses. And I would say, “I need people to be on these
committees. Would you recommend some people?”
And they put ’em in. Now you go to these meetings, nobody knows
anybody. And then we would work – Joe and I would work the crowd at A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 189
the meeting, probably at all meetings. And the idea was, look, we’re your
school. Your taxes build this school. We need to prepare our kids so that
when you hire, they become productive contributors to your business,
because they can’t just earn their – they got to do a little better than that,
because you got to make a profit.
That’s what you’re in business for. We understand that. So what we want
you to do is look at our curriculum. And tell us what it should be.
Because I hear conflicting stories. I hear we shouldn’t do this anymore.
We should do this. We shouldn’t do that. And I suspect the issue is that
this is when you’re telling’ me how you do it.
Well, you got to understand as a school district, we got small businesses,
medium-sized businesses, big businesses. What you ought to be able to
do, is you ought to be able to help me find a middle ground. And if every
kid we train has that, he fits in with any one of these opportunities along
this group.
Well, they loved it. So then we had a rule that they can’t – no, we can’t
buy a piece of equipment over $5,000.00 unless the advisory committee
approves it. Well, God, that saved us, hell, a hundred and some thousand
dollars the first year. Cause now you can’t get your buddies to sign off.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 190
Lamey: You can’t – right.
Dr. Loftus: Yeah, right? And then when you take that to the committee, hell, they
would argue with the instructor. And then half the staff, and that’s really
when we started figuring out, hey we need to use that for evaluation of our
instructors. So many guys were coming’ here, retiring instead of – yeah,
they were cutting edge in the industry. They knew all the guys. They
could place their kids in co-op.
Well, we had bankrolled a ton of money. And so Castle was going to
change the point-five deduct. And it was going to cost us $2 million, $3
million, which was big money at the time. And I had like 350 of these
guys now. Pretty faithful, business guys.
So I write a letter, and I tell them that I just came from this meeting with
the governor in the budget office. I was going to cut vocational funding.
And here’s what that means to us. We’ll lose 40 some people. We’re
going to lose $2 million. We’re going to do this.
And it has an impact on you, because I’m going to have to cut some
programs if I have to do that. All the school districts are telling’ him
“That’s what you should do. Cut the 509 stuff.” And so here’s what I
need you to do. If you believe that’s the wrong direction to go, you need A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 191
to call the governor, and you need to tell him that. And you need to tell
him why. You need to tell him how it’s going to impact your business,
how it’s going to impact your future with your course.
“If you agree with the governor, you need to call and tell him that too.
Right? And then you need to call your representatives and your senators.
And you need to make sure they hear the same story from you the
governor did. Right? And here are their numbers.”
And this is back where you had the software now, because it was really
kind of neat. I can – based on your address, we can tell who your
representative and your senator. And a day and a half, this is the thing I’m
most known for. Behind the scenes. I get a call from Castle.
“Call them off. Call them off.” [Laughter] “They’re flooding our – call
them off.” I’m saying’, “What are you talking’ about?” “You know very
well, some letters you wrote. The business community is calling’ in here.
They want my scalp. And that is off the table. We are not cutting it.” I’m
saying, “I’d like to have a meeting with you.”
“You be at my office tomorrow up in Wilmington.” So I go in. He says
that he has Ferguson there. The redhead who’s the budget director at the
university now. They’re telling’ me, “How do you come up with this shit A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 192
here. Damn, we have to pull this.” I’m going’, “I’m not here to solve
your financial problems. Goddamn.” [Laughter] “No, I’m here to take
care of my district and my kids.”
So Castle comes in. I said, “I want to make a deal.” He said, “Have you
called your dogs off yet?” I said, “Not yet.” “I thought we had decided
yesterday you’re going to do that.” I said, “No, I wanted to see you first.”
“So what do you want?” I said, “I’d like to have this understood between
you and me. This is a dead issue. And that cut will not be part of your
final budget at the end of the spring. But I don’t want anybody else to
know about it.”
“Why is that?” I said, “Because I do have some teachers who need to be
let go. And I have to figure out how I do that without hurting good
teachers so that I bring in some folks here and change the blood around in
my program. And I know you stand for quality education. You’re not
anti-vocational education. And so I will personally contact every business
that I asked to send the letter. And do they show you the letter?”
“No, they didn’t.” “I brought you a copy of the letter too.” So I gave Paul
a copy of the letter. But I’m telling’ them, “If they agree with you, call
you.” A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 193
Lamey: Right.
Dr. Loftus: “And I’m just telling’ ’them, ‘And don’t have this confusion. Tell the
representatives and the senators the same thing.’ All got to be on the same
damn page, right? And if they’re telling’ me to take the $2 million cut,
and boys, when you’re doing’ your numbers, you need to make damn sure
people understand your numbers. Because I don’t think you talked to
anybody out there either. And it isn’t just about the beans, is it? It’s what
you do with the beans.”
“So that was the letter that went out. I don’t think I beat you up at all. I
think I presented that fair and square. And I was willing to eat humble pie
and make the cuts if they called and told you that was necessary. That was
the business community telling’ you what we should be doing in
vocational education. Not me.
“Now, so what I would like to do is tell them you’ve agreed with me.
Those cuts aren’t going’ forward, but we’re not going to publicize it until
the end of the fiscal year.” “Let’s do it,” he says. Right? Well, what that
allowed me to do, is then I am now the only guy who knows we’re not
going to have to cut 40-some positions. Right?
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 194
So I bring Hoachlander. You want to ask him about this. So I tell him,
“We’re going’ through this skirmish. We’re going to have the guys plan a
new school, and not worry about this budget stuff. Just plan a new
school.”
So Gary comes in, and we end up – we had like two or three of these
workshops that he runs. And they go off, and they – forget about all
what’s going’ on. If you could build your own school, if we gave you a
chance to build your own vocational school, what programs would you
have on it? What would it look like?”
And about the end of the first day and second, these people really –
became they were the assistant principals, principals. And every once in a
while, you’d have to tell them, get out of the current. If somebody were
going to write you a check, right.
So they do this. And then they give me a report. And we hem and haw a
little bit on it. So forth and so on. And so the next thing you know, we’re
into the May period where you’re not allowed to cut staff. So the
assignment is okay. Now I really love your dream. For Howard, for
Hodgson, for Delcastle.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 195
So what I now want you to do is take your current staff. I want you to
take this dream, and I want you to cut out the current staff positions that
don’t match your dream. Cause you can’t have this conflict here, right? If
this is where we’re trying’ to go, how do we get there?
So they give me 40-some cuts. And we cut ’em all. And they I go visit
the school. And about 80 percent of these people were not what I would
consider non-contributors at the time. Because of seniority and all this
other stuff, they were hurting’ good people along the way. And they were
warehousing kids. They’d throw all their kids out by midyear, and you go
down there, and you have five kids in the shop.
You know, Jesus Christ. We got to beat this system. So then, I go to the
school. And I don’t know if they still do this, but back in those days,
whoever was on the list would get called in like the day before or ______
before or some shit like that.
So instead of the principal doing’ it that year, it was me. Calling them in.
Of course, after the first meeting, the phone calls are going to the other
schools so everybody knows what’s coming. [Laughter]
And so as far as everybody knew, we’re going to lose $2.5 million.
Right? And then there’s a few people who were going to sue my ass and A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 196
burn my home and whatever. But not pleasant for them or me. But
people were planning on the basis of this backdrop. So they go through
this whole deal.
And by the end of probably early June, 80 percent of these people sign up
for retirement benefits, moved on, found jobs and going to do something
else. And so the budget gets passed. And in July, I called the principals
in, and I say, “I want you to build your dream. And I’m giving you –
Lamey: Now, hire.
Dr. Loftus: “These positions back. Here’s the deal. I understand why you have some
of those people there under your leadership. I will never let you do that
again. If they aren’t good enough to be on the team, get rid of them, and
find somebody who is. Because you’re hurting’ kids.”
Lamey: Right.
Dr. Loftus: “And so I’m willing to agree that there was a rule at one time you couldn’t
figure out how to get around, that kids were getting’ hurt. I will not allow
you to do that again. Do we understand where we are?” They’re all, this
is Steve, this is Hank. This is Moyle. Now, build your dream.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 197
And so now, that took off. And that was really elevated, where you go,
because you didn’t have all this drag.
Lamey: Right, right.
Dr. Loftus: On what was going’ on.
Lamey: That’s amazing.
Dr. Loftus: And Deardorf would come in and go, “When did you make that deal with
Castle?” [Laughter] I’m saying’, “Actually, two days after the letter
went out.” And you never told us? I said, “I couldn’t.” We’re friends,
what you – “You don’t understand.” I said, “Leadership is tough.
Leadership is – and so here’s the rule of the street. When you can tell
people that you know more about what I’m thinking than someone else,
that’s your power in your group, right?
“And so even though I would say to you, ‘Don’t tell anybody this. But
here’s what we’re going to do.’ How long do you think that would last?”
Lamey: Not long.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 198
Dr. Loftus: That wouldn’t last 24 hours. Right? The pressure of this whole thing of
you being’ able to know, I know him better than you do. I know more
than – I couldn’t allow that to happen. There was too much at risk here.
This thing could – but it was the time for me, the one shot, even the board
didn’t know this. I had to tell the board that in executive session in June,
when you guys were all outside wondering’ what’s going’ on.
It was the one time I could give everybody the gift of renewal. But I
couldn’t let you know what was going’ on until it was over. Because you
had to get through the fiscal cycle for all the rules to work and everything.
And it was probably the – it was just a difficult time in my life.
I was convinced it was the right thing to do. But, I mean, these were
people you work with every day. And so forth and so on. But it would be
like if that would blow it all up, and so you’re so close to pulling’ it off.
And fortunately, I think most people were able to forgive me for that.
But that was really –
Lamey: A tough decision. But the district needed it.
Dr. Loftus: It’s why you get a nickel more a day.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 199
Lamey: Right, right. [Laughter] Again, a lot of these things –
Dr. Loftus: I’m sorry to keep you.
Lamey: No, no, no. I really enjoy it.
Dr. Loftus: I don’t get to tell these stories.
Lamey: The good part is for me, I was going’ through this with you guys. I was in
a different role. And I love hearing’ it, because I believe in this district. I
mean, it’s been great for me, and what it’s done for kids is it’s amazing.
So to hear it developed and how it went through, and how it got to the
place where 600 kids applied to come to St. George’s, you know, that’s
amazing.
And it didn’t happen because of me. It happened because of what all you
guys built.
Dr. Loftus: Well, no, but all of us.
Lamey: Yeah.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 200
Dr. Loftus: You know, we have the strongest alumni group in the state. It’s just
amazing. Most of our guys who are any good at what they do, they
basically go out and work in the field for about three years. And then they
start their own business. And they accumulate some people and they
grow.
Well, that’s 70 percent of the chamber membership in the state today are
small business. That was only like 15 companies that hire more than 200
people. And so this is the lifeblood. They don’t have training programs.
They depend on the vocational school district for this.
And so it’s just a power – when you look at that.
Lamey: It is. It’s a great network.
Dr. Loftus: It’s a powerful lobby and network. You don’t want to lose touch with
’em. But part of the responsibility of that is just like if parents got a kid
who’s really pretty good at wrestling and knows every move, they can
either send him to St. Mark’s or Hodgson or over to William Penn.
And so you know what? I’m going to trust you. But you got to help me
develop this kid. I can’t have my kid go there and then find out, shit, you
got him – he’s third, and you’re not pushing’ and helping’ him develop. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 201
And so it’s that same kind of element that we have as a responsibility to
that business community.
And most of us don’t see that connection. You see what I’m saying’?
Lamey: I agree.
Dr. Loftus: And that’s your lifeblood. Those people have always stood tall for this
district and what it needed. And I was a business major. I wasn’t an
education major. I was a business major. And the only reason, hell, I
would have had my own career would have been in business except for
Vietnam. And it was hell, I either teach or I’m going’ to Vietnam. It was
like, shit, that’s a no-brainer [Laughter] for me.
But because I had my MBA was business, and accounting, I always
looked at the business side of it and how I could include that part of the
marketing scheme and so forth. But they saved us time and time again on
budget cuts.
Lamey: It’s amazing.
Dr. Loftus: And curriculum and so forth. And so on. And I’m saying, they’re just
wonderful people. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 202
Lamey: Sometimes you just want to be invited to the table.
Dr. Loftus: Exactly.
Lamey: To recognize that you are a valuable commodity for us.
Dr. Loftus: Exactly. I agree.
Lamey: One of the things you’ve mentioned throughout some of the discussions
was kind of how the comprehensive side reacted and talked about the
meeting at Hodgson. And they identified in this taskforce the we/they
syndrome. And as you converted Hodgson and even with Delcastle and
Howard, early on, did you sense a different – were schools trying’ to give
us kids who maybe weren’t the academic type? Did we have any of that
kind of thing?
Dr. Loftus: They didn’t control that anymore, because what we ended up doing with
the open houses is – and then if you go back, we ran like technology
camps in the summer and some of that stuff. Well, these kids would
come, because by this time, when you’re looking’ at the demographics,
hell, all the households, both people are working’.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 203
So I need a place to send my kid, right? So we would have like a loss
leader. You can come to vo-tech for the two-week camp for five bucks or
some shit.
Lamey: Right.
Dr. Loftus: Oh, man, this is a no-brainer here. And so we would survey these kids
when they would come. And we’d be lucky if two percent of the kids
were coming’ to the vo-tech. By the end of the two weeks, 60 percent of
them thought they were coming’ to vo-tech.
Lamey: How about the flip side, where there is the criticism that we were only
taking good kids?
Dr. Loftus: That criticism, I don’t think, stuck in New Castle County like it did in the
other two counties, because they were really the case. I got called in one
time to the Senate house hearing on that, that a representative down in
Dover put this thing together. Because she was an English teacher, and
when the kids would come back from Poly Tech, they would throw them
all in her class. And it would piss her off.
And so she was out. And Sharp hated her with a passion. So I knew
whatever the hell she did, nothing’ was going to go through the senate. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 204
Cause Sharp was going to hold it all up. But I go in one time, with all
these wild stories. And this was where like James and Stearett were really
ahead of their time with data and charts and graphs.
So they put together this thing, where we could go and make this
presentation, where we take each district in New Castle County and we
tell you what percent of kids we took in the spring into our class, and how
many are still there. We had the lowest dropout rate in the state.
So not too many are moving’. And then we would show you that we were
actually expanding and taking a few more kids. When they would call us
in October and November and say, “This is a decent kid, but it just ain’t
working’ here at William Penn or Brandywine.”
And we would take the kid. And we would then have a stack. And we
went through ’em, and we’d have these stacks of like e-mails or notes
where this request would come. So I’m saying’, “Look. If I’m a one
school, and I only take 200 kids, like Sussex Tech does, and the fact that
I’m going to take some star athletes out of that, I probably – that happens.”
When you have three schools to fill, 1,000 to 1,200 kids, you don’t want –
it don’t happen that way.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 205
Lamey: Yeah, you’re right.
Dr. Loftus: It don’t happen that way. And I tell my coaches not to recruit just like
everybody else does. That doesn’t mean parents still don’t want their kids
associated with successful coaches and that. And I’m not here to tell you,
I don’t think some of that happens. But I don’t think we purposely do
that.
And now, so, but I think when you look at the numbers, anybody who is
telling’ you that we have fixed the game, is wrong. And they didn’t even
hold the down safety after that. And George and Jeff always preach
because we used to always take the lead on that, because they were –
Lamey: They’re taking a hit now.
Dr. Loftus: Yeah.
Lamey: That’s still a –
Dr. Loftus: That’s a hot item.
Lamey: That’s a hot ticket. Right. You mentioned several things. And maybe I
don’t know if this would even come up. But was there any obstacle that A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 206
you considered the most difficult that you overcame as you do in your
group? And maybe it’s something that you already mentioned as you
converted, as you moved our district forward, and as you converted and
even when I saw with Sussex and Kent.
Was there a major obstacle, or was it just a combination of getting all
those groups on the same page?
Dr. Loftus: No, the big obstacle that was always a touchy item. I don’t know that we
solved it as well as we should have. The neat thing about the vocational
school, when I joined the district in ’78, is the vocational teachers were
really the power. They saw themselves as this school was their domain.
People don’t come here for English. They don’t come here for math or
science. And if they had kids in their shops who were athletes, and the
team was good, they liked that. And you would see a good portion of
them at ball games and things like that.
You’d get caught up in that. But the academic side was part of the
problem. Because as you’re building that, you didn’t have a lot of
standards at that point in time to figure out how good is this English
teacher, how good is this math teacher. See what I’m saying’?
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 207
Lamey: Mm-hmm.
Dr. Loftus: That you’re building the whole game is going to be predicated on our
math people are going to be as good as your math people. Well, we really
didn’t know that. And that was one of the reasons why we would send
these teams over to Great Oaks. And you’d have to come up with these
two or three goals.
Cause what we were trying’ to do there is under the leadership of the
principals. Because I would tell my principals, “Look. This is your farm.
And there are certain crops you have to grow. It’s like the required
courses. But I want that farm to be yours. Not mine. I want you to be so
damned excited about what’s going’ on at that school and with your group
of people, that you can hardly wait to come to work the next day.
“And I want your people to be excited. Now how you do that is up to you.
All of you are different. I will not accept one of you being worse than the
other. But you got to have fun. When you’re impacting’ the lives of
people, you got to enjoy what the hell you’re doing’. You can’t be
dragging’ around. It’s got to be some spirit to it.
“So I’m not going to tell you how to do it. But you have good people.
You don’t have to have all the answers. I’m not that bright. I work A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 208
through people. Have fun and do that.” And so the idea was to build
these teams, so that the vocational and the academic.
And I remember, like I told Bottoms one time, integration was a big thing.
And he’s saying’, “You should do more of that.” I said, “I think I will.”
So I called Joe and Vicky in. We’re talking’. And I’m saying, “Let’s do
this. What do you think of this idea? Let’s offer $200, $300 for supplies
for vocational and academic person writes a unit together. And at the end
of the year, we all have the faculty vote on which ones the best. And they
would get a trip to go to a national conference or something.”
The first year we do this, we announce this. We’re lucky we get like six
applications, right? So I’m telling them, “Fund every one of them.”
Right? And so I think we give three trips away out of the first year. Well,
now, everybody, “Oh, Christ.” Next year, we get like 50 of these things
going’, right? [Laughter]
And so part of it is even good people, you still got to get their attention.
And some really neat stuff came out. And then after that, Christ, we were
probably sending’ another 25 people to SREB to talk about their
integrating project, and in a national forum.
Lamey: It just catches momentum. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 209
Dr. Loftus: Oh, see in our business, see, part of it, to be successful, I think, it’s like
entertainment. You got to be just a little different. And then by the time I
figure out what that difference is, if you’re good, it don’t matter. Right?
Because now we’re all happy. This difference.
And to me, I remember probably one of the proudest moments is I’m
sitting’ in the office one day. I get this call from the New York Post. The
New York Times. And they want to come and do a story on our district for
the New York paper. I’m going’, “Good. I don’t even read the paper.” I
don’t tell them that.
I’m saying’, “How did you hear about our district?” He said, “Well,” he
said, “we’ve been working’ on the new vocational ed. And we talked to
the American Vocational Association. And we told ’em, ‘Give us the
name of three places we ought to look at.’ And your district was one of
the three.
“So then we talked to the Tech Prep people. And in Texas. And we said,
‘Who should we be talking’ with?’ And your district was one of the three
places. And then we talked to the US Office of Education Vocational
Division in Berkley, California, where Hoachlander worked.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 210
“And you were the only school district on their list of three. And so it’s a
no-brainer. You’re a train ride away, and you’re the only district on all
three lists.”
Lamey: Wow.
Dr. Loftus: So they come in, and it’s the last couple of days of the school year we’re
doing’ the picnic. The district picnic, like we used to do. And you got
some tests. We’re telling’ them, “We don’t know what you’re going to
see. But we’ll line up some people.”
So we call Charlie from the teacher’s union and say, “We got these guys
coming’ in. We’d like them to talk to you. We want to get some
vocational and academic people and some kids.” And so the only time I
see these people is at the picnic. And two weeks later, we have this story
that’s the headline story in the activities, education, perspective thing, or
whatever.
And again, it’s like all the business guys read the Sunday New York Times.
And they flop it open, and Christ. Blue collar goes black tie or something
was the headline. And one of our foreign language gals, at Howard, calls
me from New York.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 211
She’s visiting her parents in New York. And they are flabbergasted
[Laughter] that her school district is being featured in the Sunday New
York Times. Right? At Howard. She calls me up there, has to find my
number or however the hell. She’s just like ecstatic to be part of this
success, right?
Well, you felt that.
Lamey: Oh, yeah.
Dr. Loftus: And so in your leadership role, you’re just trying’ to create that energy
level so that people didn’t take over. And they do this stuff not because
we told them to do it. By this time, they’re the creative force, pushing the
envelope themselves. You’re just trying’ to feed in that energy and
finding ways to complement and recognize it.
Lamey: Well, this next question is kind of the last one, but I think I know your
answer. But it’s been roughly 24 years since these recommendations from
different groups from this task force from Bottoms, from Hoachlander,
with the conversion. Do you feel it’s been a success? Where the vo-tech,
about 25 years was, until where it is now.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 212
Do you feel like pushing for the things that you made and was with the
schools in Delaware, would you consider this success?
Dr. Loftus: I considered it a success in probably the mid-nineties to 2000. In my view
today, I think the vocational school should go on a completely different
direction. And so I don’t see that happening for a while. But if it were
me, I think there’s an overload of information and perception today that
suggests that everybody just about needs a college degree.
Okay? Even though we don’t know what 40 percent of those jobs are
going to be. And whatever. And even though we know that currently,
today, 20 percent of our folks with college degrees are either
underemployed or not employed.
On the other hand, we have a statewide system in Del Tech and
Community College, which constantly gets beat up. They have a program
in which anybody can go to their school. Take any course. And get to tell
their friends they’re going to Del Tech and Community College, even
though they may be taking a remedial course.
And it’s not until they reach a certain proficiency level do they what they
call matriculate into a program. I think today we ought to blend the
vocational schools and the community college system. So that maybe you A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 213
could transfer over between the two units without losing athletic
eligibility.
But both of our systems could become much more efficient out of the
blending of that stuff. And the utilization of some of those expensive labs.
And we have a lot of articulation agreements between our institutions
anyway.
But there’s places in Iowa that are very similar to that, that I recall visiting
during this trip back in the early nineties. And then as an Iowa farm boy,
but because Iowa is – I mean, hell, must be 100 and some counties. All
this crap. They had to blend these schools and these community colleges
this way because you can’t have 100 community colleges in the state like
Iowa. You have to have 10 of them and so forth.
But some of these partnerships that they had created were just amazing.
And so that now when you’re looking at this thing today, where all these
kids got to meet these competencies. To me, the challenge we have, it’s
much like the bell-shaped curve in analogy. The thing we have today for
so many of our kids is that we think if you go to school for 12 years, you
should graduate. But yet we know almost 35 percent of our people don’t
graduate in those 12 years.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 214
If you don’t, you’re a failure. What’s wrong with that? When you go to
college today, the idea is if you graduate within 10 years, they count you
as a success. And even in athletics, you get six years to graduate from a
college program.
Well, now the difference between the two programs isn’t how long you’re
in the program. It’s that you’ve met the standards that said you’re now
ready to do this. Now we all know we learn at different rates. So why
should I expect – and you have this in your own kids, you’re telling’ me.
One just comes easier. They’re disciplined. Whatever.
Lamey: Right. [Laughter]
Dr. Loftus: Genetic thing connection is. It’s just easier for me. I’m focused. I enjoy
it. Others hate it. They got to find a way of motivating to do this. Now,
in our society, if you’re one of those, where you haven’t found out how to
do that yet, you penalize yourself. And we penalize you as a society,
because we perceive you as a failure.
This country ain’t going to make it to where you need to go because later
on, some of these people are extremely successful and so forth. They just
didn’t make our timetable. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 215
Lamey: Right.
Dr. Loftus: The timetable is the wrong thing. And so that when you’re looking at
what you should be doing in career training, and the academic preparation,
the most efficient, economical and because of the county-wide systems
already, these should be blended together vocationally, academically, and
even athletically.
And we’re not ready for that level of thinking. But that’s the next place
we have to go. And we have a far better way of finding that solution that a
comprehensive school student. Because their perception would be their
partnership would be universities.
That’s a big stretch because America’s still willing to buy and pay through
the teeth, for a college experience, which is way overpriced and
overvalued in relationship to what it really does and the guarantees that
come with it.
On the other hand, vocational education that we provide through Del Tech
as well as the vocational school system, is the most prized, most equal
valued piece today. But you got to bring those parties together. You got
to think out of the box to be able to do that. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 216
Lamey: It makes a lot of sense.
Dr. Loftus: And to me, I think that’s what the future of vocational education should
be.
Lamey: You know, I see little bits of pieces of that starting in conversations. And
I was on the timesaving workshop. And one of the things that the
presenters was talking’ about was the fact that schools need to utilize these
community colleges two years, and start using them and working together
to articulate programs, academically, vocationally.
And now you’re starting’ to see more and more of that happening. As a
timesaver, to help kids be successful. So I think you know ...
Dr. Loftus: In fact, this site here, I got this call from the – it’s not the DuPont
foundation. But it’s some community –
Lamey: Whitehall Foundation?
Dr. Loftus: Cause they were the ones that also owned all the property around
Christiania Hospital. And then built the hospital and then did all this stuff. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 217
And so they came – I got invited to this thing. And they wanted to –
what’s this Disney community?
Lamey: Oh.
Dr. Loftus: Just north of town, where –
Lamey: Down in Disney, where you live?
Dr. Loftus: You live in a community –
Lamey: Celebration.
Dr. Loftus: Celebration. Right. And so this was the – this is kind of the long-range
plan. Because the ideas were creating too much of this greenhouse effect
with automobile gas and all this kind of stuff here. And our road systems
across America today are all built.
So they wanted to design these different kinds of things. And then here
we’re going to build a school. And so we say, well, we are. We’re
turning’ away, 800, 900 kids that would more than fill. [Beep;
announcement.]
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 218
They said, “We’d like to give you these acres. If you would locate that.
And then in return, you have to be willing to talk to other parties about
how we could make this green ______.” And they had pictures, artist’s
sketches.
I thought it was kind of interesting. So I called Ron Joyce, and I said, “I’d
like to meet with us on this. Because this is down in Middletown. This is
going to be the next growth area in the county. Wouldn’t it be great if we
could build a community college and a vocational campus side by side?
And as we grow it, figure out how we share staff and we do whatever.”
He’s saying, “Can I come to the meeting but not make it public?” I say,
“Yeah. Who knows whether any of this will fly.” And he said, “No.” But
he said, “You know what?” He said, “It’s got to be like you, right? If you
give Hodgson something’, Howard wants to know what you’re going to do
for them, or Delcastle.” So he said, “That’s how I got Wilmington, I got
Stanton. I got the Pot and Terry, and then I got the Sussex.”
So he said, “The last thing these guys need to think I’m building’ another
campus somewhere, right? That’s going to take resources away from
them.” I said, “Lonny, I understand that. But you know, you get a chance
to be 15 years in the future here.”
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 219
Lamey: Right.
Dr. Loftus: “And these opportunities come when they happen. They don’t come when
you – most of the stuff in my life never was if I was ready for it.”
[Beeping] I said, “You got to get ready for it. Tomorrow is the day you
got to go in and participate and do something.”
And so for about three years, he hung in there. And it was part of the deal.
And then we had another vendor out further up the road, by the Baker
farms. They were going to give us that land. And only they wanted
political help around this land use deal with Gordon’s administration at the
time, where these guys, they just wanted you to locate here.
Lamey: Right.
Dr. Loftus: And so they ended up buying’ this concept here, in this land here. And
then I left, cause by that time it was like, I’m going to be too damn old by
the time they actually get this far. And I wanted Joe and Steve and some
people to have a chance to run the train. [Beep; announcement]
But, to me, that’s the future of vocational education. If I were 20 years
younger, I’d be up to my elbows in that stuff. Because that would sell.
There’d be all kinds of money to build that kind of system today. It’s A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 220
different enough. But in the state of Delaware, you already got the county
structure.
And in fact, Del Tech wants to go to a taxation structure by county.
Christ, so what’s in it for them? Oh, here’s what’s in it for you. So what’s
in it for the voeckeys? And what would you do, and how would you
structure that? Because of the wrinkles are always going to be the bussing
piece to a certain stage, and the athletics.
And so that’s what’s in it for us, it would seem to me. We got to control
that. And then collectively, you got to go south. Well, the university ain’t
going to give a damn about that. They think they’re above all of that,
right?
Lamey: Right.
Dr. Loftus: And my point is it’s kind of like when I was at Del Tech that was a great
experience in my life. Because for about two days, you think because I’m
at the community college, I’m like University of Delaware. There’s a big
shit, right? When you find out, wait a minute, you’re teaching the same-
ass schedule. You got the evening thing. You got all this stuff here.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 221
And so the faculty would always love to come in and bitch and complain.
I’m saying, “Look. You know what? I come from humble beginnings. I
make shoes. That’s all I do. I just want to make the best damn shoes I
can.” Right? I don’t care if somebody else is makin’ houses and cars and
jewelry. I make shoes. That’s what I do.
And if I make the best shoes, I don’t care who you are or how much
money you have. You’re going to come to my store and buy my shoes.
That’s how we should look at what we do with our work. If we’re really
good, and give great value, it don’t matter where we are. People will find
us and come.
But you have this thing in the university, it would seem there would be no
one, no one, would block this concept if you got the right people, to
fashion how you put it together. But I’m certainly not going to see that in
my lifetime. But I think that’s where the new vocational ed is.
Lamey: Well, Dr. Loftus, thank you. I mean, it’s been very –
Dr. Loftus: Good luck.
Lamey: Informative for me. And I –
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 222
Dr. Loftus: You made an old man happy. Come and tell some war stories.
Lamey: Enjoyable.
[End of Audio]
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 223
Appendix E
Interview with Mr. Chuck Moses
Moses: . . . for his programs that he had. So what’s your company?
Lamey: Well, my topic is I was looking at the history of vocational education in
Delaware, and then I’m specifically focusing in on the late eighties, early
nineties, when schools such as Hodgson, schools here in Kent-Sussex
County made the conversion from shared time to full time and how that
kind of impacted education in Delaware or vocational education where
early on there was Delcastle and Howard, but other than that it was really
shared-time programs.
What I was looking at is, I worked at Hodgson for a number of years, and
I’m at St. Georges now as Assistant Principal, and so I’ve been in
vocational education, and I just got into it when the conversion happened.
I started working in vocational education in the late eighties and at
Hodgson when it made its transformation from shared time to full time.
So I interviewed a number of people who have been involved with
vocational education, and a number of people, including myself, wanted to
talk to someone who oversaw just the traditional comprehensive district
and what your view was during that time period of what happened with
the conversion and how you saw the impact from, kind of the other side of A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 224
the fence, the side of the comprehensive tradition side, as the vocational
schools went from shared time to full time.
So both, you know, as I said, Dr. Atkinson, Dr. Crossen, they mentioned
your name as a person that would be someone I would want to talk to, to
kind of get – because you saw it from your perspective of what happened
during those times.
Moses: Well, I can tell you, you know, before you even turn that on, my
perspective is different than my perspective would be today.
Lamey: Okay, which would be – yeah, I’d like to hear both, kind of.
Lamey: Yeah. Well, go ahead.
Lamey: Okay. Well, again, today’s date is September 26, actually, interview with
Dr. Chuck Moses.
Moses: No Doctor.
Lamey: Oh, okay.
Lamey: Mister. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 225
Lamey: Mr. Chuck Moses, and I have ten questions, but feel free. I’d love you to
expand on your stories. My first question is what was the environment
surrounding vocational education in that time period of the late 1980s and
early 1990s?
Moses: What was the –
Lamey: Like what was the environment? What was – how was the feel with
vocational education, because I guess you had the shared-time programs
down here? What was happening?
Moses: Well, the shared-time, I was – when it was proposed to go from shared-
time to full time, I happened to agree with the proposal to go to a full-time
program, largely because there was a lot of time being wasted. The kids
that were going into the vocational program were kids that needed that
type of an education. I was on some committee, and we had some
meetings, as I recall, and when they talked about the regular subjects that
students would have, they talked about having mathematics geared to the
vocational programs and the like.
So I thought, well, the children that are going to the program, the
programs at that time, these were programs where they needed to be there A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 226
full time and not waste about an hour and a half every day on the bus
going back or forth and having lunch. It was a nightmare dealing with
five or six different school districts.
So I was – I had a very favorable response to it. I can’t say that happened
with every school district. It wasn’t, but I was favorable.
Lamey: Great. Great. You kind of – some of these will cross over, because you’re
gonna touch on some of the same topics, but in your opinion was the
shared-time approach, at that time was it successful or not successful? I
guess you kind of said because of transportation, loss of time. Did you
think it was successful or not successful, and what was the strengths and
weaknesses of the shared-time programs?
Moses: Well, the strengths of the shared-time program, I’m trying to put my
memory back that far, 20 years ago. I can’t recall specifically what the
strengths were except that the children – we had a little different
perspective here in Milford, because we had a diversified occupation
program where we had a hotel/motel management program, which was a
management program.
We had a service station on campus that actually dispensed gasoline and
so on. We had a small motor repair for lawn mowers and that sort of A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 227
thing. The service station dealt with cars, changing gas and things, things
that the service stations do.
We had a little hotel/motel. We had a food service, which ended up being
the faculty dining room, but it was run by the students and so forth, and
they learned how to cook and how to wait on tables and so on.
So we had that type of program for even students that were – that didn’t
go to the vocational school, and then at a higher level you had the
vocational school, and I just saw this as a continuum for children to be
able to go into it. We didn’t have enough kids to go into the occupational
part of the program in any one specific area. I don’t know if I answered
your question or not.
Lamey: Yeah, yeah, that’s fine, because how that impacted your school with
shared time and with your vocational programs. Were you aware of the
Governor’s Task Force? I don’t know if you ever saw this report, and it
was Vocational Education in Delaware. It was the –
Governor Castle at the time recommended it. I didn’t know if you were
aware of this report, and, if so, did it have any impact from your
knowledge of directing vocational education?
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 228
Moses: I may have. I may have had – I may have read that, may have seen it, but
I’m visually impaired now, so I couldn’t read that.
Lamey: Okay. This report was one of the reports Governor Castle and then Gary
Hoachlander both also wrote a report suggesting that Delaware move from
shared-time to full-time vocational education. I didn't know if as the
Superintendent of the comprehensive district with Milford if that had any
impact or if you knew that.
Moses: I know that there was an awful lot of people in Milford or in the state who
were really pushing full-time. I didn't remember who the Governor was at
the time we went into the full-time program. Was it Castle?
Lamey: Yeah, it was Castle.
Moses: So that didn’t have any impact on my thinking. I thought it would be
better for – it wasn’t going to affect us that much. We looked at what
financially it was going to do for us, and the impact was not that great.
We were still growing as a district, also, so we had some room.
Lamey: Right. Right. I hear you. How about – you mentioned some of the other
traditional high school districts in Sussex, Kent County. I don’t know. I A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 229
mean, obviously, you can’t speak for them, but what were some of the
other feelings about that? Was there some in favor, some against?
Moses: There were some on both ends of the continuum. I can’t tell you
specifically, and I don’t know. I don’t really recall what districts were for
or against or how many, but I know that when it went through there was a
majority of districts that were favorable at that time with that concept,
with the concept that was presented.
Lamey: Right. We’ll get to that, and that kind of talks about one of the things
that’s mentioned in here that with the whole conversion there’s a “we-
they” syndrome. What do we get? What do they get? Money, how is the
funding gonna work?
Do we get – are we sending – what kind of students are going there?
What kind of students are they taking? That’s still a topic today in
vocational education. Are vocational schools taking certain students? Are
they not taking certain students? What’s happening with money? Can
you elaborate on that? Did you see that? Did that become a concern?
Moses: No, because it wasn’t presented to us, and we weren’t smart enough to
ask the question. Whether or not we thought it was a continuation of
going from shared time to full time, the programs were not going to be A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 230
that different. Wrong. As it occurs today, it became – well, from what I
read, and I’m not experiencing it, and I don’t – I’m not –
I don’t participate much in the school district. When I left here, the
Superintendent that came after me I knew and I respected and so on, but as
I used to go out and visit in the schools, people started to ask me questions
what changes he was making. Then, all of a sudden, I thought to say,
“You’d better stay out of this. This is not your watch right now, and
you’re gonna be undermining and contradicting and undermining his
programs and what he wants to do.”
So I really divorced myself from going in. He has since retired, and a
different Superintendent is in there now, and so I know that I read in the
newspapers and so on, and then my wife and I also go away in the
wintertime. We head –
Lamey: You’ve had enough.
Moses: Five months of the year we’re south, so I don’t –
Lamey: Well, in your opinion, what kind of impact do you think it has had on
comprehensive traditional high schools?
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 231
Moses: Well, I think what has happened, from what I understand, what I do know
that has happened is that the programs have changed dramatically to more
of a technical high school. The students that are going there are the cream
of the crop. They’re taking students at the top. We never dreamt that that
would happen.
The athletic programs have changed in that they get some of the best
athletes around. Year after year, they’re getting athletes. Accusations of
recruiting and so on is there. Whether that’s true or not, I can’t tell you.
I don’t know, but I do know from first-hand experience that they advertise
that they have a lottery system, but it’s kind of – some of the kids that are
there that I know, including my granddaughter, who are people at the top
of the food chain, and they were concerned about –
When my granddaughter went, she said, “No, there’s lottery.” My son
said to me, “There’s a lottery now,” and they looked into comparing where
they – they’re not in this school district. They’re in Sussex Central. They
compared the test scores. They compared everything, and they put her in
Sussex Tech, and she’s very happy with her programs and stuff like that.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 232
Test scores are extremely high. I never thought that would happen, but we
never thought of asking the question, “Are you gonna change the program
in that direction?” There are no vocational programs.
Lamey: Did the leaders of the vocational districts consult with you guys once they
started or once they became full-time, or was that there wasn’t a lot of
back-and-forth together?
Moses: Well, first it happened at Sussex – George is – you know, know George is
quite a seller, and they’re friends. George and I have been good friends,
and so is Jeff Adams and I.
I knew Dianne Sole. In fact, I tried to hire her when she was a
psychologist, so before she went there, she was coming into the state
looking for a job, and I really had to hire her as a guidance counselor.
Didn’t have a psych job, and she’s done a good job down there.
She’s changed the program from when Jeff had it. They were slow. They
were a lot slower in converting to the – I’m reminded of what Brooklyn
Technical, taking the best students.
Lamey: Yeah, you’re right. I’ve heard of the –
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 233
Moses: Yeah. I knew that Dennis was probably one of the last ones to jump into
this. He had some programs, but whether it was union influence or not, he
had – he still had – does he still have trades?
Lamey: They still do.
Moses: They don’t have trades.
Lamey: Yeah, we still run masonry, carpentry, electrical trades.
Moses: [Inaudible Comment] In fact, I can’t tell you who told me, because I
won’t remember. Someone – I think he was a School Board member, and
ex-School Board member and state Board member. I see him about once a
week downtown here, even though he lives in Dover and he’s on the State
Board from up here – had told me that he thought ______convert part
of Dover High School to a vocational school whenever they built the new
high school.
Lamey: Yeah, you’re seeing more programs, even in New Castle County, stem
programs that are going into the traditional schools and giving it more of a
vocational flair than it’s ever had in the past. You spoke of some of your
vocational programs you had at Milford High School. When the vo-techs
became full-time, did that hurt those programs? A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 234
Moses: We began to phase them out, but also money is – probably politically
money started to dry up in those programs. We had a – we had a federally
program. It lasted maybe six, seven years, eight years or so, and then a lot
of the kids that were going in there were special ed, and that was all right.
Lamey: That’s one of the things that’s mentioned.
Moses: That’s all right.
Lamey: Right. One of my last –
Moses: [Inaudible Comment]
Lamey: Oh, thank you. One of my last questions is it’s been roughly 24 years
since this has been recommended and since the conversions happened. In
your opinion, do you think it’s been a success maybe on different levels
and maybe not on others? Do you think it has been, and, if so, where and
why, and if it hasn’t been, what do you think?
Moses: Well, it’s been a success. You have to say that it’s been a success. If you
look at the programs that they have, the kids that they’re getting, and the
end results, you can’t find – you can’t – you can’t dispute the test scores, A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 235
the scores kids are getting, the fact that Sussex has been a blue ribbon or
whatever you call them school.
I know that’s – you have to really get a lot of work in, get a good public
relations program and rate the programs and so on. I know that you have
to have that, but to my estimation it’s been a tremendous success for them,
and I think the loss comes to the youngster who really wants to go into the
trades, because the electrician that always works for me here can’t find
people.
Lamey: So what happens to that kid, that student now?
Moses: I’m out of it, so I wish I knew. I don’t know. I don’t know what happens.
I know that it’s harder for them – I know that it’s harder for the contractor,
for the electrical contractor. My refrigeration guy, he has to find people
who are willing to do this, and then he has to train them himself. There’s
no apprenticeship program for them, and you’re tied up with – we used to
be.
I know when Dennis Loftus was Superintendent I used to – we used to kid
that he was my northern campus, Milford’s northern campus, and Joe
Deardorff dear friend of mine. I used to kid him. “You’re taking over my
northern campus, Joe.” A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 236
Lamey: Right, they were –
Moses: I don’t know what influence Tom Sharp had on that, but the committees
they used to have, the advisory boards and so on, not apparent down here.
Now, we may not have – we probably have more non-union, too, but you
still need those people.
Lamey: Right.
Moses: They need to be trained somewhere, and kids, that’s really cheating a
whole level of student.
Lamey: Where do you – I know you’ve mentioned that you’re really not involved
anymore, but just from your experience of education and your years of
service, do you – where do you project this will go? Do you think there’s
gonna –
Because if you read the articles in today’s papers and things, you see that
there is some conflict, especially on the missions and how the voc-tech are
offering programs that they are not as, as you mentioned, not the trades
but more the technical side. Do you have any guess of where this may end
up or what’s gonna happen? A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 237
Moses: Well, you know, as I read in the newspaper, the districts in Sussex County
I think are – I don’t know if they’re entering suit or it’s just political. I
know they banned together to try to fight the programs. Do I think it’s
gonna change? Change comes awfully slow politically in Delaware, and I
don’t know. I don’t know the Superintendent at Sussex now. I don’t
know the new one that took Dianne Soul’s place.
Lamey: She was from our district.
Moses: That’s right.
Lamey: She just – Dr. Zych, Debbie Zych, she just started this year.
Moses: Okay. I don’t know her.
Lamey: She was an assistant to – you probably know Steve Godowsky, Dr.
Godowsky.
Moses: Yeah, I knew Steve.
Lamey: So she was his assistant, and she just came down this year.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 238
Moses: They have a lot of – I know Thurman Adams was a powerhouse down
here, used to be, as pro tem. Some of his family members were employed
by them, by the vocational school. Joe Booth, who is a dear friend of
mine, is employed by them. To get past now the parents of the kids that
are in that program, I know my son and daughter-in-law will fight tooth
and nail to keep that school. You can’t have a tough time beating success.
Lamey: That’s a good point. That’s a good point. Well, one thing I neglected to
ask was could you tell me a little bit about your background, just so I have
it? I know – you know, I’ve heard a little bit through – and you don’t have
to give me every – but whatever you’d like to share about your
background and education. I know you were a –
Moses: I started out. I went into the service after I graduated from college,
drafted, so I had to go. It was the Korean War, and I went to Korea for 16
months, came out, and I got a – I graduated from Ed Merle State Teachers
College at that time in Pennsylvania.
As soon as I – after I got out of the service, I got a job in a small, rural
school district in Pennsylvania. I started in like November, so I replaced
someone that they couldn’t find a replacement, all for $3,000.00 a year.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 239
That was 1955, and I taught – my major was geography and social studies,
but in that district I had one or two, three, no more than three courses in
my field and everything. I taught mathematics and English and anything
else that they had to offer. I stayed there for two and a half years.
Then the Superintendent in my home district called me and offered me a
job of teaching geography, only geography, at the big sum of a little over,
I think, $4,200.00. That’s when they would give you whatever they
wanted to give you, and I went back there to the other district.
Meanwhile, I had started at Penn State studying guidance counseling, and
I got married and had twin sons. Penn State became cumbersome to drive
that far, and I’d have to go upstate in the summer, so I transferred to
Indiana University, well, Indiana State Teachers College at the time, and I
had my master’s degree from Indiana.
I got a counseling job at the Gateway Schools in Monroeville,
Pennsylvania, and I worked there for ten years as a guidance counselor, a
visiting counselor, which was adjudicated kids and worked with them for a
year, and then the Superintendent named me Director of Pupil Services
and then told me that I was – after, I think, five years he said, “You’re my
Director of Pupil Services.”
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 240
I went back to my Principal, and I says, “What in the hell does the
Director of Pupil Services do?” I had no idea. It was a district that was
really growing. We started with 1,500 kids, and when I left it was 8,200.
So we were building left and right, and I had a great experience there with
some really good Superintendents.
The Principal that I worked for there – then when I became Director, I was
on the central staff and worked directly for the Superintendent. He
became – Chuck McLoughlin became an Assistant Superintendent in the
district, and he got a job here in Milford as Superintendent.
That was 1969, and during that year he knew I wasn’t pleased with what I
was doing. I was a single parent at the time and with two boys who were
six or seven, eight, yeah, about six, seven, or eight years old, and I told
them, “I have to get the hell out of this administration. I can’t – I can’t
work all these hours that I’m working.”
We were growing so fast. I was working – I was working every night. I
lived 18 miles away. I’d come home. I’d feed my youngsters and so on.
Around 7:00 or 8:00, I’d leave. I’d go back to work. I’d be there until
midnight, sometimes meetings at night. Then when they started to – the
School Board started to meet on Saturday, especially during budget A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 241
hearing, and I had to be there. I thought, “I can’t do this anymore until the
kids get a little older.”
I was in a doctoral program at that time, and I finished almost everything
but my – I had to do a residency for a year, a semester, and I couldn’t get
enough money to do a residency, so I said, “Well, I’m gonna put
everything on hold.”
He called me, and he said, “I need you down here.” He says, “I came to
this district.” He says, “You’d never believe how primitive it is down
here.”
He says, “I have special ed kids that have no business in special ed. They
have a guidance program. The high school guidance counselors are
certified. They have one middle school. He’s certified. I have
elementary. I have four down in the elementary school. They don’t even
know what guidance is. They’re not even certified.”
He says, “I’ve got all this money because it’s from federal money, and so I
need you to come down here.” I says, “I don’t want to do that anymore. I
want to get back being a guidance counselor and spend my time and not
worry about all this. He says, “Believe me, you come down here, you’re A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 242
not gonna work the hours. I worked those hours. I know what you’re
talking about. It’s not that way down here.”
So, we came down and we looked, and I liked it, so I came down. In
1970, I started, and he – meanwhile, I took administration courses at the
University of Delaware. I took some executive training administration for
special ed at Indiana University in Bloomington, two summers there.
I was at the University of Pittsburgh for four years studying psychology. I
was a certified school psychologist, and I never practiced it. I never had a
chance to practice it.
Let’s see, where else? I went to University of Maryland. Did you know
Bruce Denagi?
Lamey: No.
Moses: Jack Carney?
Lamey: Yeah. Yeah, Jack Carney.
Moses: Yeah, Carne.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 243
Lamey: Yeah, I know Jack.
Moses: Jack Carney and I, Jack was representing Delaware. He and Bruce Denagi
represented Delaware, and I represented western Pennsylvania and another
guy from eastern Pennsylvania. We had a national institute for Directors
of Pupil Services at Maryland, University of Maryland. That was three or
four weeks we were there studying.
It was a national, some think tank thing that I participated in, but I came
down here and started out as Director of Pupil Services, which included
special ed, ______, psych services, guidance counseling, and so on in
this district. Special ed especially was big, spent a lot of time with that.
That was the first year.
I came home after a Board meeting one night, and they went into an
executive session. I rarely stayed for executive sessions. They just met
with the Superintendent at that time, and I got a call back from the
Superintendent. He says, “The Board would like to meet with you
tonight.” Okay.
I came home. I got dressed, went back, and they said, “We’re having
problems with personnel. We’d like you to take over personnel.” I said, A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 244
“What about Pupil Services?” “Oh, you can do that, also.” I said, “Whoa.
You don’t know how much time it takes with special ed.”
They said, “Well, we’ll – we can let you hire someone. Finish out the
year, and finish out the program, and then next year or after this year ends,
in the summer you can hire someone to be your Supervisor of Special Ed.”
That’s where I was spending most of my time, anyway, so I agreed to do
that, and I did that.
Then, a year or so later, Chuck McLoughlin left Milford, went up to
Springfield School District in Pennsylvania, became Superintendent there.
A year later, he called me. He said, “Would you like to come up here as
Director of Personnel?”
I said, “Whoa, whoa, whoa.” I said, “Well, I had planned on going back
to Pennsylvania, because I had 15 years in there, and I’m still in the
pension program.” I said, “But this is a bad time. My sons are juniors in
high school, and they’re having success here. They’re wrestlers.” That’s
how I knew Joe Deardorff.
Lamey: I was the wrestling coach at Hodgson.
Moses: Were you? A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 245
Lamey: Yeah, I won a lot of titles there.
Moses: I said, “I have a” – I had a 112 and a 118. They graduated in ’77, so John
______conference and was beaten by someone in
Newark for the state. He came in third. A guy beat him in the semi-finals
there, and he was good. The guy that won it was really good. The other
one, he only – he always used to lose to one guy. We had mats in the
backyard, had them down in our basement.
Lamey: Milford’s always had great wrestling.
Moses: Yeah. Well, we had our mats here, and some of the ______and
conference coaches would sit. I had a porch over here, and they’d come
up here, and they’d sit during the summer watching on Sundays, Saturdays
and Sundays, watching wrestling matches out here. You’re not allowed to
coach your own kids, but they’d offer advice to kids that weren’t theirs,
but another coach would offer some advice. They’d talk ______
______.
So that was good. They went to – they went on to Salisbury with Mike
McGlinchey down there. You know Mike?
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 246
Lamey: Uh-hmm.
Moses: Passed away. Mike was great with them, super. Then, so I said I wasn’t
gonna go. We hired a new Superintendent from South Carolina, Mike
Woodall. Mike was a great curriculum guy, but, boy, oh, boy, he wasn’t
worth a damn with personnel, his personality.
He wasn’t – he said to me, “You handle the personnel stuff.” He says,
“I’ll handle the curriculum,” because he’d lose his cool. He had a temper
on him and so on, but he’d come in my office. He’d come in, “I want you
to fire So-and-So.” I says, “Whoa, whoa, whoa. Cool down. Tell me
what the problem is.” We’d talk it over, and I’m, “I’ll deal with that,” and
he let me do it, but he said –
So he left, and in the meanwhile I was dating a girl that was our Director
of Special Ed here. I had been dating her before she became special ed.
She was a speech therapist when I started dating her, and we ended up
marrying.
I’m probably the only person in the country that ever went to their School
Board and said, “I’m here to tell you that I’m going to marry Judy Spiegel,
and I want you to know about it ahead of time. If it bothers you, one or
both of us are gonna leave.” “ A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 247
What are you making a problem out of? It hasn’t been a problem. You’ve
been dating her for how many, 11 years?” So we ended up getting
married, and she died in ’03 from cancer. ______was a teacher in a
school district for 37 years.
So, 1984, yeah, ’83, Mike Woodall went to Charleston, South – no,
Columbia, South Carolina, to become Superintendent of Schools there,
and I didn’t – I had a lot of years in by then, and I really didn’t want to
apply. I wanted to be the Superintendent, but I didn’t really want to – I
really didn’t have the fire in my belly.
So, when the Board didn’t see – some of the Board members said, “Where
is your application?” and I was getting the applications. I said, “No, I’m
not going.”
“What do you mean, not gonna apply?” “You need to have someone
who’s gonna stay here a while,” I said. “I can retire any time now. If I do,
you’ve got my wife who’s going to be on the staff. We’ll make up 50
percent of the staff here,” because we only had four people.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 248
They said, no, they wanted me to apply. I said, “Look, you go through the
applications. Go through the interviews. If you don’t find anyone, reopen
it, and I’ll apply.”
They didn’t even get through them. Next thing I knew, they had their
attorney in. “How can we get him to?” They went through some legal
______, and they named me.
Lamey: So it was 1983?
Moses: Pardon me?
Lamey: 1983?
Moses: Yeah, I finished out the year. I finished out his term until the end of the
year as interim, and then I became – ’84 officially.
Lamey: And how long did you serve in that role?
Moses: ’96.
Lamey: ’96.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 249
Moses: And that was my 42nd year, and I was at that time 66 years old, and I – and
then I tried to – we started the process of looking for a new
Superintendent. They kept dragging their feet.
I said, “Hey, look, July – I gave you a year’s notice. July 1, I’m leaving.
July 1, ’96, I’m out of here.” “What if we don’t find anyone?” “I’m out
of here.” So, we interviewed, and Bob Smith was hired, and he graduated
from Wilmington College.
Lamey: Yeah, I’ve heard his name. I don’t know him.
Moses: He lives not next door but the door after. So that’s my background.
Lamey: Wow, that’s impressive.
Moses: And I loved every day being – I’d say every job I ever had, I loved it. I
really looked forward to it. I especially loved being a Superintendent.
Lamey: That’s great.
Moses: Really, and I never thought I would, because maybe Rob told you I really
believed in involving a lot of people in decision-making, and I didn’t – I
wasn’t a top-down administrator. I used a lot of, well, Gene Bottoms, A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 250
some of his stuff that he talks about, how you organize your people and so
on, I used to use some of his stuff.
I mean, some of this stuff I can’t tell you that I enjoyed. I negotiated
every contract Milford ever had from the first contract in ’72, when we
had our first contract, until I negotiated the ’96 contract before I left. That
job I did not relish. I didn’t care for that, but the agreement was that the
teacher union would not bring in any outsider. We would not bring any
outsider.
Lamey: That’s a heck of a career, and you did a great job, and the things I’ve heard
have been all great things.
Moses: I had a good public relations team.
Lamey: We all need that. Well, I’d like to thank you.
Moses: My pleasure.
[End of Audio]
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 251
Appendix F
Interview with Dr. Gareth Hoachlander
Lamey: Thank you. Let me begin by telling you just a little bit about myself. As
you know, my name’s Jerry Lamey. I’m a doctoral student at Wilmington
University. And I’m also an assistant principal in the Vo-Tech, New
Castle County.
I work at the new Vo-Tech. I don’t know if you’re aware, we opened
another one in New Castle County called St. George’s, and we opened in
2006. So, I’ve – and my whole career really was in Vo-Tech at Hodgson
Vo-Tech and at Delcastle.
And I’m doing a case study, and I’m looking at the conversion from share
time to full time, and looking at vocational ed. in Delaware, and it’s
specifically that time period. And your study has seemed to have such a
big impact on, you know, Delaware’s vocational environment, that I was
hoping that I could get in touch with you and eventually ask you some
questions about that time period.
Currently, I’m working with Dr. Atkinson. I don’t know if you know Lou,
you probably do.
Hoachlander: I do; say hello. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 252
Lamey: And I’ve interviewed Dr. Loftus and George Frunzi and Gene Bottom.
So, I have about ten questions, and if you’re okay with that, I’d like to get
started.
Hoachlander: Go for it.
Lamey: Okay, great. Can you give me a little bit of background – I mean of your
background. I know you’ve been a guy who’s been involved in vocational
education, and a lot of the things that have surrounded that. What’s your
background a little bit with vocational education and your educational
background?
Hoachlander: So, I’ll try to be relatively brief. I did my graduate work actually in the
department of city and regional planning here at UC Berkeley back in the
'70s. And I specialized in public finance and school finance.
Lamey: Okay.
Hoachlander: And in 1978, what was then the National Institute of Education issued an
RFP for a three-year, nation-wide study of distribution of federal, state,
and local money for vocational education. And to make a long story short,
Charles Mattson, who was sort of my mentor and was a professor and A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 253
economist in the School of Education at Berkeley, we won that bid, and
that was really my introduction to vocational education.
And as a result of that study, one of the first things we did was to go off to
New York City, and we visited Aviation High School; Murry Bergtraum
School of Business; for the post-secondary level, Fashion Institute of
Technology. And that was really my introduction to the integration of
academic and vocational education.
And all of those schools organized the entire curriculum around a major
industry theme, like aviation, or business and finance, or fashion. And I –
you know, to make a long story short, I’ve been doing that ever since.
[Chuckle]
Lamey: Great. I remember seeing some of those schools in your study. My first
question is, what – you know, if you can kind of go back to the mid-1980s,
what was the environment surrounding vocational education in Delaware
in the mid-to-late 1980s?
Hoachlander: You know, it’s a little bit difficult for me to answer that question. I think
that – you know, and again, it’s so long ago. My general recollection is
that there certainly had been a lot of success with the full-time vocational- A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 254
technical high schools in New Castle County. So, certainly Hodgson,
Howard, and Delcastle, those were the three.
And I think, you know, Dennis Loftus was superintendent at the time, at
least that’s my recollection. I think there was concern that vocational
education, as it was practiced in comprehensive high schools, was not of
the same level of sort of technical rigor, there weren’t the same kind of
connections to the rest of the academic curriculum.
And then there were the area schools in Kent County and Sussex, where
again I think the general feeling was that those were not providing the
kind of quality that folks would like to see.
So – and again, I don’t remember the exact dates, but, you know, Paul
Fine was president of the State Board of Education. I don’t know if
you’ve talked to him?
Lamey: I have not, but, you know, I have heard his name come up several times,
and I saw that again in your report.
Hoachlander: Yeah, Paul – Paul was really instrumental in certainly, you know, the
commissioning of the report and I think sort of building the consensus A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 255
among the State Board that converting from shared time to full time in
Kent County and Sussex County was a good idea.
And, you know, I’m sure that, you know, my – again, my recollection
could be wrong, it’s so long. I think George Frunzi played and important
role in that, as did Dennis Loftus. They – you know, they were real
champions for that conversion.
And, of course, George became the first superintendent or – or I’m not
sure what his title was – of the full time – of Sussex Tech, basically.
Lamey: Yes, yes, that’s right. And I did interview Dr. Frunzi, and he’s another
one who spoke very highly of your report. I mean, your report was –
came up in every interview I had.
You kind of touched on this. My next question was, you know, what
groups or what people supported you in this study that you did, and you
mentioned Dr. Loftus and Dr. Frunzi and Paul Fine. Were there any other
groups? Did you find that it was a supportive environment? Did the
comprehensive schools as well support your study?
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 256
Hoachlander: So, certainly the State Department was supportive. I don’t remember
whether – I don’t think Lou was the state director at the time. I don’t
remember now who was.
But – and we visited – we visited many if not all of the comprehensive
high schools. And I think that I would have to say that on the whole they
were supportive. I mean, there were – there were concerns about their
losing students to the newly-formed, full-time high schools. But I think –
you know, again, I don’t remember anything – anybody just being sort of
diametrically opposed to this, and I think, for the most part, supportive.
Lamey: Okay. And you kinda just mentioned that really no one – did you
encounter any resistance? Was there anybody who was – who, you know,
on the surface was like, “I don’t think this is a good idea”? Or did you
encounter any of that, or –
Hoachlander: Yeah, I – one of the biggest concerns that some people had was they were
going to lose athletes.
Lamey: That’s come up in every interview as well.
[Laughter]
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 257
Hoachlander: You know, but the – I would say that was – you know, to the extent that
folks were worried, they were worried that they were going to lose athletes
to the full-time – the newly-formed, full-time schools.
I think – well, I won’t say more seriously, ‘cause I think people were
serious about that, it was sort of unfortunate that that was the – one of the
primary concerns. I think, you know, and then losing, in effect, students
and the dollars that come with those students to schools was a concern.
However, you know, again, it’s been so long, I don’t remember whether
high school enrollments were stable or growing at the time. But there
didn’t seem to be huge concerns about that. I think there certainly was
very strong support from Paul Fine and the State Board.
And, you know, I guess I should preface this. You know, our role was to
do an analysis. It was not to develop the political support for this. That
really came after the report was submitted to the State Board, and the state
decided to move ahead.
And I certainly was not involved in building the political will to do
conversions in Sussex and Kent. George and Dennis would be much
better sources of information about that. And also, Paul Fine, if he’s – you A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 258
know, I haven’t stayed in touch with Paul, so I don’t know where he is or
what he’s doing, but –
Lamey: Right. My next question, in 1987, Governor Castle of Delaware formed a
task force to study vocational education in Delaware. Your study was
1989. Were you familiar – did you guys – did you reference the
governor’s task force? Do you remember that report?
Hoachlander: No, I don’t remember that; I don’t.
Lamey: Okay. He had just formed a report that also his committee recommended
a conversion from shared time to full time. So, I wasn’t aware if you – if
that was part of your report or not.
My next one would, is while conducting interviews for this case study, as I
mentioned, several of the interviewees referenced your study in 1989 as an
influential report in Delaware’s conversion. What impact do you think
your study had on this conversion, and who contracted your group to
perform this study, and did you continue to work with Delaware after you
presented your findings?
Hoachlander: So, it was the State Board who contracted – you know, again, I don’t
remember the specific details. I don’t remember whether they did it A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 259
through the Department of Education, but it was really the State Board
that commissioned the study. And again, under Paul Fine’s leadership. I
mean, he really spearheaded that.
The – I think – so, the – what was the first part of your question?
Lamey: What impact do you think your report had? I mean because it was
mentioned, you know, every time. Like Dr. Loftus and both George
Frunzi said that this was the report that really drove it home, that the
governor’s report was just paper; it had no teeth to it, no one really bought
into it until they had you and your group – you know, when you presented
this report, that’s what really gave Paul Fine and the State Board what they
needed.
So, do you feel that? Did you realize that, or do you believe that was the
case, that you had that much impact?
Hoachlander: Yeah, actually, no, I think that that’s right. I think that it provided the
kind of analysis that Paul and others needed to really make the kind of
case for the benefits of converting the shared-time schools.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 260
And I think there were others, like George Frunzi, who also used the
findings of the report to help build the political support, particularly in
Sussex County. I’m trying – I can’t remember –
Lamey: I think it was Jeff Adams was the superintendent.
Hoachlander: Right, yeah, thank you, yeah. And, you know, he was – he made the same
– he used the report in the same way in Kent County. So, yeah, I think
that the – I think the report had a major role to play.
You know, I wouldn’t – you know, it’s certainly not the only reason,
because I think there were lots – there were other people who used the
results of the report to make the case. But yeah, I think it had a major
impact.
And yes, I did continue to work with mainly Sussex Tech and then the
New Castle schools. And we worked pretty closely with Dennis around
building some accountability systems for New Castle schools.
I got to know Steve Godowsky very, very well when he was principal at
Hodgson, and then later became – you know, moved to the county office.
And worked pretty closely with George throughout – oh, you know,
probably until – I can’t – you know, and I’m gonna say 1995, 1998 or so.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 261
I haven’t been – I haven’t been back – oh, it’s gotta be at least ten years.
So, it’s been a while.
Lamey: Well, you need to come visit our school.
Hoachlander: Yeah, I’d like to. I heard – you know, I knew that there was a fourth
school being built. And, in fact, I guess probably the last time I met with
Steve was maybe, oh, a year before that got underway. And they’d just
chosen the principal – I can’t remember her name –
Lamey: Terri Villa.
Hoachlander: Yeah, is she still there?
Lamey: Yes, yes.
Hoachlander: Sure.
Lamey: And Steve –
Hoachlander: So, anyway –
Lamey: Steve just retired last year – this past summer as our superintendent. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 262
Hoachlander: Uh-huh.
Lamey: So, he’s working with DASL through the University of Delaware.
Hoachlander: Wow, okay.
Lamey: Yeah, and he’s my outside reader, actually. So –
Hoachlander: Say hello to Steve. I miss him.
Lamey: Yeah, he’s a great guy. He’s been really a very big influence with me and
my career. So, I will say hello.
Hoachlander: I can’t believe he’s old enough to retire [static covers speaker’s words].
Lamey: [Chuckle] Yeah, he’s a great man. One of the things your study – well,
while your study highlighted positives and negatives of both share time
and full time, it was pretty – I mean, it gave both sides for both share time
and full time.
The state decided to choose full time. Were you surprised by that choice?
And at the time, did you feel it was the right choice? A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 263
Hoachlander: I wasn’t surprised, and yeah, I did feel it was the right choice. I mean, I
think on balance – yeah, we tried to – we tried to present as an objective a
case for both shared time and full time. But in the end, and – you know, I
haven’t even looked at the report recently.
But I know in – in presenting it to the State Board, when they sort of
pushed us for, “Okay, how do you come down on this,” we were pretty
clear that from our perspective, full time was the preferred way to go.
And I think, you know, obviously, most other people felt that as well.
Lamey: Great. My next question is, both our governor’s task force and your report
mention kind of a win-lose syndrome; they called it “We-They
Syndrome.” And it was discussed in both reports. What impact do you
believe this had on traditional and vocational education?
You mentioned, you know, there were some battles, I guess, at – you
mentioned the sports, but what other ones, like financial battles you
mentioned in your report, special ed. Did that really become a focus
point?
Hoachlander: Well, I think that – and again, you know, I wasn’t as close to the
implementation issues. I think there were some concerns that certainly I A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 264
had. Because Sussex Tech and – well, and this is really true of all of the
full-time schools – because they can be selective in sort of who attends,
and I – I did, from time to time, worry that some if not all of the schools
were discouraging some kids from attending who either they didn’t have
the grades, or they didn’t have the attendance records, or the disciplinary
records.
And I think on the part of some of the comprehensive high schools there
may have been some resentment about that – may still be today, I don’t
know; it’s been so – again, I haven’t been there in a long time – that the
technical high schools had the ability to screen out students that the
comprehensive high schools had to accept.
And in fact, I think – if – if – if there weren’t actual instances, there were
certainly concerns that some students were asked to leave the technical
high schools and go back to the comprehensive high schools. And I think
that – if that’s true, and again, it’s been a while, I – you know, I think that
may have caused some resentment.
I can’t really speak about the financial aspects of it. As you know, much
better than I, these are independently funded. Each of the county districts,
at least when I was there, had independent tax authority, which was a
pretty good deal. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 265
One of the things that I found most interesting was that the boards of the
technical school districts were appointed by the governor, rather than
elected locally. And I think that that created – it helped it helped to isolate
the technical districts from a lot of the local politics and craziness that
sometimes besets local school boards.
You know, the extent to which that’s really an issue in Delaware I’m not
sure. I’ve seen that elsewhere, but I was always – I was always struck by
how well I thought the boards of these – of the technical districts
functioned, and I – the – and I think that was, in part, a tribute to the care
that the governor took in appointment people to those boards.
Lamey: And it is similar today. I mean really, the stuff that you’re mentioning,
there still is debate over the selection process for students. And the boards
still are appointed by the governor. So, really, in the 23 years since the
report, or 22 years, things really haven’t changed in those areas.
So, that still is a concern for – and it’s an area that there’s debate in
Delaware even today about what students were taking and what students
are not being accepted. So, that has still remained a concern.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 266
Kinda tying this up, it’s been roughly 23 years since your report. And
again, you really haven’t stayed that – I mean I don’t how much you
followed it, but do you think that it’s been a success, Delaware’s
conversion?
Would you, in just what the little knowledge you’ve had following our
district since, do you think that – you thought it was the right move at the
time. Looking back now, can you give any opinion on whether you think
it’s been successful or not?
Hoachlander: So, obviously I haven’t visited these schools in the last, oh, five or six
years at least. So, I would – but I would say as of, you know, early 2000, I
think absolutely, and especially compared to what was there before.
I think – I don’t know Kent County very well. I never visited that school
– or actually there are two there, aren’t there?
Lamey: Nah, there’s one, Polytech it’s called now.
Hoachlander: Polytech, yeah. I never visited Kent County, so I can’t say as much about
that. But Sussex Tech, I mean, as you know, it became a blue ribbon
school not too many years after conversion, which was pretty amazing.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 267
I think that the Sussex Tech – and this was a lot – you know, the credit
certainly is due to George and – have you interviewed Pat as well?
Lamey: No, I have not.
Hoachlander: Yeah, you might want to talk to Pat also. But they, I think, made really
extraordinary progress in integrating academic and technical education,
really helping students make the connections between math and science
and English and social studies and real-world application.
They introduced pathways long before that was sort of popular. And I
think the same was true in New Castle County. I think, you know, the –
and, of course, they were already full time before the conversion of Kent
and Sussex. But the work that Steve did at Hodgson to develop Senior
Project and again, real emphasis on integration of academic and technical,
I’d be – same thing at Howard and Delcastle.
So, you know, I think – I was always very, very impressed with all of the
full-time schools that I knew firsthand in Delaware, and the only one that I
really didn’t know was Polytech in Kent County.
Lamey: Were there any ways that you thought it was unsuccessful? And I don’t
know if you’ve even thought about that, but were there any things that A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 268
might strike you as saying, “You know, they didn’t really get that, or
maybe they struggled in that area”?
Hoachlander: Well, I sometimes worried that, you know, particularly, I would say, at
Delcastle at the time, that the way that they sort of defined programs of
study or pathways was in some instances a little too narrow, a little bit too
traditional.
I think that they could have sort of reached farther than they did to design
a program of study that would appeal to students of all abilities. I think
the – and our – you know, and actually, if you talk to Steve, he and I had
conversations about this – I think there was a tendency to sort of aim for
the middle half, that is students in sort of the 25th to 75th percentile
academically, and presume that the higher-achieving kids, this really
wasn’t appropriate for them.
And I – you know, I – certainly in the work that we’re doing here in
California now, we’re trying to design – so, for example, we have
academies of engineering and academies of biomedical and health science
that are designed to appeal to students of all levels of ability as opposed to
– for example, I think a pathway in automotive is possibly a little too
narrow, especially depending on how the vocational or the technical
curriculum is defined. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 269
So, if it’s limited, for example, to auto body and brake repair – not that
those are bad things, I’m not saying that – but if it’s limited to that rather
than being part of a larger program in automotive technology or
automotive engineering or even transportation, I worry about that.
And I don’t know how things have evolved at your school, but – so I –
that’s – but again, not having been there in six or seven years, it’s hard to
know what it looks like today. But I did have some concerns about that.
I think Sussex Tech did a much better job of broadening the pathway
themes and making them sort of less traditional Voc. Ed. That’s some of
what I saw, particularly at Delcastle.
Lamey: Well, that kind of leads me to another question that I really didn’t have
written, but what do you see the trend in vocational ed. nowadays? Do
you see more of a – I know you’re kinda talking about the integrated and
the applied learning and – do you see that across the country? Is that
happening more? Are there more full-time vocational high schools?
Hoachlander: Well, I think that – so, I would – there probably are some more full-time
vocational high schools, although I don’t think that’s the trend. I think the A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 270
trend is toward career academies – theme-based, small-learning
communities.
Here in the work that we’re doing here in California around what we call
Link Learning, Pathways to College and Career Success, is emphasizing
that the – creating venues of eight to ten pathways in school districts,
many of which operate in comprehensive high schools through what we
call California Partnership Academies, or Career Academies, again,
theme-based, small-learning communities, and organizing those pathways
around sort of major industry themes like digital media arts, or
architecture construction and engineering, biomedical and health science,
information technology, hospitality and tourism.
So – and hospitality and tourism is a good example of the kind of thing
that I worry about. I think – you know, and this is my opinion, not
everybody shares it – but I think a pathway in culinary arts in high school
is, in general, too narrow for kids.
And again, that’s not to say that culinary arts can’t be part of a larger
pathway in hospitality and tourism. But if the objective is only to prepare
kids to be short-order cooks, I think that’s too limited.
Lamey: Right. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 271
Hoachlander: That’s not doing kids a good service.
Lamey: Well, I don’t have any other questions, unless you have any – is there any
interesting story that you would like to share about that time period with
Delaware’s transition? Is there anything that I left out that you might want
to include?
Hoachlander: Well, I think we’ve touched on most of it. I mean, I always sort of held
Delaware up as one of the best-kept secrets in the country as far as – not
only in terms of technical education, but school choice. I think that the –
you know, there are very few other places in the country, certainly at that
time, that were as far ahead as Delaware was, both with respect to
technical education, but also really creating options for kids.
And from my perspective, you know, it was working very, very well, and I
hope still is.
Lamey: Well, it is. I mean, I know – and the funny thing is, is as I read your
report, I could really reflect back on a lot of the things our district and our
state tried to implement and has worked on. So, I know that it’s been a big
influence in our school, which was Hodgson at the time, and now St.
Georges, as well as our district. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 272
So, Dr. Hoachlander, I’d like to thank you for – I know your time is very
valuable. I really appreciate you meeting or having this conversation and
interview with me. If you would like, I can send you a copy when I’m
done, if that’s something you’d prefer. If not, I’d like to include your
interview in my case study.
Hoachlander: Well, I’d love to have a copy of your dissertation when you’re finished;
I’d love it. And say hello to Steve and Dennis and Lou and George and
everybody else there. I do think of them often, but it’s – I haven’t seen a
lot of them for a long time, so –
Lamey: I will, and if you’re ever in Delaware, stop by St. Georges and I’ll buy you
lunch.
Hoachlander: That’s a deal.
Lamey: Great. All right, Dr. Hoachlander, thank you and have a great day.
Hoachlander: All right, good luck.
Lamey: All right, thanks. Bye.
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 273
Hoachlander: Okay, bye-bye.
Lamey: This concludes interview, January 31, 2012, with Dr. Gary Hoachlander.
[End of Audio]
A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 274
Appendix G
The Governor’s Task Force On Vocational Education
Recommendations by the Task Force
The task force believed that significant changes were required in vocational education
delivery systems and financing arrangements. They recommend that some changes could
happen immediately, while others should be phased in over time. Here are the following 15
recommendations by the task force.
1. Alternate delivery systems should be developed and expanded.
In the task force’s first recommendation, they addressed a number of contemporary issues
including: scheduling; cooperative education; sharing facilities; and competency-based
standards.
Cooperative education is when students spend a portion of their day working in real-
world jobs related to their vocational course of study, under teacher supervision. These
programs provide a valuable teaching resource for students, and help students mature at a
greater pace. They also serve as a “fast track” to jobs after they graduate.
Another area the task force highlighted was the need for more flexible and innovate
schedules. Mentioned in the report was the two-plus-two program that some students in
Kent Vo-Tech were enrolled in with Delaware Technical and Community College. The
task force also felt that vocational schools should explore scheduling students fulltime in
vocational courses for two to four semesters, instead of having them split each school day
between academic and vocational courses throughout grades 10-12.
The committee also felt that with the high costs of building, equipping, and operating
modern vocational facilities, communities could not afford to under use them. They felt A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 275
that if schools wanted to expand in the future, they had to be able to show that they had
looked at the overall community’s needs, as well as their students’ needs, and worked
with others to develop plans for fully efficient use of their facilities.
In an effort to ease scheduling pressures, the task force recommended integrating
academics into the vocational programs. They emphasized injecting more math and
science into the vocational curriculum, at a level sufficient to permit students to meet
graduation requirements. The task force also recommended that graduation requirements
be based on demonstrated competency. They felt that students should be allowed to “test
out” of courses. This would allow students to look at advanced materials and different
subjects, rather than putting in “seat time.”
2. Provide fulltime vo-tech programs for more students.
The report of this task force addressed an issue which would shape the future vocational
education programs in Delaware—shared-time versus full time vocational programs. This
report recommended that, over time, all vo-tech schools be put on fulltime status.
With the declining enrollment problems associated with shared-time programs, the task
force recommended that the Hodgson School, located near Newark, convert to a fulltime
school for grades 10-12. This change would give New Castle County three fulltime
vocational schools (Delcastle, Hodgson, and Howard).
In Sussex County, the task force recommended that Sussex Vo-Tech continue as a
shared-time facility, but begin planning for a future conversion to fulltime status.
In Kent County, the task force recommended consolidating the two shared-time schools,
Kent North at Dover, and Kent Central at Woodside, into one school at Kent Woodside. The
only exception would be students who participated in the two-plus-two program at Kent A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 276
North. Another option that the task force presented was to plan for a single Kent County vo-
tech school, to run on a fulltime basis.
The task force also addressed the added cost of shifting shared-time schools to fulltime
schools. Since shared-time facilities did not have enough classrooms and other facilities
(gyms, auditoriums, etc.) there would be capital costs associated with the conversions. The
task force established that a minimum set of changes would involve a price tag of $15 million
dollars over a three year period.
3. On a trial basis, Hodgson School should become a three-year institution, Grades 10
through 12, rather than a four-year school.
The task force felt that while there were pros and cons in compressing the vo-tech
program from four years to three, they felt that the benefits of making Hodgson a three year
program outweigh the negatives.
Some examples the task force cited were that 9-12 vo-tech programs force students to
commit themselves at a very early age, at the end of eighth grade. Also, the task force felt
that not all ninth graders in vo-ed need the specialized facilities vo-tech schools can show
them.
In addition, the task force felt that ninth grade students could receive their academics at
their comprehensive high school which are set up to handle this capacity, as well as allowing
students another year to consider the vo-tech option.
The task force did feel that if this recommendation was followed, there would have to be
steps taken to assure those ninth grade students in district schools and their parents were
presented a full and fair picture of what is available in vocational schools. That if would not A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 277
be enough to distribute a pamphlet about vo-tech, or let them hear one visiting speaker, to see
if that “sells” them on transferring to a vocational school.
The task force concluded this recommendation by stating that if the desired results were
not being produced, then DPI and the State Board should take further action, including
consideration of returning Hodgson to a 9-12 program.
4. District high schools should continue to offer vo-ed programs, but not try to duplicate the
vo-tech schools.
Due to the financial constraints that many district high schools face, it would not be
practical or economical to try and become “vo-techs” as well as general purpose schools. The
task force feels that they should stick to the types of vo-ed programs they are best equipped
to offer. Here are the three which was recommended by the task force:
a. Vo-ed programs with modest capital requirements (business and office education,
marketing, home economics, and general agriculture); b. Vo-ed programs closely allied to
academic topics (computer technology); and c. Industrial arts programs.
5. Vocational counseling and career guidance services should be expanded. Counselors
should be directly funded by the state, separate from the unit system.
The task force felt that there was a strong need to help students in the eight and ninth
grade make academic and career decisions. They recommended that there should be more
summer institutes, training programs, and internships to strengthen counselors’ background
in vocational and non-traditional careers. In addition, they recommended that there should be
a direct funding arrangement, apart from the unit system, to allow for adequate academic and
vocational counseling in each school. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 278
6. To serve “Special Ed” students better, changes should be made in teaching, counseling,
program planning, and funding.
The task force recommended to better serve Special Education students a number of
changes was required. They felt that counselors of Special Education students should have
specialized training, and that teachers who worked with Special Education students should
have also have appropriate training, reflected in formal certification standards.
In addition, the Individual Educational Programs (IEP) that are required for Special
Education students should be broadened to include vocational objectives, and that roadmaps
should be developed to help students acquire other skills needed in the working world.
7. To remove barriers to shared-time vo-tech students, school schedules and funding
arrangements should be changed. The 0.5 Deduct should be eliminated.
Since there is no consistency among districts in daily starting times, length of school day,
scheduling, or number of periods, the option of shared-time schools for some students is
almost impossible. Therefore, the task force recommended that as long as there are shared-
time vocational schools in Delaware, the comprehensive high schools in those regions run on
schedules that are compatible with one another.
8. The tracking system should be reviewed, and the General track eliminated.
In this recommendation, the task force urged the State Board and DPI to take the lead in
overhauling the student tracking system. The task force felt that General students would be
better served if they were in a more focused program with measurable goals, rather than in
General education programs.
9. Vo-ed programs should be reexamined periodically against labor-market needs, and
updated as necessary, with funding incentives to promote change. A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 279
The task force believed that vocational course offerings should be evaluated in terms of
the track record of current and recent graduates, the prospects for career openings for future
graduates, and the ability of the schools to provide requisite career-entry skills. This report
felt that if programs were not producing measurable results, that funding should be withheld,
and programs that could not be justified should be cut.
10. Vo-ed advisory councils should be strengthened, and the private sector should play a
stronger role in planning, evaluation, and assisting vo-ed programs.
The task force reported that vocational teachers and administrators need the best advice
they can get on labor-market trends, and changes in career requirements. They also pointed
out that vocational schools need to be close enough to outside industries to know where to
put priorities in vocational education programs.
The task force listed several groups to help foster this relationship including: the
Department of Labor and Development Office; Advisory Council on Career and Vocational
Education; Business/Industry/Education Alliance; Educational Resources Association, and
the Jobs for Delaware Graduates.
11. All vo-tech schools should be accredited.
In Delaware, all comprehensive high schools must go through an accreditation process
from the Middle States Association of Schools. The task force recommends that all
vocational schools adhere to the same requirement. At the time of this report, only Delcastle
and Howard have done so.
12. Vo-ed funding should go only to vocational programs, tightly defined.
Financing vocational programs has led to many districts to manipulate the system in
order to receive funds. The task force called for the system to be changed so that vo-ed A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 280
authorization goes only to programs that fulfill the standards in the vo-ed Curriculum Policy
Manual established in 1985. This manual details the content standards for both prevocational
and vocational programs. The committee recommends that if a program does not meet these
standards, it should not be funded.
13. Vo-ed programs should be cost based, and the flow of funds more tightly monitored.
The task force felt that funding should not reflect arbitrary unit counts. Instead, it
recommended that state support be based on the type of course being offered and what it
costs to conduct that course properly. They also felt that accounting had been lax in the past,
and that DPI should authorize funds only when guidelines have been met.
14. Vo-ed dollars should stay with vo-ed students wherever they are.
The task force acknowledges that there have been games played by school districts when
determining their student count with regards to funding. If a school could hold onto its
vocational students until the fall count was complete, it could pick up considerable extra
funding. If those students left after that count, the money stayed with the student’s first
district.
The task force recommended tying funds to students and let them travel in tandem: If one
moves, so does the other.
15. The state should impanel an independent advisory group—this task force or something
like it-to monitor progress toward the goals set forth in this report, and to make further
recommendations as needed.
The task force’s final recommendation is to create an advisory group that reports
periodically to the executive and legislative branches of the state government. They A CASE STUDY OF THE CONVERSION… 281
recommend that its members be appointed by the governor, and that they should have access
to appropriate state and school district agencies for staff assistance.