DOCUMENT RESUME ED 080 880 CE 000 096 AUTHOR Frankel, Steven M., Ed.; And Others TITLE Directory of Representative Work Education Programs 1972-73. INSTITUTION Office of Education (DREW), Washington, D.C. Office of Planning, Budgeting, and Evaluation.; System Development Corp., Santa Monica, Calif. REPORT NO DHEW-OE-74-01701 PUB DATE 73 NOTE 341p. AVAILABLE FROMSuperintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 (Stock Number 1780-01244, $2.95) EDRS PRICE MF-$0.65 HC- $13.16 DESCRIPTORS *Directories; Part Time Jobs; Part Time Students; *Work Experience Programs; *Work Study Programs ABSTRACT To study existing school-supervised work education programs, to describe different organizational patterns, to identify constraints on program expansion, and to examine incentives to increase employer participation, representative programs were suggested upon, request by Chief State School Officers, Directors of Secondary Vocational Education, Directors of Community Colleges, and other consultants of national repute. The directors of each of the more than 1000 programs named was sent a questionnaire requesting information on schools in which the program operates, educational level of the program, primary purpose of the program, inclusion of job-related instruction, industrial setting, presence of students under age 16, avai3ability of academic credit for time spent at the job site, and related topics. Name, address, and phone number of the project director are included for the 550 questionnaires which met the study requirements..2, report "A Topical Bibliography of Work Education Programs, Projects, and Procedures" by Trudy Banta and others preceeded this directory. A final report in the form of 50 case studies is to be published. WO FILMED FROM BEST AVAILABLECO DIRECTORYOF REPRESENTATIVEW EDUCATIONPROGR 1972-73 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HE EDUCATION &WELPA NATIONAL INSTITUTE EDUCATION THIS DOCUMENT HASBEE DUCED EXACTLY AS RECE THE PERSON OPORGANIZAT ATING IT POINTS OF VIEW0 STATED DO NOT NECESSAN It: SENT OFFICIAL NATIONAL EDUCATION POSITION OHP 0 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION,AND WELFAREOffice of Education _ FILMED FROM BEST AVAILABLECO DIRECTORYOF REPRESENTATIVEWORK EDUCATIONPR GRAMS 1972-73 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. EDUCATION& WELFARE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRO DUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED 5-ROM THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGIN ATING IT POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONS ".,TATE0 DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRE. SENT OFFICIAL NATIONAL INSTITUTE OP EDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY EDUCATION, AND WELFARE /Office of Education cp CO DHEW Publication OCR co DIRECTORY OF Lu REPRESENTATIVE WORK EDUCATION PROGRAMS 1972-73 Edited by Steven M. Frankel Alan J. Cohen Mary Ann Milsap For the Office of Planning, Budheting, and Evaluation U.S. DEPARTMENT a HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE Caspar W. Weinberger, Secretary S. P. Mar land, Jr., Assistant Secretary for Education Office of Education John Ottina, Commissioner RY OF NTATIVE WORK ION PROGRAMS nning, luation T OF HEALTH, EDUCATION,AND WELFARE rger, Secretary Assistant Secretary forEducation n missioner U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASPINGTON: 1973 For said by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402-Price $2.95 Stock Number 1780-01244 BACKGROUND OF STUDY In Juneof 1972, the Office of Planning, Budgeting, and Evaluation (OPSF) in the U.S. Office of Education let a contract to System Development Corporation (SDC) of Santa Ronica, California, to study existing school-supervised work education programs to describe different organizational patterns, to identify constraints on program expansion and to examine incentives to increase employer participation. As defined by OPBE for this study, school-supervised work education programs are those in which students spend part of their time working in paying jobs, which are usually reserved by the employer for students from that particular school or district. Often these programsinvolvestudents being releasedfrom school for a specified portion of time to work at their jobs.School-supervised work education programs include cooperative programs in which studentsperform work related to their vocational training; work-study programs designed to provide vocational students with at least a minimal income; career exploration programs designed to cycle students through a varietyof paying jobs; and dropout prevention programs in which a student's school program includes a limited number of hours of paid work and the proviso that he will be allowed to keep his job only if his attendance and conduct in school remain satisfactory. While an exception to the general rale, school-supervised work education is also allowed to include clinical training programs in thehealth professionsin which students work in regular jobs but are not paid in cash for their efforts. To initiate this study, Chief State School Officers, Directors of SecondaryVocational Education, Directorsof Community Colleges, Education Directors of the State Chambers of Commerce, the Presidents and Executive Secretaries of the AdvisoryCommittees for VocationalEducation, Superintendents of Education in th-? Great Cities, and consultants of national repute were asked to recommend programs which they felt were representative of a diversity of work education programs wiLn which they were acquainted. Wanes of more than 1,000 programs were submitted. Once these program names were received, the director of eachprogram was senta letter describing the study and was asked to complete a questionnaire to provide information which could be used as a basis for determining the 50 programs around which case studies would he developed. Over 600 questionnaireswere retutned of which 550 met the requirements of the study (i.e., being in existence for at least 1year and having a York -for -pay component). With the exception of editing necessary to shorten and clarify comments, correct spelling and grammatical errors, and eliminate value judgements, the information included in. this directory is presented exactly as received on the questionnaires. The accuracy of the data has not been verified by either the Office of Education or System Development Corporation. Data from the questionnaires were insertedinto a data base and proceused by computer. A complex but objective sampling scheme was used to select SO programs, with widely varying characteristics, to be visited by project interview teams. The main characteristics considered in iii this selection process were the educational level of the program (seccndary orpostseccndary),the purposeoftheprogram(traininginspecific occupationalareas, career exploration, dropout prevention, etc.), and the industrial setting of the program'slocation(farmingregion, bedroom community, singleindustry,majorindustrial/business center). Interview teams were sent to each site to interview project personnel, participating and nonparticipating students, participatingand nonpareicipatingemployers and unicn personnel where they were involved in the running of programs. This information villbeusedtodocumentthegrcwth,trainingstrategies, andsignificant characteristicsof the 50 different work education programs as well as to look for commonalities in features axone the more successful of the 50 programs that can leadtorecommendations aboutthe structureoffuture work education programs. The case studies will he written so as to bring out both successful and unsuccessful features and to highlight strategies which appear to belikedto desirableoutcomesandthat are readily exportable. product resulting from this study vill be subject to OfficeofEducationreviewandfinalvalidationbytheDivisionofEducation's Dissemination' Review Panel. In September 1973, the project tea' will produce a Final Peport containing the case studies, an analysisofthedata, a handbookcontaininga detailed description of the methodology, and an ex.tcutive summary of theentirereport. However,sothateducationalresearchers andother professionalsconcernedwith career and vocational education can make use of some cf the project's findings while the information is still very current, it wasdecidedtopublishtwopreliminary report:; for immediate use by persons in the field. The first of these reports istitled A TopicalBibliographyofWork EllocaticnPEceramsa erojectsaniProcedures, byTrudyBanta,Steven Frankel, Sy lva Howlby, and Cleone Scedes. This document resulted from the bibliographicsearchactivitywhichprecededtheidentificationof eli }Oleproeramsandthegueetionnairedevelopmentactivity.Itcontainsacrethan1,000 biblio4raphie citations related to career and work education. ThereportispublishedbySystem reveloement.Corporation(Santa Monica, California) as Technical Memorandum TM-SOB6/000/00 and will available through FeTC or microfiche. This volume is the second of the two reports. When used in conjunction with its indexes ard its table, of contents, it should prcve a valuableresourceinilentifyine.programswithparticular fettures,aridineevelcoiinga better understanding of the wide breadth of program configurations operating in the work education fiell. 'pith more than 70,000 wore. education programs currently underway in the United States, there is no question blot many erograms (perhans scue of very high quality) havenotbeenincludedsimply heeetineon,- of tee itersons from whom submissions were requested saw fit to mention them. Similarly, itis 0 jually pro'n:ible tbet at )?d:; dLew of the included ptcgrams are being conducteddifferently thinatthetime of zulesiesion.