ED 401 845

AUTHORTITLEINSTITUTION

SPONS AGENCY

REPORT NOPUB DATECONTRACTNOTEAVAILABLE FROM

PUB TYPE

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

ABSTRACT

DOCUMENT RESUME

HE 029 696

Rodriguez, Esther M.; Ruppert, Sandra S.Postsecondary Education and the New Workforce.State Higher Education Executive OfficersAssociation.National Inst. on Postsecondary Education, Libraries,and Lifelong Learning (ED /OERI), Washington, DC.

PLLI-96-8005Oct 964-3-3JAH-6-PE02233p.State Higher Education Executive Officers, 707Seventeenth Street, Suite 2700, Denver, CO80202-3427.Reports Research/Technical (143) Viewpoints(Opinion/Position Papers, Essays, etc.) (120)

MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage.Career Education; College Bound Students; EducationalPlanning; *Educational Policy; Educational Resources;*Education Work Relationship; Futures (of Society);Job Training; *Labor Force Development; Labor ForceNonparticipants; *Long Range Planning; *NeedsAssessment; Noncollege Bound Students; Planning;Policy Formation; *Postsecondary Education; ReentryWorkers; School Business Relationship; StatePrograms; State School District Relationship;Statewide Planning; Work Experience Programs

This report is intended to provide a framework forstate-level policy and planning in relationship to postsecondaryeducation's role in workforce development. Underlying the report is aset of principles and priorities designed to reflect and shapecurrent policy agendas, and which will address the needs ofcollege-bound high school graduates, workers needing retraining orupgrading of skills, unemployed and underemployed workers, andemployers. In separate sections the report covers topics such as: the

role of postsecondary education as a factor in workforce development;broadening the school-to-work framework; building a collaborativesystem of education and training; capitalizing on the distinct roles

of learning providers; improving learner productivity; helpinglearners make informed choices; connecting learning and work, anddefining skills needed by new employees; and supporting teachers andfaculty. In a final section the report defines an agenda for statehigher education boards that includes high school feedback andadmissions, articulation with and transfer to postsecondaryeducation, follow-up of program completers and better employerfeedback, integration of classroom-based and work-based learning, andeffective coordination and planning. The names of participants andinstitutional leaders at two 1996 conferences on this topic inRacine, Wisconsin, and Denver, Colorado, are appended to the report.(Contains 11 references.) (CH)

II

2

A

U S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and Improvement

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

fhis document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating itMinor changes have been made toimprove reproduction quality

Points of view or opinions stated in thisdocument do not necessarily representofficial OERI position cr policy

BEST COPY AVAiLABLE

POSTSEC A

E CAT1AND THE NEWORKFO CE

byEsther M. RodriguezSandra S. Ruppert

SHEEOSTATE HIGHER EDUCATION EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

Barbara Lieb, Project OfficerNational Institute on Postsecondary Education,

Libraries, and Lifelong Learning

U.S. Department of EducationOffice of Educational Research and Improvement

3

U.S. Department of EducationRichard W RileySecretary

Office of Educational Research and ImprovementSharon P. Robinson

Assistant Secretary

National Institute on Postsecondary Education,Libraries, and Lifelong Learning

Carole B. Lacampagne

Director

October 1996

Prepared for the National Institute on Postsecondary Education,

Libraries, and Lifelong Learning, Office of Educational Research and

Improvement, under purchase order number 4-3-3JAH-6-PE022.

Individuals undertaking such projects are encouraged to express

freely their professional judgment. This report, therefore does not

necessarily represent positions or policies of the U.S. Department of

Education, and no official endorsement should be inferred.

Esther M. Rodriguez is associate executive director

of the State Higher Education Executive Officers.

Sandra S. Ruppert is a higher education consultant

at Educational Systems Research.

The State Higher Education Executive Officers is a

nonprofit, nationwide association of the chief executive officers serving

statewide coordinating boards and governing boards of postsecondary

education. Its objectives include developing the interest of the states in

supporting quality higher education; promoting the importance of state

planning and coordination as the most effective means of gaining public

confidence in higher education; and encouraging cooperative relationships

with the federal government, colleges and

universities and other institutional state-based association. Fifty states and

Puerto Rico are members.

Copies of this report are available from the SHEEO Office, 707 Seventeenth Street, Suite 2700, Denver, CO 80202-3427,.(303) 299-3686

FOREWORD

The passing of the industrial age and the com-ing of the information age have created extraor-dinary changes in the economy and sometimesdisruptive changes to the nation's workforce. Formany Americans, the nature of work haschanged, and with it, the skills and knowledgeneeded to be successful in the workplace. Andthere is growing recognition that education andtraining are inextricably linked to employmentopportunities and economic well-being.

A skilled, educated and motivated workforceis the essential ingredient for building and main-taining strongly com-petitive state andnational economies.Without such a work-force, our security isseriously threatened.For the past decade,leaders in business,government, educa-tion, and labor haveexpressed concernsabout the flaggingskills and abilities ofAmerican workers.As a result, nearlyevery state hasincluded educationand training, some-times called a "work-force developmentcomponent," in its

plans.The purpose of this report is to provide a

framework for state-level policy and planningrelated to postsecondary education's role inworkforce development. At the foundation is aset of principles and priorities designed to reflectas well as shape current state policy agendas.Taken collectively, the principles and priorities

represent a statement of state postsecondary edu-cation leadership and commitment to workforcedevelopment. Taken separately, each statementreflects a specific objective designed to advancethe call for state leadership; encourage a "com-mon language" that will bring higher educationmore centrally into workforce development dis-cussions; help policymakers and educators focuson the needs of learners; and promote coopera-tion and coordination among education sectors,employers and local, state and federal govern-ment entities.

THE PURPOSE OF THIS

REPORT IS TO PROVIDE A

FRAMEWORK FOR

STATE-LEVEL POLICY AND

PLANNING RELATED TO

POSTSECONDARY

EDUCATION'S ROLE IN

WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

economic development Enhancing the

Education and

Strengthening theconnection betweenpostsecondary educa-tion and workforcepreparation has longbeen one of SHEEO'shighest priorities. In1992, in Building aQuality Workforce: AnAgenda for Postsec-ondary Education,SHEEO urged itsmembers to developpartnerships withother education lead-ers to prepare andretrain their states'workforces. In 1995,SHEEO commis-sioned the report

Connection Between Higherthe Workplace: A Survey of

Employers by Carl Van Horn. And, in 1996SHEEO published The Roles of PostsecondaryEducation in Workforce Development: Challengesfor State Policy by Robert A. Wallhaus. Both doc-uments focused on the current economic climatedriving the need for higher education to play aleadership role in statewide workforce prepara-

tion systems. Much of this report's content issynthesized from the collective wisdom and bestthinking of leaders in higher education, business,industry, and government who joined SHEEOand its co-sponsoring organizations at two recentmeetings.

The first meeting was a WingspreadSymposium called Toward More EffectiveLearning Environments: The Role ofPostsecondary Education in WorkforcePreparation held February 22-24, 1996 in Racine,Wisconsin. In May 1996 a two-day WesternRegional Conference on the Role ofPostsecondary Education in WorkforcePreparation was held in Denver, Colorado.Appendices A and B provide a list of participantsat the Wingspread and Western Conferencemeetings. The common aim of both was to linkpostsecondary education to state and nationalworkforce preparation agendas currently beingdeveloped across the country.

The foundation for this report is theStatement of Principles and Priorities. It is basedon comments made by participants at theWingspread Symposium and expanded at theWestern Conference, and has been used to fuelfurther workforce development discussionsinvolving community colleges and technicalinstitutes, as well as baccalaureate degree-grant-ing colleges and universities. This report does notendorse a particular-set of strategies that statesshould adopt. Specific strategies need to be basedupon each state's existing economic, educationaland social conditions. However, we do provideexamples to illustrate how broad objectives arerealized at the state level. More importantly, thisframework provides direction to help state high-er education coordinating and governing boardsdevelop an agenda within statewide workforcedevelopment systems.

6

4.4tisf.'4 I

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The SHEEO workforce preparation agendaemerged from our association with several orga-nizations and individuals who have contributedgreatly to the knowledge of workforce develop-ment in this country. We asked many to advise usduring informal and formal discussions on thespecific roles of state higher education boards,colleges and universities related to workforcedevelopment. And, we have borrowed liberallyfrom their work. In particular, we have relied onthe understanding and counsel of RobertWallhaus, Carl Van Horn, Peter Ewell, DennisJones, Daniel Hull, Henry Spille, W. NortonGrubb and Anthony Carnevale.

We could not have moved forward on thisagenda without financial support and organiza-tional collaboration. The following organizationsand individuals co-sponsored our conferencesand provided critical suggestions for developingthe programs. The Wingspread Conference:Education Commission of the States (ECS),Charles S. Lenth; The Johnson Foundation,Susan Poulsen; American College Testing(ACT), Donald J. Carstensen and Thomas H.

Saterfiel; Educational Testing Service (ETS),Herbert Flamer; and the U.S. Department ofEducation, Office of Educational Research andImprovement (GERI), Barbara Lieb. TheWestern Regional Conference: WesternInterstate Commission for Higher Education(WICHE), Richard Jonsen, Dewayne Matthews,Jere Mock and Cheryl Blanco; The CollegeBoard, Janice Weinman and Irene Spero; ETS;BankAmerica Foundation, Caroline Boitano;and US West Foundation, Theresa Montoya.

Finally, this work and our continuing activitiesare guided by state higher education leadership.We would especially like to thank the 1996SHEEO Committee on Workforce Education andTraining for their commitment to this initiative:Jeffrey Baker (Chair), Kenneth H. Ashworth,Hans Brisch, James A. Busselle, Roy C. Carroll,Marc Gaspard, Diane S. Gilleland, BruceHamlett, Larry Isaak, Richard S. Jarvis, StephenM. Jordan, Stanley Z. Koplik, Katharine Lyall,Bryant Millsaps, Marilyn Quinn, Kala Stroup,and Richard D. Wagner.

7

POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION'S ROLE INPREPARING THE NEW WORKFORCE

A college education is highly valued in oursociety. Clearly, postsecondary education's vitallink to economic security is but one of its benefits;yet for many students, policymakers, and the pub-lic it is the single most compelling reason toattend college. There is mounting evidence thateducational attainment determines the "haves"and "have nots" in our society. According to cur-rent U.S. Census Bureau data, more educationmeans more earnings. And the highest earningsaccrue to those persons with education beyond thehigh school level. Put simply, from an individual'sperspective, when it comes to getting and keepinga good job, a college education can make a signif-icant difference.

EDUCATION CONTINUES TO BETHE TICKET TO HIGHER

EARNINGSMean annual earnings for persons

aged 18 and over,by level of education: 1992

Professional

Doctorate

Master's

Bachelor's

Associate's

Some College

HS graduate

Not HS graduate

$74,560

$54,904

$40,368

$32,629

$24,398

$19,666

$18,737 -

$1.2,809_

Source: U.S. Bureau of Census, Statistical BriefAugust 1994

As skill requirements continue going up acrossthe board, a higher-than-ever premium is placedon education and technical knowledge. There is

little doubt that given the current trend, thedemand for postsecondary education will continueto rise. To a large extent postsecondary educationwill be expected to deliver the new workforce. Atthe same time, colleges and universities them-selves are undergoing structural and organization-al changes driven by the demands of a changingeconomy. Like business and industry, the newwatch words for postsecondary education include:cost, quality, customer service-, accountability,convenience, and choice.

These internal and external forces make a com-pelling case for colleges and universities to be amore integral part of a workforce development sys-tem that is directly responsive to the educationalneeds of students, employers, and the public. Ifhigher education fails to respond to these chal-lenges, it will face increasing regulation by publicauthorities and decreasing public and private sup-port. Additionally, competition from the privatefor-profit sector will likely increase.

Within this changing economic and politicalenvironment, colleges and universities must try toaccommodate several groups of learner andemployer "clients":

college-bound high school graduates:Over 60 percent of high school graduates enroll inpostsecondary education following graduation.Recent surveys of college freshmen consistentlyshow that being "able to get a better job" is thenumber one reason in deciding to go to college.'

mom workers needing to retrain or upgrade skills:

Colleges and universities also are being asked toprepare returning students for further educationand work. Often these older students want moreeducation but not necessarily a degree. A recentpublic opinion survey suggested that rapid techno-logical change and new careers mean that peoplemust continually retrain and retool. Getting edu-cated once is not enough in our knowledge-based

8 BEST COPY AVAILABLE

economy. The survey found that interest in addi-tional education is highest among those whoalready have college training, and those with col-lege training are the ones who are most often con-tinuing their education in one form or another.'

Nom unemployed and underemployed workers:Emerging state strategies will have to address theeducation and training needs of individuals whocurrently live in poverty and are either jobless orwork for low pay. A great majority of these citizensare under-educated and lack the skills needed forsuccess in the workforce. For the most part, theyhave had limited opportunities for adult educationand job training, and if such training is available,it has tended to be in short-term programs thathave not helped under-prepared individuals makesuccessful transitions to the workplace.'

employers: Complementing the educationand training requirements of learners are the needsof employers for a ready-trained workforce. Recentnational and state surveys of employers indicatethat they are eager to work with colleges and uni-versities to upgrade the skill levels of entry-levelemployees, and to provide continuing educationand retraining for their current workforces.4

Given these facts, why is higher education stillat the periphery in discussions about workforceconcerns and in the search for solutions? What ispostsecondary education's role in addressing work-force needs? What can state higher educationleaders do to create an environment that is

responsive to what students, employers, policy-makers, and the public want from postsecondaryeducation?

Principles and PrioritiesThe Statement of Principles and Priorities on

page 3 was developed by SHEEO to define theleadership role that postsecondary educationshould play in workforce development in thestates. The statement is designed to reflect as wellas shape state policy and planning agendas and itis offered here to fulfill two purposes.

On the one hand, the statement, in its entirety,can be considered a tool to help rally commitmentto a broader and more learner-focused approach topostsecondary education's role in workforce devel-opment systems. It can serve as a conceptualframework and "reminder" that workforce-relatedissues must be addressed as part of policy delibera-tions on issues of postsecondary education access,cost, and quality. The state higher education lead-ers involved in its development suggest the state-ment also could be used to help define the roles ofstate higher education coordinating and govern-ing boards within this system, and they encourageits distribution to governors' offices, legislaturesand other state agencies.

On the other hand, the statement can beviewed as nine interrelated objectives, any one ofwhich can be the basis for a separate state levelinitiative. In the sections that follow, each of theseobjectives is described in more detail.

STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES AND PRIORITIES*

Create a vision for postsecondary educationin workforce development

The following principles provide the basis for buildingan effective workforce development system:

Imo The highest priority should be placed upon enhanc-ing workplace skills at all levels of education.

All levels of education need to significantly expandwork-based learning opportunities and place learning con-

tent into work contexts.

imm Learning is continuous, and the readiness to learn is

the most critical skill of all.

10 The capacity to build upon prior learning, and tomake seamless transitions from one learning experience to

another, is essential.

mu Workforce development efforts must be tailored tothe distinctive training and educational needs of regionaleconomies, communities and employers.

Broaden the "school-to-work" frameworkThe above principles are consistent with federal work-

force development block grant legislation as well as theSchool-to-Work Opportunities Act. However, they must bebroadly conceived to draw upon the full contributions of alleducation, training and learning providers (including col-leges and universities, community colleges and vocational-technical institutions). It is better, for example, to empha-size "education-to-careers-to-further education" than thenarrower, linear perspective implied by the term "school-

to-work."

Build a collaborative systemof education and training

State Higher Education Executive Officers (SHEEOs)and other state education officials should play a leadershiprole in developing and implementing statewide workforcedevelopment systems, and participate in human resourceinvestment councils and similar state-level entities. At thesame time, these state education leaders should be recep-tive to changes that are necessary to achieve effectivecoordination and division of responsibility with other unitsof state government, and to ensure broad collaborationwith all stakeholders, including business and labor.

Capitalize on the distinct rolesof learning providers

The roles of learning providers should be diffe'rentiated

to capitalize upon their distinctive missions and strengths.At the same time they should work toward coordinationand sharing of resources to maximize their collective con-

tributions.

Improve learner productivity .

Expanded efforts must be made to improve "learnerproductivity" by:

NE= making education and training "learner-centered"

Eno holding high expectations for learners

mom supporting active learning

Nom capitalizing on technologies to achieve flexibility and

_ access to learning

mom making effective use of the time and resources oflearners as well as providers.

Help learners make informed choicesLearners must have sound information and Counsel

upon which to base optimal choices regarding _learning.experiences.

Connect learning and workLearning providers must strive to build effective part-

nerships with business and create effective linkages withwork-based and other modes of learning.

Ensure an effective systemLearning processes should incorporate a common lan-

guage and understanding that are shaped by high stan-dards of performance, as well as incentives to support highlevels of achievement; all learning providers should be held

accountable to identified performance standards.

Support teachers and facultySHEEOs and other state education officials should work

together to ensure that teacher education programs andprofessional development opportunities for practicingteachers are responsive to the need to better prepare ele-mentary and secondary students for work and further edu-

cation and training.

* The term "learner" is used in its broadest sense to encompass thefull scope of possible education, training and learning experiences;and similarly the term "learning provider" is used to capture the fullrange of sponsors of these learning experiences.

n

CREATE A VISION FOR POSTSECONDARYEDUCATION ON W RKF RCE EVELOPMENT

All who participated in our discussions, fromeducation, government, business, and communi-ty sectors, underscored the critical and essentialcomponent of postsecondary education leader-ship committed to a vision for workforce prepara-tion. A necessary first step is to establish a visionand set goals for the state that are based on sharedbeliefs and which articulate clearly the role ofpostsecondary education.

The following principles provide the basis for build-

ing an effective workforce development system:

® The highest priority should be placed uponenhancing workplace skills at all levels of educa-

tion.

Mena All levels of education need to significantlyexpand work-based learning opportunities and

place learning content into work contexts.

cz= Learning is continuous, and the readiness tolearn is the most critical skill of all.

MIMI The capacity to build upon prior learning, andto make seamless transitions from one learning

experience to another, is essential.

® Workforce development efforts must be tai-lored to the distinctive training and educational

needs of regional economies, communities and

employers.

In particular, discussants emphasized that statehigher education leadership must play a pivotalrole in this "vision-setting" process by respondingin highly visible and clearly defined ways to callsfor preparing a new workforce. A few recent stateexamples where this has occurred:

MI. In the North Dakota Plan for Identifyingand Responding to Workforce Training Needs,both the new seven-year plan and the new strate-gic academic plan approved by the State Board ofHigher Education are more "customer focused"than previous plans and have specific objectivesaimed at workforce education and training. Thegoal of the plans is to "create a collaborative,responsive workforce training capacity with theUniversity System that is capable of anticipatingand meeting the needs of students, business,industry, and the economy of North Dakota."

1mm The Illinois Board of Higher Education setsout in its 1996 Workforce Preparation ActionPlan the need for improved preparation amongall learners. It identifies six goals: (1) academicand technical skills development; (2) currentworkforce skill advancement; (3) access to careerinformation, education and training; (4) transi-tions to work; (5) linking classroom and work-place learning; and (6) collaboration, quality andaccountability.

® The Minnesota Education to EmploymentTransitions Council has developed a plan thatincludes this simple vision statement: "AllMinnesotans will make successful education andemployment transitions." There are 10 guidingprinciples for getting it done: (1) establish and bedriven by multi-sector partnerships; (2) establisha lifelong approach to workforce concepts; (3)establish standards by which to measure success;(4) encourage learners to take primary responsi-bility for their own success; (5) value diversity;(6) balance learner and workforce needs; (7) pre-pare learners for the future; (8) recognize learnerscurrently in the workforce; (9) create learningopportunities in developmental and applied con-texts; and (10) coordinate existing resources.

11_

BROADEN THE "SCHOOL-TO-WORK" FRAMEWORK

Our discussants frequently raised the need forpostsecondary education to adhere to a "commonlanguage" when discussing workforce develop-ment issues. It should include a clear statementthat resources of colleges and universities will sup-port the education and training of the Americanworkforce. This common language can be thebasis for improved communication with othereducation sectors, across local, state and federalprograms, and with employers.

To date, state-level discussions about educa-tion, employment and training have focused pri-marily on the needs of non-college bound youth.This emphasis has been spurred in part by the fed-eral School-to-Work Opportunities Act which isdesigned to help youths make the transition fromeducation to employment. But, this focus ignoresthe fact that more than half of high school gradu-ates continue their education in postsecondaryprograms. According to recent data from the U.S.Department of Education, in 1994, sixty-two per-cent of high school graduates were enrolled in col-lege the October following their high school grad-uation. And an even greater percentage of stu-dents enrolled in postsecondary education beforethe age of 30.5

The principles outlined In this report are consis-

tent with federal workforce development block-

grant legislation as well as the School-to-Work

Opportunities Act. However, they must be broadly

conceived to draw upon the full contributions of all

training and learning providers and to facilitate

continuous learning. It is better, for example, to

conceptualize these premises in terms of "educa-

tion-to-careers-to-further education" than the nar-

rower, linear perspective implied by the term"school-to-work."

Many meeting participants argued that school-to-work programs must be tied to postsecondaryeducation because of the high premiumAmericans place on college degrees. This opinionis consistent with a national study that found thatnearly eight out of ten Americans are convincedhigh school graduates should go to college becauseit improves their job prospects.' Discussants point-ed out that the School-to-Work OpportunitiesAct can offer a framework for involving both sec-ondary and postsecondary education in workforcepreparation.

THE SCHOOL-TO-WORK

OPPORTUNITIES ACT CAN

OFFER A FRAMEWORK FOR

NVOLVING BOTH SECONDARY

AND POSTSECONDARY

EDUCATION IN WORKFORCE

PREPARATION

For example, in Illinois, the federal School-to-Work Opportunities Act is a basic building blockof a collaborative process to provide workforcedevelopment services at the local level, but lead-ers in the state say that it must be expandedbeyond its narrow focus as a vehicle to help stu-dents make transitions from school to work. A pri-mary goal of the Illinois Human ResourceInvestment Council is to build communicationlinkages with businesses and the public, educa-tional institutions, and state agencies. Accordingto Richard Wagner, executive director of theIllinois Board of Higher Education, "The policygoal should reflect appreciation for lifelong learn-ing and education to careers."

12

-A'

BUILD A COLLABORATIVE SYSTEMOF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

Several discussants suggested a need to coordi-nate programs and services within statewide work-force development systems. They argued that theproliferation of education and job training pro-grams often creates confusion about what servicesare available a confusion that exists amongemployers as well as among potential employees.Participants suggested that state policymakers andeducators should clarify the distinction between"job training" and "education" in some casesnarrowing it because such distinction does notserve students well nor is it understood by employ-ers. Further, operating workforce development pro-grams on separate tracks frustrates coordinationand states' abilities to design systemic approaches.

SHEEOs and other state education officials

should play a leadership role in developing and

implementing statewide workforce development

systems, and participating in human resourceinvestment councils and similar state-level entities.

At the same time these education officials should

be receptive to changes that are necessary to

achieve effective coordination and a division of

responsibility with other units of state government

and to ensure broad involvement of all stakehold-

ers, including business and labor.

Several states, including Illinois, Texas,Massachusetts, Wisconsin, and Oregon, alreadyhave made substantial strides in putting togetherboards, task forces or state human resource invest-ment councils that bring together higher educa-tion, vocational job training programs, and adulteducation. Aside from their roles in getting impor-tant players together, some councils play a key rolein developing performance measures and account-ability standards, carrying out research, and devel-oping and coordinating different kinds of skillsstandards. For example, North Dakota's Workforce

Development Council grew out of the Governor'sExecutive Order to integrate workforce develop-ment and economic development policies in thestate. In spite of dwindling resources, coordinatingservices helped the state be more responsive to theneeds of its citizens.

Under the auspices of the federal government,state agencies may soon be pressured to coordinatetheir services. Currently, Congress is debating leg-islation that will consolidate over one hundredfederal job training programs and give statesauthority and management responsibilities overthe resources. Consolidation offers states theopportunity to create more effective and coherentworkforce development systems; however, it is notclear whether final legislation will require states todevelop such approaches. According to researcherW. Norton Grubb, "States could therefore simplyallocate federal funds under a new block grant inways that federal funds have previously been allo-cated, minus whatever cuts Congress imposes." Itwould merely replicate, under state control, whathas developed under federal legislation. He sug-gested that, "To realize the opportunity that con-solidation creates, it will be necessary to create anew and more unified system out of the many stateand federal education and training programs thatnow exist. That in turn requires a vision of whatsuch a system might be."

But many participants warned that states shouldnot design their workforce preparation systemsaround the potential for federal money becausethose resources are never stable and can be reallo-cated with changes in the political wind. Stateleaders have compelling reasons to develop cohe-sive workforce development systems with or with-out federal funds and need to begin to developstrategies for creating an environment to help thesystem to thrive.

13

CAPITALIZE ON THE DISTINCT ROLESF LEARNING PROVIDERS

Seamlessness another policy recommendationfor the postsecondary education sector offered by par-

ticipants will create a workforce preparation sys-tem in which each program is linked to the next levelof education and training. Programs from job train-ing, high schools, community colleges, colleges anduniversities need to be connected and articulated.

The roles of learning providers should bedifferentiated to capitalize upon their distinctive

missions and strengths. At the same time they

should work toward achieving effective

coordination and sharing of resources so as to max-

imize their collective contributions.

The discussants confirmed that both two- andfour-year colleges should participate in workforcedevelopment, and the distinct roles and issues thateach addresses should be recognized and aligned.For example, all postsecondary education institu-tions will need to develop strategies to overcomeemployer dissatisfaction.Adult education and jobtraining (includingoccupational skillsinstruction, on-the-jobtraining and work expe-rience, and sometimes COLLEGES ANDjob search assistance)have been successful atmany community col-leges and their activitiesshould continue to be supported. Degree-grantingcolleges and universities are beginning to examinetheir admission policies and procedures, and aligntraditional programs and contextually-based cur-riculum and performance assessments. Some col-leges and universities also are developing teacherpreparation and professional development pro-grams that incorporate applied teaching and learn-

PROGRAMS

TRAINING, HI

ing strategies. These activities should be recognizedand effective practices promoted.

Participants identified many examples acrossthe country where community colleges are deliver-ing employee education and training programs tobusiness and industry. For example, we heard abouta "shadow college" in Arkansas in which collegecourses are taught on the plant floor. According toWestark Community College President JoelStubblefield, "We served 149 industries last year.They approved the curriculum and described theexpected outcomes. If we fail to deliver what theywant, they get their money back. The problem ismeeting the demand because we are the only col-lege in Arkansas working directly with businessand industry in this way. With state-level support,we want to take this model to other regions of thestate and hope that colleges and universities willadopt it."

In another example, participants from Kansasdescribed how colleges and universities can usetheir research capacities to address the technical

needs of business andindustry. The major air-craft industries (Boeing,Cessna Aircraft, and

COLLEGES, Raytheon Aircraft)have teamed with fourstate universities(Wichita State Univer-sity, Kansas StateUniversity, the Univer-sity of Kansas and

Pittsburgh State University) to create an AircraftDesign and Manufacturing Research Center. Thecenter will provide comprehensive research anddevelopment to support the civil aircraft industryand will allow for technology transfer within theindustry. Most importantly, it provides educationand employment opportunities for students whowill be working and learning at the Center.

FROM JOB

GH SCHOOLS

COMMUNITY

NEED TO BE

AND ART

UNIVERSITIES

CONNECTED

ICULATED

h

IMPROVE LEARNER PRODUCTIVITY

Becoming learner-centered, according to oneconference participant, means focusing on theindividual students and helping them connect totheir goals. This requires that postsecondary edu-cation strive to understand what the goals of theindividuals are what they are trying to accom-plish and how to customize programs andcourses to meet their needs.

Expanded efforts must be made to improve"learner productivity" by:

Gam making training and education "learnercentered"

Ege21 holding high expectations for learners

1=1 supporting active learning

ESIMI capitalizing on technologies to achieveflexibility and access to learning

C=3 making effective use of the time andresources of learners as well as providers.

To ensure all students opportunities for futureeconomic benefits and higher levels of civic par-ticipation, our discussants were unanimous intheir feeling that educators need to focus on theindividual learner. In a statement that capturedthe view of many participants, Jeffrey Baker, for-mer commissioner of higher education for theMontana University System, reflected that"Many students come to colleges and universitieswith very strong aspirations for training andpreparation for careers. A key to addressing theneeds of students is gaining the involvement andcommitment of postsecondary education institu-tions and faculty."

A number of states have put learners at thecenter of their state workforce developmentplans. For example, Missouri's State Plan forPostsecondary Vocational Technical Education isspecifically aimed at identifying the learning

needs of its citizens and aligning them with newand innovative education and training deliverysystems. This also is the focus of state plans inIllinois and North Dakota.

States and their secondary schools, collegesand universities are working with various organi-zations to develop new programs and curriculumthat connect learners to the real world. For exam-ple, the Center for Occupational Research andDevelopment (CORD) develops curriculum inapplied physics, communications, mathematics,and biology/chemistry for high schools and "tech-prep" programs (generally, the last two years ofsecondary and first two years of postsecondaryeducation programs). According to CORD's pres-ident, Daniel Hull, the courses adhere to highstandards and focus on problem-solving, are prac-tical and relevant, emphasize associated hands-onlearning, and retain integrity of course content.

But many students taking applied courses areconcerned that they will be foreclosed fromfurther education and postsecondary degree-attainment because most college and universityadmission requirements include completion of acore curriculum made up of traditional courses'inmathematics, science, English, social studies andforeign languages. While this is viewed as apotential barrier to the successful transition ofstudents from secondary to postsecondary educa-tion, CORD's data suggest that four-year collegesand universities are beginning to acceptcontextually-based courses in their admissionsprocedures. Over 70 colleges and universities intwenty states now accept applied physics andmore than 40 institutions in nine states accept asAlgebra I credit the applied mathematics series.'

15

HELP LEARNERS TO MAKE INFORMED CHOICES

Neither business nor educational institutionshave been effective at communicating to thepublic about the knowledge, skills and abilitiesneeded by entry-levelworkers. Based onpublic interest pollsand voter response totax referendums foreducation, what thepublic expects fromschools, colleges anduniversities may notalign with what busi-ness has suggested itneeds and what edu-cators say they aredelivering. One par-ticipant suggestedthat one way to resolvebetween business and

CLEARLY

of "one-stop" career centers to provide "access tothe information and job exchange network andoffer high quality basic and optional services to

every Colorado jobseeker and employer."The statewide net-work of one-stopcareer centers willprovide: ( 1 ) a com-mon applicant intakeform; (2) generallabor market informa-tion; (3) accreditationand evaluation pro-cesses for serviceproviders; (4) eligibil-ity standards for ser-vices for targeted

groups; (5) advisors; (6) management of financialsupport; (7) performance-based assessments; and(8) an evaluation process.

Similarly, one-stop centers on Nevada com-munity college campuses help non-traditionalstudents, including welfare recipients and personswith disabilities, to access information on federaland state grant programs that provide support forassessment, tuition, book assistance and child-care. According to Richard Jarvis, chancellor ofthe University and Community College Systemof Nevada, "The community colleges and StateEmployment Service Division are partners.Branches on each campus ensure that studentsreceive a full range of services from admissions tojob placement without leaving the collegecampus."

DEFINE

EFFECTIVE

THE SKILLS

WORKERS AND

CITIZENS NEED AND THE

EDUCATION AND TRAINING

EXPERIENCES THAT COLLEGES

AND UNIVERSITIES CAN

PR OVIDE

the communication gapeducators is to clearly

define the skills effective workers and citizensneed and the education and training experiencesthat colleges and universities can provide. Heconcluded, "governors and legislators aredemanding that we establish better systems tocommunicate that information to students,employers and the public."

Learners must have sound information andcounsel upon which to base choices regarding

learning experiences.

Individuals often do not know where to begintheir search for information about postsecondaryeducation and job training programs. To addressthis problem, a few states are beginning to devel-op "one-stop shops" that provide easy access toprogram and services information to students andemployers. For example, the Colorado WorkforceCoordinating Council recommends the creation

16

CONNECT LEARNING AND WORK

Our discussants pointed out the need for strate-gies that will allow businesses and other employ-ers to communicate their skill requirements topostsecondary education educators. When asked,employers report they expect high quality educa-tion and training programs that meet the needs ofthe workplace and they suggest severalapproaches internships, cooperative educa-tion, and apprenticeship programs for improv-ing the connections between them and highereducation.'

The contributions and involvement of business

are central elements of successful statewide work-_

force development systems. Learning providers

must strive to build effective partnerships with

business and effective linkages with work-based

learning opportunities.

Business also would like to provide more inputinto the curriculum. According to interviews con-ducted by the New Jersey Business-HigherEducation Forum, to ensure optimal payoff fortheir education and training investment, employ-ers want their employees to be able to apply whatthey have learned. They want more responsivecurricula, and more flexibility to respond tochanging employer needs. Additionally, employ-ers want to know more about students before hir-ing them and they want easier access to thatinformation."

Notable models are beginning to emergedemonstrating how state leadership can supportbusiness and postsecondary education partner-ships that address the training needs of employ-ees. For example, Washington's WorkforceEmployment and Training Act (HB 1988) is

designed to significantly expand the state's jobretraining efforts. It is supported through a work-

force training trust fund that receives about onecent of every $100 of existing unemploymenttaxes paid by business. In the 1993-95 biennium,the trust fund generated $35.1 million for enroll-ment at community and technical colleges.

In focus groups conducted by the WashingtonState Board for Community and TechnicalColleges (SBCTC), participants reported thatbecause the training programs developed underHB 1988 require business and labor endorsement,collaboration between colleges, business andlabor significantly increased. And business partic-ipants suggested that this involvement improvedtheir relationship with local colleges. The reasonsfor improvement were that: (1) many employers,not just a few representatives, were involved;(2) training needs were identified by employersrather than by colleges; (3) college staff acceptedcurricular input; and (4) programs included prac-tical work experience in addition to classroominstruction.

17

I

Postsecondary education and business and indus-

try should work together to support the education

and training of the Amencan workforce Anthony P

Carnevale, Vice President for Public Leadership at

Educational Testing Service recently made the fol-

lowing observations about the education needed by

those who will succeed in the new economy:

lems a formal education which includes basiceducational preparation beyond high school

preparation in an occupational or appliedspecialty

E lm formal or informal training on the job

access to information technology at work

In national and state surveys requesting feedback

on their workforce needs, employers respond that

they are generally satisfied with the academic know-

ledge that recent college graduates have acquired in

their majors; however, business and industry leaders

would like colleges and universities to incorporate

into the collegiate experience the following skills:

la= leadership and communication skills

quantification skills

N om interpersonal relations and the ability to workin teams

w oo understanding the need to work with a diverseworkforce at home and abroad

1=I the capacity to adapt to rapid change

Carnevale, Anthony P,. "Liberal Education and the New Economy," Liberal Education(Washington, D.C.: American Association of Colleges and Universities, Spring 1996);. HigherEducation and Work Readiness: The View from the Corporation (Washington, D.C.: Business HigherEducation Forum, September 1995); Enhancing the Connection Between Higher Education and theWorkplace: A Survey of Employers (Denver, CO: State Higher Education Executive Officers and

Education Commission of the States,LOctober 1995).

ENSURE AN EFFECTIVE SYSTEM

States need to create a workforce preparation sys-

tem that allows agencies, educational institutionsand businesses to learn from each other the mosteffective processes for doing business. Working pri-manly with corporations to help them find andtransfer "best practices" among themselves, JackGrayson, CEO of the American Productivity andQuality Center, suggested that educators "beginthinking outside the box and perhaps borrow prac-tices from other organizations and businesses. Forexample, when health care providers wanted todesign an effective registration and admitting system,

we suggested that they look to other businesseshotels and rental car companies for help. Using abenchmarking process gives organizations opportu-nities to organize methods of learning and thenallows them to transfer that know-how to others."

Learning processes should incorporate a com-

mon language and understanding that are shaped

by high standards for performance, as well asincentives to support high levels of achievement; all

learning providers should be accountable to identi-

fied performance standards.

Attempts to develop workforce preparation sys-tems that identify and reward "best practices" arebeginning to take shape in some states. For exam-ple, in California, the State Job TrainingCoordinating Council (SJTCC) is involved in aninteragency collaborative process to design a newworkforce preparation system for the state. AmongIts many efforts, the SJTCC is charged with respon-sibility for developing a performance-basedaccountability system that will annually publishreport cards evaluating workforce preparation pro-grams and providers.

Concomitantly, the California HigherEducation Round Table made up of the chief

executive officers from all segments of public edu-cation in the state, the president of the Associationof Independent California Colleges andUniversities, and the executive director of theCalifornia Postsecondary Education Commission

recently made a formal commitment to advance

workforce excellence. To accomplish this goal, theRound Table will focus its efforts in the followingareas:

momi examine university admission and curriculum

articulation policies and practices to ascertain theircompatibility with new curricula being developedin secondary schools

® review curricula and teaching and learningstrategies to ensure their relevance and applicabili-ty to the world of work

Nom develop alliances with leaders of industry andlabor in the public and private sectors

mm strengthen existing relationships with otherentities engaged in employment training and withlocal and state agencies charged with economicdevelopment

Imo conduct regional hearings to listen andrespond to the public's concern about education,employment, and the condition of local economies.

While the SJTCC and the Higher EducationRound Table are distinct state entities, leadership inthese groups is currently attempting to align theworkforce preparation activities in which the twoare involved.

19

SUPPORT TEACHERS AND FACULTY

Many participants raised concerns that com-prehensive workforce preparation systems willnot work unless teachers are prepared to supportand enhance "learner-centered" instruction. Oneteacher from Wisconsin spoke for many otherswhen he said, "Colleges and universities need toprepare future teachers to value and impart totheir students an appreciation for lifelong learn-ing. Teachers and teacher educators will needsupport to change pedagogy. Professional devel-opment experiences will help them to preparetheir students for more context-based experi-ences."

SHEEOs and other state education officialsshould work together to ensure that teacher educa-

tion programs and professional development oppor-

tunities for practicing teachers are responsive to the

need to better prepare elementary and secondary

students for work and further education and training

But changing teacher training programs in col-leges and universities will mean that state leadersand college administrators will have to tackle acurrent faculty reward system that bases promo-tion and salaries on attainment and maintenanceof tenure, not student success. This may changeat a "new college" recently proposed to faculty atArkansas' Westark Community College.According to President Joel Stubblefield, many ofthe traditional structures and processes for edu-cating students will be eliminated: college admis-sions will be based on proficiency levels of enter-ing students; degree attainment will be based onwhether students attain defined learning out-comes; seat-time and Carnegie course credit willbe eliminated. In Stubblefield's vision "academicdepartments will be integrated to provide cus-tomized learning for the student. Because we

want students to have certain capacities to learnfor the rest of their lives, we need to organize ourinstitutions to accommodate this learning model.So, faculty will be organized around teachingidentified skills, not academic subjects."

20

P.

AN AGENDA FORSTATE HIGHER EDUCATION BOARDS

State leaders are urged to

support the following nine

objectives for linking

postsecondary education to

workforce development systems:

lems Create a vision of postsecondary education inworkforce development

mom Broaden the "school-to-work" framework

Is Build a collaborative system of education andtraining

® Capitalize on the distinct roles of learning providers

® Improve learner productivity

illila Help learners make informed choices

® Connect learning and work

Now Ensure an effective system

WISIM Support teachers and faculty

2i

SHEEO will use these objectives as the basisfor our continuing work to support a state high-er education agenda aimed at ensuring success-ful transitions from school to further educationand work. In addition, we are committed toworking with all stakeholders national andregional education organizations, governors'offices, state legislators, business and industry,colleges and universities, schools, and othereducation and training providers in initia-tives that will strengthen needed alignments.

Part of our continuing activities will be toidentify and examine successful models and"best practices" demonstrating the involvementand leadership of postsecondary education instatewide workforce preparation systems. Thesemodels will be widely disseminated and willserve as a strategy to build the leadership capac-ity of state higher education agencies, collegesand universities in these systems. Our work willfocus on the following issues:

® high school feedback and admissions,including new linkages and measures that arebeing established between high school perfor-mance and college success; evaluating work-based and other applied or contextual learningat the secondary level in the postsecondaryadmission process; using_ high school feedbacksystems for program improvements and studentcounseling.

articulation and transfer withinpostsecondary education, including articula-tion and transfer between community collegesand baccalaureate institutions; community col-lege to baccalaureate institution articulation ofoccupational programs; articulation of "tech-prep" curricula with baccalaureate completionprograms; student tracking systems and their usein providing information feedback to institu-

tions from which students transferred.

® follow-up of program completers andemployer feedback systems, including the util-ity of alumni follow-up information for programassessment and review; the design of employerfeedback systems and the utility of informationthat employers could provide for postsecondaryprogram review and assessment; informationwhich employers find important in their recruit-ment processes and in evaluating the trainingneeds of their employees.

® integration of classroom-based and work-based learning, including achieving effectiveintegration of academic and work-based learn-ing; employer contributions to and sponsorshipof work-site learning; measures of learning suc-cess in work-based experiences; effective highereducation-business partnerships; integratingtechnology-based learning into the overall edu-cational experience and evaluation of technolo-gy-based learning; integrating applied learninginto teacher preparation and professional devel-opment programs.

=No effective coordination and planning,including patterns of representation that statesuse in coordination and governance structures;responsibilities assigned to various state agen-cies for staffing workforce development initia-tives; mechanisms states use in establishingworking relationships across agencies and orga-nizations (e.g., joint studies, executive sum-mits); roles of governors, key legislators, busi-ness executives, state education leaders (partic-ularly SHEEOs); contributions to workforceeducation and training by education providers,especially postsecondary education institutions.

22

NOTES

1 The American Freshman: National Norms for Fall 1993, American Council on Educationand Higher Education Research Institute, University of California at Los Angeles (Los Angeles, CA:University of California, 1993).

2 Dillman, Don A., James A. Christenson, Priscilla Salant and Paul D. Wagner, What the PublicWants from Higher Education: Workforce Implications from a 1995 NationalSurvey, Social and Economics Sciences Research Center (Pullman, WA: Washington StateUniversity, November 1995).

3 Grubb, W. Norton, "Creating a Comprehensive Workforce Preparation System: Re-integrating Education and Job Training." Presentation before the California State JobTraining Coordinating Council, January 30, 1996.

4 Van Horn, Carl E., Enhancing the Connection Between Higher Education and theWorkplace: A Survey of Employers (Denver, CO: State Higher Education Executive Officersand Education Commission of the States, October 1995); Task Force on High Performance Work andWorkers, Higher Education and Work Readiness: The View from the Corporation(Washington, D.C.: Business-Higher Education Forum, September 1995).

5 The Condition of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (Washington, D.C.: U.S.Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, 1996)

6 Immerwahr, John with Steve Farkas, The Closing Gateway: Californians Consider TheirHigher Education Systems (San Jose, CA: Public Agenda Foundation for the California HigherEducation Policy Center, September 1993).

7 Souders, John C. Jr., "The Coming Challenge: Are Community Colleges Ready for the New Wave ofContextual Learners?" in National Tech Prep Network Connections (Waco, Texas: Center forOccupational Research and Development, May 1996).

8 Van Horn, Carl E., Enhancing the Connection Between Higher Education and theWorkplace: A Survey of Employers. Also, several publications by the National Center on theEducational Quality of the Workforce, University of Pennsylvania provide a review of employer reac-tion to youth apprenticeships and internship programs, including: Zemsky, Robert, "WhatEmployers Want: Employer Perspectives of Youth Apprenticeships," National Centeron Educational Quality of the Workforce (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania, 1994); Lynn,Irene and Joan Wills, "School Lessons, Work Lessons: Recruiting and SustainingEmployer Involvement in School-to Work Programs," National Center on EducationalQuality of the Workforce (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania, 1994); and Osterman, Pauland Maria Iannozzi, "Youth Apprenticeships and School-to-Work Transition: CurrentKnowledge and Legislative Strategy," National Center on Educational Quality of theWorkforce (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania, 1993).

9 Ibid. 23

TOWARD MORE EFFECTIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS:THE ROLE OF POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION

IN WORKFORCE PREPARATIONWINGSPREAD CONFERENCE CENTER RACINE, WISCONSIN February 22-24, 1996

Arkansas lommi Missouri

Diane S. Gilleland Ka la Stroup

Director Commissioner of Higher EducationDepartment of Higher Education Coordinating Board for Higher Education

Joel Stubblefield Joseph L Driskill

President DirectorWestark Community College Department of Economic Development

Illinois moN

Richard D. Wagner

Executive Director

Board of Higher Education

Richard Fonte

Assistant for Workforce Education Policy

Office of the Governor

Kansas

Stephen M. Jordan

Executive Director

Kansas Board of Regents

Bruce Peterman

Senior Vice President

Aircraft Development

Cessna Aircraft Company

Kentucky Ism

Gary S. Cox

Executive Director

Council on Higher Education

Roy Peterson

Secretary of the Cabinet

for Education, Arts and Humanities

Montana Imo

Jeffrey Baker

Commissioner of Higher Education

Montana Systems of Higher Education

Hon. Daryl Toews

State Senator

Chair, Educational and Cultural

Resources Committee

Montana State Senate

Nevada is=m

Richard S. Jarvis

Chancellor

University and Community College

Systems of Nevada

Ann Wilson Andreini

Legal Counsel

Office of the Governor

24

North Dakota ElmGene A. Kemper

Vice Chancellor

North Dakota University System

Fraine C. Zeit ler

Director

Workforce Development Council

Governor's Office

Ohio mini

Elaine Hairston

ChancellorOhio Board of Regents

James Mermis

Director of Workforce Development

Office of the Governor

Wisconsin

David Ward

Sr. Vice President

Academic Affairs

University of Wisconsin System

Cheryl Wilhoyte

Superintendent of Schools

Madison Metropolitan School District

INSTITUTIONAL/ORGANIZATIONAL

LEADERS

Charles W. Bray

President

The Johnson Foundation

Donald J. Carstensen

Vice President, Educational Services

ACT

Herbert Flamer

Executive Director

College and University Programs

Educational Testing Service

C. Jackson Grayson, Jr.

ChairmanAmerican Productivity and Quality Center

W. Norton Grubb

Professor

School of Education

University of California

John R. Holmes

Teacher

John Marshall High School

Dennis Jones

President

National Center for Higher EducationManagement Systems

25

Rahul Kamath Susan Poulsen

Student Program Officer

Carlton College The Johnson Foundation, Inc.

Charles S. Lenth Esther M. Rodriguez

Director of Policy Studies

for Higher Education

Education Commission of the States

Barbara Lieb

Senior Researcher

Office of Educational Research and Improvement

U.S. Department of Education

Irene Lynn

Deputy Director

National School-to-Work

Opportunities Office

James R. Mingle

Executive Director

State Higher Education Executive Officers

Carla O'Dell

President

American Productivity

and Quality Center

Leno S. Pedrotti

Senior Vice President, Chief Scientist

Center for Occupational Research

and Development

Associate Executive Director

State Higher Education Executive Officers

Thomas H. Saterfiel

Vice President

Research Division

ACT

Barbara S. Uehling

Executive DirectorBusiness-Higher Education Forum

Carl Van Horn

Professor of Public Policy

Eagleton Institute of PoliticsRutgers, State University of New Jersey

Robert A. Wallhaus

Senior ConsultantState Higher Education Executive Officers

26

WESTERN REGIONAL CONFERENCE ON THE ROLE OFPOSTSECONDARY EDUCATION IN WORKFORCE

PREPARATIONDENVER, COLORADO May 2-4, 1996

Norma Rees

President

California StateUniversity/Hayward

ARIZONA

Tricia Euen

Occupational Program Specialist

Maricopa Community College District

John Merren

Director of Occupational Curriculum

Pima Community College

CALIFORNIA

Raul J. Cardoza

President

Chabot College

Diane Carey

President

Napa Valley College

Maureen DiMarco

Secretary

Office of Child Development

and Education

Warren H. Fox

Executive Director

California Postsecondary Education Commission

Sonia Hernandez

Special Policy Advisor

California Department of Education

Cheryl Hickey

Analyst

California Postsecondary Michael T. RotaEducation Commission

Vice Chancellor for Academic AffairsUniversity of Hawaii

Diane Vines

Vice President, Academic DevelopmentCSU Institute

Phillip Williams

Chair

State Job Training Coordinating Council

COLORADO tam"

Marilyn Akers

Director

Colorado School to Work

Susan McAlonan

Consultant

Colorado Department of Education

Dwayne C. Nuzum

Executive Director

Commission on Higher Education

H. Clay Whitlow

Vice President

Colorado Community College & OccupationalEducation System

HAWAII mom

27

(HAWAII cont.)

Thomas W. Si leo

Associate Dean/Eisenhower Coordinator

University of Hawaii at Manoa

IDAHO Nom

Trudy J. Anderson

State DirectorIdaho Division of Vocational Education

Mary Emery

Lewis-Clark State College

Jay Engstrom

Director

State Department of Commerce

KANSAS mom

William R. Docking

Regent

Kansas Board of Regents

John F. Welsh III

Director of Academic Affairs

Kansas Board of Regents

MINNESOTA

Leslie K. Mercer

Interim DirectorHigher Education Services Office

MONTANA

Dwight Johnson Richard A. Crofts

Director Deputy Commissioner, Academic Affairs

State Department of Labor Office of the Commissioner of Higher Education

Montana University SystemDavid White

Division Director

College of Southern Idaho

ILLINOIS mow

Sarah Hawker

Associate Director, Academic Affairs

Board of Higher Education

28

Gail Gray

Assistant SuperintendentOffice of Public Instruction

Pat Haffey

Education Policy Advisor

Office of the Governor

NEBRASKA mmi

Odus V. Elliott

Academic Officer

Coordinating Commission for Postsecondary Education

NEVADA

Ann Wilson Andreini

Legal Council

Office of the Governor

NEW MEXICO

Bruce D. Hamlett

Executive Director

Commission on Higher Education

Vonell Huitt

Education Policy Advisor

Office of the Governor

David Lepre

Deputy Director

Legislative Finance Committee

James N. McLaughlin

Campus Director

NMSU-Dona Ana

Antionette Pacheco-Perez

Senior Analyst

Legislative Finance Committee

Frank J. Renz

Executive Director

New Mexico Council of

Independent Community Colleges

NORTH DAKOTA

Eddie Dunn

Executive Director

College Technical Education CouncilNorth Dakota University System

Russ Statger

President/CEO

Bismarck Mandan Develop Association

Charles Stroup

Director

Department of Economic Development & Finance

Scott Wilson

President

North Dakota Chamber ofCommerce Executives

OREGON

David T. Conley

Associate Professor, University of Oregon

Director, PASS Project

Oregon State System Higher Education

Tim Griffin

Vice Chancellor for Corporate &Public Affairs

Oregon State System Higher Education

TEXAS am

Ken Tunstall

Director of Workforce Education

Texas Higher Education

Coordinating Board

29

WASHINGTON som

Geoffrey Gamble

Vice Provost for Academic Affairs

Washington State University

Daniel 1. McConnon

Director for Workforce Education

State Board for Community

and Technical Colleges

Doug Scrima

Senior Policy Associate

Higher Education Coordinating Board

Jane C. Sherman

Deputy Director, Academic Affairs

Higher Education Coordinating Board

Bryan Wilson

Associate Director

Workforce Training & Education

Coordinating Board

Hon. Jeanette Wood

State SenatorWashington State Senate

WEST VIRGINIA BMW

James Skidmore

Acting Vice Chancellor Community and

Technical College Education

State College and University Systems

WYOMING rzmm

Bev Aoki

Vice Chairperson

Wyoming Job Training Commission

Charles Bohlen

President

Laramie County Community College

Frank Galeotos

Director

Wyoming Department of Education

Thomas Henry

Executive Director

Wyoming Community College Commission

Joe Simpson

Deputy State Superintendent ofPublic Instruction

Wyoming Department of Education

30

INSTITUTIONAL/ORGANIZATIONAL

LEADERS

Cheryl Blanco

Program Director

Research and Policy Analysis

Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education

Barbara Bolin

Coordinator

Industry-Education InitiativesDell Computer Corporation

Anthony P. Carnevale

Vice President for Public Leadership

Educational Testing Service

Donald J. Carstensen

Vice President

Educational Services

American College Testing

John Childers

Vice President for Regions

and Governmental RelationsThe College Board

Frederich H. Dietrich

Vice President, Guidance, Access

and Assessment Service

The College Board

Arthur Doyle

Acting Vice President, Field Services

The College Board

31

Herb Flamer

Executive Director

College and University Programs

Educational Testing Service

Norton Grubb

Professor

School of Education

University of California, Berkeley

Daniel Hull

President and CEO

Center for Occupational Research and Development

Dennis Jones

President

National Center on Higher EducationManagement Systems

Richard W. Jonsen

Executive Director

Western Interstate Commission forHigher Education

Charles S. Lenth

Director, Higher Education Policy Studies

Education Commission of the States

Barbara Lieb

Senior Researcher

Office of Educational Research and ImprovementU.S. Department of Education

Rafael J. Magallan

Director of State Services

The College Board

Dewayne Matthews Sandra Ruppert

Senior Program Director

Western Interstate Commission for

Higher Education

James R. Mingle

Executive Director

State Higher Education Executive Officers

Educational Systems Research

Charles D. Schmitz

Dean, School of Education

Baylor University

Liz Schmitz

Director, Computer Learning TechnologyJere J. Mock Center for Occupational Research and

Program Director, Constituent Development

Relations and Communications

Western Interstate Commission for Irene K. SperoHigher Education

Leno S. Pedrotti

Senior Vice President/Chief Scientist

Center for Occupational Research andDevelopment

Richard Pesqueira

Regional Executive Director

The College Board

Russell Poulin

Associate Program Director

Western Cooperative for Educational

Telecommunications

James L. Ratcliff

Director, Center for the Study

of Higher Education

Pennsylvania State University

Esther M. Rodriguez

Associate Executive Director

State Higher Education Executive Officers 32

Executive Director Federal & State Relations

The College Board

Henry A. Spille

Vice President

American Council on Education

Carl Van Horn

Professor of Public Policy

Eagleton Institute of PoliticsRutgers, State University of New Jersey

Daniel Via

Research AssistantWestern Interstate Commission for Higher Education

Robert A. Wallhaus

Senior ConsultantState Higher Education Executive Officers

Janice Weinman

Executive Vice President for Programs

The College Board

U.S. Department of EducationOffice of Educational Research and Improvement

National Institute on Postsecondary Education, Libraries, and Lifelong Learning

U.S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI)

Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC)

NOTICE

REPRODUCTION BASIS

ERIC

This document is covered by a signed "Reproduction Release(Blanket)" form (on file within the ERIC system), encompassing all

or classes of documents from its source organization and, therefore,

does not require a "Specific Document" Release form.

This document is Federally-funded, or carries its own permission to

reproduce, or is otherwise in the public domain and, therefore, may

be reproduced by ERIC without a signed Reproduction Releaseform (either "Specific Document" or "Blanket").