50 state program approval processes for postsecondary cte

University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign November 30, November 30, 2006 2006

50 State Program Approval 50 State Program Approval Processes For Processes For

Postsecondary CTE Postsecondary CTE

Association for Career and Technical Education


RESEARCHERSRESEARCHERS

George Johnston, Project Director, UIUC & Professor Emeritus, Parkland

CollegeRodney Merkley, Graduate Assistant,

UIUC

University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 33

LIMITATIONSLIMITATIONS Research funded by the National

Center for Research in Career and Technical Education and O.V.A.E.

Inventory rather than “study” Public (not including proprietary) Sub-baccalaureate degree or

certificate programs (not including non-credit)

State-level policies and procedures


BackgroundBackground No national inventory of program

approval processes existed that we could find

More research needed on how labor market needs were incorporated into program approval

Literature suggested that industry standards were not universally implemented

More research needed on the relationship between articulation and program approval


4 Research Questions4 Research Questions Program approval and Program

review Link to labor market needs Standards (industry-based

standards) Articulation


MethodologyMethodology


Data SourcesData Sources Primary – Publicly available

websites Two sources for initial web

addresses: AACC and (add website from NCWE here) plus Google

Secondary – Interviews (phone or email) with identified state official

This was not always easy.


Coding InstrumentCoding Instrument 4 categories (approval/review

processes, labor market, standards, articulation)

Most sub-categories initially binary data (state/local, yes/no)

Piloted with UIUC staff and then representatives from IL & MN state boards


Data Collection cont.Data Collection cont. Appropriate education websites

identified (usually either state higher ed. and/or state community college)

Hard copies of policy/procedure manuals printed out

Data entered into instrument by 1 of 3 people

Interviewers with state officials used to confirm website data and answer any additional questions

Data entered into Excel spreadsheet


Study Findings: Study Findings:


Question 1 – Program Approval Question 1 – Program Approval and Program Reviewand Program Review

Most, but not all states, are involved in program approval/program review.

PA historically local control AZ recently eliminated state community

college board DE has a single system with multiple

branches (and not public website) (NH, HI, AK, etc.)

University of DC not included WY does not require state approval until

three years WV does not require initial state approval but

does require new programs to be reviewed


Program Approval/ReviewProgram Approval/Review The most common elements of

application processes are economic Language used sometimes includes

“return on Investments” Most states require new programs

requests to show not unnecessary duplication

Average turn-around time for approval for states reporting was approximately 3 mo.

Some states have a common course numbering system and/or generic course file.


Program Approval (FL)Program Approval (FL) New program request form for all

new adult and career education programs

The curriculum framework is a comprehensive document that outlines (in great detail) the specific required courses, skills, objectives, and description of the program, and many other factors.

(Similar to TX and GA)


Program Approval (WA)Program Approval (WA) Two-stage process (fairly typical) Stage one is a Notice of Intent - brief

overview of new program that is published on a list serve for comments

If other institutions object, a formal committee is formed to resolve issues.

Once Notice of Intent is endorsed by state board, local must submit full application within six months or start over.


Program Approval (CO)Program Approval (CO) The Colorado system has instituted

an online application process to facilitate to application process.

Texas also has an online system.


Program Approval (NM)Program Approval (NM) New Mexico has a somewhat

unique aspect of program approval. Applications must identify how the are going to recruit students.


Question 2: Link with Labor Question 2: Link with Labor MarketsMarkets

Nearly all require some form of labor market analysis

Local labor market needs most commonly mentioned

Followed by state, multi-state, national, and one included international markets (HI)

The specific type of labor market analysis is specified in 2/3 of states


Labor MarketLabor Market The validity and usefulness of most

labor market projections is open to question.

New and emerging industries are often not accurately reflected

Impact of outsourcing very difficult to estimate


Question 3: StandardsQuestion 3: Standards

Why concern over standards? Call for specific, measurable outcomes other

than enrollment, retention, placement, and graduation. In other words did the students actually learn anything? Did they learn the right things?

The term “standards” is not standardized. Are they the same as accreditation? How do they differ (if at all) from

accreditation, certification, and licensure? At what level must “standards” be

endorsed? Local? State? Industry?


Standards TypesStandards Types Nothing at state level – all at local

level (ME & WY) Mentioned at state level but

implementation at local level (often through advisory committees)

Mentioned at state level with “assurances” required but not documentation. (CO)

Formal process required at state level (FL & TX)


Standards cont.Standards cont. 20 states standards determined by local 7 states clearly define as at the state

level 5 states refer to both local and state

involvement 15 states where results were

indeterminate from websites and state director’s did not respond.

State directors may not have the expertise needed to determine appropriate standards


Standards cont.Standards cont. Local determination does not equal NO

standards Numerous states have local advisory

boards who may have necessary expertise for local conditions

MI has local control but a fully developed system of standards to select from.

See Michigan Skills Training Curriculum Database (MIST) http://www.mccte.msu.edu/updates/mist/index.asp


Program ReviewProgram Review 37 states have language referring to

program review 27 states determine frequency 21 states determine elements of review About half seem to use some or all of Perkins

indicators (enrollment, graduation rates, and placement rates).

Some states only report Perkins information on some programs (NY & MI) instead of all CTE.

Difficult to determine what links, if any, between approval/review processes and Perkins


Program Review cont. (IL)Program Review cont. (IL) State establishes timeline (five year

cycle) and elements All programs with similar CIPs

reviewed at the same time CTE, “Academic”, Cross-discipline

courses, student support services, and other all reviewed

Focus is on quality improvement


Program Review (IL) cont.Program Review (IL) cont. Placement rates Student satisfaction

survey Licensure pass rate Retention/persistence Course/program

completion Transfer rates Transfer performance Articulation Employer satisfaction

survey

Innovative program components

Faculty/staff/student ratio

PT/FT faculty ratio Number &

qualification of faculty

Evidence of professional development

Faculty/staff evaluations


Program Review (TX)Program Review (TX) Four Year Cycle May include onsite visit or Desk

Review Threshold for further review if 2 of 3

triggers are hit Failure to produce 15 graduates in three years Failure to place 85% of graduates within three

years Failure to pass 90% on licensure/certification

exams or if number sitting for exams is 5% or more below 3 year average


Program Review Program Review (Nebraska)(Nebraska)

Program review has minimum thresholds that programs must meet that are based on the mean number of degrees awarded (averaged over the last five years) and the mean student credit hour production per FTE faculty (averaged over the last five years).


Question 4: ArticulationQuestion 4: ArticulationSecondary to PostsecondarySecondary to Postsecondary

Secondary to postsecondary largely a local process

Limitation: did not look at effect of dual credit on articulation

North Carolina has a comprehensive articulation agreement thru Tech Prep although there appears to be a strong local component.

See http://www.ncccs.cc.nc.us/Tech_Prep/


Articulation: Postsecondary-Articulation: Postsecondary-Sub-baccalaurate to Sub-baccalaurate to

BaccalaureateBaccalaureate Sub-baccalaureate Postsecondary to

Baccalaureate rarely mentioned Where mentioned, usually refers to

A.A. or A.S. degrees and/or General Education courses. (see Ohio) http://www.regents.state.oh.us/transfer/policy.html

WA & ND have some provisions for a Bachelors’ in Applied Science which appears to be designed to accommodate A.A.S. students who transfer

MD has a B.S. in Technology


Policy ImplicationsPolicy Implications


Because of wide variations in policies and procedures at the state and local level, any “One size fits all” type regulations will alignment with Federal regulations may be difficult.

Caution urged when limiting local control: Flexibility Local funding

Policy ImplicationsPolicy Implications


Further ResearchFurther Research


Further ResearchFurther Research Better understanding of how the

policies and procedures are actually implemented needed

Better understanding of program review needed

Better understanding of the various non-credit processes and how they relate to traditional degree programs is needed.

Additional research needed on how, when, and why states make changes related to standards.


For More InformationFor More Information

[email protected]

50 state program approval processes for postsecondary cte

Documents