50 State Program Approval Processes For Postsecondary CTE

1. 50 State Program Approval Processes For Postsecondary CTE Association for Career and Technical Education

2. RESEARCHERS George Johnston, Project Director, UIUC & Professor Emeritus, Parkland College Rodney Merkley, Graduate Assistant, UIUC

3. LIMITATIONS • 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

4. Background • 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

5. 4 Research Questions • Program approval and Program review • Link to labor market needs • Standards (industry-based standards) • Articulation

6. Methodology

7. Data 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.

8. Coding 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

9. 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

10. Study Findings:

11. Question 1 – Program Approval and 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

12. Program 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.

13. 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)

14. 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.

15. Program Approval (CO) • The Colorado system has instituted an online application process to facilitate to application process. • Texas also has an online system.

16. Program Approval (NM) • New Mexico has a somewhat unique aspect of program approval. Applications must identify how the are going to recruit students.

17. Question 2: Link with Labor Markets • 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

18. Labor 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

19. Question 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?

20. Standards 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)

21. 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

22. 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

23. Program 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

24. 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

25. 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 (IL) cont.

26. 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

27. Program Review (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).

28. Question 4: ArticulationSecondary 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/

29. Articulation: Postsecondary-Sub-baccalaurate to Baccalaureate • 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

30. Policy Implications

31. Policy 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

32. Further Research

33. Further 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.

34. For More Information gjohnsto@uiuc.edu