ED 293 004

AUTHORTITLE

INSTITUTION

REPORT NOPUB DATENOTE

AVAILABLE FROM

PUB TYPE

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

DOCUMENT RESUME

CE 049 952

Stacey, Nevzer; And OthersEducation and Training of 16- to 19-Year-Olds afterCompulsory Schooling in the United States.Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED),Washington, DC.OR-87-503Apr 8870p.; For the study of which this is a follow-up, seeED 262 202.Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government PrintingOffice, Washington, DC 20402.Reports Research/Technical (143)

MF01/PC03 Plus Postage.Adolescents; *Articulation (3ducation); *DeliverySystems; Dropouts; *Educational Opportunities;Educational Research; *Education Work Relationship;Federal Government; *Government Role; *Job Training;Postsecondary Education; Public Policy; SecondaryEducation; State Government; Technical Education;Young Adults

ABSTRACTAs a follow-up to a study of education and training

beyond basic schooling issued in 1985 by the Organization forEconomic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and in response to theOECD's request, this paper presents a detailed case study of theUnited States that focuses on government policies and education andtraining options for 16- to 19-year-olds after their compulsoryschooling is completed. The paper is divided into three mainsections: (1) the description of the system, which includesdescriptions of the providers of education and training programs andthe options available to youths in pursuing education and training;(2) issues and government policies and provisions bearing on theseproviders and options; and (3) a review of the research evidence onspecial topics related to this age group. The following are among theconclusions of the study: (1) postsecondary educational and trainingopportunities for this age group are diverse and flexible; (2)coordinated standards of measurement are lacking; (3) the privatesector has become the dominant provider of postsecondary training;and (4) the lack of an explicit national policy produces a lack ofcoordination among components of the system which may make it moredifficult for young people to make informed choices; at tLe sametime, such diversity produces a wide variety of choices and secondchances. Data tables and references complete the document. (KC)

***********************************************************************

* Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made ** from the original document. *

*****************************s*****************************************

of

Higher Education and Adult Learning DivisionOffice of Research

Office of Educational Research and ImprovementUnited States Department of Education

April 1988

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOthcept Educational Research and ImprovementEO ATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION

CENTER (ERIC)

This document has been reproduced asreceived frc' the person or organizationoriginating it

O Minor changes have been made to improvereproduction quality

Pointsol view or Opmonsstatedinthisr...,co.ment do not necessarily represe.it cfficislOERI position or policy

EST4.«

'

,OPY,AVAILABLE

Education and Training of16- to 19-Year-Olds

afterCompulsory Schooling

in the United States

byNevzer Stacey

Nabeel AlsalamJeffrey Gilmore

Duc-Le To

Higher Education and Adult Learning DivisionOffice of Research

Office of Educational Research and ImprovementUnited States Department of Education

April 1988

The ideas expressed in this paper are the authors' and do not

necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Department of Education or asOffice of Research.

For ',Up( rinloglent of Dot ument. S 170,rnnini cnt114.: (MlleW,hington II :Mtg.!

3

U.S. Department of EducationWilliam J. Bennett

Secretary

Office of Educational Research and ImprovementChester E. Finn, Jr.

Assistant Secretary

Office of Research

Sally B. Kilgore

Director

Information ServicesRay Fields

Director

.4*1

Foreword

In 1985, the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) issued

a report Education and Training Beyond BasicSchooling. The paper observed, "The weakenedposition of young people in the labor marketand the need to provide them with adequateroutes and/or alternatives to employment leadpublic authorities to assume greater respon-sibility for all young people, not merely thosewho are catered to by the formal educationalsystem."

The report further stated that

in terms of general direction of policiesspecifically relevant to the youngpeople coming out of basic full-timecompulsory schools, i.e., the 16- to 19-year -old group, the majority of OECDcountries tend to encourage the pursuitof various types of education and train-ing as a more desirable alternative tosubsidized employment, temporarywork, unemployment benefits, etc.The increase in public responsibilitywhich such policy entails, is, however,interpreted in a variety of ways and thedegree of goverment intervention inthis area is currently a major politicalissue.

iii

As a follow-up to the 1985 stud), OECD re-quested that the U.S. Government prepare adetailed case study of the United States thatwould focus on government policies and educa-tion and training options for the 16- to 19-year-olds after their compulsory schooling iscompleted. This paper is a response to that re-quest.

The paper is divided into three main sections:the description of the system, which includesdescriptions of the providers of education andtraining programs and the options available toyouthsin pursuing education and training; is-sues and government policies and provisionsbearing on these providers and options; and areview of the research evidence on specialtopics related to this age group. While each sec-tion can stand alone, collectively they providethe reader with a vivid picture of the wide diver-sity of rograms and opportunities available toAmericans in the 16- to 19-year-old age group.

In considering government policies andprograms in the United States, it is to be notedthat each State is responsible for overseeing allformal education programs and for financingand operating the public education institutionsin its territory. The Federal Governmentprovides a limited amount of funds to Stateagencies, to eligible students, and to selected in-stitutions in support of the formal education

system. At the same time, it provides publicfunds for training outside the formal educationsyctem.

fhe reader may be surprised, or: the onehand, by the variety and scope of training ac-tivities available, and, on the other hand, by theapparent lack of cohesiveness in administrationof and authority for these programs. Moreover,the education and training opportunities for the16 to 19 age group are better explained in termsof two groups: the 16-17-year-olds and the 18-19- year -olds. In the United States, the vastmajority of 16-17-year-olds are enrolled inschool, whereas the 13-19-year-olds are aboutequally divided between those who are primari-ly attending school and those who are working.

This report was prepared by members of theHigher Education and Adult Learning Division(HE&AL) of the Office of Research in the Of-fice of Educational Research and Improvement(OERI), U.S. Department of Education. Thestaff team was chaired by Nevzer Stacey and in-cluded Nabeel Alsalam, Jeffrey Gilmore, and

iv

Duc-Le To. ;n addition, HE&AL staff personsClifford Adelman and Jerome Lord providedvaluable advice and assistance. Publication ofthe report was managed by OERI' s InformationServices Office with Cynthia Hearn Dorfman,edkor, Phil Carr, graphics chief, Nancy Young,type designer, and Thomas Litkowski, techni-cal advisor for computer graphics.

The ideas expressed in this paper are theauthors' and do not necessarily reflect the viewsof the Office of Research or the Department ofEducation.

The paper is not intended to reflect any singlepoint of view but, as requested by OECD,provides a case study from a national perspec-tive of the policies and programs that relate toyouths in the 16- to 19-year-old age group. Asmost research does, this study raises as manyquestions as it answers.

Salvatore CorralloDirector, Division ofHigher Education andAdult Learning

ContentsForeword i i i

Highlights vii

Overview 1

Description of the System 5Providers

School-Based Providers 5

Work-Based Providers 8

Community-Based Providers 11

Youth 12

The Postcompulsory Activities and Choices of16-17-Year-Olds 12

Activities and Choices of 18-19-Year-Olds 13

Flexibility of the System 14

Options for Out-of-School Youth 15

Summary 17

Issues, Policies, and Programs at the State and Federal Levels 19Issues at the State Level 20

Policies and Programs at the State Level 21

Issues, Policies, and Programs at the Federal Level 24

Summary 28

Review of Research Evidence on Special Topics 31

The High School Curriculum 31

High School Dropouts 34

Working High School Students 38

Conclusion 45

References 55

v

Figure and TablesFigure.Components of the U.S. system arrayed bythe major types of education and training providers 49

Table 1.-16- to 19-year-old youth, by enrollmentand working status: 1967 and 1985 50

Table 2.Percent of working students enrolled inhigh schools, vocational-technical schools, andcolleges, by age and year after high school 51

Table 3.A comparison of activities after high school51reported by the classes of 1972 and 1980

Table 4.Percent of male youths of the high school classof 1972 enrolled in any school full time, by raceand sequence: October 1972-1976 52

Table 5. Mean number of credits required by public highschools for graduation, by year and selected subjects 53

Table 6.Percent of students completing the new basics corerequirements, by subject area and program, 1980,and mean number of semesters taken in new basics courses,by subject area and year, 1072 and 1980 53

Table 7.Percent of high school seniors in academic,general, and vocational programs, by sexand program: 1972 and 1980 53

Table 8.Percent change in wage rate or earnings dueto an increase in academic achievement equivalent to100 points on a SAT test 54

vi 8

Highlights

Providers

The postcompulsory educational and training opportunities available to 16- to 19-ye, -olds in theUnited States are diverse and flexible. Institutions that provide education and training offer awide range of entry and exit points, and most show a considerable capacity to adapt to change.Their operations, as well as their financing, vary greatly from State to State, even within States.Some experts fault the system for its redundancy and lack of coordination among sectors, whileothers feel that such complexity contributes to its strength.

There has been an increase, in recent years, in the number of institutions, such as employers andproprietary schools, which offer career-related courses.

Youth

When describing the choices of 16- to 19-year-olds in the United States, it is necessary to bear inmind one important feature of American culture: For most youths, the major decision point intheir lives is not at the end of compulsory schooling (mostly at age 16) but at the completion ofhigh school at age 18. Therefore, the opportunities and choices for 16- to 19-year-olds fall intotwo distinct categories, those for 16-17-year-olds and those for 18-19-year-olds.

In i980, 38 percent of the high school stuaents were in an academic track, 24 rnrce rn were in avocational-technical track, and 36 percent were in a general education track. About half of alladolescents left school at the age of 18 or 19. Among them, 70 percent had completed high schoolor equivalent programs.

vii

In 1531, 32 percent of the students eraduating in the 1980 senior class were enrolled in 4-yearcolleges, 17 percent were enrolled in 2-year colleges, 7 percent were enrolled in vocational-tech-nical schools and other programs, and 44 percent were not enrolled in any postsecondary institu-tion.

0 In 1985, 92 percent of 16-17-year-olds were enrolled in school, and they had choices in selectingcourses.

In 1985, about 31 percent of the high school students 16-17 and 36 percent of the high school stu-dents 18-19 worked part time. The average numbers of hours worked by high school sophomoresand seniors in a week were 12.6 and 19.4, respectively.

Thirty-five percent of those who dropped out or did not graduate on time in 1982 had received ahigh school diploma 2 years later, and an additional 13 percent had returned to school but hadnot yet received a diploma.

In comparison to the class of 1972, the students in the high school senior class of 1980 were morelikely to work while attending college or other postsecondary institutions.

In 1973, the proportions of working students in 2-year colleges, 4-year colleges, and vocational-technical schools were 58 percent, 30 percent, and 47 percent, respectively. By 1981, theseproportions had increased to 64 percent, 48 percent, and 53 percent. The percentage of workingstudents in 4-year colleges increased by over 50 percent.

Issues, Policies, and Programs at the State andFederal Levels

A principal concern in the United States during the last decade has been the quality of educationat all levels. The problems of the educational system for the years of compulsory schooling werebrought to national attention by the release of the U.S. Department of Education-sponsored reportA Nation at Risk in 1983. This report and others from States, associations, and other national andregional study groups made sin,'Iar statements on the need to improve the quality of teaching, toraise high school graduation requii.emeni.s in core academic disciplines, and to increase time-on-task and parental involvement.

State and local policymakers' responses to the call for reform have ranged from strengthening re-quirements for teacher preparation to raising requirements for high school graduation.

viii

1

10

A brief review of State policies and programs for 16- to 19-year-olds reveals that students arebeing encouraged to pursue a more demanding sequence of academic courses during high schoolthan was expected of them in the 1970s.

Training is supported by the considerable investments of private corporations, individuals, andthe Federal Government. States have the responsibility of designing and implementing trainingprograms that are financed by the Federal Government.

Federal policy is not expected to remedy all social problems, though it can play a useful role infocusing public attention on important problems, issues, and strategies for improvement.

On issues pertaining to readiness for work, it has been a Federal policy to provide limited fundsfor vocational education and training. Most of these funds have been targeted for those classifiedas economically disadvantaged. There has been little coordination between vocational programsand other educational programs. In recent years, the principal initiative at the Federal level hasbeen in the privatization of training, that is, getting private sector employers involved in the JobTraining Partnership Act of 1982 th-ough the development ofPrivate Industry Councils.

Research Evidence on Special Topics

Approximately 40 percent of dropouts return to school or take an alternate route to finish theireducation, but they fare less well in the labor market than high school graduates.

Many States are raising requirements for high school graduation, and more students appear to betaking more academic subjects in the 1980s than did students in the 1970s.

The proportion of 18-19-year-olds enrolled in college has risen from 51 percent in October of1977 to 58 percent in October of 1985. The labor force participation rate of those not enrolled inschool, that is, of those wishing to work, has stayed the same, but their employment rate has gonedown from 67 percent to 62 percent in the same period.

ix

1I

Overview

The "system" of education and training inthe United States is not one system but

many different systems with varying degrees ofinteraction, commonalities of purpose andclientele, and levels of control. Since the U.S.Constituticn reserves the responsibility foreducation for the States, and both State andlocal governments have traditionally sharedthis responsibility, it may be more accurate topresent the U.S. system as a collection of 50State systems and to view Federal policies andprograms, developed in response to nationalneeds, as overlays on those systems. While asignificant amount of training is funded byFedcrai sources, the States are involved in iden-tifying local needs and in administering andpartially funding Federal programs throughState matching grants.

This system becomes even more complexwhen funding patterns and educational 'levelsare taken into account. Public primary andsecondary education is controlled by localschool boards and funded largely by revenuesfrom State and local governments, whichprovide about equal shares with modest support(less than 10 percent) from the Federal Govern-ment. Private primary and secondary educa-tion, which is controlled by religiousorganizations or individual boards, is funded

1

mostly by student tuition. Postsecondaryeducation, on the other hand, is funded by acombination of public support (Federal, State,and local), student tuition and fees, privatedonations, endowment income and invest-ments, and auxiliary enterprises. Postsecon-dary institutions may be governed byindependent institutional boards, public boardsof trustees, State agencies, or a combination ofboards, depending on whether they are publicor private institutions and the State in whichthey are located.

The education and training system availableto 16- to 19-year-olds is a pastiche of programsdesigned, administered, and financed through amyriad of sources. Certainly, one of the mostimportant features of education in the UnitedStates is its diversity and ability to offer a widearray of choices to its young and mature stu-dents. It also displays signs of overabundance.Today, for example, a 17-year-old can take anaccounting course at a 4-year college, at a com-munity college, at a proprietary school, through

a correspondence school, at a neighborhoodlearning center, in a factory, or through aprofessional association such as the AmericanBankers Association. The course descriptionsmay sound similar, but the content and quality

12

may differ a great deal. This growth in the num-ber and types of providers of postconipulsoryeducation has caused some critics of the systemto call it a "non-system" s. 1987).

Given this, it s in. to describe indetail all the education and training oppor-tunities available to 16- to 19- year-old youths,the policies influencing these opportunities, andthe issues related to these opportunities andpolicies. This report deals with the complexityby giving an overview cf the componentsin-cluding both providers and consumersof theNation's education and training systems, byhighlighting State and Federal policiesdeveloped to address major needs and deficien-cies, and by focusing on current issues.

In most States, compulsory schooling endson the adolescent's 16th birthday.1 This wouldseem like the natural point at which to begin ananalysis of the choices adolescents and theirparents make with respect to their education.At this point, most have begun to think aboutcareers and their future in the labor force. Thepaths they take will depend on their preferences

and abilities, the options available to them, andfinancial constraints.

Yet, when describing the choices of 16- to19-year-olds in the United States, it is necessaryto bear in mind one important feature ofAmerican culture: For most youths, the majordecision point in their lives is not at the end ofcompulsory schooling at age 16 but at the com-pletion of nigh school at age 18. For this reason,any discussion of the opportunities and choicesof American youth aged 16-19 must m ake somedistinctions between 16-17-year-olds and 18-19-year-olde

This p :describes the education and train-ing inves:,...mts of 16- to 19-year-olds with aspecial emphasis on issues and policies that in-

2

fluence the nature of the transition from com-pulsory schooling to furthereducation, training,and work. By the age of 21, 85 percent of theseyoullg people will have graduated from highschool or will have passed a State's n :neralEducational Development (GED) Tests and ob-tained a high school general equivalencydiploma.2 Fifty-five percent will have con-tinued with postsecondary schooling (U.S.Department of Education, 1986a). Others willhave obtained jobs and full-time work. Someyoung people appear to do both and some doneither. Few decisions are irreversible. Peoplemay leave education and return later, not once,but several times over a lifetime, to complete"unfinished business" such as to receive a highschool diploma or its equivalent.

For discussion purposes, the system includesproviders, youth (the consumers), and policies.Providers are the vast array of institutions thatoffer education and training. Youth are the 16-to 19- year -olds who are making choices abouttheir education and training. Policies inauencethe behavior of both youth and providersthrough the development of new programs andeligibility requirements. This report exploresthese three components of the system and thendiscusses three significant issues pertinent tothe 16- to 19-year-old age group: the highschool curriculum; high school dropouts; andworking high school students.3 The report em-phasizes the events and social forces contribut-ing to the development of the systemcomponents and the issues.

NOTES

1 . Table 29 of the Digest of Education Statis-tics 1985-86 (see U.S. Department of Educa-

t)

Lion, 1986a) indicates that 33 States allowadolescents to leave school on their 16thbirthday. Seven and nine States require boysand girls to attend school until their 17th and18th birthday, respectively. Only Mississippiallows teenagers to leave school before their16th birthday, at age 14.

2. GED Tests are substitute tests for a highschool diploma. The five testa in the GED,writing skills, social studies, science, reading

3

skills, and mathematics, are designed tomeasure the major concepts of high schooleducation.

3 . These do not exhaust the topics that wouldbe useful to discuss. Examples of other topicsinclude part-time students, vocational educa-tion programs, handicapped youth, militarytraining and education programs, the introduc-tion of technology into the workplace, andyouth unemployment.

14

Description of the System

Providers

The traditional providers of education in theUnited States are high schools, com-

munity colleges, 4-year colleges, and univer-sities. Vocational and occupational educationand training are offered through proprietary andtechnical schools. Employers provide mostlyjob-specific training. A substantial amount ofemployer training is provided on the job and isdifficult to distinguish from work itself. Eachof the military services operates a huge militaryoccupational training system. Apprenticeshiptraining in the United States is a small, but sig-nificant, portion of total U.S. skill training.

Providers of education and training in theUnited States can be clustered into three groups:school-based, work-based, and community-based (see figure).

5

School-Based Providers

This category includes institutions whoseprimary objectives arc to educate and train theirstudents. These institutions range from highschools to 2- and 4-year colleges and univer-sities. Also included in this category arc voca-tional, technical, proprietary, andcorrespondence schools.

Senior High Schools

Senior high schools generally include grades10-12, and the modal ages of students in theseschools are 15 17. Compulsory school age dif-fers from State to State. In nine States it is 18,in seven States and the District of Columbia it

1J

is 17, in 33 States it is 16, and in one State it is14 (U.S. Department of Education, 1986a). In1985, there were 12.4 million students in graces9-12 in public schools and 1.4 million in privatesecondary schools. Except for schoolsspecializing in preparing students for college orspecific professions, most of the public highschools offer comprehensive programs inwhich students are allowed to select courses ortailor the curriculum to meet their personalneeds and abilities. Most private high schoolsstress academic subjects and have little or novocational emphasis. Although core require-ments in public high schools have traditionallybeen few, the publication of the Department ofEducation report A Nation at Risk, in 1983,prompted a substantial effort to increase corerequirements for all students. In 1980, 38.2 per-cent of all high school seniors were enrclled inacademic-track (college preparatory)programs, 36.4 percent in general-trackprograms, and 24 percent in vocational-techni-cal programs (U.S. Department of Education,1986a). Per pupil expenditure for publicelementary and secondary education in theschool year 1984-85 was $3,449 of which 6.5percent was provided from Federal, 48.6 per-cent from State, and 44.6 percent from localgovernment sources (U.S. Department ofEducation, 1987c).

Four-Year Colleges andUniversities

There are 3,340 accredited colleges, com-munity colleges, and universities enrolling ap-proximately 122 million students at both theundergraduate and graduate levels. Of the total,2,029 institutions offer 4 years of full-timestudy leading to the baccalaureate degree (U.S.Department of Education, 1987a). These in-stitutions vary considerably in their policies onenrollment, attendance, type of program, andgraduation requirements. Although ap-

6

proximately 72 percent of the 4-year collegesand universities are private and are controlledby independent institutional boards of trustees,they enroll fewer than one- third of the students(U.S. Department of Education, 1986a). Theproportion of baccalaureate degrees awarded inprofessional and applied fields (as opposed totraditional arts and sciences disciplines) hasrisen from 53.4 percent in 1975 to 61.5 percentin 1985 (U.S. Department of Education,1987c).

Two-Year Colleges

A major share of postsecondary education isprovided by public and independent collegesthat award associate degrees after 2 years offull-time study.' These colleges also offershort-term certificate and diploma programs inspecific areas. In 1983, approximately 1,300community colleges were operating, themajority under public control, serving ap-proximately 5 million students (U.S. Depart-ment of Education, 1986a). Most publiccommunity colleges have open admissionpolicies (in many States they are required bylaw to admit any student holding a diplomafrom a public high school) but require studentsto take diagnostic placement tests after admis-sion. Some community colleges even givecredit for work experience. A wide variety ofoptions in scheduling are offered, and 60 per-cent of the students are enrolled on a part-timebasis. Half of the courses offered in these in-stitutions are noncredit and serve occasionalstudents seeking personal enrichment.

In 1985, community colleges awarded aboutone-half million associate (2-year) degrees.Although the growth rate of these degrees ap-pears to have slowed somewhat in the early1980s, it remains higher than the growth rate forbaccalaureate degrees. An interesting andgrowing activity for these institutions has been

16

the proliferation of "customized programs"designed to meet the needs of employers; manyof these programs are developed under formalcontracts with employers or labor unions.Two-year colleges have become more voca-tional than academic (Grubb and Jaussaud,1984). In 1970-71, 50 percent of the 2-yeardegrees and other formal awards were in voca-tional programs, and the rest were in arts, scien-ces, and general programs; by 1980-81, thevocational share had increased to 71 percent.

Postsecondary NoncollegiateProviders

Appre,:mately 9,300 institutions offerprograms in vocational and technical subjectsand are often referred to as "career schools."Career schools are differentiated from tradi-tional schools and colleges by their focus onrelatively narrow, short-term vocationalpreparation programs. Career schools may beindependent institutions or operate as part oftraditional high schools or colleges, and mayoperate under independent or public control.Nearly 7,400 of these institutions operate inde-pendently of colleges and universities and offerboth on- and off-site instruction. Of the totalnumber of noncollegiate career schools, privateproprietary schools (operatirg for profit) are themost numerous, constituting approximately 77percent.2

There are nine principal types of noncol-legiate, noncorrespondence career schools:cosmetology and barber schools, which ac-count for 30.6 percent of the total; schoolsteaching business and office skills, 17.2 per-cent; hospital training schools, 10.9 percent;air flight schools, 10.8 percent; vocational-technical schools, 10 percent; trade schools,9.9 percent; allied health, 5.1 percent; artsdesign schools, 3.3 percent; and technical in-stitutes, which account for 2.2 percent (Car-

7

negie Foundation for the Advancement ofTeaching, 1987). There are also approximate-ly 90 noncollegiate, correspondence schoolsoperating in the United States, as well as a num-ber of unclassified schools.

Transfer from these career school programsto 4-year higher education institutions is mini-mal, since the proprietary programs are ter-minal and generally do not include anycoursework in traditional academic disciplines.The average cost of a private noncollegiateschool program in 1980-81 was $2,200 for anaverage of 981 hours of instruction, as opposedto an average cost of $593 for an average of1,324 hours of instruction in public noncol-legiate programs (U.S. Department of Educa-tion, 1986a). In 1982, nearly 1.6 millionstudents were enrolled in public and privatecareer schools, with an average school enroll-ment of approximately 220 (Carnegie Founda-tion for the Advancement of Teaching, 1987).Almost three-quarters (72 percent) of allpostsecondary vocational students are enrolledin proprietary schools. The quality of theseschools appears uneven. As of 1984, onlyabout 45 percent of these schools were ac-credited by one of the three proprietary schoolaccrediting associations, which are supposed toidentify minimum standards of quality (Wilms,1987).

Correspondence Schools

Today, more than 5 million Americans areenrolled in home study courses undertakenthrough the mail. Correspondence study is ac-credited or evaluated through three major or-ganizations in the United States:

1) the National Home Study Council(NHSC) which, with its independent ac-crediting commission, has 90 memberschools ranging from small religious institu-

1 7

Lions to the Armed Forces CorrespondenceInstitute enrolling nearly one-half millionservicemen and women, and from privatebusiness and industry schools to publiclysponsored schools. NHSC member schoolshave course work in 283 categories;

2) the National University ContinuingEducation Association (NUCEA) which ismade up of divisions or departments ofregionally accredited colleges and univer-sities. The membership includes 72 ac-credited colleges and universities that offer12,000 courses at the high school, under-graduate, and graduate levels, as well as non-credit courses; and

3) the Program On Noncollegiate Spon-sored Instruction (PONSI) which is adivision of the American Council on Educa-tion (ACE) and administers independentevaluations of home study and other coursesfor college credit. Over 1,500 colleges anduniversities accept PONSI evaluations fortransfer credit toward graduation require-ments.

Among the most popular courses takenthrough correspondence study are business,high school equivalency courses, electronics,engineering (mid-level technician training),other technical and trade courses, and art(Valore and Diehl, 1987).

A 1978 survey conducted by the NHSCfound that the average NHSC student is be-tween 25 and 34 years old, that 3 out of every 4students are male, and that courses offered typi-cally require a year to complete.

8

Work-Based Providers

Although a rather small portion of 16- to 19-year -olds is enrolled in work-based educationand training programs, this category has shownthe most noticeable growth in the past decade.The primary responsibility of these providers isto conduct business, not to educate or train.However, due to technological changes in theworkplace, as well as the need to remedy thebasic skill deficiencies of entry-levelemployees, employers (principally private, butalso public) are integrating employee educationand training programs into their business ac-tivities.

Employers

While no accurate accounting of expendi-tures for education and training is available foremployer-sponsored programs, what data existindicate that "corporate learning has become anabsolutely essential part of the educationalresources of the nation" (Boyer in Eurich, 1985,p. ix). Estimates of corporate expenditures foreducation and training range from $40 billionto $100 billioncompared to the approximate-ly $130 billion spent annually on public educa-tion. Employee enrollment in corpo-rate-sponsored programs is estimated at nearly8 million students.

According to Boyer, corporate learning,which Boyer calls the "third leg" of the Nation'stotal education enterprise, is provided in a num-ber of ways:

1) in-house educational programs, whichinclude a wide range of training programs,seminars, and institutes offered in theworkplace;

2) educational and training facilities,which are separate facilities, often similar tocollege campuses in appearance, with class-rooms, dormitories, and libraries. Examplesinclude the Holiday Inn University, theARCO campus at Santa Barbara for top ex-ecutives, the New England Telephone learn-ing center (which accommodates 9,000employees attending classes during the sum-mer), the Xerox learning center in Leesburg,Virginia, and even McDonald's HamburgerUniversity for m erchandising and retail salestraining;

3) accredited corporate colleges that granttheir own degrees. Example; of thesedegrees include the Rand Ph.D. and theWang and Arthur D. Little Master of Sciencedegrees, to name but a few of the twenty orso such programs;

4) satellite universities (such as the Na-tional Technological University), whichbeam coursework by satellite to corporateclassrooms around the country; and

5) cooperative ventures, which includecourses held at corporate facilities but staffedby university-based faculty, employee tui-tion assistance for refund policies forcoursework taken at traditional colleges,part-time training programs using outside as-sistance, and cooperative arrangements withlocal educational institutions, pa lcularlycommunity colleges, for training purposes!'

Cooperative ventures are most common forcorporations with fewer than 500 employees

9

Coy far the majority of businesses). Accordingto the most recent survey in 1981, 57 percent ofall employer-sponsored courses were con-ducted in house, and 43 percent of courses weretaken at outside institutions. In all, corpora-tions paid for over 12 million courses. In com-parison, individuals and families paid for 17million courses (Eurich, 1985, p. 21).

At the other end of the spectrum are the For-tune 500 companies and, especially, severalhigh technology firms such as IBM, Xerox,Boeing, and McDonnell Douglas that spend be-tween 2.5 and 3.3 percent of their sales revenueon education and training (Camay ale andGoldstein, 1985). In short, after 2- and 4-yearcolleges and universities, "business and in-dustry ranks next as [an] educational provid 'in the United States" (Eurich, 1985, p. 21).

Corporate education and training programshave some common characteristics:

1) young workers between the ages of 17and 24 receive less training than olderworkers aged 25-34 (Zemsky, 1983). Theyounger group averages 1.28 years of train-ing versus 1.95 years of training for the oldergroup;

2) up through the B.A. degree, the amountof on-the-job training employees receive ispositively correlated to the number of yearsof education they have had (Hoffman, 1981);

3) white collar workers (particularlyprofessional and technical employees)receive a large share of the training;

4) employees of regulated industries(primarily public utilities, public transporta-tion, and banking wstitutions governed bygovernment-appointed boards of commis-sioners) receive a significant amount oftraining; and

13

5) craftsmen also receive a significantamount of training.

Trade Unions and Apprenticeships

Approximately 600,000 union members areinvolved in education and training through ap-prenticeship, union education, labor studies,and negotiated tuition-aid programs. There areover 730 apprenticeable trades in the UnitedStates. While an exact accounting is impos-sible, there appear to be about one-half millionparticipants in apprenticeship programs, whichrange from 3 to 5 years in length (U.S. Depart-ment ofLabor, 1984). Although apprenticeshiptraining is a very small portion of total training,it is an important component, especially forcraft workers. Unions also provide educationand training to their members through laborstudies programs at educational institutes orthrough their own facilities. Through the col-lective bargaining process, unions alsonegotiate for tuition aid so that their memberscan take courses on their own time in colleges,community colleges, and universities (Staceyand Charner, 1982).

Professional Associations

The national survey Trends in Adult Educa-tion (Hill, 1987) does not distinguish betweenprofessional associations and labor organiza-tions. Hence, no accurate estimate of theeducation and training offered by professionalassociations exists. However, according to asurvey of the major engineering and technicalsocieties in the United States and Canada(Greenwald, 1977), conducted by the AmericanSociety of Mechanical Engineers in 1977, ap-

10

proximately 50 percent of the engineers in theUnited States hold memberships in societiesthat are conducting or developing continuingeducation programs, either individually or incooperation with other societies, universities,or proprietary, organizations. A more recentstudy, sponsored by the American Bankers As-sociation in 1985, found that 12 percent of alltraining in the banking industry is done byprofessional associations (American Societyfor Training and Development, 1985).

Public Employers

Act..ording to a National Institute on Educa-tion study conducted in 3977, approximately 3million public sector employees receivededucation and training either paid for or offeredby their employers (Smith, 1979). Thirty-ninepercent of Federal civilian education and train-ing was for upgrading employees' technicalskills, and the remainder was for instructing theemployees in a variety of areas. Analysis of thisdata indicates that those with the higher salarieshad proportionally more education/training ex-periences, a pattern which would indicate thatvery few, if any, of the 16- to 19-year-oldswould benefit from these opportunities.

Military

The purpose of military training is to preparepersonnel to assume jobs in military units.Over 33 percent of all Department of Defense(DOD) military training is designed to provideinitial orientation to a job, over 55 percent isspecialized skill training, and over 95 percentprovides new skills to participants. DOD offersover 7,000 courses, ranging in length from 5 to25 weeks. An average of one-quarter million

20

military personnel are in formal training daily,with many taking more than one course annual-ly.

Community-Based Providers

Community organizations such as churches,the Red Cross, cultural organizations, and civic,sccial service, and other groups offer formaleducational programs. Although no surveydescribes the universe of these providers, orgives information on the number of 16- to 19-year -olds who take their courses, most of theparticipants in these programs are believed tobe older adults.

11

NOTES

1. Degrees are awarded based on creditsearned, not time spent in the systerit. Some stu-dents are able to earn an associate degree in 11f2 years while others may take considerablylonger.

2. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancementof Teaching (1987). The numbers and percent-ages used in this article are from the 1981HEGIS Survey of Postsecondary CareerSchools, Center for Education Statistics, U.S.Department of Education.

3. For a discussion of these estimates and re-lated studies see Eurich (1985) pp. 6-8.

4. Adapted from Boyer and Eurich (1985).

21

t

Youth

It is necessary to distinguish between thepostcompulsory education activities of 16-

17- year -olds and 18-19-year-olds in order toget a true picture of the postcompulsory terrain.Table 1 illuminates this distinction. In 1985, 92percent of the young adults aged 16-17 were en-rolled in school. Among them, 96 percent werein school below college level and 4 percentwere in college! In other words, most adoles-cents decided to stay in school and did not con-sider other alternatives until completing highschool (U.S. Department of Commerce, Ad-vanced October 1985). The percentage ofyouths enrolled in school at the ages of 16 and17 in 1985 was slightly higher than it was in1967.

The Postcompulsory Activitiesand Choices of16-17-Year-Olds

Most of these students attend 4-year seniorhigh schools, although some of them attend 3-year high schools, 6-year combined junior-senior high schools, or specialvocational-technical high schools withprograms of varying lengths.2

Curricular Choices

In 1980, 38.2 percent of the high school stu-dents were in an academic track, 36.4 percentwere in a general education track, and 24.4 per-

12

cent were in a vocational technical track (Fet-ters et al., 1984). Students in different tracksusually have different plans for activities afterhigh school. Those who expect to attend col-lege are more likely to follow the academictrack. However, the curriculum taken by stu-dents in high school does not prevent them fromgoing to college. A 1982 follow-up survey of1980 high school seniors indicated that while80.7 percent of the academic track studentswent on to college, 37.8 percent of the students

who followed a vocational track in high schooland 50.6 percent of the general- education trackstudents had also enrolled in postsecondaryeducation (Gardner, 1987).

Working Students

Diversified curricula are not the only charac-teristics of high schools in the United States;another important featureworking part-timewhile enrolled in high schoolshould not beneglected. As shown in table 2, approximately31.5 percent of the high school students workedpart time in 1967, and this percentage hasremained relatively unchanged. In 1985, about31.2 percent of the high school students workedpart time. The time devoted to part-time workwas also st ostantial. In 1980, the average num-bers of hours worked by high schoolsophomores and seniors in a week were 12.6and 19.4, respectively. Although the possibilityof working part time differs among

demographic groups (see section on workinghigh school students), it does not seem to cor-relate with family income (Lewin-Epstein,1981).

Leaving School

It is not clear whether diversified curriculaand the opportunity to work part time affect thetiming of graduaticii. What is known is thatabout 14 percent of the 1980 high schoolsophomores left school before completing therequirements for graduation (Peng,1°83).3 Students are more likely to drop out intheir sophomore or junior years than in thesenior year.4 But, follow-up surveys of highschool students have shown that 35 percent ofthose 1980 sophomores who dropped out or didnot graduate on time in 1982 had received ahigh school diploma by 1984 and that another13 percent had returned to school but had notyet received a diploma. Students who droppedout in their senior year were more likely toreturn to school than those who dropped out intheir sophomore or junior years (Owings andKolstad, 1985). Nevertheless, more than halfof the 1980 dropouts did not return to completetheir high school programs.

Those who do not return to school may takeGeneral Educational Development (GED)5Tests administered by State Governments andcan obtain a high school equivalency diploma.(More discussions on this are in the section onhigh school dropouts.) Even without a GEDcertificate, they may still gain access to highereducation, as some postsecondary institutions(especi ally com muni ty college s and proprietary

schools) do not demand a high school diplomaor GED as a condition for entry (Finn, 1987).

13

Activities andChoices of 18-19-Year-Olds

Overview: Where They Are

According to the 1984 Current PopulationSurvey, about one-half of all adolescents leftschool at the age of 18 or 19. Among them, 70percent had completed high school orequivalent programs (U.S. Department of Com-merce, Advanced October 1985). Table 3 sum-marizes the activities of the classes of 19-12 and1980, 4 years after high school graduation. In1981, 44.2 percent of the students in the 1980senior class were not enrolled in anypostsecondary institution, 32.3 percent wereenrolled in 4-year colleges, 16.8 percent wereenrolled in 2-year college:, and 6.9 percentwere enrolled in vocational-technical schoolsand other programs. Among those not going onto further study, 55 percent worked full time, 25percent worked part time, and the remaining 20percent were either unemployed or not in thecivilian, paid labor force (i.e., military person-nel, homemakers, those not looking for work,prisoners, etc.).

Working Students

As indicated by table 2, many students whoare enrolled in postsecondary institutions work,especially those attending 2-year colleges. Incomparison to the class of 1972, students in thehigh school senior class of 1980 were more like-ly to work while attending college or otherpostsecondary institution. In 1973, the propor-tions of working students in 2- year colleges, 4-year colleges, and vocational-technical schools

were 57.5 percent, 29.7 percent, and 47.3 per-

2 ,)0

cent, respectively. By 1981, these proportionshad increased to 64.3 percent, 47.7 percent, and52.6 percent. The percentage of first-year stu-dents who were working while in 4-year collegeincreased by more than 50 percent. However,for both cohorts, students were more likely towork in the junior and senior years than in thefreshman and sophomore years. As indicatedby table 2, 47.7 percent of the class of 1980worked while attending 4-year college in thefirst year after high school graduation. In thefourth year, 60.2 percent of them worked whileattending college. This particular attendancepattern parallels the increase in part-time stu-dents in recent years. From 1970-1984, the per-cent of pan-time students in higher educationincreased from 32 percent to 42 percent. In

1983,64 percent of the students in public 2-yearcolleges were attending part time. For allpublic postsecondary institutions, only 55 per-cent of the students were attending full time(U.S. Department of Education, 1983, 1986b).While these trends could have resulted fromchanges in the labor market, many other factorsmay have also contributed to these changes,e.g., higher tuition ane costs of attending col-lege. The increasing flexibility of classschedules in institutions of higher educationmay also have been a factor. Today, almost allcolleges and universities offer evening andweekend classes, thus allowing full-timeworkers to use their nonwork time for study.

Some other significant changes from the1972 to the 1980 high school classes are alsoshown in table 3: 1) More people attended 2-year colleges (especially those who worked)and fewer attended vocational-technicalschools; and 2) even though the percentage ofpeople working and not in school remained fair-ly stable, more of them were working only parttime.

14

Flexibility of the System

Delayed Entry .nto College

Although most students planning to furthertheir education enroll in postsecondary educa-tion immediately after high school, some delaytheir college attendance. According to a surveyof 1980 high school seniors, 25.3 percent of thestudents delayed their entry into postsecondaryinstitutions. Approximately 11 percent waitedabout 2 years after graduation before enrolling.There was no strong correlation betweendelayed entry and family income, though statis-tics show the delayed entry percentage wasmuch higher for students from lowsocioeconomic status (SES) families (34 per-cent of the low SES students 1/4:cloyed entry tohigher education while only 19 percent of thehigh SES students delayed entry to college)(Carroll, 1985). relayed entry also depends onstudents' high school curricula and educationalexpectations. While 16 percent of the studentsin academic tracks delayed postsecondaryeducation, 29 percent of the students in generaltracks and 40 percent of the students in voca-tional programs postponed their attendance.

Transferability of Credits

A notable feature of postsecondary educa-tion in the United States is the transferability ofcredits to different programs and schools. Alongitudinal survey of the 1980 high schoolseniors who enrolled in higher education aftergraduation reveals that about 14.2 percent ofpublic 2-year college students transferred toother schools in the first year and 31.4 percenttransferred in the second year. Among the lat-ter, 77.8 percent transferred to 4-year colleges.In other words, approximately a quarter of 2-

2 4

year college graduates (31.4 percent x 77.8 per-cent) did not quit schooling but advanced to 4-year colleges and universities. Another studyalso indicates that over 60 percent of those inthe high school class of 1972 who receivedbachelor's degrees by 1984 attended two ormore institutions and that 11 percent earnedassociate's degrees from 2-year colleges enroute to their bachelor's degrees.

Most of the transfers of 4-year college stu-dents occurred during the students' first year(17.8 percent and 16.6 percent of all first-yearpublic and private college students, respective-ly, transferred during their first year). Somestudents transferred in the second year (7.2 per-cent for public and 8.1 percent for private), butvery few transferred as juniors or seniors (fewerthan 3 percent) (Carroll, 1986). Most of thetransfers were to other 4-year colleges anduniversities; it is unusual for a 4-year collegestudent to transfer to a 2-year college. (The per-centages of 4-year college students transferringto 2-year colleges are 11 percent for public and8.5 percent for private school students (Carroll,1985)). The number of transfers between voca-tional-technical schools and 2- or 4-year col-leges was not large but was still quite significant(Carroll, 1985, 1986).

Interrupted Studies

The flexibility of postsecondary education inthe United Statls allows adolescents to move inand out of the system during the early years oftheir careers. Using consecutive surveys of theNational Longitudinal Study (NLS-72) from1972 to 1976, Meyer and Wise (1982) observedhow the 1972 high school seniors moved in andout of the school system. The percentage dis-tribution of the male youths following differentschooling patterns (sequences) is shown intable 4.6 iAs ndicatal, in 1972, 51.4 percent ofthe students continued to enroll in college or

15

other schools immediately after high school .7About 36.4 percent left school and did not en-roll again during 1972-1976. Approximately12.2 percent left school in 1972 but returnedwithin 4 years (enrolled either in high school orpostsecondary education). However, not all ofthe students who ever enrolled after high schoolexperienced continuous (uninterrupted) study.An estimation based on the data in table 2 indi-cates that approximately 14.4 percent of the stu-dents interrupted their studies.8 Among thosewho had ever enrolled, 22.6 percent interruptedtheir studies and moved in and out of formalschooling.9

Options for Out-of-SchoolYouth

As mentioned earlier, 8 percent of youngadults aged 16-17 and 48 percent aged 18-19are not enrolled in school. What educationalopportunities are available for these adoles-cents? Government- and employer-providedtraining programs, military training, appren-ticeships, and other adult education programsare important alternatives to formal schooling,but it is not known how many youth take ad-vantage of these opportunities. Available datado not provide a breakdown for 16- to 19-year-olds.

Adult Education

Increasing numbers of people take adulteducation courses and greater proportions arenow taking courses for job-related reasons. In1969, the number of courses taken for job-re-lated and nonjob-related reasons was about thesame (approximately 10,000 each). By 1984,the number of job-related courses taken hadnearly tripled (to almost 27,000) while nonjob-related courses taken had increased to only

2j

15,000 (Hill, 1987). In 1984, 53 percent of theyoung adults aged 17-24 took adult educationcourses in order to get new jobs or advance incurrent jobs, and 13.5 percent took courses tocomplete requirements for professional licen-ses. In other words, adult education programsare now more work oriented than they were 2decades ago, and youth are participating inthese programs in significant numbers.

Employers today seem to be more willing toshare the costs of adult education courses withtheir employees than they were 2 decades ago.According to Hill (1987), 36 percen* of all adulteducation courses were financed by employersin 1984, a significant increase from the 23 per-cent in 1969. The public share, from State andlocal sources, of financing these courses also in-creased during that time period from 10 percentto 15 percent. As a result, only 47 percent ofthe participants paid tuition on their own in1984, compared to 57 percent in 1969. Foryouths aged 17-24, the percentage of coursesfinanced by employers in 1984 was somewhatlower. Only 22.9 percent of their courses werefinanced by employers.

Training Programs

Some adolescents may participate in avariety of government-provided trainingprograms while they are in or out of school.Some are residence programs where classes areheld at public training centers; others simplyprovide funds and counseling services to par-ticipants and arrange for them to enroll inschools or work in firms. Besides public train-ing programs, young adults may also enroll inapprenticeship programs financed byemployees or unions. The programs involveplanned on-the-job training in conjunction withclassroom instruction (on average, 144 hourseach year). Apprenticeships are completelycontrolled and organized by employers and

local trade unions which interview applicants,review the trainees' progress, and determinewhether the apprenticeships are completedsatisfactorily. Unfortunately, no exact estimateof participants in apprenticeship programs ex-ists because only half of them are registeredwith the U.S. Labor Department's Bureau ofApprenticeship and Training (BAT). Accord-ing to surveys of high school seniors in 1980,about 2.4 percent of the students expected toparticipate in apprenticeship programs, a slightdecrease from the 2.7 percent in 1972 (Fetterset al., 1984).

Young adults do not necessarily obtain train-ing from the civilian sector, some learn theirskills in the armed services. In 1955, about 5.1percent of the young persons aged 16-19 werein the military. However, the percentagedeclined as the military draft ended in the early1970s. in 1980, only 1.8 percent of the 16-19age group were in the armed services." As themilitary changed from the draft to all-volunteer,corresponding changes in the demographiccomposition of the armed services occurred. Inthe early 1980s, the armed services had agreater percentage of high school graduatesthan it had 10 years before. In 1982, more than80 percent of the personnel in the armed ser-vices were high school graduates. In 1972, onlythe Air Force had more than 80 percent of itspersonnel with high school diplomas. (The per-centages of high school graduates in the AirForce, Anny, and Marine Corps were 83 per-cent, 61 percent, and 52 percent, respectively).

Since the average number of years of servicein the military has declined significantly from14.3 to 11.6 from 1971 to 1982, the increasednecessity of training by the military has becomea concern. As indicated by the U.S. Departmentof Defense (1981, p. 3), 55 percent of the train-ing for active forces and 41 percent of the train-ing for reserve forces was specialized skill

training. The extent .o which this training canbe applied in the civilian labor market is un-clear. Working with data on a national sampleof males born between 1930 and 1939,Coleman (1982) .lid a positive effect of

Summary

As mentioned earlier, young people in thiscountry have a variety of options for acquiringeducation and training after compulsoryschooling. The timing and content of trainingdiffer from person to person, depending on theindiv: '.ual's circumstances and personal needs.The system seems to be flexible enough toallow people to change course in their earlycareer development years. Some institutions orproviders, such as 2-year community colleges,play an important role in linking informal train-ing to formal schooling. With such links,young adults can adjust their educational planseasilywhenever they need to go back toschool to upgrade their skills, for ilistance.

NOTES

1. The finding that 8 percent of the 16-17-year-old youths did not enroll in schools seems to beinconsistent with the high school dropout rate(1 percent) cited later in this paper. Statisticaldiscrepancies among different datasets may be1,,e main reason. The other possibility is that asignificant proportion of the dropouts returned

17

military service on both the prestige and incomelevel of the first full-time civilian job.However, an updated study of the trans-ferability of military skills to the civilian laborforce is necessary.

to school 1-ter. These students were not ex-cluded from the calculation of dropout rates.Sr discussions later in this section.

2. For a graphic depiction of the structure offormal education in the United States, see U.S.Department of Education (1986a), p. 4. For en-rollmei -.atistics of high schools with differentgrade spans, see U.S. Department of Education(1984), table 1.9.

3. This percentage is based on High School andBeyond data. The alternative approach for cal-culating graduation rate by dividing the numberof public high school graduates by the public9th grade enrollment 4 years earlier shows thatthe graduation rate for public school students in1985-86 is only 70 percent. (This number hasbeen adjusted for transfers and interstatepopulation migration.) The graduation rate forprivate school students is not available. SeeState Educational Statistics Supplement: Stu-dent Performance and Resource Inputs, 1985and 1986 (U.S. Department of Education: Of-fice of Planning, Budget, and Evaluation).

4. Based on U.S. Department of Education(1986a), table 9, p.12, persistence or retentionrate from a specific grade to the next grade canbe calculated. The results indicate that, in 1975,the persistence rate was 0.903 percent fromgrades 10-11, 0.919 percent from grades 11-12,and 0.936 percent from the 12th grade tograduation.

5. In 1982, about 492,000 persons passed GEDexaminations. Among them, 37 percent were19 years old or under, and 68 percent wereunder 29 years old. See U.S. Department ofEducation (1984), table 4.7.

6. By indicating the status "in school full time"as 0 and "not in school full time" as 1, theydefined 32 different sequences that describedstudents' schooling status from 1972 to 1976.For example, the sequence 10101 indicates inschool full time in 1972, 1974, and 1976, butnot in school full time for 1973 and 1975.

7. Any sequence beginning with "1" is in thiscategory.

18

8. To estimate the percentage of students whointerrupted their studies, the proportion of stu-dents who had ever enrolled in school from1972 to 1976 was calculated (this can be ob-tained by subtracting 36.4 percent from the total100 percent, that is, 63.6 percent.) Then, thepercentage of students whose studies were in-terrupted was calculated ti% a). A , , 49.2 per-cent (including sequences 11111, 11110,01111, 11100, 00111, 11000, 01100, 00011,10000, and 00001). Finally, the difference be-tween the proportion of those who had ever en-rolled and the proportion of those whose studieswere uninterrupted represents the proportion ofthose who enrolled, but whose studies were in-terrupted.

9. This percentage was calculated by dividing14.4 by 63.6.

10. Percentages are derived from U.S. Depart-ment of Labor (1982), tables A-1 and A-2.

26

Issues, Policies, and Programsat the State and Federal. Levels

Rooted in a philosophical and constitution-al framework favoring a decentralized

system of education and grounded in a culturethat supports private enterprise, self-help, and a"marketplace" approach to the resolution of is-sues (Norris, Lasher, and Brandt, 1977), theUnited States has not been guided by a com-prehensive national plan or policy for educationand training. Rather, an accumulation ofdecades' worth of Federal, State, and privateinitiatives dealing with an assortment ofspecific educational, social, political, defense,and employment problems has affected theeducational and training opportunities ofAmerican youth (Clague and Kramer, 1976).

Under the United States Constitution, educa-tion is the responsibility of the States. Statescan choose to take their own initiatives in es-tablishing policies and programs, provided thatthey do not contravene Federal regulations orlaws. It is up to each State to interpret and im-plement, in light of its own circumstances andpriorities, appropriate programs and policies. Insome cases, nationally identified issues affectthe direction of policy discussions at the Statelevel. In other cases, innovative programs at

19

the local and State levels serve as examples ofpossible solutions to pervasive problems thatmay be addressed at the Federal level. Evenwhen education and training programs are par-tially Federally funded, as in the case of oca-tional education and job training, it is theresponsibility of the States to design ap-propriate programs to operate with allocatedfunds.

This section of the report will examine cur-rent issues and State and Federal responses tothem. It will begin with an overview of State-level issues followed by a presentation of Stateprograms addressing those issues. A discus-sion of Federal initiatives related to the sameareas of concern will conclude this section ofthe report. Although presented as separateparts, it must be remembered that State andFederal policies and programs do not operate inisolation from each other. While sometimesworking at cross purposes, often these initia-tives achieve .1 partnership in influencing thebehavior of 16- to 19- year-olds and the offer-ings of the variety of education and trainingproviders.

29

Issues at the State Level

Several issues appear to have caught the at-tention o f State policymakers and have becomethe subject of numerous reports prepared by theNational Governors' Association (NGA), theEducation Commission of the Stases (ECS), theNational Council of State Legislatures (NCSL),and other nation:-1 and regional organizationsserving the States. All these reports describe acommor core of issues with a call for aheightened State policy role. Three of these is-sues which illustrate the heightened State policyrole are: the problems of at-risk populations, il-literacy, and the role of education and trainingin economic development and industrial com-petitiveness.

The severity of the problems differ fromState to State, depending somewhat ondemographics. However, almost all the Stateshave identified these issues and are either im-plementing new policies and programs or areplanning to do so in the near future.

At-Risk Youth

One of the suggestions on how to serve theneeds of at-risk youth has been to conductdropout prevention programs. The BusinessAdvisory Committee of the Education Com-mission of the States, in its 1985 report Recon-necting Youth (ECS, L985), highlightsthe threatof school dropouts to the Nation's well-beingand challenges State and local policymakers toremedy the situation. Some of the issues thatthe States are dealing with includedefining theterm "dropout," determining the magnitude of

20

the problem, and designing programs for lowergrades that will prevent students from droppingout in later years. The States are also grapplingwith issues concerning the type and duration offunding for dropout prevention programs.

Illiteracy

Another issue of immediate concern to Statepolicymakers is illiteracy. Although olderadults are the majority of the illiterate popula-tion, State adult literacy strategies cut across allage groups and through all the vehicles whichreach the illiterate population. According to arecent report released by the NationalGovernors' Association Bringing Down theBarriers (NGA, 1987), State policymakers arefocusing theirdiscussion of illiteracy on the fol-lowing strategies: increasing the achievementof children as they grow up, providing secondchance educational opportunities in diverse set-tings (often outside schools), and providingwork-related education and training to meet thechanging demands of the work place. Specifi-cally, State policymakers are concentrating oncooperating with State agencies, the privatesector, and volunteer groups to address thisproblem. While generally reforming elemen-tary and secondary education, States are plan-ning to help welfare recipients learn to read.

Economic Development

Economic development and its link to educa-tion and training is a third issue. To prepareworkers for a climate of industrial competitive-ness, State officials are projecting future skillrequirements, identifying ways to prevent ad-verse economic trends, and coordinating publicand private resources. State officials are alsocreating jobs for youth as well as trying to retainjobs within communities throughout the State.

In addition, States continue to develop plansand implement policies and programs designedto improve the public schools as an investment

in future economic development. Because eachState must ir , Imre its educational needs by itsown criteria, Lese plans are diverse and es-tablish many different processes for change.Nevertheless, the States share a number of con-cerns: improving the teaching profession, in-tegrating technology into instruction,upgrading the school curriculum, strengtheninggraduation standards, raising teacher certifica-tion requirements, promoting business involve-ment in education, and working on ways tofinance these reforms (NGA, 1587).

Policies and Programsat the State Level

At-Risk Youth

In responding to the needs of at-risk youth,most States have designed and are conductingspecial programs. The following are examplesof comprehensive, State-initiated policies andprograms.

The California legislature passed a bill(SB65) in 1985 to help school districts keepyouth in school. The three components of thislaw are: 1) grants that are available for all dis-tricts to plan or implement programs designedto motivate and keep students in school; 2)

21

funds that are provided to districts with highdropout rates for establishing alternative educa-tion programs and cooperative work centersthat teach basic skills, operate diagnosticcenters, and provide training, counseling, andplacement services; and 3) funds that areprovided for educational clinics to assistdropouts in improving their basic academicskills. California also maintains a modelprogram data bank which stores information onstrategies for intervening when a problem isdetected.

31

Colorado has two dropout initiatives, one ofwhich is providing funding for Second Chancepilot programs for youth 16-2i years old whohave dropped out of high school. In Mas-sachusetts, the Chapter 188 School Improve-ment Act assists school districts with dropoutprevention programs. Funds are awarded ascompetitive grants to school districts to developsupplementary programs for grades 7-12.Programs implemented under these grants in-clude: remedial and tutorial programs, coun-seling programs, work-study and cooperativeprograms, and programs for pregnant teenagersand teenagers who are parents.

In 1984, the New York State legislatureadopted the Attendance Improvement/DropoutPrevention (AI/DP) Program. Under thisprogram, school districts falling in the bottom10 percent in school attendance rates in theState are required to submit a plan to addressabsenteeism, which includes methods of iden-tifying at-risk youth and specific actions to in-crease attendance and retention rates. In1985-86, the law and regulations were changedto require school districts to allocate funds forprograms at specific schools.

In North Carolina, the State legislature es-tablished a dropout prevention fund as part ofits Basic Education Program, awarding $15million to 141 school districts during the 1985-86 school year. In addition, North Carolina'sIn-School Suspension program is designed forstudents to develop the self-discipline requiredto participate in academic programs.

Washington State's Educational ClinicsProgram provides short-term instruction to 13-to 19-year-old students who have dropped outor have been expelled from school for at least amonth. These clinics diagnose each student'seducational abilities and provide individual-ized, short -teen instruction to improve basicskills and motivation. Employment informa-tion is also made available to these students.

22

Wisconsin's Act 29 of 1985, defines "at-riskyouth" and requires every school board to iden-tify at-risk children in its district each year anddevelop a plan of programs to meet the needsof youth. Arkansas and Tennesseepolicymakers have implemented statewideprograms for the early identification of basicskill deficiencies before they contribute to a0110:lent's dropping out of school. In Arkansas,students are tested in 3rd, 6th, and 8th grades.They must pass the basic skills test in the 8thgrade before proceeding to high school. In Ten-nessee, alternative learning centers have beenestablished to redirect youth with behavioral orinstructional problems.

Illiteracy

In response to illiteracy problems, State of-ficials have formulated policies to fostercooperation among State agencies, the privatesector, and volunteers. Most importantly, theyhave emphasized the need to follow throughwith education reforms. In recent years, taskforces and coalitions have been established inmany States to develop publc awareness andoutreach programs for adults and innovativebasic skills programs for at-risk students.

In South Carolina, the Governor's Remedia-tion Initiative provides students in grades 9-12who need extra instruction with an individual-ized, diagnostic, prescriptive, self-pacedprogram to build their mathematics and readingskills. Through a grant program established in1985-86, schcols which fit the identifiedcriteria were asked to apply for funds and es-tablish math and reading laboratories. Current-ly, there are 106 computer-enhanced mathlaboratories and 60 reading labs in 99 highschools.

Officials in nearly all States have addressedthe issue of illiteracy either by increasing thenumber of academic courses required for high

school graduation or by establishing basic skilltests. The most common phenomenon has beenadded requirements for coursework in mathe-matics, science, and foreign languages. InIowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, and Wyoming,social studies and physical education require-ments have also been raised. Indiana's A+Program for Educational Excellence assessesprogress for each student in grades 1, 2, 3, 6, 8,9, and 11, based on standard proficiencies;those with test scores below minimum stand-ards are required to take a remediation programthe following summer.

In summary, State policymakers deal with il-literacy as much at the primary and secondarylevels as at the adult stage. Strategics that at-tempt to break the intergenerational nature of il-literacy and reduce the number of dropoutsseem to have positive results. With that inmind, the State governors have made a series offar-reaching recommendations in a recentlyreleased report Time for Results: TheGovernors' 1991 Report on Education (NGA,1987). These proposals emphasize earlychildhood development programs as good in-vestments for improving student achievement.

23

Economic Development

Economic development at the State level hasalso given a new impetus to education reform.The role of education in preparing people tomeet the needs of business and industry hasreceived attention from State policymakers.Consequently, there has been a significant in-crease in the number of school/businesspartnerships for the design and operation ofcareer preparation programs.

In a large number of States, Federal fundsunder the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA)support work programs. In Atlanta, Georgia, adepartment store chain has placed a classroominside one of its buildings so that students canattend classes part of the day and work the restof the day. Variations of this work-study modelcan be found in Pennsylvania, Massachusetts,New York, Florida, and Arizona, among manyother places. About 150 school systems in 27States now operate Experience Based CareerEducation (EBCE) programs which expose stu-dents in school to workplace concerns. Theyalso sponsor a large number of innovative, col-laborative programs for 16- to 21-year-olddropout students. In addition to the EBCEcareer oriented programs, State and localresources ($110 million across the Nation) havebeen used to establish statewide youth serviceanti conservation camp programs.

3 3

Issues, Policies, and Programsat the Federal Level

The 1980 election shifted the focus from theequity concerns of the Carter administration tothose of economic recovery and educationquality. The early years of the Reagan ad-ministration focused on declining national stu-dent aptitude and achievement test scores,increased drug problems in the schools, andadult illiteracy. More importantly, the ad-ministration redefined the role of Federal policyfrom a broad response to social issues to onespecifically targeted at the disadvantaged. Ad-ditionally, the Reagan administration stressedan increased role for private business, industry,and organizations in the solution of socialproblems.

The issues that have caught the attention ofState policymakers have also been the focus ofFederal initiatives. In add ition, Federal policiesand programs have been targeted at specialpopulations such as economically disad-vantaged youth.

At-Risk Youth

The issues of concern at the Federal level arehow to generate the skills and motivation neces-sary for success in education beyond highschool and how to overcome the financial pres-sures of continuing high school and progres-sing to postsecondary education. Manyapproaches and programs conducted by severalFederal agencies are designed to prevent stu-

24

dents from dropping out and to facilitate theirfurther education.

Generating Skills and Motivation

The Department of Education, through theOffice of the Assistant Secretary for Post-secondary Education, carries out two majoryouth programs dealing with this issue: TalentSearch and Upward Bound.

The Talent Search program identifies youthand young adults 12-27 years old who are usual-ly high school students and dropouts but whohave the potential for participating inpostsecondary education. Low-income in-dividuals who are likely first-generation col-lege students are encouraged to completesecondary school and go on to college. Theprogram also publicizes the availability of stu-dent financial aid and provides tutorial servicesfor those choosing to take or re-enter education-al programs.

The Upward Bound program generates theskills and motivation necessary for success ineducation beyond high school among low-in-come youths and potential first-generation col-lege students between 13 and 19 years old. Thegoal of the program is to increase the academicperformance of the participants so that they cancomplete high school and postsecondary educa-tional programs. Project grants are provided toinstitutions of higher education, public and

'1,

private agencies and organizations, and second-ary schools to provide academic programs (in-cluding Saturday classes), personal andacademic counseling, career guidance, tutor-ing, and exposure to cultural events andacademic programs not usually available to dis-advantaged youths. Funds also supportresidential summer and school-year programsand stipends for students.

Overcoming Financial Pressures

Under the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978,the Office of Personnel Management has threeprograms to help youth overcome the financialpressures of continued education.

The Stay-in-School program is designed togive economically disadvantaged youth 16years old and older part-time employment inFederal agencies to allow them to continue theireducation without interruption caused by finan-cial pressures.

The Summer Aids program is anotherprogram for those 16 years old and older towork in the private or public sector and earnmoney to return to school.

High school and college students with spe-cial skills can participate in the Summer Jobs inFederal Agencies program. The jobs may beclerical, administrative, or subprofessional, inthe crafts or trades, in areas related to thestudents' career interests.

Postsecondary Financial Aid

Of the estimated $240 billion spenton educa-tion in the United States during the 1985-86academic year, more than $11.8 billion wasspent on Federal financial assistance targeted atthose needing help to afford the cost of higher

25

education (United States Department of Educa-tion, 1984). Many aid programs are grantsscholarships that do not have to berepaidwhile others are loans that must berepaid when a student leaves school, or work-study programs that enable a student to earnmoney while attending college.

The United States Department of Educationadministers five major student financial aidprograms:

1) Pell Grants are awards to college anduniversity undergraduates. For many stu-dents, they provide a "foundation" of finan-cial aid to which aid from other Federal andnon-Federal sources may be added. Unlikeloans, grants do not have to be paid back.

2) Supplemental Educational Oppor-tunity Grants are also awards to help pay forundergraduate education.

3) The College Work-Study programprovides jobs, both on campus and off cam-pus with private nonprofit or public or-ganizations, for undergraduate and graduatestudents who need financial aid.

4) National Direct Student Loans(NDSLs) are low-interest (5 percent) loansmade through a school's financial aid officeto undergraduate and graduate students.These loans are based on need, theavailability of NDSL funds at the institution,and the amount of other aid the students arereceiving.

5) Guaranteed Student Loans(GSLs)/PLUS Loans are low-interest loansmade by a lender such as a bank, credit union,or savings and loan association to help stu-dents pay for postsecondary education.These loans are insured by a guarantee agen-

35

cy in each State and reinsured by the FederalGovernment. Banks and other lenders takepart voluntarily in the GSL program and lendtheir own money. PLUS loans (ParentLoans for Undergraduate Students) provideadditional funds for educational expenses.The interest rate for these loans is currently12 percent, and, as GSLs, they are made bybanks and other lenders.

Illiteracy

In April 1983, the United States Departmentof Education's National Commissionon Excel-lence in Education released its report A Nationat Risk which concluded that "the educationalfoundations of our society are presently beingeroded by a rising tide of mediocrity thatthreatens our very future as a Nation and apeople"(National Commission, 1983, p. 5).2These strong words gave new impetus toeducation reform. Concerns about decliningnational student aptitude and achievement testscores, increasing numbers of high schoolgraduates who were functionally illiterate, andgrowing illiteracy galvanized parents, teachers,administrators, local school boards, Stateeducation agencies, private corporations andfoundations, and citizens into making an ex-traordinary response. The Federal Governmentalso played an active role in spurring educationreform and the campaign against illiteracy.

On September 7, 1983, President Reaganes-tablished the Adult Literacy Initiative to ad-dress the Nation's illiteracy problem. As a partof that effort, the Federal Interagency Commit-tee on Education identified 79 Federalprograms, administered by over 14 Federalagencies, that support literacy activities eitherdirectly or indirectly. In FY 1985, $347.6 mil-lion was obligated for literacy programs,however, only $126.5 million was actuallyspent (Education and Labor Committee, 1987).

26

Ninety-eight percent of the $126.5 million wasfor programs obligated in FY 1985 in theDepartments of Education, Health and HumanServices, and Defense (Kahn, 1986, pp. 19-21).

Special programs have been designed for theelderly, native Americans, refugees, Federalprisoners, high school dropouts. the hand-icapped, the unemployed, and the non-Englishspeaking. Many programs focus on helpingpeople gain the skills necessary to get a job orlive independently.

The most important source of Federal sup-port for programs used by 16- to 19-year-oldsis the 8 percent set-aside, with State matchingfunds required, for education under the JobTraining Partnership Act. These funds aregiven to the States, which have great leeway indeciding how they will be used and distributed.JTPA emphasizes the need to combat illii:.racyby requiring that the funds be used to: enhancethe basic educational skills of youth; encourageschool completion; provide eligible youth withexposure to the "world of woe.," improveacademic performance, including mathematicsand reading comprehension; and improveemployability skills.

Economic Development

If the United States is to be "an effective in-ternational competitor, then innovation,vitality, and effective training of the workforceare key ingredients" (Eurich, 1985, p. 3). Asthe workforce of tomorrow, those 16- to 19-year -olds in transition from school to the worldof work, are critical and so is their educationand training in this age of technology and infor-mation.

Current Federal policy is directed toward as-sisting disadvantaged youth and involving theprivate sector of the economy in developingpermanent employment opportunities rather

than "makework" jobs. The major Federalprograms preparing youth for employment areadministered by several agencies including theDepartments of Agriculture, Labor, and Educa-tion.

One youth program in the Department ofAgriculture addressing this issue is the 4-Hprogram which sponsors education and youthdevelopment projects through the extensionservices of State land-grant colleges anduniversities. 4-H clubs provide youth with op-portunities for educational, social, and personaldevelopment through participation in variousprojects addressing common farm, home, andcommunity problems ranging from animal hus-bandry to city planning.

The Department of Labor's Employmentand Training Administration, acting under theauthorization of the National ApprenticeshipAct of 1937, as amended, administers severalprograms directed at youth: apprenticeship, theFederal-State Employment Service, andprograms under the Job Training PartnershipAct. It registers apprentices and apprenticeshiptraining programs for individuals at least 16years old. It also stimulates and assists industryin the development of apprenticeship and train-ing programs designed to provide skills re-quired by the economy in those occupationscommonly known as skilled crafts or trades. Inaddition, the Employment and Training Ad-ministration introduces apprenticeship traininginto new industries and occupations.

The Federal-State Employment Service,under the Wagner- Peyser Act of 1933 and theSocial Security Act of 1935, is a national net-work of public employment offices providingjnb placement services. It also provides specialservices, including counseling and assistance inovercoming barriers to employment unrelatedto job performance, such as lack of transporta-tion and child care, to youth and minonty job

27

seekers. The Summer Employment programfor youth is also part of this effort.

The Job Training Partnership Act of 1982was enacted to provide training and related as-sistance to economically disadvantaged in-dividuals and nthers who face significantemployment barriers. As stated in Section 2 ofthe law, the purpose of JTPA is to "establishprograms to prepare youth and unskilled adultsfor entry into the labor force." The ultimategoal of the Act is to move trainees into per-manent, self-sustaining employment.

A central feature of the act is the partnershipbetween government and the private sector.Money (in the form of formula grants) comesPam the Federal government while administra-tion and operation of the training projects is car-ried out by the private sector, with jointpolicymaking at the local level to meet the realmanpower needs of the local economy. JTPAfunds flow through local private industry coun-cils (PICs) ti at are made up of representativesfrom the private and public sectors and thatdecide how most of the JTPA dollars cominginto a State will be spent.

Another significant feature of the act is that,for the first time, monetary incentives areprovided for States to bring their education andjob training policies into agreement. JTPAmakes available approximately $3 billion forjob training programs, and Section 203(b) tar-gets not less than 40 percent of the availableTitle IIA funds (the core training dollars) onyouth? It also allows public secondary andpostsecondary education systems to be themajor recipients of these funds (Riffel, n.d.).

Title II of the act (Training Services for theDisadvantaged) authorizes and sets out require-ments for adult and youth training programs tobe administered by the States. They are to beplanned and carried out through a partnershipof the private sector and government at the State

37

and local levels. Title II also includes a separateauthorization for the Summer Youth prop am.

The Department of Education's majorprograms in the area of training young peoplefor work are authorized by the Carl D. PerkinsVocational Education Act of 1984. The pur-pose of the Perkins Act's basic grants to States(Title II, Parts A and B) is to help States expandand improve vocational education programsand ensure equal opportunity in vocationaleducation to traditionally underserved popula-tions. Twenty-two percent of the funds underPart A, Vocational Education Opportunities, isto be allocated for disadvantaged students and10 percent for handicapped students. Fundsunder Part B, Improvement, may be used forany of 24 specified purposes, including new orexpanded programs, career counseling andguidance, acquisition of equipment, renovationof facilities, and staff development.

Summary

All of the programs reviewed here have theultimate goal of developing the ability ofcitizens to function effectively as adults in anincreasingly complex world. Effective citizen-ship requires literacy and the skills and attitudesnecessary for people to make informed choicesand lead productive lives. State and localprograms together with Federal programs andincentives are designed to achieve those goals.

28

Programs authorized by the Adult EducationAct work in concert with the vocational educa-tion programs and the Job Training PartnershipAct. The Adult Education Act provides blockgrants to the States to be given to local educa-tion agencies or other nonprofit agencies(public or private). The purpose of the act is toexpand educational opportunities for adults andencourage the establishment of programs ofadult education that will enable all adults to ac-quire the literacy and other basic skills neces-sary to function in society, to completesecondary school, and to profit from employ-ment-related training.

Participation in the adult education programis open to those 16 years of age or older or thosewho are beyond the age of compulsory schoolattendance and are not high school graduates.Although exact figures for 16- to 19-year-oldsare not available, it is known that approximate-ly 80 percent of the participants are between 16and 44 years old.

The foregoing analysis of State and Federalpolicies and programs reveals a great diversityof approaches and a commingling of roles in thedevelopment of education and trainingprograms. It also suggests several majortrends: the developing focus on assistance tothe disadvantaged, the expansion of education-al opportunity for all income groups, the grow-

ing role of the private sector, and the fusion ofeducation and training apprcaches.

NOTES

1. A student "at-risk" can be defined as a per-son who is likely to confront the problems as-sociated with drug abuse, unwanted pregnancy,suicide, dropping out of school or chronicallylow academic performance. However, Statesdefine "at-risk" mostly by focusing on studentswho are at risk of dropping out of school. Thisis evidenced by the conference of the NationalForum for Youth At Risk, sponsored by theEducation Commission of the States and the In-

29

terstate Migrant Education Council, whichdefines the challenge for the States as: to makeall youths in the United States free from the riskof not completing their secondary education.

2. The National Assessment of EducationalProgress's recent study of literacy among 21-to 25-year-olds indicates that this age group hasdifficulty operating at the increasingly higherliteracy rate required by a more sophisticated(technical) environment.

3. Except where the ratio of economically dis-advantaged youth to adults differs from the na-tional ratio, the amount is reduced or increasedproportionately.

3 9

Review of Research Evidenceon Special Topics

Alarge body of research is available frommany different sources on many aspects

of postcompulsory education available toadolescents. Much of the research simplyserves to bring up new questions or to focus onexisting ones. Other research is hampered bylack of appropriate data, though the quality ofthe datasets has improved substantially overtime.

In this section, only three topics are con-sidered, either because they represent importantdevelopments in the organization or content ofpostcompulsory education in the United Statesor because the research evidence may have im-portant implications for policy.1The topics are:the movement to emphasize a core curriculumof academic subjects in high school; the highschool dropout problem; and the part-time workbehavior of high school students.

The High School Curriculum

In 1983 the National Commission on Excel-lence in Education advocated in its report A Na-tion At Risk that high schools increase emphasison a core curriculum of academic subjects. Inparticular, the report recommended that "at a

31

minimum, all students seeking a diploma be re-quired to lay the foundations in the Five NewBasics by taking the following curriculumduring their 4 years in high school: 4 years ofEnglish, 3 years of mathematics, 3 years of

40

science, 3 years of social studies, and one-halfyear of computer science." For the college-bound, "2 years of foreign language in highschool" was also recommended strongly.These recommendations were based on thefinding that "secondary school curricula havebeen homogenized, diluted, and diffused," andthat "students have r.ifigrated from vocationaland college preparatory programs to 'generaltrack' courses in large numbers."

In response to this recommendation, someState and local public school districts have in-creased their requirements for high schoolgraduation by increasing the number of creditsrequired in basic academic courses. As indi-cated in table 5, the average number of creditsrequired for graduation has increased from 19.7in 1981-82 to 21 in 1987-88. Among the basiccourses, mathematics and science requirementswere increased more than those for other sub-jects.

In 19 &0, fewer than 20 percent of all studentsmet all requirements suggested by the NationalCom r.i:ssion on Excellence in Education. Only49.7 percent of students met the mathematicsrequirement, and only 36.2 percent met thescience requirement (see table 6). As expected,aca&mic-track students were more likely tomeet the suggested requirements.

Trends in the Course-TakingBehavior of High SchoolStudents

According to an analysis of high schoolstudents' transcripts, from 1964 to 1981 enroll-ment in traditional mathematics and sciencecourses dropped sharply as more students pur-sued the general-track curriculum (Adelman,1983). As the analysis of transcripts indicates,the educational experience of the general-trackstudent is quite different from that of academic-and vocational-track students. Although there

32

is no agreement on what constitutes the genera]track, students who identified themselves as onthis track spent more time in personal serviceand development courses Clan on advancedacademic courses.

Additional evidence is available from a studythat compared the high school classes of 1972and 1980 (sce table 7). Curriculum trackcan beused as a proxy for the type and rigor ofcourses students are taking. General-track stu-dents are more likely to take remedial courses,personal development courses, and diluted orabbreviated versions of traditional academiccourses. In 1980, 37.2 percent of high schoolseniors identified themselves as on the generalcurriculum track, whereas in 1972, 31.7percentdid. On the other hand, in 1980, 38 percent ofthe seniors identified themselves as studentspursuing an academic education track, a sig-nificant decline from the 46 percent in 1972.Direct measures of the number ofcourses thesehigh school graduates took are only availablefor broadly defined subject areas which mixrigorous courses for the college bound withothers at the other end of the spectrum. Themean number of courses taken in math actual-ly increased from 3.73 to 4.12 between 1972and 1980. The number in social studiesdeclined from 5.37 to 4.66, as did those inforeign languages (see table 6).2

Another analysis of transcripts for the highschool graduating class of 1982 provides aprofile of courses for students who pursue dif-ferent tracks (Rock et al., 1986, p. 164):

The hypothesized average student inthe academic curriculum would haveearned a total of 15.55 Carnegie unitsin the new basics, including 10.66 units

in non-remedial English, Algebra I,Geometry I, Advanced Mathematics,Biology I, History, Social Science, andForeign Language I and II and would

4

i

have received a 2.89 grade average.The hypothesized average student ingeneral curriculum would have ac-cumulated 11.98 Carnegie units in-cluding 8.55 in non-remedial English,Algebra I, History, and Social Sciencefor a 2.07 grade average.

General-track students are more likely thanacademic-track students to participate inremedial and generalized courses at lowerlevels of difficulty.

The Curriculum and EconomicAchievement

Bishop (1985) reviewed and synthesized theresults of six studies of the criteria employersuse in their hiring processes. For both in-schooland out-of-school youth, he concludes thatknowledge of basic skills (communication and^mputation skills) is one of the most important

criteria used to screen applicants (second onlyto attitudes and app ;arance). For in-schoolyouth and out-of-school youth in jobs that re-quire an average amount of preparation, thesebasic communication and computational skillsare important for performing well and retainingone's job. Bishop also found that employers donot use (or are not able to use) high schooltranscripts to evaluate job applicants (Bishop,1985). However, based on High School andBeyond data (U.S. Department of Education),he found that high school vocational educationhad significant, positive impacts on wages and

33

earnings acquired immediately after highschool by those who did not attend college.3

However, the study also reviewed researchliterature and found a Figni ficant correlation be-tween earnings and performance on basicacademic tests (such as Scholastic AptitudeTest-verbal and Scholastic Aptitude Test-math), grade point average, etc. Meanwhile, al-most all analyses indicate that students pursLingan academic track have better scores than theirnonacademic counterparts. 4 If basic academiccourses improve test scores, which are relatedto earnings, then basic skills could affect theindividual's careers

The literature review, which is summarizedin table 8, shows negative impacts of test scoreson earnings in early labor market experience,when the individual is 19-21 years old. The im-pacts then become positive during the rest of theindividual's career. This indicates thatacademic achievements are usually not recog-nized by employers at the beginning.Employers neither test their employees' basicskills nor do they refer to their high schooltranscripts. However, as these skills begin tocontribute to the individual's work, their earn-ings go up. In fact, as surveys indicate, the con-tribution of basic skills to prcluctivity is mostlyindirect. They help the :dual to acquirejob-specific skills quickly and adapt easily tonew jobs. If this is true, then the findings thatstudents are taking more basic skill courses,while preferring general and vocational educa-tion, are not contradictory. They simply reflectthe fact that students need more flexible andgeneral skills, i.e., basic skills, to survive in adynamic world where work content is changingrapidly in response to changes in high tech-nology.

42

High School Dropouts

Fifty years ago, a high school diploma was asymbol of high educational achievement, but itis now considered by many as the minimumcredential required for participation inAmerican society and the labor market. Failureto finish high school has serious consequencesor an individual's access to reasonable wages

and steady work. Today, 12 years of formalschooling is considered the norm. Among 25-to 29-year-olds in 1980, 97.3 percent finished8th grade, 85.6 percent finished high school orits equivalent, 37.4 percent finished 2 years ofcollege, 23.1 percent finished 4 years of col-lege, and 7.8 percent went on to graduateschool. Only 44 percent of high schoolgraduates in this birth cohort had gone on to col-lege by their late twenties.

The rate of high school completion has beenincreasing throughout the 20th century but ittook its largest jump among those who wereteenagers during the Depression. Among 65-in 69- year-olds in 1980, who would have beenstarting high school near or before the begin-ning of the Depression, the proportion with 12or more years of school was 46.1 percent.Among 60- to 64- and 55- to 59-year-olds, thehigh school completion rate jumped to 55.5 and63.7 percent, respectively. Among post-WorldWar II teenagers, it continued to grow at just alittle under a percent per year until the mid-1960s when it reached 83.8 percent (U.S.Department of Commerce, 1980). It has edgedup only slightly since then. Likewise, collegeattendance rates rose steadily throughout thepost-World War II period, but grew most quick-ly during the 1960s, peaked in 1970, fell until

34

1974, rebounded, and then remained more orless steady.

The rapid expansion in the educational at-tainment of new cohorts has stopped. On theother hand, the technological sophistication ofskills required in the workplace continues togrow. Increasing competition among busi-nesses in the United States resulting fromderegulaeon and from businesses abroa( islikely to benefit the United States consumer, butit puts new demands on United States busi-nesses and their employees. To be competitive,firms must be able to respond more quickly tothe changing demands of consumers. Theymust be able to introduce cost-saving andquality-enhancing technology more quickly.

Part of the response of both students and theeducation system to changing conditions in themarketplace is apparent in the changing dis-tribution of major fields of study among newbaccalaureates awarded and elective coursesstudents choose to take outside their majorfield. 6 Another part of the response, for whichless systematic evidence is available, is thatmore training is produced closer to the sourceof its usethe workplace. However, inde-pendent of the type and provider of educationor the training produced, evidence suggests thatworkers with more education and training per-form better in the current economic envia.1-ment. As increasing competition in themarketplace induces firms to respond morequickly to changes in consumer demand andtechnology and to specialize their products andservices for particular groups of consumers(Bailey and Noyelle, 1986), the liability of too

little education (not finishing high school) islikely to increase.

The term "high school dropout" is common-ly used to refer to those who do not finish highschool. It is by no means a permanent condi-tion. That is, young people who leave schoolearly can change their minds and either go backto school ("stopouts") or take an alternativeroute to finishing their high school education,such as passing the General EducationalDevelopment exam. Students with the charac-teristics that predict dropout behavior are the"at-risk population."

Why do young people drop out of highschool? The single most important statisticalpredictor of dropout behavior is poor academicperformance in school. This cannot be inter-preted to mean That students drop out only be-cause they are unable to do well in school.Neither does it imply that making the highschool curriculum more challenging will in-crease the proportion who d;op out.' Droppingout of high school and pool academic perfor-mance are likely symptoms of more bash;problems.° The empirical rt ch has not es-tablished what those probl be.9

What are the consequen, roppingof high school? High school 4,opouts do notfare well in the labor market relative to highschool graduates. They are more likely to bewithout work. When working, they earn less:Males with 1-3 years of high school earn about25 percent less than their counterparts with 4years of high school.

How Many Drop Out?

How many young people are high schooldropouts is not an easy question to answer. Noteveryone attends school continuously. Someleave school but return later. Not everyone whoattends school continuously graduates at the

35

same age. Some are held back and repeat gradelevels. Others start late. The proportions of18-, 19-, and 20-year-olds who had completedhigh school as of March 1979, were 45.8, 77.6,and 84.4 percent, respectively. These figuresshow that many 18-year-olds are still in highschool. Also, these figures include people whohave finished high school via alternative routes,most notably by passing the General Education-al Development tests. Other methodsl° of cal-culating the dropout rate yield lowercompletion figures near 75 percent. There isdisagreement about which figures are moremeaningful or whether 75 percentor even 80or 85 percentis too low a completion rate. InJapan, 93 percent finish secondary school.Many United States educators increasingly tendto use this Japanese standard, believing that theUnited States can do better despite fundamen-tal demographic and cultural differences. Andrealizing that, it is generally believed that thenature of worx :5 such that a high school educa-tion is the minimum employers will accept foremployment.

C:ven this situation in the United States,the -e are still some basic questions that need tobe answered. Is noncompletion occurring ear-lier in the high school cycle? And, what is areasonable national goal for high school stu-dents?

How Many Return?

As was emphasized earlier, dropping out ofhigh school is not an irreversible decision. In asample of high school sophomores in 1980, 14percent41ropped out of school before scheduledgraduation in 1982. However, by the spring of1984, 40 percent of this group had returned toschool and had earned their diplomas. Another10 percent were in school at the time but hadnot earned their diplomas yet. In California, itis estimated that 40 percent of dropouts im-

4

.nediately enroll in another form of school (Pal-las, 1987).11 Adolescents who leave highschool early can also earn a certificate of highschool completion by passing the GED tests. In1980, nearly 700,000 people took the completebattery of GED tests. Half of the test takerswere 21 years old or younger. Sixty-nine per-cent of the test takers passed the exam andreceived a certificate.

Who Drops Out?

If the 15 percent of young people who cur-rently do not finish high school were equallydistributed across demographic groups, it is un-likely there would be as much concern about thedropout problem. But the completion rates aremuch lower for some minority groups. Theproportions of blacks who had finished highschool in March of 1979 were 35.7, 57.4, 72.7,and 75.8 percent for 18-, 19-, 20-, and 21-year-olds. Young black people also take longer tofinish high school. For those of Hispanicorigin, the figures are 33.9, 63.0, 63.3, and 58.6percent for 18- to 21-year-olds. Hispanics areless likely to finish high school than blacks butthe trend is strongly upward. Borus and Car-penter (1984) demonstrate that after accountingfor the educational background of parents,family income, and other background and stu-dent characteristic variables, young blackpeople are less likely and Hispanics no morelikely to drop out of high school than their whitecounterparts.

Characteristics Associated withDropping Out

As previously mentioned, the best predictorof dropping out is poor academic performance(Pallas, 1987). For example, Borus and Car-penter (1984) find the one-year dropout ratel2

36

for those performing 2 or more years behindmodal grade was 16.8 percent as opposed to 4percent for those who were not. Dropout ratesare lower for those in college preparatory (1.7percent) than in general curricula (6.5 percent)(Boras and Carpenter, 1984).13 For women,the second best predictor of dropping out ispregnancy (Pallas, 1987). Married students orthose planning to be married are more likely todrop out than those who are not (Borus and Car-penter, 1984). Students who hold full-time jobsare more likely to drop out (D'Amico, 1984).In Malizio and Whitney's study, among thosewho dropped out and took the GED tests, 5.4percent did so because high school was notchallenging (Malizio and Whitney, 1981).

The characteristics of those who return tohigh school are consistent with those ofdropouts. Older students are less likely toreturn to school. Those who expect to attendcollege and those who have never been marriedare more likely to return. Among those whotook the GED tests in 1980, 35.3 percent did soto fulfill a future job requirement, 29.1 percentdid so to fulfill an educational admissions re-quirement, and 24.9 percent did so for personalsatisfaction.

Wehlage and Rutter (1986) find thatdropouts are less distinguishable from noncoi-lege-bound high school graduates than the lat-ter are from college-bound graduates. Theprimary distinguishing characteristic is delin-quent behaviora symptom of conflict. Theyargue that dropping out results from the into:action of certain institutional characteristics ofthe school and background characteristics ofthe student. They find that "for most studentsthe picture of high school that emerges is a placewhere teachers are not particularly interested instudents and the discipline system is perceivedas neither effective nor fair" (Wehlage and Rut-ter, 1986, p. 37). The interaction of these in-stitutional characteristics with "a lowsocioeconomic status background, which may

45

signify various forms of family stress or in-stability" (Wehlage and Rutter, 1986, p. 38)leads to conflicts which ultimately lead to drop-ping out. They report, however, that almost alldropouts indicate they expect to return andfinish high school,

Consequences of Isiot CompletingHigh School

Among teenage boys not enrolled in schoolin October 1976, the nonempleyment14 rate (orthe rate for those without jobs, including the un-employed and those out of the labor force) was42.1 percent for those with fewer than 12 yearsof school compared to 20.8 percent for thosewith 12 years (Feldstein and Ellwood, 1982).Youth can be an unsettling time, characterizedby experimentation and learning about one's in-terests through trial and error. This conditioncan result in a "high turnover lifestyle"goingfrom one job to another, going from student toworker status, and so forth. The high non-employment rate statistics for youth, in part,reflect their high job turnover rate.15

For a large number of youths, this is a tem-porary condition; for others, it is not. For thosewho do not finish high school, the high rates ofnonemployment and job turnover fall with timebut remain relatively high. For those with lessthan 12 years of school, the nonemploymentrate drops from 42.1 percent for the 16- to 19-year -old age group to 26.4 percent for the 20-to 24-year-old age group. For those with only12 years of schooling it falls less with time,from 20.8 percent for the 16- t o19-year-old agegroup to 14.7 percent for their older counter-parts. Clearly, not finishing high school is as-sociated with a much greater risk ofnonemployment. No research has attempted todistinguish whether 1) the high nonemploy-ment rate is a consequence of not finishing highschool or 2) both the high nonemployment rate

37

and the act of not finishing high school are bothsymptoms of some other problem. For in-stance, these young pcople may not havedeveloped the ability to adapt to organizationalrules. The truth is likely to lie somewhere be-tween these two extremes.

Individuals who do not finish high schoolearn substantially less than those who do.O'Neill et al. (1986) calculated from 1980Bureau of the Census data that, among whitemales 25-34 years old, weekly earnings were9.3 percent higher for each additional year ofschooling through the high school diploma. Forblack males, the increment was 7 percent peryear. Smith and Welch (1978) calculated fromthe 1974 Current Population Survey data that,among white males just entering the labormarket, annual earnings, corrected for theprobability of working part time or having zeroearnings, were 6.5 percent higher for each ad-ditional year of secondary schooling. For thosewith 10 years in the labor force the incrementwas 9.5 percent. For black males, the figureswere 3.4 percent for those just entering the laborforce and 7.8 percent for those who had been inthe labor force 10 years. In general, the rate ofreturn to years of postsecondary schooling waslarger, particularly for blacks.

In summary, since the mid-1960s, theproportion of young people finishing highschool or its equivalent has been around 85 per-cent. However, those who do not completehigh school appear to be disproportionatelyconcentrated in families when the parents havelittle formal schooling, are poor, and live inlarge cities. The economic rewards for finish-ing high school are quite large,16 and recent andforeseeable developments in the U.S. economysuggest that education will be an increasinglyimportant attribute that workers bring to themarket. The stagnation of educational attain-ment at the lower end of the educational dis-tribution would thus lead to problems.

4 C)

Working High School Students

A large proportion of high school studentshold jobs. Policymakers have generally ap-plauded this behavior. The work behavior ofhigh school students appears to be a uniquelyAmerican phenomenon. Who are the studentswho work and what motivates them to do so?What is the nature of their work experience?What are the consequences of their work on per-formance in school, persistence to graduation,likelihood of continuing with postsecondaryeducation, and outcomes in the labor market?Are the outcomes consistent with the motiva-tion for work? A flurry of recent research hasestimated the consequences of working. Someof that research casts doubt on the value of stu-dent work.

It is also the case that a large proportion offull-time college students work part time. Themotivations of these students appear to be dif-ferent, and the consequences are less wellstudied.17

Who Works?

The clearest distinguishing characteristic ofstudents who work is race. White students aremuch more likely to work than students of otherraces. For instance, in October of 1985,34 per-cent of white males 16-17 enrolled in schoolalso worked. Only 13 percent of their blackcounterparts did (U.S. Department of Labor,1986). "The source of the difference isuncer-tain. Black, Hispanic and other minority stu-dents live in areas where job opportunities forteenagers are scarce. In a large, random sample

38

of high school graduates, Meyer and Wise(1982) found that income of the parents is posi-tively, but weakly, associated with hoursworked per week in high school, while achieve-ment test scores are negatively, but weakly, re-lated to hours worked.

It is difficult to interpret the relationship be-tween work and achievement in school correct-ly. At least two effects are operating. Thesemight be labeled 1) allocation of time and2) comparative advantage or selectivity. Theallocation-of-time effect refers to the fact thatstudents who choose to work must take time andenergy. away from school and study; conse-quently, their achievement may suffer. Thecomparative-advantage effect is that, holdingconstant the allocation of time and energy tostudy, not all students may do equally well. Thesame is true for work. Students will under-standably choose to spend more time in the ac-tivity at which they are comparatively moreable. In this way, students self-select their rela-tive commitments of time and energy to schooland work. Of course, students may havean ab-solute advantage at both school and work. Forinstance, some students may be harder workingthan others. These students may earn and learnmore when they work and achieve and learnmore when they are in school. No research hasuntangled these effects. Therefore, we do notknow the magnitude of the effect of working onschool achievement.

What Are the Consequences ofWorking?

The recent increase in demand for teenageworkers has decreased the allocation of theirtime and energy to school. Also, the nature ofthe jobs youths hold has changed dramaticallyover the years. Today's high school studentswork primarily in the services and retail trade.In 1980, the most common job held bysophomores was babysitting (26.3 percent), fol-lowed by food service (12.2 percent), manuallabor (7.4 percent), and store clerk (7.2 per-cent). In the same year, the most common jobheld by seniors was store clerk (21.5 percent),followed by food service (16.8 percent), andclerical work (9.9 percent) (Lewin-Epstein,1981). Students' earnings are most often usedto finance a car, pay for clothes and gifts, ormake other major purchases (stereo, ski trips,etc.). It is not typical for their earnings to besaved for the purpose of financing college or tobe given to their parents to help pay for neces-sities (McNeil, 1984).

Future Employment

Meyer and Wise (1982) find that the hoursworked per week by high school students isstrongly related to the number of weeks theywork per year after graduation.19 Although thisrelationship weakens somewhat for each yearafter graduation, even 4 years after graduationit remains strong. Meyer and Wise concludethat "working in high school may be an indica-tion of personal characteristics not gainedthrough work, but leading to work in highschool as well as greater labor force participa-tion following graduation" (Meyer and Wise,1982, p. 306). The authors go on to say that thisinterpretation does not rule out the possibilitythat work experi '.nce in high school would have

39

resulted in increased employment after highschool for those who did not work.

Future Wages

Meyer and Wise (1982) also find a relation-ship between hours worked in high school andwage rates earned after, aduation. This effectis not as strong as it is for weeks worked, and itfails more quickly with years out of high school.As usual, several interpretations are possible.

Clearly, students who work must reduce thetime they spend on other activ'ties, and this willhave consequences. D'Amico (1984) finds thatfor most race/sex groups, intensive work in highschool (measured by the proportion of weeksthe student works 20 or more hours) is as-sociated with decreased study time and freetime at high school. However, he does not findan effect of intensive work on the student'sclass rank. He does find that intensive work in-creases the likelihood students will drop out orinterrupt their progress toward a diploma. Inter-estingly, moderate work (measured by propor-tion of weeks the student works 20 hours orless) reduces the probability that a student willdrop out.

Greenberger and Steinberg (1986) reviewtheir own earlier work and the work of manyothers related to the consequences of adolescentemployment. They examine the developmentof social and personal responsibility, achieve-ment in school (including the allocation of timeto school and study), crime and delinquency,health and well-being (including drug use andabuse), and future employment prospects. Theoverall picture they paint is one in whichteenage work has costs (often ignored or over-looked) that may not justify the (often over-stated) benefits.

The clearest result of working relates to thedevelopment of responsibility by teenagers.

48

The money earned by working yields increasedfinancial autonomy. But Greenberger andSteinberg (1986) caution that, "whetherautonomy should td equated with respon-sibility is another matter" (Greenberger andSteinberg, 1986, p. 105). They conclude that"in general, working, along with managing themoney that accrues from woricing, providesadolescents some opportunity to exercise moreresponsibility. But adolescents who work aremore likely to learn or practice personal respon-sibility than to learn interdependence, or ex-perience a high level of cooperation andinterdependencethe more `soc;11' aspects ofresponsibility" (Greenberger and Steinberg,1986, p. 103).

From the little systematic descripti on of whatteenagers do on the job, it appears that there isvery little chance to apply mathematics or topractice reading. Little instruction from adultsor learning transpires. This does not rule outthe possibility that student workers are learningon the job, but it is not apparent from observingthem while they work that they are learning orusing basic skills. A danger exists that studentslearn less from work than from school and thatthe time taken from school and study to work istime that could be better spent on schoolwork.

The Decision to Work (Self-Selec-tion) and the Effect of Work onSchool Achievement

Instead of trying to observe the process oflearning while working, which is difficult, itmay be better to measure the outcome. Howdoes the school achievement of students whowork compare to that of those who do not?Based on known family and personal charac-teristics, students who work are not very dif-ferent from those who do not (except for race).Based on their behavior, the evidence is thatthey are different. For instance, one study

40

shows that students who worked in 10th, ilth,and 12th grades had lower grades in 9th gradethan those who did not To separate the ef-fect of working on grades from the studentswith less academic ability or commitment toschooling, it is better to measure the effect ofwork on the change in an achievementmeasure.21 Greenberger and Steinberg (1986,p. 119) summarize their review of the evidence:

To sum tip: while there is littleevidence to suggest that students whodo less well in school are more likelyto become workers during high schoolyears, there is indirect evidence thatthey work longer hours than otheryoungsters. There is also someevidence to suggest that grade-pointaverage [GPA] is depressed by inten-sive levels of labor-force participation,especially among youth who beginwork early in the high school years.Although the relationship betweenworking and GPA does not always at-tain statistical significance, it is consis-tently negative. In no studies hasworking been shown to have a positiveeffect on GPA.

In a study of juniors and seniors in four mid-western high schools, McNeil found evidencethat the student's part-time employment may be"causing both students and teachers to dis-engage from the teaching-learning process"(McNeil, 1984, p. 1). She found that

...teachers resented students' prioritiesof time, energy, and effort when theywere directed at jobs to the detrimentof school performance. The teacherssaid, in ',any cases, that their own shiftto :laving the required reading done inclass, to having brief-answer tests andexercises, and to centering course les-

4 9

sons on teacher-supplied informationrather than on student participation allresulted from their low expectationsthat students would finish work, doquality work, and complete work ontime (McNeil, 1984, p. 36).

Work Intensity and School Achieve-ment

If students who work do more poorly inschool because they spend less time studying,then it should be the case that students whowork more hours per week or more weeks perschool year should achieve less. The results oftime-allocation analyses are mixed. In a studyof Orangt County (California) high school stu-dents, Greenberger and Steinberg (1986) foundthat 10th graders who worked more than 15hours per week and 11th graders who workedmore than 20 hours per week had significantlylower grades for the school year than those whoworked fewer hours. Mortimer and Finchfound that among boys who began working in10th grade, those who accumulated more exten-sive work experience had lower grades in theirlast year of high school than those who accumu-lated less work experience. 22 Also, the gradesof students who began work in 10th gradeshowed a decline; those who started later didnot. D'i.mico (1984) did not find any relation-ship between work intensitymeasured as theproportion of weeks in the school year with 20or more hours of workand class rank.

Working and the Investment ofTime in Education

Possibly, more important than the effect ofworking on school achievement is the effect ofworking on the amount of investment of timeand effort students make in schooling.

41

Reduced investment in schooling may be thecause of poorer school achievement among stu-dents who work extensively. Using time spenton homework as an index of amount of invest-ment in schooling, Greenberger and Steinberg(1986, p. 122) summarize the evidence:

[T]he effects of jobwork on homeworkparallel those for GPA. When effectsare demonstratedthey are not large.However, the effect of jobwork, or anyother potentially interfering activity,on homework is bound to be limited bythe low apparent "demand" for out-of-classroom preparation: the averagehigh school student spends less than anhour per day on homework. Also, as inthe case of GPA, the relations betweenjobwork and homework are consistent-ly negative across studies.

D'Amico (1984) found that students whowork intensively at a job spend less time study-ing and participating in free-time activities atschool. However, those who work moderatelyspend more time than either those who do notwork at all or those who work intensively.

NOTES

1. The National Commission on Excellence inEducation (1983) has advocated a strong coreacademic curriculum in high school. The Na-tional Foundation for the Improvement ofEducation (1986) and the Institute for Educa-tional Leadership (:iahn and Danzberger,1987), among others, have advocatedstrengthening programs for dropout prevention.Several commissions have argued for thebenefits of youth work (National Commissionon Youth, 1980; National Panel on HighSchools and Adolescent Education, 1976;President's Science Advisory Committee,

50)

1973; Carnegie Commission, 1980). However,recent research has brought this view intoques-tion (Greenberger and Steinberg, 1986).

2. A comparison of the course offerings and en-rollments of public high schools in 1972-73with those in 1981-82 gives a very different pic-ture of what was happening over this period.Measured as a percentage of total publicsecondary school enrollment, the enrollment inmathematics rose from 55 percent to 78 percentover the period. In the natural sciences, it rosefrom 51 percent to 65 percent. Meanwhile,some developmental and skill-specific courses,such as music, industrial arts, and dri ver'seducation, experienced decline in enrollments.

3. "The 30 percent of noncollege-bound stu-dents who took one or fewer vocational coursesreceived wage rates that were 7.5 percent lower,worked about 19 percent less and earned 32 per-cent about ($2,000) less than students who tookfour vocational courses in their last 3 years inhigh school." See Bishop (1985), p. 37.

4. West et al. 1985b, Fetters et al. 1984, Rocket al. 1986, Alexander and Pallas, 1984. Thereis evidence indicating that students enrolled inacademic programs also fiat.. wetter academiccompetency and educational experience thatpre-date high school (Alexander and Cooke,1982). Thus, this means the relations betweentest scores and curriculum can be confirmedonly if these "pm-high school" factors are con-trolled. Alexander and Pallas (1984), neverthe-less, controlled these factors and showed apositive impact of academic courses on test per-formance.

5. The question of the relative payoffs ofacademic and occupational skills in the labormarket is important. The correlations ofachievement test scores with eamings areevidence that academic skills have a payoff.

42

6. The share of B.A.s awarded is business andmanagement increased from 13.9 percent in1973-74 to 23.8 percent in 1984-85. In educa-tion the share decreased from 19.6 percent to 9percent during the same period. Computer andinformation science degrees increased from 0.5percent to 4 percent. In psychology and socialsciences the share fell from 21.4 percent to 13.4percent. Among computer science majors thenumber of credits completed in business cours-es rose from 6.6 for the 1972 freshman class to11.8 for the 1980 freshman class. Among busi-ness majors, the number of credits completedin computer science rose from 2.3 to 4.5. Seetables 154 and 191 of the Digest of EducationStatistics, 1987 edition.

7. For an analysis and warning that it may, seeMcDill, Natriello, and Pallas (1986).

8. "Dropping out is thus a symptomadramatic indicator of more basic problems andlimitations that leave an individual ill-suited tothe typical high school environment." SeeBachman, Green, and Wirtanen (1971), p. iii.

9. By focusing on student characteristics,which are difficult to change, as statisticalpredictors of dropout behavior, most of the em-pirical research has created a trap for readersthat often forces them to conclude that schoolscannot do anything to reduce the dropout rate.However, characteristics of schools undoubted-ly interact with student characteristics to in-duce dropout behavior. If the studentcharacteristics are immutable and the cost tosociety of dropouts is high, then the schoolcharacteristics warrant change. And, in fact,recent research suggests that schools' charac-teristics and structures can make a difference,especially in dealing with dropouts.

10. One common method is to take the ratio ofthe number of high school graduates to the en-rollment of 9th graders 4 years earlier.

11. In many States, including California, a highschool diploma is not a prerequisite for attend-ing a community college.

12. To be precise, this is the number of youngpeople 14-24 years old in the spring of 1979who had left school without finishing the 12thgrade by the spring of 1980 expressed as a frac-tion of the total number of young people in thisage group enrolled below the college level.

13. The dropout rate among those who couldnot specify their curriculum track was 19.4 per-cent. See Borus and Carpenter (1984).

14. The nonemployed are those without jobs.The unemployed are those without jobs whoalso indicate that they have actively soughtemployment in the past 4 weeks. Alternative-ly, the nonemployed includes both those whoare "unemployed" and those who are "out of thelabor force," where the two statuses are distin-guished by whether the individual indicates thathe or she has actively sought work in the past 4weeks. Clark and Summers (1982) andEllwood (1982) have argued that the distinctionbetween the two states is not meaningful. Flinnand Heckman (1983) formally test thehypothesis and reject it.

15. The nonemployment rate statistics indicatethe proportion of youths with jobs at a point intime (usually the last week). Young people donot hold single jobs for extended periods oftime. A substantial proportion hold two ormore jobs over a 1-year period. For instance,among 1980 high school seniors enrolled in col-lege during the 1980-81 academic year, about11 percent held two or more jobs during thesummer of 1980 in contrast to about 45 percentwho held only one job. During the 1980-81academic year about 16 percent held two jobsand 6 percent three or more jobs in contrast toabout 42 percent who held only one. If thereare periods of nonemployment between jobs,

43

the nonemployment rate for a particular weekof the year will be higher than the nonemploy-ment rate for the entire year. In contrast to thatfor youth, the nonemployment rate for adultsfor a particular week is not very much higherthan the rate for the entire year, because jobturnover for adults is much lower.

16. They are large relative to real rates of returnon other investmentsphysical capital andfinancial assetswhich have been on the orderof 2 to 10 percent, depending on the riskinessof the investment.

17. See, for example, Gee (1984) and Ehren-berg and Sherman (1987).

18. Employment rates for students are sensitiveto business cycles. In October 1978, 43 percentof white males 16-17 years old and in highschool worked, arid 18 percent of their minoritycounterparts did. See U.S. Department ofLabor (1986).

19. These statistics were calculated for thoseout of school, but corrected for sample selec-tivity and upper limit truncation of weeksworked at 52. The purpose of the "corrections"is to produce the statistic one would calculate ifone had a hypothetical random sample in whicheveryone went to work full time after graduat-ing from high school and was not constrainedon the number of weeks he/she could work. SeeMeyer and Wise (1982), pp. 291-296, for thedescription of the procedure used.

20. Greenberger and Steinberg (1986) citingMortimer and Finch (in press), p. 116.

21. Based on a sample of 521 high school stu-dents, Greenberger et al. (1986) found noevidence of a selection effect, that is, noevidence that a change in work status fromnever employed to employed during the schoolyear caused a change in GPA.

22. Greenberger and Steinberg (1986) citingMortimer and Finch (in press), p. 117.

i2

Conclusion

In the throes of education reform, the UnitedStates is struggling to address the issues of

quality and excellence in its school systems,while 16- to 19-year-olds continue to perceiveeducation as a viable route to their economicgoals.

Diversity and choice in postcompulsoryeducation and training available to 16- to 19-year -olds are unique characteristics of the U.S.systemor "non-system," as some havedescribed it. Also unique is the lack of coor-dinated standards against which acquiredknowledge and skills can be measured.

A number of significant trends point in thedirection of change. These trends are both en-couraging and discouraging, depending on howthey develop and culminate:

Leaving school prior to graduation is nolonger a "terminal" act; the door is open in avariety of ways to anyone who wants toreturn for further education and training.

There has been an increase in the number ofcourses offered by nontraditional institu-tions, and more of the available courses ap-pear to be career related.

,

45

Combining work and study, either simul-taneously or alternately, is becoming morecommon.

The private sector, rather than the public sec-tor, has become the dominant provider oftraining at the postcompulsory level.

Concern with economic outcomes has be-come an important factor in the decision-making process of young adults in theirchoice of further education and training.

In providing training to young adults, Statepolicies play a more significant role thanFederal policies.

Present economic conditions and the shrink-ing pool of young adults have con Rfrted to

the increased interest of employers in train-ing their entry-level workers.

The proportion of 18-19-year-olds enrolledin college rose from 51 percent in Octoberof 1977 to 58 percent in October of 1985.The labor force participation rate of thosenot enrolled in school, that is, or those wish-ing to work, has stayed the same, but theiremployment rate has gone down from 67percent to 62 percent in the same period.

53

The United States does not have an explicitnational policy for developing its humanresources to meet the needs of its economy, nordoes it provide for a "planned" transition fromschool to work. Yet, for many students it is asmooth transition. Although, at times, local,State, and national policies assist individualsthrough specific programs, the education andtraining system in the United States relies agreat deal on the inclinations of young adults.This works well for those who have a strongsense of direction and for those who have adultguidance. It does not work as weli for the sig-

46

nil-want portion of 16- to 19-year-olds who haveneither (Elmore, 1987).

Now, more than ever, the U.S. postcompul-sory system requires that people be equippedto make informed choices. It becomes harderto make such choices when the array of policiesgoverning public and private sector institutionsand programs makes it almost impossible forthe components of the United states system tolink up with each other. At the same time, suchdiversity produces a variety of choices andsecond chances, which no other society seemsto provide for its citizens.

5 '..i,i

I

Figure andTables

53

Figure.Components of the U.S. system arrayed by the major types ofeducation and training providers

School-based programs, including both directly and indirectly supported programs that are eitherprivate or public:

Senior high schools (including academic, general, and vocational traand noncredit instruction; and providing classroom-based study, internshipscooperative education approaches);

Vocational and technical schools (primarily publicly supported);

Proprietary schools (for profit);

Community and 2-year colleges (both public and private);

4-year colleges and universities (both public and private) offering credit and nrncredit instruc-tion and providing classroom-based study, internships or fieldwork, and cooperative educa-tion approaches; and

cks; offering both creditor fieldwork, and

Correspondence schools

Work-based programs, including private and government-supported programs (supported bothdirectly and indirectly):

Unions (including apprenticeship programs in construction and other trades);

Business and industry (including on-the-job training and formal programs);

Professional associations;

Military (including both education and training while in the service; veterans' programs aredelivered by other components); and

Public employee training.

Community-based programs:

Local organizations;

Religious groups; and

Voluntary organizations.

Other programs:

Government-sponsored manpower programs (Comprehensive Employment and Training Act,Job Training Partnership Act, etc.) and job centers;

Prison programs; and

Other governmental and organized training programs.

49

Table 1.-16- to 19-year-old 3 9uth, by enrollment and working status: 1967 and 1985

Enrollment andworking status

16-19 16-17 18-191967 1985 1967 1985 1967 1985

Number in thousands

Total 13,410 14,464 7,051 7,260 6,359 7,204Working 5,365 6,008Not working 8,045 8,456 - - - -

Enrolled, total 9,289 10,370 6,263 6,654 3,026 3,716Working 2,877 3,602 - - -Not working 6,412 6,768 - - - -

High school 6,764 6,768 6,025 6,410 739 809Working 2,133 2,251 1,835 1,962 281 289Not Working 4,631 4,968 4,190 4,448 458 520

2- or 4-year college 2,525 3,151 238 244 2,287 2,907Working 744 1,351 - - -Not working 1,781 1,800 - -

Not enrolled, total 4,121 4,094 788 606 3,333 3,488Working 2,488 2,406 350 232 2,098 2,174Not working 1,633 1,688 438 374 1,235 1,314

Percentage distribution

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Working 40.0 41.5 - -Not working 60.0 58.5

Enrolled, total 69.3 71.7 88.8 91.7 47.6 51.6Working 21.5 24.9 - - - -Not working 47.8 46.8 - -

High school 50.4 49.9 85.4 88.3 11.6 11.2Working 15.9 15.6 26.0 27.0 4.4 4.0Not working 34.5 34.3 59.4 61.3 7.2 7.2

2- or 4-year college 18.8 21.8 3.4 3.4 36.0 40.4Working 5.5 9.3 - -Not working 13.3 12.5 - -

Not enrolled, total 30.7 28.3 11.2 8.3 52.4 48.4Working 18.6 16.6 5.0 3.2 33.0 30.2Not working 12.1 11.7 6.2 5.1 19.4 18.2

-Data not available

SOURCE' U S Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, unpublished tabulation from the October 1967 and 198$ CurrentPopulation surveys, and Employment and Training Report of the President (Washington, DC Government Priming Office)

50

1.,

Table 2.-Percent of working students enrolledschools, and colleges, by age and

in high schools, vocational-technicalyear after high scholl

Age group' Year after high school'Type of school 16-19 16-17 18-19 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st 2nd 3rd 4th

1967 1985 1967 1985 1967 1985 Class of 1972 Class of 1980High school and

college 30.9 34.7 - -- --

High school 31.5 31.2 30.5 30.6 38.0 35.-r -- --

College 29.5 42.9 - -- -- --2-year - - - 57.5 65.6 69.0 75.0 64.3 71.1 74.3 77.34-year - 29.7 40.0 45.5 52.4 47.7 52.5 55.9 60.2

Vocational-technical school - - - 47.3 58.2 65.0 72.0 52.6 52.9 65.0 62.5

'Based on Current Population surveys.2Based on High School and Beyond.-Data not available.SOURCE: All calculations for this table are based on data contained in tables 1 and 3 of this report.

Table 3.-A compar ,n of activities after high school reportedby the classes of 1972 and 1980

Year after hi h school

Activity 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st 2nd 3rd 4th

Class of 1972 Class of 1980

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Enrolled in 4-year college 2.3 27.0 27.9 27.5 32.3 30.3 30.4 29.9Worked 8.7 10.8 12.7 14.4 15.4 15.9 17.0 18.0Did not work 20.6 16.2 15.2 13.1 16.9 14.4 13.4 11.9

Enrolled in 2-year college 14.6 12.8 7.1 5.6 16.8 14.9 10.5 7.5Worked 8.4 8.4 4.9 4.2 10.8 10.6 7.8 5.8Did not work 6.2 4.4 2.2 1.4 6.0 4.3 2.7 1.7

Enrolled in vocational-technical school 7.4 5.5 4.0 2.5 3.8 3.4 ',....0 1.6Worked 3.5 3.2 2.6 1.8 2.0 1.8 1.3 1.0Did not work 3.9 2.3 1.4 .7 1.8 1.6 .7 .6

Other study 2.0 .5 .4 .8 3.1 3.2 .8 1.1

Not enrolled 35.3 42.1 47.8 52.1 35.5 39.2 43.2 47.7Worked full time 29.6 37.8 43.8 47.3 24.5 29.0 35.2 39.4Worked part time 5.7 4.3 4.0 4.3 11.0 10.2 8.0 8.3

Other* 11.5 12.1 12.9 11.6 8.7 9.0 13.3 12.3

*Includes those unemployed, those not in the labor force, military personnel, homemakers ar.d those looking for work.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, The Condition of Education, 1986, table 1.9, p. 44. Data were deris.r.t1 irom the National Centerfor Education Statistics, National Longitudinal Study (unpublished tabulations) and High School and Beyond (unpublished tabulations).

r

R

51

Table 4.-Percent of male youths of the high school class of 1972 enrolled in anyschool full times by race and sequence: October 1972-1976

Sequence*by year: Percentage of total

72 73 74 75 76 All males White All others1 1 1 1 1 11.7 12.4 8.11 1 1 1 0 12.1 13.2 6.31 1 1 0 1 1.3 1.3 1.21 1 0 1 1 1.2 1.1 .61 0 1 1 1 1.2 1.2 1.30 1 1 1 1 1.0 1.0 1.01 1 1 0 0 3.8 3.9 3.30 1 1 1 0 .6 .6 .40 0 1 1 1 .5 .5 .51 1 0 1 0 .8 .8 .51 1 0 0 1 .4 .5 .30 i 1 0 1 .2 .2 .11 0 1 1 1 1.1 1.1 .91 0 0 1 1 .6 .6 .50 1 0 1 1 .2 .2 .11 0 1 0 0 .2 .2 .21 1 0 0 0 7.1 7.0 7.30 1 1 0 0 .9 .9 .80 0 1 1 0 .5 .5 .70 0 0 1 1 .8 .7 1.01 0 1 0 0 1.2 1.1 1.20 1 0 1 0 .1 .1 .10 0 1 0 1 .1 .1 .11 0 0 1 0 .7 .7 .60 1 0 0 1 .1 .1 .11 0 0 0 1 .6 .6 .71 0 0 0 0 9.5 9.2 11.20 1 0 0 0 1.6 1.6 1.70 0 1 0 0 1.5 1.4 1.90 0 0 1 0 1.1 1.0 1.50 0 0 0 1 1.3 1.2 2.00 0 0 0 0 36.4 34.9 44.0"1" in the sequence indicates in school full time for the specific year "0" indicates otherwise. For example, the sequence, "10101" indicates

in school full time in 1972, 1974 and 1976 but not in school full time in 1973 and 1975 The percentages have been rounded to the nearest tenth.SOURCE: Meyer and Wise (1982), table 9.3.

52

ti.

Table 5.-Mean number of credits required by public high schoolsfor graduation, by year and selected subjects

Selected subjects 1981-82

School year1987-881984-85

Total number of credits required 19.7 20.3 21.0

Mathematics 1.6 1.9 2.3

Science 1.5 1.8 2.0

English and language arts 3.6 3.8 3.9

Social studies and history 2.6 2.8 2.9

NOTE: A credit is defined as a class scheauled for a minimum of 200 minutes per week (275 minutes for a 'aboratory class) for 36 weeks

All credits have been converted to a 4-year base.

SOURCE Helen Ashwick. "Public High School Graduation Requirements OERI Bulletin. September 1986 Washington. DC. U S. Department

of Education. 1986.

Table 6.-Percent of students completing the new basics core requirements, by subject

area and program, 1980, and mean number of semesters taken in

new basics courses, by subject area and year, 1972 and 1980

Program

Total 1980

Academic

General

Vocational

Overall(total)

19.5

34.2

7.5

3.3

English

79.4

87.9

73.0

77.7

Socialstudies

78.5

Foreign

Math Science language

49.7 36.2 51.3

84.5 70.9 53.0 81.2

82.5 22.9 24.2 21.4

65.5 26.3 16.9 20.0

Mean number of semesters

1972 20.78 6.16 5.37 3.73 3.46 2.C6

1980 19.88 6.03 4.66 4.12 3.44 1.63

Change 1972-1980 -.90 -.13 -.71 +.39 -.02 -.43

SOURCE: Data from Educational Testing Service Growth Study. See Alexander and Pallas (1984). table 2. See Fetters et al. (1984). table 2.3.

Table 7.-Percent of high school seniors in academic, general, and vocational

programs, by sex and program: 1972 and 1980

All seniors Male Female

Program1972 1980 1972 1980 1972 1980

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Academic 46.1 38.0 48.7 39.0 43.5 38.4

General 31.7 37.2 33.0 38.0 30.4 35.9

Vocational 22.2 24.8 18.3 23.0 26.1 25.7

SOURCE: Fetters et al. (1984). table 2.1.

52

60

Table 8.-Percent change in wage rate or earnings due to an increase inacademic achievement equivalent to 100 points on a SAT test

Year of graduation Median age19 20 21 22 23 25 26 27 28 29-34 39 44-46

1980 (Kang, 1984)(HSB)Male -2.8 -0.3Female -1.0 -.3

1976-82 (Gardner, 1982)(NLS Youth)

MaleFemale

1972 (Meyer, 1982)(NLS-72)MaleFemale

4.71.2

4.84.8

1.9 4.35.3 6.0

1961 (Hause, 1975)(Project Talent) -3.7 6.11957 (Hauser, 1977)

0.1 0.9 1.9 2.6 3.71938-42 (Taubman, 1975)

(NBER-TH) -9.5 -2.3 4.2 6.61939 (Hause, 1975)(Rogers Data)

3.0 4.0 7.8NOTE: Kang, S. and Bishop J. "The Effects of Curriculum on the Non-College Bound Youth's Labor Market Outcomes." In High SchoolPreparation for Employment. Columbus: National Center for Research in Vocational Education (NCRVE) 1984, pp. 55-93.Gardner, J. A. Influence of High School Curriculum on Determinants of Labor Market Experience. Columbus. NCRVE, 1982.Meyer, R. "lob Training in the Schools." In Job Training for Youth, edited by R. Taylor, H. Rosen, and F. Pratzner. Columbus: NCRVE, 1982.Hause, J. C. "Ability and Schooling as Determinants of Lifetime Earnings, or If You're So Smart, Why Aren't You Rich?" In Education,Income, and Human Behavior, edited by F. T. luster. New York. McGraw-Hill, 1975.Hauser, R. M., and Daymont, T. M. "Schooling, Ability and Earnings Cross-Sectional Evidence 8-14 Years After High School Gradua-tion." Sociology of Education, July 1977, pp. 182-206.Taubman, P and Wales, T "Education as an Investment and a Screening Device " In Education, Income, and Human Behavior, edited byF. T luster New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975.DATASETS: HSB = High School and Beyond

NLS-Youth = National Longitudinal Survey-YouthNLS-72 = National Longitudinal Survey of the Class c. 1972Project TalentNBER-TH = NBER-ThorndikeRogers Data

SOURCE: Bishop, I. Preparing Youth for Employment. Columbus National Center for Research in Vocational Education. 1985.

54

References

Adelman, C. Devaluation, Diffusion, andthe College Connection: A Study of High SchoolTranscripts, 1984-1981. Report prepared forthe National Commission on Excellence inEducation, Washington, D.C. U.S. Depart-ment of Education, 1962.

Alexander, K. L. & McDIII, E. L."Selec-tion and Allocation within Schools: SomeCauses and Consequences of CurriculumPlacement." American Sociological Review,1976, 41, 963-80.

Alexander, K. L. & Pallas, A. M. "Cur-riculum Reform and School Performance: AnEvaluation of the 'New Basics. AmericanJournal of Education, August 1984, 391-420.

Alexander, K. L. & Cook, M. A. "Cur-riculum and Coursework: Surprise Ending to aFamiliar Story." American SociologicalReview, 1982, 47, 626-640.

Anderson, B. E. & Sawhill, I. V. (Eds.).Youth Employment and Public Policy. TheAmerican Assembly, Columbia University.Background papers for the Arden House As-sembly on Youth Employment, August 1979.Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1980.

55

Ashwick, H. "Public High School Gradua-tion Requirements." OERI Bulletin. U.S.Department of Education Publication No. CS86- 225b. Washington, D.C.: September 1986.

Astin, A. W. Minorities in American HigherEducation: Recent Trends, Current Prospects,and Recommendations. San Francisco: Jos-sey-Bass, 1982.

Bachman, J. G., Green, S., & Wirtanen,I. D. "Dropping Out Symptom or Problem?"Youth in Transition. Institute for SurveyResearch. Ann Arbor: University of Michin,1971,111.

Bailey, T. & Noyelle, T. "New Technologyand Skill Formation: Issues and Hypotheses."Columbia University, The Conservation ofHuman Resources Project, September 1986.

Baird, L L. & Holland, J. L. "The Flow ofHigh School Students to Schools, Colleges, andJobs: A Re-Examination of Old Questions bythe Use of Multiple Indices of Talent." Journalof Human Resources, Winter 1969, Pik!), "z-2.37.

Barton, P. (Ed.). WorklifeTransitions. NewYork: McGraw-Hill, 1982.

62

Belsches-Simmons, G., Flakus-Mos-gueda, P., Lindner, B. J. & Moyer, R. K.Recent State Educational Reform: InitialTeacher Certification, Teacher Compensation,and High School Graduation Requirements.Education Commission of the States. Con-ducted through a grant from the Center forPolicy Research in Education, March 1987.

Birnbaum, R. "Higher Education." InH. Mitzel, J. H. Best, & W. Rabinowitz (Eds.),Encyclopedia of Educational Research, 2.New York: Free Press, 1982.

Bishop, J. Preparing louth for Employ-ment. Technical Report to U.S. Department ofEducation, National Institute of Education.Columbus Ohio: National Center for Researchin Vocational Education, The Ohio StateUniversity, 1985.

Borus, M. E. & Carpenter, S. A. "Choicesin Education." In M. E. Borus (Ed.), Youth andthe Labor Market, Analyses of the NationalLongitudinal Survey. Kalamazoo, Michigan:The W. E. Upjohn Institute for EmploymentResearch, 1984.

Bowles, S. & Gintis, H. Schooling inCapitalist America. New York: Basic Books,1967.

California Legislature Assembly Office ofResearch. Dropping Out, Losing Out: TheHigh Cost for California. Sacramento,California: 1985.

Carnavale, A. & Goldstein, H. EmployeeTraining: Its Changing Role and an Analysis ofNew Data. Washington, D.C.: AmericanSociety for Training and Development, 1983.

Carnegie Commission on Policy Studies inHigher Education. "Giving Youth a BetterChance." San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1980.

Carnegie Foundation for the Advance-ment orTeaching. "Career Schools: An Over-view." Change, January/February 1987,19(1),29-34.

56

Carroll, C. D. Postsecondary Transitions,Entry, Persistence, Transfer, Dropout, andCompletion for 1980 High School Graduates.High School and Beyond tabulation.Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Educa-tion, Office of Educational Research and Im-provement, Center for Education Statistics,October 1985.

Carroll, C. D. The Timing of AbnormalProgression among 1980 High School SeniorsEntering Postsecondary Education in October1980. High School and Beyond tabulation.Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Educa-tion, Office of Educational Research and Im-provement, Center for Education Statistics,July 1986.

Catterall, J. S. "On the Social Costs ofDropping Out of School." The High SchoolJournal, 7 I (1), October/November 1986.

The Center for the Study of Social Policy.Youth Unemployment: A Literature Review.Washington, D.C.: August 1986.

Clague, E. & Kramer, L. ManpowerPolicies and Programs: A Review, 1935-75.Kalamazoo, Michigan: W. E. Upjohn Institutefor Employment Research, 1976.

Clark, K. & Summers, L. "DemographicDifferences in Cyclical Employment Varia-tion." Journal of Human Resour es, Winter1981,16.

Clark, K. & Summers, L. "The Dynamicsof Youth Unemployment." In R. Freeman andD.Wise (Eds.), The Youth Labor MarketProblem. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Nation-al Bureau of Economic Research, 1982.

Coleman, J. S. "The Transitic ifrom Schoolto Work." Chicago: National OpinionResearch Center, 1982.

D'Amico, R. "Does Working in HighSchool Impair Academic Progress?" Sociologyof Education, 1984, 57, 157-164.

Doeringer, P. B. & Vermeulen, B. (Eds.).Jobs and Training in the 1980s: VocationalPolicy and the Labor Market. Boston: Mar-tinus Nijhoff Publishing, 1981.

Education and Labor Committee. News.U.S. House of Representatives, March 26,1987.

Education Commission of the States. Ac-tion in the States. A report by the Task Forceon Education for Economic Growth.Washington, D.C.: 1984.

Ehrenberg, R. G. & Sherman, D. R."Employment While in College, AcademicAchievement, and Postcollege Outcomes."Journal of Human Resources, 111(1), Winter1987.

Ellwood, D. "Teenage Unemployment:Temporary Scars or Permanent Blemishes?" InR. Freeman and D. Wise (Eds.), The YouthLabor Market Problem: Its Nature, Causes,and Consequences. National Bureau ofEconomic Research. Chicago: University ofChicago Press, 1982.

Elmore, R. F. "Analyzing the Implementa-tion of Federal Vocational Education Policy:The Perkins Act of 1984." Design Papers forthe Assessment of Vocational Education, Na-tional Assessment of Vocational Education.Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Educa-tion, 1987.

Enrich, N. P. Corporate Classrooms: TheLearning Business. A Carnegie FoundationSpecial Report. Princeton, N.J.: PrincetonUniversity Press, 1985.

Evangelanf, J. "Student Aid ReachedRecord $21 Billion Last Year, College BoardSays, but Inflt'on Took Its Toll." TheChronicle of Higher Education, September 24,1986, p. 28.

Feldstein, M. & Ellwood, D. "Teenage Un-employment: What Is the Problem?" In R.Freeman and D. Wise (Eds.), The Youth Labor

57

Market Problem. National Bureau of EconomicResearch, 1982.

Fetters, W. B., Brown, G. H., & Owings,J. A. "High School Seniors: A ComparativeStudy of the Classes of 1972 and 1980." HighSchool and Beyond: A National LongitudinalStudy for the 1980s. U.S. Department of Educa-tion, Office of Educational Research and Im-provement, National Center for EducationStatistics. Washington, D.C.: U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office, 1984.

Finn, C. E., Jr. "The High School DropoutPuzzle." The Public Interest, Spring 1987.

Flinn, C. J. & Heckman, J. J. "Are Un-employment and Out of the Labor Force Be-haviorally Distinct Labor Force States?"Journal of Labor Economics, January 1983,1(1).

Frances, C. "Influence of FederalPrograms." In P. Jedamus, M. W. Peterson,and Associates (Eds.), Improving AcademicManagement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,1980.

Gardner, J. A. Transition from High Schoolto Postsecondary Education: AnalyticalStudies. Washington, D.C.: U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office, 1987.

General Accounting Office, HumanResources Division (E. Sehgal). "SchoolDropouts: The Extent and Nature of theProblem." Washington, D.C.: GAO/HRD-86106BR, June 1986.

The Governor's Remediation Initiative.Progress Report. South Carolina. October1986.

Ginzberg, E. The School/V lc Nexus:Transition of Youth from School to Work. PhiDelta Kappa Educational Foundation, 1980.

Greenberger, E. & Steinberg, L. WhenTeenagers Work: The Psychological and So-cial Costs of Adolescent Employment. NewYork: Basic Books, 1986.

64

Greenwald, S. M. "Survey of ProfessionalSociety Continuing Education Programs."Author, 1977.

Grubb, W. N. & Jaussaud, D."Vocationalizing Higher Education: TheCauses of Enrollment and Completion in theTwo-Year CollgeS, 1970-1980." Final Reportto the Nati yfl..d of Education. 1984.

Hahn, A & Danzberger, J. Dropouts inAmerica: Enough is Known for Action.Washington, D.C.: Institute for EducationalLeadership, March 1987.

Hansen, W. L. & Stampen, J. 0.Econore.:cs and Financing of Higher Educa-tion: The er ion Between Quality and Equity(revised version). Unpublished paperpresented at the annual meeting of the Associa-tion for the Study of Higher Education, SanDiego, California, February 14, 1987.

Hauser, R. M., Sewell, W. H., & Alwin, D.F. "High School Effects on Achievement." InSewell et al. (Eds.), School and Achievement inAmerican Society. New York: AcademicPress, 1976, 309343.

Heynes, B. "Social Selection and Stratifica-tion in Schools." American Journal of Sociol-ogy, 1984, 79,1434-1451.

Hill, S. T. Trends in Adult Education, 1969 -

1984. U.S. Department of Education, Office ofEducational Research and Improvement,Center for Education Statistics. Washington,D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1987.

Hoffman, S. D. "On-the-Job Training: Dif-ferences by Race and Sex." Monthly LaborReview, July 1981, 34-36.

Hotchkiss, L., Bishop, J. H., & Gardner,J. Effects of Individual and School Charac-teristics on Part-Time Work of High SchoolSeniors. Technical report to U. S. Departmentof Education, National Institute of Education.Columbus, Ohio: National Center for Research

58

in Vocational Education, The Ohio StateUniversity, 1982.

Hotchkiss, L. Effects of Work Time onSchool Activities and Career Expectations.Technical report to U. S. Department of Educa-tion. National Institute of Education. Colum-bus, Ohio: National Ccntcr for Research inVocational Education, The Ohio State Univer-sity, 1982.

The Institute for Educational Leadership.School Dropouts: Everybody's Problem.Washington, D.C.: 1986.

Jackson, G.A. Workable, ComprehensiveModels of College Choice. Final and technicalreport to National Institute of Education, Con-tract No. NIE-R-400-83-0055. Washington,D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, 1986.

Jencks, C. & Crouse, J. "Aptitude vs.Achievement: Should We Replace the SAT?"The Public Interest, 1982, 67,21-35.

Jobs for Arkansas's Future. Final Report.Little Rock, Arkansas: Governor's Office,1986.

Jones, C., Sebring, P., Crawford, I., Spen-cer, B., & Butz, M. High School and Beyond.1980 Sophomore Cohort: Second Follow-Up(1984). U. S. Department of Education, Centerfor Education Statistics. Washington, D.C. U.S. Government Printing Office, 1986.

Kahn, M. E. Literacy Management Infor-mation Project Report: Volumes I and II.Federal Interagency Committee on Education.Washington, D. C.: U. S. Department of Educa-tion, May 1986.

Kolstad, A. J. & Owings, J. A. "HighSchool Dropouts Who Change Their Mindsabout School." Washington, D.C.: U.S.Department of Education, Center for Statis-tics/Longitudinal Studies Branch, April 1986.

Kopka, T. C. 1980 High School SeniorsPSE Dropouts Between High School and Endcy February, 1982. High School and Beyond

tabulation. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Depart-ment of Education, Office of EducationalResearch and Improvement, Center for Educa-tion Statistics, May 1986.

Levin, H. M. The Costs to the Nation of In-adequate Education. A report prepared for theSelect Committee on Equal Educational Oppor-tunity. January 1972.

Lee,iin-Epstein, N. Youth EmploymentDuring High School. Washington, D.C.: U.S.Department of Education, National Center forEducation Statistics, 1981.

Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Af-fairs. The Persistent Dilemmas of Preparingfor Work: Occupational Training Programs inTexas. Policy Researc -)roject Report Number55. Austin, Texas: The Jniversity of Texas atAustin, 1983.

Malizio, A. G. & Whitney, D. R. "WhoTakes the GED Tests? A National Survey ofSpring 1980 Examinees." Research Studies,(1). Washington, D.C.: American Council onEducation, 1981.

McDill, E. L., Natriello, G., & Pallas, A.M. "A Population at Risk: Potential Conse-quences of Tougher School Standards for Stu-dent Dropouts." American Journal ofEducation, 1986, 94(2), 135-181.

McNeil,L. M. LoweringExpectations: TheImpact of Student Employment on Classroom1"...owledge. Report to the U.S. Department ofEducation, National Institute of Education.Madison, Wisconsin: Wisconsin Center forEducation Research, February 1984.

Meyer, R. & Wise, D. A. "High SchoolPreparation and Early Labor Market Ex-perience." In R. Freeman and D. Wise (Eds.),The Youth Labor Market Problem. NationalBureau of Economic Research, 1982.

59

Mugerauer, C. Improving Services to "At-Risk" Youth: A Policy Approach. Austin,Texas: Texas Department of Community Af-fairs, 1986.

The National Commission on Excellencein Education. A Nation at Risk: The Impera-tive for Educational Reform. A report to theNation and the Secretary of Education.Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government PrintingOffice, April 1984.

National Commission on Youth. TheTransition of Youth to Adulthood: A Bridge TooLong. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press,1930.

National Foundation for the Improve-ment of Education. Operation Rescue: ABlueprint for Success. Washington, D.C.:1986.

National Governors' Association. TheFive-Year Dilemma. Washington, D.0

National Governors' Association. ......of the Task Force on Adult F_,iteracy.Washington, D. C.: August 1987.

National Governors' Association. Timefor Results: The Governors' 1991 Report onEducation. Washington, D.C.: August 1986.

National Panel on High School andi'' dolescent Education. The Education ofAdolescents. Washington, D.C.: U.S.Government Printing Office, 1976.

National Science Board Comni!ssion onPrecollege Education in Mathematics,Science, and Technology. EducatingAmericans for the 21st Century. Washington,D.C.: 1983.

Norris, D D. M., Lasher, W. F., & Brandt,F. S. Manpower Studies in PostsecondaryEducation. ERIC/Higher Education ResearchReport No. 10, 1977. Washington, D.C.:American Association for Higher Education,1977.

tIS

Norton, R. E. & Belcher, J. 0. A Guide toLinkages Between Vocational Education andOrganized Labor in the United States. Colum-bus, Ohio: National Center for Research inVocational Education, The Ohio State Univer-sity, 1984.

O'Neill, J., Cunningham, J., Sparks, A., &Sider, H. The Economic Progress of BlackMen in America. Washington, D.C.: U.S.Commlion on Civil Rights, ClearinghousePublication 91, October 1986.

Oregon Youth Coordinating Council (B.Ross). A Report to the Governor: State Educa-tion and Employment Initiatives for At-Riskouth. Eugene, Oregon: 1986.

Organization for Economic Co-Opera-tion and Development. Education and Train-ing after Basic Schooling. Paris: OECD, 1985.

Owings, J. A. & Kolstad, A. J. HighSchoolDropouts Two Years After Scheduled Gradua-tion. High School and Beyond tabulation.Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Educa-tion, Office of Educational Research and Im-provement, Center for Statistics, May 1985.

Pallas, A. M. "School Dropouts in theUnited States." In J. Stem and M. Williams(Exis.). The Condition of Education, 1986 edi-tion. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department ofEducation, 1986.

Peng, S. S. "High School Dropouts: Descrip-tive Information from High School andBeyond." National Center for Education Statis-tics Bulletin, November 1983.

President's Science Advisory Committee,Panel on Youth. Youth: Transition to Adult-hood. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,1973.

Rehberg, R. A. & Rosenthal, E. R. Classand Merit in the American High School. NewYork: Longman, 1978.

60

Rifle!, R. Aligning State Education and JobTraining Policy. Issue Brief #2: Education andJob Training Issue Brief Series. Washington,D. C.: National Conference of State Legisla-tures, undated.

Rock, D. A., Ekstrom, R. B., Goertz, M.E., & Pollack, J. Study of Excellence in HighSchoolEducationLongitudinal Study, 1980-82,Final Report. Washington, D.C.: U.S.Department of Education, Office of Education-al Research and Improvement, Center forEducation Statistics, 1986.

Rosenbaum, J. E. Making Inequality: TheHidden Curriculum of High School Tracking.New York: Wiley, 1976.

Rosenbaum, J. E. "Track Misperceptionand Frustrated College Plans: An Analysis ofthe Effects of Tracks and Track Perceptions inthe National Longitudinal Survey." Sociologyof Education, April 1980, 53, 74-88.

San, G. "The Early Labor Force Experienceof College Students and Thee: Post-CollegeSuccess." Economics of Education Review,1986, 5(1).

Sherman, J. D. Strategies for FinancingState Dropout Programs. Pelavin Associates,Inc. Washington, D. C. June 1987.

Smith, D. A. An Overview of Training in LaePublic Sector. Arlington, Virginia. TheAnalytic Sciences Corporation, unpublishedreport, June 1979.

Smith, J. P. & Welch, F. Closing the Gap:Forty Years of Economic Progress for Blacks.Rand R-3330-DOL, February 1986.

Smith, J. P. & Welch, F. Race Differencesin Earnings: A Survey and New Evidence.Rand R-2295-NSF, March 1978.

Stacey, N. & Charner, I. "Unions andPostsecondary Education." Education andUrban Society, 14(2), 1982.

67

Stampen, J. 0. Student Aid and PublicHigher Education: A Progress Report.Washington, D.C.: American Association ofState Colleges and Universities, January 1983.

Stampen, J. 0. Student Aid and Publicigher Education: Recent Changes.

Washington, D.C.: American Association ofState Colleges and Universities, March 1985.

State Department of Public Instruction.State Dropout Prevention Funds. AnnualReport. Raleigh, North Carolina. April 1986.

Texas Department of Community Affairs.Texas School Dropout Survey: A Report to the69th Legislature. State of Texas. December1986.

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureauof the Census. Detailed Population Charac-teristics, U.S. Summary. 1980 U.S. Census ofthe Population, Table 296. Washington, D.C.:1980.

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureauof the Census (R. Kominski). School Enroll-mentSocial and Economic Characteristics ofStudents: October 1983, Series P-20, no. 413.Other reports cited in this series include no. 408(October 1982), no. 404 (Advanced October1984), no. 409 (Advanced October 1985).Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government PrintingOffice, 1982-1984.

U.S. Department of Defense. MilitaryManpower Task Force: A Report to the Presi-dent on the Status and Prospects of the All-Volunteer Force. Washington, D.C.: U.S.Government Printing Office, 1982.

U.S. Department of Defense. MilitaryManpower Training Report for FY 1982.Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government PrintingOffice, 1981.

U.S. Department of Education. AnnualEvaluation Report: Fiscal Year 1985 .

Washington, D. C.: Office of Planning,Budget, and Evaluation, 1985.

61

U.S. Department of Education. Digest ofEducation Statistics 1985-86. Office of Educa-tional Research and Improvement, Center forEducation Statistics. Washington, D.C.: U.S.Government Printing Office, 1986a.

U.S. Department of Education. The Con-dition of Education: A Statistical Report, 1986edition. J. Stem and M. Williams (Eds.). Officeof Educational Research and Improvement,Center for Education Statistics. Washington,D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office,1986b. Other editions include 1985 and 1984.

U.S. Department of Education. 1986Directory of Postsecondary institutions,Volume 1, 4-year and 2-year. M. M. Frankel,Office of Educational Research and Improve-ment, Center for Education Statistics.Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government PrintingOffice, 1987a.

U.S. Department of Education. Justifica-tion of Appropriation Estimates for Commit-tees on Appropriations, Fiscal Year 1988.volume II. Washington, D.C.: 1987b.

U.S. Department cf Educaf ion. Digest ofEducation Statistics 1967 Office of Educa-tional Research and Improvement, Center forEducation Statistics. Washington, D.C.: U.S.Government Printing Office, 1987c.

U.S. Department of Education. Fall En-rollment in Colleges and Universities: 1983.Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government PrintingOffice, 1983.

U.S. Department of Education. How WellDo High School Graduates of Today Meet theCurriculum Standards of the National Commis-sion on Excellence? Washington, D.C.: Na-tional Center for Education Statistics, 1983.

U.S. Department of Education. The Na-tion Responds: Recent Efforts to improveEducation. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Govern-ment Printing Office, May 1984.

68

U.S. Department of Education. The Stu-dent Guide: Five Federal Financial AidPrograms '85 -'86. Washington, D.C.: U.S.Government Printing Office, 1984.

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau ofLabor Statistics. Employment of School AgeYouth, Graduates and Dropouts. Unpublishedtabu, ..ons from the Office of Employment andUnemployment Statistics, February 1986.

U.S. Department of Labor. Employmentand Training Report of the President, 1980 edi-tion. Washington, D.C.: U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office, 1 ?lo Other editions cited in-clude 1981 edition.

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau ofI.abor Statistics. Labor Fo, ce StatisticsDerived from the Current Population Survey:A Databook, volume I. Washington, D.C.:U.S. Government Printing Office, 1982.

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau ofLabor Statistics. Occupational Projectionsand Training Data. Bulletin 2206. Washington,D.C.: 1984.

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau ofLabor Statistics. Students, Graduates, andDropouts, October 1980-82. Bulletin 2192.Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government PrintingOffice, December 1983.

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau ofLabor Statistics. "Students, Graduates, andDmpouts in the Labor Market, 'ctober 1978."Special Labor Force Repot No. 223. MonthlyLabor Review, October 1979.

U.S. General Services Administration,Office of Management and Budget and Ex-ecutive Office of the President. Catalog ofFederal Domestic Assistance, 1985 (19th edi-tion). Washington, D.C.: U.S. General Ac-counting Office, 1985.

62

Valore, L. & Diehl, G. E. The Effectivenessand Acceptance of Home Study. Washington,D.C.: National Home Study Council, April1987.

Van Den Heurel, D. Children at Risk:Resource and Planning Guide. WisconsinDepartment of Public Instruction. Madison,Wisconsin. 1986.

Wehiage, G. G. & Rutter, R. A. "DroppingOut: How Much Do Schools Contribute to theProblem'?" Teachers College Record, Spring1986, 87, (3), 374-392.

West, J., Mille, .-; 1., & Diodata, L. AnAnalysis of Course-Taking Patterns in Second-ary Schools as Related to Student Characteris-tics. Washington, D.C.: National Center forEducation Statistics, 1985a.

West, J., Diodato, L., & Sandberg, N. Ayid Study of High School Offerings and En-mews: 1972-73 and 1981-82. Washington,

L. 2.: National Center for Education Statisti s-tics, 1985b.

Willas, W.W. "The Non-System of Educa-tion and Training." In P. Doeringer and B. Ver-meulen (Eds.), Jobs and Training in the 1980s:Vocational Policy and the Labor Market. Bos-ton: Martinus Nijhoff Publishing, 1981.

Wilms, W.W. ?roprietary Schools."Change, January/February, 1937, 19(1), 10-22.

Wilms, W. W. Technology, Job Skills, andEducation: A Reassessment of the Links. LosAngeles: University of California, 1983.

Zemsky, R., Meyerson, M, Tierney, M.,& Berg, I. Training Benchmarks: A ,;:alisticalSketch of Employer Provide" Training andEd-cation 1969-1981. Unpublished report toU.S. Department of Education, National In-stitute of Education, 1983.

69