National Assessment of

Career and Technical Education

Interim Report

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development

Policy and Program Studies Service
This page intentionally left blank
National Assessment of

Career and Technical Education

Interim Report

Prepared by:

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development

Policy and Program Studies Service

2013
U.S. Department of Education

Arne Duncan

Secretary

Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development

Denise Forte

Acting Assistant Secretary

Policy and Program Studies Service

Thomas Weko

Director

May 2013

This report is in the public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in whole or in part is granted. 

While permission to reprint this publication is not necessary, the suggested citation is U.S. 

Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development, Policy and 

Program Studies Service. National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim

Report,Washington, D.C., 2013.

This publication is also available at the Department’s website at 

www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/opepd/ppss/reports.html#ve.

Request for Alternate Format documents such as Braille or large print should be submitted to the 

Alternate Format Center by calling 202-260-0852 or by contacting the 504 Coordinator via email 

at om_eeos@ed.gov.

Content Contact 

Michael Fong

202-401-7462 

michael.fong@ed.gov
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report iii

Contents

Exhibits...... ...................................................................................................................................v

Accompanying Statement from the Independent Advisory Panel ......................................... vii

NACTE Independent Advisory Panel........................................................................................ ix

Highlights..................................................................................................................................... xi

Executive Summary................................................................................................................... xiii

Chapter 1. Introduction................................................................................................................1

1.1 Key Provisions in Perkins IV......................................................................................1

1.2 National Assessment of CTE......................................................................................4

Congressional Mandate...............................................................................................5

Evaluation Issues and Strategies.................................................................................5

Independent Advisory Panel .......................................................................................6

Interim Report: A Special Focus on Secondary CTE .................................................7

Organization of Interim Report...................................................................................8

Chapter 2. Framework for Evaluating the Implementation of Perkins IV Provisions 

on Accountability and Programs of Study.............................................................9

2.1 Logic Model................................................................................................................9

Policy Guidance ........................................................................................................11

Funding .....................................................................................................................11

Programs of Study (POS): College and Career Pathways ........................................11

Accountability Measures and Targets.......................................................................13

2.2 Conclusion ................................................................................................................17

Chapter 3. Participation in Secondary Career and Technical Education from 

1982 to 2004.............................................................................................................19

3.1 Data Sources for the Analyses..................................................................................21

3.2 Measuring CTE Participation ...................................................................................21

3.3 Participation in CTE .................................................................................................24

Graduates Earning an Increasing Number of Total Course Credits..........................24

CTE Credits Are a Smaller Share .............................................................................24

CTE Participation Patterns Are Also Changing........................................................27

3.4 CTE Investors’ Characteristics.................................................................................29

Gender.......................................................................................................................29

Race and Ethnicity ....................................................................................................30

Socioeconomic Status...............................................................................................31
iv National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

3.5 CTE Investors’ Academic and CTE Occupational Coursetaking.............................32

New Basics Coursetaking .........................................................................................32

Highest Mathematics and Science Courses Taken ...................................................33

3.6 Math Achievement....................................................................................................36

3.7 Postsecondary Education ..........................................................................................37

Senior-Year Educational Expectations .....................................................................38

Ever Attended Postsecondary School .......................................................................39

3.8 Post–High School Employment................................................................................40

High School Senior-Year Occupational Expectations at Age 30 .............................41

First Job Type of Non-College Attendees.................................................................42

3.9 Conclusion ................................................................................................................42

3.10 Annex: Statistical Tables ..........................................................................................44

Chapter 4. Outcomes of Career and Technical Education: Some New Evidence ................51

4.1 Context for NACTE Outcome Studies .....................................................................51

4.2 NACTE Outcome Studies.........................................................................................52

4.3 Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 .....................................................................53

Math Achievement....................................................................................................53

Dropping Out of High School...................................................................................55

4.4 CTE Schools in Philadelphia: A Natural Experiment...............................................57

Research Questions...................................................................................................57

Key Findings on the Impact of CTE Schools ...........................................................58

4.5 Conclusion ................................................................................................................59

Chapter 5. Career and Technical Education in International Perspective ...........................61

5.1 OECD Nations..........................................................................................................62

5.2 Labor Market Context...............................................................................................62

5.3 Upper Secondary Education .....................................................................................64

5.4 Upper Secondary School Completion Requirements, by Program 

Orientation ................................................................................................................67

5.5 Career and Technical Education in International Perspective ..................................69

5.6 Annex: America’s Global Competitors ....................................................................70

Chapter 6. Implications and Final Report................................................................................73

6.1 Implications...............................................................................................................73

6.2 Final Report ..............................................................................................................73

References....................................................................................................................................75

Appendix A. Perkins IV NACTE Requirements .....................................................................79
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report v

Exhibits

Exhibit ES-1. Percentage of high school graduates participating in career and technical 

education, by level of CTE occupational coursetaking: 1982, 1992, 2004 .......... xx

Exhibit ES-2. Percentage of CTE investors and other high school graduates (noninvestors), taking the new basics courses: 1982, 1992, 2004 .............................. xxi

Exhibit ES-3. Percentage of upper secondary school enrollment in concentrated vocational 

education (25 percent of total credits) in OECD countries: 2006...................... xxiv

Exhibit ES-4. Perkins IV requirements for NACTE and associated NACTE studies.............. xxvi

Exhibit 1. Overview of changes in federal legislation of CTE................................................ 2

Exhibit 2. Logic model of Perkins IV key reforms................................................................ 10

Exhibit 3. Performance indicators required by Perkins IV and ESEA at the secondary 

and postsecondary levels....................................................................................... 14

Exhibit 4. Percentage of U.S. workers ages 18–64 years old performing selected tasks 

on their job or requiring specified job skills or attributes, by occupational 

category: October 2004–January 2006 ................................................................. 20

Exhibit 5. Types of CTE investors ........................................................................................ 23

Exhibit 6. Average number of secondary credits earned by public high school 

graduates, by type of course work: 1982, 1992, and 2004 ................................... 25

Exhibit 7. Average number of credits (Carnegie units) earned by public high school 

graduates, by subject area: 1982, 1992, and 2004 ................................................ 26

Exhibit 8. Percentage of total credits earned by public high school graduates, by type 

of course work: 1982, 1992, and 2004.................................................................. 27

Exhibit 9. Percentage of high school graduates participating in CTE, by level of CTE 

occupational coursetaking: 1982, 1992, 2004....................................................... 28

Exhibit 10. Percentage of CTE investors, by level of CTE course concentration: 1982, 

1992, and 2004...................................................................................................... 29

Exhibit 11. Percentage of public high school graduates who are CTE investors, by 

gender: 1982, 1992, and 2004............................................................................... 30

Exhibit 12. Percentage of public high school graduates who are CTE investors, by 

selected race or ethnicity: 1982, 1992, and 2004.................................................. 31

Exhibit 13. Percentage of public high school graduates who are CTE investors, by 

socioeconomic status quartile: 1982, 1992, and 2004 .......................................... 32

Exhibit 14. Percentage of CTE investors and non-investors taking the new basics 

courses: 1982, 1992, 2004 .................................................................................... 33

Exhibit 15. Percentage of public high school graduates who were CTE investors and 

non-investors taking advanced mathematics (above geometry and algebra 

II): 1982, 1992, and 2004...................................................................................... 34

Exhibit 16. Percentage of public high school graduates who were CTE investors and 

non-investors taking advanced science courses (advanced biology, 

chemistry, or physics): 1982, 1992, and 2004 ...................................................... 35

Exhibit 17. Average estimated number-right math scores of CTE investors and noninvestors: 1992 and 2004 ...................................................................................... 37

Exhibit 18. Percentage of public high school graduates expecting to earn a bachelor’s 

degree or more, by CTE occupational investment: 1982, 1992, and 2004........... 38
vi National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

Exhibit 19. Percentage of public school graduates expecting to earn no more than a high 

school degree, by CTE occupational investment: 1982, 1992, and 2004 ............. 39

Exhibit 20. Percentage of public high school graduates ever enrolled in a postsecondary 

education institution in the first two years after graduation, by CTE 

occupational investment: 1984, 1994, and 2006................................................... 40

Exhibit 21. Percentage of public high school graduates with given expectations of 

occupation at age 30, by CTE occupational investment: 1982, 1992, and 

2004...................................................................................................................... 41

Exhibit 22. Percentage of non-college-attending public high school graduates in first 

job type, by CTE occupational investment: 1984, 1994, and 2006 ...................... 42

Exhibit 23. Percentage of public high school graduates, by CTE occupational 

investment: 1982, 1992, and 2004 ........................................................................ 44

Exhibit 24. Percentage of public high school graduates, by student characteristics and 

CTE investment: 1982, 1992, and 2004................................................................ 45

Exhibit 25. Percentage of public high school graduates completing given highest level 

of mathematics, by curricular foundation and CTE occupational investment: 

1982, 1992, and 2004............................................................................................ 47

Exhibit 26. Percentage of public high school graduates completing given highest level 

of science, by curricular foundation and CTE occupational investment: 

1982, 1992, and 2004............................................................................................ 48

Exhibit 27. Percentage of public high school graduates with given educational 

expectations in 12th grade, by curricular foundation and CTE occupational 

investment: 1982, 1992, and 2004 ........................................................................ 49

Exhibit 28. Proportion of 25- to 64-year-olds in the workforce, by skill level of 

occupation in selected countries: 2006 ................................................................. 64

Exhibit 29. Upper secondary school enrollment distribution in the United States and 

selected other countries, by program orientation percentage: 2006 ..................... 66

Exhibit 30. Completion requirements for upper secondary school programs in the 

United States and selected other countries, by program orientation: 2006........... 69

Exhibit 31. Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) rankings of selected nations: 2009–10 

and 2008–09.......................................................................................................... 72
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report vii

Accompanying Statement from the Independent Advisory Panel

To: Chairman John Kline, Committee on Education and the Workforce, U.S. House of 

Representatives

Chairman Tom Harkin, Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, U.S. 

Senate

From: Independent Advisory Panel of the National Assessment of Career and Technical 

Education

Re: Interim Report of the National Assessment

The Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Improvement Act of 2006 (Perkins IV) 

called on the secretary of education to appoint an Independent Advisory Panel (IAP) to provide 

guidance on the topics and methodology of the National Assessment of Career and Technical 

Education (NACTE), and to provide an independent report on the findings of the assessment. 

The IAP, which includes experts in career and technical education as well as experts in research 

techniques and methodology, has met four times in Washington to provide guidance and 

feedback on the NACTE studies. We have also reviewed the NACTE Interim Report and the 

studies on which it is based.

We are writing at this time to draw your attention to key issues that emerge from the Interim 

Report, which we trust you will read with great interest.

Changing Landscape of Career and Technical Education

Just as 21st-century workforce needs are changing what it means to be prepared in career and 

technical education (CTE), the population of students engaged in CTE is also shifting. Whereas 

three decades ago, secondary occupational courses were primarily the province of students 

without a strong academic orientation, the most recent data (from the high school class of 2004) 

reveal that students from across the academic spectrum are enrolled in both academic and 

occupational courses. Students participating in occupational courses are taking more academic 

credits than ever before, and low-income students make up a smaller share of course enrollments 

than in the past. Overall participation in CTE courses remained steady, but the proportion of 

students concentrating in CTE—those enrolled in three or more courses in the same field—has 

declined since the 1980s. These patterns are consistent with a view that secondary CTE has 

become less of a “track” for low-achieving, low-income students and more of a “field” in which 

students participate from a wide variety of backgrounds and interests.

Meanwhile, the new realities of the workplace such as the increasing use of technology and the 

growth of the health care sector have occurred alongside an expansion of occupational 

preparation at the postsecondary level. These trends have been accompanied by a desire to create 

pathways of occupational studies that extend from the secondary to the postsecondary level.

More students who invest in CTE at the secondary level (those who take three or more credits in 

any CTE field) are continuing to the postsecondary level, and the gap in postsecondary 

attendance between CTE investors and nonparticipants in secondary CTE has declined.

However, data on whether students are actually following specific CTE pathways or “Programs 
viii National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

of Study” are not available, nor are they required by CTE accountability systems. Among 

students who do not attend college, moreover, national data show that CTE investors are more 

likely to find skilled jobs than are students who earn few or no occupational credits, an 

advantage for CTE students that has increased since the 1980s.

Evaluation Framework and Evidence

The NACTE has devised a framework for evaluation that is appropriate given its charge and 

resources. However, three main challenges have necessarily limited the scope of the evaluation

• Timing: Because the 2006 act is just now being fully implemented, the NACTE will 

evaluate mainly the quality of implementation. Evaluation of impact will also be part of 

the NACTE, but impact estimates will mainly reflect conditions of CTE that were in 

place at the start of the 2006 act, not those that unfolded subsequently.

• Longitudinal data: Until now, few states have had the longitudinal data necessary to 

permit evaluation of more than short-term outcomes; Florida is the noteworthy exception.

As states move to comply with the education provisions of the American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act, one may expect that longitudinal data will become more widely 

available.

• Evidence of quality: Despite important new accountability provisions in the 2006 act, 

available data focus mainly on who takes which CTE programs and courses, and little 

evidence is available to assess the quality of CTE instruction. Case studies that will be 

discussed in the NACTE final report will begin to address this gap, but such information 

is not regularly gathered.

Ensuring that students complete high school “college- and career-ready” has been identified as 

an important national policy goal. The IAP wishes to emphasize the potential for CTE to

contribute meaningfully toward achieving this aim. Broader education reforms such improving 

teacher quality, turning around low-performing schools, setting high standards, and improving 

data systems should also be considered for CTE. Lessons may also be drawn from CTE that 

apply to education reform efforts more generally. Including CTE in broader conversations about 

education reform would ensure CTE is part of an overall improvement strategy and not isolated 

from other, complementary efforts to improve educational outcomes.

Looking Toward the Future

CTE has the potential to play a vital role in strengthening America’s competitiveness in the 

global economy. Because it spans the secondary and postsecondary levels, CTE can not only 

help students become “college- and career-ready,” it can encourage them to pursue 

postsecondary education or training, especially in high-skill, high-wage, and high-demand 

occupations.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report ix

NACTE Independent Advisory Panel

Adam Gamoran, Chair

Professor of Sociology and Educational 

Policy Studies

University of Wisconsin–Madison

Belinda Cole

Francis Tuttle Chair Professor

Oklahoma State University

Willard R. Daggett

President

International Center for Leadership in 

Education

James Jacobs

President

Macomb Community College

Timothy W. Lawrence

Executive Director

SkillsUSA

Katharine Oliver

Assistant State Superintendent

Division of Career and College Readiness

Maryland State Department of Education

James E. Rosenbaum

Professor of Sociology, Education & Social 

Policy

Northwestern University

Larry Rosenstock

Chief Executive Officer

High Tech High

Becky Smerdon

Managing Director

Education Research and Policy Quill 

Research Associates, LLC

Mala B. Thakur

Executive Director

National Youth Employment Coalition

John Tyler

Professor of Education, Public Policy and 

Economics

Brown University

Charles Ware

Vice Chair (Retired)

Wyoming Workforce Development Council

Ross Wiener

Executive Director

Aspen Program on Education and Society

Aspen Institute
x National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

This page intentionally left blank
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report xi

Highlights

Background

Under the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 (Perkins IV), Congress 

mandated a National Assessment of Career and Technical Education (NACTE) to evaluate the 

implementation of the law and its outcomes. This interim report is the first of two reports. The 

purpose of this NACTE interim report is two-fold:

• To describe the overall research approach to meeting the congressional mandate.

• To present interim findings to date from the national assessment focused on participation, 

outcomes and international comparisons of secondary school career and technical 

education (CTE).

The final NACTE report will provide a more complete and integrated perspective on the progress 

made in implementing Perkins IV.

The findings in this interim report focus primarily on the role of secondary CTE in the 

preparation and transition of youths for college and careers. The report notes that a special 

challenge facing CTE in meeting these twin goals of academic and career preparation is the role 

of CTE for the approximately half the students in each secondary class who do not directly enter 

college upon leaving high school. Many of these students were having difficulty finding 

employment before the financial crisis and now employment is even more difficult. Based on 

Bureau of Labor Statistics data, a majority of recent graduates (54.3 percent) were jobless in 

2011 as were nearly two-thirds (65.6 percent) of recent high school dropouts.

Findings

1. Participation in secondary CTE changed significantly over the 22-year period between 1982 

and 2004. Although most students continue to take at least one CTE course, the focus of this 

report is on participation trends of students who invest in CTE (take three or more CTE courses).

• The percentage of CTE investors among high school graduates initially declined from 

46 percent to 35 percent between 1982 and 1992 but stabilized and even increased

slightly from 35 percent to 38 percent between 1992 and 2004.

• CTE investors have substantially closed the academic gap with non-investors in taking 

core academic courses (“new basics”) due in part by increasing academic course 

requirements as a condition for graduation in most states. By 2004, about 58 percent of 

CTE investors had completed the new basics, compared with about 61 percent of other

students. Additionally, a small set of new courses that generally enrolled higher 

achieving students (e.g, in computer science and education) became classified as CTE.

• In 1982, 65 percent of investors concentrated in one occupational area. By 2004, the 

situation reversed when a majority (55 percent) of CTE investors took CTE in more than 

one occupational area (exploring) rather than in a single occupational area 

(concentrating). Because states generally report performance data under Perkins IV for 

only CTE concentrators, which most states define as secondary students who have taken 
xii National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

at least three courses in a single CTE program area, Perkins IV accountability data

reflects the performance of somewhat less than half of students who invest in CTE.

2. The NACTE presented new evidence of secondary CTE outcomes from two studies, with 

mixed outcome findings. An analysis of the nationally-representative NCES Education 

Longitudinal Study (ELS:2002) failed to find any relationship between CTE coursetaking and 

student achievement on a standardized math assessment or school completion. However, one 

study in a large urban school district (The School District of Philadelphia) found a positive

relationship between CTE school attendance in oversubscribed schools and course and school 

completion but no relationship between CTE school attendance and achievement.

To further advance understanding of the potential effects of secondary CTE, evaluations would 

benefit from going beyond the approach of current studies that examine the outcomes of CTE

without taking into account program variation or implementation quality. A more useful 

approach would be to focus on rigorously assessing the potential for CTE benefits from a defined 

and well-implemented set of programs.

3. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) data show that 

secondary students in competitor nations devote a higher share of their course work to secondary 

vocational education programs than the United States, with the exception of Canada. Using 

OECD standards of vocational enrollment, in most European countries examined, almost half or 

more of secondary school graduates enroll in a vocational-oriented program (in which they earn 

25 percent or more of their total credits). Even in Korea and Japan, with their strong academic 

traditions, a quarter of secondary graduates concentrate in vocational education by OECD 

standards. By contrast, since the early 1980s the percentage of U.S. secondary students meeting 

OECD standards for vocational education enrollment declined from about 18 percent to 

6 percent.

Implications

Evidence from the interim report suggests that secondary CTE is shifting away from its historical 

dual-track approach and that successive cohorts of secondary CTE students are closing the gap 

with non-CTE students with respect to the number of core academic credits earned and collegegoing rates.

The interim report also raises issues of the role of secondary CTE in preparing for work the 

nearly half the students who do not directly go on to postsecondary education. With about half of 

all secondary students not going directly to college, and many having difficulties finding 

employment, it is important that information on the effectiveness of potentially exemplary CTE 

be investigated.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report xiii

Executive Summary

The Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 (Perkins IV) reinforces a 

longstanding federal commitment to supporting career and technical education (CTE). Although 

federal contributions account for only a fraction of total state and local spending on CTE, federal 

policy has had, and continues to have, a large influence on state and local programs and policies.

Over time, as national attention has turned to globalization and its implications for a more highly 

skilled workforce, so too has Perkins IV’s emphasis shifted, with current legislation aimed at 

raising the academic and technical rigor of secondary and postsecondary CTE instruction to 

prepare students for entry into high-skill, high-wage, or high-demand occupations.

Perkins IV attempts to strengthen CTE and improve its quality primarily by increasing the 

emphasis on accountability and introducing programs of study (POS) that, among other things, 

integrate and align secondary and postsecondary levels across challenging and rigorous academic 

and technical content.

Under Perkins IV, Congress mandated a National Assessment of Career and Technical Education 

(NACTE) to evaluate the implementation of the law and its outcomes. This interim report is the 

first of two reports. The purpose of this NACTE interim report is two-fold:

• To describe the overall research approach to meeting the congressional mandate.

• To present interim findings to date from the national assessment focused on participation, 

outcomes and international comparisons of secondary school CTE.

The final NACTE report will provide a more complete and integrated perspective on the progress 

made in implementing Perkins IV. The final report will also include more detailed information 

about the outcomes of CTE participation, drawing upon several NACTE studies. The complete 

agenda of NACTE studies is listed in Exhibit ES-4 at the end of this executive summary.

ES-1 Congressional Mandate for the NACTE

Perkins IV directs the secretary of education to “provide for the conduct of an independent 

evaluation and assessment of career and technical education programs under the Act, including 

the implementation of the [Act].” Following the enactment of the new law, the secretary of 

education directed the Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development (OPEPD) to 

conduct the NACTE.

NACTE’s evaluation agenda is driven by the requirements in the congressional mandate to 

examine the implementation of provisions in Perkins IV and the outcomes of CTE. The 

congressionally mandated issues and the set of NACTE studies to address the mandate are, as 

follows:

1. How have secondary and postsecondary student enrollments in CTE programs 

changed? Examples of studies providing data for the NACTE include secondary data 

analysis of the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) longitudinal data from 

the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), the National Education 

Longitudinal Study (NELS:88), the High School and Beyond (HS&B) study, the National 
xiv National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) High School Transcript Studies, and the 

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS).

2. Do students who participate in CTE realize any educational or workforce benefits? 

NACTE studies include secondary data analysis of ELS:2002 and secondary data 

analysis of natural experiments and quasi-experiments using local administrative data in 

Philadelphia and San Diego and state administrative data from Florida.

3. How are Perkins IV funds distributed and used? NACTE studies include analysis of 

subgrantee fiscal data; state, district, and postsecondary institution surveys; and case 

studies of selected states, districts, schools, and postsecondary institutions.

4. To what extent are Perkins IV accountability data valid, reliable, and comparable, 

and to what extent are decision-makers using these data? NACTE studies include 

state, district, and postsecondary institution surveys; case studies of selected states, 

districts, schools, and postsecondary institutions; and analysis of Perkins IV performance 

data systems.

5. Are grantees meeting the requirement to develop and implement programs of study

(POS) that integrate academic and technical content? NACTE studies include state, 

district, and postsecondary institution surveys; expert panel review of state POS; and case 

studies of selected states, districts, schools, and postsecondary institutions.

Thus, NACTE is sponsoring a set of interrelated but distinct studies to address the congressional 

requirements and associated research questions. The overall agenda calls for diverse data 

collection and analytic methods: qualitative case studies, national surveys of states and local 

entities, use of national longitudinal and cross-sectional databases, use of state and local 

administrative databases, an expert panel, and both a natural experiment in choice of CTE 

schools and econometric estimation of national and local program effects. A detailed listing of 

NACTE study activities in relation to individual provisions in the legislative mandate is 

presented at the end of this executive summary.

Results from the NACTE are to be reported in interim and final reports. This interim report will 

address parts of the first and second research questions in the preceding list: the participation of 

students in secondary CTE programs and a first look at the academic outcomes of CTE from two 

of NACTE’s quantitative studies. The final report will address the other topics.

Independent Advisory Panel

Congress further mandated that an Independent Advisory Panel (IAP) be formed for NACTE.

The purposes of the IAP are to—

• Provide guidance to the secretary of education on the implementation of the NACTE, 

including the issues to be addressed and the methodology of its research studies to ensure 

that they meet the highest standards of quality.

• Prepare an independent analysis of the findings and recommendations resulting from the 

assessment.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report xv

The U.S. Department of Education has assembled an IAP whose members have a wide range of 

expertise (see p. ix for a list of the members).

Interim Report: A Special Focus on Secondary CTE

The findings in this interim report focus primarily on the role of secondary CTE in the 

preparation and transition of youths for college and careers. While postsecondary CTE plays a 

critical role in workforce development and specialized skills training, the final report will 

examine this area more fully when the NACTE studies on postsecondary education have been 

completed.

For a large part of the 20th century, CTE (formerly vocational education) was a mainstay in the 

career readiness preparation of the majority of secondary students who entered the labor force 

directly from high school. Those going on to college were schooled in the academic track and 

exposed to a more rigorous set of college preparation courses. Vocational majors in secondary 

school were placed on a track that was more occupationally focused. As greater percentages of 

high school graduates enrolled in college directly from high school, this dual track system 

resulted in increasingly negative perceptions of vocational education as programs where students 

were not adequately prepared for further education at the postsecondary level. Moreover, 

employers raised their expectations that new job entrants would bring strong basic academic 

skills, including high school graduates who were firmly grounded in reading, writing and 

mathematics skills (Levy and Murnane, 2004).

Congress responded over the years by moving to modernize the federal vocational education law

to meet the newer and more rigorous education and workplace requirements and eliminate the 

sharp separation between the academic and CTE course work under the dual track approach. The

strengthening of the integration of academic and technical tracks continued in Perkins IV. One 

key feature is the introduction of POS, which as noted, establish in different occupational areas 

formal course sequences connecting high school and college work. POS combine academic and 

career-related courses and lead to credentials or certificates of attainment. Perkins IV also 

requires states and subgrantees to report on performance standards around core academic, 

technical, and graduation and placement indicators.

This strategy of integration between academic and technical content also seeks to prepare 

secondary CTE students for postsecondary education and careers. The movement over the years 

has been to strengthen secondary CTE students’ access to a sound academic program while 

maintaining a strong technical program. This should permit students access without wasteful 

remediation at the postsecondary level while also building a foundation toward “high-skill, highwage, or high-demand occupations in current or emerging professions.”

1

A special challenge facing CTE in meeting these twin goals of academic and career preparation 

is the role of CTE for the approximately half the students in each secondary class who do not 

directly enter college upon leaving high school. These include the approximately one-third of the 

 

1 Perkins IV, S 250-2.
xvi National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

high school graduating class who currently do not directly go on to postsecondary education as 

well as students who drop out of high school before graduation.

2

To gain a measure of the challenge in preparing students for the workforce, the employment of 

recent high school graduates and dropouts declined sharply between 2007 and 2011. Since the 

financial crisis, the labor force participation rate of high school graduates is down, the 

unemployment rate is up, and a majority of graduates not enrolled in college (54.3 percent) are 

jobless compared to 38.6 percent in 2007.

3

The picture for high school dropouts is starker. Between 2007 and 2011, the unemployment rate 

for those looking for work has risen from 26.9 percent to 38.4 percent of high school dropouts. 

The jobless rate, which includes those who are not actively seeking work, went from 58.9

percent in 2007 to 65.6 percent in 2011.

To better understand the potential role of secondary CTE, this interim report will present 

information on the participation of secondary students in CTE using a variety of participation 

measures and examine the coursetaking and academic outcomes of secondary CTE students. The 

interim report will also compare CTE preparation in the U.S. to other industrialized nations.

Organization of Interim Report

This interim report provides baseline information and lays the groundwork for a comprehensive 

final report. It consists of six chapters:

• Chapter 1 provides an overview of the NACTE research agenda.

• Chapter 2 provides an introduction to the legislative provisions of Perkins IV and issues 

they raise for NACTE’s evaluation of the implementation and outcomes of the law.

• Chapter 3 examines trends in student participation in CTE before Perkins IV was enacted 

using data from longitudinal studies of high school graduates conducted by the U.S. 

Department of Education’s NCES.

• Chapter 4 summarizes prior studies of CTE outcomes and presents preliminary findings 

from two NACTE studies (a national study and a large city study) of secondary CTE 

outcomes associated with earlier versions of the Perkins Act.

• Chapter 5 presents international benchmark data on pre–Perkins IV CTE participation 

and experiences comparing U.S. secondary students with their peers in other developed 

countries and drawing upon a report from the Organization for Economic Co-operation 

and Development (OECD, 2008).

• Chapter 6 draws implications for the final report.

 

2 Of the 3.1 million youths age 16 to 24 who graduated from high school in January through October 2011, 

2.1 million went directly on to college and one million (31.8 percent) were not enrolled in college in October 2011.

3 Bureau of Labor Statistics. College enrollment and work activity of high school graduates news releases. Analysis 

of Current Population Survey data, 2007 and 2011. http://www.bls.gov/schedule/archives/all_nr.htm#HSGEC.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report xvii

The Chapter 1 overview of NACTE has been discussed above, so that the remainder of this 

executive summary summarizes Chapters 2–6.

ES-2 Chapter 2: Framework for Evaluating the Implementation of Perkins IV

Provisions on Accountability and Programs of Study

Chapter 2 provides an analytic perspective on the provisions in Perkins IV aimed at improving 

the quality of CTE. The framework employed is called a logic model because it looks at the 

implicit logic in the program’s structures and requirements found in Perkins IV. By identifying 

the key elements in the law, the sequences and causal assumptions about the way they operate 

and interact, and the incentives and requirements for required actions, the logic model and theory 

of action provide direction for what NACTE should be examining in assessing whether 

Perkins IV is achieving its intended effects.

Perkins IV employs three major policy avenues for improving CTE services: (1) POS defining 

the expectations of a comprehensive sequence of CTE instruction; (2) accountability provisions 

holding state agencies and local subgrantees responsible for their performance; and (3) spending 

directives detailing the purposes and required uses of federal funds. These three legislative 

themes provide a range of policy levers for influencing the delivery of CTE services across 

secondary and postsecondary levels.

First, the requirement that all local subgrantees must offer at least one POS is a major change in 

Perkins IV. Perkins IV describes POS as (1) incorporating secondary education and 

postsecondary education elements; (2) including coherent and rigorous content aligned with 

challenging academic standards and relevant CTE content in a coordinated, nonduplicative 

progression of courses that align secondary education with postsecondary education; (3) possibly 

including an opportunity for secondary students to participate in dual or concurrent enrollment 

programs or other ways to acquire postsecondary credits; and (4) leading to an industryrecognized credential or certificate at the postsecondary level, or to an associate or baccalaureate 

degree.

4

The second new change is that accountability is strengthened in Perkins IV in several ways.

Accountability for performance is extended from the state agency to local subgrantees, giving a 

state more leverage in holding its subgrantees responsible for improving the outcomes associated 

with their CTE programs. Local subgrantees (generally local education agencies [LEAs] at the 

secondary level and community colleges at the postsecondary level) have the option to negotiate 

with their state agency their level of expected performance, with those falling short of their 

performance benchmarks required to develop a program improvement plan. Continued failure to 

achieve negotiated targets could lead to the loss of some or all of their federal Perkins Act

funding.

Congress has required that states use their measures of academic achievement (in mathematics 

and reading or language arts) and of high school graduation required in the Elementary and 

 

4 Dual or concurrent enrollment allows secondary students to earn college credits while also meeting requirements 

for high school graduation. This terminology is not consistent across jurisdictions, and such programs are 

implemented in various ways.
xviii National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

Secondary Education Act of 1965 as amended (ESEA) for assessing the performance of 

secondary CTE students.5States must report disaggregated performance data, and identify any 

gaps in performance compared to all CTE students, for certain categories (subgroups) of students 

specified in the ESEA as well as for the special populations defined in Perkins IV. Congress

further required a number of other student performance measures, including indicators of student 

attainment of career and technical skill proficiencies such as student achievement on technical 

assessments, which are aligned with industry-recognized standards, if available and appropriate.

The U.S. Department of Education has issued nonregulatory guidance that allows states to limit 

performance reporting to the subgroup of CTE students who are CTE concentrators. At the 

secondary level, a CTE concentrator is primarily a “secondary student who has earned three (3) 

or more credits in a single CTE program area (e.g., health care or business services).” States are 

to report the percent of CTE concentrators who have passed academic requirements and 

“technical skill assessments that are aligned with industry-recognized standards, if available and 

appropriate.” At the postsecondary level a concentrator is primarily a student who completes at 

least 12 academic or CTE credits within a single program area sequence that is comprised of 12 

or more academic and technical credits and terminates in the award of an industry-recognized 

credential, a certificate, or a degree.

The guidance further explains that the Department recognizes that a “State may not have 

technical skill assessments that are aligned with industry-recognized standards in every CTE 

program area and for every CTE concentrator.” In this regard, the State Plan guide for Perkins IV

required each state to identify the program areas for which it had technical skill assessments and 

submit a plan and timeframe for increasing the coverage of programs and students reported in 

this indicator to cover all CTE concentrators and all program areas in the future.

The final report will provide a careful examination of the state-reported performance information 

in response to Perkins IV. Also the final report will examine how states have interpreted the 

provision “if available and appropriate” for reporting students’ technical skills, including the 

consistency of reporting across states. Chapter 3 of this interim report on secondary CTE 

participation will assess the implications of limiting secondary performance reporting to CTE 

concentrators.

Third, although Perkins IV allows some flexibility in how its funds are spent, the purposes of the 

law provide some specific guidance for funding uses. One new focus is on preparing students for 

“high-skill, high-wage, or high-demand occupations in current or emerging professions. Another 

focus is on providing professional development for improving leadership and the quality of CTE 

personnel at all levels (teachers, faculty, administrators, and counselors). And third, giving states 

the flexibility to consolidate their Title II (Tech Prep) funds into their Title I (Basic State Grants)

funds is important because it allows states to tailor their CTE programs to their unique 

circumstances. These funding uses will be examined in the final report.

 

5 Perkins IV does not define a CTE student. However, the states have adopted Perkins IV performance measures that 

cover students concentrating in CTE. Although the definition of CTE concentrator varies across states, at the 

secondary level it generally includes students who take at least three occupational courses in one occupational area, 

unless only two courses are offered in an area, and at the postsecondary level it includes students who complete at 

least 12 academic or CTE credits in a program that consists of 12 or more credits, or who complete a shorter CTE 

program, that terminates in an industry-recognized credential, certificate, or degree.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report xix

This program logic model guides NACTE’s studies for examining the ways states and local 

entities are implementing Perkins IV. However, Perkins IV has only been in effect for a short 

period of time. Perkins IV was enacted in 2006, and states and local entities were allowed school 

year 2007–08 as a transition year before fully implementing the new law in school year 2008–09.

Hence, it will be the final report that will explore most of the initial effects of Perkins IV, with 

the interim report findings establishing a baseline by which to evaluate Perkins IV.

ES-3 Chapter 3: Participation in Secondary Career and Technical Education from 

1982 to 2004

Chapter 3 examines changes in participation in secondary CTE among high school graduates 

from 1982 to 2004, the period from before the Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Act

(Perkins I) was enacted in 1984 into the period covered by the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and 

Technical Education Act of 1998 (Perkins III). Over this period, CTE moved away from being 

what many described as a high school curriculum track—then known as vocational education, in 

contrast to academic and general tracks—students focused on occupationally specific courses in 

one occupational area. Instead, CTE has shifted to an educational field, in which students spend

relatively less time in one occupational area but are more likely to explore several.

The background for the changes in CTE participation is the shift in which a majority of 

secondary graduates complete the academic curricular foundation defined by the new basics

courses recommended in the 1983 report, A Nation at Risk (National Commission on Excellence 

in Education, 1983). These new basics consist of at least four Carnegie credits in English and 

three credits each in mathematics, science, and social studies. The proportion of high school 

graduates choosing the academic foundation consisting of the new basics rose from 14 percent in 

1982 to 60 percent in 2004 (Dalton et al., 2013).

As the shift to more academic coursetaking occurred, patterns of investing in secondary CTE 

occupational courses changed6(Exhibit ES-1):

• While the percentage of graduates enrolling in at least one CTE course declined by a 

small amount, almost all high school students (96 percent in 2004) still enroll in at least 

one CTE course, so that CTE has some meaning for nearly all graduates.

• The share of graduates who are CTE investors—those who earn three or more 

occupational credits—declined from 46 percent in 1982 to 35 percent in 1992, but that 

share has since stabilized and increased between 1992 and 2004 from 35 percent to 

38 percent of high school graduates.

• A key measure of CTE occupational concentration is earning three or more credits of 

CTE in a single occupational area—there was a decline in the percent of occupational 

concentrators from 30 percent of all graduates in 1982 to 17 percent in 2004.

 

6 All differences and changes over time described in the executive summary are statistically significant at p<.05, 

unless otherwise noted.
xx National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

• However, another key descriptor of CTE investors is the percent of high school graduates 

who took three or more CTE credits in more than one occupational area (CTE explorers). 

The proportion of CTE explorers increased from 16 percent in 1982 to 21 percent in 

2004.

Exhibit ES-1. Percentage of high school graduates participating in career and technical 

education, by level of CTE occupational coursetaking: 1982, 1992, 2004

3 0

CTE Concentrators

1 6 CTE Explorers 1 7

2 1

4 6

CTE Investors 3 8

9 8 Any CTE credit

9 6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1982 1992 2004

Percent

Exhibit reads: The percentage of public high school graduates with any CTE credit was 98 percent in 1982.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education. CTE concentrators earned three or more credits in at least one occupational area. 

CTE investors consist of CTE concentrators plus CTE explorers who earn three or more total occupational credits but did not 

concentrate in an occupational area. A Carnegie unit is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day for one full school year.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”

The fact that there are currently more students who invest in CTE who are explorers (three or 

more credits in more than one occupational area) rather than concentrators (three or more credits 

in one occupational area) has important implications for performance reporting under Perkins IV. 

Federal nonregulatory guidance, as noted above, allows states to report performance data for 

concentrators and hence, states are permitted to report on less than half of investors who take 

three or more CTE courses upon graduation.

As the share of graduates investing in three or more CTE credits stabilized between 1992 and 

2004, CTE investors were also able to close nearly all the gaps in the rate of completing “new 

basic” courses compared with non-investors in CTE (Exhibit ES-2):

• In 1982, only about 6 percent of CTE investors completed the new basics, compared with 

about 22 percent of other students.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report xxi

• By 2004, about 58 percent of CTE investors had completed the new basics, compared 

with about 61 percent of other students.

Exhibit ES-2. Percentage of CTE investors and other high school graduates (non-investors), 

taking the new basics courses: 1982, 1992, 2004

6

33

58

22

54 61

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1982 1992 2004

Percent CTE Investors Non-investors

Exhibit reads: In 1982, 6 percent of CTE investors completed the new basics courses.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education. CTE investors earned three or more total occupational credits (regardless of 

concentration in any occupational area). Non-investors are all other students—those who earned zero to less than three total 

occupational credits (Carnegie units). A credit (Carnegie unit) is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day for one full 

school year.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”

Students could take CTE and still complete the new basics course load at greater rates because of 

the increase in total credits earned. The total number of credits earned by high school graduates 

went from 21.7 credits in 1982 to 26.2 credits in 2004, an increase of over one-fifth.

There was also major narrowing in rates of postsecondary attendance between CTE investors 

and non-investors. Between 1982 and 2004 high school graduates who were CTE investors 

significantly increased their postsecondary attendance during their first two years after high 

school. Among CTE investors, the proportion of CTE investors attending postsecondary 

programs increased from 54 percent in 1982 to 75 percent in 2004, narrowing the postsecondary 

rate of attendance gap with non-investors from 23 percentage points to only 8 percentage points.

ES-4 Chapter 4: Outcomes of Career and Technical Education: Some New 

Evidence

The mandate for the NACTE in Perkins IV includes not only examining the law’s 

implementation but also analyzing the impact CTE has on academic achievement and 

employment outcomes.
xxii National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

NACTE’s investigations into the impact of CTE on outcomes extend the findings from the 

earlier mandated study of Perkins III, namely, the National Assessment of Vocational Education 

(NAVE; Silverberg et al., 2004), which largely examined CTE outcomes occurring under 

Perkins II. At the secondary level, NAVE reported that research evidence showed that CTE did 

not bring about or contribute to academic achievement gains. NAVE also reported that only 

mixed evidence exists that CTE reduces the high school dropout rate. Moreover, it reported, CTE 

neither helped nor hurt the chances of students going on to postsecondary schooling.

Postsecondary vocational education did, however, provide significant economic returns, with 

those earning a credential (certificate or degree) experiencing the largest benefits.

The NACTE looked for rigorous new evidence of CTE outcomes and found opportunities using 

existing data: a national study of secondary students using the NCES ELS:2002 and a natural 

experiment involving choice of a CTE high school in Philadelphia. The CTE outcomes studied 

occurred in periods covered by Perkins II and Perkins III.

The study of ELS:2002 looked at a representative sample of high school sophomores in 2002 and 

examined the relationship of CTE coursetaking to math achievement gains and dropping out of 

high school in 2004. In particular, this study examined differences in outcomes for students who 

take more versus fewer CTE courses in traditional high schools. NACTE’s study using 

ELS:2002 (Bozick and Dalton, 2013) analyzes gains in math using fixed effects regression 

analysis that reduces the influence of unmeasured factors—such as attitudes, preferences, or 

innate ability—that may lead to self-selection into certain educational programs.

The ELS:2002 study failed to find any relationship between CTE coursetaking and student 

outcomes (Bozick and Dalton, 2013):

• The total number of occupational credits earned during the last two years of high school 

had no relationship to the increase in number of correct answers on the mathematics 

assessment.

• Controlling for socioeconomic and academic differences among students as well as 

semester timing, the number of credits students earned in occupational courses was 

unrelated to their likelihood of dropping out.

A second study took advantage of a natural experiment in Philadelphia involving the choice of 

CTE high schools. Within the context of the district’s high school choice program, more students 

applied for entry to Philadelphia’s five CTE high schools than could be accepted, and acceptance 

was based on a random lottery. Therefore, the study examined the effects of winning admission 

to a CTE high school as opposed to attending another type of high school where they might also 

take CTE courses. This permitted comparing the outcomes of students accepted into CTE high 

schools with those who were not accepted. Outcomes for three cohorts of students were 

examined—the high school classes of 2003, 2004, and 2005. For two of the three cohorts (the 

classes of 2004 and 2005), the results are generalizable only to a more select group of 

Philadelphia students who applied to a CTE school and passed some moderate screens for 

achievement, attendance, and behavior.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report xxiii

The natural experiment in choice of CTE high schools in Philadelphia found some positive 

effects from attendance at CTE schools:

• Attending a CTE high school increased the probability of students successfully 

completing the college preparatory mathematics sequence of algebra 1, algebra 2, and 

geometry.

• Attending a CTE high school had no relationship to math or reading achievement growth 

from eighth to 11th grades.

• CTE high school attendance was related to higher on-time graduation rates.

The findings from the ELS:2002 study of student outcomes support the prior NAVE findings that 

CTE courestaking does not contribute to academic achievement gains as measured by 

standardized achievement tests. However, evidence from a natural experiment in Philadelphia 

found a positive relationship between attending a CTE school and mathematics coursetaking and 

graduation. To further advance understanding of the potential effects of secondary CTE, 

evaluations would benefit from going beyond the approach of current studies that examine the 

outcomes of CTE without taking into account program variation or implementation quality. A 

more useful approach would be to focus on rigorously assessing the potential for CTE benefits

from a defined and well-implemented set of programs.

ES-5 Chapter 5: Career and Technical Education in International Perspective

Chapter 5 provides international comparative information on CTE—more widely known 

internationally as vocational education—in 15 nations that are competitors to the United States 

and participants in data collections sponsored by OECD. International comparisons address one 

of the legislative purposes of Perkins IV: to provide students the opportunities to develop “the 

knowledge and skills needed to keep the United States competitive.” The Congress has also 

expressed interest in international comparisons under section 114(a)(3), which provides that 

NCES “may include international comparisons” in its assessments of CTE. Moreover, major 

education organizations including the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief 

State School Officers have also called for international benchmarking studies to help maintain 

and improve the competitiveness of the United States.

7

OECD data show that secondary students in competitor nations devote a higher share of their 

course work to secondary vocational education programs than the United States, with the 

exception of Canada (see Exhibit ES-3). Using OECD standards of vocational education 

enrollment, in most European countries examined, almost half or more of secondary school 

graduates enroll in a vocational-oriented program (in which they earn 25 percent or more of their 

total credits). Even in Korea and Japan, with their strong academic traditions, a quarter of 

secondary graduates concentrate in vocational education by OECD standards. By contrast, since 

the early 1980s the percentage of U.S. secondary students meeting OECD standards declined 

from about 18 percent to 6 percent.

 

7 National Governors Association, Council for Chief State School Officers and Achieve. Benchmarking for Success: 

Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education.

http://www.achieve.org/files/BenchmarkingforSuccess.pdf.
xxiv National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

Exhibit ES-3. Percentage of upper secondary school enrollment in concentrated vocational 

education (25 percent of total credits) in OECD countries: 2006

Exhibit reads: The percentage of upper secondary students enrolled in concentrated vocational education is 78

percent for Austria.

SOURCE: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Education at a Glance 2008 (2008, Table C1.1). 

Website: http://www.oecd.org/edu/eag2008.

It is worth noting that 25 percent of total credits earned in CTE in the United States is well above 

the definition of three CTE credits in one occupational area used to define a CTE concentrator

for Perkins IV accountability reporting. The OECD definition of a vocational education 

concentration would be equivalent to five or six CTE credits in the United States, which is more 

typical of U.S. career academy models or programs with an apprenticeship or internship 

component.

ES-6 Chapter 6: Implications and Next Steps

Evidence from the interim report suggests that secondary CTE is shifting away from its historical 

dual-track approach and that successive cohorts of secondary CTE students are closing the gap 

with non-CTE students with respect to the number of core academic credits earned and college 

going rates. The interim report findings about CTE participation, effectiveness, and international 

benchmarking, also raise important implementation and outcome issues that warrant further 

exploration in the final NACTE report and beyond. These issues include:

• How to assess the outcomes of the increasing proportion of students who invest in CTE 

courses (take three or more credits) but take fewer than three credits in a single 

occupational area (explorers). CTE explorers are not part of the current Perkins

performance accountability system yet they are a growing majority of CTE investors. 

Research could examine the implications of including the category to assess program 
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report xxv

performance. Given that explorers do not concentrate in any one CTE field, the program 

questions to address are what are the expected outcomes of explorers and how could 

these outcomes be assessed within the accountability system?

• How to reconcile different results from studies about the benefits of secondary CTE on 

academic coursetaking, achievement, and high school graduation? Some studies find no 

such benefits from CTE, but other studies find CTE strengthening academic coursetaking 

and graduation rates. Research could explore whether these differences arise from 

differences in study methodology, nature of CTE courses and programs, or differences in 

CTE population and context. Research could also move beyond only exploring average 

effects of CTE without taking into account program variation or implementation quality

and focus on assessing the benefits from a set of defined and well-implemented 

programs.

The first question about CTE accountability coverage and measures will be examined closely in 

the final report. The second question about the empirical benefits of secondary CTE populations 

will be difficult to address given present data. With about half of all secondary students not 

going directly to college, and many having difficulties finding employment, it is important that 

information on the effectiveness of potentially exemplary CTE be investigated.

There are two reasons for creating an evaluation agenda of studies that examine specific CTE 

programs or interventions in the near future. First, existing evidence shows the effectiveness of 

programs like career academies (e.g., Kemple and Willner, 2008). While these programs are now 

widely offered, much is unknown about the variation among them and what that variation might 

mean for program outcomes and their effectiveness in turning around whole high schools.

Following students from well-implemented programs could be especially informative for 

identifying what works in improving student outcomes.

A second reason for initiating new studies of CTE programs is that OECD data suggest that 

many of our global competitors having substantial shares of secondary students enrolled in more

CTE programs also have higher achievement on international tests like the Program for 

International Student Assessment and higher secondary completion rates. This suggests, and 

rigorous studies need to confirm, that it is feasible to provide a sound academic and additional 

technical education at the secondary level.

In conclusion, the transformation of CTE culminating in Perkins IV represents key program 

innovations to integrate academic and technical skills through programs of study and new 

accountability systems. The success of these innovations will depend upon sound 

implementation and having access to rigorous and timely evaluative data on what works and 

what is not working. The evidence in the interim and final NACTE reports along with 

implementing the proposed research agenda will help provide the needed evaluative data.
xxvi National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

Exhibit ES-4. Perkins IV requirements for NACTE and associated NACTE studies

Pursuant to section 114(d)(2)(B) of Perkins IV, 

Legislative Requirements: “[t]he assessment 

required ... shall include descriptions and 

evaluations of— NACTE studies

“(i) the extent to which State, local, and tribal entities 

have developed, implemented, or improved State 

and local career and technical education 

programs assisted under the Act;

 Accountability and programs of study

– Surveys of state career and technical education 

(CTE) directors and local Perkins funds subrecipients 

(secondary and postsecondary)

– Case studies of states, districts, schools, and 

postsecondary institutions

– Expert panel review of state programs of study

– Analysis of Perkins performance data systems

 Funding

– State CTE director survey

 Tech Prep

– State CTE director survey

 Promising practices

– Literature review of effectiveness of online 

technology and distance education in CTE

– Developing comprehensive, longitudinal state 

databases for CTE reporting

“(ii) the preparation and qualifications of teachers and 

faculty of career and technical education (such as 

meeting State established teacher certification or 

licensing requirements), as well as shortages of 

such teachers and faculty;

 Teachers and faculty

– Secondary analysis of National Center for Education 

Statistics (NCES) data and reports

– Analysis of SAT scores of CTE teachers

 Supply and demand

– Secondary analysis of data from NCES and Higher 

Education Opportunity Act Title II

“(iii) academic and career and technical education 

achievement and employment outcomes of 

career and technical education, including 

analyses of—

(I) the extent and success of the integration of 

rigorous and challenging academic and 

career and technical education for students 

participating in career and technical 

education programs, including a review of the 

effect of such integration on the academic 

and technical proficiency achievement of 

such students (including the number of such 

students receiving a secondary school 

diploma); and

 Integration of academic/career and technical 

education content

– Surveys of state CTE directors and local Perkins

funds subrecipients (secondary and postsecondary)

– Expert panel review of state programs of study

– Case studies of selected states, districts, schools and 

postsecondary institutions

See notes at end of table.

Continues next page
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report xxvii

Exhibit ES-4. Perkins IV requirements for NACTE and associated NACTE Studies—continued

Pursuant to section 114(d)(2)(B) of Perkins IV, 

Legislative Requirements: “[t]he assessment 

required ... shall include descriptions and 

evaluations of— NACTE studies

(II) the extent to which career and technical 

education programs prepare students, 

including special populations, for subsequent 

employment in high skill, high wage 

occupations (including those in which 

mathematics and science skills are critical), 

or for participation in postsecondary 

education;

 Impact and educational/occupational outcomes

– Secondary analysis of national NCES longitudinal 

data Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002)

– Secondary analysis (natural experiments and quasiexperiments) using local administrative data in 

Philadelphia and San Diego and state administrative 

data from Florida

“(iv) employer involvement in, and satisfaction with, 

career and technical education programs and 

career and technical education students’

preparation for employment;

 Employer involvement and satisfaction

– Review of employer surveys

“(v) the participation of students in career and 

technical education programs;

 Student participation

– Secondary analysis of NCES data and reports (e.g., 

ELS:2002, High School and Beyond Longitudinal 

Study [HS&B], and National Education Longitudinal 

Study of 1988 [NELS:88])

– Secondary analysis of Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) data on CTE 

participation

“(vi) the use of educational technology and distance 

learning with respect to career and technical 

education and tech prep programs; and

 Effectiveness of technology/distance education

– Literature review of effectiveness of online 

technology and distance education in secondary CTE 

“(vii) the effect of State and local adjusted levels of 

performance on the delivery of career and 

technical education services, including the 

percentage of career and technical education and 

tech prep students meeting the adjusted levels of 

performance described in section 113.”

 Adjusted levels of performance (also see 

Accountability above)

– Surveys of state CTE directors and local Perkins

funds subrecipients (secondary and postsecondary)

– Case studies of selected states, districts, schools and 

postsecondary institutions

NOTE: NACTE = National Assessment of Career and Technical Education; Perkins IV = Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical 

Education Act of 2006 (20 U.S.C. 2301 et seq. as amended by P.L. 109-270).
xxviii National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

This page intentionally left blank
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 1

Chapter 1.

Introduction

The Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 (Perkins IV) reinforces a 

longstanding federal commitment to supporting career and technical education (CTE). Although 

federal contributions to the CTE enterprise account for only a fraction of state and local 

spending, federal policy has had, and continues to have, a large influence on state and local 

programs and policies.

Over time, as national attention has turned to globalization and its implications for a more highly 

skilled workforce, so too has the Perkins Act’s emphasis, with current legislation aimed at raising 

the academic and technical rigor of secondary and postsecondary CTE instruction to prepare 

students for entry into high-skill, high-wage, or high-demand occupations. New legislative 

provisions, which promote the alignment of secondary and postsecondary education through 

programs of study (POS) that, among other things, lead to an industry-recognized credential or 

certificate or degree at the postsecondary level, reinforce this goal. These are backed by

secondary and postsecondary accountability provisions for student results.

Under Perkins IV, Congress mandated a National Assessment of Career and Technical Education 

(NACTE) to evaluate the implementation of the law and its outcomes. This interim report is the 

first of two reports. The purpose of this NACTE interim report is to describe the research 

approach and present findings to date from the national assessment. This interim report consists 

of six chapters plus an appendix on the NACTE requirements. The first chapter8provides an 

introduction to Perkins IV and the NACTE research agenda, while the second chapter offers a 

framework for evaluating Perkins IV implementation. The remaining four chapters present 

baseline information focused on secondary CTE including participation trends, new outcome 

evidence and the international comparative information.

1.1 Key Provisions in Perkins IV

Federal legislation addresses particular challenges facing the nation, and these policy issues can 

and do change over time (Exhibit 1). During the early years of vocational education (1917–68) 

the stress was on expanding vocational programs to provide a trained semiskilled workforce to 

meet the needs of industry. Between 1968 and 1990, ensuring equal access to vocational 

education for disadvantaged and special need populations was stressed. Most recently, the stress 

is on improving the academic and technical quality of programs in the form of CTE along with 

strengthened performance standards to ensure program quality.

 

8 This chapter was prepared by ED staffers Jay Noell (retired) and Michael Fong with assistance from Steven Klein, 

MPR Associates.
2 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

Exhibit 1. Overview of changes in federal legislation of CTE

Periods of CTE 

legislation Policy objectives and tools

1917–63 Provide trained workers for growing semiskilled occupations and retain more 

students in secondary education through:

 Expansion of separate vocational schools and programs.

 Funds for basic maintenance of programs.

 Focusing on agriculture, industry, and home economics for high school 

students.

1963–68 Improve and expand vocational education through:

 Separate funds for innovative programs, research, and curriculum 

development.

 Support for construction of regional or area vocational schools.

 Support for adult training and retraining (postsecondary vocational 

education).

 Encouragement to states to promote vocational education equity, better 

service to special populations.

1968–90 Improve vocational education and facilitate access through:

 Periodic encouragement to states to distribute some funds by community’s 

economic need and levels of student disadvantage.

 Establishment and expansion of set-aside funds to serve special 

population groups.

 Prohibiting the use of most federal funds for maintenance of programs.

 Continuation of set-aside funds for program improvement.

1990–98 Expand equal access and emphasize academic quality through:

 Introducing intrastate and intradistrict funding formulas: distribution to 

agencies and schools weighted by special populations.

 Promoting integration of academic and vocational education and “all 

aspects of the industry.”

 Set-aside funds for new program linking secondary and postsecondary 

vocational education: Tech Prep.

 Requirement that states develop performance standards.

1998–Present Improve academic and technical quality in CTE programs through:

 Introducing programs of study, a sequence of high school and college 

course work that combines academic and career-related courses that lead 

to a credential.

 Requirement that states and local subgrantees develop performance 

standards around core academic, technical, and graduation/placement 

indicators.

 Elimination of most set-asides but greater share of funds and flexibility to 

local subgrantees in exchange for an accountability system that would be 

used to improve student performance and document gaps in performance 

by student subgroups.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education.

SOURCE: Millsap and Muraskin (1992); Boesel et al. (1994).
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 3

Perkins IV employs three major avenues for improving the academic and technical quality of 

CTE services:

• Programs of study (POS), defining the expectations of a comprehensive sequence of CTE 

instruction;

• Accountability provisions, holding state agencies and local subgrantees responsible for 

their performance; and

• Spending directives, detailing the purposes and required uses of federal funds.

These three thematic areas provide a range of policy levers for influencing the delivery of CTE 

services across secondary and postsecondary levels.

First, the requirement that all local subgrantees offer at least one POS is perhaps the most 

ambitious change in Perkins IV. Perkins IV describes POS as (1) incorporating secondary 

education and postsecondary education elements; (2) including coherent and rigorous content 

aligned with challenging academic standards and relevant CTE content in a coordinated, 

nonduplicative progression of courses that align secondary education with postsecondary 

education; (3) possibly including an opportunity for secondary students to participate in dual or 

concurrent enrollment programs or other ways to acquire postsecondary credits;9and (4) leading 

to an industry-recognized credential or certificate at the postsecondary level, or to an associate or 

baccalaureate degree. This direction aligns well with recent initiatives for better integrating 

secondary and postsecondary education. For example, some states have linked K–12 and 

postsecondary data systems.

Second, accountability is strengthened in Perkins IV in several ways. Notably, accountability for 

performance is extended from the state agency to local subgrantees, giving states more leverage 

in holding their subgrantees, which generally are secondary local education agencies (LEAs) and 

community colleges, responsible for improving the outcomes associated with their CTE 

programs. Local subgrantees (which are referred to as “eligible recipients” in Perkins IV and are 

generally LEAs at the secondary level and community colleges at the postsecondary level) have 

the option to negotiate with their state agency their level of performance or targets. Those falling 

short of their performance levels are required to develop a program improvement plan.

Continued failure to achieve negotiated targets could lead to the loss of some or all of their 

Perkins IV funding.

Congress also has required that states use the measures of academic achievement (in 

mathematics and reading or language arts) and of high school graduation required in the 

Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 as amended (ESEA), for assessing the 

 

9 Dual or concurrent enrollment allows secondary students to earn college credits while also meeting requirements 

for high school graduation. This terminology is not consistent across jurisdictions, and such programs are 

implemented in various ways.
4 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

academic performance of secondary CTE students.10 States must report disaggregated 

performance data, and identify any gaps in performance compared to all CTE students, for 

certain categories (subgroups) of students specified in ESEA as well as for the so-called special 

populations defined in Perkins IV. Congress further introduced the accountability requirement 

that states report separately on programmatic outcomes for students participating in Tech Prep 

programs funded under Title II of Perkins IV, although no level of performance must be 

stipulated for these measures.11

Third, although Perkins IV allows some flexibility in how states and local entities spend their 

funds, the purposes of the law provide specific spending directives for funding uses. A new 

spending directive is on preparing students for “high-skill, high-wage, or high-demand 

occupations in current or emerging professions.” This purpose reflects congressional awareness 

that technological changes along with shifts in global markets are driving occupational changes 

in the American workforce. Another is on providing technical assistance for improving 

leadership and the quality of CTE personnel at all levels (teachers, faculty, administrators, and 

counselors). Leadership is a key responsibility in a time of change, and the quality of CTE staff 

is critical for preparing qualified students. States are also given the flexibility to consolidate their 

Title II Tech Prep funds with their Title I Basic State Grants funds, which is important because it 

could allow states to tailor their CTE programs to their unique circumstances. Finally, another

spending focus in Perkins IV calls for—

Providing individuals with opportunities throughout their lifetimes to develop, in 

conjunction with other education and training programs, the knowledge and skills 

needed to keep the United States competitive [italics added].

This focus recognizes the challenges the United States faces in remaining competitive in a global 

economy, and that individuals may need to continue their education and training throughout their 

lifetimes to remain active members of the workforce.

1.2 National Assessment of CTE

Perkins IV directs the secretary of ducation to conduct “an independent evaluation and 

assessment of career and technical education programs under the Act, including the 

implementation of the [Act].” Following the enactment of the new law, the secretary of 

education directed the Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development (OPEPD) to 

conduct the NACTE.

 

10 Perkins IV does not define a CTE student. However, the states have adopted Perkins IV performance measures 

that cover students concentrating in CTE. Although the definition of CTE concentrator varies across states, at the 

secondary level it generally includes students who take at least three occupational courses in one occupational area, 

unless only two courses are offered in an area, and at the postsecondary level it includes students who complete at 

least 12 academic or CTE credits in a program that consists of 12 or more credits, or completes a shorter CTE 

program, that terminates in an industry-recognized credential, certificate, or degree.

11 See next paragraph: Perkins IV also allows funds for Tech Prep programs under Title II to be consolidated with 

funds for programs under Title I, eliminating separate reporting requirements, and about half the states have done so.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 5

Congressional Mandate

In its mandate (see Appendix A), Congress specified that NACTE should address issues that 

include the following:

• participation of students in CTE programs;

• academic and CTE achievement and employment outcomes of CTE;

• funding distribution and uses;

• effect of accountability provisions on the delivery of CTE services; and

• extent to which state and local entities have developed, implemented, or improved state 

and local CTE programs assisted under the Perkins Act.

The research NACTE conducts is to be reported in interim and final reports. This interim report 

will address parts of the first and second issues above: the participation of students in secondary 

CTE programs and a first look at the academic outcomes of CTE from two of NACTE’s 

quantitative studies. The final report will address the other topics as well as those listed in 

Appendix A.

Evaluation Issues and Strategies

The primary policy question is whether at both secondary and postsecondary levels CTE is 

effective in helping students attain the academic and technical skills required for securing high 

skill, high wage, and high demand jobs, or put more broadly, in preparing students for college 

and careers. Perkins IV attempts to strengthen CTE and improve its quality by increasing the 

emphasis on accountability and introducing POS that integrate and align, within and across 

secondary and postsecondary levels, challenging and rigorous academic and technical content as 

conditions for federal funding.

NACTE’s evaluation agenda examines the implementation of provisions in Perkins IV to 

strengthen CTE and the outcomes of CTE through a set of studies addressing the congressionally

mandated issues identified above, as follows—

1. How have secondary and postsecondary student enrollments in CTE programs 

changed? Examples of studies providing data for the NACTE include secondary data 

analysis of the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) longitudinal data from 

the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), the National Education 

Longitudinal Study (NELS:88), the High School and Beyond (HS&B) study, the National 

Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) High School Transcript Studies, and the 

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS).

2. Do students who participate in CTE realize any educational or workforce benefits? 

NACTE studies include secondary data analysis of ELS:2002 and secondary data 

analysis of natural experiments and quasi-experiments using local administrative data in 

Philadelphia and San Diego and state administrative data from Florida.
6 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

3. How are Perkins IV funds distributed and used? NACTE studies include analysis of 

subgrantee fiscal data; state, district, and postsecondary institution surveys; and case 

studies of selected states, districts, schools, and postsecondary institutions.

4. To what extent are Perkins IV accountability data valid, reliable, and comparable, 

and to what extent are decision-makers using these data? NACTE studies include 

state, district, and postsecondary institution surveys; case studies of selected states, 

districts, schools, and postsecondary institutions; and analysis of Perkins IV performance 

data systems.

5. Are grantees meeting the requirement to develop and implement programs of study

(POS) that integrate academic and technical content? NACTE studies include state, 

district, and postsecondary institution surveys; expert panel review of state POS; and case 

studies of selected states, districts, schools, and postsecondary institutions.

Thus, NACTE is sponsoring a set of interrelated but distinct studies to address the congressional 

requirements and associated research questions. The overall agenda calls for diverse data 

collection and analytic methods: qualitative case studies, national surveys of states and local 

entities, use of national longitudinal and cross-sectional databases, use of state and local 

administrative databases, an expert panel, and both a natural experiment in choice of CTE 

schools and econometric estimation of national and local program effects.

The short time period available to NACTE for conducting its research and reporting findings 

affects the ways evaluation studies can be carried out and how the data they produce may be 

used. Although NACTE is collecting new data focused on the state and local implementation of 

Perkins IV, available data largely capture outcomes associated with the periods in which 

Perkins II—the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act of 1990—

and Perkins III—the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act of 1998—were in 

effect. The interim report is relying on available data which do not reflect Perkins IV; however, 

the final report will include findings from new data collections under Perkins IV.

NACTE’s surveys of state and local entities for the final report will assess Perkins IV

implementation for program year 2008–09. The data collected will capture the early 

implementation of Perkins IV at the state and local levels but may not reflect the longer term 

effects of Perkins IV.

Independent Advisory Panel

Congress further mandated that an Independent Advisory Panel (IAP) be formed for NACTE. 

The purposes of the IAP are to—

• Provide guidance to the secretary of education on the implementation of the NACTE, 

including the issues to be addressed and the methodology of its research studies to ensure 

that they meet the highest standards of quality.

• Prepare an independent analysis of the findings and recommendations resulting from the 

assessment.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 7

The U.S. Department of Education has assembled an IAP whose members have a wide range of 

expertise (see p. ix for a list of the members).

Interim Report: A Special Focus on Secondary CTE

The findings in this interim report focus primarily on the role of secondary CTE in the 

preparation and transition of youths for college and careers. While postsecondary CTE plays a 

critical role in workforce development and specialized skills training, the final report will 

examine this area more fully when the NACTE studies on postsecondary education have been 

completed.

For a large part of the 20th century, CTE (formerly vocational education) was a mainstay in the 

career readiness preparation of the majority of secondary students who entered the labor force 

directly from high school. Those going on to college were schooled in the academic track and 

exposed to a more rigorous set of college preparation courses. Vocational majors in secondary 

school were placed on a track that was more occupationally focused. As greater percentages of 

high school graduates enrolled in college directly from high school, this dual track system 

resulted in increasingly negative perceptions of vocational education as programs in which

students were not adequately prepared for further education at the postsecondary level. 

Moreover, employers raised their expectations that new job entrants would bring strong basic 

academic skills, including high school graduates who were firmly grounded in reading, writing 

and mathematics skills (Levy and Murnane, 2004).

Congress responded over the years by moving to modernize the federal vocational education law 

to meet the newer and more rigorous education and workplace requirements and eliminate the 

sharp separation between the academic and CTE course work under the dual track approach. The 

strengthening of the integration of academic and technical tracks continued in Perkins IV. One 

key feature is the introduction of POS, which as noted, establish in different occupational areas 

formal course sequences connecting high school and college work. POS combine academic and 

career-related courses and lead to credentials or certificates of attainment. Perkins IV also 

requires states and subgrantees to report on performance standards around core academic, 

technical, and graduation and placement indicators.

The strategy of integration between academic and technical content also seeks to prepare 

secondary CTE students for postsecondary education and careers. The movement over the years 

has been to strengthen secondary CTE students’ access to a sound academic program while 

maintaining a strong technical program. This should permit students access without wasteful 

remediation at the postsecondary level but also in building a foundation toward “high-skill, highwage, or high-demand occupations in current or emerging professions.”

12

A special challenge facing CTE in meeting these twin goals of academic and career preparation 

is the role of CTE for the approximately half the students in each secondary class who do not 

directly enter college upon leaving high school. These include the approximately one-third of the 

 

12 Perkins IV, S 250-2.
8 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

high school graduating class who currently do not directly go on to postsecondary education as 

well as students who drop out of high school before graduation.

13

To gain a measure of the challenge in preparing students for the workforce, the employment of 

recent high school graduates and dropouts declined sharply between 2007 and 2011. Since the 

financial crisis, the labor force participation rate of high school graduates is down, the 

unemployment rate is up, and a majority of graduates not enrolled in college (54.3 percent) are 

jobless compared to 38.6 percent in 2007.14

The picture for high school dropouts is starker. Between 2007 and 2011, the unemployment rate 

for those looking for work has risen from 26.9 percent to 38.4 percent of high school dropouts. 

The jobless rate, which includes those who are not actively seeking work, went from 58.9 

percent in 2007 to 65.6 percent in 2011.

To better understand the potential role of secondary CTE, this interim report will present 

information on the participation of secondary students in CTE using a variety of participation 

measures and examine the coursetaking and academic outcomes of secondary CTE students. The 

interim report will also compare CTE preparation in the U.S. to other industrialized nations.

Organization of Interim Report

This interim report provides baseline information and lays the groundwork for a comprehensive 

final report. It consists of six chapters:

• Chapter 1 provides an overview of the NACTE research agenda.

• Chapter 2 provides an introduction to the legislative provisions of Perkins IV and issues 

they raise for NACTE’s evaluation of the implementation and outcomes of the law.

• Chapter 3 examines trends in student participation in CTE before Perkins IV was enacted 

using data from longitudinal studies of high school graduates conducted by the U.S. 

Department of Education’s NCES.

• Chapter 4 summarizes prior studies of CTE outcomes and presents preliminary findings 

from two NACTE studies (a national study and a large city study) of secondary CTE 

outcomes associated with earlier versions of the Perkins Act.

• Chapter 5 presents international benchmark data on pre–Perkins IV CTE participation 

and experiences comparing U.S. secondary students with their peers in other developed 

countries and drawing upon a report from the Organization for Economic Co-operation 

and Development (OECD, 2008).

• Chapter 6 draws implications for the final report.

 

13 Of the 3.1 million youths age 16 to 24 who graduated from high school in January through October 2011, 

2.1 million went directly on to college and one million (31.8 percent) were not enrolled in college in October 2011.

14 Bureau of Labor Statistics. College enrollment and work activity of high school graduates news releases. Analysis 

of Current Population Survey data, 2007 and 2011. http://www.bls.gov/schedule/archives/all_nr.htm#HSGEC.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 9

Chapter 2.

Framework for Evaluating the Implementation of Perkins IV

Provisions on Accountability and Programs of Study

This chapter15 provides an introduction to the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education 

Act of 2006 (Perkins IV) in the form of a logic model. Logic models are systematic and visual 

ways to depict how the elements of a program are supposed to work to bring about desired 

outcomes.

The purpose of developing a logic model for Perkins IV is to guide the conduct of the 

independent evaluation and assessment of career and technical education (CTE) programs 

mandated by Congress in Perkins IV (see Section 114(d)(2) in Appendix A). The National 

Assessment of Career and Technical Education (NACTE) will provide information on the Act’s 

implementation in and influence on state and local programs. By identifying the key elements in 

the law, the sequences and causal assumptions about the way they operate and interact, and the 

incentives and requirements for required actions, the logic model provides direction for what 

NACTE should be examining in assessing whether Perkins IV is achieving its intended effects.

2.1 Logic Model

The underlying logic model presented in this chapter is premised on the interaction of two key 

legislative provisions contained in Perkins IV. First, it is postulated that programs of study (POS)

demonstrating challenging academic standards and technical content, aligned across secondary 

and postsecondary levels, and offered in an articulated, nonduplicative sequence of courses, that

lead to an industry-recognized credential or certificate, or a degree, will improve educational and 

career outcomes. Second, a valid and reliable system of accountability measures should provide 

overall information of CTE effectiveness and provide a basis for feedback and continuous 

improvement. The logic model (Exhibit 2) is organized in terms of critical inputs and activities 

as well as the student outcomes they are expected to yield.

• System inputs, which include federal legislation and funding, supplemented by federal 

guidance and technical assistance and state and local policies, form the foundation upon 

which state and local program design and operation occur.

• New activities in Perkins IV reflect congressional priorities in framing legislation that 

would more fully develop the academic knowledge and technical skills of secondary and 

postsecondary education of CTE students through the use of POS while holding systems 

accountable for both academic and technical preparation of CTE students.

• Outcomes in Perkins IV are separated into school and workplace domains. School 

outcomes at the secondary level include academic outcomes that align with ESEA 

requirements, postsecondary placement rates and technical skills attainment. 

Postsecondary outcomes include retention rates and technical degrees or certificates.

Workplace outcomes are employment and earnings.

 

15 This chapter was prepared by Steven Klein, MPR Associates.
10 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

Exhibit 2. Logic model of Perkins IV key reforms

I. Inputs II. Activities III. Outcomes 

State 

legislation, 

funding, 

policies, 

guidance, and 

technical 

assistance

Accountability Measures 

and Targets

 State and/or local 

benchmarks and targets

 Performance assessment 

systems

POS: College and Career 

Pathways

 Secondary and postsecondary 

elements

 Coherent and rigorous content 

aligned with challenging 

academic standards and 

relevant technical content

 Dual or concurrent enrollment

 Lead to industry-recognized 

credential or certificate at the 

postsecondary level, or to a 

degree

Federal 

legislation, 

funding, 

nonregulatory 

guidance, and 

technical 

assistance

Local policy 

guidance, 

knowledge, 

technical 

assistance,

and 

relationships

FEEDBACK

School 

Outcomes

Secondary

 Student 

academics 

aligned with 

ESEA

 Technical skill 

attainment

 Graduation 

rates

 Postsecondary 

placement

Postsecondary

 Postsecondary 

retention 

 Technical skill 

attainment

 Rates of

credential, 

certificate, and 

degree 

attainment

Workplace 

Outcomes 

 Employability 

 Earnings

NOTE: ESEA = Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 as amended; POS = programs of study.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 11

The remainder of this discussion takes a closer look at the Perkins IV logic model with respect to 

the intended operation of four key elements: (1) policy guidance, (2) funding, (3) POS, and

(4) accountability.

Policy Guidance

The U.S. Department of Education is responsible for assisting states in implementing the 

Perkins IV legislation. In keeping with past practice and with the limitation on federal 

regulations described in Sec. 318 of Perkins IV, the Department chose to issue nonregulatory 

guidance, rather than issue regulations for implementing the Act’s key provisions. For example, 

this nonregulatory guidance provides states with suggested approaches for defining CTE student 

populations and constructing performance measures. States have used this guidance in 

consultation with U.S. Department of Education staff to develop their own policy guidelines to 

support local programs in implementing the Act’s provisions.

Little is known about state strategies and local choices in implementing Perkins IV or how, and 

to what extent, federal nonregulatory guidance is filtered down to the local level. NACTE’s final 

report will examine this translation from statutory language to federal guidance to state policy to 

local implementation to understand how it influences the implementation of Perkins IV.

Funding

As in previous legislation, states have discretion in how federal funds are distributed between the 

secondary and postsecondary sectors, how reserve funds may be used to target resources for 

specified uses, and how the set-aside amounts are used to support nontraditional programming 

and to serve individuals in State institutions.

One new provision in the Act is the option for states to consolidate their Title II (Tech Prep) 

funding with their Title I (Basic Grant) resources. States that choose to maintain Tech Prep as a 

separate funding stream continue to have flexibility in how funds are allocated and distributed to 

local consortia, because there is no statutory Tech Prep formula for making subgrants stipulated 

in the Act. Perkins IV also introduces requirements that could affect state and local uses of funds, 

in particular for POS design and developing accountability systems.

Programs of Study (POS): College and Career Pathways

Through the requirement that all local recipients of Perkins funds must offer at least one POS, 

Perkins IV provides a new programmatic strategy shifting away from isolated stand-alone CTE 

classes to requiring a coherent program. POS should be viewed as embodying challenging 

academic content and technical content conveyed in a progressive sequence of course work 

incorporating secondary and postsecondary education elements. Its adoption implies that 

adequate career preparation requires readiness for advanced learning beyond high school, and 

that CTE course work should culminate in the award of an industry-recognized credential or 

certificate at the postsecondary level, or to a degree.
12 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

The federal legislation details four core elements that are essential to a POS:

• incorporate secondary education and postsecondary education elements;

• include coherent and rigorous content aligned with challenging academic standards and 

relevant CTE content in a coordinated, nonduplicative progression of courses that align 

secondary education with postsecondary education to adequately prepare students to 

succeed in postsecondary education;

• may include the opportunity for secondary students to participate in dual or concurrent 

enrollment programs or other ways to acquire postsecondary education credits; and

• lead to an industry-recognized credential or certificate at the postsecondary level, or an 

associate or baccalaureate degree.

There are, however, a number of components within a Perkins-defined POS that may require 

additional attention.16 Though these components currently exist in many, if not most, CTE 

programs, state agency and local subgrantee staff have not consistently sought to integrate these 

parts into a unified instructional strategy. Components that are critical to the success of POS 

include the following:

1. Secondary and Postsecondary Education Articulation

• Agreement between the participating secondary and postsecondary Perkins subgrantees

educators is reached that outlines the scope and sequence of content within the POS.

• Joint adoption by the secondary and postsecondary subgrantees of rigorous technical 

content and the alignment of the delivery of content between the two educational sectors 

in a way that establishes a nonduplicative sequence of courses.

• Identification by secondary and postsecondary subgrantees of relevant academic 

standards that support the desired outcomes for the POS.

• Conscious attention by secondary and postsecondary subgrantees to constructing the 

secondary POS component to assure student attainment of sufficient knowledge and 

skills to avoid postsecondary remediation.

2. Academic and Technical Content Alignment

• Selection of relevant academic standards that align with secondary ESEA content 

standards and postsecondary certificate or degree general education requirements.

• Selection of industry-based technical content for the POS area.

• Selection or development of valid and reliable assessments of technical skill attainment.

 

16 The federal legislation does not detail how the four core elements of POS should be operationalized in the field. 

Based on knowledge of state procedures, we examine each of the core elements to identify additional components 

that may need to be addressed in practice. It is important to emphasize that these are not mandated in the Perkins IV

legislation.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 13

• Curriculum, instruction, and assessments aligned with challenging academic and 

technical content.

• Professional development for secondary and postsecondary instructors on offering and 

teaching courses in the POS.

3. Dual or Concurrent Enrollment Accessibility

• Implement dual or concurrent enrollment agreements that award high school students 

with required credits for a postsecondary certificate or degree.

• Provide for integrating existing Tech Prep program components into POS.

• Where feasible, co-locate joint secondary-postsecondary CTE instructional facilities or 

provide secondary student access to postsecondary CTE facilities when the student is 

ready for advanced postsecondary education within his or her POS.

4. Credential, Certificate, or Degree Attainment

• POS are designed with the intended outcome of an industry-recognized credential or 

certificate at the postsecondary level, or a degree that is recognized and valued by 

employers.

• POS are constructed to promote preparation for career areas that are considered high 

skill, high wage, and high demand as defined by economic and workforce development 

needs and labor market information.

The NACTE final report will explore in considerable detail these critical success factors in terms 

of how states and districts are implementing POS. It will explore the likelihood that state 

agencies and local subgrantees will adopt differing approaches to implementing the POS model. 

In some settings, many of the core elements and components of a POS may already exist in Tech 

Prep programs, and need only be integrated into the POS framework. Other agencies or 

subgrantees may need to create new strategies for administering and delivering program services, 

may discover additional components integral to POS support, or may find ways of merging 

elements to accomplish the indicated goal. In addition, the final report will examine the extent to 

which POS are available. Currently, each local CTE recipient is only required to implement one 

POS.

Accountability Measures and Targets

Congress used its 2006 Perkins reauthorization to clearly spell out a set of CTE performance 

indicators within educational levels. In a break from earlier legislation, policymakers crafted a 

separate set of performance measures for secondary and postsecondary education (Exhibit 3).

They also introduced a new set of measures for Tech Prep programs, and extended accountability

requirements to the local level by requiring that all subrecipients of Perkins IV funds negotiate 

local performance levels with their state CTE agency or accept their state’s statewide 

performance levels.
14 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

Exhibit 3. Performance indicators required by Perkins IV and ESEA at the secondary and 

postsecondary levels 

Performance 

indicator, by level

Perkins 

IV ESEA Performance indicator requirement

Secondary

1. Academic 

attainment in 

mathematics

Same as 

ESEA

Yes Student attainment of challenging academic content standards 

and student achievement standards, as adopted by a state 

in accordance with section 111(b)(1) of the ESEA and 

measured by state-determined proficient levels on academic 

assessments described in section 1111(b)(3) of the ESEA

2. Academic 

attainment in 

reading or 

language arts

Same as 

ESEA

Yes Student attainment of challenging academic content standards 

and student achievement standards, as adopted by a state 

in accordance with section 111(b)(1) of the ESEA and 

measured by state-determined proficient levels on academic 

assessments described in section 1111(b)(3) of the ESEA

3. Technical skill 

attainment

Yes No Student attainment of career and technical education (CTE) skill 

proficiencies, including student achievement on technical 

assessments, that are aligned with industry-recognized 

standards, if available and appropriate

4. Graduation rate Same as 

ESEA

Yes Student graduation rates (as described in section 1111(b)(2)(C) 

of the ESEA) 

5. Completion rate Yes No Rates of attainment of a secondary school diploma, a GED 

credential or other state-recognized equivalent, and a 

proficiency credential in conjunction with secondary diploma, 

if offered in state

6. Placement rate Yes No Placement in postsecondary education or advanced training, 

military service or employment

7. Nontraditional 

participation and 

completion

Yes No Student participation in and completion of CTE programs that 

lead to employment in nontraditional fields (defined as those 

for which one gender comprise less than 25 percent of the 

individuals employed in each such occupation or field of 

work)

Postsecondary

1. Technical skill 

attainment

Yes — Student attainment of challenging career and technical skill 

proficiencies, including student achievement on technical 

assessments, that are aligned with industry-recognized 

standards, if available and appropriate

2. Credential, 

certificate, or 

degree attainment

Yes — Student attainment of an industry-recognized credential, a 

certificate, or a degree

3. Retention or 

transfer

Yes — Student retention in postsecondary education or transfer to 

baccalaureate degree program

4. Placement Yes — Student placement in military service or apprenticeship program 

or placement or retention in employment

5. Nontraditional 

participation and 

completion

Yes — Student participation in and completion of CTE programs that 

lead to employment in nontraditional fields (defined as those 

for which one gender comprise less than 25 percent of the 

individuals employed in each such occupation or field of 

work)

— Not applicable. ESEA is not applicable to the postsecondary level.

NOTE: ESEA = Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 as amended; Perkins IV = Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical 

Education Act of 2006 (20 U.S.C. 2301 et seq. as amended by P.L. 109-270).
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 15

To support states in refining their accountability systems under Perkins IV, the U.S. Department 

of Education issued nonregulatory guidance detailing preferred approaches for defining 

measurement populations and constructing performance measures. These guidelines included a 

description of the intent of each measure, a suggested approach for assessing student 

performance, and examples of numerator and denominator constructions. Implementing these 

accountability measures and guidelines raises a number of issues that NACTE will study 

including:

Which CTE students are covered? Under federal guidelines states report the performance only 

of CTE concentrators. The nonbinding guidance encourages states to adopt the following 

definitions to identify students concentrating in CTE programs:

Secondary CTE Concentrator. A student who has earned three or more credits in one 

CTE program area, or two credits in one CTE program area, but only in those program 

areas where two credit sequences are recognized by the state and/or its local eligible 

subrecipients.

Postsecondary CTE Concentrator. A postsecondary/adult student who completes at least 

12 academic or CTE credits within a single program area sequence comprised of 12 or 

more academic and technical credits that terminates in the award of an industryrecognized credential, a certificate, or a degree, or completes a short-term program 

sequence of less than 12 credit units that terminates in an industry-recognized credential, 

certificate, or degree.17

Because states have flexibility in adopting their definition of a CTE concentrator, Chapter 3 

examines the effect of reporting program performance using a variety of CTE participation 

measures.

How accurate are performance indicators reported? Legislative requirements and U.S. 

Department of Education policy guidance appear to have focused state reporting around a 

common set of performance measures although a number of issues merit further study by the 

NACTE. One is that the Perkins IV does not adequately address the contribution that CTE can 

make to academic performance of high school graduates. Although states are now required to use 

their ESEA measure to assess the academic attainment of CTE concentrators, many states assess 

students in the spring of their 10th-grade or fall of their 11th-grade year, prior to when students 

complete their CTE concentration. Thus, the measure is more likely to reflect the attainment of 

those who enter CTE than the effects of participation in CTE.

Perkins IV also does not allow for trade-offs among the performance indicators—all are assumed 

to be equally important and attainable. Measures are seen as independent of one another; that is, 

a state or local program that underperforms on one measure may not offset its shortfall with 

superior performance on another. Possible trade-offs in performance across indicators are also 

 

17 Definitions cited are referenced in the U.S. Department of Education’s March 13, 2007, program memorandum, 

entitled Student Definitions and Measurement Approaches for the Core Indicators of Performance Under the Carl 

D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 (Perkins IV). A copy of the document may be accessed at 

http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ovae/pi/memoperkinsiv.html.
16 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

ignored, nor is any priority attached to individual measures. State and local agencies are expected 

to achieve their negotiated performance targets within a 90 percent threshold across all measures, 

with sanctions kicking in when any one falls below agreed-upon levels.18

Finally, questions remain about the accuracy of accountability data because states only report 

raw data on the number of concentrators included in the numerator and denominator of each 

measure. States are neither required to detail the methodology used to collect information nor the 

manner in which state or local administrative records were accessed to report outcomes. For this 

and other reasons, NACTE is examining how state measures are constructed and data are 

collected. Case study visits to states and local agencies are providing rich, in-depth information 

on these topics.

The organization of state data systems and state privacy laws also affects data quality and 

availability. Many states have been maintaining separate data systems for CTE concentrators 

that, in some cases, do not include individually identifiable data. When those data do exist, state 

CTE administrators in the past have had to conduct matches across one or more state databases, 

which can be challenging if a unique student identifier, such as a Social Security number, is not 

incorporated in the data file. The availability of funding from the American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act of 2009 for developing and expanding state student-level databases promises to 

address many of these concerns and CTE administrators need to fully participate in designing 

and upgrading those databases.

What are the additional accountability requirements if Tech Prep is continued? A state’s 

choice to continue separate funding for its Tech Prep program, rather than consolidating those 

funds into the basic grant program, requires additional accountability measures under Perkins IV. 

Specifically, states are required to maintain separate funding streams and to collect data on a set 

of nine Tech Prep performance indicators. These states also face the task of reporting on Tech 

Prep students who transition from the secondary to postsecondary levels, which has, in the past, 

proven to be a difficult undertaking. Because the U.S. Department of Education does not collect 

data on the measure used by each state as it is not required to negotiate performance levels for 

Tech Prep, the validity and reliability of Tech Prep data within and across states is as yet 

undetermined.19

How will performance negotiations affect accountability? Perkins IV extends the requirement 

that state agencies negotiate with the U.S. Department of Education a level of performance for 

each of the accountability measures contained within the legislation. In the case of the secondary 

 

18 Perkins IV puts forward a progressive set of sanctions that begin with a state agency or local provider being 

required to develop a program improvement plan to address areas in which performance data show a state or local 

entity has failed to meet at least 90 percent of an agreed-on performance level or target for any indicator. Monetary 

sanctions may be imposed if a state agency or local entity fails to implement an improvement plan, fails to make any 

improvement in meeting any of its levels of performance within the first program year of the implementation of its 

improvement plan, or fails to make improvement on its performance for the same core indicator for three 

consecutive years.

19 The National Association for Tech Prep Leadership has convened a working group to develop measurement 

definitions including preferred constructions for the numerators and denominators of the Tech Prep indicators. To 

date, all states are agreeing to use these constructions, which will help to ensure the validity, reliability, and 

consistency of Tech Prep data.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 17

measures, states have little latitude in the negotiation of some measures: states are expected to 

align their targets for their measures of secondary reading and mathematics skill attainment and 

secondary graduation rate with their state’s annual measurement objectives established through 

their ESEA negotiations.20 The negotiations for targets for all measures are on a two-year cycle.

One substantial innovation in Perkins IV is the requirement that states reach agreement with local 

subgrantees on performance levels for each performance measure. In some states, all local 

entities receiving Perkins IV funds have agreed to accept the performance level negotiated by the 

state with the U.S. Department of Education; in others, locals negotiate with the state to set their 

own individual performance levels. In either instance, states must ensure that agreed-upon local 

performance levels will require that local entities make continual progress toward improving the 

performance of CTE students.

Perkins IV further requires that, if a subgrantee does not meet at least 90 percent of its 

performance level on each core indicator every year, it must develop and implement an 

improvement plan to address its deficiencies. Gaining a clearer understanding of how the state 

and local negotiation process occurs, the outcomes of these discussions, and how local 

subgrantees are held accountable for their performance is a particular emphasis for the NACTE.

2.2 Conclusion

The NACTE studies are assessing state and local implementation of the Perkins IV legislation 

along with outcomes of CTE realized under earlier versions of the Perkins legislation. The final 

report will present these results. Study findings should provide useful information in assessing 

the effects of statutory changes introduced in Perkins IV, which include updated accountability 

indicators, the extension of performance accountability to the local subgrantee level, the 

introduction of CTE POS, and increased state flexibility in allocating Tech Prep funds.

The remaining sections of the interim report will present initial findings with respect to 

secondary CTE including participation trends in CTE programs, student outcomes, and 

international benchmarking.

 

20 States generally use their statewide ESEA Annual Measurement Objective (AMO) to establish their performance 

levels for the secondary academic attainment and their ESEA statewide targets for the high school graduation 

indicators although some have negotiated with the U.S. Department of Education to set different levels or targets

under Perkins IV. As of May 2009 (excluding the District of Columbia and the territories), 48 states were using their 

statewide AMOs for reading and 49 states for math. A total of 37 states used their ESEA targets for high school 

graduation.
18 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

This page intentionally left blank.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 19

Chapter 3.

Participation in Secondary Career and Technical Education from 

1982 to 2004

Participation in career and technical education (CTE) at the secondary education level has 

changed significantly over the last three decades. This chapter21 describes those changes based 

on national longitudinal studies of the educational experiences of the high school classes of 

1982, 1992, and 2004. These data provide a baseline against which to evaluate more recent 

student participation data that will be included in the final National Assessment of Career and 

Technical Education (NACTE) report.

The background for the changes in CTE participation is the shift in which a majority of 

secondary graduates complete the academic curricular foundation defined by the new basics

courses recommended in the 1983 report, A Nation at Risk (National Commission on Excellence 

in Education, 1983). These new basics are also touted more recently by ACT (2008b) as the 

foundation for a student being college and career ready.22 The proportion of high school 

graduates choosing the academic foundation consisting of the new basics rose from 14 percent in 

1982 to 60 percent in 2004 (Dalton et al., 2013).

A representative survey of employees covering white-collar, blue-collar, and service jobs 

indicate that employers need workers who have a foundation of both academic and technical 

skills but with differential skill levels required for different occupational categories (Exhibit 4).

Jobs in all areas typically are filled with workers who have a high school diploma or more. In 

order to obtain white-collar and upper-blue-collar jobs, workers on average need more than a 

high school diploma and especially strong reading and writing skills. With respect to technical 

skills, white-collar jobs on average stress greater computer skills, and blue-collar jobs stress 

greater mechanical skills. Only service jobs on average have neither higher levels of computer or 

mechanical skill requirements, although this average may mask requirements in specific service 

sectors.

The Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act of 1990 (Perkins II) 

supported students in CTE programs to take more rigorous academic courses along with 

technical courses. Succeeding Perkins legislation—including the Carl D. Perkins Career and 

Technical Education Act of 2006 (Perkins IV)—has also increasingly emphasized the importance 

of having students in CTE programs master rigorous academic and technical content.

 

21 This chapter is based on From Track to Field: Trends in Career and Technical Education Across 3 Decades, by 

Ben Dalton and Erich Lauff, RTI International, and Robin Henke, Martha Alt, and Xiaojie Li, MPR Associates 

(Dalton et al., 2013).

22 The core academic new basics consist of at least four Carnegie credits in English and three credits each in 

mathematics, science, and social studies. A Carnegie credit is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day 

for one full school year.
20 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

Exhibit 4. Percentage of U.S. workers ages 18–64 years old performing selected tasks on their 

job or requiring specified job skills or attributes, by occupational category: October 

2004–January 2006

Task performed on 

job or job skill 

needed (See 

footnotes for score 

codes)

All 

workers 

(average)

Upper white 

collar (e.g., 

management, 

professional, 

technical)

Lower white 

collar (e.g., 

clerical and 

sales)

Upper blue 

collar (e.g., 

craft repair, 

construction, 

mechanics)

Lower blue 

collar (e.g., 

factory work, 

truck 

driving)

Service 

workers 

(e.g., food, 

home health, 

child care, 

police)

Education required 

(3 = HS grad.; 

6 = BA)a

4.15 5.42 3.72 3.49 3.10 3.17

Complexity of 

computer skills 

usedb4.21 5.91 5.06 1.95 2.43 1.77

Math skills—% using 

any math 94 95 97 94 91 88

Algebra I (%) 19 30 8 36 16 4

Reading—any 

reading (%) 96 99 97 91 91 95

Documents 5 or more 

pages (%) 54 81 47 46 26 32

Writing—do writing 

(%) 91 99 93 83 80 83

Use forms (%) 67 78 77 61 46 46

Mechanical skill levelc2.50 1.73 1.38 5.97 4.55 2.12

Exhibit reads: The average education level required by all U.S. workers is 4.15 (above high school). The percentage 

of all U.S. workers using math in their jobs is 94.

a

1 = eighth grade or less; 2 = high school dropout; 3 = high school graduate; 4 = high school + vocational education; 5 = some 

college or two-year degree; 6 = bachelor’s degree; 7 = more than bachelor’s degree.

b Self-rated complexity of computer skills used on job (0 = no computer use, 1 = very basic, 10 = very complex).

c Self-rated complexity of mechanical skills used on job (0 = very basic, 10 = very complex).

NOTE: The Survey of Skills, Technology, and Management Practices (STAMP) is a random-digit-dial telephone survey of employed 

wage and salary workers in the United States at least 18 years of age conducted between October 2004 and January 2006 

(n = 2,304). Eligible individuals were selected randomly within households. All respondents were interviewed with respect to their

own jobs.

SOURCE: Michael J. Handel, A New Survey of Workplace Skills, Technology, and Management Practices (STAMP): Background 

and Descriptive Statistics, May 23, 2007; NAS presentation. 

http://www7.nationalacademies.org/cfe/Future_Skill_Demands_Michael_Handel_Paper.pdf.

In tracing the change in CTE participation between 1982 and 2004 as school systems strengthen 

enrollment in the new basics, this chapter follows the National Assessment of Vocational 

Education (NAVE; Silverberg et al., 2004) in focusing on CTE investors. CTE investors include 

two categories of students—

• CTE concentrators who earn three or more credits in one CTE occupational area, and

• CTE explorers who earn three or more credits in any CTE occupational areas.

This chapter starts by describing data sources for the analyses of CTE participation trends. It next 

examines trends in CTE investor participation within the context of overall trends in academic 
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 21

and enrichment coursetaking. It then compares CTE investors and non-investors with respect to 

academic and employment experiences including (1) coursetaking in math and science, 

(2) mathematics achievement, (3) postsecondary expectations and initial postsecondary 

enrollment, and (4) post–high school employment experiences within two years of graduation.

3.1 Data Sources for the Analyses

Data used in this chapter come from three national longitudinal studies tracking the secondary 

and postsecondary experiences of the high school graduating classes of 1982, 1992, and 2004.

The three studies are the High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study (HS&B) for the high 

school class of 1982; the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88) for the class 

of 1992; and the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002) for the class of 2004. While 

these data do not cover the period since Perkins IV was enacted, they are the most recent 

longitudinal data on high school cohorts from the National Center for Education Statistics 

(NCES) with the necessary follow-up period required for the analysis.

23

These three studies provide information on the depth and extent of CTE participation, 

independently and in relation to: academic and other subjects; the social and demographic 

characteristics of graduates; their high school experiences and achievement outcomes; and their 

initial postsecondary education and employment experiences. A particular advantage of the 

longitudinal studies is their collection of achievement outcomes and post–high school academic 

and employment experiences. All studies were conducted by NCES, which is part of the Institute 

of Education Sciences in the U.S. Department of Education.

All three studies share similar content and design enabling cross-study comparability over time.

All include a nationally representative sample of seniors. As part of the senior-year surveys, each 

study gathered and systematically coded high school transcripts. All comparisons between values 

discussed in this chapter’s text (changes over time, differences between groups, and differences 

between groups in changes over time) are statistically significant at p < .05, unless explicitly 

noted as nonsignificant. The tests for statistical significance are based on point estimates and 

standard errors that account for the complex nature of the studies’ samples. The samples used 

were restricted to public high school graduates who had a complete set of transcripts.

3.2 Measuring CTE Participation

This analysis focuses on student enrollment in CTE occupational courses offering specific labor 

market preparation. CTE courses in general fall into three groups:

• Family and consumer sciences education (FCSE)

• General labor market preparation (GLMP)

• Specific labor market preparation (SLMP) or occupational education

 

23 The final report of the NACTE will incorporate data from the 2009 High School Transcript Study of NCES that 

will have Perkins IV CTE participation data.
22 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

FCSE courses prepare students for family and consumer roles outside the paid labor market. 

GLMP courses teach general employment skills that are not specific to one occupational area, 

such as basic computer literacy, keyboarding or typing and general work experience courses. In 

contrast, occupational courses (SLMP education) are designed to prepare students for work in a 

specific occupational field or for related postsecondary education or training.

The CTE occupational courses being studied are divided into the following 11 mutually 

exclusive occupational areas (Bradby and Hudson, 2008; Hudson and Laird, 2009):

• Agriculture and Natural Resources;

• Architecture, Construction, and Science Technology;

• Business;

• Communications and Design;

• Computer and Information Science;

• Consumer and Culinary Services;

• Engineering Technologies;

• Health Sciences;

• Manufacturing, Repair, and Transportation;

• Marketing; and

• Public Services.

Measuring participation in CTE in terms of occupational coursetaking can be done in two ways: 

the number of CTE occupational credits earned or some threshold number of courses 

representing a significant investment in CTE (e.g., Hoachlander, Kaufman, and Levesque, 1992). 

Continuous measures of the number of credits may be less useful because their representation as 

numerical averages can mask substantial variation within the population and overstate the 

influence of particularly high or low values. In considering whether CTE has particular outcomes 

associated with it, some minimal level of exposure seems necessary. In particular, some level of 

concentration in CTE occupational courses may be particularly important for postsecondary 

work opportunities.

This descriptive report expresses a concentration level for CTE participation in terms of CTE 

investors (Silverberg et al., 2004). This category is defined on the basis of the number of 

occupational courses a student takes. Those taking three or more are classified as CTE investors, 

while those taking fewer than three are non-investors.

CTE investors are also divided into two groups of students (Silverberg et al., 2004). Those who 

earn their three or more occupational credits in one occupational area are CTE concentrators. In 

contrast, those who earn their three or more occupational credits in more than one area are called 

CTE explorers (see Exhibit 5).
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 23

Exhibit 5. Types of CTE investors

CTE investor: Earns three or more CTE occupational credits

CTE concentrator: Earns three or more occupational credits in one area (but may earn more credits in 

other occupational areas)

CTE explorer: Earns three or more occupational credits, but fewer than three credits in a single 

occupational area 

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education.

These categories build upon the work of a number of previous analyses (Arum and Shavit, 1995; 

Hudson and Laird, 2009; Levesque, 2003a, 2003b; Levesque et al., 1995, 2000, 2008; Silverberg 

et al., 2004). Their advantage is twofold. First, although the categories are discrete, they reflect 

the fact that participation in CTE occupational coursetaking is a matter of degree. Almost all 

students (96 percent) took at least one occupational course in 2004. But most states do not report

students in their Perkins IV secondary level performance data unless they are a CTE 

concentrator, which they define in terms of a threshold level of participation in occupational 

courses, usually three courses in one occupational area, but sometimes two when only two are 

offered in an area.

But as the data below show, students today are increasingly likely to take three or more CTE 

courses in more than one occupational area. The pattern of CTE coursetaking could reflect the 

common perception that most new entrants to the labor force should expect to change their 

careers several times over the course of their lives, and investing in CTE courses in high school 

is one way to become familiar with possibly appealing alternative careers. And that is the second 

advantage of this typology, namely, that it recognizes students take different pathways toward

investing in CTE, even if the credits are in more than one occupational area.

In measuring students’ participation in CTE occupational coursetaking, high school transcripts 

for each graduating class were the primary data source. Participation in specific CTE programs, 

enrollment in certain types of high schools, and coursetaking experiences could all be used, 

independently or jointly, to define CTE students. However, coursetaking data from transcripts 

provide the most precise information about student participation in CTE. The specific course 

credits found on transcripts enable the construction of the categories of CTE investment.24

 

24 In this report, the terms CTE investor, CTE concentrator, and CTE explorer all use the same definitions employed 

in the NAVE (Silverberg et al., 2004). However, the classification of occupational courses has changed since NAVE 

was issued so that the numbers reported here cannot be directly compared to that report. Since the NAVE was 

released, NCES revised the CTE portion of its Secondary Schools Taxonomy of courses used for transcript analyses 

and made two consequential changes. First, a total of 21 courses were moved from occupational areas into FCSE or 

GLMP categories. Most importantly, all home economics, introduction to computers, and keyboarding courses were 

removed from occupational area categories. Second, a large occupational area used in the NAVE report, trade and 

industry, was partitioned into separate occupational areas or combined with smaller existing occupational areas.

Both of these changes mean that smaller proportions of students are now identified as occupational concentrators

than in the NAVE. This report also follows the conventions of NCES in defining occupational courses.
24 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

3.3 Participation in CTE

Participation in career and technical education in high school occurs in the context of meeting 

curriculum requirements for high school graduation. Over the past quarter century or so, those 

requirements have increased, especially the academic credits needed to earn a diploma. Those 

increasing requirements are part of a longstanding high school reform movement going back at 

least to the early 1980s (e.g., National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983) that 

started because of concern about the level of academic achievement of high school graduates.

Graduates Earning an Increasing Number of Total Course Credits

One of the most striking findings regarding coursetaking patterns of high school graduates since 

1982 is the large increase in the number of credits (Carnegie units) earned (reminder: all changes 

or differences reported in the text are statistically significant unless otherwise noted). The total 

number of credits earned by high school graduates went from 21.7 credits in 1982 to 26.2 credits 

in 2004, an increase of over one-fifth (Exhibit 6 and Exhibit 7). The increasing credits earned 

were in academic and enrichment fields.25 Academic credits earned increased from 14.6 credits 

to 19.2 credits and enrichment credits from 2.6 credits to 3.2 credits between 1982 and 2004.

More recent graduates increased their academic coursetaking in every field between 1982 and 

2004 (Exhibit 7), with the largest increases in science (from 2.3 credits to 3.3 credits) and in nonEnglish language (from 1.0 credits to 2.0 credits). Over the same 1982–2004 period, CTE 

coursetaking diminished from 4.6 credits to 3.8 credits, with the decrease concentrated between 

1982 to 1992.

CTE Credits Are a Smaller Share

A major issue for many CTE educators has been that increasing academic course requirements 

could squeeze out participation in CTE courses, especially occupational courses. In looking at 

the period between 1982 and 2004, the share of CTE credits earned by high school graduates 

dropped from over a fifth of all credits in 1982 to about 14 percent in 2004 (Exhibit 8). Students 

continued, however, to take a significant number of CTE courses. While total CTE credits earned 

dropped between 1982 and 2004, in the last year students still earned, on average, 3.8 CTE 

credits.

 

25 Enrichment credits include courses in physical education, religion, and military education.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 25

Exhibit 6. Average number of secondary credits earned by public high school graduates, by 

type of course work: 1982, 1992, and 2004

4.6 3.9 3.8

2.6 2.7 3.2

14.6 17.4

19.2

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

1982 1992 2004

Credits

CTE Enrichment Academic

21.7

24.0

26.2

Exhibit reads: In 1982, the average number of academic credits earned by public high school graduates was 

14.6 credits.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education. See Exhibit 7 for details on data. Enrichment credits include courses such as physical 

education, religion, and military education. A credit (Carnegie unit) is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day for one 

full school year.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”
26 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

Exhibit 7. Average number of credits (Carnegie units) earned by public high school graduates, 

by subject area: 1982, 1992, and 2004

Total and subject area 1982 1992 2004

Total credits earned 21.7 24.0 26.2

Total career and technical education (CTE) credits earned 4.6 3.9 3.8

Family and consumer sciences education 0.5 0.4 0.3

General labor market preparation 1.0 1.0 0.9

Occupational area credits, total 3.0 2.4 2.6

Agriculture and natural resources 0.2 0.2 0.2

Architecture, construction, and science technology 0.1 0.1 0.1

Business 1.0 0.7 0.5

Communications and design 0.2 0.2 0.3

Computer and information science 0.1 0.2 0.4

Consumer and culinary services 0.2 0.2 0.2

Engineering technologies 0.2 0.2 0.2

Health sciences 0.1 0.1 0.1

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.7 0.4 0.3

Marketing 0.1 0.1 0.1

Public services 0.1 # 0.1

Total academic credits earned 14.6 17.4 19.2

English 4.0 4.2 4.3

Mathematics 2.7 3.3 3.6

Science 2.3 3.0 3.3

Social studies 3.2 3.5 3.9

Fine arts 1.5 1.7 2.1

Non-English language 1.0 1.8 2.0

Total enrichment credits earneda2.6 2.7 3.2

Exhibit reads: In 1982, the average total credits earned by public high school graduates was 21.7 credits.

# Rounds to zero.

a Enrichment credits include courses such as physical education, religion, and military education.

NOTE: A Carnegie unit (credit) is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day for one full school year.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 27

Exhibit 8. Percentage of total credits earned by public high school graduates, by type of 

course work: 1982, 1992, and 2004

21 16 14

12

11 12

67 73 73

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1982 1992 2004

Percent CTE Enrichment Academic

Exhibit reads: For public high school graduates, the percentage of total credits that were academic was 67 in 1982.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical occupation. Sums may not total to 100 percent because of rounding. Enrichment credits include 

courses such as physical education, religion, and military education. A credit (Carnegie unit) is equivalent to a course taken for one 

period each day for one full school year.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”

CTE Participation Patterns Are Also Changing

Patterns of CTE coursetaking also changed over this period as public high school graduation 

requirements rose (Exhibit 9). The share of graduates who are CTE investors—those who earn 

three or more occupational credits—declined from 46 percent in 1982 to 35 percent in 1992, but 

that share has since stabilized and increased between 1992 and 2004 from 35 percent to 

38 percent of high school graduates. The proportion of those earning three or more credits in one 

occupational area, the CTE concentrators, declined from 30 percent in 1982 to 17 percent in 

2004, but the share of CTE explorers who earned three or more CTE occupational credits in 

more than one occupational area increased from 16 percent in 1982 to 21 percent in 2004.
28 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

Exhibit 9. Percentage of high school graduates participating in CTE, by level of CTE 

occupational coursetaking: 1982, 1992, 2004

3 0

CTE Concentrators

1 6 CTE Explorers 1 7

2 1

4 6

CTE Investors 3 8

9 8 Any CTE credit

9 6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1982 1992 2004

Percent

Exhibit reads: The percentage of public high school graduates with any CTE credit was 98 percent in 1982.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education, CTE concentrators earned three or more credits in at least one occupational area. 

CTE investors consist of CTE concentrators plus CTE explorers who earn three or more total occupational credits but did not 

concentrate in an occupational area. A Carnegie unit is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day for one full school year.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”

This shift meant that investing in CTE went from being predominantly CTE concentrators to a 

majority of investors being CTE explorers (Exhibit 10). Almost two-thirds of students investing 

in CTE were CTE concentrators in 1982, but about 55 percent were CTE explorers by 2004. 

Note also that the share of graduates earning at least some CTE occupational credit declined only 

slightly over this period, from 98.0 percent in 1982 to 97.6 percent in 1992 to 95.6 percent in 

2004, and still included virtually all students.

This shift in the composition of investors away from concentrators to explorers has implications 

for CTE performance reporting at the secondary level. As noted in Chapter 2, federal guidance 

suggests that states report the performance only for secondary CTE concentrators, who currently 

account for less than half (45 percent) of all CTE students who take three or more CTE courses 

(investors). Hence, no state performance information is available on the majority (55 percent) of 

CTE investors who take more than three courses but in two or more occupational areas.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 29

Exhibit 10. Percentage of CTE investors, by level of CTE course concentration: 1982, 1992, and 

2004

65

56

45

35

44

55

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1982 1992 2004

Percent CTE Concentrators CTE Explorers

Exhibit reads: In 1982, the percentage of CTE explorers was 35 percent.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education. CTE concentrators earned three or more credits in at least one occupational area. 

CTE explorers earned three or more total occupational credits but did not concentrate in an occupational area. A credit (Carnegie 

unit) is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day for one full school year.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”

3.4 CTE Investors’ Characteristics

Concern about the student characteristics of those earning high school credits in CTE 

occupational courses goes back to when CTE was called vocational education and seen as an 

educational track for low-performing students. In some cases, students were counseled (or even 

directed) into occupational courses based on their personal characteristics, not their preferences, 

aspirations, and abilities. This section examines how patterns of participation by gender, race or 

ethnicity, and socioeconomic status have changed between 1982 and 2004 among CTE investors

(concentrators and explorers combined).

Gender

Between 1982 and 2004, patterns of participation in career and technical education by gender 

became less similar (Exhibit 11). In 1982, about 49 percent of males and 43 percent of females 

were CTE investors. In contrast, by 2004, about 45 percent of males were CTE investors, but 

only about 32 percent of females were CTE investors. Within the category of CTE investor, in 
30 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

1982 females and males were approximately equally likely to be CTE concentrators (Exhibit 24).

By 2004, males (21 percent) were more likely than females (14 percent) to be CTE 

concentrators.

Exhibit 11. Percentage of public high school graduates who are CTE investors, by gender: 1982, 

1992, and 2004

49

40 43 45

30 32

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1982 1992 2004

Male Female Percent

Exhibit reads: In 1982, the percentage of male public high school graduates who were CTE investors was 

49 percent.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education. CTE investors earned three or more total occupational credits (regardless of 

concentration in any occupational area). A credit (Carnegie unit) is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day for one full 

school year.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”

Race and Ethnicity

Between 1982 and 2004, patterns of participation in career and technical education by race or 

ethnicity became more similar (Exhibit 12 and Exhibit 24). The general pattern was for the 

proportions of CTE investors, particularly CTE concentrators, to decline among all racial and 

ethnic groups except Asian or Pacific Islanders over that period. Hispanics had a larger decrease 

than blacks or whites, with Hispanic investors declining by 20 percentage points, compared with 

9 and 4 percentage point declines for black and white investors, respectively. Within CTE 

investors, by 2004 blacks and whites were most likely to be CTE concentrators (about 18 percent

and 19 percent, respectively), followed by Hispanics (about 13 percent) and Asian or Pacific 

Islanders (about 10 percent).
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 31

Exhibit 12. Percentage of public high school graduates who are CTE investors, by selected race 

or ethnicity: 1982, 1992, and 2004

28 33 27

47

33 38

54

33 34

45

36 41

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1982 1992 2004

Percent Asian/Pacific Islander Black Hispanic White

Exhibit reads: In 1982, 28 percent of Asian or Pacific Islander public high school graduates were CTE investors.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education. CTE investors earned three or more total occupational credits (regardless of 

concentration in any occupational area). A credit (Carnegie unit) is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day for one full 

school year. The category Asian or Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiians. Hispanic may be of any race.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”

Socioeconomic Status

Patterns of participation in CTE also became more similar over time when graduates who are 

CTE investors are grouped by socioeconomic status (SES) quartiles. The major shift was the 

decline in the share of lower SES quartile graduates who were CTE investors from about 

58 percent to about 44 percent and of middle SES quartiles graduates from 48 percent to 

41 percent (Exhibit 13). The share of upper SES quartile graduates who were CTE investors was 

basically unchanged at about 29 percent between 1982 and 2004. Within the category of CTE 

investors, CTE concentrators declined from about 40 percent to about 21 percent among lower 

SES quartiles, while the share of upper SES quartile graduates who were CTE concentrators saw 

no decline (Exhibit 24).

Although graduates grouped by SES quartile converged in their patterns of CTE participation 

between 1982 and 2004, important differences among the groups remained. Among graduates in 

the lower SES quartile about 21 percent were CTE concentrators in 2004, while only about 

12 percent in the upper SES quartile were (Exhibit 24).
32 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

Exhibit 13. Percentage of public high school graduates who are CTE investors, by 

socioeconomic status quartile: 1982, 1992, and 2004

58 52

44 48

37 41

29

22 29

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1982 1992 2004

Lowest quartile Middle two quartiles Highest quartile

Percent

Exhibit reads: In 1982, 58 percent of the lowest socioeconomic status–quartile public high school graduates were 

CTE investors.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education. CTE investors earned three or more total occupational credits (regardless of 

concentration in any occupational area). A credit (Carnegie unit) is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day for one full 

school year. Socioeconomic status is based on parental income, education, and occupation.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”

3.5 CTE Investors’ Academic and CTE Occupational Coursetaking

After looking at new basics coursetaking by CTE investors and non-investors, this section 

examines how coursetaking in mathematics and science among investors and non-investors has 

changed between 1982 and 2004.

New Basics Coursetaking

The share of students completing the core academic new basics courses recommended in the A 

Nation at Risk report (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983) and by ACT 

(2008b) increased for both CTE investors and non-investors between 1982 and 2004. Among all 

graduates, the percent completing the new basics rose from 14 percent in 1982 to 47 percent in 

1992 and 60 percent in 2004. Among CTE investors, only about 6 percent completed the new 

basics in 1982, compared with about 22 percent of non-investors (Exhibit 14). By 2004, about 

58 percent of CTE investors had completed the new basics, compared with about 61 percent of 

other students, a gap that is not statistically significant. Hence, there is no longer a discernable 

gap between CTE investors and other students in completing the new basics as preparation for 

college and career. CTE investors have substantially closed the academic gap with non-investors 
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 33

due in part by increasing academic course requirements as a condition for graduation in most 

states. Additionally, a small set of new courses that generally enrolled higher achieving students 

(e.g, in computer science and education) became classified as CTE.

Exhibit 14. Percentage of CTE investors and non-investors taking the new basics courses: 1982, 

1992, 2004

6

33

58

22

54 61

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1982 1992 2004

Percent CTE Investors Non-investors

Exhibit reads: In 1982, 6 percent of CTE investors completed the new basics courses.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education. CTE investors earned three or more total occupational credits (regardless of 

concentration in any occupational area). Non-investors earned zero to less than three total occupational credits (Carnegie units). A 

credit (Carnegie unit) is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day for one full school year. The new basics courses 

include four credits of English, three credits of math, and two credits each of science and social studies.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”

Highest Mathematics and Science Courses Taken

The percentages of CTE investors and other high school graduates taking various levels of math 

and science courses are shown in Exhibit 15 and Exhibit 16 (see also Exhibit 25 and Exhibit 26).

For mathematics, courses were divided into five levels: level 1 = no math credits or lowacademic math only; level 2 = algebra I or plane geometry; level 3 = algebra II; level 4 = algebra 

III, trigonometry, or analytic geometry; and level 5 = precalculus or calculus (Burkam and Lee,

2003). If a high school graduate earned at least one credit at one of the five levels, in any grade, 

he or she was counted in that level. For science, courses were divided into four levels: level 

1 = no science credits or low-level science only; level 2 = secondary physical science (e.g., earth 

science) or basic biology; level 3 = general biology; or level 4 = advanced biology, chemistry, or 

physics. Again, if a graduate earned at least one credit at a given level, in any grade, he or she 

was counted in that level. Note that the composition of the CTE investor and non-investor group 

changed between 1982 and 2004 as the percentage of investor students in the lowest 

socioeconomic group declined.
34 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

Exhibit 15. Percentage of public high school graduates who were CTE investors and noninvestors taking advanced mathematics (above geometry and algebra II): 1982, 1992, 

and 2004

12

24

36 39 44

54

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1982 1992 2004

Percent CTE Investors Non-Investors

Exhibit reads: In 1982, 12 percent of CTE investors took advanced mathematics.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education. CTE investors earned three or more total occupational credits (regardless of 

concentration in any occupational area). Non-investors earned zero to less than three total occupational credits (Carnegie units). A 

credit (Carnegie unit) is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day for one full school year. Advanced math includes at 

least one course in algebra III, trigonometry, analytic geometry, precalculus, calculus, and any Advanced Placement or international 

baccalaureate course.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 35

Exhibit 16. Percentage of public high school graduates who were CTE investors and noninvestors taking advanced science courses (advanced biology, chemistry, or 

physics): 1982, 1992, and 2004

20

39

60

48

63

72

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1982 1992 2004

Percent CTE Investors Non-investors

Exhibit reads: In 1982, 20 percent of CTE investors took advanced science courses.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education. CTE investors earned three or more total occupational credits (regardless of 

concentration in any occupational area). Non-investors earned zero to less than three total occupational credits (Carnegie units). A 

credit (Carnegie unit) is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day for one full school year. Advanced science includes at 

least one course in chemistry II, physics II, or an advanced biology course such as anatomy, cell biology, or genetics.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”

The general pattern is that credits earned in the highest-level math and science courses increased 

for CTE investors as well as for non-investors between 1982 and 2004, and the gap between 

CTE investors and non-investors has narrowed. For example, in 2004, in mathematics about 

39 percent of CTE investors earned math credits at the level of algebra III, precalculus, or 

calculus courses, up from 12 percent in 1982. While non-investors also increasingly earned 

higher-level math credits, the gap in advanced math credits between CTE investors and noninvestors decreased by 9 percentage points from 24 percentage points to 15 percentage points 

between 1982 and 2004.

CTE investors also earned more credits in advanced science courses and decreased the advanced 

science gap, compared with non-investors between 1982 and 2004 (Exhibit 15 and Exhibit 26). 

In 1982, only 20 percent of CTE investors earned credits in advanced biology, chemistry, or 

physics; by 2004, 60 percent of CTE investors did. Non-investors also were more likely to earn 

advanced credits in science over the period from 1982 to 2004, but the gap in credits earned in 

advanced science courses between CTE investors and non-investors decreased from 

28 percentage points to 13 percentage points.
36 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

3.6 Math Achievement

There is considerable interest in the academic achievement of secondary CTE students. Perkins 

IV requires states to report on the academic achievement of CTE concentrators using the 

measures of math and reading or English language arts achievement required by the Elementary 

and Secondary Education Act of 1965 as amended. Previous legislation had also called for a core 

indicator that measured student attainment of academic (as well as vocational and technical skill) 

proficiencies.

This section looks at how the academic achievement of CTE investors in math changed over 

time, both independently and relative to non-investors’ achievement, and focuses on math 

achievement and its relationship to CTE coursetaking in the graduating classes of 1992 and 

2004. Math achievement is based on a standardized math test developed for the NCES 

longitudinal studies, and students were high school seniors when they took the test. While 

mathematics knowledge and skills were also assessed for graduates in 1982, only the 1992 and 

2004 math tests are on the same psychometrically developed scale (0–81) that permits 

comparisons of change over time. The math test is the only assessment comparable across the 

longitudinal studies being used. Note also that the composition of the CTE investor and noninvestor group changed, with the relative percentage of investor students in the lowest 

socioeconomic group declining.

Exhibit 17 shows the overall mathematics number-right scores for high school graduates in 1992 

and 2004 for CTE investors and non-investors. While math scores for non-investors showed no 

change over time, the overall score of CTE investors increased from 46 correct items in 1992 to 

48 correct items in 2004. However, in both 1992 and 2004, CTE investors scored lower in math 

achievement than non-investors.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 37

Exhibit 17. Average estimated number-right math scores of CTE investors and non-investors: 

1992 and 2004

46 48 51 52

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1992 2004

Math 

scorea CTE Investors Non-investors

Exhibit reads: In 1992, CTE investors had an average math score of 46.

a Estimated number-right math scores represent the item response theory–estimated number correct students would have answered 

had they received all test questions in the NELS:88 test item pool; the scale runs from 0–81 and has been equated across the two 

years.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education. CTE investors earned three or more total occupational credits (regardless of 

concentration in any occupational area). Non-investors earned zero to less than three total occupational credits (Carnegie units). A 

credit (Carnegie unit) is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day for one full school year.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”

3.7 Postsecondary Education

Economic competition in the global economy makes it increasingly important that high school 

graduates gain higher-level skills and knowledge only obtainable from postsecondary education 

or training. Even if graduates focus on occupational areas while in high school and do not plan to 

obtain a baccalaureate degree, most white-collar positions in many fields require further training 

and more advanced skills than can be learned in high school (Exhibit 4). Examining the 

expectations and initial postsecondary education experiences of high school graduates can help 

identify the areas of success and weakness in CTE investors’ high school training. Each of the 

three longitudinal surveys used for analyses in this report include data on public high school 

graduates’ educational expectations in the 12th grade, as well as information on postsecondary 

educational status in the two years immediately following graduation.
38 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

Senior-Year Educational Expectations

Educational expectations rose for both groups of graduates—CTE investors and non-investors—

between 1982 and 2004 (Exhibit 18 and Exhibit 27). But the educational expectations of CTE 

investors rose more than non-investors. Between 1982 and 2004, the proportion of CTE investors 

who expected to get a bachelor’s degree or higher increased from about 26 percent to about 

60 percent, while among non-investors those expectations increased from about 58 percent to 

about 76 percent. As a result, the gap in educational expectations between CTE investors and 

non-investors was reduced by 15 percentage points (value differs from exhibit due to rounding), 

although CTE investors still have lower educational expectations than non-investors.

Exhibit 18. Percentage of public high school graduates expecting to earn a bachelor’s degree or 

more, by CTE occupational investment: 1982, 1992, and 2004

26

49

58 60

72 76

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1982 1992 2004

CTE investors Non-investors Percent

Exhibit reads: In 1982, 26 percent of CTE investors expected to earn a bachelor’s degree or more.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education. CTE investors earned three or more total occupational credits (regardless of 

concentration in any occupational area). Non-investors earned zero to less than three total occupational credits (Carnegie units). A 

Carnegie unit is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day for one full school year. “Bachelor’s degree or more” refers to 

expectations of a four-year college degree, a master’s or equivalent degree, or an advanced graduate or professional degree.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 39

A large change in educational expectations occurred at the level of completing no more than high 

school (Exhibit 19 and Exhibit 27). The proportions of both CTE investor and non-investor 

students expecting to complete no more than a high school education dropped over time, but the 

decline was greater among CTE investors. Fewer than 10 percent of high school graduates who 

are CTE investors now expect to complete no more than a high school education, compared with 

one-quarter in 1982. These graduates seem to have received the message that a high school 

diploma is no longer enough for getting a good job in today’s more competitive global economy.

Exhibit 19. Percentage of public school graduates expecting to earn no more than a high school 

degree, by CTE occupational investment: 1982, 1992, and 2004

25 7 7

11 3 3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1982 1992 2004

Percent CTE investors Non-investors

Exhibit reads: In 1982, 25 percent of CTE investors expected to earn no more than a high school degree.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education. CTE investors earned three or more total occupational credits (regardless of 

concentration in any occupational area). Non-investors earned zero to less than three total occupational credits (Carnegie units). A 

Carnegie unit is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day for one full school year.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”

Ever Attended Postsecondary School

Between 1982 and 2004, high school graduates who were CTE investors increased their 

postsecondary attendance during their first two years after high school (Exhibit 20). Among CTE 

investors, that proportion increased from 54 percent in 1982 to 75 percent in 2004. Among noninvestors, that proportion also increased, but not as rapidly, with the result being that the gap 

between CTE investors and non-investors in enrolling in postsecondary education in the first two 

years after high school graduation decreased by 15 percentage points, from 23 percentage points 

to 8 percentage points (value differs from exhibit due to rounding).
40 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

Exhibit 20. Percentage of public high school graduates ever enrolled in a postsecondary 

education institution in the first two years after graduation, by CTE occupational 

investment: 1984, 1994, and 2006

54

65

77 75 81 84

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1984 1994 2006

CTE investors Non-investors Percent

Exhibit reads: In 1984, 54 percent of high school CTE investors had ever enrolled in a postsecondary education 

institution.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education. CTE investors earned three or more total occupational credits (regardless of 

concentration in any occupational area). A Carnegie unit is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day for one full school 

year. Non-investors earned zero to less than three total occupational credits (Carnegie units). “Postsecondary education institution”

refers to both two-year and four-year institutions as well as private and public schools.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/84), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992” and “Third Follow-up, 1994”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), 

“First Follow-up, High School Transcript Study, 2004” and “Second Follow-up, 2006.”

3.8 Post–High School Employment

Because one of the goals of CTE is to prepare students for work as well as further education after 

high school, the occupational expectations and initial post–high school work experiences are 

important outcomes to consider in evaluating trends in outcomes associated with CTE 

occupational coursetaking. Because the high school graduates of 2004 have been surveyed only 

once after graduation, the only comparable information across the three cohorts studied here is 

restricted to the initial two years after graduation. Given that entering the labor force can be a 

multiyear transition for many high school graduates, even for those who do not attend college, 

these initial experiences represent only part of the association between occupational coursetaking 

and work outcomes.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 41

High School Senior-Year Occupational Expectations at Age 30

Graduates who were CTE investors have both similarities and differences with non-investors 

regarding their occupational expectations at age 30 (Exhibit 21). The most common occupational 

expectation at that age in all three cohorts among CTE investors and non-investors alike is a 

professional job. What is especially striking about the expectation is its increase among CTE 

investors, rising from about 27 percent of such graduates expecting to be in a professional 

occupation by age 30 in 1982 to almost 54 percent in 2004. By 2004, the proportion of noninvestors expecting a professional occupation by age 30 had increased to almost 70 percent, but 

the gap between non-investors and CTE investors had decreased from 25 percentage points to 16 

percentage points.

Exhibit 21. Percentage of public high school graduates with given expectations of occupation at 

age 30, by CTE occupational investment: 1982, 1992, and 2004

Occupational 

expectation

CTE 

investor, 

1982

CTE 

investor, 

1992

CTE 

investor, 

2004

Noninvestor, 

1982

Noninvestor, 

1992

Noninvestor, 

2004

Clerical 13.5 5.5 0.7 4.6 2.1 0.5

Craftsperson 10.4 5.7 8.1 3.4 0.7 2.7

Farmer 3.4 2.0 0.6 1.0 0.4 ‡

Homemaker 2.6 0.8 0.2 2.2 0.9 ‡

Laborer 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.1 0.3

Manager 7.5 5.5 4.9 9.0 3.7 3.9

Military 2.4 2.9 1.6 1.8 1.9 1.5

Operative 4.2 2.2 1.6 1.7 1.4 0.1

Professional 27.4 42.0 53.7 51.9 59.8 69.5

Proprietor 5.0 6.3 4.7 3.4 4.9 3.2

Protective services 1.7 4.3 3.5 1.5 3.6 4.2

Sales 1.7 1.3 1.8 2.0 2.1 1.9

Service 4.1 3.6 7.0 2.9 2.3 6.1

Technical 11.5 7.7 9.7 11.2 5.6 5.3

Other 3.5 9.2 1.0 2.7 10.6 0.6

Exhibit reads: The percentage of CTE investors who expected to have a clerical occupation at age 30 was 

13.5 percent in 1982.

‡ Reporting standards not met.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education. CTE investors earned three or more total occupational credits (Carnegie units). Noninvestors earned less than three total occupational credits. A Carnegie unit is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day 

for one full school year.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”

Another notable change among CTE investors includes a large drop in the proportion of 

graduates expecting to have a clerical occupation by age 30—no doubt, a tribute to technological 

change in the form of computers and word processing. Over the same period, expectations for 

being in the occupations of craftsperson and technical worker remained relatively popular for 

CTE investors (especially CTE concentrators) across all three cohorts. For example, about 

18 percent of CTE investors expected one of those jobs in 2004, about the same percentage as in 
42 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

1982. Another interesting finding is that few CTE investors and non-investors in 2004 had 

expectations for being a manager.

First Job Type of Non-College Attendees

High school graduates in 1982, 1992, and 2004 who had no postsecondary attendance in their 

first two years after high school answered a series of questions two years after graduation 

regarding their first post–high school job. Distributions of these first-job types are shown in 

Exhibit 22.

Exhibit 22. Percentage of non-college-attending public high school graduates in first job type, 

by CTE occupational investment: 1984, 1994, and 2006

Type of first job

CTE 

investor, 

1984

CTE 

investor, 

1994

CTE 

investor, 

2006

Noninvestor, 

1984

Noninvestor, 

1994

Noninvestor, 

2006

Clerical 18.5 20.0 13.5 18.0 25.5 13.3

Craftsperson 10.5 9.3 11.4 6.5 3.3 6.9

Laborer or farmer 15.8 21.4 13.2 14.0 21.3 8.4

Skilled operative 11.8 8.2 11.1 11.5 5.4 6.8

Sales or service 33.1 26.3 39.4 37.2 32.9 50.4

Managerial 2.9 6.0 5.4 3.3 5.2 6.4

Other 7.4 8.9 6.0 9.5 6.5 7.7

Exhibit reads: The percentage of high school CTE investors who had a clerical first job was 18.5 percent in 1984.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education. CTE investors earned three or more total occupational credits (Carnegie units). Noninvestors earned less than three total occupational credits. A Carnegie unit is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day 

for one full school year.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/84), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992” and “Third Follow-up, 1994”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), 

“First Follow-up, High School Transcript Study, 2004” and “Second Follow-up, 2006.”

Sales or service occupations were the most commonly reported first-job type among all 

coursetaking groups in 1984 and 2006 (which were two years after high school graduation in 

1982 and 2004, respectively). About 50 percent of non-investors reported holding that kind of 

first-job, while about 40 percent of CTE investors did. Among non-investors, the second most 

common first job was clerical, reported by about 13 percent, which was similar to the 14 percent 

of CTE investors reporting that kind of job.

But among CTE investors, about 22 percent reported holding a first job as a craftsman or skilled 

operative, compared with about 14 percent of non-investors. That experience appears to be 

consonant with the expectations and technical training of many CTE investors noted above. CTE 

investors were also more likely to report being a laborer or farmer in their first job (about 

13 percent) than were non-investors (about 8 percent). Similar and small proportions (about 

5 percent or 6 percent) of both groups reported a first job as a manager.

3.9 Conclusion

Participation in CTE in high school changed significantly over the 22-year period between 1982 

and 2004—from before the Carl D. Perkins Act of 1984 (Perkins I) to after the Carl D. Perkins 

Vocational and Technical Education Act of 1998 (Perkins III). The backdrop for the changes in 
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 43

CTE participation was the overall shift from 14 percent to 60 percent between 1982 and 2004 of 

high school graduates completing a new basics academic foundation (earning at least four credits 

in English, and three credits each in mathematics, science, and social studies). A Nation at Risk

recommended these new basics in 1983, and from 1990 on, Perkins legislation authorizing 

funding for CTE supported the new basics courses.

As the shift to more academic coursetaking occurred, participation in CTE changed in relation to 

total courses. Although the average number of CTE credits earned dropped between 1982 and 

1992 (from 3.0 credits to 2.4 credits), it increased somewhat between 1992 and 2004 (to 

2.6 credits). Because the total number of course credits earned by graduates increased over this 

period, average CTE credits between 1982 and 2004 did not decline as much as might be 

expected from the rise in new basics courses taken. Moreover, overall participation in CTE 

remained relatively stable, with over 95 percent of high school graduates earning some CTE 

credit between 1982 and 2004.

Similarly, the proportion of high school graduates who are CTE investors (three or more CTE 

credits) declined by 11 points, from 46 percent to 35 percent between 1982 and 1992, but by 

2004 the proportion increased to 38 percent.

CTE coursetaking became more diverse over these three decades. CTE explorers (three or more 

CTE credits in more than one occupational area) grew from 35 percent of investors in 1982 to 

55 percent of investors in 2004, while CTE concentrators (three or more credits on one 

occupational area) fell from 65 percent to 45 percent between 1982 and 2004.

These trends coincided with CTE investors taking more advanced math and science courses and 

some improvement in their mathematics achievement. Among CTE investors, the proportion 

completing the new basics rose from 6 percent in 1982 to 58 percent in 2004. Further, the 

educational expectations and postsecondary education participation of CTE investors increased 

as well. Differences in initial postsecondary work experiences among CTE investors and noninvestors did not substantially change. Those non-college-attending investors who had a first job 

were more likely to enter craft or skilled operative positions reflecting consistency with their 

CTE secondary school training.

These changes are consistent with the direction of Perkins legislation for greater academic 

engagement by CTE students so that there are increasing similarities between CTE investors and 

non-investors in academic coursetaking. However, the nature of CTE investment is changing as a 

greater percentage of investors are taking their CTE courses in multiple occupational areas and 

thus exploring CTE rather than concentrating within a CTE occupational area. Explorers benefit 

from knowledge about several occupations, but they do not obtain the in-depth knowledge and 

skills of single-occupation concentrators. Secondary CTE performance reporting is also limited 

to reporting on concentrators who now constitute less than half the students who take three or 

more CTE courses.
44 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

3.10 Annex: Statistical Tables

Exhibit 23. Percentage of public high school graduates, by CTE occupational investment: 1982, 

1992, and 2004

CTE occupational investment 1982 1992 2004

CTE investors 46.0 35.3 38.4

CTE concentrators 29.7 19.8 17.3

CTE explorers 16.3 15.5 21.1

Non-investors 54.0 64.7 61.6

Exhibit reads: The percentage of public high school graduates who were CTE investors was 46.0 percent in 1982.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education. CTE investors are the sum of concentrators and explorers. CTE concentrators 

earned three or more credits in at least one occupational area. CTE explorers earned three or more total occupational credits but did 

not concentrate in an occupational area. Non-investors did not earn three total occupational credits. A credit (Carnegie unit) is 

equivalent to a course taken for one period each day for one full school year.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 45

Exhibit 24. Percentage of public high school graduates, by student characteristics and CTE 

investment: 1982, 1992, and 2004

Student characteristic and CTE investment 1982 1992 2004

Gender

Male

CTE investors 49.5 40.4 44.9

CTE concentrators 31.0 22.6 21.0

CTE explorers 18.5 17.8 23.9

Non-investors 50.5 59.6 55.1

Female

CTE investors 42.9 30.3 32.4

CTE concentrators 28.6 17.1 13.8

CTE explorers 14.2 13.2 18.5

Non-investors 57.2 69.7 67.6

Race/ethnicitya

Asian/Pacific Islander

CTE investors 27.8 32.7 26.7

CTE concentrators 13.0 16.8 9.6

CTE explorers 14.7 15.8 17.2

Non-investors 72.2 67.4 73.3

Black

CTE investors 46.9 32.8 38.4

CTE concentrators 31.4 16.6 17.9

CTE explorers 15.5 16.2 20.5

Non-investors 53.1 67.2 61.6

Hispanic

CTE investors 53.6 32.8 33.5

CTE concentrators 33.9 16.0 12.8

CTE explorers 19.7 16.8 20.7

Non-investors 46.4 67.2 66.5

White

CTE investors 45.0 36.1 40.5

CTE concentrators 29.2 21.1 18.8

CTE explorers 15.9 15.0 21.7

Non-investors 55.0 63.9 59.5

See notes at end of table.

Continues next page
46 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

Exhibit 24. Percentage of public high school graduates, by student characteristics and CTE 

investment: 1982, 1992, and 2004—continued

Student characteristic and CTE investment 1982 1992 2004

Other

CTE investors 52.4 41.7 36.7

CTE concentrators 34.7 18.6 17.2

CTE explorers 17.7 23.1 19.6

Non-investors 47.6 58.3 63.3

Socioeconomic status

Lowest quartile

CTE investors 57.7 52.1 44.2

CTE concentrators 40.2 30.8 21.1

CTE explorers 17.5 21.3 23.1

Non-investors 42.3 47.9 55.8

Middle two quartiles

CTE investors 48.1 37.4 40.9

CTE concentrators 31.6 21.8 18.4

CTE explorers 16.5 15.6 22.5

Non-investors 51.9 62.6 59.1

Highest quartile

CTE investors 29.0 21.5 28.6

CTE concentrators 14.6 9.8 11.9

CTE explorers 14.4 11.7 16.7

Non-investors 71.0 78.5 71.4

Exhibit reads: The percentage of male public high school graduates who were CTE investors was 49.5 percent in 

1982.

a

The category Asian or Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiians. Hispanic may be of any race. Other category refers to those 

answering “other” in 1982 and 1992 and those answering “more than one race” in 2004.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education. CTE investors are the sum of concentrators and explorers. CTE concentrators 

earned three or more credits (Carnegie units) in at least one occupational area. CTE explorers earned three or more total 

occupational credits but did not concentrate in an occupational area. Non-investors earned less than three total occupational credits. 

A Carnegie unit is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day for one full school year.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 47

Exhibit 25. Percentage of public high school graduates completing given highest level of 

mathematics, by curricular foundation and CTE occupational investment: 1982, 1992, 

and 2004

CTE investment and highest level of math completed 1982 1992 2004

CTE investors

No math or low academic math 34.9 19.1 7.5

Algebra I/plane geometry 37.2 29.8 23.5

Algebra II 15.6 26.8 30.0

Algebra III/trigonometry/analytic geometry 9.1 13.8 15.9

Precalculus/calculus 3.3 10.4 23.2

CTE concentrators

No math or low academic math 38.5 24.1 9.4

Algebra I/plane geometry 38.2 31.6 24.7

Algebra II 14.3 24.7 30.7

Algebra III/trigonometry/analytic geometry 7.0 12.0 14.5

Precalculus/calculus 2.0 7.6 20.6

CTE explorers

No math or low academic math 28.2 12.7 5.8

Algebra I/plane geometry 35.3 27.5 22.4

Algebra II 17.9 29.6 29.4

Algebra III/trigonometry/analytic geometry 12.9 16.2 17.0

Precalculus/calculus 5.6 14.0 25.3

Non-investors

No math or low academic math 17.7 8.0 4.3

Algebra I/plane geometry 26.0 19.2 17.0

Algebra II 20.2 28.8 24.5

Algebra III/trigonometry/analytic geometry 20.6 17.6 18.3

Precalculus/calculus 15.4 26.4 35.9

Exhibit reads: The percentage of CTE investors who completed only “no math or low academic math” was 

34.9 percent in 1982.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education. CTE investors are the sum of concentrators and explorers. CTE concentrators 

earned three or more credits (Carnegie units) in at least one occupational area. CTE explorers earned three or more total 

occupational credits but did not concentrate in an occupational area. Non-investors earned less than three total occupational credits. 

A Carnegie unit is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day for one full school year.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”
48 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

Exhibit 26. Percentage of public high school graduates completing given highest level of 

science, by curricular foundation and CTE occupational investment: 1982, 1992, and 

2004

CTE investment and highest level of science completed 1982 1992 2004

CTE investors

No science or low-level science 22.8 4.1 3.4

Secondary physical science and basic biology 17.2 10.2 4.6

General biology 40.2 47.1 32.3

Advanced biology, chemistry, or physics 19.7 38.6 59.7

CTE concentrators

No science or low-level science 25.7 4.9 5.0

Secondary physical science and basic biology 18.6 10.6 5.8

General biology 39.9 53.1 33.6

Advanced biology, chemistry, or physics 15.9 31.5 55.6

CTE explorers

No science or low-level science 17.7 3.1 2.2

Secondary physical science and basic biology 14.7 9.8 3.6

General biology 40.8 39.4 31.2

Advanced biology, chemistry, or physics 26.8 47.7 63.0

Non-investors

No science or low-level science 8.2 1.7 2.3

Secondary physical science and basic biology 13.3 5.4 3.0

General biology 30.4 29.9 22.3

Advanced biology, chemistry, or physics 48.2 63.0 72.5

Exhibit reads: The percentage of CTE investors who completed only “no science or low-level science” was 

22.8 percent in 1982.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education. CTE investors are the sum of concentrators and explorers. CTE concentrators 

earned three or more credits (Carnegie units) in at least one occupational area. CTE explorers earned three or more total 

occupational credits but did not concentrate in an occupational area. Non-investors earned less than three total occupational credits. 

A Carnegie unit is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day for one full school year.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 49

Exhibit 27. Percentage of public high school graduates with given educational expectations in 

12th grade, by curricular foundation and CTE occupational investment: 1982, 1992, 

and 2004

CTE investment and educational expectations 1982 1992 2004

CTE investors

High school or less 25.1 7.1 6.5

Some college 48.5 37.8 25.0

Bachelor’s degree 17.2 30.0 34.3

Graduate or professional degree 9.3 19.2 25.7

Don’t know — 6.0 8.5

CTE concentrators

High school or less 28.9 9.5 8.3

Some college 49.6 40.5 27.9

Bachelor’s degree 13.6 28.2 30.4

Graduate or professional degree 7.8 14.9 24.0

Don’t know — 7.0 9.4

CTE explorers

High school or less 18.0 4.0 5.1

Some college 46.4 34.3 22.7

Bachelor’s degree 23.5 32.3 37.4

Graduate or professional degree 12.0 24.6 27.1

Don’t know — 4.8 7.8

Non-investors

High school or less 11.0 2.8 3.3

Some college 31.3 20.6 14.6

Bachelor’s degree 30.5 36.6 35.5

Graduate or professional degree 27.2 35.7 40.4

Don’t know — 4.3 6.2

Exhibit reads: The percentage of CTE investors who expected to complete only high school or less was 25.1 percent

in 1982.

— Not available.

NOTE: CTE = career and technical education. CTE investors are the sum of concentrators and explorers. CTE concentrators 

earned three or more credits (Carnegie units) in at least one occupational area. CTE explorers earned three or more total 

occupational credits but did not concentrate in an occupational area. Non-investors earned less than three total occupational credits. 

A Carnegie unit is equivalent to a course taken for one period each day for one full school year.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 

1980 Sophomores (HS&B-So:80/82), “High School Transcript Study”; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), 

“Second Follow-up, Transcript Survey, 1992”; and Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “First Follow-up, High School 

Transcript Study, 2004.”
50 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

This page intentionally left blank
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 51

Chapter 4.

Outcomes of Career and Technical Education:

Some New Evidence

The mandate for the National Assessment of Career and Technical Education (NACTE) in the 

Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 (Perkins IV) includes an analysis 

of the impact that career and technical education (CTE) has on academic achievement and 

employment outcomes. Because of the time it takes for a newly authorized or reauthorized 

program to have an impact on students, NACTE will only be able to examine early outcome 

evidence associated with Perkins IV in its final report. Most of the studies and databases 

available for examining CTE impacts only include outcomes associated with the Carl D. Perkins 

Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act of 1990 (Perkins II) and the Carl D. Perkins 

Vocational and Technical Education Act of 1998 (Perkins III), and such is the case for the 

evidence presented in this chapter. The evaluators of the NACTE looked for additional ways to 

examine CTE outcomes and found two opportunities to utilize existing data that were available 

for this interim report. Our new evidence is based on a recent national longitudinal study of 

secondary students and a natural experiment involving choice of a CTE high school in 

Philadelphia.26 The final report will contain additional outcome studies.

4.1 Context for NACTE Outcome Studies

The context for NACTE’s investigations into the impact of enrollment in CTE on academic and 

employment outcomes was provided by the earlier mandated study of Perkins III, namely, the 

National Assessment of Vocational Education (NAVE; Silverberg et al., 2004; for a 1994 NAVE 

review, see Gamoran, 1998).

27 NAVE sponsored its own research into the value added by CTE 

under the Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Act (Perkins I) and Perkins II on a range of 

student outcomes and also conducted a review of the literature on CTE outcomes available at the 

time.

At the secondary level, NAVE found that during the 1990s, students in CTE programs 

significantly increased their academic coursetaking and achievement. This finding is consistent 

with the evidence presented in Chapter 3 of this report. At the same time, NAVE also found that 

the research evidence consistently showed that enrollment in CTE programs did not bring about 

or contribute to those academic achievement gains. The larger context of those gains (also noted 

in Chapter 3) was the increase in high school graduation requirements among the states and the 

more intense focus on academic knowledge fostered by the ongoing education reform 

movement.

 

26 This chapter was prepared by ED staffers Jay Noell (retired) and Michael Fong based on NACTE studies by 

Bozick and Dalton (2013) and Neild, Boccanfuso, and Byrnes (2013).

27 Earlier forms of CTE were known as vocational education; the name was changed because CTE encompasses a 

broader approach to preparing students for further education, training, and careers rather than vocational education, 

which was more narrowly focused on providing job-specific skills.
52 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

NAVE also reported that only mixed evidence exists that enrollment in CTE reduces the high 

school dropout rate, with the most rigorous evidence suggesting that it did not. NAVE cites 

analyses of data from the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 as well as a natural 

experiment involving CTE programs in New York City (Crain et al., 1999) as having no impact 

or even a negative impact, which was the case in the latter study.

Impact studies of career-related education and training programs found potentially positive 

results on some student outcomes. The evaluation of Career Academies looked at a CTE 

program model, a school-within-a-school, that had students take career-related curricula and 

related work experience through local employers. This study found positive effects on staying in 

and progressing through high school as well as earnings gains at the eight-year follow up for 

young men. The evaluation of Talent Development High Schools, a whole school reform with a 

“career academies” component in the upper grades, found positive effects on progressing 

through school.

In moving to postsecondary attendance, NAVE found that the value added by CTE was 

negligible: CTE neither helped nor hurt the chances of students going on to postsecondary 

schooling. In the past, vocational education was criticized as handicapping students’ prospects of 

going on to postsecondary education, but current programs did not appear to have those negative 

consequences.

Postsecondary vocational education did, however, provide significant economic returns. NAVE 

reported those earning a credential (certificate or degree) experienced the largest benefits. NAVE 

found in particular that CTE provided by community colleges appeared to produce substantial 

gains for the vast majority of participants. Those completing even as little as a year of 

postsecondary CTE courses, especially males, realized economic gains.

4.2 NACTE Outcome Studies

In developing its research agenda for examining the impact of CTE on student outcomes, 

NACTE looked for sources of existing data that could be used for analyzing CTE impacts. Four 

sources were identified.

The first source was the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), sponsored by the 

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in the U.S. Department of Education (this study 

was also discussed in Chapter 2). This longitudinal study continues the pattern NCES started of 

studying a cohort of secondary students every decade or so. This study began with high school 

sophomores in 2002, then followed up in 2004 with seniors, and then again in 2006, two years 

after the expected graduation date. The ELS:2002 study has transcript data so that the degree of 

participation in CTE can be measured along with secondary outcomes, postsecondary education 

and training, and employment history.

The second source was administrative data in Philadelphia associated with the local high school 

choice program. Philadelphia has a fairly extensive high school choice program involving CTE 

as well as other (academic) high schools. Admission to CTE schools was basically made 

randomly, forming a natural experiment. That process allows studying how students randomly 
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 53

selected into CTE high schools perform, compared with those not selected. The data available 

allow looking at the high school classes of 2003, 2004, and 2005.

The third source was also city-level administrative data, but from San Diego, California.

Although San Diego does have a choice program, the data for it have not been as readily 

accessible as in Philadelphia. But longitudinal data on students exist going back into elementary 

school. These data are being used to look at a variety of secondary and postsecondary outcomes 

for several cohorts of high school graduates. Results are not available for the interim report but 

will be available in time for the final report.

The last source of data was Florida administrative data on the ninth-grade cohort of 1995–96, 

which was followed over 11 years. The entire cohort was followed through high school and then 

into postsecondary education and employment. The focus of this study is on postsecondary 

outcomes, in terms of education and employment. Results are not available for the interim report 

but will be available in time for the final report.

4.3 Education Longitudinal Study of 2002

ELS:2002 tracks students who were high school sophomores in 2002 and follows them into their 

postsecondary years. A nationally representative sample was drawn of 10th-graders in public and 

private schools in the United States in 2002 when Perkins III was in effect. Sample members 

were surveyed again in spring 2004, when most were high school seniors. In pring 2005, 

transcripts were collected from these students’ high schools. The data allow key student 

subgroups defined by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 as amended (ESEA)

to be examined as well as alternative ways of defining and analyzing CTE as occupational 

coursetaking.

The ELS:2002 study measures student achievement in mathematics when they are sophomores 

and seniors and thus lends itself to evaluating how participation in CTE affects gains in math 

achievement between the sophomore and senior years. The study also is appropriate for looking 

at how CTE affects dropping out and completion of high school between the sophomore and 

senior years. Although relatively more students drop out of high school in or after the ninth grade 

than in other grades, dropping out between sophomore and senior years remains an important 

problem. Because ELS:2002 also gathers information on the type of high school students who 

attend, it can also be used to examine whether high school types—for example, an area CTE high 

school—helps or hinders secondary educational outcomes.

Math Achievement

NACTE’s study (Bozick and Dalton, 2013) analyzes gains in achievement in mathematics 

between the sophomore and senior years through the use of fixed effects regression analysis. This 

is a more rigorous approach than standard cross-sectional regression analysis that looks at 

student achievement at one point in time. Standard regression analysis can only suggest factors 

or variables that are associated with achievement but cannot identify causal effects because other 

unmeasured (sometime called unobserved) factors are not available for use in the analysis. Those 

factors may be associated with student self-selection into certain educational programs, making it 
54 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

impossible to determine whether the program or some student characteristics leading to selfselection into the program were the causal factors affecting an outcome.

Fixed effects regression analysis as used in this NACTE study (Bozick and Dalton, 2013) 

reduces unmeasured factors—such as attitudes, preferences, or innate ability—that are time 

invariant and may lead to self-selection into certain educational programs. Additional factors that 

vary over time also were added to the analysis. As a result, causal inferences about the efficacy 

of identified factors (such as CTE participation) can be made more confidently by using fixed 

effects regression, although estimates are not as unbiased as typically obtained from random 

experiments.

28

In the fixed effects regression analysis, math achievement gains associated with CTE 

participation are measured in two ways (Bozick and Dalton, 2013). An overall test score is used 

to provide a general measure of math gains. In addition, five scores are calculated measuring the 

likelihood of mastery over specific and progressive benchmarks in mathematics ranging from 

basic to advanced mathematical proficiency.

Participation in CTE was also measured two ways. First, overall CTE participation was 

measured in terms of the number of occupational courses taken. Family and consumer science 

courses and general labor force preparation courses were not included. Second, a more focused 

measure of occupational courses in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) 

areas was used.

The key findings from the study (Bozick and Dalton, 2013) follow.

• The total number of occupational credits earned during the last two years of high 

school has no relationship to the increase in number of correct answers on the 

mathematics assessment. However, when occupational courses make up a larger 

percentage of the total number of courses taken, students answer fewer additional 

questions correctly on the mathematics assessment.

Overall, there are no differences in mathematical proficiency gains between students who take a 

small number of occupational courses alongside their academic courses and students who take

only academic courses. When students take relatively more occupational courses during the last 

two years of high school, however, they answer slightly fewer additional questions correctly on 

the mathematics assessment. This relationship remains statistically significant after controlling 

for a range of factors, but its magnitude is substantively small: about one-tenth fewer questions 

were answered correctly on the math assessment for each additional occupational course taken.

• Gains in basic and intermediate mathematics skills and concepts are unrelated to 

occupational credits earned in the last two years of high school. However, taking 

relatively more occupational courses and fewer academic courses during the last two 

 

28 Such causal inferences cannot be made with the same degree of confidence possible as when an experiment can be 

conducted in which students are randomly assigned to different programs, but that is not possible when examining 

many educational programs besides CTE.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 55

years of high school limits the acquisition of advanced mathematical skills and 

concepts.

The development of skills such as simple arithmetic operations, operations with decimals and 

fractions, and basic problem solving is not compromised by enrollment in occupational courses. 

The development of advanced mathematics skills such as solving multistep word problems is 

impeded when occupational courses make up a larger share of students’ course schedules. 

Though this relationship again remains statistically significant after controlling for a range of

factors, its magnitude is substantively small. For example, those who earned at least eight and 

one-half credits in academic courses and two credits in occupational courses were less than a half 

percent less likely to be proficient at level 4, one of the most advanced skill levels, than those 

who earned 10.5 credits in academic courses and zero credits in occupational courses.

• Occupational courses have similar effects on gains in mathematics achievement for 

both economically disadvantaged and affluent students as well as nonnative English 

speakers and native English speakers. Black and Asian students benefit more from 

occupational courses than do white students.

Occupational courses improve the development of basic and intermediate math skills more for 

black students than for white students, while the development of intermediate and advanced math 

skills is fostered more for Asian students than for white students.

• In general, STEM courses in the CTE curriculum neither enhance nor compromise 

overall math achievement.

Improving learning in mathematics is largely a function of traditional academic mathematics 

courses.

• Attendance at a full-time CTE school or a school located in a rural area is not related 

to mathematics gains.

Effects of occupational coursetaking on math achievement gains do not vary by attendance at 

full-time CTE schools, but occupational coursetaking is less harmful to math achievement gains 

for students attending rural schools than for students attending suburban schools.

The conclusion from the NACTE study of math gains (Bozick and Dalton, 2013) is that 

secondary CTE participation is largely unrelated to gains in mathematics proficiency between 

sophomore and senior years in high school. This new evidence from analyzing the ELS:2002 

data does not change the conclusion reached by the NAVE (Silverberg et al., 2004) report.

Dropping Out of High School

NACTE’s study of the relationship between CTE participation and dropping out of high school 

from the sophomore to senior years was also done with the ELS:2002 data (Bozick and Dalton, 

2013). Semester-by-semester dropout rates are generally low (2 percent or less). In the period 

analyzed over the last two years of high school, dropout rates increased each semester to the 

typical end of high school for most students (two years later). Then, in the fall semester 
56 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

following the on-time graduation date for the cohort, over half of the remaining students dropped 

out.

The analytic strategy used for examining dropping out was event history regression analysis.

This approach predicts the odds of dropping out of high school, contingent on a set of 

independent factors or variables. A wide variety of student characteristics and some school-level 

characteristics were used in the analysis to isolate their effects. CTE and academic coursetaking 

patterns were calibrated to match the timing of possible dropping out.

Key findings from the NACTE study of dropping out of high school (Bozick and Dalton, 2013) 

were the following:

• Controlling for socioeconomic and academic differences among students as well as 

semester timing, the number of credits students earn in occupational courses is 

unrelated to their likelihood of dropping out.

However, students who have accumulated relatively more credits in academic courses have a 

reduced likelihood of dropping out. On average, each additional academic credit earned lowers 

the odds of dropping out by 19 percent.

• High school dropouts typically accumulate fewer academic credits than enrolled 

students over the same period of time; however, dropouts and enrolled students earn 

similar numbers of occupational credits.

When comparing dropouts to enrolled students in any given semester, differences in the number 

of earned academic credits between students who drop out and students who remain enrolled are 

striking. However, no differences in occupational credits earned were observed.

• The cumulative number of occupational credits relative to academic credits is positively 

associated with dropping out. However, this relationship is driven by low academic 

course completion among students enrolled in occupational courses.

When occupational credits earned are considered relative to academic credits earned, a greater 

tilt toward occupational credits is related to a greater likelihood of dropping out. This

relationship holds even when student socioeconomic and academic characteristics associated 

with dropping out are held constant. However, students with high numbers of academic credits 

and high occupational credits are no more or less likely to drop out than other students, 

indicating that accumulating a low number of academic credits drives the relationship between 

relative occupational coursetaking and dropping out.

• Attendance at a full-time CTE school or a school located in an urban area is not 

related to dropping out.

Effects of occupational coursetaking on dropping out do not consistently vary by full-time CTE 

school attendance or rural school attendance (where one might also expect a more positive 

influence of occupational courses on high school persistence).
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 57

4.4 CTE Schools in Philadelphia: A Natural Experiment

NACTE’s study of career and technical education high schools in Philadelphia used a natural 

experiment to examine the impact of CTE high schools on student outcomes, including 

achievement and completion (Neild, Boccanfuso, and Byrnes, 2013). These high schools have 

long been known as Area Vocational and Technical Schools. Three cohorts of their students 

were studied—the high school classes of 2003, 2004, and 2005, all of whom graduated when

Perkins III was still in effect. The study involved four CTE schools whose primary focus was on 

providing career and technical training for students hoping either to pursue postsecondary 

education or enter the workforce immediately after high school. A fifth high school was given 

CTE status for the class of 2005. These high schools served students from across the district.

Although the issue of attendance at CTE schools was also examined in the ELS:2002 study of 

achievement and dropping out discussed above (Bozick and Dalton, 2013), in which no positive 

effects were detected, most studies of CTE outcomes focus on coursetaking, not the effects of 

CTE schools. NACTE’s Philadelphia study examines the impact of CTE schools.

The natural experiment in the impact of CTE schools occurred because many more students in 

each cohort applied to the CTE schools than could be accepted, and the CTE schools admitted 

students using a lottery that took into account only student race and ethnicity to achieve racial 

balance and how highly each student had prioritized the school on his or her application form.29

For the class of 2003, CTE schools entered all applicants into their lotteries, regardless of their 

prior achievement, attendance, or behavior. For the classes of 2004 and 2005, each of the CTE 

schools prescreened applicants for school-related performance. After students with weaker 

records were removed from the applicant pool, the lottery was conducted. As a result of this 

prescreening, the CTE classes of 2004 and 2005 entered high school with stronger prior 

academic performance than the class of 2003. CTE coursetaking differed between those who 

attended CTE schools and those who applied but did not attend. Those attending CTE schools 

earned approximately twice as many CTE credits as those who applied but did not attend a CTE 

school.

Career and technical courses were offered at most of the approximately 40 public high schools in 

Philadelphia. (Other types of high schools besides CTE schools include neighborhood and 

special admission [magnet] schools, plus 17 charter schools.) Some of the larger neighborhood 

high schools had a variety of CTE courses of study that rivaled those offered in CTE schools. 

But, in general, the greatest variety of occupationally focused courses was found at CTE schools.

CTE high schools operated within a district context that supported high school choice and that 

encouraged all high schools to offer college preparatory courses in mathematics, science, and 

foreign languages.

Research Questions

The Philadelphia study addressed the following three key questions:

 

29 All analyses for results reported below controlled for student race and ethnicity because empirical analysis 

showed the probability of acceptance at particular CTE schools in particular cohorts did vary according to racial and 

ethnic background.
58 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

• What is the effect of CTE schools on educational attainment, specifically, credit 

accumulation, grade promotion, and graduation?

• What is the effect of CTE schools on college preparatory coursetaking in mathematics, 

science, and foreign language?

• What effect do CTE schools have on academic performance, specifically, academic 

growth in mathematics and reading comprehension?

The natural experiment allowed two types of estimates of the impact of CTE schools to be 

calculated. The first is called an intent-to-treat (ITT) estimate, which is conventionally used in 

experiments. It addresses the question of how the outcomes of students who were accepted to 

CTE schools differed from the outcomes of students who were not accepted. Because some of 

the students accepted may not have attended, a second estimate is often calculated in 

experimental studies that takes participation or exposure into account. This is called a dosage 

estimate (DE), and it estimates the association of actual participation in CTE schools with 

outcomes.

This study relies entirely on student record data kept by the School District of Philadelphia. 

These data include enrollment and graduation status, transcript information (including course 

grades), test scores, attendance, special education status, English-language-learner status, and 

school(s) attended, from eighth grade forward, in addition to applications to high schools and 

high school admissions decisions.

Key Findings on the Impact of CTE Schools

The findings from the study represent those from one large urban community with large minority 

concentrations. The study also involves students who were motivated to apply to CTE schools. 

Therefore, these findings may not generalize to other community types or to other students. In 

addition, the study examined selective CTE schools for the classes of 2004 and 2005, where 

students applied to a CTE school and passed some moderate screens for achievement,

attendance, and behavior. Therefore, findings for the classes of 2004 and 2005 cannot be 

generalized to other CTE school models that are not selective.

• Attending a CTE high school increased the probability of students successfully 

completing the college preparatory mathematics sequence of algebra I, algebra II, and 

geometry.

The ITT estimates placed the odds of completing this course sequence as one-quarter to one-third

greater for students in CTE schools (25 percent to 32 percent increase in the odds of completing 

the sequence), while the DEs placed the odds for those attending CTE schools between two and 

three times greater than those who attended other schools (232 percent to 255 percent increase in 

odds of completing mathematics course sequence).

• Attending a CTE high school had no relationship to math achievement growth from 

eighth to 11th grades.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 59

The CTE effect for learning growth in mathematics was generally statistically insignificant, and 

the effects were always small.

• Attending a CTE high school had no relationship to reading achievement growth from

eighth to 11th grades.

The CTE effect for learning growth in reading comprehension was generally statistically 

insignificant, and the effects were always small.

• Attending a CTE high school improved on-time graduation rates in each of the three 

cohorts.

This CTE advantage in on-time completion continued to five-year graduation rates for the two 

cohorts for which data were available and to the six-year graduation rates for the one cohort for 

which data were available (13 percent to 27 percent increase in the odds of graduating using ITT 

estimate, and 111 percent to 183 percent increase in the DE). Likewise, there were CTE impacts 

on total credits earned (0.7 credits to 0.8 credits with ITT estimate, and 5.9 credits to 6.6 credits 

with DE) and total CTE courses taken (0.33 to 0.38 with ITT estimate, and 2.30 to 2.34 with 

DE).

• Estimates of impact of attending CTE schools on completing both chemistry and 

physics credits were inconsistent across cohorts and often not statistically significant.

• Estimates of impact of attending CTE schools on earning two course credits in foreign 

language were inconsistent. The DE but not the ITT indicated an impact on completing a 

foreign language course sequence (with those attending CTE schools having over twice 

the odds of successfully completing two years of a foreign language).

4.5 Conclusion

When the NACTE studies of CTE were first initiated, the context for examining the outcomes of 

CTE came largely from the conclusions of the NAVE final report and other recent studies of 

CTE-related programs. As such, the NACTE team looked for opportunities to clarify, extend, 

and deepen the research based on CTE outcomes. Studies of CTE can examine quite different 

treatments and can vary by research methodology and population. The NACTE commissioned 

studies that examined differences in student outcomes using two different program approaches.

The ELS:2002 study looked at the effects of CTE coursetaking, in particular students who take 

more versus fewer CTE courses in traditional high schools, while the Philadelphia study 

examined the effects on students of winning admission to a selective CTE high school versus 

another type of high school where they might also take CTE courses.

Two additional NACTE studies on the effects of CTE coursetaking are also being examined.

One analyzes the administrative data available in San Diego for high schools and colleges; and 

the other capitalizes on the administrative database spanning secondary and postsecondary levels 

in Florida. This interim report has findings to date from the ELS:2002 and Philadelphia studies, 

with additional follow-up to be reported on every study in the final report.
60 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

NACTE’s findings from ELS:2002 study are consistent with the conclusions reached by NAVE. 

At the secondary level, evidence suggests that CTE coursetaking does not bring about or 

contribute to academic achievement gains nor does it reduce the high school dropout rate. 

Evidence from a natural experiment in Philadelphia found a positive relationship between CTE 

school attendance in oversubscribed schools and course and school completion but no 

relationship between CTE school attendance and achievement.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 61

Chapter 5.

Career and Technical Education

in International Perspective

In reauthorizing the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 (Perkins IV), 

Congress added to section 2 a new purpose for career and technical education (CTE)—

(7) providing individuals with opportunities throughout their lifetimes to develop, in 

conjunction with other education and training programs, the knowledge and skills needed 

to keep the United States competitive [italics added].

To help maintain and improve the competitiveness of the United States, it is useful to compare 

and understand how the CTE provided by U.S. competitors differs from that in the United States. 

The importance of learning from the practices of other education systems to keep the United 

States competitive is increasingly being recognized. The Congress has also expressed interest in 

international comparisons under section 114(a)(3) of Perkins IV, which provides that National 

Center for Education Statistics (NCES) “may include international comparisons” in its 

assessments of CTE. In Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a WorldClass Education, three leading educational policy organizations—the National Governors 

Association (NGA), Council of Chief State School Officers and Achieve, Inc.—call for 

benchmarking U.S. education systems against those of top-performing nations.

This chapter30 provides an introduction to CTE—more widely known internationally as technical 

and vocational education and training, or simply as vocational education—in nations that are 

economic competitors to the United States and are members of (or participants in data collections 

sponsored by) the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).31

The analysis of OECD data addresses two questions:

• How does the mix of skilled and unskilled workers in the U.S. workforce compare with 

the mix in other OECD countries?

• How does the preparation of secondary CTE students in vocational education compare 

with the preparation in other OECD countries?

The OECD data used here and published in its report Education at a Glance 2008 provide a basis 

for initiating a discussion of what the United States needs to learn from its close competitors 

about providing CTE. Further research will be needed for achieving a full understanding of the 

different approaches to vocational education taken by other nations and of their applicability to 

the U.S. CTE system.

 

30 This chapter was prepared by ED staffers Jay Noell (retired) and Michael Fong. Sam Nayman, U.S. Department 

of Education intern, provided research assistance.

31 Unfortunately, China and India are not members of OECD and have not been participating in OECD data 

collections for the Education at a Glance series from which this chapter draws.
62 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

The OECD data used in the chapter have strengths and weaknesses. A strength of the data is that 

they are collected from a range of developed nations using standard definitions and terminology, 

thus permitting comparative analyses. But capturing the unique features of a nation’s educational 

system using terms designed to be universally applicable often means missing important 

subtleties about how that system really works. Hence, international comparisons from large-scale 

studies are only suggestive of promising practices and require further in-depth analysis;

ultimately, actual validation occurs only by evaluating promising practices within the U.S. 

context. In some instances, it also means that a nation (sometimes the United States) cannot 

provide the data requested by OECD because its data system uses very different definitions and 

produces data that cannot be easily mapped into OECD categories.

5.1 OECD Nations

Vocational education in 15 OECD nations and CTE in the United States are compared. The 

nations were identified as top competitors to the United States in The Global Competitiveness 

Report, 2009–2010, issued by the World Economic Forum (Schwab, 2009), and had data 

reported in OECD’s Education at a Glance 2008 report (see Section 5.7 for more detail on the 

included nations).

According to The Global Competitiveness Report, 2009–2010 (Schwab, 2009), 13 of the nations 

compared with the United States in this chapter are among the top 20 nations most competitive 

with the United States, while the other two, Italy and the Russian Federation, are ranked 48 and 

63, respectively (see Exhibit 31). The nations identified by the World Economic Forum were 

linked with the nations included in the OECD report (2008) that have relatively complete data on 

their vocational education systems.32

5.2 Labor Market Context

Before examining the OECD education data to compare CTE in the United States with the 

vocational education provided in the 15 selected competitor countries, it is worth briefly

examining the skill-level distributions of occupations in the economies of these countries.

Occupational skill-level distributions are important because education systems need to provide 

new (and upgrade continuing) workers with the requisite knowledge, skills, and abilities needed 

to successfully perform jobs requiring different levels of skill. It is likely that some of the 

differences in the characteristics of the education systems among nations are related to 

differences in the occupational skill-level distributions in their economies. Some countries will 

have more—and others fewer—highly skilled jobs, for example, and this could affect the kinds

of education offered in a country.

 

32 Among other top 20 U.S. competitors, Singapore (3), Hong Kong (11), and Taiwan (12) are not further compared 

in this chapter because they do not participate in the OECD survey; Denmark (5), Norway (14), and New Zealand

(20) are not included because key data on their vocational education systems are missing.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 63

The occupational skill-level distributions in the United States and the 15 selected comparison 

nations are found in Exhibit 28. The OECD uses the International Standard Classification of 

Occupations (ISCO) in defining skilled jobs (those at what are defined in ISCO as skill levels 3 

and 4), semiskilled jobs (skill level 2), and unskilled jobs (level 1). Because of missing data (e.g., 

the United States did not provide separate data on semi-skilled and unskilled jobs), occupations 

in Exhibit 28 are divided into two categories: skilled jobs, and semiskilled and unskilled jobs.

• Skilled jobs encompass professionals, managers, technicians, and associate professionals.

They require at least some tertiary education (usually called postsecondary education in 

the United States). For example, jobs at skill level 4 require a degree, in the United 

States, at the bachelor’s level or above, while level 3 requires completion of at least a 

short or medium tertiary program. Sample skilled occupations include engineers, 

secondary school teachers, computer systems analysts, shop managers, medical 

laboratory technicians, and broadcasting and recording technicians.

• Semiskilled jobs typically involve the performance of tasks such as operating machinery 

and electronic equipment, driving vehicles, maintaining and repairing equipment, and 

manipulating, ordering, and storing information. They require at least the completion of 

lower secondary education (as defined by the 1997 revision of the International Standard 

Classification of Education [ISCED97] level 2, or grades 7 through 9 in the United 

States), and many require completion of upper secondary schooling (ISCED97 level 3, or 

grades 10–12 in the United States), including a significant component of vocationspecific education undertaken after the completion of secondary education (ISCED97

level 4). Sample occupations include account clerks, machinists, police officers, 

hairdressers, electricians, and mechanics.

• Unskilled jobs, which typically constitute less than 10 percent of all occupations in 

OECD countries, require performance of simple and routine physical or manual tasks.

Completion of primary education (ISCED level 1, or grades 1 through 6 in the United 

States) may be required, plus possibly some on-the-job training. Sample occupations 

include office cleaners, freight handlers, gardeners, and kitchen assistants.

Between 1998 and 2006, the share of jobs in the skilled category increased in the United States 

and all competitor countries except the Netherlands. Among all OECD countries, almost 

4 percent more workers were in skilled occupations, and about 4 percent less were in semiskilled jobs in 2006 than in 1998. OECD (2008) identifies technicians, in particular, as the 

largest occupational group in 2006. Technicians are in the skilled occupation category and now 

outnumber those in craft and related trades, which are in semiskilled occupations and were the 

largest occupational group in 1998. Note that the OECD advises caution in interpreting these 

figures since some countries have revised their ISCO classification in the past several years.
64 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

Exhibit 28. Proportion of 25- to 64-year-olds in the workforce, by skill level of occupation in 

selected countries: 2006 

Country/economy Total (%)aSkilled (%)

Semi- and 

unskilled (%)

Change in percent 

skilled, 1998 to 2006

United States 100 39 61 2

Australia 100 51 50 —

Austria 100 40 60 7

Belgium 100 46 54 4

Canada 100 46 54 3

Finland 100 48 52 4

France 100 42 58 5

Germany 100 44 56 4

Italy 100 41 59 11

Japan 100 — — —

Korea 100 — — —

Netherlands 100 53 47 −1

Sweden 100 46 55 3

Switzerland 100 49 52 4

United Kingdom 100 44 56 1

Russian Federation 100 — — —

Exhibit reads: The percentage of U.S. 25- to 64-year-olds in the workforce who are in skilled occupations is 39 

percent.

a

Totals may not add to 100 because of rounding.

— Not available or not applicable.

SOURCE: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Education at a Glance 2008 (2008, Table A1.6).

Perhaps the most interesting data in Exhibit 28 concern the relative proportions of workers in 

skilled and semiskilled and unskilled occupations in the United States, compared with its 

competitor nations. Among the reporting countries, the United States has the smallest share of 

workers in skilled occupations, at 39 percent, and the largest share in semi-skilled and unskilled 

jobs, at 61 percent. The median share of skilled jobs among competitor countries is 46 percent, 

and at the upper end the Netherlands reports 53 percent and Switzerland 49 percent skilled 

occupations (with the converse being the share of workers in semiskilled and unskilled 

occupations).

The relative proportions of workers in skilled versus semi-skilled or unskilled occupations have 

implications for the kinds of education needed for preparing students for the workforce. Since 

skilled occupations typically call for tertiary education, often at the level of the bachelor’s degree 

in the United States, while semiskilled occupations generally require completion of upper 

secondary schooling (a high school diploma) or some nontertiary postsecondary training, one 

might expect to see differences among countries in the degree to which they enroll students in 

tertiary education programs leading to skilled occupations.

5.3 Upper Secondary Education

OECD uses the classification system and definitions for education developed in ISCED97. The 

basic categories relevant for vocational and career and technical education are upper secondary

and tertiary education levels.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 65

Secondary education (which begins after six years of primary education) encompasses two 

levels: lower secondary education and upper secondary education.

• Lower secondary education (which typically takes three years) essentially completes a 

basic education and coincides with the end of compulsory education in many economies.

In the United States, lower secondary education corresponds to grades 7 through 9.

• Upper secondary education (which typically also lasts three years) provides students with 

more in-depth knowledge to prepare them for tertiary education or entry into the labor 

market. In the United States, upper secondary corresponds to grades 10–12.

Upper secondary education (level 3 in the ISCED97 categories) encompasses three types of 

program orientation—

• General education (3A) provides students with a deeper understanding of a subject (or 

group of subjects), especially to prepare them for further education at a higher (or the 

same) level (e.g., tertiary education). Such programs are typically school-based and may 

or may not provide participants with a labor-market-relevant qualification.

• Pre-vocational or pre-technical education (3B) is intended to introduce students to the 

world of work and prepare them for entry into vocational or technical education 

programs. Successful completion generally does not lead to a labor-market-relevant 

vocational or technical qualification, but such education must have at least 25 percent of 

its content be vocational or technical.

• Vocational or technical education (3C) is designed to have students acquire practical 

skills, know-how, and understanding necessary for employment in a particular occupation 

or trade or class of occupations or trades. Successful completion leads to a labor-marketrelevant vocational qualification recognized by competent authorities in the country in 

which it was obtained (e.g., ministry of education, employers’ associations). Some 

countries combine school- and work-based learning in their vocational programs, and 

OECD classifies a program as school-based if at least 75 percent of the curriculum is 

presented at school.

Upper secondary school enrollment patterns of the United States and its competitor countries are 

shown in Exhibit 29. Because the United States does not have routine data collections including 

information on vocational programs at the upper secondary school level meeting the ISCED97 

definitions, the proportion of secondary students whose curriculum is made up of at least 

25 percent vocational or technical (occupational) courses must be estimated using special 

periodic data collections. In this chapter we use the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002,

sponsored by the National Center for Education Statistics in the U.S. Department of Education,

which collected transcript data for high school graduates in 2004. Among those 2004 high school 

graduates, about 6 percent earned 25 percent or more of their credits in CTE occupational 

courses (for more detail, see Chapter 3 above), the share of the curriculum specified in ISCED97. 

This figure is used in Exhibit 29 instead of the number reported in Education at a Glance 2008

(OECD, 2008).
66 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

Exhibit 29. Upper secondary school enrollment distribution in the United States and selected 

other countries, by program orientation percentage: 2006

Country/economy Total General

Vocational, 

total

Vocational 

type: Prevocational

Vocational 

type: 

Vocational

Combined 

schooland workbased

Includes 

enrollment in 

formal 

apprenticeships

United States 100 94 6 — — — No

Australia 100 38 62 — 62 — Yes

Austria 100 22 78 6 72 33 Yes

Belgium 100 31 69 — 69 4 Yes

Canada 100 95 5 — 5 — Yes

Finland 100 35 65 — 65 11 Yes

France 100 57 43 — 43 12 Yes

Germany 100 41 59 — 59 44 Yes

Italy 100 40 60 35 25 — —

Japan 100 75 25 1 24 — No

Korea 100 72 28 — 28 — No

Netherlands 100 33 67 — 67 18 Yes

Sweden 100 45 55 1 54 — No

Switzerland 100 36 64 — 64 58 Yes

United Kingdom 100 58 42 — 42 — Yes

Russian Federation 100 56 44 14 30 — Yes

Exhibit reads: The percentage of U.S. upper secondary school students in a general education program is 

94 percent.

— Not available or not applicable.

SOURCES: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Education at a Glance 2008 (2008, Table C1.1,

p. 326); U.S. estimate based on National Center for Education Statistics’ Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 for 2004 high school 

graduates.

OECD data show that secondary students in competitor nations devote a higher share of their 

course work to secondary vocational education programs than the United States, with the 

exception of Canada (see Exhibit 27). Using OECD standards of vocational education 

enrollment, in most European countries examined, almost half or more of secondary school 

graduates enroll in a vocational-oriented program (in which they earn 25 percent or more of their 

total credits). Even in Korea and Japan, with their strong academic traditions, a quarter of 

secondary graduates concentrate in vocational education by OECD standards. By contrast, since 

the early 1980s the percentage of U.S. secondary students meeting OECD standards declined 

from about 18 percent to 6 percent.

It is worth noting that 25 percent of total credits earned in CTE in the United States is well above 

the definition of three CTE credits in one occupational area used to define a CTE concentrator

for Perkins IV accountability reporting. The OECD definition of a vocational education 

concentration would be equivalent to five or six CTE credits in the United States, which is more 

typical of U.S. career academy models or programs with an apprenticeship or internship 

component. The OECD data raise but cannot answer the question of the likely effectiveness for 

U.S. secondary students taking these types of CTE programs.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 67

Among U.S. competitors, 9 of 15 have a majority of their students enrolled in vocational 

(including prevocational) programs instead of general education programs. Besides the United 

States, exceptions include Canada, France, Japan, Korea, the United Kingdom, and the Russian 

Federation. However, only Canada is similar to the U.S. in that it has a percentage of students 

enrolled only in vocational education programs around the 5 percent level.

With the exception of Italy and the Russian Federation, most of the students in vocational 

programs are in programs leading to a labor-market-relevant credential (or an ISCED97 3C 

vocational program; enrollment in 3B pre-vocational programs is relatively low).

Among countries with a majority of students in upper secondary vocational programs, six have at 

least 10 percent of enrollment in programs jointly school- and work-based. In Germany and 

Switzerland, for example, most vocational students are in such programs.

All the countries in Exhibit 29, with the exception of the United States, Japan, Korea, and 

Sweden (and possibly Italy), have apprenticeship programs that are a recognized part of their 

educational system. The United States does have apprenticeship programs, but they are not part 

of the formal education system (and, at the federal government level, are coordinated through the 

U.S. Department of Labor).33 In some countries (e.g., Austria and Germany), students are 

responsible for securing an apprenticeship. Across the countries with apprenticeship programs 

(which start after completion of lower secondary schooling), the duration ranges from one to four 

years. Successful completion of the apprenticeship usually results in the awarding of an upper 

secondary qualification (or, in some cases, a postsecondary, nontertiary one34).

5.4 Upper Secondary School Completion Requirements, by Program 

Orientation

Student performance is sometimes measured by the number of required courses or hours of 

instruction in a program that a student must take to complete a program and earn a credential, 

diploma, or degree. And, sometimes, it is reflected in the use of assessments or tests at various 

points in a program, including at the end, where a test may be used to ensure that a program

completer has met at least minimum standards of competence or proficiency, as measured by a 

test (an exit test) before a credential, diploma, or degree is awarded.

There is particular concern in many countries about the preparation of general versus vocational 

programs at the upper secondary school level. In some countries, vocational programs are seen as 

less rigorous than general programs, and there is a concern that this shortchanges students by not 

adequately preparing them for career and life success. Students need to be equipped with the 

skills that will allow them to continue learning throughout their lifetimes so that they may adapt 

 

33 The School-to-Work Opportunities Act of 1994 supported developing apprenticeships as part of local education 

systems in the United States but was not reauthorized.

34 The ISCED97 categories also include level 4, postsecondary nontertiary education programs that straddle 

secondary and tertiary levels. In some countries, such programs are considered secondary; in others, they are 

considered postsecondary. These programs are primarily vocational or technical in nature. In the United States, such 

programs often take the form of vocational certificate programs (often of a year or less duration) offered by 

community colleges or proprietary educational institutions. Because OECD data are sparse for this level, they are

not considered here.
68 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

to changing economic and occupational demands. Such learning might occur immediately after 

secondary schooling, through tertiary education or training, or it might occur later, after some 

experience is acquired in the labor market. But students need to have mastered the foundational 

skills and knowledge necessary not only for immediate entry into the labor market but also for 

being able to successfully continue into tertiary schooling.

Among competitor countries to the United States, the variety of approaches taken to ensure 

appropriate rigor in terms of upper secondary education program completion requirements is 

shown in Exhibit 30 by type of program orientation (general vs. vocational).

The options include the use of a final exam, a series of exams during the program, or a specified 

number of required course hours.35 It can also be noted that only two of these countries (France 

and Italy) have national examinations in lower secondary general education programs.

Regarding upper secondary program completion requirements in countries having both general 

and vocational (which includes prevocational) programs, the strategy to ensure program rigor 

through program completion requirements is typically identical. If a general program has a final 

exam, the vocational program has a final exam. Similarly, if the completion requirement for a 

general program is in terms of number of courses, a similar requirement will hold for vocational 

programs.

In terms of the specific strategies used, only the United States and Korea rely on a specified 

number of course hours for students to complete their programs and earn an upper secondary 

credential. In the United States, those requirements are generally specified in terms of Carnegie 

units (i.e., completion of one hour per day for two semesters to earn one credit).

Competitor countries to the United States, except for Japan and Korea, widely rely on exams to 

ensure rigor: either final exams or a series of exams during the program. Some of the states in the 

United States do require exams—either final (school exit) exams or during the program (end-ofprogram exams)—and some do not. A similar situation appears in Australia, which also has a 

federal structure, with territories as well as states.

Most competitor countries examined in Exhibit 30 require a final exam. However, in some 

countries—such as Finland and Sweden—not all programs do. But a number of countries rely on 

both a series of exams during the program as well as a final exam. These include Belgium, 

Germany, the Netherlands, and Switzerland.

 

35 An option pursued by some countries—including Japan—is to combine course hour requirements and exams.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 69

Exhibit 30. Completion requirements for upper secondary school programs in the United States 

and selected other countries, by program orientation: 2006

Country/

economy

General 

programs: Final 

exam?

General 

programs: 

Series of 

exams 

during 

program?

General 

programs: 

Only specified 

number of 

course 

hours?

Vocational 

programs: 

Final 

exam?a

Vocational 

programs: 

Series of 

exams 

during 

program?a

Vocational 

programs: 

Only 

specified 

number of 

course 

hours?a

United States 20 states Y/30N Some states Y — — —

Australia N/YbY N N Y N

Austria Y Y N Y/NcY N

Belgium Y Y N Y Y N

Canada-Quebecd N Y N N Y N

Finland Y/N Y N — — —

France Y N N Y/N Y —

Germany Y Y N Y Y N

Italy Y N N Y Y/Nc N

Japan N N N N N N

Korea N N Y N N Y

Netherlands Y Y N Y Y N

Sweden Y/N Y/N Y/N — — —

Switzerland Y Y — Y Y —

United Kingdom N

e

Y N — Y N

Russian Federation — — — — — —

Exhibit reads: Twenty of the States in the United States require a final exam in order to complete a general upper 

secondary school program.

Y = yes; N = no.

— Not available or not applicable.

a

Includes prevocational programs.

b Completion requirements vary by state or territory.

c Some vocational and prevocational programs have different requirements.

d

This information about Canada only applies to Quebec.

e

There is usually no final examination, but some programs can be completed that way.

SOURCE: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Education at a Glance 2008 (2008, Table X1.3).

5.5 Career and Technical Education in International Perspective

In assembling data published by OECD in Education at a Glance 2008 on career and technical 

education in the United States and 15 of its competitor countries, this chapter has identified a 

number of contextual findings, including—

• The share of skilled occupations increased in all but one competitor country between 

2000 and 2006, but the United States has relatively fewer workers in skilled occupations 

and more semi-skilled and unskilled occupations than the 15 competitor nations 

examined. Further analyses are needed to assess whether this reflects a lower supply of 

skilled workers or a different occupational structure.

• Based on OECD’s definition of a secondary vocational education program, which has at 

least 25 percent of total course work as being vocational or technical in content, the 
70 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

United States at 6 percent is near the international bottom in its small share of secondary 

students enrolling in a greater proportion of vocational education course work compared 

with OECD countries. Moreover, nine of 15 competitor nations have more students 

enrolled in secondary vocational programs than in secondary general programs.

• Among countries with expenditure data at the secondary level, vocational education is 

typically more expensive to provide than general education. Seven of the eight 

competitor nations reporting data spend more on vocational education than on general 

education.

• OECD countries typically use the same completion requirements (e.g., exams or course 

hours) to ensure program rigor in secondary general and vocational programs (although, 

e.g., the exams or courses would not necessarily be identical).

– Most competitor nations use final exams or a series of exams during secondary 

educational programs to ensure program rigor and the competency level of 

completers, but such practices are found in only about half of the states in the United 

States.

– Only the United States and Korea address upper secondary program completion 

requirements primarily through a specified number of course hours (usually in 

Carnegie units in the United States).

5.6 Annex: America’s Global Competitors

The World Economic Forum approach to calculating economic competitiveness examines the 

institutions, policies, and factors that determine the level of productivity of a country or economy 

because productivity sets the sustainable level of prosperity that can be earned by an economy 

(Schwab, 2009). In this perspective, productivity not only determines a country’s level of 

income, it is also central to determining an economy’s growth potential.

In examining a nation’s competitiveness, education is a central factor, or as the World Economic 

Forum terms it, “pillar of competitiveness” (Schwab, 2009). Today’s globalizing economies need 

to nurture pools of well-educated workers who are able to adapt rapidly to their changing 

technical and economic environments. More specifically, education and training are seen as 

efficiency-enhancing factors interacting with and supporting “innovation and [business] 

sophistication” factors that are critical if a nation is to remain among the very most competitive 

economies.36

 

36 The World Economic Forum classifies “higher education and training” as one pillar of competitiveness and 

“health and primary education” as another pillar. In its terms, higher education and training covers secondary and 

tertiary (the latter, in U.S. terms, postsecondary) enrollment as well as the quality of education as assessed by the 

business community. The forum also notes the importance of vocational and continuous on-the-job training—which 

is neglected in many economies—for ensuring a constant upgrading of workers’ skills to the changing needs of the 

evolving economy (Schwab, 2009).
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 71

As Exhibit 31 below indicates, the United States is identified as the world’s second most 

competitive economy in 2009–10, behind Switzerland and down from being the most 

competitive nation in 2008–09. According to Schwab (2009), the United States also does not 

have the top-rated pillar for higher education and training (which covers secondary and 

tertiary—in the United States, postsecondary—levels of education). That distinction is held by 

Finland, while the United States ranks 7. Countries ranking higher besides Finland are Denmark 

(2), Sweden (3), Iceland (4), Singapore (5), and Switzerland (6).

A strong association exists between overall global economic competitiveness and the strength of 

the higher education and training pillar. The rank correlation between the overall Global 

Competitiveness Index score and the higher education and training pillar score among the 

22 countries in Exhibit 32 is over 0.8 (on a scale of zero to one), meaning an overlap in variation 

of over 65 percent between overall competitiveness and strength of higher education and 

training. This suggests that while overall competitiveness depends on other factors, the higher 

education and training pillar (covering secondary and tertiary education levels) is clearly 

associated with maintaining and improving a nation’s overall competitiveness.
72 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

Exhibit 31. Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) rankings of selected nations: 2009–10 and

2008–09

Countries/economies 

examined using 

OECD education data

Overall 

rank, 

2009–10

Overall 

score, 

2009–10

Higher 

education and 

training pillar 

rank, 

2009–10a

Higher 

education and 

training pillar 

score, 

2009–10a

Overall 

ranking, 

2008–09

Switzerland 1 5.60 6 5.60 2

United States 2 5.59 7 5.57 1

Sweden 4 5.51 3 5.76 4

Finland 6 5.43 1 5.97 6

Germany 7 5.37 21 5.15 7

Japan 8 5.37 23 5.06 9

Canada 9 5.33 9 5.50 10

Netherlands 10 5.32 10 5.49 8

United Kingdom 13 5.19 18 5.27 12

Australia 15 5.15 14 5.33 18

France 16 5.13 15 5.30 16

Austria 17 5.13 17 5.19 14

Belgium 18 5.09 8 5.52 19

Korea (Rep.) 19 5.00 16 5.24 13

Italy 48 4.31 49 4.35 49

Russian Federation 63 4.15 51 4.30 51

Othersb

Singapore 3 5.55 5 5.62 5

Denmark 5 5.46 2 5.90 3

Hong Kong, SAR 11 5.22 31 4.74 11

Taiwan, China 12 5.22 10 5.52 17

Norway 14 5.17 12 5.48 15

New Zealand 20 4.98 4 5.69 23

Exhibit reads: Switzerland was ranked first overall on the GCI for 2009–10.

a Schwab (2009) defines this higher education pillar or component index as spanning secondary and tertiary (in the U.S., 

postsecondary) education (primary—or, in the U.S., elementary—education is included with health in a separate pillar). The higher 

education pillar measures secondary and tertiary enrollment rates as well as the quality of education as assessed by the business 

community; the extent of training is also factored in because of the importance of vocational and continuous on-the-job training for 

ensuring workers’ skills are upgraded to the changing needs of the evolving economy.

b Singapore, Hong Kong, and Taiwan are not further compared in this chapter because they do not participate in the Organization 

for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) survey; neither do China (ranked 29) and India (49). Denmark, Norway, and 

New Zealand are not used because key data on vocational education are missing.

SOURCE: Schwab, K. 2009. The Global Competitiveness Report 2009–2010. Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum. 

Downloaded October 30, 2009, from http://www.weforum.org/pdf/GCR09/GCR20092010fullreport.pdf.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 73

Chapter 6.

Implications and Final Report

This interim report is the first of two reports to Congress that make up the National Assessment 

of Career and Technical Education (NACTE). The report lays out a framework for evaluating 

state and local implementation efforts under the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical 

Education Act of 2006 (Perkins IV) and in measuring student successes in career and technical 

education (CTE). The purpose of the interim report is to describe the research approach and 

present findings to date from the national assessment. The interim report provides baseline 

information and builds a foundation for the more comprehensive final report.

6.1 Implications

These interim report findings about CTE participation, effectiveness, and international 

benchmarking with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)

countries raise questions that warrant further exploration in the final NACTE report and beyond.

These issues include:

• How to assess the outcomes of the increasing proportion of students who invest in CTE 

courses (take three or more credits) but take fewer than three credits in a single 

occupational area (explorers). CTE explorers are not part of the current Perkins

performance accountability system yet they are a growing majority of CTE investors. 

Research could examine the implications of including the category to assess program 

performance. Given that explorers do not concentrate in any one CTE field, the program 

questions to address are what are the expected outcomes of explorers and how could 

these outcomes be assessed within the accountability system?

• How to reconcile different results from studies about the benefits of secondary CTE on 

academic coursetaking, achievement, and high school graduation? Some studies find no 

such benefits from CTE, but other studies find CTE strengthening academic coursetaking 

and graduation rates. Research could explore whether these differences arise from 

differences in study methodology, nature of CTE courses and programs, or differences in 

CTE population and context. Research could also move beyond only exploring average 

effects of CTE without taking into account program variation or implementation quality 

but instead focus on assessing the benefits from a set of defined and well-implemented 

programs.

6.2 Final Report

Perkins IV calls for an independent evaluation and assessment of career and technical education 

programs funded under the Act to examine both program implementation and outcomes. In 

response, the U.S. Department of Education, in consultation with the NACTE Independent 

Advisory Panel, formulated a research agenda that lays out the full range of studies and 

methodologies that are addressing the legislative requirements of the national assessment

(Exhibit ES-1). The final report will present results from these studies in preparation for future 

discussions around the reauthorization of the Perkins Act.
74 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

The final report will include qualitative evidence of secondary and postsecondary CTE 

implementation and, when possible Tech Prep implementation, based on state and local surveys 

and case studies. Additionally, the final report will examine the secondary and postsecondary 

experiences of students who concentrated in CTE in high school using quantitative analysis, and 

earnings analysis when possible.

In particular, the final report will (1) build on previous analyses of student participation in CTE 

by updating enrollment trends using the latest statistics from the National Center for Education 

Statistics (the National Assessment of Educational Progress, 2009 High School Transcript 

Study); (2) present descriptive statistics of secondary CTE teachers; (3) assess the effects of key 

legislative provisions on state and local implementation of Perkins IV particularly with respect to 

programs of study at the secondary and postsecondary levels; (4) examine the effectiveness of 

CTE participation in improving student outcomes; (5) establish how well new performance 

reporting requirements are working to promote accountability and program improvement at the 

secondary and postsecondary levels; and (6) assess the distribution and targeting of Perkins IV

funding at both the secondary and postsecondary levels.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 75

References

Achieve, Inc. 2009. Closing the Expectations Gap 2009: An Annual 50-State Progress Report on 

the Alignment of High School Policies with the Demands of College and Careers. 

Washington, DC: Author.

ACT. 2008b. Making the Dream a Reality. Iowa City, IA: Author.

Alliance for Excellent Education. 2009. Reinventing the Federal Role in Education: Supporting 

the Goal of College and Career Readiness for All Students. Washington, DC: Author.

Arum, R., and Y. Shavit. 1995. Secondary vocational education and the transition from school to 

work. Sociology of Education 68:187–204.

Boesel, D., B. Ferrar, D. Hollinger, L. Hudson, C. Masten, R. Myers, S. Schneiderman, and D. 

To. 1994. National Assessment of Vocational Education, Interim Report to Congress

(NLE 98-2023). Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, 

U.S. Department of Education.

Bozick, R., and B. Dalton. 2013. Career and Technical Education and Academic Progress at the 

End of High School: Evidence from the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002. Research 

Triangle Park, NC: RTI International.

Bradby, D., and L. Hudson. 2008. The 2007 Revision of the Career/Technical Education Portion 

of the Secondary School Taxonomy (NCES 2008-030). Washington, DC: National Center 

for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Burkam, D. T., and V. E. Lee. 2003. Mathematics, Foreign Language, and Science Coursetaking 

and the NELS:88 Transcript Data (NCES 2003-01). Washington, DC: National Center 

for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.

Crain, R., A. Allen, R. Thaler, D. Sullivan, G. Zellman, J. Little, and D. Quigley. 1999. The 

Effects of Academic Career Magnet Education on High Schools and Their Graduates.

Berkeley, CA: University of California, National Center for Research in Vocational 

Education.

Dalton, B., E. Lauff, R. Henke, M. Alt, and X. Li. 2013. From Track to Field: Trends in Career 

and Technical Education Across 3 Decades. Research Triangle, NC: RTI International

and Berkeley, CA: MPR Associates.

Gamoran, A., ed. 1998. The Quality of Vocational Education. Washington, DC: 1994 National 

Assessment of Vocational Education, U.S. Department of Education.

Handel, M. J. 2007. A New Survey of Workplace Skills, Technology, and Management Practices 

(STAMP): Background and Descriptive Statistics. Posted at: 

http://www7.nationalacademies.org/cfe/New_Survey_Workplace_Skills_Presentation_P

DF.pdf.
76 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

Hoachlander, E. G., P. Kaufman, and K. Levesque. 1992. Vocational Education in the United 

States: 1969–1990 (NCES 92-669). Washington, DC: National Center for Education 

Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.

Hudson, L., and J. Laird. 2009. New Indicators of High School Career and Technical Education 

Coursetaking: Class of 2005 (NCES 2009-038). Washington, DC: National Center for 

Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Kemple, J. J., and C. Willner. 2008. Career Academies: Long-term Impacts on Labor Market 

Outcomes, Educational Attainment, and Transitions to Adulthood. New York: MDRC.

Levesque, K. 2003a. Public High School Graduates Who Participated in Vocational/Technical 

Education: 1982–1998 (NCES 2003-024). Washington, DC: National Center for 

Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Levesque, K. 2003b. Trends in High School Vocational/Technical Coursetaking: 1982–1998

(NCES 2003-025). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of 

Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Levesque, K., J. Laird, E. Hensley, S. P. Choy, E. F. Cataldi, and L. Hudson. 2008. Career and 

Technical Education in the United States: 1990–2005 (NCES 2008-035). Washington, 

DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. 

Department of Education.

Levesque, K., D. Lauen, P. Teitelbaum, M. Alt, and S. Liebrera. 2000. Vocational Education in 

the United States: Toward the Year 2000 (NCES 2000-029). Washington, DC: U.S. 

Department of Education.

Levesque, K., M. Premo, D. Emanuel, S. Klein, R. Henke, R. Vergun, and S. Kagehiro. 1995. 

Vocational Education in the United States: The Early 1990s (NCES 95-024). 

Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of 

Education.

Levy, F., and R. J. Murnane. 2004. The New Division of Labor: How Computers Are Creating 

the Next Job Market. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Millsap, M. A., and L. D. Muraskin. 1992. “United States: Federal Vocational Education 

Policy.” In The International Encyclopedia of Education (2nd ed.), ed. T. Husen and T. 

N. Postlethwaite. Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.

National Commission on Excellence in Education. 1983. A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for 

Educational Reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Neild, R., C. Boccanfuso, and V. Byrnes. 2013. The Academic Impacts of Career and Technical 

Schools: A Case Study of a Large Urban School District. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins 

University, Center for Social Organization of Schools
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 77

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2008. Education at a 

Glance 2008. Paris: OECD. Posted at: 

http://www.sourceoecd.org/education/9789264046283.

Schwab, K. 2009. The Global Competitiveness Report 2009–2010. Geneva, Switzerland: World 

Economic Forum. Posted at: 

http://www.weforum.org/pdf/GCR09/GCR20092010fullreport.pdf.

Silverberg, M., E. Warner, M. Fong, and D. Goodwin. 2004. National Assessment of Vocational 

Education (NAVE). Washington, DC: Policy and Program Studies Service, Office of 

Under Secretary, U.S. Department of Education.
78 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

This page intentionally left blank.
National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report 79

Appendix A.

Perkins IV NACTE Requirements

SECTION 114(d)(2)(B)

CARL D. PERKINS CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION

IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2006

NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION (NACTE)

MANDATED BY THE CARL D. PERKINS CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION 

ACT OF 2006 (Perkins IV) (20 U.S.C. 2301 et seq. as amended by P.L. 109-270)

Legislative requirements:

Pursuant to section 114(d)(2)(B) of Perkins IV, “[t]he assessment required...shall include 

descriptions and evaluations of—

“(i) the extent to which State, local, and tribal entities have developed, implemented, or 

improved State and local career and technical education programs assisted under the Act;

“(ii) the preparation and qualifications of teachers and faculty of career and technical education 

(such as meeting State established teacher certification or licensing requirements), as well as 

shortages of such teachers and faculty;

“(iii) academic and career and technical education achievement and employment outcomes of 

career and technical education, including analyses of—

(I) the extent and success of the integration of rigorous and challenging academic and 

career and technical education for students participating in career and technical 

education programs, including a review of the effect of such integration on the 

academic and technical proficiency achievement of such students (including the 

number of such students receiving a secondary school diploma; and

(II) the extent to which career and technical education programs prepare students, 

including special populations, for subsequent employment in high skill, high wage 

occupations (including those in which mathematics and science skills are critical), or 

for participation in postsecondary education;

“(iv) employer involvement in, and satisfaction with, career and technical education programs 

and career and technical education students’ preparation for employment;

“(v) the participation of students in career and technical education programs;

“(vi) the use of educational technology and distance learning with respect to career and 

technical education and tech prep programs; and
80 National Assessment of Career and Technical Education: Interim Report

“(vii) the effect of State and local adjusted levels of performance on the delivery of career and 

technical education services, including the percentage of career and technical education and 

tech prep students meeting the adjusted levels of performance described in section 113.”
The Department of Education’s mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global 

competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.

www.ed.gov