DOCHMENT RESUME

ED 208 227 CE 030 345

, II

AUTHOR Greenan, James

TITLE Use of State .Special Needs Set-Aside Funds for

Program Imprdveme t Activities. Policy Research and

Resource Series:. Document 8:

INSTITUTION Illinois Univ., rbana. Leadership Training

Inst./Vocational and Special Education.

SPONS AGENCY Office of Special Education (ED), Washington, D.C.

. Personnel Preparation.

PUB /ATE Oct

GRANT G0079 0952

NOTE 94p.; For related documents see CE 030 343-344, ED

194 743-745, 4nd ED 201 745.

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC04 Pigs Pgstage.

-DESCRIPTORS Abstracts; Agency Cooperation; *Demonstrati?n

Programs; *Disabilities: Educational Finance;

Elementary Secondary Education; Federal State

-Relationship; Innovation; Program Development;

.*Program Improvement; Research; *Special Education;

*Statewide Planning; *Vocational Education;

Vocational Rehabilitation

IDENTIFIERS 4 Education Amendments 1976

ABSTRACT

A study was conducted to examine the exient to which

program imprOxbient funds frdm Public Law 9'4-482 were used by states

to aid state vocational education programs serving handicapped and

disadvantaged students-through research,4exemplary and innovative

programs,-curriculum development, vocational guidance and counseling;.

And vocational education-personnel training. Information was-gathered

-through a survey of state research coordinating unit (ECU) directors,

in all states, with 100 pa/tent participation. The study indicated

that the 10 percent handicapped and 20 percent disadvantaged

set-aside funds'were not generally uged by most states.to fund

program improvement programs and activities. This does not

neceesarily'sggge4t that the stated have not funded program

improvement.ictivitAA0 that had an impact upon spdcial needslearners, nor that he set - asides have ,not been appropriaieiy used as

'basic grantS,tO support the excess costs of educating 'handicapped an

disadvantaged students in vocational education.. Future state funding . policies should reflect increased colldboration among vocational

education, special 'education, vocational rehabilitation, and, other

agencies. Program efforts should be made"to meet the needs of the

handicapped and disadvantaged populations with' potentially less fdnds

and funding sources. (The Appendix contains brief' abstracts df

various program improvement projects funded by the states.) (KC)

**********************************************#*****************#******

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made

from the original document. , * *****************4*****************************************************

1
i

I.

( . ,

...

.*

Use of State Special Needs Set -Aside Funds.

` for Program Improvement Activities

Policy Research and Resource Seriets: Document 8

,

James P. Greenan

;Research and Development Coordinator

Leadership Training Institute/

Vocational and Special Education

University of Illinois

at Urbana-Champaign

4

A Publication of the

LEADERSHIP TRAINING INSTITUTE/

'F00, VOCATIONAL AND SPECIAL: EDUCATION

4

I

College of ,Education

University of Illinois

at Urbana-Champaign

Sponsored by

Division of Personnel Preparation

Office of Special Education

U.S. Education Department

1

1

,

t_. ,

U S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION

CENTER (ERIC)

) /Thts document has been reproduced as 4 recened front the person or orconizahon

orirattr)g It

Minor changes have been made to Improve

reProduchon quehry .

, Points of view or opinions stated in this docu

ment do not ntreessanty represent off ,cal Nit u, POstron or poky

I

1

c -1

Sr

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE TH

MATERIAL HAS, BEEN GRANTED E

t

' TO THE EDUCATIONA/ VESOURCE

INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)
r

4

Z

L

...

t

eir

1 - \

F "- N

--,

t

r'' %

i A 4

.*

0,

.-

.flavvo

.

, . The contents of this publication were developed

under grant number G007900952 from the Division of , Perknnel Preparation, Office of Special Educatign,

4,U S Education Department. However, these content9do

not necessarily represent the policy of the agency,

and you should not assume endcrrsement by the

Federal Government

'p
PrL'isions for the evaluation and improvement of programs have

Foreword

historically been an integral component of federal and state educational'

legislation. Both Public Law 947142 (The Education for Air Handicapped

Children Act of 1975.1 and Public Law 94-482 VT he Education Amendments

of 1976 - Title II: Vocational Education) contain numerous provisions for

personnel development; support for programs, and research and development activities. These provision's 'serve to stimulate and regenerate the

development; dissemination; and adoption of new ideas, techniques.,-and

materials for the fields of special education and vocational education.

The study presented herein was designed, to examine- the extent to --

,yihich, program' improvement 'fu from Public Law 94-482 werg used by

X states to also address anotlwar ority.for state vocational education pro-

, g

grams serving handicapped and disadvantaged students. More specific"-- *, ally, Subpart 3 of Public +aw 94-482 allows states to use funds for re-: t

search, exemplary and' innovative programs, curriculum development,

vocational gt\idahce and counseling, sand vocational education personnel

training. Grants' for these programs are described in the legislation as

"program improvement and supportive services." Twenty percerit- (20%) of

the federal funds received by a state for vocational education is ;to be

spent for these purpose's., Simulianeou.slY, ten percent (10%) and twenty

pe'rcent (20%) of the funds are to be spent for the excess costs of providing vocational education to handicapped and. disadvarltaged tstudents

respettively. Under the, law, the 10% and '20% set-aside funds can be used

, . for either direct programs and services 1 or program improvement and

supportive services.

4

svt
-State 'and local administrators 'of vocational ocationa and special education

programs should find this study useful in describing how the set-aside

fu.nds have been spent for special population groups in vocational education over 'the last. three years. The Appendix includes brief abstracts of

the various program improvement projects funded by the states. The' LTI

project is indebted to Dr. James P. Greenan for managing and conducting

this study. Appreciation is 'also extended to Brian Cobb and Ms.

Laurie Batchelor for their efforts ins developing and editing 'the abstracts.

,Dr. George Hagerty of the U.S. Office of Special Educatipn was helpful in

planning the study. The comments made by the reviewers were extremely

helpful in pkcparing the; final report: s Dr. Wesley Budke, Director;

National Center 'for Research in Vocational Educati9n ClearinAo.y.se, The

Ohio State University.; Dr. upert N. .Evans, Bureau of Educational

. Research, University of Illinois; Dr. John, S. Washburn, Manager, Per

search and Development;, Department of Adult, Vocational and Technical

.

, EducatiOn, Illinois State Board of Education; Dr. Ronald P,IcCage, %Director, Vocational land . Technical Education Consortium 'of States, Southern

Association of Colleges.and Schools; Dr. William Eddy, Equal .Opportunity

Specialist, Office for Civil Rights, U.S. D artment of Education; Dr. f

, ,.. Addison .5.' Hobbs, 'State Director, Division o Vocational Technical Education, Maryland State bepartment oft Education; ,and Ms. Barbara H.

1 Kemp, Education Program Specialist ifor the Disadvantaged, Office of

Vocational and Adult Education, U.S. Department of Education. The LTI

staff is also extremely grateful to the. State Research Coordinating Unit

I

'V Directors for their cooperation and 4ssistance in the data collection phase

! .
of the ,study. In addition,, the staff would also, like to th-an-k Ms. Nancy

--..chum \ or her effort jn typing and Ms. BarOara Macika,s for proofreading

the re rt. Dr. Janet Treichel, was instrumental in the production. and

dissemination of this report.

'ir .

. .

' L. AJlen 1helPs-, Directer

'Leadership Training Institute/ ' Vocational and Special Education

si
.4. Table of Contents .

INTRODUCTION 1 StateMent of the Problem 0

4

Objectives of the Study. 5

,Research Qwestions

SignificanCe of, the Study

, 6

RESEARCH PROCEDURES 9

Instrumentation 9,

Population \ 9- Data Collection 10

w. .. Data Analysis rtalysis % , 10 '.

FINDINGS 13.

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 35

S.ummary 35

Conclusions 36

Recommendations 40

REFERENCES ~

I - 47'

APPENDtX . ." 0..

V

pi "1

pp p
Introduction

Several recent significant pieces of federal .legislation have estab-*

is 1. lished the rights of special needs learners to a free and appropriate

public education;tiblic Law 93-112, The Rehabilitation Act of 1 973

Sections 503 and 5p4; .Public Law 93-203, -he Comprehensive Employments

and Training Act of 1973; Public Law 94-142, The Education for All

Handicapped Children Act of 1975) These initiatives have increased

educational and employment opportunities for all special populations. At

the national, state,' and local levels 'more emphasis has been laced on

expanding the availability of vocational education instruction and support

services to handicapped and disadvantaged (including limited-English

proficiency) learners.

A major thrust in vocational education has been to. proiride special

needs learners with individualized education programs ( IEP) within least

restrictive environments (LRE) as mandated by Public Law 94-142. Publt

Law 94-482 (The Education AmendMents of 1 976 - Title I : Vocational

Education) which amends Public Law 88-20 (The Vocational Education Act

of 1ts63) and Public Law 90-576 (The Vocational "Education Amendments of

1968) has reinforced these activities by proclairninc thai states should use

vocational education funds to -assist handicapped individuals so that they

can participate in regular vocational education programs to the "maximum

extent possible."

To achieve this end, handicapped and disadvantaged students should

be "mainstreamed" into vocational programs where they are educated with

their "normal" peers_i Extra support artd supplemental services are

needed by both students and teacher's in progrbms to 'accomplish this

.

fro
Y

: . goal. Supplemental services may include: assignment of, special educatioQ

personnel, to the class., special program modifications., special remedial

instruction, counseling, and other services ,provided to handicapped or

disadvantaged students in regular vocationar programs. However, pro-

,

) viding instructional arrarfgements and services such as IEPs and LREs for

special needs students generally' costs' more than traditional education

programming.

Public Law 94-482 has provided set-aside funds specifically for the

. . vocational education of special needs learners. : The law has mandated

(that:

For each fiscal year, at least 10% of each state's allotment under

....-, Section 1b3 shall be used to pay 50% of the cost of vocational education for handicapped persons. Far each fiscal year, at Teast 20% of each state's allotment Linder Section 1-A3 shall be used to

pay 50% of the cost of vocational education for disadvantaged persons (other than handicapped persons) , .for person.s who have

limited-English speaking ability, and for providing 'stipends

authorized' under section 120(b) -(1) (G) (Section 110).

These funds are to be used primarily for basic grants (Subpart 2) which

are' flowhrough funds to local education agencies to support the excess

costs of educating special needs learners in regular vocational.programs.

The funds may also be used to support research and development activities designed to impact vocational programs for handicapped' and disadvantaged students.

, 6 Subpart 3 (Program Improvemt and Support Services) of Public-

. Law 941482, Part A, lists, defines, and describes' the'areas in which

ti

set-aside funds may be used for improving vocational programr6ing of

.., handicapped and disadvantaged learners. Areas df funding under pro-

. . gram improvement and support /services may include: research, exem01ary and innovative programs, curriculum development, vocational guidance and counseling, and vocational education personnel training.,

' i

) 2

*

.., 4. r
. . Generally, the state education agencies have4lexibelity in the whys

they distribute the "set-aside funds, for program improvement and support

services purposes. ,Local education agencies, individuals, institution's of

higher education, an,d research and development firms are among the

,eligible recipients of these funds. ..Proposals are commonly fun ded based

on the perceived areas of need within the states. The needs may be

.

-

. identified by informal procedures or by formal methods such as .statewide'

needs assessments and evaltiations, Therefore, it is expected that tht

. will be variation among the states in the types and amounts of funded

proposals.

A few investigations .have attempted- to identify or assess policy / - regarding the funding of program improvement and support services

activiti i ri vocational, education. Budke and Magisos (1978) identified

the research, exemplary and innovative programs, and curriculum

development projects that have been funded by the 'states with Subpart 3

funds. However, vocational guidance and counseling and .,vocational

.c.7----- eduCation personnel training projects were not identified. In addition,

moit states have not reported (i.e., do not report projects to dissenination networks such as the National Center fo,r Researph in Vocational

-Education, but are reported in the states' accountability reports) those

program improvement projects which' are funded in whole or in part using

the handicapped and disadvantaged set -aside ,funds. 1. The Abt Study `(1981) investigated The pattern of expenditures and

_ service delivery issues with:respect to the use of the handicapped and

disadvantaged set-aside funds . The. g eral tionlusions were that the

set-aside funds were "clearly meeting congressional intent" of providing vocational education funds to these populations. However,. the( Abt
Study dealt--witilik a sample of only 15 states and the findings did -,not

relate to spec criteria or a framework, such as statewide or nationill

needs assessments or' evaluations for determining the appropriateness and

effectiveness of the projects. Several needs assessments and policy .issup

.!;.= and problem studies focusing on the needs of special needs learners, have

suggest4d the importance of program improvement activities to deal with

problemS such as interagency cooperation and agreements, persOnel

preparation and development, funding and. fiscal policy, service delivery

and program alternatives, and program evalUation and improvement.

Specific areas of -concern have- included': vocational -.assessment; individ

alized education programs; least restrictive environment; identification of

students; and facilities, material's, and equipment_ Modification, (Davis and

Ward, 1978; Hrvard, 1979; Phelps and Thornton, 1979; Greenan and

Jti Phelps, 1980) .

In summary, the research, literature contains few studies that are

concerned with .how states are using their handicapped and disadvantaged

set-aside funds prov,ided by Public Law 94-482 to improve and expand

voda/,itmal education opportunities fO'r special needs learners. Further, in

those studies that do exist, minimal information is provided which relates

what is being fklinded to assessed needs. However, as funds hecome more

scarce and fiscal efficiency becomes Inoref important, the states will need

to develop improved funding policies and increpsingly coordinate program

improvement planning, assessment, and activities.

Statement of the Problem

The central problem investigated in this study was toodetermine, the

4,

extent to which the 50 states,. District of Columbia, and trust territories

(

4

11,
4

. / 3

(American Samoa,

Territhry of, the

Public Law 94-418

o Guam, Northern Mariana' Ilands, Puerto Rico, Trust

Pacific Islands, and Virgin 'Islancl) have used their

2 set-aside Junds (16% handicapped and 20% disadvan-..

taged) to support prograM improvement Vrojects and activities. The

specific research problem was to, identify the research; exemplary and

Innovtive ;programs, curriculum development, vifational uidance andL

counseling, and vocational education personnel 'training ,projects that havebeen funded' during fiscal years 1978, 1980, and 1981. In addition, the

extent to which federal set-aside funds and matching state and local

funds were used .to support program improvement activities was investigated.

It was not the intent of, thiS study to identify all state programs and

. . - .

. . _ . activities which impacte-el upon special needs ... learners. For example,

Subpart, 3 fundp which may have been used to support projects that

impacted upon handicapped and disadvantaged students but were not 0 ; counted as set-asides were not examined. Only those projects and

activities that were 'specifically funded with the 10% handicapped and-20%

disadvantaged set-aside funds were investigated. In addition, this study

did not mpt to, assess the effectiveness of the projects ,nor determine

the levels or focus of funding of basic t3.rants to LEAs.

'Objectives of the .Study

yr

The following objectives were

A461 blem of this study: 1"."

IP. I .

dev'eloped to resolve the central proDetermine the extent to Which resel9rc1-1, exemplary and innovative progra'ms, curriculuM development, vocational guidance and

counseling, and vocational education personnel training projects,

were funded by the states using the 10% handicapped and 20%

disadvantaged set-aside ft_i\nds during fiscal years 1979, 1980;

and 1981. ,

-_r 1 fl
e.

(

li. ASsess, the federal set-aside ancr matching state d local

funding. levels of the projects. !.

',. . s e

' ' e

- , '

.

I I I . DeterMine the scope 'cif the program improvement and supliort . services projects. , aIV. Identify several program improvemht projects and develop- abstracts.

Research Quest ens.

- The follbwirg arch quesficins were, developed to athieve the

objectiyes ,.f this s tudy.: -

1. Row- many RESEARCH projects were., funded by the -states using

the 10% handicapped ':and._,.2.0'95. disadvantaged set-aside funds;

and -what, were the local, state :. anci federal. 'funding' levels of

the projects durffig fiscal years 1979, 198Q,, -.and, 19812

2. How many EXEMPLARY AND INNOVAT.LVE PROGRAM. projects were funded by the states Using' the 1 handicapped and 20%

disadvantaged set-aside' funds:: and whaf were the local', state, and federal 'funding. levels of th`e projec0 during, fiscal years

1979, 1980, jand 1981? , . " .. . .. . , 3. floW %a CURRICULUR:DEVELOPMENT projec'ts were funded

by the states using the 10% handicapped anck 20% disadvantaged

, set -aside funds; and what, were the local, state, and federal

ii. funding ',levels of. the projtcts during fiscal years 1979, 1980,

and 19812

f It' .. u. How many VOCATIONAL GUIDANCE AND COUNSELING projects were funded by the states \using the 10% handicapped and 20%

'disadvantaged .set-'aside funds; and -what were the local, state, and federal funding leyels of the projects during fiscal years

1979, 1980, and 1981? -v.

b."

5. How -many VOCATIONAL EDUCATION PER ONNEL TRAINING

projects were funded by the states using t 10% handicapped

and 20% disadvaritaged sse it-aside funds; an what were the

. local, state, and federal funding levels of the projects tJurin

fiscal yearg 1979, '1980, and 1981?

.0 6. What content, program, or Problem areas were addressed by the program improvement and support services projeCts 'funded by

the states using the 10% han capped and 20% disadvantaged

set-aside funds during fisc years 1979, 1980, and 1981?

6
Significance of the Study°

49 Program improvement projects and activities are essential for improving and expanding vocational education opportunities for special needs'

learners. These activities agsist in generating new knowledge, developing

new programs ,.a6d curriculum for enhancing the career development of

. .handicapped. and ,disadvantaged students, and training personnel to worl

with special, needs students. As special "heeds students are increasingly

placed in regular vocational programs, the need for appropriate and

fr

cr effective ,program improvement activities will become ever(' more significant.

This study contributes to the !poly of knowledge in vocational education 'funding policy by prOviding data arad information which identify the,

program improvement projects states have funded- using the 10% 1;landi-

. . capped and 20% disadvantaged set-asides. in the areas of research, exem- *.

'Nary and .tinncrv.ative programs, curriculum development, vocational 4//iii-4.

guidance and counseling, and vocational education personnel training:-

Analysis of the activities and funding levels of the projects supported.

during fiscal years .1979, 1980, and 1981 provides an ,indication of the

,patterns.of funding and the extent to 'which specific areas of need a re or

are riot

c:Th

makers

ddressed ,within the states and across the nation.

J

-a and information should be helpful to policy and decisionstate directors of vocational and special education,

state consultants for vocational special needs education (handicapped and

disadvantaged) state direl.rtors of conipensatory education, state directors,

of bilingual education, research coordinating unit directors and their

staffs, teacher educators, local ed ucation agency personnel, individuals

from public ,.and private research firms, and 'others who are generators

and consumers of program impr.ovement projects and activities. The

' 7

I.
.te

.

..- information cyild be useful for activities such as plphning needs assesst

ii,

i

ments, developing RF.Ps,

. projects.

1

let*

el.

I

n

or evaluating .exiting program improvement

. . .1

t. .

.

. /

L.

,

rf

n.

/I

/

.

/

14
f

.9

Research Procedures

o This study used several research procedures to achieye the major

, objectives sand answeof, r the research questions. The procedures included:

the developmee\t of a survey instrument, selection of a population, co Ilectt 4 ion of 'data, aind: analysis of the data. The research procedures occurred

. . over a five-month peribcf.

Instrumentation

A six-Rage survey instrument was developed to collect the necessary

data in this study (See Appenciix A) . The coyer page asked the Research Coordiiitting- Unit (RCU) directors to provide their narrtes,

,iddressds, and telephone numbers. The instrument also provided the

,respondents with step-by-step instructions, including in example, for

completing the 'survey. Five. different survey forms were contained, in the

instrument' and included the program improvement areas of research,

exemplary ind--_innovative programs, curriculum deyelopment, vocational

guidance and ,ccitin0Ing, and vocational- education perInnel training.

The directors were 'asked to. liSt. on each of the survey form's project

titles fOr fiscal years 1979, 1980, `acid 1981, and the federal set-aside and

matching state and local funding levels of each project.

Population

The population for this study consisted of the RCU directors from the

50 states,, District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, Nonthern Mariana

Islands, Purto Rico, Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, and the

Vkgin Islands.

9

1 2

C

..4:
Data Collection

The RCU _directors' names and addressed were drawn from the current national RCU directory. The surveys and cover letters (see

. 0. Appendix B) were mai

,_, led in mid-October 1'980, and were to be returned

.

. ,. by mid-November 1980. The RCU directors were also requested to inss elude abstracts for' each protect listed on the survey forms. The initial.

response rate was 58%. A follow-up letter; (see Appendix C) and another

survey was mailed to each non'- respondent during the 'third week of

November 1980 and was to be .returned by the -third week of December

1980. , The fdllow-up increased the response rate to 82%. During the

secon d week of January 1981, a telephone follow-up was conducted

requesting each non-respondent to return his survey. Thetiata collection process was concluded during mid-March 1981. The final response

rate was 100%. The data collection process occurred over a four-month

period.

Data Analysis , The data obtained- from, each of the surveys 'were collectively. anal-

, yzed across the states and territories. Descriptive data tables vere

generated for each of the. nasearch questions. The tables specifically

provide information with respect to the numbers of projects; federal

set-aside and matching state and local funding.. levels; and the scope'of

the program improvement projects that were fu.nded during fiscal years

1979, 1980, and 1981. The tables generally provide ah overall view of

the kinds of projects that states have funded using the 10% handicapped

and 20%-.disadvanta ed set-aside funds. In addition, a representative

sample of abstracts .were selected and edited from those provided by the

10 1 "'
RCU directors. The abstracts -.provide information regarding some of the

content ; program_ or problem areas addressed by the projects. 'The

abstracts were not selected using specific eValuatiye criteria. Rather,

the q,bstracts were selected and included based on an overall bricIth of

topical areas.

\

11

I

4%.
tt

Findings

t

The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which the

1 states have ,usedjPublic Lawf 94-482 10% handicapped and 20% disadvan

, taged set-aside funds to suppo'rt program improvement projects and activities. Fifty-seven states. and territories w re surveyed. .Tbe data that

were collected focused specifically on the major objectives and .research

questions developed in this study. Therefore, the following discuss

the findings and Tables 1-11 are concerned with the major objectiv and

research questions of this study.

Objective Determine the extent to which "research, exemplary and

innova;ive programs, curriculum development, vocational

guidance and counseling, and vocational education person- nel training projects were funded by the states using the

'10% handicapped and 20% disadvantaged set-aside funds during fiscal years 1979, 1980, and 1981._

Objective H: Assess the _federal set-aside and matching state and local tliunding levelsof the projects,

1 ow many RESEARCH projects were funded by.the states

using` the 10% handicappei and 20% disadvantaged set -aside

f nds; and What were the local, state, and federal funding1= ers of the projects during &fiscal years 1979, 1980, and

1'81?

The researc projeCts funded by the states using ,the 10% hanclicap:

ped and 20% disadvantaged set -aside funds during fiscal years 1979, 1980,

ant 1981 are presented in Table 1. Twenty-five of the 57 states and

territories funded at least one research project wit th,e set-asides

during fiscal year 1979,980, and 1981. Se4n states did not provide

. data on the numbe of projects the-funded. However, from the.data

_ . .available, a total o. 92 research pFojects were funded during the three- , year nriod. Twen y-four projects were funded during, each of fiscal \

years 1 979 and 1 981 'While a substantially larger number (144) of projects

13
-t I/ A

'"ca 9

V I /

TABLE 1

RESEARCH PROJECTS THAT WERE FUNDED BY THE STATES USING THE

SET-ASIDE FUNDS DURING FISCAL YEARS 1979, 198b, AND 1981

State FY *1979' FY 1980 FY 1981 Total

Alaska 1 0 0 1 Arkansas 2 ' 3 2 7

California 0 0

Colorado ) 1 0 0

/

1 Florida 1 5 0 6

Idaho 1 1 0 2

Illhois 6 2 11

Indiana 2 15 ) 4 21

Iowa 7 , _

1 0

. Kansas . 1 2

Kentucky 1 2 4 r 7

Maine

Maryland 0 0 2

Massachusetts

Minnesota 2 3 6

New Jersey 1 3 4 8

New York /. 3 2 0 5

0 2 1 3

Ohio - ,-(.... 0 1 1 2

Oregon ° - Pennsylvania _

*, Rhode Island 1 ' 0

.....-. 0 1 0

_...,, South Carolina 0 2 2,

'Texas 2 3. 0 6

Virginia . (,-- ,

All States 24 44 24 92

N = 57 , 'n 25 (states ttla funded at least one (1) project during the three-year period)

= data not aOila le

I

14
. A were funded in fiscal year 1980. This increase. was 1fol3ably caused by

the larger number of projects funded by Iiidiana (15) during fiscal year

-qs, 1980. Indiana reported the greatest, clumber of projects funded (21)

during the three-year period. HoweVerb, while Indiana funded a larger

number of projects with the set asides, than

I the other: states, gll of their

projects were reportedly jointly funded with non-special needs monies

(i.e. , Subpart 3 funds not counted as set-asides and other funding

0. , sources). Indiana's set-aside funds are generally infused with programs

and activities that are desij,ned for all students. This type of funding

policy is probably' practiced in several cIther states. Illinois, New Jer.iey,

Arkansas, and Kentucky also funded several research projects using the

set-asides. These five states supported of all the funded prolkts.

Table 2 illustrates the federal set-aside and matching state-and local

funding levels of:the research projects funded during fiscal years 1.979,

1980, and 198T. A 'total, of $4,609,825 of combined federal set-aside and

matching state and loCal funds was used to support research projects

during the three-year period by, the 23 states reporting data. For each

fiscal year, the federal set-aside represented the largest fun-ding source

and the state funds the smallest funding source. Several states funded f

research projects with only the federal set-asides.

In summary, most states have not uted their federayhandicapped

and disadvantaged set-aside funds and matching state and, local funds to

support research projects and activities relative to the vocational ieduca-

.. tion of special needs learners. However, of the 25 states that -have

funded projects, the federal set-asides generally. represented the largest

portion of funding .

15 0 4.0
;

I

II

TABLE 2 FEDERAL SET-ASIDE AND MATCHING STATE AND LOCAL FUNDING LEVELS OF THE RESEARCH PROJECTS

THAT WERE FUNDED DURING FISCAL YEARS 1979 1980 AND 1981 Sate

Local Fr '979

State Federal Total Fr 1980 Fe1981

Local State. Federal Total Local State Federal Total T Vital' AlasKa

,40,amsas CaWorn,a Colorado

Floe da Idaho MNDtS

ItIOW43

towa Kansas Kentucky Mane Mar ywod

Massachusetts Minnesota New York New Jersey

N.g(th Dakota

IN4o4.

Oregon

Pennsytyarha Rhode !stand )D,Ah Cre04ma Texas V,gm1a AN States

0 0 56 650 56 650 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 56 650

56 818 0 328 025 534 843 5665 0 537 068 537 733 0 0 571 813 571 613 5144 389 - 5620 290 5620 290 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5620 290

'0 0 549 967 549 967 0 0 0 0 0 a

0 0 0 549 967

0 0 520 000 520 000 0 0 5170 270 51 70 270 C 0 0 0 5190 270

Y. 0 0 $1 015 51 015 0 1 0 56 443 56 443 0 0 0 0\ 57 458

517 627 0 5204 370 $221 997 520 328 0 5323 221 5343 549 0 0 S235840 5235.640 5801 386

0 . 0 56 540 56 540 0 0 5109 61 3 5109 613 0 0 566 720 566 720 5182 873

57 500 0 57 500N. 515 000 0 0 0 0 51-... 483T 51g 204 530 687 545 687

$10 842 0 S21:278

. 532 120 55 287 0 521 554 536 841 572 045 0 586 627 51 58 672 5217 633

0 0 "."--P000 51 GOS\ ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 000

0 0 343.430 543 430 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -543 430

583 866 0 5300 000 ,5383 866 0 0 5300 0;90 5300 000 0 0 5400 000 5400 000 51 083 866

A 0 520 872 S22 387 543 259 0 510 146 521.383 531 525 0 0 512 976 512 976 587 764

0 458 5316 427 5322 885 0 56 500 593 50b 5100 000 0 0 0 0 5422 885

0 0 517 080 517 080 0 0 S71 604 571 604 0 0 5111130 561130 5199 814

0 0 _(.. 0 ......-- 0 0 0 53 %0 53 950 0 0 310 241 510 241 514 191

0 0 0 0 0 0 535 000 535 000 0 0 535 000 535 000 570 000

. 0 0 0 0 0 0 571 294 01 294 0 0 0 0 571-294

0 511 602 5'106268 5117 670 0 0 0 : _0 0 0 0 0 511 7 870

0 0 510517' 510 517 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 510 517

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 734 58 34 58 734

0 0 S80 141 580 141 0 04 5131716 5131 716 0 0 0 0 5211 857

c% 5126 653 538 937 51 862 885 52 028 470 526 280 56 500 51 34206 51 439 542. 586 528 - Si 291 125 51 141 768 54 609 825

N 57 ' n 251staies that funded at mast one (II project duhng the three year perzod)

- data not avaaatie

V
2., How many EXEMPLARY AND INNOVATIVE PROGRAM prbrects were funded by the states using the 10-% handicapped an 20% disadvantaged set-aside, funds; and what were the loeal, sate, and federal funding levels of the projects during fiscal years 1979, 1980, and 198I? I

The exemplary and'innovative program projects funded by the states

using the 10% handicapped and 205 disadvantaged set -ride funds during'

fiscal years 1979, 1980, and 1981 are presented in Table 3. Twenty-two of

-the/ 57 states funded at least one exemplary and innovative programra

project with the set asides during' fiscal years 1979, 1980, and 1.,..Q81. Six

states did not provide data- on the number of projects they funded. a However, 'from the data available, it appears that 'total of 106 exemplary

and, innovative program projects were funded citring th three-year

period. Fifty-two projects were funded during fiscal year 1179, while

considerably fewer projects were funded for each of fiscal y rs 1980 and

1981: Texas reported the largest number of projects funde (27) during

the three-year period. Illinais, New Jersey, and Alaska also funded a relatively large number of exemplary- and innovative program projects.

-hlese four states funded 63% of all the projects.

Table-4 illustrates the federal set-aside, and matching state and local

funding levels of the exemplary and innovative program projects funded

during ,fiscal years 1979, 1980 and 1981. A total of $5 ,932 ,805 of combined `federal set-aside and matching state and local funds was used to

support exemplary and innovative program projects during the three-year

period by the 18 states reporting data,. For each fiscal year, the federal

set-aside was the largest funding source and the State funds the smallest

funding Sources.. Most state§ used only federal set-aside monies to fund

exemplary and innovative program projects, for.''the handicapped and

i r- --., .

-...c.. disadvantaged. i 4 ,:- --

...,44, 17

I. \'

1
At TABLE 3

EXEMPLARY AND ttaliOVATIVE P GRAM PROJECTS THAT WERE FUNDED BY a

t. - THE STATES USING THE SET-ASID NDS DURING FISCAL-YEARS 1919, 1980, AND 1981

.

, State FY 197 FY 1980 . -FY k981 Total

Alaska 1 3 6 10

0 '

... 'Arizona - 3 0 3

Florida 2

.

1

,. 3 6

Idaho '1 0 0

,, 1 Illinois 10 4 4 18

Indiana: -..,,j 4 0 0 4

Iowa

Kansas 4 2 0 6,

Maine --.-

,. r.

Maryland 4 1 0 -/;;; 5

Massachusetts , F,

Michigan 1 (N\ 0 0 1 Minnesota 1 0 '0 1

:.., New Jersey 2 3 7 12

New Mexico 0

.

1 1 2,

North Dakota 1 0 0 .. 1 Ohio

,. Oregon

Rhode Island

s

, 8 gb 8

South Dakota 1 0 0 -1

Texas 12 15 0 27 - Virginia

All States , 52 33 21 106

N = 57

n = 22 (states that funded at least one (1) project during the three-year period)

= data not available

400

18

J. ,.?
* 4.

a

' TABLE 40

FEDERAL SET-ASIDE AND MATCHING STATE AND LOCAL FUNDING LEVELS OF THE EXEMPLARY AND INNOVATIVE PROGRAM PROJECTS

THAT WERE FUNDED DURINGAISCAL YEARS 1979, 1980, AND 1981

a

4

lD

State

Ataska Aezo.a

FloAda

Idaho HInofs

!or:ana

Iowa Kansas Maine Marytal MaSlaChUsetts MjNgan Minnesota New. Jersey New Mexico North Dakota Oh*

Oregon Rhode Island South Dakota Texas Viripma*

AP Slates 5549 440

.64

FY 1979

Local State Federal Total 0 0 $6 508- S6 508

_0 O 0 0

0 0 S80 000 $80 000 . 0 0 $10 000 $10 000

$484 055 0 $625 450 51 109505

0 0 5100006 SIQ0 000 - - -

.565 385 0 569 327 $134 712

0 0 $48 475 ,548 375

0 _tt0 $74.050 $74 050

5300 000 $300 000

0 $30 693 $30 693

0 524 864 $24 864

0 0 559 575 $54 575

0 55 452 56000 $11 452

0 0 $17 934 $17934

$27 250 $27 250 $54 500

0 0 -5357 329 $357 329

N w 57

532 702 SI 837 355 $2 419 497

*4.

n 22 (states that funded at least one II) protect dung the three year De0od)

data ng,Layaltahle

Local0

0

0

0

0 $196 332

.S3 1630 1

0

0

0

0

6

0

0

0

0 _0

$231 495

St to Federal Tv] local State Federal 'Total

w

$1 681 648 $1 913 143

FY 1980 FY1981

0 533 606 533 606 0 0 $162 500 $162 500

0 $164690. 5164 690 0 0 t

0 ' 0 $202 6690

0 $10 000 $10000 0 0 $78 853 $78 853 $168 853 a

0 2 . 0 0 0 0 0 $10 000

0 0 T 0 0 0 0

0 $305 827 5502 159 552 136 0 $243 099 $295 235 $1 906 899

$100 000 _

0 538 117 $73 280 0 0 0 0 4, $207 992

0 $48037 548 037. 0 554 000 554 900, 5150 412

0 $15 000 $15 000 0 0 0 0 '° $89 050

0 5357 339 $457 339 0 00$$830 594 $830 594, $1 587 933

0 0 0 0 0 ' 0 0 $30 693

0

t --- 0 0 0 0 ,- 0 4 0 577 229 577 229 0 0 $153.983 $153 983 . $290 787

0 S25 000: $25 000 0 0 $25 000 525 000 $ 0

lif 0 4, 0 0 0 0 0 $5101 000

_-_- _- 0 0 0 0 0 0 517`934

---

0 0 0 $54 500 AD _0 5506 803 $506803 0 0 0 0 $864 132 _ _ _ _

$62 136 $1 548 029 SI 600 165 $5 932 805

s-4 Fro

Total
In summary, most states have not used their federal handicapped

and disadvantaged set-aside funds and matching state and local ficrids to

support exemplary and innovative program projects and activities. However, of the 22 states which have funded projects, the federal set-aside

A generally was the greatest portion of funding.

^..1.. 3. How many CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT projects were fUnded

by. the states using ,,the 10% handicapped ,and 20% disadvantaged set-aside funds; and what were the local, state,., and federal

funding levels of the projects during fiscal years 1979, 1980,

and 1981?

The curriculum development projects funded, by the states using the

____1.Q.L.handicapped and 20% disadvantaged set-aside funds Suring fiscal

years 1979, 1980, and 1 981 are presented in Table 5. Twenty-one of the

57 states funded at leapt one curriculum development project with th

set-asides 'during fiscal years 1 979, 1980, and :1981 5ix*"States did not

provide data on the number of projects they funded. However, from the

data avaiAle, a total of 100 curriculum development projects were funded

during the three-year period.- *.F,ifty--foui projects were funded' during

fiscal Year 1980, 31 during 1979, and 15 during 1981. Ariatina reported

111

the largest number of projects fun (30) during the three-year period.

. However, all 30 projects . were actually 'funded in fiscal year 1980.

Indiana, New Jersey, New 1111 ork, Alaska and Texas also fur{ded several

curriculum development projects. These six states funded 76% of all the

. projects.

r Table 6 illustrates the federal set-aside and matching state and local

funding levels of the curriculum development projects funded during fiscal

years 1979, 1980, and 1981. A total of $4,672,204 of combined federal

set-aside and state and local matching funds was used to support- curricuI

20

4
4

TABLE 5 . CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THAT WERE FUNDED By THE STATES USING THE

SET-ASIDE FUNDS DURING FISCAL YEARS 1979, 1980, AND 1981

State'. FY 1979

AlasI4 3

Arizona . 0

California

Florida 0

Illinois 1 Indiana , 10

Iowa

Kansas - -0

'Maine

Maryland 5 J

Massadhusetts

Michitan 1 Minnesola -1

New Jersey 3

New t*xiCo 0

New York 4

Ohio 0

Oregon . SOuttlpakota 0

Texas. -- 3

Virgiryg

All Slates 31

FY 1980 , FY 1981 Total

2 3 \

8

30 0 - 30

I 0 0

1 / 2 3

1 1 3

3 1 , 14

1 0 1 0 0 5

0 2

2 0

3 3 9

0 2 2

, 4 0 8

1 1 2

. 2 0 t 2

4 0 / 7

54 15 100

N,=. 57 is. r= 21 (states-Mat funded of leasi one (1) project during the three-year period) n = data not available h

st,

e

INts.--
41.

e a TABLE 6 FEDERAL SETASIDE AND MATCHING STATE AND jOCAL FUNDING LEVELS OF

THATWERE FUNDED DURING FISCAL YEARS 1979

4

THE CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS

1980 AND 1981

6 State FY 1979 FY 1980 Fr'98, Local - State Federal Total Local State Fecltral Tote' State Fe.tleal T,ata. Alaska 0 523 611 $23 611 0 0 530 000 $30 000 0 0 0 504 592

Anzona 0 0 0 0 0 5830 205 5430 205 0 0 2 583': 10s Ca Marne 5187 629 5187619 0 0 0 6'1. Ce -14- Slisi E i. Flonda 0 0 0 0 0 0 $25 87.5 .525'875 55' 660

______.. 55' 660 5.77 535 Mena* S12888 0 $35 560 548 448 518 606 0 529 931 548537 544 399 C 590 605 t134 39,4 523' 384

indona 0 0 5.194 955 5194 955 L r

. 0 0 527 900 527 900 0 S'4 50 5'1 100 523595;

Iowa Kansas 0 0 0 / 0 5311 0 $311 5622 0 5622 Mame 0 ,51 1 4000 5114 000 0 0 571 91 571 005 549 000 549 500 5234 050'

Maryland 0 0 570 500 570 500 0 0 0 0 0 57;5,., Massakhusetts 518 539 5200000 5218 539 0 0 5250 000 5250 000 3 0 5200 az SY,S 05, S66s 539 Mcentien 0 O S90 663 590 463 0 0 0 0 0 5135 0Of., 5' 35 500 5225 663 Minnesota 0 0 .$16 500 $16 54) 0 0 53 594 53 594 0 0 520 094

New Jersey 0 0 _$35 884 535 884 0 0 530 126 530 126 0 0 547 525 547 525 5113 535

New Masco 0 0 0 0 t., ..ip 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,72 300 5172 000 5172 000 New York 0 $14.376 5315 478 5329 854 0 519 562 5267 673 5287 235 0, 0 0 0 56,7 089

Ohka 0 0 0 0 0 0 514 000 514 000 0 0 520 050 520 000 534 000

Oregon . . -T- South Dakota 0 0 0 0 541 200 41 200 541 200

Texas 0 5408 691 5408 691 0 0 I $387 981 53157 981 0 0 . 0 5 5796 672

Vexatnta ..._

All States 531 427 $14 379 $1 693 461 51 636 684 $18917 $19 562 52 009 796 52 0i8 275 $44 399 5779 285 5884 665 54 672

N 57 ' n 21 (states thet funded at least one 1 I) protect durtng the three year oenod,

data not ayeeOZris...r-------_

3'
Wm development projects during the three-year period 1py the 18 states

reporting data. For each fiscal year, the federal set1aside was the

largest funding source and for the most part state funds the smallest

(funding source. Most states funded curriculum' development projects solely

with -federal funds.

In summary, most states have not used their federal handicapped

acid disadvantaged set-aside funds. and matching state and local funds to

support curriculum development 'projects and activities. However, for the

majority of the 21 states which have funded such projects, the federal

set-aside provided all'or sthe greatest portion of funding.

4. How many V OCATIONAL GUIDANCE AND COUNSitING projects

were funded by the states using the 10% handicapped, and 20%

disadvantaged set -aside funds; and what were the local, state, and federal funding levels of the pi.ojects during fiscal years

1979, ;1980, and 1981?

The vocational guidance and counseling projects funded by the states

apusing the 10% handicapped and 20% disadvantaged set-aside funds during

fiscal years 1979, 1980, And 1981' are presented in Table 7. Nineteen of

.

the 57 states funded, at least one vocational' guidance and counseling

project with the set-asides during fiscal years 1979, 1980, and 1981..

Seven.states did not provide data on the number of projE(cts they funded.

However, from the data available, a total of 116 vocation al' guidance and

counseling projects were funded daring the three-year period. Fifty

projects vere funded during fiscal 'ear 1980; 42 during 1981, and 24

during 1979. Kansas reported the largest number of projects funded

(34) , ne.6.0/ one-third of all 'projects during the three-year period.

Florida and Indiana also funded a relatively large number of vocational

guidance and 'counseling projects (.22). The projects that were funded by
4

i

TABLE 7

VOCATIONAL GUIDANCE AND COUNSELING PROJECTS THATVERE FUNDED BY

THE STATES USING THE SET-ASIDE FUNDS DURING FISCAL YEARS 1979, 1980, AND 1981

State FY 1979 FY 1680 FY 1981 Total'

Alaska 1 2 1 4

Arizona - 0 5 0 5

California 0, 0

Florida 9 5 8 22

, Indiana 1 11 10 -

i 22

, -r- ,

Iowa _. Kansas 6 10 18 i 34

Maryland 3

. 0 0 3

Massachusetts .,, _. v Michigari ( 1 a 1

I 2

Minnesota 2 3 3 l 8

Misgouri , - - -

..N.New Jersey 0 0 1 1 New York 1 2 0

I 3

Oregon 9 0 1 9 . Texas 0

Virginia , Wisconsin 0 /

Puerto Rico

--..J All States 24 50 116

N = 57

n = 19 (states that funded at least one (1) project during the three-year period)

= data not available

a

211

\
Kansas, Florida, 'and Indiana represented 6795 of all the projects that were

funded by the. states during the three-year period.

Table 8 illustrates the federal set aside and matching state and local

funding levels of the vocational guidance and celing projects funded

during fiscal years 1979, 1980, and 1981. A total of $5,948,185 of Ori-

',0

bined federal set-aside and matching state and local funds was used to

support vocational guidance and counseling projects and' activities during

the three-year period by the 14 states reporting data. For each fiscal

year, the federal set-aside was the largest funding Source. However,

vocational guidance and counseling projects were funded very rnirially

by matching state funds but local funds were relatively large in Some

states. This may suggest that the state education agencies in. these

states feel vocational guidance and counseling is primarily a local educption agency's responSibility. Another plausible explanation is that local

staff such as guidance counselors are arready in the schools and can

facilitate the conduct of projects. Most of the states funded projects with

only federal set-asides.

In summary, most states have not used their fpcleral set-saside funds

and matching. state and local funds to support .4.4sational guidance and

counseling projects and activities. However, of the 19 states which have

funded projects, the federal set-aside generally was the greatest portion

of funding while the matching state funds represented only a very minimal

portion of funding, and local funds represented a relatively large contri7

bution for some states.

5'. How many -*VOCATIONAt. EDUCATION PERSONNEL TRAINING

projects were funded by tb'e states using the 10$ handicapped

and 20$ dis'advantaged set-aside funds;:. and what were the

local, state, and-federal funding levels of the projects during

fiscal years 1979, 1980, and 1981?

25
-..

TABLE 8 FEDERAL SET.ASIDE AND MATCHING STATE AND LOCAL FUNDING LEVELS OF THE VOCATIONAL GUIDANCE AND COUNSELING PROJECTS

THAT WERE FUNDED DURING FISCAL YEARS 1979 1960 AND 1961

N)

Cr)

State Local FY 1979, State Federal Total Local

. FY 1980 State Federal Total Local Fet981 State Federal Totat Total.

1**

Alaska Anzona Cahlorma Ftortga

Indiana

I owa Kansas Maryland Massachusetts kbchgan Moinesota Myssoun

New Jersey New York Oregon Texas

lbegrka WSCOns+n Puerto Poo All States

y 5120

5211

/

5332

0

0

00 911 789

0

0

00

0

0

700

00

0

0

0

00

00

0 54 760

0

0

sa 760

$20 5988

54 1058

5131) 5211 574

531 5378

' $233

52 185

3701 371 536 000

942

789 649

690

000

0 240

0

0

788

5988 371

5' 0 536

56 000

$251 853

$423 578

574 649

531 890

5378 000

0 5238 000

00.

52 523 248

-4

0

0

0

0

0 5183612

0

0

00

0

0

0

5132612

512

512

0

0

0

00

0

0

0

0

0

0 518

0

0

518

55 02'3 55 023

5196 396 5196 396

0 0 575 605 575 605

5269 759 5269 759

5156 825 5340 437

0 0

0 0 $40 '59 540'159

5255 000 5255 000

0 0 $613.371 $625 889

51 70 756 5170 756

594 409 544 409

.if

k _

-. 51 87730352 073433

5373

5373

0

0

0

0

0 985

00

0

0

0

0

00

0

985

0

00

0

00

0

0

0

0

0

0

9.. 0_

C,

510

555 543

5380

550

542

5350

511

5942

000, 0

0 250

203 222

0 000

378 000

072

0

0

0

0

125

510

555

543

5754

550

542

5350

511

i

51 316

000

0

0 250

203

207

0 000

378 000

072

00

0

0

110

'

4S13965 :9964

5E2941 391 5318 962

51 346 497

$42378 ..5 5124 649,

5114 427

5983 000

511 072

5:1603 594 409

55 948 185 N ea57

n 191States tnat funded at least one III protect dunng the three year Denodt

data not ayadibte S
1

The vocational education personnel training projects funded by

states using the 10% handicapped and 20% disadvantaged set-aside funds9V

during fiscal years, 1979, 1980, and 1981 are presented in Table 9.

Twenty-seven of the, 57 states funded at least

personnel training project with

1980, and 1981.

ne vocational education

the set-asides d ring fiscal years 1979,

Five states did not provide ,c rata---16 the number of\,,

projects they funded. However, the available data indicate a total of 158

vocational education personnel training projects were funded over the

61r

three-year period. Seventy-five projects were funded during fiscal year

1980, 43 during 1979, and 40 during 1981. New Hampshire reported the

largest number of projects funded (20) during the three-year period.

Florida,. Minnesota, Maryland, Texas, and New Jersey also funded a

relatively large number of vocational education personnel training projects. Sixty percent of ,all the projects _funded were from these states.

Table 10 illustrates the federal set-aside and matching state and local

funding levels of the vocational education personnel training projects

funded during fiscal years 1979, 1980, and 1981. A total of $5,662,734 of

combined federal set -aside and matching state and local funds was used to

support vocational education personnel training projects and activities

during the three-year period by the 24 states reporting data. ,For each

fiscal year, the federal set-aside was the largest funding source and the

state funds the smallest funding source. Most states funded vocational

education personnel training projects with only federal set-asides.

In summary, most states hive not used their federal set::_a&itttr-funds

and matching, state and local, funds to support vocational education per,

sonnet training projects and activities. Howe,,ver, of the 27 states which

. 27
TABLE 9

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION PERSONNEL TRAINING PROJECTS THAT WERE FUNDED BY

THE STATES USING THE SET-ASIDE FUNDS DURING FISCAL YEARS 1979, 1980, AND 1981

State FY 1979 FY 1980 FY 1981 Total

Alaska

.

- 1 0 2 3

. e

Arizona 0 6 0 6

Arkansas 1 1 0

California 0 0

Connecticut 0 0 1 /

Florida 8 10 1 / 1 9

Idaho.---4 1 2 0

,/ 3' . -r-

, At'

,..

i Illinois 1 3 2 6

Indiana 2 2 1 5

Iowa

Kansas 1 e. 3 6

Maryland 7 5 2 14

Massachusetts 1 3 2 . 6

Michigan 2 1 " 2 5

Minnesota 4 10 5 19

Missouri 0 0

Nebraska 0 1 0 1 New Hampshire 5 9 6 20

New Jersey 2 5 . 4 11

New Mexico 0 1 2 3

New1York , -

1 1 0 2

North Dakota 0 2 2 4,

...-- Oregon

South Carolina 0 1 1 2

South Dakota 0 '4 4 8

Texas 5 7 0 12

Virginia it)

All States 75 40 158

N = 57 . n = 27 (states that funded at leastfn- 1) project during the three-year period)

= data not available

vv

28
4 cD

6

is

TABLE 10 FEDERAL SETASIDE AND MATCHING STATE AND LOCAL FUNDING LEVELS OF THE VOCATIONAL EDUCATION PERSONNEL TRAINING AOJETS THAT WERE FUNDE URING FISCAL.YEARS 1979. 1980, AND 1981 State Coca! Alaska Arizona 1 0 s

Arkansas 51006.0. California Connecticut 0 Ronda 0

Idaho i 0 Minas t'r

Indiana 0

Iowa Kansas $4 938

Maryland, 0 MassacO , usetts 0 P.,1higan $27 948 Minnesota 0 Missouri 0 Nebraska 5, 0

New Jer'sey

0

0 New Mexrco 0 New York .0

North Dakota ' 0 / Oregon

11 South Carolina 0 N kr South Dakota 0

Texas a 0

Virginia Au Stateses $42$80'

FY 1979 ' State Federal Total os Local FY 1980 , State Federal Total 6 $6 500 56 500

0 r 0 0

0 $40 .900 $50 900

$1 034 532 $1 033 532

1" 0 0 0

0 5223 300 $223 300

0 b4 450 $4 450

_0 $70 000 $70 000

0 $29 000 $29 000

r

0 $7 49i $12_430

0 $167 500 $167 500

04 $85,1X)0 $85 000

0 5105451e. $133466

0 $10 800 $10 800

0 0 0

0 0 0 _ _ . 0 $438 526 568 526

ii.-- i 0 $41 125 S41 125 /

0 0 0 5858 $42 054 S42 912

0 0 0 --

0

ql- 0. 0

0 $391 637 $391 637

. It_

$858 52 327 334 52,371 078

r

'

a

0

0

53 100

00

0

0 $45.382

0

58010

-..... 0

0

0

0

00

0

0

0a

549.283

0 _0 0

k0 $345 194 $345 194

0 $26.067 $29 167

0 0 0

0 0 0

0 $273 962 5273 2 0 $4 389 54 9 0 $102 131 $147 544

0 $6 000 S6 000

0 $1602 $2 403

1149 .5210 943 $2111 949

0 $208 000 $208 000

0 575 000 ' $75 000

0 583 858 $83 858

0 $30 000 $30 000

sa 821 $3 995 S8 816

0 $1Vir $.1424 648 0 $26 645 '54)645

0 $40 016 $40 016 S31 51 539 51 570

$3 483 .412 607 516 090

0 544 pa 544_598

0 $46 774 546,77.4

1.

0 $365.428 $365 428

_ S8 335 S2 033 402 S2 091 020

N 57

n 27 (states that funded at least 04 ( piro)ect during the three year period)

data not available

It

PY1981 r Local Stale Federal total Total O 536 500 536 51:20 543 000

O 0 A 0 $345 194

0 0 0 0 1-3 $80 067

0 0 0 0 $1 033 532

0 0 $20 434 520434 $20 434

0 $86 300 586 300 $583 562

0 548 384

0 0 0 $8 839

0 $107 462 $155 846 $373 359

0 011 0 $3 000 $3 000 $38 000 1k _

. 41:2 835 0 $21 290 _$34 125 .545 958

.

4:88 44000

0 0 $110 000 $110 000 $- 0 0 5196 000 $196 OM

0 '-O $176 000 $176 000 0" $384 466 0 0,, O

0 $4 010 r" 0 0 O

- 0 0 0 $8816

0 $2 312 598 759 $101 071 $294 245

O 115 238 $45 238 $113 008

O 0 53:000 S34 000 $74 016

O g 0 544 482

O *14.271 $48 778 $0049 $79 139

O 540 674 $40 674; $85272

O 0 $34 924 $34 324 $81 098

0 0 5757 065

$61 219 516 583,51 058 759 51 140 591 $5 662 734
., t

have funded projects, the federal set-aside was .generally the lar7f

portion , of funding.

Objective Ill: Determine the scope of the program improvement and

support services projects.

j

6. What content, prograM, or problem areas were addressed

by the program improvement and suppoil services projects

funded by the states using the 10% handikapped and 20%

disadvantaged set-aside funds during fiscal years 1979, 1980, and 1981? i

The content, program, or 'problem areas which were addreSSed by

the program improvement and support services projects and fiAnded by

,..

the states using the handicapped and 20% disadvantaged set-.aside

funds during fiscal years -1979, 1980, and 1981 are presented in 'Table 11.

A total. of 572 program improvement and support services projects were

, funded with the set-asides by the 27 ,-- states which funded at least one

project or activity' during the three-year period. Vocational education

personnel training projects (158) were most frequently funded. Research

projects and activities (92) were least frequently funded. Forty -eight

percent of all funded projects and activities were in the areas of personnel preparation, support services, instritictional methods and materials,

and career development and* exploration.

. t Personnel preparation and staff development for vocational educators

-relative to the vocational education of handicapped and disadvantaged

.4earners were the most frequent kinds *of funded protects and activities

(16%) across the five funding areas. Personnel preparation and staff

development prorams were generally ,,funded under vocational education b

ci . personnel training. These programs commonly involved general preservice

and inservice training of vocational educators and suppor't personnel with

r 0

,

30

-.---:

41

V
4

1TABLE 11

CONTENT, PROGRAM, OR PROBLEM AREAS THAT WERE ADDRESSED BY THE PROGRAM

IMPROVEMENT AND SUPPORT SERVICES PROJECTS AND FUNDED BY THE STATES USING THE

SET-A,IDES DUR ),NG FISCAL YEARS 1979, 1980, AND 1981

Content Research Exemplary Curriculum, Vocational Vocational Total

Program, or and Development 'Guidance Education

Problem Area Innovative )- and Personnel

Programs , Counseling Training

Staff Development 2 2 4 4 . 80 , 92

Support Services 4 13 14 .... 38 8 77

Community Resources

Methods and 15 4 20 7 .14 60

Materials

Career 5 22 8 8 2 45

Development and . Exploration

, Limited English 12 11 1 5 35

Proficiency Bilingual

Education

Vocational 4 9 0 12 7 32

Assessment

Unidentified . 10 .8 4 3 26

Dissemination and

Interagency \

8 1 3 7 25

C1 .1 6. 11 22

Tech I Assistance

Cd1Obor-atibn' -. Cornpetepcy i 0 lit 11 0 9 , 20

Based Vc tional

Edueation&,

.R4cruitmerirRetenti m 1 3

Prittpemen an Folio -up 744°

'bripbuts jyr ential : o,

, DrIbpouts 3

pre6rarn Imc5fave-iVe4 '15

an() Planning:

Proaram. EvalvatIon

1 11 , 1 17

10 2 1 16

1 0 0 , 13 1 0 1 0 15

Needs 4aessmenf% 11 2 1 ' 0 0 14

13"asic Skills 2 2 6 1 3 14

SterAtolyping Non- 3 0 d 10 0 13

triattertaupations i,

'', Vist4 and Hearing 0 7 0 4

i

1 12

Impaired

Sprial Populatidns 0 -5 1_ 1 5 12

(Eigotionally ., 4.

Handicapped. Native

Ampricans.

'Incarcerated, Blacks

and parejts)

Adult Vocational 1 2 2 3 1' 9

Services

Totals 92 10& 100 116 158 577

N=57

n= 27 (states that funded at least one (1) project during the three-year period)

4is

31
6

respect to studeriot needs, individualizing instruction, and methods and

procedures for mainstreaming special needs students into regular vocational

programs.

Seventy-seven support services/community resources projects and

4

activities were funded by the states and nearly 50% of these were within

the vocational guidance and counseling are. Generally, these programs

dealt with identifying, accessing, and evaluati g the necessary supplementary school and community services students n ed to be successful in

vocational programs anchin transition to employme

Methods and materials was also a high priorit' area. Many projects

focused on research, curriculum development, a d .personnel training.

Generally, the projects were concerned with the modification of existing

or. development of new teaching methods and ins ructional materials to

meet, the individual learning needs of handicapped and disadvantaged

learners. Sbme attention was focused on training personnel in the- development and use of appropriate methods and materials.

Career development and exploration in terms of the development and

implementation of vocational awareness, orientation, and exploration programs, particularly at the secondary level, was the focus of 45 projects.

Many of these were funded under exemplary and innovative programs

including the development orr modification of exploratory technical cOuiSes*

and skill training programs designed for special needs learners who

previously have had limited program options and career alternatives.

In summary, 27 of the 57 states have used their handicapped and

disadvantaged set-aside funcl" to support 572 program improvement and

support services activities during fiscal years 1979, _1980, and 1981.

Vocational education personnel training projects were most frequently

4 32 * 4
rfunded while research projects were least frequently funded., Personnel

prepar,ation, supports services, instructional methods and m .Is, and

career development and exploration projects and activities repre; ented

near alf of the projects funded during the three-year period.

Objective IV: Identify several program improvement projects and ddr'elop abstracts.

The number of projects, program descriptions (or abstracts) submitted, and abstracts developed (or edited) by program improvement

areas are presented in Table 12. Two hundred and eighty-five (285)

program descriptions and abstracts were submitted by the RCU directors

from the 572 projects that they listed on the surveys. However, 22 of the

27 states which funded at least one project during the three-year period

submitted all the program_ descriptions. The low return in some states

was attributable to program descriptions being unavailable. In some cases,

the RCU directors or their staffs were under time constraints and could

not assemble or develop the abttracts. In other states, the directors did

not have adequate staff or any staff to assign to this task.

Fifty of th'e 285 program descriptions submitted by the directors

were selected for the purpose of developing abstracts. When a state

provided program descriptions or abstracts for every program improvement area, one abstract was )developed for each of the five areas. The

projects identified by means 7f the abstracts were not selecte n specific

evaluative criteria, but ra her on diversity and on overall breadth

topics -trom the available program descriptions by program improvement

area. Therefore( a representative sample of program improvement pro- /

jects funded with the 10% handicapped and 20% disadvantaged set-asides

4

r
during fiscal years 1979, 1980, and 1981:were selected and abstracts

developed..These,are presented in Appendix D.

TABLE 12

NUMBER OF PROJECTS, PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS SUBMITTED, AND

ABSTRACTS DEVELOPED BY PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT AREAS

. J

Program

Abstracts Descriptions Total Projects

Program Improvement Area Developed Submitted .Funded

Research 5 57 92

Exemplary and Innovative Programs 12 82 106

Curriculum Development 7 , 1414 100

Vocational Guidance and Counseling 4 142 116

Vocational Education Personnel Traini 22 60 158

Total 50 285 '572

N = 27

. n = 22

34

4,";
Summary, 'Conclusions, and Recommendations

Summary I I The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which the

50 states, District of ColuMbia, and the trust territories ( American Samoa,

Guam, Northern Mariana Islands', Puerto Rico, Trust Territory of the

Pacific

20%

Jslands, and Virgin_Islands) have used their 10% handicapped and

vantaged set -aside funds provided by Public Law 94-482 to

support program improvement projects and activities. In order to examine

the central problem fore closely, the research, exemplary and innovative

programs, curriculum development, vocational guidance and counseling,

and vocational educatio'n personnel training projects funded during fiscal

years 1979, 1980, and 1981 were identified. Further the federal set-

. aside and matching state and local funding levels of the projects were alsodetermined. The specific content, program, and problem areas addressed

by the projects were identified and a compendium of program improvement

project abstracts was peloped. A five-item survey instrument was

developed to achieve the major objectives and answer the research clues-

, tions of this study. The entire population of 57 states researc) coordinating, unit (RCU) directors was chosen to participate. After the initial

mail survey and subsequent mail and telephone follow-up surveys, the

final response rate was 100%. "the data analysis- process included the

development of descriptive data tables and a discussion of the findings.

It was not the intent of this study to identify and examine all the

projects and activities the states funded that impacted upon handicapped

and disadvantaged learners. Only those projeCts, programs, or activities

funded in part or whole with the handicapped and disadvantaged set-aside

35
funds were identified. Further, - this study did not attempt to assess the

effectiveness of the projects, nor to determine the levels or focus of

funding of basic grants to LEAs. The fin'dings are based on the major

objectives and research questions developed for this study. The general

findings of this study were:

1 Twenty-five of th 7 states and'territories funded at least one

research projecti the 10% h'andicapped and 20% dis-Alvantaged

set-aside funds during fiscal years 1979, 1980, and:1981 ; while

f

tr.

a total "o* 92 projects were funded. A to 8 of $4,609,825 of

combined federal set-aside and matching state .and local funds

was used to fund research projects during the three-year

period by the 23 states reporting data. The federal set-asides

represented the largest portion of funding and the state funds

the smallest funding source. Most states funded, research

projects witt oQly the federal set-asides.

. y

2. Twenty-two of the 57 states and territories funded at least one

exemplary and innovative program project with the 10% handicapped and 20% disadvantaged ;'set-asicle. funds' during fiscal

years 1979, 1980, and 1981; while a total of 106 projects were

funded. A total of $5,932,805( of combined federal set-aside and

matching state and local funds was used to fund exemplary and

innovative program projects during the thr:ee-year period by

the 18 states reporting 'data. Most states used the federal

set-asides to fund the major part of or entire projects while the

state and local funds were relatively less used.

3.4 Twenty-one of the 57 states and territories funded at least one

36
7

curriculum development project with the 10% handicapped and

20% disadvantaged set-aside / funds during fiscal years 1979,

1980, and 1981; 'while a total of 100 projects were funded: A

. total of $4,672,204 of combined federal set-aside and matching

state and local funds was used to fund curriculum development

projects .during the three-year period by the 18 states reporting data. Most states funded projects in part or whole with

only the federal et-asides. -

4. Nineteen of the 57 states and territories funded at least one

vocational guidance and counseling prOject with the 10% handicapped and 2()% disadvantaged set-asides during fiscal years

1979, 1980, and 1981; while a total of 116 projects were funded.

SiXty-seven percent of all the projects were funded by three

states. A total of $5,948,185 of coliTh-nkci federal set-aside and

matching state and local funds was used to fund vocational

guidance and counseling projects during the three-year period

by the 14 states reporting data. The projects were funded

minimally with state funds while the federal set -aside was the

largest funding source. In addition, local funds represented a

substantial portior; of funding for some of the projects.

5. Twenty-seven of the 57 states and territories funded at least

one vocational education personnnel training project with the

10% handicapped and 20% disadvantaged set-aside funds during

fiscal years 1979, 1980, and 1981; while a total of 158 projects

were funded. sixty percent of all the projects were funded by

six states. A total of $5,662,734 of comf3Thed,federal set-aside

tI 37
I

...

and matching state and local funds was used to fund vocational

education personnel training projects during the three-year

period by the 24 states reporting data. Most states funde'd

projects with only with federal set-asides while state funds were

400 minimally used.

6. A total of 572 program improvement and support services projects were funded with the 10% handicapped and 20% disadvantaged set-asides by the 27 states .which funded at least one project or activity during the three-year period. Vocation& education personnel straining projects were most frequently funded

while research projects were )east frequenti-pfunded. Approximately 50% of all- -the projects and activities funded dealt with

the topics of personnel preparation, support services, instructional methods and materials, and career developMent and exploration.

Conclusions

The conclusions, based on theiiindings of this study, are concerned

with the extent to which the states have u)d their 10% handicapped and

t 20%. disc vantaged federal set-asides and matching state and local funds to

suppo t program improvement projects and activities in the areaS of

esir

----. res'ch, exemplary and innovative programs, curriculum development,

vocational guidance and counseling, and vocational ecier7ation personnel

training.

1. Most states and territories -did not use their 10% handi.capped

and 20% disadvantged set-asides to fund program improvement

. r

. at.

38

/

...
4

r

projects and activities. However, 47% of the states, funded at

least one project Or activity during'fiscal years 1979, 1980, and

1981:

2. Vocational education personnel training projects were most frequently funded while, research projects' were leastfrfrequently

funded.

3. A small number of states funded a large percentage of all the

projects.

4. One-half of all the program improvement projects and activities

funded focused on,the topics of personnel preparation, support

services/community resources, instructional methods and materials, and career development and 'exploration.

5. The states used their federal handicapped and disadvantaged

set-asides to fund the largest poi-tion of the projects and activities white the projects were least funded with state funds.

6. host states funecKprojects with only fe'cleral set-aside funds.

4 7. Those states which did not use their set-asides to support program improvement projects and activities apparently used the

funds for basic grants to local education agencies (several RCU

directors indicated this on their ,surveys) to 'support the excess

costs for providing vocational instruction and support seryices

to handicapped and disadvantaged learners.

8. Many states may fund several Subpart 3 (Program Improvement

and Support Services) projects which include special needs as

.39

vj
well as non-special needs students. Thus, it is difficult to

determine the full extent of funds .expended for special needs

learners under Subpart 3. Generally, these projects serving a

combination of students are not counted against the 10% and 20%

special needs set-asides.

Recommendations

. r

The 1141dings'and conclusions of this study indicated that the 10% \.

handicapped and 20%disadvantaged set-aside funds were not generally

used by most states to fund program improvement programs and activities. Although several special needs national and statewide needs assessment, evaluation, and policy studies (Davis and Ward, 1978; Howard,

1979; Phelps and -Thornton, 1979; Greenan and Phelps, 1980) have indicated a need for expanded program improvement initiatives in areaS

, such as interagency cooperation and program evaluation, many states

apparently ire not using part of th,e-i-r---set-asides for these pprposes.

This does not necessarily suggest that the states have Rot funded program improvement activities which impacted upon special needs learners,

nor that the set asides have not been appropriately used as basic grants

to LEAs to support the excess costs of educating handicapped and disadvantaged students in vocational education. However, as ',handicapped

and disadvantaged learners continue to, be placed in regular-tvocational

programs, it will become increasingly important to

programs and s1rvices which assist them in succeeding

and making the transition to the world of work.

Several general and specific- recommendations can be made

develop improved

in their programs

based on

the findings and conclusions of this study. The recommendations which

40
ft

follow are addressed to research and development; policy making , and

planning personnel at the federal, state, and local levels.

7,.- --1--.----ThTS-7siUdy s ecificallx,examined the extent to which the states

r have used thei 10% handicapped and 20% disadvantaged fund.,,

Aloe to support program improvement projects and activities. However, it is recommended that further studies examine all the

funding sources which the stat,e_s_use to fund program improve-

- ,_%

projects that impact upon special needs learners in vocational education. For example,. studies could be conducted to

dete mine all projects funded with Public Law 94-482 Subpart 3

funds which directly impact on special n'eeds learners. In

addition, Public Law 94-142, Part 13, funds could also be investigated.

2. States need to continue or begin to r&spond to the: existing

a

information and° data which have been provided by national and

statewide needs assessments and evaluations with respect to

special poprotations. bran}. improvement activities should be

rr

funded based on thy' assessed needs of different target groups

which age concerned with improving and expanding vocational

education opportunities for special needs learners. SEA personnel (state directors of vocational and' special educ.ation, state

consultants . for vocational special needs (handicapped and disadvantaged), R 'rectors, and other \-staW),. LEA personnel

(administrators, supervisors, teachers, teacher aides, and other

staff4, teacher edu,ators, parents and advocacy groups, and

significant otls should have

-41

ti

into ,assessing .program

444
d *

i .

.

.

' , 4. Illimois Minhesota Researh and Development Certter forl Voca-

, tional Education at the 'University of Minyfesota, National inr/

/

t service Network et Indiana U

_ nivergityi Eval atio4 Training

. Consortium at 'Western Michigan. Univ sity, and he Naikonal

Center for Research 'in Vocational Education at The ohio State

. L

Airiprovemefit dieeds, prOgram inservice needs, and personnel

ee needs "(den be concurrent activities). Formal needs assecmment s

can provide va Tia evidence for decision' making and fiscal 'ac-

'43;

countability4

Several agencies and programs (e.g:, Lelerghip Training

InstituteiVocational and Special 'Education at the University or

lo

\.

.

3.

Uni-versity) have been working on vocational/special catien

needs, assesYment for several years and are ava

for persons- who -went to develop instrumentat

le resources

strategie\,

'and procedures 'for assessing then-. staf needs.

States should. create regional and/or national dissemination net1 works to share the special needs program improvement projects

.which they, are' funding. Natiopal organizations such as the

Department of Educa 'on, Office of Vocational: and Adult

Education, Research SectiOnl American Vocational Education

Research Association; or the .National _Association of Vocational

. Education Special Needs Personnel could take the leadership in ,

, 4 developing such networks. One example of such a network is

the "Consbrtium for Research Related to the Career Dqveiopment

of ;Special Populationis." TI-0 Consortium includes the vocational

and special education personnel from the "E3FC TEN" universitiess

1
.f

V

who are involved in research related to special needs learners.

Through an interagency collaborative network, research ..programs and activities arty spared and conducted. Network l could

take other forms such as a° "clearinghouse" lOcated at a college

o university; or a periodic newsletter or directory-of abstracts

compiled, produced, and disseminated through a contracted pri- v

vete or public ,agency. Other alternatives could be to Ate

existing dissemination linkages or systemg such as the ERIC

Clearinghouse or the National Center for Research in Vocational

Education. The development of a dissemination network is very

desirable since it could facilitate the sharing of program imr)rove4ent information and assist states in the non-duplication

of programs and activities. a 4. A follow-up to 'this Ftu d y could examine the methods and procedures by which states have funded, are funding, and Will, in'

the futurco Andy, program improvement projects. The information

obtained froM such a study could,.provide state education . agencies w,ith alternatives for assessing 'needs, prioritizing needs,

and efficiently using their existing funds. EffeAtive stye

funding and allocation policies will become more significant as

federal funding policies and resources become less prevalent in

the states.

5. Future research should investigate the effectiveness of the

projects or their impact,,.(shor-1-term and long-term, intended

and unintended) on special needs learners. Program improvement activities are elatively costly . to conduct. As funds

43
-64

ft%

t become more scarce and the need for fiscal accountability and

efficiency becomes increasingly important, the states will have

to demon trate apprelpriate use of available local, state, and

federal dollars. Evaluation questions including the followingcould be asked: As a' result of the programs and activities,

/how many additional students are being served? How successful

are students in .their vocational programs and in the world of

work? How effective are teachers in working with special needs

T

students after receiving personnel training? How appropriate

'72.141>..... are the support services and curriculums available to students'

These and other questions, need to be asked"to *iffy and

.c. validate the utility of future prog-7-17n improvement activities.

6. Future research studies could examine the states' funding

policies regarding basic grants to LEAs. Studies could exam-

-r

ine: how needs are determined, the formulas used to allocate

funds, specific areas in which funds are,useci, the adequacy of

funds relative to assessed needs, and the cost-effectiVeness/

benefits of the basic grants. Similar studies could provide

valid evidence to state and federal funding agencies relative to

future funding priorities.

7, Vocational education, special education, vocational rehabilitation,

CETA, and other private and public agencies vyhich 'serve

handicapped and, disadviantaged populations and use federal,

state,, and local funds to support Program improvement activities

need to develop effective interagency cooperation and funding

1414 5,3
14

016

agreements.. Collaborative efforts between agenci will assist

in eliminating 'duplicative efforts ands lead .to incr ased fiscal

efficiency. State education agency personnel RCU

dirIctors, state directors of special education,'state directors)of

vocational rehabilitation) could.develop cooperative needs assess-

. ments, and funding policies, and identify cOmvion program

improyement activities. The first steps VI developing cooperative

agreements should be to define roles and' responsibilities and

determine how each agericy can best contribute to each activit4

The Leadership Training Institute .(LTI) /Vocational and

Special Education at the Univers.ity pf Illinois and the Inter-..

agency Linkage Model Project at the University of WisconsinMadison continue to work with state education agencies in

derveloping effective state level interagency cooperation and

agreements. The LTI has condiaceedi,a policy study and corn-

,. 14. piled a compendium of interagency agreerrients which were

developed and implemented in the states'. In addition, the LTI

has worked with state leadership/-personnel and has provided

training' in developing collaborative agreements among' state

agencie). The University of Wisconsin-Madison has worked'

ire intensively with states to develop effective interagency agreements. The interagency efforts of both these programs are

applicable to,Ndeveloping state level pgiogram improvement collaborative , activities.. State education agency personnel should

consult these and other similar programs for assistance and

directiOn in interagency activities.

45
In summary, the funding of program improvement activities is an

important part of providing handicapped and disadvantaged learners with

expanded vocational education and employment Opportunities. However,

local, state, and federal funds to support these activities are likely to

become more scarce as federal funding policies change and control of the

t 41P

dollars shifts to the LEAs. Therefore, future state funding policies

should reflect increased collaboration among vocation& education, special

education, vocational rehabilitation, CETA: and other public and private

agencies. Cooperation and agreements should be developed in such areas

as needs assessments, funding methods and procedures, program evaluation,. dissemination networks, and funding sources and allocations. Pro-

, gram improvement will flourish if state education agencies recognize fed- i°

eral policy changes and begin to develop effective strategies to meet .the

needs of their handicapped_ and disadvantaged' special populations with

potentially less funds and funding sources.

.1(

4

46

,3
4

Referenrces

Abt Corporation. The Abt Study of State and Local Compliance and Evaluation Practice: Special Needs Populations. A paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Associa- tion, Los Angeles, California, April 14, 1981.

Budke, W. E. and Magisos, J. H., Vocational Education ProgramImprove- ment: A Summary of State Administered Projects in FY 1978 and

1979. Columbus: National Center for Research in Vocational Education, The Ohio State University, 1980.

Davis, S. .and Ward, M. Vocational Education of Handicapped Students: A ,Guide for Policy Developrient. Reston, Virginia: Council for Exceptional Childret,1978.

Federal Register, Vocational Education, Volume 42, Number 67, April, 1977.

Federal Register, No*distriminatioo on Basis of Handicap- Volume 42, Number 86, May 4, 1977. (Regulations for Implementina Section 504

of Public Law =93-112).

,Federal Register, Education of Handicapped Children. Volume 42, Number 63, August 23, 1977. (Regulations for Implementing Public Law

94-1142).

Greenan, J. P: and Phelps, L. A. Policy-Related Problems for Delivering Vocational Education to I-Jandicappea Learners as Perceived by State Education Agency Personnel? ,Urbana, Illinois: Leader,ship Training

1) Institute/Vocational and Special Education, 1980.

Howard, R. Vocational Education of Handicapped Youth: .State of the Art. V,ashington, D. C.: National Association of StateBoards of

Education, 1979.

Phelps, L. A. and Thornton, L. J. Vocational Education and Handicapped

Learners: Perceptions and Inservice Needs of State Leadership Per- sonnel. Urbana, Illinois: Leadership Training Institute/Vocational and pecial Education, 1979.

4.

4 147
A

Appendix

4

a

4
Name:

Address:

ik (.

Appendix

Program Improvement and Support Services

Special Needs Project Survey

Telephone Number: ( Example

Fiscal Year

Vocational Education Personnel Training

Project Title Local

Funding

State Federal Total

1980 1. Personnel Preparation in $1000 $2000 S3000 $6000

Teaching Handicapped

Learners in Vocational

Education

2. Non-Categorical Vocaz 1000 2000 1500( 4500

tional/Special Education

---`leacher Programs . 0

----

. . Total $2000 $4000 $4500 $10500

Instructions

1. The Fiscar Year is,g.iven.

2. Project Title - List all projects that are being funded with the set-asides

for, special needs learners in the appropriate fiscal year.

3. Local Funding - Indicate the'amourit of local funds in terms of dollars that

8 are used to fund the project.

4. State Funding - Indicate the amount of state funds in terms of dollars that

. are used to fund the projept.

5. Federal Funding - Indicate the amount of federal funds in terms of dollars

that are used to fund the project.

6. Total - Add the local, state, and federal funds used Att- an individual project and record the sum. . r Add the local., gtate, and federal funds separately across projects

and record the sums.

51 C . it
Fiscal Year

Research

Project Title

Funding,

Local State Federal Total

.

.

FY 1979

.

x

.. .

.

\

,

.

,

,

,

Total

I

FY 1980

.

..

.

,--

..

. ?

.

...

i .

,

.-

.

.1,

Total

FY 1981

.

. e

.

,

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

ITotal

t2

b4.
Fiscal Year

Exemplary and Innovative Programs

Project Title

Funding

Local State Federal Total

,

FY 1979

Y

_

.'

.

.

.

t

.

---....

...

.

.

.

.

.

Total

.

FY 1980

.

.

.

.

.

.

_

'

.

.

.

.

. Total ,

.

. .

a FY 1981

,

.

.

,

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

ib.

.

.

4

.

.

.

. . .

.

.

,

'Totnl . O. 53
Fiscal Year

Curriculum Development

Project Title

Funding

Local -State Federal Total

FY 1979

.

,

,

.

.

a

-

.

,

.

.

. .

.

.

Total . . _....-"" Fr 1980

s

.

, `k

.

. Or

',

.

.

.

.

. .

. P

>

.

...

il

.

, Total i.

FY 1981

.

.

.

4

.

4

.

. T,

..

n

.

.

1

....---,

a Total

54 vvr
Fiscal Year

4*/

Vocational Guidance and Cbunseling

Fundin

Project Title Local State Federal Total

FY 1,979

. .

4.

.

.

.

.

.

.

,

.

4..

.

.

. .

.

. -

,

.

.

b

4

.

.

.

. . Total

Y 1980

.

.

.

.

4

,

,

t

....

.

.

.

.

,

,

.

Total

FY 1981

.

. .

.

I.

. \

.

.

.

.

.

.

p

.

.

,

,

.

,

.

.

.

.

,

.

.

Total

55.
Fiscal Year

Vocational Education Personnel Training

Project Title

Funding.

'Local State Federal Total

. FY 1979

.

.

. ®

. .

.,

, e .

,

. .

.

.

Total

H I

----

FY

_. 0

t.

. .

..

.. .

. 1

. Total

. FY 1981

.

.

.

.

, ..,

1

.

.."

,

. .

..

.

.

.

41.

Total

56
University of Illinois at UrpAna- Champaign

College of Education

DEPARTMENT OF VOCATIONAL

AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION

Dear RCU Director: .

t Appendix B

315 Education Building

1310 5, Sixth Street

Champoign, it 2i1820

(217) 333.0807

October 15', 1980

A major thrust in vocational education has been to provide special needs learners with appropriate ,instruction and support services. Publ$ Law 94-482 (The Education Amendments of 1976 - Title II: Vocational Educa- tion, Part 'A) has provided federal set -aside 'funds specifically for the vocational education of speciaVneeds leaMers (10% handicapped, 20$ dis- advantaged) . Subpart 3 (Program Improvement and Support .Services) lists, defines, and describes the are ,.in which set-aside funds 'may be used for, program improvement pr cts and activities. These areas include:

o Research. (Section 131)

.° Exemplary and Innovative Programs (Section 132) ourriculum Dev.elopment (Section 133) V rational Guid'ance and Counseling (Section 134) o Vocational Education Personnel Training (Sectiop 135)

the Leadership Training Institute/Vocational 'and Special Education staff at the University of Illinois, is currently corfaucting a policy study to determine the extent to which the 'states have' and are presently using

their TO% handicapped and 20% disadvantaged. set-aide funds to suppoPt program improvement projects and activities that impact upon special needs learners in vocational education. In addition, a compendium of selected project abstracts will be develope. This stud will describe the various program improvement .thrusts that states have ini iated regarding special needs learners.

Enclosed are five Subpart 3, program improvement and support services project survelease complete each of the surveys by listing all- projects within the five areas , that are currently or have been funded with -the set-asides for special needs learners on the appropriate

surveys. If all the; Subpart 3, program improvement areas are not under your supervision (e.g., research but not exemplary programs)', please assist us by collecting and reporting that information from the appropriate section.' Also, write yis,ur name, address, and telephone number on the cover sheet. You may want to refer to the example and instructions in completing the surveys.

tk

ti 4`,

57

a
ter.

IF-

, sr

5

. . In addition, please indlud,t 01 abstract for each project .listeti on the surveys. This will givae us a more' detailed description of the projects'

goavls, major objectives; target audiences, products, and ,other pertinent

information. ,After reviewing- t abstracts received, we will again contact you `regard'i'ng permission,lo include specific alptracts in the fint report.,

Vie would appreciate it if you would return the om I,eted cover sheet,

five project lists, and abstracts- try November 15, 1 8 If you have any questions, please don't 1-Aitate to contact us at (21 33- 2325.. Through

this study and your cooperation we,b.hope- to entify and share the broad

range of unique ',projects being initiated within he states to impreye and

:_< arid vocational education for special need ers. Your assistance

in this effort 'is greatly appreciated! .

'Sincerely,

James P. Greenan, Ph.D.

Research Development Coordinator Leadership' Training Institute/

Vocational and Special Education

11

t.

fa,

110

4'

41.
a

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

College of Education

DEPARTMENT OF VOCATIONAL

AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION

wir

Appendix C

Dear RCU Director:

4

345 Cducolion Building ,

1310 S Sixth Street

Champaign. it 61820

(217) 333 0807

November21, 1980

Five weeks ago you rived a request from us to coroplete five Subpart 3 program improvement and support services, project ivnieys. To be listed were all projects within the five areas (see -surveys)/ that are currently or

have been funded in your state with the set-asides (10% handicapped and.*

20% disadvantaged) for special needs learners on the appropriate surveys. Also to be included was an abstract for, each project listed' on the

surreys.

We have encloseid -copies of the materials that were previously mailed to

you. It would be appreciated if you would complete the Surveys and

return them to u s by December 2 1 , 1 9 8 0 . I f you have any questions, don't hesitate to contact us at (217)333-2325. Your cooperation and

assistance in 'this effort is} greatly appreciated! Thank you.

Sincerely ,

James P.. Greenan, Ph.D.

Re,seach and Dev&4'pment Coordinator, Leadership TrainIN Institute/

Vocational and Special = pRication

59

4

4,

ir , -;911jet 1r A

6
Appendix D

Program Improvement Project Abstracts

RESEARCH

STATE: Arkansas FISCAL YEAP: 1980

SPONSORING AGENCY: Fort Smith Public Schools TOTAL-FUNDS $39,740

1 CONTAtT PERSON: Mrs. Betty Morris

AL DRESS: FOrt Smith Public Schools

Fort Smith, Arkansas

PROJECT

, TITLE: Career AviareneSs and Job Placement for EaVly SchoSl Leavers

r and Adults in Port Smith, Arkansas

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals of this program are: (1) to develop a school-commemity plan of action for coordinating

meaningful educational and occupational. experiences for potential and actual early school leavers, and

(2) to explore strategies and alternative solut:t tions for'providing career guidance and job place- ment services to identified target groups.

e'

.f

STATE: Arkans'as FISCAL YEAR: 1980

SPONSORINCAGENCY: University of Centr'al

Ai\kansas

C6NTACT. PERSON:- Dr. Joseph Arn

ADDRESS: University of Central Arkansas

Conway, Arkansas 72032

TOTAL FUNDS:$32,074

^PROJECT TITLE; Coordinated Career, Education Curriculum Project

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goal of this project is to de-velop a welliflanned Coordinated Career Education (coopdrative

education for handicapped and/or disadvantaged

students) curriculum guide which will enable the

600rdinated career education teachers to provide the

kind of learning ,experiences and opportunities for

their students to achieve their educational objectives*more effectively and efficiently.

61 N
ST-ATE: Colorado

SPONSORING AGENCY: Not available

CONTACT PERSON: Not available

ADDRESS: Not Avail-able

FISCAL YEAR: 1980

TOTAL FUNDS: Not available

PROJECT- TITLE: Assessing the Impact of Vocational Education Programs on

Disadvantaged and Handicapped Students

PROJECT DESCRIPTION; The major goals of this project are to assess the following: (1) numbers of handicapped. and disadvantaged in Colorado, (2) identification of vocational

needs, (3) the existence of current programs, (Lir)

the adequacy of existing programs; (5) mainstreaming impact upon reaular vocational programs, (6)

training needs of vocational teachers, (7) career

education/guidance 'needs, and (8) future directions

of vocational 'programming.

STATE: ,Florida FISCAL YEAR: 1980;

SPONSORING AGENCY: University of Florida * TOTAL FUNDS: $15,000 ,.0"

. CONTACT PERSON: Dr. Stuart Schwartz *'`' ADAESS: University of Florida

Gainesville, Florida 32611

PROJECT TITLE: A Study. tolxplore Vocational Training Proaramg .and Subsequent Success of Handicapped Indivi uals in Rural Areas

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Available regtarch literature provides little* insight

related 4to the vocational prepar"ation and success

14;... of handicapped persons in rural areas. Observations and pilot studies conducted by the writers of this proposal in rural districts in the State of

1. _Florida indicate that . few handicapped individuals

can be considered vocationally successful. Given

the current state of affairs, this project will be

conducted to achieve the following objectives:* (1) to ... develop and meet with a statewide advisory committee

for this' project, (2) to review the literature toCle-,

termine, the . national state-of-the-art' of vocational

preparation programs ,fOr handicapped students and

compare national models to those identified in Florida,

and (3) to review the li4rature to determine the

national state-of-the-art of vocational adult adjust- ment of handi) Aped and non - handicapped' persons,

particularly a it relates to rural settings.

'4, ir 62

O A*

I
6 STATE. Pennsylvania FISCAL YEAR: 1979

SPONSORING At ENCY: Central Susquehanna TOTAL FUNDS: $40,893

Intermediate Unit

CONTACT PERSON: Dr. Patrick F. Toole

ADDRESS: P.O. Box 213

Lewisburg. Pennsylvania &7837

'PROJECT TITLE: VOcOonal Education' Needs of Handicapped Youth Project

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This project, which is concerned with the ideiltification of vocational preparation programming factors

that may affect the performance nd successful' outcomes of handicapped students,\ has the following objectives: (1) to determine the current state-ofthe-art relative 'to vocational education programs offered to handicapped students by vocational education schools, home schools, and various local commun-

. ity programs through the development and administration of an inventory, (2) to identify and develop :),

evaluation criteria to be employed in the research

project, (3) to develop research methodology, (4)

'I, to expand the information base on program options,

and (5) to establish an -advisory committee.

4

63

7
,

io

EXEMPt RY AND INNOVATIVE PROGRAMS

.STATE: Arizona'. FISCAL YEAR: 1981

SPONSTING AGENCY: Mohare County School TOTAL FUNDS: $9 ,265

District

CONTACT PERSON: David, Watson

ADDRESS: 515 West Beale

Kingmran, grizona 86401

PROJECTTITLE: Seeking Alternative Vocational Education

-44

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This igio.r^am is designed to provide a thorough voca-

.tionar education training and support program for

young people who may or who have already drppped out of the regular school system prior to graduation. The major goals of the program will be:. {1) to in-

. crease the chance for success of p ial dropoUts

by keeping them in school through p iding appro -*

priate vocational education programAing, and (2) for

dropouts to enhance their glances for successful

employment by training and/or job placement.<

STATE: Florida FISCAL YEAR: 1981

SPONSORING AGENCY: Florida State University

CCNTACT PERSON: Dr. Hollie R. Thomas

TOTAL FUNDS: $10,000

ADDRESS: Florida State University

Tallahassee, Florida 32306

W

PROJECT TITLE: A Study to Identify the Unique Criteria ancl Standards

Needed for the Development of Successful Bilingual Vocational Education Programs

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed research intends to identify the unique

criteria and standards needed for the development of .

successful bilingual vocational education 'programs. The major objectives are: (1) to idenry the unique

staff requirements for working with students of

11° limited-English speaking ability; (2) to 'identify the

unique facilities, equipment, ..and. materials needed

for the, instruction of such students; (3) to identify

the unique 'curriculum components that are needed;

and (4) to identify cultural and philosophical differ- ences that exist between the students, teacjitrs, and

the dominant population.

64

70-

Az1
0 4

k

STATE: Florida

SPONSORING AGENCY:' Florida International

University

CONTACT PERSON: Debbie Herman Seigel

ADDRESS: Florida InterRational University Tamiami Trail - Miami, Florida 33199

4

, FISCAL' YEAR: 1981

TOTAL FUNDS: 541,689

PROJECT TITLE: Handicapped User Interface for Florida VIEW

PROJECT 5ESCRIPTtON : The project will augment Florida's VIEW Career Information for relevance to physically ,handicapped, users. The major objectives are: (1) to collect physical capacities information, us)ng the Job Related

Physical Capacities (JRPC) job analysis method, on

*

at least 40 occupations on FLORIDA VIEW, (2) to pro- duce this data in apprOpriate format to be included directly on VIEW microfiche, and (3) to refine the JRPC user's manual for use with FLORIDA -VIEW.

.x K

STATE: .Idaho

0 FISCAL YEAR: 1980

1. A

,SPONSORING AGENCY: Nampa School District TOTAL FUNDS: 510,000

CONTACT PERSON: Marjorie Wesche

A ADDRESS: Nampa Senior High School-

, Nampa, Idaho 83651

PROJECT TITLE; Nutrition for Disadvantaged

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The .major. goals of this project are: (1) to improve

the nutrition 'of high school economically 'disadvan-

. students through study and teaching elemen- tary, pupils, (2) to improve the nutrition of the K-5

pupils in Centennial Elementary School through ,class-

- room unit teaching, and (3) to acquaint high school ..... students with nutritional job opportunities.

\

65 7'.,

,.

.--

IC 4-- 4
i

TATS:' Illinois

SPONSORING AGENCY:

CONTACT PERSON:

0

7

*. FISCAL YEAR: 1980 . Joliet Township District 4204 TOTAL FUNDS: $69,118

m Boldrey I

ADDRESS: 201 E. Jefferson Street

Joliet, Illinois 601432

PROJECT TITLE: Diffusion Center for Exemplary Occupational Education

Programs for Handicappti _ and Disadvantaged Students

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goqls of this project are: (1) to serve

as a diffusion center for exemplary occupational

education activities that serve the vocational education needs of handicapped and dadvantaged

students, at the secondary level; (2) to actively

participate in the coordination and diffusion of

exemplary occupational education activities operating in Joliet and in the other specified sitet. by working closely with all sites in the network and

the Illinois State University center; (3) to provide

technical assistance on a one-to-one basis to selected

school districts who are interested in adapting/adopting one or more of the .programs, services and/or

materials that relate to occupational education for

handicapped and disOvakltaged students; an ) to

strengthen existing programs, services, a d staff

competencies in relationship to occupational e ucation

for all handicapped and disadvantaged students in

District 204'. .f

STATE: Kentucky . FISCAL YEAR: 1981

SPONSORING AGENCY: Western Kentucky University TOTAL FONDS: S39,124

CONTACT PEF3SON : Dr. Norma Jean Sc.hira

ADDRESS: Western Kentucky University

Bowling Green, Kentucky 142101

PROJECT TITLE: - Assessment of Occupational Opportunities in Health Occupations for Handicapped

PROJECT D,ESCR1PTION: The major goals of this project are: (1) to assess

and identify' the types of occupational programs in

health occupations available to handicapped students,

(2) to prepare a catalog of opportunities according to

handicap 'classifications with suggestions about modifi- cations, (3) to prepare and package for field testing

66t

4
instructional materials for s'pe(cial,needs students, and

.(4) to provide inservice to health occupations teachers

in the strategies used with special needs students.

4 STATE: Massachusetts FISCAL YEAR: 1981

SPONSORING AGENCY: Ecumenical Social Action

-4, Committee

CONTACT 'PERSON: Not available

I ADDRESS: Not available

.

\

TOTAL FUNDS: $70,002

' ,..

/

PROJECT TITLE: Pre-Vocational.Program for High Risk Adolescents

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals of this project are: (1) to couplq, traditional school involvement with vocational exploration through activities such as individual and group o

counseling, field trips,. internships, family outreach

counseling, and other supirtive services; (2) to pro- vide meaningful age-appropriate center exploration/ work opportunities; and (3) to expose clients to nontraditional career options.

STATE: tbi-nnesota.

SPONSORING AGENCY: Red Wing AVT.I

CONTACT PERSON: Pat tnz t

ADDRESS: R90, Wing AVTI

Rkd Wing, Minnesota 55066

PROJECT TITLE:, PLATO (Phase III)

4

FISCAL YEAR: 1980

, \

TOTAt. FUNDS:' 524,864

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals of this project are: (1) to provide

students with a variety of skills to comprehend- concepts, (2) to provide tomple in raction opportunities through dialklue mode P TO, (3) to provide

new experiences in a variety of ubjects related to the

student program, ant (1.1) to individually assist stii-, dents in developing skills necessary to obtain success

invtheir program area.

\.:

....1...

-1

C,

67

IO
('

STATE: Neiv Jersey

15 SPONSORING AGENCY: Middlesex County Vocation.tTechnical

High School

CONTACT PERSON: Brian Laughlin

ADDRESS: Btrr D. Coe Vo-Tec

112 Rues Lane

East Brunswick, New Jersey 08816

FISCAL Y.FAR: 1980.

TOTAL FUNDS: $5,875

e PROJECT TITLE: Optimizing Vocational Development in the Handicapoed (A.

Systems Approach to Community and Family Involvement) , PROJEtT DESCRIPTION: Using the theory that interaction between community,

a

family, andschool is crucial to an indiViduarsevertual success in the competitive job market, this

project sought to bring together all three inter'relqted social systems for the purpose of developing

realistic vocational plans %Ir participating handicapped

sit08ents.`

STATE: New Mexico FISCAL YEAR: 1981

SPONSORING AGENCY: Career Services for TOTAL FUNDS: Not Available

the Handicapped

AP

CONTACT PERSON: Chris Jsengard

ADDRESS: 620 Roma, N.L\L.-, Suite B

Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103

PROJECT TITLE: Vocationaliupport for the Severely Handicapped

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The objectives of this, project are: (1) to provide'

supportive services necessary to allow "severely,

physically, and sensory 4-aandicapped students to

If attend established vocational prbgrams; and '(2) to

provide sdpportiv services to 'severely physically,

and sensory han pped persons during periods of

on-the-job trainin d job orientation.

68
STATE: New York FISCAL YEAR: 1979

SPONSORING AGENCY: Kennedy High School TOTAL FUNDS: 5231,365

CONTACT PERSON: Not a liable

ADDRESS:.Bronr, N

PROJECT TITLE: Occupational EdNation for jcadvantaged Secondary Students

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Kennedy High School offers an unusual alternative in

the Voluntary/Work Experience Program by blending

academic and work experiences. It focuses on indepth exploration and decision making, skills acquisition, and basic learning through full-time, individualized and realistic site .experiences. Three hundred

disadvantaged students in grades 10-12 are served in photography, arts, and graphics based upon predetermined selection criteria.

STATE: Texas

SPONSORING AGENCY: Region XX ESC

CONTACT PERSON: Dwain M. Ester

FISCAL YEAR: 1981

TOTAL FUNDS: $50,000

ADDRESS: 1550 N.E. Loop 1410

San Antonio, Texas 78209

PROJECT T.ITLE: Vocational Assesspent for the Handicapped

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The objectives of this project are: (1) to develop a

training program for LEA personnel in the administration and interpretation of selected vocational evaiva-'

tion instruments; (2J to evaluate 50 handicapped stu- dents and in so doing refine the process of evaluation procedures, forms., selection of tests, resorts,

and others; (3) to provide technical assistance Wpro- gramming for the handicapped; and (14) to gather data

thr'ough. research on the use of dexte'rity tests in

differentiating mentally retarded, learning disabled,

and normal high school students.

69'

I
STATE: Arizona

SPONSORING AGENCY: MCCCD (Rio Salado)

CURRICULUM DEVELOAMENT

CONTACT PERSON: Dr. Martha P.Wtin

ADDRESS: 102 North 40th Street

Phoenix, Arizona 85034 , PROJECT' TITLE: Ohe Step Further: Guadalupe

FISCAL YEA,R: 1981

TOTAL FUNDS: $29,604

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This program Will provide students with remedial

basic 'education and occupational skills necessary to

maintain. a sriall business. Its goals are: (1) tdF

develop the skills necessary to make students independent entrepreneurs, (2) to enable them to govern

their own build; and (3) to prepare them to succeed

in community college or other formal occupational programs.

STATE: Illinois

SPONSORING AGENCY: Southern Illinois

University

CONTACT PERSON: Mr. E. 1-111is Merritt

ADDRESS; School of Technical Careers

Southern Illinois University Carbondale, Illinois 62901

PROJECt TITLE: Development of Multi-Cultural

, Technical Curricula

FISCAL YEAR: 1981

TOTAL FUNDS: $29,931

Competency-Based Vocational/

PROJECT' Df CRIPTION: The major goals of this project are: (1) to reduce

4 Jinciuistic 'and cultural barriers to )earning among

limited English speaking adults JLESAs) involved

in vocational/technical ,training programs in eight

occupational areas and t2) to improve vocational

instruction through the development of bilingual

(Pocho speaking and Laotian `speaking LSAs, but

with generic applications to other vocational/tech-

. nical training needs involving Spanish speaking and

other Indochinese speaking LESA groups) competency- based curricula in modules which will be used in eight

high demand occupational areas (automobile body

repair, automobile mechanic, building maintenance

mechanic, combination welder, fiberglass technical,

food service, machine trades, and secretarial/clerical).

70
V 0

STATE: Massachusetts

SPONSORING AGENCY: Fall River Public,

Schools

CONTACT PERSON: Not available c_

,j

FISCAL YEAR: 1981

TOTAL FUNDS: $34,734

#

ADDRESS: Fall River Public Schools

Fall River, I'lassachusetts

PROJECT TITLE: Appliance Repair

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This project has as its major opal to provide additional staffing for the appliance repair program '-

including two aides, one for 15 handicapped, students and one for 30 limited English-proficiency students.

STATE: Minnesota.

-9

SPONSORING AGENCY: Duluth AVTI

CONTACT PERSON: Clifford Wiklund

ADDRESS: #709 4 Duluth AVTI

Lake Avenue and 2nd Street

Du Idth, Minnesota 55802

FISCAL YEAR: 1980

TOTAL FUNDS: 52,459

PROJECT TITLE: Chemical Deperidency Curriculum Workshops for the AVTI's

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals of this project are: (1) to satisfy the needs of the AVTIs for program implementation and

staff training, (2) to increase their use of the services available, (3) to assist students who are exper-:

iencing problems in schools related to chemical depen- dency Lisqltbuse, an'd (4) to introduce new and innovative curricula developed by-the American Business Men's Research Foundation and the California Council

on Alcohol Problems% -;

F

m 71?-',1

4 ...,

4
S STATE: New Jersey FISCAL .YEAR: 1980

SPONSORING AGENCY: Burlington County

College

CONTACT PERSON: D. Brian Lewis

ADDRESS: Social Sciences 'Division . Pemberton Browns Mills Road

Pemberton, New Jersey'08068

TOTAL FUNDS: $31,159

PROJECT TITLE.1fAraprofessidnal Training i IT Special Education

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The objectives of this project include: (1) to further

develop; field-test, and disseminate a modelacurriculum; and (2) to provide preservice and inservice

training to paraprofessionals in special education.,

The overall curriculum design, supportive materials

for the firstvtl.yo courses, and the blueprint for a

portable professional library., were- developed in a

project funded in fiscal year 1978. In fiscal year

1979, the project addressed itself .to developing the

remaining supportive materials for the third and

fourth courses and field testing all materials.

STATE: New Mexico FISCAL YEAR: 1981

SPONSORING AGENCY': Northern New Mexico TOTAL FUNDS: Not aVailable

Community College'

1;/.

,CONTACT PERSON: Connie A.. Valdez

ADDRESS: Northern New, Mexico Community. College

Espanola, New Mexico

PROJECTVITLE: Meeting Curriculum Needs of die Disadvantaged Students

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The objectives of this project are: (1) to provide

curriculum which is tailored to the needs and &Dili-

) ties of the disadvantaged student with_ emphasis on

basic skills, (2) to provide students with materials

and ,instruction 'Which will promote conceptual development and Skill awareness, (3) to assist students in th&

deyelopment of competencies-which will help them com-, pete successfully in the labor market, and (4) to promote Student success in vocational programs and thus.,

decrease dropout rates.

4 72

.,
ST9ATE: Pennsylvania

SPONSORING AGENCY: School District of

The City of Erie

xt

\

FISCAL YEAR: 1979

TOTAL FUNDS: $43,980

CONTACT PERSON: Henry Pilker ,

, - . tk i,

4 ADDRESS: School Di Strict of the City of Erie la c 0

a,

. '4 Erie, Pennsylvania 1-6501 . . . \

. l:

t r PROJECT TITLE: An Adaptive Vocational Program for '.Tr.ainable Peta'rded__

Students .

. ,

. ...- - PROJECT DESCRIPTION: T e objectives of this project which are designed to

' ' research the educational value df placing trainable

iik retardedAtydents in regular vocational shops, include:

(1) to.f6rrr4lateplEPs based on parenta), professional, and student attitudes toward -the area that could best

benefit the student; (2) to place,sVdents in various

--A, vocational stwps thpt will benefit ther: in everyday

o . self-help skins; and (.3) acquaint lheTMRs, regular students, n'd. regular teachers withieach other's

character ics. ) ' . i

. .

1, -

4

J.

.4

0.v. 000.

q

I

--

. / 4 g

/10

z

,

.1°

.04
141

4

4

VOCATIONAL GUIDANCE AND COUNSELING

, 4

STAT.E: r i zo n a "kitFCAL YE A R : 1981

SPONSORING 'AG,,E-NC;r: Nogales UnifiedSchool OT AL FUNDS: 5142,012

Di Strict #1

4

CON TA.C7 PERSON: Dr. James LehmanADDRESS: 402 Martinez Street

tioatles, Arizona 85621

PROJECT TITLE: Special Needs: Limited En`glish 4 PCT DESCRIPTION: The major goals. of this ,program are: (1) to help stu-.

Gents wn"..1-iav,e been identified as, dropouts or pot ntial dropaikts to, increase their knowledge in basic

communication skills, basic mattiersatics, and reading skills; and (2) to, provide vocational guidance ar411.

counseling services Which will help thorn in th61111,

academic and vocational pursuits after graduation.

STATE: Massachusetts FISCAL YEAR: 1981

4 .

, SPONSORING AGENCY? New Bedford Public TOTAL FUNDS: $134,1458

Schools .. ,

0 ' ' CONTACT PERSON: Not available

ADDRESO:` New Bedford Public Schools

, New Bedford, Massachusetts

, - . PROJEV TITLE: Career Or.ientaiti#n' and Training

A

PROJECT. DESCRIPTION: This alternative occupational project has the following

goals: (1). to deter students from dropping out'of high school( (2) to significantly increase their blipor-

,tunities .for employment; and (3) to provide hands-on

trainlmj .areas ot Communications, construction,

health .services, manufacturing, and office occupa-

.

lions r

Na.

9
el

fik

STATE: Oregon ACAL. YEAR: 1980

SPONSORING AGENCY David Douglas TOTAL FUNDS: $38,741-

High School

.CONTACT PERSON:. Mr. Stan Gaumer

AQDRESS)."-David Douglas SOlool District.

1500.S.E. 130th Avenue

Porstland,'Oregon 9723

PROJECT TITLE': Career, Center for Vocational Guidance

.

, es

,., PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this project is to ,pi-ovide and coor-, - -dinke_ studeht opportunities to explore, identify, and

accumulate information that w ,il pertain to, individual skills and career goals. ,tts ,major goals are: (1) to

provide career guidance services to disadvantaged and handicapped students; (2) to coordinate vocational guidance, work' experience, and disadvantagcl and handicapped services; -(3) to reduce

sex-role stereotyping; and (Li) to create 'staff awarenes's -oft career c-n'ter-aterrats-aTicrfarittions.

STATE: New Jersey

SPONSORING AGENCY: Salem County Board

for Vocational Education

CONTACT PERSON: Chary Lutz

FISCAL YEAR: 1986

TOT4.1_,FUNDS: 518,500

ADDRESS: Road #2, Box 350

k7oodstown, New Jersey 08098

PROJECT TrtLE: Vocational Courses for Handicapped Adults

N..

PROJECT DESCRI*15110N: The peinfary gol of this project was to train handl-- capped and diSadvantaged adults, other' th'an those

in need of sh.eltered, works-hop facilities, to fill"

'skilled positio1is,,d3articularly in the s'ervkce

,

. i

75 S.3;

1 O

t_

QV

e
9

V .. VOCATIONAL EDUCATION 'PERSONNEL TRAINING

STATE: Arizona' FISCAL YEAR:_ 1981

SPONSO ING GENCY: Mesa *Community TOT4L FUNDS: $105,738

College

CONTACT PERSON: Marilyn Seymann' . ADDRESS: 1833 West Southern A\ienue

Mesa, Arizona 85202 4

e

--;

-\..

PROJECT TITLE: Project to f Adults Ac.guire Special Education -- PHASE II

PROJECT .DESCRIPTION: Tod assure maximum vocational education_trairiing for it ., an increasing number of students with special needs, ,. MCC proposes to develop and implement an afternoon. college for, these individuals. The major goals of this

.. , program are: (1) to -combine an on=site work experience in the mornings 'in, a jab-related shting along.

,., with -an afternoon program of vocational studies, .a.pd

(2) to operate this progrem,in coordination with appro-

. priate support services " to p'ovide an urlinterrupted

continuum from school to employment. a . ' v STATE: Arkansasrs .11. FISCAL Y-EAR: 1980

, SPONSORING AGENCY: UQI ,ity of Arkansas TOTAL FUNDS: Not available

, at Pine Bluff \

goONTACTPERO-N: Dr. James E. Jennings

ADDRESS: University of ArkansaS at Pine Bluff

Pine Bluff, Arkansas

PROJECT TITLE: Develop aCid Field Test Modules for the Train)flg of

Teachers of Special Needs StLidents in Regular VOcational

Education ProgramS '

)

1

PROJECT 'DESCRIPTION The. purpose of this project is to prepare vocational

teachers and pOtential teachers to effectively teach

students with special needs., More specificall, the

1. 'project will facOitale the mainstreaming .of siulOents

pith special needs into the regtAlar vocational pro-

" grams through the following "means: (1) to restruc-

. ture selected 'teacher preparation coUrses in vocational areas to provide skills in working, with *gpecialt"--

needs' students, 12) to develop apprOpi-,iate ipclividu:

alized learning opportunities for prospective teachers

'76 c,

)

..
of special needs stude , (3) to provide inservice training of university acuity who will teach competency-based module in selected courses, (4) to

evaluate graduates he preservice program, 'and

(5) to provide 'training for selcted teachers of, special needs Students.

_Ar

STATE; Connecticut FISCAL YEAR: 1981

SPONSORING AGENCYA Bureau of Pupil Personneldf TOTAL FUNDS: $20,434 Hartford, Connecticut

CONTACT PERSON: Stephen Feldman

ADDRESS: Special Education Derpartment

Southern Connecticut S,tate' College New Haven, ConnecticUt

PROJECT TITLE:. Special'Study Institute

.PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals of this prOject are: (1) to train

-.140 special educators, regular educators, and school counseling personnel to jointly identify: (a) specific learning characteristics and training capabilities of

handicapped, adolescents (b) existing legal' and fiscal support mechanisms and options for vocational educa- tion, career education, and counseling; and (c)- in- service training priorities for career, occupational, and vocational educators; and (2) to, train 30 regular

teachers, special, educators, aoloinistrators, vocational

counselors, social workers, ad guidance coOnse.lors

in the concepts .of career and vocational education for the handicapped.

STATE: Idaho ; P SPONSORING AGENCY: Uhiversity of Idaho

CONT)CT 0gRSON: Dr. ;Jack Ka0fman

ADDRESS: Univeritity of Idaho

Moscow, Idaho 83$43

5

-PROJECT TITLE: Communication Skills Devetopment"Workshop for tcational

Needs

-FISCAL YEAR: 1980

TOTAL FUNDS: $4,1.97

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals 'of 'this project are: (1) to, develop

a Course to, be offered to vocational 'special needs

teac4rS throughout _tt(er state, and. (2) to develop

through this process a core of qualified affiliate

faculty whq will offer the course in various locitions

throughout the state.

77 ,
iATE: Illinois # FISCAL YEAR: 1981

SPONSORING AGENCY: University f Illinois

at Urbana- hampaign

oTOTAL FUNDS: $75,000

CONTACT PERSON": Dr. L..Allen helps

ADDRESS: 345 Education° Building

Urbana, Illinois 61801

.404g....%1ECT

.1.1-TLE:. Development of a Programmatic Emphasis and Extern Program

1 for Vocational. Special Needs Education I

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals of this project are: (1) to organize

and implement a university-based developmental model

of programmatic emplhesis on vocational special needs

education; (2) .to orgSnize and implement a model for

preparing special needs externs to provide inservice

and technicale assistance services to LEA's; and (3) to

facilitate linkages be een vocational education

special education, and ocational rehabilLtation at

the university, state ed ation agency, and local,

levels.

STATE.; Kentucky FISCAL YEAR: 1980

SPONSORING AGENCY: -Western iKentucky TOTAL FUNDS: 58,158

Univer.sity

CONTACT PRs'ON: Susan Adams

DDRESS: CCVTE

Western Kentuck niversity

Bowling Green, tucky 42101

PROJECT TITLE: Resources and Assistance forr. Vocation51 Educators of Stu-

.dents with Limited English-SpeaRing Ability (LESA)

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals of 'this project are: (1) to continue

assistande in equitable and appropriate program

modifications to Kentucky vocational education pro-.

grams. serving LESP populations; (2) to continue' pro- vision of resources, information, and tech9ical advise-

..

. ment fib vocational educators serving LESA students;

(3) to inform Kentucky vocational educators regarding

federal .mandates regulating rearditment and services

for LESAstudents and encourage appropriate response;

and (4,) to monitor the number and type of .Kentucky

vocational programs serving i_ESA students.

4,

41:

a

78 vv
STATE: Massachusetts FISCAL YEAR: 1981

SPONSORING AGENCY: Westfield State College TOTAL FUNDS: $70,200

CONTACT PERSON: Not available

ADDRESS: Not available

PROJECT tITLE: Recruitment and Training of Minority Vocational Instructors

( Phast I I)

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This program will expand the existing. prtoject to

train and recruit minority vocational instructors

in western Massachusetts. Its major goals 'are:

(1) to provide counseling and placement services

fOr the current group of 25 trainees and (2) to train

and place an additional group of 60 black and fin- guistic-minory trainees.

STATE: ''.Minnesota FISCAL YEAR: 1981 G. SPONSORING AGENCY: Duluth AVTI TOTAL FUNDS: $37,609 . CONTACT PERSON: Cliff Wiklund

ADDRESS: 2101 Trinity Road

Duluth, Minnesota 55802

isReJECT Provision' of Occupatibhal and Student Program Consultant services for Chemical Dependency in Minnesota AVTIs

PROJECT DESCRIPTION!' This project has as its major goals: (1) to provide

the necessary technical assistance and supplemental support to the individual AVTIs, (2) ..to design and

implement a program which supports the AVTIs'

efforts, (3.) to respond to chemical-related pr'oblemZ

of students, and (Li) to assist in the development of

inservice. training programs for the staff.

4

3

4
STATE: Nebraska FISCAL YEMR: 193.0.

SPONSORING AGENCY: University:of* flebraska, TOTAL FUNDS: ,53,'996

Lincoln

CONTACT PERSON : Dr. Oefy D. hleer

ADDRESS: Center for Business and Vocational Teacher Education

University of Nebraska, Lincoln

Lincoln, Nebraska

its 4, \

PROJECT, TITLE: Inservice Training for the Instruction of Special- Vocational \ Needs Students ... PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major .s.oal of this...project* to' p,rovide an in- . service wdrqshop opportunity for educators in the

state. of Nebraska who are involved with instruction of special nee,ds youth in vocational programs.

STATE: (New Hampshire

SPONSORING AGENCY: Univer'sity of New

Ham'pshire

CONTACT PERSON: Stephen Lichtenstein

ADDRESS, University of New H-afnrioshirq

FISCAL. YEAR: 1981

TOTAT.. FUNDS.: 522,319

A

PROJECT TITLE: Instructing EduCators in Providing Sprvices'ifoix4isadvantaged Learner t

(2o PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The objectives of .this project are: (1) to develop and

conduct. preservice teacher preparation courses in

vocational education., for disadvantaged learriers; (2)

to develop and, conduct inserivice training for vocational administrators, 'teachers, and ,staff serving disadvantaged learners in a vdtattonal education setting; and (3) to. provide technical assistance .establish

contact in the field of Vocational educatio'n for disad-

' vantaged learners to LEAs and other outside agencies (vocati i.7al rehabilitation., CET,A , priVate schoofty

,* and otters

A

, 11.

3'

80

4

.
.4

o

STATE: New Jersey

SPONSORING AGENCY: Jersey City State TOTAL FUNDS: Not available

College

CONTACT PERSON: George toiler'

, ADDRESS: 2039 .Kennedy $ouleyArd

Jersey City, New Jersey 07305.-

a

c

FISCAL YEAR: 1981

PROJECT TITLE: Working Effectively with Special Needs Students

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ThiS''vpraject's objectives included: (1) to share the

upertiSe of special eduators and vocational educators ....) thro conducting twoone-day workshops; (2) to ex- *

,

cFj information regarding improvip instruction's

to spAial needs students by 'becoming familiar with

federal legislation and state regulations regarding

exceptional pupils in special needs programs; (3)

to identify learning styles and characteristics of vari- ous handicapping conditions; JO to present examples of model' programs; -and (5) th provide information- on

teaching vocationally related academics, implementing individual education

N programs, and modifying

behavior. . 0

STATE:, New Mexico

SPONLORINC AGENCY: Nevi Mexico State

University

CONTACT PERSON: DFL Jack T. Cole

ADDRESS: Departnient of Educational Specialties

Box 3AC

Las Cruces, New Mexico- 8,8003.

, 44-ROJECT TITLE: An Inservice Program for the Preparation of Vocational-

, Technical Educators to Work with Hbrecficapped StudentsI

FISCAL YEAR: .1981

TOTAL FUNDS: Not available

)

PRQJECJ DESCRIPTION: The objectives of this "project include: (1') to ,develop

a hand' apped student inservice training curriculum

o

for vocalional-teehnical educators, (2) to offer_ 12 - 15 4 training workshops, (3) to train participating vocational-tee educators in the various handicapping condition!, 11.1) )to train participating, vocational-technical educators in various teaching strate- gies that are effective with handicapped students, (5)

1 *

81
to dissemina'te training materials to all workshop participants, and (6) to make follow-up contacts with

workshop .participants. er sTTT. E : RTr.

*4'

FISCAL YZAR: 1981

SPONSORING AGENCY: University of Idaho, TOTAL FUNDS: $6,14143

CONTACT PERSON: A. Lee Parks

, . ADDRESS: University of Idaho

loscow, Idaho 83843

PROJECT TITLE :' A Procedural Manual. Relating to Vocational Special Needs/

. Special Education fir Idaho

PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS: This .project has as its major goal to prepare a pro-

; cedures manual of secondary special education/needs

programs'

, t,. rograms. in Idaho.

STATE: FISC L YEAR: 1980

SPONSORING AGENCY: IInois 'State University TOTAL FUNDS: 599.138

CONTACT PERSON: Dr. Catherine Batsche/Bessi-e Hackett

ADQRESS: Turner Hall- . , Illinois State University.' :'

Normal, Illinois 61721

)PROJECT TITLE: Handicapped and Disadvantaged Networ : Coordination and

. Diffusion Project

..- \ PROJECT DESGRIRTI011: 'The- major goals of this project& are: (1) to coor-

. dinate statewide . diffusion, inservice, ander impact

activities related to. the Illinois Network of EZeriplary Occupational Education Programs for Handicapped and

Disadvantaged Students; (2) to conduct and coordi:-.

..' nate workshops at lo'cal sites based on the manual

'Instructional- Developmqnt For Special Needs Learn- ,"

19 f er3: An Inservice Resource Guide 1 (Dr. L. Allen

Phelps, author.); -'(3) to preparet the audio-visual

and printed materials necessary to complement diffusion activities, (4) to conduct 4a statewide con-

, ference on handicapped -and disadvantaged students;

(5) to provide intensive training for the BlOon'rington

. Area Vocational Center/ High School administratien

and staff; and (61 to work cooperatively with Illinois State Uniyer:sity staff to develop a plan of. action, for

preservice reratjng to special needs , students.

9 82

0.-1
*

STATE: Oregon

SPONSORING AGENCY:-.Southwestern Oregon

Community College

FISCAL YEAR: 1980

TOTAL FUNDS: $36,4149

CONTACT PERSON: Richard White

ADDRESS: Southwestern Oregon. Community College

. Cods Bay, Oregon 97420

PROJECT TITLE: Emphasis on Sophomores

a

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals of this project are: (1) to assist high

school sophomores- in clarifying career goals, (2)

to familiarize interested students with community

college setting, (3) to provide high school counsel- ors and students with more data on which to make

curriculum decisions, (4) to evaluate the project care- fully for further refinement and appliftation, (5) to

introduce participating high schools /6 a new guidance tool, and (6) to facilitate cooperative working

relationships among participating high schools.

STATE: Oregon FISCAL YEAR: 1980

SPONSORING AGENCY: Lane Community College TOTAL. FUNDS: $5,*6

7 CONTACT PERSON: John Bernharn

ADDRESS:., Lane Community College

1400 E. 30th _Avenue

Eugene, Oregon 971405

PROJECT TITLE: Physically Disabled Services Project

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this project is to provide improved

spRcialized services for 'partially-sighted and blind

students, students with hearing difficulties, and

students, with mobility and other disabilities. Its

major goals are: (1)' to provide specialized coun- seling for disabled individuals, student advocates, and outreach programs; and (2) to establish close

liaison with other community agencies serving dis- abled people.

4., 83 .
STATE: Kentucky

SPONSORING= AGENCY: Western Kentucky

University

CONTACT PERSON: Dr. Dwight Cline

FISCAL-AAR: 1981

TOTAL FUNDS: $34,235

ADDRESS: Western Kentucky University

Bowling Green, Kentucky 42101

PROJECT TITLE: Diagnostic and Prescriptive Skills

Educators

elopment for Vocational

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals of this project are: (1) to establish

an advisory committee of special education, special

,vocational education, vocational education, guidance,

administrative, and diagnostic personnel wIlo will

review the project developed products and participate in the planning and Implementation of worksbops; (2) to assess IEPs written for handicapped

students enrolled in vocational programs in regard

to compliance with P.L. '94-142, and identify specific areas in which vocational educatorS would profit frorl addition& training; (3) to provide mg and

resources to improve the diagnostic and pre riptive

skills of vocational educators of handicapped st ents;

and (4) to develop a catalogue of assessment echniques and an accompanying handbook to help ocational teachers to identify and diagnose learning abilities and disabilities of handicapped students.

STATE: Massachus*dtts FISCAL YEAR: 1980

SP.ONSORING AGENCY: Shawsheen Valley

Region& Vocational

Technic& School

CONTACT PERSON: Not-dVailable

ADDRESS: Not available

PROJECT TITLE: Pre-Vocation& Assessment

PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

TOTAL FUNDS: $57,000

This project is part of a statewide effort and has as

its major goals: (1) to develop a reliable process and

procedure that enhances the ability of local School

districts to qualitatively assess special needs students

if occupation& education, is being considered by the

core evaluation-team,*dnd (2) to train school district

personnel in this procedure once it has been developed.

84
STATE: Minnesota FISCAL YEAR: 1981

SPONSORING AGENCY: University of knnesota TOTAL FU

Q ClarTACT PERSON: ome, Moss, Jr.

ADDRESS: Department"of V ational and Te'chnical Education

14,5 Peik Hall, U.niversity of Minnesota

Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455

PROJECT TITLE: Develop a System to Distribute Federal Funds to Minnesota

AVTIs for Augmenting the Education of Special Needs° Students

PROJECKJASCRIPTION;. The major goals of this project are: (1) to clearly delineate the domain of the problem as related to the

-total state/federal interface of set-aside funds, (2) to

rev4ew related literature which impact the problem, (3) to develop guidelines for minimal special °needs support services within the AVTIs, (4) to develop

the process by which AVTIs obtain the funding to

carry out the minimum special needs support services,

, (5) to seek input from an ad hoc adviso'ry committee

and obtain its approval, and (6) to ac uire direction

from the U.S. Departthent of Educatio artd obtain

its approval.

STATE: New Jersey FISCAL YEAR: 198b

SPONSORING AGENL: Glassboro State College TOTAL FUNDS: $17,080

CONTACT PERSON: Ted Gustilo, Jr.

Coordinator of Research for Career Education

ADDRESS: Office of Career Education, BOssart 104

Glassboro State College

Glassboro, New Jersey 08028

PROJECT TITLE: Bilingualslation of Revised. Vocational English and Math

Instructional Units

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals of th-i project include: (1) to r ine

previously developed vocational curriculum materials

that .demonstrate the applications of language and

mathematics skills to specific vocational areas, (2)

to rescreen materials for sex-role stereotyping to

assure'that the revisions did not introduce sex bias,

and (3) to translate .the material into Spanish to

extend their usefulness to a large 9 oup of bilingual and Spanish speaking students who o herwise would

not benefit from them. < 85

93
4STATE: New York FISCAL, YEAR: 1979

SPONSORING' AGENCY: Oswego BOCES TOTAL FUNDS: $50,000

.CONTACT P ON: Not available

ADDRESS: MeXicoi New York

PROJECT TITLE: Regional OccupatIonal Education Planning

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The objectives for this project include: (1) to develop

a systematic process for annually gathering enroll- ment and follow-up data on students receiving- occu-, pational education at local high schools, (2) to develop'-

a systematic process for annually gathering and

analyzing data of students enrolled .in adult and continuing education occupational preparation programs,

and (3) to develop a more complete analysis of the

current and .projectecchjob market in central New York,

detailing openings Tor employment and potential

training needs'.

NA.

STATE: Texas FISCAL YEAR: 1981

SPONSORING AGENCY : University of TeXes

at Dallas

CONTAC! PERSON: George W. Fair

ADDRESS: P.O. Box 688

Richardson, Texas 75080

PROJECT TITLE: Handicapped Students in Regular Vocational Education: Impact on Class Interaction and Instructional Variables

. TOTAL FUNDS: $60,443

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this project is to gather data perti-, nent to the instruction of special education students

in regular vocational education programs. The pbjective$ of the project include: (1) to observe and

describe the handicapped student-vocational instr'uctor.

interaction in regular vocational education programs,

(2) to observe and describe the 14-n--dicapped studentnonyndiCapped student interaction in regular voca-

. tional education programs,. {3) to describe the deve1-

opment and implementation, of individualized education plans for handicapped students in regular vocational

education programs, (4) to describe instructional

adaptations and modifications that can be fined as

--(excess costs for funding purposes, and '(5 to develop

recommendations .for more effective inst tion of handl-

'capped students in regular vocational,' education pro'

grams.

86

la 64Uli 7 \

V fErD r-