Authors

Lisa Hudson

National Center for Education 

Statistics

Jennifer Laird

MPR Associates, Inc.

For more information, contact 

Lisa Hudson, National Center 

for Education Statistics, (202) 

502-7358, lisa.hudson@ed.gov

April 2009

New Indicators of High School Career/Technical 

Education Coursetaking: Class of 2005

Statistics

in Brief

Introduction

Career/technical education (CTE) can serve many purposes for high school students, including 

helping them explore career options, remain engaged in school, gain skills that are broadly 

useful in the labor market, gain job-specific skills for direct labor market entry, and prepare 

for further study in postsecondary education. The National Center for Education Statistics 

(NCES) has examined public high school students’ participation in CTE in reports that look 

at coursetaking from the 1980s through 2005 (Levesque et al. 2008; Levesque 2003; Levesque 

et al. 2000; Tuma 1996). These reports classify CTE into three curriculum areas: family and 

consumer sciences education, general labor market preparation, and occupational education, 

with occupational education being divided into a number of occupational areas (e.g., business 

services, computer technology, and construction).1

 These reports define occupational concentrators as students who earn at least 3 credits within one occupational area. The most recent 

of these reports found, for example, that 97 percent of all public high school graduates in 

2005 earned credits in CTE, with 21 percent concentrating in an occupational area (Levesque 

et al. 2008).

This Statistics in Brief examines the CTE coursetaking of 2005 public high school graduates 

using new indicators of participation. There are a number of reasons for this new look at 

CTE coursetaking. First, the taxonomy used to categorize CTE was recently updated to 

better align with current practice (Bradby and Hudson 2007). Although the NCES website 

includes tabular statistics that use the newly revised taxonomy, this Statistics in Brief is the 

first NCES report to use it.2 Second, NCES is working with the National Assessment of 

Career and Technical Education (mandated by the 2006 Perkins Act [P.L. 109-270, Section 

114]) to provide Congress with detailed information on students’ CTE coursetaking. Third, 

CTE experts have recommended developing new coursetaking measures to better capture the 

many ways in which students currently use the CTE curriculum.3 This brief thus introduces a 

variety of new indicators that contrast students’ depth and breadth of participation in CTE, 

in order to elucidate not just the extent of participation in CTE, but also variation in how this 

curriculum is used.

Using both the newly revised taxonomy and a set of new indicators, this brief presents a more 

contemporary and detailed picture of CTE coursetaking than is provided by existing indicators. 

For example, NCES data show that although an increasing percentage of students is enrolling 

in postsecondary education immediately after high school (Planty et al. 2007), students have 

maintained a fairly consistent level of participation in occupational education (Levesque et al. 

2008). These trends raise concerns that defining “concentration” as earning at least 3 credits 

in one narrowly defined occupational area may exclude many students who are using the 

CTE curriculum in a more diversified way. The 2006 Perkins Act (P.L. 109-270), for example, 

encourages the provision of instruction in “all aspects of an industry,” which may lead students 

to trade depth of coursetaking within an occupational area for a greater breadth of coursetaking across occupational areas (e.g., supplementing auto repair courses with business courses). 

1

 Family and consumer sciences education is intended to prepare students for adult roles outside the paid labor market 

(e.g., home economics, food and nutrition, and consumer education). General labor market preparation provides skills that 

are generally used across a wide range of occupational areas (e.g., keyboarding, industrial arts, and career exploration). 

Occupational education provides skills that are used within one occupation or occupational cluster.

2

 These tabular statistics can be found at http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ctes.

3

 This recommendation was made by the technical review panel that annually provides expert advice for the NCES CTE 

Statistics program.

U.S. Department of Education

NCES 2009–038

Contents

Introduction.......................... 1

Data Source and Course 

Coding.............................. 2

Participation Indicators......... 2

Summary............................... 7

Methodology and Technical 

Notes.............................. 10

References........................... 13

Appendix A: Standard Error 

Tables............................. 15
2 NCES 2009-038

earned either a regular or honors high school diploma.6 This 

resulted in an analysis sample of about 24,000 public high 

school graduates. 

NCES codes the courses listed on high school transcripts using 

the Classification of Secondary School Courses (CSSC). More 

than 2,000 CSSC codes are aggregated into subject areas 

(mathematics, business services, etc.) using the Secondary 

School Taxonomy (SST), which was last fully revised in 1998 

(Bradby and Hoachlander 1999). The CTE section of the SST 

was revised in 2007, in response to experts’ concerns that the 

CTE section of the 1998 SST (with categories such as other 

technology and print production) had become outdated, in 

both its terminology and its organizational framework. The 

2007 revision updated terminology and improved alignment 

of the CTE categories with state systems that classify CTE 

into career clusters, as well as with the NCES postsecondary 

system for classifying CTE, and the occupational categories 

used by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.7 The findings in 

this brief use the 2005 HSTS transcript information aggregated 

into subject areas using the CSSC, and into 11 occupational 

areas using the 2007 revision of the CTE section of the SST.

Participation Indicators

Coursetaking Across CTE Curriculum Areas

High school graduates from the class of 2005 earned 15 

percent of their total credits in CTE, and 66 percent of these 

CTE credits were in occupational education (calculated from 

table 1). As seen in table 1, of the average 4.0 CTE credits 

that graduates earned, 0.4 were in family and consumer 

sciences education (FCSE), 1.0 in general labor market 

preparation (GLMP), and 2.6 in occupational education. 

Although graduates earned more credits in occupational 

education than in FCSE or GLMP combined, table 2 shows 

that most graduates (70 percent) earned occupational credits 

in combination with FCSE and/or GLMP, rather than earning 

occupational education credits exclusively (17 percent of 

graduates). About one-quarter (27 percent) earned credits 

across all three CTE areas.

Over half the graduates (58 percent) also earned credits 

in more than one occupational area (table 3); among 

graduates who earned any occupational education credits, 

about two-thirds (67 percent) earned credits in more than 

one occupational area (table 3). In addition, 78 percent of 

occupational concentrators earned credits in more than one 

occupational area, with 62 percent earning credits in 2 or 

3 occupational areas, and 15 percent earning credits in 4 

or more occupational areas. Thus, student participation in 

CTE is broad not only in the sense that most students earn 

credits in CTE, but also in the sense that most students earn 

6

 The diploma restriction excluded students who completed high school with 

either a certificate of attendance or general educational development (GED) 

credential. How high school alternative completers and dropouts use the CTE 

curriculum is an interesting question, but requires a more complex analysis, as 

these students complete an abbreviated high school curriculum. Reports that have 

examined CTE coursetaking among high school dropouts include Plank, DeLuca, 

and Estacion (2008); Plank (2001); and Rasinski and Pedlow (1995).

7

 See http://www.careerclusters.org/ for a description of the CTE career cluster 

system advocated for use by states, http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ctes/tables/postsec_

tax.asp for the NCES postsecondary course classification system, and http://

www.bls.gov/soc/ for the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics occupational categories. 

Visit http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ctes/tables/exhibit3 to see how the newly revised 

taxonomy aligns with career clusters and the NCES postsecondary taxonomy.

Thus, the indicator of occupational concentration used in 

this brief requires earning at least 2 credits in 1 occupational 

area, among 11 broadly defined occupational areas—rather 

than the more restrictive and narrow definition of earning 

at least 3 credits in 1 of 18 occupational areas, as was used 

in past analyses (such as Levesque et al. 2008). Unless noted 

otherwise, all references to “concentration” in this brief refer 

to the 2-credit, 11-occupational-areas definition.4

To better understand how students use the CTE curriculum, 

this brief examines different patterns of student participation 

in CTE. First, the brief looks at student participation across 

the three main CTE curriculum areas (family and consumer 

sciences education, general labor market preparation, and 

occupational education), examining the extent to which 

students take credits across these areas. Second, the brief 

looks at coursetaking within occupational areas, including 

occupational concentration; these analyses examine the 

extent to which students participate (earn credits) in the 

newly defined occupational areas (such as communications 

and design), and the extent to which students participate 

in each occupational area broadly (many students earning 

credits) versus deeply (many credits earned by participating 

students). Finally, the brief examines coursetaking across 

occupational areas, to determine the extent to which students 

earn credits across multiple occupational areas versus within 

one occupational area, and which occupational areas students 

tend to combine.

The brief begins with an overview of the data used to 

examine participation. This is followed by a presentation of 

indicators, examining the participation patterns discussed 

above. Following a short summary, a technical section 

describes in more detail the data source, the recent taxonomy 

revision, and analytic procedures.

Data Source and Course Coding

The data used in this brief are from the 2005 High School 

Transcript Study (HSTS), conducted in conjunction with the 

2005 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 

The 2005 HSTS collected school transcripts from a nationally 

representative sample of more than 29,000 U.S. high school 

students who completed high school in 2005. The transcripts 

contain information on the courses students took during high 

school (grades 9–12) and the credits they earned in those 

courses.5

 For this brief (as for other CTE statistics reports), 

the analysis was restricted to public high school students for 

whom a complete transcript record was available and who 

4

 The reader is cautioned that this (or any other transcript-based) definition 

of an occupational concentrator is an analytic tool rather than a substantively 

meaningful grouping. Other definitions could be used; this one was selected 

because it seems to be a good compromise measure that may identify students who 

are pursuing a CTE career path, without being overly restrictive in the amount 

of coursetaking expected within a particular occupational area. In addition, 

as of 2004–05, the most common state definition of a concentrator for federal 

accountability purposes included earning 2.0 or more credits in an occupational 

area (U.S. Department of Education 2008). 

5

 Analysts translate the various credits reported on the HSTS transcripts into 

standard Carnegie units. One Carnegie unit is awarded for a class that meets one 

period per day for the entire school year, or the equivalent instructional time. 

For simplicity’s sake, the term “credits” is used in this brief in place of “Carnegie 

units.”
NCES 2009-038 3

communications and design (.36), and manufacturing, repair, 

and transportation (.39). However, this summary measure 

depends on both the breadth of student coursetaking in an 

occupational area—how many students earn credits in the 

area—and on the depth of coursetaking in the area—how 

many credits students earn in the area when they take courses 

(participate) in that area. 

Figure 1 unpacks the summary measure of average credits 

earned into these separate components of breadth and depth 

for each occupational area. The occupational areas are 

listed in the figure based on breadth of participation, from 

the area with the highest percentage of graduates earning 

credits in the area to the area with the lowest percentage 

of graduates earning credits. Five occupational areas had 

the broadest participation (i.e., had the greatest number of 

graduates earning credits in the area: business (40 percent); 

communications and design (30 percent); manufacturing, 

repair, and transportation (22 percent); consumer and 

culinary services (20 percent); and computer and information 

credits across multiple parts of the CTE curriculum and 

across multiple occupational areas within the occupational 

education curriculum.

Coursetaking Within Occupational Areas

A key measure of occupational coursetaking used in past 

NCES reports is the average number of credits graduates earn 

in each occupational area. This measure provides an indicator of the amount of “uptake” or general usage for each 

occupational area—that is, it summarizes the overall extent 

to which students participate in each area. Table 4 shows 

that among the 11 occupational areas, a higher number of 

average credits was earned in three areas: business (.51), 

Table 1. Percentage of public high school graduates earning 

credits in a curriculum area, percentage concentrating 

in career/technical education, and average number of 

credits earned in an area: Class of 2005

Curriculum area

Percent of 

graduates 

earning credits/ 

concentrating

Average 

number of 

credits earned

All curriculum areas 100.0 26.67

Academic 100.0 19.44

Enrichment/other 99.8 3.23

Career/technical education 

(CTE), total 96.6 4.01

Family and consumer 

sciences education 

(FCSE) 41.1 0.40

General labor market 

preparation (GLMP) 69.1 0.97

Occupational education 86.9 2.63

2-credit definition of 

concentration 38.8 †

3-credit definition of 

concentration 21.3 †

† Not applicable. 

NOTE: Completing an occupational concentration is defined as earning at 

least 2.0 credits within an occupational area (2-credit definition) or at least 

3.0 credits within an occupational area (3-credit definition). 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education 

Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS).

Table 2. Percentage of public high school graduates who earned 

various combinations of career/technical education (CTE) 

credits: Class of 2005

Course combination Percent

Total, any combination of CTE credits 100.0

No CTE credits 3.4

Family and consumer sciences education (FCSE) 

credits only 1.0

General labor market preparation (GLMP) credits 

only 5.5

Occupational education credits only 16.7

FCSE and GLMP credits only 3.2

Occupational credits in combination with any other 

CTE credits 70.1

Occupational and FCSE credits only 9.8

Occupational and GLMP credits only 33.3

Credits in all three CTE areas 27.1

NOTE: Detail may not sum to total due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education 

Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS).

Table 3. Percentage distribution of public high school graduates, graduates who earned any occupational credits, and occupational 

concentrators, by number of occupational areas in which graduates earned credits: Class of 2005

Number of occupational areas in which 

graduates earned credits All graduates

Graduates earning any 

occupational credits

Occupational 

concentrators1

Total, any number of occupational areas 100.0 100.0 100.0

 0 occupational areas 13.1 † †

 1 occupational area 28.9 33.3 22.4

 More than one occupational area 58.0 66.7 77.6

2 occupational areas 29.1 33.5 34.7

3 occupational areas 18.7 21.5 27.6

4 occupational areas 7.3 8.4 11.0

5 or more occupational areas 2.8 3.2 4.4

† Not applicable. 1

 Completing an occupational concentration is defined as earning at least 2.0 credits in any one of the following 11 occupational areas: agriculture and natural 

resources; business; communications and design; computer and information sciences; construction and architecture; consumer and culinary services; engineering 

technologies; health sciences; manufacturing, repair, and transportation; marketing; and public services. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS).
4 NCES 2009-038

sciences (19 percent)).8 These occupational areas are similar 

to those in which students earn the greatest number of credits 

(table 4), as these two measures are correlated (statistically 

significant correlation of 0.94). 

However, as figure 1 shows, the occupational areas in which 

graduates participate most broadly do not tend to be the 

areas in which they participate most deeply (nonsignificant 

correlation of -0.30). The occupational areas with the 

deepest levels of participation were manufacturing, repair, 

and transportation; agriculture and natural resources; health 

sciences; and construction and architecture. Graduates who 

participated in these occupational areas earned an average 

of 1.7–2.0 credits in their area of participation, significantly 

higher than the average number of credits earned by graduates 

who participated in all other occupational areas. Thus, among 

the five most broadly taken occupational areas listed above, 

only one—manufacturing, repair, and transportation—had 

8

 There were no measurable differences between the percent earning credits in 

consumer and culinary services and the percent earning credits in manufacturing, 

repair, and transportation or computer and information sciences. 

a relatively high9 average number of credits earned among 

those who participated in the area.

Occupational Concentration

A variation of the depth measure is the concentration measure, 

which has also been used in past NCES reports (although 

defined differently, as noted above) (e.g., Levesque et al. 

2008). The percentage of graduates who concentrate in an 

occupational area provides a measure of how many students are 

earning a minimum number of credits within an occupational 

area. Thirty-nine percent of all 2005 graduates concentrated 

their occupational coursetaking, that is, 39 percent earned 

at least 2 credits in one of the 11 occupational areas (table 

5). Among graduates who earned any occupational credits, 

a higher percentage concentrated in an occupational area 

(45 versus 39 percent), although the percentage was still less 

than half. However, a majority of graduates who earned at 

least 2 occupational credits—69 percent—concentrated their 

coursetaking. 

Within occupational areas, rates of concentration varied from 

1 percent of all graduates (in public services) to 9 percent 

(in business) (table 5). However, rates of concentration, like 

average credits earned, depend on the percentage of students 

who earn credits in an occupational area (i.e., generally 

speaking, the occupational areas in which more students earn 

credits tend to be the areas in which more students concentrate 

(statistically significant correlation of 0.87)). To isolate the 

depth of coursetaking (as measured by concentration) among 

students who earn credits within a given occupational area, 

this section looks at the percentage of students earning credits 

in each occupational area who also concentrated in that area. 

In other words, this section answers the question: To what 

extent do students who participate in a given occupational 

area also concentrate in that area (earning at least 2 credits 

in the area)? 

9

 As used in this brief, “relatively high” means that an occupational area is 

among a set of occupational areas for which participation was high relative to 

participation in the remaining occupational areas (i.e. participation in the given 

set of areas was measurably higher than participation in all remaining areas). 

“Relatively broad” and “relatively deep” are similarly defined.

Table 4. Average number of credits earned by public high school 

graduates during high school, by occupational area: 

Class of 2005

Occupational area

Average 

credits

Agriculture and natural resources 0.23

Business 0.51

Communications and design 0.36

Computer and information sciences 0.24

Construction and architecture 0.12

Consumer and culinary services 0.27

Engineering technologies 0.15

Health sciences 0.16

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.39

Marketing 0.13

Public services 0.08

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education 

Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS).

Figure 1. Percentage of public high school graduates who earned credits in each occupational area and, among those graduates, the 

 average number of credits earned in the area: Class of 2005

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS).

Occupational area

Business Manufacturing, repair, 

and transportation

Computer and 

information sciences

Engineering 

technologies

Marketing Public services

Communications 

and design

Consumer and 

culinary services

Agriculture and 

natural resources

Health sciences Construction and 

architecture

0

60

40

20

80

100

0.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

4.0

5.0

Percent of graduates Average number of credits

40

30

22 20 19

12 12 9 9 7 7

1.3 1.2

1.8

1.3 1.2

2.0

1.3

1.7

1.4

1.8

1.2

Percent of graduates earning credits (breadth of participation)

Average number of credits, among credit earners (depth of participation)
NCES 2009-038 5

Figure 2 compares the percentage of graduates who earned 

credits in each occupational area with the percentage of those 

earners who concentrated in the area, ordered by the percentage of graduates who earned credits in the area. As evident 

in the figure, the occupational areas in which students were 

most likely to earn credits (business; communications and 

design; manufacturing, repair, and transportation) were not 

necessarily the areas in which participating students were 

most likely to concentrate (nonsignificant correlation of 

-0.22). Students who earned credits in manufacturing, repair, 

and transportation; agriculture and natural resources; health 

sciences; and construction and architecture generally had 

the highest rates of concentration (32 to 41 percent).10 Only 

one of these occupational areas—manufacturing, repair, 

10 There was one exception: No measurable difference was found between 

the rates at which participants in construction and architecture concentrated 

in construction and architecture and the rate at which marketing participants 

concentrated in marketing.

and transportation—was an area in which a relatively high 

percentage of students earned credits (22 percent).

Concentrators (students who earned at least 2 credits in an 

occupational area) also frequently earned credits in other 

occupational areas. Table 6 shows that most of the students 

who concentrated in an occupational area took courses in 

other occupational areas; the percentage who did so ranged 

from 74 percent for concentrators in communications and 

design to 90 percent for concentrators in construction and 

architecture and in engineering technologies.

Coursetaking Across Occupational Areas

As discussed above, coursetaking across occupational areas 

is common: Most students (58 percent) earn credits in 

more than one occupational area, and most students who 

concentrate in an area (78 percent) also earn credits in other 

occupational areas (tables 3 and 6). Figures 3 and 4 provide 

Table 5. Percentage of public high school graduates who concentrated in each occupational area, overall and among graduates who 

earned various numbers of occupational credits: Class of 2005

Occupational area of concentration

Percent of each group who were occupational concentrators

All graduates

Graduates who 

earned any 

occupational credits

Graduates who 

earned 2.0 or more 

occupational credits

Any occupational area 38.8 44.7 68.6

Agriculture and natural resources 4.7 5.5 8.4

Business 8.5 9.7 15.0

Communications and design 5.4 6.2 9.5

Computer and information sciences 3.7 4.3 6.5

Construction and architecture 2.1 2.5 3.8

Consumer and culinary services 4.4 5.0 7.7

Engineering technologies 2.4 2.8 4.3

Health sciences 3.2 3.7 5.7

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 7.5 8.6 13.3

Marketing 2.6 3.1 4.7

Public services 1.2 1.4 2.1

NOTE: Completing an occupational concentration is defined as earning at least 2.0 credits in one of the 11 occupational program areas listed in the table. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS).

Figure 2. Percentage of public high school graduates who earned credits in each occupational area and, among those graduates, the 

 percentage who concentrated in the area: Class of 2005

NOTE: Completing an occupational concentration is defined as earning at least 2.0 credits in one of the occupational areas listed in this figure. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS). 

Occupational area

Business Manufacturing, repair, 

and transportation

Computer and 

information sciences

Engineering 

technologies

Marketing Public services

Communications 

and design

Consumer and 

culinary services

Agriculture and 

natural resources

Health sciences Construction and 

architecture

0

60

40

20

80

100

Percent 

Percent of graduates earning credits

Percent of credit earners who concentrate

40

21

30

18 22

34

20 22 19 19

12

41

21

9

34

9

28

7

32

7

17

12
6 NCES 2009-038

additional indicators of the breadth of student coursetaking 

across occupational areas. Figure 3 shows, for graduates 

who earned credits in each occupational area, the average 

number of credits earned in that occupational area and the 

average number of credits earned in all other occupational 

areas. Figure 4 combines the data from figure 3 to show, for 

graduates who earned credits in each occupational area, the 

percentage of occupational credits that were earned in all 

other occupational areas.

As seen in these figures, graduates who participated (earned 

credits) in each of the 11 occupational areas earned more 

credits in all other occupational areas (combined) than they 

did in the given occupational area. For example, graduates 

who earned credits in health sciences earned 55 percent of 

their occupational credits in other areas; graduates who 

earned credits in engineering technologies earned 69 percent 

of their occupational credits in other areas.

Finally, some occupational areas are more likely than others to 

be taken together (table 7 and exhibit 1). Specifically, graduates who earned credits in marketing earned more credits on 

Figure 3. Average number of credits earned in an occupational area by public high school graduates who earned any credits in the 

 area, and average number of credits these students earned in all other occupational areas: Class of 2005

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS).

Occupational area

Average number of credits

Health sciences

Communications and design

Consumer and culinary services

Business

Computer and

information sciences

Manufacturing, repair,

and transportation

Public services

Marketing

Agriculture and natural resources

Engineering technologies

Construction and architecture

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5

2.0

1.7

2.0

1.2

2.1

1.3

2.1

1.3

2.2

1.2

2.2

1.8

2.2

1.2

2.4

1.4

2.6

2.0

2.8

1.3

3.1

1.8

Credits earned in

given occupational area

Credits earned in

all other occupational areas

Table 6. Percentage of public high school graduates 

concentrating in each occupational area who earned 

credits in other occupational areas: Class of 2005

Occupational area of concentration

Percent earning 

credits in other 

occupational 

areas

Agriculture and natural resources 84.0

Business 78.3

Communications and design 74.0

Computer and information sciences 81.4

Construction and architecture 90.2

Consumer and culinary services 77.4

Engineering technologies 89.5

Health sciences 79.4

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 82.2

Marketing 87.4

Public services 82.0

NOTE: Completing an occupational concentration is defined as earning at 

least 2.0 credits in one of the 11 occupational areas listed in the table. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education 

Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS).
NCES 2009-038 7

to enter a related postsecondary program, or simply pursuing 

an area of study that interests them? Are students who 

earn credits in more than one occupational area exploring 

career options, or piecing together a broad set of skills for a 

specific career path? These questions cannot be answered by 

these data, and the reader is cautioned against making such 

inferences. However, certain generalities about how the CTE 

curriculum is used by students can be deduced from these 

data.

First, for most high school graduates, their use of the CTE 

curriculum is broad rather than narrow in the sense that 

most (70 percent) earn credits in both occupational education 

and either general labor market preparation or family and 

consumer sciences education, and most (58 percent) earn 

credits in more than one occupational area. In addition, 

most students do not concentrate their coursetaking, even 

among those who earn occupational credits (55 percent 

of occupational credit-earners did not concentrate in an 

occupational area). 

Second, the occupational areas in which graduates earn the 

highest average number of credits—business, communications 

and design, and manufacturing, repair and transportation—

reflect different patterns of depth and breadth of participation. 

average in business than did graduates who earned credits in 

any other occupational area. There is also a four-way nexus 

among credit earners in agriculture and natural resources; 

construction and architecture; engineering technologies; and 

manufacturing, repair, and transportation. Graduates who 

earned credits in construction and architecture earned more 

credits in agriculture and natural resources11 and in engineering technologies than did other occupational credit earners; 

credit earners in agriculture and natural resources, construction and architecture, and engineering technologies earned 

more credits in manufacturing, repair, and transportation 

than credit earners in other occupational areas; and credit 

earners in agriculture and natural resources, engineering 

technologies, and manufacturing, repair, and transportation 

earned more credits in construction and architecture than did 

other credit earners.

Summary

It is difficult to extrapolate students’ intent from their 

coursetaking patterns. Are concentrators preparing to enter a 

post-high-school job in their area of concentration, preparing 

11 There was one exception: No measurable difference was found in the 

average number of agriculture credits earned by graduates who earned credits 

in construction and architecture and by graduates who earned credits in 

manufacturing, repair, and transportation.

Figure 4. Percentage of credits earned in all other occupational areas, among public high school graduates who earned any credits in 

 an occupational area: Class of 2005

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS).

Occupational area

Percent of credits

0 20 40 60 80 100

Engineering technologies

Public services

Computer and

information sciences

Construction and architecture

Communications and design

Marketing

Business

Consumer and culinary services

Agriculture and natural resources

Manufacturing, repair,

and transportation

Health sciences

69

65

64

64

63

63

62

61

57

56

55
8 NCES 2009-038

Table 7. Average number of credits earned in each occupational area, by public high school graduates who earned any credits in each 

other occupational area: Class of 2005

Average number of credits earned in agriculture and natural 

resources, by graduates who earned any credits in:

Average number of credits earned in computer and information 

sciences, by graduates who earned any credits in:

Construction and architecture 0.42 1 Engineering technologies 0.33

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.31 Construction and architecture 0.25

Engineering technologies 0.25 Communications and design 0.25

Business 0.24 Business 0.22

Computer and information sciences 0.19 Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.22

Consumer and culinary services 0.19 Public services 0.22

Health sciences 0.18 Agriculture and natural resources 0.21

Communications and design 0.17 Health sciences 0.17

Marketing 0.17 Marketing 0.17

Public services 0.17 Consumer and culinary services 0.15

Average number of credits earned in business, by graduates who 

earned any credits in:

Average number of credits earned in construction and 

architecture, by graduates who earned any credits in:

Marketing 0.75 2 Engineering technologies 0.30 3

Agriculture and natural resources 0.53 Agriculture and natural resources 0.24 3

Consumer and culinary services 0.52 Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.22 3

Health sciences 0.51 Business 0.11

Communications and design 0.50 Computer and information sciences 0.09

Computer and information sciences 0.50 Marketing 0.09

Public services 0.48 Communications and design 0.08

Construction and architecture 0.46 Health sciences 0.07

Engineering technologies 0.44 Public services 0.07

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.44 Consumer and culinary services 0.06

Average number of credits earned in communications and 

design, by graduates who earned any credits in:

Average number of credits earned in consumer and culinary 

services, by graduates who earned any credits in:

Public services 0.40 Health sciences 0.29

Marketing 0.38 Public services 0.28

Computer and information sciences 0.37 Business 0.27

Business 0.35 Communications and design 0.26

Consumer and culinary services 0.35 Marketing 0.26

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.34 Agriculture and natural resources 0.24

Engineering technologies 0.33 Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.21

Agriculture and natural resources 0.29 Computer and information sciences 0.18

Health sciences 0.28 Construction and architecture 0.14

Construction and architecture 0.26 Engineering technologies 0.13

Average number of credits earned in engineering technologies, 

by graduates who earned any credits in: 

Average number of credits earned in marketing, by graduates 

who earned any credits in:

Construction and architecture 0.47 4 Business 0.18

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.22 Consumer and culinary services 0.14

Computer and information sciences 0.19 Health sciences 0.14

Agriculture and natural resources 0.16 Agriculture and natural resources 0.12

Communications and design 0.14 Communications and design 0.12

Business 0.14 Public services 0.12

Public services 0.11 Construction and architecture 0.11

Marketing 0.11 Engineering technologies 0.11

Health sciences 0.09 Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.11

Consumer and culinary services 0.08 Computer and information sciences 0.10

See notes at end of table.
NCES 2009-038 9

Table 7. Average number of credits earned in each occupational area, by public high school graduates who earned any credits in each 

other occupational area: Class of 2005—Continued

Average number of credits earned in health sciences, by 

graduates who earned any credits in:

Average number of credits earned in public services, by graduates 

who earned any credits in:

Consumer and culinary services 0.18 Health sciences 0.10

Business 0.17 Consumer and culinary services 0.10

Public services 0.15 Business 0.08

Agriculture and natural resources 0.13 Computer and information sciences 0.08

Marketing 0.13 Agriculture and natural resources 0.07

Communications and design 0.11 Communications and design 0.07

Computer and information sciences 0.11 Marketing 0.07

Engineering technologies 0.08 Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.06

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.08 Construction and architecture 0.05

Construction and architecture 0.06 Engineering technologies 0.05

Average number of credits earned in manufacturing, repair, and 

transportation, by graduates who earned any credits in:

Construction and architecture 0.87 5

Engineering technologies 0.73 5

Agriculture and natural resources 0.65 5

Computer and information sciences 0.36

Business 0.34

Communications and design 0.33

Consumer and culinary services 0.28

Marketing 0.26

Public services 0.26

Health sciences 0.19

1

 Graduates who earned credits in construction and architecture earned measurably more credits in agriculture and natural resources than did graduates who 

earned credits in any other occupational area. 2

 Graduates who earned credits in marketing earned measurably more credits in business than did graduates who earned credits in any other occupational area. 3

 Graduates who earned credits in engineering technologies; agriculture and natural resources; and manufacturing, repair, and transportation earned measurably 

more credits in construction and architecture than did graduates who earned credits in any other occupational area. 4

 Graduates who earned credits in construction and architecture earned measurably more credits in engineering technologies than did graduates who earned 

credits in any other occupational area. 5

 Graduates who earned credits in construction and architecture, engineering technologies, and agriculture and natural resources earned measurably more credits 

in manufacturing, repair, and transportation than did graduates who earned credits in any other occupational area. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS).

Exhibit 1. Relationships among occupational areas, based on the average number of credits earned in one occupational area by 

 students who earned any credits in a given other occupational area: Class of 2005

NOTE: This exhibit is based on the data in table 7. An arrow from one occupational area to a second occupational area indicates that graduates who 

earned credits in the first occupational area earned more credits in the second occupational area than did graduates who earned credits in other 

occupational areas. For example, three occupational areas have an arrow pointing to construction and architecture—agriculture and natural resources, 

engineering technologies, and manufacturing, repair, and transportation. This means that graduates who earned credits in these three areas earned more

credits in construction and architecture than did graduates in the remaining seven occupational areas. As seen in table 7, graduates in these three areas 

earned 0.22–0.30 credits in construction and architecture, compared to 0.06–0.11 for graduates who earned credits in other occupational areas. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS). 

Marketing Business

Construction and architecture

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation

 Agriculture and natural resources

Engineering technologies

Communications and design

Computer and information sciences

Consumer and culinary services

Health sciences

Public services
10 NCES 2009-038

Participation in manufacturing, repair, and transportation 

is both broad (a relatively high percentage of students, 

22 percent, earn credits, or participate, in this area) and deep 

(a relatively high number of credits are earned by students who 

participate in the area, an average of 1.8 credits). Business

and communications and design, in contrast, have broad 

but not deep participation, as a relatively high proportion 

of graduates earn credits in these areas (40 and 30 percent, 

respectively), but the number of credits earned by graduates 

who participate in these areas is not notably high (an average 

of 1.3 and 1.2, respectively). 

Third, looking across all the occupational areas, these 

indicators (figures 1–4, table 7) show that four occupational 

areas—agriculture and natural resources; construction and 

architecture; health sciences; and manufacturing, repair, and 

transportation—have deeper levels of coursetaking, among 

the students who participate in them (e.g., 32–41 percent of 

participants concentrate in these areas). The occupational 

areas taken most broadly (by 19–40 percent of graduates) 

are business; communications and design; computer and 

information sciences; consumer and culinary services; and 

manufacturing, repair, and transportation. Finally, some 

occupational areas are more likely than others to be taken 

together. Marketing coursetakers are more likely than 

other occupational coursetakers to earn credits in business 

as well, while credit-earning in four occupational areas is 

linked—agriculture and natural resources; construction and 

architecture; engineering technologies; and manufacturing, 

repair, and transportation.

Methodology and Technical Notes

The High School Transcript Study (HSTS) of 2005 was 

used in this report to examine CTE coursetaking. The HSTS 

periodically collects information about courses completed and 

credits and grades earned during high school by 12th-graders, 

including 12th-graders sampled for the National Assessment 

of Educational Progress (NAEP) tests. A brief summary of 

the HSTS survey methodology is provided below; further 

information is available in Shettle et al. (2008).

In coding the HSTS data, consistent methods for classifying 

courses were applied. High school courses vary by content 

and level, even those with similar course titles. Therefore, 

to compare the thousands of transcripts collected from 

schools included in the HSTS, and to ensure that each course 

is uniquely identified, a common course coding system, the 

Classification of Secondary School Courses (CSSC), was used. 

The 1998 revision of the Secondary School Taxonomy (SST) 

(Bradby and Hoachlander 1999), combined with the 2007 

revision to the CTE section of the SST (Bradby and Hudson 

2007), was then used to assign each of the over 2,000 CSSC 

course codes to subject areas. 

The 2007 SST Revision

The SST classifies courses as academic, career/technical 

education, or enrichment.12 CTE courses are classified into 

the three curriculum areas of family and consumer sciences 

12 Academic courses encompass English, mathematics, science, social studies, fine 

arts, and foreign languages. Enrichment includes health, physical, and recreational 

education; religion and theology; and military science.

education (FSCE), general labor market preparation (GLMP), 

and occupational education. This section provides a brief 

overview of the revisions made to the SST and to how participation differs using the two taxonomies; the reader is referred 

to Bradby and Hudson (2007) for more specific information 

on the 2007 revision.

Family and Consumer Sciences Education and General Labor 

Market Preparation. Some courses were moved out of FCSE 

into the occupational areas of manufacturing, repair, and 

transportation and consumer and culinary services, while 

a few other courses were moved into FCSE from personal 

and other services, construction, and mechanics and repair. 

For GLMP, one course was moved out of this category to 

business and one to manufacturing, repair, and transportation, while other courses were moved into this category from 

other precision production, business services, and computer 

technology.

Occupational Education. The 2007 revision largely focused 

on the reorganization of occupational education. Exhibit 2 

indicates the major shifts made between the occupational 

education categories from the 1998 SST to the 2007 SST. One 

result of this reorganization is increased specificity for many 

occupational areas (e.g., elimination of miscellaneous other 

production and other technology; disaggregation of business 

management and print production). For some occupational 

areas, changes were slight (e.g., agriculture and renewable 

resources, construction, health care, marketing, mechanics 

and repair, transportation and materials moving), including 

movement of a few courses into or out of the area and new 

nomenclature for some areas (such as health care becoming 

health sciences). Other occupational areas underwent more 

extensive change. For example, print production courses 

were divided into the three occupational areas of architecture, 

communications and design, and engineering technologies.

The 21 occupational areas in the revised 2007 SST were 

aggregated for analysis in this brief into 11 areas, as shown 

in exhibit 2. The aggregations were made to produce sufficient sample size for analysis and to provide more distinct 

occupational areas (e.g., by combining business finance, 

business management, and business support into business). 

The aggregations used here are consistent with the previous 

version of the SST, with one exception. To be consistent 

with states’ career cluster framework, this analysis combines 

architecture with construction, rather than with either of the 

categories with which it had been combined in the previous 

SST (engineering technologies and communications and 

design, previously combined in print production).

Participation Using the 1998 Versus 2007 Taxonomy. Because 

the 2007 taxonomy did not change the overall set of courses 

that comprise CTE, the overall percentage of students who 

earned CTE credits (97 percent) and the average number of 

CTE credits earned (4.0) was the same using both taxonomies 

(table 8). The main change resulting from the newly 

revised taxonomy was an increase in general labor market 

preparation coursetaking and a decrease in occupational 

coursetaking. Although the percentage of 2005 high school 

graduates earning credits in occupational education was lower 

using the 2007 SST compared to the 1998 SST (87 versus 
NCES 2009-038 11

92 percent), the percentage of students who concentrated in 

an occupational area using the new definition was greater than 

the percentage using the old definition (39 versus 21 percent). 

This increase arises from the switch to the 2-credit cut-off 

rather than from the switch to a different and broader set 

of 11 occupational areas. Using the same concentrator 

definition, there is no measurable difference in concentration 

rates using the 1998 taxonomy (with 18 categories) versus 

the 2007 taxonomy (with 11 categories): 39 percent of 

graduates concentrated under the 2-credit definition, and 21 

percent concentrated under the 3-credit definition. In theory, 

broadening the occupational areas (from 18 to 11) should 

have increased concentration rates; the lack of increase in 

concentration rates observed here apparently results from the 

shifts in courses from the 1998 to the 2007 taxonomy.13

Target Population, Sampling, and Weighting 

The target population for the 2005 HSTS was all students 

in public and private schools in the United States who were 

enrolled in 12th grade in 2004–05 and who completed school 

13 A separate analysis using the new taxonomy showed the expected increase in 

concentration rates when using 16 versus 11 occupational areas, with an increase 

from 36 to 39 percent using the 2-credit definition, and from 19 to 21 percent 

using the 3-credit definition.

Exhibit 2. Comparison of the 1998 and 2007 Secondary School Taxonomy (SST) occupational areas within the career/technical 

 education (CTE) occupational curriculum: Class of 2005

# Rounds to zero. 

NOTE: Occupational areas from the 1998 SST are lined up with their corresponding 2007 SST areas. Dark arrows indicate where a 1998 occupational area was 

split into different 2007 areas. For example, computer technology was split between computer and information sciences and engineering technologies. This 

exhibit provides a schematic of the main correspondence between the old and new taxonomies; small changes are not indicated here. Further details are 

available in The 2007 Revision of the Career/Technical Education Portion of the Secondary School Taxonomy (NCES 2008-030). 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS). 

1998 SST occupational areas and

average number of credits earned

in each area by 2005 public

high school graduates

Agriculture and renewable resources 0.23 Agriculture and natural resources

0.15

0.15

0.55

0.04

0.19

0.24

0.10

0.16

0.44

0.17

0.01

0.03

0.16

0.09

0.08

0.10

0.04

0.23

0.16

0.13

0.24

0.15

0.36

0.02

0.10

0.17

0.23

0.01

0.17

0.11

0.21

0.11

0.16

0.01

0.03

0.04

#

#

Health care

Computer technology

Marketing

Other technology

Communications technology

Print production

Business management

Construction

Business services

Mechanics and repair

Transportation and materials moving

Materials production

Other production

Food service and hospitality

Personal and other services

Child care and education

Public and protective services

Health sciences

Marketing

Computer and information sciences

Engineering technologies

Communications and design

Architecture

Construction

Construction

and architecture

Business

Manufacturing, repair,

and transportation

Consumer and 

culinary services

Public services

Repair

Transportation

Manufacturing

Culinary arts

Consumer services

Education

Library science

Protective services

Public administration

Legal services

2007 SST occupational areas and

average number of credits earned

in each area by 2005 public

high school graduates

Business management

Business finance

Business support
12 NCES 2009-038

in 2005. Sampling procedures were designed to provide a 

nationally representative sample of this target population. 

For public schools, the HSTS sample was the 12th-grade 

public school sample for the 2005 NAEP mathematics and 

science assessment; that is, the HSTS sample included every 

eligible sampled NAEP 2005 12th-grade public school that 

was contacted for the HSTS, whether or not the school 

participated in the NAEP assessments. For private schools, 

the HSTS sample was a subsample from the NAEP 2005 

12th-grade private school sample (for which private schools 

had been oversampled). 

Within schools, only those 12th-graders who had completed 

high school by early fall of the study year had their transcript 

data included in the HSTS. Students excluded from the study 

included NAEP-ineligibles,14 noncompleters, and students 

having incomplete transcripts. For each student, transcript 

information was collected for the 9th through the 12th grade. 

Transcripts were collected from about 640 public schools 

and 80 private schools, yielding a nationally representative 

sample of over 26,000 transcripts from more than 29,000 

students, representing approximately 2.7 million 2005 high 

school completers.

All estimates were weighted using sample weights to provide 

unbiased estimates of the national population. The HSTS 

includes two weights, NAEP-linked weights and HSTS sample 

weights; the HSTS weights were used in this analysis. 

Response Rates

To ensure unbiased samples, NCES has established participation rate standards for national studies that must be met in 

order for the results to be reported without a nonresponse bias 

analysis. For the HSTS, participation rates for the original 

sample needed to be at least 85 percent for both schools and 

graduates. Although the HSTS weighted graduate within14 NAEP ineligibles were English language learners and students with disabilities 

who could not meaningfully participate in the assessment, as determined by 

school staff.

school response rate was 99.7 percent, the school response 

rate (84.2 percent) fell slightly below this NCES standard. 

A nonresponse bias analysis was conducted to determine 

whether the school characteristics from nonresponding schools 

showed significant differences from those of the responding 

schools. Among public schools, the characteristics analyzed 

included region, school location, grade enrollment, minority 

school (high/low), and percent minority for different race 

groups. Significant differences were found by region, school 

location, and percent minority. Nonresponse weighting 

adjustments were used to correct for these differences. 

However, it is unlikely that these adjustments completely 

account for the differences. For details of these analyses, see 

Shettle et al. (2008).

Analytic Sample

For this report, the HSTS sample was restricted to public 

high school graduates who earned regular or honors 

diplomas, earned 16 or more total credits in high school, and 

earned more than zero credits in English. See Alt and Bradby 

(1999) for the rationale behind this approach. After applying 

the stated selection criteria, the HSTS analysis sample 

included about 24,000 public high school graduates of the 

class of 2005.

The restriction to public school graduates makes this 

report consistent with past NCES reports that examine 

CTE coursetaking (Levesque 2003, Levesque et al. 2008, 

Levesque et al. 2000). The exclusion of high school dropouts 

most likely skews CTE coursetaking estimates (as well as 

other coursetaking estimates) upward, as dropouts typically 

leave school before completing a full complement of courses 

(Hampden-Thompson, Warkentien, and Daniel 2009). 

For example, dropouts may be less likely than graduates 

to be concentrators, but this lower probability of being a 

concentrator may not reflect a curricular choice; it is not 

known what courses dropouts would have taken if they 

Table 8. Comparison of participation measures among public high school graduates, using the 1998 Secondary School Taxonomy versus 

the 2007 Secondary School Taxonomy: Class of 2005

Curriculum area

Percent of class of 2005 graduates 

earning credits/concentrating

Average number of credits earned by 

class of 2005

1998 taxonomy 2007 taxonomy 1998 taxonomy 2007 taxonomy

All curriculum areas 100.0 100.0 26.67 26.67

Academic 100.0 100.0 19.44 19.44

Enrichment/other 99.8 99.8 3.23 3.23

Career/technical education (CTE), total 96.6 96.6 4.01 4.01

Family and consumer sciences education (FCSE) 45.3 41.1 0.51 0.40

General labor market preparation (GLMP) 39.9 69.1 0.46 0.97

Occupational education 92.0 86.9 3.03 2.63

2-credit definition of concentration — 38.8 † †

3-credit definition of concentration 20.8 21.3 † †

— Not available. 

† Not applicable. 

NOTE: Completing an occupational concentration is defined as earning at least 2.0 credits within an occupational area (2-credit definition) or at least 3.0 credits 

within an occupational area (3-credit definition). In the 1998 taxonomy, concentrating was defined based on the 18 occupational areas listed in the left-hand side of 

exhibit 2. In the 2007 taxonomy, concentrating was defined based on the 11 aggregated occupational areas listed in the right-hand side of exhibit 2. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS).
NCES 2009-038 13

had remained in school. If one is interested in coursetaking 

within the context of a complete high school curriculum, the 

graduate sample is the most relevant sample.15

Statistical Procedures

The comparisons of means and proportions discussed in 

this report were tested using Student’s t statistic. Differences 

between estimates were tested against the probability of a 

Type I error,16 or significance level. The statistical significance of each comparison was determined by calculating the 

Student’s t values for the differences between each pair of 

means or proportions and comparing these with published 

tables of significance levels for two-tailed hypothesis testing.

Student’s t values were computed to test the difference 

between independent estimates with the following formula:

where E1 and E2 are the estimates to be compared and se1

and se2

 are their corresponding standard errors. 

Patterns of participation across the 11 occupational areas 

were compared using the Spearman rank-order correlation. 

For both the Student’s t statistic and the Spearman correlation coefficient, the significance level was set at .05, using a 

two-tailed test.

There are hazards in reporting statistical tests for each 

comparison. First, comparisons based on large t statistics 

may appear to merit special attention. This can be misleading since the magnitude of the t statistic is related not only 

to the observed differences in means or percentages but also 

to the number of respondents in the specific categories used 

for comparison. Hence, a small difference compared across 

a large number of respondents would produce a large (and 

thus possibly statistically significant) t statistic.

A second hazard in reporting statistical tests is the possibility 

that one can report a “false positive” or Type I error. In the 

case of a t statistic, this false positive would result when a 

difference measured with a particular sample showed a statistically significant difference when there is no difference in the 

underlying population. Statistical tests are designed to control 

this type of error, denoted by alpha. The alpha level of .05 

selected for findings in this report indicates that a difference 

of a certain magnitude or larger would be produced no more 

than one time out of 20 when there was no actual difference 

between the quantities in the underlying population. When 

analysts test hypotheses that show t values at the .05 level or 

smaller, they treat this finding as rejecting the null hypothesis 

that there is no difference between the two quantities. Failing 

to detect a difference, however, does not necessarily imply 

the values are the same or equivalent. 

15 In addition, the HSTS does not provide an accurate dropout sample. The NAEP 

sample from which the HSTS sample is drawn requires that students be enrolled 

in grade 12 in the assessment year. Because the majority of students who drop 

out of high school do so before grade 12 (Stillwell and Hoffman 2008), the HSTS 

sample underestimates the dropout population.

16 A Type I error occurs when one concludes that a difference observed in a 

sample reflects a true difference in the population from which the sample was 

drawn, when no such difference is present.

There are cases in which exercising additional caution 

concerning alpha levels is warranted. When a large number 

of related comparisons (a family of comparisons) is tested, 

the probability of a Type I error increases as the number of 

comparisons within the family increases. For example, when 

making paired comparisons among 11 aggregated occupational areas, a family of 55 possible comparisons could be 

made. To correct for this inflated Type I error probability 

when making comparisons among occupational groups in 

this report, the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure was used. 

This procedure controls the false discovery rate (defined as 

the probability that the population difference is mistakenly 

assumed to be in a different direction from the sample difference) such that it remains less than alpha divided by 2 (Thissen, 

Steinberg, and Kuang 2002). Following Thissen et al. (2002), 

the degrees of freedom for the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure were 62, based on the number of Jackknife replicate 

weights used to calculate standard errors in the 2005 HSTS.

References

Alt, M.N., and Bradby, D. (1999). Procedures Guide for 

Transcript Studies (NCES 1999-05). National Center 

for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education. 

Washington, DC.

Bradby, D., and Hoachlander, G. (1999). 1998 Revision of the 

Secondary School Taxonomy (NCES 1999-06). National 

Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of 

Education. Washington, DC.

Bradby, D., and Hudson, L. (2007). The 2007 Revision of 

the Career/Technical Education Portion of the Secondary 

School Taxonomy (NCES 2008-030). National Center 

for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, 

U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC.

Hampden-Thompson, G., Warkentien, S., and Daniel, B. 

(2009). Course Credit Accrual and Dropping Out 

of High School, by Student Characteristics (NCES 

2009-035). National Center for Education Statistics, 

Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of 

Education. Washington, DC.

Levesque, K. (2003). Trends in High School Vocational/ 

Technical Coursetaking: 1982–1998 (NCES 2003-025). 

National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of 

Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. 

Washington, DC. 

Levesque, K., Laird, J., Hensley, E., Choy, S.P., Cataldi, E.F., 

and Hudson, L. (2008). Career/Technical Education 

in the United States: 1990 to 2005 (NCES 2008-035). 

National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of 

Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. 

Washington, DC.

Levesque, K., Lauen, D., Teitelbaum, P., Alt, M., and Librera, 

S. (2000). Vocational Education in the United States: 

Toward the Year 2000 (NCES 2000-029). National 

Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of 

Education. Washington, DC.

√ t = 

E1

 - E2

2 2 se1

 + se2
14 NCES 2009-038

Plank, S. (2001). A Question of Balance: CTE, Academic 

Courses, High School Persistence, and Student 

Achievement. Journal of Vocational Education Research, 

26(3), 279–327.

Plank, S., DeLuca, S., and Estacion, A. (2008). High School 

Dropout and the Role of Career and Technical Education: 

A Survival Analysis of Surviving High School. Sociology 

of Education 81(4), 345–370.

Planty, M., Provasnik, S., Hussar, W., Snyder, T., Kena, 

G., Hampden-Thompson, G. Dinkes, R., and Choy, 

S. (2007). The Condition of Education 2007 (NCES 

2007-064). National Center for Education Statistics, 

Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of 

Education. Washington, DC. 

Rasinski, K.A., and Pedlow, S. (1995). The Effect of High 

School Vocational Education on Academic Achievement 

Gain and High School Persistence: Evidence from 

NELS:88. In Adam Gamoran (ed.), The Quality of 

Vocational Education: Background Papers from the 

1994 National Assessment of Vocational Education. U.S. 

Department of Education. Washington, DC.

Shettle, C., Cubell, M., Hoover, K., Kastberg, D., Legum, S., 

Lyons, M., Perkins, R., Rizzo, L., Roey, S., and Sickles, 

D. (2008). The 2005 High School Transcript Study 

User’s Guide and Technical Report (NCES 2009-480). 

National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of 

Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. 

Washington, DC. 

Stillwell, R., and Hoffman, L. (2008). Public School Graduates 

and Dropouts from the Common Core of Data: School 

Year 2005–06 (NCES 2008-353). National Center for 

Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. 

Department of Education. Washington, DC.

Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., and Kuang, D. (2002). Quick 

and Easy Implementation of the Benjamini-Hochberg 

Procedure for Controlling the False Positive Rate in 

Multiple Comparisons. Journal of Educational and 

Behavioral Statistics, 27(10), 77-83.

Tuma, J. (1996). Trends in Participation in Secondary 

Vocational Education: 1982–1992 (NCES 96-004). 

National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department 

of Education. Washington, DC.

U.S. Department of Education (2008). Carl D. Perkins 

Vocational and Technical Education Act of 1998, 

Report to Congress on State Performance, Program Year 

2005–06. Office of Vocational and Adult Education, 

Washington, DC.
NCES 2009-038 15

Appendix A. Standard Error Tables

Table A–1. Standard errors for Table 1: Percentage of public high school graduates earning credits in a curriculum area, percentage 

concentrating in career/technical education, and average number of credits earned in an area: Class of 2005

Curriculum area

Percent of graduates earning 

credits/ concentrating

Average number 

of credits earned

All curriculum areas † 0.100

Academic † 0.071

Enrichment/other 0.05 0.040

Career/technical education (CTE), total 0.28 0.059

Family and consumer sciences education (FCSE) 1.10 0.013

General labor market preparation (GLMP) 1.09 0.026

Occupational education 0.46 0.044

2-credit definition of concentration 0.71 †

3-credit definition of concentration 0.60 †

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS). 

Table A-2. Standard errors for Table 2: Percentage of public high school graduates who earned various combinations of career/technical 

education (CTE) credits: Class of 2005

Course combination Percent

Total, any combination of CTE credits †

No CTE credits 0.28

Family and consumer sciences education (FCSE) credits only 0.15

General labor market preparation (GLMP) credits only 0.28

Occupational education credits only 0.78

FCSE and GLMP credits only 0.24

Occupational credits in combination with any other CTE credits 0.76

Occupational and FCSE credits only 0.55

Occupational and GLMP credits only 0.89

Credits in all three CTE areas 0.87

† Not applicable.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS).

Table A-3. Standard errors for Table 3: Percentage distribution of public high school graduates, graduates who earned any occupational 

credits, and occupational concentrators, by number of occupational areas in which graduates earned credits: Class of 2005

Number of occupational areas in which 

graduates earned credits All graduates

Graduates earning any 

occupational credits

Occupational 

concentrators 

Total, any number of occupational areas † † †

 0 occupational areas 0.46 † †

 1 occupational area 0.53 0.65 0.72

 More than one occupational area 0.73 0.65 0.72

2 occupational areas 0.39 0.43 0.70

3 occupational areas 0.37 0.39 0.59

4 occupational areas 0.30 0.32 0.51

5 or more occupational areas 0.26 0.30 0.44

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS). 
16 NCES 2009-038

Table A-6. Standard errors for Table 6: Percentage of public high school graduates concentrating in each occupational area who earned 

credits in other occupational areas: Class of 2005

Occupational area of concentration Percent earning credits in other occupational areas

Agriculture and natural resources 0.98

Business 0.80

Communications and design 0.83

Computer and information sciences 1.07

Construction and architecture 0.88

Consumer and culinary services 0.78

Engineering technologies 0.73

Health sciences 0.84

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 1.02

Marketing 0.80

Public services 1.20

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS).

Table A-5. Standard errors for Table 5: Percentage of public high school graduates who concentrated in each occupational area, overall 

and among graduates who earned various numbers of occupational credits: Class of 2005

Occupational area of concentration

Percent of each group who were occupational concentrators

All graduates

Graduates who 

earned any 

occupational credits

Graduates who 

earned 2.0 or more 

occupational credits

Any occupational area 0.7 0.8 0.8

Agriculture and natural resources 0.3 0.3 0.5

Business 0.4 0.5 0.7

Communications and design 0.3 0.3 0.5

Computer and information sciences 0.2 0.3 0.4

Construction and architecture 0.2 0.2 0.3

Consumer and culinary services 0.3 0.3 0.4

Engineering technologies 0.2 0.2 0.4

Health sciences 0.2 0.3 0.4

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.4 0.4 0.6

Marketing 0.2 0.3 0.4

Public services 0.2 0.2 0.3

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS).

Table A-4. Standard errors for Table 4: Average number of credits earned by public high school graduates during high school, by 

occupational area: Class of 2005

Occupational area Average credits

Agriculture and natural resources 0.013

Business 0.016

Communications and design 0.012

Computer and information sciences 0.011

Construction and architecture 0.007

Consumer and culinary services 0.010

Engineering technologies 0.008

Health sciences 0.010

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.016

Marketing 0.009

Public services 0.009

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS).
NCES 2009-038 17

Table A-7. Standard errors for Table 7: Average number of credits earned in each occupational area, by public high school graduates 

who earned any credits in each other occupational area: Class of 2005

Average number of credits earned in agriculture and natural 

resources, by graduates who earned any credits in:

Average number of credits earned in computer and information 

sciences, by graduates who earned any credits in:

Construction and architecture 0.039 Engineering technologies 0.025

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.027 Construction and architecture 0.026

Engineering technologies 0.030 Communications and design 0.015

Business 0.020 Business 0.011

Computer and information sciences 0.027 Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.015

Consumer and culinary services 0.019 Public services 0.038

Health sciences 0.023 Agriculture and natural resources 0.022

Communications and design 0.016 Health sciences 0.018

Marketing 0.024 Marketing 0.013

Public services 0.027 Consumer and culinary services 0.014

Average number of credits earned in business, by graduates who 

earned any credits in:

Average number of credits earned in construction and 

architecture, by graduates who earned any credits in:

Marketing 0.040 Engineering technologies 0.027

Agriculture and natural resources 0.035 Agriculture and natural resources 0.031

Consumer and culinary services 0.025 Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.019

Health sciences 0.027 Business 0.010

Communications and design 0.023 Computer and information sciences 0.010

Computer and information sciences 0.024 Marketing 0.015

Public services 0.034 Communications and design 0.009

Construction and architecture 0.031 Health sciences 0.018

Engineering technologies 0.027 Public services 0.016

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.021 Consumer and culinary services 0.009

Average number of credits earned in communications and 

design, by graduates who earned any credits in:

Average number of credits earned in consumer and culinary 

services, by graduates who earned any credits in:

Public services 0.033 Health sciences 0.026

Marketing 0.029 Public services 0.032

Computer and information sciences 0.021 Business 0.013

Business 0.013 Communications and design 0.016

Consumer and culinary services 0.017 Marketing 0.023

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.019 Agriculture and natural resources 0.021

Engineering technologies 0.025 Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.016

Agriculture and natural resources 0.022 Computer and information sciences 0.012

Health sciences 0.025 Construction and architecture 0.018

Construction and architecture 0.022 Engineering technologies 0.011

Average number of credits earned in engineering technologies, 

by graduates who earned any credits in:

Average number of credits earned in marketing, by graduates 

who earned any credits in:

Construction and architecture 0.041 Business 0.014

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.014 Consumer and culinary services 0.011

Computer and information sciences 0.016 Health sciences 0.019

Agriculture and natural resources 0.019 Agriculture and natural resources 0.017

Communications and design 0.010 Communications and design 0.012

Business 0.011 Public services 0.017

Public services 0.015 Construction and architecture 0.018

Marketing 0.011 Engineering technologies 0.016

Health sciences 0.017 Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.011

Consumer and culinary services 0.007 Computer and information sciences 0.011

See notes at end of table.
18 NCES 2009-038

Table A-9. Data for figure 1: Percentage of public high school graduates who earned credits in each occupational area and, among 

those graduates, the average number of credits earned in the area: Class of 2005

Occupational area

Percent of graduates 

earning credits

Average number of credits, 

among credit earners

Percent Standard error Percent Standard error

Agriculture and natural resources 11.5 0.54 2.00 0.070

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 22.1 0.85 1.76 0.055

Construction and architecture 6.7 0.33 1.75 0.089

Health sciences 9.3 0.66 1.69 0.083

Marketing 9.4 0.54 1.41 0.049

Consumer and culinary services 20.0 0.77 1.33 0.042

Business 39.8 1.08 1.28 0.023

Engineering technologies 11.8 0.53 1.28 0.045

Computer and information sciences 19.4 0.91 1.22 0.029

Communications and design 30.2 0.79 1.19 0.026

Public services 6.9 0.61 1.19 0.100

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS). 

Table A-8. Standard errors for Table 8: Comparison of participation measures among public high school graduates, using the 1998 

Secondary School Taxonomy versus the 2007 Secondary School Taxonomy: Class of 2005

Curriculum area

Percent of class of 2005 graduates 

earning credits/concentrating

Average number of credits earned by 

class of 2005

1998 taxonomy 2007 taxonomy 1998 taxonomy 2007 taxonomy

All curriculum areas † † 0.100 0.100

Academic † † 0.071 0.071

Enrichment/other 0.05 0.05 0.040 0.040

Career/technical education (CTE), total 0.27 0.28 0.059 0.059

Family and consumer sciences education (FCSE) 1.05 1.10 0.015 0.013

General labor market preparation (GLMP) 1.60 1.09 0.021 0.026

Occupational education 0.37 0.46 0.047 0.044

2-credit definition of concentration † 0.71 † †

3-credit definition of concentration 0.61 0.60 † †

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS). 

Table A-7. Standard errors for Table 7: Average number of credits earned in each occupational area, by public high school graduates 

who earned any credits in each other occupational area: Class of 2005—Continued

Average number of credits earned in health sciences, by 

graduates who earned any credits in:

Average number of credits earned in public services, by graduates 

who earned any credits in:

Consumer and culinary services 0.016 Health sciences 0.015

Business 0.014 Consumer and culinary services 0.020

Public services 0.023 Business 0.011

Agriculture and natural resources 0.020 Computer and information sciences 0.017

Marketing 0.015 Agriculture and natural resources 0.011

Communications and design 0.011 Communications and design 0.007

Computer and information sciences 0.012 Marketing 0.010

Engineering technologies 0.013 Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.007

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 0.007 Construction and architecture 0.011

Construction and architecture 0.009 Engineering technologies 0.009

Average number of credits earned in manufacturing, repair, and 

transportation, by graduates who earned any credits in:

Construction and architecture 0.064

Engineering technologies 0.049

Agriculture and natural resources 0.048

Computer and information sciences 0.032

Business 0.019

Communications and design 0.017

Consumer and culinary services 0.020

Marketing 0.023

Public services 0.035

Health sciences 0.017

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS). 
NCES 2009-038 19

For more information on the National Assessment of Educational Progress High School Transcript Studies (HSTS), visit http://nces.ed.gov/

nationsreportcard/hsts. For more information on the CTE Statistics program, visit http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ctes. To order additional copies 

of this Statistics in Brief or other NCES publications, call 1-877-4ED-PUBS or visit http://www.edpubs.org. NCES publications are also available 

on the Internet at http://nces.ed.gov.

Table A-10. Data for figure 2: Percentage of public high school graduates who earned credits in each occupational area and, among 

those graduates, the percentage who concentrated in the area: Class of 2005

Occupational area

Percent of graduates 

earning credits

Percent of credit earners 

who concentrate

Percent Standard error Percent Standard error

Agriculture and natural resources 11.5 0.54 41.1 1.70

Health sciences 9.3 0.66 34.4 2.35

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 22.1 0.85 34.0 1.30

Construction and architecture 6.7 0.33 31.9 1.91

Marketing 9.4 0.54 28.0 1.65

Consumer and culinary services 20.0 0.77 21.8 1.16

Business 39.8 1.08 21.3 0.92

Engineering technologies 11.8 0.53 20.7 1.53

Computer and information sciences 19.4 0.91 19.1 1.04

Communications and design 30.2 0.79 17.9 0.88

Public services 6.9 0.61 17.1 2.40

NOTE: Completing an occupational concentration is defined as earning at least 2.0 credits in one of the 11 occupational areas listed in the table. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS). 

Table A-11. Data for figure 3: Average number of credits earned in an occupational area by public high school graduates who earned any 

credits in the area, and average number of credits these students earned in all other occupational areas: Class of 2005

Occupational area

Credits earned in given 

occupational area

Credits earned in all other 

occupational areas

Average number Standard error Average number Standard error

Agriculture and natural resources 2.00 0.070 2.64 0.109

Communications and design 1.19 0.026 2.04 0.053

Business 1.28 0.023 2.10 0.053

Computer and information sciences 1.22 0.029 2.17 0.069

Consumer and culinary services 1.33 0.042 2.06 0.048

Public services 1.19 0.100 2.24 0.082

Health sciences 1.69 0.083 2.02 0.060

Marketing 1.41 0.049 2.37 0.073

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 1.76 0.055 2.21 0.058

Engineering technologies 1.28 0.045 2.79 0.091

Construction and architecture 1.75 0.089 3.08 0.106

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS).

Table A-12. Data for figure 4: Percentage of credits earned in all other occupational areas, among public high school graduates who 

earned any credits in an occupational area: Class of 2005

Occupational area Percent Standard error

Engineering technologies 68.6 1.10

Public services 65.3 2.31

Computer and information sciences 64.1 0.79

Communications and design 63.3 0.91

Marketing 62.6 1.03

Construction and architecture 63.7 1.51

Business 62.2 0.62

Consumer and culinary services 60.8 1.00

Health sciences 54.5 1.61

Manufacturing, repair, and transportation 55.6 0.99

Agriculture and natural resources 56.9 1.48

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, the 2005 High School Transcript Study (HSTS).
www.ed.gov ies.ed.gov