ISSUES & ANSWERS REL 2011– No. 111

At CNA

Aligning career 

and technical 

education with 

high- wage and 

high- demand 

occupations 

in Tennessee
ISSUES&ANSWERS REL 2011– No. 111

At CNA

Aligning career and technical education 

with high- wage and high-demand 

occupations in Tennessee

July 2011

Prepared by

Christine Mokher, Ph.D.

CNA Education
WA

OR

ID

MT

NV

CA

UT

AZ

WY

ND

SD

NE

KS

CO

NM

TX

OK AR

LA

MS AL GA

SC

NC

VA WV

KY

TN

PA

NY

FL

AK

MN

WI

IA

IL IN

MI

OH

VT

NH

ME

MO

At CNA

Issues & Answers is an ongoing series of reports from short-term Fast Response Projects conducted by the regional educational laboratories on current education issues of importance at local, state, and regional levels. Fast Response Project topics 

change to reflect new issues, as identified through lab outreach and requests for assistance from policymakers and educators at state and local levels and from communities, businesses, parents, families, and youth. All Issues & Answers reports 

meet Institute of Education Sciences standards for scientifically valid research.

July 2011

This report was prepared for the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) under Contract ED-06-CO-0021 by Regional Educational Laboratory Appalachia administered by CNA. The content of the publication does not necessarily reflect the views or 

policies of IES or the U.S. Department of Education nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

This report is in the public domain. While permission to reprint this publication is not necessary, it should be cited as:

Mokher, C. (2011). Aligning career and technical education with high- wage and high- demand occupations in Tennessee. 

(Issues & Answers Report, REL 2011–No. 111). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Appalachia. 

Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs.

This report is available on the regional educational laboratory website at http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs.
Summary

Aligning career and technical 

education with high- wage and 

high-demand occupations in Tennessee

REL 2011–No. 111

This study examines the availability 

of career and technical education program areas in Tennessee high schools, 

concentrations (a three-or-more credit 

sequence in a program area) completed 

by 2007/08 high school graduates, and 

how these concentrations align with jobs 

in the labor market. It looks at how these 

outcomes differ, statewide and by region, 

and identifies corresponding high- wage 

and high- demand occupations projected 

over 2006–16.

A primary purpose of career and technical 

education is to prepare students for “high skill, 

high wage, or high demand occupations in current or emerging professions” (Perkins IV 2006, 

Sec. 2-1). How well career and technical education participation corresponds to labor market 

demands is important for both students and 

employers. Students want good careers; employers want to fill jobs in high-d emand areas. 

Previous research indicates that policymakers 

in many states have struggled to align education 

and training with labor market demands.

This study uses school-level data from the Tennessee Department of Education (2009) on the 

number and percentage of concentrators (high 

school graduates completing a three-or-more 

credit sequence) in each career and technical 

education program area (agricultural education, 

business technology, family and consumer 

services, health science, marketing, technology 

engineering, and trade and industrial education), and region-level data on employment 

projections and median annual wages from the 

Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce 

Development (2009). Data on school characteristics are from the Common Core of Data, 

maintained by the U.S. Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics 

(2008b). The school-level data are for 2007/08, 

occupational wage data are for 2006, and employment projections are for 2006–16.

This study addresses five sets of questions on 

career and technical education in Tennessee:

•	 On average, how many program areas are 

available in high schools, and which are 

most and least common, statewide and by 

region (a cluster of neighboring counties 

with similar labor market characteristics)?

•	 How does the percentage of high school 

graduates who graduated from schools 

with at least one available program area, 

and of high school graduates who completed at least one concentration, vary by 

program area and region?

•	 Statewide and for each region, how many 

concentrators would need to change 
ii Summary

program areas to match the distribution 

of workers in the labor market? For each 

program area, how does the percentage of 

high school graduates who completed a 

concentration compare with the percentage of workers employed in corresponding 

occupations?

•	 For each region, which program areas correspond to low-, moderate-, and high- wage 

occupations projected over 2006–16? What 

percentage of jobs projected over 2006–16 

are in 2007/08 program areas that correspond to high- wage occupations? What 

is the percentage of concentrators in these 

program areas? How do the median annual 

wages in occupations that correspond to 

each program area vary by education level?

•	 For each region, which program areas 

correspond to low-, moderate-, and highdemand occupations projected over 2006–

16? What percentage of jobs projected over 

2006–16 are in 2007/08 program areas that 

correspond to high- demand occupations? 

What is the percentage of concentrators in 

these program areas?

Key findings include:

•	 Statewide, the average number of program 

areas offered in non–career and technical 

education schools (schools where students 

received their diploma and that offer 

courses in addition to those in career and 

technical education program areas) was 

3.6 (out of 7). Across regions, it ranged 

from 2.9 to 4.7.

•	 Statewide, 92 percent of graduates were 

enrolled in a school offering trade and 

industrial education, the program area most 

commonly available, and 26 percent were 

enrolled in a school offering technology 

engineering, the program area least commonly available. The range in program area 

availability was just as striking by region. 

Technology engineering was not available 

to any high school graduates in two regions, 

but nearly three-fourths (74 percent) of 

graduates in one region were enrolled in a 

school that offered it. The percentage of high 

school graduates who completed at least one 

concentration ranged from 22 percent to 55 

percent by region and from 1 percent (technology engineering) to 20 percent (trade and 

industrial education) by program area.

•	 Statewide, 18 percent of concentrators would 

need to change program areas to match the 

distribution of workers in the labor market. 

The values ranged from 14 percent to 35 percent. The greatest differences in the percentage of high school graduates completing a 

concentration and the percentage of workers 

in the labor market were in agricultural 

education (16 percent compared with 1 percent) and in business technology (13 percent 

compared with 23 percent).

•	 Except for technology engineering occupations, which were high wage in all regions, 

occupations classified as high- wage varied 

by region.

•	 Statewide, approximately 17 percent 

of jobs projected over 2006–16 were in 

2007/08 program areas that correspond 

to high- wage occupations, ranging from 

0 percent to 51 percent. The percentage 

of graduates concentrating in program 

areas that correspond to high- wage 
Summary

occupations was 6 percent statewide, 

ranging from 0 percent to 13 percent.

•	 Up to 4.1 percent of jobs in high- wage 

occupations projected over 2006–16 

could potentially be filled by 2007/08 

concentrators in corresponding program areas, suggesting that up to 41 

percent of these jobs could be filled over 

the 10-year period if the number of 

these concentrators remains constant.

•	 No program area corresponded to a highdemand occupation in all regions. Business technology and trade and industrial 

education were the only program areas 

that did not correspond to a high-d emand 

occupation in any region.

•	 Statewide, approximately 31 percent 

of jobs projected over 2006–16 were 

in 2007/08 program areas that correspond to high-d emand occupations, 

ranging from 12 percent to 84 percent. The percentage of graduates 

concentrating in program areas that 

correspond to high- demand occupations was 18 percent, ranging from 3 

percent to 66 percent.

•	 Up to 7.1 percent of jobs in highdemand occupations projected over 

2006–16 could potentially be filled by 

2007/08 concentrators in corresponding program areas, suggesting that 

up to 71 percent of these jobs could 

be filled over the 10-year period if the 

number of these concentrators remains constant.

July 2011
iv Table of conTenTS

TAble of conTenTs

Why this study? 1

Career and technical education and a changing workforce in Tennessee 1

Research questions 4

Findings 4

How many program areas do Tennessee schools offer, and which are most common and least common? 6

How does the percentage of graduates of high schools that offered at least one concentration vary by program 

area and region? 6

How does the percentage of high school graduates who completed a concentration compare with the 

percentage of workers employed in corresponding occupations? 8

What percentage of jobs in high-wage occupations projected over 2006–16 could potentially be filled by 

2007/08 concentrators in corresponding program areas? 9

What percentage of jobs in high- demand occupations projected over 2006–16 could potentially be filled by 

2007/08 concentrators in corresponding program areas? 11

Study limitations 13

Appendix A Data sources and methodology 17

Appendix B Detailed supporting data 30

Appendix C Sensitivity analyses with alternate crosswalk 68

Notes 73

References 75

Boxes

1 Key terms 2

2 Tennessee regions 3

3 Data sources and methodology 5

A1 Background and experience of the crosswalk coders 25

Maps

1 Index of dissimilarity between the percentage of concentrators in each program area and the percentage of 

workers employed in corresponding occupations, by region, 2007/08 9

2 Percentage of projected jobs in high-w age occupations over 2006–16 that could be filled by 2007/08 

concentrators, by region 12

3 Projected jobs in high-d emand occupations over 2006–16 that could be filled by 2007/08 concentrators, by 

region (percent) 15

Tables

1 Non–career and technical education schools with available program areas in Tennessee, by region, 2007/08 

(percent) 6
Table of conTenTS 

2 Tennessee graduates of high schools with an available program area, by program area and region, 2007/08 

(percent, unless otherwise noted) 7

3 Tennessee high school graduates completing at least one concentration, by program area and region, 2007/08 

(percent) 8

4 Tennessee concentrators in each program area and workers employed in corresponding occupations, by 

program area, 2007/08 10

5 Median annual wage classification for occupations that correspond to each program area, by region, 2007/08 10

6 Tennessee median annual wages for occupations that correspond to each program area, by highest level of 

education completed, 2007/08 (dollars) 11

7 Projected jobs in high-w age occupations over 2006–16 that could be filled by 2007/08 concentrators, by 

region 12

8 Projected job demand over 2006–16, by corresponding program area and region, 2007/08 13

9 Projected jobs in high- demand occupations over 2006–16 that could be filled by 2007/08 concentrators, by 

region 14

A1 Counties and public school districts that served students in grade 12 in each Tennessee region, 2007/08 21

A2 Programs of study in each program area 23

A3 Level of agreement among coders in the primary career and technical education program area associated 

with each occupational Standard of Classification code 26

A4 Numbers of Tennessee high school graduates, concentrators, and concentrations 26

B1 Number of Tennessee high schools and mean program areas available, by school district and type, 2007/08 30

B2 Non–career and technical education schools with available program areas in Tennessee, by region, 2007/08 34

B3 Available program areas in career and technical education–only schools, by region, 2007/08 35

B4 Available program areas in non–career and technical education schools, by region, 2007/08 36

B5 Number of Tennessee high school graduates enrolled in a school offering each program area, by region, 

2007/08 37

B6 Tennessee high school graduates completing concentrations in each program area, by region, 2007/08 38

B7 Percentage of total concentrations completed by Tennessee high school graduates in each program area, by 

region, 2007/08 39

B8 Tennessee concentrators in each program area and workers employed in corresponding occupations, by 

region and program area, 2007/08 40

B9 Median annual wage and range of low-, moderate-, and high-w age occupations, by region, 2006 (dollars) 44

B10 Median wages for occupations that correspond to each program area, by highest level of education completed 

and region, 2007/08 (dollars) 45

B11 Projected change in employment and occupational demand range, by region, 2006–16 (percent) 48
vi Table of conTenTS

B12 High-w age and high-d emand occupations in Tennessee, by corresponding program area, 2007/08 49

C1 Tennessee concentrators in each program area and workers employed in corresponding occupations, 

alternate crosswalk, by program area, 2007/08 68

C2 Median annual wage classifications for occupations that correspond to each program area, alternate 

crosswalk, by region, 2007/08 69

C3 Tennessee median annual wages for occupations that correspond to each program area, alternate crosswalk, 

by highest level of education completed, 2007/08 (dollars) 69

C4 Projected jobs in high-wage occupations over 2006–16 that could be filled by 2007/08 concentrators, alternate 

crosswalk, by region 70

C5 Projected job demand over 2006–16, by corresponding program area and region, alternate crosswalk, 

2007/08 71

C6 Projected jobs in high-demand occupations over 2006–16 that could be filled by 2007/08 concentrators, 

alternate crosswalk, by region 72
Why ThiS STudy?

This study examines 

the availability of 

career and technical 

education program 

areas in Tennessee 

high schools, 

concentrations 

completed by 

2007/08 high school 

graduates in these 

program areas, 

and how these 

concentrations align 

with jobs in the labor 

market. It looks at 

how these outcomes 

differ, statewide 

and by region, 

and identifies 

corresponding highwage and highdemand occupations 

projected over 

2006–16.

Why ThIs sTudy?

Aligning career and technical education program 

areas with labor market demands is important 

for both students and employers. Students want 

good careers; employers want to fill jobs in highdemand areas. Although employers might be able 

to fill some of their need for skilled workers with 

those trained elsewhere, such as retirees or immigrants, a state’s ability to produce skilled young 

adults is critical for its economic growth.

A primary purpose of career and technical education is to prepare students for “high-skill, highwage, or high- demand occupations in current or 

emerging professions” (Perkins IV 2006, Sec. 2-1). 

Recent U.S. Department of Education reports have 

examined national trends in career and technical education in many fields but do not assess 

how well program areas align with labor market 

demands (Hudson and Laird 2009; Levesque et al. 

2008). A study of 10 states, however, found that 

state policymakers have struggled to match education and training with labor market demands 

(Grubb et al. 1999). One contributing factor is that 

typically, different departments oversee different 

areas, and coordination among them is lacking. In 

Tennessee, the Department of Labor and Workforce Development maintains data on employment 

and labor projections, and the Department of Education’s career and technical education division 

tracks the number of concentrations (three-ormore credit sequences) completed in each program 

area. (See box 1 for definitions of key terms.)

Career and technical education and a 

changing workforce in Tennessee

In 2008/09, approximately 90 percent (177,832 

students) of Tennessee public high school students enrolled in at least one career and technical education course (Tennessee Department of 

Education 2009; Tennessee Council for Career 

and Technical Education 2009). Students can 

take career and technical education courses at 

non– career and technical education schools 

(schools where students received their diploma 
2 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

least 20 percent greater than that for 

all occupations in the region.

High-wage occupation. Occupation 

area where the weighted median of 

the annual wages is at least 20 percent 

greater than the median of the annual 

wages for all occupations in the region.

Index of dissimilarity. An indicator 

commonly used to examine differences across two groups in a distribution. The index is bounded by the 

values 0 and 1, with lower values 

indicating greater similarity. In this 

study, the index of dissimilarity is 

the proportion of concentrators who 

would need to change program areas 

for the distribution of program areas 

and corresponding occupations to be 

identical among concentrators and 

workers in the labor market.

Low-demand occupation. Occupation 

where the change in the projected 

number of jobs over 2006–16 is at 

least 20 percent less than that for all 

occupations in the region.

Low-wage occupation. Occupation 

where the weighted median of the annual wages is at least 20 percent less 

than the median of the annual wages 

for all occupations in the region.

Moderate-demand occupation. 

Occupation where the change in 

the projected number of jobs over 

2006–16 is within 20 percent of that 

for all occupations in the region.

Moderate-wage occupation. Occupation where the weighted median of the 

annual wages is within 20 percent of 

the median of the annual wages for all 

occupations in the region.

Non–career and technical education 

school. The school where students 

received their high school diplomas. 

These schools can provide concentrations, but they offer other courses as 

well. Most non–career and technical education schools are “regular 

schools” in the Common Core of Data 

school type, but they can also include 

“special education” or “other/alternative” schools.

Program area. One of seven categories classifying secondary career and 

technical education fields in Tennessee during the 2007/08 school year, as 

defined in the state’s annual accountability reports submitted to the U.S. 

Department of Education for Perkins 

reporting purposes. The program 

areas are agricultural education, 

business technology, family and 

consumer services, health science, 

marketing, technology engineering, 

and trade and industrial education.

Region. A cluster of neighboring 

counties with similar labor market 

characteristics (see box 2 for a map 

of Tennessee regions used in this 

report).

Total concentrations. The total 

number of concentrations completed 

by high school graduates in each 

program area in high school. These 

totals may include duplicate records 

for the same student (students who 

completed concentrations in more 

than one program area).

Total concentrators. A nonduplicated 

count of the number of high school 

graduates who completed a concentration in any program area in high 

school.
Why ThiS STudy?

Locations of career and technical education–only schools, by region

4

8 7 2

5

11

6 10

9

1

12

13

3

and that offer courses in addition to those in 

career and technical education program areas) 

if offered there or at one of Tennessee’s 17 career 

and technical education–only schools (specialized schools available in some regions offering 

only career and technical education courses). 

Career and technical education–only schools are 

generally available to all students in good standing in the district or surrounding districts, but 

enrollment may be limited to students attending specific schools or those meeting district-set 

eligibility criteria.

The Tennessee Department of Education has 

developed seven career and technical education 

program areas: agriculture, business technology, 

family and consumer services, health science, 

marketing, technology engineering, and trade and 

industrial education. All of these program areas 

prepare students for jobs in the local workforce.

The Tennessee workforce has changed over 

time, most recently with the shift in the 1990s 

from a manufacturing economy to a knowledge economy (Wong, Sims, and Schuermann 

2004). This change is reflected in the Tennessee 

Department of Labor and Workforce Development employment projections for 2016, which 

indicate that the five highest-growth industries are administrative and support services, 

food services and drinking places, educational 

services, ambulatory healthcare services, and 

professional, scientific, and technical services 

(Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce 

Development 2006).

Similar changes can be seen nationally, in population and workforce characteristics as well as in the 

demand for goods and services. The U.S. Bureau of 

Labor Statistics (2008) highlights the magnitude 

of the shift in the number of jobs generated from 

goods-producing to service-providing industries. 

The health and education services supersector1

 is 

projected to grow the most over 2006–16, and 7 of 

the 20 fastest-growing occupations over 2006–16 

are in health care.

Despite these statewide and national trends, projections for specific occupations differ at a more 

local level. For example, 2006–16 projections for 

growth in employment in health care and social 

assistance range from 18.1 percent to 42.6 percent 

across Tennessee regions (author’s calculations 

based on data from Tennessee Department of 

Labor and Workforce Development 2009), meaning that the need for training more qualified workers in this field will vary significantly throughout 

the state. This report is a step in understanding 

the relationship between the projected need for 

workers in different industries and the supply of 

concentrators in program areas that correspond to 

those industries.
4 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Research questions

This study addresses five sets of 

questions on career and technical 

education in Tennessee:

•	On average, how many program 

areas are available in high schools, 

and which are most and least common, statewide and by region?

•	 How does the percentage of high school graduates who graduated from schools with at least 

one available program area, and of high school 

graduates who completed at least one concentration vary by program area and region?

•	 Statewide and for each region, how many 

concentrators would need to change program 

areas to match the distribution of workers in 

the labor market? For each program area, how 

does the percentage of high school graduates 

who completed a concentration compare with 

the percentage of workers employed in corresponding occupations?

•	 For each region, which program areas correspond to low-, moderate-, and high- wage 

occupations projected over 2006–16? What 

percentage of jobs projected over 2006–16 are 

in 2007/08 program areas that correspond to 

high- wage occupations? What is the percentage of concentrators in these program areas? 

How do the median annual wages in occupations that correspond to each program area 

vary by education level?

•	 For each region, which program areas correspond to low-, moderate-, and high- demand 

occupations projected over 2006–16? What 

percentage of jobs projected over 2006–16 are in 

2007/08 program areas that correspond to highdemand occupations? What is the percentage of 

concentrators in these program areas?

See box 3 for a summary of the study methodology 

and appendix A for details.
(delivery-school file) and the 

school where students received 

their high school diplomas (homeschool file). All analyses are based 

on the home-school file unless 

otherwise noted. These data are 

available on Tennessee Department of Education websites but for 

ease of access were provided to the 

study team in a single data file.

•	 The Tennessee Department of 

Labor and Workforce Development (2009) provided state and 

regional data on the number of 

workers in each occupation in 

2006, median annual wages for 

each occupation in 2006, and 

projected change in the number 

of workers in each occupation 

over 2006–16. These data are 

available on Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development websites but for ease of 

access were provided to the study 

team in a single data file.

•	 The Common Core of Data 

(U.S. Department of Education 

2008) provided data on school 

addresses and school type for 

each school for 2007/08.

Data analysis. The analysis consisted 

of three main steps:

•	 Matching counties and public 

school districts with regions.

•	 Developing a crosswalk of the 

relationship between program 

areas and occupations in the 

labor market.

•	 Calculating descriptive statistics 

and drawing maps to provide 

a visual representation of the 

results by region.

The study used data for the entire 

universe of regular and special 

education high school graduates in 

Tennessee public schools in 2007/08. 

Unless otherwise noted, all analyses 

were conducted at the region and 

state levels. Tests of statistical significance were not conducted because 

the analyses use population data, not 

a sample of data.

See appendix A for greater detail about 

the data sources and methodology.

technology (13 percent of concentrators and 23 

percent of workers employed in corresponding 

occupations).

High- wage and high- demand occupations varied by region. Technology engineering was the 

only program area that correspond to high-wage 

occupations in all regions; business technology 

and health science occupations were high wage 

in some regions. Up to 4.1 percent of new jobs in 

high-wage occupations projected over 2006–16 

statewide could potentially be filled by 2007/08 

concentrators in corresponding program areas. 

The extent to which the supply of 2007/08 concentrators could meet labor market demands for jobs 

in high-wage occupations over 2006–16, however, 

varied by region, from 0.7 percent to 12.5 percent.

No program area corresponded to a high-demand 

occupation in all regions. Business technology 

and trade and industrial education were the only 

program areas that did not correspond to a highdemand occupation in any region. Up to 7.1 percent 

of new jobs in high- demand occupations projected 

over 2006–16 statewide could potentially be filled by 

2007/08 concentrators in corresponding program 

areas. The extent to which the supply of 2007/08 concentrators could meet labor market demands for jobs 

in high- demand occupations over 2006–16, however, 

varied by region, from 1.4 percent to 41.7 percent.
6 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

How many program areas do Tennessee schools offer, 

and which are most common and least common?

This question defined the percentage of schools 

with at least one student completing a concentration as the metric for availability for program 

areas (see appendix A).2

 On average, Tennessee 

schools offered concentrations in 3.6 program 

areas, ranging from 2.9 in region 13 to 4.7 in 

region 6 (table 1). Further disaggregated by school 

district, the average number of program areas 

offered per school ranged from 0 to 7 (see table B1 

in appendix B). Ninety-four percent of career and 

technical education–only schools3

 and 89 percent 

of non– career and technical education schools had 

at least one concentration.

Statewide, the most common program area in 

non– career and technical education schools was 

family and consumer services, available at 72 percent of schools, followed by trade and industrial 

education and business technology, both available 

at 67 percent of schools. (See table B2 in appendix 

B for the numbers used to calculate these percentages.) These program areas were the three most 

common in 9 of 13 regions.4

 The least common in 

non– career and technical education schools was 

technology engineering, available at 18 percent of 

schools.

How does the percentage of graduates of high 

schools that offered at least one concentration 

vary by program area and region?

The previous question defined program area 

availability by the percentage of schools with at 

least one student completing a concentration. 

However, the number of students with access 

Table 1 

non–career and technical education schools with available program areas in Tennessee, by region, 2007/08 

(percent)

average percentage of schools with available program areas in:

number of 

program 

areas family and Trade and 

region

number of 

schoolsa

available 

per school

agricultural 

education

business consumer health Technology 

technology services science marketing engineering

industrial 

education

1 19 4.1 53 68 68 74 42 21 84

2 29 3.1 69 41 62 34 28 24 48

3 16 4.5 25 75 75 63 75 50 88

4 32 3.9 53 69 84 53 44 16 75

5 31 3.1 26 58 55 52 29 16 71

6 9 4.7 89 89 78 56 44 33 78

7 21 3.2 76 48 76 43 10 24 48

8 42 4.2 67 81 76 55 40 31 71

9 33 3.2 42 73 61 33 30 9 76

10 23 4.0 83 87 74 65 30 0 65

11 30 3.6 73 57 70 60 37 3 63

12 19 4.1 74 63 89 63 42 0 79

13 46 2.9 15 67 74 22 41 17 50

Tennessee 350 3.6 53 67 72 49 37 18 67

Note: A program area is defined as available in a school if any students in grades 9–12 completed a concentration in that program area at that school.

a. Includes both career and technical education–only and non–career and technical education schools.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009).
to each program area can depend on the size of 

the schools and the number of students who can 

complete concentrations at a career and technical 

education–only school.

Program area availability. For this research question, the metric for program area availability was 

estimated at the student level—by examining 

how many graduates attended a school where 

any students in grades 9–12 completed a concentration, regardless of whether instruction was 

provided at a non– career and technical education 

school or a career and technical education–only 

school. Actual availability may be constrained by 

the enrollment each school can accommodate in a 

given year. Data are not available to quantify the 

extent to which space limitations prevent students 

from completing concentrations; however, this is 

not expected to significantly constrain participation in most schools. Indeed, approximately 90 

percent of Tennessee public high school students 

enrolled in a career and technical education 

course in 2008/09 (Tennessee Department of 

Education 2009).

Statewide, 92 percent of graduates were enrolled 

in a school offering trade and industrial education 

and 89 percent were enrolled in a school offering 

family and consumer services, the program areas 

most commonly available (table 2). Approximately 

one-fourth (26 percent) of students were enrolled 

in a school offering technology engineering, the 

program area least commonly available.

Program area availability at the student level 

varied by region. Technology engineering was not 

available to any high school graduates in regions 

10 and 12, but nearly three-fourths (74 percent) 

of graduates in region 3 were enrolled in a school 

that offered it. (See table B5 in appendix B for the 

numbers used to calculate these percentages.)

Concentration completion. In 2007/08, 20,305 

graduates were concentrators, representing 

Table 2 

Tennessee graduates of high schools with an available program area, by program area and region, 2007/08 

(percent, unless otherwise noted)

family and Trade and 

number of agricultural business consumer health Technology industrial 

region graduates education technology services science marketing engineering education

1 3,245 50 81 84 94 58 31 98

2 4,285 93 57 89 69 47 32 85

3 3,285 27 98 98 82 98 74 98

4 4,522 68 79 95 81 65 22 95

5 4,532 38 76 75 62 48 15 88

6 2,047 87 83 84 76 64 32 92

7 2,478 97 50 89 74 12 33 73

8 8,019 65 87 89 67 58 36 92

9 7,538 59 88 75 48 45 19 90

10 2,385 95 94 89 81 50 0 91

11 3,383 91 64 91 88 53 10 93

12 2,505 93 70 100 85 56 0 94

13 8,632 48 84 99 79 78 22 98

Tennessee 56,856 65 80 89 73 58 26 92

Note: Availability was estimated separately for each program area, by examining how many graduates had attended a school where any students in grades 

9–12 completed a concentration in that program area at a non–career and technical education school or a career and technical education–only school.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009).
8 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

31,542 concentrations. Concentrators in multiple 

program areas were double-counted in the number of concentrations. Approximately 36 percent 

of Tennessee high school graduates completed a 

concentration in at least one program area, ranging from 22 percent in region 13 to 55 percent in 

region 12 (table 3). The percentage of high school 

graduates completing concentrations tended to 

be higher for the program areas most commonly 

available to them (see tables 1 and 2). Trade and 

industrial education, available to the highest 

percentage of graduates, was the concentration 

completed by the highest percentage of graduates (20 percent). Least commonly available at 

the school level and student level was technology engineering, with the lowest percentage of 

graduates (1 percent) completing that concentration. (See appendix table B6 for the number of 

observations used to calculate these percentages; 

table B7 replicates the results for the percentage 

of total concentrations in each program area.) 

Similar to the findings reported here, these 

results show that among concentrators, trade 

and industrial education was the most common 

program area and technology engineering was 

the least common.

How does the percentage of high school graduates who 

completed a concentration compare with the percentage 

of workers employed in corresponding occupations?

This question was addressed by calculating an 

index of dissimilarity (see box 1).5

 The index is 

bounded by the values 0 and 1, with lower values 

indicating greater similarity. In this study, the 

index of dissimilarity is the proportion of concentrators who would need to change program 

areas for the distribution of program areas and 

corresponding occupations to be identical among 

concentrators and workers in the labor market. The value 0 indicates that the proportion of 

concentrators in each program area is identical 

to the proportion of workers with occupations 

that correspond to those program areas. The 

Table 3 

Tennessee high school graduates completing at least one concentration, by program area and region, 

2007/08 (percent)

any family and Trade and 

program agricultural business consumer health Technology industrial 

region area education technology services science marketing engineering education

1 37 6 6 7 12 3 1 33

2 38 16 5 11 4 4 2 21

3 44 0 10 10 5 4 3 25

4 38 7 10 11 6 5 1 20

5 41 4 10 7 8 3 1 31

6 46 11 10 9 6 4 2 19

7 35 21 5 17 4 2 2 20

8 35 7 8 9 5 3 3 16

9 24 8 6 5 4 2 0 13

10 51 12 13 13 11 2 0 30

11 43 18 9 14 11 4 0 17

12 55 24 8 24 15 6 0 23

13 22 1 3 6 2 2 0 11

Tennessee 36 9 7 10 6 3 1 20

Note: The percentage of graduates with concentrations in any program area does not sum to that of high school graduates with concentrations in each 

program area because the program area totals double-count students with more than one concentration.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009).
value 1 indicates that no high school graduates 

completed concentrations in program areas that 

correspond to occupations in the workforce (say, 

if all high school concentrations are in agricultural education and business technology but all 

occupations are in health science and marketing). Concentrators in multiple program areas are 

double-counted, so the index could also change if 

these graduates failed to complete multiple concentrations or if any graduates completed another 

concentration in a different program area. 

The statewide index of dissimilarity is 0.18, indicating that 18 percent of concentrators would need 

to change program areas to match the distribution 

of workers in the labor market. The index ranges 

from less than 0.15 in regions 3 and 4 to more than 

0.30 in region 12, indicating that how well concentrators align with the current labor market varies 

by region (map 1).

Statewide, the greatest differences between the 

percentage of concentrators in each program 

area and the percentage of workers employed in 

corresponding occupations were in agricultural 

education (16 percent of concentrators and 1 

percent of workers in corresponding occupations) 

and in business technology (13 percent of concentrators and 23 percent of workers in corresponding 

occupations; table 4). Disaggregating the results 

by region, the discrepancies were even larger. 

(See table B10 in appendix B for a complete list of 

results by region.)

What percentage of jobs in high-wage occupations 

projected over 2006–16 could potentially be filled by 

2007/08 concentrators in corresponding program areas?

The number of program areas that correspond 

to high-wage occupations in each region ranged 

from one to three (table 5). Technology engineering corresponded to high-wage occupations in 

all 13 regions. Business technology (two regions) 

and health science (nine regions) were the only 

other program areas that corresponded to highwage occupations. See table B9 in appendix B 

for a complete list of values used to categorize 

low-, moderate-, and high- wage occupations by 

region.

For all occupations, the median annual wages for 

students with a bachelor’s degree or higher are 

above the high- wage classification of $33,636,6

with occupations that correspond to business 

technology ($64,454) and technology engineering 

($63,381) having the highest7

 (table 6; see table B10 

in appendix B for these results disaggregated by 

region).8

Statewide, the percentage of jobs projected over 

2006–16 in high- wage occupations (17 percent) 

almost tripled the percentage of concentrators in 

corresponding program areas (6 percent; table 7). 

Up to 4.1 percent of projected new jobs in highwage occupations could potentially be filled by 

2007/08 concentrators in corresponding program 

areas, suggesting that high school graduates could 

map 1 

Index of dissimilarity between the percentage of concentrators in each program area and the percentage of 

workers employed in corresponding occupations, by region, 2007/08

4

8 7 2

5

11

6 10

9

1

12

13

3

dissimilarity index

■ less than 0.15

■ 0.15–0.20

■ 0.21–0.25

■ 0.26–0.30

■ greater than 0.30

Note: Lower values indicate greater similarity.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009) and Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development (2009).
10 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table 4 

Tennessee concentrators in each program area and workers employed in corresponding occupations, by 

program area, 2007/08

program area

concentrators

number percent

employees

number percent

 percentage 

point difference

agricultural education 4,944 16 53,706 1 14

business technology 4,132 13 830,960 23 –9

family and consumer services 5,442 17 740,294 20 –3

health science 3,393 11 256,860 7 4

marketing 1,877 6 328,200 9 –3

Technology engineering 613 2 104,396 3 –1

Trade and industrial education 11,141 35 1,365,490 37 –2

Total 31,542 3,679,906

index of dissimilarity 0.18

Note: Percentages may not sum to 100 and percentage point differences shown may differ from those calculated from values in the table because of rounding.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009) and Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development (2009).

Table 5 

Median annual wage classification for occupations that correspond to each program area, by region, 2007/08

region

agricultural 

education

business 

technology

family and 

consumer 

services

health 

science marketing

Technology 

engineering

Trade and 

industrial 

education

1 low moderate low high low high moderate

2 low moderate low high low high moderate

3 low moderate low high moderate high moderate

4 low moderate low high low high moderate

5 low moderate low high low high moderate

6 low moderate low moderate low high moderate

7 moderate high low high moderate high moderate

8 low moderate low high low high moderate

9 low moderate low high moderate high moderate

10 moderate moderate low moderate low high moderate

11 low moderate low moderate low high moderate

12 moderate moderate low moderate low high moderate

13 low high low high low high moderate

Note: High-w age occupations have median annual wages at least 20 percent greater than the regional median; low-wage occupations have median annual 

wages at least 20 percent less than the regional median; all other occupations are classified as moderate wage.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development (2009) using wage classifications from Tennessee State Board of Education. (2008).

fill up to 41 percent of these jobs over the 10-year 

period if the number of concentrators in program 

areas that correspond to high- wage occupations 

remains constant.9

How much the supply of concentrators could 

meet labor market demands for jobs in high-wage 

occupations over 2006–16 varied by region (map 

2). In regions 6 and 12, more than 10 percent of 
Table 6 

Tennessee median annual wages for occupations that correspond to each program area, by highest level of 

education completed, 2007/08 (dollars)

more than high 

at most school but less than at least 

program area high school bachelor’s degree bachelor’s degree overall

agricultural education 22,012 23,688 49,702 22,012

business technology 19,931 30,057 64,554 33,834

family and consumer services 15,702 19,420 42,584 19,420

health science 21,886 34,986 55,904 37,563

marketing 15,702 19,420 48,268 19,420

Technology engineering 32,994 44,874 63,381 61,524

Trade and industrial education 25,549 36,472 39,598 27,269

all 23,767 29,899 50,768 28,700

Note: Median annual wages are weighted by the number of workers employed in each occupation.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009) and Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development (2009).

projected jobs in high-wage occupations could be 

filled by 2007/08 concentrators. If in these regions 

the number of concentrators in program areas 

corresponding to high- wage occupations remains 

constant, up to 100 percent of these jobs could be 

filled by high school graduates over the 10-year 

period. By contrast, in region 11, just 0.7 percent 

of projected jobs in high-wage occupations could 

be filled by 2007/08 concentrators, suggesting that 

high school graduates could fill just 7 percent of 

projected jobs in high-wage occupations if the 

number of concentrators remains constant. In 

region 12, the number of jobs in the one highwage program area, technology engineering, is 

projected to be the same in 2006 and 2016; no high 

school graduates completed a concentration in this 

program area in 2008.

What percentage of jobs in high- demand occupations 

projected over 2006–16 could potentially be filled by 

2007/08 concentrators in corresponding program areas?

The number of program areas that corresponded 

to high- demand occupations in each region 

ranged from one to four, and seven regions had 

three program areas that corresponded to highdemand occupations (table 8). No program area 

corresponded to a high- demand occupation in all 

regions. Occupations in health science were high 

 demand most often, in 12 of 13 regions.

The demand for some occupations varied by 

region. Occupations in agricultural education were 

high demand in seven regions but low demand in 

five. Occupations in business technology and in 

trade and industrial education were the only ones 

not high demand in any region.

Demand does not always correspond to wages (see 

table 5). Occupations in agricultural education 

were high demand but low wage in five regions. 

Similarly, occupations in family and consumer 

services, high demand in eight regions, were low 

wage in all regions. Occupations in technology engineering show the opposite pattern—low demand 

in seven regions but high wage in all regions. See 

table B11 in appendix B for the values used to 

categorize low-, moderate-, and high-d emand occupations for each region.

Statewide, the percentage of projected jobs in 

high- demand occupations (31 percent) was greater 

than that of concentrators in corresponding program areas (18 percent; table 9). Up to 7.1 percent 

of new jobs in high- demand occupations projected 

over 2006–16 could potentially be filled by 2007/08 
12 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table 7 

Projected jobs in high- wage occupations over 2006–16 that could be filled by 2007/08 concentrators, by 

region

region program area

projected new jobs in 

high- wage occupations 

over 2006–16

number percent

2008 high school 

graduates who 

concentrated in 

corresponding 

program areas

number percent

projected jobs 

in high-wage 

occupations over 

2006–16 that could 

be filled by 2007/08 

concentrators 

(percent)

1 health science, technology engineering 6,460 26 426 13 6.6

2 health science, technology engineering 3,040 11 220 5 7.2

3 health science, technology engineering 5,880 14 277 8 4.7

4 health science, technology engineering 3,570 10 287 6 8.0

5 health science, technology engineering 7,200 19 386 9 5.4

6 Technology engineering 300 3 32 2 10.7

7 business technology, health science, 

technology engineering 3,000 39 276 11 9.2

8 health science, technology engineering 14,100 15 629 8 4.5

9 health science, technology engineering 10,735 11 313 4 2.9

10 Technology engineering 0 0 1 0 0.0

11 Technology engineering 260 1 2 0 0.7

12 Technology engineering 40 0 5 0 12.5

13 business technology, health science, 

technology engineering 26,660 51 442 5 1.7

Tennessee Varies by region 81,245 17 3,296 6 4.1

Note: Differences may be greater or less than expected due to rounding. High- wage occupations are identified separately for each region. Values for Tennessee are aggregates of regional values. The percentage of projected jobs in high- wage occupations is the number of projected jobs in high-wage occupations 

divided by the total number of projected jobs. The percentage of graduates who concentrated in corresponding program areas is the number of graduates 

with a concentration in a program area that corresponds to a high- wage occupation divided by the total number of high school graduates.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009) and Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development (2009) using wage classifications from Tennessee State Board of Education (2008).

4

8 7 2

5

11

6 10

9

1

12

13

3

■ less than 1.0

■ 1.0–4.0

■ 4.1–7.0

■ 7.1–10.0

■ greater than 10.0

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009) and Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development (2009).
STudy limiTaTionS

Table 8 

Projected job demand over 2006–16, by corresponding program area and region, 2007/08

region

agricultural 

education

business 

technology

family and 

consumer 

services health science marketing

Technology 

engineering

Trade and 

industrial 

education

1 low moderate high high high low low

2 high moderate low high moderate moderate moderate

3 moderate moderate moderate high low low moderate

4 high moderate high high moderate low moderate

5 low moderate high high moderate high low

6 low low high high low moderate moderate

7 high moderate high high moderate low low

8 high moderate moderate high moderate high low

9 high moderate high moderate moderate high low

10 high low high high low low low

11 low moderate moderate high low low low

12 low low high high low low moderate

13 high moderate moderate high low high low

Note: High- demand occupations have a projected change in employment over 2006–16 at least 20 percent greater than that for all occupations in the 

region; low-demand occupations have a projected change in employment over 2006–16 at least 20 percent less than that for all occupations in the region; 

all other occupations are classified as moderate demand. Demand classifications for corresponding program areas are identified separately for each region.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development (2009) using demand calculations based on 

Tennessee State Board of Education (2008).

concentrators in corresponding program areas, 

suggesting that high school graduates could fill up 

to 71 percent of these jobs over the 10-year period 

if the number of these concentrators remains 

constant.10

How well the supply of concentrators in 2007/08 

matched projected jobs in high- demand occupations over 2006–16 varied by region (map 3). In 

regions 2, 7, 10, and 12, more than 10 percent of 

projected jobs in high- demand occupations could 

be filled by 2007/08 concentrators. If in these 

regions the number of concentrators in program 

areas that correspond to high- demand concentrations remains constant, up to 100 percent of these 

jobs could be filled by high school graduates over 

2006–16. By contrast, in region 13, just 1.4 percent 

of projected jobs in high-d emand occupations 

could be filled by 2007/08 concentrators, suggesting that high school graduates could fill just 14 

percent of projected jobs in high-d emand occupations if the number of these concentrators remains 

constant.

sTudy lIMITATIons

Several limitations affected this study and inform 

how the results are interpreted:

•	 Data on high school graduate concentrators 

could not be linked to postsecondary education enrollment. Many program areas require 

training beyond high school for students to 

qualify for high- wage or high- demand occupations in a related field. Among the students 

who attend college, many will not enter the 

workforce until at least several years after 

graduating high school, possibly overestimating in the near term the alignment of concentrations with occupations in corresponding 

program areas. However, that the occupation 

projections go to 2016 mitigates this timing 

issue, so many 2007/08 high school graduates 

will enter the workforce close to the last year 

of the occupation projections. Still, not all 

students who complete a specific concentration will seek an occupation that corresponds 
14 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table 9 

Projected jobs in high- demand occupations over 2006–16 that could be filled by 2007/08 concentrators, by 

region

region

1 f

program area

amily and consumer 

services, health science, 

marketing

projected new jobs over 

2006–16 in high-demand 

occupations

number percent

16,400 65

2008 high school 

graduates who 

concentrated in 

corresponding 

program areas

number percent

709 22

projected jobs in highdemand occupations 

over 2006–16 that could 

be filled by 2008 career 

and technical education 

graduates (percent)

4.3

2 agricultural education, 

health science 3,490 13 856 20 24.5

3 health science 5,230 12 170 5 3.3

4 agricultural education, 

family and consumer 

services, health science 14,530 39 1,061 23 7.3

5 family and consumer 

services, health science, 

technology engineering 17,060 44 706 16 4.1

6 family and consumer 

services, health science 4,380 37 293 14 6.7

7 agricultural education, 

family and consumer 

services, health science 4,230 54 1,053 42 24.9

8 agricultural education, 

health science, 

technology engineering 16,110 17 1,212 15 7.5

9 agricultural education, 

family and consumer 

services, technology 

engineering 34,585 35 1,001 13 2.9

10 agricultural education, 

family and consumer 

services, health science 3,760 84 1,568 66 41.7

11 health science 4,390 24 376 11 8.6

12 family and consumer 

services, health science 3,180 38 964 38 30.3

13 agricultural education, 

health science, 

technology engineering 15,340 29 218 3 1.4

Tennessee Varies by region 142,685 31 10,187 18 7.1

Note: Differences may be greater or less than expected because of rounding. High- demand occupations are identified separately for each region. The 

percentage of projected jobs in high- demand occupations is the number of projected jobs in high-d emand occupations divided by the total number of projected jobs. The percentage of graduates who concentrated in corresponding program areas is the number of graduates with a concentration in a program 

area that corresponds to a high- demand occupation divided by the total number of high school graduates.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009) and Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development (2009) using demand calculations from Tennessee State Board of Education (2008).
STudy limiTaTionS

4

8 7 2

5

11

6 10

9

1

12

13

3

■ less than 1.0

■ 1.0–4.0

■ 4.1–7.0

■ 7.1–10.0

■ greater than 10.0

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009) and Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development (2009).

to that program area, which could further 

overestimate the supply of potential workers. 

Likewise, students who do not complete a 

concentration could seek an occupation corresponding to a program area.

•	 The results also did not account for student 

mobility across or outside Tennessee. Regions 

with high demand for a particular occupation could perhaps fill labor market demands 

by attracting students from other regions or 

states. Yet even though students might move 

for employment opportunities, many are 

likely to remain in the same state and region. 

Indeed, approximately 70 percent of people 

ages 15–24 in 1995 had remained in the 

same residence or moved within the county 

between 1995 and 2000 (when they were ages 

20–29; Franklin 2003).

•	 Occupational projections were based on current employment data and employer surveys of future employment needs. The data, 

however, cannot predict what new industries 

might surface in a region or account for other 

factors affecting demand and competitive 

position. As high school career and technical education programs prepare students 

for near-term and emerging labor market 

demands, the long-term projections might 

not fully reflect these demands if new industries develop or technology changes, affecting 

employment in specific occupations.

•	 Wage data were not available for all occupations in all regions, due primarily to confidentiality reporting requirements. Procedures for 

handling missing data may introduce some 

uncertainty when identifying high- wage program areas (see appendix A).

•	 There was also uncertainty in matching 

program areas with corresponding occupations. Some program areas have a fairly 

straightforward match. (For example, nursing 

matches the health science program area.) 

Occupations in such areas as information 

technology could possibly align with the 

business technology program area or the 

technology engineering program area. Where 

possible, each occupation was matched with 

the single most relevant program area, to 

avoid double counting; where not possible, the 

occupation was matched with multiple program areas. So the estimates of the matches of 

concentrations to projections of high- demand 

or high- wage occupations are more precise 

for some program areas than for others. Less 

than 1 percent of workers were employed in 

occupations that could not be matched to a 

program area. Appendix C replicates tables 

4–9 using an alternate crosswalk for occupations where the appropriate corresponding 

program areas were less certain. Results at 

the state level were not substantively different 

using the alternate crosswalk, suggesting that 

double counting does not significantly affect 
16 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

the findings at the state level. Some of the 

region-level findings, however, show greater 

variation.11

•	 The measures of how much program areas focus 

on high- wage and high-d emand occupations 

are not necessarily good measures of whether 

these programs increase student earnings. For 

example, program areas focused on moderatewage occupations may help students acquire 

useful skills and allow them to increase their 

earnings by a larger amount than program 

areas focused on higher-wage occupations.

•	 Concentrators in multiple program areas were 

double counted: projections of the percentage 

of jobs in high- wage and high- demand occupations that could be filled by high school 

graduates overestimate the actual number of 

concentrators. These estimates thus assume 

that graduates could take multiple jobs in different program areas.

Despite these limitations, the data provide for 

each region the best available estimates of participation in concentrations in each program area 

among high school graduates and how much these 

concentrations align with high- wage and highdemand occupations. This information can be a 

good start for identifying areas where availability 

and participation in concentrations might not 

align with labor market demands.
APPendIx A 

dATA sources And MeThodology

This appendix describes data sources and quality, how public school districts and regions were 

matched, the development of a crosswalk between 

career and technical education program areas and 

occupations, and the methodology for calculating 

descriptive statistics.

Data sources

The study uses data for the entire universe of regular and special education high school graduates in 

Tennessee public schools for 2007/08. The available 

data cannot be used to track a single cohort of students over time. This study focuses on Tennessee’s 

public school system—approximately 12 percent 

of Tennessee students graduate from private 

schools (U.S. Department of Education 2008b), 

and nation wide, almost 3 percent of students are 

home-schooled (U.S. Department of Education 

2007). Tests of statistical significance were not 

conducted because the analyses used population 

data, not a sample of data.

The study used three data sources:

•	 The Tennessee Department of Education 

(2009) provided school-level data for 2007/08 

on the total number of high school graduates, a nonduplicated count of high school 

graduates completing a career and technical 

education concentration at any time in high 

school, a nonduplicated count of students in 

grades 9–12 completing a concentration in the 

2007/08 school year, the number of concentrations completed by 2007/08 high school 

graduates in each program area at any time 

in high school, and the number of concentrations completed by students in grades 9–12 in 

each program area in 2007/08.

Separate files were provided with school-level 

data on concentrations based on the school 

where students completed them (deliveryschool file) and the school where students 

received their high school diplomas (homeschool file). Unless otherwise noted, all analyses were based on the home-school file. These 

data are available on Tennessee Department 

of Education websites but for ease of access 

were provided to the study team in a single 

data file.

•	 The Tennessee Department of Labor and 

Workforce Development (2009) provided state 

and regional data on the number of workers 

in each occupation in 2006, median annual wages in each occupation in 2006, and 

projected change in the number of workers in 

each occupation over 2006–16. These data are 

available on Tennessee Department of Labor 

and Workforce Development websites but for 

ease of access were provided to the study team 

in a single data file.

•	 The Common Core of Data (U.S. Department 

of Education 2008) provided data on school 

addresses and school type for each school for 

2007/08.

Data quality

School-level data from the Tennessee Department 

of Education (2009). The researchers checked for 

missing data by comparing the number of schools 

in the Tennessee Department of Education files 

with the number of schools in the Common Core 

of Data that included grade 12. Sixty-one schools 

in the Common Core of Data were missing data 

on the number of total graduates and the number 

of concentrations completed by graduates, 31 of 

them designated a school type other than “regular 

school.” This group consisted of special education, vocational, and other/alternative schools, 

which students may attend in addition to their 

regular school. Another 27 schools were categorized as “regular schools” or were missing school 

type but had names indicating that the school 

was “alternative,” was “vocational,” was an “adult 

high school,” or did not include grade 12 (elementary, middle, or junior high schools). It was 

assumed that these schools were missing from the 
18 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Tennessee Department of Education file because 

students would be counted as graduates at their 

regular school rather than at these specialized 

schools. Three schools remained with missing 

data in this file on the number of total graduates 

and the number of concentrations completed by 

graduates, but none were missing data on the 

number of concentrations completed by students 

in grades 9–12, so it was assumed they had zero 

graduates and zero graduate concentrators in 

2007/08.

The home-school file also includes five schools 

with no regular or special education graduates. 

These schools awarded only certificates or General Equivalency Diplomas in 2007/08. They were 

dropped from the sample.

The final sample included 333 schools with records 

in at least one of the five spreadsheets in the Tennessee Department of Education data file (high 

school graduates, nonduplicated concentrators, 

nonduplicated concentrators in grades 9–12, 

concentrations in each program area for graduates, and concentrations in each program area for 

students in grades 9–12). Ninety-one percent of 

schools (304) had records in all five files and were 

not missing data for any variable. The remaining 

29 schools, missing values in one or more career 

and technical education files, were coded as zero 

for the corresponding variables because it appeared they were likely to have little to no participation for the year. Three percent of schools (9) 

had data on the number of high school graduates 

but were missing data in one or more career and 

technical education files. Six percent of schools 

(20) had data on the number of high school graduates but were missing data in all the career and 

technical education files. Each school missing 

career and technical education data had fewer 

than 50 graduates.

The variable for the total number of high school 

graduates includes the number of regular and 

special education graduates in each school. These 

data, used for No Child Left Behind Act reporting, 

are assumed to be high quality.

The variable for the total number of concentrators 

is a nonduplicated count of the total number of high 

school graduates who completed a concentration in 

any program area. These records indicate whether 

graduates completed a concentration at any time 

in grades 9–12. It includes all 2007/08 high school 

graduates, regardless of how many years it took 

them to graduate. There is also a variable for the 

total number of concentrators in grades 9–12 in 

2007/08. Each year, career and technical education 

teachers in each school report the names and identification numbers of all their students who complete 

concentrations. The school’s career and technical 

education director checks the data and approves its 

accuracy. The Tennessee Department of Education 

aggregates the concentrator data to the school level, 

eliminating all duplicate identification numbers so 

that each student is counted once as a concentrator. 

The data, self-reported by teachers, are subject to 

error, as teachers may not always be certain whether 

some students completed all the requirements for a 

concentration. Still, the teacher is “the person who 

has the best knowledge regarding the data for each 

student” (Tennessee Department of Education n.d. 

a), and the data are verified by the director, so there 

should be no substantial inaccuracies. Further, the 

data for these variables are used for Perkins reporting, so they are assumed to be high quality.

The school-level data also included variables for 

the total number of concentrations completed in 

each program area (by graduates and by students 

in grades 9–12). These data were collected through 

the same teacher-reporting process described 

above, though duplicate student identification 

numbers were not removed by the Tennessee 

Department of Education.

There are three reasons why these totals could 

include duplicate records for the same student:

•	 Students with concentrations in more than 

one program area were counted in the totals 

for each program area they complete.

•	 Tennessee offers different programs of study12

for each program area. Students who complete 
more than one program of study within a program area may be counted more than once as 

a concentrator in the same program area. For 

example, there are similar requirements for 

the programs of study “plant systems-horticulture production” and “plant systems-landscaping and turf science.” A student who completes 

the courses required for both programs of 

study may be counted twice as a concentrator 

in the agricultural education program area.

•	 Students may be taking career and technical 

education courses with more than one teacher 

when they complete their concentration. 

When teachers complete their concentrator reports, they are instructed to designate 

students as concentrators only if they had not 

already been classified as a concentrator in 

the same program area. In practice, however, 

more than one teacher may count the same 

student as a concentrator in the same program area.

It is not possible to distinguish the number of 

records attributed to each source of duplicate 

counts or to create a nonduplicated count 

for each program area. Statewide, there are 

20,305 graduate concentrators, based on the 

nonduplicated counts (total concentrators), 

and 31,542 concentrations completed by graduates in all program areas (total concentrations), meaning that there are 11,237 duplicate 

student records in the variable for concentrations by program area (total concentrations).

Workforce data from the Tennessee Department 

of Labor and Workforce Development (2009). The 

Tennessee Department of Workforce Development 

provided two region-level files with workforce 

data. The first included the number of workers 

employed in 2006 and the projected number of 

workers in 2016 for each occupation in the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC).13 The department collects initial data for the employment 

projections from current employment data and 

employer surveys of future employment needs. 

It next calculates statistical projections for each 

occupation, based on change factors developed 

by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. These factors 

consider anticipated workforce changes, such as 

expected openings from people permanently leaving the workforce because of such factors as death, 

retirement, and net transfers of workers among 

jobs. The projections, however, are limited. They 

cannot predict what new industries might surface 

in a region or account for other factors that might 

affect demand or competitive position. To protect 

confidentiality, employment data were suppressed 

when three or fewer employers reported occupational employment for a cell, one employer made 

up more than 50 percent of the employment for 

a cell, or two employers made up more than 75 

percent of the employment for a cell.

The original employment data file from the Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development had duplicate employment counts from 

the multiple levels of aggregation within the SOC 

codes. (That is, the same worker was counted up 

to four times from the major group, minor group, 

broad occupation, and detailed occupation.) The 

principal investigator developed a program in 

Stata to calculate a nonduplicated count of the 

number of workers and projected workers in each 

level of aggregation within the codes. These counts 

were read for accuracy by checking whether the 

total number of nonduplicated counts in all codes 

equaled the total employment in the corresponding major group (from the original data).

The totals in the major groups appeared slightly 

undercounted in some of the original records 

(expected, because of the cells suppressed for 

confidentiality reporting requirements), but the 

difference was within 10 in most cases. In 12 cases, 

the total employment in the major group from the 

original records undercounted by more than 30 

workers. After checking the raw data, it appeared 

the calculated values were more accurate, as the 

disaggregated counts did not sum to the total 

occupational counts in the original data. A new 

variable was created for the total employment in 

each major code, based on calculations from the 

nonduplicated counts within that major code.
20 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

The second Tennessee Department of Labor and 

Workforce Development data file included mean 

and median annual wages for each SOC occupational code. Values for the wage variables were 

calculated by the state, based on data from the Occupational Employment Statistics survey, an ongoing federal-state cooperative program between the 

Bureau of Labor Statistics and the department. 

The survey collects data from a random sample of 

one-third of Tennessee employers. More detailed 

information on this survey can be found at http://

www.bls.gov/oes/.

Also in the second data file, wages were reported 

only for major groups and detailed occupations. 

Since wages were not reported for minor groups 

or broad occupations, the values for the corresponding major group in the same region were 

substituted. Other codes missing wage data were 

handled as follows:

•	 Across all regions, in 2 records (out of 308) 

were wages missing for a major group. For 

these two, the mean wages for the corresponding major group at the state level were 

substituted for the missing wage variables for 

the major group at the region level.

•	 There are 9,419 records for detailed occupational codes by region, 65 percent (6,153) 

having values for the wage variables. Most of 

the records missing data were so because of 

confidentiality requirements that prevent the 

reporting of occupational wages for survey 

response rates of less than 75 percent and for 

occupations with fewer than 20 workers in a 

region. For 28 percent of the detailed occupational codes (2,652), the missing wage variables 

for the region were replaced with the values of 

the corresponding detailed occupational code 

at the state level. For 7 percent of them (614), 

the missing wage variables for the region were 

replaced with the values of the corresponding 

major group in the same region.

School-level data from the Common Core of Data 

(2008). Eight schools in the school-level Tennessee 

Department of Education data were not included 

in the Common Core of Data. Data for these 

schools were taken from the Institute of Education Sciences “Search for Public Schools” website 

(http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/), the Tennessee Department of Education website, and the 

individual schools’ websites.

The quality of the school-type variable in the Common Core of Data was also examined. Twenty-two 

schools in the Common Core of Data were designated “vocational schools.” Officials at the Tennessee Department of Education’s career and technical education division were asked to verify this list 

for completeness and accuracy. They indicated that 

five of these schools were inactive or nonpublic 

vocational centers, so those records were dropped 

from the sample. The remaining 17 were categorized as career and technical education–only 

schools in this study; all others, non– career and 

technical education schools.

Matching counties and public school districts with regions

The counties for each public school district in the 

Tennessee Department of Education (2009) data 

were matched with the county in the corresponding region from the Tennessee Department of 

Labor and Workforce Development (2009) data. 

This was straightforward—no districts spanned 

more than one county and no counties spanned 

more than one region.14 Table A1 shows by region 

all the counties and public school districts that 

served students in grade 12.

Crosswalk between program areas and occupations

A crosswalk is a tabular representation of the 

relationship between two or more sets of data. 

For this study, a crosswalk was developed between Tennessee’s career and technical education 

program areas and the corresponding SOC codes 

for related occupations in the labor market. Where 

possible, each occupation was matched with the 

single most relevant program area to avoid double 

counting; where not possible, the occupation was 

matched with multiple program areas. Less than 1 
Table a1 

counties and public school districts that served students in grade 12 in each Tennessee region, 2007/08

county School district

region 1

carter carter county, elizabethton city

Johnson Johnson county

Sullivan bristol city, Kingsport city, Sullivan county

unicoi unicoi county

Washington Johnson city, Washington county

region 2

claiborne claiborne county

cocke cocke county

grainger grainger county

greene greene county, greeneville city

hamblen hamblen county

hancock hancock county

hawkins hawkins county

Jefferson Jefferson county

Sevier Sevier county

union union county

region 3

Knox Knox county, 

Tennessee high School for the deaf

region 4

anderson anderson county, oak ridge city

blount alcoa city, blount county, maryville city

campbell campbell county

cumberland cumberland county

loudon lenoir city, loudon county

monroe monroe county, Sweetwater city

morgan morgan county

roane roane county

Scott oneida city, Scott county

region 5

bledsoe bledsoe county

bradley bradley county, cleveland city

hamilton hamilton county

marion marion county, richard city elementary

mcminn mcminn county

meigs meigs county

polk polk county

rhea rhea county

Sequatchie Sequatchie county

county School district

region 6

bedford bedford county

coffee coffee county, Tullahoma city

franklin franklin county

grundy grundy county

lincoln lincoln county

moore moore county

Warren Warren county

region 7

cannon cannon county

clay clay county

deKalb deKalb county

fentress fentress county, alvin c. york institute

Jackson Jackson county

macon macon county

overton overton county

pickett pickett county

putnam putnam county

Smith Smith county

Van buren Van buren county

White White county

region 8

cheatham cheatham county

dickson dickson county

houston houston county

humphreys humphreys county

montgomery montgomery county

robertson robertson county

Stewart Stewart county

Sumner Sumner county

Williamson Williamson county

region 9

davidson davidson county

rutherford rutherford county

Trousdale Trousdale county

Wilson Wilson county

region 10

giles giles county

hickman hickman county

lawrence lawrence county

(conTinued)
22 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table a1 (conTinued) 

counties and public school districts that served students in grade 12 in each Tennessee region, 2007/08

county School district

lewis lewis county

marshall marshall county

maury maury county

perry perry county

Wayne Wayne county

region 11

benton benton county

carroll hollow rock-bruceton, huntington Special, 

mcKenzie Special, South carroll Special, 

West carroll Special

chester chester county

decatur decatur county

hardeman hardeman county

hardin hardin county

haywood haywood county

henderson henderson county

county School district

henry henry county

madison Jackson-madison consolidated

mcnairy mcnairy county

Weakley Weakley county

region 12

crockett crockett county

dyer dyer county, dyersburg city

gibson bradford Special, gibson Special, humboldt 

city, milan city Special, Trenton city

lake lake county

lauderdale lauderdale county

obion obion county, union city

Tipton Tipton county

region 13

fayette fayette county

Shelby memphis city, Shelby county

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009), Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development 

(2009), and Common Core of Data (2008).

percent of workers were in occupations that could 

not be matched with any program area (SOC code 

27-2000 for “entertainers and performers, sports 

and related workers”).

To create the crosswalk, it was necessary to understand the types of occupations in each SOC code 

and the content of each program area. The Bureau 

of Labor Statistics website (http://www.bls.gov/

soc/home.htm) provided an occupation title, an 

occupation definition, and examples for each code. 

The Tennessee Department of Education website 

(http://www.tennessee.gov/education/cte/index.

shtml) provided pages for each program area, with 

links to curriculum course descriptions. In addition, a website developed by the Tennessee Board 

of Regents and the Tennessee Department of 

Education (http://pathways.tbr.edu/programs.php) 

provided a description of each program of study 

in each program area and a list of related occupations. Table A2 shows a list of all the programs of 

study in each program area.

The crosswalk was coded independently for all 

the SOC occupational codes and program areas. 

(See box A1 for the background and experience 

of the coders.) Table A3 summarizes the level of 

agreement between the researchers in the primary 

program areas associated with each occupational 

code. For 66 percent of the codes, the researchers 

agreed completely on the crosswalk classifications. 

For 28 percent, the researchers agreed on one 

primary program area but disagreed on matching 

the occupation with multiple program areas. For 6 

percent, the researchers disagreed completely.

To resolve the disagreements, a combined crosswalk was created by reexamining the coding materials and discussing the rationales for each classification. The disagreements were also reviewed by a 

senior labor economist with expertise in career and 

technical education and job-training programs. 

In some cases, these reviews and discussions led 

the researchers to reconsider their initial coding 

and agree on a combined crosswalk decision. In 

others, there was still some disagreement about 
Table a2 

Programs of study in each program area

program of study

Agricultural 

education

Business 

technology

Family and 

consumer 

services

Health 

science Marketing

Technology 

engineering

Trade and 

industrial 

education

Agriculture, food and natural resources ✔

agribusiness, food products and process 

systems ✔

animal systems—pre-veterinary ✔

animal systems—production animals ✔

environmental and natural resources 

systems ✔

plant systems—horticulture production ✔

plant systems—landscaping and turf science ✔

power, structures and technical systems ✔

Architecture and construction ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

construction carpentry ✔

construction electrical ✔

construction hVac/r ✔

construction masonry and concrete ✔

construction plumbing ✔

construction welding ✔

design and preconstruction ✔ ✔

interior design ✔

landscape design ✔ ✔

Arts, audio/video technology and 

communications ✔ ✔

audio technology ✔

design communications ✔

fashion design ✔

graphic communications ✔

Journalism and broadcasting ✔

Business, management, and administration ✔

administrative and information support ✔

business analysis ✔

business financial management and 

accounting ✔

business management ✔

communications development ✔

human resources ✔

Education and training ✔ ✔

pre-K early childhood education ✔

Teaching training services ✔ ✔

(conTinued)
24 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table a2 (conTinued) 

Programs of study in each program area

program of study

Agricultural 

education

Business 

technology

Family and 

consumer 

services

Health 

science Marketing

Technology 

engineering

Trade and 

industrial 

education

Finance ✔

banking and finance ✔

financial planning ✔

Government and public administration ✔ ✔

national security ✔

public/nonprofit management and 

administration ✔

Health science ✔

biotechnology research and development ✔

diagnostic services ✔

health informatics ✔

Support services ✔

Therapeutic emergency services ✔

Therapeutic services ✔

Hospitality and tourism ✔ ✔ ✔

food and beverage services ✔ ✔

hospitality management and lodging 

services ✔

recreation, attractions, sports and 

entertainment ✔

Travel and tourism ✔

Human services ✔ ✔

consumer services ✔

counseling and mental health services ✔

early childhood development and services ✔

family and community services ✔

nutritional counseling ✔

personal care services ✔

Information technology ✔ ✔ ✔

electronic publishing ✔

interactive multimedia ✔

networking systems ✔ ✔

Web design ✔ ✔ ✔

Law, public safety, corrections and security ✔ ✔

law enforcement services ✔

Security and protection services ✔ ✔

Manufacturing ✔ ✔

engineering ✔ ✔

operations and maintenance ✔

(conTinued)
Table a2 (conTinued) 

Programs of study in each program area

program of study

Agricultural 

education

Business 

technology

Family and 

consumer 

services

Health 

science Marketing

Technology 

engineering

Trade and 

industrial 

education

precision productions ✔ ✔

production design ✔ ✔

Marketing, sales and service ✔

channel management ✔

marketing communication ✔

marketing management ✔

marketing research ✔

merchandising ✔

Selling and sales management ✔

Science, technology, engineering and 

mathematics ✔

engineering and technology ✔

Science and mathematics ✔

Transportation, distribution, and logistics ✔

automotive technology ✔

aviation flight ✔

aviation maintenance ✔

collision repair technology ✔

diesel technology ✔

leisure craft/small engine technology ✔

Source: Author’s analysis based on Tennessee Department of Education n.d. b.

box a1 

Background and experience of 

the crosswalk coders

Christine Mokher, Ph.D. Dr. Mokher 

served as principal investigator for 

this study and was a coder for its 

crosswalk. She holds a Ph.D. in educational leadership and policy studies

and recently completed research on 

the effects of career and technical 

education course-taking on student 

outcomes, using Florida student transcript data, for the U.S. Department 

of Education’s National Assessment 

of Career and Technical Education. 

As part of this project, she developed 

an additional crosswalk, between 

North American Industry Classification System codes and program areas 

from the National Center for Education Statistics Secondary School 

Taxonomy (Bradby 2007).

Shira Solomon, Ph.D. Dr. Solomon 

served as a researcher for this study 

and was a coder for its crosswalk. 

Holding a Ph.D. in educational evaluation and research, she works with 

Regional Educational Laboratory 

Appalachia on projects related to 

data-driven decisionmaking.

Louis Jacobson, Ph.D. Dr. Jacobson 

reviewed and commented on the 

study’s crosswalk and advised on 

disagreements in the coding process. A senior labor economist with 

expertise in career and technical 

education and job training programs, he has more than 30 years’ 

experience in evaluating education 

and labor market programs. His 

work appears in peer-reviewed journals including American Economic 

Review, Journal of Econometrics, 

and Industrial and Labor Relations 

Review.
26 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table a3 

level of agreement among coders in the primary career and technical education program area associated 

with each occupational standard of classification code

level of agreement number percent

complete agreement—identical coding for primary program area(s) 619 66

partial agreement—identical coding on one program area but 

disagreement on matching the occupation with multiple program areas 262 28

complete disagreement—different coding for primary program area(s) 53 6

Total 934 100

Source: Author’s calculations based on the two crosswalks developed by the study researchers.

assigning multiple program areas to a single SOC 

code. If there was agreement on the match between 

the code and one program area, that program area 

was assigned to the combined crosswalk. If there 

was disagreement on a second or third program 

area that could be matched with a code, the other 

program areas were added to an alternate version 

of the crosswalk. The alternate crosswalk had 84 

codes where an agreement could not be reached—9 

percent of all codes in the state (n = 934). All 

analyses in the report were based on the combined 

crosswalk and replicated in appendix C using an 

alternate crosswalk as a sensitivity test.

Methodology for descriptive statistics

This section reviews the methodology for calculating the descriptive statistics for each research 

question. Unless otherwise noted, all analyses 

were conducted at the region and state levels.

The percentages calculated use the total number 

of graduates, total concentrators (nonduplicated 

count of the high school graduates who completed a concentration in any program area in 

high school), or total concentrations (sum of the 

total number of concentrations completed by high 

school graduates in each program area in high 

school, which may include duplicate records for 

the same student; table A4).

The availability of program areas, based on the 

average number of program areas per school. This 

question examined school-level availability of each 

program area by district and region. Graduates 

could have completed concentrations through 

courses offered at their primary high school, or they 

may have had the option to take career and technical education courses at a career and technical 

education–only school. Career and technical education data from the delivery-school file was used to 

determine whether any students in grades 9–12 

completed a concentration in each program area 

through instruction provided at that school. This 

measure was used as a proxy of the general availability of program areas, though actual availability 

may be constrained by the number of enrollments 

Table a4 

numbers of Tennessee high school graduates, 

concentrators, and concentrations

region graduates concentrators concentrations

1 3,245 1,213 2,209

2 4,285 1,628 2,690

3 3,285 1,453 1,919

4 4,522 1,729 2,690

5 4,532 1,859 2,885

6 2,047 933 1,230

7 2,478 877 1,780

8 8,019 2,837 4,138

9 7,538 1,812 2,880

10 2,385 1,216 1,931

11 3,383 1,445 2,498

12 2,505 1,378 2,478

13 8,632 1,925 2,214

Tennessee 56,856 20,305 31,542

Source: Author’s analysis based on data from Tennessee Department of 

Education (2009).
Appendix A. dAtA sources And methodology 27

districts can accommodate in a given year. A set of 

dichotomous variables was created for each school 

indicating the availability of each program area.

The number of schools offering each program 

area was divided by the total number of schools to 

calculate the percentage of schools with concentrations in each program area. The supplemental 

tables in appendix B disaggregate the results for 

career and technical education–only and non– 

career and technical education schools and report 

the average number of program areas available per 

school at the district level.15

The availability of program areas, based on the percentage of graduates enrolled in a school in a district 

offering each program area. This question examined the availability of each program area, based 

on the percentage of high school graduates enrolled 

in a school offering each one, either through a 

non– career and technical education school or a 

career and technical education–only school. For 

this question, the dichotomous variables indicating 

program area availability (for the first question) 

were merged with the home-school file containing 

the number of high school graduates to determine 

the percentage of graduates with access to each 

program area. This step was necessary—students 

who took career and technical education courses 

at a career and technical education–only school 

were counted as graduates only at their non–c areer 

and technical education school.16 Non–career and 

technical education schools were matched with 

any available career and technical education–only 

schools in the district, and a new set of dichotomous variables was created, indicating whether 

each program area was available at the non– career 

and technical education school or a corresponding career and technical education–only school in 

the district. The number of graduates attending 

a school where at least one student completed a 

concentration in a given program area was divided 

by the total number of graduates in the school to 

calculate the percentage of high school graduates 

enrolled in a school offering each program area. 

Table B5 in appendix B provides the numbers of 

high school graduates enrolled in a school in a 

district offering each program area, used to calculate the percentages in table 2 of the main report.

The alignment of concentrators in program areas 

with workers employed in corresponding occupations. This question examined how the percentage of graduate concentrators in each program 

area compared with the percentage of workers 

employed in corresponding occupations. It was 

addressed by calculating an index of dissimilarity, 

an indicator commonly used to examine differences across two groups in a distribution (Jacobs 

1995; Turner and Bowen 1999). In this study, the 

index of dissimilarity represents the proportion of 

concentrators who would need to change program 

areas for the distribution of program areas and 

corresponding occupations to be identical among 

concentrators and workers in the labor market. 

The index of dissimilarity is calculated as:

N c

0.5 i w − i

i=1 C W ,

where i is the identifier for each program area, 

N is the total number of program areas, ci

 is the 

number of concentrators in program area i, C is 

the total number of concentrators, wi

 is the number of workers employed in an occupation that 

corresponds to program area i, and W is the total 

number of workers employed in all occupations.

The index was calculated by taking the absolute 

value of the difference between the percentage 

of concentrators in each program area and the 

percentage of workers in each corresponding occupation. The differences were summed, and the 

total was multiplied by 0.5. The index is bounded 

by the values 0 and 1, with lower values indicating greater similarity in the distribution between 

concentrators and workers in the labor market. 

The results from this analysis at the state level are 

in table 4 in the main report. These results are also 

replicated at the region level in table B8 in appendix B. ArcGIS software was used to draw a map 

showing how the index of dissimilarity differed by 

region. Each region is shaded a color corresponding to the value of the index. The map provides 
28 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

a visual comparison to help readers identify the 

regions where concentrations are not well aligned 

with the composition of the local workforce.

The percentage of new jobs in high-w age occupations projected over 2006–16 that could potentially 

be filled by 2007/08 concentrators in corresponding 

program areas. This question examined the alignment of concentrations in program areas with 

high-w age occupations in each region. Median 

wage data from the Tennessee Department of 

Workforce and Development (2009) were used to 

calculate the weighted median of the annual wages 

for all occupations in the region. Weighting was 

based on the number of workers employed in the 

occupation. The calculation was made by creating 

a number of records for each occupation equal 

to the number of workers, ordering the median 

wages for all the occupational records from smallest to largest, and finding the midpoint in the 

ordered observations. The median wages were 

not directly comparable across regions because of 

differences in such factors as cost of living and the 

experience profiles of the workforce.

Once the weighted median wage was calculated for 

all occupations in each region, the value was multiplied by 0.80 and 1.20 to create a range of values 

for the wage classifications (see table B9 in appendix B). Occupations with median wages at least 20 

percent greater than the median were classified as 

high wage, occupations with median wages at least 

20 percent less than the median were classified as 

low wage, and all other occupations were classified as moderate wage. The weighted median of 

annual wages for all occupations in each program 

area was then calculated by region, using the same 

method (see table 6 in the main report).

A limitation in providing a single wage classification for each occupation is that it masks variability 

within an occupation. Although an occupation 

may have an overall classification of low wage, 

there are still opportunities for high- wage jobs, 

particularly for students with higher levels of 

education. To illustrate, data from the Bureau of 

Labor Statistics (2006) were used to classify the 

highest level of education achieved by the majority 

of workers in each SOC occupational code.17 The 

level of education for each occupation was classified as follows:

•	 At most high school. At least 50 percent of 

current workers in the occupation have a high 

school diploma or less.

•	 At least bachelor’s degree. At least 50 percent 

of current workers have a bachelor’s degree or 

more.

•	 More than high school but less than bachelor’s 

degree. Occupations that do not fit into either 

of the levels of education above include two 

groups. The first group includes occupations 

where at least 50 percent of current workers 

have some college education but not a bachelor’s degree or higher (say, an associate’s 

degree). The second group includes occupations where the highest level of education of 

the current workers is mixed, with no level of 

education having a majority (say, 20 percent 

high school diploma, 40 percent some college, 

40 percent bachelor’s degree or more).

Table 7 in the main report shows the statewide 

weighted median for occupations that correspond 

to each program area, by highest level of education 

completed. See table B10 in appendix B for these 

results disaggregated by region.

For how the percentage of concentrators in 

program areas that correspond to high- wage 

occupations compared with projected new jobs 

over 2006–16 in high-w age occupations in each 

region, the number of projected jobs in highwage occupations was divided by the total number of projected jobs to calculate the percentage 

of projected new jobs in high-w age occupations. 

Next, the number of concentrators in program 

areas that correspond to high- wage occupations 

was divided by the total number of graduates to 

calculate the percentage of graduates who concentrated in program areas that correspond to 

high-w age occupations. The difference between 
the percentage of graduates with concentrations 

in program areas that correspond to high- wage 

occupations and the percentage of projected new 

jobs in high-w age occupations was calculated 

and compared across regions. ArcGIS was used to 

draw a map showing the difference between the 

percentage of projected jobs in high-w age occupations and that of concentrators in corresponding program areas.

The percentage of new jobs in high- demand occupations projected over 2006–16 that could potentially 

be filled by 2007/08 concentrators in corresponding 

program areas. This question examined whether 

concentrations in program areas aligned with projected high- demand occupations in each region. 

The question was addressed using an approach 

similar to that of the previous question. The projected change in employment for each region was 

calculated by dividing the total employment in 

2006 by the projected number of new job openings 

over 2006–16.

Once the projected change in employment was 

calculated for each region, the value was multiplied by 0.80 and 1.20 to create a range of values 

for the demand classifications (see table B11 in appendix B). Occupations with a projected change in 

employment at least 20 percent greater than that 

for all occupations in the region were classified as 

high demand, occupations with a projected change 

in employment at least 20 percent less than that 

for all occupations in the region were classified as 

low demand, and all other occupations were classified as moderate demand. The projected change in 

employment for all occupations in each program 

area was then calculated by region (see table 8 in 

the main report).

For how the percentage of concentrators in program 

areas that correspond to high- demand occupations 

compared with the percentage of projected new 

jobs over 2006–16 in high-d emand occupations 

in each region, the number of projected jobs in 

high- demand occupations was divided by the total 

number of projected jobs to calculate the percentage 

of projected new jobs in high- demand occupations 

(see table 9 in the main report). Next, the number of 

concentrators in program areas that correspond to 

high- demand occupations was divided by the total 

number of graduates to calculate the percentage 

of graduates who concentrated in program areas 

that correspond to high- demand occupations. The 

difference between the percentage of graduates with 

concentrations in in program areas that correspond 

to high- demand occupations and the percentage 

of projected new jobs in high-d emand occupations 

was calculated and compared across regions. ArcGIS was used to draw a map showing the difference 

between the percentage of projected jobs in highdemand occupations and that of concentrators in 

corresponding program areas.
30 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

APPendIx b 

deTAIled suPPorTIng dATA

This appendix provides supplemental tables supporting the information in the main report.Table B1 disaggregates by school district the data 

in table 1 in the main report.

Table b1 

number of Tennessee high schools and mean program areas available, by school district and type, 2007/08

non–career and 

technical education 

schools

career and technical 

education–only schools all schools

School district

number program 

of areas 

schools (mean)

number program 

of areas 

schools (mean)

number program 

of areas 

schools (mean)

alcoa city 1 3.0 0 0.0 1 3.0

alvin c york institute 1 3.0 0 0.0 1 3.0

anderson county 3 3.7 1 4.0 4 3.8

bedford county 3 5.0 0 0.0 3 5.0

benton county 2 0.0 1 6.0 3 2.0

bledsoe county 1 5.0 1 0.0 2 2.5

blount county 2 6.0 0 0.0 2 6.0

bradford Special 1 1.0 0 0.0 1 1.0

bradley county 3 4.0 0 0.0 3 4.0

bristol city 1 4.0 0 0.0 1 4.0

campbell county 2 6.0 0 0.0 2 6.0

cannon county 1 3.0 0 0.0 1 3.0

carter county 4 3.8 0 0.0 4 3.8

cheatham county 3 5.3 0 0.0 3 5.3

chester county 1 5.0 0 0.0 1 5.0

claiborne county 2 5.0 0 0.0 2 5.0

clay county 2 1.5 0 0.0 2 1.5

cleveland city 1 4.0 0 0.0 1 4.0

cocke county 4 2.0 0 0.0 4 2.0

coffee county 1 6.0 0 0.0 1 6.0

crockett county 1 5.0 0 0.0 1 5.0

cumberland city 1 1.0 0 0.0 1 1.0

cumberland county 2 6.5 0 0.0 2 6.5

decatur county 1 6.0 0 0.0 1 6.0

dekalb county 2 3.0 0 0.0 2 3.0

dickson county 2 6.0 0 0.0 2 6.0

dyer county 1 5.0 0 0.0 1 5.0

dyersburg city 1 6.0 0 0.0 1 6.0

elizabethton city 1 6.0 0 0.0 1 6.0

fayette county 1 4.0 0 0.0 1 4.0

fentress county 2 2.0 0 0.0 2 2.0

(conTinued)
Table b1 (conTinued) 

number of Tennessee high schools and mean program areas available, by school district and type, 2007/08

non–career and 

technical education 

schools

career and technical 

education–only schools all schools

School district

number program 

of areas 

schools (mean)

number program 

of areas 

schools (mean)

number program 

of areas 

schools (mean)

franklin county 2 5.5 0 0.0 2 5.5

gibson Special district 1 5.0 0 0.0 1 5.0

giles county 2 5.0 0 0.0 2 5.0

grainger county 3 2.0 0 0.0 3 2.0

greene county 4 2.8 1 3.0 5 2.8

greeneville city 1 0.0 1 3.0 2 1.5

grundy county 1 5.0 0 0.0 1 5.0

hamblen county 3 4.3 0 0.0 3 4.3

hamilton county 14 2.5 0 0.0 14 2.5

hancock county 1 4.0 0 0.0 1 4.0

hardeman county 2 4.0 0 0.0 2 4.0

hardin county 1 6.0 0 0.0 1 6.0

hawkins county 3 2.7 0 0.0 3 2.7

haywood county 1 5.0 0 0.0 1 5.0

henderson county 2 4.5 0 0.0 2 4.5

henry county 1 6.0 0 0.0 1 6.0

hickman county 2 5.0 0 0.0 2 5.0

hollow rock-bruceton 1 2.0 1 6.0 2 4.0

houston county 2 1.5 0 0.0 2 1.5

humboldt city 1 5.0 0 0.0 1 5.0

humphreys county 3 3.3 0 0.0 3 3.3

huntingdon Special 1 2.0 1 6.0 2 4.0

Jackson county 1 4.0 0 0.0 1 4.0

Jackson-madison consolidated 5 3.0 0 0.0 5 3.0

Jefferson county 1 6.0 0 0.0 1 6.0

Johnson city 2 2.5 0 0.0 2 2.5

Johnson county 1 6.0 0 0.0 1 6.0

Kingsport city 1 4.0 0 0.0 1 4.0

Knox county 13 5.4 2 0.5 15 4.7

lake county 1 4.0 0 0.0 1 4.0

lauderdale county 2 5.5 0 0.0 2 5.5

lawrence county 4 4.0 0 0.0 4 4.0

lenoir city 1 5.0 0 0.0 1 5.0

lewis county 1 4.0 0 0.0 1 4.0

lincoln county 1 4.0 0 0.0 1 4.0

loudon county 2 4.5 0 0.0 2 4.5

(conTinued)
32 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table b1 (conTinued) 

number of Tennessee high schools and mean program areas available, by school district and type, 2007/08

non–career and 

technical education 

schools

career and technical 

education–only schools all schools

School district

number program 

of areas 

schools (mean)

number program 

of areas 

schools (mean)

number program 

of areas 

schools (mean)

macon county 2 2.5 0 0.0 2 2.5

marion county 3 4.0 0 0.0 3 4.0

marshall county 3 4.7 0 0.0 3 4.7

maryville city 1 6.0 0 0.0 1 6.0

maury county 6 4.3 0 0.0 6 4.3

mckenzie Special 1 2.0 1 6.0 2 4.0

mcminn county 2 5.0 0 0.0 2 5.0

mcnairy county 2 5.5 0 0.0 2 5.5

meigs county 1 5.0 0 0.0 1 5.0

memphis city 33 2.3 6 4.5 39 2.6

milan city Special 1 5.0 0 0.0 1 5.0

monroe county 3 4.7 0 0.0 3 4.7

montgomery county Schools 6 4.3 0 0.0 6 4.3

moore county 1 2.0 0 0.0 1 2.0

morgan county 4 1.8 1 4.0 5 2.2

nashville-davidson county 18 2.1 0 0.0 18 2.1

oak ridge city 1 4.0 0 0.0 1 4.0

obion county 2 4.0 1 1.0 3 3.0

oneida city 1 2.0 0 0.0 1 2.0

overton county 1 5.0 0 0.0 1 5.0

perry county 1 5.0 0 0.0 1 5.0

pickett county 1 3.0 0 0.0 1 3.0

polk county 2 3.5 0 0.0 2 3.5

putnam county 4 3.3 0 0.0 4 3.3

rhea county 1 3.0 0 0.0 1 3.0

richard city Special 1 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.0

roane county 5 2.6 0 0.0 5 2.6

robertson county 5 4.4 0 0.0 5 4.4

rutherford county 9 4.4 0 0.0 9 4.4

Scott county 1 6.0 0 0.0 1 6.0

Sequatchie county 1 2.0 0 0.0 1 2.0

Sevier county 4 3.8 0 0.0 4 3.8

Shelby county 6 4.3 0 0.0 6 4.3

Smith county 2 5.0 0 0.0 2 5.0

South carroll Special 1 4.0 1 6.0 2 5.0

Stewart county 1 5.0 0 0.0 1 5.0

(conTinued)
Table b1 (conTinued) 

number of Tennessee high schools and mean program areas available, by school district and type, 2007/08

non–career and 

technical education 

schools

career and technical 

education–only schools all schools

School district

number program 

of areas 

schools (mean)

number program 

of areas 

schools (mean)

number program 

of areas 

schools (mean)

Sullivan county 5 4.2 0 0.0 5 4.2

Sumner county 10 3.9 0 0.0 10 3.9

Tennessee high School for deaf 1 1.0 0 0.0 1 1.0

Tipton county 4 4.0 0 0.0 4 4.0

Trenton city 1 2.0 0 0.0 1 2.0

Trousdale county 1 3.0 0 0.0 1 3.0

Tullahoma city 1 4.0 0 0.0 1 4.0

unicoi 1 5.0 0 0.0 1 5.0

union city 1 4.0 0 0.0 1 4.0

union county 2 2.5 0 0.0 2 2.5

Van buren county 1 2.0 0 0.0 1 2.0

Warren county 1 6.0 0 0.0 1 6.0

Washington county 3 4.0 0 0.0 3 4.0

Wayne county 3 1.7 1 3.0 4 2.0

Weakley county 4 3.8 0 0.0 4 3.8

West carroll Special district 1 1.0 1 6.0 2 3.5

White county 1 7.0 0 0.0 1 7.0

Williamson county 8 4.1 0 0.0 8 4.1

Wilson county 5 4.2 1 6.0 6 4.5

Tennessee 333 3.6 17 3.6 350 3.6

Note: The sum of the number of schools in each district is greater than the number of schools in the state because some career and technical education–

only schools serve more than one district. A program area is defined as available in a school if any students in grades 9–12 completed a concentration in that 

program area at that school.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009).
34 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table B2 shows the numbers used to calculate the 

percentages in table 1 in the main report.

Table b2 

non–career and technical education schools with available program areas in Tennessee, by region, 2007/08

average number of high schools with available program areas in:

number of 

number program areas agri- family and Trade and 

of high available cultural business consumer health Technology industrial 

region schoolsa per school education technology services science marketing engineering education

1 19 4.1 10 13 13 14 8 4 16

2 29 3.1 20 12 18 10 8 7 14

3 16 4.5 4 12 12 10 12 8 14

4 32 3.9 17 22 27 17 14 5 24

5 31 3.1 8 18 17 16 9 5 22

6 9 4.7 8 8 7 5 4 3 7

7 21 3.2 16 10 16 9 2 5 10

8 42 4.2 28 34 32 23 17 13 30

9 33 3.2 14 24 20 11 10 3 25

10 23 4.0 19 20 17 15 7 0 15

11 30 3.6 22 17 21 18 11 1 19

12 19 4.1 14 12 17 12 8 0 15

13 46 2.9 7 31 34 10 19 8 23

Tennessee 350 3.6 187 233 251 170 129 62 234

Note: A program area is defined as available in a school if any students in grades 9–12 completed a concentration in that program area at that school.

a. Includes both career and technical education–only schools and non–career and technical education schools.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009).
Tables B3 and B4 disaggregate the data in table 1 

by school type: table B3, for career and technical 

education–only schools; table B4, for non–c areer 

and technical education schools.

Table b3 

Available program areas in career and technical education–only schools, by region, 2007/08

Schools with available program areas in:

family and Trade and 

agricultural business consumer health Technology industrial 

program education technology services science marketing engineering education

areas 

number available 

Number

e tn

Number

e tn

Number

e tn

Number

e tn

Number

e tn

Number

e tn

Number

e tn

of per school 

region schools (mean)PercPercPercPercPercPercPerc

1 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2 1 3.0 0 0 0 0 1 100 1 100 0 0 0 0 1 100

3 2 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 50

4 2 4.5 2 100 2 100 2 100 1 50 0 0 0 0 2 100

5 1 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

6 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

8 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

9 1 6.0 0 0 1 100 1 100 1 100 1 100 1 100 1 100

10 1 4.0 0 0 1 100 1 100 1 100 0 0 0 0 1 100

11 2 6.0 2 100 1 50 2 100 2 100 2 100 1 50 2 100

12 1 1.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 100

13 6 4.5 2 33 6 100 6 100 5 83 2 33 0 0 6 100

Tennessee 17 3.6 6 35 11 65 11 65 11 65 5 29 2 12 15 88

Note: A program area is defined as available in a school if any students in grades 9–12 completed a concentration in that program area at that school.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009).
36 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table b4 

Available program areas in non–career and technical education schools, by region, 2007/08

Schools with available program areas in:

family and Trade and 

agricultural business consumer health Technology industrial 

program education technology services science marketing engineering education

areas 

NumberNumberNumberNumberNumberNumberNumber

number available 

e tne tne tne tne tne tne tn

of per school 

region schools (mean)PercPercPercPercPercPercPerc

1 19 4.1 10 53 13 68 13 68 14 74 8 42 4 21 16 84

2 28 3.1 20 71 12 43 17 61 9 32 8 29 7 25 13 46

3 14 5.1 4 29 12 86 12 86 10 71 12 86 8 57 13 93

4 30 3.9 15 50 20 67 26 87 16 53 14 47 5 17 22 73

5 30 3.2 8 27 18 60 17 57 16 53 9 30 5 17 22 73

6 9 4.7 8 89 8 89 7 78 5 56 4 44 3 33 7 78

7 21 3.4 19 76 10 63 16 100 9 56 2 13 5 31 10 63

8 42 4.2 28 67 34 81 32 76 23 55 17 40 13 31 30 71

9 32 3.2 14 44 23 72 19 59 10 31 9 28 2 6 24 75

10 22 4.1 19 86 19 86 17 77 14 64 7 32 0 0 14 64

11 28 3.5 20 71 16 57 19 68 16 57 9 32 0 0 17 61

12 18 4.3 14 78 12 67 17 94 12 67 8 44 0 0 14 78

13 40 2.6 5 13 25 63 28 70 5 13 17 43 8 20 17 43

Tennessee 333 3.6 181 54 222 67 240 72 159 48 124 37 60 18 219 66

Note: A program area is defined as available in a school if any students in grades 9–12 completed a concentration in that program area at that school.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009).
Table B5 provides the number of high school graduates enrolled in a school offering each program 

area, which is used to calculate the percentages in 

table 2 in the main report.

Table b5 

number of Tennessee high school graduates enrolled in a school offering each program area, by region, 

2007/08

number of high school graduates enrolled in a school offering program areas in: 

region

number of 

graduates

family and Trade and 

agricultural business consumer health Technology industrial 

education technology services science marketing engineering education

1 3,245 1,607 2,620 2,716 3,054 1,868 1,007 3,181

2 4,285 3,968 2,450 3,825 2,957 1,999 1,378 3,634

3 3,285 895 3,233 3,233 2,687 3,233 2,431 3,234

4 4,522 3,097 3,563 4,278 3,683 2,923 990 4,284

5 4,532 1,728 3,423 3,378 2,801 2,181 686 3,974

6 2,047 1,786 1,690 1,723 1,553 1,311 650 1,878

7 2,478 2,403 1,230 2,204 1,841 309 826 1,799

8 8,019 5,219 7,005 7,139 5,338 4,689 2,912 7,374

9 7,538 4,448 6,625 5,661 3,586 3,418 1,462 6,821

10 2,385 2,267 2,252 2,116 1,925 1,188 0 2,176

11 3,383 3,070 2,155 3,080 2,986 1,799 349 3,146

12 2,505 2,338 1,766 2,505 2,140 1,408 0 2,360

13 8,632 4,144 7,279 8,514 6,804 6,725 1,934 8,496

Tennessee 56,856 36,970 45,291 50,372 41,355 33,051 14,625 52,357

Note: Availability is estimated separately for each program area, by examining how many graduates attended a school where any student in grades 9–12 

completed a concentration in the corresponding program area through a non–career and technical education school or a career and technical education–

only school.

Source: Author’s analysis based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009).
38 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table B6 provides the number of observations 

used to calculate the percentage of high school 

graduates completing concentrations in each program area (see table 3 in the main report).

Table b6 

Tennessee high school graduates completing concentrations in each program area, by region, 2007/08

region

1

agricultural 

education

191

business 

technology

202

family and 

consumer 

services

228

health 

science

388

marketing

93

Technology 

engineering

38

Trade and 

industrial 

education

1,069

2 703 227 461 153 158 67 921

3 13 343 315 170 142 107 829

4 310 438 501 250 235 37 919

5 194 448 320 344 126 42 1,411

6 230 201 179 114 84 32 390

7 529 122 420 104 48 50 507

8 583 625 758 427 267 202 1,276

9 601 440 379 292 171 21 976

10 296 303 312 255 59 1 705

11 624 308 460 376 142 2 586

12 608 189 591 373 138 5 574

13 62 286 518 147 214 9 978

Tennessee 4,944 4,132 5,442 3,393 1,877 613 11,141

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009).
Table B7 replicates the results from table 3 in the 

main report with the percentage of total concentrations completed by high school graduates in 

each program area, by region. The percentages are 

calculated using the total number of concentrations, instead of the total number of high school 

graduates, as the denominator.

Table b7 

Percentage of total concentrations completed by Tennessee high school graduates in each program area, by 

region, 2007/08

region

1

agricultural 

education

9

business 

technology

9

family and 

consumer 

services

10

health 

science

18

marketing

4

Technology 

engineering

2

Trade and 

industrial 

education

48

2 26 8 17 6 6 2 34

3 1 18 16 9 7 6 43

4 12 16 19 9 9 1 34

5 7 16 11 12 4 1 49

6 19 16 15 9 7 3 32

7 30 7 24 6 3 3 28

8 14 15 18 10 6 5 31

9 21 15 13 10 6 1 34

10 15 16 16 13 3 0 37

11 25 12 18 15 6 0 23

12 25 8 24 15 6 0 23

13 3 13 23 7 10 0 44

Tennessee 16 13 17 11 6 2 35

Note: Percentages may not sum to 100 because of rounding.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009).
40 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table B8 replicates the results from table 4 in the 

main report at the region level.

Table b8 

Tennessee concentrators in each program area and workers employed in corresponding occupations, by 

region and program area, 2007/08

program area

concentrators

number percent

employees

number percent

percentage 

point difference

region 1

agricultural education 191 9 2,150 1 8

business technology 202 9 40,610 20 –11

family and consumer services 228 10 43,180 21 –11

health science 388 18 18,130 9 9

marketing 93 4 17,550 9 –4

Technology engineering 38 2 4,280 2 0

Trade and industrial education 1,069 48 76,270 38 11

Total 2,209 202,170

Index of dissimilarity (0.27)

region 2

agricultural education 703 26 2,500 1 25

business technology 227 8 36,680 18 –9

family and consumer services 461 17 46,600 23 –6

health science 153 6 11,280 5 0

marketing 158 6 20,330 10 –4

Technology engineering 67 2 3,070 1 1

Trade and industrial education 921 34 84,670 41 –7

Total 2,690 205,130

Index of dissimilarity (0.26)

region 3

agricultural education 13 1 4,020 1 –1

business technology 343 18 77,080 24 –7

family and consumer services 315 16 66,740 21 –5

health science 170 9 24,360 8 1

marketing 142 7 30,640 10 –2

Technology engineering 107 6 9,470 3 3

Trade and industrial education 829 43 102,750 33 11

Total 1,919 315,060

Index of dissimilarity (0.14)

region 4

agricultural education 310 12 6,440 3 9

business technology 438 16 45,910 20 –4

family and consumer services 501 19 44,740 20 –1

health science 250 9 13,820 6 3

marketing 235 9 17,200 8 1

(conTinued)
Table b8 (conTinued) 

Tennessee concentrators in each program area and workers employed in corresponding occupations, by 

region, 2007/08

program area

concentrators

number percent

employees

number percent

percentage 

point difference

Technology engineering 37 1 10,610 5 –3

Trade and industrial education 919 34 85,420 38 –4

Total 2,690 224,140

Index of dissimilarity (0.13)

region 5

agricultural education 194 7 4,360 1 6

business technology 448 16 85,240 22 –7

family and consumer services 320 11 71,820 19 –8

health science 344 12 23,270 6 6

marketing 126 4 32,330 9 –4

Technology engineering 42 1 10,070 3 –1

Trade and industrial education 1,411 49 152,190 40 9

Total 2,885 379,280

Index of dissimilarity (0.20)

region 6

agricultural education 230 19 4,740 5 14

business technology 201 16 19,900 19 –3

family and consumer services 179 15 20,310 19 –5

health science 114 9 5,290 5 4

marketing 84 7 7,450 7 0

Technology engineering 32 3 2,520 2 0

Trade and industrial education 390 32 45,010 43 –11

Total 1,230 105,220

Index of dissimilarity (0.19)

region 7

agricultural education 529 30 3,550 4 26

business technology 122 7 17,520 18 –12

family and consumer services 420 24 20,030 21 2

health science 104 6 6,680 7 –1

marketing 48 3 7,630 8 –5

Technology engineering 50 3 1,450 2 1

Trade and industrial education 507 28 37,980 40 –12

Total 1,780 94,840

Index of dissimilarity (0.30)

region 8

agricultural education 583 14 5,150 2 12

business technology 625 15 69,270 23 –8

family and consumer services 758 18 67,450 22 –4

health science 427 10 18,460 6 4

(conTinued)
42 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table b8 (conTinued) 

Tennessee concentrators in each program area and workers employed in corresponding occupations, by 

region, 2007/08

program area

concentrators

number percent

employees

number percent

percentage 

point difference

marketing 267 6 28,140 9 –3

Technology engineering 202 5 7,380 2 2

Trade and industrial education 1,276 31 106,170 35 –4

Total 4,138 302,020

Index of dissimilarity (0.19)

region 9

agricultural education 601 21 7,846 1 20

business technology 440 15 193,860 25 –10

family and consumer services 379 13 147,644 19 –6

health science 292 10 56,050 7 3

marketing 171 6 69,910 9 –3

Technology engineering 21 1 27,426 4 –3

Trade and industrial education 976 34 272,550 35 –1

Total 2,880 775,286

Index of dissimilarity (0.23)

region 10

agricultural education 296 15 1,280 1 14

business technology 303 16 17,840 19 –3

family and consumer services 312 16 19,100 20 –4

health science 255 13 6,310 7 7

marketing 59 3 7,500 8 –5

Technology engineering 1 0 2,320 2 –2

Trade and industrial education 705 37 41,090 43 –7

Total 1,931 95,440

Index of dissimilarity (0.21)

region 11

agricultural education 624 25 3,600 2 23

business technology 308 12 34,230 19 –7

family and consumer services 460 18 37,720 21 –2

health science 376 15 15,250 8 7

marketing 142 6 15,230 8 –3

Technology engineering 2 0 3,390 2 –2

Trade and industrial education 586 23 72,020 40 –16

Total 2,498 181,440

Index of dissimilarity (0.30)

(conTinued)
Table b8 (conTinued) 

Tennessee concentrators in each program area and workers employed in corresponding occupations, by 

region, 2007/08

program area

concentrators

number percent

employees

number percent

percentage 

point difference

region 12

agricultural education 608 24 3,920 4 20

business technology 189 8 16,080 18 –10

family and consumer services 591 24 17,020 19 5

health science 373 15 5,040 6 9

marketing 148 6 6,280 7 –1

Technology engineering 5 0 900 1 –1

Trade and industrial education 574 23 41,610 46 –23

Total 2,488 90,850

Index of dissimilarity (0.35)

region 13

agricultural education 62 3 4,150 1 2

business technology 286 13 176,740 25 –12

family and consumer services 518 23 137,940 19 4

health science 147 7 52,930 7 –1

marketing 214 10 68,010 10 0

Technology engineering 9 0 22,070 3 –3

Trade and industrial education 978 44 249,050 35 9

Total 2,214 710,890

Index of dissimilarity (0.15)

Note: Percentages may not sum to 100 and percentage point differences shown may differ from those calculated from values in the table because of rounding.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009) and Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development (2009).
44 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table B9 provides the range of values used to define the low-, moderate-, and high- wage classifications in each region.

Table b9 

Median annual wage and range of low-, moderate-, and high- wage occupations, by region, 2006 (dollars)

median annual wage range

region median annual wage low moderate high

1 26,844 < 21,475 21,475 to 32,213 > 32,213

2 24,894 < 19,915 19,915 to 29,873 > 29,873

3 28,690 < 22,952 22,952 to 34,428 > 34,428

4 28,840 < 23,072 23,072 to 34,609 > 34,609

5 28,464 < 22,771 22,771 to 34,157 > 34,157

6 27,402 < 21,922 21,922 to 32,882 > 32,882

7 23,658 < 18,926 18,926 to 28,390 > 28,390

8 29,080 < 23,264 23,264 to 34,896 > 34,896

9 32,616 < 26,093 26,093 to 39,139 > 39,139

10 27,768 < 22,214 22,214 to 33,322 > 33,322

11 26,746 < 21,397 21,397 to 32,095 > 32,095

12 28,062 < 22,450 22,450 to 33,674 > 33,674

13 29,377 < 23,502 23,502 to 35,252 > 35,252

Note: High-w age occupations have median wages at least 20 percent greater than the regional median; low-wage occupations have median wages at 

least 20 percent less than the regional median; all other occupations are classified as moderate wage. Wage classifications for program areas are identified 

separately for each region.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development (2009).
Table B10 replicates the results from table 6 in the 

main report at the region level, instead of at the 

state level.

Table b10 

Median wages for occupations that correspond to each program area, by highest level of education 

completed and region, 2007/08 (dollars)

level of education

more than high 

at most school but less than at least 

program area high school bachelor’s degree bachelor’s degree overall

region 1

agricultural education 18,854 18,850 50,878 21,275

business technology 20,981 26,310 60,151 27,380

family and consumer services 15,180 18,376 37,593 18,376

health science 20,632 30,892 51,876 34,140

marketing 15,170 18,376 37,701 18,376

Technology engineering 31,282 39,170 60,037 49,702

Trade and industrial education 24,779 32,431 30,716 26,844

all 22,503 25,846 42,717 26,844

region 2

agricultural education 19,259 18,525 45,940 19,259

business technology 19,519 25,866 55,337 25,866

family and consumer services 15,548 19,101 41,637 18,939

health science 21,594 31,769 51,688 31,769

marketing 15,548 19,101 41,950 19,101

Technology engineering 26,959 38,589 56,575 51,043

Trade and industrial education 24,322 31,516 33,015 24,584

all 23,582 25,055 45,080 24,894

region 3

agricultural education 21,439 21,172 49,629 21,439

business technology 20,413 28,848 60,882 31,399

family and consumer services 16,332 19,632 41,052 19,632

health science 21,542 32,562 50,768 39,662

marketing 16,332 19,632 51,022 24,217

Technology engineering 27,423 39,593 62,921 56,426

Trade and industrial education 23,377 32,917 37,916 25,335

all 21,542 28,848 48,939 28,690

region 4

agricultural education 25,798 66,537 54,322 25,798

business technology 19,432 27,651 63,817 31,459

family and consumer services 15,427 20,091 42,070 18,360

health science 21,498 32,220 51,668 40,161

marketing 15,427 20,091 45,518 20,091

Technology engineering 34,385 45,890 69,419 67,319

(conTinued)
46 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table b10 (conTinued) 

Median wages for occupations that correspond to each program area, by highest level of education 

completed and region, 2007/08 (dollars)

program area

Trade and industrial education

at most 

high school

26,482

level of education

more than high 

school but less than at least 

bachelor’s degree bachelor’s degree

36,686 41,894

overall

28,134

all

region 5

agricultural education

24,821

19,881

28,509

21,596

51,668

52,576

28,840

21,596

business technology 19,489 29,656 62,873 33,420

family and consumer services 16,148 20,065 42,965 20,065

health science 21,987 34,610 52,631 35,023

marketing 15,450 20,427 53,173 20,427

Technology engineering 32,431 41,790 59,237 57,869

Trade and industrial 26,168 34,894 36,182 27,635

all

region 6

agricultural education

25,028

15,889

29,656

25,377

48,884

77,452

28,464

15,889

business technology 18,900 27,508 59,218 31,604

family and consumer services 15,126 18,703 42,893 17,431

health science 19,635 32,492 49,715 34,306

marketing 15,126 18,703 48,322 18,703

Technology engineering 31,261 51,868 67,129 67,129

Trade and industrial education 26,635 30,156 33,659 26,635

all

region 7

agricultural education

25,416

22,188

27,508

39,219

44,688

46,472

27,402

22,188

business technology 15,747 28,291 55,418 28,478

family and consumer services 15,806 19,185 37,863 19,185

health science 20,679 32,345 55,713 33,584

marketing 15,806 19,185 37,516 19,185

Technology engineering 29,483 46,879 48,592 48,592

Trade and industrial education 22,657 33,679 26,666 23,438

all

region 8

agricultural education

22,188

23,196

27,566

18,692

41,065

54,029

23,658

23,196

business technology 19,993 31,342 68,143 33,232

family and consumer services 16,110 19,693 43,094 19,693

health science 22,643 35,384 57,448 36,498

marketing 16,110 19,693 50,789 19,693

Technology engineering 34,979 45,781 68,476 58,087

Trade and industrial education 25,591 36,840 38,010 26,721

all 23,376 30,613 50,423 29,080

(conTinued)
Table b10 (conTinued) 

Median wages for occupations that correspond to each program area, by highest level of education 

completed and region, 2007/08 (dollars)

program area

region 9

agricultural education

at most 

high school

23,586

level of education

more than high 

school but less than at least 

bachelor’s degree bachelor’s degree

25,495 53,861

overall

23,586

business technology 20,167 33,010 66,913 36,487

family and consumer services 16,740 19,437 42,243 19,171

health science 23,365 38,126 59,292 51,225

marketing 16,740 19,110 49,757 30,842

Technology engineering 36,357 45,044 66,084 58,403

Trade and industrial education 26,428 39,024 40,097 28,887

all

region 10

agricultural education

24,797

25,416

31,510

29,849

53,906

47,328

32,616

33,208

business technology 16,118 27,358 55,750 29,992

family and consumer services 15,354 19,050 37,713 17,320

health science 20,411 33,073 56,137 33,073

marketing 15,354 19,050 39,120 19,050

Technology engineering 30,259 38,720 62,412 62,412

Trade and industrial education 27,768 31,540 32,776 27,768

all

region 11

agricultural education

25,554

21,046

27,358

25,377

42,346

48,304

27,768

21,046

business technology 20,015 26,746 57,305 29,616

family and consumer services 15,154 18,778 40,542 18,778

health science 20,160 31,695 49,918 31,695

marketing 15,154 18,778 44,681 18,778

Technology engineering 26,731 42,689 67,929 48,304

Trade and industrial education 25,584 32,751 33,659 26,507

all

region 12

agricultural education

22,329

28,062

26,565

39,706

42,831

44,864

26,746

28,062

business technology 19,170 27,114 51,806 27,723

family and consumer services 15,078 18,956 43,011 18,770

health science 19,481 33,032 51,827 33,032

marketing 15,078 18,956 48,268 18,956

Technology engineering — 42,186 53,270 47,824

Trade and industrial education 27,665 32,237 36,452 27,698

all

region 13

agricultural education

27,665

22,192

28,462

22,140

43,084

57,931

28,062

23,612

(conTinued)
48 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table b10 (conTinued) 

Median wages for occupations that correspond to each program area, by highest level of education 

completed and region, 2007/08 (dollars)

level of education

more than high 

at most school but less than at least 

program area high school bachelor’s degree bachelor’s degree overall

business technology 20,972 33,653 72,127 36,537

family and consumer services 15,770 20,054 45,837 20,012

health science 22,623 33,632 60,266 39,511

marketing 15,770 20,012 48,315 20,070

Technology engineering 41,582 42,232 70,559 70,346

Trade and industrial education 23,269 38,225 43,712 24,725

all 25,559 32,314 57,824 29,377

Note: High- wage occupations have median annual wages at least 20 percent greater than the regional median; low-wage occupations have median annual 

wages at least 20 percent less than the regional median; all other occupations are classified as moderate wage. Wage classifications are identified separately 

for each region and for the state as a whole. Median wages are weighted by the number of workers employed in each occupation.

— is reporting standards not met because there are too few cases for a reliable estimate.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development (2009).

Table B11 provides the range of values used to define 

the low-, moderate-, and high- demand classifications. (See table 8 in the main report.) The projected 

percentage change in the number of jobs over 2006–

2016 for all occupations in Tennessee ranged from 

4.3 percent (region 10) to 28.6 percent (region 8).

Table b11 

Projected change in employment and occupational demand range, by region, 2006–16 (percent)

region

projected change 

in employment low

occupational demand range

moderate high

1 11.2 < 9.4 9.4 to 14.0 > 14.0

2 13.1 < 10.9 10.9 to 16.4 > 16.4

3 12.4 < 10.4 10.4 to 15.5 > 15.5

4 14.9 < 12.4 12.4 to 18.6 > 18.6

5 9.5 < 7.9 7.9 to 11.9 > 11.9

6 10.8 < 9.0 9.0 to 13.5 > 13.5

7 7.4 < 6.2 6.2 to 9.3 > 9.3

8 28.6 < 23.8 23.8 to 35.8 > 35.8

9 11.5 < 9.6 9.6 to 14.4 > 14.4

10 4.3 < 3.6 3.6 to 5.4 > 5.4

11 10.2 < 8.4 8.4 to 12.7 > 12.7

12 8.2 < 6.9 6.9 to 10.3 > 10.3

13 7.0 < 5.9 5.9 to 8.8 > 8.8

Note: High- demand occupations have a projected change in employment over 2006–16 at least 20 percent greater than that for all occupations in the 

region; low-demand occupations have a projected change in employment over 2006–16 at least 20 percent less than that for all occupations in the region; 

all other occupations are classified as moderate demand. Demand classifications are identified separately for each region.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development (2009).
Table B12 identifies the occupations in each corresponding program area classified as high wage 

or high demand.18

Table b12 

high- wage and high- demand occupations in Tennessee, by corresponding program area, 2007/08

program area and occupation high- wage high-demand

agricultural education

agricultural and food science technicians ✔

agricultural and food scientists ✔

agricultural engineers ✔

agricultural inspectors ✔

agricultural sciences teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

animal care and service workers ✔

animal control workers ✔

animal scientists ✔

atmospheric, earth, marine, and space sciences teachers ✔

biochemists and biophysicists ✔

biological science teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

biological scientists, all other ✔

chemistry teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

conservation scientists ✔ ✔

environmental science and protection technicians, including health ✔ ✔

environmental science teachers, postsecondary ✔

environmental scientists and specialists, including health ✔

farm and home management advisors ✔

farmworkers and laborers, crop, nursery, and greenhouse ✔

first-line supervisors/managers of farming, fishing, and forestry workers ✔ ✔

foresters ✔

forestry and conservation science teachers, postsecondary ✔

geographers ✔

geography teachers, postsecondary ✔

geoscientists, except hydrologists and geographers ✔

hydrologists ✔

landscape architects ✔

landscaping and groundskeeping workers ✔

life scientists ✔ ✔

life, physical, and social science occupations ✔ ✔

microbiologists ✔

Soil and plant scientists ✔

Veterinarians ✔ ✔

Veterinary technologists and technicians ✔

Zoologists and wildlife biologists ✔

(conTinued)
50 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table b12 (conTinued) 

high- wage and high- demand occupations in Tennessee, by corresponding program area, 2007/08

program area and occupation high- wage high-demand

business technology

accountants and auditors ✔ ✔

administrative law judges, adjudicators, and hearing officers ✔

administrative services managers ✔

advertising and promotions managers ✔

advertising, marketing, promotions, public relations, and sales managers ✔

agents and business managers of artists, performers, and athletes ✔

appraisers and assessors of real estate ✔

arbitrators, mediators, and conciliators ✔

bill and account collectors ✔

brokerage clerks ✔ ✔

budget analysts ✔

business and financial operations occupations ✔

business operations specialists ✔

business operations specialists, all other ✔ ✔

business teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

cargo and freight agents ✔

chief executives ✔

claims adjusters, examiners, and investigators ✔

compensation and benefits managers ✔

compensation, benefits, and job analysis specialists ✔ ✔

compliance officers, except agriculture, construction, health and safety, and transportation ✔

computer and information scientists, research ✔

computer and information systems managers ✔ ✔

computer and mathematical occupations ✔ ✔

computer programmers ✔

computer software engineers, applications ✔ ✔

computer software engineers, systems software ✔ ✔

computer specialists ✔

computer specialists, all other ✔

computer support specialists ✔ ✔

computer systems analysts ✔ ✔

construction managers ✔ ✔

cost estimators ✔ ✔

court reporters ✔ ✔

court, municipal, and license clerks ✔

credit analysts ✔ ✔

customer service representatives ✔

database administrators ✔ ✔

economics teachers, postsecondary ✔

(conTinued)
Table b12 (conTinued) 

high- wage and high- demand occupations in Tennessee, by corresponding program area, 2007/08

program area and occupation high- wage high-demand

economists ✔

education administrators, all other ✔ ✔

education administrators, elementary and secondary ✔ ✔

education administrators, postsecondary ✔

education administrators, preschool and child care ✔

emergency management specialists ✔

employment, recruitment, and placement specialists ✔

engineering managers ✔

executive secretaries and administrative assistants ✔

farm, ranch, and other agricultural managers ✔ ✔

farmers and ranchers ✔

financial analysts ✔ ✔

financial examiners ✔

financial managers ✔

financial specialists ✔ ✔

financial specialists, all other ✔

first-line supervisors/managers of office and administrative support workers ✔

food service managers ✔

funeral directors ✔

gaming managers ✔

general and operations managers ✔

human resources managers ✔ ✔

human resources managers, all other ✔

human resources, training, and labor relations specialists ✔

industrial production managers ✔

insurance appraisers, auto damage ✔

insurance underwriters ✔

Judges, magistrate judges, and magistrates ✔

law teachers, postsecondary ✔

lawyers ✔ ✔

lawyers, judges, and related workers ✔ ✔

legal occupations ✔

legal and related workers, all other ✔

legal secretaries ✔ ✔

legal support workers ✔ ✔

legal support workers, all other ✔

library assistants, clerical ✔

loan counselors ✔

loan officers ✔

lodging managers ✔

(conTinued)
52 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table b12 (conTinued) 

high- wage and high- demand occupations in Tennessee, by corresponding program area, 2007/08

program area and occupation high- wage high-demand

logisticians ✔

management analysts ✔

management occupations ✔

managers, all other ✔

market research analysts ✔

marketing managers ✔ ✔

material recording, scheduling, dispatching, and distributing workers ✔

medical and health services managers ✔ ✔

medical records and health information technicians ✔

medical secretaries ✔

meeting and convention planners ✔ ✔

miscellaneous legal and related workers ✔

natural sciences managers ✔

network and computer systems administrators ✔ ✔

network systems and data communications analysts ✔ ✔

office clerks, general ✔

operations specialties managers ✔ ✔

other management occupations ✔ ✔

paralegals and legal assistants ✔ ✔

personal financial advisors ✔

police, fire, and ambulance dispatchers ✔

political science teachers, postsecondary ✔

political scientists ✔

postal service clerks ✔ ✔

postal service mail carriers ✔ ✔

postal service mail sorters, processors, and processing machine operators ✔

postmasters and mail superintendents ✔ ✔

producers and directors ✔

production, planning, and expediting clerks ✔

property, real estate, and community association managers ✔

public relations managers ✔ ✔

purchasing agents and buyers, farm products ✔

purchasing agents, except wholesale, retail, and farm products ✔

purchasing managers ✔

receptionists and information clerks ✔

Sales managers ✔

Social and community service managers ✔ ✔

Statistical assistants ✔

Tax examiners, collectors, and revenue agents ✔

Title examiners, abstractors, and searchers ✔

(conTinued)
Table b12 (conTinued) 

high- wage and high- demand occupations in Tennessee, by corresponding program area, 2007/08

program area and occupation high- wage high-demand

Top executives ✔

Training and development managers ✔

Training and development specialists ✔ ✔

Transportation, storage, and distribution managers ✔

Wholesale and retail buyers, except farm products ✔

family and consumer services

adult literacy, remedial education, and ged teachers ✔ ✔

amusement and recreation attendants ✔

animal care and service workers ✔

anthropologists and archeologists ✔ ✔

anthropology and archeology teachers, postsecondary ✔

archivists, curators, and museum technicians ✔ ✔

area, ethnic, and cultural studies teachers, postsecondary ✔

art, drama, and music teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

bartenders ✔

child, family, and school social workers ✔

clergy ✔ ✔

clinical, counseling, and school psychologists ✔ ✔

combined food preparation and serving workers, including fast food ✔

commercial and industrial designers ✔

communications teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

community and social service specialists, all other ✔

community and social services occupations ✔ ✔

cooks and food preparation workers ✔

cooks, restaurant ✔

counselors, social, and religious workers, all other ✔ ✔

counselors, social workers, and other community and social service specialists ✔ ✔

counter attendants, cafeteria, food concession, and coffee shop ✔

criminal justice and law enforcement teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

curators ✔

designers, all other ✔

dietitians and nutritionists ✔

directors, religious activities and education ✔ ✔

economics teachers, postsecondary ✔

education administrators, all other ✔ ✔

education administrators, elementary and secondary ✔ ✔

education administrators, postsecondary ✔

education administrators, preschool and child care ✔

education teachers, postsecondary ✔

education, training, and library occupations ✔

(conTinued)
54 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table b12 (conTinued) 

high- wage and high- demand occupations in Tennessee, by corresponding program area, 2007/08

program area and occupation high- wage high-demand

education, training, and library workers, all other ✔

educational, vocational, and school counselors ✔ ✔

elementary school teachers, except special education ✔ ✔

embalmers ✔

english language and literature teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

entertainment attendants and related workers ✔

farm and home management advisors ✔

fashion designers ✔

food and beverage serving workers ✔

food preparation workers ✔

food service managers ✔

foreign language and literature teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

funeral directors ✔

geography teachers, postsecondary ✔

graphic designers ✔

health educators ✔ ✔

health specialties teachers, postsecondary ✔

history teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

home economics teachers, postsecondary ✔

hosts and hostesses, restaurant, lounge, and coffee shop ✔

industrial-organizational psychologists ✔

instructional coordinators ✔ ✔

interior designers ✔

Kindergarten teachers, except special education ✔ ✔

law teachers, postsecondary ✔

librarians ✔

librarians, curators, and archivists ✔ ✔

library science teachers, postsecondary ✔

library technicians ✔

locker room, coatroom, and dressing room attendant ✔

medical and public health social workers ✔ ✔

mental health and substance abuse social workers ✔

merchandise displayers and window trimmers ✔

middle school teachers, except special and vocational education ✔ ✔

miscellaneous counselors, social, and religious workers ✔

nursing instructors and teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

other education, training, and library occupations ✔ ✔

other food preparation and serving related workers ✔

other personal care and service workers ✔

other teachers and instructors ✔ ✔

(conTinued)
Table b12 (conTinued) 

high- wage and high- demand occupations in Tennessee, by corresponding program area, 2007/08

program area and occupation high- wage high-demand

other teachers and instructors, all other ✔ ✔

personal and home care aides ✔

personal care and service occupations ✔

philosophy and religion teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

physics teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

political science teachers, postsecondary ✔

postsecondary teachers ✔ ✔

postsecondary teachers, all other ✔ ✔

preschool teachers, except special education ✔

primary, secondary, and special education school teachers ✔ ✔

probation officers and correctional treatment specialists ✔

psychologists, all other ✔

psychology teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

recreation and fitness studies teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

recreation workers ✔

religious workers ✔ ✔

religious workers, all other ✔

residential advisors ✔

retail sales workers ✔

retail salespersons ✔

Secondary school teachers, except special and vocational education ✔ ✔

Self-enrichment education teachers ✔

Set and exhibit designers ✔ ✔

Social and community service managers ✔ ✔

Social and human service assistants ✔

Social sciences teachers, postsecondary, all other ✔

Social scientists and related workers ✔ ✔

Social scientists and related workers, all other ✔

Social work teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

Social workers, all other ✔

Sociologists ✔

Sociology teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

Special education teachers, middle school ✔ ✔

Special education teachers, preschool, kindergarten, and elementary school ✔ ✔

Special education teachers, secondary school ✔

Substance abuse and behavioral disorder counselors ✔ ✔

Supervisors, personal care and service workers ✔

Teachers and instructors, all other ✔

Travel guides ✔

Vocational education teachers, middle school ✔

(conTinued)
56 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table b12 (conTinued) 

high- wage and high- demand occupations in Tennessee, by corresponding program area, 2007/08

program area and occupation high- wage high-demand

Vocational education teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

Vocational education teachers, secondary school ✔

Waiters and waitresses ✔

health science

anesthesiologists ✔ ✔

athletic trainers ✔

audiologists ✔

biological technicians ✔

biomedical engineers ✔ ✔

cardiovascular technologists and technicians ✔ ✔

chiropractors ✔

clinical, counseling, and school psychologists ✔ ✔

dental assistants ✔

dental hygienists ✔ ✔

dentists ✔ ✔

dentists, all other specialists ✔

dentists, general ✔

diagnostic medical sonographers ✔ ✔

dietitians and nutritionists ✔

emergency medical technicians and paramedics ✔

environmental science and protection technicians, including health ✔ ✔

epidemiologists ✔ ✔

family and general practitioners ✔

forensic science technicians ✔ ✔

health and safety engineers, except mining safety ✔

health diagnosing and treating practitioners ✔ ✔

health diagnosing and treating practitioners, all other ✔ ✔

health educators ✔ ✔

health specialties teachers, postsecondary ✔

health technologists and technicians ✔ ✔

health technologists and technicians, all other ✔

healthcare practitioners and technical occupations ✔ ✔

healthcare practitioners and technical workers, all other ✔

healthcare support occupations ✔

healthcare support workers, all other ✔

home health aides ✔

industrial-organizational psychologists ✔

internists, general ✔ ✔

licensed practical and licensed vocational nurses ✔ ✔

life scientists, all other ✔

(conTinued)
Table b12 (conTinued) 

high- wage and high- demand occupations in Tennessee, by corresponding program area, 2007/08

program area and occupation high- wage high-demand

massage therapists ✔

medical and clinical laboratory technicians ✔

medical and clinical laboratory technologists ✔

medical and health services managers ✔ ✔

medical and public health social workers ✔ ✔

medical assistants ✔

medical records and health information technicians ✔

medical scientists, except epidemiologists ✔ ✔

medical secretaries ✔

medical transcriptionists ✔

mental health and substance abuse social workers ✔

nuclear medicine technologists ✔ ✔

nursing aides, orderlies, and attendants ✔

nursing instructors and teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

nursing, psychiatric, and home health aides ✔

obstetricians and gynecologists ✔ ✔

occupational and physical therapist assistants and aides ✔

occupational health and safety specialists ✔

occupational health and safety specialists and technicians ✔

occupational health and safety technicians ✔

occupational therapist assistants ✔

occupational therapists ✔ ✔

opticians, dispensing ✔

optometrists ✔

oral and maxillofacial surgeons ✔

orthodontists ✔

orthotists and prosthetists ✔ ✔

other healthcare practitioners and technical occupations ✔

other healthcare support occupations ✔

pediatricians, general ✔

pharmacists ✔ ✔

pharmacy technicians ✔

physical therapist aides ✔

physical therapist assistants ✔ ✔

physical therapists ✔ ✔

physician assistants ✔ ✔

physicians and surgeons, all other ✔

podiatrists ✔

prosthodontists ✔

psychiatric aides ✔

(conTinued)
58 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table b12 (conTinued) 

high- wage and high- demand occupations in Tennessee, by corresponding program area, 2007/08

program area and occupation high- wage high-demand

psychiatric technicians ✔

psychiatrists ✔ ✔

psychologists, all other ✔

psychology teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

radiation therapists ✔

radiologic technologists and technicians ✔ ✔

registered nurses ✔ ✔

respiratory therapists ✔ ✔

respiratory therapy technicians ✔

Speech-language pathologists ✔ ✔

Substance abuse and behavioral disorder counselors ✔ ✔

Surgeons ✔

Surgical technologists ✔ ✔

Therapists, all other ✔

Veterinarians ✔ ✔

Veterinary assistants and laboratory animal caretakers ✔

Veterinary technologists and technicians ✔

marketing

advertising and promotions managers ✔

advertising sales agents ✔ ✔

advertising, marketing, promotions, public relations, and sales managers ✔

agents and business managers of artists, performers, and athletes ✔

first-line supervisors/managers of non-retail sales workers ✔

gaming managers ✔

insurance sales agents ✔

lodging managers ✔

market research analysts ✔

marketing managers ✔ ✔

property, real estate, and community association managers ✔

public relations managers ✔ ✔

public relations specialists ✔ ✔

purchasing agents and buyers, farm products ✔

purchasing agents, except wholesale, retail, and farm products ✔

real estate brokers ✔ ✔

retail sales workers ✔

retail salespersons ✔

Sales and related workers, all other ✔

Sales engineers ✔ ✔

Sales managers ✔

Sales representatives, services, all other ✔

(conTinued)
Table b12 (conTinued) 

high- wage and high- demand occupations in Tennessee, by corresponding program area, 2007/08

program area and occupation high- wage high-demand

Sales representatives, wholesale and manufacturing, except technical and scientific products ✔

Sales representatives, wholesale and manufacturing, technical and scientific products ✔ ✔

Securities, commodities, and financial services sales agents ✔ ✔

Travel agents ✔

Travel guides ✔

Wholesale and retail buyers, except farm products ✔

Technology engineering

actuaries ✔

aerospace engineering and operations technicians ✔

aerospace engineers ✔

agricultural and food science technicians ✔

agricultural engineers ✔

agricultural sciences teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

air traffic controllers ✔

airline pilots, copilots, and flight engineers ✔

architects, except landscape and naval ✔

architects, surveyors, and cartographers ✔ ✔

architectural and civil drafters ✔

architecture and engineering occupations ✔ ✔

architecture teachers, postsecondary ✔

astronomers ✔

atmospheric and space scientists ✔

atmospheric, earth, marine, and space sciences teachers ✔

biological science teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

biological technicians ✔

biomedical engineers ✔ ✔

cartographers and photogrammetrists ✔

chemical engineers ✔

chemical plant and system operators ✔

chemical technicians ✔

chemistry teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

chemists ✔

civil engineering technicians ✔

civil engineers ✔

commercial pilots ✔ ✔

computer and information scientists, research ✔

computer and information systems managers ✔ ✔

computer and mathematical occupations ✔ ✔

computer hardware engineers ✔

computer programmers ✔

(conTinued)
60 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table b12 (conTinued) 

high- wage and high- demand occupations in Tennessee, by corresponding program area, 2007/08

program area and occupation high- wage high-demand

computer science teachers, postsecondary ✔

computer software engineers, applications ✔ ✔

computer software engineers, systems software ✔ ✔

computer specialists ✔

computer specialists, all other ✔

computer support specialists ✔ ✔

computer systems analysts ✔ ✔

construction and building inspectors ✔

database administrators ✔ ✔

drafters, all other ✔

drafters, engineering, and mapping technicians ✔

drafters, engineering, and mapping technicians; all other ✔

electrical and electronic engineering technicians ✔

electrical and electronics drafters ✔ ✔

electrical engineers ✔

electro-mechanical technicians ✔

electronics engineers, except computer ✔ ✔

engineering managers ✔

engineering teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

engineering technicians, except drafters, all other ✔

engineers ✔

engineers, all other ✔

environmental engineering technicians ✔ ✔

environmental engineers ✔ ✔

environmental science teachers, postsecondary ✔

environmental scientists and specialists, including health ✔

forestry and conservation science teachers, postsecondary ✔

gas plant operators ✔

geographers ✔

geological and petroleum technicians ✔

geoscientists, except hydrologists and geographers ✔

health and safety engineers, except mining safety ✔

hydrologists ✔

industrial engineering technicians ✔ ✔

industrial engineers ✔ ✔

landscape architects ✔

life, physical, and social science occupations ✔ ✔

life, physical, and social science technicians ✔ ✔

life, physical, and social science technicians, all other ✔ ✔

locomotive engineers ✔

(conTinued)
Table b12 (conTinued) 

high- wage and high- demand occupations in Tennessee, by corresponding program area, 2007/08

program area and occupation high- wage high-demand

marine engineers and naval architects ✔

materials engineers ✔

materials scientists ✔

mathematical science occupations ✔

mathematical science teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

mathematical technicians ✔

mathematicians ✔

mechanical drafters ✔

mechanical engineering technicians ✔

mechanical engineers ✔

mining and geological engineers, including mining ✔

natural sciences managers ✔

network and computer systems administrators ✔ ✔

network systems and data communications analysts ✔ ✔

nuclear engineers ✔

nuclear technicians ✔

operations research analysts ✔

petroleum engineers ✔

petroleum pump system operators, refinery operators, and gaugers ✔

physical scientists ✔

physical scientists, all other ✔ ✔

physicists ✔

physics teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

plant and system operators, all other ✔ ✔

power distributors and dispatchers ✔

power plant operators ✔

Ship engineers ✔

Stationary engineers and boiler operators ✔

Statisticians ✔

Surveying and mapping technicians ✔

Surveyors ✔

urban and regional planners ✔

Water and liquid waste treatment plant and system operators ✔

Trade and industrial education

aerospace engineering and operations technicians ✔

air traffic controllers ✔

aircraft mechanics and service technicians ✔

aircraft structure, surfaces, rigging, and systems ✔

airline pilots, copilots, and flight engineers ✔

ambulance drivers and attendants, except emergency ✔

(conTinued)
62 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table b12 (conTinued) 

high- wage and high- demand occupations in Tennessee, by corresponding program area, 2007/08

program area and occupation high- wage high-demand

animal control workers ✔

announcers ✔

architectural and civil drafters ✔

art and design workers ✔

art and design workers, all other ✔

art directors ✔

art, drama, and music teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

arts, design, entertainment, sports, and media occupations ✔ ✔

assemblers and fabricators, all other ✔

audio and video equipment technicians ✔

automotive body and related repairers ✔

automotive glass installers and repairers ✔

avionics technicians ✔

bailiffs ✔

bartenders ✔

boilermakers ✔

brickmasons and blockmasons ✔ ✔

bridge and lock tenders ✔

broadcast news analysts ✔

building and grounds cleaning and maintenance occupations, all other ✔

building cleaning and pest control workers ✔

bus and truck mechanics and diesel engine specialists ✔

bus drivers, school ✔

bus drivers, transit and intercity ✔

camera and photographic equipment repairers ✔

camera operators, television, video, and motion picture ✔

captains, mates, and pilots of water vessels ✔ ✔

cement masons and concrete finishers ✔

chemical equipment operators and tenders ✔

chemical plant and system operators ✔

civil engineering technicians ✔

combined food preparation and serving workers, including fast food ✔

commercial and industrial designers ✔

commercial divers ✔

commercial pilots ✔ ✔

communications teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

computer, automated teller, and office machine rep ✔

construction and building inspectors ✔

construction and extraction occupations ✔

construction and related workers, all other ✔

(conTinued)
Table b12 (conTinued) 

high- wage and high- demand occupations in Tennessee, by corresponding program area, 2007/08

program area and occupation high- wage high-demand

construction laborers ✔

construction managers ✔ ✔

construction trades workers ✔

control and valve installers and repairers, except mechanical door ✔

cooks and food preparation workers ✔

cooks, restaurant ✔

counter attendants, cafeteria, food concession, and coffee shop ✔

court reporters ✔ ✔

crane and tower operators ✔

criminal justice and law enforcement teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

cutters and trimmers, hand ✔

dental laboratory technicians ✔

designers, all other ✔

detectives and criminal investigators ✔ ✔

drafters, all other ✔

drafters, engineering, and mapping technicians ✔

drafters, engineering, and mapping technicians; all other ✔

earth drillers, except oil and gas ✔

editors ✔

electrical and electronic engineering technicians ✔

electrical and electronic equipment mechanics, installers, and repairers ✔

electrical and electronics drafters ✔ ✔

electrical and electronics installers and repairer ✔

electrical and electronics repairers, commercial and industrial equipment ✔

electrical and electronics repairers, powerhouse, substation, and relay ✔ ✔

electrical power-line installers and repairers ✔

electricians ✔ ✔

electro-mechanical technicians ✔

elevator installers and repairers ✔

emergency management specialists ✔

engineering technicians, except drafters, all other ✔

environmental engineering technicians ✔ ✔

explosives workers, ordnance handling experts, and blasters ✔

extruding and forming machine setters, operators, and tenders, synthetic and glass fibers ✔

fashion designers ✔

fiberglass laminators and fabricators ✔

film and video editors ✔

fine artists, including painters, sculptors, and illustrators ✔ ✔

fire fighters ✔ ✔

fire fighting and prevention workers ✔

(conTinued)
64 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table b12 (conTinued) 

high- wage and high- demand occupations in Tennessee, by corresponding program area, 2007/08

program area and occupation high- wage high-demand

fire inspectors and investigators ✔

first-line supervisors/managers of construction trades and extraction workers ✔

first-line supervisors/managers of correctional officers ✔

first-line supervisors/managers of fire fighting and prevention workers ✔ ✔

first-line supervisors/managers of helpers, laborers and material movers, hand ✔

first-line supervisors/managers of landscaping, lawn service, and groundskeeping workers ✔ ✔

first-line supervisors/managers of mechanics, installers and repairers ✔

first-line supervisors/managers of police and detectives ✔

first-line supervisors/managers of production and operating workers ✔

first-line supervisors/managers of transportation ✔

first-line supervisors/managers, protective service workers ✔

first-line supervisors/managers, protective service workers, all other ✔

food and beverage serving workers ✔

food preparation workers ✔

food processing workers ✔

forensic science technicians ✔ ✔

furnace, kiln, oven, drier, and kettle operators and kettle operators and tenders ✔

gas compressor and gas pumping station operators ✔

gas plant operators ✔

geological and petroleum technicians ✔

glaziers ✔

graphic designers ✔

hazardous materials removal workers ✔

heat treating equipment setters, operators, and tenders ✔

heating, air conditioning, and refrigeration mechanics and installers ✔

helpers, construction trades ✔

helpers, construction trades, all other ✔

helpers—brickmasons, blockmasons, stonemasons, and tile and marble setters ✔

helpers—electricians ✔

helpers—installation, maintenance, and repair workers ✔

helpers—pipelayers, plumbers, pipefitters, and steamfitters ✔

home appliance repairers ✔

hosts and hostesses, restaurant, lounge, and coffee shop ✔

industrial engineering technicians ✔ ✔

industrial machinery mechanics ✔ ✔

installation, maintenance, and repair occupations ✔

interior designers ✔

interpreters and translators ✔

Jewelers and precious stone and metal workers ✔ ✔

Job printers ✔

(conTinued)
Table b12 (conTinued) 

high- wage and high- demand occupations in Tennessee, by corresponding program area, 2007/08

program area and occupation high- wage high-demand

landscaping and groundskeeping workers ✔

legal support workers ✔ ✔

legal support workers, all other ✔

life, physical, and social science technicians ✔ ✔

life, physical, and social science technicians, all other ✔ ✔

locksmiths and safe repairers ✔ ✔

locomotive engineers ✔

machinists ✔ ✔

maintenance workers, machinery ✔

mechanical door repairers ✔

mechanical drafters ✔

mechanical engineering technicians ✔

media and communication equipment workers ✔

media and communication workers ✔ ✔

media and communication workers, all other ✔

medical appliance technicians ✔

medical equipment repairers ✔ ✔

merchandise displayers and window trimmers ✔

metal-refining furnace operators and tenders ✔

millwrights ✔

mine cutting and channeling machine operators ✔

mobile heavy equipment mechanics, except engines ✔ ✔

model makers, metal and plastic ✔ ✔

model makers, wood ✔

molders, shapers, and casters, except metal and plastic ✔

motor vehicle operators ✔

motorboat mechanics ✔

motorcycle mechanics ✔

multi-media artists and animators ✔

musical instrument repairers and tuners ✔

news analysts, reporters and correspondents ✔

nuclear technicians ✔

numerical tool and process control programmers ✔

operating engineers and other construction equipment operators ✔

ophthalmic laboratory technicians ✔

other construction and related workers ✔

other construction and related workers, all other ✔

other food preparation and serving related workers ✔

other installation, maintenance, and repair occupations ✔

other protective service workers ✔

(conTinued)
66 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table b12 (conTinued) 

high- wage and high- demand occupations in Tennessee, by corresponding program area, 2007/08

program area and occupation high- wage high-demand

painters, construction and maintenance ✔

painters, transportation equipment ✔

paralegals and legal assistants ✔ ✔

parking enforcement workers ✔

patternmakers, metal and plastic ✔ ✔

paving, surfacing, and tamping equipment operators ✔

petroleum pump system operators, refinery operators, and gaugers ✔

pile-driver operators ✔

pipelayers ✔

plant and system operators, all other ✔ ✔

plating and coating machine setters, operators, and tenders, metal and plastic ✔

plumbers, pipefitters, and steamfitters ✔ ✔

police and sheriff’s patrol officers ✔ ✔

pourers and casters, metal ✔

power distributors and dispatchers ✔

power plant operators ✔

precision instrument and equipment repairers, all other ✔

prepress technicians and workers ✔

private detectives and investigators ✔ ✔

probation officers and correctional treatment specialists ✔

protective service occupations ✔

protective service workers, all other ✔

public relations specialists ✔ ✔

pump operators, except wellhead pumpers ✔ ✔

radio mechanics ✔

rail car repairers ✔

rail transportation workers, all other ✔

railroad brake, signal, and switch operators ✔

railroad conductors and yardmasters ✔

rail-track laying and maintenance equipment operators ✔

recreational vehicle service technicians ✔

refractory materials repairers, except brickmasons ✔

reinforcing iron and rebar workers ✔ ✔

reporters and correspondents ✔

roofers ✔

Sailors and marine oilers ✔

Security and fire alarm systems installers ✔

Security guards ✔

Separating, filtering, clarifying, precipitating, and still machine setters, operators, and tenders ✔

Septic tank servicers and sewer pipe cleaners ✔ ✔

(conTinued)
Table b12 (conTinued) 

high- wage and high- demand occupations in Tennessee, by corresponding program area, 2007/08

program area and occupation high- wage high-demand

Service station attendants ✔

Service unit operators, oil, gas, and mining ✔

Set and exhibit designers ✔ ✔

Sheet metal workers ✔

Ship engineers ✔

Signal and track switch repairers ✔

Sound engineering technicians ✔

Stationary engineers and boiler operators ✔

Structural iron and steel workers ✔ ✔

Structural metal fabricators and fitters ✔

Supervisors of installation, maintenance, and repair workers ✔

Supervisors, transportation and material moving workers ✔

Surveying and mapping technicians ✔

Tank car, truck, and ship loaders ✔

Tapers ✔

Technical writers ✔

Telecommunications equipment installers and repairers ✔

Telecommunications line installers and repairers ✔

Terrazzo workers and finishers ✔

Tile and marble setters ✔

Timing device assemblers, adjusters, and calibrators ✔

Title examiners, abstractors, and searchers ✔

Tool and die makers ✔

Traffic technicians ✔

Transit and railroad police ✔

Transportation inspectors ✔

Transportation, storage, and distribution managers ✔

Truck drivers, heavy and tractor-trailer ✔

urban and regional planners ✔

Vehicle and mobile equipment mechanics, installers, and repairers ✔ ✔

Vocational education teachers, postsecondary ✔ ✔

Vocational education teachers, secondary school ✔

Waiters and waitresses ✔

Watch repairers ✔

Water and liquid waste treatment plant and system operators ✔

Water transportation workers ✔

Welders, cutters, solderers, and brazers ✔

Welding, soldering, and brazing machine setters, operators and tenders ✔

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development (2009).
68 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

APPendIx c 

sensITIvITy AnAlyses WITh 

AlTernATe crossWAlk

Sensitivity analyses were conducted to determine 

whether any key findings from the main report 

would change if an alternate crosswalk were used to 

classify occupations where the corresponding program areas were uncertain. The results at the statelevel were almost identical. There is greater variation 

in the findings when the results are disaggregated by 

region. This appendix discusses differences between 

the primary analyses and the sensitivity analyses for 

the last three research questions.

How does the percentage of high school graduates who 

completed a concentration compare with the percentage 

of workers employed in corresponding occupations?

The index of dissimilarity at the state level was 

0.18 using the combined crosswalk. With the 

alternate crosswalk, it was 0.19, a difference of 0.01 

(table C1). At the region level, the changes range 

from 0.00 to 0.04 (results not shown).

What percentage of jobs in high- wage occupations 

projected over 2006–16 could potentially be filled by 

2007/08 concentrators in corresponding program areas?

Using the alternate crosswalk, health science 

occupations switch from moderate wage to high 

wage in one region; technology engineering occupations, from high wage to moderate wage in six 

regions (table C2).

Using the alternate crosswalk, the median annual 

wage for each occupation by level of education differed from the combined crosswalk by an average 

of $698 for at most high school education, $793 for 

more than high school but less than a bachelor’s 

degree, and $2,142 for at least a bachelor’s degree. 

Table C3 shows the statewide median annual 

wages for occupations in each corresponding 

program area, by highest level of education completed, using the alternate crosswalk.

The percentage of jobs projected in high- wage occupations changed from the combined crosswalk 

by less than 1 percentage point at the state level, 

and there was no change in the percentage of graduates with concentrations in program areas that 

correspond to high-wage occupations (table C4). 

The percentage of projected jobs in high- wage 

occupations over 2006–16 that could be filled by 

2007/08 concentrators dropped from 4.1 percent 

to 3.3 percent. At the region level, the change in 

the percentage of projected new jobs over 2006–16 

in program areas that correspond to high-wage 

occupations ranged from 0 percentage point to 

18 percentage points, with an average difference of 

3 percentage points. The change in the percentage 

of graduates with concentrations in program areas 

Table c1 

Tennessee concentrators in each program area and workers employed in corresponding occupations, 

alternate crosswalk, by program area, 2007/08

program area

concentrators

number percent

employees

number percent

percentage 

point difference

agricultural education 4,944 16 55,966 1 14

business technology 4,132 13 833,760 19 –6

family and consumer services 5,442 17 865,624 20 –3

health science 3,393 11 276,430 6 4

marketing 1,877 6 331,300 8 –2

Technology engineering 613 2 322,416 7 –6

Trade and industrial education 11,141 35 1,627,950 38 –2

Total 31,542 4,313,446

Index of dissimilarity (0.19)

Note: Percentages may not sum to 100 and percentage point differences shown may differ from those calculated from values in the table because of rounding.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009) and Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development (2009).
Table c2 

Median annual wage classifications for occupations that correspond to each program area, alternate 

crosswalk, by region, 2007/08

region

agricultural 

education

business 

technology

family and 

consumer 

services

health 

science marketing

Technology 

engineering

Trade and 

industrial 

education

1 low moderate low high low moderate moderate

2 low moderate low high low high moderate

3 low moderate low high moderate high moderate

4 low moderate low high low high moderate

5 low moderate low high low high moderate

6 low moderate low high low Moderate moderate

7 moderate high Moderate high moderate high moderate

8 low moderate low high low Moderate moderate

9 low moderate low high moderate high moderate

10 moderate moderate low moderate low Moderate moderate

11 low moderate low moderate low Moderate moderate

12 moderate moderate low moderate low Moderate moderate

13 Moderate high low high low high moderate

Note: Values in bold differ from those in table 5. High- wage occupations have median annual wages at least 20 percent greater than the regional median; 

low-wage occupations have median annual wages at least 20 percent less than the regional median; all other occupations are classified as moderate wage. 

Wage classifications are identified separately for each region.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development (2009).

Table c3 

Tennessee median annual wages for occupations that correspond to each program area, alternate crosswalk, 

by highest level of education completed, 2007/08 (dollars)

more than high 

at most school but less than at least 

program area high school bachelor’s degree bachelor’s degree overall

agricultural education 22,012 23,688 49,702 22,012

business technology 19,931 30,057 64,554 33,834

family and consumer services 15,702 19,420 42,584 18,561

health science 21,886 32,233 55,904 36,706

marketing 15,702 19,420 48,268 19,420

Technology engineering 28,140 47,191 62,036 33,379

Trade and industrial education 25,515 35,990 53,249 27,828

Note: Median annual wages are weighted by the number of workers employed in each occupation.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009) and Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development (2009).

that correspond to high-wage occupations ranged 

from 0 percentage point to 6 percentage points, 

with an average difference of 1 percentage point. 

The change in the percentage of projected jobs in 

high- wage occupations over 2006–16 that could 

be filled by 2007/08 concentrators ranged from 0.0 

percentage point to 12.5 percentage points, with 

an average difference of 2.3 percentage points.
70 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table c4 

Projected jobs in high-wage occupations over 2006–16 that could be filled by 2007/08 concentrators, 

alternate crosswalk, by region

region program area

projected new jobs in 

high- wage occupations 

over 2006–16

number percent

2008 high school 

graduates who 

concentrated in 

corresponding 

program areas

number percent

projected jobs 

in high-wage 

occupations over 

2006–16 that could 

be filled by 2007/08 

concentrators 

(percent)

1 health science, technology engineering 6,670 24 388 12 5.8

2 health science, technology engineering 5,230 16 220 5 4.2

3 health science, technology engineering 7,660 15 277 8 3.6

4 health science, technology engineering 4,580 11 287 6 6.3

5 health science, technology engineering 8,900 19 386 9 4.3

6 Technology engineering 2,870 20 146 7 5.1

7 business technology, health science, 

technology engineering 3,650 39 276 11 7.6

8 health science, technology engineering 10,810 10 427 5 4.0

9 health science, technology engineering 15,925 13 313 4 2.0

10 Technology engineering 0 0 0 0 0.0

11 Technology engineering 0 0 0 0 0.0

12 Technology engineering 0 0 0 0 0.0

13 business technology, health science, 

technology engineering 29,280 46 442 5 1.5

Tennessee Varies by region 95,575 17 3,162 6 3.3

Note: Differences may be greater or less than expected due to rounding. High- wage occupations are identified separately for each region. Values for Tennessee are aggregates of the regional values. The percentage of projected jobs in high- wage occupations is the number of projected jobs in high-wage 

occupations divided by the total number of projected jobs. The percentage of graduates who concentrated in a corresponding program area is the number 

of graduates with a concentration in a program area that corresponds to a high- wage occupation divided by the total number of high school graduates.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009) and Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development (2009).

What percentage of jobs in high- demand occupations 

projected over 2006–16 could potentially be filled by 

2007/08 concentrators in corresponding program areas?

Using the alternate crosswalk, technology engineering occupations switch demand classifications 

in eight regions, and occupations in family and 

consumer services and in trade and industrial 

education switch demand classifications in one 

region (table C5).

Using the alternate crosswalk, at the state level, 

the percentage of projected jobs in high-d emand 

occupations changes from the combined crosswalk by less than 1 percentage point, and there 

is no change in the percentage of graduates with 

concentrations in program areas that correspond 

to high- demand occupations (table C6). The 

percentage of jobs in high-demand occupations 

projected over 2006–16 that could be filled by 

2007/08 concentrators drops from 7.1 percent 

to 6.1 percent. At the region level, the change in 

the percentage of projected jobs in high- demand 

occupations ranges from 0 percentage point to 

25 percentage points, with an average difference of 5 percentage points. The change in the 

percentage of graduates with concentrations in 

program areas that correspond to high- demand 

occupations ranges from 0 percentage point to 

10 percentage points, with an average difference 
Table c5 

Projected job demand over 2006–16, by corresponding program area and region, alternate crosswalk, 

2007/08

region

agricultural 

education

business 

technology

family and 

consumer 

services

health 

science marketing

Technology 

engineering

Trade and 

industrial 

education

1 low moderate high high high low low

2 high moderate low high moderate high moderate

3 moderate moderate high high low low moderate

4 high moderate high high moderate low moderate

5 low moderate high high moderate Moderate low

6 low low high high low high moderate

7 high moderate high high moderate Moderate low

8 high moderate moderate high moderate Moderate low

9 high moderate high moderate moderate Moderate low

10 high low high high low low low

11 low moderate moderate high low Moderate low

12 low low high high low high moderate

13 high moderate moderate high low high Moderate

Note: Values in bold differ from those in table 8. High- demand occupations have a projected change in employment over 2006–16 at least 20 percent 

greater than that of all occupations in the region; low-demand occupations have a projected change in employment over 2006–16 at least 20 percent less 

than that of all occupations in the region; all other occupations are classified as moderate demand. Demand classifications are identified separately for each 

region.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development (2009).

of 2 percentage points. The change in the percentage of projected jobs in high-demand occupations over 2006–16 that could be filled by 2007/08 

concentrators ranges from 0.1 percentage point to 

9.5 percentage points, with an average difference 

of 1.5 percentage points.
72 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

Table c6 

Projected jobs in high-demand occupations over 2006–16 that could be filled by 2007/08 concentrators, 

alternate crosswalk, by region

region

1

program areas

family and consumer 

services, health science, 

marketing

projected new jobs over 

2006–16 in high-demand 

occupations

number percent

17,750 65

2008 high school 

graduates who 

concentrated in 

corresponding 

program areas

number percent

709 22

projected jobs in highdemand occupations 

over 2006–16 that could 

be filled by 2008 career 

and technical education 

graduates (percent)

4.0

2 agricultural education, 

health science, technology 

engineering 6,150 19 923 22 15.0

3 family and consumer 

services, health science 18,370 37 485 15 2.6

4 agricultural education, 

family and consumer 

services, health science 16,060 39 1,061 23 6.6

5 family and consumer 

services, health science 18,880 40 664 15 3.5

6 family and consumer 

services, health science, 

technology engineering 6,460 46 325 16 5.0

7 agricultural education, 

family and consumer 

services, health science 4,610 49 1,053 42 22.8

8 agricultural education, 

health science 13,020 12 1,010 13 7.8

9 agricultural education, 

family and consumer 

services 37,900 32 980 13 2.6

10 agricultural education, 

family and consumer 

services, health science 4,050 86 1,568 66 38.7

11 health science 4,320 20 376 11 8.7

12 family and consumer 

services, health science, 

technology engineering 3,230 31 969 39 30.0

13 agricultural education, 

health science, technology 

engineering 17,960 28 218 3 1.2

Tennessee Varies by region 168,760 31 10,341 18 6.1

Note: Differences may be greater or less than expected due to rounding. High-d emand occupations are identified separately for each region. Values for 

Tennessee are aggregates of the regional values. The percentage of projected jobs in high- demand occupations is the number of projected jobs in highdemand occupations divided by the total number of projected jobs. The percentage of graduates who concentrated in corresponding program areas is the 

number of graduates with a concentration in a program area that corresponds to a high- demand occupation divided by the total number of high school 

graduates.

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from Tennessee Department of Education (2009) and Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development (2009).
Notes

1. The Bureau of Labor Statistics uses the North 

American Industry Classification System 

(NAICS) as the structure for collecting, aggregating, presenting, and analyzing data on 

the U.S. economy (http://www.bls.gov/bls/

naics.htm). NAICS uses a six-digit hierarchical coding system to classify all economic 

activity into 20 industry sectors. For analysis, 

the bureau has further aggregated the 20 

sectors into 12 supersectors, divided into two 

groups. The first group is goods-producing, 

with three supersectors: natural resources and 

mining, construction, and manufacturing. 

The second group is service-providing, with 

nine supersectors: trade, transportation, and 

utilities; information; financial activities; professional and business services; education and 

health services; leisure and hospitality; other 

services; public administration; and unclassified (Walker and Murphy 2001).

2. This measure estimates the general availability of concentrations in program areas, 

though actual availability may be constrained 

by the number of enrollments each school can 

accommodate in a given year.

3. One of 17 career and technical education–only 

schools had no students complete three or 

more courses in the same program area (required for a concentration in 2007/08).

4. Disaggregated by school type, the average 

number of program areas available was similar for career and technical education–only 

schools and non–career and technical education schools (mean = 3.6 for both types; see 

tables B3 and B4 in appendix B). There were, 

however, some differences in the types of 

program areas available. At career and technical education–only schools, the most common 

was trade and industrial education, available 

at 88 percent of the schools. At non– career 

and technical education schools, the most 

common was family and consumer services, 

available at 72 percent.

5. The index of dissimilarity is calculated as:

N ci w

0.5 − i

i=1 C W ,

where i is the identifier for each program 

area, N is the total number of program areas, 

ci

 is the number of concentrators in program 

area i, C is the total number of concentrators, wi

 is the number of workers employed in 

an occupation that corresponds to program 

area i, and W is the total number of workers 

employed in all occupations.

6. Calculated by multiplying the median annual 

wage of $28,030 by 1.2 (20 percent above the 

median annual wage).

7. Median annual wages for all occupations in 

the state of Tennessee ranged from $23,658 

to $32,616 by region. However, the median 

annual wages were not directly comparable 

across regions due to differences in such factors as cost of living and the experience profiles of the workforce. Therefore, this section 

focuses on identifying the high- wage occupations in each region rather than comparing 

the median annual wages across regions.

8. A limitation in providing a single wage classification for each occupation is that it masks 

variability within an occupation. Even though 

an occupation may have an overall classification of low wage, there are still opportunities 

for high- wage jobs, particularly for students 

who complete higher levels of education. Data 

from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (2006) was 

used to categorize the highest level of education achieved by the majority of workers in 

each occupation.

9. These projections overestimate the actual 

number of concentrators, since graduates 
74 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

may have concentrations in multiple program 

areas.

10. These projections overestimate the actual 

number of concentrators since graduates may 

have concentrations in multiple program 

areas.

11. The percentage of projected jobs in high-w age 

occupations changes by less than 1 percentage 

point statewide, with an average difference 

of 3 percentage points at the region level (see 

appendix C). The percentage of projected jobs 

in high-d emand occupations changes by less 

than 1 percentage point statewide, with an 

average difference of 5 percentage points at 

the region level. Technology engineering had 

the most uncertainty in matching with corresponding occupations.

12. A program of study is a sequence of three or 

more credits in an “elective focus,” based on 

students’ career interests and goals. The elective focus may be career and technical education, science and mathematics, humanities, 

fine arts, Advanced Placement/International 

Baccalaureate, or other areas approved by the 

local board of education. Many programs of 

study integrate the curriculum with learning 

experiences, such as cocurricular activities 

or work-site learning. Tennessee offers more 

than 70 programs of study, many having a 

career and technical education elective focus 

(Tennessee Department of Education 2008).

13. Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) 

is a structure of occupations developed by the 

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The 2000 SOC 

classifies workers at four levels of aggregation: 

major group, minor group, broad occupation, 

and detailed occupation. Occupations with 

similar skills or work activities are grouped 

at each level to ease comparisons. Each item 

in the hierarchy has a six-digit code. The first 

two digits represent the major group; the 

third represents the minor group; the fourth 

and fifth represent the broad occupation; and 

the sixth represents the detailed occupation. 

More information about the SOC can be found 

at http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/print.pl/soc/

socguide.htm.

14. See http://www.tennessee.gov/labor-wfd/

cc/ccareas.htm for a list of counties in each 

region.

15. No career and technical education–only 

schools served students in more than one 

region.

16. All career and technical education–only 

schools have zero high school graduates in 

the home-school file. High school diplomas 

are awarded by the non– career and technical 

education school attended by the students.

17. The Bureau of Labor Statistics collects education attainment data by occupation from the 

American Community Survey. These data are 

used to group occupations by the percentage of workers with a high school diploma 

or less, some college or an associate’s degree, 

or a bachelor’s degree or more. More information on the Bureau of Labor Statistics 

education and training classification systems 

can be found at http://www.bls.gov/emp/

ep_education_tech.htm.

18. A more detailed crosswalk of all occupations 

to concentrations is available upon request.
Tennessee Department of Education. (2008). Career clusters 

and programs of study. Retrieved January 7, 2009, from 

http://www.tennessee.gov/education/cte/ad/clupos/

clupos.shtml.

Tennessee Department of Education. (2009). CTE 2020 

 vision. Retrieved August 31, 2010, from http://www.

state.tn.us/education/cte/index.shtml.

Tennessee Department of Education. (n.d. a). Tennessee 

career-technical data reporting system. Retrieved from 

www.tennessee.gov/education/cte/ad/tiger/index.shtml

Tennessee Department of Education. (n.d. b). CTE program areas and career clusters. Retrieved from www.

tennessee.gov/education/cte/ad/clupos/cluctepas.shtml.

Tennessee Department of Education (n.d. c). Pathways: 

programs of study. Retrieved from http://pathways.tbr.

edu/programs.php.

Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development. 

(2006). Hot jobs to 2016. Retrieved January 7, 2009, from 

http://www.tennessee.gov/labor-wfd/outlooks/select.htm.

Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development. (2009). Labor market analysis data, occupationspecific data. Retrieved April 14, 2008, from http://

www.sourcetn.org/analyzer/startanalyzer.asp.

Tennessee State Board of Education. (2008). The Carl D. 

Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006: 

Tennessee state plan. Retrieved January 7, 2009, from 

http://www.state.tn.us/education/cte/ad/perkins/

PerkinsIV.shtml.

Turner, S.E., and Bowen, W.G. (1999). Choice of major: the 

changing (unchanging) gender gap. Industrial and 

Labor Relations Review, 52(2), 289–313.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2006). Occupational projections and training data. Retrieved December 7, 2009, 

from http://www.bls.gov/emp/optd/.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2008). Occupational outlook handbook, 2008–09 edition. Retrieved January 7, 

2009, from http://www.bls.gov/oco/oco2003.htm.
76 aligning career & Technical educaTion WiTh high-Wage & high-demand occupaTionS in TenneSSee

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2007). Parent and family involvement 

in education survey of the 2007 National Household 

Education Surveys Program (NHES). In S. Bielick 

(2008), 1.5 million homeschooled students in the United 

States in 2007. Institute of Education Sciences Issue 

Brief 2009-030, Washington, DC.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2008a). Digest of education statistics.

Retrieved April 12, 2008, from http://nces.ed.gov/

programs/digest/d08/tables/dt08_100.asp

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2008b). Private School Universe Survey 

(PSS), 2007–2008. Retrieved August 5, 2009, from 

http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pss/tables/table_2008_15.

asp.

Wong, K., Sims, P., and Schuermann, P. (2004). The Tennessee workforce development system: investing in the 

future. Nashville, TN: Peabody Center for Education 

Policy and the Leadership Development Center at 

Vanderbilt University.