ERIC ED515067: Replication of a Career Academy Model: The Georgia Central Educational Center and Four Replication Sites. Issues & Answers. REL 2011-No. 101

0.67 MB·English

by  ERIC

&
ISSUES ANSWERS REL 2011– No. 101
Replication of a
career academy
At SERVE Center UNC, Greensboro
model: the
Georgia Central
Educational
Center and four
replication sites
&
ISSUES ANSWERS REL 2011–No. 101
At SERVE Center UNC, Greensboro
Replication of a career academy model:
the Georgia Central Educational
Center and four replication sites
January 2011
Prepared by
Amy Detgen
Academy for Educational Development
and
Corinne Alfeld
Academy for Educational Development
WA
ME
MT ND
VT
OR MN NH
ID SD WI NY
MI
WY
IA PA
NE
NV IL IN OH
CA UT CCOO WV VA
KS MO KY
NC
TN
AZ OK
NM AR SC
MS AL GA
LA
TX
AK
FL At SERVE Center UNC, Greensboro
Issues & Answers is an ongoing series of reports from short-term Fast Response Projects conducted by the regional educa-
tional 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 educa-
tors 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.
January 2011
This report was prepared for the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) under Contract ED-06-CO-0028 by Regional Educa-
tional Laboratory Southeast administered by SERVE Center at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro. 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:
Detgen, A., and Alfeld, C. Replication of a career academy model: the Georgia Central Educational Center and four replica-
tion sites. (2011). (Issues & Answers Report, REL 2011–No. 101). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute
of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory
Southeast. 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 REL 2011–No. 101
Replication of a career academy model:
the Georgia Central Educational
Center and four replication sites
The study surveyed four career acade- seen as key to developing programs and
mies in Georgia that replicated the model curricula that train students for local career
of the Georgia Central Educational Cen- and employment opportunities. The most
ter, which integrates technical instruction successful career academies have involved
and academics at the high school level. stakeholders from the beginning of program
The four replication sites adhered to the development.
major tenets of the model. The model’s
flexibility helped the new sites meet com- The Georgia Central Educational Center (CEC),
munity needs. opened in 2000, is a charter career academy
developed through a partnership of local em-
Integrating career and technical instruction at ployers, high schools, and a technical college
the high school level has gained prominence in Coweta County, Georgia. Since 2004, Geor-
in recent years, with career academies spring- gia has provided funding to other communi-
ing up around the country. Policymakers, ties to replicate the CEC model. While some
educators, and researchers have grown more studies describe the CEC model, this study
interested in career academy models as they examines how selected elements have been
search for strategies to raise student perfor- replicated in four charter schools in Georgia.
mance, academic expectations, and graduation The aim was not to examine the effectiveness
rates (Kemple and Willner 2008). An increas- of the model but to see how three selected ele-
ingly popular approach to high school reform, ments have been replicated and to compare the
career academies strive to create more effective five schools. The three focus areas are:
paths between high school and postsecondary
education and the workplace. • CEC is needs-driven. CEC develops courses
and curricula based on community and
First appearing some 35 years ago, career employer needs.
academies have been implemented in an esti-
mated 2,500 high schools across the country • CEC is a joint venture. To encourage
(MDRC 2010). Partnerships with local employ- community support, CEC invites major
ers are a distinctive part of the schools’ plan- stakeholders from secondary and post-
ning and implementation. A major feature of secondary education and local businesses
career academies has often been the involve- to serve on its steering committee or
ment of community partners, or stakeholders, board.
ii Summary
• CEC is seamless. CEC integrates academics • Emphasis on the link between academic
with career and technical education (hori- and technical skills.
zontal seamlessness) and secondary with
postsecondary education (vertical seam- • Academic classes, but fewer than in home
lessness), emphasizing dual enrollment high schools.
opportunities that lead to postsecondary
credentials. • Opportunities to earn course credits at
technical colleges through dual enroll-
Information on each replication site was col- ment. Four site leaders indicated that
lected through web searches for background sharing physical space or colocating with a
information and interviews with a leader from technical college was critical in facilitating
each site. Site leaders reported that the three vertical seamlessness.
focus areas characterized each site. Site leaders
also emphasized the importance of the CEC • More challenges with horizontal seamless-
model’s flexibility for enabling career academies ness than with vertical seamlessness.
to tailor their programs to community needs.
Site leaders reported the following variations:
Site leaders reported the following common
features: • The program areas reflect differences in
labor force needs in the community. (An
• Operation as a shared-time facility—that exception was health care, a common
is, students attend the school for part of employment need.)
the day, before or after attending their
local high school. • The composition of partnerships varied. In
addition to local businesses and technical
• Curriculum development based on a needs colleges, some sites partnered with local
assessment of area businesses. Health care nonprofit organizations, government agen-
was identified as an employment need in cies, and other postsecondary institutions.
all five sites.
• The sites took various approaches to
• Advisory committees composed of local maintaining partnerships—from joining
business members that assist in initial community organizations to sponsoring
curriculum development and regularly events.
review the relevance of programs.
• Two sites provided formal onsite planning
• Key partnerships with the business com- time for career academy academic and
munity, local technical colleges, and other technical teachers to work together.
community stakeholders.
• Two sites created opportunities for fac-
• Support from business and postsecondary ulty to interact with students’ home high
partners in funding, equipment, space, school faculty, to align course content and
and curriculum input. end-of-course testing requirements.
Summary iii
The Georgia Department of Education Charter are implemented and help the Georgia Depart-
School Division, in discussion with Regional ment of Education better understand and an-
Educational Laboratory Southeast, suggested ticipate inevitable variations in CEC replication.
that a study of the CEC replication sites would
help educators understand how CEC features January 2011
iv Table of conTenTS
TablE of ConTEnTs
Why this study? 1
What is the Georgia Central Educational Center? 2
Study findings 4
The replication process 5
Central Educational Center is needs-driven: how the sites compare in identifying needs and matching them
with curricula 6
Central Educational Center is a joint venture: how the sites compare in key partnerships 9
Central Educational Center is seamless: how the sites compare in seamlessness 11
Considerations for future replications 14
Commonalities and differences 15
Study limitations 16
Appendix A Study methods 17
Appendix B Topics for preinterview web search data 20
Appendix C Preinterview web search results 21
Appendix D Key informant interview protocol 32
Notes 34
References 35
Boxes
1 Background information 4
2 Methodology 5
Tables
1 Reasons for adopting the Central Educational Center model, timeframe to open, and mission
statements 6
2 Needs assessment process, by site 7
3 Reported contributions of postsecondary and business partners in relationships with Central Educational
Center career academies 10
4 Horizontal seamlessness, by site 11
5 Vertical seamlessness, by site 13
A1 Background information on the five Georgia career academy sites included in the study, 2009 18
C1 Central Educational Center, Newnan 21
C2 Walton Career Academy, Monroe 23
C3 Rockdale Career Academy, Conyers 25
Table of conTenTS v
C4 Floyd County Schools College and Career Academy, Rome 27
C5 Golden Isles Career Academy, Brunswick 29
C6 Tech High School, Atlanta (not included in the study) 31
Why ThiS STudy? 1
Why This sTudy?
The study
This report describes aspects of a charter career
surveyed four
academy model first developed and implemented
as the Coweta County, Georgia, Central Educa-
career academies
tional Center (CEC) in 2000. Features of the model
were replicated by new career academies across
in Georgia that
Georgia, with support from the Georgia Depart-
ment of Education. Policymakers, educators, and
replicated the
researchers across the country have grown more
interested in career academy models such as the
model of the
CEC, as they search for strategies to raise student
performance, academic expectations, and gradu-
Georgia Central
ation rates (Kemple and Willner 2008). Gathering
information on the CEC, and on the sites where its
Educational
model has been replicated, is important as states
and school districts across the country consider
Center, which
adopting some of its strategies as a way to engage
students and improve school performance.
integrates
A popular approach to high school reform, career
technical
academies have been implemented in an estimated
2,500 high schools across the country (MDRC
instruction and
2010). Career academies emerged some 35 years
ago as a way to align curriculum content and
academics at
learning experiences more closely with potential
careers. The schools reflect the goal of creating
the high school
more effective paths between high school and
postsecondary education and the workplace (Kem-
level. The four
ple and Willner 2008). Partnerships with local
employers are a distinctive feature of the schools’
replication sites
planning and implementation (Stern, Dayton, and
Raby 2000).
adhered to the
Through mandates, funding opportunities, and
major tenets of
other methods, states have supported career
academies as a high school improvement strategy.
the model. The
For example, Florida state legislation requires
each school district to operate at least one ca-
model’s flexibility
reer academy (Florida Office of Program Policy
Analysis and Government Accountability 2008).
helped the
In Georgia, the state offers grants to sites wishing
to replicate charter school career academy mod-
new sites meet
els. For example, in a January 2010 presentation
before the Georgia State Board of Education, the
community needs.
state superintendent noted the recent increase in
the number of Georgia charter schools that are
2 replicaTion of a career academy model: The GeorGia cenTral educaTional cenTer & four replicaTion SiTeS
career academies (Cox 2010). And philosophy, origins, and guidelines for replicating
The CEC model differs
the lieutenant governor’s office the model (Chow 2006; Lakes 2003; MacAllum
from many career
featured career academies promi- and Johnson 2002; Yoder and James 2006). How-
academies in that it
nently in its March 2010 “Innova- ever, these articles focus on the original CEC site.
functions as a regional
tion in Education Conference.” This study adds to the understanding of career
career technical
academies by providing information on the ap-
education center,
Although the Georgia Depart- proaches to replicating a specific career academy
operating as a one-hub
ment of Education describes the model in Georgia.
campus and offering
CEC as a career academy, the CEC
technical courses to
model differs from many career For educators in other states, this study will
students from multiple
academies in that it functions contribute to an understanding of selected features
area high schools
as a regional career technical of the CEC and four replication sites, focusing on
education center, operating as a three key areas: needs assessment, joint venture,
one-hub campus and offering technical courses to and seamlessness. Specifically, this report answers
students from multiple area high schools. The CEC the following three-part research question:
focuses on career and technical instruction and
partnerships with local businesses, but it is not a • How do the CEC and the four replication sites
school within a school, nor is it structured around compare with one another in:
cohorts of students who move together from grade
to grade. Instead, students from local high schools • Processes for identifying community
attend the CEC part-time for career-technical needs and addressing them through cur-
instruction and some academic instruction but ricula and course offerings?
spend the rest of the school day at their home
school sites. • Development and cultivation of key part-
nerships with stakeholders?
The CEC and the replication sites studied in this
report are charter schools. School districts in • Approaches to developing and imple-
Georgia and other states are following the CEC menting horizontal and vertical
model, structured as both a regional center and seamlessness?
a charter school, in developing their own career
academies. CEC career academies are now operat-
ing or in development in nearly 20 Georgia coun- WhaT is ThE GEoRGia CEnTRal
ties (Abdul-Alim 2009). EduCaTional CEnTER?
Although researchers have evaluated the effects of Conceptually, the CEC is based on a model de-
school within a school career academies (Ameri- scribed by Harless (1998) in The Eden Conspiracy,
can Institutes for Research and SRI International which outlines an education reform approach
2006; Bragg et al. 2002; Datnow et al. 2003; called “accomplishment-based curriculum.” Har-
Dynarski et al. 1998; Karp et al. 2007; Kemple and less’s model stresses high expectations, advanced
Willner 2008; Warford, Beauman, and Kindell technical training combined with more rigorous
2008), there is little research on the regional academic instruction than typical vocational
career technical education center approach. There education, daily hands-on projects, flexibility
is also little research on career academy replica- for students to determine their post–high school
tion. Studies of education reforms have found paths, seamless integration of secondary and
substantial variation in replications of particular postsecondary instruction, and opportunities for
reforms (Bodilly et al. 1998; Elmore 1996). Since work-based learning outside the classroom in local
the CEC opened, several articles have outlined its businesses.