A r c h i v e d  I n f o r m a t i o n

2. How Central Is Articulation to Tech-Prep Development?

• Articulation agreements are required under the Perkins Act as a condition for Title IIIE funding.

• Most consortia (about 60 percent) had previous experience developing articulation agreements before Tech-Prep legislation and a process for developing new agreements.

• Articulation is easy to arrange, usually involving only a short-term effort to review high school and college courses and make minor adjustments.

• Articulation agreements are tangible signs of progress and successful collaboration, which are particularly important in the early stages of Tech-Prep development.

These reasons probably account for the early emphasis on articulation, but questions remain about the long-term contribution of articulation to students' achievement of Tech-Prep objectives. Does articulation encourage students to earn a two-year associate's degree or occupational certificate? Does it provide students, as suggested in the Tech-Prep legislation, with "progressive achievement leading to competencies" in math, science, and communications? Do articulation agreements really promote levels of technical preparation that would not be achieved in the absence of the agreements?

Such concerns persist because, in most cases, articulation involves only establishing equivalences between secondary and postsecondary vocational courses so students can earn college credit in high school. This focus on vocational course-to-course articulation leaves several concerns unaddressed:

• College Concerns About Student Skills. Many community college instructors complain that first-year students lack the basic academic skills needed to master advanced technical material. Articulating a single vocational course does not address this problem.

• Low Rates of Student Use of Articulation. Employers want students to achieve high-level technical competence, but some students retake articulated courses at the college level rather than obtain credit and jump ahead to more advanced course work. This outcome is often due to lack of promotion of articulation--sometimes because teachers fear their high school courses are not really college equivalents.

• Weak Inducements to Attend Consortium Colleges. The opportunity to earn advanced credit at a two-year college is not always a strong incentive for students to enroll there, even when articulation is promoted as a benefit of Tech-Prep. In some study sites, many students still plan to attend four-year universities or other nonconsortium colleges in which they cannot obtain articulated credit.

Several strategies have emerged in the in-depth study sites to address these concerns: (1) use of competency tests as a condition for earning articulated credit; (2) expanding articulation to include four-year institutions; (3) coordination of articulation across community colleges to expand students' opportunities; and (4) extending articulation to include academic classes.

Competency tests can help reassure both high school and college teachers about students' skill levels. Secondary teachers may be more willing to promote articulation if they are confident that only students who have really mastered required competencies are granted credit. To this end, several sites require evidence of skills as a condition of credit award. In Salem, for example, all students must pass a competency assessment to earn college credit. In Dothan, high school students can earn articulated credit if they receive a grade of A or B, but if they get only a B they must pass a "challenge test."

Expanding articulation beyond the traditional high school-community college arrangement might encourage students to attend community colleges. Agreements that make it possible for students to apply their articulated credits at the community college and later at a university can reassure parents and students that pursuing a community college degree does not limit the option to pursue a four-year degree. This strategy can expand students' postsecondary options and encourage them to begin postsecondary work with advanced technical training at a community college, rather than entering a four-year liberal arts program without a clear occupational objective.

Agreements are also possible under which credit can be earned at multiple community colleges. Such arrangements allow students greater flexibility in choosing postsecondary institutions, without jeopardizing credits. This strategy may be particularly useful in large metropolitan areas with several community colleges in close proximity. A few states are beginning to consider statewide articulation agreements for this purpose. These efforts will introduce common competency objectives across institutions for the same educational programs--a movement that would be consistent with federally endorsed and funded efforts to develop national skill standards.

Finally, broadening articulation to include academic courses could result in greater emphasis on raising academic standards and encourage students to be as concerned about performance in academic classes as in vocational classes. This approach could have two variants. Consortia could simply establish equivalences between high school and college academic classes and conditions for granting college credit as they do for vocational classes; this approach is currently followed in the Hartford consortium. A more far-reaching approach is to link award of college credit to successful completion of both vocational and academic classes in the high school stage of a defined program of study; this approach is followed in the Gainesville consortium. Both approaches could allay concerns about Tech-Prep students' level of preparation for college work--but only if articulation is carried out with strict adherence to college-level standards for awarding academic credits.
-###-

[XII. Emerging Issues]

[3. How Can Consortia Make Programs of Study a Meaningful Feature of Tech-Prep?]