Career technical education has evolved a great deal over the past 50 years. Traditionally, the primary focus of CTE, or vocational training as it was referred to, was blue-collar jobs such as welding and machine repair. However, technology has changed the way most industries operate, and the job market is demanding varied technical skills that can only be acquired through CTE. Today, technical skills in fields such as engineering that were acquired in university and college courses have been factored in the CTE curriculums (Gewertz, 2019). Aware of the central role CTE plays in providing skilled labor, California has made considerable changes in the way CTE is funded; the latest changes in CTE funding will improve CTE education and help California and America at large meet their economic goals.
The past ten years have witnessed significant changes in the funding of CTE in California. In 2013, the state replaced the traditional K-12 funding system with the Local Control Funding Formula (LCCF) ("Local Control Funding," n.d.). LCCF introduced a base amount per pupil, with the option of additional funding for marginalized populations. The effect of the changes was that they gave the local education agencies flexibility in the spending of state education funds (Taylor, 2018). Before the LCCF program, CTE in California was funded through grants such as the California Career Pathway grant (Taylor, 2018). In 2018, the governor's budget increased the LCCF funding per pupil from $ 8700 to $ 9200. The budget bill also introduced additional funding for Career Technical Education through the Strong Workforce Program (Hogg & Pryor, 2018). The Strong Workforce program was introduced in 2016; it aims to enhance the accessibility and quality of CTE as well as promote coordination between CTE institutions and employers.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The above changes have improved CTE in California in different ways. The LCCF not only gave CTE institutions flexibility in the spending of education funds but also increased the funding per pupil. The introduction of LCCF is estimated to have increased the base amount per pupil by 16 percent over the average school rate (Taylor, 2018). More importantly, LCCF emphasized accountability and quality. Unlike the previous funding program, LCF required every funding district to submit a plan of how they plan to use the funding to meet students’ needs. It also required school districts to provide performance data such as tests scores and graduation rates; the information is published on a public website (Taylor, 2018). Strong Workforce is an additional source of funding for CTE schools that takes into account regional needs such as the number of job openings and the unemployment rate. Further, the enhanced collaboration between the industry and CTE schools under the Strong Workforce initiative will ensure that the schools produce graduates who can meet the needs of employers.
With the increased focus and funding for CTE, what does California and America at large stand to gain? The demand for skilled labor in America is high, and traditional education does not give graduates the technical skills required to take those jobs. It is estimated that about one in three new jobs in California demands training above the high school level but below the bachelor's degree level (Bohn, Gao, & McConville, 2018). CTE can prepare students to take up these jobs. Countrywide, there were about 17.7 million underemployed or jobless Americans in 2015, according to the US Chamber of Commerce estimates (Moore, 2015). CTE training can reduce the number by preparing graduates to take the technical jobs that are being created by industrialization and advancement in technology. Besides producing students with skills that meet the industry's demands, CTE has also increased the number of students transitioning from high school to college ("CTE General Public Fact Sheet," n.d.). In the long-term, CTE will help America maintain its position at the helm of the global economy.
In conclusion, the recent changes in the financing of CTE in California have improved its effectiveness. For example, compared to five years ago, the allocation per student is higher. Also, more emphasis is being placed on accountability, and the students’ and employers’ needs. Since CTE helps meet the high demand for skilled labor, the recent improvements will boost the economy of both California and America as a whole
References
Bohn, S., Gao, N., & McConville, S. (2018, June). Career Technical Education in California. Retrieved from https://www.ppic.org/publication/career-technical-education-in-california/
CTE General Public Fact Sheet. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ct/gi/ctegeneralfacts.asp
Gewertz, C. (2019, May 14). What Is Career and Technical Education, Anyway? Retrieved from https://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/career-technical-education/index.html
Hogg, J., & Pryor, L. (2018, June 29). Implications of California's 2018-19 Budget for Career and Technical Education. Retrieved from https://www.spra.com/2018/06/29/implications-of-californias-2018-19-budget-for-career-and-technical-education/
Local Control Funding Formula Overview. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/lc/lcffoverview.asp
Moore, J. (2015, March 4). The Importance and Relevance of CTE. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/putting-america-work/201503/the-importance-and-relevance-cte
Taylor, M. (2018, February 7). The 2018-19 Budget: Proposition 98 Education Analysis. Retrieved from https://lao.ca.gov/reports/2018/3741/prop98-ed-analysis-020718.pdf
