Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
DOCHMENT RESUME
ED 208 227 CE 030 345, II
AUTHOR Greenan, JamesTITLE Use of State .Special Needs Set-Aside Funds for
Program Imprdveme t Activities. Policy Research andResource Series:. Document 8:
INSTITUTION Illinois Univ., rbana. Leadership TrainingInst./Vocational and Special Education.
SPONS AGENCY Office of Special Education (ED), Washington, D.C.. Personnel Preparation.
PUB /ATE OctGRANT G0079 0952NOTE 94p.; For related documents see CE 030 343-344, ED
194 743-745, 4nd ED 201 745.
EDRS PRICE MF01/PC04 Pigs Pgstage.-DESCRIPTORS Abstracts; Agency Cooperation; *Demonstrati?n
Programs; *Disabilities: Educational Finance;Elementary Secondary Education; Federal State-Relationship; Innovation; Program Development;.*Program Improvement; Research; *Special Education;*Statewide Planning; *Vocational Education;Vocational Rehabilitation
IDENTIFIERS 4 Education Amendments 1976
ABSTRACTA study was conducted to examine the exient to which
program imprOxbient funds frdm Public Law 9'4-482 were used by statesto aid state vocational education programs serving handicapped anddisadvantaged students-through research,4exemplary and innovativeprograms,-curriculum development, vocational guidance and counseling;.And vocational education-personnel training. Information was-gathered-through a survey of state research coordinating unit (ECU) directors,in all states, with 100 pa/tent participation. The study indicatedthat the 10 percent handicapped and 20 percent disadvantagedset-aside funds'were not generally uged by most states.to fundprogram improvement programs and activities. This does notneceesarily'sggge4t that the stated have not funded programimprovement.ictivitAA0 that had an impact upon spdcial needs-learners, nor that he set - asides have ,not been appropriaieiy used as'basic grantS,tO support the excess costs of educating 'handicapped andisadvantaged students in vocational education.. Future state funding .
policies should reflect increased colldboration among vocationaleducation, special 'education, vocational rehabilitation, and, otheragencies. Program efforts should be made"to meet the needs of thehandicapped and disadvantaged populations with' potentially less fdndsand funding sources. (The Appendix contains brief' abstracts dfvarious program improvement projects funded by the states.) (KC)
**********************************************#*****************#******Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made
from the original document. , ******************4*****************************************************
1
i
I.
( . ,
...
.*
Use of State Special Needs Set -Aside Funds.` for Program Improvement Activities
Policy Research and Resource Seriets: Document 8,
James P. Greenan;Research and Development CoordinatorLeadership Training Institute/Vocational and Special EducationUniversity of Illinoisat Urbana-Champaign
4
A Publication of theLEADERSHIP TRAINING INSTITUTE/
'F00, VOCATIONAL AND SPECIAL: EDUCATION4
ICollege of ,EducationUniversity of Illinoisat Urbana-Champaign
Sponsored by
Division of Personnel PreparationOffice of Special EducationU.S. Education Department
1
1
,
t_.
,
U S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)
) /Thts document has been reproduced as4 recened front the person or orconizahonorirattr)g ItMinor changes have been made to ImprovereProduchon quehry
., Points of view or opinions stated in this docu
ment do not ntreessanty represent off ,cal Nitu,
POstron or poky
I
1
c-1
Sr
"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THMATERIAL HAS, BEEN GRANTED E
t
' TO THE EDUCATIONA/ VESOURCEINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)
r
4
Z
L
...
t
eir
1
- \F "- N
--,
t
r'' %
i A 4
.*
0,
.-
.flavvo
.
,.The contents of this publication were developedunder grant number G007900952 from the Division of ,
Perknnel Preparation, Office of Special Educatign,4,U S Education Department. However, these content9do
not necessarily represent the policy of the agency,and you should not assume endcrrsement by theFederal Government
'p
'PrL isions for the evaluation and improvement of programs have
Foreword
historically been an integral component of federal and state educational'
legislation. Both Public Law 947142 (The Education for Air Handicapped
Children Act of 1975.1 and Public Law 94-482 VT he Education Amendments
of 1976 - Title II: Vocational Education) contain numerous provisions for
personnel development; support for programs, and research and develop-
ment activities. These provision's 'serve to stimulate and regenerate the
development; dissemination; and adoption of new ideas, techniques.,-and
materials for the fields of special education and vocational education.
The study presented herein was designed, to examine- the extent to--,yihich, program' improvement 'fu from Public Law 94-482 werg used by
Xstates to also address anotlwar ority.for state vocational education pro-, g
grams serving handicapped and disadvantaged students. More specific"--*,
ally, Subpart 3 of Public +aw 94-482 allows states to use funds for re-:t
search, exemplary and' innovative programs, curriculum development,
vocational gt\idahce and counseling, sand vocational education personnel
training. Grants' for these programs are described in the legislation as
"program improvement and supportive services." Twenty percerit- (20%) of
the federal funds received by a state for vocational education is ;to be
spent for these purpose's., Simulianeou.slY, ten percent (10%) and twenty
pe'rcent (20%) of the funds are to be spent for the excess costs of pro-viding vocational education to handicapped and. disadvarltaged tstudents
respettively. Under the, law, the 10% and '20% set-aside funds can be used, .for either direct programs and services 1 or program improvement and
supportive services.
4
svt
-State 'and local administrators 'of vocationalocationa and special education
programs should find this study useful in describing how the set-aside
fu.nds have been spent for special population groups in vocational educa-
tion over 'the last. three years. The Appendix includes brief abstracts of
the various program improvement projects funded by the states. The' LTI
project is indebted to Dr. James P. Greenan for managing and conducting
this study. Appreciation is 'also extended to Brian Cobb and Ms.
Laurie Batchelor for their efforts ins developing and editing 'the abstracts.
,Dr. George Hagerty of the U.S. Office of Special Educatipn was helpful in
planning the study. The comments made by the reviewers were extremely
helpful in pkcparing the; final report: s Dr. Wesley Budke, Director;
National Center 'for Research in Vocational Educati9n ClearinAo.y.se, The
Ohio State University.; Dr. upert N. .Evans, Bureau of Educational
. Research, University of Illinois; Dr. John, S. Washburn, Manager, Per
search and Development;, Department of Adult, Vocational and Technical. ,
EducatiOn, Illinois State Board of Education; Dr. Ronald P,IcCage, %Direc-
tor, Vocational land . Technical Education Consortium 'of States, Southern
Association of Colleges.and Schools; Dr. William Eddy, Equal .Opportunity
Specialist, Office for Civil Rights, U.S. D artment of Education; Dr.f , ,..
Addison .5.' Hobbs, 'State Director, Division o Vocational Technical Edu-
cation, Maryland State bepartment oft Education; ,and Ms. Barbara H.1
Kemp, Education Program Specialist i for the Disadvantaged, Office of
Vocational and Adult Education, U.S. Department of Education. The LTI
staff is also extremely grateful to the. State Research Coordinating UnitI
'V
Directors for their cooperation and 4ssistance in the data collection phase! .
of the ,study. In addition,, the staff would also, like to th-an-k Ms. Nancy
--..chum \ or her effort jn typing and Ms. BarOara Macika,s for proofreading
the re rt. Dr. Janet Treichel, was instrumental in the production. and
dissemination of this report.
'ir .
. . ' L. AJlen 1helPs-, Directer'Leadership Training Institute/ 'Vocational and Special Education
si
.4.
Table of Contents .
INTRODUCTION1
StateMent of the Problem 04
Objectives of the Study. 5
,Research Qwestions
SignificanCe of, the Study
, 6
RESEARCH PROCEDURES 9
Instrumentation 9,
Population \ 9-
Data Collection 10
w. ..
Data Analysisrtalysis% , 10 '.
FINDINGS 13.
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 35
S.ummary 35
Conclusions 36
Recommendations 40
REFERENCES ~I -
47'
APPENDtX . .
" 0..
V
pi"1
pp
p
Introduction
Several recent significant pieces of federal .legislation have estab-*is 1.
lished the rights of special needs learners to a free and appropriate
public education;tiblic Law 93-112, The Rehabilitation Act of 1 973
Sections 503 and 5p4; .Public Law 93-203, -he Comprehensive Employments
and Training Act of 1973; Public Law 94-142, The Education for All
Handicapped Children Act of 1975) These initiatives have increased
educational and employment opportunities for all special populations. At
the national, state,' and local levels 'more emphasis has been laced on
expanding the availability of vocational education instruction and support
services to handicapped and disadvantaged (including limited-English
proficiency) learners.
A major thrust in vocational education has been to. proiride special
needs learners with individualized education programs ( IEP) within least
restrictive environments (LRE) as mandated by Public Law 94-142. Publt
Law 94-482 (The Education AmendMents of 1 976 - Title I : Vocational
Education) which amends Public Law 88-20 (The Vocational Education Act
of 1ts63) and Public Law 90-576 (The Vocational "Education Amendments of
1968) has reinforced these activities by proclairninc thai states should use
vocational education funds to -assist handicapped individuals so that they
can participate in regular vocational education programs to the "maximum
extent possible."
To achieve this end, handicapped and disadvantaged students should
be "mainstreamed" into vocational programs where they are educated with
their "normal" peers_i Extra support artd supplemental services are
needed by both students and teacher's in progrbms to 'accomplish this
.
fro
Y
: .
goal. Supplemental services may include: assignment of, special educatioQ
personnel, to the class., special program modifications., special remedial
instruction, counseling, and other services ,provided to handicapped or
disadvantaged students in regular vocationar programs. However, pro-,
)
viding instructional arrarfgements and services such as IEPs and LREs for
special needs students generally' costs' more than traditional education
programming.
Public Law 94-482 has provided set-aside funds specifically for the.
.
vocational education of special needs learners. : The law has mandated
(that:
For each fiscal year, at least 10% of each state's allotment under....-, Section 1b3 shall be used to pay 50% of the cost of vocational
education for handicapped persons. Far each fiscal year, at Teast20% of each state's allotment Linder Section 1-A3 shall be used topay 50% of the cost of vocational education for disadvantagedpersons (other than handicapped persons) , .for person.s who havelimited-English speaking ability, and for providing 'stipendsauthorized' under section 120(b) -(1) (G) (Section 110).
These funds are to be used primarily for basic grants (Subpart 2) which
are' flowhrough funds to local education agencies to support the excess
costs of educating special needs learners in regular vocational.programs.
The funds may also be used to support research and development activi-
ties designed to impact vocational programs for handicapped' and disadvan-
taged students., 6
Subpart 3 (Program Improvemt and Support Services) of Public-.
Law 941482, Part A, lists, defines, and describes' the'areas in whichti
set-aside funds may be used for improving vocational programr6ing of..,
handicapped and disadvantaged learners. Areas df funding under pro-.
.gram improvement and support /services may include: research, exem-
01ary and innovative programs, curriculum development, vocational guid-
ance and counseling, and vocational education personnel training.,
' i) 2
* ..,
4. r
. .
Generally, the state education agencies have4lexibelity in the whys
they distribute the "set-aside funds, for program improvement and support
services purposes. ,Local education agencies, individuals, institution's of
higher education, an,d research and development firms are among the
,eligible recipients of these funds. ..Proposals are commonly fun ded based
on the perceived areas of need within the states. The needs may be.- .identified by informal procedures or by formal methods such as .statewide'
needs assessments and evaltiations, Therefore, it is expected that tht.
will be variation among the states in the types and amounts of funded
proposals.
A few investigations .have attempted- to identify or assess policy/ -regarding the funding of program improvement and support services
activiti i ri vocational, education. Budke and Magisos (1978) identified
the research, exemplary and innovative programs, and curriculum
development projects that have been funded by the 'states with Subpart 3
funds. However, vocational guidance and counseling and .,vocational.c.7-----
eduCation personnel training projects were not identified. In addition,
moit states have not reported (i.e., do not report projects to dissenina-
tion networks such as the National Center fo,r Researph in Vocational
-Education, but are reported in the states' accountability reports) those
program improvement projects which' are funded in whole or in part using
the handicapped and disadvantaged set -aside ,funds. 1.
The Abt Study `(1981) investigated The pattern of expenditures and
_ service delivery issues with:respect to the use of the handicapped and
disadvantaged set-aside funds . The. g eral tionlusions were that the
set-aside funds were "clearly meeting congressional intent" of provid-
ing vocational education funds to these populations. However,. the( Abt
Study dealt--witilik a sample of only 15 states and the findings did -,not
relate to spec criteria or a framework, such as statewide or nationill
needs assessments or' evaluations for determining the appropriateness and
effectiveness of the projects. Several needs assessments and policy .issup.!;.=
and problem studies focusing on the needs of special needs learners, have
suggest4d the importance of program improvement activities to deal with
problemS such as interagency cooperation and agreements, persOnel
preparation and development, funding and. fiscal policy, service delivery
and program alternatives, and program evalUation and improvement.
Specific areas of -concern have- included': vocational -.assessment; individ
alized education programs; least restrictive environment; identification of
students; and facilities, material's, and equipment_ Modification, (Davis and
Ward, 1978; Hrvard, 1979; Phelps and Thornton, 1979; Greenan andJti
Phelps, 1980) .
In summary, the research, literature contains few studies that are
concerned with .how states are using their handicapped and disadvantaged
set-aside funds prov,ided by Public Law 94-482 to improve and expand
voda/,itmal education opportunities fO'r special needs learners. Further, in
those studies that do exist, minimal information is provided which relates
what is being fklinded to assessed needs. However, as funds hecome more
scarce and fiscal efficiency becomes Inoref important, the states will need
to develop improved funding policies and increpsingly coordinate program
improvement planning, assessment, and activities.
Statement of the Problem
The central problem investigated in this study was toodetermine, the
4,
extent to which the 50 states,. District of Columbia, and trust territories
(
4
11,
4
.
/ 3
(American Samoa,
Territhry of, the
Public Law 94-418
o
Guam, Northern Mariana' Ilands, Puerto Rico, Trust
Pacific Islands, and Virgin 'Islancl) have used their
2 set-aside Junds (16% handicapped and 20% disadvan-..
taged) to support prograM improvement Vrojects and activities. The
specific research problem was to, identify the research; exemplary and
Innovtive ;programs, curriculum development, vifational uidance andL
counseling, and vocational education personnel 'training ,projects that have-
been funded' during fiscal years 1978, 1980, and 1981. In addition, the
extent to which federal set-aside funds and matching state and local
funds were used .to support program improvement activities was inves-
tigated.
It was not the intent of, thiS study to identify all state programs and. .- .. . _ .
activities which impacte-el upon special needs... learners. For example,
Subpart, 3 fundp which may have been used to support projects that
impacted upon handicapped and disadvantaged students but were not0
;counted as set-asides were not examined. Only those projects and
activities that were 'specifically funded with the 10% handicapped and-20%
disadvantaged set-aside funds were investigated. In addition, this study
did not mpt to, assess the effectiveness of the projects ,nor determine
the levels or focus of funding of basic t3.rants to LEAs.
'Objectives of the .Studyyr
The following objectives wereA461
blem of this study: 1"."
IP. I .
dev'eloped to resolve the central pro-
Determine the extent to Which resel9rc1-1, exemplary and innova-tive progra'ms, curriculuM development, vocational guidance andcounseling, and vocational education personnel training projects,were funded by the states using the 10% handicapped and 20%disadvantaged set-aside ft_i\nds during fiscal years 1979, 1980;and 1981. ,
-_r
1 fl
e.
(
li. ASsess, the federal set-aside ancr matching state d localfunding. levels of the projects. !.
',. . se
' ' e - , ' .
I I I . DeterMine the scope 'cif the program improvement and supliort .services projects. ,
a
IV. Identify several program improvemht projects and develop-abstracts.
Research Quest ens.
- The follbwirg arch quesficins were, developed to athieve theobjectiyes ,.f this s tudy.: -
1. Row- many RESEARCH projects were., funded by the -states usingthe 10% handicapped ':and._,.2.0'95. disadvantaged set-aside funds;and -what, were the local, state :. anci federal. 'funding' levels ofthe projects durffig fiscal years 1979, 198Q,, -.and, 19812
2. How many EXEMPLARY AND INNOVAT.LVE PROGRAM. projectswere funded by the states Using' the 1 handicapped and 20%disadvantaged set-aside' funds:: and whaf were the local', state,and federal 'funding. levels of th`e projec0 during, fiscal years1979, 1980, jand 1981? , . "
.. . .. .,
3. floW %a CURRICULUR:DEVELOPMENT projec'ts were fundedby the states using the 10% handicapped anck 20% disadvantaged
, set -aside funds; and what, were the local, state, and federalii. funding ',levels of. the projtcts during fiscal years 1979, 1980,
and 19812f It' ..
u. How many VOCATIONAL GUIDANCE AND COUNSELING projectswere funded by the states \using the 10% handicapped and 20%
'disadvantaged .set-'aside funds; and -what were the local, state,and federal funding leyels of the projects during fiscal years1979, 1980, and 1981? -v.
b."
5. How -many VOCATIONAL EDUCATION PER ONNEL TRAININGprojects were funded by the states using t 10% handicappedand 20% disadvaritaged sse it-aside funds; an what were the
. local, state, and federal funding levels of the projects tJurinfiscal yearg 1979, '1980, and 1981?
.06. What content, program, or Problem areas were addressed by theprogram improvement and support services projeCts 'funded bythe states using the 10% han capped and 20% disadvantagedset-aside funds during fisc years 1979, 1980, and 1981?
6
Significance of the Study°
49Program improvement projects and activities are essential for improv-
ing and expanding vocational education opportunities for special needs'
learners. These activities agsist in generating new knowledge, developing
new programs ,.a6d curriculum for enhancing the career development of.
.handicapped. and ,disadvantaged students, and training personnel to worl
with special, needs students. As special "heeds students are increasingly
placed in regular vocational programs, the need for appropriate and
fr
cr
effective ,program improvement activities will become ever(' more significant.
This study contributes to the !poly of knowledge in vocational educa-
tion 'funding policy by prOviding data arad information which identify the,
program improvement projects states have funded- using the 10% 1;landi-.
. capped and 20% disadvantaged set-asides. in the areas of research, exem- *.'Nary and .tinncrv.ative programs, curriculum development, vocational 4//iii-4.
guidance and counseling, and vocational education personnel training:-
Analysis of the activities and funding levels of the projects supported.
during fiscal years .1979, 1980, and 1981 provides an ,indication of the
,patterns.of funding and the extent to 'which specific areas of need a re or
are riot
c:Th
makers
ddressed ,within the states and across the nation.J
-a and information should be helpful to policy and decision-
state directors of vocational and special education,
state consultants for vocational special needs education (handicapped and
disadvantaged) state direl.rtors of conipensatory education, state directors,
of bilingual education, research coordinating unit directors and their
staffs, teacher educators, local ed ucation agency personnel, individuals
from public ,.and private research firms, and 'others who are generators
and consumers of program impr.ovement projects and activities. The
' 7
I.
.te
. ..-information cyild be useful for activities such as plphning needs assess-
t
ii,
i
ments, developing RF.Ps,.
projects.
1
le-
t*
el.
I
n
or evaluating .exiting program improvement. .
.1
t.. .
/. L.
,
rf
n.
/I
/
.
/
14
f
.9
Research Procedureso
This study used several research procedures to achieye the major,
objectives sand answeof, r the research questions. The procedures included:
the developmee\t of a survey instrument, selection of a population, co Ilect-t 4
ion of 'data, aind: analysis of the data. The research procedures occurred
. . over a five-month peribcf.
Instrumentation
A six-Rage survey instrument was developed to collect the necessary
data in this study (See Appenciix A) . The coyer page asked the Re-
search Coordiiitting- Unit (RCU) directors to provide their narrtes,
,iddressds, and telephone numbers. The instrument also provided the
,respondents with step-by-step instructions, including in example, for
completing the 'survey. Five. different survey forms were contained, in the
instrument' and included the program improvement areas of research,
exemplary ind--_innovative programs, curriculum deyelopment, vocational
guidance and ,ccitin0Ing, and vocational- education perInnel training.
The directors were 'asked to. liSt. on each of the survey form's project
titles fOr fiscal years 1979, 1980, `acid 1981, and the federal set-aside and
matching state and local funding levels of each project.
Population
The population for this study consisted of the RCU directors from the
50 states,, District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, Nonthern Mariana
Islands, Purto Rico, Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, and the
Vkgin Islands.
91 2
C
..4:
Data Collection
The RCU _directors' names and addressed were drawn from the cur-
rent national RCU directory. The surveys and cover letters (see
. 0.Appendix B) were mai
,_,
led in mid-October 1'980, and were to be returned. . ,.
by mid-November 1980. The RCU directors were also requested to in-ss
elude abstracts for' each protect listed on the survey forms. The initial.
response rate was 58%. A follow-up letter; (see Appendix C) and another
survey was mailed to each non'- respondent during the 'third week of
November 1980 and was to be .returned by the -third week of December
1980. , The fdllow-up increased the response rate to 82%. During the
secon d week of January 1981, a telephone follow-up was conducted
requesting each non-respondent to return his survey. Thetiata collec-
tion process was concluded during mid-March 1981. The final response
rate was 100%. The data collection process occurred over a four-month
period.
Data Analysis ,
The data obtained- from, each of the surveys 'were collectively. anal-,
yzed across the states and territories. Descriptive data tables vere
generated for each of the. nasearch questions. The tables specifically
provide information with respect to the numbers of projects; federal
set-aside and matching state and local funding.. levels; and the scope'of
the program improvement projects that were fu.nded during fiscal years
1979, 1980, and 1981. The tables generally provide ah overall view of
the kinds of projects that states have funded using the 10% handicapped
and 20% disadvanta ed set-aside funds. In addition, a representative-.sample of abstracts .were selected and edited from those provided by the
10 1 "'
RCU directors. The abstracts -.provide information regarding some of the
content ; program_ or problem areas addressed by the projects. 'The
abstracts were not selected using specific eValuatiye criteria. Rather,
the q,bstracts were selected and included based on an overall bricIth of
topical areas.
\
11
I
4%.
tt
Findingst
The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which the1
states have ,usedjPublic Lawf 94-482 10% handicapped and 20% disadvan
taged set-aside funds to suppo'rt program improvement projects and activ-,
ities. Fifty-seven states. and territories w re surveyed. .Tbe data that
were collected focused specifically on the major objectives and .research
questions developed in this study. Therefore, the following discuss
the findings and Tables 1-11 are concerned with the major objectiv and
research questions of this study.
Objective Determine the extent to which "research, exemplary andinnova;ive programs, curriculum development, vocationalguidance and counseling, and vocational education person-nel training projects were funded by the states using the
'10% handicapped and 20% disadvantaged set-aside fundsduring fiscal years 1979, 1980, and 1981._
Objective H: Assess the _federal set-aside and matching state and localtliunding levelsof the projects,
1 ow many RESEARCH projects were funded by.the statesusing` the 10% handicappei and 20% disadvantaged set -asidef nds; and What were the local, state, and federal funding-1= ers of the projects during &fiscal years 1979, 1980, and1'81?
The researc projeCts funded by the states using ,the 10% hanclicap:
ped and 20% disadvantaged set -aside funds during fiscal years 1979, 1980,
ant 1981 are presented in Table 1. Twenty-five of the 57 states and
territories funded at least one research project wit th,e set-asides
during fiscal year 1979,980, and 1981. Se4n states did not provide.
data on the numbe of projects the-funded. However, from the.data_ .
.available, a total o 92 research pFojects were funded during the three-. ,
\year nriod. Twen y-four projects were funded during, each of fiscal
years 1 979 and 1 981 'While a substantially larger number (144) of projects
13
-t I/ A
'"ca
9
V I /
TABLE 1RESEARCH PROJECTS THAT WERE FUNDED BY THE STATES USING THE
SET-ASIDE FUNDS DURING FISCAL YEARS 1979, 198b, AND 1981
State FY *1979' FY 1980 FY 1981 Total
Alaska 1 0 0 1
Arkansas 2 ' 3 2 7
California 0 0
Colorado )1 0 0
/1
Florida 1 5 0 6
Idaho 1 1 0 2
Illhois 6 2 11
Indiana 2 15 ) 4 21
Iowa 7 , _1 0
.1 2Kansas .
Kentucky 1 2 4 r 7
Maine
Maryland 0 0 2
Massachusetts
Minnesota 2 3 6
New Jersey 1 3 4 8
New York/.
3 2 0 5
0 2 1 3
Ohio - ,-(.... 0 1 1 2
Oregon °-
Pennsylvania _
*,Rhode Island 1 ' 0
.....-.0 1
0_...,,
0 2 2,South Carolina
'Texas 2 3. 0 6Virginia .
(,--,
All States 24 44 24 92
N = 57 ,
'n 25 (states ttla funded at least one (1) project during the three-year period)= data not aOila le
I
14
. A
were funded in fiscal year 1980. This increase. was 1fol3ably caused by
the larger number of projects funded by Iiidiana (15) during fiscal year-qs,
1980. Indiana reported the greatest, clumber of projects funded (21)
during the three-year period. HoweVerb, while Indiana funded a larger
number of projects with the set asides, thanIthe other: states, gll of their
projects were reportedly jointly funded with non-special needs monies
(i.e. , Subpart 3 funds not counted as set-asides and other funding0. ,
sources). Indiana's set-aside funds are generally infused with programs
and activities that are desij,ned for all students. This type of funding
policy is probably' practiced in several cIther states. Illinois, New Jer.iey,
Arkansas, and Kentucky also funded several research projects using the
set-asides. These five states supported of all the funded prolkts.Table 2 illustrates the federal set-aside and matching state-and local
funding levels of:the research projects funded during fiscal years 1.979,
1980, and 198T. A 'total, of $4,609,825 of combined federal set-aside and
matching state and loCal funds was used to support research projects
during the three-year period by, the 23 states reporting data. For each
fiscal year, the federal set-aside represented the largest fun-ding source
and the state funds the smallest funding source. Several states fundedfresearch projects with only the federal set-asides.
In summary, most states have not uted their federayhandicapped
and disadvantaged set-aside funds and matching state and, local funds to
support research projects and activities relative to the vocational ieduca-..tion of special needs learners. However, of the 25 states that -have
funded projects, the federal set-asides generally. represented the largest
portion of funding .
15 04.0
;
I
II
TABLE 2
FEDERAL SET-ASIDE AND MATCHING STATE AND LOCAL FUNDING LEVELS OF THE RESEARCH PROJECTS
THAT WERE FUNDED DURING FISCAL YEARS 1979 1980 AND 1981
Sate
Local
Fr '979State Federal Total
Fr 1980 Fe1981
Local State. Federal Total Local State Federal Total T Vital'
AlasKa
,40,amsas
CaWorn,a
Colorado
Floe da
Idaho
MNDtS
ItIOW43
towa
Kansas
Kentucky
Mane
Marywod
Massachusetts
Minnesota
New York
New Jersey
N.g(th Dakota
IN4o4.
Oregon
Pennsytyarha
Rhode !stand
)D,Ah Cre04ma
Texas
V,gm1a
AN States
0 0 56 650 56 650 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 56 650
56 818 0 328 025 534 843 5665 0 537 068 537 733 0 0 571 813 571 613 5144 389
- 5620 290 5620 290 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5620 290
'0 0 549 967 549 967 0 0 0 0 0a
0 0 0 549 967
0 0 520 000 520 000 0 0 5170 270 51 70 270 C 0 0 0 5190 270Y.
0 0 $1 015 51 015 0 1 0 56 443 56 443 0 0 0 0\ 57 458
517 627 0 5204 370 $221 997 520 328 0 5323 221 5343 549 0 0 S235840 5235.640 5801 386
0 . 0 56 540 56 540 0 0 5109 61 3 5109 613 0 0 566 720 566 720 5182 873
57 500 0 57 500N. 515 000 0 0 0 0 51-... 483T 51g 204 530 687 545 687
$10 842 0 S21:278.
532 120 55 287 0 521 554 536 841 572 045 0 586 627 51 58 672 5217 633
0 0 "."--P000 51 GOS\ ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 000
0 0 343.430 543 430 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -543 430
583 866 0 5300 000 ,5383 866 0 0 5300 0;90 5300 000 0 0 5400 000 5400 000 51 083 866
A 0 520 872 S22 387 543 259 0 510 146 521.383 531 525 0 0 512 976 512 976 587 764
0 458 5316 427 5322 885 0 56 500 593 50b 5100 000 0 0 0 0 5422 885
0 0 517 080 517 080 0 0 S71 604 571 604 0 0 5111130 561130 5199 814
0 0 _(.. 0 ......-- 0 0 0 53 %0 53 950 0 0 310 241 510 241 514 191
0 0 0 0 0 0 535 000 535 000 0 0 535 000 535 000 570 000. 0 0 0 0 0 0 571 294 01 294 0 0 0 0 571-294
0 511 602 5'106268 5117 670 0 0 0 : _0 0 0 0 0 511 7 870
0 0 510517' 510 517 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 510 517
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 734 58 34 58 734
0 0 S80 141 580 141 0 04 5131716 5131 716 0 0 0 0 5211 857
c%
5126 653 538 937 51 862 885 52 028 470 526 280 56 500 51 34206 51 439 542. 586 528 - Si 291 125 51 141 768 54 609 825
N 57 'n 251staies that funded at mast one (II project duhng the three year perzod)
- data not avaaatie
V
2., How many EXEMPLARY AND INNOVATIVE PROGRAM prbrectswere funded by the states using the 10-% handicapped an 20%disadvantaged set-aside, funds; and what were the loeal, sate,and federal funding levels of the projects during fiscal years1979, 1980, and 198I?I
The exemplary and'innovative program projects funded by the states
using the 10% handicapped and 205 disadvantaged set -ride funds during'
fiscal years 1979, 1980, and 1981 are presented in Table 3. Twenty-two of
-the/ 57 states funded at least one exemplary and innovative programram
project with the set asides during' fiscal years 1979, 1980, and 1.,..Q81. Six
states did not provide data- on the number of projects they funded.a
However, 'from the data available, it appears that 'total of 106 exemplary
and, innovative program projects were funded citring th three-year
period. Fifty-two projects were funded during fiscal year 1179, while
considerably fewer projects were funded for each of fiscal y rs 1980 and
1981: Texas reported the largest number of projects funde (27) during
the three-year period. Illinais, New Jersey, and Alaska also funded a
relatively large number of exemplary- and innovative program projects.
-hlese four states funded 63% of all the projects.
Table-4 illustrates the federal set-aside, and matching state and local
funding levels of the exemplary and innovative program projects funded
during ,fiscal years 1979, 1980 and 1981. A total of $5 ,932 ,805 of com-
bined `federal set-aside and matching state and local funds was used to
support exemplary and innovative program projects during the three-year
period by the 18 states reporting data,. For each fiscal year, the federal
set-aside was the largest funding source and the State funds the smallest
funding Sources.. Most state§ used only federal set-aside monies to fund
exemplary and innovative program projects, for.''the handicapped andi r---., .
-...c..disadvantaged. i 4 ,:- --44..., ,
17I.
\'
1
At TABLE 3 aEXEMPLARY AND ttaliOVATIVE P GRAM PROJECTS THAT WERE FUNDED BY t. -THE STATES USING THE SET-ASID NDS DURING FISCAL-YEARS 1919, 1980, AND 1981
. ,
State FY 197 FY 1980 . -FY k981 Total
Alaska 1 3 6 10
0 ' ...- 3 0 3'Arizona
Florida 2 . 1 ,. 3 6Idaho '1 0 0 ,,
1
Illinois 10 4 4 18Indiana: -..,,j 4 0 0 4
Iowa
Kansas 4 2 0 6,Maine --.-
,. r.Maryland 4 1 0 -/;;; 5Massachusetts , F,
Michigan 1 (N\ 0 0 1
Minnesota 1 0 '0 1:..,
New Jersey 2 3 7 12New Mexico 0
.1 1 2,
North Dakota 1 0 0 .. 1
Ohio,.
Oregon
Rhode Islands ,
8 gb 8South Dakota 1 0 0 -1
Texas 12 15 0 27 -Virginia
All States , 52 33 21 106
N = 57n = 22 (states that funded at least one (1) project during the three-year period)
= data not available
400
18
J. ,.?
*
4.
a'
TABLE 40FEDERAL SET-ASIDE AND MATCHING STATE AND LOCAL FUNDING LEVELS OF THE EXEMPLARY AND INNOVATIVE PROGRAM PROJECTS
THAT WERE FUNDED DURINGAISCAL YEARS 1979, 1980, AND 1981
a
4
lD
State
Ataska
Aezo.a
FloAda
Idaho
HInofs
!or:ana
Iowa
Kansas
Maine
Marytal
MaSlaChUsetts
MjNgan
Minnesota
New. Jersey
New Mexico
North Dakota
Oh*
Oregon
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Texas
Viripma*
AP Slates 5549 440
.64
FY 1979
Local State Federal Total
0 0 $6 508- S6 508
_0 O 0 0
0 0 S80 000 $80 000 .
0 0 $10 000 $10 000
$484 055 0 $625 450 51 109505
0 0 5100006 SIQ0 000
- - -.565 385 0 569 327 $134 712
0 0 $48 475 ,548 375
0 _tt0 $74.050 $74 050
5300 000 $300 000
0 $30 693 $30 693
0 524 864 $24 864
0 0 559 575 $54 575
0 55 452 56000 $11 452
0 0 $17 934 $17934
$27 250 $27 250 $54 500
0 0 -5357 329 $357 329
N w 57
532 702 SI 837 355 $2 419 497
*4.
n 22 (states that funded at least one II) protect dung the three year De0od)
data ng,Layaltahle
Local
0
0
0
0
0
$196 332
.S3 163
0
1 0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
_0
$231 495
St to Federal Tv] local State Federal 'Total
w
$1 681 648 $1 913 143
FY 1980 FY1981
0 533 606 533 606 0 0 $162 500 $162 500
0 $164690. 5164 690 0 0 t 0 ' 0
$202 6
690
0 $10 000 $10000 0 0 $78 853 $78 853 $168 853a
0 2 . 0 0 0 0 0 $10 000
0 0 T 0 0 0 0
0 $305 827 5502 159 552 136 0 $243 099 $295 235 $1 906 899
$100 000
_
0 538 117 $73 280 0 0 0 0 4, $207 992
0 $48037 548 037. 0 554 000 554 900, 5150 412
0 $15 000 $15 000 0 0 0 0 '° $89 050
0 5357 339 $457 339 0 00$$830 594 $830 594, $1 587 933
0 0 0 0 0 ' 0 0 $30 693
0t ---
0 0 0 0 ,- 0 4
0 577 229 577 229 0 0 $153.983 $153 983 . $290 787
0 S25 000: $25 000 0 0 $25 000 525 000 $
0lif
0 4, 0 0 0 0 0 $5101
000
_-_- _-
0 0 0 0 0 0 517`934---0 0 0 $54 500
0 5506 803 $506803 0 0 0 0 $864 132AD _ _ _ _ _
$62 136 $1 548 029 SI 600 165 $5 932 805
s-4
Fro
Total
In summary, most states have not used their federal handicapped
and disadvantaged set-aside funds and matching state and local ficrids to
support exemplary and innovative program projects and activities. How-
ever, of the 22 states which have funded projects, the federal set-asideA
generally was the greatest portion of funding.
^..1..3. How many CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT projects were fUnded
by. the states using ,,the 10% handicapped ,and 20% disadvantagedset-aside funds; and what were the local, state,., and federalfunding levels of the projects during fiscal years 1979, 1980,and 1981?
The curriculum development projects funded, by the states using the
____1.Q.L.handicapped and 20% disadvantaged set-aside funds Suring fiscal
years 1979, 1980, and 1 981 are presented in Table 5. Twenty-one of the
57 states funded at leapt one curriculum development project with th
set-asides 'during fiscal years 1 979, 1980, and :1981 5ix*"States did not
provide data on the number of projects they funded. However, from the
data avaiAle, a total of 100 curriculum development projects were funded
during the three-year period.- *.F,ifty--foui projects were funded' during
fiscal Year 1980, 31 during 1979, and 15 during 1981. Ariatina reported
111the largest number of projects fun (30) during the three-year period.
.However, all 30 projects . were actually 'funded in fiscal year 1980.
1111Indiana, New Jersey, New ork, Alaska and Texas also fur{ded several
curriculum development projects. These six states funded 76% of all the.
projects.r
Table 6 illustrates the federal set-aside and matching state and local
funding levels of the curriculum development projects funded during fiscal
years 1979, 1980, and 1981. A total of $4,672,204 of combined federal
set-aside and state and local matching funds was used to support- curricu-
I20
4
4
TABLE 5 .
CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THAT WERE FUNDED By THE STATES USING THESET-ASIDE FUNDS DURING FISCAL YEARS 1979, 1980, AND 1981
State'. FY 1979
AlasI4 3Arizona . 0
California
Florida 0
Illinois 1
Indiana , 10
Iowa
Kansas - -0
'Maine
Maryland 5 JMassadhusetts
Michitan 1
Minnesola -1
New Jersey 3
New t*xiCo 0
New York 4
Ohio 0
Oregon .
SOuttlpakota 0
Texas. -- 3
Virgiryg
All Slates 31
FY 1980 , FY 1981 Total
2 3 \ 8
30 0 - 30
I 0 0
1 / 2 3
1 1 3
3 1 , 14
1 0 1
0 0 5
0 2
2 0
3 3 9
0 2 2
, 4 0 8
1 1 2.
2 0 t 2
4 0 / 7
54 15 100
N,=. 57 is.
nr= 21 (states-Mat funded of leasi one (1) project during the three-year period)= data not available h
st,
e
I-
Nts.--
41.
e
a
TABLE 6
FEDERAL SETASIDE AND MATCHING STATE AND jOCAL FUNDING LEVELS OF
THATWERE FUNDED DURING FISCAL YEARS 1979
4
THE CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
1980 AND 19816
State FY 1979 FY 1980 Fr'98,Local - State Federal Total Local State Fecltral Tote' State Fe.tleal T,ata.
Alaska 0 523 611 $23 611 0 0 530 000 $30 000 0 0 0 504 592Anzona 0 0 0 0 0 5830 205 5430 205 0 0 2 583': 10sCa Marne 5187 629 5187619 0 0 0 6'1. Ce -14- Slisi E i.Flonda 0 0 0 0 0 0 $25 87.5 .525'875 55' 660
______..
55' 660 5.77 535Mena* S12888 0 $35 560 548 448 518 606 0 529 931 548537 544 399 C 590 605 t134 39,4 523' 384indona 0 0 5.194 955 5194 955 L
r. 0 0 527 900 527 900 0 S'4 50 5'1 100 523595;
Iowa
Kansas 0 0 0 / 0 5311 0 $311 5622 0 5622Mame 0 ,51 1 4000 5114 000 0 0 571 91 571 005 549 000 549 500 5234 050'Maryland 0 0 570 500 570 500 0 0 0 0 0 57;5,.,Massakhusetts 518 539 5200000 5218 539 0 0 5250 000 5250 000 3 0 5200 az SY,S 05, S66s 539Mcentien 0 O S90 663 590 463 0 0 0 0 0 5135 0Of., 5' 35 500 5225 663Minnesota 0 0 .$16 500 $16 54) 0 0 53 594 53 594 0 0 520 094New Jersey 0 0 _$35 884 535 884 0 0 530 126 530 126 0 0 547 525 547 525 5113 535New Masco 0 0 0 0 t.,
..ip0 0 0 0 0 0 5,72 300 5172 000 5172 000
New York 0 $14.376 5315 478 5329 854 0 519 562 5267 673 5287 235 0, 0 0 0 56,7 089Ohka 0 0 0 0 0 0 514 000 514 000 0 0 520 050 520 000 534 000Oregon . . -T -South Dakota 0 0 0 0 541 200 41 200 541 200Texas 0 5408 691 5408 691 0 0 I $387 981 53157 981 0 0 . 0 5 5796 672Vexatnta ..._
All States 531 427 $14 379 $1 693 461 51 636 684 $18917 $19 562 52 009 796 52 0i8 275 $44 399 5779 285 5884 665 54 672
N 57 '
n 21 (states thet funded at least one 1 I) protect durtng the three year oenod,
data not ayeeOZris...r-------_
3'
Wm development projects during the three-year period 1py the 18 states
reporting data. For each fiscal year, the federal set1aside was the
largest funding source and for the most part state funds the smallest
(funding source. Most states funded curriculum' development projects solely
with -federal funds.
In summary, most states have not used their federal handicapped
acid disadvantaged set-aside funds. and matching state and local funds to
support curriculum development 'projects and activities. However, for the
majority of the 21 states which have funded such projects, the federal
set-aside provided all'or sthe greatest portion of funding.
4. How many V OCATIONAL GUIDANCE AND COUNSitING projectswere funded by the states using the 10% handicapped, and 20%disadvantaged set -aside funds; and what were the local, state,and federal funding levels of the pi.ojects during fiscal years1979, ;1980, and 1981?
The vocational guidance and counseling projects funded by the states
apusing the 10% handicapped and 20% disadvantaged set-aside funds during
fiscal years 1979, 1980, And 1981' are presented in Table 7. Nineteen of.
the 57 states funded, at least one vocational' guidance and counseling
project with the set-asides during fiscal years 1979, 1980, and 1981..
Seven.states did not provide data on the number of projE(cts they funded.
However, from the data available, a total of 116 vocation al' guidance and
counseling projects were funded daring the three-year period. Fifty
projects vere funded during fiscal 'ear 1980; 42 during 1981, and 24
during 1979. Kansas reported the largest number of projects funded
(34) , ne.6.0/ one-third of all 'projects during the three-year period.
Florida and Indiana also funded a relatively large number of vocational
guidance and 'counseling projects (.22). The projects that were funded by
4
iTABLE 7
VOCATIONAL GUIDANCE AND COUNSELING PROJECTS THATVERE FUNDED BYTHE STATES USING THE SET-ASIDE FUNDS DURING FISCAL YEARS 1979, 1980, AND 1981
State FY 1979 FY 1680 FY 1981 Total'
Alaska 1 2 1 4
Arizona - 0 5 0 5
California 0, 0
Florida 9 5 8 22, Indiana 1 11 10 - i 22
, -r-,
_.Iowa
Kansas 6 10 18 i 34Maryland 3
.0 0 3
Massachusetts .,, _.vMichigari ( 1 a 1 I 2
Minnesota 2 3 3 l 8Misgouri , - - -
..N.New Jersey 0 0 1 1
New York 1 2 0 I 3
Oregon 9 0 1 9 .
Texas 0
Virginia ,
Wisconsin 0 /Puerto Rico
--..J All States 24 50 116
N = 57n = 19 (states that funded at least one (1) project during the three-year period)
= data not available
a
211
\
Kansas, Florida, 'and Indiana represented 6795 of all the projects that were
funded by the. states during the three-year period.
Table 8 illustrates the federal set aside and matching state and local
funding levels of the vocational guidance and celing projects funded
during fiscal years 1979, 1980, and 1981. A total of $5,948,185 of Ori-',0
bined federal set-aside and matching state and local funds was used to
support vocational guidance and counseling projects and' activities during
the three-year period by the 14 states reporting data. For each fiscal
year, the federal set-aside was the largest funding Source. However,
vocational guidance and counseling projects were funded very rnirially
by matching state funds but local funds were relatively large in Some
states. This may suggest that the state education agencies in. these
states feel vocational guidance and counseling is primarily a local educp-
tion agency's responSibility. Another plausible explanation is that local
staff such as guidance counselors are arready in the schools and can
facilitate the conduct of projects. Most of the states funded projects with
only federal set-asides.
In summary, most states have not used their fpcleral set-saside funds
and matching. state and local funds to support .4.4sational guidance and
counseling projects and activities. However, of the 19 states which have
funded projects, the federal set-aside generally was the greatest portion
of funding while the matching state funds represented only a very minimal
portion of funding, and local funds represented a relatively large contri7
bution for some states.
5'. How many -*VOCATIONAt. EDUCATION PERSONNEL TRAININGprojects were funded by tb'e states using the 10$ handicappedand 20$ dis'advantaged set-aside funds;:. and what were thelocal, state, and-federal funding levels of the projects duringfiscal years 1979, 1980, and 1981?
25
-..
TABLE 8
FEDERAL SET.ASIDE AND MATCHING STATE AND LOCAL FUNDING LEVELS OF THE VOCATIONAL GUIDANCE AND COUNSELING PROJECTS
THAT WERE FUNDED DURING FISCAL YEARS 1979 1960 AND 1961
N)Cr)
State
Local
FY 1979,
State Federal Total Local
. FY 1980
State Federal Total Local
Fet981
State Federal Totat Total.
1**
Alaska
Anzona
Cahlorma
Ftortga
Indiana
I owa
Kansas
Maryland
Massachusetts
kbchgan
Moinesota
Myssoun
New Jersey
New York
Oregon
Texas
lbegrka
WSCOns+n
Puerto Poo
All States
y
5120
52115211
/
5332
0
0
0
0
911
789
0
0
0
0
0
0
700
00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
54 760
0
0
sa 760
$20
5988
54 10
58
5131)
5211
574
531
5378
' $233
52 185
3701
371
536
000
942
789
649
690
000
0
240
0
0
788
5988 371
5' 0 536
56 000
$251 853
$423 578
574 649
531 890
5378 000
0
5238 000
0
0
.
52 523 248
-4
0
0
0
0
0
5183612
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5132612
512
512
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
518
0
0
518
55 02'3 55 023
5196 396 5196 396
0 0
575 605 575 605
5269 759 5269 759
5156 825 5340 437
0 0
0 0
$40 '59 540'159
5255 000 5255 000
0 0
$613.371 $625 889
51 70 756 5170 756
594 409 544 409.if
k_
-.
51 87730352 073433
5373
5373
0
0
0
0
0
985
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
985
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9..
0
_C,
510
555
543
5380
550
542
5350
511
5942
000,
0
0
250
203
222
0
000
378
000
072
0
0
0
0
125
510
555
543
5754
550
542
5350
511
i
51 316
000
0
0
250
203
207
0
000
378
000
072
0
0
0
0
110
'
4S13965 :9964
5E2941 391
5318 962
51 346 497
$42378..5
5124 649,
5114 427
5983 000
511 072
5:1603
594 409
55 948 185
N ea57
n 191States tnat funded at least one III protect dunng the three year Denodt
data not ayadibte S
1
The vocational education personnel training projects funded by
states using the 10% handicapped and 20% disadvantaged set-aside funds9V
during fiscal years, 1979, 1980, and 1981 are presented in Table 9.
Twenty-seven of the, 57 states funded at least
personnel training project with
1980, and 1981.
ne vocational education
the set-asides d ring fiscal years 1979,
Five states did not provide ,c rata---16 the number of\,,
projects they funded. However, the available data indicate a total of 158
vocational education personnel training projects were funded over the61r
three-year period. Seventy-five projects were funded during fiscal year
1980, 43 during 1979, and 40 during 1981. New Hampshire reported the
largest number of projects funded (20) during the three-year period.
Florida,. Minnesota, Maryland, Texas, and New Jersey also funded a
relatively large number of vocational education personnel training pro-jects. Sixty percent of ,all the projects _funded were from these states.
Table 10 illustrates the federal set-aside and matching state and local
funding levels of the vocational education personnel training projects
funded during fiscal years 1979, 1980, and 1981. A total of $5,662,734 of
combined federal set -aside and matching state and local funds was used to
support vocational education personnel training projects and activities
during the three-year period by the 24 states reporting data. ,For each
fiscal year, the federal set-aside was the largest funding source and the
state funds the smallest funding source. Most states funded vocational
education personnel training projects with only federal set-asides.
In summary, most states hive not used their federal set::_a&itttr-funds
and matching, state and local, funds to support vocational education per,
sonnet training projects and activities. Howe,,ver, of the 27 states which
. 27
TABLE 9VOCATIONAL EDUCATION PERSONNEL TRAINING PROJECTS THAT WERE FUNDED BY
THE STATES USING THE SET-ASIDE FUNDS DURING FISCAL YEARS 1979, 1980, AND 1981
State FY 1979 FY 1980 FY 1981 Total
Alaska.
- 1 0 2 3. e
0 6 0 6Arizona
Arkansas 1 1 0
California 0 0
Connecticut 0 0 1 /8 10 1 / 1 9Florida
Idaho.---4 1 2 0 ,/ 3' . -r-, At'
,..i
Illinois 1 3 2 6
Indiana 2 2 1 5
Iowa
Kansas 1 e. 3 6
Maryland 7 5 2 14
Massachusetts 1 3 2 . 6
Michigan 2 1 " 2 5
Minnesota 4 10 5 19
Missouri 0 0
Nebraska 0 1 0 1
New Hampshire 5 9 6 20
New Jersey 2 5 . 4 11
New Mexico 0 1 2 3
New1York ,- 1 1 0 2
North Dakota 0 2 2 4,...--
Oregon
South Carolina 0 1 1 2
South Dakota 0 '4 4 8
Texas 5 7 0 12
Virginiait)
All States 75 40 158
N = 57 .n = 27 (states that funded at leastfn- 1) project during the three-year period)
= data not available
vv
28
4
cD
6
isTABLE 10
FEDERAL SETASIDE AND MATCHING STATE AND LOCAL FUNDING LEVELS OF THE VOCATIONAL EDUCATION PERSONNEL TRAININGAOJETS THAT WERE FUNDE URING FISCAL.YEARS 1979. 1980, AND 1981
State
Coca!
Alaska
Arizona 1 0sArkansas 51006.0.
California
Connecticut 0
Ronda 0
Idaho i 0
Minas t'rIndiana 0
Iowa
$4 938Kansas
Maryland, 0
MassacO,usetts 0
P.,1higan $27 948
Minnesota 0
Missouri 0
Nebraska 5, 0
New Jer'sey
0
0
New Mexrco 0
New York .0North Dakota ' 0
/ Oregon11
South Carolina 0N South Dakota 0kr
Texas a 0
Virginia
Au StatesStates $42$80'
FY 1979 'State Federal Total os Local
FY 1980 ,
State Federal Total
6 $6 500 56 500
0 r 0 0
0 $40 .900 $50 900
$1 034 532 $1 033 5321"
0 0 0
0 5223 300 $223 300
0 b4 450 $4 450
_0 $70 000 $70 000
0 $29 000 $29 000
r0 $7 49i $12_430
0 $167 500 $167 500
04 $85,1X)0 $85 000
0 5105451e. $133466
0 $10 800 $10 800
0 0 0
0 00_ _ .
0 $438 526 568 526ii.--i 0 $41 125 S41 125/
0 0 0
5858 $42 054 S42 912
0 0 0
--0
ql 0. 0-0 $391 637 $391 637
. It_
$858 52 327 334 52,371 078
r
'
a
0
0
53 100
0
0
0
0
$45.382
0
5801
0-.....
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0a549.283
0 _0 0k
0 $345 194 $345 194
0 $26.067 $29 167
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 $273 962 5273 2
0 $4 389 54 9
0 $102 131 $147 544
0 $6 000 S6 000
0 $1602 $2 403
1149 .5210 943 $2111 949
0 $208 000 $208 000
0 575 000 ' $75 000
0 583 858 $83 858
0 $30 000 $30 000
sa 821 $3 995 S8 816
0 $1Vir $.1424 648
0 $26 645 '54)6450 $40 016 $40 016
S31 51 539 51 570
$3 483 .412 607 516 090
0 544 pa 544_598
0 $46 774 546,77.4
1.
0 $365.428 $365 428
_
S8 335 S2 033 402 S2 091 020
N 57
n 27 (states that funded at least 04 ( piro)ect during the three year period)data not available
It
PY1981 r
Local Stale Federal total Total
O 536 500 536 51:20 543 000
O 0 A 0 $345 194
0 0 0 0 1-3 $80 067
0 0 0 0 $1 033 5320 0 $20 434 520434 $20 434
0 $86 300 586 300 $583 5620
548 384
0 0 0 $8 839
0 $107 462 $155 846 $373 3590 011 0 $3 000 $3 000 $38 000 1k
_.41:2 835 0 $21 290 _$34 125 .545 958
.4:88 44
000
0 0 $110 000 $110 000 $-
0 0 5196 000 $196 OM
0 '-O $176 000 $176 000 0" $384 4660 0,,O
0 $4 010 r"
0 0
O-
0 0 0 $88160 $2 312 598 759 $101 071 $294 245
O 115 238 $45 238 $113 008
O 0 53:000 S34 000 $74 016
O g 0 544 482
O *14.271 $48 778 $0049 $79 139
O 540 674 $40 674; $85272O 0 $34 924 $34 324 $81 098
0 0 5757 065
$61 219 516 583,51 058 759 51 140 591 $5 662 734
.,thave funded projects, the federal set-aside was .generally the lar7fportion , of funding.
Objective Ill: Determine the scope of the program improvement andsupport services projects.
j
6. What content, prograM, or problem areas were addressedby the program improvement and suppoil services projectsfunded by the states using the 10% handikapped and 20%disadvantaged set-aside funds during fiscal years 1979,1980, and 1981? i
The content, program, or 'problem areas which were addreSSed by
the program improvement and support services projects and fiAnded by,..the states using the handicapped and 20% disadvantaged set-.aside
funds during fiscal years -1979, 1980, and 1981 are presented in 'Table 11.
A total. of 572 program improvement and support services projects were,funded with the set-asides by the 27 states which funded at least one,--
project or activity' during the three-year period. Vocational education
personnel training projects (158) were most frequently funded. Research
projects and activities (92) were least frequently funded. Forty -eight
percent of all funded projects and activities were in the areas of person-
nel preparation, support services, instritictional methods and materials,
and career development and* exploration.. t
Personnel preparation and staff development for vocational educators
-relative to the vocational education of handicapped and disadvantaged
.4earners were the most frequent kinds *of funded protects and activities
(16%) across the five funding areas. Personnel preparation and staff
development prorams were generally ,,funded under vocational educationb
ci
.personnel training. These programs commonly involved general preservice
and inservice training of vocational educators and suppor't personnel withr0,
30
-.---:
41
V
4
1
TABLE 11CONTENT, PROGRAM, OR PROBLEM AREAS THAT WERE ADDRESSED BY THE PROGRAMIMPROVEMENT AND SUPPORT SERVICES PROJECTS AND FUNDED BY THE STATES USING THE
SET-A,IDES DUR ),NG FISCAL YEARS 1979, 1980, AND 1981
Content Research Exemplary Curriculum, Vocational Vocational TotalProgram, or and Development 'Guidance EducationProblem Area Innovative
)- and PersonnelPrograms , Counseling Training
Staff Development 2 2 4 4 . 80 , 92Support Services 4 13 14 .... 38 8 77Community Resources
Methods and 15 4 20 7 .14 60Materials
Career 5 22 8 8 2 45Development and .
Exploration,
Limited English 12 11 1 5 35Proficiency BilingualEducation
Vocational 4 9 0 12 7 32Assessment
Unidentified . 10 .8 4 3 26Dissemination and
Interagency \8 1 3 7 25
C1 .1 6. 11 22
Tech I Assistance
Cd1Obor-atibn' -.
Cornpetepcy i 0 lit 11 0 9 , 20Based Vc tionalEdueation&,.R4cruitmerirRetenti m 1 3Prittpemen an Folio -up 744°
'bripbuts jyr ential : o,3, DrIbpouts
pre6rarn Imc5fave-iVe4 '15an() Planning:
Proaram. EvalvatIon
1 11 , 1 17
10 2 1 16
1 0 0 ,
13 1 0 1 0 15Needs 4aessmenf% 11 2 1 ' 0 0 14
13"asic Skills 2 2 6 1 3 14
SterAtolyping Non- 3 0 d 10 0 13triattertaupations i,
'',Vist4 and Hearing 0 7 0 4 i 1 12Impaired
Sprial Populatidns 0 -5 1_ 1 5 12(Eigotionally ., 4.Handicapped. NativeAmpricans.
'Incarcerated, Blacksand parejts)Adult Vocational 1 2 2 3 1' 9Services
Totals 92 10& 100 116 158 577N=57n= 27 (states that funded at least one (1) project during the three-year period)
4is
31
6
respect to studeriot needs, individualizing instruction, and methods and
procedures for mainstreaming special needs students into regular vocational
programs.
Seventy-seven support services/community resources projects and4
activities were funded by the states and nearly 50% of these were within
the vocational guidance and counseling are. Generally, these programs
dealt with identifying, accessing, and evaluati g the necessary supplemen-
tary school and community services students n ed to be successful in
vocational programs anchin transition to employme
Methods and materials was also a high priorit' area. Many projects
focused on research, curriculum development, a d .personnel training.
Generally, the projects were concerned with the modification of existing
or. development of new teaching methods and ins ructional materials to
meet, the individual learning needs of handicapped and disadvantaged
learners. Sbme attention was focused on training personnel in the- develop-
ment and use of appropriate methods and materials.
Career development and exploration in terms of the development and
implementation of vocational awareness, orientation, and exploration pro-
grams, particularly at the secondary level, was the focus of 45 projects.
Many of these were funded under exemplary and innovative programs
including the development orr modification of exploratory technical cOuiSes*
and skill training programs designed for special needs learners who
previously have had limited program options and career alternatives.
In summary, 27 of the 57 states have used their handicapped and
disadvantaged set-aside funcl" to support 572 program improvement and
support services activities during fiscal years 1979, _1980, and 1981.
Vocational education personnel training projects were most frequently
4 32 *4
r-
funded while research projects were least frequently funded., Personnel
prepar,ation, supports services, instructional methods and m .Is, and
career development and exploration projects and activities repre; ented
near alf of the projects funded during the three-year period.
Objective IV: Identify several program improvement projects and ddr'elopabstracts.
The number of projects, program descriptions (or abstracts) sub-
mitted, and abstracts developed (or edited) by program improvement
areas are presented in Table 12. Two hundred and eighty-five (285)
program descriptions and abstracts were submitted by the RCU directors
from the 572 projects that they listed on the surveys. However, 22 of the
27 states which funded at least one project during the three-year period
submitted all the program_ descriptions. The low return in some states
was attributable to program descriptions being unavailable. In some cases,
the RCU directors or their staffs were under time constraints and could
not assemble or develop the abttracts. In other states, the directors did
not have adequate staff or any staff to assign to this task.
Fifty of th'e 285 program descriptions submitted by the directors
were selected for the purpose of developing abstracts. When a state
provided program descriptions or abstracts for every program improve-
ment area, one abstract was )developed for each of the five areas. The
projects identified by means 7f the abstracts were not selecte n specific
evaluative criteria, but ra her on diversity and on overall breadth
topics -trom the available program descriptions by program improvement
area. Therefore( a representative sample of program improvement pro-/
jects funded with the 10% handicapped and 20% disadvantaged set-asides
4r
during fiscal years 1979, 1980, and 1981:were selected and abstracts
developed..These,are presented in Appendix D.
TABLE 12
NUMBER OF PROJECTS, PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS SUBMITTED, ANDABSTRACTS DEVELOPED BY PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT AREAS
. J
ProgramAbstracts Descriptions Total Projects
Program Improvement Area Developed Submitted .Funded
Research 5 57 92
Exemplary and Innovative Programs 12 82 106
Curriculum Development 7 , 1414 100
Vocational Guidance and Counseling 4 142 116
Vocational Education Personnel Traini 22 60 158
Total 50 285 '572
N = 27. n = 22
34
4,";
Summary, 'Conclusions, and Recommendations
Summary I I
The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which the
50 states, District of ColuMbia, and the trust territories ( American Samoa,
Guam, Northern Mariana Islands', Puerto Rico, Trust Territory of thePacific
20%
Jslands, and Virgin_Islands) have used their 10% handicapped and
vantaged set -aside funds provided by Public Law 94-482 to
support program improvement projects and activities. In order to examine
the central problem fore closely, the research, exemplary and innovative
programs, curriculum development, vocational guidance and counseling,
and vocational educatio'n personnel training projects funded during fiscal
years 1979, 1980, and 1981 were identified. Further the federal set-.
aside and matching state and local funding levels of the projects were also-
determined. The specific content, program, and problem areas addressed
by the projects were identified and a compendium of program improvement
project abstracts was peloped. A five-item survey instrument was
developed to achieve the major objectives and answer the research clues-,
tions of this study. The entire population of 57 states researc) coordin-
ating, unit (RCU) directors was chosen to participate. After the initial
mail survey and subsequent mail and telephone follow-up surveys, the
final response rate was 100%. "the data analysis- process included the
development of descriptive data tables and a discussion of the findings.
It was not the intent of this study to identify and examine all the
projects and activities the states funded that impacted upon handicapped
and disadvantaged learners. Only those projeCts, programs, or activities
funded in part or whole with the handicapped and disadvantaged set-aside
35
funds were identified. Further, - this study did not attempt to assess the
effectiveness of the projects, nor to determine the levels or focus of
funding of basic grants to LEAs. The fin'dings are based on the major
objectives and research questions developed for this study. The general
findings of this study were:
1 Twenty-five of th 7 states and'territories funded at least one
research projecti the 10% h'andicapped and 20% dis-Alvantaged
set-aside funds during fiscal years 1979, 1980, and:1981 ; while
f
tr.
a total "o* 92 projects were funded. A to 8 of $4,609,825 of
combined federal set-aside and matching state .and local funds
was used to fund research projects during the three-year
period by the 23 states reporting data. The federal set-asides
represented the largest portion of funding and the state funds
the smallest funding source. Most states funded, research
projects witt oQly the federal set-asides.. y
2. Twenty-two of the 57 states and territories funded at least one
exemplary and innovative program project with the 10% handi-
capped and 20% disadvantaged ;'set-asicle. funds' during fiscal
years 1979, 1980, and 1981; while a total of 106 projects were
funded. A total of $5,932,805( of combined federal set-aside and
matching state and local funds was used to fund exemplary and
innovative program projects during the thr:ee-year period by
the 18 states reporting 'data. Most states used the federal
set-asides to fund the major part of or entire projects while the
state and local funds were relatively less used.
3.4 Twenty-one of the 57 states and territories funded at least one
36
7
curriculum development project with the 10% handicapped and
20% disadvantaged set-aside / funds during fiscal years 1979,
1980, and 1981; 'while a total of 100 projects were funded: A.
total of $4,672,204 of combined federal set-aside and matching
state and local funds was used to fund curriculum development
projects .during the three-year period by the 18 states report-
ing data. Most states funded projects in part or whole with
only the federal et-asides. -
4. Nineteen of the 57 states and territories funded at least one
vocational guidance and counseling prOject with the 10% handi-
capped and 2()% disadvantaged set-asides during fiscal years
1979, 1980, and 1981; while a total of 116 projects were funded.
SiXty-seven percent of all the projects were funded by three
states. A total of $5,948,185 of coliTh-nkci federal set-aside and
matching state and local funds was used to fund vocational
guidance and counseling projects during the three-year period
by the 14 states reporting data. The projects were funded
minimally with state funds while the federal set -aside was the
largest funding source. In addition, local funds represented a
substantial portior; of funding for some of the projects.
5. Twenty-seven of the 57 states and territories funded at least
one vocational education personnnel training project with the
10% handicapped and 20% disadvantaged set-aside funds during
fiscal years 1979, 1980, and 1981; while a total of 158 projects
were funded. sixty percent of all the projects were funded by
six states. A total of $5,662,734 of comf3Thed,federal set-aside
tI
37
I
...
and matching state and local funds was used to fund vocational
education personnel training projects during the three-year
period by the 24 states reporting data. Most states funde'd
projects with only federal set-asides while state funds werewith400minimally used.
6. A total of 572 program improvement and support services pro-
jects were funded with the 10% handicapped and 20% disadvan-
taged set-asides by the 27 states .which funded at least one pro-
ject or activity during the three-year period. Vocation& educa-
tion personnel straining projects were most frequently funded
while research projects were )east frequenti-pfunded. Approxi-
mately 50% of all- -the projects and activities funded dealt with
the topics of personnel preparation, support services, instruc-
tional methods and materials, and career developMent and ex-
ploration.
Conclusions
The conclusions, based on theiiindings of this study, are concerned
with the extent to which the states have u)d their 10% handicapped and
t20%. disc vantaged federal set-asides and matching state and local funds to
suppo t program improvement projects and activities in the areaS of
esir----.
res'ch, exemplary and innovative programs, curriculum development,
vocational guidance and counseling, and vocational ecier7ation personnel
training.
1. Most states and territories -did not use their 10% handi.capped
and 20% disadvantged set-asides to fund program improvement. r
. at.
38
/
...
4
r
projects and activities. However, 47% of the states, funded at
least one project Or activity during'fiscal years 1979, 1980, and
1981:
2. Vocational education personnel training projects were most fre-
quently funded while, research projects' were leastfrfrequently
funded.
3. A small number of states funded a large percentage of all the
projects.
4. One-half of all the program improvement projects and activities
funded focused on,the topics of personnel preparation, support
services/community resources, instructional methods and ma-
terials, and career development and 'exploration.
5. The states used their federal handicapped and disadvantaged
set-asides to fund the largest poi-tion of the projects and activi-
ties white the projects were least funded with state funds.
6. host states funecKprojects with only fe'cleral set-aside funds.4
7. Those states which did not use their set-asides to support pro-
gram improvement projects and activities apparently used the
funds for basic grants to local education agencies (several RCU
directors indicated this on their ,surveys) to 'support the excess
costs for providing vocational instruction and support seryices
to handicapped and disadvantaged learners.
8. Many states may fund several Subpart 3 (Program Improvement
and Support Services) projects which include special needs as
.39
vj
well as non-special needs students. Thus, it is difficult to
determine the full extent of funds .expended for special needs
learners under Subpart 3. Generally, these projects serving a
combination of students are not counted against the 10% and 20%
special needs set-asides.
Recommendations. r
The 1141dings'and conclusions of this study indicated that the 10% \.
handicapped and 20%disadvantaged set-aside funds were not generally
used by most states to fund program improvement programs and activi-
ties. Although several special needs national and statewide needs assess-
ment, evaluation, and policy studies (Davis and Ward, 1978; Howard,
1979; Phelps and -Thornton, 1979; Greenan and Phelps, 1980) have in-
dicated a need for expanded program improvement initiatives in areaS,
such as interagency cooperation and program evaluation, many states
apparently ire not using part of th,e-i-r---set-asides for these pprposes.
This does not necessarily suggest that the states have Rot funded pro-
gram improvement activities which impacted upon special needs learners,
nor that the set asides have not been appropriately used as basic grants
to LEAs to support the excess costs of educating handicapped and dis-
advantaged students in vocational education. However, as ',handicapped
in regular-tvocationaland disadvantaged learners continue to, be placed
programs, it will become increasingly important to
programs and s1rvices which assist them in succeeding
and making the transition to the world of work.
Several general and specific- recommendations can be made
develop improved
in their programs
based on
the findings and conclusions of this study. The recommendations which
40
ft
follow are addressed to research and development; policy making , and
planning personnel at the federal, state, and local levels.
7,.- --1--.----ThTS-7siUdy s ecificallx,examined the extent to which the states
r have used thei 10% handicapped and 20% disadvantaged fund.,,Aloe
to support program improvement projects and activities. How-
ever, it is recommended that further studies examine all the
funding sources which the stat,e_s_use to fund program improve-- ,_%projects that impact upon special needs learners in voca-
tional education. For example,. studies could be conducted to
dete mine all projects funded with Public Law 94-482 Subpart 3
funds which directly impact on special n'eeds learners. In
addition, Public Law 94-142, Part 13, funds could also be in-
vestigated.
2. States need to continue or begin to r&spond to the: existing
ainformation and° data which have been provided by national and
statewide needs assessments and evaluations with respect to
special poprotations. bran}. improvement activities should berr
funded based on thy' assessed needs of different target groups
which age concerned with improving and expanding vocational
education opportunities for special needs learners. SEA person-
nel (state directors of vocational and' special educ.ation, state
consultants . for vocational special needs (handicapped and dis-
advantaged), R 'rectors, and other \-staW),. LEA personnel
(administrators, supervisors, teachers, teacher aides, and other
staff4, teacher edu,ators, parents and advocacy groups, and
significant otls should have
-41
ti
into ,assessing .program
444
d * i .. .
' , 4. Illimois Minhesota Researh and Development Certter forl Voca-,
tional Education at the 'University of Minyfesota, National in-
r//
tservice Network et Indiana U_
nivergityi Eval atio4 Training.
Consortium at 'Western Michigan. Univ sity, and he Naikonal
Center for Research 'in Vocational Education at The ohio State. L
Airiprovemefit dieeds, prOgram inservice needs, and personnelee
needs "(den be concurrent activities). Formal needs assecmment s
can provide va Tia evidence for decision' making and fiscal 'ac-'43;
countability4
Several agencies and programs (e.g:, Lelerghip Training
InstituteiVocational and Special 'Education at the University or
lo
\.
.
3.
Uni-versity) have been working on vocational/special catien
needs, assesYment for several years and are ava
for persons- who -went to develop instrumentat
le resources
strategie\,
'and procedures 'for assessing then-. staf needs.
States should. create regional and/or national dissemination net-1
works to share the special needs program improvement projects
.which they, are' funding. Natiopal organizations such as the
Department of Educa 'on, Office of Vocational: and Adult
Education, Research SectiOnl American Vocational Education
Research Association; or the .National _Association of Vocational
. Education Special Needs Personnel could take the leadership in ,
,4 developing such networks. One example of such a network is
the "Consbrtium for Research Related to the Career Dqveiopment
of ;Special Populationis." TI-0 Consortium includes the vocational
and special education personnel from the "E3FC TEN" universitiess
1
.f
V
who are involved in research related to special needs learners.
Through an interagency collaborative network, research ..pro-
grams and activities arty spared and conducted. Network l could
take other forms such as a° "clearinghouse" lOcated at a college
o university; or a periodic newsletter or directory-of abstracts
compiled, produced, and disseminated through a contracted pri-vvete or public ,agency. Other alternatives could be to Ate
existing dissemination linkages or systemg such as the ERIC
Clearinghouse or the National Center for Research in Vocational
Education. The development of a dissemination network is very
desirable since it could facilitate the sharing of program im-
r)rove4ent information and assist states in the non-duplication
of programs and activities.
a
4. A follow-up to 'this Ftu d y could examine the methods and pro-
cedures by which states have funded, are funding, and Will, in'
the futurco Andy, program improvement projects. The information
obtained froM such a study could,.provide state education agen-.
cies w,ith alternatives for assessing 'needs, prioritizing needs,
and efficiently using their existing funds. EffeAtive stye
funding and allocation policies will become more significant as
federal funding policies and resources become less prevalent in
the states.
5. Future research should investigate the effectiveness of the
projects or their impact,,.(shor-1-term and long-term, intended
and unintended) on special needs learners. Program improve-
ment activities are elatively costly . to conduct. As funds
43
-64ft%
t
become more scarce and the need for fiscal accountability and
efficiency becomes increasingly important, the states will have
to demon trate apprelpriate use of available local, state, and
federal dollars. Evaluation questions including the following-
could be asked: As a' result of the programs and activities,
/how many additional students are being served? How successful
are students in .their vocational programs and in the world of
work? How effective are teachers in working with special needsT
students after receiving personnel training? How appropriate
'72.141>..... are the support services and curriculums available to students'
These and other questions, need to be asked"to *iffy and.c.
validate the utility of future prog-7-17n improvement activities.
6. Future research studies could examine the states' funding
policies regarding basic grants to LEAs. Studies could exam-
-r
ine: how needs are determined, the formulas used to allocate
funds, specific areas in which funds are,useci, the adequacy of
funds relative to assessed needs, and the cost-effectiVeness/
benefits of the basic grants. Similar studies could provide
valid evidence to state and federal funding agencies relative to
future funding priorities.
7, Vocational education, special education, vocational rehabilitation,
CETA, and other private and public agencies vyhich 'serve
handicapped and, disadviantaged populations and use federal,
state,, and local funds to support Program improvement activities
need to develop effective interagency cooperation and funding
1414
5,3
14
016
agreements.. Collaborative efforts between agenci will assist
in eliminating 'duplicative efforts ands lead .to incr ased fiscal
efficiency. State education agency personnel RCU
dirIctors, state directors of special education,'state directors)ofvocational rehabilitation) could.develop cooperative needs assess-
.
ments, and funding policies, and identify cOmvion program
improyement activities. The first steps VI developing cooperative
agreements should be to define roles and' responsibilities and
determine how each agericy can best contribute to each activit4
The Leadership Training Institute .(LTI) /Vocational and
Special Education at the Univers.ity pf Illinois and the Inter-..
agency Linkage Model Project at the University of Wisconsin-
Madison continue to work with state education agencies in
derveloping effective state level interagency cooperation and
agreements. The LTI has condiaceedi,a policy study and corn-,. 14.
piled a compendium of interagency agreerrients which were
developed and implemented in the states'. In addition, the LTI
has worked with state leadership/-personnel and has provided
training' in developing collaborative agreements among' state
agencie). The University of Wisconsin-Madison has worked'ire
intensively with states to develop effective interagency agree-
ments. The interagency efforts of both these programs are
applicable to,Ndeveloping state level pgiogram improvement colla-
borative , activities.. State education agency personnel should
consult these and other similar programs for assistance and
directiOn in interagency activities.
45
In summary, the funding of program improvement activities is an
important part of providing handicapped and disadvantaged learners with
expanded vocational education and employment Opportunities. However,
local, state, and federal funds to support these activities are likely to
become more scarce as federal funding policies change and control of thet 41P
dollars shifts to the LEAs. Therefore, future state funding policies
should reflect increased collaboration among vocation& education, special
education, vocational rehabilitation, CETA: and other public and private
agencies. Cooperation and agreements should be developed in such areas
as needs assessments, funding methods and procedures, program evalua-
tion,. dissemination networks, and funding sources and allocations. Pro-,
gram improvement will flourish if state education agencies recognize fed-i°
eral policy changes and begin to develop effective strategies to meet .the
needs of their handicapped_ and disadvantaged' special populations with
potentially less funds and funding sources..1(
4
46
,3
4
Referenrces
Abt Corporation. The Abt Study of State and Local Compliance andEvaluation Practice: Special Needs Populations. A paper presentedat the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Associa-tion, Los Angeles, California, April 14, 1981.
Budke, W. E. and Magisos, J. H., Vocational Education ProgramImprove-ment: A Summary of State Administered Projects in FY 1978 and1979. Columbus: National Center for Research in Vocational Educa-tion, The Ohio State University, 1980.
Davis, S. .and Ward, M. Vocational Education of Handicapped Students:A ,Guide for Policy Developrient. Reston, Virginia: Council forExceptional Childret,1978.
Federal Register, Vocational Education, Volume 42, Number 67, April,1977.
Federal Register, No*distriminatioo on Basis of Handicap- Volume 42,Number 86, May 4, 1977. (Regulations for Implementina Section 504of Public Law =93-112).
,Federal Register, Education of Handicapped Children. Volume 42, Number63, August 23, 1977. (Regulations for Implementing Public Law94-1142).
Greenan, J. P: and Phelps, L. A. Policy-Related Problems for DeliveringVocational Education to I-Jandicappea Learners as Perceived by StateEducation Agency Personnel? ,Urbana, Illinois: Leader,ship Training
1) Institute/Vocational and Special Education, 1980.
Howard, R. Vocational Education of Handicapped Youth: .State of theArt. V,ashington, D. C.: National Association of StateBoards ofEducation, 1979.
Phelps, L. A. and Thornton, L. J. Vocational Education and HandicappedLearners: Perceptions and Inservice Needs of State Leadership Per-sonnel. Urbana, Illinois: Leadership Training Institute/Vocationaland pecial Education, 1979.
4.4 147
A
Appendix
4
a
4
Name:
Address:
ik
(.Appendix
Program Improvement and Support Services
Special Needs Project Survey
Telephone Number: (
Example
Fiscal Year
Vocational Education Personnel Training
Project Title Local
Funding
State Federal Total
1980 1. Personnel Preparation in $1000 $2000 S3000 $6000Teaching HandicappedLearners in VocationalEducation
2. Non-Categorical Vocaz 1000 2000 1500( 4500tional/Special Education
---`leacher Programs .
0----
. .
Total $2000 $4000 $4500 $10500
Instructions
1. The Fiscar Year is,g.iven.2. Project Title - List all projects that are being funded with the set-asides
for, special needs learners in the appropriate fiscal year.3. Local Funding - Indicate the'amourit of local funds in terms of dollars that8 are used to fund the project.4. State Funding - Indicate the amount of state funds in terms of dollars that
. are used to fund the projept.5. Federal Funding - Indicate the amount of federal funds in terms of dollars
that are used to fund the project.6. Total - Add the local, state, and federal funds used Att- an individual pro-
.ject and record the sum.
r Add the local., gtate, and federal funds separately across projectsand record the sums.
51 C .
it
Fiscal Year
Research
Project Title
Funding,
Local State Federal Total
.
.
FY 1979
.
x
..
.
.
\
,
.
,
,
,
Total
I
FY 1980
.
..
.
,--
..
.
?
.
...
i .
,
.-
.
.1,
Total
FY 1981
.
.
e
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I-
Total
t2
b4.
Fiscal Year
Exemplary and Innovative Programs
Project Title
Funding
Local State Federal Total
,
FY 1979
Y
_
.'
.
.
.
t
.
---....
...
.
.
.
.
.
Total
.
FY 1980
..
.
.
.
.
_
'
.
.
.
.
.
Total ,
.
.
.
a
FY 1981
,
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
ib.
.
.
4
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
'Totnl .
O.53
Fiscal Year
Curriculum Development
Project Title
Funding
Local -State Federal Total
FY 1979
.
,
,.
.
a
-
.
,
.
.
..
.
.
Total. .
_....-""
Fr 1980
s
.
,
`k
.
.
Or
',
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
P
>
.
...
il
.
,
Total i.
FY 1981.
.
.
4
.
4
.
.
T,
..
n
.
.
1
....---,
a
Total
54 vvr
Fiscal Year
4*/Vocational Guidance and Cbunseling
Fundin
Project Title Local State Federal Total
FY 1,979
..
4.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
4..
.
.
..
.
. -
,
.
.
b
4
.
.
.
. .
Total
Y 1980
.
.
..
4
,
,
t
....
.
.
.
.
,
,
.
Total
FY 1981
.
. .
.
I.I
.\
.
.
.
.
.
.
p
.
.
,
,
.
,
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
Total
55.
Fiscal Year
Vocational Education Personnel Training
Project Title
Funding.
'Local State Federal Total
.
FY 1979
.
.
.
®
.
.
.
,
,
e .
,
. .
.
.
TotalH I
----FY
_.
0
t.
.
.
..
..
.
.1
.
Total.
FY 1981
.
.
.
.
, ..,
1
.
.."
,
..
..
.
.
.
41.
Total
56
University of Illinois at UrpAna- ChampaignCollege of EducationDEPARTMENT OF VOCATIONALAND TECHNICAL EDUCATION
Dear RCU Director: .
t Appendix B
315 Education Building1310 5, Sixth StreetChampoign, it 2i1820(217) 333.0807
October 15', 1980
A major thrust in vocational education has been to provide special needslearners with appropriate ,instruction and support services. Publ$ Law94-482 (The Education Amendments of 1976 - Title II: Vocational Educa-tion, Part 'A) has provided federal set -aside 'funds specifically for thevocational education of speciaVneeds leaMers (10% handicapped, 20$ dis-advantaged) . Subpart 3 (Program Improvement and Support .Services)lists, defines, and describes the are ,.in which set-aside funds 'may beused for, program improvement pr cts and activities. These areasinclude:
o Research. (Section 131).° Exemplary and Innovative Programs (Section 132)ourriculum Dev.elopment (Section 133)
V rational Guid'ance and Counseling (Section 134)o Vocational Education Personnel Training (Sectiop 135)
the Leadership Training Institute/Vocational 'and Special Education staffat the University of Illinois, is currently corfaucting a policy study todetermine the extent to which the 'states have' and are presently usingtheir TO% handicapped and 20% disadvantaged. set-aide funds to suppoPtprogram improvement projects and activities that impact upon specialneeds learners in vocational education. In addition, a compendium ofselected project abstracts will be develope. This stud will describe thevarious program improvement .thrusts that states have ini iated regardingspecial needs learners.
Enclosed are five Subpart 3, program improvement and support servicesproject survelease complete each of the surveys by listing all-projects within the five areas , that are currently or have beenfunded with -the set-asides for special needs learners on the appropriatesurveys. If all the; Subpart 3, program improvement areas are not underyour supervision (e.g., research but not exemplary programs)', pleaseassist us by collecting and reporting that information from the appropriatesection.' Also, write yis,ur name, address, and telephone number on thecover sheet. You may want to refer to the example and instructions incompleting the surveys.
tk
ti
4`,
57a
ter.
IF-, sr
5
. .In addition, please indlud,t 01 abstract for each project .listeti on the sur-veys. This will givae us a more' detailed description of the projects'goavls, major objectives; target audiences, products, and ,other pertinentinformation. ,After reviewing- t abstracts received, we will again contactyou `regard'i'ng permission,lo include specific alptracts in the fint report.,
Vie would appreciate it if you would return the om I,eted cover sheet,five project lists, and abstracts- try November 15, 1 8 If you have anyquestions, please don't 1-Aitate to contact us at (21 33- 2325.. Throughthis study and your cooperation we,b.hope- to entify and share the broadrange of unique ',projects being initiated within he states to impreye and
:_< arid vocational education for special need ers. Your assistancein this effort 'is greatly appreciated! .
'Sincerely,
James P. Greenan, Ph.D.Research Development CoordinatorLeadership' Training Institute/Vocational and Special Education
11
t.
fa,
110
4'
41.
a
University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignCollege of EducationDEPARTMENT OF VOCATIONALAND TECHNICAL EDUCATION
wir
Appendix C
Dear RCU Director:4
345 Cducolion Building ,1310 S Sixth StreetChampaign. it 61820(217) 333 0807
November21, 1980
Five weeks ago you rived a request from us to coroplete five Subpart 3program improvement and support services, project ivnieys. To be listedwere all projects within the five areas (see -surveys)/ that are currently orhave been funded in your state with the set-asides (10% handicapped and.*20% disadvantaged) for special needs learners on the appropriate surveys.Also to be included was an abstract for, each project listed' on thesurreys.
We have encloseid -copies of the materials that were previously mailed toyou. It would be appreciated if you would complete the Surveys andreturn them to u s by December 2 1 , 1 9 8 0 . I f you have any questions,don't hesitate to contact us at (217)333-2325. Your cooperation andassistance in 'this effort is} greatly appreciated! Thank you.
Sincerely ,
James P.. Greenan, Ph.D.Re,seach and Dev&4'pment Coordinator,Leadership TrainIN Institute/Vocational and Special =pRication
59
4
4,
ir , -;911jet
1r A
6
Appendix D
Program Improvement Project Abstracts
RESEARCH
STATE: Arkansas FISCAL YEAP: 1980
SPONSORING AGENCY: Fort Smith Public Schools TOTAL-FUNDS $39,740
CONTAtT PERSON: Mrs. Betty Morris1
AL DRESS: FOrt Smith Public SchoolsFort Smith, Arkansas
PROJECT,
TITLE: Career AviareneSs and Job Placement for EaVly SchoSl Leaversr and Adults in Port Smith, Arkansas
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals of this program are: (1) to developa school-commemity plan of action for coordinatingmeaningful educational and occupational. experiencesfor potential and actual early school leavers, and(2) to explore strategies and alternative solu-
t:t tions for'providing career guidance and job place-ment services to identified target groups.
e'.f
STATE: Arkans'as FISCAL YEAR: 1980
SPONSORINCAGENCY: University of Centr'alAi\kansas
C6NTACT. PERSON:- Dr. Joseph Arn
ADDRESS: University of Central ArkansasConway, Arkansas 72032
TOTAL FUNDS:$32,074
^PROJECT TITLE; Coordinated Career, Education Curriculum Project
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goal of this project is to de-velop a well-iflanned Coordinated Career Education (coopdrativeeducation for handicapped and/or disadvantagedstudents) curriculum guide which will enable the600rdinated career education teachers to provide thekind of learning ,experiences and opportunities fortheir students to achieve their educational objec-tives*more effectively and efficiently.
61 N
ST-ATE: Colorado
SPONSORING AGENCY: Not available
CONTACT PERSON: Not available
ADDRESS: Not Avail-able
FISCAL YEAR: 1980
TOTAL FUNDS: Not available
PROJECT- TITLE: Assessing the Impact of Vocational Education Programs onDisadvantaged and Handicapped Students
PROJECT DESCRIPTION; The major goals of this project are to assess the fol-lowing: (1) numbers of handicapped. and disadvan-taged in Colorado, (2) identification of vocationalneeds, (3) the existence of current programs, (Lir)
the adequacy of existing programs; (5) mainstream-ing impact upon reaular vocational programs, (6)training needs of vocational teachers, (7) careereducation/guidance 'needs, and (8) future directionsof vocational 'programming.
STATE: ,Florida FISCAL YEAR: 1980;
SPONSORING AGENCY: University of Florida * TOTAL FUNDS: $15,000 ,.0".
*'`'CONTACT PERSON: Dr. Stuart Schwartz
ADAESS: University of FloridaGainesville, Florida 32611
PROJECT TITLE: A Study. tolxplore Vocational Training Proaramg .and Subse-quent Success of Handicapped Indivi uals in Rural Areas
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Available regtarch literature provides little* insightrelated 4to the vocational prepar"ation and success
14;... of handicapped persons in rural areas. Observa-tions and pilot studies conducted by the writersof this proposal in rural districts in the State of
1. _Florida indicate that . few handicapped individualscan be considered vocationally successful. Giventhe current state of affairs, this project will beconducted to achieve the following objectives:* (1) to ...
develop and meet with a statewide advisory committeefor this' project, (2) to review the literature toCle-,termine, the . national state-of-the-art' of vocationalpreparation programs ,fOr handicapped students andcompare national models to those identified in Florida,and (3) to review the li4rature to determine thenational state-of-the-art of vocational adult adjust-ment of handi) Aped and non - handicapped' persons,particularly a it relates to rural settings.
'4, ir 62O A*
I
6
STATE. Pennsylvania FISCAL YEAR: 1979
SPONSORING At ENCY: Central Susquehanna TOTAL FUNDS: $40,893Intermediate Unit
CONTACT PERSON: Dr. Patrick F. Toole
ADDRESS: P.O. Box 213Lewisburg. Pennsylvania &7837
'PROJECT TITLE: VOcOonal Education' Needs of Handicapped Youth Project
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This project, which is concerned with the ideiltifi-cation of vocational preparation programming factorsthat may affect the performance nd successful' out-comes of handicapped students,\ has the followingobjectives: (1) to determine the current state-of-the-art relative 'to vocational education programsoffered to handicapped students by vocational educa-tion schools, home schools, and various local commun-
. ity programs through the development and administra-tion of an inventory, (2) to identify and develop :),
evaluation criteria to be employed in the researchproject, (3) to develop research methodology, (4)
'I, to expand the information base on program options,and (5) to establish an -advisory committee.
4
637
,
io
EXEMPt RY AND INNOVATIVE PROGRAMS
.STATE: Arizona'. FISCAL YEAR: 1981
SPONSTING AGENCY: Mohare County School TOTAL FUNDS: $9 ,265
District
CONTACT PERSON: David, Watson
ADDRESS: 515 West BealeKingmran, grizona 86401
PROJECTTITLE: Seeking Alternative Vocational Education
-44
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This igio.r^am is designed to provide a thorough voca-.tionar education training and support program foryoung people who may or who have already drpppedout of the regular school system prior to graduation.The major goals of the program will be:. {1) to in-
. crease the chance for success of p ial dropoUtsby keeping them in school through p iding appro -*priate vocational education programAing, and (2) fordropouts to enhance their glances for successfulemployment by training and/or job placement.<
STATE: Florida FISCAL YEAR: 1981
SPONSORING AGENCY: Florida State University
CCNTACT PERSON: Dr. Hollie R. Thomas
TOTAL FUNDS: $10,000
ADDRESS: Florida State UniversityTallahassee, Florida 32306
W
PROJECT TITLE: A Study to Identify the Unique Criteria ancl StandardsNeeded for the Development of Successful Bilingual Voca-tional Education Programs
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed research intends to identify the uniquecriteria and standards needed for the development of .successful bilingual vocational education 'programs.The major objectives are: (1) to idenry the uniquestaff requirements for working with students of
11° limited-English speaking ability; (2) to 'identify theunique facilities, equipment, ..and. materials neededfor the, instruction of such students; (3) to identifythe unique 'curriculum components that are needed;and (4) to identify cultural and philosophical differ-ences that exist between the students, teacjitrs, andthe dominant population.
64
70-
Az1
0 4 k
STATE: Florida
SPONSORING AGENCY:' Florida InternationalUniversity
CONTACT PERSON: Debbie Herman Seigel
ADDRESS: Florida InterRational UniversityTamiami Trail -
Miami, Florida 33199
4
,
FISCAL' YEAR: 1981
TOTAL FUNDS: 541,689
PROJECT TITLE: Handicapped User Interface for Florida VIEW
PROJECT 5ESCRIPTtON : The project will augment Florida's VIEW CareerInformation for relevance to physically ,handicapped,users. The major objectives are: (1) to collectphysical capacities information, us)ng the Job RelatedPhysical Capacities (JRPC) job analysis method, onat least 40 occupations on FLORIDA VIEW, (2) to pro-* duce this data in apprOpriate format to be includeddirectly on VIEW microfiche, and (3) to refine theJRPC user's manual for use with FLORIDA -VIEW.
.x KSTATE: .Idaho FISCAL YEAR: 19800
1.
A,SPONSORING AGENCY: Nampa School District TOTAL FUNDS: 510,000
CONTACT PERSON: Marjorie WescheA
ADDRESS: Nampa Senior High School-, Nampa, Idaho 83651
PROJECT TITLE; Nutrition for Disadvantaged
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The .major. goals of this project are: (1) to improvethe nutrition 'of high school economically 'disadvan-
.
students through study and teaching elemen-tary, pupils, (2) to improve the nutrition of the K-5pupils in Centennial Elementary School through ,class-
- room unit teaching, and (3) to acquaint high school..... students with nutritional job opportunities.
\
65 7'.,,.
.--
IC4--
4
i
TATS:' Illinois
SPONSORING AGENCY:
CONTACT PERSON:
0
7
*. FISCAL YEAR: 1980 .
Joliet Township District 4204 TOTAL FUNDS: $69,118
Im Boldrey
ADDRESS: 201 E. Jefferson StreetJoliet, Illinois 601432
PROJECT TITLE: Diffusion Center for Exemplary Occupational EducationPrograms for Handicappti _ and Disadvantaged Students
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goqls of this project are: (1) to serveas a diffusion center for exemplary occupationaleducation activities that serve the vocational edu-cation needs of handicapped and dadvantagedstudents, at the secondary level; (2) to activelyparticipate in the coordination and diffusion ofexemplary occupational education activities oper-ating in Joliet and in the other specified sitet. byworking closely with all sites in the network andthe Illinois State University center; (3) to providetechnical assistance on a one-to-one basis to selectedschool districts who are interested in adapting/adopt-ing one or more of the .programs, services and/ormaterials that relate to occupational education forhandicapped and disOvakltaged students; an ) tostrengthen existing programs, services, a d staffcompetencies in relationship to occupational e ucationfor all handicapped and disadvantaged students inDistrict 204'..f
STATE: Kentucky . FISCAL YEAR: 1981
SPONSORING AGENCY: Western Kentucky University TOTAL FONDS: S39,124
CONTACT PEF3SON : Dr. Norma Jean Sc.hira
ADDRESS: Western Kentucky UniversityBowling Green, Kentucky 142101
PROJECT TITLE: - Assessment of Occupational Opportunities in Health Occupa-tions for Handicapped
PROJECT D,ESCR1PTION: The major goals of this project are: (1) to assessand identify' the types of occupational programs inhealth occupations available to handicapped students,(2) to prepare a catalog of opportunities according tohandicap 'classifications with suggestions about modifi-cations, (3) to prepare and package for field testing
66t
4
instructional materials for s'pe(cial,needs students, and.(4) to provide inservice to health occupations teachersin the strategies used with special needs students.
4 STATE: Massachusetts FISCAL YEAR: 1981
SPONSORING AGENCY: Ecumenical Social Action-4, Committee
CONTACT 'PERSON: Not available
I ADDRESS: Not available. \
TOTAL FUNDS: $70,002' ,..
/
PROJECT TITLE: Pre-Vocational.Program for High Risk Adolescents
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals of this project are: (1) to couplq,traditional school involvement with vocational explora-tion through activities such as individual and group ocounseling, field trips,. internships, family outreachcounseling, and other supirtive services; (2) to pro-vide meaningful age-appropriate center exploration/work opportunities; and (3) to expose clients to non-traditional career options.
STATE: tbi-nnesota.
SPONSORING AGENCY: Red Wing AVT.I
CONTACT PERSON: Pat tnzt
ADDRESS: R90, Wing AVTIRkd Wing, Minnesota 55066
PROJECT TITLE:, PLATO (Phase III)
4
FISCAL YEAR: 1980, \
TOTAt. FUNDS:' 524,864
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals of this project are: (1) to providestudents with a variety of skills to comprehend- con-cepts, (2) to provide tomple in raction opportuni-ties through dialklue mode P TO, (3) to providenew experiences in a variety of ubjects related to thestudent program, ant (1.1) to individually assist stii-,dents in developing skills necessary to obtain successinvtheir program area.
\.:....1...
-1
C,
67
IO
('STATE: Neiv Jersey
15
SPONSORING AGENCY: Middlesex CountyVocation.tTechnicalHigh School
CONTACT PERSON: Brian Laughlin
ADDRESS: Btrr D. Coe Vo-Tec112 Rues LaneEast Brunswick, New Jersey 08816
FISCAL Y.FAR: 1980.
TOTAL FUNDS: $5,875
e
PROJECT TITLE: Optimizing Vocational Development in the Handicapoed (A.Systems Approach to Community and Family Involvement) ,
PROJEtT DESCRIPTION: Using the theory that interaction between community,a family, andschool is crucial to an indiViduarsever-
tual success in the competitive job market, thisproject sought to bring together all three inter're-lqted social systems for the purpose of developingrealistic vocational plans %Ir participating handicappedsit08ents.`
STATE: New Mexico FISCAL YEAR: 1981
SPONSORING AGENCY: Career Services for TOTAL FUNDS: Not Availablethe Handicapped
AP
CONTACT PERSON: Chris Jsengard
ADDRESS: 620 Roma, N.L\L.-, Suite BAlbuquerque, New Mexico 87103
PROJECT TITLE: Vocationaliupport for the Severely Handicapped
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The objectives of this, project are: (1) to provide'supportive services necessary to allow "severely,physically, and sensory 4-aandicapped students to
If attend established vocational prbgrams; and '(2) toprovide sdpportiv services to 'severely physically,and sensory han pped persons during periods ofon-the-job trainin d job orientation.
68
STATE: New York FISCAL YEAR: 1979
SPONSORING AGENCY: Kennedy High School TOTAL FUNDS: 5231,365
CONTACT PERSON: Not a liable
ADDRESS:.Bronr, N
PROJECT TITLE: Occupational EdNation for jcadvantaged Secondary Students
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Kennedy High School offers an unusual alternative inthe Voluntary/Work Experience Program by blendingacademic and work experiences. It focuses on in-depth exploration and decision making, skills acquisi-tion, and basic learning through full-time, individu-alized and realistic site .experiences. Three hundreddisadvantaged students in grades 10-12 are served inphotography, arts, and graphics based upon predeter-mined selection criteria.
STATE: Texas
SPONSORING AGENCY: Region XX ESC
CONTACT PERSON: Dwain M. Ester
FISCAL YEAR: 1981
TOTAL FUNDS: $50,000
ADDRESS: 1550 N.E. Loop 1410San Antonio, Texas 78209
PROJECT T.ITLE: Vocational Assesspent for the Handicapped
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The objectives of this project are: (1) to develop atraining program for LEA personnel in the administra-tion and interpretation of selected vocational evaiva-'tion instruments; (2J to evaluate 50 handicapped stu-dents and in so doing refine the process of evalu-ation procedures, forms., selection of tests, resorts,and others; (3) to provide technical assistance Wpro-gramming for the handicapped; and (14) to gather datathr'ough. research on the use of dexte'rity tests indifferentiating mentally retarded, learning disabled,and normal high school students.
69'
I
STATE: Arizona
SPONSORING AGENCY: MCCCD (Rio Salado)
CURRICULUM DEVELOAMENT
CONTACT PERSON: Dr. Martha P.Wtin
ADDRESS: 102 North 40th StreetPhoenix, Arizona 85034 ,
PROJECT' TITLE: Ohe Step Further: Guadalupe
FISCAL YEA,R: 1981
TOTAL FUNDS: $29,604
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This program Will provide students with remedialbasic 'education and occupational skills necessary tomaintain. a sriall business. Its goals are: (1) tdF
develop the skills necessary to make students inde-pendent entrepreneurs, (2) to enable them to governtheir own build; and (3) to prepare them to succeedin community college or other formal occupational pro-grams.
STATE: Illinois
SPONSORING AGENCY: Southern IllinoisUniversity
CONTACT PERSON: Mr. E. 1-111is Merritt
ADDRESS; School of Technical CareersSouthern Illinois UniversityCarbondale, Illinois 62901
PROJECt TITLE: Development of Multi-Cultural, Technical Curricula
FISCAL YEAR: 1981
TOTAL FUNDS: $29,931
Competency-Based Vocational/
PROJECT' Df CRIPTION: The major goals of this project are: (1) to reduce4 Jinciuistic 'and cultural barriers to )earning among
limited English speaking adults JLESAs) involvedin vocational/technical ,training programs in eightoccupational areas and t2) to improve vocationalinstruction through the development of bilingual(Pocho speaking and Laotian `speaking LSAs, butwith generic applications to other vocational/tech-
. nical training needs involving Spanish speaking andother Indochinese speaking LESA groups) competency-based curricula in modules which will be used in eighthigh demand occupational areas (automobile bodyrepair, automobile mechanic, building maintenancemechanic, combination welder, fiberglass technical,food service, machine trades, and secretarial/clerical).
70
V
0
STATE: Massachusetts
SPONSORING AGENCY: Fall River Public,Schools
CONTACT PERSON: Not available c_
,jFISCAL YEAR: 1981
TOTAL FUNDS: $34,734
#ADDRESS: Fall River Public Schools
Fall River, I'lassachusetts
PROJECT TITLE: Appliance Repair
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This project has as its major opal to provide addi-tional staffing for the appliance repair program '-including two aides, one for 15 handicapped, studentsand one for 30 limited English-proficiency students.
STATE: Minnesota.-9
SPONSORING AGENCY: Duluth AVTI
CONTACT PERSON: Clifford Wiklund
ADDRESS: #709 4 Duluth AVTILake Avenue and 2nd StreetDu Idth, Minnesota 55802
FISCAL YEAR: 1980
TOTAL FUNDS: 52,459
PROJECT TITLE: Chemical Deperidency Curriculum Workshops for the AVTI's
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals of this project are: (1) to satisfy theneeds of the AVTIs for program implementation andstaff training, (2) to increase their use of the ser-vices available, (3) to assist students who are exper-:iencing problems in schools related to chemical depen-dency Lisqltbuse, an'd (4) to introduce new and inno-vative curricula developed by-the American BusinessMen's Research Foundation and the California Councilon Alcohol Problems% -;
F
m71?-',1
4 ...,
4
S
STATE: New Jersey FISCAL .YEAR: 1980
SPONSORING AGENCY: Burlington CountyCollege
CONTACT PERSON: D. Brian Lewis
ADDRESS: Social Sciences 'Division .
Pemberton Browns Mills RoadPemberton, New Jersey'08068
TOTAL FUNDS: $31,159
PROJECT TITLE.1fAraprofessidnal Training i IT Special Education
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The objectives of this project include: (1) to furtherdevelop; field-test, and disseminate a modelacur-riculum; and (2) to provide preservice and inservicetraining to paraprofessionals in special education.,The overall curriculum design, supportive materialsfor the firstvtl.yo courses, and the blueprint for a
portable professional library., were- developed in a
project funded in fiscal year 1978. In fiscal year1979, the project addressed itself .to developing theremaining supportive materials for the third andfourth courses and field testing all materials.
STATE: New Mexico FISCAL YEAR: 1981
SPONSORING AGENCY': Northern New Mexico TOTAL FUNDS: Not aVailableCommunity College'
1;/.
,CONTACT PERSON: Connie A.. Valdez
ADDRESS: Northern New, Mexico Community. CollegeEspanola, New Mexico
PROJECTVITLE: Meeting Curriculum Needs of die Disadvantaged Students
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The objectives of this project are: (1) to providecurriculum which is tailored to the needs and &Dili-
)
ties of the disadvantaged student with_ emphasis onbasic skills, (2) to provide students with materialsand ,instruction 'Which will promote conceptual develop-ment and Skill awareness, (3) to assist students in th&deyelopment of competencies-which will help them com-,pete successfully in the labor market, and (4) to pro-mote Student success in vocational programs and thus.,decrease dropout rates.
4 72
.,
ST9ATE: Pennsylvania
SPONSORING AGENCY: School District ofThe City of Erie
xt
\
FISCAL YEAR: 1979
TOTAL FUNDS: $43,980
CONTACT PERSON: Henry Pilker ,, -. tk i,
4 ADDRESS: School Di Strict of the City of Erie la c 0a,
. '4 Erie, Pennsylvania 1-6501. .
. \ . l:t r
PROJECT TITLE: An Adaptive Vocational Program for '.Tr.ainable Peta'rded__Students .
.
,. ...- -
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: T e objectives of this project which are designed to' ' research the educational value df placing trainable
iik retardedAtydents in regular vocational shops, include:(1) to.f6rrr4lateplEPs based on parenta), professional,and student attitudes toward -the area that could bestbenefit the student; (2) to place,sVdents in various
--A, vocational stwps thpt will benefit ther: in everydayo . self-help skins; and (.3) acquaint lheTMRs, regular
students, n'd. regular teachers withieach other'scharacter ics. ) '
. i ..
1, -
4
J.
.40.v.
000.
q
I
--
. /4 g
/10
z
,
.1°
.04
141
4
4
VOCATIONAL GUIDANCE AND COUNSELING, 4
STAT.E: r i zo n a "kitFCAL YE A R : 1981
SPONSORING 'AG,,E-NC;r: Nogales UnifiedSchool OT AL FUNDS: 5142,012Di Strict #1
4CON TA.C7 PERSON: Dr. James Lehman-
ADDRESS: 402 Martinez Streettioatles, Arizona 85621
PROJECT TITLE: Special Needs: Limited En`glish 4
PCT DESCRIPTION: The major goals. of this ,program are: (1) to help stu-.Gents wn"..1-iav,e been identified as, dropouts or pot n-tial dropaikts to, increase their knowledge in basiccommunication skills, basic mattiersatics, and read-ing skills; and (2) to, provide vocational guidance ar411.counseling services Which will help thorn in th61111,
academic and vocational pursuits after graduation.
STATE: Massachusetts FISCAL YEAR: 19814 .
, SPONSORING AGENCY? New Bedford Public TOTAL FUNDS: $134,1458Schools .. , 0 ' '
CONTACT PERSON: Not available
ADDRESO:` New Bedford Public Schools, New Bedford, Massachusetts
., -
PROJEV TITLE: Career Or.ientaiti#n' and Training
A
PROJECT. DESCRIPTION: This alternative occupational project has the followinggoals: (1). to deter students from dropping out'ofhigh school( (2) to significantly increase their blipor-,tunities .for employment; and (3) to provide hands-ontrainlmj .areas ot Communications, construction,health .services, manufacturing, and office occupa-.lions r
Na.
9
el
fik
STATE: Oregon ACAL. YEAR: 1980
SPONSORING AGENCY David Douglas TOTAL FUNDS: $38,741-High School
.
CONTACT PERSON:. Mr. Stan Gaumer
AQDRESS)."-David Douglas SOlool District.1500.S.E. 130th AvenuePorstland,'Oregon 9723
PROJECT TITLE': Career, Center for Vocational Guidance. ,
es,.,
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this project is to ,pi-ovide and coor-,- -dinke_ studeht opportunities to explore, identify, andaccumulate information that w ,il pertain to, individualskills and career goals. ,tts ,major goals are: (1) toprovide career guidance services to disadvantagedand handicapped students; (2) to coordinate voca-tional guidance, work' experience, and disadvan-tagcl and handicapped services; -(3) to reducesex-role stereotyping; and (Li) to create 'staff aware-nes's -oft career c-n'ter-aterrats-aTicrfarittions.
STATE: New Jersey
SPONSORING AGENCY: Salem County Boardfor Vocational Education
CONTACT PERSON: Chary Lutz
FISCAL YEAR: 1986
TOT4.1_,FUNDS: 518,500
ADDRESS: Road #2, Box 350k7oodstown, New Jersey 08098
PROJECT TrtLE: Vocational Courses for Handicapped AdultsN..
PROJECT DESCRI*15110N: The peinfary gol of this project was to train handl--capped and diSadvantaged adults, other' th'an thosein need of sh.eltered, works-hop facilities, to fill"
'skilled positio1is,,d3articularly in the s'ervkce ,
.i
75 S.3;
1
O
t_QV
e
9
V ..
VOCATIONAL EDUCATION 'PERSONNEL TRAINING
STATE: Arizona' FISCAL YEAR:_ 1981
SPONSO ING GENCY: Mesa *Community TOT4L FUNDS: $105,738College
CONTACT PERSON: Marilyn Seymann'.
ADDRESS: 1833 West Southern A\ienueMesa, Arizona 85202 4
e
--;
-\..PROJECT TITLE: Project to f Adults Ac.guire Special Education -- PHASE II
PROJECT .DESCRIPTION: Tod assure maximum vocational education_trairiing forit ., an increasing number of students with special needs, ,.
MCC proposes to develop and implement an afternoon.college for, these individuals. The major goals of this
.. , program are: (1) to -combine an on=site work experi-ence in the mornings 'in, a jab-related shting along.
,., with -an afternoon program of vocational studies, .a.pd(2) to operate this progrem,in coordination with appro-
. priate support services " to p'ovide an urlinterruptedcontinuum from school to employment.
a . 'v
STATE: Arkansasrs .11.FISCAL Y-EAR: 1980
,
SPONSORING AGENCY: UQI ,ity of Arkansas TOTAL FUNDS: Not available, at Pine Bluff \
goONTACTPERO-N: Dr. James E. Jennings
ADDRESS: University of ArkansaS at Pine BluffPine Bluff, Arkansas
PROJECT TITLE: Develop aCid Field Test Modules for the Train)flg ofTeachers of Special Needs StLidents in Regular VOcationalEducation ProgramS '
)
1
PROJECT 'DESCRIPTION The. purpose of this project is to prepare vocationalteachers and pOtential teachers to effectively teachstudents with special needs., More specificall, the
1. 'project will facOitale the mainstreaming .of siulOentspith special needs into the regtAlar vocational pro-
" grams through the following "means: (1) to restruc-. ture selected 'teacher preparation coUrses in voca-
tional areas to provide skills in working, with *gpecialt"--needs' students, 12) to develop apprOpi-,iate ipclividu:alized learning opportunities for prospective teachers
'76c,
)
..
of special needs stude , (3) to provide inservicetraining of university acuity who will teach compe-tency-based module in selected courses, (4) toevaluate graduates he preservice program, 'and(5) to provide 'training for selcted teachers of,special needs Students.
_ArSTATE; Connecticut FISCAL YEAR: 1981
SPONSORING AGENCYA Bureau of Pupil Personneldf TOTAL FUNDS: $20,434Hartford, Connecticut
CONTACT PERSON: Stephen Feldman
ADDRESS: Special Education DerpartmentSouthern Connecticut S,tate' CollegeNew Haven, ConnecticUt
PROJECT TITLE:. Special'Study Institute
.PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals of this prOject are: (1) to train-.140 special educators, regular educators, and schoolcounseling personnel to jointly identify: (a) specificlearning characteristics and training capabilities ofhandicapped, adolescents (b) existing legal' and fiscalsupport mechanisms and options for vocational educa-tion, career education, and counseling; and (c)- in-service training priorities for career, occupational,and vocational educators; and (2) to, train 30 regularteachers, special, educators, aoloinistrators, vocationalcounselors, social workers, ad guidance coOnse.lorsin the concepts .of career and vocational education forthe handicapped.
STATE: Idaho ; P
SPONSORING AGENCY: Uhiversity of Idaho
CONT)CT 0gRSON: Dr. ;Jack Ka0fman
ADDRESS: Univeritity of IdahoMoscow, Idaho 83$43
5-PROJECT TITLE: Communication Skills Devetopment"Workshop for tcational
Needs
-FISCAL YEAR: 1980
TOTAL FUNDS: $4,1.97
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals 'of 'this project are: (1) to, developa Course to, be offered to vocational 'special needsteac4rS throughout _tt(er state, and. (2) to developthrough this process a core of qualified affiliatefaculty whq will offer the course in various locitionsthroughout the state.
77 ,
iATE: Illinois # FISCAL YEAR: 1981
SPONSORING AGENCY: University f Illinoisat Urbana- hampaign
oTOTAL FUNDS: $75,000
CONTACT PERSON": Dr. L..Allen helps
ADDRESS: 345 Education° BuildingUrbana, Illinois 61801
.404g....%1ECT.1.1-TLE:. Development of a Programmatic Emphasis and Extern Program1 for Vocational. Special Needs Education
I
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals of this project are: (1) to organizeand implement a university-based developmental modelof programmatic emplhesis on vocational special needseducation; (2) .to orgSnize and implement a model forpreparing special needs externs to provide inserviceand technicale assistance services to LEA's; and (3) tofacilitate linkages be een vocational educationspecial education, and ocational rehabilLtation atthe university, state ed ation agency, and local,levels.
STATE.; Kentucky FISCAL YEAR: 1980
SPONSORING AGENCY: -Western iKentucky TOTAL FUNDS: 58,158Univer.sity
CONTACT PRs'ON: Susan Adams
DDRESS: CCVTEWestern Kentuck niversityBowling Green, tucky 42101
PROJECT TITLE: Resources and Assistance forr. Vocation51 Educators of Stu-.dents with Limited English-SpeaRing Ability (LESA)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals of 'this project are: (1) to continueassistande in equitable and appropriate programmodifications to Kentucky vocational education pro-.grams. serving LESP populations; (2) to continue' pro-vision of resources, information, and tech9ical advise-
.. . ment fib vocational educators serving LESA students;(3) to inform Kentucky vocational educators regardingfederal .mandates regulating rearditment and servicesfor LESAstudents and encourage appropriate response;and (4,) to monitor the number and type of .Kentuckyvocational programs serving i_ESA students.
4,
41:
a
78 vv
STATE: Massachusetts FISCAL YEAR: 1981
SPONSORING AGENCY: Westfield State College TOTAL FUNDS: $70,200
CONTACT PERSON: Not available
ADDRESS: Not available
PROJECT tITLE: Recruitment and Training of Minority Vocational Instructors( Phast I I)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This program will expand the existing. prtoject totrain and recruit minority vocational instructorsin western Massachusetts. Its major goals 'are:(1) to provide counseling and placement servicesfOr the current group of 25 trainees and (2) to trainand place an additional group of 60 black and fin-guistic-minory trainees.
STATE: ''.Minnesota FISCAL YEAR: 1981G.
SPONSORING AGENCY: Duluth AVTI TOTAL FUNDS: $37,609 .
CONTACT PERSON: Cliff Wiklund
ADDRESS: 2101 Trinity RoadDuluth, Minnesota 55802
isReJECT Provision' of Occupatibhal and Student Program Consultantservices for Chemical Dependency in Minnesota AVTIs
PROJECT DESCRIPTION!' This project has as its major goals: (1) to providethe necessary technical assistance and supplementalsupport to the individual AVTIs, (2) ..to design andimplement a program which supports the AVTIs'efforts, (3.) to respond to chemical-related pr'oblemZof students, and (Li) to assist in the development ofinservice. training programs for the staff.
4
3
4
STATE: Nebraska FISCAL YEMR: 193.0.
SPONSORING AGENCY: University:of* flebraska, TOTAL FUNDS: ,53,'996Lincoln
CONTACT PERSON : Dr. Oefy D. hleer
ADDRESS: Center for Business and Vocational Teacher EducationUniversity of Nebraska, LincolnLincoln, Nebraska
its4, \
PROJECT, TITLE: Inservice Training for the Instruction of Special- Vocational\ Needs Students...
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major .s.oal of this...project* to' p,rovide an in-.
service wdrqshop opportunity for educators in thestate. of Nebraska who are involved with instruc-tion of special nee,ds youth in vocational programs.
STATE: (New Hampshire
SPONSORING AGENCY: Univer'sity of NewHam'pshire
CONTACT PERSON: Stephen Lichtenstein
ADDRESS, University of New H-afnrioshirq
FISCAL. YEAR: 1981
TOTAT.. FUNDS.: 522,319
A
PROJECT TITLE: Instructing EduCators in Providing Sprvices'ifoix4isadvan-taged Learner t
(2o PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The objectives of .this project are: (1) to develop andconduct. preservice teacher preparation courses invocational education., for disadvantaged learriers; (2)to develop and, conduct inserivice training for voca-tional administrators, 'teachers, and ,staff serving dis-advantaged learners in a vdtattonal education setting;and (3) to. provide technical assistance .establishcontact in the field of Vocational educatio'n for disad-
' vantaged learners to LEAs and other outside agen-cies (vocati i.7al rehabilitation., CET,A , priVate schoofty
,* and ottersA
,
11.
3'
80
4
.
.4
o
STATE: New Jersey
SPONSORING AGENCY: Jersey City State TOTAL FUNDS: Not availableCollege
CONTACT PERSON: George toiler'
, ADDRESS: 2039 .Kennedy $ouleyArdJersey City, New Jersey 07305.-
a
c
FISCAL YEAR: 1981
PROJECT TITLE: Working Effectively with Special Needs Students
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ThiS''vpraject's objectives included: (1) to share theupertiSe of special eduators and vocational educators ....)
thro conducting twoone-day workshops; (2) to ex-* , cFj information regarding improvip instruction's
to spAial needs students by 'becoming familiar withfederal legislation and state regulations regardingexceptional pupils in special needs programs; (3)to identify learning styles and characteristics of vari-ous handicapping conditions; JO to present examplesof model' programs; -and (5) th provide information- onteaching vocationally related academics, implement-ing individual education
Nprograms, and modifying
behavior. .
0
STATE:, New Mexico
SPONLORINC AGENCY: Nevi Mexico StateUniversity
CONTACT PERSON: DFL Jack T. Cole
ADDRESS: Departnient of Educational SpecialtiesBox 3ACLas Cruces, New Mexico- 8,8003.
,
44-ROJECT TITLE: An Inservice Program for the Preparation of Vocational-, Technical Educators to Work with Hbrecficapped Students-
I
FISCAL YEAR: .1981
TOTAL FUNDS: Not available
)
PRQJECJ DESCRIPTION: The objectives of this "project include: (1') to ,developa hand' apped student inservice training curriculum
o for vocalional-teehnical educators, (2) to offer_ 12 - 15 4
training workshops, (3) to train participat-ing vocational-tee educators in the various handi-capping condition!, 11.1) )to train participating, voca-tional-technical educators in various teaching strate-gies that are effective with handicapped students, (5)
1
*81
to dissemina'te training materials to all workshop par-ticipants, and (6) to make follow-up contacts withworkshop .participants.
er
sTTT. E : RTr.*4'
FISCAL YZAR: 1981
SPONSORING AGENCY: University of Idaho, TOTAL FUNDS: $6,14143
CONTACT PERSON: A. Lee Parks, .
ADDRESS: University of Idaholoscow, Idaho 83843
PROJECT TITLE :' A Procedural Manual. Relating to Vocational Special Needs/. Special Education fir Idaho
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS: This .project has as its major goal to prepare a pro-; cedures manual of secondary special education/needs
programs', t,.
rograms. in Idaho.
STATE: FISC L YEAR: 1980
SPONSORING AGENCY: IInois 'State University TOTAL FUNDS: 599.138
CONTACT PERSON: Dr. Catherine Batsche/Bessi-e Hackett
ADQRESS: Turner Hall- . ,
Illinois State University.' :'Normal, Illinois 61721
)PROJECT TITLE: Handicapped and Disadvantaged Networ : Coordination and. Diffusion Project
..- \PROJECT DESGRIRTI011: 'The- major goals of this project& are: (1) to coor-
. dinate statewide . diffusion, inservice, ander impactactivities related to. the Illinois Network of EZeriplaryOccupational Education Programs for Handicapped andDisadvantaged Students; (2) to conduct and coordi:-.
..' nate workshops at lo'cal sites based on the manual'Instructional- Developmqnt For Special Needs Learn- ,"
19 f er3: An Inservice Resource Guide 1 (Dr. L. AllenPhelps, author.); -'(3) to preparet the audio-visualand printed materials necessary to complement dif-fusion activities, (4) to conduct 4a statewide con-,ference on handicapped -and disadvantaged students;(5) to provide intensive training for the BlOon'rington
. Area Vocational Center/ High School administratienand staff; and (61 to work cooperatively with IllinoisState Uniyer:sity staff to develop a plan of. action, forpreservice reratjng to special needs , students.
9
820.-1
*
STATE: Oregon
SPONSORING AGENCY:-.Southwestern OregonCommunity College
FISCAL YEAR: 1980
TOTAL FUNDS: $36,4149
CONTACT PERSON: Richard White
ADDRESS: Southwestern Oregon. Community College. Cods Bay, Oregon 97420
PROJECT TITLE: Emphasis on Sophomores
a
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals of this project are: (1) to assist highschool sophomores- in clarifying career goals, (2)to familiarize interested students with communitycollege setting, (3) to provide high school counsel-ors and students with more data on which to makecurriculum decisions, (4) to evaluate the project care-fully for further refinement and appliftation, (5) tointroduce participating high schools /6 a new guid-ance tool, and (6) to facilitate cooperative workingrelationships among participating high schools.
STATE: Oregon FISCAL YEAR: 1980
SPONSORING AGENCY: Lane Community College TOTAL. FUNDS: $5,*67 CONTACT PERSON: John Bernharn
ADDRESS:., Lane Community College1400 E. 30th _AvenueEugene, Oregon 971405
PROJECT TITLE: Physically Disabled Services Project
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this project is to provide improvedspRcialized services for 'partially-sighted and blindstudents, students with hearing difficulties, andstudents, with mobility and other disabilities. Itsmajor goals are: (1)' to provide specialized coun-seling for disabled individuals, student advocates,and outreach programs; and (2) to establish closeliaison with other community agencies serving dis-abled people.
4., 83 .
STATE: Kentucky
SPONSORING= AGENCY: Western KentuckyUniversity
CONTACT PERSON: Dr. Dwight Cline
FISCAL-AAR: 1981
TOTAL FUNDS: $34,235
ADDRESS: Western Kentucky UniversityBowling Green, Kentucky 42101
PROJECT TITLE: Diagnostic and Prescriptive SkillsEducators
elopment for Vocational
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals of this project are: (1) to establishan advisory committee of special education, special,vocational education, vocational education, guidance,administrative, and diagnostic personnel wIlo willreview the project developed products and par-ticipate in the planning and Implementation of work-sbops; (2) to assess IEPs written for handicappedstudents enrolled in vocational programs in regardto compliance with P.L. '94-142, and identify spe-cific areas in which vocational educatorS would profitfrorl addition& training; (3) to provide mg andresources to improve the diagnostic and pre riptiveskills of vocational educators of handicapped st ents;and (4) to develop a catalogue of assessment ech-niques and an accompanying handbook to help oca-tional teachers to identify and diagnose learning abil-ities and disabilities of handicapped students.
STATE: Massachus*dtts FISCAL YEAR: 1980
SP.ONSORING AGENCY: Shawsheen ValleyRegion& VocationalTechnic& School
CONTACT PERSON: Not-dVailable
ADDRESS: Not available
PROJECT TITLE: Pre-Vocation& Assessment
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
TOTAL FUNDS: $57,000
This project is part of a statewide effort and has asits major goals: (1) to develop a reliable process andprocedure that enhances the ability of local Schooldistricts to qualitatively assess special needs studentsif occupation& education, is being considered by thecore evaluation-team,*dnd (2) to train school districtpersonnel in this procedure once it has been devel-oped.
84
STATE: Minnesota FISCAL YEAR: 1981
SPONSORING AGENCY: University of knnesota TOTAL FU
Q ClarTACT PERSON: ome, Moss, Jr.
ADDRESS: Department"of V ational and Te'chnical Education14,5 Peik Hall, U.niversity of MinnesotaMinneapolis, Minnesota 55455
PROJECT TITLE: Develop a System to Distribute Federal Funds to MinnesotaAVTIs for Augmenting the Education of Special Needs°Students
PROJECKJASCRIPTION;. The major goals of this project are: (1) to clearlydelineate the domain of the problem as related to the-total state/federal interface of set-aside funds, (2) torev4ew related literature which impact the problem,(3) to develop guidelines for minimal special °needssupport services within the AVTIs, (4) to developthe process by which AVTIs obtain the funding tocarry out the minimum special needs support services,
, (5) to seek input from an ad hoc adviso'ry committeeand obtain its approval, and (6) to ac uire directionfrom the U.S. Departthent of Educatio artd obtainits approval.
STATE: New Jersey FISCAL YEAR: 198b
SPONSORING AGENL: Glassboro State College TOTAL FUNDS: $17,080
CONTACT PERSON: Ted Gustilo, Jr.Coordinator of Research for Career Education
ADDRESS: Office of Career Education, BOssart 104Glassboro State CollegeGlassboro, New Jersey 08028
PROJECT TITLE: Bilingualslation of Revised. Vocational English and MathInstructional Units
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The major goals of th-i project include: (1) to r inepreviously developed vocational curriculum materialsthat .demonstrate the applications of language andmathematics skills to specific vocational areas, (2)to rescreen materials for sex-role stereotyping toassure'that the revisions did not introduce sex bias,and (3) to translate .the material into Spanish toextend their usefulness to a large 9 oup of bilingualand Spanish speaking students who o herwise wouldnot benefit from them. <
85
93
4
STATE: New York FISCAL, YEAR: 1979
SPONSORING' AGENCY: Oswego BOCES TOTAL FUNDS: $50,000
.CONTACT P ON: Not available
ADDRESS: MeXicoi New York
PROJECT TITLE: Regional OccupatIonal Education Planning
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The objectives for this project include: (1) to developa systematic process for annually gathering enroll-ment and follow-up data on students receiving- occu-,pational education at local high schools, (2) to develop'-a systematic process for annually gathering andanalyzing data of students enrolled .in adult and con-tinuing education occupational preparation programs,and (3) to develop a more complete analysis of thecurrent and .projectecchjob market in central New York,detailing openings Tor employment and potentialtraining needs'.
NA.
STATE: Texas FISCAL YEAR: 1981
SPONSORING AGENCY : University of TeXesat Dallas
CONTAC! PERSON: George W. Fair
ADDRESS: P.O. Box 688Richardson, Texas 75080
PROJECT TITLE: Handicapped Students in Regular Vocational Education:Impact on Class Interaction and Instructional Variables
. TOTAL FUNDS: $60,443
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this project is to gather data perti-,nent to the instruction of special education studentsin regular vocational education programs. The pbjec-tive$ of the project include: (1) to observe anddescribe the handicapped student-vocational instr'uctor.interaction in regular vocational education programs,(2) to observe and describe the 14-n--dicapped student-nonyndiCapped student interaction in regular voca-
. tional education programs,. {3) to describe the deve1-opment and implementation, of individualized educationplans for handicapped students in regular vocationaleducation programs, (4) to describe instructionaladaptations and modifications that can be fined as
--(excess costs for funding purposes, and '(5 to developrecommendations .for more effective inst tion of handl-'capped students in regular vocational,' education pro'grams.
86
la 64Uli7 \
V fErD r-
