Citation
The Effects of entry level skill assessment training on the placement decisions for handicapped students made by vocational educators

Material Information

Title:
The Effects of entry level skill assessment training on the placement decisions for handicapped students made by vocational educators
Added title page title:
Effects of entry level skill assessment training on the placement decisions..
Creator:
Cameron, Carl Thomas, 1943- ( Dissertant )
Schwartz, Stuart E. ( Thesis advisor )
Algozzine, Robert F. ( Reviewer )
Hensel, James W. ( Reviewer )
Mercer, Cecil D. ( Reviewer )
Schmid, Rex E. ( Reviewer )
Place of Publication:
Gainesville, Fla.
Publisher:
University of Florida
Publication Date:
Copyright Date:
1979
Language:
English
Physical Description:
ix, 133 leaves : ill. ; 28 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Curriculum evaluation ( jstor )
Educational evaluation ( jstor )
Expected utility ( jstor )
Instructional material evaluation ( jstor )
Job performance evaluation ( jstor )
Personnel evaluation ( jstor )
Psychological assessment ( jstor )
Special education ( jstor )
Vocational education ( jstor )
Work sample tests ( jstor )
Children with disabilities -- Education -- Florida ( lcsh )
Dissertations, Academic -- Special Education -- UF
Special Education thesis Ph. D
Vocational education -- Administration -- Florida ( lcsh )
City of Tallahassee ( local )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Abstract:
The purpose of this dissertation was to evaluate the effects of entry level skill assessment training on the value and level of placement decisions made by vocational educators about handicapped students. With the passage of federal legislation which encourages the placement of handicapped students in regular classrooms, the skills for assessing both student and training program by the vocational educator become increasingly important. The use of entry level skills criterion may present a viable alternative for making objective and functional decisions for handicapped students. The training of entry level skill assessment utilized decision theory techniques for analyzing exit level competencies and rating the subjective expected utilities of the entry level skills developed by the experimental group. The control group was provided with decision theory techniques for evaluation of existing program materials. The evaluation procedure utilized components of decision theory techniques to rank and weight vocational education outcomes and rate the subjective expected utility of placement decisions. A pretest and posttest evaluation was utilized which consisted of the application of decision theory techniques to the placement decisions of a series of case studies of handicapped students. The results of the study indicated that the training had no significant effect on the values of the subjective expected utilities of the placement choices or the number of choices for each placement option. The discussion focuses on the constraints involved in developing entry level skills training procedures and utilizing decision theory techniques for placement decisions.
Thesis:
Thesis--University of Florida.
Bibliography:
Bibliography: leaves 127-131.
General Note:
Typescript.
General Note:
Vita.
Statement of Responsibility:
Carl T. Cameron.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright [name of dissertation author]. Permission granted to the University of Florida to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Resource Identifier:
029302511 ( AlephBibNum )
06473374 ( OCLC )
AAL2295 ( NOTIS )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text














THE EFFECTS OF ENTRY LEVEL SKILL ASSESSMENT
TRAINING ON THE PLACEMENT DECISIONS FOR HANDICAPPED
STUDENTS MADE BY VOCATIONAL EDUCATORS








By

CARL T. CAMERON


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE
GRADUATE COUNCIL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY



UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

1979













ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


Appreciation is extended to Dr. Stuart Schwartz who provided

the guidance throughout my advanced degree program. His knowledge,

insight, and most of all humanness has allowed the pursuit of

knowledge with dignity. Dr. Robert Algozzine was an everpresent

source of knowledge and encouragement. Dr. Jim Hensel provided

sensitivity and understanding about relationships with the real

world. Dr. Cecil Mercer always had the questions that provided

the stimulus, and Dr. Rex Schmid knew the limits and that they

constantly expand. Finally, a special word of thanks to Dr. Ron

Nutter, who has encouraged the development of my cognitive and

intellectual pursuits. It is a rare opportunity to learn from

these men.















TABLE OF CONTENTS



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . ... . . . ii

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . vi

LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . ... ... . vii

ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . ......... .viii

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1

Statement of the Problem. .... . . . .. . 2
Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Entry Level Skills Criterion . . . . . . . . 5
Placement Decision Process .. . . . . . .. 6
Definitions of Terms . . . . . . . . ... . . 8
Limitations and Delimitations . . . . . . . . 8
Population . . . . . . . ... . . . 8
Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Training . . . . . . . . ... . . . . 9
Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . . . . .... .. 10

Vocational Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . 11
Standardized Psychological and Vocational Testing . . .. 11
Work Samples . . . . . . . . ... . .. . 14
Situational Assessment . . . . . . . .... 18
Job Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Summary ... . . . . . . ....... . 20
Vocational Education . . . . . . . . . . 22
Competency Based Curriculum . . . . . . . .. 24
Individualized Instruction . . . . . . . ... 25
Open Access . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Entry Level Skills . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Need . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Implementation Models . . . . .. . . . . . 27












Decision Theory . . . .
Multi Attribute Utility Measurement
Educational Implications ..
Identifying Educational Outcomes
Subjective Expected Utilities . .
Impact of Data on Decision Making .
Summary . . . .

CHAPTER III


METHODS AND PROCEDURES


Subjects . . .
Pretest . .
Intervention
Posttest .
Experimental Design
Hypotheses . .
Data Collection and
Data Collection
Data Analysis

CHAPTER IV


. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. .
. . .
Analysis
. . .
. . .


RESULTS . . . . . . . .


Hypothesis 1 ...
Hypothesis la . . .
Hypothesis b . . .
Hypothesis Ic ...
Hypothesis Id
Hypothesis le ..
Hypothesis If ..
Hypothesis 2 ....
Hypothesis 2a . .
Hypothesis 2b . . .
Hypothesis 2c ..

CHAPTER V

DISCUSSION . . . .

Summary of the Data . .
Hypothesis 1 ..
Hypothesis 2 ..
Constraints ..
Level of Intervention
Training Methodology


. . 36

. . 36
. . 38
. . 42
. . 47
. . 48
. . 50
. . 52
. . 52
. . 53


. . 74

. . 74
74
. . 74
S. 77
79
. . 79
. . 80









APPENDIX

A GROUP ASSIGNMENT BY SUBJECT NUMBER . . . ... 82

B VOCATIONAL EDUCATION OUTCOMES . . . . . .. 83

C RAWGOO INSTRUCTIONS . . . . . . .... 85

D CASE STUDIES . . . . . . . . . . 91

E TRAINING OPTIONS FOR VOCATIONAL EDUCATION . . .. 98

F VOCATIONAL OUTCOMES AND PLACEMENT PLANNING DECISION
GUIDE . . . . . . . . . . . 99

G LEVELS OF COMPETENCY FOR EACH BUSINESS AND OFFICE
CAREER CLUSTER . . . . . . . .... . 101

H VOCATIONAL INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM STANDARDS . . .. .102

I LEVEL 1 COMPETENCIES FOR BUSINESS EDUCATION . . .. 105

J GOAL II: TO IMPROVE PERSONAL APPEARANCE AND HYGIENE 114

K OUTCOMES AND ENTRY LEVEL SKILLS DECISION GRID . . 123

L OUTCOMES AND DAILY LIVING SKILLS DECISION GRID . .. 125

REFERENCES . . . . . . .... . . . . 127

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH . . . . .... . . . . 132















LIST OF TABLES


Table

1 Vocational Education Curriculum Models ...... 23

2 Multivariate Analysis of Variance/Case Study of
Michael. . . . . . . . . . . . 58

3 Multivariate Analysis of Variance/Case Study of
Carolyn . . . . . . . . . . .59

4 Multivariate Analysis of Variance/Case Study of
John . . . . . . . . . . . 61

5 Pre and Posttest Subjective Expected Utilities
Comparison of the Case Study of Michael for
Subjects Receiving Entry Level Skills Criterion
Training (E's) . . . . . . . . 63

6 Pre and Posttest Subjective Expected Utilities
Comparison of the Case Study of Michael for
Subjects Not Receiving Entry Level Skills
Criterion Training . . . . . . . . 65

7 Pretest Subjective Expected Utilities Comparison
of the Case Study of Michael for Subjects Both
in Experimental and Control Groups . . ... 67

8 Placement Choice Comparison of the Case Study of
Michael for Subjects in Experimental and Control
Groups . . . . . . . . . . 69

9 Placement Choice Comparison of the Case Study of
Carolyn for Subjects in Experimental and Control
Groups . . . . . . . .... .. . .71

10 Placement Choice Comparison of the Case Study of
John for Subjects in Experimental and Control
Groups . . . . . . . . . . . 73

11 Comparison of Pretest and Posttest Placement
Decisions/Case Study of Michael . . . ... 78















LIST OF FIGURES



Figure

1 Individualized Instruction System: Diagnosis of
Prerequisite Skills .................. .28

2 Experimental Design . . . . . . . 49

3 Posttest Comparisons . . . . . . .... 54






































vii














Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate Council
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy



THE EFFECTS OF ENTRY LEVEL SKILL ASSESSMENT
TRAINING ON THE PLACEMENT DECISIONS FOR HANDICAPPED
STUDENTS MADE BY VOCATIONAL EDUCATORS

By

Carl T. Cameron

December, 1979

Chairman: Stuart E. Schwartz
Major Department: Special Education

The purpose of this dissertation was to evaluate the effects of

entry level skill assessment training on the value and level of

placement decisions made by vocational educators about handicapped

students. With the passage of federal legislation which encourages

the placement of handicapped students in regular classrooms, the

skills for assessing both student and training program by the voca-

tional educator become increasingly important. The use of entry

level skills criterion may present a viable alternative for making

objective and functional decisions for handicapped students.

The training of entry level skill assessment utilized decision

theory techniques for analyzing exit level competencies and rating

the subjective expected utilities of the entry level skills developed

by the experimental group. The control group was provided with

decision theory techniques for evaluation of existing program

materials.











The evaluation procedure utilized components of decision theory

techniques to rank and weight vocational education outcomes and

rate the subjective expected utility of placement decisions. A

pretest and posttest evaluation was utilized which consisted of

the application of decision theory techniques to the placement

decisions of a series of case studies of handicapped students.

The results of the study indicated that the training had no

significant effect on the values of the subjective expected utilities

of the placement choices or the number of choices for each placement

option. The discussion focuses on the constraints involved in

developing entry level skills training procedures and utilizing

decision theory techniques for placement decisions.
















CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION



In Keys to Managing Competency-Based Education, Part One,

Harrington (1977) suggests that an individual who is undertaking

vocational training must select a vocational goal around which a

training program can be built. In order to undertake the goal

setting process, several kinds of information need to be taken

into consideration. The relevant information includes personal,

job related, and market information. Job related information

including prerequisite skills is required to adequately make a

career decision (Harrington, 1977). If prerequisite skills

knowledge is required to adequately set vocational goals, it

appears that prerequisite skills knowledge is also a requirement

in the selection of the components) of a training program.

In addition to utilizing the goal setting process in career

training selection, that selection may also be a function of

opportunity. Fair (1976) argues that special needs students

are underenrolled in vocational education because of the selective

nature of the vocational programs. The selective nature appears

to develop from the lack of adequate facilities and the desire to

recruit more "able" students does not appear to be objective.











Two of the most predominantly stated reasons for underenrollment

of special needs students in vocational education are (a) the in-

ability of the staff to maintain adequate safety procedures and (b)

the unrealistic requirements for the additional individual assistance

for special needs students. Additional reasons expressed include

the need to modify curriculum, additional instructional assistance

and evaluation criterion (Fair, 1976). Fair concluded that if a

behavioral statement of entrance competencies were available for

each vocational education program, it would permit an objective

evaluation of each prospective student, and it would also serve as

a standard for the vocational preparation of special education

students. It is the aptitude for vocational skills which appears

to underlie the rationale for not providing equal accessibility

to vocational programs for handicapped students. Carrols (cited

in Gagne, 1967) suggests that "aptitude is partly a matter of the

possession of prerequisite knowledge and skills, or the lack

thereof" (p. 42).



Statement of the Problem


Special needs learners are usually designated as such because

they fail to develop basic skills through normal growth and develop-

ment or through early school experiences. The need for basic skill

development is a key question for determining entry into vocational

education programs (Phelps & Lutz, 1977). Prevocational education











has been generally accepted as a pretraining procedure for providing

basic skills for occupational preparation. However, prevocational

and career education appear to be designed to provide generalized

and global skills which may be applicable in a variety of voca-

tional situations. In fact, there is little, if any, evidence to

suggest that these "prerequisite" skills are related to, or will

increase, the probability of assimilating specific content in

occupational areas. For example, the development of adequate job

interviewing skills does not directly relate to the tool use

required in the construction cluster training. In fact, a major

problem with examining prerequisite skills is the extreme difficulty

in determining what basic skills or concepts are essential pre-

requisites for a given learning task (Phelps & Lutz, 1977).

The identification of prerequisite or entry level skills

criteria may have potential value in the training process. One

possible effect would be the use of this information in making

placement decisions for handicapped students into regular vocational

education. Brolin and Kokaska (1979) suggest a variety of methods

for helping the handicapped student to become occupationally

prepared. However, almost no information is available concerning

how decisions are made concerning which program, course, or

service delivery model provides the least restrictive environment.

During the last 15 years, interest has been generated by

researchers (Binder, 1964; Edwards, Guttentag, & Snapper, 1975;

Guttentag, 1973; Nutter, 1977) in the use of decision making theory











and accompanying procedures in making educational programming

decisions. This model may provide a framework to formulate the

determination of prerequisite or entry level skills. Of even

broader significance, and an apparent logical extension is the

question: If entry level skills could be determined through the

use of decision making theory techniques, will this information

increase the likelihood of being recommended for placement in a

regular vocational education setting?

The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of entry

level skill assessment training on the types of program placement

recommendations made for handicapped youngsters by vocational

education personnel. It is of utmost importance to determine if

certain kinds of information increase the opportunity and acceptance

of handicapped students for vocational education. This study of the

effects of entry level skill assessment training on the program

placement decisions made by vocational educators includes the

following questions:

1. Does the training in the use of an evaluation of entry

level skills criteria have an effect on the perceived utility of

options which place handicapped students in vocational education

programs?

2. Does the training in the use of an evaluation of entry

level skills criteria have an effect on the number of choices made

which place handicapped students in programs toward regular vocational

education and away from special education programs?











Rationale


The rationale for the proposed study has both direct and

indirect implications. The current dearth of information regarding

prerequisite skills and their utility in the decision making process

suggest that information generated in this study will provide data

for entry level skills criterion and the placement decision process.


Entry Level Skills Criterion

Entry level skills have not been approached directly as a

negotiable criteria for entrance in vocational programs for special

needs students. The predominant procedures) to date have been:

(a) grade appropriate placements, (b) special educator's evaluation,

(c) available space in classrooms, and (d) student interest.

Currently no data have been generated to substantiate any of these

procedures as adequate for maximizing occupational training.

Classroom requirements (tasks and exit level skills) can be

determined through the use of job analysis techniques. At this

time, these task analysis techniques have been utilized in vocational

settings to analyze tasks presented in the classroom, but little, if

any, attention has been directed towards entry level skills

criterion. In other words, educators can determine what skills

will be taught, but the task analysis procedure does not include

prerequisite skills assessment. It may be that this technique will

be utilized as a component of the entry level skills assessment

process.











While providing an initial look at the level of skills required

for entry, entry level skills criterion information may be utilized

to identify a baseline from which negotiations (i.e., placement

decisions where entry level criteria has not been met) can develop

for students who may vary in their abilities to meet entry level or

exit level criteria in a mainstreamed vocational education setting.

Standards for preparation and placement of special needs students

for regular classrooms have always been elusive and in many cases

arbitrary. Through the development of entry level skill requirements,

special educators will know what competencies are required, when a

student has reached that level and negotiations can take place on

the basis of objective criteria between special education and voca-

tional education staff. In addition, these same competencies could

form the basis for development of entry level assessment and pre-

training modules (if required) for all students.

Finally, the development of entry level assessment and training

may have generalizability to other mainstream programs throughout

public education systems. It appears that the need for clarifica-

tion of entry level skills is not unique to vocational programming

and may suggest a procedure for other instructional areas.


Placement Decision Process

Fair (1976) and Boland (1979) describe the concerns of vocation-

al educators regarding the dichotomy between the mandated opportunity

for handicapped students to participate in vocational education











where appropriate, and the need to make the program fair and

rewarding for their nonhandicapped students. The criteria

necessary to make decisions which increase the likelihood of

completing vocational training goals has not yet been established.

The use of decision theory can provide the mechanism to make

program placement selections from available options. The selection

of the alternative with the highest vocational value for the student

is influenced by the relative importance of the outcomes. A

concomitant influence is the perceived likelihood of maximizing

that outcome for any particular placement option. For instance,

if the most important outcome selected is "to train only those who

want, need, or are able to benefit" and the least important is "to

provide for on the job training experiences," then the placement

decision will be more heavily influenced by the first outcome, given

that the perceived likelihood of maximizing both outcomes is

identical. In other words, the subjective expected utility theory

provides a method for rating how important each outcome is relative

to other possible outcomes and selecting an alternative that provides

for the highest possibility of maximizing those outcomes. Nutter

(1977) suggests, "The rational strategy is to choose an alternative

with the greatest expected utility" (p. 27). The application of this

theory has shown promise as an appropriate technology for making

programming decisions based on what the decision maker considers

the most important program outcome.











Definitions of Terms


Daily living skills: A wide variety of personal and social

skills designed to allow independent functioning in the least

restrictive environment for handicapped individuals.

Entry level skill: A skill which can be successfully demon-

strated prior to entry on which subsequent instruction is based.

Exit level skill: A skill which has been successfully demon-

strated prior to or at completion of an instructional program.

Placement option: An educational placement for handicapped

youngsters offering specific types of instructional services

designed to offer maximum service in the least restrictive environ-

ment.

Subjective expected utilities: A numerical value represented

by sunning the products of each decision option and the value

associated with each vocational outcome.

Vocational outcomes: A statement of desired outcomes for

vocational education which are agreed upon by subjects in this study.


Limitations and Delimitations


Population

The population used in this study is defined as vocational

educators. The size of the sample and the selectivity of backgrounds

limit the ability to generalize to other vocationally trained

instructors.











Setting

Vocational Education/Special Education Teachers Working With

Handicapped Students is a three week workshop designed to present

practical methods for vocation preparation of handicapped students.

The use of this workshop as a setting for this study delimits the

participants to vocational educators with an expressed interest in

improving their skills with handicapped students. This in no way

infers that all vocational educators are so disposed.


Training

The short training sessions designed into this study may limit

the possible effectiveness of an intervention procedure. A single

session provides awareness but not necessarily competence in the

skills presented.


Materials

The use of brief case studies and course descriptions limit

the interpretation of the factors used by subjects in the decision

process. While attempts have been made to insure familiarity and

generality of descriptions, no connection between these decisions

and decisions made in a real situation can be inferred from these

results.














CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE



An examination of the literature reveals little, if any,

reference to entry level skills criterion as it applies to voca-

tional education. Much of the literature concerning secondary

level mainstreaming suggests it is the role of vocational education

to both adapt classroom requirements to the learner and provide

entry level job skills (Cegelka & Phillips, 1978). The predominant

emphasis on entry level skills has come from techniques developed

from work evaluation, adjustment, and placement. In an analysis of

the procedures involved in both vocational rehabilitation (i.e.,

work evaluation, adjustment, and placement) and vocational education

the following procedural associations are apparent:


vocational
rehabilitation

vocational evaluation


Enter
Program

I


job analysis

prevocational and
vocational training

job placement

job adjustment Exit
Progran


vocational
education

entry level skills assessment


classroom analysis


entry level skills training

vocational education

exit level skills assessment











The review of the literature will present vocational evalua-

tion as it suggests techniques for entry level skills assessment.

Job analysis will be discussed as it relates to classroom analysis.

Current developments in vocational education as they apply to entry

level skills will be presented, and a review of some preliminary

developments in entry level skill assessment. The final section

will discuss the use of decision theory as a technique for

eliciting program placement decisions.


Vocational Evaluation


Neff (1966) and Brolin (1976) essentially agree that vocational

evaluation can be viewed from differing approaches. For the purpose

of this discussion the approaches will consist of standardized

psychological and vocational testing; work and job samples; and

situational assessment.


Standardized Psychological and Vocational Testing

Standardized tests are basically an aid to the decision making

involved in the placement process. Due to the ease in administra-

tion and scoring, reasonable reliability and predictive values,

standardized tests are utilized by educators in a wide variety of

educational settings (Mehrens & Lehmann,1973). However, according

to Neff (1968), standardized tests are suitable primarily for

testing of individuals for the purposes of global screening. A

major drawback is the minimal predictive value of the instruments.











Neff (1968) suggests that the characteristics of the standardization

sample, the difficulty of obtaining valid objective criteria for

work performance, the differences in test situation and the reality

of the work situation may limit the usefulness of standardized

instruments with the retarded. This particularly would apply to

those with no prior work history. Brolin (1976) has identified

several values of standardized tests. Among these positive

attributes are observational data collected during the testing

situation such as:

1. client problem solving strategies,

2. frustration levels,

3. concentration, and

4. interpersonal communication skills,

all of which may assist markedly in the decision making process.

Vocational aptitude tests usually measure an individual's

ability to perform skills assumed to be related to vocational

performance in a particular skill area. Brolin (1976) suggests

that most vocational aptitude instruments used with the mentally

retarded assess an individual's ability to complete manual tasks.

Some of the more commonly used measures are the Purdue Pegboard,

Bennett Hand Tool Dexterity Test, Crawford Small Parts Dexterity

Test, and the MacQuarie Test for Mechanical Ability.

In addition to assessments of manual tasks, more comprehensive

evaluation instruments have found increasing use in evaluation of

vocational aptitude. The General Aptitude Test Battery (GATB)












appears to have some applicability for the mentally retarded. It

was developed by the United States Employment Service for the

purpose of assessing those vocationally significant aptitudes

for vocational counseling job selection and placement (Brolin,

1976). The test measures aptitudes in nine areas including

general learning, verbal aptitude, numerical ability, spatial

aptitude, form perception, clerical perception, motor coordination,

finger dexterity, and manual dexterity. The battery makes predic-

tions for about 500 occupations of the unskilled and semi-skilled

type.

A strength of the GATB is its integration with the Dictionary

of Occupational Titles (DOT) which constitutes a comprehensive

taxonomy of the American job market (Bacher, 1972). However, the

battery requires an independent reading level of approximately

seventh grade which is unrealistic for many non-reading and dis-

advantaged clients. For this reason, the Manpower Administration

developed the NATB, Non-reading Aptitude Test Battery, which has

similar subtests to the GATB and supposedly understood by individuals

with limited verbal abilities. Both Carbuhn and Wells (1973) and

Brolin (1976) recommend the NATB as a valuable source of measure-

ment of vocational aptitude for educable mentally retarded persons.

While standardized psychological and vocational testing is

still utilized in the assessment of vocational aptitude, the recent

developments in the area of work samples has overshadowed the use

of standardized tests except primarily for screening purposes.











Work Samples

Work samples have become increasingly popular in vocational

assessment over the past several years (Brolin, 1976). A work

sample is a simulated work activity without an actual industrial

counterpart, while a job sample is a part of a job that exists in

an industrial setting. Both sample types of evaluation include the

use of tools and standards associated with jobs (Sankovsky,

Arthur, & Mann, 1971). Neff (1968) combines the concept of work

and job samples as a mock up or close simulation of an industrial

operation. The work sample is essentially the kind of work a

potential employee would perform on the job. The literature is

replete with studies indicating the superiority of work samples

as an approach to vocational assessment. Jewish Employment Voca-

tional Service (1968), Overs (1968), and Usdane (1963) offer support

for work samples because the samples assess the same skills,

aptitudes, and abilities required by competitive employment situa-

tions. Other studies indicate that because the samples resemble

real work situations, they are more motivating to clients than are

standardized tests (Hoffman, 1970; Neff, 1966; Overs, 1968). In

addition, educational level, speech and hearing disabilities, and

high levels of anxiety effect work samples less than standardized

tests (Lustig, 1966; Overs, 1968).

The use of work samples for mentally retarded populations has

been viewed as superior to standardized tests by Gold (1973),

Hoffman (1970), and Neff (1970). In contrast, several studies












have indicated that standardized tests may provide more usable

vocational information than work samples (Cobb, 1969; Sankovsky,

Arthur, & Mann, 1971; Super & Crites, 1962). According to

Timmerman and Doctor (1974), many jpb differences cannot be

duplicated by work samples which affect the predictive validity

of job samples.

One particular outgrowth of work samples has been the develop-

ment of work sample batteries or systems. These work evaluation

systems have been developed to assess vocational potential in a wide

variety of job situations. Brolin and Kokaska (1979) report that

the work sample and work sample system procedures are difficult to

validate on actual job situations. However, there is a distinct

advantage over most standardized vocational aptitude and interest

tests because of their close proximity to the world of work. This

face validity provides a more readily observable significance to

the participants (Brolin & Kokaska, 1979, p. 219). Several of the

more widely used systems are presented below:

TOWER. One of the earliest developed batteries is TOWER,

Testing and Work Evaluation in Rehabilitation (1936). TOWER

includes 14 areas of work evaluation measuring 110 work skills.

Evaluation takes approximately three weeks and tasks range from

simple to complex.

MICRO-TOWER. A more recent version of the batteries developed

by the Institute for the Crippled and Disabled, MICRO-TOWER (1976)

consists of 13 work sample areas. The samples are presented through












the use of audiocassette and photobook instructions. A learning

period is permitted before evaluation, which may be useful for

populations with learning deficiencies.

JEVS. Developed by the Jewish Employment Vocational Service

(1968), JEVS is a system that consists of 28 work samples covering

20 different work areas with 10 worker trait groupings. Originally

developed for use with culturally disadvantaged youth, the samples

have been successful with many physically, emotionally, and mentally

handicapped individuals (Brolin & Kokaska, 1979).

VIEWS. An adaptation of several work tasks, Vocational Informa-

tiona and Evaluation Work Sample (1976) was designed to assess the

work potential of learning disabled and mentally retarded clients.

One unique feature of VIEWS is that it does not require reading as

a prerequisite skill and incorporates the use of demonstration,

practice, and repeated instruction as techniques for assessing the

potential of the clients for various types of occupational areas.

SINGER. The Singer Vocational Evaluation System (1973) is a

work oriented screening device designed to help the individual make

a vocational choice through a hands-on exploration of several job

tasks. The system utilizes an audio-visual approach to present

programmed instruction of the performance of specific tasks. The

tasks, which are grouped in 17 different occupational clusters, are

self contained within each work station and complete with the

necessary instructional tools.











WREST. The Wide Range Employment Samples Test (1972) is

composed of 10 work samples. Developed in a workshop for the

mentally retarded, the WREST is designed for moderately and

mildly retarded individuals. The relatively short administration

time and precise instructions are of particular value in this

batter-.

VALPAR. The Valpar Component Work Sample System (1975)

was designed to provide information on worker characteristics and

is keyed to the Worker Trait Arrangement in the Dictionary of

Occupational Titles (1977). VALPAR consists of work samples which

include small tools, size discrimination, numerical sorting, upper

extremity range of motion, clerical comprehension and aptitude,

independent problem solving, multilevel sorting, simulated assembly,

whole body range of motion, tri-level measurement, eye-hand-foot

coordination, soldering and inspection, money handling, integrated

peer performance, electrical circuitry and print reading, and drafting.

COATS. The Comprehensive Occupational Assessment and Training

System (1974) consists of four major components: Living Skills,

Work Samples, Job Matching System, and Employability Attitudes.

Additional systems include the Talent Assessment Program

(Nighswonger, 1975), the Hester Evaluation System (1972), and the

McCarron-Dial Work Evaluation System (McCarron & Dial, 1976).

The use of work samples and work evaluation systems has signifi-

cantly influenced the vocational evaluation of handicapped persons.











A major problem in its use in vocational education programs is

the extensive resources required to develop and maintain a

complete array of work samples and work evaluation systems.


Situational Assessment

The situational assessment approach is the most commonly and

comprehensively used work evaluation approach (Brolin, 1976).

This approach is concerned with observation of individuals on

real or simulated work tasks and within a group rather than an

individual setting. Dunn (1973) argues that vocational evaluation

predictors can be expected to reach their greatest validity when

they closely approximate a real work setting.

Pruitt and Longfellow (1970) conceptualize the components of

situational assessment as follows:

1. planning and scheduling observations;

2. observing, describing, and recording data;

3. organization analysis and interpretation of

observational data;

4. inclusion of observation in the evaluation.

Brolin (1976) presents several advantages and disadvantages of situa-

tional assessment:

Advantages

1. activity approximates the real work situation;

2. eliminates typical test situation which is anxiety

producing;











3. possible to assess many typical work behaviors

(interpersonal relationships, cooperation, pressures,

authority);

4. gives person time to adjust to novel situation; and

5. evaluation can take place under a variety of

conditions.

Disadvantages

1. dependent on accurate interpretation of observers;

2. problem of variance among raters; and

3. group sitting may effect the rater's evaluations.


Job Analysis

Thorndyke (1963) has aptly described job analysis as consisting

essentially of a characteristic of the work performed on a job and

an analysis of worker characteristics relevant to job performance.

The job description is usually qualitative and the worker analysis

is usually more quantitative. Lawry (1972) describes job analysis as

"a systematic way of observing jobs; determining the significant

worker requirements, physical demands, and environmental conditions;

and reporting this information in a concise, usable format" (p. 27).

Job analysis has been approached through the statistical

procedure of factor analysis. The objective is to isolate dimen-

sions of aptitude common to a broad range of jobs (Fruchter, 1952;

Palmer & McCormick, 1961). Techniques other than factor analysis

have been employed to do job analysis. Das (1960) used both job

descriptions and motion time study techniques in analyzing worker

requirements.











Blackman and Superstein (1968) suggest that job analysis can

be a major contributing factor in the development of an instruc-

tional system. Using careful analysis of the task to be learned

as manifested by the production of appropriate terminal behaviors,

these terminal behaviors provide two distinct types of information:

(a) methods of instructional systems designed to evoke these

behaviors and (b) attention to those psychological attributes in

the learner than appear to be prerequisites.

Hopkins and Brock (1976) suggest that information obtained and

recorded through the job analysis should cover all criteria for job

placement, "from union dues to specific behaviors and tasks required"

(p. 54). Both standard formats and narrative forms are utilized in

job analysis. Hopkins and Brock (1976) suggest that a standard form

is the most useful approach when comparing one job with another and

providing comparisons of student profiles with job analysis components.


Summary

This section, in its review of vocational evaluation, describes

techniques used for identifying skills necessary to be competitive

in the world of work. If these particular techniques are applied

to determining skills necessary to be competitive (i.e., successful)

in the world of vocational training, the following conditions appear

to be necessary.

1. Standards for training must be provided either on an

individual class basis or system wide, which are shown to be specifi-

cally related to vocational success, or











2. Training situations must be identical to the actual

vocational setting from which standards are derived.

Currently, neither of these conditions appear to exist at

adequate levels in vocational education programs. The development

of entry level skill assessment may be shown to be related to these

evaluation techniques, which will provide a needed link in the

ongoing evaluation from entry level of vocational training to exit

level job competencies.

In addition, job analysis provides techniques which show promise

for the assessment of entry level skills. Its primary utility,

however, has been for identifying skills necessary to be presented

in a training sequence and has not addressed the question of how

pretraining in entry level skills may facilitate the quality and

rate of the assimilation of vocational education. The development

of additional procedures to establish initial entry level skill

criteria may be a necessary companion to the assessment of the skills

currently presented in a vocational education program. In fact, a

promising relationship may be established through the use of job

analysis techniques to provide data on existing programs. These

existing techniques, combined with the procedures for outcome

assessment and decision making presented in this study, may well

offer the symbiotic relationship necessary for determining entry

level skills criteria.











Vocational Education


One of the major problems confronting vocational education is

that of developing and maintaining curricula that are attuned to

the rapid social and technological changes in society (Calhoun &

Finch, 1976). The basic curriculum models are presented in

Table 1 and summarized below.

1. The subject centered curriculum is a traditional organiza-

tional pattern at the secondary level. Students are often

separated into tracks--college bound, general, and vocational.

Individual subjects are within each track, there is no overlap

between tracks, and courses are arranged vertically.

2. The core curriculum is a group of separate subjects

required of all students regardless of track. Vocational education

may or may not be a component.

3. The cluster based curriculum is based on the premise that

certain occupations have common learning and skill requirements

and that students who have mastered these skills have more employ-

ment options.

4. The organic curriculum design leads to options permitting

the maximum self actualization of each individual. The curriculum

prepares students for employment either before or following gradua-

tion. The student would have entry level skills permitting access

to the labor market at any point.

5. A competency based curriculum is one that specifies the

desired objectives or competencies in an explicit form, identifies














































a)




E




L-
C---

43
u- L

a) C
r- 0









C
0
t- -
-0






Ua

u
0


4-

5-
Li


a)

a)
-I




U









0V


-'
C











C
a)
,3

r-"







rO
a)




ar











4-1


>)
C-
CJ
a)
a)




-J
aC



-'


a)
E
0
u
4-1
:3






0
O











C-
Ln















0




u
aQ)




-(r














4-
0













.0





a)
Q.


o
4-'







a
z














C-

a r
)-a



u -



3
CA)


0)
E
a)
u
4-'



0
C,

L

a)
C-
3


















4-
0











2-


a)







4-










o
4-
OC

4-'










a)








E

3


a0


a()



r-


CL






a-
0
> C
(3)




















-0-
a)







04-
LC
V)












E
a)a
-:

















C













a)











rE n
0o
ar


:3




3 3
(D -



41


V)

a
C

o-'

OC







0
3J


C -


C















0


0




C-
I-
4-)


LI


0.














0-


i
0
CD














3

ai
+-i














re <-


CL
I **- E


X *'-a











a)
LU 3



















ar)
0
ar







InC
ou





m- E
C-.-
a)


-4-'O
*i-0 0



U (u















aQ)
CE










C,




4-
0








CE
3

















EU
a


1



-I-a)
r C E


0- S-

















0
at
40

3
4-
3



C-
-a)
3.- 0


>
-C
C












a)I


-

C0


















SNC





C

C-
cr 1-


aj

-o

a)



























cu



L)
U 0


r- U


0.)
aj)


















CL-
0)


L.



























0











the criteria to be applied in assessing the learner's competencies,

and holds the learner accountable for meeting these objectives.

6. Individualized instruction is characterized by (a)

selection and sequencing of instructional tasks and objectives,

(b) development or selection of materials to teach each objective,

(c) evaluation for proper pupil placement, (d) plans for develop-

ing individualized programs of study, and (e) procedures for

evaluating and monitoring individual progress.

7. An open access curriculum is characterized by flexible

scheduling, small group and individualized instruction, a high

level of student involvement, team teaching, and an emphasis on

individual interests and abilities. Open access curriculum is the

counterpart of the open school concept.

In an evaluation of these major curriculum models for voca-

tional programming, the results presented in Table 1 suggest that

only three curriculum models (competency based, individualized

instruction, and open access) address themselves to the problem

of entry level requirements.


Competency Based Curriculum

The objectives of the curriculum are met through a series of

functions which include identifiable processes and products

(Calhoun & Finch, 1976). Included in these functions are the

specification of assumptions. These assumptions could be inter-

preted to mean the prerequisite skills necessary for entry into











this competency sequence. Analysis of the following two models

(individualized instruction and open access) would suggest that

they are variations of a competency based curriculum utilizing

variable entry requirements. The major difference appears to be

in a program centered versus student centered orientation.


Individualized Instruction

The curriculum model for individualized instruction includes

as one of its elements, an evaluation procedure for placing

students at the appropriate point in the curriculum. The major

assumption is that students are, in fact, within minimal entry

level competency range and placement is primarily an assessment

procedure locating an entry point into the instructional sequence.


Open Access

In an open access curriculum the assumption of success is a

logical extension of the student developing his or her own formula

or instructional plan. Entry level requirements are determined

through a cooperative decision between student and instructor. In

this process entry level skills are assessed jointly and are a

variable unique to each individual.

The development of these curriculum models has been a response

to the rapid social and technological changes in society (Calhoun &

Finch, 1976). Despite these developments and federal mandates,

cooperative efforts toward improved programming for the handicapped

is not a widely prevalent practice (Cegelka & Phillips, 1978).











Cegelka and Phillips suggest that placement of handicapped students

in vocational programs should have variable time periods contingent

upon meeting objectives (1978, p. 86). It appears, however, to

Clark (1975) that vocational education has not and may not be

willing to use alternative instructional and curriculum models

like competency based instruction in lieu of more traditional fixed

content curriculum.


Entry Level Skills


"The characteristics of handicapped learners as they have

bearing on school learning call for explicitness in curriculum and

purposefulness in teaching method not characteristically found in

the ordinary school curriculum" (Goldstein, 1976, p. 290).

Entry level skills, a form of explicitness in curriculum is dis-

cussed from the viewpoint of need and current state of implementation.


Need

Phelps and Lutz (1977) suggest that if a prospective special

needs learner has attained certain minimal competencies that are

important for task performance, that should be sufficient to permit

the student to initiate the instructional module. However, they

note, if "the basic skills and concepts are viewed by occupational

educators as prerequisites and are used to screen students out of

occupational programs, they have been seriously misused" (p. 243).

Almost all references to entry level skills suggest that the

role of entry level skills is to determine placement. Bloom











(1971) suggests entry skills assessment is for determining placement

on a continuum applicable to the subject. Calhoun and Finch (1976)

state that entry level skills determine to what degree skills are

already mastered and to prescribe proper learning packets.


Implementation Models

Teske (cited in Calhoun & Finch, 1976) developed a comprehen-

sive model for curriculum design that has been successfully used in

vocational education. As a component of this model Teske requires

an assessment of entrance requirements for course training standards.

Entrance requirements (i.e., previous training and/or experience

needed as prerequisites) are includes in the course training

standards along with (a) purpose (employment capability), (b)

qualifications of graduates, (c) career duties and task capabilities,

(d) job elements, and (e) proficiency standard for each job element.

Burnes (1974) describes a model for implementing entry level

skills in an individualized instruction system. Figure 1 illustrates

the use of a remedial center approach to intervention prior to

entry into an instructional program.

At Rutgers University, Francine Grubb (1976) produced a

series of employment orientation courses for special needs students

designed to provide basic skill development for entry into regular

vocational programs. The course titles include (a) basic business,

(b) beauty culture, (c) hospitality, (d) laundry, (e) sewing, and

(f) foods. A major problem of this presentation is lack of
















/prerequisite
remedial center ---- behaviors
Y incomplete









completed diagnostic
remediation < evaluation
of prerequisite
behaviors










learner enters
instructional
sequence








Figure 1


Individualized Instruction System:
Diagnosis of Prerequisite Skills












a description of how criteria were established for entry level

competencies of vocational programs.


Decision Theory


The procedures used by individuals and groups to make decisions

has been the subject of research for many years (Kleiter, Gachowetz,

& Huber, 1976). The development of tools for analyzing decision

making has evolved as probability theory, theories of games,

classical and Bayesian statistics, operations research, and

utility theory (Edwards, Lindman, & Phillips, 1965). In a recent

report, Slovic, Fischhoff, and Lichtenstein (1977) suggest that a

trend is definitely apparent in the study of decision making by an

increasingly diverse set of disciplines, including psychology,

medicine, and education.

This discussion of decision theory will be limited to the use

of utility theory as a focus for the analysis of decision making as

it applies to education.


Multi Attribute Utility Measurement

Edwards (1971) has developed an application of utility theory

that has come to be known as multi attribute utility measurement.

This technology has provided an orientation toward easy communica-

tion and use in environments in which time is short and decision

makers are numerous and overextended (Edwards, Guttentag, & Snapper,

1975). The following is a brief description of the sequence

developed by Edwards (1971).











Step 1: Identify all individuals or organizations whose

utilities are to be maximized and who have a stake in the decision

making process.

Step 2: Identify the issues relevant to the decision making

process.

Step 3: Identify the outcomes of the action, or decision.

These outcomes become the entities to be evaluated.

Step 4: Identify the dimensions of value (or goals) related

to the importance of the entities under consideration. Often the

goals may be restated, combined, or eliminated.

Step 5: Rank the dimensions in order of importance through

group and/or individual participation.

Step 6: Rate the dimensions in order of importance, preserv-

ing the ratios. Assign the least important dimension a weight of 10

then increase the values of the dimensions according to importance.

Step 7: Sum the importance weights, dividing each weight by

the sum, then multiplying by 100.

Step 8: Measure the location of each entity being evaluated on

each dimension.

Step 9: Calculate utilities for entities using the equation

Ui = Xi Wj Uij. This equation is the formula for determining a

weighted average.

Step 10: Decide. Make the decision based on the maximum Ui.

If a subset of i is to be chosen, then the subset for which *Ui is

maximum is the best decision.











Educational Implications

With the passage of the Education of All Handicapped Children

Act (P.L. 94-142) the emphasis on least restrictive environment

left little doubt as to the emphasis on the most "normal" environ-

ment for education to take place for handicapped students. With

this emphasis came the obvious link to an expanded role for the

regular classroom teacher as a major source of instructional

services. The inclusion of the regular classroom teacher as a

member of the placement committee has been acknowledged. Harnack (1968)

suggests there is a cluster of knowledge that resides with the in-

structor; therefore, the instructor must help make decisions related

to curriculum planning. However, Nutter (1977) suggests that the

procedures for arriving at placement decisions has not been identified,

the context within which placement decisions are made has not been

specified and the impact of training personnel to make placement

decisions has not been discussed.

In a Subjective Utilities Approach for Evaluating Program

Choices for Exceptional Children, Nutter (1977) hypothesized that

training in a decision making child study approach would affect the

utility of program choices made which placed handicapped students

toward regular education and away from special education. The

results indicated that training showed no significant effect in the

number of placement choices at each level made as a result of

training. The results did, however, show a significant effect on

the utility of one level for one school in the experimental











population. While the significance of the findings of this study do

not lead to any conclusive trends, the use of the utilities model

for decision making presents one of the few attempts to utilize

a technique which has promise, but has not been adopted as a

procedure for making educational placement decisions.


Identifying Educational Outcomes

The identification of educational outcomes has been discussed

by Edwards (1971), Edwards, Guttentag, and Snapper (1975),

Guttentag (1973), and Nutter (1977). The procedure developed by

Edwards (1971) and described in the earlier section, Multi Attribute

Utility Measurement, has been adapted for use by Nutter (1977).

The Rawgoo Technique (Nutter, 1977), which incorporates the steps

developed by Edwards (1971), was utilized as a technique for

prioritizing desired outcomes, as a preliminary step for developing

and rating program or instructional options.

In addition, recommendations for utilization of the Rawgoo

technique included;

1. the use with students to develop individual or classroom

learning outcomes.

2. the use with teachers in cooperative planning to increase

teacher job satisfaction.

3. the use with teachers in assessment of classroom performance

for both peers and students.











In general, the procedure could be utilized whenever a series of

options need to be evaluated in terms of their probability of

maximizing some desired outcome. The evaluation of a series of

options is presented as subjective expected utilities.


Subjective Expected Utilities

Subjective expected utilities is the process of selecting among

alternatives in terms of the subjective values of some outcome and

the probability that the alternative will result in the desired

product or performance. In other words, it is the selection of a

choice which will have the greatest probability of reaching a

desired group of outcomes. Edwards (1965) in his discussion of

subjective utility defines what he calls a payoff matrix as the

relationship between the state of nature and selected alternatives.

The intersect of the state of nature and the alternative is defined

as a consequence. Nutter (1977) describes the formula as

Ual = ( Pal x WG1 ) . (Pal x WGn).

Where Ua = the measure of the utility of the alternative, Pa is the

probability of that alternative, and WG is the weighted outcome.


Impact of Data on Decision Making

One of the most commonly used strategies to modify the decision

made by individuals is to increase the amount of knowledge concerning

the topic under consideration. Burnstein and Vinokur (1975)

suggest that the acquisition of new information is the major factor

in revising choices. Bayes law states that the assimilation of a

new data item would revise probabilities as follows:











The odds after the receipt of new data equal the likeli-
hood ratio for the new data times the odds in favor of
the decision prior to the receipt of the data. (Nutter,
1977)

Vinokur (1971) described a series of findings in the influence

of information on choice shifts. The findings appear to support

the hypothesis that choice shifts are due to a cognitive process

of informational influence regarding and assessment of utilities

of the outcomes in a choice situation.


Summary


The review of the literature has been designed to present

related information through discussion of vocational education,

job analysis, vocational instruction, entry level skills, and

decision making. The concepts of entry level skill assessment

have not been explored to date in the literature. Almost all

references are incidental or nonspecific statements of procedures

within more complex elements. Through discussion of vocational

evaluation and job analysis techniques, attempts have been made to

illustrate procedures which may be applicable to vocational educa-

tion settings. The discussion of vocational education has focused

primarily on the use of entry-exit level skills criteria as a

component of the curriculum. The section on entry level skills

suggests the need to determine entry level skills and some pre-

liminary attempts to incorporate entry level skills into program

models. Finally, the use of decision theory shows promise for












the development of decisions which may produce the relevant

information needed for exploring entry level skills criteria.

Throughout the review of literature, a recurring theme

appears. The theme suggests that vocational rehabilitation and

vocational education are evolving through a process of refinement

of assessment and training. In addition, the constant evolution

of assessment procedures in rehabilitation and education suggest

that solutions are actively being sought to the problem of dis-

cerning essential from nonessential prerequisites.

Finally, the review of literature suggests by its very absence

that entry level skill training is a variable which needs to be

examined in its relationship to exit level competencies.

Chapter III will present the methods and procedures for

examining a specific application of entry level skills assessment

training and its influence on vocational education's role in the

education of special needs students.
















CHAPTER III

METHODS AND PROCEDURES



Chapter III presents the methods and procedures of this study.

The chapter is organized into two major sections and includes the

(a) description of the subjects and (b) procedures, including the

experimental design, hypotheses, and the method of data collection

and analysis.


Subjects


The subjects in this study consist of 21 participants in the

Summer Vocational Special Needs Workshop at the University of

Florida. The participants were selected according to the follow-

ing criteria:

1, A direct mail advertisement was distributed to district

level Vocational Directors and Special Education Directors in the

State of Florida describing a three week summer workshop for train-

ing vocational educators to work with handicapped students. The

directors were requested to distribute the information to all

subordinate personnel.











2. Interested and/or recommended personnel were instructed

to return the tear off portion of the mailer.

3. All respondents to the above request were subsequently

mailed an application with a return request.

4. Applications were screened and selected according to

the following priorities;

a. currently employed as a vocational educator,

b. currently employed as a secondary level

special educator,

c. currently employed in a related profession

dealing with handicapped students.

Thirty-five applications were received and a total of 24 partici-

pants were selected for participation. Three of the selected

participants did not attend. The remaining 21 participants were

randomly assigned to the Experimental (E's) and Control (C's) Groups

using a computer generated randomization technique. Group assignment

was determined by identification numbers which were assigned randomly

to the group at the beginning of the pretest phase. The selection

of groups followed the pretest phase. A list of the subjects by

identification number and group assignment is included as Appendix A.

The procedures presented will be discussed as they appear

within the proposal; the pretest, intervention, and posttest

phases.











Pretest

The pretest phase consisted of the utilization of two related

procedures; identifying vocational outcomes and determine subjective

expected utilities. All procedures described as pretest were applied

to all subjects in the study.

Identifying vocational outcomes. The application of decision

theory to the development of outcomes for vocational education has

not appeared in the literature to date. Development of outcomes or

goals was prevalent during the period of 1950-1970 resulting in the

adoption of these as basis for federal legislation. Three documents

which were generated to explore the considerations of vocational

outcomes have been selected to provide the stimulus for the

identification of a series of desired vocational outcomes. The docu-

ments are the Basic Assumptions of Vocational Education (Thompson,

1973), Theories of Vocational Education Practices (Prosser & Quigley,

1949), and Philosophical Implications of the Vocational Amendments of

1968 (Beaumont, 1971).

Using the documents described above, a listing of vocational

outcomes was generated. These outcomes were arranged by grouping

similar concepts from all documents and duplicate concepts were

deleted by project staff. All remaining concepts were randomly

selected for order of presentation. The compiled list of outcomes

is included as Appendix B.

The compiled list of outcomes was presented to the subjects

in a session which was designed to (a) increase their understanding











of the importance of identifying desired vocational outcomes, (b)

provide an opportunity to suggest and/or modify outcomes, and (c)

indicate the relative importance of each desired outcome for the

vocational education process. The following is a description of

the procedure.

1. Familiarize the subjects with the Vocational Education

Outcomes (Appendix B). Each subject received a printed copy of

the outcomes, read, and discussed them in small groups. A dis-

cussion period followed to allow for clarification.

2. The subjects were then asked to reexamine the list and

suggest any "outcomes" that they felt should be included. If an

outcome was suggested, it was presented to the other subjects.

No outcomes were added or deleted by the group.

3. Each subject was given a deck of cards. The deck contained

the number of cards corresponding to the identified outcomes, one

identification card, and five pile cards. A number for the goal

and a short descriptive phrase for the goal appeared on each of the

outcome cards. The pile cards were labeled as (a) Pile 1, Most

Important; (b) Pile 2, Moderate Importance; (c) Pile 3, Average

Importance; (d) Pile 4, Marginal Importance; and (e) Pile 5, Unim-

portant/Irrelevant. Spaces for identification number, name, and

position were provided on the subject's identification card.

4. The outcomes were then prioritized by assigning ranks

and weights utilizing the Rawgoo Procedure (Nutter, 1977).

Complete instructions for the ranking and weighting procedure are


included as Appendix C.











Each of the subjects responses was then analyzed and computed

as follows:

1. The values assigned for each of the top ten ranked outcomes

were summed to produce a total outcome sum.

01 + 02 + 03 + 04 + 05 + 06 + 07 + 08 + 09 + 010 = OSUM

2. Each of the ten outcome values were divided by the total

outcome sum to produce a weighted outcome.

01/OSUM, 02/OSUM, etc.

3. The weighted outcomes for all subjects were totaled across

each outcome and divided by number of subjects (N=21).

WO11 + W012 + W013 + W014 . W0110 = WOSUM/N=MWO

4. Each of the mean weighted outcomes were computed and the

values ranked.

5. The top ten selected outcomes (in terms of mean weighted

outcome score) were reported to the subjects as stimulus for the

determination of subjective expected utilities. During the period

of time in which the top ten outcomes were computed and selected,

all subjects were provided with an unrelated task.

Determining Subjective Expected Utilities. The subjective

expected utilities (SEU's) of three levels of vocational placement

options was obtained by asking each subject to review a narrative

referral describing a handicapped student. This description was

obtained from the records of a public school district School Staffing

Conference Report. All identifying descriptions and names were

removed prior to presentation to the subjects. The case study is

presented in Appendix D as the School Staffing Conference Report for

Michael.












Subjects were asked to consider vocational placement options

based on the information contained in the referral. Appendix E

provides a description of each of the placement options for voca-

tional education as developed by the Southwest Regional Resource

Center (1977). The subjects were then asked to rate the extent to

which they felt that the placement options would maximize each

of the ten most important vocational outcomes described in the

prior section.

The ratings were recorded on the Vocational OUtcomes and

Placement Planning Decision Guide. A copy of this guide is included

as Appendix F.

The instructions for the administration of this instrument

are:

Michael has been referred to the building placement
committee for a placement decision. Assume that
you are a member of the building committee or team
and must make a program decision from the options
presented. Place a number between 0-100 for each
option under each outcome to show how well you think
that decision will help you maximize that outcome.

Upon completion of this task by the subjects, the responses were

computed to obtain a value for the relative influence of the place-

ment decision on maximizing the outcomes presented. The value

assigned to the relative influence was identified as the subjective

expected utility (SEU). The subjective expected utilities (SEUs)

for each decision were computed by summing the product of each

probability (j) and the weight assigned to each goal where U =

subjective expected utilities, j = the jth row, p = probability of











maximizing the goal, and w = weight assigned to each outcome. This

computational formula is presented below.


Uj = E (p x w)


Intervention

The intervention phase consisted of one training session for

all subjects. The procedure and content is described below for

the experimental and control groups.

Intervention for the experimental group. The intervention for

the E's was conducted using three basic steps: the introduction,

rationale, and description of the tasks; the identification of entry

level skills criteria; and the components utilized to maximize

outcomes.

The introduction, rationale, and description of the tasks. The

subjects in the experimental group were introduced to the training

session on entry level skills criteria through a presentation of the

conceptual development of entry level skills, the rationale for

their use, and a brief description of the tasks to be completed in

this training sequence.

Identification of entry level skills criteria. The initial

task consisted of identifying the entry level skill criteria using

Level I Competencies for Business Education (Florida State University,

1978). This material provides a detailed description of the com-

petencies required for completion of an entry level business education

instructional program. This entry level sequence called Level I

include competencies required in the following program areas:











1. Accounting Occupations
2. Data Processing Occupations
3. Clerical Occupations
4. Fundamentals of Business and Office Occupations
5. Secretarial Occupations
6. Business Administration Occupations
7. Orientation and Exploration of Business and
Office Occupations
8. Business and Office Education Job Training

One program area, Accounting Occupations, was presented to subjects

for use in identifying entry level skills criteria. The selection

of Accounting Occupations was based on the high degree of commonality

to the other program areas based on types of Level I skills required.

Appendix G provides a complete list of the program areas and their

requirements for Level I competencies. The State of Florida Program

S-andard for Accounting Occupations (Standards for Vocational

Education Courses, 1978) is included for reference as Appendix H.

The participants were arbitrarily divided into three working

groups for the purposes of determining entry level skills criteria.

Using the Level I Competencies presented in Appendix I, each group

selected one competency area. The areas selected were:

1. Telephone Techniques
2. Human Relations
3. Filing and Retrieving

The groups were instructed to use the competencies provided in each

area as outcomes. These outcomes are analogous to exit level skill

criteria for each competency area. Using these outcomes, the subjects

ranked and weighted the outcomes according to the procedure pre-

sented earlier as the Rawgoo Procedure (Nutter, 1977). This

procedure is described in Appendix C. Due to the reduced number of











outcomes utilized, the pile procedure described in Appendix C

was omitted.

Components utilized to maximize outcomes. The second task

presented to the subjects involved the selection of entry level

skills required for each of the competency areas. These entry level

skills were obtained by asking each subject to review the competency

area selected and develop a list of entry level skills. All develop-

ment of the entry level skills was shared with other participants

in the working group. Interactions by all participants in the

development were encouraged. The results of each working group were

shared with other working groups, and any additions or deletions to

the entry level skills were allowed.

Using the entry level skills generated, the outcomes for each

competency area were presented to the subjects and the subjective

expected utility of each entry level skill was computed. The

subjects were asked to rate how much they felt that each of the

recommendations for entry level skills would maximize the course

outcomes previously ranked and weighted. The Outcomes and Entry

Level Skills Decision Grid was utilized to record data and compute

SEU's. The instructions for administering this procedure are:

The competencies that we have ranked and weighted as out-
comes will be used to develop a series of entry level
skills decisions. Given the ranked and weighted course
outcomes, and the course entry level skill selections
you have just completed, place a number between 0-100 for
each decision under each outcome to show how well you
think that each entry level skill will maximize the
course outcome.

The Outcomes and Entry Level Skills Decision Grid is provided in

Appendix K. Each participant discussed his/her rationale for









assigning values with the group, and at the completion of the dis-

cussion, participants were allowed to modify previously assigned

values.

The subjective expected utilities (SEU's) for each decision

were computed by summing the products of each probability (j) and

the weights of each outcome, where U=subjective expected utility,

j=the jth row, p=the probability of maximizing the goal, and w=weight

assigned to each outcome. The computational formula is presented

below:
Uj = E (p x w)

Intervention for the control group. The intervention procedure

for the C's was primarily designed to control for the effects of

treatment and the effects of practice associated with the identifica-

tion of outcomes and the development of subjective expected utilities.

This procedure was conducted using three basic steps; the introduc-

tion, rationale and description of training; the identification of

daily living skills; and the components utilized to maximize

outcomes.

The subjects were introduced to the topic of daily living

skills by a presentation describing daily living skills, the rationale

for instruction in this area, and the training exercises to be pre-

sented.

The identification of daily living skills was presented using

the materials developed by Florida Department of Education (1971)

entitled Employability Skills Guide. This material is designed to

focus on the training of students in prevocational skill areas,

including areas of daily living. The goals developed for the program

presented in this material include the following:









1. Improve attitudes about work, school, and society.

2. Improve personal appearance and hygiene.

3. Develop a realistic understanding of the connection
between the world of work and study which assists
students in becoming contributing members of society.

4. Develop personality characteristics of dignity, self-
respect, self-reliance, perseverance, initiative, and
resourcefulness.

5. Become effective in personal economics and to develop
an understanding of the economic system.

6. Receive recognition through successful experiences.

7. Achieve in all phases of the school's education program.

Improving Personal Appearance and Hygiene (Goal 2) was

selected as an exploratory area due to its position as both a

prevocational skill and a daily living skill. The selection of

daily living skills provides content in a vocationally related

area without confounding the effects of instruction in skills which

may be directly related to specific vocational education. Improving

Personal Appearance and Hygiene has been developed into a series of

three expected outcomes; To Practice Cleanliness, To Wear Acceptable

Dress, and To Practice Good Physical Fitness. Furthermore, each

expected outcome has a series of performance objectives, learning

experiences, resources, and methods of evaluation. Appendix J

includes a complete description.

The participants were arbitrarily divided into three working

groups for the purposes of evaluating learning experiences. Using

the selected goal, each group selected one of the three expected

outcomes areas. For the purposes of this training, the performance

objectives were to be considered outcomes with which comparisons










will be made. The groups were instructed to use the outcomes to

rank and weight according to the procedure presented earlier as

the Rawgoo Procedure (Nutter, 1977). The procedure described in

Appendix C was modified to exclude the piling procedure due to the

limited number of outcomes.

The subjective expected utilities (SEU) of the learning

experiences was obtained by asking each subject to rate how much

he/she felt that each of the experiences would maximize each of

the performance objectives. The Outcomes and Daily Living Skills

Decision Grid was utilized to record data and compute SEU's. The

Outcomes and Daily Living Skills Decision Grid is shown in Appendix

L. All of the developments of the participants were shared with

others in the group. Interaction by all the participants was

encouraged.

The instructions for administering this procedure were

The performance objectives that we have ranked and weighted
as outcomes will be used to evaluate a series of learning
experiences. Given the ranked and weighted outcomes, and
the learning experiences, place a number between 0-100 for
each experience under each outcome to show how well you
think that each learning experience will maximize each
outcome.

Each participant discussed his/her rationale for assigning

values with their respective groups. At the completion of the

discussion, participants were allowed to modify previously assigned

values.

The subjective expected utilities (SEU's) for each decision was

computed as described for the experimental group.









Posttest

The posttest consisted of the identical procedure described in

the pretest section as Determining Subjective Expected Utilities.

The vocational outcomes developed in the Identifying Vocational

Outcomes section of the pretest phase was utilized.

Each subject reviewed three separate case studies depicting

different types of handicapping conditions. The descriptions were

obtained through the same procedure as the pretest. The case studies

are presented in Appendix D as Michael, Carolyn, and John. The

ratings were recorded on the Vocational Outcomes and Placement

Planning Decision Guide (Appendix F). The instructions for admin-

istration of this instrument were

Michael, Carolyn, and John have been referred to the
building placement committee for a placement decision.
Assume that you are a member of the building committee
or team and must make a program decision from the options
presented. Place a number between 0-100 for each option
under each outcome to show how well you think that deci-
sion will help you reach maximizing that outcome.

The subjective expected utilities (SEU) for each decision were

computed as described in the pretest section.



Experimental Design


The experimental design used is depicted in Figure 2. This

design is analogoug to the design described by Campbell and Stanley

(1963) as the Pretest-Posttest Control Group Design and is depicted

below:
R 01 X 02 05 07
R 03 04 06 08



































STraining \
/ in the
SIdentification of \
Outcomes for Daily
Living Skill
S Intervention
\ (alternative
\ treatment) /
N A\


Figure 2

Experimental Design











In this design, 01 and 03 are representative of the pretest scores

(subjective expected utilities), 02 through 08 are representative

of the posttest scores (subjective expected utilities). The X

represents the intervention applied to the experimental group

subjects. The control group intervention is depicted as a blank.


Hypotheses


The hypotheses to be tested, stated in the null form, are:

Hypothesis 1: There is no significant difference in the subjective

expected utilities of each of the placement options

between subjects who received entry level skills

criterion training and subjects who did not receive

training.

Hypothesis la: There is no significant difference in the subjective

expected utilities of each of the placement options

for the case study of Michael between subjects who

received entry level skills criterion training and

subjects who did not receive training.

Hypothesis lb: There is no significant difference in the subjective

expected utilities of each of the placement options

for the case study of Carolyn between subjects who

received entry level skills criterion training and

subjects who did not receive training.












Hypothesis Ic:








Hypothesis Id:








Hypothesis le:








Hypothesis If:










Hypothesis 2:


There is no significant difference in the subjective

expected utilities of each of the placement options

for the case study of John between subjects who re-

ceived entry level skills criterion training and

subjects who did not receive training.

There is no significant difference in the subjective

expected utilities of each of the placement options

for the case study of Michael for the pretest and

posttest conditions of the subjects who received

entry level skills criterion training.

There is no significant difference in the subjective

expected utilities of each of the placement options

for the case study of Michael in the pretest and post-

test conditions of the subjects who did not receive

entry level skills criterion training.

There are no significant differences in the subjective

expected utilities of each of the placement options

for the case study of Michael between subjects who

received entry level skills criterion training and

subjects that did not receive training on the pretest

observation.

There is no significant difference in the placement

choices between subjects who received entry level

skills criterion training and subjects who did not

receive training.












Hypothesis 2a:








Hypothesis 2b:








Hypothesis 2c:


There is no significant difference in the regular

vocational education placement choices made by

subjects receiving training in the use of entry

level skills criteria evaluation than those not

receiving the training.

There is no significant difference in the adapted

vocational education placement choices made by

subjects receiving training in the use of entry

level skills criteria evaluation than those not

receiving the training.

There is no significant difference in the special

vocational education placement choices made by

subjects receiving training in the use of entry

level skills criteria evaluation than those not

receiving the training.


Data Collection and Analysis


The collection of data and their subsequent analysis will be

presented as two separate areas of focus.


Data Collection

The following steps were utilized in the retrieval of

information to be included for subsequent data analysis.

1. Collect personal data on all subjects including their

areas of vocational specialization, current teaching responsibilities,












and professional training. This information was available through

the workshop application.

2. Compile the data developed through the use of the Rawgoo

procedure (Nutter, 1977) for determining the assigned ranks and

weights of the vocational outcomes. Data was collected from the

pile of cards ranked by each subject. Each pile was recorded and

compiled by research staff.

3. Collect and compute the SEU score for each placement option

completed by the subjects on the Placement Planning Decision Guide

(Appendix F) for both pretest and posttest observations.

4. Compute the number of placement choices having the highest

SEU score for all subjects for both pretest and posttest conditions.


Data Analysis

The data analysis was conducted using the following procedure:

1. A comparison of the subjective expected utility (SEU)

score for each placement option was assessed for all three case

studies using a MANOVA procedure. These three case studies were

posttest scores only and are presented in Figure 3.

2. A comparison of the subjective expected utility score (SEU)

for each placement option was assessed for the case study of Michael

for both pretest and posttest conditions. Students' t-scores will

be used for comparison for both E's and C's.

3. A comparison of the subjective expected utility score (SEU)

for each placement option was assessed for the case study of Michael

between the E's and C's at the pretest level. Students' t-scores

were used for comparison.

















Placement Options


Michael


Regular

Adapted

Special


Vocational

Vocational

Vocational


Education

Education by

Education


Experimental

Control


Carolyn Regular Vocational Education Experimental

Adapted Vocational Education by Control

Special Vocational Education


John


Regular

Adapted

Special


Vocational

Vocational

Vocational


Education

Education by

Education


Experimental

Control


Figure 3

Posttest Comparisons


Case Study


Group Assignment





55





4. A comparison of the number of choices of placement options

having the highest subjective expected utility score (SEU) was

assessed for each placement option. Choice was based on the highest

SEU score compared to other placement options for each case study.

A Chi square analysis was used for comparison.















CHAPTER IV

RESULTS



The analysis of the results presents the comparisons of the

subjective expected utilities and placement choices made by subjects

who (a) received entry level skills criteria training and (b) subjects

who did not receive the training. The data were collected from

participants in the Summer Vocational/Special Needs Workshop at

the University of Florida. Data were gathered for a total of 21

subjects (N=21).

The analysis is developed through the restatement of each

hypothesis and sub-hypothesis with a presentation of the procedures

and results.


Hypothesis 1


There is no significant difference in the subjective
expected utilities of each of the placement options
between subjects who received entry level skills
criterion training and subjects who did not receive
training.

An analysis of the sub-hypothesis shows that all null hypotheses

were not rejected. Therefore, the null hypotheses for Hypothesis I

is not rejected. An analysis of each of the component sub-hypotheses

is presented as follows.












Hypothesis la

There is no significant difference in the subjective
expected utilities of each of the placement options
for the case study of Michael between subjects who
received entry level skills criterion training and
subjects who did not receive training.

The subjective expected utilities values for each of the place-

ment options were compared ysubg tge General Linear Models

Procedure, Multivariate Analysis of Variance, a component of the

Statistical Analysis System (Barr, 1976). The results presented in

Table 2 reveal non-significant F values (a= .05) for all placement

options by treatment group combinations.

The results indicate that the subjective expected utilities of

the placement options for the case study of Michael were not signifi-

cantly different between subjects who received entry level skills

criterion training and subjects who did not. Therefore, the null

hypothesis HIa failed to be rejected.


Hypothesis lb

There is no significant difference in the subjective expected
utilities of each of the placement options for the case
study of Carolyn between subjects who received entry level
skills criterion training and subjects who did not receive
training.

The subjective expected utilities value for each of the place-

ment options were compared using the General Linear Models Procedure,

Multivariate Analysis of Variance, a component of the Statistical

Analysis System (Barr, 1976). The results presented in Table 3

reveal nonsignificant F values (a = .05) for all placement options

by treatment group combinations.

























LN

CM


(0
cn u~2
M Cm


0













r-
II














a
























.


















0.
r-
1-3
C,










-


C CO



Ir LO Ln












S-u
1.u m
U-
um (0 UC
O In > 0 n

01 *
s-CM >rn ,-(0.








F-
S *0.- 4

3 [I S II (A II











14 X - -



-L -J C C =









C- -C- 1 oC
- wu- zL-


(0
U
C
(0~
C--
(00))
> (
4- U



-o '->


0 )
4ai (0


C-- C-)
(0



4-


























0. 0 -











o- oC 'C-

o o
,- cCj


LD
0
































CO





41
0J
I)


-0
-U LU
LU

L) LO 00
0 03 > CM
000 0-
C,




3 II 0 lI


C

,u







Q V)
f--
0. 0
a j *-- I-- *I-



Ci -I
4-' >C C



4- >, 0V_ C0

5- 4- 0
C. 05-LU 0U U.


C,-

N

m
CM.


'a
L



4--
00



m ,u"



C

,r
"-C









4-'
oQ f











The results indicate that the subjective expected utilities

of the placement options for the case study of Carolyn were not

significantly different between subjects who received entry level

skills criterion training and subjects who did not. Therefore,

the null hypothesis Hlb failed to be rejected.


Hypothesis Ic

There is no significant difference in the subjective
expected utilities of each of the placement options
for the case study of John between subjects who re-
ceived entry level skills criterion training and
subjects who did not receive training.

The subjective expected utilities values for each of the place-

ment options were compared using the General Linear Models Procedure,

Multivariate Analysis of Variance, a component of the Statistical

Analysis System (Barr, 1976).

The results presented in Table 4 reveal non-significant F

values (a = .05) for the variables regular vocational education and

adapted vocational education. The variable special vocational educa-

tion revealed a significant F value (a = .05) of .038 for this place-

ment option by treatment group combination.

The results indicate that the subjective expected utilities of

the placement options identified as regular vocational education

and adapted vocational education were not significantly different

between subjects who received entry level skills criterion training

and subjects who did not. The placement option special vocational

education showed a significant difference between the experimental








61











M C CO

r-] O- 0

















L.-








CO
3 co c u












0- 0 C


C-
0 *3





Zr CO C r
di






di- :z- --
0o 0 4 C






di L L > L
U, C CM -








Lr- S- 4> L L






3 a3 40--
I- 1- w C
CO

4-- '


5U C C

di UCO 00 (L'.
4-' OCO >CM 00

3 r 0 - *

-1 C u-- >0 r-L












u -

ro .- s >


C/C-1
i -1>


'4 E 4D
i J > '-- z u


L/) H- LUJC-)- ZC-)-/











and control groups. An examination of the mean values for the

experimental and control group indicates the subjective expected

utilities score for the E's is 42.442 and the C's is 27.876. This

can be interpreted as a higher SEU value for the placement choice

of special vocational education for John by the subjects who

received entry level skills criterion training.

The results of all placement options by treatment group

comparisons suggest that the null hypothesis of no difference in

the subjective expected utilities of each of the placement options

for the case study of John between the treatment groups failed to

be rejected. The significant difference (special vocational educa-

tion by treatment group) is not a sufficient condition for the

rejection of this hypothesis.


Hypothesis Id

There is no significant difference in the subjective
expected utilities of each of the placement options for
the case study of Michael for the pretest and posttest
conditions of the subjects who received entry level skills
criterion training.

The subjective expected utilities for each of the placement

options were compared using the Students t for correlated samples

(t-test) in the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (Nie,

Hadlai Hull, Henkins, Steinbrenner, & Bent, 1975). The results

presented in Table 5 reveal non-significant values (a= .05)

for all placement options by condition combinations.

The results indicate that the subjective expected utilities

of the placement options for the pretest and posttest conditions of






























4-
0-
C,-

-0 LU

4-'
V) 0)

I .-
V)C


Cd


Cd
(U -r--
0) I-



-c
0













C *I-'
CCs-

CL
E-

a) -u


0-,-






a) 4-C













0 a-)
0 0
'I






0.
'4-'
4-'r-







C->
0)cl













10mr
sd

&- '

Q-


4-'
V)




0
C/


















41
0
















4-'
CC

a)

C-














4-
CL



Cd
(0

0-


L. co a)
0 0 LU
Lo U) U0


mCo

a ci -


Cr
LO



C.'


C >C C
0 0
4-' 4-' 4-'




0C 0 0


i- a 4-. 3C*) 0
SU Q- U UC

(w -0 -0a0 o-a
0. LU ct LUi C LU












the case study of Michael were not significantly different for

subjects who received entry level skills criterion training.

Therefore, the null hypothesis failed to be rejected.


Hypothesis le

There is no significant difference in the subjective
expected utilities of each of the placement options
for the case study of Michael in the pretest and post-
test conditions of the subjects who did not receive
entry level skills criterion training.

The subjective expected utilities for each of the placement

options was compared using the Students t for correlated samples

(t-test) in the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (Nie et

al., 1975). The resul-s presented in Table 6 reveal non-significant

t values (a= .05) for the regular vocational and adapted vocational

education options between the pre and posttest conditions. The

special vocational education placement option was significantly

different between pretest and posttest conditions at the a= .05

level.

The results indicate that the subjective expected utilities

for the options of regular vocational education and adapted voca-

tional education for the pretest and posttest conditions were not

significantly different for subjects who did not receive entry

level skills criterion training.

The special vocational education option was significantly

different for the pre and posttest conditions. An analysis of the

means of both conditions indicate that the subjects assigned a

significantly lower mean subjective expected utilities value to the








































0




S-0






















ou
O U











C. CA
E

















x (
L> 4





















4-1
u












4- *i













ro
0 lL













S-
Cd 0C
>C


U U




0 Cu




a *r





+L1


u,
C-Q(




O -Q
CO



r- 0
0.. 0
Q. (


.4-
',
ad
41-


0
Q-
















cc
Ca
L



a









CD
4J













C:
0










C-



cc
4-,




u


C-


cc
mcco
- r C:) d
Cc cJ Cc


,c:
Cd cr-


Ln LD


NO 00

CN N -


C"


Lnf
Io o O


c Cd Cd











0 0 0


C0 C0 C0
CD -Z-- r sl-

















41 43 0 (T
o o U





C- 0. > L/-'
0,:3 m0 (
00 Cu 00

a) d0 0-0 'a -'0
= LLl c Ll A LW











special vocational education option in the posttest condition

(7 = 19.4925) than in the pretest condition (7 = 34.957).

The results of all placement options by pre-/posttest

comparisons suggest that the null hypothesis of no difference in the

subjective expected utilities of each of the placement options for

the case study of Michael in the pretest and posttest conditions

has failed to be rejected. The significant difference (special

vocational education option, by pretest post condition) is not a

sufficient condition for the rejection of the hypothesis.


Hypothesis If

There are no significant differences in the subjective
expected utilities of each of the placement options for
the case study of Michael between subjects who received
entry level skills criterion training and subjects that
did not receive training on the pretest observation.

The subjective expected utilities values for each of the place-

ment options by treatment condition was computed using the Students t

for independent samples (t-test) in the Statistical Package for the

Social Sciences (Nie et al., 1975). The results presented in Table 7

reveal non-significant t values (o = .05) for all placement options

by treatment conditions.

The results indicate that the subjective expected utilities of

the placement options for the pretest condition in the case study

of Michael were not significantly different between subjects who did

not. Therefore, the null hypothesis of no difference failed to be

rejected.



































4-
0



41 CL
"3


L) =
0

C0





0

"J O
Cd



4-)
C E



n4- (








44
4 m1




0- u*
-C


00

C U O


cu .
4-1
u C




C-1












a.


UL)




0O


V)














o
c



0
C)

4-
a

C
E

u
CO


U) r- i
U) m


LO

C0
U-C m

U)


LO C C-l

CD ;


Ln












cIn
c'J


''0 0 0



0 0 0
n-1 -) 4 4-




10 4r iO -0


u 0L 0 u

SLU <. LU C) LU











Hypothesis 2


There is no significant difference in the placement choices
between subjects who received entry level skills criterion
training and subjects who did not receive training.

An analysis of the sub-hypothesis shows that all null hypotheses

were not rejected. Therefore, the null hypothesis for Hypothesis 2

is not rejected. An analysis of each of the component sub-hypotheses

is presented as follows.


Hypothesis 2a

There is no significant difference than would be expected
by chance in the placement choice for the case study of
Michael between subjects who received entry level skills
criterion training and subjects who did not receive
training.

The placement choices for each of the placement options were

selected using the largest value of the subjective expected utility

score for one of the three placement options. This choice was

analyzed using the subprogram CROSSTABS, in the Statistical Package

for the Social Sciences (Nie et al., 1975). Using the statistical

procedure Chi-square, a 2 x 3 analysis, provided a comparison of

placement choice by treatment group for the case study of Michael.

The results presented in Table 8 reveal non-significant X2 values

( = .05) for all placement choices by treatment group comparisons.

The results indicate that the placement choices for each of

the options in the case study of Michael were not significantly

different than would be expected by chance for subjects in both

treatment groups. Therefore the null hypothesis of no significant

difference is not rejected.















00 41
4-' U
S0 0



Lu-
000
O
e-- LI











-0-00
O L
S0 0.










000






c 0u



0 '- 0
C C






















-0 0


















0)0
O ---J 0








0 0
CL. C-
0000














r- 0.














X LU ..
L.I. V C


v rd
033O












S--

U 0 U


040
Q 0-
000


cl rli r_ 0

C-J 0 0c)















-0 00
0 D. 04-.
000u










0d 0-










- L0 0r0
-- a










0 U -'






m 0 LCI
O-' L --















0 04
-00


O O
CC







O



m 0

L2


LO
LD





















C)


m
c0

0o











Hypothesis 2b

There is no significant difference than would be expected
by chance in the placement choice for the case study of
Carolyn, between subjects who received entry level skills
criterion training and subjects who did not receive
training.

The placement choices for each of the placement options were

selected by using the largest value of the subjective expected

utility score for one of the three placement options. This choice

was analyzed using the subprogram CROSSTABS, in the Statistical

Package for the Social Sciences (Nie et al., 1975). Using the

statistical procedure Chi-square, a 2 x 3 analysis, provided a

comparison of placement choice by treatment group for the case study

of Carolyn. The results presented in Table 9 reveal non-significant

2 values (a = .05) for all placement choices by treatment group

comparisons.

The results indicate that the placement choices for each of the

options in the case study of Carolyn were not significantly different

than would be expected by chance for subjects in both treatment groups.

Therefore, the null hypothesis of no significant difference is not

rejected.


Hypothesis 2c

There is no significant difference than would be expected
by chance in the placement choice for the case study of
John, between subjects who received entry level skills
criterion training and subjects who did not receive
training.

The placement choices for each of the placement options were

selected by using the largest value of the subjective expected utility








71


C



0000. 0000. 0 00




LOM LD CD 0




-40





CL CL 0 CL C
u >


0 c'4 SU
c -!:- t -"000 LO
i- i- CMCDi0O C' 00
o 0n



) 000 0
0 10 3.- 1

u 00
4 .






CO
'0- '0
0 + CO

SO* C 43 +






U-
*)L) 0 000 000
0 -*- 0.0.. 0 0. 11

0 0 -000 -000









-C 0 CS- U- C L U+-C LO
4--l '0 r-Ul0l0 a0'
S OC 4- . .

0 c E 0 C) O'an O t *-c-.
0 n o 0r C 3



Q -Li


Li Cu
E -a -




-C *

r3 17 Tu 0 1--- ooo
LiD 0i 7-) -. 0 0



00 SO C'iC'J00 C''C.Je
0 I 2OO CiOO
f0 0 r-L~l- ,JLni-L
i- e




0U C




0 o >S- --
5 i- (U 0U 0 0

4C ) 00 *-' *-' 4-

OJ E C r- 4-c 3 :'

0 l r4 4-' .-,- 0

)< XLi -Z S- Or 0 3











score for one of the three placement options. This choice was

analyzed using the subprogram, CROSSTABS, in the Statistical

Package for the Social Sciences (Nie et al., 1975). Using the

statistical procedure Chi-sqaure, a 2 x 3 analysis provided a

comparison of placement choice by treatment group and was computed

for the case study of John. The results presented in Table 10

reveal non-significantX2 values (c = .05) for all placement choices

by treatment group comparisons.

The results indicate that the placement choices for each of the

options in the case study of John were not significantly different

than would be expected by chance for subjects in both treatment

groups. Therefore, the null hypothesis of no significant difference

is not rejected.















C -


L L 4C4 CL




LO









u U U



;a 4
3 4- 4-'
-000


















CL 0- CL







C C















r- 40
000















a:
00
























+4* >*!-
S-CC























E C

'J i i- C-
E r


rc


CL



0
00



4-0

4-'

-' 0








C C
















4-
S-




0 C


L)


E L






SC-
L) 4
*r +

ocn
<-> *'-

+-*
!= l


C r-
L 4-




















000
4-' +- 4-'
0 0 U


-0 0


-00









C0 CL 0






















C r; 4
CO- CM -


00


C S 04-)



















3 '-4-'





CM 00









C
'-C0











0 Z -' I-
C_3 ^ (/ t


C





o ou

o o

o




LO
M









O
0












u-'














aI


















































I
4-




CM









CM


4-

0





CM













C CL II








E


o0 S














CHAPTER V

DISCUSSION



The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of

entry level skills training on the program placement choices made

by vocational educators in the educational placement of handicapped

students. The discussion summarizes the data pertaining to the

purpose, provides a discussion of results and constraints, and

explores some implications for future study.



Summary of the Data


The summary of the data is presented through an analysis of

the data for each hypothesis, followed by an analysis of findings

influenced by more than a single hypothesis.


Hypothesis 1

This hypothesis was used to explore the effect of an entry

level skills training procedure on the subjective expected utility

(SEU) value assigned to levels of placement options for a series of

case studies describing handicapped students.

The multivariate analysis of variance was used to test the

hypothesis of no difference in SEU values for experimental and











control groups. An analysis of the data showed no significant

differences between groups on all variables with the exception of

the case study of John. In this case study, a significant difference

was found on the subjective expected utility score for the special

vocational placement option. The analysis showed that the group

receiving training placed a higher utility value on special education

placement than did the non trained group for this case study.

The relationship of the experimental group to a significant

greater subjective expected utility is not apparent. Future

investigation may attempt to isolate the question of the influence

of additional specific information on the decision to make a special

education placement. For example, does the training of entry level

skills criteria actually influence the amount of information about

an existing learning deficit that was not apparent to a vocational

educator not specifically trained in the diagnosis of handicapping

conditions. This may have an effect of increasing the perception of

a handicapping condition where none existed or existed to a lesser

degree.

An analysis of the mean score for both experimental and control

group shows a higher mean score (X = 35.506) for both experimental and

control groups than either of the other two placement options (X

adaptive vocational education = 30.220 and X regular vocational

education = 21.188). This relationship was not reflected in the

other two case studies. This may suggest additional investigations

into what differential characteristics which describe handicapped

students influence various placement decisions.











In a comparison of the pre and posttest score for the subjective

expected utility of placement options for Michael, no significant

differences were found for the subjects trained in entry level

skills criteria; however, a significant difference in the subjec-

tive expected utility was found for the untrained subjects in the

placement of students in special vocational programs. The change in

mean from 34.957 to 19.493 indicates a much lower subjective

expected utility for Michael at posttest. The change in mean value

was not apparent in the subjects who received training (X pretest =

37.70 and X posttest = 29.784). In both treatment conditions a

slight increase was observed in the mean posttest score for the regular

vocational education placement option and a slight decrease in the

mean values of the other placement options. This may suggest that

some effect of training took place which slightly increased the

participants rating of the subjective expected utility of placing

Michael in a regular vocational setting and decreased slightly the

ratings for the other placement options.

The comparison of the pretest subjective expected utilities

showed no significant differences in the subjects between experi-

mental and control groups. This assures the lack of initial biases

between groups, however, the comparison was not essential in a

randomized design, but lends assurance to the control for initial

differences.











Hypothesis 2

The selection of a placement choice was the desired result

of the functional application of determining subjective expected

utilities. The option with the greatest SEU value is considered

the placement choice. The null hypothesis was not rejected, indicat-

ing no significant differences in the placement choices by the

groups.

Of interest were two similar trends to what was described in

the data concerning Hypothesis 1.

1. Within both treatment conditions, an increase was observed

in the number of regular vocational education choices for both

treatment and control groups and the decrease in number of placement

choices for special vocational education. There was no change for

the adaptive vocational education option. Table 11 depicts the

difference in placement choices between pretest and posttest observa-

tions. It is apparent from both Hypothesis 1 and Hypothesis 2 that

there was movement toward making placements in regular vocational

education and away from special education. The suggestion is that

the experience in the workshop situation by all participants may

possibly have influenced the change in placement choices toward a

more regular vocational placement.

2. An analysis of the data for Hypothesis 1(c) found a signifi-

cantly higher SEU score for the group receiving training than the

group not receiving training on the special education placement

option. The Chi-square analysis for Hypothesis 2(c) shows a much








78












0)
41 Ca-






uou

C vi


OO






*I- +j -
II (VI I I













4- -
(J 0.





-- a) 4/ M
c V)
















0 0 0 0
a
















4, 4- 4-

In 0. O i

0 00 0

S 04 4, 4/4




0 4-



4- LU 0A
41 In In
-. 4-> U U 4-

O C a
o =
4- 0










a a

..) --- -- -)

41)) 0 4 --

4 --


0 04.


LU 4 (/4
> S S

_i t/ s-
in -Z +- i
>,-L ci
S-i LU O -
-P *r T
E:- 0 -
LU 1/ Z











higher number of placement choices for special vocational education

for the group receiving training. This much larger value (N=8)

was not repeated in the other case studies. While an obvious

relationship exists between the subjective expected utilities score

and placement choice, the same inflated score tends to confirm the

significant effect in Hypothesis 2(c).



Constraints


The constraints in implementing a study which uses relatively

new technologies, or adapts materials and technologies are numerous.

The limited experience with many of the techniques involved in this

study mandate a careful evaluation of the constraints as a guide for

future investigation. The following are constraints experienced

during the conducting of this investigation.


Level of Intervention

The constraints of time were a major factor in the development

of this study. Obtaining any group of professionals for an extended

intervention sequence is a difficult task. The requirements for at

least three individual phases separated by a fairly significant

time block poses a distinct problem for the researcher. This

study utilized a pretest, intervention, and posttest phase completed

over a period of two weeks. The limits of time allocated for inter-

vention may have seriously restricted the results.











Training Methodology

The use of training methodology involves two distinct components,

the training in the development of subjective expected utilities

and the training in assessing entry level skills criteria.

Subjective Expected Utilities. The use of subjective expected

utilities involves two levels of training, the development and

prioritizing outcomes, and the selection of subjective expected

utilities. The procedures involved in prioritizing outcomes involved

two basic constraints for this study. The first constraint was the

relatively difficult task of quantifying values into outcome weights.

The task of deciding the relative importance for each of the outcomes

presented a decision not often required of educators. The second

constraint involves the unfamiliar task of exploring vocational

outcomes. The recent emphasis on legislative and regulatory

requirements has developed precedence over individual or local

outcome development. The selection of subjective expected utilities

is an easier task. There still needs to be continued research in

the quantity of outcomes to be presented in any given decision as

well as the procedures for completing the task. The feedback from

subjects was generally very positive as to the use of subjective

expected utilities, but most all subjects did not feel comfortable

with the procedures until after more than one trial/training

session.

Entry Level Skills Criteria. The development of a training

sequence for entry level skills criteria has little support in the





81





literature. The selection of a procedure involves the adaptation of

methods from existing training sequences. As a result very little

is assured as the the most effective procedure for demonstrating

and presenting techniques for assessing entry level skills criteria.

The use of subjective expected utilities offers a procedure for

making decisions in many areas, and was selected on that basis.

A comparison of this and other procedures needs to be developed

for use in training entry level skills criteria.
















APPENDIX A


GROUP ASSIGNMENT BY SUBJECT NUMBER



01 control group
02 experimental group
03 experimental group
04 experimental group
05 control group
06 control group
07 control group
08 control group
09 experimental group
10 experimental group
11 control group
12 experimental group
13 control group
14 control group
15 experimental group
16 experimental group
17 control group
18 experimental group
19 experimental group
20 control group
21 experimental group



E = 11
C = 10















APPENDIX B

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION OUTCOMES



1. Development of attitudes, basic educational skills, appropriate

habits, and skill training are all equally important for gainful

employment.

2. Prevocational experiences are necessary to introduce students to

the world of work and provide motivation.

3. Establish and maintain a minimum amount of funding below which

training should not be attempted.

4. Utilize vocationally experienced or expert individuals as the

source of occupational skill training.

5. Vocational education produces a unique body of knowledge for each

occupational skill area.

6. Student must meet minimum productive abilities.

7. Student must be able to secure a job for which he/she is trained.

8. Provide a means of acquiring skills essential for equal competition.

9. Provide preparation for initial entry level employment.

10. Serve students needs for a variety of educational experiences which

include vocational education as a component.

11. Replicate the work environment, utilize the same tools and procedures

and produce similar habits and manipulations.





84




12. Provide for on the job training experiences.

13. Enable students to use interests, aptitudes, and intelligence

to highest degree.

14. Train only those who want, need, or are able to profit.

15. Provide a program which is developmental and hierarchial in

regards to exit level criteria in a wide variety of job skills.

16. Meet demands of the marketplace even if conflicts with the state

of the art.

17. Oriented to manpower needs of community and greater society.

18. Be able to serve the demands of a technological society.
















APPENDIX C

RAWGOO INSTRUCTIONS



The question you are concerned with is "How important is each

of these outcomes for the education of students in vocational programs?"

At the end of this activity, you will have:

1. Classified the outcomes from unimportant to most important;

2. Ranked all the outcomes; and

3. Given an importance value or weighting to the top-ranked

outcomes.

You have been given a deck of cards. The top card is the identi-

fication card. If it does not have your name on it, please write your

name, your position and grade, and your area of certification on this

card. Set it aside.

The next five cards are the "pile cards" and will be used to

classify each of the outcomes. Take these five cards and spread

them out in front of you with enough room to stack outcome cards

near each "pile card."

Next, take the outcome cards and place each one near the most

appropriate "pile card" according to your own valuing it. You do

not need to put any specific number in any category, nor do you need

even a minimum number in any category . that is, you can put all

the cards in one category, or distribute them in any way you wish.












When you are finished with that step, you can go right on to

the next step: ranking the outcome cards. To do this, simply rank

all the cards in each of the five categories (leaving them in their

categories). If you have placed all the cards in one category, you

will have a greater task than if they were more evenly distributed,

but this should not affect the rankings.

Note: The number 1 item (the highest ranked), should be

on the top.

Put the pile cards on the top of the appropriate "pile" and

stack each "pile" on the next lower one so that the top "pile" is

number 1 (most important).

The last phase of this activity is to have you rate the importance,

or value of the 10 top ranked outcomes. The first step is to separate

these top ten cards from the rest of the deck. Take off the top ten

outcome cards along with the "pile cards" that may be mixed with

them. Keep the "pile cards" in their proper position during the

rest of the activity (the information that you have supplied

according to the importance/irrelevance dimension will be used

later so we do not want to lose it). We are going to work through

the cards backwards now, starting with the tenth ranked card. Take

that card and put a "10" on it. This is the base card from which

you will work and that number will not be changed through the rest

of the process.

Now take the next card (the ninth ranked card) and compare it

to the tenth card. Ask yourself "How much more important is the










ninth outcome than the tenth?" If you consider it to be twice as

important, write a "20" on the ninth card (2 times 10 = 20). If

you consider it to be 10 times as important, write a "100." Now

take the next card (eighth) and compare it to the ninth. "How much

more important is it?" If it is twice as important as the ninth,

then write "40" on the eighth card (2 times 20 = 40). Before moving

on, check back to the tenth card--is the eighth card four times as

important as the tenth card (4 times 10 = 40)? If you do not think

so, then you will have to adjust the numbers. You can do this by

changing either or both the eighth and ninth cards (but not the tenth).

There is no top limit to the numbers you can use (you can use

100, or 1 million, or whatever), but you must use whole numbers. You

can use 11, 23, 4821, etc., but as you work through the cards, each

number for the higher ranked cards must be greater than the previous

number. And check back to all the previous cards each time . this

enables us to construct an interval scale (according to measurement

people, that is supposed to be a good but rare happening in this sort

of decision making process).

After you have worked through all 10 cards, restack them with

your highest ranked cards on top. Be sure the "pile cards" are

included in the appropriate places. Put your identification card

on top of the whole thing, rubber band it, and say "good grief" or

any other appropriate utterance. We say "thank you" and we will get

back to you soon with what this means.


Adapted from:

Nutter, R. E. A subjective expected utilities approach for
evaluating program choices for exceptional children
(Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, 1977).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 1978, 34, 3416A.
-University Microfilms No. 77-26, 328)











Pile 1
Most Important




Pile 4
Marginal Importance









Development of
attitudes, basic
educational skills,
appropriate habits
and skill training
are all equally
important for
gainful employment.


Establish and maintain
a minimum amount of
funding below which
training should not
be attempted.


Pile 2
Moderately Important




Pile 5
Unimportant/Irrelevant









Prevocational experiences
are necessary to intro-
duce students to the
world of work and pro-
vide motivation.


Vocational education
provides a unique body
of knowledge for each
occupational skill area.


Pile 3
Average Importance




ID#

Name

Position






Utilize vocationally
experienced or
expert individuals
as the source of
occupational skill
training.


Student must meet
minimum productive
abilities.










Provide a means of
acquiring skills
essential for equal
competition.





Meets demands of the
marketplace even if
conflicts with the
state of the art







Provide for on the
job training
experiences.









Enable students to
use interests,
aptitudes, and
intelligence to the
highest degree.


Student must be able to
secure a job for which
he/she is trained.






Replicate the work envir-
onment, utilize the same
tools and procedures, and
produce similar habits and
manipulations.






Provide a program which is
developmental and hierarchi-
al in regards to exit level
criteria in a wide variety
of job skills







Provide preparation for
initial entry level employ-
ment.


Oriented to manpower
needs of community
and greater society.






Serve students needs
for a variety of
educational experiences
which includes voca-
tional education as a
component.





Train only those who
want, need, or are
able to profit.









Be able to serve
the demands of a
technological society.





























APPENDIX D

CASE STUDIES









School Staffing Conference Report


Regular : ESE Eligibility X : ESE Center : ESE Review

Student's Name: John

Grade: 10th

Data: Psychological Report X : Interventions X : IEP X

Anecdotal Reports X : Behavioral Observations X:

Discipline Records X : Vision X : Hearing

Language : Physical X : Other

Review of Data: John and his family recently moved to this community

from a neighboring state. He is 16 years old and will begin 10th grade

in the fall. In his previous school he was placed in a classroom for

severe learning disabilities.

The psychological report developed by our staff and previous

records indicate a severe deficit in the verbal areas. Some strengths

are noticed in the performance area although the total performance

score is slightly lower than verbal areas. The arithmetic and digit

span (WISC-R) are significantly higher than other verbal subtest scores.

A complete academic assessment has been completed and suggests

extreme deficits in the areas of word recognition and comprehension.

Scores on Key Math indicate a better grasp of computational skills

but problems involving the interpretation of verbal information are

distinctly depressed.

At this time no formal prevocational assessment has been

completed.

An anecdotal record reports that John has had some accidents

with machinery and tools. His coordination, however, appears to




Full Text

PAGE 1

THE EFFECTS OF ENTRY LEVEL SKILL ASSESSMENT TRAINING ON THE PLACEMENT DECISIONS FOR HANDICAPPED STUDENTS MADE BY VOCATIONAL EDUCATORS By CARL T. CAMERON A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 1979

PAGE 2

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Appreciation is extended to Dr. Stuart Schwartz who provided the guidance throughout my advanced degree program. His knowledge, insight, and most of all humanness has allowed the pursuit of knowledge with dignity. Dr. Robert Algozzine was an everpresent source of knowledge and encouragement. Dr. Jim Hensel provided sensitivity and understanding about relationships with the real world. Dr. Cecil Mercer always had the questions that provided the stimulus, and Dr. Rex Schmid knew the limits and that they constantly expand. Finally, a special word of thanks to Dr. Ron Nutter, who has encouraged the development of my cognitive and intellectual pursuits. It is a rare opportunity to learn from these men.

PAGE 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii LIST OF TABLES vi LIST OF FIGURES vi i ABSTRACT vi ii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1 Statement of the Problem 2 Rationale 5 Entry Level Skills Criterion 5 Placement Decision Process 6 Definitions of Terms 8 Limitations and Delimitations 8 Population 8 Setting 9 Training 9 Materials 9 CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 10 Vocational Evaluation 11 Standardized Psychological and Vocational Testing 11 Work Samples 14 Situational Assessment 18 Job Analysis 19 Summary 20 Vocational Education 22 Competency Based Curriculum 24 Individualized Instruction 25 Open Access 25 Entry Level Skills 26 Need 26 Implementation Models 27 m

PAGE 4

Decision Theory 29 Multi Attribute Utility Measurement 29 Educational Implications 31 Identifying Educational Outcomes 32 Subjective Expected Utilities 33 Impact of Data on Decision Making 33 Summary 34 CHAPTER III METHODS AND PROCEDURES 36 Subjects 36 Pretest 38 Intervention 42 Posttest 47 Experimental Design 48 Hypotheses 50 Data Collection and Analysis 52 Data Collection 52 Data Analysis 53 CHAPTER IV RESULTS 56 Hypothesis 1 56 Hypothesis la 57 Hypothesis lb 57 Hypothesis 1c 60 Hypothesis Id 62 Hypothesis le 64 Hypothesis If 66 Hypothesis 2 68 Hypothesis 2a 68 Hypothesis 2b 70 Hypothesis 2c 70 CHAPTER V DISCUSSION 74 Summary of the Data 74 Hypothesis 1 74 Hypothesis 2 77 Constraints 79 Level of Intervention 79 Training Methodology 80 TV

PAGE 5

APPENDIX A GROUP ASSIGNMENT BY SUBJECT NUMBER 82 B VOCATIONAL EDUCATION OUTCOMES 83 C RAWGOO INSTRUCTIONS 85 D CASE STUDIES 91 E TRAINING OPTIONS FOR VOCATIONAL EDUCATION 98 F VOCATIONAL OUTCOMES AND PLACEMENT PLANNING DECISION GUIDE 99 G LEVELS OF COMPETENCY FOR EACH BUSINESS AND OFFICE CAREER CLUSTER 101 H VOCATIONAL INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM STANDARDS 102 I LEVEL 1 COMPETENCIES FOR BUSINESS EDUCATION 105 J GOAL II: TO IMPROVE PERSONAL APPEARANCE AND HYGIENE . 114 K OUTCOMES AND ENTRY LEVEL SKILLS DECISION GRID .... 123 L OUTCOMES AND DAILY LIVING SKILLS DECISION GRID .... 125 REFERENCES 127 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 132

PAGE 6

LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Vocational Education Curriculum Models 23 2 Multivariate Analysis of Variance/Case Study of Michael 58 3 Multivariate Analysis of Variance/Case Study of Carolyn 59 4 Multivariate Analysis of Variance/Case Study of John 61 5 Pre and Posttest Subjective Expected Utilities Comparison of the Case Study of Michael for Subjects Receiving Entry Level Skills Criterion Training (E's) 63 6 Pre and Posttest Subjective Expected Utilities Comparison of the Case Study of Michael for Subjects Not Receiving Entry Level Skills Criterion Training 65 7 Pretest Subjective Expected Utilities Comparison of the Case Study of Michael for Subjects Both in Experimental and Control Groups 67 8 Placement Choice Comparison of the Case Study of Michael for Subjects in Experimental and Control Groups 69 9 Placement Choice Comparison of the Case Study of Carolyn for Subjects in Experimental and Control Groups 71 10 Placement Choice Comparison of the Case Study of John for Subjects in Experimental and Control Groups 73 11 Comparison of Pretest and Posttest Placement Decisions/Case Study of Michael 78 VI

PAGE 7

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Individualized Instruction System: Diagnosis of Prerequisite Skills 28 2 Experimental Design 49 3 Posttest Comparisons 54 vn

PAGE 8

Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate Council of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy THE EFFECTS OF ENTRY LEVEL SKILL ASSESSMENT TRAINING ON THE PLACEMENT DECISIONS FOR HANDICAPPED STUDENTS MADE BY VOCATIONAL EDUCATORS By Carl T. Cameron December, 1979 Chairman: Stuart E. Schwartz Major Department: Special Education The purpose of this dissertation was to evaluate the effects of entry level skill assessment training on the value and level of placement decisions made by vocational educators about handicapped students. With the passage of federal legislation which encourages the placement of handicapped students in regular classrooms, the skills for assessing both student and training program by the vocational educator become increasingly important. The use of entry level skills criterion may present a viable alternative for making objective and functional decisions for handicapped students. The training of entry level skill assessment utilized decision theory techniques for analyzing exit level competencies and rating the subjective expected utilities of the entry level skills developed by the experimental group. The control group was provided with decision theory techniques for evaluation of existing program materials. viii

PAGE 9

The evaluation procedure utilized components of decision theory techniques to rank and weight vocational education outcomes and rate the subjective expected utility of placement decisions. A pretest and posttest evaluation was utilized which consisted of the application of decision theory techniques to the placement decisions of a series of case studies of handicapped students. The results of the study indicated that the training had no significant effect on the values of the subjective expected utilities of the placement choices or the number of choices for each placement option. The discussion focuses on the constraints involved in developing entry level skills training procedures and utilizing decision theory techniques for placement decisions. IX

PAGE 10

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION In Keys to Managing Competency-Based Education , Part One, Harrington (1977) suggests that an individual who is undertaking vocational training must select a vocational goal around which a training program can be built. In order to undertake the goal setting process, several kinds of information need to be taken into consideration. The relevant information includes personal, job related, and market information. Job related information including prerequisite skills is required to adequately make a career decision (Harrington, 1977). If prerequisite skills knowledge is required to adequately set vocational goals, it appears that prerequisite skills knowledge is also a requirement in the selection of the component(s) of a training program. In addition to utilizing the goal setting process in career training selection, that selection may also be a function of opportunity. Fair (1976) argues that special needs students are underenrolled in vocational education because of the selective nature of the vocational programs. The selective nature appears to develop from the lack of adequate facilities and the desire to recruit more "able" students does not appear to be objective.

PAGE 11

Two of the most predominantly stated reasons for underenrollment of special needs students in vocational education are (a) the inability of the staff to maintain adequate safety procedures and (b) the unrealistic requirements for the additional individual assistance for special needs students. Additional reasons expressed include the need to modify curriculum, additional instructional assistance and evaluation criterion (Fair, 1976). Fair concluded that if a behavioral statement of entrance competencies were available for each vocational education program, it would permit an objective evaluation of each prospective student, and it would also serve as a standard for the vocational preparation of special education students. It is the aptitude for vocational skills which appears to underlie the rationale for not providing equal accessibility to vocational programs for handicapped students. Carrol s (cited in Gagne, 1967) suggests that "aptitude is partly a matter of the possession of prerequisite knowledges and skills, or the lack thereof" (p. 42). Statement of the Problem Special needs learners are usually designated as such because they fail to develop basic skills through normal growth and development or through early school experiences. The need for basic skill development is a key question for determining entry into vocational education programs (Phelps & Lutz, 1977). Prevocational education

PAGE 12

has been generally accepted as a pretraining procedure for providing basic skills for occupational preparation. However, prevocational and career education appear to be designed to provide generalized and global skills which may be applicable in a variety of vocational situations. In fact, there is little, if any, evidence to suggest that these "prerequisite" skills are related to, or will increase, the probability of assimilating specific content in occupational areas. For example, the development of adequate job interviewing skills does not directly relate to the tool use required in the construction cluster training. In fact, a major problem with examining prerequisite skills is the extreme difficulty in determining what basic skills or concepts are essential prerequisites for a given learning task (Phelps & Lutz, 1977). The identification of prerequisite or entry level skills criteria may have potential value in the training process. One possible effect would be the use of this information in making placement decisions for handicapped students into regular vocational education. Brolin and Kokaska (1979) suggest a variety of methods for helping the handicapped student to become occupational ly prepared. However, almost no information is available concerning how decisions are made concerning which program, course, or service delivery model provides the least restrictive environment. During the last 15 years, interest has been generated by researchers (Binder, 1964; Edwards, Guttentag, & Snapper, 1975; Guttentag, 1973; Nutter, 1977) in the use of decision making theory

PAGE 13

and accompanying procedures in making educational programming decisions. This model may provide a framework to formulate the determination of prerequisite or entry level skills. Of even broader significance, and an apparent logical extension is the question: If entry level skills could be determined through the use of decision making theory techniques, will this information increase the likelihood of being recommended for placement in a regular vocational education setting? The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of entry level skill assessment training on the types of program placement recommendations made for handicapped youngsters by vocational education personnel. It is of utmost importance to determine if certain kinds of information increase the opportunity and acceptance of handicapped students for vocational education. This study of the effects of entry level skill assessment training on the program placement decisions made by vocational educators includes the following questions: 1. Does the training in the use of an evaluation of entry level skills criteria have an effect on the perceived utility of options which place handicapped students in vocational education programs? 2. Does the training in the use of an evaluation of entry level skills criteria have an effect on the number of choices made which place handicapped students in programs toward regular vocational education and away from special education programs?

PAGE 14

Rationale The rationale for the proposed study has both direct and indirect implications. The current dearth of information regarding prerequisite skills and their utility in the decision making process suggest that information generated in this study will provide data for entry level skills criterion and the placement decision process. Entry Level Skills Criterion Entry level skills have not been approached directly as a negotiable criteria for entrance in vocational programs for special needs students. The predominant procedure(s) to date have been: (a) grade appropriate placements, (b) special educator's evaluation, (c) available space in classrooms, and (d) student interest. Currently no data have been generated to substantiate any of these procedures as adequate for maximizing occupational training. Classroom requirements (tasks and exit level skills) can be determined through the use of job analysis techniques. At this time, these task analysis techniques have been utilized in vocational settings to analyze tasks presented in the classroom, but little, if any, attention has been directed towards entry level skills criterion. In other words, educators can determine what skills will be taught, but the task analysis procedure does not include prerequisite skills assessment. It may be that this technique will be utilized as a component of the entry level skills assessment process.

PAGE 15

While providing an initial look at the level of skills required for entry, entry level skills criterion information may be utilized to identify a baseline from which negotiations (i.e., placement decisions where entry level criteria has not been met) can develop for students who may vary in their abilities to meet entry level or exit level criteria in a mainstreamed vocational education setting. Standards for preparation and placement of special needs students for regular classrooms have always been elusive and in many cases arbitrary. Through the development of entry level skill requirements, special educators will know what competencies are required, when a student has reached that level and negotiations can take place on the basis of objective criteria between special education and vocational education staff. In addition, these same competencies could form the basis for development of entry level assessment and pretraining modules (if required) for all students. Finally, the development of entry level assessment and training may have general izability to other mainstream programs throughout public education systems. It appears that the need for clarification of entry level skills is not unique to vocational programming and may suggest a procedure for other instructional areas. Placement Decision Process Fair (1976) and Boland (1979) describe the concerns of vocational educators regarding the dichotomy between the mandated opportunity for handicapped students to participate in vocational education

PAGE 16

where appropriate, and the need to make the program fair and rewarding for their nonhandicapped students. The criteria necessary to make decisions which increase the likelihood of completing vocational training goals has not yet been established. The use of decision theory can provide the mechanism to make program placement selections from available options. The selection of the alternative with the highest vocational value for the student is influenced by the relative importance of the outcomes. A concomitant influence is the perceived likelihood of maximizing that outcome for any particular placement option. For instance, if the most important outcome selected is "to train only those who want, need, or are able to benefit" and the least important is "to provide for on the job training experiences," then the placement decision will be more heavily influenced by the first outcome, given that the perceived likelihood of maximizing both outcomes is identical. In other words, the subjective expected utility theory provides a method for rating how important each outcome is relative to other possible outcomes and selecting an alternative that provides for the highest possibility of maximizing those outcomes. Nutter (1977) suggests, "The rational strategy is to choose an alternative with the greatest expected utility" (p. 27). The application of this theory has shown promise as an appropriate technology for making programming decisions based on what the decision maker considers the most important program outcome.

PAGE 17

Definitions of Terms Daily living skills : A wide variety of personal and social skills designed to allow independent functioning in the least restrictive environment for handicapped individuals. Entry level skill : A skill which can be successfully demonstrated prior to entry on which subsequent instruction is based. Exit level skill : A skill which has been successfully demonstrated prior to or at completion of an instructional program. Placement option : An educational placement for handicapped youngsters offering specific types of instructional services designed to offer maximum service in the least restrictive environment. Subjective expected utilities : A numerical value represented by summing the products of each decision option and the value associated with each vocational outcome. Vocational outcomes : A statement of desired outcomes for vocational education which are agreed upon by subjects in this study. Limitations and Delimitations Population The population used in this study is defined as vocational educators. The size of the sample and the selectivity of backgrounds limit the ability to generalize to other vocationally trained instructors.

PAGE 18

Setting Vocational Education/Special Education Teachers Working With Handicapped Students is a three week workshop designed to present practical methods for vocation preparation of handicapped students. The use of this workshop as a setting for this study delimits the participants to vocational educators with an expressed interest in improving their skills with handicapped students. This in no way infers that all vocational educators are so disposed. Training The short training sessions designed into this study may limit the possible effectiveness of an intervention procedure. A single session provides awareness but not necessarily competence in the skills presented. Materials The use of brief case studies and course descriptions limit the interpretation of the factors used by subjects in the decision process. While attempts have been made to insure familiarity and generality of descriptions, no connection between these decisions and decisions made in a real situation can be inferred from these results.

PAGE 19

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE An examination of the literature reveals little, if any, reference to entry level skills criterion as it applies to vocational education. Much of the literature concerning secondary level mainstreaming suggests it is the role of vocational education to both adapt classroom requirements to the learner and provide entry level job skills (Cegelka & Phillips, 1978). The predominant emphasis on entry level skills has come from techniques developed from work evaluation, adjustment, and placement. In an analysis of the procedures involved in both vocational rehabilitation (i.e., work evaluation, adjustment, and placement) and vocational education the following procedural associations are apparent: vocational rehabilitation vocational evaluation job analysis prevocational and vocational training job placement job adjustment Enter Program Exit Program vocational education entry level skills assessment classroom analysis entry level skills training vocational education exit level skills assessment 10

PAGE 20

11 The review of the literature will present vocational evaluation as it suggests techniques for entry level skills assessment. Job analysis will be discussed as it relates to classroom analysis. Current developments in vocational education as they apply to entry level skills will be presented, and a review of some preliminary developments in entry level skill assessment. The final section will discuss the use of decision theory as a technique for eliciting program placement decisions. Vocational Evaluation Neff (1966) and Brolin (1976) essentially agree that vocational evaluation can be viewed from differing approaches. For the purpose of this discussion the approaches will consist of standardized psychological and vocational testing; work and job samples; and situational assessment. Standa rdized Psychologic al and Vocational Testing Standardized tests are basically an aid to the decision making involved in the placement process. Due to the ease in administration and scoring, reasonable reliability and predictive values, standardized tests are utilized by educators in a wide variety of educational settings (Mehrens & Lehmann,1973). However, according to Neff (1968), standardized tests are suitable primarily for testing of individuals for the purposes of global screening. A major drawback is the minimal predictive value of the instruments.

PAGE 21

12 Neff (1968) suggests that the characteristics of the standardization sample, the difficulty of obtaining valid objective criteria for work performance, the differences in test situation and the reality of the work situation may limit the usefulness of standardized instruments with the retarded. This particularly would apply to those with no prior work history. Brolin (1976) has identified several values of standardized tests. Among these positive attributes are observational data collected during the testing situation such as: 1. client problem solving strategies, 2. frustration levels, 3. concentration, and 4. interpersonal communication skills, all of which may assist markedly in the decision making process. Vocational aptitude tests usually measure an individual's ability to perform skills assumed to be related to vocational performance in a particular skill area. Brolin (1976) suggests that most vocational aptitude instruments used with the mentally retarded assess an individual's ability to complete manual tasks. Some of the more commonly used measures are the Purdue Pegboard, Bennett Hand Tool Dexterity Test, Crawford Small Parts Dexterity Test, and the MacQuarie Test for Mechanical Ability. In addition to assessments of manual tasks, more comprehensive evaluation instruments have found increasing use in evaluation of vocational aptitude. The General Aptitude Test Battery (GATB)

PAGE 22

13 appears to have some applicability for the mentally retarded. It was developed by the United States Employment Service for the purpose of assessing those vocationally significant aptitudes for vocational counseling job selection and placement (Brolin, 1976). The test measures aptitudes in nine areas including general learning, verbal aptitude, numerical ability, spatial aptitude, form perception, clerical perception, motor coordination, finger dexterity, and manual dexterity. The battery makes predictions for about 500 occupations of the unskilled and semi-skilled type. A strength of the GATB is its integration with the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT) which constitutes a comprehensive taxonomy of the American job market (Bacher, 1972). However, the battery requires an independent reading level of approximately seventh grade which is unrealistic for many non-reading and disadvantaged clients. For this reason, the Manpower Administration developed the NATB, Non-reading Aptitude Test Battery, which has similar subtests to the GATB and supposedly understood by individuals with limited verbal abilities. Both Carbuhn and Wells (1973) and Brolin (1976) recommend the NATB as a valuable source of measurement of vocational aptitude for educable mentally retarded persons. While standardized psychological and vocational testing is still utilized in the assessment of vocational aptitude, the recent developments in the area of work samples has overshadowed the use of standardized tests except primarily for screening purposes.

PAGE 23

14 Work Samples Work samples have become increasingly popular in vocational assessment over the past several years (Brolin, 1976). A work sample is a simulated work activity without an actual industrial counterpart, while a job sample is a part of a job that exists in an industrial setting. Both sample types of evaluation include the use of tools and standards associated with jobs (Sankovsky, Arthur, & Mann, 1971). Neff (1968) combines the concept of work and job samples as a mock up or close simulation of an industrial operation. The work sample is essentially the kind of work a potential employee would perform on the job. The literature is replete with studies indicating the superiority of work samples as an approach to vocational assessment. Jewish Employment Vocational Service (1968), Overs (1968), and Usdane (1963) offer support for work samples because the samples assess the same skills, aptitudes, and abilities required by competitive employment situations. Other studies indicate that because the samples resemble real work situations, they are more motivating to clients than are standardized tests (Hoffman, 1970; Neff, 1966; Overs, 1968). In addition, educational level, speech and hearing disabilities, and high levels of anxiety effect work samples less than standardized tests (Lustig, 1966; Overs, 1968). The use of work samples for mentally retarded populations has been viewed as superior to standardized tests by Gold (1973), Hoffman (1970), and Neff (1970). In contrast, several studies

PAGE 24

15 have indicated that standardized tests may provide more usable vocational information than work samples (Cobb, 1969; Sankovsky, Arthur, & Mann, 1971; Super & Crites, 1962). According to Timmerman and Doctor (1974), many jpb differences cannot be duplicated by work samples which affect the predictive validity of job samples. One particular outgrowth of work samples has been the development of work sample batteries or systems. These work evaluation systems have been developed to assess vocational potential in a wide variety of job situations. Brolin and Kokaska (1979) report that the work sample and work sample system procedures are difficult to validate on actual job situations. However, there is a distinct advantage over most standardized vocational aptitude and interest tests because of their close proximity to the world of work. This face validity provides a more readily observable significance to the participants (Brolin & Kokaska, 1979, p. 219). Several of the more widely used systems are presented below: TOWER. One of the earliest developed batteries is TOWER, Testing and Work Evaluation in Rehabilitation (1936). TOWER includes 14 areas of work evaluation measuring 110 work skills. Evaluation takes approximately three weeks and tasks range from simple to complex. MICRO-TOWER. A more recent version of the batteries developed by the Institute for the Crippled and Disabled, MICRO-TOWER (1976) consists of 13 work sample areas. The samples are presented through

PAGE 25

16 the use of audiocassette and photobook instructions. A learning period is permitted before evaluation, which may be useful for populations with learning deficiencies. JEVS. Developed by the Jewish Employment Vocational Service (1968), JEVS is a system that consists of 28 work samples covering 20 different work areas with 10 worker trait groupings. Originally developed for use with culturally disadvantaged youth, the samples have been successful with many physically, emotionally, and mentally handicapped individuals (Brolin & Kokaska, 1979). VIEWS. An adaptation of several work tasks, Vocational Informationa and Evaluation Work Sample (1976) was designed to assess the work potential of learning disabled and mentally retarded clients. One unique feature of VIEWS is that it does not require reading as a prerequisite skill and incorporates the use of demonstration, practice, and repeated instruction as techniques for assessing the potential of the clients for various types of occupational areas. SINGER. The Singer Vocational Evaluation System (1973) is a work oriented screening device designed to help the individual make a vocational choice through a hands-on exploration of several job tasks. The system utilizes an audio-visual approach to present programmed instruction of the performance of specific tasks. The tasks, which are grouped in 17 different occupational clusters, are self contained within each work station and complete with the necessary instructional tools.

PAGE 26

17 WREST. The Wide Range Employment Samples Test (1972) is composed of 10 work samples. Developed in a workshop for the mentally retarded, the WREST is designed for moderately and mildly retarded individuals. The relatively short administration time and precise instructions are of particular value in this batter-. VALPAR. The Valpar Component Work Sample System (1975) was designed to provide information on worker characteristics and is keyed to the Worker Trait Arrangement in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (1977). VALPAR consists of work samples which include small tools, size discrimination, numerical sorting, upper extremity range of motion, clerical comprehension and aptitude, independent problem solving, multilevel sorting, simulated assembly, whole body range of motion, tri-level measurement, eye-hand-foot coordination, soldering and inspection, money handling, integrated peer performance, electrical circuitry and print reading, and drafting, COATS. The Comprehensive Occupational Assessment and Training System (1974) consists of four major components: Living Skills, Work Samples, Job Matching System, and Employability Attitudes. Additional systems include the Talent Assessment Program (Nighswonger, 1975), the Hester Evaluation System (1972), and the McCarron-Dial Work Evaluation System (McCarron & Dial, 1976). The use of work samples and work evaluation systems has significantly influenced the vocational evaluation of handicapped persons.

PAGE 27

A major problem in its use in vocational education programs is the extensive resources required to develop and maintain a complete array of work samples and work evaluation systems. S ituational Assessment The situational assessment approach is the most commonly and comprehensively used work evaluation approach (Brolin, 1976). This approach is concerned with observation of individuals on real or simulated work tasks and within a group rather than an individual setting. Dunn (1973) argues that vocational evaluation predictors can be expected to reach their greatest validity when they closely approximate a real work setting. Pruitt and Longfellow (1970) conceptualize the components of situational assessment as follows: 1. planning and scheduling observations; 2. observing, describing, and recording data; 3. organization analysis and interpretation of observational data; 4. inclusion of observation in the evaluation. Brolin (1976) presents several advantages and disadvantages of situational assessment: Advantages 1. activity approximates the real work situation; 2. eliminates typical test situation which is anxiety producing;

PAGE 28

19 3. possible to assess many typical work behaviors (interpersonal relationships, cooperation, pressures, authority) ; 4. gives person time to adjust to novel situation; and 5. evaluation can take place under a variety of conditions. Disadvantages 1. dependent on accurate interpretation of observers; 2. problem of variance among raters; and 3. group sitting may effect the rater's evaluations. Job Analysis Thorndyke (1963) has aptly described job analysis as consisting essentially of a characteristic of the work performed on a job and an analysis of worker characteristics relevant to job performance. The job description is usually qualitative and the worker analysis is usually more quantitative. Lawry (1972) describes job analysis as "a systematic way of observing jobs; determining the significant worker requirements, physical demands, and environmental conditions; and reporting this information in a concise, usable format" (p. 27). Job analysis has been approached through the statistical procedure of factor analysis. The objective is to isolate dimensions of aptitude common to a broad range of jobs (Fruchter, 1952; Palmer & McCormick, 1961). Techniques other than factor analysis have been employed to do job analysis. Das (1960) used both job descriptions and motion time study techniques in analyzing worker requirements.

PAGE 29

20 Blackman and Superstein (1968) suggest that job analysis can be a major contributing factor in the development of an instructional system. Using careful analysis of the task to be learned as manifested by the production of appropriate terminal behaviors, these terminal behaviors provide two distinct types of information: (a) methods of instructional systems designed to evoke these behaviors and (b) attention to those psychological attributes in the learner than appear to be prerequisites. Hopkins and Brock (1976) suggest that information obtained and recorded through the job analysis should cover all criteria for job placement, "from union dues to specific behaviors and tasks required" (p. 54). Both standard formats and narrative forms are utilized in job analysis. Hopkins and Brock (1976) suggest that a standard form is the most useful approach when comparing one job with another and providing comparisons of student profiles with job analysis components. Summary This section, in its review of vocational evaluation, describes techniques used for identifying skills necessary to be competitive in the world of work. If these particular techniques are applied to determining skills necessary to be competitive (i.e., successful) in the world of vocational training, the following conditions appear to be necessary. 1. Standards for training must be provided either on an individual class basis or system wide, which are shown to be specifically related to vocational success, or

PAGE 30

21 2. Training situations must be identical to the actual vocational setting from which standards are derived. Currently, neither of these conditions appear to exist at adequate levels in vocational education programs. The development of entry level skill assessment may be shown to be related to these evaluation techniques, which will provide a needed link in the ongoing evaluation from entry level of vocational training to exit level job competencies. In addition, job analysis provides techniques which show promise for the assessment of entry level skills. Its primary utility, however, has been for identifying skills necessary to be presented in a training sequence and has not addressed the question of how pretraining in entry level skills may facilitate the quality and rate of the assimilation of vocational education. The development of additional procedures to establish initial entry level skill criteria may be a necessary companion to the assessment of the skills currently presented in a vocational education program. In fact, a promising relationship may be established through the use of job analysis techniques to provide data on existing programs. These existing techniques, combined with the procedures for outcome assessment and decision making presented in this study, may well offer the symbiotic relationship necessary for determining entry level skills criteria.

PAGE 31

22 Vocational Education One of the major problems confronting vocational education is that of developing and maintaining curricula that are attuned to the rapid social and technological changes in society (Calhoun & Finch, 1976). The basic curriculum models are presented in Table 1 and summarized below. 1. The subject centered curriculum is a traditional organizational pattern at the secondary level. Students are often separated into tracks—college bound, general, and vocational. Individual subjects are within each track, there is no overlap between tracks, and courses are arranged vertically. 2. The core curriculum is a group of separate subjects required of all students regardless of track. Vocational education may or may not be a component. 3. The cluster based curriculum is based on the premise that certain occupations have common learning and skill requirements and that students who have mastered these skills have more employment options. 4. The organic curriculum design leads to options permitting the maximum self actualization of each individual. The curriculum prepares students for employment either before or following graduation. The student would have entry level skills permitting access to the labor market at any point. 5. A competency based curriculum is one that specifies the desired objectives or competencies in an explicit form, identifies

PAGE 32

^r • p-

PAGE 33

24 the criteria to be applied in assessing the learner's competencies, and holds the learner accountable for meeting these objectives. 6. Individualized instruction is characterized by (a) selection and sequencing of instructional tasks and objectives, (b) development or selection of materials to teach each objective, (c) evaluation for proper pupil placement, (d) plans for developing individualized programs of study, and (e) procedures for evaluating and monitoring individual progress. 7. An open access curriculum is characterized by flexible scheduling, small group and individualized instruction, a high level of student involvement, team teaching, and an emphasis on individual interests and abilities. Open access curriculum is the counterpart of the open school concept. In an evaluation of these major curriculum models for vocational programming, the results presented in Table 1 suggest that only three curriculum models (competency based, individualized instruction, and open access) address themselves to the problem of entry level requirements. Competency Based Curriculum The objectives of the curriculum are met through a series of functions which include identifiable processes and products (Calhoun & Finch, 1976). Included in these functions are the specification of assumptions. These assumptions could be interpreted to mean the prerequisite skills necessary for entry into

PAGE 34

25 this competency sequence. Analysis of the following two models (individualized instruction and open access) would suggest that they are variations of a competency based curriculum utilizing variable entry requirements. The major difference appears to be in a program centered versus student centered orientation. Individualized Instruction The curriculum model for individualized instruction includes as one of its elements, an evaluation procedure for placing students at the appropriate point in the curriculum. The major assumption is that students are, in fact, within minimal entry level competency range and placement is primarily an assessment procedure locating an entry point into the instructional sequence. Open Access In an open access curriculum the assumption of success is a logical extension of the student developing his or her own formula or instructional plan. Entry level requirements are determined through a cooperative decision between student and instructor. In this process entry level skills are assessed jointly and are a variable unique to each individual. The development of these curriculum models has been a response to the rapid social and technological changes in society (Calhoun & Finch, 1976). Despite these developments and federal mandates, cooperative efforts toward improved programming for the handicapped is not a widely prevalent practice (Cegelka & Phillips, 1978).

PAGE 35

26 Cegelka and Phillips suggest that placement of handicapped students in vocational programs should have variable time periods contingent upon meeting objectives (1978, p. 86). It appears, however, to Clark (1975) that vocational education has not and may not be willing to use alternative instructional and curriculum models like competency based instruction in lieu of more traditional fixed content curriculum. Entry Level Skills "The characteristics of handicapped learners as they have bearing on school learning call for explicitness in curriculum and purposefulness in teaching method not characteristically found in the ordinary school curriculum" (Goldstein, 1976, p. 290). Entry level skills, a form of explicitness in curriculum is discussed from the viewpoint of need and current state of implementation. Need Phelps and Lutz (1977) suggest that if a prospective special needs learner has attained certain minimal competencies that are important for task performance, that should be sufficient to permit the student to initiate the instructional module. However, they note, if "the basic skills and concepts are viewed by occupational educators as prerequisites and are used to screen students out of occupational programs, they have been seriously misused" (p. 243). Almost all references to entry level skills suggest that the role of entry level skills is to determine placement. Bloom

PAGE 36

27 (1971) suggests entry skills assessment is for determining placement on a continuum applicable to the subject. Calhoun and Finch (1976) state that entry level skills determine to what degree skills are already mastered and to prescribe proper learning packets. Implementation Models Teske (cited in Calhoun & Finch, 1976) developed a comprehensive model for curriculum design that has been successfully used in vocational education. As a component of this model Teske requires an assessment of entrance requirements for course training standards. Entrance requirements (i.e., previous training and/or experience needed as prerequisites) are includes in the course training standards along with (a) purpose (employment capability), (b) qualifications of graduates, (c) career duties and task capabilities, (d) job elements, and (e) proficiency standard for each job element. Burnes (1974) describes a model for implementing entry level skills in an individualized instruction system. Figure 1 illustrates the use of a remedial center approach to intervention prior to entry into an instructional program. At Rutgers University, Francine Grubb (1976) produced a series of employment orientation courses for special needs students designed to provide basic skill development for entry into regular vocational programs. The course titles include (a) basic business, (b) beauty culture, (c) hospitality, (d) laundry, (e) sewing, and (f) foods. A major problem of this presentation is lack of

PAGE 37

prerequisite behaviors incomplete completed remediation enters instruction prerequisite behaviors complete learner enters instructional sequence Figure 1 Individualized Instruction System: Diagnosis of Prerequisite Skills

PAGE 38

29 a description of how criteria were established for entry level competencies of vocational programs. Decision Theory The procedures used by individuals and groups to make decisions has been the subject of research for many years (Kleiter, Gachowetz, & Huber, 1976). The development of tools for analyzing decision making has evolved as probability theory, theories of games, classical and Bayesian statistics, operations research, and utility theory (Edwards, Lindman, & Phillips, 1965). In a recent report, Slovic, Fischhoff, and Lichtenstein (1977) suggest that a trend is definitely apparent in the study of decision making by an increasingly diverse set of disciplines, including psychology, medicine, and education. This discussion of decision theory will be limited to the use of utility theory as a focus for the analysis of decision making as it applies to education. Multi Attribute Utility Measurement Edwards (1971) has developed an application of utility theory that has come to be known as multi attribute utility measurement. This technology has provided an orientation toward easy communication and use in environments in which time is short and decision makers are numerous and overextended (Edwards, Guttentag, & Snapper, 1975). The following is a brief description of the sequence developed by Edwards (1971).

PAGE 39

30 Step 1: Identify all individuals or organizations whose utilities are to be maximized and who have a stake in the decision making process. Step 2: Identify the issues relevant to the decision making process. Step 3: Identify the outcomes of the action, or decision. These outcomes become the entities to be evaluated. Step 4: Identify the dimensions of value (or goals) related to the importance of the entities under consideration. Often the goals may be restated, combined, or eliminated. Step 5: Rank the dimensions in order of importance through group and/or individual participation. Step 6: Rate the dimensions in order of importance, preserving the ratios. Assign the least important dimension a weight of 10 then increase the values of the dimensions according to importance. Step 7: Sum the importance weights, dividing each weight by the sum, then multiplying by 100. Step 8: Measure the location of each entity being evaluated on each dimension. Step 9: Calculate utilities for entities using the equation Ui = Zi Wj U-jj. This equation is the formula for determining a weighted average. Step 10: Decide. Make the decision based on the maximum U-j . If a subset of i is to be chosen, then the subset for which Uj is maximum is the best decision.

PAGE 40

31 Educational Implications With the passage of the Education of All Handicapped Children Act (P.L. 94-142) the emphasis on least restrictive environment left little doubt as to the emphasis on the most "normal" environment for education to take place for handicapped students. With this emphasis came the obvious link to an expanded role for the regular classroom teacher as a major source of instructional services. The inclusion of the regular classroom teacher as a member of the placement committee has been acknowledged. Harnack (1968) suggests there is a cluster of knowledge that resides with the instructor; therefore, the instructor must help make decisions related to curriculum planning. However, Nutter (1977) suggests that the procedures for arriving at placement decisions has not been identified, the context within which placement decisions are made has not been specified and the impact of training personnel to make placement decisions has not been discussed. In a Subjective Utilities Approach for Evaluating Program Choices for Exceptional Children , Nutter (1977) hypothesized that training in a decision making child study approach would affect the utility of program choices made which placed handicapped students toward regular education and away from special education. The results indicated that training showed no significant effect in the number of placement choices at each level made as a result of training. The results did, however, show a significant effect on the utility of one level for one school in the experimental

PAGE 41

32 population. While the significance of the findings of this study do not lead to any conclusive trends, the use of the utilities model for decision making presents one of the few attempts to utilize a technique which has promise, but has not been adopted as a procedure for making educational placement decisions. Identifying Educational Outcomes The identification of educational outcomes has been discussed by Edwards (1971), Edwards, Guttentag, and Snapper (1975), Guttentag (1973), and Nutter (1977). The procedure developed by Edwards (1971) and described in the earlier section, Multi Attribute Utility Measurement , has been adapted for use by Nutter (1977). The Rawgoo Technique (Nutter, 1977), which incorporates the steps developed by Edwards (1971), was utilized as a technique for prioritizing desired outcomes, as a preliminary step for developing and rating program or instructional options. In addition, recommendations for utilization of the Rawgoo technique included; 1. the use with students to develop individual or classroom learning outcomes. 2. the use with teachers in cooperative planning to increase teacher job satisfaction. 3. the use with teachers in assessment of classroom performance for both peers and students.

PAGE 42

33 In general, the procedure could be utilized whenever a series of options need to be evaluated in terms of their probability of maximizing some desired outcome. The evaluation of a series of options is presented as subjective expected utilities. Subjective Expected Utilities Subjective expected utilities is the process of selecting among alternatives in terms of the subjective values of some outcome and the probability that the alternative will result in the desired product or performance. In other words, it is the selection of a choice which will have the greatest probability of reaching a desired group of outcomes. Edwards (1965) in his discussion of subjective utility defines what he calls a payoff matrix as the relationship between the state of nature and selected alternatives. The intersect of the state of nature and the alternative is defined as a consequence. Nutter (1977) describes the formula as Ua-, = ( Pa-j x WG-j ) . . . (Pa-| x WG p ). Where U a = the measure of the utility of the alternative, Pa is the probability of that alternative, and WG is the weighted outcome. Impact of Data on Decision Making One of the most commonly used strategies to modify the decision made by individuals is to increase the amount of knowledge concerning the topic under consideration. Burnstein and Vinokur (1975) suggest that the acquisition of new information is the major factor in revising choices. Bayes law states that the assimilation of a new data item would revise probabilities as follows:

PAGE 43

34 The odds after the receipt of new data equal the likelihood ratio for the new data times the odds in favor of the decision prior to the receipt of the data. (Nutter, 1977) Vinokur (1971) described a series of findings in the influence of information on choice shifts. The findings appear to support the hypothesis that choice shifts are due to a cognitive process of informational influence regarding and assessment of utilities of the outcomes in a choice situation. Summary The review of the literature has been designed to present related information through discussion of vocational education, job analysis, vocational instruction, entry level skills, and decision making. The concepts of entry level skill assessment have not been explored to date in the literature. Almost all references are incidental or nonspecific statements of procedures within more complex elements. Through discussion of vocational evaluation and job analysis techniques, attempts have been made to illustrate procedures which may be applicable to vocational education settings. The discussion of vocational education has focused primarily on the use of entry-exit level skills criteria as a component of the curriculum. The section on entry level skills suggests the need to determine entry level skills and some preliminary attempts to incorporate entry level skills into program models. Finally, the use of decision theory shows promise for

PAGE 44

35 the development of decisions which may produce the relevant information needed for exploring entry level skills criteria. Throughout the review of literature, a recurring theme appears. The theme suggests that vocational rehabilitation and vocational education are evolving through a process of refinement of assessment and training. In addition, the constant evolution of assessment procedures in rehabilitation and education suggest that solutions are actively being sought to the problem of discerning essential from nonessential prerequisites. Finally, the review of literature suggests by its \jery absence that entry level skill training is a variable which needs to be examined in its relationship to exit level competencies. Chapter III will present the methods and procedures for examining a specific application of entry level skills assessment training and its influence on vocational education's role in the education of special needs students.

PAGE 45

CHAPTER III METHODS AND PROCEDURES Chapter III presents the methods and procedures of this study. The chapter is organized into two major sections and includes the (a) description of the subjects and (b) procedures, including the experimental design, hypotheses, and the method of data collection and analysis. Subjects The subjects in this study consist of 21 participants in the Summer Vocational Special Needs Workshop at the University of Florida. The participants were selected according to the following criteria: 1, A direct mail advertisement was distributed to district level Vocational Directors and Special Education Directors in the State of Florida describing a three week summer workshop for training vocational educators to work with handicapped students. The directors were requested to distribute the information to all subordinate personnel. 36

PAGE 46

37 2. Interested and/or recommended personnel were instructed to return the tear off portion of the mailer. 3. All respondents to the above request were subsequently mailed an application with a return request. 4. Applications were screened and selected according to the following priorities; a. currently employed as a vocational educator, b. currently employed as a secondary level special educator, c. currently employed in a related profession dealing with handicapped students. Thirty-five applications were received and a total of 24 participants were selected for participation. Three of the selected participants did not attend. The remaining 21 participants were randomly assigned to the Experimental (E's) and Control (C's) Groups using a computer generated randomization technique. Group assignment was determined by identification numbers which were assigned randomly to the group at the beginning of the pretest phase. The selection of groups followed the pretest phase. A list of the subjects by identification number and group assignment is included as Appendix A. The procedures presented will be discussed as they appear within the proposal; the pretest, intervention, and posttest phases.

PAGE 47

38 Pretest The pretest phase consisted of the utilization of two related procedures; identifying vocational outcomes and determing subjective expected utilities. All procedures described as pretest were applied to all subjects in the study. Identifying vocational outcomes . The application of decision theory to the development of outcomes for vocational education has not appeared in the literature to date. Development of outcomes or goals was prevalent during the period of 1950-1970 resulting in the adoption of these as basis for federal legislation. Three documents which were generated to explore the considerations of vocational outcomes have been selected to provide the stimulus for the identification of a series of desired vocational outcomes. The documents are the Basic Assumptions of Vocational Education (Thompson, 1973), Theories of Vocational Education Practices (Prosser & Quigley, 1949), and Philosophical Implications of the Vocational Amendments of 1968 (Beaumont, 1971). Using the documents described above, a listing of vocational outcomes was generated. These outcomes were arranged by grouping similar concepts from all documents and duplicate concepts were deleted by project staff. All remaining concepts were randomly selected for order of presentation. The compiled list of outcomes is included as Appendix B. The compiled list of outcomes was presented to the subjects in a session which was designed to (a) increase their understanding

PAGE 48

39 of the importance of identifying desired vocational outcomes, (b) provide an opportunity to suggest and/or modify outcomes, and (c) indicate the relative importance of each desired outcome for the vocational education process. The following is a description of the procedure. 1. Familiarize the subjects with the Vocational Education Outcomes (Appendix B). Each subject received a printed copy of the outcomes, read, and discussed them in small groups. A discussion period followed to allow for clarification. 2. The subjects were then asked to reexamine the list and suggest any "outcomes" that they felt should be included. If an outcome was suggested, it was presented to the other subjects. No outcomes were added or deleted by the group. 3. Each subject was given a deck of cards. The deck contained the number of cards corresponding to the identified outcomes, one identification card, and five pile cards. A number for the goal and a short descriptive phrase for the goal appeared on each of the outcome cards. The pile cards were labeled as (a) Pile 1, Most Important; (b) Pile 2, Moderate Importance; (c) Pile 3, Average Importance; (d) Pile 4, Marginal Importance; and (e) Pile 5, Unimportant/Irrelevant. Spaces for identification number, name, and position were provided on the subject's identification card. 4. The outcomes were then prioritized by assigning ranks and weights utilizing the Rawgoo Procedure (Nutter, 1977). Complete instructions for the ranking and weighting procedure are included as Appendix C.

PAGE 49

40 Each of the subjects responses was then analyzed and computed as follows: 1. The values assigned for each of the top ten ranked outcomes were summed to produce a total outcome sum. 01 + 02 + 03 + 04 + 05 + 06 + 07 + 08 + 09 + 010 = 0SUM 2. Each of the ten outcome values were divided by the total outcome sum to produce a weighted outcome. 01/0SUM, 02/0SUM, etc. 3. The weighted outcomes for all subjects were totaled across each outcome and divided by number of subjects (N=21). WOl-j + W01 2 + W01 3 + W01 4 . . . W01 l0 = W0SUM/N=MW0 4. Each of the mean weighted outcomes were computed and the values ranked. 5. The top ten selected outcomes (in terms of mean weighted outcome score) were reported to the subjects as stimulus for the determination of subjective expected utilities. During the period of time in which the top ten outcomes were computed and selected, all subjects were provided with an unrelated task. Determining Subjective Expected Utilities . The subjective expected utilities (SEU's) of three levels of vocational placement options was obtained by asking each subject to review a narrative referral describing a handicapped student. This description was obtained from the records of a public school district School Staffing Conference Report. All identifying descriptions and names were removed prior to presentation to the subjects. The case study is presented in Appendix D as the School Staffing Conference Report for Michael .

PAGE 50

41 Subjects were asked to consider vocational placement options based on the information contained in the referral. Appendix E provides a description of each of the placement options for vocational education as developed by the Southwest Regional Resource Center (1977). The subjects were then asked to rate the extent to which they felt that the placement options would maximize each of the ten most important vocational outcomes described in the prior section. The ratings were recorded on the Vocational Outcomes and Placement Planning Decision Guide. A copy of this guide is included as Appendix F. The instructions for the administration of this instrument are: Michael has been referred to the building placement committee for a placement decision. Assume that you are a member of the building committee or team and must make a program decision from the options presented. Place a number between 0-100 for each option under each outcome to show how well you think that decision will help you maximize that outcome. Upon completion of this task by the subjects, the responses were computed to obtain a value for the relative influence of the placement decision on maximizing the outcomes presented. The value assigned to the relative influence was identified as the subjective expected utility (SEU). The subjective expected utilities (SEUs) for each decision were computed by summing the product of each probability (j) and the weight assigned to each goal where U = subjective expected utilities, j = the jth row, p = probability of

PAGE 51

42 maximizing the goal, and w = weight assigned to each outcome. This computational formula is presented below. Uj = E (p x w) Intervention The intervention phase consisted of one training session for all subjects. The procedure and content is described below for the experimental and control groups. Intervention for the experimental group . The intervention for the E's was conducted using three basic steps: the introduction, rationale, and description of the tasks; the identification of entry level skills criteria; and the components utilized to maximize outcomes. The introduction, rationale, and description of the tasks. The subjects in the experimental group were introduced to the training session on entry level skills criteria through a presentation of the conceptual development of entry level skills, the rationale for their use, and a brief description of the tasks to be completed in this training sequence. Identification of entry level skills criteria. The initial task consisted of identifying the entry level skill criteria using Level I Competencies for Business Education (Florida State University, 1978). This material provides a detailed description of the competencies required for completion of an entry level business education instructional program. This entry level sequence called Level I include competencies required in the following program areas:

PAGE 52

43 1. Accounting Occupations 2. Data Processing Occupations 3. Clerical Occupations 4. Fundamentals of Business and Office Occupations 5. Secretarial Occupations 6. Business Administration Occupations 7. Orientation and Exploration of Business and Office Occupations 8. Business and Office Education Job Training One program area, Accounting Occupations, was presented to subjects for use in identifying entry level skills criteria. The selection of Accounting Occupations was based on the high degree of commonality to the other program areas based on types of Level I skills required. Appendix G provides a complete list of the program areas and their requirements for Level I competencies. The State of Florida Program S-andard for Accounting Occupations (Standards for Vocational Education Courses, 1978) is included for reference as Appendix H. The participants were arbitrarily divided into three working groups for the purposes of determining entry level skills criteria. Using the Level I Competencies presented in Appendix I, each group selected one competency area. The areas selected were: 1. Telephone Techniques 2. Human Relations 3. Filing and Retrieving The groups were instructed to use the competencies provided in each area as outcomes. These outcomes are analogous to exit level skill criteria for each competency area. Using these outcomes, the subjects ranked and weighted the outcomes according to the procedure presented earlier as the Rawgoo Procedure (Nutter, 1977). This procedure is described in Appendix C. Due to the reduced number of

PAGE 53

44 outcomes utilized, the pile procedure described in Appendix C was omitted. Components utilized to maximize outcomes. The second task presented to the subjects involved the selection of entry level skills required for each of the competency areas. These entry level skills were obtained by asking each subject to review the competency area selected and develop a list of entry level skills. All development of the entry level skills was shared with other participants in the working group. Interactions by all participants in the development were encouraged. The results of each working group were shared with other working groups, and any additions or deletions to the entry level skills were allowed. Using the entry level skills generated, the outcomes for each competency area were presented to the subjects and the subjective expected utility of each entry level skill was computed. The subjects were asked to rate how much they felt that each of the recommendations for entry level skills would maximize the course outcomes previously ranked and weighted. The Outcomes and Entry Level Skills Decision Grid was utilized to record data and compute SEU's. The instructions for administering this procedure are: The competencies that we have ranked and weighted as outcomes will be used to develop a series of entry level skills decisions. Given the ranked and weighted course outcomes, and the course entry level skill selections you have just completed, place a number between 0-100 for each decision under each outcome to show how well you think that each entry level skill will maximize the course outcome. The Outcomes and Entry Level Skills Decision Grid is provided in Appendix K. Each participant discussed his/her rationale for

PAGE 54

45 assigning values with the group, and at the completion of the discussion, participants were allowed to modify previously assigned values. The subjective expected utilities (SEU's) for each decision were computed by summing the products of each probability (j) and the weights of each outcome, where U=subjective expected utility, j=the jth row, p=the probability of maximizing the goal, and w=weight assigned to each outcome. The computational formula is presented below: Uj = E (p x w) Intervention for the control group . The intervention procedure for the C's was primarily designed to control for the effects of treatment and the effects of practice associated with the identification of outcomes and the development of subjective expected utilities. This procedure was conducted using three basic steps; the introduction, rationale and description of training; the identification of daily living skills; and the components utilized to maximize outcomes. The subjects were introduced to the topic of daily living skills by a presentation describing daily living skills, the rationale for instruction in this area, and the training exercises to be presented. The identification of daily living skills was presented using the materials developed by Florida Department of Education (1971) entitled E mployability Skills Guide . This material is designed to focus on the training of students in prevocational skill areas, including areas of daily living. The goals developed for the program presented in this material include the following:

PAGE 55

46 1. Improve attitudes about work, school, and society. 2. Improve personal appearance and hygiene. 3. Develop a realistic understanding of the connection between the world of work and study which assists students in becoming contributing members of society. 4. Develop personality characteristics of dignity, selfrespect, self-reliance, perseverance, initiative, and resourcefulness. 5. Become effective in personal economics and to develop an understanding of the economic system. 6. Receive recognition through successful experiences. 7. Achieve in all phases of the school's education program. Improving Personal Appearance and Hygiene (Goal 2) was selected as an exploratory area due to its position as both a prevocational skill and a daily living skill. The selection of daily living skills provides content in a vocationally related area without confounding the effects of instruction in skills which may be directly related to specific vocational education. Improving Personal Appearance and Hygiene has been developed into a series of three expected outcomes; To Practice Cleanliness, To Wear Acceptable Dress, and To Practice Good Physical Fitness. Furthermore, each expected outcome has a series of performance objectives, learning experiences, resources, and methods of evaluation. Appendix J includes a complete description. The participants were arbitrarily divided into three working groups for the purposes of evaluating learning experiences. Using the selected goal, each group selected one of the three expected outcomes areas. For the purposes of this training, the performance objectives were to be considered outcomes with which comparisons

PAGE 56

47 will be made. The groups were instructed to use the outcomes to rank and weight according to the procedure presented earlier as the Rawgoo Procedure (Nutter, 1977). The procedure described in Appendix C was modified to exclude the piling procedure due to the limited number of outcomes. The subjective expected utilities (SEU) of the learning experiences was obtained by asking each subject to rate how much he/she felt that each of the experiences would maximize each of the performance objectives. The Outcomes and Daily Living Skills Deci sion Grid was utilized to record data and compute SEU's. The Outcomes and Daily Living Skills Decision Grid is shown in Appendix L. All of the developments of the participants were shared with others in the group. Interaction by all the participants was encouraged. The instructions for administering this procedure were The performance objectives that we have ranked and weighted as outcomes will be used to evaluate a series of learning experiences. Given the ranked and weighted outcomes, and the learning experiences, place a number between 0-100 for each experience under each outcome to show how well you think that each learning experience will maximize each outcome. Each participant discussed his/her rationale for assigning values with their respective groups. At the completion of the discussion, participants were allowed to modify previously assigned values. The subjective expected utilities (SEU's) for each decision was computed as described for the experimental group.

PAGE 57

48 P osttest The posttest consisted of the identical procedure described in the pretest section as Determining Subjective Expected Utilities . The vocational outcomes developed in the Identifying Vocational O utcomes section of the pretest phase was utilized. Each subject reviewed three separate case studies depicting different types of handicapping conditions. The descriptions were obtained through the same procedure as the pretest. The case studies are presented in Appendix D as Michael, Carolyn, and John. The ratings were recorded on the Vocational Outcomes and Placement Planning Decision Guide (Appendix F). The instructions for administration of this instrument were Michael, Carolyn, and John have been referred to the building placement committee for a placement decision. Assume that you are a member of the building committee or team and must make a program decision from the options presented. Place a number between 0-100 for each option under each outcome to show how well you think that decision will help you reach maximizing that outcome. The subjective expected utilities (SEU) for each decision were computed as described in the pretest section. Experimental Design The experimental design used is depicted in Figure 2. This design is analogoug to the design described by Campbell and Stanley (1963) as the Pretest-Posttest Control Group Design and is depicted below: R 1 X 2 5 7 R 3 4 6 8

PAGE 58

49 Identifying Vocational Outcomes Determining Subjective Expected Utilities (Pretest) / Training N / in the \ , Identification of \ . Outcomes for Daily Living Skill . x Intervention \ (alternative \ treatment) Determining Subjective Expected Utilities (Posttest) Figure 2 Experimental Design

PAGE 59

50 In this design, 0] and 0o are representative of the pretest scores (subjective expected utilities), O2 through 8 are representative of the posttest scores (subjective expected utilities). The X represents the intervention applied to the experimental group subjects. The control group intervention is depicted as a blank. Hypotheses The hypotheses to be tested, stated in the null form, are: Hypothesis 1: There is no significant difference in the subjective expected utilities of each of the placement options between subjects who received entry level skills criterion training and subjects who did not receive training. Hypothesis la: There is no significant difference in the subjective expected utilities of each of the placement options for the case study of Michael between subjects who received entry level skills criterion training and subjects who did not receive training. Hypothesis lb: There is no significant difference in the subjective expected utilities of each of the placement options for the case study of Carolyn between subjects who received entry level skills criterion training and subjects who did not receive training.

PAGE 60

51 Hypothesis lc: There is no significant difference in the subjective expected utilities of each of the placement options for the case study of John between subjects who received entry level skills criterion training and subjects who did not receive training. Hypothesis Id: There is no significant difference in the subjective expected utilities of each of the placement options for the case study of Michael for the pretest and posttest conditions of the subjects who received entry level skills criterion training. Hypothesis le: There is no significant difference in the subjective expected utilities of each of the placement options for the case study of Michael in the pretest and posttest conditions of the subjects who did not receive entry level skills criterion training. Hypothesis If: There are no significant differences in the subjective expected utilities of each of the placement options for the case study of Michael between subjects who received entry level skills criterion training and subjects that did not receive training on the pretest observation. Hypothesis 2: There is no significant difference in the placement choices between subjects who received entry level skills criterion training and subjects who did not receive training.

PAGE 61

52 Hypothesis 2a: There is no significant difference in the regular vocational education placement choices made by subjects receiving training in the use of entry level skills criteria evaluation than those not receiving the training. Hypothesis 2b: There is no significant difference in the adapted vocational education placement choices made by subjects receiving training in the use of entry level skills criteria evaluation than those not receiving the training. Hypothesis 2c: There is no significant difference in the special vocational education placement choices made by subjects receiving training in the use of entry level skills criteria evaluation than those not receiving the training. Data Collection and Analysis The collection of data and their subsequent analysis will be presented as two separate areas of focus. Data Collection The following steps were utilized in the retrieval of information to be included for subsequent data analysis. 1. Collect personal data on all subjects including their areas of vocational specialization, current teaching responsibilities,

PAGE 62

53 and professional training. This information was available through the workshop application. ?.. Compile the data developed through the use of the Rawgoo procedure (Nutter, 1977) for determining the assigned ranks and weights of the vocational outcomes. Data was collected from the pile of cards ranked by each subject. Each pile was recorded and compiled by research staff. 3. Collect and compute the SEU score for each placement option completed by the subjects on the Placement Planning Decision Guide (Appendix F) for both pretest and posttest observations. 4. Compute the number of placement choices having the highest SEU score for all subjects for both pretest and posttest conditions. Data Analysis The data analysis was conducted using the following procedure: 1. A comparison of the subjective expected utility (SEU) score for each placement option was assessed for all three case studies using a MANOVA procedure. These three case studies were posttest scores only and are presented in Figure 3. 2. A comparison of the subjective expected utility score (SEU) for each placement option was assessed for the case study of Michael for both pretest and posttest conditions. Students' t-scores will be used for comparison for both E's and C's. 3. A comparison of the subjective expected utility score (SEU) for each placement option was assessed for the case study of Michael between the E's and C's at the pretest level. Students' t_-scores were used for comparison.

PAGE 63

54 Case Study Placement Options Group Assignment Michael Regular Vocational Education Experimental Adapted Vocational Education by Control Special Vocational Education Carolyn Regular Vocational Education Experimental Adapted Vocational Education by Control Special Vocational Education John Regular Vocational Education Experimental Adapted Vocational Education by Control Special Vocational Education Figure 3 Posttest Comparisons

PAGE 64

55 4. A comparison of the number of choices of placement options having the highest subjective expected utility score (SEU) was assessed for each placement option. Choice was based on the highest SEU score compared to other placement options for each case study. A Chi square analysis was used for comparison.

PAGE 65

CHAPTER IV RESULTS The analysis of the results presents the comparisons of the subjective expected utilities and placement choices made by subjects who (a) received entry level skills criteria training and (b) subjects who did not receive the training. The data were collected from participants in the Summer Vocational/Special Needs Workshop at the University of Florida. Data were gathered for a total of 21 subjects (N=21). The analysis is developed through the restatement of each hypothesis and sub-hypothesis with a presentation of the procedures and results. Hypothesis 1 There is no significant difference in the subjective expected utilities of each of the placement options between subjects who received entry level skills criterion training and subjects who did not receive training. An analysis of the sub-hypothesis shows that all null hypotheses were not rejected. Therefore, the null hypotheses for Hypothesis I is not rejected. An analysis of each of the component sub-hypotheses is presented as follows. 56

PAGE 66

57 Hypothe si s la There is no significant difference in the subjective expected utilities of each of the placement options for the case study of Michael between subjects who received entry level skills criterion training and subjects who did not receive training. The subjective expected utilities values for each of the placement options were compared ysubg tge General Linear Models Procedure, Multivariate Analysis of Variance, a component of the Statistical Analysis System (Barr, 1976). The results presented in Table 2 reveal non-significant F values (a= .05) for all placement options by treatment group combinations. The results indicate that the subjective expected utilities of the placement options for the case study of Michael were not significantly different between subjects who received entry level skills criterion training and subjects who did not. Therefore, the null hypothesis Hl a failed to be rejected. Hypothe sis lb There is no significant difference in the subjective expected utilities of each of the placement options for the case study of Carolyn between subjects who received entry level skills criterion training and subjects who did not receive training. The subjective expected utilities value for each of the placement options were compared using the General Linear Models Procedure, Multivariate Analysis of Variance, a component of the Statistical Analysis System (Barr, 1976). The results presented in Table 3 reveal nonsignificant F values (a = .05) for all placement options by treatment group combinations.

PAGE 67

58 r— >> (13 to u oo

PAGE 68

59 oo

PAGE 69

60 The results indicate that the subjective expected utilities of the placement options for the case study of Carolyn were not significantly different between subjects who received entry level skills criterion training and subjects who did not. Therefore, the null hypothesis Hl b failed to be rejected. Hypothesis lc There is no significant difference in the subjective expected utilities of each of the placement options for the case study of John between subjects who received entry level skills criterion training and subjects who did not receive training. The subjective expected utilities values for each of the placement options were compared using the General Linear Models Procedure, Multivariate Analysis of Variance, a component of the Statistical Analysis System (Barr, 1976). The results presented in Table 4 reveal non-significant F values (a = .05) for the variables regular vocational education and adapted vocational education. The variable special vocational education revealed a significant F value (a = .05) of .038 for this placement option by treatment group combination. The results indicate that the subjective expected utilities of the placement options identified as regular vocational education and adapted vocational education were not significantly different between subjects who received entry level skills criterion training and subjects who did not. The placement option special vocational education showed a significant difference between the experimental

PAGE 70

61 — >1 (13 T3 rO to •in3 O CO

PAGE 71

62 and control groups. An examination of the mean values for the experimental and control group indicates the subjective expected utilities score for the E's is 42.442 and the C's is 27.876. This can be interpreted as a higher SEU value for the placement choice of special vocational education for John by the subjects who received entry level skills criterion training. The results of all placement options by treatment group comparisons suggest that the null hypothesis of no difference in the subjective expected utilities of each of the placement options for the case study of John between the treatment groups failed to be rejected. The significant difference (special vocational education by treatment group) is not a sufficient condition for the rejection of this hypothesis. Hyp othesis Id There is no significant difference in the subjective expected utilities of each of the placement options for the case study of Michael for the pretest and posttest conditions of the subjects who received entry level skills criterion training. The subjective expected utilities for each of the placement options were compared using the Students t_ for correlated samples (t-test) in the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (Nie, Hadlai Hull, Henkins, Steinbrenner, & Bent, 1975). The results presented in Table 5 reveal non-significant Rvalues (
PAGE 72

63 c

PAGE 73

64 the case study of Michael were not significantly different for subjects who received entry level skills criterion training. Therefore, the null hypothesis failed to be rejected. Hypothesis le There is no significant difference in the subjective expected utilities of each of the placement options for the case study of Michael in the pretest and posttest conditions of the subjects who did not receive entry level skills criterion training. The subjective expected utilities for each of the placement options was compared using the Students t_ for correlated samples (t-test) in the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (Nie et al., 1975). The resul-s presented in Table 6 reveal non-significant Rvalues (a= .05) for the regular vocational and adapted vocational education options between the pre and posttest conditions. The special vocational education placement option was significantly different between pretest and posttest conditions at the a = .05 level . The results indicate that the subjective expected utilities for the options of regular vocational education and adapted vocational education for the pretest and posttest conditions were not significantly different for subjects who did not receive entry level skills criterion training. The special vocational education option was significantly different for the pre and posttest conditions. An analysis of the means of both conditions indicate that the subjects assigned a significantly lower mean subjective expected utilities value to the

PAGE 74

65 >, 05 •iSi— 4-> •ic 1-5 O 00 .O O) S+-> O +-> 4(O -rS-r-

PAGE 75

66 special vocational education option in the posttest condition (X = 19.4925) than in the pretest condition (X = 34.957). The results of all placement options by pre-/posttest comparisons suggest that the null hypothesis of no difference in the subjective expected utilities of each of the placement options for the case study of Michael in the pretest and posttest conditions has failed to be rejected. The significant difference (special vocational education option, by pretest post condition) is not a sufficient condition for the rejection of the hypothesis. Hypothesis If There are no significant differences in the subjective expected utilities of each of the placement options for the case study of Michael between subjects who received entry level skills criterion training and subjects that did not receive training on the pretest observation. The subjective expected utilities values for each of the placement options by treatment condition was computed using the Students t for independent samples (t-test) in the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (Nie et al . , 1975). The results presented in Table 7 reveal non-significant t values («. = .05) for all placement options by treatment conditions. The results indicate that the subjective expected utilities of the placement options for the pretest condition in the case study of Michael were not significantly different between subjects who did not. Therefore, the null hypothesis of no difference failed to be rejected.

PAGE 76

67 3 (/> +-> CL CO Z5 a

PAGE 77

Hypothesis 2 There is no significant difference in the placement choices between subjects who received entry level skills criterion training and subjects who did not receive training. An analysis of the sub-hypothesis shows that all null hypotheses were not rejected. Therefore, the null hypothesis for Hypothesis 2 is not rejected. An analysis of each of the component sub-hypotheses is presented as follows. Hypothesis 2a There is no significant difference than would be expected by chance in the placement choice for the case study of Michael between subjects who received entry level skills criterion training and subjects who did not receive training. The placement choices for each of the placement options were selected using the largest value of the subjective expected utility score for one of the three placement options. This choice was analyzed using the subprogram CROSSTABS, in the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (Nie et al . , 1975). Using the statistical procedure Chi-square, a 2 x 3 analysis, provided a comparison of placement choice by treatment group for the case study of Michael. 2 The results presented in Table 8 reveal non-significant A values {fit. = .05) for all placement choices by treatment group comparisons. The results indicate that the placement choices for each of the options in the case study of Michael were not significantly different than would be expected by chance for subjects in both treatment groups. Therefore the null hypothesis of no significant difference is not rejected.

PAGE 78

69 O O O Q. +-) -4-> +-> o o u o. q. o. c so -i-> i — i — roo o o o o.o.a C So +-> NIOlflO o u o c 1o-p CO CO o o 0) +-> +J a. c •!x uj s2 2 +-> o O O O Qo o o Q. QQ. C SO +J c\j cm r~-» o +-> -i-> +> o u o o. a. cl C SO 4-> +-> O (J o 0-0-0. C SO 4-> ro n o o +-> +-> O (_) +-> Q. o o

PAGE 79

70 Hypothesis 2b There is no significant difference than would be expected by chance in the placement choice for the case study of Carolyn, between subjects who received entry level skills criterion training and subjects who did not receive training. The placement choices for each of the placement options were selected by using the largest value of the subjective expected utility score for one of the three placement options. This choice was analyzed using the subprogram CROSSTABS, in the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (Nie et al . , 1975). Using the statistical procedure Chi-square, a 2 x 3 analysis, provided a comparison of placement choice by treatment group for the case study of Carolyn. The results presented in Table 9 reveal non-significant T values (a = .05) for all placement choices by treatment group comparisons. The results indicate that the placement choices for each of the options in the case study of Carolyn were not significantly different than would be expected by chance for subjects in both treatment groups Therefore, the null hypothesis of no significant difference is not rejected. Hypothesis 2c There is no significant difference than would be expected by chance in the placement choice for the case study of John, between subjects who received entry level skills criterion training and subjects who did not receive training. The placement choices for each of the placement options were selected by using the largest value of the subjective expected utility

PAGE 80

3 o a>

PAGE 81

72 score for one of the three placement options. This choice was analyzed using the subprogram, CROSSTABS, in the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (Mie et al . , 1975). Using the statistical procedure Chi-sqaure, a 2 x 3 analysis provided a comparison of placement choice by treatment group and was computed for the case study of John. The results presented in Table 10 reveal non-significant* values (<* = .05) for all placement choices by treatment group comparisons. The results indicate that the placement choices for each of the options in the case study of John were not significantly different than would be expected by chance for subjects in both treatment groups. Therefore, the null hypothesis of no significant difference is not rejected.

PAGE 82

73 o in r+-> o o (1) o o o o o JS+-> Cl +J +J +-> (-> o u CL CL QC i. o +-> co i — i — o +-> o CL

PAGE 83

CHAPTER V DISCUSSION The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of entry level skills training on the program placement choices made by vocational educators in the educational placement of handicapped students. The discussion summarizes the data pertaining to the purpose, provides a discussion of results and constraints, and explores some implications for future study. Summary of the Data The summary of the data is presented through an analysis of the data for each hypothesis, followed by an analysis of findings influenced by more than a single hypothesis. Hypothesis 1 This hypothesis was used to explore the effect of an entry level skills training procedure on the subjective expected utility (SEU) value assigned to levels of placement options for a series of case studies describing handicapped students. The multivariate analysis of variance was used to test the hypothesis of no difference in SEU values for experimental and 74

PAGE 84

75 control groups. An analysis of the data showed no significant differences between groups on all variables with the exception of the case study of John. In this case study, a significant difference was found on the subjective expected utility score for the special vocational placement option. The analysis showed that the group receiving training placed a higher utility value on special education placement than did the non trained group for this case study. The relationship of the experimental group to a significant greater subjective expected utility is not apparent. Future investigation may attempt to isolate the question of the influence of additional specific information on the decision to make a special education placement. For example, does the training of entry level skills criteria actually influence the amount of information about an existing learning deficit that was not apparent to a vocational educator not specifically trained in the diagnosis of handicapping conditions. This may have an effect of increasing the perception of a handicapping condition where none existed or existed to a lesser degree. An analysis of the mean score for both experimental and control group shows a higher mean score 0f = 35.506) for both experimental and control groups than either of the other two placement options (X adaptive vocational education = 30.220 and X regular vocational education = 21.188). This relationship was not reflected in the other two case studies. This may suggest additional investigations into what differential characteristics which describe handicapped students influence various placement decisions.

PAGE 85

76 In a comparison of the pre and posttest score for the subjective expected utility of placement options for Michael, no significant differences were found for the subjects trained in entry level skills criteria; however, a significant difference in the subjective expected utility was found for the untrained subjects in the placement of students in special vocational programs. The change in mean from 34.957 to 19.493 indicates a much lower subjective expected utility for Michael at posttest. The change in mean value was not apparent in the subjects who received training (X pretest = 37.70 and I posttest = 29.784). In both treatment conditions a slight increase was observed in the mean posttest score for the regular vocational education placement option and a slight decrease in the mean values of the other placement options. This may suggest that some effect of training took place which slightly increased the participants rating of the subjective expected utility of placing Michael in a regular vocational setting and decreased slightly the ratings for the other placement options. The comparison of the pretest subjective expected utilities showed no significant differences in the subjects between experimental and control groups. This assures the lack of initial biases between groups, however, the comparison was not essential in a randomized design, but lends assurance to the control for initial differences.

PAGE 86

77 Hypothesis 2 The selection of a placement choice was the desired result of the functional application of determining subjective expected utilities. The option with the greatest SEU value is considered the placement choice. The null hypothesis was not rejected, indicating no significant differences in the placement choices by the groups. Of interest were two similar trends to what was described in the data concerning Hypothesis 1. 1. Within both treatment conditions, an increase was observed in the number of regular vocational education choices for both treatment and control groups and the decrease in number of placement choices for special vocational education. There was no change for the adaptive vocational education option. Table 11 depicts the difference in placement choices between pretest and posttest observations. It is apparent from both Hypothesis 1 and Hypothesis 2 that there was movement toward making placements in regular vocational education and away from special education. The suggestion is that the experience in the workshop situation by all participants may possibly have influenced the change in placement choices toward a more regular vocational placement. 2. An analysis of the data for Hypothesis 1(c) found a significantly higher SEU score for the group receiving training than the group not receiving training on the special education placement option. The Chi-square analysis for Hypothesis 2(c) shows a much

PAGE 87

78 .— +-> ti_ rQ. >, c

PAGE 88

79 higher number of placement choices for special vocational education for the group receiving training. This much larger value (N=8) was not repeated in the other case studies. While an obvious relationship exists between the subjective expected utilities score and placement choice, the same inflated score tends to confirm the significant effect in Hypothesis 2(c). Constraints The constraints in implementing a study which uses relatively new technologies, or adapts materials and technologies are numerous. The limited experience with many of the techniques involved in this study mandate a careful evaluation of the constraints as a guide for future investigation. The following are constraints experienced during the conducting of this investigation. Level of Intervention The constraints of time were a major factor in the development of this study. Obtaining any group of professionals for an extended intervention sequence is a difficult task. The requirements for at least three individual phases separated by a fairly significant time block poses a distinct problem for the researcher. This study utilized a pretest, intervention, and posttest phase completed over a period of two weeks. The limits of time allocated for intervention may have seriously restricted the results.

PAGE 89

80 Training Methodology The use of training methodology involves two distinct components, the training in the development of subjective expected utilities and the training in assessing entry level skills criteria. Subjective Expected Utilities . The use of subjective expected utilities involves two levels of training, the development and prioritizing outcomes, and the selection of subjective expected utilities. The procedures involved in prioritizing outcomes involved two basic constraints for this study. The first constraint was the relatively difficult task of quantifying values into outcome weights. The task of deciding the relative importance for each of the outcomes presented a decision not often required of educators. The second constraint involves the unfamiliar task of exploring vocational outcomes. The recent emphasis on legislative and regulatory requirements has developed precedence over individual or local outcome development. The selection of subjective expected utilities is an easier task. There still needs to be continued research in the quantity of outcomes to be presented in any given decision as well as the procedures for completing the task. The feedback from subjects was generally ^/ery positive as to the use of subjective expected utilities, but most all subjects did not feel comfortable with the procedures until after more than one trial/training session. Entry Level Skills Criteria . The development of a training sequence for entry level skills criteria has little support in the

PAGE 90

81 literature. The selection of a procedure involves the adaptation of methods from existing training sequences. As a result ^jery little is assured as the the most effective procedure for demonstrating and presenting techniques for assessing entry level skills criteria. The use of subjective expected utilities offers a procedure for making decisions in many areas, and was selected on that basis. A comparison of this and other procedures needs to be developed for use in training entry level skills criteria.

PAGE 91

APPENDIX A GROUP ASSIGNMENT BY SUBJECT NUMBER 01 control group 02 experimental group 03 experimental group 04 experimental group 05 control group 06 control group 07 control group 08 control group 09 experimental group 10 experimental group 11 control group 12 experimental group 13 control group 14 control group 15 experimental group 16 experimental group 17 control group 18 experimental group 19 experimental group 20 control group 21 experimental group E = 11 C = 10 82

PAGE 92

APPENDIX B VOCATIONAL EDUCATION OUTCOMES 1. Development of attitudes, basic educational skills, appropriate habits, and skill training are all equally important for gainful employment. 2. Prevocational experiences are necessary to introduce students to the world of work and provide motivation. 3. Establish and maintain a minimum amount of funding below which training should not be attempted. 4. Utilize vocationally experienced or expert individuals as the source of occupational skill training. 5. Vocational education produces a unique body of knowledge for each occupational skill area. 6. Student must meet minimum productive abilities. 7. Student must be able to secure a job for which he/she is trained. 8. Provide a means of acquiring skills essential for equal competition. 9. Provide preparation for initial entry level employment. 10. Serve students needs for a variety of educational experiences which include vocational education as a component. 11. Replicate the work environment, utilize the same tools and procedures and produce similar habits and manipulations. 33

PAGE 93

84 12. Provide for on the job training experiences. 13. Enable students to use interests, aptitudes, and intelligence to highest degree. 14. Train only those who want, need, or are able to profit. 15. Provide a program which is developmental and hierarchial in regards to exit level criteria in a wide variety of job skills. 16. Meet demands of the marketplace even if conflicts with the state of the art. 17. Oriented to manpower needs of community and greater society. 18. Be able to serve the demands of a technological society.

PAGE 94

APPENDIX C RAWGOO INSTRUCTIONS The question you are concerned with is "How important is each of these outcomes for the education of students in vocational programs?' At the end of this activity, you will have: 1. Classified the outcomes from unimportant to most important; 2. Ranked all the outcomes; and 3. Given an importance value or weighting to the top-ranked outcomes. You have been given a deck of cards. The top card is the identification card. If it does not have your name on it, please write your name, your position and grade, and your area of certification on this card. Set it aside. The next five cards are the "pile cards" and will be used to classify each of the outcomes. Take these five cards and spread them out in front of you with enough room to stack outcome cards near each "pile card. " Next, take the outcome cards and place each one near the most appropriate "pile card" according to your own valuing it. You do not need to put any specific number in any category, nor do you need even a minimum number in any category . . . that is, you can put all the cards in one category, or distribute them in any way you wish. 85

PAGE 95

When you are finished with that step, you can go right on to the next step: ranking the outcome cards. To do this, simply rank all the cards in each of the five categories (leaving them in their categories). If you have placed all the cards in one category, you will have a greater task than if they were more evenly distributed, but this should not affect the rankings. Note : The number 1 item (the highest ranked), should be on the top. Put the pile cards on the top of the appropriate "pile" and stack each "pile" on the next lower one so that the top "pile" is number 1 (most important). The last phase of this activity is to have you rate the importance, or value of the 10 top ranked outcomes. The first step is to separate these top ten cards from the rest of the deck. Take off the top ten outcome cards along with the "pile cards" that may be mixed with them. Keep the "pile cards" in their proper position during the rest of the activity (the information that you have supplied according to the importance/irrelevance dimension will be used later so we do not want to lose it). We are going to work through the cards backwards now, starting with the tenth ranked card. Take that card and put a "10" on it. This is the base card from which you will work and that number will not be changed through the rest of the process. Now take the next card (the ninth ranked card) and compare it to the tenth card. Ask yourself "How much more important is the

PAGE 96

87 ninth outcome than the tenth?" If you consider it to be twice as important, write a "20" on the ninth card (2 times 10 = 20). If you consider it to be 10 times as important, write a "100." Now take the next card (eighth) and compare it to the ninth. "How much more important is it?" If it is twice as important as the ninth, then write "40" on the eighth card (2 times 20 = 40). Before moving on, check back to the tenth card--is the eighth card four times as important as the tenth card (4 times 10 = 40)? If you do not think so, then you will have to adjust the numbers. You can do this by changing either or both the eighth and ninth cards (but not the tenth) There is no top limit to the numbers you can use (you can use 100, or 1 million, or whatever), but you must use whole numbers. You can use 11, 23, 4821, etc., but as you work through the cards, each number for the higher ranked cards must be greater than the previous number. And check back to all the previous cards each time . . . this enables us to construct an interval scale (according to measurement people, that is supposed to be a good but rare happening in this sort of decision making process). After you have worked through all 10 cards, restack them with your highest ranked cards on top. Be sure the "pile cards" are included in the appropriate places. Put your identification card on top of the whole thing, rubber band it, and say "good grief" or any other appropriate utterance. We say "thank you" and we will get back to you soon with what this means. Adapted from: Nutter, R. E. A subjective expected utilities approach for evaluating program choices for exceptional children (Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, 1977). Dissertation Abstracts International , 1978, 34, 3416A. (University Microfilms No. 77-26, 328)

PAGE 97

Pile 1 Most Important Pile 2 Moderately Important Pile 3 Average Importance Pile 4 Marginal Importance Pile 5

PAGE 98

Provide a means of acquiring skills essential for equal competition. Student must be able to secure a job for which he/she is trained. Oriented to manpower needs of community and greater society. Meets demands of the marketplace even if conflicts with the state of the art Replicate the work environment, utilize the same tools and procedures, and produce similar habits and manipulations. Serve students needs for a variety of educational experiences which includes vocational education as a component. Provide for on the job training experiences. Provide a program which is developmental and hierarchi al in regards to exit level criteria in a wide variety of job skills Train only those who want, need, or are able to profit. Enable students to use interests, aptitudes, and intelligence to the highest degree. Provide preparation for initial entry level employment. Be able to serve the demands of a technological society.

PAGE 99

APPENDIX D CASE STUDIES

PAGE 100

School Staffing Conference Report Regular _: ESE Eligibility __X_: ESE Center ___: ESE Review Student's Name: John Grade: 10th Data: Psychological Report _X_: Interventions _X_: IEP X : Anecdotal Reports _X_: Behavioral Observations X: Discipline Records X : Vision X : Hearing : Language : Physical X : Other Review of Data: John and his family recently moved to this community from a neighboring state. He is 16 years old and will begin 10th grade in the fall. In his previous school he was placed in a classroom for severe learning disabilities. The psychological report developed by our staff and previous records indicate a severe deficit in the verbal areas. Some strengths are noticed in the performance area although the total performance score is slightly lower than verbal areas. The arithmetic and digit span (WISC-R) are significantly higher than other verbal subtest scores. A complete academic assessment has been completed and suggests extreme deficits in the areas of word recognition and comprehension. Scores on Key Math indicate a better grasp of computational skills but problems involving the interpretation of verbal information are distinctly depressed. At this time no formal prevocational assessment has been completed. An anecdotal record reports that John has had some accidents with machinery and tools. His coordination, however, appears to 91

PAGE 101

92 be normal at this time. John has stated an interest in cooking and has suggested that he might be interested in commercial or gourmet cooking. His school behavior has been excellent and attendance is not a problem. His absences are well within the norms for the schools he has attended. John's parents are somewhat anxious about his future and are not overjoyed with his basic skills progress. They suggest that he has not been trying hard enough, or things would have improved.

PAGE 102

93 School Staffing Report Regular : ESE Eligibility _X_: ESE Center : ESE Review Student's Name: Carolyn Grade: 11 Data: Psychological Report _X_: Interventions : IEP : Anecdotal Reports _X_: Behavioral Observations X : Discipline Records X: Vision X : Hearing _: Language __X_: Physical _X_: Other Review of Data: Carolyn has been referred to the staffing committee due to academic failure and a visual impairment. She has been assigned to a regular class since the 6th grade. During the first five years in school she was given assistance through the program for the visually impaired in a large metropolitan school district. Carolyn was adamant, when in the 6th grade, and refused placement in special programs. It was the decision of staff as well as her parents, to allow her to enroll in the regular school program. Her vision appears to be deteriorating in the left eye and she now qualifies for special education services. Psychological reports indicate average intellectual functioning when instruments are modified for use with the visually impaired. She shows very good verbal skills but performance subskills are somewhat lower. She has shown more than adequate potential and skill development considering the extent of vision loss. Academically, Carolyn made adequate progress until about the time the change in visual acuity was identified. Since that time

PAGE 103

94 (one school year) her academic work has steadily declined and teachers indicate she does not complete assignments. Two instructors report a hostile attitude when Carolyn is questioned about inadequate work. One instructor reports that he was not aware of the visual problem. Carolyn has not been interested in vocational education and did not receive exposure to career exploration programs. Currently she indicates a slight interest in business and office occupations areas. She says that she likes people and works well in close proximity to others. Carolyn's parents are concerned about her deteriorating vision. The fear of the responsibility of a blind daughter has been repeatedly expressed. They think she should be enrolled in the School for the Blind.

PAGE 104

95 School Staffing Conference Report Regular : ESE Eligibility _X_: ESE Center : ESE Review Student's Name: Michael Grade: 10 Data: Psychological Report X : Interventions _X_: IEP X : Anecdotal Reports X : Behavioral Observations X : Discipline Records X : Vision X : Hearing X : Language : Physical : Other Review of Data: Michael is a 15 year old male who has been placed in a program for the educable mentally retarded since 1969. Currently his placement and educational plan is more than a year old and is being reevaluated by the committee. The psychological report indicates that he is functioning at a mental age of 12 years 3 months. He shows depressed subtest scores on the WISC with the exception of the object assembly and block design, which are within the normal range. The score indicates he is functioning in the mildly retarded range of performance. His achievement profile shows a marked deficiency in reading recognition, comprehension, and spelling. Scores on the Key Math indicate a high level of functioning, but still considerably below normal . Preliminary career exploration courses have indicated a relatively good manual skills and manipulative skills potential. Michael has repeatedly asked to have more tasks and information on working with animals. He has indicated that he would like to work in an animal hospital or on a dairy farm.

PAGE 105

96 Michael's parents have suggested that Michael try for veterinary training but express some doubts as to his ability to follow through. Michael's school behavior has been adequate, although he tends to resist directions by instructors when confronted with relatively new or difficult tasks. His attendance has been adequate, with three unexcused absences.

PAGE 106

APPENDIX E TRAINING OPTIONS FOR VOCATIONAL EDUCATION

PAGE 107

^ soo^ as 30* S A^ e 0<* ss ^-es ,t^ c^ sie^l

PAGE 108

APPENDIX F VOCATIONAL OUTCOMES AND PLACEMENT PLANNING DECISION GUIDE The student has been referred to the building placement committee for a programming or placement decision. Assume that you are a member of the building committee or team and make the recommendations that you feel are appropriate and then place a number between 0-100 for each decision under each goal to show how well you think that decision will help to reach that goal. Example: Outcome 1 Outcome 2 Outcome 3 Outcome 4 Decision Basic Skills Enjoy School Social Skills Respect Others Place in prevocational program 75 90 60 40 There are no right or wrong answers. It's your judgment that counts! 99

PAGE 109

100 C3 o

PAGE 110

Level I: Level II: Level III Level IV: Modules APPENDIX G LEVELS OF COMPETENCY FOR EACH BUSINESS AND OFFICE CAREER CLUSTER Business and Office Occupations Core (minimum skills and preparation necessary for all Business and Office Occupations) Reinforcement and Expansion Refinement and Application Specialization and/or High Proficiency Cler. Sec. Acctng. Bus. Data Bus. Adm. Occup. Occup. Occup. Proc. Occup. Occup. Orientation to

PAGE 111

APPENDIX H VOCATIONAL INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM STANDARDS Instructional Program Title : Accounting Occupations USOE No .: 13.016000 DOE No .: 7614 Occupational Titles : Statistical Clerk, Bookkeeper, Billing Clerk, Bank Cashier, Bookkeeping and Billing Machine Operator, Payroll and Timekeeping Clerk, Calculating Machine Operator, Tabulating Machine Operator, Office Machine Operator, Bank Teller, Accountant, Accounts Supervisor, Audit Clerk. Instructional Level : 10-15 Teacher Certification : Bus Ed 4; VOE 7; Teach CBE 7; Accting 7; Bookkeeping 4 & 7 Instructional Program Goals : A program designed to develop job competencies in occupations concerned with systematizing information about transactions and activities into accounts and quantitative records and paying and receiving money. Examples of related occupations toward which secondary, post secondary, and adult students may work are: Accounting Clerk, Bookkeeper, Accounts Receivable/Payable Clerk, Cash Receipts/Disbursements Clerk, Payroll Clerk, Inventory Clerk, Accounting Equipment Operator, and Bank Teller. Examples of related occupations toward which post secondary and adult students may work are: Junior Accountant, Accountant, Cost Accountant, and 102

PAGE 112

103 Internal Auditor. These occupations require analyzing, recording and interpreting numerical data and compiling it into a workable report form for management planning, budgeting, and allocating of available resources for effective operation and stablizied productivity. Instructional Program Content : The program includes a combination of theory, simulated learning experiences, on the job training and modules/activities to develop entry-level competencies. Students beginning work in these occupations will cover the modules/activities identified in the Fundamentals of Business and Office Occupations Program. These include: orientation to modules, telephone techniques, filing and retrieving, keyboarding, incoming and outgoing mail, oral and written communications, reprographics, human relations, grooming, business records, math computation with and without machines, job application procedures, data processing, business organization, and leadership training. Students will then progress to the next level of modules which will reinforce and expand competencies in oral and written communications, business records, and data processing. At the refinement and application level, the student will move into modules which will further develop competencies in math computation using machines and the various aspects of bookkeeping and accounting. These modules may be covered at the same time, or preceding, on the job training. At the post secondary or adult level, the student will have the opportunity to develop higher proficiency in Accounting Occupations.

PAGE 113

104 This program will include Level II modules in management, finance, data processing. At the refinement and application level, the student will complete a module in decision making. The student will complete the continuum with modules designed to develop high proficiency in accounting. Total cumulative time required for completion of the preparatory program is generally 720 hours; however, this may vary for clients based on aptitude, prior competency attainment or changes and variations in employment requirements. Any part of the program may be offered for any length of time to provide supplementary training or retraining of adults who have already entered the labor market to insure stability or advancement or re-entry into employment. The activities of Future Business Leaders of America/Phi Beta Lambda are included as a part of the instructional program. Students shall study and apply concepts of free enterprise, consumer and economic education appropriate to the instructional program so that they may function effectively in the American system.

PAGE 114

APPENDIX I LEVEL 1 COMPETENCIES FOR BUSINESS EDUCATION TELEPHONE TECHNIQUES 1. Identify telephone services and types of calls 2. Locate telephone numbers 3. Answer the telephone 4. Place telephone calls FILING AND RETRIEVING 1. Index, code, sort, and file alphabetically and chronologically 2. Code, sort, and file numerically 3. Retrieve materials from the file, complete an out card and checkout record 4. Identify types of filing supplies and procedures 5. Identify types of filing equipment TYPEWRITING 1. Demonstrate correct typewriting techniques 2. Identify operative parts of a typewriter and their operations 3. Identify principles of typewriting 4. Demonstrate speed and accuracy in typing straight copy 5. Type and correct business letters and envelopes 105

PAGE 115

106 6. Type interoffice memoranda 7. Chain-feed, type, and correct addresses on envelopes 8. Type and correct tabulated information INCOMING AND OUTGOING MAIL 1 . Classify mail 2. Identify special mail services 3. Locate zip codes 4. Process outgoing mail 5. Process incoming mail 6. Forward mail ORAL AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 1. Locate and record information found in a dictionary la. Identify sections of a dictionary lb. Locate and record general information found in a dictionary lc. Locate and record syllabication, diacritical marks, definitions, and synonyms 2. Spell and define words 2a. Write correct spelling for suggested statewide spelling words 2b. Write correct spelling for commonly used general vocabulary words 2c. Write correct definitions for words on suggested statewide reading vocabulary words 2d. Write correct definitions for commonly used business and consumer terms 3. Find specific information in written material

PAGE 116

107 3a. Determine main idea stated in a paragraph 3b. Infer main idea of a paragraph 3c. Find specific information in a selection 3d. Identify the conclusion supported by a paragraph 3e. Identify facts and opinions 3f. Identify unstated opinions 3g. Identify conclusion on insufficient evidence 4. Write grammatically sound and complete sentences 4a. Identify subjects and predicates 4b. Identify complete and incomplete sentences 4c. Write complete sentences using simple phrases 4d. Identify nouns and pronouns 4e. Write complete sentences using nouns and pronouns 4f. Identify verbs, verb phrases, and main verbs 4g. Write complete sentences using given verbs and verb phrases 4h. Identify correct usage of prepositions 4i . Write complete sentences using prepositions 4j. Identify possessive forms of nouns and pronouns 4k. Write possessive forms of nouns and pronouns 41. Write complete sentences using possessive forms of nouns and pronouns 4m. Form contractions using apostrophes 4n. Form possessives using apostrophes 4o. Write complete sentences using conjunctions 4p. Identify adjectives, adverbs, and interjections 4q. Write complete sentences using interjecti-ns, adjectives, and adverbs

PAGE 117

108 5. Write sentences with correct punctuation, capitalization, abbreviations, and numbers 5a. Punctuate sentences with commas 5b. Write and punctuate sentences with commas 5c. Punctuate end of sentences correctly 5d. Punctuate compound sentences with commas and semicolons 5e. Punctuate sentences with colons, semicolons, and dashes 5f. Punctuate sentences with parentheses and quotation marks 5g. Capitalize appropriate words in sentences 5h. Abbreviate words correctly 5i. Write numbers correctly in sentences 6. Compose and write simple business letters 6a. Identify qualities of effective business letters 6b. Identify parts of business letters 6c. Identify arrangement and punctuation styles of business letters 7. Follow oral instruction 8. Greet visitors and give them directions REPROGRAPHICS 1. Identify characteristics of copying/duplicating methods 2. Make decisions on best copying/duplicating method to use 3. Type, correct, and run spirit masters 4. Tupe, correct, and run stencils HUMAN RELATIONS 1. Identify ways to increase self-understanding 2. Identify terms relating to personal appearance and behavior

PAGE 118

109 3. Identify personality traits that increase job performance 4. Identify traits that promote good human relations 5. Arrange five steps for improvement of personal conduct 6. Analyze and develop written solutions to personal behavior problems on the job GROOMING 1. Develop a personal grooming plan 2. Demonstrate good grooming habits BUSINESS RECORDS 1 . Prepare checks and stubs 2. Endorse checks using restrictive endorsement 3. Prepare deposit slips and adjust checkbook 4. Prepare bank reconciliations 5. Prepare purchase requisitions 6. Prepare purchase orders 7. Prepare invoices MATH COMPUTATIONS 1. Solve math problems consisting of whole numbers la. Solve addition problems lb. Solve subtraction problems lc. Solve multiplication problems Id. Solve division problems 2. Solve math problems consisting of decimal numbers 2a. Solve addition problems 2b. Solve subtraction problems 2c. Solve multiplication problems

PAGE 119

no 2d. Solve division problems 3. Solve math problems consisting of mixed numbers 3a. Solve addition problems 3b. Solve subtraction problems 3c. Solve multiplication problems 3d. Solve division problems 4. Convert proper fractions to decimals 5. Convert decimals to proper fractions 6. Convert percents to proper fractions 7. Convert improper fractions to mixed numbers 8. Convert mixed numbers to improper fracti-ns 9. Round numbers to designated decimal places 10. Round mixed numbers to whole numbers 11. Compute simple interest 12. Compute cash discounts 13. Convert problems using the standard U.S. unit of measure and the metric unit of measure 13a. Convert length 13b. Covert capacity 13c. Convert weight 14. Prepare sales slip 15. Compute on a ten-key machine JOB APPLICATION PROCEDURE 1. Complete a Social Security application form 2. Complete a personal data sheet or resume

PAGE 120

Ill 3. Complete job application form 4. Compose and type letter of application 5. Participate in job interview 6. Complete a W-4 form DATA PROCESSING 1. Identify applications of basic data, punched card and magnetic storage processing terms 2. Identify basic data, punched card, and magnetic storage terms test 3. Identify hardware and software as first, second, third, or fourth generation 4. Identify the advantages of each generation of hardware and software over the preceding generation 5. Identify the components on an 80-column card including characteristics and positions 6. Locare requested information on a completed punched card 7. Identify the difference between punched card and magnetic recording equipment 8. Identify the relationship between a source document and a single transaction on a unit or record (such as a punched card or magnetic tape) 9. Identify terms used with punched card and magnetic recording equipment functions 10. Identify computer hardware and software 11. Identify the major programming languages ued in business data processing

PAGE 121

112 12. Manually correct errors in a computer printout 13. Verify the totals on the printout 14. Locate requested information on a computer printout 15. Identify major types of careers in data processing with the duties performed and educational requirements needed 16. Identify applications of computers in modern business BUSINESS ORGANIZATION (CONSUMER ECONOMICS) 1. Identify basic characteristics (concepts) of the American economic system. 2. Identify factors of production 3. Identify functions of marketing 4. Identify functions of money 5. Demonstrate value fluctuation of an individual's real income during deflation and inflation 6. Identify role of budgeting in personal financial planning 7. Identify appropriate sources of consumer credit 8. Identify basic types of consumer credit 9. Identify advantages and disadvantages of using consumer credit 10. Identify role of personal insurance in personal planning 11. Identify elements of a contract 12. Identify wise-buying procedures 13. Identify services performed by consumer information sources LEADERSHIP TRAINING 1 . Prepare an agenda 2. Identify purpose of parliamentary procedure

PAGE 122

113 3. Identify motions of parliamentary procedure 4. Identify parliamentary procedure terms 5. Make a motion 6. Introduce individuals 7. Introduce a speaker 8. Identify characteristics used when introducing a speaker 9. List characteristics of a good news release

PAGE 123

< en z^ o O i— S-

PAGE 124

115 Q

PAGE 125

116 •i-a c O i— i— oo S-

PAGE 126

117 r"OS-

PAGE 127

118 (O C -i-

PAGE 128

119 i — cn_o < s >o i s: o o< COULL LU

PAGE 129

120 (/i a. rs O l/> ST-

PAGE 130

121 o to S_ -iCJ3 Q « ro T3 to CO CJ c: d) 0) -rro •i-rto to >>

PAGE 131

122 •r-r-C 3 C£. <<+=! UJ O l— CC <_> i — fl Ul uj re o ai , ro O QCD S3 tQ.1/1Q • cu o car s. • +j a> +-> 3 O 3 +-> +-> o c: CD T3 CD +J C 4) r-rS i. M+-> Z3 +-> C +J +-> ITS O CO LO •!-rCD > CO r— T3 rt3 CO CD C 31
PAGE 132

APPENDIX K OUTCOMES AND ENTRY LEVEL SKILLS DECISION GRID The student has been referred to the building placement committee for a programming or placement decision. Assume that you are a member of the building committee or team and make the recommendations that you feel are appropriate and then place a number between 0-100 for each decision under each goal to show how well you think that decision will help to reach that goal. Example: Outcome 1 Outcome 2 Outcome 3 Outcome 4 Decision Basic Skills Enjoy School Social Skills Respect Others Place in prevocational program 75 90 60 40 There are no right or wrong answers. It's your judgment that counts! 123

PAGE 133

124 s [ l . L> IS [SAai /O1113

PAGE 134

APPENDIX L OUTCOMES AND DAILY LIVING SKILLS DECISION GRID The student has been referred to the building placement committee for a programming or placement decision. Assume that you are a member of the building committee or team and make the recommendations that you feel are appropriate and then place a number between 0-100 for each decision under each goal to show how well you think that decision will help to reach that goal. Example: Outcome 1 Outcome 2 Outcome 3 Outcome 4 Decision Basic Skills Enjoy School Social Skills Respect Others Place in prevocational program 75 90 60 40 There are no right or wrong answers. It's your judgment that counts! 125

PAGE 135

126 C3 O S LL. L> IS Bulali ^U^O

PAGE 136

REFERENCES Bacher, T. E. Methods of assessing the disadvantaged in manpower programs: A review and analysis (Final Report). Los Angeles: Human Interaction Research Institute, 1972. Barr, A. J. A users guide to SAS . Raleigh, NC: SAS Institute, 1976. Beaumont, J. Philosophical implications of the Vocational Amendments of 1968. In G. F. Law, Contemporary concepts in vocational education . Washington, DC: American Vocational Association, 1971 . Binder, A. Statistical theory. In P. Farnsworth (Ed.), Annual review of psychology . Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews, 1964. Blackman, L. S., & Superstein, G. N. Job analysis and the vocational evaluation of the mentally retarded. Rehabilitation Literature , 1968, 29(4), 103-5, 111. Bloom, B. S. Handbook on formative and summative evaluation of student learning . New York: McGraw-Hill, 1971. Boland, S. K. It's happening: Vocational educators teach the handicapped. Education Unlimited , 1979, Hi), 9-11. Brolin, D. Vocational education for retarded citizens . Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill ,1976. Brolin, D., & Kokaska, C. J. Career education for handicapped children and youth . Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill, 1979. Burnes, R. Methods for individualized instruction. In N. R. Franz, Jr. (Ed.), Individualizing instructional systems for vocational and technical education: A collection of readings . Athens, GA: Vocational Instructional Systems, 1974. Burnstein, E., & Vinokur, A. What a person thinks upon learning he has chosen differently than others: Nice evidence for the persuasive arguments explanation of choice shifts. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 1975, 1J_, 412-426. Calhoun, C. C, & Finch, A. V. Vocational and career education : Concepts and operations . Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1976. 127

PAGE 137

128 Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. Experimental and quasi-experimenta l designs for research . Chicago: Rand McNally, 1963. Carbuhn, W. M., & Wells, I. C. Use of nonreading aptitude tests (NATB) for selecting mental retardates for competitive employment. Measurement and Evaluation in Guidance , 1973, 5_, 460-467. Cegelka, P. T., & Phillips, M. W. Individualized education programming at the secondary level. Teaching Exceptional Children , 1978, 10 , 84-87. Clark, G. M. Mainstreaming for the secondary educable mentally retarded: Is it defensible? Focus on Exceptional Children , 1975, 7(2), 1-5. Comprehensive Occupational Assessment and Training System (COATS) . Trenton, NJ: Prep, 1974. Cobb, H. J. The predictive assessment of the adult retarded for social and vocational adjustment. Part II: Analysis of the literature . Vermillion, SD: University of South Dakota, 1969. Das, R. S. Comparison of worker analysis ratings based on job description and motion-time study. Occupational Psychology , 1960, 34, 141-147. Dictionary of Occupational Titles (4th ed.). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor, 1977. Division of Vocational Education. Standards for vocational education courses . Tallahassee, FL State of Florida Department of Education, 1978. Dunn, D. J. Situational assessment: Models for the future . Menomonie, WI: University of Wisconsin — Stout, Research and Training Center, 1973. Edwards, W. H. Social utilities. The engineering economist . Summer Symposium Series, VI, 1971. Edwards, W., Guttentag, M. , & Snapper, K. A decision-theoretical approach to evaluation research. In E. L. Struening & M. Guttentag (Eds.), Handbook of evaluation research (Vol. I). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1975. Edwards, W., Lindman, H., & Phillips, L. D. Emerging technologies for making decisions. In New directions in psychology II . New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965. Fair, G. W. Vocational education programming for special education st udents in Texas. Final Report . Dallas, TX: University of Texas, 1976. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 133 591)

PAGE 138

129 Florida Department of Education. Employability skills guide . Tallahassee, FL: Author, 1971. Florida Department of Education. Standards for vocational education courses . Tallahassee, FL: Author, 1978. Florida State University. Competencies for business education . Tallahassee, FL: Author, 1978. Fruchter, B. Ability patterns in technical training criteria. Journal of Applied Psychology , 1952, 36, 381-384. Gagne, R. M. L earning and individual differences . Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill, 1967. Gold, M. W. Factor affecting production by the retarded: Base rate. Mental Retardation, 1973, 11_, 41-45. Goldstein, H. Curriculum design for handicapped students. High School Journal , 1976, 59, 290-301 Grubb, F. A t eachers guide to an employment orientation course for special needs students . New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University, Guttentag, M. Subjectivity and its use in evaluation research. Evaluation , 1973, 1(2), 60-65. Harnack, R. S. The teacher, decision maker, and curriculum planner . Scranton, PA: International Textbooks, 1968. Harrington, C. T. Keys to managing competency-based education (Part I) Florida Vocational Journal , 1977, 5_(2), 25-28. Hes ter evaluation system . Chicago: Goodwill Industries, 1972. Hoffman, P. R. An overview of work evaluation. Journal of R ehabilitation , 1970, 36, 16-18. Hopkins, M. A., & Brock, R. J. Menomonie/UW— Stout TMR program: A vocational/life function performance based criterion referenced curriculum . Menonomie, WI: University of Wisconsin—Stout, Special Education Project, 1976. Je wish Employment and Vocational Service (JEVS) . Philadelphia: Author, 1968. Kleiter, G. D. , Gachowetz, H., & Huber, D. Bibliography: Decision making . Salsburg, Austria: Psychological Institute, University of Salsburg, 1976.

PAGE 139

130 Lawry, G. Matching students with jobs: A real challenge. In Vocational evaluation and curriculum modification . DesMoines, lAi Department of Public Instruction, 1972. Lustig, P. An overview of work evaluation. Proceedings of a traini ng institute on factors in work evaluation . Richmond, VA: Richmond Professional Institute, 1966. McCarron, L., & Dial, J. McCarron-Dial work evaluation system . Dallas: Commercial Marketing Enterprises, 1976. Mehrens, W. A., & Lehmann, I. J. Measurement and evaluation in education and psychology . New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1973. MICRO-TOMER . New York: Institute for Crippled and Disabled, 1976. Neff, W. S. Problems of work evaluation. Pe rsonnel and Guidance Journa l, 1966, 24, 682-688. Neff, W. S. Work and human behavior . New York: Aldine-Atherton, 1968. Neff, W. S. Vocational assessment: Theory and models. Journal of Rehabilitation , 1970, 36(1), 27-29. Nie, N. H., Hadlai Hill, C, Jenkins, J. G., Steinbrenner, K. , & Bent, D. H. SPSS: Statistical package for the social sciences . New York: McGraw-Hill , 1975. Nighswonger, W. E. Talent assessment program . DesMoines, IA: Talent Assessment Programs, 1975. Nutter, R. E. A subjective expected utilities approach for evaluating program choices for exceptional children (Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, 1977). Dissertation Abstracts International , 1978, 34, 3416A. (University Microfilms No. 77-26, 328, Overs, R. The theory of job sample tasks (Milwaukee Media for Rehabilitation Research Reports, No. 2). Milwaukee, WI: 1968. Palmer, G. J., & McCormick, E. J. A factor analysis of job activities Journal of A pplied Psychology , 1961, 45(5), 289-294. Phelps, L. A., & Lutz, R. J. Career exploration and preparation for the special needs learner . Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1977. Prosser, C. A., & Quigley, T. A. Vocational education in a democracy . Chicago: American Technical Society, 1949. Pruitt, W. A., & Longfellow, R. E. Work evaluation: The medium and the message. Journal of Rehabilitation , 1970, 36(1), 8-9.

PAGE 140

131 Sankovsky, R., Arthur, G., & Mann, J. Vocational evaluation and work adjustment . Auburn, AL: Materials and Information Center, Alabama Rehabilitation Media Service, 1971. Sing er Vocational Evaluation System . Rochester, NY: Harper and Brothers, 1973. Slovic, W. H. Social utilities. The engineering economist . Summer Symposium Series, VI, 1971. Slovick, P., Fischoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. Behavioral decision theory. In M. R. Rosenzweig & L. W. Porter (Eds.), Annual review of psychology . Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews, 1977. Southwest Regional Resource Center. Administrators manual . Programm i ng for h andic apped students at the secondary level : Re sponding to p ubl ic laws . Salt Lake City, UT: Author, 1977. Super, D. E., & Crites, J. 0. Apprais i ng vocational fitness . New York: Harper and Brothers, 1962. Testing, orientation, and work evaluation in rehabilitation (TOWER). New York: Institute for Crippled and Disabled, 1936. Thompson, J. F. Foundations o f vocational education . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall , 1973. Thorndyke, R. L. The prediction of vocational success. Vocational Guidance Quarterly , 1963, TJ(3), 179-187. Timmerman, W. J., & Doctor, A. C. Special applications of work eval uati on techn i ques for p rediction of employability of the trainable mentally retarded . Stryker, OH: Quadeo Rehabilitation Center, 1974. University of Iowa. The TOWER system--an application of the work sample. In L. Miller (Ed.), Rehabilitation facilities as resources f or rehabilitation cou n selors . Iowa City: University of Iowa, 1970. Usdane, W. M. An examination of selected prevocational techniques utilized in programs for the mentally retarded. Mental Retardati on, 1963, 1(4), 230-237. Valpa r component work sample series (VALPAR) . Tuscon, AZ: Valpar, 1975. Vinokur, A. Cognitive and affective processes influencing risk taking in groups: An expected utilities approach. Journal of P ersonality and So ci al Psychology , 1971, 3_» 131-142. Vocat ional information and evaluation work sample (VIEWS) . Philadelphia: Vocational Research Institute, 1976. Wide range employment sample test (WREST) . Wilmington, DL: Guidance Associates of Delaware, 1972.

PAGE 141

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Carl Thomas Cameron was born in Detroit, Michigan, on December 27, 1943, to Grace and Nelson Cameron. He was raised in Detroit and graduated from Redford High School in 1961. He then studied painting and sculpture at Detroit's Center for Creative Studies, where his talent was honored by the selection of his work for national exhibition. In 1963, he moved to California. The California State University at Long Beach conferred a Bachelor of Arts degree in psychology in 1968, and a Master of Science degree in special education in 1972. From 1968 through 1975, he was employed by the Compton Unified School District with responsibilities for teaching, coordinating, and supervising programs for exceptional youngsters. From 1975 to 1977 he was a faculty member at the University of Wisconsin— Stout where his primary responsibility was teacher training in the area of vocational-special education. In September of 1977, he became a graduate teaching assistant in the Department of Special Education, College of Education, at the University of Florida in Gainesville and served in this capacity through August 1979. During this time he produced several teacher 132

PAGE 142

133 training media packages, sound-slide and video, pertinent to both special and vocational education. He has accepted a position with the University of Missouri— Columbia to develop a graduate level program in vocational-special education. Currently he is a member of the Council for Exceptional Children— International, Division of Career Development, Teacher Education and Mental Retardation; Florida Council for Exceptional Children; American Vocational Association; National Association of Vocational Educators Special Needs Personnel; Florida Vocational Association; and Phi Delta Kappa. Mr. Cameron continues to engage in a wide variety of activities which include the arts— pottery, painting, photography, and sculpture; off road racing; sailing; down hill and cross country skiing.

PAGE 143

I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. " i. /Stuart / Assoc t E. /Schwartz, Chairperson!" i ate/ Professor of Speqial / Education ^y I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Robert F. Algozzine' Associate Professor of Special Education I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. ^~~^ Cji £u. '^tx£ "Jamds W. Hensel Professor of Instructional Leadership and Support I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. r^^P l) 7*2. Cecil D: Mercer Associate Professor of Special Education

PAGE 144

I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Rex E. Schmid Associate Professor of Special Education This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Department of Special Education in the College of Education and to the Graduate Council, and was accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. December 1979 Dean, Graduate School

PAGE 145

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 3 1262 08552 9534


THE EFFECTS OF ENTRY LEVEL SKILL ASSESSMENT
TRAINING ON THE PLACEMENT DECISIONS FOR HANDICAPPED
STUDENTS MADE BY VOCATIONAL EDUCATORS
By
CARL T. CAMERON
A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE
GRADUATE COUNCIL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
1979

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Appreciation is extended to Dr. Stuart Schwartz who provided
the guidance throughout my advanced degree program. His knowledge,
insight, and most of all humanness has allowed the pursuit of
knowledge with dignity. Dr. Robert Algozzine was an everpresent
source of knowledge and encouragement. Dr. Jim Hensel provided
sensitivity and understanding about relationships with the real
world. Dr. Cecil Mercer always had the questions that provided
the stimulus, and Dr. Rex Schmid knew the limits and that they
constantly expand. Finally, a special word of thanks to Dr. Ron
Nutter, who has encouraged the development of my cognitive and
intellectual pursuits. It is a rare opportunity to learn from
these men.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii
LIST OF TABLES vi
LIST OF FIGURES vi i
ABSTRACT viii
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION 1
Statement of the Problem 2
Rationale 5
Entry Level Skills Criterion 5
Placement Decision Process 6
Definitions of Terms 8
Limitations and Delimitations 8
Population 8
Setting 9
Training 9
Materials 9
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 10
Vocational Evaluation 11
Standardized Psychological and Vocational Testing 11
Work Samples 14
Situational Assessment 18
Job Analysis 19
Summary 20
Vocational Education 22
Competency Based Curriculum 24
Individualized Instruction 25
Open Access 25
Entry Level Skills 26
Need 26
Implementation Models 27

Decision Theory 29
Multi Attribute Utility Measurement 29
Educational Implications 31
Identifying Educational Outcomes 32
Subjective Expected Utilities 33
Impact of Data on Decision Making 33
Summary 34
CHAPTER III
METHODS AND PROCEDURES 36
Subjects 36
Pretest 38
Intervention 42
Posttest 47
Experimental Design 48
Hypotheses 50
Data Collection and Analysis 52
Data Collection 52
Data Analysis 53
CHAPTER IV
RESULTS 56
Hypothesis 1 56
Hypothesis la 57
Hypothesis lb 57
Hypothesis lc 60
Hypothesis Id 62
Hypothesis le 64
Hypothesis If 66
Hypothesis 2 68
Hypothesis 2a 68
Hypothesis 2b 70
Hypothesis 2c 70
CHAPTER V
DISCUSSION 74
Summary of the Data 74
Hypothesis 1 74
Hypothesis 2 77
Constraints 79
Level of Intervention 79
Training Methodology 80
IV

APPENDIX
A GROUP ASSIGNMENT BY SUBJECT NUMBER 82
B VOCATIONAL EDUCATION OUTCOMES 83
C RAWGOO INSTRUCTIONS 85
D CASE STUDIES 91
E TRAINING OPTIONS FOR VOCATIONAL EDUCATION 98
F VOCATIONAL OUTCOMES AND PLACEMENT PLANNING DECISION
GUIDE 99
G LEVELS OF COMPETENCY FOR EACH BUSINESS AND OFFICE
CAREER CLUSTER 101
H VOCATIONAL INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM STANDARDS 102
I LEVEL 1 COMPETENCIES FOR BUSINESS EDUCATION 105
J GOAL II: TO IMPROVE PERSONAL APPEARANCE AND HYGIENE . 114
K OUTCOMES AND ENTRY LEVEL SKILLS DECISION GRID .... 123
L OUTCOMES AND DAILY LIVING SKILLS DECISION GRID .... 125
REFERENCES 127
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 132
v

LIST OF TABLES
Tabl e
1 Vocational Education Curriculum Models 23
2 Multivariate Analysis of Variance/Case Study of
Michael 58
3 Multivariate Analysis of Variance/Case Study of
Carolyn 59
4 Multivariate Analysis of Variance/Case Study of
John 61
5 Pre and Posttest Subjective Expected Utilities
Comparison of the Case Study of Michael for
Subjects Receiving Entry Level Skills Criterion
Training (E's) 63
6 Pre and Posttest Subjective Expected Utilities
Comparison of the Case Study of Michael for
Subjects Not Receiving Entry Level Skills
Criterion Training 65
7 Pretest Subjective Expected Utilities Comparison
of the Case Study of Michael for Subjects Both
in Experimental and Control Groups 67
8 Placement Choice Comparison of the Case Study of
Michael for Subjects in Experimental and Control
Groups 69
9 Placement Choice Comparison of the Case Study of
Carolyn for Subjects in Experimental and Control
Groups 71
10 Placement Choice Comparison of the Case Study of
John for Subjects in Experimental and Control
Groups 73
11 Comparison of Pretest and Posttest Placement
Decisions/Case Study of Michael 78

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
1 Individualized Instruction System: Diagnosis of
Prerequisite Skills 28
2 Experimental Design 49
3 Posttest Comparisons 54
vi i

Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate Council
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
THE EFFECTS OF ENTRY LEVEL SKILL ASSESSMENT
TRAINING ON THE PLACEMENT DECISIONS FOR HANDICAPPED
STUDENTS MADE BY VOCATIONAL EDUCATORS
By
Carl T. Cameron
December, 1979
Chairman: Stuart E. Schwartz
Major Department: Special Education
The purpose of this dissertation was to evaluate the effects of
entry level skill assessment training on the value and level of
placement decisions made by vocational educators about handicapped
students. With the passage of federal legislation which encourages
the placement of handicapped students in regular classrooms, the
skills for assessing both student and training program by the voca¬
tional educator become increasingly important. The use of entry
level skills criterion may present a viable alternative for making
objective and functional decisions for handicapped students.
The training of entry level skill assessment utilized decision
theory techniques for analyzing exit level competencies and rating
the subjective expected utilities of the entry level skills developed
by the experimental group. The control group was provided with
decision theory techniques for evaluation of existing program
v i i i
materials.

The evaluation procedure utilized components of decision theory
techniques to rank and weight vocational education outcomes and
rate the subjective expected utility of placement decisions. A
pretest and posttest evaluation was utilized which consisted of
the application of decision theory techniques to the placement
decisions of a series of case studies of handicapped students.
The results of the study indicated that the training had no
significant effect on the values of the subjective expected utilities
of the placement choices or the number of choices for each placement
option. The discussion focuses on the constraints involved in
developing entry level skills training procedures and utilizing
decision theory techniques for placement decisions.
IX

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
In Keys to Managing Competency-Based Education, Part One,
Harrington (1977) suggests that an individual who is undertaking
vocational training must select a vocational goal around which a
training program can be built. In order to undertake the goal
setting process, several kinds of information need to be taken
into consideration. The relevant information includes personal,
job related, and market information. Job related information
including prerequisite skills is required to adequately make a
career decision (Harrington, 1977). If prerequisite skills
knowledge is required to adequately set vocational goals, it
appears that prerequisite skills knowledge is also a requirement
in the selection of the component(s) of a training program.
In addition to utilizing the goal setting process in career
training selection, that selection may also be a function of
opportunity. Fair (1976) argues that special needs students
are underenrolled in vocational education because of the selective
nature of the vocational programs. The selective nature appears
to develop from the lack of adequate facilities and the desire to
recruit more "able" students does not appear to be objective.
1

2
Two of the most predominantly stated reasons for underenrollment
of special needs students in vocational education are (a) the in¬
ability of the staff to maintain adequate safety procedures and (b)
the unrealistic requirements for the additional individual assistance
for special needs students. Additional reasons expressed include
the need to modify curriculum, additional instructional assistance
and evaluation criterion (Fair, 1976). Fair concluded that if a
behavioral statement of entrance competencies were available for
each vocational education program, it would permit an objective
evaluation of each prospective student, and it would also serve as
a standard for the vocational preparation of special education
students. It is the aptitude for vocational skills which appears
to underlie the rationale for not providing equal accessibility
to vocational programs for handicapped students. Carrols (cited
in Gagne, 1967) suggests that "aptitude is partly a matter of the
possession of prerequisite knowledges and skills, or the lack
thereof" (p. 42).
Statement of the Problem
Special needs learners are usually designated as such because
they fail to develop basic skills through normal growth and develop¬
ment or through early school experiences. The need for basic skill
development is a key question for determining entry into vocational
education programs (Phelps & Lutz, 1977). Prevocational education

3
has been generally accepted as a pretraining procedure for providing
basic skills for occupational preparation. However, prevocational
and career education appear to be designed to provide generalized
and global skills which may be applicable in a variety of voca¬
tional situations. In fact, there is little, if any, evidence to
suggest that these "prerequisite" skills are related to, or will
increase, the probability of assimilating specific content in
occupational areas. For example, the development of adequate job
interviewing skills does not directly relate to the tool use
required in the construction cluster training. In fact, a major
problem with examining prerequisite skills is the extreme difficulty
in determining what basic skills or concepts are essential pre¬
requisites for a given learning task (Phelps & Lutz, 1977).
The identification of prerequisite or entry level skills
criteria may have potential value in the training process. One
possible effect would be the use of this information in making
placement decisions for handicapped students into regular vocational
education. Brolin and Kokaska (1979) suggest a variety of methods
for helping the handicapped student to become occupationally
prepared. However, almost no information is available concerning
how decisions are made concerning which program, course, or
service delivery model provides the least restrictive environment.
During the last 15 years, interest has been generated by
researchers (Binder, 1964; Edwards, Guttentag, & Snapper, 1975;
Guttentag, 1973; Nutter, 1977) in the use of decision making theory

4
and accompanying procedures in making educational programming
decisions. This model may provide a framework to formulate the
determination of prerequisite or entry level skills. Of even
broader significance, and an apparent logical extension is the
question: If entry level skills could be determined through the
use of decision making theory techniques, will this information
increase the likelihood of being recommended for placement in a
regular vocational education setting?
The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of entry
level skill assessment training on the types of program placement
recommendations made for handicapped youngsters by vocational
education personnel. It is of utmost importance to determine if
certain kinds of information increase the opportunity and acceptance
of handicapped students for vocational education. This study of the
effects of entry level skill assessment training on the program
placement decisions made by vocational educators includes the
following questions:
1. Does the training in the use of an evaluation of entry
level skills criteria have an effect on the perceived utility of
options which place handicapped students in vocational education
programs?
2. Does the training in the use of an evaluation of entry
level skills criteria have an effect on the number of choices made
which place handicapped students in programs toward regular vocational
education and away from special education programs?

5
Rationale
The rationale for the proposed study has both direct and
indirect implications. The current dearth of information regarding
prerequisite skills and their utility in the decision making process
suggest that information generated in this study will provide data
for entry level skills criterion and the placement decision process.
Entry Level Skills Criterion
Entry level skills have not been approached directly as a
negotiable criteria for entrance in vocational programs for special
needs students. The predominant procedure(s) to date have been:
(a) grade appropriate placements, (b) special educator's evaluation,
(c) available space in classrooms, and (d) student interest.
Currently no data have been generated to substantiate any of these
procedures as adequate for maximizing occupational training.
Classroom requirements (tasks and exit level skills) can be
determined through the use of job analysis techniques. At this
time, these task analysis techniques have been utilized in vocational
settings to analyze tasks presented in the classroom, but little, if
any, attention has been directed towards entry level skills
criterion. In other words, educators can determine what skills
will be taught, but the task analysis procedure does not include
prerequisite skills assessment. It may be that this technique will
be utilized as a component of the entry level skills assessment
process.

6
While providing an initial look at the level of skills required
for entry, entry level skills criterion information may be utilized
to identify a baseline from which negotiations (i.e., placement
decisions where entry level criteria has not been met) can develop
for students who may vary in their abilities to meet entry level or
exit level criteria in a mainstreamed vocational education setting.
Standards for preparation and placement of special needs students
for regular classrooms have always been elusive and in many cases
arbitrary. Through the development of entry level skill requirements,
special educators will know what competencies are required, when a
student has reached that level and negotiations can take place on
the basis of objective criteria between special education and voca¬
tional education staff. In addition, these same competencies could
form the basis for development of entry level assessment and pre¬
training modules (if required) for all students.
Finally, the development of entry level assessment and training
may have generalizabi1ity to other mainstream programs throughout
public education systems. It appears that the need for clarifica¬
tion of entry level skills is not unique to vocational programming
and may suggest a procedure for other instructional areas.
Placement Decision Process
Fair (1976) and Boland (1979) describe the concerns of vocation¬
al educators regarding the dichotomy between the mandated opportunity
for handicapped students to participate in vocational education

7
where appropriate, and the need to make the program fair and
rewarding for their nonhandicapped students. The criteria
necessary to make decisions which increase the likelihood of
completing vocational training goals has not yet been established.
The use of decision theory can provide the mechanism to make
program placement selections from available options. The selection
of the alternative with the highest vocational value for the student
is influenced by the relative importance of the outcomes. A
concomitant influence is the perceived likelihood of maximizing
that outcome for any particular placement option. For instance,
if the most important outcome selected is "to train only those who
want, need, or are able to benefit" and the least important is "to
provide for on the job training experiences," then the placement
decision will be more heavily influenced by the first outcome, given
that the perceived likelihood of maximizing both outcomes is
identical. In other words, the subjective expected utility theory
provides a method for rating how important each outcome is relative
to other possible outcomes and selecting an alternative that provides
for the highest possibility of maximizing those outcomes. Mutter
(1977) suggests, "The rational strategy is to choose an alternative
with the greatest expected utility" (p. 27). The application of this
theory has shown promise as an appropriate technology for making
programming decisions based on what the decision maker considers
the most important program outcome.

8
Definitions of Terms
Daily living skills: A wide variety of personal and social
skills designed to allow independent functioning in the least
restrictive environment for handicapped individuals.
Entry level skill: A skill which can be successfully demon¬
strated prior to entry on which subsequent instruction is based.
Exit level skill: A skill which has been successfully demon¬
strated prior to or at completion of an instructional program.
Placement option: An educational placement for handicapped
youngsters offering specific types of instructional services
designed to offer maximum service in the least restrictive environ¬
ment.
Subjective expected utilities: A numerical value represented
by summing the products of each decision option and the value
associated with each vocational outcome.
Vocational outcomes: A statement of desired outcomes for
vocational education which are agreed upon by subjects in this study.
Limitations and Delimitations
Population
The population used in this study is defined as vocational
educators. The size of the sample and the selectivity of backgrounds
limit the ability to generalize to other vocationally trained
instructors.

9
Setting
Vocational Education/Special Education Teachers Working With
Handicapped Students is a three week workshop designed to present
practical methods for vocation preparation of handicapped students.
The use of this workshop as a setting for this study delimits the
participants to vocational educators with an expressed interest in
improving their skills with handicapped students. This in no way
infers that all vocational educators are so disposed.
Training
The short training sessions designed into this study may limit
the possible effectiveness of an intervention procedure. A single
session provides awareness but not necessarily competence in the
skills presented.
Materials
The use of brief case studies and course descriptions limit
the interpretation of the factors used by subjects in the decision
process. While attempts have been made to insure familiarity and
generality of descriptions, no connection between these decisions
and decisions made in a real situation can be inferred from these
results.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
An examination of the literature reveals little, if any,
reference to entry level skills criterion as it applies to voca¬
tional education. Much of the literature concerning secondary
level mainstreaming suggests it is the role of vocational education
to both adapt classroom requirements to the learner and provide
entry level job skills (Cegelka & Phillips, 1978). The predominant
emphasis on entry level skills has come from techniques developed
from work evaluation, adjustment, and placement. In an analysis of
the procedures involved in both vocational rehabilitation (i.e.,
work evaluation, adjustment, and placement) and vocational education
the following procedural associations are apparent:
vocational
rehabilitation
Enter
Program vocational
education
vocational evaluation
job analysis
prevocational and
vocational training
job placement
job adjustment
entry level skills assessment
classroom analysis
entry level skills training
r
Ex i t
Program
vocational education
exit level skills assessment
10

11
The review of the literature will present vocational evalua¬
tion as it suggests techniques for entry level skills assessment.
Job analysis will be discussed as it relates to classroom analysis.
Current developments in vocational education as they apply to entry
level skills will be presented, and a review of some preliminary
developments in entry level skill assessment. The final section
will discuss the use of decision theory as a technique for
eliciting program placement decisions.
Vocational Evaluation
Neff (1966) and Brolin (1976) essentially agree that vocational
evaluation can be viewed from differing approaches. For the purpose
of this discussion the approaches will consist of standardized
psychological and vocational testing; work and job samples; and
situational assessment.
Standardized Psychological and Vocational Testing
Standardized tests are basically an aid to the decision making
involved in the placement process. Due to the ease in administra¬
tion and scoring, reasonable reliability and predictive values,
standardized tests are utilized by educators in a wide variety of
educational settings (Mehrens & Lehmann,1973). However, according
to Neff (1968), standardized tests are suitable primarily for
testing of individuals for the purposes of global screening. A
major drawback is the minimal predictive value of the instruments.

12
Neff (1968) suggests that the characteristics of the standardization
sample, the difficulty of obtaining valid objective criteria for
work performance, the differences in test situation and the reality
of the work situation may limit the usefulness of standardized
instruments with the retarded. This particularly would apply to
those with no prior work history. Brolin (1976) has identified
several values of standardized tests. Among these positive
attributes are observational data collected during the testing
situation such as:
1. client problem solving strategies,
2. frustration levels,
3. concentration, and
4. interpersonal communication skills,
all of which may assist markedly in the decision making process.
Vocational aptitude tests usually measure an individual's
ability to perform skills assumed to be related to vocational
performance in a particular skill area. Brolin (1976) suggests
that most vocational aptitude instruments used with the mentally
retarded assess an individual's ability to complete manual tasks.
Some of the more commonly used measures are the Purdue Pegboard,
Bennett Hand Tool Dexterity Test, Crawford Small Parts Dexterity
Test, and the MacQuarie Test for Mechanical Ability.
In addition to assessments of manual tasks, more comprehensive
evaluation instruments have found increasing use in evaluation of
vocational aptitude. The General Aptitude Test Battery (GATB)

13
appears to have some applicability for the mentally retarded. It
was developed by the United States Employment Service for the
purpose of assessing those vocationally significant aptitudes
for vocational counseling job selection and placement (Brolin,
1976). The test measures aptitudes in nine areas including
general learning, verbal aptitude, numerical ability, spatial
aptitude, form perception, clerical perception, motor coordination,
finger dexterity, and manual dexterity. The battery makes predic¬
tions for about 500 occupations of the unskilled and semi-skilled
type.
A strength of the GATB is its integration with the Dictionary
of Occupational Titles (DOT) which constitutes a comprehensive
taxonomy of the American job market (Bacher, 1972). However, the
battery requires an independent reading level of approximately
seventh grade which is unrealistic for many non-reading and dis¬
advantaged clients. For this reason, the Manpower Administration
developed the NATB, Non-reading Aptitude Test Battery, which has
similar subtests to the GATB and supposedly understood by individuals
with limited verbal abilities. Both Carbuhn and Wells (1973) and
Brolin (1976) recommend the NATB as a valuable source of measure¬
ment of vocational aptitude for educable mentally retarded persons.
While standardized psychological and vocational testing is
still utilized in the assessment of vocational aptitude, the recent
developments in the area of work samples has overshadowed the use
of standardized tests except primarily for screening purposes.

14
Work Samples
Work samples have become increasingly popular in vocational
assessment over the past several years (Brolin, 1976). A work
sample is a simulated work activity without an actual industrial
counterpart, while a job sample is a part of a job that exists in
an industrial setting. Both sample types of evaluation include the
use of tools and standards associated with jobs (Sankovsky,
Arthur, & Mann, 1971). Neff (1968) combines the concept of work
and job samples as a mock up or close simulation of an industrial
operation. The work sample is essentially the kind of work a
potential employee would perform on the job. The literature is
replete with studies indicating the superiority of work samples
as an approach to vocational assessment. Jewish Employment Voca¬
tional Service (1968), Overs (1968), and Usdane (1963) offer support
for work samples because the samples assess the same skills,
aptitudes, and abilities required by competitive employment situa¬
tions. Other studies indicate that because the samples resemble
real work situations, they are more motivating to clients than are
standardized tests (Hoffman, 1970; Neff, 1966; Overs, 1968). In
addition, educational level, speech and hearing disabilities, and
high levels of anxiety effect work samples less than standardized
tests (Lustig, 1966; Overs, 1968).
The use of work samples for mentally retarded populations has
been viewed as superior to standardized tests by Gold (1973),
Hoffman (1970), and Neff (1970). In contrast, several studies

15
have indicated that standardized tests may provide more usable
vocational information than work samples (Cobb, 1969; Sankovsky,
Arthur, & Mann, 1971; Super & Crites, 1962). According to
Timmerman and Doctor (1974), many jpb differences cannot be
duplicated by work samples which affect the predictive validity
of job samples.
One particular outgrowth of work samples has been the develop¬
ment of work sample batteries or systems. These work evaluation
systems have been developed to assess vocational potential in a wide
variety of job situations. Brolin and Kokaska (1979) report that
the work sample and work sample system procedures are difficult to
validate on actual job situations. However, there is a distinct
advantage over most standardized vocational aptitude and interest
tests because of their close proximity to the world of work. This
face validity provides a more readily observable significance to
the participants (Brolin & Kokaska, 1979, p. 219). Several of the
more widely used systems are presented below:
TOWER. One of the earliest developed batteries is TOWER,
Testing and Work Evaluation in Rehabilitation (1936). TOWER
includes 14 areas of work evaluation measuring 110 work skills.
Evaluation takes approximately three weeks and tasks range from
simple to complex.
MICRO-TOWER. A more recent version of the batteries developed
by the Institute for the Crippled and Disabled, MICRO-TOWER (1976)
consists of 13 work sample areas. The samples are presented through

16
the use of audiocassette and photobook instructions. A learning
period is permitted before evaluation, which may be useful for
populations with learning deficiencies.
JEVS. Developed by the Jewish Employment Vocational Service
(1963), JEVS is a system that consists of 28 work samples covering
20 different work areas with 10 worker trait groupings. Originally
developed for use with culturally disadvantaged youth, the samples
have been successful with many physically, emotionally, and mentally
handicapped individuals (Brolin & Kokaska, 1979).
VIEWS. An adaptation of several work tasks, Vocational Informa-
tiona and Evaluation Work Sample (1976) was designed to assess the
work potential of learning disabled and mentally retarded clients.
One unique feature of VIEWS is that it does not require reading as
a prerequisite skill and incorporates the use of demonstration,
practice, and repeated instruction as techniques for assessing the
potential of the clients for various types of occupational areas.
SINGER. The Singer Vocational Evaluation System (1973) is a
work oriented screening device designed to help the individual make
a vocational choice through a hands-on exploration of several job
tasks. The system utilizes an audio-visual approach to present
programmed instruction of the performance of specific tasks. The
tasks, which are grouped in 17 different occupational clusters, are
self contained within each work station and complete with the
necessary instructional tools.

17
WREST. The Wide Range Employment Samples Test (1972) is
composed of 10 work samples. Developed in a workshop for the
mentally retarded, the WREST is designed for moderately and
mildly retarded individuals. The relatively short administration
time and precise instructions are of particular value in this
batter-.
VALPAR. The Valpar Component Work Sample System (1975)
was designed to provide information on worker characteristics and
is keyed to the Worker Trait Arrangement in the Dictionary of
Occupational Titles (1977). VALPAR consists of work samples which
include small tools, size discrimination, numerical sorting, upper
extremity range of motion, clerical comprehension and aptitude,
independent problem solving, multilevel sorting, simulated assembly,
whole body range of motion, tri-level measurement, eye-hand-foot
coordination, soldering and inspection, money handling, integrated
peer performance, electrical circuitry and print reading, and drafting.
COATS. The Comprehensive Occupational Assessment and Training
System (1974) consists of four major components: Living Skills,
Work Samples, Job Matching System, and Employability Attitudes.
Additional systems include the Talent Assessment Program
(Nighswonger, 1975), the Hester Evaluation System (1972), and the
McCarron-Dial Work Evaluation System (McCarron & Dial, 1976).
The use of work samples and work evaluation systems has signifi¬
cantly influenced the vocational evaluation of handicapped persons.

18
A major problem in its use in vocational education programs is
the extensive resources required to develop and maintain a
complete array of work samples and work evaluation systems.
Situational Assessment
The situational assessment approach is the most commonly and
comprehensively used work evaluation approach (Brolin, 1976).
This approach is concerned with observation of individuals on
real or simulated work tasks and within a group rather than an
individual setting. Dunn (1973) argues that vocational evaluation
predictors can be expected to reach their greatest validity when
they closely approximate a real work setting.
Pruitt and Longfellow (1970) conceptualize the components of
situational assessment as follows:
1. planning and scheduling observations;
2. observing, describing, and recording data;
3. organization analysis and interpretation of
observational data;
4. inclusion of observation in the evaluation.
Brolin (1976) presents several advantages and disadvantages of situa¬
tional assessment:
Advantages
1. activity approximates the real work situation;
2. eliminates typical test situation which is anxiety
producing;

3.
19
possible to assess many typical work behaviors
(interpersonal relationships, cooperation, pressures,
authority);
4. gives person time to adjust to novel situation; and
5. evaluation can take place under a variety of
conditions.
Disadvantages
1. dependent on accurate interpretation of observers;
2. problem of variance among raters; and
3. group sitting may effect the rater's evaluations.
Job Analysis
Thorndyke (1963) has aptly described job analysis as consisting
essentially of a characteristic of the work performed on a job and
an analysis of worker characteristics relevant to job performance.
The job description is usually qualitative and the worker analysis
is usually more quantitative. Lawry (1972) describes job analysis as
"a systematic way of observing jobs; determining the significant
worker requirements, physical demands, and environmental conditions;
and reporting this information in a concise, usable format" (p. 27).
Job analysis has been approached through the statistical
procedure of factor analysis. The objective is to isolate dimen¬
sions of aptitude common to a broad range of jobs (Fruchter, 1952;
Palmer & McCormick, 1961). Techniques other than factor analysis
have been employed to do job analysis. Das (1960) used both job
descriptions and motion time study techniques in analyzing worker
requirements.

20
Blackman and Superstein (1968) suggest that job analysis can
be a major contributing factor in the development of an instruc¬
tional system. Using careful analysis of the task to be learned
as manifested by the production of appropriate terminal behaviors,
these terminal behaviors provide two distinct types of information:
(a) methods of instructional systems designed to evoke these
behaviors and (b) attention to those psychological attributes in
the learner than appear to be prerequisites.
Hopkins and Brock (1976) suggest that information obtained and
recorded through the job analysis should cover all criteria for job
placement, "from union dues to specific behaviors and tasks required"
(p. 54). Both standard formats and narrative forms are utilized in
job analysis. Hopkins and Brock (1976) suggest that a standard form
is the most useful approach when comparing one job with another and
providing comparisons of student profiles with job analysis components.
Summary
This section, in its review of vocational evaluation, describes
techniques used for identifying skills necessary to be competitive
in the world of work. If these particular techniques are applied
to determining skills necessary to be competitive (i.e., successful)
in the world of vocational training, the following conditions appear
to be necessary.
1. Standards for training must be provided either on an
individual class basis or system wide, which are shown to be specifi¬
cally related to vocational success, or

21
2. Training situations must be identical to the actual
vocational setting from which standards are derived.
Currently, neither of these conditions appear to exist at
adequate levels in vocational education programs. The development
of entry level skill assessment may be shown to be related to these
evaluation techniques, which will provide a needed link in the
ongoing evaluation from entry level of vocational training to exit
level job competencies.
In addition, job analysis provides techniques which show promise
for the assessment of entry level skills. Its primary utility,
however, has been for identifying skills necessary to be presented
in a training sequence and has not addressed the question of how
pretraining in entry level skills may facilitate the quality and
rate of the assimilation of vocational education. The development
of additional procedures to establish initial entry level skill
criteria may be a necessary companion to the assessment of the skills
currently presented in a vocational education program. In fact, a
promising relationship may be established through the use of job
analysis techniques to provide data on existing programs. These
existing techniques, combined with the procedures for outcome
assessment and decision making presented in this study, may well
offer the symbiotic relationship necessary for determining entry
level skills criteria.

22
Vocational Education
One of the major problems confronting vocational education is
that of developing and maintaining curricula that are attuned to
the rapid social and technological changes in society (Calhoun &
Finch, 1976). The basic curriculum models are presented in
Table 1 and summarized below.
1. The subject centered curriculum is a traditional organiza¬
tional pattern at the secondary level. Students are often
separated into tracks--college bound, general, and vocational.
Individual subjects are within each track, there is no overlap
between tracks, and courses are arranged vertically.
2. The core curriculum is a group of separate subjects
required of all students regardless of track. Vocational education
may or may not be a component.
3. The cluster based curriculum is based on the premise that
certain occupations have common learning and skill requirements
and that students who have mastered these skills have more employ¬
ment options.
4. The organic curriculum design leads to options permitting
the maximum self actualization of each individual. The curriculum
prepares students for employment either before or following gradua¬
tion. The student would have entry level skills permitting access
to the labor market at any point.
5. A competency based curriculum is one that specifies the
desired objectives or competencies in an explicit form, identifies

Table 1
Vocational Education Curriculum Models
Entry Level Requirements
Sequential Evaluation
Exit Level Criteria
Subject Centered
Curriculum
Not Specified
Not Specified
Course Outcomes
Core
Curriculum
Not Specified
Not Specified
Course Outcomes
Cluster Based
Curriculum
Not Specified
Individual Course
Requirements
Specific Occupational
Requirements
Organic
Curriculum
Not Specified
Variable Level
Entry Level into
post secondary options
Competency Based
Curriculum
General
Assumptions
Specific Intermediat-
Competencies
Explicit
Requirements
Individualized
Instruction
Variabl e
Individual Structured
Criteria
Explicit
Requirements
Open
Access
Variable
Specific
Selection
Variable

24
the criteria to be applied in assessing the learner's competencies,
and holds the learner accountable for meeting these objectives.
6. Individualized instruction is characterized by (a)
selection and sequencing of instructional tasks and objectives,
(b) development or selection of materials to teach each objective,
(c) evaluation for proper pupil placement, (d) plans for develop¬
ing individualized programs of study, and (e) procedures for
evaluating and monitoring individual progress.
7. An open access curriculum is characterized by flexible
scheduling, small group and individualized instruction, a high
level of student involvement, team teaching, and an emphasis on
individual interests and abilities. Open access curriculum is the
counterpart of the open school concept.
In an evaluation of these major curriculum models for voca¬
tional programming, the results presented in Table 1 suggest that
only three curriculum models (competency based, individualized
instruction, and open access) address themselves to the problem
of entry level requirements.
Competency Based Curriculum
The objectives of the curriculum are met through a series of
functions which include identifiable processes and products
(Calhoun & Finch, 1976). Included in these functions are the
specification of assumptions. These assumptions could be inter¬
preted to mean the prerequisite skills necessary for entry into

25
this competency sequence. Analysis of the following two models
(individualized instruction and open access) would suggest that
they are variations of a competency based curriculum utilizing
variable entry requirements. The major difference appears to be
in a program centered versus student centered orientation.
Individualized Instruction
The curriculum model for individualized instruction includes
as one of its elements, an evaluation procedure for placing
students at the appropriate point in the curriculum. The major
assumption is that students are, in fact, within minimal entry
level competency range and placement is primarily an assessment
procedure locating an entry point into the instructional sequence.
Open Access
In an open access curriculum the assumption of success is a
logical extension of the student developing his or her own formula
or instructional plan. Entry level requirements are determined
through a cooperative decision between student and instructor. In
this process entry level skills are assessed jointly and are a
variable unique to each individual.
The development of these curriculum models has been a response
to the rapid social and technological changes in society (Calhoun &
Finch, 1976). Despite these developments and federal mandates,
cooperative efforts toward improved programming for the handicapped
is not a widely prevalent practice (Cegelka & Phillips, 1978).

26
Cegelka and Phillips suggest that placement of handicapped students
in vocational programs should have variable time periods contingent
upon meeting objectives (1978, p. 86). It appears, however, to
Clark (1975) that vocational education has not and may not be
willing to use alternative instructional and curriculum models
like competency based instruction in lieu of more traditional fixed
content curriculum.
Entry Level Skills
“The characteristics of handicapped learners as they have
bearing on school learning call for explicitness in curriculum and
purposefulness in teaching method not characteristically found in
the ordinary school curriculum" (Goldstein, 1976, p. 290).
Entry level skills, a form of explicitness in curriculum is dis¬
cussed from the viewpoint of need and current state of implementation.
Need
Phelps and Lutz (1977) suggest that if a prospective special
needs learner has attained certain minimal competencies that are
important for task performance, that should be sufficient to permit
the student to initiate the instructional module. However, they
note, if "the basic skills and concepts are viewed by occupational
educators as prerequisites and are used to screen students out of
occupational programs, they have been seriously misused" (p. 243).
Almost all references to entry level skills suggest that the
role of entry level skills is to determine placement. Bloom

27
(1971) suggests entry skills assessment is for determining placement
on a continuum applicable to the subject. Calhoun and Finch (1976)
state that entry level skills determine to what degree skills are
already mastered and to prescribe proper learning packets.
Implementation Models
Teske (cited in Calhoun & Finch, 1976) developed a comprehen¬
sive model for curriculum design that has been successfully used in
vocational education. As a component of this model Teske requires
an assessment of entrance requirements for course training standards.
Entrance requirements (i.e., previous training and/or experience
needed as prerequisites) are includes in the course training
standards along with (a) purpose (employment capability), (b)
qualifications of graduates, (c) career duties and task capabilities,
(d) job elements, and (e) proficiency standard for each job element.
Burnes (1974) describes a model for implementing entry level
skills in an individualized instruction system. Figure 1 illustrates
the use of a remedial center approach to intervention prior to
entry into an instructional program.
At Rutgers University, Francine Grubb (1976) produced a
series of employment orientation courses for special needs students
designed to provide basic skill development for entry into regular
vocational programs. The course titles include (a) basic business,
(b) beauty culture, (c) hospitality, (d) laundry, (e) sewing, and
(f) foods. A major problem of this presentation is lack of

Figure 1
Individualized Instruction System:
Diagnosis of Prerequisite Skills

29
a description of how criteria were established for entry level
competencies of vocational programs.
Decision Theory
The procedures used by individuals and groups to make decisions
has been the subject of research for many years (Kleiter, Gachowetz,
& Huber, 1976). The development of tools for analyzing decision
making has evolved as probability theory, theories of games,
classical and Bayesian statistics, operations research, and
utility theory (Edwards, Lindman, & Phillips, 1965). In a recent
report, Slovic, Fischhoff, and Lichtenstein (1977) suggest that a
trend is definitely apparent in the study of decision making by an
increasingly diverse set of disciplines, including psychology,
medicine, and education.
This discussion of decision theory will be limited to the use
of utility theory as a focus for the analysis of decision making as
it applies to education.
Multi Attribute Utility Measurement
Edwards (1971) has developed an application of utility theory
that has come to be known as multi attribute utility measurement.
This technology has provided an orientation toward easy communica¬
tion and use in environments in which time is short and decision
makers are numerous and overextended (Edwards, Guttentag, & Snapper,
1975). The following is a brief description of the sequence
developed by Edwards (1971).

30
Step 1: Identify all individuals or organizations whose
utilities are to be maximized and who have a stake in the decision
making process.
Step 2: Identify the issues relevant to the decision making
process.
Step 3: Identify the outcomes of the action, or decision.
These outcomes become the entities to be evaluated.
Step 4: Identify the dimensions of value (or goals) related
to the importance of the entities under consideration. Often the
goals may be restated, combined, or eliminated.
Step 5: Rank the dimensions in order of importance through
group and/or individual participation.
Step 6: Rate the dimensions in order of importance, preserv¬
ing the ratios. Assign the least important dimension a weight of 10
then increase the values of the dimensions according to importance.
Step 7: Sum the importance weights, dividing each weight by
the sum, then multiplying by 100.
Step 8: Measure the location of each entity being evaluated on
each dimension.
Step 9: Calculate utilities for entities using the equation
Ui = Xi Wj U-ij. This equation is the formula for determining a
weighted average.
Step 10: Decide. Make the decision based on the maximum U-j.
If a subset of i is to be chosen, then the subset for which U-¡ is
maximum is the best decision.

31
Educational Implications
With the passage of the Education of All Handicapped Children
Act (P.L. 94-142) the emphasis on least restrictive environment
left little doubt as to the emphasis on the most "normal" environ¬
ment for education to take place for handicapped students. With
this emphasis came the obvious link to an expanded role for the
regular classroom teacher as a major source of instructional
services. The inclusion of the regular classroom teacher as a
member of the placement committee has been acknowledged. Harnack (1968)
suggests there is a cluster of knowledge that resides with the in¬
structor; therefore, the instructor must help make decisions related
to curriculum planning. However, Nutter (1977) suggests that the
procedures for arriving at placement decisions has not been identified,
the context within which placement decisions are made has not been
specified and the impact of training personnel to make placement
decisions has not been discussed.
In a Subjective Utilities Approach for Evaluating Program
Choices for Exceptional Children, Nutter (1977) hypothesized that
training in a decision making child study approach would affect the
utility of program choices made which placed handicapped students
toward regular education and away from special education. The
results indicated that training showed no significant effect in the
number of placement choices at each level made as a result of
training. The results did, however, show a significant effect on
the utility of one level for one school in the experimental

32
population. While the significance of the findings of this study do
not lead to any conclusive trends, the use of the utilities model
for decision making presents one of the few attempts to utilize
a technique which has promise, but has not been adopted as a
procedure for making educational placement decisions.
Identifying Educational Outcomes
The identification of educational outcomes has been discussed
by Edwards (1971), Edwards, Guttentag, and Snapper (1975),
Guttentag (1973), and Nutter (1977). The procedure developed by
Edwards (1971) and described in the earlier section, Multi Attribute
Utility Measurement, has been adapted for use by Nutter (1977).
The Rawgoo Technique (Nutter, 1977), which incorporates the steps
developed by Edwards (1971), was utilized as a technique for
prioritizing desired outcomes, as a preliminary step for developing
and rating program or instructional options.
In addition, recommendations for utilization of the Rawgoo
technique included;
1. the use with students to develop individual or classroom
learning outcomes.
2. the use with teachers in cooperative planning to increase
teacher job satisfaction.
3. the use with teachers in assessment of classroom performance
for both peers and students.

33
In general, the procedure could be utilized whenever a series of
options need to be evaluated in terms of their probability of
maximizing some desired outcome. The evaluation of a series of
options is presented as subjective expected utilities.
Subjective Expected Utilities
Subjective expected utilities is the process of selecting among
alternatives in terms of the subjective values of some outcome and
the probability that the alternative will result in the desired
product or performance. In other words, it is the selection of a
choice which will have the greatest probability of reaching a
desired group of outcomes. Edwards (1965) in his discussion of
subjective utility defines what he calls a payoff matrix as the
relationship between the state of nature and selected alternatives.
The intersect of the state of nature and the alternative is defined
as a consequence. Nutter (1977) describes the formula as
(Jai = ( Pa] x WGi ) . . . (Pa] x WGn).
Where Ua = the measure of the utility of the alternative, Pa is the
probability of that alternative, and WG is the weighted outcome.
Impact of Data on Decision Making
One of the most commonly used strategies to modify the decision
made by individuals is to increase the amount of knowledge concerning
the topic under consideration. Burnstein and Vinokur (1975)
suggest that the acquisition of new information is the major factor
in revising choices. Bayes law states that the assimilation of a
new data item would revise probabilities as follows:

34
The odds after the receipt of new data equal the likeli¬
hood ratio for the new data times the odds in favor of
the decision prior to the receipt of the data. (Nutter,
1977)
Vinokur (1971) described a series of findings in the influence
of information on choice shifts. The findings appear to support
the hypothesis that choice shifts are due to a cognitive process
of informational influence regarding and assessment of utilities
of the outcomes in a choice situation.
Summary
The review of the literature has been designed to present
related information through discussion of vocational education,
job analysis, vocational instruction, entry level skills, and
decision making. The concepts of entry level skill assessment
have not been explored to date in the literature. Almost all
references are incidental or nonspecific statements of procedures
within more complex elements. Through discussion of vocational
evaluation and job analysis techniques, attempts have been made to
illustrate procedures which may be applicable to vocational educa¬
tion settings. The discussion of vocational education has focused
primarily on the use of entry-exit level skills criteria as a
component of the curriculum. The section on entry level skills
suggests the need to determine entry level skills and some pre¬
liminary attempts to incorporate entry level skills into program
models. Finally, the use of decision theory shows promise for

35
the development of decisions which may produce the relevant
information needed for exploring entry level skills criteria.
Throughout the review of literature, a recurring theme
appears. The theme suggests that vocational rehabilitation and
vocational education are evolving through a process of refinement
of assessment and training. In addition, the constant evolution
of assessment procedures in rehabilitation and education suggest
that solutions are actively being sought to the problem of dis¬
cerning essential from nonessential prerequisites.
Finally, the review of literature suggests by its very absence
that entry level skill training is a variable which needs to be
examined in its relationship to exit level competencies.
Chapter III will present the methods and procedures for
examining a specific application of entry level skills assessment
training and its influence on vocational education's role in the
education of special needs students.

CHAPTER III
METHODS AMD PROCEDURES
Chapter III presents the methods and procedures of this study
The chapter is organized into two major sections and includes the
(a) description of the subjects and (b) procedures, including the
experimental design, hypotheses, and the method of data collection
and analysis.
Subjects
The subjects in this study consist of 21 participants in the
Summer Vocational Special Needs Workshop at the University of
Florida. The participants were selected according to the follow¬
ing criteria:
1. A direct mail advertisement was distributed to district
level Vocational Directors and Special Education Directors in the
State of Florida describing a three week summer workshop for train
ing vocational educators to work with handicapped students. The
directors were requested to distribute the information to all
subordinate personnel.
36

37
2. Interested and/or recommended personnel were instructed
to return the tear off portion of the mailer.
3. All respondents to the above request were subsequently
mailed an application with a return request.
4. Applications were screened and selected according to
the following priorities;
a. currently employed as a vocational educator,
b. currently employed as a secondary level
special educator,
c. currently employed in a related profession
dealing with handicapped students.
Thirty-five applications were received and a total of 24 partici¬
pants were selected for participation. Three of the selected
participants did not attend. The remaining 21 participants were
randomly assigned to the Experimental (E's) and Control (C's) Groups
using a computer generated randomization technique. Group assignment
was determined by identification numbers which were assigned randomly
to the group at the beginning of the pretest phase. The selection
of groups followed the pretest phase. A list of the subjects by
identification number and group assignment is included as Appendix A.
The procedures presented will be discussed as they appear
within the proposal; the pretest, intervention, and posttest
phases.

38
Pretest
The pretest phase consisted of the utilization of two related
procedures; identifying vocational outcomes and determing subjective
expected utilities. All procedures described as pretest were applied
to all subjects in the study.
Identifying vocational outcomes. The application of decision
theory to the development of outcomes for vocational education has
not appeared in the literature to date. Development of outcomes or
goals was prevalent during the period of 1950-1970 resulting in the
adoption of these as basis for federal legislation. Three documents
which were generated to explore the considerations of vocational
outcomes have been selected to provide the stimulus for the
identification of a series of desired vocational outcomes. The docu¬
ments are the Basic Assumptions of Vocational Education (Thompson,
1973), Theories of Vocational Education Practices (Prosser & Quigley,
1949), and Philosophical Implications of the Vocational Amendments of
1968 (Beaumont, 1971).
Using the documents described above, a listing of vocational
outcomes was generated. These outcomes were arranged by grouping
similar concepts from all documents and duplicate concepts were
deleted by project staff. All remaining concepts were randomly
selected for order of presentation. The compiled list of outcomes
is included as Appendix B.
The compiled list of outcomes was presented to the subjects
in a session which was designed to (a) increase their understanding

39
of the importance of identifying desired vocational outcomes, (b)
provide an opportunity to suggest and/or modify outcomes, and (c)
indicate the relative importance of each desired outcome for the
vocational education process. The following is a description of
the procedure.
1. Familiarize the subjects with the Vocational Education
Outcomes (Appendix B). Each subject received a printed copy of
the outcomes, read, and discussed them in small groups. A dis¬
cussion period followed to allow for clarification.
2. The subjects were then asked to reexamine the list and
suggest any "outcomes" that they felt should be included. If an
outcome was suggested, it was presented to the other subjects.
No outcomes were added or deleted by the group.
3. Each subject was given a deck of cards. The deck contained
the number of cards corresponding to the identified outcomes, one
identification card, and five pile cards. A number for the goal
and a short descriptive phrase for the goal appeared on each of the
outcome cards. The pile cards were labeled as (a) Pile 1, Most
Important; (b) Pile 2, Moderate Importance; (c) Pile 3, Average
Importance; (d) Pile 4, Marginal Importance; and (e) Pile 5, Unim¬
portant/Irrelevant. Spaces for identification number, name, and
position were provided on the subject's identification card.
4. The outcomes were then prioritized by assigning ranks
and weights utilizing the Rawgoo Procedure (Nutter, 1977).
Complete instructions for the ranking and weighting procedure are
included as Appendix C.

40
Each of the subjects responses was then analyzed and computed
as follows:
1. The values assigned for each of the top ten ranked outcomes
were summed to produce a total outcome sum.
01 + 02 + 03 + 04 + 05 + 06 + 07 + 08 + 09 + 010 = 0SUM
2. Each of the ten outcome values were divided by the total
outcome sum to produce a weighted outcome.
01/0SUM, 02/0SUM, etc.
3. The weighted outcomes for all subjects were totaled across
each outcome and divided by number of subjects (N=21).
W01 -| + W012 + W013 + W014 . . . W0110 = W0SUM/N=MW0
4. Each of the mean weighted outcomes were computed and the
values ranked.
5. The top ten selected outcomes (in terms of mean weighted
outcome score) were reported to the subjects as stimulus for the
determination of subjective expected utilities. During the period
of time in which the top ten outcomes were computed and selected,
all subjects were provided with an unrelated task.
Determining Subjective Expected Utilities. The subjective
expected utilities (SEU's) of three levels of vocational placement
options was obtained by asking each subject to review a narrative
referral describing a handicapped student. This description was
obtained from the records of a public school district School Staffing
Conference Report. All identifying descriptions and names were
removed prior to presentation to the subjects. The case study is
presented in Appendix D as the School Staffing Conference Report for
Michael.

41
Subjects were asked to consider vocational placement options
based on the information contained in the referral. Appendix E
provides a description of each of the placement options for voca¬
tional education as developed by the Southwest Regional Resource
Center (1977). The subjects were then asked to rate the extent to
which they felt that the placement options would maximize each
of the ten most important vocational outcomes described in the
prior section.
The ratings were recorded on the Vocational Outcomes and
Placement Planning Decision Guide. A copy of this guide is included
as Appendix F.
The instructions for the administration of this instrument
are:
Michael has been referred to the building placement
committee for a placement decision. Assume that
you are a member of the building committee or team
and must make a program decision from the options
presented. Place a number between 0-100 for each
option under each outcome to show how well you think
that decision will help you maximize that outcome.
Upon completion of this task by the subjects, the responses were
computed to obtain a value for the relative influence of the place¬
ment decision on maximizing the outcomes presented. The value
assigned to the relative influence was identified as the subjective
expected utility (SEU). The subjective expected utilities (SEUs)
for each decision were computed by summing the product of each
probability (j) and the weight assigned to each goal where U =
subjective expected utilities, j = the jth row, p = probability of

42
maximizing the goal, and w = weight assigned to each outcome. This
computational formula is presented below.
Uj = E (p x w)
Intervention
The intervention phase consisted of one training session for
all subjects. The procedure and content is described below for
the experimental and control groups.
Intervention for the experimental group. The intervention for
the E's was conducted using three basic steps: the introduction,
rationale, and description of the tasks; the identification of entry
level skills criteria; and the components utilized to maximize
outcomes.
The introduction, rationale, and description of the tasks. The
subjects in the experimental group were introduced to the training
session on entry level skills criteria through a presentation of the
conceptual development of entry level skills, the rationale for
their use, and a brief description of the tasks to be completed in
this training sequence.
Identification of entry level skills criteria. The initial
task consisted of identifying the entry level skill criteria using
Level I Competencies for Business Education (Florida State University,
1978). This material provides a detailed description of the com¬
petencies required for completion of an entry level business education
instructional program. This entry level sequence called Level I
include competencies required in the following program areas:

43
1. Accounting Occupations
2. Data Processing Occupations
3. Clerical Occupations
4. Fundamentals of Business and Office Occupations
5. Secretarial Occupations
6. Business Administration Occupations
7. Orientation and Exploration of Business and
Office Occupations
8. Business and Office Education Job Training
One program area, Accounting Occupations, was presented to subjects
for use in identifying entry level skills criteria. The selection
of Accounting Occupations was based on the high degree of commonality
to the other program areas based on types of Level I skills required.
Appendix G provides a complete list of the program areas and their
requirements for Level I competencies. The State of Florida Program
S-andard for Accounting Occupations (Standards for Vocational
Education Courses, 1978) is included for reference as Appendix H.
The participants were arbitrarily divided into three working
groups for the purposes of determining entry level skills criteria.
Using the Level I Competencies presented in Appendix I, each group
selected one competency area. The areas selected were:
1. Telephone Techniques
2. Human Relations
3. Filing and Retrieving
The groups were instructed to use the competencies provided in each
area as outcomes. These outcomes are analogous to exit level skill
criteria for each competency area. Using these outcomes, the subjects
ranked and weighted the outcomes according to the procedure pre¬
sented earlier as the Rawgoo Procedure (Nutter, 1977). This
procedure is described in Appendix C. Due to the reduced number of

44
outcomes utilized, the pile procedure described in Appendix C
was omitted.
Components utilized to maximize outcomes. The second task
presented to the subjects involved the selection of entry level
skills required for each of the competency areas. These entry level
skills were obtained by asking each subject to review the competency
area selected and develop a list of entry level skills. All develop¬
ment of the entry level skills was shared with other participants
in the working group. Interactions by all participants in the
development were encouraged. The results of each working group were
shared with other working groups, and any additions or deletions to
the entry level skills were allowed.
Using the entry level skills generated, the outcomes for each
competency area were presented to the subjects and the subjective
expected utility of each entry level skill was computed. The
subjects were asked to rate how much they felt that each of the
recommendations for entry level skills would maximize the course
outcomes previously ranked and weighted. The Outcomes and Entry
Level Skills Decision Grid was utilized to record data and compute
SEU's. The instructions for administering this procedure are:
The competencies that we have ranked and weighted as out¬
comes will be used to develop a series of entry level
skills decisions. Given the ranked and weighted course
outcomes, and the course entry level skill selections
you have just completed, place a number between 0-100 for
each decision under each outcome to show how well you
think that each entry level skill will maximize the
course outcome.
The Outcomes and Entry Level Skills Decision Grid is provided in
Appendix K. Each participant discussed his/her rationale for

45
assigning values with the group, and at the completion of the dis¬
cussion, participants were allowed to modify previously assigned
values.
The subjective expected utilities (SEU's) for each decision
were computed by summing the products of each probability (j) and
the weights of each outcome, where U=subjective expected utility,
j=the jth row, p=the probability of maximizing the goal, and w=weight
assigned to each outcome. The computational formula is presented
below:
Uj = E (p x w)
Intervention for the control group. The intervention procedure
for the C's was primarily designed to control for the effects of
treatment and the effects of practice associated with the identifica¬
tion of outcomes and the development of subjective expected utilities.
This procedure was conducted using three basic steps; the introduc¬
tion, rationale and description of training; the identification of
daily living skills; and the components utilized to maximize
outcomes.
The subjects were introduced to the topic of daily living
skills by a presentation describing daily living skills, the rationale
for instruction in this area, and the training exercises to be pre¬
sented.
The identification of daily living skills was presented using
the materials developed by Florida Department of Education (1971)
entitled Employability Skills Guide. This material is designed to
focus on the training of students in prevocational skill areas,
including areas of daily living. The goals developed for the program
presented in this material include the following:

46
1. Improve attitudes about work, school, and society.
2. Improve personal appearance and hygiene.
3. Develop a realistic understanding of the connection
between the world of work and study which assists
students in becoming contributing members of society.
4. Develop personality characteristics of dignity, self-
respect, self-reliance, perseverance, initiative, and
resourcefulness.
5. Become effective in personal economics and to develop
an understanding of the economic system.
6. Receive recognition through successful experiences.
7. Achieve in all phases of the school's education program.
Improving Personal Appearance and Hygiene (Goal 2) was
selected as an exploratory area due to its position as both a
prevocational skill and a daily living skill. The selection of
daily living skills provides content in a vocationally related
area without confounding the effects of instruction in skills which
may be directly related to specific vocational education. Improving
Personal Appearance and Hygiene has been developed into a series of
three expected outcomes; To Practice Cleanliness, To Wear Acceptable
Dress, and To Practice Good Physical Fitness. Furthermore, each
expected outcome has a series of performance objectives, learning
experiences, resources, and methods of evaluation. Appendix J
includes a complete description.
The participants were arbitrarily divided into three working
groups for the purposes of evaluating learning experiences. Using
the selected goal, each group selected one of the three expected
outcomes areas. For the purposes of this training, the performance
objectives were to be considered outcomes with which comparisons

47
will be made. The groups were instructed to use the outcomes to
rank and weight according to the procedure presented earlier as
the Rawgoo Procedure (Nutter, 1977). The procedure described in
Appendix C was modified to exclude the piling procedure due to the
limited number of outcomes.
The subjective expected utilities (SEU) of the learning
experiences was obtained by asking each subject to rate how much
he/she felt that each of the experiences would maximize each of
the performance objectives. The Outcomes and Daily Living Skills
Decision Grid was utilized to record data and compute SEU's. The
Outcomes and Daily Living Skills Decision Grid is shown in Appendix
L. All of the developments of the participants were shared with
others in the group. Interaction by all the participants was
encouraged.
The instructions for administering this procedure were
The performance objectives that we have ranked and weighted
as outcomes will be used to evaluate a series of learning
experiences. Given the ranked and weighted outcomes, and
the learning experiences, place a number between 0-100 for
each experience under each outcome to show how well you
think that each learning experience will maximize each
outcome.
Each participant discussed his/her rationale for assigning
values with their respective groups. At the completion of the
discussion, participants were allowed to modify previously assigned
values.
The subjective expected utilities (SEU's) for each decision was
computed as described for the experimental group.

48
Posttest
The posttest consisted of the identical procedure described in
the pretest section as Determining Subjective Expected Utilities.
The vocational outcomes developed in the Identifying Vocational
Outcomes section of the pretest phase was utilized.
Each subject reviewed three separate case studies depicting
different types of handicapping conditions. The descriptions were
obtained through the same procedure as the pretest. The case studies
are presented in Appendix D as Michael, Carolyn, and John. The
ratings were recorded on the Vocational Outcomes and Placement
Planning Decision Guide (Appendix F). The instructions for admin¬
istration of this instrument were
Michael, Carolyn, and John have been referred to the
building placement committee for a placement decision.
Assume that you are a member of the building committee
or team and must make a program decision from the options
presented. Place a number between 0-100 for each option
under each outcome to show how well you think that deci¬
sion will help you reach maximizing that outcome.
The subjective expected utilities (SEU) for each decision were
computed as described in the pretest section.
Experimental Design
The experimental design used is depicted in Figure 2. This
design is analogoug to the design described by Campbell and Stanley
(1963) as the Pretest-Posttest Control Group Design and is depicted
below:
R 01 X 02 05 0?
R °3 °4 °6 °8

49
Figure 2
Experimental Design

50
In this design, 0-j and 0g are representative of the pretest scores
(subjective expected utilities), Og through Og are representative
of the posttest scores (subjective expected utilities). The X
represents the intervention applied to the experimental group
subjects. The control group intervention is depicted as a blank.
Hypotheses
The hypotheses to be tested, stated in the null form, are:
Hypothesis 1: There is no significant difference in the subjective
expected utilities of each of the placement options
between subjects who received entry level skills
criterion training and subjects who did not receive
training.
Hypothesis la: There is no significant difference in the subjective
expected utilities of each of the placement options
for the case study of Michael between subjects who
received entry level skills criterion training and
subjects who did not receive training.
Hypothesis lb: There is no significant difference in the subjective
expected utilities of each of the placement options
for the case study of Carolyn between subjects who
received entry level skills criterion training and
subjects who did not receive training.

51
Hypothesis le
Hypothesis Id
Hypothesis le
Hypothesis If
Hypothesis 2:
: There is no significant difference in the subjective
expected utilities of each of the placement options
for the case study of John between subjects who re¬
ceived entry level skills criterion training and
subjects who did not receive training.
: There is no significant difference in the subjective
expected utilities of each of the placement options
for the case study of Michael for the pretest and
posttest conditions of the subjects who received
entry level skills criterion training.
: There is no significant difference in the subjective
expected utilities of each of the placement options
for the case study of Michael in the pretest and post¬
test conditions of the subjects who did not receive
entry level skills criterion training.
: There are no significant differences in the subjective
expected utilities of each of the placement options
for the case study of Michael between subjects who
received entry level skills criterion training and
subjects that did not receive training on the pretest
observation.
There is no significant difference in the placement
choices between subjects who received entry level
skills criterion training and subjects who did not
receive training.

52
Hypothesis 2a:
There is no significant difference in the regular
vocational education placement choices made by
subjects receiving training in the use of entry
level skills criteria evaluation than those not
receiving the training.
Hypothesis 2b:
There is no significant difference in the adapted
vocational education placement choices made by
subjects receiving training in the use of entry
level skills criteria evaluation than those not
receiving the training.
Hypothesis 2c:
There is no significant difference in the special
vocational education placement choices made by
subjects receiving training in the use of entry
level skills criteria evaluation than those not
receiving the training.
Data Collection and Analysis
The collection of data and their subsequent analysis will be
presented as two separate areas of focus.
Data Collection
The following steps were utilized in the retrieval of
information to be included for subsequent data analysis.
1. Collect personal data on all subjects including their
areas of vocational specialization, current teaching responsibilities,

53
and professional training. This information was available through
the workshop application.
?.. Compile the data developed through the use of the Rawgoo
procedure (Nutter, 1977) for determining the assigned ranks and
weights of the vocational outcomes. Data was collected from the
pile of cards ranked by each subject. Each pile was recorded and
compiled by research staff.
3. Collect and compute the SEU score for each placement option
completed by the subjects on the Placement Planning Decision Guide
(Appendix F) for both pretest and posttest observations.
4. Compute the number of placement choices having the highest
SEU score for all subjects for both pretest and posttest conditions.
Data Analysis
The data analysis was conducted using the following procedure:
1. A comparison of the subjective expected utility (SEU)
score for each placement option was assessed for all three case
studies using a MANOVA procedure. These three case studies were
posttest scores only and are presented in Figure 3.
2. A comparison of the subjective expected utility score (SEU)
for each placement option was assessed for the case study of Michael
for both pretest and posttest conditions. Students' ¿-scores will
be used for comparison for both E's and C's.
3. A comparison of the subjective expected utility score (SEU)
for each placement option was assessed for the case study of Michael
between the E's and C's at the pretest level. Students' ¿-scores
were used for comparison.

54
Case Study
Placement Options
Group Assignment
Michael
Regular Vocational Education
Experimental
Adapted Vocational Education by
Control
Special Vocational Education
Carolyn Regular Vocational Education Experimental
Adapted Vocational Education by Control
Special Vocational Education
John Regular Vocational Education Experimental
Adapted Vocational Education by Control
Special Vocational Education
Figure 3
Posttest Comparisons

55
4. A comparison of the number of choices of placement options
having the highest subjective expected utility score (SEU) was
assessed for each placement option. Choice was based on the highest
SEU score compared to other placement options for each case study.
A Chi square analysis was used for comparison.

CHAPTER IV
RESULTS
The analysis of the results presents the comparisons of the
subjective expected utilities and placement choices made by subjects
who (a) received entry level skills criteria training and (b) subjects
who did not receive the training. The data were collected from
participants in the Summer Vocational/Special Needs Workshop at
the University of Florida. Data were gathered for a total of 21
subjects (N=21).
The analysis is developed through the restatement of each
hypothesis and sub-hypothesis with a presentation of the procedures
and results.
Hypothesis 1
There is no significant difference in the subjective
expected utilities of each of the placement options
between subjects who received entry level skills
criterion training and subjects who did not receive
training.
An analysis of the sub-hypothesis shows that all null hypotheses
were not rejected. Therefore, the null hypotheses for Hypothesis I
is not rejected. An analysis of each of the component sub-hypotheses
is presented as follows.
56

57
Hypothesis la
There is no significant difference in the subjective
expected utilities of each of the placement options
for the case study of Michael between subjects who
received entry level skills criterion training and
subjects who did not receive training.
The subjective expected utilities values for each of the place¬
ment options were compared ysubg tge General Linear Models
Procedure, Multivariate Analysis of Variance, a component of the
Statistical Analysis System (Barr, 1976). The results presented in
Table 2 reveal non-significant F values (a = .05) for all placement
options by treatment group combinations.
The results indicate that the subjective expected utilities of
the placement options for the case study of Michael were not signifi¬
cantly different between subjects who received entry level skills
criterion training and subjects who did not. Therefore, the null
hypothesis Hlg failed to be rejected.
Hypothesis lb
There is no significant difference in the subjective expected
utilities of each of the placement options for the case
study of Carolyn between subjects who received entry level
skills criterion training and subjects who did not receive
training.
The subjective expected utilities value for each of the place¬
ment options were compared using the General Linear Models Procedure,
Multivariate Analysis of Variance, a component of the Statistical
Analysis System (Barr, 1976). The results presented in Table 3
reveal nonsignificant F values (a = .05) for all placement options
by treatment group combinations.

Table 2
Multivariate Analysis of Variance
Case Study of Michael
Source of Variance
Variable
M.S. Between Groups
F Value
p (a - .05)
Treatment Group
Regular Voc Ed
(X = 27.653)
440.239
1.57
.225
Entry Level Skills
Criterion Training
(E's)
Adaptive Voc Ed
(X = 33.864)
637.476
1.76
.201
No Entry Level Skills
Criterion Training
(C's)
Special Voc Ed
(X = 24.833)
554.803
1.37
.256
df = 1/20
(_n
00

Table 3
Multivariate Analysis of Variance
Case Study of Carolyn
Source of Variance
Variable
M.S. Between Groups
F Value
p (a = .05)
Treatment Group
Regular Voc Ed
(X = 23.285)
3.274
.01
.935
Entry Level Skills
Criterion Training
(E’s)
Adaptive Voc Ed
(X = 41.420)
1136.686
4.13
.056
No Entry Level Skills
Criterion Training
(C’s)
S£ecial Voc Ed
(X = 25.817)
976.085
2.04
.169
tn
to

60
The results indicate that the subjective expected utilities
of the placement options for the case study of Carolyn were not
significantly different between subjects who received entry level
skills criterion training and subjects who did not. Therefore,
the null hypothesis HI^ failed to be rejected.
Hypothesis 1c
There is no significant difference in the subjective
expected utilities of each of the placement options
for the case study of John between subjects who re¬
ceived entry level skills criterion training and
subjects who did not receive training.
The subjective expected utilities values for each of the place¬
ment options were compared using the General Linear Models Procedure
Multivariate Analysis of Variance, a component of the Statistical
Analysis System (3arr, 1976).
The results presented in Table 4 reveal non-significant F
values (a = .05) for the variables regular vocational education and
adapted vocational education. The variable special vocational educa
tion revealed a significant F value (o = .05) of .038 for this place
ment option by treatment group combination.
The results indicate that the subjective expected utilities of
the placement options identified as regular vocational education
and adapted vocational education were not significantly different
between subjects who received entry level skills criterion training
and subjects who did not. The placement option special vocational
education showed a significant difference between the experimental

Table 4
Multivariate Analysis of Variance
Case Study of John
Source of Variance Variable M.S. Between Groups F Value p (a = .05)
Treatment Group
Entry Level Skills
Criterion Training
(E's)
No Entry Level Skills
Criterion Training
(C's)
[tegular Voc Ed
(X = 21.188)
Adaptive Voc Ed
(X = 30.220)
Special Voc Ed
(X = 35.506)
1052.656
251.136
2.33
0.57
.143
.460
111.476
4.99
.038

62
and control groups. An examination of the mean values for the
experimental and control group indicates the subjective expected
utilities score for the E's is 42.442 and the C's is 27.876. This
can be interpreted as a higher SEU value for the placement choice
of special vocational education for John by the subjects who
received entry level skills criterion training.
The results of all placement options by treatment group
comparisons suggest that the null hypothesis of no difference in
the subjective expected utilities of each of the placement options
for the case study of John between the treatment groups failed to
be rejected. The significant difference (special vocational educa¬
tion by treatment group) is not a sufficient condition for the
rejection of this hypothesis.
Hypothesis Id
There is no significant difference in the subjective
expected utilities of each of the placement options for
the case study of Michael for the pretest and posttest
conditions of the subjects who received entry level skills
criterion training.
The subjective expected utilities for each of the placement
options were compared using the Students t_ for correlated samples
(t-test) in the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (Hie,
Hadlai Hull, Henkins, Steinbrenner, & Bent, 1975). The results
presented in Table 5 reveal non-significant _t values ( a = .05)
for all placement options by condition combinations.
The results indicate that the subjective expected utilities
of the placement options for the pretest and posttest conditions of

Table 5
Pre and Posttest Subjective Expected Utilities Comparison of the Case Study of
Michael for Subjects Receiving Entry Level Skills Criterion Training (E's)
Placement Options
M
(pretest)
SD
M
(posttest)
SD
t
df
p (a = .05)
Regular Vocational
Education
29.496
10.135
32.019
14.970
0.53
10
.606
Adapted Vocational
Education
41.678
9.920
39.1173
18.033
-0.53
10
.608
Special Vocational
Education
32.7014
15.931
29.7841
19.924
-0.60
10
.559
Oh
OJ

64
the case study of Michael were not significantly different for
subjects who received entry level skills criterion training.
Therefore, the null hypothesis failed to be rejected.
Hypothesis le
There is no significant difference in the subjective
expected utilities of each of the placement options
for the case study of Michael in the pretest and post¬
test conditions of the subjects who did not receive
entry level skills criterion training.
The subjective expected utilities for each of the placement
options was compared using the Students t_ for correlated samples
(t-test) in the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (Nie et
al., 1975). The resul-s presented in Table 6 reveal non-significant
_t values (a = .05) for the regular vocational and adapted vocational
education options between the pre and posttest conditions. The
special vocational education placement option was significantly
different between pretest and posttest conditions at the a= .05
level.
The results indicate that the subjective expected utilities
for the options of regular vocational education and adapted voca¬
tional education for the pretest and posttest conditions were not
significantly different for subjects who did not receive entry
level skills criterion training.
The special vocational education option was significantly
different for the pre and posttest conditions. An analysis of the
means of both conditions indicate that the subjects assigned a
significantly lower mean subjective expected utilities value to the

Table 6
Pre and Posttest Subjective Expected Utilities Comparison of the Case Study
of Michael for Subjects Not Receiving Entry Level Skills Criterion Training
Placement Options
M
(pretest)
SO
M
(posttest)
SD
t
df
p (a = .05)
Regular Vocational
Education
20.865
13.214
22.851
18.475
.24
9
.817
Adapted Vocational
Education
34.801
10.950
28.0855
20.105
-1.38
9
.201
Special Vocational
Education
34.957
13.542
19.4925
20,294
-2.29
9
.048
CTi
cn

66
special vocational education option in the posttest condition
(X = 19.4925) than in the pretest condition (X = 34.957).
The results of all placement options by pre-/posttest
comparisons suggest that the null hypothesis of no difference in the
subjective expected utilities of each of the placement options for
the case study of Michael in the pretest and posttest conditions
has failed to be rejected. The significant difference (special
vocational education option, by pretest - post condition) is not a
sufficient condition for the rejection of the hypothesis.
Hypothesis If
There are no significant differences in the subjective
expected utilities of each of the placement options for
the case study of Michael between subjects who received
entry level skills criterion training and subjects that
did not receive training on the pretest observation.
The subjective expected utilities values for each of the place¬
ment options by treatment condition was computed using the Students t^
for independent samples U-test) in the Statistical Package for the
Social Sciences (Nie et al., 1975). The results presented in Table 7
reveal non-significant Rvalues (<* = .05) for all placement options
by treatment conditions.
The results indicate that the subjective expected utilities of
the placement options for the pretest condition in the case study
of Michael were not significantly different between subjects who did
not. Therefore, the null hypothesis of no difference failed to be
rejected.

Table 7
Pretest Subjective Expected Utilities Comparison of the Case Study of
Michael for Subjects Both in Experimental and Control Groups
Placement Options
M
M
(E's)
SD
(C'S)
SD
t
df
p (a = .05)
Regular Vocational
Education
29.496
10.135
20.865
13.214
1.69
19
.108
Adapted Vocational
Education
41.678
9.920
34.800
10.950
1.51
19
.147
Special Vocational
Education
32.701
15.931
34.957
13.542
-0.35
19
.732
CT»

68
Hypothesis 2
There is no significant difference in the placement choices
between subjects who received entry level skills criterion
training and subjects who did not receive training.
An analysis of the sub-hypothesis shows that all null hypotheses
were not rejected. Therefore, the null hypothesis for Hypothesis 2
is not rejected. An analysis of each of the component sub-hypotheses
is presented as follows.
Hypothesis 2a
There is no significant difference than would be expected
by chance in the placement choice for the case study of
Michael between subjects who received entry level skills
criterion training and subjects who did not receive
training.
The placement choices for each of the placement options were
selected using the largest value of the subjective expected utility
score for one of the three placement options. This choice was
analyzed using the subprogram CROSSTABS, in the Statistical Package
for the Social Sciences (Nie et al., 1975). Using the statistical
procedure Chi-square, a 2 x 3 analysis, provided a comparison of
placement choice by treatment group for the case study of Michael.
2
The results presented in Table 8 reveal non-significant A values
(<* = .05) for all placement choices by treatment group comparisons.
The results indicate that the placement choices for each of
the options in the case study of Michael were not significantly
different than would be expected by chance for subjects in both
treatment groups. Therefore the null hypothesis of no significant
difference is not rejected.

Table 8
Placement Choice Comparison of the Case Study of Michael
for Subjects in Experimental and Control Groups
Treatment Group Regular Vocational Ed Adapted Vocational Ed Special Vocational Ed
Experimental 3 (n) 7 (n) 1 (n) 11 row(n)
(Entry Level Skills
Criterion Training)
27.3 (row pet)
50.0 (col pet)
15.0 (tot pet)
63.6 (row pet)
63.6 (col pet)
35.0 (tot pet)
9.1 (row pet)
33.3 (col pet)
5.0 (tot pet)
55.0
row
total
(pet)
Control
(No Entry Level
Skills Criterion
Training)
3 (n)
33.3 (row pet)
50.0 (col pet)
15.0 (tot pet)
4 (n)
44.4 (row pet)
36.4 (col pet)
20.0 (tot pet)
2 (n)
22.2 (row pet)
66.7 (col pet)
10.0 (tot pet)
9
45.0
row(n)
row
total
(pet
column(n)
6
11
3
20
total(n)
column total(pet)
30.0
55.0
15.0
100.0
total
pet
Raw Chi-square = .961
df = 2
p = .618
Oh
CD

70
Hypothesis 2b
There is no significant difference than would be expected
by chance in the placement choice for the case study of
Carolyn, between subjects who received entry level skills
criterion training and subjects who did not receive
training.
The placement choices for each of the placement options were
selected by using the largest value of the subjective expected
utility score for one of the three placement options. This choice
was analyzed using the subprogram CROSSTABS, in the Statistical
Package for the Social Sciences (Nie et al., 1975). Using the
statistical procedure Chi-square, a 2 x 3 analysis, provided a
comparison of placement choice by treatment group for the case study
of Carolyn. The results presented in Table 9 reveal non-significant
X2 values (o. = .05) for all placement choices by treatment group
comparisons.
The results indicate that the placement choices for each of the
options in the case study of Carolyn were not significantly different
than would be expected by chance for subjects in both treatment groups.
Therefore, the null hypothesis of no significant difference is not
rejected.
Hypothesis 2c
There is no significant difference than would be expected
by chance in the placement choice for the case study of
John, between subjects who received entry level skills
criterion training and subjects who did not receive
training.
The placement choices for each of the placement options were
selected by using the largest value of the subjective expected utility

Table 9
Placement Choice Comparison of the Case Study of Carolyn
for Subjects in Experimental and Control Groups
Treatment Group
Regular Vocational Ed
Adapted Vocational Ed
Special Vocational Ed
Experimental
(Entry Level
Skills Criterion
Training)
2 (n)
18.2 (row pet)
50.0 (col pet)
10.0 (tot pet)
7 (n)
63.6 (row pet)
63.6 (col pet)
35.0 (tot pet)
2 (n)
18.2 (row pet)
40.0 (col pet)
10.0 (tot pet)
11 row(n)
55.0 row
total
(pet)
Control
(No Entry Level
Skills Criterion
Training)
2 (n)
22.2 (row pet)
50.0 (col pet)
10.0 (tot pet)
4 (n)
44.4 (row pet)
36.4 (col pet)
20.0 (tot pet)
3 (n)
33.3 (row pet)
60.0 (col pet)
15.0 (tot pet)
9 row(n)
45.0 row
total
(pet)
column (n)
4
11
5
20 total(n)
column total (pet)
20.0
55.0
25.0
100.0 total
pet
Raw Chi-square = .826
df = 2
p = .661

72
score for one of the three placement options. This choice was
analyzed using the subprogram, CROSSTABS, in the Statistical
Package for the Social Sciences (Nie et al., 1975). Using the
statistical procedure Chi-sqaure, a 2 x 3 analysis provided a
comparison of placement choice by treatment group and was computed
for the case study of John. The results presented in Table 10
2
reveal non-significant X values (<* = .05) for all placement choices
by treatment group comparisons.
The results indicate that the placement choices for each of the
options in the case study of John were not significantly different
than would be expected by chance for subjects in both treatment
groups. Therefore, the null hypothesis of no significant difference
is not rejected.

Table 10
Placement Choice Comparison of the Case Study of John
for Subjects in Experimental and Control Groups
Treatment Group
Regular Vocational Ed
Adapted Vocational Ed
Special Vocational
Ed
Experimental
(Entry Level
Skills Criterion
Training)
2 (n)
18.2 (row pet)
50.0 (col pet)
10.0 (tot pet)
1 (n)
9.1 (row pet)
20,0 (col pet)
5.0 (tot pet)
8 (n)
72.7 (row pet)
72.7 (col pet)
40.0 (tot pet)
11 row(n)
55.0 row
total
pet
Control
(No Entry Level
Skills Criterion
Training)
2 (n)
22.2 (row pet)
50.0 (col pet)
10.0 (tot pet)
4 (n)
44.4 (row pet)
80.0 (col pet)
20.0 (tot pet)
3 (n)
33.3 (row pet)
27.3 (col pet)
15.0 (tot pet)
9 row(n)
45.0 row
total
pet
column(n)
4
4
11
20 total(n
column total (pet)
20.0
25.0
55.0
100.0 total
pet
Raw Chi-square = 3.91
df = 2
p = .141
LO

CHAPTER V
DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of
entry level skills training on the program placement choices made
by vocational educators in the educational placement of handicapped
students. The discussion summarizes the data pertaining to the
purpose, provides a discussion of results and constraints, and
explores some implications for future study.
Summary of the Data
The summary of the data is presented through an analysis of
the data for each hypothesis, followed by an analysis of findings
influenced by more than a single hypothesis.
Hypothesis 1
This hypothesis was used to explore the effect of an entry
level skills training procedure on the subjective expected utility
(SEU) value assigned to levels of placement options for a series of
case studies describing handicapped students.
The multivariate analysis of variance was used to test the
hypothesis of no difference in SEU values for experimental and
74

75
control groups. An analysis of the data showed no significant
differences between groups on all variables with the exception of
the case study of John. In this case study, a significant difference
was found on the subjective expected utility score for the special
vocational placement option. The analysis showed that the group
receiving training placed a higher utility value on special education
placement than did the non trained group for this case study.
The relationship of the experimental group to a significant
greater subjective expected utility is not apparent. Future
investigation may attempt to isolate the question of the influence
of additional specific information on the decision to make a special
education placement. For example, does the training of entry level
skills criteria actually influence the amount of information about
an existing learning deficit that was not apparent to a vocational
educator not specifically trained in the diagnosis of handicapping
conditions. This may have an effect of increasing the perception of
a handicapping condition where none existed or existed to a lesser
degree.
An analysis of the mean score for both experimental and control
group shows a higher mean score (X = 35.506) for both experimental and
control groups than either of the other two placement options (X
adaptive vocational education = 30.220 and X regular vocational
education = 21.188). This relationship was not reflected in the
other two case studies. This may suggest additional investigations
into what differential characteristics which describe handicapped
students influence various placement decisions.

76
In a comparison of the pre and posttest score for the subjective
expected utility of placement options for Michael, no significant
differences were found for the subjects trained in entry level
skills criteria; however, a significant difference in the subjec¬
tive expected utility was found for the untrained subjects in the
placement of students in special vocational programs. The change in
mean from 34.957 to 19.493 indicates a much lower subjective
expected utility for Michael at posttest. The change in mean value
was not apparent in the subjects who received training (X pretest =
37.70 and X posttest = 29.784). In both treatment conditions a
slight increase was observed in the mean pastiest score for the regular
vocational education placement option and a slight decrease in the
mean values of the other placement options. This may suggest that
some effect of training took place which slightly increased the
participants rating of the subjective expected utility of placing
Michael in a regular vocational setting and decreased slightly the
ratings for the other placement options.
The comparison of the pretest subjective expected utilities
showed no significant differences in the subjects between experi¬
mental and control groups. This assures the lack of initial biases
between groups, however, the comparison was not essential in a
randomized design, but lends assurance to the control for initial
differences.

77
Hypothesis 2
The selection of a placement choice was the desired result
of the functional application of determining subjective expected
utilities. The option with the greatest SEU value is considered
the placement choice. The null hypothesis was not rejected, indicat
ing no significant differences in the placement choices by the
groups.
Of interest were two similar trends to what was described in
the data concerning Hypothesis 1.
1. Within both treatment conditions, an increase was observed
in the number of regular vocational education choices for both
treatment and control groups and the decrease in number of placement
choices for special vocational education. There was no change for
the adaptive vocational education option. Table 11 depicts the
difference in placement choices between pretest and posttest observa
tions. It is apparent from both Hypothesis 1 and Hypothesis 2 that
there was movement toward making placements in regular vocational
education and away from special education. The suggestion is that
the experience in the workshop situation by all participants may
possibly have influenced the change in placement choices toward a
more regular vocational placement.
2. An analysis of the data for Hypothesis 1(c) found a signifi
cantly higher SEU score for the group receiving training than the
group not receiving training on the special education placement
option. The Chi-square analysis for Hypothesis 2(c) shows a much

Table 11
Comparison of Pretest and Posttest Placement Decisions
Case Study of Michael
Entry Level
Skills Criteria
E's
No Entry Level
Skills Criteria
C's
Regular Vocational Ed
Adapted Vocational Ed
Special Vocational Ed
Pretest
Posttest
Pretest
Posttest
Pretest
Posttest
0
3
7
7
4
1
(+3)
(no change)
(-3)
0
3
4
4
5
2
(+3)
(no change)
(-3)
0
6
12
11
9
3
N
Change
N
Change
CO

79
higher number of placement choices for special vocational education
for the group receiving training. This much larger value (N=8)
was not repeated in the other case studies. While an obvious
relationship exists between the subjective expected utilities score
and placement choice, the same inflated score tends to confirm the
significant effect in Hypothesis 2(c).
Constraints
The constraints in implementing a study which uses relatively
new technologies, or adapts materials and technologies are numerous.
The limited experience with many of the techniques involved in this
study mandate a careful evaluation of the constraints as a guide for
future investigation. The following are constraints experienced
during the conducting of this investigation.
Level of Intervention
The constraints of time were a major factor in the development
of this study. Obtaining any group of professionals for an extended
intervention sequence is a difficult task. The requirements for at
least three individual phases separated by a fairly significant
time block poses a distinct problem for the researcher. This
study utilized a pretest, intervention, and posttest phase completed
over a period of two weeks. The limits of time allocated for inter¬
vention may have seriously restricted the results.

80
Training Methodology
The use of training methodology involves two distinct components,
the training in the development of subjective expected utilities
and the training in assessing entry level skills criteria.
Subjective Expected Utilities. The use of subjective expected
utilities involves two levels of training, the development and
prioritizing outcomes, and the selection of subjective expected
utilities. The procedures involved in prioritizing outcomes involved
two basic constraints for this study. The first constraint was the
relatively difficult task of quantifying values into outcome weights.
The task of deciding the relative importance for each of the outcomes
presented a decision not often required of educators. The second
constraint involves the unfamiliar task of exploring vocational
outcomes. The recent emphasis on legislative and regulatory
requirements has developed precedence over individual or local
outcome development. The selection of subjective expected utilities
is an easier task. There still needs to be continued research in
the quantity of outcomes to be presented in any given decision as
well as the procedures for completing the task. The feedback from
subjects was generally very positive as to the use of subjective
expected utilities, but most all subjects did not feel comfortable
with the procedures until after more than one trial/training
session.
Entry Level Skills Criteria. The development of a training
sequence for entry level skills criteria has little support in the

81
literature. The selection of a procedure involves the adaptation of
methods from existing training sequences. As a result very little
is assured as the the most effective procedure for demonstrating
and presenting techniques for assessing entry level skills criteria.
The use of subjective expected utilities offers a procedure for
making decisions in many areas, and was selected on that basis.
A comparison of this and other procedures needs to be developed
for use in training entry level skills criteria.

APPENDIX A
GROUP ASSIGNMENT BY SUBJECT NUMBER
01 - control group
02 - experimental group
03 - experimental group
04 - experimental group
05 - control group
06 - control group
07 - control group
08 - control group
09 - experimental group
10 - experimental group
11 - control group
12 - experimental group
13 - control group
14 - control group
15 - experimental group
16 - experimental group
17 - control group
18 - experimental group
19 - experimental group
20 - control group
21 - experimental group
E =11
C = 10
82

APPENDIX B
VOCATIONAL EDUCATION OUTCOMES
1. Development of attitudes, basic educational skills, appropriate
habits, and skill training are all equally important for gainful
employment.
2. Prevocational experiences are necessary to introduce students to
the world of work and provide motivation.
3. Establish and maintain a minimum amount of funding below which
training should not be attempted.
4. Utilize vocationally experienced or expert individuals as the
source of occupational skill training.
5. Vocational education produces a unique body of knowledge for each
occupational skill area.
6. Student must meet minimum productive abilities.
7. Student must be able to secure a job for which he/she is trained.
8. Provide a means of acquiring skills essential for equal competition.
9. Provide preparation for initial entry level employment.
10. Serve students needs for a variety of educational experiences which
include vocational education as a component.
11. Replicate the work environment, utilize the same tools and procedures
and produce similar habits and manipulations.
83

12. Provide for on the job training experiences.
13. Enable students to use interests, aptitudes, and intelligence
to highest degree.
14. Train only those who want, need, or are able to profit.
15. Provide a program which is developmental and hierarchial in
regards to exit level criteria in a wide variety of job skills.
16. Meet demands of the marketplace even if conflicts with the state
of the art.
17. Oriented to manpower needs of community and greater society.
18. Be able to serve the demands of a technological society.

APPENDIX C
RAWGOO INSTRUCTIONS
The question you are concerned with is "How important is each
of these outcomes for the education of students in vocational programs?"
At the end of this activity, you will have:
1. Classified the outcomes from unimportant to most important;
2. Ranked all the outcomes; and
3. Given an importance value or weighting to the top-ranked
outcomes.
You have been given a deck of cards. The top card is the identi¬
fication card. If it does not have your name on it, please write your
name, your position and grade, and your area of certification on this
card. Set it aside.
The next five cards are the "pile cards" and will be used to
classify each of the outcomes. Take these five cards and spread
them out in front of you with enough room to stack outcome cards
near each "pile card."
Next, take the outcome cards and place each one near the most
appropriate "pile card" according to your own valuing it. You do
not need to put any specific number in any category, nor do you need
even a minimum number in any category . . . that is, you can put all
the cards in one category, or distribute them in any way you wish.
85

86
When you are finished with that step, you can go right on to
the next step: ranking the outcome cards. To do this, simply rank
all the cards in each of the five categories (leaving them in their
categories). If you have placed all the cards in one category, you
will have a greater task than if they were more evenly distributed,
but this should not affect the rankings.
Note: The number 1 item (the highest ranked), should be
on the top.
Put the pile cards on the top of the appropriate "pile" and
stack each "pile" on the next lower one so that the top "pile" is
number 1 (most important).
The last phase of this activity is to have you rate the importance,
or value of the 10 top ranked outcomes. The first step is to separate
these top ten cards from the rest of the deck. Take off the top ten
outcome cards along with the "pile cards" that may be mixed with
them. Keep the "pile cards" in their proper position during the
rest of the activity (the information that you have supplied
according to the importance/irrelevance dimension will be used
later so we do not want to lose it). We are going to work through
the cards backwards now, starting with the tenth ranked card. Take
that card and put a "10" on it. This is the base card from which
you will work and that number will not be changed through the rest
of the process.
Now take the next card (the ninth ranked card) and compare it
to the tenth card. Ask yourself "How much more important is the

87
ninth outcome than the tenth?" If you consider it to be twice as
important, write a "20" on the ninth card (2 times 10 = 20). If
you consider it to be 10 times as important, write a "100." Now
take the next card (eighth) and compare it to the ninth. "How much
more important is it?" If it is twice as important as the ninth,
then write "40" on the eighth card (2 times 20 = 40). Before moving
on, check back to the tenth card--is the eighth card four times as
important as the tenth card (4 times 10 = 40)? If you do not think
so, then you will have to adjust the numbers. You can do this by
changing either or both the eighth and ninth cards (but not the tenth).
There is no top limit to the numbers you can use (you can use
100, or 1 million, or whatever), but you must use whole numbers. You
can use 11, 23, 4821, etc., but as you work through the cards, each
number for the higher ranked cards must be greater than the previous
number. And check back to all the previous cards each time . . . this
enables us to construct an interval scale (according to measurement
people, that is supposed to be a good but rare happening in this sort
of decision making process).
After you have worked through all 10 cards, restack them with
your highest ranked cards on top. Be sure the "pile cards" are
included in the appropriate places. Put your identification card
on top of the whole thing, rubber band it, and say "good grief" or
any other appropriate utterance. We say "thank you" and we will get
back to you soon with what this means.
Adapted from:
Nutter, R. E. A subjective expected utilities approach for
evaluating program choices for exceptional children
(Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, 1977).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 1978, 34, 3416A.
(University Microfilms No. 77-26, 328)

88
Pile 1
Most Important
Pile 4
Marginal Importance
Development of
attitudes, basic
educatonal skills,
appropriate habits
and skill training
are all equally
important for
gainful employment.
Establish and maintain
a minimum amount of
funding below which
training should not
be attempted.
Pile 2
Moderately Important
Pile 5
Unimportant/1rrel evant
Prevocational experiences
are necessary to intro¬
duce students to the
world of work and pro¬
vide motivation.
Vocational education
provides a unique body
of knowledge for each
occupational skill area.
Pile 3
Average Importance
ID#
Name
Position
Utilize vocationally
experienced or
expert individuals
as the source of
occupational skill
training.
Student must meet
minimum productive
abi1ities.

89
Provide a means of
acquiring skills
essential for equal
competition.
Meets demands of the
marketplace even if
conflicts with the
state of the art
Provide for on the
job training
experienees.
Enable students to
use interests,
aptitudes, and
intelligence to the
highest degree.
Student must be able to
secure a job for which
he/she is trained.
Replicate the work envir¬
onment, utilize the same
tools and procedures, and
produce similar habits and
manipulations.
Provide a program which is
developmental and hierarchi-
al in regards to exit level
criteria in a wide variety
of job skills
Provide preparation for
initial entry level employ¬
ment.
Oriented to manpower
needs of community
and greater society.
Serve students needs
for a variety of
educational experiences
which includes voca¬
tional education as a
component.
Train only those who
want, need, or are
able to profit.
Be able to serve
the demands of a
technological society.

APPENDIX D
CASE STUDIES

School Staffing Conference Report
Regular : ESE Eligibility _X_: ESE Center : ESE Review
Student's Name: John
Grade: 10th
Data: Psychological Report X : Interventions X : IEP X :
Anecdotal Reports X : Behavioral Observations X:
Discipline Records X : Vision X : Hearing :
Language : Physical X : Other
Review of Data: John and his family recently moved to this community
from a neighboring state. He is 16 years old and will begin 10th grade
in the fall. In his previous school he was placed in a classroom for
severe learning disabilities.
The psychological report developed by our staff and previous
records indicate a severe deficit in the verbal areas. Some strengths
are noticed in the performance area although the total performance
score is slightly lower than verbal areas. The arithmetic and digit
span (WISC-R) are significantly higher than other verbal subtest scores.
A complete academic assessment has been completed and suggests
extreme deficits in the areas of word recognition and comprehension.
Scores on Key Math indicate a better grasp of computational skills
but problems involving the interpretation of verbal information are
distinctly depressed.
At this time no formal prevocational assessment has been
completed.
An anecdotal record reports that John has had some accidents
with machinery and tools. His coordination, however, appears to
91

92
be normal at this time. John has stated an interest in cooking and
has suggested that he might be interested in commercial or gourmet
cooking.
His school behavior has been excellent and attendance is not a
problem. His absences are well within the norms for the schools he
has attended.
John's parents are somewhat anxious about his future and are not
overjoyed with his basic skills progress. They suggest that he has
not been trying hard enough, or things would have improved.

93
School Staffing Report
Regular : ESE Eligibility X : ESE Center : ESE Review
Student's Name: Carolyn
Grade: 11
Data: Psychological Report X : Interventions : IEP :
Anecdotal Reports X : Behavioral Observations X :
Discipline Records _X: Vision _X_: Hearing :
Language X : Physical X : Other
Review of Data: Carolyn has been referred to the staffing committee due
to academic failure and a visual impairment. She has been assigned to
a regular class since the 6th grade. During the first five years in
school she was given assistance through the program for the visually
impaired in a large metropolitan school district. Carolyn was adamant,
when in the 6th grade, and refused placement in special programs.
It was the decision of staff as well as her parents, to allow her to
enroll in the regular school program. Her vision appears to be deter¬
iorating in the left eye and she now qualifies for special education
services.
Psychological reports indicate average intellectual functioning
when instruments are modified for use with the visually impaired.
She shows very good verbal skills but performance subski 11s are
somewhat lower. She has shown more than adequate potential and skill
development considering the extent of vision loss.
Academically, Carolyn made adequate progress until about the
time the change in visual acuity was identified. Since that time

94
(one school year) her academic work has steadily declined and teachers
indicate she does not complete assignments. Two instructors report
a hostile attitude when Carolyn is questioned about inadequate work.
One instructor reports that he was not aware of the visual problem.
Carolyn has not been interested in vocational education and
did not receive exposure to career exploration programs. Currently
she indicates a slight interest in business and office occupations
areas. She says that she likes people and works well in close
proximity to others.
Carolyn's parents are concerned about her deteriorating vision.
The fear of the responsibility of a blind daughter has been
repeatedly expressed. They think she should be enrolled in the
School for the Blind.

95
School Staffing Conference Report
Regular : ESE Eligibility X : ESE Center : ESE Review
Student's Name: Michael
Grade: 10
Data: Psychological Report X : Interventions X : IEP X :
Anecdotal Reports X : Behavioral Observations X :
Discipline Records X : Vision X : Hearing X :
Language : Physical : Other
Review of Data: Michael is a 15 year old male who has been placed in a
program for the educable mentally retarded since 1969. Currently his
placement and educational plan is more than a year old and is being
reevaluated by the committee.
The psychological report indicates that he is functioning at a
mental age of 12 years 3 months. He shows depressed subtest scores
on the WISC with the exception of the object assembly and block design,
which are within the normal range. The score indicates he is function¬
ing in the mildly retarded range of performance.
His achievement profile shows a marked deficiency in reading
recognition, comprehension, and spelling. Scores on the Key Math
indicate a high level of functioning, but still considerably below
normal.
Preliminary career exploration courses have indicated a rela¬
tively good manual skills and manipulative skills potential.
Michael has repeatedly asked to have more tasks and information on
working with animals. He has indicated that he would like to work
in an animal hospital or on a dairy farm.

Michael's parents have suggested that Michael try for
veterinary training but express some doubts as to his ability
to follow through.
Michael's school behavior has been adequate, although he
tends to resist directions by instructors when confronted with
relatively new or difficult tasks. His attendance has been
adequate, with three unexcused absences.

APPENDIX E
TRAINING OPTIONS FOR VOCATIONAL EDUCATION

Level VI
Work Activity Center
A program designed to provide an array of work experiences
which ultimately result in economic opportunity for impaired
persons whose handicaps are so severe that their work productiv¬
ity depends on a highly structured, contained work environment.
Level V
Temporary Vocational Training Program
A thorough program provided in a work-evaluation, teaching, clinical
setting. The object of placement in a temporary vocational training pro¬
gram is to evaluate and or improve a handicapped person's work awareness,
skills, and attitudes. The person remains a maximum of six months, at the
end of this time, he or she may be placed into any of the other training pro¬
grams in the continuum.
Level IV
Individual Vocational Training
Offered on an individual basis to the handicapped, this program matches a specific
training program to the person's exhibited vocational interests and or needs. Specific
programs such as apprenticeships, manpower development, training placement, or identified
training stations are used to train the student in
vocational training that is community-based or in a
a particular job.
school vocational
It includes individual
or industrial arts class.
Level III
Vocational Education
(self-contained)
in special education classes.
It is designed
Special
This program is designed solely for students placed
for handicapped persons whose disability precludes integration into a regular vocational education
program.
Level II
Adapted Vocational Education
Regular vocational education programs which are altered to accommodate handicapped students via the pro¬
vision of special materials, equipment, and personnel. Special education students eligible for this pro¬
gram are usually those participating in resource room programs.
Level I
Regular Vocational Education
Developed and designed for all students in the regular continuum of secondary education. Handicapped students
and or students receiving support services (i.e, speech, counseling, social work, therapy) may be placed in this
program if it is determined that they can benefit.

APPENDIX F
VOCATIONAL OUTCOMES AND PLACEMENT PLANNING DECISION GUIDE
The student has been referred to the building placement committee
for a programming or placement decision. Assume that you are a member
of the building committee or team and make the recommendations that
you feel are appropriate and then place a number between 0-100 for
each decision under each goal to show how well you think that
decision will help to reach that goal.
Example:
Outcome 1 Outcome 2 Outcome 3
Outcome 4
Decision
Basic Skills Enjoy School Social Skills Respect Others
Place in prevoca-
tional program
75
90
60
40
There are no right or wrong answers.
It's your judgment that counts!
99

Placement Options
PLACEMENT PLANNING DECISION GUIDE
Vocational Outcomes
Regular Vocational
Education
Adapted Vocational
Education
Special Vocational
Education (Self
Contained)
001

APPENDIX G
LEVELS OF COMPETENCY FOR EACH
BUSINESS AND OFFICE CAREER CLUSTER
Level
I:
Level
II:
Level
III
Level
IV:
Business and Office Occupations Core
(minimum skills and preparation necessary
for all Business and Office Occupations)
Reinforcement and Expansion
Refinement and Application
Specialization and/or High Proficiency
Modules
Cl er.
Occup.
Sec.
Occup.
Acctng.
Occup.
Bus. Data
Proc. Occup.
Bus.
Occu
Orientation to
Modules
I
I
I
I
I
Telephone
Techniques
I
I
I
I
I
Filing and
Retrieving
II
II
I
I
I
Typing
III
III
I
I
I
Incoming and
Outgoing Mail
I
I
I
I
I
Oral and
Written Com.
III
III
II
II
III
Reprographics
I
I
I
I
I
Human Relations
I
I
I
I
I
Grooming
I
I
I
I
I
Business Records
III
II
II
II
II
Math Computation with
and without machines
III
III
III
III
III
Job Application
Procedures
I
I
I
I
I
Data Processing
I
I
II
III
II
Bus. Organization
I
I
I
I
I
Leadership Training
I
I
I
I
I
Machine Transcription
II
II
Shorthand
III
Bookkeeping/Accounting
III
III
Decision Making
III
III
III
III
III
Cooperative Education
Option
III
III
III
III
III
101

APPENDIX H
VOCATIONAL INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM STANDARDS
Instructional Program Title: Accounting Occupations
USOE No.: 13.016000 DOE No.: 7614
Occupational Titles: Statistical Clerk, Bookkeeper, Billing Clerk,
Bank Cashier, Bookkeeping and Billing Machine Operator, Payroll and
Timekeeping Clerk, Calculating Machine Operator, Tabulating Machine
Operator, Office Machine Operator, Bank Teller, Accountant, Accounts
Supervisor, Audit Clerk.
Instructional Level: 10-15
Teacher Certification: Bus Ed 4; VOE 7; Teach CBE 7; Accting 7;
Bookkeeping 4 & 7
Instructional Program Goals: A program designed to develop job
competencies in occupations concerned with systematizing information
about transactions and activities into accounts and quantitative
records and paying and receiving money. Examples of related occupa¬
tions toward which secondary, post secondary, and adult students may
work are: Accounting Clerk, Bookkeeper, Accounts Receivable/Payable
Clerk, Cash Receipts/Disbursements Clerk, Payroll Clerk, Inventory
Clerk, Accounting Equipment Operator, and Bank Teller. Examples of
related occupations toward which post secondary and adult students
may work are: Junior Accountant, Accountant, Cost Accountant, and
102

103
Internal Auditor. These occupations require analyzing, recording
and interpreting numerical data and compiling it into a workable
report form for management planning, budgeting, and allocating of
available resources for effective operation and stablizied produc¬
tivity.
Instructional Program Content: The program includes a combination of
theory, simulated learning experiences, on the job training and
modules/activities to develop entry-level competencies. Students
beginning work in these occupations will cover the modules/activities
identified in the Fundamentals of Business and Office Occupations
Program. These include: orientation to modules, telephone techniques,
filing and retrieving, keyboarding, incoming and outgoing mail, oral
and written communications, reprographics, human relations, grooming,
business records, math computation with and without machines, job
application procedures, data processing, business organization, and
leadership training. Students will then progress to the next level
of modules which will reinforce and expand competencies in oral and
written communications, business records, and data processing. At
the refinement and application level, the student will move into
modules which will further develop competencies in math computation
using machines and the various aspects of bookkeeping and accounting.
These modules may be covered at the same time, or preceding, on the
job training.
At the post secondary or adult level, the student will have the
opportunity to develop higher proficiency in Accounting Occupations.

104
This program will include Level II modules in management, finance,
data processing. At the refinement and application level, the student
will complete a module in decision making. The student will complete
the continuum with modules designed to develop high proficiency in
accounting.
Total cumulative time required for completion of the preparatory
program is generally 720 hours; however, this may vary for clients
based on aptitude, prior competency attainment or changes and varia¬
tions in employment requirements.
Any part of the program may be offered for any length of time
to provide supplementary training or retraining of adults who have
already entered the labor market to insure stability or advancement
or re-entry into employment.
The activities of Future Business Leaders of America/Phi Beta
Lambda are included as a part of the instructional program.
Students shall study and apply concepts of free enterprise,
consumer and economic education appropriate to the instructional
program so that they may function effectively in the American system.

APPENDIX I
LEVEL 1 COMPETENCIES FOR BUSINESS EDUCATION
TELEPHONE TECHNIQUES
1. Identify telephone services and types of calls
2. Locate telephone numbers
3. Answer the telephone
4. Place telephone calls
FILING AND RETRIEVING
1. Index, code, sort, and file alphabetically and chronologically
2. Code, sort, and file numerically
3. Retrieve materials from the file, complete an out card and
checkout record
4. Identify types of filing supplies and procedures
5. Identify types of filing equipment
TYPEWRITING
1. Demonstrate correct typewriting techniques
2. Identify operative parts of a typewriter and their operations
3. Identify principles of typewriting
4. Demonstrate speed and accuracy in typing straight copy
5. Type and correct business letters and envelopes
105

106
6. Type interoffice memoranda
7. Chain-feed, type, and correct addresses on envelopes
8. Type and correct tabulated information
INCOMING AND OUTGOING MAIL
1. Classify mail
2. Identify special mail services
3. Locate zip codes
4. Process outgoing mail
5. Process incoming mail
6. Forward mail
ORAL AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
1. Locate and record information found in a dictionary
la. Identify sections of a dictionary
lb. Locate and record general information found in a dictionary
lc. Locate and record syllabication, diacritical marks, definitions,
and synonyms
2. Spell and define words
2a. Write correct spelling for suggested statewide spelling words
2b. Write correct spelling for commonly used general vocabulary
words
2c. Write correct definitions for words on suggested statewide
reading vocabulary words
2d. Write correct definitions for commonly used business and consumer
terms
3. Find specific information in written material

3a. Determine main idea stated in a paragraph
3b. Infer main idea of a paragraph
3c. Find specific information in a selection
3d. Identify the conclusion supported by a paragraph
3e. Identify facts and opinions
3f. Identify unstated opinions
3g. Identify conclusion on insufficient evidence
4. Write grammatically sound and complete sentences
4a. Identify subjects and predicates
4b. Identify complete and incomplete sentences
4c. Write complete sentences using simple phrases
4d. Identify nouns and pronouns
4e. Write complete sentences using nouns and pronouns
4f. Identify verbs, verb phrases, and main verbs
4g. Write complete sentences using given verbs and verb phrases
4h. Identify correct usage of prepositions
4i. Write complete sentences using prepositions
4j. Identify possessive forms of nouns and pronouns
4k. Write possessive forms of nouns and pronouns
41. Write complete sentences using possessive forms of nouns and
pronouns
4m. Form contractions using apostrophes
4n. Form possessives using apostrophes
4o. Write complete sentences using conjunctions
4p. Identify adjectives, adverbs, and interjections
4q. Write complete sentences using interjecti-ns, adjectives,
and adverbs

108
5. Write sentences with correct punctuation, capitalization,
abbreviations, and numbers
5a. Punctuate sentences with commas
5b. Write and punctuate sentences with commas
5c. Punctuate end of sentences correctly
5d. Punctuate compound sentences with commas and semicolons
5e. Punctuate sentences with colons, semicolons, and dashes
5f. Punctuate sentences with parentheses and quotation marks
5g. Capitalize appropriate words in sentences
5h. Abbreviate words correctly
5i. Write numbers correctly in sentences
6. Compose and write simple business letters
6a. Identify qualities of effective business letters
6b. Identify parts of business letters
6c. Identify arrangement and punctuation styles of business letters
7. Follow oral instruction
8. Greet visitors and give them directions
REPROGRAPHICS
1. Identify characteristics of copying/duplicating methods
2. Make decisions on best copying/duplicating method to use
3. Type, correct, and run spirit masters
4. Tupe, correct, and run stencils
HUMAN RELATIONS
1. Identify ways to increase self-understanding
2. Identify terms relating to personal appearance and behavior

109
3. Identify personality traits that increase job performance
4. Identify traits that promote good human relations
5. Arrange five steps for improvement of personal conduct
6. Analyze and develop written solutions to personal behavior
problems on the job
GROOMING
1. Develop a personal grooming plan
2. Demonstrate good grooming habits
BUSINESS RECORDS
1. Prepare checks and stubs
2. Endorse checks using restrictive endorsement
3. Prepare deposit slips and adjust checkbook
4. Prepare bank reconciliations
5. Prepare purchase requisitions
6. Prepare purchase orders
7. Prepare invoices
MATH COMPUTATIONS
1. Solve math problems consisting of whole numbers
la. Solve addition problems
lb. Solve subtraction problems
lc. Solve multiplication problems
ld. Solve division problems
2. Solve math problems consisting of decimal numbers
2a. Solve addition problems
2b. Solve subtraction problems
2c. Solve multiplication problems

no
2d. Solve division problems
3. Solve math problems consisting of mixed numbers
3a. Solve addition problems
3b. Solve subtraction problems
3c. Solve multiplication problems
3d. Solve division problems
4. Convert proper fractions to decimals
5. Convert decimals to proper fractions
6. Convert percents to proper fractions
7. Convert improper fractions to mixed numbers
8. Convert mixed numbers to improper fracti-ns
9. Round numbers to designated decimal places
10. Round mixed numbers to whole numbers
11. Compute simple interest
12. Compute cash discounts
13. Convert problems using the standard U.S. unit of measure and
the metric unit of measure
13a. Convert length
13b. Covert capacity
13c. Convert weight
14. Prepare sales slip
15. Compute on a ten-key machine
JOB APPLICATION PROCEDURE
1. Complete a Social Security application form
2. Complete a personal data sheet or resume

in
3. Complete job application form
4. Compose and type letter of application
5. Participate in job interview
6. Complete a W-4 form
DATA PROCESSING
1. Identify applications of basic data, punched card and magnetic
storage processing terms
2. Identify basic data, punched card, and magnetic storage terms
test
3. Identify hardware and software as first, second, third, or
fourth generation
4. Identify the advantages of each generation of hardware and
software over the preceding generation
5. Identify the components on an 80-column card including
characteristics and positions
6. Locare requested information on a completed punched card
7. Identify the difference between punched card and magnetic recording
equipment
8. Identify the relationship between a source document and a single
transaction on a unit or record (such as a punched card or
magnetic tape)
9. Identify terms used with punched card and magnetic recording
equipment functions
10.Identify computer hardware and software
Identify the major programming languages ued in business data
processing
11.

112
12. Manually correct errors in a computer printout
13. Verify the totals on the printout
14. Locate requested information on a computer printout
15. Identify major types of careers in data processing with the
duties performed and educational requirements needed
16. Identify applications of computers in modern business
BUSINESS ORGANIZATION
(CONSUMER ECONOMICS)
1. Identify basic characteristics (concepts) of the American
economic system.
2. Identify factors of production
3. Identify functions of marketing
4. Identify functions of money
5. Demonstrate value fluctuation of an individual's real income
during deflation and inflation
6. Identify role of budgeting in personal financial planning
7. Identify appropriate sources of consumer credit
8. Identify basic types of consumer credit
9. Identify advantages and disadvantages of using consumer credit
10. Identify role of personal insurance in personal planning
11. Identify elements of a contract
12. Identify wise-buying procedures
13. Identify services performed by consumer information sources
LEADERSHIP TRAINING
1. Prepare an agenda
2. Identify purpose of parliamentary procedure

113
3. Identify motions of parliamentary procedure
4. Identify parliamentary procedure terms
5. Make a motion
6. Introduce individuals
7. Introduce a speaker
8. Identify characteristics used when introducing a speaker
9. List characteristics of a good news release

APPENDIX J
GOAL II: TO IMPROVE PERSONAL APPEARANCE AND HYGIENE
Expected Outcome: A. To Practice Cleanliness
Performance Objective: The student will (1) Demonstrate the need for daily bathing and use of
deodorant
Learning Experiences
Resources
Methods of
Evaluation
a. Show filmstrip on clothing
selection.
b. Present guest lecturers to speak
on selection of clothing (cloth¬
ing store personnel).
c. Have role-playing showing feel¬
ings of improperly dressed
persons.
d. Use experiences as seen on TV.
e. Make posters and charts, utilize
the art department.
f. Lead group discussion on color
combinations.
g. Identify minimum wardrobe (how
many shirts, etc.)
h. Initiate a contest on guessing how
many outfits can be made from a
given number of shirts, slacks,
etc.
BOOKS AND OTHER PUBLICATIONS:
ABOUT HER. Opportunity Knocks Series,
McGraw-Hill Publishing Company
ABOUT HIM. Opportunity Knocks Series,
McGraw-Hill Publishing Company
CO-ED Magazine, Scholastic Book Services
HAVE ACNE? Winthrop Laboratories
FILMS:
"Body Care and Grooming," Mc-Graw-Hill
Publishing Company
"Dressing Up," Association Films or Men's
Tie Foundation
FILMSTRIPS:
"Color in Your Clothes," McGraw-Hill
Publishing Company
"Grooming and Posture," Mc-Graw-Hill
Publishing Company
"Teen Etiquette Series," Mc-Graw-Hill
Publishing Company
"Teenaged?" Winthrop Laboratories
"What Clothes Should I Wear?" Mc-Graw-Hill
Publishing Company
Check List
Observation
Self-
Evaluation

Expected Outcome: A. To Practice Cleanliness
Performance Objective: The student will (1) Demonstrate the need for daily bathing and use of
deodorant
Learning Experiences
Resources
Methods of
Evaluation
i. Use a mirror in classroom
j. Use pamphlets on acne, body care,
teeth (from soap companies, etc.)
k. Have health nurse or doctor vist
class.
l. Use check lists of health habits
m. Have group discussions on health
habi ts.
n. Provide teacher examples of good
grooming.
o. Provide teacher follow-up on good
grooming practices.
p. Use individual counseling on the
importance of grooming aids.
q. Invite a dentist to explain the
need for dental care.
r. Provide filmstrips on dental hygiene.
s. Develop charts and posters on dental
care.
OTHER RESOURCES:
Bobbie Brooks Posters and Charts
Check List on Good Health Practices,
Proctor and Gamble, Avon Cosmetics
Company, Etc.
FIELD TRIPS:
Cosmetology Class
Department Store
Health Department
Laundromat
HUMAN RESOURCES:
Barbers and Beauticians
Cosmetic Company Consultants
Health Department (School Nurse)
Mechanic or Other Employer to Explain
Necessity for Cleanliness Even in Dirty
or Greasy Jobs
Medical Professionals
Neighborhood Service Center Personnel
Same
t.Discuss clothing care.

Expected Outcome: A. To Practice Cleanliness
Performance Objective: The student will (1) Demonstrate the need for daily bathing and use of
deodorant
Learning Experiences
Resources
Methods of
Evaluation
u. Discuss cost of required dental care. Same Same
v. Provide lessons on laundering.
w. Take field trip to laundromat and/or
1 aundry.
x. Demonstrate why clean room and desk
at school make student work easier.
y. Have room inspection. (Choose Mr. X
or Miss X for a week, secretly, and
let students try to find out who X
is and what grooming exercise was
employed.)
z. Have a barber stress cleanliness.
(May cut a boy's hair.)
aa. Provide field trip to cosmetology class.
bb. Provide films for girls on hair styles.
cc. Use various magazines for hair styles.

Expected Outcome: A. To Practice Cleanliness
Performance Objective: The student will (2) Be cognizant of the health aspects of keeping the
teeth brushed.
Learning Experiences
Resources
Method of
Evaluation
Same
Same
Group Discussion
Observation
Self-Evaluation
Performance Objective:
The student will (3) Wear clean clothing.
Learning Experiences
Resources
Method of
Evaluation
Same
Same
Individual
Counseling
Observation
Self-Evaluation

Expected Outcome: A. To Practice Cleanliness
Performance Objective: The student will (4) Keep surroundings clean.
Learning Experiences
Resources
Method of
Evaluation
Same
Same
Check List
Group
Discussion
Observation
Performance Objective:
The student will (5) Keep hair clean,
trimmed, and well-arranged.
Learning Experiences
Resources
Method of
Evaluation
Same
Same
Individual
Counseling
Observation

Expected Outcome: B. To Wear Acceptable Dress
Performance Objective: The student will (1) select proper clothing.
Learning Experiences
Resources
Methods of
Evaluation
a. Utilize fashion magazines
b. Provide booklets and pamphlets on
clothing.
c. Use resource person from clothing
store.
d. Provide field trips to department
stores to view mannequins.
e. Give individual counseling.
f. Observe clothing of fellow
students.
g. Motivate group discussions.
h. Observe attire of workers in jobs
students may possibly obtain.
i. Put magazine pictures of dress on
the bulletin board under classifi¬
cations such as casual, dress, home,
school, work, etc.
BOOKS AND OTHER PUBLICATIONS:
CO-ED Magazine, Scholastic Book Services
FAMILY YOU BELONG TO, THE. Turner-
Livingston Reading Series, Follett
Publishing Company
JOB YOU GET, THE. Turner-Livingston
Reading Series, Follett Publishing
Company
Virginia Ware Booklets
FILMS:
"Dressin1 Up," Association Films or Man's
Tie Foundation
FILMSTRIPS:
"Guidance Series," McGraw-Hill Publishing
Company
"Personal Appearance," Getting Along with
Others Series, McGraw-Hill Publishing
Company
OTHER RESOURCES:
Women's Magazines
Fashion Magazines
HUMAN RESOURCES:
Charm School Consultant
Fashion Coordinator
Home Economics Teacher
Ladies Apparel Shop Manager
Men's Wear Shop Manager
Group Discussion
Observation
Self Evaluation

Expected Outcome: B.
To Wear Acceptable Dress
Performance Objective:
The student will (2) Select attractive and becoming clothing
Learning Experiences
Resources
Methods of
Evaluation
Same
Same
Check List
Group
Discussion
Observation

Expected Outcome: C. To Practice Good Physical Fitness
Performance Objective: The student will (1) demonstrate the need for good eating habits.
Learning Experiences
Resources
Methods of
Evaluation
a. Provide doctors, nurses, etc. to
lead discussion on food needs.
b. Use school dietician.
c. Show parallel between a car
which will not work without
gas, oil, etc., to bodies and
their need for fuel (food, etc.)
d. Make a food chart.
e. List and discuss diseases caused
by deficiencies in certain
vitamins, etc.
f. Survey eating habits of school
population.
BOOKS AND OTHER PUBLICATIONS:
ABOUT HER. Opportunity Knocks Series,
McGraw-Hill Publishing Company
ABOUT HIM. Opportunity Knocks Series,
McGraw-Hill Publishing Company
"Canadian Air Force Program on Physical
Fitness," Teacher's Guide for Free and
Inexpensive Materials
FILMS:
"Balance Your Diet for Health Appearance,"
Coronet
"Body Care and Grooming," McGraw-Hill
Publishing Company
FILMSTRIPS:
"Health Series," Society for Visual Education
OTHER RESOURCES:
Combine with Other classes, such as Home Economics
Classes
Record: "Good Housekeeping Exercises, "The
Hearst Corporation
FIELD TRIPS:
Sports Activities
Spring Training Camp (baseball or football)
Group
Di scussion
Observation
Tests

Expected Outcome: C. To Practice Good Physical Fitness
Performance Objective: The student will (2) demonstrate the need for sufficient rest and
exercise.
Learning Experiences
Resources
Method of
Evaluation
a. Have students write to T.B.
Association to find out the
relationship between tuberculosis
and rest.
b. Let students write letters inviting
people to speak on physical require¬
ments of certain occupations.
c. Have physical education people to
show relationship between exercise
and good health.
d. Have students watch TV exercise
programs.
e. Have a physical education group or
your own class to work on
exercises daily to improve
proficiency in exercises.
f. Obtain material on Canadian Air
Force Program on Physical Fitness.
g. Take field trip to spring training
camp.
h. Obtain an athlete to talk to class
about value of physical fitness.
Same
HUMAN RESOURCES:
Home Economics Teacher
Medical Professionals
Physical Education Teachers or
Coaches
Professional Athlete
Supervisor of Lunch Program or
Dietician
Observation
Self-
Evaluation
Tests

APPENDIX K
OUTCOMES AND ENTRY LEVEL SKILLS DECISION GRID
The student has been referred to the building placement
committee for a programming or placement decision. Assume that
you are a member of the building committee or team and make the
recommendations that you feel are appropriate and then place a
number between 0-100 for each decision under each goal to show how
well you think that decision will help to reach that goal.
Example:
Outcome 1 Outcome 2 Outcome 3
Outcome 4
Decision
Basic Skills Enjoy School Social Skills Respect Others
Place in prevoca-
tional program
75
90
60
40
There are no right or wrong answers.
It's your judgment that counts!
123

Entry Level Skills
OUTCOMES AND ENTRY LEVEL SKILLS DECISION GRID
Exit Level Skills
r\>
4^

APPENDIX L
OUTCOMES AND DAILY LIVING SKILLS DECISION GRID
The student has been referred to the building placement
committee for a programming or placement decision. Assume that
you are a member of the building committee or team and make the
recommendations that you feel are appropriate and then place a
number between 0-100 for each decision under each goal to show how
well you think that decision will help to reach that goal.
Example:
Outcome 1 Outcome 2 Outcome 3 Outcome 4
Decision Basic Skills Enjoy School Social Skills Respect Others
Place in prevoca-
tional program 75 90 60 40
There are no right or wrong answers.
It's your judgment that counts!
125

Daily Living Skills
OUTCOMES AND DAILY LIVING SKILLS DECISION GRID
Daily Living Skills Outcomes
ro
cn

REFERENCES
Bacher, T. E. Methods of assessing the disadvantaged in manpower
programs: A review and analysis (Final Report). Los Angeles:
Human Interaction Research Institute, 1972.
Barr, A. J. A users quide to SAS. Raleiqh, NC: SAS Institute,
1976.
Beaumont, J. Philosophical implications of the Vocational
Amendments of 1968. In G. F. Law, Contemporary concepts in
vocational education. Washington, DC: American Vocational
Association, 1971.
Binder, A. Statistical theory. In P. Farnsworth (Ed.), Annual
review of psychology. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews, 1964.
Blackman, L. S., & Superstein, G. N. Job analysis and the vocational
evaluation of the mentally retarded. Rehabilitation Literature,
1968, 29(4), 103-5, 111.
Bloom, B. S. Handbook on formative and summative evaluation of
student learning. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1971.
Boland, S. K. It's happening: Vocational educators teach the handi¬
capped. Education Unlimited, 1979, 1(1), 9-11.
Brolin, D. Vocational education for retarded citizens. Columbus, OH
Charles E. Merrill, 1976.
Brolin, D., & Kokaska, C. J. Career education for handicapped
children and youth. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill, 1979.
Burnes, R. Methods for individualized instruction. In N. R. Franz,
Jr. (Ed.), Individualizing instructional systems for vocational
and technical education: A collection of readings. Athens, GA:
Vocational Instructional Systems, 1974.
Burnstein, E., & Vinokur, A. What a person thinks upon learning he
has chosen differently than others: Nice evidence for the
persuasive arguments explanation of choice shifts. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 1975, 21, 412-426.
Calhoun, C. C., & Finch, A. V. Vocational and career education:
Concepts and operations. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1976.
127

123
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. Experimental and quasi-experimental
designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1963.
Carbuhn, W. M., & Wells, I. C. Use of nonreading aptitude tests
(NATB) for selecting mental retardates for competitive
employment. Measurement and Evaluation in Guidance, 1973, 5,
460-467.
Cegelka, P. T., & Phillips, M. W. Individualized education programming
at the secondary level. Teachinq Exceptional Children, 1978, 10,
84-87.
Clark, G. M. Mainstreaming for the secondary educable mentally
retarded: Is it defensible? Focus on Exceptional Children,
1975, 7(2}, 1-5.
Comprehensive Occupational Assessment and Training System (COATS).
Trenton, NJ: Prep, 1974.
Cobb, H. J. The predictive assessment of the adult retarded for
social and vocational adjustment. Part II: Analysis of the
1iterature. Vermillion, SD: University of South Dakota, 1969.
Das, R. S. Comparison of worker analysis ratings based on job
description and motion-time study. Occupational Psychology,
1960, 34, 141-147.
Dictionary of Occupational Titles (4th ed.). Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Labor, 1977.
Division of Vocational Education. Standards for vocational education
courses. Tallahassee, FL State of Florida Department of
Education, 1978.
Dunn, D. J. Situational assessment: Models for the future.
Menamonie, WI: University of Wisconsin—Stout, Research and
Training Center, 1973.
Edwards, W. H. Social utilities. The engineering economist.
Summer Symposium Series, VI, 1971.
Edwards, W., Guttentag, M., & Snapper, K. A decision-theoretical
approach to evaluation research. In E. L. Struening & M.
Guttentag (Eds.), Handbook of evaluation research (Val. I).
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1975.
Edwards, W., Lindman, H., & Phillips, L. D. Emerging technologies
for making decisions. In New directions in psychology II.
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965.
Fair, G. W. Vocational education programming for special education
students in Texas. Final Report. Dallas, TX: University of
Texas, 1976. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 133 591)

129
Florida Department of Education. Employability skills guide.
Tallahassee, FL: Author, 1971.
Florida Department of Education. Standards for vocational education
courses. Tallahassee, FL: Author, 1978,
Florida State University. Competencies for business education.
Tallahassee, FL: Author, 1978.
Fruchter, B. Ability patterns in technical training criteria.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 1952, 36^, 381-384.
Gagne, R. M. Learning and individual differences. Columbus, OH:
Charles E. Merrill, 1967.
Gold, M. W. Factor affecting production by the retarded: Base rate.
Mental Retardation, 1973, JLT_, 41-45.
Goldstein, H. Curriculum design for handicapped students. High
School Journal, 1976, 59, 290-301
Grubb, F. A teachers guide to an employment orientation course for
special-needs students. New Brunswick, NJ~i Rutgers University,
Guttentag, M. Subjectivity and its use in evaluation research.
Evaluation, 1973, T_(2), 60-65.
Harnack, R. S. The teacher, decision maker, and curriculum planner.
Scranton, PA: International Textbooks, 1968.
Harrington, C. T. Keys to managing competency-based education (Part I).
Florida Vocational Journal, 1977, 5j2), 25-28.
Hester evaluation system. Chicago: Goodwill Industries, 1972.
Hoffman, P. R. An overview of work evaluation. Journal of
Rehabil itation, 1970, 3j5, 16-18.
Hopkins, M. A., & Brock, R. J. Menomonie/UW--Stout TMR program: A
vocational/Iife function performance based criterion referenced
curriculum. Menonomie, WI: University of Wisconsin--Stout,
Special Education Project, 1976.
Jewish Employment and Vocational Service (JEVS). Philadelphia:
Author, 1968.
Kleiter, G. D., Gachowetz, H., & Huber, D. Bibliography: Decision
making. Salsburg, Austria: Psychological Institute, University
of Salsburg, 1976.

130
Lawry, G. Matching students with jobs: A real challenge. In
Vocational evaluation and curriculum modification. DesMoines,
IA: Department of Public Instruction, 1972.
Lustig, P. An overview of work evaluation. Proceedings of a training
institute on factors in work evaluation. Richmond, VA: Richmond
Professional Institute, 1966.
McCarron, L., & Dial, J. McCarron-Dial work evaluation system.
Dallas: Commercial Marketing Enterprises, 1976.
Mehrens, W. A., & Lehmann, I. J. Measurement and evaluation in
education and psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston, 1973.
MICRO-TOWER. New York: Institute for Crippled and Disabled, 1976.
Neff, W. S. Problems of work evaluation. Personnel and Guidance
Journal, 1966, 24, 682-688.
Neff, W. S. Work and human behavior. New York: Aldine-Atherton,
1968.
Neff, W. S. Vocational assessment: Theory and models. Journal of
Rehabilitation, 1970, 36(1), 27-29.
Nie, N. H., Hadlai Hill, C., Jenkins, J. G., Steinbrenner, K., &
Bent, D. H. SPSS: Statistical package for the social sciences.
New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975.
Nighswonger, W. E. Talent assessment program. DesMoines, IA:
Talent Assessment Programs, 1975.
Nutter, R. E. A subjective expected utilities approach for evaluating
program choices for exceptional children (Doctoral dissertation,
University of Michigan, 1977). Dissertation Abstracts Inter¬
national , 1978, 3£, 3416A. (University Microfilms No. 77-26, 328)
Overs, R. The theory of job sample tasks (Milwaukee Media for
Rehabilitation Research Reports, No. 2). Milwaukee, WI:
1968.
Palmer, G. J., & McCormick, E. J. A factor analysis of job activities.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 1961, 45_(5), 289-294.
Phelps, L. A., & Lutz, R. J. Career exploration and preparation for
the special needs learner. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1977.
Prosser, C. A., & Quigley, T. A. Vocational education in a democracy.
Chicago: American Technical Society, 1949.
Pruitt, W. A., & Longfellow, R. E. Work evaluation: The medium and
the message. Journal of Rehabilitation, 1970, 36jl), 8-9.

131
Sankovsky, R., Arthur, G., & Mann, J. Vocational evaluation and work
adjustment. Auburn, AL: Materials and Information Center,
Alabama Rehabilitation Media Service, 1971.
Singer Vocational Evaluation System. Rochester, NY: Harper and
Brothers, 1973.
Slovic, W. H. Social utilities. The engineering economist.
Summer Symposium Series, VI, 1971.
Slovick, P., Fischoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. Behavioral decision
theory. In M. R. Rosenzweig & L. W. Porter (Eds.), Annual
review of psychology. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews, 1977.
Southwest Regional Resource Center. Administrators manual.
Programming for handicapped students at the secondary level:
Responding to public laws. Salt Lake City, UT: Author, 1977.
Super, D. E., & Crites, J. 0. Appraising vocational fitness.
New York: Harper and Brothers, 1962.
Testing, orientation, and work evaluation in rehabilitation (TOWER).
New York: Institute for Crippled and Disabled, 1936.
Thompson, J. F. Foundations of vocational education. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1973.
Thorndyke, R. L. The prediction of vocational success. Vocational
Guidance Quarterly, 1963, VI (3), 179-187.
Timmerman, W. J., & Doctor, A. C. Special applications of work eval¬
uation techniques for prediction of employability of the trainable
mentally retarded. Stryker, OH: Quadeo Rehabilitation Center, 1974
University of Iowa. The TOWER system--an application of the work
sample. In L. Miller (Ed.), Rehabilitation facilities as resources
for rehabilitation counselors. Iowa City: University of Iowa, 1970
Usdane, W. M. An examination of selected prevocational techniques
utilized in programs for the mentally retarded. Mental
Retardation, 1963, T_(4), 230-237.
Val par component work sample series (VALPAR). Tuscon, AZ: Valpar, 1975.
Vinokur, A. Cognitive and affective processes influencing risk
taking in groups: An expected utilities approach. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 1971, 3_, 131-142.
Vocational information and evaluation work sample (VIEWS). Philadelphia:
Vocational Research Institute, 1976.
Wide range employment sample test (WREST). Wilmington, DL: Guidance
Associates of Delaware, 1972.

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
Carl Thomas Cameron was born in Detroit, Michigan, on December
27, 1943, to Grace and Nelson Cameron. He was raised in Detroit and
graduated from Redford High School in 1961. He then studied painting
and sculpture at Detroit's Center for Creative Studies, where his
talent was honored by the selection of his work for national
exhibition.
In 1963, he moved to California. The California State Univer¬
sity at Long Beach conferred a Bachelor of Arts degree in psychology
in 1968, and a Master of Science degree in special education in
1972.
From 1968 through 1975, he was employed by the Compton Unified
School District with responsibilities for teaching, coordinating,
and supervising programs for exceptional youngsters. From 1975 to
1977 he was a faculty member at the University of Wisconsin—Stout
where his primary responsibility was teacher training in the area of
vocational-special education.
In September of 1977, he became a graduate teaching assistant
in the Department of Special Education, College of Education, at the
University of Florida in Gainesville and served in this capacity
through August 1979. During this time he produced several teacher
132

133
training media packages, sound-slide and video, pertinent to both
special and vocational education. He has accepted a position with
the University of Missouri--Columbia to develop a graduate level
program in vocational-special education.
Currently he is a member of the Council for Exceptional
Children—International, Division of Career Development, Teacher
Education and Mental Retardation; Florida Council for Exceptional
Children; American Vocational Association; National Association of
Vocational Educators Special Needs Personnel; Florida Vocational
Association; and Phi Delta Kappa.
Mr. Cameron continues to engage in a wide variety of activities
which include the arts--pottery, painting, photography, and sculpture;
off road racing; sailing; dawn hill and cross country skiing.

I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion
it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and
is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for
the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
/
l
â– /s â–  - . , ,
Associate/Pro|essor of Special 1
Education v_S
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion
it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and
is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for
the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
Robert F. Algozzine*
Associate Professor of Special
Education
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion
it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and
is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for
the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
Lil
'James W. Hens el
Professor of Instructional
Leadership and Support
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion
it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and
is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for
the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
& ^7^.,
Cecil D. Mercer
Associate Professor of Special
Education

I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion
it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and
is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the
Education
This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the
Department of Special Education in the College of Education and to
the Graduate Council, and was accepted as partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
December 1979
Dean, Graduate School

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
3 1262 08552 9534



xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID EELWSNCIJ_IBPJJL INGEST_TIME 2017-07-19T20:36:40Z PACKAGE UF00098074_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES