Preparing for the Workplace Charting A Course for Federal Postsecondary Training Policy (1994) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Pages 1-12
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 1... ...
workers. The federal government is not the primary sponsor of postsecondary training, but it can be a critical catalyst in moving the enterprise toward the quality and coherence it currently lacks.
|
From page 2... ...
to help the federal government consider the implications of multiple federal approaches to the provision of postsecondary vocational education and job training; (2) to consider policy alternatives, ranging from increased coordination of existing programs through reallocation of resources to entirely new approaches; and (3)
|
From page 3... ...
At the crucial level of local labor markets, programs and providers sometimes work together in more harmony than the fragmented national picture would suggest, but the pieces seldom add up to anything that can be described as a system. The federal government, with its proliferation of programs and lack of a coherent overall approach, bears part of the blame for this situation.
|
From page 4... ...
More important is that the federal government must take the lead in promoting policies that encourage quality and coherence in the training system as a whole. We believe that the federal government must be a catalyst in encouraging postsecondary training to evolve in ways that better meet our criteria for a well-functioning system.
|
From page 5... ...
All forms of training are related, however, as parts of the process of initially preparing and continuously improving the nation's work force. Good public policy now requires the federal government to give attention to linking the parts together in ways that are coherent to both workers and employers.
|
From page 6... ...
State governments are responsible for a wide range of domestic programs, making it logical for them to have the lead role in implementing training policy. The federal government should not micromanage programs of training for the workplace.
|
From page 7... ...
1. The impulse behind performance management and the spread of performance standards in federal programs is praiseworthy, but the complexities involved suggest that a cautious approach is warranted.
|
From page 8... ...
Much of postsecondary training lies beyond the clear influence of the federal government. Performance management should go beyond its traditional focus on establishing measures and standards in specific federal programs, aiming instead for improvement in the entire postsecondary training system.
|
From page 9... ...
Emphasizing improvement rather than compliance also helps to avoid the danger that standard-setting for postsecondary training will degrade into a minimum-standards approach. Improving Federal Programs The committee believes that the federal government needs to make sure that its own postsecondary training programs work as well as possible.
|
From page 10... ...
c. Encouraging Systemic Reform Although we have strong reservations about the federal government's trying to micromanage programs, we believe that it has an important new role to play as a catalyst or agent of change in encouraging systemic reform.
|
From page 11... ...
All of the committee members agree on the need for the federal government to become an agent of change in the task of building a strong postsecondary training system in the United States. We differ somewhat on the best vehicle for carrying out this role.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.