JVER v25n2 - Post-Secondary Students' Intentions for Participating in High School Co-Operative Education Programs: A Descriptive Study
Post-Secondary Students' Intentions for Participating in High School Co-Operative Education Programs: A Descriptive Study
Peter Chin
Queen's UniversityHugh Munby
Queen's UniversityNancy L. Hutchinson
Queen's UniversityKarin Steiner-Bell
Queen's UniversityAbstract
We surveyed 782 community college and university students in education and nursing programs to describe their intentions for participating and their participation rates in high school co-operative (co-op) education. The intention reported by most students was trying out an already chosen career (48%), and the average participation rate in co-op education of all students was 38% (with a range from 33% to 69% within the specific programs that were surveyed). Attention to self-perceptions of career development and the role of co-op education provides us with insights into students' goal-directed actions. These data suggest that secondary students are choosing co-op education for strategic, career-oriented reasons. Knowing more about students' intentions for participating in (or not participating in) co-op education can support both policy and instructional development in the growing area of secondary programming in co-op.Introduction and Purpose
This paper continues the development of a research program on co-operative (co-op) and career education across Canada. In the school context, co-op education refers to the practice of placing secondary school (i.e., high school) students in workplace settings for credit. Co-op education is large-data from Statistics Canada's CANSIM Series and from the Ontario Co-operative Education Association (OCEA) suggest that 10% of Canada's over 1.55 million high school students enrol in co-op education each academic year ( Munby, Cunningham, " Chin, 1998 ). This paper reports on data collected through a survey that was administered to post-secondary students about their high school co-op education experiences.
The primary purpose of the survey was to answer the general question: Did these post-secondary students who took co-op education in high school ascribe intentions to co-op and if so, what are those intentions? In addition, we wished to report on the participation rates in high school co-op education of post-secondary students in two types of institutions (university and community college), and in two professional areas (education and nursing). The design of the survey also afforded us insight into the number of high school co-op placements in which students were enrolled, the extent to which their co-op placements were similar to the workplaces associated with the post-secondary professional programs in which they are currently enrolled, and the extent to which students were aware of the subject-related credit that they had received for completing the co-op placement. We were also able to identify the reasons students cited for not participating in high school co-op, and the extent to which these post-secondary students would recommend co-op education to high school students.
Background
The precise beginnings of high school co-op education in Canada are hard to discern. In Ontario, the Hope Commission of 1950 did much to legitimize vocational and other work-oriented goals for schooling ( Stevenson, 1970 ). Another factor in the development of high school co-op was the federal response to the scarcity of skilled workers needed to meet industrial expansion in the post-war years, which led to passage of the federal government's Technical and Vocational Training Assistance Act in 1960. Among other things, this legislation encouraged increased co-operation between schools and industry by funding training programs for those in the workplace ( Young, 1992, p. 39 ). Federal funding in support of vocational training did much to institute co-op education. Indeed, by the time the Canadian Job Entry Program was implemented in 1985, co-op education was viewed by the Canada Employment and Immigration Commission as a version of work/study ( Young, 1992, p. 84 ). In Canada, education is within the jurisdiction of the provinces and territories, so educational (as distinct from employment) policy on co-op education came later. For example, in Ontario, the high school curriculum policy document of 1979 encouraged school boards to establish co-op education programs although formal policy did not appear in Ontario until 1989 ( Gidney, 1999 ). Currently, every provincial and territorial government has co-op education policies ( Hutchinson et al., 1999 ) enabling high school students to take co-op education credits, and there is a concerted effort underway to make co-op education programs available in all high schools (e.g., Nova Scotia Department of Education and Culture, 1998 ).
In reformed secondary curricula across Canada--Alberta, British Columbia, and Ontario--some combination of co-op and career education has assumed the role of curriculum with required credits and course descriptions ( Hutchinson et al., 1999 ). In spite of the different forms co-op education takes in these new curricula, and in spite of increasing enrolments in co-op education credits, this significant portion of the secondary curriculum has received scant attention in the research literature. The present paper contributes to redressing this situation.
Remarkably little is known about curriculum and learning in co-op education settings despite its scope ( Stasz, 1997a ). Even with the current enthusiasm for work-based curriculum experiences ( Bailey " Merritt, 1997 ), there is no widespread agreement on the educational goals they are to serve. For example, the school-to-work literature contains many lists of the potential purposes of work-based learning ( Hamilton " Hamilton, 1997 ; Urquiola et al., 1997) among which are: (a) acquiring knowledge and skills in particular occupations, (b) providing career exploration and planning, (c) learning all aspects of an industry, (d) improving personal and social competence related to work in general, and (e) enhancing students' academic achievement and motivation through contextual learning.
In the United States the spread of school-to-work programs and the 1994 School-to-Work Opportunities Act have prompted research on co-op education with particular attention to these potential purposes of work-based learning. Stasz ( 1997b ) stated that some of the most valuable skills students can gain from work-based learning programs include problem solving, communication, and teamwork. Stern, Rahn, and Chung ( 1998 ) also reported that these important general career skills can be learned through work-based learning experiences, and that these skills are necessary since many young people may change careers many times throughout their lives.
Stone and Mortimer ( 1998 ) argued that although students learn about career planning through many means, work-based learning programs can enable students to get a general sense of a career area. Stern et al., ( 1998 ) reported that work-based learning programs in some schools have allowed students to organize a portion of their curriculum around a specific career or field. Although Stone and Mortimer ( 1998 ) believed that it is difficult to attribute the specific contribution of work-based learning programs to students' psycho-social development, Stasz ( 1997b ) suggested that, through the learning of rules, norms, and professional ethics, students involved in work-based learning programs could enhance their personal and social competence.
Several research studies have reported on the impact of work-based learning programs on academic achievement (e.g., Hughes, Moore, " Bailey, 1999 ; Stasz " Brewer, 1998 ; Stasz " Kaganoff, 1997 ). Such work is exploring links between school curricula and workplace learning, including direct or indirect application of academic content at the job site, skill-oriented knowledge-use, and the impact of workplace learning on student motivation to learn at school. However, results are ambiguous ( Hughes et al., 1999 ), and there is little emphasis in this research on what students themselves expect from co-op education.
The educational goals identified in the new Ontario co-op education documents encompass all of the potential purposes of work-based programs that have been stated earlier. Rather than exclusively focusing on the goals of co-op education as intended by curriculum policy makers, our research team saw the importance of focusing on students' intentions for taking high school co-op as well.
The current focus of our program of research is clarifying the intended curriculum in co-operative education. To this end, we have analyzed the curriculum documents in co-operative and career education of all the provincial ministries of education in Canada ( Hutchinson et al., 1999 ) and the curriculum documents in co-operative education of a sample of school districts in Ontario ( Hutchinson et al., 2000 ). These studies address questions about the development that policy makers and educators intend co-op education to foster. The results suggest varied emphases on enhancing academic learning and more focused preparation for future careers. We have also carried out a series of multiple perspective case studies in order to provide descriptions of the purposes for co-operative education held by high school co-op students, their co-op teachers, their parents, and their co-op workplace supervisors ( Munby, Hutchinson, " Chin, 2000 ). These case studies describe the intentional perspectives of an array of stakeholders in the moment, while a student's co-op program is unfolding. The co-op students emphasize long-term career applicability over immediate academic enhancement. In the current study, we sought retrospective descriptions of the purposes of their high school co-op participation from university and community college students. We provided opportunities for participants to report on an array of intentions including academic enhancement and preparation for future careers, both of which may be seen as instances of career development ( Valach, 1988 ).
This study, like much of our work, merges lines of research in co-operative education and career education. Thus we use Young and Valach's ( 1994 ) and Young, Valach, Dillabough, and Mattes' ( 1994 ) recent formulation of career development as goal-directed action to frame our current research. This is a constructivist framework that suggests that career development refers to a process of linked actions in which people intentionally engage that includes manifest behaviour, conscious cognitions, and social meaning. Valach ( 1988 ) has argued that people construct social meaning of their career development actions not only within the frame of present and moment-to-moment action, but broadly within the longer frame of one's life. This opens the way to retrospective study of self-perceptions of career development and of the role of high school co-op education. The term career may not be critical to individuals who use everyday language to describe and make sense of their actions and thoughts. Thus, Young ( 1995 ) suggested that researchers ask for participants' interpretations of past actions in light of their current actions and experiences. In this framework, we asked university and community college students to report retrospectively on their reasons for participating (or not participating) in secondary school co-op education. We also asked a series of related questions about the role of co-op education in career development.
Method
The target population for this research is Canadian college and university students in professional programs. The sampling frame (survey population) was restricted to students of university programs and community college programs that prepared their graduates for similar professions. (In Canada, community colleges grant diplomas rather than degrees.) The sample was designed to meet the following selection criteria: students in programs for which we might anticipate high return rates for our surveys, and students in programs that were readily accessible to the researchers. Using students in local programs (purposeful and convenience sampling) satisfied both criteria.
We make the argument that external validity, for generalization to the survey population ( McMillan " Schumacher, 2000 ), is unlikely to be weakened by this sampling for the following reason. The university chosen, Queen's, is recognized for its high entry requirements. The average final-year grades of freshman students entering Queen's University from high school or Quebec's CEGEP system is 87.1%, the highest of Canada's universities with medical schools and extensive doctoral programs ( "Ninth Annual Ranking," 1999 ). We assume that those applying to Queen's are aware of the competition and are thus less inclined than students applying to other universities to spend time in co-op placements in the years prior to their application to university. (Similar data for the college system is not available.) Accordingly, we assume that the results of our survey will be conservative and that error in generalization will be in the direction of underestimation.
We administered surveys to post-secondary students in similar career preparation programs to report their intentions for participating in high school co-op education. Two of these programs were university programs, B.Sc.N. and B.Ed., and two were community college programs, nursing and early childhood education (ECE). The B.Ed. data were collected from a large population of teacher candidates in an 8-month post-degree program (i.e., all teacher candidates have completed a B.A. or B.Sc. prior to entry). The B.Ed. surveys were administered simultaneously by course instructors at a time when all students had a scheduled class. Due to the smaller enrolments in the other three programs, data were collected from students enrolled in both the first and second year of each program. The ECE and community college nursing programs are 2-year programs, while the B.Sc.N. is a 4-year program. Members of the research team administered these surveys to each group at the end of a class. Table 1 summarizes the administration of the surveys and demonstrates that the return rates were high.
The survey instrument for B.Ed. students comprised 14 questions asking them to identify the specific program in which they were enrolled, the year in which they graduated from high school, and whether or not they participated in co-op education ( Appendix A ). All students were asked if they would recommend co-op to high school students. Those students who participated in high school co-op were also asked questions about the number of placements and type of placements in which they participated, their career plans, and why they took co-op. Those students who did not participate in high school co-op were asked questions about why they did not take it, and what their career plans entailed.
Table 1 Survey Administration
Program Administrated Distributed Returned Return Rate
B. Ed April 1999 576 490 85% ECE Year 1 Feb. 2000 73 69 95% College Nursing 1 Feb. 2000 61 61 100% B. Sc. N. Year 1 Feb. 2000 26 26 100% ECE Year 2 Jan. 2000 43 42 98% College Nursing 2 Feb. 2000 34 34 100% B. Sc. N. Year 2 Feb. 2000 61 60 98%
The instrument (in Appendix A ), initially designed specifically for the B.Ed. students, was later modified to be more generic so it could be used with students in all community college and university programs ( Appendix B ). The question about the type of high school credits assigned to a particular co-op placement (i.e., question 7 in Appendix A ) was re-designed in the hope of getting more clarity about the school subjects to which the co-op placement was most related (i.e., question 12 in Appendix B ). Further, the survey was also adjusted so that students who took more than one co-op placement could answer questions specific to each placement (i.e., questions 10-13 in Appendix B ). These modifications resulted from a discussion with a focus group of students who completed the initial survey.
Both survey instruments had a high degree of internal consistency which insured that student responses could be accepted with confidence. For example, the survey was designed so that respondents answered all questions in section A, but only answered one of section B or section C depending on whether or not they had participated in high school co-op. Analysis revealed that none of the surveys were returned with both sections B and C completed, indicating that students correctly reported that they either had or had not participated in high school co-op. As well, in the revised survey ( Appendix B ), students who reported that they had participated in one co-op placement appropriately responded to questions 10-13 in reference to one co-op placement, and those who reported that they had participated in two co-op placements responded to questions 10-13 for both placements.
Findings
All data were entered into a statistical package (SPSS) so that descriptive statistics could be generated. Data about the nature of the co-op placements were coded according to the National Occupational Classification (NOC) system used by the Canadian federal department, Human Resources Development Canada. Using a focus on job skills appropriate to occupations, the NOC system separates occupations into 10 broad groups such as management, social science/education, health, sales/service, and trades. Thus, for example, students who stated that they had co-op placements in nursing homes, and performed duties typical of a health care aide, were classified in the NOC "health" category. As stated earlier, data for the ECE, B.Sc.N., and community college nursing programs are an aggregate of surveys administered to first and second year students in each of the programs. Table 2 provides an overview of the data sets, the participation rates in co-op education, and the gender of the participants in each program.
As researchers within a Faculty of Education, our interest in high school co-op education has been in science or science-related settings. Thus our collection of survey data has focused on programs in education and in the science-rich programs in nursing. The fields in which we chose to collect data (i.e., education and nursing) are two major professions in which males are under-represented. Due to the low number of male participants in our survey, representations of the data by gender would not be robust.
Table 2 Participation in Co-op Education
Program N = Female* Male* Participated in
Co-Op% Participation
B. Ed. 490 374 114 161 33% ECE 111 106 4 77 69% B. Sc. N. 86 78 7 29 34% College Nursing 95 88 7 32 34% Total 782 646 132 299 38%
* A small number of students did not identify their gender. The data showed (Table 2) that the participation rates in co-op education of those in the ECE program (69%) was highest, while the remaining programs have similar co-op education participation rates of 33% (B.Ed.) and 34% (B.Sc.N. and community college nursing). Also (Table 3), the majority of the ECE students took more than one co-op placement (56%), while the university students (14% in the B.Ed., 21% in B.Sc.N.) and community college nursing students (28%) were less likely to take more than one co-op placement. When compared as aggregates, university students were one-third as likely to participate in more than one co-op placement (15%) as community college students (48%). This is not surprising since university entrance requirements dictate a large number of required courses, which subsequently affects the number of optional courses (including co-op) that can fit into schedules.
Table 3 Participation in More than 1 Co-op Placement
Placements ECE College Nursing Total College B. Ed. B. Sc. N. Total University
More than 1 43/77 = 56% 9/32 = 28% 52/109 = 48% 22/161 = 14% 6/29 = 21% 28/190 = 15%
The reasons that students cited for taking high school co-op were subjected to techniques of pattern and thematic analyses typical of qualitative research ( McMillan " Schumacher, 2000 ). Members of the research team worked on the data separately and together to ensure that the construct development was reliable. The reasons that students cited for taking high school co-op were grouped into 6 categories. These categories, and two illustrative statements indicative of each category, were: (a) try out an already selected career (e.g., "I thought it would be a good experience to see if my desire to teach was correct" and "to make sure that a career in health was for me"); (b) entry into a post-secondary program (e.g., "for experience in order to get into the Con[current]-ed[ucation] program" and "to be able to get a job in the nursing profession"); (c) career exploration (e.g., "unsure of career and needed to know more" and "to check out these 'careers'"); (d) general experience (e.g., "for the experience in the work force" and "experience in an everyday work environment"); (e) change from school (e.g., "get out of school" and "sounded like fun- no homework, not in classroom"); and (f) other (e.g., "I couldn't take any more spares" and "parental influence"). In cases where students cited more than one reason, we coded their most detailed response.
The distinction between "trying out the career" and "career exploration" was made based on the students' intents. Specifically, students who responded that they were fairly sure about a particular career path and took co-op to confirm that choice were categorized as "trying out the career." Students who responded that they were unsure of their career path and took co-op to find out more about what they might be interested in were categorized as "career exploration."
Students' intentions for taking high school co-op, as reported in Table 4, reveal a clear sense of purpose. Analysis of the students' responses showed that the most frequently cited reasons for participating in co-op education were: to try out their chosen career, to gain general workplace experience, or to explore possible careers. This trend was evident with the education students where 81% of the B.Ed. students and 75% of the ECE students cited one of these three reasons. In the nursing programs, this same set of three reasons accounted for 70% of the community college nursing students' and 76% of the B.Sc.N. students' responses. Gaining experiences that would enhance their application to a specific post-secondary program was another reason that students took co-op education, while "other" reasons were cited fewer times.
Table 4 Major Reasons for Participating in Co-op*
Program
(# Students)Try Out
CareerEntry into
ProgramCareer
ExplorationGeneral
ExperienceAll Other
Reasons
B. Ed
(N = 161)78
(48%)15
(9%)22
(14%)30
(19%)17
(10%)ECE
(N = 77)44
(57%)2
(3%)8
(10%)6
(8%)11
(14%)B. Sc. N.
(N = 29)11
(38%)5
(17%)6
(21%)7
(24%)College Nurse
(N = 32)12
(38%)2
(6%)6
(19%)4
(13%)5
(16%)Total
(N = 299)145
(48%)18
(6%)41
(14%)46
(15%)40
(13%)
* Non-responses account for the remaining percentage values. These findings suggest that career-related reasons are important considerations that students weigh when deciding to take co-op education, and such a finding is in contrast to many provincial policy documents that emphasize academic learning in the workplace ( Hutchinson et al., 1999 ).
Further evidence from the survey results suggests that students' participation in specific co-op placements reflects their career aspirations. The types of co-op placement that students took (as defined by the NOC system) were similar to the workplaces to which they aspire in the majority of cases. Specifically, 78% of the B.Ed. students' placements and 86% of the ECE students' placements were classified as social science/education, while 62% of the B.Sc.N. students' placements and 63% of the community college nursing students' placements were classified as health occupations.
We identified the number of students who did not take co-op education because it was not available in their high school. Then, for those students who stated that co-op was available, we analyzed the reasons given for not taking high school co-op and generated categories. These 6 categories, and two illustrative statements indicative of each category, were: (a) no interest (e.g., "not interested at the time" and "wasn't something I was interested in"); (b) little value (e.g., "people who were not academically inclined took co-op" and "I didn't think it would be a valuable experience"); (c) time constraint (e.g., "very involved with activities within the school" and "my course load was full with maths and sciences"); (d) no placement available (e.g., "at that time it was offered more for students learning a trade" and "co-op education was not offered in areas that interested me"); (e) transportation problems (e.g., "I lived out in country so it was harder to get to the placements" and "transportation was a problem"); and (f) other (e.g., "not advertised or promoted" and "I guess the program wasn't well publicized enough for me to know about it").
Analyses of data of students who did not participate in high school co-op adds credence to our claims about the availability of appropriate placements and the inherent pressures on students to take courses required for entry into a post-secondary institution. Specifically, time constraints and lack of appropriate co-op placements were cited as reasons for not participating in co-op education by approximately 55% of the B.Sc.N. students and about 33% of students in the other programs. Table 5 shows the major reasons that students gave as barriers to taking co-op education. Also of interest is the number of students who stated that co-op programs were not offered which reflects the age range of the students, and that co-op programs have been much more widely available since 1990. As stated earlier, the increased availability of co-op programs is the result of policy changes that have increased the number of schools offering co-op education programs (e.g., Nova Scotia Department of Education and Culture, 1998 ), and recent curriculum reforms in three provinces (i.e., Alberta, British Columbia, and Ontario) that require all students to participate in co-op education experiences or other workplace experiences ( Munby, Chin, " Hutchinson, 1999 ).
Table 5 Major Reasons for Not Participating in Co-op*
Program
(# Students)Co-op Not
offeredNo
InterestLittle
ValuseTime
ConstraintNo Available
PlacementAll Other
Reasons
B. Ed
(N = 329)56
(17%)51
(16%)55
(17%)90
(27%)21
(6%)15
(5%)
ECE
(N = 34)56
(9%)7
(21%)2
(6%)8
(24%)4
(12%)5
(15%)
B. Sc. N.
(N = 57)12
(21%)3
(5%)8
(14%)17
(30%)14
(25%)1
(2%)
College Nurse
(N = 63)13
(21%)9
(14%)4
(6%)8
(13%)12
(19%)10
(16%)
Total
(N = 483)84
(17%)70
(14%)69
(14%)123
(25%)51
(11%)31
(6%)
* Non-responses account for the remaining percentage values. A small percentage of students in all programs did not take co-op because they perceived it to be of little value. This may reflect the perception that co-op education, especially in its early years, catered more to high school students not destined for post-secondary education. This pejorative view is still present today, but there is a trend to offer "high-end" co-op placements in such settings as vet clinics, law offices, and medical facilities. For example, recent enrolment data in Ontario shows that almost 43% of co-op students were enrolled in advanced-level courses and 57% in general or basic level courses ( "Enrolment in co-operative education," 1998 ). Surprisingly, among those students who did not take co-op education in high school, a high percentage (92% in education, 77% in nursing) would recommend it to others. In fact, 62 of the 69 students who stated that they did not take co-op because they thought it was of little value would now recommend it for others. An overwhelming endorsement of co-op education is evident: of those student who took co-op, 99% of the education students and 100% of the nursing students would recommend co-op to others.
These findings suggest that career-related reasons are important considerations that students weigh when deciding to take co-op education, and such a finding is in contrast to many provincial policy documents that emphasize academic learning in the workplace ( Hutchinson et al., 1999 ).
Further evidence from the survey results suggests that students' participation in specific co-op placements reflects their career aspirations. The types of co-op placement that students took (as defined by the NOC system) were similar to the workplaces to which they aspire in the majority of cases. Specifically, 78% of the B.Ed. students' placements and 86% of the ECE students' placements were classified as social science/education, while 62% of the B.Sc.N. students' placements and 63% of the community college nursing students' placements were classified as health occupations.
In the original B.Ed. survey, question 7 asked students to specify the type of credits (subject-related or generic co-op) they received for their co-op placement. The majority of students were unable to answer this question. In the modified version of the survey the question was re-designed so that students could select a subject area that was most related to their co-op placements (i.e., question 12). In the revised survey, the majority of students chose more than one subject area even though the instructions clearly asked them to select only one. These findings suggest that students do not see the relationship between traditional school subjects and their co-op placement. Overall, we found the students were clear in reporting their career-related intentions for taking co-op in secondary school yet they were frequently not aware of the academic credit they had earned for the co-op, suggesting that neither their intents nor their experiences were focused on enhancing learning in secondary courses. Instead, some appeared to be looking to enhance their admission to a post-secondary program. Their intentions and actions were future-oriented.
Conclusions
The post-secondary students we surveyed, who took coop education in high school, ascribed intentions to co-op. The most frequent reason reported retrospectively for taking co-op was trying out an already selected career, followed by gaining general work experience, and exploring possible careers. Some students reported using co-op education to enhance their application to post-secondary programs. Overall, career goals were dominant, rather than goals like academic enhancement or psycho-social development. This finding is consistent with the results of current American studies on workplace learning and academic skills (e.g., Hughes et al., 1999 ). It is also supported by the emerging results of our multiple perspective case studies on intents ( Munby, Hutchinson, " Chin, 2000 ) in which co-op students rarely make explicit connections between workplace learning and the content of their current high school academic courses. In the present study, few students could identify the academic or generic credit that they received for their co-op placement, which suggests that they do not remember the experience as primarily an enhancement of high school academic learning. However, some post-secondary students reported using high school co-op education to enhance their future academic learning opportunity- that is, to boost their applications to post-secondary programs that required a statement of relevant experience. These findings reflect Young and Valach's ( 1994 ) formulation of career development as goal- and future-directed action and support Young's ( 1995 ) recommendation that researchers study participants' interpretations of past actions in light of current experiences. We found a high level of enthusiasm among those who had not participated, as well as those who had participated, in high school co-op education, reflected in an almost unanimous endorsement of co-op education.
The findings of this study are limited in that the surveys were distributed only to students in post-secondary education, so we do not know whether those who entered employment following high school would ascribe the same intents to co-op or would be as enthusiastic about recommending co-op. We do not know whether students who were unsuccessful in entering the career-related program of their choice or those currently enrolled in liberal arts programs would retrospectively perceive co-op education the same way as those we surveyed. Males are underrepresented in the two career areas from which our respondents were drawn (nursing and education) and thus it is impossible to make any conclusions about gender and intents ascribed to co-op education.
Large numbers of adolescents participate in co-op education and in other forms of workplace learning in Canada and the United States. Efforts are underway in Canada to make co-op education an integral part of the high school curriculum. Thus it is vital that we clarify the purposes of such programs and ascertain the extent to which these purposes are met. If students act on their intended goals in making sense of their co-op and workplace experiences, then describing the goals students have for co-op is of central importance.
References
Bailey , T. R., " Merritt, D. (1997). School-to-work for the college Bound (MDS-799). Berkeley, CA: National Center for Research In Vocational Education, University of California at Berkeley.
Enrolment in co-operative education in Ontario secondary schools 1996-1997. (1998, Winter). OCEA Exchange, p. 5.
Gidney , R. (1999). From Hope to Harris: The reshaping of Ontario schools. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Hamilton , M. A., " Hamilton, S. F. (1997). Learning well at work Choices for quality. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Hughes , K. L., Moore, D. T., " Bailey, T. R. (1999). Work-based learning and academic skills. IEE working paper No. 15. New York: Columbia University.
Hutchinson , N. L., Munby, H., Chin, P., Edwards, K. L., Steiner-Bell, K., Ho K., Chapman, C., " Mills de España, W. (2000). The intended curriculum in co-op education in Ontario Secondary Schools: An analysis of school documents. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
Hutchinson , N. L., Chin, P., Munby, H., Mills de España, W., Young, J., " Edwards, K. L. (1999). How inclusive is co-operative education in Canada? Getting the story and the numbers. Exceptionality Education Canada, 8(3), 15-43.
Hutchinson , N. L., Munby, H., " Chin, P. (1997). Guidance and career education: Secondary curriculum background research. Toronto: Ministry of Education and Training. McMillan, J., " Schumacher, S. (2000). Research in Education: A conceptual introduction (5th ed.). New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
Munby , H., Chin, P., " Hutchinson, N. L. (1999). Policies in co-operative and career education in Canada: Issues for curriculum and assessment. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian Society for the Study of Education, Sherbrooke, Quebec.
Munby , H., Cunningham, M., " Chin, P. (1998, May). Co-operative education: The functions of experience in workplace learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian Society for the Study of Education, Ottawa, Ontario.
Munby , H., Hutchinson, N. L., " Chin, P. (2000). Co-operative education in the Canadian curriculum. Education Canada, 40(2), 20-23.
Ninth Annual Ranking of Universities. (1999, November 15). Maclean's, 112, 70.
Nova Scotia Department of Education and Culture. (1997-98). Public school programs: Community based education. ftp://ftp.ednet.ns.ca/pub/educ/psp/psp-b.pdf (1999, May 15).
Stasz , C., " Brewer, D. J. (1998). Academic skills at work: Two perspectives. (MDS-1193). Berkeley, CA: National Center for Research in Vocational Education, University of California at Berkeley.
Stasz , C., " Kaganoff, T. (1997). Learning how to learn at work: Lessons from three high school programs. (MDS-916). Berkeley, CA: National Center for Research in Vocational Education, University of California at Berkeley.
Stasz , C. (1997a). Do employers need the skills they want? Evidence from technical work. Journal of Education and Work, 10, 205-223.
Stasz , C. (1997b). Work-based learning: High hopes or dim realities? Paper prepared for the Roundtable on Work, Learning, and Assessment, Board on Testing and Assessment, National Research Council.
Stern , D., Rahn, M., " Chung, Y. (1998). Design of work-based learning for students in the United States. Youth " Society, 29, 471-502.
Stevenson , H. (1970). Developing public education in post-war Canada to 1960. In J. D. Wilson, R. Stamp, " L-P Audet (Eds.), Canadian education: A history (pp. 386-415). Scarborough, ON: Prentice-Hall Canada.
Stone III, J., " Mortimer, J. (1998). The effect of adolescent employment on vocational development: Public and educational policy implications. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 53, 184-214.
Urquiola , M., Stern, D., Horn, I., Dornsife, C., Chi, B., Williams, L.,Merritt, D., Hughes, K., " Bailey, T. (1997). School to work, college and career: A review of policy, practice, and results Berkeley, CA: National Center for Research in Vocational Education, University of California at Berkeley.
Valach , L. (1988). A theory of goal-directed action in career analysis. In R.A. Young " W.A. Borgen (Eds.), Methodological approaches to the study of career. New York: Praeger.
Young , D. (1992). An historical survey of vocational education in Canada (2nd ed.). North York, ON: Captus Press.
Young , R.A. (1995). An action approach to career counseling. ERIC Digest, EDO-CG-95-63.
Young , R.A., " Valach, L. (1994). Evaluation of career development programs from an action perspective. Canadian Journal of Counselling, 28, 299-307.
Young, R.A., Valach, L., Dillabough, J., " Matthes, G. (1994). Career research from an active perspective: The self-confrontational procedure. The Career Development Quarterly, 43, 185-196.
Acknowledgements
This paper is from a research program in co-operative and career education, funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Our thanks go to Karol Lyn Edwards, Wendy Mills de España, Christine Chapman, and Katherine Ho for their assistance in this research.
APPENDIX A
Co-operative (Co-op) Education Questionnaire
This is a questionnaire about your co-op education during your high-school years. By completing and returning this questionnaire, you are giving consent for the data on this sheet to be used for research purposes. The data will be reported in aggregate form only and you will not be personally identified. The completion of this questionnaire is voluntary and you are under no obligation to participate in this research.
Please DO NOT sign your name on this questionnaire.
Thank you for your co-operation.
Please check the appropriate box and provide written comments in the spaces where applicable.
SECTION A - DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION; 1. Are you: a. male ____ Female ____ b. P/J ____ I/S ____ c. Consecutive ____ Concurrent (Queen's-Trent) ____ Concurrent (Queen's-Waterloo) ____ Concurrent (Queen's-Queen's) ____ Concurrent (MAS) ____ 2. Year of graduation from High School:_________________________ 3. Did you participatein in in co-op education during your years as a high-school student? Yes ____ No ____
Complete Section B if you answered YES to Question 3, Section A.
OR
Complete Section C if you answered NO to Question 3, Section A.
SECTION B - CHARACTERISTICS OF YOUR CO-OP EDUCATION EXPERIENCES
AS A HIGH-SCHOOL STUDENT4. Describe your co-op placement(s) (e.g., school, business office, clinic,etc.)? ________________________________________________________________ 5. How many times did you enroll in a co-op placement? ____ 6. How many co-op placements did you complete? ____ 7. What kind of credit did you receive for your co-op placement(s)? Subject Credit ____ In the subjects of ____ General Co-op Credit ____ 8. What are your career plans? Teaching-related ____ Other ____ 9. Are your career plans related to your co-op experience during your high-school years? Yes ____ No ____ 10. As a teacher, would you recommend co-op education to your students? Yes ____ No ____ 11 Why did you choose to participate in secondary school co-op education? ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________
SECTION C - TO BE COMPLETED IF YOU ANSWERED NO
TO QUESTION 3, SECTION A12a. Was co-op education available during your secondary school experience? Yes ____ No ____ Not Sure ____ 12b. If yes, then why did you choose not to participate in co-op education? _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ 13. What are your career plans? Teaching-related ____ Other ____ 14. As a teacher, would you recommend co-op education to your students? Yes ____ No. ____
Please return this questionnaire to your focus-group instructor.
Once again, thank you.
APPENDIX B
Co-operative (Co-op) Education Questionnaire
This is a questionnaire about your co-op education during your high-school years. By completing and returning this questionnaire, you are giving consent for the data on this sheet to be used for research purposes. The data will be reported in aggregate form only and you will not be personally identified. The completion of this questionnaire is voluntary and you are under no obligation to participate in this research.
Please DO NOT sign your name on this questionnaire.
Thank you for your co-operation.
Please check the appropriate box and provide written comments in the spaces where applicable.
DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION 1. Male ____ Female ____ 2. Year of graduation from high school ____________ 3. In what post-secondary program are you currently enrolled? _________________________________________________ 4. Did you participate in co-op education during your years as a high-school student? YES ____ NO ____
Complete Section B if you answered YES to Question 3, Section A.
OR
Complete Section C if you answered NO to Question 3, Section A.
SECTION B - TO BE COMPLETED IF YOU ANSWERED NO TO QUESTION 4 5. 5. Was co-op education available during your secondary school experience? YES ____ NO ____ NOT SURE ____ 6. If yes, why did you choose not to participate in co-op education? _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ 7. Are your career plans directly related to your current post-secondary program? YES ____ NO ____ specify __________________ 8. Would you recommend co-op education to current high school students? YES ____ NO ____ We appreciate your participation in this research.
SECTION C - TO BE COMPLETED IF YOU ANSWERED YES TO QUESTION 4 9. In how many co-op placements did you participate? ______ 10. Describe your co-op placement(s) (e.g., school, business office clinic etc.)?
(Use the appropriate column if you completed morethan one co-op placement.)Placement 1 Placement 2 ____________________________ ____________________________ ____________________________ ____________________________ 11. What were your primary duties in your co-op placements? Placement 1 Placement 2 ____________________________ ____________________________ ____________________________ ____________________________ 12. To which group of school subjects was your co-op placement MOST related? Placement 1 Placement 2 Business ____ ____ English/Drama/Art ____ ____ Languages ____ ____ Math/Computers ____ ____ Physical & Health education ____ ____ Science ____ ____ Social Studies ____ ____ Trades/Technology ____ ____ 13. Are your career plans related to your co-op experience during your high-school years? Placement 1 Placement 2 YES ____ ____ NO ____ ____ 14. Are your career plans directly related to your current post-secondary program? YES ____ NO ____ 15. Would you recommend co-op education to current high school students? YES ____ NO ____ 16. Why did you choose to participate in secondary school co-op education? ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________
Authors
DR. PETER CHIN, Associate Professor, Faculty of Education, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada K7L 3N6, [E-Mail: chinp@educ.queensu.ca ] has expertise in science education and conducts research on science teaching and learning in school and workplace environments.
DR. HUGH MUNBY, Professor, Faculty of Education, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada K7L 3N6, [E-Mail: munbyh@educ.queensu.ca ], conducts research on co-op education, and has a special interest in the curriculum of the workplace.
DR. NANCY HUTCHINSON, Professor, Faculty of Education, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada, K7L 3N6, [E-Mail: hutchinn@educ.queensu.ca ], is an instructional psychologist and has special interest in students with exceptionalities.
KARIN STEINER-BELL is a doctoral candidate in the Faculty of Education, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada K7L 3N6, [E-Mail: karinsteiner@sprint.ca ]. Her work reflects her interest in the social cognition of students with exceptionalities.