California 
Regional Occupational Centers and Programs 
(ROCP) 
2004 Longitudinal Study Technical Report 
Douglas E. Mitchell 
School Improvement Research Group 
University of California, Riverside 
June 2004 
Funded by the California Department of Education 

California Regional Occupational 
Centers and Programs 
Longitudinal Study 
2004 Technical Report 
Executive Summary 
The study reported here provides important documentation of eight important conclusions regarding the operation and impact of California’s Regional Occupational Centers and Programs (ROCPs). In doing so it demonstrates the feasibility of developing a comprehensive, data-based system of accountability for these important contributors to the economic and civic development of some of the State’s most challenging young adults. 
Briefly, the eight key conclusions are: 
1. ROCP students earn higher wages than comparison group peers. In telephone follow-up interviews, ROCP students report employment in jobs that pay significantly higher wages than those held by a Control Group of their peers. With the average salary for all groups running in the $7 to $13 per hour range, the ROCP graduates report earning about $2.40 per hour more. It is also important to note that ROCP training leads to higher and more equal wage rates for all gender and ethnic sub-groups within this study. 
2. ROCP students have more success in securing raises and promotions on the job. In addition to commanding higher hourly wages, ROCP graduates report pay raises and job promotion rates higher than other high school graduates (25% vs. 19% for raises; 25% vs. 23% for promotions). 
3. ROCP students enroll in post-secondary education in large numbers. Despite their greater success in the labor market at the time of graduation, ROCP graduates report participating in continuing post-secondary educational programs at rates comparable to those of the Comparison Group in this study. More than half of both groups report continuing their education through Community College enrollment (51% for ROCP graduates, 52% for others). Just 4% of each group are neither in school nor working. 
4. ROCP students have better 12th grade attendance rates. During their 10th grade year, just prior to entering into career training programs, ROCP students have school absence rates that are higher than their high school peers (4.92 vs. 4.21 

days per year). By their 12th grade year, however, ROCP students’ attendance rates are significantly above the Comparison Group (8.54 absences vs. 9.04 for the comparison group). 
5. ROCP students improve their high school grade point averages. ROCP students represent a challenging target for educators who would facilitate their successful entry into the labor market and positions of civic responsibility. On average, these students enter ROCP training programs with academic records that are well below those of a Control Group of their high school peers. Nevertheless, as they move through the high school they raise their grade point averages by about three-tenths of a point – comparable with a Comparison Group of similar students who did not take ROCP courses. 
6. ROCP students prefer ROCP classes over other subjects. In responding to a High School Satisfaction Survey, ROCP students report a modest level of enthusiasm for their current school experiences, but nearly half the respondents indicate that they “Very much” like their career education course work. 
7. ROCP students question the value and relevance of many of their high school courses. ROCP students report significant disappointment with their high school classes. They generally report that “Only a few” are relevant to getting jobs or preparing them for other aspects of adult life, and there is a similar assessment regarding whether the classes are enjoyable experiences. 
8. ROCP students like some classes much more than others. When asked to indicate how well they like various academic and non-academic high school classes, the ROCP students report the lowest level of appreciation for Mathematics, Science and Social Studies classes. Only English Language Arts and Music/Art/Drama classes come close to matching their enthusiasm for ROCP course work. 
Observations: 
Judging by the initial gap in GPAs between ROCP students and comparison students, to a significant degree, high schools are utilizing ROCP to help address the needs of students who are lower in achievement and more at-risk than other non-college preparatory students in their schools. Despite initially lower levels of achievement, ROCP students stay in school and have better 12th grade attendance rates than the higher achieving Comparison Group. This is an important finding because the later job successes of these previously lower achieving students demonstrate that ROCP can be an effective intervention for at-risk students – significantly improving employment prospects. Data on the relationships among gender, ethnicity and hourly wage rates for ROCP students and their comparison group peers indicate that this type of career training is very helpful to young women and to members of all ethnic groups as they enter the labor market. ROCP graduates report significantly higher wage rates in all categories, indicating that these students are receiving training in high-demand career programs. It is recommended that further research be conducted to examine larger numbers of ROCP students in order to see if this achievement and work success profile remains constant. 
UCR:SIRG ii
Many of these low achieving students are learning the skills needed to be successful in the job market. Further study is needed to ascertain whether it is the effectiveness of math and other academic standards taught in the ROCP, or the development of social responsibility and workplace discipline that is leading to these highly desirable outcomes. 
Females and minorities who took ROCP were earning substantially more income than their counterparts in the comparison group. ROCP females earned more income than comparison group males. Minorities enrolled in ROCP all had higher salary rates than all ethnic groups in the comparison sample. Thus, across the diversity of ethnic groups graduating from ROCP programs, wages were not only raised, they were substantially equalized. Females and ethnic minorities have historically earned lower salaries than white males. ROCP can be an important instructional strategy for raising the career prospects of minorities and women in California. 
California’s ROCPs provide a meaningful educational experience to a very important population of students who are at-risk of school failure. They are providing these students with meaningful educational experiences which the students prefer over their other high school training experiences and which provide them, on average, with successful entry into the job market and encourage them to seek continuing education opportunities after leaving high school. 
A delivery system such as ROCP, that can facilitate retention of lower achieving students while teaching them important career and academic skills is a useful strategy for helping to raise overall high school completion rates, as well as to increasing the number of students pursuing post secondary schooling. One major goal of both the federal “No Child Left Behind” legislation and California’s “High Performance High Schools” initiative is supporting successful transition to post secondary schooling and careers for all children. ROCP programs are playing an important role in supporting these efforts. 
These and other important findings from this study are detailed in the body of this report. The data collection methods and the data analysis techniques used for the preparation of this technical report could easily be developed into an ongoing data system capable of documenting longitudinal outcomes and of identifying strengths and weaknesses in particular ROCP programs and services. Not only have the costs for this feasibility study been modest, instrumentation developed for this study can be scaled-up for statewide use. The study has produced an electronic database that could easily serve as the template for full implementation. 
UCR:SIRG iii
Table of Contents 
Page 
Executive Summary i 
Introduction 1 
Overview of the ROCP Delivery System 1 
Common Features of the ROCP courses included in this study 2 
Occupational/Career Education is Important 2 
Aims of the Study 3 
The Study Design and Execution 4 
Moving Beyond Feasibility 4 
Instrumentation 5 
Data Presented in this Report 6 
A Profile of the Study Sample 6 
Academic Performance Findings 12 
Employment Comparisons from the Telephone Follow-Up Sample: Employment 18 
Educational Comparisons from Telephone Follow-Up and HS Satisfaction Data 24 
Conclusions 29 
References 31 
Appendices 32 
UCR:SIRG iv
Figures 
Data from student transcripts, follow-up interviews and high school satisfaction surveys are presented in the following twenty-three Figures: 
I. Characteristics of ROCP Study Sample 
1. Count of High School Transcript Data Records 
2. Count of Useable High School Satisfaction Surveys by ROCP 
3. Regional Occupational Program Participation by Type of Program 
4. Gender breakdown by ROCP Program Enrollment 
5. ROCP Program Enrollment by Ethnicity 
II. Academic Performance Comparisons 
6. Grade Point Averages (GPAs) for ROCP and Comparison Group Students 
7. 100th, 11th, and 12th Grade Point Averages by ROCP Program 
8. California STAR Test: 10th and 11th Grade Reading Scores 
9. California STAR Test: 10th and 11th Grade Mathematics Scores 
10. Rate of Absenteeism by ROCP Program and Grade Level 
11. Years when Algebra 1 was Passed by ROCP Program 
12. Average Ratings of ROCPs 
III. Employment Comparisons 
13. Estimated Wage Rates for ROCP Program with Comparison Group 
14. Two Group Comparison (ROCP Students vs. Comparison Group) Wage Rates 
15. Estimated Wage Rates for ROCP and Comparison Group Graduates by Gender 
16. Estimated Wage Rates for ROCP and Comparison Group Graduates by Ethnicity 
17. Percent of Graduates Receiving a Pay Raise by ROCP with Comparison Group 
18. Percent of Graduates Receiving Job Promotions by ROCP with Comparison Group 
IV. Educational Comparisons 
19. Current Post-Secondary School Participation – ROCP and Comparison Group 
20. Percent of Survey Respondents with Personal Computer and/or other Participation 
21. Mother’s Education comparing ROCP Participants with Non-Participants 
22. Father’s Education Comparison of ROCP Participants with Non-Participants 
23. How Much Students Like Various High School Subjects and Career Courses 
Appendices 
A. Student Transcript Data Collection Form 
B. Telephone Follow-Up Survey Instrument 
C. High School Satisfaction Survey Instrument 
D. Sample Screens from the Electronic Database 
E. Descriptive Statistics for the 2004 Accountability Study Sample 
UCR:SIRG v
California Regional Occupational 
Centers and Programs 
Longitudinal Study 
2004 Technical Report 
Douglas E. Mitchell 
University of California, Riverside 
Introduction 
Accountability for results is an important theme in California educational policymaking and school program evaluation. In this time of sharply reduced state resources it is even more important for all school programs to demonstrate that they are able to provide students with a quality education – one that supports effective participation in the world of work, entry into fulfilling adult lives, and capacity for civic responsibility. Occupational and career education programs are no exception to this important evaluation principle. Thus, with resources provided by the California Department of Education, the California Regional Occupational Centers and Programs are undertaking a continuing review of the effectiveness of these programs. Under the leadership of the East San Gabriel Valley and Baldy View Regional Occupational Programs, a multi-dimensional research project began in the 2001-2002 academic year to study the impact of Regional Occupational Centers and Programs (ROCPs) on current participants and recent graduates from a broad cross-section of occupational groups. This important study is continuing and has generated important new data during 2003 and 2004. This report provides a preliminary summary of key elements of this most recent data. 
Overview of the ROCP Delivery System 
Regional Occupational Centers and Programs (ROCPs) were established by the California Legislature in 1967. Thirty-seven years after passage of the initial legislation, ROCPs now serve approximately 460,000 California high school students and adults each year. The primary purpose of ROCPs is to provide career preparation that includes both the technical skills and related academic standards that enable students to: 
1) Be employed in upwardly mobile careers and 
2) successfully continue into post secondary education (CA Education Code). 
More than 100 different ROCP career-technical areas are offered throughout the state, in areas such as business, agriculture, computer technologies, manufacturing, health care, automotive and other transportation technologies, child development and teaching 

occupations, public service occupations and marketing. By state law, ROCPs must only offer courses that are based upon actual labor market demand. Over 18,000 Business and Industry representatives are involved in the development and monitoring of ROCP curriculum in California. In addition to Business involvement in course development, over 35,000 businesses throughout California offer work-based internships to students who are training in the particular business’ occupational field. 
Common Features of the ROCP courses included in this study 
In addition to the career-specific skills taught in the various training areas, the ROCP courses included in this study had several common elements that distinguish ROCP courses (regardless of training area) from traditional 9-12 educational programs. These are: 
• Yearly labor market analysis that updates each course’s content to keep it current with industry demand 
• A Business Advisory Committee for each course, that consists of businesses that hire individuals who possess the career-specific skills taught by the ROCP classes 
• Inclusion of the academic standards that are necessary for success in the career area being taught 
• Student involvement in real-life practice of the career skills through experiences in business internships and/or industry state-of-the-art labs. 
Occupational/Career Education is Important to Public Education 
Occupational/Career education courses are typical components of public high school programs throughout the U. S. public school system. A recent study reveals that more than 95 percent of all high school students take at least one career/vocational preparation course before graduating from high school (Levesque & Hudson, 2003). This study goes on to show that one-third of all high school graduates take at least three year-long courses and that, by 1998, one quarter of all graduates were concentrating their course work in a specific occupational area. More than 25 percent of this course work involved some use of computer technologies. 
In a March 5, 2004 statement, California State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Jack O’Connell, highlighted the importance of integrating academic and career educational course work. National support for this integration is reported in the Levesque & Hudson (2003) study which shows that typical high school graduates in 1998 were earning just over 25 course credits – about four in vocational/technical areas and more than 18 in academic areas. Integrating career-technical education with hands-on work experience is also important. According to these authors, “About one-third of 1998 public high school graduates took at least some work-based learning courses.” 
UCR:SIRG 2
Aims of this Study 
This research project is aimed at documenting the overall educational effectiveness of California’s Regional Occupational Centers and Program (ROCPs) by comparing students who were enrolled in ROCP programs with a demographically similar group of students who have not participated in these programs. The study was designed to assess the impact of ROCP programs on participating students in seven outcome domains: 
1. Cumulative high school grade point averages 
2. Reading and Mathematics subtests of the Stanford Achievement Test (version 9) – the student achievement measure mandated under California’s STAR testing program. 
3. Rates of attendance during their most recent year of high school enrollment 
4. Job placement during the students’ first year after leaving high school 
5. Job retention during the students’ first three years after leaving high school 
6. Rates of admission to post-secondary education, including an analysis of the extent of military or technical training, community college, 4-year college, and university enrollment 
7. Satisfaction with high school courses and ROCP training experiences. 
A sub-group of ROCP students in the 11th and 12th grades during the 2001-2002 school year who were not in University of California a-g course track and were not in Special Day Classes, were targeted for this study. A comparison group of students were selected to, as closely as possible, match ROCP students with regard to gender, age, ethnicity, socio-economic status, English language fluency, prior school attendance and 10th grade high school grade point averages. The Comparison Group students were selected at random from students enrolled in the same high schools, and who were: a) not on track for admission to the University of California (i. e., not taking the UC a-g course requirements) and b) not certified for Special Day Class special education services. 
ROCP experiences across a diverse group of career programs were targeted for study. Demographic and academic history information was collected from student files. Attitudes toward ROCP and high school instructional experiences were solicited through an original High School Satisfaction Survey, and post-high school education and work experience data were sought through telephone follow-up interviews. 
UCR:SIRG 3
The Study Design and Execution 
Transcript Data were collected from twenty ROCPs who volunteered to participate in the study. The twenty-one participating ROCPs represent large and small programs, in urban and non-urban settings, as well as all geographic areas of the state. Data on student background and participation were gathered on a sample of students enrolled in more than ten different career clusters provided by these ROCPs during the 2002-2004 academic years. Data for both the ROCP students and the Comparison Group students were collected from student information files kept by the students’ home high schools. 
Schools were asked to provide complete demographic and academic history data from their student information systems, and complete records of the students’ California STAR testing program results. Additionally, high schools were asked to allow the research project to collect student special education program assignment, attendance, and disciplinary referral records. 
Telephone interviews of students from twenty-one ROCPs were utilized to determine students’ occupational experiences among recent ROCP and comparison group graduates. The telephone survey collected work experience data by job type, hours worked, job persistence and whether students received wage increases or promotions. Post-secondary educational experiences and plans were also sought during the telephone interviews. 
Finally, a sample of 1,507 students from more than 40 high schools in 21 ROCPs completed the High School Student Satisfaction Survey. The survey was administered to graduating 12th graders who had taken ROCP during the 12th grade. This survey assesses the extent to which ROCP students have found their educational experiences to be meaningful and supportive of their occupational and life goals. 
Moving Beyond the 2002 Focus on Feasibility 
While the original intent of this study was to produce a definitive documentation of the nature and extent of ROCP services and to show the extent to which ROCPs have been fully accountable for producing the results expected of them, the first round of data collection in 2002 demonstrated that neither the ROCPs nor local school district data systems could fully support cost-efficient monitoring of educational service delivery, student performance and occupational outcome data. School districts are appropriately concerned about the confidentiality of student records. Even when they become comfortable with sharing data in the interest of research, they find that the data are hard to retrieve and difficult to integrate across time and across educational agencies. Students who move from one school to another during their high school careers are lost to this kind of study because they cannot be traced to either their new or their old high schools to seek needed records. 
UCR:SIRG 4
Additionally, to collect meaningful data on the relationship between high school level academic and ROCP experiences and subsequent student occupational and further education experience, it is necessary do develop longitudinal data management systems. Such longitudinal data are largely unavailable from public school student records and exist in only short-term follow-up form in most ROCPs. Where longitudinal data tracking is feasible, it would be necessary to maintain the type of data collection system used in this study for at least three years to have effective documentation of the relationships between high school experiences and post-high school educational and labor market successes. 
The evaluation results analyzed in this report have moved toward overcoming these limitations, but there is still a ways to go before all of the goals of this project are fully realized. The 2002 study demonstrated the feasibility of establishing and maintaining an effective ROCP accountability system – one which has not existed in the past and which could be monitored on an ongoing basis to provide guidance for ROCP program improvement. The data collected in 2003-04 substantially expand the representativeness of the study (tripling the number of ROCPs, doubling the number of career programs studied and involving ROCPs from all geographic areas of the state). The new data allow for the important statistical analyses presented in the body of this report, but it must be remembered that data collection difficulties may still be introducing selection biases that could weaken or alter some of the conclusions drawn. 
Instrumentation 
Four original data collection and management instruments were developed for this study. First, a Student Transcript Data Collection Form was developed to secure consistent data from students’ high school records. This form, shown in Appendix A, was used to gather basic demographic data – gender, ethnicity, date of birth, date entering school district, special education status, language status, career/technical education beyond ROCP participation, the grade level when passing Algebra I, exposure to computer coursework, and required ROCP reporting data on barriers to student success. The most important data collected on this form were student academic achievement indicators in the form of high school GPAs for 10th, 11th, and 12th grades, and 10th and 11th grade Stanford 9 test results in reading, mathematics and language. Additionally, the form was used to gather the necessary contact information follow-up contact interviews. 
Second, a Telephone Follow-Up Survey for 2001-2002 12th Graders was developed to establish standardized follow-up data collection for students who had completed their ROCP and high school training. This form, shown in Appendix B, provides for recording both educational and work experience following ROCP and high school exit. The educational follow-up section monitors high school graduation (or reasons for failing to graduate), current and planned post-high school educational experiences, and the students’ overall evaluations of their ROCP and high school educational experiences. The employment follow-up section tracks the number and types of jobs held by students, their wage and promotion histories, and their overall job satisfaction level. 
UCR:SIRG 5
Third, as shown in Appendix C, a 77 item High School Student Satisfaction survey was used with students still attending high school at the time of the study. This survey solicits students’ attitudes about schooling, grades, course enjoyment, future educational aspirations, experiences of peer, educator and parental support for education and exposure to a variety of specialized educational programs, together with some basic demographic data about employment while in school, family income and educational levels, and student gender and ethnicity. 
Fourth, an original integrative, relational database capable of merging data from all of the separate sources into a single data model was created. This database, developed using Microsoft Corporation’s Access© database development system, is designed to allow ROCP staff to prepare data electronically at each ROCP site and seamlessly integrate local data into the overall project data system. Three screen images from this database are included in Appendix D. 
Data Presented in this Report 
The research project reported here is aimed at documenting the overall educational effectiveness of California’s Regional Occupational Centers and Program (ROCPs) by comparing students who were enrolled in ROCP programs with a demographically similar group of students who have not participated in these programs. The study assesses the impact of ROCP programs on participating students in the seven critical outcome domains described above: grade point averages, California STAR test scores, attendance rates, job placement, wage rates and promotion opportunities, post-secondary education, and high school satisfaction. 
Current and recent ROCP students from the high school graduating classes of 2002 and 2003 are the focus of this 2004 study. Nine hundred fifty three ROCP students from ten different career programs receiving training in twenty-one different ROCPs across the state are compared with 1,329 students with similar academic and demographic characteristics who were not enrolled in ROCP programs. The comparison group of students was selected to, as closely as possible, match ROCP students with regard to gender, age, ethnicity, socio-economic status, English language fluency, prior school attendance and 10th grade high school grade point averages. The comparison or “control” group students were selected at random from among students enrolled in the same high schools, and who, like the ROCP sub-group identified for the study, were not on track for admission to the University of California and not certified for Special Day Class special education services. 
A Profile of the Study Sample 
Data analysis begins with a review of the composition of the study sample drawn for this round of analysis. The student representation from the participating ROCPs, their career emphases and the gender and ethnic composition of the resulting sample are detailed in Figures 1 through 5, below. 
UCR:SIRG 6
14410315093202562972001416350100150200250300Student Count75785834175153138363605049ERButte County ROPCapistrano LagunaCoastlineCRY ROPEden AreaESGVLa Puente ValleyLAUSDLos Angeles Co.Mission TrailsMission ValleyNorth CountyNorth Santa ClaraRiverside CountySan Diego Co.Tri-Cities ROPTri-CountyTri-ValleyYosemite ROPFigure 1. Count of High School Transcript Data Records by Reporting Regional Occupational Center/ProgramsTotal Participation Count: 2,282 (Of these 1,273 provided at least some follow-up data)Note: Two ROCPs provided transcript and follow-up data but were unable to collect Satisfaction Surveys. 
By investing very substantial staff time and effort, 20 of the ROCPs participating in the study were able to collect high school transcript data on 2,282 students from more than 40 different high schools throughout the state. 
Participating ROCPs included northern and southern California programs, urban and rural programs, large and small programs, and programs operated by County Offices of Education, single school districts and those organized as joint powers agreements among school district consortia. 
While only a small fraction of the students participating in ROCP programs are represented, and the sample is far from random, it is large enough and diverse enough to be relied upon to provide a reasonably good estimate of the general condition of ROCP students across the state. 
UCR:SIRG 7
1812272176957711942144457792743163050100150200250300350Student Count232330941849erBaldy ViewButte CountyCapistrano LagCoastlineCRY ROPEden AreaESGVHart DistrictLA CountyLaPuenteLAUSDMission TrailsMission ValleyNorth Orange CoNorth Santa ClaraRiversideShasta TrinityTri-CountyTri-ValleyYosemiteFigure 2. Count of Useable High School Satisfaction Surveys by Regional Occupational Center/Program(A total of 1,507 Satisfaction Surveys were Completed)Note: Three ROCPs collected Satisfaction Surveys but could not provide transcript and follow-up data. 
High School Satisfaction surveys were collected primarily from students graduating from high school in 2003 and 2004 and do not, therefore, represent the same group of students from whom transcript and follow-up data were collected. 
Comparison with data from the 2002 technical report indicates that the views of this group of students are similar to the responses of the students from the prior study. Thus, we can assume that their responses are representative of ROCP students generally.. 
UCR:SIRG 8
Participating ROCPs were asked to secure data on students in programs where they had significant enrollment, so smaller and more specialized ROCP programs are under-represented in this data set 
Seventy percent of participants were in the four largest programs: Business, Health, Auto and Marketing 
The “Other” category includes nine architectural drawing students, five machining students, three construction students and one each from five other programs 
0 
50 
100 
200 
250 
150 Student Count 
Figure 3. Regional Occupational Program Participation by Type of Program 
Total Participant Count: 953; Control Group Count: 1,329 (not shown) 
Program Type 
21 
148 
207 
108 
27 
153 
58 
142 
67 
22 
Agriculture 
Auto 
Business 
Child 
Development 
Environment 
Tech 
Health 
Law/Fire 
Marketing 
Technology 
Other 
UCR:SIRG 9
Figure 4. Gender by ROCP Program Enrollment0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%Percent of Students in ProgramFemale55%62%9%43%76%56%78%45%59%15%32%48%Male45%38%91%57%24%44%22%55%41%85%68%52%Comparison Grp.AgricultureAutoBusinessChild DevelopmentEnvironment TechHealthLaw/FireMarketingTechnologyOtherAll ROCP Pgms 
Overall, enrollment in ROCPs has a similar gender breakdown as students not participating in these career education programs (48% females, to 52% males for ROCP students and 55% females and 45% males in the Comparison Group). 
There is great variation across the reporting ROCP programs, however. The auto program attracts more than 90% males while the health and child development programs have more than 75% female participation. 
One area which deserves close study is the predominance of male participation in the technology programs where wage rates are relatively high. 
UCR:SIRG 10
Figure 5. ROCP Program Enrollment By EthnicityCalifornia K-12 Enrollment for 2002 is Depicted for Comparison0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%Percent of Students in ProgramOther0%0%1%0%0%0%1%0%1%0%0%0%4%Native Amer1%0%1%0%1%0%0%2%1%1%5%1%1%Afro Amer3%1%1%1%1%0%8%7%10%3%0%4%8%Asian16%15%2%15%21%30%16%5%27%16%5%15%8%Hispanic36%51%10%51%38%44%61%45%30%36%18%39%45%White43%31%86%31%39%26%13%41%32%43%73%41%34%Comparison GrpTechnologyChild DevelopmentLaw/FireAgricultureBusinessMarketingEnvironment TechAutoHealthOtherAll ROCP PrgmsCA K-12 Enrollment 
Overall, the ethnic composition of ROCP programs, and of the Comparison Group drawn from the same high schools, show a somewhat higher proportion of Caucasians and Asians and somewhat lower enrollment of Hispanics than the total population of school children in California (more than 40% Caucasians in our student sample, less than 35% in the school age student population of California; 45% Hispanic students statewide but less than 40% in the study sample). Asians are over-represented in the study sample (15% in the study student sample, but only 8% statewide). 
Additionally, as shown in Figure 5, there are very large differences in the ethnic composition of the various ROCP programs – e.g., Child Development is more than 85% Caucasian while Marketing over 60% Hispanic. 
UCR:SIRG 11
Academic Performance Findings 
Figure 6 summarizes the available data on ROCP and Comparison group academic performance. 
This figure compares the Grade Point Averages of ROCP and Comparison Group students during their 10th, 11th and 12th grade years. The ROCP students are consistently below the Comparison Group (more than two-tenths of a grade-point during their 10th grade year, before enrolling in the ROCP programs). 
Note, however, that the ROCP students close the gap to just 0.13 grade points during the 11th grade. They fall sharply behind in the 12th grade (to more than half a point behind the Comparison Group). Since the 12th grade results do not agree with the sample developed for our feasibility study two years ago when the ROCP students continued to close the GPA gap during their 12th grade year, more study is needed on this issue. 
High school students are referred to ROCP classes by either a career counselor or a regular school counselor. ROCP courses are not exclusively serving at-risk students. However, judging by the initial gap in GPAs between the ROCP students identified for the study and the comparison group, high schools are utilizing the ROCP programs to address the needs of many students who are, by their 10th grade year, lower in academic achievement and more at-risk than other non-college preparatory students. This finding 
Figure 6. Grade Point Averages for ROCP and Comparison Group Students 
(During their 10th, 11th and 12th grade years) 
0.00 
0.50 
1.00 
1.50 
2.00 
2.50 
3.00 
3.50 
4.00 
Grade Points 
ROCP Program Avg. 
2.51 
2.62 
2.80 
Comparison Group Avg 
2.72 
2.75 
3.26 
10th Grade 
11th Grade 
12th Grade 
UCR:SIRG 12
is important because the later job successes of these previously lower achieving students demonstrate that ROCP courses are effective interventions for at-risk students – significantly improving their employment success after high school. It is recommended that further research be conducted to examine larger numbers of ROCP students, with follow up data over a longer period, to test whether this achievement and work success profile remains constant. 
Figure 7. 10th, 11th and 12th Grade Point Averages by ROCP Program0.000.501.001.502.002.503.003.504.00Grade Points10th Grade2.722.252.382.712.373.092.611.912.532.742.5311th Grade2.752.382.522.852.363.252.702.092.602.782.6312th Grade3.262.632.653.012.483.422.822.442.683.022.88Comparison Grp.AgricultureAutoBusinessChild DevelopmentEnvironment TechHealthLaw/FireMarketingTechnologyOther 
Figure 7 shows that there are significant differences in academic proficiency across the various ROCP programs. The Environmental Technology program displays the highest GPA for all three years. Students in this program exceed the achievement levels of the Comparison Group in each of the three years. 
The Law and Fire program participants start out with the lowest GPAs in the 10th grade, but they make more than the average amount of progress each year. 
UCR:SIRG 13
Twenty five percent of these same law and fire students also failed to pass algebra by grade 12 (see Figure 11). One year after finishing high school, however, the law and fire students are earning an average of $10.44 per hour, $2.45 an hour more than the comparison group. Similar patterns occur in other training areas such as agriculture and business. Clearly many of these low achieving students are learning the skills needed to be successful in the job market. Further study is needed to ascertain whether it is the effectiveness of math and other academic standards taught in the ROCP career training programs, or the development of social responsibility and workplace discipline that is leading to these highly desirable outcomes. 
Figures 8 and 9 show the reading and mathematics performance of ROCP and Comparison Group students on California’s mandated STAR tests. Consistent with their GPA averages, the ROCP students perform slightly below their peers on both test batteries during both testing years. 675680685690695700705Calif. STAR Test Scale ScoresFigure 8. 10th and 11th Grade Reading Scores on the mandated California STAR test (scale scores; N = 354 ROCP participants, 519 Comparison Group members)ROCP Participants685.79693.14Comparison Group692.66700.6610th11thNote: Score differences significant at p < .05 
While the differences between the groups are large enough to reach statistical significance (at the p < .05 level), they are substantially smaller than the differences usually found between lower socio-economic students or between those who come from English speaking homes and those whose native language is not English (see, Mitchell, 2001). 675680685690695700705Calif. STAR Test Scale ScoresFigure 9. 10th and 11th Grade Mathematics Scoreson the mandated California STAR test(scale scores; N = 357 ROCP participants, 522 Comparison Group members)ROCP Participants695.86700.17Comparison Group700.65706.9210th11thNote: Score differences significant at p < .05 
UCR:SIRG 14
0.002.004.006.008.0010.0012.0014.0016.0018.00Days per yearFigure 10. Rate of Absenteeism by ROCP Program and Grade Level(average number of days per year; programs with less than five recordsand students with more than 100 absences in any year removed)10th Grade5.217.605.151.415.633.2810.532.872.634.924.2111th Grade8.607.707.322.295.005.8912.315.054.686.545.6112th Grade5.278.1512.981.735.509.3516.559.847.518.549.04AgricultureAutoBusinessChild DevelopmentEnvironment TechHealthLaw/FireMarketingTechnologyROCP AverageComparison GroupNotes: 1) ROCP average moved from 0.71 days/year greater than Comp. Grp. to 0.50 lower; an improvement of 1.21 days/year (p < .01) 2) Four ROCP Programs have higher 12th grade absence rates; five programs have lower absence rates. 
Figure 10 reports on recorded absences in the 10th, 11th, and 12th grade for each participating ROCP program enrolling more than five students whose attendance data were available from school records. At the right side of the figure are the absence rates for the Comparison Group students, showing that absences climb substantially during the last three years of high school for these students. On average, however, ROCP students had worse attendance records during their 10th grade year but improved their attendance sufficiently that in their 12th grade year they had fewer days absent than the Comparison Group students. 
Here, and in many of the variables examined in this report, there are large variations across the nine ROCP career clusters providing data. Four of the programs had worse attendance records than did the Comparison Group in their 12th grade year – five had better records. The Child Development group had, by far, the best attendance record throughout their high school years. Three other programs (Agriculture, Auto, and Environment Tech) were able to avoid the characteristic jump in absenteeism during their senior year. 
UCR:SIRG 15Figure 11. Years when Algebra I was Passed by ROCP Program(Grouped by: 7th-8th grade, 9th grade, 10th-12th grade, or not taken)0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%Percent of student in programNot Taken16%24%22%27%13%0%18%24%13%12%9%18%10th-12th31%48%32%32%36%22%33%38%27%10%45%31%9th Grade42%24%41%29%41%59%46%38%52%61%41%42%7th-8th11%5%5%13%10%19%3%0%7%16%5%8%Comparison Grp.AgricultureAutoBusinessChild DevelopmentEnvironment TechHealthLaw/FireMarketingTechnologyOtherTotal ROCP Pgms
Figure 11 shows the grade in which students first succeeded in passing an Algebra I course. About 50% of both the Comparison Group and the ROCP students passed algebra by the end of the 9th grade. Approximately the same proportion of both the Comparison Group and the ROCP students never passed an Algebra I course during their high schools years (just over 15%). 
There are large variations in the grade level at which students took Algebra across the different ROCP programs. The Environmental Technology students all passed algebra by the 12th grade – more than three-fourths of them before leaving the 9th grade. At the other end of the spectrum, about a quarter of the Business, Agriculture and Law/Fire students failed to pass an algebra course by grade 12. 
UCR:SIRG 16
0.000.501.001.502.002.503.0049ERButte County ROPCapistrano LagunaCoastlineCRY ROPEden AreaESGVLa Puente ValleyLAUSDLos Angeles Co.Mission TrailsMission ValleyNorth CountyNorth Santa ClaraRiverside CountySan Diego Co.Tri-Cities ROPTri-CountyTri-ValleyYosemite ROPFigure 12. Average Rating of ROCPs with more than 5 Reports 58% of 712 Respondents Reporting: 3=Excellent, 2=Good, 1=Fair (no Poor scores given)Too few respondentsToo few respondentsFairExcellentGoodPoor 
As Figure 12 shows, the ROCP students rated their ROCP experiences highly. During follow-up interviews, no students gave their ROCP experiences either of the lowest score on the 4-point scale of quality. 
There was significant variation in the ratings given to the different ROCPs participating in the study, with scores ranging from a low of about 2.25 (just above ‘Good’ to a high of nearly 2.91 (nearly the top score of ‘Excellent’). 

Figure 12. Average Rating of ROCPs Students Experience 
UCR:SIRG 17
Employment Comparisons 
Figures 13, 14, 15 and 16 provide the most concrete evidence that California’s ROCPs are fulfilling their primary mission of preparing students for successful entry into the world of work. 
0.002.004.006.008.0010.0012.0014.00Dollars per hourFigure 13. Estimated Wage Rates in Dollars per Hour for ROCP and Comparison Group Graduates (During 1st year after graduation)Est Wage7.999.7011.2110.107.649.838.9910.449.6113.1713.1710.39Comparison GrpAgricultureAutoBusinessChild DevelopmentEnvironment TechHealthLaw/FireMarketingTechnologyOtherROCP AverageFigure 13 shows that in all but one of the ROCP programs the program graduates were commanding higher salaries than members of the Comparison Group within their first year after graduation. On average, the ROCP students were earning about $10.39 per hour, while the comparison group students were averaging $7.99 per hour – a difference of $2.40 per hour. 
The ROCP program with the lowest wage rate was the Child Development program, but ROCP officials report that many of these program participants go on to become teachers earning substantially higher salaries than commanded by those working at in their first year after graduation. 
UCR:SIRG 18
$0.00$2.00$4.00$6.00$8.00$10.00$12.00Dollars per HourFigure 14. Two-Group Comparison in Estimated Wage Rates:Average of all ROCP Programs vs. Comparison Group (in $/hour)Wage Level in $/hr 10.397.99ROCP AverageComparison Grp 
The main point of this comparison is sharpened in Figure 14 which compares the average of all ROCP program graduates with the wage rates for the Comparison Group. Considering the fact that ROCP students enter the 10th grade with substantially lower GPAs than the comparison group, the higher salaries one year out of high school is impressive. Poor academic performance is one of the strongest predictors of dropping out of school (Gaustaud, 1991; Alexander, et al., 2001; National Center for Educational Statistics, 1987). ROCP can facilitate retention of lower achieving students while teaching them important career and academic skills. This is a useful strategy for helping to raise overall high school completion rates, as well as for increasing the number of students pursuing post secondary schooling. There is currently a large mismatch between the high skilled technical jobs available and the lack of sufficient numbers of individuals leaving schools with the needed skills (O’Connell, 2004). The even higher salary levels of former ROCP students who studied technology careers and auto (also a highly technical trade) indicate that ROCPs can, in partnership with high school academic programs, help close the gap. 
UCR:SIRG 19
$-$2.00$4.00$6.00$8.00$10.00$12.00Dollars per HourFigure 15. Estimated Wage Rates for ROCP Graduates and Comparison Group by GenderEstimated Wage Rate $7.50 $8.54 $9.09 $10.76 FemaleMaleFemaleMaleComparison GrpROCP Graduates 
Figure 15 shows the wage rates for ROCP graduates and Comparison Group members broken down by gender. As this figure shows, the average wage rate for males graduating from ROCP programs was higher than all other groups (about $10.76 per hour). Importantly, however, females with ROCP training earned more than either gender groups in the Comparison Group. These young women made, on average, about 55 cents per hour more than the young men in the Comparison Group, and $1.59 per hour more than the comparison women. Thus, ROCP training is an effective strategy for improving labor market entry among young women – at least during their first year in the labor force. Young men do even better – the male ROCP graduates earn about 118% as much as the female graduates while Comparison Group males earn about 113% as much as the comparison females. 
UCR:SIRG 20
$-$2.00$4.00$6.00$8.00$10.00$12.00Dollars per HourFigure 16. Estimated Wage Rates for ROCP and Comparison Group Gradiates by EthnicityEstimated Wage Rate $8.88 $7.23 $7.00 $7.89 $8.19 $11.50 $9.83 $9.86 $9.73 $10.44 Am IndAsianAfroHispWhiteAm IndAsianAfroHispWhiteComparison GrpROCP Graduates 
Figure 16 presents the wage rate comparison between ROCP graduates and the Comparison Group students broken down by ethnicity. As with the gender groups discussed above, income advantages gained by participation in ROCP training is distributed across all sub-groups. Each of the ethnic groups with ROCP training have higher average wage rates than their Comparison Group peers. Indeed, the ROCP graduates in all ethnic groups reported average wage rates higher than those of any of the ethnic sub-groups in the Comparison Group. Within the study sample, the Native Americans (American Indian/Alaska Native) sub-group has an unusually strong showing among both ROCP and Comparison Group graduates. This strong showing may not be adequately representative, however, since reliable data were available for only 13 members of this ethnic group (9 Comparison Group and 4 ROCP). 
Most notable, African American, Hispanic and Asian students with ROCP training reported all higher salary rates than their counterparts without this training. Additionally, these groups all commanded higher salaries than the whites in the Comparison Group and had very similar wage rates following their training. Thus, across the diversity of ethnic groups graduating from ROCP programs, wages were not only raised, they became substantially equalized across sub-groups. 
UCR:SIRG 21
0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%Percent of Students in ProgramFigure 17. Percent of Graduates Who Received a Pay Raise During Their First Year WorkingRaise16%33%15%12%6%9%23%26%16%30%25%19%Comparison Grp.AgricultureAutoBusinessChild DevelopmentEnvironment TechHealthLaw/FireMarketingTechnologyOtherAvg all Programs 
Figure 17 shows that ROCP graduates, in addition to earning more, are more likely than Comparison Group students to receive a pay raise during their first year on the job. 
While 16% of the Comparison Group reported pay raises, 19% of the ROCP students reported the pay raises (nearly a 20% better success rate). 
While Auto, Business and Environmental Tech student were less likely to get raises, their starting salaries were higher and their continuing wage rates remained, on average, higher than those of the Comparison Group. Only the graduates with Child Development jobs were working at wage rates below the Comparison Group and also qualified for raises less frequently. 
UCR:SIRG 22
0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%Percent of Students in ProgramFigure 18. Percentage of Workers Who Received Promotion in First YearPromoted18%50%20%14%6%14%24%26%19%34%25%23%Comparison Grp.AgricultureAutoBusinessChild DevelopmentEnvironment TechHealthLaw/FireMarketingTechnologyOtherAvg all Programs 
Figure 18 shows that ROCP graduates were significantly more likely to receive a promotion during their first year (23% compared to 18% for the Comparison Group). 
As with other outcomes, this outcome varied substantially by ROCP program. The Agriculture program students were most likely to get promotions (at a full 50%) with the Technology students coming second (more than one-third of those responding reported promotions). 
UCR:SIRG 23
Educational Comparisons 
Figure 19 further confirms that the ROCP programs are having a significant impact on their students’ future success. 
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%Percent of StudentsFigure 19. Current Schooling Acitivities by the 60% of Follow-Up Group Reporting4-Year College25%21%Community Coll52%51%Trade/Tech School4%6%Military4%3%ROCP0%0%Adult Shool1%1%Working14%18%Unemployed4%4%Comparison GrpROCP Grads 
Even though the ROCP students had significantly lower high school grade point averages, they are entering post-secondary education at a rate comparable with members of the comparison group. More than half of the members of each group reported enrollment in a community college within a year after leaving high school. The ROCP graduates had a somewhat larger group not in school and working, and a commensurately smaller group attending 4-year colleges. However, most of those who are not in school are working. Only 4% of each group was unemployed at the time of the follow-up contacts. ROCP students are remarkably competitive for a group starting out with much lower academic attainment. 
UCR:SIRG 24
One major goal of both the federal “No Child Left Behind” legislation and California’s “High Performance High Schools” initiative is supporting successful transition to post secondary schooling and careers for all children. ROCP programs appear to be playing an important role in supporting these efforts. ROCP participants are developing the skills and the motivation to participate in post secondary education at nearly the same rates as the higher achieving comparison group students. This result is encouraging not only for its own sake, but for the economy of California as well. The U. S. Census Bureau reports a difference of over $15,000 per year in earnings separating those who don’t finish high school from those who complete at least two years of post secondary schooling – over half a million dollars in earnings over their active working lifetime (U. S. Census Bureau, 2002). 
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%Percent of StudentsFigure 20. Percent of Satisfaction Survey Respondents with Personal Computer and/or Participation in Various School ProgramsParticipantion78%60%43%33%33%32%31%28%16%18%7%Personal ComputerSummer School Req'dAlgebra before 9thBeen tutoredCollege Prep CoursesInternshipJob shadowingAdvance PlacementSpecial programEnrolled in AcademyWere in AVID 
Figure 20 depicts the rate of participation in a variety of school programs by ROCP students. Strikingly, 78% of the respondents to the High School Satisfaction survey reported having a computer in their home available for their personal use. 
A large proportion of the ROCP students (60%) also reported having to take summer school classes to complete high school requirements. A quarter to a third of the ROCP students avail themselves of nearly all of the various educational support services available in their schools. 
UCR:SIRG 25
0%5%10%15%20%25%30%Percent of MothersFigure 21. Mother's Education Level Comparing ROCP Participants with Non-ParticipantsNot in ROCP25%18%22%25%10%In ROCP23%22%24%21%10%Not HSHS OnlySome CollColl/TradeAdv Deg 
Figures 21 and 22 display the educational attainment level of the parents or guardians of ROCP students taking the High School Satisfaction survey. The mothers or female guardians of the ROCP students have, on average, a somewhat lower level of education than those of the Comparison Group. Specifically, these mothers and female guardians are less likely to hold college degrees and more likely to have high school diplomas or some college experience. 
UCR:SIRG 26
0%5%10%15%20%25%30%Percent of FathersFigure 22. Father's Education: Comparison of ROCP Participants with Non-ParticipantsNot in ROCP27%17%20%21%16%In ROCP23%24%20%20%12%Not HSHS OnlySome CollColl/TradeAdv Deg 
As shown in Figure 22, the pattern for fathers and male guardians is similar to that for the mothers/female guardians. The prevalence of high school only education level for the father figures is more pronounced. The ROCP students and especially the comparison group students have an increased tendency to live in households where the fathers’ have advanced degrees than the mothers. 
UCR:SIRG 27
1.001.502.002.503.003.504.004.505.00Figure 23. How much students like high school subjects (For ROCP Programs with 5 or more identified participants; on a 1 to 5 scale from Not at all to Very Much)Level of Liking3.142.912.953.003.443.314.1813. Like English14. Like math15. Like science16. Like social studies17. Like phys ed18. Like music/art19. Like career/ROCPNot at allVery littleSomewhatQuite a bitVery muchNote: Only Career/ROCP coures get approval average above 4.0. Math has lowest approval a under 3.0. 
Figure 23 depicts the extent to which ROCP student report on the High School Satisfaction survey that they like their various high school subjects. As shown in this graph, only the ROCP programs are rated above a 4.0 on the 5-point scale used for rating each of the subject areas. Mathematics is enjoyed the least (with an average rating of 2.91, below the 3.0 mid-point on the rating scale). 
UCR:SIRG 28
Conclusions 
California’s ROCPs are serving a very important population of students who are at-risk of school failure. They are providing these students with meaningful educational experiences which the students prefer over their other high school training experiences and which provide them, on average, with successful entry into the job market and encourage them to seek continuing education opportunities after leaving high school. While this technical report does not fully exhaust the useful information to be extracted from the data collected for the 2004 Regional Occupational Centers and Programs Accountability Study, it supports eight important conclusions and suggests some directions for further study. The conclusions are: 
1. ROCP students earn higher wages than comparison group peers. In telephone follow-up interviews, ROCP students report employment in jobs that pay significantly higher wages than those held by a Control Group of their peers. With the average salary for all groups running in the $7 to $13 per hour range, the ROCP graduates report earning about $2.40 per hour more. It is also important to note that ROCP training leads to higher and more equal wage rates for all gender and ethnic sub-groups in this study. 
2. ROCP students have more success in securing raises and promotions on the job. In addition to commanding higher hourly wages, ROCP graduates report pay raises and job promotion rates higher than other high school graduates (25% vs. 19% for raises; 25% vs. 23% for promotions). 
3. ROCP students enroll in post-secondary education in large numbers. Despite their greater success in the labor market at the time of graduation, ROCP graduates report participating in continuing post-secondary educational programs at rates comparable to those of the Comparison Group in this study. More than half of both groups report continuing their education through Community College enrollment (51% for ROCP graduates, 52% for others). Just 4% of each group are neither in school nor working. 
4. ROCP students have better 12th grade attendance rates. During their 10th grade year, just prior to entering into career training programs, ROCP students have school absence rates that are higher than their high school peers (4.92 vs. 4.21 days per year). By their 12th grade year, however, ROCP students’ attendance rates are significantly above the Comparison Group (8.54 absences vs. 9.04 for the comparison group). 
5. ROCP students improve their high school grade point averages. ROCP students represent a challenging target for educators who would facilitate their successful entry into the labor market and positions of civic responsibility. On average, these students enter ROCP training programs with academic records that are well below those of a Control Group of their high school peers. Nevertheless, as they move through the high school they raise their grade point averages by 
UCR:SIRG 29
about three-tenths of a point – comparable with a Comparison Group of similar students who did not take ROCP courses. 
6. ROCP students prefer ROCP classes over other subjects. In responding to a High School Satisfaction Survey, ROCP students report a modest level of enthusiasm for their current school experiences, but nearly half the respondents indicate that they “Very much” like their career education course work. 
7. ROCP students question the value and relevance of many of their high school courses. ROCP students report significant disappointment with their high school classes. They generally report that “Only a few” are relevant to getting jobs or preparing them for other aspects of adult life, and there is a similar assessment regarding whether the classes are enjoyable experiences. 
8. ROCP students like some classes much more than others. When asked to indicate how well they like various academic and non-academic high school classes, the ROCP students report the lowest level of appreciation for Mathematics, Science and Social Studies classes. Only English Language Arts and Music/Art/Drama classes come close to matching their enthusiasm for ROCP course work. 
Systematic data collected at modest cost can clearly delineate who is participating in ROCP programs, can show how successful each program is in preparing students for future career opportunities, and can provide information that can be used by policy makers and ROCP program administrators to focus efforts and assure continuing improvement of this important segment of California’s public school system. 
The findings presented in this report make it quite clear that further study is needed to understand why students of different ethnic groups and of different genders are participating unequally in various ROCP programs. It is equally important to collect further data to determine whether ROCP programs are focused on the most important and economically rewarding occupational programs. It would also be quite helpful to determine how the especially low achieving students coming into the ROCP programs are being successfully encouraged to remain in school and improve their academic performances. 
UCR:SIRG 30
References 
Alexander, Karl L., Entwisle, Doris and Kabbani, Nadar “The Dropout Process in Life Course Perspective: Early Risk Factors at Home and School” Teachers College Record V103(5) pp. 760-822 2001. 
Barro, Stephen M. “Who Drops Out of High School? Finds from High School and Beyond” National Center for Educational Statistics May 1987 NCES 87397. 
Delci, Mario and Stern, David “Who Participates in New Vocational Programs? A Preliminary Analysis of Student Data from NLSY97” 1999 ERIC ED436646. 
Gaustad, Joan “Potential Dropouts” 1991 ERIC ED339092. 
Mitchell, Ross E. “Class size reduction policy : evaluating the impact on student achievement in California” Doctoral Dissertation, University of California, Riverside, 2001 
Levesque, Karen and Hudson, Lisa “Trends in High School Vocational/Technical Coursetaking, 1982-1998. Statistical Analysis Report.” National Center for Educational Statistics, 2003 ERIC ED480005. 
Means, B. and Knapp, M.S. “Cognitive Approaches to Teaching Advanced Skills to Educationally Disadvantaged Students” Phi Delta Kappan 73(4) 282-289 1991. 
O’Connell, Jack “High Performance High School Initiative: A White Paper on Improving Student Achievement in California’s High Schools” California State Dept. Of Education, 2004. 
UCR:SIRG 31
APPENDICES 
Appendix A. Student Transcript Data Collection Form 
UCR:SIRG 32
Student Name (Last, First) 		School Name: 		
Student Permanent ID Number 		Todays Date: 	_____/_____/________ 	
Graduation Year 		Student Gender	! Male ! Female 	
Date of Birth 	______/____/________ 	Date entered district: 	_____/_____/________ 	
ROP Program : 	! None (Control Group) 
! Auto 
! Child Development 
! Health 
! Marketing 	Student Ethnicity:	! Amer Ind/ Alaska Native 
! Asian 
! Black/Afro American 
! Hispanic/Latino 
! White 
! Other/Unknown 	
Is student in Special Education (Do not include SDC students) 	! No. 
! RSP Program 
! DIS Services 
! GATE Program 	What is student’s language status?	! English Only 
! English Learner (LEP/ELL) 
! English Fluent (FEP/Redesign) 
! Unknown 	
Does student qualify for free or reduced lunch? 	! No. 
! Reduced Lunch 
! Free Lunch 
! Unknown 	Does student have any of these barriers?	! Parent/expecting child 
! Single parent family 
! Displaced Homemakers 
! Other Barrier 
! No known barriers. 	
If student has taken vocational or career training in other than ROC programs, which one(s)? 	! None. 
! Adult Education 
! Continuation School 
! Tech-Prep 	If student is in identifiable ‘career path’ program, what is the emphasis?	! Not in career path. 
! Health related 
! Technology related 
! Other ____________________ 
! Unknown 	
If taken, in what grade did student take Algebra I? 	! Not Taken ! ! 
! 9th !10th !11th ! 12th 	Has student taken any of the lab sciences listed?	! Biology ! Chemistry 
! Earth sci ! Life sci 
! Physics ! Other 
! None 	
Has student taken computer courses? 	! No. ! Yes – 1 
! Yes – 2 ! Yes – 3 or more. 	Enter student GPA for each year:	10th Grade ____._____ ! N/A 
11th Grade ____._____ ! N/A 
12th Grade ____._____ ! N/A 	
If 10th Grade SAT-9 Scores are available, enter scores: 	! Not available 
Total Reading _______ 
Total Math _______ 
Language _______ 	If 11th Grade SAT-9 Scores are available, enter scores:	! Not available 
Total Reading _______ 
Total Math _______ 
Language _______ 	
Address & Phone for follow-up 
Your initials: _________ 		Who is at this location?	! student 
! Immediate family 
! Other relative 
! Other _____________________ 	

7th 
8th 
Appendix B. Telephone Follow-Up Survey Instrument 
ROCP Accountability Study 
Telephone Follow-Up Survey for 2001-2002 12th Graders 
1. Student Enrollment Information: 
First Name: ___________________MI: ___ 
Last Name: __________________________ 
ROCP Attended: 
! None ! 49er 
! Antelope Valley ! Baldy View 
! Butte Co. ! Capistrano-Laguna 
! Coastline ! CRYROP 
! Eden Area ! ESGV 
! Hart ! La Puente 
! Los Angeles Co. ! Mission Trails 
! N. Orange Co ! N. Santa Clara 
! Plumas ! Riverside Co. 
! San Diego Co. ! San Joaquin Co. 
! Shasta-Trinity ! Southeast 
! Tri-Cities ! Tri-County 
! Tri-Valley ! Yolo County 
! Yosemite 
ROCP Program: ! None <Control > 
! Auto 
! Business 
! Child Develop. 
! Health 
! Marketing 	____________________________________ 
High School 
____________________________________ 
District 
2. Basic Demographic Data: 
School Permanent ID: _________________________ 
Social Security Number: ______-____-________ 
Date of Birth: ______/______/____________ 
Sex: ! Male ! Female 
Ethnicity: ! Amer Indian/Alaska Native 
! Asian 
! Black/Afro Ameriacan 
! Hispanic/Latino 
! White 
! Other/Unknown 	
3. Follow Up Information Provider: 
Intended contact: _________________________________________ (from contact record) 
Address: __________________________________________ 
City, State Zip: __________________________________________ 
Phone: __________________________________________ 
Actual contact: __________________________________________ (name of person reached) 
Relation to Student: ! Self ! Parent ! Grand Parent ! Other family ! Friend ! Other 	

G:\ADLER\CDE\RESEARCH\FLLWUP.DOC 

Education Follow-Up 	
4. In what year did you graduate from high school? 
________ 
if not graduated, What KEPT YOU from graduating? 
! Got expelled ! Moved & quit 
! Lost interest in school ! Trouble with the law 
! Was afraid of gangs ! Behind and gave up 
! Needed money, got job ! Drug/alcohol probs. 
! Accident or illness ! Got pregnant/\baby 
! Care for family member ! Other (specify) 
_______________________________ ! 	5. Have you been involved in higher training or education since high school? 
Highest level completed since high school: 
! None ! Adult school 
! ROP ! Military 
! Trade/Tech sch. ! Community college 
! 4-year coll/univ ! Other 
Level currently enrolled in: 
! None ! Adult school 
ROP ! Military 
! Trade/Tech sch. ! Community college 
! 4-year coll/univ ! Other 
If enrolled currently, are you ! fulltime ! part time 
Area of study? _________________________ 
Do you plan further education in the FUTURE? 
! None ! Adult school 
! ROP ! Military 
! Trade/Tech sch. ! Community college 
! 4-year coll/univ ! Other 	

UCR:SIRG 35
6. If continuing education, What about your high school or ROP training influenced you to CONTINUE your education? 
! No influence to cont. 
! The skills I learned at ROP classes 
! Involvement in ROCP extra-curricular activities 
! A high school teacher 
! An ROCP teacher 
! Working with people at job site 
! College credit for ROCP classes. 
! Other influences (describe) 
_____________________________________ 	7. Overall, how would you rate your ROP training? 
! Excellent 
! Good 
! Fair 
! Poor 	
Employment Follow-Up 	
8. About how many different JOBS have you held since High School? ___________ 
Tell me about your first job after your ROP training— 
HOW LONG after ROP training did you get your FIRST JOB? (mos/yrs) _____/_____ 
By Dec 31st were you. . . 
! Working ! In military 
! further Schooling ! None of above 	9. In what type of company was your first job after ROP training? _________________________________________ 
What is the SIC code for this job? __________ 
! Were skills taught in ROP used in this job? 
! Were you hired by a company where you did ROP training? 	

UCR:SIRG 36
10. How much are you currently working? 
! Not working 
! Part time 
! Full time 
! More than full time 
! More than 1 job? 
10a. (If not working) What type of work are you looking for? 
___________________________________________ 
SIC Code for this kind of job: ________________ 	10b. (If not working) What barriers do you face in trying to get a job? 
! Full time homemaker, caring for child 
! Currently full time student 
! Would lose welfare or unemployment benefits 
! Disabled, unable to work 
! Not qualified for the job I want 
! No jobs available requiring the skills I have 
! Don’t have skills needed to get a job 
! Don’t know how to get a job 
! Other (specify) 
___________________________________________ 	
11. (If working) Could you tell me about your current employment— 
What is your current JOB TITLE (primary job if working more than one)? _________________________________________ 
CBEDS code for this job title: _____________ 
! Current job is first job described above. 
In what type of BUSINESS do you work (describe)? 
___________________________________________ 
SIC Code for current work: _____________ 
Is current work related to ROP training? ! Yes 
! No 
Approximately how much is your hourly wage? 
________ 
How HAPPY are you with the TYPE OF WORK you are now doing? 
! ! ! ! ! ! 
Very Unhappy Neither Happy Very Don’t 
Unhappy Happy nor Happy know/ 
Unhappy no opinion 
Is your current job related to your ULTIMATE occupational goal? ! Yes ! No ! Don’t 
know 	12. Have you ever been promoted to a new job? 
! No ! Yes 
If yes, did any promotion include: 
! Change in job title. 
! Job description change. 
! Pay raise. 
Does your current job offer an opportunity for advancement? ! Yes ! No ! Don’t 
Know 	

UCR:SIRG 37
Appendix C. High School Satisfaction Surey 
Regional Occupational Centers and Programs 
High School Student Satisfaction Survey 
We’d like to know about your experiences as a student in order to make every student’s experience at your school the best possible. 
All of your answers will be kept confidential and will not be shared with anyone; no one will know what answers you gave to any question. You may choose not to participate at any time. 
Please answer each question carefully and thoughtfully. 	
• Please fill in the bubble next to each answer you select completely – (like this ", not #, $, or %). 
• There are no right or wrong answers to any questions, only you know the best answer for you 	
Thank you, for your time and effort in helping us better understand the needs, strengths and goals of the students in your school. 	

Thinking about the classes you’ve taken in high school, what you’ve learned from class sessions and homework. . . 	1. Not at all 	2. Very little 	3. Somewhat 	4. Quite a bit 	5. Very much 	6. Don’t know No opinion 	
1. How helpful are your classes in meeting your educational goals? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
2. How well are you being prepared for your future job? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
3. How well are you being prepared for life in general? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
4. In general, do you enjoy your classes? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
5. How much would you say you have control over your life? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
6. Does you future happiness depend on getting a good job? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
7. How important is it that you get good grades in school? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
8. How much do you like going to this school? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
9. How much will your current school work help you as an adult? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
10. How disappointed are you when you get a bad grade? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
11. How disappointed are your parents when you get a bad grade? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
12. How disappointed are your close friends if they get bad grades? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
13. How much do you like English or language arts? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
14. How much do you like mathematics? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
15. How much do you like science? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
16. How much do you like social studies? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
17. How much do you like physical education (PE)? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
18. How much do you like music, art or drama classes? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
19. How much do you like career classes (like ROP)? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	

38 

How often do the following statements describe your overall high school experience. . . 	1. Never 	2. Not very often 	3. Sometimes 	4. Frequently 	5. Very often 	6. Don’t know No opinion 	
20. My teachers connect what we learn in class to the “real world”. 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
21. My teachers help me solve everyday real-life problems. 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
22. My teachers adjust lessons so that I can learn at my own pace. 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
23. My school program brings me into contact with business or community people from outside the school. 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
24. I use a computer for classroom lessons, assignments or research. 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
25. My class work is very confusing. 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
26. My teachers use grading standards that I fully understand. 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
27. My classes are interesting and enjoyable. 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
28. My classes are boring. 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
29. I feel like I would like to drop out of school without graduating. 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
30. I feel my courses are preparing me to be a successful adult. 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
31. I feel like the best part of school is being with my friends. 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
32. I feel like the best part of school is the after-school activities (clubs, sports, drama, etc.) 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
33. I feel that there is too much emphasis on grades. 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
34. I feel I could get much better grades if I tried harder. 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
35. I feel that my teachers really care about my success in school. 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
36. I feel that my teachers really care about my success as an adult. 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
37. I feel that my career decisions are made for me by other people. 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
38. I feel that I just can’t make up my mind what I want to do when I leave school. 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
39. I feel that I am in control of my life and will reach my goals. 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
40. I feel I know just what I want to do with my life. 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
Thinking about your long range educational goals. . . 	1. High school 	2. Military training 	3. Trade/tech or business sch. 	4. Community college 	5. 4-year college or university 	6. Advanced/Professional deg 	7. Don’t know No opinion 	
41. Realistically, how far will you go in school? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	7 	
42. How far do your parents/guardians expect you to go? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	7 	
43. How far do your teachers expect you to go? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	7 	
44. How far do your counselors expect you to go? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	7 	
45. How far would you like to go if you could? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	7 	

UCR:SIRG 39
Thinking about your grades in school. . . 	1. All As 	2. As and Bs 	3. Bs and Cs 	4. Cs and Ds 	5. All Ds & Fs 	6. Don’t know 	
46. What kind of grades do you usually get? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
47. What grades could you get if you really tried? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
48. What kind of grades did you get this year? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
49. What kind of grades do you think your closest friends get? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
Thinking about your closest friends in high school. . . 	1. None 	2. Only 1 or 2 	3. A few 	4. Many of them 	5. Nearly all of them 	6. Don’t know 	
50. How many care how well they do in school? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
51. How many have dropped out of high school? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
52. How many will go to a trade or technical school after high school?	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
53. How many will go to a community college? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
54. How many will go to a 4-year college or university? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
Thinking about the classes you’ve taken in school. . . 	
55. How many are important to getting the job you would like to have? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
56. How many are important in preparing you for your future life? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
57. How many have you enjoyed taking? 	1 	2 	3 	4 	5 	6 	
Have you. . . 	1. Yes 	2. No 	3. Don’t know 	
58. Successfully completed a semester of Algebra I before the grade? 	1 	2 	3 	
59. Participated in a work-based internship? 	1 	2 	3 	
60. Attended summer school to complete requirements for a class? 	1 	2 	3 	
61. Gotten tutoring or other help through a program at your school? 	1 	2 	3 	
62. Enrolled in “college prep” courses (taking the University of California (a) to (g) requirements) 	1 	2 	3 	
63. Participated in a “job-shadowing” or apprenticeship program? 	1 	2 	3 	
64. A computer in your home that you can personally use regularly? 	1 	2 	3 	
65. Successfully completed an “Advanced Placement” class? 	1 	2 	3 	
66. Participated in any of DECA FBLA, FHA, HOSA, Skills USA or VICA programs? 	1 	2 	3 	
67. Participated in an AVID program? 	1 	2 	3 	
68. Been enrolled in an “academy” program in your high school? 	1 	2 	3 	

UCR:SIRG 40
9th 
71. What is the highest level of education of your mother or female guardian? 
- Not high school graduate 
- High school graduate 
- Some college or trade school 
- College or trade school graduate 
- Advanced degree (beyond college) 	72. What is the highest level of education of your father or male guardian? 
- Not high school graduate 
- High school graduate 
- Some college or trade school 
- College or trade school graduate 
- Advanced degree (beyond college) 	
69. If employed, how many hours per week do you typically work? 
- Not employed 
- 1 to 5 hours per week 
- 6 to 15 hours per week 
- 16 to 20 hours per week 
- More than 20 hours. 	70. Counting this year, how many years have you been at this school? 
- One 
- Two 
- Three 
- Four or more 	
73. What is the approximate yearly income of your family? 
- Less than $15,000 
- $15,000 to $24,999 
- $25,000 to $39,999 
- $40,000 to $60,000 
- More than $60,000 	74. To which ethnic group do you belong? 
- African American 
- Asian American, Pacific Islander 
- Latino/Hispanic 
- Native American 
- White/Caucasian 
- Other, More than one 	
75. Are you. . . 
- Male 
- Female 	76. What is your date of birth? 
__________/__________/_________ 
Month Day Year 	
77. If you were enrolled in a Regional Occupational Program (ROP) in the 11th grade, what career area did you study? 
- I was not in an ROP program - Auto - Business 
- Child Development - Health - Marketing 
- Health - Foods - Agriculture - Machining 
- Law/Fire - Environmental Tech - Other 	

Thank you! That completes the survey. 
If you have additional comments about your high school or career education program, please write them here: 
ROCP: 	Student ID# or Name 	
High School: 											

UCR:SIRG 41
Appendix D. Sample Screen Images from Electronic Database 
42 
UCR:SIRG 43UCR:SIRG 44
Appendix E. Descriptive Statistics For the Entire Accountability Study Sample 

1. Classes help meet education goals1. Classes help meet education goalsVery muchQuite a bitSomewhatVery littleNot at allPercent403020100 
2. Prepared for future job2. Prepared for future jobVery muchQuite a bitSomewhatVery littleNot at allPercent3020100 
3. Prepared for life in general3. Prepared for life in generalVery muchQuite a bitSomewhatVery littleNot at allPercent403020100 
4. Enjoy your classes4. Enjoy your classesVery muchQuite a bitSomewhatVery littleNot at allPercent403020100 
5. Have control over life5. Have control over lifeVery muchQuite a bitSomewhatVery littleNot at allPercent50403020100 
6. Happiness depends on good job6. Happiness depends on good jobVery muchQuite a bitSomewhatVery littleNot at allPercent6050403020100 
UCR:SIRG 45
7. How important good grades7. How important good gradesVery muchQuite a bitSomewhatVery littleNot at allPercent6050403020100 
8. Like going to this school8. Like going to this schoolVery muchQuite a bitSomewhatVery littleNot at allPercent403020100 
9. School work helps as adult9. School work helps as adultVery muchQuite a bitSomewhatVery littleNot at allPercent403020100 
10. Disappinted with bad grade10. Disappinted with bad gradeVery muchQuite a bitSomewhatVery littleNot at allPercent50403020100 
11. Parents disappointed with bad grade11. Parents disappointed with bad gradeVery muchQuite a bitSomewhatVery littleNot at allPercent6050403020100 
12. Friends disappointed with bad grades12. Friends disappointed with bad gradesVery muchQuite a bitSomewhatVery littleNot at allPercent3020100 
UCR:SIRG 46
13. Like English/Language Arts13. Like English/Language ArtsVery muchQuite a bitSomewhatVery littleNot at allPercent403020100 
14. Like Mathematics14. Like MathematicsVery muchQuite a bitSomewhatVery littleNot at allPercent3020100 
15. Like Science15. Like ScienceVery muchQuite a bitSomewhatVery littleNot at allPercent3020100 
16. Like Social Studies16. Like Social StudiesVery muchQuite a bitSomewhatVery littleNot at allPercent3020100 
17. Like Physical Education17. Like Physical EducationVery muchQuite a bitSomewhatVery littleNot at allPercent403020100 
18. Like Music, Art, Drama18. Like Music, Art, DramaVery muchQuite a bitSomewhatVery littleNot at allPercent403020100 
UCR:SIRG 47
19. Like Career Classes/ROP19. Like Career Classes/ROPVery muchQuite a bitSomewhatVery littleNot at allPercent50403020100 
20. Teachers connect to real world20. Teachers connect to real worldVery oftenFrequentlySometimesNot very oftenNeverPercent403020100 
21. Teachers helpsolve everyday problems21. Teachers helpsolve everyday problemsVery oftenFrequentlySometimesNot very oftenNeverPercent403020100 
22. Teachers adjust lessons to my pace22. Teachers adjust lessons to my paceVery oftenFrequentlySometimesNot very oftenNeverPercent403020100 
23. Contact business/community people23. Contact business/community peopleVery oftenFrequentlySometimesNot very oftenNeverPercent403020100 
24 Use computer for classroom work24 Use computer for classroom workVery oftenFrequentlySometimesNot very oftenNeverPercent403020100 
UCR:SIRG 48
25. Class work is confusing25. Class work is confusingVery oftenFrequentlySometimesNot very oftenNeverPercent50403020100 
26. Understand grading standards26. Understand grading standardsVery oftenFrequentlySometimesNot very oftenNeverPercent403020100 
27. Classes interesting/enjoyable27. Classes interesting/enjoyableVery oftenFrequentlySometimesNot very oftenNeverPercent50403020100 
28. Classes are boring28. Classes are boringVery oftenFrequentlySometimesNot very oftenNeverPercent50403020100 
29. Feel I would dropout29. Feel I would dropoutVery oftenFrequentlySometimesNot very oftenNeverPercent806040200 
30. Courses preparing me to be adult30. Courses preparing me to be adultVery oftenFrequentlySometimesNot very oftenNeverPercent403020100 
UCR:SIRG 49
31. Best part of school is friends31. Best part of school is friendsVery oftenFrequentlySometimesNot very oftenNeverPercent403020100 
32. Best part is after school activities32. Best part is after school activitiesVery oftenFrequentlySometimesNot very oftenNeverPercent3020100 
33. There's too much emphasis on grades33. There's too much emphasis on gradesVery oftenFrequentlySometimesNot very oftenNeverPercent403020100 
34. Much better grades if I tried34. Much better grades if I triedVery oftenFrequentlySometimesNot very oftenNeverPercent403020100 
35. Teachers care about school success35. Teachers care about school successVery oftenFrequentlySometimesNot very oftenNeverPercent403020100 
36. Teachers care about adult success36. Teachers care about adult successVery oftenFrequentlySometimesNot very oftenNeverPercent403020100 
UCR:SIRG 50
37. Career decisions made by other people37. Career decisions made by other peopleVery oftenFrequentlySometimesNot very oftenNeverPercent50403020100 
38. Can't make up mind for after school38. Can't make up mind for after schoolVery oftenFrequentlySometimesNot very oftenNeverPercent3020100 
39. I am in control of my life39. I am in control of my lifeVery oftenFrequentlySometimesNot very oftenNeverPercent403020100 
40. Know just what I want to do with life40. Know just what I want to do with lifeVery oftenFrequentlySometimesNot very oftenNeverPercent403020100 
41. Realistically, how far in school41. Realistically, how far in schoolAdv/Prof4-Year CollComm CollTrade/TechMilitaryHigh SchoolPercent50403020100 
42. How far parents expect you to go42. How far parents expect you to goAdv/Prof4-Year CollComm CollTrade/TechMilitaryHigh SchoolPercent50403020100 
UCR:SIRG 51
43. How far teachers expect you to go43. How far teachers expect you to goAdv/Prof4-Year CollComm CollTrade/TechMilitaryHigh SchoolPercent6050403020100 
44. How far counselors expect you to go44. How far counselors expect you to goAdv/Prof4-Year CollComm CollTrade/TechMilitaryHigh SchoolPercent6050403020100 
45. How far you would like to go45. How far you would like to goAdv/Prof4-Year CollComm CollTrade/TechMilitaryHigh SchoolPercent6050403020100 
46. Grades you usually get46. Grades you usually getAll D's & F'sC's & D'sB's & C'sA's & B'sAll A'sPercent50403020100 
47. Grades you'd get if you really tried47. Grades you'd get if you really triedAll D's & F'sC's & D'sB's & C'sA's & B'sAll A'sPercent50403020100 
48. Grades you are getting this year48. Grades you are getting this yearAll D's & F'sC's & D'sB's & C'sA's & B'sAll A'sPercent50403020100 
UCR:SIRG 52
49. Grades you closest friends get49. Grades you closest friends getAll D's & F'sC's & D'sB's & C'sA's & B'sAll A'sPercent50403020100 
50. Friends care how well they do50. Friends care how well they doNearly AllManyA fewOnly 1 or 2NonePercent403020100 
51. Friends have dropped out of school51. Friends have dropped out of schoolNearly AllManyA fewOnly 1 or 2NonePercent6050403020100 
52. Friends going to trade/tech schools52. Friends going to trade/tech schoolsNearly AllManyA fewOnly 1 or 2NonePercent50403020100 
53. Friends going to community college53. Friends going to community collegeNearly AllManyA fewOnly 1 or 2NonePercent403020100 
54. Friends to 4-year college/univesity54. Friends to 4-year college/univesityNearly AllManyA fewOnly 1 or 2NonePercent403020100 
UCR:SIRG 53
55. Classes important for job55. Classes important for jobNearly AllManyA fewOnly 1 or 2NonePercent403020100 
56. Classes preparing you for life56. Classes preparing you for lifeNearly AllManyA fewOnly 1 or 2NonePercent403020100 
57. Classes you have enjoyed taking57. Classes you have enjoyed takingNearly AllManyA fewOnly 1 or 2NonePercent50403020100 
58. Completed Algebra I before 9th grade58. Completed Algebra I before 9th gradeNoYesPercent6050403020100 
59. Participated in work internship59. Participated in work internshipNoYesPercent706050403020100 
60. Attended summer school to complete60. Attended summer school to completeNoYesPercent706050403020100 
UCR:SIRG 54
61. Gotten tutoring or other help in school61. Gotten tutoring or other help in schoolNoYesPercent706050403020100 
62. Enrolled in 'college prep' courses62. Enrolled in 'college prep' coursesNoYesPercent6050403020100 
63. Job-shadowing or apprenticeships63. Job-shadowing or apprenticeshipsNoYesPercent706050403020100 
64. Personal computer at home64. Personal computer at homeNoYesPercent100806040200 
65. Completed Advanced Placement class65. Completed Advanced Placement classNoYesPercent706050403020100 
66. Participated in DECA, FBLA, FHA, etc.66. Participated in DECA, FBLA, FHA, etc.NoYesPercent100806040200 
UCR:SIRG 55
67. Participated in AVID67. Participated in AVIDNoYesPercent100806040200 
68. Enrolled in 'Academy' program68. Enrolled in 'Academy' programNoYesPercent100806040200 
69. Hours per week employed69. Hours per week employed621 or more16 to 20 hrs6 to 15 hrs1 to 5 hrsNot EmplPercent50403020100 
70. Years in this school70. Years in this school74 or moreThreeTwoOnePercent706050403020100 
71. Mother's highest education level71. Mother's highest education levelAdv DegColl/Tech gradSome CollHS gradNot HS gradPercent3020100 
72. Father's highest education level72. Father's highest education levelAdv DegColl/Tech gradSome CollHS gradNot HS gradPercent3020100 
UCR:SIRG 56
73. Family yearly income73. Family yearly incomeMore than $60K$40K to $60K$25K to $40K$15K to $25KLess than $15KPercent403020100 
74. Your ethnic group74. Your ethnic groupOtherWhiteNative AmHispanicAsianAfro AmerPercent403020100 
75. Your gender75. Your genderFemaleMalePercent6050403020100 
ROCP ProgramROCP ProgramEnvironment techLaw/FireMachineAgricultureFoodsOtherMarketingHealthChild DevBusinessAutoControl grpPercent403020100 
In ROCP Program?In ROCP Program?ROCP StudentControl GrpPercent706050403020100 
Hours Worked while in High School 
ROCP . 14; Comp Grp . 12.5 
69. Hours per week employed21 or more16 to 20 hrs6 to 15 hrs1 to 5 hrsNot EmplPercent6050403020100In ROCP Program?Control GrpROCP Student 
UCR:SIRG 57