The Influence of Vocational Technical Education on Structural Inequality and Diversity

The Influence of Vocational Technical Education on

Structural Inequality and Diversity

Christopher Molnar

Fielding Graduate University

ELC769

Faculty Reader: Four Arrows

July 2008

The workforce of today must have a greater technical literacy than that of the past and training in computer literacy and other technological skills may help individuals become more employable. However the use and knowledge of this technology may not be sufficient for addressing the problems in our world related to structural inequality, social and ecological injustice, and the need and respect for diversity.

It is not easy to define diversity. According to a February 2008 Business Wire article organizations see the importance of diversity but only 30 percent of them have a definition of what diversity is (Harris, Hughes, & Malveaux, 2008). The article recaps a yearlong study conducted by the American Institute for Managing Diversity Inc. on diversity in the workplace. The study surveyed 1,400 Human Resource professionals and the definitions of diversity and diversity practices were varied. The largest number of those surveyed said that diversity practices “created a work environment or culture that allows everyone to contribute all they can towards the organization (Harris, Hughes, & Malveaux, 2008).” 49% of those surveyed said that diversity practices “achieved appropriate representation of racial and ethnic groups (Harris, Hughes, & Malveaux, 2008).” The study also showed that there is an over-emphasis on the racial and ethnic groups with respect to the other types of diversity. 48% of those surveyed said that the diversity practices “enhanced the ability of people from different backgrounds to work together (Harris, Hughes, & Malveaux, 2008).” The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, diversity is defined as “the inclusion of diverse people (as people of different races or cultures) in a group or organization <programs intended to promote diversity in schools> (Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, 2008).” For the purpose of this paper I am going to use the definition of “Ensuring people of different races, cultures, ethnicities, sexual orientations and backgrounds have equal opportunities, are treated fairly, have an inclusive environment, and receive affirmative action for employment and education.” for diversity.

Diversity is important to many organizations, as well as to the world in general. From a business sense the 2007 article “Diverse = Desirable in the Black Collegian” says that “Increasingly though, corporations are discovering that it’s simply good business to have their employee ranks reflect the many faces of American society (Anonymous, 2007).” Good business for two main reasons: First, diversity attracts customers. As Claudia Tattanelli, CEO of Universum the company that released the 2007 Universum Diversity Survey says, “Companies don’t do [diversity] to be nice – it reflects on the bottom line. I can’t imagine a company that is only trying to sell to Caucasians – you need to mirror the people you’re selling to. It’s not so much your color or your accent that matters. It’s the invisible traits. Your personality, your culture, your approach (Tattanelli, 2007 as cited in Anonymous, 2007).”

There are some problems that come with diversity. One of these is stereotyping. In 1991 Donald Brown published the book Human Universals and he wrote that one of these “human universals” is “having a hierarchical arrangement for judging the status and values of citizens (Brown, 2002).” Because of this ability, or universal, there is a tendency to judge people and treat them differently according to some personal attribute or group membership. Brown wrote that this causes a social stratification to occur along the lines of gender, race, ethnicity, religious affiliation, or economic status (Brown, Human Universals, 1991). One example of stereotyping is found in many classrooms in the United States. Some students look around a class on the first day and decide who are going to be the “curve wreckers” on the first day of class; those are the students with the high scores that set the standard for everyone else. In my undergraduate days I witnessed students changing to another class section based on the number of Asian students in the classroom. This was based on a stereotype that all Asian students excel in academics. In my current role as an instructor I sometimes overhear students conversations regarding the racial makeup of a class. Recently I witnessed a conversation that one class was “dumber” than another because of the large percentage of African-Americans in that class. That conversation led to a discussion on diversity and stereotyping during that class period, and in truth the class with the larger percentage of African-Americans had a slightly higher grade-point average than the largely Caucasian class.

There are several reasons stereotyping occurs. First stereotyping may come from some past ulterior motive, such as in the United States the suppression of the Black race during slavery or the American Indian during the rapid expansion of the colonists out West, and this motive may or may not still exist (Topa, 2007). After slavery was abolished the African American could not find work that paid good wages and sometimes resorted to theft and violence to feed their families. The stereotype continues that Black men steal and are violent. This stereotype hurts the African-American population, as there is a trust issue that affects employment. This stereotyping continues into the second assertion regarding stereotyping; that it plays into human communication and people start using the stereotype as a part of reality, consciously or subconsciously (Topa, 2007). For example, if an African-American goes to apply for a job in a bank the manager may not offer the position because of the stereotype of the “Black men steal” or “Black men are violent.”

Another problem that comes from diversity is “mistrust” between the various groups. A 2007 multilingual poll of African-Americans, Hispanic, and Asian Americans suggested, “Considerable tensions exist among these ethnic groups, including mistrust and stereotyping-feelings that may spill over into the workplace (Hastings, 2008)”. Sergio Bendixan, who is an expert on multilingual polling says, “While race relations between ethnic groups and whites grab the headlines, there are also serious racial problems between minorty groups in America (Hastings, 2008).” Bendixan goes on to say, “Blacks feel they are left out of the American Dream and are being displaced by the newcomers and each group buys into the negative stereotypes about the other two (Hastings, 2008).” The poll also showed that 60% of African-Americans do not believe that the “American Dream” applies to them, they feel segragated from the rest of America (Hastings, 2008). The poll also showed a positive attitude towards change. The respondents also said that the country would be better if universities, businesses, media and government had more members of the minority groups in positions of athourity (Hastings, 2008).” The African-Americans polled may well be feeling the effects of inequality that has worked against them since prior to the end of slavery. In the United States while whites believe there is an advantage to being white they don’t necessarily connect those advantages to the disadvantage of being black. According to a study on whiteness and race relationships from the University of Minnesota African-Americans “do see more raceism in society than whites but, contrary to stereotypes, seem disinclined to blame the system for their disadvantage (Lee-St. John, 2006, p1).” This study also showed that the 77% of the African-Americans polled are likely to blame the disadvantages on their lack of hard work, compared with 62% of whites (Lee-St. John, 2006).

Another such example of stereotyping is that with regard to the Indigenous Peoples. Wahinkpe Topa points out that we view shows such as Little House on the Prarie and teach out young people that “Indians” are violant and deserve to be killed. We also have the western shows, the “cowboy and Indian” battles, and the High School and proffesional sports mascotts that are prepetutating the stereotype of the Indigenous People being savage and wild (Topa, 2007).” These stereotypes become so ingrained that sometimes even members of the opressed population believe or are affected by them.

Stereotyping and biases are the center of Project Implicit, a research project that allows visitors to test themselves for their own hidden biases. This project is directed by Brian Nesek from the University of Virginia, Mahzarin Banaji from Harvard University, and Tony Greenwald from the University of Washington and is funded by the National Institute of Mental Health (Topa, 2007). By using associations and pictures that change on an on-line test visitors are able to test themselves for biases. In July 2008 I visited the web site and completed the test for Black Americans and Weapons compared with White Americans and though I do not consiously believe that Black Americans are more likely to have weapons that White Americans the test showed that I have a “Strong association of Black Americans with Weapons compared to White Americans.” I also took the test regarding Homosexual people compared to Hetrosexual peoples and the results showed that I looked at Hetrosexual people in a stronger light than I looked at Homesexual. This was interesting since I am a member of the minority group and would have suspected that I would look at Homosexual people in a more positive light than Hetrosexual. These tests are open to anyone at http://www.implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/. Does our early upbringing and society hide these prejaduces and biases in our phsyci?

The inequality that is built into industry, education, and social aspects separates a diverse population into classes. This separation of people into classes is the start of structural inequality. Structural inequality is the “inequalities in power and reward .. built into all social structures. Individuals and groups that benefit from any particular structure strive to see it maintained (Ragunathan, 2006).” These inequalities can take a population and separate them into the “haves” and the “have-nots.” The “haves” are the company owners, the business leaders, and sometimes the college professors. The have-nots are the workers, the lower class, the impoverished, the job-less, and the students. The “have-nots” are dependent on the “haves” for their existence. The “haves” will give just enough to cement this dependency but will not give enough to allow the “have-nots” to break the barrier between their class and the one above, thus they can never become a “have.” For our purpose structural inequality can be defined as any fear, practice, stereotype, or attitude that prevents a human being from advancing themselves to a position of greater power or happiness. This could be in employement, housing, responsibility, education, or reaching personal goals. It prevents a person from controlling their own destiny.

There are a few examples of this inequality that can be found in every day life. If one looks at the labor market, especially in the service industry, there are many small contractors. These contractors own the trucks and the equipment, they hire employees at low pay, make promises of advancement to provide a goal. The employees are trained with skills that are marketable, but are never trained to think as a business owner. Over the years the employee will decide to leave the company and start their own company. They will most likely fail. While they have a skill that is marketable, the drive to suceed, they do not have the knowledge to properly run a business. The business owner is in a position of the “have” and the employee is in the position of the “have-not” and by not encouraging or teaching the “have-not” how to succeed they will make sure that they continue to be the provider of that service.

One of the largest problems with this stereotyping and structural inequality is that it does not allow us to work together as a people to resolve problems. It fosters an environment where someone in power is making sure they remain in power, remain with the favorable trade, and remain the “haves”. Wahinkpe Topa (Four Arrows) writes that, “Just as Kansas wheat and Chinese rice grow better and stronger in more varied conditions than either one alone, co-existing with various cultures can be beneficial for each culture (Topa, 2007, p9).” The gains in food production, environmentalism and culture could be imense if all people could work and live in harmony. Every group has something to gain from the other, we can learn a lot from each other on such things like the environment and global issues that go beyond politics.

The stratification of society, economic inequality or structural inequality can also lead to environmental inequality. Environmental inequality is when one group of people does not have the money or the power to have their environment equally protected. Environmental equity is defined by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to allow all social groups to be equally protected. This environmental equity is supposed to protect individuals, groups, or communities from environmental racism which is based on race or color. This environmental racism and environmental equity has turned into a new field of study called Environmental Justice (Hill & Clover, 2003). Some examples of this environmental inequality are indigenous peoples fighting mercury contamination in their tribal waters, or oil and gas extraction on their sacred lands, or the targeting of their lands and territories for nuclear waste disposals (Hill & Clover, 2003). Robert J. Hill writes that education is the key for environmental equality and justice. But this environmental education must begin with “growth and empowerment of community-based associations that are the heart of civil society (Hill & Clover, 2003, p31).” Hill goes on to explain that while environmental education may possible build ecological democracy, it is often social inequality that stands in the way (Hill & Clover, 2003).

This stereotyping and the resulting structural inequality is sometimes maintained by those in power because it can be profitable and can keep those in power in power. One example is found on most University campuses, almost every campus has a diversity office and a staff that has jobs because the campuses are not diverse enough. Evelyn Hu-DeHart, director of Brown University’s Center for the Study of Race and Ethnicity in America recently pointed this out at the 21st annual National Conference on Race and Ethnicity in American Higher Education. Ms. Hu-Dehart said, “Let’s face it: Diversity has created jobs for all of us. It is a career. It is and industry, as long as we keep doing our job the way we are told to do it,” she said, “we are covering up for our universities (Schmidt, 2008).” She also went on to say that “the ideal of diversity being pursued by colleges is far more rooted in a business-driven desire to have different types of people on campuses than in the pursuit of social justice for those who have historically been excluded from education (Schmidt, 2008).” It is also important to realize that colleges and universities are businesses. For the administration of these institutions figuring out how to increase minority student enrollment and increase minority faculty representation is not easy, as they need to be careful not to alienate the white majority found on most campuses (Capriccioso, 2006). There are scores of other private and govermental agencies that are operated by the lack of diversity. Welfare, food stamps, and the department of labor are all governmental agencies that employee many people who would be out of work if structural inequality did not exist.

This structural inequality causes economic inequality as well. According to Bill Moyers in his article “America 101” on CommonDreams.org the concentration of wealth allows the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer. He points out that a “class of people having more than their share of the common wealth was the characteristic feature of an unjust society (Moyers, 2006).” According to Census Bureau data in 1976 the top 1 percent of Americans owned 22 percent of the total wealth. In 2006 the top 1 percent now controls 38% of the wealth. In 1960 the difference in weath between the top 20 percent and the bottom 20 percent was 30 fold. It has now increased to 75 fold. Americans are now less likely to advance up the socio-economic ladder (Moyers, 2006). Worse than the economic differences is the distribution of a voice. The press now represents the dominant class in this country and is tied up in an “unprecedented concentration of media ownerships (Moyers, 2006)” which decide what news becomes the headlines. It is easy to ignore the starvation and the problems of the oppressed if the news is controlled by the oppressor.

On a recent 2008 trip to New Orleans, LA I had the opportunity to witness economic inequality. We were on a bus on our way to tour the devastation of the Ninth Ward, where in August of 2005 the levies failed in the midst of Hurricane Katrina. As we entered the neighborhood I began to notice the vacant shopping centers of the area. Major retailers such as Walmart, Albertsons, Food Lion, and Lowes had not returned to the area and their buildings were still boarded up. Also not returning were the small fast-food chains. One of the most striking images for me was the Subway store and Popeye’s Chicken buildings on a corner. The buildings appeared to be undamaged, but were not open. These closed business where in contrast to the same chains and stores that were open and thriving in the other parts of the city. It made me wonder how anyone could be expected to rebuild and repopulate that section of New Orleans if three years later the stores that were needed to support these areas had not returned? The large retailers such as Walmart went into the area pre-Katrina, and through competition put the minority and locally owned business out of business. Once these business were gone they received all of the profits from the local population, through the lack of choice. These businesses literally took their money and ran. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

The lack of stores and businesses in the Ninth Ward is just one of the economic inequalities in New Orleans, the other is that of jobs. These businesses not re-opening in New Orleans took away a job market for the untrained and under-schooled minimum wage worker. New Orleans has plenty of work available for trained positions, such as electrical workers and heating/air conditioning technicians but these positions require schooling and training that people must be able to afford. To afford this training people must have jobs. And the gap between the “haves” and the “have-nots” keeps growing. Because this economical gap also effect the schools, the schools are becoming more segregated with time.

In his book Black American Students in an Affluent Suburb: A Study of Academic Disengagement Ogbu studied the schools in Shaker Heights, Ohio. He concluded that “community forces, educational orientations, beliefs, and behaviors within the Black community” caused some of the racial achievement gaps found there (Ogbu & Davis, 2003). He went further and suggested that as a result of racial discrimination in employment, skepticism about the ultimate payoff for educational investment, and perceptions of unfair treatment by school personnel members of the African-American community disengage from the educational process (Ogbu & Davis, 2003). In the conclusion of a 2006 article in The Journal of Negro Education John B. Diamond says that “based on the current population trends such as the expansion of communities of color as a percentage of the total U.S. and suburban population, the incremental nature of structural change, and the resistance to desegregation among Whites (Diamond, 2006).” Diamond went on to conclude that the African-American and Latino populations will increase in schools attended by the African-American and Latino students and that the income disparity between these and other schools will grow (Diamond, 2006). He goes on to say, “This means that one critical educational challenge that is faced is to provide quality educational opportunities for students of color regardless of the race and social class composition of their schools (Diamond, 2006).” Not only are the schools becoming more segregated over time, they are growing a population that is more economically challenged.

The lack of proper training and education is not a new issue, in his 1903 article The Talented Tenth W.E.B. DuBoise addresses this very issue, he writes:

The Negro race, like all races, is going to be saved by its exceptional men. The problem of education then, among Negroes must first deal with the Talented Tenth; it is the problem of developing the Best of this race that they may guide the Mass away from the contamination and the death of the Worst in their own and other races. Now the training of men is a difficult and intricate task. Its technique is a matter for educational experts, but its object is for the vision of seers. If we make money the object of man-training, we shall develop money-makers but not necessarily men; if we make technical shill the object of education, we may possess artisans but not in nature men (DuBois, 1903).

In the United States economics drive educational disparity and further separate the “haves” and the “have-nots.” While the laws have been in place to desegregate the schools and provide equal opportunity for all to learn over the last 54 years there have been several court cases brought by minorities when the administrators do not act. Two of these cases stand out and are used as models as well as measuring progress.

The first is Brown v. Board of Education where in 1954 the Supreme Court of the United States issued a ruling in the case of Brown v. Board of Education. The Court noted that “education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments … It is the very foundation of good citizenship. Today it is a principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values, in preparing him [or her] for later professional training, and in helping him [or her] to adjust normally to his [or her] environment. In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he [or she] is denied [an equal educational opportunity] (Supreme Court United States of America, 1954).” Prior to Brown the segregation of White and African American children was common based on the “Separate by Equal” doctrine. It was believed that as long as the facilities were equal the children could be segregated by race. In its ruling the Supreme Court found that “separate but equal had no place in the field of public education (Supreme Court United States of America, 1954).” However this was not the end of the fight.

The problem is one of a lack of equal access to the basic foundations of education. Jonathan Kozol writes in his book, Death at an Early Age – The Destruction of the Hearts and Minds of Negro Children in the Boston Public Schools about his time teaching in a segregated classroom in the Boston Public Schools in 1964-1965, well after Brown v. Board of Education. He tells the tale of social and economic disparity in a supposedly desegregated school district. He tells the story of a reading teacher who was afraid to address discrimination with her students because she did not want to be remembered by the students as being the first to address this issue (Kozol, 1967). He tells the tale of minority students being housed in a desegregated school but being sent to classes in cold, leaking auditoriums that are non-conducive to learning (Kozol, 1967). Kozol wrote about the minority population in the Boston City schools, he wrote “There were 45 schools in Boston with over 50 percent non-white, 28 with over 80 percent, 16 with 96 percent or above. Among the highest in the city: the William Lloyd Garrison School, with 96.8 percent non-white (Kozol, 1967, pp52-53).” He went on to the describe the crux of the problem by saying, “If this was not de facto segregation in education, then it was difficult to see what possible meaning that phrase could ever have again (Kozol, 1967, pp52).” While our government and our boards of education would like us to believe that these problems do not exist we must take a closer look. Why is education, either college or technical not available to everyone? Our leaders want us to believe that everyone has equal access to education, but the problem is that discrimination and inequality has continued. In 1996 the problem of desegregation once again reached a legal challenge in Hartford, Connecticut with Sheff v. O’Neil.

On July 9, 1996 the Connecticut Supreme Court rendered a verdict in Sheff v. O’Neil where the minority children sued the Governor of Connecticut and the Hartford Board of Education based on continued racial segregation of the Hartford Public Schools. The plaintiffs argued that 14 of the 25 public schools in Hartford were “almost entirely minority and that this segregation deprived them of an education equal to those of schoolchildren living in other school districts (Connecticut, 1996).” The court ruled in favor of the children by “finding that the initiatives undertaken by the public officials had not eradicated the significant disparities between school districts (Connecticut, 1996)” and ordered the state to come up with a plan to resolve the problem.

It is now over 50 years since the landmark case of Brown v. Board of Education, which forced public schools to desegregate to create educational equality and said that separate was not equal, and almost 11 years after Sheff v. O’Neil saying that public officials had not done enough, and there have been several tremendous gains but it is still not enough. According to the 2000 census data 72% of the Black population over 25 years old has graduated from High School, and over 14% of the population has graduated from College. A similar census of the Black Population was also taken in 1940 where 12% graduating from High School and 2% from college (United States Census Bureau, 2007). A different department in the Census Bureau researched poverty levels in school districts around the country. In 1995 the United States Census Bureau researched the poverty levels in school districts around the country. In 1995 they looked at 28, 229 families with children in the Hartford Public Schools, out of a total population of 135,947 students. 15,448 of these families were considered to be living in poverty (United States Census Bureau, 1999). A similar count was done again in 2005. The total population of the Hartford public schools had dropped to 126,762 and they looked at 26,153 families. Out of these 26,153 families, 7,466 families were considered to be living in poverty (United States Census Bureau, 2008). In his article, Diamond points out that wealth has an important affect on education. He points to a study done in 2002 by Ronald F. Ferguson that “parents with greater assets are free to use them to pay for tutors, purchase educational materials (computers) and pay for private schools and more expensive colleges (Ferguson, 2002) (Diamond, 2006).” It is this access to technology that is troubling. The gap in education and technology between the “haves” and the “have-nots” widens.

The economic inequalities bring about a lack of access to technology. In prior studies, such as Diamond in 2006 and Ferguson in 2002 the need for access to technology (computers and the Internet) has taken an important place. In 1996 Nathanial Sheppard wrote the article “Without access, it’s a road to nowhere” that addressed the practice of “electronic redlining”, or telecommunication companies not providing access to lower income communities. He questioned if as technology becomes commonplace “will there be on-ramps in minority communities (Sheppard, 1996)?” Sheppard also pointed out that “at stake is the scope of access to the electronic tools that are expected to profoundly shape the way we obtain information and even the way we practice democracy (Sheppard, 1996).” Almost 12 years ago Sheppard saw the way access to the internet will be a part of our every day lives, during this primary presidential season we have seen all the candidates using the Internet to express their views, their policies, and their positions on all topics. Those without access have missed huge amounts of information that may help them create a better future for themselves and their children.

Access to technology is not only based on the presence of this technology, but it also based on the income of those wanting the technology. In 1996 Ellis Jacobs, a Legal Aid Society attorney pointed out that, “All of the studies of access to computer technology show great disparity between rich and poor households and even greater disparity between White and Black households.” Jacobs went on to say, “Census data shows that 74 percent of families with incomes of more than $75,000 per year own at least one computer, but only 15 percent of the families earning under $20,000 per year own computers. And Whites are three times as likely as African-Americans or Hispanics to own a computer (Jacobs, 1996(Sheppard, 1996)).” In Sheppards article there is also a comment from Ceasar McDowell, an assistant professor at Harvard’s Graduate School of Education where he says, “minority access to emerging technologies should be treated as a civil rights issue. Minorities will be at a disadvantage if public facilities rather than homes are the major points of access to computers (Sheppard, 1996).” McDowell points out that libraries are many times not dispersed into minority areas, nor are they open all the time. He says that “this presents problems for those adults that work (Sheppard, 1996).”

In August 1999 Kominski and Newburger presented a paper at the Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association titled, Access Denied: Changes in Computer Ownership and Use: 1984-1997. In this study they compare Internet use among the different races in 1984 and in 1997. According to the Census in 1984, 8.8% of White Not Hispanic households had a computer, 3.8% of Black not Hispanic households had a computer, 4.3% of Hispanic households had a computer, and 8.4% of other races (not identified in above) had a computer. These numbers grew dramatically in 1997. The Census showed that 40.8% of the White not Hispanic households had a computer, 19.3% of Black not Hispanic households had a computer, 19.4% of Hispanic households had a computer, and 47% of those classified as other races had a computer (Kominski & Newburger, 1999). In the 2003 census the numbers changed again. According to the Census Bureau 66.6% of the White not Hispanic population had a computer, 44.6% of the Black not Hispanic population had computers, 44.3% of the Hispanic population had computers, and the Asian population was added with 72.9% of that population having at least one computer in the household (United States Census Bureau, 2005). In 1997 the Census Bureau also surveyed for Internet use at work, home, or school. These numbers were also broken down by race. According to the count 27.1% of White not Hispanic respondents use the Internet, 14.1% of the Black not Hispanic respondents use the Internet, and 12.1% of the Hispanic respondents used the Internet (Kominski & Newburger, 1999). In 2003 this survey on Internet use was repeated and the numbers rose again. 59.9% of the White not Hispanic population used the Internet, 36% of the Black not Hispanic population used the Internet, 36% of the Hispanic population used the Internet, and 66.7% of the Asian population used the Internet (United States Census Bureau, 2005). Also in 1997 the Census Bureau counted those who use the Internet at school. 19.0% of the White not Hispanic respondents use the internet at school, 13.0% of the Black not Hispanic respondents use the internet at school, and 10.3% of the Hispanic respondents use the Internet at school (Kominski & Newburger, 1999). While the Kominski & Newburger report does not draw any conclusions the numbers show that while access to technology has grown computer ownership and Internet use among the minority populations is still low.

The road to change is through education. Education leads toward economic equality and is often offered as the solution to low-wage work (Schneider, 2000). This economic equality leads towards structural equality and structural equality leads towards social justice. One of the ways to provide education is through Higher Education such as that found in universities and colleges. But often those whom need the education most often do not have the primary and secondary education to go to a college or university so the other way to provide education is that which is found in vocational and technical schools. Vocational training has always been seen as a way to learn a trade. It is a path towards a working life for many failing to graduate from high school as well as those graduates choosing not to go on to college. Until recently it has always been taken for granted that College and University graduates earn significantly more than those with non-academic or vocational training. However, times are changing and as those in the Baby-Boomer generation are set to retire from the trades the demand for highly qualified and skilled trades-people are steadily increasing pay. Something that I have heard from my students is that they want to be in the job market without spending four years in school learning liberal arts. A study completed by the National Center for Research in Vocational Education showed that “vocational education and training-related jobs help to overcome some of the labor market disadvantages faced by blacks however their position is still not equivalent or that of the white male vocational graduate in terms of hourly wages, yearly earnings, weeks worked, and labor force participation (Campbell & Laughlin, 1988).” The study went on to point out that Hispanic graduates with intensive vocational training showed greater earnings of 12-21 percent over those Hispanic graduates from a general studies curriculum (Campbell & Laughlin, 1988). Not surprisingly the same study found that those students with a lower socioeconomic status are more apt to enroll in a vocational program (Campbell & Laughlin, 1988). In addition to the socioeconomic reason to attend vocational schools some attend because of student tracking in High Schools. Student tracking is the separation of students into different tracks or programs based on student choice or learning abilities. This practice sends some students down a college preparatory track and some down a vocational or job preparation track. The vocational track in Connecticut is changing, according to Lauren Weisberg Kaufman, the vice president of the Connecticut Business and Industry Association, based in Hartford; the state vocational education system has “been treated as an alternative high school system, instead of a technical high school or technical training system (Archer, 2004).” In his article Archer explains that partially due to No Child Left Behind the state of Connecticut officials are sending a message of “Slackers need not apply (Archer, 2004).” While student tracking does have the capability of minimizing failure it can also be used to segregate students rather than teach them. One of my students who graduated from a High School vocational program told me that he did not learn anything while he was there. He explained to me that the teacher was too busy breaking up fights and preventing theft to teach anything related to the trade. If vocational education is used in this manner it is a waste of time for those attending. This student is now deeply in debt to continue an education he should have received in his High School program.

When I began this paper, I was convinced that vocational and technical training was the answer for our joblessness and our social and economic stratification, after all this training is designed to provide work. There are several studies that show otherwise and show the need for something else. In her paper Jo Anne Schneider draws some interesting statistics that support this view. She found that twenty nine percent of those who took clerical training found jobs in the field; the number was less, at twenty-six percent for the skilled trades, and climbed for nursing assistants (forty-three percent) and fifty-three percent for food services. The problem is that seventy-one percent of those people who were employed in low-end service occupations ended up in similar jobs once having completed the training (Schneider, 2000). The studies also showed that for blue-collar occupations such as the building trades most of the opportunities went to white-men in the union apprenticeship programs (Schneider, 2000). The cost and the possibility of unemployment after a short-term training program, raises the question if vocational training programs are helping keep people in poverty and widening the economic and social gap.

For vocational and technical training to work it must culminate in well paying jobs with opportunity for advancement and growth. This training cannot be done via a school alone, it must include the community and industry. One such program is the Reach Construction Institute in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Private Industry Council of Milwaukee County sponsors the Reach program in conjunction withthe Department of Workforce Development. The Reach program employs and trains young people who want to go into the construction industry through union contractors, offers them living wages and the support they need to be successful. It is not a jobs program. It is a training program using private and community funds and effort. When asked about the Reach program, Lois O’Keefe, a program manager for the Private Industry Council of Milwaukee County says, “this is an opportunity to introduce the building and construction trades to young people of color. This is the future work force of Milwaukee. We have to get kids trained to get into good-paying jobs, and we have to get them into those jobs (Dresang, 2002).” The students involved work half time on the construction sites while returning to school half time, most of the time getting their High School diplomas. The program pays the student/workers $18.50 an hour $10.00 of which is provided by the Private Industry Council. The students also receive full benefits through the Laborers Union, which also provides further training in construction related skills (Dresang, 2002). This program works because it is a partnership between industry, the community, and education. The partnership creates a future for both the student and the community. There are other such programs as well.

“Flip the Script” in Detroit, Michigan is another construction related program with a partnership between the community and industry. “Flip the Script” is sponsored by Goodwill Industries and local trades unions. It is designed to introduce minority men into the building trades. Between June 2003 and March 2006 the program has enrolled 320 young men and graduated 158 (Keating, 2006). Program manager Keith Bennett explains that one aspect of the “Flip the Script” program is that it has the participants improve their math, reading and work skills and in this way prepares them to enter the job market. Beffett said “that more than 90 percent of those who have graduated can now pass one or more skilled construction trade entrance exams, thanks to those improvements (Keating, 2006).” Another aspect to the program is that there are no women involved in the program, thus no peer pressure. This allows the participants to stop hiding issues from themselves and others – they must deal with them (Keating, 2006). One participant, a former convicted drug dealer Michael Parks said, “I think God ordained this program to help young Black men (Keating, 2006).” This program is successful because it teaches a hands-on skill or trade, it supplements this vocational learning with some academics, and it provides an entry into a career. The community is involved, industry is involved, and there is a sponsor that is familiar with the problems of the students, in this case being Goodwill Industries.

The National Center for Research in Vocational Education, along with the University of California conducted a research project titled “Their Chances? Slim and None” which is described as “An Ethnographic Account of the Experiences of Low-Income People of Color in a Vocational Program and at Work (Hull, 1992).” The research followed students in a community college’s Banking and Finance program, looking at the need for basic skills as well as the vocational/job related training. The study also evaluated if the students had the basic skills to be a valuable citizen in a democracy. The vocational program being studied was a short term program that was designed to train students to work in the local banking industry. The program did not include any additional skills, such as reading and literacy even though the college had tried to add them a number of times. The students once enrolled in the program did not receive any counseling or help from the college counselors, including financial aid. The majority of the students enrolled in the program did so “because they heard that at the end of the program you will get a job (Hull, 1992, p20).” The only instructor in the program, a Mr. Parker, represented the banking industry in the instruction, he was able to bring real-world instruction but chose to use outdated equipment that was not applicable to the students once they graduated. The report also noted that Mr. Parker knew that he was sending his students out to “dead-end” jobs and that he was aware that in order to move up in the banking industry the students would have to be “diligent, cooperative, and different (Hull, 1992, p68).” The report also mentioned that these traits are common to many of the vocational instructors drawn from business and industry (Hull, 1992). The students received jobs in the bankings “proofing” room after graduation. The researcher notes that it was clear that the program failed in its goal of getting students jobs because when she visited the bank six months later the majority of the students where no longer working there (Hull, 1992). In this program there was no community involvement, the tools and instruction was outdated, and there where not any additional life-skills taught. This program was not a way out of poverty for the participants, following graduation it was a place to learn failure.

Another program based in Brazil is a cooperative education program managed by MST. By working with the local community the trainers teach the new skills. One example of this is near the Jucara Settlement where the state-level organization has built a cashew factory and thus the main crop became the cashew tree. The trainers worked with the families in the settlement to train them to establish cultivation and processing systems (Miller, 2006). One of MST’s partners, K’inal Antzetik (Land of Women) in Chiapas, Mexico is the founder of a indigenous women’s weaving cooperative. With the help of Grassroots the received funding for several other cooperatives. This has allowed them to build more professional workshops and K’inal provides education and the organization to enable the women to enable women to make local decisions and participate in national level politics (Miller, 2006). Miller concludes that in this training has begun to overcome some of the social inequality that is a part of the Brazilian society. He writes, “the solution to this isolation is unity: individuals working together as coops, coops are a part of national and international movements committed to a development model based on human rights and human dignity (Miller, 2006, pg. 11).” There are no looser in this education. The students (the community) are being trained to be productive and raise their standard of living and economic class. Once the economic class is raised the ecological and structural injustice will diminish. The “haves-nots” slowly become the “haves.”

In Canada among the Aboriginal people there is also a strong return to Indigenous traditions and teachings. In his 2002 article “Teaching Tradition Teaches Us” Fyre Jean Graveline documents the First Nations and Aboriginal Degree Programs are revitalizing traditional healing and teaching strategies. They are making strides at bringing tradition and the Western educational theories together. According to Graveline there are several parts to the educational process of the Aboriginal Degree Program:

• -.The students prior learning and experiences are evaluated to give them credits for between 1 and 11 courses (Graveline, 2002).

• -.Common “pedagogies” for FNAC courses are facilitated by Elders for students and faculty healing. These are the Talking Circle, Sharing Circle, and healing Circles. These are used to discuss and evaluate political and critical governance issues (Graveline, 2002).

• -.For four days and four nights students and families join the elders to participate in ceremonies and cultural teachings (Graveline, 2002).

• -.The courses require two self-care courses (Graveline, 2002).

• -.Community members come to classes as speakers and are a part of community workshops (Graveline, 2002).

• -.The students do close to 1,000 hours of practicum that allow the students to practice skills in community agencies and situations (Graveline, 2002).

• -.Students can formulate their own life stories and healing journey in the self-care courses (Graveline, 2002).

• -.The curriculum is interdisciplinary Meaning some courses are taught on campus by non-Aboriginal instructors. This allows students to be exposed to and learn from the Eurocentric content and pedagogies (Graveline, 2002).

Graveline writes:

The Curriculum is designed to be a creative, innovative and interdisciplinary blend of Traditional Aboriginal teachings and Western counseling theories and skills. Understanding of Traditional philosophies and spiritual practices is [are] taught through classroom discussions with Elders and by participation in cultural ceremonies Personal growth and development as Counsellors is recognized as an ongoing journey throughout the program (Graveline, 2002).

This curriculum is an example of “Exemplary Indigenous education which requires our talk around the Medicine Wheel learning and teaching lessons about balance interconnectedness mental, spiritual, emotional, and physical dimensions. It requires living/working to revitalize Spirit every day in every place (Graveline, 2002).” First Nations then adds the Eurocentric courses to make sure that their students complete a well rounded education that will help the student build a healthier community and work towards social and ecological justice.

Education has been a reoccurring theme through this paper along with structural and economic inequality and diversity. Education is required to move an individual or a population from one class to another. I have outlined different types of vocational (school to work) types of programs. The Banking program teaches a skill for a specific industry, it does not include any type of life-skill training or literacy training and is a failure. The cooperative construction programs has community and employer involvement, the people that will hire the students are making an investment along with the community and these programs are more successful. The Indigenous people use the community involvement along with traditional training and thoughts, they add environmental training, then they mix in some of the Eurocentric educational theories and they train the students to be productive members of their communities as well as their culture. The student comes out of that program being a well rounded person. If we take students and teach the computers or any other technical skill and do not address spiritual or life issues the system is setting them up for failure and is continuing the social and economical injustice and in turn structural inequality continues and the divide between the “haves” and the “have-nots” becomes greater. If life skills and community are added to vocational and technical education the students have the chance to make a difference in society. Once a person is educated and employed with an understanding of ecological, economic, and societal skills they can begin to overcome obstacle that they may have been born into. If the gap between the “haves” and the “have-nots” is narrowed the power wielded by the oppressor over the oppressed diminishes. Once the power is diminished structural inequality over time is diminished.

References

Anonymous. (2007). Diverse = Desirable. Black Collegian, 38 (1), 85.

Archer, J. (2004, September 22). Connecticut Polishes Image of ‘Technical’ Schools. Education Week, 24 (4), p. 26.

Brown Et Al. v. Board of Education of Topeka Et Al., 347 U.S. 483 (Supreme Court of The United States May 17, 1954).

Brown, D. E. (1991). Human Universals. Philadelphia, PA, USA: Temple University Press.

Brown, D. E. (2002). Human Universals. Retrieved June 29, 2008, from Human Universals: http://condor.depaul.edu/~mfiddler/hyphen/humunivers.htm

Campbell, P. B., & Laughlin, S. (1988). Participation In Vocational Education: An Overview of Patterns and Their Outcomes. The National Center for Research in Vocational Education. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University.

Capriccioso, R. (2006, July 14). Dueling Over Diversity. Retrieved July 7, 2008, from Inside Higher Education: http://insidehighered.com/news/2006/07/14/diversity

Diamond, J. B. (2006). Still Separate and Unequal: Examining Race, Opportunity, and School Achievement in “Integrated” Suburbs. The Journal of Negro Education, 75 (3), 495-505.

Dresang, J. (2002, July 22). Program Seeks New Generation in Trades. Knight Rider Tribune Business News , p. 1.

DuBois, W. (1903, September). The Talented Tenth. Retrieved June 28, 2008, from Teaching American History.org: http://www.teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?documentprint=174

Graveline, F. J. (2002). Teaching Tradition Teaches Us. Canadian Journal of Native Education, 26 (1), 11, 19 pgs.

Harris, J., Hughes, J., & Malveaux, J. (2008, February). ‘Diversity’ Defined in Less Than a Third of Workplaces. Business Wire .

Hastings, R. R. (2008, February q). Poll Finds Mistrust Among Racial Groups. HR Magazine, 53 (2), p. 26.

Hill, L. H., & Clover, D. E. (Eds.). (2003). Environmental Adult Education. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 99, 28-29.

Hull, G. (1992). Their Chances? Slim and None. National Center for Research in Vocational Education; University of California Berkley. Washington: U.S. Department of Education.

Keating, P. (2006, March 15). Program Introduces Minorities to Building Trades. Michigan Chronicle, 69 (26), p. A1.

Kominski, R., & Newburger, E. (1999). Access Denied: Changes in Computer Ownership and Use: 1984-1997. United States Census Bureau, Population Division. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Census Bureau.

Kozol, J. (1967). Death At An Early Age – The Destruction of the Hearts and Minds of Negro Children in the Boston Public Schools (First Edition ed.). Boston, MA, USA: Houghton Mifflin and Company.

Lee-St. John, J. (2006, September 6). The Meaning of White. Retrieved July 7, 2008, from TIME: http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1531296,00.html

Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. (2008). diversity. Retrieved June 29, 2008, from Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/diversity

Miller, J. (2006). Bulding Community Building Global Justice. Peacework, 33 (365), 9-11.

Milo Sheff Et Al. v. William A. O’Neill Et Al., 238 Conn. 1; 678 A.2d 1267; 1996 Conn. LEXIS 239 (Supreme Court of Connecticut July 9, 1996).

Moyers, B. (2006, November 1). America 101. Retrieved July 7, 2008, from CommonDreams.org: http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1101-33.htm

Ogbu, J. U., & Davis, A. (2003). Black American Students in an Afflluent Suburb – A Study of Academic Disengagement. Mahwah, New Jersey, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Ragunathan, V. (2006, April 7). War is a Complex, Multi-Symptom Disease. Retrieved July 6, 2008, from Association of Tamils of Sri Lanka in the USA: http://sangam.org/taraki/articles/2006/04-07_War_is_the_Disease.php?uid=1633

Schmidt, P. (2008, June 13). Wish Upon a Star, Make a Difference Who You Are. Retrieved July 8, 2008, from The Chronicle of Higher Education: http://chronicle.com/weekly/v54/i40/40a00401.htm

Schneider, J. A. (2000). Pathways to Opportunity: The role of race, social networks, institutions, and neighborhood in career and educational paths for people on welfare. Human Organization, 59 (1), 72-86.

Sheppard, N. J. (1996). Without access, it’s a road to nowhere. Emerge, 8 (1), 30.

Topa, W. (. (2007, October). From Stereotypes to Reality: Lessons from the CAT-FAWN Connection. Retrieved July 8, 2008, from Fielding Graduate University FELIX: http://www.psfstar.org/star-library/FROM%20STEREOTYPE%20TO%20REALITY%20.pdf/view

United States Census Bereau. (2008, January). SAIPE – School Districts in Connecticut: 2005 Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates. Retrieved June 27, 2008, from United States Census Bureau: http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/saipe/saipe.cgi

United States Census Bereau. (1999, April). Small Area Income & Poverty Estimates for Connecticut School Districts: 1995. Retrieved June 27, 2008, from United States Census Bereau: http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/saipe/saipe.cgi

United States Census Beureau. (2007, February 23). Educational Attainment of the Population 25 Years and Over: 1940 to 2000. Retrieved June 27, 2008, from A Half-Century of Learning: Historical Statistics on Educational Attainment in the United States, 1940 to 2000: http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/education/phct41/CT.pdf

United States Census Bureau. (2005, October). Computer and Internet Use in the United States: 2003. Retrieved June 27, 2008, from Unted States Census Bureau: http://www.census.gov/prod/2005pubs/p23-208.pdf