24fromtextiles.pdf

24 Carolinaplanning

From

Textiles to

Transistors

Education

and

Training

for

a

New

Economy

Kathleen

Heady

KathleenHeadyreceived her Master's of Cityand Regional Planning in

May

1984fromthe

Uni-versity ofNorthCarolina

atChapelHill.Sheis cur-rently employed as an

economic development

specialist withthe

Com-munity Development De-partment of the City of Rockport, Illinois.

Toascertainactivities

which

linkeducation

and

trainingpoliciesto

economic development

strategies, the

Southern

Growth

Policy

Board (SGPB)

contacted key personnelin Virginia,

North

Carolina, South

Caro-lina, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, Kentucky,

Alabama,

Arkansas,

Oklahoma

and

Puerto Rico in

December

1983.

A

structured request

was

mailedtothese individualsinearlyFebruary. Itidentifiedeightgeneral types ofpolicy-program linkages, formal

and

informal,

which

mightexistwithin stategovernment. State

docu-ments which

exemplified those linkageswererequested: executiveorders, interagency

memos

of

understand-ing, projectfunding criteria, pertinent legislation, or relevant state publications. This article is based

on

responses to the structured request

and

is therefore representative rather than exhaustive. It is a

summary

of the

most

common

linkages,

noteworthy

activities,

and

practices.

customizingjob training programs

INTRODUCTION

The

linkbetweeneducation

and economic growth

hasbeen understoodfornearly aslongasthepublic

hasbeen responsibleforschooling.

Economic

goals

foreducationhavedriven federaleducationpolicy since the land grant colleges

were

established in

1862.

Over

theyearsithasgenerally

come

tobe

ac-cepted that the

sum

total ofskills, knowledge,

and

behaviorslearnedinschool increaseanindividual's

productivityintheworkplace

and

thataproductive workforce contributes to

economic

growth.

Thesearenot

new

concepts ineducation, but they

have

become

increasinglyimportant. International

competition

and

technologicaladvanceshave

accel-erated therateofchangeintheU.S.

economy.

The

resultisadeclinein

many

traditionalindustries

and

jobs

and an

emergenceof

new

industries

and

occu-pations.Thisrapidchange has focusedattention

on

theneedforimproving not only education butalso jobtraining tomeet

new

skillrequirements

and

take

advantageof

new

economic

opportunities. Itisnot

surprising thatthe

economic

goals ofeducationare

being discussed even

more

explicitly today than

before

and

that state

and

localeducation, training,

and economic development

agencies are

working

together

and

with the private sector to strengthen

state

and

local economies.

Change must

beginwitheducationattheprimary

and

secondarylevels.

Without

basicskills, students arenot wellpreparedtoenterthe

work

force,to con-tinue their education

and

training at colleges

and

universities, ortoparticipate inother higher

educa-tion

and

training programs.

Change

must

also occur in adult education

and

trainingprograms.Inthe past, attentionhascentered

on

vocational education

and

training, althoughsuch

programs

havenotalways

met

theneedsof

employ-ers or responded to high

growth

rates in specific

occupationalareas.

The

rapidlychangingstructure of the

economy

necessitates

improvements

in exist-ingprogramsaswellasabroadersetoftraining

pro-grams and

policies.

The

South

hasbeenaleaderin thecreation ofcustomizedjobtrainingprogramsfor

new

and

expandingbusinesses;

many

of these

pro-grams

are integral

components

of states'

economic

development

and

industrial recruitmentstrategies.

These emerging needs have beenrecognizedatthe

federal level in the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) enactedin 1982 toreplace

CETA

(Compre-hensive

Employment

and

Training Act).

Although

JTPA

provides funds for

programs

for dislocated workers, itcannotmeetallretraining

and

upgrading

needs.Additional

complementary

statetraining

pro-grams

may

benecessarytoboost

economic

growth

and

development—

e.g.,retrainingor entrepreneurial training

programs

geared to specific educational

needsofcitizens. Finally, states arebeginningto

rec-ognize the important role universities can play in

boosting

economic growth and

development.

TRAINING

State training

and

vocationaleducationprograms have often been explicitly linked to

economic

Structural changesin the

economy

haveheightened

awareness about the need not only for a broader

set of training

programs

to address retraining

and

dislocated

worker

needs, but alsofor

more

relevant

programs

to trainindividualsin occupationalareas

where

demand

exists.

The

JobTraining Partnership

Act has, in certain instances,

become

an integral

component

in the formulationof

new

and

broader

training

programs

and

the

development

of overall state training policies. Public-private partnerships,

in addition to those

found

under

JTPA,

have been

initiated in states with the

hope

of creating

more

relevant training

programs

suitedto employer needs

and

to solicit private sector support for training

programs.

Stateshavebeen

making improvements

notonly

in primary

and

secondary education, but also in

vocationaleducation

and

training.

Many

initiatives

have

come

directly

from

thegovernors'offices.

The

"South Carolina Educational

Improvement

Act of 1984" included thefollowing language: "Thehighest

priority in funding for vocational education

must

be given to job preparatory, occupational

profici-encycourses in areasrelated to: current high

tech-nologytrades, business

and

industries; small busi-nesses

which

foster

and

enhance the

economic

development, stability,

and

diversification of the

state's economy."

Customized

job training

programs were

the

most

frequently reported linkage

between

training

and

economic development bysurvey respondents. These

typesof

programs

exhibitastrong linkage

between

vocational trainingandindustrial recruitmentefforts.

Oftenthefullcost oftraining for

new

and

expand-ingindustriesisborne

by

thestate.

North

Carolina,

South Carolina,

and

Oklahoma

were

among

the

first statesto adopt thismodel, butall ofthe other

SGPB member

stateshave followedsuit.

Although

theadministrativestructure, organization, and train-ing locations vary

among

states, the intent has

usuallybeen the same: tosupportbusiness

recruit-ment and

expansion efforts.

InFlorida, the Industrial Services Training

Pro-gram

(ISTP)

was

developedtoprovidea"quickstart

program"tomeettheneedsofnew,expanding,

and

diversifying industries in the state.

The program

works

closelywith the

Department

ofLabor, Divi-sionof

Employment

Security, toprovidecandidates

for training.

Programs

aretailoredtomeetaplant's

uniqueoperations, complete with instructors,

ma-terials

and

trainingfacilities.Inaddition, the

Depart-ment

of Education'sDivisionofVocationalEducation

works

directlywith the

Department

of

Commerce's

Divisionof

Economic

Development

intheseefforts.

ISTP

offersaunique placementservice throughthe

Cooperative

Agency

Placement

System

(CAPS).

It

prepares acomputerizedprintoutevery90days,or

Nancv Gamer

on

specialrequest,

showing

the

names

and

special-ties of vocational students

who

have completed

training

and

who

are willingto relocateinthestate.

Georgiahas administereda"QuickStart"

Program

through its

Department

of Education to provide

skilledoperatortraining forexpanding

manufactur-ing industries.

The

program

offers a training plan

specifically tailored for a plant, plustraining

facil-ities,equipment, state-paid instructors

and

screening

ofjobapplicants.Training usuallytakesplacein

two

phases: pre-employmentinstruction

and

on-the-job

training. Inadditionto "Quick Start,"Georgiaalso

providescustomized trainingthroughJTPA'sTitles

II-A

and

III.

Several otherstateshave usedtraining asan incen-tive intheirenterprisezonelegislation. InArkansas,

a business participating inanenterprise zone

must

agree that

one

thirdof theemployeeshired are

un-skilled, unemployed, or receiving publicassistance. Prioritiesin the distribution of

JTPA

fundsaregiven

to enterprisezoneprojects. In Virginia, local

incen-tives are available to qualified businessesin enter-prisezones, including

economic

developmentloans,

employment and

job training services,

and

public

improvements.

26 Carolinaplanning

Public-private partnershipshave

become

an

essen-tial

component

intheformulationof relevant training

programs

and

insecuringfundsforsuch programs.

Arkansas

hasdevelopedan "Educators in Industry

Program," amaster'sdegree coursedesignedto famil-iarizeteacherswiththe industries locatedin thestate. In addition, industries in

Arkansas

have donated

over$450,000

worth

of

equipment

thisyearto

voca-tional-technical schools for training purposes.

In

North

Carolina, the State

Board

of

Commu-nity Colleges hasbeen chaired

by

a businessman, withamajorityofits

members

coming from

the

pri-vatesector.

The

statehas

had

an extremely

success-Assembly

for eight schools in 1981-82; fifteen

schools in 1982-84.

In

Oklahoma,

industry has donated

equipment

tovarious vocational programs.

The

State

Board

of

Vocational Education has

mandated

that all

voca-tionaleducationprograms have an industryadvisory

team

servinganactive, integralpart in the

develop-ment

oftrainingprograms.

Oklahoma

hasinitiated

a unique program: theSoutheast

Oklahoma

Rural

Development

Industry Program. Its purpose is to establish small businessesinspecialincubator

facil-itiesconstructed

on

thecampusesof threevocational schools,

and

subsequentlyto

"spawn

them"into the

private sector involvement

ful

equipment

donation

program which

hasresulted in over $6 million

worth

of usable

equipment

for institutionsinthe

community

collegesystem. Schol-arship

programs

have beeninitiatedatthe statelevel

by

Wachovia

Bank

and

Trust

Company,

the

Weyer-hauser

Company, and

CarolinaTelephone

and

Tele-graph

Company.

Many

other

companies

have

contributed to scholarships at the local level.

One

community

college

program

in

North

Caro-lina, the Cooperative Skills Training Centers

pro-gram,isnoteworthy becauseithasactivelyinvolved

theprivatesector. Itspurposeistoallowinstitutions

and

industriestocooperateinassessinglocal

train-ingneeds

and

indevelopinginstructional

programs

uniquely designed to

meet

those needs.

Although

thenature

and

scopeof training

may

vary, the

pro-grams

areresponsiveto theneedsofproduction

and

manufacturingindustries,withspecialemphasis

on

industrialmaintenance,machinist,

and

tool

and

die

making

occupations. Since there are

no

restrictions

on

classsize, the

program

hasbeenparticularly

ben-eficialtoexisting industries

which

needspecificskill

training for a small

group

of employees.

The

pro-gram

began

with specialfunding

from

theGeneral

community.

The

program

isdesigned toencourage

new

business activity, to reduce the rate of small businessfailure, to create

new

businesses through

entrepreneurialeducation

and

technical assistance, to incubate or develop

new

product ideas,

and

to train individuals to run a business.

Another

special project in

Oklahoma

has been

aconsortium

between

the

Department

of

Economic

Development, the

Department

ofVocational

Educa-tion, the state

Chamber

of

Commerce

and

Gover-nor's office. This profitable

and

popular

program

isoperated

by

anelite

20-member

industryadvisory

team.Itspurposeistoincrease theefficacyof

Okla-homa

businesses

and

industries

by

providing

man-agement traininggearedtowardhigherproductivity.

The

program

will not require

any

additionalstate

fundsinthefuturesincefundswill

come

from

indus-try itself.

South

Carolina has taken a comprehensive

ap-proach to job training, education

and economic

development.

A

report issuedin

December

1983 by

the Governor's Implementation TaskForce

on

Eco-nomic Development

(ITFED) called "Job Training,

recognized thatthestatemustrevitalizeitseconomic

development

efforts by addressing several specific

aspectsofjobtraining

and

education.

The

four

ele-mentsofthis

human

resourcespolicyare basicskills,

retraining formarketablejobskills, strategicjobskill upgrading

and

entrepreneurialtraining.

The

report recognizes that thequality ofpubliceducation isa

key

component

of thestate'slong-termeffortto

pro-mote economic development and

to integrateadult

education

programs

with retraining

programs

for

displaced workers. Retraining iscalled forin occu-pational areas with

maximum

potential

economic

growth.

With

careful design

and

execution, these

programscan help

promote

economic growthin busi-nesses

and

industries

which

otherwise might not

locateinSouthCarolina.

One

of themostinteresting

concepts in thereport is"life-time training,"

which

recognizes theneed to trainorretrain the so-called "structurally

unemployed"

individual throughout

his or her lifetime in order to

accommodate

ever-changingjob requirements, a

common

phenomenon

in today's workplace.

The

Governor'stask force

recommended

the

for-mation of a team comprised of staff

from

ITFED, JTPA, Vocational Education, Adult Education

and

the

Employment

Security

Commission

to implement

the

human

resources policy.

The

team currently focuses

on

the life-time trainingconcept, primarily

through

expanded

OJT

and

"vestibule" training. Pilot programsarebeingfundedinthirteen technical

schools

and

52vocational schools.

The

report also suggestedestablishing a Governor's Schoolfor Entre-preneurial

Development

as the focalpointfor efforts

acrossthestate, in alllevelsofeducation, to improve

the quality of entrepreneurial training.

UNIVERSITIES

States have undertakena

number

ofmeasuresto

expand and improvethequalityofeducationintheir colleges

and

universities.

The

goals areto keephigh school students in thestate, to trainneeded

profes-sionals

and

technicalexpertsfor stateindustry,

and

tolinkuniversity research

and

privatesectorneeds.

Not

only

do

universitieshelpprovide

manpower

forstateindustries, but university research

and

edu-cationprogramsservetogenerateeconomic

develop-ment and

providetheresearchsupportoftenneeded by

new

or expanding industries. In an

Alabama

report called"The TaskForce on EconomicRecovery,"

oneof the

major

goals ofthe

Committee on

Indus-trialandTechnological

Development

was

toenhance and improvetheresearch

and

graduateinstitutions ofhigher educationin thestateandtocreatea public

awarenessoftheimportanceoftechnological

prog-ress.

The Committee

suggestedinitiatinga

program

wherebyuniversities

would become

directlyinvolved

in efforts to recruit

new

businesses

and

industries. In Virginia, theTask Force

on

Science

and

Tech-nology

recommended

theestablishmentofa"Center

for Innovative Technology," in

which

the

major

research universities in the state

would

work

in

cooperationwiththe industry.

The

proposalforthe

Center

was

submitted

by

three

major

universitiesin the statewiththerecognitionthat, "in the

Common-wealth,

economic

expansion will depend, in part,

on

theabilityofindustrytoimproveitscompetitive positionthrough theassimilationofhightechnology

devices

and

processes,

and

thecreation of

new

high technology." This, at least, implies aneedforactive

research universities. Formation of the Center

was

approved

by

the1985 GeneralAssembly; itwillbe

located at a site nearDulles International Airport

in northern Virginia.

The

purposeof the Center is

to ".

. .facilitatethe transfer of scientific

knowledge

developed in Virginiauniversities to industries

in-volvedwithadvanced technology products

and

pro-cesses."

Other recommendations

weresuggested

by

the TaskForce

on

Science

and

Technology, such as

establishing

and

enhancing graduate

programs

in

high-techdisciplines, encouragingpart-time continu-ing education of those already employed, encour-agingon-goingparticipation

by

industryemployers

in the program,

and

establishing formal business-industryhighereducationliaisonsatallappropriate

colleges

and

universities.

A

somewhat

differentapproach has been under-taken in Louisiana.

The

purpose of the Louisiana

InnovationCenter, establishedin1983atLouisiana

retrainingprograms for

28 Carolinaplanning

incubationfacilities

StateUniversity, istoevaluate thecommercial

and

technical feasibility of ideas or inventions created

in thestate.

The

primary

objective of theCenteris

topromote, encourage

and

stimulate technological

innovation(throughinventionevaluation

and

incu-bationassistance)and, intheprocess, either

formu-late

and

developsmall innovative firmsor transfer

new

technology to existing firms.

The

Center

was

establishedwith$100,000 instate funds during its

first year.

A

similar incubation facility has been

established at the Georgia Institute of

Technology

inAtlanta.

The

Advanced

Technology

Development

&££?«:;«

3

BS5

mr

*r

#»'**

m

mi

w

Center

(ATDC)

was

createdin1980

by

the

Governor

and

the General

Assembly

to act as a catalyst to attract

and

foster the

growth

of high technology

industry in thestate.

ATDC

offers a

broad

range

of technical

and

managerial services

and

provides information to high technology firms considering

expansion or relocation to Georgia. It supports

technology-based entrepreneurs

and

small

busi-nesses, helps existing high technology

companies

with

new

product development, assists in the

for-mation

ofventurecapital,

and

conducts education programs.

One

of the older,

more

notable links

between

university research

and

private sectorneedsoccurred

in

North

Carolina in the 1950's withthe

establish-ment

of theResearchTrianglePark(RTP).

The

Park is the largest planned research park in the United

States.It issituatedinthe "triangle"

formed by North

CarolinaStateUniversityinRaleigh,

Duke

Univer-sity in

Durham,

and

theUniversity of

North

Caro-lina at

Chapel

Hill.

InTennessee, aneight-mile'TechnologyCorridor"

was

established in 1982 after the

Governor

ap-pointed a Task Force to study the feasibility of

"utilizing scientific

and

othertechnicalresources of theKnoxville-Oak Ridgeareato facilitateexpansion

ofexistingtechnology-oriented industry

and

attract

new

hightechnologybusinessto thestate."

The

cor-ridorstretchesalongthe Pellissippi Parkway,

from

theNational

Lab

in

Oak

RidgetotheUniversity of

Tennessee

campus and

theTennesseeValley

Author-ity headquarters, both in Knoxville.

CONCLUSION

Southern

Growth

Policies

Board

member

states

are

working

on

the linkage

between

education

and

training

programs

and economic development

ac-tivities in a

number

of creative ways.

The

South

often has led the way. Southern states are giving increasinglyexplicitrecognitiontothefactthat im-proved educational

and

training systems will

enhance state

economic

progress.

Southern stateshavefosteredadditional linkages as well. Vocational education

and

economic

development

are being linked through customized

training

programs

and

new

links arebeing forged

between

economic development

and

othertraining

ventures

—

e.g.,

programs

linkingthefederal

JTPA

mandates

to stateprograms,

and programs

linking enterprise zonesto training

and development

acti-vities. Statesare alsoconsidering trainingactivities

which

will deal with life-time training

programs

using

JTPA

Title III funds,

programs under

JTPA

TitleII-Atohelpintegratetrainingfor the disadvan-tagedwithindustrialrecruitment goals

and

innova-tive entrepreneurial training

programs

typified

by

theSoutheast

Oklahoma

Rural

Development

Indus-try Program.

Over

the last several years, states have

become

increasingly

aware

of thecontributions

which

state

universitysystems can provideto

economic growth

and

development.

Not

only

do

universitiesprovide

professional

and

technicallabor forceparticipants,

theycanhelpindustry

meet

itsresearch

and

devel-opment

needs.

A

number

of

SGPB

stateshave initi-ated research parks, as well as innovation

and

development

centers, tofosterindustry

and

univer-sity linkages.

A

quality universitysystem canalso helpthe state retainitsvaluablepoolofhighschool graduates.

Naturally,

economic

reasons are not the only reasons states have been

making improvements

in theireducation

and

trainingsystems, althoughthey certainly undergird the efforts. Federal legislation

hasmotivatedtheestablishment of

complementary

goals

and

objectives

and

ithasfaciliated

communi-cationbetween

human

resource

and

economic

devel-opment

agencies

and

the private sector.

Many

of

theinvolvedagencies

now

sittogether

on

advisory

councils.

A

number

of stateshave

gone

a step

far-ther forming their

own

special councils or

inter-agency advisory committees.

Communication,

cooperation

and

streamlinedefforts have resulted.

Severalstates,

most

notablyMississippi

and

South

Carolina,have takenacomprehensive lookat their