Nancy Lynne Cox, B.E.D., M.Ed. - UNT Digital Library

Theoretical FrameworkThis section outlines the theoretical framework for the study. A brief overview isprovided for Super’s occupational development self-concept theory and for theMarsh/Shavelson model of self-concept.Super’s Occupational Development Self-Concept TheoryDonald Super believed that “the process of vocational development is essentiallythat of developing and implementing a self concept” (Super, 1953, p. 189). Super(1963a) referred to the 1950s work of Sarbin in his utilization of the term self-concept asan “individual’s picture of himself, the perceived self with accrued meanings . . . apicture of the self in some role, some situation, in a position, performing some set offunctions, or in some web of relationships” (p. 18). One component of Super’s (1953)theory is the primary focus of this project:Vocational preferences and competencies, the situations in which people live andwork, and hence their self concepts, change with time and experience (althoughself concepts are generally fairly stable from late adolescence until late maturity),making choice and adjustment a continuous process (p. 189).The dynamic nature of Super’s occupational choice and self-conceptdevelopment theory may serve to increase an understanding of the development of selfconcept related to occupational choice. There has been some expressed concern dueto a lack of substantive research supporting Super’s theory (Salomone, 1996).Investigating the entire developmental scaffold of the theory is beyond the scope of thisresearch. This study focuses on the adolescent stage of development, investigating in4

particular the relationship between characteristics of CTE students and various facets oftheir self-concepts.Marsh/Shavelson Model of Self-ConceptThe current, generally accepted self-concept model, referred to as theMarsh/Shavelson model of self-concept, is rooted in the work of Shavelson et al. (1976).Shavelson et al. defined self-concept as an individual’s self-perceptions formed throughexperience with and interpretation of one’s environment as influenced by theassessments of significant others, reinforcement, and personal ascriptions for one’sown behavior (Marsh, 2005). The Shavelson et al. model includes an overall measure ofself-concept (general self-concept), two higher order factors (academic self-concept andnon-academic self-concept), and a number of domain-specific self-concept subscales.In the early 1990s, as a result of experiencing difficulties with the existing selfconcept measurement instruments in differentiating among the broad self-conceptdomains, Marsh developed the Self-Description Questionnaire (SDQ) instruments tosupport self-concept research (Marsh, 2005). Research based on the SDQ family ofinstruments (Marsh, n. d., 1989; Marsh & Shavelson, 1985; Marsh, Byrne, & Shavelson,1988) led to the Marsh/Shavelson revision of the Shavelson et al. (1976) model. ThisMarsh/Shavelson revision called for the separation of the academic higher order factorinto two higher order academic factors – math/academic and verbal/academic.Additional research by Marsh et al. (1988) has led to support for another revisionof the model, creating an even more complex self-concept structure that includes awider variety of specific academic self-concept domains. In addition to measuring thegenerally agreed upon subscales (physical appearance, peer relations, parent relations,5

and honesty self-concepts), the revised Marsh/Shavelson model also measures selfconcept related to physical abilities, emotional stability, spiritual values/religion, problemsolving, and a wide range of academic areas (Bracken & Mills, 1994; Marsh, 2005).Purpose of the StudyThe purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between thecharacteristics of students enrolled in arts, audio/video technology and communications(AAVTC) cluster CTE programs and students’ self-concept scores as measured byspecific subscales from the Self-Description Questionnaire (Marsh, n.d., 1989). Using a6-point Likert scale with values ranging from false (not like me at all) to true (very muchlike me), students responded to a variety of questions relating to how they think and feelabout themselves in terms of school-related subjects.Research QuestionIn selected secondary CTE AAVTC cluster programs in Texas, the study soughtto answer the following research question:What is the relationship between CTE student characteristics and self-concept?Limitations1. This study considered only responses from students currently enrolled in five ofthe public secondary (Grades 9-12) courses in the AAVTC career cluster.2. This study did not consider the self-concept of teachers assigned to teach in theclassrooms identified for participation in the study.3. This study was limited because of the lack of attention to the nestedness of thedata in selecting a research methodology. Canonical correlation analysis (CCA)6

methods, while honoring the complexities of the constructs, did not meet theassumption of independence of observations.Delimitations1. This research examined students’ self-reported self-concept scores while in highschool as measured by subscales of the SDQII and the SDQIII.2. This study examined students’ perceived self-concept. The study did notincorporate perceptions or reports from teachers, counselors, administrators, parents,peers, or others regarding individual students’ self-concept.3. This study focused on high school students enrolled in public CTE AAVTCcluster programs of study in a North Central Texas region in the United States. Basedon the available student enrollment data, programs investigated in this study included(a) advertising design/visual arts and design; (b) animation; (c) commercialphotography, (d) graphic arts/printing and imaging technology; and (e) mediatechnology.4. This study assumed that students enrolled in the CTE programs involved in thestudy participated in the CTE programs by their own choice.5. Data collected using the SDQ II instrument were made available in electronicform to the SELF Research Centre as part of the Conditions of Use.Definition of Terms Arts, audio/video technology and communications cluster (AAVTC): The AAVTCcluster focuses on designing, producing, exhibiting, performing, writing, andpublishing multimedia content including visual and performing arts and design,7

journalism, and entertainment services (States’ Career Clusters Initiative [SCCI],2008). Career and technical education (CTE): These are organized educationalactivities that—(A) offer a sequence of courses that—(i) provides individuals with coherent and rigorous content aligned withchallenging academic standards and relevant technical knowledge andskills needed to prepare for further education and careers in current oremerging professions;(ii) provides technical skill proficiency, an industry-recognized credential, acertificate, or an associate degree; and(iii) may include prerequisite courses (other than a remedial course) thatmeet the requirements of this subparagraph; and(B) include competency-based applied learning that contributes to the academicknowledge, higher-order reasoning and problem-solving skills, work attitudes,general employability skills, technical skills, and occupation-specific skills, andknowledge of all aspects of an industry, including entrepreneurship, of anindividual. (Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Improvement Act of2006 [Perkins IV], 2006, p. 3) Coherent sequence of courses: A coherent sequence of courses is defined bythe Texas Education Agency as two or more CTE courses for three or morecredits (Texas Education Agency [TEA], 2007b).8

Community types: Districts are classified on a scale ranging from urban to rural.Community types are as follows:Major urban – The largest school districts in the state that serve the sixmetropolitan areas of Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Fort Worth, Austin, and ElPaso. Major urban districts are the districts with the greatest membership incounties with populations of 725,000 or more, and more than 35% of thestudents are identified as economically disadvantaged. In some cases, other sizethreshold criteria may apply.Major suburban – Other school districts in and around the major urbanareas. Generally speaking, major suburban districts are contiguous to majorurban districts. If the suburban district is not contiguous, it must have a studentpopulation that is at least 15% of the size of the district designated as majorurban. In some cases, other size threshold criteria may apply.Other central city – The major school districts in other large, but not major,Texas cities. Other central city districts are the largest districts in counties withpopulations between 100,000 and 724,999 and are not contiguous to any majorurban districts. In some cases, other size threshold criteria may apply.Other central city suburban – Other school districts in and around theother large, but not major, Texas cities. Generally speaking, other central citysuburban districts are contiguous to other central city districts. If the suburbandistrict is not contiguous, it must have a student population that is at least 15% ofthe largest district enrollment in the county. Its enrollment is greater than 3% of9

the contiguous other central city district. In some cases, other size thresholdcriteria may apply.Independent town – The largest school districts in counties withpopulations of 25,000 to 100,000. In some cases, other size threshold criteriamay apply.Non-metro: Fast growing – School districts that are not in any of the abovecategories and that exhibit a five-year growth rate of at least 20%. These districtsmust have at least 300 students in membership.Non-metro: Stable – School districts that are not in any of the abovecategories, yet have a number of students in membership that exceeds the statemedian.Rural – School districts that do not meet the criteria for placement into anyof the above categories. These districts either have a growth rate less than 20%and the number of students in membership is between 300 and the state median,or the number of students in membership is less than 300. (TEA, 2009c) Economically disadvantaged students are those who are reported as eligible forfree or reduced-price meals under the National School Lunch Program and ChildNutrition Program or other public assistance. Students reported with any one ofthese status codes may or may not be enrolled in a special program such ascompensatory or special education (TEA, 2008). Educational Service Center (ESC): Established by the Texas State Legislatureand State Board of Education in 1967, ESCs provide state leadership for special10

education-related functions and services for school districts within definedgeographical areas. There are 20 ESC regions in Texas (TEA, 2009d). Perkins IV: Perkins IV refers to the Carl D. Perkins Career and TechnicalEducation Improvement Act of 2006, signed into law by President George W.Bush on August 12, 2006. Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS): The PEIMSencompasses all data requested and received by TEA about public education,including student demographic and academic performance, personnel, financial,and organizational information. Special education data are reported by localeducation agencies (school districts and charter schools) to the TEA throughoutthe school year (TEA, 2007). Self-concept: a person’s self-perceptions formed through experience with andinterpretation of one’s environment as influenced by the assessments ofsignificant others, reinforcement, and personal ascriptions for one’s own behavior(Marsh, 2005). State Board of Education (SBOE): The Texas State Board of Educationestablishes policy and provides leadership for the Texas public school system.The board works with the commissioner of education and the Texas EducationAgency to facilitate the operation of Texas’ public school system consisting of1,227 school districts and charter schools, approximately 7,900 campuses, morethan 590,000 employees, and more than 4.5 million students (TEA, 2009e). Texas Education Agency (TEA): The Texas Education Agency is theadministrative unit for primary and secondary public education. The mission of11

the Texas Education Agency is to provide leadership, guidance, and resources tohelp schools meet the educational needs of all students (TEA, 2008).SummaryThis chapter provides background on self-concept as a theoretical construct andidentifies a need to examine student self-concept with regard to CTE studentcharacteristics. The chapter also outlines a theoretical framework and purpose for theproposed study. Lastly, the chapter defines the research questions, hypotheses, andassumptions that serve as the foundation of the study. Chapter 2 reviews existingliterature related to the study.12

CHAPTER 2LITERATURE REVIEWChapter 2 reviews the literature relevant to the present study. This chapter isstructured into three topics of interest. The first topic focuses on career and technicaleducation (CTE). The second topic addresses Super’s occupational development selfconcept theory and current research testing various components of the theory. Thethird topic examines the Marsh/Shavelson model of self-concept and current selfconcept research conducted with the Self-Description Questionnaire (SDQ).Career and Technical EducationPrior to the passage of the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical EducationImprovement Act of 2006 (Perkins IV), the most current piece of federal CTE legislation,CTE had been referred to in legislation using the terms vocational education, appliedtechnology, and work. The term occupational education has also been applied todescribe the educational activities currently associated with CTE. “The history of workeducation (vocational education) is very, very old, perhaps beginning with the use ofstone tools in the Paleolithic period (old stone age) about 2,500,000 years ago” (Scottand Sarkees-Wircenski, 1996, p.49). CTE has evolved over time from instructionregarding the use of stone tools to include such areas as audio and video technology,architectural and interior design, forensic science, and engineering and robotics.CTE programs have been federally funded since the passage of the SmithHughes Act of 1917. Significant pieces of legislation have been enacted since theSmith-Hughes Act: the Vocational Education Act of 1963 (amended in 1968 and 1976);the Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Act of 1984; the Carl D. Perkins Vocational13

and Applied Technology Act of 1990 (Perkins II); the National School-to-WorkOpportunities Act of 1994; the Goals 2000: Educate America Act of 1994; and the CarlD. Perkins Act of 1998 (Perkins III). Scott and Sarkees-Wircenski (1996) provided athorough discussion of the evolution of CTE, and Threeton (2007) provided a briefsketch of legislative history related to CTE. A review of the history of CTE shows thatfederal legislation has largely impacted the development and focus of CTE programssince 1917 (Threeton, 2007).Perkins IV defines CTE as organized education that provides students with acoherent sequence of courses focusing on competency-based applied learning. CTEcurriculum, by definition, must include “academic knowledge, higher-order reasoningand problem-solving skills, work attitudes, general employability skills, technical skills,and occupation-specific skills, and knowledge of all aspects of an industry, includingentrepreneurship, of an individual” (Perkins IV, p.4) Many CTE teachers would likelyagree that these requirements, although new to the federal definition of CTE, have beenpart of the curriculum in CTE programs for years.Career ClustersWhat began in 1996 as a joint effort between the National Skills Standards Board(NSSB), the National School-to-Work Office (NSTWO), and the Office of Vocational andAdult Education (OVAE) to create curricular frameworks in broad career areas related tomanufacturing and health services eventually became a project supported entirely bythe Department of Education (DOE) in 1997. Over the course of 2 years and a numberof successful states’ grants, the DOE was able to develop standards and pathways forthree career clusters: information technology, transportation/distribution and logistics,14

and arts/audio video technology. In 1999 OVAE identified 16 broad categories ofoccupations, commonly referred to as the 16 career clusters (States’ Career ClustersInitiative [SCCI], 2008):1. Agriculture and natural resources2. Architecture and construction3. Arts, audio/video technology and communications4. Business management and administration5. Education and training6. Finance7. Government and public administration8. Health services9. Hospitalit

participating in CTE programs. In Texas public high schools (Grades 9-12), students spend approximately 8 hours a day in a classroom environment. Texas students may spend up to 2 hours each day, roughly one fourth of the school day, in one CTE class. In some districts students have the same CTE teacher all 4 years of high school as they work to