Tom Ridge claims credit for killing OBE. Is OBE really dead? Let's examine the issue.

In July of 1993, Pennsylvania's appointed State Board of Education adopted the 53 outcomes that tied every school in the Commonwealth to outcome-based education. The Board's action was met with a storm of controversy that intensified as school districts were forced into strategic planning processes to restructure their classrooms.

The outcomes were finally approved despite the fact that Pennsylvania's House of Representative had voted against outcome-based education by margins of over 3 to 1. One newspaper quoted members of the State Board admitting that they had the authority to ignore the state legislature, so they did. Other comments by education officials spoke about their "poor marketing" of the restructuring.

In 1994, Pennsylvania applied to the U.S. Departments of Education and Labor for a School-to-Work Implementation Grant. The state was turned down, and instead awarded a second development grant in the amount of $470,000. The federal government identified three areas of concern in denying the grant.

On June 15, 1995, Pennsylvania submitted its new five-year plan, a "Proposal for a Contract to Implement a Statewide School-to-Work System in Pennsylvania" for federal approval. The plan covered the period from 9/1/95 to 8/31/00, and requested $27,996,640.

The proposal began by addressing the three reasons that Pennsylvania had been turned down in 1994, as follows:

"First, there was a concern about a statewide system versus local systems. Our belief is that there must be a statewide system which promotes industry-driven, community-based programs and systems ... To this end, we have developed a structure of School-to-Work Action and Training (SWAT) teams .. .A second concern was the role of the industrial resource centers ... The primary focus of the IRCs will be twofold; (1) to organize employers and employer associations relative to the total school-to-work effort (2) to develop and promote state technical skills standards and portable credentials ... Finally, a long-term strategy is evidenced by the integration of school-to-work components/activities in the required strategic plans of all school districts and AVTS. This commitment demonstrates a long-term strategy which we believe exceeds a strategy of state legislation and unfunded mandates."

The proposal was accepted, and became the contract.

The contract specifically details how a STW system will be fully implemented in Pennsylvania without any enabling state legislation. The education bureaucrats had learned how to bypass the legislature.

It begins by identifying the basic principles upon which Pennsylvania's STW system will be built.

1. The system must be driven by industry standards. "Programs must be based on occupations and career fields where there is a reasonable expectation for future employment."
2. It must be performance-based. Academic and occupational standards must be established for all students, which at least match national standards.
3. It must be fully integrated into the public education system through the strategic planning process, and understood as a component not only of education, but of workforce and economic development.
4. It is for all students.
5. All STW experiences will be designed by employers.
6. Work based learning must be provided, although in varying formats.
7. Postsecondary institutions must be included.

The document outlines specific goals, such as providing organizations with a predictable supply of trained workers; objectives, including enabling employers to assess students prior to employment; establishes a governance structure that stretches from the state to the local level; sets out the guidelines for student programs, which shall be determined by the labor market needs of industry; and creates the menu of program/delivery strategies to insure that career guidance begins in kindergarten, and makes employers equal partners with the schools at all levels.

The state interagency STW team will work with the local action teams to overcome anticipated implementation barriers at the local level. Evaluation will include development of quality assessment indicators for the state outcomes, and the collection of individual student data in the Management Information Systems.

Local implementation of STW is driven by the strategic planning process:

"Each public school district ..., in PA is required to develop a strategic plan to describe in detail how it will ensure that all students in its attendance areas are to be given opportunities to achieve the state-established student learning outcomes, the manner in which outcomes are to be assessed, and how professional development ..., will be provided to teachers ... to implement the student outcomes and revise curricula.., the Department of Education has put into place guidelines emphasizing the need to integrate comprehensive school-to-work programs .. into their school district's strategic plan ... In short, since the strategic planning process is mandatory, we intend to take maximum advantage of the opportunity to drive school-to-work transition efforts into the education program of every public school district in this Commonwealth.

Pennsylvania continues:

"we must move quickly to develop content and performance standards for both academic and occupation skills,... And we must do these things in a way which ensure(s) broad participation and consensus of local school officials, parents, business, labor, and community leaders, and state and local elected and appointed officials ... First, we must establish specific statewide standards to accompany the student learning outcomes. These will include both content and performance standards ... we know that (this) will be a significant challenge. However, based on our success in passing the student learning outcomes and informed by that experience, we believe that we are well prepared to begin a process of statewide standards-setting."

In August 1996, Pennsylvania submitted its first annual progress report to the federal government. The agenda had not changed. That process was repeated in August 1997.

In June 1997, the Governor's Advisory Commission on Academic Standards unveiled its draft of The Proposed Academic Standards for Mathematics and Reading and Writing. They are being promoted as the alternative to the learning outcomes.