Vocational Education Act of 1963  (VEA)
1) Gordon_-_Legislative_history_and_the_changing_workspace_PDF
 

• WHAT: "The law also stipulated that funds be used for persons who have academic, socioeconomic, or other handicaps that prevent them from succeeding in a regular vocational education program. This legislation did not stipulate funds for the various vocational education services; instead it stipulated them for particular types and ages of persons. Ninety percent of the authorized funds were to be allotted to the states on the basis of formulas. According to Calhoun and Finch (1982), the formula that was used required that 50 percent of the allotted funds be used forthe 15 to 19 age group, 20 percent for the 20 to 25 age group, 15 percent for the 25 to 65 age group, and 5 percent for all groups regardless of age" (Gordon).

• WHY: "The purposes of the act were varied. However, its major goals were to maintain, extend, and improve existing programs of vocational education and to provide part-time employment for youth who needed the earnings to continue their schooling on a full-time basis. The intent of the act was to ensure that persons of all ages in all communities would have ready access to vocational training or retraining of high quality, suited to their personal needs, interests, and abilities.... A reaction to too much emphasis on service and unemployment" (Gordon).

• IMPACT: "The year 1963 was the most significant in the legislative history of vocational education since passage of the 1917 Smith-Hughes Act. As a result of a 1963 study ('Education for a Changing World of Work'), the Perkins-Morse Bill, better known as the Vocational Education Act of 1963, was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson, marking a new era for vocational education" (Gordon).
   

Economic Opportunity Act
 

• WHAT:

• WHY: 

• IMPACT:
   

Amendments to VEA (1968)
1) Gordon_-_Legislative_history_and_the_changing_workspace_PDF
 

• WHAT: "These amendments replaced all previous federal legislation for vocational education except the Smith-Hughes Act, which was retained for sentimental reasons as the first legislation passed by the federal government for secondary vocational education....
  • Ancillary services (preparation of state plans, administration, evaluation of programs, teacher education, etc.)
  • Training in private schools under contract with public schools....
  Under the amendments, federal funds could be used for:
  • High school and post secondary students.
  • Those who have completed or left high school
  • Those in the labor market in need of retraining.
  • Those who have academic, socioeconomic, or other obstacles
  • Those who are mentally retarded, deaf, or otherwise disabled.
  • Construction of area vocational school facilities.
  • Vocational guidance for all persons mentioned" (Gordon).

• WHY: "As a result of an NACVE study, the Vocational Education Act of 1963 was amended" (Gordon).

• IMPACT: "The purpose of the 1968 amendments was to provide access for all citizens to appropriate training and retraining, which was similar to the purpose of the Vocational Education Act of 1963. The major differences were that the 1968 amendments emphasized vocational education in post secondary schools and broadened the definition of vocational education to bring it closer to general education. The Vocational Education Act of 1963 authorized the appropriation of millions of dollars for vocational education in an attempt to find solutions to the nation's social and economic problems in a time of social and political violence and unrest" (Gordon).
   

Comprehensive Employment and Training Act
1) Gordon_-_Legislative_history_and_the_changing_workspace_PDF
 

• WHAT: "After a decade, the Manpower Development Training Act was replaced by the Comprehensive Employment Training Act (CETA).... In general, the special provisions of the Comprehensive Employment Training Act included:
  1. Consolidation of previous labor and public service programs;
  2. Authorization of funds for employment counseling, supportive services, classroom training, training on the job, work experience, and public service employment; and
  3. Incorporation of essential principles of revenue sharing, giving state and local governments more control over use of funds and determination of programs" (Gordon).

• WHY: "The principal effect of this new act was to transfer decision making from Washington to local and state governments (Evans and Herr, 1978)" (Gordon).

• IMPACT: "One of the unique features of CETA was its funding pattern. The act established the delivery concept of a prime sponsor. The occupational education, training, and other employment services programs were conducted in conjunction with local units of government known as CETA prime sponsors. Prime sponsors provided a variety of employment and training services by contracting with approved public and private agencies" (Gordon).
   

Amendments to VEA (1976)
1) Gordon_-_Legislative_history_and_the_changing_workspace_PDF
 

• WHAT: "The Vocational Education Amendments of 1976 extended and increased funding of the Vocational Education Act of 1963 and the VocationalEducation Amendments of 1968. The major thrusts of the Vocational Education Amendments of 1976 were to:
  1. Extend, improve, and, where necessary, maintain existing programsof vocational education;
  2. Develop new vocational education programs; and
  3. Provide part-time employment for youths who need the earnings to continue their training on a full-time basis" (Gordon).

• WHY: "Congress added several new clauses to its declaration of purpose in the 1976 vocational amendments. One new purpose for the authorization of funds was to ensure that states improved their planning by involving a wide range of interested agencies and making use of all available resources for vocational education. With the advent of the women's liberation movement, another purpose was to assist states in overcoming sex discrimination and sex stereotyping in vocational education programs" (Gordon).

• IMPACT: (social and/or political implications)
   

Job Training Partnership Act of 1982
1) Gordon_-_Legislative_history_and_the_changing_workspace_PDF
 

• WHAT: "The statute enlarged the role of state governments and private industryin federal job training programs, imposed performance standards, limited support services, and created a new program of retraining displaced workers (Mason, Furtado, and Husted, 1989)" (Gordon).

• WHY: "The Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) replaced CETA, which expired on September 30,1982. JTPA was intended to establish programs to prepare youth and unskilled adults for entry into the labor force and to afford job training to economically disadvantaged individuals facing critical barriers to employment" (Gordon).

• IMPACT: (social and/or political implications)