Over the last few years, Ohio leaders have focused on improving education-to-workforce pathways through a variety of initiatives and funding. Thus far, there’s been plenty of commendable progress. But significant challenges remain.
For ideas on how to overcome these challenges, state leaders should consider the State Opportunity Index that was recently released by the Strada Education Foundation, a national organization that works to strengthen the link between post-secondary education and opportunity. The index was designed to provide states with a quantifiable set of indicators they can use to assess how well they’re leveraging post-high school education—not just degrees, but certificates and other credentials, too. It establishes a baseline for states in five priority areas: clear outcomes, quality coaching, affordability, work-based learning, and employer alignment. States’ progress within each of these areas is categorized as leading, advanced, developing, or foundational.
How did Ohio fare on the index’s ratings? Not well. The state earned its highest rating—advanced—in the clear outcomes category. The work-based learning and employer alignment categories were rated as developing. Meanwhile, the quality coaching and affordability measures ranked the worst, with bottom-of-the barrel ratings of foundational.
To be clear, most of the data used by the index focus on college graduates. But there are useful insights for Ohio’s K–12 sector. In fact, there are some especially useful data points in the clear outcomes area, where Strada identified ten key education-to-employment data system elements, evaluated states’ progress on each element based on survey responses and an extensive review of publicly available information, and then assigned states a rating for each element, as well as an overall rating. In terms of individual ratings for each element, Ohio did particularly well—earning the highest available score of leading—in three areas: partnerships for outcomes data outside the state, interactive resources, and researcher access. But the state also earned low- or bottom-level ratings on three other elements. Here’s a look at each, and what Ohio can do to improve.
1. Integrating high school completion and employment data
This element evaluates how well states integrate and deliver information on learners’ earnings and employment after high school completion, as well as over time. The majority of states (twenty-nine) fell into the bottom two rating categories. Ohio was one of six to earn a rating of developing, indicating that the state is currently in the process of implementing information integration efforts related to earnings and employment after high school. The index notes that these implementation efforts are being done through the Coleridge Initiative, a nonprofit that works with government entities to ensure that data are used effectively in public decision-making. The Ohio Department of Higher Education and the Ohio Education Research Center are working together to expand the Multi-State Post-secondary Dashboard (which is powered by the Kentucky Center for Statistics) to track high school and non-degree employment outcomes in Ohio.
Although Ohio earned a developing rating in this area, Ohioans have cause for optimism. State leaders and agencies are already working on tracking these data. Going forward, leaders should focus on accomplishing two goals. First, these outcomes data should be published and easily accessible to the public, as well as disaggregated by demographics to ensure transparency. Second, state and local leaders should consistently use these data to drive policy decisions.
2. Open data files
This element determines whether states provide comprehensive and timely open data files containing “anonymized education-to-opportunity statistics” that anyone can access, download, and use. The index notes that these offerings should include downloadable databases, clear explanations of the resources, and data dictionaries. Public databases that contain only aggregate information—meaning individual learners can’t be identified from the data—would allow researchers, policy organizations, and members of the public to easily access information for analysis and reporting.
Twenty-one states earned a foundational rating on this element, either because their open data files contain only enrollment and completion metrics and no employment outcomes, or because they have no open data that Strada could identify. Ohio was one of the twenty-one, with the index noting that “no evidence was identified.” To improve, Ohio should look to the seven states that earned the index’s top rating. Colorado, for example, offers customizable open data files that contain a variety of disaggregated education-to-opportunity statistics. Kentucky, meanwhile, offers open data files containing disaggregated education-to-employment outcomes by program for public four-year universities, community colleges, non-degree credentials, and high school. It also provides files on apprenticeships, adult education, and career and technical education.
3. Dedicated insights capacity
This element evaluates whether states have designated a unit with responsibility and dedicated full-time capacity for generating education-to-employment insights. To earn the top rating, states must have a unit that meets four criteria:
- It is a centralized, authoritative source designated by the state for education-to-employment insights;
- It has publicly available resources, reports, or tools available for stakeholders;
- It has dedicated staff; and
- There is evidence of partnerships with higher education, workforce development, and economic development.
Only seven states—Arkansas, Colorado, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, Nebraska, and Virginia—met all four of these criteria. The index found that Ohio, which was assigned the lowest rating of foundational, had “no evidence” of demonstrating this element.
Going forward, Ohio leaders should consider what’s been established in the seven top-rated states. For example, the Virginia Office Of Education Economics is a politically independent office that works with a wide variety of state agencies and partners to “collaboratively offer resources and expertise related to education and labor market alignment.” Mississippi, on the other hand, has the National Strategic Planning & Analysis Research Center at Mississippi State University, which provides high-quality research and analysis in addition to maintaining the statewide longitudinal data system.
***
When it comes to education-to-career pathways, Ohio leaders would be wise to remember the adage that Rome wasn’t built in a day. The Buckeye State has made considerable progress over the last few years. But there’s still plenty of work to be done. Some areas, like integrating high school completion and employment data, only need to be shepherded across the finish line. Others—like providing open data files and designated insights capacity—will require considerably more effort and investment. If state and local leaders are committed to continuing Ohio’s growth, Strada’s State Opportunity Index is worth a close look.
