Introduction

Family and consumer sciences, formerly known as home economics, is a discipline of study that has been a part of American society for over 100 years. The main charge of this interdisciplinary profession is to improve the quality of life of individuals, families, consumers, and communities. Most commonly noted as enhancing the lives and well-being of the everyday individual, professionals with a background in family and consumer sciences are able to serve in a variety of professions within the business, educational, and governmental sectors. The uniqueness of this profession is that as changes occur in society, so does the emphasis on issues that need to be addressed (Kato & Elias, 2015). With the many contributions that this field has made, how exactly did this discipline come into being? Who were the pioneers that had the vision that such a discipline was a missing part of American culture? This chapter will review the beginnings of the home economics discipline and events leading to what we now know as family and consumer sciences.

Key Terms to Know

Agricultural Experiment Stations
American Home Economics Association

Career and Technical Education (CTE)
Career Clusters
Career Pathway
Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Improvement Act of 2006
Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Acts
Catherine Beecher
Ellen Swallow Richards
Hatch Act of 1887
Lake Placid Conferences
Morrill Act of 1862
Program of Study
Second Morrill Act of 1890
Smith-Hughes Act of 1917
Smith-Lever Act of 1914
Vocational Education Act of 1963
Wilbur O Atwater

THE ORIGINATION OF FAMILY AND CONSUMER SCIENCES

A Treatise on Domestic Economy

When delving into the history of family and consumer sciences, one must revert to its former professional name of home economics. Many researchers within the field credit the beginning of home economics with Catherine Beecher’s book entitled A Treatise on Domestic Economy, for the use of Young Ladies at Home, and at School. This was considered the first textbook for home economics in that it fully explained the inner workings of the household in the early 1800s (Weigley, 1974). When reviewing the content of this book, it is easy to see why it was considered the first textbook for the profession. The 371 page book consisted of 37 chapters which discussed a variety of topics such as the responsibilities and challenges that faced American women; why Domestic Economy should be considered a separate discipline; proper health as it related to food selection and preservation, hygiene, overall cleanliness, childcare, and mental awareness; understanding the roles of various family members and developing a system that worked; properly managing time and resources; the construction, maintenance, and upkeep of housing and the proper materials that should be used; and everyday household matters such as cleaning, cooking, gardening, and clothing construction (Beecher, 1848).

Beecher was truly ahead of her time in that she believed that all females should be properly educated as it related to matters of the home (National Women’s History Museum, 2013). This feeling of educating women stemmed from the fact that Beecher believed that mothers and teachers were responsible for the education and moral being of society as a whole (National Women’s History Museum, 2013). If the home could function in the appropriate manner, then this could help to produce productive citizens who would make valuable contributions to society. This feat could only be accomplished by providing a proper education to women whose sole responsibility at that time was to run the household. As a result, the book emphasized how the everyday functions of the home were an integral part of American society. Although Beecher’s idea of properly educating women through formal education would not be seen during her lifetime, it would take another pioneer to lay the foundation in allowing women to have access to a proper education.

Ellen Swallow Richards

The profession of home economics would not be fully realized until almost 61 years after the publishing of A Treatise on Domestic Economy. A woman by the name of Ellen Swallow Richards had an extreme passion for scientific studies, a strong belief that the home was the most important source for social change, and a desire to further women’s position in education and obtainment of various careers (Stage & Vincenti, 1997). She would challenge the status quo of how society thought women should be educated, break barriers among an elite post-secondary institution, and develop a profession that would give women the opportunity to make significant contributions to American society through education, research, and teaching.

Richards was raised during the mid-1800s in which the sole role of a woman was that of wife and mother. Although she was an only child, her parents deemed that it was necessary to teach her the importance of receiving an education regardless of her gender (Kato & Elias 2015). An avid learner, Richards went against the grain of what was considered “appropriate” during her time. Many individuals during this time period did not see the importance or relevance of educating women. Despite this fact, Richards attended Vassar College in 1868 where she would take a keen interest in astronomy and chemistry (Miles, 2011; Kato & Elias, 2015). When she completed her studies at Vassar, she was encouraged to continue her education at the graduate level at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) (Miles, 2011; Kato & Elias, 2015). Gaining admittance to MIT would be one of many challenges that Richards would overcome as the solely male administration was very reluctant to allow her entry. However, her application was accepted, but she was classified as a “special student” (Miles, 2011). The justification given for admitting her as a “special student” was that in the event that any of the faculty members or students complained of her being in the classroom, they could simply state that she was just observing and that her studies would not really count. Miles (2011) indicated that Richards did not fully comprehend the true meaning of her acceptance and had she been aware of the stipulation, she would not have accepted their offer. Richards would eventually graduate at the top of her class, but despite earning advanced degrees in Chemistry she was never recognized or given her degree because of her gender (Kato & Elias, 2015). Although this was a grave injustice, Richards would take the knowledge she had learned in order to later organize the home economics profession.

Richards studies allowed her to see that chemistry could be used as a practical application in enhancing the quality of life as it related to improving air, food, and water quality. During this time period, sanitation practices were not ideal and many individuals could not see the direct relationship between cleanliness and many of the health issues that plagued society. According to Weigley (1974), Richards felt that applying and using the principles of science to everyday life could help to improve and maintain a better quality of life. The only way that this could be achieved was through education.

As a result of this thought process, Richards saw the need for women to have more formal education in science so that they would be able to teach others how scientific principles could be used to improve the overall quality of life for individuals (Miles, 2011). The problem that Richards discovered was that there were not many institutions where women could enroll to gain such knowledge. To address this issue, Richards helped to establish the first Women’s Laboratory at MIT in 1876 so that women could attend classes and gain knowledge in the application of science (Kato & Elias, 2015; Miles 2011; Stage & Vincenti, 1997). The laboratory would eventually be torn down in 1883, when MIT granted women the permission to enter the classroom with men (Stage & Vincenti, 1997). Although short lived, the establishment of this laboratory would be one of many milestones that Richards would put into place to position women into the professional world and away from the traditional roles of caring for the home.

Several projects that Richards undertook after the establishment of the Women’s Laboratory would help to further define the profession. With financial backing from a wealthy philanthropist by the name of Mrs. William V. Kellen, in the early 1890s she was very instrumental in implementing the first school lunch program in the United States in Boston, Massachusetts (Kato & Elias, 2015; Stage & Vincenti, 1997). Richards also participated in The World’s Columbian Exposition of 1893 in which a model house, known as the Rumford Kitchen Exhibit, was established that offered a variety of demonstrations that explained how the application of scientific principles could maintain the home (Kato & Elias, 2015; Stage & Vincenti, 1997; Weigley, 1974). This model demonstrated how the average working man could successfully live on an income of $500 per year based on common resources available (Weigley, 1974). Other projects that were of interest to Richards included improving living conditions through the application of chemistry; studying the causes and effects of contamination in air, water, and food; testing home furnishings and foods for toxins; and designing a safe water and sewage system by allowing students from MIT to experiment in her own home (Kato & Elias 2015).

Through her experiments, she realized that this knowledge needed to be distributed to the general public. Richards also recognized that women needed to be placed into a position in which theycould not only enter the workforce to break gender barriers (especially in higher education), but also spread much needed knowledge of how scientific principles could be used to improve the quality of life for individuals. Leading up to the Rumford Kitchen Exhibit, Weigley (1974) explained how cooking schools had become very popular in the Eastern part of the United States and many public and private schools began to offer Household Arts courses to their students. Although an official name for this new discipline had not yet been established, Home Economic departments appeared in approximately 30 colleges (e.g. as programs of study for women) (Weigley, 1974).

The issue of naming this much needed discipline was not taken lightly by Richards. Many of the initial terms that had been considered by Richards during her tenure at MIT included Okeology and Euthenics (Kato & Elias, 2015; Stage & Vincenti, 1997). However, these terms were not very popular. Another issue that had developed was a variety of names being used for this discipline in educational settings. According to Weigley (1974), schools that offered various courses in home economics were using a variety of titles such as Domestic Science, Home Science, Household Administration, Household Economics, Household Management, Domestic Economy, and many other content related titles. In addition, a clear purpose for this field was not understood, educational officials were unsure of its placement in the educational setting, and there was little opportunity for practicing professionals to come together to discuss their concerns (Weigley, 1974). The push for selecting an official name for the discipline may have come through the rejection of a proposed curriculum by Bryn Mawr at Bryn Mawr College. When Richards made a proposal for this curriculum to be established on the collegiate level, Bryn Mawr stated that “there are not enough elements of intellectual growth in cooking or housekeeping to furnish a very serious or profound course of training for really intelligent women” (Stage & Vincenti, 1997). Richards then realized that the inconsistency of having an actual name for this field of study had to be addressed.

The Lake Placid Conferences

The research and study that was being completed by Richards was too important not to be recognized as an official discipline. Weigley (1974) indicated that Richards and professionals of this time believed it most appropriate for a group of leaders to discuss the problems, current progress, philosophy, and future progression of this developing discipline. During thesummer of 1898, Richard’s visit to the Lake Placid Club in New York to give a lecture on dome stic service issues would lead to the development of a series of annual conferences to better define the discipline (Weigley, 1974).

Melvil Dewey and his wife Annie Godfrey Dewey played instrumental roles and served as important allies in helping Richards to establish these meetings. One of the most important roles that the Dewey’s played was providing a location for the first meeting by lending Richards their summer home at the Lake Placid Club (Weigley, 1974). According to Weigley (1974), invitations were sent to leaders within the field who were close enough to travel and had a vested interest in this undertaking. Those invited to participate in this meeting were asked for their suggestions on possible topics that should be discussed at this conference. The topics submitted would help to guide the direction of the conference. The first conference was held on September 18, 1899 at the Lake Placid Club (Weigley, 1974). In addition to Richards, Melvil Dewey, and Annie Dewey, the following individuals were present in helping to fully name, shape, and define the profession (Stage & Vincenti, 1997; Weigley, 1974):

1. Maria Parloa – founder of the Boston Cooking School and leader in teaching cookery
2. Maria Daniell – lecturer who gave food demonstrations and had an interest in institutional administration
3. Emily Huntington – founder of the Kitchen Garden method which taught housekeeping to children
4. Anna Barrows – writer on practical cookery and editor of the New England Kitchen magazine
5. Alice Peloubet Norton – supervisor of Domestic Science in the public schools of Brookline, Massachusetts
6. Louisa A. Nicholass – organizer of the first courses offered i
7. Mrs. William V. Kellen – wealthy philanthropist who helped to finann Household Art at the State Normal School in Framingham, Massachusettsce the first school lunch program in Boston, Massachusetts
8. Mrs. William G. Shailer – representative from the National Household Economics Association

Although there were few professionals in attendance, several individuals sent their regrets as a result of being unable to attend such as Mary Hinman Abel (close associate of Richards), Helen Kinne (professor of Domestic Science), Marion Talbot (professor of Sanitary Science), Wilbur O.Atwater (professor of chemistry and founder of the Office of Experiment Stations of the United States Department of Agriculture) (Weigley, 1974).

The eleven members who were in attendance at this first meeting were able to accomplish many tasks as it related to properly establishing the discipline. The main action that was accomplished was the selection of an appropriate name. Weigley (1974) stated that members felt the name of the discipline should be simple, but extensive enough to include sanitation, cookery and kindred household arts, and proper instruction in the art of living science from kindergarten to college. After much discussion, the name of home economics was selected. The thought process was that by including “Economics” in the name, the discipline could be easily incorporated with the collegiate curriculum versus using the term “Household Arts” as the name of the discipline.

In addition to selecting a proper name for the profession, attendees also discussed how home economics could be publicized so that individuals would gain interest in the profession; how young women should be trained for leadership roles within the field; and developed an appropriate library classification for literature (Weigley, 1974). After successful discussion on these various topics, it was realized that more meetings would need to be held. As a result, the group decided to meet again the following year at their current location. In addition, committees were established during this first meeting and the charge was given that follow up reports would be made at the next annual conference in 1899. Members agreed that they would prepare and hear reports based on topics such as the teaching of Household Arts in public schools, how Domestic Science courses were structured on the high school level, how home economics was viewed on the collegiate level, how teachers of home economics were currently being trained, and simplified methods that had been implemented for housekeeping (Weigley, 1974).

The result of this first meeting was that annual meetings were set up held each September over a ten year span. These annual meetings would later be identified as the Lake Placid Conferences. With each conference, attendance grew as professionals from home economics and other disciplines such as nutrition, biology, chemistry, bacteriology, etc. actively participated in the meetings (Kato, 2008).

Many of the activities that took place at these conferences included paper presentations and round table discussions which focused on the most pressing needs of the profession. Weigley (1974) indicated that one of the most popular topics discussed at each of these conferences was the teaching of home economics on many educational levels. In addition to this significant topic, several noteworthy discussions were held at other conferences. For example, accordingly to Weigley (1974) one of the events at the second conference resulted in an appeal to the National Education Association (NEA) to develop a home economics section within their organization. Members felt very strongly that home economics courses should be included in all schools and support from the NEA could help to promote this cause. In addition, a heavy emphasis was placed on the necessity of future teachers receiving training through well-rounded college courses. Additional noteworthy topics that were discussed at this conference included Maria Parloa’s suggestion that cooking methods should be simplified within the home and that the interior of the home should be designed in such a manner that would reflect its intended use (Weigley, 1974).

Although a continued discussion of the place for the home economics curriculum occurred, the other conferences incorporated additional factors to consider. The fifth conference opened new dialogue as Mary H. Abel recommended that local businesses such as bakeries, laundry services, and cleaning services; and the development of a household labor bureau could offer a needed service to the everyday homemaker (Weigley, 1974). The sixth conference resulted in a committee recommending that Domestic Science courses taught on the high school level should be counted towards admission to college (Weigley, 1974). The thought process was that this action would encourage home economics to be better positioned on the collegiate level in order to prepare future teachers. Nutritional concepts would become a popular topic of interest in latter conferences as popular individuals such as C.F. Langworthy, John Harvey Kellogg, and Horace Fletcher shared their research and ideologies on nutrition (Weigley, 1974). Many of the topics discussed and presented included the concept of proper diet and the direct effect of uric acid being cured by a low protein diet.

By the establishment of the tenth conference in 1909, it was realized that the culmination of these annual conferences had progressed in such a way that a solidified organization needed to be established in order to further promote the workings of the discipline (Weigley, 1974). As a result, a committee was organized to determine the steps that needed to be taken in order to structure a national organization. Weigley (1974) discussed how the committee developed five resolutions which:

1. recommended the need for a broader organization for individuals who were interested in home economics,
2. encouraged groups to develop associations in each state in order for the organization to grow,
3. would require members to pay annual dues and the organization to publish a journal for its members,
4. suggested helping and recruiting as many teachers as possible who were interested in a variety of subjects that were directly related to home economics,
5. endorsed naming the organization the American home economics Association or the National home economics Association.

A meeting was held from December 31, 1908 to January 2, 1909 in which these resolutions were made. As a result, members accepted resolutions and the American home economics Association was established with Ellen S. Richards as its first organizational president (Weigley, 1974). With the establishment of this organization it helped to define standards and certification for training teachers and better define a philosophical and theoretical foundation for the home economics profession (Kato, 2008).

The Name of the Profession Changes

During the 20th Century, home economics would see significant changes, and educators would become knowledgeable experts in a variety of areas that reflected the needs of American society at a given point in time. However, a constant problem that the profession would deal with over the next century was a solidified and consistent identity. Although a name had been selected, there would still be numerous challenges that the profession would have to face. Researchers of this field offer several reasons as to why this became such an issue within the profession.

Stage & Vincenti (1997) explained that during the 1920s, even though Home Economists were becoming more involved in legislation, male legislators were still defining the field. The 1930s-1950s saw a heavy shift in curriculum in which a heavy emphasis was placed on cooking, sewing, and childcare. Unfortunately, this shift would develop a “stitching and stirring” stereotype that would plague the profession for years to come. Stage & Vincenti (1997) also highlighted that from the 1950s to 1970s, numerous home economics programs on the collegiate level were being eliminated, discontinued, or merged with other academic programs. In addition, names of programs were changed to more gender neutral titles such as Human Development and Human Ecology.

Several publications would be published and evaluations of the entire profession would take place from the 1960s to the late 1980s to determine the future direction of the profession. It would not be until 1993 that a group of home economics professionals would meet during a conference in Scottsdale, Arizona, to determine the direction of the profession for the 21st Century. Kato (2008) explained how a new model was developed that would describe the mission, purpose, and future vision of home economics. This model identified common trends and themes found within the profession. In addition, this group of professionals also decided that a new name was needed for the profession in order to better reflect what they were currently promoting in society and to try to dissuade common stereotypes that had been associated with home economics (Kato, 2008). After much deliberation, debates, and discussions, in 1993, the name of the profession was changed to family and consumer sciences at the annual American home economics Association Convention in San Diego, California. The name change helped to reflect the mission of the profession in working with individuals, families, consumers, and communities.

Key Legislation

Richards and numerous professionals who shared her passion for improving the quality of life for individuals through scientific principles undertook a tremendous task in establishing the groundwork for what we now know as family and consumer sciences. Key pieces of legislation have directly and indirectly helped place family and consumer sciences programs within the educational realm. Commonly grouped under the title of vocational educational (which would later be classified as Career and Technical Education), selected legislated pieces have allowed family and consumer sciences programs a place within the school curriculum through course offerings and federal funding. Legislation that was put into place from 1862 to present day, still greatly effects the profession within the educational system in today’s current time.

Morrill Act of 1862

The Morrill Act of 1862 allowed the establishment of land grant universities in each state (Table 1). During this time period, education was only afforded to White, males who were from elite families. Named after Representative Justin S. Morrill of Vermont, the purpose of this act was to provide a college education to farmers’ sons and other individuals who lacked the means to attend the colleges that existed at that time (Duemer, 2007). The act enabled each senator and representative 30,000 acres of land to be set aside in their home state for educational opportunities in higher education as it related to the teaching of agricultural economy, industrial economy, domestic economy, and military tactics (Kato, 2008; National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges, 2008). After the act was signed into law by President Abraham Lincoln in 1862, land grant universities were established. The significance that these land grant universities had within the profession is that these universities offered some of the first family and consumer sciences courses on the post-secondary level. This act helped to somewhat position family and consumer sciences in selected colleges and universities, even though the actual field of study had not been fully established at the time.

Hatch Act of 1887

The Hatch Act of 1887 was a component of the establishment of the land grant universities from the Morrill Act of 1862. Once the land grant universities were established, it was recognized that these universities had the unique opportunity to participate in scientific research initiatives as it related to the development of agriculture. According to the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges (2008), the Hatch Act authorized federal funds to each state in order to develop agricultural experiment stations that were directly connected to their assigned land grant institution. In connection to family and consumer sciences, many of the initial research of Home Economists stemmed from participation in the agricultural experiment stations. This collaboration was able to occur due to the working relationship that Richards had with Dr.Wilbur O. Atwater who was the first director of the experimental stations.

Second Morrill Act of 1890

Although the Morrill Land Grant Act of 1862 was intended to make higher education more accessible to individuals, some individuals were denied access to selected land grant universities. Most notably in the South, Blacks were not admitted into several universities. As a result, the Second Morrill Act of 1890 was established in order to provide endowments for land grant universities, provided that they could prove that they did not base their admissions on race (National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges, 2008). However, if these states established a separate institution for Blacks, then they were eligible to receive funding. This action would establish a cluster of institutions in the South known as 1890-Land Grant Institutions (Table 1).

Smith-Lever Act of 1914

In 1914, Congress authorized President Woodrow Wilson to develop a Commission to study the need for federal funding for vocational education (Hillison & Burge, 1988). Based on their findings, the Commission suggested that a bill should be developed that would pay the salaries of teachers, supervisors, directors of agricultural subjects, and teachers of trade and industrial subjects such as family and consumer sciences. The Smith-Lever Act of 1914 was very instrumental in the progression of family and consumer sciences in that it helped to establish cooperative extension services and provided programs with federal funding through the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) (Stage & Vincenti, 1997). These services were specifically designed to bring citizens the most current information in the subject areas of agriculture, family and consumer sciences, and other related subjects (National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges, 2008). The land grant universities were instrumental to the Smith-Lever Act in that it helped to develop educational programs that met the needs of agricultural and industrial classes, provided a location for programs to be offered, allowed individuals to complete research, and extended extension work off-campus to reach individuals in the community (National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges, 2008). As a result of family and consumer sciences positioning at land grant universities, individuals were given opportunities to share their expertise and research with not only members of the community, but stakeholders and supporters of vocational education on the state and national level.

Smith Hughes-Act of 1917

According to Kato (2008), this act was the first of its kind that clearly distinguished vocational education from the regular high school curriculum. The Smith-Hughes Act (also known as the Vocational Education Act of 1917) would help to expand Home Economic programs on the high school and collegiate level and provide the adequate funding needed to support such programs (Blakenship & Moerchen, 1979). This act was an agreement between the states and the federal government to provide appropriate funding for the salaries and training of teachers, supervisors, and directors of agricultural programs (Paulter, 1999). Blankenship & Moerchen (1979) reported that states were required to match funds that were distributed by the federal government. In addition, provisions were also made to support teacher salaries and training in the disciplines of family and consumer sciences, trade, and industrial education. Accountability measures were also put in place as states were required to develop boards for vocational education that would prepare a plan explaining how vocational education programs would be operated within the state (American Vocational Association, 1998).

Vocational Education Act (1963)

Researchers who have examined this act in depth credit its development as a result of the numerous technological advancements and changing times in the United States (Blankenship & Moerchen, 1979; Paulter, 1999). In 1961, a panel of consultants was developed by President John F. Kennedy to examine the status and relevance of vocational education in American Society (Paulter, 1999). After an evaluation of vocational education in the United States, the panel developed a listing of suggestions in 1962 which recommended that the following actions take place:

1. expand vocational and technical training as it related to the needs of the current economic time;
2. provide training for high school graduates who did not attend college;
3. offer reinforcement skills to individuals so that they can maintain employment; and
4. make educational opportunities available for all citizens regardless of their age.

Paulter (1999) explained that authorization of this law greatly increased funding for vocational education. The act provided additional assistance to individuals who had previously been unsuccessful in vocational education because of their socioeconomic or academic status. Paulter (1999) also explained that all educational levels saw a significant increase in course enrollment. Family and consumer sciences courses were able to meet these needs as the content taught helped the everyday individual to find useful employment as a result of the occupational programs that were offered (Blankenship & Moerchen, 1979). In addition to the traditional school settings, courses taught in family and consumer sciences was valuable in a variety of other educational settings such as adult learning centers, community centers, and various after school programs. This is credited to the fact that during this time in history, individuals needed to retain, enhance, or learn a new skill in order to successfully enter the job market. The knowledge possessed by Home Economic teachers in life skills was able to fill this new demand.

Home Economic programs would be greatly affected by amendments to this act in the years to come which would greatly determine the programs and courses they offered. According to Blankenship & Moerchen (1979), amendments to this act in 1968 would bring about significant changes in that funding would be provided for special needs students who were handicapped or disadvantaged, vocational counseling would be recognized, stronger requirements were developed for evaluation and justification of programs, and family and consumer sciences would have restored categorical funding. As a result of these changes, Home Economic programs were required to respond accordingly.

Amendments to the act in 1976 would force the profession to develop new programs or maintain existing programs (Blankenship & Moerchen, 1979). School systems began to look for new sources of funding and viewed courses related to vocational education as a possible area of expansion. Most importantly, a heavy emphasis shifted from college transfer programs to vocational-technical programs (Blankenship & Moerchen, 1979). Several actions from this amendment would greatly enhance the position of family and consumer sciences. For example, this act allowed provisions to be made for day care services to be provided to students who were enrolled in secondary and post-secondary programs (Blankenship & Moerchen, 1979). The access to these day-care services allowed students to participate in vocational programs, gain additional training in childcare, and have access to laboratory experiences. Blankenship & Moerchen (1979) also explained that these additional requirements tried to increase male enrollment by requiring Home Economic programs to develop curriculum that reflected new and changing occupational fields, individuals with special needs, nontraditional occupations, bilingual vocational training, and removal of sex bias and discrimination. With the many changes that were put in place by this act and amendments, Home Economic programs played an integral role in preparing individuals for these various new challenges.

Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act and Amendments

Paulter (1999) reported that this act, first enacted in 1984, was an extension of the Vocational Education Act and accompanying amendments. The American Vocational Association (1998) highlighted that this act focused on improving vocational education programs and developing strategies to better serve students from underrepresented populations. Based on the content found within family and consumer sciences, educators found themselves once again developing effective strategies to meet these new requirements. The act was developed to help each state expand, improve, update, and incorporate top quality vocational education programs that would help educate members who would eventually enter the workforce in the future (Paulter, 1999). In addition, this act also encouraged vocational education programs to make a stronger effort to provide quality education to women, minorities, and special needs populations; greater collaboration among the public and private sector; enhanced academic foundations for students; and stronger efforts in vocational education research (Paulter, 1999). The act also helped states to have access to certified counselors who assisted students in career planning, decision-making, and employability skills (Paulter, 1999); concepts which were already being taught in family and consumer sciences programs.

Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act (1990)

This legislative piece would be reauthorized several times during the 1990s in order to provide appropriate education for students. This first reauthorization occurred in 1990 when $1.6 billion was to be distributed each year to appropriate vocational programs over a five year span (American Vocational Association, 1998). The reauthorization emphasized the importance of infusing vocational education with academic instruction. The American Vocational Association (1998) felt that Congress believed that in order for vocational educational to remain relevant and credible, students needed to be adequately prepared for careers in the future that would be heavily influenced by technological advances. In addition, this reauthorization implemented a new program entitled Tech Prep which began to further ensure that academic core subjects were aligned with vocational education courses (American Vocational Association, 1998).

When the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act was up for reauthorization in 1995, it was clear that Congress had specific goals for the direction they wanted vocational education to take. According to the American Vocational Association (1998), the first goalof the reauthorization of the Perkins Act was to consolidate the numerous programs that had been developed over the years to be more aligned and consistent. The second goal was to use block granting to allow state government to determine how funds should be distributed to their vocational programs as they saw fit versus having significant involvement and requirements established from the federal government. A problem with this method identified by the American Vocational Association (1998) was that in previous experience, programs that were block granted usually received less funding. As a result, the reauthorization was not passed, but the Perkins Act was extended and funding was distributed until a new reauthorization could be developed.

Changes made to the Perkins Act based on the reauthorization in 1998 gave vocational education greater flexibility in how funds should be spent while still keeping programs a separate entity. In addition, the reauthorization continued to require academiccore courses to be heavily infused in vocational education (American Vocational Association, 1998). This reauthorization also provided students with a wealth of experience in understanding all aspects of the industry (Gordon, 2008). During this decade, the establishment and reauthorization of the Perkins Act helped to:

1. streamline, simplify, and increase flexibility;
2. establish greater accountability requirements for effectiveness of programs;
3. eliminate the authorization for a state council on vocational education;
4. increase technology use in the classroom, teacher training in technology, and distance learning; and
5. give states and recipients more flexibility with federal funds.

Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Improvement Act of 2006

Up until this point in time, family and consumer sciences courses had commonly been classified as vocational education courses. One of the most significant events of this act was the change in terminology of vocational education to Career and Technical Education (CTE). The term CTE had been used for quite a while, but this was the first time that legislation had used the title in federal documentation (Gordon, 2008; Threeton, 2007). In regards to funding, other significant actions of this act included maintaining the Tech Prep program as a separate entity for federal funding and maintaining state administrative funding at 5% of a state’s total allocated funding (Gordon, 2008). Gordon (2008) also reported that a greater emphasis was placed on establishing specific requirements for “programs of studies” that connected academic and technical content from the secondary to the post-secondary levels. Program accountability issues were also strengthened to ensure that CTE programs would continue to improve.

A significant point to note is that the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Improvement Act (2006), directly stated complete support for family and consumer sciences programs for permissible use of funds for leadership activities. In addition, this act heavily promoted professional development for all CTE professionals which would include family and consumer sciences educators (Threeton, 2007). In regards to family and consumer sciences programs, this act provided and continues to provide the necessary funding needed in order for family and consumer sciences programs to fully function fromacademic year to academic year.

Connection to CTE

As previously discussed, the origination of CTE programs can be traced back to the Smith-Hughes Act of 1917 and the development of vocational education. Based on the numerous legislative pieces that have been discussed, these governmental actions helped to establish a foundation for what we now know as CTE. From a governmental and federal funding standpoint, family and consumer sciences related courses are classified under CTE. CTE courses prepare both youth and adults for a variety of careers and educational opportunities (ACTE, 2013). In many schools across the nation, especially on the secondary level, family and consumer sciences courses are commonly grouped into a CTE program and share funding with other courses such as agriculture, business, engineering and technology, health science, guidance and career development, marketing; postsecondary, adult, and career education; and trade and industrial education (ACTE, 2013). The structure identified by the federal government in the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Improvement Act of 2006 positions family and consumer sciences as one of the numerous content areas that falls under the umbrella of CTE. The placement of family and consumer sciences has greatly assisted CTE programs by developing course offerings that help meet the need of preparing students to become productive citizens.

Significance of CTE in the Classroom

CTE courses such as family and consumer sciences have made significant contributions to the American educational system and society as a whole. Bland (2008) stated that historically CTE has prepared thousands of students for various occupations after high school. She goes on further to state that in today’s present time, CTE courses enhance and reinforce the teaching of academic core courses such as math, science, and English through theoretical and conceptual knowledge that can be applied to real-world settings. This is further validated by Gordon (2008) in which he described CTE as more challenging, academic, and relevant in the 21st Century. Bland (2008) also highlighted the fact that CTE courses prepare students to pursue academic and technical studies at the postsecondary level by helping them discover the connection between their current studies and the career they would like to further pursue. In fact, students enrolled in CTE courses indicated that they had developed problemsolving, project-completion, research, math, workrelated, communication, time-management, and critical-thinking skills during their matriculation through high school (ACTE, 2013). In addition, CTE courses provide students with the opportunity to work side-by-side with practicing professionals in applicable activities that will enhance their employability skills in the future (Bland, 2008).

When looking at the impact of CTE from a statistical standpoint, various findings that have been reported show very positive results. The Association for Career Technical Education (ACTE) (2013) reported that students who participate in CTE curriculum have an average graduation rate of 90.18% versus the national freshmen graduation rate at 74.9%. Furthermore, a ratio of one CTE class to every two academic classes minimized the risk of students dropping out of high school. The ACTE (2013) also reported that more than 70% of secondary students who concentrated in CTE-related courses continued their education at a postsecondary institution immediately after high school. From the postsecondary level, a student with a CTE-related associate degree or credential earns on average between $4,000-$19,000 more a year versus a student with an associate degree in the humanities (ACTE, 2013).

Career Clusters, Pathways, and Programs of Study (POS)

Within CTE programs, students can select courses based on career and occupational interests. This grouping of selected courses is known as career clusters. There are currently 16 career clusters®, consisting of almost 79 specific career pathways of learning which are based on a set of common knowledge and skills that prepare learners for a variety of opportunities (ACTE, 2013; National Association of State Directors of CTE Consortium, 2013). Students select their career pathway and follow an established Program of Study (POS) throughout their high school career. The career pathways are designed in such a way to help students to increase the likelihood of success in college and future careers. For example, the Hospitality & Tourism career cluster consists of educational pathways in Restaurants and Food/ Beverage Services; Lodging; Travel & Tourism; and Recreation, Amusements, & Attractions (National Association of State Directors of CTE Consortium, 2013).

The consortium also highlighted that the career clusters help to bridge secondary curriculum with post-secondary curriculum so that students are able to make realistic connections. The career cluster that students can choose is dependent upon what is offered at their assigned school. Although career clusters offered in each state may vary, the following list highlights the current clusters that are available (ACTE, 2013; National Association of State Directors of CTE Consortium, 2013): Agriculture, Food & Natural Resources; Architecture & Construction; Arts; A/V Technology & Communications; Business Management & Administration; Education & Training; Finance; Government & Public Administration; Health Science; Hospitality & Tourism; Human Services; Information Technology; Law, Public Safety, Corrections & Security; Manufacturing; Marketing; Science, Technology, Engineering, & Mathematics; and Transportation, Distribution, & Logistics. Based on courses offered in each individual state, family and consumer sciences related courses could easily fall within each of the 16 career clusters.

Summary

In order to determine where the family and consumer sciences profession will be taken in the years to come, one must look back at how far the profession has progressed and what has actually been accomplished. Although starting from humble beginnings, the family and consumer sciences profession has a detailed and rich history that spans over more than 100 years. From the very beginning, the family and consumer sciences profession has always been concerned with helping to improve the quality of life for individuals. Originally developed as an outlet for women to obtain higher levels of education and establish meaningful careers in a male-dominated society, this discipline has made its place in American society on a local, state, national, and international level. In addition, numerous legislative pieces have ensured that family and consumer sciences related courses remain relevant on the secondary and post-secondary levels. It is the family and consumer sciences profession that has a genuine interest in the well-being of individuals, families, and society as a whole. Paying honor to those individuals who have paved the way gives those associated with this profession a sense of a connection to the importance of our mission.