State leaders deserve credit for building this engine. But to ensure that these historic investments reach their destination — meaningful careers for our students — we need to shift the focus from participation to performance.
A new analysis of K-12 CTE programs offers a strategic insight into whether states even have the data to know what’s working and not working. The review examined four foundational pillars: pathway structure, data quality, workforce alignment and transparency. While the findings show that most states are still in the early stages of building this data infrastructure, the results lay out the next chapter for leaders who have already shown their commitment to student success.
The challenge policymakers face is one of clarity. In many states, pathways are not yet consistently structured. To solve this, states should clearly define pathways to include specific course sequences, work-based learning and measurable outcomes like credential attainment. Students shouldn’t just be taking random classes. They need to be moving deliberately toward careers that offer both students and the economy success.
When states lack these clear structures, it becomes difficult to measure if they are meeting their economic needs. Nationally, for example, culinary arts remains one of the highest-picked CTE programs despite lower-wage career trajectories. Meanwhile, high-demand fields like mechatronics — the backbone of modern manufacturing — enroll far fewer students.
The best laid plans are only as good as the data that backs them up. That’s why states need to establish regular processes, guided by employer input and labor market data, to assess whether pathway offerings reflect economic priorities.
At ExcelinEd, we view this through the lens of return on investment. Our comprehensive ROI analysis evaluates how well K–12 and postsecondary education-to-workforce programs align with high-demand, high-wage careers. By reviewing enrollment, completion and employment data on a reoccurring basis, states can develop evidence-based policies that maximize student success. But this research reveals that most states don’t even have the data to actually do an ROI.
Ultimately, that’s what this work is all about — figuring out what is happening and using the data to drive change. Students are the ones most affected by the gap between good intentions and reality.
A 2025 Gallup survey found that while 77 percent of Gen Z members are optimistic about their futures, only a little more than half feel prepared for them. Their top priority? Earning enough to live comfortably. As a parent, I feel this deeply. When I sit down with my kids to talk about their futures, I want to know exactly what courses they need to take and the value those choices have for them.
We owe that same clarity to every family. That’s why states should publish annual pathway-level activity and outcomes data in formats that employers, families and policymakers can easily understand. When data is accessible, it builds public trust and allows employers to engage with confidence, knowing exactly which programs are producing the talent they need.
The most important step, however, is what states do with that knowledge. Policymakers should use this information to drive real change at the state, district and school levels. Data shouldn’t sit on a shelf; it should be a catalyst for expanding high-performing programs and refining those that aren’t yet meeting the mark.
Addressing these gaps doesn’t require a massive infusion of new funding or a wholesale redesign of our schools. States just need to strengthen the foundations they’ve already built. By prioritizing how their programs are structured (program readiness) and transparency, policymakers can turn the promise of CTE into proven performance.
Adriana Harrington is managing director of policy for ExcelinEd, an education policy nonprofit.
Governing's opinion columns reflect the views of their authors and not necessarily those of Governing's editors or management.
Related Articles
