Session Information
02 SES 06 A, Learning II: Excellence in VET
Paper Session
Contribution
There have been longstanding concerns about the variable quality of apprenticeships in England, which are generally of a lower level and duration than apprenticeship programmes in many other European countries (Field, 2018). Over the past decade, the UK government has launched a series of reforms, including the introduction of new apprenticeship standards aimed at strengthening employer engagement and improving quality of provision; an apprenticeship levy to ensure adequate funding; and new funding guidelines, according to which apprentices must spend 20% of their paid working time in off-the-job training. However, little attention has so far been paid to regulate and enhance on-the-job learning. For example, the guidance for employers issued by the Education and Skills Funding Agency (2018), which sets out the responsibilities for employers providing apprenticeships under the new funding rules, focuses solely on the off-the-job element while being noticeably vague on on-the-job training.
In contrast with other apprenticeship systems in Europe, employers in England historically have had limited involvement in the provision of training, as a result of apprenticeship being driven by funded (off-the-job) training, and responsibility lying with third-party training providers (Kuczera and Field, 2018). Kuczera and Field (2018) argue that apprenticeship regulation in England has almost absolved employers of their involvement in training. This is in stark contrast with other (notably dual) apprenticeship systems, where employers take a central role. Here, the workplace element, in particular, is generally much more tightly regulated, with nationally specific workplace curricula governing the content of skills to be covered. Staff in organisations responsible for training apprentices are required to have certain qualifications (such as that of master craftsperson in Germany), whilst there is no such mandatory training for their counterparts in England.
The past few decades have of course seen a clear shift in debate towards the benefits of on-the-job (as opposed to classroom) learning, a central pinnacle leading to the increased prevalence of apprenticeship as an educational route, and there has been a growing body of literature on workplace and ‘situated’ learning (e.g. Evans et al, 2006). In this study, in order to evaluate practice and the implications for apprenticeship as a model of learning, we will draw on the community of practice model (Lave and Wenger, 1991) and Fuller and Unwin’s (2003) influential work on expansive and restrictive participation in apprenticeship.
Given the interest in work-based learning and the concern with providing quality apprenticeships, it seems surprising that there is so little in the new regulations to address the on-the-job element of apprenticeship. In addition, there is very little data concerning actual workplace practice. The present study will address this gap. By investigating the content and nature of on-the-job training of apprenticeships at Levels 2 and 3, it will enhance our understanding of current practice and perspectives of stakeholders in order to inform the future development of relevant regulation.
The aim of the study is to gain an insight into the extent, content and nature of the on-the-job training received by apprentices at Levels 2 and 3, compared with entry-level employees going for the same job. In particular, the findings will identify the elements that are distinctive about on-the-job training in apprenticeships and about those delivering this training. The findings would also contribute to the development of a strengthened workplace training element of the new apprenticeship standards, for example by providing work-based curricula. The study is funded by the Gatsby Foundation, London, who promotes research in particular to underpin reforms in technical education.
Method
The research adopts a multiple case study approach. In view of the variation in the quality of apprenticeships across different sectors and employer organisations (particularly in terms of size and resources/economic constraints) research is conducted within five contrasting sectors: Engineering and Construction (sectors that have traditionally provided apprenticeships and where high quality provision is found), Retail and Social Care (where apprenticeships are a relatively new phenomenon and training provision is often poor), and Digital (also a new sector for apprenticeship but generally at the higher end of quality provision). Social Care will be of particular interest as it is part of the sector (Health, Public Services and Care sector) that provided the highest number of apprenticeships in 2016/17. It will also enable us to contrast provision in the public and private sectors. Data collection is in three phases: In Phase 1, we are conducting comprehensive documentary research and a literature review in order to gain an overview of current regulation and to locate our study within existing research. In Phase 2, we are carrying out interviews with stakeholder organisations at national and sector level. This phase of the research is crucial for a comprehensive understanding of regulation and the perspectives of different stakeholders. In Phase 3, we are conducting interviews with employers in each of the 5 sectors (1 large employer and 1 small to medium-sized employer in each sector). We will carry out 4 interviews per employer (3 individual interviews with managers, trainers and/or supervisors; and 1 group interview with apprentices), amounting to 40 interviews in total. These interviews will enable us to investigate the actual practice of workplace training (as opposed to regulation), including the constraints employers might face, paying attention to the individual perspectives of managers and staff involved. It is important also to include the perspectives and experiences of apprentices themselves, offering an additional layer of analysis. All interviews are semi-structured and up to 60 minutes in duration. They will be audio-recorded and subsequently transcribed. The analysis will be conducted through an analytical framework, guided by the research questions. The findings will be presented in a report as the main output of the research. The study runs from January to September 2019.
Expected Outcomes
The paper will discuss the findings of the study. Comparison will be drawn with other apprenticeship systems in Europe, notably the dual system of apprenticeship in Germany, to highlight the particularities of the English case. In Germany, skill areas and competences to be covered are specified at national level to ensure that all apprentices in a particular occupation have exposure to a specified range of skills. By contrast, in England, employers chose from a range of options to suit their particular workplace needs, and skill sets tend to be narrow and fragmented. In addition, previous research indicates that English employers tend to view apprentices as fully-fledged workers rather than learners. The paper will evaluate any differences in practice across sectors and organisations and, in particular, the pressures and concerns of different stakeholders (including employers and the apprentices themselves). It will be interesting to explore any differences in workplace learning between apprenticeship frameworks and the new standards, which are being gradually introduced. As the purpose of the standards was to enhance employer engagement, it remains to be seen whether this has translated into employers taking a more active role in the work-based element of apprenticeship. It will be argued that a quality work-based element is crucial (along with off-the-job training) if the reforms are to succeed in their aim of establishing apprenticeship as a valued option for school leavers, on a par with the academic route. Equally, comprehensive provision is vital for learner development and identity. Further legislation is required to regulate the work-based element.
References
Education and Skills Funding Agency (2018) Apprenticeship Funding: Rules and Guidance for employers - May 2017 to July 2018, Version 3, March 2018, available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/733034/1819_Employer_Rules_v1.0.pdf (accessed 13/09/18). Evans, K., Hodkinson, P., Rainbird, H. and Unwin, L. (2006) Improving Workplace Learning. Abingdon: Routledge. Field, S. (2018) Taking Training Seriously: Lessons from an international Comparison of Off-the-Job Training for Apprenticeships in England, The Gatsby Foundation, available online http://www.gatsby.org.uk/uploads/education/final-apprenticeships-and-off-the-job-training-may-2018.pdf (accessed 19/07/18). Kuczera, M. and Field, S. (2018) Apprenticeship in England, United Kingdom, Paris: OECD Publishing. Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning - Legitimate Peripheral Participation. New York: Cambridge University Press. Fuller, A. and Unwin, L. (2003) Learning as Apprentices in the Contemporary UK Workplace: creating and managing expansive and restrictive participation, Journal of Education and Work, 16 (4): 407-426.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.