Journal of Vocational Education & Training Modern Apprenticeship ...

This article was downloaded by: [183.87.118.6] On: 19 March 2014, At: 19:23 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Vocational Education & Training Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjve20

Modern Apprenticeship, Process and Learning: some emerging issues Alison Fuller

a

a

Vocational Education and Training Associates , Leicester, United Kingdom Published online: 11 Aug 2006.

To cite this article: Alison Fuller (1996) Modern Apprenticeship, Process and Learning: some emerging issues, Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 48:3, 229-248, DOI: 10.1080/1363682960480302 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1363682960480302

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http:// www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Journal of Vocational Education and Training, Vol. 48, No. 3, 1996

Modern Apprenticeship, Process and Learning: some emerging issues

Downloaded by [183.87.118.6] at 19:23 19 March 2014

ALISON FULLER Vocational Education and Training Associates, Leicester, United Kingdom

ABSTRACT The Modern Apprenticeship programme in the United Kingdom has been broadly welcomed by employers, training providers, and commentators on the vocational education and training scene. A shift in policy focus has been detected from an emphasis on 'outcomes' (qualifications), which has come to dominate post-16 provision, towards a rediscovery of 'process'. One reason for this is that, at least at the level of policy, the Modern Apprenticeship can be linked to the challenges posed by a post-Fordist analysis of the relationship between the economy, work and skills. The paper identifies some of the features of Modern Apprenticeship and discusses three learning-related issues which emerged during development work for one sector's Modern Apprenticeship. It is argued that effective management and delivery of the learning process can be achieved through closer partnerships between employers and training providers. Relying on the measurement of outcomes alone, is likely to prove an inadequate approach to ensuring the quality of learning experiences on- and off-the-job.

Introduction Since it was announced during Britain's 1993 Autumn Budget, the Modern Apprenticeship programme has attracted considerable attention. The availability of S1.25 billion over three years to fund its development (Insight, 1994), has encouraged the relevant intermediary organisations, Industry Training Organisations (ITOs), to bid to the Department for Education and Employment (DfEE) for financial support to introduce Modern Apprenticeships in the sectors which they represent. By September 1994, 14 'prototype' programmes had commenced and one year later over 40 sectors had gained approval to launch the initiative. Although there are no explicitly articulated numerical targets for the 229


ALISON FULLER

numbers of Modern Apprenticeships, the expectation is that the programme should arrest, and begin to reverse, the decline in young people reporting that they are pursuing an apprenticeship (352 000 in 1990 down to 216 000 in 1994) (Leman & Williams, 1995). I shall argue in this paper that one explanation for why the Modern Apprenticeship has captured the imagination of many training providers, employers, and commentators on the vocational education and training scene alike, is that it has been linked, at least at the level of policy rhetoric, to the challenges posed by (global) economic and labour market trends (e.g. the government's latest 'Competitiveness' White Paper, 1995). These are often discussed under the rubric of post-Fordism and can be associated with an increasing demand for higher level skills.. The post-Fordist analysis and its putative consequences have become familiar (see for example, Finegold, 1991; Murray, 1991; Symes, 1995). Global economic trends and, in particular, the ease with which capital can be moved between countries; advances in technology and, particularly, the facility to transfer information almost instantaneously around the world, and the effects of consumer demand for quality and distinctive merchandise on patterns of production, are shifting the balance between capital and labour so that the route to profit growth is increasingly linked to the ability of the workforce to 'add value' to the tasks and processes with which they are involved. This thesis is reinforced through its expression at the international level by writers such as Robert Reich (1991), at the British national level, for example, in the recently published White Papers (Department for Trade and Industry, 1994, 1995) and the work of commentators such as Will Hutton (1995), and at the organisational level through publicity regarding the characteristics of 'world class' companies (e.g. Department for Education and Employment, 1994). One consequence of these trends in employment, has been the decline in the availability of 'unskilled' jobs together with the growth in higher level, technical, professional and managerial work. These have been charted in the United Kingdom, in publications such as the Labour Market Quarterly. It is to the implications of such changes for the education and training of young people that attention is currently being turned through Government sponsored initiatives such as the bearing 'Review of 16-19 Qualifications'! 1] and the Learning for the Future study being conducted by a research team from the Universities of London and Warwick,[2] as well as the launch of the Modern Apprenticeship. Whilst much debate has centred around the structure of post-compulsory education and training, particularly for the 16-19 age group, and options for its reform; there is a discernible sub-text emerging which identifies 'effective learning' as the crucial issue, and which makes a connection between the demand for people who can meet the labour requirements of a post-Fordist era and their learning experiences and achievements (see 230

MODERN APPRENTICESHIP


for example Fuller & Young, 1996, in preparation). I would suggest that we may be witnessing a shift away from an emphasis on products and outcomes; a focus which has dominated the British post-compulsory vocational education and training domain in recent years, towards the rediscovery of process. The Modern Apprenticeship is, perhaps, the most visible expression, in terms of Government sponsored initiatives, of this movement. Writing the editorial for a special report on Modern Apprenticeships for Insight, a journal published by DfEE, Edward Fennell comments that: The Modern Apprenticeship movement is signally important because it marks the start of the 'age of youth learning'. Modern Apprentices are not being narrowly trained, nor were they being given stop-gap experiences. (Insight, 1994, p. 2) This is not to assume that such rhetoric can easily be translated into reality. For example, if the programme is to succeed in providing worthwhile learning experiences for its client group, it will have to overcome the constraints on the provision of high quality training that have been associated with output-related funding (e.g. Hodkinson & Hodkinson, 1995). However, we can perceive that through the statements of influential policy makers (e.g. as reported in Insight, 1994); the requirements of the Modern Apprenticeship framework (Department for Education and Employment, 1994), and the sponsorship of research and development into issues of Learning Design (e.g. Knasel, 1993) that an opportunity seems to be emerging to rejuvenate the profile of 'process'. Paradoxically, perhaps, the rationale for its re-emergence is, apparently, being driven by the skill requirements stemming from a post-Fordist analysis of organisational and commercial trends. This may be coupled with a realisation that one of the reasons for dissatisfaction with the results of youth training policy and programmes has been the placing of insufficient priority on the development of mechanisms designed to enhance the quality of learning at work and the integration of on- and off-the-job learning experiences (Hodkinson & Hodkinson, 1995). The paper elaborates this argument, firstly, by identifying some of the key features on which the claim of the Modern Apprenticeship to represent a 'higher' quality training opportunity for young people, is based. This is followed by a discussion of three learning-related issues which have emerged during development work for one sector's (Bus and Coach) Modern Apprenticeship,^] and which help move the debate beyond the domains of design features and good intentions. Although the bus and coach sector covers a wide range of jobs, its Modern Apprenticeship programme focuses solely on vehicle maintenance and engineering occupations. The article concludes by outlining the challenge that is posed to participants in translating sound principles of learning design into 231

ALISON FULLER

practical mechanisms and processes. It suggests that reliance on outcomes-led quality assurance systems is likely to prove inadequate and uses the experience derived from work-in-progress for the Bus and Coach sector, to indicate how one group of employers, training providers and their ITO are formulating a development plan which recognises that closer partnerships provide a positive response to the goal of providing a high quality Modern Apprenticeship (Puller & Maguire, 1995).


Key Features of the Modern Apprenticeship

A number of strands of post-compulsory education and training policy are brought together under the rubric of the Modern Apprenticeship. This enables the programme to be presented as encompassing a package of characteristics which distinguish it from previous youth training schemes. These features also make it an attractive vehicle for the Government and others (e.g. Confederation of British Industry, Industry Training Organisations, Training and Enterprise Councils etc.) to use to promote messages regarding the perceived need to increase the supply of skilled and well-qualified young people across British industry. Where the message regarding the demand for such young people seems less persuasive, for example in sectors which have a less well defined stake in the 'high skills equilibrium' being advocated, then values associated with social justice, opportunity and entitlement, in this case for (all) young people to benefit from good quality training experiences, can be invoked. The features outlined below can be differentiated in two ways; those internal to the programme itself and which can be seen as symbols of 'high standards', and those relating to the extension of the Modern Apprenticeship (and by implication its putative benefits) to non-traditional participants (e.g. non-craft or engineering related sectors). Both dimensions link to the over-arching rationale for a national initiative aimed at young people which responds to projections about industry's future skill requirements. Apprenticeship

The adoption of the term 'apprenticeship' for the new programme aims to draw on the 'best' aspects of the traditional apprenticeship learning model. It attempts this by recognising that the process of becoming an autonomous, 'skilled' worker who is socialised into workplace/ occupational culture and practices, takes time and involves experiential learning as well as more formal on- and off-the-job training provision. Valerie Bayliss, a former senior DfEE policy maker involved in the development of the Modern Apprenticeship, is quoted as stating that the most notable positive associations emanating from 'apprenticeship' are:

232


the idea of quality training, much of it work-based but also off-the-job, conducted over a period of time with dedicated employers, (as quoted in an interview for Insight, 31, 1994, p. 7)


Links with NVQs: attainment, progression and flexibility In terms of attainment, the inclusion of an NVQ at Level 3 as a mandatory outcome of all Modern Apprenticeship frameworks is designed to signal that the programme intends to raise standards. Although, it is possible for young people funded under Youth Training to pursue Level 3 awards, most recent figures (Summer 1994) indicate that slightly more than 50% of all leavers from the scheme attained qualifications with only 16% of these achieving at Level 3 (Spours, 1995). Richardson et al (1995) suggest that there is a positive association between company competitiveness and employees' achievement at Level 3, and report that the Modern Apprenticeship aims to provide 'a further 5% of the age group with a programme leading to a level 3 qualification' (p. 41). In theory, positioning the Modern Apprenticeship within the NVQ framework should function to encourage individuals to progress further up the levels' staircase and, as a consequence, enables it to be tied to the rhetoric of lifetime learning, as illustrated in this quote from Edward Fennell. They [Modern Apprentices] are stepping on to a 'learning escalator' on which they will travel, change and develop through the test of their working lives. (Insights, 31, 1994, p. 2) Similarly, the unit-based structure of NVQs has enabled the developers of Modern Apprenticeships to construct alternative routes towards the attainment of the NVQ3. For example, the Bus and Coach Modern Apprenticeship framework provides employers and individuals with a choice of four apprenticeship pathways within each of the three principal vehicle maintenance disciplines (total of 12 options). The gloss that has been attached to each: 'specialist craft route1, 'multi-skilled craft route', 'craft technician route', 'craft supervisory route' reflect emerging and projected job roles and, as such, provide an example of how the Modern Apprenticeship has provided the industry with an opportunity to bring developments in training into line with the trends in work organisation and technology that previous research has identified (Maguire et al, 1995). Whilst improved flexibility within programmes might be seen as a welcome feature of the Modern Apprenticeship, the scope for apprentices to be able to pursue combinations of units taken from GNVQs with those taken from NVQs is, as yet, unclear.

233

ALISON FULLER


Breadth

Richardson et al (1995) argue that breadth will be an essential criterion of any system designed to meet future learning requirements. With this in mind, it is appropriate to examine the breadth that is currently being offered by the Modern Apprenticeship. The framing of programmes in terms of mandatory, optional and additional components provides the potential for Modern Apprentices to gain accreditation from a variety of sources. However, the requirement that they only fulfil the mandatory elements successfully to complete the programme (usually an NVQ3 and a selection of NCVQ core skill units [4]) allows us to question under what circumstances young people might be allocated the extra resources necessary for them to expand their range of attainments. It can be suggested that the design features of the Modern Apprenticeship allow for the implementation of weaker and stronger interpretations of 'breadth' within the programme. Firstly, a weaker version might be attributed to the mandatory inclusion of the relevant NVQ3 and a range of NCVQ core skills units. Alternatively, a stronger or more 'holistic' version of breadth might be perceived in terms of the scope of the learning programme as a whole (including mandatory and optional components) which, in theory, enables the apprentice to augment or broaden their mandatory studies with optional outcomes in the form of additional relevant qualifications. For example, the bus and coach Modern Apprenticeship states: The optional additional outcomes of the Modern Apprenticeship can be one or more of the following qualifications. We see these qualifications as providing added value, underpinning and endorsing the different learning routes of the Modern Apprenticeship... These include: 'GNVQ foundation level in Engineering, City and Guilds qualifications relevant to the discipline, BTEC National Certih'cate in Engineering, NEBS Management Introductory Award in Supervisory Management.' (BCT, 1995, p. 17)

The introduction of core skill units to the Modern Apprenticeship as well as its association with other optional qualifications can be seen as part of the attempt to promote 'breadth' under the notion of 'full occupational competence', and to equate its acquisition with successful completion of a Modern Apprenticeship programme. However, as we shall see, issues regarding the concept of 'occupational competence' and whether it is definitionally in conflict with an holistic or broad approach to learning are debatable.

234


Ownership by Industry


The identification of industry 'ownership' as a key feature of the Modern Apprenticeship relates to the proposition that the initiative has been developed in response to the changing needs of industry (and by implication the national economy) and that, therefore, employers (unlike in the case of Youth Training) should take the lead in its creation. Valerie Bayliss commented, What we must be very clear about is that the Modern Apprenticeship is owned by industry and is being developed in response to industry's needs. While there is Government support for the idea and hard cash to support training programmes, the development and delivery is down to industry. In no way whatsoever is it to be confused with YT which will still operate separately. (1994, p. 7) The evaluation of the prototype Modern Apprenticeship found that the most significant early lesson in terms of good practice was that the ITO should secure the early involvement of leading employers in helping to develop their sector's programme (Everett, 1994). The Apprenticeship Agreement (similar to indentures used in traditional apprenticeships) provide one tangible sign of employers' commitment to the programme and the apprentice by specifying the roles and responsibilities of the principal parties (the employer and young person) for the duration of the Modern Apprenticeship. In addition, there is an expectation that the Modern Apprentice should be employed from day one, and a recognition that this factor is likely to increase the commitment of the young person and the employer. The evaluation of the prototypes confirmed the importance of this feature to young people and identified the negative effect on those (few) Modern Apprentices who did not enjoy this status during the first year (Everett, 1994; Unwin & Wellington, 1995). Policy for Industry-wide Participation

Another distinctive aim of the Modern Apprenticeship initiative is that the programme should be available in sectors which do not have a tradition of providing apprenticeship training and, importantly, in terms of its specified outcomes, in sectors where NVQs at Level 3 have yet to become established. In such cases, the development of the Modern Apprenticeship would seem to reflect the Government's strategic aim of increasing the supply of well-trained and qualified young people across industry (the new National Target is for 60% of young people to have achieved qualifications at Level 3 or above by the year 2000), as much as providing such sectors' representatives with the opportunity to review their approach to skill formation. Unwin & Wellington's (1995) account of 235


ALISON FULLER

the early implementation of the Modern Apprenticeship prototypes suggests that the challenge of extending the programme to non-traditional sectors should not be under-estimated. It is clear from the above that there is a strong intention that the Modern Apprenticeship should succeed where other initiatives aimed at youth training have struggled; that is in its ability to offer young people high quality training leading to recognised qualifications. As already suggested, features incorporated into the Modern Apprenticeship programme confirm that the learning dimension is playing a significant role in this initiative. However, it is the contention of this paper, that the recasting of the design features of youth training even in the terms that have been adopted for the Modern Apprenticeship are likely .to be insufficient to ensure the provision of consistently high-quality learning opportunities. This is partly because the implications for managing and delivering 'good quality learning' within what is still broadly an outcomes-based delivery model need further development and, secondly, because the implementation of high quality provision is about more than the specification of outcomes and coherent features of learning design. In the remainder of the article, I shall begin to address these two issues by referring to some of the themes emerging from the development work associated with the Bus and Coach Modern Apprenticeship. I suggest that the imperative of managing and delivering high quality training is more likely to be fulfilled in cases where employers, together with other relevant groups (e.g. providers and ITO), become active participants in the creation of mechanisms designed to ensure that effective learning takes place in the workplace and off-the-job. With regard to the implementation of the Modern Apprenticeship, to which we now turn, I shall argue that there is still a lack of clarity about the kind of learning it is expected will take place in such programmes. Learning Issues

As part of the Bus and Coach Modern Apprenticeship development project mentioned above, we were asked to consider a number of issues identified by DfEE as being relevant to learning design for Modern Apprenticeships. Three main themes emerged: • holistic approaches to the attainment of occupational competence; • effective learning on and off-the-job; • core skills and skilled learners. Whilst, an examination of these topics is at an early stage, the discussion presented below indicates their relevance to the quest for promoting high quality learning experiences within a system based on the attainment of occupational standards and NVQs.

236


Holistic Approaches to the Attainment of Occupational Competence Two of the aspirations enshrined in the Government endorsed National Targets for Education and Training (NTET) and the Government's Training Strategy and which have been reported in the recent 'Competitiveness' White Paper (Department for Trade and Industry, 1995) underpin the appeal of establishing 'holistic' learning programmes:


All education and training develops self-reliance, flexibility and breadth, in particular, through fostering competence in core skills. (Aim 3, the New NTETs) Encouraging and enabling young people to gain the skills and enterprising attitudes needed for entry to the workforce and to prepare them to realise their full potential throughout their working life, and in particular to progress to NVQ3 and beyond, if they are able. (Government Training Strategy, point three) In defining an holistic approach, it is important to distinguish between at least two types of programme. The first could be perceived as 'holistic' because it is designed to serve a range of goals through providing learners with the opportunity to pursue multiple qualifications, each of which is designed to meet a specific purpose (e.g. single skills such as welding, knowledge-based awards, core skills units, competence-based awards). The acquisition of such a package or combination of qualifications could be interpreted as an holistic, or possibly, as a comprehensive way of developing broad competence. The inclusion in the Modern Apprenticeship of mandatory, optional and additional components provides a structure within which this interpretation of an holistic approach could be achieved. One implication of this modelling of 'holistic' would be that the successful completion of a Modern Apprenticeship based on the attainment of the mandatory component alone would not count as an holistic learning experience. An alternative would be to develop a learning programme which is perceived as 'holistic' because the standards have been designed to cover the range of generic, technical, academic, personal and practical competences that are deemed to represent full and broad competence, in contrast with standards focusing on occupational competence alone. It follows that the pursuit and attainment of 'holistic' standards could involve an holistic approach to the design of the accompanying learning programme. Translating this into the framework of the Modern Apprenticeship might mean that a programme could 'qualify' as holistic on the basis of the mandatory component if the standards being pursued were, themselves, deemed to be 'holistic'. However, following the argument of Stewart & Sambrook (1995) this interpretation may, as yet, 237

ALISON FULLER


appear to be somewhat wishful. They argue that the Job Competence Model on which the development of occupational standards has been based is limited in two main ways. Firstly, it draws on a definition of competence which focuses on behavioural outcomes rather than individuals' personal attributes, and secondly, it is partial in that employers' interpretations of competence are given primacy. Stewart & Sambrook, using earlier work by Stewart & Hamlin (1992, 1993, 1994), argue that the Job Competence Model produces an inherently restricted •view of competence, leading to standards which are definitionally narrow because they are applied solely at the level of occupation, so missing other aspects such as the job, the individual, and the organisation which are relevant to non-occupationally bound definitions of competence. ... factors which are specific and exclusive to particular occupations are by definition technical in character. This is because it is those factors which identify and differentiate occupations one from another. (Stewart & Sambrook, 1995, p. 10)

The authors explain that in keeping with the conceptual slant of the Job Competence Model, Functional Analysis (the tool used to apply it), will inevitably yield standards which are narrow and technical in character. A key issue here is the part played by underpinning knowledge and understanding in the specification of standards. For example, casting them in a minimal role has been associated with a somewhat superficial and limited view of standards development (FEFC, 1994). Taking the Bus and Coach Modern Apprenticeship as an example, participants (leading employers and training providers) agreed that the existing (currently being revised) occupational standards were insufficiently explicit regarding the extent and level of knowledge and understanding to be obtained. In response, some of these employers together with their established training provider, had decided to deliver City and Guilds and BTEC qualifications alongside the NVQ in order to ensure that their apprentices followed a curriculum covering the knowledge they required. Other employers and providers in the industry, were less enthusiastic about the knowledge components covered by the City and Guilds and BTEC qualifications on the grounds that they had become outdated. Consequently they were inclined to review the knowledge and understanding necessary for contemporary occupational competence and if necessary to develop a 'new curriculum'. These perspectives illustrated that knowledge and understanding were perceived to be essential to the achieving the goal of 'competence'. The concern is that the attainment of NVQs that have not been systematically linked to an up-to-date programme of underpinning knowledge and understanding would be unlikely to lead to the desired conclusion and, by implication, to encompass an holistic approach to learning or competence.

238



Major factors in the current revision of the Bus and Coach engineering standards will be the extent to which the scope and level of underpinning knowledge and understanding is specified, and whether employers and providers perceive that the specification amounts to a 'syllabus' that they can associate with full and broad competence. If the revised standards are deemed to include enough detail on knowledge and understanding to negate demand for traditional knowledge based courses and qualifications, it would indicate a move towards a more holistic formulation of the standards on which NVQs are based. Attainment of the awards would then, in effect, require candidates to have followed a specified programme of learning, a feature which hitherto has not been part of the qualification's architecture. A putative advantage to such a development would be that the NVQ could become a more consistent, reliable and 'holistic' qualification with a more convincing claim to representing a 'badge of competence'. An issue requiring further debate is the realism of the aspiration to develop holistic learning programmes within a system which uses employment and outcome-led standards as the basis for assessment. Effective Learning On- and Off-thejob One of the areas in which the ability of the Modern Apprenticeship to make an innovative and positive contribution to the quality of youth training may be judged, relates to workplace learning. Engestrom describes learning which takes place in an incidental manner, for example, when a worker is moved to a different department to acquire new experience, as 'tacit': 'learning is often incidental and piecemeal - it may happen practically without conscious effort' (1994, p. 5). This type of experience is contrasted with goal-directed learning which takes place as a result of planned instruction by a teacher or trainer. In the case of the Bus and Coach Modern Apprenticeship Framework Document, the identification of, and references to, the off- and on-the-job training environments suggested that unless steps were taken further to articulate what Modern Apprentices should expect in terms of training and learning in the workplace, then the tacit learning tag was likely to characterise the experience of the on-the-job component. This could be viewed as a missed opportunity, as the literature indicates that the motivation of individuals to learn is enhanced when they can see the relevance of their learning to the tasks they are being trained to accomplish at work (Engestrom, 1994). An important aim of the development work being undertaken in support of the Bus and Coach Modern Apprenticeship, is to find ways of facilitating and enhancing the integration of the workplace and off-the-job aspects of the programme. Whilst the fulfilment of the integrative principle requires analysis of what can be best learned and practiced in 239


ALISON FULLER

each of the two locations, a process which implies close collaboration between assessors, training providers and employers, it will also require that both types of learning environments are educative.[5] Drawing on work by Lave & Wenger (1991), Engestrom has developed three conditions that will help bring about an educative learning environment (1991, p. 252). The first is that participants should have broad access to different parts of the activity which will help them (eventually) to proceed to full participation in all core tasks. From the perspective of the Modern Apprenticeship, exposure to a broad range of tasks is necessary if learners are to gain an overall picture of their future occupational role and for them to gain the breadth and depth of knowledge and experience to enable them to become autonomous skilled workers. Secondly, participants should have plentiful opportunities to discuss tasks with their peers and with their more experienced colleagues. Engestrom (1991) suggests that it is particularly beneficial for learners to hear and talk about problematic situations and how they have been resolved, a feature which he terms 'war stories'. This 'condition' could be difficult to achieve for apprentices who find themselves isolated as learners in the workplace and who, therefore, have little access to peer group interaction. In these situations it could be beneficial to develop 'learning networks' which operate outside the scope of individual employers. Thirdly, the techniques and structures of the learning environment should be transparent, that is available for learners' inspection (for example, explicit learning goals, roles and responsibilities, and the availability of authentic tasks). This condition relates to the other two insofar as it reinforces the view that apprentices should gain authentic experience and that they should be encouraged to reflect constructively on what they have learned and to use the opportunity to think about alternative ways of solving problems. Core Skills and Skilled Learners

One of the implications for skills deriving from a post-Fordist analysis for work organisation and trends is that workers should become skilled learners. The work of writers such as Annett (1989) suggests that there is an important connection between the notions of 'core skills' and 'skilled learners' in that they both relate to cognitive development. In particular, the point can be made that skilled learners are likely to be those who have acquired 'generic' skills (e.g. problem solving, lateral thinking, conceptual skills, and analytical techniques) which help them to apply what has been learned in one context to others. One interpretation of core skills is that they refer to a range of such cognitive strategies or generic skills. Robert Reich (1991) argues that individuals that he would 240



classify as skilled learners, on the basis that they have acquired four generic skills,[6] enjoy increased employability in an international labour market. Another interpretation of core skills is that they relate to 'transferable' skills which are perceived to be the sorts of 'basic' educational abilities (e.g. literacy and numeracy) which once learned can be applied in a variety of different situations. Three of the core skills units which have been developed by the NCVQ would, superficially, appear to be more closely related to this view in that they cover 'Communication', 'Application of Number', and 'Information Technology'. However, closer examination reveals that 'Communication' and 'Application of Number' should not be confused with literacy and numeracy as their specifications relate to a more specialised view of skills, such as those likely to occur in job roles which include, communicating by using images, as well as orally, and in writing, and having access to large batch data on which statistical operations are performed (e.g. in some manufacturing environments). The fourth and fifth core skill units 'Personal Skills' covering 'the ability to work alone or as part of a team' and 'improve your own learning and performance', and 'Problem Solving' may relate more closely to the notion of generic skills or 'transfer' skills mentioned above. With regard to these latter sorts of competences, Richardson et al argue that they will be difficult to assess 'as they are more to do with the processes of teaching and learning than curriculum content' (1995, p. 6). The slow progress by NCVQ on the provision of awards for their Personal Skills and Problem Solving core skills units would seem to confirm their conclusion. Reviews of the literature on learning transfer (e.g. Annett, 1989; Soden, 1993) indicate that the assumption that core ('transferable') skills identified and taught in one situation can be easily transferred to others, is being seriously questioned. Attention is currently being directed to the alternative view that there may be ways of delivering 'core skills' that will be more likely to facilitate learners' ability to apply them in a variety of contexts (NCVQ, 1994). One implication of this is that the acquisition of the NCVQ core skills units alone is less likely to be a useful indicator of whether someone is a skilled learner, than their acquisition coupled with the ability to apply them across different situations. This may point to a tension between an approach designed to integrate core skills delivery and assessment with 'narrowly specified' occupational standards attainment and the conclusion, drawn in the literature, that the effective teaching and learning of these skills depends on them not being tied to any particular context. Skilbeck et al (1994) raise a different but nonetheless related matter when they discuss the relevance of who determines or 'owns' the 'core skills'. They argue that if core skills have been determined with little 241


ALISON FULLER

participation from those for whom they have been developed, then there is more likely to be resistance to their implementation and take up. In the Modern Apprenticeship, core skills have been specified by DfEE as a mandatory component, although each sector's Framework Document lists which of the available units is to be included in its programme. Employers and providers, consulted during the Bus and Coach Modern Apprenticeship project, had not participated in the development of the NCVQ core skills standards and were not familiar with the content of the units. The employers' interpretation was that 'Communications' and 'Application of Number' referred to general (basic) educational attainment which they felt was the responsibility of the compulsory educational sector to provide. They were also, generally, unclear about the rationale for their inclusion in the Modern Apprenticeship and from a practical point of view, how, and by whom, they would be delivered and assessed. The two broad responses to core skills that emerged during the course of the Bus and Coach development work were firstly, that training and assessment requirements associated with the core skills should be met through the off-the-job provision and would, therefore, produce minimal extra demands on employers. Secondly, that if it transpired that input from companies would be necessary to fulfil the core skills component, then this should be integrated with the training and assessment practices associated with the pursuit of the standards. Both views confirm the perception that the core skills units associated with this Modern Apprenticeship, and probably others are currently not 'owned' by key participants. As the discussion in this section of the paper has indicated, there are debates relating to learning, Modern Apprenticeship and the NVQ model which remain to be resolved. However, the onus is already on those Modern Apprenticeships in operation to meet participants' expectations regarding the delivery of effective learning programmes (Unwin & Wellington, 1995). Beyond Consultation Establishing good principles of learning design coupled with challenging outcome targets, in theory, amounts to an advance in work-based youth training in the United Kingdom. However, as Hodkinson & Hodkinson point out: If we are serious about raising the quality of the British workforce, then urgent attention must be directed to the specification and management of a quality learning process. (Hodkinson & Hodkinson, 1995, p. 222)

242



It was a concern with developing a quality learning process that shaped how we approached the task of assisting the bus and coach sector in the early stages of implementing its Modern Apprenticeship. In brief, the approach was informed by the work of writers such as Fullan (1991), Hord (1987) and Hargeaves (1993) on the management of educational innovation, which highlights the importance of participant involvement in the change process and, in this context, their pivotal role in developing strategies to enhance learning in Modern Apprenticeship programmes. In the discussion below, I suggest that the broad approach taken for this project has facilitated the identification of mechanisms for fostering partnerships between employers and providers. This paves the way for the creation of a quality learning process. To date (December 1995) the development work has consisted of the following steps: • in-depth interviews with 15 key informants (including employers, training providers, and TECs); • dissemination to leading employers as well as interviewees of an interim paper reporting respondents' understanding of the Modern Apprenticeship and their perceptions of its strengths and weaknesses; • facilitation of a consultative group meeting, attended by employers, training providers and ITO representatives to discuss, and gain feedback on, the interim report and to confirm emerging areas for development; • dissemination of a request for feedback to consultative group members on a draft development plan focusing on four themes: Selection and Recruitment, Learning, Partnerships, and Marketing; • the revision of the development plan in the light of participants' responses; • the convening of two working-groups, one focusing on 'Learning and Partnerships' and the other on 'Selection, Recruitment and Marketing'. Fostering Effective Learning Hodkinson & Hodkinson argue that the dominant model of quality assurance associated with vocational education and training has been framed in terms of the measurability of outcomes, and that the attainment of a recognised qualification is taken to embody a 'worthwhile experience' (1995, p. 212). A key weakness of the model is the lack of attention to process factors (e.g. support for apprentices in the workplace including allocation of time for study and feedback on progress) which might contribute towards or hinder individuals' learning achievements, and which could figure in the development of mechanisms designed to enhance the quality of the learning experience. We found in the bus and coach development work that participating employers were 243

ALISON FULLER

committed to the apprenticeship model of learning and had established track records of providing training leading to NVQ3 and other Level 3 (and sometimes Level 4) qualifications. Of interest in terms of a focus on process factors was that their concerns, elicited from the in-depth interviews with key informants, revolved around the potential differences that the Modern Apprenticeship might make to current apprenticeship practice, rather than to its qualification outcomes.


Learning and Partnerships

Two broad themes (Learning and Partnerships, and Selection, Recruitment and Marketing) emerged from the interviews and consultation process, the implications of these in terms of proposals for action have been recorded as part of a draft development plan. Of most relevance to the current discussion regarding the learning process is the inclusion of the theme of 'Learning and Partnership' which focuses particularly on mechanisms designed to enhance and integrate workplace and off-the-job learning. The following proposals which have been extracted from the development plan (Fuller & Maguire, 1995), illustrate the approach the 'partners' wish to pursue: • the design and undertaking by providers of workplace analyses of existing learning and assessment opportunities; • the transformation of workplace analyses into individual company training plans that include links between opportunities to gain competence in the workplace (and generate assessable evidence) and the standards being pursued; • the design and implementation of learning contracts to identify, address and support individual learning requirements, including core skills; • providers to disseminate information to employers, outlining the off-the-job curriculum being delivered to apprentices so that workplace trainers and supervisors can see what has been, and what is going to be covered at college, so enabling them to draw on this resource for the planning of workplace learning experiences; • the development and dissemination of a programme of learning to cover the underpinning knowledge and understanding that apprentices require if they are to attain full competence; • the establishment of local 'learning networks', a forum in which employers, training providers and apprentices could meet to discuss and act on issues emerging from their experiences of the Modern Apprenticeship; • reciprocal exchanges between, and visits to, training providers, employers, manufacturers and relevant suppliers to emphasise the ensure appropriate communication about technical developments. 244



A working group consisting of employers and providers has been appointed to refine and implement the proposals listed in the 'Learning and Partnership' aspect of the development plan. Members are currently engaged in the tasks of prioritising the items, allocating roles and responsibilities, devising a time-table for action and generating 'process-led' criteria by which success can be evaluated. Their goal is to extend the availability of high quality provision by developing arrangements and practices which engage the skills, knowledge and experience of those involved in the delivery of the programme. The aimed for scenario contrasts with that reported by Hodkinson & Hodkinson who found that in the Youth Credit scheme which they investigated: Definitions of quality were externally imposed, through funding related targets that had to be met. Many felt threatened and excluded, and morale seemed low. (Hodkinson & Hodkinson, 1995, pp. 222-223) As the quote makes clear the funding regime, and the imposition of an outcomes based management system can detract from finding the way to achieve genuine learning gains. The Modern Apprenticeship, as the latest in a line of Government initiatives targeted at the training of young people, is also subject to this framework. Nevertheless, this paper has indicated that there is some cause for optimism. This relates to the greater policy coherence that has recently emerged between the distinctive features of the Modern Apprenticeship, (global) economic trends, and the contingent upgrading in levels of skill requirement, and which has led (Including through Government sponsored research) to a refocusing of attention on learning and process issues. The brief example included in this paper has indicated the approach being adopted by one sector in response to this challenge. However, unless this impetus can be extended and harnessed to a quality assurance system designed to improve learning processes as well as outcomes, then the Modern Apprenticeship may come to be judged as another missed opportunity to bring about the called for changes to Britain's youth training system. Correspondence Alison Fuller, Vocational Education and Training Associates, 18 Coventry Road, Leicester LE9 5GB, United Kingdom. Notes [1] Ron Dearing's Interim Report was published during the Summer of 1995, the final report was published in Spring 1996. [2] This work is being jointly sponsored by the Banking Information Service and a range of other organisations including BT, Baring Foundation, DfEE, Paul

245


ALISON FULLER Hamlyn Foundation, The Post Office, Unilever pic. The Initial Report was published in November 1995. [3] At the end of August 1995, the DfEE commissioned Bus and Coach Training Ltd, the sectoral Industry Training Organisation, to lead the project and a research team from Vocational Education and Training Research Associates was appointed by BCT to design and undertake the related research and development work. [4] There are currently NCVQ core skills units available for accreditation up to Level 3 in Communications, Application of Number, Information Technology, and Personal Skills. As an example, the Bus and Coach Modern Apprenticeship referred to in this article makes it a mandatory requirement that apprentices gain core skills units at Level 3 in Communication, Application of Number and at Level 2 in Personal Skills - Improve Your Own Learning and Performance, and Information Technology. [5] Unwin & Wellington (1995) report the perceptions of prototype Modern Apprentices on the differences between on- and off-the-job training. In general, the on-the-job component was seen as enjoyable and challenging because it was 'hands on', and the off-the-job was perceived as too easy and too similar to school. [6] The four types of generic skills that Reich identifies are 'Connective' - the ability to relate problems and concepts in different fields; 'Conceptual' - the ability to develop hypotheses and theories; 'Collaborative' - the ability to work in teams, and 'Risk-taking' - the ability to take risks and to learn from mistakes (Richardson et al, 1995).

References Annett, J. (1989) Training in Transferable Skills, Research and Development Report No. 50, Sheffield, Department for Education and Employment. Bus and Coach Training Limited (1995) Modern Apprenticeships: the National Framework for the Bus and Coach Industry. Rickmansworth: BCT. Young People and Work Branch (1994) Modern Apprenticeships Pack. Sheffield: Department for Education. Department for Education and Employment (1994) Individual Commitment to Learning: a broad perspective on the links with investors in people and business performance. Sheffield: Individual Commitment Branch, Department for Education and Employment. Department for Trade and Industry (1994) Competitiveness: helping Britain to win. London: HMSO. Department for Trade and Industry (1995) Competitiveness: forging ahead. London: HMSO. Engestrom, Y. (1991) Non scolae sed vitae discimus: toward overcoming the encapsulation of school learning, Learning and Instruction, I, pp. 243-259. Engestrom, Y. (1994) Training for Change: new approach to instruction and learning in working life. Geneva: International Labour Office.

246


MODERN APPRENTICESHIP Everett, M. (1994) The Early Experiences and Lessons So Far: the evaluation of modern apprenticeship prototypes. London: Ernst & Young. FEFC (1994) NVQs in the FE Sector in England. Coventry: FEFC, September. Fennell, E. (1994) Insight Comment, Insight, 31, Winter, Sheffield, Employment Department Information Branch. Finegold, D. (1991) Institutional incentives and skill creation: preconditions for a high skills equilibrium, in P. Ryan (Ed.) International Comparisons of Vocational Education and Training for Intermediate Skills. London: Falmer. Fullan, M. (1991) The New Meaning of Educational Change. London: Cassell. Fuller, A. & Maguire, S. (1995) Preparing the Ground: design and implementation of modern apprenticeships. Rickmansworth: Bus and Coach Training. Fuller, A. & Young, M. (1996) Learning and Qualifications for the Future. London: Institute of Education, University of London. Hargreaves, A. (1993) Changing Teachers, Changing Times: teachers work and culture in the postmodern age. London: Cassell. Hodkinson, P. & Hodkinson, H. (1995) Markets, outcomes and the quality of vocational education and training: some lessons from a Youth Credits pilot scheme, Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 47, pp. 209-226. Hord, S. (1987) Evaluating Educational Innovation. New York: Croom Helm. Hutton, W. (1995) The State We're In. London: Jonathan Cape. Insight (1994) Modern Apprenticeship Special Report, Insight, Winter, 31. Sheffield: Department for Employment. Insight (1995) Modern Apprenticeships: early views of employers and apprentices, Insight, Summer, 33. Sheffield: Department for Employment. Knasel, E. (1993) Becoming Competent: effective learning for occupational competence. Sheffield: Department for Employment. Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning: legitimate peripheral interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Leman, S. & Williams, T. (1995) Apprentices and other long-term trainees: data from the LFS and other surveys, Employment Gazette, February, pp. 67-74. Maguire, M., Fuller, A., Maguire, S. & Walsh, K. (1995) Contextualising Training: a strategic review of training and qualifications in the bus and coach industry. Rickmansworth: Bus and Coach Training. Murray, R. (1991) Fordism and post-Fordism, in G. Esland (Ed.) Education, Training and Employment, Volume 1: educated labour-the changing basis of industrial demand. Wokingham: Addison-Wesley. NCVQ (1994) Assessing Core Skills in GNVQs. London: NCVQ. Reich, R. (1991) The Work of Nations.London. London: Simon & Schuster. Richardson, W., Spours, K., Woolhouse, J. & Young, M. (1995) Learning for the future: initial report, Institute of Education and University of Warwick. Spours, K. (1995) Post-compulsory education and training: statistical trends, Working Paper, No. 7 Learning for the Future, Universities of Warwick and London, London/Warwick, November.

247

1


ALISON FULLER Soden, R. (1993) Teaching Thinking Skills in Vocational Education, Research and Development Series, Report No. 13. Sheffield: Employment Department. Stewart, J. & Hamlin, R. (1992) Competence-based qualifications: the case for established methodologies, Journal of European Industrial Training, 16(10), pp. 9-16. Stewart, J. & Hamlin, R. (1993) Competence-based qualifications: a way forward, Journal of European Industrial Training, 17(6), pp. 3-9. Stewart, J. & Hamlin, R. (1994) Competence-based qualifications: a reply to Bob Mansfield, Journal of European Industrial Training, 18(1), pp. 27-30. Stewart, J. & Sambrook, S. (1995) The role of functional analysis in National Vocational Qualifications: a critical appraisal (Special Issue on Competence and the National Vocational Qualifications Framework), British Journal of Education and Work, 8, pp. 93-106. Symes, C. (1995) A post-Fordist reworking of Australian education: the Finn, Mayer and Carmichael reports in the context of labour reprocessing, Journal of Vocational Education and Training: the vocational aspect of education, 47, pp. 247-272. Unwin, L. & Wellington, J. (1995) Reconstructing the work-based route: lessons from the modern apprenticeship, Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 47, pp. 337-352.

248