by Dean Prigelmeier, President of Proactive Technologies, Inc.
Career and vocation-focused training is a pivotal point in every current and future worker’s life. This world is overwhelmed by forces that make the effort more difficult for the education and training providers, more urgent and critical for the learner, more scrutinized by the employer and constantly measured against time; how long the training takes (which determines costs) and the relevance of the skills acquired to the targeted job which is always moving to the next level of technology. If the training is not “continuously improved” and maintained to be predominantly current and accurate, the graduate may find that jobs for which the new-found skills were targeted now marginally or, even worse, no longer exist.
In theory, apprenticeships offer a promising approach for traditional trades and crafts. As of 2008, more jobs can be registered as apprenticeships with new models accepted by the U.S. Department of Labor. If the program is based on a sound structure and methodology (one that can work for any type of job classification), an apprenticeship capstone – the job-related, employer-based training – would be maintained current and accurate for at least the employer apprenticeship host. Without this component, an apprenticeship experience may be as hollow as some of the for-profit educational chains which are often criticized for high costs and low placement rates.
“No one would ride in a plane flown by a pilot with only classes and simulator time, have surgery by a surgeon that hasn’t yet operated on a live human, or receive a root canal from a dentist with no “live-patient” time. Certified mastery of the tasks that define each of these jobs is what makes the ‘license to practice’ credible. And there is a difference between ‘a pilot” and ‘the pilot.’ Having a pilot license certifies you to fly planes, not a specific plane; you still have to have training and be certified to apply your craft to flying that plane. With the hybrid approach to apprenticeships, both are accomplished at the same time.”
The term “apprenticeship” has taken on many new meanings in the rush to increase the number of apprentices in the United States. Some 2-year community college programs that have been around a while have been re-branded in an effort to give new life to the same programs of worker development. Some have been thrown together to position an organization for the anticipated flood of grant dollars to find apprentices. Many of these are less “employer-centric” and more “industry-friendly” in spirit. Yet, it is important to remember that the ultimate beneficiaries of an apprenticeship should be the apprentice, the employer, the community, the industry and then the workforce development community, in that order. This should always be the focus and priority.
The process of gaining a “certificate of apprenticeship completion” level status can be an important milestone in an apprentice’s life. Achieving it can be accelerated by the focus and relevancy of related technical instruction and implementing employer-based structured on-the-job training, the latter for which mastery is also the measure of accomplishment for the apprentice and employer. Both components are critical to the quality of the program. Shortening the time without focusing these two components can weaken the program’s credibility and legitimacy. That is why many states require the employer to perform a job/task analysis on the job targeted for registration to ensure the structure, content and process is in place to document and explain what job-tasks have been mastered. That is what is most important to the current employer and any future employers.
These two requisite components were established in the middle-ages, albeit modernized for today’s needs, and have served us well when implemented properly. The United States Department of Labor – Bureau of Apprenticeships describes an apprenticeship as this: “It is a unique, flexible training system that combines job related technical instruction with structured on-the-job learning experiences.” The Bureau of Apprenticeships offers 3 models it accepts; the traditional Time-Based, the Competency and the Hybrid models.
Wikipedia describes an apprenticeship in the following way:
“Apprenticeship is a system of training a new generation of practitioners of a trade or profession with on-the-job training and often some accompanying study (classroom work and reading)… People who successfully complete an apprenticeship reach the journeyman level of competence. Although the formal boundaries and terminology of the apprentice/journeyman/master system often do not extend outside of guilds and trade unions, the concept of on-the-job training leading to competence over a period of years is found in any field of skilled labor.”
On-the-Job Training is a tricky concept for some to get their head around. Some mistakenly, some intentionally, confuse on-the-job training with classroom and online learning achieved while employed – probably self-serving and not reflective of international practice. Most workforce development professionals accept the four distinct types of training delivery, which are (from most basic for core skill development to most effective for task-based skill development): online, classroom and online/classroom-facilitated, simulation and on-the-job training. Each method affects its own domain of skill development and has its own metrics of competency. They are complementary when aligned in a coherent strategy and their affects can be appropriately cumulative, but can also be very conflicting, inefficient and ineffective if joined together in a haphazard and non-logical manner.
The United States Competency Models reflect this differentiation in their “competency pyramids.” The one below for Advanced Manufacturing illustrates this well. The sum of the related technical instruction (online learning, classroom learning and simulated work performance) should build a foundation upon which the apprentice will master the job-related tasks of the job classification which, when combined, can be registered as an apprenticeship. The employer is responsible for providing the job-specific on-the-job training – the empty pyramid blocks on top – and the environment conducive of mastering a craft.
In a ProactiveTechnologies model, structuring the on-the-job training facilitates the “accelerated transfer of expertise™”and is aligned with related technical instruction, leading the apprentice to higher levels of work capacity, work quality, and compliance while lowering the internal costs of training and increasing the return on investment for the employer who is hosting the apprenticeship. If the employer in the industry is satisfied with the outcome, the odds are pretty good that others in the industry will recognize what has been achieved.
According to Wikipedia, “The system of apprenticeship first developed in the later Middle Ages and came to be supervised by craft guilds and town governments. A master craftsman was entitled to employ young people as an inexpensive form of labor in exchange for providing food, lodging and formal training in the craft…Most apprentices aspired to becoming master craftsmen themselves on completion of their contract (usually a term of seven years), but some would spend time as a journeyman and a significant proportion would never acquire their own workshop.” The accelerated transfer of expertise in a Competency or Hybrid apprenticeship approach can lower the traditional apprenticeship time length from 7-8 years to 2 ½ – 4 ½ years – depending on the occupation – while providing a more current, robust, documented and deliberate experience for the apprentice and the apprenticeship host.
Everyone can probably agree that the on-the-job training of the past was informal, loosely documented and the “knowledge learning” was rarely curriculum driven. In many respects this practice has continued to this day in the workplace. But while time was plentiful and costs were extremely low in the past, today’s employers are looking for “faster, better, cheaper.” Nevertheless, on-the-job training of the past emphasized task mastery, which was also the informal measure of success. “Knowledge teaching” was intermingled with task training, certainly an attempt to address the notion of “job-relevancy.” There may not have been much documentation, but the apprenticeship host was usually working with the apprentice side-by-side, one-on-one for the duration of the apprenticeship so the apprenticeship host’s declaration that the apprentice had met all the requirements was perceived as a strong “credential.”
Today, for most job classifications (except traditional crafts apprenticeships hosted by union centers such as carpentry, sheetmetal, plumbing) there are too many potential apprentices and too few true apprenticeship hosts. This is the case in not only manufacturing but other industries that have “apprenticeshipable” job classifications. One-on-one training relationships of the past are not possible today, since several instructors may be necessary to adequately cover the required content and shifts. Additionally, trainees do not always stay in a job classification long enough – voluntarily or involuntarily – to complete a traditional time-based apprenticeship. Most importantly, employers will not host an apprenticeship if the economics do not work for them, and an expected return on investment is not perceived. Times, priorities and needs have changed and so should apprenticeships – without losing the integrity of the program, of course.
Proactive Technologies, Inc. uses the term “structured on-the-job training” in a deliberate effort to differentiate structured, documented training for the mastery of critical tasks of a job (“craft”) from the other 4 types of learning discussed above. It is an evolution from the informal, unstructured on-the-job training which is more observational, sometimes anecdotal and usually interactive but often rushed, incoherent and rarely documented. Based on a thorough job/task analysis (unique to each employer-based job classification), structured on-the-job training is the important capstone that gives purpose to the “related technical instruction” which should have been selected or developed from the job data collected. Without structured on-the-job training, an apprenticeship is not an apprenticeship. It is a program of job-related learning at best and a loose group of industry-general coursework at worse.
No one would ride in a plane flown by a pilot with only classes and simulator time, have surgery by a surgeon that hasn’t yet operated on a live human, or receive a root canal from a dentist with no “live-patient” time. Certified mastery of the tasks that define each of these jobs is what makes the ‘license to practice’ credible. And there is a difference between ‘a pilot” and ‘the pilot.’ Having a pilot license certifies you to fly planes, not a specific plane; you still have to have training and be certified to apply your craft to flying that plane. With the hybrid approach to apprenticeships, both are accomplished at the same time.
Community and technical colleges genuinely try to provide a “simulation” of on-the-job training, but always have limited resources and lack the subject matter expertise to make the simulation a good alternative for what an employer needs performed at their facility today. Educational institutions cannot keep up with the latest innovations in technology, and we shouldn’t expect them to try. They often train students on equipment donated by a business as a tax write-off – clear evidence that for that employer, and possibly the greater industry, the technology is nearing or has reached its end.
Those educational institutions that make expensive purchases of what they think is the “latest technology” usually encounter 2-3 year delays before they receive approval and funding to acquire it, and will most likely not be allowed to upgrade it unless the number of students enrolling in the program significantly warrants the expenditure. Relevant instructors that are current in industry-specific technology are difficult to find. Each student that completes a 2-year technology-based program is guaranteed they will enter the workforce 6-10 years behind industry needs, a major contributor to the “skills gap.”
Employers know this. This phenomenon has been around since the advancement of electronics, which fueled the microprocessor revolution, which has shortened the shelf life of industry technology, instructors and the skills of the workers who operate the technology. If employers want workers that are not only generally skilled for industry but specifically skilled for their needs, they have to provide the structured on-the-job training based on their current equipment and needs. That has been the underlying goal of apprenticeships for centuries; apprentices receiving craft training from an employer hopefully representative of industry. What is the point of training workers for jobs that do not exist or training for training’s sake? The employers and the workers – present and future – are short-changed and the community ultimately pays the price.
The accelerated transfer of expertise model offered and supported by Proactive Technologies, Inc. can be set up at any facility, for any employer, in any industry, for any job classification – hourly or salary. The investment is low and is quickly recovered. In many cases, state funding for training of incumbent and new workers can minimize or defray the initial investment to setup the program, and Proactive Technologies will assist the client in finding, applying, managing and documenting the activities to ensure grant compliance. The customized structured on-the-job training and support services offered by Proactive Technologies can support all three U.S. Bureau of Apprenticeship models, but is most suited for the Competency and Hybrid models which facilitate an acceleration of the apprenticeship program.
Proactive Technologies has partnered with many educational institutions and private related technical instruction partners to combine our strengths, providing employer and trainee with the best possible outcome given all parties constraints. Many projects have turned out to be the most cost-effective, high-outcome approach for all stakeholders.
Apprenticeships and vocational training are an important time in a worker’s life. The outcome determines if in applying themselves they have chance at a sustained or improved livelihood. Credentials are important and a certificate of apprenticeship completion can be a strong one if the underlying program is viewed as credible and relevant. It is not enough to clock-in hours in a job without documentation of what was mastered. Apprenticeships can be shortened in length, focused in content and stronger in outcome – but only by design and implementation.
Proactive Technologies, Inc.®; PROTECH; Human Resource Management for Tomorrow...Today!® and logo;