This paper presents the methodologies and results of an evaluation of adult apprenticeship (“Apprentissage pour adultes”), a second chance qualification in Luxembourg. Several research questions can be put forward. For example, why is there a continuously increasing number of people who want to join this apprenticeship while only 40% of applicants obtain an apprentice position?

The evaluation of the measure involved a cyclic succession of four key-steps:

-  Data collection: Three sources where consulted: quantitative data from the Luxembourg Unemployment Agency; qualitative data obtained through interviews with managers administering the measure, adult apprentices, teachers and employers; and quantitative data obtained through surveys of 100% of applicants to the measure.

-     Comparison: We generated indicators from the quantitative, qualitative and survey data to respond to the research questions.

- Determining corrective actions: After investigation we suggested possible corrective actions and ways to implement them.

-         Implementation of solutions: The suggested actions have not yet been implemented; this would be the next step of the work.

The study has shown that the main aims and objectives of the measure have been reached but many questions remain unanswered due to an unclear definition of the measure's aims and the multiple (partially contradictory) objectives of the measure. The current evaluation has led to the planning of a piloting system of the measure. Results show that the assessment of the measure has to be widened to include curriculum assessment, process-product analysis, employers’ surveys, and systematic evaluation by developing a computation of automatic indicators.

This paper presents the methodologies and results of an evaluation of adult apprenticeship (“Apprentissage pour adultes”), a second chance qualification in Luxembourg. This evaluation has led to the proposal of a piloting system of this active labour market measure.

Description of the measure and research questions

The adult apprenticeship has three objectives: Providing a professional qualification to people without one, to people wishing or needing professional re-orientation, or to people who want career progression within their profession. The specificity of this measure is that it concerns mostly unemployed adults and gives them an opportunity to learn a profession by apprenticeship.

To be eligible to join the measure, applicants must be over 18 years old and have left school for at least one year. Note that the school system provides the same apprenticeship opportunities for young people who are still at school. The main distinction between the two systems is the difference in remuneration: adults earn nearly twice as much as the young apprentices.

The managers of the measure are faced with several questions. First, they want to know if the measure incites young apprentices to drop out of their apprenticeship, to wait a gap-year and then try to join the adult apprenticeship measure to get the higher remuneration. Another problem concerns the continuously increasing number of persons who want to join this measure, whereas only 40% of applicants find an apprentice position. Therefore a careful analysis of the profiles and interests of applicants and incumbents of the program is necessary.

Methodology for the evaluation of the measure

The evaluation of an educational system involves in our view a cyclic succession of four key-steps centred on its aims and objectives. Note that the four key-steps should all have impacts on these aims and objectives.

-         Data collection: gaining objective information about how the system works through accurate and valid indicators and implementing evaluation models to assess the results. We used three types of data: quantitative data provided by the administrators of the measure, qualitative data gathered by interviewing administrative managers, adult apprentices, teachers and employers, and additional quantitative data collected by surveying applicants and incumbents of the measure.

-   Comparison: identifying the discrepancies between the actual situation and the intended aims and objectives, evaluating which elements work and which ones don't, and communicating reliable information about these elements. We generated indicators from the quantitative, qualitative and survey data to respond to the research questions.

-    Determining corrective actions: suggesting ways to improve the quality of the system, to regulate it with institutional actions where there are gaps between effective and intended statements and using the information for evaluation and decision-making. Following our response to the research questions, we suggested possible corrective actions and ways to implement them.

-   Implementation of solutions to make the system more conformant with the objectives of the measure and control of these corrective interventions. The suggested actions aren’t implemented yet; this would be the next step of the work.

INSERT FIG1

This four-step methodology supposes a systemic vision of education and the possibility of an effective intervention on the system.

Results of the evaluation

The study has shown that people who are candidates for this measure are young people between 18 and 22 years (60% of applicants and 66% of those who obtain an apprentice position); and/or people who have had some professional instability.

The fact that people consider the measure as an opportunity to get both a relatively well-paid job and a certified qualification that increases their employment opportunities could explain the increasing number of applicants.

The following results of the data analysis are of special interest for policy makers:

-         Concerning the supposed voluntary drop out of the initial apprenticeship to get the remuneration of the adults we have found that in fact less than 1% of the applicants drop-out of an initial apprenticeship and introduce a demand for an adult apprenticeship one year after this dropping out.

-       Five clusters of people are interested in the measure: those above 22 years old with low qualifications, those above 22 years old who are unqualified and unemployed, those over 23 years old who are unqualified and precarious workers, and those above 30 years old who have low qualifications and have continuously worked, and those above 40 years old who are unqualified but stable workers. The two first clusters are more likely to get an apprentice position and are less likely to drop out.

-         Young people between 18 and 22 years are more likely (45%) to get an apprentice position than older ones (38%) and are less likely to drop out (21% vs. 28%).

-    Applicants are seeking more professional stability by getting a qualification and remuneration is a condition that makes this realistic as most of them live on their own or have families.

Conclusions and way forward

The policy makers suggested an increase of the minimal age and of the legal waiting period to reduce the number of young people who voluntarily drop out of the initial apprenticeship. Statistical data have shown that this belief is not founded and that this approach would be useless. The analyses showed that the measure reaches its aims and objectives except for one part of the program that encounters applicants with low interest. Other suggestions can be made to optimize the measure’s efficiency:

-         Widening of the evaluation with a curriculum assessment of the different professions and a process-product analysis.

-         Implementing a systematic evaluation of the measure by developing an automatic computation of the indicators and by providing a reading aid for a valid interpretation of the results.

-  Surveying employers to assess their satisfaction of the measure and the qualification of the certified leavers.

-   Developing job-seeking assistance for applicants (writing letters and curriculum vitae, training in job interviews...) to improve the 40%-threshold.