Mismatch between the Learning Expectation of Students and their Apprenticeship Placement

As discussed in Chapter 2.3 and Chapter 3.4, the apprenticeship programme aims to provide students with opportunities to engage in work activities in the workplace. The ultimate end of this apprenticeship programme is to prepare students with the vocational skills and knowledge required in the workplace after they leave school (preparing a smooth transition from school to the workplace). It seeks to contextualise what has been learned by students at school (Billet, 2002). Lave and Wenger (1991) consider apprenticeship as a social engagement where learners/apprentices learn how to think of what people (for example, instructors, mechanics, and customers) do, do things according to instructions or their observations, and interact with people around to learn skills from them. As the VUSS apprenticeship programme is solely managed by schools, a number of problems such as financial problems, the lack of vocational skills and knowledge readiness of students, and the shortage of suitable workplaces for apprenticeship have been experienced. In this section, I exclusively focus an analysis of the mismatch between the learning expectation of the students and their apprenticeship placements.

The following students provide interesting accounts about the mismatch of the apprenticeship placement in the workplace.

“I know very little [about engines], sir. My job task is only to scrub car body work which has been caulked. That’s it. I don’t learn how to overhaul engines or transmission systems.”

(Interview, S5/HL November 18, 2011)

“Well, I personally expect to learn how to assemble and diassemble whole car engines, overhaul and tune up engines, like we have learned at school before. In fact, when we leave school and arrive at the garage ... it is very far

165

from what I expect to learn. That makes me sometimes think about it after doing work tasks on a daily basis.”

(Interview, S6/GA November 19, 2011)

Two years of the in-school learning experiences of the AD students (they complete a two year registration period before attending the apprenticeship programme) and one week of preparatory learning does not effectively equip them with the vocational skills and knowledge required in the workplace. This is because the in-school learning experience of the AD students is limited to a very specific type of skills (for example, overhauling a car engine, car engine tune-up). The skills do not fully help them develop their technical and interpersonal skills in the workplace because they are mainly theoretical and procedural knowledge (discussed in Chapter 5.1). Moreover, as Eraut (2013) noted, nearly all the knowledge taught in vocational education and training is often disappointing (cited in Malloch et al, 2013: 185). The poor vocational skills and knowledge of the AD students is exacerbated by the fact that they are sent to workplaces which do not match the skills they learned at school. This is acknowledged by GT/AD in the following way:

“E e e …. Well basically, we acknowledge that sometimes, let say every year, we have differences [skills]. There are garages having the same views regarding skills the students learn at school and those required in the workplace but there are many which are not. For example, at school we have prescribed skills the students have to learn in the workplace but some of the skills are not applicable. For example, we need our students to learn how to overhaul a car engine but when they arrive in the workplace, they merely learn how to repair car bodywork or paint it. In fact, this is not what we expect.”

(Interview, GT/AD November 23, 2011)

Despite the fact that many key skills are promoted in the SBC, the provision is not always applicable for every student in their workplace engagements, especially when the workplace selected does not require the skills they learned. Unfortunately, the same mistake has occurred every year, as GT/AD lamented: “Yeah, it is like that. It happens every year”

(Interview, GT/AD November 23, 2011). There are at least two important factors behind the mismatch between the school expectations. Firstly, the apprenticeship programme of SMK1GT was not well arranged. This is clearly seen in the absence of holistic planning (see

166

Chapter 3.8.3) which requires synergy between preparation, implementation and assessment.

Secondly, since the planning of the apprenticeship programme is solely developed at school, the communication between the school and the workplace is simply conditional (see Appendix 4 – 3e4). In other words, it is purely based on a short-term plan and temporary need for the school apprenticeship programme.

However, there are few AD students who are aware that they may be placed in different kinds of workplaces, for example, S3/IS; S6/GA and S7/MP. Here again the in-school learning experiences of students play a key role in helping them deal with such problems (Gulikers et al, 2004 cited in Sluijsmansa et al, 2009: 159). The approach that these students took was heavily dependent on their readiness to face unexpected situations in the workplace. In other words, students who view the apprenticeship programme as opportunities to learn new skills are the ones most likely to progress in their vocational skills and knowledge development. In contrast, without such awareness the students cannot effectively develop their skills because they are always distracted by their negative view about the mismatch. This is noted by the students in the following manner:

“Here, different types of cars from big size to small ones are repaired. There are diesel cars and cars with petrol. Here, I learn how to assemble and disassemble diesel cars. I don’t learn this at school.”

(Interview, S3/IS November 15, 2011)

“When I was in the garage, I learned how to fix a dented car body. This is not easy. There is a special size [hammer] used for each damaged condition of the car body and we have to follow the standardised criteria.”

(Interview S6/GA November 19, 2011)

Students without such awareness found placement mismatch to be a real impediment in their learning engagements because they were not able to deal with the unexpected problems.

S5/AD and S4/AD, S9/AD explain:

“I have to master the skill of overhauling a car engine. This is what we learnt at school. But it does not happen here.”

(Interview, S4/HL November 16, 2011)

167

“What we expect in the apprenticeship programme is to learn not only about the car body but most importantly, assembling or disassembling a car engine”

(Interview, S5/HL November 18, 2011)

“I expect to master all the car engine component repairs. Essentially, it is all about automotive work. That’s what I need to master”

(Interview, S9/JA November 22, 2011)

The quotations indicate that many of the AD students were not satisfied with the skills they learned in the workplace because the students did not expect to learn other skills (for example car body works) that were different from the skills (car engine repairs) they were taught at school. In addition, some of these students were not mentally prepared to face the workplace mismatch despite being equipped with the key skills during the one-week preparatory training in school.

5.4 Summary

This chapter has demonstrated the ways in which students’ previous learning experiences shape their learning and vocational skills and knowledge development in the workplace. The chapter reflects on how students view their in-school and (outside-school learning experiences, if they have ever had) in relation to their learning participation in the workplace.

It especially highlights the views of students about their previous learning experiences, which are reflected in the ways they approach their learning activities during the apprenticeship programme. This chapter has also reviewed the mismatch between the learning expectation of the AD students and their apprenticeship placement.

168

Chapter 6: The Influence of Instructors on the Learning Experiences of Students in