Understanding differences between apprenticeship programmes in Europe: towards a new conceptual framework for the changing notion of apprenticeship

ABSTRACT

Comparative studies on ‘apprenticeships’ in Europe increasingly cover a variety of programmes previously not considered under this heading. The paper explores the potential of a new, combined cultural-historical and functional classification of apprenticeships on the basis of their underpinning training logic. Four main logics are discussed which categorise apprenticeships according to their key purpose and the responsibilities with regard to content, organisation and financing. It is argued that the typology can serve as an explanatory framework for ongoing changes in apprenticeship approaches and may be used for the identification of similarities and common challenges.

KEYWORDS:

• Apprenticeships
• training logic
• typology
• comparison

Acknowledgments

This article is partly based on research conducted under contract with Cedefop (cf. Cedefop 2018). The findings are used by permission. The authors wish to thank Philipp Gonon (University of Zurich, Switzerland) and Philipp Grollmann (Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training, Germany) for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this article.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. Depending on the definitions of apprenticeship and the sources consulted between 30 and 80 different programmes can be distinguished in Europe. The joined data collection of UNESCO, OECD and EUROSTAT lists around 80 programmes which contain work-based elements. The European Commission (2012) found around 70 apprenticeship and apprenticeship-like programmes in the EU in 2012. Cedefop (2018) found 30 apprenticeship schemes with a stable legal basis in 22 European Members states as well as in Iceland and Norway considered as apprenticeship in the national context.

2. Certainly, there is also quite some variance in the overall duration of apprenticeships (see for example, Steedman 2012).

3. Current international definitions of apprenticeship vary, but essentially require the following characteristics: (1) long-term, (2) alternating training at the workplace and in an educational institution or training centre; (3) nationally recognised qualification; (4) training or employment contract; (4) remuneration/wage.

4. See https://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/tools (last accessed 15.01.2020).

5. Thornton and Ocasio (2008) define an institutional logic as the socially constructed, historical patterns of cultural symbols and material practices, including assumptions, values, beliefs, by which individuals and organisations provide meaning to their daily activity, organise time and space, and reproduce their lives and experiences (Thornton, Ocasio, and Lounsbury 2012, 2).

6. Thornton, Ocasio, and Lounsbury (2012) posit the following seven institutional orders or societal logics: family, community, religion, state, market, profession and corporation.

7. They comprise a relatively small part of the vocational education and training (VET) system in Croatia and have experienced a dramatic decline in the past 10 years. In 2017, about 10% of all secondary VET students were enrolled in them.

8. Early examples were the Youth Training Scheme (YTS) in England or the Australian Training scheme (ATS) introduced in mid-1980s (Gospel 1994).

9. Around one quarter of all VET learners are undertaking this programme.

10. Roughly 10% of all apprentices are in ÜBA programmes.