WORKPLACE-BASED LEARNING (WBL) TRACKING AND TRACING RESEARCH STUDY - PSETA
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
WORKPLACE-BASED LEARNING
(WBL) TRACKING AND TRACING
RESEARCH STUDY
Presentation outline 01 Introduction & Background 06 Key Findings 02 Study Approach 07 Recommendations 03 Reference Framework 08 M&E Framework 04 Tracer Results 09 Way Forward 05 Employer Perceptions
Introduction & Background
Introduction & Background
Study is in-line with NSDS III Objective: All 21 SETAs to undertake
impact research (incl. tracer studies) and regularly produce findings
• Encourages better use of WBL skills development
Purpose:
• Track & trace beneficiaries of PSETA & Sector funded and supported
WBL programmes
• Gauge impact and performance (individual and sector-wide)
Outcomes:
• Short term: Statistical information on beneficiaries and status
• Long term: Impact of WBL programmes & recommendations for
improvementsStudy Approach
Methodology
8
7
Project
6 Closure
Research
5 Findings
Data
4 Analysis
Data
3 Data Collection
Collection
2 Data instruments
1 Literature Collation
Review
Inception
Final
Completed Populated Draft Reports,
OUTCOME
Questionnaires questionnaires
Excel integrated Presentation &
Literature Review Contactable & interview & database reports M&E Framework
Inception report Report sample templates interviewsReference Framework
Definition & Purpose of WBL
Definition of Workplace-Based Learning (WBL):
• Learning that occurs when people do real work.
• Experience-based learning (paid or unpaid)
• Work that leads to the production of real goods and services
Purpose of WBL:
Beneficiaries are prepared Easier transition from school- Stronger links between VET
for the labour market to-work and the labour market
Work experience sets the foundation for lifelong learning in 2 ways:
1. Beneficiaries learn to participate in organisational communities of practice; and
2. It is an opportunity for young people to develop the capability to mediate between different types of
knowledge and skills, akin to modern production systems
(Cedefop, 2004)Benefits of WBL
Benefits of WBL:
For beneficiaries
• acquire hard skills, technical expertise and tacit knowledge
• Exposes and links beneficiaries to the labour market
• Increasing chances of employability
• keeps long-erm unemployed individuals motivated
For employers
• Strengthens links between VET and the real demands of the labour market
• Employers are involved in the design and management of VET
Overall
• WBL produces higher quality skills
• Costs are shared between employers and government
• Offers learning opportunities that many public VET institutions cannot afford
• A powerful way to develop generic and soft skillsWBL in South Africa
• South African Policy considers WBL as a solution for both educational and economic growth
Purpose of WBL
To achieve a qualification To acquire professional To gain work
registration experience
Learnership Apprenticeship N Diploma Student internship A Student internship B
Internship (Experiential (WIL) Graduate
Candidacy
Learning) Internship
Technical/ Vocational Professional
Occupational Professional Designation Work experience
Vocational Qualification: Qualification
Qualification & improved
Qualification National Diploma /
employability
(National ‘N’ Diploma) Diploma / Higher
Certificate /
Advanced
CertificateWBL in South Africa
• A total of 269 147 beneficiaries were registered for SETA-supported WBL programmes in 2017/18
A total of 144 531 (53.7%) were for skills A total of 111 681 (41.5%) were for A total of 12 935 (4.8%) were for
programmes learnerships internships
• A total of 177 477 beneficiaries were certificated for SETA-supported WBL programmes in 2017/18
PSETA funded WBL beneficiaries completion in 2017/18
• Learnerships: 113
• Apprenticeships: 10
PSETA supported/facilitated WBL beneficiaries completion in 2017/18
• 32 639 WBL opportunities as declared by Public Services SectorWBL Role-players
Expectations of role-players
• Carry out all related work experience
• Design the knowledge & practical activities as specified in the WBL
components for the WBL programme programme
Employers that wish to host beneficiaries
• Provide beneficiary support • Comply with host employer policies &
are subject to a verification process by the
• Record and monitor beneficiary procedures PSETA:
training progress • Attend all knowledge, practical and
• Periodically discuss training progress work-experience activities as part of
with beneficiary and employer the WBL programme
• Conduct internal
• Undergo the required
Workplace Verification
assessment (knowledge &
practical components) SDP Beneficiary assessment (internal
& external)
• Issue statements of results
Relevance of the work-experience
• Comply with all labour • Register the WBL component to the qualification
legislation
Host programme with
• Provide facilities and
Employer SETA DHET
resources required for • Facilitate, manage
the work experience and quality assure
• Provide supervision and mentoring at the design, development and
work implementation of the programme
• Allow beneficiaries to attend off-the- • Subsidise the cost of WBL programme
implementation
job components of the programme
• Conduct workplace verification for Access to resources Structures in place to ensure
• Complete beneficiary work records related to the programme successful implementation
quality assurance (both initially and
• Periodically discuss beneficiary throughout the programme)
progress with learner and SDPRationale for Tracer Study
Definition of Tracer Study:
• Standardised survey of graduates from an education institution/education programme
• Takes place sometime after graduation/completion
• Provides systematic and reliable information about study and subsequent employment
• Important monitoring and impact evaluation tool
• Topics surveyed include:
Economic/employment status
Transition to work
Work entrance and career outlook
Relevance of learned competencies (skills, knowledge, experience)
Subjective experience during programme
Most importantly, tracer studies can provide
feedback for improvements in TVET and higher
education. This is the main objective of such
studies in many cases and most certainly so in
the case of SETAs.Rationale for Tracer Study
Improved quality of life, positive impact on community, Research Question:
lower unemployment, labour mobility
Improved competitiveness and profitability,
Main Research Question:
What are the outcomes of WBL programmes supported in
Provider of choice, re-accreditation
Self-employed, employed the Public Service sector?
or continued studies
Sub-questions:
Better skilled workforce, improved
Qualification and Certificate What is the demographic profile of WBL beneficiaries?
Improved successful completion
Confidence re programme
economic growth
BENEFICIARIES What was the employment/activity status of beneficiaries
or throughput rates
prior to taking part in WBL programmes?
Improved Labour
productivity
offerings
Market Pool
PSETA How has the beneficiaries benefitted from the WBL
supported
Provider to
programmes?
learners
What was the impact of the skills acquired through the
WBL programmes?
What is the employment/activity status of beneficiaries
after they have completed the WBL programmes?
IMMEDIATE OUTCOME MEASURES What has been the change in the beneficiaries’ living
standard after completing the WBL programme?
IMMEDIATE IMPACT MEASURES
How has the WBL programmes impacted the employers?
ULTIMATE IMPACT MEASURESReference Framework
Aspect Question
Race, Gender, Age and Disability
Demographic Profile Location of beneficiary prior to, during and after WBL
Education background
Employment status
Employment/Activity status prior to WBL
Involvement in other/previous WBL programmes
WBL awareness
Motivation for taking part in WBL programmes
Highlights and challenges of WBL programme
WBL Programme information Skills acquired
Application of skills during WBL programme
Mentorship
Promotion/securing employment
Employment/Activity status: Employed
Employment/Activity status: Unemployed
Employment/Activity after WBL
Employment/Activity status: Studying
Employment/Activity status: WBL programme
Future outlook/plans Future plans (2019/2020)
Highlights, challenges and impacts
Employer perceptions
BeneficiariesTracer Results: Learnership Beneficiaries
Sample Frame & Data Analysis
During 2017 (POPULATION) Data analysis through three key steps:
• 52 PSETA funded beneficiaries
• 149 PSETA supported beneficiaries
Sample Frame
98
Sample reached Data is Data is Data is
cleaned organised interpreted
3
Total Population
Partially completed
1 2 3
2
Untraceable
25
201 Refusals
271
Unsuccessful calls
Total sample reached (98):
• 95% Confidence level and 7% margin of errorDemographic Background of Respondents
Race & Gender Education Place of Origin
13% GP
LP
Coloured 16%
12%
15%
64% University
MP
36% 87% 19%
Degree NW
13%
African University 55% 15%
certificate Matric
FS KZN
or diploma
NC 12% 3%
9% 1%
Technical college
certificate EC
10% 3% WC 13%
15%
Coloured More than half of
all respondents are Secondary Education Location dynamics
54% 33%
African females
African 2% Private
Rural Urban
School
3% Former 42% 58%
Model C
Age School
89% of 89% 5% 6% 95% Non-former
Model C
respondents School
0% 50% 100%
are youth 20-35 36-39 40-49Pre-Learnership Activity
Employment Status Unemployment Characteristics
• Reasons for unemployment
Other: 1%
Lack of required
Lack of jobs where education level: 1%
lived: 2%
90% Unemployed Did not have the right
4% Was not looking for a
job: 5%
skills: 2%
Studying
6% Was looking, but couldn’t find a job: 80%
Employed/ Self-
• Unemployment period prior to starting
employed
the learnership programme
Employment Characteristics < 3 months 9%
• Place of employment 3 - 6 months 12%
20%: Private 6 - 9 months 5%
80%: Government 9 months - 1 year 21%
1 - 3 years 27%
3 - 5 years 22%
> 5 years 11%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%Learnership Uptake
Awareness Motivation TRAINING PROVIDER %
The Department of Home Affairs Learning Centre 40%
Reasons for doing the learnership:
Respondents found out about the Boland TVET College 15%
learnership programme through:
Ditseko Training and Development Services CC 10%
Employment agency 3% For stipend To find a Mopani South East TVET College 10%
Institution studying at 7% 1% job
Advertisements 18% 29%
Twin Peak Technologies 9%
To develop
Personal/family contacts 35% skills Khosithi Training Institute (Pty) Ltd 7%
Internet 37%
27% For Amandla Obunye Training Academy 6%
experience
Amathuba Learning and Training Centre 1%
43%
Josmap Training Institute 1%
Learnership Titles & NQF levels Host Employers
45% SAPS 1%
40% MPPG 1%
35% • 45% of programmes: NQF 5 National Parliament 3%
30% • 41% of programmes: NQF 4 DoH 6%
25% • 14% of programmes: NQF 3 DRDLR 7%
20% 40% 41% DHET 10%
15% FSPG 10%
10% NWPG 10%
5% 14% DBE 10%
5% DHA 40%
0%
National Certificate: Public Administration Immigration Services Public Administration
Public Administration: NQF 3 NQF 5 Supervisory NQF 4
Leadership NQF 5 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%Post-Learnership Activity & Destination
Pre & post activity comparison Employment Status
Location Dynamics
100%
90%
90%
80% 25% increase in
70% 62% employment after Pre 47% 53%
60% learnership ended
50% Rural Urban
40%
31%
30%
20% Post 46% 54%
10% 6% 4% 4% 3%
0%
0%
Unemployed Employed Learnership Studying 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% LP100%
Pre Post 20%
Geographic Destination GP
Increase in monthly income Absorption rate at host employer
of those employed post- NW 17% MP
3%
30% learnership 7%
Experienced an 30% KZN
income after Absorbed FS
learnership by host NC 10% 10%
1% increased
70% employer 3%
The majority if those movement to
Did not that found 70% urban areas
experience an EC
employment (94%) Not absorbed by after learnership
increase in host employer WC 20%
income enjoy a higher ended
income than before 10%Post-Learnership: Employed Respondents
Time elapsed from programme Employer type
completion to finding employment
Way of finding employment
16% Private
16% Within
months
6 organisation
Through the Learnership 79%
4% Government
controlled
4% Within 12
months 80% business
76% 4% Within 18 National,
Employed months Provincial or Local 84% Telephonic, fax, email
enquiries at workplaces
7%
Immediately Government were employed by
the host employer
after completing the
learnership Other 3%
Nature of employment
Size of organisation
Casual worker Personal contacts 3%
100%
Fixed-term 3%
More than 150 52% 90%
17% contract
80%
70% Going from place to place
50-150 14% 3%
60% to ask for work
50%
11-49 28% 40% Permanent 80%
30%
2-10 7% 20%
A newspaper advertisement 3%
10%
0% 20% 40% 60% 0%
0% 50% 100%Post-Learnership: Employed Respondents
Hours work per week Period Employed Learnership relevance
More than
31% 40 hours 11%> 2 years Respondents’ believe that the
per week learnership definitely provided
86% them with a career pathway
7% less than 4% < 1 year
40 hours
per week Respondents’ feel that the
62% 11% 1 year 86% learnership prepared them for
their current job tasks
40 hours per week
75% 2 years Respondents’ feel that their
career expectations has been
86% met
Monthly Income Respondents’ work is related to
Reasons for absorption: 83% learnership skills
R 25 601 – R 51 200 4%
52% HARD WORK & DEDICATION Respondents’ work in the same
R 12 801 – R 25 600 69%
39% HAD REQUIRED SKILLS & EXPERIENCE industry that the learnership took
80% place in
R 6 401 – R 12 800 12% 10% THERE WERE VACANCIES
R 3 201 – R 6 400 8% Respondents’ position at work
has changed for the better (e.g.
R 1 601 – R 3 200 8%
30% promotion or increase)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%Post-Learnership: Unemployed Respondents
Unemployed reasons
Activities to find work
5% Not looking 29% sent CV to companies/ organisations
for a job
15% made enquiries at workplaces
10% asked friends /relatives for assistance
95%
9% approached DoL employment office
Actively looking
for a job 9% approached recruitment agencies
7% used social media platforms
Duration seeking work 6% answered newspaper advertisements
0 - 6 months
5% registered at a private employment agency
8%
6 months - 1 year 7% 3% placed newspaper ads looking for a job
1 year - 18 months 12% 3% approach labour broker
18 months - 2 years 61% 2% offered to work for free
2 years - 3 years 10%
2% gone from door-to-door looking for work
More than 3 years 2%
2% updated LinkedIn profiles
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%Post-Learnership: Studying Respondents
Institution type Reasons for studying
Those currently doing another
33% Private To increase knowledge learnership
College
To achieve a higher
qualification
67% Learnership reasons
To improve chances to
TVET College
find a job
To find a better job 25% 25%
To acquire Had nothing
Field of Study more else to do
To earn more money knowledge
Due to a Repeat of
33% Management lack of a job same
Due to an interest in the
field
learnership
There was a gap in the
25% 25%
67% industry
Education, training
or development
To expand careerPerceived Impact of Learnership Programme
Skills acquired
Benefit status of learnership Benefits listed by respondents
40%
2% The learnership 35%
was not beneficial 35%
30%
25%
25%
20%
98% 15%
15%
The learnership was 10% 9%
10%
beneficial
5% 3% 2%
0%
Gained employment
Gained technical experience
Gained people skills
Obtained a certificate
It provided a career path
Gained workplace exposure
Gained knowledge and skills
Reasons for not being beneficial
90% 96% • The experience gained was too
specific/focussed
Of all respondents
Of all respondents were were given the
given the opportunity to opportunity to move • The learnership did not lead to
work in different around the employment
units/directorates organisation to learn
different skillsPerceived Impact of Learnership Programme
“The learnership developed your work “The learnership improved your ability to “The learnership helped you to develop
professional skills” adapt to different work situations” necessary skills to find/secure
employment”
90% 80% 60% 57%
80% 76% 70% 67%
50%
70%
60%
60% 40%
50%
50%
40% 30%
40%
30% 20%
30% 20%
20%
20%
20% 15%
10% 8% 9%
10%
10% 6% 10% 5%
2% 1% 1%
0% 0% 0%
Strongly agree
Neither disagree nor agree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Agree
Strongly agree
Strongly agree
Disagree
Neither disagree nor agree
Agree
Disagree
Neither disagree nor agree
Strongly disagree
AgreePerceived Impact of Learnership Programme
“You learned more about public services, Mentor availability to provide support
“You developed new skills in the learnership”
government and related sectors”
Rarely 2%
96%
90% 90%
83%
80%
80% 80% Of all
Occasionally 6% respondents
70% 70%
had a
60% 60%
mentor at the
workplace
Often 23% during the
50% 50%
learnership
40% 40%
Very often 68%
30% 30%
20% 16% 20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
14%
10% 10%
1% 3% 2% Opportunity to apply skills
1%
0% 0%
21%
Strongly agree
Disagree
Neither disagree nor agree
Agree
Strongly agree
Neither disagree nor agree
Disagree
Agree
Occasionally
21%
None
76%
AdequatePerceptions of the Learnership Programme Positive aspects
Perceptions of the Learnership Programme
Things that did not work well in the learnership Proposed solutions for challenges
• Poor communication from management and/or HR • Ensure greater integration of beneficiaries within the workplace
• Balancing work and academic responsibilities • Ensure organisations have the required capacity (resources & supervisors) to host
• Coping with work pressure beneficiaries
Work-related
Challenges
• Ensure beneficiaries are not exploited for administrative tasks not related to the learnership
• Lack of exposure to different departments
• Work tasks should be in line with learnership programme
• Lack of support at work
• Limit travelling of beneficiaries
• Lack of work/performance evaluation and feedback
• Senior staff to treat beneficiaries with respect
• Were required to relocate for work-exposure component
• Ensure breaktime allowance is in line with the BCEA
• Exploitation of beneficiaries
• BCEA breaches (insufficient lunch time)
• Ensure beneficiaries are first choice for vacant positions
• Ensure more beneficiaries are absorbed
• Programme not guaranteeing employment • Support beneficiaries in finding employment after completion
Administrative
Programme &
• Certificates not delivered timeously • Enforce deadlines for issuing certificates
Challenges
• Study materials arriving late • Ensure greater coordination of programme
• Results not communicated timeously • Ensure payments are processed in time
• Stipends not paid on time • Ensure greater communication between SETA and employers
• Place beneficiaries closer to where they stay
• Ensure the programme contain more general public service skills
Challenges
Academic
• Ensure facilitators are knowledgeable and experienced
• Course consist of too many modules
• Extend the programme period
• Learning material were insufficient
• Reduce the number of modules
• Allow for rewriting/supplementary examsPerceptions of the Learnership Programme
Proposed improvements
Stipend to be increased Programmes to contain more
general public service skills
Ensure beneficiary Ensure adequate capacity ad
absorption host organisations to
accommodate beneficiaries
Facilitators to be adequately
qualified and experienced
Extend the programme
period/length
Ensure greater rotation and
Coordinate theory and
exposure within workplace
practical at central place to
minimise travelling
Greater support at the
workplaceFuture Plans of Respondents
To get a promotion 5%
To set up my own business 3%
To look for a new job 4%
To continue in my current job 10%
To find a full-time job 41%
To find a part-time job 6%
To continue studying 23%
To study 9%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%Tracer Results: Internship Beneficiaries
PSETA Supported Internships & Sample Frame
INTERNSHIPS
NQF1 NQF2 NQF3 NQF4 NQF5 NQF6 NQF7 NQF8 NQF9 TOTAL
During 2017 (POPULATION)
(OFO) • 907 PSETA supported/facilitated
Total 1 1 0 190 184 323 192 14 2 907 beneficiaries
• Category A, B & C internships
Sample Frame
329
Sample reached
Data analysis through three key steps:
17
Partially completed
Total Population Data is Data is Data is
cleaned organised interpreted
214
Untraceable
1 2 3
44
907 Refusals
996
Unsuccessful callsDemographic Background of Respondents
Race & Gender 0.3%
Asian More than half of all Education Place of Origin
3% Coloured 0.3% respondents are
Unknown GP
African females 0.3% LP
1% White PLP 49%
(59%) 13% 11%
Matric
95% 31% NW
MP
African 0.3% University 16% 12%
Degree Technical 1%
Asian college KZN
1% 0.3% FS 1%
certificate
40% NC 12%
White 3% 0.3% University 1%
certificate or
63% Coloured diploma EC
37% 59% 36% WC 3%
African Secondary Education
2% 11%
Location dynamics
Private
31% School
Former (Low
Age Model C Cost) Rural Urban
School
96% of 17% 83%
respondents are 96% 4% 4%
35 years or 20-35 36+ Private 63% Non-former
School Model C
younger
(Elite) School
0% 50% 100%Pre-Internship Activity
Unemployment Characteristics
Employment Status • Reasons for unemployment
Lack of required
education level: 0.7%
99% of those
that were
84% Recently graduated:
1%
Lack of required skills:
1% unemployed or
studying pre-
Unemployed
5% Was looking, but couldn’t Lack of jobs where
internship have
never been
find a job: 95% lived: 2%
Studying employed
before.
10%
• Unemployment period prior to starting the
Employed/ Self-
internship programme
employed
< 3 months 7%
3 - 6 months 15%
Employment Characteristics
• Place of employment 6 - 9 months 12%
18%: Government 9 months - 1 year 19%
82%: Private 1 - 3 years 37%
3 - 5 years 6%
91% of respondents that were employed
pre-internship, were not employed at the > 5 years 4%
host employer prior to the internship. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40%Internship Uptake
Awareness Motivation
Reasons for doing the internship
Respondents found out about the
internship through:
Organisation working at 0.6% For stipend To find
Employment agency 1% a job
0.3%
Institution studying at 2% 10%
Personal/family contacts 10% To develop
Advertisements 39% skills
Internet 46% For For
21% experience compliance
66% 0.3%
Internship NQF levels Internship Occupations
50% Only 0,3% of internship
44% programmes
45%
40% completed by
35% respondents were
30%
funded by a SETA (the
24% rest were industry
25%
funded)
20%
15% 14%
15%
10%
5% 2%
0.3%
0%
NQF 4 NQF 5 NQF 6 NQF 7 NQF 8 NQF 9Post-Internship Activity & Destination
Pre & post activity comparison Employment Status Location Dynamics 53%
11% 9%
49%
90% 84% Geographic Destination
80% of beneficiaries LP
Pre 12% 12%
70% 25% increase in Post 1% 1%
59% employment after
60% NW GP MP
50%
internship ended 1% 0.3% 12%11%
1% 1% FS
40% 35% KZN
NC
30%
20%
3% 2% The majority of
10% respondents are
10%
3% 5% 3% EC
0% 11% 12% now located in
0% GP, WC and MP
Unemployed Employed/ self- Learning programme Studying WC
employed
Pre Post
5% increased
Increase in monthly income Absorption rate at host employer movement to Pre 17% 83%
urban areas
14% Experienced an after Urban
86% Rural
internship
increase income Not absorbed by
after internship ended Post 12% 88%
host employer
86%
The majority if those
Did not
experience an
that found 14% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
employment (87%) Absorbed by
increase in
enjoy a higher host employer
income
income than beforePost-Internship: Employed Respondents
Time elapsed from programme completion
to finding employment Employer type Way of finding employment
Before internship
ended
4% 1% NPO Relatives 1%
Work-related experiential
2%
Immediately 17% 2%Government learning
56% controlled Going from place to place to
2%
business ask for work
Within 3 months 24% National, 41%
Provincial Private A labour broker 2%
Within 6 months 22% or Local organisation
Government Gazette 3%
Government
A private employment
Within 12 months 24%
35% agency
4%
were employed Department of Labour
Within 18 months 2% 5%
employment services
by the host
Within 24 months 5%
employer after A newspaper advertisement 6%
completing the
Social medial platforms 8%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
internship
Personal contacts 10%
Size of organisation Hours work per week Telephonic, fax, email
More than 40 23%
More than 150 54% hours per enquiries at workplaces
11%
week
50-150 23% Through the Internship 33%
5% less than 40
11-49 16% hours per 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
2-10 2% 84% week
40 hours per
Don't know 5%
week
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%Post-Internship: Employed Respondents
Nature of employment Monthly Income Internship relevance
100%
90% Fixed-term 24% R 25 601 - R 51 200 14%
Respondents’ feel that the
contract
80% 2% R 12 801 - R 25 600 53% 87% internship prepared them for
their current job tasks
70% Casual/
60%
part-time R 6 401 - R 12 800 17% Respondents’ believe that the
50% 74% 79%
internship definitely provided
them with a career pathway
Permanent R 3 201 - R 6 400 11%
40%
30%
R 1 601 - R 3 200 3%
20% Respondents’ feel that their
10% Not paid for work 2%
68% career expectations has been
met
0%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Respondents’ work in the public
Period Employed Reasons for absorption: 63% services industry
7% > 2 years 52% HARD WORK & DEDICATION
39% HAD REQUIRED SKILLS & EXPERIENCE
7% < 6 months Respondents’ work is related to
16% THERE WERE VACANCIES 61% internship skills
36% 15% 6 months 7% WILLINGNESS TO LEARN
2 – 3 years – 1 year
Respondents’ position at work
34% has changed for the better
1 – 2 years 36% (e.g. promotion or increase)Post-Internship: Unemployed Respondents
Unemployed reasons
Activities to find work
No opportunities where live 2% 36% sent CV to companies/ organisations
2% 19% used social media platforms
Other
11% made enquiries at workplaces
94% 2%
Not looking 7% answered newspaper advertisements
Actively looking for a job
for a job 7% asked friends /relatives for assistance
1%
Unable to
6% updated LinkedIn profiles
work
4% approached recruitment agencies
Duration seeking work
3% approached DoL employment office
0 - 6 months 15%
2% registered at a private employment agency
6 months - 1 year 18%
2% approach labour broker
1 - 2 years 21%
2% gone from door-to-door looking for work
2 - 3 years 38%
1% placed newspaper ads looking for a job
More than 3 years 8% 1% offered to work for free
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%Post-Internship: Studying Respondents
Field of Study Reasons for studying
Those currently doing another learning
11% Law To improve chances to programme
22% find a job
Education,
training & 11% To increase knowledge
Learning programme reasons
development
Communication
44% Business,
11% To find a better job 30%
commerce & Office To gain further
management experience
administration
To earn more money
70%
All those studying after Due to an interest in the Due to a lack of
the internship, are field employment
studying at an University
To expand career
There was a gap in the
industry
Improve promotion
opportunitiesPerceived Impact of Internship Programme
Skills acquired
Benefit status of internship Benefits listed by respondents
40%
11% The 35% 34%
internship
30% 29%
was not
beneficial 25%
20%
15%
89% 15%
The internship was 10%
beneficial 6%
5% 5% 4%
5% 2%
0%
Gained knowledge and skills
Other
Gained employment
Obtained a qualification
Gained interpersonal skills
Gained technical/specialised
It provided a career path
Gained workplace experience
Reasons for not being beneficial
• Beneficiaries not exposed to required
experience
aspects
67% 45% • Beneficiaries not used effectively at
workplace
of all respondents of all respondents were
were given the given the opportunity • Internship did not lead to employment
opportunity to move to work in different
around the units/directorates
• Beneficiaries did not receive any
organisation to learn internal/workplace training
different skillsPerceived Impact of Internship Programme
“The internship developed your work “The internship improved your ability to “The internship helped you to develop
professional skills” adapt to different work situations” necessary skills to find/secure employment”
80% 70% 40%
38%
70% 68% 60% 35%
60%
60% 30%
50% 27%
25%
50% 25%
40%
40% 20%
30%
30%
30% 15%
26%
20%
20% 10%
6%
10% 9% 4%
10% 5%
5%
1% 1% 1% 1%
0% 0% Strongly disagree 0%
Strongly disagree
Neutral
Agree
Neutral
Agree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly disagree
Strongly agree
Strongly agree
Strongly agree
Disagree
Disagree
DisagreePerceived Impact of Internship Programme
“You learned more about public services, Mentor availability to provide support
“You developed new skills in the
internship” government and related sectors” 92%
Rarely 2%
70% 80%
65% 74% Of all
70% respondents
60% Occasionally had a
8%
mentor at the
60% workplace
50%
during the
Often 21% internship
50%
40%
40%
Very often 70%
30% 28%
30%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
20% 20%
20%
Opportunity to apply skills
10%
4%
10%
5%
18%
2% Occasionally
1% 0% 1%
0% 0%
Neutral
Agree
Agree
Disagree
Neutral
Strongly agree
Strongly agree
Strongly disagree
Strongly disagree
Disagree
4%
None
76%
AdequatePerceptions of the Internship Programme Positive aspects
Perceptions of the Internship Programme
Things that did not work well in the Internship Proposed solutions for challenges
• Inadequate resources to accommodate interns
• Stipulate the job descriptions of interns
Work-related Challenges
• Exposure/ tasks not related to internship/ career path
• Exploitation of interns • Ensure exposure to different departments
• Conflict with colleagues • Ensure interns rotate within the organisation
• Lack of exposure to different departments/ units
• Make sure that host organisations have the required capacity
• Age discrimination and age bias and resources to accommodate beneficiaries
• Poor communication from HR and/or management
• Ensure that mentors are available to guide beneficiaries
• Excessive workload
• Align work exposure with qualification/ career path of intern
• Limited on-the-job training received
• Insufficient mentor support • Ensure greater integration of beneficiaries within the workplace
• Lack of work/performance evaluation and feedback
• Contracts not being renewed/ not being absorbed • Ensure beneficiaries are first choice for vacant positions
Administrative
Programme &
Challenges
• Certificates not delivered timeously • Ensure more beneficiaries are absorbed
• Internship period too short • Support beneficiaries in finding employment after completion
• Insufficient communications from programme funders • Enforce deadlines for issuing certificates
• Stipends not paid on time • Ensure greater coordination of programme
• Stipend amount too small • Extend period of internship programmePerceptions of the Internship Programme
Proposed improvements
Extend the programme
period/length
Ensure on-the-job training
takes place
Ensure beneficiary
absorption Ensure adequate capacity ad host
organisations to accommodate
beneficiaries
Ensure job tasks are aligned
with qualification
Greater support at the
workplace
Ensure greater rotation and
exposure within workplace
Stipend to be increased
Give interns official job
descriptions and job tasksFuture Plans of Respondents
To get a promotion 5%
To set up my own business 2%
To look for a new job 5%
To continue in my current job 14%
To find a full-time job 44%
To continue studying 14%
To study 15%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%Tracer Results: Apprenticeship Beneficiaries
PSETA Supported Internships & Sample Frame
Trade name Trade ID Trade Code During 2017 (POPULATION)
Automotive Motor Mechanic 96266 DHET-2012-OFO-653101 • 10 PSETA funded beneficiaries
Diesel Mechanic 96275 DHET-2012-OFO-653306 • 32 PSETA supported/facilitated beneficiaries
Fitter and Turner 96264 DHET-2012-OFO-652302
Plumber 96242 DHET-2012-OFO-642601
Sample Frame
18
Sample reached
Data analysis through three key steps:
8
Partially completed
Total Population Data is Data is Data is
cleaned organised interpreted
9
Untraceable
1 2 3
8
42 Refusals
49
Unsuccessful callsDemographic Profile of Respondents
Secondary Education Place of Origin
Race & Gender 100%
Age Education
6% Private School
90%
(Low Cost)
6%
80%
Former Model C GP
56% 70% school
17%
33%
LP
11%
60% Non-former Model
78% NW MP
50% C school
94% 11% 6%
40% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%100% KZN
FS
44% 30% NC 0% 33%
Tertiary Education 0%
20%
EC
10% 6% WC 6%
0%
University 0%
100% of Degree
20-35 36-39 35%
respondents are Technical 53% Rural Urban
Black African 94% of respondents are youth college Matric
certificate
41% 59%
6%
PLP
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Pre-Apprenticeship Activity
Unemployment Characteristics
Employment Status • Reasons for unemployment
67% 100%
Unemployed
22% “I was looking for a job,
Studying
but could not find a job”
11% • Unemployment period prior to starting the
Employed/ Self- apprenticeship programme
employed
< 3 months 13%
94% of those
3 - 6 months 6% that were
Employment Characteristics 6 - 9 months 13%
unemployed
or studying
• Place of employment pre-
9 months - 1 year 19%
100% Were Employed at apprenticeshi
1 - 3 years 19% p have never
Government Department
3 - 5 years 0% been
employed
All respondents that were employed pre- > 5 years 6% before.
apprenticeship, were employed at the host employer
0% 5% 10% 15% 20%
prior to the apprenticeship.Apprenticeship Uptake
Awareness
Respondents found out about the
apprenticeship through: Apprenticeship Trades
70%
Local municipality 6%
Personal/family contacts 6%
Employment agency 17% 60%
59%
Advertisement 17%
Internet 22%
50%
Institution studying at 33%
40%
35%
30%
Motivation
20%
Reasons for doing the apprenticeship
10%
6%
To find 0%
a job
28% Automotive Motor Diesel Mechanic Plumber
To develop Mechanic
skills
For
61%
experience
11%Post-Apprenticeship Activity & Destination
Pre & post activity comparison Employment Status
Geographic Destination of Location Dynamics
70% 67% beneficiaries 11%
45% increase in
60%
56% 44%
employment after Pre 0%
Post 33% LP
50%
apprenticeship 11%
44%
44% 11%
ended 6% 33%
40% 0%
NW GP MP
30%
22% 0% 0% KZN
20% 0% 0% FS
11% NC The respondents
10% 6% are now located in
0% 0% 0% 0% GP, KZN and MP
0%
0% 0% EC
Unemployed Employed/ self Learning Programmes Studying
WC
employed
Increase in monthly income Absorption rate at host employer 17% increased
movement to urban
Pre 41% 59% areas after
Experienced an 33%
income after All those that Absorbed apprenticeship
67% apprenticeship found by host Rural Urban ended
employment employer
Did not
33% enjoy a Post 24% 76%
experience higher
67%
an increase in income than Not absorbed by
income before host employer 0% 50% 100%Post-Apprenticeship: Employed Respondents
Time elapsed from programme
completion to finding employment Employer type Way of finding employment
A newspaper
11%
advertisement
0 - 3 month 25%
50% Relatives 11%
National,
Provincial Private
or Local organisation With the help of
3 - 6 months 50% 11%
Government a SETA
50% DoL
employment 11%
Longer than 6 50% services
months
25% were employed by Through my
the host employer 56%
Apprenticeship
after completing
0% 20% 40% 60% the internship 0% 20% 40% 60%
Size of organisation Hours work per week Nature of employment
100%
More
More than 150 30% 98%
than 40
50-150 30% hours per 96%
90%
week 94% Permanent
11-49 20% 20% 92%
80%
2-10 90%
10% 40 hours per week Fixed-term
88%
Don’t know contract
10% 86%
10%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 84%Post-Apprenticeship: Employed Respondents
Period Employed Apprenticeship relevance
20% Respondents’ work in the
1 - 2 years
90% public service space
Respondents’ feel that the
11% apprenticeship prepared
80% them for their current job tasks
2 - 3 years
70% > 3 years
Respondents’ work is related
80% to apprenticeship skills
Monthly Income Respondents’ believe that the
apprenticeship provided
R 12 801 – R 25 600 40% 60% them with a career pathway
R 6 401 – R 12 800 40%
Respondents’ feel that their
60% career expectations has been
R 3 201 – R 6 400 10% met
Respondents’ position at work
Refused to answer 10% has changed for the better
10% (e.g. promotion or increase)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%Post-Apprenticeship: Unemployed Respondents
Unemployed reasons
13% No
Activities to find work
opportunities
where live 88% sent CV to companies/ organisations
63%
Actively
looking for a
13% Unwilling 63% made enquiries at workplaces
to
job relocate
50% used social media platforms
13% Unable
to work 25% registered at a private employment agency
25% approached DoL employment office
Duration seeking work
25% asked friends /relatives for assistance
< 6 months 25%
25% gone from door-to-door looking for work
6 months - 1 year 0%
13% approached recruitment agencies
1 - 2 years 13%
13% answered newspaper ads for jobs
2 - 3 years 38%
13% waited at the side of the road
> 3 years 25%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%Perceived Impact of Apprenticeship Programme
Skills acquired Benefits listed by respondents Benefit status of learnership
45%
40%
40% 17% The
35% 33% apprenticeship
was not
30%
beneficial
25%
20%
15% 13% 13%
10%
83%
5%
The apprenticeship
was beneficial
0%
Gained employment
Became a qualified artisan
Gained experience
Gained skills & knowledge
Reasons for not being beneficial
• The apprenticeship did not lead
to employment
• The training was not sufficient
of all respondents were 83%
given the opportunity to
apply the skills they have
obtained through the
apprenticeshipPerceived Impact of Apprenticeship Programme
“The apprenticeship developed your work “The apprenticeship improved your ability “The apprenticeship helped you to develop
professional skills” to adapt to different work situations” necessary skills to find/secure employment”
70% 70% 45%
61% 61% 40% 39%
60% 60%
35%
50% 50%
30%
40% 40% 25%
22%
30% 30% 20%
17%
22% 22% 15%
20% 20% 11% 11%
10%
11% 11%
10% 10%
6% 6% 5%
0% 0%
0% 0% 0%
Neutral
Agree
Neutral
Agree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly disagree
Strongly agree
Strongly disagree
Strongly agree
Strongly disagree
Strongly agree
Disagree
Disagree
DisagreePerceived Impact of Apprenticeship Programme
“You developed new skills in the “You learned more about public services, Mentor availability to provide support
apprenticeship” government and related sectors” 94%
60% 70% Very rarely 6%
56%
Of all
61% respondents
60% Occasionally had a mentor
50% 24%
at the
workplace
50%
39% Often during the
40% 47%
apprenticeship
40%
30% Very often 24%
30%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
20%
20% Opportunity to apply skills
17%
10%
11% 17%
6% 10% None
6% 6%
0% 0%
0% 0%
Agree
Neutral
Strongly agree
Strongly disagree
Disagree
22%
Neutral
Agree
Strongly agree
Strongly disagree
Disagree
61% Occasionally
AdequatePerceptions of the Apprenticeship Programme
Positive aspectsPerceptions of the Apprenticeship Programme
Things that did not work well in the Internship
Work-related
Challenges
• Poor communication from HR and/or management
• Host employers to assist with travel arrangements to work sites
• The burden of travelling to workplace/work sites
• Ensure greater coherence between beneficiaries and
permanent staff
• Personal accountability when working with equipment
Programme & Administrative
• Beneficiaries not being absorbed • Ensure beneficiaries are first choice for vacant positions
• Delays in taking the trade tests • Ensure more beneficiaries are absorbed
• Poor coordination between training provider and employer • Ensure mentors are available to guide beneficiaries
Challenges
• Theory and practical not aligned • Provide dedicated support/dedicated channel of
communication between PSETA & beneficiaries
• Stipends not paid on time
• Ensure payments to training providers are made on time
• Training providers not paid on time, leading to beneficiaries not
receiving their results • Ensure training providers are adequately qualified
• Ensure stipends are paid on timePerceptions of the Apprenticeship Programme
Proposed improvements
Short-term Future Plans (2019-2020)
To build a career in the public service
10%
sector
Ensure beneficiary absorption 3%
To set up my own business
16%
To look for a new job
13%
To continue in my current job
Add more practical aspects to the
programme To find a full-time job
23%
3%
To find a part-time job
3%
To continue studying
Ensure that the quality and quantity
of equipment/tools are adequate To study
29%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
Training providers to be adequately
qualified and experiencedTracer Results: Employer Perceptions
Host Employers in Context
‘How has the WBL programmes impacted the employers?’
• Undertook a series of in-depth, face-to-face interviews
• Purposeful sampling (as selected by PSETA)
The following departments were interviewed: The designations of the respondents are as follows:
Gauteng Department: Treasury (GPT) Director: Core Curriculum
National Department: Tourism (DT) Acting Director: Human Resource Management and Development
Statistics South Africa (StatsSA) Deputy Director: Human Resource Development
National Department: Human Settlements (DHS) Deputy Director: Career Development
National Department: Correctional Services (DCS) Assistant Director: Human Resource Development
Gauteng Department: Roads and Transport (GPDRT) Assistant Director: Human Resources Management
National Department: Public Works and Infrastructure (DPWI) Assistant Director: Skills Development
Gauteng Department: Infrastructure Development (GPDID) Chief Training Officer
National Department: Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME) Skills Development Facilitator
Senior Administration Officer: Career Development
THE RESULTS AND INSIGHTS REFLECT OVERALL FINDINGS FOR WBL
PROGRAMMES FOR HOST EMPLOYERS.WBL & Host Employer Background
Average
2500 annual number of beneficiaries hosted 2342 Reported Annual Average Absorption Rate
120%
2000
100%
100%
1500
1200 Some host employers provide beneficiaries
with referrals to assist them with finding
1000 80% employment
500
100 124 60%
24 25 36 50 80
0
GPT DT DPME DHS StatsSA GPDID GPDRT DPWI DCS
40%
33%
29%
56%
44% 20%
of host employers 10%
of host employers interviewed indicated
interviewed indicated that WBL beneficiaries 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
0%
that absorption is cannot expect
GPT
GPDRT
DPWI
DT
GPDID
StatsSA
DPME
DHS
DCS
vacancy, budget & absorption into the
resource dependent organisationExperience as a WBL Host Employer
Aspects lacking in WBL in providing Positive aspects in WBL providing Challenges in hosting Satisfaction level in WBL
necessary skills necessary skills beneficiaries
Reasons providing required skills
Reasons
Reasons
discussed
Training on professional discussed
in-text
conduct and soft skills
Beneficiaries able to find
in-text
jobs after the programme
Lack of space (office
discussed 11% Dissatisfied
space, work space etc.)
in-text
Beneficiaries require Beneficiaries obtain work Lack of equipment (tools,
22%
additional guidance during Somewhat
experience computers, PPE etc.)
work exposure 67% Satisfied
75 2 years
Satisfied
Exposure to professional Financial constraints
Greater assessment
environment (stipends, acquiring %
required while on the job
equipment etc.)
Qualifications aligned with industry
Some mismatches between Core skills required for the
Too few mentors competencies/skills needs
theory and practice job is transferred
11% Somewhat
Beneficiaries able to
Mentors require training bridge the gap between Time constraints in
prior to intake of theoretical knowledge providing guidance
beneficiaries and practical application (managers especially) 22% No
Skills are in line with
Inability to absorb
67%
departmental/
beneficiaries 75 2 years
Yes
organisational needs
%Impact of WBL on Host Employer
Positive impacts Negative impacts
Staff feel threatened by
Reasons
beneficiaries (job security)
discussed • Provides increased capacity
in-text • Empowers youth
Conflict between staff & 89% • Empowers unemployed beneficiaries
beneficiaries (re. conducts
and approach to tasks) • Produces skilled, professional workforce
of host employers
would recommend • Youth beneficiaries rejuvenate the workplace
Time that mentors/managers that other
• Provides relevant work experience
are required to set aside for departments/
beneficiaries organisations take part • Cultivates a culture of learning
in WBL programmes
• Organisation is kept abreast of best practices
Additional costs (stipends,
acquiring equipment etc.)
• Stipends are too small (exploitation of
beneficiaries)
12%
• Time, effort and resources are invested in
of host employers
beneficiaries that will not be absorbed (futile
would not recommend exercise for organisation)
that other • Organisations only take part due to
departments/ stipulated targets set, and not invested in the
organisations take part
programmes
in WBL programmesHost Employer – SETA Interactions
Relevant SETAs Level of satisfaction with Dissatisfaction reasons Suggestions for SETA
SETA interactions Improvements
Culture, Arts, Reasons
Tourism, Limited interaction & discussed
Improve turn-around time on
Hospitality & 22% poor communication in-text
all admin & communication
Sports SETA Local Government SETA 11% Very
Very satisfied SETA targets are
Manufacturing, dissatisfied unattainable Ensure greater geographical
Engineering & presence of SETAs
Related 33%
Services SETA Payments not made
Construction SETA 33% Dissatisfied
on time Improve coordination
Satisfied between SETAs, Training
Providers & host Employers
Limited monitoring
Chemical Industries SETA Public Service SETA Ensure greater alignment
Satisfaction reasons between industry needs and
General poor turn- programmes
Safety &
Energy & Security Regular around time
Water SETA SETA engagements & Provide greater financial
support support to beneficiaries & host
Poor administration employers
Financial, Accounting, Regular &
Management,
Services SETA
consistent
Consulting & Ensure better communication
other Financial monitoring
with host employers &
Services SETA
beneficiaries
Payments made
Food & on time
Beverage Intensify career guidance
Manufacturing and post-programme
Industry SETA Transport SETA support to beneficiariesHost Employer – Training Provider Interactions
Level of satisfaction with Training Provider Suggestions for Training Provider
interactions Improvements
Satisfaction reasons
11% Very Level of efficiency of Training
satisfied Issue certificates timeously Provider
Regular Contact
33%
Dissatisfied
Ensure greater Constant assistance
involvement of host & guidance
employers & mentors
56%
Greater integration Dissatisfaction reasons
Satisfied
between SETAs, Training
Providers & host employers Delays in issuing certificates
are required
SETA red tape negatively
Better monitoring of the affect the tasks of Training
performance of Training Providers
Providers
Overall, the interactions between
Training Providers and Host Employers SETAs to ensure the quality
has been positive of the Training Providers
assignedPerceptions & Details about Beneficiaries
Beneficiary proficiency improvement Considerations for appointing beneficiaries Assessment of beneficiaries
Three most common methods:
of host employers indicated
that no preference is given Quarterly performance
100% to beneficiaries – they are evaluation
subject to the normal
All host employers were able to
78% recruitment process Reporting by mentors
notice improvement in Other considerations highlighted:
proficiency after completing the
WBL programme Formal examinations/
assessments as prescribed
by programme
Observed improvements
Beneficiary feedback
Feedback received by Host
Employers were overall positive
Tracking of beneficiaries regarding the workplace exposure.
by host employers
Beneficiaries were unhappy about:
Knowledge about 44% • Stipends being insufficient
whereabouts of those not Yes
absorbed?
56% • Not being absorbed
No
75 2
years
%Key Findings
Programme Impact on Beneficiaries
• WBL effectively facilitate entry into • Positive impact on financial situation
employment: • Learnership: 30%
• Post-learnership: 25% increase in employment • Internship: 14%
• Post-internship: 25% increase in employment • Apprenticeship: 67%
• Post-apprenticeship: 45% increase employment
• Income post-WBL employed: Earn over R12 801
• WBL provides increased chances of accessing • Learnership: 22%
employment & career advancement • Internship: 20%
• WBL provide limited to no real facilitation into • Apprenticeship: 40%
self-employment • Outcomes objectively positive, although,
• Positive impact on skills development: subjectively, some beneficiaries felt less
• Learnership: most post-employed immediately
positive about the impacts
• Internship: most post-employed within 6 months • Overall, WBL programmes seem to have
• Apprenticeship: most post-employed within 6 months improved skills and knowledge of beneficiaries
• Employed post-WBL in Public Service Sector: • Beneficiaries indicated that they learned more
• Learnership: 75% about the Public Services Sector:
• Internship: 63% • Learnership: 97%
• Apprenticeship: 50% • Internship: 94%
• Apprenticeship: 78%
• Employed post-WBL for 2 years or more:
• Learnership: 75%
• Internship: 36%
• Apprenticeship: 80%Programme Impact on Employers
• Overall positive impact
• Additional capacity gained • Cultivates a culture of learning –
• Feel that taking part in WBL a spills over to other staff members
social responsibility • Those with limited capacity
• Feel proud to empower youth indicate that they cannot afford
the time and resources to host
• Acknowledge that WBL produce beneficiaries
skilled workforce in the Public
Sector • Lack of physical space and
equipment to host beneficiaries
• Kept abreast of best practices,
new approaches and emerging
trendsProgramme Particulars
Learnership Internship Apprenticeship
• Some beneficiaries not granted • Some beneficiaries not granted • Some indicated delays experienced in
opportunity to move around the opportunity to move around the taking trade tests
organisation organisation • Coordination between employer and
• Some beneficiaries taken advantage of • Some beneficiaries taken advantage of training provider required
– tasked with admin and/or non- improvements
relevant tasks – tasked with admin and/or non-
relevant tasks • Some beneficiaries held accountable
• Many not provided with required for potential damages and losses when
resources or facilities at host employer • Many not provided with required working on equipment
resources or facilities at host employer
• Some unsatisfied with quality and • Many not provided with required
competency of facilitators • Mentoring and support provided not resources or facilities
• Urge for continuous monitoring of always sufficient: • Mentoring and support provided not
facilitators throughout • Time constraints (mentors/managers) always sufficient:
• Mentoring and support provided not • Lack of familiarity with programme • Time constraints (mentors/managers)
always sufficient: content and outcomes • Lack of familiarity with programme
• Time constraints (mentors/managers) content and outcomes
• Administrative processes can be
• Lack of familiarity with programme • Administrative processes can be
content and outcomes improved on:
• Delays in issuing certificates
improved on:
• Administrative processes can be • Delays in issuing certificates
improved on: • Delays in processing payments of
stipends • Delays in processing payments of
• Delays in issuing certificates stipends
• Delays in processing payments of
stipendsTracking & Tracing Aspects
Learnership Internship Apprenticeship
• Average of four calls to achieve • Average of four calls to achieve • Average of five calls to achieve
one successful survey one successful survey one successful survey
• 68% of contact details were • 66% of contact details were • 55% of contact details were
invalid/not working invalid/not working invalid/not working
• Refusal rate of 10%
• Refusal rate of 21% • Refusal rate of 10%
• Required sample size was 150,
population consisted of only 42.
• Deployed snowballing method to
enhance chances
Overall
• In order to reach required sample, the sample frame should contain enough valid contact details
• The importance of ensuring beneficiary contact details are correct during this study
• Need for constant contact and updating of beneficiary details during and after programme
• Host employers willing to be interviewed
• In most cases, more than one individual of each organisation was interviewed together
• Importance of tracer studies was realised in establishing the impact of SETA funded programmes to inform
future programmesRecommendations
Recommendations
• Dedicated and on-going recordkeeping of
beneficiaries required by SETAs
• Ensure rigorous workplace readiness assessment
• Include primary and alternative numbers and
• Verify required resources and adept working
email addresses
facilities
• Training provider contact details
• Assist employers to achieve readiness
• Host employer contact details
if they do not meet the standards • Undertake continuous & ongoing tracer studies
SETAs to ensure: • Assessment of programmes & destinations
• Host forums or platforms to gather more insights beneficiaries
• Monitoring of facilitators and facilities from the industry and employers to steer
to ensure best practice achieved • SETAs to plan and set out budgets for this
programme direction and efficacy • Undertake to trace same individuals over a set
• Offer guidance to workplace on supporting
beneficiaries period
• Improve implementation guidelines for training
• Ensure expectations of beneficiaries aligned
providers and employers • Review curriculum to ensure relevance
with programme outcomes
• Host seminars to this effect to ensure (especially for future outlook – 4IR)
mentors and training provider efforts • Ensure includes soft/transversal skills
• SETAs to constantly follow-up with beneficiaries meet the same objectives
throughout the programme (outlet for • Use the National Occupational Curriculum
concerns) • Ensure employers maintain records and Content (NOCC) to guide WBL formulation
• Provide short-term post-programme support reports of beneficiary performance • Integrated approach to technical
• Establish a graduate network or alumni training, soft skills and workplace
• SETAs to ensure that training providers exposure
programme
are verified and up to standard
• Serve as a networking platform
• Stricter quality assurance to be administered
• Electronically distribute ‘mini-tracer’
• Undertake workplace mentoring training • Adopt more integrated communication and
sessions coordination
• Aim to guide mentors and supervisors • Training provider – Host employer – SETA
on their roles
• Ensure familiarity with requirements and contentYou can also read
