Tracing learnership results

From profiles to pathways

Much current research has focused on the adequacy of learnership programmes or on the sector education and training authorities (Setas) that host them. We have very little understanding of the effectiveness of the system in terms of the labour market outcomes or of the experience of individual participants on learnership programmes. For that purpose, we conducted a large-scale survey of the learnership pathways of 6 819 learnership participants, representing about 14% of the total of learners enrolled in the first year of the NSDS Phase II (between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2006). Here we reflect on those who have completed and terminated their learnerships programmes - who are they, and what are the labour market outcomes of the participation?

How many completed their programme? 

About two-thirds (65%) of participants who enrolled in year one of the NSDS II, reported two years later that they had completed their qualification, 15% had terminated their study and a fifth (20%) were still registered (Figure 1). These results are positive, indicating that after seven years, the system was beginning to meet its targets.

"About two-thirds (65%) of participants reported two years later that they had completed their qualification and 15% had terminated their study"
	Figure 1: Completion status of learners Source: Learnership survey, HSRC, 2007

Why did learners terminate their participation? 

Reasons provided by participants of why they terminated their learnership indicate that termination related to the poor quality of training in either the practical component at the workplace, or in the theoretical component in the classroom (Figure 2). 

Discussion with these learners revealed that, in many instances, the classroom training was not related to the workplace, which made it difficult for them to fulfil their duties during the workplace training phase. 

Lack of support from mentors and other staff at the workplace added to this problem. One respondent illustrated this problem by claiming that ‘...there was resistance from the staff members to accept and acknowledge us. For some, it was a threat that they might lose their jobs...' In fact, about a quarter (24%) of the learners claimed that they had terminated their programmes because of the resistance of fellow employees. 

Of note is that just more than a fifth (22%) of these learners terminated participation because they found employment.

Labour market outcomes of learnership programme 

One indication that the learnership system is effective would be if those who completed had more favourable labour market outcomes than those who terminated. 

Figure 3 indicates that this is the case. More than half (57%) of those who were unemployed at enrolment and completed the learnership found employment, while only 36% of those who terminated were successful in obtaining employment. A similar trend was observed for those who were employed at enrolment.

Figure 3: Labour market pathways of 18.1 and 18.2 learners who completed or terminated 
Source: Learnership survey, HSRC, 2007 

This trend is positive and represents the potential difference that learnerships can make to the lives of individuals and to the skills needs of the economy.

Ongoing inequalities

If we consider the labour market outcomes of all 18(2)1 learners, just over half (53%) accessed employment, but there are distinct demographic inequalities. Almost half of the black (49%) and coloured 18(2) learners (44%) did not gain employment compared to only about a tenth (11%) of Indian learners and almost a fifth (18%) of whites.

1 Learnership participants can be divided into two groups; the 18(1) and 18(2) learners. The 18(1) learners are participants who were employed and 18(2) learners are learners who were unemployed at the time of enrolling for the learnership qualification.  

Further comparison shows that proportionally more female 18(2) learners (53%) than male learners (41%) remained unemployed. An analysis of the home province of learners reveals that almost six out of 10 18(2) learners who originated from KwaZulu-Natal did not gain employment. Slightly more than five out of 10 18(2) learners whose home was originally in the Free State also did not access employment.

This provincial disparity requires further examination, as we do not know the province in which learners were seeking jobs - whether their home, or in the province to which they had moved to pursue a learnership.

There is also a difference in terms of sectors and skills levels. More than half of the 18(2) learners who enrolled at a low-skills level did not gain employment compared to about a quarter at the intermediate and high-skills levels respectively. More than seven out of 10 unemployed learners who successfully gained employment were enrolled for learnership programmes that fall under the banking sector (BANKSETA), the insurance sector (Inseta), the chemical industry (Chieta), the financial sector (Fasset) and the safety and security sector (SASSETA). More than seven out of 10 unemployed learners who did not access employment enrolled for learnership programmes that fall under the construction education sector (CETA) and media and publishing sector (MAPPP).

Almost three-quarters (71%) of this group indicated that they had plans to enrol for further education and training, as they realised that their learnership training was not enough to give them the necessary skills to find employment. These trends suggest a pathway of potentially extended periods of unemployment for participants in sectors that primarily employ workers with low-level skills - and that there are strong racial and spatial determinants operating.

What are learners' perceptions of why they did not gain employment?

As with those who terminated their participation, the inadequate quality of the training offered is highlighted as the main reason why the unemployed did not gain employment. More than three-quarters (77%) reported that they did not gain sufficient work experience during their training. They claimed that this might contribute strongly to lack of success in finding employment. The same proportion of learners also claimed that they needed more training in the field for which they initially enrolled. Almost half (47%) felt that employers were not really interested in future employees with learnership qualifications. About a third (31%) proposed that they needed totally different training, because of the lack of employment opportunities in the field they initially chose.

Are learnerships leading to advancement for the employed?

The majority of learners who were employed at enrolment completed their programmes (84%). More than three-quarters indicated that they were employed at the same company at which they had worked prior to and during the learnership programme. Salary information provided shows there was little significant increase, and little change in the type of contract after completion of the qualification. Indications were that, even though employees may not obtain a promotion or salary increase, they found that the learnership improved their knowledge and self-confidence in the workplace.

Positive for some, but not all

The HSRC research suggests that, after seven years, the learnership system is positive for some, but not all, learners. The learnership experience is not linear, and it does not proceed automatically and neatly on a uniform path.

Generally, the survey findings reveal a positive labour market outcome for those who completed learnerships. They suggest that learnership programmes have made a difference in the lives of many of the individuals who participated and show the potential to fill the skills needs in certain sectors of the economy, particularly at intermediate and high skills levels.

The most significant in terms of numbers and outcome is the group of 18(2) learners who were unemployed at enrolment: just over 50% gained employment after completion of their learnership programmes. An important trend is the fact that the majority of this group reported that their employment was related to their learnership training. In these instances, training did not just happen for the sake of training, and the uptake of unemployed learners was not simply linked to the benefits employers or training providers gained from the system.

The most vulnerable group remains the 18(2) learners who were unemployed at enrolment and did not gain employment. Equally significantly, this group attributed their ongoing unemployment to the poor quality of theory and work-based training.

And it appears that the learner who is more likely not to gain employment is black, female, pursuing a learnership at a low-skills level, located in specific sectors and in provinces that are less economically developed, and having terminated the learnership. 

The effect of the quality of training identifies a major challenge to be overcome by trainers, employers and Setas so that the results can be more positive and effective for this significant, vulnerable group. The potential waste of resources and the negative effect on the lives of participants was highlighted through interviews. The priority and challenge now is to regulate and improve the quality of the learnership programmes offered.

For the full report, e-mail media@hsrc.ac.za.

The research team from the Education, Science and Skills Development (ESSD) programme at the HSRC was led by Glenda Kruss and Renette du Toit and included Mariëtte Visser, Lesley Powell and Elizabeth Earle, with Andre Kraak as leader of the Department of Labour research programme