The registered apprenticeship and work-based learning topic area includes reviews of studies examining the effectiveness of work-based training programs on participants’ employment and earnings outcomes. CLEAR assessed the strength of causal evidence provided in each study and summarized each study’s design, methods, findings, and the program examined.
Registered Apprenticeship and Work-Based Learning
Status: Literature reviewed in this evidence review covers 2005 – 2023. An updated review protocol has been posted as of June 2024.
Recently Added
CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.
Displaying 31 - 40 of 108
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Community and Technical College (CTC) Worker Retraining (WR) program on employment, earnings, and benefit receipt of long-term unemployed and…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Dislocated Worker Program on the employment rate, earnings, and benefit receipt of dislocated workers in…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of compressed delivery of a World Class Shipbuilding apprenticeship program on program retention. The Apprentice School of Newport News Shipbuilding…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the net impact of 12 workforce development programs in Washington state on employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt outcomes. This profile focuses on the…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the net impact of 12 workforce development programs in Washington state on employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt outcomes. This profile focuses on the…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the net impact of 12 workforce development programs in Washington state on employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt outcomes. This profile focuses on the…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the net impact of 12 workforce development programs in Washington state on employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt outcomes. This profile focuses on…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the net impact of twelve workforce development programs in Washington state on employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt outcomes. This profile focuses on…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the net impact of 12 workforce development programs in Washington state on employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt outcomes. This profile focuses on the…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the net impact of 12 workforce development programs in Washington State on employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt outcomes. This profile focuses on the…
CLEAR Icon Key
Below is a key for icons used to indicate important details about a study, such as its type, evidence rating, and outcome findings.
High Causal Evidence
Strong evidence the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Moderate Causal Evidence
Evidence that the effects are caused to some degree by the examined intervention.
Low Causal Evidence
Little evidence that the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Causal Impact Analysis
Uses quantitative methods to assess the effectiveness of a program, policy, or intervention.
Descriptive Analysis
Describes a program, policy, or intervention using qualitative or quantitative methods.
Implementation Analysis
Examines the implementation of a program, policy, or intervention.
Favorable
The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts.
Mixed
The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain.
None
The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain.
Unfavorable
The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts.
Not applicable
Not applicable because no outcomes were examined in the outcome domain.
Favorable - low evidence
The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Mixed - low evidence
The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
None - low evidence
The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Unfavorable - low evidence
The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.