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 61 - 70 of 108
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of STEP Forward on employment, earnings, and education outcomes. The authors used a randomized controlled trial to estimate impacts of enrollment in…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) adult program’s training services on the employment and earnings of low-income adults. The authors investigated…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) dislocated worker program’s training services on the employment and earnings of dislocated workers. The authors…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Jewish Vocational Service (JVS)-Boston sectoral employment program on earnings and employment. The authors investigated similar research…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Per Scholas sectoral employment program on participants’ earnings and employment. The authors investigated similar research questions with two…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Wisconsin Regional Training Partnership’s (WRTP) sectoral employment program on earnings and employment. The authors investigated similar…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the effects of employment services offered through the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA) on employment and earnings outcomes. The author investigated…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
This study examines the relationship between mentoring and employees’ employment outcomes. Specifically, the study examines the relationship between psychosocial mentoring and turnover intention.…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Registered Apprenticeship (RA) program on employment and earnings. The authors compared outcomes for participants in the RA program with people…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impacts of the Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST) program on educational attainment and wage outcomes. The authors used statistical…
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.