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 81 - 90 of 108
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the WorkAdvance sectoral training program at the Per Scholas site on employment, earnings, and education and training from 2011 to 2015. The authors…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the relationship between formal training and promotion for managers. The author investigated similar research questions in another study, the profile of which is…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the relationship between formal training and promotion for employees who were not managers. The author investigated similar research questions in another study,…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study examined the relationship between participation in extracurricular food service employment during culinary arts training and two eligible outcomes: students’ post-graduation employment in…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study examined the relationship between participation in extracurricular food service employment during culinary arts training and the proportion of culinary arts courses students successfully…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the WorkAdvance sectoral training program at the St. Nicks Alliance site on employment, earnings, education, and training from 2011 to 2015. The…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) on the employment and earnings of participants displaced from jobs in the manufacturing sector who did and did not…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) on the employment and earnings of displaced manufacturing workers. The authors investigated similar research…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of customized employment services for disabled adults on earnings and employment. Using administrative data, the authors compared employment and…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of training funded by Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) on dislocated workers’ employment. The author used a nonexperimental approach to compare 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.