This article focuses on an instructional topic that hasn’t been discussed sufficiently in the apprenticeship literature, which is unfortunate. That is, the instruction that occurs in a lab setting. For one reason or another, we focus more on what occurs in classrooms, while the lab has been overlooked, even though it’s likely that apprentices spend more time learning in a lab than a classroom setting. As the name implies, labs are controlled learning environments, located in a school, union training center, or company-sponsored training center, that provides trainees a hands-on learning experience. When considering labs, simulators and similar devices that represent real situations to trainees should be included in this definition.
Today, with the increased emphasis on skills development, lab instruction has become even more important when planning and delivering apprenticeship programs, especially when considering a competency-based approach. The lab is where skills are first developed. My first experience in developing lab instruction was in a university-based school of technology, involving a lecture/lab course on using the PDP-8 computer which, at one point, was the most advanced 12-bit minicomputer on the market. I realized early on that effective lab instruction depended on considering the classroom and lab objectives as being complementary parts of the same overall lesson. Otherwise, what is learned in each setting becomes disjointed and likely confusing to the student.
I have carried that overarching design perspective from that time forward to other situations. This was especially true when helping a group of community colleges in South Korea design courses based on the competencies identified in their National Occupational Standards scheme. We showed curriculum designers and instructors how to prepare course modules that included both knowledge and skills—based instructional objectives, and how to lay-out the content for each objective. Some of the information from this project is presented in Chapter Eight of my book, Work Analysis in the Knowledge Economy (2019).
Even today, whenever I’m invited to a school or company training center, I purposely make it a point to see what their labs look like, and have been in labs across the U.S., the Netherlands, Taiwan, Germany, Singapore, Ethiopia, China, and Saudi Arabia among other places. Some of the lasting impressions include chatting with young apprentices at the Volkswagen Wolfsburg plant, who were diligently filing away on metal pieces, a scenario I’ve mentioned in a previous article, and marveling how a technical college in Nanjing, China, used their labs to raise funds by having students assemble products for area companies, such as motor bikes and plastic auto components. I’m not certain whether this situation accomplished much from an instructional perspective as it seemed somewhat exploitative of cheap student labor. But students did learn the importance of meeting customer requirements since they were making something for the real marketplace, not just a student project.
A more high-tech lab experience was in Wuhan, China, at the China High-Speed Rail Training Center, in which engineers are trained, through a highly sophisticated and realistic simulator, how to operate a train under varying weather conditions. As a guest, they allowed me to “operate” a high-speed train from Shenzhen to Guangzhou, and I did it without missing too many signals. Walking away, I was highly impressed with the gee-whiz factor of the technology, but less impressed with the training design.
In its truest form, labs represent the opportunity for apprentices to apply and practice the concepts and principles learned otherwise. In many modern training facilities, labs and classrooms are intentionally located adjacent to each other, so that each are just a doorway away from the other. From this perspective, students shouldn’t need to walk to another part of the facility to get to their lab or even to another building altogether, such as I observed at the Riyadh Technical School in Saudi Arabia. In the best case, there should be no physical barrier between the two learning settings.
Labs play a key role when planning both major components of apprenticeships: the Related Instruction and the OJT. For the Related Instruction, along with the classroom, lab instruction allows trainees to apply skills, solve problems, and make relevant products, all of which should transfer to meet later occupational expectations. For the OJT component, lab Instruction logically focuses on learning to perform the actual work of the occupation, calling upon what has been learned previously. Labs often serve as proxies for actual company work settings, when access is not possible for students.
Finding and retaining lab instructors is a major concern globally. This is especially true when seeking individuals who are qualified both to present the classroom content, such as the principles of electronics, and the practical skills to use that information in the lab, such as designing and assembling circuit boards. After all, anyone considering to be an instructor likely realizes that he or she can make a much higher salary by being employed by a company than in a school setting. And anyone considering to be an instructor often fears losing touch with cutting edge advances in their occupation. For this concern, many schools and organizations give instructors paid time away to work in the field for a while. AT&T had a policy in their craft training center in Columbus, Ohio, that experienced employees could serve as instructors for no more than three years.
Beyond getting qualified individuals, there is the question of how instructors actually run their labs. I’ve observed different strategies used by instructors, not all effective. Some instructors allow trainees to learn with minimal guidance other than providing some instructional sheets that were prepared as part of the classroom lesson. The instructor might rove around, offering coaching and advice as necessary and, when necessary, call trainees together to receive a small-group demonstration, mostly ad hoc in nature, to clarify something or correct errors the trainees were making. This approach often lacks adequate planning resulting in uncertain apprentice outcomes.
More ambitious instructors have developed self-paced instructional modules, to be used alongside the equipment or operation, thinking that those documents used alone could guide trainees in what they were supposed to do. While the modules represent a clear advancement in planning, they fail to recognize the one key element that truly distinguishes lab instruction– that is, learning from a person who can guide and share their experience, not from a set of texts. It is for that reason that structured on-the-job training has often been adapted for lab instruction. S-OJT combines the desired planning aspect and the personal interaction between students and the instructor.
There are many free resources available about designing lab instruction across disciplines, such as from the National Science Teaching Association https://www.nsta.org/blog/lab-instructions-finding-right-mix?srsltid=AfmBOoo3nyWL1K2jxcdIvfz7ux047fqH-bd0mi-akvX6kvoDujI6hAqa
Here’s some brief thoughts about lab instruction:
- All the learning that occurs in labs, and in the classroom for that matter, must be based on objectives derived from a systematic analysis of the occupation, which should be done first. The analysis identifies the tasks of the occupation and links those tasks back to prerequisite knowledge and skills. In this sense, all apprenticeship and skills development planning starts at the end first.
- Many apprenticeship programs fail to clearly distinguish between objectives for the lab instruction and objectives for the OJT component, lessening the impact of the learning for both instances.
- Similarly, delivering lab instruction differs from classroom instruction, requiring that any instructor development program should include information on how to deliver instruction in both settings. Most train-the-trainer programs focus on the classroom only, even though lab hours often far exceed classroom hours.
- As stated, we’re now seeing increased use of principles from structured on-the-job training (S-OJT) to develop the lessons for the Related Instruction, prepare the training guides for the OJT component, and use established standardized steps to deliver the lab instruction.
Arguably, the lab represents the most important aspect of an apprenticeship program, often providing the most memorable learning outcomes for trainees. What is learned in a lab truly represents the bridge between the academic program and trainee’s later performance on the job. OJT plays a major role in the success of lab instruction. In Saudi Arabia, most TVET programs include two OJT components: the one occurs in a lab setting in the technical school and the other OJT experience occurs later in a company setting.
Lab instruction represents a significant investment in program resources, making it even more critical to engage in the planning necessary to ensure its effectiveness.
Reference: Jacobs, R. (2019). Work analysis in the knowledge economy: Documenting what people do in the workforce. Palgrave Macmillan: Geneva.
