Engineering Trainee Characteristic: How Does This Affect Modern Apprenticeship Training In Malaysia?


Ridzwan Che Rus,Zaliza Hanapi,Mohd Azlan Husain,Arasinah Kamis,Suriani Mohamed,Che Ghani Che Kob,



Modern Apprenticeship,Vocational Education,Grounded Theory, Skills Acquisition ,Engineering Trainee,


Modern apprenticeship training systems require trainees to have the capability to become highly skilled workers. However, most studies only deal with high-skill and knowledgeable terms without deliberating in depth what skills are required in the high-skilled intentions. Thus, this study is conducted to examine the characteristics of the trainers to form the model of modern apprenticeship trainer characteristics to develop highly skilled workers. Modern apprenticeship system should combines elements of mixed trainee ability. Previous study showed that most trainees enter public training institutions due to poor academic results. This creates the view of public vocational training institutions as second-class education. Study using grounded theory method was to identify the factors behinds successful trainees and how they manage their learning process. A total of 32 respondents were interviewed comprising trainees, industry supervisors, and employers. The results showed that there are eight factors that contribute to the success of the trainees in training institutions and also through industrial training before being appointed as an employee. This clearly shows that the success of the apprenticeship training system not only depends on the training system itself but also on the trainees’ characteristics model that are natural or formed by the working environment.


I.Abdel-Wahab, M. (2012). Rethinking apprenticeship training in the British construction industry. Journal of Vocational Education & Training,64(2), 145–154. doi:10.1080/13636820.2011.622450.

II.Barab, S.A., & Hay, K.E. (2001). Doing science at the elbows of experts: Issues related to the science apprenticeship camp. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(1), 70-102.

III.Behrens, M., Pilz, M. & Greuling, O. (2008). Taking a straightforward detour : learning and labour market participation in the German apprenticeship system. Vocational Aspect of Education,60(1): 93–104. doi:10.1080/13636820701837730.

IV.Berik, G., Bilginsoy, C. & Williams, L. S. (2011). Gender and Racial Training Gaps in Oregon Apprenticeship Programs. Labor Studies Journal, 36(2):221–244. doi:10.1177/0160449X10396377.

V.Billet, S. (2002). Critiquing workplace learning discourses: Participation and continuity at work. Studies in the education of Adults,34 (1):56-67 .

VI.Billett, S. (2004). Workplace participatory practices: Conceptualizing workplaces as learning environments. Journal of Workplace Learning,16(6):312-324.

VII.Billett, S. (2009). Conceptualizing learning experiences: Contributions and mediations of the social, personal, and brute. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 1–14. Retrievedfrom

VIII.Billett, S. & Choy, S. (2013). Learning through work: emerging perspectives and new challenges. Journal of Workplace Learning,25(4):264–276. doi:10.1108/13665621311316447.

IX.Brandt, B.L., Farmer Jr., J.A., & Buckmaster, A. (1993). Cognitive apprenticeship approach to helping adults learn. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 59, 69-78.

X.Christman, S. (2012). Preparing for Success through Apprenticeship. Technology and Engineering Teacher, (September), 22–29. Access from

XI.City and Guilds. (2009). Apprenticeships: Briefing Note.

XII.Collins, A., Bown, J.S. &Newman, S.E. Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L.B. Resnick (ed.) Knowing, Learning, and Instructional Essays in Honor of Robert Glaser. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1989.

XIII.Dieckhoff, M. (2008). Skills and occupational attainment: a comparative study of Germany, Denmark and the UK. Work, Employment & Society, 22(1), 89–108. doi:10.1177/0950017007087418.

XIV.Dreyfus, S E (1981). Four models v human situational understanding: inherent limitations on the modelling of business expertise. USAF.

XV.Dreyfus, H L and Dreyfus, SE (1986). Mind over Machine: the power of human

XVI.intuition and expertise in the age of the computer , Oxford, Basil. Blackwell

XVII.Fuller, A. and Unwin, L. (2003). Fostering workplace learning: looking through the lens of apprenticeship, European Educational Research Journal2 (1):55.

XVIII.Glaser, B. G. (1998). Doing Grounded Theory: Issues and Discussions.Ed. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

XIX.Glaser, B. G. (2002). Conceptualization: On Theory and Theorizing Using Grounded Theory. International Journal of Qualitative Methods1 (2) Spring 2002.

XX.Glaser, B. G. (2004). Remodeling Grounded Theory. Grounded Theory Review. 5(2). Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press..

XXI.Glaser, B. G. & Strauss A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research Ed.New York: Aldine Transaction.

XXII.Hansman, C.A. (2001). Context-based adult learning. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 89, 43-51.

XXIII.Hawkins, T. H. (2008). What is an apprentice ? Education + Training50(1):24–27. doi:10.1108/00400910810855441.

XXIV.International Labour Organization ILO. (2012). Overview of Apprenticehip Systems and Issues. Report.

View | Download