developing best practices for increasing, supporting and ... · final report developing best...

Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining

Apprentices in Northern Ontario

Final Report – April 2014

Prepared By

Stewart Kallio

FINAL RepoRt

Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario

Funded By

The Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities

2013/2014

Service Delivery Network Development Fund

Prepared By

Stewart Kallio project Coordinator, Literacy Northwest

thunder Bay, oN April 2014

iv

Acknowledgments

The author and the Northwestern Ontario Literacy Network (also known as Literacy Northwest) would like to thank all of the participants in this research and development project. This Project would not have been completed without the generous time provided by survey respondents and trades experts, all of whom contributed to the Project’s successful completion.

We also wish to acknowledge funding provided by the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities (MTCU) 2013/2014 Service Delivery Network Development Fund.

Special acknowledgement goes out to the Advisory Committee members who represented key community stakeholders such as employers, educators, and Employment Ontario service providers.

Any inaccuracies in this document are the sole error of the author. All information in the report was current at the time of publication.

Author: Stewart Kallio, Project Consultant Project Supervisor: Annemarie Wesolowski, Executive Director, Literacy Northwest

Project Steering Committee:

Audrey Anderson Member-at-LargeDiane Corner Member-at-LargeJoseph Pyringer Ontario College of TradesJason Thompson Vector Construction, Thunder BayTerry Webb Northwestern Ontario Building Trades CouncilRic Windsor Member-at-Large

The Committee also included:

Melissa Alers Executive Assistant, Literacy NorthwestMarsha Bell/Jaime Lafond Co-Executive Directors, Mid North NetworkTamara Kaattari Evaluator/Executive Director, Literacy Link South CentralKaitlin Taylor Executive Director, Literacy Network NortheastAnnemarie Wesolowski Executive Director, Literacy Northwest

© Literacy Northwest, April 2014

v

table of Contents1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2. Ontario Adult Literacy Curriculum Framework (OALCF) and Task-Based Programming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

3. Project Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

4. Project Activities – Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

4 .1 project Steering Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

4 .2 project and evaluation Work plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

4 .3 Collaborating with the Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 .3 .1 Follow-up Apprenticeship Forums . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 .3 .2 Apprenticeship Forum for Literacy Northwest and the North Superior Workforce planning

Board – thunder Bay, November 12, 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 .3 .3 Literacy Network Northeast and the Far Northeast training Board – timmins, February 28, 2014

114 .3 .4 Coordination with project partners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 .3 .5 provincial Webinar Highlights – March 26, 2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

5. Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey – Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

5 .1 Design of the Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey and . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Criteria for Selecting the Reference trades . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

6. Task Development Process – Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

6 .1 task Development team . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

6 .2 task Development Work process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216 .2 .1 Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216 .2 .2 task Development Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226 .2 .3 task Reviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226 .2 .4 trade expert Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246 .2 .5 QUILL Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

6 .3 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 .3 .1 tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 .3 .2 tasks and the LBS task-Based Activities portal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 .3 .3 Collaborating with project partners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266 .3 .4 Collaborating with LBS practitioners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266 .3 .5 Collaborating with trade experts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276 .3 .6 Collaborating with Apprenticeship Stakeholders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276 .3 .7 professional Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

vi

6 .4 Learnings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276 .4 .1 Contextualized tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276 .4 .2 task Consistency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286 .4 .3 essential Skills preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286 .4 .4 orientation and professional Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 296 .4 .5 task Development process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

7. Post Implementation Follow-up and Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

8. Concluding Thoughts – Is Task development Art or Science? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

9. Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Appendix 1 – terms of Reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

Appendix 2 – project Work plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Appendix 3 – project evaluation Work plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Appendix 4 – Literacy Link South Central and Literacy Northwest projects Webinar . . . . . . 49

Appendix 5 – Summary Report of Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey Findings . . . . . . . . 52

Appendix 6 – Summary of tasks by trade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

Appendix 7 – task Development Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

Appendix 8 – LBS practitioner Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

Appendix 9 – LBS Learner Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

Appendix 10 – Learner task Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

Appendix 11 – LBS task Review Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

1Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario

“The economic environment in Northern Ontario is rapidly changing. A critical gap is developing between the supply of skilled workers and the demand for skilled workers. Jobs are being created through workforce retirement and industry growth, particularly in the construction, industrial and service trades. Mining activity in Northwestern Ontario is projected to bring a $136 billion return and 13,149 related jobs with the highest occupational demand in trades and production such as underground miners, millwrights, mineral processors, heavy equipment operators and electricians” (Supporting Apprenticeship Completions: Models of Service Provision, 2012/2103).1

Supporting Apprenticeship Completions: Models of Service Provision (SAC: MSP, 2012/2013) identified that many apprentices and trade qualifiers who attempt apprenticeship exams are not successful, particularly those who are challenging the Certificate of Qualification (C of Q). High on the list of barriers was poorly developed literacy and numeracy skills. Research from SAC: MSP (2012/2013) showed that apprentices and exam challengers who don’t have senior-level mathematics and English and/or the level 3 literacy and Essential Skills (reading text, document use, numeracy, writing) have difficulty completing an apprenticeship and/or the Certificate of Qualification exam.

An LBS/apprenticeship program manager provides a personal perspective.

1 This TCU project was supported by Literacy Northwest in partnership with the Northern Literacy Networks (http://www.northernliteracy.ca/index.php/resource-library/category/75-supporting-apprenticeship-completions).

1

Introduction

http://www.northernliteracy.ca/index.php/resource-library/category/75-supporting-apprenticeship-completions

http://www.northernliteracy.ca/index.php/resource-library/category/75-supporting-apprenticeship-completions

Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern OntarioIntroduction2

“We are noticing a big problem with the

students’ lack of literacy and numeracy

skills. This is becoming a major issue.

Students end up leaving the trade because

they can’t read/write or do the math. Many

times a lack of confidence prevents them

from getting the additional help they

need. We are suggesting that students

should be assessed as soon as they are

signed on as apprentices to identify if

they will need upgrading…then provide

them with mandatory upgrading before

they proceed with their apprenticeship

curriculum. This would assist us with

retention and provide the Ministry with

better success/outcomes. The grade 12

diploma is not adequate in many cases as

a pre-requisite for apprenticeship.”

— LBS/apprenticeship program manager

This 2013/2014 Literacy Northwest project, Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario, explored how to increase or improve the rate of apprenticeship completions by:

1 building more robust curriculum resources specifically targeted to apprenticeship-bound learners, and

2 developing a broader base of LBS service providers who can support and deliver programming for apprenticeship learners.

The Project products improve the capacity of LBS service providers to help adults access trades occupations where work is available and where, increasingly, employers require formal certification (e.g., Certificate of Qualification)

and/or a grade 12 credential. Workers with long experience in a trade but who lack formal certification/accreditation often have difficulty getting work. Older workers, especially those who’ve worked in the trades for years, face the hurdle of writing and passing an exam to qualify for employment.2

That doesn’t seem fair, but that’s the way it is.

2 This situation is particularly acute in the construction trades where there is a high demand for workers. The literacy skills of construction workers, particularly those who’ve been working in a trade for a long time, may not match well with new skill demands in the job or with the skills needed to retrieve information on the exam. We know that skills not used are skills that are lost or diminished.


The Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario (2013/2014) project developed apprenticeship-specific tasks for the Ontario Adult Literacy Curriculum Framework (OALCF).

The Ontario Adult Literacy Curriculum Framework supports Literacy and Basic Skills (LBS) service providers as they help learners develop the required knowledge, skills, and behaviours to successfully transition to their goals of:

®® Employment

®® Apprenticeship

®® Secondary School Credit

®® Postsecondary

®® Independence

The LBS Program is learner-centred, goal-directed, and transition-oriented. Its overarching purpose is for learners to develop the knowledge, skills, and behaviours they need to achieve their goals at home, at work, in educational settings, and in the community. Through the LBS Program, learners can acquire the missing skills, knowledge, and behaviours necessary for moving on to other goals.

LBS service providers develop programming that links literacy learning to a learner’s literacy use at home, in the workplace, in the community, and within other learning situations. The OALCF

3 The text in this section was adapted from the document, Practitioner Guide to Task-Based Programming, Ontario Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities, March 2011.

2

Ontario Adult Literacy Curriculum Framework (OALCF) and Task-Based Programming3

Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario4

Ontario Adult Literacy Curriculum Framework (OALCF) and Task-Based Programming

helps LBS practitioners answer the learner’s question, “Why am I learning this?” Using the OALCF, practitioners can establish the link between LBS programming and literacy use in meaningful real-life applications – enabling learners to achieve their goals.

A commitment to learning may be a challenge for many adults who have other responsibilities. Therefore, to inspire persistent participation, a literacy program must connect to something meaningful. A task-based approach related to learners’ goals provides the necessary motivation for learners to stay in the LBS Program long enough to succeed.

Task-based programming extends literacy instruction beyond the development of discrete skills. Instead, practitioners focus on strengthening the learner’s ability to integrate skills, knowledge, and behaviours required to perform authentic, goal-related tasks. Practitioners can combine elements of the OALCF to develop integrated tasks, in which learners complete complex tasks that accurately reflect real-life literacy use.

Tasks can be understood in real-life terms. Tasks related to a learner’s goal enable the learner to see the connection between the learning that occurs in the goal-directed LBS Program and the application of that learning in everyday activities. Within the OALCF, a task is an activity that has a particular purpose and an authentic application. Authenticity is an important consideration when identifying tasks related to a learner’s goal path.

Tasks can be levelled by analyzing their underlying complexity using the task and performance descriptors, indicators, and task examples in the Curriculum Framework. Analyzing both the qualities of the task itself and the observable characteristics of learner performance determines the level of a task. The levelling of a task also provides a clear and easy way for learners and delivery agencies to talk about progress and achievement with other LBS providers and stakeholders.

task developers in this project

worked closely with trade experts

(journeypersons) to develop 36 tasks

drawn from authentic trade practice . to

determine authenticity, task developers

asked the question, “Is this activity

something a learner would actually do

outside the classroom?” If the answer was

“Yes,” then the task is authentic .


The Project set out the following activities:

®® Establish a Project Steering Committee and develop a Project Terms of Reference.

®® Survey apprenticeship stakeholders to identify a priority set of trades for which OALCF apprenticeship tasks would be developed.

®® Create a Task Development Team (TDT) to develop 36 tasks for the apprenticeship goal path to include LBS practitioners, trades experts (journeypersons), employers and other subject matter experts as appropriate.4

®® Conduct professional development for the Task Development Team to build expertise in OALCF task development.

®® Develop 36 tasks for the OALCF apprenticeship goal path focused on the competencies “find and use information” and “understand and use numbers” at higher levels of complexity (level 2 and 3). Task selection and construction was guided by data from surveys of EO practitioners and apprenticeship stakeholders; review of Apprenticeship Training Standards, National Occupational Analysis, In-School Curriculum Standards, and trades test bank practice exams; and advice from subject matter experts, trades experts and employers.

4 The original proposal had each of the three Northern Literacy Networks establishing regional Task Development Teams. Early in the project, it was clear that having three Teams added unnecessary complexity; therefore, one Team with experts drawn from throughout the province was established.

3

Project Description

Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern OntarioProject Description6

®® Coordinate task development with the QUILL Learning Network (QUILL) and Literacy Link South Central (LLSC) to submit tasks to the LBS Task-Based Activities Portal (QUILL) and to the Project team developing face-to-face/online apprenticeship modules (LLSC).

®® Introduce tasks/apprenticeship modules to the field through regularly scheduled Regional Literacy Networks’ professional development meetings. Piloting of the products would follow with agencies that have apprenticeship goal-path activity. EO service providers will be included in Network professional development, as appropriate.

The Project developed the following products:

®® Thirty-six (36) tasks aligned with barriers to apprenticeship completion and the apprenticeship goal path.

®® Collaborative task development – shared with Literacy Link South Central’s face-to-face/online apprenticeship modules and posted on the LBS Task-Based Activities Portal (QUILL).

®® Professional development workshops: 1) Project Teams – building task development capacity; 2) Northern Ontario Literacy Providers – building capacity to integrate apprenticeship resources; 3) Provincial Webinar – introducing the Literacy Northwest and Literacy Link South Central apprenticeship projects to apprenticeship stakeholders.

The Project achieved the following outcomes:

®® Identification of priority skill development for apprenticeship completion (literacy and trades practitioners report satisfaction with priorities)

®® Literacy practitioners in 3 Northern Literacy Network regions report more confidence developing OALCF tasks

®® Literacy practitioners report increased satisfaction implementing apprenticeship resources (tasks) Note: this outcome will actually be achieved in fiscal year 2014/2015.


Too many skilled workers who enter the apprenticeship path do not complete their journey to certification. Research clearly shows that those who complete the in-school and employer training as well as successfully pass the certifying exams are more immediately employable, have better earning potential in the short and long term, and report higher levels of job satisfaction and job security.5

This Project builds on findings and recommendations from the project, Supporting Apprenticeship Completions: Models of Service Provision (SAC: MSP, 2012/2013), which piloted referral and delivery models specifically focused on action research to identify why so few apprentices actually participate in literacy programs, why some credible tradespersons in Northern Ontario cannot pass the qualifying trade exam, and what strategies might be explored to improve apprenticeship completion.

The SAC: MSP (2012/2013) project identified barriers people experience that prevent them from successfully passing the Certificate of Qualification exam:

®® weak communication and math skills

®® lack of multiple-choice test-taking strategies

®® difficulty with specialized language

®® misalignment between what is learned in school/employer training and what is expected on qualifying exams/trades practice.

5 Canadian Apprenticeship Forum

4

Project Activities – Introduction

Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern OntarioProject Activities – Introduction8

Fownes and Evetts6 suggest that test items on trade qualifying exams are complex reading and document-use tasks that pose significant challenges to test writers with weak communication and math skills. They challenge test designers to develop alternate test formats. Test writers have difficulty unpacking the language and intent of the question – or identifying the right answer.

one practitioner told us, “a combination of written and practical exams might be a good

solution”. Another “had experience with apprentices who waited too long to write after

attending Trade School. Many are good with their hands but when it comes to an exam they

have difficulties visualizing the question. They know what they are doing on the job but in most

cases it gets lost in translation.” 7

— LBS practitioners

4.1 Project Steering Committee

The Project Steering Committee (PSC) was established by the fall of 2013 and had its first meeting October 24, 2013. Future meetings/consultations were held as required at key stages of the Project.

The PSC approved the Project Terms of Reference (Appendix 1).

Committee members included:Audrey Anderson – Member-at-LargeDiane Corner – Member-at-LargeJoseph Pyringer – Ontario College of TradesJason Thompson – Vector Construction, Thunder BayTerry Webb – Northwestern Ontario Building Trades CouncilRic Windsor – Member-at-Large

The Committee also included:Melissa Alers – Executive Assistant, Literacy NorthwestMarsha Bell/Jaime Lafond – Co-Executive Directors, Mid North NetworkTamara Kaattari – Evaluator/Executive Director, Literacy Link South CentralKaitlin Taylor – Executive Director, Literacy Network NortheastAnnemarie Wesolowski – Executive Director, Literacy Northwest

The Project Coordinator consulted formally with the PSC and informally with individual Committee members throughout the Project. The PSC reviewed the final report in April 2014.

6 Fownes, L. & Evetts, J. (2001). Essential Skills and Success in Apprenticeship. Burnaby, BC: SkillPlan. Retrieved May 15, 2013 from: http://www.skillplan.ca/essential-skills/ published-papers

7 This issue is being discussed at the Canadian Council of Directors of Apprenticeship (CCDA). Alternate exam formats are used in other countries (Germany, Great Britain).

http://www.skillplan.ca/essential-skills/

Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario Project Activities – Introduction 9

4.2 Project and Evaluation Work Plans

Project Plan

The Project followed the Work Plan set out in the original proposal. Timelines had to be adjusted to reflect a later-than-anticipated start in June 2013.

One change was made to the structure of the Task Development Team (TDT). The original plan proposed three TDT’s – one operating in each of the three Northern Literacy Network regions. It quickly became apparent that three teams presented logistical challenges for at least two reasons: 1) three TDT’s would impose a high level of logistical complexity that would be difficult to manage, and 2) it would be too challenging to recruit experienced task writers.

Three experts agreed to develop 12 tasks each.

In retrospect, the decision to modify the plan proved fortuitous. Task development was demanding, involving a great deal of research and consultation with trade experts (journeypersons). Communications throughout the task development process was complex and needed careful management. Modifying the Work Plan as we did resulted in effective processes and excellent results.

All Project activities and deliverables were completed. The Work Plan is attached as Appendix 2. It includes notes regarding completion and status of activities/deliverables.

Evaluation Plan

An External Evaluator was hired to develop an evaluation strategy that was well-aligned to the Project Work Plan. The Evaluator worked with the Project Coordinator, and the QUILL and LLSC partners to ensure that appropriate evaluation tools/processes were developed and applied in a timely manner. The Project Evaluation Report will be submitted to MTCU with the Final Project Report.

The Project Evaluation Plan is attached as Appendix 3.

4.3 Collaborating with the Field

This section of the Report describes how the following Project products and outcomes were achieved.

Project products:®® Collaborative task development – shared with Literacy Link South Central’s face-to-face/online apprenticeship modules and posted on the LBS Task-Based Activities Portal (QUILL).


®® Professional development workshops: 1) Project Teams – building task development capacity; 2) Northern Ontario Literacy Providers – building capacity to integrate apprenticeship resources; 3) Provincial Webinar – introducing the Literacy Northwest and Literacy Link South Central apprenticeship projects to apprenticeship stakeholders.

Project outcomes:®® Literacy practitioners in 3 Northern Literacy Network regions8 report more confidence developing OALCF tasks

®® Literacy practitioners report increased satisfaction implementing apprenticeship resources (tasks) Note: this outcome is anticipated to be achieved in fiscal year 2014/2015.

The Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario project (2013/2014) shared information with literacy practitioners. Presentations were made to Northern Ontario Literacy Networks and task development was shared with Project partners Literacy Link South Central (LLSC) and the QUILL Learning Network (QUILL).

4.3.1 Follow-up Apprenticeship ForumsPost implementation follow-up and support for the 2012/2013 project, Supporting Apprenticeship Completions: Models of Service Provision (SAC: MSP), included several apprenticeship forums in Northern Ontario. The forums were co-sponsored by the Regional Literacy Networks and local Workforce Planning Boards.

Findings from the SAC: MSP (2012/2013) were presented to a cross-section of literacy and employment service providers as well as other interested stakeholders. Each forum included Roundtable discussions during which strategies to address supporting apprenticeship completion were explored.

The apprenticeship forums introduced participants to key themes related to apprenticeship completion, including barriers to passing the qualifying exams. The 2013/2014 project, Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario, was a direct response to some of the issues raised in the SAC: MSP (2012/2013) project.

The forums provided opportunities to introduce the current project and begin a dialogue with literacy and employment service providers about the purpose of the Project and the OALCF apprenticeship tasks that would be delivered to the field.


Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario Project Activities – Introduction 11

Apprenticeship forums were held in the following locations:

®® Dryden, May 30, 2013 Literacy Northwest and the Northwest Training and Adjustment Board®® Sudbury, June 6, 2013®® Sault Ste. Marie, June 11, 2013 Mid North Network and Sudbury-Manitoulin Workforce Planning

As we delivered apprenticeship forums later in the Project schedule, we were able to share more useful information and products (i.e., actual draft tasks, research findings). Two more recent forums in Thunder Bay and Timmins are described below.

4.3.2 Apprenticeship Forum for Literacy Northwest and the North Superior Workforce Planning Board – Thunder Bay, November 12, 2013The forum was attended by approximately 70 participants representing a broad range of stakeholders drawn from Thunder Bay and the Northwest. The presentation reviewed the Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey findings and outlined the task development process that was underway in the fall of 2013.

Participants indicated the workshop was valuable, especially the Roundtable discussions at which they discussed key questions related to improving apprenticeship completions. Participants noted the importance of opening a community dialogue around this issue.

4.3.3 Literacy Network Northeast and the Far Northeast Training Board – Timmins, February 28, 2014By this time, the Project was much further advanced (i.e., tasks had been completed). The presentation included sample tasks, recent information about the Ontario College of Trades and apprenticeship, and additional evidence for the importance of trades in the overall workforce picture.

The Project Coordinator presented to approximately 40 participants who largely represented literacy and employment service providers. The workshop clearly helped participants to better understand the issues related to supporting apprenticeship completion. It also provided opportunities for others who knew the issues well to share and dialogue with a larger community of apprenticeship stakeholders.

LBS service providers noted the importance of making the tasks available and expressed strong interest in using them immediately. They were not concerned that some of the tasks are set at complexity levels beyond OALCF level 3. Indeed,

LBS service providers noted the

importance of making the tasks

available and expressed strong interest

in using them immediately . they were

not concerned that some of the tasks are

set at complexity levels beyond oALCF

level 3 . Indeed, they felt the higher

complexity tasks can be very useful

motivators for apprenticeship-bound

learners .


they felt the higher complexity tasks can be very useful motivators for apprenticeship-bound learners. The Project Coordinator also received a request from a Francophone literacy provider to provide all of the tasks so she could translate them for use in her programs.

A PDF version of the Timmins presentation is posted to the Northern Literacy Networks website at http://www.northernliteracy.ca/index.php/en/

4.3.4 Coordination with Project PartnersLiteracy Northwest’s (LNW’s) Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario project partnered with two Literacy Networks, Literacy Link South Central (LLSC) and the QUILL Learning Network (QUILL).

The Literacy Link South Central project developed apprenticeship modules for face-to-face and online delivery. The 36 apprenticeship tasks were made available to LLSC to integrate into their apprenticeship modules. Project staff maintained close communication with the LLSC project staff so that task development proceeded in a timely and organized way that supported the LLSC module development. The Project Coordinator participated on the LLSC advisory committee; the Executive Director of LLSC was the Project Evaluator for the LNW project.

The QUILL Learning Network is working with AlphaPlus to build an inventory of OALCF tasks on the LBS Task-Based Activities Portal. The LNW project collaborated with QUILL to develop 36 apprenticeship-specific tasks for the portal. QUILL’s role in the partnership involved vetting and formatting the tasks at the final stage of their development and posting them to the portal. QUILL staff also provided professional development to the Task Development Team.

4.3.5 Provincial Webinar Highlights – March 26, 2014As there was more than one SDNDF project funded in 2013/2014 by MTCU on curriculum related to apprenticeship, the Project Coordinator for the Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario project worked in concert with Literacy Link South Central’s apprenticeship Project Consultant to develop and deliver a provincial webinar to share the results of both projects.

The Project staff developed a PowerPoint presentation and worked with Community Literacy of Ontario to create, promote and deliver the webinar (invitation attached as Appendix 4). The webinar, which was well-received by 40+ participants, attracted a broad cross sector of stakeholders interested in apprenticeship.

http://www.northernliteracy.ca/index.php/en/


Canada has over 300 designated trades and 55 Red Seal Trades in 13 jurisdictions.9 Ontario has 156 designated trades (22 compulsory) representing four trades sectors – Construction, Industrial, Motive Power, and Service.10 Construction (42 trades) and Industrial (54 trades) represent the largest sectors.

Developing OALCF tasks for all the Ontario trades is a huge job.11 It was neither practical nor reasonable to present survey respondents with a list of 156 Ontario trades, especially given clear evidence that some trade sectors (e.g., construction) as well as particular trades (e.g., Red Seal Top 10 registrations) represent a larger, more active workforce. OALCF tasks in the apprenticeship goal path need to align with trade demand and be current, relevant and practical.

The scope of Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario (2013/2014), therefore, focused on describing an important subset of the Ontario trades. The Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey identified priority trades that would represent credible employment opportunities and provide excellent references for the development of 36 OALCF apprenticeship tasks.

9 Ellis Chart (http://www.ellischart.ca/[email protected])

10 Ontario College of Trades

11 The Project partners are working in this direction already. The QUILL Learning Network, which hosts the LBS Task-Based Activities Portal, is gathering tasks for all six OALCF competencies across each of the 5 goal paths. Literacy Link South Central (LLSC) is developing apprenticeship tasks at introductory levels for online and paper-based apprenticeship modules.

5

Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey – Introduction

http://www.ellischart.ca/[email protected]

Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern OntarioApprenticeship Stakeholder Survey – Introduction14

The complete survey findings and the Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey are described in Appendix 5, Summary Report of Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey Findings.

5.1 Design of the Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey and Criteria for Selecting the Reference TradesStatistics Canada and Registered Apprenticeship Information System (RAIS) data sets provided aggregated data about trade registrations and related demographic details. In 2008, Statistics Canada organized the trades into 22 major trade groups based on the National Occupational Classification (NOC).12

The annual report of the Canadian Council of Directors of Apprenticeship (2013) contains details on Red Seal trade registrations and completions. Red Seal data analysis was relevant to the research because Red Seal trades are an important subset of the national trade profile.

Our research also considered the trade affiliation and profile of participants in the SAC: MSP (2012/2013) project. The average age of the participants was 38; most participants were exploring construction trades.

Apprenticeship data is compiled by the Performance Planning, Reporting and Information Management (PRIME) unit at the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities (MTCU). Early in the Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey design process, a request was made to MTCU for apprenticeship-specific data related to registration/completion rates and exam rewrites, including general demographic information about the apprenticeship and trade qualifier population. We hoped to show how completion rates vary across trades (i.e., that some are more challenging), demonstrate which trade exams produce more rewrites, assess trends in apprenticeship registrations (i.e., how trade activity is growing and changing over time) and describe a demographic profile of apprentices and trade qualifiers.

The PRIME data were requested to 1) collect evidence to support findings (i.e., barriers) in the 2012/2013 SAC: MSP project and 2) provide rationale for selecting the subset of trades to inform task development. The data were received in November 2013, well past the time when the apprenticeship field was surveyed. However, the data are important and have been retained for future review and analysis.

12 Automotive service; carpenters; electricians; and plumbers, steamfitters and pipefitters represent the four largest major trade groups.

http://cscptomoap00175/sites/ORUportal/Pages/compass/Documents/New_name_PIE.pdf

http://cscptomoap00175/sites/ORUportal/Pages/compass/Documents/New_name_PIE.pdf

Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey – Introduction 15

The following criteria were used to assess the Statistics Canada, Canadian Council of Directors of Apprenticeship and SAC: MSP (2012/2013) apprenticeship data and to select trades that were included in the Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey.

Trade Sector:

The 156 Ontario trades were grouped by sectors – Construction (42), Industrial (54), Motive Power (21), and Service (39). Some sectors are more in-demand than others and offer more opportunity for apprentices and trade qualifiers.

Service providers tended to receive more inquiries about the construction sector.

Trades Represented in Supporting Apprenticeship Completions: Models of Service Provision (2012/2013):

The profile of trades represented by the participants in SAC: MSP (2012/2013) was considered because it helps identify trades that are in demand. Workers are attempting to access these trades in Northern Ontario.

The SAC: MSP (2012/2013) project recruited 27 participants who represented all of the trade sectors (construction-12, industrial-4, motive power-6, service-5). Construction trades represented 44% of the activity, which was expected given the strong demand for construction trades in Northern Ontario.

It was important to target task development on occupations that prepare workers for high-demand jobs.

Grade Equivalent:

Generally, trades require grade 12 or the equivalent. However, most of the construction trades still retain grade 10 as an entry to practice. Older workers – those who ventured into a trade with grade 10 – are more likely to have lower literacy skills and therefore more challenges with completing the qualifying exams.

It is important to target trades that attract workers who represent more vulnerable populations.

Age Gap between Trade Qualifiers and Trade Completers:

The gap varies by trade and represents the average age gap between trade qualifiers and trade completers.13 Trade qualifiers tend to be older. They work in trades that have lower educational requirements (i.e., construction). They also acquire many years of trade practice without formally requiring certification.

13 Trade qualifiers have not completed an apprenticeship program but have acquired enough practical work experience to write the examination to obtain the Certificate of Qualification (or Certificate of Competence). Trade completers finish all the in-school and employer-based training and successfully pass the qualifying exams issued by the provincial or territorial authorities responsible for certifying trades workers. Generally, these persons are already trades workers active in various work environments.


In response to employer demands for grade 12 and/or the C of Q for employment purposes, older tradespersons with a lot of practical work experience pursue the trade qualifier route to certification.

Writing the C of Q introduces a whole new set of challenges for individuals who’ve been out of school for more than 10 years.

According to an employment service provider, “some people [who] have been

doing the job for years CAN [original emphasis] actually perform the job to a high

standard but do not have the literacy or confidence skills when it comes to writing

the exams. In some of the cases I’ve seen, the employer is forced to lay the person

off as they need that journeyman to send out on jobs and apprentice others.”

Trades where the age gap between trade qualifiers and trade completers is greater are more likely to have workers who need literacy and essential skills preparation.

Growth Trend:

Some trades, even trades with a small number of registrations, are growing faster than others.

Heavy equipment operators and welders, for example, are seeing strong growth demand.

Strong Activity:

Some trades have more activity than others.

These trades represent ongoing employment opportunities for trade qualifiers and apprentices.

Compulsory in Ontario:

An individual must be either a registered apprentice or a certified journeyperson to work in a compulsory trade. People cannot legally work in these trades without being certified or registered. An example of this type of trade is an Electrician or a Hairstylist.

Workers seeking employment in a compulsory trade require formal certification. If they need support to prepare for the exam, they can access the Employment Ontario network of service providers, including LBS, which will have the OALCF apprenticeship tasks.

Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey – Introduction 17

Certificate of Qualification (C of Q) Exam:

This exam is required for compulsory trades in Ontario. It is also available for many voluntary trades.14

Red Seal:

The annual report of the Canadian Council of Directors of Apprenticeship (2013) provides details on Red Seal trade registrations and completions. The Red Seal certification provides workers with employment mobility across Canada.

Many of the Red Seal trades are in strong demand across the country. Workers who complete the Red Seal qualification can “follow the work.”

Red Seal Top 10 Registrations (New) 2009:

There are 55 Red Seal trades in Canada. 79% of total Red Seal registrations are represented by 10 Red Seal trades.

Red Seal Top 10 Completions (New) 2009:

The list of trades for the top 10 registrations and completions is very similar.

The apprenticeship data and information was listed in table form and then queried using the Excel sort feature. The analysis used “what if ” queries to identify 13 Ontario trades. Two specialized areas of automotive service are listed in the Ontario descriptions, so they are combined as Automotive Service for purposes of the Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey. As a result, 12 Ontario trades (plus “other”) are included in the survey.

Table 1 shows the trades by major trade group and by their Ontario name. It is a summary of the data used to do the analysis.

14 Workers don’t require the C of Q to legally work in a voluntary trade in Ontario, but they often need it because employers require it for hiring purposes.


Tabl

e 1

Cri

teri

a fo

r th

e A

ppre

nti

cesh

ip S

take

hol

der

Surv

ey

Sum

mar

y of

Tra

de S

elec

tion

s

NO

CO

ntar

io T

rade

Nam

etrade Sector

SAC project Sample

Grade or equiv .

Age Gap between trades Qualifiers and Completers

Growth trend

Strong Activity

Compulsory in ontario

C of Q exam

Red Seal

Red Seal top 10 Registra-tions (New) 2009

Red Seal top 10 Comple-tions 2009

Stat

isti

cs C

anad

a M

ajor

Tra

de G

roup

7233

Shee

t Met

al W

orke

rC

N10

101

3Y

YY

Shee

t Met

al W

orke

rs

7721

Gen

eral

Car

pent

erC

Y10

124

8N

YY

13

Carp

ente

rs

7251

plum

ber

CY

1012

59

YY

Y5

6pl

umbe

rs, p

ipefi

tter

s an

d St

eam

fitte

rs

7241

elec

tric

ian

Cons

truc

tion

and

Mai

nten

ance

CY

1012

410

YY

Y2

1el

ectr

icia

ns

7252

Stea

mfit

ter (

2)C

N10

59

YY

Y7

7pl

umbe

rs, p

ipefi

tter

s an

d St

eam

fitte

rs

7327

Wel

der

IY

125

82

NY

Y6

5W

elde

rs

6341

Hai

rsty

lists

SY

126

39

YY

Y3

3H

airs

tylis

t and

est

hetic

ians

7521

Hea

vy e

quip

men

t ope

rato

rC

Y12

79

2N

NY

Hea

vy e

quip

men

t and

Cra

ne o

pera

tors

6322

Cook

SY

127

48

NY

Y8

N/A

Food

Ser

vice

7311

Indu

stria

l Mec

hani

c M

illw

right

IY

128

16

NY

Y10

8M

illw

right

s

7321

Alig

nmen

t and

Bra

kes t

echn

icia

nM

Y12

111

10Y

YN

Auto

mot

ive

Serv

ice

7312

Hea

vy D

uty

equi

pmen

t tec

hnic

ian

MY

1213

23

NY

Y9

9H

eavy

Dut

y eq

uipm

ent M

echa

nics

7321

tran

smis

sion

/Alig

nmen

t & B

rake

s Au

tom

otiv

e Se

rvic

e te

chni

cian

(1)

MY

121

10Y

YY

44

Auto

mot

ive

Serv

ice


This section of the Report describes how the following Project products and outcomes were achieved.

Project products:®® Thirty-six (36) tasks aligned with barriers to apprenticeship completion and the apprenticeship goal path

®® Collaborative task development – shared with Literacy Link South Central’s face-to-face/online apprenticeship modules and posted on the LBS Task-Based Activities Portal (QUILL)

®® Professional development workshops: 1) Project Team – building task development capacity

Project outcomes:®® Identification of priority skill development for apprenticeship completion (literacy and trades practitioners report satisfaction with priorities)

®® Literacy practitioners in 3 Northern Literacy Network regions15 report more confidence developing OALCF tasks


6

Task Development Process – Introduction

Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern OntarioTask Development Process – Introduction20

®® Literacy practitioners will report increased satisfaction implementing apprenticeship resources (tasks) Note: this outcome will be achieved in the 2014/2015 fiscal year.

The Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario project (2013/2014) produced apprenticeship-specific tasks linked to the Ontario Adult Literacy Curriculum Framework (OALCF) apprenticeship goal path. The tasks, which are aligned with the competencies “find and use information” and “understand and use numbers” at complexity levels 2 and 3, address the need for higher-level math and English skills. During the process of task development, it was clear that many tasks also addressed the competencies “communicate ideas and information” and “use digital technology”.16

A Trades Needs Analysis informed by research and survey data identified six trades for the Project:

®® Automotive Service®® Carpenter®® Cook

®® Electrician®® Millwright®® Plumber

The Project was very complex. It required careful coordination of activities and communications across multiple contributors. Two online tools – Dropbox and GoToMeeting – were used to manage project communications.

Draft tasks were reviewed by task writers, LBS practitioners and learners, trade experts, and task writing experts from the QUILL Learning Network. QUILL’s task experts provided the final formatting before posting the finished tasks to the LBS Task-Based Activities Portal.

Tasks are actually “task sets” that contain activities. The Project created 36 new tasks that include 178 activities (Summary of Tasks by Trade – Appendix 6).

6.1 Task Development TeamIt was crucial to have strong task developers who could work independently and collaboratively. The Project hired three task developers – Lesley Hamilton, Doug Noyes and Clay Rhodes,. All three task developers had strong backgrounds in Essential Skills; one had a strong background in developing authentic tasks that were articulated to the Ontario Adult Literacy Curriculum Framework.

Building the capacity of Ontario’s literacy field to develop and articulate tasks to the OALCF is one of the Project objectives. The task development process was an opportunity for task writers to work collaboratively and learn from each other to build their practical knowledge about developing authentic tasks.

16 Lack of the Essential Skill document use (level 3) was noted earlier as a barrier to completing apprenticeship, but it is not specifically mentioned in the OALCF competencies. The skill is implicit in “find and use information,” “understand and use numbers,” and “communicate ideas and information.” Indeed, the skill is thoroughly embedded in “use digital technology.”

Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario Task Development Process – Introduction 21

The Project generated a lot of activity over a very short period of time, and it involved multiple partners. The first meeting (August 26, 2013) brought all the Project partners together for orientation. Partners included task writers, Project staff from Literacy Northwest, the Project Evaluator, and task development experts associated with the LBS Task-Based Activities Portal.

The one-day orientation ensured that the partners reached consensus on:

®® the concept of a “task” (agreed to think of it as a task set that included activities)®® a template for writing tasks sets (agreed to use the QUILL template)®® trades for task development (reviewed the survey data and analysis)®® a timeline for delivering 36 tasks to project partners (QUILL and Literacy Link South Central)

As a result, project partners developed familiarity with each other’s roles and expertise. The orientation created a strong sense of purpose and collaboration, which proved vital to the Project’s success.

6.2 Task Development Work ProcessThe Task Development Team (Task Writers, Project Coordinator) met September 3, 2013 to establish the work schedule and expectations. They continued to meet through the fall of 2013 (October 4, October 11, November 6, November 29, and December 19).

Task writers selected two trades. They needed to identify and describe “blocks” of trade content that consistently present problems for apprentices and trade qualifiers. This involved research and consultation with trade experts who helped them:

®® analyze the trade National Occupational Analysis (NOA) to identify areas of difficulty®® explore content themes®® collect documents/authentic trade materials®® review draft tasks

Task writers developed a rich knowledge of trade content and collected authentic documents and processes to incorporate into trade tasks.

Tasks developed throughout the fall of 2013 were ready for review by the end of December. Some development continued into January 2014.

6.2.1 CommunicationEffective communication was critical to successfully completing the tasks. The Project partners were scattered throughout Ontario.17 The online meeting application,

17 Thunder Bay (Project Coordinator, Literacy Northwest), Oshawa/Kingston/Cavan (Task Writers), Kitchener/Waterloo/St. Thomas/Walkerton (QUILL staff), London (Project Evaluator)


GoToMeeting, facilitated the sharing of computer screens, Dropbox files and other information during virtual meetings.

The Task Development Team communicated regularly to review each other’s work. Draft tasks were posted to Dropbox – an online application that helped Project partners manage large volumes of files that had to be retrieved, reviewed, shared and stored by numerous individuals throughout this Project. Through Dropbox, Team members were able to easily access each other’s work and provide comments. The process started slowly and iteratively at first but proceeded expeditiously as task writers developed confidence and expertise.

Folders were established in Dropbox for task writers to post tasks at various stages of development. Once a task was in Dropbox, the entire Task Development Team and the Project Coordinator would review and/or actually try the task. Feedback was provided to the developer of the original task and the task would be revised and re-posted. Tasks were first posted to “working folders” used strictly by the team and Project/partner staff. The tasks were then posted to “review by the field” folders and finally to “task completed” folders. In this manner, the complex flow of information involved in writing and reviewing the tasks was organized and carefully moved to a completed state. The use of Dropbox and GoToMeeting to share files and communicate established a very effective and complementary project management environment.

6.2.2 Task Development MonitoringThe Project Coordinator tracked task development in a very detailed manner. A coding system and detailed Excel spreadsheet (Task Development Schedule) were created to monitor task progress from conception to final posting on the Portal. The coding system was an essential means for organizing and referencing the many tasks. The Excel spreadsheet presented a dynamic snapshot of progress-to-date and a strong visual representation of the task writers’ accomplishments. Task coding is included on the Task Development Schedule (Appendix 7).

The Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario project had a task review process that had multiple steps, including the initial task developers, the Project coordinator, literacy practitioners, literacy learners, trade experts and the QUILL Learning Network – the regional literacy network that hosts the LBS Task-Based Activities Portal and which has the responsibility for approving tasks that go on its portal.

6.2.3 Task ReviewsAn important step was task review by a practitioner and at least one or more learners. In this way, the task developers received feedback on how useful the tasks would be in an actual literacy setting. An LBS Practitioner Survey (Appendix 8) and an LBS Learner Survey (Appendix 9) were developed to collect feedback.

Task review began in late November 2013 and continued into January 2014. LBS practitioners were recruited through the Learning Networks of Ontario, the College


Sector Committee for Adult Upgrading (CSC), and personal inquiries to LBS practitioners known to the Project staff. It proved difficult to recruit LBS practitioners. Many practitioners expressed interest initially but only a few were able to commit. Those who declined cited heavy program workloads. As a result, a few practitioners provided feedback on a lot of tasks. Because the process proved to be logistically challenging, some later developed tasks didn’t undergo the LBS review.

Practitioners were asked to administer the draft tasks with learners, collect learner feedback using SurveyMonkey, and provide a practitioner perspective on the tasks, again using SurveyMonkey.

In all, six LBS reviewers and the learners with whom they worked provided 45 task reviews. Some learners provided feedback on more than one task set. It was important for learners to review task sets for which they had an interest. As a result, some of the task sets were not reviewed by a learner, while other tasks sets were reviewed by numerous learners. A total of 59 learners provided feedback on at least one task set (Appendix 10).

Learners and practitioners provided robust and useful feedback.

“I believe these questions should have multiple choice answers like they do on the trades exam bank website. These tasks are very much like the actual questions on the millwright red seal exam itself ” (learner, millwright task). A practitioner discussing the same task suggested giving “an example of what may happen if any of the rigging equipment were not used correctly. The reason I would like to see this question be a bit more specific is that the learner’s answer to this question was ‘Accidents would happen and people would get injured.’ Not sure if putting ‘give an example’ would have made the learner be more specific and make mention of ‘a rope could break’ or ‘the load may shift’ resulting in injury. I found her answer too general and would have liked a reference to the rigging equipment.”

“It’s a good task to complete for this type of industry because knowing how

the parts work are important to the job” (learner, automotive service) . the

practitioner added, “This task is somewhat easy for a higher level learner (level 3).

Useful for the average literacy learner. Task was well laid out, easy to follow and

clear. Instructions for learners make sense and are easy to understand. Answer key

and rubric makes instructor’s work light.”

The Project Coordinator engaged LBS reviewers in ongoing conversations and collected the feedback data, all of which was shared with the task writers. One of the Project outcomes states, literacy practitioners report increased satisfaction implementing apprenticeship resources (tasks). The LBS practitioners who assisted with task review and who communicated with the Project team throughout were pleased with the opportunity to be involved with developing these apprenticeship resources.


A chart of the LBS Task Review Summary is included as Appendix 11.

6.2.4 Trade Expert ReviewThe Project recruited journeypersons (trade experts) who had experience working with apprentices and/or trade qualifiers who’ve attempted the trade exams. They advised the Task Writers about 1) examination content that consistently presents exam writers with problems and 2) authentic trade documents, processes and materials that should be used to develop literacy and essential skills tasks.18

Trades Experts ensured that the tasks made sense and were relevant from the perspective of someone who was actually familiar with the trade. The timing of the review by a Trades Expert varied depending on their availability. The carpenter, cook, electrical, millwright and plumber trades received feedback. As many of the trade experts who assisted with the project actually teach or work in the trades, task writers found it necessary to take the feedback whenever and however they could get it.

One of the trade experts, a carpenter, provided the following feedback:

“Excellent work! The series of questions and tasks you have developed will truly

evaluate the skill level of the respondent. I really like the way that you co-joined

the need for B.P.R. knowledge, Building Code usage, Geometry and overall Trade

Knowledge in certain aspects of the trade. This will be a terrific tool in our belt to

assess, evaluate and train the students. Congrats on an excellent job. Let me know

if I can be of any further help to you. Have a good day!!”

6.2.5 QUILL ReviewThe final step in the task review process was a review by the QUILL Learning Network. QUILL was responsible for having each task reviewed a final time by a very experienced task developer. If the reviewer had feedback, it was communicated to the original task developer. If not, or when the task came back with the feedback incorporated, the task went to the final formatting and editing stage. Once the task was in a format that mirrored all other tasks on the QUILL portal, a PDF and Word version of the final task was made available to Literacy Northwest and posted to the LBS Task-Based Activities Portal.

18 We focused on the National Occupational Analysis (NOA) document for each trade. It breaks out the characteristic content of the IP exam questions. Our Trade Experts suggested areas of NOA that pose the most difficulty. They then helped us understand the particular content of the troublesome areas.


6.3 ResultsThe Project produced several products which are posted to the Northern Literacy Networks website at http://www.northernliteracy.ca/index.php/en/

®® Final Report: Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario

®® Summary Report of Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey Findings

®® Guide to Using OALCF Apprenticeship Tasks for the Competencies “Find and Use Information”, “Communicate Ideas and Information”, “Understand and Use Numbers” and “Use Digital Technology”

®® Webinar recording: Apprenticeship and LBS Webinar (March 26, 2014)

®® Apprenticeship Forum, Presented on behalf of Literacy Network Northeast and the Far North East Training Board/Commission de formation du Nord-Est, February 28, 2014

6.3.1 TasksThe Project achieved its goal of developing apprenticeship-specific tasks. The product – 36 tasks specifically linked to the Ontario Adult Literacy Curriculum Framework (OALCF) apprenticeship goal path 19 – is aligned with the OALCF competencies “find and use information” and “understand and use numbers” at complexity levels 2 and 3. This focus most closely aligns with the need for higher-level math and English proficiency 20 identified in the SAC: MSP (2012/2013) Project. Tasks are specifically designed to help apprentices and trade qualifiers prepare for qualifying exams.

The tasks were developed by a Task Development Team (TDT) comprised of task writers, experienced tradespersons from priority trade areas, and others, who helped identify trades content. They were designed with specific reference to the competencies set out in trades Apprenticeship Training Standards, trade content described in the National Occpational Analysis (NOA), and test items drawn from the practice exams. They were informed by input from employers and trades experts (i.e., journeypersons), leveled within the OALCF framework, and perceived as authentic, relevant, and useful to practitioners and learners.

6.3.2 Tasks and the LBS Task-Based Activities PortalWe started with an initial focus on two OALCF competencies, “find and use information” and “understand and use numbers” at level 2 and 3, but we realized during the process that complex task sets often need additional competencies to fully

19 We’re actually developing 36 “task sets” which contain a number of integrated activities. As a result, we’ll have 178 apprenticeship specific activities. The tasks are designed to assess literacy and numeracy skills, but not the learners’ knowledge of the trade. The trade-specific content provides the means to assess literacy skill.

20 Although our focus is these two competencies, we’ve found that our tasks often include the “communicate ideas and information” and “use digital technology” competencies. Technology is proving to be particularly important given the recent PIAAC findings.

http://www.northernliteracy.ca/index.php/en/


describe skills. As a result, we included the “communicate ideas and information” and “use digital technology” competencies as appropriate.

Tasks developers worked with trade experts to describe authentic trade practice; however, that practice often led task writers to describe activities that didn’t fit the OALCF descriptors. During the vetting process, we discovered that some tasks did not meet at-that-time criteria for being posted on the LBS Task-Based Activities Portal. They were deemed to 1) require prior knowledge of that particular trade and/or 2) contain activities at a level beyond OALCF level 3.

We worked closely with practitioners responsible for the portal (QUILL Learning Network and an external reference group of practitioners) who subsequently revisited policies around what gets posted to the portal and what processes are required to ensure integrity and appropriateness of documents on the portal.

QUILL explored the overall question of what skills, training and background are required for a practitioner to become adept at developing and levelling tasks. It also proposed that the following specialized language be included in the task descriptions:

®® This task is higher than level 3 OALCF

®® This task has been identified as authentic to a particular (trade or job) and may need some prior knowledge of that (trade or job) to complete

6.3.3 Collaborating with Project PartnersDeveloping Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario, partnered with:

®® the QUILL Learning Network to populate the LBS Task-Based Activities Portal

®® Literacy Link South Central to provide tasks for use in LLSC’s three apprenticeship modules – each of which relates to a family of trades – for literacy practitioners to use with clients who have identified apprenticeship as their goal. The modules were designed for face-to-face delivery and modified by the Avon Maitland District School Board so that they can be offered through the LearningHUB for apprentices and would-be apprentices who cannot or choose not to attend LBS programs in person.

6.3.4 Collaborating with LBS PractitionersA small community of LBS practitioners was involved in this project’s task development. They provided critical feedback on task suitability in the LBS learning environment. The early exposure to the tasks and the conversations that evolved helped build stronger awareness of the tasks and confidence to use them with learners. Six practitioners participated in review, but they represent agencies throughout Ontario where their early knowledge of the tasks will be shared with colleagues.


6.3.5 Collaborating with Trade ExpertsThe Project recruited trade experts (journeypersons) who recognized the importance of supporting apprenticeship completions and appreciated our efforts to develop curriculum tasks. We also had occasional conversations with Ontario Community College administrators and professors who deliver upgrading, pre-apprenticeship or apprenticeship programs. Trade experts demonstrated a poor understanding of LBS initially, but they quickly understood its important role in supporting adult learners, particularly those pursuing apprenticeship. College apprenticeship administrators also saw the value of linking their programs to LBS services and the resources created for this Project. Involving “outside” experts in the Project has created modest but important movement towards building a broader network of training allies and advocates.

6.3.6 Collaborating with Apprenticeship StakeholdersThe Project was presented to a broader community of apprenticeship stakeholders at apprenticeship forums co-sponsored by Literacy Networks and Workforce Planning Boards. Literacy practitioners enthusiastically embraced the apprenticeship resources that were shared in the forums. Indeed, a Francophone practitioner insisted the tasks were urgently needed and offered to translate the tasks for immediate use in her program.

6.3.7 Professional DevelopmentTask writers underwent an intensive research and writing experience. They all had Essential Skills experience and were familiar with the OALCF initiative; nevertheless, they increased their understanding of task development and confidence to lead task development initiatives and/or training in their professional roles.

6.4 Learnings

6.4.1 Contextualized TasksThis project solicited the assistance of a number of experts who work within the trades/apprenticeships. The content experts’ knowledge was invaluable in creating tasks that are authentic and relevant to the trades.

Developing tasks for use within Ontario’s adult literacy programs is complex and requires significant practice and skills. Descriptors and examples of tasks for each competency and complexity level exist, but a level of subjectivity related to dissecting tasks into competencies and levels remains.


tasks must be contextualized which means that task designers must acquire

authentic materials . task designers had to find materials and documents

that were relevant to the trades of Cook, Automotive Services, Carpenter,

electrician, Millwright, and plumber . Further, tasks developed for use in

ontario’s LBS programs must be articulated to the ontario Adult Literacy

Curriculum Framework (the oALCF) .

6.4.2 Task ConsistencyIt’s important that tasks can be used across literacy sectors (community-based, school board and college) and across geographical regions. They need to be properly vetted to ensure they are consistently developed and articulated to the OALCF. In the absence of proper vetting, tasks can vary considerably in the assignment of competencies and levels, especially if more than one task developer is involved. If literacy practitioners have doubts about how competencies and levels have been assigned to tasks, they will be less likely to use the tasks or perhaps not use them at all. This has real implications for practice. Based on provisional feedback during the Project, we are confident that tasks have been well received.

6.4.3 Essential Skills PreparationA background in Essential Skills is important to understanding the concepts behind task development and the Ontario Adult Literacy Curriculum Framework (OALCF).

All of the task developers, as well as the Project Coordinator who worked on this Project, had prior training in Essential Skills. They believe that such training is critical to understanding how to build tasks and level them for complexity.

Task developer preparation included SkillPlan courses, Workplace Materials Developer Certificate, Essential Skills Analysts, as well as a number of other online courses SkillPlan offers. The training taught them how to write Essential Skills profiles, gave them a background in Essential Skills and how the skills relate to the workplace, and helped them know what to look for and what questions to ask of the experts. One of the task developers also had some significant experience in Controlling Complexity – another approach developed by SkillPlan.

One task developer enjoyed and appreciated the flexibility that exists within the OALCF, as well as the opportunity to become more familiar with and capable of using the framework. The other task developers had had some exposure to the OALCF before the Project began. They agreed that this Project assisted them in increasing their own knowledge and abilities with regard to developing tasks within the OALCF.

Task developers noted that Essential Skills has a useful document called the Readers’ Guide to Essential Skills Profiles, which provides strong guidance for understanding


and levelling Essential Skills. A similar type of document for OALCF task development would be very useful.

6.4.4 Orientation and Professional DevelopmentAt the beginning of the Project, even though the task developers, Project Coordinator and External Evaluator are located in different parts of Ontario, the Project Coordinator arranged for a face-to-face meeting. All of the task developers said that this face-to-face meeting was an excellent use of their time as it led to stronger relationships, assisted them in feeling comfortable with one another, and gave them an opportunity to reach consensus about project expectations.

Task developers felt that mentoring and coaching was an important dimension of the task development process. Each task developer depended upon the others for constructive feedback and opportunities to learn.

6.4.5 Task Development ProcessOne of the task developers is not a front-line practitioner. He appreciated working with a new network of people associated with the apprenticeship goal path. From a professional development perspective, he better understood how much effort is required to create tasks and how intensive task development processes develop more in-depth knowledge of the particular trades. Another task developer learned that a significant amount of research is required in order to develop tasks for the trades and that many of the tasks required to prepare apprentices to write their Certificate of Qualifications are higher than those that are typically associated with the OALCF. Literacy and Basic Skills practitioners could benefit from additional training to use apprenticeship goal path tasks.


The Project collected some data from literacy practitioners, but it is too early to state how well practitioners will accept or use the tasks. Literacy Northwest will conduct a survey of the three Northern Networks in the fall 2014 after the tasks have been posted to the LBS Task-Based Activities Portal and used by practitioners. LNW will also poll its Project partners regarding practitioners’ acceptance and use of the tasks. The input will be used to inform future PD planning and/or project proposals.

In addition, Northern Literacy Networks will follow up with service providers regarding OALCF task development and implementation issues or concerns. They will schedule on-going training for task development using experienced literacy practitioners who participated in the Project.

7

Post Implementation Follow-up and Support


This question was raised during our Project because so much of what we did to develop credible apprenticeship tasks involved the art of creating engaging tasks for learners and the science of research and curriculum design.

On one hand, we had a number of resources to guide the task development including existing templates, competency descriptions (OALCF, NOA, Trade Standards) and the wisdom of professionals more experienced than us. On the other hand, we wrestled with understanding what trade experts told us, and we were challenged to transform that information into activities embedded in tasks. Once tasks and appropriate activities were drafted, we debated how to align the activities to competencies and level them for complexity.

Bringing art and science together to build tasks certainly generated learning – a desired and positive Project outcome.

One task developer noted that when he initially started working on this Project, he felt comfortable because of his background training and experience. Then, after drafting his first few tasks and taking into account feedback he received, he felt that perhaps he didn’t know as much as he thought he did.

Learning is like that. What you know is challenged; you reframe and reorient the way you see things; you produce something better.

All of the task developers agreed that the more time they spent on the tasks and the more tasks they completed, the more competent they felt. It was also clear that as the Project proceeded there was less

8

Concluding Thoughts – Is Task Development Art or Science?

Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario32

Concluding Thoughts – Is Task Development Art or Science?

and less constructive criticism required. Tasks moved from draft to completion informed by much better understanding and knowledge of task development.

Task developers described their Essential Skills training as “rigorous” and “tough.” Practitioners with this kind of background develop strong ownership about the proper ways to write and describe tasks. The Task Development Team felt that there should be standards for LBS practitioners to follow as they create tasks. The OALCF is still in its infancy. Practitioners are trying to “unlearn LBS 1-5 levels.” If substandard tasks get developed and posted for all to use, the overall quality of instruction could be undermined. One standard should require that practitioners have formal training in Essential Skills – a requirement that many current LBS practitioners do not currently have.


Recommendations

1 The name of the program – Literacy and Basic Skills – be changed to Literacy and Essential Skills.

The conceptual link between OALCF competencies and the Essential Skills framework remains a little unclear. There’s also a need to better describe what LBS actually does and encourage the perception across the apprenticeship stakeholder population that LBS is more than “basic” skills.

2 Task resources be shared or made accessible to educators and trainers outside LBS.

Trade Experts and others with whom we worked on the Project recognize that apprenticeship tasks are transferrable tasks that have wide application for educators and trainers.

3 A document similar to the Readers’ Guide to Essential Skills Profiles be developed for the LBS field.

The Readers’ Guide to Essential Skills Profiles (http://www.esdc.gc.ca/eng/jobs/les/profiles/readersguide.shtml) provides a framework for understanding Essential Skills complexity levels. LBS practitioners use OALCF performance descriptors to infer complexity levels, but this inevitably introduces a high level of subjectivity around task development and levelling. A document that more explicitly links tasks/activities to actual levels would be helpful.

9

Recommendations

http://www.esdc.gc.ca/eng/jobs/les/profiles/readersguide.shtml

http://www.esdc.gc.ca/eng/jobs/les/profiles/readersguide.shtml

Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern OntarioRecommendations34

4 All LBS practitioners obtain significant formal training in Essential Skills.

All of the Task Developers and the Project Coordinator had Essential Skills experience. We know that many of the LBS practitioners who reviewed the tasks also had Essential Skills backgrounds. Understanding, developing and using OALCF tasks is challenging and a huge shift for many practitioners, especially those without Essential Skills training.

5 Professional development include practitioner training in how to anchor skills training in authentic workplace contexts.

Literacy programming has traditionally been anchored in academics. A shift is needed to orient programming and anchor it in authentic workplace contexts.

6 LBS practitioners receive additional training in how to use apprenticeship goal path tasks.

Task developers appreciated working with a new network of people associated with the apprenticeship goal path. From a professional development perspective, they better understood that much effort and research is required to create tasks. It’s an intensive process. LBS practitioners could benefit from additional training in how to use apprenticeship goal path tasks.

7 The distinction between an activity and a task be reinforced with practitioners.

Early in the Project, the team agreed that tasks are actually task sets which have activities. The distinction needs to be reinforced to ensure that the LBS field understands that task development is much broader than skill-building activities.

8 The 36 apprenticeship-specific tasks be adapted for use in French-language programs.

LBS practitioners expressed keen interest in acquiring the tasks. During the Project, a Francophone practitioner requested French-language versions of the product and offered to do her own translation in order to immediately use the tasks with Francophone learners.

9 Orientation and team-building be a priority for effective project work.

An important factor in the Project’s success was building a strong team. A one-day orientation was held at the beginning to bring the Project team together and build consensus about project expectations. Task developers depended on each other for constructive feedback and opportunities to learn. Mentoring and coaching was an important dimension of the task development process. The face-to-face meeting was an excellent use of their time as it led to stronger relationships and assisted them in feeling comfortable with one another.

Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario Recommendations 35

10 Simplify task development processes by using small teams of highly skilled people.

Task development was demanding, involving a great deal of research and consultation with trade experts (journeypersons). Communication throughout the task development process was complex and needed careful management. Modifying the work plan to create a small, highly skilled Task Development Team proved effective.

11 A committee of practitioners with significant task development expertise establish future-oriented policies for developing and posting tasks to the Portal.

Task development doesn’t always align neatly with OALCF criteria for approval and posting to the Portal. Good tasks will be created which are of value to the LBS practitioner but which don’t strictly meet the OALCF criteria (i.e., have complexity levels higher than level 3 and/or require specialized or prior knowledge). The Portal needs a credible structure that supports both rigorous task development and innovative policies to encourage and accept task development not strictly aligned with the OALCF.

12 The implications of creating an OALCF level 4 to assist clients who will need to perform tasks at this level in order to achieve their goal be explored.

Some learners will need to transition to programming beyond OALCF level 3.

Appendices

# Appendix Page #

1 terms of Reference 38

2 project Work plan 42

3 project evaluation Work plan 45

4 Literacy Link South Central and Literacy Northwest projects Webinar 49

5 Summary Report of Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey Findings 52

6 Summary of tasks by trade 69

7 task Development Schedule 75

8 LBS practitioner Survey 78

9 LBS Learner Survey 80

10 Learner task Review 82

11 LBS task Review Summary 83


Appendix 1 – Terms of Reference

Project Steering Committee

Terms of Reference Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario July 2013

Official NameMTCU Service Delivery Network Development Fund (SDNDF) Project – Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario

Project SummaryLiteracy Northwest received approval in June 2013 to conduct this Project, which is a joint initiative of the Regional Literacy and Basic Skills (LBS) Networks in the Employment Ontario North Region.

This Project promotes capacity building within the Ontario Adult Literacy Curriculum Framework (OALCF) apprenticeship goal path by providing literacy service providers with more robust apprenticeship-specific tools and services.

The Project builds on findings and recommendations from the research and development Project, Supporting Apprenticeship Completions: Models of Service Provision (SAC: MSP) which piloted referral and delivery models that specifically focused on action research to identify why so few apprentices actually participate in literacy programs, why credible tradespersons in Northern Ontario cannot pass the qualifying trade exam, and what might be done to help them overcome those challenges.

Too many skilled workers who enter the apprenticeship path do not complete their journey through to certification. Research (Canadian Apprenticeship Forum) clearly shows that those who complete the in-school and employer training as well as successfully pass the certifying exams are more immediately employable, have better earning potential in the short and long term, and report higher levels of job satisfaction and job security.

Capacity building within EO literacy and employment services is promoted by:

1 developing authentic apprenticeship-specific tasks to make more current, relevant curriculum resources available

2 piloting apprenticeship-specific LBS delivery to a wider Northern Ontario literacy network, and

3 providing professional development to Literacy Service Providers to promote the integration of apprenticeship goal path resources and services

Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern OntarioAppendices38

Appendix 1 – terms of Reference

Project Products/Deliverables®® Thirty-six (36) tasks aligned with barriers to apprenticeship completion and the apprenticeship goal path

®® The thirty-six (36) tasks developed in this Project will be incorporated into Literacy Link South Central’s face-to-face/online apprenticeship training modules project

®® The thirty-six (36) tasks developed in this Project will be formatted and posted on the QUILL Network’s LBS Task-Based Activities Portal

®® Professional development workshops: 1) Project Task Development Team – building task development capacity; 2) Northern Ontario Literacy Providers – building capacity to integrate apprenticeship resources; 3) Provincial Webinar – introducing i) tasks specific to apprenticeship completion and ii) apprenticeship curriculum (face-to-face/online apprenticeship modules)

Project Outcomes®® Identification of priority skill development for apprenticeship completion (literacy and trades practitioners report satisfaction with priorities)

®® Literacy practitioners in 3 Northern Literacy Network regions report more confidence developing OALCF tasks

®® Literacy practitioners report increased satisfaction implementing apprenticeship resources (tasks)

®® EO service providers report improved knowledge of literacy services for apprenticeship-bound clients/learners

Members/Composition

Executive Committee:LNW Board of DirectorsAnnemarie Wesolowski – LNW Executive Director

Project Steering Committee:Audrey Anderson, Member-at-Large, SudburyDiane Corner, Member-at-Large, Thunder BayRic Windsor, Member-at-Large, Thunder BayJason Thompson, Employer Representative(TBD), Employer(TBD), Northeastern Ontario Building Trades, SudburyTerry Webb, Northwestern Ontario Building Trades, Thunder BayJoseph Pyringer, Ontario College of TradesMarsha Bell, Executive Director, Mid North Network, SudburyKaitlin Taylor, Executive Director, Literacy Network Northeast, TimminsAnnemarie Wesolowski, Executive Director, Literacy Northwest, Thunder BayTamara Kaattari, Project Evaluator/Executive Director, Literacy Link South Central, LondonStewart Kallio – Project Coordinator/Kallio Consulting, Thunder Bay

Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario Appendices 39




Term of MembershipFor duration of project – June 1, 2013 – March 31, 2014

Formation DetailsThe Project Steering Committee was formed in July/August 2013 and, as a joint initiative, includes the Executive Directors of the three Regional LBS Networks in the Employment Ontario North Region: Literacy Network Northeast, Literacy Northwest and the Mid North Network. It is deemed critical to the success of the project.

Members of the Project Steering Committee were recruited and selected for their extensive knowledge and experience related to apprenticeship and the skilled trades. They are “subject matter experts” and, as such, they will act as an information gathering and sharing committee that will lend expertise, insight and guidance to support project staff to achieve the identified project outcomes.

The Project Steering Committee reports to the Executive Committee. Final decisions rest with the Literacy Northwest Board of Directors. Should changes to timelines or budget be required, the Executive Director, Literacy Northwest, will be responsible for communicating these changes to Literacy Northwest’s Board of Directors and submitting a request to the project funder (MTCU) for approval, prior to moving forward.

Committee Chair:For practical purposes, the Executive Director of LNW or a designate will chair the meetings. The role of the Chair is to facilitate discussion based upon the agenda topics and to ensure that all Project Steering Committee members are provided the opportunity to be actively engaged in the business of the meeting. The Chair will exercise decision making as needed for the Project Steering Committee to achieve consensus.

Roles and Activities of the Project Steering Committee:The Project Steering Committee will work together to provide direction and/or make decisions related to project activities, tools and resources, and timelines.

The Project Steering Committee may also be called upon to offer input and guidance to project contractors on other project components such as project work plans, timelines and troubleshooting with respect to completing project deliverables.

This may include involvement in areas such as®® external communication and outreach to apprenticeship stakeholders

®® input to survey development and development of summary findings

®® input to the Task Development Team including strategies to promote effective integration of tasks in LBS programming



®® review of draft documents and guidance re: content, layout, format and use

®® participation in the project evaluation process is a mandatory requirement

Committee Communication and Meetings:Meetings will take place via conference call on an as–needed basis (3-5 meetings over the life of the project). Members will be consulted regarding the scheduling of meetings and provided with meeting agendas and materials in advance of all meetings. It is expected that conference call meetings will be no more than 90 minutes in duration.

All communications will be done via audio conferencing, online meetings, and email. A Project page will be established on the Northern Literacy Networks website. There may be opportunities for face-to-face meetings (budget permitting). Those involved in the project are responsible for regularly checking their email, meeting schedules, roles/responsibilities chart and all other project documents to support their full participation.

Communications regarding the project’s progress and status will be provided by the Executive Director, Literacy Northwest and/or the Project Coordinator. Project Steering Committee communication will be conducted, for the most part, by email and by phone.

Decision Making:Decision making will be by consensus, allowing for dialogue until a point of understanding and agreement is reached. By consensus we mean that everyone has the opportunity to express their opinions and the will of the group is evident. If there is an impasse, the Project Steering Committee will defer to the Chair/LNW Executive Director for a final decision. The Project Steering Committee will also confer with the LNW Executive Director on any issues that arise that may need broader discussion.

Committee Support:LNW will provide full administrative support to the Project Steering Committee in terms of coordinating committee meetings, other external meetings, and committee activities; conducting research and providing all information required for decision making; and preparing documentation as a result of committee work and activities.

All approved costs associated with Project Steering Committee participation will be paid by LNW, including any travel costs, which will be subject to project objectives and budgetary constraints. All travel must receive advance approval by LNW prior to the actual travel date and expense reimbursement.


Appendix 2 – project Work plan

Appendix 2 – Project Work Plan

Activities Deliverables (products/services)

Completion/Status

Hire coordinator/researcher ®® Contract for services signed and filed

Completed June 2013

establish a project Steering Committee

®® project Charter®® terms of Reference

Completed June 2013

Survey trades sectors regarding key trades and/or trades exams competencies that pose challenges to apprentices

®® Develop survey tool®® Distribute using SurveyMonkey®® Follow-up to confirm data

Completed July – September . Discussion in Final Report .

prepare summary of key trades/trades exams competencies that pose challenges to apprentices

®® Summary report of survey findings

Completed . Summary attached as Appendix to Final Report .

prepare report with recommendations for areas of priority focus for developing the 36 apprenticeship-specific tasks

®® Report to include survey findings and recommendations for priority development of apprenticeship goal path tasks

Completed . Summary attached as Appendix to Final Report .

establish task Development project teams to develop apprenticeship-specific tasks . team to include task writers (LBS practitioners), journeypersons, and QUILL subject matter expert .

®® terms of Reference (to include membership, operating practice, deliverables, and timelines)®® Regular meeting schedule®® pre-/post-assessment of project team’s capacity to develop oALCF apprenticeship tasks

team established August 2013

professional development for task Development project teams regarding 1) principles of task development and 2) emphasis on developing more complex tasks (i .e ., oALCF level 2 and 3)

®® professional development training (in-person)®® presentation posted to Northern Literacy Networks website®® evaluation of pD training

August 26, 2013 – Niagara College

pDF of power point presentation posted to Northern Literacy Networks website

project team develops work plan for developing tasks in priority trades and trades test exam competencies

®® Framework for task development®® online meetings®® Liaise with QUILL SMe

ongoing meetings fall 2013

Draft 36 tasks for levels 2 and 3 of the oALCF competencies “find and use information” and “understand and use numbers .” tasks are approved for posting to the provincial website portal

®® 36 apprenticeship-specific tasks posted to the provincial website portal and made available to Literacy Link South Central’s Apprenticeship Modules®® Liaise with QUILL SMe

tasks fully completed by January 2014

LLSC acquired tasks

QUILL reviewed tasks under development




Completion/Status

professional development workshops for the Northern Literacy Networks to promote integration of apprenticeship tasks

®® professional development training event (coordinated with scheduled regional Network meetings with service providers)®® presentation posted to Northern Literacy Networks website®® evaluation of pD

Introduced project at Apprenticeship Forums:®® Dryden, May 30, 2013 Literacy Northwest and Northwest training and Adjustment Board®® Sudbury, June 6, 2013®® Sault Ste . Marie, June 11, 2013 Mid North Network and Sudbury-Manitoulin Workforce planning

presented project-in- progress at Apprenticeship Forums:®® thunder Bay, November 12, 2013 Literacy Northwest and North Superior Workforce planning Board®® timmins, February 28, 2014 Literacy Network Northeast and Far North east training Board

presentations posted to Northern Literacy Networks website, including an independent apprenticeship forum (recorded)

Coordinate scheduling of task development with Literacy Link South Central

®® tasks are aligned with Literacy Link South Central’s apprenticeship modules

Completed

pilot draft tasks with Northern Literacy providers

®® Feedback to project teams November 2013 – Jan 2014

45 task reviews; 6 LBS reviewers; approximately 50 learner reviews

Follow-up with LSp’s to pilot LLSC’s apprenticeship modules

®® on-going meetings as required using online meeting tools

Reference LLSC Final Report

provincial Webinar to present apprenticeship tasks and modules

®® Co-presented by LNW and LLSC Co-presented by LLSC and LNW

March 26, 2014

Hosted by CLo . Recording is available .

Survey of Northern Literacy Networks to assess their rating of apprenticeship supports and resources

®® Data to support the effectiveness of the training and usefulness of the supports and resources

Webinar March 26 received feedback from participants across ontario

Summary comments included in evaluation report




Completion/Status

production and distribution of final reports

®® Distribution to tCU and others as appropriate®® posting to Northern Literacy Networks website

April 2014

evaluation of project project evaluator will be hired who will set out a detailed evaluation plan to include:®® project Steering Committee meetings®® task Development project team meetings®® task Development project team capacity for developing tasks

evaluator hired June 2013

plan was prepared (see evaluator’s Work plan)

evaluation Final Report April 2014

Interim Report (refer to APPENDIX F: Interim Project Report template on the eopg.ca website)

June 2013

Progress Reports (if applicable)

Final Report (refer to APPENDIX G: Final Report template on the eopg.ca website)

April 2014


Appendix 3 – project evaluation Work plan

Appendix 3 – Project Evaluation Work Plan


Evaluation Work Plan June 28, 2013

Prepared by Tamara Kaattari

Part One: Become oriented to the project and its goals.

Receive a copy of the project proposal . June 2013

Request feedback on the draft evaluation plan and clarify timelines . Incorporate changes .

June 2013

present final work plan to project Supervisor/Coordinator . July 2013

Part Two: The Project Coordinator will develop a survey tool to be distributed to Trades practitioners to determine the key trades and/or trades exam competencies that pose challenges to apprentices. The role of the Evaluator will be to request the survey results, compare them to the recommendations made by the Project Coordinator and to write a summary.

Survey tool is developed by project Coordinator and is distributed with the goal of achieving a 30-40% response rate .

the project Coordinator will compile the results of the survey and bring recommendations to the project team .

July/August 2013

external evaluator will review the raw survey results and the recommendations made by the project Coordinator and will prepare a brief report .

September/october 2013

the report will be shared with the project Supervisor/Coordinator for feedback . october 2013

the Final Report will form part of the overall evaluation Report . March 2014

Part Three: Develop a tool for the Project Team to determine:® to what extent their work was informed by the survey results in Part Two® if and to what extent there has been an increase in their knowledge of tasks, task

development and how tasks are integrated into their trade

Note: Jane will train the Project Team in Aug/Sept, likely in Sudbury. Tasks will start to be produced in September and will be worked on until December.

prepare the tool . January 2014

Send it to the project Coordinator for feedback . January 2014



Make any required changes . January 2014

Ask the project Coordinator to administer the survey . January 2014

Collect and analyze the data . Share the findings with the project Coordinator .

February 2014 February 2014

Add the findings to the overall evaluation Report . March 2014

Part Four: Develop a survey tool for LBS agencies within the Northern Literacy Networks for which the apprenticeship goal path is integral, to determine:® the extent to which the tasks build organizational capacity within the Northern Literacy

Networks to deliver ongoing quality programming and prepare other, less experienced practitioners with the competencies they’ll need as more senior people retire

® if the tasks which are developed will specifically prepare individuals to demonstrate their knowledge of the trade, particularly in an exam setting

® if the tasks will be useful within the agencies’ programming

Ask the Northern Networks, based on business plan submissions, to identify 2-4 agencies each that focus on the apprenticeship goal path. Break up the tasks into batches (3) and ask each network group to focus on one batch to answer the questions above.

Develop the survey tool . october 2013

Send it to the project Coordinator for feedback . october 2013

Make any required changes . october 2013

As the project Coordinator to administer the survey . November 2013

Collect and analyze the data . Share the findings with the project Coordinator . February 2014


Part Five: Provincial Webinar – co-hosted – introducing i) tasks specific to apprenticeship completion and ii) apprenticeship curriculum (face-to-face and online)® Develop authentic apprenticeship-specific tasks to make more current, relevant curriculum

resources available® Provide professional development to providers (probably LBS) to promote the integration

of apprenticeship goal path resources and service® Evaluate if tasks are authentic, relevant and useful to practitioners and learners® Determine to what extent literacy service providers throughout the province believe they

have access to project products that enhance their capacity to deliver training within the apprenticeship goal path

® 75% of participants indicate satisfaction with the training event

Develop a tool for participants of the webinar to complete . January 2014



Ask participants to complete the tool . February 2014

Gather and analyze the feedback . February 2014

Collate the results . March 2014


Part Six: Evaluation process for task piloting and review by OALCF task SME’s® Describe this process in the Evaluation Report® Project Teams will build task development capacity through professional development with

subject matter experts proficient in OALCF task development® A total of 36 tasks will be developed, 12 by each of the three Northern Literacy Networks® Tasks will be developed at higher levels of complexity (Level 2 and 3)® There needs to be a connection between the task selection/development and the data/

research/advice from SME (trades)® This project develops an inventory of apprenticeship-specific tasks for the OALCF app. goal

path and these tasks will be posted to the LBS Task-Based Activities Portal® SME from QUILL to work with Project Teams® Tasks are approved for posting to the provincial website portal

propose a process for evaluating the development and vetting of the 36 tasks to the project Coordinator (including articulation charts) .

August 2013

Ask for/develop a template for writers to use to develop and record their tasks . July 2013

Implement the evaluation process . September/october 2013

Ask the writers involved in the LNW project to report on their experiences sharing, vetting and developing with the staff from the LLSC project and the SMe from QUILL .

November 2013

Write up a review of the process for inclusion in the overall evaluation Report . December 2013

the consistency is important . SMe from QUILL will review the tasks (Jane tuer) .

Part Seven: Evaluation of the coordination and collaboration between the QUILL Learning Network project, the LLSC curriculum development project, and the LNW apprenticeship project (work with Cindy and whoever is hired by QUILL to develop this instrument).® Literacy service providers throughout the province will have access to common products

that enhance their capacity to deliver training within the apprenticeship goal path® Coordinate the scheduling of task development with Literacy Link South Central (and tasks

are accepted/built upon by LLSC for use in apprenticeship modules® Tasks are approved for posting to the provincial website portal



Develop an evaluation tool to give to QUILL, Lit Northwest, LLSC (eDs) and to project staff . February 2014

Ask parties to complete it . February 2014

Summarize and analyze the feedback . March 2014

Write a summary report for inclusion in the overall evaluation Report . March 2014

Part Eight: Create a tool for project Task Development Team and for the Advisory Committee Members and other stakeholders to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the project; to determine if the project was beneficial from the project management and staff perspectives; and to determine what worked well and what changes could be made for future projects.

Develop the tools . Request feedback from the project Coordinator .

January/February 2014

Distribute the tools . Collect and analyze the feedback .

January/February 2014

Include the feedback from both surveys in the overall evaluation Report . March 2014

Part Nine – Final Evaluation Report

Draft along the way . March 2014


Appendix 4 – Literacy Link South Central and Literacy Northwest projects Webinar

Appendix 4 – Literacy Link South Central and Literacy Northwest Projects Webinar

Apprenticeship and LBS Webinar March 6, 2014

Literacy Link South Central (LLSC) and Literacy Northwest (LNW) are pleased to offer a free 75- minute webinar on the topic of Apprenticeship and LBS.

This webinar will be held on Wednesday, March 26, 2014 from 10 to 11:15 a.m.

Topic #1: LBS and Apprenticeship: Supporting Clients through Curriculum

This 2013/2014 Literacy Link South Central project focused on developing curriculum modules to allow LBS learners explore apprenticeship in three major trade groups:

• Construction Trades • Automotive-Related Trades • Food Trades

The task-based activities are primarily level 1-2 and integrate a variety of competencies. The modules were designed for face-to-face delivery and will also offered online by the Avon Maitland District School Board through the LearningHUB. Individual task-based activities developed through this project will also be available on the Task-Based portal hosted by QUILL.

Join us to hear more about how these modules were grounded in apprenticeship research and how they were received by learners and practitioners during our project pilot. This project was funded by Employment Ontario.

Robyn Cook-Ritchie will facilitate this webinar.



Topic #2: Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario

This Literacy Northwest project was designed to help workers, especially those who’ve worked in the trades for years, overcome the hurdle of writing and passing an exam to qualify for employment.

The project developed 36 tasks for the OALCF apprenticeship goal path focused on the competencies ‘find use information’ and ‘understand and use numbers’ at higher levels of complexity (level 2 & 3). Tasks were written for the Automotive Service Technician, Carpenter, Cook, Electrician, Millwright and Plumber trades. Tasks were shared with the QUILL Network and included in the LBS Centralized Task-Based Activities Portal and with Literacy Link South Central for its face-to-face/on-line apprenticeship modules.

This webinar describes a rationale for developing these particular trade tasks and outlines how LBS service providers can access and use the tasks with learners. This project was funded by Employment Ontario.

Stewart Kallio will facilitate this webinar.

Registration Process

The webinar is free of charge and is open to anyone but will be of special interest to literacy organizations, employment agencies and others who are interested in learning more about apprenticeship. However, you will need to register. Space is limited and registrations will be accepted on a first come first served basis. Register as soon as possible to avoid disappointment.

We will be using GoToWebinar technology to deliver the webinar. You will need a computer, a high speed Internet connection, and a head set or speakers to participate.

To register, just click this link: https://www4.gotomeeting.com/register/367991983



Joining the Webinar

When your registration is accepted, you will receive a confirmation email, along with the link for joining up. You will also receive a reminder email one day prior to the webinar.

Community Literacy of Ontario (CLO) will be hosting the webinar in partnership with Literacy Link South Central and Literacy Northwest, so don’t be surprised when you receive registration emails regarding this webinar from CLO via the email [email protected].

If you are unable to participate in this webinar, you will still be able access the recorded version of webinar on Literacy Link South Central’s website at www.llsc.on.ca/ .

If you have any questions, please contact Amanda Burdick at 519-681-7307 or by email at [email protected].

Sincerely,

Literacy Link South Central and Literacy Northwest


Appendix 5 – Summary Report of Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey Findings


Prepared for the Project


by

Stewart Kallio Project Coordinator, Literacy Northwest

Thunder Bay, ON April 2014

Funded by

The Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities 2013/2014

Service Delivery Network Development Fund



IntroductionThe Summary Report of Apprenticeship Stakeholder Findings describes how the Project achieved the following outcome.

Outcome met:

Identification of priority skill development for apprenticeship completion (literacy and trades practitioners report satisfaction with priorities)

Canada has over 300 designated trades and 55 Red Seal Trades in 13 jurisdictions.1 Ontario has 156 designated trades (22 compulsory) representing four trade sectors – Construction, Industrial, Motive Power, and Service.2 Construction (42 trades) and Industrial (54 trades) represent the largest sectors.

Developing OALCF tasks for all the Ontario trades is a huge job.3 It was neither practical nor reasonable to present respondents with a list of 156 Ontario trades, especially given clear evidence that some trade sectors (e.g., construction) as well as particular trades (e.g., Red Seal Top 10 registrations) represent a larger, more active workforce. OALCF tasks in the apprenticeship goal path needed to align with trade demand and be current, relevant and practical.

The scope of the Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario project, therefore, focused on describing an important subset of the Ontario trades. The Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey identified priority trades that represent credible employment opportunities and provide excellent references for developing 36 OALCF apprenticeship tasks.

1.0 Research Questions

Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario produced literacy and essential skills tasks (curriculum resources) specifically designed to help exam writers build the necessary literacy and numeracy competencies to successfully challenge the trade exams.

Supporting Apprenticeship Completions: Models of Service Provision (SAC: MSP, 2012/2013) pointed to issues that are important for this current project. Some trades are more in demand than others. Does that demand profile change across different geographies? Some trades present more challenges than others. Is that true? Which trades are they?

The Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey asked stakeholders specific questions about trades in demand and trades that pose real challenges for trade qualifiers or apprentices. It explored the following questions:

1 Ellis Chart (http://www.ellischart.ca/[email protected])

2 Ontario College of Trades

3 The Project partners are working in this direction already. The QUILL Learning Network, which hosts the LBS Task-Based Activities Portal is posting tasks for all six OALCF competencies across each of the 5 goal paths. Literacy Link South Central (LLSC) is developing apprenticeship tasks at introductory levels for online and paper-based apprenticeship modules.

http://www.ellischart.ca/[email protected]



®® Which skilled trades are in highest demand?®® Where is that demand geographically located?®® Which high demand, skilled-trades qualifying exams present the most difficulties for exam writers?®® What trade-specific content (blocks of questions on the exam) consistently present the most difficulty for exam writers?

The Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey was constructed using SurveyMonkey and distributed through email. It is included at the end of this summary report.

2.0 Findings

The survey was distributed from July 2013 to September 2103 to LBS service providers, employment service providers, Aboriginal service providers, employment training consultants (apprenticeship), Ontario community college apprenticeship programs, and the Ontario College of Trades. We cannot identify how many people received the survey, so it is not possible to determine the response rate.

Eighty three (83) responses were received from July 11, 2013 to September 2013.

The original Project start date was April 2013 with a survey release planned for June. The start was delayed resulting in a later-than-desired release date in July. By that time, many respondents were unavailable due to the summer vacation period. The survey remained open until September to improve the response rate. We are confident the survey provides a good stakeholder perspective on apprentice and trade qualifier activity.

QueStion 1: in which community is your workplace located?

The survey was distributed throughout Ontario. The majority of responses (55%, N=46) are from Northern Ontario.

Eastern Ontario (N=19) and the Central and Western Ontario (N=17) also responded well. Several literacy network Executive Directors are directly involved in the project. They encouraged broad distribution of the Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey throughout their regions.

QueStion 2: Do you work with apprentices and/or trades qualifiers?

This question allowed us to deselect respondents who didn’t have experience with our apprenticeship population. As a result, 30% of the respondents (N=25) indicated they do not work with apprentices and/or trade qualifiers. 70% of the 83 respondents (N= 58) have experience with our population and completed the survey.



Table 1

Question 2

Do you work with apprentices and/or trade qualifiers? (N=83)

Answer Options Response Percent

Response Count

Yes 69 .9% 58

No 30 .1% 25

Employment service providers represented 47% of the respondents who work with apprentices and trade qualifiers. They “help place apprentices with various employers in the community…assist individuals seeking apprenticeships…and work with people who are planning to enter the trades, or are planning to take certificate courses at a college, as well as people who are as yet not sure of their ultimate goal.” They observe that “more individuals are looking to become apprentices rather than those who have obtained or are in the process of an apprenticeship.”

QueStion 3: What best describes your workplace context?

The Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey confirms that respondents are primarily either Employment Service Providers (N=25) or Literacy Service Providers (N=16).

Other responses include the apprenticeship offices (N=4), employees (N=2), labour/union (N=2), college (N=2), EO other (N=1), apprentice/journeyperson (N=1), and other (N=5). “Other” respondents include OYAP, pre-employment training program, and immigrant bridging program.



Table 2

Question 3

What best describes your workplace context? (N=53)


Response Count

eo Literacy Service provider 30 .2% 16

eo employment Services provider 47 .2% 25

Aboriginal employment and training Service provider 0 .0% 0

eo Apprenticeship 7 .5% 4

employer 0 .0% 0

employee 3 .8% 2

eo (other provider) 1 .9% 1

Labour/Union 3 .8% 2

Apprentice/Journeyperson 1 .9% 1

College 3 .8% 2

other 5

QueStion 4: How often do you work with or provide services for apprentices and/or trade qualifiers?

The average rating is 2.72 based on a scale of 1 (I rarely work with apprentices/trade qualifiers) to 4 (I work a lot with apprentices/trade qualifiers).

We acknowledge that respondents’ determination of “work a lot with…” is subjective and only represents respondents’ perceptions about the level of apprenticeship activity. Respondents describe what they do: “I mostly work with new college graduates looking for help finding employers.” They also commented on the project: “[Region] has a strong trades component of the local labour market…this would be an excellent opportunity for our program to provide support to qualifying trades apprentices to help them successfully pass the certification test.”



QueStion 5: What is the average age of the apprentices and/or trade qualifiers with whom you most often work or provide services?

The average age of apprentices in Ontario is 27.4 Trade qualifiers tend to be older. The average age of the participants in the SAC: MSP (2012/2013) project was 38 years. Indeed, the age gap between trade completers (i.e., apprentices) and trade qualifiers noted in Table 3 also suggests that trade qualifiers are likely to be older.

Table 3

Question 5

What is the average age of the apprentices and/or trade qualifiers with whom you most often work or provide services? (N=53)


Response Count

less than 25 years old 22 .6% 12

26-35 years old 60 .4% 32

36-45 years old 11 .3% 6

older than 45 years 5 .7% 3

The Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey shows that stakeholders are engaged with a somewhat older population: 26-35 (60.4%); 36-45 (11.3%). Service providers are seeing apprentices engaged in the in-school/employer-based training and older workers seeking qualifications through a trade qualifier route. It is a population that has completed secondary or postsecondary education. Indeed, one provider comments, “I mostly work with new college graduates looking for help finding employers.”

Apprentice and trade qualifier populations experience difficulty preparing for and passing the qualifying exams. One respondent said:

“It appears to us that the longer an individual is out of school, the more difficulty s/he has

with specific blocks of questions: fractions, measuring imperial/metric; and mechanical

reasoning.”

4 Patrick Dillon, Business Manager/Secretary Treasurer of the Provincial Building and Construction Trades Council of Ontario, 2014



Apprentices are typically enrolled in a school or college environment where they have access to institutional learning supports, including assessment, accommodation for disabilities, learning strategies and peers (cohort model). Apprentices also have school staff to help them manage learning in the workplace and school.

Trade qualifiers are older. Many years have passed since their last formal schooling. They don’t have easy access to institutional student services or a supportive learning network of peers. They need to advocate for themselves as they navigate through the apprenticeship system. Trade qualifiers can find support from literacy and employment services, including access to OALCF apprenticeship tasks. Moreover, the tasks also serve a broader community of learners preparing for the trades (i.e., local delivery agents, community college apprenticeship programs).

QueStion 6: Which of the following trades are currently most in demand in your geographic region?

QueStion 7: in your experience, which trade exams present the most difficulty for apprentices/trade qualifiers?

The questions asked stakeholders about their perceptions about the 1) demand for certain trades and 2) difficulty apprentices/trade qualifiers have with the trade exams.

One respondent noted how complex the issue can be.

“Anyone who comes to us for help is having great difficulty passing their exam. I’m

thinking that it’s not the trade exam itself that poses the problem. It’s an array of other

barriers that is keeping them from being successful.”



Table 4

Question 6

Which of the following trades are currently most in demand in your geographic region? (N=53)


Response Count

electrician (Construction and Maintenance) 67 .9% 36

General Carpenter 60 .4% 32

Automotive Service technician (transmission/Alignment & Brakes) 49 .1% 26

plumber 47 .2% 25

Cook 39 .6% 21

Industrial Mechanic Millwright 39 .6% 21

Welder 37 .7% 20

Heavy Duty equipment technician 34 .0% 18

Heavy equipment operator 26 .4% 14

Hairstylist 24 .5% 13

Sheet Metal Worker 11 .3% 6

Steamfitter 5 .7% 3

other (please specify) 12

We did not present survey respondents with 156 Ontario trade choices once we had selected a subset of 12 trades (plus “other”). We hoped that questions six and seven would identify a priority list of trades for developing OALCF apprenticeship tasks. Respondents had an option to include other trades not listed. The 12 trades are:5

®® Automotive Service5

®® Carpenter®® Cook®® Electrician®® Hairstylist

®® Heavy Equipment Operator®® Heavy Duty Equipment Technician®® Millwright®® Plumber

®® Sheet Metal Worker®® Steamfitter®® Welder®® Other

5 Automotive Service is a Statistics Canada major trade group that includes the Ontario trades Alignment and Brakes Techni-cian &Transmission/Alignment and Brakes. For the purposes of this survey, we listed the two Ontario trades as Automotive Service.



Table 5

Question 7

In your experience, which trade exams present the most difficulty for apprentices/trade qualifiers? (N=53)


Response Count

electrician (Construction and Maintenance) 64 .2% 34

Industrial Mechanic Millwright 35 .8% 19

plumber 28 .3% 15

General Carpenter 28 .3% 15

Automotive Service technician (transmission/Alignment & Brakes) 26 .4% 14

Heavy Duty equipment technician 15 .1% 8

Welder 9 .4% 5

Steamfitter 7 .5% 4

Heavy equipment operator 5 .7% 3

Hairstylist 3 .8% 2

Cook 3 .8% 2

Sheet Metal Worker 1 .9% 1


Comparing the responses to question six (Table 4) and question seven (Table 5) suggests that 5 trades have a higher priority: automotive service technician, carpenter, electrician, millwright, and plumber. Indeed, one person told us, “the majority of my apprenticeship opportunities are in the automotive, cooking, electrical and roofing [trades].” A 6th trade, cook, was included because it represents a high demand trade in the North.

®® Automotive Service®® Carpenter®® Cook

®® Electrician®® Millwright®® Plumber

QueStion 8: Please identify the most common reasons for not passing the qualifying exam.

The responses confirm evidence from the 2012/2013 SAC: MSP project research suggesting that the Certificate of Qualification exam is a barrier to apprenticeship completion. Difficulty with the timed exam certainly suggests why writers are “unable to complete within the allotted time.”



Responses also support a focus on developing tasks that build literacy and numeracy competencies, specifically “find and use information” and “understand and use numbers.”

Table 6

Question 8

Please identify the most common reasons for not passing the qualifying exam. (N=53)


Response Count

Had difficulty with a specific block/blocks of exam questions 64 .2% 34

Lacked specific knowledge of some of the trade content on the exam 60 .4% 32

Had difficulty with specialized trade language on the exam 28 .3% 15

english was not the exam writer’s first language 24 .5% 13

Unable to complete within the allotted time 17 .0% 9


Respondents indicate that exam writers have “difficulty translating practical knowledge to a written exam…they did not understand how to prepare.” Additional barriers include: low literacy skills, math in particular, little experience writing multiple-choice exams, and specialized language: “The questions are not specific enough. The ‘trick’ wording is also a huge issue.”

Exam writers are challenged by reading highly complex text and/or poorly designed test items, which ultimately leads to confusion and uncertainty about what is being asked and how to identify correct answers. Respondents note:

“ The exam format is not tailored to the learners’ type of learning. Multiple-choice

questions are difficult for all…15 years of plumbing experience, very good plumber in all

aspects, but presented to the exam with learning disability/literacy issues.”

— survey respondent

Another reason for not passing the exam is gaps in trade knowledge. Trade content is outlined in the National Occupational Analysis (NOA) which sets out competencies according to “blocks” of trade knowledge and skills. Each block of competencies represents a percentage of the whole. Exam questions are generated with reference to each block of competencies and distributed on the exam in the same proportions. For example, the concrete question block in the Carpenter NOA represents 20% of the trade content and 20% of the exam questions.



We wanted to know if exam writers have difficulty with a specific block of exam questions or lacked specific knowledge of trade content. If that was the case, the apprenticeship tasks should focus on that aspect of trade learning.

One survey respondent said,

“trade qualifiers have trouble passing the exams…they have to have knowledge of all

sectors and most don’t…Apprentices obtained hours in only one stream of trade limiting

full knowledge of trade content [thus becoming an] expert in one area / lacking in another

(i.e., commercial / residential plumbing).”

— survey respondent

Another indicated, “often times, apprentices have not been exposed to enough of the trade to be successful. The exams are based on workplace training and not the theory taught in trade school. So, the apprentice is successful at trade school, but not successful on the exam because he/she has not performed enough of the skill sets to be successful on the exam.”

Clearly, task development needed to focus on specific trade content where exam writers have most difficulty.

QueStion 9: in your experience, who has the most difficulty in passing the trade exam?

Table 7

Question 9

In your experience, who has the most difficulty in passing the trade exam? N=41


Response Count

Apprentices 53 .7% 22

trade Qualifiers 46 .3% 19

Apprentices and trade qualifiers follow two distinct paths to trade certification. The SAC: MSP (2012/2013) project helped us understand the challenges faced by trade qualifiers. We heard enough anecdotal evidence to know that apprentices also struggle with completion (i.e., successfully passing the trade exam).

Ontario’s overall apprenticeship completion rate remains at about 50%. Survey responses suggested that both apprentices and trade qualifiers experience difficulty passing the trade exam. One respondent told us, “both groups have difficulty and it is very hard for me to say which has more trouble as a big part of this process starts and is dependent upon the learner.

5



If a learner has supports in place, time, and is very motivated, they can progress faster than someone in the same situation [who] has no supports whether they are an apprentice or a trade qualifier.”

3.0 Conclusions

The Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey was designed to collect data to inform trade task development. We needed to be confident that the 36 tasks we developed were practical and provided real curriculum value. It is important to link task development to trades that represent credible employment opportunities. Learners who access literacy and employment services will benefit from the tasks as they prepare for trades completion and qualifying exams.

We are confident that the trade-specific OALCF tasks we developed can be used by all educators and practitioners who work with adult learners on an apprenticeship journey.

Four research themes informed the findings.

Which skilled trades are in highest demand?

Careful analysis of current trade data and related apprenticeship information were used to prepare a list of 12 trades (plus other). Most of the responses (87%) represented Employment Ontario service providers.

More than 40% of the respondents selected six trades – automotive service technician, carpenter, cook, electrician, millwright, and plumber.

Where is that demand geographically located?

Although 55% of the responses are from Northern Ontario communities, there was also a good response from other Ontario regions (Eastern Ontario, Central and Western Ontario). It is reasonable to conclude that respondents identified a generalized, Ontario-wide demand.

Which high demand, skilled-trades qualifying exams present the most difficulties for exam writers?

The electrical trade showed a very strong response compared to other trades.

Respondents indicated that the cook trade does not present difficulties for apprentices and trade qualifiers, but we decided to include it because it represents a high demand trade. As we proceeded to research the cook trade, we discovered that numeracy is a real challenge for many apprentices.



What trade-specific content (blocks of questions on the exam) consistently present the most difficulty for exam writers?

The survey confirmed that exam writers have difficulty with trade-specific content and/or blocks of questions on the exam.

Respondents, however, couldn’t provide us with the specific trade content with which exam writers have difficulty. The reason is obvious – respondents are not the trade experts who know and teach the trade competencies. It was important that we consulted with trade experts to help the task writers understand the very specific trade content needed to develop authentic tasks.



Apprenticeship Stakeholder Survey

We know that many who attempt trade qualifying exams are not successful, particularly those who challenge the Certificate of Qualification.

Our project, Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario, will develop curriculum resources (literacy and essential skills tasks) for LBS practitioners that are specifically targeted at helping exam writers successfully challenge the trade exam.

The scope of our project restricts our ability to work with all the trades that present challenges to exam writers. As a result, we are asking for your assistance to identify a priority list of trades for which we will develop project resources.

The survey explores several core questions:

®® Which skilled trades are in highest demand?®® Where is that demand geographically located?®® Which high demand, skilled trades qualifying exams present the most difficulties for exam writers?®® What trade -specific content (blocks of questions on the exam) consistently present the most difficulty for exam writers?

Trade Qualifiers and Apprentices

In Canada, apprenticeship training is the main method used to train workers in the skilled trades. However, it is not always necessary to have completed the apprenticeship program or to have been a registered apprentice to be eligible to challenge the Certificate of Qualification and to work in a skilled trade.

Some people can challenge a Certificate of Qualification as a “trade qualifier.” This term refers to any person who has not completed an apprenticeship program but who has acquired enough practical work experience to write the examination to obtain the Certificate of Qualification (or Certificate of Competence) issued by the provincial or territorial authorities responsible for certifying trades workers. Generally, these persons are already trades workers active in various work environments.

With your assistance, we’ll be able to develop literacy resources that help trade qualifiers and apprentices complete their exams.

Thank you for completing our survey.



SURVEY

1. In which community is your workplace located?

____________________________________________________________________________

2. Do you work with apprentices and/or trade qualifiers?

Yes No

Comments ___________________________________________________________________

3. What best describes your workplace context?

EO Literacy Service Provider Employee

EO Employment Services Provider EO (other provider)

Aboriginal Employment and Training Service Provider Labour/Union

EO Apprenticeship Apprentice/Journeyperson

Employer College

Other (please specify) ___________________________________________________________

4. Using the following scale, please indicate how often you work with or provide services for apprentices and/or trade qualifiers.

1 2 3 4 N/A

I rarely work a lot with I work a lot with apprentices/trade qualifiers apprentices/trade qualifiers

Comments ___________________________________________________________________

5. What is the average age of the apprentices and/or trade qualifiers with whom you most often work or provide services?

Less than 25 years old

26 to 35 years old

36 to 45 years old

older than 45 years



6. Which of the following trades are currently most in demand in your geographic region (Check all that apply)?

Electrician Cook (Construction and Maintenance)

Automotive Service Technician Industrial Mechanic Millwright (Transmission/Alignment and Brakes)

Plumber Heavy Duty Equipment Technician

Steamfitter Sheet Metal Worker

Hairstylist Heavy Equipment Operator

General Carpenter Welder


7. In your experience, which trade exams present the most difficulty for apprentices/trade qualifiers (Check all that apply)?

Electrician Cook (Construction and Maintenance)

Automotive Service Technician Industrial Mechanic Millwright (Transmission/Alignment and Brakes)

Plumber Heavy Duty Equipment Technician

Steamfitter Sheet Metal Worker

Hairstylist Heavy Equipment Operator

General Carpenter Welder


8. Please identify the most common reasons for not passing the qualifying exam. (Check all that apply)

Had difficulty with a specific block/blocks of exam questions

Lacked specific knowledge of some of the trade content on the exam

Had difficulty with specialized trade language on the exam

English was not the exam writer’s first language

Unable to complete within the allotted time




9. In your experience, who has the most difficulty in passing the trade exam?

Apprentices

Trade qualifiers

10. Do you have additional comments?

____________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________

11. Please provide contact information if you would like to discuss your survey responses further.

____________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________


Appendix 6 – Summary of tasks by trade

App

endi

x 6

– Su

mm

ary

of T

asks

by

Trad

e

OA

LCF

Refe

renc

e

Find

and

Use

In

form

atio

nCo

mm

unic

ate

Idea

s an

d In

form

atio

nU

nder

stan

d an

d U

se

Num

bers

Use

Dig

ital

Te

chno

logy

Task

Set

sSu

b Ta

sks

Com

plex

ity

Leve

lA

1A

2A

3B1

B2

B3B4

C1C2

C3C4

Task

Gro

ups

Not

App

licab

le

Road

Saf

ety

Reca

ll D

atab

ase

4

1 2A

2 .2

D2

3B2

.3

tech

nica

l Ser

vice

Bul

letin

s4

1A

1 .1

2A

2 .2

B2 .2

D

2

3B2

.3

Vehi

cle

Mai

nten

ance

Sch

edul

e5

1A

1 .1

2A

2 .2

B2 .2

D2

3

Auto

mot

ive

Repa

ir In

voic

e8

1A

2 .1

C1 .1

2A

2 .2

C1 .2

3

Auto

mot

ive

Vehi

cle

Insp

ectio

n4

1B3

.1a

2A

2 .2

B3

.2a

3

Aut

omot

ive

Serv

ice



OA

LCF

Refe

renc

e

Find

and

Use

In

form

atio

nCo

mm

unic

ate

Idea

s an

d In

form

atio

nU

nder

stan

d an

d U

se

Num

bers

Use

Dig

ital

Te

chno

logy

Task

Set

sSu

b Ta

sks

Com

plex

ity

Leve

lA

1A

2A

3B1

B2

B3B4

C1C2

C3C4

Task

Gro

ups

Not

App

licab

le

Calc

ulat

e Vo

lum

es o

f Con

cret

e Re

quire

d4

1A

2 .1

C4 .1

2D

2

3C3

.3

Inte

rpre

t Blu

eprin

ts4

1 2A

1 .2

A2 .

2B2

.2

3A

2 .3

Calc

ulat

e A

ngle

s3

1A

1 .2

A2 .

1

2A

2 .2

C1 .2

D2

3C3

.3

Read

ing

Blue

prin

t Not

es6

1A

1 .1

B2 .1

C3 .1

2A

1 .2

A2 .

2B2

.2

3A

2 .3

Wor

king

with

Con

cret

e3

1A

2 .1

2A

2 .2

C3 .2

D2

3C3

.3

prep

arat

ions

bef

ore

pour

ing

Conc

rete

3

1A

1 .1

B2 .1

D1

2A

1 .2

A2 .

2B2

.2D

2

3C3

.3

Carp

ente

r



OA

LCF

Refe

renc

e

Find

and

Use

In

form

atio

nCo

mm

unic

ate

Idea

s an

d In

form

atio

nU

nder

stan

d an

d U

se

Num

bers

Use

Dig

ital

Te

chno

logy

Task

Set

sSu

b Ta

sks

Com

plex

ity

Leve

lA

1A

2A

3B1

B2

B3B4

C1C2

C3C4

Task

Gro

ups

Not

App

licab

le

Und

erst

andi

ng a

nd U

sing

Ba

ked

Ziti

Reci

pe5

1A

1 .1

C2 .1

2A

2 .2

C3 .2

3B3

.2b

Banq

uet e

vent

ord

er4

1A

2 .1

C1 .2

2A

2 .2

D2

3

Calc

ulat

e Ch

icke

n D

ip R

ecip

e In

gred

ient

s7

1A

2 .1

C2 .1

2C3

.2

3C3

.3

Bagu

ette

Cos

ting

Card

8

1B3

.1a

C1 .1

2A

2 .2

C1 .2

3

Inve

ntor

y pr

ice

Shee

t7

1C3

.1C4

.1

2A

2 .2

C1 .2

C3 .2

3

Cook

pur

chas

e o

rder

6

1C1

.1

2A

2 .2

C1 .2

3

Cook

Yie

ld te

st F

orm

7

1A

2 .1

C1 .1

2C3

.2C4

.2D

2

3

Lasa

gna

Cost

ing

Card

3

1 2A

2 .2

C1 .2

C3 .2

D2

3

Cook



OA

LCF

Refe

renc

e

Find

and

Use

In

form

atio

nCo

mm

unic

ate

Idea

s an

d In

form

atio

nU

nder

stan

d an

d U

se

Num

bers

Use

Dig

ital

Te

chno

logy

Task

Set

sSu

b Ta

sks

Com

plex

ity

Leve

lA

1A

2A

3B1

B2

B3B4

C1C2

C3C4

Task

Gro

ups

Not

App

licab

le

Inte

rpre

t and

Cre

ate

Dra

win

gs3

1B2

.1

2A

2 .2

B3 .2

a

3A

2 .3

B3 .3

a

Find

ing

Info

rmat

ion

task

s4

1A

2 .1

2A

2 .2

3A

2 .3

Serie

s an

d pa

ralle

l Circ

uits

3

1D

1

2A

1 .2

A2 .

2B2

.2C3

.2D

2

3C3

.3

Calc

ulat

ing

Serv

ice

Size

3

1A

1 .1

B2 .1

C3 .1

D1

2A

1 .2

A2 .

2B2

.2C3

.2

3

Inte

rpre

t ele

ctric

al M

easu

ring

equi

pmen

t Rea

ding

s3

1C3

.1

2A

2 .2

B2 .2

D2

3A

1 .3

A3

B2 .3

Elec

tric

ian



OA

LCF

Refe

renc

e

Find

and

Use

In

form

atio

nCo

mm

unic

ate

Idea

s an

d In

form

atio

nU

nder

stan

d an

d U

se

Num

bers

Use

Dig

ital

Te

chno

logy

Task

Set

sSu

b Ta

sks

Com

plex

ity

Leve

lA

1A

2A

3B1

B2

B3B4

C1C2

C3C4

Task

Gro

ups

Not

App

licab

le

Und

erst

andi

ng th

e te

rmin

olog

y of

Hoi

stin

g an

d Ri

ggin

g5

1A

2 .1

2A

2 .2

3

Calc

ulat

ing

Wor

king

Loa

d Li

mit

for H

oist

ing

and

Rigg

ing

3

1 2A

1 .2

A2 .

2

3C3

.3

Find

ing

and

Calc

ulat

ing

Wor

king

Loa

d Li

mits

for

Mill

wrig

hts

4

1B2

.1

2A

2 .2

D2

3C3

.3

Und

erst

andi

ng G

ears

and

Ca

lcul

atin

g G

ear R

atio

s8

1 2A

1 .2

A2 .

2B2

.2

3C4

.3

Und

erst

andi

ng a

nd Id

entif

ying

H

ydra

ulic

pow

er S

yste

ms

10

1 2A

1 .2

B2 .2

D2

3A

1 .3

Und

erst

and

V-Be

lts a

nd

Calc

ulat

e Si

zes

9

1 2A

1 .2

A2 .

2B2

.2C3

.2D

2

3A

1 .3

Mill

wri

ght



OA

LCF

Refe

renc

e

Find

and

Use

In

form

atio

nCo

mm

unic

ate

Idea

s an

d In

form

atio

nU

nder

stan

d an

d U

se

Num

bers

Use

Dig

ital

Te

chno

logy

Task

Set

sSu

b Ta

sks

Com

plex

ity

Leve

lA

1A

2A

3B1

B2

B3B4

C1C2

C3C4

Task

Gro

ups

Not

App

licab

le

Und

erst

and

and

Loca

te

plum

bing

Info

rmat

ion

5

1 2A

1 .2

B2 .2

D2

3

Form

ulas

in p

lum

bing

5

1B2

.1

2A

1 .2

C3 .2

3C3

.3

Und

erst

and

Hyd

roni

c In

form

atio

n fo

r plu

mbi

ng7

1B1

.1

2A

1 .2

B2 .2

D2

3A

1 .3

Calc

ulat

ing

offs

ets

in

plum

bing

3

1 2A

1 .2

A2 .

2

3C3

.3

Calc

ulat

ing

Line

ar p

ipe

expa

nsio

n5

1B2

.1

2A

1 .2

A2 .

2B3

.2a

3C3

.3

Calc

ulat

ing

the

Size

for a

Se

ptic

Sys

tem

of a

Res

iden

tial

Hom

e4

1B2

.1

2A

1 .2

A2 .

2B3

.2a

3C3

.3

Plum

ber


Appendix 7 – task Development Schedule

App

endi

x 7

– Ta

sk D

evel

opm

ent S

ched

ule

Task

Set

Tit

leSu

b Ta

sks

Trad

eW

rite

rD

rop

Box

Entr

y

OA

LCF

refe

renc

eTD

T Re

view

Trad

e Re

view

Lear

ner

Pilo

tQ

UIL

L (F

inal

)Fi

nd a

nd u

se

info

rmat

ion

Com

mun

icat

e id

eas

and

info

rmat

ion

Und

erst

and

and

use

num

bers

Use

dig

ital

te

chno

logy

1Co

1U

nder

stan

ding

an

d U

sing

Bak

ed

Ziti

Reci

pe

5Co

okCl

ay12

-oct

-13

A1 .

1 A

2 .2

B3 .2

bC2

.1

C3 .2

Re

ady

for

Revi

ew N

ov 8

Sent

Nov

21

JF

Re

-sen

t Dec

12

BG

l

Mar

4 2

014

2Co

2Ba

nque

t eve

nt

ord

er4

Cook

Clay

15-o

ct-1

3A

2 .1

A2 .

2C1

.2D

2Re

ady

for

Revi

ew N

ov 8

Sent

Nov

21

JF

Re-s

ent D

ec

12 B

Gl

Apr

il 20

14

3Co

3Ca

lcul

ate

Chic

ken

Dip

Rec

ipe

Ingr

edie

nts

7Co

okCl

ay12

-oct

-13

A2 .

1C2

.1

C3 .2

C3

.3Re

ady

for

Revi

ew N

ov 8

Sent

Nov

21

CR/

CM

Re-s

ent D

ec

17 K

R

Apr

il 20

14

4Co

4Ba

guet

te

Cost

ing

Card

8

Cook

Clay

24-o

ct-1

3A

2 .2

B3 .1

aC1

.1

C1 .2

Read

y fo

r Re

view

Nov

8Se

nt N

ov

21 C

R/CM

Re

-sen

t Dec

17

Wo

Apr

il 20

14

5Co

5In

vent

ory

pric

e Sh

eet

7Co

okCl

ay13

-oct

-13

A2 .

2C1

.2

C3 .1

C3

.2

C4 .1

Read

y fo

r Re

view

Nov

8Se

nt N

ov

21 C

R/CM

Re

-sen

t Dec

17

Wo

Mar

3 2

014

6Co

6Co

ok p

urch

ase

ord

er6

Cook

Clay

22-S

ep-1

3A

2 .2

C1 .1

C1

.2Re

ady

for

Revi

ew N

ov 8

Sent

Nov

21

GR

Sent

Dec

11

BG

Mar

3 2

014

7Co

7Co

ok Y

ield

test

Fo

rm7

Cook

Clay

13-o

ct-1

3A

2 .1

C1 .1

C3

.2

C4 .2

D

2Re

ady

for

Revi

ew N

ov 8

Sent

Nov

21

GR

Sent

Dec

11

BG

Mar

3 2

014

8Co

8La

sagn

a Co

stin

g Ca

rd

3Co

okCl

ay24

-oct

-13

A2 .

2C1

.2

C3 .2

D

2Re

ady

for

Revi

ew N

ov 8

Sent

Nov

21

KR

Apr

il 20

14

9A

S 1

Road

Saf

ety

Reca

ll D

atab

ase

4Au

tom

otiv

e Se

rvic

eCl

ay24

-oct

-13

A2 .

2B2

.3

D2

Read

y fo

r Re

view

Nov

7Se

nt o

ct

to R

D

Sent

Nov

21

GR

Sent

Dec

11

BG

Mar

4 2

014

10A

S 2

tech

nica

l Se

rvic

e Bu

lletin

s4

Auto

mot

ive

Serv

ice

Clay

28-o

ct-1

3A

1 .1

A2 .

2B2

.2 B

2 .3

D2

Read

y fo

r Re

view

Nov

7Se

nt o

ct

to R

D

Sent

Nov

21

KR

Mar

4 2

014

11A

S 3

Vehi

cle

Mai

nten

ance

Sc

hedu

le

5Au

tom

otiv

e Se

rvic

eCl

ay6-

Nov

-13

A1 .

1 A

2 .2

B2 .2

D

2U

pdat

ed

Nov

27

Sent

Nov

28

Wo

Mar

4 2

014



Task

Set

Tit

leSu

b Ta

sks

Trad

eW

rite

rD

rop

Box

Entr

y

OA

LCF

refe

renc

eTD

T Re

view

Trad

e Re

view

Lear

ner

Pilo

tQ

UIL

L (F

inal

)Fi

nd a

nd u

se

info

rmat

ion

Com

mun

icat

e id

eas

and

info

rmat

ion

Und

erst

and

and

use

num

bers

Use

dig

ital

te

chno

logy

12A

S 4

Auto

mot

ive

Repa

ir In

voic

e8

Auto

mot

ive

Serv

ice

Clay

9-N

ov-1

3A

2 .1

A2 .

2C1

.1

C1 .

2U

pdat

ed

Nov

27

Sent

Nov

28

Wo

Apr

il 20

14

13A

S 5

Auto

mot

ive

Vehi

cle

Insp

ectio

n

4Au

tom

otiv

e Se

rvic

eCl

ay9-

Nov

-13

A2 .

2

B3 .1

a B

3 .2a

Upd

ated

N

ov 2

7Se

nt N

ov

29 JF

Re

-sen

t Dec

12

BG

l

Apr

il 20

14

14CA

1Ca

lcul

ate

Volu

mes

of

Conc

rete

Re

quire

d

4Ca

rpen

ter

Dou

g7-

oct

-13

A2 .

1C3

.3

C4 .1

D2

Upd

ated

D

ec 1

Nov

embe

rSe

nt D

ec

17 G

RA

pril

2014

15CA

2In

terp

ret

Blue

prin

ts4

Carp

ente

rD

oug

17-N

ov-1

3A

1 .2

A2 .

2 A

2 .3

B2 .2

Upd

ated

D

ec 1

Sent

Dec

17

KR

Mar

4 2

014

16CA

3Ca

lcul

ate

Ang

les

3Ca

rpen

ter

Dou

g17

-Nov

-13

A1 .

2 A

2 .1

A2 .

2C1

.2

C3 .3

D2

Upd

ated

D

ec 1

Sent

Dec

17

Wo

Apr

il 20

14

17CA

4Re

adin

g Bl

uepr

int N

otes

6Ca

rpen

ter

Dou

g13

-Nov

-13

A1 .

1 A

1 .2

A2 .

2

A2 .

3B2

.1

B2 .2

C3

.1

Upd

ated

D

ec 1

Sent

Dec

17

GR

Mar

4 2

014

18CA

5W

orki

ng w

ith

Conc

rete

3Ca

rpen

ter

Dou

g16

-Dec

-13

A2 .

1 A

2 .2

C3 .2

C3 .

3D

2U

pdat

ed

Dec

20

Sent

Dec

21

KR

Mar

4 2

014

19CA

6pr

epar

atio

ns

befo

re p

ourin

g Co

ncre

te

3Ca

rpen

ter

Dou

g20

-Dec

-13

A1 .

1 A

1 .2

A2 .

2B2

.1

B2 .2

C3 .3

D1

D2

Upd

ated

Ja

n 16

Sent

Jan

16

Wo

/RC-

RA

pril

2014

20eL

1In

terp

ret a

nd

Crea

te D

raw

ings

3el

ectr

icia

nD

oug

17-N

ov-1

3A

2 .2

A2 .

3B2

.1

B3 .2

a B

3 .3a

Upd

ated

D

ec 1

Sent

Dec

17

KR

Apr

il 20

14

21eL

2Fi

ndin

g In

form

atio

n ta

sks

3el

ectr

icia

nD

oug

27-N

ov-1

3A

2 .1

A2 .

2 A

2 .3

Upd

ated

D

ec 1

Sent

Dec

17

Wo

Apr

il 20

14

22eL

3Se

ries

and

para

llel C

ircui

ts3

elec

tric

ian

Dou

g3-

Jan-

14A

1 .2

A2 .

2B2

.2C3

.2

C3 .3

D1

D2

Upd

ated

Ja

n 16

Sent

Jan

16

KR/R

C-R

Apr

il 20

14

23eL

4Ca

lcul

atin

g Se

rvic

e Si

ze3

elec

tric

ian

Dou

g6-

Jan-

14A

1 .1

A1 .

2 A

2 .2

B2 .1

B2

.2C3

.1

C3 .2

D1

Upd

ated

Ja

n 18

Sent

Jan

16

KR/R

C-R

Apr

il 20

14

24eL

5In

terp

ret

elec

tric

al

Mea

surin

g eq

uipm

ent

Read

ings

3el

ectr

icia

nD

oug

28-M

ar-1

4A

1 .3

A2 .

2 A

3B2

.2

B2 .3

C3 .1

D

2U

pdat

ed

Mar

28

Apr

il 20

14

eL 6

Not

com

plet

edel

ectr

icia

nD

oug

25M

I 1U

nder

stan

ding

th

e te

rmin

olog

y of

Hoi

stin

g an

d Ri

ggin

g

5M

illw

right

Lesl

ey8-

oct

-13

A2 .

1 A

2 .2

Upd

ated

N

ov 2

5Se

nt D

ec

2 BG

Apr

il 20

14



Task

Set

Tit

leSu

b Ta

sks

Trad

eW

rite

rD

rop

Box

Entr

y

OA

LCF

refe

renc

eTD

T Re

view

Trad

e Re

view

Lear

ner

Pilo

tQ

UIL

L (F

inal

)Fi

nd a

nd u

se

info

rmat

ion

Com

mun

icat

e id

eas

and

info

rmat

ion

Und

erst

and

and

use

num

bers

Use

dig

ital

te

chno

logy

26M

I 2Ca

lcul

atin

g W

orki

ng

Load

Lim

it fo

r H

oist

ing

and

Rigg

ing

3M

illw

right

Lesl

ey17

-oct

-13

A1 .

2 A

2 .2

C3 .3

Upd

ated

D

ec 3

Sent

Dec

2

BGA

pril

2014

27M

I 3Fi

ndin

g an

d Ca

lcul

atin

g W

orki

ng L

oad

Lim

its fo

r m

illw

right

s

4M

illw

right

Lesl

ey11

-oct

-13

A2 .

2B2

.1C3

.3D

2U

pdat

ed

Nov

25

Sent

Dec

2

KR

Sent

Dec

11

BG

Mar

28

2014

28M

I 4U

nder

stan

ding

G

ears

and

Ca

lcul

atin

g G

ear

Ratio

s

8M

illw

right

Lesl

ey14

-oct

-13

A1 .

2 A

2 .2

B2 .2

C4 .3

Upd

ated

N

ov 2

5Se

nt D

ec

2 G

RA

pril

2014

29M

I 5U

nder

stan

ding

an

d Id

entif

ying

H

ydra

ulic

pow

er

Syst

ems

10M

illw

right

Lesl

ey22

-oct

-13

A1 .

2 A

1 .3

B2 .2

D2

Upd

ated

D

ec 3

Sent

Dec

4 JF

Re

-sen

t Dec

12

BG

l

Apr

il 20

14

30M

I 6U

nder

stan

d V-

Belts

and

Ca

lcul

ate

Size

s

9M

illw

right

Lesl

ey19

-Nov

-13

A1 .

2 A

1 .3

A2 .

2B2

.2C3

.2D

2U

pdat

ed

Nov

25

Sent

Dec

4 JF

Re

-sen

t Dec

12

BG

l

Apr

il 20

14

31pL

1U

nder

stan

d an

d Lo

cate

plu

mbi

ng

Info

rmat

ion

5pl

umbe

rLe

sley

28-o

ct-1

3A

1 .2

B2 .2

D2

Read

y fo

r Re

view

Nov

15

Sent

Nov

21

Wo

Apr

il 20

14

32pL

2Fo

rmul

as in

pl

umbi

ng5

plum

ber

Lesl

ey28

-oct

-13

A1 .

2B2

.1C3

.2

C3 .3

Read

y fo

r Re

view

Nov

15

Sent

Nov

21

Wo

Apr

il 20

14

33pL

3U

nder

stan

d H

ydro

nic

Info

rmat

ion

for

plum

bing

7pl

umbe

rLe

sley

4-N

ov-1

3A

1 .2

A1 .

3B1

.1

B2 .2

D2

Upd

ated

N

ov 6

Sent

Nov

28

CM

/CR

Re-s

ent D

ec

17 G

R

Apr

il 20

14

34pL

4Ca

lcul

atin

g o

ffset

s in

pl

umbi

ng

3pl

umbe

rLe

sley

A1 .

2 A

2 .2

C3 .3

Upd

ated

N

ov 6

Sent

Nov

28

CM

/CR

Re-s

ent D

ec

17 G

R

Apr

il 20

14

35pL

5Ca

lcul

atin

g Li

near

pip

e ex

pans

ion

5pl

umbe

rLe

sley

8-N

ov-1

3A

1 .2

A2 .

2B2

.1

B3 .2

aC3

.3Ad

ded

Nov

8Se

nt D

ec

9 BG

Apr

il 20

14

36pL

6Ca

lcul

atin

g th

e Si

ze fo

r a

Sept

ic S

yste

m

of a

Res

iden

tial

Hom

e

4pl

umbe

rLe

sley

24-N

ov-1

3A

1 .2

A2 .

2B2

.1

B3 .2

aC3

.3U

pdat

ed

Nov

25

Sent

Dec

9

KR

Sent

Dec

11

BG

Apr

il 20

14

178


Appendix 8 – LBS practitioner Survey

Appendix 8 – LBS Practitioner Survey


Our project, Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario, is developing literacy and essential skills tasks to help learners prepare to successfully challenge the trade exams.

Our task writers have consulted with trade experts to make sure the tasks are about real activities in the trades. We also need to hear from you about how useful these tasks might be for learners in literacy programs.

The survey is very brief. We thank you in advance for your assistance.

1. I am a:

Literacy practitioner

Trade expert


2. The task identification number is located at the top of page 1 of your task handout. Please circle which task you reviewed.

Co 1 CA 1 MI 2

Co 2 CA 2 MI 3

Co 3 CA 3 MI 4

Co 4 CA 4 MI 5

Co 5 CA 5 MI 6

Co 6 CA 6 pL 1

Co 7 eL 1 pL 2

Co 8 eL 2 pL 3

AS 1 eL 3 pL 4

AS 2 eL 4 pL 5

AS 3 eL 5 pL 6

AS 4 eL 6

AS 5 MI 1


Appendix 8 – LBS practitioner Survey

3. How many learners reviewed this task?

____________________________________________________________________________

4. Do you believe that this type of task is one that people would actually do in the trade?

Yes No Unsure

Additional comments ___________________________________________________________

5. Please rate how appropriate you think this task is for use in a literacy program.

Too easy

Just right

Too hard

Not appropriate


6. On a scale of 1 – 5, with 1 being “not at all” and 5 being “extremely,” how useful do you think this task would be to someone who is preparing for apprenticeship?

1 2 3 4 5

Not useful at all Extremely useful


7. On a scale of 1 – 5, with 1 being “not at all” and 5 being “extremely,” how easy do you think it is to use this task in the program?

1 2 3 4 5

Not easy at all Extremely easy


8. Thank you for helping us with our project. Your feedback about the tasks is important to us. Do you have additional comments about this task or about the project that you’d like to share?

____________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________


Appendix 9 – LBS Learner Survey



Our project, Developing Best Practices for Increasing, Supporting and Retaining Apprentices in Northern Ontario, is developing literacy and essential skills tasks to help learners prepare to successfully challenge the trade exams.

Our task writers have consulted with trade experts to make sure the tasks are about real activities in the trades. We also need to hear from you about how useful these tasks might be for learners in literacy programs.

The survey is very brief. We thank you in advance for your assistance.

1. My goal in this literacy program is:

Apprenticeship Postsecondary

Employment Independence

Secondary School

2. The task identification number is located at the top of page 1 of your task handout. Please circle which task you reviewed.

Co 1 CA 1 MI 2

Co 2 CA 2 MI 3

Co 3 CA 3 MI 4

Co 4 CA 4 MI 5

Co 5 CA 5 MI 6

Co 6 CA 6 pL 1

Co 7 eL 1 pL 2

Co 8 eL 2 pL 3

AS 1 eL 3 pL 4

AS 2 eL 4 pL 5

AS 3 eL 5 pL 6

AS 4 eL 6

AS 5 MI 1



3. Do you believe that this type of task is one that people would actually do in the trade?

Yes No Unsure


4. Please rate how appropriate you think this task is for use in a literacy program.

Too easy

Just right

Too hard

Not appropriate


5. On a scale of 1 – 5, with 1 being “not at all” and 5 being “extremely,” how useful do you think this task would be to someone who is preparing for apprenticeship?

1 2 3 4 5

Not easy at all Extremely easy

Other (please specify) __________________________________________________________

6. Thank you for helping us with our project. Your feedback about the tasks is important to us. Do you have additional comments about this task or about the project that you’d like to share?

____________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________


Appendix 10 – Learner task Review

Appendix 10 – Learner Task Review

Automotive Carpentry Cook

Task Set Number of learners Task Set Number of

learners Task Set Number of learners

AS 1 6 CA 1 0 Co 1 7

AS 2 3 CA 2 1 Co 2 5

AS 3 1 CA 3 0 Co 3 4

AS 4 1 CA 4 0 Co 4 1

AS 5 5 CA 5 1 Co 5 1

CA 6 0 Co 6 4

Co 7 5

Co 8 4

Total 16 Total 2 Total 31

Electrical Millwright Plumber

Task Set Number of learners Task Set Number of

learners Task Set Number of learners

eL 1 1 MI 1 2 pL 1 0

eL 2 0 MI 2 1 pL 2 0

eL 3 0 MI 3 1 pL 3 0

eL 4 0 MI 4 1 pL 4 0

eL 5 0 MI 5 4 pL 5 0

eL 6 0 MI 6 5 pL 6 1

Total 1 Total 14 Total 1


Appendix 11 – LBS task Review Summary

App

endi

x 11

– L

BS T

ask

Revi

ew S

umm

ary

Task

s $-

$-

LBS

Prac

titio

ners

Auto

mot

ive

Serv

iceCa

rpen

ter

Cook

Elec

trici

anM

illw

right

Plum

ber

Num

ber o

f Ta

sk R

evie

ws

LBS S

tipen

dTr

ade E

xper

t St

ipen

d

LL

PL

PL

LP

L

Cone

stoga

Co

llege

AS 5

CO 1

CO

2 M

I 5 M

I 65

0

Conf

eder

ation

Co

llege

AS 1

CA 1

CA 4

CO 6

CO

7M

I 4PL

3 P

L 48

0

Valle

y Adu

lt Le

arnin

g As

socia

tion

AS 2

CA 2

CA 5

CO 8

CO

3 EL

1 E

L 3

EL 4

MI 3

PL 6

100

Dryd

en

Liter

acy

AS 3

AS 4

AS

5CA

3 C

A 6

CO 4

CO

5EL

2 E

L 4PL

1 P

L 211

0

Atiko

kan

Liter

acy

AS 1

CO 6

CO

7M

I 1 M

I 2

MI 3

PL 5

PL 6

80

Algo

nquin

Co

llege

Trad

e Ex

pert

AS 1

AS 2

00

Liter

acy L

ink

Sout

h Cen

tral

CA 6

EL 3

EL 4

30

Trad

e Ex

pert

s0

Durh

am

(Cook

)

CO 1

CO 2

CO 3

CO 4

CO 5

CO 6

CO 7

CO 8

0 $-

Durh

am

(Millw

right

)M

I 1 M

I 2 M

I 3

MI 4

MI 6

MI 7

0 $-

Carp

ente

r (T

hund

er Ba

y)CA

1 CA

2 CA

3 CA

4 CA

5 CA

60

$-

45

0 $-