The role of apprenticeship in the cultivation of soft skills and dispositions

Abstract

As a learning model, apprenticeship is well known for its capacity to develop skills and vocational identities. It is also increasingly appealing for its potential to develop soft skills and enhance dispositions. This article focuses on the nature and role of apprenticeship and employers in developing dispositions and soft skills. It draws on a two-year New Zealand study of 41 apprentices in general practice medicine, carpentry, and engineering technician work, and their workplace mentors and teachers. The study theorised that apprentices’ most significant learning is personally as well as professionally challenging, and can be understood in terms of ‘vocational thresholds’ – portals to deeper capability in the field. This article argues that crossing vocational thresholds requires ongoing development of dispositions and soft skills, critically supported by workplace mentors and teachers. The article suggests that the situated nature of apprenticeship uniquely positions it to foster dispositions and soft skills, and that these are field-specific and learnable, rather than general, abstract and fixed.

Full text

The Role of Apprenticeship in the Cultivation of Soft Skills and
Dispositions
As a learning model, apprenticeship is well-known for its capacity to develop
skills and vocational identities. It is also increasingly appealing for its potential to
develop soft skills and enhance dispositions. This article focuses on the nature
and role of apprenticeship and employers in developing dispositions and soft
skills. It draws on a two-year New Zealand study of 41 apprentices in general
practice medicine, carpentry, and engineering technician work, and their
workplace mentors and teachers.
The study theorised that apprentices’ most significant learning is personally as
well as professionally challenging, and can be understood in terms of “vocational
thresholds” – portals to deeper capability in the field. This article argues that
crossing vocational thresholds requires ongoing development of dispositions and
soft skills, critically supported by workplace mentors and teachers. The article
suggests that the situated nature of apprenticeship uniquely positions it to foster
dispositions and soft skills, and that these are field-specific and learnable, rather
than general, abstract, and fixed.
Keywords: workplace learning; adult learning; vocational education and training;
pedagogy; learning in the professions
Citation: Vaughan, K. (2017): The role of apprenticeship in the cultivation of soft skills and
dispositions. In Journal of Vocational Education & Training. Online DOI:
10.1080/13636820.2017.1326516.
Introduction
This article explores the development of soft skills and dispositons through
apprenticeship. Drawing on research in general practice (GP) medicine, carpentry, and
engineering technician work, it shows that soft skills and dispositions such as
relationship-centredness (GPs), craftsmanship (carpenters) and problemsolving with a
“social eye” (engineering technicians) are vitally important for vocational capability.
The article also argues that soft skills and dispositions are distinct but interdependent.
Soft (and hard) skills need mobilisation through dispositions, and employers can be seen
as important actors in enabling this development.
Employers and educators are increasingly interested in soft skills and
dispositions for social, as well as economic, value creation in work and life. Employers
have pointed to a lack of soft skills in graduates or job applicants. Numerous surveys
around the world attest to employer preferences for soft skills and dispositions and the
idea that this is important for employable and job-ready candidates (AlphaBeta, 2016;
Cunningham & Villasenor, 2016; Kusmiersczyk & Medford, 2015; UK Commission for
Employment and Skills (UKCES), 2013). This has challenged tertiary education
Page 1 of 19

institutions to demonstrate their relevance, driving the development of “graduate
attribute profiles”. It has also led institutions to seek more employer involvement and
expand work-integrated learning (WiL) programmes from more traditional areas such as
nursing to computer science, engineering, and business.
Educators argue that soft skills and dispositions have become important in the
face of increasing life complexity, “future of work” challenges (The New Zealand
Labour Party, 2016), and urgent “wicked” (multi-faceted) problems facing the world
(Barnett, 2004; Gilbert & Bull, 2012). They argue that the pressing purpose of education
has shifted from transmitting selected bodies of knowledge to developing people’s
capacity to engage in lifelong learning (Carr et al., 2010; Gilbert, 2005). This has driven
the development of key competencies in schooling curricula around the world, based on
the Organisational for Economic Cooperation and Development’s (OECD) work and
recognition of soft skills and dispositions in 21st century life and work (Rychen &
Salganik, 2003). Dispositional development is now being included in some professional
education programmes in tertiary institutions (Bell & Loon, 2015; LaBelle & Belknap,
2016; Meidl & Baumann, 2015; O’Neill et al., 2015).
Soft skills are generally understood as socio-emotional, intra-personal and inter-
personal skills (for example, communication skills, critical thinking). Dispositions are
“behavioural tendencies” (Perkins, Jay, & Tishman, 1993) that lead to adapting and
responding to the environment in certain, characteristic ways (Carr & Claxton, 2002)
(e.g. open-mindedness, persistence). The definitions of soft skills and dispositions are
still being debated and in fact both are often cited interchangeably and overlappingly
with “employability skills”, “non-cognitive skills”, and “life skills” (Cimatti, 2016;
Cinque, 2016). However the conflation does usefully highlight a shared history of being
overlooked in favour of disciplinary knowledge, technical skill, and conceptions of
hard-wired “ability”.
For the purposes of this article, I consider soft skills and dispositions to be
distinct in theory but co-implicated in practice. Soft skills are skills which involve
knowledge-informed task performance or actions (Matteson, Anderson, & Boyden,
2016). Dispositions provide the impetus for, and mediation of, deployment of soft skills.
The areas of distinction and overlap matter. As with the difference between being able
to read (skill) and being a reader (disposition) (see Katz 1993 in Carr & Claxton, 2002),
it suggests that that soft skills and dispositions are not fixed, but evolving, and that they
need each other for capability in real-life situations. In other words, soft skills and
dispositions are socio-cultural phenomenon.
Apprenticeship is fertile ground for explorating the cultivation of soft skills and
dispositions because apprenticeship is also socio-cultural as a model of learning (Billett,
2016; Fuller & Unwin, 2011; Guile, 2011). For young people, apprenticeship can play a
developmental role, supporting transition to adulthood (Halpern, 2009). For apprentices
of any age, the contextual nature of apprenticeship and emphasis on “becoming and
Page 2 of 19

being” (Chan, 2013) fosters the formation of vocational identities involving field or
occupation-specific “signature dispositions” (Lucas & Spencer, 2016). These may in
part develop through participation in “communities of practice” (Lave & Wenger, 1991)
for apprentices and experienced practitioners alike – a phenomenon we now recognise
as an essential part of the continuous vitalisation and legitimation of practitioners’
knowledge-in-practice (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015).
Apprenticeship is also worth exploring for soft skills and dispositional
development because of its importance for Governments looking to strengthen their
vocational education and training (VET) systems. In 2016 the New Zealand
Government boosted its apprenticeship investment and set new targets for apprentice
numbers by 2020 (New Zealand Government, 2016a, 2016b). This supports changes in
2014 which encouraged development of new apprenticeships. The definition of
apprenticeship was broadened to encompass all ages and any training leading to
qualifications at Level 4 or higher on the National Qualifications Framework, and
funding adjusted to incentivise Industry Training Organisations (ITOs), which develop
qualifications and arrange most apprenticeships, to develop qualifications at Level 4 and
above - the apprenticeship “bar”.
Apprenticeship is therefore an important as a learning model and an institution
of VET for enculturating soft skills and dispositions. Such a focus contributes to
determining sustainable workplace curriculum and pedagogic practices (Billett & Choy,
2013) and the occupational “habits of mind” and “optimal blend of theory and practice”
(Lucas, Hanson, & Claxton, 2014, p. 53) for vocational capability.
Apprenticeship across three fields
This article draws on a two-year study of apprenticeship learning experiences in New
Zealand with 41 general practice (GP) registrars, carpentry apprentices, and engineering
technician cadets (Vaughan, Bonne, & Eyre, 2015). Although only carpentry officially
used the term “apprenticeship” (“vocational immersion” was used in general practice;
“cadetship” was used in engineering), all three pathways followed an apprenticeship
learning model. New employees were taken on as apprentices and learned on-job
towards formal certification, with some additional self-directed learning and/or
classroom-based work off-site. Their work was scaffolded and supported by designated
workplace mentors and teachers. Learner-practitioners in each pathway readily
described themselves as “apprentices”.
Apprentice GPs are known as registrars in the 3-year General Practice Education
Programme (GPEP) run through the Royal New Zealand College of General
Practitioners (RNZCGP). Registrars have a medical degree and at least two years’
experience working in hospitals. In the GPEP, they work under supervision of a “GP
teacher” in community clinics with 3-20 staff. The GP teacher and registrar review cases
each week, identifying and addressing areas of weakness through discussion and role
Page 3 of 19

play. Registrars also attend off-site clinician lectures and participate in “reflective
practice groups” led by medical educators. The frequency of these activities reduces
sharply after the first year.
Carpentry apprentices spend around 3-4 years in training with an employer,
typically in a micro-enterprise of 1-5 staff members. The Building and Construction
Industry Training Organisation (BCITO) manages the apprenticeship through a
collaborative “assessment team” designed to align the assessment process with the
learning environment. The BCITO training advisor liaises with the employer, assesses
competence, and provides learning support. The apprentice collects evidence of learning
for discussion in a physical or digital scrapbook. The employer provides training and
verifies evidence. Sometimes training advisors and employers arrange short-term
placements to ensure the apprentice gains the range of experience needed.
Engineering technician apprentices undertake 5-6 year long cadetships under the
auspices of the Institute of Professional Engineers of New Zealand’s (IPENZ)
“Futureintech” initiative. Cadetships are usually offered by large consultancies.
Learning is on-job, supplemented by a weekly lecture at a tertiary institution site.
Cadets are rotated through different teams to gain exposure to a range of roles and tasks.
Their designated mentor is usually not part the cadet’s work team, and provides broad
career development support. Technical support is provided by team leaders.
Researchers worked with the stakeholder organisations and employers to find
volunteer “matched pairs” of apprentices and teachers/mentors. For alignment with the
project lifecycle, apprentices needed to be in the first 12-18 months of apprenticeship
and not be in workplaces about to cease trading or with a known history of poor
learning opportunities. Gender imbalances in each field tended to be reflected among
the participant mix (e.g. no female carpenters and few engineers; more females than
males in GP medicine).
Following observation of a teaching or mentoring session (where feasible),
researchers conducted individual, face-to-face, semi-structured interviews with each
apprentice and the main mentor/teacher(s). Interviews included a focus on a very
significant learning experience1 in relation to “being” a practitioner (for apprentices) or
what might constitute such an experience for an apprentice (in the opinion of their
teachers/mentors). Apprentices were re-interviewed approximately 12 months later,
either face-to-face or by telephone. Interviews focused again on significant learning
experiences and on what the attributes of good and not-so-good practitioners might be.
The following table summarises participation and fieldwork. Some teachers and
mentors were responsible for multiple apprentices. Some observations involved
multiple apprentices.
1The main interview question here about was adapted from a question about tertiary education courses and
experiences prior to entering careers in clinical psychology, the clergy, and teaching (Grossman et al., 2009).
Page 4 of 19

Knowing Practice project participants and fieldwork
GP medicine Carpentry Engineering
Apprentices 1st interview: 14 registrars
2nd interview: 12 registrars
1st interview: 15 apprentices
2nd interview: 11 apprentices
1st interview: 12 cadets
2nd interview: 11 cadets
Teachers and
mentors
1 interview
7 GP teachers
3 medical educators
14 trainers
5 training advisors
8 mentors
3 team leaders
2 managers
Observations 6 GP teacher sessions
5 reflective practice groups
14 training advisor visits 7 mentoring meetings
Observations provided researchers with contextual detail and interview prompts
about work and learning arrangements, relationships, and issues. Interviews were
transcribed and data analysed iteratively in two main stages. First researchers let themes
emerge inductively, leading to identification of patterns in learning experiences. Second
data related to significant learning experiences was analysed through development of
the idea of “vocational thresholds”, which is discussed in the following subsection.
Significant learning experiences and “vocational thresholds”
Apprentices’ accounts of their learning and work revealed much about the
interdependence of (hard and soft) skills and dispositions, and the workplace
affordances crucial to their development. Accounts of the most significant learning
experiences were particularly informative because they suggested there could be a kind
of portal through which apprentices reached new levels of capability. This capability
necessarily encompassed vocational soft skills and dispositions, as well as knowledge
and hard or technical skills.
While apprentices’ accounts were, not surprisingly, specific to their practice
field, they were also remarkably similar. They had in common a new view of their work
and role, with theory and practice integrated. The experiences described were often
Page 5 of 19

personally and professionally challenging. There were painful, and sometimes joyful,
realisations that seemed counter-intuitive to apprentices’ earlier understandings. Once
apprentices “saw with new eyes”, there was no going back. They seemed to have passed
through a portal to a different world. Researchers called this the “vocational threshold”
(Vaughan et al., 2015), developing this idea to help understand a vocational threshold
“crossing” experience and its role in learning.
The vocational thresholds idea builds on Meyer and Land’s (2003) theory of
“threshold concepts”, where knowledge is transformative in perception and perspective;
unlikely to be forgotten; integrative of different and previously hidden aspects;
sometimes bounded conceptually; and possibly troublesome in relation to previous
beliefs. Threshold concepts have been particularly embraced by tertiary educators to
help them identify disciplinary gateway concepts and areas where students encounter
difficulty and need support (Meyer, Knight, Callagahan, & Baldock, 2015).
Take-up of threshold concepts has tended to emphasise the knowledge demands
on learners and downplay the ontological or “way of being” demands they face.
However studies in tertiary teaching and school teaching support (Harrison & Clayton,
2012; Timmermans, 2014) have brought to light that there are also ontological
dimensions involved, where practitioners have needed to “be” different in order to
develop capabilities for the changing nature of their work. The vocational thresholds
idea focuses on experience (in authentic practice) more than knowledge concepts (e.g.
in a classroom). It underlines the idea that capability is not simply technical; it also
requires apprentices to invest in their vocation at the level of identity
A vocational threshold presents an opportunity for soft skills and dispositonal
development. When apprentices were asked in interviews to describe the characteristics
of good practitioners in their field, they picked out many of the popularly cited soft
skills and dispositions – for example, communication, teamwork and negotiation skills;
integrity and ethics; self-management; responsibility; independence; conscientiousness;
and a lifelong learning disposition. The manifestation of these soft skills and
dispositions varied according to the nature of work and interactions within each
different field. However in facing and crossing vocational thresholds, apprentices
highlighted an articulation, enactment, expression, and deployment of soft skills and
dispositions in becoming good practitioners.
GPs: uncertainty in care
GP registrars’ vocational thresholds cohered around repositioning their medical
knowledge as they moved out of a hospital context into apprenticeship in a community
context. The characteristic complexity and instability of general practice medicine (van
de Wiel, van den Bossche, Janssen, & Jossberger, 2010) was newly foregrounded
through the relationship-centred nature of the work. This gave new impetus to the less
visible (and sometimes also less glamorous) aspects of consultation and treatment,
Page 6 of 19

which GP registrars often experienced as a sharp surge in the levels of uncertainty in
their work.
Registrars now had individual responsibility for patients and their continuity of
care – both over time and in collaboration with other healthcare professionals. They had
no direct access to hospital-level diagnostic testing, only 15-30 minutes per
consultation, and no ability to impose treatment. One registrar described feeling ‘more
stressed than I expected. You need to check how [patients] are motivated...if I say
things, the patient does not necessarily agree to do it. You have to negotiate’ (Sita).
Registrars felt both excited and daunted by the responsibility. Their learning had
always been driven by, and embedded within, the idea of patient care. However they
now struggled with the more negotiated aspects of this, particularly when, as they
reported, they found themselves “just listening” to patients or “being there” for them.
For registrars who enjoyed the technical, problem-solving challenges of medicine,
“being there” was disturbing, prompting some to report a sense of inadequacy. As one
described it, “I still struggle with the concept [that] sometimes people just want to be
heard and that just being heard is a therapeutic thing (Jem, GP registrar). Others found a
new and rewarding dimension to medical practice in listening well and constructing
with the patient what the problems were, which to pursue, and how to do so.
In hospital I learned to address a problem and give the medicine. Here, I am trying to change
lifestyle. When I get positive feedback, that it has clicked, and [the patient] wants to change,
that makes me a GP. In hospital we could not change anything. We could diagnose really good
stuff…But here, there’s a satisfaction in looking after a man. (Kendrick, GP registrar)
Registars also found they needed to apply an ethic of care to themselves so that they
could be fully available to their patients. Their expertise now had to include a different
kind of knowing – and management – of their own strengths, frailties, and anxieties, and
the nature of their (ongoing) relationships with patients. This changed who GPs were as
people, at home as well as at work. Relationships with patients developed over time but
so did registrars’ relationship with themselves.
Looking back I was quite volatile. I am gentler now…In a hospital you can afford to have
strong opinions because you’re fairly anonymous...Whereas in general practice, [patients] are
always coming back. You have to maintain a relationship. (Tamati, GP registrar)
GP soft skills and dispositions
GP registrars described needing communication skills to move beyond reporting
diagnoses and “talking at” patients. A “good GP” was one who negotiated with, and
generated buy-in from, patients. Registrars also cited the need for timeliness and clarity
in working with other health personnel and agencies. The quality of their written notes
set in motion long-term consequences for medical approaches, insurance, and
employment arrangements.
Page 7 of 19

Notably registrars’ accounts highlighted a need to be disposed to bring
themselves authentically to relationships with patients. Patients only disclose fully or
buy-in to treatment when they trust and connect with the GP they see as genuine. Some
registrars reported using furniture and body language, as well as verbal language, to try
and communicate openness, authority, honesty and caring. One registrar struggled with
“getting that lump in the throat quite often” but had “learned to control it” because
“people like you to be real but there’s a boundary” (Miriam). Another felt she had a
good picture of the balance needed:
[a very good GP] is personable, open and knowledgeable about what’s gone on with a patient
—the medical conditions and general knowledge…they have a good memory about the patient
so they’re comfortable to talk with you—and not just about medical things. (Nita)
Soft skills and dispositions related to ethics and integrity were cited in a range of ways.
Registrars described taking a “holistic view” of each patient, attending to a big picture
of wellbeing instead of relying on clinical knowledge alone. They described a good GP
as humbly recognising the responsibility over others’ lives, including refusing patients
where necessary– for example, needless testing, drug-seeking, or over-involved family
members. As one registrar explained: “It’s not just the patient’s wellbeing we have to
look after; we have to look after the public too”. (Ellen, GP registrar).
The ethical disposition to engage in continuity of care extended into GPs’ own
lives. The were beginning to see that their ability to care deeply for patients depended
on taking responsibility for their own wellbeing and avoiding burnout, substance abuse,
and apathy or “compassion fatigue”.
You go home drained. If it went on for a long time, it would become detrimental for patients.
You would start not wanting to care because you know what it’s going to do to you. (Bo, GP
registrar)
Carpenters: pride in craft
Carpentry apprentices worked on a variety of jobs from small renovations to full house
builds or large-scale commercial projects. Their vocational thresholds were based on
getting to grips with an increasingly sophisticated interplay between their minds, bodies,
cross-trade interactions, and their physical environment of climate, tools and materials.
Over the course of their apprenticeship they not only learned the discrete skills needed
to complete each part of a job, but how to draw these skills together to produce a
finished product of a high standard. This involved internalising the standards associated
with excellent workmanship: being able to work independently to meet industry and
regulatory requirements and produce something valued by clients and admired by others
in the industry.
Apprentices move towards being considered professional builders when they can
work with a range of others, including architects, clients, and subcontractors such as
electricians and plumbers. Being able to complete projects in a timely manner depended
on organisational, relationship-building and communication skills.
Page 8 of 19

It’s not just about how good [carpenters] are at building; it’s about leadership as well. They
have to have a high standard of skills in the building industry, and leadership towards people
like me who are learning still. (Abe, carpentry apprentice)
Apprentices reported that building became less straightforward as the complexities
involved in a project revealed themselves. This steered apprentices away from the idea
of there being one right method towards an increasing skilfulness in sensing the
different possibilities and enacting the mind-body-environment-materials interplay. In
other words, apprentices were using grounded cognition, distributed across their bodies
and the environment, as well their minds (Barsalou, 2008). As they were entrusted with
opportunities to solve more complex problems, they began to enjoy the respect of their
co-workers and clients.
As soon as you’ve done a good job and you look back at it and you think it’s a good job, and
then someone else comes along and sees it finished and you can see it in them. They say: ‘That
looks awesome, mate.’ It feels amazing. Now [towards the end of my apprenticeship] I know
when I’ve done a good job. But when you’re an apprentice, you don’t know. It might be the
first time you’ve ever done it. As you get experience, you get to know if it’s right. (Pete,
carpentry apprentice, original emphasis)
Apprentices’ cited being able to independently identify and correct mistakes as a key
aspect of their development of a craftsperson-like character. Apprentices’ experiences
drew attention to a commonplace tendency in education to think about values as distinct
from individual cognitive processing and technical skill. Yet carpentry apprentices’
experiences demonstrated that aesthetic and craft values could direct their choice of
tool, material and technique, as well as stimulating their problem-solving and problem-
finding approaches to work (Rose, 2005, p. 205).
A really great builder has been building for ten years, doing architecturally designed homes,
really important, specific jobs working with high quality timber – a real master of the trade.
Not like a guy who just whips up a [prefabricated] home. (Pete, carpentry apprentice)
Carpentry soft skills and dispositions
Carpentry apprentices cited communication skills as part of sociability and teamwork on
building sites. They described good carpenters as effecting good relationships with other
“tradies” and with clients from a wide range of backgrounds, often different from their
own. The communication and teamwork package included receiving and providing
feedback in order to follow-on from other’s tasks and intentions, or set up tasks and
make their own intentions clear for those following on from them. This kind of
coordination was crucial to producing good work product.
There’s a way of helping someone understand a certain thing. Some people don’t have that
patience or some people just can’t shape or form instructions to suit an individual. That’s a
really important thing and quite fundamental, especially in an environment when you are
relying on two or three or maybe six or ten guys…you have got to have technical skills, but
people skills is a huge part of it. (Mike, carpentry apprentice)
Apprentices’ ideas about “workmanship” contained a strong theme of integrity. This
meant respecting others, no matter who they were, nor what their role or job. Most felt
Page 9 of 19

that hierarchical relations onsite were damaging to performance and teamwork,
challenging old-school and oppressive versions of the apprentice-master relationship
(e.g. being given the worst jobs with no particular learning value). Like the GP
registrars, carpentry apprentices cited the ability to embrace responsibility with wisdom
and humility, and to privilege excellent work and site relations over a short-term focus
on making money.
Carpenters do not work with simple recipes or without reference to others; they
interpret references on plans and follow it through, coordinating their activities with
those of other people in different roles on-site. They must be sensitive to the work and
the broader aims of design, and take pride in it, similar to the way an architect’s design
might be sympathetic to land forms and features. Carpentry apprentices therefore
referred frequently to developing a certain “nous”. While their craftsmanship involved
knowledge and skill, it was particularly dependent on their judgment and “workmanship
of risk” in undertaking activities that cannot be predetermined and that require constant
and close attention to changes in materials, tools, and context (Pye 1968, p. 20 cited in
Chan, 2014, p. 315).
Engineering technicians: resituating solutions
Engineering technician cadets have a range of related but discrete roles in geo-tech,
roading and environmental aspects of civil engineering, and support the work of
professional engineers. Their vocational threshold exepriences were ones that shifted
their focus of attention and gave new meaning to their work. The different roles and
experiences in a cadetship are intended to provide opportunities to develop the range of
skills, knowledge and judgment needed to practise as an engineering technician.
Engineering technician cadets described the challenge of having their focus
extended from the discrete, immediate and bounded task. Much of their work involved
intense devotion to detail – physical measurement, symbolic notation, computer-aided
plan drafting, and precise calculation. Cadets were deliberately restricted as learners, so
they would not be overwhelmed. However, this meant they sometimes struggled to
appreciate the place of their work within a project and team.
It may seem insignificant, digging up some dirt, but the results of your testing can impact on
the whole project. That’s something I didn’t realise. I had thought that the guys who are
building it were the most important, but it turns out that if you don’t have good foundations,
you won’t have good buildings. (Jack, engineering technician cadet)
Their significant learning experiences made visible what their measurements and
drawings, a small aspect of a project, enabled for the rest of the team and for the project
overall. Experiences interacting with other members of the team, or people in mentoring
roles, helped cadets lift their gaze, reinforce diligence, and understand their contribution
as fundamental rather than trivial. They were not just taking soil samples or using a
theodolite. They were engineering solutions, making things possible.
Page 10 of 19

When cadets began to use judgment about which of their repertoire of skills and
knowledge to draw on to solve a given problem, they underwent an ontological shift
that can be thought of as crossing a vocational threshold. One cadet summed up his very
early sense of such a shift:
We had to move 3000 litres but the pumps had to stay where they were. The fire engineer said,
‘You can’t do it’…I went to our water engineers and they had ideas: ‘here’s the equations’. I
thought: wow. That’s the first time I realised the power of engineering. You can go from ‘no,
you can’t’ to ‘yes, you can’. (Dylan, engineering technician cadet)
The definition of what was possible was not simply a technical one. As part of the
design process they were faced with considering how people would engage with the
results of their (and their team’s) labour. This included the possibility that the work
could be contested by different groups or have differential impacts in the world. Cadets
therefore found that engineering was not just a physical-technical enterprise; it was
social one. They needed to recognise engineering and project teamwork as socio-
scientific (Patil & Eijkman, 2012).
A slip knocked out half the road for a good hundred metres and…contractors had built a
temporary road around it, but [the speed limit]was still down to 30 kilometres…it made me
think how important some of the work that we do is – that it doesn’t just affect us, it affects a
lot of people…it’s encouraging me to think about it more than just drawing it. (Kane,
engineering technician cadet)
Engineering soft skills and dispositions
A good engineering technician was described as focused on accurate, reliable, and
timely knowledge-sharing with others in the team, and those outside the team and
connected with the project (e.g. architects, clients). Teams were made up of individuals
with different and very specific roles and tasks so good team functioning enabled
something to be created that was more than the sum of its parts. This kind of team
problem-solving is described by Lucas, et al (2014) as one of the key engineering
“habits of mind” involving joint ideas generation and rigorous critique in the “team
sport” of engineering. Some cadets described the ultimate sign of good communication,
negotiation and teamwork skills as being sought out for advice by others working on
similar but different projects, in different teams.
Engineering technicians’ work did not reside solely in the symbolic realm, such
as when making traffic flow calculations. The work also involved understanding where
those calculations or notation elements fitted within the work of the wider team and
where the project as a whole was located within the idea of public works. It required an
inclination to read the situation as social, and see the bigger picture of public
understanding and road safety. Like carpenters, taking responsibility for parts of the
project and being to recognise mistakes early, was an important part of teamwork.
Cadets described developing a “social eye”: sensitivity and respect for where
engineering “solutions” may not be read that way by parts of the community, who
Page 11 of 19

indeed may formally oppose or informally resist something technically feasible but
socially, ecologically or politically unpalatable.
The role of employers, teachers and mentors
It is clear that apprentices brought initial dispositions into their apprenticeships. GP
registrars brought with them a disposition to care for others and help create healthy
communities. Carpentry apprentices brought with them a disposition for problemsolving
and synchronicity with materials, conditions, and tools. Engineering technician cadets
brought with them a disposition for figuring out “how stuff works” and translating
between the physical and symbolically-represented worlds. Through vocational
threshold experiences, dispositions were further cultivated, becoming an “affective and
cultural filter” for “turning knowledge and skill into action” (Carr & Claxton, 2002, p.
15), and developing occupation-appropriate soft skills.
By design, workplace teachers and mentors, many of whom were also the
employer, played a critical role here. Apprentices knew what a really capable
practitioner in the field looked like because their workplace teachers and mentors
worked alongside them. Interviews with teachers and mentors revealed a perspective
that knowledge was not simply something from a textbook or competence specification
but something vital embodied in them as they “inhabited” the landscape of practice
(Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015). In other words, workplace teachers and
mentors and apprentices acted together as “co-constructors of competence” (Hodge,
2010), repositioning each field’s “curriculum” in practice terms.
GP teachers described “turning theory into people” (Kath, GP teacher), and
modelling how to say “I don’t know…how could we find this out?” (Charlotte, GP
teacher). Many GP teachers also encouraged registrars to “work on the hard bits”
(Perkins, 2009) – for example, openly discussing the management of patient complaints.
“The idea is to reflect on your feelings, not just what happened, because you will have
to see the complaining patient again” (Jamila, GP teacher). The colleagiality modelled
by GP teachers was not simply about workplace relations but about cultivating a
disposition to provide just-in-time backup for others and confirm one’s place in a wider
group of healthcare professionals. These designed participatory practices are well
documented and used throughout medical education (see for example Chen, Sheu,
O’Sullivan, Cate, & Teherani, 2014; Newton, Billett, & Ockerby, 2009) and registrars
reported understanding them as helping to balance autonomy – to avoid dangerous
isolation – and connectedness –to move from dependence on their GP teacher or
adhering to only one right answer.
In their interviews, carpentry employers/trainers and training advisors described
their role in terms of helping apprentices develop the practical skills, attitudes, values
and behaviours required to both complete the apprenticeship and become capable,
valuable contributors to the carpentry workforce. They described their role as having a
Page 12 of 19

significant pastoral dimension for young apprentices, helping them “grow up to be
proper human beings with a good trade behind them” (Travis, training advisor) and
being “mentor, mate, and discplinarian” (Jim, carpentry employer/trainer). Many also
reported pushing apprentices to take responsibility for important parts of projects and to
do “perk” jobs (paid or unpaid work for friends and relatives) so they would develop a
sense of autonomy and need less supervision on-site.
Engineering mentors reported attending to cadets’ enculturation into the
organisation and into engineering more generally. In one observed mentoring meeting,
the mentor told a cadet that learning included “taking an interest in projects that you are
not involved in directly” (Steve, engineering mentor). In interviews, many mentors
emphasised stressed their role in helping cadets develop a mind-set to cope with
everyday conflict and setbacks within project teams and in relation to public opinion. “A
lot of it is thankless and it doesn’t get all the glory…People don’t think about it until it
doesn’t work” (Alice, engineering mentor). Team leaders reported providing cadets with
a balance of support, deliberately mixing seniors and juniors in teams, “showing them
they’re trusted” (Geoff, team leader) and “not spoonfeeding them” (Daniel, team leader)
while also carefully limiting the risk to projects that comes with cadets’ inexperience.
Researchers observed and heard accounts of teachers and mentors using many of
the well-known pedagogies of vocational learning (Lucas, Spencer, & Claxton, 2012) in
the formal apprenticeship process. In particular general practice medicine made use of
reflection, coaching and simulation; carpentry made use of imitation, game playing and
deliberate practice; and engineering made use of enquiry, critical thinking and feedback.
Teachers’ and mentors’ pedagogies gained much traction in relation to soft skills
and dispositional development because similar pedagogies were integrated into their
fields’ everyday work. Many of these practices are notably reflective ones, used
explicitly for learning and to inform future decisions and actions (Reynolds, 2011).
They are closely connected to the curriculum and pedagogies of the apprenticeship
process as well as being integral to actually doing the job. So even once apprentices
complete their apprenticeship, their everday work will still involve these practices.
GPs routinely engaged in “corridor consultations” and had “open door” policies
where GPs could confer with each other on-the-fly or rehearse patient interactions. The
formative “assessment team” approach in carpentry apprenticeships created a way for
“windows on episodes of practice” (Eraut & Hirsch, 2007, p. 17) to be explored
playfully in everyday employer-apprentice conversations. The engineering cadetship’s
mentor meetings dovetailed with the everyday mode of collaboration and debriefing in
engineering work. However notably cadets reported struggling to align their off-site
lectures, focused on technical theory, with their everyday work. This is likely a
symptom of what Lucas et al (2014) argue is a mismatch between the engineering of
way of thinking and behaving and the approach actually taken in engineering education.
Page 13 of 19

The workplace structures, pedagogies, and interactions were not only the basis
for cultivating field-specific dispositions and giving life to occupation-appropriate soft
skills. They also helped create a meta-disposition of “agility”, where agile learners not
only continually seek opportunities for learning, but can make judgements about their
own learning (Rooney, Hopwood, Boud, & Kelly, 2015). The agility meta-disposition is
essentially a “learning to learn” disposition, which is sometimes also cited as the soft
skill of “lifelong learning”. Such a meta-disposition may well be “the ultimate life skill
for the 21st century” (Burgogne 1998 cited in Carr & Claxton, 2002, p. 9) because it can
shift apprentices’ knowledge and skills into “proactive knowledge” for deployment to
situations that cannot be fully known inadvance (Perkins, 2008). Good GPs, carpenters,
and engineering technicians therefore become disposed to “read” a range of situations as
they unfold in the field, anticipating, taking initiative, and responding in ways that are
aligned, ethical, and sustainable in their practice landscape.
In all three fields, the work involved some uncertainty which would require a
learning-to-learn or agility meta-disposition – for example, patient social as well as
health backgrounds, and the ambiguous relationship between symptoms and conditions
(GPs); new combinations of materials and design, and coordination of specialised
subcontractors (carpenters); groundworks, weather conditions, team relations, and
public engagement (engineering technicians). Indeed all three groups of apprentices and
workplace mentors and teachers made it clear that they expected to be actively and
continuously learning throughout their careers. This was not only about keeping up with
changes in knowledge, techniques, and standards, though this was acknowledged as
important. It was also frequently cited in terms of learning from patients, colleagues,
team members, and clients and learning about oneself through these interactions.
It is notable that the agility meta-disposition and learning-to-learn stance is
common to both identities – apprentice and experienced practitioner – and not
something to be developed later on attaining expert status. It is also significant that it
involves using mistakes and failures, as well as ordinary events, as learning
opportunities. As one GP teacher put it: “The most important attribute as a teacher is the
willingness to learn. And willingness to share failures, difficult things, and learn from
registrars” (Jamila). Similarly carpentry trainers and training advisors reported gaining
valuable refreshment of their own skills and knowledge from working with apprentices.
Mistakes were “valuable learning experiences and you don’t need to tell them off
because they know what they’ve done and they hate wasting materials” (Richard,
carpentry employer/trainer). Engineering mentors and team leaders described the
deliberate nature of making processes transparent to cadets, including their own
“constant struggles” (James, engineering team leader).
Conclusion: the employer’s role is crucial
This article provides an alternative to a focus on apprenticeship developing knowledge
and (hard) skills. It highlights the processes by which apprenticeship can also develop
Page 14 of 19

soft skills and dispositions. All of these dimensions – knowedge, (hard and soft) skills,
and dispositions – are needed to become, and continue being, a capable practitioner.
Framing GP, carpentry, and engineering technician apprentices’ most significant
learning experiences as “vocational thresholds” allows us to see that capability involves
facing personal, as well as professional, challenges about how to be (Vaughan et al.,
2015). In crossing these thresholds, identity becomes central, not simply an addition to
capability, and soft skills and dispositions are fundamental. This allows practitioners to
engage with the inherent uncertainty in their fields “as persons, not merely knowers”
(Barnett, 2004). In creating conditions and using specific pedagogies, employers,
teachers and mentors can surface the vocational thresholds that they, and apprentices,
face. This use of vocational thresholds serves as a way to understand the socio-cultural
dimensions of apprenticeship and enhance development of dispositions and soft skills.
Workplace affordances (Billett, 2001) and a workplace environment’s location
on an “expansive-restrictive continuum” (Fuller & Unwin, 2003) are key to shaping the
possibilities for soft skill and dispositional development and deployment. Soft skills are
most meaningful in a context and they need dispositions to take them there, from the
abstract to the meaningful. The communication (soft) skills of GPs and carpenters are
different; their respective dispositions and attention to the context and purpose of the
work give life to them.
Because dispositions involve values and attitudes, they are comparatively stable
over time, similar to personality traits (Matteson et al., 2016). However their actual
deployment, and the discovery of their value in different fields, is not a given; that
depends on how different environments frame, afford, and encourage this (Carr &
Claxton, 2002). In other words, soft skills like teamwork skills do not show up if
situations do not include interesting and challenging teamwork interactions and projects.
The disposition of conscientiousness may not be mobilised if sensitivity to getting
things right is not recognised or rewarded. In some instances employees may be
erroneously blamed for soft skill deficits which are really due to poor job quality and
disaffection leading to “soft skill withdrawal” (Hurrell, 2016). Being willing, as well as
able, does not just depend on the individual. Soft skills and disposition development is
dependent on informal learning and that in turn depends on how work is organised and
jobs are designed (Keep, 2015).
It is worth noting that the industries in this research are regulated industries to
varying extents and have a history of strong collaboration between the education
system, employers, and industry associations, and of providing in-house training. We
also saw that the “sustainability” of the curriculum and pedagogic practices (Billett &
Choy, 2013) depended on a close relationship with what people actually do at work,
regardless of whether they are apprentices or experienced practitioners. So this account
is able to provide another perspective to the sentiment in so many employer surveys and
Page 15 of 19

media reports of feeling alienated from education systems (Keep, 2015) and
experiencing soft skill gaps and job candidates lacking the right stuff.
With support and capability development in their own internal systems,
employers might see themselves as members of the education community, rather than
recipients of education’s “outputs”. They could be in a position to model and/or provide
support for the required soft skills and dispositions within the context of learning-
friendly structures and pedagogies. Employers’ role in fostering soft skills and
dispositions, especially a lifelong learning disposition, is not only crucial for apprentices
looking for direction; it is also crucial for the renewal and further development of
employers’ own knowledge, skills, and dispositions, not to mention business survival.
References
AlphaBeta. (2016). The New Basics: Big data reveals the skills young people need for the New Work
Order. Melbourne: Foundation for Young Australians.
Barnett, R. (2004). Learning for an unknown future. Higher Education Research and Development, 23(3),
247–260.
Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded Cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59(1), 617–645.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093639
Bell, R., & Loon, M. (2015). The impact of critical thinking disposition on learning using business
simulations. The International Journal of Management Education, 13(3), 362–370.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2015.10.003
Billett, S. (2001). Learning Through Work: Workplace Affordances and Individual Engagement. Journal
of Workplace Learning, 13(5), 209–214.
Billett, S. (2016). Apprenticeship as a mode of learning and model of education. Education + Training,
58(6), 613–628.
Billett, S., & Choy, S. (2013). Learning through work: emerging perspectives and new challenges. Journal
of Workplace Learning, 25(4), 264–276.
Carr, M., & Claxton, G. L. (2002). Tracking the development of learning dispositions. Assessment in
Education, 9, 9–37.
Carr, M., Smith, A. B., Duncan, J., Jones, C., Lee, W., & Marshall, K. (2010). Learning in the Making.
Disposition and Design in Early Childhood. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Chan, S. (2013). Learning Through Apprenticeship: Belonging to a Workplace, Becoming and Being.
Vocations and Learning, 6(3), 367–383.
Chan, S. (2014). Crafting an Occupational Identity: Learning the Precepts of Craftsmanship Through
Apprenticeship. Vocations and Learning, 7(3), 313–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-014-9117-9
Chen, H. C., Sheu, L., O’Sullivan, P., Cate, O. ten, & Teherani, A. (2014). Legitimate workplace roles and
activities for early learners. Medical Education, (48), 136–145.
Cimatti, B. (2016). Definition, Development, Assessment of Soft Skills and Their Role for the Quality of
Organizations and Enterprises. International Journal for Quality Research, 10(1), 97–130.
Page 16 of 19

Cinque, M. (2016). ‘Lost in Translation’. Soft Skills Development in European Countries. Tuning Journal
for Higher Education, 3(2), 389–427.
Cunningham, W., & Villasenor, P. (2016). Employer Voices, Employer Demands, and Implications for
Public Skills Development Policy Connecting the Labor and Education Sectors (Working paper No.
7682). Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
Eraut, M., & Hirsch, W. (2007). The Significance of Workplace Learning for Individuals, Groups and
Organisations. Oxford: ESRC Centre on Skills, Knowledge and Organisational Performance (SKOPE).
Fuller, A., & Unwin, L. (2003). Learning as apprentices in the contemporary UK workplace: creating and
managing expansive and restrictive participation. Journal of Education and Work, 16(4), 407–426.
Fuller, A., & Unwin, L. (2011). Apprenticeship as an evolving model of learning. Journal of Vocational
Education and Training, 63(3), 261–266.
Gilbert, J. (2005). Catching the Knowledge Wave? The Knowledge Society and the Future of Education.
Wellington: NZCER Press.
Gilbert, J., & Bull, A. (2012). Swimming out of our depth? Leading learning in 21st century schools.
Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.
Guile, D. (2011). Apprenticeship as a Model of Vocational ‘Formation’ and ‘Reformation’: The Use of
Foundation Degrees in the Aircraft Engineering Industry. Journal of Vocational Education and Training,
63(3), 451–464.
Halpern, R. (2009). The Means to Grow Up. Reinventing Apprenticeship as a Developmental Support in
Adolescence. New York: Routledge.
Harrison, B., & Clayton, P. H. (2012). Reciprocity as a Threshold Concept for Faculty Who Are Learning
to Teach with Service-Learning. Journal of Faculty Development, 26(3), 29–33.
Hodge, S. (2010). Trainers and transformation: Facilitating the ‘dark side’ of vocational learning.
International Journal of Training Research, 8, 53–62.
Hurrell, S. A. (2016). Rethinking the soft skills deficit blame game: Employers, skills withdrawal and the
reporting of soft skill gaps. Human Relations, 69(3), 605–628.
Keep, E. (2015). Unlocking workplace skills: What is the role for employers? (Policy report). Oxford:
Centre on Skills, Knowledge & Organisational Performance, Oxford University.
Kusmiersczyk, E., & Medford, L. (2015). 2015 Students and Graduates Employability Skills Survey.
Wellington: Victoria University of Wellington.
LaBelle, J. T., & Belknap, G. (2016). Reflective journaling: Fostering dispositional development in
preservice teachers. Reflective Practice, 17(2), 125–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2015.1134473
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge, MA:
Cambridge University Press.
Lucas, B., Hanson, J., & Claxton, G. (2014). Thinking like an engineer. Implications for the education
system (A report for the Royal Academy of Engineering Standing Committee for Education and
Training). London: Royal Academy of Engineering.
Lucas, B., & Spencer, E. (2016). A Practical Guide to Craftsmanship: Creating the Craftsmen and Women
that Britain Needs. London: City & Guilds.
Lucas, B., Spencer, E., & Claxton, G. (2012). How to teach vocational education. A theory of vocational
pedagogy. London: City & Guilds Centre for Skills Development.
Matteson, M. L., Anderson, L., & Boyden, C. (2016). ‘Soft Skills’: A Phrase in Search of Meaning.
Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 16(1), 71–88.
Page 17 of 19

Meidl, T., & Baumann, B. (2015). Extreme Make Over: Disposition Development of Pre-Service
Teachers. Journal of Community Engagement & Scholarship, 8(1), 90–97.
Meyer, J. H. F., Knight, D. B., Callagahan, D., P., & Baldock, T. E. (2015). An empirical exploration of
metacognitive assessment activities in a third-year civil engineering hydralics course. European Journal of
Engineering Education, 40(3), 309–327.
New Zealand Government. (2016a, May 19). Budget 2016: $14.4m for more apprentices. Retrieved 10
November 2016, from http://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/budget-2016-144m-more-apprentices
New Zealand Government. (2016b, November 9). Government targets 50,000 apprentices. Retrieved 10
November 2016, from http://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/government-targets-50000-apprentices
Newton, J. M., Billett, S., & Ockerby, C. M. (2009). Journeying through clinical placements--an
examination of six student cases. Nurse Education Today, 29(6), 630–634.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2009.01.009
O’Neill, T. A. ., Deacon, A., Larson, N. L. ., Hoffart, G. C. ., Brennan, R. W. ., Eggermont, M., &
Rosehart, W. (2015). Life-long learning, conscientious disposition, and longitudinal measures of
academic engagement in engineering design teamwork. Learning & Individual Differences, 39, 124–131.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.03.022
Patil, A., & Eijkman, H. (2012). Megatrends in Engineering and Technology Education: A Call for the
Communicative Imagination. In A. Patil, H. Eijkman, & E. Bhattacharyya (Eds.), New Media
Communication Skills for Engineers and IT Professionals: Trans-National and Trans-Cultural Demands
(pp. 1–8). IGI Global.
Perkins, D. (2008). Beyond Understanding. In R. Land, J. Meyer, & J. Smith (Eds.), Threshold Concepts
Within the Disciplines. Rotterdam: Sense Publishing.
Perkins, D., Jay, E., & Tishman, S. (1993). Beyond abilities: a dispositional theory of thinking. Merrill-
Palmer Quarterly, 39, 1–21.
Reynolds, M. (2011). Reflective practice: origins and interpretations. Action Learning: Research and
Practice, 8(1), 5–13.
Rooney, D., Hopwood, N., Boud, D., & Kelly, M. (2015). The role of simulation in pedagogies of higher
education for the health professions: through a practice-based lens. Vocations and Learning, 8, 269–285.
Rose, M. (2005). The Mind at Work: Valuing the Intelligence of the American Worker. New York:
Penguin Books.
Rychen, D. S., & Salganik, L. H. (2003). Key Competencies for a Successful Life and a Well-Functioning
Society. Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Retrieved from
https://us.hogrefe.com/shop/key-competencies-for-a-successful-life-and-a-well-functioning-society.html
The New Zealand Labour Party. (2016). The Future of Work. Wellington: The New Zealand Labour Party.
Timmermans, J. A. (2014). Identifying threshold concepts in the careers of educational developers.
International Journal for Academic Development, 19(4), 305–317.
UK Commission for Employment and Skills (UKCES). (2013). UK Commission’s Employer Skills
Survey 2013. Wath-upon-Dearne: UKCES.
van de Wiel, M. W. J., van den Bossche, P., Janssen, S., & Jossberger, H. (2010). Exploring deliberate
practice in medicine: how do physicians learn in the workplace? Advances in Health Science Education,
16(1), 81–95.
Vaughan, K., Bonne, L., & Eyre, J. (2015). Knowing Practice: Vocational Thresholds for GPs, Carpenters,
and Engineering Technicians. Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research and Ako
Aotearoa.
Page 18 of 19

Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2015). Learning in a Landscape of Practice: A Framework. In
E. Wenger-Trayner, M. Fenton-O’Creevy, S. Hutchinson, C. Kubiak, & B. Wenger-Trayner (Eds.),
Learning in Landscapes of Practice. Boundaries, Identity, and Knowledgeability in Practice-Based
Learning (pp. 13–30). Oxon, UK: Routledge.
Page 19 of 19