A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Work-Based Learning Studies

• In Event: Career and Technical Education and Work-based Learning: a Meta-analysis and Current Research in Three States

Abstract

Work-based learning (WBL) incorporates authentic, real-world work exposure into a learner’s educational experience. WBL is a prevalent and increasingly used strategy in the United States, and current understanding of WBL impacts on participant outcomes is limited. To better provide insights for practitioners and policymakers seeking to optimize their WBL programming, the CTE Research Network conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to document impacts of WBL programs.Our analysis was guided by the following research questions: 1) What are the impacts of WBL for different participant groups—secondary education students, postsecondary education students, and adults in training programs? 2) What are the impacts of different types of WBL (e.g., apprenticeships, service learning) on participant outcomes? And 3) What are the impacts of WBL on various outcome domains (e.g. academic achievement, employment)?We comprehensively searched, catalogued, and synthesized all available evidence from eligible WBL program evaluations. We examined existing research on WBL conducted between 2003 and 2023. We screened studies on their: (1) relevance to WBL, (2) inclusion of a quantitative analysis, (3) comparison of two groups, and (4) inclusion of adequate quantitative data to calculate the effect of WBL education. After extracting and validating data, we used state-of-the-art meta-analytic methods to compute descriptive summaries of focal variables, examine patterns of existing evidence, and analyze data to quantify the strength, significance, and variability of WBL impacts on various outcomes.We found that evidence on student outcomes from comparison group design WBL studies is scarce. Of the 7,015 potentially relevant studies returned by our literature search, only 21 unique studies evaluated differences between comparison participant groups (WBL participation versus business as usual) and provided enough effect size information to be included in our meta-analysis. Therefore, our inferences are restricted to a narrow set of participant groups, WBL types, and outcomes. Yet, the evidence we do have is promising.First, we found eligible WBL programs had positive and statistically significant impacts on secondary and postsecondary education participants. Evidence on impacts for adults was inconclusive. Second, internships were the most common type of WBL and showed positive, statistically significant impacts. Other WBL types were less studied and evidence on impacts was mostly positive but inconclusive. Third, academic achievement and advancement, employment, and social and emotional health were the most studied outcomes. Eligible WBL programs showed positive, statistically significant impacts on academic achievement and advancement and social and emotional health, with positive impacts for employment approaching statistical significance. Impacts on other participant outcomes were less studied and were positive but not statistically significant.This synthesis has implications for practitioners, researchers and policy developers. We recommend that: 1) Practitioners continue to develop WBL programs that connect learners’ education to authentic work experiences and develop coherent data systems to track outcomes; 2) Researchers conduct comparison group studies that examine the impacts of different WBL types on different outcome domains across various participant groups; and 3) Policymakers support coherent data systems, require rigorous causal evaluations of WBL programs, and invest in WBL simulations when direct workplace training is limited.

Author

• Kristin Kelley, American Institutes for Research
  Presenting Author