Vocational High Schools Apprenticeship Program, in Greece: Application, Recent Facts and Views Adult Education, Post-Secondary

Apprenticeship in Greek vocational high schools started as a pilot program in 2017. The number of apprentices is gradually increasing, Greece followed the dual German apprenticeship system, when the students complete successfully their studies obtaining a degree of level 5, according to the European Qualifications Framework. The purpose of the project was to capture the views and experience of apprentices and employers regarding their involvement with the above apprenticeship program, during the period 2020-2021. Structured questionnaires were appropriately used and were completed by 622 apprentices and 265 employers. Factor analysis reduced the variables and was followed by further investigation with chi-square. To test the linear relationship between the variables of the research queries, the Pearson correlation coefficient was applied. Finally, by using the Mann-Whitney (U-test), a significant difference between the apprentices’ and the employers’ responses was found. Main Results: 89% of the apprentices and 78.9% of employers were very satisfied with their participation in the apprenticeship program. 71% of apprentices and 81.5% of employers were very satisfied with the overall quality of the apprenticeship program. Conclusions: The majority of apprentices and employers seemed satisfied regarding the apprenticeship program quality. The knowledge and skills were acquired by the students during the apprenticeship which help them to gain a place in the labor market. Hosting companies provided the appropriate equipment; all safety regulations and the employees who trained the apprentices had the necessary qualifications in the same or related subject.


Introduction
The political scene in Greece radically changed after the outbreak of the fiscal and economic crisis and the inclusion of Greece in the European Financial Stability Mechanism in 2010 (CEDEFOP, 2014a). The economic downturn has exacerbated chronic problems in the labor market, leading to rising social inequalities and youth unemployment. However, Greek society is characterized by a strong demand for university studies, while vocational education has had little impact on young people so far. As an expecting result, Greece has produced a plethora of scientists, but no sufficiently specialized workforce that can support the country's production and economy.
Globalization, the development of technology, the aging of the population and the need to integrate thousands of refugees and immigrants into the education system as well as the labor market have created unprecedented conditions of economic uncertainty and unemployment, not only in Greece (13%, November 2021) but throughout all European countries (CEDEFOP, 2016).
In order to reduce high unemployment, the E.U. countries have jointly decided to take drastic measures. Despite the present recession, countries such as Austria, Germany, etc. managed to keep youth unemployment on a low scale (CEDEFOP, 2014b). This achievement is partly attributed to: a) application of apprenticeship programs; and b) dual education systems that significantly increased interest attracting more young people.
According to Hellenic Ministry of Education (2016), Apprenticeship Program (A.P.) defines the educational system in which learning time alternates between work and educational structures.
A.P. is considered a very effective learning method, since it provides young people and adults with the skills that current employers demand, thus facilitating the transition from school to work (CEDEFOP, 2020). It further enhances cooperation between governments, social partners, employers and educational institutions, which explains in a way why its revival is a global trend nowadays(CEDEFOP, 2014b). A.P. has different characteristics throughout countries. However, CEDEFOP (European Center for the Development of Vocational Training) has identified some common elements (CEDEFOP, 2021). The A.P.: • Is supported by a legal framework; • Leads to the acquisition of formal professional qualifications; • Is based on an organized alternation between learning in the workplace and at school; • Presupposes a commitment for a minimum duration of the program that makes the exchange of training meaningful. and one semester at work. Studies in these schools are part of non-formal education.

Purpose of the Research
The purpose of the present project was to investigate the attitudes, views and living experiences of both apprentices and employers on A.P. of the Ministry of Education, with the main task to capture, evaluate and improve these progressive programs for the future. More specifically, present research was based on two main pillars where students and employers were asked to reply: 1) How satisfied are they with the benefits obtained from their participation in AP? 2) How satisfied are they with the quality of whole A.P.?

Method
Appropriately designed questionnaires for employers and apprentices were used G. Vlassopoulos et al. as research tools. In the compilation of the questionnaires, clear closed-ended questions were used, using simple language and the existence of appropriate explanations. The questionnaires consisted of three parts (Table 2). Table 2. Structure of the questionnaire. The answers were given on a Likert ten-point scale, where it was graded from "1" corresponding to "not at all satisfied" to "10" corresponding to "completely satisfied". Where necessary, the ten-point scale was converted to three-point scale. The max time to complete the questionnaires was 15 minutes.

Parts
Type of questions # of questions

Validity Check and Reliability Check
The questionnaires in a pilot phase were distributed to 10 students of the apprenticeship department of (V.S/EPA.L) of Paros and were answered in the presence of the researcher in the school room, after the necessary clarifications were made.
The number of students was considered satisfactory for the impartial and unbiased submission of their views (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2017). The reliability factor (Cronbach's alpha) was determined to check if the questions were highly consistent with each other (Markos, 2012). C) The variables that reduce the reliability of the survey and were present in the questionnaires in the pilot phase were removed from the reliability analysis table and specifically from the column "Alpha if the item was deleted".

Statistical Data Analysis
Data was analyzed using SPSS 25.0 (academic license). Initially, a descriptive statistical analysis was performed to display the demographic and other selected characteristics of the respondents. Then, factor analysis was performed in order to reduce the variables (research questions) to only the important factors. Factors are real latent variables, which cause variance between variables. The goal is to study all the existing variance in order to "extract" the largest percentage of covariance from the least possible factors (Tsaousis, 2011).
In addition, the chi-square test was applied to investigate the most important correlations between the variables (Siomkos & Vasilikopoulou, 2005) that make up: 1) the degree of satisfaction from the benefits-benefits offered by the A.P.
participation; and 2) the degree of satisfaction from the quality of the A.P. as a whole. Pearson's chi-squared test is used to determine whether there is a statistically significant difference between the expected and the observed frequencies in one or more categories of a contingency table, as shown in Table 3 (Menexes, 2015).

Ethical Ethics
The ethics committee of the University of West Attica in Athens approved the research. Students and employers were informed of the purpose of the research and agreed to participate. It was clarified that their participation in the research

Results Analysis
For each research question, the variables/questions were analyzed using the methodology of factor analysis. The aim was to look at the interaction (of variables) with each other in terms of existing covariance, in order to focus on the variables that play a key role in answering the research questions.
The two research questions consist of the same variables and we tried to confirm: a) the statistical significance of the data; and b) the sincerity of the answers.
Theoretically, someone who is satisfied with their participation in the A.P.  Table 3. For practical reasons, the data of the table are presented in a three-point Likert scale. The responses from these tables were summarized and transferred to Table 4 and Table 5.
Chi-square statistical tests were applied to each data table (Table 4 and Table   5), because there was a large number of data. The boards are made in such a way that we can easily compare how satisfied the students and employers were.
From the factor analysis of the research question A, the variables included in the first four components of the analysis interpret 64.167% of the total variance and are considered as the most important variables for the interpretation of the research question, in terms of students. The most important variables are 22 in total and are indicated by an asterisk (*) in Table 4.
Regarding the employers, the factor analysis showed that the first 7 factors interpret 65.904% of the total variance and 22 variables are considered as the most important for the interpretation of the research question A. These variables are denoted by (**) in Table 4.
From the factor analysis of the research question B, the variables included in the first four components of the analysis interpret 63.869% of the total variance and are considered as the most important variables for the interpretation of the research question, in terms of students. These variables are 21 in total and are indicated by an asterisk (*) in Table 5.
As for the employers, the factor analysis showed that the first 7 factors interpret 66.107% of the total variance and consist of 18 important variables. These variables are denoted by (**) in Table 5.   In Table 4, the variables presented with (A) for apprentices or (E) for employers have the highest relevance with each other, with Extraction value of Factor Analysis greater than 0.6 (Bersimis, 2020) and value of the statistical criterion Kaiser Meyer Olkin very high 0.962 and 0.965 for the research question A while 0.905 and 0.906 for the B, students and employers respectively.
The chi-square test performed on the same employer and student variables showed a P value > 0.05, therefore: 1) the populations (apprentices and employers) from which the independent samples came, are represented in equal percentages in the survey (test of homogeneity of independent populations) (Zavras, 2004) and 2) the populations are independent of each other (independence control) (Antoniou & Costoglou, 2017). While the chi-square informs the researcher about the intensity of the variables, it does not give any indication for the direction of the correlation (Siomkos & Vasilikopoulou, 2005). To test the linear relationship between the variables of the research queries, the Pearson correlation coefficient was applied (Table 6). The table above presents only the values of the coefficient that have a high and low linear correlation with the research questions. There is no negative sign in the results of the correlation coefficient, meaning that the variables have a positive correlation with each other (when one variable increases, the other also increases).

Comparison of Student and Employer Responses
The Mann-Whitney or "U" test was applied to compare the students and employers answers (comparison of attitudes, perceptions and habits) (Siomkos & Vasilikopoulou, 2005). At first glance, Table 4 and Table 5 show that the answers (in percentages) of students and employers were almost the same. All the comparisons with P value < 0.05 are considered statistically significant (    Table 7 shows in bold all the values of P < 0.05 which means that in these proposals there is a statistically significant difference in the answers given by apprentices and employers. Table 8 both summarizes and analyzes the results for the two research project questions from both apprentices and employers. G. Vlassopoulos et al. Table 8. Total results of each variable from the statistical analysis. Where there is (*) the variables coincided, without coming to a conclusion. In the questions with (√) the variables interpreted the research questions satisfactorily. In the questions with (-) either the variables did not satisfactorily interpret the research questions, or the answers of the apprentices and employers were different. In column (1) the variable contains a significant percentage of covariance. It contains information related to the other variables. In column (2) the variable satisfactorily interprets the research question Α. In column (3) the variable satisfactorily interprets the research question Β. In column (4) employers and apprentices answered almost the same research questions (10% margin). In column (5) [results from Table 7 (U-test) are also contained)] it seems that there was a statistically significant difference in the answers of employers and apprentices.
(1) Each variable contains a percentage of covariance (2) Degree of satisfaction from the benefits of the apprenticeship (3) Degree of satisfaction with the quality of the program.
(4) Employers and apprentices answered almost the same to the research questions (10% margin).
(5) There is a statistically significant difference in the responses of employers and apprentices Apprentices Employers Apprentices Employers 1 Query Table 4 2 Query Table 5 1 The selected workplaces were deemed suitable to train the apprentices (Question 12) since they had all the necessary material, technical infrastructure and the required equipment (Question 8). In addition, safety and hygiene rules were applied in the workplace by all staff (Question 15). There was guidance from experienced colleagues (Question 10) with studies in the same or related subject with the vocation (Question 13). Colleagues treated apprentices as equal members of the group (Question 23). The cooperation between the employees was quite good (Question 9) and in case the apprentices met difficulties during the A.P., there was support and encouragement from all the members of the team (Question 11).
It is worth noting that: a) there was no required correlation between the curriculum and the subject of employment in the workplace (Question 3); and b) school knowledge was not relevant to the knowledge provided in the workplace (Question 21).
There were many cases where different views were expressed from the apprentices and employers. In order to reflect the quality of the whole A.P., the apprentices considered it is important to receive opportunities for initiatives that would familiarize them with the vocation (Question 7). Employers, on the other hand, considered initiative-taking to be insignificant, because they want the apprentices to deal strictly with only what was assigned to them.
The apprentices considered that it is important to use the leave to which they are entitled (Question 14) but not the employers, although they consider the students as equal members of the team.
In addition, as reported by all and especially the employers the apprentices lacked knowledge and skills that made it difficult for them to exercise the vocation (Question 17). Employers consider it important that at the end of the A.P., the apprentices have a full understanding of the nature of the vocation (Question 26), which is related to the professionalism of employers and their desire to train the staff properly.
The benefits of participating in the A.P. (Research question A) are directly related to the degree of education and training of apprentices in the workplace (Question 29). For employers, apprentices were not fully trained in the vocation. However, we can mention that for the employers the quality of the education they offered (research question B) was not related to the training of the students and finally to what the apprentice obtains (Question 29).
Employers considered that there was room for improvement in the context of continue their work after the end of the A.P. The apprentices were not satisfied with the salary they received for their work hours (Question 19), while the employers considered that the salaries given were satisfactory.
It was found that for both groups of respondents, the employment of apprentices in real working conditions (Question 25) is not considered important for the research questions. Obviously, it was taken for granted that working conditions in the workplace were real.
Finally, apprentices had few probabilities to retain their working position after the end of the program (Question 20).

Suggestions for Improving A.P.
Present research showed that apprentices and employers were satisfied with the A.P., however, a number of critical suggestions for further A.P. improvement and efficacy, are listed shortly below: • Employers should encourage apprentices to take initiatives; • Apprentices should not fall victims to exploitation by employers; • Apprentices have to be granted the leave which they are entitled to; • School has to fill the gaps that arise in the cognitive subjects of the apprentices through courses of study; • School and supervisors should coordinate more often with the employer; • Visits of the supervisors to the workplace are substantial and constructive; • Basic salary should be increased to attract more apprentices; • Award premiums establishment e.g. reducing taxation, etc.; • Employers should regularly inform the Ministry over the latest developments in their vocation, for the improvement of the curricula, since the vocational education and A.P. must be up-to-date and meet the changing needs of the labor market; • Knowledge offered by the school has to be relevant with the knowledge/skills offered in the workplace; • Apprentices should be employed only in positions that are directly related to the vocation; • A.P. should substantially reduce existing bureaucracy for participation in the program.

Author Statement
I formally declare that academic ethics are observed, supporting the strict study style. No published or written content is included by anyone other, than what is expressly stated in the paper.