# **5.2 Apprentices’ Performance**

Section 4.2 showed that, despite an increase in the total number of apprentices entering firms, there is only a weak increase in the total number of days worked, but a large increase in the value of work by apprentices in firms. In this section, we further explain these results by looking at disaggregated data at the apprentice level. The upper panel of Table 8 showed results estimating equation 8 with dependent variables for apprentice attributes. The purpose was to document selection into apprenticeship. The middle panel of Table 8 presents the results of the estimation of equation 8 on a set variable obtained from the follow-up firm survey. This allows documenting differences by type of apprentices at the moment of the follow-up survey. These differences cannot be given a causal interpretation. They can be explained by selection effects, by some of the effects of program participation, but also by the difference in experience across apprentices.<sup>38</sup> . Still, these results are useful to shed further light on the aggregate impacts observed in firms.

We first analyze apprentices’ participation in firm activities and their productivity. We find two main results. First, absenteeism is more important among formal apprentices than other apprentices: traditional apprentices in control firms worked on average 20.14 days, but the average for formal apprentices is smaller by 7.09 days. Second, formal apprentices are more productive than traditional apprentices in control firms. The value of tasks performed the last day of work is on average FCFA 1,296 for traditional apprentices in control firms. It is higher by FCFA 839 for formal apprentices.<sup>39</sup> To analyze differences in performance, we build several indices of skills: a technical skill index, a behavioral skill index and a learning skill index.<sup>40</sup> Results show that formal out taking place was not associated with stronger selection of a particular profile of apprentice.

> 38The inflow of formal apprentices took place within six month after the start of the experiment, while other apprentices entered over the whole 20 month period (see figure 1).

> 39The table shows that traditional apprentices who entered treatment firms are also more productive than traditional apprentices in control firms. There might be various explanations for the differences in performance. First, employers might have selected traditional apprentices more carefully in treatment firms (particularly since substitution effects are observed within these firms, as we already documented). However, results in the upper panel of Table 8 do not suggest strong selection effects. Very few significant differences are observed between traditional apprentices in treatment and control firms. Second, formal apprentices are found to be more productive, and this may spill over to traditional apprentices.

40 Skills are measured using a set of questions asked to the employer about each apprentice. The technical skills measure includes two general questions about how well apprentices master techniques, tools and safety procedures. It also includes questions specific to each trade: for each trade, we worked with the national training agency (AGEFOP) to identify a list of 2 to 7 technical tasks and asked the employer how well each apprentice performed these tasks (on a scale from 0 to 10). The apprentice-level technical skill index is the average of the scores obtained across the trade-specific questions and the two general questions. The learning 34