For the two worksite field days, the participants were given directions to the site and were told to make their own way to the site on time and ready for work. The day was organized into two parts, HEO field assessment and basic hand tools activities. While one group worked on the equipment, the other group worked with the hand tools and then switched. The heavy equipment used at the site was an excavator and a dozer, because they are commonly used on worksites. The participants were assessed on these machines for overall operator potential, including performing a pre-operation inspection of the equipment. The field assessment tool used was provided by OETIM and has been a resource in the development of a new criteria-based field assessment (Appendix C). Good news for all when, based on their observation of the participants’ skills on the site, A.P.E. Construction asked for a list of the participants for possible employment opportunities.
The project was evaluated on two levels, participant results and program evaluation. Although the participant results varied, eight out of ten were positively assessed as potential heavy equipment operators or skilled labourers. Two of the participants presented barriers to full employability. Since the completion of the course, two participants are confirmed to have found employment in operating heavy equipment at an entry-level. At the end of May, the other participants had not been contacted for follow-up.
The evaluation of the program was based on feedback from participants, instructors, employers, and overall project partners. The participants felt that the content was very relevant and reflective of working in construction, but anticipated more seat time on the equipment. They received a very clear picture of the real world of working in construction and benefited directly from Henry Borger of Borland Construction, an employer who came to speak with them.
The instructors recommended significant changes in the duration, content, and assessment process. The pre-training assessment was designed to identify participants with some experience in the industry. As a result, previous knowledge expedited learning, which indicated that the program could be condensed considerably and could be delivered in one week rather that two.
Therefore, with the screening of potential applicants and condensing the program, the training cost would be reduced and targeted to the workers who are assessed to be suitable for working in construction. The modularized program was designed to follow the principles of prior learning assessment and recognition. This allowed participants who previously obtained certification with WHMIS and First Aid to be exempt from that section of the program.