The perception that the United States is falling behind in the skills race has prompted experts to look abroad for policy ideas. Of particular interest has been the German "dual system," which alternates 2 to 3 years of highly structured work-based training with classroom teaching for young people, beginning at age 16. Buoyed by the success of the German example, enthusiasm for a U.S. youth apprenticeship program has soared, despite considerable disagreement as to what, precisely, "apprenticeship" would mean in the American context. President Clinton has announced a goal of creating an apprenticeship system that covers all 50 states, but budget constraints mean allocating just over $5 million per state--not nearly enough for a national system. To produce a large return on this relatively small federal investment, the administration must decide which objectives to pursue and then set out a clear strategy for achieving them. Three criteria can guide policymakers. First, the system must have enough status to attract and motivate young people. Second, the system must provide incentives and institutional support for employers to offer high quality youth training. Third, the system must be feasible. One youth training scheme would link youth apprenticeships with the new administration's broader strategy for helping U.S. industry compete in a high tech global economy. A key part of this technology strategy is to use federal matching funds to build a national network of manufacturing extension centers and create a new set of regional technology alliances. The capacity of firms to use the services thus provided, however, would depend on the skills of their workers. Linking youth apprenticeships and lifelong worker training programs with these other services would enhance both the use of the services and the relevance and quality of training. Setting high national standards would ensure quality of training and make apprenticeships more attractive to employers. (20 notes) (YLB)