Search

At first glance, the physical design of a setting ostensibly seems routine and neutral. However, it tends to powerfully govern who goes where and who can access certain places. Much of the literature on exclusion within education settings often overlook this significance. This paper therefore seeks to rectify this by examining exclusion by design and allocation of physical space at The Site, a fictional name used for the large general further education (FE) college in England's East Region. Adopting a case study approach over two academic years (2013–2015), qualitative research was undertaken with seven tutors and twenty-six so-called NEET and disengaged youth. Drawing on Wacquant's theoretical concept of the ghetto, my key findings demonstrated territorial exclusion by design: this employability course was delivered in Q-Block, a temporary prefabricated building positioned out of sight and primarily used to deliver programmes for disabled, mature and disengaged youth on the fringes of education. This article concludes that, whilst existing research on policy and outcomes is useful in understanding the negative educational outcomes of stigmatised youth, a sharper focus is needed on wider social processes and exclusionary continuities in seeking to elucidate how governance processes contribute to their social and spatial marginalisation in education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The words, 'Sorry, you're not Black enough' painfully alerted me to the domineering presence of institutional racism at the University of Cape Town (UCT), a prestigious university which customarily reserved access for White, affluent and international students. Positioned at the intersections of race, gender and social class, this study draws on Critical Race Theory's counter-storytelling, using autoethnographic research to critically reflect on my childhood, Social Work studies and career in South Africa and England. The paper reveals painful experiences of microaggressions and overt racism in social work practice, but also celebratory moments of good practice, academic success and individual resilience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Self-governance and responsibilisation are integral to Basic Key Skills Builder (BKSB) assessments and Functional Skills qualifications. However, very little is known of its neoliberalist effects and the governance practices of tutors teaching disengaged youth taking Functional Skills as part of the overall employability certificate. Adopting a case study approach within a large further education (FE) college, qualitative research was conducted over two academic years (2013–2015) with tutors and students enrolled on the Level 1 Achieving Skills Course, an employability course designed as a Raising of Participation Age (RPA) re-engagement provision to engage former NEET and disengaged youth in FE. Drawing on Foucault's theory of governmentality for analysis, key empirical findings revealed chaos, controversy and contradictions inasmuch as exposing the problematic ways in which course tutors implemented BKSB assessments and Functional Skills. Evidently, BKSB and Functional Skills operated as powerful, governance mechanisms of management ordering students according to their capabilities whilst simultaneously bringing students face-to-face with their individual shortcomings. The paper concludes that although in principle the participants were positioned in a setting which could ideally offer them a through-way from pre-vocational studies to university or apprenticeships, in actual reality this opportunity was not granted for many participants. This was exacerbated by the fact that this qualification held lowered academic status. It is on this basis that I argue for a revamp and restructure of the educational framework so that it integrates and position pre-vocational courses as the first formal rung of qualifications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The role of the education sector has expanded into areas of social welfare. A key influence, relates to the disintegration of public-funded organisations responsible for mental health and social welfare provision. This article considers the policy drive for a broadened welfare mandate within education settings. Drawing on illustrations of welfare-orientated teaching, the article explores the extent to which a welfare agenda influenced teaching practise and education provision for marginalised youth enrolled on an employability course in an FE college. During academic years 2013 to 2015, empirical research was conducted with seven tutors and 26 students enrolled on a Level 1 employability course at a large FE college in South East England. Key findings discovered that there was a disproportionate focus on welfare duties when teaching youth with complex backgrounds. Fieldwork data mainly highlighted complications, contradictions and the counter-productive nature of welfare-orientated teaching: it gave rise to 'social welfare tutors'; they have a diminished academic focus and were wholly engaged in welfare duties, reducing the course to something akin to therapy and welfare practise. Despite good intentions, generally, such practise directly reinforced disadvantage and marginalised participants from essential provision that granted access to a range of further study and training opportunities within the setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

RPA (Raising of Participation Age) legislation re-positioned all youth in England to participate in post-16 education and training, the ultimate aim to develop ‘human capital’. However, how does RPA play out in practice with previously NEET (not in education, employment or training) and so-called disengaged youth engaged on a Level 1 pre-vocational course? Empirical research was conducted at a large general further education (FE) college in south-east England, named The Site with seven tutors and twenty-six students from the 2013-14 and 2014-15 cohorts. Key findings revealed ‘warehousing’ appeared to be the main purpose of education for these students. Whilst student conduct was observably loud and disruptive, it arguably overshadowed concerns over pedagogical activities and teaching practices, reproducing negative classroom conditions which consolidated stereotypical beliefs that with these particular students, there was a reluctance to learn - in effect, legitimising warehousing practice. This study brings into focus a counter discourse: structurally, the system is producing the kind of provision reflected on this course. Hence, creating and consolidating NEET identities rather than providing conditions in which new learner identities can emerge and benefit individuals themselves and (to use the neo-liberal line of reasoning) to the ‘economy’. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Raising of Participation Age (RPA) legislation mandates English youth to participate in post-16 education, employment or training. However, how does this particular college accommodate youth that were so-called disaffected learners and previously not in education, employment and training (NEET)? The aim was to investigate the educational experiences of 26 Skills to Succeed (S2S) students to discover their trajectory and the extent to which they could access various provisions that facilitate higher academic and employment outcomes as per RPA discourse. Hence, classroom observations, semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions were conducted alongside documentation analysis. Key findings revealed that S2S students find themselves in a very competitive college environment that institutionalises a system of success and failure, and also brings them in direct competition with better qualified young people for access to desirable and limited provision. What’s more, embodied policies and practices used GCSE capital to construct an intellectual divide, segregating those with low GCSEs from those deemed more academic. Consequently, S2S students faced exclusion from a range of educational opportunities, placing higher levels of vocational courses, apprenticeship training and the opportunity to re-take GCSEs out of reach. S2S provision fundamentally contributed to exclusionary discourses and practices that constructed great ambiguity as to whether higher academic and employment goals could be accomplished in such a milieu. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]