This article was downloaded by: [Corporacion CINCEL]

On: 26 November 2012, At: 13:01

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,
UK
British Journal of Educational
Studies
Publication details, including instructions for authors
and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rbje20
Learning to (Dis)Engage? The
Socialising Experiences of Young
People Living in Areas of Socio-
Economic Disadvantage
Carolynne Mason
a
, Hilary Cremin
b
, Paul Warwick
c
&
Tom Harrison
d
a
Loughborough University
b
University of Cambridge
c
University of Leicester
d
Community Service Volunteers
Version of record first published: 08 Dec 2011.
To cite this article: Carolynne Mason, Hilary Cremin, Paul Warwick & Tom Harrison
(2011): Learning to (Dis)Engage? The Socialising Experiences of Young People Living in
Areas of Socio-Economic Disadvantage, British Journal of Educational Studies, 59:4,
421-437
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2011.615734
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.
Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-
licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly
forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any
representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to
date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be
independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable
for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages
whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection
with or arising out of the use of this material.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
c
i
o
n

C
I
N
C
E
L
]

a
t

1
3
:
0
1

2
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

British Journal of Educational Studies
Vol. 59, No. 4, December 2011, pp. 421437
LEARNING TO (DIS)ENGAGE? THE SOCIALISING
EXPERIENCES OF YOUNG PEOPLE LIVING IN AREAS OF
SOCIO-ECONOMIC DISADVANTAGE
by CAROLYNNE MASON, Loughborough University, HILARY CREMIN, University of
Cambridge, PAUL WARWICK, University of Leicester and TOM HARRISON,
Community Service Volunteers
ABSTRACT: Young people are increasingly required to demonstrate civic
engagement in their communities and help deliver the aspirations of local-
ism and Big Society. Using an ecological systems approach this paper
explores the experiences of different groups of young people living in areas
of socio-economic disadvantage. Using volunteering as an example of civic
engagement it is shown that barriers and motivators for young people stem
from within the micro, meso, exo and macrosystems, and that these inter-
act with each other, and with bio-psychological factors within individuals,
to bring about differential opportunities and outcomes for young people.
Through examining the experiences of three different groups of young people
placed within socio-economically disadvantaged communities, considerable
variation in levels of civic engagement are identied and it is suggested that
some young peoples lived experiences are resulting in decisions to civically
disengage. It is argued that young people need to benet from genuine oppor-
tunities to develop self-efcacy if they are to respond to the demands of Big
Society aspirations for localised decision-making.
Keywords: civic engagement, young people, socio-economic disadvantage,
localism
1. INTRODUCTION
Concern about the civic disengagement of young people continues to be promi-
nent in research, media and policy-making arenas in England and elsewhere
(Cushion, 2007; Jowell and Park, 1998; Putnam, 2000). Such concern con-
tributed to Citizenship Education (CE) being included into the Secondary National
Curriculum in England in 2002 as a statutory subject and, more recently, to the
UK Governments introduction of the pilot National Citizens Service and the
International Citizens Service (Cabinet Ofce, 2010; Department for International
Development, 2011). Implicit in such policy initiatives is the notion that young
people need support in order to become civically engaged and be active citi-
zens within their communities. The collaborative Building voice, civic action and
learning (EngagEd) research project under consideration here,
1
originated in part
in response to concerns about the absence of young peoples voices within debates
ISSN 0007-1005 (print)/ISSN 1467-8527 (online)
2011 Society for Educational Studies
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2011.615734
http://www.tandfonline.com
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
c
i
o
n

C
I
N
C
E
L
]

a
t

1
3
:
0
1

2
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

422 LEARNING TO (DIS)ENGAGE?
about young peoples civic engagement. Notions of voice are intrinsically linked
with notions of civic engagement. The UNCRC Article 12 resulted in considerable
interest and activity directed at ensuring that children and young people participate
in decisions that affect their lives. The effectiveness of voice-driven activities is
not always clear, however, particularly for the young people who were the focus of
this study (Cremin et al., 2010; Percy-Smith, 2008, 2010; Tisdall, 2008). Although
initiatives in schools and elsewhere do attempt to access young peoples voices,
this rarely results in the outcomes that young people desire. As de Winter (1997)
points out, it is not sufcient to just provide structures for children to engage in
decision-making if they do not bring about a change in their ability to participate
as equal citizens within the context of the community.
The EngagED project aimed to explore the ways in which young people
express their civic identities, engage with their communities at local, national
and global level, and to reect on processes of civic participation. Focusing on
young people living within socio-economically disadvantaged communities the
project was concerned with building the capacity of schools and voluntary agen-
cies to provide opportunities for civic participation that reect the preferences and
contexts of young people. This paper provides an overview of ndings from a
survey of organisations that offer young people opportunities for civic engage-
ment and participation, and ndings from focus groups with young people living
in areas of socio-economic disadvantage. It discusses the ndings in the light of
current drives towards localism and a post-bureaucratic society in which peo-
ple ask less of the state, looking after each other informally as family, friends
and neighbours, or more formally as community activists, volunteers, and social
entrepreneurs (Rogers, 2010, p. 1). It has signicance for those interested in the
National Citizens Service pilot that aims to prepare young people to meet the
demands of the Big Society and to foster a culture of volunteering and social
responsibility.
2. BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
The EngagED project was focused exclusively on the experiences of young peo-
ple living in areas of socio-economic disadvantage in recognition that these are the
young people who continue to face the most challenges in life with implications
for their civic engagement and participation. The number of young people living
in poverty in Britain continues to be a key political issue, with government statis-
tics revealing that 2.8 million children were living in relative poverty in 2008/09
(Department for Work and Pensions, 2010). The concept of socio-economic dis-
advantage, however, is broader than poverty, which prioritises scal inequalities.
Socio-economic disadvantage reects the fact that people who experience poverty
are also likely to face a variety of other challenges in their lives (for example those
associated with health, housing and education) and that these challenges interact
with each other cumulatively to produce negative effects (Darton et al., 2003).
Children and young people living in households experiencing poverty experience
poor life conditions that frequently persist into adulthood (Feinstein et al., 2007;
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
c
i
o
n

C
I
N
C
E
L
]

a
t

1
3
:
0
1

2
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

LEARNING TO (DIS)ENGAGE? 423
Palmer et al., 2008) and the UK government Home Ofce has recognised that,
those who suffer the greatest from . . . social exclusion [are] least likely to become
active citizens in any context (Home Ofce, 2004, p. 6). Despite the daily chal-
lenges facing young people living in these communities, most research on young
peoples civic engagement is conducted with little or no reference to this issue.
Consideration of young peoples volunteering behaviour illustrates that socio-
economic status is an issue relevant to furthering our understanding of young
peoples civic engagement. There is evidence that young people living in socio-
economically disadvantaged communities face additional challenges in becoming
formal volunteers. Many young people, particularly those from socially excluded
backgrounds, do not consider themselves as volunteers since volunteers were seen
by them to be hippies, afuent or old people (Pye et al., 2009). Organisations that
aim to facilitate formal volunteering amongst young people suggest that young
people face difculties associated with language, lack of nancial and temporal
resources and the pressures of performing in a target driven culture (Institute for
Volunteering Research, 2002; Roker et al., 1999).
3. CONCEPTUALISING CIVIC ENGAGEMENT
Civic engagement is a term that is used in a variety of ways by different peo-
ple to mean different things. To a great extent, this is because the meaning of
civic is contested. Altruistic activities that are grounded in the family and com-
munity are often overlooked in research into formal civic engagement, and in
national policies that aim to increase civic participation amongst young people.
In a study of 730 1116 year-old English secondary pupils, Morrow (1994) found
that 40 per cent had regular home responsibilities (minding siblings, cleaning,
laundry etc.) and almost as many helped in a family business or earned money
outside the home. Becker et al. (2001) found that a worrying number of young
children across Europe are the main carers of disabled parents or other family
members. In immigrant families childrens language skills are frequently used by
the family in dealings with ofcialdom (Orellana et al., 2003). There is a danger
that these valuable contributions to family and community life will be overlooked
in attempts to formalise and value young peoples volunteering and civic engage-
ment within the public domain. In this study an inclusive viewof civic engagement
has been taken, with civic engagement broadly dened as an active concern for the
common good, at the local, national or international level.
The challenge of adequately conceptualising the civic engagement of young
people is mirrored by the challenges of recording evidence of young peoples
civic engagement. As noted by Fahmy, survey data frequently underestimate the
participation of socially marginalized groups in the type of relatively uid and
unstructured forms of participation that tend to engage young people (2006,
p. 105). Whiting and Harper (2003) note that qualitative methods show young
people to have higher levels of social and civic participation than is shown through
recording using quantitative methods. The reasons for this disparity, they suggest,
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
c
i
o
n

C
I
N
C
E
L
]

a
t

1
3
:
0
1

2
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

424 LEARNING TO (DIS)ENGAGE?
may be that, indicators used to measure some of the dimensions of social capital
such as civic and social participation are not relevant to the lives of young people
(Whiting and Harper, 2003, p. 14). For this reason the project in hand adopted
research approaches that aimed to access and prioritise the voices of young people
living in disadvantaged communities.
4. RESEARCH DESIGN
The EngagED research project evolved through three stages. Stage One, Setting
the Scene, involved a systematic literature review. Stage Two, Narrowing the
Focus, involved listening harder to young people using surveys and focus groups.
Organisations involved in offering civic opportunities to young people living in
areas of socio-economic disadvantage were also surveyed during the second stage
in order to provide contextual data for the study. The nal stage of the EngagED
project involved interventions in two case study schools and two community set-
tings. The interventions, which involved young people in Photo-voice activities
and Active Citizenship are reported elsewhere.
Organisational Survey
Prior to conducting focus groups and surveys with young people a survey was
distributed to UK-based organisations identied as working to provide opportu-
nities for young people to be civically engaged. The initial database consisted
of 340 organisations and was derived from organisations already known to
Community Service Volunteers (CSV). Responses were received from 175 organ-
isations and of these 144 were deemed relevant to the study (31 respondents either
did not work with young people between the ages of 14 and 25 or alternatively
did not work with any young people from socially disadvantaged communities).
The largest organisational grouping returning the survey was universities (62), fol-
lowed by local youth groups (29), volunteer centres (20) national charities (13),
local charities (12) and local authorities (9).
Focus Groups with Young People Living in Areas of Socio-Economic
Disadvantage
Atotal of 24 focus groups were conducted in settings identied through the organi-
sational survey. All settings were located in areas of socio-economic disadvantage.
Of the 163 participants 105 were female and 58 male. The youngest participant
was 11 and the oldest 21 with the average age being 15 years old. The focus
groups were located in a mix of inner city and rural areas, and included two sec-
ondary schools, an inner city post-16 College, an out-of-school service for young
offenders, a provision for young people living in social service care, and two youth
volunteering organisations.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
c
i
o
n

C
I
N
C
E
L
]

a
t

1
3
:
0
1

2
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

LEARNING TO (DIS)ENGAGE? 425
Participants in the focus groups completed a form identifying their rst name,
gender, ethnicity and postcode. Postcode was included as a means of conrming
that the young participants lived in areas of socio-economic disadvantage. Letters
of thanks were sent to the participants in the focus groups in recognition of their
contribution to the project. The aims of the focus groups were to:

explore young peoples experiences of expressing their voice, civic partici-

pation, volunteering and altruism;

examine young peoples motivations for civic participation;

identify the challenges they face in their lives that may prevent civic
participation and action;

explore existing avenues for civic participation and action.

Data Analysis
Data from the surveys and focus groups were analysed in the light
of Bronfenbrenners ecosystemic theory of human development (2005).
Bronfenbrenner (1989) described the ecology of human development as:
The scientic study of the progressive, mutual accommodation, throughout the life
course, between an active, growing human being and the changing properties of the
immediate settings in which the developing person lives, as this process is affected
by relations between these settings, and by the larger contexts in which the settings
are embedded.
The systems which surround a developing individual (and which interact with each
other) are the microsystem, the mesosystem, the exosystem and the macrosystem.
Whilst the microsystem is made up of activities, roles and interpersonal relations
experienced in face-to-face settings, the exosystem encompasses the linkage and
processes taking place between two or more settings, at least one of which does not
ordinarily contain the developing person, but which inuences processes within
the immediate setting. The mesosystem is a system of microsystems, and the
macrosystem consists of the overarching pattern of micro- meso- and exosystems
characteristic of a given culture, subculture, or other broader social context, with
particular reference to the developmentally instigative belief systems, resources,
hazards, lifestyles, opportunity structure, life course options and patterns of social
interchange that are embedded in each of these systems (Bronfenbrenner, 1988,
p. 150). Patterns of belief and behaviour characterising the macrosystem are
passed on from one generation to the next through processes of socialisation.
Bronfenbrenners theory suggests that young people develop progressively
more complex concepts and ways of behaving within communities of discourse
and practice, that function at many levels. At the centre of this model is the indi-
vidual young person. Young people move from peripheral to central participation
in a variety of overlapping communities at the school or neighbourhood level, and
potentially at the national and international level.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
c
i
o
n

C
I
N
C
E
L
]

a
t

1
3
:
0
1

2
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

426 LEARNING TO (DIS)ENGAGE?
It is perhaps unsurprising then that others have investigated young peoples
civic action and learning using Bronfenbrenners theory and in doing so have
found socio-economic status to be an important inuence on young peoples learn-
ing. In 1996 a study was commissioned by the International Association for the
Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) to investigate the ways in which
young people are prepared for their roles as citizens in 28 countries (Amadeo
et al., 2002) using these theories. The research took place in two phases. In the
rst, researchers in each country developed qualitative case studies that examined
the contexts and meaning of civic education. In the second a test of civic knowl-
edge and a survey of civic attitudes and engagement was administered to 90,000
14-year-old students and 50,000 1619 year-olds. For upper secondary students,
the learning environment of homes was seen to play the most important role in
students acquisition of civic knowledge and skills. Those from smaller more edu-
cated families who reported higher exposure to books at home had considerably
higher knowledge scores. Thus the micro level of the family interacts with the
macro level of social stratication and economics to create differential experiences
of citizenship for individual young people.
It seems important, then, for the research in hand to investigate the civic
engagement and participation of young people from socio-economically disad-
vantaged communities to build on this international research, and to look in more
depth at how these factors play out in the lives of the young people at various lev-
els from the micro to the macro, and how these interact. It is to this that the paper
now turns.
5. FINDINGS
Organisational Surveys Contextual Issues
The survey ndings from the organisational survey from the EngagED study
indicated that organisations offered a range of opportunities to young people in
order to develop their civic engagement. Volunteering brokerage was the most fre-
quently offered opportunity (55 per cent), followed by learning, development and
accreditation (17 per cent), and sports, arts and cultural experiences (15 per cent).
A small number of organisations (5 per cent) offered advice and support services
to young people. There was overlap between services offered; so, for example,
organisations offering sports, arts and cultural experiences also offered other ser-
vices and opportunities to young people such as advocacy, advice and support,
leadership and volunteering.
The adult respondents were able to suggest a number of extrinsic benets
that they saw arising from engagement in volunteering activities. These included
improved educational and employment opportunities through accreditation, learn-
ing basic skills, obtaining references and learning how to deal with the system.
They also included the acquisition of softer skills, including condence, inde-
pendent living skills, teamwork, self-discipline, maturity and tolerance. Adults
believed that young people gained by feeling valued, accessing their voice and
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
c
i
o
n

C
I
N
C
E
L
]

a
t

1
3
:
0
1

2
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

LEARNING TO (DIS)ENGAGE? 427
making a difference to their communities. Community cohesion was promoted
through young people meeting with other young people and adults who would
never usually meet in ways that challenged the prior expectations of all involved.
Staff at the organisations were asked what they considered to be the main
barriers to recruiting and retaining young people from socio-economically dis-
advantaged communities in the opportunities they offered. Financial and temporal
constraints were the most frequently cited barriers. Examples included young peo-
ple who could not afford to offer their services for free, particularly where there
were costs such as transport involved and issues faced by young people who were
also working, studying or had family commitments. Lack of appropriate skills
was cited as another key barrier for recruitment. Young peoples attitudes to vol-
unteering, and in particular their lack of belief in volunteering as a developmental
opportunity, was seen as an inhibiting factor, alongside peer pressure.
The organisations offering volunteering opportunities to young people sug-
gested that some challenges to recruiting young people from socio-economically
disadvantaged communities came from within their own organisations as a result
of negative attitudes to young people (exosystem). It was also often difcult to
match young people to suitable opportunities in a timely manner. Given that nd-
ing attractive opportunities for young people to volunteer can be time-consuming,
it was not always possible to respond to them quickly enough to match expec-
tations. This was at times exacerbated by the available settings for volunteering,
such as churches or universities, that were not appealing to all young people.
Communicating opportunities for volunteering to young people living in areas
experiencing socio-economic disadvantage was seen as challenging. Young peo-
ples lack of knowledge about available opportunities, and a reluctance to actively
seek opportunities, were suggested as barriers to recruitment (microsystem).
Sometimes organisations did not have existing links within these communities
(mesosystem), and lack of access to IT faced by young people did not help.
Ensuring that staff had suitable skills to work with young people, and being able
to create rapport and ongoing relationships with young people was also seen
as challenging particularly when the young people involved were more chal-
lenging and did not conform to idealised notions of a volunteer (macrosystem).
Negative attitudes towards young people meant that some host organisations were
not very enthusiastic about offering volunteer opportunities to them in the rst
place.
There were exosystemic barriers to both recruiting and retaining young peo-
ple in areas of socio-economic disadvantage including cultural barriers, lack
of suitable role models and disaffection. Lack of power to bring about change
(self-efcacy) was also suggested as a disincentive. Poor transport in rural and
socio-economically disadvantaged communities was noted as another important
issue affecting both recruitment and retention of young people. Pressures result-
ing from paid work, education, family commitments and chaotic lifestyles were
identied as the main barriers to retention, alongside lack of self-belief, lim-
ited ambition, and poor social skills. Maintaining the interest of young people
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
c
i
o
n

C
I
N
C
E
L
]

a
t

1
3
:
0
1

2
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

428 LEARNING TO (DIS)ENGAGE?
and making the experience exciting was also seen as problematic when the real-
ity of the experience did not match the young persons expectations. Facilitating
progression for young volunteers was also challenging.
It is clear from the above that barriers and motivations for volunteering come
from within the micro, meso, exo and macrosystems, and that these interact with
each other, as well as with bio-psychological factors within individuals to bring
about differential opportunities and outcomes for young people. Although there
are clear patterns to the barriers faced by young people in socio-economically dis-
advantaged communities, the complex web of inuences surrounding individuals
within those communities results in very different individual experiences.
Focus Groups
The preliminary ndings from the focus groups indicated that young people living
in areas of socio-economic disadvantage varied enormously in their civic engage-
ment and participation. Some young people felt strong connections with issues
and causes beyond their lived experiences whilst for others their concern for com-
mon good was much closer to home. Some young people had been specically
supported by organisations to develop their civic engagement and participation,
and they were able to describe their experiences as an exciting journey, whilst
for others these opportunities had not even been registered as important. Three
broad categories emerged from the 24 focus groups, and to a lesser extent from
the organisational and young peoples surveys. These were: minimally engaged,
socially excluded; functionally engaged, socially aspirant; and maximally engaged,
socially aspirant. Below is an account of three different groups of young people
chosen to represent each of the above categories.
Minimally Engaged, Socially Excluded: Young Offender Group
This focus group involved four young people, three male (aged 15, 16 and 19) and
one female (16). Their motivation to come together as a group was to engage in
activities that encouraged them not to re-offend. They lived in the east of England
and experienced rural deprivation.
The young people in this group were able to identify issues that were of con-
cern and therefore mattered to them. Neighbours, the police, old people and
foreigners were all identied as issues of concern, as well as stereotyping and
racism, although there was some ambiguity about whether the young people saw
themselves as victims or perpetrators. When asked whether there were any issues
that concerned them at a global level such as global warming one participant
responded, We dont really worry about that until we are older.
Even using an inclusive broad denition of civic engagement it was still dif-
cult to nd evidence that these young people were civically engaged. As part of the
focus group discussions the young people were asked about whether young peo-
ple should be encouraged by the government and others to engage in community
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
c
i
o
n

C
I
N
C
E
L
]

a
t

1
3
:
0
1

2
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

LEARNING TO (DIS)ENGAGE? 429
action (actions to change or improve their community). This appeared to be an
unfamiliar concept and was understood by participants to be community service
within the criminal justice system, and as such they equated it with litter pick-
ing. Perhaps understandably, these young people were not enthusiastic about this
idea, If it was my rubbish. If it was my rubbish then fair enough. Anyone elses
no. These young people came across as more beleaguered, less resilient and more
changeable than other groups. They felt judged, mistrusted and disliked by their
communities, and responded in kind, But if the area arent respect me yeah why
should I respect them? Do you know what I mean?
The one young woman in this group was considering formal volunteering. For
her the motivations were closely linked to the extrinsic benets of getting a job in
a nursing home, Then I will get a good reference for when I go to college as well.
She was also able to see more intrinsic benets, however, and these were linked
with her immediate family, I think I will nd it really rewarding, so I can look
after my nan, because my nan is disabled. I dont know I nd it really rewarding.
Functionally Engaged, Socially Aspirant: the Envision Group
The second focus group discussed in this paper involved nine young people living
in a deprived area in central London. There were eight females and one male, all
aged 17. The young people attended the same school and had been working with
the group Envision during their lunch breaks for the majority of the academic year
on projects including raising issues around homelessness. Envision was set up
by four young people in 2000 to challenge the stereotype of youth as apathetic
and disengaged with the issues going on around them. Envision programmes help
young people to design their own local community projects, tackle issues ranging
from street crime to climate change, and aim to provide individuals with powerful
and rewarding experiences of making a positive difference.
This group of young people were very able to list issues that were of concern to
them, including stereotyping, the recession, sweat shops and fair trade, train ticket
prices, people and child-trafcking, migration, exploitation, safety on transport,
Chelsea fans, rules, university, job opportunities, the Olympics, pollution, lack of
youth provision, knife and gun crime and war. In contrast to the young offenders
this group were able to speak about motivations for, and barriers to, young people
being civically engaged. They had been working on a project to promote greater
awareness of homelessness within the school and had deliberately picked this issue
as it was one they felt was relevant to young people and with which young people
had a connection. The young people were very positive about their experiences of
working with Envision and felt it had been benecial for those involved. The same
young people were also very honest that their initial motivation for being involved
was to enhance their CVs.
Most of the things that young people do to make a difference is often because of
their CV. Like when I joined the [Envision] I thought Let me throw it on my CV,
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
c
i
o
n

C
I
N
C
E
L
]

a
t

1
3
:
0
1

2
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

430 LEARNING TO (DIS)ENGAGE?
and I actually got a lot more from doing it, but I only started coming because of the
CV thing. And the Duke of Edinburgh, its gonna be fun doing everything, but by
the end of it you are more employable with a Duke of Edinburgh award. (Male)
Whilst they had in the main been originally motivated by the benet to their CV,
these young people had continued to be active in the group because they had dis-
covered intrinsic benets through their experiences, including learning new skills,
making a difference and enjoying their involvement. Signicantly they were also
very keen to ensure that they left a legacy and became role models for younger
students who might become involved with Envision in the future.
Many of the young participants in this group spoke passionately about political
issues and yet they expressed concern that they were not well-informed about, or
represented within, political discussions that they felt impacted on them. This was
particularly pertinent as many of those in the focus group were eligible to vote in
the 2010 general election.
Thats it, I think there should be more people our age involved in politics like there
should be more a voice for us, cos theres voices for adults like theyve got their
constituency leaders they can go to and do stuff, but like we cant even vote. And
the university thing affects us directly, so I think its really unfair that we dont get
to choose who is in power. (Male)
Maximally Engaged, Socially Aspirant: Youth Action Team
This was a group of three individuals, two male (18 and 21) and one female (18),
who were part of a youth action team located within the Midlands. The young
people experienced rural deprivation. The group came together on a monthly basis
to engage in a variety of activities under the umbrella of civic engagement.
This group were hesitant at rst but were then able to provide a list of issues
that were of concern to them. The list included chavs, the environment, nothing
to do, animal welfare, tness and obesity, medicinal marijuana, pigeons, the job
centre, the recession, unemployment, underage drinking, binge drinking and poor
parenting. The young people in this focus group had actively joined the group in
order to become involved in civic activities. One of the participants explained that
she, just . . . I wanted to do something with my life, rather than just sitting there
and doing nothing. I wanted to get out. So, like I said, I dont like being stuck
inside. Another participant stated that at a younger age he had become involved
with a group of peers with low aspirations, but that one day he decided he wanted
more from life:
I dont know, its just sort of refreshing to meet people really on a sort of a different
wavelength. People that actually want to do something. Ive been quite bogged down
for so long by all these people who are just gonna live in [the town] for their entire
life, you know, and like not do anything. And, you know, just go stale and I just felt
like I was . . . I was just . . . you know, I would be sitting there wasting my life. (Male)
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
c
i
o
n

C
I
N
C
E
L
]

a
t

1
3
:
0
1

2
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

LEARNING TO (DIS)ENGAGE? 431
In common with the Envision group, this group were very positive about their
experiences of being part of the youth action team. They also felt that the positive
side of being civically engaged was not visible to young people generally:
I think its like . . . its ignorance actually, the whole thing. And like when I told
people I was volunteering at the library, everyone was like Oh, ha ha, youre going
to the library. Youre sad, and things like that. And like now youre the sad one,
because youre sat on your own doing nothing. Im actually going out and helping
people, and if you think thats sad then go and sit in the corner. (Male)
Also in common with the Envision group the participants were disenchanted with
politicians and they felt that young people were disconnected from formal politics:
The countrys not run by the people though, its run by like the elite and no matter
what anyone thinks. Like you can put on this whole faade and, yeah, you can go
about and do this. But you know theres people behind the scenes pulling the strings,
that you probably have no idea about, you know, people who own businesses. (Male)
These young people, then, were motivated to make a difference, both to others and
to themselves, as they challenged expectations from both community members
and peers. It is interesting to reect on what it was about these individuals that
made them stand out from the other young people within their communities.
Commonality between the three focus groups
An issue that was raised by all three of the groups was the way in which they felt
young people were stereotyped within their communities (microsystem) and by
the media (macrosystem).
People dont listen to young people that is the thing I dont get. Why dont they listen
to young people? We are still humans, do you know what I mean? We are the same
as everybody else . . . People judge you by the clothes you wear. People judge me
by the clothes I wear. And if I want to wear these clothes I wear them. Do you know
what I mean? (Young offender, Male)
Everyones looked at, right, and judged within like the rst, what, two, three sec-
onds of just someone looking at you. And I could be wearing a tracksuit one day and
then someone will think this way of me. And thats the day I actually like went out
to meet new friends, and then today I could be all dressed like smart and wearing a
skirt, heels and everything and then think totally different of me, and that was just
two different days. (Envision group, Female)
Some young people felt debilitated by this it does my head in (Young Offender,
Male) but others felt motivated to make a difference. One young person in a
focus group not reported here stated that:
Everyone can make a change. Just because we are labelled we can still make a
change. Because at the end of the day, we all believe in the same thing, on the
same level, so if we work together we can change the way the media think about
us. (Female, City School)
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
c
i
o
n

C
I
N
C
E
L
]

a
t

1
3
:
0
1

2
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

432 LEARNING TO (DIS)ENGAGE?
The ndings presented in this paper indicate that the salience of these inuences
will vary between individuals for some, family and peer group will have a
greater inuence than other factors. For some, the experiences of various elements
of the environment, near and far, interact and become overwhelming. The young
offender group, for example, were able to list a whole range of factors that made
them feel like failed citizens, in need of containment and surveillance, and with
little to offer. They had come to feel this way through interactions with the adults
in their communities:
Interactions with teachers . . .
Making me look stupid in front of classes. I wrote on the bench, and they both shout
at me for no reason when they can just talk to you.
I think they actively sort of . . . Not all of them obviously, but some of them do try
and humiliate people and I think that school is not a very good experience for those
people.
Interactions with police ofcers . . .
Once you get a name . . . My mates will get stopped and taken in and stuff like that.
But thats why I keep getting stopped and searched every day man. I am telling
you. Last week I got stopped and searched. And I have had enough. Yeah. How many
yellow slips
[2]
Ive got. I have got them all at home. I have got a big box full man.
I have got that many. I have got too many.
They just stop me to see if I have got any drugs. 10 note on me that they thought
was to do with drugs.
Interactions with neighbours . . .
I moved into this area before my neighbours did, and my neighbours think they run
the Close. And they dont run the Close . . . they are not good people . . . But my
neighbours, man, I wouldnt help them out for nothing. Like if you give me a million
pounds I still wouldnt help them out.
Interactions with employers . . .
I cant go to an interview and talk like how I talk. Do you know what I mean? Ive
gotta be posh, like Oh are you alright, and I dont knowhowto talk like that. Do you
know what I mean?
Through their experiences these young people have learnt to disengage and keep
their heads down. Their experiences have led them to avoid being visible within
the civic domain because they feel stereotyped, unvalued and unable to change the
environment in which they live.
6. DISCUSSION
Thus, the organisational survey chimed with the results of the focus groups with
young people to suggest that there are many barriers to their civic action and
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
c
i
o
n

C
I
N
C
E
L
]

a
t

1
3
:
0
1

2
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

LEARNING TO (DIS)ENGAGE? 433
volunteering, including nancial, temporal, educational and family-related con-
straints at the micro level, and social, political and structural constraints at the exo
and macrolevel. As suggested by Bronfenbrenner, these appear to interact with an
individuals bio-psychological characteristics, as well as with each other, to create
complex outcomes. Young people who were minimally engaged had more direct
experience of crime, prejudice, poor education and intrusive policing, and were
more engaged in anti-social behaviour. They came across as lacking condence,
and more focused on the immediate environment which had left them feeling
beleaguered rather than motivated. They seemed to experience less well-being.
Those who were functionally engaged experienced some good Citizenship edu-
cation, were aware of the personal benets of participation having experienced it
rsthand, and were socially aspirant. Young people who were maximally engaged
demonstrated altruism and a desire to make a difference backed up with skill
and insight. Many of them had developed personal resilience and a clear vision
for their future. Inuences from the macrosystem on these young peoples civic
engagement included national and global politics and politicians, the media, eco-
nomic processes and institutions, and socio-economic stratication. Mistrust of
young people, and by young people, interacted at various levels from the local to
the national to the global. Thus national and international discourse and practices
impacted on the daily experiences of individuals, and on life opportunities and
psychological health.
A theory that may be useful in understanding how young people learn about
civic engagement and participation is Social Learning Theory which is perhaps
most closely associated with Albert Bandura, who argued (1977) that learning
is contingent on the interplay between personal factors, behaviours and the envi-
ronment. Importantly, the model suggests individuals are more likely to engage
in certain behaviours when they believe they are capable of implementing those
behaviours successfully that is they have high self-efcacy. Self-regulation
occurs when the individual has his/her own ideas about what is appropriate or
inappropriate behaviour and chooses actions accordingly. Some of the factors
affecting self-efcacy include previous successes and failures, messages received
from others, and successes and failures of others.
Self-efcacy has been shown to impact in civic engagement (Lopes et al.,
2009; Pattie et al., 2003). Young people are increasingly encouraged to engage
civically through contributing to decision-making processes and this has been
shown to increase levels of self-efcacy. There is a growing culture of participa-
tion whereby young peoples contributions are valued as having the potential to
inuence decisions that affect their lives and those of their communities (Halsey
et al., 2006). This culture of participation can have a positive impact on young
peoples sense of self-efcacy which in turn has been found to be a key factor in
inuencing their levels of civic engagement (Benton et al., 2008).
Halsey et al. (2006) suggest that the time has now come for organisations to
move beyond concerns with participation as a process, in order to direct atten-
tion towards exploring the actual impact of young peoples involvement and their
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
c
i
o
n

C
I
N
C
E
L
]

a
t

1
3
:
0
1

2
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

434 LEARNING TO (DIS)ENGAGE?
feelings of self-efcacy. They report that there is a paucity of evidence about the
impact of young peoples involvement, prompting them to recommend that the
outcomes of young peoples involvement are properly evaluated, and that young
peoples own perspectives are prioritised. As Percy-Smith (2010, p. 119) suggests:
If we are seeking to foster a culture of democratic participation, inclusion and active
citizenship we need to move away from the current emphasis on participation in
formal, institutionalised public decision making processes and instead focus more
on the multiplicity of ways which people act, contribute to and realise their own
sense of agency in everyday life contexts.
Social capital is clearly relevant here. Morrow (2002) explored socio-
economically disadvantaged young peoples social networks, local identity and
attitudes towards institutions and facilities in the community, and found that
participation in community decision-making for young people in the study was
limited. Morrow concluded that linking social capital, that is, connecting or
bridging groups to inuential others, enabling access to power structures, was
clearly lacking for the young people in the study. It is perhaps understandable
that young people who have very limited opportunities to engage in community
decision-making, and even less to actually have an impact on decisions that are
made, do not feel capable of inuencing others that is they lack self-efcacy.
According to Bandura they are therefore less likely to engage in participatory
behaviours in the future as a result of the lack of reinforcement messages they
receive from their own experiences, those of their peers and from others in their
communities.
To give the nal word on this matter to young people, the participants in
the Envision focus group were unhappy that the school meals at the school they
attended had been altered and the tuck shops closed in response to healthy eating
drives. Whilst the young people were not opposed to healthy eating per se they
felt angry that they had not been involved in either making this decision or in its
implementation. Instead the change to the school meal provision was done to stu-
dents rather than with students and their response was to deliberately boycott the
schools meal service. The lack of consultation was described as demotivating, as
one of the participants in this group explained:
Like its just motivation thats all it is, motivation . . .When they did it they didnt
talk to us or nothing, they just took it out of schools and we went like What are you
doing?. . . And then of course we boycotts the canteen, well that is what we did.
(Female)
This young woman was angry about a decision being made that affected her
directly in which she had no say and her preferred response was to disengage
with the school meal service rather than challenge the decision-makers. She had
learnt through her prior experiences that she could not make a difference and her
lack of self-efcacy meant disengagement was preferred over engagement.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
c
i
o
n

C
I
N
C
E
L
]

a
t

1
3
:
0
1

2
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

LEARNING TO (DIS)ENGAGE? 435
7. CONCLUSION
Where young people from disadvantaged communities do engage in formal vol-
unteering, they appear to benet. The Young Volunteer Challenge project aimed
specically to recruit volunteers from more diverse backgrounds, as dened by
factors including young peoples socio-economic status, ethnicity and gender.
Feedback from the volunteers about the impact of the programme was positive
and showed that young people who took part were more likely to progress into
education and employment (GHK Consulting Ltd, 2006, p. 3).
This research is timely because there is a belief that by engaging in civic action
and volunteering young people can develop their social capital and full their
potential despite the disadvantages they face in their communities. This is the
promise of a Big Society in which everyone is engaged. Our research indicates,
however, that in addition to the many logistical barriers to formal volunteering
faced by young people, many of them are dissuaded from contributing to their
communities by their lack of self-efcacy and their belief that they cannot make
a difference. They are also dissuaded because they are unable to see the benets
of civic engagement for themselves in their daily lives and experiences and this
necessarily has an impact on their motivation. Where the majority of young peo-
ples interaction with adults is prejudiced and confrontational and where young
people are not considered, or are not considered capable of taking part in deci-
sions that affect their daily lives, it is perhaps unsurprising that the benets of
civic engagement remain obscured. Care needs to be taken over the ways in which
young people are framed within these communities, ensuring that strategies and
initiatives designed to promote community safety do not backre and create failed
citizens in need of containment and surveillance, who cannot nd inroads into
their community.
8. NOTES
1
Funded by the Society for Educational Studies.
2
Yellow slips are issued by police ofcers to mark verbal interactions (encounters) with
members of the public. Colours vary between geographical locations. They do not imply
criminal behaviour necessarily.
9. REFERENCES
Amadeo, J., Torney-Purta, J., Lehmann, R., Husfeldt, V. and Nikolova, R. (2002) Civic
Knowledge and Engagement: an IEA Study of Upper Secondary Students in Sixteen
Countries (Amsterdam, International Association for the Evaluation of Educational
Achievement (IEA)).
Bandura, A. (1977) Social Learning Theory (New York, General Learning Press).
Becker, S., Dearden, C. and Aldridge, J. (2001) Childrens labour of love? Young carers
and care work. In P. Mizen, C. Pole, and A. Bolton (Eds) Hidden Hands: International
Perspectives on Childrens Work and Labour (London, RoutledgeFalmer), 7087.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
c
i
o
n

C
I
N
C
E
L
]

a
t

1
3
:
0
1

2
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

436 LEARNING TO (DIS)ENGAGE?
Benton, T., Cleaver, E., Featherstone, G., Kerr, D., Lopes, J. and Whitby, K. (2008)
Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study (CELS): Sixth Annual Report. Young peo-
ples Civic Participation in and beyond School: Attitudes, Intentions and Inuences
(London, DfES).
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1989) Ecological systems theory, Annals of Child Development, 6,
187124.
Cabinet Ofce (2010) PM launches National Citizen Service Pilots. Press Release avail-
able at: http://www.cabinetofce.gov.uk/news/pm-launches-national-citizen-service-
pilots (accessed 23 September 2010).
Cremin, H., Mason, C. and Busher, H. (2011) Problematising pupil voice using visual meth-
ods: ndings from a study of engaged and disaffected pupils in an urban secondary
school, British Educational Research Journal, 37 (4), 585603.
Cushion, S. (2007) Protesting their apathy? An analysis of British press coverage of young
anti-Iraq war protestors, Journal of Youth Studies, 10 (4), 419437.
Darton, D., Hirsch, D. and Strelitz, J. (2003) Tackling Poverty: a 20-year Enterprise (York,
Joseph Rowntree Foundation).
De Winter, M. (1997) Children as Fellow Citizens: Participation and Commitment (Oxford,
Radcliffe Medical Press).
Department for International Development (2011) Young People to make a Difference
to the Worlds Poorest. Available at: http://www.dd.gov.uk/Media-Room/News-
Stories/2011/Young-people-to-make-a-difference-to-the-worlds-poorest-International-
Citizen-Service-opens/ (accessed 4 June 2011).
Department for Work and Pensions (2010) Households Below Average Income (HBAI).
Available at: http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/index.php?page=hbai{_}arc (accessed
9 February 2011).
Fahmy, E. (2006) Social capital and civic action a study of youth in the United Kingdom,
Young, 14 (2), 101118.
Feinstein, L., Hearn, B. and Renton, Z. (2007) Reducing Inequalities: Realising the Talents
of All (London, National Childrens Bureau).
GHK Consulting Ltd (2006) Evaluation of the Young Volunteers Challenge Programme
(London, DfES).
Halsey, K., Mureld, J., Harland, J. L. and Lord, P. (2006) The Voice of Young People:
An Engine for Improvement? Scoping the Evidence (London, National Foundation for
Educational Research).
Home Ofce, Civil Renewal Unit (2004) Active Citizenship, Active Learning (London,
Home Ofce).
Institute for Volunteering Research (2002) UK-Wide Evaluation of the Millennium
Volunteers Programme (London, DfES).
Jowell, R. and Park, A. (1998) Young People, Politics and Citizenship: a Disengaged
Generation? (London, The Citizenship Foundation).
Lopes, J., Benton, T. and Cleaver, E. (2009) Young peoples intended civic and political
participation: does education matter? Journal of Youth Studies, 12, (1), 120.
Morrow, V. (1994) Responsible children? Aspects of childrens work and employment out-
side school in contemporary UK. In B. Mayall (Ed.) Childrens Childhoods: Observed
and Experienced (London, Falmer), 128143.
Morrow, V. (2002) Childrens Experiences of Community: Implications of Social Capital
Discourses in Social Capital for Health Insights from Qualitative Research (London,
Health Development Agency).
Orellana, M. F., Dorner, L. and Pulido, L. (2003) Accessing assets: immigrant youths work
as family translators or para-phraser, Social Problems, 50, 505524.
Palmer, G., Macinnes, T. and Kenway, P. (2008) Monitoring Poverty and Social Exclusion
2008 (York, Joseph Rowntree Foundation and New Policy Institute). Available at:
http://www.jrf.org.uk/bookshop/details.asp?pubid=1041.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
c
i
o
n

C
I
N
C
E
L
]

a
t

1
3
:
0
1

2
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

LEARNING TO (DIS)ENGAGE? 437
Pattie, C., Seyd, P. and Whiteley, P. (2003) Citizenship and civic engagement: attitudes and
behaviour in Britain, Political Studies, 51, 443468.
Percy-Smith, B. (2008) Evaluating the Development of Childrens Participation Plans in
Two Childrens Trusts. Year One Report (Leicester, National Youth Agency).
Percy-Smith, B. (2010) Councils, consultations and community: rethinking the spaces for
children and young peoples participation, Childrens Geographies, 8 (2), 107122.
Putnam, R. (2000) Bowling Alone: the Collapse and Revival of American Community (New
York, Simon and Schuster).
Pye, J., Lister, C., Latter, J. and Clements, C. (2009) Ipsos MORI. Young People Speak Out:
Attitudes to, and Perceptions of, Full-Time Volunteering (London, vResearch).
Rogers, B. (2010) Camerons speech strongest on Big Society, The Financial
Times, London. Available at: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4dc03ba8-d151-11df-8422-
00144feabdc0,_i_email=y.html (accessed 23 June 2011).
Roker, D., Player, K. and Coleman, J. (1999) Young peoples voluntary and campaigning
activities as sources of political education, Oxford Review of Education, 25 (1 and 2),
185198.
Tisdall, K. (2008) Is the honeymoon over? Children and young peoples participation in
public decision making, International Journal of Childrens Rights, 16 (3), 4157.
Whiting, E. and Harper, R. (2003) Young people and Social Capital (London, Ofce for
National Statistics).
Woodward, V. (2004) Active Learning for Active Citizenship (London, Home Ofce).
Correspondence
Dr Carolynne Mason
Loughborough University
Ashby Road
Loughborough LE11 3TU
E-mail: bscljm1@lboro.ac.uk
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
c
i
o
n

C
I
N
C
E
L
]

a
t

1
3
:
0
1

2
6

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2