Beyond ‘NEET’ and ‘Tidy’ pathways: Considering the ‘Missing middle’ of youth transition studies

(2011) - Steven Roberts

Journal: Journal of Youth Studies
Link:: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13676261.2010.489604
DOI:: 10.1080/13676261.2010.489604
Links::
Tags:: #paper #NEET #Unemployment #LabourMarket
Cite Key:: [@Roberts2011]

Abstract

Jones’ (2002) discussion of polarised transitions and the ‘fast and slow lanes to adulthood’ espoused by Bynner et al. (2002) are good examples of how dualistic language often permeates youth transitions discourses. This often results in transitions research concentrating on a dichotomy of experience during the youth phase. The primary purpose of this article is to develop the argument for the inclusion of detailed documentation and analysis of the transitions of intermediate groups who fall between the lines of this dualism. These young people constitute a ‘missing middle’ in relation to youth studies and UK educational policy. To support this argument, the paper turns to the results of a qualitative study of 18 24-year-old, male, front-line, retail employees in the South-East of England to illustrate how some young people do not find themselves neatly situated on one side of such categorical cleavages. These young men are following neither a NEET (not in education, employment or training) pathway nor a ‘tidy’, government preferred, route through post-compulsory education. Thus, studying such seemingly ordinary young people can contribute towards developing a more holistic understanding of youth in the contemporary period

Notes

“Jones’ (2002) discussion of polarised transitions and the ‘fast and slow lanes to adulthood’ espoused by Bynner et al. (2002) are good examples of how dualistic language often permeates youth transitions discourses.” (Roberts, 2011, p. 21)

“These young people constitute a ‘missing middle’ in relation to youth studies and UK educational policy.” (Roberts, 2011, p. 21)

“Linearity has been replaced by a protracted ‘set of movements which are less predictable and involve frequent breaks, backtracking and the blending of statuses’ (Furlong et al. 2003, p. 24).” (Roberts, 2011, p. 21)

“‘...glimpse the wider processes that generate such different outcomes for young people as they reach adulthood: processes which continue to mean that some get a lot where others end up with very little’ (MacDonald et al. 2001, paragraph 5.7).” (Roberts, 2011, p. 21)

“This idea of a missing-middle sits easily with reference to youth studies, because little is said or known about ‘ordinary youth’ (France 2007, p. 57).” (Roberts, 2011, p. 22)

“Much youth transitions research considers the 16 18 age range, with many investigating the NEET group (e.g. Istance et al. 1994, Yates and Payne 2006). There is also substantial focus upon disengagement and social exclusion through the experience of unemployment (e.g. Ashton 1986, Furlong and Cartmel 2004), as well as the experiences of the transition from school to the first experiences of work through increasingly complex and individualised circumstances (e.g. Griffin 1985, McDowell 2003).” (Roberts, 2011, p. 23)

“reviously, young men had found unskilled or semi-skilled jobs predominantly in the manufacturing sector, which provided opportunities for the majority of boys leaving school in the 1970s with no or few educational credentials (Roberts 1995).” (Roberts, 2011, p. 26)

“Retail has a major presence across the UK nations and in every region (Skillsmart, 2007), making it pervasive in a very real sense.” (Roberts, 2011, p. 26)

“The divide between ‘fast-track’ and ‘slow-track’ transitions (Jones 2002) is usually along class lines” (Roberts, 2011, p. 30)

“Working-class young people are often thought to be excluded from a slow-track as ‘they suffer from a lack of resources and are restrained by traditional norms and familial ties’ (Yoon 2006, p. 375). This results in faster employment, partnership formation and parenthood, and often leaving home to live with a partner rather than to live alone or with peers (Heath 2008).” (Roberts, 2011, p. 30)