Taking Sides:
Dilemmas
and Possibilities for 'Radical' Youth Work
Tania
de St Croix, June 2007
Note: This is a shortened
version of an undergraduate dissertation, with some of the academic
and referencing conventions removed to make it a bit easier to read.
If you would like a fully referenced version with 'methods' section,
I’ll happily email you one: tan_dsc@yahoo.co.uk
Summary
As youth work is increasingly subsumed within the capitalist project, youth workers can no longer claim political neutrality. This paper examines whether there is a 'radical' form of youth work which takes sides against capitalism, authoritarianism and ecological destruction. A definition of radical youth work is proposed which emphasises struggle as well as informal education, and political as well as methodological values. Using this definition, the paper reviews radical influences on youth work debate and practice. The concept of radical youth work challenges workers to choose which side they are on; if they fail to do so, youth work will become more firmly entrenched as a form of social control.
Introduction:
In
search of 'niches and forgotten corners'
My motivation for writing
this paper is to make some sense of the contradictions and possibilities
of trying to live out ecological and anarchist beliefs while attempting
to be a ‘good’ youth worker. A brief personal history: I left school
full of naïve political vigour, fresh from fighting the school mock
election as a Green Party candidate and interested in neither university
nor career. I volunteered at a playscheme and a youth project and went
to live on a local anti-road action camp. A year later, the road protest
fizzled out and I got my first paid playwork job. I began to experience
something of a dual identity as public services worker and political
activist. Challenges included negotiating the clash between professional
and activist cultures, explaining my criminal convictions to employers,
and managing my time and energy between two demanding and unpredictable
activities. In recent years I have prioritised my youth worker identity,
while trying to maintain at least some political integrity.
This has not always been
successful. My condescending vision of raising the consciousness of
young people was obstructed by the everyday realities of youth work,
especially because I had no coherent theory to support my practice.
In this study I attempt to address the latter, at least. When I began
doing some background reading I was struck by two things. First, despite
many youth workers identifying themselves as anti-authoritarian there
is surprisingly little written on the subject of youth work against
the status quo, especially when compared with the more extensive literature
on radical schooling. I realised I could not investigate radical youth
work before asking whether such a concept even exists. Second, I discovered
a widely-held view that youth work’s survival is threatened, in particular
its distinctive principles of informal education and voluntary participation.
This perceived threat to youth work is part of the backdrop to this
study.
In their critique of recent government youth policy, Jeffs and Smith argue,
“For youth work to survive with any integrity it will be necessary to exploit niches and forgotten corners; and to hide from, or at least stay out of sight of, key state surveillance systems”.
I am seduced by this hint
at youth work practice which is prepared to oppose the state to preserve
its integrity. The search for ‘niches and forgotten corners’ suggested
the questions I have attempted to address. Can I justify approaching
youth work from a political perspective? Is a notion of ‘radical youth
work’ meaningful, and if so, how can it be defined? Is there a history
of radical youth work? How do youth workers from radical perspectives
experience the dilemmas and contradictions of working 'in and against
the state'? What are the possibilities, if any, for future radical youth
work theory and practice?
With its roots in volunteering
and community-based projects, youth work lacks an extensive literature.
There is little recent writing from an explicitly anti-capitalist perspective
and ecological perspectives on youth work tend towards liberal reformism.
I hope this paper adds modestly to youth work theory, stimulates debate
and adds meaning to my own youth work practice. As Marx argued, “The
philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point,
however, is to change it”. I hope, at least, to change my own actions
in the world by developing a more coherent theoretical understanding.
Ideally, I would love this paper to spark thoughts, agreements and disagreements
amongst others interested in whether there is such a thing as radical
youth work.
In structure this paper
moves broadly from the general to the specific. Chapter one sets the
context, arguing that youth work is affected by ideology and can never
be a neutral endeavour. In chapter two I develop a theory and definition
of radical youth work. Chapter three looks for radical influences on
ideological struggle in the history of modern youth work, while chapter
four focuses on attempts at radical practice. In this context, chapter
five reflects on some of my own experiences of dilemmas in radical youth
work. In the conclusion I summarise the key dilemmas and possibilities
of radical youth work. This paper was originally written as an undergraduate
'Education Studies' dissertation, but I've been encouraged to produce
a slightly more readable and less academic version. In re-reading for
this purpose I can inevitably see plenty of things I want to change,
but I'll leave that for another time or it'll take me months. So in
general, apart from taking out the methods section and a lot of the
references, it's similar to the original essay and so I'm afraid it's
probably a bit jargonistic and long-wordy at times. Any comments,
criticisms and suggestions for improvements on writing as well as youth
work and politics are particularly welcome!
1. Background:
The
myth of the neutral youth worker
“Youth work,” I used
to say, “means working alongside young people for positive change”.
Others define youth work as 'giving kids something to do', ‘building
relationships' or 'social and political education'. These different
language choices inevitably reflect different ideological positions.
The background to this study, then, is not a neutral description of
what youth work is. Instead I argue that everything that is said, written
or done about youth work is affected by ideologies. I am aware that
those of us on the political left inevitably fill our writing with the
questioning of common-sense, the problematising of concepts, the dissecting
of language. This tendency put me off reading theory as a novice youth
worker. I used to think, why do we have to question everything, let's
get to the point! But youth work is a product of struggle, debate and
competing ideologies, and if youth workers don't try to understand this
then we'll probably support the existing political system by default.
Ideology is what people believe to be common sense, or in Meighan and Siraj-Blatchford's words,
“a broad interlocked set of ideas and beliefs about the world held by a group of people that they demonstrate in both behaviour and conversation to various audiences... they become the taken-for-granted way of making sense of the world”.
Youth work has professional ideologies, often formalised as ‘good practice’ guidelines. It is also shaped by the varied ideologies of its workers, its young participants and the wider structures in which it operates. This challenges the idea that it is possible to be a politically neutral youth worker. Freire argues that so-called neutral education,
“uses the classroom to inculcate in the students political attitudes and practices, as if it were possible to exist as a human being in the world and at the same time be neutral”.
Shaw argues that in community
work “neutrality is not an option, for ‘no politics’ inevitably
means ‘their politics’”. Similarly, youth work that does not actively
support social change inevitably supports the status quo.
A brief critical analysis
of my earlier youth work definition demonstrates that the language we
use often consiously or unconsciously reflect our ideological position.
'Working alongside' suggests equality between young people and adults
in the youth work relationship. But hierarchy is rarely absent in reality,
and my phrasing is rather utopian. 'Young people' is professional youth
work jargon; just as social workers refer to ‘clients’ and teachers
to ‘pupils’, the phrase ‘young people’ is also adult-imposed,
but intends to show respect. The phrase 'young people' also assumes
a commonly understood and socially constructed stage of life between
childhood and adulthood. 'Positive change' implies my opposition to
the status quo, but its unqualified use assumes a common understanding
of good and bad and a pluralist belief in change generally. As Thomas
argues, “the plain, but uninteresting, fact is that most human transactions
can be conceptualised as change activities”. My definition reflected
some of my beliefs but was rather naïve and vague.
Lack of theory makes youth workers particularly susceptible to such vagueness. Jeffs and Smith argue that youth works' weaknesses,
“arise from the extent to which workers fail to rise above the 'taken for granted', and are unable to develop the sort of sophisticated ways of working that are necessary”.
There are at least three reasons for this. First, youth work's low status leads to workers prioritising survival over analysis; criticism risks projects and jobs and can therefore be seen as disloyal. Second, the growing culture of public service managerialism promotes the myth that workers have commonly agreed goals and need only find out how best to achieve them. Third, there is a common tendency of resistance to theory. The following quote from playleader Jack Lambert is typical of this anti-intellectual discourse.
“Frankly I believe
that academic degrees are of no help in this field of work; it is some
other elusive quality which ensures that a playground always seems to
be a hive of activity.”
There has always been a
somewhat tenuous relationship between youth work ideology and what actually
happens in youth clubs and projects, leading to suggestions that the
practice of youth work tends to be more conservative than its liberal
theory. This divide between ideas and practice is partly related to
youth work itself, which must focus its practice on what young people
want or they will leave. This is why, for example, a youth worker may
aim to work for social change but spend much of her time organising
pool tournaments and bowling trips. Another factor limiting the practice
of progressive theories is the ongoing attack on left-wing movements
generally. Many socialist youth workers are disillusioned or exhausted
after experiencing the defeat of the old labour movement, symbolised
by the demise of the great miners’strike.
Lack of theory has led to “an interesting myth about the lack of coherence to youth work practice”, as Leigh and Smart argue. Before going on to define radical youth work specifically it is therefore important to identify what is fundamental and distinctive about youth work generally. Bernard Davies, Tony Jeffs and Mark Smith have written in more depth on this subject, but for the purposes of this paper I argue that youth work's distinctiveness can be summarised in three features:
This reflects findings from
my literature review in which these features are repeatedly emphasised
across different ideologies and types of youth work.
Youth work is influenced
by ideology in the language used to describe it, the features which
define it and what takes place under its name. Where consensus exists,
it results from ideological struggle by workers, young people and others.
Youth work's social educational purpose was established during its professionalisation
in the late 1930s and has been defended since then. The informal approach
survives so far, despite attacks by government-imposed curricula, inspection
and bureaucracy. The principle of voluntary participation remains despite
pressure to target and monitor supposedly 'problematic' individuals.
These key features of youth work have remained for nearly seventy years
despite attempts by the political right to undermine them.
2.
Towards a theory of 'radical' youth work
What is 'radical youth work'?
At the beginning of this study my radical youth worker identity was
a matter of instinct and I had no clear answer to this question. One
of my early tasks, therefore, was to search for a theory of radical
youth work, but while the concept existed in youth work literature it
was rarely theorised in detail. I needed a definition or framework of
radical youth work to assess my findings against, one based on my own
experience and informed by theory. Although youth work lacks extensive
written theory, “people routinely use theories without making them
explicit or labelling them as such” as Bond argues. Youth work theory
tends to be grounded in practical experience, but often contains inadequately
considered assumptions. To develop a theory of radical youth work I
initially considered some of my own assumptions.
My choice of the word 'radical'
requires justification because it is rooted in my (sub-)cultural context.
I identify as a radical because of my history and continuing identification
with environmental and anti-capitalist direct action movements. I take
my political identity into my workplace, both inevitably and intentionally.
I try to provide spaces and skills for young people to practice skills
of co-operative community; I aim to be a political educator, but a questioning
influence rather than a propagandist; and I believe in young people
taking power for themselves, using that power to care for others and
the planet as well as themselves. Specifically I call myself an ecological
anarchist but, while I make no secret of this, there are probably few
ecological anarchist youth workers. In this paper therefore I am interested
in a broader category of political conviction which I sum up with the
word 'radical'.
In common usage the word 'radical' suggests extremity on any political
spectrum, for example, ‘Thatcher's radical welfare reforms’, ‘radical
Islamists’ and ‘radical animal rights activists’. The less
political use implies newness, as
in “The BBC today unveiled radical plans to rebuild its website”,
a usage which paradoxically results from radical's older meaning as
'returning to the roots'. However, the political sub-cultural
meaning of 'radical' is also valid. Building a political movement includes
creating or changing language, and the word radical is used by left-wing
and anarchist movements. These encompass people who label themselves
as anarchists, socialists, communists, feminists, anti-racists, environmentalists,
those who identify with various labels, and those who avoid political
labels. There are as many differences within each group as between them,
so the catch-all 'radical' is usefully vague. It is used by professional
groups including teachers, social workers, community workers and midwives,
but is harder to find in youth work theory.
Tony Jeffs, one of UK youth work's most eminent academics, wrote an article entitled, 'Whatever happened to radical youth work?'. Jeffs presents youth work history as dominated by two ideological traditions, conservative and radical, with the latter in decline. His concept of radical youth work is most clearly articulated in this passage;
“There has always been a radical tradition within youth work, of workers committed to not merely working with young people, but working with young people in order to try and create a better society. Something that is about radical root and branch reform”.
But if radical youth work
is about creating a better society, what would this society look like?
This question is barely addressed. While agreeing with Jeffs' analysis
that there are different ideological traditions in youth work, I would
argue that to reduce them to two traditions is overly simplistic and
leads to a broad definition which encompasses socialist, liberal and
all non-conservative youth work. A narrower definition would usefully
distinguish radical youth work from reformist liberalism.
Canadian academic Hans Skott-Myhre conceptualises radical youth work from a specifically Marxist perspective. In a recent article with Gretzinger he defines radical youth work as:
“…an alternative form of work done with youth that centres on the premise of intergenerational collaboration that might be described as located on the edge”.
This collaboration theory
is reminiscent of Hart’s ‘ladder of participation’ model, which
promotes an ideal of young people and adults sharing decisions (see
chapter 4). This idea is exemplified by Youth Force, a community action
group in the Bronx. But the trouble with collaboration as an end in
itself is that it assumes progressive political values on the part of
the children and adults involved. Would collaboration between adult
BNP1 activists and young people, leading to direct action
and challenges to the status quo, count as radical youth work in this
model? Skott-Myhre and Gretzinger clearly argue from a left-wing perspective,
but their definition of radical youth work is based on methods rather
than values.
The tendency for educators on the left to fudge their values led Freire to argue,
“I cannot be a teacher and be in favour of everyone and everything. I cannot be in favour merely of people, humanity, vague phrases far from the concrete nature of human practice” (p93)
Youth workers are often
guilty of this vagueness, partly because of a strong belief in non-judgmentalism.
At best, this prevents stereotyping and negative labelling, but at worst
can stifle debate. Struggles against sexism and racism, however, have
successfully changed youth work discourse and practice. I do not claim
that youth work is always anti-sexist and anti-racist, but the overt
sexist or racist comments and actions which were once common in youth
clubs are becoming rarer. While these forms of youth work have at times
been contradictory or ineffective, they are at least refreshingly clear
about their political values.
My working definition below,
then, is based on values (which I admit could be accused of being 'vague
phrases'; it's difficult to avoid this in a short definition). It aims
to include various left-wing or anarchist political positions but not
be so broad as to encompass 'everything except the right'. My definition
also includes fun and informal education, and points out the inevitability
and necessity of political struggle. It is inevitably imperfect, but
is at least a basis for this paper and for wider debate.
Radical youth workers work informally with young people and take them seriously. Their daily work is informed by political and moral values: opposition to capitalism and authoritarianism, belief in equality and respect for the environment. They question 'common sense' and reflect critically on their work. They are aware that practising their beliefs will involve debate and struggle, but try to have fun too!
3. Controllers or liberators?
Radical
influences on youth work struggles
This chapter focuses on struggles in youth work history, and whether radicals have had influence on them. For the sake of brevity I will consider the radical influence on three key debates:
Education or control?
The concept of informal
education is central to modern youth work discourse, but youth work's
roots are in leisure provision. Nineteenth century youth organisations
such as the Boys Brigade, the Girls Friendly Society, Scouts and Guides
used leisure activities to inculcate middle-class values. Youth work
jargon gives clues to these origins; the phrase 'youth provision' implies
something provided by someone (middle-class adults) for someone else
(working-class young people). Early youth work was a response to fears
of working-class ‘disorder’, and aimed to prepare young people for
war and the workplace. After the introduction of the state-sponsored
Youth Service in 1939 and its strengthening in 1960, youth workers increasingly
defined themselves as informal educators. This conceptual change from
the control of leisure time to education was pragmatic as well as ideological;
educators attract higher pay and status than leisure workers and police
officers.
In a review of training, Butters and Newall argued that most youth work was part of the 'Social Education Reportoire' and as such had made a 'critical break' with character-building aims. They even called for the further radicalisation of youth work (a call which is less common in recent state-funded research reports!) In any case, Butters and Newall gave the impression that socially controlling forms of youth work had all but ended. Several years later, Tony Taylor argued that this had been over-stated:
“contrary to what liberal ideologies might wish to be true, character building, the indoctrination of obedience to the capitalist imperative, is alive and flourishing”.
Capitalism was well entrenched
in the youth work of the 1970s and 1980s, not only through ‘character
building’ but also through its involvement in work-related skill courses
and job creation schemes.
Many youth club members today remain blissfully unaware they are meant to be getting an education, assuming that workers merely “wield the keys and distribute the table tennis balls”. Meanwhile, the state has attempted to formalise youth work's educational role by introducing a curriculum, unpopular with young people and youth workers. Recent government policy requires youth workers to measure their members' achievements through recorded and accredited outcomes. Tiffany's research found that even detached youth work2 is becoming structured, thereby excluding the most vulnerable young people it sets out to reach. As Jeffs argues,
“The provision of quantifiable output measures for youth work is impossible; for who can measure the worth of a conversation, the value of an experience or the depth of an insight, on a scale of one to ten?”.
Specifically radical influences
on these debates are hard to detect, possibly because the fairly united
(if muted) opposition by youth workers to social control policy has
blurred boundaries between liberals and the left.
Equalising or oppressive?
Radical influences are more easily seen in anti-oppressive youth work. This includes youth work against homophobia, classism and disablism (albeit limited in some cases), but I will focus on anti-racist and feminist youth work. Lincoln Octavious Williams explores these tensions from a black neo-Marxist perspective, arguing that the state and white youth workers perceive black workers as a means of controlling black young people. Williams argues that success in these terms means,
“we alienate ourselves from our communities, because we have to repress to a greater extent. It is one of the principle ways that we can show we are not a threat to the white system”.
Gus John's Youth and Race
research project concluded that youth work was institutionally racist,
working from a pathological view of black young people, and trying to
control or exclude them. Radical black activists have been at the forefront
of developing youth work practice that explicitly aims to change the
system rather than support the status quo. Inevitably, the state attempted
to limit this effect, using 'divide and rule tactics' to make groups
compete for funding rather than work together.
Early twentieth century
girls work varied from the conservative, emphasising motherhood and
marriage, to the feminist, promoting knowledge of social issues and
lobbying for more rights for working women. By the early 1960s, most
girls clubs had become mixed and dominated by boys, while boys clubs
remained. This led to feminist critiques which accused youth work of
inherent sexism. In the 1980s, women feminists started girls groups,
facilitated discussions on sexism and challenged unequal access to resources,
while some male workers explored feminist approaches to boys work. Openly
feminist youth work has declined, partly because of negative perceptions
of feminism and partly because resources continue to favour supposedly
criminal young men. The limited resources for girls are often for teenage
pregnancy reduction, as young women tend to be perceived as sexually
rather than criminally deviant.
Responses to new managerialism
New managerialism has been
a growing influence on public services during the Thatcher, Major and
Blair years. Youth work has been affected later than most, somewhat
protected by its traditional role as the 'cinderella service' where
underfunding is accompanied by relative autonomy from state and market.
But managerialism increasingly affects youth work, introduced through
apparently generous funding with strings attached. ‘Diversionary activities'
(under various policy guises) have enabled youth projects to organise
attractive and expensive activities which were previously unaffordable.
In return they are asked to target certain named individuals and keep
detailed personal records on them which are often shared with other
agencies. Opposition to this monitoring and surveillance has been limited;
as generic youth work faces cuts, many youth workers have had to choose
between colluding with the new managerialism and facing the closure
of their projects.
Meanwhile, marketisation of youth work is heralded in the familiar guise of choice in the Government's ‘Youth Matters’ paper:
“Our first challenge is to put young people themselves in control of the things to do and places to go in their area. We don't want government agencies second guessing them. So we propose to put buying power directly in the hands of young people themselves…”.
This means 'Youth Opportunity Cards' to be topped up by parents and local government for access to facilities including youth projects. If introduced the cards may increase choice for middle-class young people who can afford expensive activities, but will offer nothing to the most vulnerable: “This subsidy would be withheld from young people engaging in unacceptable and anti-social behaviours and the card suspended or withdrawn”. Again, there are few signs of active resistance except perhaps from trade unionists such as Doug Nicholls:
“The Youth Service
could be bought and sold by young people swinging their new Opportunity
Card in the direction of terrified councillors. If the young people
misbehave of course their rights to cheap McDonalds and political influence
in the Council House will be taken away. Whatever!”
Summary
I have looked briefly at some important struggles in youth work history but missed out many others, including young people's struggles against youth work. While there has not been a coherent radical tendency, there is evidence of scattered radical involvement in struggles over the direction and role of youth work, particularly in anti-oppressive youth work. One common thread is that youth work has been most successfully controlled through resource allocation. It is unclear whether radical youth work has diminished, but there is a worrying lack of concerted opposition to current repressive youth work policy. Many youth workers are willingly joining the managerial recuperation of youth work, and those that do not are treated with suspicion. Apple's reflections on similar struggles in schooling strike a chord;
“Active professionals
are free to follow their entrepreneurial urges – as long as they 'do
the right thing'... Foucault's panoptican is everywhere”.
4. “The type of place we were looking for”:
Radical
youth work in practice
Practical examples of radical
youth work are limited in number but qualitatively important. To give
an analogy, anti-climate change action happens at various levels including
through governments, the media and pressure groups. Radical direct action
groups are qualitatively different from other campaigners in both their
methods and values, despite often receiving less media attention. By
blocking the Drax power station and calling for it to be permanently
closed, protesters acted themselves instead of asking for government
action, drawing attention to the major changes they argue are needed
to halt climate change. Similarly, radical practice has been a minority
aspect of youth work but its methods and values are distinct. I will
consider three areas where radicals have had an impact: political education,
autonomous spaces and environmental youth work.
Political Education
Magnuson argues that political education is more often reformist than radical;
“Instead of politics, we have created niches where we allow youth to participate, and we have created new languages, for example, civic engagement, character education, and public work. These niches and languages distract us - and youth - from participation in decisions about substantive political issues, and they allow us to avoid the real conflicts and divides that are part of politics”.
However, radical youth workers
have sometimes created “opportunities for lived democracy: those tiny,
small little pockets where real democracy grows” as Tony Jeffs puts
it. Genuine participation in youth projects can give young people confidence
to engage in wider political issues; one group for example became “a
force to be reckoned with. They don't sit back and take what is handed
out to them”. As Roger Hart's 'Ladder of Participation' proposes,
young people can participate at different levels but it is better to
involve them in real decisions rather than simulating involvement in
structures which are unlikely to listen to them. Examples of youth workers
supporting meaningful youth involvement in local politics include Youth
Force in the Bronx and the Lewisham Young Mayor project.
(Diagram from
http://freechild.org)
Anti-oppressive youth work
practice tends to be claimed as radical, but is not necessarily so.
Spence found that many young women's workers refused the label feminist
and adopted political moderation as a survival strategy. John and Williams
found that young people in many black-led youth projects were more politically
aware than their youth workers. However, small voluntary organisations
in particular have taken radical approaches to anti-oppressive issues.
The Hideaway in Moss Side, Manchester was set up in the 1970s to counter
negative perceptions of Moss Side and its black young people. As well
as providing social activities, the centre was active in struggles against
police violence and racism and was seen as a safe space for black young
people during the riots. The Water Adventure Centre, also in Manchester,
uses canoeing and water-based play as a basis for youth work and is
locally known for its successful feminist work.
Autonomous Spaces
Libertarian schools such as Summerhill inspired various informal education projects where young people had a high level of autonomy. Marie Paneth was an early pioneer of such spaces, running a children's project during the London blitz with few rules and minimal adult direction. She explained, “I never interfered with their work, except that I met every attempt to produce anything at all, with approval”. Paneth was an early advocate of adventure playgrounds, which were at their most popular in the 1960s and 1970s. These were areas of derelict land supervised by an adult whose role was to acquire building materials, look after tools and dissuade bullying. Although adventure playgrounds were aimed at younger children, teenagers sat on the edges smoking and talking. The freedom of the playgrounds was at odds with their everyday lives, as this teenager explains,
“I found that far
from settling down to study, as I should, I was restless through lack
of freedom I suppose and felt rebellious towards schooles”.
The Paint House was an independent youth club run by two youth workers from an anarchist perspective. The workers encouraged local young people to use the space, hoping they would take responsibility for it. A group of 'skinheads' adopted the building, repeatedly trashing and re-building it, eventually realising it was an opportunity to have a space of their own.
“When we first come 'ere you told us that this was our place, to do what we liked but we didn't believe you. We tried to force you to tell us what to do... we didn't realise that this was the type of place we were looking for”.
The workers used the anti-authoritarian
values they shared with the young people as a focus for informal education,
but were less effective where values clashed such as on racism. The
group members eventually became less racist through relationships with
the workers, but in the meantime the building was a safe space for active
racists. The balance between autonomy and authority is an inevitable
dilemma in this type of youth work. Other self-run youth projects sprung
up in the 1970s and 1980s, often inspired by the punk movement. For
a time it was not unheard of for young people to run youth clubs, hold
keys or be allowed to sleep overnight. Such freedoms are difficult to
imagine in these days of risk assessment, inspections, litigation and
financial regulation.
Environmental youth work
Although the environment
has been a significant focus of radical political activity in the last
twenty years, this is not reflected in youth work. Despite calls for
an increase in environmental youth work this has so far not transpired.
Edbrooke encountered a widespread assumption that environmental education
should be confined to schools. Francique suggests that youth workers
feel under-informed about the environment. Connelly argued that 'issues'
such as recycling do not greatly interest most young people, whereas
engaging young people in taking action on their surroundings attracts
more attention.
Where the environment does appear in youth work, it is usually perceived as uncontroversial rather than as potentially radical. Francique shows a reformist perspective to environmental youth work when she writes, “What is required is merely a shift in approach rather than a major reorientation”. Others are more controversial. Dearling and Armstrong ask,
“Should youth work stick to the 'safe' areas such as recycling and tree planting, or can empowerment embrace the Do it Yourself culture of the road and tree protesters?”
Roger Hart argues that children are likely to be more willing than adults to act on environmental issues because they are less vested in economic systems and spend more time in their local areas.
“There is considerable theoretical reason to believe that concern for the environment is based on an affection that can only come from autonomous, unmediated contact with it”.
Groups such as the Woodcraft
Folk and Wild Things in Nottinghamshire approach environmental youth
work from a social equality perspective, aiming to encourage wider access
to varied environments and outdoor activities.
Summary
While these examples of
radical youth work practice may seem marginal, it is worth remembering
(as Beresford and Beresford put it) that youth workers themselves have
“scant resources with which to challenge the status quo, and can only
try to do their best to equip young people to cope with or resist it”.
These examples bring into sharp focus the dilemmas that are an inevitable
aspect of radicalism. Can we engage in state-sponsored initiatives like
the participation agenda from a critical rather than a conformist perspective?
Are libertarian projects still possible, and can we give experiences
of freedom without condoning oppressive beliefs and actions? Why have
environmental issues not been a significant focus for struggle? Radical
youth work seems to ask more questions than it answers.
5. “A tightrope we walk daily...”
Experiences
of youth work
For radical youth workers,
everyday practice is (as Williams argues) “a tightrope we walk daily,
quite often losing our balance, and we only manage to maintain our grip
by our fingertips”. So far I have neglected this day-to-day reality;
in this chapter I will redress the balance by reflecting on some of
my own experiences. Robin Richardson argues that “much of our experience
in education is ODTAA – one damn thing after another”. One way of
communicating this complexity of everyday events is through fictional
or narrative forms, as Robin Richardson and Peter Clough have done.
My narrative passages are not fictional, but I find that using aspects
of this form enables me to focus on certain details and skip over others
without simplifying the issues involved. As Bernard Davies argues, practice
is often “the result of improvisation, of expediency, of compromise,
even of opportunism”. Therefore, rather than selecting 'successful'
or representative examples of my experience I have simply chosen memories
which illustrate some dilemmas in radical youth work.
Fifteen teenagers
huddle by a local landmark, uncertain and expectant behind their cardboard
signs ('SAVE OUR YOUTH SERVICE'). “Did you just happen to be in town
shopping too, then?” asked a colleague, smiling. I smiled back but
to tell the truth I was surprised at the question. It has come to something
when we can't even admit to supporting young people who want to protect
their youth centres and our jobs. Are advocacy and community action
no longer part of youth work? I used to joke that a measure of good
youth work was whether the young people were fighting the council over
something or another. The joke's not funny now. My manager was scared
to put up a poster about this protest. Instead, our youth centre walls
are decorated with motivational posters demanding pride in our employer
even as it makes our colleagues redundant.
I do not wish to blame my
colleagues for being cautious; they were brave to support the young
organisers of this protest and I believe some were told off. But it's
hard to fight for something without admitting you are doing so. In this
case I asserted my right to attend this protest in my own time and refused
to lie about why I was there, but I am a very junior employee and can
get away with it easier than my managers. At other times I have been
more cautious. I've never told this next story to other youth workers,
and I am interested in what readers might think!
I was due in court
for ripping up genetically modified crops. The young people were indignant
that I'd taken a day off in the middle of the summer programme, so I
told them and my co-worker about the court case and they all decided
to come to court to support me. I was surprised, delighted, but a bit
worried how it would look to my manager – and (accidentally on purpose)
I never got around to telling him. The astonished look on the usher's
face was priceless as twelve black young people entered the public
gallery of that small-town-white courtroom. The youngest were escorted
out; none of us knew that 'minors' are not allowed in court. The hearing
lasted all of ten minutes, but back home we talked for days: should
children should be allowed to watch court cases, why did I break the
law, should people with criminal records become youth workers, what
it's like being arrested? I still think this was good youth work...
but the episode didn't get a mention in my summer report!
I am unconvinced by my excuses
for dishonesty; I had trustworthy colleagues I could have discussed
my decision with. Other types of youth worker dishonesty include 'talking
the talk' while doing very little. I have met some politically aware
people who talk for hours about problems with government youth policy,
institutional sexism or racism in the youth service, and how the bosses
know nothing. And yet, there are only a few youth workers I have had
these conversations with and then gone out and done a satisfying night
of youth work.
“Forgot my coat,”
she said, and I wondered if her half-smile was in apology or smug satisfaction
at getting one over on me. Eight times I had cycled cold miles to this
echoing community centre to work at a mythical youth club, and I hadn't
met one young person. My new colleagues worried me, so satisfied moaning
about how they and the local young people had been done wrong by the
council in the past. Now they collected their wages as some kind of
compensation for how they'd been messed about, and they certainly weren't
impressed at having me imposed on them, me a naïve southerner suggesting
that we walk around the estate and get to know some young people for
once.
I've experienced and heard
versions of this story many times. But what should be done? The 'new
managerial' response would include support and supervision, clear targets
and disciplinary action 'as a last resort'. As an anarchist I automatically
side with workers against management, but I believe in youth work and
get frustrated at colleagues' laziness. Some argue that the council
does not own them, so why should they work harder than necessary? My
energetic enthusiasm makes me a productive employee; am I the radical?
My involvement in youth work is part of my political action in the world
whereas for others, it is a job to be skived like any other. Unless
I achieve political change through my youth work, who decides who's
right and wrong?
'Teamwork'; a word
popular in workplaces and youth clubs. I'm suspicious of its managerial
overtones, and yet remember wistfully a time when I really felt like
part of a team. Each week, several detached youth workers got together
to share experiences and discuss things that affected us, from local
policies and funding to wider political issues affecting young people
and ourselves as workers. Our manager encouraged critical reflection
and sprinkled our discussions with theories from Freire and Foucault.
These sessions were powerful; I was on the edge of my seat! Our manager
encouraged us to take up training opportunities and go to university;
to see ourselves as educators and to educate ourselves too. He trusted
us, and showed it by dividing the project's budget between us. I have
never before or since heard of part-time youth workers being given such
financial autonomy. But it was collective autonomy: we answered not
just to our manager and the young people we worked with, but also in
each weekly meeting we answered to our peers.
This 'collective autonomy'
approach could address laziness and incompetence, but this would serve
conservative as well as radical aims. While some methods may be suited
to radical practice, it is values which distinguish it. This is of course
the case with all youth work. An example from my experience is the Streetmates
group who got together to have a say in the regeneration of their local
area. The power and success of this group was that the motivation came
from the young people themselves and that their objectives were supported
by us youth workers. (If the same young people had wanted to set up
a community group to stop asylum seekers from living in their area,
I'd have taken a dissuasive role rather than an encouraging one.)
Inevitably I have only skimmed the surface of some of the dilemmas I have struggled with in my own practice. I use my personal experience with the awareness that, as Magnuson argues, “Historically, it is too often those who seek to liberate who are the most self-deceptive about their own motives”. Honest critical reflection shared with our peers should go some way to preventing this. As well as oral discussions and academic writing, I am interested in the use of narrative to celebrate and criticise youth work practice from a radical perspective. As Richardson argues,
“Racism and nationalism
are kept alive through narratives as well as through structures, and
we need – amongst other things – our own oppositional narratives
in order to deal with them”.
Conclusion:
Taking
sides
This paper would have been
easier to write had my focus been on criticising the myriad capitalist
influences on youth work rather than looking for the few radical ones.
I wanted to find possibilities and hope, but found my optimism tested.
Despite wearing rose-tinted spectacles I did not find it easy to reclaim
radical theory and practice, possibly because its history is scattered
and barely recorded, its theories vague and its practice contradictory.
However, as long as I remain a youth worker I intend to test the potential
of radical theory and practice. The alternative is to stand by as youth
workers become indistinguishable from other soft-cop public employees
such as community wardens, police support officers and neighbour nuisance
mediators. These professions have little space for the radical values
I identified in chapter two, 'opposition to capitalism and authoritarianism,
belief in equality and respect for the environment'. I believe there
is still room for the practice of these values in youth work.
This conclusion builds on
discussions in previous chapters to propose some key dilemmas and possibilities
for future attempts at radical youth work practice. The dilemmas are
questions which the preparation of this paper has brought into sharp
focus. Although I have strong feelings about the issues they raise,
they are dilemmas because I cannot yet see a clear way forward. The
possibilities are my proposals for radical youth workers, guidelines
I intend to test out in my future practice. Although I will use the
inclusive pronoun “we” to refer to those who identify with the definition
of radical youth work I proposed in chapter two, I do not mean to assume
common agreement. I suggest rather that these dilemmas and possibilities
would benefit from further discussion and debate.
Five Dilemmas
Youth workers hide behind
the excuse that we support young people in what they want rather than
acting on our own values. This is nonsensical unless we only work with
young people we broadly agree with; I have yet to meet a youth worker
who helped young fascist sympathisers with their leaflets. If radicalism
includes taking sides against structural forces of capitalism and state
control, shouldn't we act as strongly against these as we (should) do
against racism? The dilemma is that youth work has been subsumed into
capitalism. Fighting this would mean opposing systems our jobs require
us to comply with such as the direct surveillance of young people through
computerised monitoring systems.
New managerialism in youth
work is culturally enforced through the tyranny of 'good practice'.
Things which were debateable are now the norm; minor health and safety
risks over-ride freedom to develop innovative projects, monitoring requirements
undermine confidentiality, and accredited 'benchmarks' challenge the
principle of informality. Just as we encourage young people to think
critically, we too need to think for ourselves, questioning and debating
the new common-sense. As with the previous dilemma, taking action on
these issues could be more daunting.
The state controls youth
workers most effectively through the targeting of resources rather than
through compulsory reforms (see chapter 3). There is no clear solution
for youth workers fearing for their jobs or attracted by improved facilities,
but this question cannot be dodged. Many of us are seduced by offers
of funding, becoming materialist in the guise of 'getting what's best
for the young people'. To maximise our freedom from the state, we may
need to explore how to run independent youth projects without funding,
but would this mean doing the state's job for free?
Burn-out and exhaustion
affect youth workers of all political perspectives. Radicals experience
particular stress because we constantly negotiate the contradictions
between our deeply-felt convictions and the policies and practices of
our employers. If we voice our opinions and act on our principles we
are labelled as 'troublemakers' and risk our funding, job or status.
In addition, it is inevitably stressful to live in a world which is
far from how we would like it to be. And yet, without hope we become
disillusioned and ineffective.
Youth work in itself has
changed little on a structural level. At best, our interventions are
small-scale and become apparent years later. One possibility is to remain
involved in other political activism as well as being a youth worker.
The success of youth work as political action relies heavily on feminist
'personal is political' theories. Structural change, on the other hand,
may be supported by radical youth work but is unlikely to result from
it. This can make daily practice feel rather hollow.
Five Possibilities
Collective autonomy means
exploiting freedoms and spaces as we find them, but as part of a community
rather than as unaccountable mavericks. We should create collectives
at different levels, from our own work teams to national networks. Different
types of existing networks include trade unions, the Federation for
Detached Youth Work and the Critical Chatting group3. As
part of networks we can discuss and debate ideas and take joint action.
Being part of a collective can address burn-out and isolation, and reduces
the ease with which individual 'troublemakers' can be targeted by the
state.
Autonomous spaces are among
the most important things youth work can offer. This does not mean we
should let young people do everything they want, but we could explicitly
aim to make youth clubs available for young people to use with some
degree of freedom and self organisation. Playworkers talk of providing
'compensatory space' for children who have few opportunities for freedom
and adventure in today's society. Teenagers (and adults) need play and
adventure too, but society curtails this impulse even more strongly
than in younger children. We should create spaces which compensate for
the authoritarianism young people meet everywhere they go, not seem
to be more of the same.
In recent years, youth work
theorists have increasingly argued the need to learn from history. There
has been a growth in written history and discussion forums such as the
History of Community and Youth Work conferences4. We should
engage in these conferences, read relevant literature, and reflect and
write about their own experiences and histories. Those of us who are
interested in theory should explore alternative ways to share this interest,
not confine it to documents like this which most youth workers don't
have the time or the inclination to read.
Most radicals agree that
youth work aims to educate, but for what? Our 'curriculum' (however
informal) should be powerful, not pointless. This could include sharing
skills of political involvement, exploring the environment and history
of local areas, and learning about inequalities and environmental destruction.
If we fail to move beyond the constraints of schooling, what is the
point of informal education? We need to consider our reasons for doing
any work that is neither excitingly educational nor the practice of
autonomy and adventure.
While the concept of waged
labour is problematic to me as an anarchist, I would choose to spend
time in dialogue with teenagers even in my utopian post-revolutionary
society. Even for those who would not, it is worth finding something
to love about youth work for the sake of ourselves and the young people
we work with. Workers who would rather be in their garden could fill
their youth club with plants and grow vegetables in window boxes. Those
who dream of the forest or the sea should take young people there whenever
they can. As well as following young people's existing interests youth
work should also broaden their horizons, and using our own interests
is consistent with this. It could also be a way for some of us to love
youth work again.
The theory and practice
of radical youth work is scattered, messy and contradictory, but this
does not excuse sitting on the fence. History shows that a passive response
to government interventions has resulted in youth work becoming increasingly
embroiled in the capitalist project. In pursuit of funding or simply
to follow the latest guidelines, we increasingly monitor and control
the most vulnerable young people, or lose contact with those young people
by concentrating on accreditation and formal programmes. History also
shows that radical workers can influence the direction of youth work
as well as organising projects for freedom and against authoritarianism,
for the environment and against capitalism, for equality and against
oppression. Through dialogue with colleagues and young people, we need
to work out which side we are on. Unless we want capitalism and social
control to become permanently entrenched in youth work, neutrality is
not an option.
Acknowledgements
Hundreds of conversations
with young people, friends, family and colleagues have informed my thinking
before and during this study, so I make no apologies for a long list
of acknowledgements, still too short to include all those I've spoken
with about youth work and radical politics. In influencing my thinking
before starting this study, I particularly want to mention colleagues
at Bath Development Education Centre, the A6 Detached Project (Manchester)
and the Water Adventure Centre (Manchester), projects in which critical
debate was encouraged. Similarly, staff and participants at Manchester
University's Community Work Unit have been vital influences on my thinking
and work.
During this study I have
appreciated the support and interest of many friends, colleagues and
family members, in particular:
Olie Brice:
for innumerable productive and supportive discussions, and commenting
on drafts.
Howard Gibson: for
being my supervisor; for teaching me about language and research, learning
about youth work, taking me seriously, and asking questions.
Tony and Marilyn Taylor:
for support, encouragement and very useful comments on a draft.
Tony Jeffs and Hans Skott-Myhre:
for showing enthusiasm and sharing reading suggestions.
The Critical Chatters:
for inspiration, enthusiasm and solidarity.
Chris
Griffin and Andrew Bengrey-Howell of Bath University, and all those
who came to my workshops at the Feminist Health Gathering or the History
of Community and Youth Work Conference:
for comments, questions, ideas and positive feedback.
Bibliography
Altrichter, H. (1993) The concept of quality in action research: giving practitioners a voice in educational research, chapter 3 in: M. Schratz (ed.) Qualitative Voices in Educational Research, London: Falmer
Apple, M. (2001) Educating the 'Right' Way: Markets, Standards, God and Inequality. New York: Routledge Falmer
Ball, C. & Ball, M. (1973) Education for a Change: Community Action and the School. Middlesex: Penguin.
Banks, S. (1993) Young people and the environment: an editorial, Youth and Policy 42: 1 – 5
BInvolved (2007) http://www.binvolved.org.uk/ accessed 1/5/07
Bradford, S. (1997) The management of growing up: young people in community settings, chapter 27 in: J. Roche & S. Tucker (eds.) Youth in Society. London: Sage Publications
Beresford, S. & Beresford, P. (1980) Powerless in Toytown, Youth in Society 49: 18 – 19
Bond, A. (ed.) (2004) Writing Your Masters Thesis. Bishops Lydeard: Studymates
Bradford, S. (1997) The management of growing up: youth work in community settings, Chapter 27 in J. Roche and S. Tucker (eds.) Youth in Society. London: Sage (Open University)
Butters, S. & Newell, S. (1978) Realities of Training: A Review of the Training of Adults who Volunteer to Work with Young People in the Youth and Community Service. London: National Youth Board
Checkoway, B., Figueroa,
L. & Richards-Schuster, K.
(2003) Democracy multiplied in an urban neighbourhood: Youth Force in
the South Bronx, Children, Youth and Neighbourhoods 13 (2) accessed
8/4/07 at http://colorado.edu/journals
Clough, P. (2002) Narratives and Fictions in Educational Research. Buckingham: Open University Press. Clough, P. & Nutbrown, C. (2002) A Student's Guide to Methodology: Justifying Enquiry. London: Sage
Connelly, D. (1993) Environmental youth work: making connections, Youth and Policy 42: 44 – 49
Daniel, S. & McGuire, P. (eds.) (1972) The Paint House: Words From an East End Gang. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin
Davies, B. (1977) Agency collaboration or worker control? Alternative models for more integrated services to young people. Youth in Society 22: 3 – 6
Davies, B. (1979)
From social education to social and life skills training: In whose interest?,
Leicester: National Youth Bureau. (Accessed on 7/4/07 at http://www.infed.org/archives
Davies, B. (1986) Threatening Youth: Towards a National Youth Policy, Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Davies, B. (2005) Youth Work: A Manifesto for our Times. Leicester: National Youth Agency.
Davies, B. (2006)
'Threatening Youth' revisited: youth policies under New Labour, The
Encyclopaedia of Informal Education
accessed 25/1/07 at www.infed.org/archives/bernard
Davis, M. (2000) Fashioning a New World: A History of the Woodcraft Folk. Loughborough: Holyoake Books
Dearling, A. & Armstrong, H. (1997) Youth Action and the Environment. Lyme Regis: Russell House Publishing
Department for Education and Skills (DfES) (2002) Transforming Youth Work: Resourcing Excellent Youth Services. Nottingham: DfES
DfES (2005) Youth Matters: Summary. Nottingham: DfES
Edbrooke, J. (1993) Policy into practice in Birmingham, Youth and Policy 42: 38 – 43
Flowers, R. (1998) How effective are youth workers in activating young people's voices? Youth Studies Australia 17 (4): 34 – 40
Francique, M. (2007) Working With Young People to Create a Climate of Change. Leicester: National Youth Agency
Freire, P. (1988) (trans. Myra Bergman Ramos) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum.
Freire, P. (1998) Pedagogy of Freedom: Ethics, Democracy and Civic Courage. Trans: P. Clarke. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield
Freire, P. & Shor, I. (1987) A Pedagogy for Liberation. Basingstoke: MacMillan
Guardian (2006) BBC
unveils radical revamp of website,
accessed on 27/3/07 at http://media.guardian.co.uk
Gilchrist, R., Jeffs, T. & Spence, J. (eds) (2001) Essays in the History of Youth and Community Work. Leicester: Youth Work Press
Gilchrist, R., Jeffs, T. & Spence, J. (eds) (2003) Architects of Change: Studies in the History of Community and Youth Work. Leicester: National Youth Agency
Harris, P.
(2005) The Curriculum Debate and Detached Youth Work,
accessed on 12/02/07 at http://www.detachedyouthwork
Hart, R. (1997) Childrens Participation: The Theory and Practice of Involving Young Citizens in Community Development and Environmental Care. London: Earthscan.
Hicks, D. (2004) Radical education, chapter 12 in: S. Ward (ed.) Education Studies: A Student’s Guide. London: Routledge Falmer
Humphries, S. (1981) Hooligans or Rebels? An Oral History of Working-Class Youth and Childhood 1889-1939. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Indymedia (2006)
Climate camp to target UK's largest power station, accessed on 7th
May 2007 at http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en
Ivanic, R. & Simpson, J. (1992) Who's who in academic writing? Chapter 6 in: N. Fairclough (ed.) Critical Language Awareness, Harlow: Longman.
Jeffs, T. (1997) Changing their ways: youth work and the underclass theory, chapter 10 in R. MacDonald (ed.) Youth, The 'Underclass' and Social Exclusion. London: Routledge.
Jeffs, T. (2002) Whatever happened to radical youth work?, in Concept 12 (2): 4-8
Jeffs, T. & Smith, M. (1994) Young people, youth work and a new authoritarianism, Youth and Policy 46.
Jeffs, T. & Smith, M. (2003) Putting youth work in its place, chapter 5 in P.C. Nolan (ed.) Twenty Years of Youth and Policy: A Retrospective. Leicester: National Youth Agency
Jeffs, T. & Smith, M. (2006) Where is Youth Matters Taking Us? Youth and Policy 91: 23-39
John, G. (1981) In the Service of Black Youth. Leicester: National Association of Youth Clubs.
Lambert, J. & Pearson, J. (1974) Adventure Playgrounds Harmondsworth: Penguin
Lambert, J. (1978) Political values and community work practice, chapter 1 in: P. Curno (ed.) Political Issues and Community Work, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul
Leigh, M. & Smart, A. (1985) Interpretation and Change: The Emerging Crisis of Purpose in Social Education. Leicester: National Youth Bureau
London – Edinburgh Weekend Return Group (1980) In and Against the State. London: Pluto
Magnuson, D. (2005) Response to 'captured by capital', Child and Youth Care Forum 34 (2): 163 – 166
Marx, K. (1845)
Thesis on Feuerbach, accessed 14/01/07 at http://www.cpusa.org/article
Meighan, R. & Siraj-Blatchford, I. (2004) A Sociology of Educating, Continuum
Morris, M. & Shagen, I. (1996) Green Attitudes or Learned Responses? Slough: National Foundation for Educational Research
Neill, A.S. (1968) Summerhill, Harmondsworth: Pelican
Nicholls, D. (2005) Youth work matters, CYWU Rapport November: 8-10
NOW (National Organisation for Work with Girls and Young Women) (1983) Reclaiming the past, Youth in Society, 79: 18 – 19
Paneth, M. (1944) Branch Street. London: The Women's Book Club, George and Allen and Unwin
Pons, L. (1981) Water adventure, Youth in Society 59: 13 -15
Richardson, R. (1990) Daring to be a Teacher. Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham
Richardson, R. (1996) Fortunes and Fables: Education for Hope in Troubled Times. Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham.
Robertson, S.
(2001) A warm, safe place: an argument for youth clubs, Infed,
accessed 6/2/07 at http://www.infed.org/archives
Shaw, M. (2003) ‘Community’, community work and the state, chapter 13 in: R. Gilchrist, T. Jeffs & J. Spence (ed.s) (2003) Architects of Change: Studies in the History of Community and Youth Work. Leicester: National Youth Agency
Skott-Myhre, H. (2005) Captured by capital: youth work and the loss of revolutionary potential, in Child and Youth Care Forum 34 (2): 141-157
Skott-Myhre, H. (2006) Radical youth work: becoming visible, Child and Youth Care Forum 35 (3) 219 - 229
Skott-Myhre, H. & Gretzinger, M. (undated) Creating a politics of mutual liberation for youth and adults, part 2, Journal of Child and Youth Care Work, 20: 110 – 127
Smith, M. (2001) Josephine Macalister Brew: Youth work and informal education, chapter 13 in: R. Gilchrist, T. Jeffs & J. Spence (ed.s) Essays in the History of Youth and Community Work. Leicester: Youth Work Press
Spence, J. (2003) Feminism in work with girls and young women, in P.C. Nolan (Ed.) Twenty Years of Youth and Policy: A Retrospective. Leicester: National Youth Agency
Spence, J., Pugh, C. & Turner, P. (2003) Reconfiguring youth work: some findings from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation detached and outreach research project, Youth and Policy 81
Stanton, N. (2004) The youth work curriculum and the abandonment of informal education, Youth and Policy 85: 71-85
Taylor, T. (1981) Challenging stereotypes, changing roles... and developing a strategy, Youth in Society 59: 18 – 20
Taylor, T. (1987) Youth workers as character builders: constructing a socialist alternative, Chapter 9 in: T. Jeffs & M. Smith (eds.) Youth work. London: MacMillan
Taylor, T. (2000)
Beyond connexions: a response, Infed, accessed on 03/02/07 at
http://www.infed.org/personalad
Taylor, T. (2007)
Youth Work and Class: The Struggle That Dare Not Speak Its Name,
accessed at http://critically-chatting
Thomas, D. N. (1978) Community work, social change and social planning, chapter 13 in: P. Curno (ed.) Political Issues and Community Work, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul
Tiffany, G. (2007) Standards and Excellence in Detached Youth Work, forthcoming
Turnbull, A. (2001) Gendering young people – work, leisure and girls clubs: the work of the National Organisation of Girls Clubs and its successors 1911 – 1961, chapter 7 in: R. Gilchrist, T. Jeffs & J. Spence (ed.s) Essays in the History of Youth and Community Work. Leicester: Youth Work Press
Water Adventure Centre (undated) Policy, Manchester: WAC
Wells, G. (1987) The Meaning Makers Portsmouth USA: Heinemann
Wild Things (2007) About Wild Things, accessed 07/05/07 at http://www.wildthings.org.uk/
Williams, L. (1988) Partial Surrender: Race and Resistance in the Youth Service. Lewes, Sussex: The Falmer Press
Wright, N. (1989) Assessing Radical Education. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Wylie, T. (2001) 'Those that I guard I do not love': a memoir of HM Inspectorate and youth work in the Thatcher era, chapter 15 in: R. Gilchrist, T. Jeffs & J. Spence (ed.s) Essays in the History of Youth and Community Work. Leicester: Youth Work Press
Young, K. (1999) The Art of Youth Work. Lyme Regis, Dorset: Russell House