Introduction‘At the end of 2006, 454,600 young people between the ages of 16 and 18 were classified as not being in any form of education and training (NET), with 206,200 of these classified as NEET (not in education, employment or training).’ (National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER), 2008)
Retention, attendance and learner cohesion are currently high within the current e2e cohort at the college forming part of this research. The researcher believes this is due to a specific two-week induction programme, together with a holistic and student centred approach from the e2e team. Research will explore the extent to which this is true and, if so, whether the successes of the e2e induction can be replicated or adapted across college to be of institutional benefit. The researcher’s hypothesis is: if improvement of retention, attendance and learner cohesion of NEETs are supported by undertaking a bespoke induction programme, then following such a programme will increase learner outcomes.
Research Description:
Research undertaken will consist of different types of research. The first phase will be retrospective: an analytical study of quantitative data comprised of statistical evidence pertaining to retention and attendance of learners held by the institute and a comparative study of induction resources used. In this respect analysis can be categorized as positivist in approach.
The second phase will be explorative: a study of ethnographic literature to present a perspective that expands the researcher’s understanding of NEETs. This will lead to qualitative research paradigms, where questionnaires will be created, and interviews undertaken if necessary, to obtain perceptions, views and reflections of participants involved in the planning and delivery of the January Start courses as well as views on learner cohesion. Cohen, Manion and Morrison’s (2007) planning model of ethnography will be used for guidance.
This phase will also look for emergent issues, whilst aiming to remain objective to avoid generalisation. Consideration will be given to ethics and participant wellbeing including the option to withdraw, see Appendix A: letter of consent. The researcher is aware of the weaknesses of this type of research, namely that of the researcher’s personal bias and subjectivity as well as the ability to identify relationships between independent and dependent variables (Cohen et al, 2007:p.p.272-296). The overall category of this phase is therefore interpretivist in approach. For guidance the Cohen et al (2207) action research model will be used see box 2.2.
The third phase will be analytically based, focusing on the triangulation of evidence from different sources. It may become evident that more than three sources are required for reliability. It will be important to ensure that qualitative data used for triangulation are comparable and balanced. It could also be found that instead of looking for just similar emerging elements to add validity and credibility, a different set of questions could be applied to the same data to see if the same trends emerge.
It was the researcher’s intention within the fourth phase to perform a controlled test, to assess and measure success of using a specific two-week induction programme. However, this would not be ethical as it is simply setting-up students and lecturers for possible failure. Furthermore it does not comply with the college’s ethos of parity and equity. Therefore, research will become predictive at this stage and a proposal will be put forward for induction across college to embrace characteristics of the specific e2e induction programme. If accepted, a second cycle of research will be undertaken, incorporating statistical and analytical study of quantitative and qualitative data to make a comparison with initial research to establish if the researcher’s hypothesis is correct.
Literature Review:
In the months from November 2008 to January 2009, Connexions identified 9,956 NEETs aged 16, 17 or 18 in the borough of Croydon (Department for Children, Schools and Families, (DCSF, 2009a). As a practitioner in the field of education specifically aimed at NEET learners, it is the interest of the researcher to look at ways of improving the retention, attendance and learner cohesion of NEET students. In order to do this effectively, it is the intention to first expand ones personal understanding of the ethnography, societal background and multiple complex needs of NEETs.
The literature review will look at qualitative and quantitative data within NFER’s (DCSF, 2009b) research report: Increasing Participation: Understanding Young People who do not Participate in Education or Training at 16 and 17, which was commissioned by the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) to explore the characteristics and experiences of NEETs and young people who were in jobs without training (JWT) and therefore at risk of becoming NEET. The researcher will also draw upon another DCSF (2008) report and its findings of two surveys: the Youth Cohort Study (YCS) and the Longitudinal Study of Young People in England (LSYPE) which carried out four ‘waves’ of interviews with the same cohort of young people from Spring 2004 to Spring 2007. From this report the researcher hopes to gain a better understanding of the ‘behaviours, experiences, and attitudes both of young people and their families’ (DCSF, 2008 p.1.1)
It will also look at qualitative and statistical data from theses and reports such as those produced by Yuji (2006), on Japanese NEETs where the definition covers a larger age range than those defined in the United Kingdom, and Chen (2009) who explores Taiwan’s NEETs. The review will also consider findings from Maguire and Thompson (2007) on future government policy and Dunn and Layard’s (2009) recently published report on childhood for the Children’s Society, together with a briefing paper by Petrie et al., to explore ‘social pedagogy’ (TCRU, 2008).
NEET students often arrive at the institute for intended research with multiple complex needs. Bad prior learning experiences, educational gaps, exclusion, teenage pregnancy or time in a pupil referral unit are just some of the events/circumstances that contribute toward learner disengagement. The current e2e cohort of twenty-six students includes some who live independently or who are in care as a result of a dysfunctional family. There are others who have suffered sexual abuse or who are self-harmers for a number of reasons. Some are young mums or mums to be. There are also students who are currently of no fixed abode; too old for care and too young to be housed. Many have mental health issues and most of who have either been put forward for, or are receiving, counselling from within or outside the college. However whilst this could be true of many learner groups, particularly in city areas, it is a common feature of e2e students at the institute for intended research.
The inquiry report, A Good Childhood (Dunn and Layard’s 2009), highlights the link between poverty, broken homes and poor academic achievement and depression and low self-esteem. ‘Children need above all to be loved. Unless they are loved they will not feel good about themselves, and will in turn find it difficult to love others’ (ibid: p.15). The report further states that where there is a void of parental love, the result is ‘emotional narrowing’, ‘an empathy deficit’ and/or an inability to ‘empathise’, which the authors warn will often have ‘disastrous results in adolescence and early adulthood’ (ibid: p.173).
Not all NEETs can be classified as a homogenous group: NFER’s (DCSF, 2009b) report details the segmentation analysis carried out on young people who the government define as JWT or NEET, which they constitute as an overall group deemed not to be in education or training (NET). Their findings were as follows: out of the one hundred and twenty young people interviewed, NFER came to the conclusion that within the NET group there were six sub-groups. One of which were young people who due to negative experiences at school were reluctant to partake in education or training. The report further stated that within the NEET group there were about forty-one percent who were open to learning. In summary, it is suggested that there is a need for more flexible and appropriate post-16 provision, with more informal learning opportunities that will help them to appreciate the value of learning in a non-threatening way (ibid).
This further emphasises the need, in the researcher’s eyes, for an in-depth interview and longer induction to allow individual barriers to learning to be addressed, giving time for trust to be gained from NEETs so that in-house welfare, guidance and counselling can take place. In doing so, this will allow learners a real opportunity to learn as their physical and emotional needs are met. Maguire and Thompson (2007) also highlight: ‘the importance of establishing personal and trusting relationships between young people and their advisors as an effective tool for re-engagement’ (2007: p.1).
By having a longer induction that focuses on the emotional and physical barriers to learning, learners will also be able to overcome another barrier: that of learner cohesion through specific resources, strategies and workshops. Chen’s report about learners participating in the Flying Young Programme in Taiwan, points out that they come with ‘different intentions and backgrounds’. He suggests that just because they are NEETs, one cannot automatically assume learner cohesion. Stating that ‘…such group dynamics resemble their previous experiences in school’ (2009: p.23).
The literature review will look to either support or disprove the researcher’s hypothesis. Unfortunately, the researcher has yet to find theory or research relating specifically to ideal induction programmes to re-engage NEET learners.
Methodology:
For the purpose of keeping an audit trail of thought, direction and progress of research, the researcher has started a diary and set up a weblog to act as an aide-memoire for later reflection on ideas to be revisited and explored further. McNiff’s (1988:p.45) visual model 3.1 below aptly depicts the researcher’s messy way of thinking.
McNiff, Lomax and Whitehead (2003) state:
‘The most useful models represent the idea of practice as non-linear, showing that people are unpredictable and creative, and that life seldom follows a straightforward path.’ (2003:p.59)
It has been difficult to find a research model that typifies the researcher’s current and more methodical approach to keeping a blog diary. This may change once the proposal has been marked and action research starts. However, to attempt to explain the present approach to understanding and direction of development has created the following diagram:
To determine which methods would be appropriate for the type of research required, table 4.3 below was designed by the researcher to categorise what facts the researcher was trying to establish. Through taking this approach the researcher was able to ascertain the methods required to collect evidence, as outlined above.
The instrument for quantitative data collection of Figure 4.3 Point 1 Retention and Attendance of learners will be statistical and the methodology used will be an analytical survey of statistical data belonging to the Institute of Research. For this reason the researcher will need to define what are considered public data as described by the Freedom of Information Act (OPSI, 2000: c.36) and/or request permission from the institute to gain access to relevant data and/or publish any findings pertinent to the purpose of research. Outcomes will be documented in a visual format like pie charts that lends itself to percentages. It is important for the researcher to acknowledge that as an employee of the Institute of Research, access privileges to data as a staff member should not override research ethics.
For Figure 4.3, Point 4 Type of Induction the instruments for data collection will be documents and questionnaires. The methodology used will be a case study of three cohorts of learners: two groups on fast-track courses together with a current e2e cohort as a control group. This will equate to thirty to forty-five learners. Analysis of resources, strategies and itinerary for induction will be compared with those used by the e2e team to establish any trends.
Ideally it would be prudent to make comparisons of all five fast-track courses with the current e2e cohort to give weight to validity of research, however due to the research time-frame and constraints of the researcher’s other commitments, whilst highly desirable, it is not feasible. Therefore the two learner groups to be studied will be determined from statistical data analysis of retention and attendance, looking to compare one with a high percentage to another with a lower percentage as well as comparable analysis of learners.
The researcher is interested to find out if the group profiles of the three cohorts represent the sub-groups identified in NFERs report for DCSF (2009b). If a similar segmentation does emerge, the researcher will review the strategies advocated in the report by NFER. Group profile analysis for the e2e cohort will be drawn from information collected through the current robust interview process. Depending upon interview processes of other cohorts, this may prove to be more difficult if individual learner profiles have not already been established at the start of the course. It may therefore be necessary to conduct a survey of the other cohorts through questionnaires to learners to build an overall profile of the learner group.
But by the very nature of the learners in question, NEETs, this is not a desirable option for the following reasons: the wellbeing of the learner may be compromised as such research may lead to individuals having to address physical and situational difficulties and buried emotions. If the relationship between the enquirer and learner is not good, it can make them feel uncomfortable, as there is no trust. Furthermore, if any needs that surface through enquiry are not effectively addressed and followed up by personal tutors with referral to the institute’s welfare, counselling and guidance services, this may create a barrier to learning for the individual and a feeling of vulnerability.
The instrument for qualitative data collection of Figure 4.3 Point 3 Learner Cohesion will be questionnaires containing both open and closed questions. The methodology will be action research. It will be important for the researcher to establish what constitutes learner cohesion and success, as this can be defined in many ways. To find out what the institute regards as successful and what the paradigms for measurement are, and to consider if they are realistic in terms of what can be expected of NEET students and of tutors of NEET students, in consideration of current availability and criteria for assessing and funding learning support assistants within the institute. It is the researcher’s belief that both the current and previous cohort of e2e learners has benefited from having additional in-class support.
For Figure 4.3 Point 2 Type of Learner: methodology will be an evaluation of previous empirical research from documents, reports and theses of other academics’ in-depth analysis of ethnographic literature pertaining to NEETs.
Lastly, if the institute accepts the recommendations proposed, the last phase of research will be predictive, with methodology being testing and assessment of strategies relevant to interview, enrolment, induction and resources for NEET learners. Cohen et al’s (2007) testing and assessment model will be used for guidance see box 4.4.
This research has to be contained to avoid the scope and breadth of intended methods of data collection becoming unmanageable as highlighted above. For this reason the researcher intends to conduct a survey of opinions using ‘purposive sampling’ (Denscombe 2003:p.p.15-16). The researcher will pick participants deemed ‘critical for the research’ (ibid), as it is the researcher’s aim to gather evidence to establish an overall picture of the initial planning stages and demography of different learner groups on the fast-track courses. If any interesting trends emerge then interviews will be conducted. The researcher has also created a timetable to assist with management of time allocated for research see Appendix B.
The questions will be carefully constructed to avoid leading the participants. Hall’s (1990) thoughts on reflexivity in emancipatory action research will be borne-in-mind, as well as her views on the privileged position of the researcher when looking for the signifier of what has been signified (1990: p.p.28-48). A critical friend will be sought to help the researcher maintain impartiality and develop bias-free practice. This will also facilitate toward ensuring systematic collection of data and acknowledgement of variables that influence validity and reliability that need to be taken into account. For example, even when elements and characteristics of learner groups look comparable, the overall diversity of participants can manifest very different results if repeated. Hopkins (2008) states:
‘…if the various threats to validity are not taken into account, then one cannot claim that one’s interpretation is correct. The existence of possible sources of invalidity potentially offer plausible, rival interpretations to our findings when we do not account for them.’ (Hopkins 2008: p.140)
McCormick and James (1989) state:
‘Basically reliability is concerned with consistency in the production of results and refers to the requirement that, at least in principle, another researcher, or the same researcher on the same occasion, should be able to replicate the same piece of research and achieve comparable evidence and results.’ (McCormick and James 1989: p.188)
Another aspect for consideration is that of reliability. Reliable action research employs a process of methods that can replicate evidence, which is constant in its equivalence over a span of time if carried out on a comparable learner group.
Establishing what the overall outcomes, agreed by all stakeholders, for the January Starts initiative were will help with validity of triangulation in the next phase. Denscombe seems to suggest that if participants who are reflecting on the same issue independently highlight the same element from their perspective, this will give weight and validity to evidence used for triangulation (2003: p.p.131-143).
Hopkins (2008) states:
'…if the various threats to validity are not taken into account, then one cannot claim that one's interpretation is correct. The existence of possible sources of invalidity potentially offer plausible, rival interpretations to our findings when we do not account for them.' (Hopkins 2008 p.140)
Proposed Solution:
It is predicted by the researcher that by adopting a more thorough approach to the interview process and type of induction given to NEETs learner outcomes can only improve. The researcher’s solution will include a comprehensive questionnaire to be worked through with the potential NEET learners at interview, for the purpose of identifying potential barriers to learning, and to ensure individual learning needs are promptly met through an assessment of additional needs by Learner Services and the subsequent provision of appropriate support, provided without any delay, by Learner Services. It will also be suggested by the researcher that the institute adopts a longer bespoke induction programme that includes regular assessment and feedback to NEET learner, of their attainment, attitude, behaviour and commitment toward learning.
Conclusion:
It is the researcher’s aim to encourage collaboration in the place of work, by ensuring that this area of research leads to improving the overall delivery of professional practice in relation to engagement of NEET learners on courses. Eames states:
'...action research is of immense importance to the professionalism of teachers. It's a form of knowledge produced by teachers, and primarily aimed at communicating with teachers, and at being used by teachers.' (Eames, 1990, In, McNiff, 1993:p.71)
This links with Hannan's (2006) thoughts about 'beginning research':
'...action research is likely to be better appreciated and used by teachers because it is done by them and for them and that insights generated by such work are more likely to influence teachers' practice than the theories produced by external experts.' Hannan, P. (2006)
The researcher does not in any way claim to be an expert on the pedagogy of NEET students, but awareness toward their needs is innate as she is one who has experienced a dysfunctional upbringing. As parents we are in the privileged position of responsibility to silently but lovingly shape the next generation. However, not every child is in a place where they are the recipients of good parenting. So whose responsibility is it? As teachers we can either take a pro-active role or remain passive, but we must be mindful that it is the next generation that will be responsible for making decisions about our future. NEETs are worthy of investment.
Appendices:
References:
ReferencesChen, Y., (2009) Once ‘NEET’, Always ‘NEET’? Experiences of Employment and Unemployment of Youth Participating in a Job Training Program in Taiwan
Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2007) Research Methods in Education. (6th Ed). London, RoutledgeFalmer. p.86
DCSF (2008) Youth Cohort Study & Longitudinal Study of Young People in England: The Activities and Experiences of 16 year olds: England 2007. Statistical Bulletin. London: Department for Children, Schools and Families.
DCSF (2009a). 14-19 education and skills: NEET figures for Local Authority areas 2008). London: Department for Children, Schools and Families.
DCSF (2009b) Increasing Participation: Understanding Young People who do not Participate in Education or Training at 16 and 17. Research Brief: DCSF-RR072. London: Department for Children, Schools and Families.
Denscombe, M. (2003) The Good Research Guide: for small-scale social research projects. (2nd Ed). Berkshire, Open University Press.
Dunn, J., and Layard, R. (2009) A Good Childhood: Searching for Values in a Competitive Age. London: Penguin Books
Eames, K. (1990) Growing your own. In: McNiff, J. (1993) Teaching as learning: an action research approach. Oxon: RoutledgeHopkins, D. (2008) A Tearcher’s Guide to Classroom Research. (2nd Ed.). London: RoutledgeFalmer
Hall, S. (1990) Chapter 3. Reflexivity in Emancipatory Action Research: illustrating the researcher’s constitutiveness in Zuber-Skerritt, O., (1996) New Directions in Action Research. London: The Falmer Press
Hannan, A. (2006) Beginning Research. University of Plymouth. [Online] Available from: http://www.edu.plymouth.ac.uk/resined/beginning/begresed.htm [Accessed 1st March 2009]
Hopkins, D. (2008) A Tearcher’s Guide to Classroom Research. (2nd Ed.). London: RoutledgeFalmer
Maguire, S., and Thompson, J. (2007) Young people not in education, employment or training (NEET): Where is Government policy taking us now? Youth and Policy Journal. [Online] Available from: http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/446/1/WRAP_Maguire_ YOUTH_ POLICY_FINAL_1st_June.pdf [Accessed 17th March 2009]
McCormick, R. and James, M. (1989) Curriculum Action Research. (2nd Ed). London: RoutledgeFalmer
McNiff, J. (1988) Action Research: Principles and Practice. Basingstoke: Macmillan
McNiff, J., Lomax, P. and Whitehead, J. (2003) You and Your Action Research Project. (2nd Ed). London: RoutledgeFalmer
NFER (2008). Informal learning offer and positive activities for young people. [Online] Available from: http://www. nfer.ac.uk /research-areas/pims-data/outlines/informal-learning-offer-and-positive-activities-for-young-people.cfm [Accessed 2nd February 2009]
OPSI (2000:c.36) Freedom of Information Act. [Online] Available from: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/Acts/acts2000/ukpga_20000036_en_1
Petrie, P., Boddy, J., Cameron, Claire, Heptinstal, E., McQuail, S., Simon. A. and Wigfall, V. (2008) Pedagogy – a holistic, personal approach to work with children and young people, across services. London: Institute of Education University of London.
Yuji, G. (2006) Jobless Youths and the NEET Problem in Japan. Social Science Japan Journal. University of Tokyo [Online] Available from: http://ssjj.oxfordjournals.org/ cgi/reprint/jym029v1 [Accessed: 30th March 2009]
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for your comment.