Theory and Practice of Work with Young People

Authors Avatar

Theory & Practice of Work With Young People                                         Dawn Summers

Introduction

         ‘The group constituted an open air society, a communal gathering which had         great importance socially, culturally and economically. --------- During each         nightly meeting the young worker, once fully integrated, listened, questioned,         argued and received unawares an informal education..’  (Roberts in Smith,         1998:24).

Describing his experience of street groups in the early part of the 20th century, Roberts uses the term ‘informal education’ to describe the accidental learning that took place as a direct result of the interaction between young working men.   But can what we call ‘informal education’ in the 21st century be described as accidental?  Mark Smith argues that whilst:

        ‘Learning may at first seem to be incidental it is not necessarily accidental;         actions are taken with some purpose.  The specific goal may not be clear at any         one time – yet the process is deliberate.’  (Smith, 1994:63).

Throughout this assignment I shall be exploring the term ‘informal education’, examining its origins and meanings, its purpose and practice.  Using historical information to examine the early roots of present day youth work, I shall asking whether anything has really changed in the past 150 years by exploring the issues that I face in my day to day practice as a youth and community worker.  

In 1755 Jean Jacques Rousseau published his work ‘A Discourse on Inequality’ and argued that as civilisations grew, they corrupted:

        ‘Mans natural happiness and freedom by creating artificial inequalities of wealth,         power and social privilege’ (Smith, 2001, www.infed.org/thinkers/et-rous.htm)

In 1801 Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi published How Gertrude Teaches Her Children.  

Like Rousseau, Pestalozzi was concerned with social justice and he sought to work with those he considered to be adversely affected by social conditions, seeing in education an opportunity for improvement.  (Smith, 2001).  In the first half of the 20th century John Dewey published three books that built on the earlier work of educationalists like Rousseau and Pestalozzi.  These works heavily influenced the development of informal education as we know it today since they:

        ‘Included a concern with democracy and community; with cultivating reflection         and thinking; with attending to experience and the environment.’

        (Smith, 2001, ).

In 1946 Josephine Macalister Brew’s book Informal Education: Adventures and Reflections, brought informal education into the realm of youth work. This was followed in 1966 by The Social Education of the Adolescent by Bernard Davies and Alan Gibson.  Since then there have been numerous works on the subject of informal education, most notably, in relation to youth work, those of Tony Jeffs and Mark Smith.

So what exactly is informal education?  Like many terms in use today, it is widely used to describe an enormous variety of settings and activities.  In 1960 the Albermarle Report used it to describe youth work provision as:

        ‘The continued social and informal education of young people in terms most likely         to bring them to maturity’. (in Smith, 1988:124).

Houle (1980) favoured the experiential definition of informal education describing it as ‘education that occurs as a result of direct participation in the events of life’ (In Smith, 1988:130), whilst Mark Smith said ‘one way of thinking about informal education is as the informed use of the everyday in order to enable learning’ (Smith, 1988:130).  

In 2001 Smith went further, describing informal education that:

        ‘* works through and is driven by conversation

        * involves exploring and enlarging experience

        * can take place in any setting’

        (Smith, 2001, )

And of its purpose:

        ‘At one level, the purpose of informal education is no different to any other form         of education. In one situation we may focus on, say, healthy eating, in another         family relationships. However, running through all this is a concern to build the         sorts of communities and relationships in which people can be happy and         fulfilled.’  (Smith, 2001, ).

Whilst I would agree with Mark Smiths definition of informal education there is and has been an enormous diversity of opinions, theories and explanations of exactly what sort of community we need for people to be happy and fulfilled.  Smith’s assertion that the role of informal educators is to work towards all people being able to share a ‘common life’ with an emphasis on:

        ‘Work for the well-being of all, respect the unique value and dignity of each         human being,  dialogue,  equality and justice, democracy and the active         involvement of people in the issues that affect their lives’ (Smith, 2001,         http://www.infed.org/i-intro.htm)

involves a commitment to anti-oppressive practice that is expounded in much of the literature surrounding the field of informal education.  But this has not always been the case and can we hand on heart honestly lay claim to practicing liberating education in our work today?

Whilst Rousseau, Pestalozzi and Dewey all identified structural inequalities and believed that ‘education is the fundamental method of social progress and reform’ (Dewey in Smith, 2001, ) the application of their theories were not always applied to the work of those who first began providing services for young people.  Indeed early ventures into the field of youth work are often seen as controlling not liberating and as overtly oppressive instead of anti-oppressive.  

        ‘The early youth service history in both England and Wales has been described –         as a time when work with young people was characterised by both appalling                 social and employment conditions and by rapid social and political change         caused by the development of an industrialised urban society’ (Jones & Rose,         2001:27)

It is within this context that intervention by middle class societies and organisations in the 1800’s was seen to be necessary in order to rescue, control and/or rehabilitate young, working class people.  Concern over the working conditions of children and young people brought into being an array of groups, clubs and educational services and policies designed to rescue and protect young people from the worst excesses of employment practices and the failure of working class parents to provide a suitable and controlled home life.

Join now!

        ‘Working class adolescents were thought to be most likely to display delinquent         and rebellious characteristics – because it was widely assumed that working class         parents exercised inadequate control over brutal adolescent instincts’         (Humphries 1981 in Smith, 1988:9)

This moral underclass discourse lays the blame for social inequalities, poverty and disaffection solely on the shoulders of the working class themselves because:

        ‘The problems faced are then seen not so much as structural but as personal.  The         central deficit is often portrayed as emotional or moral’ (Smith, 1988:56).

And it also suggests that:

        ‘Their behaviour, without coercion and control, ...

This is a preview of the whole essay