No description available.

This study investigates how young people and employers perceive equal opportunities in the world of work. Events such as the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry (Macpherson, 1999), the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 and other legislation to promote equal opportunities, for example, Employment Equality Regulations, 2003 (Phillips, 2007, p.36) have placed this issue high on the political and education agenda. This study also investigates how young people perceive the message of equal opportunities in employers’ recruitment material as employers often declare in recruitment advertising that they are an equal opportunity employer (Dickens, 2000, p.138). A qualitative approach is taken using semi-structured interviews with thirty students in the sixth form in five secondary schools and five employers (The Army, The Fire Service, Metropolitan Police Service, British Airways and Mars UK) in West London. Policy documents on equal opportunities were also collected from the selected schools and employers. All the sources of data, that is the interviews with students and employers and the documentary data were analysed using a thematic approach. This study provides an in-depth insight and a snapshot at a local level of the national picture on equal opportunities in the world of work in relation to gender and ethnicity. The findings are that the young people, employers and the documentation of employers and schools show common understandings but also differences in their perception and portrayal of equal opportunities in the world of work. This study has also found that young people do not perceive the message of equal opportunities in the recruitment material. The implications of these findings are considered for both Careers Education and Guidance in schools and employers. This study concludes that the consensus is inspiring as it shows that young people and employers have a common vision of equal opportunities in the world of work and this consensus is followed through in policy documents. However, the differences, whilst they add variation to the perception and portrayal, need to be addressed if equal opportunities in the world of work are to progress further. To address these issues a model of Embedded Mutual Partnership is recommended between schools and employers.

This qualitative study is concerned with the transition process from school to post-school life for students labelled with learning disability in New Zealand. My interest is in understanding how a particular group of these young people can make a successful transition from school in their search for a good life, as they themselves judge this. I draw on critical social theory to position these young people within contemporary education and society, using a Disability Studies in Education (DSE) framework to understand learning disability as socially, culturally and politically constructed. I draw on Zygmunt Bauman’s critique of neoliberal hegemony and use of metaphor to understand how young people with learning disability are excluded in a contemporary Western society. Post-school outcomes identify very little useful tertiary education or paid employment; long-term reliance on family for living and housing; and extremely limited social networks, mostly founded on family members and paid or voluntary support workers. I argue that these young people are caught in a parallel education system that largely controls and manages them along a restrictive pathway from special education services in schools to special vocational and welfare services post school. The clear voice of the young people through the research findings demonstrates this is not what they want. They want the same opportunities as their peers without disability. Andrew and Caroline, two young people with Down syndrome, and I formed a research team. We came together to explore, understand and respond to an exclusionary landscape during the transition process that I argue leads to unrealised lives. The study utilises a participatory action research approach. It is a collaborative journey and a transformative response to exclusion through what I describe as “the relational dimension.” Further, it is a call to arms on behalf of a particular group of students who have been mostly excluded from rights, responsibilities and opportunities to contribute positively to their lives and the lives of others. This thesis has been a journey of personal and professional, individual and collective discovery. Answers to the question of how young people with learning disability can transition towards a good life are to be found in how we fundamentally value this group of young people in education and society. Valuing can only occur if we recognise our interdependence while acknowledging our unique differences. Only then will we truly provide the opportunities and support that we all need to move forward in our journey towards a good life. This thesis will be of interest to young people; parents; education and social policy leaders; school leaders; career specialists; and all teachers, professionals and support workers in the field. Its findings and recommendations challenge “expert” and deficit constructions of learning disability. They have relevance for a collaborative “whole-school” approach to career and transition policy and practice for students with learning disability; importantly, however, they also have relevance for all students. Effective relationships are central to understanding how, through our relative interdependency; we can collaboratively make the journey towards a good life. Additionally, the thesis contributes to knowledge regarding how to meaningfully involve young people with learning disability in the research process through their lived and our shared experiences that provide ethical, methodological and procedural insights. I develop two main arguments in this thesis. My first argument is that exclusion from educational opportunity must be exposed, challenged and rejected. Exclusion must be exposed in order to understand the unequal power mechanisms at play. Exclusion must be challenged, as the outcome of these unequal power mechanisms is that some students succeed and some fail. Exclusion must be rejected to make way for new relational, transformative education agendas. My second argument is that direct and meaningful involvement and collaboration by young people with learning disability in the research process will support practical solutions towards greater democracy in education and society. The ultimate outcome of democracy in education is a system where all students are valued and celebrated for their unique differences and stories, yet with recognition of their relative interdependency. All students are viewed as capable, purposeful, responsible and contributing. They are provided with the opportunities and support required to realise a good life, leading to active contribution and a sense of belonging in education and society.

<p>Careers education was first established in Sweden at the beginning of the 1940s. At that time it was mainly the concern of the Swedish Labour Market Board. The Labour Market Board started to develop a model, partly influenced by the activities of other countries in the field, that over the years grew into something exceptional with for instance a lot of activities in schools.</p><p>In the early stages the aim was the development and production of informational texts. The person behind most of the ideas was Einar Neymark. In 1971, responsibility for careers education was handed over to the school authorities except for the part concerning the production of occupational information texts.</p><p>The aim of this study is to improve our understanding of careers education as it is represented in occupational information texts produced by the Swedish Labour Market Board, in the period from 1940 - 1970.</p><p>The empirical research focuses on careers education and gaining an understanding through the texts within (not about) careers education. The research has a philosophical-hermeneutic orientation and falls into two parts. Starting from an assumption that the intentions behind careers education are met, three “careers education realities” are constructed for the sake of argument. These realities are then analysed using a theoretical framework grounded in educational sociology, or more precisely the thinking of Durkheim and Bernstein. The result shows that careers education plays an important role in making invisible the connection between school and society hierarchies and also in creating a collective conscience in a Durkheimian sense.</p><p>The first constructed “reality” shows that a careers education based on labour market considerations is both normative and deterministic. In this careers education the labour market consists of a variety of working lives depending on who you are and where you come from. For that reason careers education is both limiting and subordinating according to sex and class background.</p><p>A consciousness-raising careers education is moralizing and limiting. A “perfect” working life is presented to which individuals can relate their personal qualities. For that reason careers education also subordinates.</p><p>A study-motivating careers education is principally motivating for those who have already had good experiences of schooling. It limits and subordinates primarely in terms of sex. Possible relations between education and working life are mostly discussed in general terms. For example, education will be a good thing to have in a future working life as an insurance against unemployment.</p><p>The extended analysis, where the above mentioned results are put together, shows that careers education can be described as unjust, limiting and concealing. It is unfair in that it creates images about different and non-questionable working lives for young people to fit into, in that it perpetuates sex and class subordination, and in that it uses present individually related competencies as the grounds for future education and employment. It is limiting through being normative, moralizing and subordinating. It is concealing in that it is being selective concerning the information given in the texts prepared for pupils.</p><p>Careers education is also adjustable. It fits easily into different situations by being pragmatic and flexible, as is shown by the impact of other scientific areas. This adjustability makes it possible to use careers education regardless of the conception you may have of career choices or wherever careers education is carried out. Being adjustable is not something to be avoided in careers education, on the contrary it is a condition for its existence.</p>

Careers education was first established in Sweden at the beginning of the 1940s. At that time it was mainly the concern of the Swedish Labour Market Board. The Labour Market Board started to develop a model, partly influenced by the activities of other countries in the field, that over the years grew into something exceptional with for instance a lot of activities in schools. In the early stages the aim was the development and production of informational texts. The person behind most of the ideas was Einar Neymark. In 1971, responsibility for careers education was handed over to the school authorities except for the part concerning the production of occupational information texts. The aim of this study is to improve our understanding of careers education as it is represented in occupational information texts produced by the Swedish Labour Market Board, in the period from 1940 - 1970. The empirical research focuses on careers education and gaining an understanding through the texts within (not about) careers education. The research has a philosophical-hermeneutic orientation and falls into two parts. Starting from an assumption that the intentions behind careers education are met, three “careers education realities” are constructed for the sake of argument. These realities are then analysed using a theoretical framework grounded in educational sociology, or more precisely the thinking of Durkheim and Bernstein. The result shows that careers education plays an important role in making invisible the connection between school and society hierarchies and also in creating a collective conscience in a Durkheimian sense. The first constructed “reality” shows that a careers education based on labour market considerations is both normative and deterministic. In this careers education the labour market consists of a variety of working lives depending on who you are and where you come from. For that reason careers education is both limiting and subordinating according to sex and class background. A consciousness-raising careers education is moralizing and limiting. A “perfect” working life is presented to which individuals can relate their personal qualities. For that reason careers education also subordinates. A study-motivating careers education is principally motivating for those who have already had good experiences of schooling. It limits and subordinates primarely in terms of sex. Possible relations between education and working life are mostly discussed in general terms. For example, education will be a good thing to have in a future working life as an insurance against unemployment. The extended analysis, where the above mentioned results are put together, shows that careers education can be described as unjust, limiting and concealing. It is unfair in that it creates images about different and non-questionable working lives for young people to fit into, in that it perpetuates sex and class subordination, and in that it uses present individually related competencies as the grounds for future education and employment. It is limiting through being normative, moralizing and subordinating. It is concealing in that it is being selective concerning the information given in the texts prepared for pupils. Careers education is also adjustable. It fits easily into different situations by being pragmatic and flexible, as is shown by the impact of other scientific areas. This adjustability makes it possible to use careers education regardless of the conception you may have of career choices or wherever careers education is carried out. Being adjustable is not something to be avoided in careers education, on the contrary it is a condition for its existence.