International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy: Article Information

International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy
Education Reform for At-Risk Youth: A Social Capital Approach

Bradley Jorgensen,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Bradley Jorgensen, (2005) "Education Reform for At‐Risk Youth: A Social Capital
Downloaded by Universitas Indonesia At 20:44 24 September 2018 (PT)
Approach", International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, Vol. 25 Issue: 8,

pp.49-69, https://doi.org/10.1108/01443330510629090
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/01443330510629090
Downloaded on: 24 September 2018, At: 20:44 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 0 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 592 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2005),"Smart Partnership or Cronyism? A Malaysian Perspective",
International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, Vol. 25 Iss 8 pp.
31-48 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/01443330510629081">https://
doi.org/10.1108/01443330510629081</a>
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by

emerald-srm:602779 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please
use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which
publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of
society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over
2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of
online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a
partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico
and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
Volume 25 Number 8 2005 49
Education Reform for At-Risk Youth: A Social Capital Approach

by Dr Bradley Jorgensen, 68 Atkinson Drive, Q 4306, Australia
Abstract
Using the Education Queensland Reform Agenda to illustrate examples and ap-
proaches to education reform, this article discusses education reform for at-risk
youth. It argues that the characteristics of modernity, the rise of Mode 2 Society, and
the power asymmetries associated with the emergence of the politico-economic will
contain the reform ambitions of the Education Queensland and other education re-
form agendas. It is proposed that the State adopt a transgressive and complimentary
set of reform strategies including the adoption of distributed governance, making
available meaningful school performance data, encouraging experimentation and
facilitating broad stakeholder, community and neighbourhood engagement in
school planning and operations. The article argues that measures such as these will
assist to mobilize trust, minimise social fragmentation, generate and regenerate
community resources, build cohesion, foster the socio-cultural-self-identities of
‘at-risk’ youth and will assist youth to achieve full participation in a robust and vi-
brant democracy.
Keywords: Education Reform; Mode 2 Society; Social Capital; Trust; Community;
Social Inclusion
Introduction
This article is in four parts. Firstly it outlines the rationale behind the reform agenda
proposed by the Education Queensland, Education and Training Reform for the Fu-
ture (ETRF) White paper (The State of Queensland, 2002). This outline is used as
an example of current education reform initiatives and is used to illustrate argument
presented in the following pages. The context for the discussion that follows, high-
lights the nature and scope of change that confronts modern society. The rise of
Mode 2 society, organisational change, creativity, modernity and trust are outlined.
This discussion then maps the terrain over which education reform agendas such as
the ETRF must pass, including social exclusion, governance, the rise of individual-
ism, democracy, power and regulatory reform. Finally, I discuss the value in adopt-
ing a transgressive education reform strategy that extends beyond the realm of
education to include a wider definition of community in an integrated social agenda.
Education and Training Reforms for the Future
The ETRF agenda, like other education reform initiatives, seeks to respond to the
dynamics of modern life and the rise of informationalism by equipping young peo-
International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 50
ple with the necessary attitudes, skills and knowledge needed to sustain success in
the knowledge society. Broadly, the ETRF invokes a set of initiatives that will lead
to ‘improving pathways for all young people’. These ETRF themes, like other edu-
cation reform agendas, aspire to deliver a public good.
Hargreaves (2003) reveals similar aspirations in his book Teaching Beyond
the Knowledge Society, where he notes that people’s emotional sympathy makes it
possible to pursue the public good. He warns however, that ‘If we teach only for the
knowledge society…we will create no sympathy or empathy for those who do not
succeed’ (Hargreaves, 2003, p.55). We need to, according to Hargreaves (2003,
p.3), ‘create the social capital of networks and relationships that provide people
with extra support and further learning. Hargreaves (2003, p.61) adds that the edu-
cational answer to ‘the angst of early adolescence mainly is to be found not in more
curriculum but in stronger community.’ This ‘answer’ is, in part, supported by
Schienstock’s (1999; 2002) observations regarding the causes and effects of social
exclusion within the information society. Schienstock’s (2002, p.3) findings include
the observation that:
‘…digital skills play a less significant role in the current transformation
process compared with social and learning skills.’
I now turn to begin my discussion on change.
The ‘change’ that I refer to is far-reaching and intransitive in the sense that it
carries all before it. Thus, there are seemingly disparate elements of social, cultural,
economic and political change that run in parallel in discontinuous ways. In educa-
tion circles, there is much discussion of indicators that family structure patterns for
example are changing from the traditional ‘family’ to a variety of other configura-
tions. In this article, I adopt the position that these seemingly disconnected changes
that affect societies and individuals are part of a larger, more fundamental shift in
epoch. The ETRF agenda is an effect of this shift in education epoch.
Nowotny, et al. (2001, pp.33-49) identify an historical shift from what they
refer to as ‘Mode 1’ society to ‘Mode 2’ society. The organisational mechanisms of
these kinds of societies are different. Nowotny (2002) states that:
‘In Mode 2 there is greater interaction…characterised by an overall increase
in complexity which embraces a pervasive and inherent uncertainty, greater
institutional permeability, the emergence of new forms of economic rational-
ity, the emergence of a greater degree of self-organisation, and a profound
shift in our notions of time and space’.
Nowotny, et al. (2001, p.36) describe ‘the accumulation of uncertainties affecting

social choice and behaviour, individual lifestyles and identities’ as unending. In this
accumulation, society’s ‘stable categorisations’ (Nowotny, et al., 2001) that once
provided for differentiation, have been eroded revealing a much more fluid, volatile
and transgressive existence. Similarly, the elimination of distance, induced by infor-
mation and communication technologies, the compression of space associated with
the merging of global and local and the emerging ‘self-organising capacity of sci-
ence and society’ have fundamentally altered existence (Nowotny, et al., 2001). The
ETRF White Paper responds to this evolutionary ‘accumulation’ by seeking to
equip young people to cope with the dynamic and transgressive nature of modern
life. Alternate pathways to ‘earning and learning’, and curriculum offerings that
emphasise literacy, numeracy and science, including vocational education and
training alternatives are proposed.
The forces for change noted by Nowotny, et al. (2001) however, suggest
more than the human capital ‘earning or learning’ reform strategy proposed in the
ETRF and elsewhere. A more generalised way of doing things that responds to the
dynamic complexity of modern life is now required. These new ways emphasise the
social, continuous learning, the notion of place, community and, particularly, the
importance of collaborative action among interdependent entities that share a com-
mon understanding. The capabilities to grow new knowledge through collabora-
tion, to transgress boundaries, to create, relate and innovate are now especially
important. The meaning of ‘knowing’ has also shifted from being able to remember
and repeat information to being able to find and use information (Simon, 1996).
More specifically, success now rests on the ability of the individual to exploit
knowledge and information in collaboration with others. The ETRF agenda is a
consequence of and response to these new ways of doing things.
In response to these forces for change some organisations have sought to im-
prove the capacity of individuals to engage and participate in new ways of making
and implementing decisions, to encourage invention rather than passively following
and to create networks that access the tacit and explicit knowledge of employees.
Successful corporations Hargreaves (2003, p.17) argues, ‘break down old depart-
mental divisions’ to operate as learning organisations inhabited by organic modes of
arrangement. Similarly, education reform proposals such as those listed under the
banner of the ETRF seek also to adopt these alternate ways of doing things. How-
ever, in the education sector where in many instances, according to Edwards, Gilroy
and Hartley (2002, p.144), ‘teaching and teacher education have been reduced to
the delivery of deliverables’, reforms of this type have, in the main, yet to be solidly
embraced. While the ETRF and related initiatives take important steps the reform
agenda does not fully account for the dynamics of Mode 2 society and the new ways
of doing things associated with it. I now turn to explicate these matters.
In learning organisations, the attitudes, skills and knowledge that collaborat-

ing individuals can bring to the workplace assume a high priority (Davenport and
Prusak, 2000). This observation serves to underscore the value of competent and
creative individuals, who ‘know-what, know-why, know-how and know-who’
(Hargreaves, 2003, p.25). These creative individuals have been described as the
‘creative class’ (Florida, 2002). For Florida (2002), creativity has a multi-dimen-
sional quality and is mobilised through new structures and modes of operation un-
derpinned by an acceptance of individuality and the activation of diversity.
‘The centre of gravity in societies has shifted to those occupations which fa-
vour change, unpredictability, spontaneity, innovation and creativity’
(Mulgan, 1997, p.77)
Creativity comes from people ‘motivated and nurtured in a multitude of ways’

(Florida, 2002, p.5). The ETRF offers a response to these emerging needs through a
range of strategies. However, it would seem appropriate that the modes of behav-
iour and values that guide the creative class should also be available to guide educa-
tion reform proposals. These seem muted, probably because they lie outside the
conventional organisational models.
Other forces of change are also at work. Modernity has introduced new risks
producing difference, exclusion and marginalisation. These risks, identified in the
ETRF White Paper pose particular challenges. For example, the de-differentiation
associated with the impact of Information and Communication Technologies
(ICTs), globalisation and the expansive growth in knowledge makes for volatility
(Nowotny, et al., 2002). Modernity unifies but also creates new forms of fragmenta-
tion and dispersal. Public and private are increasingly differentiated but are also
subject to internal pluralisation (Giddens, 1991). Instead of liberating people, tech-
nology has simply enabled people to do more things. Rather than facilitating deci-
sion making, technology has expanded choice. In this information age, society and
industry are moving towards perpetual transition (Kleiner, 1995) to the extent that
contemporary society is characterised by pluralism, diversity, volatility and
transgressivity (Nowotny, et al., 2001). While the ETRF reform agenda attempts to
meet these characteristics head-on, the capacity of education reform to transgress
boundaries may need to be strengthened. Thus, Giddens (1991, p.20) says:
‘The transformation of time and space, coupled with the disembedding mecha-
nisms of modernity propels social life away from the hold of pre-established
percepts and practices’.
Effective social functioning now requires a leap-of-faith that can bracket the new
dimensions generated by the separation of time and space. Within the abstraction of
modernity, trust has emerged as a mediating factor (Giddens, 1991). Preparing
young people to take this leap-of-faith is likely to involve much more than a strong
emphasis on human capital development.
Modernity is also subject to chronic revision undermining the ‘certainty of

knowledge’. Knowing has not created stable inductive arenas (Giddens, 1991, p.31)
but has heightened the perception of risk. The intensification of technology into
daily life and the growth of embedded knowledge have fundamentally affected the
capacity to make and implement choice, have marginalised involvement and casual-
ised relationships. This intensity has been referred to as ‘the economics of bad
neighbours’, delivering less time for individuals to engage, to share, to become po-
litically involved and to volunteer. Within the individual, risk assessment then turns
to the subjective, centring on individual interest. In consequence, reform proposals,
such as those proposed under the ETRF, which hinge upon community engagement
and involvement, face a sturdy challenge.
The growth in complexity and uncertainty also means that no single individ-
ual can be an expert on more than just a momentary and tiny part of the whole. Nor
can an individual be sure that a selected risk mitigation strategy is the best ‘among
plural possibilities’ (Giddens, 1991, p.182). In the wake of the growth of uncer-
tainty and new forms of economic rationality, the transformation of time into the
‘extended present’, flexible space, an increasing capacity for self-organisation and
the emergence of a multiplicity of choice (Nowotny, et al., 2001), tradition loses its
hold and lifestyle is assaulted by choice and variety. These effects are omnipresent,
invading the boundaries of our education institutions and, as such, are of special im-
port when considering reform design and their implementation arrangements.
The growth in anxiety associated with the dynamism of the modern era also
tends to threaten awareness of the self, triggering a search for ontological security
based on routines (Mulgan, 1997). However, the routine of daily practice is now
less able to provide a stable baseline for the future. The dynamics of change that
now surrounds us has precipitated fewer and fewer encounters with the trusted
surety of familiar outcomes. In turn, trust has moved to take on an active dimension
that is subjectively perceived to be ‘risky’ (Möllering, 2002). This anxiety is also
heightened by the ‘perpetual’ transition often associated with dynamics of modern

living. In turn the protective cocoon afforded by the surety of knowing has nar-
rowed around a time span that brackets self-interested economics.
The rise of the economic has emerged imperceptibly, passively accepted by

an increasingly insular citizenry, to subvert the individual. Indeed, the role of the
‘economic’ has risen to become the dominant means of recognition and has also
come to dominate political discourse. The politico-economic in redefining human
motivation rationalises individuality (Mulgan, 1997). For the disempowered, such
as ‘at-risk’ youth, the silent few isolated from the dominant discourse, the vector of
self-identity (Mulgan, 1997) that carries an individual across the plurality of institu-
tional settings is then truncated and confined to the realm of small, insular and iso-
lated networks. As Foucault (1971) observes, the totality of western discourse
reinforces social organisation. This combination of factors particularly the chal-
lenges posed by modernity and the rise of Mode 2 society have serious implications
for the realisation of economic goals, individual prosperity and social inclusion and
are of special relevance to education reform agendas.
The irony is that while the technological, economic and social dynamism of
the modern era may enhance the scope of action available to many individuals
(Michalski, Miller and Stevens, 2002) the disempowered, removed from the domi-
nant discourse, run the risk of increasing isolation and irrelevance. Wolin (2003,
p.378) says:
‘All that is needed to produce a politically neutralised demos is a combination

of work haunted…by unemployment; public education that provides the tools
to consume popular culture and representative government that regulates
mass politics according to a timetable of periodic elections…’
Thus the challenge is, to find a way to deal with these trends and their powerful ef-
fects. However, the pathway to achieving these important ends is complex and full
of risk, particularly for ‘at-risk’ young people.
Education reform across the globe has an unhappy history. This is evidenced
in the terrain of large-scale education reform that is littered with the corpses of for-
gotten and failed programmes (Hargreaves, 2003; Fullan, 2001; Fullan, 2003).
Hargreaves (2003, p.21) argues that convention persists within social systems be-
cause:
‘…professionals and bureaucrats…look inward to the custom and certainty of

their own expertise and routines rather than outward to the concerns of stu-
dents, families and communities’.
This outlook, complicated by the dynamics associated with the rise of Mode 2 soci-
ety and the characteristics of modernity can interfere with the implementation of
large-scale education reform initiatives. The literature however, proposes a range of
alternate and complimentary ways. These include the adoption of a model for dis-
tributed governance, affording meaningful transparency, pursuing regulatory re-
form, emphasising participation, creating a new professionalism for teachers,
valuing learning, activating community wide participation and adopting an outward

focus.
The dynamics of modern life have particular implications for governance
and centralised planning (Fukuyama, 1996). Indeed, the richness of information
flows now available to many means that it is no longer necessary to centralise
knowledge and strategic intelligence (Mulgan, 1997, p.153). For example,
Gharajedaghi (2002) has argued for the adoption of a distributed governance
model. Similarly, others such as Paquet (2000); Maxwell (2003); Aldridge, Halpern
& Fitzpatrick (2002); Bentley and Wilsdon (2003); Mulgan (1997); Leadbeater
(2002); Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (2001a) and
Skidmore, Chapman and Miller (2003) have argued for new forms of governance
and new ways of doing things within government. In the ‘Grown Up Trust’
Skidmore and Harkin (2003) argue that the command based regulatory arrange-
ments that inhabit society’s institutions operate to erode trust. Mulgan (1997) ech-
oes a similar theme when he states that the ‘gigantic’ efforts of bureaucracy to
prevent the abuse of trust have produced less than perfect results prompting further
and further efforts to contain the abuse. Under the weight of technical regulation
bureaucratised accountability measures have broken down. In turn, trust’s role as a
necessary mediating factor for effective societal functioning has been allowed to
decay. Education reform has an important role in countering this decay. However,
the emergence of individualism presents a serious implementation obstacle.
The rise of individualism, regarded ‘contemptuously’ by Tocqueville as a
‘triviality’ (Wolin, 2003) has narrowed the ‘field’ of community, depoliticised citi-
zens and reduced action to the pursuit of individual ‘interest’. Mulgan (1997) is
similarly disparaging:
‘Individual choice has become a totem…blinding ourselves to its limits’
(Mulgan, 1997, p.49).
In effect, the adversary culture of individual has caused a crisis of values. Laclau
and Mouffe (1985, p.19) add an additional concern.. They note that ‘the more im-
mediate material interests predominate, the more the tendencies towards fragmenta-
tion assert themselves’. The resultant depoliticisation of the populace has left
individuals socially isolated, forcing retreat into the bounds of the narrow protec-
tion of short-term self-interested action.
Similarly, the hardening of definitions around the idea of freedom has pro-
duced a ‘motionless state’ within which the emergence of legislated equality oper-
ates as a form of democratic despotism (Wolin, 2003).
‘The uniformisation and massification of the citizenry through the assignment

of positive liberties has imposed a single norm upon citizens’ (Laclau and
Mouffe, 1985, p.177).
The uniform vocabulary of ‘rights’ ultimately excludes deviance and overwhelms
difference, ‘expunging rival contexts and revealing a triumph for generality’
(Wolin, 2003, p.97). The value of practices, habits and the mores once ‘engraved in
the hearts’ of citizens are denied and growth becomes stunted.
O’Neill (2002) also laments the arrival of the motionless state and argues that
passive citizens who wait for others to accord their rights and mistakenly suppose
that states alone can secure them, are doomed to disappointment (O’Neill, 2002,
p.32).
‘State power has revealed itself as inadequate wherever people take a merely
passive view of citizenship’ (O’Neill, 2002, p.38).
Indeed, O’Neill has argued that calls for greater ‘transparency’ in public institutions
has marginalised the more basic obligation of not to deceive (O’Neill, 2002, p.18).
The offering of limited transparency has operated as a form of deception (O’Neill,
2002), fragmenting society and reinforcing the hegemony of the politico-economic
through cooperating power elites. Without meaningful transparency the citizenry is
left wondering and in perceiving their interests put at risk, express their ‘apparent’
vulnerability by withdrawing their trust.
For institutional transparency to be meaningful, particularly as a mechanism
for inclusion, individuals must find the proffered ‘transparency’ valuable. The liter-
ature suggests that this might involve a range of measures including openness, dia-
logue, consent, negotiation and positive action to address mistakes (MORI, 2001),
rather than the assignment of increasingly weightier regulatory conditions. Giddens
(1991) suggests, that trust is mobilised by a process of mutual disclosure and is sus-
tained through mutual commitment. Perhaps a school education system regulatory

framework that adopts a negotiated and mutual character may be an appropriate
parallel initiative when considering education reform.
Similarly, the notions of accepting uncertainty, assigning priority to public
value, taking an evolutionary approach and harnessing adaptive capacities to assist
self regulation as advocated by Skidmore, Chapman and Miller (2003) also emerge
as potential means to restore trust and to achieve meaningful transparency. In terms
of education and schooling, these measures might translate into the adoption of dis-
tributed governance, making available meaningful (valuable) school performance
data, encouraging experimentation and facilitating stronger and broader stake-

holder and community engagement in school planning and operations.
Having mapped the education reform terrain I now turn to discuss social cap-
ital. In so doing I hope to envelope the previous discussion under one integrating
logic.
‘Today, there is broad agreement that economic development is embedded in
social and political development’ and as a result there is growing interest in social
capital and its application across sectors and disciplines (Fournier, 2002). Within
the education sector in particular where the notions of inclusion, democracy and
public goods are nurtured and sustained, social capital may provide some of the an-
swers to the difficulties often encountered when seeking to push through reform.
According to Bourdieu the origins of social capital reside in the realms of
conflict and power (Schwartz, 1997) as actors engage in a struggle over their inter-
ests. Through social relations an individual and groups acquire the ability to ad-
vance their interests. This means that people who are social capital poor lack the
resources to ‘extract the full benefit from their qualifications’ (Bourdieu, 1979,
p.147). Indeed, Bourdieu refers to the collective disillusionment of youth as a prod-
uct of the mismatch between aspirations and real probabilities (Bourdieu, 1979).
Schooling is a conservative force that relegates the working class to second class
courses. Given these views, the ‘working or learning’ mantra of the ETRF reform
agenda runs the risk of repeating the faults of the past.
Bourdieu’s sociology offers key insights into the scope and nature of the ob-
stacles that might be encountered along the way to achieving an education reform
agenda that seeks to rescue ‘at-risk’ youth, particularly those who experience the
difficulties of reduced socio-economic circumstance, isolation and weak cultural
capital (Bourdieu, 1979). The point is that power asymmetries and the logic within
‘at-risk’ youth operate powerfully to limit their field of action. This logic then be-
comes a significant factor for consideration when seeking to push through educa-
tion reform such as that proposed under ETRF.
Power works in subtle ways to internalise oppression operating visibly and
invisibly through the use of information, administrative control, surveillance and
structures to supervise populations (Mulgan, 1997). In influencing many aspects of
day-to-day behaviour the power of the State is able to penetrate the private of ideas,
opinions and habits (Wolin, 2003, p.2003). The state then becomes the incarnation
of the popular will of the people, institutionally fixed as an ensemble of citizens iso-
lated in the sub-stratum of socio-economic relations (Poulantzas, 1975). Particular
interest is concealed under the veil of public interest (Wolin, 2003, p.255).
‘In democracies there tends to be a reinforcing circle between social, eco-
nomic and political inequality that enables the powerful to preserve privilege
or to perpetuate injustice (Young, 2002, p.17).
These observations remind that the accumulation of human capital within individu-
als offers only part of the solution to achieving individual success and suggests that
education reform should strongly emphasise the social.
Power also exists within cultural practices, habits and mores. Bourdieu re-
gards cultural systems as operating symbolically through internalised cultural prac-
tice to contain and direct individual growth. Thus, these systems establish and
maintain social and competitive hierarchies that persist and reproduce themselves
without resistance or the conscious recognition of members (Schwartz, 1997).
Bourdieu argues that the dominant cultural standards of any social order are funda-
mentally arbitrary. ‘The logic within us determines our mode of apprehending our
social world’ (Schwartz, 1997). Indeed, all cultural symbols, practices and artifacts
function to enhance social distinction and operate symbolically (symbolic capital)
and violently (symbolic violence) to perpetuate social strata (Schwartz, 1997).
Individual choice according to Bourdieu reflects the encounter between ac-
cumulated dispositions and past experience. These encounters operate within
‘fields’ as constraints and opportunities to connect the action of ‘habitus’ to the
power structures in modern society that mediate between structure and practice.
Habitus shapes individual action, adjusts aspirations and expectations, divides the
scope of action between what is possible and impossible and is resistant to change
(Schwartz, 1997). Through habitus therefore, opportunity structures are perpetu-
ated (Schwartz, 1997). For example, Bourdieu found that scholastic success can be
explained by the amount and type of cultural capital inherited from the ‘family’ mi-
lieu. This finding has significant implications for education reform that seeks to res-
cue ‘at-risk’ youth and underscores the importance of the reform proposals
proffered by Hargreaves (2003), Fullan (2003) and Bransford, Brown and Cocking
(2000).
The effect of ‘habitus’, though he did not refer to the term, is also exampled
in Fukuyama’s Trust. The Social Virtues and The Creation of Prosperity (1996).
Fukuyama describes the Irish immigrants to the USA as having ‘little tradition’ of
higher education and of their desire to maintain their religious identity. These ‘hab-
its’ discouraged the pursuit of further education. Giddens (1991) also observes that
tradition has a binding normative character that resists the introduction of some-
thing new. One can imagine the isolation of a new immigrant in a strange land. In
the absence of a sense of wider community and generalised trust individuals and
their families cling to their ‘ascriptive identities’ (Fukuyama, 1996) in niche societ-
ies (Mulgan, 1997) seeking the security of close group ties.
‘Attitudes of trust…are directly connected to the psychological security of in-

dividual and groups’ (Giddens, 1991, p.19).
Paradoxically, in seeking the security of close group ties, affiliates can render them-
selves vulnerable to a contained and fragile existence. These affiliations may oper-
ate powerfully and unconsciously to contain the ambitions of education reform
agendas that seek to assist disadvantaged youth. Indeed, patterns of behaviour,
group aspirations, role models and peer groups operate to generate ‘imitative be-
haviour’ (Durlauf, 2003, p.6) that contributes to an enduring socio-economic status.
Place also matters, particularly for young people. Mechanisms such as access
to and the quality of institutional resources, relationships, community norms, peer
influences, social networks and spatial mismatch have been shown to be influential
in shaping the quality of neighbourhoods (Iannotta and Ross, 2002, p.18) and the
prospects for community members. The action of these mechanisms, when applied
negatively can lead to the uneven distribution of opportunities creating ‘significant
barriers to opportunities for residents’ (Iannotta and Ross, 2002). It seems then that
the persistence in economic status, generated by group level influences on individu-
als (Durlauf, 2003) and the effects of place present as implementation challenges
for the ETRF’s ‘at-risk’ youth agenda. This suggests that education reform agendas
that seek to assist ‘at-risk’ youth must address not only ‘education’ but also socio-
economic and place effects.
The literature suggests that individuals prosper when they can access linking
social capital, which facilitates connection with individuals in positions of power,
and bridging social capital that facilitates access to the resources and support of oth-
ers who share similar characteristics.
‘For the disadvantaged to gain a better status, strategic behaviours require
accessing resources beyond the usual social circles’ (Lin, 2000, p.793).
Through access to social capital resources in ‘quality neighbourhoods’ individuals
can access ‘know-who’ to become ‘members’ connected to networks that extend be-
yond the bounds of familial bonds (Woolcock, 2002). These elements, particularly
bridging social capital, emerge as supplementary strategies to overcome the con-
tainment of habitus and to resist power asymmetries.

Putnam (2000), Fukuyama (1996) and Schuller (2001) and others have ar-
gued that ‘association’ may provide the necessary access to bridging and linking so-
cial capital and, in so doing, facilitate the achievement of a robust and reliable social
order and an inclusive society. Tocqueville, also saw the value in ‘association’ and
regarded it as critical to resisting the tyranny of the majority (Wolin, 2003, p.238).
However, Schwartz (1997) reminds that disinterested participation is not possible.
Indeed, hierarchy and centralised modes of leadership within traditional voluntary
associations can ‘structure’ internal conversations that can, in turn, control the is-
sues that are allowed to enter the political arena (Siisiäinen, 2000). Symbolic power
thus activated can conceal private interests as universal and can give distinction and
classification a taken-for granted character (Schwartz, 1997). This reminds of the
need for education reform initiatives to embrace a transgressive agenda. An agenda
that appropriately spans the effects of place, power asymmetries and social position.
Thus, in seeking to build a vibrant and inclusive democracy, solutions based
on expanding community engagement through ‘association’, as it is popularly de-
fined, exudes a ‘top-down’ or ‘parachuting-in’ character that may not connect with
the local need. Consequently, education reform measures that tilt towards ‘working
together’ and building new community partnerships may not, in the absence of
transgressive enabling measures, lead to the desired end. Strong norms and group
cohesiveness can also limit a group’s receptivity to new ways of doing things and
new information (Coleman, 1988; Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998). Indeed, normative
practices are likely to contribute to the exclusion of difference and the erosion of
trust, operating to perpetuate the disadvantage of ‘at-risk’ youth and to challenge
the ambitions of education reform.
It seems then, that the idea of association, as it is often described, would ben-
efit from a broader definition. In many ways the popular character of association
and organisation is one that retains its industrial era vestiges and fails to recognise
that association has value regardless of form. As Mulgan (1997) observes ‘Mem-
bership figures tend to be skewed towards older rather than newer forms of associa-
tion’. The economic has yet to properly value a diversity of association, inferring
quality from form rather than public value. In so doing the discourse of the eco-
nomic, which operates at the level of self-interest, limits the capacity for recogni-
tion and the realisation of a full identity. Yet,
‘Our sense of well-being our desire, our fears, all are bound up with the people
around us. We understand ourselves not from the inside but by the clues given
us by other people and by institutions’. (Mulgan, 1997, p.47)
Thus reform initiatives that seek to leverage off a diversity of community-based so-
lutions, particularly initiatives that seek to generate rather than consume community
resources, present as essential companions to any education reform agenda (The
Policy Implications of Social Capital, 2003).
Indeed, well-functioning modern societies require a shared understanding
built upon a values base that emphasises voluntary regulation between unfamiliar
persons (Siisiäinen, 2000). Individuals need to be life-long learners, technically
competent, proactive, flexible and able to access the benefit of solid relations built
upon reciprocity and mutuality (Jorgensen, 2004). The human capital initiatives of
the ETRF and similar agendas are unlikely, on their own, to achieve the desired
socio-economic outcomes for ‘at-risk’ youth. A much stronger emphasis on place,
the social and community, in all its forms, is required.
Government’s role then is to participate with its citizens to build social capi-
tal, to assist communities to bridge community cleavages and to facilitate inter and
intra neighbourhood dynamics (Policy Research Initiative, 2003). The aim is to
help citizens to become successful learners, stronger, responsible, flexible and cre-
ative by providing the room to use initiative and to experiment as well as the capac-
ity to create, manage and sustain cumulative connections. This aim has important
implications for ‘at-risk’ youth.
Through the establishment of new modes of association across a diversity of
communities, growth and inclusion through effective participation can be sus-
tained. The limitations of top-down interventions would be avoided, community
identities preserved and the active agency of young people recognised (Policy Re-
search Initiative, 2003). Approaches such as these are likely to assist in the amelio-
ration of the negative effects associated with modernity, the emergence of the
politico-economic, the influence of power elites and the rise of individualism. In
this endeavour, schools and the communities of which they are a part have an im-
portant co-participatory role to play.
Participation, in this context is an important element. Through ‘effective par-
ticipation’ development becomes demand driven (‘bottom-up’), rather than
top-down, supply driven and generic (Oyen, 2002). However, ‘broad scale partici-
pation in school-based learning…requires clear goals and schedules and relevant
curricula that permit and guide adults in ways to help children learn’ (Bransford,
Brown and Cocking, 2000, p.246). Accordingly, a key success factor for education
reform agendas, especially for ‘at-risk’ youth, appears to hinge not only on commu-
nity partnerships but also on the design of responsive and participatory social and
organisational structures that can create and sustain supportive and inclusive learner
centred environments (Bransford, Brown and Cocking, 2000). Such an approach
extends well beyond a human capital approach to also invoke a socio-economic di-
mension (Durlauf, 2003).
To conclude this part, social capital has a transgressive character that oper-
ates as an intermediary factor, focusing on, among other things, networks, the rela-
tionships within and between them, the creation of synergies and partnerships and
the facilitation of coordinated effort (Gavigan, Ottitsch & Mahroum, 1999; Glaeser,
2001; OECD, 2001, 2000; Schuller, 2001; Temple, 2000). Social capital recognises
that knowledge is created through combination and exchange and, potentially, is a
source of valuable heterogeneity between and within communities (Maskell, 2000).
This gives rise to the transdisciplinary value of social capital.
‘The inter-relationship between capacities and relations is vital because it is

the nexus between these two forces that the space or possibilities for individu-
als to develop their capabilities and intelligent action will be created’ (Brown
and Lauder, 2000, p.235).
and opens the way for the discussion that follows.

Given the main features of modern life it would seem that the key to
long-term improvement now resides within new mindsets and new behaviours that
look to the potentialities that exist between the disciplines. Similarly, the relational
and transgressive approach of social capital defies a ‘single line of analysis’ (Baron,
Field & Schuller, 2000, p.29). Baron, Field and Schuller (2000) parallel this view
with the realm of quantum physics dominated by multiple realities, uncertainty and
probabilities. A realm also occupied by the action of transdisciplinarity thought and
action (Nicolescu, 2002).
Hargreaves (2003) proposals for the education sector respond to the com-
plexity of post-modern life by recommending a broad and transgressive model for
the education sector. In particular, Hargreaves (2003) argues for the establishment
of schools as caring and moral learning organisations, the professionalisation of
communities of teachers and to step away from the industrial models of education.
Hargreaves (2003) advocacy appears to resonate with the goals of education reform
articulated in the Education Queensland and elsewhere, suggesting additional are-
nas for further action. Similarly, Edwards, Gilroy and Hartley (2002) argue for the
professionalisation of teaching based on networks, communities of learners
(Bransford, Brown and Cocking, 2000). Bransford, Brown and Cocking (2000)
also highlight the need to involve communities, parents, teachers and students in the
educational agenda. By building on these types of initiatives including the adoption
of new forms of governance, the reinvention of teaching and teacher education,
broader community participation and trust building regulatory reform, a socio-cul-
tural transdisciplinary agenda for education that recognises the value of collabora-
tive action across boundaries can be established and sustained.
Conclusion
In seeking to address the needs of disengaged and ‘at-risk’ youth I have argued in
this article that education reform has to do much more than aspire to keep youth
‘earning or learning’. Broad and inclusive community based initiatives that build in
human capital approaches but which also transgress ‘boundaries’ appear needed
(Cote, 2001). Factors such as the rise of Mode 2 society, dynamic change, the rise of
powerful politic-economic interests and persistence of social traditions together
form an agglomeration, conspiring as a system of trip-wires to successful education
reform. A key challenge is to find a way ahead that preserves social cohesion while
enabling the potential(s) associated with working and earning in a Mode 2 society
(Cote, 2001). Rapid change is a potential ‘agent of exclusion’ for the weak, slow or
non-learners and the disenfranchised. In seeking to facilitate social inclusion and to
build a vibrant democracy, education reform proposals such as the ETRF provide an
important set of initiatives. However, given the complexity and dynamics of
post-modern life and the risk of repeating the failures of the past, the ETRF reform
agenda like other ‘reform’ agendas may not yield the expected results.
Complimentary approaches would include the incorporation of the initia-
tives proposed by Hargreaves in his book Teaching in the Knowledge Society
(2003) supplemented by the adoption of a model for governance that recognises the
new ways of doing things and contributes to the public value of education through
activities that build social capital. Measures such as these invoke the need to trans-
gress education reform beyond the borders of education to include related Govern-
ment Departments, community and stakeholder groups, local industry and councils,
a diversity of associations, neighbourhoods and local partnerships that extend
across the depth and breadth of society. Approaches of this ilk, that acknowledge
the importance of ‘bridging’ and ‘linking’ social capital, that can transgress bound-
aries to establish new connections between schools and the many facets of modern
communities, that minimise social fragmentation, generate and regenerate commu-
nity resources and build cohesion are likely to foster the socio-cultural-self-identi-
ties of ‘at-risk’ youth and their full participation in a robust and vibrant democracy.
In so doing education reform can take important strides towards securing the
well-being of future generations.
References
Aldridge, S., Halpern, D. & Fitzpatrick, S. (2002) Social Capital. A discussion pa-
per. Retrieved January 9, 2004 from
http://www.number-10.gov.uk/su/social%20capital/socialcapital.pdf
Baron, J. Field, J. Schuller (2000) Social capital. A review and critique. In Social
Capital: Critical Perspectives. (Eds.) S. Baron, J. Field and T. Schuller (2000) Ox-
ford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (2000) How people learn. Brain, mind, ex-
perience and school. National Academy Press: Washington, DC.

Bentley, T. & Wilsdon, J. (2003) The Adaptive State Strategies for Personalising the
Public Realm. Retrieved January 8, 2004 from www.demos.co.uk
Bourdieu, P. (1979) Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. London,
UK: Routledge.
Brown, P. & Lauder, H. (2000) Human capital, social capital and collective intelli-
gence. In Social Capital: Critical Perspectives (Eds.) S. Baron, J. Field & T.
Schuller. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Coleman, J. (1988) Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Jour-
nal of Sociology, 94, Supplement, s.95-s.120.
Cote, S. (2001) The contribution of human and social capital. Retrieved on July 23,
2003 from www.isuma.org
Davenport, T. & Prusak, L. (2000) Working knowledge. Boston, MA: Harvard Busi-
ness School Press.
Durlauf, S. (2003) Groups, social influences and inequality: A membership theory
perspective on poverty traps. Retrieved on January 25, 2004 from
http://www.santa-fe.edu/sfi/publications/Working-Papers/03-03-020.pdf
Edwards, A., Gilroy, P. & Hartley, D. (2002) Rethinking teacher education. Collab-
orative responses to uncertainty. London: Routledge Falmer.
Florida, R. (2002) The rise of the creative class. And how its transforming work, lei-
sure, community and everyday life. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Foucault, M. (1971) Revolutionary action until now. In Language, Counter Mem-
ory, Practice. Selected essays and interviews by Michel Foucault (Ed.), D.
Bouchard. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Fournier, F. (2002) Social capital formation poverty reduction: Which role for civil
society and the state. In Social Capital and Poverty Reduction. Which role for the
civil society organizations and the state? UNESCO. Retrieved January 14, 2004
from http://www.unesco.org/most/soc_cap_symp.pdf
Fukuyama, F. (1996) Trust. The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New
York, NY: Free Press Paperbacks.
Fullan, M. (2001) Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Fullan, M. (2003) Change forces with a vengeance. London: Routledge Falmer.
Gavigan, J., Ottitsch, M. & Mahroum, S. (1999) Kowledge and learning – towards
a learning Europe. In The IPTS future project conference proceedings 10/11 Febru-
ary 2000. Retrieved September 20, 2002 from http://futures.jrc.es/menupage-b.htm
Gharajedaghi, J. (1999) Systems thinking: Managing chaos and complexity – a
platform for designing business architecture. MA, USA: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Giddens, A. (1991) Modernity and self-identity. Self and society in the late modern
age. Stanford University Press: Stanford, California.
Glaeser, E. (2001) The formation of social capital. Isuma 2, 1, Spring 2001.
Retrieved September 5, 2002 from
http://www.isuma.net/v02n01/glaeser/glaeser_e.shtml
Hargreaves, A. (2003) Teaching in the knowledge society. Boston, MA: Harvard
Business School Press.
Henagulph, S. (2000) Three pillars of transdisciplinarity. Retrieved November 27,
2003 from http://www.goodshare.org/pillars.htm
Iannottta, J. & Ross, J. (2002) Equality of opportunity and the importance of place.
Summary of a Workshop. Center for Social and Economic Studies. Division of Be-
havioral and Social Sciences and Education. National Research Council. National
Academy Press. Washington, DC.
Jorgensen, B. (2004) Social Capital in a Tolerant Society? A Response to Treasurer
Costellos’ Presentation to the Sydney Institute. IJSSP, Vol. 24, Number 1/2, p.1-20.
Kleiner, A. (1995) Twenty-first century organizations: Four plausible prospects.
Retrieved October 1, 2002 from
http://www.gbn.com/public/gbnstory/articles/ex_21st_cen_org.htm
Laclau, E. & Mouffe, C. (1985) Hegemony and socialist strategy. Towards a radi-
cal democratic politics. London: NLB.
Leadbeater, C. (2002) Innovate from within. An open letter to the new cabinet secre-
tary. Retrieved January 9, 2004 from www.demos.co.uk
Lin, N. (2000) Inequality in social capital. Contemporary Sociology, 29, 6,
pp.785-795.
Maskell, P. (2000) Social capital, innovation and competitiveness. In Social Capi-
tal: Critical Perspectives (Eds.) S. Baron, J. Field & T. Schuller. Oxford, UK: Ox-
ford University Press.
Maxwell, J. (2003) The great social transformation. Implications for the social role
of government in Ontario. Retrieved January 8, 2004 from www.cprn.org

Michalski, W., Miller, W. & Stevens, B. (2002) Governance in the 21st century.
OECD Secretariat, Advisory Unit to the Secretary-General. Paris Cedex 16, France:
OECD Publications.
MORI (2001) Trust in public institutions. Retrieved January 9, 2003 from
http://www.mori.com/sri/pdf/omnibus3.pdf
Möllering, G. (2002) Traditional, Institutional and Active Trust: Just Do It!? Re-
trieved January 9, 2004 from
http://www.sses.com/public/events/euram/complete_tracks/trust_within_organizat
ions/mollering.pdf
Mulgan, G. (1997) Connexity: How to live in a connected world. Boston, MA: Har-
vard Business School Press.
Nahapiet, J. & Ghoshal, S. (1998) Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organi-
zational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23, 2, pp.242-266.
Nicolescu, B. (2002) Manifesto of transdisciplinarity. New York, NY: SUNY Press.
Nowotny, H. (2002) Re-thinking science: knowledge and the public in an age of un-
certainty. Abstract. Retrieved September 21, 2003 from
http://www.wiss.ethz.ch/research/res_nowotny.de.html
Nowotny, H., Scott, P. & Gibbons, M. (2001) Re-thinking science: knowledge and
the public in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity.
O’Neill, O. (2002) A question of trust. The BBC Reith lectures. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (2000) The contribution
of human and social capital to sustained economic growth and well being. Re-
trieved September 25, 2002 from http://www.hrdc-drhc.ga.ca/arb/conferences/oecd
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (2001) The well-being

of nations. The role of human and social capital: education and skills. Retrieved
October 1, 2002 from www.oecd.org
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (2001a) Governance in
the 21st century. Retrieved January 9, 2004 from
http://www1.oecd.org/publications/e-book/0301011E.PDF
Oyen, E. (2002) Social capital formation as a poverty reducing strategy. In Social
Capital and Poverty Reduction. Which role for the civil society organizations and
the state? UNESCO. Retrieved January 14, 2004 from

http://www.unesco.org/most/soc_cap_symp.pdf
Paquet, G. (2000) The New Governance, Subsidiarity, and the Strategic State. Re-
trieved on June 30, 2003 from
http://www.governance.uottawa.ca/english/Publications/Downloads/Paquet/2000
%20-%20The%20New%20Governance,%20Subsidiarity%20and%20the%20Strat
egic%20State.pdf
Putnam, R. (2000) Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Commu-
nity. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Poulantzas, N. (1975) Political power and social classes. London, UK: New Left
Books.
Policy Research Initiative (2003) The opportunity and challenge of diversity. A role
for social capital. Conference Issues Paper. Retrieved on February 3, 2004 from
http://policyresearch.gc.ca/confpaper
Schuller, T. (2001) The complementary roles of human and social capital. Re-
trieved September 5, 2002 from
http://www.isuma.net/v02n01/schuller/schuller_e.shtml
Schwartz, D. (1997) Culture and power: The sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. The
University of Chicago Press: Chicago.
Schienstock, G. (1999) Social exclusion in the learning economy. Retrieved January
8, 2004 from
http://www.uta.fi/laitokset/tyoelama/sowing/report/SocExcLeaEconsum.pdf
Schienstock, G. (2002) Information Society, Work and the Generation of New
Forms of Social Exclusion. Retrieved January 9, 2004 from
http://www.uta.fi/laitokset/tyoelama/sowing/report/SowingFinal2002.pdf
Siisiänen, M. (2002) Two Concepts of Social Capital: Bourdieu vs. Putnam. Depart-
ment of Social Sciences and Philosophy: University of International Journal of So-
ciology and Social Policy 18 Jyvaskyla, Finland. Retrieved on July 23, 2003 from
http://www.istr.org/conferences/dublin/workingpapers/siisiainen.pdf
Simon, H. (1996) Observations on the sciences of science learning. Paper prepared

for the Committee on Development in the Science of Learning for the Sciences of
Science Learning: An Interdisciplinary Discussion. Department of Psychology,
Carnegie, Mellon University. Cited in How People Learn. Brain, Mind, Experience
and School. (Eds.) J. Bransford, A. Brown & R. Cocking. National Academy Press:
Washington, DC.
Skidmore, P. & Harkin, J. (2003) Grown up trust. Retrieved January 8, 2004 from
www.demos.co.uk
Skidmore, P., Chapman, J. & Miller, P. (2003) The Long Game How Regulators and
Companies Can Both Win. Retrieved January 9, 2004 from www.demos.co.uk
Temple, J. (2000) Growth effects of education and social capital in the OECD coun-
tries. Economics Department working papers No. 263. Retrieved September 30,
2002 from www.OECD.org
The Policy Implications of Social Capital (2003) The National Economic and So-
cial Forum. Forum. Report No. 28. Retrieved on March 3, 2004 from
http://www.nesf.ie/documents/No28SocialCapital.pdf
The State of Queensland (2002) Education and training reforms for the future. A
white paper. Retrieved on June 26, 2003 from http://education.qld.gov.au/etrf/
Woolcock, M. (2002) Social capital in theory and practice: Reducing poverty by

building partnerships between states, markets and civil society. In Social Capital
and Poverty Reduction. While role for the civil society organizations and the state?
UNESCO. Retrieved January 14, 2004 from
http://www.unesco.org/most/soc_cap_symp.pdf
Wollin, S. (2003) Tocqueville between two worlds. The making of a political and
theoretical life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Young, M. (2002) Inclusion in democracy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

This article has been cited by:
1. Frances Camilleri-Cassar. 2014. Education strategies for social inclusion or

marginalising the marginalised?. Journal of Youth Studies 17:2, 252-268.
[Crossref]

International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy: Article Information

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy: Article Information

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy: Article Information

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy

Education Reform for At-Risk Youth: A Social Capital Approach

Approach", International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, Vol. 25 Issue: 8,

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by

Education Reform for At-Risk Youth: A Social Capital Approach

Nowotny, et al. (2001, p.36) describe ‘the accumulation of uncertainties affecting

In learning organisations, the attitudes, skills and knowledge that collaborat-

Creativity comes from people ‘motivated and nurtured in a multitude of ways’

Modernity is also subject to chronic revision undermining the ‘certainty of

heightened by the ‘perpetual’ transition often associated with dynamics of modern

The rise of the economic has emerged imperceptibly, passively accepted by

‘All that is needed to produce a politically neutralised demos is a combination

‘…professionals and bureaucrats…look inward to the custom and certainty of

valuing learning, activating community wide participation and adopting an outward

‘The uniformisation and massification of the citizenry through the assignment

tained through mutual commitment. Perhaps a school education system regulatory

data, encouraging experimentation and facilitating stronger and broader stake-

‘Attitudes of trust…are directly connected to the psychological security of in-

tainment of habitus and to resist power asymmetries.

‘The inter-relationship between capacities and relations is vital because it is

and opens the way for the discussion that follows.

perience and school. National Academy Press: Washington, DC.

of government in Ontario. Retrieved January 8, 2004 from www.cprn.org

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (2001) The well-being

the state? UNESCO. Retrieved January 14, 2004 from

Simon, H. (1996) Observations on the sciences of science learning. Paper prepared

Woolcock, M. (2002) Social capital in theory and practice: Reducing poverty by

Young, M. (2002) Inclusion in democracy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

1. Frances Camilleri-Cassar. 2014. Education strategies for social inclusion or

You might also like