Masaryk University Faculty of Social Studies Department of Social Policy and Social Work
DOCTORAL THESIS
Brno 2018 Marija Wazi
Mgr. Marija Wazi
Impact of international self-development training on social functioning and participation of disadvantaged youth: perspectives of young people and practitioners
Doctoral Thesis
Supervisor: doc. PhDr. Pavel Navrátil, Ph.D.
Brno 2018
2
Preface
I declare that this text was my own work and does not involve plagiarism or teamwork other than that authorized in the general terms above or that authorized for any particular piece of work. Marija Wazi April, 2018
3
Contents
Obsah
Contents ...... 4 Introduction ...... 11 1 Disadvantaged youth in 21st century ...... 18 1.1. Defining youth in a postmodern context ...... 18
1.1.1. Identity in postmodern society ...... 20
1.1.2. Context of social work ...... 22
1.1.3. Youth confronted by new challenges ...... 23
1.1.4. Young people in Europe in contexts of education, labour-market and citizenship 25
1.2. Understanding disadvantage, disaffection and fewer opportunities ...... 28
1.2.1. Disadvantaged youth and young people with fewer opportunities ...... 28
1.2.2. Disaffection and motivation hand in hand ...... 31
2 Social work with youth at international level ...... 34 2.1. Youth work beginnings ...... 34
2.2. Social work practice with young people ...... 37
2.2.1. Different approaches and types of working with youth ...... 37
2.2.2. Positive youth development and social work aspects ...... 38
2.3. Re-shaping of citizenship and youth work ...... 40
2.4. International programs with disadvantaged youth in European context ...... 43
3 Self – development method in social work ...... 47 3.1. Self-development in social work: a field to explore ...... 47
3.1.1. Different variations of ‘self” ...... 48
3.1.2. Development through experiential learning...... 50
3.1.3. Supporting well-being through self-development ...... 51
3.2. Self-development training: key characteristics, benefits and risks ...... 53
3.2.2. Life competences and the contribution of non-formal method ...... 56
4
3.2.3. Opportunity for a ‘turning point” ...... 57
3.3. Reflection in learning from experience: self-development perspective ...... 58
3.3.1. Critical reflection in social work with young people in self-development trainings ...... 59
3.3.2. Critical reflection by Knott & Scragg and its connection to Synergy trainings .... 61
3.4. Self-development training at international level ...... 62
3.5. Synergy network: opportunities for young people...... 63
3.5.1. Olde Vechte Foundation and International Synergy Network ...... 64
3.5.2. Connecting methods and values to life situation of participants ...... 65
4 Social functioning ...... 70 4.1. Social functioning: between capacities and expectations ...... 70
4.2. Positive functioning in terms of ‘congruence’ by Virginia Satir ...... 71
4.3. Assessing social functioning: selected elements...... 72
4.4. Young people´s needs and relationships ...... 74
5 Participation of youth ...... 77 5.1. Participation in what and how? ...... 77
5.1.1. Different faces of participation ...... 78
5.1.2. Resources and conditions for participation ...... 80
5.1.3. Models and forms of participation ...... 81
5.1.4. Participation: tensions between theory and practice ...... 84
5.2. Young people and their active participation in society ...... 85
5.2.1 Significance of empowerment ...... 86
5.2.2. Domains, barriers and outcomes of empowerment...... 88
5.2.1. Changes in 21st century: ICT and cyber-participation ...... 90
5.2.2. Role of self-perception and motivation ...... 91
6 Understanding impact ...... 95 6.1. Variations of impact ...... 95
6.2. Exploring impact ...... 95
6.2.1 Kirkpatrick´s four levels ...... 96 5
6.2.2. Benett´s hierarchy ...... 96
6 Methodology ...... 98 6.1. Choosing research strategy and techniques ...... 98
6.1.1. Interpretive qualitative study ...... 98
6.1.2. Used techniques and the process of data collection ...... 99
6.1.3. Advantages and disadvantages of on-line research ...... 102
6.2. Research sampling...... 103
Table 1. Basic demographic data and information about the interviews with participants ...... 104
Table 2. Basic demographic data and information about the interviews with trainers .. 105
6.3. Operationalisation ...... 106
6.4. Data analysis ...... 107
6.5. Validity ...... 108
6.6. Reflections on limitations of the research ...... 109
6.7. Ethical context ...... 109
6.7.1. Informed consent, confidentiality and anonymity ...... 109
6.7.2. Other ethical dimensions...... 110
6.8. My position of a researcher ...... 111
6.9. Reflection on the Research Context ...... 113
6.9.1. Creating rapport and keeping contact with participants ...... 113
6.9.2. Where research took place ...... 114
6.9.3. Presence of other people ...... 114
6.9.4. Incentives ...... 115
6.9.5. Context of interviewing participants ...... 115
6.9.6. Context of interviews with trainers ...... 116
6.9.7. Context of survey ...... 117
6.9.8. Context of participant observation ...... 117
6
6.9.9. Context of document analysis ...... 118
7 Interpretation ...... 119 7.1 YOUTH: THEIR OPPORTUNITIES AND DISADVANTAGES ...... 119
7.1.1 Challenges youth face ...... 120
7.1.2 Living conditions of young people ...... 122
7.1.3 Needs of young people...... 124
7.1.4 Risks experienced in life ...... 126
7.1.5 Understanding less-opportunity ...... 127
7.1.6 Less-opportunity factors and what they bring ...... 130
7.1.7 Dealing with less-opportunity ...... 133
7.1.8 Youth in context of research and theory ...... 133
7.1.9 Updates on youth ...... 136
7.2 INTERNATIONAL DIMENSION ...... 138
7.2.1 Benefits of international dimension: different perspectives ...... 138
7.2.2 Benefits of international dimension: common language and connections...... 140
7.2.3 Benefits of international dimension: diversity of cultures ...... 141
7.2.4 International dimension: learning towards tolerance ...... 143
7.2.5 Limitations of international dimension ...... 144
7.2.6 International dimension in context of research and theory ...... 145
7.2.7 Updates on international dimension...... 147
7.3 BENEFITS AND LIMITATIONS OF SELF-DEVELOPMENT TRAINING ...... 149
7.3.1 Basic Synergy training: What is it about? ...... 149
7.3.2 Limiting or stopping elements of the training ...... 158
7.3.3 Risks in participation in the training ...... 160
7.3.4 Supporting elements of the training ...... 164
7.3.5 Self-development training in context of research and theory ...... 170
7.3.6 Updates on self-development training ...... 173
7
7.4 UNDERSTANDING IMPACT ON SOCIAL FUNCTIONING ...... 177
7.4.1 “Basic Synergy training supported me in developing my…” ...... 178
7.4.2 Learning in Basic Synergy training ...... 179
7.4.3 Outcomes of the training seen by youth ...... 191
7.4.4 Acceptance and enjoyment increased in life ...... 192
7.4.5 Decision making and problem-solving skills ...... 192
7.4.6 Education and position in life ...... 193
7.4.7 Employment or occupation ...... 193
7.4.8 Effect on health and independent living ...... 194
7.4.9 Leisure time and enjoyment ...... 196
7.4.10 Needs met in the training ...... 197
7.4.11 Needs not met in the training ...... 198
7.4.12 Potential of young people, quality in life and turning point ...... 199
7.4.13 Impact on relationships ...... 200
7.4.14 Impact on resources, problem solving skills and dealing with risks...... 201
7.4.15 Self-confidence and initiative ...... 202
7.4.16 Impact of social functioning in context of research and theory ...... 204
7.4.17 Updates on social functioning ...... 206
Perspective of trainers ...... 209
7.5 IMPACT ON PARTICIPATION ...... 211
7.5.1 “Basic Synergy training supported me in…”...... 212
7.5.2 Connection to community or society reported by youth ...... 212
7.5.3 Involvement in NGO and international partnerships ...... 214
7.5.4 Supporting other people in development and assisting in a training ...... 216
7.5.5 General volunteering and other involvement ...... 216
7.5.6 Involvement in non-formal education and cultural activities ...... 217
7.5.7 Impact on resources and conditions of participation ...... 217
8
7.5.8 Impact on participation of youth in context of research and theory ...... 219
7.5.9 Updates on participation ...... 221
Perception of trainers ...... 222
8 Conclusion ...... 224 8.1 Answering main research question ...... 224
8.2 Suggestions for practice ...... 229
References ...... 231 Abstrakt ...... 255 Abstract ...... 256 Name index ...... 257 Attachments ...... 260 1. Interview guide with trainers ...... 260
2. Survey content ...... 261
3. Interview guide with participants of Basic Synergy training...... 264
4. Survey demographic details ...... 265
5. Operationalisation ...... 269
6. Measuring impact...... 275
7. Impact as analysed in this research ...... 275
8. Numbers of interviewed young people by countries ...... 276
9
...... 276
9. The Framework of Disadvantage ...... 277
10. Participation Tree ...... 278
11. Social functioning and social participation ...... 279
Acknowledgements ...... 280
10
Introduction
‘Knowing that many of them are like me in isolated situation with low self esteem about themselves and their skills, most of them are not actively participating in society. Knowing out of experience that intercultural exchanges are very powerful way of support to meet new people and to take an active role in society,’ Leonie, blind organizer of international self-development Synergy training Building Bridges in Netherlands, 2009
The world is changing. This is the common conclusion of philosophers, artists, scientists, social workers and other people of diverse professions and interests. Well, we could without much hesitation state that ‘the world’ has been doing so since it has started, hence change is, again by far too many to mention, proclaimed to be an essential part of being itself. What is both intriguing and fundamental though, and what will be the central starting point of this thesis, is to understand how youth - as the generation that will handle our world of tomorrow - perceives specific changes of nowadays and how they are dealing with them. This thesis is undertaking a task of searching for answers in the times of globalization and post-modern processes linked with individualization, reflexivity of the self and shattered certainties in risk society. These are elements that affect young people´s lives on daily basis and these are also themes that are of great importance when it comes to youth development. The research question I intend to focus on is the following:
How is the impact of self-development method used at international level on social functioning and participation of disadvantaged youth understood by disadvantaged young people and practitioners?
This introduction is here to bring light to the need of answering it.
Ferguson (2001) as many other practitioners and theorists (Bauman 2003; Beck, Giddens, Lash 1994; Giddens 1991a; 1992; Jeffs, Smith 2002; Navrátil, Navrátilová 2008; Pallisera, Fullana, Palaudarias, Badosa 2013; Rose 2008; Satir 1995; Virokannas, Rauhala, Harrikari 2014) bring attention to the need to develop social work education and practice so it fully understands the processes of postmodernity such as individualization, reflexivity, the new intimacy and choices open to consumers of services - and to respond accordingly to these processes and changing needs of clients of social work. Social workers need to be skilled in how to develop nurturing relationships with clients which promote self-actualization, mastery and healing. Choosing an approach in practice which goes to the heart of people’s lived realities and attachments, which promotes effective life planning, enhances their mastery and, ultimately, their happiness, means advancing social work and life politics. The purpose behind this thesis is therefore to advance social work practice by elaborating on a method of self-development which is growing within, and through, this era of transformations. And as there are many target groups in social work, it is important to notice that in this thesis the main focus is on young people. Therefore, all the themes are presented here with an intention to understand the context of young people´s lives nowadays.
So what are the transformations we are talking about? To start with, globalization can be examined as a process of convergence and compression with the boundaries between 11 individuals and between states. The world shrinks and social movements, cultural phenomena, trans-national organizations and businesses come to dominate, creating global markets and cultures, while social, cultural and economic differences are decreasingly visible. It has been accompanied by the internationalization of social problems as issues that arise in one location become problematic in another. People move across different parts of the world for various reasons: poverty, wars, famine, and environmental degradation. Internationalized social problems bring the global to the local and raise the local to the global arena (Dominelli, 2010). Within the Western world, the hegemony of the nation-state has been fractured by this emergence of new globalizing social and cultural processes. We live in what, adopting the expression of (Appadurai 1990), we could call a shifting mosaic in which immigrants, refugees, exiles, guest workers, even tourists and other moving groups or persons constitute an essential feature of the world and appear to affect the politics of nations to a unprecedented degree. These factors, as (Rassool 1998) is pointing out, have fractured the rigidity and monolithic structure of the nation-state, and consequently, the homogeneity of national cultures is increasingly being challenged by the large scale social displacement of large groups of people across the world. What we have as a result is cultural and social fractionalization, and the dynamic reconstitution of group and individual identities in temporary or more permanent immigrant settlements. Globalization, and hand in hand with it post-modern transformation, are seen behind the conditions in which young people in present-day European societies face more choices and greater risks. Youth can no longer rely on collective patterns of progression, they need advice and counselling that take into consideration the complexity of postmodern life. Meanwhile, there is a growing youth division in terms of availability of resources, as not all young people have access to the opportunities open to their generation, and obstacles tend to accumulate for those who are disadvantaged to start with. It is not so far ago when the economic crisis and its impact on the labour market have put large numbers of young Europeans at risk of social exclusion. In fact, reports provide evidence that thousands of young people are still excluded from social and civic life, which is interlinked with their unemployability, poverty, disabilities, lower qualification and general disconnection from social arena (Eurostat 2015a; 2015b; 2017). It further points to the importance of supporting and preparing young people to flourish in a global system of economics that discriminates and marginalizes. Especially youth unemployment remains a serious concern nowadays as millions of young Europeans currently cannot find work and the proportion facing long-term unemployment or involuntary part-time work remains considerable. In total, approximately 17 million of them were in 2016 neither in employment nor education or training, abbreviated as NEETs. For example, almost one in three young people aged 20-24 was neither in employment nor in education or training in Italy, and nearly one in four in Romania, Greece, Bulgaria or Cyprus (Eurostat 2017). At a personal level, these individuals are more likely to become disenfranchised and to suffer from poverty and social exclusion, while at a macro-economic level they represent a considerable loss in terms of unused productive capacity and a considerable cost in terms of welfare payments. People with a low level of education in the EU were almost three times as likely to be neither in employment nor in education and training as those with an intermediate level, while the pattern of lowest NEET rates in cities (as compared with rural areas and towns and suburbs) was repeated in 18 EU Member States (Eurostat 2015a). From previous statistics, young migrants recorded even higher rate increases than non-migrants (Eurostat 2013). These data highlight how low education, poor rural areas and migration are factors making ‘NEET career of a young person more probable (EUR-Lex, 2015).
12
As such, poverty is an issue not to be ignored. For example, according to the most recent data close to 27 million young people are seen at risk of poverty or social exclusion. Poverty rates were noticed to be higher for young people than for the overall population and involuntary part-time work or protracted temporary positions expose this generation to a risk of long-term poverty. In addition, obstacles in social functioning caused by health condition are another issue that many young Europeans are facing in their daily life. In 2013, one tenth of the EU- 28 young population from 16 to 29 years old reported suffering from a chronic illness or long-standing health problem, while 8 percent of them reported health-related long-term limitations in usual activities (Eurostat 2015c). There is also a statistics-based reason to focus on self-acceptance of young people and their fulfilment in life, as according to data intentional self-harm is the second most frequent cause of death among young people of this age (Eurostat 2015c). It could be connected to the fact that young people today have to negotiate a set of risks and self reflexivity which were largely unknown to their parents, no matter their social background or gender. These changes of postmodernity affect their whole life, starting with relationships with family and friends, experiences in education and the labour market, leisure and lifestyles and finally the ability to become established as independent young adults. In addition, many of these changes have come about within a relatively short period of time and increased uncertainty, which can be seen as a source of stress and vulnerability. Moreover, because there is a much greater range of pathways to choose from, young people may develop the impression that their own route is unique and that the risks they face are to be overcome by them as individuals rather than as members of a collective, which might evolve into their stronger disconnection. Certain life circumstances of a young person are contributing to even more profound obstacles to overcome. As mentioned above, particularly youth with a migrant background, low educational achievers or young people with health issues, who are all considered as disadvantaged1or with fewer/less opportunity, are more likely to become NEETs. Taking into account all these factors, it is indeed relevant to give particular attention to such young people. Nowadays, the gap is widening between young people who study, are confident of finding a job and engage in social, civic and cultural life, on the one hand, and those who are struggling with the mentioned processes and find themselves at risk of exclusion and marginalisation, on the other hand. The target group I am focusing on in this research consists then of disadvantaged youth experiencing certain disadvantages in their lives compared to their peers and thus being at increased risk of social exclusion. In contemporary life, where opportunities and choices are in a centre of attention, another way of perceiving the conditions of this youth would be as of young people with fewer opportunities. It is a definition used also by European Commission for young people who have long term experience with social obstacles, economic obstacles, disability, educational difficulties, cultural differences, health problems or geographical obstacles. It includes also young people who, among all the choices available in society around them, are having trouble in actually making a choice due to their life circumstances as listed above disadvantages. In literature the conceptualization of ‘disadvantage’ is used more frequently, while in practice and in European youth work context it is not uncommon to use the later definition with the intention to avoid labelling and to emphasise the person and not a disadvantage as a characteristic. This thesis is using a concept of disadvantage as a well-
1Terms ‘disadvantaged’, ‘less opportunity’ or ‘fewer opportunity’ carry the same core information about development conditions of young people and in this thesis are therefore used as basically overlaping concepts. 13 known one to refer to, however described young people are here perceived mainly as the ones with fewer or less opportunities. All the listed above attributes, such as having a job, experienced health and social living conditions, educational background or cultural aspects, are elements shaping ‘social functioning’ of a young person. Without much hesitation we could proclaim that social functioning is one of the main interests of social work practice and therefore a constant subject to be explored and supported (Bartlett & Saunders, 1972; Navrátil & Musil, 2000; Sheafor & Horejsi, 2015). And as much as each human being has a mode of functioning in society, each also has a position of participation in it. Being a part of a social complex we are, either in an active or on the contrary quite disconnected manner, co-creators of our environment. Numerous theorists (Adams 2008; Arnstein 1969; Eurostat 2015c; Giddens 1991a; Percy-Smith, Thomas 2009; White 1996) see participation of individuals as an important, even essential, component of a healthy and developing society. How do young people, and especially those who are facing disadvantages, function in their transforming society nowadays? More importantly, what is supporting their functioning and what is hindering it? And lastly, how do they actually (choose to) participate in their society? These questions arise and call for exploration also in our times. As global information networks have expanded rapidly, the international influence of concepts and methods have been transported more quickly also within the field of social science to fit the local needs. In such a world social work cannot help but be international, if it still aims to address the issues of social injustice, inequality, oppression and exclusion. It is important to engage with the new international discourses and keep maintaining its commitment to the old idea of social justice (Ife, 2007). There exist claims that suggest that modern Western knowledge based on positivism and rationalism is embedded with ‘normative assumptions presented as truth and serving the purpose of Western dominance over others’ (Brydon 2014). Seen within this context, the postmodern approach offers opportunities to move beyond the Western model of casework and the privileged paradigm, viewing indigenous approaches as equally valid and worthy of applying. The need is then for us to think in terms not of difference, but of interdependence and interconnectedness (Arnold 2014). This points leads to how young people need and benefit from support and working with each other as well. The internationalisation of youth work in Europe started to become an increasingly important element of youth work after World War II, often as confidence building measures between former enemy countries. It has been demonstrated that traineeships abroad afford a unique opportunity to experience differences through unfamiliarity, since quite different cultural behaviour can call for re-orientation and adjustments, even for abandoning familiar mechanisms. They may foster personal competency, self-reliance, self-confidence or adaptability as well as team ability, particularly in foreign, intercultural groups (IdA, 2011). It is also explained by observation that a homogeneous group will not work in the same way as a group in which there are multiple differences (Rose, 2008). Experiencing international dimension thus allows young people to benefit from diversity and different incentives (IdA, 2011; Paige, 2009; Lafraya, 2011). I am well aware of the value of international youth development. Becoming a Ukrainian immigrant in the Czech Republic was a turning point on my way to embracing the value of international activities for young people. My personal experience proved what other social workers all around the world discover in their practice: getting to know another culture and deeper understanding of it through creating a partnership with the representative of that culture during an intense experience brings more understanding of one´s own self. Many 14 experts present the international perspectives on social work and its potential (Payne, Askeland 2008; Bridge 2008), what we lack is the further research in concrete target groups. As MacDonald points out regarding disadvantaged youth, ‘commentaries based on close-up, detailed, qualitative research with those so labelled are few in number’ (MacDonald, Marsh 2005). Recently also several interviewed European national youth policy-makers raised concerns that the implementation instruments in Europe do not take due account of specific target groups and the structured dialogue is perceived to miss the voice of the ‘disadvantaged’ (EU Youth Monitor 2016). Therefore in order to find solutions to current issues international cooperation of diverse fields including social work is needed, which counts for social work with young people influenced by those global social problems as well. Thousands of them are spending their adolescence with a feeling of exclusion in their society, with factors like belonging to minority in the country they live in or stigma they carry because of low social status, and it takes away their motivation for getting involved as an active citizen and a person with unique skills and competences. Social work looks through a wide lens to see the complexity of linking the personal to the political. In contemporary life this includes including a global perspective as part of the solution.
The international perspective in intervention with young people with fewer opportunities is also useful for improving the methods used at international level and the way how people involved in this field share them. For that we particularly need to know how specific methods and activities organized within the framework of social work affect lives of disadvantaged youth and what the impact on their participation and social functioning is. Young people should be the ones asked and included into the process of finding the solutions in this field. Finding out about their triggers of motivation, what exactly they lack in the current system and what kind of support do they need in order to take active part in society processes could be a significant step towards social functioning and participation of youth. Listening to the voices of those affected uncovers what is real rather than guessing and working over them. It is indeed an empowering process which draws on social work values.
Rogers (1959) believed that because each person has the potential for growth, the practitioner can contribute to a client´s self-development. The goal of the helping relationship from a Rogerian perspective is to promote a self-actualizing process, in which a human being can develop its potential and this way to grow. In our society with post-modern issues such as fragmentation, as Ferguson (2001) emphasizes, enabling the person to (re)gain a sense of mastery over their life needs to be at the centre of social work and life politics. For a purpose of applying it in social work, Datar et al. (2008) operate with self-development as with a sum total of many aspects, qualities and abilities that one possesses and how these are used to maximize one´s effectiveness as a functioning individual. Their concept offers to look at ‘self-development in social work in the following context of what is desired to reach both for workers and clients’ (Datar et al., 2008:8). Self-development training with its aspects of interpersonal helping and group dynamics and relationships focus would fall into both micro and mezzo levels of social work, as well as macro level given the international focus in development, and is being recently researched in social work practice and used for social work education (see Francis & Woodcock, 2008; Pallisera, Fullana, Palaudarias, & Badosa, 2013; Rose, 2008; Ruch, 2000). There are also calls for deeper research on individualization processes, new identity forming, reflexivity and creating space for participation (see (Artaraz 2005; Ferguson 2003). All those being attributes of a self-development training make it a suitable field for research as well. Ashworth (Ashworth 2013) interestingly points out, while recognising the benefits of personal-development methods, not much is known about how or 15 in which context they occur. The question remains, whether those benefits are brought by the environment, the activities, the way how group is functioning or may be by the relationships developed with leaders and others. Researching self-development aspects in social work with disadvantaged young people can first of all support better understanding of young people´s needs and motivation, yet also serve for improving the methods used in social work with this target group on local and international level. For that we particularly need to discover how self-development approach affects lives of disadvantaged youth, and whether and in which way it encourages them in participating in society.
With everything emphasized above we are coming back to the main purpose of this thesis and its practical dimension. The following theoretical part and research itself will focus on finding the arguments for use or non-use of culturally and socially differentiated environment such as international self-development training in social work with young clients with fewer opportunities to develop their social functioning and social participation in the context of heterogeneous social conditions and post-modern challenges. The way to contribute to the knowledge around these issues will be by exploring self-development method at international level as one of the possibly effective solutions in social work practice with young people who face diverse obstacles on their life path. The ultimate aim of my PhD thesis is then to find an answer to the main research question: How is the impact of self-development method used at international level on social functioning and participation of disadvantaged youth understood by disadvantaged young people and practitioners? Several non-governmental organizations in Europe and outside of it are working with disadvantaged young people as described above. Over 30 NGOs are connected in non-formal international network Synergy Group with its headquarters in Olde Vechte Foundation (Ommen, Netherlands) and altogether they organize youth exchanges and personal development trainings for disadvantaged youth. In those activities young people are working together and experiencing each other’s world, they meet young people from different cultures, people with different experiences, backgrounds and abilities. At the same time these NGOs intend to support young people in understanding their ‘selves ‘and seeing themselves capable of bringing change with their possibilities rather than their limitations. It also implies fostering well-being of people and consequently their social functioning and participation. Synergy network and its activities offer a huge sample of international and intercultural social work with the above mentioned target group, where self-development method is being frequently used in trainings and youth exchanges. This network offers a rich main field for research I am focusing on for the purpose of this thesis. Being one of the trainers in this network brings for me as a researcher a considerable challenge: to use the inner observations in the field as part of methodology for deeper understanding of the theme and at the same time to construct the research in such a mode that such inner position is not an obstacle to recognize and analyze all possible elements. As (Uggerhøj 2011) underlines, in most cases in social work it is impossible to examine a research process solely from a researcher‘s point of view, because he or she is always under the influence of the political and institutional context that is the framework of the phenomenon or the issue in focus. I have accepted this challenge at the very beginning with an intention to be aware of this double role and to undertake needed measures in designing methodology and conducting the research itself. At the same time, it is also strength of my investigation given I have a deep understanding of the program. The key was to be up front in 16 my involvement and to work towards a non-biased conclusion, which means I needed certain detachment through my growing knowledge via literature and thorough application of theory. Before the search for the answers to the main question could possibly begin a deeper understanding of what it is tackling is needed. The following theoretical part brings recent findings and discourses on the themes of disadvantaged youth as a target group of this exploration, social work at international level as a field, self-development as a method, impact as a tool to observe changes, social functioning as a central focus of social work and participation as a level of social functioning in environment needed for a functional and developing society.
17
1 Disadvantaged youth in 21st century
‘As thugs they steal cars, vandalize estates, attack older (and sometimes, younger) people and disrupt classrooms. As users they take drugs, drink and smoke to excess, get pregnant in order to jump the housing queue and, hedonistically, care only for themselves. As victims they can’t find work, receive poor schooling and are brought up in dysfunctional families.... For all the talk of ‘empowerment’, the underlying pitch has been around young people as victims, thugs or users.’ Jeffs and Smith, 1999
Each century brings its own discoveries and updated understanding of diverse social issues. Some ideas are quite surprising and revolutionary, other on the contrary confirming what has been already known and thus keeping a parallel with traditional views. Also being young meant different conditions in societies throughout centuries that are recorded in human´s history, as well as the state of ‘youth2‘itself. Terms like ‘adolescent’, ‘teenager’, ‘youth’ and ‘young person’ have been often used interchangeably. Yet there are some distinctions between those terms and they are linked to connotations we make while using them. The purpose behind this chapter is to bring understanding of the target group being a focus of this thesis - to clarify who I refer to when it comes to disadvantaged young people. 1.1. Defining youth in a postmodern context ‘Adolescence’, as we know it now, tends to be linked to notions of personal, private and psychological identity. We talk of ‘adolescent behaviour’, ‘adolescent angst’ and ‘adolescent identity’ while focusing on supposedly age-specific developmental problems, as well as upon insecurity and uncertainty. ‘Teenager’, however, is more up-beat and often bracketed with what are understood as age-specific forms of consumption. It is connected to words like ‘fashion’ and ‘magazines’. ‘Youth’ is largely used where the discussion is centred on the behaviour of young people in the public sphere. We find it commonly pronounced with words such as ‘crime’, ‘policy’ and ‘culture’ (Jeffs and Smith, 1999). Marketers nowadays also use newly invented terms such as ‘tweenagers”, ‘middle youth”, ‘kidults’ and ‘adultescents”, categories that intentionally blur the differences between children, youth and adults (World Youth Report, 2005). These terms can be linked to different professions and social groupings. Psychologists and psychiatrists have used the category ‘adolescent’ since G. Stanley Hall (Hall 2013) has came up with his theoretical concept. Within youth work, ‘young person’ has tended to be used to indicate clienthood and ‘youth’ is almost exclusively employed to signify a behaviour being described in a negative light or a discussion of a social problem itself. Attaching ‘teenage’ or ‘teen’ to anything is for example basically synonymous with triviality, as even when linked to something as important as pregnancy or motherhood, a lack of maturity and irresponsibility are implied (World Youth Report, 2005). Over the past decade, world-wide experience has brought evidence that young leaders and youth led organizations engaged in civic activities have influenced public policies through the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of initiatives that have direct relevance to their well-being and development. Young people have proven themselves to be an enormous source of innovative solutions (World Youth Report, 2013). Yet it is comparably only recently that ‘youth’ and the significance of ‘youth’ as a category began to be recognized. It
2In this thesis the term „youth“ is here and further on used as a synonym of „young people“ and „youngsters“. 18 was around the mid-century people began consciously working with ‘youths’ as a separate grouping with specific needs (Smith 2013). In Britain, there are two traditions of youth research, which influenced conceptualization of youth (MacDonald, Marsh 2005): a) youth cultural studies tradition, where we would find ethnographic studies of youth sub-cultural style and resistance, which are theoretically-driven, b) youth transitions tradition, which is more empirically and policy-oriented of school- to-work transition of young people The later is recently more visibly used in social work field due to its recent frequent appearance in policy making. In simple terms youth transitions can be understood as the pathways that young people make as they leave school and encounter different labour market, housing and family situations as they progress towards adulthood. These include obstacles at school, meeting with a lack of access to training, lack of entry routes into the labour market, falling into poverty, partnerships breaking up etc, all according to some practitioners potentially leading to limited citizenship (Coles 1995). The most damaging problem with ‘transition concept’ is that it has tended to treat young people as troubled victims. There has been a dominant belief that growing-up is a one-way journey when a person is moving on from adolescent ignorance to being wise as an adult. In other words, a process of transformation from teenage carelessness to adult seriousness, from youth training to adult employment. The adult, as we often hear, is the finished product, whilst the young person is the incomplete prototype (World Youth Report, 2005). The term ‘transition ‘also tends to evoke youth as a transitory phase from point A which is childhood to point B represented by adulthood (Miles 2002), rather than as a recognized stage in its own right with distinctive experiences and issues. As a result, conceptualizing youth as a transitory stage setting up notions of phases and passing through to emerge afterwards as something better, improved and fully formed (Skelton 2002). The notion of becoming is bound up with the notion of developing into being more mature, in other words ‘adult‘. From a structurally oriented approach, successful transition into adulthood is understood as successful integration into mainstream society (Morciano, Scardigno, Manuti, Pastore 2013). Furthermore, the participation of young people in decision making on matters that affect their own welfare is uneven within and between social contexts. International Federation of Social Workers has underlined in their report (IFSW 2012) that it is important for governments and agencies to systematically review the position of young people, as of other groups, at periodic intervals in order to identify problems, evaluate the results of previous policies and activities, and select logical points on which to concentrate. It calls social workers for a focus upon the needs of young people themselves. IFSW also suggests that objectives of programmes aiming to meet the needs of youth should include: strengthening family life and relationships and encouraging parental participation in programmes; promoting productive employment opportunities and self-employment; improving general education and specific education on youth issues; maintaining services and facilities that cater for youth, and reappraising their effectiveness. Mobilisation and organisation of young people is underpinned by IFSW to be encouraged in order to help achieve potential of youth. Such activities could include: promoting non-formal education programmes based on the needs of young people rather than commercial considerations; and working to enhance the preservation and promotion of indigenous culture and values where these are regarded as positive for young people (ibid.). What I want to emphasize and to use as a fundamental concept for this thesis is the starting point of young people being in a state of both ‘being ‘and ‘becoming ‘as it is used by United
19
Nations3. Without this basic condition of acknowledging their status as social and political actors in the present as well as their status as adults-in-the-making there cannot be really any space for participation and fulfilling social functioning of young people. And self- development of youth seen through this perspective of being and becoming calls for further attention, as the process of self-development itself is the core of the mentioned double state. In the context of the European Erasmus+ Programme4 fostering development of life competences of youth, young people are simply individuals aged between 13 and 30 (Erasmus+ Programme Guide 2016). Using the definition given by the United Nations, ‘youth’ refers to the population sector ranging from the age of 15 to 24 years. It is then estimated that at least half of the world’s population belongs to the ‘children ‘and ‘youth ‘categories (IFSW, 2012). For the purpose of this thesis I adopt the latter definition combined with the Erasmus+ extension and country division within this programme. Meaning the target group of my research is then youth aged 15 to 30 years old living in European and selected neighbouring countries taking part in Erasmus+ Programme. 1.1.1. Identity in postmodern society In contemporary life, young people particularly experience tensions of attitudes, values and ideology, as well as social and economic issues, all mediated through institutions, media, religious, commercial, political and civic organizations (IFSW, 2012). The core of such experience lays first of all in the changes of identity perception associated to postmodernism. Postmodern thinking developed in the mid-20th century as a reaction to modernism, which in turn was a product of the late 1800s. If modernism sought to identify observable, replicable phenomena as really real and truly true, postmodernism declines to acknowledge any one true phenomenon, instead considering individualized perceptions of it (Casstevens 2010; Smith, White 1997). Postmodernism thus replaced linear, logical, reductionistic thinking, hallmarks of modern science and philosophy, with systemic, subjective and holistic thinking which notably altered young people’s traditional transitions from childhood to adulthood. There are many meanings to the word ‘postmodernity’ and many of them overlap with the concept of ‘reflexive modernity’, ‘late’ or ‘advanced’ modernity, ‘post-traditional’ development of society etc. The purpose behind this chapter is not to discuss the core differences between those concepts and to which extent they have already emerged or are just emerging, but rather to focus on the elements connecting these concepts one way or another, which without doubt are shaping our world. Since what many theorists from different fields of social and political science agree on is that the certainties of simple modernity have gone and that our society is undergoing a profound change starting with human´s understanding oneself and resulting into shifts in society. Institutional changes in the social world nowadays have a common background in a process named by many as ‘postmodernity”, which became a central theme of discussion for Giddens (1991a, 1991b), Bauman(Bauman 2003), Ferguson (2001), Beck (1994) and others. This transformation has arisen from complex social, economic and political processes, such as globalization, and the impact of new social movements including feminism, indigenous rights, environmentalism or rights of the disabled. The traditional roles of women and men were shaken, as well as models of family and stability of given by social position relationships or role of state in individual´s life.
3 United Nations repeatedly state their official “being” and “becoming” understanding of young people´s state. For further details about their youth policy see http://www.unworldyouthreport.org/ 4More about Erasmus+ Programme see chapter 2 Youth work at international level. 20
Understanding the needs and life circumstances of young people nowadays therefore requires analyzing the characteristics of post-modern development of society they live in. A ‘state of mind”, this is how Zygmunt Bauman (2003), who has analysed the consumer aspects of contemporary conditions and applies the term ‘postmodernity’ as the best way of describing contemporary conditions, understands postmodernity first of all. He is precisely referring to states of those minds who ‘have the habit to reflect upon themselves”, to ‘search their own contents ‘and report what they found, the state of mind of ‘philosophers, social thinkers, artists”. In his Intimations of Postmodernity he is describing this era as the one which ‘braces itself without truths, the standards and the ideal’ (2003:ix) and brings several transformations like the transformation of intimacy. Ferguson (Ferguson 2001) draws attention to this idea of the transformation of intimacy in postmodernism, which contrasts much of the twentieth century, where people ‘essentially knew their place’, and the State intervened to ‘ensure that those on the margins did not forget it’. While in the order of simple modernity identity was structured through external controls imposed by the church, family, experts and tradition itself, in a post-traditional order, the self has become a ‘reflexive project’ (Giddens, 1991) in which people are required to fashion an identity; a so-called ‘biographical project’. Thus, although traditional ‘authorities’, faith related and others, may still have an influence in some people’s biographical projects, in reflexive modernity people draw information in reflexively making their lives mainly from experts, global media, books and so on. Beck (1994) describes this process as ‘individualization’. Meaning that it is not only that people have to make decisions about their lives, but they have to actively make their lives in the context of the increased amount of decision making and number of choices that are open to them (Ferguson 2001). At the same time, it has to be undertaken in the context of a heightened sense of how risky and consequential decisions are, as there exists a consensus among diverse discourses that contemporary society is increasingly characterised by risk. It is at the same time widely argued that such a risk context is affecting how people think about themselves, which alters the nature of social relationships and of social support (Carter 1998). Ones of the most influential contributors to this issue Ulrich and Elizabeth Beck (Beck, Beck-Gernsheim 2002; Beck, Bonss, Lau 2003; Beck, Giddens, Lash 1994) argue that the central problem of western societies is not the production and distribution of goods such as wealth and employment in conditions of scarcity itself, but the prevention or minimisation of risks. According to them, individuals are daily bombarded with debates and conflicts, which proliferate over these risks, and such environment co-creates a state of living with contingency, in other words in a more complex and less controllable world than that of our past. More and more areas of social life, as Ferguson (2001) adds, have shifted from the sphere of the natural and inevitable and been made the object of choice and responsibility. The key elements of contemporary risk were described by Giddens (1991) as reflexivity of the self, lifestyles and life planning, and ontological security. A core feature is then the constant habit of assessing and making calculations about potential risks which might intrude one´s life. Typical products of such culture are then information packages on almost any aspect of human´s life such as sleeping and eating habits, finances, intimate relationships, leisure or health etc, accompanied by increasing number of self-help publications and manuals for living. There can be little doubt that social identities have become more fluid over time and we are able to negotiate our notions of the self (Carter 1998). Because of the ‘openness ‘of contemporary society, we are required to make lifestyle choices and those are affecting lifestyles and choices of others around us (Giddens, 1991). Postmodernity proclaims all the restrictions on freedom illegal and opens up the ultimate freedom of choices for every 21 human being. In accordance with these changes individuals' sense of selfhood has moved toward being more sensitive as to risks, such as threats to their health, as economic security or emotional wellbeing than they were in previous eras. Living in such a world can lead individuals to what Giddens (1991) would call ontological insecurity. Characteristics of the ontologically insecure individual are obsessive exaggeration of risks to personal existence, extreme introspection and moral vacuity. The opposite condition, ontological security, when achieved, leaves the individual with a sense of continuity and stability, which enables a person to cope effectively with risk situations, personal tensions and anxiety. According to Giddens ontological security, feeling like having a place and belonging in the world is derived from a narrative of the self. This narrative envelops past, present and future around the self and does so continually. The constant nature of perceiving one's self in time is a reflexive act. These characteristics of the modern self makes a stable sense of self-identity reflexively controlled. This continuous character can be compared to the individual who has to 'work' to 'become himself' (ibid.). Beck (Beck, Beck-Gernsheim 2002) give a general example: ‘If a traveller in France, Finland, Poland, Switzerland, Britain, Germany, Hungary, the USA or Canada asks what really moves people there, what they strive and struggle to achieve, the answer may be money, work, power, love, God or whatever, but it would also be, more and more, the promise of ‘a life of one's own’. Money means your own money, space means your own space, even in the elementary sense of a precondition for a life you can call your own. Love, marriage and parenthood are required to bind and hold together the individual's own, centrifugal life story”. A life of a postmodern person thus becomes one of an experiment, to improve and to discover one´s own path. Navrátil and Navrátilová (2008) also argue that the most fundamental social change that has taken place in connection with the ‘maturation ‘of the modern age is the process of individualisation and the related transition from a firmly established identity to identity formed as a reflexive project. They further summarize that a life plan as a plan for a whole life-long being of a person does no longer exist and a new need of individualized life projects has risen. Accordingly, this is connected to new topics emerging in the late modernity, such as healthy life style, self-development and healthy relationships. Such initiatives can be seen as an attempt to replace the former ‘plan for life’, certainty given by norms in society. Personal identity becomes problematic at the moment when freedom of choices creates a necessity to form this identity. As (Ashworth 2013) states, young people tend to follow the two qualities desirable in a globalised society characterised by capitalism, individualism, regulation, freedom of choice, risk and technology: they believe that they can accept responsibility for themselves and make independent decisions. 1.1.2. Context of social work Social workers answer differently to those issues. (Camilleri 1999) became a voice of those, for whom the adjective ‘postmodern’, which has been increasingly used in social work texts, appears to ‘throw them into the middle of a conversation’ when they don´t know what to think of it themselves. Ungar (2004) is on the other side describing an ‘ideal state ‘of a postmodern social worker who is not surprised by described changes and is aware of them. Such social worker views knowledge as socially constructed, reality as unfixed and multidetermined through the language used to describe our individual experience of the world. According to Ungar, each individual with whom we work holds a conviction that his or her interpretation of reality is both justified and frequently just. There is no way to demonstrate objectively that one preferred reality is better than another, except to discuss the
22 relative privilege that each enjoys in the dominant discourse. Progressive social workers who embrace aspects of postmodernism have found that they can tolerate multiple points of view and still assert that there are behaviours and beliefs so universal as to be accepted as guiding principles for social intervention (Ungar 2004a). As Ferguson (2001) mentions, in the 20th century in social workers´ practice with relationships there was, relative to the situation nowadays, a lack of intimacy in the sense that there was few expectations regarding companionable relationships or that clients would 'disclose' their inner selves. Whatever negotiations were facilitated by professionals tended to be based on limited and limiting choices for people, as e.g. marriage and intimate relations were treated rather as ‘fate’ than as a connection based on negotiation and choices that had to be worked at. Yet in transformation that we are facing today, people are dealing with great amount of choices. It is becoming a routine that social workers intervene into people’s lives to assist them with their life-planning in the context of the new choices and problems they face. This may especially be at times of crisis when several options confront the service user who may be feeling overwhelmed by anxiety and the need to make decisions and be on the verge of or actually experiencing a ‘breakdown biography’ (Ferguson, 2001). Possibly more than anyone´s else it is a case of young people, whose choices of a life partner, career, way of living or a place in society creates often unbearable question marks they are fighting with. 1.1.3. Youth confronted by new challenges The life experiences of young people in modern societies have changed quite significantly compared to previous generations. These changes affect their whole life, starting with relationships with family and friends, experiences in education and the labour market, leisure and lifestyles and finally the ability to become established as independent young adults. Many of these changes are a direct result of the re-structuring of labour markets and consequently of an increased demand for educated workers. Flexible employment practices and social policies which have extended the period in which young people remain dependent on their families have played their role as well. As a result, young people today have to negotiate a set of risks which were largely unknown to their parents, no matter their social background or gender. In addition, many of these changes have come about within a relatively short period of time and increased uncertainty, which can be seen as a source of stress and vulnerability (Furlong and Cartmel, 2007). Globalization, which destroys the clarity provided by stable structures in the past and creates changeability and insecurity, is another factor causing that young people in present-day European societies face more choices and greater risks. We live in growing individualization and in common condition of uncertainty, when different events on one side of the world might in short term affect living conditions of people on the other side of it. Youth can no longer rely on collective patterns of progression, they need advice and counselling that take into consideration the complexity of postmodern life (Beck 2000; Kovacheva, Pohl 2007; EU Youth Report 2012; Bauman 2001; Sennett 1998; Giddens 1991a). As (Jeffs a Smith 2002) sum up, there are three overarching social transformations that are happening recently - globalization, the emergence of a risk society, and the appearance of new forms of individualization. All are intricately inter-woven. The first, globalization, refers to a process of convergence and compression with the boundaries between individuals and between states. Social, cultural and economic differences are decreasingly visible as the world shrinks and social movements, cultural phenomena, trans-national organisations and businesses come to dominate, creating global markets and cultures (Jeffs and Smith, 2002; (Giddens 1991b). Young people have an ambiguous economic and cultural relationship with this globalizing world. They are relatively adaptable 23 and able to make use of the new opportunities presented. According to United Nations (World Youth Report, 2005), we are talking about the best-educated generation, particularly in areas relating to new information and communication technology (ICT). Young people nowadays benefit from economic growth; many of them travel around the globe for work, studies, exchange projects and vacations. At the same time, telephone and Internet enable them to stay in touch with friends and relatives all over the world. ICT play a significant role in youngster´s lives of 21st century. Youth who have access to information about better opportunities elsewhere are more likely to take advantage of them in today’s world. Web- based social networking platforms such as Facebook, YouTube weblogs (blogs) have been particularly important within this context, in addition to more traditional information technology, such as television and radio, in less connected parts of the world (World Youth Report, 2013). Yet, not all of them can reach to those possibilities, thus finding themselves on the other side of a widening information and communication gap. Risk as the second social transformation refers to a shift that is creating a world that is as little secure and predictable in terms of outcomes as never before. It requires an individual to place oneself at the centre of one´s plans and reflexively forge one´s own 'biography'. In a 'post-modern' and globalized environment young people are obliged with regards to every segment of their lives to make choices, even regarding the social groups and communities they affiliate to and lifestyle they opt for. In other words, nowadays choice has become virtually obligatory and individuals have no choice but to choose (Giddens, 1991). Less and less is determined by place of origin, family or birth. The pitfall of having such choice is that every youngster is as a consequence constantly at risk of making a ‘wrong’ selection. In such conditions, poor health is explained as a result of a failure to exercise, eat properly or adopt a 'healthy lifestyle'; youth unemployment is seen as a result of a lack of skills, the wrong attitude or laziness. Failure and misfortune become therefore linked not to structural causes but to the direct consequence of personal failings in making ‘right’ choices (World Youth Report, 2005). To summarize it, in the described system young people need actively participate. Moreover, their participation is not only permitted, it is demanded, so they can constantly adapt to changing conditions of the labour market, the welfare state, and the education system. Failure to do so becomes personal failure and goes hand in hand with forms of self-responsibility (Ashworth 2013; Beck, Beck-Gernsheim 2002). The paradoxical nature of choice in the context of late modernity is also one of the fundamental arguments we find in contemporary youth transition approach. This argument is articulated in a discussion about how much unconstrained choice young people have in creating their own biographies and to what extent their pathways are mapped out for them by predetermined institutional patterns (Furlong and Cartmel, 2007). There are also some voices in researcher´s pool calling for more clarity in such theory. One of the strongest arguments was brought by France (2007), who pointed out that these normative, linear and ‘at risk’ tendencies in transitional models of youth experience are ‘popular’, especially in youth research conducted for government and youth policy purposes led by a range of fears and anxieties about ‘what has to be done about young people’ (France 2007:1). Within this framework, young people are considered to be exposed to objective, as well as subjective risks, while at the same time exposing both themselves and society to their possibly threatening behaviour as ‘risk-takers’. By delivering such a definition, youth researchers themselves participate in the ongoing constructions of youth as a social problem. I aim to avoid such a conclusion and to understand ‘risk’ as an inevitable consequence of undoubtedly changing safety nets. France (2007) concludes that youth research has been traditionally driven by concerns over ‘youth as a social problem’ and this focus prevails, even nowadays. Consequently, youth has arguably been constructed, partly also by youth researchers, as a social group consisting of 24
‘passive victims ‘of ‘either their biology or their social circumstances’ (France 2007: 154). Similarly, Griffin (Griffin 2001) points to the ideological dimension of youth research by reproducing and constructing a very narrow and often distorted ‘academic common sense’ about young people. Kovacheva&Pohl (2007) then argue, that the key factor for success of policies is defining policy objectives in a way that starts not from the institutional perspective or narrow institutional considerations but from the individual’s life perspective and needs. Acknowledging the structural barriers that face youth integration, programs and measures of support of disadvantaged youth should ‘build upon the biographical perspective of the young person and their subjective orientations, values and skills, and allow them to take a role as key actors in their own social integration’ (Kovacheva&Pohl, 2007:39). Following this suggestion, young people should be the ones asked and included into the process of finding the solutions in this field. Finding out about their triggers of motivation, what exactly they lack in the current system and what kind of support they need in order to actively participate could be a successful step towards social integration of less-opportunity youth. Jeffs and Smith (2002) further explain that described two transformations foster the third, which is already mentioned individualism. As the global economy erodes difference it imposes a universal culture no longer linked to place, producing the elimination of the boundaries within which communities are or were constructed (Jeffs and Smith, 2002). This 'sameness', the authors claim, is affecting security. Meaning, for individuals the certainties once imparted by mutuality, community and emotional commitment and attachment to place and locality are not available anymore. Such environment creates what Beck (Beck 1999) calls 'rootless new cosmopolitans', who are obliged to live in a world wherein 'no one stops anyone from being what one is and no one seems to stop anyone from being someone other than one is' (Bauman, 2001: 61). Identity and ethics are being removed from the public domain and end up as the responsibility of the individual young person. The individual may gain independence from the old ties that bound, such as the family, the local community, even the nation state, but they become dependent upon a market that enters every aspect of their lives, restricting their choice and closing down their options in the interests of efficiency and product standardisation (Jeffs and Smith, 2002). Moreover, because there is a much greater range of pathways to choose from, young people may develop the impression that their own route is unique and that the risks they face are to be overcome as individuals rather than as members of a collectivity (Furlong and Cartmel, 2007). This might evolve into their stronger disconnection. 1.1.4. Young people in Europe in contexts of education, labour-market and citizenship Today’s European young generation is repeatedly claimed to be better educated than any other before it: one third of 30 to 34 year olds in Europe hold a tertiary degree, and 82% of the 20 to 24 year olds have completed secondary education. At the same time, there is a growing youth division in terms of availability of resources. Not all young people have access to the opportunities open to their generation, and obstacles tend to accumulate for those who are disadvantaged to start with. The economic crisis and its impact on the labour market have put large numbers of young Europeans at risk of social exclusion (Dietrich 2012; Paz 2012; European Commission 2015). Statistics show that many young people struggle to find quality jobs which seriously hampers their path towards independence. In spite of a decrease in most Member States after its 2013 peak, youth unemployment remains a serious concern as millions of young Europeans nowadays cannot find work and the proportion facing long-term unemployment or involuntary part-time work remains high. In total, over 18 million were neither in employment nor education or training, so-called NEETs, in 2014 (Eurostat 2015a) and since
25 then the number decreased with around one million (Eurostat 2017). Being NEET is often both an outcome and a defining characteristic of these disadvantaged, ‘fast-track’ transitions to adulthood according to MacDonald (MacDonald 2011). At the same time, close to 27 million are at risk of poverty or social exclusion. Poverty rates are higher for young people than for the overall population and involuntary part-time work or protracted temporary positions expose this generation to a risk of long-term poverty (Eurostat 2014). In 2014, 122.3 million people of the population in the EU-28 were at risk of poverty or social exclusion (AROPE)5, among them youth again at greater risk of poverty or social exclusion than the rest of the population. According to Eurostat (2017) more than 16 thousand persons aged 16 to 24 years and lived at risk of poverty or social exclusion. Statistics also suggest that being an immigrant is adding to such a risk, as e.g. in 2012 foreign non-EU-born young people had higher at-risk-of-poverty rates, with almost half of them being AROPE (Eurostat 2013). Regarding the issue of homelessness, the data collected in EU showed that homelessness tends to be relatively concentrated among young people and has sharply increased in some countries, including Denmark, and that migrants and the children of migrants are more likely to be homeless in some circumstances (Busch-Geertsema, Benjaminsen, Filipovič Hrast, Pleace 2014). Youth homelessness could be associated with high and complex support needs, while economic marginalisation, disruption to the family and experience of childcare systems could be associated with experience of youth homelessness. The document summarizing the evolution of the situation of young people in Europe was presented in the EU Final Report (EU Youth Monitor 2016). Overall, shared findings show that in the 2010-2014 period young people’s situation worsened in terms of access to work, increased risk of poverty or social exclusion, increased health problems (i.e. use of drugs) and stagnating or even decreasing participation in civil society and youth organisations. As recorded in this research, improvements have been made only in young people’s education and training and, to some extent, in the youth influence on democratic decision-making processes. The results of the survey to young Europeans indicate that young people’s perceptions on the progress made in the last five years in terms of mainstreaming of youth issues in policy-making tend to be negative; similar perceptions are noticed for the evolution in youth influence in democratic decision-making. The most positive perceptions of young people surveyed were in relation to the developments in young people’s education and training, which are confirmed by the evidence presented in the monitoring study. Over the same period of time, young people’s participation to cultural and artistic activities, to sport clubs as well as to cultural and youth organizations has decreased. Data shows that more young people are unemployed and for longer periods than before(Dietrich 2012; Eurostat 2015a; Paz 2012). The deteriorating situation of young people meant that initiatives to ease youth unemployment and linked to that to improve education and training moved up the policy agenda. Many national as well as EU initiatives have been developed in this period with the objective to improve the situation of young people and in particular their employment rate and education outcomes. As a result while the youth agenda gained stronger importance, it also became rather focused on the topics of employability and education and training. In particular less attention was being paid to what some youth stakeholders see as the core ‘youth issues’ such as participation or volunteering (EU Youth Monitor 2016; EU Youth
5Eurostat identifies a person ‘at risk of poverty’ as someone who is living in a household with an equivalised disposable income below the risk-of-poverty threshold, which is set at 60% of the national median equivalised disposable income (after social transfers). 26
Report 2012). For example it has been also noticed that the numbers of disadvantaged young people taking part in cross-border voluntary activities remains very low, meaning reaching this target group despite all the efforts remains with considerably little success. Inactivity, poverty and exclusion do not strike evenly though. As studies show, young people with a migrant background, low educational achievers or young people with health issues, all considered as less-opportunity or disadvantaged6, are more likely to become NEETs (EUR- Lex 2015). It is just one example of the argued tendency of those starting life with fewer opportunities to accumulate disadvantages. The gap is widening between young people who study, are confident of finding a job and engage in social, civic and cultural life, on the one hand, and those who are at risk of exclusion and marginalisation, on the other hand. In all these circumstances, an important question rises – what kind of citizens do we actually want to raise for our society to function? And therefore what kind of basic characteristics of citizenship do we want to foster in social work field? (McDonald, Marston 2002) explain that under the post-World War II settlements, the citizen was constructed as a member of a unified, national and coherent political community, whose interests were collectively expressed through institutionalized means, within a seemingly stable system of governance. Recently quite significant shifts have been observed, since the expansion of social citizenship rights resulted in an escalation of a demand of an individual towards state, which brings exhaustion to those regimes. For example, the ‘growth of long-term unemployment changed into a permanent rather than temporary feature of many people´s lives’ (McDonald & Marston, 2002:340). McDonald (McDonald 2006) calls this change as a costumer/consumer orientation of citizenship, and this concept is more elaborated in the next chapter focused on youth work. For the purpose of this thesis we could use a summarizing description offered by Joel Westheimer and Joseph Kahne (Westheimer, Kahne 2004), who posit three visions of good citizens that educators and policy-makers can use to consider for building active citizens in a democracy. While these may be seen as desirable forms of citizens they are also clearly evident in most societies. First, the personally responsible citizen acts responsibly in his/her community by, for example, picking up litter, giving blood, recycling, obeying laws and staying out of debt. This is a relative low level of active citizenship but still requires the citizen to be informed. The participatory citizen actively participates in the civic affairs and the social life of the community at local, provincial and national levels. This citizen is more proactive and to be active requires the citizen to be informed. Third, the social justice- oriented citizen emphasizes social change and seeks to prepare people to improve society by critically analyzing and addressing social issues and injustices. Advocates of social justice- oriented programs argue that effective democratic citizens need opportunities to analyze and understand the interplay of social, economic and political forces. This is a highly active, engaged citizen who requires considerable sources of information in order to act effectively. All of these visions are underpinned by the concept of an informed citizen. This is the person who has acquired knowledge about political and societal processes and their historical background (Lange, Print 2012). For young people experiencing disadvantages becoming an engaged citizen with described and in society desired characteristics might represent an additional struggle.
6Here and later on this term is used as a synonym of „less opportunity“ youth. 27
1.2. Understanding disadvantage, disaffection and fewer opportunities
The last global economic depression is often seen as one of the most severe crises of capitalism, claimed to be partly brought on by ‘laissez-faire’ attitude (Steger, Roy 2010). Growing inequalities in nations around the globe have had severe consequences for young people, with youth unemployment rates exceeding fifty percent in some developed countries and even higher in some developing countries (Côté 2014). Several studies have informed, that despite a formal equality, people from different social backgrounds have unequal chances to make their voice count and to exercise their participation rights. Many national youth policy-makers raised concerns that the implementation instruments in Europe also do not take into real consideration specific target groups: i.e. the structured dialogue is perceived to miss the voice of the ‘disadvantaged’ (Evaluation of the EU Youth Strategy, 2016; Beuret, 2013). And it is particularly their voice that is in a centre of this thesis. Although, the specifics of this target group are not united by one concept, as one might assume.
1.2.1. Disadvantaged youth and young people with fewer opportunities The mentioned economic crisis has widened the gap between those with more and those with fewer opportunities and consequently some young people are increasingly excluded from social and civic life (EU Youth Report, 2015). These circumstances resulted in a negative concept connected to such youth, a view of ‘youth as a problem’ (see France, 2007), when certain groups of young people are seen in deficit, as a trouble for society. It continues to drive policy discussion and it is often linked to notions of social exclusion. And unfortunately often the ‘answer’ to this behaviour is to impose more control on the one hand, and, on the other, to direct ‘remedial’ resources and interventions at those deemed to be in need (Jeffs and Smith, 1999). In this thesis I do not refer to disadvantaged young people as to the ones being a deficit or a problem, I am explicitly operating with this term as with a set of experiences or conditions that young people face on their pathway with no other connotation. This understanding is closer to what is presented by the European Commission and many practitioners mentioned further on in this chapter. Disadvantage could be seen as any life circumstance which negatively affects life quality and life chances. Disadvantageous factors include deprived neighbourhoods, low income and poor health. Families and communities who are disadvantaged by socio-economic factors have fewer resources in the form of material goods, knowledge and networks. Ten important domains are recognized within disadvantage that have been defined across three areas. Firstly, it is resources, which include (1) material/economic conditions of a person, (2) usage of public and private services and (3) individual´s social capital. Secondly, it is participation which can be (4) economic, (5) social, (6) in culture, education and skills development or (7) political and civic. Finally, it is the area of quality of life, where the focus is on (8) health and well-being, (9) living environment of a person and (10) crime and harm that individual experiences in a life being (EU Youth Report, 2012:17). Traditionally, disadvantage was linked with poverty, low education or immigration status. Over years of social work practice with the ones in need we could find references to ‘racial disadvantage’, ‘educational disadvantage’, ‘socio-economic disadvantage’ and more (Dannefer 2003; Lange, Print 2012; Mayer, Scammon, Andreasen 1993; SocIEtY 2013; Wilson 2012; Wolff 2009). Studies focusing on the notion of disadvantage further enrichments of the conceptual framework of inequality can be found in social work field. This concept is historically closely bound with the development of so-called ‘disability studies’, which was a research program born in the wake of collective efforts conducted since
28
the 70s by activists, scholars and organizations to improve the inclusion of disabled people. The critics of disability scholars are based upon two main arguments against the medical paradigm. Firstly, the failure to grasp adequately the experiences and narratives of people concerned with disability issues, and secondly, fostering segregation and dependency of physically and mentally impaired people compared to non disabled people (Beuret, 2013). The notion of ‘disadvantage’ appears as the cornerstone of this reconceptualization: for a similar impairment, one can result very disadvantaged or very limited in his/her functionings, while another one succeeds in living the life s/he has reason to value. In other words, the concept of disadvantage ‘refutes any mechanical correspondence between impairment and disability, insisting on the fact that issues of disability are not just questions of organic disruptions, functional limitations, or psychological disorders, but issues of local settings, administrative categorizations, and political will’ (Beuret, 2013:43) . While this model raises obvious issues of generality insofar as it focuses on ‘requirements of justice and equality’ (Zimmermann 2006:471) for physically or mentally impaired persons, empirical studies also point out the relevance of singularity, highlighting contrasted experiences and concerns. Disadvantage can be then understood as a result of the interplay of socioeconomic structures, institutional measures and individual strategies. The analysis of the national reports presented by Kovacheva and Pohl (2007) reveals that issues leading to disadvantage arise at various points in youth transitions. The issue of ‘corrosive or cumulative disadvantage’ is mentioned where disadvantage in one specific field leads to an accumulation of disadvantages (SocIEty, 2013; (Wolff 2009). More recently, life-course approaches have included perspectives, which provide new insights on the way inequalities cumulate. In this perspective, attention is drawn to the very mechanisms by which initial differences in terms of social location (gender, age, race etc.), available resources or capitals (economical, social, and cultural), transform over the life-course into comparative (dis-)advantages that increase the gaps between groups (Dannefer 2003). The concept of cumulative advantage/disadvantage (CAD) resonates with popular folk sayings such as ‘‘success breeds success’’ or ‘‘the rich get richer; the poor get poorer’’ and it is concerned with the existence and sources of age-specific individual differences and with questions of fairness in the distribution of opportunities and resources (Dannefer 2003:327). Bradbrook (Bradbrook, Alvi, Fisher, Lloyd 2008) introduces another framework of disadvantage7, which illustrates it from an individual’s perspective, describing the social, physical and economic environment that exists around that person. The three tiers are: 1) Physical and socio-economic infrastructure (e.g. schools and housing) 2) Relationships and the behavioural norms adopted through socialization 3) Identities developed through interpretation and internalization of experiences A young person may create a negative circle within all three of them. Low self-worth and esteem (from the area of identity) draws a young person further towards the negative influences from relationships and socialization and physical and socio-economic infrastructure. A young person is then more likely to be rejected by his/her peers, engage with negative cues and become embroiled in the deprived aspects of the community, such as drugs and crime. This downward spiral represents the ‘path to failure’ (Bradbrook, Alvi, Fisher, Lloyd 2008:43). And it leads us to conclusion, that if we want to understand and work with disadvantaged youth, it is necessary to focus on the whole trio of tiers and to reveal connections between them for each person, as negative circles are quite individual. Since
7See Attachment 9: The Framework of Disadvantage
29 especially for disadvantaged young people access to full citizenship is narrowed (see Colley, 2007), it is highly important to work with this group in order to follow the principles and values of democracy. However, there is a certain critique towards distinguishing ‘disadvantaged young people’ as a separate group, which needs to be mentioned. Coté (2014) claims that although this perspective influenced subcultural views of youth, since the 1980s sociological and cultural studies approaches to youth studies have tended to focus on the disadvantaged class rather than the entire youth segment of the population. According to him, they were becoming increasingly preoccupied with subjectivities rather than the material conditions. And although these approaches to class divisions within the youth segment are useful, there has been evidence of a systemic proletarianization of the entire youth population in many countries, raising again materialist concerns and the issue of youth-as-class. In this research I am focusing on disaffected and disadvantaged group of young people from social work perspective, as simply this target group is often becoming clients in social services such as youth contact centres, youth counselling, vocational trainings etc. Unemployment, poverty, poor health, cultural, social and economic exclusion and all forms of discrimination are generally seen as obstacles to the well-being of young people and may hinder their active participation in society (Bužinkić, Ćulum, Horvat, Kovačić 2015; Council Resolution on the participation of young people 2008). Within European Commission programs and projects directed on youth non-governmental organizations and youth workers use a definition of disadvantaged young people, or youth with less opportunities/fewer opportunities, for youth who and have fewer opportunities than their peers for a variety listed below reasons or so-called ‘exclusion indicators’ with which they have long term experience with (Erasmus+ Programme Guide 2016; Kloosterman, Brown 2007): • Social obstacles (coming from broken families, young people facing discrimination because of gender, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, disability or other characteristics, young people with limited social skills or anti-social or risky sexual behaviours, young people in a precarious situation etc.) • Economic obstacles (having for instance very low standard of living, staying in dependence on social welfare system, long-term unemployed youth, homeless young people) • Disability (young people with mental, physical, sensory or other disabilities) • Educational difficulties (early school-leavers and school drop-outs, lowly or non-qualified persons...) • Cultural differences (members of minorities, migrants) • Health problems (mental illnesses, severe psychiatric conditions) • Geographical obstacles (young people coming from remote rural places) In certain contexts, these situations or obstacles prevent young people from having effective access to formal and non-formal education, transnational mobility and participation, active citizenship, empowerment and inclusion in society at large. Presented definition focuses on the situation young people are in, with the aim to avoid stigmatisation and blame. Some target groups, such as notably young people not in employment, education or training (NEETs), find themselves in several of the situations listed above at the same time (Czech presidency of the Council of the EU 2009; Erasmus+ Inclusion and Diversity Strategy 2014; Youth in Action Programme guide 2013). At the same time, it would be fairly arguable that the mere fact of coming from a minority does not automatically limit one´s opportunities. It is a multiple set of conditions that creates 30 a more challenging environment for a young person. Over the years, several evaluations of the EU youth programmes with a special focus on youth with fewer opportunities have been carried out. The most extensive project investigating the impact of the European youth programmes so far has been Research-based Analysis of ‘Youth in Action’8 (RAY), and it used a specific way to embrace the described target group. While bringing the results, a narrower definition of fewer opportunity youth have been developed based on a mix of objective and subjective criteria used in this research. The educational levels of the respondents and of their parents are generally accepted as objective indicators of young people’s resources that influence their chances in life, therefore these indicators were used in some of the questions. Other questions in this research asked the participants to (subjectively) indicate which obstacles they faced or whether they got a fair share of opportunities in life. A respondent had to have at least three exclusion indicators (from the listed above) to be in the ‘fewer opportunities’ subgroup, thus making sure that in this subgroup people had at least one subjective and one objective disadvantage. In order to reach those in whose life more disadvantage elements combine, criteria of at least 2 exclusion indicators will be adopted for the purpose of this study as well. One of the most important normative acts at the EU level for youth work known as Council Resolution on Youth Work (Council Resolution on the participation of young people 2008) is especially pointing out the need to reach ‘young people with fewer opportunities´ when calling for promotion of social participation and responsibility, voluntary engagement and active citizenship of youth. Bužinkić, Ćulum, Horvat and Kovačić (2015) present their perspective on this target group in a context of Croatia. Among young people with fewer opportunities they particularly list young people with disabilities and health problems, young people belonging to ethnic or national minorities (especially Roma girls), young people who have not completed their primary and secondary education, young criminal offenders, and those without adequate family support and from institutions of social care. As scholars argue, these groups of young people ‘face more obstacles and often have more problems associated with achieving success in education, accessing educational programs and with employment’ and in addition ‘are more likely to need alternative educational programs and additional support around employment and inclusion’ (Bužinkić, Ćulum, Horvat, Kovačić 2015). The conditions of having fewer opportunities are in its core overlapping with the concept of disadvantage, as it will be explained further. For this reason those terms will be used as synonyms in the following theoretical conceptualization from now on. 1.2.2. Disaffection and motivation hand in hand While disadvantage can be understood as a series of mainly external factors which affect the life quality and life chances of an individual, disaffection is a resulting internal emotive change for an individual, usually for those facing disadvantage. A disaffected young person ‘feels estranged from the surrounding social norms, particularly education...[ ]... such young people are likely to lack motivation and have behavioral problems including truancy and antisocial behavior’ (Bradbrook, 1998:29). Apathy towards politics and a lack of interest in joining traditional youth organizations seem to characterize the younger generation in many countries (World Youth Report, 2005). Disaffected youth and their communities, those facing the greatest risk to well-being, are the most likely to be disengaged from activities and decision making processes that affect them. Also, disengaged youth who do not participate in formal group activities tend to be older, more challenged, or members of minority groups. Developmental psychologists in the U.S. report that youth from low income families and
8The name of the 2007-2013 EU programme for youth. 31 youth of colour feel more alienated from their communities than young people from middle income, white families(Annie E. Casey Foundation 2007). The issue of disengagement from social norms and labour market is not new though. Even in the context of the better economic conditions in the early 2000s a significant number of young people entered into negative destinations (such as unemployment); and it was stated often that those young people who are most vulnerable or disadvantaged (e.g. those who lack qualifications, those with social, emotional or behavioural difficulties, and those living in poverty) do not make successful transitions (Scottish Government 2009; Bynner, Parsons 2002; Bradbrook, Alvi, Fisher, Lloyd 2008). Annie E. Casey Foundation (2007), which is formed by several international youth organizations, informs that many young people are indeed disillusioned with the traditional political and civic engagement process. According to foundation´s observations and research, youth shows little patience for decision making processes that seem to exclude and ignore them. However, they bring a conclusion that this does not mean that young people are disinterested in public well-being and decision making. Research suggests that while many youth view traditional political and civic decision making as largely futile, they are attracted to local, face-to-face problem-solving related to issues they experience personally. Young people report a preference for hands-on community improvement efforts that yield an immediate and practical value, such as tutoring, working in homeless shelters and other volunteerism. They desire to see changes in issues they encounter on daily basis (ibid.) MacDonald (2008) has contributed to understanding of this issue by an extensive qualitative research with young adults growing up in selected Britain’s poorest neighbourhoods, looking particularly at their labour market transitions. He underlines that while most young people in the UK make relatively ‘successful’, unproblematic transitions from school to work and adulthood, there are also those who experience periods of poor quality employment and unemployment. He also argues that particularly those representations of youth are ‘overburdened’ with unspoken but powerful assumptions, as many normative labels are widespread in policy and academic discourse in the UK, such the ‘disaffected’, ‘disengaged’ and ‘disconnected’, the ‘hard to reach’ and ‘the hard to help’ and so on. He reminds his colleagues that names matter and we should be aware of how we use them also in connection with young people. For this reason it is also needed to put our attention to the roots of (dis)affection which lay in motivation of a human being. Considering a range of policies meant to reduce social inequalities affecting young people, 'motivation', on the side of the target group, seems to be critical, and causing, when not present, serious obstacles in policy implementation. An example from Australia shows that their motivation has become central to the discourse of employment services for disadvantaged (Marston, McDonald 2008). Notably in Dutch youth policy and according to Baillergeau & Duyvendak (2013) also in other countries, motivation is a strong, explicit and recurring prerequisite in all kinds of programmes targeting disadvantaged youth. As these practitioners explain, in a context of increased competition in nowadays society lack of motivation is likely to be conducive to reduced access to supportive programmes and, thereby, stepping further in marginalisation processes. Those who do not display motivation are therefore often left outside. At the same time it seems that motivation is supposed to come naturally, self-produced. Young people are widely expected to be self‐evidently motivated to engage in training programmes supporting them in solving their issues. Baillergeau & Duyvendak (2013) emphasize the importance of putting a question: what are the conditions and the triggers of motivation and can motivation be actively enhanced? We will concentrate more on this phenomenon in the chapter about self-development method, which is closely
32 related to it. Yet firstly we need to explore what is behind youth work and what working with youth at an international level means.
The presented above theories and studies embrace the target group of disadvantaged youth in Europe as young people between 15 and 30 years old who experience inequality as they are at a disadvantage compared to their peers because they face one or more of the situations and obstacles, such as social, economic or educational. In certain contexts, these situations or obstacles prevent young people from having effective access to formal and non-formal education, trans-national mobility and participation, active citizenship, empowerment and inclusion in society. The framework of disadvantage can be examined through the following three tiers: physical and socio-economic infrastructure; relationships and the behavioural norms adopted through socialization; and identities developed through interpretation and internalization of experiences. A young person may create a negative circle within all three of them and finally find oneself not living a fulfilling life in terms of social functioning and disconnected or disaffected from any kind of participation in surrounding community. Findings also show that there are millions of young Europeans who would fit in such criteria. This all is happening while the Western world is undergoing changes in understanding ‘local’ and ‘global’, while lifestyles, and life planning and ‘risk’ culture are affecting young people´s decision making, and while individualization and ontological insecurity influences their perceptions of themselves. To start answering our main research question it would be first useful to know what sense do young people who according to presented concepts above could be called disadvantaged make out of their present life conditions. How do disadvantaged young people understand their own disadvantages and/or opportunities? (RQ1) I am further involving also trainers of the researched self-development methodology in order to bring the dimension of triangulation into this research. Since they are the ones working with youth and being in contact with their life situations directly during the training, their point of view might be useful in embracing the issue. How do trainers understand young people` s disadvantages and/or opportunities? (RQ2) The answers to these questions will provide us a clarification of what exactly the specific target group of this study is dealing with and, more importantly, with a deeper understanding of how young people seen as the ones with fewer opportunities perceive their life conditions themselves and what conclusions do they make out of it. In the next chapter I will focus on working with youth at international level, as this is the field where those questions need to be asked.
33
2 Social work with youth at international level
Social work is a broad field that involves supporting individuals, families and groups to cope with everyday issues. Social workers engage in a broad range of activities within many different settings and with different people. Some work intensely with individuals and families, while others work with small groups, organizations, or whole communities. Some deal primarily with children or youth, while others deal with older persons. Some are psychotherapists or counsellors, while others are supervisors, program planners, fund-raisers or administrators. This variety is also what makes social work so challenging and often misunderstood (see (Arnold, 2014; Bartlett & Saunders, 1972, 1972; DuBois, 1999, 1999; Gausel, 2014a; Musil, 2004; P. Navrátil, 2001). To keep it simple we can borrow a concept used by National Association of Social Workers (NASW 2015), which describes social workers as the ones who help people obtain concrete needs, provide counselling and psychotherapy, help communities to improve social and health services and participate in legislative processes. They support people in obtaining concrete needs, like food and shelter, and often must advocate for their clients with public agencies or in legal situations. As it was underlined in the previous chapter, young people today are different from any of the previous generations of youth. It is therefore essential to ensure that youth interventions are relevant and valid for the current young generation (United, N., 2005). Social work with young people needs to follow the challenges of 21st century and reflect the changes affecting youth if it still aims to support this target group as well.
2.1. Youth work beginnings
The meaning of the term ‘youth work’ is generally difficult to pin down. When professionals talk about youth work they might mean quite different things. They might be describing mentoring a young person; or facilitating a church fellowship; work with a group of Guides; running a youth club as well as making contact with different groups of young people or tutoring on a mountain walking course (Smith 2013). The 20th century was recognized as the era of concern about children and youth. A range of helping professions including social work, embracing a ‘scientific ‘approach to diagnosis and treatment, began to focus on the welfare and discipline of risky9 youth. There was an increase of training programs for practitioners in order for them to gain skills in identifying trouble and to be in charge of developing disciplinary technologies of control and care. As Nybell at Al. describes, ‘many of those practitioners turned their attention to youth and the shaping of young people´s proper trajectories to adulthood and place in the social and economic order’(Nybell, Shook, Finn 2009, p. 47). Over the years contrasting traditions of youth work have emerged and further developed. It is thus helpful to think of there being different forms of youth work rather than a single youth work with commonly agreed characteristics. However, we can identify some key dimensions of working with youth that have been present to differing degrees in the central discourses of practice since the early 1900s (Jeffs and Smith, 2010):
9The terms ‘risky youth’ and ‘disadvantaged youth’ in their core definitions describe the same target group.
34
• Focusing on young people, their needs, experiences and contribution. • Voluntary participation, young people choose to become involved in the work. • Fostering association, relationship and community, encouraging all to join in friendship, to organize and take part in groups and activities and deepen and develop relationships and that allow them to grow and flourish. • Being friendly, accessible and responsive while acting with integrity. Youth work has come to be characterized by a belief that workers should not only be approachable and friendly; but also that they should have faith in people; and be trying, themselves, to live good lives. • Looking to the education and, more broadly, the welfare of young people.
Mainstream youth work as a consequence acquired a discernibly different persona from institutional provision and individualised casework. Unlike the former, it was based upon a voluntary relationship. Young people have, traditionally, been able to freely enter into relationships with workers and to end those relationships when they want. They did not operate according to a pre-ordained externally imposed and inviolate curriculum or structure. Simultaneously, they were offered an educational and social programme that was to a greater or lesser degree negotiable (Nybell, Shook, Finn 2009). The voluntary principle has distinguished youth work from most other services provided for this age group. This has fundamental implications for the way in which youth workers operate and the opportunities open to them. It can encourage youth workers to think and work in rather more dialogical ways. It also means that workers either have to develop programmes that attract young people to a youth work agency, or they have to go to the settings where they are. In The Encyclopaedia of social work (2008) the mid-1990s are described as the beginning of focus on positive youth development. This approach focuses on building youth´s skills and self-esteem with offering them safe, stable housing and support services so that they can become healthy, successful, and independent adults. Those better relationships with adult role models, literacy, competence, work readiness and social interaction have been promoted among this target group. For this reason, several service delivery institutions and organizations have been founded with the emphasis shifted from prevention of negative behaviour into promotion of a positive one10 with a specific focus on civic engagement of young people. A common starting point in Europe could be the development of Sunday Schools associated with churches in last few years of the eighteenth century. These schools run by volunteers were aimed at the many children and young people who could not access other forms of education due to poverty. They usually met in alternative settings like stables, under railway arches, church halls or run-down houses. Another important landmark in the emergence of youth work was appearance of young men’s associations. It could be stated that the Young Men’s Christian Association (YMCA), which was set up in 1844, was the first dedicated youth organization (Jeffs and Smith, 2013, Smith, 2001). Youth work has emerged through a period of changing and contested perspectives on young people, where age has persisted as the basis of policy development. Youth work as we know it now has its roots in philanthropic movements of the nineteenth century developed in reaction to adverse social and economic circumstances experienced by young people in
10 For example a very successful in USA program Big brothers/Big sisters, known in Czech Republic as Pět P and organized by Ratolest, o.s. in Brno. More online http://www.bbbs.org 35 working-class communities (Jeffs, Smith 2002; Davies, Batsleer 2010). State interest in this field was then limited. Structural inequality and poverty led to core concerns for spirituality and improvement, based on the idea that those who were ‘better off ’ could help poor young people through provision of diverse structured and principled activities (Coburn, Wallace 2011). We could then state that youth work originated from a reaction to certain disadvantages observed in life conditions of some young people. According to Jeffs and Smith (2013), ‘youth work’ grew as a term with the emergence of local youth services. Those practitioners report that they have seen a growing adoption of the term ‘work with young people’ in place of ‘youth work’ by funders and agencies. Gradually it developed a distinctive mode of intervention and focus so that by the end of the nineteenth century it had acquired a recognizable style and dynamics. It embodied a distinctive approach to work with young people, which was characterized by an emphasis on relationships and voluntary participation; a belief that practitioners should be approachable; have faith in people and be trying to live good lives a commitment to association; a concern with the education and more broadly the welfare of young people (Jeffs and Smith, 2002). In the European Union context youth work is defined as a national responsibility, as its regulation is not under the jurisdiction of the European Union. However, there are attempts to influence the practice of youth work throughout Europe by employing the open method of coordination, meaning by providing guidelines and good practice examples, using the ‘peer- pressure ‘method for comparing and improving (Bužinkić, Ćulum, Horvat, Kovačić 2015).Still, various countries emphasize different aspects of youth work. European Commission provided a broad definition which is used internationally by different NGOs. In this context, youth work refers to ‘activities with and for young people of a social, cultural, educational or political nature’. In addition, youth work is supposed to deal with unemployment, educational failure, marginalisation and social exclusion of young people(EU Youth Report 2012). Whether it is true or not in practice is after all to be concluded by youth workers themselves and confirmed by young people as a target group, as each country has its own policy and collected experience regarding youth. For now some deeper emerging into social work practice with young people might be useful in order to understand which activities and purposes will be examined in the following research.
36
2.2. Social work practice with young people
Step by step, several concepts have been developed within social work, including the punishment-oriented ones with emphasis on judgments about the assumed deviance and specific corrective interventions designed for youth. In the last quarter of the century, along with economic shifts, as Nybell (Nybell, Shook, Finn 2009) claims, there is a medicalization of youthful difference taking place and increasing proportions of young people are being deemed in need of care. Also control and for-profit youth care in 90s was on its way to becoming a huge industry and by the end of the first decade of 21st century it continues to grow (ibid.). These alarming data reminds us about risks of misusing power and age-driven hierarchy. Fortunately, we could also witness a growth-oriented approach being created with calls for treating youth as the ones needing support and considering their background. The findings from the survey of young people and that of youth organisations also show the continued relevance of youth work evaluated by participants of youth programmes and facilitators (EU Youth Monitor 2016). As Giddens (1992) points out, one of the main tasks of social worker nowadays is to support people in facing postmodern questions of identity, life, death and personal relationships. Social work with young people thus should also empower them in taking responsibility for their lives and managing the necessity of making a choice among all possibilities available to them. Ferguson (2004) in addition brings attention to self- reflection and awareness of life environment, uncovering meanings that life situation might bring a person and support in decision making regarding life trajectories. Based on these emphasis, (Pavel Navrátil & Navrátilová, 2008) describe a social worker as a ‘guide in biography and identity development of a personʼ. And guidance is surely what young people facing obstacles might find of use nowadays. 2.2.1. Different approaches and types of working with youth Social work policies and practice in Europe nowadays has developed with certain differences also when it comes to the target group of young people. The Central European youth policy model has quite an opposite approach from the universalistic model proposed by Scandinavian countries, where youth is not considered as an intermediate phase of transition towards adulthood but rather as a specific phase within the growth cycle. We have already mentioned that transition processes between different life stages and between different institutions of education, social services, etc. are a challenge for individuals, since social expectations, environments, and reference points are changing dramatically. Therefore, social support both informal and formal is considered to be an important feature and starting point for social work (Morciano, Scardigno, Manuti, Pastore 2013). Furthermore, in contrast to the selective approach, widespread in Central and Southern Europe and based on the fostering of interventions towards specific categories of young people ‘in need’, youth policies in Northern Europe are focused on universalism. It is typical for them to pursue addressing young people as ‘citizens’ as they consider them a resource to develop in the present with no necessary bound to young people´s future status of adult. In clear opposition to the Scandinavian model, the liberal model developed in Great Britain and Ireland has a tradition to put focus on the prevention of ‘youth problems’. A specific centering on the issue of entry into the labour market and in the late transition to adulthood can be usually noticed as well. Youth policies and youth-work activities here have long-term concentrated in issues such as criminal behaviour, drug use, deviance, drop out and adolescent pregnancy. At the same time a growing interest has been observed within the last decade towards the issue of youth participation in social and political life. It is may be a counterbalance to a more traditional orientation considering young people as a category
37 challenging the social order or as disadvantaged (Morciano, Scardigno, Manuti, Pastore 2013). Coussée (2008:114) distinguishes four types of work with young people as sets of techniques and methods nowadays. First he calls social movement, which is focused on acting out of positive development of young people departing from analysis of their situation. Second is educational method, which is mainly based on building future citizens. Then it’s a youth movement, with most important activities reinforcing self-government. And the last is then positive youth development, which according to author bases on cross connections made with organizations in other fields. As he adds, all four should serve the purpose of supporting youth in their growth and development in society. Coburn and Wallace (2011) mention so called functional youth work, where self-development Synergy trainings as a focus of my research are fitting11. This often links between individual development and diversion as a form of remediation, for example in antisocial behaviour, poor sexual health and in risk-taking with drugs or alcohol. A specified programme is the centre of activity that often targets young people labelled as disadvantaged or at risk. Participation in such programme is targeted in terms of age and social characteristics such as not being in employment, education or training, or being a young parent. Young people have limited choices12 within the programme and facilitation will be by coaches, tutors or key workers (youth workers). Relationships with young people may be cyclical but are configured by, and restricted to, the timeframes afforded by the programmes. Linguistic currency in functional youth work includes keywords such as guidance, instruction, programme, planned for, involvement, personal development, confidence, containment, progression (Coburn and Wallace, 2011). Variety of methods was used to engage young people, many of which have become constant throughout periods of revised policy and practice development. The aims to reach in youth work should include that young people: • develop awareness of themselves and their potential; • acquire the necessary interpersonal skills to establish and maintain relationships with their peers and other members of society; • acquire decision making skills to enable them to participate fully in society; • are positive about themselves. Reaching those aims, which should definitely stay in focus of youth work, has been demonstrated to be well achievable through positive youth development concept. 2.2.2. Positive youth development and social work aspects Agencies have been obliged to bid and compete for cash from a variety of state, charitable and commercial sources, most of it allocated for specific time-limited interventions. As a consequence youth workers have become Janus-faced. When asking for funds they tend to emphasize both the dangers posed by unmonitored youth as well as the failings and inadequacies of young people. Many times they choose the concept of ‘underclass’ and exaggerate the negative, conjuring up a collection of euphemisms for inadequacy such ‘status zero youth’, ‘at risk’, ‘disaffected’, and ‘excluded’. The face offered to young people and colleagues is different (Jeffs and Smith,1999).
11Synergy self-development trainings involving disadvantaged youth are further described in chapter 3. 12Which seems not to be a case of Synergy trainings though, as it will be discussed later on. 38
While some of the interventions treat youth as the problem, others such as Positive Youth Development (PYD) and Community Youth Development (CYD), frame young people as a community resource and focus instead on providing opportunities for civic participation. In the CYD field, the voices of youth are central to the work, and they are taken very seriously. In fact, social change is thematic in two models of youth participation in the CYD field: youth-adult partnerships and youth engagement in community evaluation research (Watts, Flanagan 2007). Positive youth development is then framework used to describe the factors that support youth's capacity to thrive. It places a strong emphasis on the strengths and competencies of youth rather than focusing on the problems, risky behaviours, and negative outcomes ( Benson, Scales, Hamilton, & Sesma, 2006, Merrick et al., 2013). The key themes of holistic approaches to learning, the significance of the self and multiple subjectivities, the personal in the professional and the importance of attending to the process and content of learning are explored ( see Ruch, 2000). Over the years, there have been several approaches to positive youth development, but one aspect shared among these different conceptualizations is the premium placed on the interaction between youth and their environment (Masten, 2014). Two environments which are pivotal in youth development and occupy a considerable amount of a youth's time are the family and school or educational environments. Therefore, factors related to these environments such as family support, teacher and community support, and school climate are perceived as playing critical roles in a youth's development (Van Boekel, Bulut, Stanke, Palma Zamora, Jang, Kang, Nickodem 2016; Fraser-Thomas, Côté, Deakin 2005). Roles or implications for social work with young people nowadays are in assuming dignity and worth of all youth, encouraging youth service to the community and promoting youth involvement in social change to affect social justice (Encyclopaedia of social work, 2008). Professionals thus should strive to promote these mentioned values by facilitating youth participation and acting upon youth´s opinions, needs assessments and strategies for positive change. For that, welfare state developed a system of several services focused on youth in need. Youth care is provided through information centres, intervention institutions or judicial system, starting from protection of a young person and reaching the imprisonment (Ewijk 2009) as a consequence of delinquency and a way to take responsibility for actions within society. One of such services could be also self-development training. Another aspect of social work with young people, which arose at last years, has been pointed out by Coussée (2008). Rather than social inequality and a distorted social policy, the official problem has been seen with unequal participation in the educational provisions13, as socially vulnerable young people were supposed to be a part of new preventive programs for youth. Due to this approach, specific needs of youth could have been ignored for fulfilling the purpose of mere participation in programs, in other words social work would succeed in ‘having customers’ but fail in ‘getting the results”. At the same time, an emphasis on self- reliance and social responsibility has played a key role in this area. Social worker has been during last years, and is nowadays, supposed to support a young person on his/her way in finding own place in living environment and overcoming obstacles (disadvantages) for taking an active role in society (Coussée, 2008). Mentioned programs for youth apparently have some impact. Fewer behavioural problems and better academic outcomes have been noticed among young people who undertake diverse programs for prevention of social exclusion. They proved also to show higher self-esteem and to be more likely to get involved in political and social causes. These outcomes, however, were mostly reached by those who were already included in other spheres of social life before being influenced by social work programs. The most
13Or according to Van de Walle (2010) instruments for „social inclusion“. 39 marginalized young people have been then less compelled to participate in structured activities, and professionals in their practice with this target group seem sometimes only to be capable of ‘cooling out the inappropriate aspirations of vulnerable youth’, ‘providing a safe place in the short term’ and ‘preventing boredom’ (Van de Walle, Coussee, Bouverne-De Bie 2011, p. 220). This conclusion implies that it is uneasy to measure the degree to which programs really interfere into youth development. As Nybell argues, youth also seems to ‘have been reduced to commodity in an ever- expanding marketplace of care, containment and control’ (Nybell, Shook, Finn 2009, p. 59). Within social work with youth, age-related expectations have contributed towards dependency in practice. As a pitfall of mentioned concepts, there has been an emphasis on provision for young people rather than by them. Furthermore, a comparably extensive effort has been put into seeking to restrain young people from progressing too fast to the next stage. Much ‘social education’ has, therefore, been aimed at getting young people ‘to appreciate and conform to age-related, rather than competency-related, definitions of acceptable behaviours’ (Smith 1988, p. 97). Among issues in social work with youth Smith (2003) also mentions ‘delivery rather than relationship ‘and ‘individualization”. Government policies have been increasingly focusing upon targeting interventions at named individuals. Programs are assessed on whether these individuals return to learning or enter work, rather than on any contribution made to the quality of civic life, personal flourishing or social relationships that come out of the process. The result has been a ‘sharpening orientation to young people as individual consumers of a service rather than the creators of groups and activities’ (Smith, 2003:49). Moreover, organizing work around concepts like outcome, curriculum and issue according to the author means there is a danger of overlooking the core of working with youth. Primarily, he underlines, workers ‘face losing 'relationship' as a defining feature of their practice’ (ibid.). To prevent such tendency from growth, the new approaches should hence seek more involvement of young people in designing and conducting the programs for their development. McDonald (McDonald 2006) is bringing some insights by putting those issues in social contexts, and presents several aspects of changes in society. Considering those aspects could be beneficial for understanding the core of youth work nowadays and choosing most helpful direction in practice.
2.3. Re-shaping of citizenship and youth work
Change is the reality, as Catherine McDonald (McDonald 2006) writes about contexts influencing social work nowadays. Australian professor intends to bring attention to the transformation of the welfare state into workfare state, emphasizing the retreat from collective responsibility and increased institutional destabilization with the background of decreased interest in and commitment to social integration. The welfare state used to forge the social bond between citizens, and also between citizens and the state. However the request for free markets and small government further on created the asymmetries in the relationship between the global economy and the national state and resulted into neoliberalism resting on five values: ‘freedom of choice, the primacy of the individual, laissez faire, market security and minimal government’(McDonald 2006, p. 69). One of the outcomes of implementation of these values in society is re-shaping of citizenship, as the way how the state views the people who use social services changed. McDonald claims that while in 20th century social services were conducted as part of responsibility of the state on behalf of society, now on the contrary people use services in a different way, as ‘claimants with obligations to the state’(McDonald 2006, p. 20). In these conditions the welfare state 40 also changes into workfare state, where recipients of services have to meet certain participation requirements (such as e.g. training, work experience or rehabilitation) to continue to receive their welfare benefits. In parallel, there is another transformation taking place: re-constructing service users and specifically their status. McDonald is writing about labels attached to welfare users, which conjure up their specific identities with specific consequences. In the past, they have been called ‘patients’, later on ‘clients’ and ‘service users’, nowadays they are being identified as ‘consumers’ or ‘costumers’(McDonald 2006, s. 115). The stress is then on the obligations of worker-citizens to take up an active role in managing various social and economic risks through engagement with the paid labour market, while at the same time introducing harsher penalties for non-compliance with the new regime (McDonald, Marston 2005). First of all, this consumer-citizen is not a person in need or lack of knowledge (as it used to be previously in case of charitable or professional discourses), but has rights, such as a right to access service and the right to minimum standards in service delivery. In this conception, it is a consumer who has power of choice and thus determines what will be provided and how. As author explains, this new type of welfare user stands in contrast to others, for example unemployed, who because they are not customers purchasing services cannot choose and can be directed into specified modes of intervention. Main problems with such a system are limited in practice (especially to involuntary service users) the capacity to ‘exit’ and the capacity of ‘voice’, and its exercising by service users (McDonald 2006). The idea of a good citizen is being fulfilled in a responsible consumer-customer, who is active in the labour force and in the market and acting with self-surveillance. And in this governing complex ‘it is social work which most immediately conducts the conduct of risky populations’ (McDonald 2006, s. 90) taking the desired by the system freedom of choice for the users. There is therefore an important task for social workers, which lies in recognizing mentioned contexts and reflecting them in their practice in order to provide support to marginalized groups, which become risky ones in the politics of neoliberalism. There is little doubt that changes presented in the work of McDonald (Marston, McDonald 2008; McDonald 2006; McDonald, Chenoweth 2006; 2009; McDonald, Marston 2002) are influencing also the interventions and interaction with youth, especially in the area of decision making and involvement into one´s community or society. From my own experience of seven years working with disadvantaged youth from all over the Europe in social programs designed in different settings, I could only confirm that the concepts of re-shaping of citizenship and consumer-customer perception of a social services user are strongly rooted in European Union policy and consequently in many NGO´s approach. Observing the attitudes of young people nowadays, it is visible that frequently their behaviour corresponds with mentioned by McDonald claiming with obligation to the state. The impact on young people then could be of a ‘waiting and requesting’ position, when the initiative to bring a positive change to their situation from their side might be lacking (compare Smith, 2003). Of course, we should not ignore the circumstances of current socio-economic complications which youth is facing in a workfare state of nowadays. And definitely this possible impact does not imply their complete responsibility for unemployment or other social issues in young people´s lives. Still, practice shows that youth tends to expect the state to take care of them (both in areas of studies, finding a job or life changes) and is resistant in taking direct responsibility for their development. Another important outcome connected to a transformed view on a user is that consumer- citizen is seen as the one who has power of choice and thus determines what will be provided and how, which brings also young people freedom. This condition however carries an additional disadvantage. Clearly, also as McDonald (McDonald 2006) proclaims, there is still a limitation towards those who do lack information (due to e.g. low ICT skills and resources), 41 and many times they are really the ones who need support. This way the capacity of ‘voice’ is also limited, as those ‘out of the info-network’ young people are hardly ever heard. The offered freedom and power thus instead of empowering bring even deeper isolation. Meanwhile, positive youth development concept seems to be one of the most beneficial changes for this target group, compared with previous ‘preventive’ programs treating young people as potential delinquents. Building youth´s skills is a promising way for them to deal with the new settings in society, where self-direction is required, as it creates a preparation for becoming an active citizen. Unfortunately, the decreased interest in and commitment to social integration appears to be a reality in the context of workfare state and among young people. While the values of neoliberalism and post-modern transformation bringing freedom and choices most likely appeals to this age group, the impact of implementation of these values shows to be more of a disengagement than of an active participation of young people in their environment. Yet conclusions of a lexicalization of youthful difference, which Nybell (Nybell et al. 2009) confirms basing on increasing proportions of young people being deemed in need of care, shouldn’t be made so fast, since there is no evidence this care is not needed indeed and then provided accordingly. At the same time, delivery rather than relationship and individualization reflected by Smith (2003) are widely influencing social work. They are bringing specific techniques used for assessment and focus on diversity of programs rather than depth of knowing the person´s needs and getting his or her trust. Social work with youth is therefore also facing marketing shift resulting in services offered as ‘effective packages’ to a customer and awaiting for immediate or very fast outcome. The labels attached to welfare users do play their role in the whole system, though it seems not that common yet to call young people consumers. They are still rather ‘clients’ or ‘users’ in the area of services delivered through non-profit sector and offered by non-government organizations14. It could be discussed, whether this lack of change in label with this particular target group is caused by perception of youth within social work practice, which may not be ‘reaching the level’ of an adult service user, or by other hidden factors. The first seems more likely to be the cause. The concept of power in the hands of a user is apparently applied also with young people, yet not being labelled according to this shift. In any case, there is an obvious need to foster programs where young people could apply their responsibility and become proactive players in their life changes rather than waiting receivers. Another outcome worth to be given attention is what McDonald (McDonald 2006) calls the ‘social work´s conduct of the conduct of risky populations’. As young people are not always aware of their options and possibilities, e.g. in a situation of being unemployed, professionals tend to decide which programs would fit them best and recommend specifically those ones. Comparably little effort is given to empowering young people in their own search, as it might be still seen as ineffective and time consuming. Instead, practitioners could invest into strategies, such as e.g. open and user-friendly databases available in community or youth centres, of opening new sources to (especially) disadvantaged young people in order for them to practice their own active approach and decision making. And hand in hand with such an opportunity to support them in this process by guiding and avoiding pre-selection and imposing own conduct is needed. Using Nybell´s (Nybell, Shook, Finn 2009) observation, the emphasis on provision by young people rather than for them is crucial for youth to take an accountable role in the environment they live in. Programs, where young people can exercise
14This conclusion has been driven from practice in Czech Republic and on international level with several NGOs of European Union. It would be useful to research more on usage of this term in the context of social work with youth to discover, to which extent is this conclusion close to reality.
42 their responsibility to the maximum, are nowadays also available internationally and create a chance for desired switches in approach.
2.4. International programs with disadvantaged youth in European context
The benefits of international youth work has shown to be particularly tangible for disadvantaged young people and young members of the immigrant community in that they help them to integrate more easily in society. There have been observations that by taking part in international youth work projects, the young participants become more aware of their own identity and acquire valuable skills. Experiencing mobility in this way provides them an opportunity to make some profound positive changes in their lives (Dreber, Piesche, Wissing 2014). The explored benefits of international programs could be put in three main domains: intercultural learning and widening horizons, empowering and self-confidence and developing new competences (Klocker 2010) Kloosterman & Brown (2007) listed the following positive elements for youth to gain in such experience: • space to reflect, which young people lack in their daily life and usual environment; • self-confidence building while dealing with diversity given by such circumstances; • competences and potentials discovered in unknown environment; • creating life-perspective in dialog with youth from other cultures; • intercultural experience while being confronted by other languages, customs, perceptions, which may lead into broadening one´s views and understanding; • enhanced team work skills through communicating in foreign language and working with other´s ideas. Additionally, apart from obvious benefits such as discovery of cultures, knowing that things can be done differently in different countries can stimulate young people’s creativity, encouraging them to find new solutions to old challenges. It can also increase their empathy, supporting them in looking at things from different perspectives. During their experience young people also learn to react positively to differences, they are confronted by their prejudices or stereotypes towards other nations and this gives them a chance to enhance tolerance (Klocker 2010; Teffel 2011). And as Klocker (2010:20) emphasizes that discussing issues of importance to their everyday life and discovering that many young people are facing the same challenges “can be truly inspiring and motivate people to take on new challenges to improve their situation.” She further adds that when meeting their peers from other countries young people exchange life stories which make them reflect on their own values and ideas and via this process they also learn to reflect and understand their societies better (ibid.). Traineeships abroad afford a unique opportunity to experience differences through unfamiliarity. Quite different cultural behaviour can call for re-orientation and adjustments, even for abandoning familiar mechanisms. In shorter traineeships abroad, about 4 to 6 weeks, the personal development of the participants is mostly the prime concern. They foster personal or self competency, as is associated with such notions as self-reliance, self- confidence, initiative, adaptability, ability for criticism and team ability, particularly in foreign, intercultural groups (IdA, 2011, p. 16). The main role of youth work in the framework of European policy is to provide to young people opportunities for participation, personal development and nonformal learning. In such contexts, young people can also develop a range of competences as described in the concept of key competences for lifelong learning (Balogh, Europe 2014).
43
The internationalisation of youth work in Europe, involving also youth mobility and youth exchanges, started to become an increasingly important element of youth work after World War II, often as confidence building measures between former enemy countries. It evolved into diverse out-of-school learning opportunities, now referred to as ‘nonformal learning’, over the following decades. In this context, the Youth for Europe Programme was established by the European Union in 1988, and for the recent period 2007-2013 it was named and well- known in non-profit world of youth work as ‘Youth in Action’ (Fennes, Gadinger, Hagleitner 2012). Youth in Action (YiA) is thus a programme design within European Union that supported youth initiatives and projects. Its purpose was to foster participation, active citizenship and competence development of young people, youth workers and youth leaders through non- formal education and learning, while empowering them to meet the challenges of their societies. YiA also aimed to contribute to the inclusion of young people with fewer opportunities as well as to the development of youth organisations and groups, hence to civil society in general (RAY 2014; Youth in Action Programme guide 2013). The programme found its continuation in the youth chapter of the Erasmus+ Programme, which has started in 2014 and is planned to last until 2020. EU launched the Erasmus+ programme for education, training, youth and sport, and all these youth activities have a dual purpose: firstly to develop key competences and thereby strengthen the employability of young people; and secondly to promote young people’s social inclusion, well-being and participation and foster improvements in youth work and youth policy at local, national and international level(Erasmus+ Inclusion and Diversity Strategy 2014; Erasmus+ Programme Guide 2016).With regard to non-formal and informal learning, the policy in question has significantly switched its focus from the personal and cultural development of young people, being so in the Youth in Action Programme 2006-2013, towards the acquisition of professional skills by young workers, validation systems of non-formal learning, and greater complementarities with formal education and training. As (Wochowska 2015) explains, this approach ‘was determined to be necessary in view of a whole combination of negative factors, such as: the economic crisis, high youth unemployment, skills gaps, low employability of graduates, a growing demand for highly skilled employees, a global competition for talent, and the internationalisation of education”. At the same time, she adds, it made use of an extraordinary offer to broaden learning and the potential of ICT and that of complementarity between formal, informal and non-formal learning. Concretely, the mentioned programme offers three main opportunities connected to youth participation (Erasmus+ Programme Guide, 2016): • mobility for young people and youth workers (Key Action 1) Young people have the opportunity to participate in youth exchanges or to volunteer for a period of up to one year in another country under the European Voluntary Service scheme. Youth workers can take part in training and networking activities abroad or spend some time in a youth organisation for job shadowing or a period of observation. • cooperation for innovation and exchange of good practices (Key Action 2) Organisations can apply for funding to work in partnership with organisations from other participating countries. The projects funded under this action focus on sharing, developing and transferring innovative practices in education, training and youth provision. • support for policy reform (Key Action 3) Funding opportunities under this key action may extend to meetings between young people and decision-makers or support the implementation of structured dialogue. Both Youth in Action and Erasmus+ placed emphasis on cooperation with neighbouring partner countries: the Western Balkans, Eastern Partnership countries, Southern 44
Mediterranean countries and the Russian Federation. The idea behind was to create space for even further cultural and social exchange in order to support future economic relationships. As declared in their official documents (Erasmus+ Programme Guide 2016; Youth in Action Programme guide 2013), both programs aimed to promote (and work with) cooperation with neighbouring countries, principles of connecting youth and intercultural dialogues, youth initiative and developing key social competencies. The evaluation of the programme was carried out in 2011 while it was underway, and it showed considerably relevant long-term outcomes. The level of impact of the participation in the YiA programme on future educational and professional perspectives showed to be significant, with over 2/3 of respondents agreeing with the following statements: ‘I have a clearer idea about my professional career aspirations and goals”, and ‘I believe that my job chances have increased”. The average appreciation by youth of the extent to which they had increased their competences proved also very promising, with the top three categories being (1) Communication in foreign languages, (2) Social and civic competences, and (3) Cultural awareness and expression (Wochowska 2015). Among the youth organisations that were involved in activities under the EU Youth Strategy, the vast majority reported that their participation led to changes in their practices in terms of learning and knowledge-building, creating new partnerships, developing new activities and networking with stakeholders and policy-makers. They also saw broader effects on youth policy, recognition of the value of youth work and of volunteering, better understanding of youth issues among stakeholders and improved youth participation, among others (Erasmus+ Programme Guide 2016; EU Youth Monitor 2016; Wochowska 2015). The strongest effects of this program, as summarized in a report in 2012 (Fennes, Gadinger, Hagleitner, Lunardon 2013) are claimed to be within development of competences related to citizenship. A large majority of participants indicated that they improved their interpersonal, social, intercultural and civic skills and this was also confirmed by project leaders and project teams. What seems not to be very presented in literature is a thorough examination of limitations of international dimension. For example this report also stated that the research method applied had its limitations due to a short period of time between YiA project and this survey and therefore it is difficult to measure whether and to which degree participants of these programs actually changed their behaviour and attitudes. Another pitfall that is quite visible is the lack of other researched evidence rather from the mechanisms and research conducted by EU itself, which could be also the reason for a lack of explored limitations in European context. However, the intention behind this thesis is not to confirm or to discover whether and how Erasmus+ programme is effective. Its primary focus is self-development method used in trainings, although happening within this programme. My focus lies within exploring both benefits and limitations of international dimension of those trainings for youth. Nevertheless, it is not excluded that the answer to the main research question of this study might also contribute to answering the question of programme´s impact from another than grant provider´s position. One of the objectives of the programme is engagement of less opportunity young people. Through actions including evidence gathering, mutual learning and dialogue with youth, the framework aims to support action in eight fields: education and training, employment and entrepreneurship, health and well-being, participation, voluntary activities, social inclusion, youth and the world, and creativity and culture (EU Youth Report, 2015). Notably, according to reports from European Commission, vast majority of participants in YiA programme were well educated young people from middle class who have already had an international experience. The smaller group of participants who identify themselves as ‘less-opportunity’ in EU classification (unemployed, belonging to minority, economic or cultural obstacles etc.), 45 is hardly being reached and at the same time challenging to be assessed in terms of disadvantage. This identification is partly based on subjective assessments and it depends on specific contexts, such as country of residence (RAY, Transnational analysis, 2012).
Although youth work has been described here as a broad term and practice, for the purpose of this thesis it is understood as a sum of activities, initiatives and services focusing on young people and their needs, where the focus is well-being of youth together with an emphasis on education (rather non-formal) and in which this target group participates voluntarily. In this study the primary context is youth work in the European Union, more specifically activities conducted with and for youth via Youth in Action and Erasmus+ programmes, which have been the largest international programmes aiming to support development of young people in Europe in the past decade. Functional youth work, in which a specified programme is the centre of activity that often targets young people labelled as disadvantaged or at risk, has been presented as one of possible solutions to current situation of youth with fewer opportunities. And the need to support young people in developing awareness of themselves and their potential; acquiring the necessary interpersonal skills to establish and maintain relationships; acquiring decision making skills and being positive about themselves was introduced as an important part of social work with young people. Attention was also given to positive youth development framework, which places a strong emphasis on the strengths and competencies of youth rather than focusing on the problems, since it seems to be helpful for the mentioned above purposes. And while the process of re-shaping citizenship with the challenges it creates shouldn´t be ignored, a task of a social worker with youth remains the same: to support a young person on his/her way in finding own place in living environment and overcoming disadvantages for taking an active role in society. Furthermore, in given by our times circumstances it is argued tube beneficial to focus on creating opportunities for development of youth ‘with’ them rather than only ‘for’ them. The answers to the next question might unravel what young people experience themselves and thus enhance our understanding of those themes. How do disadvantaged young people perceive15 international level of self-development method? (RQ3) The same question will be put to the practitioners to create space for more perspectives on international dimension in order to understand its benefits and limitations better. How do trainers perceive international level of self-development method? (RQ4) By development here a general ‘well-being’ and growth in terms of identity are meant. However, the purpose of this thesis is to examine how a specific method of self-development is contributing to such well-being. The third chapter is bringing the latest findings in the field of self-development used in social work practice particularly with young people.
15 Here and elsewhere I am using ʻunderstandʼ and ʻperceiveʼ in partial research questions interchangebly. 46
3 Self – development method in social work
‘Each of us can make a difference; each of us is needed. The difference we can make begins when we develop high self-esteem as individuals.” Virginia Satir
One of the defining strength of social work is the holistic approach to the complex reality of a client. Social work practice is incorporating other traditions working with people, such as psychology, sociology, political science, law and others (Arnold 2014; Bartlett, Saunders 1972; DuBois 1999; Field, Munro, Littler, Jasper 2014; Gausel 2014b; Musil 2004; Navrátil 2001; Ruch 2000). At the same time, precise and generally agreed-upon understanding of the boundaries that mark the several helping professions does not exist. Different disciplines mentioned above have claimed their domains without mutual agreement about where one profession ends and another begins or where they appropriately overlap. Therefore it might be challenging to distinguish which activities are still within competences and resources of particular field, and especially it counts for new methods which are arguably categorized. In this chapter I will focus on framing self-development16 as a method used within social work practice yet not widely acknowledged nor often considered when it comes to disadvantaged youth. The purpose behind is to describe the benefits that this approach brings to social work as well as potential risks of grasping it in inappropriate way.
3.1. Self-development in social work: a field to explore
The following definition of social work was approved by the International Federation of Social Workers General Meeting and the IASSW General Assembly in July 2014: ‘Social work is a practice-based profession and an academic discipline that promotes social change and development, social cohesion, and the empowerment and liberation of people. [...]Social work engages people and structures to address life challenges and enhance wellbeing.”(IFSW 2014)17
The social work profession’s unique focus on the ‘person-in-environment’ requires that the social worker attend to several interrelated dimensions of the person: social, familial, spiritual, biological, intellectual, emotional, economic or communal etc. This concern for the whole person contributes to the breadth of concern by the social work profession such as for example, the person’s capacity to meet basic physical needs, the individual’s levels of knowledge and skills needed to cope with life’s demands and to earn a living, the person’s thoughts about others and his or her own life, the individual’s goals and aspirations and so on. As Sheafor and Horejsi underline (2015), it is important to note the person-in-environment construct uses the word person, not personality, because personality is but one component of the whole person. A focus only on personality would be according to them incongruous with the domain of social work and slant it toward psychology. The term ‘environment’ refers then to one’s surroundings—that multitude of physical and social structures, forces, and processes that affect humans and all other life forms. Of particular interest to social workers are those systems, structures, and conditions that most frequently and most directly affect a person’s
16Personal development is used equally as self-development, as definitions of both carry the same meaning. 17Also available online on 26.07.2016 at http://ifsw.org/get-involved/global-definition-of-social-work/ 47 day-to-day social functioning (i.e., the person’s immediate environment). One’s immediate environment includes the person’s family, close friends, neighbourhood, workplace, and the services and programs he or she uses (Bartlett, Saunders 1972; Musil 2004; Navrátil 2001; Sheafor, Horejsi 2015). While macro-level practice of social work may involve work with an organization, a community, a state, or even a society as a whole, at the micro level it focuses on the individual and his or her most intimate interactions, such as exchanges between husband and wife, parent and child, close friends, and family members. The terms interpersonal helping, direct practice, and clinical practice are often used interchangeably with micro-level practice. Between the micro and macro levels there is mezzo-level (midlevel) practice. Practice at this level is concerned with interpersonal relations that are somewhat less intimate than those associated with family life but more personally meaningful than those that occur among organizational and institutional representatives. Included would be relationships among individuals in a self-help or therapy group, among peers at school or work, and among neighbours. Some practice approaches address more than one intervention level (Sheafor, Horejsi 2015). Self-development training with its aspects of interpersonal helping on one side and group dynamics and relationships focus would fall into both micro and mezzo levels. Ferguson (2001:53) states that the emphasis today is not simply on safety, equality and the securing of rights (emancipation), but on self-actualization (life politics) as evidenced by how ‘social work and other counselling and self-help initiatives are used as resources to deepen self-understanding, construct a new narrative of the self, and find healing”. Researching self- development aspects in social work with disadvantaged young people can first of all support better understanding of young people´s needs and motivation, but also serve for improving the methods used with this target group on local and international level. For that we particularly need to know, how self-development approach affects lives of disadvantaged youth, and whether and in which way it encourages them in active participating in society. Yet to implement this approach we firstly need to deepen an understanding of what exactly is ‘self’ and what contribution the development of self brings to social work practice. 3.1.1. Different variations of ‘self” In the past fifty years, the field of social practice has witnessed an explosion of research on the ‘self”, exploring topics such as self concept, self-esteem, self-complexity, self-regulation, and self-schemas (McConnell et al., 2012). For example, James (1890) identified different constituents of the self, including the material self as one’s body, the spiritual self as one’s faculties, and the social self as one’s social facets. McConnell et al. (2012 : 384) suggest, that the self is a ‘collection of self-aspects, each of which is composed of self-relevant attributes that serve significant needs, goals, and motives. These multiple selves, which are organized and represented in long-term memory, become activated in the context of pursuing one’s goals.’ In accordance with this theorising, self is not a unitary concept, but rather is a collection of multiple self-relevant identities, which a person uses during life according to specific social roles (a parent, a teacher, a neighbour) in certain circumstances. Therefore, when it comes to developing this self, we can also witness several dimensions of this process. The accumulation of experiences within a specific relationship, peer group, or cultural context may ultimately affect underlying biology, to facilitate diminished, enhanced, or even excessive responses in brain regions that support the socioemotional and cognitive construction of the self (Pfeifer, Peake 2012). Already Wall (1977) defined a framework for a personal development. He argued that it was about the formation of a sense of identity and that this included the development of the
48 following aspects of self: bodily self, sexual self, social self, vocational self, philosophical self, self as a learner and self in the community. Derezotes (2000: 199) refers to self- development as to evolvement in ‘different dimensions of self, such as affective or emotional, physical, spiritual, cognitive and social dimensions”. At the same time, as he claims, it involves developing of knowledge, skills and values in all these areas. While emotional self- development contains three ongoing interrelated processes: (a) self-awareness, (b) self- acceptance and (c) capacity to feel, physical dimension includes an increasing ability to create healthy patterns of self-care and self-expression that may be associated with exercise, diet, sleep, relaxation etc. Spirituality, literally the ‘breath of life”, as an essential process of human development toward realization of such goals as the highest levels of well-being and consciousness, a sense of meaning and purpose of life, and acceptance and connectiveness with self and the world is another dimension to grow in as a human being. By this definition, each person has a spiritual dimension. Growing in it might mean exploring the highest level of well-being of oneself as well as shadow (unknown) aspect of self. Development in cognitive dimension then includes maturation of one´s cognitive processes and it is connected to will and commitment for a certain position in life or society. The last, yet not least important, is social development, which represents maturation in individual´s interpersonal patterns (a) in intimate relationships, (b) in family, (c) with friends, (d) with co-workers / supervisors and (e) with others in society. It includes growth in trust, individuation and identity, accompanied by creating healthy boundaries (Derezotes, 2000). Giddens (Giddens 1991a) suggests we should forget the general terms of individual and self. Instead, he proposes to analyse the traits of the modern self in further detail. The self is here seen as a continuous ‘reflexive project’ that carries responsibility for its own development and forms a trajectory of development from past to anticipated future. At the same time, it is continuous and all-pervasive, presumes narrative of the self and actualisation’s control of time, while also extending to the body and balancing risk and opportunity. Such self perceives the life course as series of passages and is internally referential. Being responsible, the awareness of this for one’s identity is the most important feature of a modern individual. This opens an entirely new type of risk to the existence into being. The risk of not living up to our own expectations is now a source of anxiety and related to the notion of an ‘ideal self’. Opposed to a more traditional perception of self, outside events or institutions are here of less relevance and are only taken into the life trajectory when they give support for the self- development. Also because reflexivity of the self is continuous, both the past and the future can be differently perceived along the course of one's life trajectory. And at the core of modern social life there stands the narrative of the self as a new genre of autobiography to be worked on during life time (ibid.). For a purpose of applying it in social work, Datar et al. (2008) operate with self-development as with a sum total of many aspects, qualities and abilities that one possesses and how these are used to maximize one´s effectiveness as a functioning individual. Their concept offers to look at ‘self-development in social work in the following context of what is desired to reach both for workers and clients’ (Datar et al., 2008:8). Firstly, it is crucial to have a realistic self- concept, meaning positive and healthy appreciation of oneself, understanding one´s capacities and limitations, and overcoming idealistic and negative ideas about oneself. Then acquiring internal control over the self, or the ability to define ‘self’ independently on what others think about it, is needed. And the last mentioned, yet not less important, is understanding the cognitive, affective and behavioural aspects of the self. This implies being sensitive to one´s own feelings, sharpening emotional responses and developing a range of behavioural capacities which would be appropriate to different situations (Datar et al., 2008). 49
As it is visible from the presented above, self-development concept is a complex process interlinking diverse dimensions of human functioning and for this reason needs to be addressed from several perspectives. At the same time, it offers a rich platform for research and implementing the approach in social work field. The core of it lies in experiential learning. 3.1.2. Development through experiential learning Several principles have emerged recently in understanding of how people learn and grow. Firstly, it has been claimed that intellectual learning has limited value and that direct experience is the principal key to learning. Secondly, the rate of personal development was argued to vary considerably among individuals. Thirdly, self-awareness and rigorous review are believed to form the basis of personal development, while experimentation and risk- taking are pointed out as necessary components of effective programs for personal change. And lastly, distinct skills of problem identification, decision making, and leadership are discussed as aspects possible to be identified and learned (Francis, Woodcock 2008). These principals create a supporting ground for experiential method of learning to expand. Experiential learning theory identifies a process of learning abstract concepts from concrete experiences if these concepts and experiences are reflected upon, and then experimented with, such as through sharing, explaining, and application to similar situations. This form of learning is described by practitioners as a powerful one which promotes critical thinking, and is particularly effective in engaging people and raising self-awareness about their own biases (Ashworth 2013; Brooks-Harris, Stock-Ward 1999; Kolb 2014; Pugh 2014; Schuth 2010; Stapley, Stein, Miller, Gould 2004; Weigert 1990). A specific definition is presented by the National Society for Internships and Experiential Learning (NSIEE) that holds that experiential learning refers to learning activities that engage the learner directly in the phenomena being studied. The NSIEE lists three basic types and forms of such learning: 1) discrete experiential education courses or programs (e.g., internships, field research); 2) experiential education as one or more components of a course or program (e.g., field trips, participatory observations); and 3) other experiential techniques incorporated into a course or program (e.g., role playing, simulation games) (in (Weigert 1990). Synergy training as specific program for young people most readily fit into the first category. The theory of experiential learning is one that suggests that a uniquely valuable source for learning lies in the experience of everyday life and the conceptualization and reflection on it. One of the earliest explorations of the link between experience and learning is mentioned in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics (Aristotle, 1976 in Stapley, Stein, Miller, Gould 2004), who emphasises ‘the practical business of life’. In more recent times theories of experiential learning have emerged from a wide range of sources. One of these comes from William James (James, 1890 in Stapley, Stein, Miller, Gould 2004), who stated that there is a fundamental difference between ‘knowing about’ and ‘knowledge of acquaintance”, which derives from the direct experience of situations. One of the most influential educationalist in the twentieth century Dewey (Dewey 1999) has argued strongly that learning and experience are profoundly interconnected and should be examined together. And finally, one of the most prominent current theorists in the field is Kolb (Kolb 2014), according to whom learning is a cyclical and interactive process and it is true both at an individual, group, or organizational level. As David Kolb (Kolb 2014) explains, experiential learning opportunities call for different kinds of abilities: concrete experience abilities, reflective observation abilities, abstract 50 conceptualization abilities, and active experimentation abilities. His experiential learning style theory is represented by a four stage learning cycle in which the learner 'touches all the bases': 1. Concrete Experience (a new experience of situation is encountered, or a reinterpretation of existing experience); 2. Reflective Observation (of the new experience. Of particular importance are any inconsistencies between experience and understanding); 3. Abstract Conceptualization (Reflection gives rise to a new idea, or a modification of an existing abstract concept); 4. Active Experimentation (the learner applies them to the world around them to see what results). All four of them are worth of exploring separately, since each might bring its own space for conclusions. The ultimate purpose of experiential learning in self-development, and the subject of this study, is an improved well-being of a learner. 3.1.3. Supporting well-being through self-development All the contexts imply to well-being of a client, which is one of the main goals of social work18, as self-development opens another opportunity of reaching one´s goals and solve life situation for the benefit of a client. Frances and Woodcock (1982) suggest a three-stage approach to self-development: exploring the present as auditing and evaluating what you know, visioning the future as assessing what you wish to achieve and bridging the gap as devising strategies and activities to achieve your goals. By using this structure for implementing such a tool in social work we connect both exploring the present personal circumstances of a client and a plan for actions to be undertaken for solving his or her situation through assessment and steps towards solution. Rogers (1959) believed that because each person has the potential for growth, the practitioner can contribute to a client´s self-development. The goal of the helping relationship from a Rogerian perspective is to promote a self-actualizing process, in which a human being can develop its potential and this way to grow. Social worker is therefore the one who is there to provide the facilitating conditions to stimulate the client´s exploration and feeling of regard for his or her own world of experience. This should be conducted with a belief that the individual has a capacity to have a healthy drive to attain full development of their potentials and talents (Rogers, 1959). It brings us back to a necessity of overcoming disaffection to reach this drive. Thus developing self due to its complexity might take long time, yet evolvement and significant changes in enhancing it might happen in shorter period of intervention as well. Self-development is a lot about mastering one´s life. As Giddens (1992) observes, gaining ‘mastery’ is at the core of social intervention into life politics in order to assist people to be able to take control over their life circumstances, influence the future with some degree of success and ‘allow the social and natural framework of things seem a secure grounding for life activities’. We could also remind Ferguson´s (2001) emphasis on promoting such development, both at the level of emotional literacy and self-understanding, and in day-to-day
18 See the Code of Ethics of the National Assiosiation of Social Workers: “Social workers’ primary goal is to help people in need and to address social problems. “(NASW, 1996) available online on http://www.socialworkers.org/ 51 routines of caring for the self and family life, as a successful form of closing the painful experiences of life and moving on to form healthier intimate relationships. Some might argue that self-development or personal development (PD) has very similar attributes to personal therapy. What are the main differences then, if any? This is an important and reasonable question to answer. Rose (Rose 2008), who was facilitating several personal development groups with young social work students, presents a range of ways in which the PD group differs from a therapy group, and some aspects that it may share. To start with, the differences begin before the group even meets. Members of a therapy group usually acknowledge to each other that they are vulnerable, just by their presence in the group. In the PD group members may be vulnerable also, but this is not the rationale for the group’s existence. Moreover, the course and the group facilitator (trainer) ‘do not have the same level of responsibility for the person’s psychological well being that the health service and a group psychotherapist would have for a patient/client’ (Rose, 2008:13). There are also differences in the form of communication. Once in the therapy group, members would usually agree to interact only when in the group. In this way every member is a witness to the interactions of every other member, thus the creation of alliances within the group can be observed and talked about. In contrast, the PD group has members who interact continually. They see each other in seminars, work groups, practical sessions, as well as maybe having lunch together and meeting up socially. As a result, there will inevitably be pairings and subgroups, with some group members having information that others do not. This gives any group the opportunity to hide away from what is really going on in its midst. In order to enable the group to develop into a place where challenges can be issued, contained and processed, members need to actively work hard not to split apart into smaller groups or pairs. At the same time, both types of group share a fundamental common ground. As well as therapy in groups also personal development rest upon the mutual and meaningful relationships that the members build in the process of the group’s existence. In reality members of both have to take responsibility for their own behaviour and the impact that they have upon others. The author finally points out that while ‘development’ derives from ‘unfold, unfurl”, ‘therapy’ derives from ‘healing”. If what is unfolding has been damaged in some way, then it may need healing in order to unfurl. Conversely, if something has been damaged, it may need to unfold before it can be healed (Rose 2008). Understanding this we can derive a conclusion that therapy has its specific role in person´s well-being as well as self-development has its own. 3.1.4. Experiential learning and self-development techniques in social work education Experiential learning has been also repeatedly used in social work education all around Europe. Pugh (2014) is coming with a concrete example of courses for students of social work, where an important condition of experiential learning is creating cognitive dissonance. Meaning students experience discomfort when unrealized beliefs or attitudes conflict with new ideas and experiences. Attending to this dissonance is necessary to transform that discomfort into learning. However, as he points out, it is not possible to predict or plan what students actually learn from an experiential exercise. Creating cognitive dissonance does pose some risks. It may be threatening to some students and needs to be addressed in a safe class environment (Pugh 2014). The additional conclusion then could be that similar principles should be applied in other circumstances where such learning is taking place. Another example has been presented by Chapman et al. (Mimi V. Chapman MSW, Susan Oppenheim MSW, Tazuko Shibusawa MSW, Helene M. Jackson MSW 2003), who describes a seven-week course ‘What We Bring to Practice’ designed to help students address difficult questions on use of self and critical thinking. The course explored the areas of self-revelation, boundaries in the professional relationship, race and ethnicity in the care relationship, and 52 family origins through the viewing and analyzing of films showing different perspectives of user and professional interaction, readings and role plays. Dempsey et al. (Dempsey, Halton, Murphy 2001) then mention a module aimed at working on personal identity during the first two years of training for students of social work, the purpose of which was to allow them to develop self-awareness and work in a safe environment to explore who they are as human beings and how they feel in a small group. Another experience consists of a sequence of seminars related to work on use of self, focusing on being a person within a group, use of self in preparing for practice, and use of self in practice (Pallisera, Fullana, Palaudarias, Badosa 2013). Different practitioners contribute with their examples of self-development techniques used, so we can see how social work is incorporating it. What is important though is also to understand the specific forms of this method, particularly self-development training as a group experience of young people who attend it voluntarily with different issues to be solved.
3.2. Self-development training: key characteristics, benefits and risks
Social and life skills training is not, of course, an entirely new form of practice. It has been used for many years in work with diverse target groups such as mentally handicapped, prisoners and even with those seeking help with personal and behavioural difficulties. However, in these fields of practice it has usually been possible to regard those undergoing the 'training' as victims of some personal incapacity, or as seriously deviant, or as (in)voluntarily submitting themselves to some form of therapy. It has, therefore, also been possible to act as if their 'problems' could be defined 'objectively' and as if their 'treatment' were entirely a 'technical' matter calling for no important ethical choices. That is, it has been assumed that those being 'trained' have few, if any, rights to define their 'problems' in their own way, or to decide for themselves if and how they wish to be 'trained' (Davies, 1979). In the times when author was writing about it, this training was seen as relevant, via intermediate treatment programmes for example, to young people defined as 'at risk' (normally of breaking the law) and above all to thousands of unemployed young people. Social and life skills training gave primary attention to coping rather than developing, to surviving rather than responding creatively and critically, to getting by rather than to moving on. Above all, what social and life skills training has been expected to do, therefore, is to manage some of the most threatening consequences of the worst crisis which our society, and especially its economy, has had to face for decades. The personalised needs and demands of those who ultimately receive the 'service' have thus increasingly become secondary considerations (ibid.). Nowadays the situation is quite different, as personal development training also operating with the growth of skills is voluntary. Goldstein and Noonan (1999) claim that in order to provide short-term treatment practitioners must be convinced that clients can make improvements in their lives within a limited time frame. Another important predisposition presented by these researchers is that nature of support is multidimensional. As they explain, client can get professional help in his life situation through any activity that attempts to alleviate discomfort, stress, or suffering or to improve some aspects of client´s functioning. And there are several ways to achieve such goals: ‘providing an atmosphere in which client can share his or her feelings and obtain encouragement, support and guidance, linking the client to necessary resources or opportunities or by improving some environmental circumstances’ (Goldstein and Noonan, 1999:55). In general, as McLaughlin and Byers (2001:72) emphasize, the self-development approach needs to be:
53
• based on the action learning cycle • continuous and relevant • starting from where the young person is and building on previous experience and knowledge while starting small • helping young people to make meaning and transfer learning from the activity • focusing on knowledge, skills and attitudes • foster support and responsibility for participants • encouraging resourcefulness, resilience and reflectiveness Chairman of the Development Training Advisory Group Everard (1993) describes development training such as enhancing individual effectiveness by evoking a sense of purpose, developing coping and learning skills and increasing self-understanding. Development training thus accelerates learning and cultivates the habit of learning from life, it combines the concepts of development (change and growth) and training (learning specific skills). Self-development approach used in international trainings, where both group and individual social work are taking place, represents a short-term intervention with a diversity of feedback and observations of participants from different cultural and social backgrounds. After all, as Ungar (2004) points out, a celebration of diversity is a natural consequence of a postmodern emphasis on a plurality of perspectives and multiple and competing constructions of reality. Hence such training is actually corresponding to and following the recent shifts in society, where a young person needs to be creative, flexible and self-dependant with solutions within one´s life trajectory. Values are another element of such training, which are there to be explored by young people participating in it. Warren (2007:73) underlines, that being aware of our own value system is important for two reasons. First, it helps us to ‘guard against manipulation and control”, and second, it helps us to identify where conflicts may arise between our own and others´ values and beliefs so that we are better prepared to deal with them. At the same time, the theme of empowerment is crucial for this method. As Adams (Adams 2008) points out, almost every approach to self-development has an empowering dimension. Particularly young people with less-opportunities would find it beneficial to experience empowerment in order to use the charter and to follow its recommendations. Although they might have the potential and motivation, there are a number of skills and attitudes that need to be developed, and some extra knowledge that is useful to be gained. Without empowerment it might be very difficult, if not impossible, for young people in some circumstances to get involved and to contribute to the lives of their communities (Goździk- Ormel 2008). It is also true since empowerment is a concept that, when incorporated into social work practice, pertains to efforts to increase feelings of personal self-efficacy and self- esteem (Baillergeau, Duyvendak 2013). Another element to emphasize in connection with described training is resilience, when development is understood as building upon their enhancement of the capacity to deal with everyday life (Hoffman 2004; Ungar 2004b). However, resilience is according to more than bouncing back and coping with everyday life situations when it is understood in terms of a capacity for transformation and change (Lifton,1993 in (Ashworth 2013) and in this way, it implicates transition and is associated with young peoples' successful one to adulthood. The other key characteristic is that in trainings this development takes place in a group context and the group is very powerful in shaping it. Watkins (1995) writes that groups may recognize and enhance social processes which support learning and growth while becoming supportive places. According to this practitioner they can also be used to stimulate social 54 processes and to provide a platform for reflecting on our own performance. At the same time, groups can become safe contexts for supporting experimentation and provide opportunities for people to give and receive personal feedback. Consequently, as (Ashworth 2013) implies, ‘person’s concept of themselves and their interactions with others promotes effective life development’. Rose (Rose 2008) brings another observation from working with personal development groups. Some people struggle not with the idea of personal development as such, but with the group nature of the task, practitioner reports. The people argue that they are a ‘private person’ and therefore could never talk openly in a group. These individuals see groups as places in which they need to protect themselves rather than expose any vulnerability. Groups can be indeed perceived as dangerous places where members are exposed to aggression, or ridicule, or humiliation. An individual might have an experience that groups can reject, punish, attack and damage. Added to this follows the fear that people behave differently in groups and that groups can change behaviour. As Rose further (2008:4) states, ‘as a group member I may find myself doing and saying things that seem out of character or out of my own control”(Rose 2008)(Rose 2008). As it was already discussed, in our western culture, the idea of individual is given a dominant role. We put an emphasis on self esteem, self- actualising, self-awareness, and self-regard. Yet Rose (2008) further explains that the group and the individual are mutually interdependent, the group cannot exist without the individual and the individual cannot exist without the group. Because we are all born into a group, learn who we are in the context of groups and live out our lives and deaths within groups. We have no existence outside of the group - the family, the school, the club, the workplace, the society, the culture, the language, the beliefs, all kinds of groups become our living environment where we develop our social functioning (Bartlett, Saunders 1972). Therefore, even the most isolated of people are born into relationship with others, belong to the group ‘men’ or ‘women”, live as a member of a particular society in a specific historical context. Who we are, the inner ‘self’ we focused on previously in this chapter, comes from a constant negotiation between the rewards and responsibilities of these group memberships. Clearly, as human beings we are inextricably linked to each other, and we need that web of connection. We become who we are through our group belonging, and if we are to change and develop, we can only do it in the context of others (Rose 2008). The Synergy training group offers an opportunity to experience and understand such me-in-relation-to-others in a here and now context that can be shaped by all those other groups, past and present. 3.2.1. Limits and risks of self-development trainings Together with the benefits, working with people in all areas brings also risks and limitations. There are certain limits to these trainings as well. According to Komárková (2001: 204-206), it is impossible to change a young person from the base or to create an ideal person or an individual. Nor it is possible to ensure life without conflicts after participating in a training, to learn to act without emotions, to ensure success in communication with anyone and anywhere and most of all, or to change the person passively, without their active contribution (ibid.). And echoing Rose (2008), for some young people perceiving themselves as ‘private persons’ disclosure in a group would be too challenging if not impossible. Therefore self-development trainings as any other intervention in social work require cooperation with participants as well as their willingness to grow and to search for solutions in such context. Heydt and Sherman (Heydt, Sherman 2005) list several risks of personal development programs. According to them, engaging in activities that increase self-awareness also entails risks which should be explained for participants just as they would be for clients. Developing a level of trust for sharing about one's self with others is necessary. Therefore, the risks for 55 young people include first of all the others knowing private information about them or their family as in the case of sharing genograms and ecomaps. Authors mention that discovering aspects of oneself that were previously unknown is usually both exciting and disquieting. Young people then risk self-understanding that may not be as they wish to be known, particularly in receiving feedback from others. Uncovering new memories or perhaps even revisiting old wounds is not accomplished easily. For some participants, exploring their relationships with family and others involves the risk of bringing into the open unhealthy and potentially harmful behaviours and/or beliefs (ibid.). Especially with disadvantaged youth, often lacking security and stability in their lives, those risks and limits should be taken in consideration. 3.2.2. Life competences and the contribution of non-formal method In the past decade there has been a growing emphasis on ‘life competencies’ within the education system. The rising popularity of alternative approaches and modalities such as lifelong learning, distance education, e-learning, peer education, on-the-job training and non- formal learning shows that the concept of education is increasingly expanding beyond the traditional classroom (World Youth Report, 2005). Formal education and training is the most visible and recognised form of learning in society. Yet, non-formal methods and training is increasingly acknowledged as an essential part of the lifelong learning process of any individual. Non-formal approach covers a range of educational programmes: adult literacy, basic education for out of school children, life-skills, work-skills, and general culture. It may take place both within and outside educational institutions and cater to persons of all ages (EU Youth Report 2012). Lafraya (2011:9) sees non-formal method as a ‘voluntary learning that takes place in a diverse range of environments and situations for which teaching/training and learning is not necessarily their sole or main activity”. Examples include adult education courses, leisure or sporting activities. European Commission defines several characteristics of non formal learning (Erasmus+ Programme Guide 2016). In Synergy trainings participants work with more of them and specifically with the following (Nobilisova 2013): • voluntary & self-organized character of learning (participants set own goals for development); • intrinsic motivation and close link to interests and aspirations (out of their own lives); • participative and learner-centred approach; • supportive learning environment (reflections, discussions in small groups and buddies); • open character and structure, transparency and flexibility (programs adjusted to needs); • evaluation in a collective process and without judgment; • sharing of results with public and planned follow-up. While it is recognised that formal approaches may well be needed in order to negotiate with governments and senior decision makers, an informal approach may work best with individuals and groups (Percy-Smith, Thomas 2009). There is also an implication that motivation of participants and their involvement is increased by this approach, as they have more methods and space for creativity in developing the final product than in formal education. Participation of young people in evaluation techniques of such trainings might also increase validity of the achieved information and reduce fear of failure. Trainers here aim to support groups in their ability to carry out daily activities, create a structure for themselves
56 and dividing roles and finally in evaluation and self-assessment, which are all parts of non- formal approach (Nobilisova 2013). Often during self-development trainings experiential learning is being used, as many dispositions to develop and learn that young people perform are attitudinal. Perkins (1995) has characterized these dispositions as being ready, being willing and being able. Much personal development focuses on behaviour and interaction and one of the most successful models among experiential learning is the model of active learning or ‘learning by doing”, which also reflects processes of personal development trainings. First young people do something, then they get feedback of some sort and on basis of that they review the strategy and plan the next action. Golombeck (2002) explains it on example of active citizenship. According to him, it cannot be expected to happen overnight when a person reaches age: it must be learned ‘by doing’ through everyday experiences: opportunities to participate in shared decision-making, listening to different opinions, weighing options and consequences. Research on this particular learning type found that individuals who learn by balancing experiencing and conceptualising are more flexible in adapting to situations and have an increased ability to develop both analytic and interpersonal skills (Mainemelis et. al., 2002, in Anghel, Amas&Dicks, 2010). Work done by Simons, Hicks and Amas (Anghel, Amas&Dicks, 2010) also showed that using creative mediums in training and education enhance confidence, self-efficacy and self-image; enable trust and deep learning; and develop creativity and imagination, which are central to problem-solving and coping. They are reporting on a self-development programme conducted with social work young students, which has not been organised around strict learning outcomes and assessment due to the personal nature of the work. The present programme has included a mix of experiential techniques, individual and group reflection and creative mediums to explore the three sets of concepts. The students felt that the informal, active and interactive approach to working together helped them develop trust and openness, and made them feel connected. Thus, this format facilitated group cohesion, authenticity and an atmosphere conducive to participation and learning. They had space to express themselves. The dialogue, the observation of self and others, and the active interaction and feedback from others enabled them to learn about themselves, and to be empathic (ibid.) There are several possibilities we could name that participants are offered to use during a self - development training. As Komárková (2001: 204-206) explains, young people can develop general communication skills and increase their ability to reflect upon their actions and the actions of people around them. They could also explore their weaknesses and gaps in dealing with surroundings as well as map their own style of perception. Accepting emotions and develop sensitivity towards non verbal communication are another aspects to benefit from. As a result, young people´s understanding of reality can be enriched by such an experience of self-development training within a group. Consequently, they are much better equipped for life choices and handling obstacles they encounter on the way of social inclusion. Another aspect to be considered is a concept of ‘turning points”, which are discussed to be occasions that have had a substantial impact on one´s life and have changing life course effect. 3.2.3. Opportunity for a ‘turning point” As we lead our lives, we encounter both positive and negative experiences. Some of these experiences have no significant impact on our lives and our future situation, others do and quite remarkably. Some experiences may even change the direction of our lives. Such experiences can be referred to as turning points occasions that will turn our lives in a serving or a destructive direction. How then can we identify such a ‘turning point”?
57
According to Rutter (1996) turning points cannot be identified in terms of broad classes of experiences, nor as a unitary set of phenomena. The experiences involved in the mechanisms underlying turning point changes have two characteristics: ‘First, the experiences are likely to involve some form of marked environmental or organismic discontinuity or changing quality and the direction of change must be of a type that is likely to influence development in a direction that is different from that before the turning points. Secondly, the experiences should be of a kind that carries the potential for persistence of effects over time’ (Rutter 1996:613-164).Turning points are then defined as significant life events or experiences in life that have a visible importance on the life course as they persist. Turning points are crucial events in life which give a structure of ‘before’ and ‘after’ and can be described as events when life comes to a head (Denzin, 1989). Turning points might be represented by situational life events, such as losing a job, or by personal subjective experiences, such as having control over active decisions in life. They can also consist of random happenings in life (King et al., 2003). In their core such points term can be understood as serving ones, which are supporting growth, or destructive, which create hardships for a person. They can also consist of single episodes or cumulative events, and give a gradual understanding or a sudden illumination of an event. According to narrative theory, turning points often come with a moral message that gives evidence of changes and shifts in beliefs and standpoints. Awareness and reflection when significant changes have taken place are good indicators to call an experience or an event a turning point (Riessman, 2002 in Höjer and Sjöblom 2014). As presented above, there are all kinds of different views as to the nature of turning points. Sometimes they are understood only as changes in the direction of a person's life course; sometimes they are instead seen as transitions or events which can normally be expected to occur and which alter people's self-interpretations. Undoubtedly though they presented unique life experiences which contribute to some sort of learning. Self-development training with its diversity and intensity could be seen as one of the opportunities for such turning. In line with Höjer and Sjöblom (2014) also Pelánek (2008) mentions awareness in a form of reflection as an important element of change and learning. He defines reflection as the measuring factor of the difference between ‘recreational’ and ‘pedagogical’ experience. Learning and enhancing the experience can happen through exploring it, ‘looking back’ and analyzing what was done and created. Yet it is impossible to analyze all the themes, so for self-development it is essential to focus on skills and attitudes, cooperation and self- understanding, as well as critical thinking. In other words, the ‘do’ part is then the planned activity and the ‘learn’ phase is where the future learning is identified’ (McLaughlin and Byers, 2001:70). We will explore what reflection means and what is its place in self- development method.
3.3. Reflection in learning from experience: self-development perspective
Reflective practice is closely related to the idea of learning from experience. Areas for reflection include the personal purview of individual values, beliefs, strengths and weaknesses, as well as the practice purview of professional values and ethics, strengths and limitations in practice, the roles social workers play and professional identity of the students. Reflection is at the same time the active attempt to generate generalizable knowledge about self and the profession, in dealing with the dynamic practice environment (Lam et al.,2007; (Kemshall, Littlechild 2000). Given that reflective practice is based on learning from diverse
58 sources, including personal experience and intuition, everyone has the potential to reflect and be reflective (Ruch 2000). 3.3.1. Critical reflection in social work with young people in self-development trainings McLaughlin and Byers (2001) state that self development approach needs to be focusing on knowledge, skills and attitudes, to foster support and responsibility for participants and to encourage reflectiveness. In the context of work with young people the challenge still exists to evaluate their participation beyond a success or failure model. Meaning not asking did a project ‘get participation right’ or meet programme targets, but thinking about ‘whether, by being critically reflective and learning from the experience, the achievement of a culture of [children’s] participation may become more realisable’ (Percy-Smith, Malone 2001, p. 18). The capacity to reflect upon one’s self—attitudes, emotions, behaviour and thought—is the key ingredient in personal development. Relating to others at depth is inseparable from relating to oneself at depth. Our ability to think about ourselves and experience ourselves from the ‘inside and the outside’ is crucial if we are to be able to offer this sort of relating to other people (Rose 2008). Using critical reflection on a personal level can be according to the personal experience of Fook and Gardner (2007) also illuminating. As they describe, it has a potential to encourage openness and depth, an attitude of mind that stresses connectedness between the internal and external and across our experiences as human beings. It also brings questioning of one own established ideas and approaches and opens a door for re-evaluating the meanings. In addition, reflection is an aspect of self-empowerment, a crucial element for participation (Adams 2008). Therefore, it makes sense to deepen our understanding of this issue and to discover how the critical reflection can be applied in practice with young people. Taken literally, reflective refers to the process of thinking about the work we undertake – that is, we reflect on our actions either at the time or at a suitable opportunity thereafter. A key principle of reflective practice in this connection is ‘the value that can be brought by drawing on our critical faculties to make sure that practice does not become so mechanical.ʼ (Thomson & Pascal, 2012:319). Put in a context of learning, ‘reflection’ is a general term for those intellectual and affective activities in which individuals engage to explore their experience in order for new understandings and appreciation. Reflective learning is a process of interpretive discovery embedded in experience, it includes thinking about and exploring an issue, which is triggered by an experience. The aim is to make sense of the experience and to incorporate this experience into one’s view of self and the world (Lam et al., 2007). As Ixer (Ixer 2012) adds, reflection is a social process, meaning the way how we think is influenced by our social, historical and political backgrounds. He claims that reflection is due to this a social construct, happening in place as well as in time. A number of myths and misunderstandings have grown up around reflective practice, including the tendency to take reflective practice too literally, meaning to see it as simply a matter of pausing for thought (Thomson & Pascal, 2012). According to Fook& Gardner (2007), reflective practice is an approach designed to assist professionals to become aware of the ‘theory’ or assumptions involved in their practice, with the purpose of closing the gap between what is espoused and what is enacted. Reflective practice is closely related to the idea of learning from experience. Reflective learning can be characterized by blending theory and practice (two-ways dialogue), active learning (where practitioners are seen as active participants in learning rather than receivers from an ‘expert”), participative learning (the ‘curriculum’ for learning is determined jointly rather than decided by the trainer) and not
59 least important challenging dogma with focus on curiosity and open-mindedness (Thomson & Pascal, 2012). Elisabeth Morrow (2009) then divides different forms and domains of critical reflection, such as(1) personal, thoughts and actions as a set of ‘filters’ e.g. past experience, feelings and mood and aspirations; (2) interpersonal, interactions with others; (3) contextual, meaning concepts, theory and methods that influence practice and (3) critical, which examines political, ethical and social contexts. The concept of critical reflection as also widely described by Fook and Gardner (2007). They describe critical reflection as a process and theory for unearthing individually held social assumptions in order to make changes in the social world. Change should come through changed actions that can only happen when connections between premises on which thinking, actions and emotions are based and the social world are made. By change the authors mean changes in professional practice, which happen happens through unearthing hidden assumptions, and scrutinizing them, which can lead to any of the following reactions: their reaffirmation, modification, reframing, improvement or even drastic reworking (2007:19). What does it mean then to be reflective? It implies thinking about and exploring issues of concern, to make sense of one’s experiences within knowledge boundaries, and to interpret one’s experience against one’s view of the self and the world (Lam et al.,2007). To affirm the value of the reflection process itself, we need to realize that this is not just an intellectual exercise designed to satisfy course requirements but a chance to apply theory or beliefs to some common experiences in practice (Martyn, 2000:201-202). From this perspective, it is the process itself which is more important than the choice of material, of which we may in any case have limited knowledge. One of the most known critics of technical rationality Schön (Schon 1984) sees practice as more a matter of art or craft than science, where drawing on formal knowledge as and when appropriate is needed. This involves tailoring theoretical and research-based knowledge to fit the circumstances encountered in specific practice situations. According to this author creating and using knowledge in helping professions happens through: • reflection-in-action (‘thinking on our feet’, but recognizing that this is not just random thought or so-called ‘common sense’, thinking and doing coincide in a moment-to-moment adaptation), • reflection-on-action (retrospective thinking which occurs after the event, can be used to develop our understanding further and to test and develop the knowledge base). Bleakley (1999) proposes a third level of reflection, as neither reflection-on-action nor reflection-in-action, but reflection-as-action. Author explains it as a shift to a wider context of a world-orientation, where reflection-as-action is a constant stream of consciousness. Another type was added by Thompson & Thompson (2008: 15), which they call reflection- for-action, referring to planning and thinking ahead of action, so that practitioner can draw on his experience and the professional knowledge base implicit within it in order to make the best use of the time resources available to him. Knott & Scragg (2007) come with their own clarification as well, using the concept of ‘lens”. When someone who wears glasses puts them on, the difference in being able to see clearly is immense. ‘Things come into focus and clearer patterns emerge. This is what reflection on action can begin to achieve for the beginning professional practitioner. So it is essentially a retrospective activity, thinking about an event after it has taken place.’(Knott & Scragg, 2007:6). A critique was brought by Morrow (2009:16), who based on her practice informed about commonly reported drawback of using reflective techniques. She proclaimed that individuals 60 can slide into self conscious cynicism, isolated thinking and self-absorption, which was instead of supporting them bringing less effectiveness. A group context, with its diverse feedbacks and points of view shared among participants, could serve to avoid or even eliminate such outcomes. As mentioned above, this model pays attention to the role of emotions, as according to authors the ability to think critically is essential, but the importance of emotion in this process is not always recognized. Emotion is closely linked to motivation, so what we feel will influence our actions. The concept of emotional intelligence is based on recognition of the crucial role of emotion in influencing cognitive thought and determining what we do. ‘The emotionally intelligent person is thus able to sense, understand and use emotions in order to improve their own effectiveness and their relationships with others’ (Knott & Scragg, 2007:40). They recognize emotional self-awareness as an essential first stage of using emotion effectively. Through conscious reflection people can develop their awareness of own feelings and what has triggered them. Then they can start to focus on the feelings of others, noticing and reflecting on their meaning. One way of doing this is by exploring our responses to particular triggers in small groups. At the same time, it is important to become aware of how a person is reacting physically in order to change his or her position to reduce the muscles becoming rigid. As Knott & Scragg (2007:56) explain, once you do become conscious of your body, the ‘ability to reduce physical tension will enable you to feel mentally calmerʼ. Another concept being used within this model is transference, which is based on the conclusion that the emotional mind may react to the present as though it were the past. Transference reactions are responses which are triggered by a memory of an earlier experience, which unconsciously then determined their feelings and responses in the present, they may be positive or negative (Knott & Scragg, 2007). According to those theorists, the ability to ask and be asked good questions in assessment enables deep reflection to take place, as a good question seems to demand a thoughtful answer. It is how a question is asked as well as what is asked that can make a good question. The more open a questions such as the 5WH formula is helpful. Who, What, When, Where, Why and How questions tend to suit thinkers who like to work in a logical, ordered or controlled way and appreciate some external direction (Knott & Scragg, 2007:72-73). Authors further emphasize that experiential learning has an element of risk as the responsibility for the level of engagement passes from the trainer to the participants in learning environments. As Knott & Scragg notice, guidance should be given about the potential for distress, either from the nature of the material reflected upon or the actual process of reflection. 3.3.2. Critical reflection by Knott & Scragg and its connection to Synergy trainings In Synergy trainings (ST)19 all forms of reflections described above are present. Reflection- in-action is necessary when a trainer is working with sensitive issues of his participants on the spot and needs to react to their learning processes and deal with his own reaction to these incentives. He is also guiding participants in this process, so they can become more aware of their behaviour in the group at the moment of action. Reflection-on-action is then needed when the trainer creates an environment for one on one feedback in a group or invites
19 The further presented information about trainings was collected from diverse documents such as introduction about trainings or different infoletters from concrete self-development projects and trainings available also at official website of Synergy network headquarters in Olde Vechte, Netherlands http://www.synergytrainingsnl.com/trainings. 61 participants to look back on their experience in order to go through experiential learning and to make their own conclusions upon their results and understanding. Also reflection-for- action is being used, when participants with the support of a team member are planning their learning goals and actions for achieving them. All these elements serve as supportive for the practice. The concept of ‘lens”, describing someone who wears glasses putting them on and being able to see clearly, seems to be a supportive one as well. In ST participants are being encouraged to open their patterns, and with this explanation it is easy to understand that those patterns can emerge when we put an effort into reflecting. The attention this model pays to the role of emotions is highly usable for ST, as self-awareness of own feelings and what has triggered them is one of the goals of the training. Also, the emphasis on reacting physically in this model supports the focus on ‘body language’ and ‘physical reality”. Both concepts are being used in ST widely and one of the thing that trainers also say to participants is that once you do become conscious of your body, the ability to reduce physical tension will enable you to feel mentally calmer, which Knott & Scragg mention as well (2007:56). Transference is another supportive element for these trainings, since participants deal with their reactions to new events with linking them with the past experience and learning how to stop them being automatic. Assessment as presented in this model is quite supportive, especially the focus on ability to ask and be asked good questions. In SN, open questions are encouraged during the de-briefing of the activities with a group on regular basis. When connecting the approaches suggested in this model, more of them seem to be supportive. For example writing reflective journals is sometimes used in the practice of SN by introducing it to participants and team as a tool for learning and also for a trainer himself to keep his reflection-on-action fluent. Reflective blog could be more limiting in this case, since the usage of internet is not encouraged during the training in order to bring one´s focus to ‘here and now”. Among non-verbal approaches using aesthetic approaches such as drawing, sculpting, making collages or listening to music seems to be very helpful and is already used to some extent. Also relaxation with guided fantasies and drama are listed among supportive elements in ST techniques, as well as usage of metaphors. On the other hand, photographs and videos during the sessions can create limitations, since for many participants it is sensitive what they do and they prefer not to be recorded during activities. Critical incident analysis and narrative analysis are as well as supervision are both being included in ST practice, first two with participants in realizing their background and the last with trainers and team members to support them in improving their performance. Used at international level reflection becomes a more powerful tool for its participants to evolve.
3.4. Self-development training at international level
Internationalized social problems bring the global to the local and raise the local to the global arena (Dominelli, 2010). In such a world social work cannot help but be international, if it still aims to address the issues of social injustice, inequality, oppression and exclusion. It is important to engage with the new international discourses and keep maintaining its commitment to the old idea of social justice (Ife, 2007). As Williams adds, people now more than ever have to transfer knowledge so that it emerges into identities relevant for themselves. Critical reflection used in that process can ‘enable the development of localized responses, knowledge and skills’(Williams, 2009:117). Development trainings done at international level thus can contribute to such a transfer as well as to personal growth of its participants.
62
The most important practices for a person´s well-being according to Jackson (2014) are to develop healthy habits, create clear boundaries, ask for and accept help, find ways to centre yourself for peace, and manage perfectionist tendencies—to be aware of what you are humanly capable of. But, as he adds, each person will have to explore the path and practices that best suit their needs. Practice has shown that traineeships abroad afford a unique opportunity to discover one´s needs and to experience differences through unfamiliarity. Different cultural behaviour can call for one´s re-orientation and adjustments, even for abandoning familiar mechanisms. They offer the opportunity to enlarge occupational and personal competencies, also, or may be particularly, for underprivileged youth and young adults. For many participants with difficult educational histories and/or social backgrounds it is a chance to free themselves from expectations based on experience of their accustomed environment and discover and try out their own strengths (IdA, 2011:16). As Rose (2008) argues that homogeneous group, where members share key characteristics such as gender, race, ethnicity, age, social class, physical ability, will not work in the same way as a group in which there are multiple differences in any of these aspects. Therefore, international dimension allows young people to benefit from diversity and different incentives. A following project can serve as an example of a positive impact of mentioned short-terms international interventions. According to research realized in Germany with over a thousand young people taking part in almost 60 intercultural and international events increased motivation and self-reliance of participants were proven as well as cooperativeness and team ability, ability to cope with conflict and communicate (IdA, 2011:19). As young people claimed themselves, after the traineeship abroad they felt more self-assured and self- confident. More studies show that such an intense experience abroad changes person`s perspectives. For instance Paige (2009) describes how similar projects had a positive impact on five dimensions of global engagement of participants20 - civic engagement, knowledge production, philanthropy, social entrepreneurship and voluntary simplicity, as well as on subsequent educational and career choices. Most of these activities were conducted through non-formal education21 (Lafraya, 2011). The reliance on non-formal education here stands for a belief in potential, abilities and interest of young people to learn, and represents the main method of participation (Colley, 2007:104). We have an opportunity to compare the described above attributes with particular personal development training at international level taking place in different countries of Europe and sometimes out of it as well. It is delivered within Synergy network for over a decade and thousands of less-opportunity young people have already participated in it.
3.5. Synergy network: opportunities for young people
The connecting centre for all the non government organizations working with disadvantaged youth on international level with Synergy self-development method is the Olde Vechte
20For more on engagement and participation of youth see the following chapter. 21 Examples include development trainings, adult education courses, leisure or sporting activities. Characteristics are voluntary and self-organized character of learning (participants set their goals for development), intrinsic motivation and close link to interests and aspirations (out of their own lives), participative and learner-centred approach, supportive learning environment (reflections, discussions in small groups and buddies), open character and structure, transparency and flexibility (programs adjusted to needs), evaluation in a collective process and without judgment, sharing of results with public and planned follow-up (Lafraya, 2011:9).
63
Foundation. While more institutions working with young people and using experiential learning and elements of self-development could be found in Europe, I have chosen this one for my research as I have been cooperating with its NGO members for over eight years by now and I am one of the practitioners. Since 1966, it has been functioning as a training centre for informal learning in Ommen, the Netherlands. Its board declares to be ‘committed to participation of youth in society, per overnight trainings for educational institutions, cultural exchanges, reintegration projects and personal development trainings”22. The training centres are meant to be open to anyone who is motivated to improve personal and professional skills in order to create a better society and a higher quality of life. Trainings generally focus on various topics such as coaching, personal development, employability or art expression. 3.5.1. Olde Vechte Foundation and International Synergy Network The Foundation Olde Vechte is a non-formal organisation, established in 1966, which is situated in Ommen, the Netherlands. The mission of the founders is to create a world that works for everyone out of love, care and cooperation. By supporting people in their personal development, we encourage them to use their freedom and take responsibility in their lives, to create a world that works for everyone. In order to realize this, the foundation has created a training centre, where people are able to live, learn and work on their personal development. The board of the foundation employed professional youth workers to support the trainees in putting their potential into active reality. The trainees can initiate and carry out activities to realise this vision. The Foundation claims to be open for everyone, regardless their background, and not limited by country borders. Their main target group is youth, especially youth with fewer opportunities, and their staffs is specialized in the method of learning by experience or ‘learning by doing”. Activities of the Foundation consist out of: international exchanges for young people and individual training placements; training courses for formal education; internship for students (national and international) ; training and coaching youth organisations; facilitation of training; international training for youth workers and youth leaders; initiating and maintaining an informal network of international youth organisations, called the International Synergy Group; coaching and training the trainers of the Synergy trainings; and finally composing and controlling the quality of personal development Synergy trainings (basic synergy training, advanced training, training for trainers). Olde Vechte Foundation along with other European partner organizations has founded the International Synergy Network in 1991. Up to today this network has spread in over 25 countries and through the trainings thousands of young people experienced developing their selves within an international context. These trainings are either open calls or financially supported by the European Commission via Erasmus+ Programme or the Council of Europe. Self-development trainings which are being organized by non-governmental organizations connected in Synergy Network and working with disadvantaged youth all over the Europe could serve as another example of trainings as short-term intervention in social work. As the organization states23, communication with oneself and others is essential to get out the
22 OV (2015). More about Synergy Network and trainings available in publications on website: http://www.synergytrainingsnl.com/ 23 Here and after the information about the organization and its methods is being taken from the official documents (description of aims of foundation, information letters for the participants, final reports of the projects etc ) available on the website of Olde Vechte Foundation.
64 maximum of this training. In such trainings ‘participants learn how to benefit from experiences in their lives in an enjoyable and dynamic way’ (OV, 2015). During a seven days period young people are provided with tools which they can reintegrate in their personal or professional life. The training first of all focuses on actually experiencing one’s own way of doing things. The next step is to explore alternative possibilities to function in society in a satisfying way. Its main focus is on subjects such as one’s own self-confidence, joy of life, collaboration, openness, spontaneity, daring and enrichment of relationships in all areas: relationships with one’s partner, family, friends or at work. As it states in description provided by organization: ‘We make use of methods that follow the natural human behaviour, which work in the same way like learning to walk, taste and feel. We call it learning by experience and the training deals with vital questions, such as: What do I want to do with my life? How do I cope with events? How do I build up good relationships, both in private life and in work situations? How do collaboration, self-confidence, parenthood, love, self- expression and other aspects that determine my personal growth make up the framework of my life?’ (Event Wise training Infoletter 2014). The training thus creates conditions that are meant to enable participants to experience how they behave, what effect this has on them and what the results for them and the community they live in can be. Through the years of existence of this organization majority of the participants were young people facing insecurity in their lives and disadvantages within their society. 3.5.2. Connecting methods and values to life situation of participants Self-development method adopted by Synergy network is based on taking personal responsibility for one's own learning and development through a process of assessment, reflection, and taking action (Nobilisova 2013). There are several methods connected to this approach which are being used in this program. The main concept is learning by doing, meaning through personal experience. Participants first use methods offered during workshops themselves, test them, and then decide which they want to bring for the people they work with, which they want to improve and how. To bring a proper background for such an experience, training aims to provide participants with lectures and presentation from professional trainers or coaches, exercises and games. Young people work with such elements as self-guidance and teamwork, co-operative decision-making, group dynamics, leadership, setting up goals and objectives and problem solving. This approach is designed to connect to the specific needs of individuals and the level of learning of the participant at that moment, to which the program is adjusted. Learning in outdoor is another approach used in Synergy, since it seems as an effective frame for participants to gain inspiration for their goals, to clear up the structure of their plans and to create connection among each other. There is also sharing, evaluating and feedbacking included. Participants practice how to open up their own topics, how to go through what was achieved and to learn from results and how to give and receive feedback in a constructive way (Brand yourself 2015; Grow Creative basic synergy training Infoletter 2015; Let´s Get Creative training course Infoletter 2016; New Waves-basic synergy training Infoletter 2015; Nobilisova 2013; Pathways basic synergy Infoletter 2016). Francis and Lorenzo (2002) have identified seven realms under which they believe most projects can be categorised – ‘romantic’, ‘advocacy’, ‘needs’, ‘learning’, ‘rights’, ‘institutionalisation’ and ‘proactive’. While in learning realm the focus is on the process of changing perceptions and skills rather than physical places, the proactive one is about young people´s participation with vision, focusing on making substantial changes. Within this realm we begin to see the starting point of a view of young people as competent and able to
65 construct their own cultural practices outside the adult domain. Synergy training project would partly fit in both categories. The program of the self-development training in Synergy Network can differ in structure, yet it works with specific values which cover different areas of life of a person (Event Wise training Infoletter 2014; 2016; Pathways basic synergy Infoletter 2016): 1. Judgments The first activities focus on the aspects of judgment. They are based on the predisposition that each person has his or her own way of judging and considering matters. ‘When we error again and again, this means that our judgment is failing us. When we are capable of identifying the mistakes, we can correct them.’ Therefore, the opportunity in the first part of the trainings is to increase one´s ability to identify how (s) he judges, considers and weights various situation. 2. Patterns Patters here are understood as automatic ways of behaving and acting while dealing with events that are coming up, which are specific for every individual. These seemingly inescapable patterns may consciously or unconsciously affect our life. During this part of the training, the following questions are raised: What conditions do I allow to affect my life? What automatic responses do I have? How do I side step problems? How does this affect my choices and the way in which I conduct my life? How can I improve this? There is an opportunity to review one´s current patterns and to decide individually which are serving the healthy growth and social inclusion of the person and which are not. 3. Self-loyalty The third area is working with a fact that many times things happen without people wishing for them. Human´s reaction to the unexpected is often anger, nerves, stress and pressure. The new circumstances, or even other people around, can control the quality of one´s life although this is not an intention of that person. Participants are offered to search for answers to how they can achieve the desired quality in what they do by maintaining their first intentions and by being loyal to themselves. 4. Spontaneity Routines of the daily life can limit person´s spontaneity. With this part, the next questions appear in front of participants: Do I allow myself to be spontaneous? How does this affect my relationships? What are the advantages? What restrictions do I impose on myself by acting in a certain way? Could I do something new? This area gives an opportunity for creative thinking and finding the new solutions for diverse personal and social issues. 5. Cultural Landscape Organized in international groups, couples, solo and as a whole group young people do several activities during the training while being also outside of the accommodation. This way they have the opportunity to put into practice the theory and the tools of the self- development event and see how they can create and recreate enjoyment in every moment independent of the circumstances. A series of missions are usually provided by the facilitators to each international group. There are different types of challenges and riddles giving the possibility to the mission groups to work actively and to discover what are the strengths that they are using in order to succeed. 6. Freedom
66
By freedom ‘the state where you have always a choice’ is meant. This part of the program deals with a central question: What do you really want in life? Young people can confront themselves with this question independent of the opinion of others. It is an opportunity to explore, discover and experience what they want to do with their life and to make decisions for shifts. 7. Self-fulfilment During this last part all experiences and insights gained during the self-development training are combined and there is space for young people to define what makes them fulfilled. They can learn to appreciate their own learning and personal growth through reflection and feedback. During the whole program disadvantaged youth has a chance to experience own self and its specifics. Yet next to benefits also the limits and risks of such trainings remain an important area to be explored in the following research. Another concept that is being used in Synergy trainings is mindset.(Dweck 2007) explains mindset as a view one is adopting for oneself and it profoundly affects the way person leads his/her life. While believing that one´s qualities are carved in stone she calls a fixed mindset, the growth mindset is based on the belief that ‘your basic qualities are things you can cultivate through your efforts’ (Dweck 2007). And as Virginia Satir (1991) underpins, everyone can change through application and experience, and everyone can change one´s own mindset as well. A method worth to mention, as Synergy trainings are using it in the approach itself, is neuro- linguistic programming (NLP). ‘Neuro’ relates to what´s happening in person´s mind, ‘linguistic’ refers to language and how we use it, while ‘programming’ tackles the persistent patterns of behaviour that we learn and then repeat. NLP is then based on the idea that our senses affect our behaviour through neurological system. This model is also focusing on how language and the words people use influence their experience and how they use thinking patterns in their decision making and action itself (Ready, Burton 2004). Richard Bandler, a master´s student of information sciences and mathematics, and John Grinder, a professor of linguistics, studied in 1970s people they considered great communicators and agents of change, and based on these studies they introduced this method as an effective one. NLP has its roots in two world-renowned therapists: Virginia Satir (developer of Conjoint Family Therapy) and Fritz Perls (founder of Gestalt Psychology), whom the two mentioned practitioners followed. There are four pillars of NLP (Ready, Burton 2004): • Rapport (how you build a relationship with others and yourself) • Sensory awareness (paying attention to senses) • Outcome thinking (focusing on a desirable result) • Behavioural flexibility (changing behaviours according to whether they serve or not) NLP is focusing on the way one´s perceive the world and aims to change this perception in case that it is malfunctional. To sum up what was listed above, the ideal and wanted outcome is that training is creating a safe and stable environment for participants to learn and to solve their issues / complete their goals during the training in a possible by given circumstances way or extend. For this, each person involved has a clear role: a participant, a co-trainer and a trainer (facilitator)24.
24 For the purpose of this thesis I will here and further on refer to practitioners (who are also youth workers and social workers) delivering self-development Basic Synergy training simply as „trainers", which is a summarizing term for the role in which they conduct all the individual and group work with young people during the training as a field of social work intervention. 67
Roles of a team consisting from co-trainers (young people who came to support voluntarily based on the previous experience as a participant of Synergy training), participants and the one of a trainer are then described in a following way: ‘Even though the training is individual-based, it is given within a group, thus you take the training for yourself, with others. The exercises, called processes in our training context, will be done alternately alone, in pairs or in a group. Giving lectures that provide insights, the trainer will prepare the ground. They are assisted during this event by an experienced international team.ʼ (Event Wise training Infoletter 2014) As Rose (2008) points out, a skilful, competent, sensitive facilitator cannot produce a functioning group without the cooperation of the group members. Every group member hence has a shared responsibility to create a personal development group that provides opportunities to learn and grow. Whatever their personal style, the facilitator is often according to Rose the most visible and scrutinized person in the group. They may play a variety of roles—teacher, mentor, colleague, parent, friend, or enemy as the group develops. Moreover, there is an ‘unavoidable element of authority in the role of facilitator, whatever the modelʼ, and this inevitably engages with the attitudes and experiences of authority that members bring to the group’ (Rose 2008). It is definitely an aspect that should be paid attention to when researching the impact of this method. The training requires a specific ground for participants to work on their goals. This ground is then consisting of environment conditions and activities delivered in a certain way, both depending on trainer and team performance within given roles and tasks. The way how trainer is guiding the team and how (s) he delegates particular responsibilities to team members creates this ground for participants and consequently affects their learning and development.
In the previous pages self-development was introduced as an evolvement in different dimensions of self, such as affective or emotional, physical, spiritual, cognitive and social. Self-development approach then, used in international trainings, represents a short-term intervention with a diversity of feedback and observations of participants from different cultural and social backgrounds. The core of it lies in experiential learning, described by practitioners as a powerful one which promotes critical thinking. One of the most successful models among experiential learning is the model “learning by doing”, which requires a wide usage of reflection as a core tool. Also, using creative mediums in such training enhance confidence, self-efficacy and self-image; enable trust and deep learning; and develop creativity and imagination, which are central to problem-solving and coping. Young people as participants could explore their weaknesses and gaps in dealing with surroundings as well as map their own style of perception, and accepting emotions and develop sensitivity towards non verbal communication are other aspects for them to benefit from. As a result, young people´s understanding of reality can be enriched by such an experience of self-development training within a group. Nevertheless, there are limits to be considered: cooperation with participants is a crucial necessity, as well as their willingness to grow and to search for solutions. More, disclosure in a group would be too challenging if not impossible for some people. Among risks we could mention others knowing private information about them or their family as in, also discovering aspects of oneself that were previously unknown could be disquieting and result into unhealthy and potentially harmful behaviours and/or beliefs. Yet, self-development training with its diversity and intensity could be seen as one of the opportunities for „turning points“, significant life events or experiences in life that have a visible importance on the life course as they persist. 68
Synergy trainings, run all around Europe, with all the potential risks and limits, were presented as an opportunity for young people to achieve such personal growth also in participation and social functioning. What we need to find out is whether, and then how exactly is this happening. To understand better young people´s perceptions regarding this issue we will need to ask: What benefits and what limitations do young people see in self-development training? (RQ5) To find out whether there is anything that trainers could add from their point of view there is another question: What benefits and what limitations do trainers see in self-development training? (RQ6) Meanwhile, the next chapter is driving our attention to the concept of social functioning and its meaning in young people´s lives.
69
4 Social functioning
‘Ultimately it’s not what you get that will make you happy long term, but rather who you become and what you contribute will.” Tony Robbins
Social workers have historically claimed they represent the profession best prepared to help people resolve problems in social functioning and to guide social change efforts to prevent problems from occurring or becoming worse. An individual’s growth and development requires the guidance, nurturing, and protection provided by others. And that person’s concept of self is tied to the decisions and actions of other people. It is interconnectedness and interdependence of people and the ultimate power of social relationships that underpins a profession devoted to helping people improve the quality and effectiveness of those interactions and relationships, or to enhance their social functioning (Sheafor, Horejsi 2015).
4.1. Social functioning: between capacities and expectations
The concept of social functioning is a broad one, yet it is a key to understanding the unique focus of social work and distinguishing social work from the other helping professions. Positive social functioning is a person’s ability to accomplish those tasks and activities necessary to meet his or her basic needs and perform his or her major social roles in the society. Basic needs include such fundamental concerns as having food, shelter, and medical care, as well as being able to protect oneself from harm, finding acceptance and social support, having meaning and purpose in life, and so on. Major social roles include, for example, those of being a family member, a parent, a spouse, a student, a patient, an employee, a neighbour or a citizen. A person’s social roles change through his or her life, and expectations associated with these roles differ somewhat depending on the person’s gender, ethnicity, culture, religion, occupation, and community (Bartlett, Saunders 1972; Birchwood, Smith, Cochrane, Wetton, Copestake 1990; Blakely, Dziadosz 2007; Navrátil, Musil 2000; Sheafor, Horejsi 2015; Van Boekel, Bulut, Stanke, Palma Zamora, Jang, Kang, Nickodem 2016; Weissman, Olfson, Gameroff, Feder, Fuentes 2001). To sum-up, the concept of social functioning focuses on the match or fit between an individual’s capacities and actions and the demands, expectations, resources, and opportunities within his or her social and economic environment. Social functioning is a concept in Social Role Theory (SRT), which has a history in the literature of sociology similar to that of social functioning in social work practice. It has enabled CT&R clinicians to focus on the here and now of a client's social role behaviours in social positions, with a view toward changing behaviour to a normative status that produces acceptance and/ or positive feedback from observers. The results have been an increase in a client's self-esteem, and the psychiatric condition not being a major factor in how the client lives her/his life (Blakely, Dziadosz 2007). Bartlett (1972) viewed social functioning as having an overarching concern in all social work fields and methods as well as agency service systems. She pointed out that most social workers, if asked to describe their profession, would emphasize two central ideas: 1) it is a helping profession and, 2) it is concerned with the social functioning of people (Bartlett, Saunders 1972). Although the social work profession is concerned with the social functioning 70 of all people, it has traditionally prioritized the needs of the most vulnerable members of society and those who experience social injustice, discrimination, and oppression (Sheafor, Horejsi 2015). At the same time, social functioning is traditionally linked to a concept of desired citizenship. The ability to function as a citizen requires rights to political participation, such as freedom of speech and the franchise, and also effective access to the goods and relationships of civil society. This entails ‘freedom of association, access to public spaces such as roads, parks, and public accommodations including public transportation, the postal service, and telecommunications’ (Anderson 1999: 318). Social functioning is also defined by Matoušek (2008) as the quality of social bonds of an individual consisting of the ‘relationship with people’, using ‘own potential’, fulfilling the requirements of the society etc. It reflects the ability of a person to respond to the demands of the society and also the demands of the society themselves. Problems with social functioning are the reason for a client to contact with social worker (Matoušek 2008). And as Běhounková (2012) states, basic problems with social functioning lay within the imbalances in cases of 1) expectations of surrounding environment being too high for a person to cope with; 2) insufficient support net and 3) insufficient specific competence of a young person. Though it might seem the opposite, functioning how it is understood in social work practice doesn´t imply ‘being able’ or ‘capable’. The analysis of human capabilities was provided by Martha Nussbaum (Nussbaum 2000), who followed previous work of Amartya Sen (Evans 2002). Nussbaum makes a clear distinction between human capabilities and functionings. Functionings are ‘beings and doings’, whilst capability is the capability to achieve a functioning. It is important, on this view, to acknowledge that it is possible to have a capability to achieve a functioning, yet choose not to do so. Sen (Evans 2002) provides the famous example of a wealthy individual who has chosen to fast to a degree where they are now undernourished. Nevertheless, although lacking the functioning of nutrition the individual in question does enjoy the capability. He simply has chosen not to convert the capability into a functioning. Therefore, as choice is linked to motivation and awareness, both play a crucial role in social functioning. There are at the same time more subtle connections between functionings. For example, attempts to secure one functioning, or in other words the cost of control, could often lead to increased vulnerability with respect to another (Wolff 2009). Wolff and de-Shalit (2007) also argue that doing well in one functioning will consequently lead to improvements in other functionings. We will examine different aspects of social functioning by re-viewing discourses used also in psychiatry.
4.2. Positive functioning in terms of ‘congruence’ by Virginia Satir
Virginia Satir believed that people are capable of continued growth, change and new understanding. Her work focused on self-worth and relationships in a family grew to be accepted as applicable to all human communication and growth – within a person, a family, a community or a company. The Satir Model she developed became a powerful framework for examining one´s own self, life situation and choices25. Satir (Satir, 1991; Satir, 1995; Satir, 2009; Satir & Satir, 1988) states that all human relationships are based on trust and love. When an event raises the question of whether that love and trust really exist, we activate our survival responses. Underneath the question of survival we can usually find the beliefs that others are in charge of our lives, that we could
25 See more on official website https://satirglobal.org 71 not cope with them, and that they define us. She presented the three elements that can be used in the concept of functioning – Self, Context and Other. Only by accepting one´s Self, accepting one´s self-worth, it is possible to connect with the Context, represented e.g. by life circumstances and conditions of here and now, or also society, culture, and Other. Other can be also a group or organization, yet for the purpose of this thesis Other in terms of another human being would fit. How we relate to all three of them defines our reactions to life changes. The hierarchical submissive/dominant explanation of relationships, which has taken over all around the world, as described by this practitioner treats people as better or worse and creates inequality and power differences. Therefore she is suggesting her growth model which is based on equality of value of each person. The balance between three mentioned elements brings congruency, which is communication that builds esteem of self and other, while our verbal and body language express the same message. It is whole communication in which the self, other and context are honoured. Such communication has potential to heal ruptures, break impasses, and build bridges between people (Satir, 1995). Congruence is seen both as a state of being and a way of communicating with oneself and others. Satir argues that high self-esteem and congruence are two of the main indicators of more fully functioning human beings. It is characterized also by appreciation of the uniqueness of self; a willingness to trust oneself and others and to take risks; the use of one´s inner and outer resources; and ultimately openness to intimacy and to change ( Satir, 1991). Hence, in addition to a state of being, congruence is also a way of conveying information, which is an important skill when it comes to social functioning itself. To respond congruently, when nonverbal and verbal message are in harmony and the one sending information is also in peace with oneself, is then a choice as well. As Virginia emphasizes, it is not another rule or a way to control the situation. Choice at conscious level is based on ‘awareness, acknowledgement, and acceptance of self, other and context, and of being in charge of self’ (Satir, 1991:73). Another approach that Satir stressed is the concept of change. Much of the transformation from dysfunctional to functional being involves adding to what we already are or know. The process of change includes looking carefully at what and how something happened and changing perceptions, expectations and feelings. Change is then also possible externally, meaning in how we react to external events. Satir emphasized that such change is possible for everyone. Examining our external responses means acknowledging our reactions without concern for whether they are bad or good. When we respect our feelings, we can make choices about how to handle them. Finally, she underlines that we all ‘have choices of reacting, coping and being. How we choose to cope often relates to our level of self-esteem.’ (Satir 1991). Already explaining the concept of social functioning and bringing clarity to its elements is due to diverse concepts challenging, yet even more challenges arise when assessing this process.
4.3. Assessing social functioning: selected elements
Not only the definition of mentioned term is quite vague itself, there is also a lack of assessing methods for embracing social functioning in the field of social work research. However, in the domain of psychiatry there have been already several attempts to categorize elements of social functioning of a person. Although they have been applied for projects focused on patients with mental diseases, schizophrenia or depression (Addington, Addington 2008; Altshuler, Mintz, Leight 2002; Birchwood, Smith, Cochrane, Wetton, Copestake 1990;
72
Heinrichs, Hanlon, Carpenter 1984; Weissman, Olfson, Gameroff, Feder, Fuentes 2001), I join in an argument of (Ondráčková 2016) that described above scales and questionnaires might be also of use in research with other less-opportunity target groups, such as in our case disadvantaged youth. They can serve as a starting point for understanding sub-categories of social functioning and further design of research. One of the most spread methods, The Life Functioning Questionnaire (LFQ), was presented also by Altshuller, Mintz a Leight (2002). They applied it in order to assess what they call a ‘functional outcome’, by its definition not far from the concept of social functioning. This instrument is 14-item, gender-neutral self-report questionnaire designed to assess role function in four domains: ‘workplace’, ‘duties at home’, ‘leisure time with family’ and ‘leisure time with friends’. For each domain, there are questions about the ‘amount of time spent in activities’; ‘interpersonal conflict or friction’; and ‘level of enjoyment’. For the duties at home and work sections, there is an additional self-assessment question about ‘performance’. The second one, Social Funcioning Scale (SFS), was developed by Birchwood et al. (1990) 1990) It is a 79-item scale designed to assess social functioning in schizophrenia. It asks about abilities and performance in seven areas: ‘social engagement’ (e.g., How much time do you spend alone?), ‘interpersonal communication’ (e.g., How many friends do you have?), ‘activities of daily living’ (e.g., How often do you prepare and cook a meal?), ‘recreation’ (e.g., How often do you play a sport?), ‘social activities’ (e.g., How often do you visit friends?), ‘competence at independent living’ (e.g., How able are you to handle your own money?), and ‘occupation/employment’. The next one is The Quality of Life Scale presented by Heinrichs in 1984 ((Addington, Addington 2008; Tobin, Drager, Richardson 2014). It measures adjustment on four subscales: ‘interpersonal relations’, ‘instrumental role functioning’ (role of worker, student, housekeeper/parent), ‘intrapsychic foundations’ (e.g., sense of purpose, motivation, empathy, emotional interaction), and ‘common objects and activities’ (e.g., owning a car, reading a book).The World Health Organization (in (Tobin, Drager, Richardson 2014) defines subjective quality of life as “individuals’ perception of their position in life in the context of the culture and value systems in which they live and in relation to their goals, expectations, standards, and concerns”. From this perspective we can evaluate quality of outcome using a person-cantered approach by looking at individual characteristics and support characteristics that are present in that person's environment. The practitioners (Addington, Addington 2008) further described The Assessment of Interpersonal Problem Solving Skills, which is a videotaped vignette test used to assess the social skills of schizophrenia patients. The test measures a subject's ability to describe an interpersonal social problem, to derive a solution to the problem, and to enact a solution in a role-played simulation test. This analysis implies a problem-solving model of social skills. First, recognizing the existence of a problem requires skills of problem identification. Problem description, the next step, is here understood as the ability to describe both the goal and the obstacle is. Together, problem identification and problem description are called receiving skills. Second, various alternatives must be identified, the consequences considered, and the best alternative chosen. These are processing skills. Finally, the solution must be enacted. Weissman and his colleagues (2001) introduced Social Adjustment Scale Self-Report, where social functioning and limitations in social activities were among eight concepts assessed. Questions assessing work functioning from three scales measuring social functioning were
73 focusing on the following themes: ‘working area’ and ‘economic aspects of life’, ‘interpersonal relations’ and ‘social activities of a person’(Weissman at. al., 2001:465). All the mentioned areas and elements within might bring a new, more detailed and profound perspective on how to conceptualize social functioning in social work field, and particularly what to focus on when researching it. My intention is to elaborate on them with the depth which qualitative research allows reaching. For this a further focus on needs and relationships, two frequently listed aspects of social functioning, is required.
4.4. Young people´s needs and relationships
An important aspect of a need is that it appears that the logic of need is always ‘person p needs x in order to y’. That is, need is a three-place relation between a person, a needed object or service, and a goal that can be better pursued with the needed object or service. However, if needs are understood in this way, it appears that there is something instrumental, or at least less than ultimate, about needs, for needs are always needs for something. Presumably for the elements of a flourishing life (Wolff 2009). The world wide known self-awareness promoter Anthony Robbins (2001) has gone beyond Maslow´s pyramid and introduced a reviewed theory on people´s needs. As he claims, there are six basic, universal needs that make people ‘tick’ and drive all human behaviour. Everybody has the same six needs, but how we value those needs and in what order, determines the direction of our life. The first human need is the need for certainty, a need to feel in control of what is happening and to know what is coming next so we can feel secure. It’s the need for basic comfort, the need to avoid pain and stress and to create pleasure. The higher the need for certainty, argues Robbins (2001), the less risk one will be willing to take or emotionally bear. The second one is the need of variety or uncertainty, as people also seek stimulation and novelty to add interest to their lives. This is the reason they try new things, take risks and gamble, even when they do not need to do so. The next one is connected to our need of meaning in our lives. People want to have purpose and direction, to be important for others. They may pursue gaining this in many different ways, from becoming well-qualified to being friendly and helping others. This need is called significance. Just as uncertainty balances certainty, so the forth need, consisting from love and outer connection with others, balances the inner need for significance of the self. The fifth one Robbins calls growth. According to him, beyond fulfilling the previous needs, people want to learn and to develop. As it is a higher need, one can live without it and some people seek little in way of growth, while others are highly motivated to make something more of themselves. And finally, combining growth and connection, contribution takes into account other people and the world at large. If a person is active in contributing to other individuals and groups, rather than just 'belonging', (s)he increases his/her own connection with them and it feels good as the sense of identity is expanded (Robbins 2001).Accordingly, then, there appears to be good reason to focus, at least in the first instance, on the elements that make up a flourishing human life. One of the most important already mentioned, if not the core one, is relationships. Compton (Compton, Galaway 1999, p. 175) says that ‘relationship doesn´t appear spontaneously out of some chemical reaction. It is evolving during concrete and purposeful situations.’ Author classifies following 7 elements among bases of such relationship (pp.176- 185): • care about the other one – not ‘liking him”, but being engaged in other´s issue in a way, that we offer our experiences and competencies within the established cooperation 74
• commitment and responsibility (which bring safety for the other one) • acceptance (to accept what the other one offers and to believe in his value and capacity for growth) • expectations (for other´s expectations to be fulfilled) • empathy (professional is able to ‘feel’ with the other one, but also take a distance) • authority and power • purity and congruence In literature of social work we could find several elements in the working relationship, which social worker should be aware of and deal carefully with them: • misuse of power (danger – will to have all the power, to decide and to force own ‘responses and solutions’ on the other one) (Guggenbühl-Craig, 2007). • projection (passing one´s own thoughts, feelings on the other person) (Navrátil, 2001) • too high expectations (when we move our own tempo and we ignore the tempo of others (Anderson 2009) • used language (specific words create the reality and affect our relationships) (Anderson 2009) • trust (effective relationship cannot function without trust) (Zastrow 1989) • boundaries (in order to function well, professional has to take care of him/herself and to keep boundaries) (Úlehla 2005) Giddens (1991) claims that in context of postmodernity people have to negotiate their relationships. A good relationship is then the one when a person engaged in is experiencing space for growth, self-esteem, individual desires and intimacy. Such a relationship needs to be voluntary, mutually kept and fulfilling. If those attributes are not present, it is socially acceptable to end a relationship. Dealing with obstacles and limited perceptions play a significant role in one´s well-being and maintaining fulfilling relationships. One of the theories working with obstacles and dividing them in categories has been also presented by Virginia Satir (2005). The subject of Satir´s exploration are also relationships and dealing with them. But most importantly it uses a structure, which is fitting the purpose of this self research project, since it covers all areas of possible intervening elements. Satir (2005) works with the term of limited perceptions put in practice as actions stopping individual from full usage of his/her potential and eventually not reaching his/her goal26. This way we can also understand obstacles as something stopping one from fully achieving what (s)he wants.
To summarize, the concept of social functioning is quite vague. It focuses on the match or fit between an individual’s capacities and actions and the demands, expectations, resources, and opportunities within his or her social and economic environment; and it is traditionally linked to a concept of desired citizenship. Positive social functioning is then understood as a person’s ability to accomplish those tasks and activities necessary to meet his or her basic needs and perform his or her major social roles in the society. The ability to function as a citizen requires rights to political participation, such as freedom of speech and the franchise, and also effective access to the goods and relationships of civil society. It could be also perceived as the quality of social bonds of an individual consisting of the ‘relationship with people’, using ‘own potential’, fulfilling the requirements of the society. And there exists a theory that doing well in one functioning might consequently lead to improvements in other functionings. The tricky part is that in social work field, there is a lack of assessing methods
26Here and further on I use this definition for defining „obstacle“ as well. 75 for embracing social functioning. However, in the domain of psychiatry there have been already several attempts to categorize elements of social functioning of a person. The Life Functioning Questionnaire, Social Funcioning Scale, The Quality of Life Scale or The Assessment of Interpersonal Problem Solving Skills aim to assess such aspects of life as ‘duties at home’, ‘leisure time with family, ‘social engagement’ , ‘competence at independent living’ or ‘economic aspects of life’. Two main aspects are emerging from these scales, namely relationships and needs of people. A reviewed theory on people´s needs by Robbins (2001) lists the need for certainty and the need of variety or uncertainty, need for significance and need of love and outer connection, and lastly contribution. In order to understand how young people link their experience in self-development training to their social functioning, all those listed needs, as well as elements of a healthy relationship (such as e.g. commitment and responsibility or acceptance) should be explored together with other attributes of social functioning. Also, the view of trainers who deliver a program and witness the process from the other perspective could bring an additional angle. And thus we should ask: How do disadvantaged young people understand the impact of self-development training on their social functioning? (RQ7) How do trainers understand the impact of self-development training on social functioning of disadvantaged youth? (RQ8) While social functioning is seen as a key component of a healthy and developing human being, participation of individuals is understood by many as an important, even essential, component of a healthy and developing society. And as it was already mentioned, human beings are born into groups and consequently into all sorts of communities and societies. Exploring impact on social functioning implies embracing participation as a certain level of the later.
76
5 Participation of youth
‘If not larger dreams for organizations, what? If not you, who? If not now, when?” Dee Hock
Learning more about support for social functioning and participation is important not only from the perspective that quality of life may be positively impacted, but also because “increased social participation and interaction with others may be a potential avenue for disadvantaged young people to build communication skills and social functioning” (Tobin, Drager, Richardson 2014). A model27 developed by (Tobin, Drager, Richardson 2014) and based on (Schalock 2004) describes the observed relationship between social functioning, social participation, and well-being or quality of life of a person. Social functioning, or use of social skills in natural settings with friends, peers, or family, is here considered to be bidirectionally related to social participation, and social participation is in turn bidirectionally related to quality of life, primarily through the interpersonal relations and social inclusion domains. This model demonstrates the importance of examining both components of a young person´s life when we are considering his or her well-being. Citizen participation in matters of community has long been considered an important cornerstone of community development. In recent years, participation has been mentioned as a key concept to address issues of inequality in the domain of public action as well as in academic research. It seems that participation have become both an indicator of a new form of disparity (inequality of participation) and a possible remedy to social inequality (Beuret, 2013:45). Just like inequality and disadvantage, it is a multidimensional notion (SocIEtY, 2013). It refers to a rather vague ‘catch-all’ term, an essentially contested notion which endorses a variety of meanings. Another difficulty lies in the fact that participation is far from being a value-free notion. So-called ‘raw participation”, meaning without any further specification, is almost always linked to something positive and desired. In this chapter we will uncover some of the aspects hidden behind this term.
5.1. Participation in what and how?
Exploring diverse resources provided by institutions and organizations in the field of social work provides into many definitions of participation as such. Organizations as UNICEF, British Youth Council or Save the Children for example see participation as a basic human right (Goździk-Ormel, 2008; Warren, 2007; (Percy-Smith, Thomas 2009). In EU-documents, participation either refers to participation in decision-making and political processes, or to participation in ‘education and the labour market’ (Eurostat 2018). Krebs (Krebs 2007) defines the principle of participation as a change in the position of a person when the individual is no longer a mere object in terms of social policy, but becomes a full-fledged, responsible and respected individual. And while e.g. Hofbauer (Hofbauer 2002) understands it as peoples' decision-making process and governance, Steinert (Steinert, Pilgram 2003)
27 See Attachment 11: Social functioning and social participation
77 claims that participation in the basic case means simply having access to the means of survival (food, shelter, clothing) that are socially produced, yet at the same time ‘participation in the highest case means access to the means of contributing to new inventions (experience, education, free experimentation, autonomous production) and the generalization of these’(Steinert 2003: 54). There is also a general way of understanding it, represented by (Adams 2008). According to his definition, participation includes all kinds of forms of involvement where people play a more active part, have greater choice, exercise more power and contribute significantly to decision-making and management. Participation may thus take numerous forms from passive and formalized attendance (e.g. of education, training or employment) to active exercise of rights and power in relation to one’s own life or community. This heterogeneity is also present in the academic field, where patterns of participation are associated with various outcomes (not always directly observable or quantifiable) according to the groups under focus, their social locations and living conditions. For instance, Eurostat defines participation as ‘social participation’ and suggests to measure it in terms of the overall level of social contacts and engagement in voluntary activities in local institutions and networks (Eurostat 2010), (Goździk-Ormel, 2008). All presented definitions are important, as they are also reflected in indicators and measurement scales used in cross-national surveys. Here social participation takes a hybrid form between social inclusion in local networks and ‘social capital”. The political dimension of participation clearly loses significance in this definition (Beuret, 2013:45). For the sake of deeper understanding we will unfold this concept step by step. To begin with, we can choose simplicity and follow the categories given by Hofbauer (2002), who distinguishes three types of participation: political, economic and social participation. The United Nations General Assembly (United Nations, Department of Public Information 2001) completes this list with cultural participation relating to different forms of art and expression (visual arts, music, film, dance,etc.).Within these categories, the first essential question to focus on is of who participates. This recognises that `the people’ are not homogeneous, and that special mechanisms are needed to bring in relatively disadvantaged groups. The second touches the level of participation, as the involvement of the local people in implementation is not enough. For a fully participatory project, they should according to some also take part in management and decision-making (Gunn 2005). There is therefore difference in modes that participation is taking. 5.1.1. Different faces of participation In policy rhetoric participation is regarded in as active involvement in the social sphere. It can be judged by the extent to which people can exert influence and bring about change. Advocates of participation say it has tended to fall into two main types. Firstly, it´s the consumerist approach, initiated by central government’s moves to the political right in the 1980s and pursuit of market ideologies in the provision of welfare. Then there is the democratic approach utilised by service user movements such as those developed by mental health survivors, disabled people and older people with an emphasis on civil rights at national and local levels (Beresford, Croft 2000).In its most formal dimension, the notion of political participation designates, in representative democracies, the participation in elections (Golombek 2002). For such minimalist definitions, democratic deliberation requires only the removal of external impediments and the granting of basic citizenship rights, such as freedom of speech. Participation amounts here to regular voting that is meant to control the elites from abusing their power and making ‘bad’ decisions (Beuret, 2013:45).
78
Others see participation intimately linked to processes of public deliberation. Drawing for example on Dewey’s (1999) conception, democracy takes the form of a collective ‘social inquiry’ where experiences are mediated through public discussion, and it is acknowledged as the best way to define what ‘desirable goals’ a society wants to follow. Following Dewey (1999), democracy amounts to a collective learning process, as a method of ‘organized intelligence’ in which conflicts of interest are brought ‘out into the open where their special claims can be discussed and judged in the light of more inclusive interests’ (Dewey 1999:56). In this perspective, unlike minimalist theories of democracy, deliberation should not be limited to formal political institutions, but apply in every arena where collective issues emerge in relation to people’s experiences, concerns and moral sentiments (Beuret, 2013). As Goździk-Ormel (2008) underlines, participation in the democratic life of any community is about more than voting or standing for election, yet about having the right, the means, the space and the opportunity and where necessary the support to participate in and influence decisions and engaging in actions and activities so as to contribute to building a better society. An interesting view is offered by Sullivan (2011), who is pointing out the direction of participation. Practitioner states that it is common to talk and think about youth engagement28 participation as a one-way action in which adults engage youth. But authentic youth engagement happens when youth and adults engage with each other. They work, play, talk, laugh, cry, create, think, celebrate, struggle and learn together. Along the way, they develop positive attitudes, knowledge, skills and habits. This human capital is understood as a ‘valuable currency to help both youth and adults achieve their own goals as individuals and contribute to a thriving society’ (Sullivan 2011). In her evaluation of youth–adult partnerships, also Camino (Camino 2005) found that activity quality and positive development outcomes were compromised when adults were not involved. Youth may lack the skills, expertise, and connections to social capital that may be required to successfully conduct research or an activity, which can lead to frustration and unintended disempowering outcomes. A young activist Ngampiboolwet (Golombek 2002) is contributing to this views by his own experience. At school, he writes, ‘A special teacher and my friends have also given me the energy and will to participate. Ms. Aeumporn is the only one to see through me and discover my potential. She gives me strength and opens up opportunities for me to develop myself through training and other activities...[ ]..The social environment itself stimulates my desire to participate in the problem-solving process that helps make this a better society’. Therefore, shared youth–adult cooperation within participation and action may be ideal for positive youth development and empowerment rather than youth-driven participation29. As the base concept of participation, the notion of civic participation is rooted in the normative assumption that the efficiency of any economic, management, and other social system as well as the legitimacy of democratic political systems depends on the involvement and participation of the public and does not simply derive from the output dispensed by the
28Sullivan (2011) uses the terms of youth engagement and youth participation as synonyms, yet they are not really.Youth engagement’ is a term related to youth participation that has emerged from North America. It’s now becoming more widely used in the Australian context. Academics Nenga and Taft made an atte attempt to conceptualize youth engagement as “activities in which children and youth enact a public-spirited commitment in pursuit of the common good”, a kind of balance between volunteerism and activism (Nenga and Taft 2013). 29Youth-driven participation was also presented by Hart (1992). For details, see the next sub-chapter.
79 system. Civic participation brings a great number of people with diverse sources of information and interests into the process of public decision making. Widespread and intensive public discussions enhance the critical assessment of different moral ideas, informing decision makers. As a result, civic engagement contributes to the quality of democracy. Through civic participation, people can influence social, cultural, and economic policies, as decision makers facing involvement of people have to continuously take into account the interests, rights, and opinions of members of society (Berg-Schlosser, Badie 2011). Both in literature and in common use of practitioners there is also a distinction between active and passive participation, meaning between individuals having a direct influence on matters which concern them, which is considering the importance of their involvement a desired outcome, and simply taking part in formal programmes (Kovacheva&Pohl, 2007). In academic and public debates, ‘full participation’ is often understood in terms of a ‘socially integrated’ recognised person. Which is closely linked to social exclusion as such, as e.g. referring to the EU project Coping with Social Exclusion (CASE), from the beginning of the 2000’s social exclusion can be understood ‘as the continuous and gradual exclusion from full participation in the social’ (Steinert, Pilgram 2003). At the same time, Sotkasiira, Haikkola and Horelli (2009) argue that if participation is used only as a tool for citizenship education, a great deal of resources and creativity may be lost. According to them, successful youth participation has also to be effective in terms of being able to create change in the lived realities of children and young people. Their concept of ‘effective’ participation introduces this process as the one having an impact on the transformation of young people’s living conditions and the learning of citizenship skills (Percy-Smith, Thomas 2009). Nevertheless, participation not only requires being included with formal participation rights, and access to those public arenas of participation. It is at the same time dependent on a variety of symbolic resources that are partly outside people’s control, and circumstances or certain life conditions. 5.1.2. Resources and conditions for participation Beside ‘soft’ and ‘hard’ skills, beside individual achievements like educational degree or vocational status, there are other factors that may function as disincentives - or, by contrast, provide incentives - towards one’s own involvement in participative action. Identity markers like race, class or gender may (or also may not) favour ‘a view of oneself as the legitimate source of reasons for acting’ (Anderson and Honneth, 2005: 146). These aspects, as authors claim, are in turn affecting person’s sense of self-legitimacy to have a say when it comes to take part to collective decision. Additionally, involvement of the individuals requires sustaining resources of identity recognition, which also entails the ‘social conditions of being accepted by others, such as the ability to appear in public without shame, and not being ascribed an outcast statusʼ (Anderson, 1999: 317). Alongside with symbolic resources, there are also several material conditions to participation, i.e. access to socially produced resources. They allow a certain level of security that constitutes a precondition for a person to participate in collective decision-making processes. According to Anderson (1999), it is a central feature for functioning as a capable citizen. The three central conditions for the deployment of the capacity for public deliberation were presented by Bohman (1996). Firstly, everyone has to be able to access the arenas of deliberation. What he means is not simply in the form of formal rights, but the effective ability to make one’s voice count. Secondly, in order to avoid arbitrary decision to be taken outside of public discussions, debate needs to be transparent and open. And finally the right
80 of free expression has to be done without fear of negative consequences. (Arnstein 1969) also introduced his understanding of crucial context for people to get involved. His argument lies within a belief that participation without redistribution of power is an empty and becomes a frustrating process for the powerless. It allows the power holders to claim that all sides were considered, but makes it possible for only some of those sides to benefit. It maintains the status quo. The principles of youth participation can be found in the concept of Marc Jans and Kurt De Backer (Goździk-Ormel, 2008). This model indicates that participation should be based on: (1) challenge, (2) capacity and (3) connection. Challenge here means a theme that should be directly related to the daily reality of young people and which should be captivating or interesting for them. By capacity authors emphasize the need of young people have some knowledge and skills in order to get involved. Projects or initiatives should therefore fit the capabilities of the young people concerned. Connection refers to the need to know that they are not alone and that they can identify with and count on a group or institution. One of the concepts providing theoretical grounds on which young people’s voices have to be taken seriously is capability approach. The capability approach insists that there is a strong connection between equality of opportunities and participation, as inequality or social injustice is seen as the main obstacle impeding effective democratic participation (Beuret, 2013). ‘Capability for voice’ relies on many conditions such as (Beuret, 2013: 54-55): a) the presence of cognitive resources that encompass not only rhetoric or argumentative skills, but also the ability to produce one’s knowledge and information about one’s specific situation; b) the availability of political rights, e.g. constitutional guarantees for formal participation, access to public arenas, freedom of speech; c) the availability of material and symbolic resources, considered here as primary conversion factors of political rights into real participation; d) the ‘readiness’ of interlocutors, in this case representatives of public administrations, third sector local agents, etc. to listen to the concerns expressed by young people. In other words, ‘voice’ refers to opportunities for youth to express their ideas and have input into programs, policies and practices that affect them (see Sullivan, 2011). While youth do not have decision-making authority in this type of engagement, they have authentic input. This means they have the power to influence programs and policies by sharing new perspectives, information and/or making a persuasive case to adults who truly consider their ideas as they make decisions (Beuret, 2013). These conditions are considered to a different degree in the following models and forms of participation, which are representing some wide- spread perceptions of this concept. 5.1.3. Models and forms of participation The world renown theory by Arnstein (1969) develops degrees of participation on the basis of power over different resources, making it particularly fitting for the assessment of concrete citizen participation programs. Arnstein uses a ladder metaphor to suggest that participation can be divided into eight types of participation that fall into three major categories: (1) non- participation, (2) tokenism, and (3) citizen power. A major assumption of Aronstein’s ladder is that participation types are linear, where citizen power types are preferred over non- participation types. However, it does not allow embracing participation in a broader way going beyond the punctual participation in specific programs.
81
Hart’s (Hart 1992) typology builds upon Aronstein’s ladder metaphor and adapts the framework to produce a typology called Ladder of Young People’s Participation that delineates a stepwise progression of participation in the context of youth and adult interactions. Similar to Aronstein’s ladder, this one includes varying degrees of non- participation and participation types organized in a linear fashion. The biggest failure is manipulation stage, when young people are invited to take part in the project, but they have no real influence on decisions and their outcomes and their presence is used to achieve some other goal, such as winning a local election, creating a better impression of an institution or securing some extra funds from institutions that support youth participation. The two highest participation types are then assumed to be the most desirable. The ideal state is described in shared decision-making and young people led and initiated rungs. Projects or ideas are ideally either initiated by young people, who invite the adults to take part in the decision- making process as partners, or adults might get invited to provide any necessary support, but a project can carry on without their intervention. In this ladder Hart is also introducing the term of tokenism, which occurs when young people are given some roles within projects but they have no real influence on any decisions. Basically, either on purpose or unintentionally the illusion is created that young people participate, when in fact they have no choice about what they do and how. Stange et al. (2008) are differentiating several forms of participation: open forms (i.e. forum and assembly), representative forms (i.e. youth council), project orientated forms, involvement in institutions (of the adults’ world), punctual and selective forms as well as the right to vote. The most common forms of youth participation observed in contemporary European societies are presented in the following list (Goździk-Ormel, 2008): • voluntary work; • participating in different forms of non-formal education; • peer education – involvement of young people in educating their peers (for example, health promotion programmes, awareness-raising campaigns, etc.); • being active in an organisation/club and taking responsibility for some areas of its work; • youth councils, parliaments, boards and other structures – a traditional way of participating in decision-making processes in the framework of international, national, regional or local authorities, schools, clubs, NGOs, etc.; • co-management systems existing in some institutions (for example, in the Directorate of Youth and Sport of the Council of Europe) where the decisions are taken by representatives of young people or youth organisations and representatives of the authorities on an equal basis; • consultations – used in decision-making processes to voice needs and concerns and to make proposals; • different levels of participation of young people in projects and activities (organised as well as not organised); • campaigning activities; • membership of political parties, unions, interest groups; • taking part in elections (both to vote and to be elected). The recent research has shown that the most popular organised activities in which young people participated were those linked to sports clubs. Over one third (35 %) of respondents across the EU reported having participated in sports club activities within the past year, while the next most frequent activity was being involved in a youth club, leisure-time club or any kind of youth organisation (22 %). Participation rates for young people involved in local 82 organisations aiming to improve the local community were lower (at 15 %), followed by those active in cultural organisations (14 %) and non-governmental organisations (12 %). Other types of organisation, such as those promoting human rights or global development (8 %), organisations on climate change and environmental issues (7 %), as well as political organisations or political parties (5 %) were less popular (Eurostat 2015c).The results from at the same time interestingly indicate that, despite a majority of respondents having participated in some of the listed organised activities, there remained a considerable proportion of 44 percent that had never taken part in such an activity (Eurostat 2015c), thus pointing out the importance of youth participation question once again. There have been also so-called ‘new forms of participation’ mentioned in diverse resources recently, as for example peer-to-peer networks, support groups, international meetings or using the Internet to gather information, express views or influence decision-making processes (Goździk-Ormel 2008). Kirby et al. (Kirby, Lanyon, Cronin, Sinclair 2003) have developed a non-hierarchical model of participation, where no one level is assumed to be better than another; instead, the type of participation activity will be determined according to the circumstances. The last model to be explained here is ‘ring of engagement’ developed by researches from Minnesota (Sullivan 2011). It differentiates four uses of the term ‘youth engagement’ that they found in the literature and in practice by youth development practitioners throughout the state: Participation, Passion, Voice and Collective Action. Benefits of participation are here strengthened through opportunities for connection to positive people and places. Passion includes commitment to ongoing growth and development in a particular area of pursuit. Voice requires opportunities not just to speak out, but for youth to be heard and taken seriously, to truly have input into decisions that affect them. The definition of Collective Action includes shared power and decision-making authority among youth and adults as they work together to achieve shared goals. While youth engagement is often thought of as a process of adults engaging youth, each of these rings involves youth and adults engaging with each other. They are linked at their core by ongoing, authentic youth/adult relationships. All four types of engagement in this model are also inter-dependent, and expanding and deepening opportunities in one ring can help to further development of the others (Sullivan 2011). All of these models highlight the need to understand the term ‘participation’ and prompt examination of what kind of participation is appropriate. They also support in distinguishing between different levels of empowerment afforded to young people. It is now generally accepted that the level of participation will vary depending on the decision being made and the capability and choice of the person. However, as Kirby (Kirby 2001) and (Adams 2008) underline, meaningful participation must be seen as a process, not simply an isolated activity or event. Therefore its dynamic over time must be taken into account as well. Seen at its simplest, there is a strong tendency for levels of participation to decline over time. This can be observed within groups as well as in individual´s life (White, 1996). This change may be due to disillusionment with the project, but it can also mean that people choose positively to use their time in other ways. There is a tendency in the rhetoric of participation to assume that it is always good for people to take an active part in everything. People do, however, have other interests, such as in leisure. People often participate for negative reasons: they do not have confidence that their interests will be represented unless they are physically there. And as (White 1996) has brilliantly pointed out, ”one can grow tired of being an `active citizen’.
83
5.1.4. Participation: tensions between theory and practice In addition to all described models, Ley (2013:70) points out that participation is located in different paradoxes and inconsistencies, which are often blanked out in the ‘good intentions of participation’. We can notice a tension between integration and exclusion. Participation cannot be equalised with (social) integration - that means, a socially integrated person would be participative and vice versa. There are different forms of participation which are not tending to be a ‘(good) part of the society’ as well as situations where people are deprived of ways to participate. In other words, there are cases where people should participate but they do not want to or where people want to participate but they should not. Then it is a question of legality vs. illegality. According to Ley, not every attempt to participation is located in the frame of legality. Taking an example of demonstrations and the case of squatting: they could be read as a form of participation, which is not always following the current law. In this sense, if we don’t want to fall behind a subject orientated view onto participation, unconventional forms of participation have to be kept in mind. And the last one is the ascription of the ‘political”, as in mainstream definitions, participation is often boiled down to political participation, as formulated in the EU Youth Strategy(EU Youth Monitor 2016) and in the EU indicators in the field of youth: ‘Young people’s participation in representative democracy and civil society at all levels and in society at large should be supported.’ In a broader sense of participation, which is also adopted in this thesis, it is therefore hard to define it as inherent politically or the other way round as initially apolitically. Both faces should be therefore examined. Several reports also emphasize the complex interaction between participation and inequality: it indeed cannot be assumed that more participation will necessarily result in less inequality or more efficiency in the public action designed to tackle inequality. It is not because people are allowed to participate that their voice will make a difference (SocIEtY, 2013). The crucial contest in this field, as Braye (Braye 2000) argues, is between rhetoric and reality. Simply said, talking and writing about participation, even understanding the concepts at a theoretical level, does not make them happen. The difference is created by the commitment and will of those with power to change the nature of injustice, and ‘the terminology is less important than the intention behind the actions it describes’(Braye 2000). In practice, the uses and abuses of participation may vary to a huge extend. (White 1996) introduced the following types describing people´s real involvement in a process of decision making and action upon it. When nominal participation occurs, the subjects of such ‘participation’ mainly serve the function of display; they justify the existence of a certain organization or a program. People are involved only in a formal way and they are benefiting from a certain way of formal inclusion and benefits of organization / project. The function of instrumental type is to serve the efficiency interests of outside funders. The people’s labour is taken as `local counterpart funds’, which guarantee the people’s commitment to the project. The funders’ input can be limited to financing raw materials, and the programme can therefore be far more `cost-effective’. Its function is to achieve a local facility, on the one hand, and cost-effectiveness, on the other. The next representative participation is there to allow the local people a voice in the character of the project, as it becomes means through which the people could express their own interests. Lastly, White mentions the transformative type. The idea of participation as empowerment is that the practical experience of being involved in considering options, making decisions, and taking collective action to fight injustice is itself transformative. It results into greater consciousness of what makes and keeps people poor, and at the same time into greater confidence in their ability to make a difference (White 1996).
84
After all I would like to emprise that I have to agree with Ley (2013) in a following conclusion: participation is not a catalogue of forms and models, but the exercise of influence on the entirety - which can be a political or social entirety - and therefore it is always tending to the (re)arrangement of the social. Putting it in a short and concise phrase, participation is about: having a stake, having a say, being engaged. It evolves in relationship to other individuals and to social contexts, and thus depends on trust and confidence young people have for the ones who work with them.
5.2. Young people and their active participation in society
The past decade has seen a growing acceptance of the importance of youth participation in decision-making, and successful efforts to engage young people in the political process have led to improved policy formulation, adoption, implementation and evaluation (Beresford, Croft 2000; Gunn 2005; Rimmer 2012; White 1996). Participation is assumed to strengthen young people's commitment to and understanding of the concepts of human rights and democracy. In reality, involving young people in the decisions that affect society is not always effectively practised. The nature of youth engagement ranges from manipulation and tokenism to the assumption of full responsibility for the design and implementation of programmatic responses. The idea of including young people in decisions that affect them is yet gaining acceptance. Service providers and public officials start to recognize that young people themselves have a huge part in improving their lives and their communities. For many nations, the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child marked a shift in rhetoric, public policy and day-to-day operations of youth-serving organizations. Even in these nations, however, many young people assert that their involvement remains marginal. Effective youth participation requires fundamental changes in the way societies perceive young people (World Youth Report, 2005(Annie E. Casey Foundation 2007). In order to function as an active citizen today, a person needs to be part of the community, to belong. And to be included in today’s community, a certain set of predispositions which also allows one the resources, time and energy to participate in different roles in society is needed. Rather than following collective patterns, young people increasingly have to take individual decisions, such as staying on in education, reducing aspirations if jobs are difficult to find, moving out from the parental home, etc. (Colley, 2007). By the overview of groups of children and young people who are often marginalized, presented also by Warren (Warren 2007) young people are already more likely to be excluded from participation opportunities if they are simply young enough. The author is then specifying more groups of young people in risk of having no access to participation: homeless, disabled, young travellers, refugees or asylum seekers, teenage parents, young people care leavers, unable to access education, training or employment, from a minority ethnic community, living in a rural area, young carers, gay or lesbian (compare with (Erasmus+ Programme Guide 2016). A simple pattern emerges: being involved and engaged leads to more opportunities to become involved and engaged. The reverse of this is also true, as those that are not involved often stay excluded, both in terms of real world opportunities and the way that they are thinking (Bessant 2004). The Foundation for Young Australian’s report indicates that while some young people had found a way to make a difference they knew others who had been excluded from these processes. These others may have cared deeply about their communities but did not feel that they had the opportunity to contribute (Bridgland Sorenson 2006).
85
Creating space for youth with less-opportunity to gain the effective capability to voice their problems (in accordance with their positional objectivity) and make sure that they count in the policymaking process is one of the important tasks of social policy. As Beuret (2013) underlines, the development of young people’s capabilities should not be pursued via paternalistic ways in which other people define their needs and the best ways to satisfy them, but requires the active participation of all young people, whatever their social background, educational level, gender, race, age and so on. According to the Foundation for Young Australians (Wierenga 2003), the following broad principles need to be used as the basis of youth participation strategies. Firstly, youth participation should be beneficial for young people: why should young people be involved and what do they stand to benefit from their participation? This includes consideration of: informed choice; enjoyment; relevance; developmental benefits, for instance social, political and economic awareness; educational opportunities both formal and informal; relationship opportunities such as chances for young people to build wider networks; support, supervision and monitoring; resourcing; and direct benefits such as payment for consultation on a specific issue (Wierenga 2003). These principles are also echoed by Bessant (2004). (Bridgland Sorenson 2006) mentions other issues to consider include: accountability (including monitoring and feedback); goals and strategies whereby young people identify the problem as they see it and examine alternatives; a sense of ownership for participants; value regarding their participation; negotiation concerning young people’s role and adult responsibilities and commitments and the avoidance of tokenism. She emphasizes the flexibility and space to incorporate young people’s value systems, as well as availability, commitments, language skills, culture, financial resources and access to transport for instance. Part of this attitude is acknowledgment that young people are not a homogenous group and recognition that some tasks need to be undertaken by trained professionals; ongoing evaluation; appropriate recruitment processes; and lastly, confidentiality. Youth participation then should recognise and respect the needs and contributions of all involved (Bridgland Sorenson 2006). Historically, youth participation was operationalized through two key dimensions: empowerment, understood as an output of participation both in terms of practical management as well as of the concrete ability to affect local development processes (Wong et al. 2010; Morciano et Al., 2014; Rimmer, 2012) and decision-making power concerning active participation in the planning activities of the centre (Hart 1992). The later we discussed previously, therefore a brief overview of empowerment would be useful. 5.2.1 Significance of empowerment Empowerment is a construct shared by many disciplines and arenas: community development, psychology, education, economics, and studies of social movements and organizations, among others. There is a very close link between participation and empowerment. According to Brohman (1996 in Lee & Charm 2002: 74) participation can be perceived as an equivalent of development of human potential in terms of empowerment, while Croft and Beresford (Beresford, Croft 1993) also see participation as a way to empowerment of the clients of social services. (Adams 2008) explains empowerment as the capacity of individuals, groups and/or communities to take control of their circumstances, exercise power and achieve their own goals. It is the process by which, individually and collectively, they are able to help themselves and others to maximize the quality of their lives. A fully effective approach to empowering people through participation cannot begin to function until they experience empowerment. And as Warren (2007) adds, usually in this context there is a focus on the positive connotations of power: gaining control and reducing dependency, gaining autonomy and maximising potential. Therefore, to promote young 86 person´s participation is an empowerment process through which they are offered opportunities to ‘take control of their circumstances and develop their potentials and capabilities in order to attain positive self-development’ (Lee & Charm, 2002:74). Page and Czuba (1999) bring a similar perspective, as they call empowerment a multi- dimensional social process that helps people gain control over their own lives. Accordingly, it is a process that fosters power (or the capacity to implement) in people, for use in their own lives, their communities, and in their society, by acting on issues that they define as important. They argue that there are three components of this concept: empowerment is multi-dimensional, social, and a process. It is multi-dimensional in that it occurs within sociological, psychological, economic, and other dimensions. Empowerment also occurs at various levels, such as individual, group, and community. By definition, it is at the same time a social process, since it occurs in relationship to others. It is a process that is similar to a path or journey, one that develops as we work through it. Murphy-Graham and Lloyd (2016) have created a typology of competencies that the ideal education fostering empowerment of young people should impart, meaning those are elements to focus on when we deal with creating space for empowerment. The four competencies they identify comprise: critical thinking and knowledge acquisition; productive competencies; personal competencies; and social competencies. By critical thinking, authors refer to the mode of thinking in which the thinker improves the quality of his or her thinking process by taking charge of the structures inherent in thinking and imposing intellectual standards upon them. Practitioners emphasize that it as a key to analyze the reality and it would support young people into understanding connections in society. Social competencies then should focus on pro-social values and allow youth to develop feelings of social connectedness, friendships, networks, respect for human rights, negotiating skills, collaborative skills, leadership skills, and knowledge of social systems and local and global issues. According to Murphy-Graham and Lloyd, experiential forms of education and service learning are particularly important for this area, as young people will only develop these social competencies if they are able to work and learn to form relationships with others both inside and outside of their communities. The third, productive competencies are there to support young people´s abilities to produce, to generate, and to create in economic and social spheres. Concrete examples of productive competencies in the economic sphere include for example environmental stewardship, financial literacy or entrepreneurship. And finally, empowering education should promote a number of processes they have labelled ‘‘personal’’ because they pertain to the thoughts, habits, and dispositions of the individual. Among these are self-awareness, self-care, and personal development, which is also a subject of examination in this research. Empowerment is often seen as an agenda controlled `from below’. This is because it must involve action from below. However supportive, outsiders can only facilitate it, they cannot bring it about. Empowerment may also be identified as the interest in participation `from above’, when outsiders are working in solidarity with the poor or disadvantaged (White 1996). Many youth organizations state empowerment of youth as their core mission, such as YMCA, AIESEC, World Organization of the Scout Movement, Global Youth Action Network, American Youth Congress and other. For example Youth Empowered Solutions is cantered on the model that is underlining the following focus on what to create with and for youth: developing skills, gaining critical awareness, and participating in opportunities that are necessary for creating community change (YES! 2014). There are also intercultural aspects to be considered in the field of participation and empowerment. While in the West empowerment is associated with individualism and the 87 rights of the individual, in many developing societies mutual help and traditions of family life and community are as important. Whereas interpretations of participation in ‘Western’ countries have tended to emphasise the expression of views in public sector decision-making, in majority world countries participation often has a wider meaning of ‘active contribution to the family and community’ (Adams 2008; Percy-Smith, Thomas 2009). However, emancipatory ideas are not bound by geographical boundaries and the growing social and financial freedom of people to travel, and in addition the spread of internet, has accelerated existing trends towards their global accessibility. Empowerment concepts and practices are not the invention solely of the developed world, they cross regional and national boundaries and provide strategies to tackle problems posed by global inequalities. The problems of Western industrial societies tend to arise from overproduction and overconsumption, whereas in developing countries the reverse is true (Adams 2008). Experiences from across five countries located in the Asia-Pacific region presented by (Percy-Smith, Thomas 2009) also reveal an ambiguity in the interpretation and implementation of participation. Cultural contexts structure adult–young person relations in different ways, so that it cannot be assumed that the meaning of ‘participation’ in a liberal democracy is the same as it is in a country with a hierarchical system of social relations, a predominantly communist country, or one racked by internal strife. In each of these countries the concept of citizenship builds up relations differently, giving space to a variety of ways in which participation is interpreted and enacted. Whereas for some children and young people participation may open up new opportunities and choices, for others, living in circumstances of conflict or poverty, it may be essential for survival. For the latter, participation can be a means by which to access other rights in the daily struggle to meet individual needs. (ibid.) Therefore what is needed is to take cultural and regional aspects of this process. Rocha (1997) used the term ‘empowerment’ and devised a ladder where the intended arena of change shifts from the individual through to community based on classification of power experiences. What Rocha effectively identifies is that atomistic individual empowerment is a base of socio-political empowerment. The crucial realization brought by this author is that individuals need to understand the nature and terms of their action and engagement, so that they can make informed choices. 5.2.2. Domains, barriers and outcomes of empowerment Empowerment in practice must be realized in all domains – self, individual, group, organization and community. As (Annie E. Casey Foundation 2007) stated in their document about international empowerment of youth, it happens when ‘young people become agents of change instead of targets to be changed’. The recent use of the term recognizes that empowerment cannot simply be given or granted to another. People can only empower themselves, although others may facilitate the empowerment process (Staples, 1999). To be empowered therefore requires an internal attitude of ‘giving oneself permission to experience personal power, which then extends outward into the world, influencing, manipulating, and changing whatever is necessary to feel in charge of one's own destiny’(Jones de Almeida 2010). Self-empowerment is the central domain of empowerment and is the area where we begin to work on ourselves and take control of our lives. Self-empowering process means taking control of one’s life, learning, updating and improving skills, taking risks, building confidence, assuming power over personal circumstances, and developing the resilience to overcome inevitable challenges to come. There are many roads to self-empowerment, depending upon an individual’s personal objectives, inclinations, and values (Irving 2015). The person who feels and is empowered is more likely to have the motivation and capacity to empower other people and to be empowered by them. Surprisingly though, this form is one of 88 the most neglected aspect of empowerment theory and practice (Adams, 2008:82). This also the reason to focus on examining such methods as Synergy self-development training and their contribution to self-empowerment itself. Several barriers to participation and empowerment have been noticed in practice and need to be mentioned. (Danso, Greaves, Howell, Ryan, Sinclair, Tunnard 2003) report about some of them such as: negative attitudes of those who tries to participate and became disillusioned because it felt tokenistic; too little time devoted to setting up participation, leading to failure; lack of appropriate methods of participating and lack of integration between these and established structures and lack of information being given to those participating. Also social and traditional values continue to be the main stumbling block for youth participation, as well as inequality and discrimination among young people themselves. Younger persons, in some contexts girls, young people from lower caste, class or income groups, youth with disabilities or from minority ethnic groups may participate less as older, male, more educated young people tend to dominate. This domination may be reinforced by adults, especially educators, who often select the more vocal, confident youth to represent their peers (Percy-Smith, Thomas 2009). Adultism, or a pattern of adult behaviours and attitudes toward young people based on adults’ beliefs that they are better, more advanced, and more highly developed than youth, might be also a strong barrier to youth engagement. It can result into withholding information and access to benefits or rights with the belief that youth are too immature or incapable or using them properly, acting on behalf of young person without the individual’s informed consent, making judgments and decisions based on generalizations and stereotypes instead of dialogue and response to individuals and actual situations, and providing barriers to the participation and voices of young people as individuals or as a group (Annie E. Casey Foundation 2007). Another concept, meaningful youth participation, has a strong correlation to empowerment and was presented by Goździk-Ormel (2008). It demonstrates that research associates participation with a wide range of positive developmental outcomes for youth, including physical health, positive psychosocial development, enhanced academic achievement, mastery of specific skills, reduction in violence and risk-taking behaviour, and positive identity development (Gunn 2005; Resnick, Bearman, Blum, at Al. 1997). Participation, especially in diverse groups, can build a sense of belonging and social trust, a belief that ‘most people are fair, helpful, and trustworthy’ (Flanagan 2003, p. 167) and widen one’s sphere of others to whom we feel a sense of connection and responsibility. Goździk-Ormel (2008) then collected a whole list of attributes which make participation of young people meaningful. To mention some selected ones, meaningful participation is when it: makes a positive difference in the lives of young people, makes young people heard, stimulates young people to develop new skills and/or gain more confidence, stimulates young people to take responsibility for their own actions and decisions, supports them in understanding how democracy works and how it should work in real life and creates space for young people to use their talents and strengths for the benefit of the whole community or organisation. Common themes that emerge from the models that have been presented thus far include: participation is not a short term process; adults need to consciously cede their organisational power to young people at some stage to ensure that participation becomes meaningful; and taking into account young people´s voice is the core of the whole process. And as (Bridgland Sorenson 2006) concludes: ‘if these principles are honoured, then meaningful participation becomes more achievable’. Mainstreaming such youth participation then means incorporating their voices into all decisions as a matter of course (Golombek 2002). New resources and especially ICT have significantly helped in making the later possible.
89
5.2.1. Changes in 21st century: ICT and cyber-participation Bridgland Sorenson (2006) further claims that it is no longer adequate to see participation simply in terms of the ‘components of participation’ repeated in various publications and embraced over the past years, hence the means and modes of communication of young people have changed. As (Percy-Smith, Thomas 2009) state: ‘Rather than T-shirt slogans of ‘make love not war’, these young people are using the internet and mobile phones and other media to ‘culture jam’, beating many unwitting multinationals and global organisations at their own game.’ Participation is neither an attitude of an individual, nor a must for young adults but a range of opportunities (Ley, 2013). While the importance of participation and its role in a young person's life has not diminished, its nature has changed. Youth participation today tends to be issue-specific and service-oriented. Reluctant to join formal organizations or councils, many young people prefer to take advantage of open opportunities created by communities and institutions to become involved in addressing the issues that particularly concern them. In line with this trend, new participatory structures have emerged that tend to be based on collaborative networks and common interests. One popular option is Internet-based activity involving the exchange of ideas and information and the coordination of plans and programmes for localized action. Through cross-boundary websites and video-conferencing, chat boards and webcams, ICT (information and communications technology) has facilitated the development of new forms of open, non-hierarchical and creative channels of cyber- participation. Young people are gradually becoming more aware of resources outside their communities and of opportunities to share in and reinforce each other's work. These new models can provide more young people with opportunities to become active in decision- making and in shaping their societies (World Youth Report, 2005). While many connect ICT mainly with mobile and more advanced technologies, a more useful definition of the term is one encompassing all technologies that enable the handling of information and facilitate different forms of communication. Clearly, ICT has become a significant factor in development and is having a profound impact on the political, economic and social sectors in many countries, while also becoming core components of youth activism and civic engagement. These technologies are used by youth movements for communication and coordination, allowing instantaneous contact between young activists, and also serve to strengthen the sense of e-solidarity among individuals and groups with different agendas. In many countries, the Internet is also the least-controlled information medium and can be a powerful tool for activists, contributing to increased transparency, the development of civil society. Nonetheless, while young people in general are very eager to use them and freely do so, many poor youth are unable to take advantage of new technologies because of access limitations or cost factors (Golombek 2002). To conclude, new ICTs have caused important changes in people’s representation of communications and in their communicative behaviours in the past decade. The use of increasingly more sophisticated new devices made it possible to extend the space and time limitations of formerly existing situations of communications, resulting into restructuring these situations and radically modifying the communicative relationships among the users. Also people’s attitudes, needs and behaviours concerning information and communication are undergoing a particular change. It has largely been debated both in the scientific community and in the larger public, whether the use of new ICTs result in more democracy or more leisure in everyday life; whether it is global or local participation that gets enhancement through these new technologies and how such developments concern different societies or different layers of the same society. Certain researchers fear that problems of access to new 90
ICTs reinforce political, economic and cultural cleavages, condemn large publics to passive consumption of never-ending entertainment and hamper the functioning of the public sphere by introducing divergent developments, causing the deepening of the digital gap as well as fragmentation of publics. They point to the risk of loosening social cohesion and weakening intensity of social organization and solidarity (Ludes 2008). What is important to focus on is that the digitalisation process is a two-sided coin. Although it has shifted the way we live our daily lives, it has also opened up the so-called digital divide. Access to the internet is now within anyone’s reach, however the skills required to use it to its fullest extent, are not (Eurostat 2015c). More optimistic social scientists, on the contrary, believe that new ICTs ‘contribute to the construction of more conscious societies, where active and interactive citizens can easily participate in the public sphere, in public decision-making because the new technological development provides them with new devices, new forms and spaces for communication and debate’ (Ludes 2008). In this perspective, new ICTs foster democratic development and the construction of a global world-society, with common universal values. It is not the task of this thesis to answer which side is right about its arguments, yet also this form of participation needs to be considered in the following research. Çoban (2015) is bringing some findings about cyber-participation in a context of political participation. Since the arise of Facebook´s popularity, but even before starting with blogs or chat-rooms as means of online participation, an enormous number of young people interact as a part of so-called Web 2.0 community. As Çoban states, cyber-participation is not based on traditional socioeconomic factors and unlike traditional participation is driven not by ideology, but engagement and political curiosity. What might be interesting to explore is the assumption that this author brings together with suggestion of further research: ‘the cyber political discourse may also lead to other forms of civic participation’ (Çoban 2015). Adopting his point of view, online participation would be any form of participation taking place online. It could be supporting some social cause, receive or send information about certain campaigns, organize events via internet etc. While these activities are happening on internet, there is still a connection to traditional participation offline. Cyber-participation is rather a new outlet, it is not about single activities, but about growing engagement within a community through social networking websites, which help people keep their ties (ibid.). Certain scholars (Heller 2008) regard the increasing participation in online communities as a false escape into non-existent communities, where only anonymous, faceless and nicknamed individuals take part in fake interactions. They do not believe this kind of participation can lead to the development of community identity or public consciousness. At the same time, as Heller (2008) informs, several international research projects have found evidence that participation in various communications communities through ICTs increase communication competence and skills and promotes the accumulation of social capital. It also reinforces the feeling of responsibility towards the community. The fact that many ICT users search for reliable information filtered by the online community shows that ICT use increases social trust. Cyber-participation seems to reinforce so called ‘glocal’ (both global and local) activities (Wellman 2001) and 40% of people active in cyber-communities report having more intensive participation in local communities as well, even if this does not always mean face-to-face presence. 5.2.2. Role of self-perception and motivation Youth development activities emphasize positive self-identity and outcomes through opportunities for growth and development of individual capacities. The focus is on promoting
91 personal and social assets, not treating or preventing negative outcomes (Annie E. Casey Foundation 2007). Young people increasingly have to take individual decisions, their motivation thereby becomes a crucial factor. Their self-perception at the same time defines what choices they will go for and what opportunities they would use. Another important issue is thus the link between participation (and voice) and the issue of motivation and capacity to aspire, as obviously more voice and participation does not necessarily coincide with more motivation and capability to aspire (SocIEtY, 2013:8). Generally speaking, aspiring has to do with how people frame a desirable future, and what they regard as being a 'good life'. Aspirations relate to ‘wants, preferences, choices and calculations’, while immediate wants are correlated to a 'bigger picture', a system of ideas (Baillergeau & Duyvendak, 2013). The relevance of individuals’ attitudes and intentions is also increasingly entering the policy debate. In fact, policy-makers are increasingly considering targeting young people’s educational attitudes and intentions to enhance their educational attainment and foster social mobility (Rampino, Taylor 2012; SocIEtY 2013). Passionate engagement involves becoming engrossed in some activity. Doing the activity becomes rewarding in its own right, regardless of the outcome or external rewards like social approval, money or power. This kind of engagement is marked by high levels of attention, concentration, enthusiasm and commitment (Sullivan 2011). Some researchers agree (Benson, 2008; Csikszentmihalyi, 1997; Damon, 2008) that activities which enrich the common good are those most enriching for the individual, because they help us feel part of something greater than ourselves. A sense of purpose beyond one’s own self-interest has been found to build resilience in hard times, and to help young people control destructive impulses. As Colley (2007) emphasizes, change in participation does not occur mechanically by ‘putting’ young people into education or work, but depends on their individual decisions to engage actively in constructing their biographies. This is where motivation comes into play, and relates to a currently significant policy approach, that of ‘activation”. In order for youth to get engaged into society they need to find that motivation, their affection for being a part of solution instead of a problem, and their own meaning of being involved. Psychology explains motivation as the result of the interaction between interest and experiences of self-efficacy. Motivation can be intrinsic if a goal is self-chosen, or extrinsic if it is imposed by someone else. The latter suggests that motivation is less sustainable because it is only effective as long it is needed to avoid the negative incentive (Bandura, 1997). According to the Self Determination theory (SDT), motivation can be understood along a continuum that represents a distinction in the degree to which one acts for internal or external reasons or rewards. While intrinsic motivation is here seen as the expression of the natural human tendencies of seeking to learn, to explore, to act autonomously, to connect with others, and to experience competence, extrinsic motivation is where individuals simply aim to satisfy external demands to pressure or some kind of social reward (Ryan, Deci 2000).Ryan & Deci (2000) also state that individuals who don´t have motivation, or have so-called amotivation, lack any intention to act and just ‘go through the motions’ rather mechanically. An interesting concept of ‘flow”, which is a central concept in positive psychology, was brought by psychologist (Csikszentmihalyi 1997). It is about engagement in absorbing and purposeful activities that make us forget time. Flow is different from pleasure – simply doing things that are enjoyable like watching television or shopping – because flow activities are demanding and take up all our concentration and attention. According to Csikszentmihalyi, who identified the term, the world is chaotic. Therefore finding and constructing order and being engaged in a meaningful and purposeful activity is an essential component of flow. Flow activities can enable us to flourish (Csikszentmihalyi 1997). Individuals need to use 92 their highest character strengths and talents in order to achieve flow. Hence the importance of enabling young people to identify their highest or signature strengths and talents and enabling them to use them more often in order to achieve flow. The engagement and concentration which are critical elements of flow are also the essential triggers for motivation, and if youth doesn´t experience flow they are at risk of becoming disaffected. On the other hand there are effortless shortcuts to experiencing positive emotion, that is, pleasure, through shopping, watching TV or even, on pathological level, taking drugs for example. However, the pleasure that accompanies these pleasures is extremely short-lived. This happens due a process that positive psychologists call ‘adaptation’ – we get used to the good and the bad things that happen to us. This finding are used to support the following statement: while pleasure itself does not lead to motivation and well-being, flow does (MacConville, Rae 2012). Colley (2007) further adds that while motivation is often viewed in policy contexts as an individual characteristic, it results from experiences which are structured by unequal access to resources and opportunities. There have been also conclusions among practitioners that no matter how many programs youth in that state would be offered, that they would be of no use unless there would be an inner decision of these young people to go for a change (Colley, 2007). The task of social work in this case is to support youth in finding their motivation and to work with their own resources and opportunities. And exactly in this task self-development approach, used in international training with all the focus on improving one´s self- understanding and different dimensions, might play a key role. A great in its simplicity and depth example was shown in the visualisation of young people’s participation called Participation Tree30, drawn up by a group of Nicaraguan participation workers in 2007 (Percy-Smith, Thomas 2009). While the ‘seed’ from which this Participation Tree grows is seen as the family home, the first setting where the young person learns to participate and be a part of the community, the ‘trunk’ that holds up the whole tree is made up of all the learning processes through which young people gain awareness of their rights, raised self-esteem, awareness of themselves as members of society and rights-holders, as competent and capable of achieving anything in life; ability to express themselves and to organise. The ‘branches’ of the tree are then the various activity groups and spaces in which youth gradually develop their active and pro-active participation in tune with the growth of their knowledge and experience. This example coming from young people themselves emphasizes the fundamental importance they see in development of a human being as a base of participating practice.
We have paid attention to participation as a notion endorsing a variety of meanings. While some international organizations see it as a basic human right, some other refer to it in decision-making and political processes or in education and the labour market, and in the basic case it could also mean simply having access to the means of survival. We can distinguish four main types of participation: political, economic, social and cultural participation. The most common forms of youth participation observed in contemporary European societies vary from voluntary work or peer education to taking part in elections. There is also a distinction seen between active and passive participation, meaning between individuals having a direct influence on matters which concern them, which is considering the importance of their involvement a desired outcome, and simply taking part in formal programmes. In academic and public debates, ‘full participation’ is often understood in terms of a ‘socially integrated’ recognised person, et some argue that participation cannot be
30 See Attachment 10: Participation Tree 93 equalised with (social) integration, as there are cases where people should participate but they do not want to or where people want to participate but they should not. It is at the same time dependent on a variety of symbolic resources such race, class or gender, or also access to socially produced resources. The capability approach insists that there is a strong connection between equality of opportunities and participation, as inequality or social injustice is seen as the main obstacle impeding effective democratic participation. Within this concept applied on working with youth, Hart’s (Hart 1992) typology is most known. The ideal state is here described in shared decision-making and young people led and initiated rungs, while tokenism is to be avoided. Another model, ‘ring of engagement’, contributes to explaining of benefits of participation, which are here strengthened through opportunities for connection to positive people and places. It also emphasizes commitment to ongoing growth and development and shared power and decision-making authority among youth and adults. A so-called meaningful participation then must be seen as a process, not simply an isolated activity or event. Therefore the dynamic over time must be taken into account as well. Participation is believed to strengthen young people's commitment to and understanding of the concepts of human rights and democracy. However, in reality, involving young people in the decisions that affect society is not always effectively practised. As Warren (Warren 2007) puts it, simply being young is enough to be excluded from participation opportunities, but also being homeless, disabled, young travellers, refugees or asylum seekers, teenage parents, young people care leavers, unable to access education, training or employment, from a minority ethnic community, living in a rural area, young carers, gay or lesbian. And a pattern has been noticed, that being involved and engaged leads to more opportunities to become involved and engaged, while the reverse of this is also true. Experiential forms of education and service learning are thus particularly important for this area, as young people will only develop these social competencies if they are able to work and learn to form relationships with others both inside and outside of their communities. Empowering education should promote a number of processes they have labelled ‘personal’, including personal development. There are also intercultural aspects to be considered in the field of participation and empowerment, as while in the West empowerment is associated with individualism, in majority world countries participation often has a wider meaning of ‘active contribution to the family and community’. So first of all, individuals need to understand the nature and terms of their action and engagement, so that they can make informed choices. Especially because today youth participation tends to be issue-specific and service-oriented. Reluctant to join formal organizations or councils, many young people prefer to take advantage of open opportunities created by communities and institutions to become involved in addressing the issues that particularly concern them. One popular option is Internet-based activity involving the exchange of ideas and information and the coordination of plans and programmes for localized action, resulting into cyber-participation. Nonetheless, many poor youth are unable to take advantage of new technologies because of access limitations or cost factors. The last important aspect to recall is that participation is not a short term process and young people´s voice is the core of the whole process. And derived from the presented arguments, the last two questions to support answering the MRQ arise: How do disadvantaged young people understand the impact of self-development training on their participation? (RQ9) How do trainers understand the impact of self-development training on participation of disadvantaged youth? (RQ10)
With all the questions ready to be asked it is time to introduce the way of gathering the answers. 94
6 Understanding impact
Realizing what youth is facing nowadays, having an understanding of certain challenging circumstances that in this thesis are called less opportunity and having an overview of a self- development as a method being used to address the needs of young people dealing with such obstacles, we could possibly start discovering what is their experience as participants of Basic Synergy trainings and how does it connect to their social functioning and participation. Yet firstly a definition of impact is necessary.
6.1. Variations of impact
The Centre for High Impact Philanthropy’s multidisciplinary team examined over 50 sources of information, including available policy briefs, foundation materials and academic research, which served as a valuable resource for stating what impact is in the context of this study. As the authors of the final report of this examination Wallman-Stokes, Hovde, McLaughlin and Rosqueta (2014:2) claim, “the definition of impact depends on who is talking and who is listening”. As it turned out, for most organizations and people involved, impact implies a change brought about by some sort of action. At the same time the effect of change is generally presumed to be positive. Still, there is no single right answer to what exactly impact is and how it should be measured, and to add to the general confusion observed, “impact” is often confounded or used interchangeably with “outcome” in practice. A useful suggestion then would be to simply define “impact” clearly at the start (Wallman-Stokes, Hovde, McLaughlin, & Rosqueta, 2013). Several discussions of impact implicitly or explicitly refer to what evaluation professionals call the impact, value, or results chain which represents actions and resources with their expected effects. Those effects are described as outcomes leading to impacts (Wallman-Stokes et al., 2014). An example of a results chain adapted for this research is presented in Attachment 6. Applying six varying characteristics of impact that (Hearn, Buffardi 2016) introduce to increase understanding when using this term, I will narrow its usage for the purpose of this thesis. In 1) application, the focus is on describing actual observed or measured change; in 2) scope, an open perspective of impact is taken and I am looking at as many variables as it makes sense so as to make a useful judgement; 3) regarding level of change, I will be focusing on impact at the levels of individual citizens, households, communities, organizations and society structures; 4) in degrees of separation, or directness of the link between the intervention and impact, there is a need for empirical evidence for causal links based on the interpretations of participants themselves; 5) in the context of immediacy of change, impact in this study is observed after at least half a year after participation in a training, so there is time for it to emerge or to become more tangible; and finally regarding 6) homogeneity of benefits, rather than a uniform property, impact is here understood as varying across population with different experiences of benefits, though similarities will be given attention.
6.2. Exploring impact
While hard skills training has more tangible and easily measurable results, soft skills training evaluation is acknowledged as difficult and challenging by many researchers (McLean, Moss 2003). Additionally, it has been noted in practice with evaluating diverse social programs that 95 beneficiaries are often left out of the usual impact measurement process. Wallman-Stokes, Hovde, McLaughlin and Rosqueta (2014) argue that this could occur mainly due to a growing focus on externally verifiable metrics, such as income, that can be more easily obtained and assessed for statistical significance. Such tendencies present another absence of voice of youth, as well as the accompanying issues of power dynamics. In my thesis I have decided to take an open perspective on impact and to pursue the goal of bringing up the participant- reported impact. Another challenge arises - how do we know whether an intervention had an impact? What to observe in the experiences of young people so that we can identify effects of the method on their lives? The next two models support in finding the solution to these tasks. 6.2.1 Kirkpatrick´s four levels Donald Kirkpatrick, past president of the American Society for Training and Development (ASTD), developed in 1959 what is referred to as the four levels of evaluation specifically for training programs, which has been widely used ever since. This model proposed four criteria of training evaluation: reactions, learning, behaviour, and results. While the reaction level measures trainees’ satisfaction for a training program, the learning level is defined as principles, facts, and techniques understood and absorbed by the trainees. The behavioural level assesses changes in behaviours or performance and the results level gauges improvements in tangible individual or organizational outcomes such as increased productivity, morale, or teamwork (Kirkpatrick, Kirkpatrick 2006; McLean, Moss 2003). In my study, I am searching for impacts on all four levels. The aim is to discover how satisfying is participation in self-development training for young people and what and how much they learned from the course; to investigate their self-reported levels of change in terms of attitudes, communication and relationships as well as the results for themselves that they link with the training. 6.2.2. Benett´s hierarchy There is another relevant source to take into account when it comes to impact. Claude Bennett (Benett 1975) brought into practice his hierarchy which depicts the range of impact´s elements that might be observed in a program. Considering the purpose of this research, which is not an extent evaluation of self-development training as such but exploration of young people´s unique experiences with the method, measuring such elements as inputs or activities and people involvement is not given primary attention in this case as they are more linked with the design and logistics of the intervention. While conducting my research, the main subjects of analysis from the mentioned hierarchy throughout the emerging themes will be: • reactions - what participants thought of and felt during the program • KASA (Knowledge, Attitudes, Skills, Aspirations) change • practice change - improved methods of action adopted • end results - broader effects and benefits resulting from changes in practices According to Keith G. Diem (Diem 2004), impact doesn’t really happen until at least the “KASA Change” level and isn’t as significant until the “Practice Change” and “End Results” levels. In making a decision on how exactly to evaluate impact with participants, practitioner offers three ways: to ask them, to observe them or to test them. Among the methods and tools that can be used to measure he lists first of all a) survey research (asking) in forms of written questionnaires, program follow-up surveys and longitudinal studies, interviews, testimonials, & case studies; then b) observations (observing) such as direct observation of program participants (by program leader or by objective observers/recorders) or reviewing information 96 from other sources, such as reports; and finally c) simple experimental designs (testing) like pre-test, post-test (Diem 2004). Out of the proposed I decided to use the first two (see the following chapter Methodology). To summarize, in my study by impact I mean “change in knowledge, attitudes, behaviours, skills, aspirations and practice of the participants of Basic Synergy self-development training brought about by an action of participating in this training, as well as their reactions to it and end results”. In the next chapter I will describe in detail how exactly the research to uncover this impact on social functioning and participation of young people was prepared, conducted and reflected upon.
97
6 Methodology
‘Highly organized research is guaranteed to produce nothing new.” Frank Herbert
Before starting any research and even picking up techniques fitting the purpose of a study the most, it is helpful to realize, which is my personal approach as a researcher. At the same time, considering the field and target group of this research, several details need to be taken care of. Decision about the methodology is a crucial one for research, as each of the available methods has its pitfalls and strengths. How we gain needed information affects its amount, its depth and its credibility most of all.
In this chapter, I explain how I have chosen a strategy, method and techniques for my research (6.1), how I proceeded with research sample (6.2) and operationalisation (6.3). Then I present data analysis (6.4), how validity (6.5) was embraced and what I recognized as reflections of limitations of this research (6.6). Further I give space to explaining how ethical context (6.7) was kept and to share how I reflect my position as a researcher (6.8). Finally I include reflections on the context of this study (6.9) depending on data collection techniques. With all the described details it might seem that I would fit in a highly organized research drawer after all. Yet I have to emphasize that the whole process was in a way very organic for me and at each stage I was adjusting, re-thinking and making decisions on spot while keeping a structure as a helpful base for further changes. What you see here is a final result of the growth I needed to undergo in order to put everything together.
6.1. Choosing research strategy and techniques
There is a Chinese proverb stating that "the journey is the reward" and emphasizing the importance of the process of using a qualitative approach to understanding human experience, as it is discovery oriented (Maschi, Youdin 2011). Accepting the fact that a person is an expert on his or her life, the best way to obtain the information connected to the changes which appeared in client's lives and their experiencing of their own social environment is uncovering the data by qualitative method.
6.1.1. Interpretive qualitative study Qualitative methods provide a mechanism for reflection upon the life process, and qualitative inductive approach is well positioned to capture the authenticity of individuals and cultures from the individual´s point of view (Maschi, Youdin 2011). Quantitative data could prove that mentioned trainings caused a certain change, but in-depth interviews or focus groups can help discovering the meanings behind such trainings created by participants themselves. While statistics can be a powerful way to show the impact and its extent achieved, a qualitative study has a potential to show a richer, more personal story of change. Qualitative research is particularly helpful when we are aiming to understand the experience of particular subgroups of service users, or those who have achieved particular outcomes, in order to learn why (Carey 2013; Denzin, Lincoln 2011; Frost 2011; Gibbs, Friese, Mangabeira 2002; Hatch 2002; Shaw, Holland 2014). Until recently qualitative, phenomenological studies that inquire into the subjective feelings of participants have been the most prevalent type of inquiry into one´s experience (Bennett, 2009). Indeed, such research would always contain subjectivity and it is necessary to establish from the beginning, which would be the strategy and means to 98 ensure that questions put in front of respondents are understood and their answers are narrowed to experience to which these questions refer to. The methods in qualitative approach also help to create conditions for participants to share their world. Qualitative data analysis then involves a process of data reduction and organizing data into patterns and themes to make empirical generalizations or build theories (Maschi, Youdin 2011). At the same time, as Braun and Clarke (2013) point out, qualitative research is about meaning, not numbers, and it doesn’t provide a single answer. I am not expecting a straightforward explanation provided by this research. What I am after is a deeper understanding of the authentic experience of young people itself and recognizing the connections and links between different contexts of the researched issue. This research is a basic interpretive qualitative study with elements of grounded theory analysis embedded in it. The purpose behind such interpretive qualitative approach is exploring how people interpret their experiences and what meaning they attribute to their experiences. The overall purpose is then to understand how people make sense of their lives and their experiences through collecting interviews, document analysis and observations. There is no additional purpose of building a substantive theory about the phenomenon of interest, yet some concepts, models and theories might emerge (Merriam 2002).
6.1.2. Used techniques and the process of data collection Main widely used data collections in qualitative method are interviewing, observation, and document analysis (Hendl, 2005). Bennett (2009) points out that questions need to be couched in terms of a precise definition of researched issue for the answers to be given a strong interpretation. Clear definition further allows the answers to be categorized by level of analysis. Also Flick (1998) uses his experience in research to focus our attention on the way of putting questions. To stimulate deeper levels of critical reflection and analysis, he suggested providing participants with optional open‐ended questions. This is also a path that I have chosen for my research. Using self‐report methodology of descriptive studies is yet not enough if we want to understand the connections between experience of participants, in this case disadvantaged young people, and their social functioning and participation in society. Creswell (2009) even writes that it is not possible to claim that programs ‘caused’ participants to change. According to him, retrospective tracer study methodology is very useful for this purpose. Retrospective tracer study was initially used for checking the impact of international experience on people`s lives and activities. It was developed for contacting alumni of study‐abroad programs after a period of time ranging from three to 45 years to inquire about their levels of commitment to global engagement issues and activities. Respondents reported on their involvement in a set of civic activities in the domestic (local, state or national) or international sphere (Creswell, 2009). This method seems to be useful for the purpose of the planned research, since several factors, such as the program offered by Synergy Group in which young people participated abroad or daily setting for international groups, remain without any particular for the purpose of the main research question change. This counts for both recent participants and the ones who have experienced self-development learning some years ago. For the purpose of data collection several techniques have been used to obtain data, all corresponding with the partial research questions (see 6.3.Operationalisation): qualitative survey, interviews, participant observation and document analysis.
99
6.1.2.1 Data collection summary
These sources were meant to be complementary and to create a synthesis for as clear final picture of findings. The first one was a qualitative survey. Due to the fact that self- development method and its specific form of Synergy training have not been yet researched in-depth nor analysed, I have chosen this technique in order to tackle as many elements of personal experience of participants as possible, so that the diversity of it is presented in a wide perspective before going deeper. It consisted of series of open-ended questions about a topic and participant typed responses to each question. This way I could access a wider range of views while survey data, and as Braun and Clarke (2013:135-137) point out, such data tends to be more focused on the topic and the method produces greater standardisation of the responses. The survey consisting of 28 open questions (see Attachment 2) was designed and activated via esurveycreator.com password protected website. In order to reach needed population, over 20 organizations involved in youth work around Europe and sending participants to Synergy trainings were addressed and asked to participate by spreading an invitation for a survey and interviews via mails and social media (websites of organizations, FB Synergy groups, info-letters etc). This data collection took place between April 2017 and June 2017 and 50 complete survey responses from 50 survey respondents have been collected and analyzed (see Attachment 4.2). At the end of survey participants could choose to give their contact in order to participate in the following in-depth interviews as well, and 14 survey participants thus volunteered and became interviewees.
While I was preparing the survey and while it was active, 6 trainers have been interviewed face to face or via skype during November 2016 – June 2017. These semi-structured interviews lasted in average 60 minutes and served as a base for understanding and exploring the method of self-development viewed by those who deliver it to young people as well as youth topics including the concept of disadvantage. Interviews with trainers were used also for triangulation in research when it came to questions of impact of the training. Triangulation as a process by which the area under investigation is looked at from different (two or more) perspectives is used to ensure that the understanding of an area is as complete as possible or to confirm interpretation through the comparison of different data sources (Braun, Clarke 2013; Hardwick, Worsley 2011). It is the strategy of founding the credibility of the method by using more techniques. For this purpose also trainers of the Synergy method
100 were invited to share their views and understanding of possible impact on young people’s lives (see Interview guide in Attachment 1).
After certain topics have emerged in survey, I started with the main source of my data - semi- structured interviews with participants of the training. They are usually conducted with a fairly open framework and allow for focused, conversational, two-way communication. It is a relevant technique that supports the purpose of extracting more information and understanding on more profound level (Minichiello, Kottler 2010; Shaw, Holland 2014), which was exactly my intention. The main characteristic of questions in such interview is their openness, neutrality, sensitivity and clarity (Hendl, 2005). The interviewees in my research were as mentioned above firstly trainers of the method and then, more importantly, young people with less-opportunities who have participated in Synergy trainings. According to Braun and Clarke (2013:48) suggestion 20 and more interviews should be conducted in case of a large study such as a PhD research in order to present relevant information. For the purpose of this research, 33 participants have been interviewed face to face or via skype. The interviews with youngsters were conducted between June 2017-August 2017, all of them via skype and lasting in average 45 minutes (see Interview guide in Attachment 3).
In qualitative research a researcher is an instrument, which demands "social worker know myself" state (Maschi, Youdin 2011). With all the risks and limits of my dual role in such research, on which I will focus on later in this chapter, there are benefits of being an insider. I have done several self-development trainings myself as a participant before starting running them and constant self-reflection is part of my practice here as well as collected knowledge of the method. As self-development process is a personal one and any presence of another person (also in a form of observation by somebody not aware of the specific processes the participants are going through) could possibly create a negative interference into young people´s learning and growth, my position of a trainer, therefore a component of a training for them, creates a safe and “natural” for the training´s environment observation position. These are elements supporting in participant observation, which was another technique I chose for this study. Participant observation is the process enabling researchers to learn about the activities of the people under study in the natural setting through observing and participating in those activities (DeWalt & DeWalt, 2002). This was possible for me to do in a position of a trainer and youth worker, which I already have eight years of experience within Synergy network. As (McNeill, Chapman 2005) underline, being part of the process (as a trainer, for example) and being a researcher at the same time, if well-designed and conducted, is bringing also benefits of both inner insights and a close observation. The key elements of the method usually involve the following (DeWalt, DeWalt 2011): • Living in the context for an extended period of time • Learning and using the local language • Actively participating in a wide range of activities with people who are full participants in that context • Using everyday conversation as an interview technique • Informally observe during leisure activities • Recording observations if filed notes • Using both tacit and explicit information in analysis and writing A self-development training TC1 using Synergy method and taking place in the Czech Republic in June 2017 became a platform for this observation. Among 20 participants there were 8 fitting the criteria of this research, and participant observation was conducted there 101 with the data analysis proceeding during June-August 2017. As a trainer there, I was living in the context of the training for the whole time with participants, I was using English language as an official language of the training and specific vocabulary used in this training, I was actively participating in activities with people from the perspective of my position, I was using interview techniques during open sharing within a group as well as informal observation during the program, and finally during the whole time I was keeping field notes used later for analysis. The last technique in this research was document analysis. It contained detailed examination of documents and represented a secondary analysis. Final reports as written feedback forms from participants from 3 other trainings (TC2, TC3 and TC4) which took place in the Check Republic within years 2015-2017 were analysed in this research. All these trainings lasted for 10 days and altogether there were 84 young people from 8 countries ( Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Croatia, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Romania and Greece) participating, 47 of them fitting the criteria of this research. Their final reports were thus chosen for analysis. These texts have been assessed against four criteria that include authenticity, credibility, representativeness and meaning (Shaw, Holland 2014) recommendation.
6.1.3. Advantages and disadvantages of on-line research Due to the international context and different locations of the respondents, though some interviews with trainers were conducted face to face, an online form dominated in this research. There are certain disadvantages of virtual interviewing or survey worth to mention. Firstly, they are less accessible to some groups, which do not have access to internet e.g., and less convenient for participants, as writing responses takes longer than talking. Also, researcher has less control over the interview and some forms of information such as non verbal signs are lost in the process. And lastly, the researcher ability to respond to participants is limited and there is some risk to security of data (Braun and Clarke, 2013:100- 101). Another issue to mention is that online surveys struggle with self selection, when people who respond to certain surveys may do so simply because they have something particular to say. To ensure validity, a triangulation is suggested also in this case (Hardwick, Worsley 2011) At the same time, there are advantages that are supporting such approach. Virtual interviews are convenient and empowering for participant, as in online interview they can reply when they are ready and think more about the answer. They are also accessible in geographical terms and more anonymous, meaning being not limited by location or shyness of participants. Potentially they are ideal for sensitive topics and may allow more engagement with data during data collection (researchers have time to formulate follow-up questions while interviews are filled in). Lastly, they are relatively resource-light, as there is no need for transcription and there is no loss of raw data with written interviews or surveys, so that larger samples become more possible (Braun and Clarke, 2013:98-99). Considering listed benefits, virtual survey and interviews are offering what is needed for this research. In case of survey it is geographic accessibility, possibility of respondents to think about answers and write them in their own time as well as opportunity to gain more perspective from more people thanks to no need of transcription. Here, the risk to security of data is limited by password protected access to survey analysis and strict conditions of protection of data on the used website itself. In case of interviewing online via skype, it is again access to participants no matter which country they live in, and it is still very close to the interview offline, as all skype sessions were run with video and I as a researcher could see the respondent (and vice versa) and therefore also non verbal context was not lost. I was taking into account all the mentioned above issues of online research and undertook steps to 102 include different sources of information as valid complementary data while relying mainly on in-depth interviews. 6.2. Research sampling
Sampling, or systematically selecting a smaller group of participants from your overall ‘population’, can give a reliable account of the bigger picture (Denzin, Lincoln 2011; Maschi, Youdin 2011). In qualitative research precise or definitive conclusions are less important so sample sizes can be smaller—the goal is to learn about the range of experiences. My intention was to reach a ‘saturation point’: the point when researchers have spoken to enough people that the same themes are being repeated and they are learning nothing new. According to Braun and Clarke (2013) it is a valid and widely used rationale in qualitative research. Although samples for qualitative research can be smaller, it’s still vital to ensure the sample resembles the whole group as closely as possible.
Social functioning and participation are components of client's personal and professional lives, in this case represented by disadvantaged young people all over Europe and neighbouring countries. Therefore it is necessary to take them as main sources for answering the main research question. What is important here is the view, the understanding, the conclusions and beliefs, or in total the experience, of disadvantaged young people themselves. They are the ones holding the knowledge and expertise on their social functioning and participation and they are the ones to be asked first of all. As (Shaw, Holland 2014) write, purposive choosing of respondents allows us to tackle typical cases as well as a range of cases to achieve maximum variation. The sampling in this research was criteria based and purposive. It consisted of young people who had long term (a year and more) experience with(Erasmus+ Programme Guide 2016) such as social or economic obstacles, disability, educational or health difficulties, cultural differences or geographical obstacles. Their less-opportunity conditions varied, they came from different countries of Europe or neighbouring countries such as Turkey or Ukraine, and all of them have participated in Basic Synergy training while being 17-30 years old. They were all between 18-30 years old and some of them due to long-term retrospective method chosen for this research also older - still it applied that they were fitting less-opportunity criteria and youth age as defined by European Commission criteria while participating in the self-development training. This sampling was the same also in cases of participant observation and document analysis.
Out of over 200 respondents who started filling in the survey there were 32 female and 18 male respondents from 14 EU countries, Turkey, Ukraine and Armenia, who filled in the survey completely, and the average age of this final sample of these 50 respondents was 28 years while the time of participating in a training was for half of them up to 5 years ago and for another half more than 5 years ago (more in Attachment 4).
Out of 33 conducted interviews, there were altogether 14 male and 19 female interviewees from 10 EU countries, Turkey and Ukraine31, and their average age when participating in the training was 24 years.
31 Some young people have participated in a training together and some have very specific characteristics that could be recognized by other participants or trainers in International Synergy network if finding their notes in Interpretation part. Therefore I decided to be scrupulous in keeping anonymity and not to present countries connected to participants in this table. The numbers of participants from each country can be found in a map in Attachment 7. 103
Table 1. Basic demographic data and information about the interviews with participants YEARS NICK SEX AGE IN TC LESS-OPPORTUNITY FACTOR AFTER TC Gregor M 27 4 broken family & low standard of living Caesar M 19 12 rural area & low standard of living broken family & minority & low Vladimir M 19 7 standard of living rural area & broken family & low Hugo M 22 6 standard of living facing discrimination & long-term Lucas M 25 2 unemployed facing discrimination & low standard of Emil M 19 11 living Dragomir M 22 10 school dropout & financial problems broken family & low standard of living Filip M 30 11 & facing discrimination & ex drug/alcohol abuse Ben M 20 14 broken family& financial problems staying in dependence on social welfare Tibor M 25 3 & low standard of living & educational problems Gustav M 30 3 health issues & financial problems Osvald M 25 2 broken family & low standard of living long-term unemployed & low standard Albert M 23 2 of living Max M 25 3 conflict region & low standard of living Marina F 30 2 health issues & financial problems geographical obstacles & low standard Dagmara F 25 1 of living long-term unemployed & low standard Flora F 28 2 of living Valeria F 23 5 broken family & low standard of living Diana F 26 6 broken family & health issues Cecilia F 29 3 broken family & low standard of living Elenor F 21 1 broken family & low standard of living Carla F 23 3 low standard of living & minority geographical obstacles & low standard Costina F 18 4 of living geographical obstacles & low standard Alina F 27 5 of living Vivien F 21 8 health issues & financial problems Frida F 20 16 broken family &in debt geographical obstacles & low standard Ester F 23 2 of living geographical obstacles &long-term Padme F 23 3 unemployed Afina F 23 8 broken family &in debt
104
Ilona F 21 6 cultural differences & conflict region Zora F 30 1 broken family & conflict region Roxolana F 20 8 cultural differences & conflict region broken family & conflict region &low Laura F 23 6 standard of living
I put as a goal to ensure avoiding the "usual suspects", the educated, white, middle-class, straight people who tend to dominate much psychological research (Braun and Clarke, 2013) The purpose here was to access the "hidden", hard to engage or difficult to reach groups, such as young people from foster homes, migrants or minorities, that should be represented in the sample as well. For this, several NGOs that were sending organizations for those participants assisted in reaching out for these individuals, inviting them personally and via mail / social media to take part in the research. ‘Snowball’ sampling was partly used as well, as respondents shared the information about the research among each other. In this case, it led also to the inclusion of participants who were not accessed directly by researcher, thus enlarging the sample and making more diverse (Shaw, Holland 2014).
Additionally, another sample of trainers delivering this method was used. Altogether I conducted interviews with 6 trainers (T1-T6) being 2 females and 4 males from 5 countries.
Table 2. Basic demographic data and information about the interviews with trainers
sex age country Years of TC Less-Opportunity criteria delivering T1 M 55 Netherlands 12 Educational,economical,geografical T2 M 26 Hungary 6 Geographical obstacles T3 F 46 Hungary 11 Cultural differences T4 M 30 Bulgaria 3 Cultural differences, minority T5 M 35 Greece 3 Economic obstacles, Cultural differences T6 F 29 Czech 3 x Republic
There are no summarizing statistics or demographic data available for exact numbers of young people participating in Basic Synergy self-development trainings courses (TC) since they were offered more than 20 years ago. Thus it is quite challenging, rather impossible, to form a representative sample for this target group without precisely identified average age, nationality or gender of young TC participants. However, both male and female young people take part in them (in varying proportions) and according to sending NGOs and trainers themselves, as well as what document analysis of several training reports and my own practice showed me, all European and some neighbouring countries are usually represented, my aim was to create a variety of respondents with diverse cultural and social background while keeping the criteria of age and less-opportunity conditions. Yet this research is not offering a fully representative sample of participants, it is merely following the tendencies observed with the intention to provide similar variety of participants as is present at trainings. It is different though with trainers involved in this study, as they are representing all the professionals using the method currently and for longer than 3 years with the exception of two more who didn´t participate in this research due to their time schedule.
105
6.3. Operationalisation
In this thesis the main research question is: How is the impact of self-development method used at international level on social functioning and participation of disadvantaged youth understood by disadvantaged young people and practitioners? The following questions, which were presented in the previous theoretical framework, were formulated to support in answering this main research question and serve as a base for creating a research and conducting operationalisation. This is also a structure that I am following in the next chapter - 7 Interpretation. a) Understanding disadvantage How do disadvantaged young people understand their own disadvantages and/or opportunities? RQ1 How do trainers understand young people` s disadvantages and/or opportunities? RQ2 These questions help first to bring more clarity and new perspectives to the concept of disadvantage. As it was discussed in theoretical part, there is a lack of information on how young people themselves perceive their life situation and conditions and what and whether at all they consider as disadvantage in their lives. These questions give an opportunity mainly to explore the views of youth on this topic and additionally the interpretations of trainers who work with them on their development. b) Understanding international context How do disadvantaged young people perceive the international level of self-development method? RQ3 How do trainers perceive the international level of self-development method? RQ4 This study also has a purpose of bringing arguments pro and contra using the international context as an environment for an effective youth work while applying self-development method. These questions create space for discovering what youth and trainers have to share regarding this. c) Benefits and limitations of self-development training What benefits and what limitations do young people see in self-development training? RQ5 What benefits and what limitations do trainers see in self-development training? RQ6 Given the fact that self-development training remains under-explored field in social work, answers to these questions have a potential to contribute to the knowledge about this form of intervention. d) Impact of self-development training on social functioning How do disadvantaged young people understand the impact of self-development training on their social functioning? RQ7 How do trainers understand the impact of self-development training on social functioning of disadvantaged youth? RQ8 These questions aim to bring answers for the first dimension of impact in MRQ focused on social functioning of youth. Trainer´s view plays a role of a complementary source of data and triangulation. e) Impact of self-development training on participation How do disadvantaged young people understand the impact of self-development training on their participation? RQ9
106
How do trainers understand the impact of self-development training on participation of disadvantaged youth? RQ10 These questions aim to bring answers for the second dimension of impact in MRQ focused on participation of youth. Trainer´s view plays a role of a complementary source of data and triangulation. In the process of operationalisation I was “translating” the partial research questions into conversational questions for them to be used in the interviews and survey. The result of this process is presented in Attachment 5. Indicators for social functioning were mainly retrieved from the following chapters: 4.2. Assessing social functioning: selected elements and 4.4. Young people´s needs and relationships. The indicators to tackle participation were then mainly used from chapter 5.1.3. Models and forms of participation. 6.4. Data analysis As already mentioned, this research is a basic interpretive qualitative study with elements of grounded theory analysis embedded in it. To analyse the collected data I used thematic analysis. The so-called canons of grounded theory as presented by (Shaw, Holland 2014, p. 204) provided me with steps for interpreting data. Firstly, I worked with data collection and analysis as interrelated processes and concepts connected into categories as basic units of analysis. Then in analysis I was applying constant comparisons, for similarities and differences. During the process I was writing theoretical memos while verifying relationships among concepts and categories. For the whole process I used qualitative data analysis computer software NVivo 11. To start with, each interview transcript and document such as filed notes or final report from training was analysed and data that appeared to address the research questions were coded. Next, themes and concepts were compared across data sets and conclusions driven based on results. Hardwick a Worsley (2011:126), who introduced several steps of thematic analysis, were an inspiration for my interpretation journey: • Knowing your data The data I collected were transcribed and read repeatedly before starting with coding itself, which gave me an opportunity to go deeper into the material and emerging themes. • Coding Coding in qualitative area is the process of categorizing data, engaging into the meaning of it and organizing this data into inter-connected pieces (Hardwick, Worsley 2011). The naming and categorizing of phenomena through a close examination of the data is referred to as open coding (Merriam 2002), which I put into practice as first. While open coding fractured the data, axial coding put the data back together by making connections. In axial coding I was using my concepts and categories while re-reading the text to confirm that my concepts and categories accurately represent interview responses and explore how my concepts and categories are related. • Theming and Selecting While theming entails drawing together of the codes into groups, or themes, in selecting phase I was choosing which pieces of data best illustrate my themes, or selecting quotes and examples from the interviews, surveys, observation and document analysis. • Committing
107
As here it is about writing down the research report itself from analysed and selected data, when themes seemed to present the obtained answers to the point of saturation I stopped further analysing and summarized all findings. 6.5. Validity Several authors have outlined some of the minimum requirements in the reporting of a qualitative research study to increase the possibility to appraise the validity of findings. (Riessman 2007, p. 184) describes two levels of validity: validity of the story told by a research participant and the validity of the analysis as the story told by the researcher. Regarding the first type of validity I would like to emphasize that in this study experience and its interpretation shared by participants and trainers is seen as their unique understanding of the topic and as an individual expression of events and observations in their lives connected to researched issue. Therefore I am not analysing it nor presenting as an “ultimate truth”, yet I am taking these contributions as a valid source for compiling and interpreting it as a common experience in given environment of social work. Regarding the validity of analysis, I am bringing clarification for this research through the following summary of validity factors, which (Shaw, Holland 2014, p. 98) have presented based on what they have gathered from other authors in the field with some of their own additions. Funding and potential conflicts of interest There was no funding for the research from the third parties rather than educational institutions themselves. During my PhD studies I was first provided with a 12 months Gruntvig grant in order to conduct literature review while working with disadvantaged youth in an NGO in Romania, and secondly I received a grant to conduct research while being an occupational trainee for 6 months at Deakin University in Victoria, Australia within bilateral agreement between Masaryk University and Deakin. None of these grants and its providers had any deeply relevant connection to the researched topic itself. Sampling decisions made Sampling was purposeful and apart from the given criteria no priorities were given nor any willing potential participant denied a possibility to take part in research. Access, approach and self-presentation In all stages I was making clear what the intention behind collecting data is, I was introducing myself with true name and personal details such as research position or contact as well as providing involved parties (NGOs, participants, supervisors) with other information regarding the research. Data collection operations and database summary Data collection was run as described above, with obtaining consents and keeping the structure and purpose of questions put transparent. Details about data used in this research can be found in attachments section of this thesis. Software used and overview of analytic strategies followed All the data was from the beginning till the final summaries analysed via NVivo 11 software. Analytic strategies have been followed as described previously. Credibility of the study can be evaluated accurately only if the procedures are explicit enough and the research standards are appropriate to the study (Strauss, Corbin 1990). This research was guided by detailed procedures, such as selection of participants, identifying categories or repeated and analysed coding. Concepts were generated from the data and systematically related.
108
The last two components for verifying validity are Reflections on limitations of the research and Ethical dimension, which are presented in the following chapters. 6.6. Reflections on limitations of the research In different contexts of the research I am also reflecting the limitations, yet here are some general ones. • Qualitative methodology – cannot be generalized, although provided me with a huge insight into this field. In order to know what the impact on a wider scale is we need quantitative approach – can be used with the results of this study, since it provides variety of topics and elements of this method and deeper understanding of the experience of young people; • Self-reported data from participants and trainers – might hide some important aspects (more research could be done with relatives of participants to gain point of view “from outside”); • Collision of roles – my position of insider could have altered the responses of both trainers and participants; • My own world view and values – could have affected my interpretation of a researcher, as it is always subjective to a certain extent; • International dimension –I might have missed some cultural aspects which were not evident to me since I am not an anthropologist and not really expert in cultures. 6.7. Ethical context In this part I am focusing on consent, confidentiality and anonymity as well as ethical dimensions depending on the chosen way of data collection and analysis.
6.7.1. Informed consent, confidentiality and anonymity All participants in this research were informed about the purpose of the study either in written (as in case of survey) form or as an introduction in all other cases. I gave them basic information about my thesis and research topic and they were then informed about the confidentiality of all the information and that they would be referred to in anonymous form as no real names of people or concrete places were used in the thesis, nor any other information which could disclose the participants’ identity. For interviews, informed verbal consent was taken from all of the participants who were told that they could withdraw from the interview/research at any point. An interview guide was used to ensure that key areas were addressed yet interviewees were free to expand on issues important to them. The interviews were audio recorded and transcribed manually, to which all participants gave permission. And all participants gave informed consent both with the video skype when being interviewed and with use of the data for my thesis in this and all other cases. Regarding document analysis, there is always a consent to use data for further needs of the organization, where participants who fill in these final reports choose whether they allow their reflection on the training to be used or not. With all the documents I was analysing there was such a written consent given, most of final reports filled in anonymously. All interviews, survey, participant observation and document analysis were conducted in English language by me personally. Anonymity is a necessity, and it should include into consideration also e.g. place names and certain characteristics of individual in a way, so that their identity cannot be discovered. It is also suggested to avoid keeping identifying records and lists longer than necessary (Berg, Lune 2013). I gave nicknames for all interviewed participants, case numbers for survey respondents (R1-R50), numbers to trainers (T1-T6) and also to trainings where participant 109 observation took place or from which documents were extracted (TC1-TC4). Collected data were then stored in password protected folder to ensure security and avoid leak of personal data and information32.
6.7.2. Other ethical dimensions Hardwick and Worsley (2011) emphasize the need of ethical considerations that apply when a practitioner investigates an intervention where the respondents might also be service users with whom the practitioner may have a professional relationship. In this situation, practitioner’s legal duties may be in conflict with standards of confidentiality etc. These ethical considerations ‘need to be paramount but should not necessarily be insurmountable’ (Hardwick and Worsley 2011:19). One may argue that my role of a trainer in researched self- development training might be exactly the case. I was reflecting upon that concern. What needs to be mentioned is that as a trainer I don’t have any continual professional relationship with participants that once participated in training. They participate and then they leave to their countries/organisations and the majority I never see again, as the ones I do see are those who come to assist as volunteers, which they can as well do in other trainings where I am not involved. Thus there were no connected to my position implications, nor any relevant potential consequences, for them in engaging or on the contrary in refusing participation in this research. Whatever the outcome, there were no other services that would be affected by their participation in this process or by the findings in the research itself.
Another potential problem with practice research on practice interventions is the potential for research becoming self-serving. For example, a practitioner who has an interest in kinship fostering is more likely to design an investigation that endorses this view rather than criticizes it. This issue can be according to the authors overcome with due ethical scrutiny (Hardwick, Worsley 2011) They argue that practitioners can and should engage in social work research which develops analysis of practice. As they claim, this will help influence and contribute to the future development of welfare initiatives that will be of benefit to service users and carers (Hardwick, Worsley 2011, p. 27). Such benefit is one of the main purposes of this research, hence I put efforts into precise and transparent conduct of the study.
In participant observation, due to the character of the training where the process itself is very personal and the knowledge of being observed could have affected the learning and experience itself, the covert type of observation was chosen for a period of time. It is usually justified as a way in places that would be difficult to research (Hardwick, Worsley 2011; Shaw, Holland 2014), which I have evaluated as the case since otherwise research might have been intrusive for participants learning. This decision was made conscious of the possibility that the whole observation might not ever be used for the purpose of this research if any of the participants would object afterwards. At the very last day, the group was informed about a possibility to contribute to the research by giving a consent to use all the data obtained by observation and recording in field notes. The whole group was presented with the consent and they voted anonymously by ‘yes’ or ‘no’ on identical papers prepared for this occasion. The condition for the data to be used was that there would be only all 20 ‘yes’ responses, meaning the whole group giving a consent. Which was exactly what happened and it allowed me to include this source to triangulation process.
32 In Interpretation part of this thesis when I am using quotes of respondents I put the details which could disclose their identity in brackets, stating only the noun of what the person is referring to, e.g. [country] or [name]. 110
6.8. My position of a researcher
Reflexivity has been repeatedly recognized as a crucial strategy in the process of qualitative research (Finlay, Gough 2003). And as (Berger 2015, p. 220) states, researchers: „need to increasingly focus on self-knowledge and sensitivity; better understand the role of the self in the creation of knowledge; carefully self monitor the impact of their biases, beliefs, and personal experiences on their research; and maintain the balance between the personal and the universal.“ My research conduct and analysis were without a doubt influenced by a variety of factors, both external and personal. Relevant researcher’s positioning to be reflected in this thesis include personal characteristics, such as gender, race, affiliation, age, sexual orientation, immigration status, personal experiences, linguistic tradition, beliefs, biases, preferences, theoretical, political and ideological stances, and emotional responses to participant. All these positions might have had an impact on the research in three ways connected to data, relationship with interviewee and worldview itself (Berger 2015). First, they could affect access to data because respondents might have been more willing to share their experiences with me as a trainer of the method whom they could perceive as understanding and close to their situation. At the same time the researcher in my position might be more knowledgeable about potentially helpful and informative resources. Second, they might shape the nature of researcher–researched relationship, which consequently could affect the information that participants were willing to share; thus, a woman respondent could be more eager to discuss impact of her training experience on her intimate relationships with me as a woman myself. Finally, my worldview and background affects the way in which I use language, ask questions, and choose the filters for the information gathered from participants and further interpretation of it, in summary how I construct the world. And this may also shape the findings and conclusions of the research. Important goal of reflexivity is thus to monitor such effects and enhance the credibility of the findings by accounting for my positioning. As a white woman in my late twenties I was sharing race and age category with majority of my respondents, which could have had an effect of similarity and support the common ground. Although majority of interviewed participants were females, it was the opposite with trainers, thus creating an option for both shared and withhold information which would be affected by gender. These were some visible and known-to-respondents characteristics, yet some I didn’t disclose to them. For example regarding affiliation, I have an immigrant history with a background of discriminating behaviours towards myself. Also I could mention other less-opportunity factors, such as family background with low-standard living and substance abuse in a broken family while growing up in Ukraine. Though these circumstances of mine were not presented to interviewees or survey respondents, having shared certain experiences with some study participants put me in the role of the ‘insider’ and offered the following advantages in studying what was familiar to me: understanding specific reactions of those participants and knowing about the topics. Being a heterosexual might have on the contrary alienated me from participants who exposed their homosexual or bisexual orientation during research. My thoughts or feelings towards their sexual orientation were based on acceptance of human being no matter the orientation, although I never reacted in a way to express verbally my view during interviews. However, it could be that respondents felt I was not judging them while representing different orientation and it provided them with needed space to share, as together with their orientation they were mentioning issues they encountered due to this condition (such as misunderstanding from
111 relatives and friends or discrimination from state structures). Still, it could be some nuances were not shared with me. None of respondents was a native English speaker. So on one hand we all had the same ground for expressions and they didn’t need to feel intimidated due to my native language as it could possibly be in case my mother tongue was English. On the other hand there could have emerged some linguistic barrier when needed expressions were not available in this foreign language. I was informing respondents that I spoke 6 other languages, so they could choose to respond in a different one if they were lacking an expression in English. Few respondents used this option and I obtained some experiences shared with expressions in Russian, Ukrainian, Czech and Romanian. In some cases I was offering a translation of the sentence on the spot and if it was accepted as an adequate, I included it into transcription. In other cases these expressions were translated by translator during transcription process. Another influencing aspect is that I have a background in social work which I believe to be a meaningful field to support young people in their growth, I personally prefer non-formal education and I am actively involved in self-development method. This could have affected my perception of shared information and make me more “blind” towards arguments contra practicing any of the listed above or its elements. From the beginning my intention was to use self-reflection constantly at every stage of this research (in form of notes, supervision and revising my interpretations) while putting more effort into searching especially for any evidence that would not support my beliefs and preferences. The questions regarding non- serving/harming/not-supporting elements of the method were the ones I was specifically focusing on and repeating during interview. By this effort I aimed to balance my personal view. Simultaneously, I could be more “eager” to accept responses which were supporting my position. Therefore I was very scrupulous to note and code everything connected to researched topics and themes disregarding my own understanding of it. Another position to be discussed is the one of the trainer. Basic Synergy training is a specific intervention with given structure and team work, processes, used vocabulary, support system and guided group dynamics. As participants also claimed in their responses, one of their main struggles after participation is sharing their experience with people back home, or the ones who haven’t participated. While introducing myself as a researcher I always stated my role of a trainer in the network as well. Knowing that I am familiar with all the elements gave them freedom to express in a way they wanted – by using particular examples, situations they have encountered during the training, mentioning details such as diverse meetings and group sharing and surprise moments without filtering or explaining as they would do with someone who has no or very little knowledge or experience in this field. Being a trainer helped me gain rapport with interviewees and more than half of them expressed their positive evaluation of our interviews at the end, particularly pointing out the fact that they could reflect on their lived through experience once again and without restrains. Thus I perceive this role of mine as mainly a beneficial one for this study. Nevertheless, my previous working relationship with five respondents, who participated in a training that I was delivering in the past, was an additional challenge. Here I was especially conscious in putting questions in neutral way and to direct interviews into detailed description of the events in order not to take them for granted (as I have been present at that time) and to obtain all possible sides of the story. I have to mention that none of the respondents who were trainees during my involvement had been silent regarding downsides of the training or their personal experience in it, thus listing what was not beneficial for them and to which parts they did not connect any impact at all as they were useless for them. This assured me that if not fully, at least partially they remained open about both positive and negative aspects of their experience no matter my involvement. 112
In addition to the benefits, such familiarity and insider’s position carry the risks of imposing own values, beliefs, and perceptions by a researcher; projection of biases and in general blurring boundaries (Berger 2015; Finlay, Gough 2003). I was aware of those and my choice was to follow the structure of the research plan and analysis and to follow strictly the steps required for a credible and transparent study as well as include reflective techniques at every stage of the research. 6.9. Reflection on the Research Context Here I am presenting the reflections on several research contexts so that the way of my thinking and decision making during the whole process is as much clear as possible.
6.9.1. Creating rapport and keeping contact with participants After gaining contacts of participants either through survey (when they volunteered to be interviewed), through social media/websites (when they reacted to posts put on international groups on Facebook gathering ex-participants of the trainings or websites of NGOs involved in delivering trainings) or through mail invitations sent by organizations that send young people to these events, I agreed with all of them via mail on the dates that were suitable for them. Prior to meeting them on skype, to all of them I also sent again the conditions of the research and informed consent as well as clarification of my role of researcher and trainer of the method and estimated our interview to last 30-60 minutes when asking them to be available for at least an hour. At the beginning of our skypes we would usually start with introduction and non-formal talk for about 10-15 minutes without recording. I found this time crucially important for creating a connection with interviewees and observing their communication style – whether they were more straight forward with answers or waiting for me to ask detailed questions, whether they were staying with the topic or getting carried away with other themes that appeared during our talk. These short observations at the beginning helped me to adjust my interview guiding style. With some I was more alert and was reminding them of the question if they got side-tracked, with some I was leaving more space for them to talk without interruption. One participant even asked me during the first 5 minutes to keep reminding him about the question as he “rarely stays focused and easily drifts”. After I established basic rapport with respondents and made sure they knew what they were attending, only then I asked them for permission to push the recording button and we started with expressed informed consent and first question. At the end of our skype I was giving information about the planned completion of PhD thesis and estimated dates of its defence and publishing to let participants know when the compilation of their contributions will be available for them as well. I used it to emphasize their important part in this research and in all cases they expressed their interest in reading the final thesis to get to know about their and other´s experiences in the context of my work. I offered them my contact details once again with possibility to add anything to our interview later on (in case they find something important they forgot to mention) together with a proposal to send them a link of the released thesis document once it is public. All interviewees welcomed this option and at the same time none of them contacted me afterwards with any additions to interview. I can conclude that all skype interviews were based on at least basic connection established at the beginning and certain amount of trust expressed towards me as a researcher, as more than 2/3 of interviewees also commented that there was no need for hiding their identity as they, using the words of one female respondent, “trust this information will be used correctly and for a good cause.”
113
6.9.2. Where research took place Due to the combination of the techniques used in this research and the domination of virtual communication in case of interviews and research it is quite challenging to state where it took place. As to interviews with trainers, majority of them took place in Ommen, Netherlands during the meeting of trainers of the method either in a local cafe or a staff room of the organization. In two cases it was also skype, when trainers were in the places they chose to be for this interview-again a staff room or home environment. Interviews with participants took place in all sorts of settings in their countries or the countries they were visiting at the moment, as some agreed to be interviewed during vacation abroad. From my side it was always a separate room at home and once my office at university while at their side it was usually either at home or at work, in few cases in a cafe. One participant even surprised me with staying outside at the street in a town where he also had internet connection, which he found comfortable and most suitable for himself. What I was asking them was whether they felt comfortable talking about their experience with training at that particular place. With two of them we have agreed the place they have chosen was not really working for them (too loud and crowded or with bad internet connection) and we re- scheduled our meeting in order for them to find a more suitable place, which worked the second time. Looking back I have to agree with a benefit of flexibility when using skype as a data collection technique. I can hardly imagine this research being done with inclusion of such a diverse range of young people coming from different countries and some being constantly on the move. Not that it would be impossible, but considering how much time consuming and costly all the logistics would be if we wanted to conduct similar interviews offline, I evaluate my choice of skype as a successful and effective one. Also I believe that leaving the choice of the interview place to participants provided them with the position of the ones deciding about circumstances of their sharing and gave them opportunity to arrange it as fitting and safe as possible for themselves. It was similar situation regarding online research survey. Of course, its flexibility when it comes to time and space to fill in the responses is generally seen as a benefit of this technique since again respondents are usually left with this decision. Thus places were again diverse, yet in this case I am not aware what kind of environment respondents chose for completing the survey, as it was rather irrelevant considering the nature of survey and there was no question mapping it. Re-thinking this matter, it could still be useful to know whether majority was responding in a quite and isolated place or for example via their phones (this survey offered an application to do so) in a public transport. In addition, since there was also an option to do survey in parts, the places could vary. And surely these factors would influence respondent´s focus on the question and the amount of time given to answering. Finally, participant observation took place in the area in Czech Republic where the observed training was happening. It was a group accommodation in nature with no other residents at that time, which created quite a supportive environment for focusing on what was happening with the group without any substantial interfering elements, and which I appreciated as a researcher.
6.9.3. Presence of other people In general, there were no other people present during interviews both with trainers and participants. An exception was in case of cafe environment, where interviewees would sit further from other tables not to be overheard. Also couple of times it happened that somebody would enter the room or an office (mine or on the side of the respondent) and then we would deal with the interruption briefly and continue with interview. I didn’t find it as a significantly disturbing element. 114
During participant observation apart from participants there was also a team of volunteering assistants. Yet as my focus was on the experience and expressions of participants I didn´t pay equal attention to the experience of the context of the research question. And as team members are a part of the training methodology and are present at the training from beginning to the end being its essential part, I consider the presence of these people as not an interfering one but a part of the experience for the participants.
6.9.4. Incentives No financial reward nor any other way of incentives rather than contribution to understanding of the method and its impact were offered to respondents. When I was inviting people to participate, I was merely emphasizing the importance of their story as a part of understanding and potentially improving social services for young people dealing with less opportunities given by circumstances in life - such as themselves. I believe this way I avoided participation driven by other motives rather than sharing personal experience and being involved in solution. I made sure I repeatedly thanked each respondent at the beginning and at the end of our interview for their involvement and explained once again that their experience is a fundamental pillar for the research and consequently for understanding the impact of self- development method in the lives of youth.
6.9.5. Context of interviewing participants When I was inviting potential respondents to this research I obviously made the criteria of age, experience in training and less-opportunity factors public, so that everyone who would consider joining could first see whether they fit or not. Yet in order to be sure that my interviewees fit the criteria, I also checked them with young people before we started interviews. With one of the participants we came to a conclusion that he didn´t really fit the criteria of less-opportunity (only coming from a rural environment with no further implications) and his involvement was cancelled. At the time when interviews were planned I was in Australia as an occupational trainee, and the time difference with Europe made skype scheduling quite a practical issue. My priority was to adjust my timetable to interviewees completely, thus giving them freedom to choose when and where the skype interview would take place. This resulted in me waking up at 5am or staying late at night until 1-2 am in order to conduct an interview. It could possibly affect my concentration and sharpness during interviews. Yet good knowledge of my own energy and state management assisted me in overcoming this challenge. I put efforts into preventing lacking concentration by going to sleep earlier if I needed to wake up sooner or to keep myself awake and active during the night, as knowing my functioning going to sleep and then get up for interview wouldn’t be a choice if I wanted to be alert. I chose semi-structured design of the interview and due to the large scope of the experience that participants were sharing I evaluated this step as a convenient one. Many interviewees were talking broadly and “jumping” from remembering one situation to another with additions of later observations and changes they have linked to these concrete experiences. Having a structure in questions helped to bring their attention always to one topic. At the same time all questions were open and offering a field that each participant could still fill in with personal input, as I was broadly asking e.g. about impact on relationships or employment. During the interview I would put some clarifying questions, mainly intending to obtain better understanding of the described issue or making sure the answer is clear to me (“What do you mean by...?” “How would you explain that..?”). Having the last question focused on any addition gave participants an opportunity to mention anything they found important. Some used it to elaborate what was more challenging for them during the training,
115 some went back to not serving techniques and suggestions for improvement and some were remembering more details of “turning point” moments of the training for them. As I was aiming to gather as much information as possible from them, it was important for me to continue until they confirmed they had nothing to add to this matter. Although in few cases it meant almost 2 hours of interview and thus became more demanding also for transcription, I believe having our interview time framed by saturation moment expressed by interviewees themselves created a sufficient ground for collecting data. After we finished I was checking what their state was at the moment. This way I wanted to ensure they were not disturbed by sharing experiences. Interestingly enough a lot of participants expressed being excited and energized by remembering these events in their life, in case of one more than a decade ago. They were sharing that merely remembering what they have been through reminds them again about learning and gives motivation to revive some old attitudes and decisions that faded away over time. Couple of them said they felt physically exhausted as they were not used to reflecting for such a long time, yet ensuring they would manage to regain energy. And few remained what seemed to me neutral, not expressing any particular emotion or state after the interview. I have observed the benefits and pitfalls in both long-retrospective and short-retrospective shared experience. While those participants who have undergone training latest 3 years ago had this event “fresh” in their mind and could give a lot of examples, they were struggling with identifying what would be the most significant impact and how exactly some changes became part of their life. Some were even stating that the impact was still in process for them and they were not completely finished with “digesting the experience” in order to make use of it. On the other side, those who participated in a training more than 5 years ago had difficulties in remembering specific activities or giving examples of learning in particular situation, yet they were very clear on what it was that they benefited from the most, how they implemented it in their lives and how they saw the impact on both their social functioning and participation. My conclusion is that the combination of shared experiences from participants with shorter and longer retrospective could give a more complete picture as to variety and depth of impact. We can, for example, explore whether some kind of impact has a more lasting nature or it is merely an individual aspect and whether there are certain areas in lives of young people that are affected on the more profound level than the others given the duration of the impact over time.
6.9.6. Context of interviews with trainers The most important issue to deal with in this part of my thesis was the fact that I knew all of the trainers personally, since I am a trainer in this network as well. One of them is also my colleague. This condition put me in a more biased position than in any other case. Detailed introduction, explicitly expressed purpose of this research and my intention to keep our relationship aside as much as it can be to stay more in a role of a researcher were the tools I was using to avoid interference of my position of a colleague. There were several risks in such engagement - other trainers could adjust their responses to describe the method in the best light possible and withhold the impacts they found negative; they could be affected by our relationship and (sub)consciously select responses that would, according to them, support the research in order to help me as a person; or they could take for granted me knowing certain aspects of the training and skip important information for the research. At the same time I could be affected in the same way – not realizing some information wasn’t mentioned or not questioning further assuming that I understand the context. Regarding describing the method and its impact as they perceive it in a positive way I would say this could be the tendency in front of anybody else as well, as it is a risk connected more to the 116 fact of respondents being practitioners of the method and thus having it as a preference, rather than having me in front of them. As to our relationship, I made it clear prior to interview that information regarding negative impact is as much valued as the one they consider positive, as I am after the whole picture and withholding information/observations would take the quality of the research. Here I could only rely on their assurance to talk openly about their true experience. With the last issue of taking information for granted I chose the same strategy as with participants – asking repeatedly for clarification and definitions even when I assumed I knew what was meant. The atmosphere of the interviews was rather informal, nevertheless I kept the structure of each interview.
6.9.7. Context of survey It was the first time that I was designing and conducting qualitative on-line research, therefore I was seeking advice with my Deakin university colleagues regarding needed measures. My choice of a website for this data collection was based on three main requirements – safety, simplicity, low cost and accessibility. I wanted the information shared by participants to be simply presented, safely stored and easily accessed from different devices while being free of charge, since I didn’t have the means to invest in this technique. Esurveycreator.com offered an account for a PhD student, which served me well and fulfilled the parameters mentioned above. What I found challenging while working with survey was the lack of any possibility to encourage participants to finish it. While doing interviews it is possible to create a rapport and a background for cooperation, in a survey it is depending on the written introduction and whether potential respondents read it and understand. Out of more than 200 participants who have started and even filled it in until half only 50 have completed it. My criteria was to work only with completed survey, thus the information given by respondents in not complete ones was lost. I consider it on one side a loss of data that could potentially uncover more useful for this research information. On the other side already 50 remained survey responses created a huge material for analysing and as I discovered later on while coding and making sense of this source, the point of saturation was anyhow reached – after already approximately 30 responses I noticed there was not any completely new information coming, but more additions and different expressions of the similar. And since it is not a quantitative research and I was after understanding, I evaluate this result as satisfactory one. I have also got a feedback from some participants that this survey was quite long with its more than 25 open questions. I assume that this length could have a discouraging effect for some of those who have started it. It could be argued that all those questions were not needed there equally and I could have reduced the number and to rely more on getting deeper understanding via interviews (which was also the case after all). My learning in this process resulted into a conclusion to put maximum 10 open questions in such survey to increase effectiveness.
6.9.8. Context of participant observation I became an observer at the training that I was also delivering for young people together with an international team of volunteers. What was crucial was the preparation, when I needed to clarify what exactly I will be observing. As every day, there were many hours of interaction within activities and an enormous amount of possible analysis. So I carefully prepared my field notes documents with the partial questions of this research together with operationalisation including indicators visible at all time for me, which served as a filter for incoming information. While participants were doing some activities, I was writing down what I heard and saw and what I made out of it. When I was guiding them in reflections and
117 it wasn’t possible nor practical to keep immediate notes, I was writing them later, always within couple of hours after. Due to the fact that writing such notes is a part of usual trainer´s activity for me as a needed reflection of what is happening with a group, it wasn´t such a difference this time being also a researcher, apart from more detailed descriptions and the filters created for this study and thus a concrete focus on recognizing shared expressions (thoughts or feelings) about impact from participants side. Also, it was more time demanding and I had to keep in mind giving myself time for field notes, which sometimes was quite a challenge. As I described in Ethical context part, I was aware that all my notes could be left unused in research itself if the whole group didn’t agree at the end on giving consent to work with it. Yet I have to say it was meaningful for me anyhow since the process supported me in staying more connected to the facts as a practitioner - trainer (as I was writing my observations in a fact wise style base on what exactly I heard or saw and separating it from my own interpretations) and also to what the group was going through.
6.9.9. Context of document analysis I decided to analyse final reports of participants in order to collect information on the immediate impact that they reported right after the training, since with retrospective some were having obstacles to give concrete examples (both in interviews and survey). It was the final step in my data collection and after all the other information gathered already it was interesting to recognize statements that were very frequently mentioned by interviewees or survey respondents, such as “I learned I can achieve more than what I thought, to believe in myself, to give freedom to who I am, to be more self-confident…” or “I thought I have to do everything myself…now I know I can rely on people around me”. This way I could many times confirm what has emerged through thorough previous analysis and at the same time connect those mentioned impacts to particular events in the training as examples of connected to such understanding/realizations experiences of participants. The next chapter represents the part of the research process that was, without doubt, most enjoyable and most challenging for me at the same time. After years of getting to know and putting together the theoretical background, months of preparing and conducting the research and weeks of coding I finally arrived to the moment when interpreting the data could receive its final features.
118
7 Interpretation
“A scientist must also be absolutely like a child. If he sees a thing, he must say that he sees it, whether it was what he thought he was going to see or not. See first, think later, and then test. But always see first. Otherwise you will only see what you were expecting.” Douglas Adams “The aim of interpretation is not agreement but understanding” Donald Davidson In this research my purpose was to bring understanding to the changes, conceptualised here as an impact, that occur in social functioning and participation of young people experiencing less opportunities in their lives, and that are connected to their participation in a self-development training as a method within social work with youth. In the theoretical part of this study while defining how I operate with key terms the lack of clarity or common agreement upon those concepts became evident. Meaning in both academic field and social work practice there are many ways to perceive “youth” and the challenges they face in postmodern society, “disadvantage” or “less-opportunity” and its implications, as well as “participation of youth” with its conditions. Additionally, self-development method in a context of social work remains as rather underexplored, particularly the benefits or pitfalls of its international dimension. Keeping all this in focus, I decided to address young people themselves as those whose voice is often missing in the debates around mentioned topics. While the definitions and interpretations based on available theory are presented in the first part of the thesis, in this chapter I aim to deliver the perspective of young people as they shared it when being asked. Prior introducing their understanding of impact of Basic Synergy training on their social functioning (7.4) and their participation (7.5), I present how youth sees their own living conditions nowadays and how they perceive what is called disadvantage or (less) opportunity (7.1). Then I describe the international dimension of self-development method as experienced by young people (7.2) and benefits and limitations they find in self-development training (7.3) they took part in. For the purpose of triangulation and additional information especially regarding the method I also involved trainers at all stages of this discovery, hence there is always their point of view added and compared to young people´s interpretations. Every chapter consists of 1) summary of the findings with the representing quotes33 of respondents, 2) findings in the context of theoretical background and 3) answering the partial research question (PRQ) with my additional comments and observations as a researcher34
7.1 YOUTH: THEIR OPPORTUNITIES AND DISADVANTAGES “It is up to me, whether I call myself disadvantaged or not” Being a young person nowadays, when our society is affected by post-modern shifts, brings along certain living conditions, ways of dealing with relationships, challenges to face and risks to take or avoid. This chapter introduces what those who we talk about have to say
33 Quotes of all respondents (interviewees and survey participants) are here either enclosed in brackets in case of terms/short expressions used by participants or in italics in case of longer statements. With each quote there is either a nick name of the participant (in case of interviews or participant observation at the training course), T1-T6 (trainers), R1-R50 (survey) or TC1-TC3 participant (final reports). Pauses in the speech are demonstrated by dots and exclamation marks indicate respondents’ emphasis on the word or sentence. An interrupted quotation is indicated by three dots (...) at the end. 34 These answers I call ʻupdatesʼ since I bring them for consideration to already existing knowledge in the researched field. 119 regarding these issues, and what those who work with them observe in their practice. The partial research questions I am seeking answers to are thus the following: How do disadvantaged young people understand their own disadvantages and/or opportunities? (RQ1) How do trainers understand young people` s disadvantages and/or opportunities? (RQ2) The sources used were interviews with young people and trainers and survey. 7.1.1 Challenges youth face Among all mentioned challenges the following four were most frequently stated and explained: choices that youth need to make, keeping flexibility as a necessary attitude and insecurity which young people deal with together with a challenge of creating authentic human connections. Choice is by some seen as something one “has to do”. Young people were referring to situations at work, study or personal matters where they simply need to make decisions and their trouble lies in not knowing exactly what to choose. They link these difficulties in decision making too many choices (also interestingly addressed as opportunities) they actually have in front of them and the lack of knowing the possible consequences in the future, which creates instability for them. This is how Costina explained: “I have to make a decision what I want... would like to continue, what I would like to do. Because also with my university degree, there are many, many opportunities, which are just opening now.” And as Ester´s words show, for many the meaning in their choice is a crucial attribute: “I'm thinking about the future, but I'm not sure what I want to do. I want to do something meaningful, like have an impact not just work for a living, like, earn money and that's it.” Flexibility is then understood as an attribute which allows young people to combine more things in life that they want to do, achieve or discover. “Because now the job, the condition that I had there that allowed me to also like study. And to go for exams and whatever I needed. But it is not like for long time, to be at this job.” (Cecilia) Choices and flexibility go hand in hand with insecurity for some young people. Caesar describes his situation as “shaky” in terms of not having a stable income and a distant relationship with his girlfriend as a result of their choices and priority given to flexibility. And Emil lists the whole range of what he is not sure about: “I am hopeful, but of course I at the same time, I have a lot of... a lot of concerns about how I go through life at the moment or ... what is it personal time and how to deal with life's time, who to be... Who do I work with pleasure and what is pleasure, and what is work and how do I work. And, yeah, and there is a lot of, I mean, at least there is a lot of instability or lack not knowing constantly, I think, and then constantly inside that of... of searching, but also searching to understand how I perceive my life and my environment at the moment.”. At the same time, as for example for Ben, such conditions are seen rather as positive than negative, as it implies personal freedom: “I do have kind of more options to choose from. More, you know, more flexible at the moment than I could feel like many years ago, you know. So, yeah, I...I feel quite okay...” Also Gustav agrees with him, pointing out that such freedom is giving him the base for developing: “I have freedom of travelling and I have the freedom of working at, basically, any place where I want to. And... yeah, that gives a challenge and at the same time an opportunity for growth.” Yet he immediately emphasizes the price of it, which for him is the same as for Emil stability: “I also see that there's a little bit of a...burden, I mean every upside has a down side. The challenging part in having that freedom is that it's a little bit hard to, actually, settle down, so, that's one of the question of challenges.” In the context of such awareness of choices in their lives, it is worth noting that some also take credit for their decisions when looking back. An example of Carla could 120 demonstrate it as she says: “I'm happy with myself and I'm acknowledging all this successes that I have created so far in my life and all the pathways that I had taken and I chose to take in order to be at this point in my life.” While quoting her, I find also important to bring attention to what I have heard repeatedly from some interviewees, and it is reference to life and making choices as searching for, discovering or identifying one´s own “path”. For example Gustav describes his life as dynamic stating: “I feel that I'm on a path in which I'm getting to...to have a lot of new experiences, challenges, opportunities, problems even…”, Filip talks about new direction in his job as a “new path” opening for him, Osvald refers to his place in society as “where my path is” and the period in his life when he was overloaded by tasks and demands of surroundings as “I didn´t follow one path” and Afina summarizes one phase of her life as “this is a path that I am going through now and it is preparing me for the next one.” Also in survey some of the respondents were answering to the question about their life conditions at the moment using the concept of path: „I see my life as a path where things repeat“ (R20) or „I see myself on the road“ (R35) or even „I jumped fully onto the path“ (R14) meaning a choice of occupation. The experience that many of them are going through could be put in Caesar´s words as “again and again re-discovering myself“.
Connection as another challenge is given more attention further in this chapter when it comes to the needs of young people. Gustav links this particular challenge to frustration that it caused for him specifically during the training experience: “Because I felt that I wasn't fully capable of... connecting with people. Actually, because I was for the...at least for the first three...I think three days of the training I was completely shut off mostly from other participants.” And one of the trainers distinguishes connection via social media and offline connection which is exactly what is becoming challenging for young people. “Even that everybody is connected, but it is something that is a challenge. World is faster somehow. You have a lot to connect to other people but many times they don’t stay or they stay online, so being with people, connection… this is a challenge.” (T4)
Half of the interviewed trainers observed and emphasized choice as a main challenge for youth they are working with. As T2 puts it: “They have a huge variety of possibilities and from my point this is the biggest challenge for them. How to choose, how to pick what is really designed for them. The rest is coming with this…” According to him, the group pressure and group dynamics as well as media play a significant role in young people´s decision making. Yet he is persuaded young people are the ones who choose whether to follow such pressures or not. “How I see it or at least the 95 percent of the youngsters lately are going for images. Like they are taking examples from TV, from social media, and they are taking these examples in a way that they are never going to reach it. Yeah, it is impossible to reach,... And they want immediately be there, without doing any effort or without doing any actions. It is also a matter of choice, how do they filter the info, do they let it enter…” (T2). While not doubting that it is a challenge that young people are capable to solve for themselves, T1 adds that such a choice doesn´t have to be seen as a “must” given merely by circumstances of age or position, but rather as a step which one decides to take or not. „You used to have not so much choice and now we have all the choices. So a lot of them they don´t know what to choose. They assume that they have to choose something. Many times I hear in the training "Yeah, but now I am 30, so I need to choose". Why?“ (T1). Also he 121 agrees that on one hand „it´s great that you can do whatever“, yet on the other hand „there is no security“. And T6 is bringing another perspective by stating that young people´s choices are made also through the filter of fulfilment, which would correspond with what Ester was sharing about meaning. What she mentions is also that on the way of searching for “what is mine” it is “very easy to get lost in it”. According to T5 there is too much information available for young people and as he explains, they “get lost on which is the information that is working for me”. Regarding flexibility, the most summarizing and fundamental could be a statement from T1. He underlines that staying in the same frame of either work or life experience such as relationships or leisure time is unacceptable for youth nowadays, and that many prefer to lower or alternate their standard of living in order to keep their flexibility. “If you get work, you don´t know if you want it, to be a slave of someone. It used to be a good thought, that ok, you have your job and until your pension you are working somewhere, that would be a good thought. But now it’s not, it’s a horrible thought on the moment. The ones who are clever they have low standard of living so they do really whatever they like to do. It’s like sometimes ok, they have to work a bit to get money, but many times they are very dynamic in it.”(T1)
7.1.2 Living conditions of young people The most remarkable summary from the interviews with young people would be the shared conclusion of their satisfaction with their living conditions. Thirty of them claimed one way or another that they were generally satisfied with what they had and were experiencing in their lives. Many were mentioning “freedom” of choice in different life areas as a crucial condition to be satisfied, and one of the striking answers which would perfectly demonstrate the need for having decisions in one´s hands was given by Carla: “I'm very satisfied and happy with what I'm... I'm creating, and the most important thing is that things are not happening to me, but I make things happen, which was the biggest realization.” Curiously, satisfaction itself can be evoking concerns as such. According to Osvald he is very satisfied but “this feeling is scary, scares me” since: “The only thing that is not working is that everything is working and I'm afraid of it a bit, yeah”. Apparently there is also a connection between being satisfied and the fact that while mentioning different difficulties (economical, social, psychological etc) that all the young people were solving at the moment, almost half of them shared that they felt very connected to either their family members or friends. This connection seemed to be a lot about showing interest in each other and communicating about daily life and personal plans and dreams, and for feeling satisfied it doesn’t need to be functional with all close family members. Young people say that they feel connected even when relationship with one parent is not really working but with the other it is quite warm (Lucas), or there are misunderstandings with parents but their romantic partner provides love and support (Carla). As Elenor discloses, it doesn´t need to be an ideal connection at all times: “With my family, I am really with good them, I'm satisfied with them... We're not always happy and getting alone, but we're a family, so… We have quarrels.” And Costina adds that the important thing about her family relationships is that she always has “someone to rely on”. Regarding friends, some of the interviewees mentioned putting an effort into keeping friendships on distance. What appears to be significant is not so much a quantity of time spent together, but a quality and what Dagmara describes as “to be present in each other’s lives”, meaning keeping in touch through social media or visiting each other occasionally. Yet for example Costina or
122
Ben struggle with such distance, as they made deep friendships in the country where they lived for a longer time previously and now they have long-term difficulties in finding new friends while staying connected to those far away. Also, this satisfaction varies when it comes to a living place being a city or countryside and though it depends on it to certain degree, it also depends on the priority of the person. While some as Lucas and Flora enjoy very much the business of their city life calling it “very comfortable” and “fun”, others like Vivien or Ilona are happy to stay in a small village. Vivien coming from town sees switching to village as a life improvement as she feels “more relaxed” and Ilona and her partner have a “wonderful garden for the animals we always wanted”. Still, as it is also discussed in the chapter of less-opportunity factors, for majority of respondents who used to live in a village it symbolises a limitation. Dagmara´s summary is quite representative: “But the thing that is missing is the independence and living on my own in the city, because now I live in the small village, which is pretty much far away and train is not that effective, so it takes me quite some time and money to go to the capital.” Another shared condition is in changing countries as living environment. Nine interviewees described how living within different countries is both enriching and problematic at times. For Costina, it’s the process of coming back to her home country: “I just came back from Sweden after six months, so, yeah, I had a lot of struggling with this reintegration and everything...” The reasons to switch from one country to another is in the case of most of them work, for some it is a distant romantic relationship, and for some like Gustav or Caesar the combination of both. “I have trainings and I travel all the time for theme and at the same time my girlfriend, she is from [country] and she lives here, so, I also come for this tour every month. Sometimes for a week, sometimes for two, “explains Caesar. He provides us with a significant aspect of his life style, which indicates lack of stable living place: „I hardly live anywhere. It's like very abstract to say that I live in somewhere, wherever it is.” For Gustav such a change is for the first time in his life and he finds it “very dynamic”. Six young people also revealed that part of their living conditions is their state of discovering oneself. Emil is in a point of his life where he is “constantly questioning, researching, there is a lot of ... extremely a lot of input... So that opens up questions of identity and constantly transforming identity.” Laura then calls this search “a deal of her life” while believing that the social business she is starting at the moment could be “the beginning of something big, of a big stage of my life, of fulfilment”. And Afina finds herself in a “more mature phase” while feeling more grounded after confronting with her damaging habits or believes: “Everything is getting lighter and lighter, actually, like, I... I lost my worries, I lost my anxieties. So, it feels like it's a phase that I accepted myself and my life as a whole. Not judging it that much, like I used to do...” Majority of the young people interviewed were employed at that time and mostly satisfied with their jobs as well. Alex even linked his satisfaction in life to a fact of having a job in the first place, since previously when being unemployed he could´ t afford that much nor he felt good about himself. If there were some factors they didn´t like about their employment, it was either low payment or a “boring” content. Out of the rest who were currently unemployed eight also emphasized their financial instability. Interestingly, nor Diana nor Albert would change their insecure financial condition for a job that would provide them with security yet not being fulfilling enough. Both of them stated it very clearly and there were other young people indicating the same tendency. Albert connects it also to the fact of being not so demanding in his needs: “Economically that is a diverse depending on the time of the year, and depending on the project that I get approved... sometimes it is `hard to end up 123 having some money at the end of the month. I'm still happy to have taken this step and not to go for a job that I would earn more, but still there would be not that much satisfaction I'm earning enough, because I'm, I don't need that much.” There is another person sharing his views among survey respondents, who states that he can “manage to live with very little” and is confident he “could solve any situation” while “not lacking any essential in my life: food, a home, and love” (R22). And R25 is valuing an experience of “a lot of freedom” due to the absence of a full time job and thus managing most of personal time according to his/her liking. On the other hand also this respondent admits facing financial difficulties and not being sure “where my home is” as he doesn’t “have one of my own”. Two other interview participants see their unsatisfactory working situation at the moment as a temporary condition to reach what they desire. But while Elenor was in peace “working now to do things that will satisfy me later”, Padme was coming to realization that she didn’t want to continue that way: “Now it is clear for me ... I really want to focus on something what I really love. Now it is much more clear that I don´t want to make those compromises. Like ok you will work few months this and then you will finally have money to do something else. I know some people do it this way. For some people it works, but I think it is not really working for me.” In case of Marcela and Flora it is again a matter of not being able to decide at this stage in their lives and thus staying jobless for already some months. “I don´t have any job right now, but it is my decision, it is not that it is not available here. I think it is actually quite easy to find a job, I just don´t know which one I would like to choose.” (Flora). The ones who are living by themselves or with their partners, which is almost one third of interviewees, claim to enjoy this change and feel more independent. Yet there are few as for example Hugo or Dagmara who mention that living with parents brings them comfort and quality of life. 7.1.3 Needs of young people The most important need for young people nowadays, as those being interviewed presented, is connection or authentic relationships, which they see as fundamental for their happiness. Almost half of them mentioned it directly and even more were indicating this need indirectly. Then they were specifically emphasizing the need of contribution to other people, the need of adapting to change and hand in hand with the need of inspiration also a need of recognition or being seen. There was a certain struggle that some participants were sharing regarding creating connection with other people. Being eager to come closer and to create friendships, those young people do directly the opposite – out of fear (commonly fear to be vulnerable) they hide behind indifference and push the others away. Ester´s example is clearly conveying such attitude: “People are easygoing and friendly and I always put a barrier between me and the other people, and I think, like, maybe somebody wants something from me, why is he nice with me? So I push away people just because of this. I usually just change people, when I don't like something I just loose the connection with them and find new people... I tried to change it, but it's not always working... to give up and find new people, that don't know, who you truly are.” From interviews, an interesting correlation emerged between ability to connect to others authentically and understanding that human beings have similar needs regardless their differences. As Afina summarizes her observations during the training, when she came to such conclusion for herself and it helped her to improve her relationships: “In each and every one of them I discovered that deep inside we all have very similar and basic needs, like, this acceptance, being loved, and being visible, you know, and being appreciated, like, very simple things.” Also Zora had an experience close to Afina´s, when in the training she connected to others through sharing thoughts and emotions, which she was “lacking for a 124 long time”. Connection was also one of the most mentioned missing sources in life by respondents of the survey. R38 claims that connection is the main thing for him that he is lacking while R43 states that having good connections means “having everything” in his life. And R50 takes this need even further as he emphasises that he feels fulfilled when he sees connection between people being a result of his actions. Creating connection among each other was also what the whole group of participants of TC1 agreed on to be the crucial and needed positive result of the outdoor part of their training experience. And trainers T5 and T6 explicitly indicate connection as an element of young people´s lives both desired and feared. T6 is then linking this state with digitalisation process that youth is exposed to: “I think that the generation, like ok, my generation and even younger generation like this living online, living on the internet, and creating a life that is actually not real. Like Facebook, pictures on Instagram, creating YouTube videos... and doing these things that are actually very... unconnected from the reality and then not even being able to go out with friends and enjoy it. So, yeah, it´s this like somehow we are getting all lost in mobiles and computers and it´s very difficult to spend a nice time outside, talk, have an authentic conversation.” She then adds that she often observes in trainings that she delivers how young people use the space “to break of shells” that they create and to “share the core”. Contribution to other people some participants explain as the manifestation of their need to help others, or to be significant. Elenor is giving an example of volunteering that she is doing in her free time: “I see the link that volunteering and helping... volunteering meets my need to help.” In becoming volunteers, Gustav, Frida and Marina experience the same triggers in their life, mentioning that such contribution needs again to be meaningful for them. While a considerable part of survey respondents agree with them, R18 even recognizes that being “part of a group and contribute to it and also learn and get things for myself” is the most fulfilling aspect at this stage of his life. Adapting to change participants mostly mentioned when talking about job market and finding their place in it. Half of the trainers recognize ability to adapt as a crucial one in postmodern society, as the environment young people live in changes rapidly. T4 gives an explanation: “Things are faster and faster and then whatever you cover as an ability or as a skill or as knowledge, it can be that tomorrow yeah, I can´t use it. This ability to learn, ability to change, ability to develop all the time, this is the main thing.” And as T3 points out, even reactive functioning is a challenge in these circumstances, and youth needs ideally to be proactive. Four interviewees brought up recognition as an acknowledged need and few more were sharing this need in a more indirect way. Afina refers to this need as to wanting “to shine in the group” and Emil calls it a “need to be seen or to understood, or to be in front of people”, when he can freely share “more myself with the others”. For Carla, who has a history of depressive states, being recognized has a deep effect which is significant for her self-worth: “This need of respect for myself and appreciation that hey, there is nothing wrong with me.” Dragomir remembers how during the training he could “feel myself special in a way” which he found very important and considers it his need: “Yeah, being important, like, how to say that... to show yourself out of the mass, like, from many people you are somebody that today can address, yes, this, guy did something.” Also T2 and T6 agree that this is a commonly visible need among their participants. Another one is inspiration, which apparently serves as a trigger for some of the young people to overcome their hesitations and to follow their dreams or decisions. It is quite interesting at the same time how for example for Marina an inspiring person is hard to find: “I have met many people in my life. I like people, you know, but there are few who can really inspire me, who I find special.” And thus, however needed inspiration, she doesn´t find it often and this need remains unfulfilled. On the contrary, 125
Padme describes how “kind of new inspirations are almost every day coming to my mind” and meeting new people is always in some way inspiring for her. Taken as a whole, inspiration in the eyes of young people is something that everyone, compared to other mentioned needs, experiences rather differently. Among other needs listed both by majority of trainers and less than a half of participants were the need to develop skills and attitudes and support in a form of mentorship, meaning having somebody who is more experienced for guidance in choosing their “path”. R42 confirms their conclusion by revealing that lack of guidance was exactly what he is missing. 7.1.4 Risks experienced in life In qualitative survey respondents were asked a question “What kind of risks do you experience in your life and how do you deal with them?” Curiously, more than ten out of fifty answered that they recognize no risks in their life. R20 claimed he “can´t imagine any risks” he faces, adding that problems always comes up, but “that is life”. Quite an intriguing answer was given by R29. She wrote: “The most dangerous thing I can really be sure it exists it's my own mind”, while not disclosing any other risks she would face. Among those who did mention dealing with risk it was mainly (almost one third of all young people who replied) in the area of managing finances or a job and then a bit less of them saw risk in keeping relationships functional. Another group of eight identified health risks as more – or the only - significant risk in their case and same number was referring what could be summarized as “daily life risks” such as being in danger because of traffic or some random accident or unexpected event. Just few (three in each case) spoke about cultural risks or risk of failure. Regarding relationships respondents mostly shared they were risking loosing friends either because of travelling or that death would occur, and then being hurt as a result of allowing others to come too close to them. When mentioning finances, the main concern was not to lose at least basic resources. Although it is important to add that several times there was a notice of being capable to deal with such situation. As R1 wrote: “Risk of finding myself broke. I have faith in myself and I know there's always a way, so no worries there.” And R4, for whom the main risk is also staying without a job, reveals: “But I had several months being unemployed and I made it. I saw that I can do it. Just have to change my attitude about this kind of situation.” It is interesting to note that even risks were for some participants linked with their own choice with consequences. For example R18 was explaining that he experiences the risks that he himself creates such as “leaving family, home, country and friends to try how it is somewhere else”. And R22 gives an even more detailed explanation: “I experience daily life risks and they are a matter of choice. For me risk is to share my opinion, to trust people so they can take care and understand; to invite some people I am not close to for a coffee, to go to a business conference where I don't know anybody.” R27 brings an intriguing answer, as for her there are two contradictory reactions towards risks. As she writes, she “accepts them” but then at the same time tries “to do my best to avoid them”. And R41 tends to take risks without regret and step back when she feels uncomfortable. R44 shares that variety of aspects for her are risky on daily basis: “There are plenty of risks I face every day - the risk of long term unemployment, living with my parents due to the lack of financial independence. Every action I take outside of my comfort zone can be considered as a risk, and many people around me see it as risky or even unimaginable.” Further interesting aspect is a correlation of risk and fear. Some respondents while answering this question would mention that certain risk is linked with being afraid of 126 something. This could explain why some didn´t recognize any risks and others were mentioning different elements. The response of R6 is a great demonstration: “I wouldn't call it a risk but rather a fear of abandonment which takes place in my relationships with people. Whether it is a friendship or love relationship, I get attached to people a lot (which is normal) but am having hard time to deal with it. I'm trying to be as open as possible with the people and enjoy the moment.” Another example we can see in the case of R7 who says: “I am cautious in my personal relationships, I don't let people in that easily anymore and I tend to be overly worried about circumstances, I play safe sometimes way too often.” R16 belongs to those who were highlighting health risks as the most present for them, which is given mainly by the fact that health is an issue for him for a long time. He describes that: “It's mostly about uncertainty, the chances of a full recovery, and the ups and downs of the healing process. Coping with these issues is tiresome but necessary, and the first step was developing kind of an unyielding attitude.” It is similar for R28, who has a history of eating disorder and is cautious about not getting into that state again. Yet then there were respondents who didn´t have experience with being in a poor health and still emphasised that concern about health is their main risk area in life. Three respondents also identified so called cultural risks, as they were moving from one country to another to live for a longer period of time. While R34 sees a risk in cultural isolation, for R42 is rather concerned about cultural adaptation in general. 7.1.5 Understanding less-opportunity
One of the most significant findings that I would like to inform about is that almost one third of all interviewed young people had difficulties to recognize less-opportunity factors in terms of disadvantage in their lives. Some would even ask for support in identifying what conditions could mean lack of certain opportunities for them and couple of them were genuinely surprised hearing that they would fit in such a category of youth. Taking Diana´s words, who lost her mother when turning 18 and suffered from severe depressions for years which led to hospitalizations, she had a great life and she wouldn´t see herself as lacking anything. “I had no problems with access to school or health care or whatever, I had everything I wanted when I was a child. I didn´t really have lack of money. I have a great husband right now, so I don´t really know what´s my problem, sorry.” In her statement we can notice two significant features regarding less-opportunity as such. Firstly, it is using it interchangeably with a “problem”, which could be correlated to negative perception of having lack of opportunities as well as connected to (not) blaming as it is explained further. And secondly, in this case it seems that giving the importance to certain less-opportunity factors that one doesn´t experience in his or her life could result into not evaluating one´s own as worth to mention or give attention to. Caesar considers it hard to define the “border of where” the less-opportunity condition starts. He claims that everyone is different and everybody´s situation is thus different. Similarly to Diana, he examines this concept also through the filter of comparison: “But where does it start exactly to be just different and where it starts to be, like, less opportunities, disadvantage... I mean you can have people who are very slightly... or I think about myself I can in some ways be very slightly disadvantaged compared to someone else but there is...can be someone else who is like way more disadvantaged compared to me.” When being asked whether she experienced any disadvantage or lack of opportunities compared to her peers, Valeria answers after long hesitation that she hasn´t, yet adding in a while: “Well, ok, I have experienced some disadvantages like because of the fact that my parents were divorced, or 127 are divorced, that like we didn´t work as a family as good as mother-children when I was a child or when I was younger. Like its very specific, but for example I felt disadvantaged that for example I cannot ski because we have never gone to mountains to do skiing and so on. Such family experiences that I haven´t experienced because our family didn´t work as a normal family, but that´s it.” Later in the interview she admits that economical conditions in her family were often very critical and they had to change living places, which together with other aspects affected her self-esteem and confidence. Nevertheless, she wouldn´t call herself disadvantaged in any way. The same attitude was present with Dragomir and Filip. While describing personal hardships and confirming obstacles they were facing due to financial situation in their families they both claim they have seen “worse” around them and their experience could hardly be called as being disadvantaged. And Ben who is coming from a foster home with all the implications of such upbringing finds such term for his experience as not fitting: “I don't know if it would be proper to call it disadvantage, just... your own permanent challenge, you know. Every person has something, something like that.” One of possible explanation for this perception could be resistance towards “being labelled” going hand in hand understanding of disadvantage as something “others have” while embracing one´s situation as not so bad compared to others. It would correspond also with what Laura believes in: “I never estimated myself like disadvantaged. I think that if person estimates herself like this, so people also estimate the same. If you feel ok, people think that you are ok as well. That´s why, yes. This is my position.” The choice is then to perceive oneself without disadvantage as a condition to be perceived – and then may be accepted as equal – by others. Here it is important to add how the striking majority of survey respondents answered to the question whether they considered themselves less-opportunity or disadvantaged youth or not. Out of fifty more than forty stated “no” (see Attachment 4.5.), which is also supporting described above. Another crucial finding about how young people understand this concept is depending merely on a person who is experiencing it. In other words, according to almost half of interviewees, less-opportunity depends on one´s own perspective. Alina summarizes what the others were mentioning in pieces: “If I had to define this lack of opportunity, I'd define it by the outside the circumstances. In the past I was blaming, you know, my... I don't know... my city, my parents, my relationship... yeah, but it's not true. I mean. Of course it's just...it's just the matter of perspective what is lack of opportunity.” She further explains that when she doesn´t see her possibilities it happens due to being overloaded with daily work and not having time to relax, which she connects to widening her perspective and consequently providing her with needed realizations of possibilities. Together with others Ben agrees with her saying that recognizing opportunity is just another matter of choice and priorities and stating he is merely not using opportunities around him since he is not always focused on finding them. Neither Albert perceives himself being disadvantaged compared to his friends and emphasizes something worth of notion: “I see myself as a person who is also taking these choices and being able to change them and I feel empowered to overcome difficulties in a way that is working for me. I feel empowered to change this.” Here we can see how power could be correlated to disadvantage, or more precisely that having the power to deal with obstacles is for Albert more significant than focusing on obstacles, hence they become something to overcome rather than to stop him. Regarding this, a very interesting thought was shared by one of the interviewees. As Vladimir who grew up without a father and experienced bullying on the streets explains, what used to be a disadvantage he evaluates as a 128 source for gaining strength at this stage of his life: “It made me stronger in some kind of way and I find my strength as my advantage now. But before that it was my disadvantage because there was no one to protect me on the streets, may be... because there were some people attacking me and I was looking for some strong father, you know, some man who would protect me from them. I was looking for a father to hang around, to play games, to like to tell him I don´t know about my successes in school, so...Yeah, back then it was a disadvantage.” Sometimes though different perspectives could be harder to realize due to the environment. As Carla discloses, because of her sexual orientation she found it difficult to see opportunities and rather felt limited in several ways: “I was living a lot of things in this fear and it was quite a painful. And also I was not in the environment that I could get another perspective, I was not in the cultural environment when I could meet other people and realize that ok, I'm not alone in this. Back then I didn't have friends who had similar experiences so than of course I was feeling all alone and everything.” Emil informed about the same issue and added that he never had an overview of more perspectives until he entered international environment as his home environment wouldn´t allow him to see other aspects. Also half of the trainers share similar understanding regarding the role of perspective. While T2 is persuaded it is almost always purely the matter of self-identification, T5 links less- opportunity partly to a stand that a person is taking in his/her life and partly to circumstances: “We make ourselves less opportunities. And sometimes the context that we live in. Or the culture... It is a perspective. I think that everyone can be seen as less opportunities. And everyone can be seen as a person who is taking accountability in his life and doing thing he wants or can.” Interestingly, there was no clear agreement as to what trainers see as less-opportunity, starting with whether it exists or not at the first place. T1 is sure that such category exists differentiating those who objectively cannot reach as many options as others. T2 with hesitation admits that it is a case for some, but that he often sees young people avoiding responsibilities under the excuse of “being disadvantaged”. And T3 even states: “I don’t think anyone in Europe is disadvantaged. It became fashion to be disadvantaged. One way or another anyone can be, on the other hand you can only define yourself as „less-opportunity“ or „disadvantaged“ if you know what is an opportunity or advantage,” while arguing with her experience outside Europe where disadvantage takes a completely different meaning. T5 puts it broadly: “Basically we are all less opportunity in this planet. We don´t have the chance to do everything we want, or we think we don´t have the chance to do everything we want.” Both T5 and T4 were emphasising that they don´t want to treat young people with such conditions differently from others, so they keep the same behaviour towards all participants regardless background. Also T6 finds it very difficult to define the category of less-opportunity and even more complicated to describe youth that would fit in it. According to her seeing oneself as a person lacking or having opportunities is also correlated to whether this person has a fulfilling life or not. As she explains, there can be imbalance between subjective and objective factors: “There are people who are objectively less opportunity in a way of they have a handicap or they are poor or something, but they themselves they are able to create such a rich and fulfilling life, that they don´t actually consider themselves less opportunities. And then there are people who don´t really have reason for it and they somehow behave as they had less opportunities.” She further adds that young people who are put in this category might not even feel like fever opportunities or it is not visible in their lives, as no matter circumstances they manage to take several roles in society and successfully become a part of it. This observation would confirm what interviewed youth was revealing as well. Overall, trainers would agree on the following less-opportunity factors: 129 economical, family, health (including experience with addictions) and minority related. T4 also added “all kind of trauma, bigger traumatic events”, T1 “lower level of education” and “gender related” and T2 “homelessness”. 7.1.6 Less-opportunity factors and what they bring
Among all the listed in the theoretical part less-opportunity factors the ones mainly mentioned by interviewees were those connected to dysfunctional family background or financial difficulties. This was also the case in the survey, where twenty informed about coming from broken families, and financial difficulties were also differentiated by participants into having a very low standard of living or being in debt (see Attachment 4.1). Then one-third of interviewees also talked about nationality or belonging to minority as a significant factor and similar number described their long-term health issues and geographical obstacles as possibly resulting into lack of opportunities that they could recognize. A few mentioned also lack of certain skills (either due to incomplete education or any previously stated factors), being long-term unemployed or being discriminated because of their sexual orientation in case of three respondents. It was different in the survey, as more young people who answered were long-term unemployed and facing some kind of discrimination. In family background taking a stand for bringing change into their circumstances was one of the attributes that young people were mentioning. For example R5 wrote she had to be strong and to help her mother after divorce since her father became a “very strange person”. R7 was connecting her experience from unhappy family with problems in her relationships, where she doesn´t feel able to create a fulfilling bond, and need to have strength to overcome her issues. And R33 chooses “everyday to forgive my parents for the grief that some of their behaviours caused me”. A particular factor was brought up by Flora. She wouldn´t call any other less-opportunity factors (such as in her case economical and social) as mattering much. Yet what she highlighted was the up-bringing in her family which she considered as in some way putting her in disadvantaged position: “It´s some kind of lack of self-confidence from my family, I think it comes from my Mum and with Dad also. I didn´t really feel supported when I was about to decide what to do after high school. And I felt like I am not good at anything, so I was like ok, what can I do, like nothing”. She added that because of lack of support she nowadays feels not confident enough to set goals and follow them. Filip was also distinguishing lack of any kind of support from family as the main disadvantage factor, saying he “could never rely on them”. Afina experienced similar circumstances. Growing up with a gambling father who misused alcohol and in financially very poor conditions she recognizes that the main challenge was, as Vladimir was mentioning, not having a strong figure in her life which could protect her. She explains it affected her self-esteem and belief in her capability: “I lacked confidence that I could fix my needs. Because, yeah, because sometimes we didn't have money even to pay the rent, and of course as the kids we felt it in the house. Or sometimes we didn't have money to buy my books, so, there were days that I didn't go to school just because that day I didn't have that book for the subject of the day and so on.” Another element was presented by Padme, who believes living in a rural area affected her parents, since compared to those of her friends in a town they wouldn´t encourage her to try new things to grow: “May be if my parents were more open minded in that way... or may be they just weren´t aware of these possibilities. I was at high school and I wanted to go to study to America. And they were afraid, they were afraid to send me there.” Looking back she summarizes that this attitude contributed to her issues with decision making and taking 130 risks. Thus, there are several aspects mentioned by young people which can lead us to the conclusion that confidence or self-worth are among crucial issues that they are dealing with. For some family connections are missing due to their situation of living in another country. Gregor expresses that on-line communication is not enough: “As disadvantage, I don't have relatives around here, I don't have immediate, like, support system of family. Of course technology connects us, but it's different to have a human body in front of you or next to you, who is relative...” A remarkable fact regarding economic conditions of young people is that some clearly stated it is their choice to be financially unstable. Given the conditions when it comes to having a fully paid job that is not appealing to them or having irregular and poor income while keeping the freedom to do what they enjoy, a considerable number of them (almost one-third) chooses the later. Interestingly, Caesar and Gregor who both work in NGO sector, call conditions in their Eastern-European country as discriminating. Belonging to those who prefer to work in what they like, they recognize that their income hardly allows them to cover their moderate expenses in chosen field. Belonging to a minority in a country one lives in seems to be strongly correlated to the feeling of safety and freedom, as interviews and surveys revealed. R28 who is coming from a nationally mixed family noticed what she called a “lack of safe background” during her life. All of those who claimed to be part of a minority group without exception also mentioned difficulties they were facing because of this factor. Caesar, Lucas and Gregor were talking about experienced discrimination, and Vladimir described details of him being bullied at school which he entered as an immigrant. And almost all of those coming originally from non-EU countries were mentioning procedure with visas as an additional disadvantage which was also humiliating for them. Having non European citizenship wouldn't allow him to move freely or could be much more difficult: “So, I was very angry about it at that moment. If I wanted to go out of Schengen zone I would be triple checked, and I felt very personally insulted really. And now it's happening again and again, and I was like what the hell is happening? Why am I different person?” Roxolana also shares her experience emphasizing that hand in hand with the administrative process the part of communication with officials is also very difficult for her: “You feel very vulnerable and when you go to the embassy mostly those people are not so nice, and then they ask you about your questions with... this continuation and certain perception towards you, like with lots of suspicion and disrespect, you know.” One third of interviewees was evaluating their geographical obstacle factor, as quite a significant one in their development. Dagmara explains the core of such disadvantage in being disconnected from several opportunities: “Definitely one thing is not having access. When I was in [town], like, I would go to some place and I would find myself more work or more jobs and more opportunities. And now I'm just in a way disconnected, which is also good in some way, but not in the sense...not in the sense, like, professional growth.” Also Carla who spent her childhood on the island felt more isolated from events and possibilities she heard of on the mainland which was difficult for her to reach. Albert who is living on the island currently informed he is struggling with the same feeling. And Emil coming from a small village thinks that a negative outcome for him was “being shy and less-confident” than people he met later on in the city. It was the same for Padme and Ester who both claimed dealing with a concept that “city people are more smart” which made them be less assertive or straight forward when moving to town. Costina then mentioned different quality of education which she realized when entering university after finishing a high school in countryside: “Because here we had high schools, but not opportunities to learn languages 131 deeper or to go for so many competitions or go for trips abroad or any kind of exchange for grants. At my bachelor already my classmates came with several languages already speaking it and experiences what I know that I personally and also people who live here we don't have.” Three interviewed women were referring to their gender as another less-opportunity element that they encountered repeatedly in their lives. While Alina experienced that she wasn´t taken seriously at her work because she was a woman, Vivien recalls not being allowed to take the tasks that her male colleagues at the same hierarchical level at her work could do thought they were not connected to physical strength. And Frida gives an example of applying for a job she wanted in education sector and being commented upon for a possibility to become pregnant. As to health issues, some respondents shared they were really affected by this factor. For example R15 has long-term psychiatric problems which interfere into her functioning: “My medical treatment does not completely make me feel and behave as I want to, make me really hard to concentrate, put things into perspective, get a grasp of reality and medium and long term goals.” Five other survey respondents indicated that due to their chronic state of health they cannot do what they want (either within work, leisure activities or relationships) properly as they lack concentration or physical capacity. Among interviewees the most remarkable would be the case of Gustav. He described how because of his physical challenge caused by an acute and serious disease resulting also into almost complete blindness he used to think he had fewer opportunities in everything around him. He also mentioned being persuaded that “there are no people who are actually attracted to people with physical disability” and thus avoiding intimate relationships. One of the most curious factors connected to education was shared by Max. While applying for university in his Eastern- European country he was informed that some of the places were not available for him no matter the results of the entrance exam. He reveals that this situation was caused by corruption at the institutions towards which he felt powerless: “There was a limit of the places and because of corruption there was a lot of places already booked, like as I understood, it was no sense to pass exams because everything was already booked and for money. And it was disappointment for me. I wanted to choose like from three universities as I remember, but in two of them like they say directly ok guys, its already booked from year before.” While not considering other factors such as very low standard of living in his past or family issues as important, this was the disadvantage that he felt most affected by. In the light of all the factors with their potential consequences presented above it is important to note that generally trainers see obstacles in addressing those young people and including them in programs that would support them in dealing with their circumstances. Both T1 and T6 stated that this category of young people is simply hard to reach. T1 is mostly concerned about how to encourage this target group to take part in different programs, including self- development trainings, in the first place. As he describes, from his experience for many young people coming from poor rural background or other disadvantaged circumstances it is simply unusual to “move around”, meaning to travel, to discover new things. He gives an explanation that they rarely hear about available grants and programs that could contribute to their development or learning, often don´t trust the unknown and don´t have resources to take part if it needs to be financed: “They have these strong concepts, the fear for everything that is different. Kids who even now they didn´t leave their neighbourhood. And also financial wise, they are not used to pay for education. And if they need to pay they don´t take it, so they don´t get further in life.” At the same time he believes that self-development training could be very beneficial for this youth, although in their lives it is not usual to take such a step. 132
“Because they have these fixed concepts about how they think things are, they will not do steps in order to break through these concepts. Because school is not fun. So you don’t go to a training course, are you crazy?” (T1). 7.1.7 Dealing with less-opportunity It is worth to highlight a specific connection that almost one third was making between sharing about their conditions which could be placed under less-opportunity and blaming or complaining about them. Analysis shows that for some young people it is very important to make clear that they are “not complaining” about their life. Caesar remarkably states about his very poor economical and rural background: “On the other side it's not like that I... that I'm complaining, because I still have a lot of freedom with this, and I can do a lot of things which other people, for example, with even more money cannot afford. So, it's... it's very relative.” And Diana says she feels “very blessed” and “really has nothing to complain about”. For Marina then it was important to emphasise she was “not sorry for anything” in her life, referring to lack of opportunities in accordance with Diana as to problems. Another particular attitude in dealing with less-opportunity factors that more interviewees demonstrate is to choose to focus on opportunities rather than on lack of them. As Cecilia puts it: “I´m just the only disadvantage. It´s like about me. If I want to see opportunities, it´s...Yes, because I think there is like opportunity but it´s about people and about me. If I want to complain, I can... It´s just about me and about my attitude and how I want to see the things. Because there are opportunities but it’s still just about me, if I will try or not.” A variation of this attitude would be turning the lack of something into motivational factor, as we can see in case of Hugo: “I think it´s always how you are taking this stuff. And how can you deal with them. So it actually could be a problem but in the same way it could be just another engine to push you forward.” His perspective is not far from Albert´s, as both find lacking not a limitation but an opening to finding a solution. And Ilona gives credit to a similar attitude of hers to her mother, who served her as an inspiration because she “always pointed out towards having opportunities rather than limitations”. She emphasised that she prefers not to think that “something is limiting” her. Such attitude could be a powerful source and tool for young people. 7.1.8 Youth in context of research and theory This thesis is not aiming to prove any theories nor to create a substantial new one. Yet it is always beneficial to compare what is already known and explained in the theory to new findings. Therefore in each chapter, starting with this one, I will analyze the results and insights from this study in the context of the presented theoretical part of the thesis.
7.1.8.1 Youth in context of research and theory: post-modern shifts Zygmunt Bauman (2003) is referring to postmodern thinking as to minds who „have the habit to reflect upon themselves” or to „search their own contents“. This is without a doubt a state of mind that many of the young interviewees in this study are experiencing nowadays. They were talking about searching for their path, what fits them and what specifically they would want to do in life. Caesar´s conclusion of having to “re-discover” himself again and again speaks for all. The evidence in their words strongly suggests that the selves of those young people undergo what (Giddens, 1991) calls a ‘reflexive project’ in which people are required to fashion an identity or a personal ‘biographical project’. Young participants in this research were constantly referring to thinking about themselves and their environment, as well as questioning their abilities and places of living, relationships or jobs. We definitely cannot say that those people take their conditions as they are, as given and not subjective to change.
133
Quite on the contrary. They see themselves as those who bring change, who are even required to take lives in their hands. They are not sure about “how”, there are clear doubts to be observed. Yet the majority of them sees “what”, standing for life and steps to take, as their own matter. Indeed, their lives as described by young people themselves are consistent with a life of a postmodern person as one of an experiment, to improve and to discover one´s own path. What is not such an obvious part of postmodern shifts in literature is flexibility which young people were talking about frequently. For them it seems to be rather a crucial topic connected both to choices and risks. Another attitude that emerged was the increasing change of living places. As some young people described, their life style and relationships were affected by constant or frequent movement. This phenomenon could be also seen as a part of flexibility and decision making characteristic for postmodern tendencies. The findings also reinforce what Ferguson (2001) was indicating about how people deal with choices nowadays. Also young people both interviewed and those who answered the survey not only claim that they have to make decisions about their lives, but they also have to actively make their lives in the context of the increased amount of number of choices that are open to them. Youth is very much aware of necessary decision making which they link to “opportunities around” them, which is also creating instability for them since they understand they can hardly foresee the consequences of their choices. Hence uncertainty discussed by Furlong and Cartmel (2007) plays its part here as well.
As to risks that youth faces and assesses, there can be observed somewhat a connection with what Beck (Beck, Beck-Gernsheim 2002; Beck, Bonss, Lau 2003; Beck, Giddens, Lash 1994) was bringing up. Following his line, young people are daily bombarded with debates and conflicts, which proliferate over risks, and such environment co-creates a state of living in a more complex and less controllable world than the one of our past. In summary we cannot really state this would be the case of youth involved in this project, at least not at their conscious level. Considerable part of them didn´t identify any risks and no one mentioned any fear or concern regarding the world being less controllable or anything of that sense. Nevertheless, there is evidence of these young people being sensitive to risks, such as threats to their health, as economic security or emotional wellbeing, in accordance with what Giddens (1991) presented. At the same time it´s difficult to claim based on these results whether individuals' sense of selfhood have moved toward being more sensitive than they were previously, for such a comparison we are lacking findings within given sample and conditions. What I find remarkable though is the fact that some young people perceive risks as their own creation, the result of their choices, rather than as an external factor. And consequently, they are ready to deal with those risks from their own power and resources. Exploring the answers that trainers were giving I believe they are mostly not that far from what Ungar (2004) is describing an ‘ideal state’ of a postmodern social worker who is not surprised by described changes and is aware of them. All trainers demonstrated certain level of understanding of the changes in nowadays environment that young people are living in. Also in their practice they intervene into people’s lives to assist them with their life-planning in the context of the new choices and problems they face, which is according to Ferguson (2001) a description of changed routine in relationship between a social worker and a client in 21st century.
134
7.1.8.2 Youth in context of research and theory: understanding disadvantage One of the main questions in this research is focusing on how young people understand disadvantage and less-opportunity conditions. I consider difficulties that youth experienced while trying to recognize a disadvantage in one´s life as one of the central findings in this research. While answering “yes” to certain conditions identified as disadvantage or less- opportunity factors (see the theoretical part of this thesis) either prior filling the survey or at the very beginning of the interview, they would hesitate or completely deny calling it as such themselves. There could be more reasons for this stand. Possibly knowing or feeling that disadvantage is often connected to “problems” or even criminal activities and is not rarely seen as a negative attribute of youth (see France, 2007), young people themselves either subconsciously or on the contrary being quite aware of it choose not to belong to this category, hence not to be connected to negative. Another reason could be perceiving one´s own issues as minor compared to other relatively more “serious” circumstances of others, which was also mentioned by participants. Both these reasons carry a risk of young people not willing to admit what they are lacking / needing or address their situations and refusing to use resources available in society/ their environment for improving their conditions. The second important aspect of what youth shared is a perspective of a person experiencing a condition of disadvantage. As many interviewees agreed, this is what matters when it comes to dealing with less-opportunity elements in their lives. I find this strongly connected to a reflexive constitution of identity or one´s self, as also in this case youth declares how thinking and feeling about personal situation creates their reality and the ways to cope with it. Particular notice should be given to an attitude of focusing on opportunities rather than lack of anything. It is that sort of decision that, according to what results of interviews and survey revealed, brings youth power and needed attitude for finding solutions. It was confirmed also by another finding: what young people recognize as missing, such as support of a family member or financial resources, can actually become a source of strength for them during the process of dealing with this lacking element. This is not a new perspective in social work, quite the opposite – the strength approach has been used for decades already. In the context of youth we could mention positive youth development (Merrick, Sun, Shek 2013; Benson Peter L., Scales Peter C., Hamilton Stephen F., Sesma Arturo 2007). As a framework used to describe the factors that support youth's capacity to thrive it seems to be fitting what some young people choose themselves, as this research reveals. All the mentioned above would be useful to consider in practice, especially suggesting re-focus towards opportunities. The emphasis on “not complaining” that was clearly present in young people´s responses might be emerging from what was discussed previously – their perception of life as a set of their decisions and individualism (Beck, Beck-Gernsheim 2002) which provides them with a filter of “being responsible” for their conditions and pushes them towards direction of solving issues on their own rather than collectively. Trainer´s perspective confirmed what was already known from reports from European Commission, that is that the smaller group of participants who identify themselves as ‘less- opportunity’ in EU classification is hardly being reached and at the same time challenging to be assessed in terms of disadvantage (RAY 2014). It brings us to the conclusion that more means are needed to engage this target group if social workers want to change the current state. Taking the context of EU Youth Report (2012:17), there are some similarities between what is officially presented and how youth explain it to themselves. When they mention disadvantages, also young people understand it mostly:
135
• in terms of resources, and in this case rather material/economic conditions of a person than usage of public and private services or individual´s social capital (though such a factor as “less friends/connections” was mentioned couple few times); • then in terms of quality of life, where they would mostly refer to health and well- being or living environment of a person, completely skipping crime or harm that individual experiences (may be because it wasn´t a case of any of them). Overall, the main difference is that participation at diverse levels as another domain of disadvantage listed in this document wasn´t mentioned among young people at all, which is another interesting aspect. Considering Bradbrook´s (1998) framework of disadvantage, findings reinforce his theory that a young person may create a negative circle within three tiers of 1) physical and socio- economic infrastructure (e.g. schools and housing), 2) relationships and the behavioural norms adopted through socialization and 3) identities developed through interpretation and internalization of experiences. According to Bradbrook low self-worth and esteem (from the area of identity) draws a young person further towards the negative influences from relationships and socialization and physical and socio-economic infrastructure. I could observe this process in case of some young people, such as Padme or Afina. Both described facing difficulties in their relationships and searching for job connected to lack of confidence which according to them originated in non-supportive family background.
Both participants and trainers were stating the ambiguity of the line between those being identified as disadvantaged and those who are not. This only confirms the lack of agreement in theoretical field, where the definition of this concept remains also rather unclear. 7.1.9 Updates on youth Updates here stands for answering the partial research questions and by this providing the social work field with another source for understanding the issues that are being addressed in this thesis. The sources I used to answer those questions were interviews with young people and trainers, qualitative survey and field notes from participant observation.
7.1.9.1 Perspective of disadvantaged young people Disadvantaged young people understand their own opportunities mostly as disconnected to their conditions in life and connected to their attitudes or choices. When referring to opportunities they mention that lack of them is caused by them “not seeing” them while they are present around. Among all mentioned challenges the following four were most frequently stated and explained: choices that youth need to make, keeping flexibility as a necessary attitude and insecurity which young people deal with together with a challenge of creating authentic human connections. Choice is by some seen as something one “has to do”, and with flexibility they go hand in hand with insecurity for some young people. Such conditions can be seen by youth rather as positive than negative, as it also implies personal freedom. Young people were describing how they identify one´s own “path” while seeking opportunities and some revealed that part of their living conditions is their state of discovering oneself. Meanwhile, what they claim they need the most are connection or authentic relationships, which they see as fundamental for their happiness, contribution to
136 other people, the need of adapting to change and together with the need of inspiration also a need of recognition or being seen. Curiously, more than ten out of fifty answered that they recognize no risks in their life. Among those who did mention dealing with risk it was mainly in the area of managing finances or a job and then in keeping relationships functional. Also health risks were identified and a set of various risks that could be summarized as “daily life risks” such as being in danger because of traffic or some random accident or unexpected event. Just few (three in each case) spoke about cultural risks or risk of failure. An interesting finding is that even risks were for some participants linked with their own choice with consequences. One of the most significant findings that I would like to inform about is that almost one third of all interviewed young people had difficulties to recognize less-opportunity factors in terms of disadvantage in their lives. Some would even ask for support in identifying what conditions could mean lack of certain opportunities for them and couple of them were genuinely surprised hearing that they would fit in such a category of youth. And few clearly said that defining the “border of where” the less-opportunity condition starts is not easy at all. Two significant features regarding less-opportunity emerged. Firstly, it is using it interchangeably with a “problem”, which could be correlated to negative perception of having lack of opportunities as well as connected to (not) blaming as it is explained further. And secondly, in this case it seems that giving importance to certain less-opportunity factors that one doesn´t experience in his or her life could result into not evaluating one´s own as worth to mention or give attention to. Also comparison seems to play its part. While describing personal hardships and confirming obstacles young people were facing due to financial situation in a family some claimed they have seen “worse” around them and their experience could hardly be called as being disadvantaged. Another finding is that according to almost half of interviewees, less-opportunity depends on perspective. In case of some what used to be a disadvantage is even evaluated as a source for gaining strength at the current stage of person’s life. Yet sometimes different perspectives could be harder to realize due to the environment which is not allowing diversity of opinions in certain domain. Analysis also shows that for some young people it is very important to make clear that they are “not complaining” about their life. And an important additional attitude in dealing with less-opportunity factors that more interviewees demonstrate is to choose to focus on opportunities rather on lack of them.
7.1.9.2 Perspective of trainers When it comes to dealing with opportunities, half of the interviewed trainers observed and emphasized choice as the main challenge for youth they are working with. According to some, the group pressure and group dynamics as well as media could play a significant role in young people´s decision making. Interestingly, one was persuaded that young people are also the ones who choose whether to follow such pressures or not. Another one thinks choice doesn´t have to be seen as a “must” given merely by circumstances of age or position, but rather as a step which one decides to take or not. Meaning even making a choice is a matter of choice. At the same time on such way of searching for “what is mine” it could be easy to get lost. To conclude, trainers see young people being aware of opportunities they have and making choices for themselves and they bring attention to obstacles that youth is facing on the way, such as instability or insecurity.
137
Also half of the trainers share similar understanding regarding the role of perspective in seeing disadvantage. According to them, it can be for example purely the matter of self- identification or a stand that a person is taking in his/her life. Remarkably, there is no clear agreement as to what trainers see as less-opportunity, starting with whether it exists or not at the first place. While one is sure that such category exists differentiating those who objectively cannot reach as many options as others, another with hesitation admits that it is a case for some, but that he often sees young people avoiding responsibilities under the excuse of “being disadvantaged”. There also is an opinion that youth in Europe can hardly be called disadvantaged compared to the underdeveloped rest of the world. And another understanding that emerged is that anybody could be seen as less-opportunity due to the fact that nobody can have everything. In general, also trainers found it challenging to define the category of less-opportunity. Overall they would agree on the following less-opportunity factors: economical, family, health (including experience with addictions) and minority related. 7.2 INTERNATIONAL DIMENSION “New perspectives and inspiration” The internationalisation of youth work in Europe was discussed in the theoretical part of this thesis as an increasingly important element affording a unique opportunity for young people and youth workers to experience differences through unfamiliarity. According to previous findings, international dimension of social programs for youth may foster personal competency, self-reliance, self-confidence or adaptability as well as team ability, particularly in foreign, intercultural group. Additionally, observations showed that homogeneous group doesn´t work in the same way as a group in which there are multiple differences. International dimension thus allows young people to benefit from diversity and different incentives. At the same time, what is lacking is a qualitative research with those called disadvantaged that would bring additional knowledge about international aspects. This chapter of my thesis aims to fill this gap and to bring understanding of how those young people perceive international dimension of the intervention they took part in. The partial questions to be answered at the end of this chapter are:
How do disadvantaged young people perceive the international level of self-development method? RQ3 How do trainers perceive the international level of self-development method? RQ4
The source used for answering those questions was qualitative survey with some additions from interviews with young people and trainers. 7.2.1 Benefits of international dimension: different perspectives The most frequently mentioned and emphasized benefit according to young people is to gain new points of view from their peers coming from different cultural and social backgrounds. For quite some among them it was an unexpected outcome. Taking an example of R1: “I got to be surprised with reactions to things that my culture would find normal. I feel that I wouldn't get as much if I participated in personal development trainings in my own country.” Others would bring up the connection with inspiration that leads into improvement in their case. As R15 revealed: “I like hearing things from people that I could get inspired by and that could help me improve my ways if I develop certain attitudes and habits too, which for me is the most valuable in international environments.” Or as R21 puts it, participation in an international environment can start a process of re-viewing of one´s own culture and even bring a person towards considering changes: “First I had the chance to see and hear
138 different perspectives from different events in life and history. I had the chance to evaluate myself and my country and to decide where am I and weather I want to change something.” More respondents also agreed that such an environment fosters sharing and creates an opportunity of collecting diverse ideas that one can implement. Remarkably, R33 calls this opportunity “fantastic” because young participants then “can really share different ways of living and being into life”. Or according to R50, for whom it was “interesting and fun to see the different ways of thinking” another benefit was to find ways for “cooperation with no matter the differences”. Furthermore, for some such as R35 it even meant to discover more about “what is out there” and apparently it helped her in decision making as afterwards she didn’t feel “stuck in life choices related to job, location, and people.” Also case of R45 confirms a possibility of such outcome young people: “I could compare myself and my possibilities I had to the wider ones and make own decisions.” And while R32 mentioned becoming also “more aware of myself”, R39 added that she felt “more free” in the international community not explaining it in details though what caused such a feeling. Another realization of what participants found useful was linked with improving communication skills. R44 describes: “I learned that communication is a key to building relationships in intercultural environment because it is easy to misunderstand actions of people which don't correspond with our realities, and are based on different background. I learned to communicate more effectively, always to check what is it that someone perceives as something, and then to act.” Curiously, R36 wrote that another plus for him was that he got a lot of information about other countries. He explains how this was beneficial: “I know the economic situation is hard everywhere, so I worry less in my country.” R46´s conclusion was somewhat similar, although in a negative perspective which at the same time brought him a broader view and less stress, as he wrote: “I realised that even that my country has problems, everyone's country disappoint them!” This particular beneficial element of the international dimension was also clearly recognized and valued by all trainers apart from T2. T1 has observed many of the aspects mentioned by young people themselves: “That you lived for like 2 months or a week with some people from completely other countries, with other habits, with other language. So it puts your own life in a completely other perspective. You get to know yourself, because suddenly the other person is a mirror to who you are. Because you start realizing how Dutch you really are.” He claims that such experience makes youth realize about their own identity and very often to come to conclusion that what is normal for them is apparently not that normal everywhere. “Habits that you have, ways of thinking, way of affecting, the whole concept, way of politics, whatever. You get way and way more confronted with what in your country is not everywhere. It is a mirror. That´s a big advantage from it.” (T1) In accordance with him also T3 uses a metaphor of a mirror adding that this gives young people a more diverse chance to practice human interactions. She underlines that in the international environment it is easier to observe, challenge and re-evaluate „obvious" and generally „accepted“ concepts, thoughts or actions. Thus it creates a “wider field and inventory to learn from each other”. T5 then points out another curious aspect, which goes hand in hand with perspective also a diversity of attitudes when it comes to problem solving or team work. He shares his observations in this context: “There are completely different dimensions from a person coming from Greek culture who is into “let´s do it together”, to a person coming from the Netherlands who is like “ok, what is the task”, not this is the team.”
139
7.2.2 Benefits of international dimension: common language and connections One of the benefits that young people were pointing out was an established common language that they could use and improve during such occasion. For some becoming a participant in an international training was the first time they found themselves “pushed” to share their skills and experience with people from other nations by using a foreign language they would hesitate to speak before. Facing real people from another country led them to activate their knowledge of English (which was a foreign language used in these trainings) and to overcome language barriers. Even more importantly, some respondents indicated that participation in such an international event brought change into their global engagement and fostered interest in international issues. R26 explains it with a remarkable summary: “The most immediate and practical benefit of the international self-development training was a significant improvement of my English, which than enabled me to get further involved in other international events, keep track of global events and follow news in English, and get to know people from different cultures and countries in person and in depth.” Also Padme finds this experience beneficial for herself, especially in combination of not knowing the other young people previously. For her it was a discovery to have a capacity of living together with people she didn´t know and didn´t share the same language: “And you can also be able to spend two weeks or something just in really among some strangers and you speak just one language with them.” And R12 puts her realization simply: “You can communicate with people from a different culture even though you do not speak the same language.” An interesting element was mentioned by T2, who claimed common language to be the biggest beneficial source of international dimension. He understands it as a common ground for all, where all participants share the same conditions of expressing themselves in a second language, as nobody from the participants he was working with had English as a mother tongue. And thus no matter the level of foreign language they are all in a certain way dealing with the same circumstance, nobody has an “advantage”. For him language is basically a “tool to share” and he experiences that once young people understand this, it is easier for them to overcome their judgement upon their own language skill. T6 is calling common foreign language a “new layer of learning”, because apart from the personal development young people also go through the process of experiencing it in English which can be “very challenging”. Along with the common language, connections and friendships with people from other countries were identified by young people as the second crucial attribute of international dimension. Almost half of the respondents mentioned this outcome among the most important ones for them. Apart from usual examples that respondents gave such as meeting “a great variety of people” (R11) or even finding “friends for life” (R32), it is worth mentioning what R6 wrote: “For people like me, who are not opening in front of others very often, the international environment was crucial. It is easier to share with somebody and open yourself to someone you don't know, rather than someone you know. On top of that, seeing that the cases you have are common for people across the world makes them less frightening and solvable.” This statement could suggest that for him as similarly for some others experience the conditions for opening up and sharing with others their issues in accordance to his description, the level of “unknown” was increased by the differences caused by international environment and as such created a more safe or potentially more inviting for disclosure atmosphere. In the light of shared experiences of others there is then a possibility to gain certain distance from one´s own troubling issues. Another quite interesting point of view was presented by R7, who described her understanding as following: “It's extremely helpful in that, being in your own country, you only perceive problems to be related to your culture or social conditioning, and by meeting a 140 diverse group of people from all over Europe, you slowly realize that those issues you have with yourself and people around you, are ultimately universal in their nature. So, by meeting these people and seeing their struggles, you start feeling connected to a much larger group, to the whole world in fact.” Here we can observe how personal can transform into collective, or in other words how young people can experience a shift from a closed “universe” of their own, also within their own cultural circumstances, to seeing themselves as part of a bigger picture. R17 while writing uses an intriguing term “I am a child of the World”, the feeling she gets when being in international environment. R25 calls it a “breath of fresh air!” and further explains that he doesn’t feel “very much belonging in my national environment, so the international one, especially in the area of self development feel more like my own community”. This is a state that shouldn´t be overlooked and I will give it more attention in the chapter about being connected to community or society. As he also adds, international dimension helped him to learn and adopt “universal human values, needs” and to detach him from the “national paradigm that is very limiting”. Sense of belonging to diverse international community was an element that also R28 emphasized. This respondent wrote about herself as about a “person of a different ethnicity coming from a community that sees itself as very ''clean'', white, catholic” and she revealed that being of different origin she never exactly fitted in any group in her country. Before the international experience in Basic Synergy training this was a “huge issue” for her. As she stated: “The international environment there made it shift for me, so from a person ''who fits nowhere with mixed ethnicity and nationality'' to a person who can fit pretty much anywhere and connect to pretty much everyone because of her cultural and ethnical background richness.” One of the trainers was also highlighting personal face to face connections to people from other cultures as one of the main benefits. She describes that in any kind of international project according to her it happens that the connections that are created bring young people closer to each other and this experience has a significant influence on their thinking. “Ok, you know people from Spain and you know people from Lithuania, so somehow it also creates this sense of being European, being connected to people all around the world, which is very important, or for me at least it is. And the relationships usually are very strong.” (T6) 7.2.3 Benefits of international dimension: diversity of cultures
Almost a half of respondents claimed that they got to know about the specifics of different cultures which they were not aware of previously. Which is not a surprising outcome by itself, as obviously they encountered diversity of a new level in international context. Still it is interesting to follow how young people make sense of such experience and which details they reveal. For example R49 admits her knowledge of other European countries was rather little before the training: “What I learnt - characteristics of different nationalities, their customs and traditions, and also how little I know about other countries in EU”. And R15 explains how valuable is for her to have conversations with international people face to face or “listening to their remarks in shared discussions”. For her the most important is to share inspiration, as she believes that: “Every nation has its own personal characteristics valid for the majority of its people, but also every single person is different, their environment, growing up and so on have shaped them to have certain features but on individual lever their imagination, ideas, perceptions are just so varied.” For many it was a process of comparison and realization of the main feature of their culture, or similarities that they have within their own nation as well as differences when it comes to other nations. For example R2 presents her learning as following: “I experienced difference in cultures. Some 141 nationalities are more focused and results orientated, also not so stressful as we Romanians are.” Trainers see these opportunities to discover cultures and people who represent or carry them as well. T1 shared an observation of how the international dimension changed for young people over the last two decades. “When I started my first international event, it was 1991... I don´t remember exactly. We lived in a completely different world. People from Eastern Europe they were aliens. Yeah, for us.” He explains that the reason behind organizing first international events for youth back them was exactly this – to get to know people he and other youth workers from his country had no or very little experience with. T2 meanwhile doesn´t believe that cultural differences are of a big significance in Europe and calls them rather as “differences in routines”. And T5 reveals his concept of international as simply a common space divided by imaginary borders: “Let´s say what makes it international is that people coming from different parts of the same sphere that is divided by lines, that someone decided to put lines and we created different cultures behind these lines” For him it is crucial that young people have a possibility to go beyond such borders and experience exchange and confrontation: “I find important that people behind different lines meet in the same place, and exchange... confront themselves with their own culture.”
142
7.2.4 International dimension: learning towards tolerance
“Connecting to human core” was another expression used by some young people for this domain. A considerable number of them, almost a half, agreed that experiencing the training internationally brought them to understanding how similar people are all around the world. And this understanding resulted into closer connection they could create with others. R26 was one of those respondents emphasizing realization of similarities between human kind: “Once we are able to communicate, what the training made me realize is how similar we all actually are, and that the cultural differences are only different manifestations of what we have all in common as human beings.” Secondly, there was a significant unity among youth describing their discovery of people´s “universal” needs and issues. As R37 shares how such discovery led to peaceful interactions also between representatives of sometimes hostile towards each other nations: “Biggest benefit is destructing the cultural differences, figuring out made up things, and realizing that traditions can go really awry, and with openness they can be driven out if proves to be wrong. Armenians and Georgians sleeping in same room, with no aggressive thoughts on each other. Now that is an achievement.” He then adds about what he learned that “whatever the map looks like” everybody “use same oxygen”, and they “have limbs same as me :)”. Quite remarkably he then concludes: “There is no German guy, Russian-close girl, pothead Dutch, but there are people living there with specific hardships and advantages, history, and preferences. If people share in common life experiences, there is no beyond the border traits to see.” Also R31 learned that everyone “has problems, and doubts, and everyone is trying to deal with their problems, and make life work”. And R7 explains that while being in one´s own country a person only perceives problems to be related to his or her own culture or social conditioning, and by meeting a diverse group of people from all over Europe “you slowly realize that those issues you have with yourself and people around you, are ultimately universal in their nature.” This is exactly how she understands that by meeting these people and seeing their struggles a person starts “feeling connected to a much larger group, to the whole world in fact”. The described process consequently potentially makes a person more open minded and social, as R48 claims. Using her words, she started to “feel like a part of something bigger, like in big different family.” And regarding issues of other people, rather an intriguing response worth to mention came from R32, who wrote: “Sometimes I felt a bit stupid because, due to the cultures, some participants shared really big problems depending on the policy of their country. I felt stupid because my problems were problems with solutions, problems that I made, and their not.” Here we can see another comparison of personal world to the environments of others, yet it is hard to say where this conclusion brought the author afterwards as there was no further notice. An important outcome closely interlinked with all others is overcoming prejudices and stereotypes. As R47 reveals: “I learned about prejudice, which is something someone should know about, that people are humans everywhere, no matter religion or country.” R42 agrees and adds that international experience helped her to change her prejudice towards some cultures because she “saw them from the very close distance” and it changed her mind “absolutely”. Overall, young people were sharing a common conclusion of an increased tolerance towards differences of other people. A significant remark connected to society as a whole was written by R50. He states that international dimension: “Gives opportunities for acceptance and understanding with people with different mindset. I learnt that we are all people after all, and that our differences combined with the togetherness is what makes us 143 strong and potential-fulfilling as society.” R14 then describes how she was learning to be tolerant towards differences and be willing to look deeper beyond the first impression which allowed her to “learn about the beauty everyone is bringing”. 7.2.5 Limitations of international dimension
In general, there were few limiting aspects that both participants and trainers would mention. The most important one was curiously the language again – yet in this context seen as a limitation in terms of expressing oneself fully and clearly or not knowing the shared foreign language at all and thus being isolated from the international experience. Only five respondents actually revealed they had troubles with language and saw it as a limitation of international dimension. While R3 remembers that “It was hard to follow stuff” for him sometimes, R32 describes that communicating in a language that was not her own mother tongue and neither for the others made everything “more difficult “. Yet interestingly she adds: “But I believe that the idea is to commit to work hard, all together, due to the difficulties as the language.”, thus seeing this limitation as an obstacle to overcome. And some mentioned that although their level of English was satisfying for them, they found it limiting not to be able to communicate freely with those young people who couldn’t speak as well as them. T1 adds that the limitation with a foreign language is present because “we don´t have the emotional connection with words we have in our own language”. This way, young people are not always able to give way to their emotions and thoughts as they actually experience them. And T6 explains it even further how language is a crucial element for understanding particularly in case of self-development training that she is delivering: “If you are coming with a not very good level of English, you might loose understanding. The whole training is very much about the language, about how things are phrased, how the instructions are given, and then you also reflect and you need to be able to formulate, and the moment you don´t know how to do it, it can become very frustrating and you might lose the understanding, yeah. So actually for people who have very basic English the training, they get learning, but they miss a lot, I think.” Among other limitations R37 listed the opposite of shared inspiration. According to him there are also all sorts of “harming habits” that young people could bring to each other as “it is the risk of having people mixed from big range of selection”. Yet immediately he adds an interesting comment: “The worst was even same nationality as me. You might say, with different community culture.” While being correlated with international dimension, such limitation for him is brought also within same nationality. Another respondent R45 remembers how for her meeting new cultures or subcultures and interacting with people from different religions brought uncertainty and unease because she didn’t know how to interact or how to behave with them. And R50 had an unpleasant experience due to the situations when he felt misunderstood and not fully accepted because of his beliefs. He describes such limitation occurring when: “They didn't get my jokes and getting angry or criticizing me for my beliefs. And when being stereotyped because of something I said in way the others are not used to hear it (misunderstood). And then excluded.” Here he doesn’t explain further and one way of interpreting his shared experience is that “not getting jokes” or “criticizing for beliefs” had its roots in differences between him and other participants that led to disconnection. A very interesting thought was presented by T1. He didn´t distinguish any other limitation in international dimension of training for young people rather than foreign language in a context of Europe. Yet he argued that for youth from other countries such experience can be very 144 challenging because their culture is way too far from European. “We have also many people from Pakistan or India or Africa or this kind of countries in our training courses. The limitation is that they go here through an event which they mostly they are going through in amazement. But they go home and they go home to society what is completely different and a culture that doesn´t ...this training doesn´t make sense in a culture of Pakistan. So it is ok, you come here, you have an event, but then you go home and you can do nothing with it. I mean they cannot place it. It´s too far away.” In other words, from his experience it seems that there are circumstances when international means not really applicable in one´s own environment. Yet as he claimed, it is not the case of European countries and close neighbouring ones. T3 mentioned another aspect, which is higher cost and lower access to international events for some young people. After over a decade of practice she summarizes: “Many people cannot afford it and another many never even get the news about them. We get a lot of „training tourists“, whose main motivation is travelling. A lot of people came with the attitude of being „entitled“ and having „rights“ only, no obligations, or not respecting the opportunity at all.” And T4 brought attention to a quite significant factor which is connected to geographical distances. According to him, it is much more difficult for young people to keep connections after intense events if they were international simply because they are not physically close to each other. And as T6 pointed out, it also limits their chances of supporting or inspiring each other in personal matters that they shared during the training: “Like if it is people from the same country, it is easier that they meet together, they hang out and they somehow support each other in staying in what they got. But this going back to our own realities and getting separated from the group it makes it more difficult for the individuals to keep the results.” This leads to a conclusion that especially because of this element a particular attention should be given to follow-up after the training process with young people. 7.2.6 International dimension in context of research and theory
This study is not comparing disadvantaged youth with their peers, hence it is not possible to confirm or to refute whether the benefits of international youth work are particularly tangible for disadvantaged young people as argued by (Dreber et al., 2014). Yet based on the findings we could positively state that there are undeniable benefits in international experience which young people recognize themselves and which possibly help them to find ways for integrating more easily in society. As in general, majority of respondents indicated and explained how they improved their intercultural skills together with some interpersonal, social and civic skills. Such result is corresponding with previous studies (RAY 2014; Wochowska 2015) and thus reinforces the contribution element of international projects with youth. To start with, there is an interesting aspect of a surprise. Young people declared they were not expecting to encounter so many differences in international environment. The gained inspiration and mentioned re-viewing of one´s own culture are connected with intercultural experience leading to confrontation and broadening one´s views listed by Kloosterman and Brown (2007). According to young people in this research, while facing diverse ways of living and getting information about other countries directly from their peers who live there, they were also considering changes in their own lives, which is a very direct and immediate change in their thinking which we could link to what Kloosterman and Brown (2007) call creating life-perspective. Also in their case they had time and space to reflect away from their daily routines, which authors see as another positive outcome which here remarkably led into a state that youth presented as “more aware of myself” or feeling “more free”. This 145 research further shows that the next benefit highlighted by authors, namely enhanced team work skills through communicating in foreign language and working with other´s ideas, belongs in case of young respondents among additional benefit from international event. Starting with overcoming barriers of communicating in English and continuing with improved communication skills or sharing their experience among others in a group, young people created strong bonds with each other, that some even call “friends for life”. With such improvement it is possible to expect them to be more prepared and capable of working in a team and being more ready to work within differences. Learning about diversity in different countries and cultures also seems indeed to encourage youth to find new solutions to old challenges, as (Klocker 2010) writes. In this research this process would be connected to realizing similarities among young people and their challenges. This we can clearly observe in R6 response according to whom seeing that issues he struggles with are common for people across the world makes them “less frightening and solvable”, which is a great start to finding new solutions on itself. Also the transformation from personal into collective or how young people declared to see themselves as part of a bigger picture when “feeling connected” to representatives of other nations or adopting “universal human values”, can be found in literature. (Klocker 2010) is pointing out that international dimension can also increase empathy. With almost a half of respondents agreeing that experiencing the training internationally brought them to understanding how similar people are all around the world, common embracing universal needs and issues of human beings hand in hand with described by young people connection to others, we can identify the impact of international experience on their perception of others. There is little doubt that the foundation for empathy has been increased. This fact is strongly interlinked with enhanced tolerance that has been also previously observed as a beneficial element (Klocker 2010; Teffel 2011). During their confrontation by their prejudices or stereotypes towards other nations young participants came to conclusions such as “people are humans everywhere, no matter religion or country” or “we are all people after all”. Finally, some respondents indicated that participation in such an international event brought change into their global engagement and fostered interest in international issues. This impact was studies also by (Paige, Fry, Stallman, Josić, Jon 2009) and declared effect on respondent´s of this research involvement reinforces also their observations while bringing an explanation. As youth has experienced strong connection with their peers from other countries, as they have created friendships and shared personal issues and had even gained a sense of belonging to “international community” that some call “being a child of the World”, it was only another step to become more interested in what is happening beyond the borders of their home countries. Because there is a much greater range of pathways to choose from, young people may develop the impression that their own route is unique and that the risks they face are to be overcome as individuals rather than as members of a collective (Furlong and Cartmel, 2007), which might evolve into their stronger disconnection. This research provides additional support to this theory and brings a considerable insight as well. Young people informed about their often surprising understanding of “similarity of problems” among themselves regardless nationality or social background. Which, as they declared, led to stronger connection and bonding, as well as tolerance and desire to support. Furthermore, there were cases when youth admitted to realize that there is no need to manage everything alone and that it is “great to rely on others” who also “have issues” and thus can understand.
146
Altogether, also this research brings evidence confirming positive effect of youth program´s international dimension on disadvantaged young people. With what was mentioned we could agree with the possible outcomes: re-orientation and adjustments of familiar mechanisms of youth (IdA 2011), becoming more aware of own identity and acquire valuable skills (Dreber, Piesche, Wissing 2014) and increased competences such as communication in foreign languages, social and civic competences, and cultural awareness and expression (Wochowska 2015). Yet there is an important part of the research that brings an additional aspect to international dimension, and it is limitations to it described by young people themselves with a complementary view from practitioners who work with them. Although I have to notice that there were few such aspects comparing to shared benefits, still they shouldn´t be neglected. Being isolated from the international experience when not knowing the language, feeling misunderstood and not fully accepted because of one´s beliefs as well as limited chances of supporting or inspiring each other due to geographical distances I consider the most important ones that could be further researched, compared to other studies and dealt with in practice. 7.2.7 Updates on international dimension
Disadvantaged youth perceives international dimension of the program they participated in mostly in positive terms. Many of them were surprised by the experience and its outcome. Mostly, it brought inspiration leading to improvement (of skills, behaviours, understanding etc) while also starting a process of re-viewing of one´s own culture or even encouraging youth towards considering changes in their lives. They valued facing different ways of living and finding information about other countries. And while undergoing the process of realization and comparison with other cultures and its attributes they were becoming more aware of similarities among themselves and “people around the world” while also gaining understanding of their own needs, possibilities and identity in general. Further young people mentioned discovery of people´s “universal” needs and issues which was followed also by overcoming prejudices and stereotypes they were carrying about others. Consequently, another important outcome of international event for them was increased tolerance towards differences. Participating in international training was the first time for some young people to share their skills and experience with people from other nations by using a foreign language and thus overcoming language barrier. Even more importantly, some respondents indicated that participation in such an international event brought change into their global engagement and fostered interest in international issues. According to some young people, international environment can represent safer or potentially more inviting for disclosure atmosphere, as many of them dared to express their thoughts and feelings as never at home. As a result, one of the most mentioned beneficial aspect were close connections with peers from other countries. In addition, considering what respondents disclosed, in the light of shared experiences of others there is a possibility to gain certain distance from one´s own troubling issues. And while feeling more connected to others young people can experience a shift from a closed “universe” of their own to seeing themselves as part of a bigger picture in some cases even with a certain sense of belonging rather to international community that to one back home. It is crucial to emphasize that international dimension is not lacking limitations, and those were also recognized by young respondents. While for some an international experience 147 could be broadening, for others it could mean also an experience of exclusion. This could happen when a person doesn’t know the shared foreign language or simply cannot express oneself fully and clearly in another language than mother tongue, which is definitely a risk in international environment. Interestingly, another indicated limitation was presented in terms of “harming habits” that could be shared among people mixed from different cultures. It is difficult to imagine what kind of habits were meant by the young person who introduced this thought. I personally understand this statement in a way that people from some cultures could see as harming certain customs that in other nation are somehow a routine and not seen as harming by majority at least – for example a level of drinking alcohol or established gender implications. And then spreading such “harming habits” could be seen as a threat and a limitation, or unwanted outcome, in international environment. Other aspects to mention were uncertainty and unease when interacting with people from different religions due to lack of knowing how to behave and the feeling of being misunderstood and not fully accepted because of one´s beliefs. Perspective of trainers Trainers agreed that such experience makes youth realize about their own identity and very often to come to conclusion that what is normal for them is apparently not that normal everywhere. At the same time they gain a more diverse chance to practice human interactions and deal with diversity of attitudes. Common language was understood by one as a common ground where all participants share the same conditions of expressing themselves in a second language and no matter the level of foreign language they are all in a certain way dealing with the same circumstance; nobody has an “advantage”. One of the trainers was also highlighting personal face to face connections to people from other cultures as one of the main benefits. And interestingly, another doesn´t believe that cultural differences are of a big significance in Europe and calls them rather as “differences in routines”. For T5 it is then crucial that young people have a possibility to go beyond imaginary borders of countries and experience exchange and confrontation. And there emerged a belief that under the circumstances when cultures are way too different (such as in case of European countries and African or Indian) international means not really applicable in one´s own environment. Another mentioned limiting aspect is higher cost and lower access to international events for some young people, especially those disadvantaged on more levels. And finally, there is a limitation connected to geographical distances. It is much more difficult for young people to keep connections after intense events if they were international simply because they are not physically close to each other, which also limits their chances of supporting or inspiring each other.
148
7.3 BENEFITS AND LIMITATIONS OF SELF-DEVELOPMENT TRAINING
In the theoretical part, the self-development approach used in international trainings was introduced as a short-term intervention with a diversity of feedback and observations of participants from different cultural and social backgrounds. Practice has shown that using creative mediums in such trainings enhance confidence, self-efficacy and self-image of young people; enable trust and deep learning; develop creativity and imagination, which are central to problem solving and coping. There are certain limits to be considered as well, such as disclosure in a group or discovering aspects of oneself that were previously unknown or disquieting. Self-development Basic Synergy trainings were presented as an opportunity for disadvantaged young people to achieve personal growth also in participation and social functioning. This chapter contributes to finding out whether and how exactly personal growth is happening within the target group I am focusing on. Additionally, since one of the aims of this research is to bring more understanding of self-development as a method used in social work with disadvantaged youth, this part of the thesis presents definitions of self- development as a method, and training as an intervention formulated by participants together with their experience with it. Their perceptions are enriched by trainers´ perspective. The partial questions to be answered at the end of this chapter are: What benefits and what limitations do young people see in self-development training? RQ5 What benefits and what limitations do trainers see in self-development training? RQ6
The sources used for answering these questions were qualitative survey and interviews with young people and trainers. 7.3.1 Basic Synergy training: What is it about?
To answer this question I interviewed the trainers as they are the ones delivering the training and working with participating youth. The first elements they mentioned were the theatrical setting and non-judgmental approach. For trainer T1, the combination with theatre in this method makes it “visible for everyone” while also making the experience for participants “enjoyable and crystal clear”. Yet he admits that this setting can be overdone, which happened in the past: “We made our mistakes, because we played it too tough. But I don´t think in the last four years we were confronted with anything like this.” Also, T5 sees the training through the lenses of theatrical play, where: “Some people are outside, and you are not the audience, and you as a participant go inside, you interact in this play. And you see what you can get for yourself out of it.” It is worth to mention that while in general young people were referring to this attribute of the training in positive terms, one of the interviewed young people found such setting not really supportive for himself. As Albert describes, for him it is more artificial than daily life and thus difficult to connect to: “Because I believe that I don't live in a way that I'm pacing a lot of theatrical situation in my current life, but it's very honest. I'm facing situations that are not theatrical contexts, but very honest real ones, so this confrontation that is not happening in my life. And it did happen in the Basic Synergy training, so it is also creating a gap between my experience there and my experience in my current life and this is why I think it 149 can really .. it may reduce the impact in some cases, yeah, I believe it can reduce its impact and its applicability in the participant's life.” These contradicting views shouldn´t be ignored, as we can conclude that the setting is not universally accepted and although it might work for the majority of participants, there can be others who take it as less beneficial. Another element that T1 points out is a personal choice to do the training, as nobody is participating under obligation: “If people come through our training courses, they do it on voluntary basis. Nobody is forcing them to be there. So this has a complete other function. I did also training course where people were sent to. By their boss, their government. Uf. That´s a completely other category and there is battle...” And T4 adds that “beyond judgement approach” is one of the most valuable elements for him in this training, as in his practice he has never encountered such a high priority of it. When asked to describe Basic Synergy training in a couple of sentences, trainers mostly agreed on what we could call arranged space to foster awareness. Each one of them then saw certain elements as more outstanding. T4 revealed he still had troubles with specific identification of the training, since it is so wide: “I would say ok, development, and according to change, development and change, it's so you are challenged, you see yourself from different angle and you're always challenged more.” He compares training to a certain laboratory setting where young people can experiment with their behaviour and actions with fewer consequences than outside of the training. T6 then revealed that first of all, the training is very intense and confronting in its core as a person cannot get ready for it completely: “Because it is the thing with experiential: you come and things are happening and you have to adapt.” Basic Synergy training is therefore based on informal, experiential learning of youth. She also mentioned the concrete tools that young people can bring with them to their “real life” and make a difference there. And according to her, another important element is the personal content of the training, due to which it is also difficult to estimate the individual outcome: “Everybody comes in a different period of their life and with different needs, and then they are taking different things out of it. Like there are many elements that are there and for everybody it rings a different bell. You cannot really say this and this will happen for you, because you never know who is taking what.” She believes such an element creates space for youth to really find what they need in their moment in life. One of the participants Ilona supports this belief with her observation: “It probably pushes every person in different direction, like it depends...” T6 also refers to Basic Synergy as to an individual training in a group context, which T3 further explains with the description of a desired effect: “It supports you to explore, map and understand your patterns of thinking and behaviour, their benefits and drawbacks, improves your creativity to identify, create and practice new patterns that serve you better in specific life situations.” T1 indicated that training can provide “all kind of surprises”. And while content is personal, context is delivered in a frame: “We create a context, in the context you can learn, you can work on things that you want to learn, where you are in your personal development on this moment. It is concrete.” And for T2 the training is mainly about relationships. Not only with people, but also with certain things and certain actions. He explains that in a program participants are offered a toolkit to evaluate and re-evaluate their relationships and they decide whether they want to use it or not. Regarding the design of the training, trainers mostly are united in a view that the partial methodology is not unique and has been used before. Yet what is unique about the training is how it is structured. T4 believes that from the beginning to the end, through different kinds of events, participants are gradually challenged. T1 describes it in detail: “First small steps, creating a playing field, with the rules, with the agreements, with what is possible, with 150 lectures and input, explanations, people who are sharing about what they come to do in this training. And piling up process after process, everything follows everything and its connected. You do first A, then you do B, then you do AB and then you go to C. It is all designed and it avoids that you end up in chaos.” And T2 agrees with what T6 claimed as well – the uniqueness of each event is based on the uniqueness of personal content of each participant. Interestingly, there were some participants as well as trainers referring to a certain philosophy of the training as to a set of ideas being mostly accepted as supporting development in general and worked on with young people. For example Filip says: “Yeah, like love, care, cooperation. Like for me it was really inspiring, what was there. Like, this sharing, this open source, this possibility to develop.” Trainer T4 calls this philosophy “giving space” and T1 brings more details explaining: “And philosophy is that - In here and now nothing is done before, so it is a unique moment of nothing. Because everything what is between you and the other person is based on history, or interpretations, which is also coming from history. So fact wise, there is nothing between you. This I find extremely liberating.” For T5 this “nothing” then means he has an opportunity to create everything and every given moment he is accountable for what he wants to do in his life. Also this understanding of possibility and what is available for a young person is offered in the training as an attitude to practice. Answering the question about the purpose of Basic Synergy, trainers altogether summarized it as creating an environment for young people to experience freedom of choice and connected with it accountability. T1 perceives freedom of choice as a state in which there is creativity in one´s response to events: “If you ask what is the purpose, this is the purpose. That people realize that they have choice. Not in everything, I am not somebody who says you can always choose, because I don´t think life is like this... because you need to take in account the background that you are coming from. The country that you live in, the social aspects that you have with family there... all determine what you can or cannot do. Of course, you can step out of it, it is possible. But it hardly happens.” He finds it important to highlight that with a choice there is often a price and it can be useful for young people to realize both in order to make conscious and responsible decisions in life. T3 further recalled the goal and the purposes of the training that are shared with participants on the first day, where awareness of one´s reality and being creative with solutions are the main message. And T2 emphasizes that such awareness is necessary in terms of facts, when young people practice “to see, accept and be aware of facts as they are” with the encouragement to act upon what is present and available in their life rather than upon their own possibly misleading interpretations. For both T6 and T5 this attitude means “taking your life in your own hands and not being victim of circumstances” and the intention in the training for T5 is then to provide youth with means to plan things based on what they want with their own vision, which he calls “personal empowerment”: “How me as a person I can get the inner power to create things for myself, with myself, with the others around me.” Additionally, T4 found important to mention that for him this process is not only about the development of participants, but also the development of society as a consequence, as he sees supporting youth in finding their ways as one of the solutions to create a better functioning society.
151
7.3.1.1 “Choice” and “empowerment” as used in a program Having and making a choice is a key pillar of both training´s content and context, this is what all the trainers agree on. They put emphasis on the variety of choices that are in focus during the whole program and the attitude that is encouraged in young people: to be aware of the choice making process and to recognize choices as diverse opportunities that are in their hands to accept or to refuse. T1 is describing how the training is creating space for young people to reflect on the consequences of their choices and decide according to what they want to achieve. He also reveals that part of the method is to offer an experience where everybody is gaining: “Here it is a constant opportunity of choices, in the different processes. About how to play the game of win and win, that is the most important one. Like how you can choose for yourself and in this also can choose for another, so both people are winning. Although we are living in the society that is encouraging winning - losing.” Expressed in other words, as T5 states: “We are social beings, so how the choices that I make can be ok for me and others around me.“ T1 further explains that choice is understood in the training in broader context: “Choices in things that you have to solve, choices in people that you need to meet. Choices in what you like and don´t like in people but also in things.” He sees choice as a fundamental stone of a certain motto of the training that young people are offered to contemplate on and to practice. He formulates it in a way that the choice is simply always there: “You can make it, you can break it. You can enjoy, you can suffer. Pain is unavoidable, suffering is optional. That´s the motto.” T6 adds that this attitude is shared with participants at the very beginning of the training. As she elaborates, the first step when participants are about to agree or disagree with ground rules of the training is to verify with them whether it is their conscious choice: “You ask them - Ok, are you willing to participate? There is a choice when they check, are you in or are you out. Or then you do different activities and you always have these choices and we never tell people you have to do this. But then if you make some choice, make sure you know what might be the consequences.” She is also bringing an example of young people who say they don´t have a choice in certain situations, when they see themselves as merely figures in someone´s else design. T6 emphasizes that it is an attitude she works frequently with: “So I think we work with it a lot, like saying there is always a choice, just see how you actually realize that choices are there and what choices bring. And what is the responsibility connected with the choice.” Another practitioner also brings attention to the rules which are an important part of the training. For T3 it is important to make clear with participants that the rules are there not to limit their choices but to define the space “where we can support people, and to facilitate cooperation between all participants, trainers and other staff”. According to T2 another important aspect is what he calls “never closing topics”, meaning communicating with youth in a way that there are no definite statements of his own in open discussions with participants that would eliminate choices of participants. “I all the time let them with the question. And also with the language that I am using, I all the time let the somehow in between. I all the time offer them the possibility to say yes and to say no. I somehow believe that it is in the system of Synergy trainings. It is all that I am just an invitation to take it or leave it. And it is totally in their hands, if they take it or not.” We can see how trainers operate with this concept while working with youth. Apparently, there is a very clear and strong correlation between their own understanding of it and how they communicate it to their clients. Regarding the empowerment T5 gives a very short answer: “It is the training.” Same as in case of choice, also here trainers are united in their perception. T3 is connecting this concept with rules as well. For her creating empowerment is about giving space to youth with no 152 expectations on reactions and: “Accepting what they bring. Supporting them with questions and soft guidance, no pushing, still challenging them. Giving a clear frame - the ground rules.” T2 puts it as “being ok” with the moment and with whatever participants bring in. And T1 reveals one of the rules that is connected to empowerment specifically: “We ask people not in this training but in many trainings that you don´t solve the problems of someone else. Because there if you do that, you are disempowering. So you don´t believe, if you do so, that they can solve it themselves. Because you don´t believe it, you don´t give them a chance.” Empowerment according to him is what is used in the training – creating a situation for young people where they can find solutions for themselves together or individually. T6 describes that this attitude allows youth to “find out that they are capable of it”, meaning to be the ones who can solve issues. And T4 mentions that at the same time there is “lots of space to make mistakes”. His observation so far is that young people feel safe to make mistakes in such kind of training and it results into overcoming personal fears and obstacles that would stop them from learning: “And then if you feel free to make mistakes, then they feel the courage to really go for it. Like fully. Not holding back, and I find this empowering. I gonna go, I know I could fail, but I still wanna go.”
7.3.1.2 “Motivation” and “self-perception” in a training
I find it quite useful to summarize what was the main motivation for young people to take part in a self-development training in the first place. Knowing what moves them towards such an experience might serve understanding their motives for improving their life situation and hence provide social workers with valuable information about what to address in case of young people when encouraging them to be involved. Many of interviewees revealed that the first thing that supported their decision to go was an invitation from a friend, meaning they have got information and invitation from a trusted source. As Ester describes: “A friend told me about it, she participated, I think the same year in February, maybe. And for me, like, it's really life-changing and I should try it, so I applied.” The main motivation to participate in training as young people shared was a desire for an adventure. Quite a considerable number of participants – more than half of them - admitted that one way or another, self-development as such wasn´t their main motivation or a motivation at all. Caesar remembers: “So, I didn't know anything about the personal development element, anything... I knew only this adventure, fun, outdoor activities, and that's why I wanted to go.” Emil, Flora and Elenor when being asked about motivation put it very openly as “travelling”, as all three were curious about a foreign country and were not much concerned about the program of the event itself. And Filip adds that for him another important aspect was that it was financially affordable since it was covered by grant – which also Ilona, as well as some others, who “didn´t have much money” appreciated as well. For Zora part of motivation was another availability of the course. Coming from a non-EU country she was seeking an opportunity for an experience abroad: “When I have read the requirements I thought I may apply, because many of the programs of EU they have the limitation for the countries that are not members of EU. I was surprised that [her country] is allowed.” For Tibor it was rather a “holiday” and he was expecting entertainment, for Afina the first and for Frida a second opportunity to go abroad in their lives. The same motivation was initially shared by T4 when he came as a participant.
153
On the other side, a will to develop skills was a strong motivational factor for other participants. Vladimir had it quite clear: “I heard this training could help me out with myself and how to work with my mind and with I don´t know how to react to some situations with people around me, so not to be way too much aggressive. So that was the reason why I went there, to improve my social life and may be also my communication with people.” Communication with others was the main skill to develop for Ben as well. Lucas also describes that he wanted to work on his skills – yet curiously not connected to self- development, as he didn´t realize at that time it would be the main focus in the training. For him the additional topic of the training, which was theatre, was more important: “Getting techniques for me as a facilitator. Some extra tools. That´s what I thought.” Diana then interestingly points out that she doesn´t want to “stay the same all my life” and wants to “develop somehow” and “learn something about myself and my main functioning”, which brought her to training. And Zora who has taken part in some self-development activities before wanted to extend her experience to international level. Thirdly, for one third of participants the main motivation was mere curiosity. Valeria for example says she hasn´t expected much out of the training: “Well, just curiosity. I haven´t expected it to... have such an impact on my life.” And Gregor explains that to him it meant “to do something different, which was unknown..., curiosity and desire to take a risk”. Costina had some friends who participated in training and she wanted to see “what was this big mystery” as her friends were sharing their stories from the event. Padme heard from a friend that the training was a “life changing experience” and she became curious. Trainers T5 and T6 claimed this was their main motivation to participate as well. Almost half of young people also mentioned that they wanted to get new input in their own learning. As Marina states, she was searching for ways to “cope with life” and Ilona wanted to find understanding for people from other countries. And similar amount of young people came to resolve their personal issues known to them prior to the training. Alina is one of them: “I was completely broken. Like, in my personal life, my relationship was not going really well... and I wanted to create a better life for myself.” Similarly Gustav wanted to work out his relationship with a partner and his acknowledged problems in self-esteem, while Padme decided to work with her fears and “to be more spontaneous, be more assertive”. Vladimir also informs: "I was going through some stuff with my step father. So I was looking for peace, for peace for my soul let´s say. Because I was quite nervous and also aggressive person, and I needed some to calm down a little bit.” Others declared that their motivation was to discover themselves, to make decisions on their life crossroads or simply to meet new people. Ben is one of those for whom an opportunity to participate in the training came in an uncertain period of his life: “I didn't feel formed as a personality, you know. I was looking for whom to become and how to be. What is right, what is not. Because there's so many ideas, you know, and some of them contradicting to others, and that confused me a little bit. So probably that was main what the motivation, to put things together.” And Roxolana remembers that she was a student when she decided to participate and she was lacking some unidentified element in her life: “I felt I am missing something and I feel like I need something... And I like need to grow or develop, I just may be need to do something like this - go to another country, out of my comfort zone, and do something new and try to learn more about myself and develop.” Gregor was in a situation after quitting his job and not knowing what to do next while Dagmara was seeking an opportunity to re-think her priorities and to understand where she “wants to go”. Hugo summarized his situation as not knowing “what to do with my life” and “being lost”.
154
Remarkably, some young people reported that a personal example of a person that participated in training was an additional motivation. For example Dragomir and Padme recalled social skills of those people that they both found inspiring and their desire was to learn from the same source. Similarly, T2 came to participate after meeting a friend and seeing “how much she is in harmony with herself and with the things that she is doing”.
There were also questions in the research mapping the concept of motivation directed to participants and trainers. While participants were asked what their motivation was to take part in training, the question towards trainers was regarding how the motivation is being used in a program. In other words, how they understand it and how they use motivation while working with youth. Rather remarkable is how T1 perceives motivation: “Motivation is coming from or curiosity or pressure. Everybody is motivated to run very fast on the moment there is a tiger behind you that is trying to catch you. This is motivation. An outside source. Intrinsic motivation is something completely different. People are motivated on the moment that it catches them.” He explains that the purpose of the training is not to motivate young people and he as a trainer is not motivating youth: “Most of the time we want to motivate people because the one who is motivating somebody else who wants something. Not because the person wants it. Motivation is a very polluted word. Because mostly with motivation we mean manipulation. Which is something completely different.” According to him when youth is not interested in something it means there is a lack of catching element: “Apparently you cannot find something that connects with their interest. Or they cannot find something that connects with their interest. So they will not move.” T5 explains the same position in a way that in the training he creates context where the others can be self motivated. And T4 brings an additional perspective summarizing that it is not that much about motivating oneself, because one is always motivated for something (for example sleeping instead of doing an exercise), but rather about realizing what a person is motivated for and why. As he says, it depends on what we put our focus on, what we are telling ourselves, how we see ourselves at the given moment or do we have energy for that particular activity etc. T2 shares the same understanding with both as he reveals that he doesn´t believe in motivating someone. Using his words, motivation is there for young people to discover by themselves: “Meaning to get motivated on Basic Synergy trainings you have to find your own sun or your own I don´t know what inside you, and then you go along. But motivation I am not giving to the people and I truly believe that Synergy training is not giving motivation to people. But if you participate and if you allow yourself to be in the process, you will find your own.” T3 then adds that there are many aspects in the program of the training that might support youth in this process: “A wide variety of activities, their nature, atmosphere, style ensures that everyone finds some activities motivating.” According to her, the ultimate understanding for participants is that motivation comes from within and they do not need to depend on an outside source to feel motivated. And T6 summarizes the role of support provided in the training for youth to gain motivation: “And what we give is this support when we support them in saying ok, what is your learning goal, and... we support them with the reflection. But still how they work with it is very much up to them.” Regarding self-perception, based on what youth revealed the training supported them to a significant extend firstly to find out more about the characteristics they were aware of before, but also to discover completely new “sides” of themselves. Valeria´s summary could serve as an example: “I learned a lot about myself, how do other people see me, and how do I see myself and how do other people see me like differently than I see myself of course.”Or as Carla explained: “It allowed me, it gave me the opportunity in that safe space to see myself in 155 another perspective, in many other perspectives.” She further stated that also her perspective of herself shifted – which was an expression used by a significant amount of other young people in describing the changes they recognized in seeing themselves. And Max pointed out that the way one perceives himself affects the way he is perceiving his surroundings: “I understood ok, I don´t understand myself, how I can understand these people and this world around, because everything starts from myself and my perspectives or view. Like I understand firstly about myself and then I understand how I behave, so it´s like a base from which begins everything I think.” This is an interesting conclusion which puts self- perception as a prerequisite for a broader view. Focusing on the role of self-perception in the training, it seems that trainers have quite a different understanding of it. While T1 thinks that it is a feature that “not everybody is capable of” and therefore believes it is not really an important factor in the training to be practiced as such, T3 is sure self-perception is of “key importance, main tool and main area of improvement” in the training. And T5 uses a metaphor to describe how according to him self-perception can be worked with during the training depending on the level of involvement of participants: “You put the ball on the water and if you want to put it deep, when you leave it it´s gonna go high. If you put it less it will go less high. It is not only for the training, it is in general. Like the more you get involved in it, the more you get out of it on level of self-perception, self awareness and realisation.” And for T6 self-perception is strongly linked to the process of reflection. She states that this is something that young people don´t experience very often in their lives: “Like stopping, writing things down, drawing, talking with somebody and really...making it clear like ok, there was an activity that happened, how was it for me. How did I feel, what did it bring, so you really stop and you see. There is a lot about this awareness and also creating the self perception through the reflection.”
7.3.1.3 Offer in Basic Synergy training and its target group To explore what the target group of a Basic Synergy training is and to establish what the offer for these young people is, I firstly asked youth “Who do you believe could benefit from this kind of training?” Secondly,the trainers were asked what the offer of the training for the target group is and how could the Synergy training meet their needs. The offer could be summarized as awareness of circumstances, personal accountability for choices, flexibility and capacity to create and keep authentic relationships. Both T3 and T4 emphasized the awareness factor. T4 mainly describes it as awareness of having a choice, which for him is the main point since in his experience many disadvantaged young people are living in a story that they think they cannot change: “They are stuck, they are less opportunity or whatever they call it in their mind, and that is it. I think they have an opportunity to be aware that it is not like this, they have the power to change things. This is the main offer, the realization.” Part of this offer is a group context in which youth can develop social skills and see that things can be different in other people´s lives and also practical tools they can implement in daily life. He believes that when young people realize they have a choice they actually make better choices: “We make worse choices when we don´t know that we have a choice. We think we don´t have a choice and then we want to fight it or we do it just because we have to. Many times there are these people they don´t believe that they can get it and then this cuts their willingness to do, willingness to develop or willingness to work for it.” T2 agrees and calls this awareness process “to face with it”. Personal accountability was mostly elaborated by T5, who connects this issue mainly to the non-supportive environment some young people are growing up in. He thinks that then the 156 main struggle for youth is to let go of the old habits which can be rather destructive for them: “How you can unlearn the things that you learned there, and create things that you want to create for yourself.” At the same time according to him the first step for such youth is to really deal with their own challenges: “I have to admit that I see that it is a bit egoistic, this training... In a sense that for me it brings focus first in myself, and if I make it work for myself I can also make it work for my family, for my friends, for my environment. To write the life that you want to live not to act that life is waiting for you.” Flexibility was mentioned by T1 as another offered attribute. He highlighted a concrete context of flexibility not as a philosophical term, but rather a very practical attitude for youth to adapt: “How to deal with circumstances that I have now. And that is problem solving like getting your qualities on the table, being creative in your solutions, using all the tools that are available.” According to him this skill is very needed in our times: “Getting to know yourself like ok, how can I operate. And that is offered in the training. How to navigate yourself, I think that is one of the powerful things in it. You go through an event, and you navigate your own learning, you navigate your own choices.” T6 thinks that an additional offer which is linked with the needs of young people nowadays is a chance to create authentic relationships: “Because the training offers the space where you are invited to be very authentic, to share, to go deep, and to be with people on a very authentic level.” She explains that the content of the training by having specific activities encourages young people to have “meaningful conversations” when reflecting and sharing about themselves. This way they get the opportunity to see that this is actually possible, and that its available, which later on supports them in re-creating such authentic conversations and consequently closer relationships in their daily life. In a survey young people were asked who they think the Basic Synergy training could serve well or who could benefit from it. Remarkably, almost all the participants and trainers answered “for everybody” disregarding age, nationality or gender, and five specified that this training would be more beneficial for a target group of “young people in need”. The arguments for this statement were somewhat diverse, yet in general the main reasoning was that there is always something that the person can experience in the training that could contribute to his or her growth. For example R1 wrote “training always has something to give back to you” and R2 explained that self-development is a “life-long learning process” and thus such trainings might be beneficial at nearly any time. R6 is then arguing that “each person can find something valuable” although the benefits that he gained might not be valuable for others. Yet R15 emphasizes that a person needs to “have the desire to develop” himself, in accordance with R18 who calls this condition “to be ready to face it and get involved”. R7 expresses his understanding of the target group of this training broadly: “Literally anyone, from drug addicts, to just young teenagers who are looking for guidance and direction in their lives, to even well-established professionals who need to reconnect with their initial inspiration for work projects.” R21 then narrows it to people “who are lost, confused, doubting, have no self esteem, lack experience and knowledge about themselves, who want to change, who need support”. And R29 chooses to use a slightly poetic expression - according to her this training could serve best to those who “would like to meet themselves”. R45 then brings quite an unique among the others opinion, as she believes the training method would be beneficial in secondary school levels: “Like age sixteen. You start forming yourself not going with a flow, but setting goals for your own future.” Gustav also adds that he would recommend this experience to every young person, but especially to those “having the label of disadvantaged” as himself. Here it is worth reminding how trainers agreed on 157 disadvantaged youth being hard to reach for participation in such trainings. Again, regarding the target group, T1 admitted that no matter how much the less-opportunity might benefit from this experience more and although there are more young people from this category participating, these trainings are still mostly consisting of participants from “not troubled” middle class.
7.3.2 Limiting or stopping elements of the training
A wide range of views was offered by respondents of the survey. One of the limitations was connected to the role of the trainer. For R5 and R30 possible incompetence of a person taking this role can be a risk or a limitation, while R14 understands a risk in a trainer being seen as a role model or someone who knows more and, is higher on some imaginary hierarchy. According to his words, it was his personal experience: “There's a space where I struggle, as it's not necessary true and might create a picture, there's someone higher than me, so I am less.” Another aspect was linked with the attitude of the team, which in training is based on a neutral approach and on separation from participants. In such a way, the team does not interact with the participants during the breaks - in order to not interfere in group dynamics - while still supporting with the program. Ilona explained how a rule of not interacting closely with team members during the training was confusing and distracting for her: “At the end it all made sense. It is just strange in the moment, because you do not really know why is that happening for example that you couldn´t speak. But in the end it made sense. That´s rules and you just accept them eventually.” This is also what a trainer T5 remembers was hard to accept for him when he was participating himself, since one of the team members was his friend: “Back then I was thinking that it was limiting that I cannot hang out with my roommate and discuss and reflect. But looking now, I understand why it was there.” In case of six respondents of the survey there also appeared a conclusion that there is nothing in a training that could potentially stop or limit young people in their development or growth. While R6 declared the risks and limitations are “happening only in the brain”, R13 used a metaphor “sky is the limit”. This view was also shared by trainers T1 and T3, with the latter adding that she initially found it “strange to share personal matters with strangers”, yet concluding that it did not really stop her from going through the experience in any way. Another limitation R23 sees in a person. According to him the main limitation comes from oneself, explaining: “Thinking that one doesn't need it or it will bring nothing means blocking oneself from the learning it can bring.” T5 and T6 agree with T6 pointing out how personal matters outside of the training´s context were stopping her in learning: “I was still kind of processing something that was happening outside of the training, and it made the training very difficult for me, because I was actually making a very painful decision.” While for some the structure of the training is a supporting element (see the chapter 7.3.4), there are also those who see it rather as an artificial aspect and thus quite limiting. As R14 describes, for him it is hard to connect the structure of this experience with his experience back home: “I see the limitation of processes being structured and modelled, being it taken a bit apart from everyday life. I prefer more natural learning conditions and going with what is there now.” The next mentioned limitation was connected to accessibility of the course. R16 has several times encountered difficulties with being selected as a participant due to the amount of young
158 people interested in the program when she applied. She thinks youth should be given more chances to take part in this training: “I don't know how much candidates are for any given training or how many people are rejected because of no available places but I think it should be made available for more people in some way.” Further, potential limitation was also recognized in case of people with mental health issues. R17 was persuaded that “it could be dangerous” for them while R32 was concerned that participation in such training could even “destroy the psychology of the person” in this case. Curiously, some limiting elements were listed only by trainers while not appearing among participants´ observations. For example both T4 and T6 admitted for them part of the theory was “boring” when they were remembering their own experience as participants. T2 mentions two things. Firstly, it was a lot of writing: “Many things we needed to write down yeah, and I am not this writing type and if I have to write down things, it is already suffering.” Another thing he pointed out was the tempo of the group: “I caught myself that I am way much faster than some of the people, and since its happening in the group context like this is one of the advantage and disadvantage at the same time. Because it means that you need to wait for everyone like till the last ones are getting it.” And finally, he found the fact that he did training in his mother tongue (which is an exception in Basic Synergy courses) created a certain limitation as well compared to diversity of experience of other young people who participated in international environment using English. T6 on the other side talked about the insufficient level of English on the trainer´s side that was disturbing her at the beginning of the training: “I remember that sometimes I was really having troubles understanding, and it was also pissing me off, how can a person who doesn´t have an understandable English deliver training.” Unclarity and complexity of the training course was the last limitation recognized both by participants and trainers. R47 experienced it as misunderstanding in simple things adding: “Sometimes you need someone to explain it to you, so that you don´t take it personally or rejected it without proper understanding.” T4 and T6 see training as an intense event where it is challenging for young people to completely understand and embrace everything what is happening. T6 summarizes: “What I think is that training is very intense and there is a lot to take, the risk is that people don’t get some parts and they misunderstand them, they misinterpret them. And then they leave with things that are not clear, not closed up, that they are somehow they didn´t express it, they didn´t ask for explanation.” Filip and Diana agreed that while needing clarity they were lacking it in some moments of the training. Both remembered how even when asking for it they were left with a question mark as a trainer wouldn´t explain certain aspects and leave it to their interpretation.
7.3.2.1 Follow-up of the trainin0067 An important weaker element recognized by some participants is the follow-up part after the training. Carla as one of those who were missing a better follow-up says: “You're back home and then a bit of some evaluation, maybe, some question a bit of, how it is in the present moment after two or three months. Because I don't remember having this, maybe this could bring also a new push, like a bit of ok, looking back to and now, how it is?” R5 is in agreement with her as she thinks Basic Synergy trainings don't have so much follow-up and there is little time to create a habit or ritual that also works in daily life. She compares it to meditation courses that provide “something that can actually stay as daily habit/practice also after the course”. Also Ben remembers that after finishing the training he was lacking more support and according to him the organizers probably didn't have “really good 159 designed closing part”. And while R35 sees not being able to follow-up as one of the risks that participants face in this training, R38 refers to this gap as to a “lack of longer-term assistance in the development process”. The same perception is shared by the other respondent R28 who has personal experience with organizing trainings as well and finds the follow-up one of the biggest issues: “How I see it now, self-development is an ongoing process and as life goes up and down so do our emotions and patterns. As an organizer I saw a lot of people who did the training, changed their lives for the better and then two years later went back to exactly the same issues they had before and started considering the training as ''something silly and cute I did when I was younger''. Based on his statement, it is then crucial to give enough attention to this aspect, as lack of follow-up might affect the impact of the training in a negative way and significantly limit young people´s development. Padme´s experience was similar. She recalls that at the end there was some activity, when each of the participants set “very specific, very concrete” goals for the time after the training based on their decisions and what they wanted to change in their lives. But as she claims, nobody checked them and it was easy to let the whole plan vanish: “I don´t remember that somebody would ask like "Hey, what´s up with your plans? Did you do something?" We had this Facebook group and we were probably posting something after the training, but for me it wasn´t may be really enough.” She further explained that for her sharing on social media was not supportive and she would prefer something “more personal”. At the same time she admitted she wasn´t sure about the purpose of the follow-up activity and could have missed some important instructions regarding it. Laura brings another point of view. While revealing that as a national team they didn´t complete the task of follow-up, she still finds it a useful process that also contributed to their growth: “To tell the truth we did nothing. We met once and agreed about something and even that meeting was important. Because we have met, we had a task and we started to think and to discuss what we want to do, what we - actually me and other people - we personally, what we want and we can do. And it was important, yes.” One of the trainers elaborated on this issue as well. As T5 discusses, a poorly designed follow-up part is a weak point of this training indeed: “I think that we as trainers of this training we have to take care of how these people can go and use this force that they get in this training in their society. There is potential, the way we do it I don´t see its somehow working...” Yet he wasn´t sure himself whether there is a capacity to design and offer a better follow-up adding that it might be an offered experience after which young people could decide themselves how to implement it. 7.3.3 Risks in participation in the training Answering to the question whether they recognized any risks in participating in Basic Synergy training one fifth of the respondents replied they couldn´t list any. Nevertheless, there were others who described several different aspects they found risky. The main risks identified were confrontation experienced by participants during the program, difficulties in implementing back home what they have achieved in a training, intensity of the program itself and participation of young people who are dealing with some mental issues.
7.3.3.1 Confrontation Both among participants and trainers, the most frequently mentioned possible risk that young people could face during the program was to be confronted in such a way, that it might be too much for them to absorb or even also not supporting their growth. Some of the respondents 160 revealed that for them some new realizations or activities were overwhelming and difficult to take in. As R35 states, confronting people with more than they can handle in that period of time could be contra-productive. Trainer T2 claims that there is such an element as timing for training: “Also what can be risk, or risky or shaky a bit, is that people are coming to Basic Synergy when it is not time to do it.” He explains that in this training, a person needs to be open to work with his or her questions and to change, otherwise unwillingness could only create an unnecessary “under zero state” when a person is even more discouraged to be pro-active than before this experience. T6 agrees that there are cases when confrontation or state out of comfort zone is too much, so young people “get lost”. And R6 shares his own experience: “One of the risks was to change the way I've been thinking before that, to go out of my comfort zone and feel unknown emotions.” Interestingly, R31 thinks that this state is caused also by conscious decision to ignore, as for some young people it would bring an ultimate instability: “The risk is just to see things that people prefer to ignore for a long time and facing those things could create a breakdown, but it's for their own good.” R34 goes further in explanation. According to her, becoming more aware brings full responsibility to the person, which young people may not want. Still she is persuaded that awareness is a better choice: “I can pretend I don´t know but that would hurt even more.” Additionally, since in this training there is a lot of self-reflection and self-guidance used, the risk could be the attitude of a young person towards him/herself, which might be destructive. On the other hand, young person could react with certain resistance when being confronted. R9 summarizes these different reactions: “Sometimes one could be too harsh to themselves, too critical or the other extreme - too content with what is there, not wanting to question or change the status quo.” R21 agrees and adds that the risk in the last case is that participants are also “ignoring the process” and are not giving possible change a chance as they fear what is “behind it” and fear the “responsibility of their own learning”. An experience shared by R39 could serve as an example, as she admitted “switching off” her reactions and many times when the situation in the training became too emotional for her, telling herself that this was “not serious” moment. Also there is a matter of being informed and ready for the experience. If young people are not well-prepared and are lacking information about the training, it could result into quitting it completely. As R49 points out: “It might be that some people are not prepared for an experience on a deeper level within a completely new group of people and expect more like a lecture style that will stay on the surface. Therefore, they might drop out of the training.” Another interesting aspect of confrontation effect after the training was brought by R45. She informed that she witnessed a particular behaviour among young people after the event, when they would want to use their experience in daily life and would start to “to teach or coach other people by confronting them in every single step”. According to her, such “persuading” people wasn´t working well nor for those who did it nor for those addressed because: “The tool is to empower person and the person thinks that he is able to change and control everything. But it does not happen.” Other three respondents brought up the same aspect. While R19 calls this attitude “starting to become judgemental towards others because you think you are doing so much”, R36 refers to accepting the experience in this event as “the holy truth”. This is something that also trainer T4 talks about. He sees it even as the main risk: “So they take the training as new belief system they should believe in and this is how it is. And it could be that it works for you, if you realize it, you are choosing to believe it. It is not "the truth". You choose to believe it. But some people go into making it holy. And I find it dangerous, because then it stops growth. Cause growth is not about this is the way, it is about finding the way, always.” 161
Half of trainers came to agreement that the confrontation issue is the one they see participants dealing with. T1 remembers young people coming with no certain motivation and having an experience “they don´t want”, when he was wondering for which reason they decided to participate in a first place. And T2 describes a curious risk that wasn´t mentioned by participants, which he calls “acting”. He means the situation when a young person decides not to be authentic and to pretend certain states or hide his/her real motives or needs. Also in this case their healthy development is rather under question.
7.3.3.2 Difficulties in implementing back home When the training experience stays just in a notebook or in one´s head, emphasizes R25, this is the main risk. Young people might see their learning at the training as a one time in life experience which stays in the past and is not transformed to their daily life. R22 refers to such outcome as “being seduced” back home with the usual habits and environment and basically “acting the same way” as before the undergone change. And R18 is sure that participating once brings much less benefit than when a person decides to be a part of the training again in a position of a team member for example: “It is inspiring in general and it dissolves fast after the experience. It might stay just as a pleasant or unpleasant dream in someone's mind and memory. The ones who benefit are the ones who get involved and stay and participate more than once.” R28 gives an explanation to a risk of such going back. She thinks it happens because some participants are lacking support after the training and thus are struggling with using the tools that helped them to grow. Also R37 expressed his concern about the environment where young person is returning to after the training. He claims it has a big impact on how participants use their experiences afterwards and whether (s)he would be accepted with the changed attitudes: “The individual... can have the world turn around him, that his/her original environment will find the participant alienated.” Trainer T6 gives a different perspective about the same issue. According to her, it also depends on how young people view their experience. When comparing it to daily life they find it exceptional and not possible to use, then they will also miss the opportunity to change things for themselves back home: “It is kind of an artificially created group. So you come and you get this really strong experience, and you go home and you are not able to recreate it. Yeah, like thinking it was because of this group, it was because of these people and my friends are not like this, my family is not like this. So actually close the experience into the group where you experienced the training and you don´t know how to transmit it. So you actually go home and you are disappointed that the life is still the same and you don´t know how to use what you got.” Another difficulty that T5 mentioned was connected to impulsive decisions. He states that during the last day of the training, it is important to advice participants to be careful with their decisions immediately after this experience: “We say that the training is also creating emotion after it, and we say like don´t make changes in your life that cannot be undone for 6 weeks after the training. And this we say for a reason.” As he elaborates, this reason is based on the fact that with the emotions and diversity that youth lives through the training they might make decisions they could regret later on when seeing more clearly the circumstances back in their environment. Also for this process guidance would be helpful.
7.3.3.3 Intensity of program Based on the responses of participants and trainers, there is no doubt that the way how the training is run can be very intense for many young people, and in certain circumstances it may represent rather a limitation to their development. What participants generally shared 162 about the intensity factor of the intervention could be summarized firstly with the words of R40: “For me, it was like learning how to live all over again, but it is worth it. Initially it costs a lot of energy, but it pays back over the long term.” Yet this summary would be incomplete without the description of R41: “There is too much going on and only little time to absorb.” Also T6 believed this was the reality in some cases and T5 additionally admitted that the training offers too much information especially the first day. Altogether we can conclude that there is a positive side of intensity which offers a rich ground for learning, yet on the other side for a young person there is a real lack of time and space to embrace and understand all the experience.
7.3.3.4 Mental state of participants Several respondents identified a potential risk in participating in training when having unresolved mental issues. Interestingly, none of them wrote about having heard of it, witnessing anything like that during their training or even experiencing it themselves. For example R10 thinks that if training is delivered “incorrectly” it might cause “mental breakdown” of a person, while R14 and R50 see a threat in “opening traumas” that young people had prior participating. R44 then sees also the effect of one´s state on other participants, as for her the risk is: “Possibility of having participants who don't mention any kind of health problems, or who are mentally instable. That could affect the whole group, and have counterproductive results.” Her observation reminds about importance of knowing about the state of participants on trainer´s side and necessity to inform about it from participant´s side. Also this is the risk that the majority of trainers brought attention to. For T4 and T1 though the training itself is not much more potentially damaging than any other events in case of mental state. As the first says, since they are working with people, anything can happen. And as the later adds: “If you are depressed... and on medicine or on therapy. But then everything is risky. It is not so specific in the training. Life is risky on itself then.” As he explains further, it happens that young people don´t disclose information about themselves and then participating in a training is not what is helping them: “People who didn´t tell things, that they were with the psychotherapist and they were not doing well at all, and then they come to the training and they got ...found themselves in a setting that wasn´t helpful on that moment. Because there are too many stimulus going on.” And while T3 agrees with him saying there are basically no significant risks for “healthy and responsible” people, she also puts emphasis on the fact that the training cannot be used as a therapeutical session: “I do not suggest it for people with depression, schizophrenia, borderline and other symptoms that require qualified support. This training is not a therapy or a substitute for that.” She is persuaded that people with such conditions should only join under the agreement and close supervision of their therapists. T5 then mentions cases from his practice, when young people who recognized the training wasn´t suitable for them exactly for those reasons would quit and then come to participate later when they felt better and were ready for it. Additional risks that emerged from interviews and survey were regarding outdoor part of the program. T1 claimed there were certain situations when participants needed to be careful, as in daily life, for example with traffic. T4 then informed about one case when a participant with a drug addiction who didn´t inform about his state upfront was also struggling with a training, yet according to T4 it was difficult to say whether it was simply another implication of the addiction or not.
163
7.3.4 Supporting elements of the training
Broadly speaking, the elements that participants indicated as the most supporting their growth and learning in the training were the approach of a trainer usually seen as inspiring and helpful, interestingly again confrontation as a source of awareness, experiential form of learning providing personal frame, outdoor part as a very intense component, safe environment as a basic needed attribute, guided sharing setting among participants, feedback as a tool to find new perspective and finally, as many respondents highlighted, the fact that the training is very practical and usable in life.
7.3.4.1 Approach of a trainer and confrontation Carla and Alina remember how they were impressed by trainer´s skilful guidance and both expressed appreciation for his support. Alina even mentions that seeing a trainer working with youth gave her some kind of a model: “And I remember [trainers´ names] and they were amazing and I really love their presence there. And I was really...and that time I was really convinced that I wanted to be a trainer.” It also seems that for some participants a trainer may represent a highly valued individual, as for example for Marina: “For me he is really interesting person, he has got a huge amount of knowledge... he has got so many skills. So for me, he has been a really very charismatic leader.” Although there is no evidence that such a view would be harmful in this case, I consider seeing a trainer as the one who has “huge amount” of either knowledge or skills while being “really very charismatic” as potentially an element of a power imbalance. Trainers also mentioned the approach that they use as one of supporting aspects, yet in their case rather than knowledge and skills it was more about a certain way of behaviour they choose for guiding young people. T2 recognizes it as “directness” or in other words “impolite approach”, meaning that he generally tends to skip usual polite phrases and prefers to communicate in a short and clear way either when giving instructions or facilitating open sharing. For T4 this attitude is strongly connected with his own experience as a participant, when he was surprised by such behaviour of trainers that he calls “not pleasing”. He adapted it in his practice as well: “They didn't really, or even tried to please us. And it is something that stood with me. Because usually in trainings of course you want to, the one leading has to lead, and it's more pleasing approach...”Also T5 recalls how he perceived trainer´s approach when participating himself: “I was feeling that she is there for us, the way she was delivering for me it was first time seeing so well structured trainership. It supported me, it gave me safety to feel ok in this environment.” Being structured and focused on participants are thus significant elements of attitude in his practice. As we could see in previous chapter, confrontation is seen by some participants as a limiting element. Yet there are also those who have an opposite view. Afina is one of them and she describes confrontation as her opportunity for becoming aware: “And also I confronted with the fact that I had certain image of myself, that I thought I'm so open-minded, that I was so free and I don't take myself seriously, and so on, but I realized it was all cultural. That level that I was open-minded was open-minded in [my country].” For her this realization brought certain struggles which ultimately led to desired change: “So it put me down first, this confrontation, but then I start to build them up again. How can I say? My perception changed, I believe I build this more objective look to myself, instead of getting these labels.” And for Ben it represented a shift in viewing his life situation and his position in it as of the person who is capable of change, which he shortly describes: “Shit, everything is in my hands! That was like wow, you know.” 164
Trainers also named possible positive outcomes of confrontation. T1 sees it as a way to review one´s own values and behaviours and T4 informs that the training is there to confront young people in the first place: “And confront I don´t mean in a bad way, but kind of put some mirror so people can see themselves. So if they are ready to look, then they see what they are doing that is good for them, what they are doing that is bad for them.” For T6 it is then an opportunity to “find ways how to handle” different situations or diverse cultures.
7.3.4.2 Experiential learning and reflection There was a common understanding among interviewed young people about the supportive nature of experiential attribute of their participation. Cecilia puts it this way: “That we have like the games and then we had the time to review and see back and have some feedback. And I think it was a good place to recognize all ... sometimes having fun, sometimes serious time, to see the things in our lives, in my life. I think it was very good for me. Because it helped me also.” And Carla explains that for her this aspect was indeed very important compared to her formal learning: “I certainly realized what was not working with me and formal education and how I was struggling with the theory. Because I'm a learner by experience, I'm in my high level when I actually do, when I take action.” Also Gustav who has a wide experience in different kind of trainings is persuaded that Basic Synergy offers a variety of experience which makes it effective: “I think that this training in particular offers that possibility both in a theoretical point of view, as well as in experiential point of view. And that is something that is really-really extraordinary and exceptional. Even though you do processes or interactions in this training, actually, they mix that also with really experiential learning. And that is highly effective.” Roxolana in addition values the fact that she was never told what to do and had her own space to discover. She says that for her the method is “fantastic” because she always felt present and enjoyed to be given “things to do and things to experience”. She felt in the training as an owner of her experience: “It is up to me to learn from it or to take things from it. So never has it been told to me hey, this is personal development training, I am gonna teach you how to live your life and what you should believe or things like that.” As T4 underlines, the point is not “just to talk about it”, but to create your own practice. The opportunity to stop and reflect is a part of experiential learning, which young people identified to be beneficial for them. Dagmara recalls that it was even her learning goal to become more reflective: “To take time to reflect on my actions. And I see a huge progress in difference one year ago and now. I also became more aware of the language. And I became more aware of the way I communicate.” Also Flora sees reflection as one of the key tools that she gained in the training and are useful for her nowadays: “That I think more about what´s going on in my head and I don´t react that much, I think more before I do something.” And Emil points out that although he was used to reflect on his actions before quite consciously, “that type of reflection” as practiced during the training he “never had”, hence he thinks he developed himself in this direction. Some other young people also described very concrete outcomes they got through reflective practice when participating. For example for Carla the main understanding was linked with inclusion: “How am I including myself and how am I excluding myself, because by blaming all the time to the other people, yeah, I’m being excluded... So this was quite a reflection.” And Frida explains that for her reflection process started empowerment: “It was that during training I realized that it's very good and helpful for me to work with myself. I only started back then to realize that...okay, I'm in power and I have the power to conduct my life. I experienced like this...reflection method.” Roxolana then discovered the connection between her thinking and her actions that resulted in repeated scenario in her usual behaviour: “That gave me a physical representation and reflection of how I have a certain pattern and how it goes, how I react, how I think, and then how it makes 165 me feel, and then that I cannot handle... back then it was like wooow.” And Max brings an interesting addition. According to him, before the training he wasn´t questioning much his own attitudes or his environment in general. Yet Basic Synergy experience led him to understanding about his reactions and values and after he realized that he started to have questions “about myself, about my relationship, about my family, my friends”, which supported him in improving these areas of his life. Trainers mentioned reflection as a fundamental part of the whole event and using the words of T6, their role is to support young people in connecting what they discover through this process to their life back home. This way it doesn´t stay at the level of realization, but also transforms into improvement of life conditions of youth.
7.3.4.3 Sharing and expressing emotions Sharing experience as another tool used in the training served some young people as a source of inspiration. One of the participants of TC4 wrote in his evaluation form: “The sharing with some group members was very useful. I got inspired by their experiences and achievements and I realized I have a lot of potential too. I am capable of many things.” For some as Emil or Ben it was another new experience. Emil describes it as “really my first steps of learning how do I share with people” and Ben says it was “very powerful to be open and talk to people... touch those personal, you know, stuff”. And using the example of Ester, for whom sharing meant a switch in her attitude of disconnecting from people, it can also create an empowering and healing moment for a person. She describes how she talked about her issue with group members: “I usually just change people and go for new people, I never have like true friends. And then I like start crying and everyone came and hug me and saying "thank you for sharing" and it was really... All this I remember.” And Afina explains how this experience with sharing her true thoughts and emotions affected her connections with people till nowadays: “I can speak about any, let's say, so called deep or emotional subject or private subject. Anywhere, anytime with anyone, but in a very gentle way. Without bothering the personal, without bothering myself, or without putting myself in difficult positions. I can connect to people in more emotional level, let's say.” Also trainers confirm the importance of sharing. T4 even calls it “the most powerful part” and T6 thinks it is a helpful tool for awareness of one´s own inner world. Three participants explicitly highlighted expressing emotions. For Gregor it was a completely new situation, to talk about his inner space and he linked it to fulfilling his need for self-expression. Ester was also not used to sharing her feelings prior the training and as she summarizes, it brought her some sort of a breakthrough: “There were some very emotional moments of sharing where people shared their problems. And I realized, like, everyone has problems, because I thought I'm the only one... For example, a girl and she said she felt discriminated at work, because she's a girl... And I was, I never thought about this and when you see her, you think she's perfect and then you see she has problems.” According to Ester, people don't usually share their problems nor their emotions and as she concluded, this aspect of expressed emotions was really helpful for her to connect with the other young people at the training. Zora revealed she had a very similar realization. As well as ester she wasn´t used to open up about her emotions, and as she explains in the training she recognized the value of it: “They were... touching some deep emotions and some feelings that I hadn´t shared before. And I remember myself crying. I understood the importance of the sincere and the importance of opening yourself to others.” She further adds that the connection that she could create through this expression was something that she was lacking for a long time in her life.
166
7.3.4.4 Group setting and feedback Based on the findings these two elements are connected in beneficial effect on participants of the training. Both were highlighted by young people and trainers, and while possibility of feedback was seen as a contribution to the potential improvement of youth, group context was recognized as a necessary base for it. Using what R49 wrote: “Because of the group context I got feedback from others on me, which was in same case eye-opening and since that time, I remember the feedback time to time, and evaluate how I have grown.” It is clear that, as quite many other participants, she assessed obtained feedback as a lasting reference usable also after the training. This conclusion is also supported by what Valeria who took part in this event five years ago reveals: “So, I got a feedback there about myself, and that´s what I have to say, even after the years when I sometimes remember, it influences me till now, you know. Sometimes I realise, oh yeah, I am doing it again.” She discloses that the feedback from other young people was that they see her as having some kind of a wall around herself, meaning they found her not open much to the others. This perception encouraged her to change behaviour and seek connection with others: “So I constantly try to break the wall. Because I experienced that it always helps me, it always brings something important to me.” Another participant from TC3 wrote in his evaluation form how feedback led him to acceptance: “With a help of feedback from others I also got closer to understanding what my values and needs are, learning to accept the not-so-positive part and learning to accept it as a part of myself.” Apparently it was similar with Gregor, as getting a feedback from others that his “ideas were very interesting and very, how to say, useful” brought him to realization of his potential. And while Dagmara sees feedback “very valuable for my perception of myself”, Cecilia and Vladimir pointed out that they appreciated the frequency of it during the program. Dragomir then remembers how what others told made a “very good starting point” for him as it encouraged him to work on his skills. And Laura explains that she understood once more her “good qualities” in this international gathering of people because they told her “a lot about them”. It is important to add though what trainer T6 emphasized. According to her, it is always clarified in the training that feedback is there for the person to use it or leave it – it is again a choice of a receiver what to do with it: “There is somebody who is giving you the mirror and immediately you see what people take and what they don´t. And it´s up to you... the setting is take what you want, yeah. Do you like it? Keep it. Or you agree what people are saying and may be you want to do the things differently the next time.” Curiously, Lucas shared another point of view. For him the “non-judgemental” approach that he experienced during the training was also caused by what he understood as a limited amount of feedback. He claims that the biggest and the most conscious learning for him was not to see judgement of other people: “That I found actually very cool and free and happy and satisfying. The fact that other people were actually not sending me any feedback, neither positive either negative. And that was, I was the one to play and enjoy and just do things the way I do, because there's no feedbacks from anyone.” In the context of what others said and how the program is structured (there is always space for participants to give feedback), my conclusion is that what Lucas is really talking about are evaluating reactions of other people on his behaviour. Then we could understand what he actually appreciated was that other were not commenting with positive or negative interpretation of what he was doing – and if any instructed feedback took place, it was rather based on facts than on personal evaluation of the person giving it. When it comes to group setting, young people mention different elements that supported them. For example for Carla as well as for Elenor group setting was increasing learning, as both claimed to “learn a lot from what was happening with the other people”. Alina then 167 remembers that thanks to her group, the fact that they were more people, she experienced “a lot of fun”, which could indicate the aspect of increased joy compared to individual´s process. And for Ben his team was part of the support system that helped him to overcome obstacles: “That probably helped me to be so confident, because I know that I had team. I looked at them as a support system.” Also T2 recalled relying on his small group for support when he was a participant himself.
7.3.4.5 Music element and outdoor part T2 and T5 talked about music as a supportive element, which also one of the interviewed young people agreed with. As Marina explains, for her music is especially helpful when she is going through hardships. And listening to music used in the training was inspiring for her: “When you get played songs, which are just to the point of the session, you know... I could recognize most of the lyrics and stuff like this. They were like perfectly chosen, perfectly selected, then this has been huge personal inspiration, which I continue to... source inspiration from music still, to this day.” One of the trainers shared her view. For T2 music is also an element that helps in learning both in personal life and as a tool during the training that he delivers. Another element described by trainers was outdoor part. It was frequently mentioned by young people in this research as well and separate space to this element from perspective of participants is given in the chapter about impact, so here I provide only summary from trainers´ observations. T4 understands outdoor as the most powerful part of the program: “Whatever you do, this is most powerful moment for everyone in the training, just they go out... This kind of put everything together what was before. You are not just in the room, but then you are out there.” He further explains how young people learn to connect and to trust through outdoor experience: “Because they have to make it. Ok, we are together, they find a way to work with each other. And to create like immediate connection and trust and even love, and then they are like surprised with themselves.” For T4 such outcome is not surprising given the conditions of the outdoor, when young people need to rely on themselves. Yet as he elaborates, often youth close themselves to other people and don´t experience real connection. But in outdoor part according to him connection is hard to avoid: “You spend just too much time together. But actually it is not so much if you look in perspective, not so much time... But somehow when you cannot hide, then you open up and connection happens. And it is an example you can have in your life.” T6 then reveals an additional detail about outdoor part, which is connected to handling time and creativity. As she describes, young people get a certain time frame and they can practice how to use it and how to create enjoyment for themselves: “And I think there are more elements in the training where it is about ok, how do you create your energy, how do you create your fun. So again, being able to create something for myself because I want to, no matter what the circumstances are.”
7.3.4.6 Safe environment and practical dimension of the training One of the most significant findings is that majority of respondents claimed to feel very safe during the training. Although they were not asked about it explicitly, almost a half of them emphasized this aspect and some others mentioned it in a context. Interestingly, young people perceive the training as a safe environment despite the fact that most of them don´t know what is coming or what to expect, hence they deal with unknown. Roxolana explains it by the created atmosphere and practiced acceptance of a person and emotions: “How I see it is that you come there without knowing what is gonna happen to you, but it feels safe. So environment is safe. I felt so safe to be quite open with bunch of strangers, you know. Which 168 is if you look at it from perspective of normal life, quite unusual. So the atmosphere created there, and also what was important was that everything is ok actually. Like if you are angry, that´s fine, like that´s good, you know. That, the acceptance of everyone how they are, and the processes and emotions that was also very valuable to me.” Afina agrees with her also adding that she felt “so accepted and loved” and Gregor points out that for him it was exceptional to be listened to and accepted with his opinions: “Whenever I wanted to say something, I could say it. It was always, like, accepted, or taken as I said it without proving me right or wrong.” For Padme safety was ensured by the attitude she was practiced during the training, which was solution-oriented approach: “To know that you can like yes, like every new situation is new and maybe it is difficult, but there is always some way how to manage this situation.” And Carla shared remarkable observation regarding safety as a needed attribute to become an initiator and to create: “For me it was really striking and I really felt in a safe space that ok, I can really create, and on the moment that I have safe space and I'm not told what to do, then I can do, yeah, I take initiative. I go for it and I recognize that this is what is working for me. It allowed me in that safe space to see myself in another perspective, in many other perspectives and recognize, ok, how am I in my life.” Notably, all the trainers see the training as generally a safe environment as well. They listed several attributes that makes it so. According to T1, such result is achieved by guiding the participants in small groups which are meeting on daily basis to share and support. This statement was supported by Dagmara´s observation. She also thinks that the smaller the group, the stronger is the support system since people care more about each other: “I see that in bigger groups, like group's responsibility is disperse. From my experience, I saw everyone was thinking 'Oh, that’s not my problem, that's someone else's problem' , even though it was happening in between.” T2 is then emphasizing the intentional approach of accepting youth no matter how they react during the training and T4 reminds about the “space to do mistakes”, which also creates safety for young people to experiment and not to be hold by fear of being judged or punished. And while T5 thinks it is also connected to “equal treatment” of all participants that is part of the trainer´s attitude, T6 believes safety is given by the rules and design of the training. The practical dimension is worth noting as from the analysis of the interviews and survey it appears to be a significant attribute of the training. Quoting Cecilia would put together most of the revealed experiences: “What I learned, I put in my life. But it is still process, but I think I´m improving.” As nobody really claimed him/herself completely accomplished with personal development. Quite the opposite – many young people emphasized they were “still on the way”. At the same time majority indicated that they used what they learned in the training in their daily life. For example Elenor says that she applied her experience to “everything that happens in my life” and Dragomir recalls several situations when he used feedback in a productive way. Albert refers to his use of training tools such as evaluation or assessment as to a general “transformability, applicability of the learning”. And for Ben the main tool was about recognizing himself as a person in charge of his life: “If I'm victim or accountable, you know, that was I guess main stuff what I really used a lot after.” Osvald remarkably brings attention to how training meant connecting previous experience and knowledge that he gained during his life: “I was reading book for development, and Basic Synergy training helped me connect all of them. Yeah, so, one of my learning connecting all the learnings previously discovered, and now they made more sense.” Here we can see that the theory that young people can get from diverse self-help literature could be applied and understood on deeper level when they actually experience what they read about. Another detail that he presented was connected to specific phrases of encouragement or support during the program. Repeating some of them supported Osvald in awareness in some 169 situations or overcoming obstacles in others. And Afina informed about one of concrete tools that she got from the training - it was about difference between facts and thoughts, which helped her to deal with her assumptions after the training. Also all of the trainers see a practical side of this intervention as a significant one. As T6 summarized: “There are concrete tools that you can take with you and bring them to your real life, which is a big value for me. Because it is not like I spend a week, I go home, nothing happens, but there are things that you really go through... that can then build differences in your real life.” She also identified inclusion as another practiced and “usable outside” element, as according to her observations during the training young people are facing the question of “how to make it work” with others in a group, and then inclusion is fundamental.
7.3.4.7 Structure and other specifics of the program The last element that more participants agreed on to be supportive for them was the structure of the training. A summary provided by Roxolana is describing the beneficial aspect of it: “So the method is like to me, it has a very clear structure, but so open, that it´s up to me to take things from it and I am not told what do we need and how to work with it.” T1 explains this feature as a crucially necessary one. He believes that if there is structure, learning can be done. And if there is no structure, there is only chaos and certain survival. Together with T2 and T5 they highlighted the structured program as the main characteristic of the training which is there for a reason to ensure young people´s clarity and safety. There also emerged other supportive elements mentioned by few people. For example T4 pointed out the commitment part of the training, namely the rules and agreements that participants, team members and trainers commit to follow at the very beginning. He further listed different perspectives that young people can gain because as the training is designed, there is “always a twist in a way, always something unexpected”. T6 talked also about a support system of couples or so-called “buddies” that she finds useful in trainings: “Like a person through whom I was doing all kind of reflections.” In her opinion, it is crucial that training works with equality among participants while making their uniqueness visible. A remarkable view was offered by T5, who stated that an experience in training is somewhat compact because bringing many events together. He used a comparison to other events in a life of a young person: “I see the added value of this training, that it brings in a compact way many events, many set ups, for you to explore and understand what is there for you. Which can happen through life, can happen through a trip, can happen when going to university, can happen when going for holidays with friends.” So he basically believes that what young people can learn elsewhere and in different circumstances in a longer period of time is offered to them in self-development Basic Synergy training. 7.3.5 Self-development training in context of research and theory
In the theoretical part I was arguing that researching self-development aspects in social work with disadvantaged young people can support better understanding of young people´s needs and motivation and at the same time serve for improving the methods used with this target group on local and international level. One of the purposes of this thesis is also to discover what exactly is offered in a selected self-development Basic Synergy training and how this self-development approach is perceived by less-opportunity young people as clients.
170
7.3.5.1 Understanding self-development method For a purpose of applying it in social work, (Datar, Rao, Rao, Bawikar, Masdekar 2008) operate with a concept of self-development where it is crucial for a client to have a realistic self-concept, meaning positive and healthy appreciation of oneself, understanding one´s capacities and limitations, and overcoming idealistic and negative ideas about oneself. Non- judgmental approach together with the arranged space to foster awareness used in training as noticed by participants and described by trainers appears to support these conditions for a client. Indeed, young people mentioned appreciation and acceptance as an important experience for them during the training (as Carla, Lucas, Afina or Gregor) as well as overcoming the negative perspective and focus on their potential (Dagmara, Laura or Dragomir). Datar et al. (2008) further highlight that the ability to define ‘self’ independently on what others think about it is needed, as well as understanding the cognitive, affective and behavioural aspects of the self, which implies being sensitive to one´s own feelings, sharpening emotional responses and developing a range of behavioural capacities which would be appropriate to different situations. These are precisely the aspects brought up by several participants (such as Ben, Ester or Emil), who claimed that such understanding took place for them during the training. We could therefore conclude that Basic Synergy training would fit the intervention that authors present as a self-development one with the required attributes encouraged and worked on with clients. Francis and Woodcock (2008) presented mention of several principles of how people learn and grow. All of those listed in theoretical part were somehow present in young people´s or trainers understanding. To start with, the variation of the rate of personal development was discussed for example by T6 who sees the outcome of the training unpredictable, and also by R6 who thinks the benefits that he gained might not be valuable for others. The limit of intellectual learning was confirmed by Carla who claimed to have struggles with formal education and theory. Yet more importantly, also interviewed youth as well as trainers see self-awareness and rigorous review forming the basis of personal development. Many of them mentioned awareness as a key element of the experience thus supporting authors´ theory. And T4 who stated that training creates safety for young people to experiment, together with participants such as Lucas, who refers to his experience as to “playing”, reinforce the view that Francis and Woodcock (2008) share about experimentation as a necessary component of effective programs for personal change. Lastly, authors inform about distinct skills of problem identification, decision making, and leadership being discussed as aspects possible to be identified and learned. In this discussion, based on the findings from this research both young people and trainers would agree that these skills were possible for young people to identify (as they indicated particularly through feedback) and learn as well. As the results of research indicate, this seems to be made available also by specific elements in the training – the fact that youth can experience freedom of choice and connected with it accountability that they practice during the program. Notably, also all Kolb´s (Kolb 2014) four stages of experiential learning style were also represented in what young people shared about their time during the training. It is hard to say whether any of them was appreciated more by the interviewees, yet it is certain that all were mentioned with positive connotation. Another connection can be found in the goal of the helping relationship from a Rogerian perspective (Rogers 1959), which is to promote a self- actualizing process where a human being can develop its potential and this way to grow. Social worker is therefore here the one who is there to provide the facilitating conditions to stimulate the client´s exploration and feeling of regard for his or her own world of experience. There is evidence that trainers of Basic Synergy training are in accordance with his perspective, since they highlighted their role as mostly of a facilitating, creating 171 conditions or space or supporting participants in their own process without interfering or deciding for them. And compared to a range of ways in which the personal development group differs from - or aspects that it shares with - a therapy group as described by Rose (2008), in the view of participants and trainers there was only a perspective supporting the difference between the two. As T3 clearly declare, this training is not a therapy or a substitute for that and therefore she wouldn´t recommend it to people who need therapy. And T1 in unity with some young people - e.g. R17 who was persuaded that “it could be dangerous” for them and R32 claiming that participation in such training could even “destroy the psychology of the person” in this case - even mentions that there is a risk for people with medical condition requiring therapy to participate in the training.
7.3.5.2 Self-development training: benefits and limitations Goldstein and Noonan (1999) claim that the client can get professional help in his life situation through any activity that attempts to alleviate discomfort, stress, or suffering or to improve some aspects of client´s functioning. And there are several ways to achieve such goals: ‘providing an atmosphere in which client can share his or her feelings and obtain encouragement, support and guidance, linking the client to necessary resources or opportunities or by improving some environmental circumstances’ (Goldstein and Noonan, 1999:55). Based on what we have discovered about the training, out of the mentioned tools the first one is being widely used in this case. While trainers explained how a safe environment and the atmosphere for sharing emotions and getting support are crucial and therefore created during the training, the majority of young people confirmed that this is exactly what they experienced and what supported them. What seems to be missing though is the second part - linking the client to necessary resources or opportunities. In the training it is rather about becoming aware of those. What I see connected to lacking elements in the training is a follow-up which was described by both youth and practitioners as underdeveloped. And it might be that it is follow-up part that could connect youth with additional resources or improve their environmental circumstances. Also when it comes to necessary attributes of the self-development approach presented by McLaughlin and Byers (2001), weak follow-up part is contradicting with the requirement of the approach being “continuous”. Although during the time of the training it definitely seems to be according to the structure and “step by step” design also appreciated by youth. Additionally, there are some other beneficial aspects highlighted by theorists. Warren (2007) brings attention to values and importance of being aware of one´s own, which young people in this research mentioned repeatedly with the same emphasis. In accordance with Adams (2008) then youth confirmed empowerment to be a real and powerful dimension of their experience in self-development training. Another element which appears in theory is resilience, when development is understood as building upon young people´s enhancement of the capacity to deal with everyday life (Hoffman 2004; Ungar 2004b). Interestingly, none of the trainers or participants ever mentioned resilience as such. Yet while examining the findings it is obvious that what young people share is very much correlated with this concept or is even identical with it – just not being named so. For example what Padme describes she learned during the training as “every new situation is new and maybe it is difficult, but there is always some way how to manage this situation.” Or T1 then talks about youth learning “how to deal with circumstances that I have now” and T6 practice “being able to create something for myself because I want to, no matter what the circumstances are.” Group context as the other key characteristic of the trainings was discussed by (Watkins 1995) who wrote that groups may recognize and enhance social processes which support
172 learning and growth while becoming supportive places. According to him they can also provide a platform for reflecting on our own performance while becoming safe contexts for supporting experimentation and providing opportunities for people to give and receive personal feedback. Indeed, young people without exception indicated that having an experience within a group was highly beneficial for them. They were particularly emphasizing the experienced safety and the valuable role of feedback. And it is important not to forget about the inspiration gained from the group that one of the participants pointed out. Regarding reflection as divided by (Morrow 2009) into different forms and domains, all of them appear in the findings about the nature of the training. Participants claimed to practice reflection within the following domains: (1) personal as with their thoughts and actions; (2) interpersonal, while interacting with other participants; (3) contextual, meaning concepts and methods such as general perception of choice for example and (3) critical, which also ethical and social contexts. In the case of interviewed young people it was the context of different cultures and habits they shared in one space. Taking (Schon 1984) division of reflection, according to participants during the training they mostly used reflection-on-action, meaning retrospective thinking which they practiced after the event. It is rather interesting that in general none of risks of personal development programs listed by Heydt and Sherman (2005) were identified by youth or trainers. One of the risks for young people described by these authors is connected to others knowing private information about them or their family. There was no evidence confirming that this risk would be experienced or witnessed by those interviewed in the research. Further authors mention that discovering aspects of oneself that were previously unknown is usually both exciting and disquieting. Young people thus risk self-understanding that may not be as they wish to be known, particularly in receiving feedback from others. Curiously, nor this aspect was reflected by any of the interviewees. It might although be explained by the possibility that those who had such an experience were not willing to share about it since it might have been too disquieting. And finally, according to Heydt and Sherman (2005) for some participants exploring their relationships with family and others involves the risk of bringing into the open unhealthy and potentially harmful behaviours and/or beliefs. Again, based on the findings nobody from the trainers of young participants has apparently found this risk as a relevant one to be mentioned. Nevertheless, there were other potential risks indicated in this research. 7.3.6 Updates on self-development training
In order to summarize benefits and limitations of the method we firstly need to bring clarity into what exactly Basic Synergy self-development training represents, what are its key elements and attributes. The following conceptualization is based on statements of practitioners – youth workers who deliver this training in a role of a trainer, and additionally some young people who participated in it.
7.3.6.1 Key attributes of the training According to what trainers shared, Basic Synergy is an individual training in a group context where content is personal and context is delivered in a designed frame. This training unique about the training is how it is structured and what is brought in by participants themselves. It is crucial that there is a personal choice to do the training, so nobody forces young people to participate. Altogether, the main motivation of youth to participate in this training could be summarized as firstly a desire for an adventure, secondly a will to develop skills and thirdly, mere curiosity. Almost a half of them also mentioned that they wanted to 173 get new input in their own learning and similar amount of young people came to resolve their personal issues they knew about prior to the training. Some others then declared their motivation was to discover themselves, to make decisions on their life crossroads or simply to meet new people. There is an arranged space to foster awareness - in a program participants are offered a toolkit to evaluate and re-evaluate their relationships/values/behaviour and they decide whether they want to use it or not. Choice and empowerment are values practiced and used in the training. Already the purpose of this intervention trainers altogether summarized as creating environment for young people to experience freedom of choice and connected with it accountability. They link it with encouragement to act upon what is in fact present and available in young people´s lives rather than upon their possibly misleading interpretations. It is important to notice that this event is quite intense and confronting in its core. Having and making a choice is thus a key pillar of both training´s content and context. Creating space for young people to reflect the consequences of their choices and decide according to what they want to achieve is also important. In the training, young people can experiment with their behaviour and actions with fewer consequences than outside of the training. And empowerment was also explained as giving space to youth with no expectations on reactions. In such space they can feel safe to make mistakes and as a result overcome personal fears and obstacles that would stop them from developing. There was an agreement that trainers´ role is not to motivate youth, but rather to facilitate their process of realizing what they are motivated for and why. Different understanding was present in case of self-perception. While one trainer saw it as not so important, another perceived it as a main tool. Other trainers also claimed it is depending on the level of involvement of participants or it is strongly linked to the process of reflection. Basic Synergy training is therefore based on informal, experiential learning of youth. The mentioned key elements of the training were the theatrical setting and non-judgmental approach. While in general young people were referring to this attribute of the training in positive terms, one of the interviewed young people found it more artificial than daily life and thus difficult to connect to. Regarding target group almost all the participants and trainers answered that this training is for everybody disregarding age, nationality or gender, and five specified that this training would be more beneficial for a target group of young people in need. The offer for potential participants could be summarized as awareness of circumstances, personal accountability for choices, flexibility and capacity to create and keep authentic relationships.
7.3.6.2 Limiting elements of the training While some young people didn´t recognize anything that would potentially stop or limit them in their development or growth in the training, a wide range of different views on limitations of the training was offered by other respondents of the survey. The most important weak element identified was the follow-up of the training, which based on findings is lacking more support and better connection to daily life, although seen as a useful aspect. One of the limitations was connected to the role of the trainer possibly representing risk in case of incompetence or when being seen as a role model or someone who knows more, as higher on some imaginary hierarchy. Also the attitude of the team can be rather confusing for some participants and thus distracting. Interestingly, also the opinion that the main limitation comes from oneself appeared, as well as structure of the training being too far from everyday life, 174 which for many others is more supportive that limiting. Another participant found training less accessible than it should be and several young people identified potential limitation in case of mental health issues of participants that could affect their state and the whole group. Lack of clarity and complexity of the training course was the last limitation recognized both by participants and trainers. Boring theory, a lot of writing, insufficient level of English or tempo of the group emerged only in trainer´s response. Answering to the question of whether they recognized any risks in participating in the training part of the respondents replied they couldn´t list any. Nevertheless, there were others who described several aspects they found risky. The main risks identified were confrontation experienced by participants during the program, difficulties in implementing back home what they have achieved in a training, intensity of the program itself and participation of young people who are dealing with some mental issues. Some details regarding indicated risks are worth to mention. For example, there appeared an observation about the timing for training, which is not always right for young people who need to be willing and ready to work on themselves. Or that some participants make conscious decision to ignore what is happening in the training, as it could bring an ultimate instability to them. Another particular risk could be in the attitude of a young person towards him/herself, which might be destructive. The risk of quitting the training or not benefiting from it might also appear when young people are not well-prepared and are lacking information about the training. During the training its intensity on one side offers a rich ground for learning, yet on the other side for a young person there could be a real lack of time and space to embrace and understand all the experience. And then after the event itself it might be destructive to take one´s own experience as the holy truth and to start forcing it on the surroundings. It is similar impulsive decisions that youth might take immediately after the training under the impression of their experience, which need to be careful and well thought trough. As to mental state of the participants, there was a notice that the training is not the therapy or its substitute and young people with mental health issues should only join under the agreement and close supervision of their therapists.
7.3.6.3 Supporting elements of the training The elements that participants indicated as the most supporting their growth and learning in the training were the approach of a trainer usually seen as inspiring and helpful, remarkably again confrontation as a source of awareness, experiential form of learning providing personal frame, outdoor part as a very intense component, safe environment as a basic needed attribute, guided sharing setting among participants, feedback as a tool to find new perspective and finally, as many respondents highlighted, the fact that the training is very practical and usable in life. Basic Synergy therefore offers a variety of experience which makes it effective and opportunity to stop and reflect, which is important to highlight many young people claimed to never have had before. For some young people reflection process can enhance empowerment while for others it is valuable and new to recognize the connection between her thinking and her actions. Sharing experience as another tool used in the training served some young people as a source of inspiration or as a healing moment. And expressing emotions as a tool in the training showed to fulfil the need for self-expression, creating strong connection among young people while in other case bringing a breakthrough in attitude. Another remarkable finding is that youth evaluated obtained feedback as a lasting reference usable also after the training which also led some to accepting themselves, some to switch 175 in their self-perception towards more positive one and additionally encouraged some of them to change their behaviour in a radical way. Group setting was seen by young people as rather supportive as well. T2 and T5 then talked about music as a supportive element, which also one of the interviewed young people agreed with. And outdoor part was highlighted as a powerful and beneficial experience by most of the trainers and the majority of participants as a space to handle connection and given time. One of the most significant findings is that majority of youth claimed to feel very safe during the training. Although they were not asked about it explicitly, almost a half of them emphasized this aspect and some others mentioned it in a context. Interestingly, young people perceive the training as a safe environment despite the fact that most of them don´t know what is coming or what to expect, hence they deal with unknown. According to trainers, safety during the training is achieved by the setting of small groups, clearly declared space to do mistakes, equal treatment of young people, rules and general structured design of the training.
176
7.4 UNDERSTANDING IMPACT ON SOCIAL FUNCTIONING
Basic Synergy self-development trainings with all the benefits and limitations were presented as an opportunity for young people to achieve personal growth also in their social functioning. One of the key purposes of this study is to explore whether and then how exactly the impact of this method on different aspects of social functioning of youth is happening. Four criteria of training evaluation from Kirkpatrick´s model - reactions, learning, behaviour, and results – served as a framework for collecting data and their analysis. In this chapter I provide the findings on all levels: reaction as satisfaction with a training program; the learning level as principles, facts, and techniques understood and absorbed by young people during the training; the behavioural level presenting changes in behaviours or performance of youth; and the results level summarizing improvements in tangible individual outcomes. The purpose of this chapter is to provide answers to the following partial questions: How do disadvantaged young people understand the impact of self-development training on their social functioning? RQ7 How do trainers understand the impact of self-development training on social functioning of disadvantaged youth? RQ8
In this way I aim to provide information on young people´s perceptions regarding their own life changes connected to participation in the training and to add observations from trainers´ practice. The sources used for answering these questions were mainly interviews and a survey with participants and trainers with additions from all other sources listed in the methodology.
177
7.4.1 “Basic Synergy training supported me in developing my…” To start with, I would like to provide a table which summarizes responses provided by participants in a survey. Young people were asked to use a scale with values from “not at all” to “extremely” to generally indicate how participation in the training affected different aspects of their social functioning. It can serve as an overview of what young people found increased or
improved in the training, and I will pay attention to these aspects in this chapter using also findings from interviews which supported in the deeper understanding of these aspects. This research is not a quantitative one though, so my intention is not to analyze these numbers with quantitative means and conclusions. Yet based on what youth reported in this survey, we can make the following conclusions. Participation in the training supported them the most (a lot or extremely) in their self- understanding, freedom of choice, self-fulfilment and connection to others. Other domains where the training was highly beneficial for young people, and in all cases at least a little bit, were: finding resources, values, spontaneity, self-esteem and trust. On the other side, compared to others the training was the least supportive in their material/economic conditions, living environment, security and job/employment. Nevertheless, in these cases participants didn´t reach a complete agreement, as there are quite contrasting values given. These results suggest that while in some aspects the training is generally considered by youth as supportive, the other aspects are more connected to their personal situation and therefore significantly vary. 7.4.2 Learning in Basic Synergy training In introduction of TC1 during the participant observation, the most mentioned desired learning and change during the TC was connected to „communication skills“, „knowing myself“ and “overcoming fears in front of people”. For example, young people expressed a desire to improve their self-esteem, their strong points or presenting in public. When I started to analyse the learning that youth claimed to achieve via their experience in trainings, my first realization was that it was indeed a very wide range. In this chapter I intend to present the very essence of the findings, yet also to avoid skipping important details. Overall, the most emphasized learning as young people informed in interviews, survey and evaluation forms happened for them in the fields of: clarity and awareness; own capability or strength; responsibility for life; dealing with opportunities and limitations and overcoming fears or obstacles. What I also find important to underline is a significant common state which was shared by youth before the training. In the same way as the majority of all interviewed young people and those answering the survey, who claimed they had “no idea” or very little “image” of what they were going for, also most of the participants of TC1 stated they came to participate after their friend suggested to do so and they “knew nothing” about what was coming. The only thing that they knew, as they were told, was that it was intense and interactive. When asked at the end of the training what would have been different for them if they had known the program upfront, there were several responses such as “I would hesitate to go at all” or “It would change my experience”. Remarkably, the whole group concluded that if somebody had told them before the experience what they would have learnt and managed to achieve, they would think “it´s crazy”. Therefore, they all agreed that knowing upfront about activities and solutions would have interfered into their experience. At the same time, almost all of the interviewed young people disclosed that they had had very little or no expectations towards their learning and training in general when coming to participate. Vladimir summarizes: “I didn´t expect much from this training, because I had no idea what I am going to experience there.”And Elenor shared that she wasn't expecting “a list of things” to cross them after in a way “that happened and that didn't”. In contrast to them, Alina had very high expectations and was disappointed at the end: “I was expecting some change, like okay I do the training and it will change my life, everything would be different. But not. Yeah... The one thing I forgot, that I forgot to do the realistic check and yeah I look the run and okay, still the same. And now, yeah, if I'm able to reflect in my reality now slowly-slowly baby steps I can change. A training for yourself - it won't change your life immediately, like not the way I expecting...” These different experiences lead us to quite a valuable conclusion. Based on what these young people revealed, not knowing much about the training and having few expectations brought them to learning and appreciating the experience and themselves in it. On the other hand, as in the case 179 of Alina, expecting “life changing” outcomes could result into disappointment and discouragement to develop further. Another curious aspect were the memories of the activities. It was evident that while some young people couldn´t remember what they did exactly during the training already a couple of years ago, some could recall day by day even after six or seven years had passed. Thoughts and emotions experienced during the training were dominating over concrete activities in most cases and it showed that no matter the time after the event, most of the participants remembered their own “highlights”, meaning each one of them had a story to share representing their main learning and/or change connected to the training. What also emerged from the answers of young people was that the training started a long-term development process, as many revealed, thus bringing change into their daily lives afterwards. Caesar mainly referred to his relationships, specifically with his parents, which he started to improve year by year. Gregor informed he realized in his own experience that this change and this process was “gradual and it step-by-step and takes years” and still continues for him. Cecilia also finds herself “still in a process and improving”, while Lucas describes that taking part in training was a “starting point for all the rest” when talking about his growth and changes he has undergone over the years. For Costina it was “the first push to work on herself”, since she admits she has never experienced any such support before. She further adds: “It brought results later a bit, when all the materials started to go down and I started to use this.” Frida then explains her realization was that she needed an “ongoing learning” which she has been taking care of since then. And Roxolana interestingly summarizes how it took her time to implement things that she learned: “It happened more like I took it in and it started some processes, and that was very slow. So immediately after, nothing changed much, no. I was just...I was influenced very much. I remember having different conversations with people, but after time I went back to my normal life. And then all the time passed and then things started to move more. So again, Basic Synergy just like started some processes for me.” Max had a very similar experience and as he underlined, the training is not a miracle to bring an immediate change: “Yeah, there are some examples, I heard that people after it changed, but my process was step-by-step. I was implementing new tools, my new experience in my life. Step by step in brought me in a place, in a point where I have to be. And now, when I looking back, I see this way and I see how it depends on my decisions, on my honest answers, I see the results, and how this training worked for me personally.”
7.4.2.1 Clarity and awareness Clarity in their needs, values and life goals together with awareness of their potential, possibilities and circumstances were by far the most frequently mentioned learning aspects by young people. Also, during participant observation in the training I noticed that young people mentioned several times “becoming aware” of certain things, and it was present in the majority of evaluation forms from TC2-TC4 as well. As T1 summarized: “They discover new sides of themselves, of relationships, of how it can go. Unexpected things.” Identifying their unknown parts of self showed to be one of the most appreciated learning processes. R6 explains how it supported him to find solutions of issues in his life: “The most valuable part of the training for me was the higher level of self-awareness I reached. It is easier to solve the problems when you are aware that they exist.” And R31 goes even further in her description: “It helps getting an insight of some problems and situations I just ignored like how I
180 deal with people, and how I'm too self-focused, ignoring other people needs and this way loosing friends and accumulating more sadness inside without being aware of that.”The responses of young people indicate that they use these acquired skills on a conscious level and in different areas of their functioning. Quoting R35, who claimed to have become more aware how to work on herself, even though she faces obstacles in life she tends “to evaluate and work on them”, while continuing to “improve myself in other areas and tools”. As she wrote: “I feel like I have the basis for making my life better and I can go through anything with time.” And according to Roxolana, participation in the training started a process of reflection in her daily life and now she is “just trying to see yourself as clear as possible” and then see the opportunity “to change something”. While for some this experience was mostly about realizing their limitations or fears and the ways to overcome them when focusing on strengths, for others it was more about identifying how they perceive their reality. R27, for example, admitted that for her “the greatest lesson” was to learn “not to assume anything” and to rely on facts, which was the same for Ilona. In the case of Flora it was more linked to relationships with parents: “To realize how much I care about them. And that yeah... I should really work on that, so we can like be closer to each other.” Valeria then shared how such awareness had a direct impact on her behaviour and consequently on closeness and inspiration in relationships as well: “The impact was that I was more aware of myself first, and so I started to again to be more open to others in my relationships. And I was able to express feeling. So basically improvement in all my relationships because of my bigger, better awareness of myself, I felt better about myself, what I want, what I don´t want. I was able to speak about it. And into my friendships it brought inspiration to others and may be motivation somehow. Because when I was speaking about the way you can feel, you can live, they liked it and they felt inspired some of them.” Interestingly, Emil revealed he became more aware of his body and some others, like Costina or Afina, of their language, of the way they speak to others. Afina also added that through awareness she learned empathy. As she describes: “The way how I do things it is completely normal for me, but it might not be normal for others. I learned that the other person might not like the way how I do this thing. So maybe I need to ask to his permission first.” Osvald´s understanding then was regarding his possible contribution to others - “how much I can help, and how much I can contribute”. And Max remarkably connects clarity with asking himself questions and honesty: “In general the main thing what I learned is to ask questions. And to ask question to myself and to give answers... to give honest, honest answers. The first is the questions, and the second is honesty. Honesty first of all again to myself, and the second to people around.”
7.4.2.2 Communication and different perspectives There was one aspect that was highlighted by many young people among other attributes of communication that they learned - and it was asking for help. Caesar describes that when he learned to ask for help, which was not acceptable for him before, it even gave him a “feeling of hope that a different way of relationship, and working, and living with other people, and communicating, interacting with them is possible”. Ester experienced that “people are willing to help you if you ask for it” and she called these events “small miracles”. According to her, there were many moments like this during the training and as she concluded, “in just one week it was really impressive”. Flora additionally explained that thanks to this realization she is now “more open to ask strangers for things” when she needs something. Also 181 for Afina asking became a better alternative to her previous problem solving strategies: “Instead of just waiting, instead of trying to solve the problems all by myself, or just waiting for them to disappear I learned to ask. And I keep doing that. Like you never know if you don't ask.” It is also worth mentioning how Osvald indicated the connection between asking for help and team work. In his opinion it had a very big impact on him: “When I'm working in a group, when I feel, see people down or if they don't have energy, I'm trying to put the energy in. And when I feel bad and I don't have the energy, I usually ask for people to help me. So, I can help more my team.” One of the participants in TC1 also shared that for her asking for “advice and support” brought an understanding that she “can learn more things like this”. Another understanding that apparently was surprising and useful for participants was linked with communication without knowing the same language. Elenor reveals for her this meant she could “be friends with anyone even if we wouldn´t talk”. And Caesar remembers how he interacted with some locals that he met during the outdoor part of the training: “They didn't even speak English, so, we were communicating with, like, by with gestures and hands, and we could still make up whole stories and say what we did. And they asked and it was so beautiful, this communication we had there. Even though we didn't speak the same language.” Then there were those who would hesitate to communicate with people they hadn´t known before. Max, being one of them, summarized his conclusion about the importance of open communication regardless of people´s characteristics: “Because I already had that thought that ok, I see this person, I am scary to talk or communicate. But we are just people and let´s not pretend that we are I don´t know...let´s not create that I am a cool guy, or I am business man, or I am an old man with a lot of experience and who are you? That brought me some feelings that ok, from the beginning we are all the same, so let´s be just all human being and let´s communicate like a human being without all this like rubbish with statuses, with nationalities or colour of skin... I felt that´s something new I never experienced before.” He then emphasized that this perspective made his communication with others much easier. Cecilia pointed out that for her an enlightening moment was recognizing how she gives up on communication and deciding she wanted to be more persistent with communicating her ideas and thoughts to others and managing own reactions: “I had a good idea, but I didn´t insist on like it would be good. I was a little angry... So may be that was more things together. The first like I could decide not to be angry to start behave decently, because I remember I just decided to be silent. And I think it wasn´t good. Because of the training I realized it like ok, I can change my attitude.” Gustav, similarly to Tibor and Ben, then recalls that for him the crucial step was to accept the difference of the communication and to search for ways to relate to others: “I realized that I was quite frustrated with a part of myself that I projected on to other people, and I thought, you know, why don't these people communicate or relate, or interact in a way that so easy to understand, and... basically I was the only one that saw, because I was looking through my own filter, through my own beliefs, and through my own eyes, essentially.” Interestingly enough, some participants such as Afina also came to the conclusion that what they considered to be sufficient showed to need more attention. As Afina explained she was sure about her communication prior to the training: “I had considered myself that I I'm very communicative and I have no problem in communication. But afterwards I realized that I create a lot of tension and resistance in my communication.” This realization, as she adds, supported her in improving her communication patterns.
182
Regarding perspectives, youth recognized them as a key part of their learning. According to what they shared, new or different views on things allowed other learning – such as becoming responsible for one´s own life or seeing more opportunities - to happen. We can therefore conclude that learning about and within different perspectives is some kind of a prerequisite that helps young people to grow.
7.4.2.3 Emotions and inspiration One of the participants who filled in the evaluation form for TC3 wrote: “I learned that all people have problems and role of the life is not to be perfect but the best who you can be! I developed better my expression of emotions.” Dealing with their emotions was one of the immediate impacts that more young people indicated. Yet, even after years that passed after the experience, as in case of most of interviewed participants, they still recalled this learning as a crucial one. Most of the time joy or happiness as a dominating emotion was mentioned, and also a mixture of emotions. Marina describes her state during the training: “So I was having a lot of emotions, you know, I was crying, I was laughing... Basically I don't really talk, you know. I need more time, like, to open up, I need to get to know them better, so I didn't talk, it wouldn't be evident, but inside, let's say, I'm laughing.” There was also evidence of unpleasant emotions experienced by quite some participants. What they agreed on though was that after all, even “negative emotions” had its place in their experience and served for growth. As Lucas puts it: “It was not always pleasant experience also because of that. All in total it worked. In the end of the day it worked.” And Valeria for example describes how she followed her decision to share with the group some very personal and complicated issues in her life: “First I was incredibly nervous and feeling like I´m gonna die, and then after that when I did it I felt that I was really successful and I felt really relaxed and good and successful. And accepted.” And while Emil recalls being “nervous” during the program, Gustav, Afina and Carla got “really angry” at some point and Elenor was “terrified” at the beginning of the outdoor part. For Zor,a who had issues with expressing her emotions prior to participating, the whole training was, as she says, very difficult and touching. She remembers crying every day but then always feeling happy. And she is even persuaded that this “emotional concentration” was “like a small helper to overcome other situations” that she faced the following year. Interestingly, some participants also mentioned that recognizing and accepting their emotional side brought a complete switch into their daily functioning. Albert explains that before the training he perceived himself as an “achiever” and not as an emotional person: “And excluding a very human part of myself, because I felt that it was not serving and after the training I was more open and actually not only opened, but willing to explore very emotional dimension of my human being and allowing myself to show with others ... with partner that I had at that moment, with some friends and also my family, and not blaming them for other action that they took and I took.” Another fundamental attribute of youth´s learning was connected to inspiration. Ester remembers that she wanted to follow the example of others she met in a training: “I've seen people that ...not dedicate their life, but they are doing something to help the community and they are sacrificing some aspects of their life, for example family or this career, so they can help others and I was really impressed that this kind of people exist.” And for Max an important realization
183 was that there are quite a lot of people who “wanna change something and they are not just saying that they don´t like something, but they really take actions”. The effect of inspiration was also highlighted by T1 who calls it “like oil on the water, it spreads”. According to him, young people being inspired then take a stand "oh, but this I can do also" and start being more involved in what is happening around them. While most of the young people were inspired by personal stories shared by participants, both Diana and Marina claimed that for them personal stories that trainers used as a tool during the program were also very inspiring. For Diana especially the story the trainer revealed to the participants was similar to her own life circumstances and therefore extra valuable: “She talked about her own experience with life with her sibling, which was very similar to mine, and this I connected with me and somehow it made me think about my situation in a bit different way.”
7.4.2.4 Accountability for one´s own life and importance of taking actions To “take life in my hands” - this is another way to describe what youth referred to as being accountable or responsible. Almost half of the respondents indicated they went through some process that R12 calls “realizing things depend on me, not on others”. As R7 states, she started understanding that it's her “responsibility to make my life great, to create it in such a way that I would feel truly happy with myself and what I'm doing”. And Diana brings an example from her complicated and at some points destructive relationship with her ill brother: “I needed to accept the situation I am in. To embrace it as something as I have power over, or something like that. I am not the victim and I am not the one who has to suffer every injustice, everything that happens... Because some things happen to me, I am the one who is deciding in my life.” Based on her experience in the training she further believes that in every situation in my life I am the one who decides what will happen next: “Of course I don´t have unlimited options, I have the options that I have, but...I can choose somehow. Something.” Interestingly, Diana also connects her understanding to her Christian background: “This is connected with the idea of that I have the choices, which is the idea from the training, and I can cope with them, which is my idea from my Christian belief. I can manage. There is no situation that I cannot manage somehow.” Valeria mentioned a remarkable metaphor. She remembers that standing in front of the group also made her accountable of herself: “Because it´s always like standing there alone like you stand alone in your life. And you do there only what, what you create, it´s just your decision what you create in your life and what you create on the scene. Yeah and for me it was a breaking point in the training.” Costina then linked accountability to creating her “own stability” and Laura to being brave and taking responsibility for decisions she made without regretting them. It is worth mentioning that also trainers T2, T4 and T6 agreed on this learning being a common one for young people and particularly empowering when it came to planning their future steps. Padme was one of those underlining the crucial role of taking actions. Being, as she revealed about herself, a person who has difficulties to decide, she started to put more effort into taking steps in order not to stay stuck in one place: “I learned that it´s very important to just step, to... take actions. I reminded this sentence or this word like action after this training quite often when I was just doing something with people. When I don´t know what to decide, I often remind myself that I want to take action. I want to be person who tries and learn by experience. So this was something very important for me.”
184
7.4.2.5 Creativity and ownership According to findings, youth learned about their capacity for creativity and more than that – they learned to implement it while overcoming fears. Some, as R22, were mainly emphasizing “creative thinking” as the main achievement, and others, as R34, highlighted “creative actions”. To mention also an immediate impact recognized right after the event, one of the participants from TC2 stated in his evaluation form: “I see myself as having more creativity than I thought I had. Now I see myself as a person who matters and has unique value. I recognized that I can see myself as a fountain of inspiration to others.”And conclusions from two teams during the TC1, where participant observation took place confirms this evidence. In both teams young people declared to have used creativity which supported them in solving their situation and creating stronger connection among each other. One of team members even stated: “You can create anything from nothing”. There was an important correlation with ownership over their lives among responses of young people. The statement of Carla, who “had this need to take ownership over my life and acceptance towards myself”, represents the majority of them. There is no wonder then that since youth learned it is possible for them to take this position, it gave them certain power and strength to create as well. As Ben quite remarkably describes: “Because I had assumption that it's a lot of things happens to you and you aren't in control at all, you know. I mean we are in some level, but it so little in comparison what is a... what is out there. And then in the training I've got that feeling that, oh shit, I'm so much myself... I'm so much creator of my own environment, reality, you know.”It corresponds with what Frida shared as well – realizing she was “in charge of her life”. And what T2 summarizes as “no one will create instead of me” since he is the one who is able to create what he wants.
7.4.2.6 Inclusion and leadership According to their words, young people also became more aware of the topic of inclusion. As R44 explains, she particularly understood how she excludes herself and others. She adds that she realized: “Inclusion is very important while working in a team, and whatever is happening to one member of the team affect the other member.” Lucas then emphasizes how important this topic was for him and how he uses his experience up to this day: “When I realize that I'm excluding people I remember that concept of inclusion and then automatically my behaviour changes.” And Roxolana compares the result of including her team members to the moments when in the same situation she was trying to find solutions on her own: “And especially the requirement of including everyone in, really like being together, and supporting each other, talking to each other, it gives so much more energy and that you can go on for a really long time. In contrast to before, when I was just trying to figure out in my mind like what is expected of me, what the puzzle that I need to solve, I can do this... it was keeping more separate.” A participant from TC2 wrote right after the training: “I learned that a leader is also a member of a team and there must be team needs, there must be a common goal.” Thus his understanding was the same as that of many others who shared they developed leadership skills. And another participant from the same training expressed in her evaluation form that she “became a leader for the first time” which was an extraordinary experience. It was the same for Vladimir, who was open in front of the group about his issue with self-confidence and then was chosen for a leader in some activity, which supported him in believing in himself. And Cecilia being a leader of an
185 outdoor group came to the conclusion that she is capable of leading: “I have learned to see myself as leader, that I can lead the people, I don´t need to feel afraid. It´s just like about try and then see.”Similarly Hugo saw himself “in this light” and becoming a leader showed him that he “can take care of someone else”.
7.4.2.7 New methods of working with people and team work skills This learning was emphasized particularly by participants who admitted working with people themselves. For example, Filip explained that he adopted the attitude of giving space in his later teaching and training methods: “It is not about me that I have to bring wisdom and information and teaching, but it is about helping people to grow themselves. They have to find their way, and to find their patterns. So, it helps me to disappear. It is something that is not natural for me, so, I'm still working on it. But it´s perspective that I completely love. About the other people that are the protagonists of the training. It's not about me.” For Lucas it was more important to practice how to work with a group and peer to peer and Tibor as a psychologist claimed to have become better in his specialization as he could “better connect to feelings” of his future clients. Vivien then shared that she is using learning by doing, a method that she encountered in the training, in her classes with students, and Osvald said he learned how to organize the training, the way it was structured, which helped him in youth exchanges and trainings that he did afterwards. For a majority of young people their experience in the training brought an additional value of learning how to work in a team. As a participant from TC2 stated, he practiced “taking other people´s ideas into consideration”, while another one shared she thought she had to do everything herself and now she “can rely on people around” her. And during the participant observation in TC1 one young person described the cooperation they had in their outdoor team which he appreciated and got inspired from: “When I couldn´t do something, the other did it. We completed each other.” His colleague also added that he wouldn´t continue without a team and since they supported him he could manage. There were remarks from the other time such as realizing “how common vision is important in a team”, which also Dagmara mentioned as her main understanding. She was comparing the situation within a team with and without this attribute: “And I saw how it goes when we didn't have a common vision, because for me it was very hard to contribute, all the time it was like stepping in the dark -ok, what will we do now? What will have enough?' And I saw that we were functioning much better when we were, when we stopped, discussed, then decided how to progress together.” As she added, this situation gave her an idea how teamwork should look like: “Not just like there is the leader and the leader dictates, and gives instructions, and then all the others have to follow. But it quite the other way alone and that each person in the team has the same contribution... same responsibility.” or the other one would remember how they “didn´t talk to each other in the beginning” but since they were in a team together they got “closer and closer” and were happy to have this common experience. Gregor gave an interesting example from a situation he went through with his team: “And we were struggling for very long time to solve this assignment, and we were thinking we were working as a team, but we were actually a group of individuals who just wanted to get the job done and go their way.” He recalls that one of the strongest points for him was the moment when his team solved the assignment and all of a sudden there was what he called a “total” change: “There was a very strong learning moment for me, that from being focused on individualistic perspective - 'ok, it's me and I don't care about the others, they're not good enough, I know better and more than them and bla-bla-bla.' In certain moment solving the assignment, the perspective 186 changed 360 degrees and actually I realized, that by this thinking and approaching attitude, I've been excluding myself and then from 'I' from not thinking as 'we'. That was very strong learning point, which I still remember very clear.” And for Alina team work experience resulted in a conclusion that she really has a need for a team in her life: “Because we can do better and more things than I could do alone. So, maybe at that time it was a greatest learning. I was really grateful that I didn't have to go through this alone. It was better as a group.” Gustav then found the balance in a team important, a win-win result when he can contribute and also ask others for what he needs: “How can I deliver, or how can I bring, how can I give something that the other person needs, and dare for to get my need, or my desire, or my goal, achieve as well. So, how can I win without losing the other person? That...that really gave me significant insight, like really- really profoundly. That's what I learned.”
7.4.2.8 Persistence and overcoming fears Seeing the benefits of persistence was one of the immediate impacts declared by young people. For example, a participant from TC4 wrote in the evaluation form: “I realized I have a lot of potential too. I am capable of many things, I should just brave it out, persist and I will be better in life.” And another one from TC3 shared: “I learned something that might be useful in my life, as not to give up if you want something, ask people and they will help you – it is easier than I thought before. I became more proactive.” Also in interviews youth admitted not giving up and being persistent is what they learned and wanted to practice after the training. Dagmara explained she had the tendency to “run away” a lot of times in her life when she wasn´t satisfied with the situation, which is according to her “the easiest thing to do” and which she decided to change. For Diana this realization was connected with relationships, as she recognized that “not to give up after a few failures and just try harder or just try longer” might bring her a desired outcome. And Ester linked this attitude to a better chance of solving a problem, which Zora called dealing with unconscious choice “to leave the problem be” in her case. As T4 underlined, it is important to be aware that what worked previously might not work now and vice versa, since every moment is different. This is the message that is according to him present in the training and is strongly connected to every day changes and needed flexibility. Some of the fears that young people learned to overcome were linked with the decision making process. This was the case of R5 for example, who wrote she could make choices she was scared of after the training and emphasized she did so “out of love for myself, not out of fear”. For many others overcoming fears was in a domain of expressing thoughts or emotions, facing outcomes of their actions or connection with other people. And for some, such as R48, it was more about allowing themselves to be visible – as she recalls, overcoming fear for her meant “letting myself be seen as I am”. R28 brought a significant comparison with her perception and situation before participating in the training: “I remember when at the end I said that my life before synergy was a collection of ''no'', for example I can´t dance because I am fat, I can´t live in another country because I am poor, I can´t do music cause I have no talent, and well here I am, dancing away in a foreign country.” Cecilia mentioned she decided not to be afraid “to make things my way” and to be open to sharing her ideas to the world. And while Flora started to be more open to unknown people, for Tibor and Lucas the biggest switch was in presenting in front of others. Another experience of growth worth mentioning was presented by Dragomir. Like some others, he connects overcoming fears with answering positively to challenges in his life and highlighted his willingness to take risky steps as a part of his learning process in the
187 training: “I could feel myself growing up to take challenges. Previously I was only taking actions, which I was hundred percent sure that I can make it through and I can assure myself It will be successful and it worse taking the shot and stuff'. But after becoming okay with mistakes and bombs, it was much easier to go for challenges, which was estimated much bigger than myself, but I knew with the special skills, like big enthusiasm, I can accomplish it, even if I do not know from step to step what will happen.” For Padme the key element in overcoming fear was in trusting herself and another person. She explains that she always tries to be very independent yet in a situation when she needed to cooperate with another participant she accepted the need of support: “But of course I need sometimes help. It was like I felt like oh, it is so good to have someone who tell you or show you how to do something and just rely on that person and it´s good.” And Max uses the attitude of overcoming fears to remind himself that every step he is scared of might bring him a “new experience” which in itself is motivating for him.
7.4.2.9 Opportunities and limitations in life According to findings, one of the major understandings of young people´s conditions in life regarded what is available for them in terms of opportunities and chances. As R6 put it while answering in survey: “I learned how not to set myself boundaries about what is possible and what is not.” Also R9, R16, R44 or R46 all clearly state that “seeing more opportunities” was what they took out of the training. And R26 describes it in detail: “The realization that I have all the resources for living my life in the way I enjoy it. It encouraged me to do things I had always wanted to do, but was limiting myself be seeing obstacles rather than opportunities. It helped me develop thought patterns that support me in moving forward, and let go of those that were preventing me from it.” A participant of TC2 wrote about discovering “simple opportunities” and concluded that he didn´t know where this realization would lead him from now on. And another one from the same training explained she learned not to limit herself “because of age, nationality, position or other things” and to give herself an “opportunities to try myself”. The third one from that group additionally shared that the training brought “courage to take actions” and consequently “this way more opportunities came” to this person. Carla remarkably stressed that for her the key understanding was about how she is limiting herself and “putting my own obstacles” in life by creating stories she tells to herself. Lucas then interestingly pointed out that his discovery was correlated with not needing much: “I can do a lot with very limited resources and it still applies.” He brings a personal example from what happened to him after the training and how the experience helped him to deal with the situation: “Let's say crisis or terrible situation half a year ago. With zero money on an island without sleep, waiting for a flight. And then...I mean...a pattern would be to panic, feel miserable. There was no moment for me, for this to happen to me. It was actually enjoyable, because I knew how to do it. I could see the opportunities because of the training.” Padme added that the outdoor part helped her to realize she is capable of many things that she might “not be aware of yet”. And Valeria summarizes her realization as “opened horizons” while elaborating how such a view provides her with a stronger sense of freedom: “It really opened my mind and my attitude or how to say it, to the jobs and what I do in life. So this is good base for my freedom too. But this was important for me like on a deeper level, because I really felt some kind of power that I have inside and possibilities that I can ...there are actually no limits.” This view is also close to what T3 believes – that it is up to us whether we see something as an opportunity or a limitation.
188
7.4.2.10 Personal freedom and own capability A significant detail about experiencing freedom lies within an act of “giving freedom”, as we could observe in the statements of young people. Some would talk about giving freedom to themselves to be truly as they are, others would give freedom to their actions, to do what they found meaningful and fulfilling. As a participant from TC2 expressed, learning was “to believe in myself, to give freedom to who I am, to be more self-confident”; or according to R22 “to know that I have the complete freedom to choose and act”. Interestingly, participants also added such adjectives as “freeing” or “liberating” to certain activities and reflections in the event. For example Marina recalls an experience during the training which was highly liberating for her, when she has “just been, totally present, not thinking, not analysing, not comparing”. Afina then connects such liberation to “stop taking herself seriously” and Vivien used a quote “dance like nobody is watching” to describe her perception of freedom after the training. T4 has also observed such effect on youth during the trainings that he has delivered so far. He calls it as “something to remember in life” that is very “alive” for young people. When conducting participant observation, I noticed that young people claimed several times not to “believe in themselves”. During the activity on the first day some participants expressed that they became aware of having the tendency to underestimate their capacity, ability to achieve goals. Some mentioned that this was due to previous experience and belief about themselves. This makes the following finding even more important. Identifying own capability or strength during the training became a reality for half of the survey respondents. Many of them would also use a word “power” as a characteristic that they have within themselves and can use as they identified during the training. R8 wrote about his realization simply “that I'm really strong person” while R13 calls his experience “like a power up battery” supporting him to stand up for himself. R32 then revealed she is now “more determined” and listens to herself “without shame to seem weak sometimes”. And R50 wrote he started seeing himself as capable and strong: “No matter what situation may happen - I will be able to solve it. I saw myself as a worthy member of the society. And also as a human that deserves love and respect.” Remarkably, a participant of TC2 revealed how in the training he made a list of his “good characteristics” which support him: “I used to have some “bad” characteristics that I repeated to myself every day and they didn’t help me to go further and achieve my goals. So, I changed them and instead of keeping repeating what I am not and what others made me do I made a list of what I am , what I can do and I am finally myself.”And another young person from the same training described in the evaluation form the process of own change “from incapable and weak to capable and strong” and “from waiting and striving for appreciation from outside to knowing what and why I do, taking a stand for it”. Lastly, their group member summarizes how unpredictable program brought more adaptability: “I came to this training full of fear and insecurities because I didn´t know what to expect every day, we had an unpredictable daily program. But this made me adapt more easily. I became a leader for the first time, I overcame the obstacle of not-focusing much on what I did.” Especially for young people like Vladimir, who are struggling with seeing themselves as generally capable, this training seems to create an encouraging environment. As Vladimir reveals: “So I understand myself as weak person and as I was saying after this training I realised that I am not that weak as may be some people say, some close people to me, and not always close, just other people...So I realised that I am strong person that can make hard decisions, and I can make them successfully.” And Hugo additionally links his understanding in this area with his present situation: “Actually now I am self employed. It showed me that power in myself, that 189 responsibility, which actually I can use right now in it.” Valeria then describes in detail how this change was happening within her while underlining the importance of this transformation: “I could also feel more my strength. When I was creating something or doing something during the processes or not during the processes, I could see that it works - that I can help others, I can help myself, I can just create something nice and something important and then it just exists and yeaah... it was like a materialisation of my power. I could feel it that I do something good and well. It´s important.” T6 recognizes similar experiences in the training as very constructive ones for youth. As she recalls, being a participant she also kept reminding herself that because she “managed to handle this situation” in the training she was “able to handle other situations” in her life. She added that based on her observations she believed young people are also using such “anchor” from their own experience.
7.4.2.11 Benefits of assisting as a team member: further reflection Participants of the training sometimes decide to come and learn more in a different role, as part of the organizing and facilitating team. Mostly it is due to the desire to discover more about oneself and to see what else is there to develop, yet sometimes there is also a willingness to support the others in their learning. And as data showed, for some young people taking part in training as a participant was a less beneficial experience compared to assisting as a volunteer in a team in the next training. For example Caesar informs that for him a lot of the reflection came two years later after his participation when he attended for the first time as an assistant: “And there I could really put more the learning into words. In this first experience as a participant most of it was at the level of like feelings, you know, like I really felt like this ... joy of life, an adventure, and also connection with others.” It was the same with Dagmara, who additionally understood some parts of her learning in the training that were not clear to her prior becoming an assistant: “When I was the participant I was in my process, I had different perspective. Now with this co-trainer experience, I got another perspective and I really saw, how much impact it [training] creates. And how much... how much it is serving, even though when I was participant, I was thinking 'what the hell? Why? And it was, at that point, even when I was participant, I saw 'ok, this is something that I feel that is useful. And now even when I was the co-trainer I really see a great value in it.” And Lucas completes it with his statement: “Yeah, through assisting I got a deeper understanding of what I already understood at least a little bit, when I was participating.” Diana also added that due to the fact that she came to assist few years later after participating she had time to implemented the things she learned in the first training, thus making sense of what she has learned and practiced meanwhile. And as T1 observed, there are many young people who volunteer as assistants in training after going through it themselves.
7.4.2.12 Biggest contribution of the training When answering the question what was the biggest contribution of the training to their life was, young people were mostly united in two answers: half of them claimed it was change of attitude and almost another half identified achieved discovery. R10 answered in quite an interesting way clearly emphasizing the effect on his dealing with emotions: “Not being afraid to say I Love You to my parents and other family.”R9 called his chosen and practiced attitude as “driving your own life, not just floating and leaving the circumstances and the environment command the direction”. And R25 summarized the contribution in terms of seeing opportunities: “It encouraged me to do things I had always wanted to do, but was limiting myself be seeing obstacles rather than 190 opportunities. It helped me develop thought patterns that support me in moving forward, and let go of those that were preventing me from it.”Other five respondents informed that for them it was a changed life situation. For example R34 wrote: “It did open a chapter in my life. Actually in a way it brought me where I am now, with a family and 2 children. Concerning that specific training, it supported me to ease and to open up, to my creativity and playfulness.” R42 is also connecting her last year with her experience in the training including inspiration and empowerment she gained there: “Just in a year, my changes are: I am married, I have good relations with my parents, I am relocating to a new country with better conditions and I have a freelance job that helps me to manage my time as I want it.” Additionally, for a few respondents the main contribution was in the new tools that they learned and improved relationships with others. It is worth noting that altogether half of all participants claimed that the outdoor part of the experience was the strongest one for them in terms of learning and development. 7.4.3 Outcomes of the training seen by youth The question that young people received was “What were the concrete outcomes of this training for you in terms of decisions made or actions took right after Synergy training?” Some participants mentioned specific actions, others said it was more of a change of attitude for them. In both cases there was strong evidence of very concrete examples. There were also quite a few informing about their involvement in volunteering or non-governmental organizations, or even starting their own NGOs or social enterprises. I will give more attention to these examples in the chapter 7.5 Impact on Participation. To start with actions, the first one revealed by many participants was supporting others in their development or in other words encouraging people from their environment to learn ad explore either in training setting or elsewhere. This was for example an action that Caesar took repeatedly and as he claims, thanks to him hundreds of people went abroad for similar programs to learn. Another action shared by many young people was continuing in their non-formal education by joining other trainings or international events, as also Lucas, Afina or Filip did. Valeria was one of those who organized an international training herself after having started an application already during the training and Ben organized a camp for children. Emil realized he really wanted his independence and also his “own space and time”, and thus he moved out to his own place away from parents, the same as Padme. For others it was more connected to improving health. For Ilona, who was struggling with, her weight the actions was actually to lose weight, which she achieved; and Marina started taking care of her mental health better by doing sports. Decisions were mostly taken in the domain of relationships. Lucas, Gustav and Albert shared they made a “painful decision” of breaking-up, which they both nevertheless evaluate as a good and constructive decision since the relationship wasn´t working. Osvald explained that right after the training he didn´t have where to live since it was a “total mess” at home, so his decision was to ask for support and to “reach out my friends” and to live for one month “from friend to friend” until he could solve his situation. Afina could represent a group of participants for whom the main decision was regarding being pro-active. This is what she says about what she learned: “Go for it. Decide this. Yeah, this go- for-attitude, like, if you want it, just do it, just stop crying. I did, I went for a lot of things afterwards.” Ilona emphasized her decision to take an attitude of checking the reality and not to rely blindly on her assumptions.
191
7.4.4 Acceptance and enjoyment increased in life Both in survey and interviews the topic of acceptance belongs to the most relevant ones for young people. There was a strong agreement about the experience in the training supporting their process of being accepted by others, accepting themselves, their surroundings and different life conditions that they cannot change including their past. Some participants mentioned acceptance in a contrast to “not liking” or even “hating” themselves prior to training. R9 used quite an interesting expression saying: “I learned to love myself for what I am, rather than hate myself for what I am not.” R31 found it important to accept herself in a context of comparing herself to others - and not just “think everyone is perfect and I am the only one who has all those flaws”. R37 also had a negative self-perception connected to comparison with other people, although in his case according to his words it was also caused by other´s attitude towards him: “I had quite a lot of feelings against myself for inability to achieve success, depression of sequential failures, looking for the easy ways, and a lot of unreasonable thing keeping myself down. It was not out of the blue, huge role was there from my classmates. But I started to clean up the mess, stand up for myself and not let other to bully on me fast excuses for not completing something. I believe it has much to do with improved self-esteem.” Some others described circumstances that they managed to accept and it helped them in dealing with related issues. For example Diana explains that for her it was the choice to support her ill brother and accepting unpleasant consequences: “You really see that it´s up to you what you do. And if you do that, then take everything with it.... I needed to accept the situation I am in. To embrace it as something as I have power over.” And Valeria remembers how being accepted by other participants was crucial for her growth: “Actually may be what I needed and what I got there - the feeling of being accepted. The feeling of feeling the part of a group, feeling a member of even society, like..I don´t know how to explain it better, I felt accepted just as I was, as a person, in a group, in a family, in society, in the world..Yeah that was what really meant a lot for me.” For Emil the important element was linked to accepting his sexuality which led to allowing himself “not be in doubt or panic about it” but start relaxing and investing in that “without having guilt”. Afina even admitted she was lacking acceptance in her life generally and that experience of being accepted as she was during the training brought her to self-acceptance step by step after the training. And Zora explained how being accepted helped her to accept others back home, particularly her mother’s: “Before the training I couldn´t think about her and her behaviour and her emotions and her ways of living without any judgements. It changed completely my relationship with her, absolutely, because for eight years or something this relationship was like half alive. The way was easy, to start from myself of, and then to translate to other and to accept how they are. And leave behind my own judgements and the judgements of other people.” Laura then called this attitude allowing herself “to be myself and other people to be other people”. 7.4.5 Decision making and problem-solving skills Some young people were united in their recognized impact on decision making. Most of those described it as improved, yet a few indicated a switch which R11 called “from half decided person into very decisive person”. R48 even linked his experience with a change that stays with him and affects his every decision: “It shaped the way I am today and thus contributed to all the decisions I made from that moment until now and from now on until the rest of my life.” Interestingly, within this domain participants gained in different ways. One participant from TC1 during the sharing with the whole group particularly highlighted the fact that she was making decisions which she found otherwise very challenging for herself. For Vladimir it was the 192 opposite. Being a person who makes decision rather hastily and not always thinking about them, for him the learning was in reflecting more about his options and consequences of his decisions. And Dragomir recognized that improvement in the training supported him in a very tense life threatening situation some months later, when he managed to deal with a stressful moment and decide for right steps. Gustav then uses a metaphor of “being a captain of your ship”, which is a state he reinforced at the training and since then it is much easier for him to “make conscious decisions”. Osvald and Padme both benefited from realizing they can make decisions “step by step” which allows them to proceed in their plans and at the same time to reflect more on what is happening. On the contrary, Laura was previously struggling with being too late in decision making – and thus she learned to make decisions “fast when needed”. According to T2, it is not that important to label young people´s decisions as “good or bad” as such, since they might learn from consequences anyhow. As he says, it is much more important that they develop ability of making decisions on their own to bring “contribution to their lives”. And T6 explains that when it comes to decision making, Synergy training “kind of gives you a kick into going into the direction you want”, or in other words young people have their space and support in order to clarify what they need to make a decision. 7.4.6 Education and position in life Mainly for those who were still in their studies when taking part in the training this event brought an impact also in their education. Carla admits that ownership she experienced in her life in general transformed her attitude in her final year of studies as well, so she could finish her education with determination and greater results. Emil on the other hand realized he wasn´t connected to his field of studies and he changed his direction in a way that until now he is satisfied with his occupation. Elenor used her newly improved skill of overcoming fears and right after the training applied for a competition in physics which she wasn´t “brave enough” to do before. Altogether, with the diversity of impacted fields in their social functioning, young people also identified that their position in life has undergone certain change during and after the training. R33 summarized her view which resonates with the conclusions of others: “It served to grow in a real way. It helped me to find the way to feel at the right place in the world.” Trainers then gave some specific examples in the training that they see connected to young people´s search for their position in life. T2 listed activities where youth can explore images of a man or a woman which is present in their society; their own potential as a source of inspiration or not; working in a group as following blindly or sharing own ideas and critically considering others´; and lastly their visions as larger ideas to be implemented in society in a way that it serves them and others. T3 mentioned that also sharing experience within a group shapes youth´s position that they take in daily life, to which T4 also added confrontation and reflection. 7.4.7 Employment or occupation Regarding the field of employment, there were four main impacts that young people mentioned. Firstly, they described how participation in the training and learning achieved there led to change of occupation or direction of work. Secondly, it was an improved communication with colleagues. Then some revealed they were using the tools from the training at their working place. And finally, they were referring to their improved working skills in general.
193
Caesar or Gregor are examples of those few young people among respondents who understood that non-formal education and social issues as their priority and applied their potential in this domain while becoming youth workers themselves. And Dagmara who was already involved in non-formal education decided to switch her target group from adults to youth work as well. While Lucas decided to leave the corporate world and became active in the self-development field also with disadvantaged youth, Costina and Zora found the courage to start freelancing which they do up until now. Vivien represents those who realized they would prefer to work with people: “I did learn during the process that I really do like to contribute to someone else` s life. Like it doesn´t have to be huge, but in a way to make someone else´s life just a bit better.” Working also with immigrants nowadays she applies also the tools she practiced in the training. This is also a tendency common for other young people who chose the direction of youth work or working with people – almost all of them indicated using the methodology and techniques from the training to certain extent. This way, elements of training are used in the fields of social work, psychology or teaching. Altogether, the findings suggest that part of the impact on young people´s decision regarding their occupation was also an increased interest in social dimension of their preferred jobs. Another significant element was connected to meaningfulness that young people were searching in their occupation. As Ester remembers: “After I came back and work a bit ... for three month, but I realized it's not I want to do. I thought about what do I want to do with my future and I don't want job like 9 to 5, where I just stay in office and the day pass by and I just have salary, but no time for myself or for doing something meaningful.” And since for Albert his previous field in science wasn´t fulfilling he decided to move towards youth work yet still in connection with nature. Not everybody though was seeking youth work as their main field of work. It is important to notice that in case of Max, who was firstly considering the same direction, his “honest answers” to himself led to choosing a different occupation which he recognized as much more fitting his talent and interests. He describes this process: “There was a period of time when I was looking for what I want to do, and I think the question and honest answer brought me to my job now. Because I thought that ok I wanna be I don´t know a trainer or work with kids. But after I learned to ask question I understood ok, it´s not really what I want. And then I started my research of what brings me joy. And it also was important to be honest to myself, not to pretend that ok, I wanna learn this because this is cool, this sounds cool, you know. And then I wanna pretend that I am a cool guy and other people are amazed by me. But then I think ok, it´s not about other people, it´s about myself, what I really want.” Improved communication was either presented as “more clear and direct” as for example by R48, more “effective” as in case of Costina or more “open” as described by Vladimir. In addition, he claimed to use communication skills gained in the training in his current job as well: “I was talking in front of group of people, I was saying my own opinions, and I was communicating with them in English and in Czech, so this is what I am doing right now in my job. And let´s say that that was the impact on my current job. One of many impacts in my life.” Zora also added that for her improved communication at work resulted into created friendships whilst before they were “just colleagues”. 7.4.8 Effect on health and independent living Firstly, I find it important to notice that young people mentioned several times “energy”, some kind of vitality, as one of the impacts of the training. For example R30 wrote about gaining “a lot of active and concrete energy for implementing new things in my life” while Valeria called it 194
“enthusiasm” or a “kick of energy” that brought her more strength to do what she wanted and influenced her actions after the training. Trainers also recognized this state while also pointing out that it could carry a danger of unconsidered decisions under the impression that everything will work out. Therefore, there is also a strong recommendation at the end of the training to wait with decisions for couple of weeks, so that this energetic state could become more grounded and connected to daily lives of participants. Based on findings presented in the chapter 7.3.2 Limiting or stopping elements of the training, young people with mental health issues are generally not advised to participate by trainers and their involvement in training is seen by some participants as dangerous. Nevertheless, R15 reveals that for her this experience was beneficial: “I did it in a moment when I had very serious mental issues, so this training brought life back to me again, made me remember who I was, made me concentrate and enjoy a huge personal achievement in just improving my mental well being drastically.” Her case implies there are circumstances when even more serious mental condition doesn´t necessarily mean the training would be harmful for a young person, but rather the opposite. Of course, these conditions need to be researched further and no definite conclusion can be made until it is clear under which circumstances there is no relevant potential risk and more benefits for such a client. Carla then interestingly shared she was going to psychologist before the training and during the event she managed to solve some of her issues. And although some years have passed since then, she never again had a “need that I need to work things in my past” which was her focus before. Alina then revealed she used to drink a lot and she managed to change that. Filip additionally mentioned that he knew some young people attending therapy, since he was also working with them under different circumstances, who after the training received feedback from their therapists regarding their significantly improved mental health. Gaining a state of independence was particularly appreciated by six participants and mostly linked with relationship with parents. After the training Hugo claimed to feel “more grown and independent”, which supported him in moving away from his parents and going abroad for the first time to travel and work. For R34 becoming more independent meant to start “taking more care of living place/look/hobbies”. Padme then remarkably explains how she started to take herself more into account: “I mean at least that I want to listen my voice. I don´t want to listen to voice of my parents or something what they expected me to be in my life. So this was the beginning.” For Zora this matter was rather in dimension of work, as the independence she “was looking for” was found in freelancing. It is quite interesting though that trainers were not united in this matter. While some think that independence is not very supported or encouraged directly as such during the training, others on the contrary see elements of the training clearly influencing independent living of young people. T1 representing the first group explains it by safe or even protective environment where “everything is prepared” for participants, such as food, accommodation and program, and they don´t need to take care about many things by themselves. T2 agrees with him and sees the only independency encouragement in making choices: “Independency is not all the time an impact of Basic Synergy, what it can give is the independency of my choices. Like to be able to see that no matter in which situation I am, I have at least 2 or 3 choices. And I am having the possibility to choose.” On the contrary, T3 understands different parts of the program as implicitly beneficial for young people´s independent functioning, and T4 and T5 repeatedly emphasized that training is about personal accountability and therefore could, but not necessarily, support in 195 independency. T6 in addition indicated that in the training young people often learn not to be “dependent on other´s opinions” which she finds crucial for their growth as well. 7.4.9 Leisure time and enjoyment When it came to the question about the impact on their leisure time, some young people would claim that in this domain nothing really changed for them. Yet there were more than a half that mentioned that they linked experience in training with finding new hobbies and activities and spending more time with friends. Another frequently named impact was increased travelling and lastly, few also underlined increased outdoor and health related activities as well as creating a balance between leisure time and other areas in their life. Interviewees identified a whole range of new hobbies that they included in their life after the training, interestingly often arguing that their increased self-confidence and seeing opportunities led them to this decision. R28 gave a remarkable explanation about her broadened social life: “It made me go out. I'm exaggerating, but it made me comfortable to try all sorts of things, I've been to every dance class offered in [home city], I've been to several basketball matches, I've been to all sorts of book clubs, gatherings, rock concerts, festivals and generally any events I would come across. And have in mind that these weren't particularly areas of my interest, people would invite me or I would see stuff on Facebook and I would just say yes to things and go see them. Have in mind that before the training I would say ''I am too fat'' or ''I have nothing to wear'' to go to certain places.” For Lucas the main change was in a specific way of spending free time, as he claimed that he started using “fewer resources” while still enjoying quality leisure time. And Afina adopted an attitude of adding some new activity to her life when she realizes that she is “doing the same things all over again”. Regarding more time spent with friends what R6 wrote could demonstrate the general experience: “I'm able to make new connections and relationships easier and mange to maintain the existing ones.” Descriptions of R44 or Roxolana who stated they started to spend “more quality time with people in general” completes the picture. Travelling then was another activity that young people found increased. And while for Hugo and Padme it was caused as they say by overcoming hesitation and stronger belief in themselves, Diana´s example shows how it happened due to the connections made in the training: “We visited each other, we were in contact and it gave me the chance to get to know other countries, and other ways of life.” T5 also recalls one participant for whom the experience served as an inspiration: “We had a guy that he had so much fun of this outdoor that he decided to put himself in a process of going for eight days around Europe without money.” The results also offer evidence of the strong correlation between outdoor experience in the training and increased interest in outdoor activities in general including those directly intended to improve health of youth. Caesar is one of those who recognized this impact saying he “discovered my love for this outdoor adventures activities through the training”. Marina explains for her it´s movement in general that is crucial: “When you were actually really physically active, they showed me that I actually enjoy, enjoy very much doing that. And it makes me free, it liberates me, so if I could do it in some form or another , running, biking, whatever, not necessary dancing, any form of physical activity, it would just help me think less, analyse less. And you know, just move.”Afina informs she “became more outdoor person” and Alina recalls that while stopping drinking much as she used before she also started running and doing yoga and felt better.
196
Balance is also important as some young people discovered. Dagmara stated that for her it is since participation in the training “essential to find balance and to find balance between work and leisure time”. And Elenor shared she managed to organize herself better in hours she had to study and for what she liked to do without “being anxious”. State of joy or enjoyment was an additional aspect that half of interviewed young people declared to experience more in their lives after the training. For the majority of them joy was something they started to value, seek and create more as well, as Dragomir put it “avoiding such a way of life which I wouldn't even enjoy”. And some as Frida or Ester were making decisions to change their activities in life because they “didn´t enjoy” what they were doing back then. To create joy in his life, Albert for example started to do more sports. And Afina admits she stopped “pushing herself” doing what she couldn´t enjoy at all when it came to spending free time. For Max the main change happened in his working field, since in contrast to his past experience after the training he now enjoys what he does: “My job brings me joy and also I get paid for it, so that´s the perfect combination.” Laura´s conclusion is corresponding with his realization: “I learned how to get joy from life. May be it doesn´t matter what do you do, but it matters how you do it, with joy or not.” 7.4.10 Needs met in the training Some of the needs correspond with young people´s motivation to come to this training in the first place (see chapter 7.3.1.2 Motivation). This applies mainly for the need for adventure as in case of Hugo or Caesar, need to resolve personal issues as in case of Flora or Vladimir or need for change as it was for Filip or Marina. General needs met in the training as frequently mentioned by youth were the following: a) Need of understanding oneself b) Need to be accepted c) Need of better communication d) Need to take risks e) Need to connect f) Need of clarity Gregor and Emil together with some others appreciated their need “to be seen” and “recognized and given opportunity” as well as “need of self-expression” were fulfilled as well. Caesar interestingly also points out a need for intimacy, which wasn´t fulfilled as such during the training, but thanks to increased self-confidence he was reassured he was capable of creating a loving romantic relationship. He reveals: “Until that point, for example, I never had a relationship, and my confidence in my ability to have a relationship with woman was... there was a lot of doubt. But in the like the last twenty four hours, with someone, who was external to the training, we kind of fell in love. And we never met after, that was...we just had like few hours of like being in love and that was it. But this definitely had a huge impact on me and on my self- confidence of like being able to start potentially the relationship.” Dagmara also shared an interesting insight regarding her met need of letting go or decreasing control: “Definitely I needed to get reed of the fear of having control over everything. Not, like having power over my life, but being in control, when it is not necessary to be in control and to allow space to others, to bring input as well.” Vladimir and Padme both named a “need for peace” that they were seeking and which was also met by their experience. And Elenor as few 197 others realized right after the training she had a need to contribute, to support others in growing, which was also met by a follow-up part of the program. And Gustav directly linked his experience with Tony Robbins´ six human needs he was aware of: “Definitely the need for growth and even the need for contribution, although I didn't go there to do that. The growth part absolutely was very much alive. I wanted to get beyond the problem that I saw as a problem. Connection, and essentially I would say love even, but connection, yeah, for sure. And I wouldn't say significant variety, maybe, a little bit, but, maybe, the certainty that I needed to get through this problem.” 7.4.11 Needs not met in the training Quite significantly half of young people interviewed concluded there were no needs that wouldn´t be met for them in the training. However, there were still needs that young people listed that were not met for them. Mostly it was linked to personal preferences, yet more participants agreed on the need for lasting friendship not being fulfilled due to weakened connection with others from the group after the training. As Gregor summarizes: “The only thing that was missing is that with the other participants after the training we just stop being in touch. So, let's say we spend ten or twelve days together, we experienced so many interesting and great things and we were connected on spot, but after the training, I don't know...” Also Dagmara agrees and underlines that with participants they went their “separate way” and there was little “ongoing connection”. Another need not met shared by some participants while on the contrary met for others was a need of clarity. These young people found the training too confusing and complex at times, as Lucas shares: “Very often I didn't know what's happening, why we did it, what was the idea of the trainers and...Yeah, just more clarity, that was my feeling back then.” And lastly, a need of follow-up was mentioned couple of times as a not met one. Marina for example needed to meet more inspiring people, which didn´t happen. And curiously, while many young people stated they found understanding among others in the training, Vladimir on the other hand remembers that his need of understanding wasn´t met: “I was looking for some understanding back there when we were fighting with people, like conversation. So let´s say I didn´t get much understanding among participants which I was requiring at the moment, until the end.” It is further important to notice that both Flora and Diana recall their need of respect not being met. Diana remembers that when she was asking for explanation, it wasn´t really provided to her: “I felt that it was like fuck off with your problem, if you don´t understand. And take it. And I would expect like more... accepting or giving may be attitude from the trainer. Because I really don´t like [trainer´s name] way of communication in the training. Ok, I understand that there are things that you have to come to understand yourself and nobody can explain them to you, but the attitude was like... whatever. That´s what I felt. May be it was not on her, like she didn´t mean it this way, but it felt this way.” And Flora describes: “During the training I was often very pissed because of the trainers. And their behaviour and I felt really not respected. But maybe it wasn´t there, it was my thing.” While not clarifying what exactly this respect it meant for her, she also added that another need was rather physical – her need for sleep due to very intense program wasn´t fulfilled either. Oscar and Ester whose main need was to discover their path didn´t fulfil it fully as both claimed they still don´t know for sure what they want to do in life. And Albert and Gustav expressed their not covered need of further guidance, as Albert explained: “I didn't manage to end up having
198 concrete steps, specific steps to take action afterwards. So it was clear that I wanted to change my life direction and to be doing different type of things and being in a different state and after that it was hard for me to know how to do it and how to bring it to my life, so it took several months to realize how to make this change.” 7.4.12 Potential of young people, quality in life and turning point Interviewed youth was referring to using their potential in different dimensions such as creativity, being pro-active or finding solutions in their current situations. What I find important to add is the point of view of trainers who bring a perspective of training´s program. As T1 remarkably expressed: “There is always one of the things that you can solve with the qualities that you have.” Such variety in the training thus allows young people to contribute in their own way and based on what they are unique at, giving them an experience of a situation, some sort of a precedent, when they could apply what they were good at. Young people see openness as a valued impact of their participation in the training. They connect it both with being open to people and being open to new ideas or actions they could possibly take. Elenor belongs to those who benefited mostly in the area of relationships. She says about her learning: “Nobody knows me if I don't show myself to others. I am more direct to what I have to say people, like, I'm not holding back feelings anymore. If I find something wrong with friend of mine I will tell them 'this is hurting me, what can we do about this?” Also Tibor provided an example of an effect of such attitude in his personal relationship: “I understood even I am not lying to person... but more if I am not saying something which what I am really thinking or I keep it inside its really destroying my relationship. So I have to be honest to my partner and I have to try really saying everything what I am seeing, what I think. Not only good things, but if I don´t like some things.” Tibor calls it “being authentic” and Padme adds for her it meant also to be more “open to accept help”. There appeared also a broad “quality” attribute that youth was mentioning together with other impacts. While majority as for instance also Dagmara or R25 claimed for them the “quality of relationships” increased, R7 recognized spending more “quality time” with people in general and Max identified more “quality in life” including his working time. One of the significant findings is connected to what can be recognized as a turning point in the lives of youth. More than a half or participants were describing their experience in the training using an expression “life changing”. Valeria says simply: “It is one of the most important experiences of my life. It really changed my life and I gain from it till now.” And Filip uses an elaborated metaphor to describe his feelings towards a shift he experienced during the training when he realized he can support people in growth by giving them more space and stay in the background: “And this was the change completely. I called that for me it was, like, revolution between Galileo and Copernic. Like, the Sun around the Earth. Or the planets around Sun. This was really the shift for me. It had this power.” And Osvald together with other declared that some moments of the training he “will remember forever” since they were so strong and bringing change for him. There is at the same time a significant experience of Alina who had high expectations towards the impact of the training, as she admitted. She explains the roots of her disappointment afterwards: “I did the trainings because I really thought that it would change my life. It changed somehow. But it's not the way I wanted to see that change. So I was expecting some change, my perception was that it would change my life in a way that everything would be different. But not.”
199
7.4.13 Impact on relationships One of the quite obvious impacts on their relationships that youth identified was creating new ones. A lot of them especially appreciate having contacts with their peers from all over the Europe, which is an impact connected both to self-development method itself (which, as youth shared, supported them in deeper connection in a group) and to international dimension of the events. Elenor is one of those who still keeps in touch with her international group members from the training and meets them time to time: “I never expected that I would feel all these things, during that training... making friends. The last day I was always thinking that I will miss you so much. I had created bond that I didn't want to stop existing later.” On the other side, there were quite a significant amount of examples provided by participants which showed that after the training they were also cutting not well-functioning relationships. It was a case of nine interviewed young people and it was both related to friendships and intimate relationships. Afina for example lost connection with some of her friends which she evaluated as “very good” because she “made some beautiful friends afterwards” instead. And Gustav broke up with his partner since they realized they were “not matching”. Interestingly, Zora pointed out that prior the training she was going out and meeting a lot of people, but these relationships according to her were “superficial and artificial”. So after the training she decided to change this “quantity for quality” and started to spend more time with less people. Another effect could be called improving current relationships. Over a half of survey respondents indicated minimum one improving element that they could bring into their relationships after the training – some informed they became “more understanding”, some “more honest” or “open”, others “more supportive” or “listening more”. T1 noticed that once youth experiences in the training they can treat each other in a way to create strong and functioning connection, they realize that they can recreate it also at home. Which according to him is more “tough” because at home “there is history” others link them with, while in the training they are “not judged upon history”. Almost all interviewed young people and some from survey further reported changes in family relationships and without an exception these changes were described as bringing the better state. R13 recalls he “started again after three years to talk with my parents more that basic things” and R33 decided to “start forgiving my father for all the grief he caused me” which she called “one of the best goal of my relationship life”. However, while in some cases we can observe quite fast changes, it is important to underline that for some others it wasn´t at all immediate and has rather started a long-term transformation. Caesar shared about his process: “In terms of family I had a lot of issues with my relationships with my parents, for example. And it's not like I solved them after this training, definitely not. Many of them I feel I solved in the twenty years since then. Some are still there. But what I could say is that my feeling is that in this training it started the process of working on my relationship with my parents. This was the beginning and it took many years since then. In a long term it definitely impacted, most my relations.” Also Albert summarizes a considerable contrast in relationships before and after his participation which took longer period to happen: “It was very-very clear the impact that it had, because before I was excluding them a lot from my life. And right now I'm in peace with my family and I mean in very close contact with them and I'm carrying a lot about them. It's funny because before the training it was them who were asking me, hey, come on let's be more in contact. And after the training it was a very long process, but it started at that point when I stopped blaming and I started to allow them to be more part of my life. Now it's me who is mostly contact them and sharing what I'm doing... so this 200 is a big turning point in my relationship with my family.” And Vladimir reveals that his relationships in a family didn´t change drastically, yet there was a different element: “It was not the moment that I made peace with my step father, like relationship with him and my family, but it was next step for all the people around me, they were starting to understand me better. I was very confident, so they felt good when I was with them. And I realised that this is the person I wanna be. Not some guy who doesn´t believe in himself. As I was taught before. So this changed me. And I successfully started this way of confidence after the training on university.” And while Ben and Padme became “more able” to speak to their mothers with whom they had troubles to communicate and Osvald managed to “accept” his family members as they are, Carla admitted she still couldn´t quite connect to her parents although she improved relationships with friends. Afina then interestingly highlighted she became “more aware of emotional needs of people around” and Max admitted he “stopped trying changing people”, which in both cases also led to improved family connections. According to what youth disclosed their friendships were improved as well - the adjectives they were using to describe it were indicating positive effect. Dagmara for example called her relationships with friends “stronger” as they really started sharing much more “intimate stuff” and “allowed each other to enter some personal zone” which was not happening before. And Lucas explained he distinguishes between conversations which are “empty” and “meaningful” and he claimed that after the training he is better in “turning the conversations in a way that they have a meaning”. Furthermore, some participants also revealed improvement in their intimate relationships connected to their changed self-perspective and achieved clarity and awareness of what they want. We can generally summarize their statements regarding improvement by what R40 wrote: “I am in an open, honest, healthy and supporting relationship, where I can build trust, which I've never had before.” 7.4.14 Impact on resources, problem solving skills and dealing with risks There is strong evidence in study results that impact of the training was also transformed into the domain of resources of young people. Many of them informed about recognizing, finding or creating resources after the training. R15 for instance informed: “It helped me find many resources for success and better well being in virtually everything, deep within myself too.” R17 wrote she learned some tools and techniques that helped her afterwards when she needed them; R21 compared the training to “compass and a toolbox” in practice since when she got out of the training she already knew “where to go”; and R23 claimed it served him “to see myself as a source of light and joy”. In a field of problem solving skills young people emphasized their reinforced attitude to persist even when they don´t succeed and search for a solution in the first way. As one of the participants of TC2 wrote in his evaluation form: “I realized that there are many ways to approach the problem and its solution and instead of trying to find reason why I can´t do it, I should be creative (and I CAN be creative) and find the solution. At least try to solve and if I need, to ask other people to help. Now I know I am brave and I dare!” Ester further elaborated on the importance of seeing the issue from other person´s perspective when it comes to relationships: “I realize that I am doing it more often, when something is not happening the way I want to, I try to think about the other person perspective and think okay, maybe I can compromise and think more what's his point of view or her point of view and try to adapt that. I more aware of these things after the training.” Trainers observe this realization of young people quite often, as all of them agreed. T1 explained that in the training youth is given a situation or a problem to solve, which is 201 more in the personal awareness than the technical problem solving. He calls problem solving “stepping over your own limitations, be creative, create joy of things that are not so enjoyable”. What is happening a lot, as he highlighted, is that young people are surprised by their own capability to find solutions and overcome diverse obstacles. Both T2 and T3 gave concrete examples of such activities from the program and T6 pointed out that the whole outdoor part is one big opportunity to solve situations that teams find themselves in. There was a question regarding young people´s ability to deal with risks also in evaluation forms they anonymously fill in right after the training: What changes did training bring into your risk taking? The answers that young people gave were mostly connecting better dealing with risks to what they have learned during the training - relying more on themselves and team, managing obstacles and overcoming fears. I provide here some examples from what different participants wrote: • “The outdoor part of the training taught me how to push over my limits. I am more confident now in a sense of communication and team work.” • “A lot of risk taking from outdoor. Take them, they are not scary, they pay off.” • “I took risks and nothing bad happened, so I would like to be brave and take risks in order to know myself better and to see obstacles as opportunities.” • “It gave me strength and courage to act and risk no matter how difficult I think something is. If I set my vision and take actions, I am sure that I will find a way to overcome the obstacles.” • “I took a risk and it made me more self-confident.” • “I started to trust people more and involve myself in a team.” • “Helped me understand there is always a way to find a solution no matter what circumstances or situations.” • „I have more courage to share my work with others“ • „That every risk is countable and manageable, I decreased my negative feeling when taking a risk and through building confidence making them less intimidating and undoable.“ • „I was challenging myself every day, stimulating my creativity and fears and dealing with my fears.“ • „I learned to break the barriers and asking: interaction and empathy are the keys.“
As we can see, they mention a range of views or understanding that were also shared by young people in retrospective either in interviews or in survey. Thus it is very likely that indicated similar aspects would be helpful in dealing with risks also for others who for example claimed to become more confident or capable of searching for solutions. 7.4.15 Self-confidence and initiative Previous findings already pointed to the change of young people´s perception of their abilities and self-worth. This leads us to another element that appeared very often in their descriptions, which was increased self-confidence. It was visible especially in cases of participants such as Vladimir, Flora or Padme, who haven´t experienced enough support in their family environment and came to training struggling with seeing themselves as “enough” to succeed in general. Vladimir expresses that this positive change could happen also due to others in a group: 202
“Because there were people who were supporting me, which my step father wasn´t doing in my life. So it was very, very good for me to see people that I was working in groups with, which are supporting me. And telling me about my successes and that it was really good, so it was warming inside of me.” Emil remembers that feeling more confident allowed him to speak up for himself: “Saying, I don´t like this or I like this and I need this or ... Which I could not do before, I was bit too shy or too, yeah, too much of an introvert, also being from a small village.” For Dragomir it was a matter of sharing his ideas that before he didn´t see as useful and worthy to be ventilated. In addition, youth recognized being more pro-active and taking initiative in positions or situations that were rather unusual for them previously. R50 put it broadly: “I started creating something for people, now I am more giver and less taker than before.” And Elenor explains switch in her attitude: “Through the program I found that I don't need others to push me to do things, but I have to be the one who will do something. Not just waiting for it to happen by itself or someone to do it for me.”Osvald then remarkably points out his need to try to be the first in actions: “One of my small objectives during that time was to rise my hand and to answer or to go first whatever activities. So I was always answering first, putting questions first, volunteering first. It was my need to be more confident that I can do it first, yeah.”And Max compares his previous rather analysing attitude to a new one he adopted: “Before I liked more to observe and analyse... what if I do and what will happen, but there was no action in it. But after I think the big things that I started to just do things, and then see what will happen. And after that I started to get really amazing, amazing new experience, like life situations.”
203
7.4.16 Impact of social functioning in context of research and theory It has been argued that basic problems with social functioning lay within the imbalances in cases of 1) expectations of surrounding environment being too high for a person to cope with; 2) insufficient support net and 3) insufficient specific competence of a young person (Běhounková 2013). I find this research to a certain extent supporting this theory particularly in the two last cases. There have been identified voices of young people who specifically pointed out to lack of support in their lives (Padme, Vladimir, Flora, Filip and others) which according to them led to having lower self-esteem, issues in relationships or trusting themselves and thus not fully using their potential. At the same time some of them recognized missing competences, usually in communication field (such as speaking in a group, expressing emotions or own thoughts), that would also limit them in creating an environment where they would feel in balance with their social functioning. Yet the same young people shared they gained this kind of support and increased their competences already during the training or afterwards as a result of their experience. Therefore, I believe the impact on social functioning reported in this study is significant in the context of basic problems in this domain and the method applied to achieve such results consequently useful for dealing with them. The emphasis that young people put on recognition of their choice as a fundamental element in their social functioning (demonstrated by statements such as “take life in my hands”) is consistent with what (Nussbaum 2000) describes in her analysis of human capabilities. According to her, functionings are ‘beings and doings’, whilst capability is the capability to achieve a functioning – and it is possible to have a capability to achieve a functioning, yet choose not to do so. As we can observe in what young people revealed, they have made diverse choices to achieve a better functioning in the context of either relationships with family or friends or using their potential when making decisions of their own, deciding to live independently etc. Generally speaking, since participation in the training supported them in making choices based on awareness and clarity while focusing on what they want and what empowers them, the possible use of capability to achieve social functioning increased as well. And this is rather an important conclusion, since it implies not only immediate change, but also chances to maintain well-being in their future. Findings in this research are further in agreement with (Wolff, de-Shalit 2007) argument that doing well in one functioning will consequently lead to improvements in other functionings. Young people described how improving relationships with people around them brought “joy” and “persistence” in their daily actions, also some indicated improved health and leisure time after their perception of themselves became more positive. It is then worth to focus on some key aspects of social functioning with an intention to contribute to such a chain reaction of change. More than a half or participants were describing their experience in the training using an expression “life changing”. This attribute together with examples that they were giving could be recognized in theory as a turning point, meaning an experience that changes the direction of our lives. Turning points are then defined as significant life events or experiences in life that have a visible importance on the life course as they persist. Turning points are crucial events in life which give a structure of ‘before’ and ‘after’ (Denzin 1989; Rutter 1996). All these attributes fit the descriptions that young people provided. All of them were talking about their experience in the training and its impact in terms of before it and afterwards, also emphasizing the lasting effect of changes that have occurred within them. In consistence with theory, there was mainly a moral message in them as well – such as the way of helping people or seeing oneself as worthy. The
204 findings thus strongly suggest that this self-development training can serve some young people in experiencing turning points. As Satir (Satir 1995) states, all human relationships are based on trust and love. When an event raises the question of whether that love and trust really exist, we activate our survival responses and in such state we usually find the beliefs that others are in charge of our lives, that we could not cope with them, and that they define us. The impact of realizing that they are the ones in charge of their lives and are capable to solve their issues – together with repeated experience of trust and acceptance during the training - that youth frequently shared in interviews points to conclusion that mentioned survival responses were replaced by more healthy and supportive ones. In the context of Satir´s theory their experience makes perfect sense. Once allowing themselves to trust and be accepted, which is a crucial feature of love as well, young people could discover and adopt new beliefs which allowed them to see themselves as worthy, capable and powerful. Moreover, as it is visible from retrospective responses of those who participated many years ago, they still keep those adopted during the training beliefs and claim to benefit from them. (Satir 1991) also presented the three elements used in the concept of functioning – Self, Context and Other. It is interesting to notice how the results of this study fit this concept as well. Satir argued that only by accepting one´s Self or one´s self-worth it is possible to connect with the Context and Other. Context as represented by life circumstances and conditions of here and now, or also society and culture, was much more easily accepted and understood by youth hand in hand with finding their own values and strength, as young people summarized themselves. Again, as many mentioned, self-acceptance and increased belief in oneself led to better connection to their environment demonstrated also by recognizing opportunities and willingness to take part in what is happening around. Similarly, the connection with the Other as another human being or the whole group was happening. Young people described how realizing their self-worth either in terms of for example “being capable of a relationship” or “being able to care for others” resulted into strong connection with other participants and later on with their family members and friends back home. The balance between three mentioned elements brings congruency which is characterized also by appreciation of the uniqueness of self; a willingness to trust oneself and others and to take risks; the use of one´s inner and outer resources; and ultimately openness to intimacy and to change (Satir, 1991). All these aspects were clearly present in what young people shared as an impact of the training. And all these findings therefore offer compelling evidence that participation in basic Synergy training strengthened conditions or in some cases even fully enabled congruence of youth to grow. Another concept worth considering when it comes to the results of this research is a reviewed theory on people´s needs offered by Robbins (2001). He introduced six universal needs that drive all human behaviour. Apart from Gustav who explained how some of them were met for him in the training, none of the participants directly referred to this theory. Yet the data they provided indicate that all of those six needs were met for participants during the training to a different extent. The need of variety or uncertainty was met for participants already by the novelty of the self-development international experience and unpredictable and diverse program. This need led them to try new things and take risks, which they later evaluated as contributing to their growth. The need of certainty was met by many through feeling safe and secure during the event and significance need was met especially for those who revealed they wanted to “feel important” or “to be seen”, yet also others expressed they felt “accepted” and “supported” by other members, 205 meaning they also got a message that they matter. According to what youth shared, the forth need consisting from love and outer connection with others was met completely for majority of them since they generally reported creating strong bonds among each other. It is the same with need of growth, which was a key result for youth throughout the training activities, as they revealed. And a considerable number of them also declared they could fulfil their need of contribution while supporting other participants or taking steps after the training either within follow up or simply their own initiative to bring change in their living environment. Thus we can state that Basic Synergy training offers a nourishing platform for developing oneself while also allowing them to fulfil all basic six needs. 7.4.17 Updates on social functioning Based on what youth reported in this survey, participation in the training supported them the most in their self-understanding, freedom of choice, self-fulfilment and connection to others. Other domains where the training was highly beneficial for young people were: finding resources, values, spontaneity, self-esteem and trust. On the other side, compared to others the least supportive the training was in their material/economic conditions, living environment, security and job/employment. Nevertheless, in these cases participants didn´t reach a complete agreement, as there are quite contrasting values given. These results suggest that while in some aspects the training is generally considered by youth as supportive, the others are more connected to their personal situation and therefore significantly vary. Overall, the most emphasized learning by young people was in the fields of: clarity and awareness; own capability or strength; responsibility for life; dealing with opportunities and limitations and overcoming fears or obstacles. The majority of them also claimed they had “no idea” or very little image of what they were going for. Remarkably, the whole group from TC1 agreed that knowing upfront about activities and solutions would interfere into their experience. At the same time, almost all of the interviewed young people disclosed that they had very little or no expectations towards their learning and training in general when coming to participate. And a unique case of a participant who did have high expectation led to disappointment at the end since her life didn´t change as much as she expected. What also emerged from the answers of young people was that the training started a long-term development process, as many revealed, thus bringing change into their daily lives afterwards. As many agreed, it wasn´t an immediate change they were experiencing, but step by step improvement through making new decisions. And one of the significant findings is connected to what can be recognized as a turning point in the lives of youth. More than a half or participants were describing their experience in the training using an expression “life changing”. Identifying their unknown parts of self showed to be one of the most appreciated learning processes. The responds of young people also indicate that they use these achieved skills on a conscious level and in different areas of their functioning. There was one communication aspect that was valued and highlighted by many young people - and it was asking for help. Another understanding that was surprising and useful for participants was communication being possible without knowing the same language. And while some understood the importance of open communication regardless people´s characteristics, others learned to be more persistent with communicating ideas and thoughts to others or to accept the difference of the communication and to search for ways to relate to others.
206
Most of the time joy or happiness as a dominating emotion connected to training was mentioned, and also a mixture of emotions. There was also evidence of unpleasant emotions experienced by quite some participants. What they agreed on though was that after all, even “negative emotions” had its place in their experience and served for growth. Interestingly, some participants also mentioned that recognizing and accepting their emotional side brought a complete switch into their daily functioning. Another fundamental attribute of youth´s learning was connected to inspiration – young people became an inspiration or got inspired by other´s examples. Meanwhile they also referred to becoming more accountable or responsible as “taking life in my hands”. Almost half of the respondents indicated they went through a process of “realizing things depend on me not on others”, and some underlined the crucial role of taking actions. According to findings youth learned about their capacity for creativity and more than that – they learned to implement it while overcoming fears. Some also highlighted “creative thinking” and “creative actions” as their main achievement. There was an important correlation with ownership over their lives among responses of young people, as well as understanding inclusion and leadership - some were a part of a team or became a leader for the first time. For many others overcoming fears was in a domain of expressing thoughts or emotions, facing outcomes of their actions or connection with other people. Some connected overcoming fears with answering positively to challenges in their lives and highlighted willingness to take risky steps as a part of his learning process in the training – which in few cases was also enable by achieved state of trusting oneself and another person. Moreover, youth admitted not giving up and being persistent is what they learned and wanted to practice after the training. According to findings, one of the major understandings of young people´s conditions in life was regarding what is available for them in terms of opportunities and chances. Interestingly, such “opened horizons” can provide young person with a stronger sense of freedom. A significant detail about experiencing freedom lies within an act of “giving freedom”, as we could observe in the statements of young people. Some would talk about giving freedom to themselves to be truly as they are, others would give freedom to their actions, to do what they found meaningful and fulfilling. It is significant that participants also added such adjectives as “freeing” or “liberating” to concrete activities and reflections in the event. Identifying own capability or strength during the training became a reality for a half of survey respondents. Many of them would also used a word “power” as a characteristic that they have within themselves. Another remarkable aspect is that unpredictable program brought more adaptability. And participants who admitted to work with people themselves additionally emphasized gaining new methods of working with people and team work skills. Those young people described their experience by using such expressions as “thinking as 'we', “need for a team in life” or desired “win-win result”. As data additionally showed, for some young people taking part in training as a participant was a less beneficial experience compared to assisting as a volunteer in a team in the next training, when they could grow even more. When answering the question what was the biggest contribution of the training to their life young people were mostly united in two answers: half of them claimed it was change of attitude and almost another half identified achieved discovery. It is worth notion that altogether half of participants claimed that outdoor part of experience was the strongest one for them in terms of learning and development. Regarding concrete outcomes as they identified, there were different 207 ones in terms of actions took and decisions made. To start with actions, the ones revealed by more participants were supporting others in their development and continuing in their non- formal education by joining other trainings or international events. Decisions were mostly taken in the domain of relationships, including “painful” ones of break-up or on the contrary, improving current. There was a strong agreement about the experience in the training supporting their process of being accepted by others, accepting themselves, their surroundings and different life conditions that they cannot change including their past. Some young people were united in their recognized impact on decision making in which they gained in different ways according to what they were struggling with more: while some learned to decide faster, others practiced to analyze their options deeper. Mainly for those who were still in their studies when taking part in the training this event brought an impact also in their education either in a form of more committed attitude or on the other hand complete change of the study field. Regarding the field of employment, there were four main impacts that young people mentioned. Firstly, they described how participation in the training and learning achieved there led to change of occupation or direction of work. Secondly, it was an improved communication with colleagues. Then some revealed they were using the tools from the training at their working place. And finally they were referring to their improved working skills in general. Altogether, the findings suggest that part of the impact on young people´s decision regarding their occupation was also an increased interest in social dimension of their preferred jobs. Another significant element was connected to meaningfulness that young people were searching in their occupation. When it came to the question about the impact on their leisure time, some young people claimed that in this domain nothing really changed for them. Yet there were more than a half that mentioned that they linked experience in training with finding new hobbies and activities and spending more time with friends. Another frequently named impact was increased travelling and lastly, few also underlined increased outdoor and health related activities as well as creating a balance between leisure time and other areas in their life. Gained state of independence was also appreciated and mostly linked with relationship with parents – some participants managed for example to move away from their parents. Some of the needs met in the training correspond with young people´s motivation to come to this training in the first place: need for adventure, need to resolve personal issues or need for change. Other than that there were general needs met in the training as frequently mentioned by youth: need of understanding oneself, need to be accepted, need of better communication, need to take risks, need to connect or also need of clarity. Quite significantly half of young people interviewed concluded there were no needs that wouldn´t be met for them in the training. However, there were still needs that young people listed that were not met for them. Mostly it was linked to personal preferences, yet more participants agreed on the need for lasting friendship not being fulfilled due to weakened connection with others from the group after the training. Another need not met shared by some participants while on the contrary met for others was a need of clarity. Also a need of follow-up was mentioned couple of times as a not met one. There were unique cases when need of understanding or need of respect were not met. Some participants also didn´t discover their path as much as they wanted to and two more expressed their not covered need of further guidance after the training.
208
In terms of relationships, the impact that youth identified was: creating new ones, cutting not well-functioning relationships and improving current relationships. Almost all interviewed young people and some from survey further reported changes in family relationships. However, while in some cases we can observe quite fast changes, it is important to underline that for some others it wasn´t at all immediate and has rather started a long-term transformation taking years. There is strong evidence in study results that impact of the training was also transformed into the domain of resources of young people. Many of them informed about recognizing, finding or creating resources after the training. Furthermore, the answers that young people gave were mostly connecting better dealing with risks to what they have learned during the training - relying more on themselves and team, managing obstacles and overcoming fears. The last yet not the least important element that appeared very often in their descriptions was increased self- confidence. Perspective of trainers It is worth to mention that also trainers T2, T4 and T6 agreed on learning accountability for one´s own life to be a common one for young people and particularly empowering when it came to planning their future steps. Regarding decision making, there appeared a view that it is not that important to label young people´s decisions as “good or bad” as such, since they might learn from consequences anyhow. Consequently, it is much more important that they develop ability of making decisions on their own to bring “contribution to their lives”. Synergy training supposedly then “gives you a kick into going into the direction you want”, or in other words young people have their space and support in order to clarify what they need to make a decision. Trainers then gave some specific examples in the training that they see connected to young people´s search for their position in life, such as activities where youth can explore images of a man or a woman which is present in their society; their own potential as a source of inspiration or not; working in a group as following blindly or sharing own ideas and critically considering others´; and lastly their visions as larger ideas to be implemented in society in a way that it serves them and others. Sharing experience within a group, confrontation and reflection in trainer´s view shapes youth´s position that they take in daily life. It is quite interesting though that trainers were not united in the matter of impact on independence. While some think that independence is not very supported or encouraged directly as such during the training, others on the contrary see elements of the training clearly influencing independent living of young people. T6 in addition indicated that in the training young people often learn not to be “dependent on other´s opinions” which she finds crucial for their growth as well. In a field of problem solving skills young people emphasized their reinforced attitude to persist even when they don´t succeed and search for a solution in the first way. Trainers observe this realization of young people quite often, as all of them agreed. In the training youth is given a situation or a problem to solve, where they practice “stepping over your own limitations, be creative, create joy of things that are not so enjoyable”. What is happening a lot is that young people are surprised by their own capability to find solutions and overcome diverse obstacles. Variety in the training thus allows young people to contribute in their own way and based on
209 what they are unique at, giving them an experience of a situation, some sort of a precedent, when they could apply what they were good at. Trainers also recognized in “energetic state” during and right after the training that youth experiences a potential danger of not well-thought through decisions under the impression that everything will work out. Therefore there is also a strong recommendation at the end of the training to wait with decisions for couple of weeks, so that this state could become more grounded and connected to daily lives of participants.
210
7.5 IMPACT ON PARTICIPATION
Participation as we have discussed in theoretical part is believed to strengthen young people's commitment to and understanding of the concepts of human rights and democracy. However, in reality, involving young people in the decisions that affect society is not always effectively practised and while young people´s voice is the core of the whole process, it is not always searched for or heard if recognized. The purpose of this chapter is therefore to contribute to this issue in the context of self-development method by providing answers to the following partial questions: How do disadvantaged young people understand the impact of self-development training on their participation? RQ9 How do trainers understand the impact of self-development training on participation of disadvantaged youth? RQ10
I provide a mosaic of young people´s views regarding their participation in society from different angles connected to their experience in the training. In addition I present observations from trainers´ practice as well. The sources used for answering those questions were again mainly interviews and survey with participants and trainers with complementary sources.
211
7.5.1 “Basic Synergy training supported me in…” Also in case of participation attributes young people filling in the survey were asked to identify to which extent the training contributed here. Similarly as with social functioning elements I provide a summary as an overview of what was also present in interviews and is further interpreted in this chapter.
As it is visible from these data, young people recognized that training supported them the most in participating in non-formal education, participating in international meetings and volunteering. Many of them also reported that also domains of being interested in society in general, peer education, joining an organization or a club, supporting human rights or global development as well as becoming active in cultural activities were supported at least quite enough and for some extremely. The least supported were domains of political participation - becoming a member of a political party/group (although some indicated in their case it was “a lot”) or taking part in elections. However, it is impossible to conclude whether this result is brought by the focus of the training, which is generally rather disconnected from politics as such, or by the preferences of young people. 7.5.2 Connection to community or society reported by youth Disengagement is one of the predispositions of little or no participation whatsoever. In order to map the current situation of youth I firstly wanted to find out more about the perception of respondents in terms of their experienced connection to the community or society they live in. In a survey they were answering the following questions: “How connected do you feel to people in your community, society, country?“ and „How are you involved in what is happening in your community/society/country?“ 212
Remarkably, over a half of respondents wrote they feel rather disconnected from their community and society and a few feel “strongly disconnected” as also R46 who doesn´t feel he belongs where he was born and he cannot change the society. R18 states so even though he claims to like “the place and the ways community and society functions”, R19 admits she sometimes feels even “hopeless” mainly due to the “political situation in the country and in the world in general” and R22 adds that she knows she “is responsible to them” and is “doing little steps to improve the world”. Some indicated uncertainty regarding whether they should be involved in any way at all, for example R20 wrote regarding his disconnection: “I want to change that, not sure however, if I really should.” And others as R25 explain this state by not shared values and priorities: “I hardly find a common topic with people who live around me and also with majority of the people in my country... I put efforts in it, but we have very different priorities and sometimes values.” Some of those who don´t find themselves connected with the society describe that they do connect with those communities that are close to them in terms of values. As R26 explains: “I do however feel connected to the alternative communities which develop different, more sustainable and inclusive lifestyle, and I try to connect with these communities in the places where I currently stay.” Interestingly, also R45 narrowed her connection to a specific group as well: “I feel strong connections with my church community (it is minor religion), quite active as citizen.” For R31 the base is mistrust, as she informs about not following the news because she is persuaded “it's all lies or most of what is presented to the people”. And R44 and R49 feel disconnected due to spending “a lot of time abroad”. Dagmara brings an interesting reflection of her state connected to changing living places as well: “I've been studying away for seven years and I was three years in one city, then three years in another city, then two years here in the smaller city and I didn't invest some time to any of the community, because I was thinking 'Yeah, I will move away soon'”. Both her and Carla also emphasized to feel much more connected to a certain “international community” than to any in their country. Carla called this condition being a “citizen of the world”. R28 quite significantly explained that for her it is even a sort of global connection: “First of all ''your'' is a very confusing term for me cause I feel I have my people in [countries] and a few other countries where my friends have spread around so I like to believe I have a certain global connectedness and consciousness. For example I follow the news from [country] as much as I follow them about Syria, Croatia, Yemen, France or Spain. So I guess I feel super-connected.” Though they were a minority, there were still some young people expressing they were feeling very connected to either community or society they lived in. It was a case of R9 who wrote. “I am very well-connected with various people with different backgrounds, being part in different NGOs, taking active part in society by volunteering, participating in sport activities, protests, being part of a global leader services...” Curiously, while reporting about their disconnection, half of young people at the same time highlighted they are rather involved in society or community. They gave a whole list of different actions that they take in order to contribute, such as creating new ideas and projects with other people, supporting education, getting involved in some public issues or causes, volunteering or even running a social enterprise. Only one mentioned voting as being active in politics as well. It is worth to add how trainers who work with these young people see their participation. T1 calls it a “very polluted word” since according to him participating mostly doesn´t mean participating as young people are not really given space to create what they want. T3 agrees with him and 213 brings concrete examples of what this concept means to her: “Youth participation is either volunteering, or entrepreneurship, with these they take responsibility for themselves and their communities.” She believes so-called „dialogue“ and just talking with decision-makers is only participation in talking and “by the time it brings result it will be irrelevant” because: “The generation grows up, their needs will be satisfied towards the next generation with totally new needs.” T2 is in accordance with her adding that participation as the word in itself is carrying something active: “Meaning you cannot participate only with thinking. Because then it´s called brainstorming, it has nothing to do with participation.” T5 understands youth participation as “an evolution” and a “chance for creating something new in this world”. For him education is the key to work on environment, on wars, on everything including participation. And T4 points out that this term is really vague: “Yeah, it says everything, so it says nothing.” At the same time he is persuaded that the main reason to encourage youth participation is to ensure young people care for their living conditions and environments which is brought by direct involvement: “When you get yourself involved in something then you want to develop it and keep it nice and great and good. And when you distant yourself usually you start to care less. So if you want better society then young people should be participating in it, so it´s their society. And this should be... in any way possible that it´s encouraged that they participate, they do things, they say their opinion, they show their opinion, they show examples, they argue even, they yeah...just that they are part of the society so they should be participating actively and this should be encouraged.” Attention to the matter of choice was then brought by T2: “Without creating choices for them, their participation is going to be very much limited.”He further explained that this should be a task of youth workers to support youth in dealing with choice so that they can decide whether, in what and how they want to participate. And T6 added that as she observed in her practice, there are just a few active young people willing to change something in their society or community: “I see that it´s something very important, yet not happening on the wide range. What I see in younger generation is this: you watch Instagram, Facebook and YouTube videos about shopping and make up, but do you actually know what is happening in your city, in your country. I don´t have numbers, but my feeling is that majority is not interested.” 7.5.3 Involvement in NGO and international partnerships Young people were highlighting that after the training they started generally to “care more” about what is happening in their surroundings – about issues, causes and people. R7 informed that she started “dealing with charity more”, R46 got interested in “youth actions” and Carla started “growing activism” in her city. Costina explains further how interest in human rights brought her to focus on this topic in her master thesis and open up this issue also in her family environment: “I became more aware of human rights abuse and especially rights related to children and this is what I did my master, and I'm also active in a way that I'm really against all kinds of exclusion. I believe in basic human rights. And I think this training was one of the components which brought me this kind of attitude, because I come from a really racist part of the country, so this is really surprising and I still have a lot of struggles, like with explaining my grandparents what is refugee crisis about and all this.” Filip remembers that he used to be “more passive” and the main change for him was to start investing into social causes also with his time and finances.
214
And Afina interestingly calls herself “an individual activist” revealing that she prefers to support people in re-considering their social or political views on a personal level by starting different discussions with others. At the same time she made a decision to care about other people in a practical way. As she describes, she sees her personal well-being connected to others and thus important to take into consideration both: “Definitely, I got more aware of this thing that the better society that I will live in, the better environment that I will have than the happier I will get, or the better life I will have. But not only for my personal reasons. During the training I became more aware that our well-being, our happiness, and our peace is so much connected with the others around. With this in mind, like, with this perspective, I really take care of well-being others around me. I'm giving them like mother Theresa, but more like also making sure that they are taking care of themselves as well. So, yeah, my focus have changed a bit from my individual well-being only... I opened it up.” Similarly also Zora shares her changed attitude: “I became more responsible with others and more caring about others... and I am more open to share, to meet, and to help basically.”And Laura found important to emphasize that for her this effect is continuous: “I started to think about society where I am living in, and how can I do something for people around me. Because before I didn´t think at all about this. And it´s actually lasting until today.” One of the main impacts of such caring about others can be seen in getting involved into or even creating new non-profit organizations back home. Starting an organization is exactly what five young people decided to do based on their inspiration and learning in the training. Mostly, as it is visible from findings, such organizations are again focused on youth work. Gregor same as Ben or Lucas together with his friends also established a new NGO in his country, through which he is organizing mainly youth events and is sending young people abroad for international exchanges and traininigs. Frida recalls how she felt “amazing” that she could bring such initiative to her community, where there haven´t been any such centres for young people as her established NGO. Also all the trainers were in agreement as to the occurrence of this impact and all were giving examples of different associations and organizations started by participants after the training. According to them, even more young people then get involved in some already existing NGOs, which is a very common step they have observed. However, they were also united in conclusion that it is definitely not always the case and with some young people no changes really happen in context of participation. As T5 relevantly points out: “The way it developed - it has a network all around Europe, that people went back and did brilliant things. And there were people that they went back and they were happy and funny for ten days, twenty days, and people that they went back and everything was the same.” Regarding international dimension, for example Hugo used the contacts from his training to organize his multicultural festival: “I used the connections from training, from people who I actually have met there, their idea, their vision of the world, and I was actually cooperating also with them.” Also Frida and Carla started to cooperate with other organizations from Europe while organizing their events for young people, to which Carla remarkably added she felt “more comfortable” working in international context rather than in her immediate community. And Albert described how he started to get more involved in non-formal education and due to this search and create contacts with different NGOs, so he can “give more opportunities to people” and “to have a larger impact in society and to support people to be more active and participate in their own life and society”. Afina then was the one who previously volunteered on national level and participation in the training brought her “into the international network of youth
215 work”. Trainer T2 confirms these tendencies by his observation. As he informed, young people often start new partnerships during the training which result into diverse international projects they create together. 7.5.4 Supporting other people in development and assisting in a training Many young people indicated that one way or participation for them is to support other people in their society to develop by taking active part in this process and becoming volunteers in youth field in addition to their regular job. For instance R1 said she became a mentor for disadvantaged international volunteers and R26 was co-organizing self-development activities for other disadvantaged youth for more than a year. And Caesar remembers how he felt it was a pity that just few people from his country really knew about such trainings and thus he started encouraging youth in taking this step and going abroad: “I wanted to reach to more people, I wanted to engage more people to have these opportunities.” Max had the same intention as him, which led to inviting more peers from his environment: “I was so inspired so I wanted to do something similar in my country. Because I really felt how it changed myself, so I thought I have to do it in my country with our people.” Around quarter of all the participants that took part in this research had an experience of assisting in the training as a team member as well. And some of them explicitly viewed this step as their participation in society in terms of voluntary contribution to other young people. For Elenor for instance it meant to “help other people see themselves” and for Dragomir “to share” his learning experience. According to Flora, during her assistance she learned how “to give others space to create”. Yet at the same time they found this experience beneficial for themselves, as Max put it: “To be a team member it was also something really new. And I would say it´s even equal for me with the new outcomes. And for me it´s like complete experience.” Also trainer T5 identified this volunteering assisting as one of the aspects of participation that young people get involved into. 7.5.5 General volunteering and other involvement Volunteering was another most frequently mentioned form of participation. While Emil refers to his volunteering as “investing in people”, R9 calls it “supporting what I find important” and R16 admitted that instead of waiting for others to ask him he “started looking for opportunities to volunteer”. It is worth to notice that although it might seem that youth work would be the only field where young people started to be active in, the opposite is true. There were also participants who chose different target groups according to their preferences and where they detected some need. R33 started to volunteer with prisoners in jail, Diana decided to support activities with disadvantaged children in another country where she moved for half a year, Zora got involved in a program for homeless children and Emil worked with seniors as well. Still it is important to add that there were a few young people who perceived their engagement in social matters as something which is simply their intention and has nothing to do with their experience in the training. As R5 wrote:“My involvement came from me, not training.” Two trainers also recalled cases when they witnessed youth becoming involved in the matters of politics. T1 gave an example of a participant who ended on the list for the elections and T2 remembered about two participants lobbing for some issues at European Commission. However, there was almost no evidence of such impact among participants of this study. Only one person informed about her increased political involvement after the training: Frida mentioned she decided to go voting. Both T3 and T1 further mentioned social enterprises that few young people who participated in the training also started. There was only one example from 216 interviewees – Laura admitted that after the training she was searching for something meaningful and “good for society” and she recently decided to focus on social business. 7.5.6 Involvement in non-formal education and cultural activities Non-formal education was the field that young people mentioned the most while reporting on their volunteering activities. While some participants became part of other´s initiatives, there were also some who decided to create a project, a workshop or an event for (disadvantaged) young people as well. Interestingly, this would happen either due to a new inspiration or simply due to overcoming certain obstacles on the way to an idea that was already in young person´s head prior the training. The second happened also in case of Max who brings a summary of his process: “I can say that I always was thinking about some social projects and... I was really you know like thinking very globally, like ok, I wanna change the world and these kind of things. But after I understood I can´t change the world just with the thoughts about it or about like these great ideas. I have to do something. And when I started to do something, that was eco project, I understood that it´s a big process and I need a plan, I need to do it step by step. And it´s not something what can work very fast. I understood that I need to communicate to people, I need thoughts about this projects...I start to act. And that´s actually what changed in my behaviour, you know, from thoughts to some active yeah, active steps to my goal, to my idea.” Together with motivation, inspiration and increased confidence which can support youth in realizing their ideas, an additional aspect from the training thus appears to be an active approach, a sort of attitude of action. For others the new added dimension in their life became participation in cultural activities. Hugo´s case is a great example of such development, as he himself initiated a music festival in his town after the training: “May be in that way I found myself and I found that power, this is actually also what pushed me to do something like that.” As he describes, it was a multicultural festival with “music and also theatre and also some art exhibition, everything really”. Also Emil turned his attention to culture and is now quite active in this field evaluating this change as something he grew into gradually after the realizations in the training. 7.5.7 Impact on resources and conditions of participation In the findings there appeared evidence of the impact on conditions and resources enabling young people to participate. One of those elements was an attitude towards being involved. Statement of R6 serves as a valuable explanation: “Well, it changed the way I take a look at what's happening around me and the possibilities there are. Before I was seeing barriers and reasons NOT TO. Now I always try, do, experience and then decide if it can or cannot be done. And that is the biggest contribution of the training. I had ideas, supported different causes before and after the training. The difference is the approach I have now.” Also R37 underlines that the biggest effect was on his personal attitude, concretely already presented awareness, which he referred to as to “being responsible for my micro and macro environment at the same time”. And T1 points out that in the training youth is basically not provided any significant resources and therefore “they have to figure out how to get it”. The impact then can be in becoming skilful in getting resources one needs. He further provided some remarkable examples of young people who purposed their goal and searched for resources available: “I know a guy who did the training here and he realized that hey, but you know, I really don´t need money to travel through all over the world and he went for a year travelling around the world. And there was another guy, he came here for two months just to go into the working field, to just talk with as much as possible people,
217 because he wanted to be an engineer and illustrator and this combination wasn´t present in his country. And he did so - he got the idea from the training, from the outdoor part. I just go, I ask and then I will get results. And he got a job. In a company that didn´t have any vacancies at all. I mean, there are more examples like this.” At the same time he emphasized that the training experience serves rather as an accelerator in such cases. Meaning that certain ideas, attitudes, characteristics and potential steps need to be “present in a person” and training is then “stimulating these things”. In other words, the experience itself definitely doesn´t create a new person or new set of specific characteristics that is unique for every human being. It simply fosters encouragement and support for young people to use what is already within them, many times hidden deeply and yet undiscovered. T6 shared another element in the training which she believes is affecting young people´s perspective towards participation. She explained that part of the program is discussion about contribution and invitation to share their time and abilities: “When we close up the training and also do the planning, we put emphasis on like ok, this is what you got, so how are you going to bring it further, who are you going offer it to? So we actually invite them and give them this idea - how do you want implement it, how do you want to share it, and bring forward. So this impact on sharing and spreading.” An additional perspective appeared when I was analysing anonymous evaluation forms from participants of trainings TC2-TC4. They were asked a question about their motivation to be active in society, which is one of the key conditions of participation in general: “How would you describe your motivation now to be active in social life (working, volunteering, coming up with innovations...)? Did training have any impact on it?” There were a couple of answers reporting that in this area there was no significant impact at all. Nevertheless, the following answers demonstrate the dominating tendency, which is confirming what was already presented above and can be characterised as pro-active approach and willingness to contribute. “I am more motivated to be active in social life, I will try to volunteer in local NGO” “I will organize a camp in summer and I feel motivated now to bring them interesting experience.” “Both „to be active” and „motivation“ were elements that I worked on during this training and it brought results.” “It had a big impact on me and I feel I can bring that impact to others too.”
Some who considered themselves already active prior the event experienced an additional encouragement after the training: “I have been motivated before the training, but now I learned new methods that I can try in many aspects of my life.” “I was already active, training strengthened me.” “Usually I am a very active person, sociable, do volunteering. For some time I was thinking to go for 1 year travel in Europe/Asia working or volunteering on the way. This training helped me to believe in myself and understand that it is actually possible and I can do it.”
These findings support what was discovered also in interviews and survey and additionally they bring a perspective of an immediate impact that young people reported right after taking part in the training. 218
7.5.8 Impact on participation of youth in context of research and theory
In theoretical part there were arguments defining participation as a rather ‘catch-all’ term taking numerous forms from passive and formalized attendance to active exercise of rights and power in relation to one’s own life or community. Considering some of the definitions, the findings from this study place participation in several of them. The results point to vital evidence of active participation among respondents and interviewed youth. Many of them didn´t remain in the field of passive acceptance, yet on the contrary became active organizers and implementers of their ideas mostly connected to social field. Eurostat defines participation as ‘social participation’ and suggests to measure it in terms of the overall level of social contacts and engagement in voluntary activities in local institutions and networks (Eurostat 2010, Goździk-Ormel, 2008). Based on what young people shared, starting or increasing voluntary activities and involvement in organizations were the most wide-spread actions they linked to the impact of the training. In their case it would be possible then to recognize such social participation and even to measure it. Another view provided by Steinert (Steinert, Pilgram 2003, p. 53) introduces participation in the highest case as an “access to the means of contributing to new inventions (experience, education, free experimentation, and autonomous production) and the generalization of these”. This can be also observed in the experiences of young people in this research, as many claimed to bring contribution mainly in the field of education and production when listing their steps in organizing festivals, projects or courses. Several young people were highlighting feeling more responsible towards the people around them together with a state of “caring” about other´s needs and willingness to support where they recognize certain needs. However, for a fully participatory project, they should according to some also take part in management and decision-making (Gunn 2005). Also such level of participation is present in the examples given by youth, since some of them even started their own organizations or initiated new events. This without a doubt requires both management and decision-making on their side. Especially in the context of what (McDonald 2006) brings attention to - that youth tends to expect the state to take care of them (both in areas of studies, finding a job or life changes) and is resistant in taking direct responsibility for their development – all those findings regarding the impact of the training on responsibility and initiative of youth gain an additional and crucial importance.
Following the three types of participation, political, economic and social, given by Hofbauer (2002), with an addition of cultural participation relating to different forms of art and expression (visual arts, music, film, dance,etc.) from the United Nations General Assembly (United Nations, Department of Public Information 2001), this study provides clear evidence of mainly the social and cultural participation being practiced by young people in this sample. Although economic participation was demonstrated as well given the impact on their employability that youth described, with specific examples of finding a job and becoming an active member of the labour market. Participation is at the same time dependent on a variety of symbolic resources that are partly outside people’s control, and circumstances or certain life conditions. Rather than material resources, young people increased their symbolic resources (Anderson 1999) with support of the training program. This was mainly represented by the attitude towards being involved, where I believe their increased self-esteem and self-worth together with fostered interest in society 219 matters played a big role: young people could see themselves as a “legitimate source of reasons for acting” (Anderson and Honneth, 2005: 146). In addition, we can connect the examples from this study to the principles of youth participation that can be found in the concept of Marc Jans and Kurt De Backer (Goździk- Ormel, 2008). This model indicates that participation should be based on challenge, capacity and connection. Challenge means a theme that should be directly related to the daily reality of young people and which should be captivating or interesting for them. This was confirmed by majority of participants who stated they decided to volunteer or to get involved in what was “meaningful” or “interesting” to them, ending up working with different target groups and mostly in youth work field. Capacity as the need of young people to have some knowledge and skills in order to get involved was increased also in the training context, as many of young people declared – they learned how to lead, to cooperate, communicate or initiate without fears stopping them, and then reported how they implemented those skills. Lastly, connection refers to the need to know that they are not alone and that they can identify with and count on a group or institution. Also this principle was present in their shared experience, as most of those who started their organizations or organized an event emphasized they did so with the support of their friends either from the training or back home, who were interested in the same. Referring to Hart’s (Hart 1992) typology of participation it is important to stress that based on what youth reported no aspects of tokenism were identified in the findings. Either during the training, when decision-making is repeatedly underlined to be in the hands of youth, or after the training in follow up phase, when it is young people who decide how they want to implement their experience and which steps to take. Which carries the characteristics one of the two highest participation types: young people led and initiated rungs. Interestingly, the results support another pattern observed in practice: being involved and engaged leads to more opportunities to become involved and engaged (Bessant 2004). Young people mentioned frequently that due to their involvement in the training they realized and grasped many other opportunities they had, which created a chain of outcomes. There is a very close link between participation and empowerment. As Warren (2007) informs that usually in this context there is a focus on the positive connotations of power: gaining control and reducing dependency, gaining autonomy and maximizing potential. Therefore, to promote young person´s participation is an empowerment process through which they are offered opportunities to ‘take control of their circumstances and develop their potentials and capabilities in order to attain positive self-development’ (Lee & Charm, 2002:74). Based on what has been researched about Basic Synergy training and what young people who took part in it revealed themselves, there is a strong consistency with the description provided above. Most importantly, youth indicated the fundamental part of empowerment in their answers. Realizing their own power was one of the main impacts of the training they agreed on. And majority of them used the expression “power” in connection with their improvements, initiatives and creativity. Additionally, with observations from this study I can only agree with Staples (1999): people can only empower themselves, although others may facilitate the empowerment process. Which brings us to self-empowerment, according to Adams (2008) one of the most neglected aspect of empowerment theory and practice. Self-empowering process means taking control of one’s life, learning, updating and improving skills, taking risks, building confidence, assuming power over personal circumstances, and developing the resilience to overcome inevitable challenges to come. All these aspects were listed by youth when they were sharing about their experience and 220 learning in the training, some particularly mentioning an on-going process of development that started for them during the event and others emphasizing their ability to work with what they gained even years later, up until now. This suggests a conclusion that the training offers a platform for self-empowerment which has also a potential to last and be highly beneficial for youth. Also motivation and self-perception were given attention in this research. Young people increasingly have to take individual decisions, their motivation thereby becomes a crucial factor. Their self-perception at the same time defines what choices they will go for and what opportunities they would use (Annie E. Casey Foundation 2007). As it is described in interpretative part of this thesis, both aspects are seen as crucial also by participants and trainers. What is important in the context of participation is that one of the reported impacts of the training was indeed also increased motivation to be active in society, while self-perception was many times described as “shifted” or “changed” with an emphasis on seeing oneself more “capable” than before. There is another aspect worth notion. Young people are gradually becoming more aware of resources outside their communities and of opportunities to share in and reinforce each other's work also due to ICT, which enable the handling of information and facilitate different forms of communication (World Youth Report, 2005). The findings in this study are in line with this tendency, since especially those young people involved on international level expressed their appreciation towards being connected with their peers on such level while creating projects together – thus becoming involved in cyber-participation. Curiously, they were not very aware of this aspect to be a significant one in any way, but rather taking it as it was, available to them and simply ready to use. 7.5.9 Updates on participation In a survey young people identified that training supported them the most in participating in non-formal education, participating in international meetings and volunteering. Many of them also reported that also domains of being interested in society in general, peer education, joining an organization or a club, supporting human rights or global development as well as becoming active in cultural activities were supported at least quite enough and for some extremely. The least supported were domains of political participation - becoming a member of a political party/group (although some indicated in their case it was “a lot”) or taking part in elections. However, it is impossible to conclude whether this result is brought by the focus of the training, which is generally rather disconnected from politics as such, or by the preferences of young people. When answering questions concerning their connection to their community and society, remarkably over a half of respondents wrote they feel rather disconnected and a few feel “strongly disconnected”. There appeared explanations of not shared values and priorities, mistrust, a lot of time spent abroad or frequent changing living places. And some indicated uncertainty regarding whether they should be involved in any way at all. Additionally, among young people there was a state of feeling more connected to a certain “international community” than to any in their country which one of them called global connection. And still there were few young people expressing they were feeling very connected to either community or society they lived in. Curiously, while reporting about their disconnection, half of young people at the same time highlighted they are rather involved in society or community. They
221 gave a whole list of different actions that they take in order to contribute, such as creating new ideas and projects with other people, supporting education, getting involved in some public issues or causes, volunteering or even running a social enterprise. Only one mentioned voting as being active in politics as well. Young people were highlighting that after the training they started generally to “care more” about what is happening in their surroundings – about issues, causes and people. There was a notion of an understanding that one´s personal well-being is connected to others and thus important to take into consideration both. One of the main impacts of such caring about others can be seen in getting involved into or even creating new non-profit organizations back home. Starting an organization is exactly what five young people decided to do based on their inspiration and learning in the training. Regarding international dimension, young people started to cooperate with other organizations from Europe while organizing their events for youth. Many young people further indicated that one way or participation for them is to support other people in their society to develop by taking active part in this process and becoming volunteers in youth field in addition to their regular job. Around quarter of all the participants that took part in this research had an experience of assisting in the training as a team member as well. Volunteering was another most frequently mentioned form of participation. It is worth to notice that although it might seem that youth work would be the only field where young people started to be active in, the opposite is true. There were also participants who chose different target groups according to their preferences and where they detected some need. Still there were a few young people who perceived their engagement in social matters as something which is simply their intention and has nothing to do with their experience in the training. Non-formal education was the field that young people mentioned the most while reporting on their volunteering activities. While some participants became part of other´s initiatives, there were also some who decided to create a project, a workshop or an event for (disadvantaged) young people as well. Interestingly, this would happen either due to a new inspiration or simply due to overcoming certain obstacles on the way to an idea that was already in young person´s head prior the training. Together with motivation, inspiration and increased confidence which can support youth in realizing their ideas, an additional aspect from the training thus appears to be an active approach, a sort of attitude of action. For others the new added dimension in their life became participation in cultural activities. And when it comes to resources and conditions of participation, the most important finding is connected to an attitude towards being involved, that young people practiced during the training, together with searching for resources themselves. Answering the question about motivation to be active, some young people reported that in this area there was no significant impact at all. Nevertheless, the majority of answers demonstrated the dominating tendency, which was confirming what was already presented above and can be characterized as pro-active approach and willingness to contribute. Perception of trainers A view that young people are not really given space to create what they want was present in trainers´ statements and there was a certain agreement as to what is real participation. This according to trainers is not only in dimension of talking or discussing, but more in the actions. 222
And while one sees education as a key, another thinks the most important is to encourage young people to care for their living conditions and environments by their direct involvement. According to one trainer the task of youth workers is to support youth in dealing with choice so that they can decide whether, in what and how they want to participate. And there was also an opinion that there are just a few active young people willing to change something in their society or community. Two trainers also recalled cases when they witnessed youth becoming involved in the matters of politics. T1 gave an example of a participant who ended on the list for the elections and T2 remembered about two participants lobbing for some issues at European Commission. However, there was almost no evidence of such impact among participants of this study. Two trainers further mentioned social enterprises that few young people who participated in the training also started, which was supported by one example from participants. In addition it was pointed out that in the training youth is basically not provided any significant resources and therefore “they have to figure out how to get it”. The impact then can be in becoming skilful in getting resources one needs. At the same time the training experience was introduced to serve rather as an accelerator in such cases. Meaning experience itself definitely doesn´t create a new person or new set of specific characteristics that is unique for every human being. It simply fosters encouragement and support for young people to use what is already within them, many times hidden deeply and yet undiscovered.
223
8 Conclusion The practice in the field of youth work has brought me to the very beginning of this research, and the discovery on the way has provided me with considerable material to analyze and draw conclusions upon. By using compiled theoretical framework and applying designed methodological process in a survey with participants of self-development training, semi- structured interviews with both young people and practitioners, participant observation during one of the trainings and document analysis, I was able to find the answer to the main research question: How is the impact of self-development method used at international level on social functioning and participation of disadvantaged youth understood by disadvantaged young people and practitioners? In this final chapter I will present the answer and suggest further steps in social work practice based on the findings of this research.
8.1 Answering main research question
What is worth mentioning in the context of the discussion around the concept of disadvantaged youth and challenges they face in post modern society is that disadvantaged young people understand their own opportunities mostly as disconnected to their conditions in life and connected to their attitudes or choices. Young people identify one´s own “path” while seeking opportunities and undergoing a process of discovering oneself. Meanwhile, what they claim to need the most are connections or authentic relationships, which they see as fundamental for their happiness, contribution to other people, the need of adapting to change and together with the need of inspiration also a need of recognition or being seen. An interesting finding is that even risks were for some participants linked with their own choice with consequences. One of the most significant findings is that almost one third of all interviewed young people had difficulties to recognize less-opportunity factors in terms of disadvantage in their lives. Some would even ask for support in identifying what conditions could mean lack of certain opportunities for them and couple of them were genuinely surprised hearing that they would fit in such a category of youth. Young people were using disadvantage interchangeably with a “problem”, which could be correlated to negative perception of having lack of opportunities as well as connected to (not) blaming or complaining, which they prefer to avoid. According to youth and practitioners, less- opportunity then depends on perspective and by some young people evaluated as a source for gaining strength at the current stage of person´s life. Analysis also shows that for some young people it is very important to make clear that they are “not complaining” about their life. And an important additional attitude in dealing with less-opportunity factors that more interviewees demonstrate is to choose to focus on opportunities rather on lack of them. Also trainers see young people being aware of opportunities they have and making choices for themselves and they bring attention to obstacles that youth is facing on the way, such as instability or insecurity. At the same time there was no clear agreement as to what trainers see as less-opportunity, having difficulties to define it, which only reflects the situation in the field. International environment can represent safer or potentially more inviting for disclosure atmosphere, as many of young people dared to express their thoughts and feelings as never at home. As a result, one of the most mentioned beneficial aspect were close connections with
224 peers from other countries and seeing themselves as part of a bigger picture. Limitations recognized by young respondents were experience of exclusion (when not knowing the shared foreign language or not being able to express oneself fully and clearly in another language than mother tongue), so called harming habits (such as e.g. high level of drinking alcohol), uncertainty when interacting with people from different religions due to lack of knowing how to behave and the feeling of being misunderstood and not fully accepted because of one´s beliefs. From trainers perspective, international means also not really applicable in one´s own environment, also higher cost and lower access to international events especially for disadvantaged young people were mentioned as limiting aspects. And finally, chances of supporting or inspiring each other after the international event is over are lower due to the distance. International dimension of the program disadvantaged young people participated in was perceived by them mostly in positive terms as it brought inspiration leading to improvement, started a process of re-viewing of one´s own culture or even encouraged youth towards considering changes in their lives. The process of realization and comparison with other cultures allowed them to become more aware of similarities among themselves and gaining understanding of their own needs, possibilities and identity in general. Among important outcomes young people recognized overcoming prejudices and stereotypes they were carrying about others and increased tolerance towards differences. Some respondents indicated that participation in such an international event brought change into their global engagement and fostered interest in international issues. Practitioners came to agreement that such experience makes youth realize about their own identity and at the same time they gain a more diverse chance to practice human interactions and deal with diversity of attitudes. Self-development Basic Synergy training is understood as an individual training in a group context where content is personal and context is delivered in a designed frame. Regarding target group almost all the participants and trainers thought that this training was for everybody disregarding age, nationality or gender, while some specified that this training would be more beneficial for a target group of young people in need. The offer for potential participants could be summarized as awareness of circumstances, personal accountability for choices, flexibility and capacity to create and keep authentic relationships. Which meets the needs and life challenges that young people expressed, making the training a potentially useful background for their growth. A wide range of different views on limitations of the training was offered by other respondents of the survey. The most important were the follow-up of the training, which based on findings is seen as a useful aspect but lacking more support and better connection to daily life. Other limitations were connected to the role of the trainer representing a risk in case of incompetence or the attitude of the team that can be confusing and distracting. The main risks identified were confrontation experienced by participants during the program, difficulties in implementing back home what they have achieved in a training, intensity and complexity of the program itself. During the training its intensity on one side offers a rich ground for learning, yet on the other side for a young person there could be a real lack of time and space to embrace and understand all the experience. The timing for the training might not always right for young people who need to be willing and ready to work on themselves. The risk of quitting the training or not benefiting from it might also appear when young people are not well-prepared and are lacking information about the training. Taking one´s own experience as the holy truth and to start forcing it on the surroundings could destructive, and similarly with impulsive decisions that
225 youth might take immediately after the training under the impression of their experience, which need to be careful and well thought trough. The training is not the therapy or its substitute and young people with mental health issues should only join under the agreement and close supervision of their therapists. All these aspects should be considered when working with youth in this context. The elements that participants understand as the most supporting their growth and learning in the training are the approach of a trainer usually seen as inspiring and helpful, remarkably again confrontation as a source of awareness and safe environment as a basic needed attribute. Also guided sharing setting among participants, feedback as a tool to find new perspective and finally that the training is very practical and usable in life – this all young people understand as benefits of the training. Basic Synergy therefore offers a variety of experience which gives an opportunity to stop and reflect, which is important to highlight many young people claimed to never have had before. For some young people reflection process can enhance empowerment while for others expressing emotions as a tool in the training showed to fulfil the need for self- expression and even bringing a breakthrough in attitude. Another remarkable finding is that youth evaluated obtained feedback as a lasting reference usable also after the training which also led some to accepting themselves, some to switch in their self-perception towards more positive one and additionally encouraged some of them to change their behaviour in a radical way. Group setting was seen by young people as rather supportive as well and outdoor part was highlighted as a powerful and beneficial experience by most of the trainers and the majority of participants. Young people in this research understand their experience in the training as a significant one in both contexts of social functioning and participation. More than a half or participants were describing it using an expression ʻlife changingʼ. Starting with social functioning - the examples of the changes were mostly related to their personal capability in the field of clarity and awareness; own capability or strength; responsibility for life; dealing with opportunities and limitations and overcoming fears or obstacles. While having very little image of what they were going for the training started a long-term development process, as many revealed, thus bringing change into their daily lives afterwards. Not bringing an immediate change, but step by step improvement through making new decisions. The responds of young people also indicate that they use these achieved skills on a conscious level and in different areas of their functioning. There were several communication aspects that were highlighted by many young people as valued developmental outcome, such as asking for help or communicating with others beyond cultural and religion differences. Interestingly, some participants also mentioned that recognizing and accepting their emotional side brought a complete switch into their daily functioning. Another fundamental attribute of youth´s development was connected to inspiration – young people claimed to become an inspiration or getting inspired by other´s examples. Meanwhile they also referred to becoming more accountable by “taking life in my hands”, which also practitioners confirmed. According to findings youth learned about their capacity for creativity and to implement it while overcoming fears. They achieved understanding inclusion and leadership - some were a part of a team or became a leader for the first time. Some connected overcoming fears with willingness to take risky steps as a part of his learning process in the training. Moreover, a common understanding of youth and practitioners was that young participants developed their persistence and resilience which was also showing in daily life after the training. It is significant that participants also described their training process as freeing or 226 liberating as well as bringing power while identifying own capability or strength. Another remarkable aspect is that unpredictable program brought more adaptability. Young people understand the biggest contribution of the training to their life mainly as a change of attitude or as an achieved discovery. It is worth notion that altogether half of participants claimed that outdoor part of experience was the strongest one for them in terms of learning and development. There was a strong agreement about the experience in the training supporting their process of being accepted by others, accepting themselves, their surroundings and different life conditions that they cannot change including their past. Impact on decision making was also understood as a significant one both by youth and trainers. Mainly for those who were still in their studies when taking part in the training this event brought an impact also in their education either in a form of more committed attitude or on the other hand complete change of the study field. Regarding the field of employment, there were four main impacts that young people mentioned: change of occupation or direction of work, improved communication with colleagues, using the tools from the training at their working place and finally improved working skills. Altogether, the findings suggest that part of the impact on young people´s decision regarding their occupation was also an increased interest in social dimension of their preferred jobs. Another significant element was connected to meaningfulness that young people were searching in their occupation. More than a half linked experience in training with finding new hobbies and activities and spending more time with friends. Another frequently named impact was increased travelling and lastly, few also underlined increased outdoor and health related activities as well as creating a balance between leisure time and other areas in their life. Some of the needs met in the training correspond with young people´s motivation to come to this training in the first place: need for adventure, need to resolve personal issues or need for change. Other than that there were general needs met in the training as frequently mentioned by youth: need of understanding oneself, need to be accepted, need of better communication, need to take risks, need to connect or also need of clarity. Quite significantly half of young people interviewed concluded there were no needs that wouldn´t be met for them in the training. Gained state of independence was also appreciated and mostly linked with relationship with parents. However, there were still needs that young people listed that were not met for them: the need for lasting friendship, need of clarity, need of follow-up and further guidance after the training. In terms of relationships, the impact that youth identified was: creating new ones, cutting not well-functioning relationships and improving current relationships. Almost all interviewed young people and some from survey further reported positive changes in family relationships. While in some cases we can observe quite fast changes, for some others it wasn´t at all immediate and has rather started a long-term transformation taking years. There is strong evidence in study results that impact of the training was also contributed the domain of resources of young people. Many of them informed about recognizing, finding or creating resources after the training. The last yet not the least important element that appeared very often in their descriptions was increased self-confidence. Young people identified that training supported them the most in participating in non-formal education, participating in international meetings and volunteering. Many of them also reported that also domains of being interested in society in general, peer education, joining an organization or a club, supporting human rights or global development as well as becoming 227 active in cultural activities were supported at least quite enough and for some extremely. The least supported were domains of political participation - becoming a member of a political party/group (although some indicated in their case it was “a lot”) or taking part in elections. However, it is impossible to conclude whether this result is brought by the focus of the training, which is generally rather disconnected from politics as such, or by the preferences of young people. This research uncovered an intriguing correlation between participation and experienced connection to community. Although there were few young people expressing they were feeling very connected to either community or society they lived in, over a half of respondents wrote they feel more connected to a certain “international community” than to any in their country which one of them called global connection. Curiously, while reporting about their disconnection, half of young people at the same time highlighted they were rather involved in society or community. They gave a whole list of different actions that they take in order to contribute, such as creating new ideas and projects with other people, supporting education, getting involved in some public issues or causes, volunteering or even running a social enterprise. Young people were highlighting that after the training they started generally to “care more” about what is happening in their surroundings – about issues, causes and people. One of the main impacts of such caring about others can be seen in getting involved into or even creating new non-profit organizations back home. Volunteering was another most frequently mentioned form of participation, mainly in non-formal education, but also youth work and other target groups according to their preferences and where they detected some need. For others the new added dimension in their life became participation in cultural activities. And when it comes to resources and conditions of participation, the most important finding is connected to an attitude towards being involved, that young people practiced during the training, together with searching for resources themselves. The impact then can be in becoming skilful in getting resources one needs, also observed by practitioners. At the same time the training experience was introduced to serve rather as an accelerator in such cases. Meaning experience itself definitely doesn´t create a new person or new set of specific characteristics that is unique for every human being. It simply fosters encouragement and support for young people to use what is already within them. For a summary I would like to come back to Kirkpatrick´s and Benett´s (Kirkpatrick, Kirkpatrick 2006; Benett 1975) models of impact, on which I based its definition in this thesis. Young people and practitioners described significant changes in several dimensions of young people´s lives, as they understand them personally. In the area of knowledge the most important change was in getting information about oneself or one´s own capacity and capability, but also information about other cultures/countries/traditions or about new methods of working with people. In attitudes, the most highlighted were changes towards accountability, resilience, resourcefulness, adaptability and acceptance of differences. When it came to behaviours, mostly the examples were connected to proactivity of respondents leading to improvements in relationships and life conditions. In the domain of skills it was enhanced communication that youth and practitioners emphasized the most, and also problem-solving as a crucial skill. Regarding aspirations, it all comes from self-worth and confidence that youth was gaining during the trainings, which was followed by increased tendencies in searching for meaning in what one does either for living or in free time and increased willingness to use one´s potential. As to practice, many examples of very concrete actions were given, such as starting an NGO or social enterprise or organizing a community event. Reactions to the training were presented in quite a diverse range, from joy to
228 struggles with the structure and methodology. And end results were particularly visible in the cases of those who participated in the training more than five years ago – they stated how decisions made during or after the training affected their professions, relationships and personalities in general. To conclude, disadvantaged young people understand the impact of self-development method used at international level on social functioning in terms of improved skills, relationships, emotional states, decision making and its implications; and impact on participation in terms of getting involved in society matters and becoming pro-active while improving one´s skill to get resources for what is needed. Practitioners confirm that according to their observations it is indeed the case many times while bringing examples of pro-active attitude of training´s participants from their practice.
8.2 Suggestions for practice
My first suggestion is connected to the concept of disadvantaged youth. Based on how young people see themselves and described their conditions as „challenging“ and using the expression „overcoming obstacles“, even seeing their disadvantage as an advantage – I suggest using the term „challenged youth“ instead of „less-opportunity“ or disadvantaged. By addressing youth experiencing conditions that currently are in social work field called “disadvantage” we rather connect them with some sort of “problem”, as this is how they personally understand the issue. And as many of them stated, they prefer to avoid such category, even if it takes to neglect their unsatisfactory/complicated/difficult situation. My conclusion is that if we want to reach these young people and to create connection with them, it is necessary to support such vocabulary which doesn’t push them away from searching support, but on the contrary brings them to improvement and solutions for their needs. If they themselves rather call what they are facing as “obstacles” and “challenges”, then a term “challenged youth” is much more appropriate and serving the cause. Secondly, as data show, self-development Basic Synergy training is fostering a diverse range of beneficial changes in the lives of young people both in terms of social functioning and participation. Currently it is supported by international grants, its frequency is quite random and it is run exclusively by non-profit NGOs involved. Young people learn about the training mostly from their friends and in this study they expressed further need of this method to be visible and available for their peers. I suggest connection to state institutions and other organizations dealing with youth issues such as unemployment or prevention of crime. This way this method can be offered and delivered to more young people who might benefit from it. Such connection can be conducted via established personal contacts at institutions and discussed and agreed upon way of sharing information and support, but also with the structural and financial support from state entities. As it is now, self-development training is an event without a well-designed and thoroughly kept follow up part that would support young people in implementing their improvements back home and continuing with their growth. There is clearly a need of a structured and facilitated further process available for young people after they participate in the training, and ideally in their home environment. I suggest a) designing a detailed manual for a follow-up considering young people´s needs discussed also in this study and b) creating a structure of support network
229 for youth. Some further connections with local youth organizations might be very helpful in order to establish a strong base for continuous work with participants of the training. Also different forms of mentorship and support groups among participants themselves could be considered and implemented on local/national level. This step would also react to limitations observed in international dimension of this method. Another suggestion is to ensure that all young people coming for such international training are really prepared for both its intensity and culture diversity. As youth recognized, they also experienced troubles in this domain. Thorough preparation done by sending organization should be a key pre-requisite for participation in the training in order to foster beneficial impact and increase the experienced issues. I suggest that there are also guidelines for such preparation similarly to follow up part, which are checked by organizers prior the training. There were also recognized limitations connected to the role of the trainer representing a risk in case of incompetence or the attitude of the team that can be confusing and distracting. Here my strong suggestion would be to ensure the competence of trainer by keeping it supported within the network. Of course, the question arises who is competent to pronounce another one competent enough to deliver such training. It is definitely a field for discussion, yet what I find important that the competence of a trainer is increased by practicing with more experienced ones and challenged in different environments and different partial tasks prior running training by him/herself. Regarding the team, as for now it is explained in the introduction of the training, yet it might be useful to put information about its role already in infoletter, so that participants prepare upfront for a different to usual attitude. Since another mentioned limiting aspect is higher cost and lower access to international events for some young people, especially those “challenged” on more levels, I suggest a research on possibility to raise funds for youth that cannot afford travelling to such training – other than from Erasmus+. And then spreading this information among involved NGOs so these opportunities can be offered and used by those who need them.
230
References
ADAMS, Robert, 2008. Empowerment, participation, and social work. 4th ed. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Practical social work series. ISBN 978-0-230-01999-7. 364-7 |2 MRF
ADDINGTON, Jean and ADDINGTON, Donald, 2008. Social and cognitive functioning in psychosis. Schizophrenia Research. February 2008. Vol. 99, no. 1–3, p. 176–181. DOI 10.1016/j.schres.2007.07.004.
ALTSHULER, Lori, MINTZ, Jim and LEIGHT, Kristin, 2002. The Life Functioning Questionnaire (LFQ): a brief, gender-neutral scale assessing functional outcome. Psychiatry Research. 1 January 2002. Vol. 112, p. 161–182. DOI 10.1016/S0165-1781(02)00180-4.
ANDERSON, Elizabeth S., 1999. What Is the Point of Equality? Ethics. January 1999. Vol. 109, no. 2, p. 287.
ANDERSON, Harlene, 2009. Konverzace, jazyk a jejich možnosti. Brno: NC Publishing. ISBN 978-80-903858-6-3.
ANGHEL R., AMAS D., HICKS J. 2010 Self-awareness and Personal Development in Social Work Education. Social Work and Social Policy Department, Faculty of Health and Social Care. Networks Issue 13, February 2010, pp 30-38
ARTARAZ, Kepa, 2005. Harry Ferguson (2004), Protecting Children in Time: Child Abuse, Child Protection and the Consequences of Modernity, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 262 pp., £16.99 pbk, ISBN 1-4039-0693-9. Journal of Social Policy. July 2005. Vol. 34, no. 3, p. 504– 506. DOI 10.1017/S0047279405309044.
ASHWORTH, Dianne, 2013. Relating Trainees’ Personal Development to Their Leeuwin II Ocean Adventure. doctoral thesis. Deakin University. Geelong, Australia.
ANNIE E. CASEY FOUNDATION, 2007. Engaging YOUTH in Community Decision Making. Washington, DC: Center for the Study of Social Policy. APPADURAI, Ajun, 1990. Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy. Public Culture. March 1990. Vol. 2, no. 2, p. 1.
ARNOLD, Eva Nicole, 2014. Social Work Practices : Global Perspectives, Challenges and Educational Implications [online]. Hauppauge, N.Y.: Nova Science Publishers, Inc. [Viewed 25 July 2016]. Social Issues, Justice and Status. ISBN 978-1-63321-315-9. ARNSTEIN, Sherry R., 1969. A Ladder Of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners. 1 July 1969. Vol. 35, no. 4, p. 216–224. DOI 10.1080/01944366908977225. http://www.participatorymethods.org/sites/participatorymethods.org/files/Arnstein%20ladder%20 1969.pdf 231
BAILLERGEAU, E. and DUYVENDAK, J.W., 2013. Aspirations of young people and social inequality in Europe. Final conceptual report for addressing Inequality, Disadvantage, Social Innovation and Participation. [online]. 2013. SocIEtY. [Viewed 7 July 2016]. Available from: http://www.society-youth.eu/society/78-society/131-aspirations-of-young
BALOGH, Günter J. Friesenhahn, Hanjo Schild, Hans-Georg Wicke, Judit and EUROPE, Council of, 2014. Learning mobility and non-formal learning in European contexts: Policies, approaches and examples. Council of Europe. ISBN 978-92-871-7833-6.
BANDURA, A. (1997) Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. Worth Publishers, 604 p. Available on 14.01.2013 at http://www.becta.org.uk
BARTLETT, Harriett Moulton and SAUNDERS, Beatrice N, 1972. The common base of social work practice. [By] Harriett M. Bartlett, with the assistance of Beatrice N. Saunders. New York: National Association of Social Workers. ISBN 978-0-87101-054-4.
BAUMAN, Zygmunt, 2001. The Individualized Society. 1 edition. Cambridge, UK ; Malden, MA: Polity. ISBN 978-0-7456-2507-2.
BAUMAN, Zygmunt, 2003. Intimations of Postmodernity. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-134-91760-0.
BECK, Ulrich and BECK-GERNSHEIM, Elisabeth, 2002. Individualization. [electronic resource] : institutionalized individualism and its social and political consequences [online]. London : SAGE, c2002. [Viewed 4 September 2016]. Theory, culture & society. ISBN 978-1- 4462-1869-3.
BECK, Ulrich, BONSS, Wolfgang and LAU, Christoph, 2003. The Theory of Reflexive Modernization Problematic, Hypotheses and Research Programme. Theory, Culture & Society. 4 January 2003. Vol. 20, no. 2, p. 1–33. DOI 10.1177/0263276403020002001.
BECK, Ulrich, GIDDENS, Anthony and LASH, Scott, 1994. Reflexive modernization : politics, tradition and aesthetics in the modern social order. Stanford : Stanford University Press, 1994. ISBN 978-0-8047-2472-2.
BECK, Ulrich, 1999. What is Globalization? Cambridge: Polity Press.
BECK, Ulrich, 2000. The Brave New World of Work-. Oxford: Polity Press.
BĚHOUNKOVÁ, L., 2013. Sociální kompetence jako zdroj intervenční potřeby u dětí v riziku poruchy chování. In: VOJTOVÁ, V. and PAVLOVSKÁ, M., Včasná intervence jako zdroj inkluzivních přístupů k dětem v riziku poruch chování. Brno: Masarykova univerzita.
BENETT, C.F., 1975. Up the hierarchy. Journal of Extension. 1975. No. March/April, p. 6–12.
232
BENSON PETER L., SCALES PETER C., HAMILTON STEPHEN F. and SESMA ARTURO, 2007. Positive Youth Development: Theory, Research, and Applications. Handbook of Child Psychology [online]. 1 June 2007. [Viewed 15 April 2018]. DOI 10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0116.
BERESFORD, P. and CROFT, Suzy, 1993. Citizen involvement: A practical guide for change. UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
BERESFORD, P. and CROFT, Suzy, 2000. User. Participation. In: The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Social Work. Oxford: Blackwell. p. 355–357.
BERG, Bruce L. and LUNE, Howard, 2013. Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences: Pearson New International Edition. Pearson Higher Ed. ISBN 978-1-292-03569-7.
BERGER, Roni, 2015. Now I see it, now I don’t: researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research. April 2015. Vol. 15, no. 2, p. 219.
BERG-SCHLOSSER, Dirk and BADIE, Bertrand, 2011. International Encyclopedia of Political Science [online]. Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE Publications, Inc. [Viewed 16 August 2016]. ISBN 978-1-4129-5963-6.
BESSANT, Judith, 2004. Mixed messages: youth participation and democratic practice. Australian Journal of Political Science. July 2004. Vol. 39, no. 2, p. 387–404. DOI 10.1080/1036114042000238573.
BIRCHWOOD, M, SMITH, J, COCHRANE, R, WETTON, S and COPESTAKE, S, 1990. The Social Functioning Scale. The development and validation of a new scale of social adjustment for use in family intervention programmes with schizophrenic patients. The British Journal Of Psychiatry: The Journal Of Mental Science. December 1990. Vol. 157, p. 853–859. 2289094
BLAKELY, T.J. and DZIADOSZ, G.M., 2007. Social Functioning: A Sociological Common Base for Social Work Practice. The Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare [online]. 2007. Vol. 34, no. 4.
BLEAKLEY, A. 1999 From Reflective Practice to Holistic Reflexivity. Studies in Higher Education [online]. Vol. 24(3): 315-330 [cit. 2015-05-20].
233
BRADBROOK, Gail, ALVI, Imran, FISHER, John and LLOYD, Heidi, 2008. Meeting Their Potential: The Role of Education and Technology in Overcoming Disadvantage and Disaffection in Young People. London: Becta.
BRAND YOURSELF, 2015. Brand yourself [online]. November 2015. Synergy Croatia. [Viewed 9 August 2016]. Available from: http://brnoconnected.cz/en/brand-yourself-croatia-10- 20-11-2015/
BRAUN, Virginia and CLARKE, Victoria, 2013. Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide for Beginners. 1 edition. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications Ltd. ISBN 978-1-84787-582-2. BRAYE, Suzy, 2000. Participation and involvement in Social Care. In: User involvement and Participation in Social Care. 1. London: Jessica Kingsley publishers. ISBN 978-1-85302-777-2.
BRIDGE, Gillian, 2008. International Social Work: Social Problems, Cultural Issues and Social Work Education, Stefan Borrmann, Michael Klassen and Christian Spatscheck (eds), Opladen, Barbara Budrich Publishers, 2007, pp. 189, ISBN 978 3 86649 0871, £12.95. The British Journal of Social Work. 1 February 2008. Vol. 38, no. 2, p. 409–411. DOI 10.1093/bjsw/bcn005.
BRIDGLAND SORENSON, J. G., 2006. Constraints to youth participation in the current federal political environment [online]. Master’s degree dissertation. Edith Cowan University. Available from: http://ro.ecu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1010&context=theses
BROOKS-HARRIS, Jeff E. and STOCK-WARD, Susan R., 1999. Workshops : Designing and Facilitating Experiential Learning [online]. Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE Publications, Inc. [Viewed 19 July 2016]. ISBN 978-0-7619-1020-6.
BRYDON, Kerry, 2014. Social work education across borders: multiple layers of conceptualisation. In: Social Work Practices : Global Perspectives, Challenges and Educational Implications [online]. Hauppauge, N.Y.: Nova Science Publishers, Inc. Social Issues, Justice and Status.
BUSCH-GEERTSEMA, Volker, BENJAMINSEN, Lars, FILIPOVIČ HRAST, Maša and PLEACE, Nicholas, 2014. Extent and Profile of Homelessness in European Member States. 4. Brussels: European Observatory on Homelessness. EOH Comparative Studies on Homelessness.
BUŽINKIĆ, Emina, ĆULUM, Bojana, HORVAT, Martina and KOVAČIĆ, Marko, 2015. Youth Work in Croatia: Collecting Pieces for a Mosaic. Child & Youth Services. January 2015. Vol. 36, no. 1, p. 30–55. DOI 10.1080/0145935X.2015.1015879.
BYNNER, John and PARSONS, Samantha, 2002. Social Exclusion and the Transition from School to Work: The Case of Young People Not in Education, Employment, or Training (NEET). Journal of Vocational Behavior. 1 April 2002. Vol. 60, no. 2, p. 289–309.
CAMILLERI, Peter, 1999. Chapter 2: Social work and its search for meaning: Theories, narratives and practices. In: Transforming Social Work Practice [online]. Taylor & Francis Ltd / Books. p. 25–39. [Viewed 3 September 2016]. ISBN 978-0-415-21647-0.
234
CAMINO, Linda, 2005. Pitfalls and promising practices of youth–adult partnerships: An evaluator’s reflections. Journal of Community Psychology. January 2005. Vol. 33, no. 1, p. 75.
CAREY, Malcolm, 2013. The Social Work Dissertation : Using Small-Scale Qualitative Methodology [online]. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education. [Viewed 3 September 2016]. ISBN 978-0-335-24759-2.
CARTER, John, 1998. Postmodernity and the Fragmentation of Welfare [online]. London: Routledge. [Viewed 2 September 2016]. ISBN 978-0-415-16391-0.
CASSTEVENS, W. J., 2010. Social Work Education on Mental Health: Postmodern Discourse and the Medical Model. Journal of Teaching in Social Work. October 2010. Vol. 30, no. 4, p. 385–398. DOI 10.1080/08841233.2010.515920.
ÇOBAN, Barış, 2015. Social Media and Social Movements: The Transformation of Communication Patterns. Lexington Books. ISBN 978-1-4985-2931-0.
COBURN, Annette and WALLACE, David, 2011. Youth Work in Communities and Schools [online]. Edinburgh: Dunedin Academic Press Limited. [Viewed 25 July 2016]. Policy and Practice in Education. ISBN 978-1-906716-23-3.
235
COMPTON, B.R. and GALAWAY, Burt, 1999. Social work processes. 6th. Pacific Grove: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
CÔTÉ, James, 2014. Youth Studies: Fundamental Issues and Debates. Macmillan International Higher Education. ISBN 978-1-137-11214-9.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION ON THE PARTICIPATION OF YOUNG PEOPLE, 2008. Council Resolution on the participation of young people with fewer opportunities [online]. 2008. COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Available from: http://www.eu2008.si/si/News_and_Documents/Council_Conclusions/May/0521-EYC- young.pdf
CSIKSZENTMIHALYI, M., 1997. Finding Flow: The Psychology of Engagement with Everyday life. New York: Basic Books.
CZECH PRESIDENCY OF THE COUNCIL OF THE EU, 2009. Glossary for the participants [online]. 2009. Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports. Prague, Czech Republic. Available from: www.msmt.cz/file/1138_1_1/
DANNEFER, Dale, 2003. Cumulative Advantage/Disadvantage and the Life Course: Cross- Fertilizing Age and Social Science Theory. Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences & Social Sciences. November 2003. Vol. 58B, no. 6, p. S327.
DANSO, C., GREAVES, H., HOWELL, S., RYAN, M., SINCLAIR, R. and TUNNARD, J., 2003. The involvement of children and young people in promoting change and enhancing the quality of social care [online]. London: National Children’s Bureau. The University of Manchester. [Viewed 11 August 2016]. Available from: https://manchester.rl.talis.com/items/3C355243-E156-7570-FA20-D06CF4CF7907.html
DATAR, Sudha, RAO, Geeta, RAO, Nagmani, BAWIKAR, Ruma and MASDEKAR, Ujwala, 2008. Skill Training for Social Workers: A Manual. New Delhi: SAGE Publications India Pvt Ltd. ISBN 81-321-0238-X. DAVIES, B. 1979 From social education to social and life skills training: In whose interest?, Leicester: National Youth Bureua
DAVIES, B. and BATSLEER, J.R., 2010. What is youth work? Exeter: Learning Matters. A helpful exploration of the nature of youth work. 2010.
DEMPSEY, Maria, HALTON, Carmel and MURPHY, Marian, 2001. Reflective learning in social work education: Scaffolding the process. Social Work Education. 1 December 2001. Vol. 20, no. 6, p. 631–641. DOI 10.1080/02615470120089825.
DENZIN, Norman K. and LINCOLN, Yvonna S., 2011. The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. SAGE. ISBN 978-1-4129-7417-2.
236
DENZIN, Norman K., 1989. Interpretive Biography. SAGE Publications. ISBN 978-0-8039- 3359-0.
DEREZOTES, D. 2000 Advanced Generalist Social Work Practice, SAGE Publications, 253 p.
DEWALT, Kathleen M. and DEWALT, Billie R., 2011. Participant Observation: A Guide for Fieldworkers. Rowman Altamira. ISBN 978-0-7591-1927-7.
DEWEY, John, 1999. Liberalism and social action. Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books. ISBN 978-1-57392-753-6.
DIEM, G.K, 2004. Measuring Impact of Educational Programs [online]. 2004. Rutgers. Available from: http://florida4h.org/staff/evaluation/Resources/RUTGERS- mesuring%20impact.pdf
DIETRICH, Hans, 2012. Youth unemployment in Europe : theoretical considerations and empirical findings. Berlin. ISBN 978-3-86498-212-5.
DREBER, Marie-Luise, PIESCHE, Cathrin and WISSING, Bettina, 2014. Strengthening international youth work at the local level [online]. 2014. Druckhaus Süd, Cologne/Germany. Available from: http://pjp-eu.coe.int/documents/8871905/262f034f-03a1-43f2-bba1- 7cbc7a880648
DOMINELLI, L. 2010 Globalization, contemporary challenges and social work practice. UK: University of Durham
DUBOIS, Brenda L., 1999. Social work : an empowering profession / Brenda DuBois, Karla Krogsrud Miley - Details - Trove [online]. 3rd ed. Boston Allyn & Bacon. [Viewed 20 July 2016]. DOMINELLI, L. (2010) Globalization, contemporary challenges and social work practice. UK: University of Durham Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. Reprint edition. New York: Ballantine Books. ISBN 978-0-345-47232-8.
ERASMUS+ INCLUSION AND DIVERSITY STRATEGY, 2014. Erasmus+ Inclusion and Diversity Strategy [online]. 2014. European Commission Directorate General for Education and Culture. Available from: https://www.salto-youth.net/downloads/4-17- 3103/InclusionAndDiversityStrategy.pdf
ERASMUS+ PROGRAMME GUIDE, EU, 2016. Erasmus+ Programme Guide. Version 1/2016 [online]. 2016. European Commission. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/erasmus- plus/sites/erasmusplus/files/files/resources/erasmus-plus-programme-guide_en.pdf
237
EU YOUTH MONITOR, 2016. EU Youth Monitor. In: Evaluation of the EU Youth Strategy and the Council Recommendation on the mobility of young volunteers across the EU Final Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
EU YOUTH REPORT, SWD, 2012. Status of the situation of young people in the European Union. 2012. European Commission.
EUR-LEX, 2015. Joint Report of the Council and the Commission on the implementation of the renewed framework for European cooperation in the youth field (2010-18) [online]. 2015. Journal of the European Union. [Viewed 25 July 2016]. Available from: http://eur- lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52015XG1215(01)
EUROPEAN COMMISSION, 2015. EU Youth Report 2015. 2015. Publications Office of the European Union,.
EUROSTAT, 2013. Young people - migration and socioeconomic situation - Statistics Explained [online]. 2013. [Viewed 3 September 2016]. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Young_people_- _migration_and_socioeconomic_situation
EUROSTAT, 2015a. Statistics on young people neither in employment nor in education or training - Statistics Explained [online]. 2015. European Union. [Viewed 25 July 2016]. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics- explained/index.php/Statistics_on_young_people_neither_in_employment_nor_in_education_or_ training#Young_people_neither_in_employment_nor_in_education_or_training
EUROSTAT, 2015b. Quality of life. Facts and views [online]. 2015. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/3217494/6856423/KS-05-14-073-EN-N/742aee45-4085- 4dac-9e2e-9ed7e9501f23
EUROSTAT, 2015c. Being young in Europe today [online]. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/3217494/6776245/KS-05-14-031-EN-N.pdf/18bee6f0- c181-457d-ba82-d77b314456b9
EUROSTAT, 2017. EU labour force survey [online]. 2017. European Commission. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/EU_labour_force_survey
238
EUROSTAT, 2018. Participation of young people in education and the labour market [online]. 2018. European Commission. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics- explained/index.php/Participation_of_young_people_in_education_and_the_labour_market
EVANS, Peter, 2002. Collective Capabilities, Culture, and Amartya Sen’s Development as Freedom. Studies in Comparative International Development. Summer 2002. Vol. 37, no. 2, p. 54.
EVENT WISE TRAINING INFOLETTER, 2014. Event Wise training [online]. February 2014. Olde Vechte Foundation.
EVENT WISE TRAINING INFOLETTER, 2016. Event Wise training Infoletter [online]. February 2016. Olde Vechte Foundation. [Viewed 8 August 2016]. Available from: http://www.synergytrainingsnl.com/trainings
EVERARD, K.B. 1993 The History of Development Training. Development Training Advisory Group.
EWIJK, Hans van, 2009. European Social Policy and Social Work: Citizenship-Based Social Work. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-135-19847-3.
FENNES, Helmut, GADINGER, Susanne, HAGLEITNER, Wolfgang and LUNARDON, Katharina, 2013. learning in Youth in Action. Resutls from the surveys with project participants and project leaders in May 2012 [online]. 2013. Innsbruck. Available from: http://www.researchyouth.net/documents/ray_specialsurvey_learning.pdf
FENNES, Helmut, GADINGER, Susanne and HAGLEITNER, Wolfgang, 2012. Learning in Youth in Action. Results from the surveys with project participants and project leaders in May 2012. Interim Transnational Analysis. Innsbruck: Interkulturelles Zentrum.
FERGUSON, Harry, 2001. Social Work, Individualization and Life Politics. British Journal of Social Work. February 2001. Vol. 31, no. 1, p. 41–55.
FERGUSON, Harry, 2003. In Defence (and Celebration) of Individualization and Life Politics for Social Work. The British Journal of Social Work. 2003. Vol. 33, no. 5, p. 699–707.
FIELD, Pam, MUNRO, Liz, LITTLER, Lesley and JASPER, Cathie, 2014. Practice Education in Social Work : Achieving Professional Standards [online]. Northwich: Critical Publishing. [Viewed 20 July 2016]. Critical Skills for Social Work. ISBN 978-1-909330-17-7.
FINLAY, Linda and GOUGH, Brendan, 2003. Reflexivity : a practical guide for qualitative researchers in health and social sciences. Malden, MA : Blackwell Science, 2003. ISBN 978-0- 632-06414-4.
239
FLANAGAN, Constance, 2003. Trust, Identity, and Civic Hope. Applied Developmental Science. 2003. Vol. 7, no. 3, p. 165–171.
FOOK, J., GARDNER, F. 2007 Practising Critical Reflection. Berkshire, Open University Press.
FRANCIS, Dave and WOODCOCK, Mike, 2008. 50 Activities for Self-development [online]. Amherst, Mass: HRD Press. [Viewed 20 July 2016]. ISBN 978-0-87425-173-9.
FRASER-THOMAS, Jessica L., CÔTÉ, Jean and DEAKIN, Janice, 2005. Youth sport programs: an avenue to foster positive youth development. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy. 1 February 2005. Vol. 10, no. 1, p. 19–40. DOI 10.1080/1740898042000334890.
FROST, Nollaig, 2011. Qualitative Research Methods in Psychology : Combining Core Approaches [online]. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education. [Viewed 5 September 2016]. ISBN 978-0-335-24151-4.
GAUSEL, Nicolay, 2014a. SOCIAL WORK AS A PROFESSION:MADE INSECURE BY ITS OWN HISTORY AND ABRAHAMFLEXNER? In: Social work Practices : Global Perspectives, Challenges and Educational Implications.
GAUSEL, Nicolay, 2014b. SOCIAL WORK AS A PROFESSION:MADE INSECURE BY ITS OWN HISTORY AND ABRAHAMFLEXNER? In: Social work Practices : Global Perspectives, Challenges and Educational Implications.
GIBBS, Graham R., FRIESE, Susanne and MANGABEIRA, Wilma C., 2002. The Use of New Technology in Qualitative Research. Introduction to Issue 3(2) of FQS. Forum: Qualitative Social Research. May 2002. Vol. 3, no. 2, p. 196–207.
GIDDENS, Anthony, 1991a. Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Stanford University Press.
GIDDENS, Anthony, 1991b. The Consequences Of Modernity [online]. [Viewed 21 July 2016]. Available from: http://ebookinga.us/ebook/s/pdf/Anthony-Giddens-1991-The-Consequences-Of- Modernity.html
GIDDENS, Anthony, 1992. The transformation of intimacy : sexuality, love and eroticism in modern societies. Stanford, California : Stanford university press, 1992. ISBN 978-0-8047-2090- 8.
GOLOMBEK, Silvia, 2002. What Works in Youth Participation: Case Studies from Around the World | Equity for Children [online]. 2002. International Youth Foundatio. [Viewed 19 July 2016]. Available from: http://www.equityforchildren.org/what-works-in-youth- participation-case-studies-from-around-the-world/
240
GOLDSTEIN, E., NOONAN,M. (1999) Short-term Treatment and Social Work Practice: An Integrative Perspective .Simon and Schuster, 316 p. GOŹDZIK-ORMEL, Żaneta, 2008. Have your say!: manual on the revised European Charter on the Participation of Young People in Local and Regional Life. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Pub. ISBN 978-92-871-6239-7.
GRIFFIN, Christine, 2001. Imagining New Narratives of Youth: Youth Research, the “New Europe” and Global Youth Culture. Childhood: A Global Journal of Child Research. 1 May 2001. Vol. 8, no. 2, p. 147–66.
GROW CREATIVE BASIC SYNERGY TRAINING INFOLETTER, 2015. Grow Creative basic synergy training Infoletter [online]. August 2015. Synergy Croatia. [Viewed 9 August 2016]. Available from: http://brnoconnected.cz/en/grow-creative-croatia-6-17-10-2015-2/
GUNN, Robert, 2005. Young People’s Participation in Social Services Policy Making. Research Policy and Planning. 2005. Vol. 23, no. 3, p. 127–137.
HALL, G. Stanley, 2013. Adolescence - Its Psychology and Its Relations to Physiology, Anthropology, Sociology, Sex, Crime, and Religion (1931). Read Books Ltd. ISBN 978-1-4465- 4549-2.
HARDWICK, Louise and WORSLEY, Aidan, 2011. Doing social work research. London : SAGE. ISBN 978-1-84787-912-7.
HART, Roger, 1992. Children´s participation: from tokenism to citizenship [online]. 1992. UNICEF International Child Development Centre. Available from: https://www.unicef- irc.org/publications/pdf/childrens_participation.pdf
HATCH, J. Amos, 2002. Doing Qualitative Research in Education Settings [online]. Albany: State University of New York Press. [Viewed 5 September 2016]. ISBN 978-0-7914-5503-6.
HEARN, Simon and BUFFARDI, Anne, 2016. What is impact? [online]. 2016. Methods Lab Publication. [Viewed 21 September 2017]. Available from: https://www.odi.org/publications/10326-what-impact
HEINRICHS, D. W., HANLON, T. E. and CARPENTER, W. T., 1984. The Quality of Life Scale: an instrument for rating the schizophrenic deficit syndrome. Schizophrenia Bulletin. 1984. Vol. 10, no. 3, p. 388–398.
HELLER, Maria, 2008. Global and European Infromation Society. In: Convergence and Fragmentation: Media Technology and the Information Society. Bristol, UK: Intellect.
241
HEYDT, Margo J. and SHERMAN, Nancy E., 2005. Conscious Use of Self: Tuning the Instrument of Social Work Practice with Cultural Competence. Journal of Baccalaureate Social Work. 1 March 2005. Vol. 10, no. 2, p. 25–40. DOI 10.18084/1084-7219.10.2.25.
HOFBAUER, B., 2002. Participace dětí a mládeže na životě společnosti: přání, potřeba nebo reálná možnost. Praha: Institut zájmového vzdělávání MŠMT.
HOFFMAN, Joan Serra, 2004. Youth Violence, Resilience, and Rehabilitation [online]. New York: LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. [Viewed 8 September 2016]. Criminal Justice. ISBN 978- 1-931202-59-6.
HÖJER, Ingrid and SJÖBLOM, Yvonne, 2014. What Makes a Difference? Turning Points for Young People in the Process of Leaving Placements in Public Care. Social Work & Society [online]. 2014. Vol. 12, no. 1. [Viewed 26 July 2016]. Available from: http://www.socwork.net/sws/article/view/387
IDA, 2011. Mid-term review of the ESF programme IdA – Integration through Exchange. 2011. Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs. Bonn
IFE, J. (2007) The new international agendas: what role for social work (lecture). Inaugural
IFSW, 2012. Youth unemployment in Europe threatens a social crisis | International Federation of Social Workers [online]. 2012. Youth. Policy Issue. [Viewed 25 July 2016]. Available from: http://ifsw.org/news/youth-unemployment-in-europe-threatens-a-social-crisis/
IFSW, 2014. Global Definition of Social Work | International Federation of Social Workers. [online]. 2014. [Viewed 15 April 2018]. Available from: http://ifsw.org/get-involved/global- definition-of-social-work/
IRVING, Paul, 2015. Self-Empowerment in Later Life as a Response to Ageism. Generations. Spring 2015. Vol. 39, no. 1, p. 72–77.
IXER, Graham, 2012. ‘There’s no such thing as reflection’ ten years on. The Journal of Practice Teaching and Learning. 20 December 2012. Vol. 10, no. 1, p. 75–93. DOI 10.1921/jpts.v10i1.238.
JACKSON, K. 2014 Social Worker Self-Care — The Overlooked Core Competency . Vol. 14, No. 3, 2014, p. 14
JAMES, W. (1890). The principles of psychology.New York: Henry Holt
JEFFS, T. and SMITH, M. K., 2002. Individualization and youth work [online]. Youth and Policy. [Viewed 26 July 2016]. Available from: http://www.infed.org/archives/e- texts/individualization_and_youth_work.htm
242
JONES DE ALMEIDA, Joeritta, 2010. How Empowered Am I? Is There a Match Between My Perception of Self-Empowerment and Empowerment Measures? Researcher: An Interdisciplinary Journal. Fall 2010. Vol. 23, no. 2, p. 47–67.
FURLONG, A., and CARTMEL, F. (2007) Young People and Social Change: New Perspectives. Series: Sociology and social change. McGraw-Hill/Open University Press: Maidenhead, UK. ISBN 9780335218691
KEMSHALL, Hazel and LITTLECHILD, Rosemary (eds.), 2000. User involvement and participation in social care: research informing practice. 1st pub. London: Jessica Kingsley publishers. ISBN 978-1-85302-777-2. 364-3 |2 MRF
KIRBY, Perpetua, LANYON, Claire, CRONIN, Kathleene and SINCLAIR, R., 2003. Building a Culture of Participation [online]. 2003. National Children’s Bureau. Available from: https://www.unicef.org/adolescence/cypguide/files/Building_a_culture_of_participation.pdf
KIRBY, Perpetua, 2001. Chapter 16: Involving young people in research. In: New Handbook of Children’s Rights [online]. Taylor & Francis Ltd / Books. p. 268–284. [Viewed 31 July 2016]. ISBN 978-0-415-25036-8.
KIRKPATRICK, Donald L. and KIRKPATRICK, James D., 2006. Evaluating Training Programs : The Four Levels [online]. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. [Viewed 21 September 2017]. ISBN 978-1-57675-348-4.
KLOCKER, Sabine, 2010. Village International [online]. 2010. SALTO-YOUTH Inclusion Resource Centre. Available from: https://www.salto-youth.net/downloads/4-17- 2036/VillageInternationalUpdate.pdf
KLOOSTERMAN, Paul and BROWN, Clair, 2007. No Offence [online]. 2007. SALTO-YOUTH Inclusion Resource Centre. Available from: https://www.salto-youth.net/downloads/4-17- 1414/NoOffence.pdf
KNOTT, C., SCRAGG, T. 2007 Reflective practice in social work. Exeter : Learning Matters
KOLB, David A., 2014. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. 2 edition. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson FT Press. ISBN 978-0-13- 389240-6.
KOVACHEVA, S. and POHL, A., 2007. Disadvantage in youth transitions: constellations and policy dilemmas. Council of Europe Publishing.
KREBS, V., 2007. Sociální politika. Praha: Aspi,a.s.
LAFRAYA, S. Council of Europe and the European Commission, November 2011
243
LAM, C.M. et al. (2007) An Unfinished Reflexive Journey: Social Work Students’ Reflection on their Placement Experiences. British Journal of Social Work , Vol.37, 91–105 pp.
LANGE, Dirk and PRINT, Murray, 2012. Schools, Curriculum and Civic Education for Building Democratic Citizens [online]. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. [Viewed 16 August 2016]. Civic and Political Education. ISBN 978-94-6209-165-8.
LEE, Francis Wing-lin and CHARM, Louis Man-yung, 2002. The Possibility of Promoting User Participation in Working with High-risk Youth. British Journal of Social Work. January 2002. Vol. 32, no. 1, p. 71.
LET´S GET CREATIVE TRAINING COURSE INFOLETTER, 2016. Let´s Get Creative training course Infoletter [online]. April 2016. Brno Connected. [Viewed 9 August 2016]. Available from: http://brnoconnected.cz/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Lets-get- Creative_infoletter.pdf
LUDES, Peter, 2008. Convergence and Fragmentation : Media Technology and the Information Society. Changing Media Changing Europe Series, Volume 5 [online]. Bristol, UK: Intellect. [Viewed 16 August 2016]. ISBN 978-1-84150-182-6.
McLAUGHLIN C., BYERS R. 2001 Personal and Social Development for all. David Fulton Publishers, London, 106 p.
MACCONVILLE, Ruth and RAE, Tina, 2012. Building Happiness, Resilience and Motivation in Adolescents : A Positive Psychology Curriculum for Well-Being [online]. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. [Viewed 15 August 2016]. ISBN 978-1-84905-261-0.
MACDONALD, R. and MARSH, J., 2005. Disconnected Youth?. Palgrave Macmillan. 2005. Palgrave Macmillan. MACDONALD, Robert, 2011. Youth transitions, unemployment and underemployment: Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose? Journal of Sociology. December 2011. Vol. 47, no. 4, p. 427– 444. DOI 10.1177/1440783311420794.
MAINEMELIS C, BOYATZIS R.E. & KOLB, D.A., 2002. Learning styles and adaptive flexibility. Testing experiential learning theory. Management Learning. In McCONNELL et al. (2012) The Self as a Collection of Multiple Self-Aspects: Structure, Development, Operation, and Implications. Social Cognition, Vol. 30, No. 4, 2012, pp. 380–395
MARSTON, Greg and MCDONALD, Catherine, 2008. Feeling motivated yet? Long-term unemployed people’s perspectives on the implementation of workfare in Australia. (Cover story). Australian Journal of Social Issues (Australian Council of Social Service). Winter 2008. Vol. 43, no. 2, p. 255–269.
MARTYN, H. 2000 Developing reflective practice : making sense of social work in a world of change. Bristol, UK, Policy Press.
244
MASCHI, Tina and YOUDIN, Robert, 2011. Social Worker as Researcher: Integrating Research with Advocacy. 1 edition. Boston: Pearson. ISBN 978-0-205-59494-8.
MATOUŠEK, Oldřich, 2008. Slovník sociální práce. Vyd. 2., přeprac. Praha: Portál. ISBN 978- 80-7367-368-0. 364-78 |2 MRF
MAYER, Robert N., SCAMMON, Debra L. and ANDREASEN, Alan R., 1993. Revisiting the Disadvantaged: Old Lessons and New Problems. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing. Fall 1993. Vol. 12, no. 2, p. 270–275.
MCDONALD, Catherine and CHENOWETH, Lesley, 2006. Workfare Oz-Style: Welfare Reform and Social Work in Australia. Journal of Policy Practice. June 2006. Vol. 5, no. 2/3, p. 109.
MCDONALD, Catherine and CHENOWETH, Lesley, 2009. (Re) Shaping Social Work: An Australian Case Study. [online]. January 2009. [Viewed 6 September 2016].
MCDONALD, Catherine and MARSTON, Greg, 2002. Patterns of Governance: The Curious Case of Non-profit Community Services in Australia. Social Policy & Administration. August 2002. Vol. 36, no. 4, p. 376.
MCDONALD, Catherine and MARSTON, Greg, 2005. Workfare as welfare: governing unemployment in the advanced liberal state. Critical Social Policy. August 2005. Vol. 25, no. 3, p. 374.
MCDONALD, Catherine, 2006. Challenging social work: the institutional context of practice. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-1-4039-3545-8. 364-7 |2 MRF
245
McLAUGHLIN C., BYERS R. 2001 Personal and Social Development for all. David Fulton Publishers, London, 106 p
MCLEAN, Scott and MOSS, Gwenna, 2003. They’re Happy, But Did They Make a Difference? Applying Kirkpatrick’s Framework to the Evaluation of a National Leadership Program. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation. 1 March 2003. Vol. 18, no. 1, p. 1–23.
MCNEILL, Patrick and CHAPMAN, Steve, 2005. Research Methods. Psychology Press. ISBN 978-0-415-34076-2.
MERRIAM, Sharan B. (ed.), 2002. Qualitative Research in Practice: Examples for Discussion and Analysis. 1 edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. ISBN 978-0-7879-5895-4.
MERRICK, Joav, SUN, Rachel C. F. and SHEK, Daniel T. L., 2013. Positive Youth Development : Theory, Research and Application [online]. New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc. [Viewed 20 July 2016]. Pediatrics, Child and Adolescent Health. ISBN 978-1-62081-305-8.
MILES, Steven, 2002. Consuming Youth: Consuming Lifestyles. In: MILES, Steven, ALISON, Anderson and KEVIN, Meethan, The Changing Consumer. London: Routledge. p. 131–144.
MIMI V. CHAPMAN MSW, PhD, SUSAN OPPENHEIM MSW, DSW, TAZUKO SHIBUSAWA MSW, PhD and HELENE M. JACKSON MSW, PhD, 2003. What We Bring to Practice. Journal of Teaching in Social Work. 4 February 2003. Vol. 23, no. 3–4, p. 3–14. DOI 10.1300/J067v23n03_02.
MINICHIELLO, Victor and KOTTLER, Jeffrey A, 2010. Qualitative journeys : student and mentor experiences with research. Thousand Oaks, Calif. : SAGE. ISBN 978-1-4129-5677-2.
MORCIANO, Daniele, SCARDIGNO, Anna Fausta, MANUTI, Amelia and PASTORE, Serafina, 2013. An evaluation study of youth participation in youth work: a case study in Southern Italy. Educational Research for Policy and Practice. 23 June 2013. Vol. 13, no. 1, p. 81–100. DOI 10.1007/s10671-013-9150-8.
MORROW, Elizabeth, 2009. Teaching critical reflection in healthcare professional education [online]. 2009. School of Nursing & Midwifery, King’s College London. Available from: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/11e1/e2d2ba2a82c381de56c0f36154e7d59e3955.pdf
MURPHY-GRAHAM, Erin and LLOYD, Cynthia, 2016. Empowering adolescent girls in developing countries: The potential role of education. Policy Futures in Education. 1 June 2016. Vol. 14, no. 5, p. 556–577. DOI 10.1177/1478210315610257.
MUSIL, Libor, 2004. “Ráda bych Vám pomohla, ale--”: dilemata práce s klienty v organizacích. Brno: Marek Zeman.
246
NASW, 2015. Social Work Speaks: 10th Edition—NASW Policy Statements [online]. 10. NASW Press. [Viewed 25 July 2016]. Available from: http://naswpress.org/publications/practice/speaks.html
NAVRÁTIL, P., 2001. Teorie a metody sociální práce. Brno: Zeman.
NAVRÁTIL, Pavel and MUSIL, Libor, 2000. Sociální práce s příslušníky menšinových skupin. Sociální studia [online]. 2000. No. 5. [Viewed 6 September 2016]. Available from: https://is.muni.cz/publication/337371
NEW WAVES-BASIC SYNERGY TRAINING INFOLETTER, 2015. New Waves-basic synergy training Infoletter [online]. September 2015. Egyesek. [Viewed 9 August 2016]. Available from: http://www.egyesek.hu/?p=9-Trainingsexchanges&id=91
NOBILISOVA, M., 2013. Non formal education in Synergy Romania. In: International conference Quality in formal and non formal education. 3. Iasi, Romania: SAVA, Angela and Co. Editura PIM. ISBN 2247-2266.
NUSSBAUM, Martha Craven, 2000. Women and human development: the capabilities approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-66086-0.
NYBELL, L.M., SHOOK, J. and FINN, J., 2009. Childhood, youth, and social work in transformation : implications for policy and practice. New York: Columbia University Press.
ONDRÁČKOVÁ, Hana, 2016. Podpora klientů dětského domova rodinného typu pro budoucí sociální fungování [online]. Master’s thesis. Masarykova univerzita, Fakulta sociálních studií. [Viewed 26 July 2016]. Available from: https://is.muni.cz/auth/th/219039/fss_m/
PAGE, Nanette and CZUBA, Cheryl E., 1999. Empowerment: What Is It? Journal of Extension [online]. October 1999. Vol. 37, no. 5. [Viewed 12 August 2016]. Available from: http://www.joe.org/joe/1999october/comm1.php
PAIGE, R. Michael, FRY, Gerald W., STALLMAN, Elizabeth M., JOSIĆ, Jasmina and JON, Jae-Eun, 2009. Study abroad for global engagement: the long‐term impact of mobility experiences. Intercultural Education. 1 January 2009. Vol. 20, no. sup1, p. S29–S44. DOI 10.1080/14675980903370847.
PALLISERA, Maria, FULLANA, Judit, PALAUDARIAS, Josep-Miquel and BADOSA, Mercè, 2013. Personal and Professional Development (or Use of Self) in Social Educator Training. An Experience Based on Reflective Learning. Social Work Education. August 2013. Vol. 32, no. 5, p. 576–589. DOI 10.1080/02615479.2012.701278.
PATHWAYS BASIC SYNERGY INFOLETTER, 2016. Pathways basic synergy Infoletter. May 2016. Synergy Bulgaria
247
PAYNE, Malcolm and ASKELAND, Gurid Aga, 2008. Globalization and International Social Work : Postmodern Change and Challenge [online]. Aldershot, England: Routledge. [Viewed 4 September 2016]. Contemporary Social Work Studies. ISBN 978-0-7546-4946-5.
PAZ, M.M., 2012. The European Union tackling youth unemployment in times of crisis. Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Berlin: INTERNATIONAL POLICY ANALYSIS.
PELÁNEK, R. Příručka instruktora zážitkových akcí. Praha: Portál, 2008. 205 s.
PERCY-SMITH, Barry and MALONE, K., 2001. Making children’s participation in neighbourhood settingsrelevant to the everyday lives of young people. PLA Notes. 2001. Vol. 42, p. 19–22.
PERCY-SMITH, Barry and THOMAS, Nigel (eds.), 2009. A Handbook of Children and Young People’s Participation: Perspectives from Theory and Practice. 1 edition. London ; New York: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-46851-0.
PERKINS, D. (1995) Outsmarting IQ: The Emerging Science of Learnable Intelligence. in McLAUGHLIN C., BYERS R. (2001) Personal and Social Development for all. David Fulton Publishers, London, 106 p.
PFEIFER, Jennifer H. and PEAKE, Shannon J., 2012. Review: Self-development: Integrating cognitive, socioemotional, and neuroimaging perspectives. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience. 1 January 2012. Vol. 2, p. 55–69. DOI 10.1016/j.dcn.2011.07.012.
PUGH, Greg L., 2014. Revisiting the Pink Triangle Exercise: An Exploration of Experiential Learning in Graduate Social Work Education. Journal of Teaching in Social Work. January 2014. Vol. 34, no. 1, p. 17–28. DOI 10.1080/08841233.2013.863264.
RAMPINO, Tina and TAYLOR, Mark, 2012. Educational aspirations and attitudes over the business cycle [online]. 2012. Institute for Social and Economic Research. Available from: https://www.iser.essex.ac.uk/research/publications/working-papers/iser/2012-26.pdf
248
RASSOOL, Naz, 1998. Language RightsPostmodernity, cultural pluralism and the nation-state: Problems of language rights, human rights, identity and power. Language Sciences. 1 January 1998. Vol. 20, no. 1, p. 89–99. DOI 10.1016/S0388-0001(97)00014-4.
RAY, 2014. Research-based analysis and monitoring of Youth in Action [online]. 2014. Institute of Educational Science University of Innsbruck. Available from: http://www.researchyouth.net/documents/ray_policybrief_2014.pdf
READY, Romilla and BURTON, Kate, 2004. Neuro-Linguistic Programming for Dummies [online]. For Dummies. [Viewed 21 July 2016]. Available from: http://www.alibris.com/Neuro- Linguistic-Programming-for-Dummies-Romilla-Ready/book/8010191
RESNICK, M.D., BEARMAN, P.S., BLUM, R.W. and AT AL., 1997. Protecting adolescents from harm: Findings from the national longitudinal study on adolescents’ health. Journal of the American Medical Association. 1997. Vol. 10, no. 278, p. 823–832.
RIESSMAN, Catherine Kohler, 2007. Narrative Methods for the Human Sciences. 1 edition. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications, Inc. ISBN 978-0-7619-2998-7
RIMMER, Mark, 2012. The participation and decision making of ‘at risk’ youth in community music projects: an exploration of three case studies. Journal of Youth Studies. May 2012. Vol. 15, no. 3, p. 329–350. DOI 10.1080/13676261.2011.643232.
ROBBINS, Anthony, 2001. Awaken the Giant within: How to Take Immediate Control of Your Mental, Emotional, Physical and Financial Life. New edition edition. Pocket Books.
ROGERS, Carl Ransom, 1959. A Theory of Therapy, Personality, and Interpersonal Relationships: As Developed in the Client-centered Framework. McGraw-Hill.
ROSE, Chris, 2008. The Personal Development Group : The Student’s Guide [online]. London: Karnac Books. [Viewed 20 July 2016]. ISBN 978-1-85575-535-2.
RUCH, Gillian, 2000. Self and social work: towards an integrated model of learning. Journal of Social Work Practice. November 2000. Vol. 14, no. 2, p. 99–112. DOI 10.1080/02650530020020500.
RUTTER, Michael, 1996. Transitions and Turning Points in Developmental Psychopathology: As applied to the Age Span between Childhood and Mid-adulthood. International Journal of Behavioral Development. 9 January 1996. Vol. 19, no. 3, p. 603–626. DOI 10.1177/016502549601900309.
RYAN, Richard M. and DECI, Edward L., 2000. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist. January 2000. Vol. 55, no. 1, p. 68–78. DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68. 2000-13324-007
249
SATIR, V., 1991. The Satir Model: Family Therapy and Beyond. California: Science and Behavior Books.
SATIR, Virginia M., 1995. Self-Esteem. Millbrae, Calif: Celestial Arts. ISBN 978-0-89087-109- 6.
SATIR, Virginia and SATIR, 1988. The New Peoplemaking. 2nd ed. edition. Mountain View, Calif: Science and Behavior Books. ISBN 978-0-8314-0070-5.
SATIR, Virginia, 2009. Your Many Faces: The First Step to Being Loved. 3rd Revised edition edition. New York: Celestial Arts. ISBN 978-1-58761-349-4.
SCHALOCK, R L, 2004. The concept of quality of life: what we know and do not know. Journal Of Intellectual Disability Research: JIDR. March 2004. Vol. 48, no. Pt 3, p. 203–216. 15025663
SCHON, Donald A., 1984. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think In Action. 1 edition. New York: Basic Books. ISBN 978-0-465-06878-4.
SCHUTH, Katarina, 2010. Experiential Learning. America. 16 August 2010. Vol. 203, no. 4, p. 23–25.
SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT, 2009. Destinations of Leavers from Scottish Schools 2008/09. 2009. Edinburgh:Scottish Government.
SENNETT, R., 1998. The Corrosion of Character: The Personal Consequences of Work in the New Capitalism. New York and London: Norton.
SHAW, Ian, 1945- author. and HOLLAND, Sally, 2014. Doing qualitative research in social work. London : SAGE Publications Ltd, 2014. ISBN 978-1-4739-0503-0.
SHEAFOR, B.W. and HOREJSI, Ch.R, 2015. Techniques and Guidelines for Social Work Practice [online]. 10. Pearson eText. [Viewed 26 July 2016]. Available from: https://www.pearsonhighered.com/program/Sheafor-Techniques-and-Guidelines-for-Social- Work-Practice-with-Pearson-e-Text-Access-Card-Package-10th-Edition/PGM183643.html
SKELTON, T., 2002. Research on youth transitions: some critical interventions’. In: CIESLIK, Mark and POLLOCK, Gary, Young People in Risk Society: The Restructuring of Youth Identities and Transitions in Late Modernity. Aldershot, England: Ashgate.
SMITH, Carole and WHITE, Susan, 1997. Parton, Howe and Postmodernity: A Critical Comment on Mistaken Identity. British Journal of Social Work. April 1997. Vol. 27, no. 2, p. 275–295.
250
SMITH, M. K., 2013. What is youth work? Exploring the history, theory and practice of work with young people. infed.org [online]. 12 October 2013. [Viewed 15 April 2018]. Available from: http://infed.org/mobi/what-is-youth-work-exploring-the-history-theory-and-practice-of- work-with-young-people/
SMITH, Mark, 1988. Developing Youth Work [online]. Michigan: Open University Press. [Viewed 7 August 2017]. Available from: http://infed.org/archives/developing_youth_work/dyw5.htm
SOCIETY, 2013. Inequality, Disadvantage, Social Innovation and Participation from a Capability perspective. [online]. 2013. FINAL CONCEPTUAL REPORT. [Viewed 18 July 2016]. Available from: http://www.society-youth.eu/publications/wp2/108-wp2- report-inequality
STAPLEY, Lionel, STEIN, Mark, MILLER, Eric J. and GOULD, Laurence J., 2004. Experiential Learning in Organizations : Applications of the Tavistock Group Relations Approach [online]. London: Karnac Books. [Viewed 19 July 2016]. ISBN 978-1-85575-979-4.
STEGER, Manfred B. and ROY, Ravi K., 2010. Neoliberalism: A Very Short Introduction. 1 edition. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-956051-6.
STEINERT, Heinz and PILGRAM, Arno, 2003. Welfare policy from below: struggles against social exclusion in Europe. Aldershot, Hants, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate. ISBN 978-0- 7546-3063-0.
STRAUSS, Anselm L. and CORBIN, Juliet M., 1990. Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage Publications. ISBN 978-0-8039-3250-0.
SULLIVAN, Theresa K, 2011. Youth Engagement: More than a method. A way of life for healthy youth and community development. 2011. University of Minnesota Extension. white paper
TEFFEL, Michael, 2011. Bringing the young and old together: how to connect international youth work with intergenerational practice. Working With Older People; Brighton. 2011. Vol. 15, no. 2, p. 53–57. DOI http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.1108/13663661111144754.
TOBIN, Megan C., DRAGER, Kathryn D.R. and RICHARDSON, Laura F., 2014. A systematic review of social participation for adults with autism spectrum disorders: Support, social functioning, and quality of life. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders. 1 March 2014. Vol. 8, p. 214–229. DOI 10.1016/j.rasd.2013.12.002.
THOMPSON, S., THOMPSON, N. 2008 The Critically Reflective Practitioner. New York, Palgrave.
251
THOMPSON, N. , PASCAL, J. 2012 Developing critically reflective practice. Reflective Practice, Routledge, Vol. 13, No. 2, 311–325 pp.
UGGERHØJ, Lars, 2011. What is Practice Research in Social Work - Definitions, Barriers and Possibilities. Social Work & Society. 2011. Vol. 9, no. 1, p. 45–59.
ÚLEHLA, Ivan, 2005. Umění pomáhat : učebnice metod sociální praxe [online]. Sociologické nakladatelství. [Viewed 15 April 2018]. ISBN 978-80-86429-36-6. Available from: https://is.muni.cz/publication/673673
UNGAR, Michael, 2004a. Surviving as a Postmodern Social Worker: Two Ps and Three Rs of Direct Practice. Social Work. July 2004. Vol. 49, no. 3, p. 488–496.
UNGAR, Michael, 2004b. Nurturing Hidden Resilience in Troubled Youth [online]. Toronto, Ont: University of Toronto Press. [Viewed 8 September 2016]. ISBN 978-0-8020-8565-8.
UNITED NATIONS and DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INFORMATION, 2001. The United Nations youth agenda: empowering youth for development and peace. New York: United Nations Dept. of Public Information.
UNITED NATIONS. 2014. World Youth Report, 2013 : Youth and Migration. [New York]: United Nations Publications. UNITED NATIONS 2005. World Youth Report, 2005 : Young People Today and in 2015. [New York]: United Nations Publications.
VAN BOEKEL, Martin, BULUT, Okan, STANKE, Luke, PALMA ZAMORA, Jose R., JANG, Yoojeong, KANG, Youngsoon and NICKODEM, Kyle, 2016. Effects of participation in school sports on academic and social functioning. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology. September 2016. Vol. 46, p. 31–40. DOI 10.1016/j.appdev.2016.05.002.
VAN DE WALLE, Tineke, COUSSEE, Filip and BOUVERNE-DE BIE, Maria, 2011. Social exclusion and youth work - from the surface to the depths of an educational practice. Journal of Youth Studies. March 2011. Vol. 14, no. 2, p. 219–231. DOI 10.1080/13676261.2010.506534.
VIROKANNAS, Elina, RAUHALA, Pirkko-Liisa and HARRIKARI, Timo, 2014. Social Change and Social Work : The Changing Societal Conditions of Social Work in Time and Place [online]. Farnham, Surrey: Routledge. [Viewed 3 September 2016]. ISBN 978-1-4724-3278-0.
WALL, W.D. 1977 Constructive Education for Adolescents. London, Harrap/UNESCO
252
WALLMAN-STOKES, C., HOVDE, K., MCLAUGHLIN, C. and ROSQUETA, K., 2013. What we talk about when we talk about impact [online]. Center for High Impact Philanthropy.Women Moving Millions. [Viewed 4 July 2017]. Available from: https://www.impact.upenn.edu/wp- content/uploads/2016/2014/12/What_Are_We_Talking_About_When_We_Talk_About_Impact. pdf
WALLMAN-STOKES, Cecily, HOVDE, Katherine, MCLAUGHLIN, Carol and ROSQUETA, Katherina, 2014. Defining Impact [online]. 2014. The Conference Board. [Viewed 4 June 2017]. Available from: https://www.conference-board.org/pdf_free/TCB_GT-V1N5-14.pdf?width=100
WARREN, Janet, 2007. Service user and carer participation in social work. Exeter: Learning Matters. Transforming social work practice. ISBN 978-1-84445-074-9. 364-78 |2 MRF
WATKINS, C., 1995. Personal-social education and the whole curriculum. In: MCLAUGHLIN, C. and BYERS, R., Personal and Social Development for all. London: David Fulton Publishers. p. 106.
WATTS, Roderick J. and FLANAGAN, Constance, 2007. Pushing the envelope on youth civic engagement: A developmental and liberation psychology perspective. Journal of Community Psychology. August 2007. Vol. 35, no. 6, p. 779–792.
WEIGERT, Kathleen Maas, 1990. Experiential learning and peace education. Peace & Change. July 1990. Vol. 15, no. 3, p. 312.
WEISSMAN, Myrna M., OLFSON, Mark, GAMEROFF, Marc J., FEDER, Adriana and FUENTES, Milton, 2001. A Comparison of Three Scales for Assessing Social Functioning in Primary Care. American Journal of Psychiatry. 1 March 2001. Vol. 158, no. 3, p. 460–466. DOI 10.1176/appi.ajp.158.3.460.
WELLMAN, Barry, 2001. Computer Networks As Social Networks. Science. 14 September 2001. Vol. 293, no. 5537, p. 2031–2034.
WESTHEIMER, Joel and KAHNE, Joseph, 2004. What Kind of Citizen? The Politics of Educating for Democracy. American Educational Research Journal. 1 January 2004. Vol. 41, no. 2, p. 237–269. DOI 10.3102/00028312041002237.
WHITE, Sarah C., 1996. Depoliticising Development: The Uses and Abuses of Participation (La dépolitisation du développement: usages et abus de la participation / Despolitisando o desenvolvimento: participação: usos e abusos / Despolitizando el desarrollo: los usos y abusos de la participación). Development in Practice. 1996. No. 1, p. 6.
WIERENGA, Ani, 2003. Sharing a New Story: Young People in Decision-Making [online]. 2003. Australian Youth Research Centre, The University of Melbourne. Available from: http://web.education.unimelb.edu.au/yrc/linked_documents/WP23.pdf
253
WILLIAMS, J. Globalization and International Social Work: Postmodern Change and Challenge. Journal of Social Policy 38 (Apr 2009): 375-377 pp.
WILSON, William Julius, 2012. The Truly Disadvantaged: The Inner City, the Underclass, and Public Policy, Second Edition. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-92465-6.
WOCHOWSKA, Małgorzata, 2015. Non-formal Learning And The Acquisition Of Skills - How Does The EU Support Youth Employment? / Edukacja Pozaformalna I Nabywanie Umiejętności - W Jaki Sposób Unia Europejska Wspiera Zatrudnienie Młodzieży? Comparative Economic Research. June 2015. Vol. 18, no. 2, p. 161–179. DOI 10.1515/cer-2015-0017.
WOLFF, Jonathan and DE-SHALIT, Avner, 2007. Disadvantage. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. Oxford Political Theory. ISBN 978-0-19-927826-8.
WOLFF, Jonathan, 2009. Disadvantage, Risk and the Social Determinants of Health. Public Health Ethics. November 2009. Vol. 2, no. 3, p. 214–223. DOI 10.1093/phe/php033.
YES!, 2014. Youth Empowerment Model [online]. 2014. Youth Empowered Solutions. Available from: http://www.youthempoweredsolutions.org/about/youth-empowerment-model/
YOUTH IN ACTION PROGRAMME GUIDE, 2013. Youth in Action Programme guide [online]. 2013. European Commission. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/youth/tools/documents/guide13_en.pdf
ZASTROW, Charles, 1989. The practice of social work. 3rd edition. Chicago, Ill.: Dorsey Press. ISBN 978-0-256-06255-7.
254
Abstrakt
Dopad mezinárodního seberozvojového tréninku na sociální fungování a participaci znevýhodněné mládeže: pohledem mládeže a pracovníků Marija Wazi Tato práce se zabývá hlavní výzkumní otázkou: Jak chápou dopad seberozvojové metody používané na mezinárodní úrovni na sociální fungování a participaci znevýhodněné mládeže znevýhodněná mládež a pracovníci? Teoretická část práce nabízí poznatky a teorie v oblasti práce s mládeží spolu s koncepty znevýhodnění, seberozvoje a postmoderních změn. Hlavní důraz je na prozkoumání perspektivy mladých lidí na jejich zkušenost s mezinárodním Basic Synergy tréninkem. Tento výzkum je interpretativní kvalitativní studií s prvky zakotvené teorie. Je založen na datech sbíraných od mladých lidí, kteří splňují kritéria „omezených příležitostí“ jakožto formy znevýhodnění, a trenérů, kteří s nimi pracují s využitím metody seberozvoje. Jako nástroje sběru dat posloužily polo-strukturované rozhovory, on-line dotazník, zúčastněné pozorování a analýza dokumentů. Shromážděn00E1 data byla přepsána a analyzována v programu NVivo11. Dopad, tak jak ho chápou mladí lidé a pracovníci, je popsán a analyzován v empirické části jakožto významný a přítomný v různých dimenzích životů mladých lidí, jako například ve vztazích, dovednostech anebo posílených kapacitách a schopnostech. Konkrétní doporučení do praxe jsou zahrnuta v závěru.
Klíčová slova: mládež, mezinárodní práce s mládeží, znevýhodnění, znevýhodněná mládež, omezené příležitosti, postmodernita, seberozvoj, seberozvojový trénink, zážitkové učení se, reflexe, sociální fungování, participace, dopad
255
Abstract
Impact of international self-development training on social functioning and participation of disadvantaged youth: perspectives of young people and practitioners Marija Wazi In this study the main research question is: How is the impact of self-development method used at international level on social functioning and participation of disadvantaged youth understood by disadvantaged young people and practitioners? The theoretical part of the thesis brings findings and theories in the field of youth work together with concepts of disadvantage, self-development and post-modern changes. The main focus is then on exploring the perspective of young people on their experience with international Basic Synergy training. This research is a basic interpretive qualitative study with elements of grounded theory analysis embedded in it. The presented study is based on data collected from young people fitting the criteria of less-opportunity as a form of disadvantage and trainers who work with them by using self-development method. Semi- structured interviews, on-line survey, participant observation and document analysis served as tools of data collecting. The gathered data were transcribed and analyzed by using NVivo11. Impact as understood by youth and practitioners is described and analyzed in empirical part as a significant one and present in different dimensions of young people´s lives, such as relationships, skills or particularly in strengthened capacities and capabilities. Specific recommendations for practice are included in conclusion.
Key words: youth, international youth work, disadvantage, disadvantaged youth, less-opportunity, post- modernity, self-development, self-development training, experiential learning, reflection, social functioning, participation, impact
256
Name index
A C Adams, 14, 72, 80, 105, 113, 118, 119, 120, 121, 165, 242, Carey, 136 309 Cartmel, 27, 28, 30, 187, 204 ADAMS, 324 Casstevens, 22 ADDINGTON, 324 Clarke, 136, 138, 139, 141, 142, 144 ALTSHULER, 324 Alvi, 36, 40 Anderson, 95, 101, 109, 308, 339 Ç ANDERSON, 324 Andreasen, 35 Çoban, 124 Annie E. Casey Foundation, 39 ANNIE E. CASEY FOUNDATION, 324 C Appadurai, 11 APPADURAI, 324 Coburn, 45, 48 Arnold, 15, 43, 62 Colley, 36, 86, 116, 126, 127 ARNOLD, 324 Coussée, 48, 50 Arnstein, 14, 109, 110, 324 Creswell, 137 Artaraz, 17 Croft, 106, 115, 118 Ashworth, 17, 25, 28, 66, 73, 375 Csikszentmihalyi, 126
B Ć Badosa, 10, 17, 70 Ćulum, 37, 39, 46 Baillergeau, 40, 73, 125 Balogh, 57 C Bandura, 126 Bartlett, 14, 43, 62, 63, 74, 94, 95, 325 Czuba, 118 Bauman, 10, 23, 27, 29, 186 Beck, 10, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 187, 189 D Běhounková, 95, 286 Benett, 6, 133, 320 Damon, 126 Bennett, 133, 136, 137 Dannefer, 35, 36 Benson, 50, 126, 189 Danso, 121 Beresford, 106, 115, 118 Datar, 16, 65, 239 Berg, 108, 151 Deci, 126 Berger, 153, 155 Dempsey, 70 Beuret, 34, 35, 104, 105, 106, 107, 110, 116 Denzin, 78, 136, 142, 287 Blakely, 94, 95 Derezotes, 64, 65, 330 Bleakley, 81 DeWalt, 140 Bradbrook, 36, 39, 40, 190 Dewey, 67, 106 Braun, 136, 138, 139, 141, 142, 144 Diem, 133 Braye, 114 Dietrich, 30, 31 Bridgland Sorenson, 116, 117, 122 Dominelli, 11, 84 Brooks-Harris, 66 Dreber, 56, 202, 204 Brydon, 15 DuBois, 43, 62, 330 Buffardi, 131 Duyvendak, 40, 73, 125 Burton, 91 Dweck, 91 Busch-Geertsema, 31 Dziadosz, 94, 95 Bužinkić, 37, 39, 46 Byers, 72, 79, 242 257
E I Encyclopaedia of social work, 45, 50 IdA, 15, 57, 85, 204, 335 Erasmus+ Programme Guide, 22, 37, 58, 59, 75, 116, 142, Ife, 14, 84 330 IFSW, 21, 22, 62, 335 EU Youth Report, 27, 32, 34, 35, 46, 60, 75, 189, 331 Irving, 121 EUR-Lex, 12, 32 Ixer, 80 European Commission, 13, 30, 34, 37, 46, 60, 75, 87, 143, 189, 303, 313, 330, 331, 332, 336, 347, 356, 357 Eurostat, 12, 13, 14, 30, 31, 105, 112, 124, 307 J James, 64, 67, 329, 336 F Jeffs, 10, 19, 27, 29, 34, 44, 45, 46, 49 Jones de Almeida, 121 Fennes, 57, 59 Ferguson, 10, 16, 23, 24, 26, 47, 63, 69, 187, 188, 324 Finlay, 153, 155 K Finn, 44, 47, 51, 55 King, 78, 339 Fisher, 36, 40 Kirkpatrick, 5, 132, 248, 320, 339 Flick, 137 Klocker, 56, 203 Fook, 79, 80 Kloosterman, 37, 56, 203 France, 25, 28, 29, 34, 188, 299 Knott, 5, 81, 82, 83, 84 Francis, 17, 66, 89, 240, 327, 336, 337 Kolb, 66, 67, 241 Fullana, 10, 17, 70 Komárková, 74, 77 Furlong, 27, 28, 30, 187, 204 Kovačić, 39 Kovacheva, 27, 29, 35, 108 G Gardner, 79, 80 L Gausel, 43, 62 Lafraya, 15, 75, 86, 336 Giddens, 10, 14, 23, 24, 27, 28, 47, 65, 69, 101, 186, 187, Lam, 79, 80, 81 333 Lange, 33, 35 Goldstein, 71, 241 Lash, 10, 24, 187 Golombeck, 76 Lee, 118, 309 Gough, 153, 155 Ley, 114, 115, 123 Goździk-Ormel, 73, 105, 107, 109, 111, 112, 122, 307, 308 Lloyd, 36, 40, 118 Guggenbühl-Craig, 101 Ludes, 124 Gunn, 106, 115, 122, 307 Lune, 151
H M Hardwick, 139, 141, 148, 151, 152 MacDonald, 15, 20, 30, 40 Harrikari, 10 Maschi, 135, 136, 139, 142 Hart, 107, 111, 117, 128, 309 Matoušek, 95 Hearn, 131 Mayer, 35 Heller, 125 McConnell, 64, 337 Hendl, 137, 139 McDonald, 32, 40, 52, 53, 54, 55, 307 Heydt, 74, 243 McLaughlin, 72, 78, 79, 131, 132, 242 Höjer, 78 McLean, 132, 133 Holland, 136, 139, 141, 142, 145, 147, 149, 152 McNeill, 140 Horejsi, 14, 63, 94, 95 Miles, 21 Horvat, 37, 39, 46 Morrow, 80, 82, 243 Musil, 14, 43, 62, 63, 94 Ch Chapman, 70, 140 N Charm, 118, 309 NASW, 43, 68, 340 Navrátil, 2, 10, 14, 25, 43, 47, 62, 63, 94, 101, 375 Navrátilová, 10, 25, 47 258
Nobilisova, 75, 76, 88 Stapley, 66, 67 Noonan, 71, 241 Steinert, 105, 108, 307 Nussbaum, 95, 286 Stock-Ward, 66 Sullivan, 107, 110, 113, 126, 373 P T Page, 118 Paige, 15, 85, 204 Teffel, 56, 204 Palaudarias, 10, 17, 70 Thomas, 14, 50, 76, 105, 108, 119, 120, 121, 122, 127 Pallisera, 10, 17, 70 Thompson, 81 Pascal, 80 Thomson, 80 Paz, 30, 31 Peake, 64 Perkins, 76 U Pfeifer, 64 Uggerhøj, 18 Piesche, 56, 204 Pilgram, 105, 108, 307 Pohl, 27, 29, 35, 108 V Pugh, 66, 70 Van de Walle, 50, 51 Virokannas, 10 R Rauhala,, 10 W RAY, 38, 57, 60, 189, 202, 342 Wall, 64 Ready, 91, 342 Wallace, 45, 48 Riessman, 78, 148 Wallman-Stokes, 131, 132 Rimmer, 115, 117 Warren, 72, 105, 116, 118, 129, 242, 309 Rogers, 16, 68, 241 Weigert, 66, 67 Rocha, 120 Wellman, 125 Rose, 10, 15, 17, 69, 73, 74, 79, 85, 92, 241 Westheimer, 32 Roy, 34 White, 14, 22, 113, 114, 115, 119 Ruch, 17, 50, 62, 79 Wierenga, 117 Rutter, 77, 287 Wilson, 35 Ryan, 121, 126 Wissing, 56, 204 Wochowska, 58, 59, 203, 205 S Wolff, 35, 36, 96, 100, 286 Woodcock, 17, 66, 68, 240 Satir, 5, 10, 62, 91, 96, 97, 101, 287, 343 World Youth Report, 19, 20, 21, 27, 28, 39, 75, 116, 123, Saunders, 14, 43, 62, 63, 74, 94, 95, 325 310, 345 Shaw, 136, 139, 141, 142, 145, 147, 149, 152 Worsley, 139, 141, 148, 151, 152 Sheafor, 14, 63, 94, 95, 343 Sherman, 74, 243 Shook, 44, 47, 51, 55 Y Schön, 81 Youdin, 135, 136, 139, 142 Schuth, 66 Sjöblom, 78 Skelton, 21 Z Smith, 10, 14, 19, 20, 22, 27, 29, 34, 43, 44, 45, 46, 49, 51, Zimmermann, 35 54, 76, 79, 94, 98, 105, 108, 119, 120, 121, 122, 127
259
Attachments
1. Interview guide with trainers
1. How would you describe your life situation (living conditions, state, phase in life) right before you participated in a Synergy training (ST)? Relationships? Aspirations? Work? Life plans? 2. What attracted you to the ST? 3. What was your learning in ST about? 4. What / which elements was supporting you in the program? In approach? In setting? 5. What /which was limiting/stopping you in the program? In approach? In setting? 6. What were the concrete outcomes (understanding, decisions, actions) for your after ST? 7. What are the key features of Synergy training? How would you present it in few words? 8. What is a basic ground of this training? Its purpose? 9. What are the benefits of international dimension of ST? 10. What are the limitations in the international dimension of ST? 11. How do you see the „less-opportunity“ in the lives of young people? How would you define it? And „disadvantage“? 12. What are the specific challenges of young people living nowadays, 21st century? 13. What are the specific needs of young people living nowadays, 21st century? 14. What do ST offer to this target group? How could ST meet their needs? 15. How do you perceive „social functioning“? What does it mean for you? 16. Which elements of ST might have an impact on young people´s own potential and how? 17. Which elements of ST might have an impact on young people´s healthy relationships (in family, with friends) and how? 18. Which elements of ST might have an impact on young people´s leisure time and how? 19. Which elements of ST might have an impact on young people´s occupation/employment and how? 20. Which elements of ST might have an impact on young people´s community/society they live in and how? 21. Which elements of ST might have an impact on young people´s perception of their position in life and how? 22. Which elements of ST might have an impact on young people´s problem-solving skills and how? 23. Which elements of ST might have an impact on young people´s competence at independent living and how? 24. How do you understand the „participation“ of youth? What is its place in society? 25. Which elements of ST might have an impact on resources and conditions for young people´s participation and how? 26. From your own experience, which examples of an impact of ST on young people´s social functioning could you mention? 27. And which would be the examples of an impact of ST on participation of youth? 28. How is „empowerment“ used in ST? 29. How is „choice“ of a person perceived and practiced in ST? 30. What is the place of „self-perception“ in ST program? 31. What is the place of „motivation“ in ST program? 32. Which are the risks in ST regarding young people´s growth and development? 33. Anything else that you would like to add?
260
2. Survey content
Dear participant, Welcome to our common project. This research was designed to understand and describe the experience of less-opportunity young people who participated in Basic Synergy training (being then 15-29 yrs old) in either a form of a youth exchange or as an Event Wise event.
You are asked to fill in this survey ONLY IF AT LEAST 2 of the following CRITERIA of less-opportunity condition (as given by European Commission definition) ARE TRUE FOR YOU. You will find them all in the first question at the end of this page, after the consent.
Read carefully the following information before you start answering. The deadline for filling in this survey is 30th June 2017 20:00. In case you decide to go for it - thank you for your part! I assure you it will be taken and treated as important information, and analyzed equally together with other´s experiences.
As a PhD student at Masaryk University, I conduct this research with the purpose of exploring the impact that this training had brought into your life, and to share the results with the public. It should take approximately 1 hour to complete, yet feel free to give it time - as these questions are here to give you space to express yourself in unlimited way and as deep as you choose. By answering the following questions, you are becoming a part of a bigger picture. Your answers will be used for the purpose of obtaining data for the research under PhD study seeking the answers to the following question:
What impact has self-development method used at international level on social functioning and participation of disadvantaged youth?
You are asked to fill in this survey only if you fulfil at least 2 of the following criteria of less-opportunity, as given by European Commission definition. You will find them all in the first question. PARTICIPATION Your participation in this survey is voluntary. You may refuse to take part in the research or exit the survey at any time without any penalty. You are free to decline to answer any particular question you do not wish to answer for any reason. BENEFITS Your responses may help us learn more about the possible use of the training, introducing it to the social work field as a tool to support young people in their development , as well as show the room for improvements in the program and design. RISKS There is the risk that you may find some of the questions to be sensitive. CONFIDENTIALITY Your survey answers will be sent to a link where data will be stored in a password protected electronic format. This program does not collect identifying information such as your name, email address, or IP address. Therefore, your responses will remain anonymous. No one will be able to identify you or your answers. At the end of the survey you will be asked if you are interested in participating in an additional interview [by skype or in person]. If you choose to provide contact information such as your phone number or email address, your survey responses may no longer be anonymous to the researcher. However, no names or identifying information would be included in any publications or presentations based on these data, and your responses to this survey will remain confidential.
CONTACT If you have questions at any time about the study or the procedures, you may contact me via email at [email protected] ELECTRONIC CONSENT: Please select your choice below. Clicking on the “Agree” button indicates that • You have read the above information • You voluntarily agree to participate • You are 18 years of age or older • At least 2 less-opportunity criteria listed below (according to European Commission definition) are true for you. • You fill in all the answers according to your true experience
SURVEY QUESTIONS:
Is any of the following true about your life conditions/environment today or in significant past (long- term as a year or more)? Choose all the options that apply and are part of the reality for you. • coming from broken families (divorced) • educational difficulties (dropped-out from school, low or no qualitifaction) • health issues (chronic health problems, severe illnesses or psychiatric conditions) • disability (with mental, physical, sensory or other disabilities) • (ex)drug or alcohol abuse • Staying in dependence on social welfare system • in debt or with financial problems • having very low standard of living (low income) • cultural differences (members of minorities, migrant, refugee) • facing discrimination because of gender, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation • geographical obstacles (coming from remote rural places) • growing up in foster home • long-term unemployed • homeless
262
1. How would you describe your life situation? What do you experience as fulfilling? What kind of resources do you lack/miss in your life (information, connections, motivation, support, money, new opportunities, ideas…)? 2. What is your health condition? 3. What is your economic/financial condition? 4. What is your job/work/employment situation, how satisfied are you with it? 5. How do you see yourself – what do you like about yourself, what would you like to change? 6. How would you describe your relationships with family members? 7. How do you experience relationships with friends? 8. How would you describe your living environment – healthy, supportive, friendly, inspiring/dangerous, boring, limiting…? 9. What kind of risks do you experience in your life and how do you deal with them? 10. How connected do you feel to people in your community, society, country? 11. How are you involved in what is happening in your community/society/country? 12. Would you say that you have fewer opportunities to grow in society compared to your peers? Would you call yourself disadvantaged? 13. What is your job/work/employment situation, how satisfied are you with it? 14. How are you involved in what is happening in your community/society/country? 15. What are the benefits/pluses of self-development training being international? 16. How did you benefit from international environment yourself? What did you learn from international environment? 17. Was there anything limiting/stopping/harming for you in training because of different cultures there? If yes, what? 18. According to you, what is self-development training good for? How did it serve you? 19. Whom could self-development training serve well, who could benefit from it? 20. What kind of risks / limitations do you see in self-development training?
263
21. Basic Synergy training supported me in developing my (click what fits, if any): self-esteem, managing emotions, self-understanding, finding resources, resilience, support network,responsibility,values,spontaneity, freedom of choice, self-fulfilment, self-esteem, trust, material/economic conditions, health and well-being, living environment, connection to others, Intimate relationships, Family relationships, Friendships, Education, life planning, security, job/employment? 22. What was the biggest contribution of this training to your life (life situation, life conditions)? 23. What impact had participation in BS bring on how you see yourself? 24. What changes did participation in BS bring to your relationships? 25. What changes did participation in BS bring to your environment? 26. Basic Synergy training supported me in (click what fits, if any): Being interested in society, creating social entrepreneurship, volunteering, participating in different forms of non- formal education, peer education, joining in an organisation/club, joining youth councils, parliaments, boards, campaigning activities, becoming a member of political party/group, taking part in elections, becoming active in cultural activities, supporting human rights or global development, involving into environmental issues, participating in international meetings 27. What was the biggest contribution of this training to your involvement in society? 28. What changes did participation in BS bring to your social activities?
3. Interview guide with participants of Basic Synergy training
This interview will be used for the purpose of obtaining data for the research under PhD study seeking the answers to the following question:What impact has self-development method used at international level on social functioning and participation of disadvantaged youth?
All the answers will be collected and analysed under the protection of the source conditions. Meaning none of the names nor concrete places will be exposed, and all the respondents of this research will receive a number/nickname for further anonymity. In the publication that will follow after this research all the respondents will be referred to only in terms of these numbers/nicks, so that their identity is not revealed.
1. How would you describe your life situation (living conditions, state, phase in life)? How satisfying is it for you now? 2. What do you experience as disadvantage or a lack of opportunities comparing to other people around you? 3. What brought you to Synergy training, what was your motivation? 4. Which of your needs did the Basic Synergy training meet? 5. Which of your needs did the Basic Synergy training not meet? Something that was lacking, missing for you in the program, approach, setting, follow up...? 6. What did you learn in Basic synergy training, what did it bring you? 7. What would be the strongest example, an experience/situation as your own story from a training that represents it? 8. How did this training affect your perception / understanding of yourself, if in any way? 9. Which impact did it have on your relationships (family, friends, intimate) and how? 10. How did it affect your occupation/employment? 11. Which changes did it bring to your leisure / free time/social activities, if any? 12. How did it change your involvement / participation in community/society? 13. What were the concrete outcomes of this training for you in terms of decisions made or actions took right after ST? 14. Anything else regarding your participation in this training that you would like to add, mention, comment, suggest 264
4. Survey demographic details
4.1. Less-opportunity factors
number of participants
In a category “other” respondents were mentioning additional factors or the ones listed above with details, such as: not financially stable, spending early childhood years in a country at war, alcohol addiction in a family, discrimination because of physical appearance etc.
265
4.2. Countries participants live in
4.3. Countries where Basic Synergy took place
266
4.4. Education of participants
4.5. Considering oneself less-opportunity or disadvantaged
4.6. Years passed after participating in TC
267
4.7.Survey respondent’s details: country, sex, education, years passed after TC
CODE COUNTRY AGE SEX EDUCATION years after TC R1 Portugal 25 female high school '3-4 R2 Romania 36 female university MA degree 10+ R3 Greece 35 male university BA degree '5-6 R4 Bulgaria 29 female university MA degree '1-2 R5 Latvia 26 female university BA degree '1-2 R6 Bulgaria 24 male university BA degree '1-2 R7 Bulgaria 28 female university BA degree 0,5-1 R8 Bulgaria 33 female university MA degree '1-2 R9 Bulgaria 32 female university BA degree 10+ R10 Czech Rep 27 male university MA degree '1-2 R11 Czech Rep 31 female university MA degree '1-2 R12 Greece 22 female high school '1-2 R13 Romania 25 male high school '1-2 R14 Czech Rep 28 female university MA degree '1-2 R15 Bulgaria 32 female university MA degree '1-2 R16 Hungary 23 male university BA degree 0,5-1 R17 Croatia 33 female university MA degree '5-6 R18 Bulgaria 31 male university MA degree '3-4 R19 Bulgaria 30 female university BA degree '1-2 R20 Hungary 28 male university MA degree '1-2 R21 Bulgaria 25 female university BA degree 0,5-1 R22 Bulgaria 23 female university BA degree 0,5-1 R23 Spain 25 male university BA degree '1-2 R24 Bulgaria 31 male university BA degree '5-6 R25 Bulgaria 31 male university MA degree 10+ R26 Croatia 29 female university MA degree '5-6 R27 Switzerland 27 female university MA degree '3-4 R28 Croatia 28 female university MA degree '3-4 R29 Romania 24 female high school '1-2 R30 Italy 40 male university MA degree 10+ R31 Romania 25 female university BA degree '1-2 R32 Italy 22 female university BA degree 0,5-1 R33 Italy 27 female university BA degree '3-4 R34 Hungary 37 female high school '7-10 R35 Turkey 31 female university BA degree '7-10 R36 Hungary 39 male university BA degree 10+ R37 Hungary 32 male high school '7-10 R38 Latvia 27 male high school 0,5-1 R39 Slovakia 26 female university MA degree '1-2 R40 Bulgaria 25 female university BA degree 0,5-1 R41 Greece 24 female high school 0,5-1 R42 Ukraine 31 female university MA degree '1-2
268
R43 Armenia 28 male university MA degree 0,5-1 R44 Croatia 26 female university MA degree 0,5-1 R45 Lithuania 34 female university MA degree 10+ R46 Greece 27 male university MA degree '1-2 R47 Czech Rep 26 male university BA degree '7-10 R48 Germany 24 female university MA degree '7-10 R49 Czech Rep 29 female university MA degree '3-4 5. Operationalisation
PARTIAL RQ QUESTIONS IN SURVEY/INTERVIEW INDICATORS
RQ1: SURVEY resources: How do disadvantaged • How would you describe your life material/economic conditions young people situation? What do you experience as usage of public and private understand their own fulfilling? What kind of resources do services disadvantages and/or individual´s social capital you lack/miss in your life opportunities? (information, connections, motivation, participation: support, money, new opportunities, economic, social, in culture, ideas…)? education and skills • What is your health condition? development, political and civic • What is your economic/financial condition? quality of life: • How do you see yourself – what do health and well-being living environment you like about yourself, what would crime and harm experienced you like to change? Risks • How would you describe your Making decisions/ choosing relationships with family members? Self-perception • How do you experience relationships Connection to others with friends? Intimate relationships • How would you describe your living Family relationships environment – healthy, supportive, Friends Support friendly, inspiring/dangerous, boring, Education limiting…? life planning • What kind of risks do you experience ontological security in your life and how do you deal with health them? job • How connected do you feel to people life opportunities in your community, society, country? individuality • Would you say that you have fewer community situation in society opportunities to grow in society inclusion /exclusion compared to your peers? Would you Access to information call yourself disadvantaged? Inequality • What is your job/work/employment Disability situation, how satisfied are you with it? broken families • How are you involved in what is discrimination happening in your limited social skills community/society/country? very low standard of living dependence on social welfare 269
system INTERVIEW long-term unemployed youth • How would you describe your life homeless situation (living conditions, state, school-leavers and school drop- outs phase in life)? How satisfying is it for lowly or non-qualified you now? cultural differences (members of • What do you experience as minorities, migrants) disadvantage or a lack of geographical obstacles (remote opportunities comparing to other rural places) people around you? Interest in social environment
RQ2: How do trainers INTERVIEW understand young • How do you see the „less-opportunity“ people` s disadvantages in the lives of young people? How and/or opportunities? would you define it? And „disadvantage“? SURVEY job chances increased RQ3: • What are the benefits/pluses of self- cooperation How do disadvantaged development training being Cultural awareness and young people perceive international? expression Communication in foreign languages the international level How did you benefit from international Communication skills of self-development environment yourself? What did you Team work method? learn from international environment? knowledge-building • Was there anything networking limiting/stopping/harming for you in partnerships training because of different cultures volunteering there? If yes, what? intercultural and civic skills their interpersonal, social skills creativity international experience ability to cope with conflict self-confidence
RQ4: INTERVIEW How do trainers • What are the benefits of international perceive the dimension of ST? international level of • What are the limitations in the self-development international dimension of ST? method?
self-esteem RQ5: SURVEY mastering one´s life What benefits and • According to you, what is self- emotional literacy what limitations do development training good for? How self-understanding young people see in resourcefulness did it serve you? resilience self-development • Whom could self-development training reflectiveness/reflexivity training? serve well, who could benefit from it? support • What kind of risks / limitations do you responsibility see in self-development training? values 270
empowerment INTERVIEW conflict • Which of your needs did the Basic change Synergy training meet? turning point Judgments • Which of your needs did the Basic Patterns Synergy training not meet? Something Self-loyalty that was lacking, missing for you in Spontaneity the program, approach, setting, follow Freedom of choice up...? Self-fulfilment • What did you learn in Basic synergy training, what did it bring you? • What would be the strongest example, an experience/situation as your own story from a training that represents it?
RQ6: INTERVIEW What benefits and • Which are the risks in ST regarding what limitations do young people´s growth and trainers see in self- development? development training? • What do ST offer to this target group? How could ST meet their needs? SURVEY congruence RQ7: • Basic Synergy training supported me self-esteem How do disadvantaged in developing my: self-esteem, trust young people managing emotions, mastering one´s life understand the impact emotional literacy • self-understanding, finding resources, self-understanding of self-development resilience, support resourcefulness training on their social network,responsibility,values,spontane resilience functioning? ity, reflectiveness/reflexivity • freedom of choice, self-fulfilment, support self-esteem, trust, responsibility • material/economic conditions, health values and well-being empowerment conflict • living environment, connection to change others, turning point • Intimate relationships, Family material/economic conditions relationships, individual´s social capital • Friendships, Education, life planning, health and well-being security, job/employment? living environment crime and harm experienced Self-perception • What was the biggest contribution of Connection to others this training to your life ( life situation, Intimate relationships life conditions) ? Family relationships • What impact had participation in BS Friends bring on how you see yourself? Support • What changes did participation in BS Education bring to your relationships? life planning • What changes did participation in BS ontological security
271
bring to your environment? health job/employment community INTERVIEW situation in society • How did this training affect your inclusion /exclusion perception / understanding of Access to information Judgments yourself, if in any way? Patterns • Which impact did it have on your Self-loyalty relationships (family, friends, Spontaneity intimate) and how? Freedom of choice • How did it affect your Self-fulfilment occupation/employment? social engagement • Which changes did it bring to your recreation leisure / free time/social activities, if problem-solving contribution any? growth • What were the concrete outcomes of belonging this training for you in terms of expectations decisions made or actions took right commitment after ST? empathy
INTERVIEW • What are the specific challenges of RQ8: young people living nowadays, 21st How do trainers century? understand the impact • What are the specific needs of young of self-development people living nowadays, 21st century? training on social • How do you perceive „social functioning of functioning“? What does it mean for disadvantaged youth? you? • Which elements of ST might have an impact on young people´s own potential and how? • Which elements of ST might have an impact on young people´s healthy relationships (in family, with friends) and how? • Which elements of ST might have an impact on young people´s leisure time and how? • Which elements of ST might have an impact on young people´s occupation/employment and how? • Which elements of ST might have an impact on young people´s community/society they live in and how? • Which elements of ST might have an impact on young people´s perception 272
of their position in life and how? • Which elements of ST might have an impact on young people´s problem- solving skills and how? • Which elements of ST might have an impact on young people´s competence at independent living and how? • From your own experience, which examples of an impact of ST on young people´s social functioning could you mention?
SURVEY participation: RQ9: • Basic Synergy training supported me economic, social, in culture, How do disadvantaged in: education and skills development, political and civic young people • Being interested in society, creating understand the impact community social entrepreneurship, volunteering, inclusion /exclusion of self-development participating in different forms of non- Access to information training on their formal education, Inequality participation? • peer education, joining in an limited social skills organisation/club, joining Interest in social environment • youth councils, parliaments, boards, Global engagement • campaigning activities, becoming a ICT participation civic engagement • member of political party/group, knowledge production taking part in elections, becoming philanthropy active in cultural activities, supporting social entrepreneurship human rights or global development, volunteering involving into environmental issues, Challenge • participating in international meetings Capacity • What was the biggest contribution of Connection this training to your involvement in non-participation tokenism society? citizen power • What changes did participation in BS shared decision-making bring to your social activities? participating in different forms INTERVIEW of non-formal education • How did it change your involvement / peer education participation in community/society? active in an organisation/club youth councils, parliaments, boards campaigning activities RQ10: INTERVIEW membership of political parties, unions, interest groups How do trainers • How do you understand the taking part in elections understand the impact „participation“ of youth? What is its local organisations aiming to of self-development place in society? improve the local community training on • Which elements of ST might have an cultural organizations participation of impact on resources and conditions for NGOs disadvantaged youth? young people´s participation and how? human rights or global • And which would be the examples of development an impact of ST on participation of climate change and 273
youth? environmental issues • How is „empowerment“ used in ST? political organisations or • How is „choice“ of a person perceived political parties support groups and practiced in ST? international meetings • What is the place of „self-perception“ in ST program? • What is the place of „motivation“ in ST program?
274
6. Measuring impact
7. Impact as analysed in this research
275
8. Numbers of interviewed young people by countries
276
9. The Framework of Disadvantage
In BRADBROOK, G. and Ed. (2008)
277
10. Participation Tree
In Sullivan, T. K. (2011)
278
11. Social functioning and social participation
In Tobin, M. C., Drager, K. D. R., & Richardson, L. F. (2014). Based on Schalock, R. L. (2004).
279
Acknowledgements
There are far too many to thank, as many people have contributed one way or another - some with a hug at the critical moment of possible giving up the whole idea of writing a thesis, some with an important reference to get inspired from. I will at least point out those who significantly and directly affected this work. Masaryk University Pavel Navrátil, my supervisor, for his incredible support over so many years, his ideas for improvements, lots of hours of discussing thesis and life and most importantly, encouraging me exactly when it was needed; Martina Jenčková and Daniela Jaklová-Střihavková, my dear PhD friends, for their shared struggles and resilience; Synergy connections Krisztina Győry for taking the first steps with me and sharing her experience and knowledge as well as time to support me on my trainer`s path; Kateřina Martínková and Lenka Maruniaková for creating the whole world of Brno Connected with me, and your pressious friendship and colleagueship; Norbert Hochstein, Panagiotis Mamouzakis and Tihomir Georgiev for sharing ideas, materials, energy of insiders and laughter; Marco Vlaming for contributing to my growth and fostering my courage and peace; Anca Clipa for her pure love and everlasting encouragement; Research journey All my respondents for your openness and trust! Sophie Goldingay for making my learning process in Australia possible and enjoyable; Diane Ashworth for her shared passion and inspiration for the same cause; Rojan Afrouz for her PhD companionship and valuable advices; Chele and Woz Barnes and Perry and Leanne Mills for becoming our beloved family! Friends and family Anna and Roman Chigirin, Lisa Krejčí, Mirjana Kovačević, Jana Valášková, Eszter Emília Bajkó, Oana Constantin, Paul Anton, Marietta Balázs, Madalina Darabana, Teodora Dureva, Agnes Horváth, Lubica Christophory, Ashley Valosek, Emma Boyd, Anna Marija Berzina, Madlen Nenkova and Ráchel Bílá – thank you, my dears friends and voluntary editors, for giving your knowledge and time as a present! Jitka Trutnovská for literally pushing me forward several times when I was considering quitting; Zuzana Gogová, my patient and compassionate supporter, for her listening and insights;
280
My parents for still being interested after years and my grandparents Anna and Anatolij Shevchenko for constant reminding and being most faithful fans; And finally, my greatest gift in this world, my husband, for his never-ending supportive humour, care and lots of love on the way. Thank you for simply believing in my intentions and efforts! And surely, our common greatest twin-gift J&R, for being so much fun and becoming the final kick to complete this journey.
Organisations involved Hereby I attach a list of organisations that supported me in this research by sharing it among the young people who they work with. Thank you for making this study possible!
Bulgaria Smokinya [email protected] Bulgaria Synergy Bulgaria [email protected] Croatia Syncro [email protected], Czech Republic Brno Connected [email protected] Greece Synergy Flow [email protected] Greece Break the Couch [email protected] Hungary Egyesek [email protected] Hungary Quality Impact [email protected] Lithuania Synergy Lithuania [email protected] Netherlands Olde Vechte [email protected] Romania Synergy Romania [email protected] Spain WeGo [email protected] Ukraine Ukrainian Youth Center [email protected]
281