ABSTRACT
At the turn of the century discourses about young people, including those which dominate the academy, focus on the “problematic” rather than the “normal” and construct a youth “collective” as undisciplined and rebellious (Humphries, 1981), as muggers and weapon-carrying hooligans (Cotterell, 1996), and as being “out of control” (Coffield et al., l986; Griffin, 1993). Young urbanites appear as “potential criminals”, arousing large-scale suspicion among adults (Scott, 2000). Such discourses, however, have helped to shape policies which have had a considerable impact on young people’s lives. Prefacing other, nationally-expressed concerns about youth apathy, low educational achievement, declining post-16 educational and vocational participation, they have contributed to the rhetoric of “raising standards” and “long-term social exclusion” (Pearce and Hillman, 1998). In turn, this has prompted a UK national social inclusion policy agenda for young people which has deployed the Social Exclusion Unit, the Excellence in Cities Education Initiative 11-16, Gifted and Talented and Learning Mentor Strands, Excellence Challenge Fresh Start, the New Deal Initiatives l6-24, and the Criminal Justice service. This policy agenda, accepted with great alacrity but little public debate, has been centrist and authoritarian in its approach (Dale et al., 1990; Jeffs, 1995).
