Fit with ETE-type Programmes

Where youth development programmes 'fit' relative to other programmes seeking to support young people is an important policy issue. Where they fit relative to ETE programmes is of particular interest for MSD, where there sometimes seems to be a lack of clarity regarding the purpose of the two broad classes of programmes as well as a perception of overlap or even potentially duplication.

In considering the matter of 'fit', it is important to distinguish between different types of youth development programmes. Youth development programmes vary significantly in terms of their target participant group, their goals and intended outcomes, and the nature and the intensity of activities. Some programmes target quite high-achieving and/or well-supported young people, seeking to provide additional developmental or 'enrichment' opportunities. Some seek to provide developmental opportunities for young people who are 'doing reasonably well' but may benefit from some additional opportunities; Outward Bound courses can fall into this group. Volunteering programmes also provide useful developmental opportunities for young people, and are often taken up by those who would be deemed 'doing well'. Others provide low intensity or one-off developmental activities to young people generally, such as the MYD con-funded Stage Challenge.

Intensive, structured youth development programmes, such as NZCC and YSC, at least as conceived in this review, are a different category of youth development programme. They are targeted at young people who lack basic/foundational qualities and competencies, and seek to establish a core platform of practices, competencies, values and so forth that the literature suggests is ultimately necessary not only for successful adult economic and social participation but also seemingly for successful participation in training, education and employment. As proposed in this review, NZCC and YSC would also seek to connect young people with resources in their natural environments to support positive engagement and activity over the longer term.

Viewed in this way, structured youth development programmes like NZCC and YSC sit lower on a 'staircasing' framework than ETE programmes and complement, rather than replicate, ETE activities. A portion of graduates of NZCC and YSC programmes, for example, would be directed into the kinds of programmes being proposed under the newly-approved Youth Guarantee policy.¹

An examination of evidence on the efficacy of youth employment assistance measures provides some support for the position outlined above. Amongst others, Martin and Grubb conclude that ETE-related programmes have had limited or modest effects on youth's labour market prospects.² To support this conclusion, they cite a substantive review where the reviewers concluded about the US-based studies "...we believe that neither the experimental or non-experimental literature provide much evidence that employment and training programmes improve US youths' labour market prospects".³ Drawing on the European literature, these same authors conclude there is "...no consistent indication whether these interventions are more or less effective for youth, nor whether more disadvantaged youth benefit more or less from these programs".⁴

Poor attitudes towards work amongst disadvantaged youth have been identified as "...a major factor in explaining the dismal record of special youth measures".⁵ Martin and Grubb argue, however, that it is difficult for ETE programmes to influence attitudes in ways that improve the employment and earnings' prospects of disadvantaged youth. They suggest the use of mentoring programmes to help overcome negative attitudes towards work rather than simply relying on traditional ETE programmes.⁶

While they focused specifically on mentoring programmes, the key thread of Martin and Grubbs' argument is that additional intervention is required in order to support young people into employment, beyond that traditionally included within an ETE framework. Youth mentoring is fundamentally a youth development intervention and the youth development literature suggest there are a range of youth development activities that can achieve the kinds of attitudinal, value and behavioural shifts needed to support employment participation. While mentoring can have positive effects under certain conditions (and is ultimately a cheaper form of intervention), it is also more narrowly focused and provides far fewer of the developmental opportunities associated with a good structured youth development programme. For that group of young people who lack basic habits around rising/routine, for example, an intensive structured youth development programme seems more likely to teach or instil productive habits than a 'once-a-week' mentoring relationship.

Given the inability of ETE programmes to adequately respond to the needs a certain portion of young people present, well-designed and well-delivered structured youth development programmes - targeted at the right young people - represent a potentially valuable contribution to the overall effort to help young people transition into productive adulthood.

Footnotes

¹ Soc Min (09) 9/2 refers

² Martin, J. P. and Grubb, D (2001), What works and for whom: A review of OECD countries’ experiences with active labour market policies. Working Paper 2001:14. Paris: OECD.

³ Heckman, J. J., Lalonde, R. J. and Smith, J. A (1999) cited in Martin and Grubb, 2001, op cit, p18

⁴ Ibid

⁵ Martin and Grubb, 2001, op cit, p20

⁶ Martin and Grubb, 2001, op cit