From Zero to Hero. Belonging and Re-enrolment in Education Among Young People Outside School

Abstract

This article investigates the process of re-enrolling young people who have dropped out of school. Drawing on an analytical framework that integrates perspectives on resilience and belonging, the study explores the potential of at-risk youth to overcome challenges and complete their upper secondary education. A crucial aspect of facilitating their reintegration is establishing a sense of belonging. The data comprise in-depth interviews and observations involving 41 young participants in a flexible learning arena over a period of three years. The analytical design is based on a thematic analysis, where questions mainly initiated the narratives from the participants themselves. The findings show that dropouts can be reintegrated into a flexible learning arena within the school system. Furthermore, this re-enrolment initiative acts as a catalyst, reigniting participants’ sense of mastery. However, the pivotal factor lies in creating an environment that fosters a renewed sense of belonging to peers and the school.

Keywords

Dropout flexible learning re-enrolment belonging resilience

Introduction

In Nordic countries, completing upper secondary school is considered a crucial milestone in transitioning into the labour market and adulthood.¹ In Norway, the standard duration for upper secondary school is three years, while vocational education and training (VET) takes four years. Students who fail to complete upper secondary school within five years or VET within six years are categorized as ‘dropouts’. Although perceived as an anomaly in public discourse, statistics show that nearly one out of five students do not complete upper secondary school within the normative time frame (Statistics Norway, 2023).²

High dropout rates, followed by the social and economic exclusion of young people, have sparked political and academic concerns aimed at reducing early school leaving in education and preventing the emergence of NEETs (neither in education, employment or training) (Meld. St. 32, 2021). Vogt (2017), however, mitigates this alarm associated with this situation, arguing for more patience with young people. His argument aligns with the findings of Bratsberg et al. (2019), who show that the dropout rate in Norway decreases by approximately 13 percentage points when comparing those who re-enrol and complete upper secondary education at the age of 25 versus those who have completed it at 20 years of age.

In the present study, I investigate the crucial prerequisites for successful re-enrolment among 41 young adults aged 16–24 who had returned to education after a shorter or longer period of time. The main question addressed is as follows: What is crucial for at-risk youth in overcoming personal and environmental challenges and successfully completing their upper secondary education? The aim is to describe how resilience and a sense of belonging can be re-established through a flexible learning arena within the school system.

The literature on re-enrolment primarily focuses on the subjective experiences of young people in relation to the process of returning to education (Bunting & Moshuus, 2017; Kindt & Reegård, 2021; McGregor et al., 2015; Ramsdal & Wyn, 2021; Ross & Gray, 2005). However, other studies emphasize institutional barriers, including the inclusion of young people with special needs (McGregor & Mills, 2012; Wilkins, 2011) or the experiences of teachers (Cavaco et al., 2021).

There are compelling reasons to be concerned about those who permanently drop out of secondary education, as well as those who temporarily disengage before returning to school: for the individual, it is emphasized that completing their education both strengthens their self-esteem and has a significant impact on their transition to work (Aaltonen, 2012; Albæk et al., 2015). From a macro perspective, the population’s level of education affects the national economy and contributes to the financing of public goods, such as schools and welfare (Barr, 2020). The timing of their re-enrolment holds significant implications for their lifelong income, perceived self-worth and economic sustainability of the welfare state (Bratsberg et al., 2020). Therefore, it is perceived as crucial to find interventions that enable young people who are outside of school to return and successfully complete upper secondary education. As a result, there is a need for knowledge regarding the factors hindering or promoting re-enrolment among young people who experience temporary stopouts as opposed to permanent dropouts (Rosen et al., 2019).

Analytical Framework and Existing Literature

There are many reasons behind early school leaving. In accordance with the research on re-enrolment, there are two strands of literature, making a distinction between institutional and individual factors (Mawn et al., 2017; Rumberger, 2003). Institutional factors have received particular attention, with research focusing on school-related factors (Lagana, 2004), family influences (Parr & Bonitz, 2015) and residential segregation (Metzger et al., 2015). On the other hand, researchers have also emphasized individual aspects, such as human capital (Struffolino & Borgno, 2021), health disparities (Faas et al., 2018), differences in expected educational outcomes (von Simpson, 2016) and resilience (Schoon, 2006). Additionally, it is relevant to learn from the young people who have dropped out of upper secondary school themselves. Some of these individuals highlight a lack of support and access to material, academic and social resources (Ramsdal & Wynn, 2021, 2022); furthermore, it has been shown that young people who drop out of school often differ from their peers in terms of mental and social challenges (Ramsdal et al., 2018).

What, then, do we know about existing initiatives that promote re-enrolment? One strand of the literature deals with initiatives aimed at empowering individual young people and their encounters with a seemingly demanding school system (Kindt & Reegård, 2021; McGregor & Mills, 2012; McGregor et al., 2015). These have focused on stress, illness, feelings of inadequacy, and, thereby, the need for individual adaptations. McGregor and Mills (2012) and McGregor et al. (2015) have conducted studies on the experiences of young people who have been excluded from mainstream schools and have instead entered alternative schools outside the traditional educational system. These young people often had negative experiences with school authorities and pedagogical practices in their original schools. The new initiatives offer a wider range of opportunities aimed at making them more robust and giving them a feeling of mastery.

Another strand of the literature focuses on initiatives that can be linked to institutional change. From this perspective, upper secondary dropout rates are interpreted as a symptom that something is not working within the education system. This understanding aligns with broader concerns about individualization and risk in knowledge societies (Bauman, 2000; Beck, 1992; Furlong & Cartmel, 1997). Furthermore, studies within this framework have shown that promoting self-esteem through positive self-statements can have a negative effect because a focus on positive inner motivation implies rising ambitions and making comparisons with others, which can lead to some individuals feeling worse (Madsen, 2020; Wood et al., 2009).

The primary objective of the present article is empirical in nature. I utilize ‘resilience’ and ‘belonging’ as sensitizing concepts (Blumer, 1954). Furthermore, the review of the literature emphasizes the importance of considering both individual and institutional factors, as well as understanding their interplay.

Resilience

Resilience is a term frequently employed by psychologists in studies exploring why certain individuals—despite facing adversity—manage to overcome challenges and achieve positive outcomes (Bottrell, 2009; Breda, 2018; Hupfeld, 2010; Waxman et al., 2003; Schean, 2015). However, in the current article, a more sociological understanding of the concept is adopted, which also allows us to consider belonging as a resource—a dimension that is often weak or absent for many young people. According to Ungar (2011), resilience pertains to how individuals and groups have the capacity to navigate in ways that mobilize available psychological, social, cultural and physical resources in ways that are perceived as meaningful and promote well-being.

Furthermore, a pertinent conceptualization relevant to the current article is provided by Schoon (2006), who identifies three risk factors that play a pivotal role in the transition from youth to adulthood. The first risk factor relates to individual attributes: resilient youth often possess special skills, experience fewer persistent behavioural problems and engage in more hobbies and social activities compared with their more vulnerable peers, despite socioeconomic hardships (Masten et al., 2008). Belief in one’s ability to pursue education and the motivation to do so are also crucial for success. The second factor focuses on a stable, supportive family with an interest in the child’s education and values promoting further education (Ganong & Coleman, 2002; Schoon, 2006). The third factor encompasses the wider social context and local community, emphasizing the importance of peers and teachers who recognize, encourage, and support children (Bottrell, 2009; Ungar, 2011). A sense of belonging in the school environment, social cohesion among peers, and community support are essential factors.

However, it is relevant to highlight some of the criticisms directed at the use of the concept of resilience. One notable criticism is that the perspective is excessively individualistic (Breda, 2018; Garrett, 2016; Joseph, 2013). From a sociological standpoint, resilience theory is criticized for placing excessive emphasis on psychological factors while downplaying the role of socioeconomic factors and class differences (Guanglun, 2020; Langenkamp, 2010). This critique has spurred a more sociological understanding of resilience. Schoon (2006) underscores the significance of the social context in comprehending different life chances as a result of different socioeconomic backgrounds and variations in values, as crucial contextual variables that explain educational disparities and trajectories.

This implies that we consider risk factors that make re-enrolment challenging for some young people while also emphasizing that the lives and pathways of young people in and out of education must be understood as a combination of factors related to the individual, as well as the social relationships and institutional landscape in which they find themselves. A concept for capturing more sociological explanations related to resilience is to address ‘belonging’. In the present article, this concept is valuable when connected to resilience because it can shed light on aspects that are critical in a sociological understanding, linked to social cohesion and, consequently, how at-risk youth can reconnect with peer groups and institutions, such as schools and the workforce.

Belonging

The perspective of belonging appears highly relevant for gaining insights into the central conditions related to how young people with interrupted educational trajectories can reconnect with school and the social environment within it. Harris et al. define belonging as ‘about membership, rights and duties, forms of identification with groups or other people and with places, and the emotional and social bonds that come from feelings of being part of a larger whole’ (2021, p. 3); the authors point out that belonging is subjective and that affective factors play a crucial role in the experience of recognition, inclusion and exclusion.

Among the influential contributors to the understanding of belonging is Yuval-Davis (2006, 2011), who distinguishes between social location, identification and emotional attachment and ethics and political values. With these three components, it becomes clear that belonging primarily addresses social and identity-related communities. This is further supported and developed by Anthias (2006, p. 21), who argues for the importance of empirical analyses focusing on the practices and processes to gain insight into the significance of belonging.

An example of such practices is a study (Hegna, 2019) of 23 young people in VET regarding the importance of being an apprentice. The determining factor is a shift in their learning identity from narratives of being a student in school, which is characterized by poor educational experiences that are related to relationships with teachers and peers, often leading to academic failure, to becoming an apprentice and to being part of a firm. According to Hegna, the apprenticeship narrative includes ‘feelings of belonging, equity to peers, pride, independence, and being an adult’ (2019, p. 62).

Despite the relevance of Hegna’s study, there are certain significant differences. One notable distinction is that her work particularly focuses on situated learning and learner identity, drawing references from seminal works such as Lave and Wenger (1991). They introduced the concept of ‘situated learning’ to highlight the strength of learning within an established workplace. Their argument revolves around the importance of learning occurring in context, emphasizing that this type of learning is not individual but happens through what they refer to as a ‘community of practice’. The significance of the contextual and relational aspects is relevant to the study I am undertaking.

Although this perspective is highly relevant to my article, the primary objective of the present article is not to align itself with the pedagogical research tradition. Instead, it aligns with youth research that emphasizes meaning and belonging (Furlong, 2015; Harris et al., 2021). The latter also encompasses collective identities and larger social communities but differs in that the learning process itself is not the primary focus.

The Institutional Context

A dominant narrative throughout Western Europe, including the Nordic countries, is that education is essential for the sustainability of society, as well as, for individual self-realization and well-being (Meld St. 32, 2021). Moreover, education is perceived as a fundamental means of mitigating societal inequalities. As a result, education policy has become a prominent and enduring topic within the realm of Norwegian politics.

Since 1994, there has been a right for all individuals to enter higher education, which was supplemented in 2022 by the right to complete upper secondary education. The prevailing narrative is that young people should attend public schools and complete upper secondary education within a normative time frame. Although the Norwegian system is generous in providing educational opportunities, flexibility within the system is relatively low. Currently, about 98% of young people between the ages of 15 and 16 start upper secondary education (Statistics Norway, 2023). The question arises as to why a significant proportion of them drop out before completing or graduating.

There are certain characteristics of the Norwegian education system that are important to highlight in trying to understand dropout rates and take action to reduce them within the Norwegian institutional context. The cornerstone of the system is the universalistic principles in Norway, which are often referred to as the unified school: everyone should have the opportunity to receive an education, and the content should be the same, regardless of the school attended. Education is free for all. The ambition is to provide equal educational opportunities for everyone, irrespective of their place of residence, gender or parental income. Furthermore, the proportion of students attending private and independent schools (which receive public funding) in Norway is low, both in primary and upper secondary education, at 4% and 7%, respectively, compared with 15% in Sweden and 17% in Denmark.

Data and Methods

The methodological design of this study was grounded in thematic analysis, a strategy that enables a blend of both deductive and inductive approaches (Braun & Clarke, 2022). In this study, I integrated elements from both approaches during data collection and subsequent analysis. Drawing from existing literature, I harboured preliminary notions about certain themes, such as experiences in school, peer relations, family situations, and school motivation, before commencing the interviews. Simultaneously, the interview guide remained flexible and receptive to unforeseen themes. While I anticipated some aspects based on prior literature, the openness of the guide allowed for the emergence of novel themes during the course of the study. This iterative process of learning along the way not only introduced new themes but also unveiled the relevance of some initially hypothesized themes. Thus, the design organically assumed an inductive character. The learning process, guided by both deductive and inductive elements, played a pivotal role in identifying themes such as belonging (to peers and institutions) and resilience within a social context. This contribution provided valuable insights into significant patterns within the data.

The present study is based on qualitative data. In addition to conducting observations by participating in various activities, I have primarily relied on qualitative group interviews with young people as the most important source of data. In total, I conducted qualitative interviews with 41 young people over a span of three years: 12 were interviewed in 2017–2018, 14 in 2018–2019 and 15 in 2019–2020. The results were impressive considering the statistics on dropout rates in upper secondary school: Nearly 75% of the young people who participated in these three school years completed their education with low absenteeism, passed their exams and either continued their education or entered apprenticeships.

Each interview lasted approximately two hours and included three to four participants. While I had a predefined set of interview questions, in line with the principles of thematic analysis, and as I gained a deeper understanding of both the youth and the learning environment, the interview guide was expanded and modified. Group interviews offer the advantage of enabling participants to collectively contemplate the questions, fostering discussion and the sharing of experiences. In several interviews, one young person would reference a specific incident, prompting others to reflect and contribute to the conversation.

All the group interviews were transcribed and analyzed using NVivo, a valuable tool in the qualitative research process. NVivo aids in managing, coding, and categorizing complex data based on themes or patterns.

The young people recruited to the flexible learning arena were encouraged to apply for a place themselves. The responsibility for follow-up was assigned to a service called ‘follow-up service’ (OT), which collaborates with the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration (NAV) to provide employment, education or suitable activities for young people who have dropped out of school and employment.

I met with all the participating young people and participated in various collective activities and gatherings. Through observation and participation in activities, I gained several insights into the routines and the activities, not least the relations between the teachers—or the adults, as they referred to themselves—and the youngsters. This direct participation also allowed me to establish trust with the young people, which was crucial for the subsequent interviews. Prior to meeting anyone, I was introduced as a researcher interested in learning more about these young people and their experiences at school.

Direct observation was a valuable source of information about the young people. Engaging in one-on-one conversations while doing practical activities together also provided rich information. Each of these encounters was summarized in a separate document, making these observations and unstructured conversations an important part of the data collection process.

In the individual conversations and group interviews, I drew inspiration from Thomson et al. (2002). In addition to the themes that emerged, I placed significant emphasis on eliciting the young people’s narratives and understandings. In the group interviews, I focused more on their experiences related to the transition from an excluded position to establishing a new sense of connection. This topic was less sensitive and more suitable for sharing and reflecting on together. I ensured variation in terms of gender and background during the selection process. However, it should be acknowledged that group interviews can hinder the emergence of sensitive topics. I was mindful of this throughout, which was possible because I had gotten to know the young people individually before conducting the interviews. I also conducted interviews with all the teachers or adults in the flexible learning arena at least three times each over the three-year period.

The study’s implementation and writing of the present article have taken ethical considerations into account. All the young people and adults were informed that I was a researcher and was present, observing them in their daily lives. They were given a choice of whether they wanted to participate in the research or not. Furthermore, I ensured that the participation of informants was based on informed consent by providing information letters. Parents signed for participation in cases where the informant was under 18. In the transcriptions, I maintained anonymity by altering the names in the quoted references. I have also excluded information that could potentially identify employees and other individuals. Furthermore, the data collection was approved by the National Committee for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities (NESH).

Resilience and Belonging within a Flexible Learning Arena

The following subsection explores how the young people expressed their experiences with re-enrolment. This presentation is structured in alignment with various resilience factors and will subsequently underscore the responsive nature of flexible learning environments and their role in fostering a sense of belonging. Initially, belonging was a response directed at the individual, but it is highly relevant to clarify how the school worked to facilitate a new sense of belonging, which has systemic implications.

Individual Attributes

In my exploration of resilience, I pointed out that individual attributes were the first of three components associated with risk. From the empirical material, the focus was particularly on personal health and learning difficulties, both of which need to be addressed or accommodated to increase individuals’ chances of returning to school.

Regarding personal health, there was variation among the young people. For many, it revolved around varying degrees of social anxiety. Others had specific diagnoses that could pose challenges in social relationships and learning situations, often in combination. As Geir, an 18-year-old boy, described it, these were challenges he had been struggling with for many years: ‘I struggle a lot with social anxiety. I have been suffering for as long as I can remember’. In conversations with Andreas, it emerged that what had started as a social challenge eventually affected his ability to keep up in class: ‘When I sat there dreading recess, I didn’t absorb much of what the teacher said’ (Andreas, 21). His words illustrate how dropout can be a gradual process, with multiple factors reinforcing one another. Andreas initially did not have learning difficulties, but over time, he fell behind academically. Therefore, getting him back to school did not primarily require additional instruction but rather a need for social reinforcement or the ability to function in alternative student communities.

It is important to note that, among those I interviewed who returned to education, they were not among those with the most severe health-related challenges. There was a selection, even among them. NAV and the follow-up service (OT) recommended young people they were in contact with and whom they believed could cope to apply for a place. It is not unlikely that this encouragement itself, which essentially meant that adults had faith in them, had a positive effect on their self-esteem.

Simultaneously, the participants’ health challenges played a pivotal role in influencing their previous encounters with the education system. For many, this was an enduring experience that left lasting emotional wounds impacting their self-assurance and self-worth. Numerous young people expressed feelings of anger and frustration, frequently attributing these sentiments to external factors. These factors encompassed their own families, although, for most, the prevailing narrative revolved around the perception that ‘the school failed to comprehend them’, as succinctly summarized by one of the teachers. Consequently, this cohort developed a narrative in which the school was perceived as an impediment rather than a facilitator in their journey towards adulthood.

In many ways, the experiences among the young people I interviewed seemed to align with general trends among youth in Norway. Based on Ungdata, which includes all young people attending school in Norway, there has been an increase in the proportion of those with negative school experiences: between 2010 and 2022, there has been a six-percentage-point decline in the proportion of students who enjoy school (Bakken, 2022, p. 18). Pressure and stress from school constitute significant factors affecting the mental health of young people. A large proportion, especially among girls, reported experiencing mental health issues (in 2022, this applied to 11% of boys and 29% of girls in the second year of upper secondary school; Bakken, 2022, p. 35). Therefore, many young people who complete and pass upper secondary school face challenges in managing their own health, while for some, it becomes too demanding. This can be related to varying degrees of health-related challenges, but individuals also have different levels of resilience, and their involvement in families and social relationships plays a role in how they face these challenges. While most young people have been socialized to believe that completing their education not only serves as a steppingstone in the transition from school to work but also forms the basis for well-being, there were, however, some who challenged the normative premise of completing education:

I have struggled a lot with anxiety and meeting people. When you have been at home for a while, you become, at least I did, more uncertain. Do they really want me to be there? I thought they saw me as a stranger, and everyone asked about everything. At the darkest moments, the school didn’t feel like an answer; it was perhaps more of a symbol of the Problem with a capital ‘P’. (Trine, 22)

From the resilience perspective, the main question is what compensates for the various risk factors. Health is an important factor, but for these young people, certain measures were taken to get them back on track. The first was to give them a sense of mastery, something most of them lacked during their time in school.

The method aimed to give the young people a new sense of mastery, motivation and belonging through trips and activities. However, it was not just about doing something extreme, like long mountain hikes or fishing trips in the far north of the country. The key was a combination of doing something different that they could succeed in, enjoy and, most importantly, be proud of in the presence of their peers. One of the informants, Thea (23), said, ‘To fish the biggest cod I’ve ever seen does something to you. It was cool. When I manage this, I can do most things if only I get the chance’.

Although it is clear that experiences like these provide immediate fun and a sense of mastery, it is not equally evident whether these experiences are transferable and can pave the way back to school. When asked, some of the young people argued that these were experiences they would carry with them going forward. The adults in the flexible learning arena agreed and stated that experiences of mastery, breaking barriers they did not think were possible, represent a stepping stone in the process.

I think it is of great importance that they succeed in something. The feeling that they can, that it is possible if they put the effort into trying. That is just what we try to facilitate, but obviously, this is just the start. (Adult, employee)

Additionally, trips and activities can serve as a quick and smooth way to form groups and promote friendships. Another function of these activities is to make young people feel proud. In the interviews, it became apparent that some of them were concerned about how they were perceived by others, especially their old-school friends. At the same time, there were several who expressed that the new sense of belonging was limited and did not apply to all arenas. Some, not all, said they did not want to return to their old school classes. Having a job gives them a social reputation, particularly because work represents money and, consequently, freedom. Furthermore, economic status can be translated into social status, at least to some extent. Importantly, while some seemingly did not care, several informants expressed that they did not want to be perceived as victims or losers.

I really care about what other people think, and I have to admit, I am partly embarrassed. I did not think that I would be part of a special initiative for youth before. If you treat people you are struggling with … I will use ugly words here, but if you treat someone as if they are losers, they become losers. (Tina, 20)

The interviews revealed that many of the informants found it challenging to face the fact that their former classmates had moved on. This finding suggests that the subjective experience of mastery and self-esteem has a relational dimension, meaning that well-being is partly influenced by external encounters.

Supportive Family

All the young people had families, but the level of family functioning during their upbringing varied, resulting in many of these young people being in vulnerable life situations. This primarily revolved around three different family challenges, often occurring in combination: parents who had their own challenges with health, substance abuse, unemployment or personal crises, such as divorce. One of the teachers put it this way: ‘My impression is that many of the young people here are sort of caught in their parents’ struggles to get their own lives on track’. For some, their parents’ challenges resulted in frequent moving, leading to a lack of roots in the places they had lived. Others had taken on responsibilities throughout their lives that they may have been too young to handle, such as caring for younger siblings. Examples of this came from Erik and Line:

I think we moved seven times from when I was 7 to 17. I got a bit tired of it and never really made proper friends, either at school or outside. I withdrew into myself and gaming instead. (Erik, 18)

My mom had to work a lot extra. I managed okay in school, at least for a while. However, I also had the task of shopping and cooking for my little sister. Eventually, that became more important than anything else. (Line, 21)

However, for the families these young people grew up in, it was not just about parents having their own problems. Similar to Lareau’s (2011) contribution on how class and parenting are culturally conditioned, one aspect was the extent to which parents were able to help their children with homework, but more significant were the differences in how parents talked about school. These are understandings, narratives and interpretations that, according to Lareau and others, are passed down between generations.

I’ve always been told that school wasn’t for me. My mom has some education, but my dad was a dropout, too. It’s actually incredible that I’ve started again, he, he, he. … (Erik, 13)

Erik did indeed have parents with low education levels. When asked about his memories of dialogue with the school, it appears to have been minimal as far as he knows. For example, he did not remember his parents attending any parent-teacher meetings, but they did attend the student conferences, which Erik found ‘rather embarrassing moments from his upbringing’. Andrine (18) tells a different story. She struggled with learning difficulties, and her experience was that her parents and the school worked together to find solutions. They tried various approaches, but ‘there was nothing they could do to make me not have dyslexia anymore’. When asked, the teachers also acknowledged that there are clear differences in how engaged parents are. ‘Unfortunately, it’s hard not to think that this has a lot to do with the parents’ own school experiences’, says Cathrine, one of the teachers, before adding, ‘that’s exactly where we come in’. Even though the young people were of legal age, they still needed supportive adults around them. The job was to provide the young people with a secure framework, one that was secure enough for them to actually explore who they were: ‘I place my hand on their shoulder and stand there. It means they can move forward, but I don’t retreat. They can’t move backward because I’m there to catch them’.

Meeting the students like this required a lot from the teachers. They had lunch together every day. Sometimes, they met the young people on weekends, and most importantly, all the teachers called the young people in the morning and occasionally had to drive to their homes, wake them up, and get them to school. As Erik, one of the leaders, stated, ‘We have to be both mom and dad at the same time. Often, I feel like we’re doing the tasks they should have done’. A significant topic in families—and one that was important for the young people I interviewed—was meals. As one of the activities, the young people and adults ran a café. This was part of the culinary and restaurant education, but was more practical-oriented and resembled a regular café more than many other schools. However, the kitchen also played an important role in creating a family-like setting for the young people and the teachers. The teacher in the kitchen, a former chef at a Michelin restaurant in Oslo, taught them to make fantastic dishes. More importantly, food served less obvious functions: making the participants proud of what they were doing and bringing the young participants and teachers together.

The food they prepared was of high quality, comparable to what could be served in restaurants, which made the students proud. Consequently, they took pictures and presented the results on their private profiles on social media. Moreover, aside from making the participants proud, food also served as a means of bringing everyone together. The chef in the kitchen emphasized the importance of food in fostering connections. Every day, they gathered around a shared meal, resembling a family table where both the young participants and the teachers ate together, engaging in conversations about anything that crossed their minds. The communal meal had a unifying effect, and in many ways, they felt like a family. As a researcher, I also had the opportunity to join these meals on several occasions and experienced firsthand how they created a sense of warmth and togetherness, akin to gathering around a comforting campfire.

The Social Context

The third factor of resilience is the broader social context, including peers and teachers. A recurring theme among my interviewees was their encounter with a system that failed to recognize their identities, burdens from past experiences and a lack of knowledge or interest in their future aspirations. The qualitative data clearly demonstrate the importance of self-confidence and self-esteem. Several participants mentioned that their self-esteem had been damaged to some extent because of persistent bullying during primary and secondary school. They lacked a sense of belonging to a peer group and consequently lacked trusted friends.

When you’ve experienced as much shit as I have, you start thinking shit about yourself, too. That’s what’s so weird. (Maria, 19)

The school is often depicted as an institution characterized by individualization, where learning is the primary goal and individual grades serve as measures of abilities and achievements. Similar to individual sports, achievement is tied to competition and student rankings. Students benefit from individual learning and tests and even prefer fewer classmates in terms of time spent with the teacher. Several interviewees reported experiencing social exclusion in the past, which led to the perception that their former classmates would prefer their absence.

Of course, it hurts when you realize that the other students are happy when you do not show up. (Adam, 21)

I noticed that the teacher wasn’t particularly pleased when I came to class. I was simply told that I didn’t have to come. I really think he meant that the day would be more pleasant for him if I stayed out of school. (Monica, 24)

For many of the young participants, the challenge was to create inclusion in practice, as they felt that the school was ‘full of words about inclusion, but little happened’. They felt excluded from important communities, with neither their classmates nor their teachers showing concern, and they found it difficult to grasp the purpose of education. However, the flexibility they experienced allowed them to combine school with elements from the working world. One crucial aspect was how collaboration became more tangible and experiential when connected to task completion. They achieved this through activities such as cooking, as mentioned earlier, and their practice of running a café. As Tina stated, ‘No-show is not an option when my obligation is to serve the food the others have prepared in the kitchen all day’. Some of the others added that the difference between the classroom and what they did there was that ‘we actually feel and see that the others are needed. It’s not just something we say or sing about in all those songs about inclusion’. This exemplifies belonging as a practice. More importantly, in this context, it elucidates how this practice highlights belonging as both an individual experience and one rooted in institutional-level solutions and practices. Furthermore, it demonstrates how belonging among peers is characterized by reciprocity, which is pivotal for the transformation from individual learner identity to collective learner identity.

Conclusion

Dropout rates have been a persistent challenge for several decades, and finding effective solutions has proven difficult for politicians and academics alike. Therefore, it is relevant to explore what can be done to address this issue to examine factors that appear to be particularly important, considering both individual and institutional levels, here based on the literature on dropout causes and re-enrolment.

The present article is based on experiences among young people who shared their experiences when returning to schooling. The main contribution is the empirical illustrations of the different ways in which young people were made resilient through institutional solutions that fostered a sense of new belonging. The crucial aspect was that the young people not only re-established new social bonds with friends, but also with the institution and the experience of being in school. The latter is pertinent to discussions about the conditions for establishing a collective learning identity. The at-risk youth in the present article showed that a new sense of belonging to peers and the school can be achievable in a flexible learning arena within the school system.

The individuals I interviewed were all students at a school, following a school trajectory. However, a significant part of their flexibility lies in the fact that they take a bit longer and engage in practical activities. Nevertheless, practical work is not an end in itself but rather a means to provide mastery, pride and a sense of belonging in practice. The crucial aspect here is that the institutional response goes beyond addressing individual problems and incorporates a flexible learning environment within the school, thereby facilitating a systemic adjustment that supports belonging and a new collective learning identity among the re-enrolees.

The findings have significant implications for the ongoing discourse surrounding the potential and constraints of implementing educational policies in various schools and learning environments. These results underscore a notable tension between the ideals associated with a standardized school system and universal solutions, on the one hand, and the necessity for adaptability and more personalized educational pathways, on the other hand. The central contribution of the present article lies in its ability to demonstrate that it is indeed possible to promote flexibility and nurture a sense of belonging within the framework of the public school system.

The concept of belonging, as outlined by Harris et al. (2021), proved instrumental in gaining insights into what young people in this flexible learning environment themselves identified as crucial upon their return to engagement in learning. Thematic analysis reveals the subjects they emphasized in their narratives, highlighting that belonging encompasses peers, adults, and the school institution. Moreover, belonging was experiential; they needed to feel that they were essential to solving concrete tasks.

This study complements the works of Lave and Wenger (1991) and Hegna (2019) by demonstrating that this sense of belonging can be established within the framework of the school system. Furthermore, the findings resonate with the extensive literature on communities of practice within the domain of education with a particular focus on the comprehensive school system in Norway.

Based on the presented empirical material, it further emerges that belonging was a crucial precondition for resilience among the young people included in the study. The latter highlights the utility of linking belonging and resilience, while the former suggests that resilience can function as a sociological concept to understand how young people can reconnect to groups and institutions through community, in accordance with Schoon (2006) and Ungar (2011).

A crucial point to note is that addressing dropout issues goes beyond enhancing individual resilience through mastery experiences. Many at-risk youth face challenges related to the school environment, teachers, and the educational system, making the term ‘push-out’ more accurate than ‘drop out’. Applying the study’s findings emphasizes the need for institutional changes in flexible learning environments. This involves various activities, with a key focus on the relationship between adults and youth, emphasizing the importance of belonging as a prerequisite for learning, not just an outcome of attending school.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to thank Anna Hagen Tønder and Kristoffer Chelsom Vogt and members of the Youth section at NOVA, OsloMet for valuable comments to earlier drafts of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: the Norwegian Research Council under Grant 283408 (Comeback Kids).

Notes

References

Aaltonen

(2012). Subjective orientations to the schooling of young people on the margins of school. Young, 20(3), 219–235. https://doi.org.10.1177/110330881202000301

Albæk

, Asplund

, Barth

, Lindahl

, von Simson

, & Vanhala

(2015). Youth unemployment and inactivity: A comparison of school-to-work transitions and labour market outcomes in four Nordic countries (TemaNord 2015:548). Nordic Council of Ministers.

Barr

(2020). Economics of the welfare state. Oxford University Press.

Bauman

(2000). Liquid modernity. Polity Press.

Bakken

(2022). Ungdata 2022. Nasjonale resultater. NOVA Rapport 5/22. NOVA, OsloMet.

Beck

(1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. Sage.

Blumer

(1954). What is wrong with social theory? American Sociological Review, 19(1), 3–10.

Bratsberg

, Nyen

, & Raaum

(2019). Adult vocational qualifications reduce the social gradient in education. Social Inclusion, 7, 95–109. https://doi.org.10.17645/si.v7i3.2026

Bratsberg

, Nyen

& Raaum

(2020). Economic returns to adult vocational qualifications. Journal of Education and Work, 33(2). https://doi.org.10.1080/13639080.2020.1722988

10.

Braun

, & Clarke

(2022). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. Sage.

11.

Breda

A. D. V.

(2018). A critical review of resilience theory and its relevance for social work. Social Work, 54(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.15270/54-1-611

12.

Bottrell

(2009). Understanding ‘marginal’ perspectives: Towards a social theory of resilience. Qualitative Social Work, 8(3), 321–339.

13.

Bunting

, & Moshuus

(2017). Young peoples’ own stories about dropping out in Norway: An indirect qualitative approach. Acta Didactica Norge, 11(2), 20. https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.3182

14.

Cavaco

, Alves

, Guimarães

, Feliciano

, & Paulos

(2021). Teachers’ perceptions of school failure and dropout from a gender perspective: (Re)production of stereotypes in school. Educational Research for Policy Practice, 20, 29–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-020-09265-7

15.

Faas

, Benson

M. J.

, Kaestle

C. E.

, & Savla

(2018). Socioeconomic success and mental health profiles of young adults who drop out of college. Journal of Youth Studies, 21(5), 669–686. https://doi.org.10.1080/13676261.2017.1406598

16.

Furlong

(2015). Transitions, cultures, and identities: What is youth studies? In Woodman

& Bennett

(Eds.), Youth cultures, transitions, and generations (pp. 16–27). Palgrave Macmillan.

17.

Furlong

, & Cartmel

(1997). Young people and social change: Individualization and risk in late modernity. Open University Press.

18.

Ganong

, & Coleman

(2002). Family resilience in multiple contexts. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64, 346–348.

19.

Guanglun

M. M.

(2020). Sociologising resilience through Bourdieu’s field analysis: misconceptualisation, conceptualisation, and reconceptualisation, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 42(1), 15–31. https://doi.org.10.1080/01425692.2020.1847634

20.

Harris

, Cuervo

, & Wyn

(2021). Thinking about belonging in youth studies. Palgrave.

21.

Hegna

(2019). Learner identities in vocational education and training – From school to apprenticeship. Journal of Education and Work, 32(1), 52–65. https://doi.org.10.1080/13639080.2019.1593330

22.

Hupfeld

(2010). Resilience skills and drop out prevention. A review of literature. Scholar Centric.

23.

Joseph

(2013). Resilience as embedded neoliberalism: A governmentality approach. Resilience, 1, 38–52. https://doi.org.10.1080/21693293.2013.765741

24.

Lagana

(2004). Protective factors for inner-city adolescents at risk of school dropout: Family factors and social support. Children & Schools, 26(4), 211–220. https://doi.org/10.1093/cs/26.4.211

25.

Langenkamp

A. M.

(2010). Academic vulnerability and resilience during the transition to high school: The role of social relationships and district context. Sociology of Education, 83(1), 1–19. https://doi.org.10.1177/0038040709356563

26.

Lave

, & Wenger

(1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.

27.

Madsen

O. J.

(2020). Livsmestring på timeplanen - rett medisin for elevene? [Life skills on the timetable - the right remedy for students?] Spartacus.

28.

Masten

A. S.

, Herbers

J. E.

, Cutuli

J. J.

, & Lafavor

T. L.

(2008). Promoting competence and resilience in the school context. Professional School Counseling, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2156759X0801200213

29.

Mawn

, Oliver

E. J.

, Akhter

, Bambra

C. L.

, Torgerson

, & Bridle

(2017). Are we failing young people not in employment, education or training (NEETs)? A systematic review and meta-analysis of re-engagement interventions. Systematic Reviews, 6(1), 16.

30.

McGregor

, & Mills

(2012). Alternative education sites and marginalised young people: ‘I wish there were more schools like this one’. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 16(8), 843–862.

31.

McGregor

, Mills

, Riele

, & Hayes

(2015). Excluded from school: Getting a second chance at a ‘meaningful’ education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 19(6), 608–625. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2014.961684

32.

Meld, St. 32. (2021). Ingen utenfor – En helhetlig politick for å inkludere flere i arbeids- og samfunnsliv [No one left behind - A comprehensive policy to include more people in work and society] .Arbeids- og inkluderingsdepertementet.

33.

Metzger

M. W.

, Fowler

P. J.

, Anderson

C. L.

, & Lindsay

C. A.

(2015). Residential mobility during adolescence: Do even ‘upward’ moves predict dropout risk? Social Science Research, 53, 218–230.

34.

Parr

A. K.

, & Bonitz

V. S.

(2015). Role of family background, student behaviors, and school-related beliefs in predicting high school dropout. The Journal of Educational Research, 108(6), 504–514. https://doi.org.10.1080/00220671.2014.917256

35.

Ramsdal

, & Wynn

(2022, January 28). Attachment and school completion: Understanding young people who have dropped out of high school and important factors in their re-enrolment. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/wsj8h

36.

Ramsdal

G. H.

, Bergvik

, & Wynn

(2018). Long-term dropout from school and work and mental health in young adults in Norway: A qualitative interview-based study. Cogent Psychology, 5, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2018.1455365

37.

Ramsdal

G. H.

, & Wynn

(2021). How young people who had dropped out of high school experienced their re-enrolment processes. International Journal of Educational Research, 106, 101732. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2021.101732

38.

Rosen

J. A.

, Warkentien

, & Rotermund

(2019). Stopping out versus dropping out: The role of educational resilience in explaining on-time completion of high school. American Journal of Education, 125(1), 259–287.

39.

Ross

, & Gray

(2005). Transitions and re-engagement through second chance education. Australian Educational. Research, 32, 103–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03216829

40.

Rumberger

R. W.

(2003). Dropping out. Why students drop out of high school and what can be done about it. Boston Harvard University Press.

41.

Schean

(2015). Current theories relating to resilience and young people. A literature review. Victorian Health Promotion Foundation.

42.

Schoon

(2006). Risk and resilience: Adaptations in changing times. Cambridge University Press.

43.

Statistics Norway. (2023). Gjennomføring i videregående opplæring. [Completion of Upper Secondary education] https://www.ssb.no/utdanning/videregaende-utdanning/statistikk/gjennomforing-i-videregaende-opplaering

44.

Struffolino

, & Borgna

(2021). Who is really ‘left behind’? Half a century of gender differences in the school-to-work transitions of low-educated youth. Journal of Youth Studies, 24(2), 162–185. https://doi.org.10.1080/13676261.2020.1713308

45.

Thomson

, Bell

, Holland

, Henderson

, McGrellis

, & Sharpe

(2002). Critical moments: Choice, chance and opportunity in young people’s narratives of transition. Sociology, 36(2), 335–354.

46.

Ungar

(2011). Community resilience for youth and families: Facilitative physical and social capital in contexts of adversity. Children and Youth Services Review, 33, 1742–1748.

47.

Vogt

K. C.

(2017). Vår Utålmodighet Med Ungdom. [“Our Impatience with young people”] Tidsskrift for Samfunnsforskning, 58(1), 105–119. https://doi.org.10.18261/.1504-291X-2017-01-05

48.

Waxman

H. C.

, Grey

J. P.

, & Padron

Y. N.

(2003). Review of research on educational resilience. Centre for Research on Education, Diversity and Excellence.

49.

Wilkins

(2011). Re-entry programs for out-of-school youth with disabilities: The need for a broad range of options. National Dropout Prevention Center for Students with Disabilities, Clemson University.

50.

Wood

J. V.

, Perunovic

W. Q.

, & Lee

J. W.

(2009). Positive self-statements: Power for some, peril for others. Psychological Science, 2009(7), 860–866. https://doi.org.10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02370