Cultural Diversity Literature week 4 (Street culture), Universiteit Utrecht

Hoe je dit kan lezen:
Zwart: informatie of vragen vanuit de 'reading guide'
Blauw: mijn uitwerkingen op de vragen
Rood: aanvullingen op mijn uitwerkingen n.a.v. de werkgroep

[note: enkele afbeeldingen bij deze samenvatting zijn door de WorldSupporter redactie verwijderd wegens vermoedelijke inbreuk op het auteursrecht]

Reading guide Cultural diversity 2021, week 4.
Two articles relate to this week’s main topic: street culture. The article of Vonorov and Singer relates to one of the central concepts of this course: Kağıtçıbaşı’s model

Chalhi, S., Koster, M., & Vermeulen, J. (2018). Assembling the Irreconcilable: Youth Workers, Development Policies and “High Risk” Boys in the Netherlands. Ethnos, 83(5), 850–867. doi:10.1080/00141844.2017.1362452

Chalhi, Koster & Vermeulen. This article is an ethnographic research from which the findings show the challenges youth workers face as ‘brokers’ between different worlds: the world of social welfare policies and the world of youth living in underprivileged areas. The authors write about the concept of positive youth development, the role of youth workers as brokers and it paints a good picture of the practice and field of youth work in Utrecht. Based on the article, you should know what positive youth development is, what challenges youth workers may face and importantly: how can you relate this to the article of Iliass el Hadioui?  à brug slaan tussen straat cultuur en domein van beleid/instituties zoals school; zorgen dat jongeren niet de andere 2 domeinen (traditioneel thuis en feminien school) verlaten om nog slechts op straat te zijn

1. What is the main question?

how youth workers in a Dutch city bring together seemingly irreconcilable worlds: the development policies of their organisations and the state on the one hand and the practices, needs and aspirations of young people on the other

2. In what way is the question answered?

To demonstrate this, we begin by outlining the history of youth work and the notion of ‘positive youth development’ in the Netherlands. We then introduce two youth workers and describe two situations in which they have to cope with opposing interests and values. First, we show a situation in which some of their clients start ‘shopping’ – looking around for other workers who may better serve their needs. Second, we show what happens when some start ‘hunting’ (‘jagen’) – engaging in criminal practices that clash with the development policies of youth work. The research is based on 18 months of multi-sited ethnographic fieldwork, in 2012 and 2013, on the interface between youth and organisations carried out in an underprivileged neighbourhood in Utrecht.2 Data were collected through participant observation and informal interviewing. This article focuses on the interactions between youth workers and youth through over a period of seven months.

3. Which theories and key concepts are described?

Keywords: Brokerage; frontline work; youth; the Netherlands; youth workers

Shift from term frontline workers to other terms because focus more on to teach citizens responsibilites for themselves and rely less on state support

4. What are the main results and or conclusions?

Looking at both situations from the perspective of correspondence, we are able to characterise youth work along two lines. First, we see it as relational in the sense that the youth workers are constantly negotiating their position vis-à-vis the boys and their fellow youth workers. In the shopping story, they engage with the boys and with their colleagues. In the hunting case, they deal with the boys and with each other. In all their engagements, they are navigating between the demands and policies of their organisations and the state on the one hand and the practices and desires of the youth on the other. They do not force the policies upon the youths. Neither do they integrate the two ‘worlds’. Rather, they correspond to the youth and the events in their lives. Indeed, as anthropologists Otto and Smith aptly argue, ‘correspondence refers to being in accordance with the flow of events, to moving forward with people in the pursuit of their dreams and aspirations’ (2013: 17). Their relationship with the boys is vital to their ability to do their work in a meaningful way. Second, youth work is an ongoing process of correspondence, as seen in youth workers’ struggles with the demands and policies they are enjoined to implement. The boys’ criminal activities clashed with the developmental policies Joost and Nathan are employed to implement. Joost and Nathan are supposed to teach the boys to participate in society and to refrain from crime, but they also must maintain a relationship with the boys as a trusted adult. Facing this dilemma, Joost and Nathan chose to act in a highly deliberative and cautious manner, seeking out a position that would indeed correspond to both the policy values and the values of the youth. Correspondence, we argue, is not the enactment of previously defined structures or meanings, but is, as Ingold (2013) states, constantly in the making. Correspondence is improvisation (Otto & Smith 2013: 18). The hunting case demonstrates the improvisational character of the brokering done by youth workers, where Joost and Nathan contemplate their possible lines of action. This puts them in a rather autonomous position regarding their organisations. Later, in an interview, Joost’s superior told us that he found Joost very hard to manage, as he did not stick to the rules. Joost, in turn, complained to us that he felt hampered by the rules of his organisation. These brokers assemble the irreconcilable: youth socialisation and crime prevention policies and the (sometimes criminal) practices of youth. In so doing, two different ‘worlds’ converge through the practice of brokerage, yet without becoming fully integrated; the assemblage is always incoherent, unstable and incomplete (Collier & Ong 2005). We have demonstrated how the youth workers’ practices resonate with the development goals of their organisation on the one hand and the practices, needs and aspiration of youth on the other. In so doing, they create and reproduce their own position with a certain level of autonomy and room for manoeuvre. While the policies portray the youth workers as frontline workers, implementing policy at the street level, our study demonstrates how they constantly correspond to ongoing events, actions and aspirations. They engage with the world in which they  work, without integrating all its elements into a harmonious whole. Corresponding with the youth on the one hand and their organisation on the other hand, they connect the different components of the youth work assemblage that is made up of multiple actors, institutions and resources at different levels and scales. The youth workers, as brokers, play a crucial role in bringing together the many elements of such assemblages.

5. How is the article related to the theme of the week? The theme of the course? To lectures and other articles?

The theme of this week is street culture. This article relates to that as it describes the way youth workers deal with street culture in a system where this is not approved. Its related to the theme of the course because street culture is a subculture.

El Hadioui, I. (2011). Hoe de straat de school binnendringt. Amsterdam: van Gennep. Hoofdstuk 7, (pp. 79-104) beschikbaar op Blackboard. English translation available on Blackboard

El Hadioui. This is a chapter of El Hadioui’s book on street culture and school. Central concept of El Hadioui is the pedagogical triangle: the relation of home culture, street culture and school culture. In this chapter the relation of street and school culture, street and home culture and home and school culture is presented. It is important to know the main characteristics of each corner of the triangle, the similarities and differences between the corners, and to understand the concept of pedagogical mismatch.

De aard en verhouding van masculiene straatcultuur en traditionele thuiscultuur is complexer van aard dan verhouding met feministische schoolcultuur. De waarden zijn namelijk hetzelfde (eer, respect, trots), maar invulling erbij is anders. Geen gedragsmatige mismatch, maar emotionele mismatch. Loyaliteitsconflict tussen thuis en straat.

De verhouding tussen feminiene schoolcultuur en traditionele thuiscultuur is meest complex. In beide domeinen wordt functionele ontwikkeling van kind en leerling onderschreven. Tegelijkertijd is het zo dat de schoolcultuur qua pedagogisch klimaat een reflectie is van de dominante middenklassencultuur. In Nederland is dat geen traditionele cultuur. De mismatch doet zich dan ook voor op het niveau van communicatief handelen. De nadruk op assertiviteit en zelfexpressie in de expliciete communicatievorm conflicteert met de nadruk op prudentie en zelfbeheersing in de impliciete communicatievorm.

Een pedagogische mismatch kan leiden tot mentale en fysieke verwijdering. Jongeren die ook de primaire straatsocialisatie meekrijgen weten zich op een gegeven moment geen houding meer te geven op school en thuis.

Voronov, M., & Singer, J. A. (2002). The myth of individualism-collectivism: A critical review. The Journal of Social Psychology, 142, 461-480. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224540209603912

Vonorov. Kagitcibasi’s model is widely used an has often been critized. Vonorov and Singer represent some of the criticism. Next, they represent some alternative views to understand characteristics of societies and the behaviour of people in it. Criticism: the IC model fit doesn’t fit all societies. There are alternative explanations. Paragraphs Why do collectivists …; What ever happened …; and Within-country variability … Critisism: methodological issues of research on the I-C model. Paragraphs The Hofstede project ….; Questionable usage ….; and I-C as a dependent …. Alternative views: Paragraphs I-C and social organization…; The special case ….; Ecological Determinants ….; and The theory of trust .

1. What is the main question?

What are the flaws of the dimension individualisme-collectivism and what can be another dimension to do cross-cultural research?

2. In what way is the question answered?

In the present research, we identify several flaws that have plagued I-C research, and we briefly touch on the related concept of independent-interdependent self-construal (Markus & Kitayama, 1991), to illustrate the concept’s vulnerability to criticism stemming from its assumption of cultural variability in I-C. Finally, we suggest dimensions that may be used in place of I-C and assess, in more general terms, the implications of the construct’s weaknesses for cross-cultural research.

3. Which theories and key concepts are described?

Keywords: alternative dimensions, critical assessment, cross-cultural psychology, individualism-collectivisrn

4. What are the main results and or conclusions?

We have reevaluated the dimension of individualism-collectivism and its utility in cross-cultural research. The foregoing discussion suggests that the I-C dimension is inadequate. A given country’s I-C score tells one little beyond how a certain group of people (who may or may not represent the general population) scored on a measure of a vague concept that is associated with several other concepts; the overall significance remains uncertain. The present review of the I-C research has also illustrated a larger issuethe uncomfortable relationship that psychology has had with culture. Having finally realized the futility of culture-blind research, psychologists still sometimes find themselves tempted to reduce culture to a collection of ideas, attitudes, and behaviors (Hermans & Kempen, 1998). Hence, one finds the excessive reliance on dichotomies, such as I-C. Researchers’ discomfort with cultural issues is also reflected in the frequent confusion of cross-cultural and cross-national research. Much of the so-called cross-cultural research published in the leading psychology journals and texts is, in fact, cross-national research. With today’s unprecedented exchange of information between countries and continents, one may no longer assume the correspondence between geographical and cultural boundaries. As Hermans and Kempen (1998) argued, “As long as cultures (e.g., Japanese, Balinese, and those of indigenous people) are conceived as localized, cultures are described and investigated without any recognition of the influences that the global has on the local and vice versa” (p. 11 15). Despite the present criticism of I-C, dichotomies have their place in crosscultural research. For instance, several constructs (e.g., cooperativeness-competitiveness and agency-communion), currently subsumed under the heading individualism+ollectivism, would be a great deal more informative, because those concepts correspond to specific aspects of behavior and are more easily operationalized and measured. Cross-national and cross-cultural research in collective efficacy would shed more light on cross-national variation in social organization. Research on trust, as reviewed in the present study, has yielded some extremely fruitful results. In addition, studying concepts originated by non-Western scholars, such as amae (Doi, 1981) andface (Ho, 1994). cross-culturally and crossnationally may illuminate important cross-cultural-cross-national variations in dealing with in-groups as opposed to out-groups. The main lesson from the weaknesses of the I-C research is that a reductionist approach to studying culture (just like studying anything else) is simply inadequate. Researchers must aim to capture the complexities of human behavior and understand its interaction with the larger socioecological context. Mapping societies along the axes of a single dimension, be it I-C or any other dichotomy, is not enough.

5. How is the article related to the theme of the week? The theme of the course? To lectures and other articles?

The theme of this week is street culture. This is related to the article, as the distinction between individualistic and collectivistic values is visible in school vs street culture. It’s related tot he theme of the course as as the distinction between individualistic and collectivistic cultures says something about the difference of cultures.