Righting rewritings of the myth of Mentor: A critical perspective on career guidance mentoring

Mentoring is entering the repertoire of career guidance techniques as careers services prioritise socially excluded young people. This article explores the use of Homer's Odyssey as a source of definitions and legitimations of many current accounts of mentoring. Contrasting modern versions of Homer's myth of Mentor with the original, it draws on feminist and class perspectives to question the basis on which such myths are used to proclaim the origins of a very contemporary phenomenon. It identifies an emerging discourse of mentoring, a régime of truth which exerts control not only over the young people being mentored, but also over career guidance staff expected to act as mentors in new Personal Adviser roles

Engagement Mentoring for 'Disaffected' Youth: A new model of mentoring for social inclusion

This article presents a critical analysis of mentoring for social inclusion. It traces its dramatic international expansion as a tool of education policies in the 1990s, and identifies a new model, 'engagement mentoring', which seeks to re-engage 'disaffected' young people with the formal labour market, and to engage their commitment to dominant interests through shaping their dispositions in line with 'employability'. Mentors are treated as vehicles for these objectives, their dispositions also subject to transformation according to gendered stereotypes of care. The model is illustrated by a case study of engagement mentoring, and feminist readings of Bourdieu and Marx are used to relocate it within the socio-economic context from which it is usually disembedded. The article concludes that engagement mentoring constructs the habitus of both mentor and mentee as a raw material subjected to an emotional labour process

Problems with Bridging the Gap:the reversal of structure and agency in addressing social exclusion

The Social Exclusion Unit's Report Bridging the Gaphas had a major influence on the British government's policy towards socially excluded young people. This article argues, however, that the Report contains fundamental contradictions in its analysis of non-participation in learning and the solutions proposed. Despite appearing to re-instate a concern for the social, it locates the causes of non-participation primarily within individuals and their personal deficits. Yet it denies individuality and diversity by representing the socially excluded as stereotyped categories. In a flawed move, the Report presents non-participation not just in correlation to a raft of other social problems, but as cause to their effect. Deep-seated structural inequalities are rendered invisible, as social exclusion is addressed through a strongly individualistic strategy based on personal agency. At the same time, measures to enhance individual agency, notably the new ‘ConneXions’ service, are formulated within a prescriptive structural framework. Structure and agency are thus reversed in current English policy approaches. While such approaches will doubtless assist some young people, there is a significant risk that they may make things worse for others