Socially Haunted? Exploring Young People’s Views on Education and Marginalization

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper sets out to use the concept of social haunting as a way of exploring the intersections of aspiration and marginality in  post industrial region of the UK. It offers evidence from one component part of five waves of qualitative data collection from engagements with 11 young men. The paper asserts that this is part of a doctoral study.

While the paper is likely to eventually be a useful addition to the literature, it needs work in terms of justification, but especially both data provision and a more in depth discussion of relevant scholarship at the start and end of the paper.

To begin, Section 1.1 should be after the current 1.3 and should feature a much more elaborate discussion of the research on de-industrialised communities that uses the concept. The Simpson and Simmons edited book mentioned at the end offers a way in here, and a summary and critical engagement with the chapters in that book would be very welcome as a starting point. There is no literature mentioned here on aspirations and working class communities - this is sorely missing, especially because the title and the abstract each mention aspiration as if it were going to be a central feature if what follows. Some of the material used at the end could feature here but so too could  e.g. St Clair's work on aspirations in Scotland and Evans and Roberts' work in the South of England. There is lots of such material and it is needed.

A second strand of literature also entirely absent is the literature on class and masculinity. I can see from this paper that the author will not want to re-work the angle to make it about masculinity but there is an absolute requirement to recognise the eleven men as gendered beings with gendered experiences and aspirations. This necessarily requires at least some discussion of literature on working class young men in post industrial settings in Britain - and definitely some discussion of Michael Ward's (2015) work on the South Wales Valleys, Richard Gater's (2023) work in Sociology (and also in the Simpson and Simmons book) also on South Wales, Steven Roberts' (2018) work on young men in the South East, and Anoop Nayak's (2006) work on the North East. All of these in different ways will strengthen the paper because while they do not use the concept of social haunting they all tackle similar issues of men's working futures in and after a changing economy. Adding in this work will not only strengthen the paper but also present an opportunity to frame the gendered nature of social haunting as a useful advance on these literatures.

 

The results section requires the addition of more dat and I would suggest an entire new theme on aspiration, as is promised in the title and abstract. The current section on the data delivers only on a discussion of perceived marginality. It does not in my view address, 'their future aspirations and the role of Further Education in it', as set out in the abstract'. The future is literally absent from the analysis of data, in terms of a theme and the word itself.

It is further unclear why the paper tells us in the last part of the methods that it was coded according to Bourdieu's concepts but then the data analysis section itself does not use these ideas, instead pivoting back only to Messiou.

These all indicate the need for a major re write - but there is plenty of space to do it. The paper is short and can be made much better by better attending to and being located in the right the scholarship and better using the concepts.

 

 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Generally fine

Author Response

Many thanks for the extremely helpful review and constructive comments. Please see the attached document for evidence of our revisions and actions taken.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

The issue of the manuscript is very interesting (the phenomenon of ’socially haunted’). The used methods and the qualitative way is appropriate. The place of the research is suitable for the analysis of the given concept and the features of the respondents too.

The theoretical part contains the required elements – the description of the concept, the description of the location and the post 16 educational system in England. The presentation of the methodology is detailed and the reference list is numerous.

To sum up, in my opinion this is high-quality paper, but I have got few remarks to improve it.

-        some elements seem to be missing for me – e.g. the specific attitude toward school and education of the young people in disadvantageous situations.

-        if the key notion is the ’marginalisation’ in the research, the theoretic part has to contain this phenomenon too. One direction of the analysis based on the theory of Bourdieu - these elements can be described too in the theoretic frames.

-        we can see the core elements of the concept but I am wondering if there are any similar analyses or not? What can we know about the application of the ’social haunting’ in social sciences? The authors may sum up this in 1.1. I can see some details in 4.2. but in my opinion this fits into the theoretical part or into the relevance of the paper.

-         I can not see the results of the second cycle of coding and the results of the forms of capitals clearly. Perhaps the author(s) have/has to more highlight what type of results belong to these approaches.

-        Formulation of research questions may the paper more guided.

-        The authors have to refer to the limitations of their research.

-        Perhaps the authors have to use more quotations.

-        I am wondering what are the differences and similarities between the ecological/political judgement of the desindustrialisation process during the Thatcher era and the contains of the ’social haunting’?

Author Response

Many thanks for the extremely helpful review and constructive comments. Please see the attached document for evidence of our revisions and actions taken.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have engaged throughly with the suggestions. I believe it to be a much improved paper. 
I have just one minor comment, which relates to the point on page 14 where the authors clarify that their participants are not concerned with demise of jobs of masculine character, but with jobs themselves more broadly; aspirations for non-masculine jobs follow suit. This point appears more tightly in lockstep with arguments by Roberts 2018 rather than Ward per se. The latter describes change more in line with the Nayak thesis while Roberts and also Gater 2023 much more vividly capture and try to make sense of the loosening grip of masculine ideals on job participation. 

Author Response

Many thanks for the suggestion. As requested, we have now revised the end of the section on masculinities (bottom of page 13) to include reference to Roberts (2018), rather than Ward.