Staff reflections on which youth the program wishes to recruit

In the week after the selection meeting I conducted an interview with the director about the recruitment process in order to expand on my observations and interpretations of the first interaction between staff and youth at the information meeting as well as the selection meeting with the contact teacher. When asked about the form of the information meetings Byron reflects on his intention for this event as to communicate a narrative about being “visual, short and sweet” with a concrete emphasis on what’s to gain in form of credits, stipend and letter of recommendation. When I asked why he was throwing fruits as part of a name game he answered that he sees this as an interaction that both has an element of surprise, that – as also commented by the teacher also present in the room – can be interpreted as openly breaking the norms of social interaction in a school setting and creates attention through bodily movement – and a way to get an interaction with the youth with elements of play, joy and presence. Another aspect of the role the director was communicating was his invitation to be called by his first name, and not by surname as still is the practice in the American school system.

The director sees these aspects of the interaction with the youth at the information meetings as a way of ‘tone-setting’ from the very day one, especially in practicing communication in speaking to the youths’ decision making – specifically to decide whether to apply or not to apply – as well as in inviting youth to call back if they change their minds about applying – as stated in the phrase that also was said at the meeting: “This is a youth empowerment program – it’s your choice …”.

92

Regarding the details around which youth the program wants to work with, concretely why the program prioritizes low-income and non-white youth, made Byron expand on this and its wider structural and systemic connotations with poverty:

There's just the straight economics, but everything that comes from that the potential for substance abuse, for physical violence or the lack of education of the parent to support the student and their professional or academic goals .. maybe the lack of resources of clothes or something to get a job .. you need to wear nice clothes to your interview .. or lack of food on the table that hinders your success as a student .. these are the effects of poverty and your success as a young person .. It's understood that black, white, latino, asian, mixed .. every who is low income will interact with that set of challenges .. and because of the history in this country and because of systemic inequity we do add extra weight to students of color who apply and prioritize them .. they have an edge over a white equivalent.” [Interview with staff person B, March]

Byron also unfolds how the selection process in dialogue with the teacher can be very excruciating because most applicants fit all of the criteria. One specific dilemma in this process can be about a youth that has a very poor attendance in high school and the question is whether the program is the opportunity that can learn the youth the skill of showing up. This awareness is very present among the staff that each year has to reject a large number of youth that apply, but also feeling a responsibility to help the youth deal with this ‘No’ in as Byron formulates it “giving context to the decision so that the ‘no’ not just is added to a long list of rejections”. In relation to this Byron tells me a narrative that exemplifies how negotiations between staff and youth also can be the history of which youth ends up being hired:

I had one student who after he got his ‘no’ the first time said that he was very bummed and the second time he got a ‘no’ he actually cornered me in the school and it was like 'I applied last year and I why didn't I get it this year?? .. And I told him .. I gave him the honest truth..

'Your teachers said you're bringing drugs into the school and you're smoking weed in the school .. and that you right now can't be trusted to be in a program like ours and not bring it down .. and I didn't say that to dismiss him, I said it as a challenge .. I said, here's the deal: If you can turn around the situation in school .. I will guarantee you a position next year ..

especially after you have applied for 3 years .. that has cred ... So he did .. and I did .. and he was great .. and he loved the program, and I see him around town .. and he says 'Okay farmer B, what's up?' “ [Interview with staff person B, March]

93

An interpretation of this narrative could point to the interesting aspect that the becoming hired in the program has such an appeal to the youth that it motivates him to stop bringing drugs and smoking weed in the school and thus becomes eligible to be hired.

Participating in different key events in the outreach and recruitment process as well as doing an ethnographic interview with the program director at this stage produced data and insights into staff’s central intentions and challenges when it comes to decide who to work with, which youth to hire.

The process also shown meb examples of how staff concretely seeks to interact with the youth, as well as how the program was communicated and how the approach to do ‘empowerment’ was explicated as the youth’s own decision to apply – or not to apply.

94