‘Imagining otherwise’ or tinkering with the system?

Reay’s point is extremely poignant: she is calling for culture change and, short of a revolution in education, this is surely a must for both young people and staff. Cooper (2012) similarly calls for a radical shift in youth work to counter the current pressures imposed from a system driven by neo-liberal ideology (see also Chapter 1). Reay asserts that formal schooling is dominated by a target-led hegemonic regime, with a restricted valorizing of academic attainment, the like of which is articulated throughout this volume. Reay is not alone in her call for change; rather there is a groundswell of interest in alternative forms of education, including the work by Hope (Chapter 6, this volume, Hope 2012 and her involvement with Freedom to Learn1) and a Special Interest Group in Alternative Education (SIG) inaugurated at the BERA Conference 2014.2 This volume identifies important pedagogical practices, inspired by ways of working that put young people at the centre, informed by critical pedagogy, with the possibilities of transferring into more formal educational settings, often underpinned by youth work values (see Hope, Chapter 6, this volume, as an example). This chapter will explore how, when inclusion in decision-making is offered, sometimes the intent is undermined owing to the problematic nature of engagement between institutions and those they aspire to include. Whilst acknowledging that there are various reasons as to why this can happen, this chapter will focus on processes that impede ‘imagining otherwise’ (Hughes forthcoming); that is, being able to think beyond ‘what is’ to achieve revolutionary change