Primary schools in England may soon be asked to identify children at risk of future unemployment, following a recommendation by Alan Milburn, the former Labour minister. The proposal, reported on 7 August, aims to intervene early to prevent young people from becoming Neet (not in education, employment, or training). While the idea has support, readers responding to the Guardian have raised concerns about labeling and the need for systemic solutions.
Early Intervention vs. Labeling
Emad Rehman, a 16-year-old from Wallington, London, acknowledged that early intervention makes sense, noting that children who miss school often drift away later. However, he warned against attaching labels like “likely future Neet” to 11-year-olds based on poverty, absence, or home life. “Use those signs to offer tutoring, mentoring, and proper support, by all means. Just record the help a child needs, not the failure we expect from them,” he wrote. Rehman added that statistics are useful for governments to act but harmful when they become a verdict on an individual child.
Systemic Solutions Needed
Simon Gibbs, emeritus professor of inclusive educational psychology and philosophy at Newcastle University, argued that the proposal alone would be pointless and risk alienating marginalized families. He pointed to US research from the 1970s showing that children who attended nursery settings based on Piaget’s theories were, 50 years later, significantly more likely to have good health and employment. Those with different early years provision were more likely to be unemployed, imprisoned, or suffer from drug and alcohol abuse. Gibbs emphasized the need for systematic nursery provision to avert the “school-to-prison pipeline.”
Funding and Responsibility
Jane Berridge, a secondary school teacher in Leatherhead, Surrey, said the answer is not to give schools another underfunded responsibility. She recalled Sure Start, a former program that supported families in the early years, and suggested bringing it back to tackle the problem downstream. Stephanie Garrett, who taught in state primary schools for 20 years, noted that asking teachers to address societal problems is a common but insufficient solution. She shared a heartbreaking conversation with a boy who wanted to “get enough money to buy a job.” Garrett suggested adopting the Netherlands’ secondary education system, which offers different pathways for children, as a more holistic approach.
The proposal has sparked debate, but without systemic changes, readers argue, it may not solve the underlying issues of poverty and inequality that lead to unemployment.
