Keywords

Introduction

The aim of this article is to describe and analyse the importance of recognition in school career guidance counselling, based on counsellors’ own descriptions of how they work with this category of young people. Attention is primarily directed to the importance and value that the interviewees attribute to competencies and aspirations established outside the Swedish context, and how they relate to perspectives on education, work, professions and the future shaped in these contexts. What significance are they assumed to have for the career development (in the broad sense) of the counselled person in Swedish working life? What is their short and long-term significance, and what didactic strategies are developed to deal with them? The empirical material of the article is collected from interviews with career guidance counsellors who work mainly, but not exclusively, in the guidance of young adults, and the analysis is based on qualitative data.

The theoretical focus of this chapter is the concept of “recognition”, and the adherence of this principle in the design of career guidance counselling practice. Focus is set on the recognition of competencies and aspirations, but I will also pay attention to other aspects of the principle of recognition will also be, as the chapter also describes the plurality of meaning attached to it. In many ways, recognition could be seen as essential for the fulfilment of integration and inclusion. In the theoretical tradition that stems from the philosophical anthropology of Hegel (Honneth, 1995), recognition is precondition for social integration. Denoting a fundamental interpersonal reciprocity and sociality, recognition is held to inevitable for the development of social identity and community. In reverse, misrecognition is held to be a social pathology and a cause of suffering, conflict, and, hence, disintegration (McQueen, 2020).

Hence, it could reasonably be said that the study of the prospects for recognition in the career guidance counselling setting also highlights the prospects for a reciprocal including process in the transition from school to work (or further education). The relation between recognition and inclusion will be continued below, in a longer yet tentative discussion of the concept of recognition, with particular attention to its importance in career counselling activities. The article begins, however, with a brief description of the content and objectives of career counselling. The introductory section of the article concludes with a description of the study’s methodology and empirical material.

Study and Career Counselling

The Swedish National Agency for Education’s Allmänna råd för skolans vägledning (2013) states that career guidance counselling is a pedagogical activity that aims to provide pupils with the prerequisites for dealing with issues relating to the choice of education and vocation. It is a comprehensive task that pupils have to tackle in a relatively short period of time, in a pedagogical activity that is rarely scheduled or given significant time resources. The wording is general but clear and describes the core content of the counselling. Pupils should, as far as possible, learn to choose their education and vocation independently. The “intended learning outcomes” of the counselling are thus broad – to give pupils introductory, general knowledge of how the education system works and what options are available given the supply and demand of the labour market, and to teach them to identify different courses of action and consider the consequences of these options, in order to decide as independent as possible.

The counsellor thus plays a central role in the education system. They guide pupils through a maze of options, possibilities, difficulties, rules, procedures and reservations. For most pupils, the “systemic landscape” of educational institutions and the labour market is new territory, and the need for guidance is great, both at the compulsory school level and the upper-secondary school level. Newly arrived students, with a short history in the receiving country, have an even greater need for guidance in this terrain (Yakushko et al., 2008; Sundelin, 2015), as the makeup of education and educational institutions varies considerably across countries and continents, as does the demand for labour, the content of different vocations and the forms of recruitment.

With a focus on the value of knowledge, skills and experience for an individual’s further career development, some of the goal conflicts and paradoxes that counsellors face in their work also come to the fore. In particular, there is a recurring goal conflict in the practice of career counselling (Matsson, 1984), namely whether and, if so, how the interests of the individual should be reconciled with the demands and wishes of the labour market and working life during the counselling work. The frequent divergence between the interests of the labour market and those of the counselee has often been highlighted and discussed in policy materials and other texts describing the goals of career counselling. In recent decades, the strongest tendency in Swedish educational policy and counsellor training has been to give priority to the interests of the individual, for both pedagogical and ethical reasons (Lovén, 2015). However, even if policy and pedagogy point in the same direction on this issue, the goal conflict is nevertheless alive and evident in the practice of counselling at educational institutions. There are often calls for counselling to take the interests of the labour market more into account; particularly at the local level (Lundahl & Nilsson, 2009). It is such practical conflicts that are highlighted below. However, the focus will not only be on the conflict between the interests of individuals and those of the labour market. In the analysis of these conflicts, the principle of recognition will be the primary focus.

Recognition

The concept of recognition will be used in this article as a “sensitising concept” (Blumer, 1954). It has been given a deliberately vague definition and draws attention to expressions that describe or question the relevance of skills and meaning-making established at a distance from Swedish contexts, and relates them in a theoretical framework based on justice as fairness. The deliberately vague definition establishes a polyvalent understanding of the term, and draws attention to all the expressions in the interview material that directly or indirectly discuss the skills and meaning-making in question, as well as their institutional management within the counselling framework.

In present-day ethical-philosophical accounts, the concept of “recognition” generally has two central dimensions, one normative and one psychological. If you recognise another person because they have a particular characteristic or quality (e.g. an independent, autonomous person), you are not just recognising that particular characteristic or quality. Recognition also implies that you commit yourself to having a positive attitude towards the person who exhibits the characteristic in question (e.g. because she is free and equal to others). But recognition also has a psychological side. Many theories of recognition argue that such an act is necessary for a person to develop a functional social identity (cf. Taylor, 1994; Honneth, 1995); we are dependent on affirmation from other individuals, and from society as a whole (McQueen, 2020).

Being a polyvalent concept, recognition has a somewhat varied scope among the philosophers and educators who highlight its importance. The object of recognition varies to some extent between the theories advocating the principle. For example, Charles Taylor (1994) highlights the importance of recognising the meaning-making and morality that is particular and specific to a group or individual. This becomes important in the context of the politics of difference, where the recognition of a minority’s worldview, beliefs and ethos – what is often described by the term “culture” – strengthens their position as full-fledged citizens. The fabric of culture is central to the individual’s identity formation, Taylor argues; it is there that the notion of self and of being a self among others is established and shaped. If the meaning-making of the individual and the group is relegated to a second-rate position and assigned a lower value, they may develop a distorted (negative) perception of themselves, their agency and their activities (McQueen, 2020). In line with what was said by way of introductions, Taylor states that such acts of misrecognition cause suffering, conflict, and, in the end, disintegration (McQueen, 2020), and he advocates inclusion without demands for assimilation.

The object of recognition has a broader scope in Axel Honneth’s (1995) formal ethics, in which the general conditions for a good life are stated, focusing on the social conditions for human self-realisation (cf. Heidegren, 2002). Drawing on Hegel’s philosophy, Honneth postulates that human beings have a general need for love, justice and solidarity, and that these needs can and should be recognised within three corresponding social spheres – the family, the state and the civil society. The family can provide love, the state can establish status as a citizen and legal subject, and in civil society deference and respect are shown. In this chapter, recognition in the civil society is most important. During the conditions of modernity, Honneth claims, esteem and respect in the civil society includes esteem for skills, achievements and activities. Until proven otherwise, they should be regarded as a benefit to society as a whole, even if they are established in a distant community of practice. And his is not only a matter of neutral tolerance, Honneth (1995) points out. The principle of recognition also prescribes consent, encouragement and assistance (cf. Heidegren, 2002).

Although the civil society by definition is located outside the institutional sphere, it could be claimed that this particular attitude fits in educational institutions, where encouragement, assistance and the development of competencies are among the core activities. And the concept of recognition is well established in the history of pedagogical philosophy, in which it prescribes a particular ideal approach on the part of teachers/educators in their relationship with the student – the capacity to identify and encourage the abilities and possibilities of the students, above all their potential for self-formation. In this process, the reflective capacity of the student is held to be the foundation for a self-reforming dynamic and the development of autonomy (Björk & Uljens, 2009).

The relationship between pedagogy and recognition really requires a longer and more detailed account, but there is no space for such in this introductory section. But it is important to mention a central paradox that Björk and Uljens (2009), among others, have highlighted: in the pedagogical context, the principle of recognition can lead either to an affirmation of what the students/individuals are and know (their actuality), or of what they can become and learn in and through schooling and teaching (their potential). Different doctrines of recognition have different “objects” of recognition, but Björk and Uljens (2009) emphasize that some of them they are qualitatively different, and that both of the abovementioned aspects should be attended to in pedagogical practice. In particular, they claim that recognition should be subordinate to the pursuit of learning (cf. Sandberg, 2013).

The term “recognition of prior learning”, RPL, denotes a procedure in competencies and knowledge established in distant and/or informal contexts is identified and attributed a value (Andersson & Harris, 2006). The basic idea is parallel to the ethics of Taylor and Honneth: a previously established instance of meaning-making should be confirmed and attributed a value, and constitutes a reason why the individual is assumed to be able to contribute to the common good. However, the act of validation is surrounded by a host of conditions – professional qualification requirements, third party (patient and client) interests, and other criteria for valid knowledge. In the latter case, the focus is not always solely on practical suitability but also on social suitability (Jenkins, 1986), and it has been argued that the validation process’ pursuit of standardisation and criterion fulfilment has worsened the conditions for recognition, rather than the other way around.

Following the philosophical anthropology of G.W.F. Hegel, it could be said that recognition is fundamental for social inclusion. Above all, Hegel’s anthropology draws attention to inclusion in three specific social spheres – the family, the state and the civil society (Honneth, 1995). Thereby, it diverges from many present-day policy accounts of social inclusion, above all liberal or neoliberal (Silver, 1995; Levitas, 1998) ones, in which inclusion into work-life and the labour market is foregrounded (Schierup et al., 2015). It is also important to note that the most influential contemporary philosophical elaborations on recognition, such as Honneth’s (1995) and Taylor’s (1994), have moved to the realm of ethics. Here, the conditions and constituents of a fair and decent inclusionary process is foregrounded, and the focus is quite often set on the rights of the outsider, i.e. the subject of inclusion. Social inclusion thence denotes a process of incorporation to a democratic society which provides the means for individual growth and self-fulfilment. Consequently, Honneth (1995, ch. 5) explicitly refers to the writings of T.H. Marshall (1950), where inclusion into society is equated with inclusion into a social citizenship, in which not only civil and political rights are granted, but also social rights, above all through the provision of unemployment and health insurance which safeguards citizens from poverty-struck and denigrating conditions. So, with focus the on recognition in this article comes a perspective on social inclusion which transcends the mere insertion in work-life and labour market participation, and pays respect to the end goals of mutual respect, social sustainability and personal growth.

Recognition and Career Counselling

In the methodology and pedagogy of career guidance counselling, the client-centred methodology of Carl Rogers (1989) has had a relatively great influence, both internationally and in Sweden (Lindh, 1988; Hägg & Kuoppa, 2007). One of the basic tenets of Rogers’ psychology is that every person has an inner core, a potential and an opportunity to become something, which must be developed to full autonomy. A person is autonomous if their perception of themselves, the world around them and the relationship between themselves and others is characterised by “transparency” – they know their abilities and desires, and how they are influenced and developed by other people. In Rogers’ methodology, the person being counselled is given the right to define and describe her/his own situation. The counselling conversation begins with the counsellor listening uncritically to the person being counselled and how they describe their situation, which is thus recognised as reasonable and relevant. The person being counselled is thus not seen as a subordinate, but rather as a fellow human being who needs help with their development.

In this respect, Rogers’ model departs from the previously dominant paradigm in counselling, where counselling was dominated by matching perspectives, and the counsellor was an authority who used tests and examinations to identify the counselled person’s aptitudes and, on that basis, decided which education and which profession was suitable (Lovén, 2015). Rogers’ methodology is a pedagogy of listening and recognition. The solution to the counselled person’s dilemmas about educational and vocational choice is self-analysis, and the self-reflection of the counselee is at the centre of the counselling conversation. In this pedagogy, there is a clear parallel to the recognition pedagogy discussed above; the understanding and insight into (conditional) freedom of action becomes a tool for the development of an independent study or career choice. The insight into actuality leads to the realisation of potential.

The principle of recognition can also be seen as a solution to a professional dilemma. The concept has been defined as an effort to “guarantee universal social rights while recognising and accepting differences” (Pettersen & Simonsen, 2013, p. 20). This definition draws attention to the specific freedom of action or discretion of social and labour market professionals (Lipsky, 1980). This freedom is required when the professional has to define problems and devise situation-specific solutions on their own, without direct support from formal rules and instructions. They must instead balance different rules and principles, and deal with conflicts of rules and goals that may arise in the practice of professions. Ensuring universal social rights is a challenge for many professions, Pettersen and Simonsen (2013) point out, but the principle of recognition describes a way to achieve this by the individual professional, such as the career guidance counsellor, paying attention to the conditions and experiences specific to the group to which the client belongs, and taking them into account in the performance of the work.

Previous Research

In career guidance methodology it has often been argued that the pedagogical practice should observe an approach that in several respects parallels the principle of recognition. This approach is often referred to as “multicultural guidance” (Launikari & Puukari, 2005), and is highlighted as particularly relevant in the counselling of migrants and ethnic or racialised minorities. The term became an early umbrella term for the ambition to develop counselling models and practices that seek to reduce the significance and effects of discrimination during and after the counselling process, and thus strive for social justice (Carter & Qureshi, 1995; Peavy & Li, 2003), and also take into account both minority norms, values and forms of communication (Palmer & Laungani, 1999; Launikari & Puukari, 2005; Ponterotto et al., 2010; Arulmani, 2014), and the difficulties faced by refugees when their lives are disrupted and they have to flee (Magnano et al., 2021; Sultana, 2021; Sundelin & Hertzberg, 2022).

However, there is a great deal of empirical research that draws attention to and provides evidence of more or less systematic departures from the principle of recognition in study and career counselling. One such deviation is the “cooling” of established vocational aspirations (Yogev & Rodity, 1987; Resh & Rachel, 2002). Another aspect is a lack of understanding of the experience of or fear of discrimination (Sundelin, 2015). A third aspect of deviation from the principle of recognition in career guidance counselling is a lack of understanding of the conditions under which refugees and other migrants live in the receiving society (Sundelin, 2015), and/or the impact of the formative experiences they have been forced to have due to flight (Magnano et al., 2021; Sultana, 2021). A fourth deviation is a lack of understanding of patterns of thought and action that differ from those that are commonly held and hegemonic in the receiving society (Arulmani, 2014; Sundelin, 2015). These research contributions highlight the importance of studying the conditions of recognition, or the prerequisites of recognition, in guidance and counselling – which is the focus of this article.

In previous research, I have discussed what the principle of recognition can reasonably entail in counselling work with newly arrived migrants (Hertzberg, 2015, 2017a, b; Hertzberg & Sundelin, 2014). The matter of recognition in counselling implies the recognition of plans for and meaning-making about future education and vocations that differ from the most common and normative ones in society (Hertzberg & Sundelin, 2014; Hertzberg, 2017a), as well as more collectivist approaches to important personal choices (Hertzberg, 2015) and previously established knowledge and experiences (Hertzberg, 2017a). As a development of these earlier research contributions, and using recognition as a “sensitising” concept for the analysis in this article, attention follows to how study and career counsellors draw attention to and manage skills, meaning-making and norms established in communities far removed from Swedish contexts, and their significance for opportunities, inclusion and future in Swedish society, as well as the influence of the institutional context which study and career counselling is part of.

Methodology and Empirical Data

The study presented here describes and analyses qualitative data. The method used to collect the data is semi-structured interviews. There were 11 interviewees, most of whom work as career guidance counsellors in the school system, with a focus on youth and young adults; either in upper-secondary schools (D, F and G) or in municipal adult education (A, B, C, E, I and K). There are two exceptions, though: one interviewee works in project-based counselling with a municipality as employer (H), and one is a counsellor in compulsory school (J); the latter, however, has good professional experience of working with newly arrived youth and young adults. The interviewees work in municipalities of different sizes in Central Sweden, and almost half of them (B, C, G and H), work in metropolitan or suburban municipalities in Stockholm County. A common denominator is that the workplaces of all the interviewees received relatively large groups of newly arrived pupils from 2015 onwards (see below).

The sample of interviewees can be described as a sample of typical cases, a convenience sample and a snowball sample (Bryman, 2016). We sought study and career counsellors in schools/educational units that received many, in absolute or relative terms, newly arrived pupils from 2015 onwards (typical cases). The interviewees were sought from groups of study and career counsellors with whom I had previously had contact on educational and continuing professional development matters (convenience sample). These previously established contacts either chose to be interviewed themselves, or passed on the question in their local or regional professional networks (snowball sample). Using convenience and snowball sampling, I thus obtained a group of interviewees who can be described as “typical cases” of the category of counsellors whose views and interpretations I was interested in. The typical case was a study and career counsellor who, at some point during the years mentioned above, had experienced a sharp increase in the number of newly arrived pupils in need of study and career counselling, and where the increase changed the conditions under which the work was carried out. Each interviewee was informed of the ethical guidelines of the Swedish Research Council (2017), in particular the protection of anonymity and the option to withdraw from participation without giving a reason.

The interviews asked questions related to three overarching themes: “formal and informal learning outcomes”, “general professional considerations” and “the role of recognition in counselling”. The first step of the analysis was to identify and synthesise the interview sections that addressed the themes in focus here, with a focus on different understandings of the concept of recognition (cf. Taylor, 1994; Honneth, 1995; Björk & Uljens, 2009; Pettersen & Simonsen, 2013): (a) the identification and valuation of previously established skills; (b) previously established meaning-making about education, work and the future; (c) the significance of (a) and (b) for the implementation of guidance; (d) the significance of (a) and (b) for the opportunities of the counselled person in Swedish education and working life, and (e) other meanings of the concept of recognition.

The subsequent analytical step was reconstructive rather than deconstructive, and sought to emphasise coherence and rationality in the interviewees’ statements (cf. “principle of charity”, cf. Davidson, 1984); the focus was on finding the logic in what the interviewees said, by identifying the motives for their positions, reconstructing the coherence in their interpretations or situation descriptions, and extrapolating the possible consequences of the positions, descriptions and interpretations. In the third step, the analysis was more critical and normative. The focus here was on clarifying the extent to which the interviewees’ positions and descriptions were consistent with the principle of recognition, as expressed in any of the interpretations listed above.

Results

Recognition as a Pedagogical Principle

Several of the study and career counsellors I interviewed clearly expressed that the principle of recognition is given a prominent place in their pedagogical work. This was then not primarily about recognition of previously established skills or meaning-making about education, work and the future, but also recognition as a principle in the pedagogical interaction. Acknowledging, discovering and encouraging abilities was considered to have an intrinsic value, and to be part of the counselling work. An example comes from the interview with D. She emphasises the importance of highlighting the pupils’ “strengths” in the counselling conversation, even if they lack longer schooling. Pupils should be able to “feel seen”, and have an opportunity to “talk about their knowledge”, and it is part of the effort of the counsellors to “push them” and “empower them”. Already established skills are highlighted, as is the possibility of building on these, rather than the need to “start from scratch”.Footnote 1

In her description, D speaks in the first-person plural, of a “we” working in a particular way, with the plural form suggesting that she is speaking for all the study and career counselling staff in the school and expressing a pedagogical ideal that is shared by many. Interviewee B expresses a similar approach when, in describing her counselling work, she makes clear the importance of never becoming a “gatekeeper” and always being open to new solutions and ways of working, particularly when the previous knowledge and experiences of new arrivals is the topic of discussion; the counsellor must “never ever, like, trivialise and say ‘that has no value’.”

In these examples, the desire for recognition is relatively decontextualized. It is not directed at a situation or a defined “object of recognition”, but rather expresses a general pedagogical principle. The counselees and their knowledge should be recognised, and before any clear reason to the contrary is given, the counsellor should assume that this knowledge can be valuable and useful also in a Swedish context. Nevertheless, this general pedagogical principle can sometimes conflict with other considerations in counselling work. In the following section, I will focus on this.

Recognition of Prior Knowledge, Experience and Aspirations 1: New Aspirations Are Established

Career guidance counselling is generally a pedagogical activity in which those involved look both forward and backward. The counsellor should help the counselee to choose an education and/or a career path based on scenarios of a desired, possible and probable future. But the choice often requires a retrospective view, which pays attention to what the counselled person has done and learned in the past, and what conclusions they draw based on these experiences. Can the trajectories expressed in past experiences be extrapolated into the future, and in what ways can previously established knowledge be used in future careers? What is the value of the past in the present, when planning for the future?

This retrospective task may relate to the general recognition pedagogical approach described above, but the object of recognition in this particular counselling element is usually somewhat more circumscribed and concrete. The educator should pay attention to the specific knowledge and meaning-making expressed by the pupil. What attention consists of and what it leads to, however, is an open question. In the material presented here we can see several different directions.

I, a counsellor working in adult education, and especially with young adults, describes a situation in which the importance of previous education is discussed, and how she as a counsellor relates to these previous experiences. She points out that previous work experience is already considered during the initial assessment, and the enrolled person is also asked to explain what they want from their education. And during the course of the education, these issues are continually raised, and there may also be a need to validate previous knowledge and experience. The pupil then realises: “but this is not possible. I have to have a completely new education here” or “my knowledge is good enough”. The interviewee, I, describes a procedure of identification, guidance and possible validation, in which attention is paid to previously acquired knowledge and (professional) experience. The person being counselled is given the opportunity to describe their previous experience and education, and to consider whether their future educational or professional career should build on this material.

Validation is the “official” assessment of education and professional experience acquired in other countries, and the judgement and possible recognition stemming from the validation procedure obviously outweighs the words of the individual counsellor (although some validation procedures have been criticised for devaluing rather than valuing knowledge and experience acquired abroad; cf. Andersson & Osman, 2008; Andersson & Fejes, 2010). The existence of different validation procedures helps to put the issue of recognition on the counselling agenda, and to make it concrete. In the counselling context, validation can be “framed” in such a way that it becomes part of a learning process as much as an assessment or classification process. The validation then encourages meaning-making about the future, learning and professional development (cf. Andersson, 2021).

To what extent the counselled person wants a future study and career path that builds on previously established knowledge experiences, and what practical relevance the recognition imperative thus has, is certainly an open question. Several interviewees draws attention to newly arrived who, for various reasons, wish to change direction in their career path. H, who counsels both older and young adults in a municipal project, highlights this very issue. Among highly educated refugees in particular, it is “quite common” to want to change career paths, she claims, and it is not uncommon for them to focus on shortage professions (“I want to become a nursing assistant. I’ve heard there are plenty of jobs in that field”). In this way, her current work differs from counselling in compulsory school, H reflects; for her counselling seekers, “the road is already paved”. They have been referred to her project by Social Services, and have to apply for the jobs that are available.

Other study and career counsellors confirm the same experience – many new arrivals want to enter the workforce as soon as possible, and they orient themselves towards those professions or industries where such an opportunity exists. Those coming from upper-secondary education certainly do not have the same strong financial incentives, i.e. to avoid withdrawal of social security contributions, but concrete financial considerations seem to nonetheless be involved. Several interviewees also noted that many new arrivals have dependent care responsibilities in their home countries, which steers their career aspirations towards vocations and industries where there is the possibility of getting a job as soon as possible – something that has also been noted by previous research (Sundelin, 2015).

In addition, the so called “Upper-Secondary School Act” was in force at the time of the interviews. This act stipulated that upper-secondary young people without a residence permit could obtain a residence permit provided that the graduated, got a job and became self-sufficient – which obviously influenced the aspirations of the young people and the direction of the counselling (Linde et al., 2021). Several interviewees drew attention to this issue, explicitly pointing out that the principle of recognition of previously established aspirations and experiences became less important in these circumstances.

Recognition of Prior Knowledge, Experience and Aspirations 2: Long, Short and Broadened Perspectives

In the career guidance counselling pedagogy, short-term aspirations of this kind are rarely an end point. A central part of this pedagogy is to support the counsellee to develop new approaches to already established aspirations, while considering both knowledge about the self and the options of educational institutions and the labour market (Lovén, 2015; cf. OECD, 2004). In a Swedish context, this element is usually described as a broadening of perspectives (Lindh, 1988; Hägg & Kuoppa, 2007), and often entails the prioritisation of goals other than immediate entry into the labour market. The broadening of perspectives was a central issue for several interviewees in our study, even when the principle of recognition was clearly acknowledged. Broadening could then be about taking into account that conditions for similar activities were different in Sweden than in the home country – even if previously established aspirations and activities were recognised.

Interviewee E described an example of this. She had a young adult applicant who had designed and sewn clothes in his home country. Once in Sweden, he wanted to continue on this path and pursue an education in design. Together they went through the range of possible courses, at different levels (folk high school, higher vocational education, university). But it turned out that the admission requirements were too high, and E tried to find an internship for the applicant with a tailor in the nearest big city. This proved unfeasible, so E offered him an internship in his home town, with a compatriot who ran his own shop. Although it was not in the right sector, the idea was for the applicant to gain insight into what it was like to run a business in Sweden (“and so they talked a lot about it, what it’s like, what the climate is like in Sweden to start your own business, and things like that”). F points out that she “tries to draw on what they tell me, to the extent that they have knowledge from a professional field”, but that “sometimes it’s so difficult to translate it to our circumstances”. The perspective broadening element thus entails modifying aspirations in relation to Swedish working life; not only its quality requirements and working methods, but also its conditions for self-employment.

With a concept of recognition that focuses strongly on actuality (Björk & Uljens, 2009), this broadening could be seen as a departure from the principle of recognition, as it implies adaptation to the new context, the Swedish labour market. But the perspective broadening element may also prescribe an increased consideration of personal interests and preferences. Here, a less pragmatic development of educational and career aspirations is encouraged, as well as meaning-making about work and future that is based on individual deliberation and introspection. In this sense, the broadening of perspectives may entail the recognition of deep-seated and previously established desires and interests, although the development of these is also envisaged.

The relationship between perspective broadening and recognition is clearly complex, as is evident in the interview with G, a study and career counsellor in municipal adult education with a focus on Swedish for Immigrants (SFI). On one hand, she points out that many new arrivals are “under a lot of pressure” – “they have a family to support and need to bring in money” – and that she has to “keep that in mind to some extent”. The counselling must be adapted to the specific situation. On the other hand, she stresses that she “always has to bear in mind” that “you choose and compare things”, and although she describes it as a “luxury perspective”, she thinks that you should stick to that perspective. Everyone who receives counselling should be given the opportunity to compare different courses/programmes and professions to see which one(s) are the best fit – including new arrivals. “It can’t be the case that everyone should become a nursing assistant, just because they are a newly arrived woman”. So, she tries to maintain the broadening of perspective, but adds “I still have to respect their life situation”.

G points out that the perspective broadening element implies a longer-term orientation, and that the issue of career development goes beyond immediate entry into the workforce. She points to the fact that recognition of actuchaality (what a person is) and potentiality (what a person can become) goes in different directions, and that there may be a case of informing the counselled person about the possibility of becoming something other than what she aspires to at the moment. This form of recognition is close to what Axel Honneth (1995) expresses in his theoretical elaborations of recognition as social appreciation. With reference to Mead’s (2015) social psychology, Honneth argues that the “right to recognition” is a right to individual self-realisation (cf. Heidegren, 2002), which can be obtained, for example, by giving the individual the opportunity to develop (and thus achieve the certainty of possessing) skills that other members of society regard as valuable.

Here, it can be recalled that counselling practice exhibits a tension between recognition and inclusion (which is generally the primary objective in the societal reception of newly arrived migrants). In the context of career guidance counselling, a strict application of the recognition requirement may imply a recognition of previously established educational and career aspirations (Hertzberg & Sundelin, 2014; cf. Yakushko et al., 2008), whether or not they lead to inclusion in the workforce; the recognition requirement is then prioritised over inclusion in the workforce.

Recognition of Prior Knowledge, Experience and Aspirations 3: The Pursuit of Autonomy

The above-mentioned contradiction between recognition and inclusion was not commented on by the interviewees. However, in previous studies I (Hertzberg, 2015) noted that many counsellors identify another conflict between the desire for inclusion and the principle of recognition. This does not relate to the content of aspirations, but rather about how young people’s aspirations take shape – when parents influence their children’s educational and career plans in ways that are too overt and explicit, and it can be assumed that the parental role is clearly authoritarian. But excessive compliance with parental wishes is also seen as problematic, even when authoritarian influence is not evident. It is considered that career choice must be autonomous, not only as a matter of principle but also because freedom from influence makes new options and higher aspirations possible (Hertzberg, 2015).

Clear influence and compliance go against study and career counsellors’ desire to teach independence or autonomy. Establishing an autonomous approach in relation to complex choice situations, such as choice of education and a future career, is an informal intended learning outcome for many counsellors (Hertzberg, 2015), as well as an objective in key target documents (Swedish National Agency for Education, 2011a, b). The ability to act autonomously is one of the school’s general intended learning outcomes, laid down in the curriculums for compulsory school (Lgr 11) and upper-secondary school (Lgy 11). Lgr 11 states “The school is responsible for ensuring that each pupil on completing compulsory school /…/ can make well-informed choices regarding further education and vocational orientation” (Swedish National Agency for Education, 2011a: 3f), while Lgy 11 states “The school’s aim is for every pupil to /…/ be able to make a conscious decision about further study and vocational orientation based on accumulated experience and knowledge” (2011b: 13).

However, the pursuit of autonomy is negotiable. Several interviewees describe situations where circumstances require a different prioritisation, and where the requirement of autonomy can be put in parentheses. One of these is B, who works with counselling in adult education, mainly young adults. As her students often lack both broader knowledge of the range of courses and programmes offer and the possibility to get a reasonable idea of the desirable and appropriate options within a short time span, B feels that she has to “dare to show” what is the “smartest option”. Her pupils should not have to “get to grips with the whole range of courses and programmes on offer” before taking the next step. For example, the support in question may lead to a course close to home being given priority over one further away, even if the latter course is slightly more appropriate in terms of content. This support reduces the risk of the counselled person becoming trapped in a vicious circle of failure, in B’s view, as the counselled person has a better chance of finding a course that suits their circumstances and needs.

B describes a professional dilemma. On the one hand, the pedagogy of counselling and its pursuit of autonomy (Hertzberg, 2015) prescribes independent choice, without the influence of others. The counselled person should choose the most suitable educational location and not the closest one; the wishes of the family, the housework and the reluctance to leave her own residential area should not be the deciding factor for her. It should be the content of the education. On the other hand, the demands of the environment and of everyday life may be too great at the moment, and interfere with the possibility of studying in a district further away. Therefore, if the risk of dropping out is significant, it is better at this initial stage to choose an option where there is a greater chance of success. It is better to choose such an option, argues B, than to prioritise the principle of autonomy and, in this case, potentially create a failure, which becomes part of a vicious circle of failures in the Swedish education system. Creating conditions that foster experiences of school success is more important, B believes. She thus pays attention to the needs of the counselled person, given her life situation, and prioritises them over independence and autonomy.

However, it can be remembered here that the object of recognition – i.e. the desire to study close to home – may not have been established earlier, before arrival in Sweden. It could possibly relate a more traditional gendered division of domestic labour, but equally it could be a strategy for coping with the initial time in Sweden, where the relatively safe local environment is juxtaposed with the unfamiliar and less safe urban environment a good deal away from the home. The object of recognition in this case is an aspect of being a new arrival, not part of a culture (cf. Yakushko et al., 2008).

Refugee Status and Advocacy

It was mentioned at the outset that the concept of recognition can also be defined as an effort to guarantee universal social rights while recognising and accepting differences (Pettersen & Simonsen, 2013, p. 20), and that this definition can be related to the freedom of action of the social and labour policy professionals. It is a freedom that requires the identification and management of the rule and goal conflicts that may arise in the practice of the professions. In the previous sections, we could also see that the principle of recognition could run counter to counselling pedagogy’s attention to perspective broadening and autonomy, as well as to the pursuit of inclusion that generally characterises educational, social and labour market policy considerations of the situation of newly arrived migrants.

One way of attempting to address the tension between universal rights and special needs is the ambition to shape the provision of the former with respect to the latter. This ambition was also expressed by several of the interviewees in this study, in different areas, not least the task of shaping counselling activities to the special needs that newly arrived migrants, in particular refugees, may be considered to have; a task that is obviously not only a matter of personal professional considerations, but also laid down in education policy target documents and general advice (Swedish National Agency for Education, 2013).

Some of the considerations described in the section above could be included in this definition of “recognition”; e.g. pedagogical considerations that takes into account refugee status and the conditions under which new arrivals live, and which shape the opportunities for learning. But knowledge on refugee conditions is also held to be relevant in other ways. This is pointed out by A, who is a counsellor at Komvux adult education and works mainly with SFI students. Having to flee one home country and experiences of this flight are often unpleasant, she points out, and the decision to flee requires that “they have thought about their human situation”. If you are prepared to risk your life, then “you have really thought this through”. A draws particular attention to vulnerability and experiences of difficult living conditions; conditions that apparently justify an escape in which the individual risks their life, and she expresses a willingness to understand living conditions that are radically different from their own.

A similar ambition is expressed by B, who counsels young adults in a municipal education policy project. She emphasises the fact that the counsellor knows the options, opportunities and obstacles of the education system and has a responsibility to guide the new arrival through this complex and difficult-to-understand system. This responsibility requires that the study and career counsellor make newly arrived aware of what they can actually help with. The counsellor should form an alliance with the counselled person, guiding them through the system in the best possible way, and act as their advocate in meetings with other actors in the system, such as the Swedish Board of Student Finance. B takes the counselled person’s side, and tries to guide them through institutions and, if necessary, around regulations, making learning about the system is partially subordinate. She has developed a professional approach that takes the particular circumstances of the newly arrived counselees into account. Without much knowledge of a system they have not experienced until recently, they need information and support to navigate through it.

The extracts from the interviews with A and B make clear an adherence to the principle of recognition. Both interviewees shape (parts of) their counselling practice while considering the conditions the newly arrived face, such as experiences of disruption and flight, and/or being a newly arrived and forced to adapt to a completely new context. Hence, the experiences and conditions specific to a particular social category and identity are considered, and the delivery of a their pedagogical “service” is are adapted to the particular needs that follows from a specific set of circumstances and life stories. Hence, these interviewees seek to “meet the other” within the context of a professional practice (Pettersen & Simonsen, 2013). It is also worth noting that the approach transcends the framework of pedagogy; counselling is not only career learning, but also advocacy that takes sides and pilots past obstacles.

The Limits to Recognition

So far, I have only presented and discussed empirical evidence that essentially considers and confirms different principles of recognition. With the vaguely defined concept of recognition as a moving searchlight, it has not been difficult to find these examples. But there are also examples of the contrary in my interview material – considerations, positions and examples from practice that describe the limits of recognition. To a significant extent, these are the interviewees’ approaches to experiences and skills that are not in demand in the labour market. How does a study and career counsellor respond to this? To what extent can experiences and aspirations be validated, and to what extent can they not? What counselling pedagogical considerations follow from this? As shown above, these questions can be answered in different ways. However, other limits have also come to light. To clarify these, I allow a conceptual slide that brings us closer to Charles Taylor’s (1994) understanding of this term. The object of recognition in Taylor’s theory is summarised by him with the term “culture”, in particular the cultures held to define ethnic groups. It is often a meaning-making process that encompasses key aspects of people’s existence (beliefs, social outlook, interpersonal relations, sexuality, etc.) and creates a sense of belonging to the group(s) one wishes to belong to.

In the interview material, this perspective became particularly relevant in relation to norms, values and perspectives linked to general human issues such as sexuality, gender and beliefs. For example, interviewee D, who works in an upper-secondary school, is part of a professional network where she discusses such issues: “We have talked about LGBTQ. We have talked about violence, or honour-related violence … social exclusion, violence at home or honour-related. There are pupils who have disappeared after the summer too. And, yeah, they may have been married off.” The network in which the interviewee participated has discussed many culture clashes, and the knowledge and perspectives from this context will now form the basis for a new educational activity in her own school. The plan is to start a girls’ group, and within this activity to discuss, manage and try to solve the problems that arise. The aim is to combat social exclusion, drop-out and violence. The underlying premise, which is only implied here, is that the problems can be combated if the newly arrived pupils are exposed to and gradually adopt the perspectives that are dominant and common in Swedish society.

Without criticising an activity that has not yet started, and without at all objecting to the legitimate criticism of violence, oppression and genital mutilation, it is nevertheless reasonable to note that the interviewee here marks a boundary to recognition and tolerance. On the other side of the boundary are values and perspectives which, in addition to their dubious moral standing, are seen as a source of exclusion. As many other researchers and philosophers have pointed out (Okin, 1998; Joppke, 2004), it is relatively common for multiculturalist recognition to extend to this very boundary. The patriarchal norms and practices of minorities are recognised and criticised by the institutions of the majority society. Gender oppression is not accepted by any group.

This is a very complex issue. There are critics who argue that the boundary-marking processes of the mainstream society quite often express idealising and self-affirming positions about the righteousness of their own society and group, without considering their own shortcomings (cf. Martinsson, Griffin & Giritli Nygren 2016). In this context, with its limited space, I will not contribute to this discussion. However, with reference to the purpose of the article, it is important to note that the clear boundary-marking of the interviewee, and her choice of theme when marking the boundary, is made in a context where she is working on a task that is partly outside the remit of study and career guidance. The clear rejection of the principle of recognition thus occurs in a professional context that lies beyond the “core tasks” of study and career counselling, although parts of the activities of the intended discussion group fall within the framework of what is called “career learning” (cf. Krumboltz, 1996; Law, 1996). In this specific case, for example, the subject matter could be described as “learning that facilitates inclusion into the workforce and labour market”.

Conclusion: Summary and Discussion

In the above, I have described several of the circumstances that shape study and career counselling’s approach to previously established knowledge, experiences and aspirations. These include the seemingly voluntary abandonment of previous educational and career aspirations by many new arrivals, the need for income and rapid inclusion in the workforce, and the contradictory relationship between the principle of recognition and the pedagogy of counselling, particularly as expressed in the latter’s focus on perspective broadening and autonomy.

Initially, however, it was noted that several interviewees emphasised a recognition principle as a general approach in the counselling conversation. Regardless of the importance of previously established knowledge, experience or meaning-making in Swedish working life, it was important to acknowledge and confirm these in the counselling conversation. One should “never trivialise” or say “that has no value”. The pupil should be given the opportunity to express themself, show their skills and be seen. The nature of the recognised object is not a deciding factor. The significance or value that the already established may have in the new context is not relevant in itself.

However, the question of the significance that previously established knowledge, experience and meaning-making may have for career development is more central in relation to the general purpose of counselling activities. Many interviewees highlighted the frequency with which newly arrived pupils wanted to change the focus of their studies and career plans. Continuing on a previously established path was not always considered to be relevant. The reason with the heaviest weight was time and money. They wanted to enter the workforce as soon as possible and become self-sufficient (and also be able to support others).

Nevertheless, there were examples of older students, especially in Komvux adult education, who wanted to continue in an already established direction. This raised the question whether or not previously established aspirations and skills met the requirements of the labour market. Obviously, the career guidance counsellors interviewed were trying to help the student reconcile the latter with the former. This “reconciliation” is close to the counselling pedagogical principle of perspective broadening (Lindh, 1988), which implies that the person counselled should be encouraged to look at themselves and their possibilities (in the labour market and in educational institutions) in a new way, and to adapt, develop or change their plans and aspirations if necessary.

This element of the counselling process may come into conflict with the principle of recognition, if we start from a strict interpretation of the concept formulated by Taylor, where ethos, assumptions and norms are at the forefront. Adapting to the new context can easily take precedence over maintaining what is already established. However, the broadening in question can be seen as an expression of an ability to reflect and a part of a self-reforming dynamic, as described by Björk and Uljens (2009) – the perspective on education, profession and future is broadened through reflection. In this way, the broadening of perspective is an aspect of a recognising pedagogy in which the career counsellor considers the counselled person’s potential, malleability and possibility of self-formation (cf. Björk & Uljens, 2009). The ability to reflect and the self-reforming dynamic can also lay a foundation for the self-actualisation that, according to Honneth (1995; Heidegren, 2002), is a central aspect of recognition. Encouraging (self-)reflection on one’s own interests and skills, and their possible space in relation to the opportunities offered by the labour market and educational institutions, can – at best – provide the individual with opportunities for self-actualisation and the development of skills that are valuable in the eyes of other members of society.

The interviewees’ pedagogical practice is thus in line with the curriculum objectives for career guidance counselling, where the ability to make independent choices is an important intended learning outcome (Swedish National Agency for Education, 2011a, b). However, the counselling of new arrivals can sometimes necessitate a departure from this principle. The new arrival’s need to find their way in and through the education system could, as we saw above, motivate the counsellor to deviate from the counselling pedagogy and take on the role of an ally, who guides the counselled person past the institutional obstacles. These deviations and this advocacy were thus motivated by the particular conditions under which some new arrivals live, and the experiences they have sometimes been forced to undergo. In line with the arguments of Pettersen and Simonsen (2013), this professional approach can be seen as a form of recognition, as it seeks to guarantee universal social rights and at the same time identify, accept and acknowledge particular interpersonal differences. We can thus see that the scope of recognition depends on how we choose to delimit its object. The limits to recognition can be hard to detect, and the only things that are clearly detached are the norms, values and actions associated with so-called honour cultures.

It is fair to say that an attention to the principle of recognition in the context of career guidance counselling could pave the way for social inclusion. For example, the ambition to “push” and empower the counselees, and make them believe that their competencies can be of value and useful even in the Swedish context might foster an attitude which facilitates an entry into the labour. Moreover, the strive for independent choosing and development of counselee autonomy provides ideational tools for deliberate and sustainable career decisions, and upward mobility. On the other hand, recognition of the particularity conditions which are specific for newly arrived migrants allowed for deviations from strict interpretations of career guidance counselling pedagogy, above all the development of autonomy and independent choosing, in order to make experiences of school success possible in the near future, and/or assist the counselees in finding their way through the educational system. With the latter in mind, and considering the ways in which the interviewees generally motivated the design and content of their pedagogical activities, it seems that the end goal social inclusion was given priority over several objects of recognition.