Current topic focuses on at-risk youth and the role of vocational education institutions –the social ecology of risk factors for vocational students. Combating social exclusion and supporting risk groups (early school leavers, low-skilled workers, immigrants, unemployed) has been a high priority in European Union (EU) policy for the last decade. There are not many studies focusing on the Estonian context about the role of vocational education and workplace training (VET) on the social inclusion of at-risk youth. (OECD 2016) The students in VET institutions tend to be increasingly diverse in terms of educational and professional background, motivations and competence levels. Vocational education tends to be a second-choice solution for graduates of the general education institutions with lower educational outcomes and often tends to be an attractive choice for young people from less economically secure families. (Loogma et al, 2019). Therefore, vocational teachers ́ professional roles have diversified and teachers perceive the social work as forming an increasingly big part of their workload (Ümarik & Rekkor, 2013; Sirk et al., 2019). According to an interview study conducted among vocational teachers (Sirk et al., 2019) Even among the graduates of vocational schools the low level of generic skill, including social skills has been outlined as a problem by employers. (Nestor & Nurmela, 2013) and also as a most important risk factor for becoming NEET youth.Different projects targeted to risk youth, NEETs or young people with potential risk of dropping out from school have been carried out with the support of European Social Fund or government funding, but these initiatives have often been related to youth work providers, open youth centers or general education schools. But the problem is that VET institutions are rarely involved in these projects. Therefore, too many young people leave education or vocational education too soon (Cedefop, 2017). Youth at risk who dropout from school and early leavers are at greater risk of long-term unemployment, poverty and crime, and cost the European economy. (Reiska, 2018) Social ecology is treated not as the established and consistent theory, but rather as a methodological approach to analyze complex phenomena (e.g Weaver-Hightower, 2008, Evans et al, 2011, Evans, 2020). In the case of social ecological analysis, two main analytical directions can be distinguished. Bronfenbrenner’s ecological system theory (1979). Another option of applications of the socio-ecological approach is more related to macro-level analysis, the analysis of organizations and different social groups (Evans et al, 2011, p. 356) Both approaches share the idea of dynamic and multi-level interdependencies that enable ecology to function and sustain itself.

The aim of the research is to find out the social and individual factors that increase and/or decrease the risk factors of at-risk youth in initial vocational education and their interactions in the context of an individual learning path.Based on this, the risk factors of young people at risk of dropping out of vocational education are discussed from a socio-ecological approach, paying attention to the limitations and opportunities experienced in their individual learning paths and the role of vocational education in preventing risk factors.

RQ1. How do young people at risk of dropping out themselves describe their individual learning path and understand how different social and institutional environments and communities have supported or hindered them? RQ2. What are the experiences and perceptions of institutional and personal risk factors in vocational education and possible support measures and their effectiveness in vocational education? RQ3. What practices and methods are implemented in vocational education institutions and the community that increase the social inclusion of young people at risk of dropping out and reduce the risk of dropping out of vocational education?

The theoretical framework for research instruments consist of socio-ecological approach (Evans, Waite, Kersh, 2010) and resilience approach (Zimmermann, 2013). The social ecology approach means that individuals are learning, developing, and acting in a complex system of various social environments and structures, actors, and interrelationships (Jacobson, Wilensky, 2006; Evans et al, 2011). The socio-ecological approach is aligned with the resiliency approach, which emphasizes positive factors in young people’s lives as the basis for positive change strategies (Zimmermann, 2013). The social ecology approach will be at the basis for the analysis of the data, enabling understanding of the role of various social environments that young people at risk have been involved in, their learning and development paths, as well as identifying the factors enabling the development of their competences and exercising of their agency. The focus in the study is on identifying and promoting the positive personal strategies and factors supporting the strengths of young people. The idea is to understand the transitions between different levels of schooling as presenting possibilities for change and transformation in term of young people’s self-understanding regarding educational strategies. The interview guide is scripted to the notion of a semi-structured interview following Kvale and Brinkmann (Kvale, 2007; Kvale & Brinkmann, 2015). For the semi-structured type of interview, the guide will include an outline of topics to be covered, with suggested questions (Kvale & Brinkmann, 2015). The interviews in narrative study will not follow a strictly predetermined sequence but will instead be determined by the local context, as well as “the interviewer’s judgment and tact that decides how closely to stick to the guide and how much to follow up the interviewee’s answers and the new directions they may open up. The interview is based on the chronology of narrative research, in which the questions will be about past - present – future, but the topics are not given in a specific order. (Bruner, 1990, 1996, 1997; Riessman, 2008)

The preliminary results show that the life and learning path of at-risk youth is mainly influenced by the primary school experience prior to vocational school, and the influences have been teachers and peers. In turn, the primary school experience can be influenced by family background and related bullying in primary school. Thus, as a result of the confluence of many unfortunate circumstances such as lack of family support, school bullying, negative labeling in elementary grades, the self-esteem and self-confidence of at-risk youth drop, which has long-term effects in their learning. This can be interrupted by the systematic implementation of intervention methods that can support the self-confidence of at-risk students. In summary, the expected research results are as follows: - as a result of the integration of student interview data, a self-regulating social ecology model of the risk situation of vocational students will be described; - as a result of the inductive analysis of the texts of student interviews, the roles and activities of individuals belonging to the social ecology of the main risk students in vocational education are clarified; - finding out the factors under the control of vocational schools and discussing the possibilities and limitations of empowering at-risk students in the context of vocational education.

Andersen,D., Ravn, S., & Thomson, S. (2020). Narrative sensemaking and prospective social action: Methodological challenges and new directions. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 23(4) 367-375. doi: 10.1080/13645579.2020.1723204 Bruin, M., & Ohna, S.E.(2015) Negotiating Reassurance: Parents' Narratives on Follow-Up after Cochlear Implantation. European Journal of Special Needs Education, p 518-534 Chase, S.E. (2011) Narrative Inquiry: Still a field in the making. In N.K Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.) The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, 4th edn. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 421-434 Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design. Choosing among five approaches. London. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Ltd. Evans, K., Waite, E. (2010) Stimulating the innovation potential of ‘routine’ workers through workplace learning. https://doi.org/10.1177/1024258910364313 Evans K. , Waite E. , and Kersh N. ( 2010) Towards a Social Ecology of Adult Learning in and Through the Workplace. The Sage Handbook on Workplace Learning. London: Sage. Jacobson, M. J., & Wilensky, U. (2006). Complex Systems in Education: Scientific and Educational Importance and Implications for the Learning Sciences. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(1), 11–34. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1501_4 Loogma, K., Ümarik, M., Sirk, M., & Liivik, R. (2019). How history matters: The emergence and persistence of structural conflict between academic and vocational education: The case of post‐Soviet Estonia. Journal of Educational Change, 20, 105–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-018-09336-wNestor, Ümarik, M., & Rekkor, S. (2013). Diversification of students and professional roles of vocational teachers: Teachers’ individual approaches to negotiate work identities. In J. Mikk, M. Veisson, & P. Luik (Eds.), Change in teaching and learning, 5 (pp. 9−26). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Thomson, R. (2009). Unfolding lives: Youth, gender and change. Bristol: Policy Press. Zimmermann, M., (2013) Resiliency Theory: A Strengths-Based Approach to Research and Practice for Adolescent Health. Health Education & Behavior 40(4): 381-3. Doi:10.1177/1090198113493782 Collins, S.L, Carpenter, S.R., Swinton, S.M., Orenstein, D.E., Childers, D.L., Gragson, T.L., Grimm, N.B., Grove, M.J., Harlan, S.L., Kaye, J.P., Knapp, A.K., Kofinas, G.P., Magnuson, J.J., McDowell, W.H., Melack, J.M., Ogden, L.A., Robertson, G.P., Smith, M.D and Whitmer, A.C. (2010). An integrated conceptual framework for long-term social–ecological research. Frontiers in Ecology Environment, 2011; 9(6): 351–357, doi:10.1890/100068 Evans, K., Waite, E., Kerch, N (2014). Towards a Social Ecology of Adult Learning in and through the Workplace. In: The Sage Handbook of Workplace Learning Evans, K (2020). Learning Ecologies at Work. Ronald Barnett and Norman Jackson (eds). Ecologies for Learning and Practice. Emerging Ideas, Sightings, and Possibilities, pp 163-176