Assessment in Youth Work Placements. Explore and understand the perceptions of students and placement agencies regarding current assessment methods used in youth work placements.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56433/fymfas76Keywords:
practice learning, work based learning, placement, action reseach, youth workAbstract
This action research project explores the perceptions of students and placement agencies regarding the suitability and relevance of current assessment methods used in community youth work placements. In the context of professional youth work education, where academic learning is tested in complex, real-world environments, ensuring alignment between assessment strategies and workplace expectations is crucial. This study explores how well current approaches support students’ personal and professional development, and whether these methods are seen as fair, appropriate, and reflective of authentic practice in youth work and in learning and teaching with Higher Education. Using a qualitative action research methodology, this study engaged both placement supervisors and final year students through semi-structured interviews and focus groups. The findings reveal a strong consensus on the value of reflective assessment and practice-based learning; however, concerns were raised about the clarity, consistency, and practical relevance of some tasks. Supervisors questioned the developmental appropriateness of specific assessment components at different levels, suggesting the need for more graduated expectations and a clearer alignment with challenges of youth work practice such as partnership working, safeguarding, resource management, and project evaluation.
Students shared many of these thoughts, emphasising the importance of placements that are challenging, supportive, and well-integrated with academic content. They advocated for assessment strategies that are more authentic and better tailored to different learning levels, including the use of observed practice, risk assessments, portfolios of evidence, and opportunities to demonstrate impact and growth across their professional formation. The role of supervision, placement structure, and timing also emerged as factors affecting assessment fairness and student progression. The research identifies opportunities for redesigning assessment frameworks to enhance authenticity, inclusivity, and collaboration between university staff and placement partners. Recommendations include greater flexibility in assessment timelines, differentiated expectations across academic levels, increased supervisor input in assessment processes, and a broader recognition of non-written forms of evidence, particularly to support students with diverse learning needs. This study contributes to wider conversations in Higher Education about improving work-based learning by offering a model of collaborative, critically engaged assessment that prepares students not only for academic success, but for effective, ethical, and sustainable youth work practice. It highlights the potential for co-produced, context-sensitive assessment strategies to bridge the gap between the academia and youth work practice.
References
Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616
Ashford-Rowe, Kevin & Herrington, Jan & Brown, Christine. (2014). Establishing the critical elements that determine authentic assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 39. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.819566
Banks, S. (Ed.). (2010). Ethical Issues in Youth Work (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203849361
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2015). Constructive Alignment: An Outcomes-Based Approach to Teaching Anatomy. In: Chan, L., Pawlina, W. (eds) Teaching Anatomy. Springer, Cham.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08930-0_4
Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (2006). Aligning assessment with long‐term learning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(4), 399-413. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930600679050
Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (2012). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: the challenge of design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 698-712. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2012.691462
Bradley, C, Devlin, M, Brennan, P, Tierney, H Reynolds, S & Crickley, A. (2024). Pedagogy as Praxis: An integrated framework for initial professional education and training in community work and youth work. Journal of Practice Teaching and Learning pp1-16.
https://doi.org/10.1921/jpts.v21i1-2.2050
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2013) Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide for Beginners. SAGE Publications.
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health. Routledge, 11(4), pp. 589-597.
https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806
Bryman, A. (2012). Social Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Byrne, D. (2022). A worked example of Braun and Clarke's approach to reflexive thematic analysis. Quality and Quantity. Springer Netherlands, 56 (3), 1391-1412.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y
Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315-1325
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354
CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 3.0. Retrieved from https://udlguidelines.cast.org [Accessed 04.06.2025]
Clough, P. & Nutbrown, C. (2012). A Student's Guide to Methodology (3rd ed.). London: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529682564
Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2018) Research Methods in Education. 8th Ed. London. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315456539
Cooper, T. (2024) Becoming a Youth Worker: Contested approaches to education and training. Youth and Policy Online. https://www.youthandpolicy.org/articles/becoming-a-youth-worker/ [Accessed 29.11.24]
Cooper, T., & Brooker, M. R. (2019). Achieving economic sustainability for niche social profession courses in the Australian higher education sector.
Cooper, S. and Ord, J. (2014) Developing 'know how': a participatory approach to assessment of placement learning, Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 66(4), pp. 518-536.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2014.948906
Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative research and evaluation. South African Journal Of Psychology, p. 395.
De St Croix, T. (2016) Grassroots Youth Work: Policy, Passion and Resistance in Practice. Bristol Policy Press. https://doi.org/10.1332/policypress/9781447328599.001.0001
De St Croix, T. (2017). Youth work, performativity and the new youth impact agenda: getting paid for numbers? Journal of Education Policy, 33(3), 414-438. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2017.1372637
Denscombe, M. (2014). The Good Research Guide for Small-scale Social Research Projects (5th eds). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Dingwall, R. (2012). How Did we Ever Get into This Mess? In Hillyard, S (Editor) Studies in Qualitative Research, 12, 3-26.
https://doi.org/10.1108/S1042-3192(2012)0000012004
Flick, U. (2009) An Introduction to Qualitative Research. SAGE Publications.
Flick, U. (2015). Introducing Research Methodology. London: Sage.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Seabury Press.
Gulikers, J., Bastiaens, T., & Kirschner, P. (2004). A Five-Dimensional Framework for Authentic Assessment. Educational Technology Research and Development, Vol. 52, No. 3, pp. 67-86. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504676
Hall, I & Hall, D. (2004). Evaluation and Social Research Basingstoke: Palgrave.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-91681-8
Hammersley, M. (2009) Why Critical Realism Fails to Justify Critical Social Research, Methodological Innovations Online, 4(2), pp. 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1177/205979910900400201
Hammond, M., & McArdle, E. (2023). Conversation in Youth Work: A Process for Encounter. Child & Youth Services, 45(1), 140-160. https://doi.org/10.1080/0145935X.2023.2279305
https://doi.org/10.1080/0145935X.2023.2279305
Hockings, C., Brett, P., & Terentjevs, M. (2012). Making a difference-inclusive learning and teaching in higher education through open educational resources. Distance Education, 33(2), 237-252. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2012.692066
Lave, J., and Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1080/09503159808411492
Lundy, L. (2007). 'Voice' is not enough: conceptualising Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. British Educational Research Journal, 33(6), 927-942.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920701657033
McCombe, S. (2022). Designing an Ulster University Placement Student Network. ASET.
Moon, T. R. (2005). The Role of Assessment in Differentiation. Theory Into Practice, 44(3), 226-233. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4403_7
Norton L. (2019). Action Research in Teaching and Learning.2nd Ed. London. Routledge
National Youth Agency. (2020). National Occupational Standards for Youth Work. Leicester. https://nya.org.uk/2020/05/national-occupational-standards-and-english-youth-work-policy-new-document-published/. [Accessed 29.11.24]
Novick, G. (2008). Is there a bias against telephone interviews in qualitative research? Research in nursing and health. Wiley Online Library, 31 (4), 391-398.
https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20259
Ord, J. (2016). Youth Work Process, Product and Practice: Creating an authentic curriculum in work with young people (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203742440
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203742440
Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA). (2019). Subject Benchmark Statement: Youth and Community Work. London. https://www.qaa.ac.uk/docs/qaa/subject-benchmark-statements/subject-benchmark-statement-youth-and-community-work.pdf?sfvrsn=5e35c881_4. [Accessed 29.11.24]
Rea, L. M. & Parker, R. A. (2005). Designing and Conducting Survey Research: A Comprehensive Guide. Wiley.
Rudestam, K.E & Newton, R.R (2007) Surviving Your Dissertation (3rd edition) London: Sage Publications.
Smith, C., Ferns, S. & Russell, L. (2014). The impact of Work integrated learning on student work-readiness, the impact of Work integrated learning on student work-readiness: Final Report, Curtin University of Technology, LSN Teaching Development Unit
Smith, J. A. Flowers, P. & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Thomas, G. (2017). How To Do Your Research Project (3rd eds). London: Sage Publications.
Trede, Franziska & McEwen, Celina. (2012). Developing a critical professional identity: Engaging Self in Practice. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-128-3_3
Waterfield, J. & West, B. (2006) Supporting Inclusive Practice: Developing an Assessment Toolkit. In Adams, M and Brown, S. (2006). Towards Inclusive Learning in Higher Education, Routledge.
White, P. (2017). Developing Research Questions (2nd eds). London: Palgrave.
https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-49048-3
Wierenga, A. (2003). Sharing a New Story: Young People in Decision-Making. Foundation for Young Australians. Retrieved from http://web.education.unimelb.edu.au/yrc/linked_documents/ WP23.pdf
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Mark McFeeters

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice has made best effort to ensure accuracy of the contents of this journal, however makes no claims to the authenticity and completeness of the articles published. Authors are responsible for ensuring copyright clearance for any images, tables etc which are supplied from an outside source.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.