Assessment in Youth Work Placements. Explore and understand the perceptions of students and placement agencies regarding current assessment methods used in youth work placements.

Authors

  • Mark McFeeters Ulster University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.56433/fymfas76

Keywords:

practice learning, work based learning, placement, action reseach, youth work

Abstract

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

2026-04-02

Issue

Section

Original Research