Author T. de St Croix
Published by Journal of Education Policy, 1-25 (2017)
The article is based upon research undertaken between early 2011 and late 2013, using in-depth semi-structured interviews and focus groups in different areas of England, as well as participant observation in two youth organisations in East London.
Impact ‘agenda' and austerity
The author traces the emergence of new public managerialism under the 1979-1997 Conservative governments, through to the creation of "Resourcing Excellent Youth Services" (REYS) policy under New Labour, to the claims made in 2011 by a House of Commons Education Committee that the youth sector was inadequately evidencing its outcomes. The author argues that a "youth impact agenda" has emerged where qualitative forms of research and evaluation have been "sidelined" by quantitative data-based approaches that normalise the idea that "outcomes" can be "proven", and hence monetised. Consequently, when combined with the politics of austerity, it is argued that understandings of "quality" have become intrinsically tied to value-for-money where "funding agencies reward organisations that are able and willing to measure their effectiveness in numerical and monetary terms".
Numbers and youth work
Through the research, the author found that the shift to quantitative understandings of evidence had led to several consequences for youth workers, including a rise in "numbers game" and "box ticking" exercises that were considered to be inauthentic and tokenistic. This feeling was also mirrored within young people, who were said to find questionnaires tedious, intrusive and of limited or no value to themselves, all of which made them reluctant to fill them out. A final consequence of this focus on numbers was said to come in "compliance", where individual youth workers felt their performance was ranked, and potentially punished, against their peers with team meetings no longer spaces of reflection on practice, but public opportunities to hold individuals to account.
Implications for practice
This study serves as a timely and thoughtful analysis of the relationship between impact measurement and youth work. At the Centre for Youth Impact we believe there are several implications that need to be taken forward as this field evolves.
- We agree with the author that "if young people seem reticent to comply with impact processes, we need to take their reluctance seriously and invite critical and open discussions". We believe in approaches that design evaluations with young people and youth workers, such as those used in the Youth Investment Fund Learning Project.
- It is important to recognise that adding more measurements does not necessarily lead to greater levels of analysis, and that consequently fewer measures may be more meaningful. This could have the added benefit of reducing the burdens that evaluations can place on young people and youth workers.
- Youth work is not only accountable to young people and youth workers because both are inevitably connected to the world of policy and funding. However, we must be wary of the power dynamics involved in these relationships and find approaches to evaluation that work with, rather than against, the values of youth work.
The Centre for Youth Impact is a community of organisations that work together to progress thinking and practice around impact measurement in youth work and services for young people.
This article is part of CYP Now's special report on Youth Work Impact. Click here for more
