Key misconceptions when assessing digital technology for municipal youth social work

Mackrill, Thomas; Ebsen, Frank Cloyd

doi:10.1080/13691457.2017.1326878

Cited by 24 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since digital technologies have become vital elements of young people’s everyday lives, youth development practitioners (#NotWithoutMe, 2017; Wilson, 2017) and researchers (Buckingham, 2008; Erstad, 2012; Livingstone, 2012) have struggled to find ways to holistically examine and measure the social impact of young people’s digital participation. Several commentators (for example Mackrill and Ebsen, 2017) noted that there are currently no evaluation methodologies or approaches which specifically examine the social impact of youth digital participation.…”

Section: Measuring Social Impact With Young Digital Participants: Curmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Livingstone et al (2015: 14) have argued that it is yet unknown if ‘online opportunities may (or may not) result in tangible benefits’ to younger generations. Elsewhere, in the context of implementation of digital elements into youth social work, Mackrill and Ebsen (2017: 1) have stated ‘there is still limited research on how to assess the impact of digital technologies’ on youth work. Additionally, Ito et al have highlighted ‘a lack of literature that discusses and evaluates the impact of youth-led social change’ (Ho et al, 2013: 53).…”

Section: Measuring Social Impact With Young Digital Participants: Curmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It can be assumed that ‘as technological innovations continue to develop, social practices among youth creatively adjust around them’ (Livingstone et al, 2015: 9) and therefore, it will be increasingly challenging for the researcher community not only to keep up to date with the technologies teenagers use (Subrahmanyam and Smahel, 2011), but to examine and understand the impact of these revolutionary cultural changes. Indeed, scholars (Buccieri and Molleson, 2015; Livingstone et al, 2015; Mackrill and Ebsen, 2017) and youth development practitioners (#NotWithoutMe, 2017; Wilson, 2017) have agreed that to examine and improve the use of social impact evaluation in digital youth participation alternatives, youth-centred practical solutions are required. Likewise, they agree that the extent to which digital technologies support youth development also requires further research (Buccieri and Molleson, 2015; Livingstone et al, 2015).…”

Section: Conclusion: Young Participants As Co-evaluatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Whilst the notion of digital youth participation has emerged as an important topic among research community, there is currently limited understanding of practical ways to measure the impact of youth digital participatory projects. Scholars (Mackrill and Ebsen, 2017) and youth practitioners alike (#NotWithoutMe, 2017) have called for further research into social impact evaluation of interactions between young people and digital technologies. This article addresses this research gap by reviewing literature from the areas of youth studies, youth participation, digital media, information science, and social impact assessment and evaluation.…”

Section: Introduction: Evaluating the Social Impact Of Youth Digital mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Youth digital participation: Measuring social impact

Pawluczuk

Hall

Webster

et al. 2018

Journal of Librarianship and Information Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

13Current scholarly debate around digital participatory youth projects and 14 approaches to their evaluation are examined in this article. The analysis of the literature 15 presented here reveals (1) an over-reliance on traditional evaluation techniques for such 16 initiatives, and (2) a scarcity of models for the assessment of the social impact of digital 17 participatory youth projects. It is concluded that the challenges and limitations of social 18 impact evaluation practice in digital participatory youth projects should be addressed 19 through the adoption of alternative, participant-centred approaches. These issues are 20 discussed in reference to a current ongoing study that seeks to identify solutions for 21 enhancing social impact evaluations of participatory digital initiatives by young people. 22

show abstract

Section: Measuring Social Impact With Young Digital Participants: Curmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Measuring Social Impact With Young Digital Participants: Curmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Conclusion: Young Participants As Co-evaluatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introduction: Evaluating the Social Impact Of Youth Digital mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Youth digital participation: Measuring social impact

Pawluczuk

Hall

Webster

et al. 2018

Journal of Librarianship and Information Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the light of fast-paced digital advancements of the 21st century, youth-centred organisations report that measuring and interpreting the social impact of digital youth has become difficult (Wilson & Grant, 2017). Whilst information on how to evaluate youth work outcomes and measure digital literacy are available, there is limited understanding of how to analyse and interpret the impact of digital youth projects (Mackrill & Ebsen, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Social Impact of Digital Youth Work: What Are We Looking For?

Pawluczuk

Webster

Smith

et al. 2019

MaC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Digital youth work is an emerging field of research and practice which seeks to investigate and support youth-centred digital literacy initiatives. Whilst digital youth work projects have become prominent in Europe in recent years, it has also become increasingly difficult to examine, capture, and understand their social impact. Currently, there is limited understanding of and research on how to measure the social impact of collaborative digital literacy youth projects. This article presents empirical research which explores the ways digital youth workers perceive and evaluate the social impact of their work. Twenty semi-structured interviews were carried out in Scotland, United Kingdom, in 2017. All data were coded in NVivo 10 and analysed using thematic data analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Two problems were identified in this study: (1) limited critical engagement with the social impact evaluation process of digital youth work projects and its outcomes, and (2) lack of consistent definition of the evaluation process to measure the social impact/value of digital youth work. Results of the study are examined within a wider scholarly discourse on the evaluation of youth digital participation, digital literacy, and social impact. It is argued that to progressively work towards a deeper understanding of the social value (positive and negative) of digital youth engagement and their digital literacy needs, further research and youth worker evaluation training are required. Recommendations towards these future changes in practice are also addressed.

show abstract