Youth Digital Culture Co-Creation: Measuring Social Impact in Scotland
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Youth digital culture co-creation: measuring social impact in Scotland Alicja Pawluczuk A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of Edinburgh Napier University, for the award of Doctor of Philosophy May 2019 Declaration I hereby declare that the work presented in this thesis has not been submitted for any other degree or professional qualification, and that it is the result of my own independent work. Alicja Pawluczuk (Candidate) Date 24/09/2019 i Abstract This thesis examines youth workers’ and young people’s perceptions of social impact and social impact evaluation of youth digital culture co-creation in Scotland. The analysis is made in relation to academic domains including (but not limited) to Human Computer Interaction, Information Science, Social Impact Assessment, Youth Studies, and Community Development. A sequential qualitative methodology was applied to gather data, underpinned by Charmaz’s (2014) Constructivist Grounded Theory. The methods utilised included interviews, a focus group, and youth participatory workshops. The findings provide new insights into how social impact is perceived by digital youth workers and young people, and into the associated challenges of social impact evaluation. It is evidenced that both groups struggle to strike a balance between following externally-imposed social impact definitions and facilitating authentic and meaningful analysis of the social impact of digital youth projects. Resultant tensions between targets and authenticity in the digital youth sector in Scotland might lead to a lack of critical understanding of the actual social impact, and thus young people's real digital needs, aspirations, and skills shortages. The contribution of this thesis is founded upon an analysis of youth workers’ and young people’s experiences of digital youth project evaluation. This thesis also provides a summary and analysis of digital youth related literature and policy activities since the year 2000 in Scotland. The findings are used to develop recommendations for academia and practice, policy makers, and digital youth project funders. Findings relating to young people’s and youth workers’ recommendations with regards to social impact evaluation of youth digital projects in Scotland are presented. It is posited that an improved evaluation approach should be (1) accessible, (2) anonymised, (3) digital, (4) encouraging of critical thinking, (5) independent of funding, (6) informed, (7) participatory, (8) playful, (9) serendipitous, and (10) well-timed. ii Publications associated with this research Pawluczuk, A., Webster, G., Smith, C., & Hall, H. (2019). The Social Impact of Digital Youth Work: What Are We Looking For?. Media and Communication, 7(2), 59-68. doi.org/10.17645/mac.v7i2.1907 Pawluczuk, A., Hall, H., Webster, G., & Smith, C. (2019). Digital youth work: youth workers' balancing act between digital innovation and digital literacy insecurity. Information Research: An International Electronic, 24(1). Pawluczuk, A., Hall, H., Webster, G., & Smith, C. (2018). Youth digital participation: Measuring social impact. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science. doi:10.1177/0961000618769975 Pawluczuk, A., Webster, G., Smith, C., & Hall, H. (2017). Evaluating the social impact of youth digital culture co-creation: let's participate and play. In Proceedings of the 31st British Computer Society Human Computer Interaction Conference (p. 32). BCS Learning & Development Ltd. doi.org/10.14236/ewic/hci2017.32 iii Acknowledgements I would like to thank my supervisors Dr Gemma Webster (Director of Studies), Dr Colin Smith, and Professor Hazel Hall for all of the advice and assistance they provided me throughout the course of my PhD. I could not have asked for a better team in terms of the expertise and general support they have provided. It has all been greatly appreciated. In the School of Computing at Edinburgh Napier University I have many people to thank: my friends and fellow PhD students, my Centre for Social Informatics colleagues, and all of the support staff in the school office for always being approachable and very knowledgeable. This study would also not have been possible without those who gave up their time to participate in the research, or to help me source participants. There are too many people to thank individually; however, please know that I am very appreciative of your contribution. Finally, I would like to extend my warmest thanks and gratitude to my partner Marcin and my writing mentor Victoria, my urban family in Scotland, and my real family in Poland. iv Table of Contents DECLARATION ABSTRACT PUBLICATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS RESEARCH ........................................................................... III ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ...................................................................................................................... IV TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................................... V LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................ XI LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................................. XII CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................1 1.1 BACKGROUND AND AIMS................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 THEORY AND METHOD ...................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 THESIS STRUCTURE .......................................................................................................................... 3 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW AND RESEARCH GAP ....................................................................5 2.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 YOUTH PARTICIPATION: FROM TRADITIONAL TO DIGITAL FORMS OF PARTICIPATION ........................................ 6 2.2.1 Youth participation ................................................................................................................... 6 2.2.2 Digital youth participation ........................................................................................................ 9 2.2.3 Digital Youth Participation in Scotland ................................................................................... 18 2.2.4 Digital Youth Participation: youth workers ............................................................................. 21 2.3 YOUTH DIGITAL CULTURE CO-CREATION .............................................................................................. 23 2.3.1 The origins of participatory practice in research and education ............................................ 23 2.3.2 Emergence of participatory design and human-centred approaches .................................... 24 2.3.3 Co-creation: defining meaningful participatory practice........................................................ 29 2.3.4 Defining Youth Digital Culture Co-creation ............................................................................ 35 2.3.5 Youth Digital Culture Co-creation: definition ......................................................................... 39 2.4 SOCIAL IMPACT EVALUATION ........................................................................................................... 40 2.4.1 Social Impact and Social Impact Assessment and Evaluation ................................................ 40 v 2.4.2 A Short history of Social Impact Assessment and Evaluation ................................................. 41 2.4.3 Social Impact Assessment and Evaluation of youth participation .......................................... 43 2.4.4 Technocratic versus Participatory Evaluation ......................................................................... 44 2.4.5 Dimensions of Participatory Evaluation (PE) .......................................................................... 45 2.4.6 Participatory Youth Evaluation: key areas for consideration ................................................. 51 2.5 KNOWLEDGE GAP .......................................................................................................................... 55 2.5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 55 2.5.2 Social impact of digital youth culture co-creation .................................................................. 55 2.5.3 Knowledge gap: digital youth impact evaluation ................................................................... 58 2.6 RESEARCH QUESTIONS .................................................................................................................... 59 CHAPTER 3: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND RESEARCH PHILOSOPHY .......................................... 62 3.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 62 3.2 THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................................................ 62 3.2.1 Grounded Theory ...................................................................................................................