Curriculum
The curriculum for the Master’s Programme Comparative European Perspectives on Youth Work and Social Disadvantage has been designed jointly by three partner-universities: HUMAK University of Applied Sciences (FI), University of Bedfordshire (UK) and University of Tartu, Viljandi Culture Academy (EE). The Programme was prepared within the framework of Curriculum Development project.
Objectives
The main idea of the curriculum is to combine the traditional academic approach of research universities with the practical traditions of universities of applied sciences in order to produce youth workers committed to translate internationally acclaimed research into enhancing practical youth work.
The consortium is committed to embed the European citizenship and perspective into the curriculum and provide youth workers with a Master’s degree able to increase awareness of social justice and responsibility in policymaking on local, national, and international levels. The key to achieving these goals lies in the interdisciplinary collaboration creating a Master’s degree programme in youth work that offers undergraduate students from various backgrounds the possibility to use their previous degrees as a pathway to this discipline. Moreover, one of the goals of the degree programme is to create a profession recognised in all European Union countries.
The objective is to train experts in the international and multicultural field of youth work in a European context. These experts will be able to critically analyze, clarify, and solve development tasks using research-based development methods in their professional work. The degree programme prepares students for professional and educational mobility in Europe and enables them to work as specialists in youth work and youth policy in international and multicultural work environments and networks. Most importantly, the programme provides new competencies in preventive work in the field of juvenile justice and rights. Thus, graduates of the programme will be able to develop counselling for youth suffering from social exclusion using different service systems.
Studies
The studies consist of four study areas (see Structure of the Studies): 1) European perspectives in youth policy, 2) European perspectives on models of youth work, 3) Perspectives on methods of youth work and youth policy, and 4) Research methods and thesis.
The first two areas give students perspectives on youth policy and youth work in Northern Europe (Finland), Eastern Europe (Estonia) and the English-speaking world (United Kingdom). This holistic and wide overview offers students possibilities to analyse and criticise different models while at the same time developing knowledge and understanding of new kinds of models on a European level. These studies are compulsory for all students.
The aim of Study Area Three (Perspectives on methods of youth work and youth policy) is to give the ability to benefit from different methods of youth work. This study area consists of nine units: Young people and drugs, Experimental learning and adventure education, Drama, Youth policy, GO and violent crime, NGOs and youth work, Simulation and gaming, Sexual exploitation and youth work, Multidisciplinary youth work, and Adventure education. Students can choice three out of these nine units according to their own interest.
Study Area Four aims at identifying important research questions and developing a programme or a commission and completing and answering to the research questions in a research project in the field of youth policy and youth work. This study area consists of two units (research methods and thesis) implemented nationally.
Structure of the Studies
The structure of the curriculum is as follows:
- Study area 1: Comparative European Perspectives on Youth Policy (3 modules of 5 ECTS each = 15 ECTS)
- Study area 2: Comparative European Models of Work with Youth People (3 modules of 5 ECTS each = 15 ECTS)
- Study area 3: Perspectives on the Methods for Youth Work with Youth Policy
(3 optional modules of 7 ECTS each = 21 ECTS)
Study area 4: Research Methods and Thesis (3 modules of 3 ECTS + MA-thesis of 30 ECTS = 39 ECTS)
| Study Area 4: Research methods and Thesis | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Research Methods 9 etcs | Thesis 30 etcs | ||||||
| Study Area 3: Perspectives on the Methods for Youth Work with Youth Policy | |||||||
| Young People and Illicit Drug Use in the UK (UK) 7etcs | Youth Policy, Group Offending, and Violent Crime (UK) 7etcs | The Trafficking and Sexual Exploitation of Children and Young People (UK) 7etcs | Drama Work (EE) 7etcs | Simulation and Gaming 7etcs (EE) | Experiental Learning and Adventure Education (FI) 7etcs | Multidisciplinary Cooperation in Youth Work (FI) 7etcs | |
| Study Area 2: European Perspectives on Models of Youth Work with Young People | |||||||
|
|||||||
| Study Area 1: Comparative European Perspectives on Youth Policy 15 etcs | |||||||
|
|||||||
Study Area descriptions
STUDY AREA 1: Comparative European Perspectives on Youth Policy (15 etcs)
|
Unit Name |
Comparative European Perspectives on Youth Policy |
|---|---|
|
Level |
M |
|
Credit Value |
15 ECT |
|
Location of Delivery |
Luton, UK, Viljandi, Estonia, and Helsinki, Finland |
|
Summary/Overview |
This unit addresses contemporary youth policy utilizing trans-national comparison between the UK, Eastern Europe, and Nordic countries. The unit is predicated on the assumption that greater insight may be gained into the functioning of domestic systems if they are viewed through the prism of other national systems with different histories and political, legal, and professional cultures and different conceptions of the problems to be addressed and effectiveness of these policies in tackling social disadvantage or exclusion. The unit allows students to interrogate some of the most significant developments in the policy areas of education, training, and employment, youth work and non-formal education, health, child protection, family policy, leisure and culture, and youth justice. It will enable students to make broad and specific links between political and policy implications and current debates and undertake and develop comparative analysis. How these developments have impacted upon and historically influenced the shaping of Youth Work as a profession in the different countries being examined will be a significant consideration. |
|
Aims |
The unit aims to
|
STUDY AREA 2: Comparative European Models of Work with Young People (15 etcs)
|
Unit Name |
Comparative European Models of Work with Young People |
|---|---|
|
Level |
M |
|
Credit Value |
30 /15 ECT |
|
Location of Delivery |
Luton, UK, Viljandi, Estonia, and Helsinki, Finland |
|
Summary/Overview |
The practice response to combating the social exclusion of young people will be critically examined in this unit. Civic engagement with young people in Finland provides the starting point for an in-depth exploration of how youth work professionals engage young people in meaningful informal educational opportunities and how effective these preventative methods are in diverting young people away from marginalization within their communities. The unit will consider universalistic youth work in Nordic countries. Youth work in Finland has a multidisciplinary background and it aims to support the growth and independence of young people and to promote active citizenship and social empowerment. The unit will examine the theoretical background and different models of preventative youth work. Due to the historical background of Finnish youth work, the work in NGOs and civic activities are an essential part of the Finnish youth work model. UK ‘NEET’ (Not in Education, Employment or Training) Young People will be the focus of practice interventions from a UK perspective, Finally, the Estonian model of school-based youth work will be considered, including its relationship to the formal side of the educational curriculum and how professionals from teaching and youth work backgrounds come together to engage young people at risk from exclusion. The historical and multicultural context that has determined certain important and specific aspects of these youth work models will be apparent. It will also offer an understanding of the way in which deviance and social exclusion and disadvantage are defined, and the potential for alternative explanations arising from each other’s different contexts. |
|
Aims |
The unit aims to
|
STUDY AREA 3: Perspectives on the methods for youth work with youth policy (21 etcs)
3.1 Young People and Illicit Drug Use in the UK (7 etcs)
|
Unit Name |
Young People and Illicit Drug Use in the UK |
|---|---|
|
Level |
M |
|
Credit Value |
7 |
|
Location of Delivery |
Luton, UK |
|
Summary/Overview |
This unit is designed for post-graduate students and professionals working in a variety of practice settings with young people. It would be particularly appropriate for youth workers, social workers, health service workers, practitioners in a range of voluntary sector agencies, and practitioners within the youth justice system. The unit will enable students to understand and critically appraise the complex interactions between social exclusion, gender, ethnicity, and historical and cultural factors in illicit drug use. By drawing on historical and cross-cultural comparisons, students will be able to compare and contrast contemporary policy and practice in the drug field in the UK with that which prevailed in previous periods in the UK and with that which currently prevails in other countries |
|
Aims |
The unit is intended to enable students to critically appraise the extent and patterns of young people’s drug use in the UK and analyse these patterns in relation to factors such as class, ethnicity, and gender. By drawing on comparative material, the unit also aims to enable students to contrast UK drug policy and enforcement measures with those that have existed previously in the UK and which currently exist in other areas of the world. In short, the unit aims to equip students to engage critically with some key debates about the drug problem in the UK as it relates to young people. |
3.2 Young People, Group Offending, and Violent Crime (7 etcs)
|
Unit Name |
Young People, Group Offending, and Violent Crime |
|---|---|
|
Level |
M |
|
Credit Value |
7 |
|
Location of Delivery |
Park Square, UK |
|
Summary/Overview |
This unit will equip students with an understanding of the nature and extent of violent group offending by young people in the UK, mainland Europe, and North America, and will develop their capacity to critically evaluate the relevant sociological and criminological perspectives that aim to explain these phenomena. In particular, it aims to explicate the impact of social, economic, and political change on changes in the forms of youth crime. It offers an opportunity to critically analyse policy and practice in relation to group offending amongst ‘socially excluded’ young people in a range of European and North American settings. |
|
Aims |
The unit aims to equip students with the conceptual tools and knowledge base to critically analyse policy and practice in relation to group offending amongst ‘socially excluded’ young people in a range of European and North American settings. |
3.3 The Trafficking and Sexual Exploitation of Children and Young People (7 etcs)
|
Unit Name |
The Trafficking and Sexual Exploitation of Children and Young People |
|---|---|
|
Level |
M |
|
Credit Value |
7 |
|
Location of Delivery |
Park Square, UK |
|
Summary/Overview |
Taking a child protection focus, this unit explores the conflict between welfare and criminal justice approaches both supporting children and young people and disrupting and prosecuting those who intend to abuse them. It looks at the range of risk factors that can push a young person into vulnerable situations (such as problem drug and alcohol use, homelessness, and school exclusion) and the pull factors (such as relief from poverty and conflict) that can encourage them into exploitative relationships. The unit offers the opportunity to critically examine theories of risk, resilience, agency, and victimhood within the child protection, health, and education professional responses to the sexual exploitation and trafficking of young people. |
|
Aims |
The unit aims to equip students with an understanding of the nature and extent of the sexual exploitation of children and young people. It offers an analysis of the development of discourses of ‘trafficked’ young people, exploring the relationship between ‘trafficking’ and ‘sexual exploitation’ of children from abroad and of UK Nationals. |
3.4 Drama Work (7 etcs)
|
Unit Name |
Drama Work |
|---|---|
|
Level |
M |
|
Credit Value |
7 |
|
Location of Delivery |
Viljandi, Estonia |
|
Summary/Overview |
This course offers to participants an insight into drama methods that can be used for several purposes simultaneously—for example, socializing, teaching, and therapeutic, artistic, and research purposes. Students learn interactive theatre mostly by performing and experiencing drama processes in workshops which are created or designed according to the group’s needs and wishes. The interactive theatre techniques such as dramatic improvisation, forum-theatre, and play-back theatre are introduced and rehearsed. |
|
Aims |
To prepare students to work with groups (of youth) using drama methods, to train their communication and drama skills, to learn to create drama processes for young people and with groups of young people. |
3.5 Simulation and Gaming (7 etcs)
|
Unit Name |
Simulation and Gaming |
|---|---|
|
Level |
M |
|
Credit Value |
15/7 |
|
Location of Delivery |
Viljandi, Estonia |
|
Summary/Overview |
Within the first part of the unit the students are introduced to theories of experiential learning and explore the main implementation areas of games and simulations. Then the focus shifts to the basic aspects of modelling and exploring criteria for selecting the most appropriate elements and rationale for a given simulation. The fourth component considers various aspects of implementation: what and how people learn from simulations, how to select and run a simulation game, and how to carry out debriefing. The unit will be delivered as an intensive one-week course. |
|
Aims |
The unit aims to allow students to
|
3.6 Experiential Learning and Adventure Education (7 etcs)
|
Unit Name |
Experiential Learning and Adventure Education |
|---|---|
|
Level |
M |
|
Credit Value |
7 |
|
Location of Delivery |
Tornio, Finland and Viljandi, Estonia |
|
Summary/Overview |
This module aims to equip students with an understanding of experiential learning and adventure education theory. Students learn what to create and lead educational processes based on experiential learning principles. |
|
Aims |
The unit aims to
|
3.7 Multidisciplinary Cooperation in Youth Work (7 etcs)
|
Unit Name |
Multidisciplinary Cooperation in Youth Work |
|---|---|
|
Level |
M |
|
Credit Value |
7 |
|
Location of Delivery |
Helsinki, Finland |
|
Summary/Overview |
The unit examines Finnish multidisciplinary cooperation in the field of youth work in a broad sense, considering its different factors both in client work, planning, and on developmental and legislative levels. The unit considers why multidisciplinary cooperation is demanded and needed in Finland, how it has changed and developed, and how it could be developed in the future, especially from the perspective of youth work. The considers also the meaning and objectives of multidisciplinary cooperation as a working method taking into account the various aspects of its partners and how the role of youth work is connected to them. |
|
Aims |
This unit aims to
|
STUDY AREA 4: Research Methods and Thesis (39 etcs)
4.1 Research Methods (9 etcs)
|
Unit Name |
Research Methods |
|---|---|
|
Level |
M |
|
Credit Value |
9 |
|
Location of Delivery |
Helsinki, Finland |
|
Summary/Overview |
This unit provides students with a solid grounding in the theoretical and philosophical underpinnings of the research methods currently in use in the field of youth studies. The unit gives skills to define and focus on the research-based developing task and skills for gathering and analyzing research data. |
|
Aims |
The unit aims to provide students with the tools, skills, and understanding necessary for successful problem-solving in their professional field and for the completion of their Master’s thesis. |
4.2 Thesis (30 etcs)
|
Unit Name |
Thesis |
|---|---|
|
Level |
M |
|
Credit Value |
30 |
|
Location of Delivery |
Helsinki, Finland |
|
Summary/Overview |
The thesis is the most demanding unit in the master’s degree programme. It provides an opportunity for students to undertake an independent study related to the professional structure. Students are expected to demonstrate an ability to develop and sustain a logical and consistent argument in relation to the analysis of relevant issues in their occupational field. In this unit, students must prove their own skills to identify and solve problems by using relevant methods independently. The thesis can be a research-based development project or an applied investigation. Relevant parts of the thesis work are closely linked to the professional field in youth work. The thesis is related to previous studies and also to previous experience in the student’s own professional field. The thesis process will be done in close cooperation between the student, the professional field, and the university. |
|
Aims |
The overall objective is that students demonstrate their ability to carry out research-based development work in the field of youth work and youth policy in multicultural or international environments. |
Study areas 1 and 2 Case UK
Video conference 17.03.11
Study area 1 – Youth Policy – UK
Students were given the opportunity prior to the video conference to access various articles posted on Moodle. The selection of these articles and presentations was determined by the need to give the student body both a historical overview of the development of youth policy in the UK and how such perspectives have informed service delivery for young people across service sectors.
Students were engaged in recent attempts to evidence the ‘impact’ of youth work via a study undertaken by Bryan Merton for the National Youth Agency 1n 2005 and alongside this, the contradictory nature of the newly elected Coalition Governments’ attempt to once more require the presentation of evidence to a Education Select Committee (due to report in July 2011). Coinciding with the ‘rolling back’ of the state and the need to re-configure public sector finances, the profession of youth work in the UK is in serious jeopardy at this time.
The video conference considered the similarities and differences in the development of welfare systems across the partners and how concepts of ‘citizenship’ were translated into practice for young people. The legislative and policy frameworks governing the direction of youth work were also examined, Youth Act 2006 etc.
Study area 2 - UK
Socially Excluded Young People: Education, Training and Employment
Parsons (1999) summarises the functions of the education system as being: custodial; creating a national identity; skilling; credentialing; selecting, organising and transmitting public knowledge.. Internationally, educational systems have evolved differently, with varying degrees of emphasis on these functions. Within any individual education system, some will also benefit from these different functions more than others. Parsons notes that the relative weight given to these different functions will reflect ideological positions, and will result in different organisation of schools, curricula and teaching approach.
As formal and compulsory schooling has developed, there has been evidence of resistance and rebellion to schooling – demonstrated through truancy, misbehaviour, and both silent and active resistance to learning within the classroom. These subcultures of resistance have been central to social scientific analyses of education and the experience of young people within the system.
The video conference discussion focussed upon the relationship between policy discourses in education and what happens to young people who are disaffected or in some way ‘excluded’ from school. Students were asked to come prepared to respond o the following questions:
- In your professional experience, how do young people come to be disaffected by schooling? How is this deal with (a) by teachers and (b) other professionals?
- What are the key concerns amongst policy makers regarding the inclusion of disaffected youth in education? To what extent do these concerns support/act against working effectively with young people?
- How is the voice of the child heard in this context?
- What approaches/resources are available to professionals in working with young people who are disaffected by education?
The vast anomalies between the three systems became apparent and linked to the legislative framework mentioned above; three key areas became apparent in the discussion.
- The attempts to retain children in the school system varied across the partners – the UK seemed most likely to exclude,
- the impact of the introduction of managerialist measures, for example league tables on communities, and
- the arrival of newcomers to previously homogenous communities (Somali young people in Helsinki)
Background readings
Michael Gove’s speech - speech to the Education World Forum
Transcript of a speech to the Forum by Michael Gove. He talks about using the PISA survey of international education performance to outline how whole-system reform is needed to build a world-class education system.
http://education.gov.uk/inthenews/speeches/a0072274/michael-gove-to-the-education-world-forum
Alitolppa-Niitemo, A. (2002) ‘The generation In-Between: Somali youth and schooling in metropolitan Helsinki’, Intercultural Education, 13, 3, 275-290.
Ogg, T. And Kaill, E. (2010) A new secret garden? Alternative provision, exclusion and children’s rights. London: Civitas. Pp17-20
Block Study week 15-19th May 2010
The week was extremely busy and full of peer learning opportunities.
Monday started with an introductory input by Professor John Pitts, using the three crime detectives, Holmes, Maigret and Chandler as examples of how to undertake crime investigation from three different angles or perspectives. This was to encourage students to think more critically about undertaking comparative analysis when comparing policy and practice across the consortium.
The afternoon focussed upon youth work values and how the profession was having t compromise these values in order to provide evidence for the value of increasingly ‘target driven’ youth work services. Neville Palmer asked the group to consider a ‘business planning model ‘ in order to prioritise service delivery on a particular UK estate with complex and multiple issues. Students were asked to consider how they would manage the decision making process to minimise the erosion of core youth work values.
Dr Isabelle Brodie closed the day with a presentation on the history of the education system in the UK.
On Tuesday morning, following a brief welcome from Professor David Barrett, two workshops were offered to reflect key elements of UK youth policy and to give students the opportunity to focus in greater detail n their assignment topics:
Professor Margaret Melrose talked about young people, drugs and alcohol in the UK, and in particular the findings of her research on cannabis use and what messages had been derived for the practitioners working with substance using young people.
Camille Warrington led a workshop on young people’s rights, participation and citizenship and the development of a rights-based practice approach in the UK. This was supplemented by her own experience of developing innovative participative practice methods with young people in the UK who have been trafficked or sexually exploited.
The afternoon saw Professor Tony Jeffs captivate his audience with a historical and comparative analysis of youth work. Sometimes controversial, his comments gave a useful current overview in which to locate UK youth work practice and what the profession may look like in the future (and what it shouldn’t look like).
On Wednesday the group travelled to Islington, London to hear from two practitioners attempting to engage young people at risk of exclusion. Lez Quinn, Islington Youth Offending Team and Angels with Dirty Faces (AWDF) talked about the innovative methods to bring the community together following the murder of local youth Kiyan Prince. His community development model s based on the ‘Pay it Forward’ principle (Benjamin Franklin).
Sacha Kaufmann, Camden Detached youth work project, explained how practitioners engage with young people on the streets and the potential, but also importantly, limits and professional boundaries that inform this model of practice.
On Thursday morning, the group were given the case study for the assignment on study area 2. Dr. Isabelle Brodie was able to answer student queries about how to approach the assignment.
The afternoon and final curriculum session was a panel discussion. The panel was representative of the different agencies/partners that would be involved in some way to either support a young person who was at risk of exclusion, or indeed offer alternatives to the formal education system.
Karl Weaver, Xers Project, discussed the nature and complex needs of the young people that attend his centre, and how for many, it is their last chance. Neil identified what schools try and do to prevent exclusion becoming a real possibility for young people. Dr Tim Bateman focussed upon the youth justice system in the UK and how certain policies within the system can actually exacerbate the situation of exclusion for young people.
Neville Palmer reminded the practitioners of the preventative role of youth work, particularly in schools.
Our final morning together was spent dancing, writing evaluation forms and engaging in a participant focussed evaluation process, the results of which are on Moodle. Informal feedback appeared most positive.




Share