The Digital Youth Work Research Hub, launched earlier this year at Leeds University with support from the INCLUDE+ Network, recently hosted its first workshop. This marks a key step in addressing some of the challenges and opportunities in the field of digital youth work.
The workshop provided an opportunity to examine the current state of the field, identify pressing issues, and consider ways to improve knowledge sharing and collaboration. This blog post outlines key themes and insights from the session, as well as considerations for the future of digital youth work research and practice.
What is DYWR.HUB?
The DYWR.HUB (Digital Youth Work Hub) was established in response to the fragmented nature of digital youth work knowledge. Reports, blog posts, webinars, and academic articles are available but often dispersed across platforms, making it difficult for practitioners and researchers to find cohesive guidance or an overview of the field.
While unifying all resources under a single framework may not be feasible or necessary, creating an organised approach to recognising and sharing knowledge is important. Digital youth work is inherently interdisciplinary, which adds to its complexity.
The hub aims to ensure that digital youth work is recognised as a legitimate area of research and policymaking.
This recognition is essential for its integration into both formal and non-formal education sectors and for supporting its development within broader social and policy contexts.
fragmentation & digital divides: the value of [dis]connect?
One of the issues discussed during the workshop was the fragmented nature of digital youth work. Participants noted disparities in how knowledge is produced, shared, and applied across different regions and contexts. There seems to be he lack of a coherent link between research, policy, and practice in digital youth work. While policies often set out broad and ambitious goals for digital transformation, they frequently lack the depth or specificity needed to address the realities faced by youth workers on the ground.
This fragmentation is exacerbated by digital divides, which disproportionately affect marginalised communities. The COVID-19 pandemic brought these inequalities into sharper focus, as some youth organisations struggled to access the resources or training needed to engage effectively in digital practices.
Participants highlighted the need for research-informed policy that reflects the practical challenges and diverse contexts of digital youth work. This involves creating stronger bridges between policymakers, researchers, and practitioners to ensure that insights from the field inform policy development and vice versa.
As part of our mission, the DYWR.HUB is also critically examining its own role in this process. Is it necessary to standardise practices and unify the field, or should we embrace its diversity and allow its disconnectedness to remain a defining characteristic? These questions are central to understanding how the hub can best support the development of digital youth work.
Complex academic language or inaccessible formats can prevent valuable insights from reaching the practitioners who need them most. Ensuring that research is translated into actionable recommendations and shared in inclusive ways is essential to bridging these gaps.
do we still need digital youth work?
A recurring and challenging topic during the workshop was the overemphasis on digital youth work as a concept. Should we still be using this term? What if it oversimplify the nature of the work that is happening in the field?
Participants debated whether it should be narrowly defined as the integration of digital tools to enhance traditional youth work practices, or whether it should take a broader, more transformative approach that includes fostering critical digital literacy, youth empowerment, and ethical engagement with technology.
Some participants argued that focusing primarily on the use of digital tools might limit the field’s potential by framing it as an extension of existing practices rather than recognising it as a distinct area of knowledge and practice. This perspective emphasised the importance of positioning digital youth work as a critical response to digital transformation in society, equipping young people to navigate issues like data privacy, algorithmic bias, and online safety.
Others, however, pointed out that overloading the definition with broader societal goals could risk diluting its practical applications. Youth workers often face significant constraints, including a lack of funding, training, and resources, which makes implementing broad or abstract goals challenging. For these practitioners, digital youth work is most valuable when framed as a practical toolkit that enhances their existing work, such as facilitating digital communication, delivering online workshops, or supporting digital inclusion.
Despite these differing perspectives, participants acknowledged that defining digital youth work in a rigid or overly prescriptive way might oversimplify the complexities of the field. Digital transformation in youth services varies greatly depending on local contexts, organisational priorities, and available resources. As such, it may be necessary to maintain flexibility in how digital youth work is conceptualised and practiced.
The discussions also raised critical questions about whether digital youth work should be standardised to create a unified field or whether its diversity and disconnectedness should be embraced as a defining characteristic. While standardisation could help establish digital youth work as a recognised profession, attract funding, and ensure more consistent policy and research agendas, it might also risk erasing the creative and context-specific approaches that make youth work effective.
Participants highlighted the importance of recognising digital youth work as both a practical field and an area of critical inquiry.
For instance, some suggested that exploring interdisciplinary connections – such as linking digital youth work with STEM, media studies, or ethics – could enrich its theoretical and practical dimensions. Additionally, discussions included the potential for formal education pathways, such as dedicated courses or certifications, to support youth workers in developing specialised digital skills.
Ultimately, there was agreement on the need for a shared reference point that allows the field to evolve while remaining grounded in practice. This reference point could provide a framework for discussions on research, policy, and funding, while still leaving space for local adaptation and innovation.
The workshop concluded that defining digital youth work is less about finding one definitive answer and more about creating a flexible, inclusive framework that reflects the diversity of practices and goals in the field. This approach acknowledges both the strengths of standardisation and the value of diversity, ensuring the field remains dynamic and responsive to the needs of young people and youth workers alike.
Key questions
The workshop raised several important questions for the field:
- How can digital youth work be recognised as a distinct profession?
- What role can interdisciplinary approaches, such as STEM, play in shaping its future?
- How can youth workers be supported in integrating digital practices without additional burdens?
- What might structured training or formal education in digital youth work look like (e.g., Degree in Digital Youth Work)?
Conclusion
This workshop was a starting point for examining and addressing the challenges in digital youth work. It reinforced the importance of collaboration, knowledge sharing, and practical engagement in shaping the future of the field.
I want to thank all participants for their time and insights. Their contributions have helped lay the groundwork for further exploration and development within the DYWR.HUB.
The goal is to continue these discussions and work collectively towards a resilient, inclusive, and impactful future for digital youth work. If you have further thoughts or ideas, I welcome your input – this is a collaborative effort, and ongoing dialogue is essential.