The value of partnerships

While everyone would agree that practitioners should engage with the broader research knowledge base when seeking to build their practice on the evidence base, the authors acknowledge that this is not a simple process in practice. The wealth of research evidence and academic ideas presented to youth justice professionals can be perceived as ‘noisy and argumentative’ which can hinder rather than help the development of effective practice in youth justice. Academics may also be too remote from practice/coalface youth justice delivery, due to a lack of insider or tacit knowledge about the realities of day to day work in youth justice services.

Drs Creaney and Price argue that knowledge partnerships can act as a bridge between the worlds of academic theory and youth justice practice, even catalysing research/evaluative cultures within youth justice settings. This can help to drive positive change by making academic insights and research evidence on contemporary frameworks, models and practices more accessible to professionals.

This paper discusses the formation and operation of knowledge partnerships within the youth justice context, offering original insights into the principles and resources necessary to build learning and research cultures within youth justice services. It is divided into three sections:

1. knowledge partnerships for building synergies between academia and practice
2. enablers and barriers to the development of knowledge partnerships
3. building evaluation/research cultures across the youth justice sector.

The authors share a number of thriving current knowledge partnerships:

• Cheshire Knowledge and Skills Partnership (a partnership between Cheshire Youth Justice Services, Edge Hill University and the University of Chester; a group comprising practitioners, volunteers and academics who meet remotely to share insights into the use of theory and contribute to discussions around the development and efficacy of differing approaches to practice).
• Greater Manchester Youth Justice University Partnership  (a long-established partnership in Greater Manchester which champions a synergy between academia and practice. A framework was co-produced to facilitate young people’s participation in decisions that affect their life, thus enhancing links between research findings and practice).
• The Dyfed Powys Hwb Doeth partnership (a group with strong links between policy, practice and academia, facilitating knowledge exchange between key stakeholders).

Of course these are not the norm and the authors acknowledge a number of barriers to developing these knowledge partnerships including time constraints and workload pressures and cultural clashes between the two groups of professionals.

The authors address this issue by providing guidance on building evaluation/research cultures:

“Investment in resources is necessary to allow professionals the time and space to undertake meaningful work and engage in a reflective dialogue. It is also important to nurture a culture that values research, which moves from occupying a marginal role within a setting to becoming ‘hardwired into the organisation’. A learning culture should be developed where professionals reflect on how they think and act; strengthening valuable dissemination opportunities to share candid insights into the value and efficacy of youth justice service interventions and practices.” 

Conclusion

The authors describe knowledge partnerships as “future-facing collaborations, capable of bridging gaps between evidence and action, enhancing opportunities for the conceptualisation and implementation of principled and progressive practices”. They make the point that such joint working arrangements can provide fertile ground to ‘fill critical evidence gaps’ with practitioners’ input key to the design of research projects which are likely to result in the refinement of youth justice practice.

Thanks to Hassan Pasha for kind permission to use the header image in this post which was previously published on Unsplash.