Written by:
Guest Author
In this piece, Stuart Paul, recent graduate from The University of the West of Scotland, explores intergenerational practice in the field of community development, and encourages us to think more holistically about how practice, policy and place can come together to help us shape better connectivity across generations.
Intergenerational Practice in Community Education – An Undervalued Asset?
Earlier this year, I completed an undergraduate research dissertation at The University of the West of Scotland as a student on the BA (Hons) Community Education course. This dissertation gathered the views of both participants and practitioners of an intergenerational group in Scotland, in order to explore whether intergenerational practice should be more central to Community Learning and Development (CLD) practice and policy within Scotland.
The intergenerational group brings young people, aged 12-18, together with older adults, aged 70+, together to voluntarily take part in a range of activities. These activities have included art, games, music, icebreakers, discussions, yoga, pool and more! The group takes place once a week in a community centre.
The experiences of community members are a core element of community education. As such, the research included data gathering methods which would allow research participants to delve into their own lived experiences as members of an intergenerational group. The first method involved bringing research participants together to create a collage based on their experiences as members of the group. This would then be followed up with individual semi-structured interviews, using the previously created collage as a stimulus for discussion.
I was interested in researching intergenerational practice within a community education setting, as I felt it was an underrepresented approach in the CLD sector. CLD often focusses on three key domains of practice. These are: youth work, adult learning, and community development. This led to me having discussions and trying to place intergenerational practice within the parameters of CLD. Where exactly does it sit? While it was clear intergenerational practice crossed boundaries into all the domains of CLD practice, it did not exactly fit into one specific domain. The boundaries which CLD restricts itself to means alternative approaches, such as intergenerational practice approaches, are less common in CLD practice and, therefore, are not utilised as much by practitioners to support communities within Scotland.
Discussions with the community education practitioners involved in the group revealed frustrations around the lack of representation of intergenerational practice, both in practice and in academia. Upon investigation into community education courses at Scottish universities, I found nothing which indicated that intergenerational practice was included as part of course content. This led me to think about my own experience as a community education student at university. I was the only student in my year group to discuss intergenerational practice and to investigate the topic in my dissertation. Specialisms on the course centered around youth work, adult learning or community development, meaning I had to somewhat shoehorn intergenerational practice into a topic. The concern for me is if, at university level, community education practitioners are not being exposed to alternative approaches and ideas outwith the rigid CLD domains of practice then how are we truly best equipped to support the communities in which we work.
A key discovery while investigating the policy landscape of intergenerational practice in Scotland revealed that there is no specific intergenerational practice policy for practitioners to align their practice with. In a community education context, The National Youth Work Strategy or The Adult Learning Strategy can often be the driving force of CLD work. However, they are not specific to intergenerational practice and intergenerational approaches are mainly absent from these strategies. Another alarming aspect of the policy situation was the omission of intergenerational approaches in twenty-three of the thirty-one local CLD plans in Scotland. The majority of the mentions appear to be a tokenistic throw of the word “intergenerational” too, with no real discussion on how an intergenerational approach will be utilised to deliver work in the local authority.
Through the collage and semi-structured interviews, discussion arose around the positive impacts that participation in the intergenerational group had on its members. Negative attitudes which generations held towards one another had been challenged through the group, as by spending time together and building up positive relationships with one another, both younger and older members of the group had been able to challenge previously held biases or stereotypes towards one another, leading to a more positive outlook on people from other generations. This led to the feeling from the older people that they felt safer within their community. It was also clear that loneliness had decreased among group members as part of the group, as they felt a connection to people from their generation and the other generation, and a sense of belonging was felt being part of the group. These positive impacts led to an increased sense of wellbeing among members in the group.
What appeared to make the group a long-term success was the adoption of community education values. Participants would all attend the group voluntarily, members were included in designing of the group programme and the community centre offers an informal environment to facilitate activities. Due to the group running for so long in the same community centre, a connection was built between members and the space they frequented. The community centre itself was a deeply valued asset to the community.
Participants of the research project credited the community centre as peaceful, intimate and informal. It was clear that the community centre was a factor in the success of this group. This was no mere space which held an activity once a week, but a safe place which allowed generations to come together, for people to be themselves and create meaningful connections in their lives. People felt comfortable in being who they are, with people who they enjoyed spending time with, in a place they felt they belonged. Undoubtedly, this community centre held an important place in the participants’ hearts, as they had a personal connection to the place through the joy which had been brought to their lives and the friendships they had made. Truly, it was inspiring to see young people and older people come together in the community, seeing one another not as “old people” or “young people”, but as friends and equals.
This then begs the question, if Scotland is facing issues around loneliness, mental health, and disconnectedness across all ages within our communities, then why are we not utilising intergenerational practice within community education more? Why must we pigeonhole our practice to CLD domains of practice. Through working with this group, it was clear to me that not only did members of the group experience positive impacts within their own lives but that this also spilled into the local community, strengthening the community in the process, as people were now more connected. Intergenerational practice could be an asset utilised by CLD to improve the lives of individuals and to strengthen our communities. Community centres and organisations could be the focal points for bringing different generations together in our communities. Through intergenerational practices, these community centres could improve the lives of individuals and build more connected communities in Scotland. The creation of these intergenerational spaces in our communities is therefore an essential topic of discussion and practice going forward in community education. Funding and support for community organisations to implement intergenerational practice must be delivered.
However, a bleak funding situation and limited policy representation means that intergenerational practice remains the forgotten cousin of community education in Scotland at the moment. I, for one, would not only like to see intergenerational practice at the forefront of policy and funding in community education but also greater representation within research and academia discourses. A sentiment which was echoed by the research participants in this study. Greater awareness and exposure of intergenerational practice will be an essential step in bringing it to the forefront of community education practice and policy in Scotland.
About the Author
My name is Stuart Paul. After six years of working in retail, I returned to formal education in 2019 to study the HNC Working with Communities course at Edinburgh College. At college I focused on youth work in my studies and practice. After then working in a school supporting children and young people, I decided to return to formal education by joining the BA (Hons) Community Education course at the University of the West of Scotland.
While again initially focusing my practice and studies on youth work, a placement opportunity allowed me to discover and experience intergenerational practice. This experience piqued my interest and made me consider the positive intergenerational relationships within my own life. This led me to delve into the position of intergenerational practice within community education in Scotland. I then chose to focus my research dissertation on exploring intergenerational practice in relation to CLD practice and policy. I completed my university course with First Class Honours.