Why do youthwork? Is it formal or informal education?

[Chris Hoskins]

This thread is on behalf of one of my friends studying at Moorlands Bible college: she asks this question; Why do you do Youthwork? Do you see Christian Youthwork as informal or formal education???....hit me what u got???

As well as having the opportunity to help out a fellow youth ministry practitioner, I thought this could prove to be quite a good discussion for us to have as well!

[Stewart Cutler]

Some definitions from the European Community to help...

Formal learning is typically provided by an education or training institution, structured (in terms of learning objectives, learning time or learning support) and leading to certification. Formal learning is intentional from the learner’s perspective.

Non-formal learning is not provided by an education or training institution and typically does not lead to certification. It is, however, structured (in terms of learning objectives, learning time or learning support). Non-formal learning is intentional from the learner’s perspective.

Informal learning results from daily life activities related to work, family or leisure. It is not structured and typically does not lead to certification. Informal learning may be intentional but in most cases is not or mat be incidental or random.

[Neil MacLennan]

Revised Definition:

Formal learning is typically provided by a church or parachurch organisation, structured (in terms of Bible Study, daily prayer or individual mentoring) and leading to discipleship. Formal learning is intentional from the learner’s perspective and from God's.

Non-formal learning is not provided by a church or parachurch organisation although typically does nonetheless provide quality discipleship. It is, however, structured (in terms of Bible Study, daily prayer or peer support). Non-formal learning is intentional from the learner’s perspective and from God's.

Informal learning results from daily life activities related to work, family, leisure and church. It is not structured although typically plays an important role in discipleship. Informal learning may be intentional but in most cases is evidence of the Holy Spirit at work.

[Allan Clyne]

Hi Chris,

It’s an interesting question, personally I understand youth work to be underpinned by an informal approach, if it’s not informal it’s not youth work. Mainstream youth workers may also define there practice in terms of being an informal educator. However things are never that clear cut. They end up delivering an agenda set by the local authority and we by whoever pay us.

In reality Christian youth work (in Scotland at least) is rarely committed to informal education, its need for proclamation usually draws it back into some form of formal approach, even if it does use some informal methodologies. There are however a growing, if small number of Christian organisations out there who are changing this.

There is some interesting stuff around on this
Ellis in Using Informal Education; Green in Ethical issues in youth work; Pugh on Infed; Holdman’s Kids at the door and a couple of books by Richard Passmore,

Personally I’m committed to Informal education because it fits better with my theology. To suggest that Christianity can be taught in the same way as we teach French or German would seem to me to be an error of judgment.
Informal education with its locus on the needs, and situation of the young person and its commitment to supporting the right and responsibility of that young person to have ownership of their views and decisions is a more appropriate view then it comes to working with the personal, social, emotional and spiritual aspects of our lives

This informal approach is built around a commitment to the belief that:-
• It is God who calls people and converts
• He is already at work not following up my evangelism.
• That faith must make sense and be nurtured in the Context in which it is born
• We must look out for sign of his grace and place ourselves in a place where he will use us.
• We are called to work with the whole person.

In reality things are never this clear cut and we all operate in a blend of these approaches, more often it is about situating one approach as central to our practice and the others as tools to be used

[Jonathan Fraser]

Interesting Chriso!
The 'why' question is that which interests me. The question over informal or formal education seems to be more of a 'how' question. And I don't consider myself qualified to answer 'how' questions. But I'll have a bash...
There are numerous approaches to learning languages. But essentially you can boil them down into two categories. There is the theoretical way (reading books, attending classes: formal education) by which one gains knowledge, essentially, 'about' the language. The other way is what I like to call 'participatory immersion.' So you'd go to Germany, for example, and associate with people who speak no English, forcing you to speak German yourself. Or, like in the Gaelic school in Inverness, whether or not you can speak the language you are spoken to solely in Gaelic from day 1 forward. You learn pretty quickly but it's not formal - it's just what you do. As such, you gain knowledge 'of' the language. I understand youth ministry as participoatory immersion. In other words, we get on with doing what the church does (i.e. telling the story of God) and we just invite young people to jump in with us at the deep end. Or simply to join us as we do what we do as the church of Jesus Christ (although we probably need to get better at it). Certainly North American youth ministry has always emphasised catechesis and more formal models of education over and against this less formal participatory 'model' (though it's not a model at all). I'm not undermining formal educational approaches but I do think that they are secondary to more informal approaches. However, I wonder if we still persist with doing education prior participation (i.e. are you good enough to come to church, do you know enough, etc.). I can give you a look at a paper on this very issue if you want.

[Neil Pratt]

Hi Chris,

isn't that really two distinct questions? 'Why' has to do with motivation, the second may well be shaped by the assumptions about youth work implicit in the answer to the first.

While I share Allan's preference for informal approaches in youth work, I'm not prepared to go as far as to say that only informal approaches constitute youth work - if a group of young people ask for discussion on a certain topic, the discussion may contain a formalised 'curriculum', but it is still valid to call it youth work.

It's been my experience that youth workers who describe their work with an emphasis on evangelism and discipleship tend to be more comfortable with a formal approach, whereas youth workers who describe what they do as developing the young people and journeying with them through adolescence into adulthood tend to default towards informal, reflective approaches. Of course, buried in both of these descriptions are a whole host of assumptions and values about the Christian faith, young people, the church's mission, how we learn and so on.