Written by Domagoj Moric
Both youth work and higher education support the validation of non-formal learning and with all of this, it still barely happens. It sounds controversial, but that was the central dilemma put to participants at the opening of this year's Youth Work Talks webinar series - and, with a collective score of 7,4 out of 10, the audience agreed.
The first in a three-part series organised within the Growing Youth Work SNAC partnership, the webinar Youth Work Talks: Recognition brought together practitioners, researchers, and policymakers from across Europe for a 90-minute conversation on one of the most persistent tensions in the youth work sector: validation and recognition.
Setting the scene
At the beginning of the webinar, Elke Führer, coordinator of the SNAC Growing Youth Work, has shared how the topic of validation and recognition is connected with the broader political context.
The European Youth Work Agenda had already made clear that validation, certification, and accreditation require a common narrative, collaborative spaces, and concrete bridges between youth work training and formal educational pathways. The 4th European Youth Work Convention in Malta in 2025 reinforced this by putting emphasis on the importance of mutual recognition of the youth work approach by other sectors, including higher education, and highlighting the importance of treating youth work as an equal sector.
With that framing, the floor was opened to three speakers bringing perspectives on how validation works (or does not work!) in practice.
Three perspectives, one tension
Kristiina Pernits, Senior Advisor at SALTO Training and Cooperation, presented findings from a recent Youthpass validation study conducted across four countries - Slovenia, Estonia, France, and Germany. The study examined where validation of competencies developed in youth work and volunteering contexts actually stands within higher education procedures.
Verena Frühwirt-Mock, Head of the aufZAQ office, offered an institutional perspective. aufZAQ certifies training programmes in a field where all youth work training is, by definition, non-formal - there is no formal qualification pathway in Austria. Her organisation has developed a competence framework that maps directly onto the Austrian National Qualifications Framework, working to create recognition without sacrificing the flexibility that defines youth work practice.
Dragan Atanasov, President of AYWA (Alliance of Youth Workers Associations), a European network of national associations, brought the practitioner and policy angle - including insights from an active Erasmus+ Youth strategic partnership project co-creating online courses with universities in Finland and Italy. What was shown from the conversation is a structural tension reflected in the nature of what both sectors are trying to protect.
The core dilemma
The youth work sector puts emphasis on flexibility, learner in the centre, and personal development. On the other hand, higher education puts emphasis on academic standards, measurable outcomes, and institutional coherence. Both of the approaches are good, however, when on tries to translate one system's learning into another system's language, something tends to get lost - or, at least, someone tends to feel threatened.
Verena Frühwirt-Mock said: “In Austria, universities operate autonomously when it comes to recognising non-formal learning. Each institution decides for itself what it will accept. There are no legally binding guidelines, no common framework, no shared process. Support for validation exists at the level of principle. At the level of practice, it stops there.”
A study done by Youthpass confirmed similar patterns across all four countries. The legal frameworks enabling validation are present. The flexibility exists, at least on paper. But the procedures are heavy and awareness among learners is minimal. Most importantly, the study found that the third and fourth stages of validation, assessment and certification, seem to be more developed, while the earlier stages of identification and documentation of learning remain weak points. These are precisely the stages where the youth work field has the most to contribute.
Dragan from AYWA drew attention to something that often goes under the radar: the question of incentives. In principle, higher education supports validation. However, in practice, if you would ask yourself „what does my university actually gain from it?“ for institutions that already offer programmes, opening pathways for non-formal learning to count may feel more like a dilution of standards than a broadening of access. The pressure to move things forward, he shared, falls then on the youth sector itself.
During the discussion, a question of ownership was also tackled: if the identification and documentation of non-formal learning is the weakest link in the validation chain, who should take responsibility for strengthening it?
Kristiina's answer was direct: the youth field, as supporting reflective learning processes - helping young people and youth workers understand and articulate what they have learned - is already something youth work does well. The task is to make that process more visible, more systematically connected to the later stages of validation, and more legible to higher education partners.
This also means, she noted, not treating Youthpass as a finished product, but as a basis for a deeper reflection and learning process throughout a project experience.
So, where do we go from here? Formal recognition is not a sprint, but a marathon
In breakout groups and plenary reflections, participants identified several possible next steps:
improving channels between formal and non-formal education;
developing co-designed certification systems that involve youth workers themselves;
ensuring quality standards keep pace with the challenges posed by AI-generated portfolios;
developing shared quality standards and clearer assessment approaches;
strengthening recognition of tools such as Youthpass as a starting point for validation processes;
and continuing to share good practices across countries so that individual examples of cooperation do not stay as an exception.
In the spirit of Youth Work Talks webinars, the webinar was closed with some final thoughts. “The path to formal recognition is not a sprint, it is a marathon”, was a thought from Verena at the end. And the challenge is not to fully align youth work with higher education, but to develop forms of validation that create genuine trust and recognition while respecting the distinctive character of non-formal learning.
And yes - the conversation about validation and recognition is not finished. Our bridge towards mutual cooperation and validation is still under construction: sometimes a bit uneven, demanding, but visible and with many questions still to tackle. Each shared practice, each pathway, and each moment of trust between sectors adds another stone to the bridge. So, let’s keep our conversation going, so that youth work learning becomes valued both in principle and in practice!
