KESS - Place-Based Research in Education & Housing

1.30pm: Welcome

1.35pm: - Opening Remarks

1.45pm: “The Story I Want My Life to Be”: Lessons from the Conversations Research for the 16-18s in Education and Training Bill

Dr Liam O’Hare, School of Social Sciences Education and Social Work and Innovation Zones, Queen’s University of Belfast

This presentation is grounded primarily in Conversations Research “The Story I Want My Life to Be” - a co-produced, place-based study involving one-to-one conversations with children and young people in the Greater Shankill about their understanding of participation, aspiration and support. The study’s direct insights are relevant to Assembly deliberations concerning the forthcoming Education and Training Bill - a Bill that is to require all young people in Northern Ireland to participate in education, apprenticeship or training until age 18. Departing from traditional transitions research, this Conversations Research asked young people not only what they want to do next, but what kind of life they want to live. Its findings revealed how the young participants value education and training as part of a wider picture that includes well-being, family, community belonging and economic security. The participants emphasised happiness, stability and contribution over narrow attainment measures. Their holistic framing and aspirations provide informative evidence when scrutinising the forthcoming Bill and considering the extent to which its Clauses align with these young persons’ views. Another central finding from this Conversations Research was the importance of pathway diversity. The young people expressed interest in academic, vocational, technical and community-based routes, but identified barriers such as mental health challenges, low confidence, family pressures and negative school experiences. Interestingly, those findings echoed responses received by the Department of Education (DE) during its consultation exercise about the Bill, when respondents broadly supported participation, but they also raised concerns about resourcing and recognition of non-academic and flexible routes. The Research also identified a risk of adopting a narrow, compliance-focused interpretation in that it could deepen disengagement among young people. Highlighting the importance of trusted adults and sustained relational support, the Conversations Research found pathfinders who trained through this Research enabled young people to articulate aspirations and pathways in ways not captured by statutory systems. Responses to the consultation similarly stressed the need for enhanced guidance and mentoring if participation would be extended to age 18. (This training work has informed the 2025 Community Research Toolkit, demonstrating how structured relational approaches can be embedded alongside legislation to support meaningful participation.) Another key insight from the Conversations Research concerned social capital and exposure. Many young people participating in the study had limited contact with role models in higher education, skilled trades or professional employment, constraining their perceived options. The Research therefore recommends earlier engagement with employers, colleges and universities through place-based partnerships. There is an urgency to do so, which is reinforced by consultation responses concerning careers education. At a system level, the Conversations Research showed how the individual voice can inform population-level outcomes frameworks. It therefore recommends scaled Conversations when Page 16 implementing the Bill, to help inform local and regional planning and to align those Conversations with consultation calls for review and flexibility. The presentation concludes with key evidence-based considerations to reflect on when considering the Bill and the systems to implement it, if enacted - in particular, the importance of those systems in recognising and supporting the “story” that young people want for their lives.

2.05pm: The Spatial Context of Anti-Social Behaviour in Housing: An Under Examined Dimension of Policy Scrutiny Dr. David Coyles, Belfast School of Architecture and the Built Environment, Ulster University

This presentation is relevant to ongoing Assembly deliberations regarding the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill - in particular, the Bill’s Clauses addressing anti-social behaviour, where housing, justice and community safety responsibilities overlap. It highlights how physical environment considerations rarely feature in legislative debate, including debate about the current proposals, even though real-world settings will be the context in which the new powers will operate (such as injunctions or exclusions). To reduce that apparent gap, this presentation offers a scrutiny lens from a physical environment perspective, to highlight how design and organisation of real-world settings shape what people see and how incidents are interpreted by residents, landlords and statutory bodies. Looking beyond legal, administrative and policing perspectives, it aims to broaden discussion about the Bill. The presentation draws on a decade of peer-reviewed research from Ulster University’s Hidden Barriers programme and work undertaken through the Ministerial Advisory Group for Architecture and the Built Environment (MAG), which have relied on field-based architectural research methods, including site observation, spatial mapping and photographic documentation. It also features comparative insights from research undertaken in Northern Ireland and other divided and post-conflict cities. Relying on that research, it highlights how an understanding the physical setting provides valuable, additional insight when assessing legislative proposals, enabling better understanding of how they would work in practice – for example, the effects of the street and shared space designs on reporting, enforcement, community relations and everyday experience; all contributing factors to how things play out. Using photographs, maps and spatial diagrams drawn from field research, the presentation describes common spatial features found in many social housing areas where anti-social behaviour is reported or enforced. It explains how those features include complicated layouts, unclear boundaries between public and private space, shared spaces such as alleyways and courtyards and defensive measures such as gates, walls and barriers; affecting visibility, accountability and perception. Moreover, it shows how confusing layouts can obscure responsibility, while poorly defined shared spaces can blur the line between acceptable and unacceptable behaviour, and defensive design can sometimes increase feelings of safety, while also making a place feel more controlled, surveilled or divided.

2.25pm: Discussion

2.55pm: Closing

3.00pm: Networking & Refreshments

Know what’s Happening Next — before everyone else does.

Get App

Host or Publisher RaISe