How have the evidence-based practice principles of the last 50 years contributed to developments in offender management? (Learning outcome 2)Why are methods such as pro-social modelling and motivational interviewing key in offender supervision? (Learning outcome 3)What are the benefits and challenges of inter-agency working? (Learning outcome 4)How could power, diversity and discrimination impact on effective practice and the process of change? (Learning outcome 5)Q1 How have the evidence-based practice principles of the last 50 years contributed to developments in offender management? (Demonstrate understanding of the concept of rehabilitation and aspects of the process of change. Learning outcome 2) Reading – Key reading • Chapman & Hough (1998) A guide to effective practice (chapters 1 & 4) • Canton & Dominey (2018) Probation (chapter 7) • Chui (2003) what works in reducing re-offending (Chapter 4) in Chui & Nellis (EDS) moving probation forward • Bonta & Andrews (2010) viewing offender assessment and rehabilitation through the lens of the RNR model (chapter 2) in Mc Neill et al (eds) offender supervision What to cover: • A brief history of ‘what works’. · Effective practice. · The rediscovery of rehabilitation · Meta-analysis • Cognitive behavioural approaches. • The Risk need responsivity (RNR) model. • Desistance and strengths-based approaches, including Good lives model (GLM). • Compare and contrast how the different approaches have influenced offender management. Notes and guidance Although you do need to consider it, don’t spend too much of your word count talking about the history of probation and of ‘What Works.’ You could acknowledge that there was a belief that ‘nothing works’ prior to what works. You could discuss the two influential large studies conducted in the early 90’s which relied on meta-analysis. If you discuss this, make sure you are clear about what is meant by meta-analysis to demonstrate your understanding. – Also relevant in terms of rediscovering rehabilitation is the groupwork programmes run in the UK including STOP (straight thinking on probation) which produced good evidence that some interventions could have the effect of reducing offending. Think about where you see RNR models and CBAs in probation practice today. OASys? Sentencing Planning? Accredited Programmes? Structured Interventions? To add some criticality to your work, you also need to consider some critiques of effective practice, RNR and ‘What Works.’ – You could consider the Good Lives Model which is a strengths based approach and developed by the supporters of desistance such as Ward and McNeill. GLM supports the view that people on probation are not just carriers of risk or ‘moral strangers’ and that the RNR model is too risk focused. They believe that practitioners should work with people to create more fulfilling and rewarding lives. How are desistance models and GLM incorporated into probation practice today eg you might add a SP objective in OASys for a non-criminogenic need. Other criticisms you could consider are the implementation of the accredited programmes ran ahead of the evidence and before OASys was used, the ‘What Works’ agenda was accompanied by what can be described as ‘programme fetishism’ and considered activities that did not fall under the accredited programme umbrella as less important, which we know not to be true. Accredited programmes will not work unless they are delivered in the context of effective case management based on a full assessment of
