Select Committee on Education and Skills Minutes of Evidence


Supplementary memorandum submitted by the Youth Justice Board

LITERACY AND NUMERACY

1.  LOW ATTAINMENT AND YOUNG PEOPLE AT RISK OF OFFENDING AND RE -OFFENDING

1.1  Educational Risk Factors

  There are four main areas where there appear to be significant links between education and offending by young people:

    —  detachment from mainstream education;

    —  the impact of custodial sentences and care episodes;

    —  the efficacy of school organisation; and

    —  educational under-achievement, particularly with respect to literacy and numeracy.

  It is likely that these four aspects have complex and negative inter-relationships. It is highly likely, for instance, that the barrier to learning represented by low levels of basic educational attainment is a significant factor in pushing young people out of formal learning. Once outside mainstream education a young person's attainment will tend to fall even further behind. Despite the interplay between these areas, there is evidence to support the argument that each of them represents an independent risk factor for youth offending.

1.2  Low attainment

  In 2001 the YJB commissioned a strategic audit of custodial education and training and a review of the pre- and post-custodial educational experiences of young people on Detention and Training Orders (DTOs)[3] The Review revealed low attainment levels in a significant proportion of the population on entry to a Young Offender Institution, specifically:

    —  One in 10 was functionally below the level expected of the average 7-year-old in literacy, and a slightly higher number in numeracy.

    —  One fifth were functioning at or below the level expected nationally of the average 7-year-old in literacy and nearly one third in numeracy.

    —  Over half of the sample (51% for literacy and 52% for numeracy) were not functioning at the level expected of the average 11-year-old

  A recent survey of young people on Intensive Supervision and Surveillance Programmes (ISSP)[4] found that the average reading age was 10.8 years which is 5½ years below the average actual age of this group.

  Knowledge of the attainment levels of children and young people who have just entered the Youth Justice System, however, is much more sketchy, although analysis of Asset[5]data across the whole of the wider population of young people who offend (Oxford University, 2002)[6] demonstrates that:

    —  one in two Yot clients is under-achieving in school;

    —  one in three needs help with reading and writing;

    —  one in five has special educational needs.

  However, the relationship between low attainment in literacy and numeracy and offending behaviour is unclear, although likely associated links are shown in the diagram below:


        (Stephenson, 2004[7])

  The link with "employability" is an important one, in particular the development of the essential skills required for long-term "employability" and lifelong learning, fundamental to which is the development of sound literacy and numeracy skills.

  The evidence indicates that attainment in literacy and numeracy may be inversely related to the length and/or gravity of a young person's offending career. The reasons for this are hard to establish, although the following summarise the most likely causes:

    —  these young people's lives are characterised by instability;

    —  young people at risk of offending spend too much time out of school or other learning environments;

    —  young people do not have sufficient help with their education if they get behind;

    —  primary carers are not expected, or equipped, to provide sufficient support and encouragement for learning and development;

    —  young people have unmet emotional, mental or physical health needs that impact on their education;

    —  young people have specific learning difficulties that have either not been properly assessed or are not being adequately met by mainstream services.

1.3  Detachment

  It appears that the older a young person is, the more likely s/he is to have detached completely from mainstream learning. Given that the majority of young people sentenced to DTOs are 15 and over, it is not surprising that the majority of these young people are likely to have received little or no education or training for some time prior to their admission to custody. The Review of the Pre and Post Custodial Educational Experiences of Young People on DTOs[8]revealed that between one-quarter and one-third had no education, training or employment provision arranged immediately prior to their entry into custody.

  The recent evaluation of Intensive Supervision and Surveillance Programmes[9] (ISSP) revealed that only about one-fifth of the cohort were in mainstream education. Over half of the young people on ISSP who were above statutory school leaving age were unemployed. Only 13% of this group were in full time/part time or temporary employment and 29% were attending some form of training or educational course.

  Interim findings from research into re-connecting young people with education, training and employment[10]reveals that there are still large numbers of young people partially or fully detached. The initial analysis of the census survey revealed that only 53% of those young people known to Yots under school-leaving age were in mainstream full time education, whilst 7% had nothing arranged at all (which represents over 1,800 young people). For those post school-leaving age, 32% were unemployed, (not participating in any education, training and employment at all) which is strikingly higher than the national NEET (not in education, employment or training) figure for 16-18 year olds at the end of 2002 of 10%.

1.4  School disorganisation

  Schools have a substantial effect on the academic progress of their pupils and on attendance (Rutter, Giller and Hagell, 1998)[11] However, examination of the influence of schools has concentrated on their effects on pupils' academic achievement and attendance rather than positively engaging young people to address their disruptive behaviour, exclusion or offending.

  In relation to mainstream community provision, Youth Offending Teams are often frustrated in their attempts to broker access to appropriate provision either through lack of availability or through the unwillingness of schools and colleges in particular to take on challenging young people with low attainment levels when they are striving to achieve government targets related to national tests and qualifications. In a recent Audit Commission review of the reformed youth justice system[12] only one third of Yots said that they had good access to educational services.

  In reality, where provision is provided, many young people who are at risk of offending or re-offending are often placed into Pupil Referral Units and other segregated provision, often only part-time. While behaviour maybe modified in a segregated setting, it is the transfer to mainstream settings such as school, college or work that is the real challenge. A reintegration model that groups together young people on the basis of their anti-social behaviour and encourages them to form a group—in an environment that is very different from mainstream school—would appear to have a limited chance of success in terms of equipping them for a return to mainstream school. Even positive behaviour, when it is learned in "abnormal" environments, will not easily survive the challenge of transferring to a school, college or workplace without additional resources such as mentors to support young people[13]

1.5  Custody

  There are grounds for suspecting that the criminal justice system itself exacerbates the problems of detachment by lowering attainment and increasing risk factors for further offending. This is exemplified by the impact of custody. The criminal justice system, in its interaction with the education system, appears to detach young people from mainstream schooling, partly as a punitive reaction to offending. Legislation permits Head Teachers to remove a young person from the school roll when they receive a custodial sentence (The Education (Pupil Registration) (Amendment) Regulations 1997). In addition, schools may assume that the educational problems of young people who are subject to custodial episodes belong to Yots and the secure establishment, rather than to them. The Audit Commission Review recommends that schools retain responsibility for the education of young people remanded or given custodial sentences and that funding should follow the young person and only return to the school when the young person does. It further recommends that a Connexions Service personal adviser should be responsible for facilitating the link between a young person's school and the custodial establishment.[14]

  The review of the pre- and post-custodial education and training experiences of these young people[15]found that, while for some young people there was an increase in the volume of education that they received in custody, there were some extremely negative consequences. While between one-quarter and one-third had no education, training or employment provision arranged immediately prior to their entry into custody, this figure had risen to nearly 60% by the time of their release into the community, on average only three months later. There was a significant increase in part-time educational provision and where young people did continue in education there was a 70% discontinuity in the learning opportunities they encountered compared to those undertaken in custody.

  Whilst the YJB has through its commissioning relationship with the Prison Service invested significantly in improving both the quality and quantity of education available to juveniles in YOI's with considerable success, a recent review[16]showed that progress continues to be hampered by:

    —  population churn resulting from the transfer of young people between establishments. A young person serving a DTO in a YOI stands a 29% chance of being moved mid-sentence;

    —  staffing issues—recruitment and retention of appropriately skilled and qualified staff remains a problem both in terms of delivering effective learning programmes (particularly in vocational areas and enrichment), and in ensuring punctuality and attendance (establishments site disruptions to movement due to staff shortage as a significant factor in relation to attendance and punctuality);

    —  continued difficulties in ensuring the timely transfer of educational information and records of progress between custody and the community;

    —  the lack of availability of suitable, full time placements for young people returning from custody.

2.  THE YOUTH JUSTICE BOARD'S RESPONSE

  In recognition of the importance of learning and skills provision in assisting with the Youth Justice Board's primary aim of preventing offending, a strategic approach towards young people's access, participation and progression in education, training and employment has been adopted.

  The following extract from the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales Corporate Plan 2003-04 to 2005-06 outlines the strategy.

    "Ensuring young people are in full-time education, training or employment is the single most important factor in reducing the risk of offending. The Youth Justice Board will, therefore, continue to prioritise the engagement of young people in education and training. We aim to improve access to education, training or employment in the community and for those young people making the transition from custody to the community on Detention and Training Orders . . .".

2.1  Targets and Performance Indicators

  The Youth Justice Board has set out in its 2005-06 Corporate Plan that during 2004-05, 90% of young people will receive 30 hours a week of education, training and personal development activity compliant with the National Specification for Learning and Skills. For young people in YOIs, the target is for 25 hours a week by the end of 2005. Other targets and performance indicators set by the Youth Justice Board relating to education, training and employment include:

    —  to ensure that 90% of young offenders supervised by Yots are in suitable full-time education, training or employment;

    —  all young people entering secure facilities will be tested for literacy and numeracy, with 80% of young people on DTOs of six months or more improving by one skill level or more in literacy and/or numeracy to the level of need set out in their Individual Learning Plan (ILP).

2.2  Investment in Custodial Education and Training

  In relation to young people on Detention and Training Orders the Youth Justice Board has produced a detailed National Specification for Learning and Skills (Youth Justice Board, 2002) which is now part of the Service Level Agreement between the Youth Justice Board and the Prison Service. The vision of the secure learning centre has been an important element in driving forward a culture change within secure establishments aimed at positioning learning as the central purpose to which all other functions contribute.

  The implementation of the National Specification has been accompanied by a significant increase in resources for education and training. Over the last three years the YJB has trebled the per capita spend on education for juveniles in Prisons and invested £13 million in new classrooms and workshops. It pioneered the introduction of Heads of Learning and Skills, whose role it is to co-ordinate activities to ensure coherence and quality both across the whole of the regime and with opportunities in the local community. The Board has also funded a raft of other new posts: 250 Learning Support Assistants, Special Educational Needs Co-ordinators and Literacy and Numeracy Co-ordinators. The reforms have had a positive impact on both the volume and quality of education now being delivered to juveniles in custody and is reflected in Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Prisons reports and in Progress Reports prepared by the YJB.

  As identified earlier, however, there is still some distance to travel before the National Specification is fully implemented in all establishments.

2.3  The Effective Practice Strategy

  In order to achieve its objectives the Youth Justice Board has adopted an evidence-based approach to practice through its Effective Practice Strategy designed to enable managers and practitioners to apply the lessons derived the evolving body of research to their everyday practice.

  There is a specific focus within the strategy on education, training and employment. In addition, the strategy emphasises the importance of learning generally in relation to all areas of effective practice, in particular the development of new skills such as literacy and numeracy as an essential part of helping young people to learn to behave differently and to have greater opportunity for positive engagement in their communities.

2.4  The PLUS Strategy

  In recognition of the low level of attainment in relation to literacy and numeracy amongst young people who offend, and its importance as a risk factor in their offending the Youth Justice Board has also devised and introduced the PLUS strategy. PLUS is funded jointly by the Youth Justice Board, the Offenders' Learning and Skills Unit (OLSU), and Arts Council England (ACE), who comprise its main strategic stakeholders along with the DfES Adult Basic Skills Strategy Unit. Significantly, many local PLUS development partnership areas have found or are seeking funding through, for example the Learning and Skills Council, to drive the implementation of PLUS. This is vital for the long term sustainability of PLUS at local level and the process of mainstreaming it.

  The PLUS Strategy is designed to address some of the weaknesses in literacy and numeracy provision that exist for adolescent learners who have not achieved in line with their peers, in particular the paucity of age and attainment level appropriate learning materials and the lack of appropriately knowledgeable and skilled staff to initiate and sustain long-term learning gains for this group.

  The overall aim of the PLUS Strategy is:

    to raise significantly the literacy and numeracy levels of children and young people in order to prevent crime.

  The Government's strategy on children at risk and for correctional services provides the social policy context for the PLUS Strategy. PLUS provides the means for helping young people return to mainstream learning and become functionally literate and numerate. It also aims to equip universal services to prevent this happening in the first place.

  The objectives of PLUS are to:

    —  equip all educational and other practitioners working in the Youth Justice System, and others working with children and young people at risk, with the skills, knowledge and learning resources to promote literacy and numeracy skills acquisition;

    —  enable educationalists to fulfil their duty of preventing offending by enhancing their skills, knowledge and resources in teaching literacy and numeracy to children and young people at risk of (re-) offending;

    —  mobilise community involvement in raising literacy and numeracy levels of children and young people at risk of (re-) offending;

    —  promote reading amongst children and young people at risk of (re-) offending;

    —    establish how significant and widespread low literacy and numeracy levels are amongst young people at risk of (re-) offending and how the problem may be remedied.

  There are five strands that comprise the PLUS Strategy.


    —  Resources: High quality paper and ICT based resources that are accessible and engaging for learners and relevant for teaching staff. Enrichment materials for use by any practitioner in the Youth Justice System.

    —  Learning and Development: Training/staff development programmes to support all relevant staff in the implementation of the PLUS Strategy.

    —  Information and Advice: Assisting managers to plan and review the effectiveness of their implementation of PLUS within secure and community settings throughout the DTO, in ISSP and preventative programmes.

    —  Research and Evaluation: Development of the evidence base through continuous assessment of the effectiveness of teaching and learning resources, interventions and learning and development programmes.

    —  Promotion and Advocacy: Encouraging a clearer understanding of issues related to basic skills, re-offending, participation and progression.

  The initial priorities are young people on Detention and Training Orders and Intensive Supervision and Surveillance Programmes. PLUS is also a vital component of preventative strategies for young people at risk and one of its objectives is to enable practitioners to identify children and young people who have low attainment levels in literacy and numeracy at much earlier stages, including before offending behaviour has commenced.

2.5  Implementing PLUS in the Juvenile Secure Estate

  The National Specification for Learning and Skills requires establishments to deliver the PLUS Strategy through a range of contexts: daily literacy and numeracy sessions, through one-to-one support provided by Learning Support Assistants or volunteer mentors and through learning embedded into other curriculum areas, including vocational training. The PLUS Strategy has provided learning materials and staff training to enhance the capacity of staff to do this.

  Young people in custody should also be provided with the opportunities to extend their learning through enrichment activities that will also focus on linking back to the community and extending learning there. These activities are broadly educational as well as supporting the objectives of the Adult Core Curricula and give young people the chance to apply and practise the skills they have learned in diverse settings and with a range of different people. The PLUS Strategy has developed a series of materials for enrichment projects on arts and environmental themes such as drama, building a pond and making digital music.

  A range of staff including tutors, vocational training instructors, Physical Education officers and wing officers have undergone accredited training in order to support learners and/or work in the classroom when off duty. In some cases, identified staff work in the education block daily. Some YOI's for example have plans to put a group of officers through the YJBs accredited Professional Certificate in Effective Practice (Learning Support) which focuses on providing effective support in relation to literacy and numeracy, particularly for young people below Level 1. This programme has also been provided for Learning Support Assistants in all Young Offender Institutions.

  Training and support for instructors to deliver accreditation through vocational training workshops, and to support these skills with underpinning key skills such as communication, numeracy and teamwork, is further encouraged by peer partnership schemes through which prison staff as well as young people can become literacy and numeracy supporters.

2.6  Implementing PLUS in the Community

  Improving the quality of literacy and numeracy provision in custody, however, is irrelevant on its own if there is no suitable provision for young people in their communities. In addition, even though the custodial population is important in terms of the severity and persistence of offending behaviour and costs it represents, of the 160,000 cases processed through the youth justice system, 95% are not subject to custodial sentences.

  To this end, the community roll-out of the PLUS Strategy is fundamental to ensuring not only that there can be seamless provision both in terms of approach and materials used for young people returning to their communities following custody, but also in terms of preventing the escalation of serious and persistent offending behaviour in the first instance.

  A range of work is being done through the PLUS Strategy team to ensure a managed rollout to a range of community providers. A number of specific sites in England and Wales have been identified either through Youth Offending Teams or providers, such as NACRO, which has adopted PLUS as the strategy underpinning its literacy and numeracy programmes, in particular Entry to Employment.


  The main drivers for this are PLUS Development Advisers working at regional level and PLUS Co-ordinators working at Yot level and funded locally. The role of the PLUS Co-ordinator is vital at a local level in ensuring that the support of all relevant local agencies comply with the PLUS Strategy in order to increase the literacy and numeracy attainment of young people at risk of offending or re-offending. A number of sites have already been identified and PLUS Co-ordinators appointed.

  As the PLUS Strategy is adopted by mainstream providers, such as schools, colleges, Training Providers and Pupil Referral Units, the opportunities for much greater consistency in relation to promising approaches should emerge.

  However, getting local authorities, Local Learning and Skills Councils and mainstream education and training providers to take the learning needs of young people at risk of offending sufficiently seriously, remains a significant challenge to Youth Offending Services.

  The impact of the PLUS Strategy in terms of outcomes for individual learners is currently being evaluated and preliminary results should be available during 2005. In order to illustrate the way in which the PLUS Strategy is influencing work with individual young people, a composite case illustration is included at Appendix A.

2.7  Dyslexia

  Given the YJB's commitment to evidence based practice in order to ensure that youth justice interventions are effective, there is some reluctance to adopt a singular position on dyslexia, where there are clear differences between practitioners and academics about what consititues effective definition and practice in this field.

  In order to develop a tenable position and unequivocal guidance to practitioners, the Youth Justice Board has recently commissioned a review of dyslexia in relation to young people at risk of offending and re-offending. Emerging findings suggest that there is a range of definitions of dyslexia, reflecting different theoretical approaches. Some researchers do not believe that dyslexia is a valid concept. And among those who do regard it as a diagnosable condition, there is no consensus about whether dyslexia is biological in origin; related to experience such as the influences of the home and explicit teaching methods; or a consequence of an interaction between the two.

  Research studies specifically relating to those at risk of offending or re-offending have come to widely differing conclusions, some suggesting that there is no evidence that the incidence of dyslexia is over-represented in the prison population, after other relevant variables have been taken into account, while others claim that there is a very high rate of dyslexia among young people who are at risk of offending or re-offending.

  The underpinning research base for this is often methodologically weak. Issues include inconsistent definitions of dyslexia, poor research design, questionable sampling techniques including inappropriately selected control/ comparison groups, poorly defined interventions, and over-stated claims made on the basis of unsubstantiated findings.

  To compound this, assessments that purport to test for dyslexia reflect the various theoretical positions outlined above and have not always been appropriately validated, often relying on data from small samples and unrepresentative groups, eg. university students, or relying on data purely from screening rather than diagnostic assessment. It is likely, therefore, that many tests conflate dyslexia with poor reading skills, particularly when used with groups who have low attainment levels in literacy generally.

  Given the diversity of views on dyslexia, the lack of robust research and the consequent unreliability of existing assessment tools, it is not possible currently to determine what "dyslexia" means in relation to young people who enter the youth justice system. The Youth Justice Board also has a responsibility to ensure that all young people at risk of offending and re-offending have their individual needs met. To this end, resources provided through the PLUS Strategy will help support the progress of all young people experiencing literacy and numeracy difficulties, including those who may have dyslexia. In addition, the Youth Justice Board will continue to appraise new and existing research evidence related to literacy and numeracy difficulties, including dyslexia, experienced by young people. It is vital to be able to assess the credibility of claims and the implications of findings for young people who offend or who are at risk of offending.

  In particular the YJB has a keen interest in the study currently being conducted by the British Dyslexia Association, Bradford Youth Offending Team and Wetherby YOI and will be assessing the outcomes against its effective practice criteria.

APPENDIX A

PLUS Composite Case Illustration

CASE STUDY: ALEX

  Alex is 16 years old and has just received a DTO for aggravated burglary.

  Alex struggled to achieve in line with his peers from an early age, particularly in relation to literacy and numeracy. He found the move to secondary school particularly difficult, often turning up with the wrong books and equipment. His mum provided little support at home and rarely turned up for parents' evenings as there are a number of other children in the family younger than Alex and there is no one to look after them. While Alex is offered some additional support by the school, he continues to struggle and objects to being "singled out" as he sees it. He is placed in bottom sets for everything. Alex begins to act out his frustration in lessons and by the time he is in Year 9 he has been temporarily excluded on two separate occasions. Although he shows a particular aptitude for sport, Alex is dropped from the school football team because he has failed to turn up for matches. He refuses to go for additional support with his reading although it is offered as he says the work they do is too babyish.

  Alex starts developing friendships with older pupils. These pupils rarely attend school and they associate with a group of young people who have left school and are involved in offending, mostly car-related. During Year 9 Alex is arrested as a passenger in a stolen car. He is placed on a Final Warning. Alex struggles with GCSE's, and quickly falls behind in terms of completing coursework. His attendance becomes even more sporadic and when he is in school his behaviour is increasingly challenging. He is told that his behaviour is such that he is not going to be allowed to go on the geography residential fieldtrip. He pushes the member of staff over and storms off. He is permanently excluded for this.

  Alex is referred to a Pupil Referral Unit (PRU). He attends for 15 hours a week (the rest of the time he is provided with work to do at home). Alex appears to enjoy life there but does little work. The PRU is 10 miles and two bus rides from his home. Alex's attendance soon starts to drop off.

  Alex is arrested for minor thefts and receives an Action Plan Order. By now Alex is well known to the police as part of a local group of young people who are felt to be responsible for much local crime. Alex is now receiving no formal education. At the age of 16 Alex is arrested for aggravated burglary and given an eight-month DTO. He will be beyond statutory school leaving age by the time he leaves custody.


  On entry to custody, Alex assessed for Literacy and Numeracy in line with National Standards for Youth Justice using the PLUS Initial Assessment Tool. Overall, the initial assessment reveals that Alex is at Entry 2 in Numeracy and Literacy overall, although the PLUS Initial Assessment reveals "spiky profiles" as shown in Fig 4.

  Alex is quite communicative during the initial interview. He says he is interested in getting some qualifications so that he can get a job on release from custody. He is unclear about what kind of job he would like, but expresses an interest in doing something out of doors. He is concerned that having been in custody, this will make getting a job difficult.

  As Alex is below Level 1 in both literacy and numeracy, he is assigned a Learning Support Assistant who also attends the first Sentence Planning Meeting to ensure that education and training needs are fully represented in resettlement plans and to find out more about what options are available for Alex on release from custody.

  On the basis of all initial assessment information and Alex's likely destination on return to the community, the Special Educational Needs Co-ordinator with the help of Alex's Learning Support Assistant draws up an Individual Learning Plan with SMART targets relating to the areas of difficulty highlighted in the Initial Assessment.

  A learning programme is set up whereby Alex focuses on the goals and targets set in his Individual Learning Plan. There is a strong focus on literacy and numeracy although all the work is contextualised through themes that he finds interesting. He particularly enjoys the PLUS football modules and the IT based interactive elements of Buying a Scooter. Literacy and numeracy are also embedded within all areas of learning, including Vocational Training and PE where they use parts of the PLUS module on health. Alex achieves Entry 3 qualifications in literacy and numeracy of which he is very proud.

  Alex also takes part in an environmental enrichment programme at weekends and in the evenings where he works with a group of young people to build a wildlife pond and bird and bat boxes. Literacy and Numeracy are fully embedded in the programme through the PLUS enrichment materials for Pond Kit and Tree Kit. Alex completes a portfolio of work, including a photographic diary of the process, which is accredited both in terms of its literacy and numeracy outcomes, but also for the wider key skills. His Learning Support Assistant helps him to complete some of the activities and Prison Officers trained in supporting private study and enrichment also help on the residential wings.

  Alex's Learning Support Assistant attends all DTO review meetings and makes sure that all those involved in the process are aware of what Alex has achieved and what his aspirations are.

  Early on in his sentence, it was agreed that Alex would start an Entry to Employment programme run by a voluntary sector Training Provider in his home area when he is released for the community part of his DTO. Through Release on Temporary License (RoTL), Alex visits the Training Provider for a day with a Connexions personal adviser where they give him a taster session. A member of staff from the Training Provider also attends Alex's final review at the YOI and phones him regularly. Through RoTL, Alex also goes once a week to a park near the Young Offender Institution where he does some work experience.

  On release from custody, Alex takes up his placement on the E2E programme. The Voluntary Sector Training Provider uses the PLUS Strategy to support its literacy and numeracy provision. The Yot Supervising Officer ensures that Alex's Individual Learning Plan transfers to the Training Provider, which includes evidence of what Alex has achieved and his current literacy and numeracy levels. The establishment makes sure that a record of Alex's work also transfers so the Training Provider is clear about which elements of the PLUS learning materials Alex has completed. Alex continues to work with the PLUS materials to improve his literacy and numeracy, in particular through enrichment materials. A work placement is arranged at a local nature reserve.

  While Alex finds the challenge of the programme difficult, particularly with the greater level of freedom compared to custody, he achieves Key Skills Level 1 in Communication and Application of Number and gains an IT qualification. His Yot Supervising Officer monitors his attendance and works closely with the Training Provider to ensure that any lapses are picked up quickly.

  Alex completes the E2E programme. A year later he is working full time at the nature reserve and is doing an NVQ in land management. He attends college once a week. He has not reoffended.

October 2004




3   Youth Justice Board. (2001) An Audit of Education and Training Provision Within the Youth Justice System. London: Youth Justice Board. Back

4   Youth Justice Board (2004) ISSP Interim Evaluation. London: Youth Justice Board. Back

5   Asset is the Youth Justice Board's statutory tool for assessing risk and protective factors in relation to offending behaviour with individual young people. Back

6   Oxford University (2002) Validity and Reliability of Asset: Findings from the First Two Years of the Use of Asset. London: Youth Justice Board. Back

7   Cited in YJB (2004) Reader: Education, Training and Employment (Community). London: Youth Justice Board. Back

8   Youth Justice Board, 2001. Back

9   Youth Justice Board (2004) ISSP Interim Evaluation. London: Youth Justice Board. Back

10   Youth Justice Board (2004) Research and Evaluation to determine the most effective means of ensuring that young people are in education, training or employment: Interim Report. London: Youth Justice Board (Unpublished). Back

11   Rutter, Giller and Hegel (1998) Antisocial Behavior By Young People. Cambridge University Press. Back

12   Audit Commission (2004) Youth Justice 2004: A Review of the Reformed Youth Justice System. London: Audit Commission. Back

13   Stephenson, M (2000) "Inclusive Learning" in B Lucas and T Greany (eds) Schools in the Learning Age. London: Campaign for Learning. Back

14   Audit commission (2004). Back

15   Youth Justice Board (2001). Back

16   Youth Justice Board (2004) Progress Report on the Implementation of the YJB's National Specification for Learning and Skills in the Juvenile Prison Estate 2003-04. London: Youth Justice Board. Back


 
previous page contents

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2005
Prepared 4 April 2005