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:
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
| 
