Some thoughts on recent research on pathfinder programmes in the Probation Service
| Date | 01 September 2005 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0264550505058026 |
| Published date | 01 September 2005 |
| Author | Steve Stanley,Simon Merrington |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Some thoughts on recent research on
pathfinder programmes in the
Probation Service
Simon Merrington, Research Consultant
Steve Stanley, London Probation Area
Abstract In this article the authors consider the results of the largest study of
programme effectiveness yet published, arguing that it is still disappointingly
inconclusive, partly because of the results themselves, and partly because of
concerns about methodology.
Keywords pathfinder programmes, probation, ‘What Works’
Published at the end of 2004, Hollin et al.’s retrospective analysis of pathfinder
programmes is a long-awaited contribution to the evidence-base of What
Works in this country. Based on over 2,000 offenders, it is ‘the single largest study
of programme effectiveness in probation yet reported’ (p. 5). It joins the growing
family of outcome evaluations in probation, prisons and youth justice, which are
now yielding up their results. The research team from Leicester and Liverpool
universities are evaluating a range of mainly cognitive skills programmes: Think
First, Reasoning and Rehabilitation (R&R), Enhanced Thinking Skills (ETS), Priestley
One-to-One and Addressing Substance-Related Offending (ASRO).
The present retrospective study is limited to exploring whether the programmes
reduce reconviction, but can say little about why or for whom they are effective.
Oxford University’s retrospective study of Think First in probation was similarly
handicapped, as well as the three outcome evaluations of ETS and R&R in the
prison service.
As in all these evaluations, the research team adopted a quasi-experimental
design. Results were compared between an ‘experimental’ group (those given a
condition to attend one of the above programmes) and a ‘comparison’ group of
offenders given a standard probation order without such a condition.
289
Probation Journal
The Journal of Community and Criminal Justice
Copyright © 2005 NAPO Vol 52(3): 289–292
DOI: 10.1177/0264550505058026
www.napo.org.uk
www.sagepublications.com
Comment
06 Merrington (bc-d) 27/7/05 3:27 pm Page 289
To continue reading
Request your trial