No Cover Image

Conference Paper/Proceeding/Abstract 686 views

From ‘what works’ to ‘how things work’: Strategies for Harmonising Criminal Justice Practice with the Relevant Evidence-Base

Pamela Ugwudike, Peter Raynor, Gemma Morgan, Bridget Kerr

British Society of Criminology Conference, Plymouth University

Swansea University Author: Pamela Ugwudike

Abstract

This paper presents the findings from ongoing evaluations of frontline youth justice and probation practice in Wales. The Swansea Service Evaluation Team (SSET) (which is based in Swansea University) is conducting the evaluations. Unlike many evaluations that overlook the processes of service delive...

Full description

Published in: British Society of Criminology Conference, Plymouth University
Published: 2015
URI: https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa24964
first_indexed 2015-12-06T01:56:30Z
last_indexed 2018-02-09T05:05:17Z
id cronfa24964
recordtype SURis
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0"?><rfc1807><datestamp>2016-08-03T19:59:34.3606116</datestamp><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>24964</id><entry>2015-12-05</entry><title>From &#x2018;what works&#x2019; to &#x2018;how things work&#x2019;: Strategies for Harmonising Criminal Justice Practice with the Relevant Evidence-Base</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>450c8cd55ce8b79f10484c88c0102310</sid><firstname>Pamela</firstname><surname>Ugwudike</surname><name>Pamela Ugwudike</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2015-12-05</date><abstract>This paper presents the findings from ongoing evaluations of frontline youth justice and probation practice in Wales. The Swansea Service Evaluation Team (SSET) (which is based in Swansea University) is conducting the evaluations. Unlike many evaluations that overlook the processes of service delivery, and focus on practice outcomes, SSET&#x2019;s evaluations have focused on a relatively under-researched aspect of criminal justice practice. The evaluations have sought to unlock what has been described as the &#x2018;black box of supervision&#x2019; (Bonta et al. 2008). This pertains to the actual processes through which frontline criminal justice practitioners deliver interventions and other supervision services. A key objective of the evaluations is to ascertain the extent to which frontline practice is aligned to the existing evidence-base. Another objective is to explore how best to harmonise frontline practice with the evidence-base. By exploring these issues, SSET seeks to draw attention to what the evidence-base tells us about &#x2018;how things work,&#x2019; or in other words, how to implement skills and strategies that produce positive outcomes. Examples of positive outcomes include effective service user engagement during supervision and reduced reconviction. This paper discusses the findings emerging from the evaluations, alongside potential means of enhancing the specificity of the evaluation tool SSET employs. Dr Pamela Ugwudike Reference:Bonta, J., Rugge, T., Scott, T., Bourgon, G., and Yessine, A.K. (2008) &#x2018;Exploring the Black Box of Community Supervision&#x2019;. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 47(3), 248&#x2013;270.</abstract><type>Conference Paper/Proceeding/Abstract</type><journal>British Society of Criminology Conference, Plymouth University</journal><publisher/><keywords/><publishedDay>2</publishedDay><publishedMonth>7</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2015</publishedYear><publishedDate>2015-07-02</publishedDate><doi/><url/><notes></notes><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm/><lastEdited>2016-08-03T19:59:34.3606116</lastEdited><Created>2015-12-05T19:13:36.6976630</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences</level><level id="2">Hilary Rodham Clinton School of Law</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Pamela</firstname><surname>Ugwudike</surname><order>1</order></author><author><firstname>Peter</firstname><surname>Raynor</surname><order>2</order></author><author><firstname>Gemma</firstname><surname>Morgan</surname><order>3</order></author><author><firstname>Bridget</firstname><surname>Kerr</surname><order>4</order></author></authors><documents/><OutputDurs/></rfc1807>
spelling 2016-08-03T19:59:34.3606116 v2 24964 2015-12-05 From ‘what works’ to ‘how things work’: Strategies for Harmonising Criminal Justice Practice with the Relevant Evidence-Base 450c8cd55ce8b79f10484c88c0102310 Pamela Ugwudike Pamela Ugwudike true false 2015-12-05 This paper presents the findings from ongoing evaluations of frontline youth justice and probation practice in Wales. The Swansea Service Evaluation Team (SSET) (which is based in Swansea University) is conducting the evaluations. Unlike many evaluations that overlook the processes of service delivery, and focus on practice outcomes, SSET’s evaluations have focused on a relatively under-researched aspect of criminal justice practice. The evaluations have sought to unlock what has been described as the ‘black box of supervision’ (Bonta et al. 2008). This pertains to the actual processes through which frontline criminal justice practitioners deliver interventions and other supervision services. A key objective of the evaluations is to ascertain the extent to which frontline practice is aligned to the existing evidence-base. Another objective is to explore how best to harmonise frontline practice with the evidence-base. By exploring these issues, SSET seeks to draw attention to what the evidence-base tells us about ‘how things work,’ or in other words, how to implement skills and strategies that produce positive outcomes. Examples of positive outcomes include effective service user engagement during supervision and reduced reconviction. This paper discusses the findings emerging from the evaluations, alongside potential means of enhancing the specificity of the evaluation tool SSET employs. Dr Pamela Ugwudike Reference:Bonta, J., Rugge, T., Scott, T., Bourgon, G., and Yessine, A.K. (2008) ‘Exploring the Black Box of Community Supervision’. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 47(3), 248–270. Conference Paper/Proceeding/Abstract British Society of Criminology Conference, Plymouth University 2 7 2015 2015-07-02 COLLEGE NANME COLLEGE CODE Swansea University 2016-08-03T19:59:34.3606116 2015-12-05T19:13:36.6976630 Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Hilary Rodham Clinton School of Law Pamela Ugwudike 1 Peter Raynor 2 Gemma Morgan 3 Bridget Kerr 4
title From ‘what works’ to ‘how things work’: Strategies for Harmonising Criminal Justice Practice with the Relevant Evidence-Base
spellingShingle From ‘what works’ to ‘how things work’: Strategies for Harmonising Criminal Justice Practice with the Relevant Evidence-Base
Pamela Ugwudike
title_short From ‘what works’ to ‘how things work’: Strategies for Harmonising Criminal Justice Practice with the Relevant Evidence-Base
title_full From ‘what works’ to ‘how things work’: Strategies for Harmonising Criminal Justice Practice with the Relevant Evidence-Base
title_fullStr From ‘what works’ to ‘how things work’: Strategies for Harmonising Criminal Justice Practice with the Relevant Evidence-Base
title_full_unstemmed From ‘what works’ to ‘how things work’: Strategies for Harmonising Criminal Justice Practice with the Relevant Evidence-Base
title_sort From ‘what works’ to ‘how things work’: Strategies for Harmonising Criminal Justice Practice with the Relevant Evidence-Base
author_id_str_mv 450c8cd55ce8b79f10484c88c0102310
author_id_fullname_str_mv 450c8cd55ce8b79f10484c88c0102310_***_Pamela Ugwudike
author Pamela Ugwudike
author2 Pamela Ugwudike
Peter Raynor
Gemma Morgan
Bridget Kerr
format Conference Paper/Proceeding/Abstract
container_title British Society of Criminology Conference, Plymouth University
publishDate 2015
institution Swansea University
college_str Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id facultyofhumanitiesandsocialsciences
hierarchy_top_title Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
hierarchy_parent_id facultyofhumanitiesandsocialsciences
hierarchy_parent_title Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
department_str Hilary Rodham Clinton School of Law{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences{{{_:::_}}}Hilary Rodham Clinton School of Law
document_store_str 0
active_str 0
description This paper presents the findings from ongoing evaluations of frontline youth justice and probation practice in Wales. The Swansea Service Evaluation Team (SSET) (which is based in Swansea University) is conducting the evaluations. Unlike many evaluations that overlook the processes of service delivery, and focus on practice outcomes, SSET’s evaluations have focused on a relatively under-researched aspect of criminal justice practice. The evaluations have sought to unlock what has been described as the ‘black box of supervision’ (Bonta et al. 2008). This pertains to the actual processes through which frontline criminal justice practitioners deliver interventions and other supervision services. A key objective of the evaluations is to ascertain the extent to which frontline practice is aligned to the existing evidence-base. Another objective is to explore how best to harmonise frontline practice with the evidence-base. By exploring these issues, SSET seeks to draw attention to what the evidence-base tells us about ‘how things work,’ or in other words, how to implement skills and strategies that produce positive outcomes. Examples of positive outcomes include effective service user engagement during supervision and reduced reconviction. This paper discusses the findings emerging from the evaluations, alongside potential means of enhancing the specificity of the evaluation tool SSET employs. Dr Pamela Ugwudike Reference:Bonta, J., Rugge, T., Scott, T., Bourgon, G., and Yessine, A.K. (2008) ‘Exploring the Black Box of Community Supervision’. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 47(3), 248–270.
published_date 2015-07-02T12:53:10Z
_version_ 1821410056594259968
score 11.080252

Similar Items