If ‘Something Works’ is the Answer, What is the Question?

Abstract

A B S T R A C TThe aims of the paper are to present the argument for pluralistic evaluation, by outlining and assessing the various measures that have been and might be used in the United Kingdom, and to question the value of relying on reconviction rates. Most evaluation studies of offender programmes in the community and in prison have been based on single measures, mostly the recidivism rate. Some studies have evaluated the effectiveness of particular programmes in terms of the costs or of changing the attitudes or addressing the needs and problems of offenders. However, no single measurement can reveal the full picture of the effectiveness of a particular correctional programme. This paper criticizes current evaluation-driven practice -only do things that can be measured and divert resources from delivery to fairly unimaginative evaluation. It concludes that commitment to pluralistic evaluation in principle is often compromised in practice. K E Y W O R D SCommunity Corrections / Effectiveness / Pluralistic Evaluation / Recidivism / 'What Works'.

Reenvisioning Success for Programs Supporting Pregnant Women With Problematic Substance Use

“…As service programs and systems develop and change, definitions of success must also evolve conceptually. Reliance on single indicators and static measurements conceals complex individual and sociostructural contexts within which health experiences are rooted (Israel & Chui, 2006). Evaluative approaches drawing on a range of outcome measures and using a variety of techniques, both qualitative and quantitative, are more likely to capture this complexity because they allow for consideration of both inductive and deductive findings from various perspectives.…”

An exploration of the purposes and outcomes of probation in European jurisdictions

“…Lloyd and others (apud Israel and Chui, 2006) provided a list of problems associated with the use of reconviction rates for measuring effectiveness, suggesting that they:…”

“…More generally, many researchers have criticized the use of reconviction rates as an outcome indicator. Lloyd and others (apud Israel and Chui, 2006) provided a list of problems associated with the use of reconviction rates for measuring effectiveness, suggesting that they:…”

The Rehabilitation and Reintegration of Offenders

“…However, this is not the case. Although great advances have been made in our understanding of offender treatment and evidence for its effectiveness abounds (e.g., McGuire, 2002), critics remain suspicious about efforts to intervene in the lives of offenders (e.g., Israel & Chui, 2006;Merrington & Stanley, 2004;Wilkinson, 2005). Furthermore, some chinks have developed in the armor of what have been the "poster children" of offender treatment, notably cognitive skill training (Cairn, 2006) and multisystemic therapy (Leschied & Cunningham, 2001;Littell, Popa, & Forsythe, 2006) and raise research questions about the client group, the mode of delivery, and the precision of the outcome measure.…”