Never too late to intervene? The effects of a literacy intervention on reading comprehension and resilience in young offenders

This thesis examines the prevalence and nature of literacy difficulties in young offenders accessing support within Youth Offending Services.

The impact of a computerised literacy intervention on reading (accuracy, fluency, rate and comprehension) and resilience (mastery, relatedness, reactivity, resource and vulnerability) is explored.

Factors relating to the implementation of a successful reading intervention, and young offenders' engagement within the Youth Offending Service are discussed.

A systematic review (reported in Chapter 2) of literacy difficulties in young offenders found a prevalence rate higher than that of the general population.

The majority of studies did not use a comparison group. There were methodological limitations such as convenience sampling and self-referral.

When previous engagement in education was controlled for within the statistical analysis, there was little difference in prevalence of diagnosable speech, language and literacy needs between young offenders and controls, suggesting that presenting difficulties in young offenders may be due to a lack of previous learning opportunities.

In Chapter 3, a case-series design was used to establish preliminary effectiveness of a literacy intervention on reading and resilience in four young offenders.

Theoretical propositions were made and data was accordingly collected from six sources including standardised measures, database information, observation and documentation.

Reliable Change Index was calculated using pre and post scores; conventional content analysis was used to analyse qualitative information.

Gains on the reading measure were not statistically significant after six sessions. Standardised measures were completed for one participant after 18 sessions; reading rate and accuracy significantly improved

Significant changes to self-reported scores on the resilience measure were found.

All three theoretical propositions were partially supported, therefore rival explanations were considered.

Recommendations for future research and implications for professional practice were discussed.