Scottish Government

5. Build an active learning culture in prisons

While convicted offenders are required to work, over-crowded prisons struggle with how far work opportunities can be offered. Learning is voluntary. A presumption of all convicted offenders being engaged in a range of work and/or learning activities should be established. A combination of 'help and hassle' to take part and to achieve is needed to address some of the lax features of prison life. For example, we have heard how it is possible for some to have a 'duvet day' in prison, where the routine involves watching TV most of the night and sleeping during the day.

If taking part in some activity for at least part of the week is to be expected of all, there is a matching responsibility on prisons to develop a balanced programme of opportunities for all spanning work, learning, accredited programmes and approved activities as appropriate. Elements of the package should be negotiated with offenders as an exercise in building responsibility. A 'day release' model could be developed where some offenders combine work plus 'college' (perhaps a better name for the prison learning centre), e.g. four days work/ VT with one day of core skills learning or attending education. Offender feedback on the content of VT, work parties and courses of learning should inform evaluation and improvement of activities. In this way, participation would be required, but some discretion exercised over an appropriate mix of activities. It would be for the proposed co-ordinating panel in each prison to identify the best way to deploy existing resources.

5.1 Informal learning

For many disengaged and reluctant learners, education in a classroom setting is an unrealistic goal. Their only experiences of education at school may have been interrupted and largely negative. So, formal learning is unlikely to be an attractive option initially for many. A wider set of informal learning options has been developed in a number of prisons in recent years. Some of them are highlighted in a joint thematic review of learning by HMIE & HMIP (2008). These may provide 'hooks' to other forms of learning or they may be, simply, pleasurable experiences which improve social interaction and 'soft skills' e.g. team-based working with agreed goals.

Learning partners often succeed in engaging those who are totally disengaged and lacking in self-belief, by making informal learning relevant and fun to the offenders through the use of Arts and Culture. During our visits to HMP Cornton Vale, we were introduced to an interesting collaboration with Historic Scotland, the Room with a View programme. In this initiative, offenders had the opportunity to experience a variety of learning styles where they wrote poems, stories and ballads which was set to music and played to an audience of inmates, external visitors and officers. They produced art work which was displayed at the event. It turned a tense environment into a vibrant and fun experience to the benefit of many who would otherwise not engage in formal learning. Other examples of positive arts activities that have succeeded in changing attitudes and motivation are creative writing by literacy learners, script-writing for a theatre performance, learning through dance and various activities developed by Readers in Residence.

5.2 Formal learning: overview

Formal learning is defined here as learning with a clear educational purpose, delivered through a recognizable curriculum and by various learning practitioners. Most of our focus is upon activities delivered by LSE contractors (Motherwell College and Carnegie Colleges) through public sector prison learning centres. Table 1 shows participation rates at the learning centres as a two-month average (May and December 2008). This shows the broad variations in uptake, non-attendance by those who enrolled ('no-shows') and the composition of learning activity by offender learning hours.

Table 1: Estimated figures for SPS prison learning centres: two-month average for 2008

*Estimated proportions. Cornton Vale figure for employability expressed as a proportion of offender contact hours delivered by LSE staff.

The overall proportion attending learning centres is around one-third of those eligible. This represents a snapshot measure, which fails to capture the higher proportion likely to take part at some stage during their sentence. For example, 37% (2006) and 43% (2008) of respondents to the SPS Prisoner Survey said they had attended a course of learning in their current prison.

Interpretation of these figures depends on which benchmark is being used. Levels of engagement in learning are much higher than among their peers in the neighbourhoods they lived in before entering prison and compared to their probable levels if they were not in custody. This is especially impressive in the context of a prison regime which must place custody and order considerations first. Yet, the variations between prisons are striking. Participation rises to almost 70% at Inverness (where this is the main opportunity available) and more than half in both Polmont and Greenock, but drops to just one in six at Barlinnie, Scotland's largest prison. This appears to reflect the inadequate capacity of facilities relative to the volume of prisoners. The proportion attending learning in the Open Estate prisons is lower, at around a quarter. This reflects the emphasis on work placements and college attendance outside the prison as part of preparation for release and highlights the need for greater flexibility in how learning is delivered e.g. available in evenings and at weekends when offenders are not at work. An alternative model of delivery in the Open Estate was introduced from April 2009, although it is too early to assess its impact. Even taking into account the different functionality of each prison, the variation in participation rates is too high. At Barlinnie alone, if the rate were the same as average - i.e. about double the current level - this would make a significant difference to the overall rate for Scotland.

No-shows

The system needs to become more efficient. A sizeable minority of offenders enrolling for classes don't show up. The proportion listed for learning who did not attend varies significantly, from an average of 4% at Dumfries to one in three at Barlinnie and almost half at Shotts. In five prisons the share of 'no-shows' exceeded 20% in 2008. There are legitimate reasons why this happens on any one day - for example, appointments with a lawyer, medical staff, being in court or on report. Timetabling restrictions - e.g. clashes with work, vocational training or PE - place a further constraint on who is available for learning. The National Audit Office review of England's offender learning service notes that: "Some reasons for non-attendance are unavoidable, but not all are inevitable". It also appears that arrangements in some residential areas are too lax. Some offenders and Officers may lack the motivation to ensure high levels of attendance. There are clearly issues about how offenders get out of their cell and onto the 'route' movement to the learning centre. If this opportunity is missed, offenders cannot take part. This issue has been recognised by the SPS and a specific action to tackle this has been included in the current public sector service specification.

Resources for learning

The quality of facilities for learning varies as well. For example, a new learning centre is currently under construction at HMP Glenochil; modern facilities are under-utilised at HMP Edinburgh; sizeable waiting lists to access the learning centre are found at HMP Cornton Vale; and inadequate space is available elsewhere (notably HMP Barlinnie, with the lowest participation rate in Scotland). Survey responses (Table 2) show learning centre staff are evenly split in their views: by a margin of 46% to 44%, they disagree that facilities are adequate, while a majority (56%) do not believe there is enough capacity in terms of space and staffing to meet levels of demand.

Table 2. Source: Survey of learning centre staff

Seven in ten (72%) feel access to the internet for learning centre staff is inadequate, a point underlined by our method of conducting an on-line survey. Respondents either took turns to log in and out of PCs used by learning centre managers or administrative staff, or completed the survey in their own time using personal e-mail accounts. Almost half (48%) feel there is not enough access to training and professional development for staff, though a sizeable minority (31%) report a more positive experience.

SPS had made a major capital investment in improving the prisons estate in recent years. However, better facilities for learning are still needed in a number of cases, and we would recommend that those prisons where supply is currently unable to meet demand and where facilities are of a poorer standard should have a priority claim upon new capital investment.

5.3 What to learn?

Current profile

The most common subjects reported in the 2008 SPS Offender Survey by those taking part in a course of learning were IT (58%), literacy/numeracy (44%) and art (43%). Measured by offender learning hours, Table 1 shows clear variations in learning content. Uptake in the Open Estate prisons is dominated by IT, at around 60% in both cases.

The share devoted to Communication and Literacy is at least one-quarter at three prisons. At Polmont, where a large majority of those assessed are at or below Intermediate Level 1, the share is about one-fifth. The Open Estate prisons had the lowest share of learning focused in this area. Managers of the Open Estate believe that closed prisons should have addressed the bulk of literacy and numeracy needs before offenders are transferred and are not geared up to deliver in this area, though they recognise a substantial level of unmet need remains and are looking at the best means to address this. Numeracy & Maths accounted for an average of 20% of time at Inverness and Peterhead. In contrast, less than 5% of learning time at Polmont was in this area, and none of the time at the Open Estate. Creative Arts¹¹ is the most common activity at three prisons (Shotts, Polmont and Barlinnie), at or above 30%. Little time is devoted to these activities in the Open Estate. Working with Others (not shown in the table) is recorded as a separate category. Almost half of offender learning hours at Polmont and Shotts were in this category, with five other prisons recording at least one quarter of hours on this theme.

Relatively little time appears to be taken up by learning focused explicitly on Employability. In seven prisons, less than 2% of learning hours are in this area. The higher figure for Cornton Vale is measured as a proportion of staff contact hours with offenders. Employability skills are not restricted to those learned in a classroom setting ( e.g.CV preparation, book-keeping for small businesses). They may also be part of health/addictions support and offender behaviour programmes, as well as being embedded within work parties, work placements, vocational training and pre-release activities. However, it is hard to find evidence of a consistent approach being taken in these settings to move individuals on in terms of employability. So we are unable to assess the true extent and value of employability support overall.

Some offenders who were more familiar with education in their current and previous sentences expressed concerns about the loss of specific resources ( e.g. art materials) and a perceived narrowing of the curriculum to basic literacy and numeracy in other cases. It is unclear if this reflects a decision on the part of prison managers to focus limited resources in fewer areas. But it is evident that some highly motivated offender learners are unable to progress to a higher level of study as opportunities for open and distance learning are limited. Nonetheless, funding for college-based open and distance learning is covered by Scottish Funding Council fee waiver arrangements and around 60 Open University students are being funded at the present moment

Literacy and numeracy

Because of different motivations and learning styles, we believe it is essential to maintain a varied programme of learning options. We recognise the frustration expressed by some governors and prison managers as a result of the high continuing levels of basic educational difficulties and the feeling that these are not really being addressed. Despite rising levels of education in the population as a whole, the casualties keep coming through the prison gates. This trend is also observed elsewhere ¹² as offenders become drawn steadily from the most disadvantaged groups in society. We don't support a 'back to basics' policy where learning in Scottish prisons becomes narrowed to literacy and numeracy classes. But we do believe there is greater scope to incorporate elements of literacy and numeracy learning within existing subjects ranging from art to music and IT. And we support a renewed focus on literacy learning in various settings for those who currently receive least support.

Why is this important? One reason can be found in a Home Office evaluation of basic skills training for over 400 offenders in England (Home Office, 2005). This indicated that regular attendance and more than 30 hours of learning were the only significant indicators of improvement to offenders' literacy and numeracy. These participants were more likely to achieve Level 1 or above, re-offending was lower and employment prospects were increased compared with those whose attendance was sporadic and less than 30 hours in total. The majority of offenders who completed more than 30 hours were serving sentences of over 12 months.

The SPSKPI focuses on those serving over a year. However, a minority of offenders in the Home Office evaluation managed to complete 30 hours attendance while serving sentences less than this. If the range of literacy learning opportunities were delivered in a different way, it should be possible to offer more offenders in the short-term churn opportunities to improve their literacy and numeracy. For example, one hour per day (5 hours per week) over six weeks or half this level over 12 weeks would reach the 30-hour level for those serving six months. Encouraging consistent attendance should be the priority for those serving more than six months. While this threshold seems reasonable in terms of targeting resources, we see no reason in the longer-term why some offenders serving even shorter sentences could not benefit as well (as some currently do, on a self-referral basis). A recent report on those serving short sentences in England - defined as less than 12 months - suggested that successful learning and skills provision for offenders on short custodial sentences was associated with the early and accurate identification of offender literacy and numeracy levels and related support needs (Ofsted, 2009).

Practical life skills

The four dimensions of learning in the SPS Strategy are learning for life, health, work and leisure. It has proved difficult to track how these are expressed in activities in prison. For example, practical life skills are particularly vulnerable to changes in prison priorities, funding and partnership working. We heard examples of cookery classes, food hygiene and handling and money management being proposed or run in some prisons and disappearing for no apparent reason in others. Yet there is a consensus among many offenders, learning providers and managers that these skills should be considered as a core part of prison life. Where space does not allow for a teaching kitchen, the prison kitchen could be used a place of learning.

Lack of money management skills is due in part to poor numeracy, low income and the easy access to licensed and unlicensed forms of credit. Several of the offenders we met were in debt when they arrived due to rent arrears and unpaid bills. The Scottish Government in partnership with APEX Scotland recently launched a Financial Capability training programme, aimed at offenders in prison and the community but with the potential to be used with other groups who have money management issues. In the Time to Learn report (Prison Reform Trust, 2008), one offender commented:

"[Programmes like these] should be seen as education for young men or young women. It shouldn't be education for offenders".

Very often materials, programmes and services have the words 'offender' or 'offender' in their title. If learning, skills and employability options are to reflect, as far as possible, the mainstream services offenders will be returning to, reinforcement of these labels serve as a constant reminder of the past. Education should be a means to retain a sense of personal rather than an institutional identity (Wilson 2003) if it is to contribute to desistance.

5.4 Why learn?

Why do around one-third of those in custody take part in learning, which is a voluntary activity? If learning providers are able to encourage positive motivation to learn, this may become one stepping stone along a pathway to desistance. In one focus group with offenders at the Open Estate, we heard positive views about experiences of learning. One man serving his second long-term sentence saw education as:

' PT for the mind...it's to better yourself while inside, to improve your own self-worth'.

While this offender had taken maximum advantage of the opportunities available, and had achieved various qualifications, he did not see this as having much bearing on his plans after release. His primary motivations were to keep busy during another lengthy sentence and to demonstrate his ability to achieve to his daughter.

Among the most positive elements of learning, participants identified:

• getting help to improve reading and writing;
• access to IT support for beginners as well as those with some prior experience;
• better library facilities ( e.g. at HMP Edinburgh), where offenders can use computers, play games and read;
• training to become a peer listener;
• and access to peer tutors.

During our visits, some clear differences were observed between those who take part in learning activities and those who did not. Focus groups and interviews indicated that those taking part in learning felt better about their own abilities. Those who did not take part in any form of learning or training were inwardly focused and more pessimistic about their prospects.

One focus group (women at Cornton Vale) was composed of individuals who had not taken part in any learning. It met twice. In other prisons, a mix of learners and non-learners took part in the same group. We found few clear motives for not taking part in learning. Instead, levels of awareness about education were low and levels of interest typically remained low after being reminded about the Learning Centre. Some preferred to pursue a vocational route, while others reported such bad experiences of school that learning was seen as 'just not for me'. What they had heard about learning was positive even if this did not persuade them to enrol. A number of participants had positive experiences of visiting the library and informal learning ( e.g. a film discussion group). A small number expressed a desire to get some help with reading, writing or numbers after release, and the involvement of ALN Partnerships at the pre-release stage ( e.g. at HMP Cornton Vale, especially for those returning to Glasgow) provided a fresh opportunity to encourage participation.

In the survey of learning centre staff, we asked how often they thought a range of motivations applied for offenders taking part in learning (Table 3). The most common reasons are to occupy time usefully (54% said this applies in most cases) and to gain a certificate (41%), followed by staff encouragement (26%) and for personal development/to better themselves (23%). Combined with those who believe these apply 'in some cases', around 80%-90% choose these reasons. A majority think eight of the nine reasons apply in at least some cases, offering staff a variety of 'hooks' to motivate learners. The exception is encouragement from Officers. Just one in four (23%) say this applies in some cases, while four in ten (41%) believe this rarely or never explains an offender's motivation to learn.

Table 3. How often do you think these reasons apply for offenders taking part in learning?

Growth mindsets

Confident learners should be an aspiration for Prisons Officers and managers. Confidence encourages people to try new things, engage in challenging tasks, risk making mistakes, express themselves as individuals, ask for help when they do not understand and avoid being defeated by a fear of failure.

The fear of attention and getting it wrong is summed up in Carol Dweck's empirical research on 'mindsets'. Dweck argues that there are two basic mindsets in relation to achievement. The 'fixed' mindset supports the view that a person's abilities are fixed and not amenable to change. Thus people are considered as clever or stupid, interesting or dull, honest or dishonest. In contrast, the 'growth' mindset sees individuals as having potential to change and grow. With enough motivation, effort and good teaching, we can become better at most things and change many aspects of ourselves and our behaviour. Carol Craig (2003) argues that part of the challenge facing Scotland - not least in the arena of criminal justice - is the prevalence of the 'fixed mindset'. At the very least, the growing use of imprisonment and the failure to impact upon re-offending levels suggests new thinking on persistent challenges is needed. The report of the Scottish Prisons Commission (2008) is one notable example, though its influence on practice remains to be realised.

An unpublished thesis by Karen Cooper (2008) Engaging Young Offenders in Education, Training and Employment generally supports Dweck's ideas. Irrespective of personal talents, responses to learning are influenced by attitudes. More often than not, young people's attitudes were found to be influenced by their peers. Immediate rewards of being respected by their friends were far more important than the prospect of future employment. Whilst individuals sought the lifestyle that earnings could bring, other priorities such as peer pressure and offending pre-occupied their time.

Many offenders would rather lie in their cells or hide in a work party to avoid education or training. This performance avoidance reflects feelings of incompetence relative to others (Elliot and Harackiewicz 1996). Many offenders perceive any effort as futile due to a fixed view of their own ability. This is highlighted in Locked up Potential ( CSJ 2009):

" Many offenders arrive in custody embarrassed, even bitter, about their personal ability and the prospect of participating in prison education...Too often offenders make a disengaged journey through courses they do not understand, dislocated by movement between prisons, delivered in classrooms with lessons similar to those they once rejected. For many, prison education is an embarrassment: irrelevant and to be avoided at all costs"

To support people to change mindset and motivation, it is necessary to understand the change process. This becomes urgent when people believe they can avoid the current pain (loss of liberty, freedom, missing the people they care about) or may receive a desired goal ( e.g. getting out of prison early). Then an offender may recognise the potential benefit for them in taking part in activities. Some offenders see activities as being imposed on them by SPS, psychologists, government, educators and social workers, not as something they have chosen to do for themselves. Yet, the impact of offenders understanding the benefits of learning for themselves could be felt within families: by passing on a positive view of learning to their children, the pattern of offending behaviour in families may be lessened in the long-term.

Incentives and disincentives

Qualifications

Although some offenders believe their ambitions to pursue learning to a higher level are frustrated, course levels are relatively well matched to assessed levels of literacy and numeracy. Many of those who attend the learning centre have found the motivation to take part for the first time since school. Even if opportunities to progress beyond Intermediate Level 1 are more limited, many go on to gain a certificate marking their achievement for the first time. Their value is primarily in terms of pride and demonstration of their ability to achieve something positive, rather than their currency with employers. SPS encourages prisons to hold award ceremonies for offender achievement and in some cases family members have been invited to attend.

Wages

While SPS wages policy means the same wages should be paid for learning as for work or VT, a system of bonuses applies to some enhanced work parties which may create disincentives to pursue education. Moreover, a series of local decisions are in place in some prisons which leads to disparities in the range of wages that can be earned. Where this impacts differentially on men and women, or between adults and young offenders, the progress achieved by SPS to date on equalities may be called into question. Whatever official position applies now or in future, the gap between policy and practice across the prison estate needs to be is reduced and confusion resolved.

5.5 Where to learn?

A more flexible approach to places of learning is needed. Looking beyond the learning centre, outreach activities could enable many more offenders to benefit from learning. Adult Literacy & Numeracy ( ALN) Partnerships of some local authorities provide small group, paired and one-to-one support in a number of prisons ¹³. This reaches some who don't take part in other classes. LSE providers can work with ALN staff and peer tutors to bring tasters, small group work and some classes to residential areas. These activities may provide encouragement to pursue formal learning or vocational training, to improve literacy or stimulate an interest in informal learning. At present, a very small amount of learning activity is taken to residential areas and to work/vocational settings. Many learning centre staff recognise the need to complement attendance in a classroom environment with other approaches. However, they express legitimate concerns about the going into offenders' 'own territory' and the practical limits to teaching in residential areas which may be inadequate in terms of noise, temperature and lack of IT equipment. Some halls in refurbished prisons appear to present greater opportunities for this kind of activity. For example, a new hall recently opened at HMP Edinburgh benefits from a member of the learning centre staff spending dedicated time working with learners in their hall.

Role of prison libraries

We saw some impressive examples of SPS partnership with local authority library provision being delivered in prisons including Edinburgh and Cornton Vale. In prisons which are more community-facing, libraries can serve as a bridge into the offender's home area. Library use in prison compares favourably with the population as a whole. The 2008 SPS Offender Survey asks if the respondent had used the prison library in the last month: 27% said they had and if the responses were disaggregated we might find significantly higher numbers in prisons with the best facilities. By comparison, the Scottish Household Survey (2007 ¹⁴) indicated that 25% of adults visited a library at least once a month. People living in the most deprived neighbourhoods, men and those with no qualifications were less likely than average to use a library. However, the good examples we saw are limited to just three SPS prisons. We recommend that all local authorities with a prison in their area support library services in prison on a cost-sharing basis with SPS. A simple action would then be to issue every offender who has enrolled at the prison library with a library card for their home authority.

5.6 When to learn?

We heard in a number of prisons, particularly Cornton Vale, that a modest increase in learning opportunities available at the weekend could address some of the boredom, depression and risks that occur at that point.

The Open Estate has among the lowest rates of participation in learning. It is focused more on a 'work first' approach than other prisons with priority given to filling places in work parties around the two establishments and community work placements. The offenders we spoke to felt education was less valued than in some of the closed prisons they had been in. The Open Estate prisons have recognised this and are making changes to their delivery model to include some provision for weekends and evenings. Being able to combine work and education was a priority for a number of offenders who felt they were unable to pursue various opportunities of interest. In principle, offenders are permitted time off work to attend the learning centre, but experiences varied in practice. One woman at Cornton Vale reported a positive experience of being given additional time off a vocational work placement to pursue education at a critical stage by a supportive VT Officer. Others reported difficulties in being able to go to the gym or the learning centre without losing money from their work party. We recommend that more provision is offered during evenings and weekends to enable more offenders to combine work with learning.

Duration

The allotted three-hour blocks of learning are too long in most cases. We believe running more classes of shorter duration (1 or 1.5 hour 'bites') could many more offenders to take part, or more classes to take place. This could open up greater opportunities for remand and short-term offenders who have the lowest rates of participation. In one case, we heard that access to learning on remand reaches no more than ten offenders for one hour per week. The learning day should begin after all participants have had breakfast.

5.7 How to learn?

Peer support

Focus group participants spoke consistently about learning, work and VT in terms of relationships with individual members of staff. These day-to-day interactions are often the key ingredient to a successful experience against the odds. However, even committed and expert members of staff may lack the ability to 'connect' with very disengaged offenders. Peers - offenders who have had similar experiences and can 'talk the same language' - can offer a valuable and trusted source of support. Peers are trained as listeners as well as tutors to support learning. This takes a different form in various places. Cornton Vale runs an impressive Learner Champions initiative where women are trained to support the work of the learning centre and the library, including literacy and numeracy assessments and the Toe by Toe course which a number of Chinese offenders with little or no English were pursuing. Peers also support others with reading, writing and numbers in the residential areas, including untrained peers who volunteer to help. At HMP Barlinnie, we heard how VT instructors develop some of their most skilled VT participants to take on a peer trainer role.

The advantages of peer tutoring are especially clear and the impact can be seen in the demeanour of the peer tutors, listeners and learner champions. They expressed an increased level of self-efficacy and optimism. However, trained peers are an under-used asset with low numbers in some prisons, and others who are unable to put their skills into practice. Better identification of suitable peer tutors is needed, e.g. to reduce the transfer of experienced peers to other prisons. This suggests more should be drawn from those serving long-term sentences. Better matching of need/demand and supply is also needed. For example, we heard examples of peer tutors being unable to access those with highest need due to living in different areas. Facilitating contact for this purpose at weekends is one simple and effective activity that could be taken forward quickly if staffing implications can be resolved. This would help peer tutors become a flexible resource for the whole prison rather than limited to a few hours in the learning centre.

Case Study: Jack

Approaches to learning

A number of prison tutors told us that those who most need to take part in learning, or could benefit most from the support available, don't take part. They recognise the need for other approaches. These include taking learning provision into the VT workshops, PE and work parties. It was suggested that a large number of other offenders could be engaged in learning if staff worked with peer tutors to run taster sessions in residential areas. It was also stressed that second and third chances to take part should be promoted around the theme 'it's never too late to learn', especially where take-up is below capacity.

A blended approach to learning would promote a combination of routes to learning, e.g.VT or work party plus attending the learning centre or working with the ALN provider. The goal should be a personal development plan for every convicted offender serving at least 60 days. Time for learning could be pursued through a 'day release' model, where VT participants could attend college ( i.e. the learning centre) one day per week. This has been a familiar model in industry for apprentices and might be well suited to the prison environment. Instead of talking about education, literacy & numeracy or the learning centre, 'college' could be presented as a place to go to learn a range of practical life skills ( e.g. cooking, budgeting).

An embedded approach involves weaving learning opportunities into other activities and settings. For some, this is learning by stealth - relevant, in context and with a practical purpose. A shared location is not enough for embedded learning to take place. It requires creativity and strong partnership working between learning providers and VT instructors for example. Some promising examples were identified in the joint thematic review of good practice in learning, skills and employability ( HMIE/ HMIP, 2008). These work well when literacy or numeracy tasks are properly embedded in the core activity, e.g.PE, painting & decorating, art, cookery and some accredited programmes rather than switching between VT and learning activities in sequence ¹⁵. Literacy learning was included in some PE classes on the initiative of Officers. This appears to be especially important for young offenders in custody who are more focused on getting a job than taking courses (Hurry et. al. 2009). Yet, exhortation to build on these good examples seems unlikely to be enough. They stand out because they are unusual rather than typical. After years of inspection reports calling for closer integration between learning providers and VT staff, it is time for this to become routine. Development of shared content, greater clarity in the commissioning of services and in expectations upon key Officers are needed to ensure this becomes standard practice where it is appropriate.

An adapted approach to learning involves mainstream principles of adult learning being applied in diverse ways - for example, through a focus on prior experience, tapping into individual expertise, shared development of some curriculum materials ( e.g. for family learning) and testing/revising content and learning approaches via learner feedback.

Learning difficulties

Learning has to be adapted to individuals with different learning styles and abilities. The Prison Reform Trust's influential study No-One Knows ( PRT, 2009) identifies many with learning difficulties or disabilities receiving inadequate levels of support and often excluded from activities as a result. Yet, there are examples of good practice in Scotland where the learning centre has had some success in addressing more complex learning needs, such as funding from the local authority ALN Partnership to undertake dyslexia training with learning centre staff at HMP Perth ( HMIE/ HMIP 2008).

Example: Learning with a visual impairment

The mix of learners was commented upon in two ways. First, learners with a wide range of abilities are likely to be in the same class. This may cause difficulty for teaching staff, as well as being frustrating for those who are learning at a higher level. Running more classes of shorter duration might enable some to be pitched to different levels in future. Second, the mix of adults with young offenders is a more contentious issue. While there are compelling reasons in law for these groups to live in separate residential areas, there may be some positive aspects for allowing an element of age mix within learning opportunities. Adult female offenders said they felt there would be advantages of mixing with young offenders at the learning centre in terms of informal mentoring. Although there are risks involved, we believe it is worth exploring the potential benefits.

Tools for learning: ICT and on-line

Information and Communication Technology ( ICT) is one of the most popular subjects of the prison curriculum: it is as much about how to learn as a subject. It offers the Prison Service huge potential to improve education and training through enhanced opportunities in learning centres and personal learning in cells. It could support the various approaches to learning mentioned previously. More importantly however, it could support literacy and numeracy learning for offenders in a relevant and fun way. Digital learning is being piloted in many primary schools by Learning Teaching Scotland in partnership with the University of Dundee and HMIE. Initial findings suggest it is both motivational and enables less confident learners to close the gap on others. Children who were behind in numeracy using traditional methods of teaching were able to catch up with their peers within a very short space of time using Brain Training on a Nintendo DS (Russell and Miller, 2008). Offenders are allowed to use play stations for games, so it seems reasonable, in principle, for other digital equipment (such as Nintendo DS) to become available through the prison library for numeracy and literacy learning. We would recommend this is done on a trial basis in a small number of prison libraries and with the involvement of literacy providers.

Other digital learning planned is the Moodle Offender Learning Environment ( MOLE). This is a project developed in partnership by SPS, Skills Development Scotland, Glenaffric Ltd and Motherwell and Carnegie Colleges. Initially the project aimed to give internet access in all learning centres to Skills Development Scotland's, Skillsnet. In the short term, due to SPS security concerns, MOLE will be on a closed network in each of the learning centres. It will give access to a package of relevant learning resources drawn from the Skillsnet catalogue and other sources to support core learning, skills and employability. MOLE will highlight courses available which could support completion of an academic or vocational course started in prison or the community.

The majority of offenders we spoke to said that they wanted to be able to use a PC for learning and for communicating via the internet. There are legitimate concerns about giving offenders access to the internet, primarily due to security risks via e-mail and access to on-line pornography and illegal content. Prison authorities in a number of Nordic countries are committed to exploring how these might be overcome without compromising security, and we would recommend that the Scottish Prison Service keeps a focus on their conclusions.

We have already noted that internet access for learning centre staff is considered inadequate. Just over half (54%) feel IT provision for teaching purposes is adequate to meet demand, though 40% disagree. While most appreciate SPS concerns about security, many feel limited access to on-line learning tools is necessary. The MOLE initiative represents a welcome step in this direction. To support effective learning, any staff development needs arising would need to be addressed by the learning providers drawing upon mainstream practice in their own institution/sector.

5.8 Improvement: inspection and quality assurance

HM Chief Inspector of Prison reports include a short section by HMIE on education provision. Individual reports have identified key strengths in learning provision in many prisons. An overview of trends in Scottish education ( HMIE, 2009) included a summary section on findings from inspection visits in recent years. Moreover, HMIE is conducting its own detailed review of prison learning, due for publication in Autumn 2009. This still leaves prison learning in Scotland some way from the more rigorous and consistent system in place in England, where Ofsted has lead responsibility for inspection and quality standards in prisons (see Ofsted, 2009 for example). We believe HMIE should have the same role in Scotland, conducting full reviews of learning in prison, supporting quality improvement and bringing prison learning into the mainstream.

Because staff specialise in prison learning, there is a risk that approaches become detached from mainstream adult education practice in the community. The Colleges are aware of this and are keen to encourage professional development and network opportunities for prison-based and community-based staff. This issue appears to be less significant where practitioners split their time between work in the prison and in a local college, or where staff rotate between these settings over time.

5.9 Reward progression and completion

A future learning system should focus more clearly on progression and completion. Being able to stick at learning, VT or a work placement - and having something to show at the end of it - is associated more strongly with success post-release than just taking part. While some offending behaviour courses ( e.g. Constructs) appear to work well post-release, it is currently unrealistic to expect completion of VT or educational qualifications post-release in many cases. More can be done in time with modular courses delivered in shorter parts and better partnership arrangements with training providers in the community. But the priority should be for prisons to remove barriers to progression, notably arising via transfer to another prison where the same opportunities are not offered (see box). This would reduce resources wasted in unfinished courses. While we have no estimate of the opportunity costs arising in Scotland, the National Audit Office review of England's OLASS model suggests up to 30% of courses are started but not completed. There is a likely trade-off here in terms of increasing consistency between prisons by also specifying more tightly a range of core opportunities, which would probably limit the variety of learning available.

Case Study: interrupted learning

To incentivise achievement rather than taking part to ease the boredom of prison life, an enhanced bonus could be paid. This is one part of the wider issue of wages which we have not looked at in any detail. A remittance system could be offered, allowing offenders to roll up some of their earnings ( e.g. bonuses) to send to their family.

Evidence of progression in learning and work should be taken into account by the Parole Board to balance its dominant focus on accredited programmes, which also have a limited evidence base in terms of effectiveness. It is unclear how much weight is attached to progression in work and education for parole decisions, whereas accredited offender behaviour programmes are taken into account in the broader assessment of risks.

5.10 Reforms to learning: summary of learning centre staff views

Feedback from the survey of learning centre staff indicates that providers are supportive of change. Almost all (95%) believe a better system to encourage attendance and reduce 'no-shows' is needed, while just over half (57%) agree it has become harder to maintain attendance rates and one in four (26%) think it has become neither harder nor easier. A majority (51%) disagree that most Officers involved in escorting offenders do a good job of encouraging their attendance at the learning centre - just one in five (18%) agree with this view. Despite this, a majority of respondents (57%) still agree that most offenders who express a desire to attend learning are able to without much difficulty, with one in five (18%) taking the opposite view.

Annex A1 presents survey responses in more detail. The dominant feature is the high level of support expressed for many of the reforms we recommend, whether these are consolidating pockets of good practice or making the existing model more flexible. For example, of twelve suggested reforms, all are supported by at least 60% of respondents. More than 90% of staff respondents support:

• More classes to develop practical life skills (97% support, 61% strongly);
• Offender access to secure websites for learning and employability (97% support, 59% strongly);
• Easier access to the internet/e-mail for all learning centre staff (95% support, 82% strongly);
• Outreach activity like tasters and small group work in residential areas (92% support, 55% strongly);
• A higher priority on supporting short-term offenders with high literacy/numeracy needs (90% support, 58% strongly).

More than 80% of staff respondents support:

• Offender involvement in helping to design some educational activities (89% support, 29% strongly);
• Better use of peer tutoring (86% support, 39% strongly);
• More classes of shorter duration (81%, 55% strongly);
• More spaces for learning in residential areas e.g. with IT provision (81% support, 39% strongly);

While a majority were in favour of the following, less support was expressed for:

• Some Prison Officers being trained to provide extra support for learning and employability activities (66% support, 21% strongly and 18% oppose);
• Offender access to stand-alone digital learning e.g. Nintendo DS (63% support, 24% strongly, 10% oppose);
• Learning provision at other times, e.g. evenings and/or weekends (60% support, 21% strongly, 8% oppose);

Finally, Table 4 indicates that upwards of 85% of respondents are in favour of closer working relationships within the prison (to blend learning with VT provision and to complement the work of ALN providers) and in the community (active referrals to other Colleges on release and better sharing of information with other learning providers).

Table 4: Degree of support for possible reforms