Changes in Probation Training in England and Wales: The Probation Qualification Framework (PQF) Three Years on

Abstract

This article draws on the personal experience of two lecturers delivering the academic programme of the Probation Qualification Framework to students employed by a number of different Probation Trusts. It considers the current qualifying arrangements and identifies a number of issues that have come to the fore over the first three years of implementation. Specifically, it establishes the importance of all stakeholders, students, the employing Trust and NOMS understanding what is of fundamental importance for work-based distance learning study. The changing composition and characteristics of the student body and the ways in which new developments in professional knowledge are included in the curriculum are explored with particular focus on the new group of graduate entrants at Part 3. The authors remain committed to the belief that those who work in the criminal justice system of England and Wales, supporting change and rehabilitation with a complex and vulnerable client group must have a nationally recognised qualification which includes both employer responsibility for quality practice based learning and a Higher Education award.

The revolving door of reform

“…It is somewhat ironic that the Ministry of Justice has determined the need for training programmes to develop the professionalism of the practitioners in the newly formed HMPPS, when less than 12 months ago it signed contracts with three higher education providers to deliver a range of routes to a qualification at Level 6 of the Qualifications and Credit Framework (QCF): the Professional Qualification in Probation (PQiP). The PQiP acts as a professional licence for probation officers, though further irony is found in calling it a ‘professional qualification’, when successive iterations of probation training programmes have been criticized for eroding the professional skills of community justice practitioners (Skinner and Goldhill, 2013). By prescribing a standard set of skills necessary to function as a probation officer, the ability of individual practitioners to respond to ethical and moral dilemmas within a well-developed framework of critical thinking is diminished (Raynor and Robinson, 2009).…”

“…The PQiP acts as a professional licence for probation officers, though further irony is found in calling it a 'professional qualification', when successive iterations of probation training programmes have been criticized for eroding the professional skills of community justice practitioners (Skinner and Goldhill, 2013). By prescribing a standard set of skills necessary to function as a probation officer, the ability of individual practitioners to respond to ethical and moral dilemmas within a well-developed framework of critical thinking is diminished (Raynor and Robinson, 2009).…”

“…According to the Qualifications and Credit Framework (Ofqual, 2008), the expectations for someone with a Level 3 qualification is they will 'take responsibility for initiating and completing tasks and procedures' (p. 47), while those with a degree (Level 6 qualification) will 'take responsibility for planning and developing courses of action that are capable of underpinning substantial changes or developments' (p. 49). Probation officers trained in the post-social work schemes have consistently been frustrated by the lack of time afforded for developing their understanding of the concepts and theories presented in the training and qualification programmes (Skinner and Goldhill, 2013). Time pressures were exacerbated during the PQF era, particularly in the final year of the contracts when higher education providers were obliged to facilitate a condensed version of their programmes.…”

Rehabilitation: What does ‘good’ look like anyway?

“…The review suggests that this needs to include 'positive work to provide prisoners with skills, [and] tackle the underlying causes of offending' and notes that this relies on well-trained and motivated staff (Owers et al, 2011: 10). This is also true for staff delivering probation services (Skinner and Goldhill, 2013). Prisons can also support desistance through focusing on prisoners' motivation and achievement, supporting the development of a non-criminal identity and through fair and reasonable treatment (Owers et al, 2011).…”

“…This implies that, in addition to the use of OASys for higher risk offenders, it is important for the responsible or supervising officer of any offender to be a skilled practitioner who has knowledge of the pre-disposing personal factors and wider structural factors underlying offending behaviour, and skills in building empathy and in working with the service user to reach a deeper understanding of their background, strengths and vulnerabilities (Shapland, 2014; Skinner and Goldhill, 2013). This requires good understanding of the impact that damaging early experiences can have, for example, among the disproportionate number of both young and adult offenders who have been in the looked-after system (Ministry of Justice, 2013c).…”