Putting Education at the Heart of Youth Justice….

A version of this article first appeared in TES in September 2017 and argues that the current state of Youth Custody makes the need to develop new approaches to Youth Justice more urgent than ever. It says that the Government’s intention to place education at the heart of youth justice is right, but action to deliver this is taking too long. It highlights work being taken forward by the Campus Educational Trust replicating the Virtual Head Teacher function for Looked after Children to Young Offenders and suggests that this could provide a quicker impact at a lower cost than Secure Schools.

There was ‘not a single establishment that we inspected in England and Wales in which it was safe to hold children and young people’, Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Prisons Annual Report concluded. In the context of the first increase in the number of young people in custody in nine years, and an increase in reoffending rates amongst young offenders, the current Youth Justice system appears to be on the brink of crisis.

Further evidence of how the current system is failing these young people comes from a recent Department for Education (DfE) and Ministry of Justice (MOJ) analysis: ‘Understanding the educational background of young offenders’ (Dec 2016). The report found that among young people sentenced in 2014, between 78% (for those cautioned) and 94% (for those sentenced to less than 12 months in custody) had a record of persistent absence from school; 23% of those sentenced to less than 12 months in custody have also been permanently excluded from school prior to their sentence date. Arguably the most shocking finding was that only 1% of those sentenced to less than 12 months in custody had achieved 5 or more GCSE’s or equivalent graded A-C (including English and Maths) compared to 59% for all pupils.

So, what is to be done? Whilst there is an important debate to be had about youth custody, the circumstances under which we lock young people up and the nature of custodial provision; we here at the Campus Educational Trust have long argued that improving education provision for those that have had contact with the criminal justice system is the single most impactful thing we can do.

There is a strong body of evidence to support this. The most rigorous causal analysis on British data (Machin, Marie and Vujic LSE 2010) concluded, “The implications of these findings are unambiguous and clear. They show that improving education can yield significant social benefits and can be a key policy tool in the drive to reduce crime.”

Whilst the Government’s commitment to place education at the heart of youth justice is welcome, there are a number of reasons to be concerned about an innovation focused solely on Secure Schools.

First, in prioritising the building of custodial provision over keeping young people out of custody, there is a real danger that it misses the importance of ensuring continuity of education provision from custody and into the community.

An effective pathway is essential if we are to help young people reach high levels of attainment and provide them the means to break away from the circumstances that contribute to reoffending. The Campus School — our innovative proposal for a school exclusively for young people who have had contact with the criminal justice system and are not in settled education, training or employment — is intended to be part of this.

A community school with education at its heart, the Campus — which has been approved as a Free School and is in its Pre-Opening Phase — will provide a broader curriculum and services to address the problems of the young people attending. It is intended to support a young person’s reintegration into the community through extended day release from custody in the lead up to their release.

A second and potentially more pressing issue with Secure Schools is that it will take significant time and money to get this right, with any unnecessary haste to pilot invariably impacting on quality. The prevailing circumstances require something more urgent and less expensive

A more pragmatic and cost effective solution could be found in the experience around young people in care. About a third of young offenders have at some point been in care, so there is a crossover and some strong parallels around poor educational attainment and how this impacts on longer term social outcomes.

The Children and Families Act 2014 required local authorities in England to appoint a Virtual Head to promote the educational achievement of its looked after children, wherever they live or are educated.

As part of that, the Virtual Head is responsible for:

• Maintaining an up-to-date roll of its looked after children and gathering information about their education placement, attendance and educational progress
• Ensuring up-to-date, effective and high quality Personal Education Plans (PEP) for all looked after children, while reinforcing the importance of participants in this process being aware of their roles and responsibilities in this
• Ensuring that the educational achievement of children looked-after by the authority is seen as a priority and reporting regularly on the attainment of looked after children.

Whilst the impact of these changes is still bedding in, the early evidence is encouraging with respect to attainment and attendance for young people in care. The focus on and accountability for educational attainment has been shown to be a key contributing factor in delivering on this.

Replicating this framework for young people who have had contact with the criminal justice system and are not in education or training could have a similar impact and provide momentum for improving their educational outcomes.

As part of our work we have been collaborating with colleagues at the Institute of Education at University College London to develop a proposal for testing this in Haringey.

In developing what we are calling the Virtual Campus, we are mindful that the Youth Offending Team has a key role in this. However, they are increasingly stretched and do not necessarily have the leverage to ensure the placement and planning necessary to provide the support most likely to help that young person achieve their potential. This is analogous with the relationship between the Virtual Head and Social Workers for young people in care who reported that having specific educational expertise from the Virtual School to support them was of great value.

Our proposed Virtual Campus Model would provide additional and immediate support to Young People in the Campus Cohort, but has the additional advantage of providing experience to inform the development of the Campus — which we are on track to open in 2020 — and so improve the likelihood of it being successful. If the Virtual Campus Model demonstrates impact, then there would be the potential for it to become a permanent part of the Campus Model, operating alongside the Campus School.

Doing nothing is not an option, and whilst we should continue to explore how we can re-model youth justice provision to ensure that education is at its heart, Young People currently in the system cannot wait on this. We owe it to them to be bold and build on good work done elsewhere in education, lest we condemn a generation of young offenders to a life of being troubled and communities suffering the consequences of this.

Andrew Morley is Chair of the Campus Educational Trust and former Chief Executive of the London Criminal Justice Partnership. You can find out more about the Campus on their website.