This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Atkinson, D. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The What Works Debate: Keeping a Human Perspective

Dorset Probation Area

This article, arising from the author’s long experience of work in the probation service, was inspired by Peter Raynor’s (2003) article ‘ Evidence-based practice and its critics’. It argues that the antipathy many probation staff have towards the What Works agenda is not necessarily a rejection of cognitive behavioural methods in themselves. Rather, in the politically driven rush to produce ‘results’, it suggests that there has been a failure to take proper account of the importance of the individual and his or her complex needs. This is the probation officer’s traditional strength and, it is argued, is something that Raynor’s article fails to fully appreciate.

Key Words: cognitive behavioural methods • ‘quick fix’ • valuing the individual • What Works

Probation Journal, Vol. 51, No. 3, 248-252 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/0264550504045900


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?