{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01585820895522388, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.311764705882353, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Style over substance?

The implementation of the What Works agenda within probation has brought about the development and delivery of a suite of accredited programmes in relation to work with offenders. The accreditation criteria emphasize the evidence-based nature of these interventions and outline a number of key principles. An integral tenet of this approach has been ‘relevance to offenders’ learning style’. While most of the other aspects have been explored in research studies and publications, this element has tended to become a ‘given’ and while mentioned, has not been subjected to a similar level of critique. The recent publication of an evaluation of learning styles by the Learning and Skills Research Centre has provided an important overview and appraisal of this area, which is relevant to probation practice. This article draws together these various strands by outlining the changing situation in probation, reviewing the findings concerning learning styles and then developing an analysis of the wider implications for probation policy and practice.