General principles for video monitoring

Guidance notes for Prison and Probation Service Treatment Managers, Tutors and Facilitators

April 2005

Acknowledgements

Many thanks to all the prison and probation staff who assisted in the piloting of the new video monitoring forms and guidance notes and provided invaluable feedback. Special thanks are due to Fiona Williams, Senior Psychologist, for her helpful input in relation to the Prison Sex Offender Treatment Programme.

John Shine Principal Psychologist National Probation Directorate

April 2005

For further information contact John.Shine@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

CONTENTS

1

Background

3

2

Threats to reliable scoring and how to minimise them

5

3

Video/Audio tape monitoring form and marking scale

7

4

Item descriptions and scoring guidance

4.1 Adherence to programme manual

9

4.2 Adherence to treatment style

15

4.3 Group work/session delivery skills

21

4.4 Responsivity skills

27

5

Notes

30

6

Treatment Manager’s video monitoring form

31

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

1

2

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

1

BACKGROUND

This document is an updated version of the guidance notes that were jointly prepared in 2003 by the National Probation Directorate (NPD) and Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Probation (HMIP). The document has been revised to take account of user feedback, and to align prison and probation monitoring systems to facilitate closer working between the two services.

Making good use of video monitoring in supervision
The main purpose of video monitoring is to develop and maintain the skills of tutors or facilitators to avoid programme drift and promote mindful and responsive delivery skills. It is important that the video monitoring form is used in a constructive way during supervision. The scores should only be presented within a wider framework of verbal and written feedback. Individual scores for each item can be used to provide specific feedback on strengths and areas for development. Tutors and facilitators should be encouraged to see the scores as reflective of the verbal and written feedback rather than being an end in themselves.

Use of scores in supervision
The video monitoring form includes a section for average scores for each of the scales and for combined scale averages at the end of the form. Whilst the use of scores in supervision is encouraged, some Treatment Managers expressed a concern during the piloting of the new documents that this detracted from the supporting verbal feedback. In order to take account of this, the use of scores for supervision purposes is optional in the revised version of the form. Those Treatment Managers who choose not to use scores in supervision need to ensure that a fully scored version is saved as it may be used for benchmarking and quality assurance purposes at a future date. Treatment Managers may wish to use video-monitoring clips in supervision to illustrate how a difficult session could have been handled differently and to reinforce good practice. When giving feedback on low scores or poor practice, it is imperative that video-monitoring information is used in a sensitive and supportive way and that this is linked to a clear action plan to develop skills. Self-assessment by tutors/facilitators prior to supervision sessions should also be used to develop awareness of the scoring criteria and consistency in measuring delivery skills. Examples of good practice should be shared with colleagues whenever possible and may be used (with consent) at regional/area meetings to promote a culture of continuous improvement across different sites. It is important that the items are scored reliably, both to ensure the integrity of the supervision process and assist in benchmarking performance across different areas/prisons for quality assurance purposes. The guidance notes have been prepared to assist Treatment Managers, tutors and facilitators with this process.

How to use the guidance notes
A detailed description of each item in the four sections of the form is provided. Examples of positive and negative evidence and for a low, mid range or high score are presented. The examples are intended to be illustrative rather than exhaustive. It will be necessary for treatment managers and area assessors to apply their professional judgement to generalise the principles illustrated throughout this document to the programmes they are managing. 1

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

3

Effective delivery style for accredited programmes
Tutoring or facilitating on accredited programmes is a highly skilled activity requiring dedicated, well-trained and properly supervised staff. Effective tutoring, both for groupbased and one-to-one programmes, requires a combination of skills as evidenced in the teaching, counselling and cognitive-behavioural literature. The literature confirms that, in general, good tutors or facilitators have:
An interpersonal style that is warm and empathic

There is extensive evidence indicating that these qualities are important in promoting change irrespective of delivery setting. It is important for tutors or facilitators to develop a therapeutic alliance with offenders without colluding (perhaps unwittingly) with the attitudes, values and beliefs that underpin their anti-social behaviour. Good tutors or facilitators develop their alliance with offenders through forming and maintaining trusting relationships and utilising a range of skills. For example, showing patience and perseverance with resistant offenders, modelling pro-social attitudes and behaviour, teaching and practicing effective problem solving skills in ways that are accessible to offenders, reinforcing pro-social change, reviewing learning from the programme, consolidating progress and identifying areas for further work and practice.
A tutoring style that is paced, confident and engaging

Effective tutors or facilitators present as confident in their understanding of the course material and demonstrate enthusiasm for the programme. They do this by delivering sessions with tempo (but do not appear rushed) in a way that encourages offender engagement, participation and learning in exercises. Sessions are presented in a lively, interactive style and with a positive body language. When delivering group-based programmes, tutors or facilitators should, where appropriate, move around the room on occasion, to ensure that they draw in quieter members. If challenged they use an appropriate response and seek always to encourage offenders to apply learning from the programme in dealing with problems rather than drifting into vague, open-ended discussions. They are directive when the situation demands and seek to deliver the session as set out in the programme manual and uphold the model of change at all times.
A group working style that is inclusive and enabling

Good tutors work towards creating an atmosphere that is respectful, welcoming and workorientated. They model the interpersonal skills taught on the programme in their interactions with participants and, where group-based, with their co-tutors or facilitators. Effective tutors or facilitators seek to involve participants as much as possible in the learning process. When delivering groups, they work to draw in quieter participants and to manage domineering ones. They have a good understanding of diversity issues and demonstrate this in their use of appropriate language and an inclusive, non-discriminatory approach. Tutors or facilitators should work to encourage participants to explain and validate ideas for themselves. In this respect, they will have the confidence to allow for short silences and follow this with probing questions, if necessary, rather than lecturing. Tutors or facilitators should use praise judiciously, for example it should be specific rather than general and timely, to reinforce progress made by participants.

4

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

2

THREATS TO RELIABLE SCORING AND HOW TO MINIMISE THEM

Video/audio tape monitoring is a skilled task requiring a disciplined approach to avoid drift and unreliable scoring. The research literature identifies a number of threats to reliable scoring in exercises of this type. These include: (a) Rating on a global impression rather than following a careful review of the evidence. What tends to happen if this occurs is that scores typically cluster tightly together at the top or lower end of the scale depending on whether the impression is positive or negative. (b) Limiting scores to the middle of the scale. This sometimes occurs when assessors are unsure of their judgements and therefore rarely use the full range of the scale, tending to score in the middle leading to little variation. When these effects occur they present a serious threat to reliable scoring and therefore compromise the integrity of the quality assurance system. There may be occasions when a consistently high, low or middle range score is justified – the important point is the process by which this judgement is arrived at. Threats to reliable scoring can be minimised by using the following methods:
Read each item carefully

Confusing items is easily done, particularly if you are in a hurry.
Score each item independently

You should score each item independently without being influenced by those scores given to previous items.
Use a mental template of how the skill should be demonstrated ideally and match the performance you have observed against this

Each item on the form has a detailed description below. You should use this to match against the skill levels demonstrated on the video/audio tape.
Support your judgements with evidence from the video/audio tape

Use the form to make a note of the evidence you have seen/heard to justify your scoring.
Score across the whole observation period

When marking items, try to score across the whole observation period and take care not to be unduly influenced by a particular example (of good or poor practice) in arriving at a score. Exceptions to this principle can occur if there is only a limited amount of information on which to make an assessment; for example, if there is only one occasion for the tutors or facilitators to challenge offence-supporting views.
Score each tutor/facilitator independently

Assess each tutor/facilitator on the evidence they present during the session and try not to be influenced by their level of experience or the quality of the session overall.

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

5

Score on the skills of the tutors or facilitators and not on the offenders behaviour

Assessors may be inclined to score on the behaviour of group members rather than the skills of the tutors or facilitators, depending on how offenders are responding to the session. It is important to focus on the skills of the tutors/facilitators when assigning scores on video monitoring. For example, a tutor /facilitator could receive high marks if they managed an unmotivated or disruptive group skilfully. Similarly, a tutor/facilitator could be scored low on treatment style or groupwork skills if they failed to demonstrate positive evidence in these areas even if the group appeared to be highly motivated and to be benefiting from the programme.

6

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

3

VIDEO/AUDIO TAPE MONITORING FORM AND MARKING SCALE

The national video/audio tape monitoring form uses a 17-item scale divided into four sections: Adherence to Programme Manual (four items); Adherence to Treatment Style (six items); Group Work/Delivery Skills (four items) and Responsivity (three items). Assessors should score all the items based on evidence from the video/audio tape. There may be rare occasions in which assessors have insufficient evidence to score an item or it is clearly not applicable. This could apply to the following items:
1c – Checking out learning related to aims and objectives and encouraging participants to make links between sessions and exercises.

May be omitted in the very early sessions of a programme. However, if tutors or facilitators are able to make relevant links then they should be scored on this item.
1d – Out of session work.

Omit if not issued.
2c – Challenges offence supporting/anti-social views.

May be omitted if not observed during the session. If an item is omitted, the reason should be given on the monitoring form and the scale average will be calculated only on the number of items scored. The national form uses a 5-point scale and a description of the scoring key for each of the points is given below:

1 Skill level undermines programme integrity
The tutor has major skill deficiencies to the extent that the integrity of the programme is seriously undermined. Some assessors may be reluctant to give a score of 1, perhaps because they are unsure of the difference between this and a higher score. It is important that the full range of the scale is utilised where appropriate. The following are examples of when a score of 1 can be safely given: 1(a) Inaccurate or misleading explanations of exercises are given indicating that the tutor or facilitator does not understand the underlying model of change. 2(c) Tutors or facilitators may persistently fail to pick up on offence-supporting, anti-social or discriminatory views expressed by participants during the programme. They may model offence-supporting, anti-social or discriminatory attitudes; for example, by joining in with homophobic jokes during a session. 2(d) Tutors or facilitators show persistent competency deficits throughout the sessions, tending to use a lecturing style, relying heavily on written prompts, delivering the session in a leaden, sermonising manner, rather than actively engaging with the participants and encouraging them to validate ideas for themselves. 3(d) Poor skills are persistently demonstrated in the management of the dynamics between the tutor and individual in the case of one-to-one programmes, or between tutors or facilitators and the group. For example, engaging in long, open-ended discussions with

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

7

participants to the detriment of the aims and objectives of the programme, allowing themselves to be drawn into heated exchanges with participants when challenged rather than using Socratic questioning, etc.

2 Skill level needs significant improvement
The skill is delivered with some adherence to the programme manual, treatment style or group work/one-to-one skills, but with significant areas for improvement. Examples include: 1(b) The session plan is covered, but some exercises are shortened without good reason. 2(a) Tutors or facilitators show some use of an open questioning style, but predominantly use closed questions during the sessions. 3(b) Tutors or facilitators work collaboratively during the session, but show poor co-working on a significant number of occasions; for example, one tutor talks over the other, ignores their colleague’s contributions, does not assist when the opportunity presents itself, etc.

3 Skill evidenced at capable level
The skill is demonstrated as specified with minor areas for improvement. A score of three means that the session is generally being run as intended but can be improved. Examples include: 1(c) Participants are generally encouraged to make links between exercises, but tutors or facilitators miss some opportunities to do this. 2(b) Tutors or facilitators generally listen and allow for answers, but occasionally fail to do so. 2(e) Praise is generally given when appropriate but, on occasions, tutors or facilitators fail to comment when participants make important contributions.

4 Skill evidenced at competent level
Tutors or facilitators show skilled performance in delivering the sessions, showing very slight areas for improvement. A score of four represents competent performance. Areas for improvement will be very minor and based on honing skills that are already in place and delivered to good effect.

5 Skill evidenced at mindful level
The tutor or facilitator consistently demonstrates the skill to a high standard throughout the session. A score of five can be safely given if, after careful consideration, the assessor struggles to find evidence of any areas for improvement without appearing extremely pernickety. A score of 5 represents highly proficient performance with the tutor demonstrating mindful and responsive skills.

8

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

4

ITEM DESCRIPTIONS AND SCORING GUIDANCE

Descriptions of the items given on the monitoring form are given below to be used as templates to aid scoring. Advice on scoring is presented in terms of what constitutes a low, mid-range or high score. Area assessors should use their judgement in deciding on finer levels of scoring, e.g. whether a mark of one or two is warranted, depending on the persistence of skills deficits shown during the duration of the tape and using the marking guide shown in section three.3

4.1 ADHERENCE TO PROGRAMME MANUAL

1a. Exercises set up, explained and run correctly
Tutors’/facilitators’ teaching, action and behaviour should be consistent with the model of change for the programme. The exercises should be run as set out in the manual. This involves using the correct materials (adapted, if appropriate and responsive, to the group’s needs) and in the sequential order described in the manual. A well-run exercise will show that tutors or facilitators have prepared for the session in the organisation and presentation of the materials, equipment, worksheets, etc. Tutors or facilitators should demonstrate that they understand the key concepts underlying each session and convey these clearly to offenders. The rationale for each exercise should be explained and set in context, preferably using real life examples. If questioned, tutors or facilitators should give clear, unambiguous explanations that are understood by those involved.

Positive evidence

• • • • • •

Upholding the model of change throughout the session. Covering all material and in the correct order. Smooth and accurate presentation of exercises. All materials easily to hand. Dealing with questions confidently and accurately. Evidence that tutors or facilitators understand the purpose and underlying concepts of exercises. • Providing additional explanations that improve learning and engagement.

Negative evidence

• • • • • • •

Deviating from the model of change. Inaccurate or unclear explanations. Materials not easily available or wrongly presented. Missing or shortening exercises. Changing the order of materials or exercises. Use of inappropriate extras.4 Failure to remain task focussed.

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

9

Scoring

• Low score if there is significant deviation from the manual in the way the session is set up and run, incorrect or poor explanation of exercises, significant deviation from the model of change. • Mid-range score if the session is generally correctly explained but with minor areas for improvement; for example, the session is explained properly, but in a rushed manner without allowing time for any questions or points for clarification. • High score if the sessions are set up and run according to the manual with exercises explained properly in a clear, unambiguous way to offenders. To achieve top scores, tutors or facilitators should demonstrate that they understood the concepts involved and have allowed time for points of clarification and dealt with questions confidently and accurately. The model of change will have been upheld throughout the session.

10

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

1b. Timing and pace
Programmes are designed to ensure that all the material and exercises can be covered in the allotted time period. If a time period is specified it should (as far as possible) be complied with. On some occasions, careful judgement may be needed in scoring this item. For example, tutors or facilitators may demonstrate responsivity skills in giving additional time to explain an exercise if participants are encountering difficulties with the material. This is good practice and tutors or facilitators should not be marked down provided there is evidence additional time is required.

Positive evidence

• Sessions starting and finishing on time. • Sufficient time on each part of the programme to ensure that exercises are covered and the main learning points are conveyed. • Adapting the pace of the session to meet the learning needs of offenders.
Negative evidence

• • • •

Labouring points unnecessarily. Rushing the delivery of material. Major departures from allocated time periods specified in manual. Sessions/exercises starting or finishing late.

Scoring

• Low score if tutors or facilitators run significantly over the time limits for exercises when they are specified in the manual. A low score can also be given if tutors or facilitators either spend too long on particular sections or rush through too quickly. • Mid-range score if exercises are generally run to time with minor deviation. • High score if the session starts and finishes on time, exercises are run to time as specified in the manual, tutors or facilitators show adaptations to pace of session in response to needs of offenders.

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

11

1c. Checking out learning related to aims and objectives and encouraging participants to make links between sessions and exercises.
As far as possible, the structure of the session should be seamless, each exercise should flow into the next. This is achieved by linking and signposting during the session to facilitate continuity. For example, “...we have three types of behaviour here (pauses and refers to flipchart), let’s see how these different types of behaviour can affect us and other people”. Tutors or facilitators should check out with participants whether the aims and objectives of the programme are being achieved. They should encourage participants to understand links between skills taught at other stages and the overall aims and objectives of the programme.

Positive Evidence

• Use of linking sentences between exercises. • Eliciting feedback from participants as to whether they have understood and are ready to move on. • Scanning the room to check for signs of understanding. • Responding to verbal and non-verbal cues that offenders are encountering difficulties with the material. • Reviewing and checking out learning points at stages during the session. • Encouraging offenders to generate examples that illustrate aims and objectives of the programme. • Repeating or reframing learning points to aid learning and understanding.
Negative Evidence

• • • • • • •

Exercises presented independently without linking sentences. Presenting the session in a leaden, rote or sermonising manner. Little or superficial engagement with offenders to review learning points. Brusque or regimented delivery style. Giving the impression of wanting to get through the material as quickly as possible. Failing to respond when offenders offer insights or evidence of linking learning points. Missing opportunities to make links between exercises and sessions.

Scoring

• Low score if tutors or facilitators deliver the session and fail to check out with the participant(s) whether the aims and objectives are understood, tutors or facilitators fail to review learning and persistently miss opportunities to make links to exercises and sessions. • Mid-range score if tutors or facilitators do check on most occasions, but occasionally miss opportunities. • High score if tutors or facilitators skilfully check learning and encourage participants to make links throughout the session, taking appropriate action when necessary.

12

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

1d. Out of session work
Out of session work is a key component of accredited programmes to ensure effective skill acquisition. It involves three elements: completing assignments, journal keeping/reviews and practice of skills in real life settings. It is important that sufficient time is given to explaining out of session work and to reviewing this at appropriate stages of the programme. Out of session work should be presented clearly and in a motivational way. Offenders should be encouraged to generate meaningful and relevant examples. Evidence of learning and application of skills outside of session should be reinforced. In cases where out of session work is not completed, additional work time or opportunities to catch up should be negotiated with participants.

Positive evidence

• Sufficient time is given to presenting out of session work and reviewing completed work. • Deadlines are set for completion. • Out of session work is presented in a motivational way and the importance of practice is emphasised. • Facilitators/tutors ensure that participants are clear about what they have to do. • Additional help is provided for offenders with learning difficulties. • Offenders encouraged to provide meaningful examples. • Exercises explained in accordance with the manual. • Tutors/facilitators negotiate additional time/catch ups for homework/jour nal assignments when offenders fail to complete on time. • Tutors/facilitators provide support, encouragement and reinforcement for completed work.
Negative evidence

• • • • • • • •

Out of session work is rushed or doesn’t happen. Out of session work is given low emphasis or trivialised. Out of session work is collected in without exploration of how they could be useful. Out of session work is presented in a vague or confusing manner. No deadline is set. Participant(s) seems unclear about what they are expected to do or why. Completion of homework/journal assignments is not recognised or rewarded. Little or no attempt is made to negotiate additional time/catch ups for offenders who do not complete assignments.

Scoring

• Low score if specified assignment is not set, completed work is not reviewed or reinforced, confusing/incomplete instructions on how to complete homework assignments are given, practice of skills is not reinforced.

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

13

• Mid-range score if out of session work is presented as specified but with some areas for improvement, for example insufficient time spent on exploring how particular skills could be useful, failing to draw out and reinforce learning points sufficiently, cursory attempts at negotiating additional time for assignments not completed etc. • High score if homework/journal assignments are presented as specified, in a motivational manner and with skilful use of negotiation techniques to encourage offenders who have not completed assignments to complete additional work required. Homework/journal assignments are reviewed and reinforced appropriately. Practice and application of skills in real life settings is encouraged.

14

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

4.2 ADHERENCE TO TREATMENT STYLE

2a. Use of open questions5
Open questions should be used at appropriate stages in the session, for example when eliciting information or statements from participants or reviewing learning points. Examples of open questions are, “What is meant by the term assertive?” “How does what we have covered today relate to offending behaviour?” etc. Tutors or facilitators should seek to develop and build on examples generated by the participant(s), to facilitate learning and be prepared to follow with further open, probing questions, with reflection if appropriate; for example, “That’s interesting can you tell me some more?” etc.

Positive evidence

• • • • • •

Use of open questions at appropriate stages of session. Presents as genuinely curious and interested when asking questions. Uses follow up probes and reflection to elicit further information and build on responses. Varies style and tone of questioning to engage offenders. Knows when to stop and move on (avoids using multiple questions). Uses Socratic questioning techniques, although makes good use of directive questioning when needed. • Cognitive restructuring is used with distorted or resistant thinking.
Negative evidence

• • • • • • •

Asks mainly closed questions. Misses opportunities to ask open questions. Lectures rather than elicits. Repetitive questioning without variation in tone and style. Too many open questions. Over use of questions beginning with ‘why...’ (may invite justification). Presents as only concerned with getting ‘right’ answer rather than meaningfully engaging offenders. • Failing to use follow up probes when appropriate.

Scoring

• Low score if tutors or facilitators use mainly closed questions during the session, or if their open questions consistently lack direction. • Mid-range score if tutors or facilitators mainly use an open questioning style during the session, but with areas for improvement; for example using follow up probes. • High score if tutors or facilitators use skilfully phrased open questions throughout the session, using information from participants to develop learning points and engage offenders.

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

15

2b. Listening, reflecting and summarising skills
Tutors or facilitators should listen attentively to participants’ contributions during the session. On occasion they will reflect back points made in order to ensure clarity of understanding to check out that they and participants have heard correctly. Tutors or facilitators should periodically summarise key learning points at appropriate stages during the session. The summaries should be delivered clearly, succinctly and accurately, demonstrating tutors’ or facilitators’ understanding of the material. A good summary should reflect contributions made by the participant(s) when related to the aims and objectives of the session to facilitate learning.

Positive evidence

• • • • • • •

Shows appropriate eye contact and body language (nodding, smiling, etc.) when listening. Reflects back points that capture language, emphasis and meaning accurately. Summarises at key intervals. Delivers summaries clearly, succinctly and accurately. Allows time for participants who are slow in conveying points. Summaries include references to contributions made by participants. Brief overview at end of session reflecting the participants’ understanding of the main objectives and themes.

Negative evidence

• Does not allow sufficient time for responses. • Ignores some contributions. • Inappropriate body language (turns sideways or away from offenders, looks bored or disinterested etc). • Fails to check understanding or reflect back. • Inaccurate or misleading summaries. • Failing to provide summaries. • Overview not provided at end of session or reflects content rather than overall objectives and theme.
Scoring

• Low score if tutors or facilitators demonstrate poor listening skills; for example, by talking over the participant(s), finishing their sentences for them, appearing distracted, bored or impatient when contributions are being made. • Mid-range score if tutors or facilitators demonstrate appropriate listening, eliciting and summarising skills for most of the session, but on occasion fail to do so. • High score if tutors or facilitators demonstrate appropriate listening, reflecting and summarising skills throughout the session.

16

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

2c. Effectively challenges offence-supporting, anti-social or discriminatory views
Tutors or facilitators should challenge participants in an appropriate manner if offence supporting, anti-social or discriminatory remarks are made during the session. This is important to maintain the ground rules set at the start of the programme and encourage an atmosphere based on respect and pro-social modelling. In cases where many examples of offence supporting or discriminatory views are expressed during a session, tutors or facilitators will need to strike a balance between reinforcing the ground rules and continuing with the programme delivery and engaging the offenders. In these cases repetitive challenging is unlikely to be helpful and should be avoided. However, it should be clear that the tutors or facilitators do not support the views expressed.

Positive evidence

• • • • • • • • • •

Challenges offenders when appropriate. Models interpersonal skills taught on the programme. Links challenge to learning points from the programme. Uses Socratic questions to create discrepancy between current behaviour and important goals. Knows when to stop. Gently but firmly reminds participants of their responsibility in maintaining ground rules. Utilises group support (when feasible and appropriate). Encourages reflection. Encourages re-phrasing of anti-social, pro-offending or inappropriate language. Plants seeds of doubt.

Negative evidence

• • • • • •

Confrontational approach. Engages in extended arguments or heated debates. Encourages long rambling discussions to the detriment of programme. Moralises or lectures offenders. Repeatedly ignores offence supporting/anti-social/discriminatory views. Responds inappropriately e.g. smiles, nods, supports or colludes.

Scoring

• Low score if tutors or facilitators persistently fail to respond to offence supporting, antisocial or discriminatory remarks, or show inappropriate verbal or non-verbal encouragers. Low score can also be given if the challenges are delivered in a moralising or demotivating way. • Mid-range score if remarks are responded to during the session, but not skilfully; for example, by turning to the participant with a remark such as “careful” or “respect” without expanding or following up. • High score if tutors or facilitators deal with remarks skilfully and are able to link this to learning points from the programme and encourage offender motivation.

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

17

2d. Motivational skills
Effective tutors or facilitators have a positive encouraging and interpersonal style. They continuously seek to develop participants’ motivation to complete the programme and avoid offending behaviour. The material should be presented in a way that makes it relevant to participants’ problems and encourages their motivation to continue on the programme.

Positive evidence

• • • • • • •

Encourages and builds on motivation to change. Helps participants to overcome barriers to progress. Elicits and builds on pro-social change talk and responsible thinking. Addresses and encourages the development of the ‘responsible’ part of the participant. Encourages offenders to validate and apply new ideas and skills for themselves. Uses offenders’ own examples whenever possible. Shows patience and perseverance.

Negative evidence

• • • • •

Reliance on the manual with little engagement of offenders. Misses opportunities to elicit or build on change talk. Evidence of impatience or lack of interest in progress of offenders. Lack of interest in evidence that offenders have applied skills outside of session. Focuses on participant’s irresponsibility without providing opportunities/options to contrast their old with their new thinking.

Scoring

• Low score if tutors or facilitators show little interest in participants as individuals, seeming more concerned in delivering the programme to time-scale; convey the impression of being disinterested; fail to encourage participants; present pessimistic attitudes about the capacity for offenders to change or for the programme to be of benefit. • Mid-range score if tutors or facilitators show motivational skills but with minor areas of improvement; for example, by missing opportunities to reinforce change talk when they occur. • High score if tutors or facilitators demonstrate high level motivational skills throughout the session. For example, skilful eliciting and reinforcement of change talk.

18

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

2e. Appropriate use of praise and reinforcement
Verbal and non-verbal encouragers are used when participants display appropriate behaviour and when they evidence their understanding and/or application of the learning points within the session. Specific praise is used to reinforce and develop understanding and learning.

Positive evidence

• • • •

Positive body language. Nodding, smiling, hand gestures etc. Verbal praise that appears genuine and is varied in style and content. Uses praise judiciously (specific and timely) throughout the session.

Negative evidence

• • • • •

Little or no use of praise. Praise given in a bland or repetitive manner. Lacks sincerity when giving praise. Over use of praise. Praises inappropriately e.g. following anti-social remarks.

Scoring

• Low score if tutors or facilitators appear detached from proceedings; for example, slouched body posture, appearing distracted, fidgeting or looking/sounding bored, etc. Also score as low a tutor who tends to use verbal praise or non-verbal encouragers inappropriately (e.g. in response to antisocial comments). • Mid-range score if tutors or facilitators generally make good use of verbal praise and nonverbal encouragers, but show minor areas for improvement. For example, showing attentiveness throughout the session, but appearing bored or distracted on a small number of occasions, or missing out on a number of opportunities to acknowledge progress. A mid-range score can also be given if praise is given but in a repetitive manner with little variation in tone and content. • High score if tutors or facilitators use verbal and non-verbal encouragers skilfully throughout the session.

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

19

2f. Warm, genuine and empathic style
Effective tutors or facilitators have a warm, genuine and empathic therapeutic style. These qualities are necessary to establish an effective therapeutic alliance with participants.

Positive evidence

• • • • • • • •

Attempts are made to understand and relate to the feelings of the group members. Appropriate expressions of empathic understanding are made. ‘Real,’ honest and consistent behaviours are shown signalling genuine interest in the group. Tutors or facilitators are non-defensive and comfortable with themselves. Accepting, caring and supportive behaviours are shown to group members. A warm and friendly approach is adopted. Body language is used appropriately to signal interest. Humour is used appropriately to facilitate learning.

Negative evidence

• • • • • •

Group members may be ignored or belittled. Tutors of facilitators seem ‘fake’ or insincere. A defensive or confrontational stance is adopted. Tutors or facilitators behave in a judgmental or hostile manner. A cold and impersonal manner is adopted. Body language signals disapproval or lack of interest (e.g. looking through notes, gazing out of the window, chewing gum). • Inappropriate use of humour; group members perceive that they are being laughed at.

Scoring

• Low scores if tutors or facilitators consistently appear cold and impersonal. They may ignore or belittle group members or be judgmental or hostile. Their behaviours are seen as ‘fake.’ Their body language communicates that they are disinterested and disapprove of the group. Their use of humour is inappropriate. • Mid range score if facilitators show warmth, a genuine approach and empathic understanding but there are minor areas of improvement needed, e.g. the body language shown does not signal interest. • High score if facilitators demonstrate high levels of warmth, genuine and empathic understanding throughout the session.

20

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

4.3 GROUP WORK/SESSION DELIVERY SKILLS

3a. Clear and engaging verbal style and use of appropriate language
Tutors or facilitators should be clearly spoken and audible to all participants. Pro-social modelling and appropriate language should be used at all times throughout the session. The use of slang and swearing should be avoided and tutors or facilitators should also be sensitive to diversity issues.

Positive evidence

• • • •

Consistently audible and comprehendible. Adapts pace and wording with particular sensitivity to participants’ needs. Avoids jargon. Uses pro-social language at all times.

Negative evidence

• Inaudible or difficult to understand. • Uses swear words or language that may seem to support anti-social or discriminatory views. • Verbal style that is monotone, rambling or verbose.
Scoring

• Low score if the tutors or facilitators cannot be clearly heard or understood. Also score low if tutors or facilitators use language that is not sensitive to diversity issues or which minimises or colludes with offending behaviour. • Mid-range score if the tutors or facilitators can generally be heard and understood and generally use appropriate language with some room for improvement. • High score if the tutors or facilitators are clearly spoken throughout with top marks for tutors or facilitators who modulate their tone, pace and wording in an engaging style sensitive to participants’ needs.

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

21

3b. Effective co-working
Tutors or facilitators should convey a positive and supportive working relationship. This includes modelling the interpersonal skills taught on the programme and treating each other with respect at all times. Effective co-working involves a co-ordinated approach throughout the session, showing evidence of good planning with defined roles. Co-tutors or facilitators should support each other in promoting a positive approach to the programme and deal with any concerns they have through the proper channels. Scoring for this item can include promoting a positive and constructive approach to working with other disciplines when evidenced during the session.

Positive evidence

• • • •

Clear, respectful and co-ordinated approach throughout session. Modelling effective and respectful interpersonal interactions. Evidence of good planning in delivery of session. Supporting the co-worker if they are encountering difficulties, for example in dealing with a disruptive group. • Handovers conducted clearly and in an ordered sequence. Tutors or facilitators should start by linking with the previous tutor’s input. • Consistent messages given by both tutors/facilitators.

Negative evidence

• Co-worker looks bored or fidgets throughout session. • Off the cuff, sarcastic or belittling remarks about co-worker or other members of staff/disciplines. • Complaining about managers, co-workers other disciplines or the programme in group time. • Co-worker fails to assist or makes matters worse when lead worker is encountering difficulties. • Handovers are conducted in a confused manner, it is not clear which tutor is leading, tutors or facilitators appear disorganised, etc. • Co-tutors or facilitators give inconsistent messages. • Ignores co-worker.
Scoring

• Low score if tutors or facilitators fail to model respectful relationships during the session. For example, one tutor ignores the other, talks over them, or the co-worker looks bored and fidgets throughout the session, may suddenly leave the room on occasion without explanation and/or fails to assist when help is needed, etc. • Mid-range score if tutors or facilitators generally show effective co-working, but with minor areas for improvement; for example, one tutor talks over the other on one occasion in an otherwise effectively co-tutored session.

22

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

• High score if the session is delivered with good co-working between tutors or facilitators throughout. Handovers are conducted in a skilled manner, done naturally and conversationally so as to engage and motivate the group (How about if we try it out? What do you think about this……?”). Tutors or facilitators demonstrate that they are clear about who is leading a section, by body language and positioning, e.g. gesturing that the co-tutor is taking over, moving to sit in an appropriate position, and show appropriate interest in the co-tutor’s section. Tutors or facilitators show respect and appreciation for each other’s contribution.

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

23

3c. Group/Session Facilitation Skills
Effective tutors or facilitators use group processes to aid learning and promote pro-social behavioural and attitudinal change. They encourage participants to explore issues and to meaningfully engage with the programme and its relevance to their lives. Skilled tutors or facilitators can use group processes in many different ways to meet the aims and objectives of the programme. For example, to challenge offence-supporting views, encourage motivation or use contributions/insights from offenders to expand on learning points. This is achieved by a combination of an interpersonal style that is calm and transparent together with a good understanding of the underlying model of change and skilful application of the treatment methods involved in the programme. For example, encouraging perspective taking, drawing out differences and similarities of opinion and encouraging the group to share ideas and experiences on how to apply new skills etc. Contributions by lead tutors or facilitators should be made in a spirit of genuine enquiry and interest. 6

Positive evidence

• • • • • • • • •

‘Rolling with resistance.’ Presenting as calm, transparent, genuine and interested. Comfortable with short silences. Encouraging offenders to reflect and share the meaning and relevance of the programme to their issues/problems/life goals and ambitions. Dealing with questions clearly and confidently. Conveying the impression that tutors or facilitators and offenders are working collaboratively (shared goals, genuine interest). Encouraging participation, sharing of views/ideas, self-reflection and discussion. Encourages group/individual ownership of change process. Emotionally responsive.

Negative evidence

• • • • • •

Confrontation or sarcasm. Discomfort with short silences. Conveys impression of being nervous/needing to be liked. Unresponsive. Presents as disinterested/rigid/aloof/cold. Mechanistic delivery style.

24

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

Scoring

• Low score if tutors or facilitators present as easily flustered or unsure if responses are not forthcoming; talk for offenders rather than allowing them to express ideas themselves; argue against resistance; miss opportunities to utilise group processes to explore the meaning of exercises or seem emotionally unresponsive the feelings of participants. • Mid-range score if tutors or facilitators generally show good facilitation skills, but show minor areas for improvement; for example, seeming emotionally unresponsive on some occasions, misses an opportunity to use group processes etc. • High score if tutors or facilitators demonstrate good facilitation skills throughout the session.

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

25

3d. Group/Session management skills
Good tutors or facilitators should model respectful behaviour and behave in a professional manner throughout the session. They should demonstrate assertiveness skills in their management of disruptive members and in the delivery of the programme. In a wellmanaged session, tutors facilitate the learning process as opposed to allowing the group or individuals to control or dominate proceedings. Good tutors or facilitators should encourage and support less vocal group members to enhance their opportunities for contribution and learning.

Positive Evidence

Models professional and respectful behaviour to group members. Manages domineering or disruptive offenders assertively. Draws quieter members into the exercises. Seeks to obtain a balanced and representative contribution from all participants. Shifts attention around the room. Asserts control when necessary. Evidence of boundary keeping skills e.g. prompt start and finish, clear differentiation between group time and refreshment breaks. • Promotes respectful and work oriented group/session atmosphere. • Remains focussed on aims and objectives of programme.
Negative evidence

• • • • • • •

• • • • •

Allows individuals to dominate discussions. Easily thrown off track. Not clear who is in control - offenders or tutors/facilitators. Submissive or aggressive when challenged. Evidence of poor boundary keeping, e.g. refreshment breaks overlap with programme time.

Scoring

• Low score if tutors or facilitators present as easily thrown off track; for example, when a participant asks a difficult question they embark on a long discussion about the programme or drift into irrelevant subjects. It is also poor practice for tutors or facilitators to manage the session in an overpowering or over controlling manner. • Mid-range score if tutors or facilitators generally show good management skills, but show minor areas for improvement; for example, showing poor assertiveness for a short period in the session. • High score if tutors or facilitators demonstrate good management skills throughout the session.

26

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

4.4 RESPONSIVITY SKILLS

4a. Flexible delivery style responding to the needs of the group members
Effective treatment programmes should utilise treatment methods to which participants of the programme are responsive. Tutors or facilitators should be responsive to the learning styles of the individual and accommodate these. They should also be able to tailor their style of interaction to fit the changing goals and needs of different group members at varying stages of treatment.7

Positive Evidence

• Tutors/facilitators are sensitive to the participants’ current stage of change. • Attempts are made to simplify language according to the needs of participants. • Alternative methods of communication are incorporated to meet the needs of the group (e.g. drawings, use of symbols etc.). • Creativity and initiative are shown to develop learning and increase understanding. • Tutors or facilitators check understanding of the learning made. • The pace and style of the session are adapted to respond to learning styles/ needs of the group. • A sensitive and motivational style is used with the group members who are encountering specific difficulties. • Use of ‘buddying’ or mentoring systems for offenders with learning difficulties. • Pairing offenders on exercises to take account of literacy needs/basic skills.
Negative Evidence

• • • • •

No attempts are made to simplify or moderate language used. The approach is exclusively didactic. Insensitive comments are made to group members about their difficulties. No account is taken of individual needs /learning styles /stage of change. Tutors of facilitators do not attempt to gauge whether or not group members have understood. They ask only “Do you understand?” and make no real attempts to measure the depth of understanding.

Scoring

• Low scores if facilitators make no attempts to respond to the individual needs of the group members by simplifying or moderating the language they are using. Insensitive comments are made. Little or no attempts are made to check understanding. • Mid range score if facilitators make attempts to adapt to the individual needs of the group members, but still have some outstanding areas which need to be addressed. For example, they make use of “Do you understand?” as a question, but fail to make any real attempt to check comprehension. • High score if facilitators adapt their delivery style to suit the needs of the group members.

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

27

4b. Adaptation of the material to reflect culture, ethnicity, gender, age, sexual orientation, social background and life experiences of participants.
Effective tutors or facilitators tailor their presentation of material in respect of the diversity needs of participants. Treatment managers should use their judgement in considering whether any adaptations to the material compromise the integrity of the underlying model. If there have been any adaptations of the material in terms of any of the above, Treatment Managers should note under this section for audit purposes.

Positive Evidence

• Attempts are made to understand the backgrounds of the group members taking into account the various factors listed. • No derogatory language or attitudes are expressed. • Tutors or facilitators deal sensitively with issues relating to cultural and other forms of diversity (gender, sexuality, disability, religion, mental health and impairment, language, literacy issues and so forth). • Tutors/facilitators express anti-discriminatory attitudes and behaviours. • Use of initiative and creativity in employing the most relevant or local examples relating to learning points covered in the programme. • Provisions and adaptations made for any offenders with physical disabilities.
Negative Evidence

• • • •

There are no attempts made to understand background factors. Lack of sensitivity and respect towards issues relating to cultural and other forms of diversity. Derogatory language or attitudes are expressed. No anti-discriminatory attitudes or behaviours are expressed.

Scoring

• Low score if facilitators make no attempts to adapt the material to reflect culture, ethnicity, gender, age, social background and life experiences of group members. There is no sensitivity or respect shown. There is use of derogatory language or attitudes. • Mid range score if facilitators make attempts to adapt the material to reflect learning ability, culture, ethnicity, gender, age, social background and life experiences of the group members, but further effort could have been made. For example, to explicitly express anti-discriminatory attitudes and behaviours. • High score if facilitators make attempts to adapt the material to reflect culture, ethnicity, gender, age, social background and life experiences of group members.

28

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

4c. Paying attention to external responsivity factors; room layout, seating plans, use of wall space etc.
Effective tutors or facilitators pay attention to all factors that have an impact on treatment. The treatment room should provide a ‘safe’ environment. Wherever possible, opportunities for learning are reinforced, visual symbols should be put up on the walls.

Positive Evidence

• Good use of materials is made to reinforce learning. • Material on the walls supports learning and encourages recall of material. • The layout of the room facilitates learning and signals to the group that care has been taken to support learning. • Breaks are taken at appropriate points in the session.
Negative Evidence

• No attempts are made to reinforce learning by using wall space. • Material on the walls looks uncared for. It clearly relates to other issues not related to the programme or offending behaviour. • The chairs are not arranged in a useful way to encourage group cohesion and aid group processes. • Breaks are taken inappropriately; i.e. not at a point that suits the session.
Scoring

• Low score if tutors or facilitators pay no attention to external responsivity factors. There is no attempt made to reinforce learning and recall. The room is poorly laid out. Breaks are taken at inappropriate times. • Mid range score if tutors or facilitators pay attention to external responsivity factors but there is an area that could be improved; e.g. seating layout. • High score if facilitators pay attention to external responsivity factors.

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

29

5

NOTES
1

Supplementary guidance is available for some programmes, e.g. SOGP.

A note on one-to-one programmes – items 3a, 3c & 3d should be scored within this section. Whilst supervisors of one-to-one programmes will not be monitoring group work, items 3c and 3d also concern offender interaction skills, which can be assessed in terms of working with individual offenders as well as groups.
2 3

Note that whole numbers (e.g. 2 or 3 not 2.5) should be used in scoring. Sliders e.g. 3 or 3 may be used on hard copy for supervision purposes if TMs or facilitators feel that the skill level observed falls between two marks, but whole figures should be used in calculating scores.

This refers to exercises added by tutors that are not specified in the manual. It should not be confused with tutors giving additional explanations or examples provided (in the opinion of the assessor) they aid the learning of the participants and do not compromise the session plan.
4 5

See Fuller C. and Taylor P. Toolkit of Motivational Skills,’ National Probation Directorate, for further details.

See Thornton, D, Mann RE & Williams, FMS (2000) Therapeutic style in sex offender treatment. Unpublished paper, OBPU, HM Prison Service, London.
6

Kottler, J.A, Sexton, T.L. & Whiston, S.C. (1994). The heart of healing: Relationship in therapy. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
7

30

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

6

VIDEO MONITORING FORM

Treatment manager’s video monitoring and responsivity form for prison and probation programmes

PROGRAMME: SESSION NO: NAMES OF TUTORS/ FACILITATORS:

LOCATION:

SUPERVISOR/ TREATMENT MANAGER NAMES:

DATE OF VIEWING: SECTION OF SESSION SAMPLED: QUALITY OF RECORDING (SOUND AND PICTURE):

OBSERVER:

The form is divided into four sections: 1. Adherence to programme manual 2. Adherence to treatment style 3. Gourpwork/Session delivery skills 4. Responsivity Each item is scored on a scale of 1-5. 1. Skill level undermines programme integrity 2. Skill level needs significant improvement 3. Skill evidenced at capable level 4. Skill evidenced at competent level 5. Skill evidence at mindful level

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

31

1. ADHERENCE TO PROGRAMME MANUAL:

Tutor/facilitator A a) Exercises set up, explained and run correctly? b) Timing and pace?

Tutor/facilitator B

c) Checking out learning & encouraging group members to make links? d) Out of session work

Average score for each tutor/facilitator

2. ADHERENCE TO TREATMENT STYLE:

Tutor/facilitator A a) Use of open questions to facilitate learning?

Tutor/facilitator B

b) Listening, reflecting and summarising?

c) Challenges offence supporting/ anti- social/ discriminatory views? d) Motivational skills?

e) Use of specific praise & reinforcement?

f) Warm, genuine & empathic style?

Average score for each tutor/facilitator

32

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

3. GROUPWORK/SESSION DELIVERY SKILLS:

Tutor/facilitator A a) Clear and engaging verbal style style and use of appropriate language? b) b) Effective co-working?

Tutor/facilitator B

c) Group/ session facilitation skills?

d) Group/ session management skills?

Average score for each tutor/facilitator

4. RESPONSIVITY:

Tutor/facilitator A a) Flexible delivery style responding to the needs of the group members? b) Adaptation of the material to reflect culture, ethnicity, gender, age, social background and life experiences of participants? c) Paying attention to external responsivity factors; ; room layout, seating plans, flipcharts on wall etc?

Tutor/facilitator B

Average score for each tutor/facilitator

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

33

TUTOR/FACILITATOR ASSESSMENT

Tutor/facilitator

Tutor/facilitator

Strengths:

Strengths:

Areas for development:

Areas for development:

Tutor/facilitator response:

Tutor/facilitator response:

OVERALL SUMMARY:

OVERALL SCORING (OPTIONAL) Tutor/facilitator Average score for adherence to programme Average score for treatment style Average score for Groupwork skills Average score for responsivity Overall average Tutor/facilitator Average score for adherence to programme Average score for treatment style Average score for Groupwork skills Average score for responsivity

OVERALL SCORE FOR SESSION (averaged over Tutor/facilitators):

Adherence to programme: Groupwork skills:

Adherence to treatment style: Responsivity:

34

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

FOR

VIDEO

MONITORING

Published in April 2005 by: National Probation Directorate Horseferry House Dean Ryle Street London SW1P 2AW Tel: 020 7217 8409 Email: NPSPublications@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk NPD/002/2005