This research focuses on the question whether with the execution of penal sanctions of an educational nature for underage delinquents, the responsivity principle is met. The responsivity principle ...Show moreThis research focuses on the question whether with the execution of penal sanctions of an educational nature for underage delinquents, the responsivity principle is met. The responsivity principle – in the literature known as one of the most important What Works principles – has until now not been examined much. Consequently a clear and operational definition is lacking. In this research the two most cited components of responsivity in scientific literature, namely motivation for treatment and learning style, have been researched. Furthermore it has been researched if the quality of the trainer and the match between the characteristics of the trainers and youth offenders carries any weight. The data collection for this research has been carried out on the basis of a process evaluation of Tools4U, i.e. an intervention for juvenile delinquents between twelve and eighteen years. This research is an explorative and multi method. It appears from the results that a number of aspects of the responsivity principle are reflected in practice. Nonetheless, currently the following aspects of the responsivity principle are presumably not met sufficiently: maintaining the inclusion criteria with relation to motivation and learning style, the estimation of the stage of change and learning style of youngsters and to act accordingly, and the availability of qualitative trainers. Some results, especially in the area of learning styles, appear to be contrary. Thus, further examination is required. The discussion focuses on the sake, and complexity, of (measuring) the ‘soft’ factors in effective interventions for underage delinquents. The limitations of this research are mentioned and recommendations for further examination as well as for in practice are given.Show less
