Reading Right From Wrong - Investigating the role a Community Rehabilitation Company plays in supporting individuals who experience literacy difficult

背景：对识字的定义有很多，而且还在不断演变。英格利斯和埃尔斯（2008）指出，这是一个人的阅读和写作能力，而国家扫盲基金会认为，听说能力以及阅读和写作能力是培养扫盲能力的基本技能。虽然劳森和戈登（1996）指出，没有“普遍的识字标准”，但“功能性识字”一词试图将识字与目的联系起来，并被描述为人们需要能够应对成人生活的阅读和写作技能水平。扫盲在日常生活中发挥着至关重要的作用，缺乏扫盲会造成更广泛的不平等，破坏福祉，阻碍人们做出明智的选择，或为经济和文化生活做出充分贡献。“扫盲计划”根据大量证据制作了《文盲字母表》，这些证据深刻地说明“文盲是人类面临的几乎所有重大问题的根源”。他们认为，支持人们阅读和写作将有助于减少疾病的传播，使人们摆脱贫困，减少不平等。扫盲是国家的优先事项。道格拉斯（2017）估计，到2025年，文盲将使英国GDP损失约340亿英镑。根据国家扫盲基金会的数据，英国约有15%（510万人）的成年人缺乏基本的识字技能。研究表明，低识字率与犯罪之间存在关系。识字率低是囚犯人口的一个明显特征。Kozol（1985）指出了读写能力与犯罪之间的因果关系：“虽然不能将不识字的男女的犯罪定罪完全归因于不识字和不写字，但60%的监狱囚犯不能阅读超过年级水平的事实无疑提供了他们犯罪活动的一个主要原因。”虽然这指的是美国的情况，但英国也出现了类似的情况。监狱改革信托基金（2018年）发现，超过一半（54%）进入监狱的人被评估为具有11岁儿童的识字技能，是普通成年人（15%）的三倍多。Hendricks等人（2016）根据加州青少年管理局的研究，讨论了阅读能力与再犯速度之间的关系。研究发现，“阅读能力低的人更有可能在三个月内再次吸毒，而阅读能力高的人更有可能在第四个月到第十五个月再次吸毒。”这得到了Harer（1994）的支持，他注意到累犯率和教育之间的反比关系，即一个人接受的教育越多，他们再次被捕或再次入狱的可能性就越小。刑事司法系统以书面形式提供的信息为基础。不理解向他们提供的信息可能会对违法者产生影响，包括不理解警告信，判刑前报告和指定的干预措施，最终可能导致不遵守规定。在Boyce-Cottrell（2014）的研究中，缓刑官员指出，低文化水平缩小了“你可以对罪犯做些什么”的选择，特别是指那些被认可的项目，因为它们有书面元素。他们认为，对于文化水平较低的人，缓刑干预不太成功。这是一个重要的研究领域，因为Morrisroe（2014）指出，提高文化水平“可能是防止参与犯罪风险的保护措施”。

Background:The definitions of literacy are many and continually evolve. Inglis and Aers (2008) noted it is a person's ability to read and write whereas the National Literacy Trust considered speaking and listening skills as well as the ability to read and write as essential skills in developing literacy. Whilst Lawson and Gordon (1996) noted there is no 'universal standard of literacy,' the phrase 'functional literacy' attempts to link literacy to purpose and is described as the level of skill in reading and writing that people need to be able to cope with adult life.Literacy plays a vital role in daily living and its absence creates wider inequality, undermines wellbeing and prevents people from making informed choices or offering a full contribution to economic and cultural life. Project Literacy produced the Alphabet of Illiteracy, based on a body of evidence poignantly illustrating 'that illiteracy is the root cause of almost every major problem humanity faces'. They argue that supporting people to read and write will help to reduce the spread of disease, lift people out of poverty and reduce inequality. Literacy is a national priority. Douglas (2017) estimated by 2025 illiteracy will cost UK GDP an estimated £34 billion. According to the National Literacy Trust around 15% (5.1 million people) of adults in England lack basic literacy skills. Research demonstrates a relationship between low literacy and crime. Low literacy is a characteristic evident in the prisoner population. Kozol (1985) noted the causal relationship between literacy and offending: 'While criminal conviction of illiterate men and women cannot be identified exclusively with inability to read and write, the fact that 60 per cent of prison inmates cannot read above the grade level surely provides some indication of one major reason for their criminal activity'. Whilst this was referring to the U.S. situation, a similar picture unfolds in the UK. The Prison Reform Trust (2018) found over half (54%) of people entering prison were assessed as having literacy skills expected of an 11 year old over three times higher than in the general adult population (15%). Hendricks et al (2016) discussed the relationship between reading ability and speed of recidivism following research by the California Department of the Youth Authority. It found 'those with low reading ability were more likely to recidivate within three months, while those with higher reading ability were more likely to recidivate during the fourth through fifteenth months'. This is supported by Harer (1994) noting the inverse relationship between recidivism rates and education which is the more education a person receives the less likely they are to be re-arrested or re-imprisoned.The criminal justice system is based on information presented in a written format. Failure to understand the information presented to them may have implications for offenders, including failure to understand warning letters, pre-sentence reports and specified interventions, ultimately this could result in non-compliance. In the Boyce-Cottrell (2014) study, probation officers noted low literacy levels narrowed 'your options of what you can do with offenders' specifically referring to accredited programmes because of a written element to them. They considered probation interventions to be less successful with people who had low literacy levels. This is an important research area because Morrisroe (2014) noted improving literacy levels 'could be a protective measure against the risk of involvement in crime'.