Corrections_Today_September-October_2022_Vol.84_No.5

n Education

a study by the Rand Corporation that analyzed a large amount of U.S. prison education data. Findings indicated that recidivism rates for participants of carceral academic or vocational education were 43% lower than those who did not participate in similar activities (Reese, 2019). Barriers to carceral education For as much evidence as there is for effective prison programming, there are also documented limitations and barriers to carceral education. Some of those barriers in clude the attitudes of leadership, overcrowded conditions, inadequate funding for programming and/or materials and students’ motivation levels. Support from prison leader ship is critical to the success or failure of prison education programs (Vacca, 2004). Supportive prison wardens and others in leadership will create environments in which educational programs are treated as a priority. Where education is not considered a priority, other factors will take precedence and interfere with the schedule and/or effectiveness of prison education programs. Austin (2017) addressed some of the interruptions in programming, in cluding the transfer of students in the middle of programs, logistical interferences with class schedules/meetings and/or having students work instead of attending classes. Many states inadequately fund their prison education pro grams, which may affect the availability and effectiveness of those programs (Vacca, 2004). Offender motivation is another factor that has a direct impact on the achievement of students in prison educa tion programs (Vacca, 2004; Austin, 2017). Many inmates dropped out of school because of deficiency in academic skills and/or difficulty in school-related tasks, which frustrated the individuals and contributed to poor self concepts in those offenders. These factors together often end with offenders having a pervasive negative attitude regarding school (Vacca, 2004). However, there are a va riety of reasons why incarcerated individuals may want to participate in prison education programs (Dunleavy, et al., 2008). They may want to improve their skills to improve their likelihood of employment upon release. There may be other incentives that can increase the motivation of offenders to participate in such programs. For example, many states offer time off the offender’s sentence for participation in education programming. Offenders may be transferred less if they are participating in particular

istock/jacoblund

programs. Additionally, they may find the atmosphere in the school positive and encouraging, compared to the rest of the prison facility, and want to spend more time in the school (Reese, 2017). Gaes (2008) discussed the idea prison education is cost-effective and provides reductions in recidivism, which improves the safety of the public. Ellison et al. (2017) completed a meta-analysis of 18 studies that demonstrated the effectiveness of prison educational programs in reducing recidivism by approximately 33%. Their meta-analysis of five studies indicated carceral education increases the likelihood of gainful employment. Although the indication is education in prison has positive effects on recidivism and employment, the studies did not specify which programs were most effective. The meta analysis included information on high school equivalency programs and other post-secondary opportunities. Most prison education studies do not provide enough infor mation about the details of the educational programs, including type, delivery methods or population investi gated. There is a need to continue research on carceral education in detail, considering “how and why education ‘works’” (Ellison et al., 2017).

34 — September/October 2022 Corrections Today