Corrections_Today_September_October_2023_Vol.85_No.5

Hindered by their innate blind spots, scholars are wedded to glimmering ideations that strain the limits of academic probity (Liebling, 2006). Their limited pedagogi cal understanding of jails and prisons align with Professor Robert Barrington’s (1991:35) contention that “classroom ridden” professors, devoid of actual knowledge on captive milieus harbor, at best, a rudimentary understanding of “life behind the walls.” This misinformation, underscored Bar rington’s (1991:35) poignant corollary that “an appalling number of colleges presume to be able to teach corrections courses with academics who have never worked in the cor rections field.” Of note, Professor Todd Clear (2001:711) prefaced his presidential address to the Academy of Crimi nal Justice Science by averring that college-level criminal justice studies are “Typically seen as an academically ‘weak’ program, attracting below-average students who are taught by questionably prepared instructors.” Correctional officers have become marginalized and devalued by correctional authorities, and seldom have the chance to articulate their immediate concerns within a proper forum. Given the aforementioned, the relevance of academic participation in correctional affairs is in order. Particularly, how will it affect the organizational sphere of jail and pris on operations? In the most abbreviated terms, correctional officers harbor a corrections/academic disconnectedness exemplified in their renunciation of collaborative partner ships between jails/prisons and universities. From the vantage point of correctional officers, the working alli ance’s correctional administrators forge with members of the academic community are analogous to the blind leading the blind. These correctional administrators that encompass the correctional hierarchy — correctional commissioners, prison wardens and jail superintendents — are recognized by inmates and correction officers

as the proximate cause of the problems within unstable carceral institutions. This arrangement leads correctional officers to impassioned, ad hominem attacks depicting their commitments and suspicions that lies in rote aca demic pedagogical ventures, which tie-in with Lee and Stohr’s (2021:100) “correctional quackery.” A metaphor depicting a collage of patently false inmate transforma tional epiphanies, embraced by inexperienced correctional administrators, that suggest institutional imperatives for inmate rehabilitation programs reduce recidivism rates (Cherry, 2017) — a throwback in vogue with Robert Mar tinson’s (1974) “nothing works” era. These non-punitive, trial and error rehabilitative practices proffered by profes sors jeopardize the safety of correctional staff and infringe upon the security of the institution. An illustration, at the Vaughn Correctional Facility, correctional officers maintained that, besides interfering in operational affairs, mental health professionals baited wayward inmates with treats from Dunkin’ Donuts to partake in compassionate therapeutic programs (Cherry, 2017). Beyond the corrections/academic divide, correctional practitioners take issue with the statements proffered by national organizations such as the Academy of Crimi nal Justice Sciences. Under the rubric of their “policy expert’s directory,” the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences cast several of its members as experts in jail/ prison affairs when they clearly were not. Correctional officers label such academics as recipients of undeserved accolades. Researchers must recognize their limited knowledge and understanding of carceral environments. Their unsupported explanations depicting penal environ ments ascend beyond diminishing the credibility of their scholarship to jeopardizing the integrity of correctional institutions themselves. END NOTES 1 Overcrowding has created challenges for correctional administrators on how to manage inmate populations safely and efficiently. To consider the complexity of this problem, consider the situation that occurred at the Essex County Jail (NJ). To cope with severe overcrowding, the entire floor comprising the gym and social service areas became inmate repositories. Despite sleeping on cots and contrary to existing academic beliefs, placement in such cramped quarters was highly preferred by inmates, who roamed about freely in lieu of cell confinement. 2 Drawn from its total inmate population, Sarasota County Jail (FL) has a small complement of inmates that comprise the highly sought after “road gang” — a variant of the prison chain gang. Road gang inmates relish their outside jobs and favor its benefits such as smoking cigarettes and enjoying lunch by frying fish and frogs caught in ponds and creeks throughout Sarasota County.

→

Corrections Today September/October 2023— 29