Petra commented on: Group #1 and 4

Erin commented on: Group 1

Unique Adult/Community Education Programs

Erin Rusher and Petra Knezevich, Ball State University

“We must not believe the many, who say that only free people ought to be educated, but we should rather believe the philosophers who say that only the educated are free.” ~ Epictetus

Introduction

            For most of the twentieth century, imprisonment in the United States (US) was rare. The incarceration rate was 100 per 100,000, meaning that just one-tenth of 1 percent of the population was behind bars. In the mid-1970s, the prison and jail population began to grow. This pattern continued for 35 years. Now, 1 in 31 Americans is in jail, prison, on probation or on parole (Prison Studies Project, 2014). Criminal acts that result in the rearrest, reconviction, or return to prison with out without a new sentence is called recidivism (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2014). Nationwide, as many as half of those released end up back in prison within three years (The New York Times, 2014). A high correlation exists between the level of education attained by an incarcerated person and his/her recidivism rate. For example, in Indiana the recidivism rate for individuals with a GED is 20% lower than the general prison population, while the rate for college graduates is 44% lower (Steurer, Linton, Nally, & Lockwood, 2010). The presence (or absence) of a degree has far-reaching implications for the employment opportunities available to formerly incarcerated people reintegrating into society. Gainful employment is one of the defining characteristics of successful reentry and readjustment into society (Prison Studies Project, 2014).

In the fall of 2008, Professor of Sociology Bruce Western and Kaia Stern, then a project director at Harvard Law School, forged a relationship with Boston University’s longstanding Prison Education Program and the Massachusetts Department of Correction to create unique opportunities for college education in prison (Prison Studies Project, 2014). The Prison Studies Project (PSP) was established to promote informed conversation about the challenges of mass incarceration through an interdisciplinary approach committed to education and policy change (Prison Studies Project, 2014). Their focus revolves around four main goals: 1) raise awareness among the general public and policymakers; 2) teach college courses inside prison as part of increasing educational opportunities for people who are incarcerated; 3) promote a perspective on criminal punishment that emphasizes its connection to racial, class, and other socioeconomic disadvantages; and 4) discuss policy alternatives, i.e. alternatives to incarceration, effective “reentry” models, and prison programming (Prison Studies Project, 2014). To pursue these goals, the PSP has begun to convene leading researchers and practitioners, promoting a dynamic interaction that raises the profile of mass incarceration in public conversation, works to flood the marketplace with information, and challenges conventional assumption about crime and punishment (Prison Studies Project, 2014). The PSP behind bars has proven to be deeply transformative for students, changing not only their attitudes about the United States justice system but their career and life goals as well. In order to move public policy towards increasing educational opportunities for people with criminal records, the PSP has released a national directory of post-secondary education programs in prison, including the Ball State University Correctional Education Program at Pendleton Correctional Facility (Prison Studies Project, 2014).

The Bard Prison Initiative (BPI) creates the opportunity for incarcerated men and women to earn a Bard College degree while serving their sentences. The academic standards and workload are rigorous, based on an unusual mix of attention to developmental skills and ambitious college study. The rate of post-release employment among the program’s participants is high and recidivism is extremely low. By challenging incarcerated men and women with a liberal education, BPI works to redefine the relationship between educational opportunity and criminal justice (BPI, 2014). As the largest program of its kind in the US, BPI enrolls 275 incarcerated men and women across a full spectrum of academic disciplines, and offers over 60 courses each semester. By 2013, Bard granted nearly 275 degrees to BPI participants and enrolled more than 500 students. BPI began in 1999, when then-student Max Kenner set out to engage Bard College in the effort to restore meaningful education to the prison system. At the start, Kenner organized other Bard students to volunteer as tutors in local prisons. In 2001, BPI outgrew its role as a student organization and became an academic program of the college. In 2005, BPI awarded the first Bard College degrees to incarcerated candidates. It now operates a network of 6 satellite campuses across New York, engaging students up through their release and after (BPI, 2014).

Program Comparison

By participating in a prison education program, students discover new strength and direction, often fundamentally rethinking their relationship to themselves, their communities, and the world in which they live (i.e. transformation theory). Returning home with confidence and hope, participants are able to find and hold satisfying jobs in a range of fields, prepared to lead productive and fulfilling lives. PSP and BPI offer education programs (associate’s and bachelor’s degrees) within prison walls in order to provide a realistic opportunity for ex-convicts to assume the responsibility of returning to general society as better parents, neighbors, and citizens (BPI, 2014). College in prison helps prevent people from leaving the institution more isolated, embittered, and likely to return.

PSP is a comprehensive prison educational program, addressing not only the courses themselves but also existing institutional education policies, policy alternatives, and general assumptions among the institutional policymakers. BPI is one, specific liberal arts curriculum that results in an associate’s or bachelor’s degree. PSP serves the students, as well as the needs of the people who build, run, and fund accredited programs. Program practitioners often work in isolation: juggling the administrative tasks, training teachers and volunteers, and fundraising while having a limited capacity to network with other directors. A national directory of postsecondary education programs would both reduce the labor associated with responding to inquiries and increase opportunities for synergies capable of yielding greater access to education in prison (PSP, 2014). It would also help leverage resources to expand and institutionalize existing educational programs behind bars. PSP is currently compiling the first nationwide directory of postsecondary programs in US prisons. BPI is just one such example of a postsecondary program.

Implications

Studies conducted over the last two decades almost unanimously indicate that higher education in prison programs reduces recidivism, which translates into reduction in crime, savings to taxpayers, and long-term contributions to the safety and well-being of the communities to which the formerly incarcerated return. Recent research on prison education programs presents discouraging statistics on the current recidivism rate (Prison Studies Project, 2014). According to the Institute for Higher Education Policy (IHEP) (2011), nearly 7 in 10 people who are formerly incarcerated will commit a new crime, and half will end up back in prison within three years. Given that about 95 out of every 100 incarcerated people eventually will rejoin society, it is crucial that we develop programs and tools to effectively reduce recidivism (IHEP, 2011). Prison education is far more effective at reducing recidivism than boot camps, “shock” incarceration, or vocational training (National Institute of Justice, 1998). A 2005 IHEP report states that recidivism rates for incarcerated people who had participated in prison education programs were (on average) 46% lower than the rates of incarcerated people who had not taken college classes.

Directors of prison education programs often report noticeable improvement in general prison conduct and discipline. Changes in behavior can be attributed to improved cognitive capacity as well as the opportunity to feel human again by engaging in an activity as commonplace as going to class (Correctional Association of New York, 2009). Survey results from an Indiana prison showed that incarcerated people who were enrolled in college classes committed 75% fewer infractions than those who were not. A more recent study demonstrated that postsecondary correctional education programs can break down the racial barriers that are a common cause of disciplinary problems in a prison setting (Erisman & Contardo, 2005). According to the Correctional Association of New York (2009), prison officials recommend reinstating college programs because of their multiple benign effects, such as providing an incentive for good behavior, producing mature and well-spoken leaders, and communicating the message that society has respect for the potential of incarcerated people.

The number of children affected by their parents’ incarceration is significant. In the first decade of the 21^st century, more than half of all people behind bars have minor children at home. A college education has a far-reaching capacity to set a good example for these children (Prison Studies Project, 2014). Erisman et al. (2005) found that children of women enrolled in the prison college program expressed pride in their mothers’ academic achievements, were inspired to take their own education more seriously and were more motivated to attend college themselves. Postsecondary prison education programs offer a chance to break the intergenerational cycle of inequality. When children are inspired by their parents to take education seriously, they begin to see alternatives to dropping out of school and entering a life of crime.

The criminal justice system is staggeringly expensive. As a country we spend $212 billion dollars annually to apprehend, try, and incarcerate prisoners. In recent years, the US has maintained a prison population of more than 2.3 million people, with the average annual cost of over $29,000 per person (BPI, 2014). The high cost of correctional spending is exacerbated by an astonishingly high national recidivism rate of 67.5%, which contributes to the increasing prison population (PSP, 2014). Research indicates that these high and expensive rates of recidivism fall to less than 22% if prisons offer educational opportunity to their prisoners. According to the Department of Policy Studies at UCLA (2004), a $1 million investment in incarceration will prevent about 350 crimes, while that same investment in correctional education will prevent more than 600 crimes. Correctional education is almost twice as cost effective as incarceration. Post-secondary education also yields multiple public benefits, including greater social productivity, increased tax revenue, and decreased reliance on governmental support (IHEP, 2005).

	PRISON STUDIES PROJECT	BARD PRISON INITIATIVE
LOCATIONS	Massachusetts	New York
EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES	To promote informed conversation about the challenges of mass incarceration through an interdisciplinary approach committed to education and policy change.	Creates the opportunity for incarcerated men and women to earn a Bard College degree while serving their sentences
EDUCATIONAL PERSPECTIVES	1) raise awareness among the general public and policymakers; 2) teach college courses inside prison as part of increasing educational opportunities for people who are incarcerated; 3) promote a perspective on criminal punishment that emphasizes its connection to racial, class, and other socioeconomic disadvantages; and 4) discuss policy alternatives, i.e. alternatives to incarceration, effective “reentry” models, and prison programming	By challenging incarcerated men and women with a liberal education, BPI works to redefine the relationship between educational opportunity and criminal justice.
LEARNERS	Adult prisoners	Adult prisoners
HOW THEY WERE ORGANIZED	In the fall of 2008, Professor of Sociology Bruce Western and Kaia Stern, then a project director at Harvard Law School, forged a relationship with Boston University’s longstanding Prison Education Program and the Massachusetts Department of Correction to create unique opportunities for college education in prison.	BPI began in 1999, when then-student Max Kenner set out to engage Bard College in the effort to restore meaningful education to the prison system. At the start, Kenner organized other Bard students to volunteer as tutors in local prisons.
WHY THEY WERE ORGANIZED	PSP serves the students, as well as the needs of the people who build, run, and fund accredited programs. Program practitioners often work in isolation: juggling the administrative tasks, training teachers and volunteers, and fundraising while having a limited capacity to network with other directors. A national directory of postsecondary education programs would both reduce the labor associated with responding to inquiries and increase opportunities for synergies capable of yielding greater access to education	To pursue a liberal arts curriculum that results in an associate’s or bachelor’s degree.
IMPLICATIONS	Higher education in prison programs reduces recidivism, which translates into reduction in crime, savings to taxpayers, and long-term contributions to the safety and well-being of the communities to which the formerly incarcerated return. Directors of prison education programs often report noticeable improvement in general prison conduct and discipline. Changes in behavior can be attributed to improved cognitive capacity as well as the opportunity to feel human again by engaging in an activity as commonplace as going to class. Postsecondary prison education programs offer a chance to break the intergenerational cycle of inequality. When children are inspired by their parents to take education seriously, they begin to see alternatives to dropping out of school and entering a life of crime. Correctional education is almost twice as cost effective as incarceration. Post-secondary education also yields multiple public benefits, including greater social productivity, increased tax revenue, and decreased reliance on governmental support.	Higher education in prison programs reduces recidivism, which translates into reduction in crime, savings to taxpayers, and long-term contributions to the safety and well-being of the communities to which the formerly incarcerated return. Directors of prison education programs often report noticeable improvement in general prison conduct and discipline. Changes in behavior can be attributed to improved cognitive capacity as well as the opportunity to feel human again by engaging in an activity as commonplace as going to class. Postsecondary prison education programs offer a chance to break the intergenerational cycle of inequality. When children are inspired by their parents to take education seriously, they begin to see alternatives to dropping out of school and entering a life of crime. Correctional education is almost twice as cost effective as incarceration. Post-secondary education also yields multiple public benefits, including greater social productivity, increased tax revenue, and decreased reliance on governmental support.

References

Bard Prison Initiative (2014). BPI: Bard Prison Initiative. Retrieved from http://bpi.bard.edu/faqs

Bureau of Justice Statistics (2014). Recidivism. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=17

Correctional Association of New York (2009). Education from the inside out: The multiple benefits of college programs in prison. Retrieved from http://www.correctionalassistance.org/press/advisories/1-28-2009_CA_Higher-Education_Report.htm

Erisman, W. & Contardo, J.B. (2005). Learning to reduce recidivism: A 50-state analysis of postsecondary correctional education policy. Retrieved from http://www.ihep.org/Publications/publications-detail.cfm?id=47

Institute for Higher Education Policy (2005). The investment payoff: A 50-state analysis of the public and private benefits of higher education. Retrieved from http://www.ihep.org/Publications/publications-detail.cfm?id=43

National Institute of Justice (1998). Preventing crime: What works, what doesn’t, what’s promising, research in brief. Retrieved from http://www.nij.gov/publications/pages/publication-detail.aspx?ncjnumber=171676

Prison Studies Project (2014). Prison Studies Project: Teaching, Research, Outreach. Retrieved from http://prisonstudiesproject.org

Steurer, S.J., Linton, J., Nally, J., & Lockwood, S. (2010, August). The top nine reasons to increase correctional education programs. Corrections Today, 40 – 43.

The New York Times (2014). Gov Cuomo’s bold step on prison education. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/19/opinion/gov-cuomos-bold-step-on-prison-education.html

Bureau of Justice Statistics (2014). Recidivism. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=17