The missing link: service-learning as an essential tool for correctional education.

Frank, Jacquelyn B. ; Omstead, Jon-Adam ; Pigg, Steven Anthony 等

In the fall of 2009, a university faculty member was conducting a year-long qualitative study of long-term inmates at Wabash Valley Correctional Facility (WVCF) in Carlisle, Indiana. As the research progressed a two-part theme began to emerge (unsolicited) from the long-term prisoners that were interviewed: 1) many inmates expressed a strong desire to become more civically engaged both within and outside of the prison community; and, 2) these same inmates believe that the opportunity to serve others is central to their rehabilitation and preparation for reentry.

Based on this feedback and an extensive background in service-learning, the faculty member selected two prisoners from her long-term inmate study (both of whom earned college degrees while incarcerated) and embarked on a research collaboration with them. The stated goal of the research team was to design a service-learning model specifically for correctional education. This collaboration developed into a participatory action research study that culminated in the creation of the S.L.I.C.E. (Service-Learning in Correctional Education) program.

SLICE is a collaborative teaching and learning strategy designed to promote academic enhancement, civic engagement and personal growth (Pigg & Omstead, 2010).

Piloting the Course

The first SLICE course was piloted in the fall of 2010. The university faculty member served as the primary facilitator for the course and the two inmate-researchers acted as teaching assistants and mentors. After the semester ended, the research team concluded (through the PAR process) that SLICE reached its goal as a transformative experience for the 7 inmates participating in the pilot course. In order to know for certain, however, it was necessary to ask the college students who took the SLICE course.

The research team tested this hypothesis by reconvening the first SLICE cohort in March, 2011. Five of the students from the original class cohort were able to attend. The research team administered a questionnaire to the course participants and conducted a focus group with the 5 men to learn if they could discern or articulate any differences between their SLICE education and their college experience while incarcerated (see appendix for a copy of the questionnaire administered at the focus group session). The responses were revealing and point to the added value that service-learning could bring to higher education in prison. Inmate R.D. stated:

 Based on my experience in the SLICE program, I believe that my
 self-confidence has improved because of the opportunity I was
 given to validate my own self-worth. ... My self-awareness and
 understanding of others have vastly improved due to the seriousness
 of the curriculum and how it parallels with my rehabilitation
 efforts (R.D., personal communication, March 2011).

Another SLICE participant stated:

 College did not give me the desire or ability to do anything for or
 with others. College was just about me, what I could learn, and
 what I could gain for myself in life. Service-learning has taught
 me not only how to do service with others instead of just 'for'
 them, it has also shown me ways to do so even given my
 circumstances. ... SLICE also did something that college didn't and
 probably couldn't. It gave me something to build self-confidence
 and leadership around (G. G., personal communication, March 2011).

It is worthwhile to note that among the SLICE participants (including 2 members of the research team) the average number of years they have spent in prison thus far is 14.75 years. These men have been part of the prison culture and community for many years, making their appraisal of the role of the SLICE program in prison post-secondary education worth examining further.

Method

Research Design

The researchers used a qualitative research design called phenomenology to implement this research project. Phenomenology attempts to objectively study concepts that are usually regarded as subjective in nature such as: judgments, emotions and perceptions. Phenomenology uses systematic reflection to describe and explain the lived experience and conscious awareness of those being studied (focusing on the participant's own interpretation of their reality). Phenomenology not only blends logically with a study on service-learning but it also incorporates the prisoners' experience and reality into the service-learning model---thus creating an educational tool that is both relevant and accessible for prisoners. Through reflection and collaborative discussions, the PAR has revealed issues of depth and consequence to prisoners that would not have been revealed without their participation in the phenomenological design. Through this in-depth qualitative process, themes such as humanity, civic engagement and the importance of meaningful service in the community have all been identified by the two prisoner partners as central to the SLICE model and programs. The model that has taken shape would not have developed without the equal commitment, intuitiveness, and participation of all three members of the research team.

The SLICE team spent weeks reviewing service-related articles as well as various research methods before choosing to focus the course content on the quality of the subject matter rather than the quantity. That aspect, in conjunction with incorporating the participants' service experiences within the prison would enable the cohort to piece together reflections which would demonstrate their natural development without being onerous. The approach was designed to cultivate a relaxed environment which would motivate participants to exercise their critical thinking skills and ultimately increase the value of their service experiences by connecting the course material to their everyday lives.

The recruitment of subjects for the first cohort of the SLICE program was a purposeful, non-random sample of 8 long-term inmates. A conscious choice was made to select prisoners who were already performing some type of service within the prison. The rationale for this decision was that the researchers wanted the cohort for the pilot class to be men who would likely be serving in mentoring roles in the prison and would be inclined to disseminate their experiences to other inmates. All inmates in the first cohort were also either graduated college (while incarcerated) or were currently enrolled in college (six graduates and two currently enrolled). The researchers also wanted inmates in the first cohort to be able to offer thoughtful feedback and critical evaluation of the program for future cohorts. In addition, all inmates selected by the research team selected had to undergo approval from the administration at the prison. There were several inmates that the administration did not approve and thus they were not included in the first cohort. There were 8 inmates who started the first SLICE course. Two inmates did not complete the course (one decided to drop out after 2 weeks and the other inmate was transferred to a different prison). Six prisoners completed the entire 16- week course. The age and racial composition of the original cohort of eight inmates was as follows: two African-Americans and 6 Caucasians, and an age range of 31-53 years old. The cohort of inmates had served an average of 14.5 years in prison at the time the course began and all were incarcerated for violent offenses.

Participatory Action Research (PAR)

Participatory Action research (PAR) is central to the SLICE project. Participatory Action Research is defined by Kemmis and McTaggart (1988) as "collective, self-reflective enquiry undertaken by participants in social situations in order to improve the rationality and justice of their own practices" (p.5). PAR consists of a repeating four-stage process that begins with reflection and then moves through planning, action, and then observation. The research collaboration itself was designed to replicate the structure of a course--with the 2 inmate partners from Wabash Valley Correctional Facility simultaneously taking on the roles of planner and future participants.

There have been a few studies conducted involving PAR in prison settings (Fine & Tore, 2006; Sullivan, Hassal, & Rowlands, 2008). However, a more in-depth examination of the prison-related PAR research reveals no published studies where prisoners used PAR to design an actual course. Thus while the PAR methodology is not new, its application in this manner does represent something new for each member of the research team and for prisons in general.

McTaggart (1997) outlines sixteen tenets of Participatory Action Research which mirror the steps the SLICE research team took to design the SLICE model. Several of these sixteen tenets were particularly critical in the research process and by highlighting a few of them the researchers will illustrate the complexity of their collaborative process.

Tenet #2 states, "participatory action research is contingent on authentic participation which involves a continuing spiral of planning, acting (implementing plans) observing (systematically), reflecting and then re-planning" (McTaggart, 1997, p. 79). The SLICE research team found this process to be invaluable to discovering key themes to be included in the SLICE course (including stigma, humanity, community, and service). In addition, it is critical to note the flexibility that the prison administration allowed us to meet, take our time, and really develop a solid model for implementation.

Another of Taggart's PAR principles is that "participatory action research is collaborative: those responsible for action are involved in improving it" (ibid). The prisoners on the research team found this a bit challenging at first---mostly because they were not accustomed to being treated as equals in an intellectual process and therefore, it took months for them to really perceive themselves as full partners. McTaggart's PAR tenet #4 states:

 Participatory action research establishes self-critical communities
 of people participating and collaborating in the research processes
 of planning, acting, observing and reflecting. It aims to build
 communities of people committed to enlightening themselves about
 the relationship between circumstance, action, and consequence and
 to emancipating themselves from the institutional and personal
 constraints which limit their power to live by their legitimate,
 freely chosen social values (McTaggart, 1997).

Perhaps this PAR tenet, more than the rest, truly struck a chord with the 2 inmates on the research team. Through reading and reflecting on writings such as Stigma, by Goffman, Changes in criminal thinking and identity in novice and experienced inmates: Prisonization revisited by Walters, and Context, creativity and critical reflection: Education in correctional institutions, by Behan, the team found its best inspiration for the design of the SLICE model. Most critical, it helped to flesh out for the research team the true niche that service-learning can fill in higher education. Behan's 2007 article, in particular his reference to the need for education to be a transformative experience (p.160) inspired the inmate researchers to critically reflect on their higher education experience while incarcerated. In spite of them both being very strong students academically, they believed that something was "missing" from their educational experience and realized that, for them, it was such transformative experiences mentioned by Behan. As the PAR cycle continued and the planning team moved forward, SLICE began to evolve into the bridge of transformation. For example, a critical reflection by Omstead (2011) notes:

 The knowledge gained from post-secondary education in itself is not
 solely responsible for lowering recidivism, but rather the credit
 should be given to the transformative nature of the entire process.
 SLICE focuses on the transformative aspect of the post-secondary
 correctional education experience and cultivates this
 transformation within the student/participants (Omstead, 2011).

The SLICE team aimed to push inmate participants to seek their own transformation by not only making them aware of their ability to positively impact the community around them, but also by fostering their self-awareness. Through participatory action research, the researchers have come to see service-learning (and the SLICE model) as the missing link between post-secondary education and a transformative experience because of its unique design which guides prisoners through a three-step process:

1) Participants recognize the reality of their own prisonization.

2) They understand the necessity for de-prisonization through the cultivation of critical thinking skills and self-belief.

3) Prisoners appreciate the role of civic engagement as a medium to apply their formal education and critical thinking skills to real world issues and problems while simultaneously enhancing their sense of humanity.

Results from the PAR Process

Through weekly meetings predominant themes, such as humanity, social validity, and civic responsibility, were soon formulated. Each concept is a key principle in the development of citizenship skills. Yet, the critical question that remained was, "How do you teach such fragile concepts in an institution that is designed to deprive an inmate of their humanity?" This conflict was resolved with one word: believe. By believing in the human potential for change the barriers of prison life switched from the end of the road to detours. With each turn students experience personal growth and develop a sense of self-worth and responsibility to the community that they participate in. However, it will not begin until service-learners believe in themselves and the community that they serve, and in return participate in a community that believes in them.

The normative behaviors, values, and customs which comprise the "convict code" are not conducive to a successful life in a civil society. A bigger problem noted by the inmates on the research team is that after prisoners subscribe to the convict code for an extended period of time, they forget that these beliefs, attitudes and resulting behaviors that are forged within the prison environment should be left at the prison gate upon their release. Omstead notes:

 Instead, these inmates take their prison mentality back out onto
 the streets and when a situation calls for prudence they act
 recklessly, and when confronted with everyday rudeness they react
 with violent aggression. Whereas both behaviors are acceptable
 behind bars, they are not acceptable in society. Ultimately, their
 failure to readjust to societal expectations will cost them their
 newfound freedom (Omstead, 2011).

However, Omstead continues, SLICE helps to address the very issue discussed above.

 It prompts participants to conduct a thorough self-inventory and
 then to shift their focus. After concentrating on their
 psycho-social issues, the participants are then directed to apply
 their insight into the interpersonal dynamics of their everyday
 lives. By the end of the course, participants gain a better
 understanding of themselves, the people around them, and life in
 general.

Discussion

SLICE encourages the participants to apply their academic knowledge to their everyday lives in a way that traditional education does not. The aim of correctional education should be to enrich the lives of inmates, propel them to new levels of self-growth, and bring prisoners closer to a true understanding of the meaning of humanity. Simply memorizing facts, becoming familiar with intellectual concepts and learning to write term papers does not rehabilitate a person. Although it is an undeniable fact that the more education a prisoner acquires while incarcerated the less likely he is to recidivate after his release, the definable link between education and rehabilitation remains hazy. So, what is it about the process of correctional education that actually does the correcting?

The correcting comes when prisoners begin examining themselves and their lives through the lens of higher education. When this happens the prisoner's journey through post-secondary education evolves from being simply an educational experience into a transformative learning process. This evolution is key to rehabilitating a "prisonized" mind into one of a responsible, productive citizen. However, general education, vocational programs, and higher education in prison does not appear to intentionally set out to cultivate this process. SLICE attempts to address this issue by making the enrichment of the prisoner students' lives first and foremost as the objective. The creators of the SLICE model discovered that through a cycle of deep introspection coupled with academic discussion it was possible to foster social rehabilitation within its participants--- a key ingredient for successful reintegration back into society upon one's release from prison.

Conclusion

In the United States over 96% of all inmates in state correctional facilities will be released from prison at some point (Bureau of Justice, 2009). This statistic challenges our society to move away from arguing about punishment and turn instead to contemplating how society can best prepare prisoners for the practical realities of life after prison. What exactly needs to be done to help transform "offenders" into engaged citizens? Studies indicate that education is the best answer. Research show that participating in educational opportunities while incarcerated greatly reduces recidivism (Chappell, 2004; Foley & Gao, 2004). "All available evidence demonstrates that education upgrading even in prison, results in increased self-esteem, critical thinking, and self-discipline. These personal gains combine to reduce the likelihood of a released prisoner coming back into conflict with the law" (Collins, 2008, p.78).

The research literature in the 1990s and 2000s clearly outlines the benefits of post-secondary education for inmates, post-release. "A survey of inmates at an Indiana prison, for example, showed that prisoners enrolled in college classes committed 75 percent fewer infractions than the average inmate" (Taylor, 1994 as cited in Erisman & Contardo, 2005, p 10). In addition, Chappell (2004) examined fifteen studies conducted during the 1990s on recidivism and higher education and found that fourteen of the fifteen studies showed reduced recidivism among released inmates who had participated in post-secondary correctional education.

As of 2004, only 4% of state prisoners in Indiana were enrolled in postsecondary correctional education (Erisman & Contardo, 2005). Even though the number is small the outcomes are impressive--estimates are that prisoners who receive an undergraduate education while incarcerated have a recidivism rate of approximately 12% which represents at least a 50% decrease in recidivism from those in the general offender population (Contardo & Tolbert, 2007). Finally, Batiuk et al. (2005) conducted a study of 1,000 former inmates in Ohio. The study tracked the released prisoners for three years and the data showed that, "while earning a GED or completing a vocational program did reduce recidivism, completing an associate's degree had a particularly significant impact, reducing the likelihood of re-incarceration by 62 percent" (Batiuk et al., 2005 p. 59).

Postsecondary education in U.S. prisons dates back to the early 1800s (Erisman & Contardo, 2005). Educational programs in correctional facilities grew and expanded until the 1990s when a combination of "get tough on crime" laws and the elimination of Pell Grants for prisoners substantially reduced funding and opportunities for higher education in prisons. Part of the reduction in educational programs has been further spurred on by public sentiment that violent offenders behind bars should not be given such "undeserved" opportunities. Nevertheless, the Indiana Department of Correction website notes, "the State Constitution states that the penal code shall be founded on the principles of reformation, and not of vindictive justice."

However, due to state budget cuts in 2011, the Indiana Department of Correction severely reduced its correctional education program, completely removing its Baccalaureate program and offering very limited general education, vocational, and Associate degree opportunities (and only in minimum to medium security facilities). All correctional education programs have essentially been removed from maximum security facilities except for a few seats in GED classrooms and a minimal offering of vocational courses. Although the pilot SLICE program was designed around the transformative experience of higher education, its usefulness as a teaching paradigm is not contingent on the availability of postsecondary educational opportunities.

The removal of such a large portion of Indiana's correctional education programs represents a trend within the U.S. prison system as a whole: the failure to adequately provide prisoners with transformative educational opportunities. In 2008, only between 35% and 42% of the prison systems in the U.S. offered postsecondary education to inmates (Myer, Fredericks, Borden, & Richardson, 2008). With only a handful of states taking the extra step to rehabilitate their prisoners, the national average showing that one half to two thirds of those released prisoners are likely to recidivate is not surprising (Mercer, 2009). The numbers speak for themselves. It is clear, that new alternatives to traditional correctional education methods must be examined in or to "correct" the problem of the revolving door cycle.

The SLICE model can fill an important niche in the correctional education setting by providing prisoners with an adaptive teaching strategy which focuses on self-transformation through study, introspection, and community involvement. For inmates, the prison experience severs the sense of community through social isolation and suspends human development with the restraints of "security." Education seems to be the only known bridge spanning the chasm between being dysfunctional to being socially acceptable. The researchers view SLICE as such a bridge. The potential role of service-learning is in helping to transform the prison experience into one wherein critical thinking skills are developed, confidence is built, and social validation is increased. In prisons devoid of any meaningful experience, through SLICE, inmates learn how to trust themselves and the people around them in order to build the bonds of community.

References

Batiuk, M., Lahm, K.F., Mckeever, M., Wilcox, N. & Wilcox, P. (2005). Disentangling the effects of correctional education: Are current policies misguided? An event history analysis. Criminal Justice: International Journal of Policy & Practice, 5(1), 55-75.

Behan, C. (2007). Context, creativity and critical reflection: Education in correctional institutions. The Journal of Correctional Education, 58(2), 157-169.

Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (1999). Reflection in service learning: Making meaning of experience. Educational HORIZONS, 77(4), 179-185. Society, 7(1), 93-103.

Brown, A. (1998). 'Doing Time': The extended present of the long-term prisoner. Time & Society, 7(1), 93-103.

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2009). Reentry Trends in the United States. Retrieved from http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/reentry/reentry.htm

Chappell, C. (2004). Post-Secondary correctional education and recidivism: A meta-analysis of Research conducted 1990-1999. Journal of Correctional Education, 55(2), 148-169.

Collins, P. (2008). Education in prison or the applied art of "correctional" deconstructive learning. Journal of Prisoners in Prison, 17(1), 71-90.

Erisman, W., & Contardo, J. (2005). Learning to reduce recidivism: A 50 state analysis of post-secondary correctional education policy. Washington, D.C.: Institute for Higher Education Policy.

Fine, M., & Tore, M.E. (2006). Intimate details: Participatory action research in prison. Action Research, 4(3), 253-269. DOI: 10.1177/147650306066801

Foley, R., & Gao, J. (2004). Correctional education: Characteristics of academic programs serving incarcerated adults, Journal of Correctional Education, 55(1), 6-21.

Furco, A. (1996). Service-learning: A balanced approach to experiential education. Washington DC: Corporation for National Service, 2-6.

Goffman, E. (1986). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. New York, New York: Touchstone.

Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1998). The action research planner (3rd ed.). Victoria: Deakin University.

McTaggart, R. (1997). Guiding principles for participatory action research. In R. McTaggart (Ed.), Participatory action research: international context and consequences (25-43). Albany State University: New York Press.

Mercer, K.R. (2009). The importance of funding postsecondary correctional educational programs. Community College Review, 37(2), 153-164.

Meyer, S.J., Fredericks, L., Borden, C.M., & Richardson, P.L. (2008). Implementing postsecondary academic programs in state prisons: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Correctional Education, 61(2), 148-184.

Omstead, J. (2011). SLICE reflection journal entry. Unpublished paper.

Richards, S.C., Faggiani, D., Roffers, J., Hendrickson, R., & Krueger, J. (2008). Convict criminology courses at the university and in prison. Journal of Prisoners on Prisons, 17(1), 43-60.

Sullivan, E., Hassal, P., & Rowlands, D. (2008, November). Breaking the chain: A prison-based participatory action research project. The British Journal of Forensic Practice, 10(3).

Walters, G.D. (2003). Changes in criminal thinking and identity in novice and experienced inmates: Prisonization revisited. Criminal Justice and Behavior. 30(4), 399-421.

White, G.W., Suchowierska, M., & Campbell, M. (2004, April). Developing and systematically implementing participatory action research, Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 85(2).

Whyte, W.F., Greenwood, D.J., & Lazes, P. (1991). Participatory action research: Through practice to science in social research. In W.F. Whyte (Ed.), Participatory research (19-55). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Biographical sketch

JACQUELYN FRANK is an assistant professor and Coordinator for Gerontology MA program at Eastern Illinois University. She holds a PhD in cultural anthropology from Northwestern University. Her research areas of interest are re-entry issues for long-term inmates, family caregiving, and post-secondary education for prisoners.