Prison Literacy: Implications for Program and Assessment Policy.

More documents

Recommendations

Info

PRISON LITERACY:IMPLICATIONS FOR PROGRAMAND ASSESSMENT POLICYANABEL P. NEWMANWARREN LEWISCAROLINE BEVERSTOCKINDIANA UNIVERSITYPiefaceAmerica wealthy, educated, and democratic truly has aproblem of too much illiteracy among its people and an evengreater problem with illiteracy among its people in prisons andjails. Whereas the "literacy movement" is an indication thatAmerica is resolute and willing to deal with illiteracy in general,America is by and large ignoring the latter problem, whic hdespite valiant efforts by a fewis worsening. America's morethan 1,000,000 people behind bars (more than any other nationand three times as many as the nations of the EuropeanCommunity, most of them illiterate drop-outs from our schoolsand rejects of our society, are a national cancer eating quietlyaway at our economic substance and our will to pledge to oneanother the rights of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"(Jones, 1988). Prison illiteracy is America's secret shame. It isthe problem that most educators do not know about, mostpoliticians do not acknowledge, most corrections professionalsare unprepared to deal with, and most tax-payers resent havingto pay for.1 0NATIONAL CENTER ON ADULT LITERACYvi
ABSTRACTAmerica, already with far more of its people behind bars thanin any other other country and the prison populaton risingsteadily, confronts a double problem: the majority of prisoninmates are (by almost any definition) also insufficiently literate. Astrong correlation exists between ordinary criminal behavior andeducational insufficiency, so that the numbers of adjudicatedpersons who are inadequately literate will tend to be higher than inthe rest of the population. Add to the general effects of educationaldisability the marginalizing factors of ethnicity, class, socioeconomicdeprivation, and other handicaps, and one has theformula for America's epidemic case of prison illiteracy.Historically, the situation in prison literacy is a 150-year-oldnarrative of reforming energies with uneven results, spottyapplication, and meager support. Even so, the effort to deliverliteracy to inmates of America's federal and state prisons,reformatories, and city and county jails has generated a roster ofnoble namesWilliam Rogers, Jared Curtis, Galord Hubbells,Zebu lon Brockway, E. C. Wines, Gideon Haynes, Homer Lane,Thomas Mott Osborne, Fred Nelles, and Austin MacCormick(among others)leading to today's growing guild of correctionsexperts, teachers, librarians, researchers, literacy volunteers, andother advocates of greater literacy for inmates for many very goodreasons.The present scene is acted out before the backdrop of thesocial reforms during the Johnson Administration of the mid-1960s, the significant turning point for prison education in thesecond half of the 20th century. Despite even the ripening of legaland social opinion in favor of inmates' greater rights to literacyand education since the Great Society, practice still lags far behindstatute. The federal system and a few state systems are bestorganizedto deliver educational services to inmates, followed bymost state systems, and the local jails bring up the rear.1Because illiteracy and criminality are umbilically joined, itstands to reason that greater literacy would have a dampeningeffect on criminality. The result of research, on balance, seems tobe that this, in fact, is the case: greater literacy is a way out ofcriminality, and improving literacy is a way of reducing criminalrecidivism among the adjudicated. Despite a widespreadperception that "nothing works," careful studies, and the review ofstudies by American and Canadian researchers, reveal that theNAiIONAL CENTER ON AULT LITERACYix
Page 1 and 2: DOCUMENT RESUMEED 363 729AUTHORTITL
Page 3 and 4: PRISON LITERACY:IMPUCATIONS FOR PRO
Page 5 and 6: ACKNOWLEDGMEN TSOne of the hidden b
Page 7 and 8: project, his major effort at workin
Page 9: H. Implications for a Model Literac
Page 13 and 14: The results of study, and the revie
Page 15 and 16: A. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM:PUTTIN
Page 17 and 18: vocational training, and prison ind
Page 19 and 20: driver-instruction manual, grasp jo
Page 21 and 22: C. WHO ARE THE INCARCERATEDNEEDING
Page 23 and 24: habilitation is the purpose of inca
Page 25 and 26: Americans find themselves as inmate
Page 27 and 28: 72% of the prisons surveyed offered
Page 29 and 30: A most insightful study of "learnin
Page 31 and 32: numbers of inmates enrolled in thes
Page 33 and 34: D. THE BACKGROUND OFPRISON LITERACY
Page 35 and 36: vocational education towards post-r
Page 37 and 38: Two years later, Brockway attended
Page 39 and 40: By the 1960s, unevenness in prison
Page 41 and 42: that "a prisoner is not stripped of
Page 43 and 44: E. ILLITERACY AND CRIMINALITY:LITER
Page 45 and 46: indicated a range of abilities that
Page 47 and 48: Others similarly have uttered cavea
Page 49 and 50: Characteristics of Effective Litera
Page 51 and 52: F. THE PARADIGMS OF PRISONEDUCATION
Page 53 and 54: unreformed attitude among the priso
Page 55 and 56: may be resolved, this human factor
Page 57 and 58: educators, but, surely, the best th
Page 59 and 60: 6. THE COGNITIVE ELEMENTMoral reaso
Page 61 and 62:
In her most recent restatement of t
Page 63 and 64:
Thus whether one opts for student c
Page 65 and 66:
on literacy education, teaching met
Page 67 and 68:
libraries, though inmates were perm
Page 69 and 70:
new jail is under construction tbat
Page 71 and 72:
1. A LITERACY PROGRAM EDUCATES BROA
Page 73 and 74:
vocational education within a workp
Page 75 and 76:
Another reason to remove education
Page 77 and 78:
not to self-efficacy, i.e., adaptiv
Page 79 and 80:
4. A UTERACY PROGRAM IS COST-EFFEME
Page 81 and 82:
corrections costs, increase offende
Page 83 and 84:
until one is satisfied with the pro
Page 85 and 86:
as a legal resource, use of bibliot
Page 87 and 88:
counselors and teachers, but not if
Page 89 and 90:
skills. Besides computers, interact
Page 91 and 92:
offer the promise of increased atte
Page 93 and 94:
I. ASSESSMENT OF LEARNERS ANDEVALUA
Page 95 and 96:
inconsistency, and unreliability, e
Page 97 and 98:
expect attrition in the population
Page 99 and 100:
ability, tests of learning potentia
Page 101 and 102:
of prison-related authorities with
Page 103 and 104:
Program evaluation and learner asse
Page 105 and 106:
APPENDIX A: CHECKLIST OF QUESTIONSF
Page 107 and 108:
PARADIGMS (EXAMPLES OR MODELS) OF P
Page 109 and 110:
PROGRAMS (CONTINUED)No. Question Y.
Page 111 and 112:
IIIII1IIIIII1IIIIIIPROGRAMS (CONTIN
Page 113 and 114:
IIIIIII1IIIIIIIIIII-PROGRAMS (CONTI
Page 115 and 116:
IIIIIIIIIIIIIII1IIIPROGRAMS (CONTIN
Page 117 and 118:
1EDUCATIONAL STMF (CONTINUED)No. Qu
Page 119 and 120:
GOVERNANCENo. Owes lion Y. s No. Do
Page 121 and 122:
COMMUNICATIONS (CONTINUED)No. Quest
Page 123 and 124:
LIBRARIES (CONTINUED)No. Question Y
Page 125 and 126:
I1IIIIIIIIIIIITECHNOLOGY (CONTINUED
Page 127 and 128:
ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION (CONTINUE
Page 129 and 130:
ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION (CONTINUE
Page 131 and 132:
IiiIJAILS (CONTINUED)No. Ouostion Y
Page 133 and 134:
IIIPoucy (CONTINUED)No. Question Y.
Page 135 and 136:
POUCY (CONTINUED)No. Ouestion Yes N
Page 137 and 138:
POLICY (CONTINUED)No. Question Yes
Page 139 and 140:
APPENDIX B: AREAS IN NEED OFFURTHER
Page 141 and 142:
11. Determination of whether the ed
Page 143 and 144:
11 Holt V. Sarver (II) [309 F.Supp.
Page 145 and 146:
female, and their numbers have decl
Page 147 and 148:
community (Ryan, 1989); the Folloup
Page 149 and 150:
excellent auto mechanics and cosmet
Page 151 and 152:
48 Hamm, 1988, p. 147; Oh lin, 1986
Page 153 and 154:
and Correctional Education Associat
Page 155 and 156:
citizens enjoyed, lending to each s
Page 157 and 158:
BIBLIOGRAPHYNote: Some of the items
Page 159 and 160:
Atteberry, J. W., & Tacker, A. B. (
Page 161 and 162:
the Rio de Janeiro penitentiary sys
Page 163 and 164:
Breed, A. (1981). Charge. Proceedin
Page 165 and 166:
(1983). Cataloo of Adult Education
Page 167 and 168:
Conrad, J. P. (1965). Crime and its
Page 169 and 170:
Decker, J. M. (1980). Inside prison
Page 171 and 172:
Dwyer, P., & Botein, M. (1974). The
Page 173 and 174:
Farrar, J. R. (1986). Achieving pri
Page 175 and 176:
Gehring, T. (1989, December). A cha
Page 177 and 178:
Greenwood, P. W. (1988). Correction
Page 179 and 180:
Helgeson, M. E., & Hisama, T. (1982
Page 181 and 182:
177). Ithaca NY: Cornell University
Page 183 and 184:
Ketterling, M. E. (1970). Rehabilit
Page 185 and 186:
Lee, R., & Haynes, N. (1980). Proje
Page 187 and 188:
Lucas, G. S. (1985). Volunteer comm
Page 189 and 190:
McCollum, S. (1978, Special Issue).
Page 191 and 192:
Mil lot, K. (1982). Higher educatio
Page 193 and 194:
Nordwall, A. (1974). Need for educa
Page 195 and 196:
Pendleton, E. P. (1988, June). Stud
Page 197 and 198:
(1978). Prisoner education. A selec
Page 199 and 200:
Reynolds, J. (1982). Incarcerated s
Page 201 and 202:
Rutherford, R. B., Jr. (1988, Summe
Page 203 and 204:
Seashore, M. J., Haberfeld, S., Irw
Page 205 and 206:
Stevens, R. D. (1986, October). The
Page 207 and 208:
Traynelis-Yurek, E., & Giacobbe, G.
Page 209 and 210:
Institute of Justice, National Crim
Page 211 and 212:
Wolford, B. (1983a). Correctional e
show all

Prison Literacy: Implications for Program and Assessment Policy.

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?