Making the Grade in the Prison Yard: Who Takes Advantage of Educational Programming While Incarcerated?

• NCJ Number: 203541
• Journal: Journal of Crime & Justice Volume: 26 Issue: 2 Dated: 2003 Pages: 101-124
• Author(s): Christopher D. Rose
• Date Published: 2003
• Length: 24 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This study analyzed the self-selection process involved in inmate participation in prison educational programming.

Abstract

The link between prison educational programming and recidivism has been often studied, but there is a scarcity of research devoted to understanding the self-selection process involved in an inmate’s decision about whether or not to participant in prison educational programming. Data from the nationwide 1997 Survey of Inmates in State Correctional Facilities were analyzed using logistic regression models to predict inmate participation in educational programs and to discover the impact of such participation on inmate behavior during incarceration. The results indicate that inmates who participate in educational programming differ in significant ways from inmates who choose not to participate in educational programming. Most of the difference between these two groups lies in the degree of inmate involvement and integration within authorized forms of prison programming. The author refers to this integration into authorized prison programming as prisonization. Demographic factors and affiliation with groups that promote educational pursuits prior to incarceration were unrelated to inmate participation in educational programming. As such, the results indicate that efforts to “prisonize” inmates to a higher degree may be the most effective means to promote participation in educational programming, as well as other forms of prison programming. The article offers a discussion of social bond theory and how participation in prison programming leads to stronger social bonds within prison and greater involvement in other prison programming. Finally, the results of this study call into question the direct causal link that has been suggested between educational programming and recidivism. The link between the two may be more complex than originally theorized and may involve the degree of inmate prisonization. Future research should continue to probe issues related to inmate participation in prison programming and recidivism. Tables, references