Prison Inmate Education

The article "The Impact of Career and Technical Education Programs on Adult Offenders: Learning Behind Bars" by Howard Gordon and Bracie Weldon (2003) studies of how prisoners receiving educations in prison reduces the recidivism rate. Gordon and Weldon studied the inmates who were participating in the educational programs at the Huttonsville Correctional Center in West Virginia and claimed that inmates who participated in the educational programs were less likely to recidivate once released back into the population as compared to inmates who did not participate in these programs (Gordon & Weldon, 2003). This study provides valuable information as to the effectiveness of educational programs in prison and how they affect prisoner's lives once they are out of prison. I believe that this study is very important because we can then gauge the effectiveness, if any, that these prison education programs have and better judge whether they are useful to have in the prison system. The argument that prisoners who participate in educational programs are less likely to recidivate is a sound argument for the reason that these educational programs teach them basic skills to help them adapt to life and find employment once they are released.

Gordon and Weldon's study shows how prisoners who have completed the General Education Development (GED) program have a significantly lower rate of recidivism. The goal of these educational programs are to achieve six goals: "to provide inmates with basic academic and vocational skills, to provide inmates with an opportunity to change their personal behavior, attitudes, and values, to reduce recidivism, to provide passive control of inmate behavior, to support the operational needs of the correction institute in jobs such as fast food service, building maintenance, grounds keeping, etc..(Gordon et al, 2003)." The author's assume that a higher level of education will prevent an inmate from coming back to prison once they are released back into society. Gordon and Weldon base their assumption on the fact that since these inmates are receiving a higher level of education once they are released they will be able to more easily reintegrate back into society and stay there. The data they gathered to support their claim does support it quite well in the fact that prisoners who have completed both vocational training and their GED have a recidivism rate of 6.71% while inmates who participated in none of the programs have a recidivism rate of 26% (Gordon et al, 2003). This percentage of recidivism for the participants compared to the non participants gave Gordon and Weldon much support for their claim that education makes the recidivism rate go down.

In this study the assumption that inmates who participate in vocational and GED training will run a lower risk of recidivating once they get out is defended, but not by a lot. Gordon and Weldon, only have their results and the results of a few other researchers to support their claims. They do not really touch on studies that may dispute their claims; they only bring up other studies that support their arguments fully. In this argument the authors try to propose a clear cut cause and effect relationship of education directly affecting the recidivism rate of prison inmates; however, there could be other factors such as how many jobs are available at the moment that play a role in the recidivism rate (Gordon et al, 2003). The authors claim is supported by relevant data, being that this study was done from 1999 to 2000 (Gordon et al, 2003). I think that Gordon and Weldon could have made their study more valid if they had chosen random prisons all over the United States so then we could have a wide variety of samples instead of just what is happening in West Virginia. By just using West Virginia they could be making a mistake by just generalizing the inmates of the prison they were studying. Yet, they do make their argument based on the facts of what they found in their prison. Gordon and Weldon offer a rational appeal to the reader and do not try to use emotional tactics to get the reader on their side. The information provided from the study is not distorted per say, it supports their claim, but their test area is too small to make any real claims of education affecting recidivism.

The article "Educated Prisoners Are Less Likely to Return to Prison" by James Vacca (2004), deals with the subject of if prisoners receive the right type of educational programs in prison their risk of recidivism goes down immensely. Vacca states that "Since 1990, the literature has shown that prisoners who attend educational programs while they are incarcerated are less likely to return to prison following their release (2004)." Vacca cites many examples of the types of educational courses the inmates should have to help them deal with their emotions and problems. The educational programs help the inmates deal with their social skills, encourage artistic development, and teach techniques on how to deal with their emotions (Vacca, 2004). These programs would help inmates deal with the issues that put them in prison in the first place and knowing these skills can then help keep them out of prison in the future. I find these arguments to be sound because Vacca shows the research from other people all over that concurs with his own claims of how these programs can keep recidivism at bay (2004). He cites many examples and goes into depth about why inmates may be in prison and what these programs will do to correct their problems and turn them into a real member of society.

In the article Vacca tells of how prisoners that are educated with the right kind of education are less likely to recidivate (2004). He goes on to tell that the right kind of education is an educational program that is suited to their individual needs so they can learn the proper life skills to keep themselves out of jail. Recent studies have indicated that most male inmates in prison are high school dropouts who have almost no employable skills and can barely read or write (Vacca, 2004). These programs also teach the inmates how to integrate back into society and how to deal with the people and emotions that is contains. In this study, Vacca cites many examples of past research that has been done concerning inmate education and recidivism and also the quality of the education being a factor in how much recidivism occurs (2004). All of these past studies further his claim that an educated inmate will be at less risk to recidivate once he is released back into society. This is true because the education the inmate receives allows him to go out, find a job, and properly deal with