One of the most enduring and universal social debates is the ultimate effectiveness of incarceration, particularly given the implied failure of recidivism. Reported recidivism rates have been unsatisfactorily high: for instance, 49% of young people 10 to 17 years old subjected only to first-tier penalties (action plans, reparation orders, etc.) in the UK in 2001 (Hertfordshire County Council, 2003); in the U.S., a rather dated 15-state sample survey carried out by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (2007) revealed that among 272,111 persons released from prisons in 1994, no less than two-thirds (67.5%) were apprehended again for a felony or serious misdemeanor by 1997, 46.9% were reconvicted, and 25.4% resentenced to prison for a new crime; analysis of the 2003 Survey of Youth in Residential Placement (SYRP) reveals a similar (albeit self-admitted) prior offense rate of 62% for all juvenile offenders arrested that year; and 27 states reported 12-month juvenile recidivism rates of from 25% to 55% of those released from state incarceration, the wide variation owing more to different judicial systems than relative success in reintegration programs (Snyder and Sickmund, 2006).
Many institutions and civic organizations have embarked on a variety of programs to drastically reduce recidivism rates. There is, for instance, “restorative justice” which aims to rehabilitate juvenile offenders arrested for minor crimes with a combination of counseling, warning and shaming the offender into taking responsibility, confronting his victim and offering at least an apology (Braithwaite and Mugford, 1994).
In some cases, the offender is obliged to work so as to be able to pay damages. The risks attending the immediate return of such offenders to the community is counted acceptable against the drawbacks of incarceration with hardened criminals. In some cases, the offender must also work and earn money to pay for the damages caused to the victim. The process attempts to create a dialogue between the two and this has resulted in increased satisfaction for the victim, the offender ostensibly feels accountable for his actions and there is also lesser recidivism.
Among the other social sciences, economics weighs in with value and utility theory in contending that youth crime declines in rough proportion to both present and future wage rates. Lochner (2008) offers empirical proof that better wages increase the opportunity cost of committing crime – in terms of the time spent planning, finding a victim and eluding arrest – while higher future earnings raise the opportunity costs of going to jail. Since education raises future income, incarcerated youth who take advantage of educational facilities should be less prone to revert to crime when released. At the same time, youth in correctional facilities lack direction from parents, legal guardians and other mentors. They must have within themselves the modicum of intelligence to discern economic opportunity and the perseverance to stay with an educational program till graduation.
Common to almost every rehabilitation effort is the goal of reintegrating released convicts into a productive, self-sufficient role in society either by providing educational opportunities and skills training while incarcerated or paving the way for re-admission into the school system. There are many stumbling blocks to this, however.
Chief among such hindrances is variable success in resuming progress through the educational system and hence, the dire need for support in furthering education. In the UK experience, for example, convicts who get off lightly (either pre-Court police reprimand or “first tier” handling) easily return to schooling whereas less than half of those who have been in custody manage to do so on their own.
A second major challenge is what might be deemed a failure of will on the part of those detained to take advantage of educational and training opportunity. A case in point is the situation at Manson Youth Institution, Connecticut’s only prison for youth aged 14 to 21. The inmate population comprises all security or risk levels (1-5) and all mental health levels (1-5). Many inmates are gang members (Bloods, Crypts, MS-13, Latin Kings and so on).
Inmates receive the best possible care, including such entitlements as free 24 hour medical, dental, mental health treatment, DirecTV and cookies with milk before bed time! Mandatory education is in force but once they turn 18, inmates need only participate voluntarily. Even if they have not yet obtained a GED, most choose to stay in the cell blocks despite having signed up to learn a trade, high school or college courses; instead, they opt to while away their time playing cards or basketball, attending only when the mood strikes them.
Thus far, there has been no evidence that mandatory attendance has any adverse effects. Controlling for inmate sex, race, age, education level, and IQ, Ryan and McCabe (1994) found from retrospective investigation of 1990-1991 educational records of the South Carolina Department of Juvenile Justice no statistically significant differences in academic achievement under either voluntary or mandatory attendance regimes.
Whatever the proximate causes or compounding factors, ultimately, the failure to complete a high school education or a General Education Degree exacts a high toll on individuals and bears an intolerable social and economic cost later in life. Any intervention that will motivate participation in educational opportunity can only help in reducing recidivism and enhancing the youthful offender’s reintegration into society.
Applicable Theory and Sources
For the nonce, behavioral modification will be the principal theoretical platform. Behavior modification is an entire branch of modern psychology launched by the work of B.F. Skinner in operant conditioning. Essentially, his landmark contribution was to show that both animals and humans can learn desirable behavior and persevere in it in response to antecedents and positive rewards. For its part, aversive stimuli is terminated before the desired act but never as a consequence of resistance to “learning” the desirable behavior.
The chief sources for the literature search prior to designing the intervention will likely be the databases for PsychINFO Abstracts and applicable professional journals revolving on prison education.
Proposed Dissertation Topic and Statement of Research Problem
As already disclosed in the title of this paper, the researcher proposes to investigate behavior modification as an intervention that could significantly raise participation rates in prison education programs. This constitutes a pragmatic response to a problem of inmate apathy about education and skills training at Manson Youth Institution.