Developing a Program of Postsecondary Academic Instruction in State Prisons Improving Evidence of Impact through a National Study of The Correctional Education Association College of the Air (CEA/COA) Program Spring 2010 Project Update Dr. Stephen

1
Developing a Program of Postsecondary Academic
Instruction in State PrisonsImproving Evidence
of Impact through a National Study of The
Correctional Education Association College of the
Air (CEA/COA) Program Spring 2010 Project
Update Dr. Stephen Meyer, Principal
InvestigatorRMC Research CorporationCindy
Borden Penny Richardson, Field
InvestigatorsNorthstar Correctional Education
ServicesLinda Fredericks, Qualitative Analyst
RMC Research Corporation Dr. Stephen Steurer,
Project DirectorCorrectional Education
Association

• CEA Leadership Forum March 29, 2010

2
This Session

• Context for Focus on Postsecondary Education
• Study Overview
• Cohort 1 Implementation Findings
• Considerations for Implementing College Programs
• Initial Results from Post-Release Interviews
• Next Steps

3
Context for Focus on Postsecondary Education in
Prison
4
Importance of Postsecondary Ed.

• Labor market demand for jobs requiring a
  postsecondary education expected to increase
• Obama administration investments in college to
  increase participation and completion

5
Promise of Postsecondary Ed. in Prison

• Evidence of positive impact on
• Recidivism
• Rates of employment, earnings
• Inmate behavior, attitudes, self-esteem
• Disciplinary infractions, relationships among
  inmates and correctional staff, development of
  positive peer role models

6
Postsecondary Ed. Participation in Prison

• Fewer than 25 of state/federal prison inmates
  have college experience
• Programs available at between 35 and 42 of
  institutions
• An estimated 11 of eligible participation
  participates (5 of total population)

7
Study Overview
8
Study Goals

• Provide information about the implementation,
  effectiveness, impact of a widely available
  postsecondary academic delivery model that can
  facilitate access, persistence, and completion of
  postsecondary education by incarcerated students
  
• Provide evidence that meets rigorous research
  standards

9
CEA/COA Program

• Partnership - Correctional Education Association
  (CEA) and Milwaukee Area Technical College (MATC)
• General education/liberal arts and sciences
  courses leading to an Associate of Arts degree to
  students in prison
• 21 course (66 credit) sequence 7 interim
  certificates
• 325 per 3 credit course
• Two pre-college level courses (College Success
  and College Technical Math)
• 10 courses offered during each 16-week semester
  of 2009-2010, including 8-week compressed
  courses also 10-week summer courses

10
CEA/COA Program

• DVD video programs (min of 2x30min/wk)
• Readings and assignments using texts, study
  guides, workbooks, and CD-ROMs
• Site coordinator
• Inform, advise, register students
• Liaison between students/instructors
• Ensure resources (e.g., materials, space,
  schedule)
• Proctor tests
• Track student progress

11
Research Questions

• To what extent does the Correctional Education
  Association College of the Air (CEA/COA)
• Increase rates of participation in postsecondary
  and other academic programming?
• Improve participants academic achievement
  outcomes and progress toward postsecondary
  academic degrees?
• Improve participants achievement motivation and
  educational aspirations?
• Affect post-release employability for
  participants?
• Affect institutional outcomes, such as
  institutional climate and recidivism?
• To what extent do aspects of the CEA/COA
  curriculum and its delivery, institutional
  support, participant engagement, and participant
  characteristics affect outcomes?

12
Logic Model
13
Random Assignment Design

• If assigned to experimental condition, CEA/COA
  provided as the primary institution-sponsored PS
  academic curriculum for the duration of the
  study.
• If assigned to control condition, alternative PS
  academic programming made available for the
  duration of the study. CEA/COA must not be
  provided.

14
Timeline

• Three-year study, began fall 2008
• Three cohorts of students (fall 2008, 2009, 2010)
• Fall and spring data collection through spring
  2011
• Post-release interviews 2010-2012

15
Requirements for Study Sites

• Have the infrastructure to provide postsecondary
  academic instruction
• Have not offered CEA/COA in the past
• Provide federal Incarcerated Individuals Program
  funds (IYO in 2008-09) or other funds for PS
  academic programs
• Willing to be randomly assigned to treatment or
  control condition as part of the study
• Have a population that will provide a minimum of
  approximately 15 study participants each fall
  beginning PS academic programming whose tuition
  costs are paid using IIP/IYO or other grant
  funding and who meet eligibility for IIP/IYO
  funding
• (1) have a secondary school diploma or
  equivalent (2) eligible for release within 7
  years (3) 35 years of age or younger and (4)
  not have been convicted of a) a criminal offence
  against a victim who is a minor, b) a sexually
  violent offence, or c) murder.

16
Data Sources

• Data collection conducted by research team during
  onsite visit
• CAAP Critical Thinking Test
• Student Survey
• Site Coordinator Survey
• Institutional Data
• Student Follow-up Telephone Interview
• Case Studies (interviews, focus groups,
  observations sample of sites)

17
Cohort 1 Implementation Findings
18
Questions for Initial Analyses

1. What are the characteristics of students in
   postsecondary education programs?
2. What program content and instructional delivery
   comprise these programs?
3. What types of instructional resources and support
   are available to students?
4. What benefits for students and for institutions
   are associated with participation?
5. What factors interfere with successful
   implementation and what suggestions do students,
   educators, and administrators have for improving
   programs?

19
Cohort 1 Sample

• 38 institutions in 5 states (Iowa, Massachusetts,
  Nevada, Oklahoma, and South Carolina)
• 20 assigned to implement CEA/COA
• 6 womens facilities
• Mostly medium security facilities (slightly over
  half). The other half included roughly equal
  proportions of minimum security facilities,
  maximum security facilities, and facilities with
  multiple security levels.

20
Cohort 1 Sample

• 259 students who participated in baseline and
  follow-up data collection (117 CEA/COA and 142
  control)
• IA 54 students (21) MA 53 students (21) NV
  38 students (15) OK 43 students (17) SC 71
  students (27)

21
Student Characteristics

• Average age 22.5
• Male (78)
• White/Caucasian (46), Black/African-American
  (37), Latino/Hispanic (11), Other (6)
• Never married (90)
• Parent (38)
• Received high school equivalency in prison (55)
• No prior postsecondary ed (65)

22
Student Characteristics

• 65 had no prior postsecondary ed
• Those who did, reported completing an average of
  5.1 courses
• Student Achievement - Critical Thinking Test
• Baseline average score 58.8
• Close to typical American college sophomore
• Slight non-significant increase at follow-up

23
Course Participation

• 82 successfully completed at least 1 course
• Average number of completed courses was 2.5
  (ranged from 1 to 9)
• Freshman and sophomore level liberal arts courses
  in English composition, sociology, economics,
  psychology, political science, history, and
  environmental science

24
Instructional Delivery

• Classroom observations (8 CEA/COA, 5 control)
• Watching prerecorded lessons, participating in
  lessons led by an instructor or site coordinator,
  discussing course topics, and reviewing course
  assignments and tests
• Site coordinator involvement varied
• Peer support varied

25
Support for Participation

• Encouragement from family and peers
• Encouragement from education and prison staff,
  tutors, instructors
• Other supports efforts by prison to publicize
  courses, access to computer lab and library,
  tuition support, books, good time credit

26
Support for Participation

• Most comments about site coordinators were
  positive
• Comments about support from officers were mixed

27
Positive Aspects of Programs (Students)

• Opportunity to gain knowledge, become a better
  person
• Positive challenge
• The feeling of independence
• Being part of a group that was motivated to
  succeed
• Coursework with cost that led to degree
• Being invited to participate in the program
• Feeling respected by others
• The self-paced instruction
• Having a syllabus that provided clear
  expectations
• Getting new textbooks

28
Positive Aspects of Programs (Site Coordinators,
Administrators)

• Furthering inmate knowledge, providing
  independence
• General ed courses, study guides
• Distance learning - ease of delivery,
  affordable, greater variety of courses
• Direct instruction - interaction with professors,
  ability to answer student questions

29
Perceptions of Student Outcomes (Site
Coordinators, Administrators)

• Reduced behavioral problems and detention
• Improved ability to abide by behavioral norms in
  the classroom
• Increased confidence, motivation,
  self-discipline, and maturity
• Improved self-image
• Improved communication skills and willingness to
  engage in thoughtful conversations
• Improved logical thinking skills
• Higher ambitions

30
Perceptions of Institutional Outcomes (Site
Coordinators, Administrators)

• Relationships among inmates or between inmates
  and institutional staff
• Encouragement for others to learn and grow
• Stabilization of inmate behavior on the yard
• Inmates being more supportive of each other
• Inmates becoming more responsible in facility
  jobs and seeking higher level jobs
• Positive influence on hearings with parole boards

31
Perceptions of Outcomes (Students)

• Improved study skills and test taking ability
• Improvements in writing and content knowledge
• Improved social, communication, presentation, and
  critical thinking skills
• Improved relationships with peers
• Increased willingness to interact with and help
  out others in the program
• Increased self esteem
• A sense of accomplishment
• The ability to be a role model for others

32
Challenges (Students)

• Lack of interaction with instructor (hard to stay
  motivated, difficult to get feedback)
• Outdated textbooks and videos
• Unclear expectations for success, lack of
  introductory materials
• Limited reference materials
• Late receipt of or unavailability of textbooks

33
Challenges (Students)

• Inadequate preparation to take college-level
  classes
• Lack of a place to study and limited time for
  study
• Lack of choice in courses, course cancellation,
  and limited funding to take multiple courses
• Delays in receiving feedback on course work and
  receiving grades
• Unconstructive critical feedback from an
  instructor

34
Challenges (Site Coordinators, Administrators)

• The lack of direct instruction and interaction
  between students and instructors
• Unpreparedness of students to do college-level
  work
• The high level of difficulty associated with some
  course papers and exams
• Lack of tutoring and other support for students
• Shortage of research materials
• Uncertainty about site coordinator roles and
  expectations
• Limited correlation between information in
  lessons and content in books
• Lack of responsiveness by course instructors

35
Suggestions for Improvement (Students)

• Interaction with instructor more feedback,
  support from local instructor
• Increasing access to computers and research
  materials, Internet access
• Provide classes to prepare for college-level
  courses (e.g., study skills)
• Expand funding and course availability so more
  inmates could participate
• Improve explanations about course format and
  expectations
• Provide a quiet place to study and dedicated
  classroom space
• Have a tutor or coordinator to help the students

36
Suggestions for Improvement (Students)

• Have more class time to allow for discussion
  among students after viewing a prerecorded lesson
• Offer more courses and having them grouped
  together so that inmates could obtain a specific
  certification or degree
• Give a realistic picture of expectations to let
  students know they have to be self-motivated and
  mature to succeed
• Conduct better screening to ensure that students
  are sufficiently prepared and committed to
  learning

37
Suggestions for Improvement (Site Coordinators,
Administrators)

• Offer more class choices and include a mandatory
  study skills component in the curriculum
• Provide a preparatory course in college-level
  reading and writing
• Make less challenging classes available for
  students making the transition from GED
  certification to college
• Provide more computers, research materials, and
  study space for students

38
Suggestions for Improvement (Site Coordinators,
Administrators)

• Better organize classes to lead to a certificate
  or degree and to provide marketable skills
• Offer clearer guidance from the partner college
  about the support expected from the prison
• Provide sites with the option to purchase used
  textbooks
• Provide more basic supplies such as notebooks,
  folders, pens, and books
• Allow inmates in college programs to avoid
  institutional transfers while enrolled

39
Summary of Outcomes

• Improvements in student behavior and attitudes,
  including increased confidence, motivation,
  self-discipline, and maturity
• Improved study skills, improved social,
  communication, and critical thinking skills, and
  increased self-esteem
• Improvements in prison climate, including
  relationships among students and between students
  and institution staff
• Several issues that presented substantial
  challenges to program success have implications
  for improving programs

40
Considerations for Implementing College Programs
41
Several Themes Identified

• Student Readiness for College Level Work
• Coverage of Science and Mathematics Topics
• Identification of Student Participants
• Role of the Site Coordinator
• Institutional Incentives and Supports
• Understanding Goals and Objectives of
  Postsecondary Programming
• Peer Supports
• Managing Challenges Created by Distance Learning
  Programs

42
Student Readiness for College

• Coursework too difficult, esp. for those who
  completed GED in prison
• GED preparation described as inadequate
• Need for study skills, writing skills

• Recommendations
• Offer course(s) focusing on readiness skills
• As part of GED preparation
• As prerequisite for PS program admission
• Concurrently with enrollment
• Recruit inmate tutors or other volunteers to
  provide targeted support to address student needs

43
Mathematics and Science Coverage

• Limited coverage relative to other course content
• Knowledge/skills needed for labor force

• Recommendations
• Explore ways to integrate into current curricula
• Ensure readiness for these courses
• Encourage early enrollment in these courses

44
Identification of Students

• Issues of motivation and commitment
• Academic ability, readiness skills
• Need for self-discipline, maturity, social
  skills, ability to collaborate and pay attention

• Recommendations
• Take additional steps to ensure preparedness and
  motivation of students, e.g.
• Local assessments, evaluations, or exercises
• Trial courses
• Clarify requirements, expectations

45
Role of the Site Coordinator

• Large differences in roles, from program
  administrator (e.g., managing communication with
  course instructors, arranging lesson viewing,
  administering exams) to more direct role (e.g.,
  encouragement, leading discussions, targeted
  support)

• Recommendations
• Ensure that site coordinators have sufficient
  interest, ability, and time to carry out roles
• Opportunities to share best practice
• Provide guidance on how to foster support among
  inmates, solicit outside support

46
Institutional Incentives Supports

• Differences across sites
• Need for tutoring/advising opportunities to
  discuss lessons access to research materials,
  quiet places for study, computers, and supplies,
  such as folders, pens, and books

• Recommendations
• Monitor and address student concerns
• Limit inmate transfers
• Minimize scheduling conflicts

47
Communicating Goals/Objectives of Postsecondary
Programs

• Correctional officers made strong contributions,
  both positive and negative

• Recommendations
• Provide professional development to communicate
  goals of postsecondary education, potential
  benefits, and the role that officers play in
  success
• Offer opportunities for officers to attend
  courses enroll at reduced or no cost

48
Peer Support

• Varied across sites, but often a strong source of
  support

• Recommendations
• Designate inmate clerk/tutors to facilitate
• Provide opportunities for students to work
  together encourage culture of peer support

49
Managing Challenges with Distance Learning
Programs

• Lack of interaction with instructor created
  challenges for staying motivated, monitoring
  progress and feedback on work, responses to
  questions

• Recommendations
• Ensure that site administrators monitor and
  address concerns
• Explore periodic phone contact with offsite
  instructors
• Enhance local support (e.g., peer groups, tutors)

50
Study Limitations

• Sample not representative of all states, all
  prisons
• Cohort 1 focus on youth offenders
• Excludes self-pay students
• Half are CEA/COA sites in first year of
  implementation

51
Initial Results from Post-Release Interviews
52
Post-release Interviews
Interview complete Interview pending Unable to locate after 6 tries No info available Other TOTAL
NV 6 1 5 12 13 37
MA 3 4 13 10 14 44
IA 19 5 2 12 7 45
SC 11 3 2 16 8 40
OK 11 5 2 2 8 28
TOTAL 50 18 24 52 50 194
53
No ph survey mailed no response Escaped Re-incarcerated Federal custody New charges pending
NV 5 1 1 1 1
MA 4 0 2 0 0
IA 3 1 2 0 0
SC 5 0 3 0 0
OK 5 0 1 0 0
22 2 9 1 1
Deceased Refused interview Deported Incarcerated in another state Parole officer refused to cooperate Refused consent
NV 0 3 0 0 1 0
MA 1 5 0 1 0 1
IA 0 0 0 1 0 0
SC 0 0 0 0 0 0
OK 0 0 2 0 0 0
1 8 2 2 1 1
54
60.8 located
55
Next Steps and Discussion
56
Next Steps

• Cohort 2 includes 43 sites in 7 states (addition
  of WI and TN)
• Integrate Cohort 2 data (post-test data
  collection currently underway)
• Examine pre- and post-release student outcomes
  (achievement, motivation, academic engagement,
  employment, recidivism)
• Examine factors associated with positive outcomes

57
Dr. Stephen Meyer, Principal InvestigatorRMC
Research Corporationmeyer_at_rmcdenver.comCindy
Borden Penny Richardson, Field
InvestigatorsNorthstar Correctional Education
Servicesnorthstar_at_ekit.comDr. Stephen
Steurer, Project DirectorCorrectional Education
Associationssteurer_at_ceanational.org
Contact Information