Matching Items (3)
Filtering by
- Creators: School of Politics and Global Studies
Description
We, a team of students and faculty in the life sciences at Arizona State University (ASU), currently teach an Introduction to Biology course in a Level 5, or maximum-security unit with the support of the Arizona Department of Corrections and the Prison Education Program at ASU. This course aims to enhance current programs at the unit by offering inmates an opportunity to practice literacy and math skills, while also providing exposure to a new academic field (science, and specifically biology). Numerous studies, including a 2005 study from the Arizona Department of Corrections (ADC), have found that vocational programs, including prison education programs, reduce recidivism rates (ADC 2005, Esperian 2010, Jancic 1988, Steurer et al. 2001, Ubic 2002) and may provide additional benefits such as engagement with a world outside the justice system (Duguid 1992), the opportunity for inmates to revise personal patterns of rejecting education that they may regret, and the ability of inmate parents to deliberately set a good example for their children (Hall and Killacky 2008). Teaching in a maximum security prison unit poses special challenges, which include a prohibition on most outside materials (except paper), severe restrictions on student-teacher and student-student interactions, and the inability to perform any lab exercises except limited computer simulations. Lack of literature discussing theoretical and practical aspects of teaching science in such environment has prompted us to conduct an ongoing study to generate notes and recommendations from this class through the use of surveys, academic evaluation of students' work and ongoing feedback from both teachers and students to inform teaching practices in future science classes in high-security prison units.
ContributorsLarson, Anika Jade (Author) / Mor, Tsafrir (Thesis director) / Brownell, Sara (Committee member) / Lockard, Joe (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / School of Life Sciences (Contributor)
Created2015-05
Description
Debates about criminal justice have erupted onto the American political scene in recent years. Topics like mass Incarceration, civil asset Forfeiture, three strike laws, and mandatory minimums have been dredged up and discussed at every level of government from county courtrooms to state legislatures and all the way up to the halls of the US Senate and the desk of the White House. According to Marc Mauer of the Sentencing Project, a non-profit entity focused on prison population reduction, this new focus has yielded some important victories with New York, and New Jersey both reducing their respective prison populations by 26% between 1999 and 2012 (1). In the summer of 2015, President Obama became the first sitting President in American history to visit a prison. His visit to El Reno Prison, just outside of Oklahoma City, came on the heels of a speech against Mass Incarceration that the President made at an NAACP conference in Philadelphia (Horsely). The movement for change had reached all the way to the desk of the oval office. Indeed, it is of little wonder why our criminal justice system has come under such close scrutiny. With mass protests breaking out around the nation due to clashes between the criminal justice system and those it has victimized, the rise of a new Black Lives Matter movement, and an overburdened prison system that houses almost 25% of the world inmates (Ya Lee Hee), criminal justice in America has been driven to an ideological and financial breaking point. In a nation that purportedly values freedom and individual choice, the stark realities of our prison system have created a divide between those that would reform the system and those who seek to keep the status quo. I align with those stakeholders that desire comprehensive reform. In my opinion, it is no longer fiscally responsible, nor morally credible to lock American citizens up and throw away the key. The days of tough on crime, of Willie Horton, and of super predators are gone. Crime has been reduced to historic lows in almost the entire country despite significant increases in the population. According to Oliver Roeder, in a Brennan Center scholarly article, violent crime has been reduced by 50% since 1990 and property crime has been reduced by 46% (Roeder et al, p.15) while the population during this same period has grown by how much 249 million to 323 million, almost 30%. For the first time in almost 20 years, the conversation has finally shifted to how we can make the system equitable. My vision for our criminal justice system will stretch beyond the following plan to revise truth in sentencing. TIS remains a small component of a much larger question of our justice system. It is my fundamental belief that the way America treats its offenders needs reformation at every level of the system, from the court, to the prison. It is my view that our prerogative when treating offenders should be to address the root causes of crime, that is the societal structure that causes men and women to commit crime. Poverty, education, economics, and community reinvestment will be just some of the issues that need to be addressed to secure a better future. If we seek true justice, then we must seek to reinvest in those communities that need it the most. Only then can the lowest rungs of our society be given the opportunity to climb upward. In my view, a reimagined prison system idealistically strives to put itself out of business.
ContributorsHolbert, Connor Michael (Author) / Herrera, Richard (Thesis director) / Wells, Cornelia (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2017-05
Description
Abstract What began in 1971 as a "War on Drugs," led to the political position of being "tough on crime" and has ultimately given birth to the mass incarceration crisis that we see in 2017. The United States composes 5% of the world's population, yet holds 25% of the world's incarcerated. At least 95% of those incarcerated in the United States will be released at some time and each year, 690,000 people are released from our prisons. These "criminals" become our neighbors, our colleagues, and our friends. However, the unfortunate reality is that they will go back to prison sooner than we can embrace them. In order to end this cycle of recidivism, higher education in prison must be made more available and encouraged. Those who participate in education programs while incarcerated have a 43% less chance of recidivating than those inmates who do not participate. This thesis dissects that statistic, focusing on higher education and the impact it has on incarcerated students, how it affects society as a whole, and the many reasons why we should be actively advocating for it. Additionally, I wish to demonstrate that students, educators, and volunteers, as a collective, have the power to potentially change the punitive function of the prison system. That power has been within education all along. While statistics and existing research will play heavily in the coming pages, so will anecdotes, first-hand experiences, assessments of established programs, and problems that still need to be overcome. By no means are the following pages a means to an end, but rather a new beginning in the effort to change the interpretation of being "tough on crime." Keywords: higher education, prison, recidivism
ContributorsGood, Hannah Rose (Author) / Wells, Cornelia (Thesis director) / Herrera, Richard (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / School of Criminology and Criminal Justice (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-12