How do you train a corrections programs professional?  This question may sound like a bad joke, particularly if it is followed with, "Very carefully!"  But there is really some truth to that.  Specialized niches need specialized training content. 

Certainly, basic mandatory instruction is crucial.  Courses such as CPR, unarmed self-defense, remedies against manipulation and infection and pathogen control are necessary for all corrections staff.  They serve as annual reminders of vocational fundamentals.  But shouldn't corrections training address both sides of the hyphen?  Consider the corrections-librarian, for example.  Is the librarian component receiving a much subordinate emphasis compared to the corrections part? Shouldn't the left and right side of the equation get more or less equal development? The needs of some groups are not always apparent. Sometimes niche professionals such as prison librarians have not asked themselves these questions.

Yet, programming is very important, even if this is not stated often. Everyone should recognize the benefits of program staff in a correctional setting.  Programs staff preside over opportunities for prisoners to learn, create, and grow within the bounds of policy and procedure. Programming also provides custody staff and the administration with crucial management tools, allowing would-be management problems to be productive.  When they consider it, most correctional administration and custody staff recognize the importance and utility of programs for the order of the facility. But, if each specialty provides so much, shouldn't there be distinct training to buttress programs professionals?

Yet, programs staff (teachers, chaplains, recreation directors, hobby craft instructors, and librarians) traditionally have more to worry about than homogenized training schedules. They contend with additional hazards.  Those dangers are present in all classifications, but more prevalent in programs staff.  They are:

* professional isolation
* disenfranchisement within the facility
* boredom
* quick turnover
* burnout
* vulnerability to manipulation
* And a general vocational identity crisis. 

But, there is hope for valuable programs staff whose work complements custody staff and aids in fulfilling the mission statement.  That optimism is based in the concept of balanced training called the tripod model. It is a full-day training opportunity tailored to the needs of programs staff.

The tripod model is applicable to all programs staff, regardless of specific job title, seniority or experience.  Newly hired staff need acclamation.  Seasoned corrections professional need occasional reminders of the comprehensive nature of their jobs in the corrections setting.  The tripod model is divided into these components: Departmental Perspective, the Professional Perspective, and Standard Tools.

Proactive trainers can guide niche staff into beneficial in-service that nurture both the corrections and specialty sides of each job.  The tripod model goes beyond the fundamentals.  Its three components render many benefits to programs staff. The tripod model makes conditions favorable to:

* Keep hard to recruit niche staff vested and professionally interested
* Diminish turnover
* Reduce recruitment costs
* Eliminate redundant initial training costs
* Lessen retention costs
* May be counted towards annual training requirements
* Promote networking as a means to arrest professional isolation
* Strengthen ties through networking and leaves staff less vulnerable
* Promote broader perspective, vanquishing 'fly on the wall' mentality

All of those benefits and more are possible with the tripod model of training.  But it is up to the coach to cultivate each particular program area. This seminar works from the general to the specific.  Let's review the three parts that make the whole.

Departmental Perspective. This segment of the tripartite is a review of new employee school, but with a larger scope.  The mission statement of the Department is highlighted here. This exercise gives a sweeping view of the custody/programs/administration paradigm.  The goal is to demonstrate how these three groups interact and attain the ultimate goal of institutional safety and security.  This part of the Departmental Perspective shall incorporate interdepartmental training in rapport.  There will be heavy emphasis on custody/programs staff relations. Then, the role of each program unit within the institution is noted.  Departmental Perspective is capped with emphasis on certain policies and procedures such as the mission statement, the prisoner disciplinary process, prisoner security classification, prisoner programs classification, etc.

Professional Perspective.  The second component of Balanced Training is the Professional Perspective.  This part examines what it is to be an isolated professional who assumes many non-traditional duties in the corrections setting.  This is meant to complement the Departmental Perspective while illustrating the uniqueness of the professional niche. 

Part of the Professional Perspective would be presented with help from outside the Department. Academic speakers from the particular field should be obtained for each specialty group. The topic would be like a keynote address, focusing on a hot topic in the sub-field.  This would assist in outreach and aid in the battle against professional isolation.  It would also serve as an intellectual stimulus addressed to each professional niche within the institution.  Theories and concepts about one's own chosen vocation tend to make one more excited about what one does for a living. 

It should not be too difficult to arrange such a colloquium. There could be promises of reciprocal presentations or participation in career days at the sponsoring college or university.  A representative from the corrections profession certainly would be welcomed at college job fairs.  If the reciprocity does not suffice to cover academic speaker expenses, grants can be written to cover those fees.

Standard Tools.  Having looked at the broad Departmental Perspective and the specialized and conceptual Professional Perspective, we now move to the Standardized Tool section.  The sessions would be completed with a comparison of sample tools that we all use in corrections each day.  An example of a standard tool is a generic set of chapel posted rules.  Or, another example is a standardized legal photocopy processing flow chart from the law library.

Similar rules exist at all institutions.  So, it would be useful, for instance, if all recreation directors compiled and compared the weight rule rules system-wide.  This does not mean that generic rules would leave no room for local autonomy.  It is merely an exercise in issuing common practices for common challenges.  It would be up to each professional to strike the balance between pragmatic uniformity and necessary modification at the institutional level.

Sample misconduct reports, notices of intent and local operating procedures are other examples of useful tools to compare and adapt.

The responsibilities of the trainer. Who initiates this?  The answer to that is as different as all corrections systems are.  The request for new, comprehensive training like this could originate from the line staff in the particular niche.  Or, the catalyst can arise from some perceived need as seen from the official leader of the group. No matter where the request comes from, the training office should take an active role. First, the training committee has to be aware of the origin of the training request.  Of course, centralized permission is necessary. 

Part of planning a full day of training of course is assessing the needs of the group.  In doing this the creators have to know the history and dynamics of the group.  A series of questions should be asked.

* Does the group meet at least once a year? 
* Does the group meet regionally? 
* Who arranges such meeting? 
* Is there a centralized coordinator? 
* Are there de facto leaders in the ranks? 
* Would such a group be receptive to the tripod model?
* Has the chain of command requested such training?

It behooves planners to know who in the group leads officially and who holds influence and respect.  That might not always be the same individual. Knowing this can make the difference between mediocre training and a truly useful education experience.

The needs are as important as the history.  It is important to know what problems weigh on the minds of the group.  The challenge comes in asking a sample of the group to present problems.  There is the possibility that a faction or a few individuals will present their own agenda.  Are those who are silent not getting their needs met?  Is this a group that wants to be lead by a few members?  Is there dissension?  Will some strategies of training lead to division rather than a united perspective to help achieve departmental and niche needs? In this planning stage, email polls and consulting with selected members should be balanced.  Certainly, the successful training committee will be adept at the game of group psychology and reading dynamics.  The above questions should be considered in the initial planning phase.

Before training can commence, one has to appoint an assertive, yet tactful moderator. A strong arbitrator is crucial to the effectiveness of the instruction. For example, a member from the training may lead some venting by staff.  Expressing concerns in measure may be a useful gauge of the health of the sub-profession.  It also is a brainstorming process that can be successful with the momentum of the group setting.  This method typically is not as fruitful with an email poll. It also relieves vocational stress.  However, excessive articulations of grievances can transform quickly into a free-for-all gripe session.  At this point, the focus is to remain broad. And the idea remains that the moderator must be tactfully assertive to achieve maximum benefits of group discussions.

Pitfalls. Can a well-planned tripod training session be without flaws?  It is absolutely doubtful. There are many challenges to this balanced training that range from misunderstanding of initial needs to the post mortem: In random order, some of the problems that the training committee and group may face are:

* No perceived need from niche
* Programs niche or centralized coordinator may feel need for training of this sort but may not necessarily ask for it.  Therefore, training staff may be able to advertise the program.
* No perceived need from chain of command
* Fiscal concerns
* Motivating the apathetic
* Some staff (and trainers) may be reluctant to altering established, traditional instruction
* Traversing the tangle of chains of command
* Controlling suppressed enthusiasm in the case of new opportunity in the face of infrequent training.
* Power struggles and ego battles can erupt when professionals are called to improve their lot through training.

Despite all of the potential pitfalls, you can help all programmers to expand vocational horizons. Through this tripod model of training, programs staff can be re-energized and more eager to fulfill the Department's mission statement.  Professional isolation can be combated. Boredom and burnout can be mitigated, thus allowing for more productive, longer tenured, inspired employees.  Any workshop that accomplishes those meritorious goals would certainly be deemed a worthwhile investment for any facility.

About the Author

Joseph Bouchard, a member of The Corrections Professional Board of Advisors, is the librarian at Baraga Maximum Correctional Facility in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan.  He also teaches criminal justice and corrections classes at Gogebic Community College.  You may contact him at (906) 353-7070 ext 1321.

These are the opinions of a Librarian employed by the Michigan Department of Corrections.  The Department of Corrections is not in any way responsible for the content or accuracy of this material, and the views are those of Joseph Bouchard and not necessarily those of the Department.