|
|
| Utilizing Distance Learning With Inmates Balancing Education and Security |
| By Donald P. Dougherty |
| Published: 07/15/2002 |
|
Prison officials generally agree that educational programs for inmates are necessary for a productive return to society. Preparing our prison populations for positive lifestyles 'on-the outside' continues to challenge educators, corrections administrators and state/federal prison authorities. How many inmates released from American prisons today will stay out of prisons in years to come? Can new skills and education programs offered by our prison system(s) challenge inmates to stay away from unlawful activities after their release? How will technology and the Internet fall into the success of future corrections programs? This review will offer a journey through modern correctional methods to train convicted offenders for positive lifestyles, thus reducing the recidivism rates of released prison inmates. Some agencies have considered moving training procedures to computer-based methods, but few have harnessed the power of the Internet. The Internet continues to be viewed as a 'Security-Risk' for most corrections agencies and numerous attempts have been made to convince officials to use 'net-based tools to deliver effective inmate training to produce positive results. The resounding answer to all Internet requests in the correctional arena is always: 'NO!' Why is it too dangerous for convicted offenders to gain the benefits of the Internet? Prisoners can use telephones to communicate with the law-abiding public. Don't prison officials monitor inmate telephone transmissions? What makes the Internet so different from our public telephone networks? Prison libraries are open for use and inmates are encouraged to utilize the reference material available in the libraries. The Internet is a vast resource for potential use by inmates to gain necessary reference points to rebuild their lives. By no means should any network solution exist without proper security and controlled access. With security foremost in our minds, the ability to use the network to deliver course content to inmates behind the walls of our prisons makes a great deal of sense for corrections officials. The ultimate goals of our prison training programs are to keep released offenders working and apart from the criminal lifestyles that put them in prison. The Internet should be considered a valuable tool to gain effective inmate education and vocational training. It's time for corrections officials to take the responsibility to utilize Internet tools for inmate training. Applying Effective Education Through Technology Current technologies can provide a mechanism to deliver inmate courseware in a protected distance-learning environment. Corrections institutions should consider using the Internet as a medium for course delivery without major concerns involving public safety or cyber crime. The Internet has resources in abundance and provides methods for teaching inmates more than just facts. The Internet is becoming an integral part of life. It is used in education, business and in leisure, and students will need to become familiar with the Internet to become prepared citizens (Ellsworth, 1994). If course content delivery implementation(s) include private network security practices and/or portal implementations, the fears of illegal network-use that prevailed in the 1990's will be minimized. Administrators can electronically monitor Internet use and actually prohibit users from specific activities based on user identification codes and network access rights. Implementation of a well-prepared distance education program in the correctional setting should include the following guidelines taken from the research reviews and current technology offerings: 1. Teach Vital Life Skills & Build Job Retention Attitudes 2. Link Parole Goals & Objectives With The Community 3. Address Institution Policies That Prohibit Technology Implementation 4. Train Staff To Support Distance-Learning Environment 5. Deliver Proven Course-Content (e.g., Virtual University as a start) 6. Utilize Open-Technologies To Prohibit Proprietary Infrastructures 7. Establish & Maintain A Secure Distance Learning Infrastructure 8. Build Courseware To Support Virtually Any Web Browser These guidelines will help program developers and administrators build a distance-learning program that will provide a solid infrastructure for success. Although necessary training and network protocols will be added concerns for program success at the onset, the long-term benefits of successful inmate training will outweigh the short-term setbacks. We are now ready to address implementation strategies and potential roll-out plans. Implementation Options Crossing the Internet threshold for inmate training and rehabilitation is like exploring a new planet or walking on the moon. Most corrections professionals do not have the experience or training to feel comfortable about supporting such an activity. This review is not going to force the average administrator to become an expert in computer networks or security procedures. Do not be concerned if a particular procedure or step-by-step instruction in this policy paper doesn't work in your environment. There are a variety of ways to deliver course content or access the Internet. The aim of this review is to explain the 'lowest common denominator' methods of building a successful inmate training program over the Internet. If your situation allows you to use alternative methods to gain similar results, then by all means use them. For many correctional environments, a strong commitment to inmate benefits and public security will be the driving force behind implementation. Above all, funding and budgets must be available for project consideration and implementation. Management support is not an option at this point. Before any technology-based program is to be considered, the program developers need to identify the responsible parties for establishing policy and procedures within the institution or agency. Central office staff can solicit feedback from directors, finance and budget officials, inmate education advisors and technical support management. Field services personnel and wardens should also share their ideas and concerns during initial planning efforts. Initial discussions should be limited to management staff to gain overall program acceptance. Contacting line-personnel and programming staff initially can create negative preconceptions that can undermine future advancement of the inmate technology program. Most successful implementations of new technology and modern methods will require management's commitment and direction to help motivate the corresponding support and technical staffs. Program administrators should review current inmate course offerings and vocational needs to help build new courseware. Technology is present in many professions in today's American society and older, outdated training programs may need to be refreshed to incorporate modern methods. A GED curriculum may need to be enhanced for delivery via a computer workstation. Continued enhancement of such programs could include modern delivery methods via the Internet with thin-client network appliances to replace more costly personal computers. Additional courseware could include office automation training for resume writing, electronic mail exercises and basic accounting using 'off-the-shelf' application programs utilized in today's commercial business environment. More advanced vocational training could encompass modern-day skills such as computer administration and operation, database administration, electronic publishing and photography. Inmates can gain important vocational skills that can be valuable in today's job market if properly trained prior to their release from prison. As important and challenging as some of these new technology-based professions can be for the inmates, education administrators and course content authors will also have to become proficient in these new areas of training prior to developing courseware and content delivery. Existing departmental policies and procedures may actually prohibit technology enhancements and additions to inmate training programs. A review of departmental policies and procedures will help program developers plan delivery of new course content in compliance with restrictive regulations. Some policies may be outdated and need revision(s) to incorporate inmate use of computer technology and the Internet. Careful consideration must be taken when presenting technology ideas and supporting arguments that may cross policy boundaries. Some policies may need full review prior to implementing new training methods and possible amendments may be needed to remedy restrictions based on those policies. Keeping directors and administrators informed of needed changes and/or additions will help the planning process, if accomplished in the early stages of technology planning. Acquiring technology, expanding networks and selecting courseware software tools can hinder most technology implementations. External resources from departments outside the correctional institution may be needed to accomplish such tasks. Some agencies may require a central purchasing group to review technology requirements and govern the acquisition process. Other agencies may use private contractors for network administration and security. Program developers should agree upon their desired technology options, along with connectivity needs prior to meeting with the outside acquisition group(s). Some technologies or services may need to be selected per existing volume purchase agreements or contracts. 'Latest and greatest' versions of select technologies and/or application software may have to be forfeited to gain lower costs and timely implementation. Setting technology expectations early in the planning process will assure that future acquisitions will flow smoothly. Technologies and software can be demonstrated to agencies prior to final acquisition by the correctional agency. In these cases, a well-defined acceptance plan, with goals and objectives, should be produced by project developers and presented to technology vendors prior to the demo period. This tactic will give program developers an opportunity to test technology for effectiveness and ease of use before acquisition and assure performance based on program-dependent selection criteria. Training staff and technical support personnel is another link to successful implementation and ongoing performance of the distance-learning effort. Basic operations of technologies must be fully understood by support groups and backup resources should be identified early in the planning process. Local vocational training may be sufficient for some of the members of the project team, while remote specialized training facilities may be required for utilizing technology and courseware tools. Annual program budgets must consider continued training for project and implementation staff. Many application tools (e.g., computer operating systems, database tools and course content software) are revised on a regular basis to take advantage of new technologies and industry trends. On-going staff training should be a routine planning activity no matter which medium is utilized to present inmate course-content. Unfortunately, professionals in today's technology arena are transient and distance-learning projects are often jeopardized due to trained personnel leaving midstream for 'greener pastures.' Keeping staff up-to-date with specific technology training will control emergency-needs when a project team member withdraws due to outside employment opportunities. Utilizing popular 'industry-proven' technologies and open-architectures can also reduce the need for specialized expertise due to general acceptance and use throughout the high-tech community. Course content and delivery to the inmates must be developed to take advantage of the technology it resides upon. Should a GED program be updated for delivery via computerized methods? Should new vocational efforts be made in office automation, desktop publishing and/or automotive design? This is the time to overhaul the training directions for the future and modern vocations will help drive the technology initiative. Technology can offer multi-media presentations using text, pictures, photos, video recordings and interactive classroom chats. These options are readily supported by courseware applications like Blackboard or WebCT. Initially, corrections administrators may elect to use public course content portals (e.g., virtual high-schools) via secured virtual private networks to deliver classes to the inmates. As the project staff becomes fully trained on courseware application software, some courses can be written specifically for the inmates. Life skills training to help inmates cope with their release to the community can be simulated via computer exercises. As mentioned earlier in this policy paper, course-content development must follow a model that carefully considers content, design and delivery that is best utilized by the students. The convergence of technologies that enable the representation of ideas in many different media forms through information and telecommunication technology offers designers unique opportunities to customize learning environments, place learners in open ended student-centered investigations, and to support the shift in traditional instructor roles to mentor and co-learner (Harper, Hedberg & Wright, 2000). Visual adaptive learning architectures will also need to be considered when designing courseware for inmates. In short, delivering training for the inmates may be best achieved if the corrections professionals ultimately design and deliver the courseware. This process will take time for corrections developers to efficiently master, thus justifying the need to obtain initial course content through public entities like K-12 districts or the virtual university. Delivering new programs to the field will require a pilot testing environment that can help evaluate all aspects of the course content and the technology it resides upon. Setting specific pilot goals and objectives will assure performance and accountability of program effectiveness. The segments for pilot testing a distance learning program in the correctional setting should include (a) testing course content and its ability to deliver the intended lessons to the inmates, (b) reviewing the instructors' contributions and abilities to administer daily program goals & objectives, (c) rating technology performance, up-time and ease of use, (d) monitoring network security and potential network-usage violations and (e) reviewing general acceptance by the inmate user community for building pro-social life skills. At least three locations should simultaneously test the new technology delivery methods to gain independent success ratings. Each institution should prepare its staff to support the pilot with advanced training and program involvement. The correctional agency's Central Office can host pre-pilot training and awareness sessions prior to pilot deployment. A Central Office pilot coordinator can keep the locations up-to-date on successful activities and ineffective procedures. Pilot programs could also go as far as to create a test sample inmate population for delivery of courseware on new technology and also establish a control group to train on similar course-content using traditional or non-technology methods. Post testing of both groups will provide substantial information to prove or disprove technology methods. Results should be reported to Central Office management, along with field services management and the wardens of the pilot sites. Future program activities will be dependent on approval by agency directors and appropriations of funding to support a total roll-out effort. In summary, implementing a distance learning initiative will not happen overnight. Most agencies cannot forfeit the time or money to fully investigate the technology options available from the computer industry. Inmate course-content delivery needs to be ultimately developed by corrections professionals to support pro-social life skills. Reviewing successful technology-based correctional training programs in select states and gaining timely knowledge through partners like the American Correctional Association and university research can help establish a starting point. No matter where an agency begins its review process, it is important to consider the implementation strategies contained herein when deploying a distance-learning environment for the correctional setting. *This is an excerpt from Distance Learning In The Correctional Setting: How Secure Are We Letting Criminals On The Internet, by Donald P. Dougherty. Dougherty received his Master's degree (MS) in Adult Corrections at Michigan State University and continues to consult in the technology arena for the Public Sector. He held an Internship at the Michigan Department of Corrections during his Master's work and today provides Secured Enterprise Server solutions for Distance Learning and ERP applications at Michigan Colleges and Universities. Feel free to contact Dougherty for complete copies of his work or to provide him feedback via E-mail: dorty1@aol.com or at (248) 528-0150. Next week on The Corrections Connection, Dougherty will explore vocational education for inmates utilizing technology. References Ellsworth, J., (1994). Education On The Internet. Indianapolis, IN: Sams Publishing. Harper, B., Hedberg, J.G., & Wright, R. (2000). Who benefits from virtuality? Computers & Education 34, 163-176. |
advertise
|
privacy policy
|
add URL
|
about us
|
terms/disclaimer
|
contact us
|
join our team
|
help
Comments:
No comments have been posted for this article.
Login to let us know what you think