A Guide for Culturally Responsive Teaching in Adult Prison Educational Programs

Copyright © 2010 by Michael Gray.

ISBN:      Softcover      978-1-4500-8676-9

                eBook           978-1-5245-6450-6

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the copyright owner.

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Thinkstock are models, and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Thinkstock.

Rev. date: 11/21/2016

Xlibris

1-888-795-4274

www.Xlibris.com

566520

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

1 INTRODUCTION

Background

Purpose of the Project

Definition of Terms

Limitations

Significance of the Project

Organization of the Remainder of the Project

2 REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE

Introduction

Correctional Institutions Teaching and Management Conditions

Culturally Responsive Teaching

Learning Theory

Motivation

Rationale

Summary

3 METHODODLOGY

Research Design

Setting of the Project

Population and Sample

Data Collection

Data Analysis

Analysis of Data

Findings

Interpretation

Description of the Project

Summary

4 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary

Conclusions

Recommendations

APPENDICES

Appendix A Human Subjects Approval Review Forms

Appendix B Interview Protocol

Appendix C The Project: Culturally Responsive Teaching in Adult Prisons: An Educational Program

References

Abstract

of

A GUIDE FOR CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE TEACHING IN ADULT PRISON EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS

by

Michael Gray

Brief Review of Literature

Increasingly, prison education programs are multicultural environments where teachers must relate their content to inmates of varying cultures, and backgrounds. In contrast, engagement in learning is the visible outcome of motivation, and redirecting energy in the pursuit of a goal (Feistritzer & Haar, 2008). Teachers that do not understand culturally responsive teaching or have a lack of training in culturally responsive teaching may cause the students feelings of embarrassment (Feistritzer & Haar). Some people enjoy sharing personal information with others who are relatively unknown to them when teaching adults (Galbraith, 2004).

Statement of Purpose

The purpose of this project is to develop a handbook for the educational departments of correctional agencies in the process of in-service training for their teaching staff. The development of this project focuses on three main areas; incompatibilities in adult prison educational programs, culturally responsive teaching in adult prison educational programs, and learning theory in adult prison educational programs.

Methodology

The data for this study was collected and analyzed from adults currently in prison educational programs. Teachers rely on the correctional staff to guide them in styles of communication and methods for solving problems in their classroom (Cartledge, Gardner & Ford, 2009). Teachers must have a firm understanding of different cultures, gender gaps, and how different ethnic groups learn, will help the teacher become successful when they try new teaching strategies (Cartledge et al.).

Conclusions and Recommendations

Studies have shown that there is considerable need for education in adult prisons, and political bureaucracy is disabling prison educational programs by suffocating programs with economical demise (Campbell, 2005). Teachers become reluctant to pay the extra cost to learn andragogy teaching practices; therefore teachers are unprepared to deal with adult students that practice and demonstrate criminal behavior. Improving teachers’ ability to teach is obviously crucial to school success, and that is the purpose of professional development (Dipaola & Hoy, 2006).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The completion of this project would not have been possible without the help and professionalism of all those who contribute to this project. Thanks to Sam Williams his support in the effort to complete this project in time. Many hours were spent researching and debating the competencies known to be successful with developing a handbook that would best serve both the teachers and the correctional staff.

I am deeply grateful to the administrator at California Department of Corrections, for his unselfish efforts in helping to move the project forward and help to realize the vision for creating a model for classroom manage and leadership.

A special thanks to my coworkers for fully supporting this project since its inception. I thank them for proofreading my papers over and over, and for the many hours reviewing each phase of the project. I am also indebted to the teachers for allowing me to interview them during their lunch hour, and thanks to all of those who helped bring this document to fruition. A special thanks to my wife for her editorial support, sound suggestions, and attention to detail that helped to improve the final version of this project.

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

Background

The purpose of this project is to design a handbook that will help improve the teaching strategies of adult literacy prison educational programs that can be used as a reference manual. This correctional education research focuses on three areas:

1. Correctional Institutions

2. Teaching and Management Conditions

3. Culturally Responsive Teaching and Learning Theory

Correctional institutions and teaching and management conditions includes, but is not limited to, correctional officers, VS inmates, teacher VS inmates, and inmates versus peers. All of these elements play a critical role in the success or failure of the adult prison education program. Inmates do not go to prison to get an education, and correctional officers are reminded on a daily basis that criminals will respond with criminal behavior when they run out of options to resolve problems in a logical way. Correctional officers respond to fights, stabbing, suicide attempts, and verbal, as well as physical assaults. They are also trained to respond in aggressive ways towards inmates, providing more reasons why correction educational programs are failing (Campbell, 2005). Correctional officers provide their own form of disruptions in the prison regarding their educational programs. With mass handling of inmates, countless ways of humiliating inmates in order to make them subservient to rules, orders and special rules of behavior, are designed to maintain social distance between officers and inmates. Campbell (2005) claimed that frisking of inmates, regimented movement to work, eat, play, and drab prison clothing, all tend to depersonalize inmates. It also reinforces their belief that authority in the department of corrections is too opposed and not cooperative with correctional authorities. Therefore, how can educational programs function properly under these conditions? Correctional officers (CO’s) assigned to educational programs should have special training in social-work and psychology as a component of the internal organization. Campbell (2005) stated internal collaboration encouraged employees to become more invested in the success of correctional educational programs, they have a better understanding of the programs goals, and it benefits both the correctional organization and the educational department. According to Muth, Gehring, Puffer, Mayers, Kamusikiri and Pressley (2009), too frequently, COs become so accustomed to responding to fights and operating in crisis mode, that they continue to function in that mode even when the situation does not demand it. Disrupting the learning process and many opportunities for useful collaboration between custody, staff and education staff are overlooked.

Positive attitudes toward prisoners are important in securing the effectiveness of various correctional rehabilitation programs and the successful reintegration of prisoners after release. Positive attitudes toward prisoners are important in securing the effectiveness of various correctional rehabilitation programs and the successful reintegration of prisoners after release. It is the responsibility of the prison warden and unit leaders to build trust, and to develop a commitment to the vision for the program. Without their support, the program is set up for failure. Making the vision clear is a process, and the goal cannot be accomplish with just one staff meeting. Part of the goal would have to be several meetings and in-service trainings, making sure that all staff had a clear understanding of what the vision and mission of the program (Kjelsberg, Skoglund & Rustad, 2007). An example of leadership can be set by modeling attitudes and behavior that support the vision, rewarding achievement of goals that support the vision. This strategy may not turn