States across America continually must attend to the mass incarcerations that plague their prisons. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, “The number of prisoners held by state and federal correctional authorities on December 31, 2014 was 1,561,500” (Carson, 2015). This large number has complications that come along with it, including the legal implications, which some Americans conceive to include the violation of human standards and constitutional rights. As criminals will continue to forge ahead in criminal behavior leading way to the continuation of incarceration of convicted individuals, this predicament cannot begin to become controlled until a solution is chosen. One way to begin to eliminate this American mass incarceration problem is through the reduction of recidivism rates. The more people able to stay out of prison once released will contribute to the reducing of incarceration rates. A review of the literature illustrates the use of educational and vocational training in prisons is an effective form of rehabilitation that leads to prevention of future crimes and therefore decreasing offender’s reentry into prison. Qualitative Studies Although, opinions can vary on the effectiveness of vocational and educational training programs to prisoners a study done by John Esperian on opinions towards these programs showed support in the continuation of them. Although his sample was limited to a geographical location of the state of Nevada, it provides a frank discussional presentation of opinions on these training programs from people who have or had direct contact with the prisoners themselves. Interviews of varying members across the scope of the incarceration realm were conducted and begin to show how opinion of these programs matter to their continuation. One of whom states this about program impacts, “Records make it clear that a lot fewer former felons return to prison if they have earned at least a high school diploma while incarcerated” (Esperian, 2010). While another speaks directly to the types of programs offered, “Highly successful programs in the prisons at both the secondary and college level, programs that generated more enthusiasm, are the vocational programs, like mechanical, small engine repair, and landscaping. This interest, in turn,” he says, “generates more motivation and self-direction to develop more basic skills such as reading” (Esperian, 2010). Opinion matters and they suggest that prisoner’s positive reentry into society has a place in these programs. However, criticisms occur when looking at the methods used in studies conducted by social science researchers. One opinion based literature looks at studies that have flawed measurements and only show ‘promising’ impacts that these programs have on the future of prisoners (Lewis, 2006). The abilities of modern studies to limit the possibility of other factors contributing to recidivism rates and the correlation of these programs are not controlled. According to this researchers finding, “Traditional model for evaluating correctional education, with its dependency on macro-level and misconceptualized variables, does not reflect the true impact of correctional education on the individual” (Lewis, 2006) He critiques a study done by Hull in 2000, where the study itself listed the limitations one being it “failed to identify motivational factors behind participation or not in completing the educational programs” which Lewis concludes the limitations limit the analysis to concluded any correlation between these programs and better adjustment for prisoners after release (Lewis, 2006). Lewis provides no statistical data to back his opinion so while its necessary to understand his opinion; this does not lead way to …show more content…
Prison Education Research Project (PERP) reported on information they collected from a criteria selection of research findings in which created the sample of over fourteen thousand inmates who had been released between spans of a little more then a year and who had completed their incarceration. This project looked at studies recidivism rates of specific prisoners (compared their released prisoners sample in comparison to recent prison records) and there use of educational and vocational programs while incarcerated. They reported, “programs in prison lowers recidivism rates, lower parole revocation rates, better post release employment patterns” (Ward, 2009). Ward’s review on PERP’s findings called for continual research of this topic and the continual research will only continue to create knowledge on the topic and progress towards the best programs for