Imagine That A New Education Program Was Created To Serve

Imagine That A New Education Program Was Created To Service Inmates Wh

Imagine that a new education program was created to service inmates who do not hold a high school diploma. The inmate population is approximately 1500 on any given day, and only 10 percent are serving life sentences. The majority of inmates will be released within 3 years, and the average age of the inmate population is 19. Since this is not a mandatory program, how should programmers determine the number of General Education Development (GED) instructors to hire? What factors should be considered in determining the number of instructors hired to staff the education program? Should there be any restrictions in terms of inmate eligibility?

Paper For Above instruction

Designing an effective educational program within a correctional setting requires a strategic assessment of various operational, demographic, and logistical factors. When establishing a GED program for inmates, determining the appropriate number of instructors is vital to ensure quality education while maintaining cost-efficiency. This paper discusses how programmers and prison administrators can determine the number of GED instructors to hire, considering various critical factors, and explores considerations around inmate eligibility.

Assessment of Inmate Population and Educational Needs

The starting point in staffing for a GED program is understanding the size and characteristics of the inmate population likely to participate. With roughly 1500 inmates present daily and 10% serving life sentences, about 1350 inmates are expected to be eligible or interested in participating, as inmates serving life sentences typically have limited opportunities or motivation for educational advancement, especially if their eligibility is restricted due to security classifications or program policies.

Given that the majority of inmates are projected to be released within three years and are young (average age of 19), the program’s design must emphasize rapid and effective skill acquisition. Younger inmates often have higher engagement levels and capacity for learning, which should be taken into account when planning instructor-to-student ratios.

Factors Influencing the Number of Instructors

Several critical factors should be reviewed to determine the number of GED instructors:

1. Student-to-Teacher Ratios: Evidence from correctional education research suggests that lower student-to-teacher ratios improve learning outcomes. Typical ratios range from 10:1 to 15:1 in correctional settings (Bunker & Norman, 2014). Facilities should analyze their target class sizes to maintain manageable class sizes conducive to individualized attention.

2. Program Duration and Class Frequency: Given that most inmates will be released within three years, staging the program in multiple cohorts or offering flexible scheduling increases the need for more instructors. The frequency of classes (e.g., daily, weekly) and class lengths influence staffing needs.

3. Instructor Qualifications: Teachers with correctional education certifications or experience in adult education may be more effective, but their availability may be limited, influencing instructor hiring plans.

4. Program Capacity and Infrastructure: Classroom facilities, access to learning materials, and technological resources impact how many simultaneous classes can be held and thus how many instructors are needed.

5. Inmate Participation Rates: Not all inmates may choose to participate. Historical participation rates in correctional education programs usually range from 50 to 80%. Therefore, staffing should be based on expected enrollment rather than total inmate population, possibly requiring adjustment as participation levels change.

6. Program Type and Complexity: Basic literacy or GED prep courses require less instructional intensity compared to specialized programs, which could influence staffing needs due to different instructional demands.

7. Security and Logistical Considerations: Movement policies, security clearances, and security levels may restrict teaching hours or access, influencing staffing schedules.

Determining the Number of Instructors

A pragmatic approach involves using enrollment forecasts based on outreach and inmate interest surveys, then applying average class sizes and instructional hours to calculate total instructor hours needed. For example, if projections estimate 600 inmates participating, with an average class size of 15 students and each class meeting 4 times a week for 2-hour sessions, the program may need approximately 10-12 instructors to cover all classes without overburdening staff.

Additionally, allowing for instructor substitutes, administrative support, and contingency coverage is critical, generally adding 20-30% to the base staffing calculations. Regular assessment of enrollment and participation should inform staffing adjustments in real-time.

Restrictions in Terms of Inmate Eligibility

Eligibility restrictions should be designed to maximize program benefits while ensuring safety, security, and manageable resource allocation. These may include:

- Age restrictions, prioritizing younger inmates nearing release.

- Security level limitations, with high-security inmates participating in specialized or remote instruction where necessary.

- Behavioral considerations, disqualifying inmates with disciplinary issues that could disrupt learning environments.

- Completion or progress benchmarks that determine ongoing eligibility, incentivizing participation and maintaining program integrity.

Implementing eligibility criteria ensures that resources are concentrated where they can have the most significant impact on inmates' future prospects post-release.

Conclusion

Effective staffing of a GED program in a correctional setting requires a holistic approach that considers inmate demographics, program objectives, resource constraints, and security policies. Estimating the necessary number of instructors involves analyzing participant projections, class sizes, instructional needs, and logistical factors. Eligibility restrictions should aim to optimize the program’s success and fairness, focusing on inmates most likely to benefit and successfully transition back into society. Administrators must remain adaptable, continuously evaluating program participation and adjusting staffing levels accordingly to achieve educational and rehabilitative objectives.

References

  • Bunker, S., & Norman, R. (2014). Correctional Education and Its Impact on Prisoner Rehabilitation. Journal of Correctional Education, 65(2), 18-29.
  • Cameron, J. (2018). Adult Education in Correctional Facilities: Strategies for Success. Educational Review, 70(4), 456-472.
  • Gordon, M. (2020). Security and Educational Programming in Prisons: Balancing Safety and Learning. International Journal of Correctional Education, 10(3), 45-59.
  • Johnson, R., & Smith, L. (2016). Workforce Development in Correctional Settings. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 44(1), 21-30.
  • Levin, H. M. (2017). The Role of Education in Prison Reform. The Future of Education, 12(1), 75-88.
  • Martinez, A., & Williams, P. (2019). Strategies for Effective Correctional Education Programs. Prison Journal, 99(4), 347-366.
  • National Research Council. (2014). Education and Employment Outcomes for Former Inmates. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
  • Palmer, E., & Taylor, J. (2021). Measuring the Impact of GED Programs on Recidivism. Criminal Justice Review, 46(2), 123-139.
  • Thompson, S., & Carter, J. (2015). Inmate Learning Needs and Program Design. Journal of Correctional Education and Training, 2(3), 5-22.
  • Wilson, D. (2012). Correctional Education Policy: Challenges and Opportunities. Policy Analysis No. 388. Rand Corporation.

Related Assignments