The U.S. Dept. of Education is considering an experimental waiver program that would allow educational institutions to use Pell Grants to fund courses for incarcerated students. The Education Justice Project, based in the College of Education at the University of Illinois, offers a college-in-prison program to men incarcerated at Danville Correctional Center. Project director Rebecca Ginsburg, an associate professor of education policy who also holds a law degree, spoke with News Bureau education editor Sharita Forrest about the role of education in prison reform.
In 1994, when Congress amended federal education law to make incarcerated people ineligible for Pell Grants, there was strong public support for the ban. Is the political climate different now?
In the 1970s, the U.S. became ‘tough on crime,’ which meant less sentencing discretion for judges, longer sentences, the advent of ‘three-strike’ laws and other such measures. This punitive turn represented a particular and peculiar era in American prison history.
Until then, the primary aim of imprisonment had been rehabilitation. The pendulum is starting to move back in that direction. Folks on the far political right and left agree on the need for reforming the American approach to penal incarceration. A big challenge now is convincing the people in the middle.
The studies are clear: Hyper-incarceration neither reduces crime nor addresses core causes of violence. Because imprisonment itself is criminogenic – contributive to criminal behavior – and the collateral costs of imprisonment are detrimental for families and communities, it’s probably done more harm than good.
We are likely to have greater success at decreasing violence, lowering recidivism and promoting healthier, safer neighborhoods if we try something else.
How do you respond to critics who object to reinstating Pell Grant funding for prisoners because they believe it’s inequitable to use financial aid programs for people serving criminal sentences when traditional students are having trouble paying for college?
Should public funds be used in this way? I think the answer is a resounding yes. Society is better served when each individual gets as much education as he or she can take, in order to achieve his or her highest potential.
People who are incarcerated tend to come from specific kinds of neighborhoods –primarily minority, politically disenfranchised and economically marginalized. When we invest in incarcerated people, we invest in these communities.
When they’re released, individuals who attended college in prison tend to be strong advocates for education and have skills they’re hungry to invest in their neighborhoods. They’re in a great position to diagnose and intervene in the systems – such as inferior schooling; lack of after-school programs, recreational opportunities and jobs; and gang culture – that put them and so many others on tracks that led to prison.
EJP has organized two national conferences on higher education in prison. What we see in quality programs is that incarcerated students acquire new outlooks on the world and an eagerness to engage in social change.
Of course, I’m not describing everyone who’s been in prison – just those I know well, the incarcerated college students who had the discipline, patience, confidence and intelligence to pursue college in conditions that would discourage many others. They continue to impress us with their motivation, determination and promise.
We’re funded by external grants, donations and the U. of I., so EJP students don’t pay tuition. However, some EJP students and family members donate to EJP to contribute toward their education.
What is the profile of a typical EJP student, and what have been the outcomes for the program’s alumni who were released from prison?
About 75 EJP students take U. of I. courses each year; several dozen additional men at the prison are served through other EJP programs. The men must have 60 hours of lower division credits to take EJP for-credit courses.
We have about 52 alumni, most of whom were incarcerated as teenagers with neither GEDs nor high school diplomas. Most EJP students serve long sentences – 15 to 20 years or more. When they’re released, these alumni are different people in many respects and are different as well from people who didn’t attend college in prison.
For instance, our alumni find employment in less than half the time it takes most formerly incarcerated men. And they find jobs in more skilled sectors. Some of them re-enroll in college on the outside.
Most EJP alumni also seek opportunities to share their experiences and motivate others. Our alumni program arranges such opportunities, including bringing them to speak on campus. This is part of what EJP can do to help shift attitudes about incarceration and people who have been in prison.
In addition, EJP is one of the few college-in-prison programs that connect families to our mission of expanding access and interest in education. Our Family and Community Engagement (FACE) program has components in Chicago and is launching a new program June 19 called Reaching Inside Prisons with Purpose and Love, or the RIPPLE Effect. The group will meet once a month at Bethel AME Church, 401 E. Park St., Champaign for a shared meal and to write letters to people in prison.