Search results

The newly formed Division on Corrections and Sentencing of the American Society of Criminology held a roundtable at its 2000 annual meeting. In the roundtable, titled "Corrections and Sentencing in the 21st Century," prominent correctional researchers discussed their perceptions of the issues that will be important in corrections and sentencing as we move into the 21st century. The articles in this issue of The Prison Journal are based on the presentations given that day. In this article, the author reviews the changes that have occurred in U.S. corrections and sentencing philosophy in the past 30 years and discusses the evolving philosophy as we move into the 21st century.

This assesses the effectiveness of rehabilitation programs, specialized treatment for different types of offenders, management and treatment of drug-involved offenders and punishment, control and surveillance interventions to provide an intensive review of correctional interventions and programs. Through extensive research, MacKenzie illustrates which of these programs are most effective and why

Prior research suggests that educational opportunities during incarceration can help prepare one for reentry into the community and are effective in reducing recidivism. This article evaluates the differences between education programs offered at two Maryland State Correctional Facilities. Inmates serving a "six and out" sentence were randomly assigned to either the Herman L. Toulson Boot Camp or a traditional facility, Metropolitan Transition Center. Both facilities were to provide the same educational opportunities to inmates. The differences between the education provided at these facilities and the impact of these programs on the inmates' ability to obtain a General Equivalency Diploma while incarcerated are evaluated. Findings suggest that inmates have better access to education and are more successful at educational achievement in the small therapeutic environment provided at the boot camp. If replicated, the findings would support policies for increasing resources for educational programming at traditional facilities and design/implementation guidelines for successful therapeutic facilities.

AbstractAlthough this concept has rarely been investigated systematically, the prison is an environment that severely limits inmates'personal control. This article applies theoretical and empirical advances in the area of personal control to the issue of inmate adjustment to prison. Personal control has three components: outcome control, choice, and predictability of future events. Research findings suggesting adverse impacts of limited control are discussed in light of their implications for prisoner adjustment. Several models of personal control, including the environmental/learned helplessness, individual difference/self‐efficacy, and incongruency/reactance models, are applied to the process of prisoner adjustment. Using these models, a conceptual framework for integrating past research in the sociology and social psychology of corrections is proposed, and directions for future research are discussed.

A systematic review incorporating meta-analytic techniques of correctional boot camps studies was conducted. An intensive search identified 771 documents of which 144 were deemed potential relevant, located, & evaluated for eligibility. In 37 documents, 29 studies were judged eligible for inclusion in the systematic review. The 29 studies resulted in 44 samples providing the primary unit of analysis. Quasi-experimental & experimental studies evaluated a residential program with a militaristic environment & compared the recidivism of participants to a comparison group receiving another correctional sanction. In 9 studies, boot camp participants had lower recidivism than did comparison groups; in 58, comparison groups had lower recidivism; & in the remaining studies, no significant differences were found. A meta-analysis found no overall significant differences in recidivism between boot camp participants & comparison samples. Further analyses indicated the results cannot be explained by differences in study methodology, offender characteristics, or boot camp program components. 4 Tables, 1 Figure, 1 Appendix, 51 References. [Copyright 2001 Sage Publications, Inc.]

Recidivism reduction is an important objective of many correctional programs. Recent survey data suggest that boot camp prisons (also referred to as shock incarceration programs) are no exception. In this study, we examine recidivism among boot camp completers in eight states during community supervision. We then assess these recidivism patterns in light of how one or more comparison groups in each state perform. For most states, two or more recidivism measures (such as arrest and revocation) are employed. The analysis suggests that those who complete boot camp do not inevitably perform either better or worse than their comparison group counterparts. Rather, program effectiveness has to be judged on a state‐bystate basis.