Factors influencing the design, establishment, administration, and governance of correctional education for females

The purpose of this study was to investigate factors influencing the design, establishment, administration, and governance of correctional education for females. A descriptive case study approach was used to gather and analyze data, and provide a detailed account of correctional education for inmates in a female prison institution located in North Carolina.; This study concluded that: (a) there was no comprehensive written history on correctional education or specifically on females; (b) state support was essential; (c) a collaboration between agencies was important; (d) the development of cooperative agreements was essential; (e) there was a lack of communication between agencies; (f) the joint committee/task force that oversaw the collaboration among agencies improved success; (g) there was no comprehensive organizational structure; (h) there was an inconsistency in the administration of policies and procedures; (i) community college instructors were not properly prepared to be correctional education instructors; (j) correctional education programs should reflect employment opportunities for inmates upon release; (k) there was a lack of a joint mission, vision, goals, and objectives for the Department of Correction and the Community College System; (l) a classification system was beneficial in addressing the continuity of education as inmates transfer from one facility to another; (m) a mandatory education program addressed the needs of the inmates with the lowest levels of education; (n) North Carolina did not specifically focus on female correctional education; (o) instructors were perceived as sole correctional education mentors; (p) there was an inadequate amount of correctional education research and literature; (q) there was a considerable gap between programming needs and resources; (r) a proper environment was important for all students to learn; (s) inmate and staff technological issues were not addressed adequately; (t) there was not a comprehensive evaluation system on correctional education programs; (u) program design did not include the analysis of inmate backgrounds and needs or feedback from inmates; and (v) there was no formal public awareness campaign for correctional education.