Thesis advisor: Andrés Castro Samayoa / The involvement of colleges and universities in the provision of higher education opportunities in prison has reemerged after a long pause following the 1994 Omnibus Crime Bill, which effectively ended the majority of postsecondary prison education programs. The 2016 Second Chance Pell Program has been instrumental in the development and expansion of higher education opportunities in prison. Support for justice reform measures has led to the likely full restoration of Pell Grant availability in prisons, taking effect as early as 2023, with funding for the initiative included in the most recent congressional stimulus bill. Both Second Chance Pell and one of the most progressive state-level prison education policies, New York’s Right Priorities initiative, rely almost exclusively on positioning higher education in prison as a tool for meeting the market needs of the state: reduced recidivism equating to taxpayer savings. This dissertation extends prior research examining the pitfalls of justifications overly reliant on narratives of recidivism. Using a three-article approach, it explores justifications capable of articulating the full moral vigor necessary to sustain long-term commitments to such policies and programs, ones that prioritize humanized responses to incarceration. The first article amplifies justifications articulated by those who have been the beneficiaries of such educational opportunities, investigating formerly incarcerated student perspectives on the value, meaning, and purpose of such programs. The second article, by focusing on policy developments within the state of New York, examines how the rhetoric of recidivism emerges in media coverage of both federal and state level support for college-level prison education. And, finally, the third article considers the pedagogical implications of adjusting the lens through which programs are defended, exploring the use of andragogical teaching methods—those associated with the tenets of adult education—in the context of prison classrooms. Taken together, each study contributes to literatures examining justifications for higher education in prison, and develops deeper understandings of the need for the provision of such opportunities. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2022. / Submitted to: Boston College. Lynch School of Education. / Discipline: Educational Leadership and Higher Education.

Currently, offender education, in general, is inadequate in supporting offenders to progress to university, succeed in Higher Education (HE) and progress into sustainable employment. In the community the picture is grim regarding offender education with little literature or policy to support academically able offenders to break free of low-level attainment constraints imposed by institutionalised stereotypical support mechanisms. What little exists is focused on low level attainment: a little Maths and English and basic employability support. Probation staff are ill-equipped to support higher ability offenders due to lack of systems, limited educational offer and funding systems and targets that are designed to support short-term crime reduction targets, at the cost of well documented educational needs of offenders. What is not so well documented is that there is a significant minority group of offenders who are capable and could progress to university, if they had support, encouragement and a probation education system that acknowledged that not all offender needs are linked to basic skills and behavioural issues. It is this one size fits all education system that is at the heart of poor attainment, progression and success and this has been repeatedly reported through independent studies from OFSTED. If probation cannot support lower level education attainment above the minimum standards expected by government, what hope is there for higher ability offenders to access support and education to enable them to progress to HE? This study aims to contribute to the policy debate in community based offender education in the UK by answering the central research question of this thesis: How do you design a community based offender education model that incorporates support to access Higher Education? Preliminary aims include exploring alternative delivery and funding models to encourage and support offenders in and into Higher Education. This fresh approach to offender education is aimed at reducing marginalisation and increasing participation in HE. The literature review has been segmented into three chapters. Chapter one explores the current situation of offender education, using the Leitch report as a structure of enquiry. Chapter two progresses onto vocational training, NVQs and unitised accreditation as possible routes for offenders to gain access to higher-level skills. The final chapter of the review explores a possible model for the formation of a self-funding organisation formed for the purpose of supporting offenders towards and throughout their HE journey. This chapter uses literature drawn from corporate university texts and case studies of charitable organisations. There are overlapping themes throughout this document, drawing on a wide scope of literature to determine the benefits to individuals, organisations and society as a whole of the development of an organisation designed to help offenders gain access to support, funding and progression in and into HE. Each chapter of the literature review highlights existing knowledge on the subject area and this has influenced the design of the methodology of this study i.e. stakeholder analysis using case studies. Changes to policies related to funding for higher-level education for offenders, attitudes and perceptions of offender education and ability and support structures to help offenders achieve their true potential are required. The conclusion of this thesis demonstrates that the current offender education system in the UK is inadequate and potentially subjugates those offenders who are capable of progressing to higher education, either due to not knowing how to progress to HE, normally due to intergenerational poor levels of education, or due to having other barriers that need supporting whilst studying for a degree. Higher education is proven to change life aspirations, positively affect health and impact on families and communities for generations. Why not for offenders?