Stakeholders Influence on Prisoner Learning

Stakeholders influence on formal and informal prisoner learning is a non- linear and non-static concept, changing over time and shaped by a range of activities. Cooksey and Gates (1995) provide an outline of the interrelation of five interacting systems (environmental, organisational, individual, learning and social). These systems can be applied to understanding how stakeholders influence prisoner learning.

The model of prisoner learning shows a potentially non-linear non

equilibrium-oriented perspective. It highlights the role which stakeholders play in influencing the provision of prisoner learning through these interacting systems. This perspective enables us to see prisoner learning as being changed by and changing through the interplay between the various systems and their stakeholders. “Issues are not simple and clean but intricately wired to political, social, historical and especially personal contexts” (Stake, 1995, p. 17). Each system comprises a complexity of interacting influences and paradigms, which create changes within the system itself. These five systems, along with multiple and varied stakeholders, influence prisoner learning.

41

Prisoner learning is therefore in a constant state of fluctuation due to this complex interplay of change (Cooksey & Gates, 1995). The complexity of prisoner learning “involves multiple potential outcomes including those unforeseen, an ever- changing mix of resources and human inputs, and hidden relationships between circumstances and human agents” (Pierson, 2010, p. 195). The systems and structures are dynamic forces shaped by the “recurring, re-iterative actions of the actors”

(Garland, 2001, p. 24). It is the ways in which people think and their values which guide their choices and this is an integral part of the production of change and the continuation of routines (Garland, 2001). The values which stakeholders have, play an important role in policy development of prisoner learning and offender rehabilitation as “they serve to identify therapeutic goals and to place boundaries on what might be considered to be appropriate rehabilitative attempts”, they also inform the decisions made on a day to day basis when implementing such programs (Day & Ward, 2010, p. 291).

42

Figure 2.1. Model of prisoner learning (Adapted from Cooksey & Gates,

1995)         Individual  System  Environmental  System  Organisational  System  Social   System  Learning  System  Prisoner  Learning  World events, Media attention, Legal and ethical constraints,  Politics, Resources and support, Demographics, Government  policies, Lobby groups and unions, Competition/Privatisation,  Ministerial policy, Community support & influence  Ability, Prior  Education &  learning  experiences,  Motivation &  effort,  Neuropsycholo gical processes,  Biological  processes,  Cognitive style,  Personality,  Level of brain  function, Moral  development,  Self‐ concept &  self – efficiacy,  Life history,  Goals, needs  and objectives,  Gender, Age,  Socioeconomic  factors  Resources, Staff support, Learning design,  Assessment systems, Availability &  Frequency, Options and choice, Access  and Equity, Delivery methods, Hidden  curriculum  Group dynamics, Peer support, Family,  Conformity pressure, Norms, Power,  Influence factors, Staff support,  Classification  Resources & Support,  Classification, Prison  policies and practices,  Management styles,  Staff attitude &  commitment,  Expectations and  perception of role of  learning, Culture,  Communication  patterns and systems,  Decision making  systems, Prisoner  classification &  behaviour  modification systems,  Prison environmental  factors, Staff levels and  pressure, Security  issues and influence,  Prison work and  activity systems 

43

The individual system highlights the internal processes which shape prisoner learning. This includes not only the individual learner, but also the individual

experiences of stakeholders which inform their perceptions of prisoners and the learning in which they engage. The social system highlights the impact of the social environment on prisoner learning highlighting the ways in which prisoners are influenced in their learning by others including their peers, family and staff. The power of the organisational system is particularly strong for prisoners learning as they are reliant on the system to fulfil all their needs (Johnson, 1996). The environmental system is concerned with the larger community and political issues which influence prisoner learning. The degree of community support and available resources for prisoner learning is a key variable affecting prisoner learning. The learning system highlights the options and choices available to prisoners, in particular access to formal learning opportunities. This system influences not only what is available but also affects the ways in which learning is designed and presented to the learner.

The interaction of each of these systems and the influence of the stakeholders involved impacts the daily lives of prisoners and the valued learning which they have access to. This research seeks to develop a greater understanding of each of the systems within the model in relation to the research questions by exploring both the literature and the data pertaining to each research question.

2.4 Summary

Through exploring the literature on prisoner learning, the interrelatedness of theories and issues becomes apparent, these interrelations highlight the complexity of prisoners’ learning and the role which stakeholders play in influencing prisoner learning provision. Stakeholders can learn, create, adapt and manipulate their

44

environment, at the same time they are also subject to a wide variety of constraints – environmental, biological and cognitive – which moderate the extent to which they can successfully accomplish those abilities (Cooksey & Gates, 1995).

The model of prisoner learning highlights the complexity of the issue of engaging prisoners in personal change through rehabilitative efforts whilst they are incarcerated. There are numerous points throughout each of the systems which could lead to a failure to appropriately facilitate personal change and prisoner learning. Not all programs, work all the time, for all people, however, research (MacKenzie, 2006; Davis, et. al., 2013; Hall, 2015) does highlight the potential for education to produce the best results in regards to recidivism and desistance from crime.

45