University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Community college education for the incarcerated: the provision of access, persistence and social capital

(USC Thesis Other)

Community college education for the incarcerated: the provision of access, persistence and social capital

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

COMMUNITY COLLEGE EDUCATION FOR THE INCARCERATED: THE
PROVISION OF ACCESS, PERSISTENCE AND SOCIAL CAPITAL

by

Christian B. Teeter

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements of the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2010

Copyright 2010 Christian B. Teeter

ii

DEDICATION

This study is dedicated to the Jesuit Community of Bellarmine College Preparatory, a
committed group of educators that taught me how to write, reinforced the importance of
service to others, and who inspired me to reach for the highest in all of my endeavors.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Professional Acknowledgements:

I want to thank the faculty and administrator participants in this study, as their
commitment to education and serving those in need strongly influenced the outcomes of
this project. They serve as role models in community college education.

I also wish to thank the governing board my employer for its unyielding support of my
Doctoral studies and this dissertation project. I am grateful for the board’s
encouragement, support, and patience, as I pursued this educational endeavor over a two
and one-half year period.

I also extend special thanks to the University of Phoenix Southern California Campus,
Dr. Lester Reams and Mr. Dennis Edwards, for providing me a teaching opportunity that
has blossomed into a rewarding, fulfilling career path in both the classroom and
administration areas of higher education.

Personal Acknowledgements:
I want to thank my wife, Nisie, for her strong and unwavering support of my participation
in the Doctoral program. Her encouragement, guidance and wisdom made a huge
difference for me as I returned to attend school after a nine year interval.

iv

Thanks to Dr. Kristan Venegas, the Chair of my Dissertation Committee, for her
guidance and input for this entire dissertation process. As Nisie’s former academic
advisor at the University of Southern California, it was only fitting for me to work with
Dr. Venegas on this important, final project of my Doctoral studies.

Thanks also to the members of my Dissertation Committee, Dr. Ding-Jo Currie, and Dr.
Tatiana Melguizo, for their assistance, participation, guidance and invaluable input in this
project.

I also want to thank Gary L. Ross, Vice President and Dean of Admission at Colgate
University, for his support and assistance during my undergraduate years, for all his
helpful advice and guidance, and for inspiring me to pursue a career in academic
governance.

Lastly, I thank the Reverend Richard Cobb, S.J., for teaching me how to write as a
Freshman at Bellarmine College Preparatory. His very high standards, commitment to
rigor, and willingness to review many a rough draft of my papers transformed my writing
abilities. Without his guidance and support of many years ago, this project would not
have been possible.

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Dedication ii

Acknowledgements iii

Abstract vii

Chapter 1: Introduction to the Topic 1
Statement of the Problem 4
Purpose and Significance of the Study 6
Main Research Questions 9
Brief Description of the Theoretical Framework 9
Brief Description of Methodology 11
Definition of Key Terms 13
Overall Organization of the Dissertation 14

Chapter 2: Literature Review 15
The Social Capital Theoretical Framework 18
Table 1: Funds of Knowledge 28
Trends and Issues Facing the Incarcerated 30
Educational Endeavors for the Incarcerated 34
The Distance Learning Modality 42

Chapter 3: Methodology 52
Methodology 52
Setting 52
The Distance Learning Telecourse Modality 54
Research Design 56
Participants 61
Data Collection 62
Ethics 66
Data Analysis 68
Researcher Bias 69
Limitations of the Study 70
Conclusion 71

Chapter 4: Findings 73
Access and the “Foggy Glass” 76
Persistence and the “Lowest Denominator of Society” 81
Social Capital and the Decoding of Higher Education 91
Reflections and Comments on the Findings 102

vi

Chapter 5: Discussion 106
Background and Purpose 106
Summary of Key Findings 107
Implications for Practice 113
Implications for Research and Recommendations for Further Study 117
Conclusion 122

References 125

Appendices
Appendix A: Former Student Interview Protocol 136
Appendix B: Faculty Member Interview Protocol 139
Appendix C: Administrator Interview Protocol 141
Appendix D: Counselor Interview Protocol 143
Appendix E: Corrections Official Interview Protocol 145
Appendix F: Informed Consent Form 146

vii

ABSTRACT

This study details an investigation of community college studies for the incarcerated,
focusing on the offerings of South Coast College for inmates within California. The study
interviewed ten former inmates, each of whom studied with South Coast College while in
prison, as well as faculty members, educational administrators, and a corrections officer.
The study posed two main research questions as part of its investigation to determine
whether or not this educational endeavor increases access, persistence, and social capital
for its students. After a data collection process and analysis of the findings, the study
concludes that community college education for the incarcerated enhances the access to
college for this population, increases persistence, and builds the social capital of the
students that participate. The study poses recommendations that are presented for South
Coast College to consider, encouraging further study of various aspects of its offerings
for the incarcerated, in hopes that in the future, community college students that attend
classes while in prison have even greater potential to maintain their persistence in
education and to increase their social capital to a greater degree.

1

CHAPTER ONE

Introduction to the Topic

A major driver in the United States’ engine of economic growth is the community
college, with diverse campuses, broad program offerings, and close ties to local
communities that help facilitate the development of job training programs and economic
development (Community College League of California, 1999). These institutions
promote access to all, affording students academic opportunities that lead to transfer to
four-year institutions. Community colleges also have a major focus on career technical
education programs to assist students seeking to learn skills for job trades or other labor
related industries. As the United States now participates in a global economy, its ability
to provide a strong education to its population remains more critical than ever. As its
economy has moved away from manufacturing to one that is focused on information and
services, greater access to education for all individuals of society has become an even
higher priority for policy makers, business leaders and elected officials.
One segment of the population of the United States that is especially at risk of
falling behind in this competitive environment is the incarcerated. The United States
contains approximately five percent of the world’s people, but currently houses about
twenty-five percent of the Earth’s incarcerated population (Economist, 2009). The
nation’s incarcerated population nearly tripled between the years 1987-2007
(pewcenteronthestates.org). With over two million people in the United States currently
behind bars, and the number likely to grow, policy makers and educators alike must
consider new approaches to assisting this population in attaining more educational

2
resources (Liptak, 2008). The situation becomes even more challenging when it is noted
that African-American men have a one in three chance of spending time behind bars
during their lifetimes (Economist, 2009). As Rose and Clear (1998) comment, “Growth
in imprisonment has disproportionately affected the poor and people of color” (p. 450).
Rose and Clear’s comments are further supported by data from the year 2008, confirming
that African-Americans make up 43% of the nation’s prison inmates, while Latinos made
up 22% of the total (U.S. Department of Justice). On a national level, the age groups
Latino inmates make up the following composition of the total inmate population: Ages
18-19: 1%, Ages 20-29: 9%, Ages 30-39: 7%, Ages 40-49: 4%, Ages 50-59: 15%, and
Ages 60-older: Less than 1%. The age groups of African American inmates make up the
following composition: Ages 18-19: 2%, Ages 20-29: 15%, Ages 30-39: 13%, Ages 40-
49: 9%, Ages 50-59: 3% and Ages 60-older: 1%. In the State of California, ethnic
minorities also dominate the numbers of incarcerated, with African-American inmates
accounting for 28% of the total population, and Latinos comprising 38% (California
Department of Corrections, 2007). With these demographic facts in mind, the challenges
are even greater for those released from prison at this time, given the limited employment
prospects that they face. As Hunter and Boyce (2009) comment, “Employers remain
resistant to employing ex-offenders. Their concerns include … the lack of skills amongst
this group and a view that ex-offenders are unreliable, untrustworthy and will lack the
motivation to work hard” (p. 119).
The incarcerated population faces a dramatic transition that has occurred in the
United States with respect to how criminal behavior should be addressed. As Brown, et

3
al., (1998) comment, “The criminal justice system in America has undergone a
significant shift in purpose and function. The national conscious has abandoned belief
that convicted criminals are salvageable…the…system has moved from rehabilitation to
restitution” (p. 235). With many politicians strengthening their platforms to rid their
constituencies of criminal activity, there has been less focus on the rehabilitation aspects
associated with the payment of one’s debt to society. Furthermore, many elected officials
fear losing their seats to opponents accusing them of being soft on crime. As such, local,
state and national leaders have worked hard to dispel any notion they are weak on crime
issues (www.pewcenteronthestates.org). Without educational opportunities, the
incarcerated will face limited options upon release from prison; the increasingly
competitive nature of the economy and moribund job market that has prevailed in the last
three years, adds more difficulty to this task. Opportunities for higher learning are
critical to the inmate population of this country. With this perspective, this study
attempted to determine whether or not inmates pursuing higher education can raise their
level of access, persist in their studies to a greater extent than prior to pursuing
incarcerated studies, and lastly, endeavors to understand whether or not this population
can increase its social capital through community college education.
As Rose and Voss (2003) comment, “Correctional students need teachers and
leaders who are committed to rehabilitating offenders and who believe in education as a
necessary component of rehabilitation and renewed quality of life” (p. 134). Without
education, the incarcerated may also lack what is known as “social capital,” a framework
derived from Ricardo Stanton-Salazar (1997) that emphasizes students’ relationships to

4
“institutional agents” that work within programs and have the ability to transmit
information regarding courses, training and mentoring opportunities that increase
students’ knowledge and supports their upward mobility (Stanton-Salazar, 1995).
Upward mobility, therefore, can be supported by institutional agents within an
educational setting; without them, advancement can have more obstacles. How can the
incarcerated gain assistance in obtaining opportunities and improving their
competitiveness, thereby raising their level of social capital, in the economy that now
prevails? The analysis of social capital has been specifically applied to the educational
endeavors of incarcerated community college students. As part of this research endeavor,
pseudonyms were used to protect the confidentiality of all individuals and institutions
that participated in the analysis.
Statement of the Problem
Community colleges open avenues of opportunity for the students who
matriculate in their classrooms. How can these benefits be transmitted to the realm of the
incarcerated? Throughout the United States, the community college system prides itself
as one of open access to all. In this spirit, then, the doors of the community college can be
opened to those incarcerated, in hopes of fostering additional access and opportunity. As
competitive pressures grow for our labor force, what steps can society, through the
vehicle of the community college, take to improve the educational plight of the
incarcerated? Increasing access to this population represents one crucial step. According
to one college executive, raising the level of access remains a key challenge, as many
correctional institutions, and inmates themselves, have little knowledge of these kinds of

5
programs – much of the information about the programs is spread by word of mouth
(Personal Communication, January 8, 2009). Can the institutional agents of community
college programs for the incarcerated encourage and provide more access, encourage
students to remain enrolled, and lastly, provide social capital to assist these individuals in
their future endeavors? What steps are educational administrators and corrections
officials taking to increase awareness of these programs? These statements and questions
represent the essence of the problem before us and are key focal points that this study
addresses.
By answering these questions, this study provides administrators and policy
makers more perspective on increasing opportunity for the incarcerated as well as finding
a balance between the current perspectives of criminal justice, described previously, and
the need to rehabilitate convicted felons. As Zaro (2007) comments, “Clearly, impetus is
to build more brain cells and less jail cells” (p. 30). In spite of these developments
within the last two decades, a new pedagogical focus has evolved within the community
college system of California to provide educational opportunities to this growing
population. This area of higher education has not been significantly researched due to
competing priorities and the challenges of gaining access to the incarcerated themselves.
While existing literature provides insight on the state of affairs for the incarcerated as
well as educational endeavors for the this group, they do not, specifically, focus on ways
that community college education, in itself, can assist inmates in growing access,
enhancing persistence, and developing social capital.

6
Providing educational resources for this population can be especially challenging,
given that many incarcerated individuals may not trust others, and may not conduct due
diligence on an issue before making a decision (Labar, et al, 1983). Through a focus on
access, persistence, and the building of social capital within community college programs
for the incarcerated, this study demonstrates how this population can be empowered to
overcome the challenges that they face to have tools, resources, and networks to live as
productive members of society, as well as how these individuals, through education, can
establish life-changing goals. Although society has become much more focused on
punishment for felons, and less on rehabilitation, it is hoped that many will see these new,
innovative distance learning programs for the incarcerated as a beacon of hope in an
otherwise very challenging set of circumstances that prevail for the prison inmates of
today.
Purpose and Significance of the Study
The results of this study hold great promise. According to an administrator of a
community college that serves the incarcerated, educational systems for this group are
not new, but a focus on higher education for this population has not been a priority in the
past for educational leaders, corrections officials, and holders of elected office (Personal
Communication, April 7, 2009). With government officials, policy makers and
community college leaders throughout the United States working to improve access, a
focus on the incarcerated as an underserved population has merits. As Gaes, et al, (1999)
comment, “The rationale for providing educational services to inmates flows directly
from the educational deficits that offenders bring with them…” (p. 398). Without

7
market-centered skills, offenders have less incentive to pursue legitimate careers and
instead have the tendency to focus on criminal endeavors that are more lucrative,
increasing recidivism rates (Street, 2001). By providing educational opportunities to the
prisoner, the correctional facility can provide resources to close the gaps in education and
skills that prevail among the incarcerated population. Gaining exposure to various
disciplines through an educational program, the incarcerated will gain new perspective
which could help them make more informed life decisions, reducing the likelihood that
former inmates will return to a life of crime.
This project, through program access via the South Coast College Distance
Learning program provides insight and evidence of the ability of community colleges to
assist students in gaining access to education, encouraging them to seek additional
opportunities, and provides new information that demonstrates that these studies can
build social capital for students. This study offers community college leaders and policy
makers with recommendations on how these educational opportunities can be researched
further, or enhanced, to provide greater opportunities for clients.
While this research endeavor has uncovered largely affirmative responses to the
questions it posed, the study, through its findings, provides some support to the premise
that community college programs for the incarcerated can help reduce recidivism.
Recidivism, defined by Chappell (2004), “…is the tendency to relapse into criminal
behavior” (p. 152). Gaes, et al., (1999) discuss previous research on college programs for
the incarcerated that provide support: “As participation in college programs increased,
recidivism rates decreased … analysis of college programming found that participants

8
were more likely to be employed after release and more likely to participate in additional
educational opportunities after release” (p. 402). Although data collection efforts did not
research the extent to which former students had re-entered incarceration, the study
provided multiple instances in which students indicated a new focus on life, one that was
far removed from returning to a life of crime.
With the conclusions reached from this study, it is hoped that our elected officials,
policy makers and community college leaders will gain new insights on opportunities for
training the incarcerated and seek to expand opportunities for this underserved
population. Repayment of one’s debt to society must be factored in whenever considering
provisions for prisoners, but given the increasingly large numbers of inmates within the
United States, this study intends to show the benefits that can be reaped by providing
additional attention and energy to this group through increased opportunities in higher
education.
Given the lack of established literature on community college education for the
incarcerated, this study makes a recommendation for further study on this important
issue. With minimal research studies available on associate degree programs for inmates,
this dearth of material also provided me with a major impetus to partake in this project.
With many other researchers addressing education concerns for the incarcerated, but not
focusing on community college programs, this project will hopefully stand out as an early
step in closing the gap that exists in analyzing scholastic opportunities provided by junior
colleges for the inmates.

9
Main Research Questions
This study attempted to determine whether or not community college studies for the
incarcerated can increase access, persistence, and social capital for students. In
answering this question, this study affirms the role of distance learning as an educational
modality in higher education, as community college programs for the incarcerated
operate within this format to comply with state rules and regulations, as well as intending
to operate in the most efficient ways possible. Derived from the principles above that
guide this study, two research questions were drafted to provide further direction to this
endeavor, and which contributed to the interview protocols that supported the
investigative aspects of this project. These questions are as follows:
1) To what extent does the South Coast program for the incarcerated provide
institutional agents who equip students with knowledge, skills and networks to
achieve upward mobility in society?
2) To what extent do participants in the program feel empowered to further
accomplishments in their academic pursuits and professional endeavors?
These questions relate to the themes of social capital, and persistence, and through them,
detailed questions were formulated in order to glean, and uncover, detailed information
from respondents and informants that participated in the data collection process.
Brief Description of Theoretical Framework
This study utilized a social capital framework to guide this analysis of community
college studies for the incarcerated. Social capital has been defined by Dika and Singh
(2002) as “the aggregate of actual or potential resources linked to the possession of a

10
durable network of essentially institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and
recognition. This group membership provides members with the backing of the
collectively owned capital” (p. 33). Social capital, therefore, provides students with
resources, networks and knowledge that they can take to better themselves and move
forward in society. Students who have a network of supporters to assist with guidance
counseling, planning and mentoring, provides advantages over those who do not have
such resources and opportunities. The interactions with others who have the experience
to train, instill knowledge, and provide guidance can help students to build social capital.
Within a framework of social capital, underserved students, in this case, the incarcerated,
can learn to seek guidance, ask for assistance, and build networks with institutional
agents that they have access to within their educational program.
Institutional agents play a critical role within the social capital framework. To
complement the understanding of relationships and networks that help facilitate the
creation of the social capital framework that will be part of this study, Stanton-Salazar
(1997) provides the concept of “institutional agent” which he states, “can be formally
defined as those individuals who have the capacity and commitment to transmit directly,
or negotiate the transmission of, institutional resources and opportunities” (p. 6).
Institutional agents, have an instrumental role in building social capital for the clients
they serve. These individuals use their resources and influence to help clients improve
their abilities to build connections and to search for opportunities that will ensure their
future growth and development in society (Martinez, 2007). With prison life having so
many limitations, the role of the institutional agents within a community college program

11
for the incarcerated plays a critical role and will be investigated further as part of the
social capital framework governing this study.
Brief Description of the Methodology
In order to provide a clear understanding of whether or not community college
programs for the incarcerated enhance access, support persistence and assist students in
developing social capital, this study used a qualitative approach, focused on an inductive
method, which includes interviews that are set within two different formats. Former
inmates that attended the South Coast program, which are the principal respondents of
this study, were interviewed in a structured format. As Yarborough (1985) comments,
“Certainly, any studies about prison education programs should be designed to include
input from the client population” (p. 93). Given the sensitivity of interviewing former
inmates who have participated in a community college program, interview questions and
protocols were derived with a set focus and objective for each question, limiting the
ability of any discussion to sway into sensitive areas that linger outside the realm of this
study’s topic matters, but providing the flexibility to go into subjects, related to the South
Coast program, that could provide additional information. Providing a set of questions to
focus on adds consistency to the data collection process and assists in making more
transparent any patterns that arise in the information gathered from research subjects
(Tierney, 1991). Additional interviews took place with the South Coast College Acting
President, Vice President of Instruction, Vice President of Student Services, Director of
Admissions, as well as faculty members, program administrators, counselors, former
inmates who attended the community college program and a corrections official.

12
Contrary to the interviews with the former program participants, an ethnographic
approach to interviewing was applied to the discussions with administrators, faculty
members, and counselors which enhanced the transmission of additional insights and
ideas from these individuals, fostering greater understanding of the South Coast program
and the benefits it has provided. The ethnographic approach allowed the interviewer to
bring about a deeper understanding of the unit of analysis, often asking respondents or
informants to reflect, characterize, or ponder an issue at length while responding to a
question. This form of interviewing has been increasingly utilized by researchers in the
scholars over the last two decades and given its ability to provide greater dissemination of
knowledge and experiences through the interview process (Tierney, 1991).
As part of this research endeavor, the names of the college and the individuals
interviewed in this study have been altered to protect the privacy of all who participated
in this research effort. The main respondents in the study were ten former inmates who
have attended a community college education program prior to their release from prison.
Principal informants to the study are faculty members, administrators, community college
executives and corrections officials. Through this examination, the ability of these
programs to support increased access, persistence, and to help build social capital is
explored and analyzed in the latter chapters. And, given the special nature of the South
Coast College program for the incarcerated, informants were also asked to describe the
impact that the distance learning educational modality has had on their perspective in
hopes that more can be understood about the viability of this approach to higher
education in today’s competitive marketplace. To provide support and greater

13
understanding with respect to the scope of this study, definitions of key terms are
described below, which will appear throughout the study.
Definition of Key Terms
• Access: Students are afforded the opportunity by society to attend an institution of
higher learning, and to select areas of studies and programs that assist them in
meeting their educational goals.
• Distance learning: The means by which an institution of learning transmits course
content, lectures, discussions, assignments, presentations, and grading to students
through media such as mail, television, or the Internet.
• Empowerment: The process such that students obtain skills and tools to have a
greater influence on their own life’s trajectory, providing the wherewithal to
establish and meet important life goals (Maton and Salem, 1995).
• Institutional Agent: Individuals within an educational setting that have the ability
to transmit information, such as courses, training programs, and mentoring
services that increases knowledge and supports the upward mobility of the
students (Stanton-Salazar, 1995).
• Institutional Support: Key forms of social support that assist students to operate in
well known, understood, circumstances, enhancing their ability to be more
successful as students and within the marketplace, and to have more autonomy
over their individual destiny (Stanton-Salazar, 1997).
• Persistence: Students matriculating to an institution of higher learning are
provided encouragement and opportunities by that institution, or other like

14
organizations, to continue to stay in college, or, to pursue additional, or higher
levels of education.
• Social Capital: The aggregate of actual or potential resources linked to the
possession of a durable network of essentially institutionalized relationships of
mutual acquaintance and recognition within a social structure which increase the
likelihood of success in a purposeful action. (Dika and Singh, 2002).
• Telecourse: A distance learning approach that involves an integrated system
involving television media, textbooks and other academic materials to instill
knowledge, in which students study independently, watching video-taped lessons
and completing assignments on their own (Lueddeke, 1997).
Overall Organization of the Dissertation
The subsequent chapter provides a literature review of issues concerning
education for the incarcerated, distance learning programs, as well as issues related to the
framework of social capital. The third chapter of this study provides specific information
on the methodologies used to gather and analyze research used. In the third chapter,
limitations of the study are also described and analyzed. The fourth chapter of this study
provides the findings that were derived from the project’s data collection efforts. The
fifth and final chapter of this study restates the goals of this research project, synthesizes
the key findings with established literature, discusses implications for further practice,
and provides recommendations/next steps for community college leaders and policy
makers that provide educational opportunities for the incarcerated. The final chapter also
includes concluding thoughts on this program and research study.

15
CHAPTER TWO
Literature Review
This study focuses on a community college program for the incarcerated,
administered by South Coast College, one of the three colleges that make up the Bayside
Community College District in California. Community colleges have a rich history
within the United States, taking shape in the early stages of the Twentieth Century.
These institutions thrived in response to increased demands from our society for
educational resources and opportunities. The development of these organizations in local
communities, as opposed to the placement of traditional four-year universities in largely
urban areas, greatly expanded access to students who otherwise would not attend any
form of higher education (Cohen and Brawer, 2003). Brint and Karabel (1989) reinforce
these ideas further by noting that community colleges have “universal access, relatively
weak boundaries between curricular offerings, and an orientation of service to the entire
community” (p. 727). In California, there are seventy-two community college districts
containing one hundred and ten individual colleges. With the idea of increased access
and opportunity, the mission of California’s Community Colleges is to offer educational
services to students of all ages, including those students that are returning to college.
(California Education Code 66010.4 (a)). The colleges also developed with the idea of
changing a higher education system focused on the elites into one that was more open,
with greater opportunity for all citizens, not those just at the top of society (Cohen and
Brawer, 2003).

16
With their commitment to access and opportunity, community colleges in the
United States by 1997, were educating almost half of the nation’s ethnic minority
students (Cohen and Brawer, 2003). In spite of the increased opportunities that
community colleges have provided with their open access platform that is available to all
citizens, scholars have grown concerned about the ramifications of this service model,
given that outcomes for all groups attending the colleges are not equal: “…evidence
shows stubborn gaps in educational attainment between students of different social
backgrounds and a significant under-representation in the upper tiers of the system of
minority students and students from working class backgrounds” (Brint and Karabel,
1989, 732). Given the large number of ethnic minorities currently in prison, the
opportunities, and challenges, afforded by the community college system provide the
backdrop for the pursuit of this educational endeavor for the incarcerated.
Providing community college education for the incarcerated dovetails with the
mission of the colleges and their focus on increasing educational opportunity for all.
Focusing research efforts and analyzing literature related to this important educational
issue, providing education to inmates, leads to uncharted waters for researchers. As Gaes,
et al, (1999) comment, “Despite decades of experience with educational programs in U.S.
prisons, the research literacy on the efficacy of such programming … is not well
developed” (p. 399). Overall, there is minimal research available with respect to the
educational endeavors of the incarcerated past the high school level (Yarborough, 1985).
In spite of the limited research pertaining to this topic, a survey of material pertaining to
inmate education will take place in this chapter. Although the general lack of studies

17
concerning community college education for inmates presents a challenge, this affords
many new opportunities to break ground in this area of study, and hopefully will inspire
future analyses of educational programs for the incarcerated. As this study has attempted
to determine whether or not community college studies for the incarcerated can increase
access and persistence for students, an analysis of the distance learning modality, and a
subcomponent, the distance learning telecourse modality, shed light on the ways in which
the study’s research questions can be answered. This literature review discusses
additional sources of material pertaining to other institutions of higher learning that have
applied telecourse learning modalities for their students. As this study demonstrates a
number of ways in which distance learning education community college studies for the
incarcerated can develop social capital for inmates, this literature review analyzes major
studies of the framework, with a specific focus on underrepresented, ethnic minorities
espoused by Stanton-Salazar’s (1997) applications and analyses.
In a review of the relevant literature, three main areas were analyzed and applied
to this study. First, a review of literature focusing on the theoretical framework of social
capital takes place. Forms of capital are described, and examples of capital, and how they
relate to the incarcerated, are discussed. Then, general issues related to the incarcerated
individuals, providing additional insight and background as this study segues to the
research methodology and data analysis chapters, are studied. Further, an analysis of
literature pertaining to inmate educational endeavors takes place. Next, this section looks
at distance learning, providing history and overview of the concept, and adding
perspective about the modality. In addition, other programs that have applied the

18
distance learning modality, through the lens of the telecourse, in order to gauge the
efficacy of that teaching approach, are discussed.
The Social Capital Theoretical Framework
Social capital has been selected as the theoretical framework to guide this study
given its ability assist students in overcoming barriers that impede success in educational
systems. Pierre Bourdieu (1977) was the first scholar to identify social capital as he
studied social reproduction issues within European society. As McDonough and Nunez
(2007) note, “Bourdieu…focuses on social capital in social reproduction of societal
hierarchies…schools reproduced and legitimated the class structure by transforming
social distinctions into educational distinctions …” (p. 143). Bourdieu’s research has
been instrumental and assisting other researchers in taking studies of social capital to a
new levels, given that he has focused on how social capital is developed and spread
among various classes, contributing to social inequality (McDonough and Nunez, 2007).
Ricardo Stanton-Salazar (1997) has also provided significant research concerning social
capital providing new perspective in taking Bourdieu’s work to a new level by applying it
to the United States and focusing on educational issues concerning ethnic minorities.
Stanton-Salazar’s work is instrumental to this current study, especially concerning the
concepts of “institutional agency” and “the seven funds of knowledge” which are
discussed further below. Stanton-Salazar emphasizes the importance of relationships
with others in building social capital, including siblings, which can help students obtain
important knowledge concerning education, career and other important matters
contributing to one’s development (McDonough and Nunez, 2007).

19
Education is a resource available to inmates today to assist them in building their
social capital. Concerning corrections education, Wright and Gehring (2008) comment,
“As teachers engage students in dialogue and ethical forms of communication, they build
social capital…that says to students that they are human beings, subjects and not objects,
and people whose identities must be affirmed, and transformed” (p. 335-336). As much
of the analysis on social capital has focused on ethnic minorities, and knowing that the
incarcerated population today is comprised of a majority of ethnic minority populations
(California Department of Corrections, 2007), application of the social capital framework
to this population will hopefully afford opportunities to explain how students address
obstacles in their learning, gain new skills, establish networks, and obtain knowledge
about how to navigate the educational bureaucracy, seek out employment, and gain new
opportunities in the marketplace, through their participation in community college
studies. The key aspects of the social capital framework, as applied by Ricardo Stanton-
Salazar (1997), and his term, the “seven funds of knowledge” will be applied to this
study, given the significance of institutional support in contributing to the success of the
students in the program. Analysis of the “seven funds of knowledge” supports the
qualitative aspects of this study given that the interview questions for respondents and
informants will be geared toward an understanding of those concepts, in hopes that
responses will afford insight on the level of institutional support that is being provided to
students, and whether or not social capital is being built from it. In analyzing the social
capital framework and applying it to community college education for the incarcerated, a
potential drawback is that not all of the “seven funds of knowledge” and the ideal of

20
institutional support would apply to the community college education program. It is
possible that not all of the seven funds of knowledge would specifically apply to the
program, given the emphasis of faculty and administrators on other educational
approaches. While the findings of this study did not confirm that all of the “seven funds
of knowledge” would relate to this study given that the South Coast program may not
have attributes in its operations that address each fund described by Stanton-Salazar
(1997), much useful and insightful information was obtained that demonstrates that these
studies do build elements of social capital for students.
Prior to analyzing social capital in more depth, a discussion of the meaning of
“capital” will take place, as well as an analysis of scholars, in addition to Stanton-Salazar,
that have studied the concept of social capital. Bourdieu (1986) notes there are three
forms of capital that prevail in society today: economic, cultural, and social. Economic
capital refers to one’s income as well as other financial assets, and is also supported by
property rights (Anheir, et al, 1995). Cultural capital exists in the form educational
qualifications, skills, knowledge and intangible system of values and understanding of
cultural forms within a person’s day to day behaviors (Portes, 2000). Lastly, social
capital is defined by Bourdieu (1986) as “the aggregate of the actual or potential
resources which are linked to a position of a durable network of more or less
institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition” (p. 248). In a
more practical way, social capital can be explained as one’s access to career
opportunities, investing advice, or credit, through his or her networks (Portes, 2000). In
addition, the amount of social capital an individual maintains “depends on the size of the

21
network of connections he can effectively mobilize and on the volume of the capital
(economic, cultural or symbolic) possessed in his own right by each of those to whom he
is connected” (Bourdieu, 1986, p. 249).
Scholars have addressed social capital in a number of ways with respect to
educational issues. Coleman (1988) looks at issues concerning high school dropouts and
their relationship to the concept of social capital. He emphasizes the importance of social
capital, its intangible status, and its focus on relationships between individuals (Coleman,
1988). Coleman provides a key example of social capital development amongst children
by providing the example of how some families obtain two books for a child’s class, one
for the parent and one for the pupil, to facilitate the learning process, contributing to a
high level of social capital being available in that particular family (Coleman, 1988). To
delve further, Coleman studied a data set consisting of public, private and Catholic high
schools. His analysis of the data set revealed that of the three sets of schools, drop-out
rates were lowest among students attending Catholic schools. Coleman attributed this
fact to the level of social capital amongst Catholic students, theorizing that it is the
highest amongst the three types of pupil populations studied. Specifically, the high level
of social capital was attributed to the adult community supporting the students (Coleman,
1988).
Another study provides less of a direct connection to education levels and
attainment of social capital. Portes (2000) provides an analysis of social capital with
respect to the educations of immigrant children. Using data from the National
Educational Longitudinal Study and data that related to childrens’ education, focusing on

22
Chinese, Mexican, Korean and Filipino immigrants. Portes analyzes the social capital of
various immigrant groups in the data. His analysis revealed that social capital mostly did
not apply. Portes analyzed data related to second generation members of these immigrant
groups and determined that social capital did not apply to the studies, with exception to
the Mexican immigrants, as test scores for all three other immigrant groups increased.
Portes (2000) emphasizes the importance of socio-economic status in his study, and given
that this variable increased dramatically among the second generation groups he studied,
and he emphasizes that Mexican immigrants face more scrutiny and harsh treatment, this
slowing their ability to integrate into society. Given that the other groups developed so
rapidly by the second generation, then, Portes makes the argument that other sociological
concepts could be applied rather than social capital.
In spite of the results from Portes’ study, other researchers continue to have
concern about the plight of ethnic minorities in the education system. Issues of capital
contribute to some of the stratification between these groups and the dominant classes
(Driessen, 2001). With immigrants and ethnic minorities often existing within a lower
tier of society, this presents challenges for their children to cope within the educational
system. Children from the higher levels of society often have a more structured
educational program, supported by the wealth of their families, which in turn allows them
to build social networks prior to entering college. In many cases, students from lower
classes, many of whom are ethnic minorities, do not have the same opportunities, and
without the structure enjoyed by wealthier groups, they cannot build the same type of
networks (Martinez, 2007). As such, the system of education plays a key role in

23
perpetuating the dearth of social capital that underrepresented groups maintain (Driessen,
2001).
Johnson (2003) applies social capital to inmates, focusing on educational and
employment issues. She emphasizes that incarceration generally further limits
educational opportunities for inmates, contributing to a reduction in their social capital
(Johnson, 2003). Without continued education, the skills of inmates can deteriorate once
inside prison. The lack of job-related skills limits the marketability of these individuals
upon release, providing fewer options to build ties with industry networks and making
them less desirable to potential employers (Johnson, 2003). Without a focus on
education, Johnson notes that inmates have a greater propensity to focus on less
productive matters, such as joining gangs or forming ties with others that would
encourage them to pursue a life of crime upon release, as opposed to pursuing
educational endeavors that would enhance their skills and open doors into networks of
groups that can assist in further future employment opportunities (Johnson, 2003).
Johnson provides additional context by stating, “As a result of being imprisoned, social
ties to people who work consistently in secure good paying jobs are weakened” (p. 29).
Johnson (2003) makes a further case for the need for additional education for inmates,
pointing out the difficulty those with limited scholastic credentials have to obtain viable
positions or to build their social networks.
As one way to measure the effectiveness of the South Coast College program, this
study endeavors to determine whether or not students who participate are able to develop
social capital. Dika and Singh (2002) provide a definition of social capital, defining it as

24
“the aggregate of actual or potential resources linked to the possession of a durable
network of essentially institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and
recognition. This group membership provides members with the backing of the
collectively owned capital” (p. 33). Stanton-Salazar focuses his analysis of social capital
extensively on these groups. The social capital theory, as analyzed by Stanton-Salazar, is
applied extensively to this research study. Stanton-Salazar has created a framework for
understanding the integration of minorities in the United States’ educational system.
Furthermore, he has identified mechanisms of common organizations that are responsible
for the challenges that low status and minority individuals are expected to overcome in
order to obtain social capital (Dika and Singh, 2002). As ethnic minority students today
face an Anglo-centered system of education, and must in many ways learn to sacrifice
their own cultural norms in order to adapt to current education cultures and
methodologies that prevails, creating serious challenges for these populations (Wallace
and Bell, 1999). As noted previously, researchers have seen inequality in levels of social
capital among different groups, as espoused by Lin (1999), “… the inequality of social
capital offers less opportunities for females and minority members to mobilize better
social resources to attain and promote careers” (p. 483). Underserved populations face
greater challenges in obtaining social capital given their lack of knowledge of how to
decode the educational system such that they can leverage its capabilities to develop
networks and resources that would propagate social capital (Stanton-Salazar, 1997).
With the decks continuing to be stacked against ethnic minorities in terms of social
capital, and knowing that the majority of our incarcerated population consisted of these

25
underrepresented groups, Stanton-Salazar’s theoretical approach may help to shed light
on the obstacles that participants in incarcerated education programs face. For example,
in the states of New York and Illinois, the number of African-American inmates in state
prisons exceeded the numbers of African-American students attending universities in
those states, contributing to a significant education deficit among those populations in the
two states (Street, 2001). The deficit is derived by a variety of shortcomings and
unfortunate circumstances related to family difficulties, inability to maintain steady
employment, abusive relationships with sexual partners, and excessive use of illegal
substances (Gaes, et al, 1999).
The application of the social capital framework to the South Coast College studies
for the incarcerated will assist in addressing this project’s research question. Given the
public policy implications of this research endeavor, Dika and Singh (2002) emphasize
that “social capital is increasingly proposed by political and educational leaders as a
solution to persistent educational problems…” (p. 32). This study has determined that
students who attend incarcerated community college studies, through their attainment of
new knowledge and interactions with institutional agents that support the academics, are
able to build social capital. This was accomplished through analyzing data retrieved
through a set of comprehensive interview protocols with former students, administrators,
faculty members, counselors, and corrections officials. Respondents (former students)
and informants were asked questions concerning the opportunities for participants in the
South Coast program to build networks, collaborate with institutional agents, obtain job
skills, and to assess the overall level of institutional support that is provided. Through the

26
responses gleaned from the interview protocols, a determination was made as to the
program’s ability to raise the level of social capital for its students.
In prison, personal relationships with others make a difference (Lindquist, 2000).
Students who develop social capital have a group, or network, of supporters that provide
them with information, tools and resources to help them attain educational and career-
oriented goals. As Coleman (1988) comments, “Like other forms of capital, social
capital is productive, making possible the achievement of certain ends that in its absence
would not be possible” (p. S98). Regardless, career endeavors remain a significant
challenge for those released from prison. As Hunter and Boyce (2009) comment, “There
remain significant and well-known ‘barriers to employment’ for ex-offenders: there are
those directly related to employability such as their limited academic or vocational
qualifications, literacy problems, lack of skills…” (p. 118). Attainment of education and
development of social capital, if applied, can alleviate these deficiencies, providing
enhanced opportunities for the incarcerated as they pay their debts to society and plan a
return to a normal, civilized life after prison.
Relevant to the understanding of social capital is the concept of institutional
agents. As defined previously, these individuals have the ability to provide information
and guidance related to networks, resources, mentoring and other details that can assist
students (Stanton-Salazar, 1997) in making a difference and helping them to make a
positive life change by pursuing higher education opportunities. Institutional agents are
critical to establishing social capital, given that the greater the racial and class divisions
that prevail in a system, the more important it is for institutions to have staff that can

27
support the growth of resilient qualities among students facing challenges (Stanton-
Salazar and Spina, 2000). Development of resiliency is critical for the incarcerated
student, given the many obstacles that this population faces. Social support, in the form
of institutional agents, plays a key role. As Kiecolt (1994) comments, “Others seem to
weigh the costs and benefits, to themselves and to the person, of the changes that the
person is contemplating, and their approval can accelerate the person’s decision to
change” (p. 56). While each participant within the incarcerated program is an adult that
must make decisions for herself, the role of support staff can be instrumental in changing
the outlook and perspective of these individuals as they attempt to reach otherwise
unreachable heights by matriculating in the program.
Attainment of social capital is critical for the incarcerated, but one must go a step
further to realize the benefits that it can provide. As Stanton-Salazar (1997) comments,
“The possession of social capital does not imply the utilization of support, but rather the
potential for such utilization” (p. 10). Support in itself has special qualities that assure
that the social capital itself can be realized. As discussed previously, “institutional
support” consists of forms of social support that assist students to operate in well known,
understood, circumstances, enhancing their ability to be more successful as students and
within the marketplace, and to have more autonomy over their individual destiny
(Stanton-Salazar, 1997). In terms of “institutional support” Stanton-Salazar provides
seven attributes, all of which are important to the development of support within the
social capital framework which he calls “funds of knowledge” (p. 11). In Table 1 below,
the funds of knowledge are described:

28
Table 1: Funds of Knowledge

1) Institutionally sanctioned discourses: (i.e., socially acceptable
ways of language and communicating)
2) Academic task specific knowledge (e.g., subject-area
knowledge)
3) Organizational/bureaucratic funds of knowledge (e.g.,
knowledge of how bureaucracies operate – chains of command,
resource competition among various branches of bureaucracy)
4) Network development (i.e., knowledge leading to skillful
networking behavior; e.g, knowledge of how to negotiate with
various gatekeepers and agents within and outside of the school
environment; knowledge of how to develop
supportive/cooperative ties with peers who are well integrated
in the school’s high status academic circles)
5) Technical funds of knowledge (e.g., computer literacy, study
skills, test taking skills, time-management skills, decision
making skills)
6) Knowledge of labor and educational markets (e.g., job and
educational opportunities, requisites, and barriers to entrée;
knowledge of how to fulfill requisites and how to overcome
barriers)
7) Problem-solving knowledge (i.e., knowing how to participate in
the first six knowledgeable forms for the purpose of solving
school-related problems, making sound decisions, and reaching
personal or collective goals) (Stanton-Salazar, 1997).
Note: From “A Social Capital Framework for Understanding the Socialization of Racial Minority Children and
Youths” by David Stanton-Salazar, 1997, Harvard Educational Review, 67¸ p.12. Copyright 1997 by the Harvard
Educational Review.

In addressing the research questions posed by this study, data collection efforts
with formerly incarcerated students are framed in such a way as to determine how
Stanton-Salazar’s funds of knowledge might apply to the South Coast College program-
in hopes that better understating could be attained about the initiative’s ability to build
and grow social capital for its students. Data collection efforts in this study revealed that
many, but not all, of the “funds of knowledge” applied to the South Coast studies for the
incarcerated. For the inmate population, growth and development of social capital is
absolutely critical, as this group faces so many challenges once released from a

29
correctional facility. In raising their level of social capital, students also have the
opportunity to improve their skills. As Rose and Clear (1998) comment, “Social capital
relies upon (and in turn promotes) human capital. Human capital refers to the human skill
and resources individuals need to function effectively, such as reading, writing and
reasoning ability” (p. 455). While education and knowledge about subjects and various
disciplines can prove invaluable, attainment of social capital complements, and enhances,
opportunities for students after graduation. For example, a student that graduates from a
university can collaborate with that organization’s graduates in a particular career field
that she may be interested in for employment opportunities.
Given that the majority of inmates in today’s prisons are ethnic minorities, and as
previously noted, much of the educational system today focuses on an, Anglo-centered
approach, how can the incarcerated, released from prison, leverage any social capital that
they may have attained? (Stanton-Salazar, 1997). The educational system, in many ways,
has not been designed to serve the needs of ethnic minorities. Underserved populations
in many cases must commit a form of “cultural suicide” in order to adapt to the norms
that prevail on most campuses (Tierney, 1992). The adaptation to the Anglo-focused
culture, yet alone learning how to advance within it, can be quite challenging. In order to
benefit from the increased knowledge and social capital, and human capital that results
from an educational program, one way that students can continue to benefit is to gain an
understanding on how to “decode” the systems in which they propagate. Individuals that
understand this concept are able to develop relationships with mentors who can act as
institutional agents, and further, have the ability, on their own, to resolve challenges that

30
they face within the academic environment or other educational bureaucracy have the
ability to decode the system (Stanton-Salazar, 1997). While obtaining the education
remains critical, it is not enough. As Bourdieu (1977) comments, “…possession of a
diploma, as prestigious as it may be, is in any case less and less capable of guaranteeing
access to the highest positions and is never sufficient to generate in itself access to
economic power” (p. 507). Students that can decode, have more than just technical skills
that come along with the diploma or degree they earn and understand how to
communicate and advance within the dominant forms of social interaction that are
espoused by society (Stanton-Salazar, 1997). When decoding occurs, the student obtains
an understanding, direct or indirect, about how individuals rise within social circles while
obtaining the perception from others that they have excelled academically. Stanton-
Salazar (1997), describes the impacts when students are able to “decode” their
educational environments by activating “crucial exchanges with institutional agents, who
respond to the display of mainstream cultural and linguistic capital by providing not only
enriched academic subject knowledge, but also the forms of institutional support viewed
… as critical to school success” (p. 14). This ability to decode, in addition to gaining the
basic knowledge that an education provides, makes a major difference for ethnic minority
groups as they continue their studies.
Trends and Issues Facing the Incarcerated
The United States faces a major crisis with its incarcerated population today. With
the country’s criminal justice system focusing more on punishment than rehabilitation,
the prison population has continued to grow (Liptak, 2008). Resources have not been

31
provided to keep up with demand: during 2007, the 50 states spent a combined $44
billion on corrections programs, straining budget allocations (New York Times, 2008).
The State of California alone accounted for $8.8 billion of the total national spending on
prisons in 2007 (www.pewcenteronthestates.org). As noted previously, inmates within
the United States consist of about one-fourth of the world’s total population behind bars,
even though its overall population is less than ten percent of the world’s total (Economist,
2009). The majority of the incarcerated population within the United States consists of
ethnic minorities. As the New York Times comments, “More than 1 in 100 American
adults are behind bars. One in nine black men, ages 20-34, are serving time, as are 1 in 36
adult Hispanic men” (www.nytimes.com). The large increase in the inmate population
has been buffeted by societal shifts in how crime should be addressed, with a focus by
legislators increasing the length of sentences, and requiring inmates to complete up to
85% of the prison term before being eligible for parole (Kling, 2006). In addition to the
establishment of stricter sentencing guidelines, a change in perspective has evolved,
focusing less on rehabilitating inmates and instead seeking retribution for their crimes.
As Slater (1994) comments, “The public seems to be of the mind that incarceration
should be strictly punishment and that rehabilitation is a waste of time” (p. 101). This
paradigm shift in the treatment of prisoners was evinced by Congress’ passage of the
Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act in 1994 which by adding an
amendment of the Higher Education Act of 1965, eliminated all federal funding for
incarcerated students pursuing educational opportunities in Federal or state correctional
institutions (Slater, 1994). As a result, over 100 college programs for the incarcerated

32
were shut down (Maher, 2004). While other factors must be considered, there is little
doubt that these developments contributed to the dramatic increase in the incarcerated
population within this country. From a global perspective, the harsh transition that
occurred in the perspective of United States’ policy makers contradicted international
themes that supported increased support for the incarcerated. Making matters more
challenging, the shift in focus to punishment, combined with fewer opportunities for
inmates to rehabilitate themselves has increased the probability that many released felons
will return to a life of crime. Popovici (2009) comments on the nation’s recidivism
levels: “The U.S. Department of Justice estimates that about two-thirds of the 650,000
ex-offenders released from prison each year will be arrested for new offenses within three
years” (p. 1). California’s repeat-offender rate matches the national figures
(www.pewcenteronthestates.org). With such staggering statistics prevailing, a renewed
focus on rehabilitation could temper the high levels of recidivism and increase
opportunities for felons returning to their communities from prison.
Given the significant growth of the prison population the perspective of many
communities towards prisons themselves have changed, with different municipalities
embracing the concepts of having prisons built in their areas to stimulate employment
and growth prospects for local economies. The management and administration of
prisons has become an industry in and of itself (www.nytimes.com). This phenomenon
can be described as “Correctional Keynesianism,” named in reference to the British
economist John Maynard Keynes that derived many of the economic theories that support
increased government spending to stimulate economic growth (Street, 2001). This term

33
has been further amplified by other scholars, referring to our current system as a “prison
industrial complex” (Torre and Fine, p. 569, 2005). Further, challenges stand out when it
is noted that many inmates suffer from sexual abuse, mental illness, all within dated,
overcrowded facilities that do little to deter crime, spawning a high recidivism rate
(Economist, 2009). The passage of Federal laws limiting educational options for
offenders has serious individual consequences. As Brown, et al, (2002) comment, “…if a
known drug dealer is arrested and convicted of more than two counts of dealing drugs,
serves out a prison sentence, and decides to reform his life and get a college degree, he is
no longer eligible for financial aid” (p. 235). Removing eligibility for financial aid for
students that have a criminal record places another barrier in the way of those wishing to
enhance their upward trajectory in society (Brown, et al, 2002). Prior to the
implementation of the 1994 crime legislation, Pell Grants for inmates accounted to
approximately one percent of their annual budget (Torre and Fine, 2005).
These negative attributes contribute to a viscous circle in which inmates have
challenges successfully reintegrating into society; with over half a million inmates
returning home from prison each year, the ability of these individuals to re-adapt into
society has become more critical than ever (Kling, 2006). As noted previously, the
majority of inmates in the corrections system of the United States consist of African-
Americans and Latinos. Commenting on African-American inmates, Strickland (2008)
comments, “Black men who return to their communities from prison find it difficult to
make connections … that foster mainstream participation” (p. 2). The inability to build
connections signals a dearth of social capital – and a lack of institutional agency and

34
support to build the self-esteem and resiliency that is needed to create a strong network of
useful contacts. The challenges, overall, for returning prisoners are great and difficult to
overcome, with seeking employment, re-establishing family ties, and reintegrating into
their communities as some of the biggest issues they face (Visher, LaVigne, and Travis,
2004).
Educational Endeavors for the Incarcerated
There are numerous programs throughout the United States that have provided
scholastic opportunities for the incarcerated. While literature pertaining directly to
community colleges has remained limited, significant material exists concerning other
programs that have provided educational resources for inmates. In spite of the many
obstacles that this population faces, educational endeavors, such as the South Coast
Program, can make a difference for their clients, assisting them in developing cognitive
skills that help improve student behavior, and by attaining more education, providing
insights on how individuals can pursue a life that is free of crime (Bazos and Hausman,
2004). And, in spite of the cutbacks in funding at the federal level for post-secondary
correctional education (PSCE) programs, a variety of organizations in New York,
Indiana, North Carolina, and other states have continued to offer educational
opportunities to their incarcerated populations. Some states, such as North Carolina’s
community college system, backfilled federal dollar reductions for students by
categorizing them, both incarcerated and non-incarcerated, as the same status to ensure
consistent funding levels, and opportunity (Correctional Association of New York, 2009).
These efforts to continue operations, in spite of Federal limitations, have made a

35
difference for many. In a specific example of the benefits that can evolve from the
provision of these higher education opportunities, Slater (1994), quotes Linda Smith, a
former inmate that earned a degree while in prison, comments on her experience: “’There
are a lot of us out here who came through the prison system who are making it outside…
I got an education, which enabled me to get a good paying job, and I never looked back’”
(p. 101). Smith’s statements are compelling and provide hope that college-level
programs for the incarcerated can make a difference. Without education, inmates are
much more liable to go back to repeating the very behavior that led them to prison in the
first place (Spangenberg, 2004). Education can combat the tendencies that ex-felons
have to repeat their behavior. Cheryl Wilkins, another former inmate who participated in
a study by the Correctional Association of New York comments (2009), “’Coming out of
prison with a degree is no comparison to transitioning back into the community without
one. No comparison’” (p. 6). A different experience, along with a new set of tools and
skills for an individual, can make all the difference as she transitions back to society after
repaying a debt to society. Recent reports have confirmed that recidivism rates can be
decreased as much as 20% when incarcerated individuals earn a college degree during
their sentence (Correctional Association of New York, 2009). Reductions in recidivism
also contribute to the taxpayer bottom line, reducing overall costs for prison operations
and administration, given that with a lower repeat crime rate, fewer offenders return to
prison. Such benefits amount to a strong return on investment to the public (Chappell,
2004). The figures can be significant – with estimates amounting to $20,000 for every

36
inmate when an education program contributes to the individual remaining crime-free
(Bazos and Hausman, 2004).
Given that the literature, described above, demonstrates that both prisoners, and
society, can benefit from educational opportunities for the incarcerated, how have
programs been applied in specific cases to inmates? Numerous initiatives have been
surveyed and analyzed by researchers across the country in an effort to understand more
about the benefits that these approaches to learning can provide. Six individual studies
that discuss and analyze educational endeavors pursued in order to benefit the
incarcerated are discussed below, as well as their relationship and context of this current
study.
An important research effort took place, via a case study methodology, with
respect to Purdue University’s program for the incarcerated by Rose and Voss (2003).
The authors’ analysis, with data gleaned from interviews with faculty members and
inmates on the Purdue platform focused on an implementation that began in 1985 in an
effort to provide opportunities for students to earn an associate or bachelor level degree.
Purdue University required all students to have completed at least a high school
equivalency prior to admission. Faculty are mainly part-time level and come from a
variety of business and educational backgrounds, and are encouraged to establish close
working relationships with each student, more so than in a traditional classroom
environment. As such, Ross and Voss describe the faculty in the program as “tight-rope
walkers” balancing the needs of the students whilst maintaining the standards of the
academic program (Rose and Voss, 2003). A liberal arts curriculum is applied to the

37
program in order to foster students’ critical thinking abilities, and as part of that, students
are trained to develop communications that improve their ability to interact with diverse
groups of people (Rose and Voss, 2003). As part of the bond which students form with
their professors, Rose and Voss emphasize that inmates have gained an increased level of
motivation as they pursue their studies, as well as other benefits. Rose and Voss (2003)
comment that the Purdue program, “…instills a profound sense of control and
empowerment over the future course of their lives” (p. 133). The comments of Rose and
Voss, with respect to empowerment, provide fodder for additional consideration, as this
research study seeks to understand the South Coast College program’s ability to increase
the feelings of control that students have over their futures. In addition, students that
attend the program are inspired to pursue further education, many seeking to obtain
advanced degrees after being released from prison (Rose and Voss, 2003), applying to the
context of this study’s attempt to determine whether or not community college programs
for the incarcerated increase the persistence of students that participate.
Other research studies have focused less on the qualitative aspects of a particular
education program, and instead, addressed the larger scale societal benefits that a
program can provide, specifically a reduction in recidivism. Batiuk and Rountree (1997)
analyzed an incarcerated education associate degree program within the State of Ohio’s
corrections system sponsored by a partnership with Wilmington College. Although the
authors focus on the issue of recidivism, a key element of their study is the relationship
between employment, upon release from prison, and the reduction in likelihood that
inmates will return to a life of crime. The authors were focused specifically on the

38
application of the education toward reducing the recidivism rate of inmates, and applied a
quasi-experimental time series analysis of approximately 300 inmates over a ten-year
period (Batiuk and Rountree, 1997). The study emphasized that higher education
opportunities with a prison setting can benefit inmates by increasing their chances to
obtain employment upon release. As Batiuk and Rountree (1997) note, “Thus … college
education does reduce the likelihood of recidivism, but this effect works principally
through postrelease employment” (p. 175). Although the authors were able to determine
the impacts of the State of Ohio program, they encouraged future studies on the topic as
their project’s scope was limited to only one geographical area of the United States. This
study highlights the role educating prisoners play in their re-employment after being
released from prison.
Another analysis of an incarcerated program which brings context to this current
study concerns the work of Edwards-Willy and Chivers (2005) and their focus on the
reasons why inmates consider educational opportunities in the first place. As this study
focuses on the issue of access, the reasoning that inmates use to decide whether or not to
pursue education while in prison stands out as a contributing factor in addressing part of
the project’s research question. Edwards-Willy and Chivers focus on an incarcerated
education program managed by Ball State University, and focused on the insights of
faculty members as to why inmates enroll in college level courses. They interviewed 48
faculty members who had taught students in courses ranging from remedial English to
graduate level studies. The authors’ study of the Ball State program emphasized that
faculty members deemed the incarcerated students they worked with to be at least equal

39
to traditional college students that they had taught in terms of competencies and
intelligence (Edwards-Willey and Chivers, 2005). The study also revealed that Ball State
faculty members perceive the incarcerated students that they have worked with as putting
more efforts into their studies as opposed to those students that attend a traditional
campus setting (Edwards-Willey and Chivers, 2005). This particular finding resonates
with the context of this current study given its relationship to persistence: it demonstrates
that incarcerated students have a high interest level in continuing their work. One other
factor that contributes to persistence which arose from the Edwards-Willey study was the
perceptions of faculty members in the Ball State program of students indicated that many
participated in higher education studies to impress the staff of the prison facilities, as well
as court officials (Edwards-Willey and Chivers, 2005). While one could debate the
merits for this type of reasoning on the part of the students, it demonstrates that there is
additional incentive for students to continue their studies while in prison. The study
further noted that faculty members perceived students as not receiving strong
encouragement from corrections officials to participate in higher education programs,
although on-site prison staff members were deemed to be supportive of students’
participation (Edwards-Willy and Chivers, 2005).
An additional study related to incarcerated education that falls within the context
of this project is an analysis of best practices in teaching approaches for inmates,
emphasizing ways in which students can be empowered through their studies. Dennis
Zaro (2005) in his work, “Teaching Strategies for the Self-Actualized Correctional
Educator: The Inside Person vs. the Outside Person” provides a number of important

40
areas in which faculty members can have a stronger impact on incarcerated students, and
emphasizes the importance of “attitude” as something teachers should emphasize, just as
much as skills and knowledge (p. 28). A major area that this study attempts to determine
is whether or not students that attend a community college program for the incarcerated
can feel, after participating, that they have more control over their futures, contributing to
a sense of empowerment. Zaro’s (2005) analysis provides context to this study’s focus
on issues of empowerment, given that he suggests that faculty members that teach
inmates look at the “inside person” who applies his or her time toward “grappling with
challenges and concerns over which they can exercise great control” (p. 32). Zaro’s
guidance can assist students in seeing the areas of their lives in which they can exhibit
more control – nurturing a sense of empowerment.
Another study of incarcerated education focused on the student perspective, and
analyzed their feelings about a program. Furtado and Johnson (1980) deliver a thoughtful
analysis of the General Studies Degree program at the State Prison of Southern Michigan,
a partnership with Wayne State University. As this study focuses on the importance of
the provision of institutional support for incarcerated students in developing social
capital, a major of the weakness of the Southern Michigan program is the lack of
counseling opportunities available. Less institutional support can make the learning
environment more challenging. To make up for this shortcoming, Furtado and Johnson
(1980) noted that students in the program did form strong bonds with faculty members.
In addition, the Furtado and Johnson (1980) address issues that relate to the concept of
empowerment, noting that the Southern Michigan program, through a course called,

41
“Education for the Future,” had the following impact: “For many students this was a
profound insight into life planning…the course enabled students … to develop a clearer
perception of the implications of their choices in the future” (p. 263-264). The Furtado
and Johnson (1980) research further relates to the key areas of the current study, given
the Southern Michigan use of telecourses to enhance the learning experience of students,
noting students embracing the modality as a valid form of learning: “A later survey
showed students were strongly in favor of this arrangement and appreciated the use of TV
as an educational tool…” (p. 264). Another key point addressed, relating to this study’s
application of social capital, is that that authors emphasize is the student commitment to
upward mobility in their lives and careers as part of their choice to participate in higher
education studies in prison (Furtado and Johnson, 1980). Students did not attend for the
sake of attending, or to impress corrections or court officials, but instead, to move ahead
in society.
Another case study that relates to the context of this research project is Jane
Maher’s (2004) analysis of an incarcerated education program for women at the Bedford
Hills Correctional Facility in New York State, which offers both high school and
undergraduate education options for inmates. While Maher emphasizes the importance
of reducing recidivism, like other scholars focused on incarcerated education, her
analysis calls out several issues that resonate with this current study, specifically the
issues of institutional agency and empowerment. Maher (2004) emphasizes the
importance of peer counselors in the Bedford Hills program noting that these individuals
serve as “buffers” to students, providing support in challenging personal situations as

42
well as giving guidance on such issues as writing personal letters (p. 109-110). In
addition to the institutional agency provided by the peer counselors, Maher provides
evidence that students who participate in the Bedford Hills program gain a sense of
empowerment as a result of their attendance in the program. Maher (2004), provides the
input of one inmate who states, “’…I have to see myself and acknowledge myself as an
educated human being who is responsible for her own actions’” (p. 111).
The studies above demonstrate the positive impact education programs might
have on the lives of inmates once they are released from prison (Labar, et al, 1983). With
so much of the United States’ population locked up, what then, must be done to improve
their educational opportunities? The distance learning modality represents one viable
option to addressing the educational dilemma that our incarcerated face, and is in
discussed more depth below.
The Distance Learning Modality
Distance learning started as an educational modality in the 19
th
Century,
commencing with a program founded by the University of Chicago, which relied upon
the United States Postal Service to support communications between faculty members
and student. Since that time, the distance learning modality has evolved into a variety of
formats, through radio, television, videoconferencing and browser-based environments.
(Winogron, 2003). Given the proliferation of the World Wide Web into the education
system starting in the mid-1990s, this learning modality is the most rapidly expanding
modality of education at this time (Markowitz, 2009). The rapid expansion of the
modality, however, has created obstacles. As Moskal (2006), et al. comment about the

43
online environment, “…it creates formidable challenges to higher education. Universities
must confront the demand for new pedagogies, enhanced support for both faculty and
students, organizational redefinition…and new policies and practices” (p. 27). For
community colleges alone, enrollment in online courses alone in 2008 increased by over
twelve percent from the previous year (Fischman, 2009). The overall rapid expansion of
distance learning is warranted, given the increasing pressures the United States economy
faces from globalization and represents an investment on behalf of our society to provide
skills needed to increase in a much more competitive international economy (Ohler,
1991). Over the last decade, distance learning approaches to higher education have been
transformed by the evolution of the Internet and the increased availability of broadband
access, enhancing faculties’ and students’ abilities to pursue their educational endeavors.
As Moskal, et al. comment (2006) comment, “With more than 73% of adults in the
United States using the Internet, universities are turning to web-based instruction to better
serve the needs of their students” (p. 26). Staff, faculty, administrators and students
appreciate the ease of use and convenience that distance learning and browser-based
courses provide (Heubeck, 2008). The benefits of distance learning include:
• Convenient, flexible options for fulfilling degree requirements.
• Academically proven, produced curriculum developed by college faculty,
scholars, practitioners and instructional design specialists.
• Opportunities to attain educational/career goals without sacrificing full-time
employment or family.
• Technology-enhanced learning experience.

44
• Programs tailored for highly motivated, committed, goal-oriented learners.
(South Coast College, 2008)
Distance learning courses can also benefit ethnic minorities who may not feel
comfortable attending courses on a predominantly white campus (Anonymous, 2007).
While not all of the facts above relate to community college education for the
incarcerated, distance learning options, transmitted through a telecourse media, still
provide options to those students that they would not otherwise have. As Bagwell
(2002) comments, “There is no digital divide with telecourses … Even the least digitally
sophisticated students – those who do not have computers or computing skills – can profit
from telecourses” (p. B18). Dr. Bagwell’s words ring true for the incarcerated, as
internet availability within prison walls remains very limited, and is not available to
support an online learning environment within a correctional facility, as one South Coast
college administrator has noted (Personal Communication, January 9, 2009).
As referenced above, the proliferation of broadband internet access has led to the
development of a wide range of academic programs being offered online. The rapid
expansion of these programs has provided even more flexibility that the distance learning
modality provides. These benefits, however, have not arrived without many detractors
questioning the viability of pursuing education opportunities in any course within that
modality. As Jacobson (1994) comments on distance learning, “A key issue raised by
such technology recalls academe’s perennial struggle with tradeoffs between access and
quality – that is, whether it is possible to use limited or even declining resources to
educate more and more people without lowering standards” (www.chronicle.com).

45
Faculty organizations, for example, have come out against educational programs that are
supported by Internet technologies. As Carnevale (2000) notes, “The American
Federation of Teachers passed a resolution … that opposes undergraduate degrees that
are earned entirely online” (www.chronicle.com). The organization emphasized that a
degree earned via the Internet did not have the same value as a degree attained through on
ground academic resources, and its members expressed concern about the drive for
financial gain on the part of online universities (Carnevale, 2000). Faculty members also
have voiced strong concerns about compensation for the teaching of browser-based
courses, noting that the online courses took additional time, but salaries for teaching the
courses remained the same (Carr, 2000). Many faculty, prior to teaching an online
course, did not realize the work involved in arranging a course and composing a
comprehensive learning environment for students, all for the same salary schedule
(Heubeck, 2008). Furthermore, faculty members struggle to provide students consistent
feedback on coursework, and this issue has arisen as a top concern among students who
take online courses (Bedford, 2007). But, in spite of many faculty leaders about the
quality, pay issues, and motives of those behind educational programs on the World Wide
Web, universities pursuing this modality have flourished: the University of Phoenix, for
example, has become the largest institution of higher learning in the United States mainly
due to its online operations, with over 300,000 students (Blumenstyk, 2008).
In addition to the benefits that distance learning provides to students seeking to
attain their educational goals, our underrepresented populations, which make up more
than the majority of those incarcerated today, stand to benefit. As Ohler (1991)

46
comments, “In its most positive application, it is used to cross difficult physical and
social boundaries, reaching minorities, high-risk learners, and the
handicapped…equalizing opportunity for our nation’s disenfranchised” (p. 23). For
students, a major obstacle in the distance learning modality is the lack of face-to-face
contact with the faculty member, requiring additional effort and focus to complete
assignments and to address questions as they arise. Furthermore, distance learning
courses also have obstacles associated with them, largely applied to the faculty and
administrators that implement and oversee them – and these must be paid close attention
to in order to assure continued success in managing a program. The fast pace in which
technologies evolve must be closely monitored and tracked. As Moskal (2006), et al,
comment, “The challenge for higher educators and administrators is to stay ahead of the
curve, recognizing educational technology expands more rapidly than anything else …
and can morph into educational forms that … [are]… not anticipated” (p. 29). Further
challenges for those entities that pursue distance learning encompass harnessing various
technologies to provide a sound student experience (Simmons and Korrapati, 2007).
Without the focus and commitment, the results of the experience may not be the
same. Pursuing a course in a distance learning modality requires a great deal of discipline
and self-regulation to succeed, which may not apply to all students (Heubeck, 2008). As
Winogron (2008) comments, “For those learners who have the determination and self-
motivation, distance education provides access to learning, overcoming time and distance
constraints” (p. 62). These insights have special meaning for the South Coast College
program for the incarcerated, given the many obstacles that students enrolled in the

47
program face. This educational endeavor provides a new avenue away from the daily
routine of the prison, helping students to change their perspective and affords a new focus
on higher pursuits, influencing students to avoid conduct that would lead to disciplinary
action (Correctional Association of New York, 2009). In spite of those challenges, South
Coast’s studies for the incarcerated, which again, uses a telecourse distance learning
modality, has grown not because it has been marketed by the college, but instead due to
the fact that student awareness and demand for these educational services has increased
through word of mouth (Barnes, Vasquez, and Dekermejian, 2008). South Coast
College has harnessed the capabilities of the distance learning modality to provide a
critical avenue of educational opportunity to a very special population, the incarcerated.
Numerous institutions throughout the United States have also embraced the
telecourse modality. A number of studies have attempted to evaluate the efficacy and
describe attributes of this system of educational programming. Michael Mills (2004)
provides a case study of the telecourse program provided by Delaware Technical &
Community College, an organization that serves approximately 12,000 students through
telecourses and other distance learning methodologies. The college began offering
telecourses to students in the 1980s (Mills, 2004). Mills provides evidence that students
at the college who enroll in these course are less successful than those that receive their
education from other learning modalities, and indicates that personal interaction with
faculty members is critical to the success of any type of distance learning program (Mills,
2004). After analyzing results of a 25 question survey on the telecourse program, he

48
notes that over 80% of the respondents recommended the program to other students
(Mills, 2004). For further improvement on the program, he emphasized the importance
of faculty member training with respect to distance learning and recommends the addition
of new technologies, such as the Blackboard learning system, to complement the
telecourse offerings and to provide an additional avenue for faculty to reach students
outside of the class meeting times (Mills, 2004).
Collins (2002) analyzes the effectiveness of telecourse offerings by studying the
results of 47 students he surveyed at Kirkwood Community College, via a true
experiment, in Iowa who participated in a firefighting training course. Collins’ analysis
of the Kirkwood course demonstrated that students that participate in telecourses are able
to learn at the same pace as those who attend regular face-to-face classroom courses
(Collins, 2002). Further, the results of the experiment demonstrated that many of the
students who participated in the telecourse format had higher levels of learning, and
Collins (2002) noted that “the personal characteristics and level of professional
motivation that may have led such individuals to enroll in a telecourse at remote sites
may also account for their learning more during the course” (p. 46). Collins’ conclusion
after completing his study and analysis is that there is no “significant difference” between
the learning of students that participate in either traditional classrooms or distance
learning environments through a telecourse (Collins, 2002). This, combined with the fact
that Collins’ experiment determined that the distance learners he surveyed actually
performed higher than students in the traditional firefighting course offered at Kirkwood
provide validation to the telecourse learning approach.

49
Slavich (1993) also analyzes the effectiveness of telecourses by comparing the
modality with a traditional on-ground learning course at Butte Community College in
Oroville, California. Slavich surveyed 176 students as part of his study of a basic plant
science course, one-third of whom participated in a traditional classroom, with two-thirds
participating in the telecourse arrangement (Slavich, 1993). The key finding of Slavich’s
study was that an almost identical percentage of students successfully passed the course,
in either modality. Slavich notes that 77% of students passed the onground course, while
78% of students successfully completed the telecourse, but noted that the latter modality
had a higher dropout rate, of 12%, compared to 4%, for the former (Slavich, 1993).
Furthermore, Slavich emphasizes that more than half the students who participated in the
study felt the academic quality of the telecourse was commensurate to that of the
traditional classroom environment, and would not hesitate to enroll in a future section.
While the findings of the study again validate the application of telecourse to learning in
the community college system, the higher dropout statistic that is cited does pose
concerns for persistence issues. Additionally, in the context of this study, Slavich notes
the following of the telecourse participants: “…many commented that the support staff
was invaluable in adapting to the video system” (p. 54), noting the importance of
institutional agents that support students’ orientation to this learning modality.
An additional study of telecourses was conducted by Wetle (1996), who as part of
a dissertation study, surveyed students at Chemeteka Community College in Salem,
Oregon. Dr. Wetle’s study provides insights on the perceptions and views of students
that participate in a telecourse distance learning program by surveying the students of

50
three distance learning courses. While her study did not make a determination about the
effectiveness of the telecourse itself, it shed light on attributes and expectations of the
students that participated in the courses Wetle analyzed. Key findings from Wetle’s
survey of her population sample yielded that female students scored higher than their
male counterparts, that over half of the students surveyed earned an “A” or a “B” in the
courses they enrolled, that participation in the classroom was not a factor in whether or
not a student completed the course, and that students were indifferent to the variety of
telecourse technologies that they were exposed to within their program (Wetle, 1996).
Another researcher that brought about insights on application of the telecourse
modality focused on student perceptions. Floyd (1981) conducted a research study at
Tulsa Junior College that would gauge the views of students in order to assist policy
makers in making future decisions about telecourse offerings. Floyd surveyed 479
students are part of his study, taking eight different course offerings by television, as well
as a dozen faculty members and ten administrators (Floyd, 1981). Among several
findings, Floyd also emphasizes, as did Wetle (1996), that female students had higher
scores than their male counterparts in telecourse programs (Floyd, 1981). Furthermore,
Floyd noted that while students in the program appreciated the format and were likely to
take additional courses, they did not perform as well academically as their counterparts in
the traditional classroom environment (Floyd, 1981). In addition, students surveyed
noted that they appreciated the independent attributes of the program, as it was
complementary to their learning styles (Floyd, 1981). Floyd emphasized that one
weakness of the program was the limitations on communications between students and

51
faculty, but with other students as well, and suggested that on-campus activities in the
program be increased to address this area of concern (Floyd, 1981). Floyd’s analysis
provides additional validation for telecourse efficacy, but his work emphasizes the need
for strong communication and building of ties with students for a stronger, more vibrant
learning experience.
The following chapter describes the methodology applied to study the experiences
of former students, faculty members, administrators, counselors, and a correction official
that have participated in the South Coast College program for the incarcerated.

52
CHAPTER THREE

Methodology

This chapter describes the methodologies that will be utilized in this research
study to analyze the South Coast College program for the incarcerated. This study, again,
asked the program increases social capital, access and persistence for the incarcerated as
they pursue community college studies while in prison. This chapter provides an
overview of the setting for the study, and also analyzes and describes key attributes on
research design, participants, data collection methods, data analysis, and ethical issues,
that were applied to this project. A brief discussion of the project’s timeline and efforts to
protect the confidentiality of data will also take place. This chapter also describes the
relationship between the research protocols and methodologies being pursued throughout
this project to the concept of social capital and the “seven funds of knowledge” derived
by Stanton-Salazar (1997).
Setting
The study looked at a community college in California, South Coast College,
which is an innovator in distance learning approaches to higher education. South Coast is
part of the three-college Bayside Community College District, governed by a publicly
elected five member board of trustees. The college, through the KOST television station
in Huntington Beach, California, pioneered distance learning initiatives by offering on-air
courses to students. The college has since remained on the cutting edge of distance
learning education by developing degree programs for members of the United States
Military, in addition to its program for the incarcerated. As one South Coast College

53
college manager comments, “South Coast today serves anyone from ‘tweens’ in the Early
College High School program to grandparents in the Emeritus Institute; from 3,000-plus
incarcerated adult students to more than 25,000 active-duty military students…”
(Personal Communication, January 8, 2009). The program brings community college
education to students seeking higher learning opportunities while in prison, and is based
entirely on the distance learning modality. It collaborates with a variety of correctional
facilities throughout the State of California. The program uses the United States Postal
Service exclusively to deliver educational programming to students, distributed in the
form of telecourses that are in a videotape format. College faculty members design the
curriculum in the telecourse format prior to its distribution to the correctional facilities.
Coordinators, who assist in the educational service delivery at the institution, facilitate
the transmission of the telecourse materials to the students, and assignments are returned
back to the college through the mail. At the college, South Coast faculty members grade
and score the assignments, and issue grades. South Coast College’s Director of Distance
Learning has noted that the program has gained notoriety within the corrections system
and has consistently grown its enrollment of incarcerated students, given the interest, and
appreciation of many of the incarcerated, who are thankful to have any kind of higher
education opportunity at all (Personal Communication, April 7, 2009).
South Coast College itself was founded upon the principles of providing non-
traditional approaches to education. As quoted in the New York Times (1977) shortly
after the college was created in 1977, “More than 20,000 persons in Orange County,
south of Los Angeles, are getting education these days at a college without a single

54
building” (www.nytimes.com). Community colleges have consistently drawn
populations of students different from traditional groups that attend four-year universities
(Gilroy, 2008). The college was created based on the concept of the United Kingdom’s
“Open University.” In this concept, according to Hechinger (1982), “instructors not only
develop radio and television programs and extensive textbooks for home study, but also
run a system of remote-control homework and examinations with the help of computers
and tutors” (www.nytimes.com). Founded to provide non-traditional forms of education,
South Coast College leveraged these roots to build core competencies in telecourses, a
specialized distance learning modality. As Franz (1996) comments, “Done right,
telecourses have proven to be sound instructional systems that promote, in some cases,
deeper learning than classroom instruction” (p. 31).
The Distance Learning Telecourse Modality
The South Coast College studies for the incarcerated, which is a distance learning
format, uses a very traditional, decades-old technique to provide education to its students:
the telecourse. While much of today’s growth in distance learning is focused on the
Internet, inmates today have very little access to online resources, precluding attainment
of an education through Internet resources (Hefferman, 2008). As correctional facilities
today do not allow inmates to access the Internet, popular online learning programs are
not available to the South Coast Students. As such, telecourses were selected by the
college as the most effective way to deliver education services to these students, all in
way that complied with State of California Department of Corrections guidelines. As
Lueddeke (1997) comments, “A telecourse is a complete and integrated learning system.

55
It generally includes television programmes, a textbook, and a variety of other teaching
material designed to be used by staff and students as the main components of a course”
(p. 278). Students who take telecourses review the class material and complete
assignments independently. Community colleges and other institutions of higher learning
have embraced the telecourse, in which students enroll within a course at an accredited
institution, and read textbooks and other pertinent materials, all the while reviewing taped
lessons that are approximately thirty minutes in length each. The institution of higher
learning assigns a faculty member to grade students’ assignments and exams, while also
managing the course. Telecourses can also be transmitted through live television media.
Telecourses are often produced and then licensed to other colleges given that the cost to
develop a single course ran run into the seven figures, and are generally utilized over a
ten year period. As such, few colleges actually produce them independently (Carnevale
and Young, 2001).
South Coast College, in emphasizing a new approach to education, emphasized
distance learning and other non-traditional forms of education to attract students who
may not otherwise be able to attend college. As Turner (1989) comments, these kinds of
educational environments “attract mothers with small children to care for, executives
with hectic work schedules, school teachers who need credits for continuing education,
retired people who are looking for intellectual stimulation…” (www.chronicle.com).
Another major reason for the popularity of the telecourse distance learning modality is
the ease of access, ensuring that those who cannot attend a traditional classroom on a
regular basis can continue their educations (Lueddeke, 1997). And, with respect to more

56
at-risk populations, such as the incarcerated, Ohler (1991) provides insights on why a
distance learning program, such as South Coast’s would appeal to students, “…all of
whom share a similar trait: they all feel somehow distant, or excluded, from the
educational system … they turn to distance education in search of options” (p. 25). With
demand coming from so many different walks of life, then, it is no surprise that
institutions such as South Coast College, and others, have been able to carve out a niche
within the higher education system. Student interest and determination drives these
programs, as many faculty members that participate in telecourse based distance learning
programs appreciate the dedication and hard work that their students undertake to
succeed in the programs (Turner, 1989). Within the South Coast College program,
institutional agents could consist of faculty members at the prison site, college
administrators and faculty. Resources would include tutoring, mentoring, career
guidance and information about continuing studies beyond the South Coast program
(Martinez, 2007).
Research Design
Using a case study approach, I focused my analysis of the South Coast studies on
a group of ten former inmate students, six administrators, and five faculty members, two
counselors, and one corrections official. By utilizing a case study research design, I
enlisted an approach that provides useful information to administrators and policy makers
wishing to develop and implement higher education opportunities for the incarcerated.
As Merriam (1998) comments, “A case study design is employed to gain an in-depth
understanding of the situation and meaning for those involved” (p. 19). The “cases”

57
usually represent subjects such as a pupil, instructor, administrator, or a program, and as
such, the unit of analysis for this study was the South Coast College program for the
incarcerated (Merriam, 1998). This project takes on an “instrumental” case study
approach as it focuses on one issue, community college education for the incarcerated,
through the lens of the South Coast College program (Creswell, 2007). With the research
question of the study contingent upon the actual human experience of the participants in
the South Coast College program, describing the elements of human nature that emerge
when structured interviews are utilized with program participants, such as the human
perceptions, feelings, and reactions to a program or endeavor, cannot be generalized. As
such, Yin (1984) comments that the case study approach functions “…to describe the
real-life context in which an intervention has occurred…to explain the causal link in real
life interventions that are too complex for the survey or experimental strategies” (p. 25).
Within the study of the case, the administrators included for interviews are the
college president, vice president of instruction, dean of distance learning, dean of
admissions, vice president of student services, and administrator coordinator. Two
counselors that service the incarcerated students, and who also serve the college as
faculty members will also be queried in a separate interview protocol. The interviews
with the former students of the program also play a key role in this project’s research
design, given that their assessment, understanding and experiences of the program will
help glean the information that this study’s research question addresses. As Patton
(2002) comments, “…the primary focus of data collection will be on what is happening
to individuals in a setting and how individuals are affected by the setting…the program,

58
organization or community, not just the individual people, becomes the case study
focus…” (p. 228). As such, I will model my interview efforts in order to understand more
about the following questions and to assist in determining if the South Coast College
program enhances access, supports persistence, and increases social capital, or not, for its
students and the community.
1) To what extent does the South Coast program for the incarcerated provide
institutional agents who equip students with knowledge, skills and networks to
achieve upward mobility in society?
2) To what extent do participants in the program feel empowered to further
accomplishments in their academic pursuits and professional endeavors?
With these questions posed, how do they relate to the key themes and theories that prevail
to this study?
The first research question was derived from the theory of social capital and
contributed to the design of specific questions in each of this study’s research protocols
that are aimed at understanding the ways in which institutional agents, through providing
support to students, transmit new knowledge about educational opportunity, training, and
other key details that will position students to achieve upward mobility in society
(Stanton-Salazar, 1997). The “seven funds of knowledge” espoused by Stanton-Salazar
(1997) and previously described in Chapter 2 provided the basis for the second research
question, given that they represent the key areas in which institutional agents can make a
difference for students to enhance their social capital. Without the contributions of
institutional agents helping students to develop the “seven funds of knowledge” the

59
ability of an academic program to assist students in enhancing their social capital can be
limited. The five sets of research protocols applied in this study pose questions that seek
to gain more understanding of how informants work to instill the attributes of the “seven
funds of knowledge” in their students, and also, to gauge the respondents’ perceptions of
these concepts during their learning experiences in the South Coast program. In
Appendix A, an example of the interview protocol that relates to Research Question #2
asks respondents the following: “Did you learn any skills in the program about how to
build and establish a network of individuals to interact with and who would support your
educational and professional endeavors?”
The second research question tied to the concepts of empowerment and
persistence. With respect to empowerment, which is described in the first chapter of this
study, each interview protocol contains attributes designed to provide greater
understanding as to how the South Coast studies can assist students in obtaining key life
goals, and that can help them feel more in control over their own futures (Maton and
Salem, 1995). With a stronger sense of purpose, students can be empowered to seek
higher achievements in educational and professional endeavors. To support this research
question, the interview protocol in Appendix B asked informants the following: “Do you
think that students who attend the South Coast program feel that they have more control
over their futures?”
Furthermore, as an application to the concept of persistence, also described in
Chapter 1 of this study, with students feeling more in command of their life trajectories,
this final question also influenced all interview protocols, as information received from

60
respondents and informants demonstrated to what extent the South Coast program
stimulated students to pursue continued, or higher level studies after participating in their
community college education in prison. In Appendix A, the interview protocol asked the
following that supports the premises of the third research question related to persistence:
“After participating in the South Coast program, did you pursue additional educational
opportunities? Why or why not?”
To facilitate the case study approach of this research endeavor, the responses to
interview protocols, were elicited from the research questions, and shed new insights and
opportunities for further analysis on this program. Interview protocols outlined in
Appendices A-E are designed to support the themes in the two questions above, as well
as to tie back to Stanton-Salazar’s (1997) “seven funds of knowledge” as well as
affording the opportunity for respondents and informants to provide information on
access and persistence issues. I developed interview questions, based on the “seven
funds of knowledge”, that seek to answer whether or not the program supports students in
the following areas: communications ability, subject area knowledge, understanding of
educational bureaucratic systems, network development, labor market knowledge, and
critical thinking skills. The protocol questions that focus on bureaucratic issues also
pertain to the Stanton-Salazar (1997) concept of “decoding” whereby students obtain
knowledge that helps them navigate through the educational system. In addition, the
protocols sought to determine the impact the level of institutional agency that prevails
within the program, by asking respondents and informants to describe individuals that
play key roles in the students’ experiences. As there has been little research done on

61
community college initiatives for the incarcerated, case studies provide a great
opportunity to increase awareness on an educational approach that is relatively unknown
outside of California corrections circles, offering knowledge on a topic that may not
otherwise be discussed or analyzed (Merriam, 1998). The interview protocols developed
complement the case study approach by providing significant detail on the unit of
analysis, the South Coast program, and by focusing specifically on the two research
questions and theories that support them.
Participants
The selection of participants is critical to the success of any qualitative study, as
such inquiries must obtain a comprehensive set of rich and dynamic analyses of the
experience under investigation (Polkinghorne, 2005). Within this study, ten former
students of the college’s incarcerated studies, consisting of nine men and one woman,
were interviewed in order to understand their insights on access and persistence, as well
as to gain understanding about the potential of the South Coast program to build social
capital. Locating the former students presented a challenge; South Coast College, in its
effort to treat all students equally, lists students within its incarcerated program in the
same category as any other within its distance learning unit. Additional research was
required on the part of the college to locate these individuals, as institutional databases do
not specifically list the participants in an “incarcerated” category. This fact caused some
limitations, and as such, convenience sampling was used as the method to locate
informants.

62
Pena (2007) describes convenience sampling by stating, “the researcher selects a
sample based on accessibility to respondents, site, and time” (p. 54). As so little
published information exists on this kind of program, I cannot be selective in defining
criteria for former students to interview; the only condition is that these individuals had
attended and experienced the program in some way. As Polkinghorne (2005) comments,
“This approach is not so much a strategy as it is the use of people who happen to be
available to the researcher as participants” (p. 141). Additional interviews will take place
with the South Coast College president who created and implemented the organization’s
community college education program for the incarcerated, as well as faculty members,
program administrators, counselors, and coordinators, former inmates who attended the
community college program, and corrections officials. In addition to understanding the
experience of the students, administrators and faculty members afforded valuable insights
with regard to the inner workings of the program, as well as assisting in the application of
the social capital framework to this study, specifically concerning the role of institutional
agents in the experience of the students. With the emphasis of distance learning as part
of this groundbreaking program for the incarcerated, South Coast respondents were asked
to describe the impact that the educational modality had on their perspective. Questions
were formulated in hopes that more can be learned and understood about the viability of
this distance learning approach to community college studies.
Data Collection
This study applied a qualitative approach, focused on an inductive method, which
included interviews that were set within two different formats. The primary instrument

63
for gathering the data within this study consisted of interviews, both in structured and
ethnographic format. Interviews represented the predominant source of data collection
because they best assisted in answering the research question that forms the basis of this
study. As Patton (1982) states, “The purpose of interviewing is to find out what is on and
in someone else’s mind” (p. 161). Interviewers, in order to be successful, must obtain a
comprehensive account from respondents and informants regarding the subject of the
study (Polkinghorne, 2005). In the data collection effort for this study, structured
interviews were applied for the respondents (former students), and for the informants
(faculty and administrators) ethnographic interviews were utilized.
Structured interviews involve the establishment of protocols for general questions
to be pursued, and hope to gain specific responses to each group of questions (Tierney,
1991). Working with the informants of this case, the faculty, administrators, counselors
and a corrections official, the utilization of ethnographic interviews will enable the
interviewer to probe, take discussions in different directions, and allow imagination and
ingenuity to play out within the process – bringing a more detailed level of depth and
breadth to the results of each session (Tierney, 1991).
These interview approaches were best suited to answer the research questions
posed in this study given the fact that little is generally known about community college
programs for the incarcerated. While community colleges have a mission to increase
access and persistence to all students, the incarcerated represent a special group of
students given the “at-risk” status that they hold in research circles. Interviewing former
inmates, as opposed to those currently institutionalized, provided a less formal, more

64
secure environment for ideas and insights to be gained from respondents during the
interview process. The interviews used in this study attempted to glean if the community
college distance learning platform can also benefit for the incarcerated, and in addition,
sought to develop an understanding as to whether or not these programs cultivated social
capital for their clients, the students.
The former South Coast College former students who participated in the
interview process did so within a structured format. Given the sensitivity of interviewing
former inmates who have participated in a community college program, however,
interview questions and protocols were derived in advance with a set focus and objective
for each question, limiting the ability of any discussion to sway into sensitive areas that
linger outside the realm of this study’s topic matters, but still providing significant
leeway for participants to inform on their educational experiences. As Tierney (1991)
comments, “The goal is to check for replicability of answers and variation across
interviewees…the purpose remains to elicit responses to each of the set questions raised”
(p. 9).
Contrary to the interviews with the program participants, an ethnographic
approach to interviewing was applied to the discussions with administrators which
enhanced the transmission of additional insights and ideas from these individuals,
fostering greater understanding of the South Coast program and the benefits it has
provided. With this approach, it was hoped that the interview process can provide
informants a more relaxed atmosphere to speak freely and provide a greater expression of
ideas and concepts related to community college education for the incarcerated. Tierney

65
(1991) comments on the value of this approach with its inductive roots, “Consistent with
the ethnographic tradition, the interviewer enters the field site without preconceived
notions or hypotheses; rather, the researcher uses an inductive approach to the collection
and analysis of data” (p. 10). With this approach to interviewing, additional insights and
understandings were gleaned from the program, and most importantly, this endeavors to
uncover and elucidate the benefits that its administrators and leaders are working to
provide students. The interview protocols outlined in Appendices B, C, D, and E, for
example, were designed to bring about the transmission of significant knowledge about
the South Coast program itself, in addition to providing critical information pertaining to
this research study’s question. The protocol in Appendix A, however, focused on more
specific questions, allowing for respondents to answer and provide necessary
information, but with less emphasis on asking for characterizations, perceptions and more
focus on direct responses. The protocol in Appendix A is structured, and more tightly
bound than the ethnographic approach in the other three appendices, reducing the risk of
respondents going off topic or other area which could add complications to the interview
process.
Given challenges to obtain clearance to visit State of California correctional
facilities that participate within the South Coast College program for the incarcerated,
interviewing current inmates was not possible. Therefore, former student participants in
the program will be selected for interview, via a convenience sampling process, as
opposed to current students currently inside of a correctional facility. Scholars apply

66
convenience sampling when difficulties emerge finding subjects; they must work with
whatever elements of the population are available (Polkinghorne, 2005).
In addition to the non-participant approach to observing the South Coast distance
learning unit, a document review will also place. This study reviewed a student survey, a
course guide for the class, Counseling 105, and an education plan provided by a South
Coast counselor to an incarcerated community college student. Reviewing program
documents assisted me in gaining understanding of the program’s approach to increasing
educational opportunities for the incarcerated. Through a document review, I obtained a
greater perspective of the South Coast program’s service delivery, in addition to the data
that I collected in personal interviews, and specifically, helped shed further light on
whether or not internal systems of the college facilitated any positive impact on this
study’s research questions.
As part of this research endeavor, the names of the college and the individuals
interviewed in this study have been altered in order to protect the privacy of all who
participated in this research effort. The main informants in the study are the
administrators and ten former inmates that have attended the South Coast College
education program prior to their release from prison. Interviews with all informants were
taped and transcribed. Through this exercise, the ability of these programs to support
increased access, persistence, and to help build social capital were explored and analyzed.
Ethics
While the provision of community college programs to the incarcerated can
demonstrate great promise for innovations in education, ethical concerns play a

67
significant role in this study. For this reason, I was determined to interview former
inmates that had attended the program, as opposed to students who are still incarcerated.
Regardless, sensitivity to the individuals who have formerly been incarcerated has
weighed greatly in the formulation of this study. Protecting the privacy of these
individuals and formulating interview questions that will be focused specifically on their
program experiences, and their impact on the students’ perspective, was paramount in my
fieldwork. Because of the sensitivity involved with this population of former students,
every effort was made to stray from questions that asked about the informant’s personal
life and choices, except within the bounds of the educational experience and the
attainment of educational goals. This approach to interviewing via a structured format
was helpful to keep the focus on the issues of the study during the discussion.
As part of the data collection process, the objectives of this study will be clearly
explained to each respondent or informant in advance of the interviews, to limit any
potential misunderstandings about the scope of this project. All respondents and
informants were provided informed consent forms, attached in Appendix F, which
describe the purpose of the study and advise all participants of their rights as part of their
inclusion in this research study, and also describe the details concerning the
confidentiality of this research endeavor. The consent forms also informed participants
of their rights to review audio recordings of their interviews and to review notes taken
from those sessions. Patton (2002), in discussing the importance of institutional review,
comments that many higher education entities “…refuse to approve protocols in which
research participants are deceived about the purpose of a study…” (p. 270). With this

68
research endeavor looking at an area in which limited research has occurred,
transparency, openness and integrity remained the highest of priorities to ensure that
information and knowledge about this educational program are shared in the most
appropriate, legal, and professional way. And with a focus on ethics and integrity,
transparency is critical in fulfilling those ideas, as well as yielding significant, impactful
research results. As Polkinghorne (2005) comments about interviewers, “…they need to
attend to establish a trusting, open relationship with the participant and to focus on the
meaning of the participant’s life experiences, rather than on the accuracy of his or her
recall” (p. 142). In addition, the approach of this study emphasized humility; I wanted to
learn as much as I could from each specific informant, and as such, I addressed
Seidman’s (2006) sentiments in this area with a focus on modesty, which state, “…we
interviewers [must] keep our egos in check. It realizes that we are not the center of the
world. It demands that our actions as interviewers indicate that others’ stories are
important” (p. 9). These elements helped ensure that my meetings with the people I
interview were relaxed, open, and rich with information about the program that assisted
in answering this study’s research questions.
Data Analysis
The inductive method provides significant benefits to a qualitative approach, and
as such, was the principle methodology used for conducting the interviews in this study.
As Patton (2002) comments, “Inductive analysis involves discovering patterns, themes,
and categories in one’s data, through the analyst’s interactions with the data” (p. 453).
Through reviewing the patterns that evolve from the interview process, perspective and

69
understanding of the actual experiences that the students had as well as the individual
significance of those experiences will be attained (Seidman, 2006). For example, if
several respondents indicate that that the South Coast program provided resources to
support their job search efforts after prison, I would emphasize in my case analysis that a
pattern had emerged in the research process. After reviewing these types of trends and
related information, as well as any chronological data from the case, an analysis of
themes that prevailed from the data collection exercise will take place. Studying the
themes that arose from the research will assist in address any complex findings that came
out of the research process (Creswell, 2007). As such, given the sensitivity of the
participants in this study, the analysis takes on a thematic as opposed to a narrative
approach. With a thematic approach, the study will remain sharply focused on concepts
and ideas that address the research question. Although former students, as respondents
within this study are no longer incarcerated, a thematic approach assisted in maintaining
attention on the specific foci of the study, emphasizing key concepts and themes as the
project’s research question is answered. A thematic approach complements the case
study methodology for this project, given the importance of analyzing data, patterns and
trends through description of the case (Creswell, 2007). After the themes and patterns are
analyzed, this study will provide a “lessons learned” analysis from the case and will
provide next steps for future research (Lincoln and Guba, 1985).
Researcher Bias
As a management employee of the Bayside Community College District, my
perspective on the South Coast College program, combined with my knowledge of

70
community college education, afforded me with insight on many of the educational topics
that were discussed during this project’s data collection efforts. My participation in
meetings of the Chancellor’s Cabinet, and relationships with governing board members,
executive leaders, and faculty members will afford me easy access to all facets of the
South Coast program. Furthermore, the various capacities of my work as Secretary of the
Board of Trustees and member of the Bayside District Management Association afford
me numerous opportunities to interact with a large number of the research subjects in this
study, specifically the South Coast College President, Vice President of Instruction, and
Dean of Distance Learning. These professional relationships will hopefully facilitate a
more relaxed and productive dialogue during my interviews with the informants of this
study. Give my role at the district, and the enthusiasm of my colleagues for the promise
of incarcerated studies, my overtures to them were very well received as I pursued this
endeavor. As such, these favorable circumstances were invaluable as the study
proceeded.
Limitations of the Study
Developing a list of respondents stands out as the key challenge of this study.
Given the emphasis on convenience sampling (Polkinghorne, 2005), some former
inmates interviewed in this study proved more effective than others in sharing
experiences and providing information to assist in obtaining data that address the research
question. Seeking out former inmates through the South Coast program was challenging,
given that the college protects the privacy of these students by not categorizing them as
“incarcerated” but rather as “distance learning” students, under the respective division at

71
the school. A further limitation of the study is the status of the population of formerly
incarcerated students itself. Because there is a greater element of risk involved with
interacting with this population, interview questions had to be structured, limiting the
opportunity for outside topics, non-related to this study, to arise in the interview process.
This format was chosen to assist in protecting the privacy of the formerly incarcerated
students, but can also be limiting, in that the questions and resulting discussion cannot
elicit other material that might prove useful to this study. It should also be noted that the
results of study cannot be generalized, given that a population of ten respondents (former
inmates) was used to conduct data collection. As such, the study’s findings and
conclusions are intended to provoke thought and inspiration for further work related to
this topic. A final limitation of this study concerns the fact that the former students that
will be interviewed are spread out across large geographic regions. As such, face-to-face
meetings with these research subjects may not be possible, limiting my ability to have
personal meetings. The majority of interviews with former inmates took place by phone,
and those conversations were successfully recorded and transcribed.
Conclusion
The research methods outlined in this chapter intend to demonstrate the great
promise that the South Coast program for the incarcerated has, and have elicited a high
level of rich information that are further analyzed in the remaining chapters of this study.
In spite of the promise this study holds, I worked diligently to overcome obstacles in
locating research subjects and managing the sensitivities associated with interacting with
a population of formerly incarcerated students. With these challenges in mind, this

72
project’s research design has assisted this study in reaching a new level of scholarship
and helped to set the stage for further research and analysis of community college
education for the incarcerated.

73
CHAPTER 4
Findings
This case study is based on interviews and document reviews with administrators,
faculty and former students of South Coast College, part of the Bayside Community
College District. The college, founded in 1976 in the British model of the “open
university” does not have a central campus and provides community college education
students in Southern California through three satellite facilities and offers distance
learning options to the incarcerated and military staff throughout the United States and
the world.
The college has served the incarcerated population for over two decades, but as
late as 2002, only had approximately three hundred inmates as students (Personal
Communication, July 21, 2009). That same year, the Chancellor of the California
Community Colleges asked the college to collaborate with the State Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation to expand its offerings to the incarcerated population.
South Coast responded affirmatively, conducted research to determine the best
approaches to increasing the offering, and began to grow the incarcerated studies the
following year. As of the fall 2009 term, the college had over 5,000 incarcerated students
at over 50 state and federal prisons throughout California and the United States, with this
population accounting for approximately twenty percent of the college’s enrollment
(Personal Communication, July 21, 2009). Although a distance learning program,
incarcerated students, just as any other at South Coast, can take advantage of college
counseling services, and are supported by two coordinators that work with local prison

74
Education Officers to serve student needs. All courses are taught in a telecourse distance
learning format by instructors, who correspond with students via the U.S. Postal Service.
Education Officers at the prison facilities provide resources and administer exams and
assignments to inmates participating in the studies. As noted previously, college
counselors are available to assist students, and can produce educational plans and provide
other resources to students seeking educational and vocational opportunities. Students
are able to pursue studies in the liberal arts, with the potential to earn a non-transferable
Associate of Arts degree. These students also have the option to pursue a certificate in
business studies. Inmates, through a prison education officer, are able to register for
South Coast courses and gain access to the telecourses, which are in a digital video disk
(DVD) or video taped format. Assignments and exams are completed by the students and
sent to faculty members for grading via the U.S. Postal Service.
This study sought to determine whether or not community college education for
the incarcerated increased access, persistence, and social capital for inmates participating
in these studies. Further, two research questions were posed to support the study’s
objective: In the spirit of access, how are students informed about a community college
program for the incarcerated? What steps must they take to become enrolled in the
program? In terms of persistence, to what extent do participants in the program feel
empowered to further accomplishments in their academic pursuits and professional
endeavors? And concerning the matter of social capital, to what extent does the South
Coast program for the incarcerated provide institutional agents who equip students with
knowledge, skills and networks to achieve upward mobility in society? With these

75
research questions in mind, the findings of this study focused on three key areas: access,
persistence, and social capital. Findings were derived from interviews with formerly
incarcerated students, South Coast College administrators and faculty, and an internal
document review of a class course booklet, a student education plan, and an anonymous
survey of student feedback on the incarcerated studies from June 2008. The findings of
the different data collection methodologies are summarized within this chapter in
relationship to the specific theme that they support.
The data collection efforts in this study revealed that community college
education for the incarcerated increases access, persistence, and helps students build their
social capital, to a limited extent. The sections below analyze the material obtained
through the data collection process, with analysis and summary of findings, pertaining to
access, persistence, and social capital, in that order. This chapter then segues to a
discussion that reflects on the findings that were derived as the study progressed.
Throughout the data collection process, a number of key themes emerged, each of which
provide information tied to the two research questions that this study posted.
These include:
1) Board of Governors’ Wavier and Access
2) Impact of Prison Education Officers and Support Personnel
3) Communication
4) Significance of Educational Plans
5) Role of Empowerment
6) Impact of Academic Success
7) Increased Student Desire to Pursue More Education
8) Institutional Agency
9) Decoding of the Educational System
10) Impact of the Counseling 105 course
11) Enhancement of Problem Solving Skills
12) Network Building

76

Each of these themes will be discussed throughout this chapter, under three umbrellas of
access, persistence, and social capital.
Access and the “Foggy Glass”
Community colleges provide a gateway for graduating high school seniors,
displaced workers, returning Veterans and community members to achieve their
education, vocational and professional goals. But, does community college education
increase access for the incarcerated? Access, defined previously, is whereby students are
afforded the opportunity by society to attend an institution of higher learning, and to
select areas of studies and programs that assist them in meeting their educational goals.
This section discusses a number of themes related to access, specifically the impact of the
State of California’s Board of Governors’ Waiver, student communications’ role in
fostering access, and lastly, the impacts of Education Officers, counselors, and support
staff on the access’ development.
The Board of Governors’ Waiver and Access
Numerous interviews with former students and the administration and faculty of
South Coast College support the notion that community college education for the
incarcerated does increase access. How? Each of the ten former students interviewed in
this study acknowledged some form of financial difficulty because of their status as an
incarcerated person. These financial challenges in many circumstances would preclude
the ability of these individuals to pursue an education, given the costs of tuition and
books. In spite of these difficulties, community college in itself, within the State of

77
California, has a built-in mechanism to alleviate this concern. The system assists
students that cannot afford its fees, enabling these men and women to obtain community
college education without paying a cent of tuition. Incarcerated community college
students are also eligible. All former students interviewed in this study took advantage of
this opportunity, utilizing what is known as a State of California Community College
Board of Governors’ Waiver to enter the college. This Waiver, filled out and submitted
to the college by the community college student, enables the tuition for community
college education to be waived. The college facilitates this access opportunity for
students by providing a Board of Governors’ Waiver form in each packet it submits to
incarcerated students when they express interest in enrolling (Personal Communication,
July 21, 2009). The waiver has a tremendous impact on access, making a major
difference for students. As one student commented, “The greatest strength is that it is free
tuition. I would have never had a chance if not for that.” Or, as another student put it,
“The (Board of) Governors’ Waiver seals the deal.” The only major barrier to obtaining
access to the South Coast program comes from the prisons themselves: the students must
exhibit good behavior in order to take courses (Personal Communication, July 20, 2009).
The consequences of poor behavior were summed up by one former student: “I could not
take my mid-term in administrative segregation,” whereby she was held in detention,
away from the rest of the prison population, due to poor behavior.
Communications to Students about Incarcerated Education
One of the other important areas concerning the issue of access pertains to the
ways in which inmates learn about the opportunity to pursue community college

78
education. Of the five college administrators interviewed as part of this study, each one
noted that the college does not have a formal “marketing plan” in place to promote access
opportunities to the incarcerated. Further, internal documents confirm the same. As a
South Coast manager notes, “The college has never made any recruitment efforts targeted
at incarcerated students.” In spite of this, the program has grown from having 210
students in 2003 to over 5,000 in 2009 (Personal Communication July 21, 2009). How
could this dramatic increase take place? Although a formal marketing campaign was not
implemented by the college, steps were taken to build awareness of the opportunities
available to the incarcerated. Education officers in some prisons have posted signs,
promoting the South Coast program (Personal Communication, July 26, 2009). But with
a limited approach to promoting these studies, how has this area of education grown so
explosively in a six year period? The key to the growth of South Coast’s incarcerated
studies has been greater awareness via communication amongst prisoners within the
institutions where the colleges are offered. As a college executive notes, “The growth of
student enrollment is attributed to word-of-mouth within this student population inside
the prison.” Interviews with college administrators and former students confirmed the
accuracy of these statements. One student’s comments confirmed the limited approach to
promoting the program and the informal way that students learn about the program: “I’ve
seen a flyer. The institution put up a flyer … And, by word of mouth from other
inmates.” Seeing others in the pursuit of education also supports the expansion of these
studies through word of mouth: “Another girl was enrolled, and I happened to see her
studying, asked what she was doing, and she told me.”

79
The Impact of “Education Officers,” Counselors, and Support Personnel
South Coast College staff work closely with corrections officers on site at each
prison where it offers courses. These individuals, collectively known as “Education
Officers” liaison with the South Coast College staff and support students, on site, at the
prison. Education Officers provide students with access to the telecourse material that is
used to transmit each course to the students, once they are enrolled. These “Education
Officers” vary in title and responsibility at each prison. Former students expressed
varying observations about these individuals. One former student noted that his
Education Officer was so overwhelmed, that only the bare minimum could be done to
support enrollment activities and to proctor exams (Personal Communication, July 26,
2009). Another Educational Officer described by a former student provided the basic
support for matriculation purposes and with tests and quizzes, but also offered other
services to students such as hands-on training and career advice (Personal
Communication, July 31, 2009). In spite of the varying roles that these individuals play,
each former student confirmed that they do work with the college and inmates to support
the educational activities of the students, with all focusing on enrollment and exam
support.
To complement the work of the onsite Education Officers at the prisons, South
Coast College employs two coordinators to work with each education officer at the
prisons (Personal Communication, July 20, 2009). Education Officers receive packets of
enrollment information for each student in the form of a Distance Learning Guide, assist
the students in completing these materials, and then, the students, or in some cases, the

80
Education Officers, submit the forms back to the college to complete the process on the
students’ behalf. Former students indicated the ease of enrolling in the program, and
noted the assistance that they received from their institutions’ Education Officers, in
facilitating their enrollment with the college. As a former student, describes, “You
signed up at the education office and completed your form, and they (Education Officer)
forwarded them to the college. In a matter of a few weeks, they (Education Officer) were
called back, and the process for enrollment was started.” Another student affirmed the
ease of enrolling and the support of the Education Officers: “They (Education Officers)
sent me the paperwork. I filled it out, and they sent it back in” to facilitate enrollment.
The ease of the process was confirmed by another former student: “It was pretty simple.
You just fill out the application, and mail it in.”
With limited efforts on the college’s behalf to promote these educational
opportunities, the South Coast’s incarcerated student population has increased
dramatically largely due to word of mouth communications amongst the inmates and the
efforts of the Educational Officers on site at the prisons, who work directly with the
students. Although these attributes have resulted in an expansion of the incarcerated
student population, how has the college, in the spirit of access, supported the students in
selecting areas of studies that help them meet their educational goals? The college’s
counseling function provides support to students that are seeking guidance, and
approaches, to meeting their educational objectives. Although South Coast College does
not have counselors on site at each prison, students have the opportunity, through the
United States Postal Service, to correspond with college counselors. A key service that

81
these individuals provide to all students, including those incarcerated, is an “educational
plan” that maps out a student’s academic accomplishments in an area and lists what
academic work remains to be completed in order to achieve a specific goal, such as a
certificate, or associate’s degree. As one counselor notes, “We set up an educational
plan, a template, for the incarcerated … it changes whenever the state (academic)
requirements change…From whatever they are missing, we give them the classes they
need to concentrate on.” With this plan in place, students become aware of the
requirements they need to meet to obtain their educational goals. As one student
commented on this aspect, “Before, you were looking through a ‘foggy glass’ and then
somebody wiped the fog away and I could see…It outlined everything I needed.”
Although interview data collection efforts revealed the positive impact that counseling
services provide to complement access to the incarcerated studies, not all of the former
students interviewed noted that they had the opportunity to take advantage of them. As
one former inmate commented on counseling opportunities, “I don’t know if it would
have helped because I didn’t have time to correspond.” Given the significance that the
counselor role can play within incarcerated education, further discussion will take place
on this topic as this study continues.
Persistence and the “Lowest Denominator of Society”
As community college education for the incarcerated promotes access for this
student population, this study also sought to determine whether or not these studies
increase persistence, which was defined previously as students matriculating to an
institution of higher learning that are provided encouragement and opportunities by that

82
institution, or other like organizations, to continue to stay in college or to pursue
additional, or higher levels of education. In addition to seeking to determine whether or
not community college education for the incarcerated increased persistence amongst
students, this study sought to understand the nature by which participants in the South
Coast program felt empowered to pursue additional accomplishments in their academic
and professional endeavors. In analyzing the issue of persistence within community
college education for the incarcerated, several themes arose during the data collection
process: Empowerment’s impact on persistence, improvement in self-confidence and
esteem, the impact of academic success, the role of education plans, the desire to pursue
further educational endeavors, and lastly, college efforts to facilitate transfers,
Empowerment’s Impact on Persistence
Empowerment, as defined previously, is the process whereby students obtain
skills and tools to have a greater influence on their own life’s trajectory, providing the
wherewithal to establish and meet important life goals, and to have more control over
their own futures (Maton and Salem, 1995). Prison inmates, given their unfortunate
circumstances, stand out as one of the lowest denominators of society (Personal
Communication, July 26, 2009). With that understanding, what role can community
college studies play in raising their self-confidence and esteem to pursue further studies
to meet their educational and professional goals? The data collection efforts of this
study yielded a significant amount of material, through interviews and document analysis
that demonstrate that South Coast students, while incarcerated, were empowered to

83
continue forward in their academic and professional pursuits. This section describes and
analyzes the attributes discovered in greater detail.
Improvement in Self-Confidence and Esteem
Improvement in self-confidence and esteem was one way in which empowerment
was evinced in this study. As one administrator commented, “It (studies) helps build their
confidence knowing that they’re competitive.” Another South Coast leader commented
on incarcerated students, “They might have dropped out of school, they might have
thought they could never get through a course, and yet they have seen success, and with
each success, whether it is passing a class or moving on to the next level, they’re
experiencing educational achievement that they were never able to before.” The
college’s Dean of Distance Learning called the studies, “inspirational” and a “legacy” for
students and their families as these inmates see another way of life that is not tied to
crime (Personal Communication, July 21, 2009). With the previous references to the
“lowest denominator” of society, one interview revealed the positive impacts to self-
esteem focused on another very significant area of an inmate’s perspective: hope. The
college’s Director of Admissions noted, “They get hope. I would say it is a new avenue,
they receive hope, they know that people are not just looking down on them, that they can
go forward, and be a better person when they leave.”
While college administrators supported the notion of community college studies
to build empowerment, faculty members that worked with the incarcerated students also
observed the ability of the studies to have impacts in this area. One counselor, who also
serves as a college faculty member, emphasized the self-confidence issue in her

84
observations of incarcerated studies noting, “I do encourage them to continue their
education. Rationale: Access to education, improving their mind, and proving to their
family that they are not someone at the bottom. There is shame with that (incarceration).”
Education provides these students an opportunity to rise up from the ashes of their
misguided and unfortunate past experiences. Students can gain a sense of
accomplishment, and empowerment, because after completing several courses, they
realize that they have college credit on their academic records that no one can take away
from them, providing them with a sense of accomplishment and a foundation to build
upon. As another faculty member explained, “There are things that have been taken from
them, but this is something that they earned, that can’t be taken back.” In that vain, the
impact of achievement and success builds on the self-confidence of students. One faculty
member commented, “Are they empowered? Yes, they are in jail, but they are being
productive. They are in jail and they are not providing for their families… They are being
productive and when they get out they will at least have a degree … it might help them
get a job.”
Numerous comments by former students also emphasized the importance of self-
confidence and esteem building resulting from their studies with South Coast. As one
former inmate commented, “For most people in prison, they are screwups in a way, their
family thinks they are screwups, and their friends think they are screwups. So, by
becoming involved, they gain a new sense of self-confidence, and in some cases take on a
new self-identity…” The issue of self-identity arose in other discussions with former
students, affirming the studies’ ability to have a positive impact on self-esteem and

85
confidence as they persisted with their studies: “There are some psychological reasons,
some uplifting reasons, because it (studies) helps me personally cope with my
environment, and helps me with being demeaned, and it helps me gain a sense of freedom
within my circumstances.” Another student echoed those comments, noting that “The
greatest strengths of South Coast’s Incarcerated Students Education Programs is the
feeling of personal satisfaction and self-worth.” Furthermore, self-confidence was
expressed in yet a different way by another former student that had attended South Coast:
“It helps me be more confident, and to keep me from having feelings of going back to the
illegal lifestyle.”
The Impact of Academic Success
Success in itself also has a major impact, as one student noted, “When I get an ‘A’
I feel worthwhile.” Another former student affirmed the impacts of academic success on
persistence, commenting that “It does lift your esteem, it keeps you motivated, and when
you receive letters informing you that you are on the Dean’s List, it gives you incentive
to want to continue your education.” Raising the level of one’s self-esteem not only
assists with the psychological aspects of a student’s perspective, but also with future
plans and objectives. Students, with the increased self-confidence that results from the
incarcerated community college studies, noted that they wanted to do more with their
educational futures. As one former student noted, “I was just looking for a two year
degree, but when I obtained that degree, it was amazing. I just felt I never could do
something like that, and I did it. I applied myself, and I said I was going to do it, and I did
it. I didn’t think it was possible before.”

86
Participants in the South Coast studies for incarcerated demonstrated a greater
sense of empowerment with respect to continuing their studies to enhance their future
professional endeavors and life goals. As they participated in the incarcerated studies
with the college, students gained interest in a variety of areas related to additional studies
and careers. One administrator provided perspective on this area of empowerment
stating, “We are training students for life transformation…Just by nature, coming to
college, they made a clear decision to themselves that they are going to gain a skill, find a
new career, expand personal knowledge…that is life changing….To meet their
educational, personal and professional goals.”
The focus on studies to support future professional endeavors has a unique role
for this type of student. Administrators, faculty and counselors noted in interviews that
many of these students are concerned about their status as felons, and the limitations that
they could face in future careers, given the challenge to be hired in many firms while
having a criminal record. Because of this, business studies have emerged as one of the
most popular areas of the South Coast offerings for incarcerated students. Former
students affirmed this in their statements, noting that they pursued business studies to
learn more about operating a business, as a business owner, and therefore, their criminal
record would not stand in the way of a hiring opportunity. One faculty member
commented, “But, typically, they are thinking that when they get out, they are going to
have a difficult time getting hired by a large company after being incarcerated.” These
sentiments were echoed by another faculty member that affirmed the challenges for
felons to obtain employment, and how that drove incarcerated students to flock to

87
business management courses: “The business program…it is popular… on most job
applications, you have to indicate whether you have a felony, and so, that limits whether
they will be able to get a job…’So if I am a business major I will be able to get a business
license and start my own job.”
The Role of Education Plans
As this study has demonstrated that South Coast has been effective at increasing
access for community college education for the incarcerated population, the hopes and
desires of students to persist in their studies, after they enroll, represents another key facet
in the endeavors of this group in its pursuit of higher studies. One of the most powerful
ways in which South Coast increases persistence for its students is through the education
plans that are drafted for students by college counselors. While these plans and their
contribution to increasing access were discussed previously, they also play a strong
element in encouraging students to continue their studies. By providing students with an
detailed list of the courses they have completed, and those that are needed to be taken in
order to reach a specific academic objective, students see the steps needed to continue
their studies and to meet their goals. One counselor that was interviewed noted the impact
that the plans have with respect to persistence: “From whatever they (students) are
missing, we give them the classes they need to concentrate on…they gain understanding
that they are progressing along.” The education plans provided to incarcerated students
also only list college courses that are available to the students who take telecourses,
which would be all incarcerated students. These plans enable students to see exactly
what is available to them; it does not list other course options that are not attainable for

88
someone that is in prison (Personal Communication, August 3, 2009). The benefits to the
students are clear, as one indicated, “They had a counselor review my transcripts and also
let me know the rest of the classes that I needed to take” to obtain a degree. These
academic plans can assist students in seeing the “big picture” involved with a college
education and with this new perspective, they want more: “But, if you take a few courses,
and you sort of set your record straight and shows that you don’t know everything and
that there is still a lot to learn….seeing that I am lacking a lot of information and
knowledge, and if I don’t continue to pursue it, I am going to continue to lack that
knowledge that I may need in the future.” Another pupil’s observations affirmed the
comments of a different former student providing additional insight, responding partially
to a college survey question in all capital letters, on the ability of the incarcerated studies
to foster further educational activity: “EVERY SINGLE COURSE has enriched me
tremendously, and left me wanting more.” Lastly, the drive for consistent academic
pursuits for those participating in the incarcerated studies was affirmed by another former
student of South Coast, “I lived and breathed South Coast College. My every single day,
at least 8 hours a day, was nothing but studying.”
Desire to Pursue Further Education and Professional Endeavors
The transformational nature of the studies has impacted the perspective of
students, as they are inspired to think about future opportunities and careers. In a general
sense, students noted that the incarcerated studies provided fodder for reflection and
thought about new goals. One former student commented, “Yes, I have changed and
developed goals…College would open up this whole ambitious type of mindset and I

89
would start pursuing bigger and better goals…” As one former inmate who gained
interest in a career devoted to serving youth noted, “It helped me really focus and define
what I wanted to do as far as working with kids, and trying to help organizations develop
programs for kids.” The impact of the studies on setting life goals was also reflected in
the comments of another student: “When I look at my transcripts from before, and then at
South Coast, it helped me determine the field that I wanted to pursue for my personal
life.” An additional student emphasized the importance of goal setting that he obtained in
a specific South Coast course, Counseling 105, and noted that he established the goal of
opening a franchised business, thanks to his studies with the college while incarcerated:
“I want to establish something for my family that will keep them going, and to me,
setting up a franchise will help me be a family man.” One former student emphasized
the studies’ contributions to goal setting, with its holistic impact on the perspective of
students: “The more people have a chance to get a really wide view of what this field is,
and the way that this applies to the way that goals are determined…they have more of an
option to develop new goals because they were exposed to so much of the world than
they were exposed before.” The repeated examples of incarcerated students establishing
new goals, or considering new goals, as a result of these studies, demonstrates another
instance of the empowering, transformational potential that community college education
can bring for the incarcerated population.
College Efforts to Facilitate Transfers
In addition to the work of counselors, the college has made numerous other efforts
that support the persistence of incarcerated students. As noted previously, the telecourse

90
is offered as the media in which students attend their South Coast classes while in prison.
Students are able to obtain, through the South Coast studies, an Associate of Arts degree.
However, this degree has not been transferable to the California State University system,
such that the student could not leave prison with a South Coast degree and start upper
division academic work (Personal Communication, July 21, 2009). Students felt the
impact of this situation as well: “I really feel that South Coast should offer a fully
transferable degree to incarcerated students.” As the number of incarcerated students
grew, the college made the decision to modify the delivery method of several courses,
such that students could meet the basic requirements of the California State University
system and enter those institutions as a Junior, with their Associate of Arts degree from
South Coast College. These courses will be modified such that incarcerated students
would be able to take the class in the new format by January 2010. Instructors have
revised curriculum for English 103 and English 135 so the classes may be
scheduled through correspondence delivery. In addition, the math instructors have
converted their online content for South Coast seven separate courses so it may be
offered through a telecourse delivery method, providing more resources for students to be
able to complete a transferable Associate of Arts degree (Personal Communication,
August 3, 2009). As an administrator commented, “We are now taking the course that we
have and altering the content so it can fit in the delivery method (telecourse) that would
help those (incarcerated) students.” The revised delivery format, enhancing the value of
the South Coast Associates degree by making it transferable to the California State
University system, will enable students to continue their studies and to be able a four-

91
year university as an upper level student, as opposed to being required to take more
courses at a lower division student in a four-year university.
Social Capital and the Decoding of Higher Education
Social capital is the aggregate of actual or potential resources linked to the
possession of a durable network of essentially institutionalized relationships of mutual
acquaintance and recognition within a social structure which increase the likelihood of
success in a purposeful action (Dika and Singh, 2002). This study sought to determine
whether or not community college for the incarcerated can raise students’ levels of social
capital, and further, to determine the extent that the South Coast College incarcerated
studies provide institutional agents that can equip students with knowledge, skills, and
networks to achieve upward mobility in society. And, perhaps the most critical for this
population, this study sought to determine whether or not the South Coast educational
offering to the incarcerated assisted students in decoding the system of higher education,
such that they could successfully navigate the educational bureaucracy in order to meet
their goals. Interviews and document analysis confirmed that students, to a limited
extent, were able to raise their level of social capital, and in some cases, their studies did
provide elements of institutional agency that assisted with the increase. Furthermore,
administrators, faculty and former students each provided evidence of the increased
ability on participants to navigate their way through the educational bureaucracy,
supporting the notion that this population of students learned how to decode, or navigate
through the system of higher education.

92
The distance learning nature of the South Coast College incarcerated studies
offering provides challenges to the traditional way of education, where face-to-face
contact with teachers, counselors, and other figures in the educational system can
promote the development of social capital amongst students. In spite of this challenge,
the data collection efforts of this study revealed that in multiple circumstances,
incarcerated students have benefited from institutional agents that participated in their
education, both through correspondence in the U.S. Postal Service and through
interpersonal contact. As defined previously, an institutional agent is an individual within
an educational setting that have the ability to transmit information, such as courses,
training programs, and mentoring services that increases knowledge and supports the
upward mobility of students” (Stanton-Salazar, 1997). This study revealed that South
Coast faculty members and counselors provided institutional agent roles to students.
Furthermore, discussions with former students and a corrections official noted that within
the individual prisons, some education officers have also maintained institutional agency
roles in their service to students. This section discusses several themes that arose during
the data collection process related to social capital: Institutional Agents, decoding of the
education system, the impact of the South Coast Counseling 105 course, network
building, and the development of problem solving skills.
Institutional Agents for Incarcerated Students
Faculty members, in a limited way, provided details that supported their role as
institutional agents within the South Coast incarcerated studies. Surprisingly, faculty
members at South Coast, while aware that students are taking a telecourse, have no

93
knowledge that their enrollees are incarcerated, unless those pupils self-identify
themselves to their instructors. In multiple cases, faculty members commented that they
have not only been advised by students of their incarcerated status, but also, that they had
been asked for guidance and advice on career and academic subjects. One faculty
member, for example, noted that a student self-identified as incarcerated and had
submitted art samples to her and requested feedback on their viability. The faculty
member provided the student with guidance and feedback and noted, “…They view me
as an expert and they want to know…I will critique their work…If they want to publish, I
will give them information on self-publishing” (Personal Communication, July 23, 2009).
In addition to providing mentoring input on student work products, some faculty
members gave guidance to students seeking to further their studies. Students, through the
United States Postal Service, write to faculty and ask for input: “They will frequently
write a letter saying ‘what college should I go to after I earn my AA degree, are you
aware of any colleges that offer correspondence courses for BA degrees’” (Personal
Communication, July 24, 2009). Institutional agency is provided by counseling staff of
the college, who provide students with information on career and job related fields,
increasing their knowledge of professional opportunities available after college studies
are completed, mailing labor statistics to students, documentation on the job market
outlook, and job descriptions for specific fields. A counselor and faculty member noted
that she provided job market and related materials to approximately half of the students
she served (Personal Communication, July 27, 2009). An additional counselor and
faculty member emphasized the personal touch that she applies when providing guidance

94
to students: “I will write them a letter, giving them information that will be helpful to
them…I always write something encouraging on my later to them.”
Students provided details in the data collection process concerning institutional
agency in their studies with South Coast College, noting the impacts of the Education
Officers at the prisons they studied at. While some students had little contact with their
educational officers at the prison, others reported that prison education officers had
played an invaluable institutional agency role in their academic experiences. Data
collection efforts revealed that the potential exists among students and educational
officers to establish institutional agency, but not all students interviewed had such an
experience. Education Officers, if resources are available, have tremendous potential to
help build students’ social capital. Regarding an Education Officer at one facility, a
former student noted that “He was an advocate…Those people have a different outlook.
It was inspirational because somebody was in a non-traditional field as part of a
corrections institution…The person believed in the power of an education, and didn’t
look at us as criminals” (Personal Communication, July 26, 2009). The promise of the
Education Officer relationship was explained by another former student concerning his
experience in prison: “He told me about all of the advantages that you can obtain by
getting an education…I would have never thought about getting an education before…He
helped me, and showed that it could be done” (Personal Communication, July 31, 2009).
This former student noted further that his Education Officer provided him with input on
suggested career paths to consider, once he was released from prison (Personal
Communication, July 31, 2009). Institutional agency was also described by a current

95
corrections official who administers an “Education Dorm” at a Tumbleweed State Prison.
The official noted that in the facility he administers, four staff members serve as proctors,
but also provide mentoring support to each of the 320 students that reside in the facility
(Personal Communication, August 12, 2009).
Some students, however, experienced little support from their educational
officers. A former student describes the situation regarding his education officer: “There
were way too many inmates for this one person, so there wasn’t very much attention that
you would receive…” Another student noted that in his facility, he was prohibited from
having any interaction with the staff, aside from the facilitation of his coursework and
tests (Personal Communication, July 26, 2009). In several other cases, students
emphasized that their drive and determination, in the absence of a strong educational
officer relationship, helped them persist as their studies continued. As one noted, “In
order to succeed, you have to have some drive or initiative because the structure is up to
you.”
Decoding the Educational System
For those incarcerated, many have had limited experience with the United States
system of higher education. How one obtains enrollments, obtains credits, sets goals, etc.,
can be extremely challenging for an incarcerated student that has attended some college,
or none at all. While students may gain new knowledge about academic subjects, do they
really understand the system of higher education and to navigate through it to meet their
educational goals? This comes at no easy task. As one faculty member commented about
the students, “They are very naïve about all of the bureaucratic aspects. They just have to

96
learn it, by immersion. They have to do it, and the rest of us have to be very forgiving.”
The professor’s reference to “forgiveness” demonstrates the understanding that faculty
members must take when working with this population.
Former students commented on the decoding issue, one noting that “There are
videos that must be watched in a time period, that have to be learned in order to pass the
quiz, and I think that at least gave me a good idea of what I would be faced with in any
other educational college related system.” Increased understanding of the educational
system was reported by another former student, as well: “I was prepared better…I wanted
to complete my Associate degree. I wanted to transfer…I felt comfortable that I could
handle distance learning courses.” Another former student noted that thanks to the South
Coast studies, he knew the difference between an Associate’s degree, Bachelor’s degree
and Master’s degree, what the requirements were for all three, how to pursue each level
of education, and the requirements needed to complete each degree (Personal
Communication, August 10, 2009). Another former student noted that many years prior
to incarceration, she had dropped out of college because she found it to be too complex.
But, when presented with South Coast’s opportunity in prison, she was able to see how
simple it was to proceed, and enrolled. Further, she noted the school’s support of her
incarcerated status, complementing her new enhanced abilities to navigate through the
educational system: “Since I have been dealing with the school, everyone has been
courteous and understanding as to what I have been through. It was remarkable, and I felt
more of an obligation to stay with the school because of what I had done through that
community college. And, as one student put it succinctly about navigating through the

97
educational bureaucracy: “Oh yeah. I know what I have to do.” The comments of the
former student denote new found knowledge about higher education, and a sense of
confidence.
Impact of the Counseling 105 Course on Social Capital
In addition to these general observations about the student experience pertaining
to decoding, numerous former inmates and faculty members/counselors and a corrections
official commented about the impact of a specific course, Counseling 105, and its ability
to give perspective about higher education endeavors, further facilitating for inmates the
decoding of the system. This course provides a basic overview of what going to college
is like, helps students recognize the importance of establishing and maintaining goals,
and encourages collaboration to solve challenging problems. One former student
commented, “I took a counseling course (Counseling 105). It was good to do, because I
had been away from school…it was good to get reacquainted.” Another former student
commented, “It (Counseling 105) mapped out what I needed for the AA or business
certificate…Counseling 105 really made you sit down and look at what your goals
were…and detailing out your goals into one, three, and five year plans…”. Impacts on
students were further noted by another former inmate: “Anyone that pursues a college
program will realize that they won’t complete the program if they don’t do things by a
certain time. Unless I take Counseling 105, I don’t think I was specifically taught to
manage my time better.” One counselor and faculty member noted that students learn
about setting goals, and along with that, the educational requirements to meet the
objectives that they establish. It was further indicated by the corrections official

98
interviewed that Counseling 105 “helps them see that college is a way out…shows them
what they have to do to be a college student…” But, perhaps the comments of the Dean
of Distance Learning emphasize the true promise of the Counseling 105 course and its
relationship to decoding: “(Counseling 105)…helps them prepare for college, sets the
tone for what is expected, how to get a plan in place and how to navigate through college,
how to be a master student.” With completion of the Counseling 105 course a South
Coast incarcerated student will have a fresh perspective about what is needed to be
successful in pursuit of higher education. While several students commented on the
impact of this course, not all of the ten former inmates interviewed had enrolled in the
course while in prison.
Network Building
Another key element of social capital, and which relates to this study is the
building of networks among incarcerated students to enhance their upward mobility in
society, including understanding of how to act with individuals in and out of the school
environment, as well as the ability to develop collaborative connections to peers
(Stanton-Salazar, 1997). How could studies with South Coast College facilitate the
establishment of new networks for students? Data collection efforts revealed that in many
ways, a network already existed in prison among the inmates, but that it was not always
focused on education. Furthermore, it was noted in numerous interviews that students
applied new skills, through their educational endeavors, by working together,
collaborating and discussing their academic and scholarly pursuits. What’s more, more
than one former inmate noted that these experiences of team work and collaboration were

99
being applied by them in their lives and careers outside of prison. The vast majority of
these observations came from the former students themselves, with limited input from the
faculty members interviewed. In the case of the students, only one example
demonstrated that an institutional agent, in this example an education officer, directly had
a role in facilitating a networking situation amongst students.
The comments provided by a former student concerning networks are perhaps the
most compelling amongst the respondents in this study concerning social capital, given
his elucidation of the kind of a network that exists within a prison’s walls, and how an
educational environment can modify that network’s functioning. He stated:
In the prison setting, it’s always about how we can help each other to
overcome our circumstances. The college program provides us with a
version of that, and provides us with a way of what we would do anyways,
which might have gone in a negative direction, had it (education) not been
there. With more activities, positive activities to preoccupy us, the
network becomes fine-tuned.

This student noted that his educational experience and his collaboration with others had
assisted in him communicating, obtaining jobs, and in gaining the respect of others
(Personal Communication, July 26, 2009). Further, he emphasized that “there are certain
ways to accelerate how you communicate your qualities to another person…that I got out
of networking with people in prison.”
The experience described above on prison networks also emphasizes the
importance of relationships being able to make a difference for inmates (Lindquist,
2000). The former student’s comments indicate how relationships with others, via an
education setting, can be built and persist in a positive way, as opposed to inmates having
associations that are less productive. Prison educational experiences of collaboration and

100
also assisted another former student in his post-incarcerated state. Another former inmate
noted that his experience with South Coast College had made him more eager and
comfortable to ask questions, seek assistance from others, and in general, helping him to
become more proactive. As he states, “I have no problem asking for help if I need it.”
Another former inmate also provided important feedback with respect to networks and
other attributes of his studies that he was able to apply outside of prison. He noted that
his education officer had provided him with the opportunity to mentor other students, and
to teach them first how to register for the courses, apply for scholarships, and to assist
other students with academic work. As he noted, “I would get a room in the education
department…and I would get a stock of registration papers…and I would do an example
copy, pass it around, and they would fill it out on their own, and if they had any
questions, I would help them each step of the way.” He further noted that because of his
studies and collaborative activities in prison, he is able to now have an intelligent
conversation with others in his role as a car salesman, and that the studies, “100%”
helped him with his post-incarcerated life (Personal Communication, July 31, 2009).
Development of Problem Solving Knowledge
An additional finding, related to social capital, concerns the development of
critical thinking and problem solving abilities from educational endeavors. These ideas,
described by Stanton-Salazar (1997) as “Problem Solving Knowledge” and one of his
“funds of knowledge” arose in several instances throughout the data collection process.
One faculty member explained how his approach to teaching fosters the development of
these skills: “I am assessing how they process the material … and how well they put

101
together an argument…I specifically tell them, ‘I am not going to grade you up or down
on the position you take, I am making you take a position.” The faculty member
emphasizes that how one gets to the answer, and not the answer itself, compels students
to think critically about their work. Students also reported information concerning
critical thinking, with the reflections of one former inmate noting: “Before, I just acted.
This (community college) made me think. ‘What are my options’? It helped me think
things through.” The ability of students to pause, and think critically about issues
confronting them was spelled out by another former student: “Your problem solving
skills will increase because you have a variety of different understanding and tools …
you are armed with better understandings of what you are dealing with.” One former
student commented that the Logic course, with its emphasis on critical thinking skills,
that impacted him greatly, did so on a greater scale because his professor was the actual
instructor within the South Coast telecourse offering that was used for the course,
providing an indirect connection to institutional agency.
While students in the South Coast studies have demonstrated that they
collaborated and worked together with others, the education offerings also afford the
opportunities for students to learn more about the importance of building and sustaining
networks, as well as the input of faculty members and counselors. The Counseling 105
course focuses on the topic, and emphasizes the importance of people skills, networking
with others, the obtaining of strong communication skills, the significance of conflict
resolution abilities, and how a network of contacts can contribute to one’s education and
employment opportunities (Personal Communication, July 27, 2009). Further, because of

102
the cost of textbooks, students are encouraged to form networks to share textbooks. This
assists the students by reducing their costs, and also provides incentives to take additional
courses, knowing that a prison network has the book available for students (Personal
Communication, July 27, 2009). Another faculty member indicated that he had
encouraged students to share information about coursework with one another, and that he
had received feedback from numerous students that they had been discussing and
collaborating on coursework in prison (Personal Communication, July 27, 2009).
Reflections and Comments on the Findings
The findings of this study have focused closely on each of the two research
questions that have been posted about community college education for the incarcerated.
After reviewing interview data, and South Coast documentation, data that supported
affirmative responses to each of this study’s two research questions was located.
Community college education for the incarcerated does increase access, because of its
application of state mechanisms, such as the Board of Governors’ Waiver that enables
students to enroll for free of charge. The college further supports this access by
supporting students’ studies with academic plans and other materials to support their
enrollment in the courses. Further, this study has demonstrated that community college
education for the incarcerated supports persistence, and empowers students to continue
studying and to seek out new academic and professional goals, which result from their
studies in school. The discussions with former students, faculty, and administrators,
concerning empowerment, yielded some of the most compelling information in this
study, which I hope to explore further in the future. Lastly, the data collections efforts of

103
this study have confirmed that community college education for the incarcerated also
builds the social capital of students. Of the two research questions, the query pertaining
to social capital was perhaps the most challenging to see a completely affirmative
response, largely because of varied and inconsistent responses from respondents during
the data collection process. Some students, for example, benefited from the institutional
agency of educational officers, college counselors, and faculty members, but others had
little or no interaction with these individuals. Some responses were completely opposite,
for example, a former inmate building a strong partnership with his Education Officer in
the role of an institutional agent, but another individual emphasizing that education office
staff at his facility were overwhelmed and unable to provide anything else but basic
services to students. The reference of the corrections official and the Education Dorm at
his facility demonstrates the potential for providing mentoring support and other
educational services of institutional agency to a group of students, but the interviews with
former students revealed that not every prison is able to offer such resources to
incarcerated students, other than the basic enrollment services, proctoring and provision
of tests and quizzes.
Furthermore, in some cases, by default, the studies encouraged students to
reframe, or form, networks of inmates that were focused on educational endeavors. The
most remarkable finding of this study, related to social capital, has been the references of
several former students to applying their collaboration and networking experiences to
their careers and pursuits outside of prison. This fact alone demonstrates the power that
education provides, influencing students in a positive way to focus on constructive areas,

104
other than returning to a life of crime after their incarceration ends. Faculty members and
counselors emphasized the role of Counseling 105 in teaching the significance of
collaboration, team-building and networking, but interviews with former students did not
tie a connection to their networking with the that course’s curriculum. In addition, not all
students interviewed had been enrolled in Counseling 105.
Lastly, South Coast staff and specifically the Counseling 105 course, have
provided students with invaluable tools to help decode the system of higher education,
supporting another aspect of social capital attainment for students. It was rewarding to
hear former students confirm that they understood what an education was, and what steps
they need to take to continue on in order to meet their goals and objectives. In spite of
this favorable response, as mentioned above, not all former students interviewed had
taken Counseling 105, and as such, did not benefit from the perspective it provided about
navigating through the system of higher education. It was surprising, initially, to see the
findings bring forth relevance to social capital concepts, given the distance learning
nature of these studies and the fact that institutional agency generally bodes regular,
routine contact between students and the agents. In spite of this obstacle, students were,
in some cases, able to benefit from agents through mentoring and other guidance
activities. Through the U.S. Postal Service, students would self-identify themselves to
faculty as incarcerated, and in some cases, would ask for input and guidance on various
matters related to their careers, studies, and futures. The faculty members that responded
to these inquiries, giving the students the desired input, demonstrate how the South Coast
studies can provide a form of institutional agency that can contribute to social capital

105
development. The efforts of counselors to provide information about academic planning,
and career options, at a distance and through the U.S. Postal Service, demonstrates
another example of agency that provides students opportunities to develop their social
capital. Further, in some limited cases, students were fortunate enough to have the
opportunity to interact with institutional agents through direct interaction with their
Education Officers, who provided mentoring support in a variety of issues related to
education and career matters, and again, affording the chance to enhance student social
capital. In the end, the findings of this study yielded much pertinent information in
fulfillment of the two study questions posed. With these findings in place, the next
chapter will focus on a brief review of the study, and will provide a discussion of this
study’s implications for current practices in incarcerated education and for future
research related to this very important topic.

106

CHAPTER 5
Discussion
Background and Purpose
The United States of America and the State of California face a crisis within their
corrections’ systems. With over 2,000,000 individuals in this country incarcerated or
under the control of a corrections bureau, and with a recidivism rate for released inmates
approaching 70%, new ideas and solutions are needed for policy makers and corrections
officials to consider as the incarcerated population continues to grow (Liptak, 2008).
This study, looking at community college education for inmates through the lense of
access, persistence and social capital sought to see how this endeavor could benefit
inmates as they work to honor their debt to society and seek new lives outside of prison.
Could community college education help deter former inmates from returning to a life of
crime, and instead, teach them to persist in their studies, set new goals, and enhance their
abilities to network and collaborate with others?
In order to facilitate this study’s goals, two research questions were posed to
facilitate an investigation that would deliver definitive conclusions about this study’s
main objective: to determine whether or not community college for the incarcerated
increases access, builds persistence, and grows social capital for students. The research
questions, described previously, asked how inmates learn about community college
education, sought to determine the extent to which incarcerated community college
students persist in their studies, and are empowered to pursue more, and lastly, whether

107
or not these educational endeavors afford inmates the opportunity to learn new
knowledge and build networks through the support of institutional agents.
Summary of Key Findings
The findings of this study gleaned significant amounts of material to support an
affirmative response to each of the two research questions and the supported positive
trends related to access, persistence and social capital. Not all respondents and
informants, however, yielded information in interviews to support the notion that the
incarcerated studies were building social capital for the students.
With unanimity, all former students interviewed, for example, received the
support of the community college system by obtaining the State of California’s Board of
Governors’ Waiver, enabling the incarcerated students to attend class free of charge.
Furthermore, it should be noted that regardless of the state’s role in the Board of
Governors’ Waiver process, this study found that the South Coast College amplified the
impact of the Waiver by including it with the enrollment materials sent to each prison for
inmates to complete. This affirmative information concerning access was supported by
the efforts of South Coast College counseling staff to provide educational plans to
students. Even though access had been granted, the college took the next step and made
available a plan for the student so she/he could understand where he or she stood in terms
of completing a specified educational goal. Not all former students interviewed benefited
from the plans, but those who did were able to wipe the fog away, as one former student
emphasized in his interview (Personal Communication, July 26, 2009).

108
Some of the study’s most profound findings arose with respect to persistence and
the ability of community college education for the incarcerated to empower students to
establish new educational and professional goals. One of the most important findings
related to this area concerned the college’s revision of multiple telecourse sections in
business writing, modifying its delivery format so that the course could be counted as
transferable by the California State University system, enabling incarcerated students,
upon their release, to attend a State University as a Junior level student. Persistence and
students’ interest in this area was further evinced in document reviews that noted requests
from students to have a fully-transferable Associate of Arts degree. This action on the
part of the college, revising a class to enable transferability, demonstrates South Coast’s
commitment to persistence and helping incarcerated students meet their academic
objectives. Numerous former students expressed interest in continued studies after their
release, and some had continued with their enrollment in community college post-
incarceration. The importance of “wanting something more” after beginning one’s
studies, must also be emphasized as a key driver for supporting increased persistence
among incarcerated students (Personal Communication, June 24, 2008). Further, the
commitment that incarcerated students exhibit was noted by Edwards-Willey and Chivers
(2005), as they surveyed faculty who worked with this population and noted that great
deal of effort put forth studies. A focus on academics was noted by a number of former
students, with perhaps the most notable individual former student commenting that he
had “lived and breathed” South Coast College during his incarceration.

109
To support the concept of persistence, this study provided numerous findings
indicating that students, attending community college studies in prison, gained a sense of
empowerment that they had not obtained before. Having a sense of empowerment helps
students feel that they have a sense of greater control over their own futures (Maton and
Salem, 1995). This was noted in students seeking to establish new goals, and
significantly, gaining new confidence and self-esteem that they did not have prior to their
studies. The desire of students to start their own businesses after pursuing such studies
with South Coast College, for example, was noted in discussions with both former
students and faculty members. Literature reviewed in this study provided evidence that
incarcerated education could provide a significant level of empowerment with students
feeling in more control of their futures as a result of their studies (Rose and Voss, 2003),
as well as a focus on issues that are within the immediate control of the incarcerated
students (Zaro, 2005). The comments of one student, emphasizing that he felt
empowered, given that community college studies inspired him to do more and to reduce
tendencies he felt to return to a life of crime, affirm the transformational power that these
studies can have on students (Personal Communication, July 26, 2009).
The theoretical framework of social capital and the application of Stanton-
Salazar’s (1997) “seven funds of knowledge” provided this study rich opportunities to
analyze the impacts educational experiences on the inmates that participate in the South
Coast studies. In analyzing the “seven funds of knowledge” via this study’s data
collection process, three of the fund concepts that Stanton-Salazar (1997) derived arose
more prominently than others during the discussions with the informants and respondents

110
affiliated with South Coast. The study’s findings related to the concept of
“organizational/bureaucratic funds of knowledge” came up frequently, as former
students, counselors and faculty members commented on the impacts of the Counseling
105 course in helping students to gain knowledge of higher education and to decode the
system – raising their understanding of the system and how to maneuver within it.
Another fund of knowledge, “Network development” was a major finding for this study
given the fact that inmates and faculty members noted the discussions of students
focusing on educational issues, and the idea of “fine tuning” the network of the prison
situation with students focusing on education as opposed to other topics that are less
constructive (Personal Communication, July 26, 2009). The third fund of knowledge that
arose significantly from this project’s investigation is “Problem-solving knowledge.”
Former inmates that participated in the study emphasized their interest in critical
thinking, collaborating with others to solve problems, and to give pause before making
decisions too quickly – reinforcing the impact of the community college studies on their
general perspective.
The efforts to understand the impacts of community college education and the
attainment of increased social capital posed perhaps the most dynamic nature of the
study, given its distance learning format and the minimal contact students have with
South Coast faculty and staff. Much of the data collection process obtained material
relevant to the “seven funds of knowledge” (Stanton-Salazar, 1997), which emphasizes
the importance of institutional agents in developing attributes of social capital for
students. As such, within a more limited situation, and in spite of limited personal

111
interactions with college personnel, the study surprisingly demonstrated that incarcerated
students were able to build social capital while pursuing community college education.
The comments of one former student informing that a “network” already exists within
prison, and the contributions that education has in “fine-tuning” the network toward
constructive dialogue and pursuits related to education, and further, that those
experiences of collaboration and team-building while pursuing the studies were being
applied to this former inmate’s pursuits after prison, had a very significant impact
(Personal Communication, July 26, 2009). His comments further reinforce the
importance of relationships within prison walls and reconfirm not only the importance of
relationships with others, but of gearing those associations in a positive, constructive way
(Lindquist, 2000). Others, including former inmates and faculty members, supported the
former student’s statements about the dialogue amongst inmates about academic matters,
and furthermore, numerous interviews revealed that students even developed “networks”
to support the sharing and distribution of textbooks throughout the prison, another
example of constructive, positive activity. These examples tie to Stanton-Salazar’s (1997)
“funds of knowledge” concept of “network development…knowledge of how to
negotiate with various gatekeepers and agents within and outside of the school
environment” (p 12). The other very significant area pertaining to social capital was the
issue of decoding, and the ability of a course, Counseling 105, to provide students with
guidance on how the college system works, and what makes a community college student
successful, as a method for these inmates to navigate through the educational
bureaucracy. The findings pertaining to the Counseling 105 course tie to Stanton-

112
Salazar’s (1997) “fund of knowledge” ideal of “Organizational/bureaucratic funds of
knowledge…knowledge of how bureaucracies operate” (p. 12). Gaining a greater
understanding of the education system, and the steps needed to be taken to advance
forward within it, can have an invaluable impact on one’s social capital. The description
of these students as “naïve” concerning the academic world emphasizes the critical nature
in which decoding can play to help students understand how to work through the system
in order to meet their educational goals (Personal Communication, July 24, 2009).
Less frequent, but still a critical finding in the study, was the evidence of
mentoring activities taking place on a limited basis, with faculty members and counselors
providing some of this function to the inmates, through offering feedback on career
suggestions, writing encouraging notes and letters to students about professional and
academic pursuits, and offering information about the job market and other vocational
pursuits. As noted, also, there was limited evidence discovered confirming that prison
education officers also provided mentoring services to students. Limitations existed due
to the distance learning nature of the studies, which have less face-to-face or telephone
contact between students, faculty and counselors. The efforts of South Coast College
counseling staff to provide information to incarcerated students concerning careers and
job market issues, in some cases, being provided to almost half of one counselor’s clients,
relates to the “fund of knowledge” concept of “Knowledge of Labor and Educational
Markets” that emphasizes how students can understand requirements for various careers
(Stanton-Salazar, 1997, p. 12). One former student also received input on job markets
and careers, from his prison education officer. His example was the only one discovered

113
out of ten separate student interviews, concerning career mentoring offerings (Personal
Communication, July 31, 2009).
Mentoring helped the incarcerated students develop resiliency, critical to this
population that faces so many challenges and obstacles. The experiences of former
student one former and his close mentoring relationship with a prison education officer
helped his personal and professional development. Positive influences on an inmate by a
strong mentor can accelerate a person’s decision to change and better one self (Kiecolt,
1994), and this former inmate, after serving sixteen years, was able to leave incarceration
with a South Coast certificate in business studies and pursue a career as a car salesman
(Personal Communication, July 31, 2009). The Education Dorm at Tumbleweed State
Prison described by a corrections official provided a very significant example, and rare
instance of institutional agency occurring inside the prisons, given that his staff members
were specifically dedicated to providing mentoring services to students in the dorm to
complement the studies of South Coast College and other institutions of learning
(Personal Communication, August 12, 2009).
Implications for Practice
As incarcerated students represent twenty percent of the student population for
South Coast College, efforts to better understand the impacts education has on these
students, and approaches to build and strengthen service delivery to this group will
provide invaluable benefits to the college over the long term, as well as strengthen the
efforts of community college leaders to promote the tenets of incarcerated education to
policy makers and elected officials that control budgets and who define educational

114
priorities for the community college system in California. The grave situation that this
country faces, with its inmates, presents a crisis for our policy makers and society. How
much larger can the number of inmates grow? And, how can taxed state and federal
budgets cope with increasing costs to house more and more inmates? This project has
implications for policy makers and community college leaders that wish to continue to
expand the offerings of this educational system, which, in fact, educates more students
than any other area of higher education. The California Community College system, in
which South Coast is part of, is in fact the largest education organization in the world.
Incarcerated education has a long term future as community colleges continue to evolve
and innovate within educational areas.
The transformational impact that education has on inmates, derived even from this
current study, has the potential to bring about a great deal of change to our corrections
system. Perhaps the most striking challenge that society faces with its prison population
is the fact that over two-thirds of the inmates return back to prison after release. The
current prison system faces tremendous pressures, as states battle to reform their
corrections bureaucracies, crippled by unbalanced budgets and overcrowded facilities.
With these facts prevailing, education, and community college education as a starting
point for those inmates with a high school equivalency, can help set inmates on a new
direction, change their perspective, and provide them with information and knowledge
that will make them more effective within, and more useful to, society. While Federal
funding requirements limit any institution of higher learning to have more than 25% of its
students within an incarcerated state (Personal Communication, July 21, 2009),

115
community colleges should continue to seek opportunities to grow their relationships
with prisons, making inroads to reach out and serve this population, that is in great need
of the educational services that these institutions provide. A further implication for
practice is the fact that these studies, now at over 50 prisons throughout the state, have
breathed new life into the distance learning telecourse modality. Incarcerated students
largely do not have access to the Internet (Personal Communication, January 8, 2009),
and as such, the popular method of taking courses “online” does not apply. Given the
explosive growth of the South Coast program, in the telecourse format, and the college’s
own effort to modify certain courses to enhance the transferability of courses, indicates
that there is still a viable future for telecourses, and they should not be overlooked. And,
given that this modality of learning, the telecourse, was developed for the non-traditional
learner that cannot attend a traditional classroom environment, its role in incarcerated
studies can continue to grow and foster as South Coast College and other institutions
continue to reach out to these students (Lueddeke, 1997). The college’s commitment to
the telecourse has been reinforced with the provision of this learning modality to over
5,000 incarcerated students throughout the state, breathing new life into a learning
approach that has been given much less attention than more popular online options that
serve the general population’s needs for distance learning.
One area in which South Coast College can assist incarcerated students is to work
to ensure that all Education Officers are consistently trained and engaged with
incarcerated students on a commensurate level. Respondents, throughout this study,
provided evidence of the major impact the Education Officer can have on the educational

116
experience, but other responses indicated the more limited nature of the officers on
students’ endeavors. A more consistent training approach across the more than 50 prisons
the college currently services would maximize the students’ educational experience, such
that all will have an opportunity to engage more directly with students, facilitating their
studies, providing them with information about educational opportunities, and helping to
shape their goals. The Tumbleweed State Prison’s Education Dorm, for example,
provides the ultimate example of the opportunity that dedicated resources can provide to
students as they work to navigate through the higher education system.
A further implication for practice concerns the college’s management of textbook
issues for students. Data collection efforts revealed networks established within the
prisons to support the sharing and transferring of textbooks among students. While this
was a positive example for the development of a network and the contribution that plays
to the building of social capital, it demonstrates the fact that students cannot afford to pay
for their textbooks. While South Coast College has fully utilized the Board of
Governors’ Waiver to increase access for incarcerated students, gaps exist with student
textbooks. In order to address this, South Coast College should work more closely with
the State Department of Corrections to facilitate increased textbook opportunities for
students, and further, the college should leverage the resources of its foundation unit to
raise funds for textbooks for inmates. Given the substantial proportion of incarcerated
students within the South Coast population (20 %), the justification exists for pursuit of
fund raising activities for this area: increases in textbook resources will facilitate
additional learning, academic success, and greater long term opportunities for students.

117
In addition, administrators, staff, faculty and former students all emphasized the
importance of the Counseling 105 course to incarcerated students. Data collection efforts
revealed that not all former students had enrolled in the course, and that they were not
required to do so. Because of the compelling nature of the course’s influence of students
to help define goals, and further, to gain understanding of what it means to be a student,
and lastly, to glean more information about how students must navigate through the
higher education system, South Coast College should consider recommending to the State
Department of Corrections that it require all community college students, that enroll with
the college, to take the Counseling 105 course. The findings of the data collection
process with respect to the Counseling 105 course, concerning goal establishment, echo
the analysis of Furtado and Johnson (1980) and their discussion of the college course
provided to inmates in Southern Michigan, “Planning for the Future” which assisted
inmates in understanding the importance of life planning and the establishment of career
and personal objectives.
Implications for Research and Recommendations for Further Study
This endeavor represents what is hopefully a first step to further investigate the
merits of community college education for the incarcerated. Investigators did not, in
collecting data, visit a correctional facility. The next step in this research process must
involve visits to one or more education areas of different corrections facilities.
Researchers should visit both federal and state prisons, as these entities participate in the
South Coast College studies. The study, in many ways discussed previously, emphasized

118
the ability of community college education to build access, increase persistence, and
empower students to set new goals.
The study did not, however, discover consistent and uniform evidence that social
capital was being built, but the examples that did arise, were of significance,
demonstrating that this kind of program has the potential to build social capital. While
the distance learning and telecourse modalities have proven viable in making a difference
for students, scholars should seek out programs where faculty and counselors work
directly with students on a day-to-day or consistent basis. Such a framework could
provide more evidence for social capital development for researchers. In addition,
researchers must seriously consider the establishment of Tumbleweed State Prison’s
“Education Dorm.” While access has been affirmed to a great degree by what
community colleges offer by default (Board of Governors’ Waiver), more information
about persistence, empowerment and social capital could be derived in this highly
concentrated environment that focuses its attention solely on inmates who are attending
school in prison.
While the study revealed significant and impactful findings in the variety of areas
it researched, other gaps were also discovered. The Counseling 105 course, for example,
was not taken by all students. Furthermore, not all students who were interviewed in this
study had received an education plan from a counselor. Both Counseling 105, and the
creation of educational plans for students, represent key parts of the South Coast offering
are critical to assisting students in their decoding efforts of the educational bureaucracy
and assisting in meeting their educational goals. Lastly, numerous students expressed

119
frustration with the college for not receiving timely, or in some cases any, responses to
their inquiries.
Future studies related to community college education for the incarcerated should
focus on the following areas in order to continue to realize the impacts that these studies
provide and to find additional ways to enhance service delivery. As such, it is
recommended that South Coast College do the following:
1) Obtain permission from the State Department of Corrections to conduct a
case study of the Tumbleweed State Prison Education Dorm related to the
research questions and themes of this study, with the exception of access;
2) Analyze and evaluate the impacts of the South Coast College Counseling
105 course, and conduct a study to determine the benefits that would be
provided to incarcerated students by making enrollment in the class
mandatory;
3) Conduct a study of the impacts of counseling services on incarcerated
community college students; research methodologies to increase
awareness of counseling services and the benefits of educational plans to
students;
4) Further investigate the potential of community college education to
develop social capital amongst its students, with a specific focus of each
of the elements of Stanton-Salazar’s (1997) “seven funds of knowledge.”

120
5) In collaboration with the State Department of Corrections, track the
number of South Coast incarcerated students that return to prison after
release;
6) Account for the number of incarcerated students that earn an Associate of
Arts degree, certificate, or who successfully transfer to a four-year
university.
The pursuit of a case study of the “Education Dorm” will take the merits of this current
study to the next step, providing first-hand experience with inmates, educators, and
prison staff that are fully dedicated to serving a population of student inmates. It is
recommended that the same theoretical frameworks be applied as a basis for the
establishment of a new set of more comprehensive research questions, but without the
focus on access, that will hopefully provide fodder for even more compelling data
regarding the enhancement of persistence and the development of social capital.
Furthermore, additional research on the benefits that Counseling 105 provides to
students, could offer the opportunity for serious consideration of requiring all
incarcerated students to enroll, and further, all community colleges, not just South Coast,
could be encouraged by policy makers to require such a course for inmates. And, the
status of counseling services themselves, with the critical role that they play in providing
educational plans and mentoring services to students, deserves further research,
specifically with consideration of possibilities of expanding those offerings to
incarcerated students. Lastly, further study of the specific tenets of the “seven funds of
knowledge” within community college studies for the incarcerated will enable scholars to

121
better understand the development and maintenance of networks, and specifically within
a community college offering that provides more direct connections with individuals that
have the ability to serve as institutional agents for students. The final recommendation
focuses on the tracking of formerly incarcerated students that return to prison. Over the
long term, as the South Coast studies reach the promise that they have demonstrated in
this study, college administrators and policy makers will be able to see the studies’
contribution to society, with hopefully, very few if any of these students returning to
incarceration after release, showing education’s ability to contribute to a reduce in
recidivism (Batiuk and Rountree, 1997). As one former student (Personal
Communication, July 26, 2009), commented on his goal establishment of a new business,
and a dedication to his family, his statements provided support for the notion that the
studies can contribute to a positive change in perspective, and behavior, of former
inmates after release (Spangenberg, 2004).
Of the ten former students interviewed in this study, only one self-identified as
having returned to incarceration at some point since attending South Coast community
college studies (Personal Communication, July 26, 2009). While this study has provided
significant information about transformational changes in the perspective of students that
could reduce the probability that they would not return to prison, further work is needed
to determine if community college education is actually reducing the recidivism rate for
its student populations. As such, this study has recommended that South Coast College
leverage its relationship with the State Department of Corrections to begin tracking this
data over time.

122
Conclusion
The incarcerated face many challenges, with many inmates leaving prison and
regaining freedom only to find themselves faced with the stigma of a criminal record,
pressing family obligations, and limited career options. For many, these challenges are
too formidable, and because of this, a very large proportion of paroled inmates eventually
return to a life of crime, and not soon after, return to an incarcerated state. Because of
society’s lack of tolerance crime and increasing focus on punishment, the prison
population of the United States has swelled over the last two decades. The huge
increases in the prison population, combined with a very high rate of recidivism, provides
an incentive for policy makers to consider new options to manage the incarcerated
population.
With this perspective, this study set out to determine the impacts of community
college education for inmates, and explored whether or not this opportunity increased
access, persistence, and social capital for students. Through interviews with former
inmates, administrators, faculty and counselors, as well as review of institutional
documents, the study confirmed with little doubt that these studies increase access.
Furthermore, the results of the data collection revealed that community college education
has a powerful, transformational effect on students that encourages persistence,
empowerment and the establishment of new goals. While all of the interviews conducted
in the study were helpful, the portion of the meetings with administrators, faculty,
counselors, and former students which discussed the empowering nature of these studies
were the most profound, and compelling, of all the material collected. The study also

123
demonstrated that incarcerated studies in community college have the potential to build
social capital for students, with several examples providing support. Specifically, former
inmates interviewed in this study noted that they developed stronger networking skills
through their studies, enhanced their ability to decode the system of higher education,
developed new problem solving skills that they did not previously have prior to
incarceration, affirmed relationships of institutional agents (faculty and Education
Officers) that acted as mentors, and increased their understanding of the importance of
establishing constructive life goals. Of the three areas focused on by this study: access,
persistence and social capital, the findings related to social capital was perhaps the most
surprising, given the distance learning nature of this program and the limits of
institutional agency within such an educational arrangement.
Given the grave pressures that our corrections institutions face today, policy
makers must focus on new options that will, over the long term, help to reduce the
population of inmates in this country. A shift in public mood toward rehabilitation of
inmates is unlikely any time. As more and more felons are forced to pay their debts to
society via a prison sentence, increasing educational opportunities for these individuals
provide them with new avenues to consider, ones that will afford more options and
knowledge, upon their release, as simply opposed to these individuals returning home
with no new alternatives, and a higher possibility of returning to a life of crime.
While this study had limitations in the sense that data collection was not
conducted at a prison facility, significant information was gathered not only to see the
value that community college education provides to the incarcerated, but further, to

124
hopefully stimulate and encourage future studies on this topic for policy makers and
elected officials. It is hoped that this study will provide fodder to decision makers in this
realm to seriously consider the possibility that the nation’s prison nightmare can be
mitigated by the benefits, and opportunities, that a community college education can
provide to incarcerated students.

125
References
Anheier, H., Gerhards, J., & Romo, F. (1995). Forms of capital and social structure and
cultural fields. The American Journal of Sociology. 100, 4, 859-903.
Anonymous. (2007). Black colleges and universities embrace distance education. The
Journal of Blacks in Higher Education. 55, 31.
Anonymous (Personal Communication, June 24, 2008).
Allen, R. (Personal Communication, July 26, 2009).
Associated Press (2007). More blacks, latinos in jail than college dorms. Retrieved from
MSNBC.com, April 16, 2009.
Bagwell, G. (2002). State funds for telecourses. Retrieved from www.chronicle.com,
April 11, 2009.
Barnes, B., Dekermenjian, A. & Vasquez, F. (2008). 100 classes slashed. Retrieved from
CoastReportOnline.com, April 16, 2009.
Barton, J. (Personal Communication, August 12, 2009).
Batuik, M.E., Moke, P, & Rountree, P. (1997). Crime and rehabilitation: correctional
education as an agent of change-a research note. Justice Quarterly. 14,1, 167-
180.
Bazos, A, & Hausman, J. (2004). Correctional education as a crime control program. Los
Angeles. University of California, Los Angeles.
Bedford, J. (2007). Distance education: choices, choices and more choices. Searcher.
15, 9, 18-22.

126
Blumenstyk, G. (2008, June 13). University of phoenix says test scores vindicate its
academic model. The Chronicle of Higher Education. 54, 40, A1.
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Cultural reproduction and social reproduction. In J. Karabel & A.H.
Halsey (Eds.), Power and ideology in education (pp. 487-511). New York:
Oxford University Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J.G. Richardson (Ed.), The handbook of
theory and research in the sociology of education. New York: Greenwood Press.
Brauer, F. and Cohen, A. (2003). The american community college. San Francisco:
Jossey Bass.
Brooks, C. (Personal Communication, July 20, 2009).
Brown, C., Lane, J. & Rogers, K. (2002). Walking a policy tightrope: balancing
educational opportunity and criminal justice in federal student financial aid.
Journal of Negro Education. 71, 3, 233-242.
Brint, S. & Karabel, J. (1989). American education, meritocratic ideology, and the
legitimation of inequality: the community college and the problem of american
exceptionalism. Higher Education. 18, 6, 725-735.
Bryan, G. (Personal Communication, July 24, 2009).
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. (2007). California prisoners
and parolees. Sacramento, CA.
Carnevale, D. (2000). Faculty union opposes undergraduate degrees earned entirely
through distance learning. Retrieved from www.chronicle.com, April 11, 2009.

127
Carnevale, D. and Young, J. (2001). Telecourses change challenges. Retrieved from
www.chronicle.com, April 11, 2009.
Carr, S. (2008, July 7). Many professors are optimistic on distance learning, survey finds.
Retrieved from www.chronicle.com, April 11, 2009.
Carruthers, D. (Personal communication, January 9, 2009).
Carlson, J. (Personal Communication, August 10, 2009).
Chappell, C. (2004). Post secondary correctional education and recidivism. The Journal
of Correctional Education. 55, 2, 148-169.
Collins, J. (2002) A true experiment comparing learning outcomes of a two-way
interactive telecourse and a traditional face-to-face course. University of Iowa.
Community College League of California (1999). Facing the millennium; america’s
community colleges into the 21
st
century. Sacramento, CA.
Correctional Association of New York (2009). Education from the inside, out. Retrieved
from www.correctionalassociation.org, April 28, 2009.
Coleman, J.S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. The American
Journal of Sociology. 94, S95-S120.
Creswell, J. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design. Thousand Oaks, CA. Sage.
Currie, D. (2007). Investing in our human capital. Community College Journal. 77, 6, 6.
Dika, S., & Singh, K. (2002). Applications of social capital in educational literature: a
critical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 72, 31-60.
Drissen, G. (2001). Forms of capital and educational achievement. International Review
of Education. 47, 6, 513-538.

128
Edwards-Willey, T., & Chivers, N. (2005). Perceptions of inmate-students ability to
succeed. The Journal of Correctional Education. 56, 1, 65-86.
Fine, M. & Torre, M.E. (2005). Bar none: extending affirmative action to higher
education in prison. , 61, 3, 569-594. The Society for Psychological Study of
Social Issues.
Lexington (2009, April 4). A nation of jailbirds. The Economist. P. 40.
Fischman, J. (2009, April 14). E-learning and its challenges increase at community
colleges. Retrieved from www.chronicle.com, April 26, 2009.
Forman, D. (Personal Communication, July 27, 2009).
Franz, R. (1996). Virtual u: increasing number of internet, television and
teleconferencing courses brings college closer to students. EEO Bimonthly. 27, 3,
30.
Furtado, A., & Johnson, D. (1980). Education and rehabilitation in a prison setting. The
Journal of Offender Counseling, Services and Rehabilitation. 4, 3, 247-273.
Gaes, G., Flanagan, T., & Motiuk, L (1999). Adult correctional treatment. Crime and
Justice. 26, 361-426.
Gilroy, M. (2008). Distance learning course. The Hispanic Outlook in Higher Education.
18, 23, 10-12.
Gorman, J. (Personal Communication, July 26, 2009).
Grams, J. (Personal Communication, July 31, 2009).
Harris, O. (Personal Communication, July 26, 2009).

129
Hechinger, F. (1982, July 27) About education. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com, April
11, 2009.
Hefferman, A. (2008, April 6). Soft cell. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com, April 26,
2009.
Heubeck, E. (2008). Higher ed professionals’ perspectives on online education. Diverse
Issues in Higher Education. 25, 18, 30-31.
Howard, C. (Personal Communication, July 24, 2009).
Hunter, G. and Boyce, I. (2009). Preparing for employment: prisoners’ experience in a
prison training programme. The Howard Journal. 48, 2, 117-131.
Jacobson, R. (1994). Extending the reach of “virtual” classrooms. Retrieved from
www.chronicle.com on April 10, 2009.
Johnson, K.R. (2003). Prison, race and space: the impact of incarceration on career
trajectories and labor market outcomes. North Carolina State University.
Kiecolt, K.J. (1994). Stress and the decision to change oneself: a theoretical model.
Social Psychology Quarterly. 57, 1, 49-63.
Kling, J. (2006). Incarceration length, employment and earnings. The American
Economic Review. 96, 3, 863-876.
Luga, R. (Personal Communication, July 20, 2009).
LeBar, C., Parkinson, S., Lloyd, J. & Wright, I. (1983). Practical reasoning in corrections
education. Canadian Journal of Education. 8, 3, 263-273.
Lewis, R. (Personal Communication, July 26, 2009).

130
Lin, N. (1999). Social networks and status attainment. Annual Review of Sociology. 25,
467-487.
Liptak, A. (2008, February 29). U.S. imprisons one in 100 adults, report finds. New York
Times. P. A14.
Lueddeke, G. (1997). Telecommunications in education and training and implications for
the communications and information technologies. Education and Training. 39,
6-7.
Lin, N. (1999). Social Networks and Status Attainment. Annual Review of Sociology. 25,
467-487.
Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA. Sage.
Linquist, C. (2000). Social integration and well being among inmates. Sociological
Forum. 15, 3, 431-455.
Luga, R. (Personal Communication July 20, 2009).
Maher, J. (2004). My way out of this life is an education. Women’s Studies Quarterly, 32,
½, 100-114.
Markowitz, J. (2009). Speech for distance learning. Speech Technology. 14, 1, 68.
Martin, V. (Personal Communication, July 22, 2009).
Martinez, D. (2007). The manifestation of social capital within the mathematics,
engineering, and science achievement (MESA) program. Los Angeles, CA.
Maton, K & Salem, D. (1995). Organizational characteristics of empowering community
settings: a multiple case study approach. 23, 5, 631-656.

131
Merriam, S.B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San
Francisco, CA. Jossey-Bass.
McDonough, P. & Nunez, A. (2007). Bourdieu’s sociology of education. In Torres C. &
Teodoro, A (Eds.) Culture and Utopia. London: Rowman and Littlefield.
Mensh, I. & Henry, J. (1953). Direct observation and psychological tests in
anthropological field work. American Anthropologist. 55, 481-80.
Mills, M. (2004). Toward a taxonomy of telecourse improvement strategies. University
of Delaware.
Moksal, P., Dziuban, C., Upchurch, R., Harman, J., & Truman, B. (2006). Assessing
online learning: what one university learned about student success, persistence and
satisfaction. Peer Review. 8, 4, 26-29.
Myles, J. (Personal Communication, July 20, 2009).
Newman, R. (Personal Communication, July 26, 2009).
New York Times (1977, 30 May). An american college with no campus is succeeding.
New York Times, (2008, 10 March). Prison nation. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com,
April 28, 2009.
Newman, A. (Personal Communication, August 3, 2009).
Nyberg, A. (Personal Communication, July 27, 2009).
Ohler, J. (1991). Why distance education? Annals of the American Academy of Political
and Social Science. 514, 22-34.
Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA.
Sage.

132
Patton, M.Q. (1982). Practical evaluation. Newbury Park, CA. Sage.
Pena, E.V. (2007). The responsive academic practioner: using inquiry methods for self-
change. Los Angeles, CA.
Pew Center on the States (2008). 1 in 100: behind bars in America 2008. Retrieved from
www.pewcenteronthestates.org, April 28, 2009.
Peters, M. (Personal Communication, July 23, 2009).
Polkinghorne, D.E. (2005). Language and meaning: data collection in qualitative
research. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 52, 2, 137-145.
Popovici, A. (2009). Ex-offenders struggle for second chance. National Catholic
Reporter. 45, 12, 1.
Raddison, V. (Personal Communication, July 21, 2009).
Rose, D. & Clear, T. (1998). Incarceration, social capital, and crime: implications for
social disorganization theory. Criminology. 36, 3, 441-479.
Rose, J. & Voss, M. (2003). The unity in community: fostering academic success among
diverse communities of male offenders in correctional institutions. The Journal of
Correctional Education. 54, 4, 131-159.
Spangenberg, G. (2004). Current issues in correctional education. New York. Council
for Advancement of Adult Literacy.
Stanton-Salazar, R. & Dornbusch, S. (1995). Social capital and the reproduction of
inequality; information among mexican-american origin high school students.
Sociology of Education. 68, 2, 116-135.

133
Stanton-Salazar, R. (1997). A social capital framework for understanding the
socialization of racial minority children and youths. Harvard Educational
Review, 67, 1-40.
Stanton-Salazar, R. and Spina, S. (2000). The network orientations of highly resilient
urban minority youth: a network analytic account of minority socialization and its
educational implications. The Urban Review. 32, 3, 227-261.
Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research. New York, NY. Teachers
College Press.
Simmons, K. & Korrapati, R. (2007). Distance learner expectations for quality,
technology-enabled, student support services. Academy of Information and
Management Sciences, 11, 1, 45-47.
Slater, R. (1994-1995). Locked in but locked out: death sentence for the higher education
of black prison inmates? The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education. 6, 101-103.
Slavich, R. (1993). Traditional versus passive telecourse methodologies: a comparative
study of success among community college students. Northern Arizona University
Press.
South Coast College (2008). Incarcerated studies review. Fountain Valley, CA.
South Coast College (2009). Counseling 105 course guide. Fountain Valley, CA.
South Coast College (2009). Education plan. Fountain Valley, CA.
Street, P. (2001). Color blind: prisons and the new merican racism. Dissent, 48, 3, 49.
Strickland, J.A. (2008). Building social capital for stable employment: the post prison
experiences of black male ex-prisoners. Chicago, IL.

134
Tierney, W.G. (1991). Utilizing ethnographic interviews to enhance academic decision
making. New Directions for Institutional Research, 72, 7-22.
Tierney, W.G. (1992). An anthropological analysis of student participation in college.
The Journal of Higher Education. (63), 6, 603-618.
Turner, J.A. (1989, September 27). “Distance learning” courses get high marks from
students and enrollments are rising. Retrieved from www.chronicle.com, April 11,
2009.
U.S. Department of Justice (2008). Prison inmates at mid-year 2008. Retrieved from
www.ojp.usdoj.gov, December 14, 2009.
Visher, C., LaVigne, N, & Travis, J. (2004). Returning home: understanding the
challenges of prisoner re-entry. Retrieved from www.urban.org, April 28, 2009.
Wallace, D. & Bell, A. (1999). Being black at a predominantly white university. College
English. (61), 3, 307-327.
Walters, S. (Personal Communication, August 3, 2009).
Wetle, V. (1996). An examination of the validity of the telecourse self-assessment
prediction instrument: “are telecourses for me.” Oregon State University.
Winogron, D. (2008). Access to college for non-traditional students. Distance learning.
4, 4, 57-62.
Wright, R., & Gehring, T. (2008). From spheres of civility to public spheres: democracy
and citizenship in the big house (part ii). The Journal of Correctional Education.
59, 4, 322-338.

135
Yarborough, T. (1985). Some inmate viewpoints on teaching and curriculum in
community college programs. Journal of Corectional Education. 36, 3, 92-93.
Yin, R.K. (1984). Case study research: design and methods. Beverly Hills, CA. Sage.
Zaro, D. (2007). Teaching strategies for the self-actualized correctional educator: the
inside person vs. the outside person. The Journal of Correctional Education. 58,
1, 27-41.

136
Appendix A
Former Student Interview Protocol
1. What were the reasons for your decision to pursue higher community college
education while in prison?
2. Was it easy or challenging to enroll in the program? What obstacles did you face
in gaining admittance to the program? Did your correctional facility have any
requirements for you to meet before you could participate in the program?
3. How did you hear about the program? What were the costs? Was financial aid
available?
4. Did you interact with onsite faculty members? If so, how often did you work with
them? How did they assist you?
5. Describe your communications with faculty members who served the program
outside of the correctional facility. How did you communicate with them?
6. Did any of the faculty or staff that you interacted in the program with provide you
with suggestions or insights on how to develop your communications skills? If so,
how was this information provided to you?
7. Through your experience in the South Coast program, did the faculty or staff help
you gain new knowledge of academic subjects? If so, can you describe what
subject areas you learned about?
8. Did you learn any skills in the program about how to build and establish a
network of individuals to interact with and who would support your educational
and professional endeavors? Have you kept in touch with any one from the

137
program (former fellow students, faculty members, counselors, or administrators)
since you left prison?
9. Did the South Coast program teach you new skills related to technology,
computers, test taking, or time management? If you gained new knowledge of
any of these areas in the program, who did you interact with during your studies
that helped you develop those skills?
10. During your studies in the South Coast program, did you gain knowledge about
participating within the job market? Did the program provide you with any
information on educational requirements that you would need to fulfill to pursue
different career paths or additional studies? Who provided this information?
11. After attending the South Coast program, do you feel more confident about your
problem solving abilities, such as analyzing challenging situations and making
recommendations for improvements? How has the program assisted in you
building your problem solving skills?
12. Did the South Coast program assist you in gaining understanding about the way
the higher education system is structured? After attending the program, do you
feel more knowledgeable about how students must work within the nation’s
higher education system in order to meet their goals?
13. After participating in the South Coast program, did you pursue additional
educational opportunities? Why or why not?

138
14. What aspects of this program helped you shape or change your life goals? Did
anyone that you interacted with in the program contribute to the development of
those goals?
15. Do you keep in touch with faculty, staff, or former fellow students from the
program? If so, please describe your interactions with them.
16. Which individual from the program influenced you the most with respect to your
studies and career endeavors? How was this person helpful to you?

139
Appendix B
Faculty Member Interview Protocol
1. How do students enroll in this program? How do they find out about it, and what
does South Coast College do to promote the program?
2. What would you characterize as the major drivers that lead students to enroll?
3. Given your experience in the program as a faculty member what do you perceive
as the most important skills that the South Coast program prioritizes for its
students? In general, what are the new skills that students take away from this
program?
4. Does the program provide students with any insights on how the skills it teaches
can be applied in the job market? Are students looking for new skills that are
marketable with employers?
5. I continue to be interested in your experience as a faculty member. In that
capacity, do you ever have the opportunity to mentor the students you teach? If
so, how do you go about this, and what are your perceptions about the benefits it
has provided?
6. Have you observed the students making new contacts with others while attending
the program? Do you teach them anything about building networks of contacts?
7. How does the program assist students in building time management and self-
regulatory skills towards their academic work? Does the program teach the
students problem-solving skills?

140
8. Do students in the program receive any information on the labor markets and
about additional educational requirements that they would need to meet in order
to pursue future careers?
9. After teaching classes in this program, I am interested in your perspective as
whether or not students would pursue additional community college or higher
education studies. Does this happen?
10. What are some of the challenges that students in the program face with respect to
working through the system of higher education? From your vantage point, does
this program help students understand how to work within the educational system
and its related bureaucracies to meet their goals?
11. Do you think that students who attend the South Coast program feel that they
have more control over their futures?

141
Appendix C
Administrator Interview Protocol
1. What was the impetus for creating a community college program for the
incarcerated?
2. Why do students want to study in an incarcerated program? How are they
benefiting from it?
3. How does South Coast College promote and spread the word about the program’s
existence?
4. Why was the telecourse selected as the modality this program? How old are the
telecourses being used for this program? When is the next revision planned?
5. How do you collaborate with faculty to prioritize curricula? And, what skill areas
are prioritized?
6. What skills are faculty members and counselors prioritizing for students? Are
students gaining knowledge in areas related to computer literacy, study habits,
time management ability?
7. What collaboration do you have, if any, with employers who may wish to employ
a formerly incarcerated student? How is South Coast College gauging the needs
of employers when developing curricula? How do you encourage faculty
members and counselors to promote job skills development to their students?
8. What steps is the college taking to encourage students to continue community
college studies or other, higher level educational pursuits? How does the program
prepare students for success in their future studies?

142
9. Do you think it is important for students to gain knowledge and a comfort level of
navigating the educational bureaucracy, and does the program provide insight in
that regard? What challenges are your students facing in terms of their
understanding of how to work through our educational system?
10. Does the program provide students with any mentoring services? If so, can you
please describe? Who provides them?
11. Do you emphasize to faculty members and counselors the importance of students
developing problem solving skills and self-regulated behaviors in this program?
12. Do students receive assistance in the program in developing new life goals? If
not, how would you characterize the program’s influence on students to develop
new life goals? Have you seen any evidence from the program that students who
attend eventually feel more in control of their futures?
13. Are students encouraged, while in the program, to build and sustain networks? If
so, with which groups?

143
Appendix D
Counselor Interview Protocol
1. What do you see the as the greatest challenge facing the incarcerated students that
you counsel?
2. What is leading the incarcerated students that you support to pursue community
college education?
3. Have the students you worked with had difficulty enrolling in the program? How
did they find out about the South Coast program in the first place?
4. Are the students you that you counsel learning new skills? If so, what subject
areas are these focused on? Do the students you work with wish to learn about
additional subject areas in addition to what they are studying now?
5. Do you provide any guidance to students about the importance of building and
maintaining networks during and after their studies? If so, what types of networks
are students encouraged to build? And, what rationale is provided to students for
the importance of establishing and maintaining networks?
6. To what extent does your counseling program inform students about the attributes
of the education system and its related bureaucracies? Do you feel it is important
for students to understand how to work through our higher education system?
What challenges are students facing in this area?
7. I am interested in your perspective on how the South Coast counseling program
provides information to students about the labor market, and educational

144
requirements needed for students to reach career-related goals. Does the South
Coast program give attention to any of these areas when counseling students?
8. How would you characterize the ability of the South Coast program to help
students in developing problem solving skills? Do you think that incarcerated
students that participate in the program gain a better sense of their abilities to
make decisions?
9. In your interactions with students, do you feel that they, after participating in the
program, have a stronger sense of their ability to control their own futures? If so,
why?
10. Is your counseling program encouraging students to continue their studies after
they complete the South Coast program? If so, what areas of additional study are
students that attend program considering? Why?

145
Appendix E
Corrections Official Interview Protocol
1. How are students learning about the South Coast program? Why has, in your
opinion, the program been gaining popularity within the California corrections
system?
2. What are the requirements of your corrections facility for students to be able to
attend the program?
3. I am interested in your perspective as a public servant and one who works closely
with incarcerated people on a daily basis. What skills are students learning? Do
you feel that the students have a better understanding of the educational and
career opportunities that are available to them?
4. Have you kept in touch with any of the students that have attended the program
and left prison? If so, do you see the program having any impact on the former
inmates’ career and job prospects? Have these individuals pursued any further
studies since leaving prison and the South Coast program? Have students joined
any networks to facilitate their further career or educational development?
5. As you have, or have held, responsibility for a large group of staff in a
correctional facility, have there been any persons on site that made a difference
for the students participating in the South Coast program? If so, how did these
individuals contribute to the learning experiences of the students?
6. Do you think that students feel that they are in more control over their own
futures after attending the South Coast Program? Why or why not?

146
Appendix F
Informed Consent Form
University of Southern California, Rossier School of Education
INFORMED CONSENT FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH

CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN RESEARCH

Former Student, Faculty, Administrator, Counselor and Correction Official’s
Perspectives of the South Coast College Incarcerated Program

You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Dr. Kristan Venegas and
Christian Teeter of the University of Southern California, Rossier School of Education.
You were selected by the researchers as a participant in this study because of your
working relationship with students in the South Coast College incarcerated program.
Your participation is voluntary. You must be aged 18 or older to participate. Your
participation is voluntary. You should read the information below, and ask questions
about anything you do not understand, before deciding whether or not to participate.
Please take as much time as you need to read the consent form. You may also decide to
discuss it with your family or friends. If you decide to participate, you will be asked to
sign this form. You will be given a copy of this form.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to determine whether or not a community college program
for the incarcerated can increase social capital, access and persistence for students.

PROCEDURES
If you are able to participate in this research study, you would be asked to participate in
an interview session lasting approximately one hour. The interview will be audio taped.

POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
There are no risks or unpleasantries anticipated as part of your participation in this
research study.

POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO SUBJECTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY
You will not receive direct benefits from your participation in the research.

Materials published that result from this study may contribute to the development of
faculty, administrator, counselor, corrections official and policy maker knowledge of
community college education for incarcerated students.

147
PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
You will not be compensated for your participation.

CONFIDENTIALITY
All information gathered in this study related to your participation is confidential and will
be released only with your permission, as required by law.

Dr. Kristan Venegas and Christian Teeter will have the only access to notes and audio
tapes that are used from the interview process. These materials will be locked in a file
cabinet. You have the right to review tape recordings or notes taken from your interview
sessions. If audio-tape recordings of you will be used for educational purposes, your
identity will be protected or disguised. Tape recordings will be destroyed after three
years.

To ensure your confidentiality in this process, a pseudonym (false name) will be utilized
to identify you and to protect your privacy. When the results of this study are published
no information will be provided that would in any way reveal your identity.

PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL
You will make the final choices as whether or not you will be part of this study. You
have the option to withdraw from this study at any time, without any consequences. You
also reserve the right to refuse to answer any of the interview questions in this study. The
researcher, if necessary, also reserves the right to withdraw you from this research at any
time.

ALTERNATIVES TO PARTICIPATION
Your alternative is to not participate. Your relationship with the college will not be
affected whether or not you participate.

IDENTIFICATION OF INVESTIGATORS
Please contact the individuals below if you have any questions about this research study:

Christian Teeter, Principal Investigator
(714) 438-4607
1370 Adams Avenue
Costa Mesa, CA 92626

OR

Dr. Kristan Venegas, Faculty Advisor
(213) 740-0507
Waite Phillips Hall, 6
th
Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90089-4037

148
RIGHTS OF RESEARCH SUBJECTS
You have the right to withdraw from this study at any time. You are not waiving any
legal claims, rights or remedies because of your participation in this research study. If
you have questions about your rights as a research subject, please contact the University
of Southern California Institutional Review Board, Office of the Vice Provost for
Research Advancement, Stonier Hall, Room 224a, Los Angeles, CA 90089-1146,
(213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu.

SIGNATURE OF RESEARCH SUBJECT
I understand the procedures described above. My questions have been answered to my
satisfaction, and I agree to participate in this study. I have been given a copy of this form.

□ I agree to be audio-taped

□ I do not want to be audio-taped

__________________________________
Name of Subject

__________________________________
Signature of Subject

__________________________________
Date

SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR

I have explained the research to the subject and answered all of his/her questions. I
believe that he/she understands the information described in this document and freely
consents to participate.

__________________________________
Name of Investigator

_________________________________ _________________________
Signature of Investigator Date

149
SIGNATURE OF RESEARCH SUBJECT

I understand the procedures described above and I understand fully the rights of a
potential subject of a research study involving people as subjects. My questions have
been answered to my satisfaction, and I agree to participate in this study. I have been
given a copy of this form.

I agree to be audio-taped during interviews for this research study:

_______ _______
Yes No

__________________________________
Name of Subject

__________________________________
Signature of Subject

__________________________________
Date

SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR

I have explained the research to the subject and answered all of his/her questions. I
believe that he/she understands the information described in this document and freely
consents to participate.

__________________________________
Name of Investigator

_________________________________ _____________________________
Signature of Investigator Date (must be the same as subject’s)

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study details an investigation of community college studies for the incarcerated, focusing on the offerings of South Coast College for inmates within California. The study interviewed ten former inmates, each of whom studied with South Coast College while in prison, as well as faculty members, educational administrators, and a corrections officer. The study posed two main research questions as part of its investigation to determine whether or not this educational endeavor increases access, persistence, and social capital for its students. After a data collection process and analysis of the findings, the study concludes that community college education for the incarcerated enhances the access to college for this population, increases persistence, and builds the social capital of the students that participate. The study poses recommendations that are presented for South Coast College to consider, encouraging further study of various aspects of its offerings for the incarcerated, in hopes that in the future, community college students that attend classes while in prison have even greater potential to maintain their persistence in education and to increase their social capital to a greater degree.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Peers as institutional agents: acquiring social capital through peer interactions

PDF

Significant others in the lives of Latino first-generation college students: how social capital aids persistence

PDF

University ready: examining the relationships between social capital and an online college access program

PDF

The relationship between academic capitalism and student culture at two four-year higher education institutions

PDF

What factors influence student persistence in the community college setting?

PDF

The intersection of grit and social capital: a mixed methods examination of successful first-generation college students

PDF

The experiences of successful higher education Latino administrators and educational leaders in selected western United States community colleges

PDF

Imparting social capital to educationally disadvantaged students: A study of the early academic outreach program

PDF

Understanding undocumented students' resistance of acting white as they persist to gain access to college-valued information and resources

PDF

Navigating and accessing higher education: the experiences of community college students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

PDF

Persistencia de nuestro ingeniera/os: examining the persistence of Latina/os in engineering at a minority serving community college

PDF

Persistence among low income community college students

PDF

Community college transfer student involvement experiences at a selective, private four-year university

PDF

How can I help you? college students' perceptions of financial aid advisors

PDF

The lived experience of first-generation latino students in remedial education and navigating the transfer pathway

PDF

Federal loan borrowing in community colleges: examining the decision making processes of non‐traditional community college students

PDF

Achieving the dream: undocumented Central American Latinas in college

PDF

Examining the networks of program leaders in the community college component of the Puente Project within the context of a social capital framework

PDF

First-generation college students: perceptions, access, and participation at urban university

PDF

Four year college access for undocumented Latino students

Asset Metadata

Creator Teeter, Christian B. (author)

Core Title Community college education for the incarcerated: the provision of access, persistence and social capital

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 01/21/2010

Defense Date 12/14/2010

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag access,community college,empowerment,incarcerated,OAI-PMH Harvest,persistence,recidivism,social capital

Place Name California (states), Orange (counties)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Venegas, Kristan M. (committee chair), Currie, Ding-Jo (committee member), Melguizo, Tatiana (committee member)

Creator Email christian_teeter@sbcglobal.net,cteeter@cccd.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m2806

Unique identifier UC1441896

Identifier etd-Teeter-3448 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-290089 (legacy record id),usctheses-m2806 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Teeter-3448.pdf

Dmrecord 290089

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Teeter, Christian B.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Repository Name Libraries, University of Southern California

Repository Location Los Angeles, California

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu