University Education in Quebec's Federal Prisons: Report and Recommendations
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ARCHIVED - Archiving Content ARCHIVÉE - Contenu archivé Archived Content Contenu archivé Information identified as archived is provided for L’information dont il est indiqué qu’elle est archivée reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It est fournie à des fins de référence, de recherche is not subject to the Government of Canada Web ou de tenue de documents. Elle n’est pas Standards and has not been altered or updated assujettie aux normes Web du gouvernement du since it was archived. Please contact us to request Canada et elle n’a pas été modifiée ou mise à jour a format other than those available. depuis son archivage. Pour obtenir cette information dans un autre format, veuillez communiquer avec nous. This document is archival in nature and is intended Le présent document a une valeur archivistique et for those who wish to consult archival documents fait partie des documents d’archives rendus made available from the collection of Public Safety disponibles par Sécurité publique Canada à ceux Canada. qui souhaitent consulter ces documents issus de sa collection. Some of these documents are available in only one official language. Translation, to be provided Certains de ces documents ne sont disponibles by Public Safety Canada, is available upon que dans une langue officielle. Sécurité publique request. Canada fournira une traduction sur demande. 1 University Education in Quebec's Federal Prisons: Report and Recommendations 1 1 Lucien Morin Ph.D. Professor of Educational Philosophy Department of Education University of Quebec at Trois-Rivieres August 1979 HV 8883.3 .C2 M6 1979 \-\/ PA 4 HI n79 /UNIVERSITY EDUCATION IN HI QUEBEC'S FEDERAL PRISONS: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS \ t I 8-ireii; M N.SIRV OF SOL ICITO G:NERAL R AU,' 23 190 BIBLI teiNSIte.. OTHÈQUE DU SO ,Ciic UR GÉNÉRAL BY LUCIEN MORIN PROFESSOR OF EDUCATIONAL PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF QUEBEC AT TROIS-RIVIERES Cqoyeght of this any intended use document does not fProperauthonzation must be obtainedbelong from fain&the author» AUGUST 1979 Les Crown. droits d'auteur pas à l'État du present document Toute document doit utilisation du contenu dun'appartiennent ere approuvée préalablementpajsent par l'auteur This report was prepared under a contract with the Education and Training Division of the Correctional Service of Canada, 340 Laurier Avenue West, Ottawa, KlA 0P9. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 3. CHAPTER I - The Present Situation 4 1. Courses without programs 5 i. A changing objective 6 ii. Gathering information 9 iii. Description 14 a) Unclear data 14 b) Main themes 22 -Policy of accessibility 23 -Individualized instruction 27 -Linear adult education 32 2. Critique of the present situation 35 i. Rememberance of education past 38 a) Why university education in prison? 41 h) Human growth 48 -The person as mystery 49 -The person as openness and communion 51 -The person as conquest 53 ii. The improvised university 56 a) The fall of the ivory tower 56 b) Primitive totality 60 iii. Failure to understand the psychology of the student inmate 66 a) The criminal personality 67 -A good person 67 -Etiological inadequacy 71 b) Adolescent reasoning 73 c) Preconventional morality 77 iv. Administrating vs. educating 82 a) Superiors and subordinates 82 b) The blind men's elephant 83 c) Humanists and administrators 85 Conclusion 88 CHAPTER II - On University Education for Inmates: Recommendations 91 Introduction 91 - li - 1. The basic assumption: human dignity 92 j. The natural obligation to do what is good 94 ii. Human dignity 96 2. The objectives 98 j. The student must develop a critical mind 100 ii. The student must learn to consider the moral significance of things 103 iii. The student must be able to assess his own internal development 106 iv. The student must learn to master written and oral communication 108 v. The student must develop an awareness of his cultural identity 110 3. The content 113 i. A difficult choice 113 ii. Motives 118 4. The student 124 i. A need for higher standards 124 ii. Ability to read, desire to learn 127 5. The teacher 132 6. Evaluation 134 i. A recognized approach to evaluation 135 -The program 139 -The methodology 141 ii. Stages in the evaluative process 143 -The evaluation committee 145 -Evaluation criteria 147 7. Organization 152 i. The administrative aspect 153 a) The university 153 -Enrolment 155 -Implementation 156 h) The penitentiary 156 -The program co-ordinator 159 ii. The pedagogical aspect 164 a) Courses 164 I - 111 - b) Students 165 c) Professors 168 iii. Budget 168 iv. Schedule 172 8. The agreement 173 REFERENCE 178 CONSULTATIONS 186 INTRODUCTION This study was commissioned by the Correctional Service of Canada in order to respond to the following question: "Should a university program be established in Quebec penitentiaries?" In order to explain more fully the many factors involved in such an undertaking, it was necessary, more specifically, for the researcher in charge of this study to: - establish the objectives of such a program; - develop and propose one or more type(s) of program content; - identify a clientele for such a program; - identify the institution (prison) most able to promote and offer this program; - determine the requirements for teaching staff; - conduct a management study on the human, material and financial resources required for the continuing operation of the programs; - establish a model for a memorandum of agreement between the Correctional Service of Canada and a recognized university. It is obvious that these tasks - although both specific and determinative in nature - could only be indicative of the scope of questions to be asked and problems examined. In other words, they alone did not exhaust either the theoretical 2 presuppositions (for example, those involving the purpose of incarceration, the aim of education in penitentiaries or the objectives of a university program for inmates) or the complexity of the problems inherent in such a plan (for example, one important variable, the CEGEP, was never initially identified). Thus it was constantly necessary to go beyond the apparently restrictive framework of this description of tasks in order to grasp all the nuances essential to an understanding of the question. Moreover, as each task listed was directed toward an area of activity defined by its own objective and therefore involved relatively independent methodological strategies, only a simple and flexible overview would ensure that the conclusions of this study possessed some degree of coherent uniformity. This macroscopic approach, to use a well-known term, proved the most suitable for such a study. Finally, from the very beginning of the study, it was soon apparent that the ultimate justification for establishing a university program for penitentiary inmates would basically depend on the philosophy, objectives, content and instructional techniques involved in the program being 3 considered. As a result, even before the material and financial conditions were examined and minimum viability criteria established, there was an almost urgent necessity to devise two antithetical program model outlines so as to elicit all relevant reactions from those concerned, understand them in their context and respond to them in the most efficient and flexible manner possible. As can be easily imagined, a study of this scope could not have been conducted in isolation. In a sense, it was carried out by those for whom it is intended. For the most part, those who were consulted - inmates, university principals and assistant directors (education) - are the people who eventually - must be responsible for instituting and managing it. As well, external visits and meetings with qualified individuals and interested organizations provided additional input, for which we are grateful. As we did not wish to forget anyone, a list of names of those consulted is appended to this report. Once again, we would like to extend our most sincere thanks to all those who took part either directly or indirectly in this research. CHAPTER I The Present Situation "The necessity of making conscious decisions based on insufficient information is the major feature characterizing the human condition." J. Fourastié, Le long chemin des hommes The conclusions of this study will make little sense and its recommendations will be unrealistic and have little chance of success unless they are based on a general understanding of the situation which presently exists with respect to university teaching in penitentiaries. This situation is complex and complicated. It is especially difficult to understand in that its elements are scattered, confused and practically inextricable from the contradictions of everyday experience. For someone with a clear understanding, there is no need for special procedures or particular insight in order to see evidence of this fact. The aim of this first chapter is to demonstrate this by drawing the most faithful portrait possible of the reality -5 in question, a portrait, it must be said, hidden under- neath a great deal of approximation and reconstruction. In a case such as this, an analysis of the situation cannot take all the ramifications of the problem into consideration. Fortunately, the basic orientation of our education-related concerns does not have to be based on an exhaustive description; correct information about the essential points is all that is required. With this in mind, our analysis will comprise two facets: first, a description of what is actually being done in the penitentiaries with respect to university education; this section is called "Courses without programs". Following this will be an examination of the present situation and, in particular, of the assumptions underlying it. 1. Courses without programs A coherent understanding of the situation does not develop automatically, but as the result of constant and systematic consideration. The subject is dealt with in three separate parts, as follows, in order to facilitate an understanding of this progression.