Book Review: Providing College to Prison Inmates

• Date: 01 December 2011
• Author: Robert M. Worley
• Published date: 01 December 2011
• DOI: 10.1177/0734016811400360
• Subject Matter: Book Reviews

Book Review

J. B. Contardo

Providing College to Prison Inmates El Paso, TX: LFB Scholarly Publishing

LLC, 2010. xi, 208 pp. $65.00. ISBN 978-1-593-32407-0

Reviewed by: Robert M. Worley, Texas A&M Central Texas, Killeen, TX,USA

DOI: 10.1177/0734016811400360

In this book, Jeanne Bayer Contardo examines North Carolina’s postsecondary correctional

education programs. According to the author, North Carolina is the second highest provider of col-

lege education opportunities for inmates. In fact, Contardo notes that the North Carolina Department

of Corrections (NCDOC) and the North Carolina Community College System (NCCCS) have been

working together since 1987. She contends that this is quite a remarkable period of time, given that

college programs for inmates tend to be somewhat controversial. For example, the author argues that

during the ‘‘get tough’’ movement in corrections, college programming for inmates came under

attack. This is reflected in legislation, such as the 1994 Violent Crime Act, which prohibited inmates

from receiving Pell grants for their postsecondary education. In spite of this law, Contardo asserts

that North Carolina continued to provide more educational opportunities to inmates at a time when

most states were restricting access. In her book, she maintains that correctional officials in North

Carolina have demonstrated their ability to stay committed to core values, even during periods of

crisis. While a number of quantitative studies regarding prison educational programming have

been published, Contardo utilizes a qualitative, bounded case study approach in her exploratory

study. The author relies on interviews, document analysis, a nd observation. The data, which were

collected over a four-month period, were triangulated to ensure accuracy. Contardo also discusses

how she developed a positive relationship with a gatekeeper in order to gain entre´e into the prison

system. While this discussion is brief, it nevertheless makes for interesting reading, given the dif-

ficulties that researchers generally have in gaining access to correctional facilities. It is evident

that the author was able to win the support of officials in both the prison and college system

throughout the course of her research. In fact, throughout the data collection of her book, Contardo

was permitted to observe a semiannual interagency committee meeting, as well as other official

gatherings. In all of these meetings, the author took handwritten field notes and employed this

information during the course of her analysis.

In addition to field observations, Contardo conducted semistructured interviews with various

prison and college administrators. While she granted these subjects confidentiality, many of the

respondents gave Contardo permission to use their names. Ultimately, Contardo decided not to iden-

tify any of the participants who were interviewed. These case study interviews were open-ended and

permitted the subjects to elaborate on sensitive topics. While Contardo was interested in multiple

issues, she especially wanted to ascertain why North Carolina expanded access to college for

inmates at a time when other states were restricting educational opportunities. In addition to inter-

viewing key officials, the author also interviewed three ex-offenders who had taken college classes

while incarcerated within the NCDOC. All of these interviews were recorded and transcribed.

Criminal Justice Review

36(4) 513-532

ª2011 Georgia State University

Reprints and permission:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

http://cjr.sagepub.com