Reentry of Incarcerated Juveniles: Correctional Education as a Turning Point Across Juvenile and Adult Facilities

• DOI: 10.1177/0093854820934139
• Published date: 01 November 2020
• Date: 01 November 2020
• Subject Matter: Articles

CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2020, Vol. 47, No. 11, November 2020, 1348 –1370.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854820934139

Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions

© 2020 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology

1348

REENTRY OF INCARCERATED JUVENILES:

CORRECTIONAL EDUCATION AS A TURNING

POINT ACROSS JUVENILE AND ADULT

FACILITIES

LENA JÄGGI

University of Basel

Virginia Commonwealth University

WENDY KLIEWER

Virginia Commonwealth University

All incarcerated juveniles have to receive correctional education, but little is known about how these school experiences

influence reentry. With longitudinal data of 569 incarcerated juveniles (91% male) from the Pathways to Desistance

Project, this study tested how motivational (teacher bonding, school orientation, time spent on homework) and perfor-

mance (grades) aspects of schooling were related to desistance for youth returning from juvenile versus adult facilities.

Results revealed that across facility type, increased attachment to facility schools, but not grades, predicted increased

gainful activity (attending school and/or working), less self-reported delinquency, and lower recidivism in the community.

Path models showed that gainful activity during Months 1 through 6 was related to stay in community, but not to self-

reported behavior in Months 7 through 12. Results indicate that incarceration is an environment that shapes future behav-

ior, but also highlight differences between behavioral and system responses. Facility school experiences might be an

important locus of intervention.

Keywords: reentry; desistance; juvenile offenders; longitudinal; criminal justice system; corrections

Ample research shows that involvement with the justice system as a juvenile has more

severe derailing consequences than involvement as an adult, especially for juveniles

that have spent time in adult facilities (Lambie & Randell, 2013; Redding, 2016). For exam-

ple, several studies have shown higher rates of recidivism in transferred youth compared

with youth remaining in the juvenile system (Zane et al., 2016). Although rates have

declined, incarceration of juveniles in adult prisons and jails continues; in 2015, 3,500 juve-

niles were held in adult jails across the United States (Minton & Zheng, 2016).

AUTHORS’ NOTE: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. Data for this project were from

the Pathways to Desistance Project and supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse through a coopera-

tive agreement that calls for scientific collaboration between the grantees and the National Institute on Drug

Abuse staff. The project was completed as part of the dissertation of the first author under the direction of the

second author. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Lena Jäggi, Faculty of

Psychology, University of Basel, Missionsstrasse 62, 4055 Basel, Switzerland; e-mail: lena.jaeggi@unibas.ch.

934139CJBXXX10.1177/0093854820934139Criminal Justice and BehaviorJäggi, Kliewer / EDUCATION AND REENTRY ACROSS FACILITY TYPES

research-article2020

Jäggi, Kliewer / EDUCATION AND REENTRY ACROSS FACILITY TYPES 1349

Educational programs for incarcerated adults are one of the most powerful interventions

to prevent recidivism, particularly if the recipients develop a high commitment to education

(RAND Corporation, 2014). In contrast to incarcerated adults for whom it is a privilege,

school-aged incarcerated juveniles must receive schooling meeting the minimal standards

of mandatory public education (Leone & Cutting, 2004). This means that receiving some

type of correctional education is one shared experience for most incarcerated juveniles, and

investigating how this experience influences community adjustment might provide insights

into an important locus of intervention that is applicable across State judicial systems.

Furthermore, the extent to which differences in outcomes between transferred and nontrans-

ferred youth have to do with experiences during incarceration versus labeling processes

happening after incarceration is unclear (Augustyn & Loughran, 2017; Redding, 2016).

This study describes and measures how differences in the delivery of correctional education

in a sample of incarcerated adolescents who spent time in juvenile versus adult facilities

affects their reentry, shedding some light on these important questions.

CUMULATIVE DISADVANTAGE AND THE LIFE COURSE

DEVELOPMENT OF CRIME

Labeling an individual as deviant (e.g., through a criminal record) can trigger exclusion-

ary processes that have negative consequences for conventional opportunities in education,

employment, and social relationships, thereby increasing the likelihood for further deviance

(Sampson & Laub, 2005). According to this view, current antisocial behavior is explained

by the strength of social bonds, regardless of prior differences in propensity to offend.

Especially serious sanctions are seen to cut justice-involved individuals off from future

options for social interdependence, such as a stable employment, and compromise their

relationships with family, friends, and romantic partners. Furthermore, these processes get

magnified in contexts of already disadvantaged urban poor minorities (Blomberg et al.,

2012; Sampson & Laub, 2005). There is ample evidence supporting this theory. For exam-

ple, a large longitudinal study showed that among adolescents with equivalent neighbor-

hood, school, family, peer, and individual characteristics, as well as similar frequency of

criminal offending, having an arrest record was associated with a substantively large and

robust impact on dropping out of high school and a gap in 4-year college enrollment (Kirk

& Sampson, 2013). These effects were due to institutional responses that led to disrupted

academic trajectories, and not due to individual characteristics of the adolescents.

Conversely, bonding with prosocial individuals and traditional institutions can be a posi-

tive turning point that promotes desistance. Research repeatedly has shown an impressive

amount of plasticity in trajectories of offending (e.g., Natsuaki et al., 2008). Consequently,

investigating so-called turning points—events that redirect criminal trajectories in either a

more positive (strengthening social bonds) or a more negative manner (further alienating

individuals from mainstream society)—seems a promising avenue to both explain and pre-

dict offending (Mulvey et al., 2004).

THE INCARCERATION EXPERIENCE AND RECIDIVISM

It can be argued that incarceration constitutes a treatment intervention intended to change

future behavior. Treatment evaluations consistently find that client perceptions are among

the strongest predictors of treatment outcomes (Lambert & Barley, 2001), while educational