To Learn or Not to Learn—This Is the Question
| Author | Tomer Einat,Amela Einat |
| Published date | 01 December 2015 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0032885515596509 |
| Date | 01 December 2015 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
research-article2015
Article
The Prison Journal
2015, Vol. 95(4) 423 –448
To Learn or Not to
© 2015 SAGE Publications
Reprints and permissions:
Learn—This Is the
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0032885515596509
tpj.sagepub.com
Question: Learning-
Disabled Inmates’
Attitudes Toward School,
Scholastic Experiences,
and the Onset of
Criminal Behavior
Tomer Einat1 and Amela Einat2
Abstract
This research explores the rate of learning disabilities (LD) within the Hebrew-
speaking adult prison population in Israel, examining the relationship between
LD and dropping out of school with criminal behavior. The study finds that the
frequency of LD is very high among Israeli inmates (69.6%) and that a gap exists
between LD inmates’ awareness of their scholastic weakness in school and
the educational system’s ignorance. Implications of these results are discussed.
Keywords
learning disabilities, inmates, education, school dropout, criminal activity
Introduction
One of the challenging questions regarding inmates’ life courses relates to
the shift from normative lifestyle to criminal ways of conduct (Sampson &
1Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
2Tel-Hai Academic College, Upper Galilee, Israel
Corresponding Author:
Tomer Einat, Department of Criminology, Bar Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, 5920002, Israel.
Email: Tomer.Einat@biu.ac.il
424
The Prison Journal 95(4)
Laub, 2003). From psychological, sociological, educational, and crimino-
logical perspectives, several risk factors, among them familial issues, socio-
economic status, peer pressure, scholastic factors, and personality
characteristics, appear to affect this dramatic change (Brown, Fisher, Stys,
Wilson, & Crutcher, 2003). One significant personal risk factor that has been
consistently related (casually or correlatively) to antisocial or criminal con-
duct in adolescence and adulthood is learning disabilities (LD; Zabel &
Nigro, 2001).
LD negatively affect reading comprehension, writing skills, organiza-
tional skills, time management, arithmetic, perception, and problem solving
(Snowling, Bishop, & Stothard, 2000). Inadequate or lack of sufficient edu-
cational and emotional support for learning-disabled, intelligent individuals
and/or incorrect diagnosis of LD may create pessimistic attitudes in learning-
disabled persons toward reading (Richek, List, & Lerner, 1989) and school
(Lazarus & Callahan, 2000), as well as negative stigmatization and harass-
ment by non-learning-disabled peers (Seeman, 1999). These scenarios may
consequently initiate a long and repeated process of failures (mainly in
school) and result in feelings of frustration and low self-esteem (Einat &
Einat, 2006). Furthermore, such upsetting experiences often cause learning-
disabled pupils to miss school for long periods of time and/or to perform
antisocial or criminal acts as a way of promoting their self-esteem and appre-
ciation among peers (Reid & Kirk, 2000). In this line of reasoning, it is not
surprising that a relatively high proportion of learning-disabled individuals—
as opposed to non-learning-disabled individuals—engage with the criminal
enforcement system (Riddick, Sterling, Farmer, & Morgan, 1999).
Numerous studies have examined the relationship between LD and antiso-
cial or criminal behavior (Lindsay, 2002). Some studies have suggested a
causal connection between such disabilities and criminal behavior (Zabel &
Nigro, 2001). Other research has posited a strong correlation between LD,
poor scholastic achievement, and unemployment (Brown et al., 2003).
Additional studies have revealed a strong connection between LD, poor
school performance, and school truancy with delinquency1 (McCord, Widom,
Bamba, & Crowell, 2000). Finally, a fourth group of studies has discovered a
link between LD, self-esteem, and antisocial behavior. Moreover, various
studies of criminal and prison populations in many Western criminal justice
systems have reported significant overrepresentation of LD. For example,
high rates of LD among non-incarcerated criminals and among prison
inmates, ranging from 25% to 76%,2 have been reported in Sweden (Lindgren
et al., 2000), Norway (Rasmussen, Almvik, & Levander, 2001), the United
States (Moodey et al., 2000), Canada (Brown et al., 2003), Australia (Hayes,
1997), and the United Kingdom (Reid & Kirk, 2000).3
Einat and Einat
425
Although much attention has been paid to the correlative or casual rela-
tionship between LD and criminal behavior, three research topics in particu-
lar have often been overlooked in international and local arenas: (a)
correlation between LD, level of formal education, and age of criminal
onset, among prisoners, (b) learning-disabled inmates’ attitudes toward
school, and (c) learning-disabled inmates’ perceptions of the relationships
between scholastic experiences and initiation of criminal behavior. Given
the critical implications of these research findings on the education system
outside prisons and the learning and rehabilitation systems inside prisons
(Einat & Einat, 2006), such study seems particularly important. The present
research seeks to fill these gaps in the understanding of the relationship
between LD and criminal behavior among prisoners. Accordingly, the main
research questions are as follows:
Research Question 1: What are the correlations between LD, school
drop-out age, and onset of criminal activity in a random sample of learn-
ing-disabled inmates?4
Research Question 2: What are the viewpoints of a random sample of
learning-disabled inmates toward school?
Research Question 3: What were the educational system reactions toward
learning-disabled inmates’ scholastic experiences—as perceived, retroac-
tively and subjectively, by a random sample of learning-disabled inmates?
Research Question 4: What are the relationships between LD and onset
of criminal activity—as perceived, retroactively and subjectively, by a
random sample of learning-disabled inmates?
Many studies have been done on the characteristics, origins, and influence
of LD on social adaptation, common ways of coping with them, and the effect
of the educational environment on students’ general reactions to such disor-
ders. Despite this, there appears to be general perplexity over the definition
of the term across times and settings. For example, in Ireland and the United
Kingdom, the term “learning disabilities” is most frequently used as a syn-
onym for “mental handicap” (Murphy, Harrold, Carey, & Mulrooney, 2000).
In Canada, the term refers to a number of disorders that may affect the acqui-
sition, organization, retention, understanding, or use of verbal or non-verbal
information among individuals who otherwise demonstrate average abilities
essential for thinking and/or reasoning (Brown et al., 2003). In the United
States, the formal definition of LD has been revised several times to express
the notion that LD do not naturally fade with maturity (Taymans & Corley,
2001). The most updated definition LD, crafted by the U.S. National Joint
Committee on Learning Disabilities (1990), holds that
426
The Prison Journal 95(4)
(learning disabilities) is a general term that refers to a heterogeneous group of
disorders manifested by significant difficulties in the acquisition and use of
listening, speaking, reading, writing, reasoning, or mathematical abilities.
These disorders are intrinsic to the individual, presumed to be due to a central
nervous system dysfunction, and may occur across the life span. (Corley et al.,
1999, pp. 13-14)
In this study, the term learning disabilities is defined according to the
1990 version of the U.S. National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities.
Nonetheless, it focuses solely on difficulties in the acquirement and use of
listening, speech, reading, and writing abilities. Phonological memory and
phonological awareness tests are used to assess the participants’ phonological
processing skills (see Appendix A), whereas orthographical identification
tests as well as orthographical fluency and visual memory tests (see Appendix B)
are used to assess visual processing abilities.
Method
The main interest of this study is the analysis of the subjective and objective
relationships between LD, level of formal education, school dropout, and
onset of criminal activity, among a sample of Israeli-born native-Hebrew-
speaking adult inmates. To analyze the aforementioned components, the
researchers chose to combine quantitative and qualitative methodologies.
The quantitative part, concentrating on correlations between LD, com-
pleted years of formal education, age, and onset of criminal activity, uses a
Pearson chi-square correlation matrix. The qualitative part, focusing on
learning-disabled inmates’ perceptions, experiences, and significance of past
scholastic experiences, utilizes a semi-structured interview and content anal-
ysis techniques (Weber, 2001).
Participants
The quantitative part of this research is based on an analysis of five phono-
logical and visual processing skills’ tests, administered to 89 native-Hebrew-
speaking adult inmates (2.83% of the 3,141 native-Hebrew-speaking
prisoners in the Israeli Prison System) randomly selected for the study,5
between March and April, 2011 (Table 1). The participants were incarcerated
in 7 prisons, randomly selected from the 33 criminal prisons in Israel (http://
www.shabas.gov.il/Shabas/PRISON/Jailing+Facility+-+MAP/default.htm)...
To continue reading
Request your trial