ACA’s 135th Congress of Correction

• Opening Session
  • Baseball’s Iron Man Urges Correctional Professionals to Persevere
• Candid Conversations With E.R. Cass Recipients Glenn S. Goord and Charlotte A. Nesbitt
• Correctional Employees Volunteer to Help Rebuild Houses With Habitat for Humanity in Baltimore
• Workshop Coverage
  • Washington State Sets Example for Sex Offender Success
  • Prison Employment’s Influence on Reentry
  • Correctional Ethics
  • Affirmative Action
  • A Study of Heroes
• Student Poster Winners

Greetings from Baltimore

If you were unable to join us in the "Charm City" for the American Correctional Association’s 135th Congress of Correction, here’s a glimpse of a few of the conference activities that took place.

Baseball’s Iron Man Urges Correctional Professionals to Persevere

In his home town of Baltimore, legendary baseball great Cal Ripken Jr., whose philosophy of working hard, playing with passion and enjoying the game have made a tremendous impact on the sport of baseball and on fans throughout the world, addressed a few thousand correctional employees at the Opening Session of the American Correctional Association’s Congress of Correction. During his career with the Baltimore Orioles, Ripken was one of only seven players to achieve 400 home runs and 3,000 hits. He played 2,632 consecutive games for nearly 17 years without missing a game. Ripken voluntarily ended his streak in 1998.

Prior to and following his breaking Lou Gehrig’s consecutive game record on Sept. 6, 1995, with 2,131 games played, Ripken was asked by players, fans and media what the secret was to his longevity. For a while, he simply told people that it was no big deal — he just showed up for his job every day, just like many other people. One day he was approached by a reporter who asked him if he thought his record could ever be broken. To this Ripken replied, “Sure. If I can do it, someone else can. I’m not Superman.” The reporter then asked what traits would that player have to possess. This question is what prompted Ripken to finally define the value of perseverance.

Ripken outlined for the audience eight traits (which he was happy about because his number was eight) to define perseverance: the right approach; strong will to succeed; passion; love to compete; consistency; conviction; strength; and life management. According to Ripken, these are the traits that player would need to have.

For Ripken, the right approach should be honest and pure, and requires meeting the challenges of each day. He knew that he needed to show up to the ballpark every day ready to play. Whether he actually played or not was the manager’s decision. But, no matter what, he was always ready. Ripken compared this to a corrections professional’s commitment to juvenile rehabilitation. “I want those kids to trust me and I want them to count on me. And the only way to do that is to show up to work every day because if I miss one day maybe they will fall back,” Ripken said. He noted that there was only one time in his career that he doubted his approach. It was in the early 1990s and Ripken sought the advise of teammate Rick Sutcliffe, who had more experience than him. Ripken was going through a bit of a hitting slump and was questioning whether he should end the streak. So, he asked Sutcliffe what he thought. “I’m pitching tomorrow and I want the best behind me,” Sutcliffe said. “You mean so much more to this club than just getting hits and making plays. I need you behind me.” Ripken was grateful to Sutcliffe for setting him straight.

The second trait is having a strong will to succeed. Ripken noted that it can be both genetic and learned. One must have an internal drive and the desire to succeed. Ripken told attendees that he was a poor winner and loser as a child. But his parents did him a great justice; they recognized that this was due to his desire to succeed. And they thought to themselves, “Instead of squelching and putting the fire out, let’s grow the fire.” So, they taught Ripken to channel that energy back into what he was doing, in his case, playing baseball. Now, he says his son Ryan has that same trait and Ripken knows that he and his wife Kelly need to try to help their son understand what he needs to do with it.

“You also have to love what you do; you have to have passion,” Ripken said. He shared memories of his father telling him that there are too many people doing work they hate. His father also told him that the secret to happiness was not in the money but in the work that you do, in the contributions you make and how it makes you feel. Ripken noted that some people think his father forced him into baseball. “All he did was open up the world of baseball to me and then let me choose,” Ripken said. He acknowledged that everyone has days when they do not feel like going to work. That is when passion comes into play. “Passion is what will keep you coming back,” Ripken said.

The love of competition is also important. To Ripken, this means competing on all levels. It involves internal and external competition. Ripken was developed as a third baseman in the minor league system but shortly after moving up to the major leagues he was moved to short stop. It was supposed to be a temporary move, but Ripken ended up playing short stop for 15 years. Although he was in competition with other teammates for his position, year after year, he still shared his wisdom, knowledge and advice. “That’s what team-building is about,” Ripken said. “However, I never let anyone outplay me in that position.”

Consistency is another essential trait, according to Ripken. “You have to make consistent contributions every day.” He stressed the need to adjust and readjust, solve problems and find solutions quickly. “The more contributions you make, the more valuable you are.” The next trait is conviction. One must believe in what he or she is doing. “My dad taught me that when you are right you have to stand up for what you believe in,” Ripken said. This, he said, requires thick skin, stubbornness (with the right purpose) and the ability to see things through to the end.

Strength is necessary as well. This includes both physical and mental strength. “There needs to be an understanding of the link between exercising and maintaining focus,” Ripken said. In other words, each requires the other. Finally, life management skills must be learned so that one can achieve a personal and professional balance in life. For him this involved managing various situations with his family, managers, teammates, fans and media. For example, Ripken learned that during a typical season, he played about 162 games in 175 days. Days off usually were travel days. Therefore, he had to learn to make the time that he did have with his family count.

In closing Ripken read a quote from Theodore Roosevelt: “Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs even though checkered by failure, than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat.” To Ripken this meant that you cannot accomplish anything from the sidelines; you have to get in the game. He left the audience with this thought: “Get in the game, persevere and then find out who you are.”

— Susan L. Clayton

Candid Conversations With E.R. Cass Recipients Glenn S. Goord and Charlotte A. Nesbitt

For more than three decades, Commissioner Glenn S. Goord has dedicated himself to the betterment of the New York State Department of Correctional Services. His career first took root in 1973 and has blossomed into an invaluable example of leadership in the corrections field.

With the oversight of Goord, New York’s correctional services have remained on a path of success that seeks to rehabilitate offenders and keep New York residents safe. Goord has also ensured that the people of the community see the positive face of corrections, with more than 500 inmate work crews dispersed throughout the state, engaged in community projects.

Goord’s commitment to ACA and its standards has permeated the framework of his career. He was a member of the Standards Committee and now serves as chair. He has also been elected to ACA’s Board of Governors. This belief in ACA and the accreditation process has molded the shape of the commissioner’s vision of corrections in New York, and now, it is the largest correctional system in the country that has every facility accredited.

What originally drew you to corrections?

When I graduated from college, I wanted to live in upstate New York. I applied to numerous agencies, both county and state, for a position. Woodbourne Rehabilitation Center was the first, and I should say only, to offer me a job. I was happy to accept.

What experience and knowledge did you gain from your first job as a narcotic rehabilitation counselor?

When I was hired, I knew very little about institutions, the people who worked there or the people confined. I had great supervisors who taught me how to work in a secure environment and provide services to the inmates, through individual and group counseling.

What is the most challenging part of being head of one of the country’s largest prison systems?

The most challenging part of my job is balancing the need to ensure the safety of the public, the employees and the inmates while providing the inmates with the treatment and services they need for a successful transition back into the community. That balance is always on my mind. I have received great support from Gov. George E. Pataki ensuring that we have the resources necessary to run a safe and secure system.

What do you feel has been the most significant achievement(s) in your career?

My achievements, I don’t know that I have any. However, my employees’ achievements are many: a 100 percent ACA accredited system; a significant reduction in prison violence (as exemplified by the lowest assault rate on staff and inmates in more than 25 years); new and innovative programs; improved training and orientation, etc. I do not believe that one person can take the credit for the more than 30,000 employees supervising more than 63,000 inmates in 70 correctional facilities.

How has ACA influenced your career?

ACA has had a great influence on me, especially [in regards to] attending the conferences, networking with other members and reading the publications. I learned New York was not alone; similar issues and challenges were experienced in other systems. We are able to work together and share ideas on how to improve the systems.

What do you think have been your biggest contributions to ACA?

Support and promotion of the accreditation process and my work on the Standards Committee are my biggest contributions to ACA. ACA accreditation provided a unifying goal for the employees and a road map for the department during the extraordinary growth New York experienced in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s. It also provides us with a way to measure our successes.

What motivated you to create an Office of Victim Services?

I felt very strongly that victims’ voices should be heard and that services needed to be provided. The effect has been great. Victims now have a place to go in this department. The most positive effect is providing education and support. Misinformation was our biggest enemy.

What area in corrections do you see as needing improvement?

Corrections needs to have a vision. The areas that need the most ongoing attention are education and communication with the public. They do not understand what we do, which makes it very difficult to explain why we do certain things and to get the resources that are needed to meet our mission. The challenge is effective communication with the public, our employees and the inmates. Our vision, goals and objectives must be clear and consistent.

What do you feel is the most rewarding part about working in corrections?

The most rewarding part of my job is touring the facilities, seeing and talking with the employees and inmates. Knowing that the facilities are well managed, safe, secure and clean, and that inmates are involved in productive activities is very rewarding.

What are your thoughts on being selected for the American Correctional Association’s highest honor?

Of course I am honored and humbled, but as I will say on Wednesday, I accept this award for the 30,000 employees of the state of New York. One person does not make a system, the system belongs to the people of New York. The employees and inmates are the system.

What does the future hold for you, career- wise and personally?

I started in the system July 19, 1973, and I have been commissioner for over nine years. There is much work to be done; I look at the system two, three, four, five and 10 years from now. I feel I have the energy and motivation to help move the system forward. As long as Gov. Pataki agrees, and Joann [significant other] and my dog Mogul agree, I will continue to serve the people of New York.

Charlotte A. Nesbitt

For more than 30 years, Charlotte A. Nesbitt’s unparalleled dedication to corrections has been a guiding light for personnel in all facets of the field. Her undeniable passion for helping youths, her fearless leadership and her belief in the accreditation process have ensured Nesbitt’s place among the best in corrections. Nesbitt began her career as a juvenile probation officer, but her true calling would lie in opening doors and blazing pathways. While cruising the Caribbean for two years with her husband, a dream was forged to bring at-risk youths in Indiana services that could steer them away from self-destruction and toward life fulfillment. After the loss of her husband, Nesbitt went on to provide the leadership for development, financing, design and construction of the Youth Village. And after its completion, Nesbitt assumed the role of executive director and oversaw the achievement of accreditation in 1997. Nesbitt served as project director for ACA’s public policy process for six years. Under her guidance, the first ACA Policy Committee was formed and obtaining ACA members’ input on draft policies began. Nesbitt has also served as ACA chairperson and co-chairperson of the Women in Corrections Committee and has been a member of the ACA Delegate Assembly.

What originally drew you to the corrections field?

People. Even as a youth, I recall want-ing to understand the “why” of what we do. As a seventh grader, I wrote a paper titled, “I want to be a psychologist to help people.” When I was in high school, I organized a group of my friends to do volunteer work in a mental hospital. There, I worked with patients, some of whom were adolescents, who needed care and I remember feeling good [about it], even if it was only that I would listen to them. This and many others were the experiences that confirmed my choice to study psychology and sociology.

What was it like to be the first woman to serve as superintendent of a male facility in Illinois, a classification counselor of a FBOP penitentiary, and an assistant warden at a Maryland penitentiary?

In those early years of my career, it was sometimes lonely when I was the only female in some of my positions in corrections, but I felt overwhelmingly that I was supported. Early on I went to so many meetings and training programs where I was the ‘lone’ woman. But this loneliness was so much more outweighed with support and encouragement from my female and male co-workers, family and other friends in corrections. Being the first female in some positions, ones that were at one time held mostly by men, was a challenge. It was just another thing that motivated me to work harder, longer and smarter. I just wanted to do my job well.

What do you feel has been your most significant achievement(s) in your career and why?

Helping to provide opportunities for both the offenders and the staff working with them. Overall, I hope the quality of life for them, their families and communities is better. Specifically, the creation and my 10 years of being the executive director of the Youth Village gave me the most significant opportunities to hopefully positively impact some 12,500 youths, their families and their communities and to share with the Youth Village staff in these efforts.

How has ACA influenced your career?

ACA gives me direction, knowledge, training, and the opportunities to meet, get to know, and become friends with [many different] people. I was so fortunate early on in my career to have worked with Sam Sublett in Illinois. He was the first to promote me to head up a facility and he introduced me to ACA, its principals and its standards. For more than 40 years, ACA gave me people with whom to learn and share and so many opportunities for training, guidance and friendships. How do you feel about winning the E.R. Cass Correctional Achievement Award? Wow! When I first was told that I had been chosen to receive the E.R. Cass Award, I was so taken back. I was in Arizona attending the ACA Conference. After the phone call, I went walking with my dog Precious in the foothills of the Suspicious Mountains. During that walk and others since, when I think of the E.R. Cass award I have these mental walks of memories and replays of all the wonderful people who were and are the wind in my sails. I might be the one receiving this most prestigious award, but I share it with them. I am proud of my accomplishments, but I know I could not and cannot do what is meaningful without my family, friends, co-workers, and all those who have worked and supported me.

What does the future hold for you?

I am not done yet. I have joined Xebec Management in Nashville, Tenn. Some of the principals of this company are the ones that helped me make the Youth Village dream a reality. My dream now is that I will be able to help younger children and those who are coming out of facilities. Aftercare and reentry are so critical for those who are being released from facilities and I want to be there to help some of them find better opportunities. I want to share ways they can make better life choices. And just maybe I can be involved in creating a state-of-the-art center for assisted living, especially for those with Alzheimer’s disease. Then I hope the next chapter will include taking my boat, Precious Time II, from Annapolis, Md., to Ft. Lauderdale, Fla., via the Chesapeake Bay and then the Inner Coastal Waterway. Then just maybe, I will retire and find other ways to spend precious time.

— Philip J. Comey and Susan L. Clayton

Washington State Sets Example for Sex Offender Success

Nothing strikes fear in the heart of a community like the return of a sex offender. On Saturday, Anna Aylward, program administrator for the Twin River Sex Offender Treatment Program (SOTP), explained what the state of Washington is doing to wither those worries away.

Aylward began with a discussion of Washington statistics, noting that of the 27,213 felony sentences imposed in Washington state, 1,403 involved sex offenses. And out of Washington’s 17,850 inmate population, 18.3 percent were incarcerated for sex offenses. Aylward also pointed out the significant disparity between average sentence length for felonies, 37.3 months, compared with those sentenced for sex offending, 90.8.

Aylward then explained the different types of treatment including a brief overview of the Special Sex Offender Sentencing Alternative and the Civil Commitment, which involves sexually violent predators. Afterwards, Aylward began the discussion of the Twin Rivers Sex Offender Treatment Program by reciting the mission statement: Contribute to community safety by providing state of the art treatment to sex offenders. “I think this is so important because what treatment is about is prevention,” Aylward said.

Aylward continued the workshop by outlining the goals of the Twin Rivers treatment including helping offenders learn skills to manage their risk, help them learn to lead pro-social lifestyles and help manage offender risk more effectively. The make-up of the program includes 36 personnel from across the state, Aylward said. Clinical teams, research and assessment teams, and community treatment teams all work in conjunction to reach the program’s aspirations.

SOTP participants are chosen depending on their time left until release and their risk to reoffend. A usual point of commencement for offender participation is during the last 18 months of their sentence, Aylward explained. While incarcerated, SOTP attempts to dismantle mental distortions offenders may have and tries to instill victim empathy within them.

The workshop also offered attendees a clearer picture of sex offenders and their needs. Key points such as appropriate, sexual-deviancy treatment and supervision suited to particular offenders would help reduce recidivism, Aylward explained. Other basic knowledge such as the tendency for offenders to have habitual patterns that facilitate their offending was brought up as information that required addressing.

The workshop continued with an overview of the effects of the treatment. According to Aylward, the treatment program reduces recidivism, assists offenders in locating and accessing community resources, and helps prevent future reoffending. Aylward then delved into more specifics of effective sex offender treatment. Among the criteria were a relapse prevention framework and cognitive-behavioral techniques.

Aylward concluded the presentation by offering advice participants should bring home, such as caution against certain assumptions. “A low-risk offender can be a high-risk offender given a certain situation,” Aylward said. Aylward also highlighted the importance of not ignoring low-risk offenders simply because they have been allocated less resources. Also, flexibility reigned as a key word in treating this often difficult offender group. As risk is dynamic, so intervention must also be dynamic, said Aylward.

— Philip Comey

Prison Employment’s Influence on Reentry

Does working in prison result in greater employment and less recidivism upon release? This is the question that was examined in an afternoon workshop on Saturday presented by Cindy J. Smith, Ph.D., director of the Criminal Justice Graduate Program at the University of Baltimore and research associates Jennifer Connolly, M.S., and Angie Patrick, M.S. This session summarized, for the first time ever, preliminary findings of an ongoing research study based on data gathered during a five-year period. The Prison Industry Enhancement Certification Program (PIECP) has been operational since 1979 but this is the first national evaluation. It is assumed by many corrections professionals that joint venture industries between inmates, departments of correction and the private sector is a positive reentry initiative. This presentation looked at outcome measures of recidivism and reentry employment for a national sample of 7,400 released men and women from 46 prisons for a follow-up period of up to six years.

Smith began by pointing out the differences between PIECP and traditional industries (TI). She noted that PIECP employees make living wages and are supervised by a person outside of the corrections field. In traditional industry jobs, goods are made in prison, remain in-state and may be sold to the government. The University of Baltimore study has examined if PIECP works. It looked at three areas: time it takes to obtain successful employment, how long employment is maintained and the amount of time between release and recidivism. The three groups that were compared were PIE, TI and other than work (OTW), those eligible to work but who participated in programs other than work, such as education, treatment, etc.

Connolly discussed a few key findings. One question the study examined is: Does PIECP participation increase post-release employment compared with TI and OTW? The total sample size for the question was 6,827. Twenty-one percent never gained employment after release. PIE participants obtained a job quicker than TI and faster than OTW. TI and OTW were approximately the same. When comparing those previously employed, PIE was the same as TI, PIE was higher than OTW, and TI and OTW were the same. Of those not previously employed, PIE was higher than TI and OTW, and TI was higher than OTW. Thus, if the inmate did not work before coming to prison, working in prison makes him or her more likely to work after prison. In this study, losing employment was defined as not working for a quarter. The length of employment for all three groups was nearly the same. PIE participants maintained employment longer than those in TI or OTW. There was no significant difference between the TI and OTW groups. Smith told workshop participants that there was no difference between those previously employed and those who were not. Ninety-six percent of those who worked did not earn enough wages in each quarter to be comparable to working full time and earning minimum wage.

Patrick outlined recidivism findings. She pointed out that this study looks at a person’s first recidivism. In looking at whether PIECP participation decreases recidivism, post-release arrests, post-release convictions and post-release incarcerations were measured. In a sample of 5,656 ex-offenders, 3,203 (57 percent) were never arrested after release. The time from release to arrest ranged from one to 2,707 days. When comparing the three groups, PIE took longer to be rearrested than TI and OTW. Seventy-six percent, 4,288, were not convicted after release. The range from release to conviction was six to 2,724 days. The length of time it took for PIE participants to get convicted was longer than TI and OTW participants, and TI and OTW were the same. From release to incarceration, 5,195 (91.8 percent) were never incarcerated after release. PIE participants did better than TI and OTW participants.

After looking at the findings, a question emerged: Should everyone be in PIE programs? Patrick said probably not. An important factor in determining this is the number of prior arrests. For successes, it averaged four and for re-arrests it averaged eight. According to Patrick, if an inmate has zero to eight prior arrests, he or she is more likely to be successful by working in PIE or TI.

Throughout the study, sample matches were made based on age, race (white or minority), gender (80 percent male, 20 percent female), length of sentence, crime type (person, other) and number of disciplinary infractions. Preliminary findings show that if an inmate did not work before coming to prison, working in prison increases the possibility of gaining employment after release. Researchers do not yet know what motivates employment longevity. The study shows that those who earn above minimum wage recidivate less and tend to have only zero to eight prior arrests. And those with eight or fewer prior arrests are arrested and convicted at a slower rate and less frequently if they work in PIE or TI. Reincarceration is less frequent for PIE participants. Smith ended by pointing out that there is much left to learn from the data of this study including philosophy based on length of time served, mental health issues and educational levels. Questions from the audience were taken at the end of the workshop.

— Susan L. Clayton

Correctional Ethics

Workers face ethical decisions every day. Often, these situations present ethical dilemmas. In corrections, making the right decision protects the employee, the organization and the clients the organization serves. Ethical behavior also protects corrections as a whole. In the workshop “Ethics in the Correctional Workforce,” Richard B. Rosenblatt, Esq., assistant secretary, Treatment Services, Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services, explained what ethical behavior is and discussed why some people act unethically. He said that understanding what constitutes ethical and unethical behavior will help an organization encourage ethical thinking and improve ethical behavior.

Rosenblatt defined ethical behavior as “an intentional course of conduct judged as proper or acceptable based on some standard of right and wrong.” He stressed that the conduct must be intentional and that it must involve “action” not “thoughts.” He pointed out that what is considered ethical can be very subjective, depending on how the “standard of right and wrong” is derived. He gave three examples of where people can learn ethical standards: what society accepts; the heroic model (e.g., What would Lincoln do?); and religious teachings. These three sources have a powerful impact on peoples’ understanding of what is ethical, Rosenblatt said, and there are many more. He said this is why an organization needs to have “prophylactic ethics,” which is the creation of a set of rules to help ensure compliance with ethical behavior.

Rosenblatt then engaged the audience in a discussion about legal versus moral behavior. Rosenblatt said that there are individual ethics and societal ethics. Individual ethics include those qualities that reflect personal integrity, such as honesty, loyalty and trustworthiness. Everyone can agree that these are good things. Societal ethics, however, often involve matters that demand government action on issues that can be very controversial, such as affirmative action, capital punishment, abortion and land preservation.

Rosenblatt next explored why some people act unethically. He said some people act this way because they are immature or cognitively unbalanced. They just do not understand the importance of doing the right thing. Some people are motivated by greed. Other people believe that, in special circumstances, “the ends justify the means,” and they can suspend their standards of right and wrong. Some people are “moral and ethical dummies.” In corrections, Rosenblatt explained, we call them sociopaths or psychopaths. They care about themselves only and are not concerned about how their actions affect other people. Finally, there are those who believe that the reward of unethical behavior outweighs the risk of punishment.

Behaving ethically is not just a battle of conscience. There are also tangible results. Behaving ethically can cost money, drain management time, cause discontent among employees and create unrealistic expectations, Rosenblatt said. However, unethical behavior can result in fines, court restrictions and time in jail or prison. It can also cost an organization valuable good will with the public. Fewer people will want to do business with an organization that is known for being unethical.

Determining whether a particular action is ethical is not always easy. The ethical questions involved may not be obvious. Rosenblatt offered three questions that should be asked when someone is in a dilemma and wants to stay on the right side of ethics: Is it legal? (Does it violate civil or criminal laws or any company policies?); Is it balanced? (Is it fair to all concerned, in the short- and long-term?); and, How will it make me feel about myself? (Will I feel proud? Can I tell my family and others?)

With that guidance, the audience broke into groups and discussed various hypothetical, ethical dilemmas that Rosenblatt proposed. Each group came up with a reasonable response to the ethical situation assigned to them and shared it with the audience. Finally, the audience discussed the ethics involved in each group’s response.

Affirmative Action

With the wounds of discrimination still lingering in the United States, a workshop Monday sought to inform attendees why diversity should be considered among correction’s top priorities. To begin the workshop titled “From Affirmative Action to Affirming Diversity,” Walter Ridley, chair person of ACA’s Affirmative Action Committee, urged the audience to think of the future of corrections and the diverse personnel that will constitute that employee pool.

Then Gerri Mason Hall, vice president of business diversity and strategic initiatives for Amtrak, used a Power Point presentation to illuminate the evolution of affirmative action policies. Hall explained that although language pertaining to affirmative action was signed into law in 1965, a void remained that left noticeable gaps in minority representation through the 1970s. Hall explained that to make progress, Arthur Fletcher, an affirmative action advocate, designed a plan that called upon setting goals for hiring minorities rather than passive compliance of existing laws. By the 1980s, the goal of minority representation was being reached and by the 1990s, diversity was a buzzword, said Hall. “It is clear that the work force will continue to change, there will be no turning back to the predominantly white, male environment,” Hall stressed. Following Hall, Jeanna Gomez, president of Gomez Counseling and Consulting Services, P.A., spoke of the flourishing Latino population and the significance it will have on corrections in various facets. To stress this point, Gomez displayed hard to ignore statistics. According to the information, there will be 27 million Latinos in the United States, they will make up 10 percent of the entire population and will be the largest minority group in the nation by 2007.

Gomez emphasized what these numbers mean in the context of the corrections field. While corrections serves a diverse group and sizeable number of minorities, most correctional employees remain Anglo-male. She added that with diversity, the certainty and safety that comes with understanding the language of inmates may degenerate. “Can it pose a problem? It definitely can,” Gomez said in reference to the language barrier. Shifting from a matter of safety to a situation of potential solutions, Gomez offered the average age of Latinos in the work force: 26. This is a statistic that the aging corrections field needs to scrutinize, Gomez explained.

Wrapping up the trio of speakers, Richard L. Stalder, secretary of corrections services for the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections, offered an uncommon perspective on the value of diversity. Rather than pulling on emotional heartstrings of idealistic equality, Stalder suggested that corrections officials offer objective reasons such as monetary gain and increased institution safety as justification for diversity.

To illustrate, Stalder explained that a devastating riot at a facility in Ohio years ago is now largely seen as having been an issue of diversity, or rather, lack there of. Scathing tensions between a mostly homogeneous inmate population and a different, yet also homogeneous correctional officer population ignited with dire results. “You will have safer institutions if you make a work force more culturally aware of others across the board,” said Stalder.

To reap diversity benefits, Stalder explained that leadership in an institution must ensure that diversity is not only acheived externally through hiring; it must also be acheived internally, in the hearts and minds of employees. Stalder followed by explaining that if a particular warden (in Louisiana) did not understand the culture of his mostly Cajun work force, the job and goals of the facility would be compromised. Stalder concluded by stating that while subjective reasoning should remain, objectivity wears a stronger armor when it comes to political or personal dilution. While some people may not be willing to listen when discussing the idea of fundamental fairness, a discussion of monetary benefits may gain the attention of those same people, Stalder explained.

A Study of Heroes
A Study of Heroes is an inter-disciplinary educational program for grades kindergarten through 12, created by the Raoul Wallenberg Committee of the United States. Wallenberg, who was a Swedish citizen, is well known for saving the lives of nearly 100,000 Jewish people in Budapest, Hungary, by liberally distributing Sweden’s safe pass (Shutzpass) to individuals facing death in Nazi concentration camps between July 1944 and January 1945. He was captured and imprisoned by Nazi troops on Jan. 17, 1945. Although his fate remains unknown to this day, he is recognized as a hero who saved lives in a nonviolent way.

The heart of A Study of Heroes is the study of role models from a spectrum of cultural, racial, religious and generational diversity. The program has now been successfully tested in all New Jersey prisons through the Character Education Grant of the New Jersey Department of Corrections. The program teaches inmates through the example of nonviolent heroes. It is a 32-unit, flexible resource designed to compliment existing curricula by incorporating character education into academic disciplines and students’ everyday lives. Presented by Rachel Oestreicher Bernheim, chair and chief executive officer of the Raoul Wallenberg Committee of the United States, and Kathleen Dunlevy Morin, Ed.D., director of education and author, curriculum designer and developer for A Study of Heroes, the workshop outlined how a correctional facility can integrate the program into their current curriculum.

By studying the lives of heroic role models, students are encouraged to learn the difference between “hero” and “celebrity.” This is important because many inmates only look up to sports figures, drug dealers and people who do not play by the rules. “Everyone has the potential to be a hero and a hero does not have to be famous,” Bernheim said. Each chapter includes biographical material, vocabulary lessons, various exercises, and discussion and reflection questions. After reading biographical sketches of 22 heroes from throughout history, students are asked to choose their own hero and write about how they could be heroic like that person. Heroic figures studied include Wallenberg, Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King Jr., Roberto Clementi, Helen Keller, the Dalai Lama, Rosa Parks, Pope John XXIII and Thomas Jefferson.

“We tell students they are heroes in training,” Bernheim said. She said that students are posed four questions: Who is your hero? What is a hero? Was there ever a time when you wished a hero had been nearby? Would you ever want to be a hero and why or why not? After learning about several heroic people, a New Jersey inmate wrote, “I never knew there were people like this in the world. One day I hope I can be a hero to my son.”

Bernheim told attendees that so many people do not have parents who teach their children values. “You may be the first people in your students’ lives who teach them values and believe in them.”
Commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Corrections Devon Brown also shared a few thoughts. He said A Study of Heroes is one of the cornerstones of educational efforts in New Jersey prisons. “Character-building is at the core,” Brown said, adding, “Those who complete the program are less likely to commit infractions in and out of prison.”

Morin then discussed how in order to understand and appreciate a hero five contexts need to be examined: historical, cultural, geo-political, technological and socio-economic. She also outlined various resources of the program. “Teachers are closest to their students and make the best curriculum decisions,” Morin said. “Learning should be fun, even though its content is serious.”

According to Bernheim and Morin, the program has shown positive results: Students know the difference between heroes and celebrities; they are able to discover their own strengths and develop skills for overcoming peer pressure and dealing with conflicts in a nonviolent way; their literacy and cognitive skills are improved; and they recognize that all people can make a difference. Ultimately, they discover heroes in their own lives and within themselves. Clearly, A Study of Heroes is helping inmate students build character and self-esteem

In closing, Bernheim told those in attendance that they are working with a very important population — those who need hope restored. A Study of Heroes is one way to achieve this with inmate students. “I know of no other profession that has the potential to change lives and to save lives,” Bernheim said.

— Michael Kelly, Philip J. Comey and Susan L. Clayton