Juvenile Correction Facility detailed analysis

Juvenile Correction Facility

Close to 350,000 youths are arrested and detained in theUnited States each, and every year half of the population is detained in residential facilities, and the remaining is adjudicated(Benner et al. 2016).Nearly 24000 youths were held in juvenile centres in Washington statesas per 2009 (Benner et al. 2016).  Also, it has been argued that children detained will spend almost one-third of their youth life in juvenile centres (Clark et al. 2016).  Besides, another study asserted that there is an education challenge in juvenile centers across the United States.  As such, the study purpose of finding a solution for proper education to meet a short term period of youths while in detention centres (Benner et al. 2016).  Also, social workers more especially teachers should change education to integrate the needs of youths in correction facilities.  In most cases, their education is interrupted due to a change of environment.  Not exempting the poor networking in correction facilities. The research also offers a research-driven solution to the education staffs to consider in the process of implementing changes (Gagnon, 2018).  Quality education has made a subsequent change in youth involvement in criminal behaviours. The period youths spend in detention is the right opportunity to intervene in the challenges they face in education. The objective of the paper is to analyze the educational program that will improve behavioral change and educational outcomes in juvenile facilities.

Background of study

WashingtonState possesses22 juvenilecorrection facilities maintained by a juvenile court and one regional centre controlled by the consortium of the counties. The youth coming from 39 counties are confined in the 22 correctionfacilities. The facilities have educational programs managed by local school districts.  The teenager receives a minimum of five hoursin class. Those who refuse to take part inclasses face punishment under the court.  The average length of stay in the facilities range from 5 to 7 days (Gagnon, 2018).  The visit is only extended if the court case is still pending.  As such, this poses a challenge to the type of educational program to be implemented.  When the youth enters correction facilities, they in most cases have specific educational need and deficit (Benner et al. 2016).  The study has identified that most teenagers who are detained at some point end up underperforming.  Incarceratedyouths consistently underperform in contrast to their peers. Apart from facing educational complications, they are likely to have emotional and behavioural challenges as well as poor socialization skills.

Educators in most cases face barriersto due to many obstacles to meet the emotional, educational and toplanfor the future of detained teenager.  The issues identified by human rights to be lacking behind include lack of standardized knowledge, overcrowding, and failure to offer an educational program (Gagnon, 2018).  The plan that is mostly provided to juvenile youths is characterized by poor oversight, low academic expectations, under-skilled teaching and insufficient communication system.  Lack of sufficient system in place increases the challenge that is in existence today (Benner et al. 2016). Youths who are released from juvenile facilities most of the munder performing and 16% are likely to drop out of school.

Additionally, the lack of an effective communication system hampers the program useless. Youths who go back to school in most cases lacks educational history and always left behind by their peers. Similarly, it may take ages for their records to reach their school as such, this continues to waste them. The conditions encourage more school dropouts.

Research question

Is the change in the educational program lead to an improved education system for short term juvenile facilities?

Research hypothesis

H1 incarcerated students have less parental involvement than community students.

H2 incarcerated students have fewer vocational training courses than community students.

H3 incarcerated students have fewer curriculum options than community students.


Education program being independent variables, issues such ashealthy, safe and positive facility comprehensive climate, community engagement andhighly effective classroom practices are some of the factors that affect dependent variables.

Literature review

Young people who are detained should have the opportunity to access education as it helps to change their behaviour. The move is also cost-effective in the process of moulding the youths.  The average cost to detain or confine juvenile is approximately $ 88000 per year. However, teens who took part in education while in confinement centre are not likely to be rearrested (Sullivan, 2018). To ensure that youths in a correction facility have the determination to go back to school, there should be a quality education program.  However, what accounts to quality educational programs remains unclear and a topic of debate.  A study was done by improving the informative, and the educational and vocational outcome for incarcerated youth holds that detained youths do not receive quality education compared to another student in that community.  Also, a report published by the national evaluation and technical assistant education went ahead to issue guidelines that correction facilities should implement. The guidance was about quality education and how to transition level should increase.

Research goal

The research goal in the study is to identify the effectiveness of educational curriculum or program in juvenile correction facilities in Washington states.  Also, the research objective is to implement and improve policies through outlining standardized, evidence-based practices (Sullivan, 2018).  In connection with the research questions stated below, data were collected concerning the weakness and strength of providing useful and relevant education system to juvenile correction centers (Benner et al. 2016).  Furthermore, the study seeks to find out the effect of the current educational program provided in correction facilities and its outcomes.  The data collected is to help in developing a quality assurance tool to improve education program for short term period detainees are in correction facilities.


Research design

To explore the research question, the research will use qualitative research method.  The method was used to capture the behavior of detained youths.  Semi-structured interviews were later on used toinvestigate the critical theme of study (Sullivan, 2018). The participants of the research responded to the open questions. The questions were mainly centered on the curriculum assessment, community relation specialized staff, parental involvement, vocational training, transitions and discipline, and behavior support.

Sampling and research site

The qualitative sampling composed of 85 interviews with educational service district, classroomprofessionals, teachers, district, administrators, and transition specialists. The participants were obtained through government organizations, where people were picked randomly and through google search.  The participants were questioned about the predetermined themes (Leone, & Wruble, 2015).  Further, the local policies together with practices concerning juvenile court and traits of youths sentenced at the juvenile district court were to be obtained by the court officials during the interviews. The interview was to be complemented by observation

Semi-structured interviews

The questions will be delivered to the respondent before meeting to allow them to absorb the problem.  The choice of method will favorthe participants through grouping of the questions into sub-topics and to be handled by participants according to their interest (Gagnon, 2018).  The answer to the questions will be written down through obtained consent from participants. The data will later be transcribed for the analysis. The research will be approved by the national institute of health where the research procedurewill go on as planned.

Classroom observation

Further, non-participatory classroom observation complemented the interview method of collecting data.  The observation focuses on the actions and behaviors of vocational training courses and parental involvement. Theprocedure allowed filling the gap of the questions with no great answers. The method also helped to formulate and understand behavioral and instructional practices utilized (Benner et al. 2016). The limitation of the method wasthat people can change their behavior on realizing that others are monitoring them.  As such, the data can only be analyzed with this type of limitation in the mind

Qualitative findings

Some of the question that qualitative data focus on is: what program element may be related to positive youth outcome in the JuvenileDistrict Courts in Washington states?The program should focus on parental involvement and vocational training. Despite the presence of general policies and regulation that all JDCs follows, the real practice is influenced by local district policies, fundingdecisions, population differences and factors affecting educational outcomes (Clark et al. 2016).  Also, sentencing varies from county to county as such number ofyouths in the juvenile facility is different.   Besides, the variation in policies as well as funding, a clear theme can emerge from the study.  Also, qualitative findings are organized around specific topics such as positive climate, transition, highly effectiveclassroom practice and instructional practices.


The change will be realized if the following recommendations are practiced.  Positive climate should be prioritized whereby healthy, safe and positive facility comprehensive climate is present.  The climate act by accelerating education as such provides the social and emotional environment and condition forlearning.  The second principle that should be prioritized is community engagement.  A healthy and safe relationship with the community is advocated.  The communitywill help in the provision of education skills, intervention and treatment resources in the right place.  The third principle is highly effective classroom practices. The move brings about high-quality classroom experiences (Benner et al. 2016).  Employment and retention of qualified staffs in correctional facilities should be encouraged. In detentioncenters, it is hard to find highly skilled teams.  Moreso, social-emotional services to gather for a particular groupsuch as a person with a disability should be implemented. Academic engagement is another factor that should be encouraged.  Relevant curriculum or system associated with the factors such as; state, career, the academic and technical educational standard using resources and instructional method is recommended.  The last principle is the coordinated transition support.

Several limitations to this research warrant discussion. The validity ofthe study focused on one area, Washington states detection centers. This is challenging because the study to other short-term juvenile centers mighty proves otherwise.  Similarly, the study measures did not include families or youths.  As such, future research work should revolve and focus on the gap.  Also, the study is needed to analyze and evaluate the predictive validity of practices that emerged from the study.

Ethical consideration

Following the approval of research by the National Institute of Health, the research procedures were allowed to go on. Also, the consent was obtained by the participants, and their wishes were respected. The minor participants were consented by their guardians and parents  The board asked permission from participants to write down data generated from interview and observation (Clark et al. 2016). Moreover, the confidentiality of the information accessed was kept privately. The participants were informed that there would be no fee charged for the study. The opinion of everyone was respected, and participant treated equally. The participants consisted of both male and female from African American, Asian, Americans and Hispanic descent.



Benner, G. J., Zeng, S., Armstrong, A. L., Anderson, C., Carpenter, E., University of Washington-Tacoma, & United States of America. (2016). Strengthening Education in Short-term Juvenile Detention Centers: Final Technical Report. Center for Strong Schools, University of Washington, Tacoma.

Clark, H. G., Mathur, S., Brock, L., O’Cummings, M., & Milligan, D. (2016). Transition toolkit 3.0: Meeting the educational needs of youth exposed to the juvenile justice system. National Technical Assistance Center for the Education of Neglected or Delinquent Children and Youth (NDTAC).

Gagnon, J. C. (2018). Making the Right Turn: A Research Update on Improving Transition Outcomes among Youth Involved in the Juvenile Corrections System.Research Brief.Issue 3.National Collaborative on Workforce and Disability for Youth.

Leone, P. E., & Wruble, P. C. (2015). Education services in juvenile corrections: 40 years of litigation and reform. Education and treatment of children, 38(4), 587-604.

Sullivan, K. (2018). Education Systems in Juvenile Detention Centers.BYU Educ. & LJ, 71.




order custom essay paper

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.