National Evaluation Program Phase 1 - Assessment of Correctional Personnel Training Programs, Volume 1 - Executive Summary

• NCJ Number: 76552
• Author(s): H C Olson; M A Cooper; A S Glickman; R Johnson; S J Price; R I Weiner
• Date Published: 1980
• Length: 26 pages
• Contract Number(s): J-LEAA-023-78
• Sponsoring Agency: US Dept of Justice - LEAA; US Dept of Justice NIJ Pub
• Corporate Author: Advanced Research Resources Organization
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
• Publication Type: Best Practice/State-of-the-Art Review
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

Findings and conclusions are summarized from an examination of the state-of-the-art in correctional staff training and an effort to develop models for the evaluation of such training programs.

Abstract

The project began with development of three conceptual models of training evaluation. Study data were then gathered via site visits to 17 corrections agencies, a questionnaire survey of 1,170 directors of all types of corrections agencies, and a review of literature on program evaluation. The 485 responses received by October 26, 1979 were included in the analysis. Findings showed that 96 percent of the agencies conducted training. Courses viewed as useful and offered most often included basic orientation training, crisis intervention, supervision and leadership, security procedures, human relations and communications skills, and counseling techniques. Across agencies of all types, two-thirds of the personnel received 40 hours of training over the preceding year at a median cost of $270 per person trained. The main problem involved in correctional staff training was lack of resources in terms of staff and money. Site visit data also indicated that much of the training was somewhat pro forma and did not deal with the most pressing problems in corrections. Agency goals in training were mainly to maintain control of offenders and to obtain offenders' compliance to agency regulations. The courses viewed as most useful included procedural courses, communication courses, and decisionmaking courses. The most useful courses had clear and specific goals as well as clear relevance to trainees' work. The courses judged most useful were developed on the basis of a job analysis, development of written standards for work performance, and assessment of need. However, a sense of powerlessness on the part of persons responsible for training and lack of explicit linkage of organizational goals to the correctional environment were problem areas. Using data from the survey and site visits, the three models for evaluating training efforts were revised by the evaluation project staff. These models included the Instructional System Operations Model, the Correctional Issues Model, and the Instructional System Evaluation Model. A list of about 150 references is provided. For the volumes comprising the full report, see NCJ 76553-55.