TERJE MANGER, OLE-JOHAN EIKELAND, ARVE ASBJØRNSEN

and TORFINN LANGELID

EDUCATIONAL INTENTIONS AMONG PRISON INMATES

ABSTRACT. The aim of the study was to examine the impact of geographical and cultural

affiliation and learning problems on prison inmates’ intentions to embark on education

above their obtained level of education. Younger inmates, inmates who had reading or writ-

ing problems and inmates with less geographical and cultural affiliation to Norway were

significantly more likely to report that they wished to start upper secondary school than

older inmates, inmates who had no reading or writing problems and inmates with a strong

affiliation to Norway. Likewise, younger inmates, inmates who had a non-Norwegian affil-

iation and inmates who had no problems with arithmetic or mathematics were significantly

more likely than others to say that they wished to embark on university studies or other

higher education.

KEY WORDS: cultural differences, education, gender, mathematics problems, prison in-

mates, reading problems

INTRODUCTION

Education is now recognized as a basic human need and as a human right,also for prison inmates (e.g., United Nations and UNESCO 1995). Ac-cordingly, in recent years, there has been an increasing amount of interestinternationally in prison education and education after inmates have beenreleased into society. This interest is also in line with the concept of lifelonglearning, which sees each educational activity as part of a lifelong process.From this point of view, there is no reason why the learning process shouldbe interrupted by previous learning problems, negative educational expe-riences, or imprisonment. The aim of the present study is thus to examineprison inmates’ intentions to embark on education above their obtainedlevel of education and some factors that impact such wishes.

Most literature suggests that crime and recidivism are inversely relatedto the educational attainment of the individual (e.g., Batchelder and Pippert2002). Findings of the national Adult Literacy Survey (Kerka 1995) showthat only 51% of inmates had completed high school, compared to 76%of the general population. Similarly, Eikeland and Manger (2004) foundthat 51% of the inmates in Norwegian prisons had completed 1, 2, or3 years of upper secondary school (school for those between 16 and 19years of age). However, only 35% of inmates under 25 years of age hadcompleted any level of upper secondary education. In comparison, 74% ofthe equivalent general population age group in Norway had completed 3years of secondary education.

European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research (2006) 12: 35–48

DOI: 10.1007/s10610-006-9007-2 C© Springer 2006

36 T. MANGER ET AL.

Despite these typical characteristics of prison inmates, this group showsgreat diversity in learning ability and educational history. Eleven percentof the inmates in Norwegian prisons had completed single courses or de-grees at university or other higher education (Eikeland and Manger 2004).This variety in educational background is in line with the developmenttaxonomy of antisocial behavior, which suggests two primary prototypes:life-course-persistent (LCP) offenders versus adolescence-limited (AL) of-fenders (e.g., Moffitt et al. 2002; Patterson et al. 1998). The LCP offendersare the traditional educational nonparticipants, and among the AL offendersare the well-qualified offenders (Costelloe 2003; Forster 1990). Thus, withrespect to future education, both in prison and after release, prison inmateshave different needs. However, the initial decision to become involvedin education in prison, either at lower or higher levels, may for variousgroups be related to the lack of choice of other activities or the inevitabledeprivation in prison. According to Forster (1990, p. 18), the previouslyeducationally deprived inmate finds himself in a paradoxical situation: “the‘new experience’ of education, which the constraints of prison push himinto, makes him aware of some of the shortcomings of this provision com-pared with opportunities outside – yet without the constraints, he wouldnever had tasted the experience.” For the previously educated inmates, ed-ucation in prison is often seen as the only part of his former life he cancontinue.

Independent of their age, a significant number of prison inmates havea history of substance abuse and mental health problems (Friestad andSkog-Hansen 2004) that have interfered with reading and writing skillsand thus with further education. The British Social Exclusion Unit Report(2002, cited in an All-Party Parliamentary Group report on prison educa-tion, 2004) concluded that half of all prisoners are at or below Level 1 (thelevel expected of an 11-year-old) in reading. Svensson et al. (2003) con-cluded that most of the inmates with literacy difficulties in Swedish prisonshad a background from infancy and onwards characterized by severe socialand emotional problems, interfering with the development of literacy andliterate culture.

Although reading and writing skills are the most needed educationalskills in a modern society, arithmetic and mathematics skills are also impor-tant. Fridhov (1991) found that 50% of inmates in a sample of Norwegianprisoners reported that they needed help with such problems. However, atthe time of writing of the present paper, a search in the databases Eric andPsychINFO revealed no studies of prison inmates’ arithmetic or mathe-matics problems. For inmates who have reading and writing problems orarithmetic and mathematics problems, education in prison and after releasemay be perceived to have an “enabling” function and be designed to repairclearly defined inadequacy (Forster 1990).

EDUCATIONAL INTENTIONS AMONG PRISONERS 37

In several countries, attention is regularly drawn to the relatively highnumber of nonindigenous inmates. In Europe, non-Europeans are over-represented in the prison population (e.g., United Nations and UNESCO1995). However, studies comparing prison inmates from different culturesare still rare. Some studies have shown that differences in literacy skillsamong prison inmates are related to racial or ethnic status (e.g., Haigleret al. 1994), and that ethnic minority groups in prison have more prob-lems than ethnic majority inmates (Taube and Fredriksson 1995; Myrberg1996). According to Viljugrein (2002), many inmates from ethnic minor-ity groups in Norwegian prisons have a lack of language skills, even whenthey have spent most of their childhood and teenage years in Norway. How-ever, at the time of writing, a review of the literature (using the data basesEric, PsychInfo and PubMed) revealed no study comparing prison inmatesacross nations or cultures.

The Right to Learn

A fundamental principle of the Norwegian prison system is that inmatesshould have the same access to social services as other citizens. Publicinstitutions other than the prison service supply these services. The importmodel, or administrative collaboration, is meant to lead to circumstancesthat are as normal and open as possible within a basically closed system.This is also a way of making other institutions aware of their responsibilitiesby indicating that they too have an obligation to assist in the return ofprisoners to the community (County Governor of Hordaland 2005). TheNorwegian Education Act recognizes the general right to basic schoolingand the right of those who have completed compulsory schooling to 3years of upper secondary education. In addition, all adults born before1978 have a right to upper secondary education and also to supplementarybasic schooling and special education.

These legal guarantees are particularly important for education withinthe prison system. The majority of prisoners are between 21 and 40 yearsof age, and among them are previously educationally deprived inmates andpreviously educated inmates with a need for even higher education. It isthus important to study whether the prison inmates intend to take advantageof the opportunities that the educational system offers them while in prisonand after they are released. The results can provide valuable informationabout both motivating factors and the barriers preventing this group fromparticipating in education.

Research Problems

On commission from the County Governor of Hordaland and the Nor-wegian Ministry of Education and Research, we were asked to examine

38 T. MANGER ET AL.

which formal education the prison population intended to embark on. Inthe present study, inmates’ educational wishes will be related to their learn-ing problems and their geographical and cultural affiliations, controlled forthe demographic variables of age and gender. Our assumption was that thesefactors will have a different impact at different educational levels. Morespecifically, cultural and geographical affiliation and learning problemswere assumed to have a greater impact on the intentions to start educationabove the obtained level for inmates with a lower level of education thanfor inmates with a higher level of education who might be consideringembarking on or continuing higher education. At a lower level, inmateswith a lack of affiliation to Norway may not wish to embark on educationdue to a lack of elementary skills, language problems, or cultural obstacles.However, they may gradually recognize the opportunities offered by theNorwegian educational system and prison education. Thus, these individ-uals may see educational programs as an opportunity to compensate for alack of elementary skills and education. Similarly, inmates with learningproblems may avoid education but also recognize the new opportunitiesoffered by the prison context.

The interpretations attaching importance to the opportunities of prisoneducation are in line with Viljugrein (2002), who, in her qualitative studyamong ethnic minority males in Norwegian prisons, reported that manyteachers concluded that these inmates were more motivated, had morepositive attitudes to prison education and teachers, and were prouder ofattending school than Norwegian inmates. At the higher levels of educa-tion, we assume that geographical and cultural differences and learningproblems will have less effect on inmates’ intentions to embark on fur-ther education. We assume that the more education inmates have, the moresimilar educational experiences they will have and the more similar (andpositive) attitudes to education and teaching they will also have.

METHODS

Participants

The target group was all 2946 inmates over 18 years of age in Norwegianprisons between February 3 and 10 in 2004 (only eight inmates were under18 years of age). For several reasons (e.g., illness, temporary leave, presencein court) 169 inmates were not included (i.e., 2777 were). One thousandnine hundred and thirty-seven inmates in 42 prisons, or 69.8% of thosewho received the survey responded.

A total of 93.4% of the participants were males and 6.6% were females.According to government figures, at the week of data collection, femalescomprised 5.3% of the prison population. 83.1% of the respondents were

EDUCATIONAL INTENTIONS AMONG PRISONERS 39

Norwegian citizens and 16.9% were foreign citizens, representing 73 coun-tries. According to Norwegian government figures (Kriminalomsorgen2003), 18% of the prison population had foreign citizenship. Moreover,80.2% of the respondents in our study had spent most of their childhoodand teenage years in Norway, while 19.8% had spent most of their child-hood and teenage years in another country. The mean age of all inmates inthe study was 33.8 years.

Instrument

In a short questionnaire respondents were asked which level of educa-tion listed below they wished to start. The questionnaire also containedquestions about age, gender, terms of incarceration, citizenship, countryof childhood and teenage years, both parents’ birth country, level of ed-ucation completed up to that point in time, and perceptions of reading orwriting problems and arithmetic or mathematics problems. For most of thequestions, the respondents were asked to tick the appropriate box or boxes.The questionnaire was available in both Norwegian and English, and oneearlier version was tested in a pilot among inmates in one large prison.

Procedure

A representative of the County Governor of Hordaland, Department of Ed-ucation (the organization in charge of the Norwegian prison education),telephoned each Prison Governor and each teacher in charge of the prisoneducation in order to outline the purpose of the study and to arrange forcarrying out the assessment. In addition, a letter was sent to the same per-sons, explaining the procedures. In line with instructions from the researchgroup, the Prison Governor in each prison or the teacher in charge of theprison education carried out the survey.

The front page of the questionnaire to all inmates explained the purposeand procedure of the study and emphasized that participation in the studywas voluntary. In addition, the participants were assured that their answerswould be confidential and that no specific feedback on their individualperformance would be provided. Inmates with reading and writing prob-lems or who were not fluent in English or Norwegian were offered helpduring the completion of the questionnaire. In accordance with Norwegianlaw, the survey was reported to the Ombudsman for Privacy in Research,Norwegian Social Science Data Services Ltd.

Statistics

Descriptive statistics were used to summarize survey responses. A logisticregression procedure was used to investigate the impact of age, gender,

40 T. MANGER ET AL.

geographical affiliation, reading or writing difficulties and arithmetic ormathematics problems on educational intentions.

RESULTS

A total of 55.5% inmates who had completed primary school and lower sec-ondary school (compulsory school for 6–16-year-olds in Norway) wishedto start upper secondary education; 27.3% of those who had completed anylevel (1, 2, or 3 years) of upper secondary school wished to embark onuniversity studies or other higher education; 46.2% of those who had al-ready completed single courses or degrees within higher education wishedto continue such education.

The information about whether the inmates spent most of their childhoodand teenage years in Norway or in other countries, and which countries theirmothers and fathers were born in, provided a clue to their geographical andcultural affiliations. The subjects were divided into two groups: (1) inmateswith Norwegian parents who had spent most of their childhood and teenageyears in Norway, and (2) inmates with a less strong affiliation to Norway(i.e., inmates who had spent most of their childhood and teenage years inNorway, but whose parents, either one or both, were not born in Norway;inmates who had spent most of their childhood and teenage years in acountry other than Norway, but who had one or two Norwegian parentsand inmates who had spent most of their childhood and teenage years in acountry other than Norway and whose parents were not born in Norway).

Among the inmates who had the lowest level of education, 52.7% of theNorwegians and 64.0% of those with foreign affiliations wished to startupper secondary education. 23.1% of the Norwegians and 43.2% of thosewith foreign affiliations wished to start university studies or other highereducation, while 43.9% of the Norwegians and 50.7% of those with foreignaffiliations wished to continue higher education.

A total of 22.8% of the inmates reported that they had some problemswith reading or writing and 8.3% reported having a lot of problems of thiskind. Significant gender differences were found: 23.7% of the males and8.7% of the females reported that they had some problems, while 8.7%of the males and 3.2% of the females reported having a lot of problems,chi-square (2, N = 1916) = 23.2, p < 0.000. 28.9% of the subjectsreported that they had some problems and 9.4% had a lot of problems witharithmetic or mathematics. No gender difference was found, chi-square(2, N = 1910) = 3.1, p < 0.21.

In order to study geographical and cultural affiliation and learning dif-ficulties as predictors of inmates’ wishes to start education above theiralready obtained level of education (or to continue university studies orother higher education) three logistic regression analyses were conducted.

EDUCATIONAL INTENTIONS AMONG PRISONERS 41

In all analyses, the inmates’ wish to start education (code 1) or not (code0) was entered as a dependent variable and age (a continuous variable),gender (females: 1; males: 0), geographical and cultural affiliation (lessstrong affiliation to Norway: 1; Norwegian: 0), reading or writing diffi-culties (problems: 1; no problems: 0) and arithmetic or mathematics diffi-culties (problems: 1; no problems: 0) were entered as predictor variables.In the first analysis, we included only inmates whose highest completededucational level was primary school or lower secondary school; in thesecond analysis we included only inmates whose highest completed ed-ucational level was upper secondary school; and in the third analysis weincluded only inmates who had completed single courses or a degree fromuniversity or other higher education. Table I shows the impact of eachindependent variable when all other variables were controlled for, on in-mates’ wish to embark on education above their obtained level (Level 1and Level 2, respectively) and on their wish to continue higher education(Level 3).

As Table 1 shows, gender had no significant impact on inmates’ edu-cational wishes. Age had a statistically significant impact in all analyses.

TABLE I

Logistic regression analyses for inmates’ educational intentions above their ob-

tained level of education

Obtained level

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3

Predictor variables Exp(B) Sig. Exp(B) Sig. Exp(B) Sig.

Gender 1.18 (.32) .599 .64 (.48) .363 1.34 (.48) .537

Age .94 (.01) .000 .96 (.01) .000 .95 (.02) .002

Geographical and 1.46 (.19) .041 2.56 (.22) .000 1.30 (.31) .398

cultural affiliation

Reading or 1.58 (.18) .012 .91 (.26) .604 .43 (.55) .125

writing problems

Arithmetic or .94 (.17) .742 .58 (.25) .035 1.50 (.48) .398

mathematics

problems

N 749 599 212

−2 Log likelihood 940.88 642.31 274.91

X2 67.25 .000 41.54 .000 13.45 .020

The exponentiated value of the regression coefficients (standard error in

parentheses).

Note: Level 1 = primary school and lower secondary school; Level 2 = upper

secondary school; Level 3 = single course or degree at university or other higher

education.

42 T. MANGER ET AL.

For inmates who had only completed primary school and lower secondaryschool, the impact of age on the likelihood that the inmate would wish tostart upper secondary school was linear and significant. As the table shows,the odds that a 1-year older inmate would want to start upper secondaryeducation was 0.94 compared to a 1-year younger inmate, i.e., the chanceof having such a wish decreases slightly with increasing age. The size of thecoefficient suggests that for every year the inmates grow older the odds ofwishing to start upper secondary school decreases by 6%. When recodingthe age variable into age groups, descriptive statistics showed that 70.6%of those under 25 years of age wished to start upper secondary education;59.3, 44.4, and 28.8%, respectively, in the age groups 25–34, 35–44, and45 years or older wished to start such education.

Among inmates who already had completed upper secondary educa-tion, younger inmates were more likely than others to want to start highereducation. Similarly, age had the only significant impact on the wish tocontinue higher education when the inmates already had that kind of ed-ucation. Again, younger inmates were more likely to have such wishes.In both these analyses, the relationship between age and the wish to starteducation was nonlinear. That is, when recoding the age variable into agegroups, the tendency to have such wishes was most likely for the age group25–34 years. Inmates who were under 25 years of age were more likelythan those who were 35 years or older to have an intention to embark onhigher education or to continue such education.

Geographical and cultural affiliation had a significant effect on inmates’wish to start upper secondary education when the other predictor variableswere controlled for. Those who had least affiliation to Norway were morelikely than Norwegians to report such wishes. Similarly, inmates who al-ready had completed a level of upper secondary school and had a weakeraffiliation to Norway were more likely than the Norwegians to intend tostart higher education.

Inmates who had reading or writing problems were significantly morelikely than inmates who had no such problems to report an intention tostart upper secondary education. For inmates who had completed uppersecondary school or higher education, reading or writing problems had nosignificant effect. However, those who had no problems with arithmeticor mathematics were more likely to report that they wished to embarkon university studies or other higher education than those who had suchproblems.

The prediction model was significant for all three levels of education.In line with the predictions, cultural and geographical affiliation and learn-ing problems had an impact on less-educated inmates’ intentions to starteducation above the obtained level of education. However, these variables,but with arithmetic or mathematics problems instead of reading or writing

EDUCATIONAL INTENTIONS AMONG PRISONERS 43

problems, also had significant impact on intentions to start higher educa-tion. Our assumption that the impact would be reduced at higher levels ofeducation was supported for those who already had completed some highereducation and wished to carry on with their studies.

DISCUSSION

Consistent with previous research (Fridhov 1991; Skardhamar 2002), a con-siderable percentage of prison inmates intended to start education abovetheir obtained level of education. A total of 55.5% of the inmates whohad only completed primary school or lower secondary school (compul-sory school in Norway) reported that they wished to start upper secondaryschool. Among them, the youngest inmates, inmates who had reading orwriting problems and inmates who did not have a strong affiliation toNorway, were more likely to have such intentions. Due to the high schooldrop-out rate and the high rate of self-reported reading or writing problemsin this group (e.g., Eikeland and Manger 2004), these respondents are of-ten called the traditional educational nonparticipants (e.g., Costelloe 2003).According to Moffitt et al. (2002), these individuals may have followed thelife-course-persistent path to antisocial and delinquent behavior.

Costelloe (2003) suggests that the traditional educational nonparticipantprisoners display evidence of long-standing and enduring negative forma-tive factors that occurred at an early stage in their educational experiencesand that would normally militate against their involvement in formal ed-ucation. However, and paradoxically, Costelloe suggests that their time inprison has provided them with the opportunity to reconsider such views.Having experienced substantial benefits from their initial prison education,they develop an interest in pursuing further educational opportunities. Forthe educationally disadvantaged inmates, the data from the present studyindicate that the observed effects of age and reading or writing problemsboth explain why they have not completed any upper secondary educationand why they intend to start such education. Reading and writing skills areimportant in prison in several ways: inmates must often fill out forms tomake requests; letters are vital links with the outside world; some prisonjobs require literacy skills; prison education requires reading and writingskills and reading is one way to pass time behind bars. On release, readingand writing skills are of vital importance for education and jobs. Lack ofreading and writing skills will therefore hinder personal development andparticipation in society.

It is in line with our assumptions that geographical and cultural af-filiation had an impact on less educated inmates’ wishes to embark oneducation above their present level. Inmates with a non-Norwegian affil-iation were significantly more likely to aim for upper secondary school

44 T. MANGER ET AL.

than inmates who were brought up in Norway and who had Norwegianparents. Compared to Viljugrein’s (2002) finding that ethnic minority in-mates in Norwegian prisons often have more positive attitudes to educationand teachers, the result is not unexpected. In Viljugrein’s study, many for-eign prisoners expressed their appreciation at being treated as students andnot as prisoners by the teachers. Likewise, the teachers expressed theircontent with the ethnic minority inmates’ educational motivation and at-titudes to teachers. Inmates from other cultures seem to discover the ed-ucational opportunities in Norwegian prisons and in Norwegian societyin general. In this situation, it becomes more natural that these inmateswish to benefit from the opportunities and embark on education. Time inprison may offer them a chance to enhance their skills, and this may nothave been possible on the outside or during previous imprisonment in othercountries.

Among inmates who had completed a level of upper secondary school,younger inmates were significantly more likely than older inmates to re-port that they wished to start university studies or other higher education.Inmates in the age group between 25 and 34 years were most likely to havesuch intentions. The nonlinear relationship may simply reflect that edu-cational intentions above upper secondary level mature a few years laterin prison inmates than in the population on the outside and that some ofthe youngest inmates, due to their crime record, are less likely to considerfurther education as a realistic opportunity.

We assumed that inhibiting factors such as learning problems and ge-ographical and cultural affiliation might have less impact on intentions toembark on further education for those who already have reached a certainlevel of education. In line with this, reading or writing problems had nosignificant impact on educational wishes among inmates who had alreadycompleted a level of upper secondary school. However, those who had self-reported problems with arithmetic or mathematics were less likely to wishto start higher education. According to research on antisocial and delinquentpathways (e.g., Moffitt et al. 2002), adolescent limited offenders stand abetter chance than life-course-persistent offenders of benefiting from a for-mer repertoire of pro-social behaviors, including high school qualifications.Mathematics problems, however, may be considered a dispositional barrierpreventing these individuals from participating in more advanced educa-tion. Unfortunately, research has not provided us with enough knowledgeabout inmates’ arithmetic or mathematics problems and the implicationsof such problems.

Again, inmates with a non-Norwegian affiliation were more likely toreport an intention to start education above their obtained level. Contraryto our assumption, this effect was stronger for inmates who had alreadycompleted secondary school than for those who only had achieved the

EDUCATIONAL INTENTIONS AMONG PRISONERS 45

lowest level of education. A possible interpretation is that the opportunitiesfor education in Norway have offered them chances that were previouslyunknown, but also that inmates with a weaker affiliation to Norway to agreater extent than those with a strong affiliation had completed generaltheoretical upper secondary education (Eikeland and Manger 2004), whichwould immediately qualify them with entrance to higher education.

Almost half of the inmates who already had completed single coursesor degrees at university or other higher education wished to continue theirstudies. In line with our assumptions, geographical and cultural affiliationand learning problems had weaker (and nonsignificant) effects here thanat lower levels of education. The only significant impact was that of age,i.e., younger inmates more often tended to have an intention to embark onmore higher education. With so much free time on their hands in prison,established study skills and a positive attitude to learning, it is naturalthat those who already have completed some higher education should tryacquire more such education. According to Forster (1990), it has long beenrecognized that certain individuals in prison have both the ability and therequired qualifications to spend some of their sentence pursuing a courseof higher education.

Costelloe (2003) concluded that inmates’ main motivation for partici-pation in prison education was to alleviate boredom, to prove something tothemselves and others, and because it was a next educational step while inprison. Likewise, Foster (1990) found that all prisoners were initially ed-ucationally motivated by boredom while simultaneously wanting to avoidor defy prison work or discipline. The previously educationally disad-vantaged were not initially seeking an educational opportunity but begangradually to realize the possibilities afforded by education. The previouslywell-qualified group, however, were initially clear-cut and positive andtended not to display changes in their personal values. The initial impe-tus to join in an educational activity in prison suggested by Costello andForster is also in line with Skaalvik et al.’s (2003) findings in Norwegianprisons which indicated that inmates’ intentions to embark on educationwere primarily motivated by the prison context. The respondents in thisstudy wished to start education because the prison had nothing else tooffer, because they wanted to avoid work loads (in Norwegian prisonsinmates have to go to embark on education, participate in programs ordo manual work) or because the prison represented an intermission fromdrugs.

Most inmates are males and many have been in prison before. Generally,they demonstrate low levels of education attainment, poor employmenthistories, are often addicted to drugs, and face a range of health and socialproblems such as homelessness and financial difficulties (e.g., Friestad andSkog-Hansen 2004). With respect to prevention of future crime, inmates are

46 T. MANGER ET AL.

able to upgrade their skills by completing the schooling they did not receiveas children. For those who have encountered multiple life-course problems,practitioners must be prepared to acknowledge the challenges of educationand other rehabilitation. In contrast, other offenders are not hampered byadverse family background, cognitive deficits, or academic failure. Moffittet al. (1996, p. 442) suggest that assessments should be designed to identifythese promising candidates among delinquents in correctional and clinicalsettings. “The hypothesis is suggested that they might be profitably divertedaway from punitive incapacitation programs and into therapeutic programsthat capitalize on their personal strengths.”

Education and training is certainly a key issue for those serving sen-tences. Any attempt to increase their educational abilities while in prisonand after they have been released will have an impact on their further edu-cation and employability. The findings from this representative study of theNorwegian prison population have confirmed that prison inmates have edu-cational intentions and that learning problems and cultural and geographicalaffiliation impact their wishes. However, several limitations of the presentwork must be acknowledged. First, we did not consider the motivationalaspects other than the inmates’ wishes to start education at different levels.Second, we did not have the opportunity to test the inmates’ reading orwriting problems or their arithmetic or mathematics problems. Third, wedid not include a number of variables that might predict future educationalintentions, for instance, like details about former schooling, family history,number of incarcerations, offences, prison length, and measures of attitudesto schooling and education. These limitations suggest that future studiesshould adopt modeling approaches that can extend our understanding offactors that can predict prison inmates’ educational motivation.

Education as a goal of imprisonment has been advocated for at least fourcenturies (Langelid and Manger 2005). However, absence from school andeducation is still quite high for prison inmates compared to the generalpopulation (Eikeland and Manger 2004). Hence, education in prison andafter release should be part of long-term plans for transferring the formerprison inmates successfully into society. To reduce the rate of recidivism,offenders should be helped to realize their intentions to embark on educationabove the level previously obtained.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The study was initiated and funded by the County Governor of Hordaland,the Department of Education. Thanks to Prison Governors and teacherswho organized the data collection and inmates who participated.

EDUCATIONAL INTENTIONS AMONG PRISONERS 47

REFERENCES

All-Party Parliamentary Group, Inside Track. Prisoner education in 2004 and beyond. The

report of the All-Party Parliamentary Group for further education and lifelong learning’s

inquiry. London: All-Party Parliamentary Group, 2004.

Batchelder, J.S. and J.M. Prippert, Hard time or idle time: Factors affecting inmate choices

between participation in prison work and education programs. Prison Journal, 82, pp.

269–280, 2002.

Costelloe, A., Third level education in Irish prisons: Who participates and why? (Doctoral

thesis). Milton Keynes: The Open University, 2003.

County Governor of Hordaland, Researched-based evaluation of education in Norwegianprisons. Recommendations from a Group nominated to monitor the evaluation of Edu-cation in Norwegian prisons. Bergen: County Governor of Hordaland, 2005.

Eikeland, O.-J. and T. Manger, Innsette i norske fengsel: Utdanning og utdanningsønske

(Inmates in Norwegian prisons: Educational background and educational aspirations).

Bergen: Fylkesmannen i Hordaland, 2004.

Forster, W., The higher education of prisoners. In: S. Duguid (Ed.), Yearbook of CorrectionalEducation 1990, pp. 3–43. Burnaby, BC: Institute for the Humanities, Simon Fraser

University, 1990.

Fridhov, I.M., Alt som før? Om norske fangers sosiale-og skolebakgrunn (The same as

always? On Norwegian prisoners’ social and educational backgrounds). Oslo: Justisde-

partementet, 1991.

Friestad, C. and I.L. Skog Hansen, Levekar blant innsatte (Living conditions among in-mates). Fafo-report 429. Oslo: Fafo, 2004.

Haigler, K.O., C. Harlow, P. O’Connor, and A. Campbell, Aliteracy behind prison walls.

Washington, DC: National Centre for Education Statistics, 1994.

Kerka, S., Prison literacy programs. ERIC Digest No. 159. US, Ohio, 1995.

Kriminalomsorgen, Arbok 2003. Kriminalomsorgen – med statistikk (Year book from

The Norwegian Correctional Service–Statistics included). Oslo: Justis-og politideparte-

mentet, 2003.

Langelid, T. and T. Manger, Fra tukt til opplæring. Fengselspedagogikk før og no (From

punishment to education. Prison education in past and present). In: T. Langelid and T.

Manger (Eds.), Læring bak murene. Fengselsundervisningen i Norge (Learning BehindBars. Prison Education in Norway). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget, 2005.

Moffitt, T., A. Caspi, N. Dickson, P. Silva, and W. Stanton, Childhood-onset versus

adolescent-onset antisocial conduct problems in males: Natural history from ages 3

to 18 years. Development and Psychopathology, 8, pp. 399–424, 1996.

Moffitt, T., A. Caspi, H. Harrington, and B.J. Milne, Males on the life-course-persistent and

adolescent-limited antisocial pathways: Follow-up at age 26 years. Development andPsychopathology, 14, pp. 179–207, 2002.

Myrberg, M., Grunder for fortsatt larande: En internationell jamforande studie av vux-

nas formaga att forsta och anvanda tryckt och skriven information, p. 115 (Reasonsfor lifelong learning. An international comparative study of adults’ ability to un-derstand and use printed and written information). Stockholm: Skolverkets rapport,

1996.

Patterson, G.R., M.S. Forgatch, K.L. Yoerger, and M. Stoolmiller, Variables that initiate

and maintain an early-onset trajectory of offending. Development and Psychopathology,

10, pp. 531–547, 1998.

Skaalvik, E.M., L. Finbak, and T. Pettersen, Undervisning i fengsel. Pa rett kjøl? (Prison

education. On an even keel?). Bergen: Fylkesmannen i Hordaland, 2003.

48 T. MANGER ET AL.

Skardhamar, T., Levekar og livssituasjon blant innsatte i norske fengsler (Living conditionsamong inmates in Norwegian prisons). Oslo: Institutt for kriminologi og rettssosiologi,

Universitetet i Oslo, 2002.

Svensson, I., I. Lundberg, and C. Jacobson, The nature of reading difficulties among inmates

in juvenile institutions. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 16, pp. 667–

691, 2003.

Taube, K. and U. Fredriksson, Hur laser invandrarelever i Sverige? (How do immigrants to

Sweden read?), pp. 79. Stockholm: Skolverkets rapport, 1995.

United Nations and UNESCO, Basic education in prison. Vienna and Hamburg: United

Nations Office at Vienna and UNESCO Institute for Education, 1995.

Viljugrein, T., Skole, sprak og fengsel. Undervisning av mannlige minoritetsspraklige fanger

i norske fengsler (School, language and prison. Education of ethnic minority males in

Norwegian prisons). Bergen: Fylkesmannen i Hordaland, 2002.

TERJE MANGER, OLE-JOHAN EIKELAND

and ARVE ASBJÈRNSEN

Department of Psychosocial ScienceUniversity of BergenChristies gate 12Bergen 5015NorwayE-mail: terje.manger@psysp.uib.no

TORFINN LANGELID

The County Governor of HordalandDepartment of EducationBergen 5020Norway