CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 50Criminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisCriminal Justice and PenologyDigital Education and Society

The prison is another country: incarcerated students and (im)mobility in Australian prisons

Farley, Helen, Hopkins, Susan·2017·Critical Studies in Education
DOI 10.1080/17508487.2016.1255240
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Space, time and movement have particular meanings and significance for Australian prisoners attempting higher education while incarcerated. In a sense, the prison is another ‘world’ or ‘country’ with its own spatial and temporal arrangements and constraints for incarcerated university students. The contemporary digital university typically presupposes a level of mobility and access to mobile communication technologies which most Australian prisoners cannot access. This article examines the immobility of incarcerated students and their attempts to complete tertiary and pre-tertiary distance education courses without direct internet access. Drawing on critical mobilities theory, this article also explores attempts to address this digital disconnection of incarcerated students and where such interventions have been frustrated by movement issues within the prison. Prison focus group data suggest the use of modified digital learning technologies in prisons needs to be informed by a critical approach to the institutional processes and practices of this unique and challenging learning environment. This article also highlights the limitations and contradictions of painful immobilisation as a core strategy of Australia’s modern, expanding penal state, which encourages rehabilitation through education, while effectively cutting prisoners off from the wider digital world.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/17508487.2016.1255240

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In prison, learning supported by digital technologies includes proper spaces and timings that must not conflict with established routines.

    “In prison, learning supported by DT includes proper spaces and timings (Farley & Hopkins, 2017) that must not conflict with established routines.”

    From Learning with digital technologies in prison: a scoping review (2023) · cites this paper as Farley & Hopkins, 2017

  • The prison setting usually discourages learning because of noisy spaces, lack of material and human resources, and poor organization for focused, autonomous and self-regulated learning.

    “The prison setting usually discourages learning, because of its noisy spaces, lack of material and human resources, as well as its poor organization for focused, autonomous and self-regulated learning (Farley & Hopkins, 2017;Hopkins & Farley, 2014;Hopkins, 2015;Moreira, et al., 2017b;Pike and Adams, 2012).”

    From Learning with digital technologies in prison: a scoping review (2023) · cites this paper as Farley & Hopkins, 2017

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 27 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Farley, H., & Hopkins, S.
Affiliations
University of Southern Queensland (AU)
Corresponding author
Hopkins, Susan
ORCID
Venue
Critical Studies in Education
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2016-12-02
Volume
58
Issue
2
Pages
150-167
ISSN
  • 0076-6275 (ISSN-L)
  • 1750-8487
  • 1750-8495
DOI
10.1080/17508487.2016.1255240
OpenAlex
W2558660038
Cited by
30
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1
FWCI
2.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Critical Studies in Education (publishedVersion)
  • UC Research Repository (University of Canterbury) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Australian Government HEPPP (The Making the Connection project is funded by the)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Digital Education and Society
Keywords
incarcerated students, prison education, immobility, digital disconnection, distance education, penal state, Australian prisons, mobile communication technology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review