CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2Criminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisHigher Education Research StudiesCriminal Justice and Penology

"People Like Me Don’t Belong in Places Like This." Creating and Developing a Community of Learners beyond the Prison Gates

Open access
Gosling, Helen, Burke, Lawrence·2019·VCU Libraries
DOI 10.25771/c5qj-fh19
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

It is widely accepted that individuals with criminal convictions experience multiple disadvantage and deprivation, and, as a result, are considered least likely to progress to higher education (Unlock, 2018). The risk-adverse nature of higher education application processes further compound such disadvantage, even though there is no evidence to suggest that screening for criminal convictions increase campus safety (Centre for Community Alternatives, 2010). Drawing upon ethnographic data, the discussion critically reflects upon the development of one situated Learning Together initiative based within a University in the north-west of England. In doing so, the discussion highlights a series of emerging opportunities and competing contradictions that span over three key developmental areas: creation, progress and maintenance. We anticipate that the findings will go some way in opening up a wider debate about the sustainability of initiatives that seek to create dynamic educational partnerships between the higher education sector and criminal justice system more broadly.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.25771/c5qj-fh19

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Internet access in prisons remains an issue in many jurisdictions, and some digital literacy initiatives are restricted, shaped, and limited by the criminal justice system.

    “However, internet access in prisons remains an issue in many jurisdictions, and some initiatives focused on digital literacy are restricted, shaped, and limited by the criminal justice system (Gosling & Burke, 2019).”

    From Learning with digital technologies in prison: a scoping review (2023) · cites this paper as Gosling & Burke, 2019

    In “Moving Beyond Edgework: Stepping Stones and Stumbling Blocks” (page not provided), the paper says Learning Together initiatives are restricted, shaped, and limited by the criminal justice system, with participants’ digital literacy as an example. It does not establish that internet access in prisons is an issue in many jurisdictions, and Learning Together is a higher-education initiative rather than one focused on digital literacy. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 49

  1. Annells, M. (1996). Grounded theory method: Philosophical perspectives, paradigms of inquiry and postmod- ernism. Qualitative Health Research, 6(3), 379-393. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973239600600306 · DOI
  2. Asher, S. R., & Weeks, M. S., (2014). Loneliness and belonging in the college years. In R. J. Coplan and J. C. Bowker (Eds.), The handbook of solitude: Psychological perspectives on social isolation, social with- drawal and being alone (1st ed.) (pp. 283-301). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.
  3. Atkinson, P. & Hammersley, M. (1994). Ethnography and participant observation. In: N.K. Denzin, K. and Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 248-261). London, United Kingdom: Sage Publications.
  4. Bakhtin, M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays (Michael Holquist, Trans. & Eds., Caryl Emerson, Trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
  5. Barnes, D. (1996). An analysis of the grounded theory method and the concept of culture. Qualitative Health Research. 6(3), 429-441. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973239600600309 · DOI
  6. Biggs, J. & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university (4 th Ed.). Berkshire, United Kingdom: Open University Press
  7. Bruner, E., M. (1993). The ethnographic self and the personal self. In P. Benson (ed.), Anthropology and Lit- erature (pp. 1-26). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press
  8. Charmez, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London, United Kingdom: Sage Publications.
  9. Clifford, M. M. (1991). Risk taking: Theoretical, empirical, and educational considerations. Educational Psy- chologist, 26(3-4), 263-297. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2603&4_4 · DOI
  10. Cook-Sather, A. & Felten, P. (2017). Where student engagement meets faculty development: how student-fac- ulty pedagogical partnerships fosters a sense of belonging. Student Engagement in Higher Education Journal, 1(2), 03-11. Retrieved from https://journals.studentengagement.org.uk/index.php/raise/article/ view/cook
  11. Cook-Sather, A. and Felten, P. (2017). Ethics of academic leadership: Guiding learning and teaching. In F. Su, & M. Wood (Eds.), Cosmopolitan perspectives on academic leadership in Higher Education (pp.175- 191). London, United Kingdom: Bloomsbury Academic.
  12. Cook-Sather, A. and Porte, O . (2017) Reviving humanity: Grasping within and beyond our research. Journal of Education Innovation, Partnership and Change, 3(1), 299-302. Retrieved from https://journals.stu- dentengagement.org.uk/index.php/studentchangeagents/article/view/638
  13. Dey, I. (1999). Grounding grounded theory: Guidelines for qualitative inquiry. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
  14. Devlin, M. (2011). Bridging the socio-cultural incongruity: conceptualising the success of students from low socio-economic status backgrounds in Australian higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 1-11. Advanced online publication http://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.613991 · DOI
  15. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York, NY: Free Press
  16. Egan, T. (2002). Grounded theory research and theory building. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 4(3), 277-295. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422302043004 · DOI
  17. Fetterman, D. M. (1998). Ethnography: Step by step (2 nd Ed.). London: Sage Publications limited
  18. Fink, L. D. (2003). Creating significant learning experience: An integrated approach to designing college courses (1 st Ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  19. Gosling, H. J. (2017). Creating and developing inclusive learning environments beyond the prison gate. In S. Fletcher & H. White (Eds.), Emerging voices: Critical social research by European group postgraduate and early career researchers (pp. 83-89). London, United Kingdom: EG Press
  20. Gray, D. (2009). Doing research in the real world (2 nd Ed.). London, United Kingdom: Sage Publications Limited.
  21. Hammersley, M. and Atkinson, P. (1995). Ethnography. Principles in Practice (2 nd Ed.). London, United Kingdom: Routledge
  22. Hart, A. W., Sorensen, N. B., and Naylor, K. (2010). Learning to lead: Reflective practice in preservice educa- tion. In F. Wendel (Ed.), Leadership in the profession (pp. 5-22). University Park, PA: University Council for Educational Administration.
  23. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement (1 St Ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
  24. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. (2007). The State of Cooperative Learning in Postsecondary and Professional Settings. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 15-29.
  25. Kahu, E., & Nelson, K. (2017). Student engagement in the educational interface: understanding the mecha- nisms of student success. Higher Education Research and Development. 37(1), 58-71.
  26. Koh, E., Yeo, J., & Hung, D. (2015). Pushing boundaries, taking risks. Learning: Research and Practice, 1(2). Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23735082.2015.1081318 · DOI
  27. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press
  28. LeCompte, M., & Goetz, J. (1982). Problems of reliability and validity in ethnographic research. Review of Educational Research, 52(1), 31-60.
  29. Lee, H. S., & Anderson, J. R. (2013). Student learning: What has instruction got to do with it? Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 445-469
  30. Lett, J. (1990). Emics and etics: Notes on the epistemology of Anthropology. In T.N. Headland, K.L. Pike, & M. Harris, M. (eds.), Frontiers of Anthropology: Vol. 7. Emics and etics: The insider/outsider debate. New York, NY: Sage Publications.
  31. Lyng, S. (2005). The sociology of risk taking. New York, NY; Routledge
  32. Mann, S. J. (2001). Alternative perspectives on the student experience: Alienation and engagement. Studies in Higher Education, 26(1), 7-19.
  33. Millis, B. J. & Cottell, P. G. (1998). Cooperative learning for higher education faculty. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press.
  34. Nevin, A. I., Thousand, J. S., & Villa, R. A. (2007). Collaborative teaching: Critique of the scientific evidence. In L. Florian (Ed.), Handbook of special education research (pp. 417-428). London, United Kingdom: Sage Publications
  35. Odeh, Z., Kurt, M., & Atamtürk. N. (2010, October 20). Reflective Practice and Its Role in Stimulating Per- sonal and Professional Growth. Paper presented at the First National Conference on Improving TEFL Methods and Practices at Palestinian university, Palestine.
  36. Power, A. (2010). Community engagement as authentic learning with reflection. Issues in Educational Re- search, 20(1), 57-63.
  37. Prisoners' Education Trust (2018, May 30). UCAS bans the box, promoting fair chances in higher education. Retrieved from https://www.prisonerseducation.org.uk/media-press/ucas-bans-the-box
  38. Robinson, L. E., & Bell, A. (2012). Exploring adult risk propensity and academic risk-taking within the online learning environment. Proceedings of the Adult Education Research Conference, Saratoga Springs, NY, USA. Retrieved from https://newprairiepress.org/aerc/2012/papers/37/
  39. Rubin, C., Martinez, L., Chu, J., Hacker, K., Brugge, Doug., Pirie, A., Allukian, N., Rodday, A., and Leslie, L. (2012). Community-engaged pedagogy: A strengths-based approach to involving diverse stakehold- ers in research partnerships. Community Health Partnerships, 6(4), 481-490. https://doi.org/10.1353/ cpr.2012.0057 · DOI
  40. Ruby, J. (1980). Exposing yourself: Reflexivity, anthropology and film. Semiotica, 30(1-2), 153-179
  41. Runell, L. (2015). Identifying desistance pathways in a higher education programme for formerly incarcerated individuals. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 1-25.
  42. Shields, P. (2003). The community of inquiry: Classical pragmatism and public administration. Administration and Society, 35(5), 510-538.
  43. Strayhorn, T., L. (2012). College student's sense of belonging: A key to educational success for all students. New York, NY: Routledge
  44. Villa, R. A., Thousand, J. S., & Nevin, A. I. (2008). A guide to co-teaching: Practical tips for facilitating stu- dent learning (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
  45. Wagner, S., Pate, M., Turmel, S., & Burke, J. (2018). What motivates todays criminal justice student to be- come an engaged learner? Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 29(1). Retrieved from https://www. tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10511253.2017.1336247 · DOI
  46. Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G., L. (2007). A question of belonging: Race, social fit and achievement. A Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(1), 82-96.
  47. Wells, K. (1995). The strategy of grounded theory: Possibilities and problems. Social Work Research, 19(1), 33-37.
  48. Helena Gosling is senior lecturer in Criminal Justice at Liverpool John Moore's University. She has a partic- ular interest in alternative responses to lawbreaking and those who break the law. Helena has published in a number of leading journals such as Criminology and Criminal Justice, Critical Social Policy and the Interna- tional Journal of Crime, Justice and Social Democracy.
  49. Lol Burke is professor in Criminal Justice at Liverpool John Moore's University and specialises in the area of probation research, policy and practice. He has an extensive publication record in probation policy and practice related areas. He was editor of the Probation Journal from 2007-2016 and is on the editorial board of the European Journal of Probation.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gosling, H., & Burke, L.
Venue
VCU Libraries
Publisher
VCU Libraries
Published
2019
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
46-61
DOI
10.25771/c5qj-fh19
OpenAlex
W2967974763
Cited by
2
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • VCU Scholars Compass (Virginia Commonwealth University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Liverpool John Moores University (submittedVersion)
  • VCULIBRARIES
  • Journal of Prison Education and Reentry
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Research Studies
  • Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
Keywords
ex-offenders, higher education access, criminal conviction, educational disadvantage, community of learners, educational partnerships, campus safety

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