Profiling a Research Article

Article citation in APA style: Clark, H.G., Mathur, S.R., & Helding, B.R. (2011). Transition services for juvenile detainees with disabilities: findings on recidivism. Education and Treatment of Children, 34(4), 511-529.

1. Foundation for Research (identify main ideas in introduction)

Approximately 4,600 court cases relating to juvenile justice are handled each day in the United States. Students with disabilities

represent an overwhelming majority of the incarcerated youth, approximately 60 percent. This population is four times the amount

of special education students within traditional school settings. The trend continues a disturbing path in a 3 year longitudinal study.

40 percent released from a juvenile detention facility were in prison, and 20 percent resided in other residential placement programs.

The entire juvenile detention population, which over 30 percent exhibit significant academic or behavioral problems, that would

justify an Individualized Educational Program (IEP) or qualification for special education services similar to public education

standards.

2. Problem or Question to Be Investigated (usually prefaced by "The aim of the current study….")

The goal for the research is to educate individuals within the educational system the connection between literacy and juvenile

recidivism. Students who participated received enhanced transitional services, including community-based academic, community-

based diversion programs to reduce criminality, and most importantly, the necessarily psychological services for both detainees and

their families. The study followed individuals involved with local and state juvenile courts outside secured detention facilities for an

academic year. Statistical information is collected, evaluated, and explain the need for comprehensive transitional services—a

missing component in correctional settings and qualifies the growing recidivism rate among juvenile offenders. The researchers

define transitional services as:

“a coordinated set of activities for which a juvenile offender, designed within an outcome-oriented process, which promotes movement from the community to a correctional setting, from one correctional setting to another, or from a correctional setting to post-incarceration activities including public or alternative education, vocational training, integrated employment, continuing education, adult services, independent living, or community participation” (Clark, Mathur, & Helding, p. 512).

3. Methodology

A. Type of Study (qualitative or quantitative and specific design used)

In local localities, the juvenile detainees remain with a program for at an average of 3 weeks before a court decision is determined.

The study is both qualitative and quantitative in nature. The idea for the study is to improve the outcomes of juvenile offenders by

creating or strengthening transitional programs for individuals with special needs identified by an Individualized Education Program

(IEP). Qualitative research focuses on the quality of research outcomes, while quantitative measures those impacted. The authors

studied 4,809 youths between 8 to 17 years in two detention centers in the U.S. Southwestern region.

B. Participants (identify population, including description, size and selection criteria)

First, there is a need for a transitional specialist teams within the juvenile justice system. Both school localities and the local

court representatives collectively work together in creating stronger transitional programs for adjudicated youth. At the end of the

study, the transition specialists submitted a detailed portfolio. The responsibilities include (Clark, Mathur, & Helding, p. 513):

a) conducting pre-release interviews to offenders;b) aligning community based services that addresses the specialized needs of youth;c) establishing permanency within the community, such as housing. Note: homelessness plays a key factor in juvenile recidivism, as academic, behavioral, or psychological needs are neglected by residential instability;d) locating services upon the release of juvenile offenders;e) accessing mental health services and substance abuse programs;f) recognizing individualized needs of each youth;g) providing links to workforce preparedness, including employment opportunities, school attendance; and, h) encouraging therapeutic outreach programs to occupy leisure time.

The facilities for the academic study were located in Arizona. The daily population of 423 (2010), was accessed by a team of

officers to determine whether or not detainment was necessary. The average detainee length was approximately one academic month

(18.2 days), where physical, educational, emotional, and social needs were assessed. Based on the initial intake process, the youth

population was assigned to a treatment or non-treatment group. The total number of youths who participated in the study began at

144. Youths under 14 years were excluded from the study; transitional services begin at 14 years and older for students with

disabilities. Students with incomplete data sets and without disabilities were excluded.

62 males and 6 females, totaling 68 participants, contributed to the treatment group. 37 were identified as Learning Disabled (LD)

and 31 were EBD—Emotional Behavior Disorder. The non-treatment group totaled 76 participants, with 71 males and 5 females.

36 were identified as LD and 38 as EBD.

C. Setting (describe location, conditions and duration of the study)

Local school systems are responsible for providing a school program to incarcerated youth. School programs in Arizona

detention facilities operate year-round (225 days a year) and provide 240 minutes (6 hours) of instruction daily. For the study, two

special educators, one at each facility, were accountable for identifying and revising IEP’s and ITP’s for students with disabilities.

D. Data-gathering Methods (identify the procedures for data collection)

Transitional Portfolio: According to the authors of the study, the most critical component for success was for detention centers to

collect information, including IEP’s, academic records, comprehensive testing on academic, behavioral, social and vocational abilities

and needs for a comprehensive overview of the individual. (Clark, Mathur, & Helding, p. 517). Distinctions were made between

individuals with documented disabilities and the groups. Despite grouping differences, individuals with IEP’s were reminded of

procedural safeguards and rights according to federal laws. The Basic Transitional Portfolio, which the non-treatment group

completed, had local resources in the community, including crisis hotline numbers, temporary shelter information, food bank

locations, workforce/employment agencies, and other local agencies.

A total of 13 items versus the 8 in the non-treatment group, demonstrated that the portfolio components were complimentary to

federal law pertaining to transitional programs for students with disabilities. The data group’s portfolios also possessed copies of vital

records (social security cards, birth certificates, and immunization records), academic transcripts, resume, and work samples.

E. Data-analysis Methods (identify the procedures for data analysis)

Coding System: The coding system was deemed necessary, because previous studies indicated further examination of success rates of

transitional services for juveniles. The categorizations only provided analysis and descriptions of participant behaviors; it did not

influence the results of the study itself.

F. List Findings (usually included under "Results" and in tables)

The measurements were increments of 15, 30, 45, 60, and 90 days. Individuals who returned to a facility were immediately

counted and dismissed from future measurement. At 15 days after initial release, both groups were expected to reoffend. The

total number of participants left was 132. Upon further research at 30 days, older individuals in the controlled group were less

likely to recidivate. The number at 30 days was 113. At 45 days, the remaining number of participants was 87.

G. List Conclusions (usually included under "Discussion")

The research is limited from ages 8 to 17, as once residents reach 18 years, charges and trials are conducted in adult court.

H. Implications for Practice (specify what merit this study may have for you area of interest)

The study implicates that we as a school division, region, and state must address Reading Recovery. Reading problems should

include every individual who are in contact with school-aged children, regardless of documented or undocumented disabilities. The

area of interest is for more traditional settings to learn more of the reading/criminality recidivism cycle and work along alternative

settings for realistic solutions. School localities are under state and federal pressure to provide data-driven results for annual progress

by any methodology, including suspending low-achieving students, coincidentally, during a standardized testing period. It is the

opinion of this writer/researcher all incoming students new to the education profession should understand the importance of each type

of student clientele.