In many countries, education in prison is acknowledged as an important part for the rehabilitation of incarcerated individuals (Behan, 2014; Council of Europe, 2006; Halimi et al., 2017; Novek, 2019; Roth et al., 2017; United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 2015). While many countries offer education to their prisoners, research in this area remains sparse with few qualitative studies providing insights into the experiences of teaching and learning in correctional settings. In my presentation, I want to share the results of my interview study with teachers working in Swedish prisons with a focus on the teacher-student relationship. Albeit focusing on only one country, this study provides valuable insights into prisons as a place for education. The study can highlight the challenges surrounding the provision of education in correctional settings that are not only related to country-specific factors but inherent to the prison as an institution.

Similar to teaching outside of prisons, a central part of the teachers’ work is to establish and sustain good relationships with their students in order to fulfill their professional mission and to support their students’ learning (Bingham & Sidorkin, 2004). Good relationships are often defined as those marked by care, warmth and trust (McLaughlin, 1991; Noddings, 2012; Owens & Ennis, 2005; Wright, 2004). However, building good relationships with students in correctional settings can be challenging as it is an institution associated with punishment and a clear distinguishment between us and them prevails (Lukacova et al., 2018; Novek, 2019; Wright, 2005). Wright (2004) also points out that teachers are warned about the potential for manipulative behavior among prisoners. In addition, the need to maintain a professional distance gains a new significance as it becomes a matter of security to determine how close one can and should get to the incarcerated individual. 

My presentation will shed light onto how teachers approach their students in correctional settings and what kind of relationships they build with their students in order to support their students’ learning. What teachers consider to be a good relationship and how to establish this relationship is not predetermined but subject to teachers’ moral judgements. Those individual judgements have to be made by balancing both prison regulations and their own professional norms and values that are fostered in another context than the prisons. My presentation therefore addresses following research questions: 

1. What do teachers perceive as a professional approach towards incarcerated students? 
2. What do teachers consider as “good” relationships? How do teachers establish those relationships with their students in correctional settings? 

The study draws on notions of teacher professionalism inspired by Englund and Dyrdal Solbrekke (2015), Sockett (1993)and Stenlås (2011) in order to understand what it means for the teachers to be professional and to establish professional relationships in an institution that is not primarily designed for educational purposes. A special focus is put on the concept of trust as teachers need to create mutual trust in the prison where usually control instead of trust governs. Belonging to both school and prison requires navigating and aligning those contradicting ideals in order to exhibit professionalism which is under investigation in this study. 

The empirical data consists of 14 semi-structured interviews with teachers working with education in the prison system across the country. All interviewees except of one participant work as teachers teaching different school subjects. One of the participants is a special education teacher meaning that the person does not work with teaching specific students but meets both teachers and students across different prisons in order to help them find the right learning support. The interviews lasted between 45 and 100 minutes (in average around 1 hour) and were conducted on site at respective prison, at Stockholm University, online or by telephone depending on preference and practical considerations. A semi-structured interview guide covering questions relating to the teachers’ views on education, their experiences of working in correctional settings and how they support their students was used. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. The data is analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis by Braun and Clarke (2019) where I am working abductively (Thompson, 2022). During the interviews and the initial reading of the interview transcripts, I noticed that all teachers mention the importance of a good relationship and trust in order to succeed with their teaching and to promote their students’ learning. This led me to explore theoretical frameworks focusing on these aspects and eventually I found teacher professionalism as fruitful for analyzing the data. Currently I am also exploring different conceptualizations of trust to apply to my analysis.

RQ 1: For some teachers, a professional approach towards their incarcerated students meant to avoid reading too much about their students’ background or committed crimes in order to meet their students as open-minded as possible. It can be seen as a strategy to avoid feelings such as fear or aversion towards the person which, in turn, can interfere with the teaching and relationship-building. For other teachers, especially in high security prisons, reading everything and getting a mental heads-up is part of being professional as it allows teachers to better read situations and adapt their words and behavior in order to avoid dangerous situations. RQ 2: A common feature across the interviews is the emphasis on trust as an important part of a good relationship. As pointed out by Sockett (1993), a certain level of personalness and closeness is needed to create trust. This is also taken up by a number of teachers who mention the rule of being personal but not private. In order to create those relationships, the teachers need to strike the right balance between private and personal. However, how the interviewed teachers translate the rule into practice varies as it depends on one’s professional judgement and what one feels comfortable sharing. Topics, where teachers have different approaches on what can be shared, pertain to for example family, relationships and future plans. Some teachers mention that establishing good relationships with their students is rather easy and their students are very friendly towards them as the teachers represent the civil society rather than prison staff. However, this friendliness is accompanied by an underlying sense of mistrust as some teachers point out the need to stay alert to their students’ other capabilities and that, in some cases, being friendly is used as a tactic to manipulate teachers and gain advantages.

Behan, C. (2014). Learning to Escape: Prison Education, Rehabilitation and the Potential for Transformation. Journal of Prison Education & Reentry, 1(1), 20–31. https://doi.org/10.25771/8039 Bingham, C., & Sidorkin, A. M. (Eds.). (2004). No Education Without Relation. Peter Lang Publishing Inc. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597. Council of Europe. (2006). European Prison Rules. Council of Europe Publishing. Englund, T., & Dyrdal Solbrekke, T. (2015). Om innebörder i lärarprofessionalism. Pedagogisk Forskning i Sverige, 20(3–4), 168–194. Halimi, M., Brosens, D., De Donder, L., & Engels, N. (2017). Learning during Imprisonment: Prisoners’ Motives to Educational Participation within a Remand Prison in Belgium. Journal of Correctional Education, 68(1), 3–31. Lukacova, S., Lukac, M., Lukac, E., Pirohova, I., & Hartmannova, L. (2018). Prison Education in Slovakia from the Teacher’s Perspective. Journal of Prison Education and Reentry, 5(1), 63–79. McLaughlin, H. J. (1991). Reconciling Care and Control: Authority in Classroom Relationship. Journal of Teacher Education, 42(3), 182–195. Niklas, S. (2011). Läraryket mellan autonomi och statliga reformideologier. Arbetsmarknad & Arbetsliv, 17(4), 11–27. Noddings, N. (2012). The caring relation in teaching. Oxford Review of Education, 38(6), 771–781. Novek, E. (2019). Making meaning: Reflections on the act of teaching in prison. Review of Communication, 19(1), 55–68. Owens, L. M., & Ennis, C. D. (2005). The Ethic of Care in Teaching: An Overview of Supportive Literature. Quest, 57(4), 392–425. Roth, B. B., Westrheim, K., Jones, L., & Manger, T. (2017). Academic Self-Efficacy, Educational Motives and Aspects of the Prison Sentence as Predictors for Participation in Prison Education. Journal of Correctional Education, 68(3), 19–40. Sockett, H. (1993). The Moral Base For Teacher Professionalism. Teachers College Press. Thompson, J. (2022). A Guide to Abductive Thematic Analysis. The Qualitative Report, 27(5), 1410–1421. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2015). The United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (the Nelson Mandela Rules). Wright, R. (2004). Care as the “Heart” of Prison Teaching. Journal of Correctional Education (1974-), 55(3), 191–209. Wright, R. (2005). Going to Teach in Prisons: Culture Shock. Journal of Correctional Education, 56(1), 19–38.