Empowering Inmates Through Literacy Education: Challenges, Opportunities, and Strategies for Effective Engagement in the Prison Setting

This paper delves into the critical intersection of literacy education, human rights, and the prison environment, examining the multifaceted challenges and opportunities in providing literacy courses to inmates. Since its inception in 1946, UNESCO has consistently prioritized universal literacy, underling its relevance later with the Belém Framework and Hamburg Declaration (Wagner, 2013) to emphasise its indispensable role in personal, socio-economic, and political empowerment. However, the focus shifts to the unique context of prison education, particularly for immigrants arriving in Italy without foundational literacy skills, exacerbating their vulnerability upon release (Marcus, 1986). The transformative value of prison education is underscored, offering concrete examples of inclusion, and preparing individuals for successful reintegration into society (Tucciarone, 2020). Empirical evidence supports the positive impact of educational paths on behaviour within correctional settings and reducing recidivism rates (Vacca, James, 2004). Nevertheless, the staggering number of illiterate and unidentified education levels among inmates in Italy, as evidenced by DAP data, poses challenges. Almost 50% of the total prison population remains excluded from educational programs, giving rise to the concept of “invisible illiterates” (Boev, 2020). Drawing from the author’s experience in penal institutes in Padua, the paper conducts a literature review (Ghirotto, 2020) to critically analyse challenges and opportunities for engaging inmates in literacy courses. The first section identifies barriers hindering inmate participation, including feelings of shame, embarrassment, low self-esteem, and a lack of confidence (Kett, 2001). Cultural resistance (Schumann, 1978) and the impact of dynamic security (Tucciarone, 2020) further complicate motivation for linguistic courses. The prison setting intensifies these barriers, emphasizing the need to preserve one’s image in a narrow social community (Assenzio, 2020). The second section explores strategies to overcome these challenges, starting by making the name of the courses less stigmatizing (Tucciarone, 2020) and emphasizing the creation of a supportive learning environment that reduces the affective filter (Krashen, 1982). This allows inmates to feel comfortable enough to expose themselves to error, which is a necessary element in language acquisition (Corder, 1967). Moreover, the andragogical approach (Knowles, 1997) values inmates as adult learners, fostering reciprocal respect and providing space for cultural and linguistic expression, enhancing their previous knowledge (Lorenzoni, Martinelli, 1999). Stimulating activities, aligned with the comprehensible-input hypothesis (Krashen, 1982) and the ludo-linguistic approach (Begotti, 2010), contribute to a balanced focus both on group dynamics and task-oriented activities (Assenzio, 2020). Integration of ICT with literacy programs emerges as a successful strategy to enhance engagement and meaningful learning experiences (Kett, 2001; Vryonides, Marios et al., 2014; Tucciarone, 2020). Adopting the “I care” pedagogy (Scuola Di Barbiana, 1967) and establishing effective relationships between teachers and inmates can be identified as the cornerstone of a successful approach, which is the most relevant reward for teachers, giving value to their efforts (Shethar, 1993). In conclusion, this comprehensive exploration tries to shed light on the intricate landscape of literacy education within the prison system, offering some insights into the challenges faced by teachers and presenting a possible roadmap for developing effective strategies that promote inclusivity and empowerment among inmates