About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

57 Prison J. 2 (1977)

handle is hein.journals/prsjrnl57 and id is 1 raw text is: Editorial At first glance, for many of our readers, this issue of The Prison Journal will appear very dull. To be sure, the matter of evaluating criminal justice systems is a task for the researchers, and is thus somewhat technical. Before one lays this issue aside, however, one should consider how critical the subject is to the future of corrections. Without evaluation-good evaluation-we are unlikely to achieve very much progress. As many have pointed out, nearly everything we do in cor- rectional programming is based on unfounded and untested as- sumptions. We have spoken often on these pages of the questions raised by Robert Martinson on the effectiveness of correctional treat- ment. The unfortunate aspect of that study is that after examining many thousands of projects, the researchers could find only 210 that were capable of being measured. We may very well be conducting programs that are enormously successful, but no one can prove that they work. This is not to say that there are no evaluations. Many of the projects funded by LEAA are evaluated. This writer sits on a com- mittee that reviews such projects in Philadelphia, and we listen to dozens of evaluators. But few report much more than good feelings about the programs. This is not the evaluator's fault. He is hamstrung in his efforts by several handicaps. The first is that too little of the budget is allocated for such research. Secondly, the evaluator is sel- dom involved in project design, and is thus unable to suggest method- ologies which lead to a sound interpretation of data. Thirdly, since he is often retained by those who administer the project, he some- time lacks the independence to give an unbiased judgment. A particular defect in this field is the lack of consensus as to what constitutes success. Everyone likes success stories, and we bear many episodes of cases that have done well. We have not shown. however, that the particular intervention used in most cases was responsible for the results. Nor have we adequately considered that our greatest success may be in those high risk or severely disadvantaged cases which are helped to achieve very modest outcomes. Corrections continues to wander aimlessly through the darkness of traditional and untested procedures. Only definitive evaluations can lead us out of our confusion. In this light, we commend this issue to be read carefully and with an understanding of its impor- tance. In this regard, the National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice deserves commendation for its leadership in hosting the first National Conference on Criminal Justice Evaluation from which these papers are drawn. R.A.D. 2

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most