Dear (Senators/Representatives),
The undersigned represent a wide array of academic professionals across the State of Ohio.
We have gathered to express our concern around HB 338, a bill that passed the House of Representatives and awaits a hearing in the Senate Judiciary. This bill would strip educational programming from incarcerated people categorized as high security (i.e., Levels 3-5), a move that would affect over 25% of the prison population. Education is one of the strongest forces communities rely on to increase safety and stability and move generations forward, both in prisons and the community. Education in prisons positively impacts in-prison behavior, creates a safer environment for staff and incarcerated people, and increases the chance of success upon release by reducing recidivism, boosting employment opportunities, enhancing self-confidence, and restoring connections with friends, family, and the broader community.
We, the undersigned, urge you to oppose or amend HB 338 (Sec. 5120.012.F) to prevent the dismantling of higher education programs in Ohio’s prisons.
Higher education creates safer prisons and safer communities
Education is an integral part of personal and social transformation. Scholar Jody Lewen writes, “Great educational experiences also create a mutual sense of connection, respect, affection, and gratitude—and this in turn produces a sense of personal responsibility and accountability to the other.”1 Personal responsibility translates to better behavior while incarcerated, with studies associating educational access to a reduction in prison misconduct, including in Ohio.2 In fact, prisons with college programs experience less violence than those without programs.3 A meta-analysis aggregating 37 years of studies on correctional education concluded that people who participate in college programs in prison are 28% less likely to recidivate.4
Protecting higher education in prison is fiscally sound
Higher education in prison saves considerable taxpayer money. By reducing misconduct, education reduces the use of segregation, a much more expensive form of incarceration than allowing people to remain in the general population. On average, it costs around three times as much to house someone in segregation as it does to house them in the general population.5 Savings don’t end in the prison; recidivism is costly to communities and governments. The Council of State Governments estimates that recidivism collectively costs 41 states around $8 billion annually.6 The same study estimated that Ohio spent more than $98 million on recidivism in one year. Likewise, studies have shown that educational attainment in prison increases employment opportunities, and as importantly, increases average annual earnings, culminating not only in better financial stability but also increase in community dollars. The same study notes that “the return on investment for prison programs varies from 61.15% for college to 205.13% for vocational coursework.”7
Higher education in prison creates stronger communities
Participating in higher education in prison is a pro-social activity that fosters a sense of community engagement and belonging8 that doesn’t end with the individual.9 Incarceration negatively impacts families and children of people in prison. Having an incarcerated parent can severely impact children’s school performance.3 Children with parents with college degrees are more likely to complete college themselves, disrupting generational cycles and increasing social mobility.11 People returning home who’ve experienced college in prison also often play a role in encouraging family members and friends to pursue their own higher education.11
Conclusion
Ultimately, depriving people in prison of educational opportunities in the name of safety is woefully misguided and undermines the very safety it purports to uphold. It will also impact the safety, security, and economic well-being of families and communities across the state of Ohio and equip people for failure rather than for success. We strongly urge the Senate to champion education by amending or rejecting these damaging provisions of HB 338.
Signed,
Footnotes:
1 Lewen, J. (2014) Prison higher education and social transformation. Saint Louis University Public Law Review, 33(2). https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/plr/vol33/iss2/9
2 Alsan, M., Barnett, A.M., Hull, P., & Yang, C. (2024). "Something works” in U.S. jails: Misconduct and recidivism effects of the ignite program. NBER. https://www.nber.org/papers/w32282 / Pompoco, A., Wooldredge, J., Lugo, M., Sullivan, C., & Latessa, E. J. (2017). Reducing Inmate Misconduct and Prison Returns with Facility Education Programs. Criminology & Public Policy, 16(2), 515-547.
3 Vera Institute of Justice (n.d.) Expanding access to postsecondary education in prison. https://www.vera.org/publications/postsecondary-education-in-prison-fact-sheet-for-correction-leaders
4 Bozick, R., Steele, J., Davis, L., & Turner, S. (2018). Does providing inmates with education improve postrelease outcomes? A meta-analysis of correctional education programs in the United States. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 14, 389-428. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-018-9334-6
5 Reiter, K. (2018). The root of America’s over-use of solitary confinements in prison — and how reform can happen. Scholar’s Strategy Network. https://scholars.org/brief/root-americas-over-use-solitary-confinements-prison-and-how-reform-can-happen
6 Clement, M. & Saunders, J. (2023). The cost of recidivism: The high price states pay to incarcerate people for supervision violations. CSG Justice Center. https://csgjusticecenter.org/publications/the-cost-of-recidivism
7 Stickle, B., & Sprick Schuster, S. (2023). Education linked to better employment prospects upon release from prison. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/education-linked-to-better-employment-prospects-upon-release-from-prison-216972
8 Romero-Carazas, R., Del Carpio-Delgado, F., Espinoza-Casco, R.J., Bernedo-Moreira, D.H., Morales-Garcia, W.C., Rodriguez-Asto, R.A.A., & Quinones-Ormeno, L.K. (2025). Prison education in the resocialization of incarcerated individuals. Frontiers, 10. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/education/articles/10.3389/feduc.2025.1592692/full
9 Tadic, V., Inmates education as a function of developing socio-emotional competencies,. Journal of Criminology and Criminal Law, 62(1), 63-88. https://doi.org/10.47152/rkkp.62.1.4
10 Shlafer, R.J., Reedy, T., & Davis, L. (2017). School-based outcomes among youth with incarcerated parents: Differences by school setting. Journal of School Health. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5657233/
11 Gibbons, A. & Ray, R. (2021). The societal benefits of postsecondary prison education. Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-societal-benefits-of-postsecondary-prison-education/