n your initial post, share your share your concept and ideas for the “Discussion” section of the final project. This can be an outline, bullets, or similar form that shows your plan to address all components of the milestone rubric.
-
RubricDiscussionUndergrad-3.pdf
-
PartnershipAfterPrison-2.docx
Discussion Rubric: Undergraduate
Your active participation in the discussion forums is essential to your overall success this term. Discussion questions are designed to help you make meaningful connections between the course content and the larger concepts and goals of the course. These discussions offer you the opportunity to express your own thoughts, ask questions for clarification, and gain insight from your classmates’ responses and instructor’s guidance.
Requirements for Discussion Board Assignments Students are required to post one initial post and to follow up with at least two response posts for each discussion board assignment.
For your initial post (1), you must do the following:
Compose a post of one to two paragraphs.
In Module One, complete the initial post by Thursday at 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time.
In Modules Two through Eight, complete the initial post by Thursday at 11:59 p.m. of your local time zone.
Take into consideration material such as course content and other discussion boards from the current module and previous modules, when appropriate (make sure you are using proper citation methods for your discipline when referencing scholarly or popular resources).
For your response posts (2), you must do the following:
Reply to at least two different classmates outside of your own initial post thread.
In Module One, complete the two response posts by Sunday at 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time.
In Modules Two through Eight, complete the two response posts by Sunday at 11:59 p.m. of your local time zone.
Demonstrate more depth and thought than simply stating that “I agree” or “You are wrong.” Guidance is provided for you in each discussion prompt.
Rubric
Critical Elements Exemplary Proficient Needs Improvement Not Evident Value
Comprehension Develops an initial post with an organized, clear point of view or idea using rich and significant detail (100%)
Develops an initial post with a point of view or idea using adequate organization and detail (85%)
Develops an initial post with a point of view or idea but with some gaps in organization and detail (55%)
Does not develop an initial post with an organized point of view or idea (0%)
40
Timeliness Submits initial post on time (100%)
Submits initial post one day late (55%)
Submits initial post two or more days late (0%)
10
Engagement Provides relevant and meaningful response posts with clarifying explanation and detail (100%)
Provides relevant response posts with some explanation and detail (85%)
Provides somewhat relevant response posts with some explanation and detail (55%)
Provides response posts that are generic with little explanation or detail (0%)
30
Writing (Mechanics)
Writes posts that are easily understood, clear, and concise using proper citation methods where applicable with no errors in citations (100%)
Writes posts that are easily understood using proper citation methods where applicable with few errors in citations (85%)
Writes posts that are understandable using proper citation methods where applicable with a number of errors in citations (55%)
Writes posts that others are not able to understand and does not use proper citation methods where applicable (0%)
20
Total 100%
- Discussion Rubric: Undergraduate
- Rubric
,
3
Analysis of “Partnership After Prison: Couple Relationships During Reentry”
Sabrina Middleton
Southern New Hampshire University
Math – 133
November 4th, 2022
The study that I picked was Partnership after prison: Couples relationships during reentry. The primary focus of this research is on couples after the man has been released from prison and is reentering society. They were thinking about how long the relationship would last. They were also curious about the relationship before and after prison. This study focused on men who had recently been released from prison for the second time. The study also focuses on what could potentially affect the couple’s relationship.
The purpose of this study was to show what life is really like when trying to adjust to life after getting out of jail. In addition, the data and information obtained during the study were used towards reducing the number of repeated offenders while encouraging positive interaction and communication with their partner. The use of statistical data made it easier to find out what methods were most likely useful and which options should be made available to the detained person both before and after release to help with their relationship and the life challenges the detainee may face once released. The study’s goal is to demonstrate how programs and support can help people successfully reenter society with the person they are in a relationship with.
For this study, 641 couples who were in relationships with the male incarcerated were interviewed. The majority of the couples in the study were not legally married but had long-term relationships. A high percentage of the males in the research couples had previous incarcerations on their record, with an average of 6.5 and 7.0 prior incarcerations during adulthood (Comfort et al., 2018). This demonstrated that the couples had been through similar experiences and were not new to this type of relationship. The demographics are released prisoners and their spouses.
References
Comfort, M., Krieger, K. E., Landwehr, J., McKay, T., Lindquist, C. H., Feinberg, R., Kennedy, E. K., & Bir, A. (2018). Partnership after prison: Couple relationships during reentry. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 57(2), 188-205. https://doi.org/10.1080/10509674.2018.1441208
USEFUL NOTES FOR:
Analysis of “Partnership After Prison: Couple Relationships During Reentry”
Introduction
“Partnership After Prison: Couple Relationships During Reentry” is a longitudinal study conducted by Kelly, Walker, and Milam. The main question the researchers asked was whether there was a relationship between the incarcerated partner’s perceived emotional closeness with the non-incarcerated partner and how likely it is that they will both remain free of involvement with criminal justice systems. McLean and colleagues (2015) found in two studies of couples separated due to incarceration that negative spillover from relationship issues predicted recidivism and partner distress predicted reincarceration. In order to address these questions and understand the complex interplay between incarcerated partners’ relationships, their psychological well-being, reentry experiences
The article, “Partnership After Prison: Couple Relationships During Reentry,” is a longitudinal study conducted by Kelly, Walker, and Milam.
In the article, “Partnership After Prison: Couple Relationships During Reentry,” Kelly and her colleagues studied the relationship between partners in couples who have been incarcerated. The study is a longitudinal one that began when participants were first arrested and continued through their release from prison.
The researchers interviewed 97 couples who participated in the study and found that most of them had been together for more than 10 years at the time of their interviews (about 70%). They also found that many of these couples reported having children together; however, only 50% reported having children while they were incarcerated.
The main question the researchers asked was whether there was a relationship between the incarcerated partner’s perceived emotional closeness with the non-incarcerated partner and how likely it is that they will both remain free of involvement with criminal justice systems.
The main question the researchers asked was whether there was a relationship between the incarcerated partner’s perceived emotional closeness with the non-incarcerated partner and how likely it is that they will both remain free of involvement with criminal justice systems.
As part of their research, they found that there were few differences in how often partners reported being physically abused or injured by their partners when compared to those who did not have an incarcerated spouse or significant other. However, this may be due to less reporting because of fear or embarrassment rather than actual differences in abuse levels between these two groups.
McLean and colleagues (2015) found in two studies of couples separated due to incarceration that negative spillover from relationship issues predicted recidivism and partner distress predicted reincarceration.
McLean and colleagues (2015) found in two studies of couples separated due to incarceration that negative spillover from relationship issues predicted recidivism and partner distress predicted reincarceration.
In one study, participants were assessed at T1 and T2 using the Relationship Distress Scale (RDS; Griffin & Bartholomew, 1993). This scale consists of 10 items that measure how partners view each other when things aren’t going well between them. The researchers found that higher scores on this scale are associated with more distress and lower relationship quality over time as well as higher odds of being incarcerated again after release from prison (McLean et al., 2015).
In another study, researchers looked at how couples’ relationships change when one partner goes to prison for an extended period of time versus being incarcerated for shorter periods during their relationship (McLean et al., 2016). They also examined whether there was an association between negative spillover experienced by one partner from their own imprisonment or divorce/separation with subsequent criminal behavior by either party post-release
In order to address these questions and understand the complex interplay between incarcerated partners’ relationships, their psychological well-being, reentry experiences, and recidivism, Kelly et al. (2017) conducted a longitudinal investigation of 96 couples in which the male partner was recently released from prison.
In order to address these questions and understand the complex interplay between incarcerated partners’ relationships, their psychological well-being, reentry experiences, and recidivism, Kelly et al. (2017) conducted a longitudinal investigation of 96 couples in which the male partner was recently released from prison. The study also examined whether female inmates were more likely than male inmates to have children as young as 18 months old when they returned home after being imprisoned for drug offenses.
These researchers used a survey method addressing topics such as emotional support from relationships, perceived stress in different aspects of life, coping mechanisms for stressors, depression symptoms, and social support.
The survey method is a way to collect data. In this study, researchers used a survey method addressing topics such as emotional support from relationships, perceived stress in different aspects of life, coping mechanisms for stressors, depression symptoms and social support.
These researchers used a survey method addressing topics such as emotional support from relationships, perceived stress in different aspects of life, coping mechanisms for stressors and depression symptoms.
The findings indicate that incarcerated men who tended to be less emotionally supportive had greater depressive symptoms in early reentry but lower depressive symptoms later in reentry.
The findings indicate that incarcerated men who tended to be less emotionally supportive had greater depressive symptoms in early reentry but lower depressive symptoms later in reentry. The researchers also found that male inmates with higher levels of emotional support from their partners exhibited lower levels of depression than those with lower levels.
Additionally, the possession of strong social networks (support systems) appeared to have a buffering effect on the relationship between incarcerated men’s perceived emotional support from their partners and their depressive symptoms over time.
Additionally, the possession of strong social networks (support systems) appeared to have a buffering effect on the relationship between incarcerated men’s perceived emotional support from their partners and their depressive symptoms over time. The researchers found that having two or more people who were close friends or relatives did not significantly affect levels of depression among participants with no prior criminal history; however, it was found that those who had multiple sources of support had lower odds of having high levels of depressive symptoms than those who had only one source. This finding suggests that having additional supports can help reduce stress in individuals who are going through stressful situations such as incarceration or homelessness.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this study provides a unique opportunity to identify the factors that influence long-term adjustment and reentry outcomes for incarcerated individuals. It sheds light on what is likely a complex relationship between couples with an incarcerated partner and their psychological well-being, reentry experiences, recidivism and losses related to incarceration
# Part 2: Introduction of data