Accepting the Terms and Conditions: An Evaluation of a Parole-Based Experiential Assignment

Abstract

Experiential learning is an effective pedagogical tool that has been associated with several beneficial student outcomes. Given the complex and applied nature of criminal justice courses, educators in these fields have sought to implement experiential learning, developing several impactful initiatives along the way. However, many of these require extensive safety planning, resource acquisition, community partnerships, and institutional buy-in. The present study introduces and evaluates an experiential assignment that helps circumvent some of these issues, wherein first-year university students (n = 42) abide by a set of self-selected parole/probation conditions, write a reflection on their experience, and report on the empirical saliency of their conditions. Following the assignment deadline, an online survey was disseminated to students to gauge the impact of their experience. Results indicated that students enjoyed the assignment, believing that it provided real-world experience, transformed their perspectives, and helped them better understand their course material. Students also demonstrated a strong desire for more experiential learning opportunities in their program. Implications and future directions are discussed.

Keywords:

• Experiential learning
• science of teaching and learning
• criminal justice pedagogy
• parole
• probation
• corrections
• forensic psychology
• criminology

Introduction

Degrees relating to criminal justice issues are growing in popularity as more students seek to understand the cultural, societal, personal, and situational precursors and solutions to criminal behaviour. The 2020–21 academic year alone saw a 7.8% increase in the number of criminology degrees awarded over the previous year and the demand for criminal justice-oriented university degrees is high (American Psychological Association, 2009; College Factual, 2023). This follows a longitudinal trend in the proliferation of criminal justice majors which represented only 0.3% of undergraduate degrees in 1970 and has increased its market share ten-fold by 2011 (Bui, 2014). According to the National Center for Education Statistics (2023), the number of undergraduate degrees awarded between 2010 and 2020 in forensic psychology, criminology, and criminal justice and corrections programs has increased by 73%, 60%, and 20%, respectively. A similar proliferation has taken place among Master’s degrees, with growth of 151%, 42%, and 20%, respectively, over the same time period. The interest in criminal behaviour among university students also reflects a fascination amongst the general public, with criminal justice television programs such as Criminal Minds and NCIS being ranked among the most watched in the United States, each surpassing 30 billion minutes of watch time in 2022 (Spangler, 2023). Crime dramas are also popular in the United Kingdom, with the British television program “Line of Duty” being the most watched drama series of the twenty first century, its season finale eclipsing 15 million viewers in the UK (Jones, 2021).

While this interest is encouraging, it does not necessarily make the content any easier to teach; criminology and forensic psychology courses have core concepts, theories, and research findings that need to be covered on topics that are contentious, emotion-filled, and potentially divisive. As in any course, instructors may turn to the pedagogical literature to enhance student learning experience and bring course content to life, which may include the utilization of experiential learning. However, in the criminal justice context, this may prove difficult as student safety, respect for justice-involved persons, correctional staff availability, and access to justice settings (e.g. courthouses, correctional institutions) are among several practical hurdles in organizing such an endeavour. Further, other alternatives that may involve power imbalances and a loss of autonomy, such as assigning participants to dominant (e.g. prison guard) and submissive (e.g. incarcerated person) roles would likely run afoul of institutional ethical committees. The purpose of this paper, then, is to offer an experiential alternative that gives students an opportunity to gain first-hand experience of the criminal justice system without being bound by their or their institution’s resources.

Experiential learning theory

Experiential learning is best defined as a process wherein a person is engaged cognitively, behaviourally, and emotionally in the creation and processing of knowledge in an active, applied setting (Hoover, 1974; Rogers, 1969). Put simply, it is a holistic pedagogical approach that places the learner at the center—literally and figuratively—of the learning (see Kurthakoti & Good, 2019 for how this differs from learning from experience). The use of experiential learning has a solid research base in terms of both enhancing students’ conceptual understanding and their overall engagement and enjoyment with the course (Burch et al., 2019). Much of this is based in Experiential Learning Theory (ELT), a four-stage model of knowledge generation through meaningful involvement in some event, situation, or circumstance (Kolb et al., 2001). Specifically, it hypothesizes that knowledge is generated via the constellation of “grasping and transforming experience” (Kolb, 1984, p. 41) through two modes of grasping experience and two modes of transforming experience, which comprise the four stages. The first stage is the concrete experience itself, the tangible, immersive event that is experienced through the senses (Kolb & Kolb, 2009, 2022). This serves as the foundation for reflective observation, the second stage. Reflection on one’s experience allows for abstract conceptualization, the generation of knowledge from the concrete experience. During this third stage, symbolic representation, a cognitive immersion rather than a sensual one, as seen in stage one, takes place where the learner uses their analytical, planning, and questioning skills as a guide to making sense of their experience. The final stage, active experimentation, is best conceptualized as the application of this newfound knowledge base to inform upcoming decisions or predict future events (Kolb & Kolb, 2009, 2022).

What makes ELT a useful framework for understanding experiential learning is not that it results in knowledge generation and application, but that it specifies the mechanics behind this process. Specifically, Kolb (1984; et al., 2001) posits that experiential learning calls upon abilities that are polar opposites (concrete and abstract conceptualization, reflective observation and active experimentation) to work in conjunction in order for this knowledge to be generated and used. This is different from non-experiential learning, which may not call upon all of these abilities, resulting in students, broadly defined, using a singular, preferred strategy (Kolb & Kolb, 2009). Thus, not only is experiential learning more holistic, but it also utilizes students’ preferred learning approaches (e.g. concrete experience, abstract conceptualization) to inform other, perhaps lesser used mechanisms.

Experiential learning and student outcomes in educational settings

A recent meta-analysis of experiential learning activities spanning 43 years of research found that student outcomes, broadly defined, were moderately (d = .43) and significantly higher when experiential activities were employed (Burch et al., 2019). Specifically, experiential activities appeared to be most effective in enhancing student understanding of social issues (d = .57) and increasing cognitive development (e.g. skill development, academic achievement; d = .89). Activities that employed some form of simulation outperformed those that did not (d = .96, .70, respectively); interestingly, service-learning—a form of experiential learning that also involves service to the community (Furco, 2003)—was associated with weaker outcomes than non-service-learning (i.e. traditional) approaches (d = .49. .83, respectively; Burch et al., 2019). Results from a separate meta-analysis exclusive to service learning suggests that its benefits are most beneficial to academic rather than personal or social outcomes (Conway et al., 2009). While studies conducted on business majors (d = 1.04) demonstrated more positive results than non-business majors (d = .64), experiential activities were still beneficial to students in both groups (Burch et al., 2019). Similarly, a university-wide evaluation found that student breadth and depth of learning as measured by the National Survey of Student Engagement increased as the number of experiential learning activities increased (Coker et al., 2017). What is promising about this pattern of results is that the institution being evaluated requires all students to complete at least one form of experiential learning (equivalent of 40 h), suggesting that there may be ongoing positive effects beyond a singular experiential learning opportunity. Perhaps speaking to student interest, the average number of hours spent in experiential activities was 376 h (range: 40–2,520), far surpassing the minimum requirements (Coker et al., 2017).

Other studies have also highlighted the beneficial impact of experiential learning on a number of different domains from empathy to academic performance to communication skills. In one study, students in a lifespan developmental psychology course engaged in experiential learning project that involved 12 two-hour sessions at a relevant setting, such as a daycare or assisted living facility (Lundy, 2007). Upon completion, they were asked to incorporate their 12 daily diary entries into the empirical literature and course materials into an essay and presentation. Compared to their classmates that chose alternative assessments (interview project or research paper), students who engaged in the experiential option scored higher on subsequent class tests. Experiential learning students also demonstrated higher empathy scores at the end of the semester and also demonstrated an increase in empathy across the semester that was not seen in the other two groups.

In another evaluation, students in a research methods course who worked with a local Boys & Girls Club to develop a study to help measure youth attendance scored higher on a test of course content than those who took a traditional research methods course which replaced this service-learning option with a traditional group research project (Fleck et al., 2017). Students were cognizant of these changes, reporting the experience as helpful in understanding course material in addition to being enjoyable and requiring no extra work compared to a conventional lecture-based approach. Students who undertook the project with the Boys & Girls Club also reported greater engagement with their research methods professor outside of the classroom, suggesting that this service-learning approach may result in greater opportunity to establish instructor-student rapport, which was not measured. An evaluation of experiential learning on a student-run organic farm based on reflective essays found that students reported improvements in their overall work ethic, their teamwork abilities, communication skills, and personal initiative (Reeve et al., 2014). Students also indicated that the farm work experience encouraged them to do further research to enhance crop yield and that they were able to apply the knowledge gained in their own personal gardens or family farms.

Experiential learning in criminal justice and forensic psychology

The application of experiential learning to the fields of criminal justice and forensic psychology (CJ-FP) is a natural extension given their applied nature and focus on understanding complex societal problems. This is supported by multiple meta-analyses indicating the effectiveness of experiential learning in classrooms across multiple disciplines (Burch et al., 2014, 2019; Conway et al., 2009). Experiential learning in CJ-FP has been enacted across a wide array of formats (see Crandall et al., 2021 and Trappen & Cruz, 2022 for reviews) that range in duration from short, single session activities such as watching films, doing police ride-alongs, and hosting guest speakers (Belisle et al., 2020; George et al., 2015; Mathna & Koen, 2023; Rockell, 2009) to more intensive endeavours such as internships, service learning, and research projects (Clevenger et al., 2017; Coker et al., 2017; Davis, 2015; Portillo et al., 2013; Trejbalová et al., 2022). Such initiatives have been effective in increasing student empathy (Belisle et al., 2020; Clevenger et al., 2017; Hirschinger-Blank & Markowitz, 2006; Stacer et al., 2017), reducing biases and stereotypes (Calaway et al., 2016; Murphy & Gibbons, 2017), improving critical thinking skills (Clevenger et al., 2017; Nickoli et al., 2003; Payne et al., 2003), refining career goals and professional development (Belisle et al., 2020; George et al., 2015; Stacer et al., 2019), improving learning outcomes (Crandall et al., 2021; Murphy & Gibbons, 2017; Portillo et al., 2013) and enhancing student engagement (Murphy & Gibbons, 2017; Pugh, 2014; Rockell, 2009).

For instance, in order to tackle victim-blaming narratives surrounding intimate partner violence, Clevenger et al. (2017) developed a research activity titled “Why doesn’t she just leave” where students are asked to create a safety plan for a woman who is looking to escape an abusive relationship with her child and pet. Specifically, students need to identify community resources that can take care of the woman’s immediate needs (including those of her child and pet) such as housing—a difficult situation as many domestic violence shelters cannot accommodate children and/or pets. Following this, a long-term plan is devised to promote the woman’s independence. Both plans require students to calculate the financial costs associated with leaving the relationship (e.g. shelter, food) and maintaining independence (e.g. childcare, transportation) and to reflect on the psychological issues the woman may experience throughout the process. Ninety-seven percent of students surveyed after the assignment agreed that the experience helped increase their understanding of why victims of intimate partner violence (IPV) have difficulty leaving or remaining away from their abusive partner. Several students also indicated that the experiential assignment altered their perceptions of IPV victims and challenged victim-blaming attitudes that they held previously.

Another experiential learning opportunity involved students attending residential nursing facilities that accept individuals who have been granted medical parole (Davis, 2015). Students were paired with individuals on parole to help provide them company, act as a liaison between an individual on parole and staff to help prevent parole revocation, and to build critical reflective skills as they pertain to penal policies and reintegrative practices. Due to the distance between the university and the location of the residential care facilities which required 30–45-minute commutes each way, students only met with their partner on parole six to eight times for 45 to 60 min at a time. Following each meeting, students responded to targeted prompts in a journal, which narrowed in focus as the semester progressed, which contributed to a final paper reflecting on their experience and how their attitudes changed as a result of their service learning. An evaluation of the service learning project indicated that students became more comfortable interacting with their parole partners as time progressed and that they developed a better understanding of the elderly prison population and the issues that they face navigating current correctional justice policies.

In recognition that many CJ-FP students may pursue correctional professions, such as a probation officer, Goulette and Denney (2018) implemented an eight-week probation simulation to promote critical reflection on what the experience is like for both parties. Students were randomly paired with one another and were assigned roles as the probationer and the probation officer. After four weeks, roles were reversed, giving each student an opportunity to experience probation as a supervisor and as an individual under supervision. Probation scenarios were provided based on consultations with local and federal probation officers. An analysis of student reflections indicated that the experience enhanced their understanding of probation and the issues and impact it can have on both parties, although this did not translate into changes in their attitudes toward individuals on probation. A second evaluation of this was done following a shortened six-week iteration using a pre-post design (Denney & Goulette, 2019) that found only select effects; specifically, significant pre-post differences were only found for two of the 23 items. While its effects differed slightly across participant gender, experience with crime, and instructor, it is possible that re-enacting typical probation scenarios alone was not immersive enough to alter student attitudes. However, a parole activity where students engaged in four 12-minute sessions reflecting tasks and obstacles that a justice-involved person may face upon the first four weeks upon release did result in increased empathy toward individuals on parole (Moak et al., 2020). Taken in context with the above findings, it suggests that the intensity of the activity or learning opportunity may be more influential than the duration.

Present study

Many of the above experiential opportunities involve brief interactions with the criminal justice system or individuals who are currently or have been justice-involved (e.g. field trips, guest speakers, meeting with individuals on parole; Belisle et al., 2020; Davis, 2015; George et al., 2015). Some are topically relevant (e.g. research projects on a specific criminal justice issue; George et al., 2015), but do not involve direct contact with the criminal justice system or those affiliated with it. Others require substantial time investments and reliance on other students for the experience to be maximally effective (Denney & Goulette, 2019; Goulette & Denney, 2018). What is missing from our repertoire of criminal justice experiential learning exercises are opportunities for students to engage in protracted activities that provide first-hand experiences of criminal justice system involvement. Offering such opportunities is difficult due to numerous practical and ethical issues—it may not be feasible or safe to have students reside in a correctional facility for any period of time; however, there exist options that can simulate some of these situations that can be pedagogically valuable. The current study presents an evaluation of one such experiential activity where students abided by a set of parole/probation conditions for one week, documenting the impact it had on their daily lives (as explicit reflection enhances the impact of experiential learning; Burch et al., 2019), and conducting a short literature review on the efficacy of their chosen conditions (see Appendix for full assignment). To the best of the authors’ knowledge, there is no research literature or evaluation of an experiential learning activity of this nature. The goal of the present study is two-fold: first, it provides criminal justice and forensic psychology educators with an activity to incorporate into their own classrooms, and second, it offers insights into the impact of said activity with opportunities to adapt and improve the assignment for future use.

Methods

Design

The assignment described in this manuscript was developed in 2019 by the authors while teaching a CJ-FP course at the University of Saskatchewan. The assignment has been refined based on informal student feedback since its initial use and the present study reflects an evaluation that was conducted following its implementation in the Fall of 2022. The assignment has also been adapted into French and was awarded the 2022 Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues (SPSSI) Teaching Resource Award. For their first assignment of the semester in a mandatory first-year course for forensic psychology and criminology undergraduates in the UK, students were asked to follow a set of three parole/probation conditions for a one-week period. A list of several example conditions was given based on commonly used restrictions in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada that are imposed on individuals departing or diverted from secure settings (see Appendix A) from which they could choose. Students were also given the option to modify¹ these or to choose their own. To enhance efficacy and accuracy, students were encouraged to pick conditions that would cause some disruption in their daily lives (e.g. they were discouraged from selecting a condition that prohibits use of public transport if they do not normally use it). It was made clear to students that they would not be punished by the instructor for breaking their condition. Following their week on parole/probation, students wrote a reflection on the impact that each condition had on their day-to-day lives and how this experience could be more difficult for justice-involved persons who may not have the same access to resources that they do (e.g. a family member to provide transportation). The assignment concluded with students conducting a short literature review to indicate whether their chosen conditions help or hinder the reintegration process.

Measures

The survey (see Table 1) was designed by both authors based on questions used in evaluations of other experiential activities in criminal justice settings and qualitative student responses (Belisle et al., 2020; Clevenger et al., 2017; Crandall et al., 2021; Davis, 2015; George et al., 2015). It was comprised of 23 quantitative items that captured educational impact, perspective-taking, beliefs about experiential learning, and professional development. These followed a five-point Likert scale response format (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree; see Table 1). The survey was hosted online via Qualtrics and students were given opportunities both in-class and online to complete the evaluation in the two weeks following the due date. This was done to minimize the time lapse between completing the assignment and reporting on it as well as to ensure that student grades did not influence their evaluations. This project received a favourable ethical opinion from the host university.

Table 1. Student responses.

Question	Strongly disagree (1)		Somewhat disagree (2)		Neither agree nor disagree (3)		Somewhat agree (4)		Strongly agree (5)		M (SD)
The parole assignment…	n	%	n	%	n	%	n	%	n	%
Was a valuable educational experience for me	1	2.4	3	7.1	5	11.9	18	42.9	15	35.7	4.02 (1.00)
Helped me understand what it would be like to be involved in the criminal justice system	1	2.4	3	7.1	1	2.4	28	66.7	9	21.4	3.98 (.87)
Changed my attitudes toward parolees	1	2.4	2	4.8	17	40.5	12	28.6	10	23.8	3.67 (.98)
Helped me understand perspectives of individuals who are on parole	1	2.4	1	2.4	3	7.1	20	47.6	17	40.5	4.21 (.87)
Has helped me understand the perspectives of parole officers	2	4.8	6	14.3	14	33.3	14	33.3	6	14.3	3.38 (1.06)
Has helped me understand treatment/crime prevention effects	1	2.4	1	2.4	4	9.5	25	59.5	11	26.2	4.05 (.83)
Helped module content come to life	1	2.4	1	2.4	5	11.9	16	38.1	19	45.2	4.21 (.93)
Helped me apply and expand on concepts learned in my modules	0	0	1	2.4	6	14.3	22	52.4	13	22.8	4.12 (.74)
Has made me more interested in correctional reform/changing the way our criminal justice system works	2	4.8	3	7.1	11	26.2	15	35.7	11	26.2	3.71 (1.09)
Has helped me decide what career paths/goals I may pursue	6	14.3	8	19.0	14	33.3	11	26.2	3	7.1	2.93 (1.16)
Increased my desire/motivation to continue in my course	2	4.8	2	4.8	10	23.8	16	38.1	12	28.6	3.81 (1.07)
Helped make module content more approachable/relatable	1	2.1	1	2.4	7	16.7	21	50.0	12	28.6	4.00 (.88)
Helped make me feel like my skills and interests were valued in this module	1	2.4	3	7.1	14	33.3	18	42.9	6	14.3	3.60 (.91)
Made me feel like the lecturers values my learning/university experience	1	2.4	2	4.8	11	26.2	14	33.3	14	33.3	3.90 (1.01)
Was an overall enjoyable experience	1	2.4	2	4.8	9	21.4	13	31.0	17	40.5	4.02 (1.02)
Assisted me in learning in my forensic psychology and criminology modules	0	0	1	2.4	4	9.5	21	50.0	16	38.1	4.24 (.73)
Provided me with real-world experience	1	2.4	3	7.1	2	4.8	16	38.1	20	47.6	4.21 (1.00)
Experiential learning
I would recommend keeping the parole assignment in this module for next year’s students	1	2.4	0	0	4	9.5	14	33.3	23	54.8	4.38 (.85)
I think that future students would enjoy the parole assignment	1	2.4	1	2.4	4	9.8	18	43.9	17	41.5	4.20 (.90)
Experiential learning opportunities such as the parole assignment should be required in forensic psychology/criminology courses	0	0	0	0	3	7.1	19	45.2	20	47.6	4.40 (.63)
There should be more experiential learning opportunities such as the parole assignment in my undergraduate course	1	2.4	2	4.8	6	14.3	11	26.2	22	52.4	4.21 (1.03)

Participants

Participants were enrolled in a mandatory first-year course for forensic psychology and criminology undergraduate students in the United Kingdom. One hundred and two students (88% female, 12% male) were enrolled in the course at the time of the assignment. Students were primarily 19.5 years old (SD = 2.05). The course represents the ethnic diversity of the institution: 44% of the students of the 102 students identified as White, 22% as Black, 21% as Asian, 12% as mixed or other ethnicity, and 1% as Middle Eastern. One student did not provide data regarding their ethnicity. Following the assignment due date, students were encouraged to take part in the evaluation via announcements over the learning management system (Canvas). Some class time was also given for students to partake. Students were made aware that their participation was anonymous and would not have any impact on their assignments (which were marked anonymously following the closing of the survey). Of the 95 students who submitted the assignment, 42 (44%) provided consent and filled out the evaluation questions. The response rate is similar to other evaluations of experiential class activities and assignments (e.g. Belisle et al., 2020).

Results

Overall, the parole/probation assignment received favourable evaluations². Just over three-quarters of students (78.6%) agreed that the assignment was a valuable educational experience with 85.7% considering it to be real-world experience. While 71.5% of students agreed that the assignment was enjoyable, when asked to rate their enjoyment on a 1 (not at all) to 100 (extremely) point scale, the average was a modest 60.5 (SD = 20.1). Closer inspection of these responses indicated that reactions were generally positive; over three-quarters of students responded at or above the scale midpoint, with 70 and 75 being the most common responses. Student responses were particularly encouraging with respect to module and course-related measures, agreeing that the assignment helped them in their modules (88.1%), made the content more relatable (78.6%), helped them apply this content (75.2%), and made the content come to life (83.3%). Results were also promising with respect to perspective-taking and empathy-based responses. Students strongly felt that the assignment helped them get a better understanding of what it would be like to be involved in the criminal justice system generally and specifically on parole (both 88.1% agreeance). A smaller proportion indicated that the experience changed their attitudes toward parolees (52.4%). The parole/probation assignment appeared to have the weakest impact on career-related metrics, with only one-third agreeing that it has helped in career planning and two-thirds reporting that it increased their motivation to continue in their forensic psychology or criminology program. Of note, even the lesser endorsed items all indicated a neutral to slightly positive response, indicating that the assignment was not wholly detrimental in any measurable category.

Student enthusiasm and support for more experiential learning opportunities was high. Endorsement was strongest for requiring all forensic psychology and criminology courses to offer experiential opportunities (92.8%), with 78.6% agreeing that they would like to see more experiential opportunities in their undergraduate degrees. These were the highest-scoring items in the survey. Students also felt that future students would enjoy the parole assignment (85.4%) and that it should be offered the following year (88.1%).

Discussion

The present manuscript describes and evaluates an experimental learning assignment focused on probation and parole. In the assignment, students were asked to imagine that they are on probation/parole and adopt conditions to abide by for a week. Students then reflected on their experiences of abiding by their selected conditions and conducted a literature review to make explicit connections between their experiences and current research evidence related to parole and probation. The evaluation consisted of student responses to 23 items regarding their experience, opinions, and judgements of having completed the assignment.

Overall, the parole assignment was well received by students with the majority of students indicating that it was an enjoyable and valuable learning experience. Specifically, students felt that the assignment made the content more relatable, helped them to apply the content covered in class, and that it brought the course content to life. While this is encouraging, it is not entirely surprising as the assignment adheres quite closely to Kolb et al. (2001) experiential Learning Theory (ELT) and covers all four stages proposed by the model. First, the concrete experience is reflected in the selection and adherence to common parole and probation conditions. Students are then asked to use those experiences to engage in reflective observation by explicitly reflecting on their experiences and their feelings during the week—resulting in abstract conceptualization related to the experience. Students then move into the third and fourth stage when they are asked to write a paper based on their reflections and incorporate evidence from the literature (Kolb et al., 2001). ELT has been tested extensively with Kolb and Kolb (2009) noting over 700 evaluations of ELT programs across disciplines with most providing support for adherence to the model. While the number of studies published seem to be more modest this trend continues in recent work as well (Kolb & Kolb, 2022).

The results of this study were also in line with previous research that has indicated that experiential learning opportunities benefit students enrolled in forensic psychology and criminal justice programs. Specifically, these opportunities have been effective in increasing student empathy (Belisle et al., 2020; Clevenger et al., 2017; Hirschinger-Blank & Markowitz, 2006; Stacer et al., 2017), reducing biases and stereotypes (Calaway et al., 2016; Murphy & Gibbons, 2017), improving critical thinking skills (Clevenger et al., 2017; Nickoli et al., 2003; Payne et al., 2003), refining career goals and professional development (Belisle et al., 2020; George et al., 2015; Stacer et al., 2019), improving learning outcomes (Crandall et al., 2021; Murphy & Gibbons, 2017; Portillo et al., 2013) and enhancing student engagement (Murphy & Gibbons, 2017; Pugh, 2014; Rockell, 2009). The results from this evaluation indicate that, similar to the previous literature, the parole/probation assignment that we designed resulted in improvements in perspective-taking and empathy-based responses, challenged attitudes related to probation/parole. Surprisingly, the assignment had a relatively weak impact on career related metrics. Given that the goal of both psychology and criminology educational programs are to better the life of others (West, 2001), improvements in empathy can be an extremely important soft skill taught within these programs. Increased empathy has previously related to an enhanced ability to cope with stress, respond to conflicts, and improved decision making (Engel, 2003; Keena & Krieger-Sample, 2018; Kremer & Dietzen, 1991). Additionally, previous literature has indicated that increased empathy scores can have an impact on the perceived attractiveness of certain criminal justice career paths (e.g. those with higher empathy score were less likely to be interested in careers as police officers or prison wardens; Courtright et al., 2005), thereby bettering students’ ability to select a fulfilling career path in the future. As students have been found to focus on certain areas of the criminal justice system such as law enforcement (Collica-Cox & Furst, 2019; Krimmel & Tartaro, 1999), assignments that introduce students to the complexity of the criminal justice system and the variety of possible career opportunities can be extremely helpful for students in future planning.

Another advantage of the present experiential assignment is that it allows students a unique opportunity to experience the criminal justice system while minimizing exposure to trauma. Specifically, it aligns with trauma-informed pedagogy by recognizing that traditional experiential opportunities in criminal justice settings that require engagement with law enforcement, secure settings, or justice-involved persons may be triggering to some students (Boppre et al., 2023; Katz, 2020; Parrotta et al., 2021). When instructors or courses are negligent of the negative impact that protocols or activities may have on students, this is institutional betrayal, a term used to describe instances where a body (e.g. a professor, a department, an institution) that a person once held in esteem violates that sense of trust and security (Smith & Freyd, 2014). While institutional betrayal is not confined to certain subjects or topics, those that discuss criminal justice issues such as intimate partner and sexual violence are particularly at-risk to undermine student trust (Agllias, 2012; Bedera, 2021). Experiences of institutional betrayal are also associated with negative mental health outcomes such as anxiety, depression, and sleep problems (Smith & Freyd, 2013, 2017). The parole/probation assignment also enables students to engage without experiencing vicarious trauma, a form of suffering associated with witnessing someone with whom you share an empathic bond experience duress (McCann & Pearlman, 1990). This can manifest by seeing another person experience institutional betrayal or by engaging with justice-involved persons (Agllias, 2012). In providing students with the opportunity to choose their own conditions, with the understanding that they may be modified slightly and broken without punishment, the parole/probation assignment provides the flexibility for students from a variety of backgrounds to safely engage and challenge themselves without setting them up for betrayal or vicarious trauma.

Limitations

The present study, while novel, is not without limitations. First, it relied upon student judgments following their participation in the assignment, which could raise issues with demand characteristics, social desirability bias, or students responding favourably to appease their instructor. While strategies were implemented to reduce this likelihood (both evaluations and assignments themselves were anonymously submitted, evaluation results were not viewed until assignments were graded), they cannot be altogether discounted. Second, as a cross-sectional design, it is not possible to capture what within-person change (if any) the assignment may have had. This limits any claims of causal effects and results in the evaluation being reliant on the accuracy of student self-reflection judgments. Third, participant demographics were not collected to ensure anonymity. It is therefore not possible to determine whether the students who participated in the evaluation reflected the broader makeup of the class (reported above) and whether certain demographic characteristics were associated with any pattern of responses. Lastly, the assignment itself was reliant on the integrity of the students; instructors did not witness them engaging in this form of learning, unlike other mediums that require supervision (e.g. field trips, service learning). Thus, there is no guarantee that students followed instructions, although it is unlikely that students would complete an optional evaluation if they did not engage with the assignment honestly.

Future directions

Moving forward, it is integral to establish the impact of the present assignment by developing a pre-post study design to measure attitudinal, characteristic, and knowledge changes that occur as a result. Based on Kolb et al. (2001) ELT model, it is recommended that this takes place after students have written their reflective element and not just after completing their week on parole. As some parole conditions are objectively more difficult than others (e.g. prohibited from using public transport), it would be worthwhile to capture what parole conditions were chosen and how well these were adhered to in the evaluation as this could conceivably influence the impact of the parole assignment in specific domains. Asking students to assess the difficulty (and perhaps projected difficulty) following and leading up to their week on parole could also help identify who benefits most from the experience. For instance, would individuals who experience more difficulty following their conditions report a greater impact with respect to attitudinal changes or perceived educational impact? Lastly, it is important to replicate this evaluation with other populations. Students in the present class were first-year students who explicitly chose to take either forensic psychology or criminology programs. As such, there may be a ceiling effect given their chosen academic pathways. Evaluating the impact of the parole assignment in an optional module that is available to students outside of those pursuing criminal justice careers may help uncover additional benefits and have more impact on job-related items.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the newly created assignment seems to benefit students and provides an enjoyable, robust learning experience which resulted in perceived improvements in learning, empathy, and increased engagement with course materials. While experiential learning opportunities show promise that may lead to their increased adoption, it is important to note that there are still challenges to their implementation. Specifically, faculty have voiced concerns over the resources and time needed to establish partnerships in the community and a lack of incentives and support from the university (Skaggs & Graybeal, 2019). These concerns illustrate that, while beneficial, these opportunities cannot be fully realized without institutional support. Assignments like that described here are important developments to ensure that students are able to receive experiential opportunities regardless of the capacities of their institutions.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Brandon Sparks

Brandon Sparks is a Senior Lecturer in Forensic Psychology at Kingston University. Dr. Sparks received his PhD in Psychology from the University of Saskatchewan. His primary research revolves around sexual violence and healthy relationships, with a growing interest in technology-facilitated sexual violence. He has also published work on involuntary celibacy (incels) and is dedicating more time to pedagogical research.

Alexandra Zidenberg

Alexandra Zidenberg is an Assistant Professor at the Royal Military College of Canada. Dr. Zidenberg received her PhD in Psychology from the University of Saskatchewan. Her research is focused on two main areas: The first examines the nexus between forensic psychology and human sexuality, focusing on topics like sexual violence, zoophilia, bestiality, multiple perpetrator sexual offenses, and children under 12 with concerning sexual behaviors. The second is focused on the forensic mental health system including topics such as mental health courts, treatment in forensic settings, and sexual and violence risk assessment.

Notes

1 Students were informed that they could make minor modifications to the conditions as long as the spirit of the assessment remained intact. For instance, the prohibition against making contact with children under the age of 18 may be modified to exclude individuals living in their household or to minimize contact with such persons as much as possible during the week.

2 see https://osf.io/dxmb5/?view_only=0bfc773b6a13475eae134af3794e90b3 for dataset.

Appendix.

Parole assignment

Overview

Many individuals who have had contact with the criminal justice system are required to obey a set of conditions either as an alternative to incarceration (probation) or upon release from an institution (parole). Failure to abide by these restrictions may result in further incarceration or other penalties. For this assignment, you are asked to spend one week abiding by at least 3 of the conditions of your choosing and write a reflective paper of 1,000 words (+/- 10%) describing your experience. Note any difficulties this had on your daily life and whether you had to violate any of your conditions (don’t worry, you won’t be punished!). After noting your own experience, describe how the conditions you chose may help or hinder the reintegration of offenders into society.

Example parole/probation conditions:

• Prohibited from attending public parks, pools, daycares, schools, and playgrounds

• Prohibited from using alcohol and/or drugs

• Prohibited from owning, possessing, or transporting firearms

• Prohibited from being with children under 14 unsupervised

• Prohibited from making contact with children under the age of 18

  • This can include your own children, siblings and/or family members

• No access to computers or devices that can connect to the internet

• Frequent check-ins with their parole/probation officer (you may designate a friend or family member to act as your Parole Officer)

• Must abide by a curfew designated by their Parole Officer

• Must provide their Parole Officer with a driving or travel log

• Prohibited from leaving your residence except to attend school/work

  • Approval from Parole Officer must be sought to leave residence for other reasons

• Prohibited from using public transit

• Prohibited from driving a motorized vehicle

  • Or prohibited from driving a motorized vehicle unsupervised

• Prohibited from accessing any sexual or pornographic material or patronizing a place where such material is available

• Prohibited from hitchhiking or picking up hitchhikers

You will be expected to describe the conditions that you have selected, to reflect on your experiences abiding by these conditions and any difficulties that you experienced (approx. 500 words). To ensure that your reflection has sufficient depth, check out the “what does reflection look like?” section on Brock University’s Centre for Pedagogical Innovation website here. Then you will be asked to comment on how your experiences may translate to the criminal justice system and support or refute your conclusions using evidence from the academic literature (approx. 500 words). While there may not be formal evaluations of the specific condition(s) that you chose, you are encouraged to be creative (e.g. could adult curfews may result in missed prosocial opportunities? If so, how may this relate to recidivism?). The goal of this assignment is not to write a large research paper but to encourage you actively engage with the class materials and to consider the factors that might help or hinder justice-involved individuals through reflection and a brief review of the literature.

Your paper should be written in APA format (7^th Edition). This means that your paper will need to have a title page, a reference page, and in-text citations. Failure to follow APA format will result in a deduction of marks on the paper. You should be paraphrasing information from journal articles and other sources rather than directly quoting material.

Learning objectives

• To be able to meaningfully reflect on your experience and be able to contrast that with an individual who is formally on parole/probation (who may have fewer resources than you).

• To discover the challenges and changes that these conditions have on one’s day-to-day living.

• To be able to defend or challenge the efficacy of your chosen conditions (on reintegration or recidivism) based on your own experience and that of the empirical literature.

• To enrich/modify your perspective on parole/probation and its role in the criminal justice system.

Helpful tip

Given that this is in part a reflective exercise, it may be worthwhile to document your expectations going into your week on parole/probation. You can refer back to this in your writing if you wish.

Supplemental material

We certainly hope that this experiential assignment is more enriching than a traditional term paper. To maximize your enjoyment (and ours), we encourage you to submit any additional materials you feel are relevant to your assignment. Whether you choose to do this or not will not impact your grade; rather, it will offer you a portfolio that better captures your entire experience. For instance, some students have included their travel log with their assignment. You may also wish to include more personal or creative effects, such as your expectations heading into the week, diary entries, or artistic representations (e.g. poetry, artwork) that reflect your experience.

Key points

In summary, we are asking you to:

• Undertake an experiential learning opportunity by spending a week abiding by 3 or more parole/probation conditions

• Write a 1,000 word paper

  • Half of this should be a summary and reflection of your experience

  • The other half should discuss how these conditions may help or hinder reintegration, based on your experiences and evidence from the literature

• Use APA (7^th Edition) formatting throughout

We are also hoping you will:

• Share with us any additional materials to fully capture your experience

• Experience a new or more informed perspective on the way in which we treat individuals with involvement in the criminal justice system

Parole/Probation Assignment Rubric

Student name: ________________

Table

Points Available	Requirements	Points Achieved/Explanation
5 points	Description of the Conditions Outline the specific conditions that you have selected Outline the types of offenders/offences that these conditions may apply in the criminal justice system (e.g., general, sexual, IPV) Describe what these restrictions entailed
15 points	Reflection on your Experiences. Describe your experiences following your chosen conditions (e.g., difficulties) Provide concrete examples of the effects the conditions had on your daily life Explain how other factors may make these conditions easier or harder to abide by (e.g., how owning a car would make being banned from public transit easier) Reflect on how these conditions may help or hinder reintegration to the community for justice-involved individuals
10 points	Integration of the Literature Use evidence from the literature to support or refute your conclusions Use of multiple studies to support conclusions
5 points	Proper APA format (including): Title Page Headings In-text citations Paraphrasing Reference Page
Total Possible: 35 pts		Total Achieved: