CITI-VAL Analysis of collected data

CITI-VAL PROJECT / ERASMUS+ 2016-1-FR01-KA204- 023961 / MARTA FEKETE – JUDIT HEGEDUS (HUNGARY) 12 DISCUSSION In the above analysis we have tried to sum up some of the in prison practices addressing social competences, citizenship value education and draw from them a conclusion of what to follow when creating a collection of educative material with the same focus. We have evaluated 21 questionnaires and found that in the participating countries there are adequate and good examples of social competence and civic education programs. All in all, the focus of the courses was to sensitize and, in a broader sense, to prepare the students for reintegration. The themes addressed in the courses were: mutual respect and listening, practice of the debate, religious knowledge, civic values and social competences, moral dilemmas and moral values, notion of differences, fighting discrimination and prejudices, the ability to resolve a conflict peacefully, recognition of anger and learning control methods, individual motivation, communication skills, respecting human rights, self-awareness and responsibility of the self. Some of the courses were aimed at everyday “know - how” knowledge, like how to start a conversation and how to handle money. The researchers evaluated the type of the courses: most of them were interdisciplinary and discovery- based, requiring active participation of the inmate. Many were carried out in group work or pair work – so that they have to cooperate. Some of the very successful practices were creative, like fresco painting. Art therapy has proven to be an effective way of improving communication, enhancing cooperation skills thus, overall, preparing for reintegration. During the analysis of the questionnaires the researchers found two very important traits: one is that the more professionals leading the course the harder for the prisoner it is to get attached to it and the easier is to fall out (one can see many examples to this in French sequences). Prisoners need stability and permanence, they need to get used to a particular person, to their style and teaching methods. The interplay of the number of dropout prisoners to the number of teachers leading a course proved this view very well (in one French prison 3 finishers in a 32-member-group). The other very important aspect is the characteristic of a prison time management-wise, that it is also very ha rd to “cram in” another program in the already busy schedule of both prisoner and staff. The questionnaire lacked, unfortunately, one aspect that would have been worth finding out: the motivation of the staff working with prisoners. Whether they enjoy the collaboration or find it difficult and tiring to show up for another program: the motivation of the staff invokes the motivation of the inmate, their reciprocity is beyond question.