The purpose of this study was to listen to what youth with special needs in juvenile justice (JJ) settings say they need to be successful during reentry. The three instruments used to gain an understanding of their perspectives on reentry and their perceptions of barriers include (a) intake interviews, (b) focus groups, and (c) semi-structured post-release interviews. Major themes shared are related to reentry programming, post-release transition activities, barriers to success, influences, and outcomes. This article also notes the differences between productively engaged and not productively engaged youth. Finally, the article discusses implications of these findings on transition programming and reentry practices for youth and JJ settings.
AbramsL. S.AguilarJ. P. (2005). Negative trends, possible selves, and behavior change. Qualitative Social Work, 4, 175-196.
2.
BullisM.YovanoffP.HavelE. (2004). The importance of getting started right: Further examination of the facility-to-community transition of formerly incarcerated youth. The Journal of Special Education, 38, 80-94.
3.
ColeH.CohenR. (2013). Breaking down barriers: A case study of juvenile justice personnel perspectives on school reentry. Journal of Correctional Education, 64, 13-35.
4.
The Council of State Governments Justice Center. (2015). Locked out: Improving educational and vocational outcomes for incarcerated youth. New York, NY: Author.
5.
DawesG. D. (2011). The challenges of reintegrating Indigenous youth after their release from detention. Journal of Youth Studies, 14, 693-707.
6.
DollB.LyonM. A. (1998). Introduction to the mini-series: Resilience applied: The promise and pitfalls of school-based resilience programs. School Psychology Review, 27, 346-347.
FredricksJ. A.BlumenfeldP. C.ParisA. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59-109.
9.
Griller ClarkH.MathurS. R.HeldingB. (2011). Transition services for juvenile detainees with disabilities: Findings on recidivism. Education and Treatment of Children, 34, 511-529.
10.
Griller ClarkH.UnruhD. (2010). Transition practices for adjudicated youth with E/BDs and related disabilities. Behavioral Disorders, 36, 43-51.
11.
GroverS. (2004). Why won’t they listen to us? On giving power and voice to children participating in social research. Childhood, 11, 81-93.
12.
HalseyM. J. (2006). Negotiating conditional release: Juvenile narratives of repeat incarceration. Punishment & Society, 8, 147-181.
JamesA. (2007). Giving voice to children’s voices: Practices and problems, pitfalls and potentials. American Anthropologist, 109, 261-272.
15.
LipseyM. W. (2009). The primary factors that characterize effective interventions with juvenile offenders: A meta-analytic overview. Victims & Offenders, 4, 124-147.
16.
MathurS. R.Griller ClarkH. (2013). Prerelease planning and practices for youth with disabilities in juvenile detention. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 26, 82-92.
17.
MathurS. R.Griller ClarkH. (2014). Community engagement for reentry success of youth from Juvenile Justice: Challenges and opportunities. Education and Treatment of Children, 37, 713-734.
18.
McDanielS. (2015). A self-determination intervention for youth placed in a short-term juvenile detention facility. Journal of Correctional Education, 66(3), 5-15.
SinclairM. F.ChristensonS. L.LehrC. A.AndersonA. R. (2003). Facilitating student engagement: Lessons learned from check & connect longitudinal studies. The California School Psychologist, 8, 29-41.
25.
StefanssonK. K.GestsdottirS.GeldhofG. J.SkulasonS.LernerR. M. (2016). A bifactor model of school engagement: Assessing general and specific aspects of behavioral, emotional and cognitive engagement among adolescents. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 40, 471-480.
26.
SteinbergL.ChungH. L.LittleM. (2004). Reentry of young offenders from the justice system: A developmental perspective. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2, 21-38.
27.
TiltonJ. (2013). Rethinking youth voice and institutional power: Reflections from inside a service learning partnership in a California juvenile hall. Children and Youth Services Review, 35, 1189-1196.
28.
UnruhD.Povenmire-KirkT.YamamotoS. (2009). Perceived barriers and protective factors of juvenile offenders on their developmental pathway to adulthood. Journal of Correctional Education, 60, 201-224.
29.
WehmeyerM. L. (1995). The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale: Procedural guidelines. Arlington, VA: The Arc of the United States.
30.
WilsonS. J.LipseyM. W.SoydanH. (2003). Are mainstream programs for juvenile delinquency less effective with minority youth than majority youth? A meta-analysis of outcomes research. Research on Social Work Practice, 13, 3-26.
31.
ZaffJ. F.GinsbergK. K.BoydM. J.KakliZ. (2014). Reconnecting disconnected youth: Examining the development of productive engagement. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 24, 526-540.
32.
ZhangD.BarrettD. E.KatsiyannisA.YoonM. (2011). Juvenile offenders with and without disabilities: Risks and patterns of recidivism. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 12-18.
