Boot camps are known for their rigorous regimen of marching, physical training, and hard work; however, Alabama boot camp officials have learned that additional services, such as individual and group counseling, will help improve probationers' chances of not reoffending when they are released. Moreover, officials at the Disciplinary Rehabilitation Unit have also discovered that by asking offenders what works, they can better treat and rehabilitate them.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Akers, R. L.
(1994). Criminological theories: Introduction and evaluation. Los Angeles: Roxbury.
2.
Anderson, J.F.
, & Dyson, L. (1996). A tracking investigation to determine boot camp success and offender risk assessment for CRIPP participants. Journal of Crime and Justice, 19(1), 179-190.
3.
Babbie, E.
(1995). The practice of social research (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
4.
Beccaria, B.
(1764/1963). On crime and punishments (Henry Paolucci, Trans.). Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.
5.
Bentham, J.
(1789/1948). An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation. New York: Kegan Paul.
6.
Burns, J.
, & Vito, G. (1995, March). An impact analysis of the Alabama boot camp program. Federal Probation, pp. 63-67.
7.
Burton, V.S., Jr.
, Marquart, J. W., Cuvelier, S., Hunter, R., & Fiftal, L. (in press). The Harris County Courts Regimented Intensive Probation Program (CRIPP): An outline for a program evaluation assessing correctional effectiveness. Texas Probation.
8.
Flowers, F.J.
(1988). Survey research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
9.
Freelander, D.
(1987, December 28). Money for boot camp at issue: Prison, state officials at odds over funds availability. The Houston Post, pp. A1 & A10.
10.
Grande, P.
, & Prejean, R. (1991, Fall). An analysis of boot camps in Texas. Texas Probation Journal, pp. 109-114.
11.
Hagan, F.E.
(1989). Research methods in criminal justice and criminology (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
12.
Hayleslip, D. W.
(1994, March). Correctional boot camps: Promise and pitfall. Unpublished paper presented at the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, Chicago.
13.
Hunter, R. J.
, Burton, V. S., Marquart, J. W., & Cuvelier, S. J. (1992). Measuring attitudinal change of boot camp participants. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 8(4), 283-297.
14.
Lambert, C.
(1990, September/October). Boot camps: Latest trend in juvenile justice. Youth Law News, 5, 6.
15.
Mackenzie, D. L.
(1990). Boot camp programs grow in number and scope. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
16.
Mackenzie, D. L.
, & Shaw, J. (1990, March). Inmates' adjustment and change during shock incarceration: The impact of correctional boot camp programs. Justice Quarterly, pp. 125-150.
17.
Mackenzie, D. L.
, & Shaw. J. (1993, September). The impact of shock incarceration on technical violations and new criminal activities. Justice Quarterly, 10, 3.
18.
Nachmias, C. F.
, & Nachmias, D. (1996). Research methods in the social sciences. New York: St. Martin.
19.
Parent, D. G.
(1989). Shock incarceration: An overview of existing programs. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
20.
Ratiff, B.
(1988, December). The Army model: Boot camp for youthful offenders. Corrections Today, 50, 98-102.
21.
Yochelson, S.
, & Samenow, S. E. (1977). The criminal personality: The drug user (Vol. III). Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.
22.
Yurkanin, A.
(1988). Trend toward shock incarceration increasing among states. Corrections Today, 50(3), 87.
