Bridging the Divide: Connecting University Teaching & Learning Resources to Higher Education in Prison Programs (HEPS)

Publication Year
2025

Teaching and learning centers—encompassing writing centers, academic support services, tutoring programs, and faculty development hubs—are home to experienced staff committed to inclusive pedagogy, student success, and continuous faculty learning. Yet many of these educational developers are unaware of their university’s own HEP program and the students who could benefit tremendously from their support. 

The Freedom Education Project Puget Sound (FEPPS) research team interviewed HEP alumni, faculty, and administrators across the country to better understand some of the challenges and promising practices in the field. They delved into how campus-based teaching and learning supports are (and aren’t) collaborating with their HEPS, and what students in prison still need to receive an equitable education. Inside Bridging the Divide, you’ll find:

  • A landscape scan of HEP programs, the challenges of the prison learning environment, and the benefits of getting an education in prison.

  • Analysis and case studies of the barriers and promising practices of integrating university teaching and learning resources with their HEP programs.

  • A call to action for universities to recognize incarcerated students as full members of the campus community.

Based on in-depth interviews with HEP program faculty, teaching and learning center staff, a national survey of HEP alumni and current students, and a focus group of HEP students, Bridging the Divide reveals that when teaching and learning centers collaborate directly with HEP programs, the results are transformative—for students, faculty, and universities alike.

2

Comments

Permalink

Profile picture for user ttaylor

As an advisory board member for this project, I would love to hear thoughts from the field about this report. There currently isn't an efficient means for robust conversation on reports like this, outside of discussions at NCHEP and other convenings, yet I believe it is vital that we have collaborative discussions when these types of reports and resources are published. 

With that said, when you have read the report, we would love to have some comments here about what landed and what questions you may still have. Which of the promising practices resounded the most to you in your work? Which of them do you think has the largest hurdle to obtainment? What was missing from the report that you have experienced? Comment below.