The Feminization of the Community Corrections Work Force, Article Critique Example

The article claims that while women participation in the labor force has increased, their representation in traditionally male-dominated professions including corrections continue to lag behind. The author believes that this low representation of women in professions such as corrections hints at the existence of discrimination against women regarding professional opportunities. In addition, not only low representation is an issue but even career advancement opportunities are rare for women. The article identifies several factors that limit the potential of women to professionally advance such as limited networking opportunities, exclusion by male colleagues, lack of mentors and other support systems, and limited access to informal cultures. Norfolk State University’s Department of Criminal Justice carried out a research in 2005 which sought to collect survey responses from 407 women including 12 chief probation and parole officers, 20 deputy chief officers, 292 probation and parole officers, and 20 surveillance officers. The overall response rate was 62 percent. The research questions addressed by the study included understanding historical trend of women participation in the corrections career, the current state of professional opportunities for women, and expected future trends (Holland, 2008).

The article states that the greatest proportion of women was found in probation and parole agencies at 52 percent and 50 percent in 1990 while the lowest was found at adult institutional agencies at 28 percent. The article implies that these rates indicate women are discriminated in certain professional areas of law enforcement but it is possible that these differential rates are more the outcome of the nature of work responsibilities rather than explicit discrimination. It is possible that men are more suited to the physical requirements of the job at adult institutional agencies. We do see high women participation rates at parole and probation agencies which may be due to the fact that these jobs are primarily administrative in nature.

The article also mentions that women employed after 1994 are more likely to apply for promotion (96 percent) as compared to women employed before 1994 (89 percent). Similarly, 85 percent of women hired after 1994 and 81 percent of women hired before 1994 emphasized the importance of networking and support systems for advanced career opportunities. 76 percent of women hired before 1994 received support from other women as compared to 71 percent for those hired before 1994. These statistics give important clues regarding one of the factors behind low presence of women in advanced positions. Women who joined corrections department before 1994 didn’t have women mentors to look to and they also lacked confidence regarding their own potential as compared to those hired after 1994. Thus, it is possible that they didn’t actively seek advancement opportunities in the first place due to little hope of getting them. Since they didn’t have access to support networks and mentors, they were at a competitive disadvantage as compared to their male counterparts.

I do agree with the author that barriers to promotional opportunities continue to exist in the corrections field as they do in many other professions but the low percentage of women in advanced positions is not entirely the outcome of limited opportunities and prejudice but has also been shaped by other factors such as specific requirements of certain positions including physical requirements and low average self-confidence among women that discouraged them from pursuing advancement opportunities. But I do believe with the author’s recommendations that in order to improve their prospects of advancing to higher positions, women do need to develop social and communication skills.

Reference

Holland, J. G. (2008, August). The Feminization of the Community Corrections Work Force. Corrections Today, pp. 44-47.