THE TRAINING PROGRAM FOR JAIL CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS CONSIDERED AROSE IN REACTION TO SERIOUS PUBLIC CRITICISM OF THE JAIL FOR NOT MEETING GENERALLY ACCEPTED STANDARDS FOR A CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, PARTICULARLY IN THE AREA OF REHABILITATION PROGRAMS. FOLLOWING THE RESIGNATION OF THE SHERIFF IN OFFICE WHEN THE JAIL WAS EVALUATED, THE NEW SHERIFF UNDERTOOK THE DEVELOPMENT OF A TRAINING PROGRAM FOR JAIL CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS, IN CONSULTATION WITH TWO LOCAL COLLEGES. FROM THE OUTSET, ALL MAJOR JAIL ADMINISTRATORS WERE INVOLVED IN THE DETAILED PLANNING, AND ALL CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS WERE SURVEYED TO DETERMINE THEIR PERCEIVED EDUCATIONAL NEEDS. STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS PERSONNEL WERE ALSO INVOLVED AS CONSULTANTS IN THE PLANNING. THE TRAINING PROGRAM DEVISED WAS CONDUCTED ON A RELEASED TIME BASIS, WITH CLASSES CONDUCTED IN THE JAIL FACILITY. CONTINUITY IN PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION WAS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF PERSONNEL FROM THE TWO COLLEGES. EIGHT SESSIONS WERE HELD, COVERING THE FOLLOWING TOPICS: (1) THE ROLE OF THE JAIL GUARD, INCLUDING JOB PRESSURES AND CONFLICTING ROLE EXPECTATIONS; (2) GUARD-INMATE COMMUNICATION; (3) EMOTIONAL PRESSURES ASSOCIATED WITH BEING A JAIL GUARD; (4) LEGAL ASPECTS OF JAIL OPERATIONS; (5) IMPACT OF AUTHORITY ON GUARD-INMATE INTERACTION; (6) SPECIFIC PROBLEMS THE INMATES BRING TO THE JAIL; (7) SPECIFIC PROBLEMS THE GUARDS BRING TO THE JAIL; AND (8) RESOURCES FOR CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS. THE CONTENT OF EACH OF THESE SESSIONS IS DESCRIBED, AND STUDENT REACTIONS IN EACH SESSION ARE SUMMARIZED. THE INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT FOR THE TRAINING, COURSE RELATED HAZARDS, POSITIVE OUTCOMES, AND SUGGESTIONS FOR REPLICATION ARE DISCUSSED IN THE SECTION ON EVALUATION.