In 1994 the government issued a federal crime bill, which made inmates ineligible to receive Pell Grants that had provided scholarships for prisoners to earn a bachelors degree while incarcerated.
"Studies have clearly shown that “participants in prison education, vocation and work programs have recidivism rates 20-60 percent lower than those of non-participants (The Nation. March 4, 2005.) However, support for these programs is rapidly diminishing. If the trend continues, prisons are likely to become merely overcrowded holding cells which release inmates without alternatives and tools and skills to apply for jobs, and become legitimate members of the community. This trend more then likely guarantees these inmates become repeat offenders and return to prisons reinforcing the cycle of crime and punishment.
Statistics have indicated that the cost of keeping a prisoner in prison for one year exceeds the cost of educating prisoners for one year by a 10 to 1 ratio. Despite the obvious advantages, the movements away from prison reforms that educate and rehabilitate have been cut severely in the past ten years. The concept of prison reform has been replaced by policies that are punitive and in favor of permanent incarceration." education update.com
"Research over the past 10 years has consistently demonstrated that the most effective way to reduce offending, and particularly reoffending is through education, particularly literacy training and GED (Steurer, Smith, and Tracy, 2001). An Arizona Department of Adult Probation Study showed that probationers who received literacy training had 35% rearrest rate compared with a control group that had 46% rearrest, and those who received a GED had a rearrest rate of 24% (Siegal, 1997). Less dramatic but equally encouraging results were received from a Florida study of 18,414 inmates released from prison in FY1996-97 followed up after 2 years, which found that “inmates who earn a GED are 8.7% less likely to recidivate than those who do not complete a program. . . Inmates who receive a GED and improve their TABE score to 9th grade level or higher are 25.0% less likely to recidivate than those who receive a GED and have a TABE level of 8th grade or less.” (Florida Department of Corrections, 2003). The Florida study also found that “Academic program impacts are found even among offender groups that normally have higher recidivism, for example, males, younger males, black offenders and prior recidivists.” Importantly, a New York State study found that “young inmates who earned a GED while incarcerated returned to custody at a rate of 40% compared with 54% of inmates under 21 released with no degree” (Staley, 2001). Most dramatic, however, is the data on those in prison: Inmates with at least two years college education have a 10% re-arrest rate, compared to the national rearrest rate of 62%. A Texas study is most revealing showing that the overall recidivism rate for degree holders in the Texas Department of Corrections between 1990-1991 was 15% compared to 60% for the national rate and a two year follow-up study showed that those with associates degrees had a recidivism rate of 13.7%, those with bachelor’s degrees, 5.6%, and those with master’s degrees zero (Tracy and Johnson, 1994):
Source: Open Society Institute, Research Brief, Sept 1997, based on Tracy and Johnson, 1994
So, if the evidence is clear that prison as punishment is ineffective in deterring offenders, but education makes a substantial difference to recidivism, why do we continue to use prison as punishment? Moreover, why did we stop using education, particularly college-level education, for prisoners? The analogy of criminal justice and social policy as a “toolbox” comes to mind (Einstadter and Henry, 1995). We have many “tools” each refined for serving different functions. Just as a screwdriver, hammer, saw, wrench serves different functions to solve technical problems, so various policy options are available to deal with crime problems, whether this is biologically based treatment, psychologically based therapy, sociologically based education and training, and economically based punishment."
wayne.is.wayne.edu
2007-10-27 04:50:49
·
answer #1
·
answered by MARSHA G 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
The heck with their education. They taking valuable resource money away from the children that could use them in a better way.All they are interested is how to get high, and back into their old habits. Honestly, we ought to create military boot camps for those folks. The military makes people tough. And I think that what we should do. Put them through training and let them fight off the wars., Then our son's and daughters would not have to go. It would make less more criminal on the streets.
2007-10-27 21:50:36
·
answer #3
·
answered by angelikabertrand64 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Many would argue that the cost of educating offsets itself in the long run. By making them a productive member of society, you aren't repeatedly putting them in jail.
As for your question about sites, here's one I've found useful...
2007-10-26 23:52:13
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 2
·
0⤊
0⤋