Work Release: “Not in my Backyard” by Sara Cosgrove

 “Not in my backyard”, That is the common comment when a work-release program is suggested to enter a new environment. And honestly who does want freshly released criminals in their neighborhood? That answer is simple, no one. But if no one wants these individuals in their backyard then as a society we need to decide what to do with these people who are trying to start over.

           
          There is currently a work release program MINSEC operating in downtown Hazelton, PA and so far it has not received any positive feedback. From local community members reporting how unsupervised residents do not report home. Or the residents engaging in fight over a rule and storming out of the building. This is a major issue. If the city is willing enough to welcome such an operation into the city you would think the residents would have the decency to respect the rules, and report home when they should or not leave the premises whenever they wish. This is also the responsibility of the owner and managers MINSEC. They should enforce the rules and regulations and make the current residents return home at the designated time. After hearing that criminals are basically allowed to roam the streets freely throws up a red flag. There should be no leeway, they go to work and come back, no questions asked. But that clearly is not happening at MINSEC.

          
          Another important fact to mention is that property values tend to decrease when there is an operation like a work release functioning in an area. From residential to business properties, work release programs bring negative attention that no one wants to be a part of or buy into.

           
          So the question still remains where to place these people? The best place would possibly be in more rural area, but there are still going to be people living in there and what makes anyone think that they would be okay with a work release program in their backyard? The best option is to make these work release programs safer and better integrated into whatever environment they are placed. These individuals need to respect the boundaries they are given and if they cannot do that then back to jail with them. It is society’s responsibility to protect the law abiding public first, not the criminal. If they blow their chance to get back into the real world, well, that is their fault. By making these work release programs strict and forcing the criminals to abide by the rules maybe then communities will be more willing to accept such a facility into their backyard. Until then everyone is going to protect their backyards from these criminals to keep themselves out of harm’s way. And who can blame them?  

Computers Replacing Teachers: When Technology goes too Far by Lindsay Behrenshausen

           In today’s society we are surrounded by persistent technological advances. Our world changes by the minute and there is always a new piece of technology waiting in the wings to be introduced. While computers have, without a doubt, simplified life and certain processes the question must be posed when is technology too much of a good thing?

          A recent article published by AOL News highlighted a new and upcoming form of learning. A series of 41 schools in New York City that identify themselves as part of a program called iLearnNYC has moved their curriculum strictly to a computerized format. The students do not use textbooks and teachers do not stand at the front of the class and instruct. This style of education has essentially made teachers inferior to computers and taken the human, personal element out of education, which will only prove to be a detriment to society.

          According to the New York City Education Department this experiment is the largest in scale in the United States. Both educators and administrators agree that the current education system is outdated and must be updated with new forms of technology and learning styles. However, essentially replacing teachers with computers is not the best way to approach updating the education system. Technology should be an aid to education, not a main form of teaching.

          While a strong proponent of striving to do what is necessary to help the youth of America succeed, there is a line that is being crossed. This style of learning is further pushing younger generations to be almost entirely dependent upon technology in all aspects of life. Teaching is a profession where educators have the power to make a difference and change the lives of young people. The personal, human element must not be taken out of American education.

          I can recall several teachers I had growing up that made lasting impressions upon me and taught me things that I still use and apply in my life today. While certain forms of technology was incorporated into the curriculum, they taught me things that I could not have learned on a computer monitor. The iLearnNYC program does claim that it provides more time for teachers to work one-on-one with students because the lessons come from computers; however, this is an unrealistic concept. The lessons are generic, generalized lessons that might not apply to every classroom and every setting. Without the teacher preparing lessons and teaching students it is harder for the instructor to cater the learning material to the progress of the students.

          Our society is already facing enough problems with computers and technology such as the overuse of video games and cyber bullying. These youth do not need to attend school and be placed in front of yet another computer screen. While the American education system is not perfect and certainly has its flaws it certainly has one thing correct—teachers actually teaching and students learning without being dependent on a computer. To take the human and personal element out of the education system in this country would be a large detriment to society and cause more harm than good.