Of the 600,000 individuals who enter the United States prison system every year, approximately two-thirds will be rearrested within three years of their release. The problem of mass incarceration refers not only to this statistical reality, but also the reality that a disproportionate amount of those incarcerated are members of minority populations and are generally of low socioeconomic status. In state prisons, Black Americans are incarcerated at nearly five times the rate of White Americans. Likewise, Latinx Americans are incarcerated at 1.3 times the rate of White Americans. Data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics indicates that individuals who have been incarcerated have a median annual income 41% lower than individuals in the same age group who have never been incarcerated. Political leaders and community members alike have voiced an increased concern for public safety in the past decade, oftentimes framing these racial minority and socioeconomically disadvantaged populations as the enemy. While it may be true that these populations are associated with higher rates of criminal activity, they are also routinely subjected to a range of disparities in opportunity, which are simultaneously the cause and result of high crime. Thus, these populations are much less the enemy than they are the vulnerable party. It would seem that the release of previously incarcerated individuals back into such environments–often without a job, education, money, or a healthy support network–is the perfect formula for recidivism. If the aim of the criminal justice system is to deter crime and protect society, its practices are ill-equipped to do so.
The cyclical nature of the criminal justice system, therefore, is reflective of the challenges faced by vulnerable populations prior to and upon their return to society, and of the insufficiency of the prison system to offer proper rehabilitation. In light of these obstacles, it is evident that changes must be implemented to combat the furthering of inequality. A slew of empirical research backs the role of education in helping previously incarcerated individuals reintegrate into free society and avoid recidivism. There are a multitude of educational paradigms available for adoption by state and federal prisons, yet education while incarcerated remains a luxury only afforded to few. An article published by The Journal of Correctional Education analyzed an assortment of existing educational paradigms in U.S. carceral institutions, finding both in-house education by recruited professionals and out-sourced collaborations with local colleges to be effective. Additionally, technological advancements in response to COVID-19 have made it more achievable than ever for prisons to administer education virtually. The implementation of such educational programs for state and federal prisoners is worth investing in, for such programs effectively reduce recidivism and alleviate the economic and societal burden of the U.S. carceral system, thereby uplifting vulnerable populations.
The Efficacy of Education
The intersection of education and crime is highly relevant to the creation of restorative programs for incarcerated individuals. Research continuously shows a negative relationship between high educational attainment and criminality. That is, the more education one receives, the less likely one is to become criminally involved. In fact, a meta-analysis of this relationship estimates that the implementation of education programs would reduce reincarceration rates by 12.9%. This relationship is convincing, and it can be observed on a variety of scales. Firstly, individuals who enter the criminal justice system differ substantially in educational attainment compared to non-incarcerated individuals. While an average of 94% of individuals in the United States have received high school diplomas, the U.S. Department of Justice reports that a whopping 68% of state prison inmates and 59% of federal prison inmates have not. The same report found that incarcerated individuals with less educational attainment were more likely than incarcerated individuals with higher educational attainment to become recidivists.
These disparities may partially be explained by the sheer amount of human and social capital imparted by education. Due to racial and class-based disparities in the criminal justice system, vulnerable populations in the U.S. often do not have equal access to educational opportunities. The effects of educational disparities can be crushing, especially when it comes to employment. Data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reveals that the unemployment rate for individuals with less educational attainment than a high school diploma was 2.6% higher than those with a high school diploma and 4.2% higher than those with an associate’s degree. Education increases the opportunity for legitimate work, thus decreasing the financial motivation that often underlies criminal behavior. Additionally, employed and enrolled individuals generally have less time available to participate in criminal activity. Some oppose this doctrine, claiming that education enables individuals to more efficiently and covertly participate in criminal activity. Research published by the International Economic Review, however, estimates that increases in educational attainment are linked to an 11% increase in arrest rates for white collar crime. Relatively speaking, this increase is low. These findings are not enough to negate the effect of education in reducing criminal activity among those with low educational attainment.
Previously incarcerated individuals can be on their best behavior, but that will not save them from being excluded from educational opportunities and labor markets, or from being pushed back into the same environment that initially landed them in prison. High rates of recidivism are not indicators of previously incarcerated individuals’ capacity for moral transformation. Rather, they reveal the cumulative and compound inequalities in a system which exacerbates the already daunting task of reintegration. The implementation of educational programs for incarcerated individuals has the potential to curb this problem by offering individuals the capital they need to more successfully reintegrate and avoid future criminality.
The Burden of Criminal Justice
In turn, the implementation of educational programs would strengthen the criminal justice system’s capacity to reduce the economic and societal costs of crime, which deepen some of crime’s root causes: poverty and inequality. The economic component of the criminal justice system is responsible for a common argument against education for incarcerated individuals. Opponents argue that taxpayers should not be responsible for investing in individuals who have previously disrupted their community through crime. However, economists contend that the implementation of educational programs actually stands to help taxpayers save money in the long term. To understand this argument, one can compare the cost of prisoner education to the cost of incarceration. The average annual cost of education per inmate is between $1,400 and $1,744. Meanwhile, the average annual cost of incarceration per inmate is between $28,323 and $31,286–an expense which is amplified by the fact that the average length of incarceration is 2.4 years. When an individual is reincarcerated, the cost of incarceration for that individual is essentially doubled. The costs above indicate that expenditures on education within the criminal justice system are very likely to be profitable–both financially and socially–rather than a misuse of taxpayer money. If educational opportunities during incarceration prevent reincarceration of any more than 1 in 19 individuals, the taxpayer burden will have actually been reduced. Although some level of spending on incarcerated individuals is necessary to uphold public safety and protect human rights, taxpayer funds can be more efficiently spent through investment in programs which increase human and social capital, such as education.
These direct economic costs constitute only one component of the impact the criminal justice system has on communities. The societal cost of criminality begins with the anticipation of crime in vulnerable communities. Recidivism, both as a result of targeted policing and the impossibility of reintegration for previously incarcerated individuals, reinforces the collection of anecdotes and stereotypes that govern the structural and institutional biases that criminalize vulnerable populations. This is only the beginning. Once an individual is incarcerated, their loved ones are expected to pay a combination of overt and covert costs, a circumstance which has been proven to have a negative and lasting impact on the family system. Through a series of interviews of siblings of incarcerated individuals, Tandros and Fye (2019) recorded a slew of negative financial impacts on the family, including expenses accrued from commissary, and the loss of income that came from individuals’ incarceration. Additionally, the study found common feelings of emotional pain, anger, mistrust, and responsibility for their loved ones’ incarceration. All participants reported experiencing distress related to a concern that their loved ones were in danger or being treated poorly by the carceral institution. In these ways, communities and families who bear such burdens are often asked to put their needs aside, even if they cannot readily afford to. Likewise, these negative experiences may strain relationships. If this is the case, the ordeal of incarceration may deplete the incarcerated individual’s support system, a circumstance which may have grave consequences upon their release. Despite the enormous cost of incarceration–financial, physical, and emotional–high rates of recidivism indicate that these vast expenses may accrue to only a slight reduction in future criminal involvement. Thus, the cycle continues.
In Closing
Previously incarcerated individuals are routinely released back into environments with ongoing political, economic, and societal obstacles that hinder their ability to succeed. In spite of this, the U.S. prison system continues to disproportionately incarcerate members of vulnerable populations, expecting them to bear the additional burden of legalized discrimination upon their release. With this in mind, the problem of mass incarceration and the challenges of prisoners’ reentry into society remain persistent causes of opportunity disparities among socioeconomically disadvantaged and racial minority groups in the United State. The resolution to which is undoubtedly complex and daunting. Radical as it may sound, the implementation of educational programs for incarcerated individuals offers an extraordinary opportunity to support such vulnerable communities by addressing one of many root causes to the problem: disparities in education.
Education remains an incredibly powerful tool. However, it is important to acknowledge that individuals impacted by the carceral state will not experience true liberation until we can deconstruct and reform the institutional frameworks that silence their voices and oppress them. This call to action implores the majority to transcend their rigid misconceptions and endeavor to see humanity in all incarcerated individuals. Only then can the cycle truly cease.