Eva

My path to becoming a stronger writer

Academic writing is an ever-evolving craft, shaped by engagement with new ideas and constructive feedback. Throughout this semester, I have learned to navigate the challenges of creating coherent arguments, analyzing evidence, and finding my voice as a writer. As Cathy Birkenstein and Gerald Graff argue in They Say/I Say, effective writing is a conversation, one that involves responding to and engaging with other perspectives. Through my Building Stories essays, I’ve not only improved my grasp of academic “moves” but also developed a deeper understanding of how writing shapes and is shaped by its context. In this review, I’ll explore my growth as a writer this semester, focusing on the refinement of my argumentation and the evolution of my rhetorical strategies. Ultimately, I argue that my writing has become more nuanced and reflective, enabling me to better engage with complex ideas while appreciating the role of structure in academic writing.

At the start of the semester, my essays often struggled to balance broad claims with specific evidence. My first essay, “Enhancing Originality and Overcoming Challenges with AI,” explored the debate around whether AI helps or hinders creativity. One moment that highlighted this challenge was my attempt to analyze Ted Chiang’s metaphor of AI as a “blurry JPEG of the web.” I wrote:

“Ted Chiang describes ChatGPT as a blurry JPEG of the web. While ChatGPT retains most of the information found on the web, it repackages information by using different words.”

Although this summarized Chiang’s critique, it lacked the analytical depth that They Say/I Say encourages. Birkenstein and Graff emphasize that advancing your argument requires more than just presenting a viewpoint; you also need to explain your interpretation of it. At this stage, I was summarizing ideas rather than engaging with them critically. Later in the semester, I applied this advice more effectively. In my essay on Exit West, I incorporated both a direct quotation and my interpretation of Goyal’s critique. I wrote:

“Hamid’s optimism, as Goyal argues, ‘evacuates the specific historical experience that generates it’ (241). However, this erasure invites readers to grapple with the missing stories and the systemic inequalities behind them.”

This comparison shows my progression from summarizing ideas to integrating them into a larger argument. By the time I wrote my final essay, I was more confident in balancing summary, evidence, and analysis.

As I progressed, I began experimenting with rhetorical strategies to engage my audience. Initially, I relied on a conventional essay structure, starting broadly and narrowing to specific claims. Over time, I adopted a more conversational tone, inspired by the accessibility of online writing. In my AI essay, for instance, I opened with a relatable observation:

• “AI has become a new technology we are starting to use in our everyday life, already infiltrating life in all kinds of ways, from auto-complete to robotics.”

This approach, as Mark Sample suggests in his lecture on AI, mirrors the interactive nature of AI itself, encouraging readers to view writing as a collaborative process.

Additionally, I noticed a shift in how I approached conclusions. In early essays, I often ended with rhetorical questions, such as, “Is Hamid’s portrayal truly optimistic, or does it mask deeper truths?” By the end of the semester, I had moved toward more assertive, reflective conclusions that tied my argument back to the broader context. For example, in my essay on rehabilitation programs, I concluded:

“Instead of working against mass incarceration by giving more money to rehabilitation programs, the government is investing in prisons and jails, boosting mass incarceration. Programs like Homeboy Industries demonstrate that rehabilitation works—and it’s time for the justice system to prioritize this approach.”

Peer critiques and class discussions were instrumental in refining my writing. One recurring piece of feedback was the need to balance analysis with summary. Early drafts often over-explained background information, leaving little room for deeper interpretation. For example, in my essay on Exit West, I initially summarized Mohsin Hamid’s use of magical realism without fully engaging with its implications. After a peer suggested focusing on the symbolism of the magic doors, I revised my essay to highlight their dual role as a metaphor for hope and displacement.

In my essay on mass incarceration, feedback helped me refine the structure of my essay. Initially, the way I wrote the essay did not make sense in the eyes of a reader. I did not explain what Homeboy Industries was and focused too much on other writers’ opinions rather than my own. When Dr. Suzanne Churchill and a peer pointed that out to me, I realized and revised my essay to make it clearer for my readers. This revision not only clarified my argument but also strengthened its connection to the broader debate on criminal justice reform.

The debate over whether templates democratize or constrain academic writing revolves around their dual role as tools for accessibility and potential limitations on creativity. Cathy Birkenstein and Gerald Graff argue in They Say/I Say that templates provide a framework that empowers writers to enter academic conversations by clarifying structure and purpose. They claim that templates “offer a language for talking about writing” and ensure that all students, regardless of background, can effectively engage with complex ideas. Critics, however, contend that rigid adherence to templates can lead to formulaic and uninspired writing, stifling originality. From my own experience, I’ve found templates to be invaluable for scaffolding arguments and organizing ideas, especially when tackling new or unfamiliar concepts. At the same time, I recognize the importance of using templates flexibly, allowing them to guide rather than dictate the creative process. Ultimately, the value of templates lies not in their strict application but in their ability to help writers focus on substance and develop confidence in their academic voice.

Reflecting on my journey, I see recurring themes worth exploring further, including the intersections of technology and creativity, and the role of narrative in shaping social justice debates. Writing online has also shifted my perspective, making me more aware of my audience and the importance of certain writing structures. Moving forward, I hope to build on these insights by experimenting with multimedia storytelling and diving deeper into the rhetorical strategies of scholars like Birkenstein, Graff, and Lamott. Whether tackling academic essays or creative projects, I plan to approach writing with the same curiosity and critical engagement that defined this semester.

PLEDGE EVA VAN DER KOOI

I used ChatGPT (https://chatgpt.com/) to look at the structure of my essay. I asked ChatGPT :” Structure my ideas so they flow logically.”. After that I sent my essay draft, which ChatGPT made flow logically. It also helped me envision how I should expand on my ideas.

Sources:
Birkenstein, Cathy, and Gerald Graff. They Say/I Say: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing. W.W. Norton & Company.

Chiang, Ted. “ChatGPT Is a Blurry JPEG of the Web.” The New Yorker, 2023.

Goyal, Yogita. “The ‘Refugee Aesthetic’ in Mohsin Hamid’s Exit West.” The Common, vol. 16, 2020, pp. 241–246.

Hamid, Mohsin. Exit West. Riverhead Books, 2017.

Sample, Mark. Lecture on Artificial Intelligence. [Further details needed if available, e.g., date, institution.]

Homeboy Industries. Homeboy Industries website, www.homeboyindustries.org.

Churchill, Suzanne. Feedback on “Mass Incarceration and Rehabilitation” Essay, fall semester, 2024.

Lamott, Anne. Bird by Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and Life. Anchor Books, 1994.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MUe-3FIwxwQu18TDh2asskauOBUsCwO8YMUJ2f7kiFI/edit?usp=sharing

How Rehabilitation Programs Challenge Mass Incarceration

In the debate about mass incarceration, the high recidivism rates reveal that prisons often fail to equip criminals with the tools necessary to rehabilitate them into society. Michelle Alexander critiques the system as a modern racial caste system, disproportionately targeting marginalized communities and reinforcing their criminalization. Elizabeth Hinton underscores how punitive policies, such as those from the War on Crime and War on Drugs, emphasized punishment over reform, worsening systemic issues. James Forman expands the conversation by critiquing the narrow focus of criminal justice reforms, which often prioritize non-violent drug offenders while neglecting individuals convicted of violent crimes, which is a significant portion of the prison population. He advocates for community-based programs aimed at rehabilitating all offenders, challenging the limitations of current reform efforts. The Bureau of Justice Statistics shows that 71% of state prisoners released in 2012 were rearrested within five years, highlighting the inability to rehabilitate prisoners back into society. Rehabilitation programs such as Homeboy Industries try to fight the odds of the high recidivism rates by addressing the root causes of reoffending and providing help in reintegration. Alexander’s, Hinton’s, and Forman’s critiques show that the U.S. justice system is working against all the hard work that rehabilitation programs put into lowering recidivism rates, causing the rehabilitation programs to fail. 

Homeboy Industries is a nonprofit organization based in Los Angeles, founded by Father Gregory Boyle, that helps former prisoners and individuals involved in gangs rebuild their lives. Through job training, education, therapy, and support groups, as well as operating businesses like cafes, bakeries, and a tattoo removal service, the organization provides participants with real work experience and a sense of belonging (Homeboy Industries). By addressing root causes of crime, such as poverty, trauma, and discrimination, Homeboy Industries significantly reduces recidivism rates among its participants, boasting a rate of less than 30% compared to the national average of over 70% (Jesuits Global). Despite its effectiveness, the program faces challenges, including limited funding and a justice system that prioritizes punishment over rehabilitation. These broader systemic issues are underscored by a U.S. Department of Justice report showing that from 2012 to 2017, Black prisoners had a recidivism rate of 74%, compared to 70% for white prisoners and 67% for Hispanic prisoners. Homeboy Industries employs around 300 staff members, all program alumni, and helps approximately 8,000 trainees annually (Jesuits Global). While other rehabilitation programs struggle to reduce recidivism rates, often staying around 70%, Homeboy Industries Recidivism rates are 30%, demonstrating that effective rehabilitation is possible. 

In The New Jim Crow, Michelle Alexander explains how the U.S. justice system purposely leaves out rehabilitation programs to keep people, especially Black and Latino men, stuck in a cycle of poverty and crime (180). She describes mass incarceration as a system designed to create a racial underclass by making it impossible for people to fully re enter society after being in prison (186-187). One way this happens is through what Alexander calls “invisible punishments.”. These include things like not being able to get a job, rent an apartment, or access public benefits after prison. This makes it almost impossible for people to start fresh (194). “We know that people released from prison face a lifetime of discrimination, scorn, and exclusion, and yet we claim not to know that an undercaste exists.” (Alexander 182). Because of this undercaste many people end up reoffending and going back to prison because they can’t find a way to live outside of the system. Alexander also explains how poor Black and Latino neighborhoods are unfairly targeted by policies from the War on Drugs (180). Police focus on these areas, arresting and punishing people for small offenses, which guarantees that these communities are overrepresented in prisons (188). This focus on punishment, rather than help, keeps the system going and makes society ignore the bigger issues, like poverty and racism, that lead to crime.

While Alexander argues that criminal justice reforms are not strong enough, because they do not address systematic racism, Hinton goes more in depth, revealing how systemic issues far beyond the War on Drugs have shaped mass incarceration, disproportionately harming poor communities of color. She explains that while the War on Poverty was meant to address structural problems like unemployment and failing schools, it was soon overtaken by punitive crime-control measures that framed poverty as a cause of crime (12). According to Hinton, policymakers used this justification to expand policing and incarceration in low-income Black neighborhoods, even as they cut funding for social programs (2). This change turned federal crime control policies into ways of unfairly targeting and controlling people of color. Hinton says that programs originally meant to help poor communities often ended up being used to punish them instead. For example, federal crime policies targeted Black neighborhoods and labeled kids as “potentially delinquent,” even if they hadn’t done anything wrong (4). “Policymakers interpreted Black urban poverty as pathological—as the product of individual and cultural ‘deficiencies’” (Hinton, 3). This meant that police and surveillance became normal in Black neighborhoods, even though more policing didn’t really stop crime. Instead, it led to higher arrest rates in these neighbourhoods and more people of color being sent to prison (24). Hinton also explains how programs that were supposed to help people, like job training or housing support, got connected to the justice system. This turned those programs into ways to control poor communities rather than ways to help them (3). She says this created a system that was more about controlling people than solving problems. 

While Alexander and Hinton argue that the criminal justice system includes structural inequalities that prevent the recidivism rates from going down, Forman blames the narrow scope of the modern criminal justice reform efforts, which often only include non-violent drug offenders (45). Forman critiques the exclusion of violent offenders from the broader conversation about criminal justice reform, highlighting how this focus neglects the realities of mass incarceration (45). By just looking at non-violent drug offenses, reform efforts risk overlooking the significant proportion of the prison population made up of those convicted of violent crimes (50). This way of thinking ignores how violence affects low-income communities of color and doesn’t deal with the real reasons behind it. Forman stresses that violent offenders face similar systemic barriers as non-violent ones, noting that they “become ineligible for health and welfare benefits, food stamps, public housing, student loans, and certain types of employment” (Forman 28)​. He compares their post-incarceration experiences to a “lifetime of second-class citizenship,” in other words, being trapped in a caste system​. 

Homeboy Industries shows the kind of reform that Michelle Alexander, Elizabeth Hinton, and James Forman all believe is needed. The organization focuses on helping people turn their lives around and stay out of prison by offering job training, therapy, tattoo removal, and education. It also works to fix the systemic issues that hurt poor communities of color by creating a sense of community and giving people real chances to succeed. Instead of just punishing people, Homeboy addresses the root causes of crime. Next to that, Homeboy offers personalized support, like therapy and conflict resolution programs, for everyone, including those who have committed violent crimes, proving that everyone deserves a chance at rehabilitation. By focusing on support and second chances, Homeboy shows that rehabilitation works better than punishment. Despite Homeboy Industry’s success there’s still a big gap when it comes to funding: the U.S. federal and state governments spend about $80 billion annually on prisons and jails (McLaughlin M, 2), while allocating only $110 million in 2021 to support incarcerated and formerly incarcerated individuals (Office of Public Affairs). Homeboy Industries raises $23 million annually, one-fifth of the total federal allocation, with only $1 million coming from government grants (Jesuits Global), highlighting the urgent need for greater investment in rehabilitation-focused programs.

With all the efforts being done by rehabilitation programs toward reducing recidivism rates, the government is not prioritizing rehabilitation enough to reduce mass incarceration. Homeboy Industries proves that helping people rebuild their lives works better and costs way less than locking them up. With a recidivism rate of under 30%, compared to the national average of over 70%, it shows that programs that focus on job training, therapy, and support can make a real difference. Instead of working against mass incarceration by giving more money to rehabilitation programs, the government is investing more towards operating prisons and jails boosting mass incarceration. The U.S. prison population is rising with a 2% rate from 2021 to 2022 (Bureau of Justice Statistics), showing us that rehabilitation programs do not stand a chance against battling the high recidivism rates if they have to work alone. If the government put more money into programs like Homeboy, instead of just punishing people, we could help more former prisoners succeed and make our communities safer. Homeboy Industries, embodying these ideas and arguments into their program, show that recidivism rates could drop when incorporated into the criminal justice system.

Works Cited

Alexander, Michelle. The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. New Press, 2010.

Carson, E. Ann, and Rich Kluckow. “Prisoners in 2022 – Statistical Tables.” Bureau of Justice Statistics, Nov. 2023, bjs.ojp.gov/document/p22st.pdf. Accessed 07 Dec. 2024. 

Durose MR, Antenangeli L. Recidivism of prisoners released in 34 states in 2012. Bureau of Justice Statistics. July 2021.

Forman, James. “Beyond the New Jim Crow.” New York University Law Review, vol. 87, no. 1, 2012, pp. 21-69.

Hinton, Elizabeth. “The Origins of Mass Incarceration: The Racial Politics of Crime and Punishment in Postwar America.” Carceral Notebooks, 2009.

Homeboy Industries Awarded the 2020 Hilton Humanitarian Prize. Jesuits Global. August 4, 2020.

“Home.” Homeboy Industries, 16 June 2023, homeboyindustries.org/. Accessed 06 Dec. 2024. 

Justice Department awards more than $110 million to support currently and formerly Incarcerated Individuals. Office of Public Affairs | Justice Department Awards

More Than $110 Million to Support Currently and Formerly Incarcerated Individuals | United States Department of Justice. December 22, 2021.

McLaughlin M, Pettus-Davis C, Brown D, Veeh C, Renn T. The Economic Burden of Incarceration in the United States. IJRD @FSU. July 1, 2016.

PLEDGE EVA VAN DER KOOI

Rehabilitation programs vs. The Criminal Justice System

In the debate about mass incarceration, one sticking point is whether the United States criminal justice system has emphasized punishment over rehabilitation.The high recidivism rates reveal that prisons often fail to equip criminals with the tools necessary to rehabilitate them into society. The Bureau of Justice Statistics shows that 71% of state prisoners released in 2012 were rearrested within five years, highlighting the inability to rehabilitate prisoners back into society. Hinton discusses how punitive policies, such as those from the War on Crime and War on Drugs, prioritized punishment over reform. Forman critiques the limited scope of criminal justice reform, which continues to focus on non-violent drug offenders and dismisses the people convicted of violent crimes, which make up a large part of the prison population. He suggests that reforms should include community-based programs that focus on helping violent offenders, not just those involved in drug-related crimes. Lastly, Michelle Alexander brings up the modern racial caste system embedded in mass incarceration, affecting marginalized communities while reinforcing their criminalization. Rehabilitation programs such as Homeboy Industries try to fight the odds of the high recidivism rates by addressing the root causes of reoffending and providing help in reintegration. With the barriers in place described by Hinton, Forman and Alexander do rehabilitation programs stand a chance at fighting the high recidivism rates?

Hinton argues that the modern U.S. criminal justice system was shaped by policies implemented during the War on Crime and the War on Drugs. These policies have prioritized incarceration and policing over addressing the root causes of crime. The policies in place disproportionately target low-income black communities, facing racial inequalities, and not getting the same rehabilitation opportunities. Instead of focusing on the root problems of criminal behavior, such as poverty, lack of education, and unemployment, the policies of the criminal justice system look to punish. Homeboy industries is a program that challenges the initiatives prioritizing policing and incarceration over social reform by addressing the systemic issues. The Homeboy industries tries to counter this policy structure by providing job training and education for all individuals leaving prison, giving people equal and better opportunities to rejoin the community. By offering opportunities for personal growth and employment, the program counters the approach that Hinton describes as being active, demonstrating that reform and rehabilitation are possible with the right structural support. Even if it is possible to reform with the right structural support, the U.S. federal government is not prioritizing reforming over punitive policies, making it difficult for rehabilitation programs like Homeboy Industries to reduce recidivism rates.

While Hinton argues that the criminal justice system includes structural inequalities that prevent the recidivism rates from going down, Forman blames the narrow scope of the modern criminal justice reform efforts, which often only include non-violent drug offenders. He thinks that only addressing the injustice of the War on Drugs is neglecting the significant portion of the prison population convicted of violent crimes. By excluding violent offenders from reform initiatives, the justice system keeps the punitive structure reinforcing the high incarceration and recidivism rates. Forman challenges the binary narrative that violent offenders do not deserve rehabilitation, as he points out that these violent crimes result from complex social factors. These factors including poverty and trauma make it all the more important to be helped rehabilitate into society and break the cycle. Homeboy Industries represents the inclusive reform approach that Forman is advocating for. Recognizing that violent offenders tend to have greater challenges in reintegrating into society, they provide personalized support, like therapy and conflict resolution programs. Additionally, forman argues for community-based interventions that tackle the root causes of criminal behavior rather than relying only on incarceration. Homeboy Industries gives a sense of community and belonging, making it easier for criminals of all kinds to reintegrate back into society.

With Forman’s focus on including violent offenders in reform efforts and Hinton’s critique of punitive policies Alexander’s argument aligns by mentioning that the systematic racism in mass incarceration disproportionately targets Black and Latino communities. She argues that the criminal justice reforms are not strong enough because they do not address the deep racial and economic inequalities that lead to mass incarceration. After prison inmates still face major challenges with rehabilitation: not being able to find safe housing, etc. These challenges make it more likely for them to reoffend, especially African Americans and Latinos who experience the racial and economic inequalities. Programs like Homeboy Industries try to overcome those systemic barriers by offering job training and connecting participants with opportunities, since securing a stable job is one of the most significant challenges people face after being released from prison. Next to that, Alexander also mentions the psychological impact of systemic racism and the stigma associated with imprisonment. Homeboy industries counters this stigma by fostering a sense of community, offering therapy and jobs that include interaction with customers. This way the stigma is shown to be wrong to the customers, who experience firsthand positive impact of the formerly incarcerated individuals. 

With all the good that rehabilitation programs like Homeboy Industries do, they are actively working against the punitive policies still in place. While trying to work against mass incarceration by trying to minimize recidivism rates, it does not work as well as expected. In a special report done by the U.S. Department of Justice in the period of 2012-2017 it showed that black prisoners had a 74% recidivism rate within a 5-year period, 4% more that white prisoners’ rates and 7% more than hispanic prisoners’ rates. Homeboy Industries has a staff of around 300, all have gone through the program themselves, and help pass 8000 trainees each year. The recidivism rates comparing Homeboy Industries to other post-incarceration programs show us that while other post-incarceration programs averaged 70% or higher recidivism rates, Homeboy Industries individuals reoffend less than 30%. This shows us that not all rehabilitation programs work as efficiently as Homeboy Industries and the U.S. federal government is not helping a lot to reform from the punitive policies to reforming ones. The U.S. federal and state governments spend around $80 billion annually to operate prisons and jails, while in 2021 the justice department awarded only $110 million to support currently and formerly incarcerated individuals. Homeboy Industries raise around $23 million annually, with $14 from foundations, $7 million from the Homeboy Industries businesses, and only $1 million from government grants. This means that Homeboy Industries alone makes up one-fifth on its own towards rehabilitation compared to what the government is putting towards rehabilitation. 

With all the efforts being done by rehabilitation programs toward reducing recidivism rates, the government is not prioritizing rehabilitation enough to reduce mass incarceration. Instead of working against mass incarceration by giving more money to rehabilitation programs, it is investing more towards operating prisons and jails boosting mass incarceration. The U.S. prison population is rising with a 2% rate from 2021 to 2022, showing us that rehabilitation programs do not stand a chance against battling the high recidivism rates. By tackling the problems that Hinton, Forman and Alexander are mentioning in their articles, there could be a change in the numbers we see. Homeboy Industries, embodying these ideas and arguments into their program, show that recidivism rates could drop when incorporated into the criminal justice system.

Sources:

Alexander, Michelle. The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. New Press, 2010.

Durose MR, Antenangeli L. Recidivism of prisoners released in 34 states in 2012. Bureau of Justice Statistics. July 2021.

Forman, James. “Beyond the New Jim Crow.” New York University Law Review, vol. 87, no. 1, 2012, pp. 21-69.

Hinton, Elizabeth. “The Origins of Mass Incarceration: The Racial Politics of Crime and Punishment in Postwar America.” Carceral Notebooks, 2009.

Homeboy Industries awarded the 2020 hilton humanitarian prize. The Society of Jesus. August 4, 2020. Accessed November 18, 2024.

Justice Department awards more than $110 million to support currently and formerly Incarcerated Individuals. Office of Public Affairs | Justice Department Awards More Than $110 Million to Support Currently and Formerly Incarcerated Individuals | United States Department of Justice. December 22, 2021.

McLaughlin M, Pettus-Davis C, Brown D, Veeh C, Renn T. The economic burden of incarceration in the United States. IJRD @FSU. July 1, 2016.

PLEDGE EVA VAN DER KOOI

After looking more carefully and reexamining Forman’s, Hinton’s and Alexander’s standpoint on mass incarceration, recidivism, and racial injustice I want to focus my essay on the question as to why recidivism rates are higher among the African American population.

In a special report done by the U.S. department of Justice it showed that black prisoners had the highest 5-year recidivism rates, with 74% being arrested within five years of release, while white prisoners’ rates were 70% and hispanic prisoners 67%. During the first year after release the arrest rates were higher for Black (38%) and Hispanic (39%) prisoners, and slightly lower for White prisoners (35%). Lastly, the report showed that the recidivism rates were notably higher for Black prisoners over time.

Elizabeth Hinton argues that the policies that were created during the War on Crime and the War on Drugs are still influencing the criminal system today, and even though there have been changes made, most of it is still in place. She thinks that the changes/reforms that have been implemented don’t do enough to get rid of the racial biases in the policing and incarceration. Her argument points out that Black and Hispanic communities are still the most affected by mass incarceration, and to lower recidivism rates, we need to look at the “reformed” policies that still implement racial inequalities.

James Forman tells us about how the reformed criminal justice system looks too much at non-violent drug offenders, and that they should also focus on people convicted of violent crimes since they make up a large part of the prison population. He argues that if we don’t focus on these crime rates as well, the efforts to reduce recidivism won’t work. He suggests that reforms should include community-based programs that focus on helping violent offenders, not just those involved in drug-related crimes.

Lastly, Michelle Alexander explains that the racial caste system is still strong today. She believes that the criminal justice reforms aren’t strong enough because they don’t address the deep racial and economic inequalities that lead to mass incarceration. She says that people who get out of prison still face major challenges with rehabilitation; not being able to find safe housing, find jobs, etc. These challenges make it more likely for them to reoffend, especially Black Americans who experience the racial and economic inequalities the most.My essay may contribute to the ongoing debate as it sparks more discussion about a part that is usually left out: recidivism and equal rehabilitation opportunities to reduce mass incarceration.

Key terms in BOLD!

Sources:

Alexander, Michelle. The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. New Press, 2010.

Forman, James. “Beyond the New Jim Crow.” New York University Law Review, vol. 87, no. 1, 2012, pp. 21-69.

Hinton, Elizabeth. “The Origins of Mass Incarceration: The Racial Politics of Crime and Punishment in Postwar America.” Carceral Notebooks, 2009.

1. Durose MR, Antenangeli L. Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 34 States in 2012: A 5-Year Follow-Up Period (2012–2017). Bureau of Justice Statistics. July 2021.

PLEDGE EVA VAN DER KOOI

For my third essay, I want to investigate the question: What is being done to avoid recidivism in the context of mass incarceration? There is a lot written about the causes and consequences of mass incarceration, and not a lot of attention is given to rehabilitation of criminals to reduce reoffending and support successful reintegration into society. It is. a large issue, because it has been said that about 50% of criminals end up going back to prison. This undermines the rehabilitation efforts, and contributes to the mass incarceration in the US.

In Elizabeth Hinton’s “The Origins of Mass Incarceration”, she discusses the policies that have contributed to the system’s expansion, but also shows us how some reforms aimed at reducing recidivism. Next to that James Forman’s “Beyond the New Jim Crow”, gives alternatives to incarceration and emphasizes the role of community-based interventions. Lastly, Michelle Alexander, in her book The New Jim Crow, discusses how systemic racial disparities in incarceration limit the effectiveness of current recidivism programs.

I will support the evidence and show stats of recidivism that are given by the US government and other sources, I will also try and look into the rehabilitation programs: do they work, how they work, are there systemic racial disparities in the rehabilitation programs, etc. (might have to be more specific with this.)

Sources:

Alexander, Michelle. The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. New Press, 2010.

Forman, James. “Beyond the New Jim Crow.” New York University Law Review, vol. 87, no. 1, 2012, pp. 21-69.

Hinton, Elizabeth. “The Origins of Mass Incarceration: The Racial Politics of Crime and Punishment in Postwar America.” Carceral Notebooks, 2009.

United States Sentencing Commission. Recidivism of Federal Offenders Released in 2010. 2021. (statistics)

Bureau of Justice Statistics. Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 30 States in 2005: Patterns from 2005 to 2010. (statistics)

PLEDGE EVA VAN DER KOOI

I. Citation for the article or chapter in MLA Style.

Hinton, Elizabeth. From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America. Harvard University Press, 2016.

II. Identify the thesis of the article or chapter, aka WHAT is its central argument?

“The past half- century, since it emerged from within the War on Poverty and alongside it, this long War on Crime has today positioned law enforcement agencies, criminal justice institutions, and jails as the primary public programs in many low income communities across the United States.” (4)

“The long mobilization of the War on Crime was not a return to an old racial caste system in a new guise— a “New Jim Crow.” Rather, the effort to control and contain troublesome groups with patrol, surveillance, and penal strategies produced a new and historically distinct phenomenon in the post civil rights era: the criminalization of urban social programs. In the two decades preceding Reagan’s War on Drugs, this phenomenon laid the groundwork for the continued rise of mass incarceration and its deep racial injustices into the twenty-first century.” (25-26)

The War on Crime has made law enforcement, criminal justice institutions and jails the main public service in troublesome groups/ low income communities. It has laid the foundation for the staggering mass incarceration and deep racial injustices in the 21st century.

III. Analyze and describe HOW the argument is organized.

Hinton organizes her argument in the introduction by first showing the historical context of the War on Crime. She says that although this time is known for its positive changes, it also started a national crime control plan that unfairly focused on poor communities. Even though important civil right laws were passed, they also started programs like LEAA, which increased federal control over local police forces. Hinton claims that this created a turning point shifting resources from social welfare to law enforcement and criminal justice systems.

Hinton then explains how the prison system grew with support from both political parties, punishing crimes harder. Even though these policies didn’t directly mention race, they targeted cities with many African Americans and Latinos, making crime control racially biased. It concludes by showing how these policies led to mass incarceration because both parties focused more on punishment than solving social inequality.

IV. List three rhetorical strategies you would like to apply to your own essays.

1. The use of statistics: she used a lot of statistics to emphasize the importance of the matter.
2. Historical Comparisons: she frequently compares different historical moments to show shifts in policy and society. 
3. Argumentation: She starts by acknowledging opposing viewpoints and ends with her counterargument to make it come out stronger. 

PLEDGE Eva van der Kooi

I. Citation in MLA Style

Forman, James Jr. “Racial Critiques of Mass Incarceration: Beyond the new Jim Crow.” New York University Law Review, vol. 87, no. 1, April 2012, p. 21-69. HeinOnlineThesis Statement

II. Thesis of the Article

“Accordingly, an effective response to mass incarceration will require directly confronting the issue of violent crime and developing policy responses that can compete with the punitive approach that currently dominates American criminal policy. The idea that the Jim Crow analogy leads to a distorted view of mass incarceration – and therefore hampers our ability to challenge it effectively- is the central theme of this Article.” (25)

Forman’s main argument is that while the Jim Crow analogy effectively gives a view of mass incarceration, it oversimplifies it by neglecting important issues leading to the inability to reform certain efforts to better the situation.

III. Organization of the Argument

1. Introduction: Forman begins by acknowledging the contributions of the New Jim Crow analogy by giving attention to racial disparities in mass incarceration. He acknowledges that the Jim Crow analogy successfully brings attention to racial injustices affecting Black communities, but he warns that it oversimplifies the issue. Forman aims to explore these limitations throughout the article (22-23).
2. Historical Background of the Jim Crow Analogy: in the next part he talks about the historical origins of the Jim Crow analogy, showing how it can be used as a tool for activists and scholars to give attention to the racial biases in criminal justice policies. Forman acknowledges that the analogy has been successful in raising awareness but critiques its limitations (27-34).
3. Criticisms of the Jim Crow Analogy: Forman argues that the Jim Crow analogy oversimplifies mass incarceration by ignoring its complex history, which includes more than just racial motivations.He argues that it disproportionately looks at drugs crimes (more) and violent crimes (less) and that it fails to take social class differences among African Americans and other racial groups (34-58)
4. Conclusion: Forman’s conclusion says that while the Jim Crow analogy has brought attention to mass incarceration, it limits our understanding and response. By focusing narrowly on race and disregarding other factors, the analogy may stop efforts to effectively address and reform the system (64-69).

IV. Rhetorical Strategies to Apply

1. He talks about the value of the analogy first to give the reader a better understanding of what it is; its logical and its good for persuasion when he counters the analogy later on (he can finish on a strong note). 
2. He effectively uses janice faced transitions, making the essay transition more fluently from paragraph to paragraph.
3. In his introduction he creates a great ethos by talking about his credibility because of his expertise and by showing how invested he is/ how much he cares about the problem. 

breaking loose from history through Exit West’s migrant-native relationship

In the novel Exit West, writer Mohsin Hamid invites his readers into the complex world of the migrants Nadia and Saeed, who fall in love and escape their destroyed city through magic doors that transport them to new countries. As they navigate a series of magical doors leading to various global cities, the narrative raises critical questions among the readers about the migrant-native relationships after crossing the border of the magic doors. Anam argues in her article that some literature shows migrants as reverse colonizers, which can spark fear of an apocalyptic happening or loss of western civilization. She recognizes that Exit West disrupts this narrative by using the magic doors to show that migration is an almost worldly, everyday phenomenon. Contrary to that Goyal argues that Hamid’s Exit West universalizes the experience of migration and that Hamid changes the refugee condition into a broad human metaphor risking erasing the historical and political abuse behind forced displacement. But Hamid is less interested in portraying the historical suffering of migrants than in offering a constructive portrayal of migrant and native interactions. Rather than highlighting endless suffering and discrimination, the book presents a hopeful vision in which the migrant-native relationship is improved through the formation of shared spaces and the possibility of coexistence.

Contrary to Goyal’s argument that Hamid paints a rosy picture of the migrant-native relations, Hamid actually shows the potential conflict laying between these relationships. For example, when Nadia and Said arrive in the London mansion through the magic door. They transform it into a place of refuge as migrants start to take over the mansion. Native residents view the migrants occupying this mansion as trespassers, threatening western civilisation. The mansion among other places, once symbolizing wealth and privilege, becomes a contested space representing the fears about the invasion of migrants into the native’s world.

“Returning to where they had been born was unthinkable, and they knew that in other desirable cities in other desirable countries similar scenes must be unfolding, scenes of nativist backlash, and so even though they discussed leaving London, they stayed.” (136-137)

In this passage Nadia and Saeed face the harsh realities of being migrants in a world seemingly hostile to their presence. “Returning to where they had been born was unthinkable” shows the sense of displacement they feel; they do not have a home to return to, leaving them with few choices but to stay and face the resistance in London. Staying in London they receive “scenes of nativist backlash”, which reflects on the simmering hostility and rejection that Saeed and Nadia among other migrants had to face from native populations. So, by staying they receive backlash, showing that migrants can be seen as threats, who turn safe spaces into contested ones. This portrayal counters Goyal’s argument of the rose-colored picture and illustrates the hostility that Nadia and Saeed initially face when arriving in London. 

Even as Hamid shows how tensions rise, like in the London mansion, he also shows how they can be defused. In London the rising hostility outside of the mansion becomes substantial, with the migrants sensing the anger outside and being forced to stay inside of the mansion. The tension erupts after the threat of violence shifts from riots to an organized nationwide action, where the natives try to reclaim the buildings with migrants such as the London mansion.

“After the riots the talk on the television was of a major operation, one city at a time, starting in London, to reclaim Britain for Britain, and it was reported that the army was being deployed, and the police as well, and those who had once served in the army and the police, and volunteers who had received a weeklong course of training.” (135) 

The phrase “reclaim Britain for Britain” in this passage signals the heavy nationalistic backlash, showing migrants as outsiders who do not belong in their population. This sentence shows a deconstructive migrant-native relationship and by mentioning deploying the army, police and even ex-military it shows the severity of it. Britain is in a defensive mode, protecting the country from outsiders by quickly mobilizing the army, police and even volunteering residents to take action against the migrants. But instead of fulfilling the apocalyptic expectations, like Anam says happens in most migrant literature, Hamid disrupts this narrative by returning to peace. After the rising hostility in London against the migrants, it calms back down. Not only in London, but other cities where migrants have arrived experience the same peacefulness.

“On the third day the elderly man asked the wrinkled man if he would care to join him on the balcony, and though the elderly man could not speak Brazilian Portuguese and the wrinkled man could not speak Dutch, they cobbled together a conversation, a conversation with many long gaps, but these gaps were eminently comfortable, almost unnoticed by the two men, as two ancient trees would not notice a few minutes or hours that passed without a breeze.” (175)

The tension fades as two elderly men, each from different cultural backgrounds and speaking different languages, connect without words. The “long gaps” can symbolize the quiet acceptance, as they are described as “eminently comfortable”, contrasting with the tensions that are typically described between migrant-native relations. This is completed by the comparison to “two ancient trees” showing that despite their difference there is peaceful coexistence and mutual respect. 

Through the magic doors Hamid offers separated instances of positive migrant-native relations by working together to build new communities, also sharing traditions. After the initial hostilities in London, the migrants and natives start to work together to construct new housing and restore damaged areas. This collaboration shows the shift from two separate communities, one with migrants and one with natives, to one big community. When Nadia and Saeed arrive in Marin, they experience a willingness from locals to explore the different cultures, rather than the immediate danger they experienced when arriving in London. This setting lets both migrants and natives learn about each other’s traditions, and for example music. With these positive migrant-native relationships the community can flourish. Its hopeful narrative shows readers that a positive connection between people from different backgrounds can enrich communities.

Mohsin Hamid breaks the narrative of apocalyptic migration novels by presenting migration as a way to enrich communities and better human connections across different backgrounds. While Goyal argues that Hamid’s portrayal of migrant-native relationships overlooks the conflicts that often arise in reality, Anam counters that Hamid’s narrative creates the vision for potential meaningful connections between these two groups to create one community. Hamid’s narrative invites the reader to think that rather than to repeat patterns of history there is the opportunity to write a new story, where the stigma of migrants is broken. By having this hopeful vision Hamid encourages readers to see migration as a way to enrich communities with positive migrant-native relationships.

SOURCES:
Anam, Nasia. “The Migrant as Colonist: Dystopia and Apocalypse in the Literature of Mass Migration.” Project Muse, Johns Hopkins University Press, Sept. 2018, muse.jhu.edu/pub/1/article/711837/pdf.

Goyal, Yogita. “‘We Are All Migrants’: The Refugee Novel and the Claims of Universalism.” Project Muse, Johns Hopkins University Press, 2020, muse.jhu.edu/article/758170. 

Hamid, Mohsin. Exit West: A Novel. Penguin, 2017.

COMMENTS:
Hey Eva! I think one thing you model really well in this essay is the use of quotation sandwiches, and here I’m especially referring to the first body paragraph. You fully engage with Goyal’s quote and even use it as counter evidence, but then say “it overlooks the possibility that…”, which I think is a strong move. One thing you could work on are your transitions. I can see a clear connection between the first and second body paragraph, but after that it is easy to get lost in the different ideas you bring up. Clear signaling, referring back to previous ideas, and offering more guidance on how the next part ties in with your central claim could help the reader feel less lost. One additional thing to think about: Could you possibly include any evidence of other sources that left out something important and thereby sparked a great debate? Would it be possible to use that source to support your claim? I think this could really strengthen your thesis and make you more credible. Keep up the great work, I’m looking forward to reading your next/final draft! 😊

-Alina

I love the direction that your essay is heading towards. The idea of the unspoken being a tool to discuss the spoken and unspoken is brilliant. I also love your formatting and use of different templates to set up your paragraphs and topics. I can see the direction you are trying to go. However, I get lost in your argument and who you lean towards. At first, I thought you were siding with Anam, but then it seemed you were speaking against their ideas. The many ideas you bring up make the direction a bit blurry. So just like Alina said, clear signaling, referring back to previous ideas, and offering more guidance on how the next part ties in with your central claim could help. I also believe you should focus on either one or two specific instances so you have strong evidence for your thesis and claim. Keep up the good work! A little more tuning! Cant wait to see the final version!

-Veyane

I used AI to detect passive voice

PLEDGE Eva van der Kooi

I. Identifying the Thesis

“We have not ended racial caste in America; we have merely redesigned it” (2).

In The New Jim Crow, Michelle Alexander argues that the U.S. criminal justice system works like a racial caste system, controlling and creating disadvantaged Black Americans in a way that continues the country’s history of racial oppression, just in a new form.

II. Analyzing the Argument’s Organization

Alexander shows how historical systems of racial oppression have evolved into the criminal justice system we know today. The introduction starts by looking back in time at history, showing how mechanisms like slavery and Jim Crow laws were designed to maintain racial control. By looking back at the criminal justice system within this history, Alexander argues that it has not changed but redesigned past systems of racial hierarchy (3-5).

After that Alexander analyzes the role of legislation, law enforcement, and media in establishing and reinforcing this new caste system. She describes the ways in which drug laws and policing practices affect Black communities, leading to poverty and social separation that resembles the legally sanctioned discrimination of the Jim Crow era (12-14).

The final part of the introduction emphasizes how society’s view of race has been shaped by these systems of control, noting that by associating Blackness with criminality, society justifies the continued exclusion of black people. This section effectively lays the foundation for the book’s call to recognize and dismantle this racial caste system, urging a collective acknowledgment of how ingrained systems perpetuate inequality (15-17).

III. Rhetorical Strategies to Apply in Your Own Essays

1. Historical Framing: Alexander’s method of framing the criminal justice system as part of a historical continuum (beginning with slavery and ending with the Jim Crow laws) provides powerful context. This approach could be used to show how current issues often come from historical happenings, which helps readers understand their complexity. IN this instance we could look at history and see how it repeats itself, instead of changing the inequality in the criminal justice system.
2. Direct Statements of Thesis: Alexander’s use of a direct, clear thesis (“We have not ended racial caste in America; we have merely redesigned it”) creates a clear, memorable statement. I find it hard to make a thesis that clear, but such direct statements/thesis can strengthen the core of an argument by giving readers a concise takeaway, instead of them questioning what you are arguing.
3. Appealing to Moral and Ethical Values: By framing racial injustice as a moral issue, Alexander appeals to readers’ sense of ethics, urging them to consider the human costs of systemic oppression. This technique can be persuasive in encouraging readers to consider an issue not just as a systematic matter but as a question of what is morally right and wrong.

PLEDGE Eva van der Kooi

Hope, n.

1. A desire for something to happen in a certain way.
   “Walter’s case taught me that hope can be a powerful force. It was essential for the wrongly convicted, like oxygen for someone drowning.” (Just Mercy, Ch. 6, p. 144)

2. A personal source of strength or motivation.
“Proximity to the condemned and incarcerated made the question of each person’s humanity more urgent and meaningful, including my own. Hope kept me going.” (Just Mercy, Ch. 1, p. 13)

3. Belief in the possibility of freedom, redemption, or change.
“You can’t understand most of the important things from a distance, Bryan. You have to get close. It was close proximity that strengthened my hope for these men and women.” (Just Mercy, Ch. 4, p. 67)

Works cited:

Stevenson, Bryan, author. Just Mercy : a Story of Justice and Redemption. New York :Spiegel & Grau, 2014.

PLEDGE Eva van der Kooi