Studies in America have supported the notion that the more concentrated the poverty is the more likely more crimes would be committed. Low income housing projects, for example, create a breeding ground for criminals. It is where gangs are created and ideas and values of hatred against governmental systems formulate and are intensified.
It is suggested the Gentrification would serve to promote more positive attitude towards society, and are more aware of opportunities
Do a little research and tell us whether you think gentrification would help or whether it is futile. Would modernizing the schools in low income areas work? Would more community centers help reduce gang activity? Would more church activity reduce crime?
Please respond with your posting and then respond to at least two of your classmates.
I think gentrification would help with the schools, because that will make some students feel better about coming to school. But than again it would be useless, cause you have the students who have the attitude about they don’t care about the school or anything else. And those are the students who mess it up for the rest of the students ( the good have to suffer with the bad). Because when I attended Northwestern my class of 1997 closed the old school and we opened up the new school, a year later the school went down, because the student’s didn’t appreciate having that new school, but some students did and some didn’t. But I feel everybody need a fair chance in their community to have a better place where their kids can go to school in a great educational environment.
And with the community centers I would say we have community center’s for the younger kids but not for the teenage kids these kids get bored, but now these days the teenagers are not interested in doing anything but acting like their an adult that’s where mentoring come in at….we need more mentor’s people who they can look up to.
And to answer would more church activities reduce crime….I know there are some teenagers that goes to church but what about the teenagers who standing out there on the corner with their pants on the ground. I know some of them want to do good but they don’t have that helping hand. So I think it would but how would we get the teenagers who just don’t won’t to do right into the church…..all you would hear is excuse after excuse. Even though now some church’s says come as you are…..
Goodmorning...I think with thought of gentrification it depends on the individual...Students do what they see others do...If we put a crack down on the bad seeds then we could have a better school systems...For example, people are in jail because they do bad things. Some of those people get out early because of good behavior. Then you have those ones who just keep going back to jail because they never learn. Its the same thing like the children, iif you get rid of the bad seeds then there will be a better outcome. Like one of the students said, we need a check and balance system to make the kids more responsible...Stop giving them so many times to mess up.
I agree with Ms, Simmons in her anology however why do the good keep having to suffer with the bad...
In the example of churches, they are more critical of the children. So they are really scared to even come to church. It's like being under a magnifying class....Is that a bad thing though? I ask. If they know someone is really paying attention' I quite sure they will put there best foot forward.
Should we get rid of community centers for teenage children? Again why should the good suffer with the bad. If those children who do not want to be something positive in life then let them be..But those chilldren who will benefit, I say let them benefit. If we be rid of all teenage children because of some spoiled apples then the rest will fall by the waste side....I am quite sure there still is some caring individuals to be involve with the positive growth of these children. And just like Professor Kalam said they should be qualified to handle the task at hand.
Gentrification is defined as the rebuilding of degenerated areas to become suitable for middle and upper class while displacing poorer inhabitants. Historically speaking gentrification began as early as the 1960’s in which non blacks would invade black communities riddled with high crime and poverty bringing opportunities and money. By the 1970’s living in suburban areas and working in the city required as much as two hours commuting because of traffic congestion and rush hours. The inner city then becomes an interest because of its many benefits which include easy accessibility to jobs, a transit system close to home and job, historical structures and varied cultural experiences. The dilemma faced by suburbanites gave roots to gentrification. Gentrification only benefits residents as it purges crime, violence, riots and poverty. There is an opportunity to own homes or businesses if banks would loan poor blacks money. It becomes futile when residents watch hopelessly as upper and middle class people move in and the local government invests money to improve the quality of life for its new residents. The land usage in gentrified community changes as expensive housing, retail, offices, restaurants and other forms of entertainment are erected. While many see this as job opportunities, the local residents are often excluded thus the sentiment of “don’t support local businesses.” The real estate market changes, in the sense, increase in rents and home prices which leads to evictions therefore reinventing apartments into condominiums. The positive effect is the property value increases, attracting prospective residents and business owners. When poor residents are unable to purchase or rent because of increased prices or lack of resources then we have a dislocation of poor ethnic groups. Introducing technology in schools promotes modernization of students living in impoverished neighborhoods. Technology benefits students by enabling a positive approach to learning and having access to such a tool is vital in a modernized society. Students will have access to resources that will produce a positive attitude about oneself and education. In comparison, many homes in low income areas do not have access to technology nor do they know how to use technology to their benefits. Modernizing schools will aide those who want to learn an opportunity to become productive members of society, when they graduate and efficiently use technology within the work place. This will also benefit parents who have interest in their children and education. Parents are motivated by their children to not only purchase a computer but also learn how to operate one creating a sense of pride for a household assimilating in mainstream America. Community centers that provides after school activity for many of its student population will see a reduction in gang activities. Gang activities thrive where there is no accountability. Parents who work often leave their kids to the ramification of peer pressure and a negative involvement with their community. Statistics have proven that most juvenile crimes occur between when they are out of school and the time their parents come home. Getting children involve in a extra curricular activity eliminates negative peer pressure and brings a positive association between community and juveniles. The church should partnership with community centers to provide a religious accountability to the children. The church should teach self esteem classes, provide an haven for spiritual enhancement and a neutral environment for bullying.
To Ms. Simmons: I totally agree with you. A lot of these centers are only for the younger children who are easier to manage. The problem comes with those that are older. It would be a great idea for our community to have centers made for teenagers to keep them busy and off the streets where they are more likely to get in trouble with the law.
I am in total disagreement with the concept of gentrification. They way I see it, as developers are always trying to make their fortune grow by restoring and updating low income neighborhoods for middle-class society, they are only alienating the poor and contributing to widening the gap between middle class and the poor. In the end, this cannot be a good thing.
Low income families are accustomed to living a certain way, making them unable to afford a higher rent and increased household expenses. It is hard enough they have to go out and work long hours each day, in some cases making less than minimum wage, in order to supply for their loved ones. I find it really unfair to displace them from what they consider their neighborhood, all because of some rich investors wanting to make the area a more “desirable” place for the rich. I often ask myself, suppose they do make this area a more pleasant place to live in, would these low income families be able to afford living in these apartments? Will they be allowed to co-exist with a higher society without being discriminated? I am inclined to think the answer to these questions is no. By forcing these low-income families out of that area, some of them might become homeless, which in turn could create more violence, since they will see themselves in a desperate situation that might lead them to resort to petty crimes and possibly violence in order to somewhat mitigate their living conditions.
As far as modernizing schools in low income areas, I am of the opinion that it would be a total waste of time and money, because things like technology would not resolve the issues those kids have to deal with on a daily basis. Kids in underdeveloped areas tend to lose motivation in school easily, since they usually have no incentive in wanting to pass their classes or do well in school because they have other problems to deal with. Honestly, if a student truly wants to learn, he or she would not care if they have a chalk board compared to an overhead projector. In addition, if the teachers are good and competent, they will teach with whatever means they have to get the message across to their students.
More community centers would in fact help reduce gang activity. If they were to be offered, children and young adults would have another avenue to direct their energy and attention to, instead of wondering the streets with the wrong crowd while their parents are not present. Also, these centers can even offer them help with school assignments, such as tutoring or even provide them access to computers, either for work related projects or for entertainment. Not only would this help these children receive some of that much needed attention most of them crave, but also their parents could feel somewhat at ease, knowing their children are spending their free time doing something productive and staying out of trouble.
More church activity would definitely help reduce crime, especially among young adults. Church-sponsored youth groups not only provide spiritual comfort for these youths, but also a safe haven, keeping them away from harm’s way. Youth groups can also serve as counseling, helping them release frustrations that might stem from their situation at home, and can also distract their minds by getting to know other kids, helping them socialize with many different types of people that might have the same common interests they have. Youth groups usually offer young adults incentives to help them make the decision to join. They can do fundraising events, in which even the parents can get involved, to collect money to be able to offer them trips, food, and other fun activities. This definitely would help cement a good relationship between these youths and their parents, thereby reducing the likelihood of them going out and committing a crime.
I totally agree with you regarding the negative effects of gentrification. The fact is that the process of gentrification would only displace those unfortunate ones that can barely afford a decent living. The same local government and investments firms that are so intent in creating a better living condition to middle and upper classes, should worry about providing the same to the poor class that already lives in that area.
To Tamika and Silvia The youths of the community that understands the importance of extra-circular activites have engaged in various art forms such as cheerleading, sports and various art forms. There are community centers that target teenagers but to get full funding and effective resources they have to include the younger children. Most non profit organizations charge a fee for registration and materials utilizedby the youths.Majority of parents in low income areas place a emphasis on material goods and services rather than what is important for their children thus the decline in enrollment in effective extra circular activiteis for the youths in the community.Here is an opportunity for schools to partnership with community centers by providing parents with information, location and a guide to after school activities. It is up to local government agencies and commissioners to make sure these community centers are modernized and given every opportunity to succeed. Thamicka Morgan
I also agree that a check and balance approach is essential in order to maintain a level of performance. Oftentimes, a policy and procedure does exist and measures are clearly outlined. Yet, the implementation lacks momentum and does not continue. We should all consider ways to make the efforts last so that checks and balance systems are effective.
Silvia, I understand your concept in the direction that you where headed. However, the point was not focused on the monetary gain of the developers, but to provide the low income areas with a more up-graded visual and actual facility in their neighborhood as supposed to of other educational institute in other neighboring communities. Nevertheless, at the end of the day, it will continue to operate as neighborhood school, with the same students, same building, the only variable that changed would be the mind set. Fostering new innovation of I am somebody ideology.
Yes, I believe gentrification would be helpful because seeing changes makes a difference. Knocking down the old and building the new will help. For example, with the schools in the intercities schools sure as Miami Carol City, Miami Central and Miami Jackson High School will help the students have the same educational opportunities as students in bigger income areas would have. It would also help the students in the community see that better things can be achieve in life. On the other hand there will be some people who just don't care at all... and won't see the opportunities that are there for them.
Building community centers would give kids the activities and ambition rather than hanging out in the street and getting in trouble, also hopefully the staff at the centers monitor the activites of the kids and help stop them from gertting in trouble. The kids have to much time on their hands there need to more events and activities to keep them busy.
I believe a great leader leads by example.. There are many churches in our communities reaching out to our men and the youth. There are churches that help in non believers/non members as well. That shows hope and people do care. Focusing on the youth shows them that no matter what life brings believeing in self is most important. No matter what or who we believe in faith is the key. Leading by example does help. I was a single, worked full-time, high school diploma, attended church regularly, kept my kids involved with the school and church activities, I spent time with them we did everything together and yes it was tired but I had to make them know they were important to me and build up their self esteem, you most love yourself. Morales has to come from in-house.
You make a good point when you mention the use of technology in schols. How can we compete as a society with the emerging world without educating our youth about those worlds. Technology is obviously a key par of that educational experience. But you must have a comupter!!!!!
While I see your perspective, I want to add that gentrification should involve more than one aspect of the community. A program whould include a broad based approach considering both government and NGOs participating in contracting with one another to accomplish planned improvements. I know this sounds like the same old thing all over again, but like any other measure to help impoverished areas, there needs to be motivated involvement.
Poverty in America is a never ending story, whether it is in housing projects or not. Living in the ghetto has gone from a looked down on area to a beautiful place of gangs, drug dealing, and rap stars. The housing project the place a young person from a richer urban area can escape and look at the rap lyric heard on the radio. Low income areas can be called breeding ground for criminals, because the children in those parts have looked at not else. Government being looked down on or hated is due to mother, father or another friend or family member being arrested making the government the criminal not the member of the area. Years ago gangs in Miami were at every stop sign on the street. Going to a new part of Miami where you didn’t grow up, you did not know what you would find. Funny, but the truth the friends of the family had more of a problem with me then the children they would introduce me to. That would lead me to getting into fights with the friend of the families children by the end of the visit. This goes to show that poverty areas have descent people in them which is something often left out because of the gang talk and drug dealer always mentioned. Gentrification in my opinion is a great idea and not. This would mean move companies and the non existent middle class to an area that is going to be renovated and bettered. That is great in it has happened in Liberty City in Miami from what I have read making housing for the house less, and off of 27th avenue a new business area was built with store for better of the community. The schools didn’t really get a make over like they needed but are cleaner paint wise. One of the only school that I have seen an overhauling on is Booker T. Washington, with new building made and painted beautifully even though that is Overtown not Liberty City. In this transition of cleaning the area people and families that have been in that part of town which have become poverty stricken loss the little they have left. Violence is another happening that goes on with this change; people in the community get fearful of what the change in there area may bring, and fight back. Churches and community center are great places for a child to grow up in and learn. When I was younger my youth was spend in the parks of The City of Hialeah and Friday at youth groups. This helps the youth to stay out of troubles at least while there, as I would look at. Of course it was a different era in the 80’s. I have to stop fist fights in my church group event just like at the parks. So this can help pending on the child there is a misconception that going changes the person not in every case. Though, you may save some from gang entrance or at least becoming statistic.
Tahysha, I agree totally with your comment on about the younger generation fears upon entering some churches. Ex: during my era of upbringing, there was a dress code that we followed however; it was not engraved in stone. Ladies were not allowed to wear pants; Ladies could not be caught with a cigarette hanging from their lips on church grounds, while men were allowed to smoke on church grounds. Ladies also, had to wear stocking, pantyhose’s, no revealing of the body parts ever. Whereas today, women are being allowed to preach, where pants, and dresses above the knees are been acceptable. At the end of the day, everyone will be judge according to his own deeds and held accountable for his own words and action and not what you wear or wore on Sunday.
Sonya I agree with you saying church goings can make a great person for a community, still there are some like always that walk into an office in vane. They have the mask of a good person and are nothing but a lair and a thief. For example the woman Rev. Dunn replace she looked great on television and is lair of the truth turning the community aganist is self for her gain because she would be the only one that would.
I am agree with you on church, you go in and your judge by humans not the lord but human and there god head attitude. I know it first hand, going to church on Sunday as is my right with long hair down my back, tattoos, and ear rings looking at me like I am Lucifer. I will alway be looked at as a bad seed even though I am not. Best part about it is looking a them with the truth, and viewing a baby with out the light of god in there life while they judge me and my light blinds them with me being a child.
Sonya, I agree with your views, just like the old saying, you cannot put new wine in an old wine skin; it would burst and run everywhere. I don’t know about anyone else, but I do know for a fact that when I get a new hair doo, my nails done and purchase a new outfit as a reward to myself for the excellent job I have done in spite of, I get and emotional rush so high I have to talk to self to come down. So if a make-over something as simple as a hair doo can create such a rush, imagine what a coat of paint can do to a weather beaten school would produce.
DK, I found this website very informative to would gentrification of schools in low-income work. http://www.ed.gov/blog/2010/01/a-promise-kept-a-school-renewed-locke-high-schools-turn-around/ You be the judge!
I agree with your statement, people do not welcome change. However, everyone does not want to be poor all there lives. Most people do not know how to get out of thensituations that they are in. But does that mean we still don't try and make changes? To whom much is given much is required.
When we were in class Saturday, the group that I was in discussed Welfare and Section 8. To my understanding these programs were given to families that were in need but back then they were not giving the way to better themselves to get off completely. Now they have them with more requirements than just a couple of papers to turn in. What I am trying to say is to whom much is given much is required. We can not give up wehave to find a solution.
I do understand that we can not cram these thing down there throats but we need to be a little more forceful.
You are absolutely right about grooming yourself. Everytime a woman takes the time to beautify herself, she is showing everyone that she cares how she presents herself. Most of the time you hear children say they dont care so I don't care. The humanatarian part of the a human being has went out of the window.
For example, I am an insurance agent' the people that i have as clients come to my office with other issues that they don't know how to handle on there own. Does that mean i do not help them? It is my humanitarian duty to look out for my fellow man.
Our children are in a dying situation do we not try and help them out? I have my son's friends who come over needing some guidance. I share with them my love that I have for my children. It does not always have to start from the top..It can be from the bottom up. One child at a time. If all of us that were strong enough to take one child it could be a difference.
As long as the progress go to toughs that deserve it not beg for it. A slave is not worth having an employee is. You boss a slave you dignify an employee.
I agree with u 100% because you have kids out there that don't have that love at home. So where do they find the love in the street which is the wrong place. But thats good that u share ur love with those kids because look ur kids is hanging out with them same kids u giving love too. So I would do the same....
I read in some one post that gentrification will cause the less fortunate to have to When you rebuild it will be a betterment of the people as a whole. Alot of people did nto like the fact when Scott's got tore down in the city because they didn't like the fact that these people had to change the norm. It was said that these people did not have anywhere to go but how long were they there before a change came. How do we get the message across that change has to happen to wake people up from there sleep state. There is always ngoing to be poor people if they choose not to do better. I understand there are very few jobs or some would say no jobs at all. But thats not true. I look in the classified as all the time. Not because I need a job right now, but i am always looking for a better opportunity.
The real desire to have better is really up to the individual. I say when the world gives you lemons make lomonade.
You still have empty lots that houses can be built. With whats I stated on my other comment a person that has been making it through this hell that is happening. Should be first in line to better there life not wait for nothing be there to then take a look at that person.
Gentrification is a plausible, however, not necessarily universal solution for guaranteed educational success. Because every individual is unique in his/her own thoughts, desires, motivations, etc. and it would be very challenging to assess the prime benefactor. Some may want to be educated in a new modern educational facilities, others, like me, would like to sit at the same desk their forefathers were sitting and going in the same libraries they were going, to feel inspiration and bond.
Modernization itself is very general term, because many things could be modernized, but not all of them are requiring modernization. Again, for example, buildings to my mind are not essential elements of modernization, but having interactive whiteboards, internet, and books are. Or, building bigger classes with more desks and chairs versus recruiting a teacher or a professor after whom it is not necessary to subjugate pupils to anyway useless testing.
I always argued that regardless of age or any other type of classification, it is an absolute must for those who are in power to implement free interest based communions. Moreover, mandatory implementation of especial taxation in form of fiduciary supervision and share of experience in these communions, for those who are using benefits of the society achieved respectful and noble statuses in their lives and society itself. Nevertheless, religious involvement may reduce certain amount of particular crimes in a short run; religions should be kept out of general educational programs, as religion is kept out of governmental politics.
At last, here is a recent quote from a person of my deepest and sincere admiration, Queen Rania of Jordan. ”Saddest thing is not death; saddest thing is when your dreams die while you are still alive. That’s what happens when you illiterate: you feel trapped.”
I believe it’s not about facility; rather it is about perception and diverted values. As we may all know that Harvard, Yale, Cambridge, Oxford, etc. are all centuries old institutions with centuries old buildings, and yet successful and prestigious.
Your comments make sense. You make a good illustration using those old insitutions and I am assuming that your point is that it is not neccessary to make it new to make it work. While I can agree, I can also say that application to all situations may not fit. If, coupled with a broken down home, a broken family, lack of needed resources, etc., the child is sent to a broken school, then it may not matter.
Here is something with regards to the definition of education. Nevertheless, it is important to take into account that views of literacy have evolved over time. UNESCO has made four major statements in relation to this:
a) A person is literate who can, with understanding, both read and write a short simple statement on his or her everyday life (UNESCO, 1958);
b) A person is functionally literate who can engage in all those activities in which literacy is required for effective functioning of his or her group and community and also for enabling him or her to continue to use reading, writing and calculation for his or her own and the community’s development (UNESCO, 1978);
c) Literacy is the ability to identify, understand, interpret, create, communicate and compute using printed and written materials associated with varying contexts. Literacy involves a continuum of learning in enabling individuals to achieve his or her goals, develop his or her knowledge and potential, and participate fully in community and wider society (set in 2003 and published in UNESCO, 2005); and
d) Finally, the notion of "plurality of literacy" (2004) was advanced to stress the social dimensions of literacy in relation to both acquisition and application. Therefore, literacy is seen as comprising diverse practices embedded in socioeconomic, political, cultural and linguistic contexts, acquired in school and outside of school. It also involves family and community contexts; the media in various forms of technology; skills for further learning; and the world of work and life in general. Thus, this concept of literacy emphasises the literacy challenge as making societies literate and not simply as making individuals literate (UNESCO, 2004).
To Tahysha The residents wanted change for Scott Projects, they were tired of the crime and drugs but they objected to the requirements/stipulations addressed by the Hope V1 initative. Most residents would not be welcome back because of a criminal background, unable to meet requirements for a loan and most parents would have to abandon their chidlren if they were to return. With this being said the housing were open to new residents. What happen to those who didnt meet the criteria, they have now become disenfranchised, homeless and most will return to crime as a means of surviving.The cycle continues.
Definitely combination of factors would play crucial role, especial in cases with raw base, meaning communities without previously established strong values may need extra careful approach in first phases of origination.
First off gentrification doesn't work but can work if every chlid that is "misbehaving" in school is tested for mental disorder or behavior problems. In most low income household, kids with mental disorders or behavior problems are labeled as bad so this child will not see a behavior specialist or a therapist so the issues go undetected not knowing the child can be ill or being affected by something going on in the household or environment. Negativity brings only more negativity, sometimes children are only repeating what they see at home, product of poor parenting, lashing out for attention or behavioral problems; before we start separating kids between good & bad we must get to the root of the problem. Gentrification is almost border line segragation. Having a boyfriend who went to MacArthur North (opportunity school and thru many conversations about our pass he has always felt putting all the bad kids in the same school didn't help the situation because then there's no examples of good around them. He also stated that there were kids there who were worst (behavior) than him. He had been sent to the Mac due to repeat fights in school most of which were in being protective of his 3 sisters. My question is: what about the kids with mental problems are they just put into another school without being tested or sat with a therapist to see whats wrong with him/her to possibly find another game plan? Being a product of one's environment is never by choice and having to live in a low income area doesn't always affect every child in a negative way. Nowadays low income housing have cracked down on persons qualifying and residing on their properties often evicting one's who break there rules. Having a modern school in a low income area shouldn't even be a discussion because every child should have the same opportunity. When one has a place of pride then they in turn will feel the pride of ownership and involvement, hence rising graduation & extra curriculum activities. You often find high parental attendance at school sporting events due to pride the same can be achieved when the school structure and materials are modernized. Community centers would not stop or lower gang activities because as it was proven gangs are formed based on children (migrant) often looking for a place of acceptance and family, which are two things gangs tend to act as. As far as church involvement lessening crimes, that too would be according to the actual child.Personally, living in an area that has equal number of churches as it does liquor stores, it would be solely to that child's strong parental upbringing and exposure to other avenues plus understanding the importance of doing better and wanting to achieve more beyond the environment they're use to. There are numerous programs whether faith or non[profit based that young kids can get involved in but because persons in the low income areas aren't educated about them they often go with low attendance/involvement.
Replying to Ms. Simmons: She stated she's a alumni of Northwestern Sr. High and as she's stated when they opened the newer building the school went down within a year. Northwestern is a school well known primarily for the football program, having attended there games there's a HUGH sense of "BULL" pride amongst the current and pass students in the stands as well as enough persons in attendance to have "BULL" attendees sit on the visiting side bleachers. With seeing this one would think there academic program would be the same "BULL" pride when in reality it doesn't have that much parental involvement. Now heres a school in a low income area given monies to rebuild a state of the art property, producing more athletes getting scholarships then it is scholars, yes in deed that wasn't the plan but if that is the way out of the neighborhood to another state which too can be an education within itself then I commend that athlete cause no other way may they have seen another state or culture or than being transported on a prison bus. If that better school facility ie sporting equipment/program wasn't afforded then it would've been that much harder for that athlete to achieve scholarship status. Once there the change in environment would propel that person to focus on schoolwork due to not having to worry about bills as the athletic scholarship would have taken care of all that and being away from the negative influences and the stress that is often associated with the low income neighborhood.
I believe that gentrification; will not be a good thing to do when it comes down to schools that’s that already going thru poverty. Yes it a good idea to upgrade the low class to middle class, but why move them form where they grow up from. They can rebuild and have them move back into the area. Everyone needs a change in life, so If schools are modernized it will have a student to wanting to learn a little more because the will have more books to lean form and more take home books. If more upscale community center is created in the urban city I do believe that it will have a tremendous effect on reducing gang activity. Have more churches involved in students life will limit crimes, only if the churches are open and more on hands with children.
i do agree with you Povidence, when she stated that"gentrification is almost border line segragationg" i but do disagree with her about community center not help in gang activetiy, if a child is doing something right with his or her life and have someone around to show them the right thing to, it will help. most commmunity center service as a after school care when parent are not home due to them working 2 and 3 jobs just to provide for them, so that were a community center comes in to help out the parent.
Tahysha, you are right children will do what they see other do, and they sometimes no what the out come will be and they stil do. and i beleive they do it just to try to fit in with their peers, so by gentrificating them it will not be a good idea they need to taught right, if the parent can't do it then that's where the community centers should come in at.
Replying to Tahysha: I agree with you when you stated the people of Scott Projects wanted a change because some were tired of the drugs, shootings and other crimes but then what happened to he ones who didnt meet the new requirements to going back into the rebuilts and they weren't a problem tenant?
Coming from a country that is poor (financially) we are rich in pride and culture so even the slum and countryside schools that may not have proper equipment or even worst a roof they some how find a way to produce some of the best cadets for the Royal Army, exchange doctors to Cuba and interrupters for the UN.How is this so in a country that doesn't have as much money as other countries?...I believe its not always about the monies to produce the finer things but about the educators who care and the parents who are involved. We don't have opportunity schools back home but parent(s) are informed of the child's misbehavior and the possibilities of the child being banned from returning to school. Because that's considered shameful to a family the child's behavior doesn't go to far, not saying we don't have any drop outs but saying the parental involvement is done and the need for gentrification isn't present.
Silva, I disagree, new affordable buildings are being built for the middle and lower income families which are making the community better. LOW INCOME FAMILIES MAY BECOME USE TO LIVING A CERTAIN WAY because they have to, but that doesn't mean they don't want to live or have the better things in life. They should be given the same opportunities as the fortunate. This county is always helping other countries in need why can't our country help are own... I feel technology would be helpful, it would resolve some issues not all. It has helped. You can be of the opinion its a waste of time to modernize the schools in the low income areas but if you ask the people whose living in the areas their opinion it would be totally different from yours. I am sure they would like to experience some of the new technologies and in general have a better way of life. It may not elimimate all the issues but it would help improve their way of life. Some improvement is better than none at all.
I do agree with you regarding the church involvement. I know alot of kids/youth that have been helped by the programs and activities provided.
Ms. Queen2flee9, It is very important to stay on our leaders... who can make a difference for our youth and communities. We as parent have to fight and voice the needs. Example.. parents will go the extra mile to support extra curricular activities like football, cheerleading etc..by selling donuts and candy, providing carwash why can't that same philosophy be used on the academic/educational needs.
Hello everyone!!!...After doing a little research on gentrification, I think will be good because it will reduce crime in the area, it slows suburban and environmental degradation, more available jobs in the area due to new businesses and property tax revenues increase. But on the other hand; it will be bad because it increases homelessness for displaced residents because it is financially hard and sometimes impossible to find new housing and pay for moving. It may upset children who are displaced have to change schools, which can negatively impact their performance in school, not to mention their emotional well being and sense of stableness. Poor people can’t provide education to themselves and their child as they don’t have enough funds, education play a big part in developing community moral and thoughts. Moreover, poverty may lead to an actual inferior education, which would cause youth to count on less access to quality schools, jobs, and role models, decreasing the opportunity costs of crime. In my opinion, I don’t think that poverty is a key factor for crime because if poverty causes crime than why is crime rates lower in poor world countries than in rich countries. I think that it is not poverty that causes crime but the anti poverty programs that cause crime. I feel that the United States has created its own crime problem because the U.S. pays people not to work or be married through the welfare program. In a sense people are being rewarded for doing nothing. In addition, no one could argue that keeping children in poor conditions with high crime rates and allowing drug use are beneficial outcomes. The decision to gentrify a neighborhood is the decision to destroy a unique culture, but it is instead framed as the appropriate decision to bring new vitality back into the community. It is rarely taken into consideration that the community that exists will be gone and that its participants will be forced to relocate, or that the relocation phase can make their lives worse than before.
Natasha, I totally agree with you. In addition to that, a study, conducted by “Northeastern University” researchers, looked separately at crime and risky behaviors for both young men and women in a suburban high school and how involvement in outside activities influenced those behaviors. The findings provided interesting, and, in some cases, surprising results. They found that involvement in extra-curricular activities definitely seemed to minimize the risky behaviors, there seemed to be a “tipping point” where too much participation had a counter-effect. They also found that nontraditional activities for each gender (such as sports for girls and church for boys) provided a greater protection from criminal behavior. I also believe that extracurricular involvement (church and community centers) helps deter crime rate.
Arlene Love said…… Gentrification is the process by which poor and working- class residents, usually communities of color are displaced from neighborhoods by rising costs and other forces directly related to an influx of new, wealthier, and often white residents. This displacement is usually accompanies by: an almost complete shift in the cultural identity of a neighborhood and its residents.
I think gentrification may not be the dirty word most people think it is. However, it depends greatly on the individual at hand.
I do believe gentrification would help in neighborhoods and modernizing schools in low income areas because a change for the better is good for the soul. A facelift will encourage not all but some students to feel good about themselves and to do better and make a difference. Most people(s) are afraid of change.
Contrary to popular belief, that few low-income residents are forced out of their neighborhoods as typically white, affluent residents move in. In fact, in some areas, low-income residents are more likely to remain in gentrifying neighborhoods, as improved safety, city services, and more jobs make them more attractive places to live. Regardless, there will always remain some hostile person against change.
Yes. I believe that more community centers and more church activities would help reduce crime. For those parents who work and need after school care will prevent kids from hanging out on the corner waiting on something negative to happen. As the old saying goes – idle time is the devils workshop.
I would like to piggy back on both comments about the younger generation fears upon entering some churches. Even during my era of upbringing, there was a standard dress code that we followed…Ladies was not allowed to wear pants, preach nor sit in the pulpit. They wore dresses below their knees with stocking. No sleeveless tops without covering. This saved most of our skids from getting in trouble. I feel that the church is a safe haven for our kids of yesterday and today.
Yes, modernizing the schools in low-income areas would work for the greater good of the individuals, parents, teachers, principals, communities, society and our nation as a whole. First and foremost, not providing students with a visual of (a state of the art building) an eye opener and not an eye sore reason to partake in their own education have found to be the head start for failure. By doing just a little research on A Promise Kept, A School Renewed: Locke High this particular high school in Los Angeles was performing at its lowest ever in their education history. One of the main reasons for this failures reported by students, parents, community leaders, business and educator was the appearance along. One student reported that she was ashamed to inform her peers that she attended the school. Also, stated that the teacher would careless if you showed up for class or even left the classroom during lecture. Also stated, if students were wandering the halls; no one would stop them and inquire why you were not in class. The facilitators would report being victimized and threaten for trying to do their jobs. To make a long story short, The Green Dot program was modeled and the changes were made visible throughout the school. As a results of the model and lots of hard work by teachers, students, law enforcement officers, and the U.S. Dept of Ed., and A Promise Kept campaign; the fundamental of possessing an education was restored. Finally, students showed up on time and attendance increased. This is only one of the many success stories for the gentrification of low-income areas school. Yes, and No adding more community center would reduce gang activity. Again, doing a little research on community centers I have found that the centers are not being utilized to its full potential. Being that they are boarded up, not in use with signs posted due to budget cuts this facility is closed until further notice. Even before the cuts, the hours of operations either began late or closed early. As gang researchers reported that youth gang related crimes occur during the hours of 3:00 pm right after schools are released for the day and 8:00 pm just before parents return home from work. Alike, gentrification of schools, community centers needs to be in cooperated into the Race to the Top Program. Again, providing incentives for mentoring programs, innovation scholarships, and formulating character building skills and self-improving, and family empowerment programs into the forum of the community centers would decrease gang enrollment and restore family values to the surrounding communities and the purpose of the greater good of our nation at the end of the day. On a personal note would more church activity reduce crime? I do not believe that the increase of church activities would reduce crimes because today’s churches are being represented as a business/money making organization. Again, this is my personal opinion and relation involving surrounding churches. What I would like to see is that, church goers (elders) removed the emotional gap with our younger members of society and accept the fact that these are some changing times and because we do not agree with some of their personal decisions we as akin can look beyond faults and recognized the need to assist and not dismiss. Instead of insisting that just say No, explain the reason why No represent a positive instead of a negative. Another, I believe the key and sole purpose of a church is a place to worship GOD. Seeking and building on a more personal relationship with a whole hearted felt thankfulness of t e goodness of the Highest God. As asking for forgiveness, guidance and direction while persevering on this journey called LIFE.
Deborah, I agree with you. Plus, unfortunately, many people think crime is associated with the poverty. Many people are forced to believe that poverty is the only reason why one would go all out to commit a crime. People argue that when you become poorer you are more likely to commit crime. I know that poverty can lead to high levels of stress that in turn may lead individuals to commit theft, robbery, or other violent acts but should not be use as an excuse. I also believe that extracurricular involvement (church-GOD- and community centers) helps deter crime rate.
Thamicka To Sonya When it comes to our leaders, especially the Comissoners, for impoverished neighborhoods are never elected by the residents but by special interest groups and friends. The residents dont really participate in an election unless there is money involved or they truly involve in thier community. The people's interests are not met on a community scale but whatever the Commissoner think is best by their standards and the local government. Take for example, the new housings that are being built across Lil Haiti, Liberty City and Overtown, the unemployed in the communities are supposed to be the first to be considered to work on these construction sites, however, this never happens nor is the contract given to Black contractors. Parents have their responsibilities distorted because we live in a society where an emphasis for blacks are placed more on sports and entertainment than that of academics. Therefore, parents have misplaced energy and focus on the wrong thing
I believe Gentrification may help benefit the community to a certain extent. Modernizing the schools in a low income area I think would help by stimulating the students. They now have brand new equipments, sufficient school supplies and more of the essential things needed for learning and succeeding. This will make the students want to attend school and be more involved in their studies. Of course, there will always be a handful of students that don’t care to learn, even if they are sent to the best schools in the country but I certainly don’t think that should ruin it for the majority of the good students who are willing to succeed. I also believe that more community centers will help reduce gang activity and all the negativity that comes with that. Community centers will allow kids to participate in activities that will keep them busy and out of trouble during their spare time. Again, it may not help out all of the children in the community but I am pretty sure it will minimize some of the gang activity, and some is better than none. Finally, I think the church activities will certainly play a role in reducing crime in a low income area. It all starts from what you learn at home. I strongly believe if you don’t have a parent at home insisting to attend church every Sunday and making it custom in the household, no child will pick up and go to church on their own.
To answer Dr. Kalam’s question or questions you must need to know or understand what gentrification really means. I looked up the definition on the internet and found that gentrification means the buying and renovation of houses and stores in deteriorated urban neighborhoods by upper or middle-income families or individuals, thus improving property values but often displacing low-income families and small businesses. Okay if gentrification is used on only schools to modernize and renovating it then I am all for it but if it is used for the community like homes and small businesses I am not for it at all. I think if it is used for schools it will bring new books, new computer, and new supplies for students to succeed. Which might also give a result in more and more students going to school. But if it is used to improve and renovate the whole community it will displace all the low-income people and the same problem will occur elsewhere. To answer the second question I think modernizing the schools in low-income areas will work. I think the computers, books, and other supplies will help people that are less fortunate. I also think more community centers will help reduce gang activity, well at least for the younger children. I think for high school students it will be harder for them to join a community center just because of the peer pressure trying to impress their friends. But I also think if kids start at an early age going to community centers they are more likely to stay in the community center, as they get older. I think more church activity will reduce crime just like community centers will. But like I said I think it will be better for kids to start out young going church clubs or community centers then just joining late like in high school. I just think there will be a better success rate if they start in a younger age.
Welcome to our Asynchronous Blog for DSC1006 Introduction to Homeland Security. You should respond to the questions and follow the instructions from our class meetings on Saturday.
running around on blog site by myself....
ReplyDeleteStudies in America have supported the notion that the more concentrated the poverty is the more likely more crimes would be committed. Low income housing projects, for example, create a breeding ground for criminals. It is where gangs are created and ideas and values of hatred against governmental systems formulate and are intensified.
ReplyDeleteIt is suggested the Gentrification would serve to promote more positive attitude towards society, and are more aware of opportunities
Do a little research and tell us whether you think gentrification would help or whether it is futile. Would modernizing the schools in low income areas work? Would more community centers help reduce gang activity? Would more church activity reduce crime?
Please respond with your posting and then respond to at least two of your classmates.
testing
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis is a test this is only a test of the american broadcasting system...please stand by beeeeeeeeeeeepppppp
ReplyDeletethank you
OK
ReplyDeleteHello
ReplyDeleteTesting, testing......
ReplyDeleteI think gentrification would help with the schools, because that will make some students feel better about coming to school. But than again it would be useless, cause you have the students who have the attitude about they don’t care about the school or anything else. And those are the students who mess it up for the rest of the students ( the good have to suffer with the bad). Because when I attended Northwestern my class of 1997 closed the old school and we opened up the new school, a year later the school went down, because the student’s didn’t appreciate having that new school, but some students did and some didn’t. But I feel everybody need a fair chance in their community to have a better place where their kids can go to school in a great educational environment.
ReplyDeleteAnd with the community centers I would say we have community center’s for the younger kids but not for the teenage kids these kids get bored, but now these days the teenagers are not interested in doing anything but acting like their an adult that’s where mentoring come in at….we need more mentor’s people who they can look up to.
And to answer would more church activities reduce crime….I know there are some teenagers that goes to church but what about the teenagers who standing out there on the corner with their pants on the ground. I know some of them want to do good but they don’t have that helping hand. So I think it would but how would we get the teenagers who just don’t won’t to do right into the church…..all you would hear is excuse after excuse. Even though now some church’s says come as you are…..
Ms. Simmons:
ReplyDeleteYou are right. Who could be motivated going to a really old school with poor facilities.
Mentoring is a very positive measure. The people involved need to meet certain criteria; be professional and educated, etc.
Goodmorning...I think with thought of gentrification it depends on the individual...Students do what they see others do...If we put a crack down on the bad seeds then we could have a better school systems...For example, people are in jail because they do bad things. Some of those people get out early because of good behavior. Then you have those ones who just keep going back to jail because they never learn. Its the same thing like the children, iif you get rid of the bad seeds then there will be a better outcome. Like one of the students said, we need a check and balance system to make the kids more responsible...Stop giving them so many times to mess up.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ms, Simmons in her anology however why do the good keep having to suffer with the bad...
In the example of churches, they are more critical of the children. So they are really scared to even come to church. It's like being under a magnifying class....Is that a bad thing though? I ask. If they know someone is really paying attention' I quite sure they will put there best foot forward.
Should we get rid of community centers for teenage children? Again why should the good suffer with the bad. If those children who do not want to be something positive in life then let them be..But those chilldren who will benefit, I say let them benefit. If we be rid of all teenage children because of some spoiled apples then the rest will fall by the waste side....I am quite sure there still is some caring individuals to be involve with the positive growth of these children. And just like Professor Kalam said they should be qualified to handle the task at hand.
Gentrification is defined as the rebuilding of degenerated areas to become suitable for middle and upper class while displacing poorer inhabitants. Historically speaking gentrification began as early as the 1960’s in which non blacks would invade black communities riddled with high crime and poverty bringing opportunities and money. By the 1970’s living in suburban areas and working in the city required as much as two hours commuting because of traffic congestion and rush hours. The inner city then becomes an interest because of its many benefits which include easy accessibility to jobs, a transit system close to home and job, historical structures and varied cultural experiences. The dilemma faced by suburbanites gave roots to gentrification. Gentrification only benefits residents as it purges crime, violence, riots and poverty. There is an opportunity to own homes or businesses if banks would loan poor blacks money. It becomes futile when residents watch hopelessly as upper and middle class people move in and the local government invests money to improve the quality of life for its new residents. The land usage in gentrified community changes as expensive housing, retail, offices, restaurants and other forms of entertainment are erected. While many see this as job opportunities, the local residents are often excluded thus the sentiment of “don’t support local businesses.” The real estate market changes, in the sense, increase in rents and home prices which leads to evictions therefore reinventing apartments into condominiums. The positive effect is the property value increases, attracting prospective residents and business owners. When poor residents are unable to purchase or rent because of increased prices or lack of resources then we have a dislocation of poor ethnic groups.
ReplyDeleteIntroducing technology in schools promotes modernization of students living in impoverished neighborhoods. Technology benefits students by enabling a positive approach to learning and having access to such a tool is vital in a modernized society. Students will have access to resources that will produce a positive attitude about oneself and education. In comparison, many homes in low income areas do not have access to technology nor do they know how to use technology to their benefits. Modernizing schools will aide those who want to learn an opportunity to become productive members of society, when they graduate and efficiently use technology within the work place. This will also benefit parents who have interest in their children and education. Parents are motivated by their children to not only purchase a computer but also learn how to operate one creating a sense of pride for a household assimilating in mainstream America.
Community centers that provides after school activity for many of its student population will see a reduction in gang activities. Gang activities thrive where there is no accountability. Parents who work often leave their kids to the ramification of peer pressure and a negative involvement with their community. Statistics have proven that most juvenile crimes occur between when they are out of school and the time their parents come home. Getting children involve in a extra curricular activity eliminates negative peer pressure and brings a positive association between community and juveniles. The church should partnership with community centers to provide a religious accountability to the children. The church should teach self esteem classes, provide an haven for spiritual enhancement and a neutral environment for bullying.
To Ms. Simmons: I totally agree with you. A lot of these centers are only for the younger children who are easier to manage. The problem comes with those that are older. It would be a great idea for our community to have centers made for teenagers to keep them busy and off the streets where they are more likely to get in trouble with the law.
ReplyDeleteSilvia Mendoza
I am in total disagreement with the concept of gentrification. They way I see it, as developers are always trying to make their fortune grow by restoring and updating low income neighborhoods for middle-class society, they are only alienating the poor and contributing to widening the gap between middle class and the poor. In the end, this cannot be a good thing.
ReplyDeleteLow income families are accustomed to living a certain way, making them unable to afford a higher rent and increased household expenses. It is hard enough they have to go out and work long hours each day, in some cases making less than minimum wage, in order to supply for their loved ones. I find it really unfair to displace them from what they consider their neighborhood, all because of some rich investors wanting to make the area a more “desirable” place for the rich. I often ask myself, suppose they do make this area a more pleasant place to live in, would these low income families be able to afford living in these apartments? Will they be allowed to co-exist with a higher society without being discriminated? I am inclined to think the answer to these questions is no. By forcing these low-income families out of that area, some of them might become homeless, which in turn could create more violence, since they will see themselves in a desperate situation that might lead them to resort to petty crimes and possibly violence in order to somewhat mitigate their living conditions.
As far as modernizing schools in low income areas, I am of the opinion that it would be a total waste of time and money, because things like technology would not resolve the issues those kids have to deal with on a daily basis. Kids in underdeveloped areas tend to lose motivation in school easily, since they usually have no incentive in wanting to pass their classes or do well in school because they have other problems to deal with. Honestly, if a student truly wants to learn, he or she would not care if they have a chalk board compared to an overhead projector. In addition, if the teachers are good and competent, they will teach with whatever means they have to get the message across to their students.
More community centers would in fact help reduce gang activity. If they were to be offered, children and young adults would have another avenue to direct their energy and attention to, instead of wondering the streets with the wrong crowd while their parents are not present. Also, these centers can even offer them help with school assignments, such as tutoring or even provide them access to computers, either for work related projects or for entertainment. Not only would this help these children receive some of that much needed attention most of them crave, but also their parents could feel somewhat at ease, knowing their children are spending their free time doing something productive and staying out of trouble.
More church activity would definitely help reduce crime, especially among young adults. Church-sponsored youth groups not only provide spiritual comfort for these youths, but also a safe haven, keeping them away from harm’s way. Youth groups can also serve as counseling, helping them release frustrations that might stem from their situation at home, and can also distract their minds by getting to know other kids, helping them socialize with many different types of people that might have the same common interests they have. Youth groups usually offer young adults incentives to help them make the decision to join. They can do fundraising events, in which even the parents can get involved, to collect money to be able to offer them trips, food, and other fun activities. This definitely would help cement a good relationship between these youths and their parents, thereby reducing the likelihood of them going out and committing a crime.
Silvia Mendoza
To queen2flee9:
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you regarding the negative effects of gentrification. The fact is that the process of gentrification would only displace those unfortunate ones that can barely afford a decent living. The same local government and investments firms that are so intent in creating a better living condition to middle and upper classes, should worry about providing the same to the poor class that already lives in that area.
Silvia Mendoza
To Tamika and Silvia
ReplyDeleteThe youths of the community that understands the importance of extra-circular activites have engaged in various art forms such as cheerleading, sports and various art forms. There are community centers that target teenagers but to get full funding and effective resources they have to include the younger children. Most non profit organizations charge a fee for registration and materials utilizedby the youths.Majority of parents in low income areas place a emphasis on material goods and services rather than what is important for their children thus the decline in enrollment in effective extra circular activiteis for the youths in the community.Here is an opportunity for schools to partnership with community centers by providing parents with information, location and a guide to after school activities. It is up to local government agencies and commissioners to make sure these community centers are modernized and given every opportunity to succeed.
Thamicka Morgan
Tayisha:
ReplyDeleteI also agree that a check and balance approach is essential in order to maintain a level of performance. Oftentimes, a policy and procedure does exist and measures are clearly outlined. Yet, the implementation lacks momentum and does not continue. We should all consider ways to make the efforts last so that checks and balance systems are effective.
Silvia, I understand your concept in the direction that you where headed. However, the point was not focused on the monetary gain of the developers, but to provide the low income areas with a more up-graded visual and actual facility in their neighborhood as supposed to of other educational institute in other neighboring communities. Nevertheless, at the end of the day, it will continue to operate as neighborhood school, with the same students, same building, the only variable that changed would be the mind set. Fostering new innovation of I am somebody ideology.
ReplyDeleteYes, I believe gentrification would be helpful because seeing changes makes a difference. Knocking down the old and building the new will help. For example, with the schools in the intercities schools sure as Miami Carol City, Miami Central and Miami Jackson High School will help the students have the same educational opportunities as students in bigger income areas would have. It would also help the students in the community see that better things can be achieve in life. On the other hand there will be some people who just don't care at all... and won't see the opportunities that are there for them.
ReplyDeleteBuilding community centers would give kids the activities and ambition rather than hanging out in the street and getting in trouble, also hopefully the staff at the centers monitor the activites of the kids and help stop them from gertting in trouble. The kids have to much time on their hands there need to more events and activities to keep them busy.
I believe a great leader leads by example..
There are many churches in our communities reaching out to our men and the youth. There are churches that help in non believers/non members as well. That shows hope and people do care. Focusing on the youth shows them that no matter what life brings believeing in self is most important. No matter what or who we believe in faith is the key. Leading by example does help. I was a single, worked full-time, high school diploma, attended church regularly, kept my kids involved with the school and church activities, I spent time with them we did everything together and yes it was tired but I had to make them know they were important to me and build up their self esteem, you most love yourself. Morales has to come from in-house.
Queen?
ReplyDeleteYou make a good point when you mention the use of technology in schols. How can we compete as a society with the emerging world without educating our youth about those worlds. Technology is obviously a key par of that educational experience. But you must have a comupter!!!!!
Sylvia;
ReplyDeleteWhile I see your perspective, I want to add that gentrification should involve more than one aspect of the community. A program whould include a broad based approach considering both government and NGOs participating in contracting with one another to accomplish planned improvements. I know this sounds like the same old thing all over again, but like any other measure to help impoverished areas, there needs to be motivated involvement.
Thanks
Sonya:
ReplyDeleteI also believe faith based initiatives that involve respectable and responsible leaders contribute to better citizens.
Thanks
Poverty in America is a never ending story, whether it is in housing projects or not. Living in the ghetto has gone from a looked down on area to a beautiful place of gangs, drug dealing, and rap stars. The housing project the place a young person from a richer urban area can escape and look at the rap lyric heard on the radio. Low income areas can be called breeding ground for criminals, because the children in those parts have looked at not else. Government being looked down on or hated is due to mother, father or another friend or family member being arrested making the government the criminal not the member of the area.
ReplyDeleteYears ago gangs in Miami were at every stop sign on the street. Going to a new part of Miami where you didn’t grow up, you did not know what you would find. Funny, but the truth the friends of the family had more of a problem with me then the children they would introduce me to. That would lead me to getting into fights with the friend of the families children by the end of the visit. This goes to show that poverty areas have descent people in them which is something often left out because of the gang talk and drug dealer always mentioned.
Gentrification in my opinion is a great idea and not. This would mean move companies and the non existent middle class to an area that is going to be renovated and bettered. That is great in it has happened in Liberty City in Miami from what I have read making housing for the house less, and off of 27th avenue a new business area was built with store for better of the community. The schools didn’t really get a make over like they needed but are cleaner paint wise. One of the only school that I have seen an overhauling on is Booker T. Washington, with new building made and painted beautifully even though that is Overtown not Liberty City. In this transition of cleaning the area people and families that have been in that part of town which have become poverty stricken loss the little they have left. Violence is another happening that goes on with this change; people in the community get fearful of what the change in there area may bring, and fight back.
Churches and community center are great places for a child to grow up in and learn. When I was younger my youth was spend in the parks of The City of Hialeah and Friday at youth groups. This helps the youth to stay out of troubles at least while there, as I would look at. Of course it was a different era in the 80’s. I have to stop fist fights in my church group event just like at the parks. So this can help pending on the child there is a misconception that going changes the person not in every case. Though, you may save some from gang entrance or at least becoming statistic.
Benny Setien
Tahysha,
ReplyDeleteI agree totally with your comment on about the younger generation fears upon entering some churches. Ex: during my era of upbringing, there was a dress code that we followed however; it was not engraved in stone. Ladies were not allowed to wear pants; Ladies could not be caught with a cigarette hanging from their lips on church grounds, while men were allowed to smoke on church grounds. Ladies also, had to wear stocking, pantyhose’s, no revealing of the body parts ever. Whereas today, women are being allowed to preach, where pants, and dresses above the knees are been acceptable. At the end of the day, everyone will be judge according to his own deeds and held accountable for his own words and action and not what you wear or wore on Sunday.
Sonya I agree with you saying church goings can make a great person for a community, still there are some like always that walk into an office in vane. They have the mask of a good person and are nothing but a lair and a thief. For example the woman Rev. Dunn replace she looked great on television and is lair of the truth turning the community aganist is self for her gain because she would be the only one that would.
ReplyDeleteTahysha
ReplyDeleteI am agree with you on church, you go in and your judge by humans not the lord but human and there god head attitude. I know it first hand, going to church on Sunday as is my right with long hair down my back, tattoos, and ear rings looking at me like I am Lucifer. I will alway be looked at as a bad seed even though I am not. Best part about it is looking a them with the truth, and viewing a baby with out the light of god in there life while they judge me and my light blinds them with me being a child.
Sonya,
ReplyDeleteI agree with your views, just like the old saying, you cannot put new wine in an old wine skin; it would burst and run everywhere. I don’t know about anyone else, but I do know for a fact that when I get a new hair doo, my nails done and purchase a new outfit as a reward to myself for the excellent job I have done in spite of, I get and emotional rush so high I have to talk to self to come down. So if a make-over something as simple as a hair doo can create such a rush, imagine what a coat of paint can do to a weather beaten school would produce.
Hello All:
ReplyDeleteHere is an interesting article about the root cause of school violence: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCR/is_2_38/ai_n6130139/
Also, please check your college email for another link to interesting topics. Enjoy your reading and I hope you learn much.
DK,
ReplyDeleteI found this website very informative to would gentrification of schools in low-income work. http://www.ed.gov/blog/2010/01/a-promise-kept-a-school-renewed-locke-high-schools-turn-around/
You be the judge!
Thanks Deborah:
ReplyDeleteI'll look at it,
Benny
ReplyDeleteI agree with your statement, people do not welcome change. However, everyone does not want to be poor all there lives. Most people do not know how to get out of thensituations that they are in. But does that mean we still don't try and make changes? To whom much is given much is required.
When we were in class Saturday, the group that I was in discussed Welfare and Section 8. To my understanding these programs were given to families that were in need but back then they were not giving the way to better themselves to get off completely. Now they have them with more requirements than just a couple of papers to turn in. What I am trying to say is to whom much is given much is required. We can not give up wehave to find a solution.
I do understand that we can not cram these thing down there throats but we need to be a little more forceful.
Sonya
ReplyDeleteYou are absolutely right about grooming yourself. Everytime a woman takes the time to beautify herself, she is showing everyone that she cares how she presents herself. Most of the time you hear children say they dont care so I don't care. The humanatarian part of the a human being has went out of the window.
For example, I am an insurance agent' the people that i have as clients come to my office with other issues that they don't know how to handle on there own. Does that mean i do not help them? It is my humanitarian duty to look out for my fellow man.
Our children are in a dying situation do we not try and help them out? I have my son's friends who come over needing some guidance. I share with them my love that I have for my children. It does not always have to start from the top..It can be from the bottom up. One child at a time. If all of us that were strong enough to take one child it could be a difference.
We have to start somewhere...
Tahysha
ReplyDeleteI agree with you.
As long as the progress go to toughs that deserve it not beg for it. A slave is not worth having an employee is. You boss a slave you dignify an employee.
Tahysha
ReplyDeleteI agree with u 100% because you have kids out there that don't have that love at home. So where do they find the love in the street which is the wrong place. But thats good that u share ur love with those kids because look ur kids is hanging out with them same kids u giving love too. So I would do the same....
Worship and love the only two things that are the truth
ReplyDeleteI read in some one post that gentrification will cause the less fortunate to have to When you rebuild it will be a betterment of the people as a whole. Alot of people did nto like the fact when Scott's got tore down in the city because they didn't like the fact that these people had to change the norm. It was said that these people did not have anywhere to go but how long were they there before a change came. How do we get the message across that change has to happen to wake people up from there sleep state. There is always ngoing to be poor people if they choose not to do better. I understand there are very few jobs or some would say no jobs at all. But thats not true. I look in the classified as all the time. Not because I need a job right now, but i am always looking for a better opportunity.
ReplyDeleteThe real desire to have better is really up to the individual. I say when the world gives you lemons make lomonade.
You still have empty lots that houses can be built. With whats I stated on my other comment a person that has been making it through this hell that is happening. Should be first in line to better there life not wait for nothing be there to then take a look at that person.
ReplyDeleteHave a great week.
ReplyDeleteBenny Setien
Gentrification is a plausible, however, not necessarily universal solution for guaranteed educational success. Because every individual is unique in his/her own thoughts, desires, motivations, etc. and it would be very challenging to assess the prime benefactor. Some may want to be educated in a new modern educational facilities, others, like me, would like to sit at the same desk their forefathers were sitting and going in the same libraries they were going, to feel inspiration and bond.
ReplyDeleteModernization itself is very general term, because many things could be modernized, but not all of them are requiring modernization. Again, for example, buildings to my mind are not essential elements of modernization, but having interactive whiteboards, internet, and books are. Or, building bigger classes with more desks and chairs versus recruiting a teacher or a professor after whom it is not necessary to subjugate pupils to anyway useless testing.
I always argued that regardless of age or any other type of classification, it is an absolute must for those who are in power to implement free interest based communions. Moreover, mandatory implementation of especial taxation in form of fiduciary supervision and share of experience in these communions, for those who are using benefits of the society achieved respectful and noble statuses in their lives and society itself. Nevertheless, religious involvement may reduce certain amount of particular crimes in a short run; religions should be kept out of general educational programs, as religion is kept out of governmental politics.
At last, here is a recent quote from a person of my deepest and sincere admiration, Queen Rania of Jordan. ”Saddest thing is not death; saddest thing is when your dreams die while you are still alive. That’s what happens when you illiterate: you feel trapped.”
To Dr. Kalam and Ms. Simmons,
ReplyDeleteI believe it’s not about facility; rather it is about perception and diverted values. As we may all know that Harvard, Yale, Cambridge, Oxford, etc. are all centuries old institutions with centuries old buildings, and yet successful and prestigious.
Timur,
ReplyDeleteYour comments make sense. You make a good illustration using those old insitutions and I am assuming that your point is that it is not neccessary to make it new to make it work. While I can agree, I can also say that application to all situations may not fit. If, coupled with a broken down home, a broken family, lack of needed resources, etc., the child is sent to a broken school, then it may not matter.
Thanks
Here is something with regards to the definition of education.
ReplyDeleteNevertheless, it is important to take into account that views of literacy have evolved over time. UNESCO has made four major statements in relation to this:
a) A person is literate who can, with understanding, both read and write a short simple statement on his or her everyday life (UNESCO, 1958);
b) A person is functionally literate who can engage in all those activities in which literacy is required for effective functioning of his or her group and community and also for enabling him or her to continue to use reading, writing and calculation for his or her own and the community’s development (UNESCO, 1978);
c) Literacy is the ability to identify, understand, interpret, create, communicate and compute using printed and written materials associated with varying contexts. Literacy involves a continuum of learning in enabling individuals to achieve his or her goals, develop his or her knowledge and potential, and participate fully in community and wider society (set in 2003 and published in UNESCO, 2005); and
d) Finally, the notion of "plurality of literacy" (2004) was advanced to stress the social dimensions of literacy in relation to both acquisition and application. Therefore, literacy is seen as comprising diverse practices embedded in socioeconomic, political, cultural and linguistic contexts, acquired in school and outside of school. It also involves family and community contexts; the media in various forms of technology; skills for further learning; and the world of work and life in general. Thus, this concept of literacy emphasises the literacy challenge as making societies literate and not simply as making individuals literate (UNESCO, 2004).
Some read for those who interested:
http://www.uis.unesco.org/template/pdf/LAMP/LAMP_Rpt_2009_EN.pdf
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001866/186606e.pdf
To Tahysha
ReplyDeleteThe residents wanted change for Scott Projects, they were tired of the crime and drugs but they objected to the requirements/stipulations addressed by the Hope V1 initative. Most residents would not be welcome back because of a criminal background, unable to meet requirements for a loan and most parents would have to abandon their chidlren if they were to return. With this being said the housing were open to new residents. What happen to those who didnt meet the criteria, they have now become disenfranchised, homeless and most will return to crime as a means of surviving.The cycle continues.
Dr. Kalam,
ReplyDeleteDefinitely combination of factors would play crucial role, especial in cases with raw base, meaning communities without previously established strong values may need extra careful approach in first phases of origination.
Thank you for your inside,
First off gentrification doesn't work but can work if every chlid that is "misbehaving" in school is tested for mental disorder or behavior problems. In most low income household, kids with mental disorders or behavior problems are labeled as bad so this child will not see a behavior specialist or a therapist so the issues go undetected not knowing the child can be ill or being affected by something going on in the household or environment. Negativity brings only more negativity, sometimes children are only repeating what they see at home, product of poor parenting, lashing out for attention or behavioral problems; before we start separating kids between good & bad we must get to the root of the problem. Gentrification is almost border line segragation.
ReplyDeleteHaving a boyfriend who went to MacArthur North (opportunity school and thru many conversations about our pass he has always felt putting all the bad kids in the same school didn't help the situation because then there's no examples of good around them. He also stated that there were kids there who were worst (behavior) than him. He had been sent to the Mac due to repeat fights in school most of which were in being protective of his 3 sisters. My question is: what about the kids with mental problems are they just put into another school without being tested or sat with a therapist to see whats wrong with him/her to possibly find another game plan? Being a product of one's environment is never by choice and having to live in a low income area doesn't always affect every child in a negative way. Nowadays low income housing have cracked down on persons qualifying and residing on their properties often evicting one's who break there rules. Having a modern school in a low income area shouldn't even be a discussion because every child should have the same opportunity. When one has a place of pride then they in turn will feel the pride of ownership and involvement, hence rising graduation & extra curriculum activities. You often find high parental attendance at school sporting events due to pride the same can be achieved when the school structure and materials are modernized. Community centers would not stop or lower gang activities because as it was proven gangs are formed based on children (migrant) often looking for a place of acceptance and family, which are two things gangs tend to act as. As far as church involvement lessening crimes, that too would be according to the actual child.Personally, living in an area that has equal number of churches as it does liquor stores, it would be solely to that child's strong parental upbringing and exposure to other avenues plus understanding the importance of doing better and wanting to achieve more beyond the environment they're use to. There are numerous programs whether faith or non[profit based that young kids can get involved in but because persons in the low income areas aren't educated about them they often go with low attendance/involvement.
Replying to Ms. Simmons:
ReplyDeleteShe stated she's a alumni of Northwestern Sr. High and as she's stated when they opened the newer building the school went down within a year. Northwestern is a school well known primarily for the football program, having attended there games there's a HUGH sense of "BULL" pride amongst the current and pass students in the stands as well as enough persons in attendance to have "BULL" attendees sit on the visiting side bleachers. With seeing this one would think there academic program would be the same "BULL" pride when in reality it doesn't have that much parental involvement. Now heres a school in a low income area given monies to rebuild a state of the art property, producing more athletes getting scholarships then it is scholars, yes in deed that wasn't the plan but if that is the way out of the neighborhood to another state which too can be an education within itself then I commend that athlete cause no other way may they have seen another state or culture or than being transported on a prison bus. If that better school facility ie sporting equipment/program wasn't afforded then it would've been that much harder for that athlete to achieve scholarship status. Once there the change in environment would propel that person to focus on schoolwork due to not having to worry about bills as the athletic scholarship would have taken care of all that and being away from the negative influences and the stress that is often associated with the low income neighborhood.
I believe that gentrification; will not be a good thing to do when it comes down to schools that’s that already going thru poverty. Yes it a good idea to upgrade the low class to middle class, but why move them form where they grow up from. They can rebuild and have them move back into the area. Everyone needs a change in life, so If schools are modernized it will have a student to wanting to learn a little more because the will have more books to lean form and more take home books. If more upscale community center is created in the urban city I do believe that it will have a tremendous effect on reducing gang activity. Have more churches involved in students life will limit crimes, only if the churches are open and more on hands with children.
ReplyDeletei do agree with you Povidence, when she stated that"gentrification is almost border line segragationg" i but do disagree with her about community center not help in gang activetiy, if a child is doing something right with his or her life and have someone around to show them the right thing to, it will help. most commmunity center service as a after school care when parent are not home due to them working 2 and 3 jobs just to provide for them, so that were a community center comes in to help out the parent.
ReplyDeleteTahysha, you are right children will do what they see other do, and they sometimes no what the out come will be and they stil do. and i beleive they do it just to try to fit in with their peers, so by gentrificating them it will not be a good idea they need to taught right, if the parent can't do it then that's where the community centers should come in at.
ReplyDeleteReplying to Tahysha:
ReplyDeleteI agree with you when you stated the people of Scott Projects wanted a change because some were tired of the drugs, shootings and other crimes but then what happened to he ones who didnt meet the new requirements to going back into the rebuilts and they weren't a problem tenant?
Coming from a country that is poor (financially) we are rich in pride and culture so even the slum and countryside schools that may not have proper equipment or even worst a roof they some how find a way to produce some of the best cadets for the Royal Army, exchange doctors to Cuba and interrupters for the UN.How is this so in a country that doesn't have as much money as other countries?...I believe its not always about the monies to produce the finer things but about the educators who care and the parents who are involved. We don't have opportunity schools back home but parent(s) are informed of the child's misbehavior and the possibilities of the child being banned from returning to school. Because that's considered shameful to a family the child's behavior doesn't go to far, not saying we don't have any drop outs but saying the parental involvement is done and the need for gentrification isn't present.
ReplyDeleteSilva,
ReplyDeleteI disagree, new affordable buildings are being built for the middle and lower income families which are making the community better. LOW INCOME FAMILIES MAY BECOME USE TO LIVING A CERTAIN WAY because they have to, but that doesn't mean they don't want to live or have the better things in life. They should be given the same opportunities as the fortunate. This county is always helping other countries in need why can't our country help are own...
I feel technology would be helpful, it would resolve some issues not all. It has helped. You can be of the opinion its a waste of time to modernize the schools in the low income areas but if you ask the people whose living in the areas their opinion it would be totally different from yours. I am sure they would like to experience some of the new technologies and in general have a better way of life. It may not elimimate all the issues but it would help improve their way of life. Some improvement is better than none at all.
I do agree with you regarding the church involvement. I know alot of kids/youth that have been helped by the programs and activities provided.
Ms. Queen2flee9,
ReplyDeleteIt is very important to stay on our leaders... who can make a difference for our youth and communities. We as parent have to fight and voice the needs. Example.. parents will go the extra mile to support extra curricular activities like football, cheerleading etc..by selling donuts and candy, providing carwash why can't that same philosophy be used on the academic/educational needs.
Hello everyone!!!...After doing a little research on gentrification, I think will be good because it will reduce crime in the area, it slows suburban and environmental degradation, more available jobs in the area due to new businesses and property tax revenues increase. But on the other hand; it will be bad because it increases homelessness for displaced residents because it is financially hard and sometimes impossible to find new housing and pay for moving. It may upset children who are displaced have to change schools, which can negatively impact their performance in school, not to mention their emotional well being and sense of stableness. Poor people can’t provide education to themselves and their child as they don’t have enough funds, education play a big part in developing community moral and thoughts.
ReplyDeleteMoreover, poverty may lead to an actual inferior education, which would cause youth to count on less access to quality schools, jobs, and role models, decreasing the opportunity costs of crime. In my opinion, I don’t think that poverty is a key factor for crime because if poverty causes crime than why is crime rates lower in poor world countries than in rich countries. I think that it is not poverty that causes crime but the anti poverty programs that cause crime. I feel that the United States has created its own crime problem because the U.S. pays people not to work or be married through the welfare program. In a sense people are being rewarded for doing nothing.
In addition, no one could argue that keeping children in poor conditions with high crime rates and allowing drug use are beneficial outcomes. The decision to gentrify a neighborhood is the decision to destroy a unique culture, but it is instead framed as the appropriate decision to bring new vitality back into the community. It is rarely taken into consideration that the community that exists will be gone and that its participants will be forced to relocate, or that the relocation phase can make their lives worse than before.
Natasha,
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you. In addition to that, a study, conducted by “Northeastern University” researchers, looked separately at crime and risky behaviors for both young men and women in a suburban high school and how involvement in outside activities influenced those behaviors. The findings provided interesting, and, in some cases, surprising results. They found that involvement in extra-curricular activities definitely seemed to minimize the risky behaviors, there seemed to be a “tipping point” where too much participation had a counter-effect. They also found that nontraditional activities for each gender (such as sports for girls and church for boys) provided a greater protection from criminal behavior. I also believe that extracurricular involvement (church and community centers) helps deter crime rate.
Arlene Love said…… Gentrification is the process by which poor and working- class residents, usually communities of color are displaced from neighborhoods by rising costs and other forces directly related to an influx of new, wealthier, and often white residents. This displacement is usually accompanies by: an almost complete shift in the cultural identity of a neighborhood and its residents.
ReplyDeleteI think gentrification may not be the dirty word most people think it is. However, it depends greatly on the individual at hand.
I do believe gentrification would help in neighborhoods and modernizing schools in low income areas because a change for the better is good for the soul. A facelift will encourage not all but some students to feel good about themselves and to do better and make a difference. Most people(s) are afraid of change.
Contrary to popular belief, that few low-income residents are forced out of their neighborhoods as typically white, affluent residents move in. In fact, in some areas, low-income residents are more likely to remain in gentrifying neighborhoods, as improved safety, city services, and more jobs make them more attractive places to live. Regardless, there will always remain some hostile person against change.
Yes. I believe that more community centers and more church activities would help reduce crime. For those parents who work and need after school care will prevent kids from hanging out on the corner waiting on something negative to happen. As the old saying goes – idle time is the devils workshop.
Arlene Love said…….
ReplyDeleteTahysha and Deborah
I would like to piggy back on both comments about the younger generation fears upon entering some churches. Even during my era of upbringing, there was a standard dress code that we followed…Ladies was not allowed to wear pants, preach nor sit in the pulpit. They wore dresses below their knees with stocking. No sleeveless tops without covering. This saved most of our skids from getting in trouble. I feel that the church is a safe haven for our kids of yesterday and today.
Yes, modernizing the schools in low-income areas would work for the greater good of the individuals, parents, teachers, principals, communities, society and our nation as a whole. First and foremost, not providing students with a visual of (a state of the art building) an eye opener and not an eye sore reason to partake in their own education have found to be the head start for failure. By doing just a little research on A Promise Kept, A School Renewed: Locke High this particular high school in Los Angeles was performing at its lowest ever in their education history. One of the main reasons for this failures reported by students, parents, community leaders, business and educator was the appearance along. One student reported that she was ashamed to inform her peers that she attended the school. Also, stated that the teacher would careless if you showed up for class or even left the classroom during lecture. Also stated, if students were wandering the halls; no one would stop them and inquire why you were not in class. The facilitators would report being victimized and threaten for trying to do their jobs. To make a long story short, The Green Dot program was modeled and the changes were made visible throughout the school. As a results of the model and lots of hard work by teachers, students, law enforcement officers, and the U.S. Dept of Ed., and A Promise Kept campaign; the fundamental of possessing an education was restored. Finally, students showed up on time and attendance increased. This is only one of the many success stories for the gentrification of low-income areas school.
ReplyDeleteYes, and No adding more community center would reduce gang activity. Again, doing a little research on community centers I have found that the centers are not being utilized to its full potential. Being that they are boarded up, not in use with signs posted due to budget cuts this facility is closed until further notice. Even before the cuts, the hours of operations either began late or closed early. As gang researchers reported that youth gang related crimes occur during the hours of 3:00 pm right after schools are released for the day and 8:00 pm just before parents return home from work. Alike, gentrification of schools, community centers needs to be in cooperated into the Race to the Top Program. Again, providing incentives for mentoring programs, innovation scholarships, and formulating character building skills and self-improving, and family empowerment programs into the forum of the community centers would decrease gang enrollment and restore family values to the surrounding communities and the purpose of the greater good of our nation at the end of the day.
On a personal note would more church activity reduce crime? I do not believe that the increase of church activities would reduce crimes because today’s churches are being represented as a business/money making organization. Again, this is my personal opinion and relation involving surrounding churches. What I would like to see is that, church goers (elders) removed the emotional gap with our younger members of society and accept the fact that these are some changing times and because we do not agree with some of their personal decisions we as akin can look beyond faults and recognized the need to assist and not dismiss. Instead of insisting that just say No, explain the reason why No represent a positive instead of a negative. Another, I believe the key and sole purpose of a church is a place to worship GOD. Seeking and building on a more personal relationship with a whole hearted felt thankfulness of t e goodness of the Highest God. As asking for forgiveness, guidance and direction while persevering on this journey called LIFE.
Deborah,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. Plus, unfortunately, many people think crime is associated with the poverty. Many people are forced to believe that poverty is the only reason why one would go all out to commit a crime. People argue that when you become poorer you are more likely to commit crime. I know that poverty can lead to high levels of stress that in turn may lead individuals to commit theft, robbery, or other violent acts but should not be use as an excuse. I also believe that extracurricular involvement (church-GOD- and community centers) helps deter crime rate.
Thamicka
ReplyDeleteTo Sonya
When it comes to our leaders, especially the Comissoners, for impoverished neighborhoods are never elected by the residents but by special interest groups and friends. The residents dont really participate in an election unless there is money involved or they truly involve in thier community. The people's interests are not met on a community scale but whatever the Commissoner think is best by their standards and the local government. Take for example, the new housings that are being built across Lil Haiti, Liberty City and Overtown, the unemployed in the communities are supposed to be the first to be considered to work on these construction sites, however, this never
happens nor is the contract given to Black contractors.
Parents have their responsibilities distorted because we live in a society where an emphasis for blacks are placed more on sports and entertainment than that of academics. Therefore, parents have misplaced energy and focus on the wrong thing
I believe Gentrification may help benefit the community to a certain extent. Modernizing the schools in a low income area I think would help by stimulating the students. They now have brand new equipments, sufficient school supplies and more of the essential things needed for learning and succeeding. This will make the students want to attend school and be more involved in their studies. Of course, there will always be a handful of students that don’t care to learn, even if they are sent to the best schools in the country but I certainly don’t think that should ruin it for the majority of the good students who are willing to succeed. I also believe that more community centers will help reduce gang activity and all the negativity that comes with that. Community centers will allow kids to participate in activities that will keep them busy and out of trouble during their spare time. Again, it may not help out all of the children in the community but I am pretty sure it will minimize some of the gang activity, and some is better than none. Finally, I think the church activities will certainly play a role in reducing crime in a low income area. It all starts from what you learn at home. I strongly believe if you don’t have a parent at home insisting to attend church every Sunday and making it custom in the household, no child will pick up and go to church on their own.
ReplyDeleteTo answer Dr. Kalam’s question or questions you must need to know or understand what gentrification really means. I looked up the definition on the internet and found that gentrification means the buying and renovation of houses and stores in deteriorated urban neighborhoods by upper or middle-income families or individuals, thus improving property values but often displacing low-income families and small businesses. Okay if gentrification is used on only schools to modernize and renovating it then I am all for it but if it is used for the community like homes and small businesses I am not for it at all. I think if it is used for schools it will bring new books, new computer, and new supplies for students to succeed. Which might also give a result in more and more students going to school. But if it is used to improve and renovate the whole community it will displace all the low-income people and the same problem will occur elsewhere.
ReplyDeleteTo answer the second question I think modernizing the schools in low-income areas will work. I think the computers, books, and other supplies will help people that are less fortunate. I also think more community centers will help reduce gang activity, well at least for the younger children. I think for high school students it will be harder for them to join a community center just because of the peer pressure trying to impress their friends. But I also think if kids start at an early age going to community centers they are more likely to stay in the community center, as they get older. I think more church activity will reduce crime just like community centers will. But like I said I think it will be better for kids to start out young going church clubs or community centers then just joining late like in high school. I just think there will be a better success rate if they start in a younger age.
i agree with the majority of everybody.. i think everyone has the same views in improving are schools would benefit in low-income areas.
ReplyDelete