Students as Theorists in a Criminology Course
Author(s): William H. Norman
Source: Teaching Sociology, Vol. 19, No. 2 (Apr., 1991), pp. 249-254
Published by: American Sociological Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1317858
Accessed: 30-09-2015 16:11 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
American Sociological Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Teaching Sociology.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 152.20.158.206 on Wed, 30 Sep 2015 16:11:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
STUDENTSAS THEORISTSIN A CRIMINOLOGYCOURSE*
WILLIAMH. NORMAN
Graceland
College
As teachersof sociologywe shouldhelpour
studentsto understandthe sociologicalperspectiveand the concepts,theories,and researchfindingsof the field. We also should
askthemto inquire,to thinkcritically,andto
endeavorto explainsocial phenomenasyscriminology
tematically.In the introductory
course,studentslearnsome of whatsociologistsknowandthinkaboutcrimeandcriminal behavior,but generallythey experience
the studyof criminologyas spectatorsrather
than as participants.
This paperdescribesan
assignmentwith whichI encouragestudents
to take an active role in understanding
and
explainingthecausesof crime.
Theassignmenthas threemainpedagogical objectives.One is to motivatestudents
throughactiveinvolvement.The secondis to
of criminencouragea deeperunderstanding
ologicaltheoriesand theirimplications.The
thirdis topromotecriticalthinkingandhigherordercognitiveskillssuchasapplication,
analysis, andsynthesis(Bloom1956).
TASKS
INTELLECTUAL
As describedby GoldsmidandWilson(1980,
p.63), theprocessof sociologicalinquirystarts
witha questionthatpressesus to explaindifferences.Forexample,whydo somesocieties
havemorecrimethanothers?Why do some
groupscommitmorecrimesthanothers?Why
does one personcommitcrimesandanother
in
doesnot?We lookto previousexplanations
experienceandtheoryfor a tentativeanswer;
wherethatansweris inadequate,
we trytobuild
another,refiningandcorrectingpreviousexplanations.It is this processof inquirythatI
wantthestudenttoexperience.Inmycriminology course,the processbeginswitha survey
of themajortheoriesexplaining
andevaluation
crimeandcriminalbehavior.
Although students in the course are
mostlyjuniorsandseniors,manyhavehadno
priorexposureto sociologyexceptthe intro*I would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for
theirhelpful commentson earlierversions of this paper.
ductorysurvey course, so I do not expect
them to analyze and evaluatethe theories
criaccordingto formaltheory-construction
teria. Instead,I ask them to performfive
generalintellectualtasks.
First,they are to examineeach theory's
assumptionsabouthumannatureand social
functioningandareto comparetheseto their
own assumptions.This exerciseforcesthem
to considertheirownassumptions
morecarefully. Eventuallythey will find one or more
theorieswhose assumptionsare compatible
withtheirown.
Second,theyareto evaluateeachtheory's
andconceptswithregardto what
explanations
for wantof a
mightbe calledverisimilitude,
betterterm.Thatis, theconceptsandexplanationsmustmakesenseto themandshouldhelp
themto organizeand understand
crimephenomena.Both micro-leveland macro-level
theoriesareevaluated.
Third,they are to considerthe shortcomings of the theories.When writingthe first
thestudents
paperrequired
by thisassignment,
mustaddressthe weaknessesof the theories
to contheyhavechosen.Theyareencouraged
sideradditionsor modifications
to the theory
whichwoulddealwithits weaknesses.
Fourth(andsimultaneously
with the secondandthirdtasks),thestudents
mustconsider
thecompatibility
of microandmacrotheories.
They are to integrateexplanatorysystemsat
bothlevelsintoa singlecomprehensive
theory.
Thefifthtaskis to workouttheimplications
of thistheoryforexplainingdivergenttypesof
crimeandfordeveloping
andcorrecprevention
tion policies.The studentwill use his or her
preferred
theoryto explainparticular
typesof
crimeandto makepolicyrecommendations
in
the secondandthirdpapers,respectively.
These intellectualtasks culminatein a
writingassignment.As notedabove,the assignmentinvolves three papers,one associatedwitheach of threesectionsor unitsof
the course.The firstpaperis the explication
of a generaltheory,thesecondusesthetheory
(as revised)to explaina particulartype of
crime,andthe thirddescribesthe policy im-
Teaching Sociology, 1991, Vol. 19 (April:249-254)
This content downloaded from 152.20.158.206 on Wed, 30 Sep 2015 16:11:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
249
250
TEACHING
SOCIOLOGY
plicationsof the theory(as revisedagain,if
necessary).Let me explainin furtherdetail
whatI do to preparestudentsto developtheir
owncriminologicaltheories.
PREPARATION
FORTHE
FIRSTPAPER
To lay thefoundationfortheirtheorizing,we
devotethefirstfew weeksof thecourseto the
majortheoriesof crimeandcriminalbehavior, includingbiological and psychological
as well as a numberof sociologiapproaches
cal explanations.It is useful to have a textbook whichnot only discussesa numberof
theoriesbutalso makestheretical issuessalientfor the studentreader.
If the assignmentis to have the intended
notonlythatstudents
outcome,it is important
be exposedto a widevarietyof theoriesin the
firstsectionof thecourse,butalsothattheytake
a criticalor evaluativeapproachto each. In
differential
associationtheory,for
considering
example,studentslearnthe basicpremisesof
thetheoryfromthetextandby readingSutherWethen
landandCressey's(1978)explication.
andshortcomings.
discussthemainstrengths
Somemajorstrengthsof differentialassociationtheoryareas follows:1) It hasa great
orfacevaliditydependdealof verisimilitude
ing, of course,on one's own assumptions.It
identifieslearningas the crucialprocessin
creatingcriminality;thisview coincideswith
a prominentcommon-senseexplanation,and
it assumesthatcriminalsarenotdifferentby
naturefromnoncriminals.2) It is usefuland
parsimoniousin thatit is able to interrelate
diverse phenomenaassociated with crime
(poverty,absenceof father,greed)by specifyingan interveningcondition(learning).
We also discuss the followingthreecrithelearnticisms:1)Thetheoryoversimplifies
mechanistic
and
a
image
ing process presents
of learners.2) The theorydoes not deal well
withcrimesby loners.3) It begs the question
1One textbookI have used is Criminology:Crimeand
CriminalJustice by D. Stanley Eitzen and Doug A. Timmer(1985). This book emphasizesandincorporatestheory
throughout,not only in an introductorychapter.It also has
a theoreticalpoint of view ("radical"criminology supplemented by labeling theory). The authorsmake their perspective explicit and apply it in every chapter. This
approach has enormous pedagogical value, as it gives
studentssomethingto evaluate and reactto.
of why andhow the socialcontextor subculturethatpromotescriminality
cameto existin
the firstplace.The theorydisregards
broader
social forces and institutionalarrangements
of
thatgeneratecrime.(Thisis a shortcoming
all microtheoriesof criminality.)
Next we read DonaldCressey's(1960)
defenseof differentialassociationandan article by DanielGlaser(1956) whichalso defendsthetheoryandcharacterizes
identificationas the crucialmechanismin the process
of becomingcriminal.
Wheneachof thetheorieshasbeenstudied
in thisway,the studentsareaskedto develop
andpresenttheirowntheoretical
perspectives.
THEFIRSTPAPER:DESCRIBING
THETHEORY
of thefirst
Thefirstpaper,whichis a culmination
own
thestudents'
sectionof thecourse,presents
theoriesof crimeandcriminality.Studentsare
encouragedto adoptone or moreof thetheorieswe havestudiedor,atleast,to incorporate
elementsof theseintotheirowntheoriesrather
thanstartingfromscratch.
The theorypresentedin thisfirstpaperis
expectedto provideexplanationsat boththe
macrolevel (for differencesin criminality
acrossregions,races,classes,etc.) andat the
microlevel (forindividualdifferencesin behavior).Eachtypeof explanationshouldaccountforall typesof crimefromstreetcrime
to corporateandpoliticalcrime.In addition,
thestudenttheoristmustanticipatecriticisms
and addressthem throughrefutationor by
modifyingthe theory.Thistaskis facilitated
by textbookcoverageandclassroomdiscussion of the maincriticismsof eachtheory.
This is a tallorder.I tell the studentsthat
no professionalcriminologisthas produced
an adequate,universallyaccepted,comprehensiveexplanationforcrime,thoughthatis
theobjectiveof theoryandresearchin crime
and criminalbehavior.I also informthem
that I expect them to modify theirtheories
from one paperto the next. Modifications
should be made in response both to my critique and to their own reevaluation in light
of their exposure to new information. The
development of an adequate theory of crime
and criminality is a long-term dialectical
process which will not end for the student
when this course ends.
This content downloaded from 152.20.158.206 on Wed, 30 Sep 2015 16:11:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
STUDENTSAS THEORISTS
251
in termsof on the nexttwo,chieflybecausethe revision
I evaluateeachtheorypresented
andconsonancewithreal- of the theorythatthe studentincludesin the
comprehensiveness
ity.I alsoevaluateit withrespectto whetherit second paperis typicallya substantialimis consistentwiththewriter'sownunderlying provementoverthe firstversion.
assumptions(I ask the studentsto begin the
paperby statingas explicitlyas possibletheir
THE
abouthumannature)andwhether THESECONDPAPER:APPLYING
assumptions
it is internallyconsistent.
THEORYTOEXPLAINPARTICULAR
CRIMES
It is the instructor'sjob to point out
andweaknessesandto suggestmodstrengths
into Before writing the second paper, the stuificationsor revisionsto be incorporated
mentioned dents study what we know about various
thenextpaper,usingthestandards
above. (See the appendixfor the directions types of crime, such as robbery,profesfor the firstpaper.)
sionaltheft,organizedcrime,andcorporate
Studentsgenerallytake one of threeap- crime. As we readaboutthese and discuss
theirtheories.By farthe them,I remindstudentsthattheirtheoryis
proachestopresenting
mostcommon,andpreferred,approachis to intendedto explain both why this type of
presenta combinationof two or moreof the crime exists and why someone would entheoriesdiscussedin readingandin class. In gage in it. The second paperis due at the
anexam- conclusionof this unit of the course.
suchcasesmy critiqueis principally
As partof the secondpaper,studentsare
inationof how well the studenthasaddressed
therecognizedweaknessesof thetheoriesand to resubmitthe theorypresentedin the first
howwell thetheoriesfit together.
paper(withrevisions),togetherwithanappliA secondapproachtakenby studentsis to cationof thattheoryto two of the types of
list and discussa numberof factorsthatare crimediscussedin the text, robberyandocassociatedwith criminality,such as broken cupationalcrime.(Directionsfor the second
defects,andlackof educa- paperalso areincludedin the appendix.)Ofhomes,personality
and
to
tion,
presentthis discussionas their ten a studentfindsa theoryappealing,adopts
Thisapproach
failsto meetthe it, and defends it, but uses anothertheory
of
crime.
theory
of theassignment,however,be- entirelyto explainspecifictypesof crimeor
requirements
causesucha list does notconstitutea general particularinstances of criminal behavior.
andCressey1974,pp. Thissecondpaperrequiresthestudentto contheory(cf. Sutherland
When
studentstake this ap- frontthe problemof practicalapplication,to
57-61, 71-75).
is adequate,
I
that
show
them
simplyenumerating judgewhetherthetheorypresented
proach,
factorswhich correlatewith some type of and,if it is not,to rejectormodifyit.
I evaluatethis paper,like the first,with
doesnot
crimebegs thequestion.Correlation
and
connection.
Even
indicate
a
causal
respectto logicalandinternalconsistency,
necessarily
with
to
and
comnot
tell
if it did,this"shotgun"
does
respect
comprehensiveness
approach
in whichone or another patibilitywith reality.Again, the studentis
us the circumstances
factorapplies,itdoesnotidentifythenecessary expectedtodealwithboththemacroandmicro
andthesufficientconditionsfortheoccurrence levelsof explanation.
of crime,andit does not constitutea general
whichhelpstoorganizeand
causalexplanation
THETHIRDPAPER:POLICY
makesenseof crimephenomena.
IMPLIED
BY
PROPOSALS
A thirdapproachoccasionallytakenby a
THETHEORY
studentis to contendthatno theorycan be
developedbecausecriminalbehavioris such
an individualdecisionthatgeneralexplana- The final section of the course is contionsareuseless.I remindsuchstudentsthat cerned with societal reactions to crime.
ourpurposeis nomotheticandthatthe many We study the criminaljustice system, corin crimedatacannotbe explained rections, and crime prevention programs
regularities
as the resultof randomindividualdecisions. and proposals.The thirdpaper in this asCarefulandthoroughscrutinyof thepaperis signment is due at the conclusion of the
essential.I have found that I spend much course and is to be a response to this final
moretime on evaluatingthe firstpaperthan section. The student again must submit
This content downloaded from 152.20.158.206 on Wed, 30 Sep 2015 16:11:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
252
TEACHING
SOCIOLOGY
the theorypresented in the first paper,as
revised.(See the appendixfor directionsfor
the thirdpaper.)
Inthispaper,thestudentis to applyheror
his theoryto a proposalfor thepreventionof
crimeandto a proposalfor"treating"
or"curing"criminalbehavior.I ask the studentsto
drawout the implicationsof this theoryand
of its assumptionsin constructingtheseproposals.SometimesI askthemto focusparticularlyon two typesof crimeandtheirperpetrators,namelymuggingandpricefixing;this
ensuresthat the proposalstake
requirement
bothlower-classandupper-classcriminality
intoaccount.
As in the secondpaper,this assignment
mayproducecognitivedissonance.The"prevention"implications
of one'stheoryof crime
sometimesconflictstronglywithone'scorrectionalphilosophy.A studentwho advocatesa
labelingapproachto explainingcrime also
mayholda "make'emdo hardtime"attitude.
"Thethirdpaperrequiresstudentsto confront
andto tryto rectifythem.
suchinconsistencies
As in theothertwopapers,thecriteriafor
evaluationof the thirdpaperarecomprehensiveness,congruencewithreality,andlogical
andinternalconsistency.
APPRAISAL
inthisformthelast
I haveusedthisassignment
threetimesI havetaughttheintroductory
criminologycourse.Withsomeexceptions,it has
beenwell receivedeach time.I thinkthe assignmenthelps to motivatestudentsto learn
the majortheoriesof crimeand criminality;
theyrealizethattheymustproducea seriesof
threepapersbasedlargelyon theirownchoice
anddefenseof criminological
theories,so they
wanttounderstand
thosetheories.Theyappear
tobemoreattentiveandmoreinterested
during
discussionsof thetheoriesthanwereprevious
classes,and they raisemorequestionsabout
thetheories.AlthoughI cannotclaimthatthe
studentscompletingthis assignmentlearn
moreaboutcriminologytheoriesin general,
their essay exams make it clear that they do
very well at mastering those theories which
they appropriateas theirown.
Both anecdotalevidence and course evaluations suggest that students become more
aware of their beliefs and assumptions and
make progress in taking a more logical and
crime
analyticalapproachto understanding
andcriminal
behavior.
Onestudent,whosefirst
combineda
papersomewhatincongruously
"personality"theoryof criminalitywith a
radical-critical
theoryof crime,thankedme
laterfor makingherthinkaboutthe connecand
tionsbetweenherunderlying
assumptions
herexplanations
forbehavior.Shesaidthatshe
hadbegunto use this skill in herpsychology
andreligioncoursesas well. Students'contributionsto discussionin thefinalsectionof the
courseshowgreaterrecognitionof suchconnections,as in one student'schallengeto anotherthatbegan,"Howcan you believe that
societyis responsiblefor crimeandstill believe in the deathpenalty?"Anotherstudent
statedexplicitlythatherbelief thata crimefreesocietyis theoreticallypossibleis based
uponherassumptionthatpeopleareshaped
by theirenvironments.
The chief drawbackof this techniqueis
the amountof timeit requiresof the instructor.Withthe exceptionof a few very wellwrittenpapers,I needaboutan hourto read,
evaluate,and write commentsjust for the
student'sfirst paper.This approachmay be
practicalonly in classes of 20 or fewer students.Giventhe payoffin increasedmotivaandanalyticalthinking,
tion, understanding,
I thinkit's worththe effort.
APPENDIX
FIRST
CRIMINOLOGY
THEORY
PAPER
1. Thispaperis tobe typewritten
orcomputerThereis nolimprintedanddouble-spaced.
itationon length.
2. Beforeexplaining
yourtheory,identifyyour
assumptionsabouthumannature.Are we
or social or what?
naturallyself-centered
oraltruistic?
Hedonistic
Governed
bydrives
or instinctsor shapedby ourenvironment?
Is ourbehaviordetermined
by chemicalsor
or
social
pressuresor other
conditioning
aspectsof thesituationor do we chooseto
actas we do?
3. Set forthyourtheoryexplainingbothpatternsof crime(macro)and differencesin
criminalbehavior(micro)."Macro"questionsto answer:Whatcausescrimein our
evenly
society?Whyis crimenotdistributed
throughoutthe society?Why do different
andtypesofcrime?
groupshavedifferentrates
Whatcauses a
toanswer:
"Micro"
questions
This content downloaded from 152.20.158.206 on Wed, 30 Sep 2015 16:11:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
STUDENTSAS THEORISTS
persontocommitcrimes? Why do people
with similar backgrounds act differently
with respect to criminal behavior?
4. Youshouldadoptone ormoreof thetheories
studied,fittingthemtogetherandmodifying
to deal with limitationsand weaknesses.
5. Your theory should be able to explain as
many types of crime as possible assault,
burglary, fraud, organized crime, corporate crime, etc.
6. Take a critical look at your theory. Find
criticismsin the book, in class notes, andin
the Analysis and Critiquearticlesin Traub
and Little. Address these limitations and
weaknesses in your paper.
7. Which kinds of criminalacts does your theory not explain (or which areyou not trying
to explain) (e.g., those few crimes committed by psychopaths,or a motherstealing to
feed her children.)?
8. Be internallyconsistent.Check your theory
to be sure that you are not contradicting
yourself (e.g., combining radical-critical
andpsychoanalyticexplanationswould not
seem to be internally consistent; I would
have to be persuaded).
9. Be consistent with reality.Researchresults
andother"facts"shouldnot contradictyour
theory.The theoryshould fit with what we
know aboutcrime.
10. Don't despair if you don't seem to be able
to do all this successfully; no one has up
until now! (And bear in mind that this is
probablynot the final version of your theory; you will be revising it to deal with any
weaknesses and with new information.)
SECONDCRIMINOLOGY
THEORYPAPER
1. This paper has two parts: 1) an explanation of your theory of crime, as revised,
and 2) an application of this theory to two
types of crime discussed in this course:
robbery and occupational crime. (Parts 1
and 2 may be submitted as two separate
papersor as two sections of a single paper.)
2. The first part-the theory-is a resubmission, with revisions where necessary, of
your theory of criminalitypresentedin the
firstpaper.Referto my commentsandto the
page of instructionsgiven for the firstpaper.
(If there are no revisions to your first
paper, simply resubmit it unaltered.)
3.
253
If you do make revisions, give me the
original version too, for comparison
purposes.
4. The second part of the paper should explain-from the standpointof your theory
-what are the causes of robbery and then
what are the causes of occupational
crimes. You must be sure each explanation
is a logical extension or application of
your general theory to this specific type of
crime, and that it is consistent with reality
(i.e., consistent with the facts about this
type of crime). This second part need not
be long.
5. Both parts are to be typewritten or computer-printed and double-spaced.
THIRDCRIMINOLOGY
THEORYPAPER
1. In this paper, you are to explain what
your theory of crime indicates about
preventing crime and "curing" or reforming criminals. In other words, what
should be done about crime, from the
standpoint of your theory?
2. This paper has two parts: 1) an explanation of your theory of crime, as revised,
and 2) "policy recommendations"derived
from your theory.
3. The first partthe theory is a resubmission,
with revisions where necessary, of your
theory of criminality. Refer to my comments on the second paper and to the page
of instructions given for the first paper.
Give me the other revision too (the second
paper), for comparison purposes.
4. The second part of the paper should explain the implications of your theory for
both preventing crime and dealing with
convicted offenders. If your theory is correct, what policies should be followed to
reduce the crime rate? And what policies
should be followed to "treat"(or otherwise
deal with) personsconvicted of crimes?
5. The policies you are identifying are to be
general approaches,not details about specific programs, and must be logical implicationsof your theory.
6. Both parts are to be typewrittenor computer-printedanddouble-spaced.
REFERENCES
Barlow,H. D. 1987. Introductionto Criminology.,4th
ed. Boston: Little, Brown.
This content downloaded from 152.20.158.206 on Wed, 30 Sep 2015 16:11:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
254
TEACHING
SOCIOLOGY
Bloom, B., ed. 1956. Taxonomyof Educational Objectives, HandbookI: Cognitive Domain. New York:
McKay.
Chambliss,W. J. 1988. ExploringCriminology.New
York:Macmillan.
Cressey,D. R. 1960. "Epidemiologyand IndividualConduct:A Case from Criminology."Pp. 216-39 in Theories of Deviance, 3rd ed., edited by S. H. Trauband
C. B. Little. Itasca,IL: Peacock.
Eitzen, D. S. and D. A. Timmer. 1985. Criminology:
Crime and CriminalJustice. New York:Wiley.
Glaser, D. 1956. "CriminalityTheories and Behavioral
Images." Pp. 182-99 in Theories of Deviance, 3rd
ed., edited by S. H. Traub and C. B. Little. Itasca,
IL: Peacock.
Goldsmid,C. A. and E. K. Wilson. 1980. Passing On Sociology: The Teachingof a Discipline. Belmont,CA:
Wadsworth.
Hagan,E E. 1990. Introductionto Criminology:Theories, Methodsand CriminalBehavior,.2nd ed. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
Nettler,G. 1984. IxplainingCrime,3rded. New York:
McGraw-Hill
Sutherland,E. H. and D. R. Cressey. 1974. Criminology,
9th ed. Philadelphia:Lippincott.
. 1978. "The Theory of Differential Association." Pp. 176-182 in Theories of Deviance, 3rd
ed., edited by S. H. Trauband C. B. Little. Itasca,
IL: Peacock.
Traub,S. H., and C. B. Little,eds. 1985. TheoriesofDeviance. 3d ed. Itasca,IL: Peacock.
Vold, G. B. and T. J. Bernard.1986. Theoretical Criminology. 3d ed. New York:Oxford University Press.
Bill Norman is Associate Professorof Sociology at
GracelandCollege. His teachingresponsibilities include
criminology,the sociology of religion, andresearchmethods. He is currentlyengagedin conductinglocal community
researchwith undergraduate
sociology majors.At present,
his researchinterestsincludetheinfluenceof socialnetworks
on life satisfactionamong older people and the effects of
college attendanceon religiousbeliefs. Addresscorrespondence to WilliamH. Norman,Division of Social Sciences,
GracelandCollege, Lamoni,IA 50140.
This content downloaded from 152.20.158.206 on Wed, 30 Sep 2015 16:11:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions