External Review Report
Law and Justice Program
Central Washington University
Phyllis B. Gerstenfeld, J.D., Ph.D.
California State University, Stanislaus
Introduction
I visited Central Washington University March 1-4, 2009. During my visit I was
able to visit the Des Moines center as well as the Ellensburg campus. I met with students,
full and part-time faculty, administrators, and staff members at both locations, and was
also able to meet with the center directors from Des Moines, Lynnwood, Pierce, and
Yakima centers.
This report is based on that visit, as well as on the department’s own self-report,
and on my own experiences in the field of criminal justice. Within this report, I will make
comments and suggestions on a number of aspects of the LAJ program. For ease of
reading, I have divided the report into several subheadings, although several of the topics
within those subheadings are inter-related.
1. Program Curriculum
The name of the program itself is a good indication that the program does not
follow a traditional criminal justice curriculum. Compared to more traditional CJ
programs, the LAJ program has more of an emphasis on the law itself, especially civil
law, as well as on social justice. This is perfectly appropriate on several grounds. First,
even with more traditional CJ programs there is a great deal of variation in the curricula.
Second, CJ is itself a multidisciplinary field that has drawn on many areas, including law,
sociology, psychology, political science, and others. So it is fitting that the curriculum
reflect that. And third, even within more traditional CJ programs, a large percentage of
1
graduates go to law school or go into careers such as social work that aren’t strictly
criminal justice. So the program’s somewhat untraditional approach does not pose any
particular problems, and its uniqueness and broader scope might even be advantageous as
selling points to prospective students.
The department has chosen not to seek certification by the Academy of Criminal
Justice Sciences. This is appropriate. The certification standards and procedures are quite
controversial, even among more traditional CJ programs.
Until now, the program has offered three tracks in Legal Studies, Law
Enforcement, and Corrections. All of these, especially the latter two, are very commonly
found within CJ programs. However, the department has recently decided to eliminate the
tracks, largely to permit more flexibility in course offerings while maintaining
consistency at its several locations. This decision is a sensible one, under the
circumstances, and will not reduce the quality of the program. However, I do make two
suggestions in line with these changes. First, students should still be given a list of
suggested coursework in accordance with their career goals, and should be strongly
advised to follow these lists when possible. Otherwise, some students may be confused
about which courses are appropriate, and others will probably mostly take whatever
classes are most convenient, rather than those that are most suitable for them. Second, the
department should put some careful thought into how the program is marketed. Without
the “criminal justice” name many prospective students are used to, and without the
specific tracks in place, people wishing careers in law enforcement or corrections might
not realize that this major is a good choice for them.
2
The one skill that is most urgently needed by professionals in the legal and
criminal justice fields is good communication, especially in writing. Every agency head I
have every spoken to emphasizes this point, as did several of the LAJ lecturers with
whom I met. The department’s alumni survey demonstrates this as well. The department
already has several classes that seek to improve writing skills, and it has recently added a
requirement for students to pass their basic skills classes before beginning LAJ courses.
Because of the importance of good writing skills, and the deficiencies so many students
have in this area, I recommend that the department explore additional ways of improving
students’ writing.
2. Enrollments
The LAJ program continues to be one of the largest in the college and within the
university. However, FTE has decreased in all locations except Yakima within the past
few years. This is contrary to the college and university trends, which were mostly
upward during this same period (although there was a slight decrease between 2006-7
and 2007-8). It is also contrary to trends within the discipline, in that most similar
programs have faced increasing demand. The decrease in FTE is not completely a bad
thing. One positive aspect is that it has permitted the average class sizes to decrease as
well. While class sizes still remain quite respectable, smaller classes often permit
improved class discussion and increased feedback by instructors.
However, in general the decreased enrollments are somewhat troubling. That this
pattern exists at every location except one suggests that the problem does not lie with
particular people or particular centers. Perhaps there has recently been more competition
from other universities and online programs. Whatever the cause, little to no resources
3
are currently allocated by the university to the department specifically for outreach and
advertising purposes. I recommend that outreach and advertising efforts be increased,
especially at community colleges and among current criminal justice professionals. This
is particularly important given the upcoming curriculum changes, as discussed above.
Prospective students need to be told about the program, and need to be convinced that it’s
appropriate for them.
3. Masters Program
In 2002, the LAJ department received approval for a proposed Masters degree
program. However, the program itself was never implemented. I strongly recommend that
resources be allocated so that the graduate program can begin.
There is increasing demand for graduate degrees within the field. Many agencies
require them for advancement beyond a certain level, and many also give salary
incentives to employees who earn graduate degrees. The department’s alumni survey
reflects the need for such a program, as did my discussions with students currently
enrolled.
I have no doubt that were a Masters program to be implemented, enrollments
would be strong. The undergraduate program is large enough to support a graduate
program, and there are apparently few other Masters programs in criminal justice or
related fields in Washington. For comparison’s sake, my own program has about 500
majors, roughly the same number as CWU’s. Despite the fact that there are at least three
other CJ graduate programs within a 100 mile radius (all at much bigger campuses than
my own), our MA program is currently at its capacity enrollment (about 40 students) and
we are going to have to become more selective in our admissions this Fall.
4
A Masters program at CWU would fill a need within the community and among
the students as well as bolster enrollments. However, three matters ought to be given
careful consideration before it is begun.
First, the department might want to consider revising the originally proposed
Masters curriculum to reflect more recent developments within the field and to reflect the
expertise of the faculty, many of whom were hired after the program was proposed.
Second, in order for the program to work, the department would need to have a
minimum of two additional full-time faculty members. One faculty member should be
named as director of the program, and should receive an appropriate level of course
releases. Our program’s director receives two course releases per year (compared to the
Chair, who receives three).
Third, careful thought ought to be put into where to offer the program. In my
experience, most graduate students are not particularly interested in online or distance
learning classes; they prefer that all or most of the classes be in traditional in-person
format. On the one hand, if the department were to offer the program at one of its west
side centers, it could draw on a much larger pool of prospective students, as there
undoubtedly are many thousands of criminal justice professionals in the greater Seattle
area. On the other hand, this would require increased full-time faculty assignment at the
center (which is not necessarily a bad thing), and it would have to be determined whether
library and other resources are sufficient to support a graduate program.
4. Faculty Issues
There are several issues I would like to discuss in relation to the LAJ faculty
itself.
5
The faculty represent a variety of backgrounds in their specific disciplines as well
as in their specific areas of research. This is appropriate and quite desirable for a program
of this type. With its recent hires, the department has also improved the gender, ethnic,
and racial diversity of the faculty. While additional improvements could be made in this
regard, it is an excellent start.
The scholarly productivity of the faculty members is appropriate for a program of
this type, where the teaching load is high and where many professors spend considerable
time with advising and administrative duties. It appears that the level of support for
faculty research, such as funding for travel to conferences, is adequate.
The size of the faculty right now is adequate, but barely so. It is not sufficient to
support a Masters program. The program still continues to rely more on part-time faculty
than is ideal, with nearly one-third of classes taught by lecturers in 2007-8. Part-time
lecturers can add to the quality of the program, in that they often have considerable field
experience. Certainly the ones whom I met were very well-qualified, and some had been
teaching for several years. Students I spoke with also praised the lecturers. However, as
the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences recognizes in its standards, adjunct faculty are
not an adequate substitute for tenured/tenure-track professors, and they should be used
sparingly. In the LAJ program in particular, students at the centers generally have all of
their courses taught by one particular tenured/tenure-track person and by lecturers.
Substantively, the department is particularly in need of tenure-track faculty members with
expertise in law enforcement.
There has been considerable instability in leadership at both the department and
the college level, with there having been several chairs and several deans over the past
6
few years. This instability has likely hindered the department in a variety of ways. For
example, it is difficult for a department to determine its future course or to implement
new programs if the leadership is constantly changing. I recommend that every effort be
made to ensure that the department receives strong, consistent leadership.
I have some reservations about the mentoring that new members of the faculty are
receiving. Although these newer members did not themselves express concerns, it did not
appear to me that concerted efforts were being made to ensure that they did receive
guidance from the more experienced members of the department. I believe such guidance
is extremely important. Especially if the department does continue to grow, I strongly
suggest that efforts be made to improve in this regard. As I discuss below, this is
especially true for new people at the centers.
In general, communication among the members of the department appears to be a
problem. In the past, there was apparently some degree of a rift between the more senior
and the more junior faculty, but I was told by several people that that rift has narrowed
considerably. However, the department as a whole continues to have difficulties in
talking with one another. This doesn’t seem to be due to lack of willingness, but rather
the complications in physically gathering people who are widely scattered
geographically. Lack of communication can lead to inconsistencies in the curriculum, a
lack of focus in a program, and isolation for the centers. I strongly recommend that
resources be allocated so that the department can meet in its entirety and in person at least
once per quarter, and perhaps meet even more frequently using videoconference
technology. Conference calls and speaker phones are not enough; effective
communication of this kind requires face-to-face contact.
7
5. Student Issues
Again, there are several issues I wish to discuss regarding LAJ students.
The LAJ majors are diverse in terms of gender, race, and ethnicity. On the whole,
they praised the program and its faculty. They said the courses were interesting and did a
good job of preparing them for their chosen careers, the work was appropriately rigorous,
and the faculty was well-qualified and demonstrated true concern for students.
I believe the department does a good job of communicating with students. A
variety of materials are made available to students, outlining the degree requirements.
Students I spoke to felt the expectations and requirements were very clear. The
department also provides advising to it students. I think this is an excellent idea, but I am
concerned with the very heavy advising load the faculty carries. LAJ faculty advise and
average number of 52 students each, compared to a college average of 15. Some
individual members of the faculty have especially high advising loads. I believe it is
important that most advising done by professors, rather than by staff members or others.
However, I do recommend that the department explore ways of reducing this heavy load.
Students in Ellensburg did mention that sometimes communication was difficult,
due to the manner in which their LAJ classes were spread throughout campus, and the
fact that there was no central place for them to socialize or hang out between classes. I
believe the move to the new building will alleviate this problem.
One area that could use improvement is with job placement. Students now can
choose an internship, but for the most part they must seek out the placement themselves. I
recommend that the department consider appointing a single faculty member as
internship coordinator, and have this person arrange placements and supervise the interns.
8
Such an arrangement can help facilitate relationships between the department and
agencies in the community as well. The department might also wish to consider more job
fairs, a jobs-related clearinghouse of some kind physically located in the department, and
perhaps more employment-related speakers.
I also recommend that the department consider additional ways to involve
students in research. Of course, a graduate program would help in this regard, not just for
the graduate students themselves, but also undergraduates who are steered toward
research as a way of preparing themselves for graduate work.
6. The Centers
In addition to the main campus in Ellensburg, the department operates out of four
remote centers. Most of these are quite distant from the main campus, and physical
connections can be especially difficult in the winter, when the mountain pass is apt to
close periodically.
I met with the directors of all four centers, and was able to spend a day at the Des
Moines center. I was very impressed with the level of staff support available for students
at this center; having people available on campus for advising and financial aid and so
forth is extremely important. The one shortcoming was the lack of a real library, but I
understand the centers are able to get students the books they request very quickly. The
physical facilities at Des Moines were also excellent.
Although the curriculum is the same at all locations, the experience for students at
the centers is very different than for students at Ellensburg. More of the center students
are non-traditional, working students. They take more of their classes online or via
distance learning. And almost all of their classes are taught by a single tenured/tenure-
9
track faculty member, plus part-timers. In general, the center students were very satisfied
with the quality of the education they receive, as well as the availability of courses that fit
their schedule.
I do have some concerns about the centers, however. One of these is the
workloads that the center directors must shoulder. In many ways, they are the functional
equivalent of chairs, but they don’t receive appropriate teaching load reductions. For
those who are not yet tenured, their administrative contributions might not be weighed
very heavily during the promotion and tenure process either, which leaves them in a
difficult situation. I strongly recommend that the center directors receive appropriate
reductions in their teaching loads.
Although none of them expressed worries to me in this respect, I am also
concerned about the isolation of center faculty, especially the more junior members. It is
extremely difficult for a newer member of the faculty to receive mentoring, to serve on
committees, and to find opportunities for collaborative research when he or she rarely
sees any other tenured/tenure-track professors. The department is in a predicament,
however, because the geographic separation between locations makes it nearly
impossible for a single person to teach at multiple places. I’m afraid I don’t have any
solutions to this problem, but I strongly recommend that the department consider whether
there might be one. At the very least, the department might want to reconsider having
new faculty members serve as center directors.
A third concern is enrollment, especially at Pierce (Yakima has a lower FTE, but
the FTE there has been increasing). I recommend that the department do some research to
determine why enrollment there is low and dropping. Given the budget situation, the
10
department might want to consider the viability of this center in the long run. At the very
least, the department and the college ought to explore additional methods for
advertisement and outreach.
7. Academic Integrity
In general, the academic integrity within the program appears to be quite strong.
Students said most classes were quite rigorous, and the department’s assessment rubrics
demonstrate that the coursework is doing a good job of meeting most goals.
I did have some reservations expressed to me concerning certain courses and
certain instructors. Naturally, some degree of dissatisfaction is inevitable. However, I
recommend that the department consider efforts to ensure that appropriate integrity is
maintained in all classes, including those taught by part-time faculty.
8. Online courses and distance learning
The department was one of the first at the university to make frequent use of
online courses, and it now offers quite a few courses this way. Some students said they
prefer to avoid online courses, while others said they like to take a mixture of traditional
and online classes. None of them wanted online classes exclusively. They liked the
flexibility these courses permit, especially when the students have work or family
responsibilities. Overall, they were satisfied with the specific online courses they had
taken and felt they were appropriately difficult.
The department does not appear to have followed any particular plan in its online
course delivery. I think the program is at a crossroads now, and a deliberate decision
needs to be made about the extent and manner of online course delivery. I strongly
11
recommend that the department meet soon to discuss this issue, and to reach a considered
plan of action.
The program also uses distance education. Satisfaction with this method among
the students is much lower. Professors who teach DE classes receive lower evaluations.
Technical problems sometimes occur; in fact, when I met with some of the students via
DE, we weren’t able to get a camera feed from one of the sites (although I could hear
them and they could see and hear me). Again, I recommend the department carefully
consider whether it wants to continue using this method, and how.
9. Community Partnerships
The department has several methods of partnering with the community. Some
faculty members serve on community boards and committees, some students engage in
internships, and several members of community agencies teach part-time for the
department.
I recommend that the department continue these efforts, and also explore others.
These might include the creation of an Advisory Board (I understand there was one at
some point, but it was discontinued), and perhaps the creation of a program in which LAJ
students mentor at-risk youth. Partnerships can help improve a program’s curriculum,
increase research opportunities for faculty and students, increase enrollments, and assist
graduates in finding jobs. Of course, they can benefit the community as well.
10. Assessment
The department has an assessment plan in place. It has taken some steps to
implement the plan and has revised the plan in accordance with the results of these early
12
steps. I recommend that the department continue its assessment efforts, and perhaps even
appoint a member of the faculty as assessment coordinator.
Conclusions
The LAJ program has many strengths, including a unique curriculum, diverse and
enthusiastic students, and diverse and dedicated full-time and part-time faculty. Its major
challenges appear to be:

Avoiding a continuing decrease in enrollment

Communication and continuity in leadership among the faculty

Obtaining appropriate levels of faculty resources for a Masters program, and so
that faculty members can effectively fulfill administrative and other duties

Finding ways to make the centers work better and more effectively
13