REPORT ON EXTERNAL REVIEW OF CENTRAL WASHINGTON
UNIVERSITY’S LAW AND JUSTICE PROGRAM
Submitted by David M. Blurton
Associate Professor of Justice
University of Alaska Fairbanks
17 May, 2004
Introduction
This report is based upon onsite interviews with Central Washington University
(CWU) administrators, Law and Justice faculty and students, and a review of the
Law and Justice Department’s Self-Study, CWU’s 2003/04
Undergraduate/Graduate Catalog and several syllabi associated with the Law
and Justice Bachelor of Arts Pre-law/Paralegal track. The onsite interviews were
conducted on CWU’s main campus at Ellensburg on 21 April, 2004, and at the
Seatac Center on 22 April, 2004. While onsite interviews were conducted at only
one of four CWU Centers, the Law and Justice faculty/director representing the
Department at each of the Centers was interviewed.
This review of the Law and Justice program has been conducted in the context of
the program furthering CWU’s Mission and Strategic Goals as stated in the
2003/04 undergraduate/graduate catalog. Additionally, this review considers
the Law and Justice Department’s mission and goals as stated in its self-study.
Consequently, the evaluation for this report is separated into three main
components: Consistency of the Law and Justice Department’s Mission and
Goals with CWU’s Mission and Goals; Law and Justice Curriculum Relationship
to the Department’s and CWU’s Mission and Goals; and Law and Justice Faculty
Relationship to the Department’s and CWU’s Mission and Goals.
Consistency of the Law and Justice Department’s Mission and Goals with
CWU’s Mission and Goals
CWU’s Mission Statement two focuses: preparing students for leading full and
productive lives as good citizens; and providing an intellectual resource for the
State of Washington and the region in solving human and environmental
problems. Related to the first focus are strategic goals of creating and sustaining
productive, civil and pleasant campuses that provide for an outstanding
academic and student life. Related to the second focus are strategic goals of
building mutually beneficial partnerships with industry, professional groups,
institutions and communities, and strengthening CWU’s position as a leader in
the field of education. A final strategic goal of the University is to develop a
diversified funding base.
The Law and Justice Department’s mission mirrors CWU’s mission with regard
to preparing students to live full and productive lives by emphasizing the
development of students’ analytical abilities, orientations, skills, and knowledge
necessary to pursue law enforcement, corrections or paralegal careers, as well as
preparing students for continuing studies in graduate or law school. The
Department’s mission further supports the above CWU mission focus by
providing students with a broad background in history, philosophy and current
trends in law and society; particularly with regard to diversity issues.
The Law and Justice Department’s mission is also consistent with and supportive
of CWU’s second mission focus of serving as an intellectual resource for the State
and region in solving human and environmental issues. Within the United
States, criminal justice issues have been at the forefront of public concern for the
past couple of decades. The Department’s mission foci of providing services in
response to the needs of law and justice agencies, and of serving as a center for
scholarly inquiry regarding law and justice, directly support the second mission
focus of CWU with regard to solving human issues. The Department’s emphasis
upon involving undergraduate students in collaborative scholarly work provides
further support of CWU’s second mission focus, while similarly supporting the
University’s first mission focus of preparing students for full and productive
lives.
As would be expected from the consistency in missions, the Department’s goals
coincide with the University’s strategic goals. Related to the University strategic
goals focusing upon the quality of students’ academic experience, the Law and
Justice Department has set goals emphasizing: the presentation of high quality
programs; involving professionals in law enforcement, corrections, paralegal,
and other law related professions in the continuing development of the
Department’s academic programs; delivering courses to the main campus and its
four centers in a timely manner; and supporting the involvement of students in
scholarly activities.
Related to the University’s strategic goals building partnerships with industry,
professional groups etc., the Department has established goals supporting law
and justice related agencies: serving as a center for law and justice related
services to the community and region; enhancing the climate for productive
faculty scholarship and the visibility of such scholarship; and the involvement of
students in scholarly work.
A review of the above clearly indicates the Law and Justice Department’s
mission and associated goals are entirely consistent with the University’s mission
and strategic goals. Both sets of mission and goals evince a primary focus of
providing a high quality educational experience for students attending CWU.
While interviewing Law and Justice students and faculty it became evident that
the Department’s adoption of “Law and Justice” for its department and program
name, rather than adopting more common titles such as “Criminal Justice” or
“Criminology” has significance. The Department’s selection of its name reflects
its greater emphasis upon preparing students for careers in the law and justice
fields rather than an emphasis on academic interests associated with the
disciplines of criminal justice and criminology. When reviewing the
Department’s undergraduate curriculum, this aspect must be remembered.
Law and Justice Curriculum Relationship to the Department’s and CWU’s
Mission and Goals
The Law and Justice curriculum, with but one exception, is comprised of courses
designed for junior and senior level students. The intent of the curriculum is to
provide a broad-based foundation in law and justice, and specifically not
intended to be a training experience for law enforcement or corrections
personnel. At the same time, the curriculum is intended to provide an education
specifically beneficial for individuals aspiring to be employed in the law
enforcement, corrections, or paralegal professions. To accomplish this the
Department has devised a curriculum embodying a core of 24 credits of 300 and
400 level courses providing a broad perspective on law and justice topics, and
combines this general justice education with additional 20 credits of Law and
Justice courses in one of three career oriented tracks (law enforcement,
corrections, and paralegal and pre-law studies). In addition, to the Law and
Justice courses indicated above, Law and Justice majors are required to acquire
an additional 16 credits from an extensive list (numbering well over 100) of
approved electives for the major. This curriculum is clearly consistent with
CWU’s and the Department’s set of mission and goals related to preparing
students to lead full and productive lives as good citizens. Additionally, the
curriculum facilitates the University and Department in meeting their mission
and goals related to solving human issues. Related to this, as well as the mission
and goals related to developing partnerships with industry, professions etc., the
Law and Justice curriculum offers opportunities for internships or cooperative
education. The Department has been exceptional in this regard, growing its
number of majors participating in cooperative education from 50 students in
1998/99 to 111 in 2002/03.
If popularity of a program is a measure of the quality and success of a
curriculum then the Law and Justice undergraduate program curriculum must
be considered top-notch with the number of majors varying over the past five
academic years from 351 in 2000/01 to 500 in the spring of 2003. A better
measure of success of a curriculum is the number of students graduated each
year, and by this measure the Law and Justice curriculum also excels with
approximately 40% of Law and Justice majors graduating each year, or
approximately 165 degrees awarded each of the years being reviewed by the selfstudy. This represents not only the curriculum’s ability to attract students, but
also the curriculum’s ability to retain students.
A question raised by CWU’s Administration is whether Law and Justice students
and the University would be better served by a reduction of career-related tracks.
Such a modification could reduce the number of courses needing to be offered,
and arguably reducing the need for additional Law and Justice faculty. While
such a modification might make sense in a different context, given the mission
and goals of both the University and the Department, such a modification is
inappropriate. As mentioned in the previous section, the Law and Justice
program has a greater focus upon preparing students for employment in law and
justice professions than does the typical criminal justice or criminology program.
This enhanced focus of the Department is entirely consistent with the
University’s foci of preparing students for leading productive lives, and
developing partnerships with industry, professions, etc. In interviews with Law
and Justice faculty and students, alike, queries about the efficacy of reducing the
number of specialized tracks, or eliminating the specialized tracks altogether,
met with resounding opposition.
Another issue raised by CWU’s Administration was regarding whether the Law
and Justice Bachelor of Arts degree would benefit from greater reliance upon
courses taught by other disciplines. Currently, the Law and Justice degree
requires 44 quarter credits of Law and Justice courses, and provides for the
incorporation of another 16 credits of approved electives from other disciplines
to complete the Law and Justice degree. In other words, currently 44 credits of a
students minimum 180 credits for graduation with a Bachelor of Arts degree in
Law and Justice must be in the major’s discipline; slightly less than 25% of the
student’s total course work. In comparison, for a Bachelor of Arts in Justice
degree at the University of Alaska Fairbanks 42 semester credits of a required 120
overall credits must be attributed to the Justice major, and 36 of those 42 credits
must be in the Justice discipline; 30% of the student’s total coursework. The 36
semester credits are viewed by the UAF Justice Department as the minimum
number of credits that should be required from within the discipline.
Consequently, this reviewer does not believe it would be prudent to alter the
Law and Justice degree requirements to include fewer courses within the Law
and Justice discipline.
One specific course, which both external reviewers questioned with regard to
whether a comparable course might be offered by another discipline was LAJ
450, Report Writing. At the University of Alaska Fairbanks, the Justice
Department often recommends to students, anticipating entering the law
enforcement or corrections profession, that they enroll in Technical Writing, a
course offered by the English Department and focusing upon report writing and
similar writing activities. Similarly, CWU’s English Department offers ENG 310,
Technical Writing. On the surface this course appears to be an adequate
substitute for LAJ 450. However, while interviewing students on the Ellensburg
campus, it was indicated that Report Writing contributed significantly to a
student’s performance in LAJ 331, Investigation. The students’ comments
suggested that the particularized content of Report Writing is important for
facilitating the understanding of concepts in Investigation. In addition, to
teaching report writing techniques and formats, the Report Writing course may
provide ancillary education related to conducting criminal investigations. If that
is the case then the Technical Writing course would not be an adequate substitute
for Report Writing; additionally, the Law and Justice Department should
consider having Report Writing as a prerequisite for the Investigation course.
A curriculum issue that surfaced during interviews with Law and Justice majors
on the Ellensburg campus was the prevalence of multiple-choice tests for Law
and Justice exams. It is not the use of multiple-choice questions that is
troublesome, it is the apparent absence of essay questions as part of the
examination process in courses designed for upper division students that is
troublesome. Consequently, in reviewing the syllabi associated with the
paralegal/pre-law track, attention was paid regarding the incorporation of
essays and papers in determining grades for the various courses. The syllabi
revealed that in most instances students’ grades were partially dependent upon
some form of writing, either in the context of assignments or as components of
exams. While this reviewer has not instructed classes similar to each of the
courses offered under the paralegal/pre-law track, for those courses to which the
reviewer has instructed similar classes, it was found that the Law and Justice
instructors were using texts recognized as top undergraduate texts and quite
suitable for upper division courses.
Law and Justice Faculty Relationship to the Department’s and CWU’s Mission
and Goals
The Law and Justice faculty currently consists of seven full-time faculty, three
being located on the Ellensburg campus, and one full-time faculty member
located at each of the University’s four Centers. The Department’s faculty is a
model of racial/ethnic/gender diversity with four of the faculty representing
under-represented groups. The graduate educational background of the fulltime faculty provides a high degree of diversity representing the disciplines of
law, sociology, psychology, social work, public administration and criminal
justice. In addition to possessing a collectively diverse educational background
the full-time faculty also represents a diverse collection of professional
experiences related to law and justice fields. Consequently, is well suited to
provide a curriculum appropriate for a diverse student body, and equally
appropriate for preparing students for a leading productive lives while pursuing
careers related to the law and justice fields.
In addition to the full-time faculty, 25 adjunct professors are utilized to deliver
the undergraduate program. Over the period reviewed for the Department’s
self-study, adjuncts instructed approximately 50% of the classes offered by the
Department. This is troublesome, and certainly not a desirable circumstance.
Although interviews with students elicited high praise for several adjunct
professors, and the Law and Justice faculty indicated that the Department has
developed a lengthy and strong relationship with several of the adjunct
professors, such heavy reliance upon adjunct instruction leaves a program
susceptible to having to make rapid changes in instructional plans, and can lead
to inconsistency in the content of courses. Furthermore, adjuncts only contribute
to the instructional responsibilities of a department, leaving full-time faculty to
shoulder the weight of other responsibilities associated with a program that far
exceeds the capabilities of the full-time faculty. Nowhere is this more evident
than in examining the undergraduate advising loads of the full-time faculty,
which average about 80 students per full-time faculty. To expect faculty to
provide adequate advisement under such circumstances is unreasonable. This is
supported by comments of students on the Ellensburg campus indicating a high
degree of frustration with regard to being able to meet with professors outside of
class. Similarly, adjunct faculty do not contribute to department service
responsibilities. Nor do adjunct faculty provide opportunities for collaborative
research efforts. Consequently, the CWU Administration needs to address this
situation, preferably by expanding the number of full-time faculty allocated the
Law and Justice Department.
Over the period reviewed the production of peer-reviewed scholarly works
appears limited, with two of the six tenured or tenure track professors producing
seven of the eight peer-reviewed articles published. This reviewer’s experience
has been that scholarly productivity is judged primarily upon publications in
peer-reviewed journals. However, there appears to be several reasons or
justifications for Department’s collectively small number of peer-reviewed
publications. First, as already noted the responsibilities placed upon the fulltime faculty in serving the relatively enormous number of undergraduate
students has to interfere with the faculty’s ability to conduct research and
publication activities. For example, as part of their work with undergraduate
students, the faculty participate with about a dozen students each year in
research and associated presentations. Such collaborative efforts with
undergraduate students is extremely valuable for the student, but often
consumes considerable time of a professor in directing the student’s research
efforts, as well as in extensively reviewing the student’s paper/presentation.
Second, for a discipline that is applied in nature, such as the Law and Justice
program, there is often a blurred line between activities that constitute research
and those that constitute service. Several of the Law and Justice faculty are
involved in consulting type activities that ordinarily are construed by academia
as service in nature, but for applied fields may equally represent scholarly work.
For instance, more than one of the Law and Justice faculty have been involved
with the organization and presentation of restorative justice conferences and
training. Restorative justice is cutting edge theory and application in the
criminal justice field. The development, organization and presentation of such
conferences and training, no doubt, entail considerable research components.
Third, the separation of the full-time faculty on to five separate campuses (the
Ellensburg campus plus the four Centers) deprives the faculty, especially those
located at each of the Centers, of a collegial atmosphere supportive of research
activities. The full-time faculty members located at the Centers each indicated
feelings of isolation, lack of mentoring from senior faculty, and a general lack of
support for their career development. In other words, faculty at the Centers lack
an environment conducive to productive research agendas.
The collective service efforts of the Department exceed what should be expected
from a faculty dwarfed in size by the number of majors it serves. With several of
the faculty involved with Law and Justice related activities in their communities,
the Department’s service efforts embody the University’s mission and goals
focus on creating partnerships between the University and the industries,
professions, and communities the University aspires to serve.
A distinct feature of the Law and Justice Department is the location of over half
its full-time faculty at Centers in which they are the sole Law and Justice faculty
member. In addition, to the problems noted above regarding research efforts, it
also poses a problem regarding undergraduate instruction. Students attending
courses at the Centers receive many of their Law and Justice courses from one
instructor. This is problematic when a student and professor have a personality
conflict, or learning style conflict, or any other type of conflict. It is also
problematic in that the student is not exposed to as diverse of a collection of
ideas, simply because so much of their education is presented by a single person.
Distance education has been utilized by the University to overcome this
handicap associated with the remote location of the Centers; however, testimony
from faculty and students alike indicates that the success of distance education is
highly dependent upon the qualities of the professor. Professors whose presence
in the classroom is excellence, may have a less than adequate presence when
delivering instruction through distance education.
Commendations
The Law and Justice Department is to be commended for its development and
implementation of an undergraduate program that serves students and
establishes links between the University and the larger community within which
the University exists. The Law and Justice Department is exemplary: in its
development of cooperative education opportunities for students; in its
involvement of undergraduate students in collaborative research; and in its
development of a curriculum recognized by the law and justice agencies that
ultimately provide employment for the Department’s graduates.
The Department is also to be commended for assembling a diverse faculty. The
Department not only represents a diverse array of academic disciplines in the
educational backgrounds of its faculty, but it has also managed to achieve a high
degree of racial/ethnic/gender diversity. Each of the full-time faculty members
possesses multiple graduate degrees, generally representing more than one
discipline. The breadth and flexibility this provides the Department is a distinct
advantage. The cultural and gender diversity adds to the breadth provided by
the educational diversity, providing students with additional opportunities for
growth.
The Department is to be commended for its faculty’ s involvement in service
activities at the community level. It is easy for academia to become isolated in its
ivory towers. The time and dedication involved in serving community
organizations is easily overlooked by disciplines having no direct links to
community organizations and professions. Consequently, faculty providing
such services, engender good will for the University; but do so at a risk to their
own careers. Often, the time and energy in providing such service to
communities is done so at a cost to time and energy that would otherwise be
dedicated to research and other scholarly activities, more highly recognized by
the University community.
Finally, the Department is to be commended for its service to such an
extraordinarily large number of majors. The Department has done a remarkable
job of piecing together a curriculum supported in large part by adjuncts, and
providing the required courses in a timely manner allowing a graduation rate
that is roughly 40% of the number of majors at any one time.
Recommendations
The evaluation of the Law and Justice program raises three concerns: 1) the large
number of students entering the major has created a daunting task to provide
adequate services, instructional and advising in nature; 2) the applied nature of
the discipline and the field experiences of the faculty has lead to their extensive
involvement in community service, and as a result have less time for
involvement in traditional activities normally recognized as scholarly endeavors;
and 3) the placement of a significant portion of the Law and Justice faculty as the
sole department members at the Centers has created difficulties with regard to
professional development of the faculty, as well as instructional delivery
problems.
1) The rapid growth in the number of Law and Justice majors has overtaxed the
faculty resources of the Department. This is recognized, both by the
Administration and the Department. There is no easy solution to this problem.
One alternative is to place a cap upon the number of students admitted into the
Law and Justice major. However, that alternative is contrary to the mission of
the University and the Department. A primary focus of CWU’s mission is to
provide education to students, allowing them to pursue full, productive lives,
and at the same time meeting the personnel needs of the State’s industries,
businesses and agencies. The Law and Justice program has an excellent record of
their graduates being employed in the Law and Justice fields. Placing a limit on
the number of Law and Justice majors will frustrate students, preventing many
from pursuing the education of their choice, and will also reduce the pool of
graduates from which State and local agencies may hire future personnel. This
would be in direct conflict with the University’s mission.
Another alternative is to increase the number of full-time faculty members of the
Law and Justice Department. If financial resources were limitless, this would be
the easy solution. However, reality does not suggest that CWU, like most state
institutions of higher education, will receive increased funding from state
revenues. Consequently, increasing the Law and Justice Department’s faculty
allocation will require CWU to reallocate funds. Such reallocation is obviously
unsettling to a University’s faculty, and undermines the cohesiveness and
collegial atmosphere of a University’s faculty. Given the fact that the Law and
Justice Department has recently received additional faculty allocations, it is
predictable that any diminishment of faculty allocations to other departments in
order to support an increased allocation to the Law and Justice Department will
be met with considerable opposition. Additionally, for this alternative to be
consistent with the mission and goals of CWU, a college-wide (if not universitywide) assessment of programs would need to be conducted to determine which
programs are serving student and State demands for university degrees, and
which programs are not as productive with regard to meeting the educational
needs of students and the State. Until such an assessment has been made it is
inappropriate to recommend that faculty reallocation be utilized to increase the
number of Law and Justice faculty. However, if at the conclusion of such an
assessment, it is determined that student and State demands for the Law and
Justice degrees is greater than the demands for other degrees, then it is
incumbent upon the Administration to make such reallocations; despite the
unpopularity of such a measure amongst other departments of the college or
university.
2) Collectively, the Law and Justice faculty have not been prolific regarding the
production of articles published in peer-reviewed journals; a highly recognized
forum for demonstrating excellence in scholarly achievement. Given the
Administration’s recent emphasis on increasing faculty scholarship this must be
a concern to the Department and the University. There can be little doubt that
the demands placed upon the faculty in serving the needs of their majors impacts
the amount of scholarly activity in which they can engage. Consequently, if
additional faculty positions can be allocated to the Department it would be
reasonable for the Administration to expect greater scholarly productivity from
the Department.
As alluded to above, the amount of traditional scholarly activity engaged in by
the Law and Justice faculty is also limited by the involvement of its faculty
members in community service. For an applied discipline, like Law and Justice,
this community service involvement should be encouraged, not discouraged. In
fact, such activity is directly supportive of CWU’s mission and strategic goals to
provide an intellectual resource for the State and its communities. Recognizing
the pull between traditional scholarly work and the benefits associated with the
community service efforts of the Law and Justice faculty, CWU should seek to
achieve a means by which both can be accommodated. The University’s attempt
to quantify and qualify faculty scholarship expectations provides such an
opportunity. The community service work in which the Law and Justice faculty
have become involved has components of scholarship inherent in their activities.
The Administration and the Department need to collaborate to develop
scholarship criteria that recognizes the scholarly nature of the community service
work engaged in by the Law and Justice faculty. The development of such
criteria will benefit tenure-track faculty by providing definite and suitable
benchmarks by which their professional development can be judged. The
development of such criteria will also be beneficial to the Administration by
providing information and criteria by which they can demonstrate the scholarly
productivity of the Law and Justice program.
3) While the placement of Law and Justice faculty at the Centers has enhanced
CWU’s ability to serve the needs of students and the State, the individual faculty
are professionally at a distinct disadvantage in comparison to faculty assigned to
the Ellensburg campus. Once again there is no easy solution. One alternative is
to continue to assign newly created Law and Justice faculty positions to the
Centers. However, it is unlikely that a new position will be created for each of
the four Centers, and such a solution assumes that the need for faculty is greater
at the Centers than at the main campus. It is a better alternative to focus upon
means of incorporating the Centers-located faculty into the mainstream of faculty
at the Ellensburg campus. This alternative will require investment in time and
money, but is more feasible for the University. The Administration has indicated
it expects to recruit a new Department Chair for the Law and Justice Department.
In doing so, the recruitment should seek individuals experienced with programs
involving remotely located faculty, and an individual with the management
skills to build a strong rapport and support system for the Centers-located
faculty.
The Centers concept also results in instructional difficulties. In effect, the
placement of Law and Justice faculty at the Centers increases the instructional
responsibilities of the entire Department, and requires the Department to
implement some means of distance delivery of their courses. Without the
implementation of distance delivery of courses, students attending the Centers
receive a large portion of their education in their major from one instructor. This
is an undesirable situation in which students do not have the opportunity to
benefit from a diversity of professors representing different perspectives.
Utilization of various modes of distance education is the logical answer to this
problem. Consequently, if the Law and Justice Department is allowed to hire
additional faculty, whether the faculty will be located at a Center or on the
Ellensburg campus, the new faculty should have experience in the distance
delivery of education.
With regard to recruitment criteria, whether for a tenure-track position or a new
department chair, a broad net needs to be cast. The Department has been
exceptional in hiring individuals with multiple graduate degrees. In particular,
faculty members with law degrees such as a juris doctorate have also acquired
graduate degrees in subjects relevant to criminal justice. This is commendable
and brings to the Department significantly more flexibility than if the faculty
members possessed law degrees alone. However, requiring the dual graduate
degrees narrows the pool of applicants considerably. With the present faculty
flexibility, and the increasing number of students pursuing the prelaw/paralegal track it is unnecessary to restrict the size of the pool of eligible
candidates by requiring applicants with law degrees to also possess a second
graduate degree. It is more important to obtain instructors with expertise in
distance delivery of instruction. If a department chair is to be recruited
externally, Law and Justice faculty must predominate the selection committee,
and it is imperative that each of the faculty at the Centers be a part of the
selection committee. Centers-located faculty must have excellent rapport with
any new department chair, and must have confidence that the chair will
represent the remotely located faculty’s interests.
A final comment should be made concerning the Law and Justice masters degree
proposal, which has been approved but not implemented. Implementing the
program is consistent with the mission and goals of WCU. However, until
additional faculty can be allocated to the Law and Justice Department, it is not
feasible for the Department with its present compliment of faculty to implement
the proposed masters program. Consequently, aside from providing for the
already noted need for additional faculty, the Administration should devise a
plan for increasing the number of faculty allocated to the Law and Justice
Department so that the masters program can be implemented within the next
few years.
David Blurton, Chair
Justice Department
University of Alaska Fairbanks