San Diego State University
School of Public Affairs
Masters Program in Criminal Justice & Criminology (MCJC)
CJ 601: SEMINAR IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Fall 2014: Weds, 4:00-6:40, PSFA
Professor Information:
Dr. Stuart Henry:
Office: PSFA 101D
Email: stuart.henry2@gmail.com
Office hours:
Wednesday 2:00-4:00pm & by
appointment
* All books on the right can be
purchased at the SDSU bookstore
but you’re likely to find them
cheaper (used) on the web
( e.g. Amazon) or elsewhere.
The required books are needed for
the course. The recommended
books are worth consulting and will be
made available in the library.
Books:
REQUIRED:
Booth et al. 2010. The Craft of Research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Newman et al 2005. Rampage. New York: Perseus, Basic Books.
Muschert et al. 2014. Responding to School Violence. Boulder CO: Lynne
Reiner.
Lanier, Mark M. and Stuart Henry. 2010. Essential Criminology. Boulder Co:
Westview Press.
RECOMMENDED:
Turabian, Kate. L. et al. 2013. A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses
and Dissertations, 8th edition: Chicago Style Guide for Students and
Researchers
Hinkle, William G. and Stuart Henry. 2000. School Violence. ANNALS of the
American Academy of Political and Social Sciences (Will be posted on
BB)
Benbeneshty, Rami and Ron Avi Astor. 2005. School Violence in Context:
Culture, Neighborhood, Family, School and Gender. Oxford University
Press.
Sandhu, Daya Singh and Cheryl B. Aspy (eds.). 2000. Violence in American
Schools: A Practical Guide for Counselors. Washington DC: American
Counseling Association.
Luker, Kristin. 2010. Salsa Dancing In The Social Sciences: Basics of Research.
Harvard University Press.
Lanier, Mark M. and Lisa M. Briggs. 2013. Research Methods in Criminal
Justice and Criminology. Oxford University Press.
Maxfield, Michael G. and Earl R. Babbie. Research Methods for Criminal Justice
and Criminology (6th ed). Cengage Learning.
Journal of School Violence
------------------------------------------------------Other required readings (to be assigned): academic journal articles available in
the library or provided by instructor + various web-based research reports
Prerequisite: Graduate Student Standing in MCJC
Course Description and Overview:
The graduate Seminar CJ 601 is the introductory course for the Master’s in Criminal Justice and Criminology. This seminar
is intended to provide you with a foundation and framework for the rest of your graduate coursework in this field; you’ll
learn about the academic research and writing process, and develop skills for successfully undertaking both. The course will
provide an overview of the operations/processes, theories, policies, problems and challenges of the American criminal
justice system, while also imparting the knowledge/tools necessary to succeed as a cj/crim graduate student.
1
Student Learning Outcomes
Upon completion of this course, you should achieve mastery in the following tasks at a graduate level: (1) select a topic
area, and define a specific problem to research, and refine that problem into a research question; (2) access and critically
review existing data on a specific crime, and techniques of social control and the way the U.S. justice system responds to or
frames this problem; (3) locate review and critique relevant scholarly literature (e.g., academic journal articles) on the topic;
(4) synthesize the scholarly research/writing on a specific criminological/cj topic (these vary depending on the instructor
and year) and write a literature review; (5) select an appropriate research method to conduct the study and design a specific
crim/cj research proposal to study the topic (6) understand and engage the IRB process for research involving human
subjects and articulate the ethical issues that may arise during research endeavors; (7) write a research proposal to address
the chosen question which seeks (hypothetical) funding; (8) assess and critique other students’ research proposals; (9)
critically analyze policies related to the chosen research question; and (10) demonstrate appropriate style and referencing.
COURSE REQUIREMENTS/GRADING:
Defining the Problem
Literature Review and Hypotheses
Theoretical Framework
Research Methods
Data Analysis
Policy Implications
Total
15%
20%
15%
20%
15%
15%
100%
Grading Scale:
Final grades with a decimal of point five (0.5) and above will have the decimals rounded up to the next single digit. Final
letter grades in this course will be assigned according to the following percentage scale:
A = 93-100
A- = 90-92
B+ = 87-89
B = 83-86
B- = 80-82*
C+ = 77-79
C = 73-76
C- = 70-72
D+ = 67-69
D = 63-66
D- = 60-62
F = 59 and below
*In graduate school a B- is considered a failing grade and a student cannot carry a grade less than a
C+ to remain on good standing.
A (90%-100%) – Material is basically ready for moving on to the next step. Content is appropriate
and robust, showing clear understanding of the material. Arguments are logical, wellthought-out, and clearly supported by appropriate evidence that is academic in nature,
cited appropriately. Writing is well-organized, with excellent punctuation, spelling, etc.
B (80%-89%) – Handled assignment fairly well, but material needs some rewrite and polishing
before moving on to the next step. Content is mostly appropriate and robust, showing
clear understanding of the material. Good arguments, but not always well-thought-out,
well-articulated, or well-supported by appropriate evidence. Writing is fairly wellorganized, with some problems in punctuation, spelling.
C (70%-79%) – Material addresses the requirements of the assignment, but needs fundamental
rewriting and/or editing before moving on to the next step. Content is not clearly
appropriate or robust. Arguments are weak, not well-explained, or not well-thought-out.
Arguments are unclear or lacking in supporting evidence, or nature of the evidence is
problematic or incorrectly cited.
D (60%-69%) – A poor product that indicates lack of understanding of the assignment and
exhibits several major flaws or problems. Content inappropriate or not robust. Arguments
inappropriate or missing. Problematic writing in terms of organization, grammar,
spelling, citation style, etc.
F (59% and below) – A very poor product that demonstrates only minimal ability to deal with
facts and present them. May contain serious (i.e., “fatal”) errors of fact or form. The work
is unacceptable.
2
The purpose of these grading criteria is to prepare you for the grading of your work in the Program. The
grading rubric is as follows:
Criterion
A = Outstanding
achievement; available
only for the highest
accomplishment
B = Praiseworthy
performance;
definitely above
average
C = Average;
awarded for
satisfactory
performance
D = Minimally
passing; less than the
typical undergraduate
achievement
General presentation
of proposal
Outstanding; work is
distinguished by its
completeness,
organization,
thoroughness, and
creativity.
Level of work is
best characterized as
solid, well-thought
out and dependable
(consistent).
Meeting minimum
requirements of
written work.
Poorly organized,
and not well
structured and
lacking clarity
Variety of sources
(Evidence Based)
Variety of professional
major/classic evidence
based academic journal
sources, original chapters
in books or monographs.
Primarily from
textbooks, but also a
few other evidence
based academic
references.
There is use of
texts; however, no
references to
academic journals.
Grades of D are given
if the assignment is not
turned in or for work
that does not meet
minimum requirements,
particularly if
disorganized and
repetitive.
Little use is made of the
text or other references.
Web-based sources of
uncertain quality and
origin.
Depth and breadth
of thesis
Information throughout
the proposal is presented
in- depth and is accurate.
Proposal centers on
some points and
covers them
adequately, but is
underdeveloped in
some areas.
Limited evidence
used to support
points/information
may be missing
and discussion is
minimal. Underdeveloped
Stylistic guidelines
of academic
discipline (e.g.,
Chicago, APA) and
appropriate
formatting using
Proposal Guidelines
Multiple and varied
citations including
primary research articles.
Style format correct.
Proposal formatting
followed consistently.
Cited
appropriately. Style
format correct.
Proposal formatting
followed mostly
consistent with
proposal guidelines.
Idea generation and
flow
Original ideas, those that
go beyond the reference
material are presented
and, where appropriate,
discussed in relation to
existing knowledge. The
writing is clear, logical,
and internally consistent.
Original synthesis of
source ideas
Some original
thinking is evident,
though it may not
be at the depth or
extent seen in “A”
work. Writing is
mostly clear,
logical, and
internally
consistent, though
with occasional
lapses.
Citations and
references
inconsistent or
underdeveloped.
Style format
followed
minimally; student
inventing their
own format
There is little or
no indication of
original thinking
or creative use of
the evidence. The
writing is clear,
but lacks
development and
appears more as a
list of topics than a
developed
argument. Internal
inconstancy, or
illogical flow.
Superficial textbook
derivative evidence;
ineffective and
inconsistent use of
evidence to support
arguments. Poor or
irrelevant choice of
evidence
Information presented
lacks or inappropriately
cites references/ sources.
References inconsistently
cited, or citations with
missing references.
Formatting not followed.
Writing is vague or
ambiguous; ideas
derivative of textbooks,
and are not linked, do not
follow logically, and are
not connected to a main
argument.
3
Organization and
Compelling and clear
overall quality of the introduction to the
proposal project
purpose and the
relevance of the research.
A clear summary and
analysis of the literature
review. Clearly identify
and explain the research
approach and research
methodology.
Appropriately analyze
data. Reaches
conclusions that are
clearly explained and
supported by the data.
Convincing discussion of
the implications of the
research findings.
Clear introduction
to the purpose and
the relevance of the
research. A
summary and
analysis of the
literature review.
Explanation of the
research approach
and research
methodology.
Appropriately
analyze data.
Discusses the
implications of the
findings of the
research.
Proposal covers
required
components
(introduction,
literature review,
results, and
discussion)
minimally and
inconsistently.
Poor organization and
quality in all aspects of
proposal.
Completion of Assignments:
Deadlines are real. If you turn in a take-home assignment late, you will lose points. Assignments that are more than
four calendar days late will not be accepted. Please give yourself enough time to get your work done, and this
includes planning for such events as disk/flash/thumb drive losses or computer failures; save your work to two
places, e.g. a flash drive and the computer’s hard drive or a cloud host. If a serious personal crisis or illness does
occur, please contact the instructor; you may be asked to show evidence of some work completed prior to the crisis
before any arrangements will be considered.
Policy on Incompletes:
The grade of “incomplete” is given only to a student whose work in a course has been qualitatively satisfactory (i.e.,
at least a B average for graduate-assignments ) when, because of illness or other circumstances beyond the student’s
control, he/she has been unable to complete some small portion of course work. In no case will an incomplete (I) be
recorded for students who have not completed major course assignments (i.e., items worth at least 10 points), nor
will incompletes be given for students who fail to complete requirements of the research proposal.
Educational Philosophy:
Some people believe that we should be evaluated on the actual outcomes of our work, i.e., you get the grade that you
earn based on (a) the knowledge and understanding that you demonstrate and (b) the quality of this work. Others
believe that we should be evaluated on (c) the effort that we put into the work, (i.e., you get graded based on how
hard you tried); yet others believe we should be evaluated on (e) the strength of your desire to achieve the outcome
“the more you want it, the greater the grade!” The challenge for many college students is that college is a time when
students must transition from the “effort-based” philosophy of K-12 education to the “outcome-based” philosophy
of the real world.
1.
Desire/Motivation → 2. Effort → 3. Knowledge & Understanding → 4. OUTCOME: Quality of Work
I believe in both an effort based and an outcome-based assessment of knowledge, understanding and quality. Why?
Because an effort-based philosophy is merely the means to produce a quality outcome; it is not a substitute for it, or
an end in itself. Operating an effort-based philosophy alone, does a serious disservice to college students who must
graduate to operate in the outcome-based world. What does this mean for you? It means that you will receive the
grade that you earn, based on the grading criteria and rubrics that are outcome based.
Professional Conduct Policy:
We will work within a climate that fosters mutual respect, dialogue, and interaction. It is expected that students in this class
will comport themselves with prudence, courtesy, and dignity in all course-related activities, and operate with civil
discourse, based on evidenced-informed argument rather than opinion and ideological positioning.
4
Class Attendance:
Class attendance is required. We do not meet every week, so when we do meet it is critical that you be there. Class
attendance involves being on time to attend all of the class period. If you miss class, you are responsible for obtaining the
information covered in that session from your classmates.
When a student does not attend class, the absence is excused ONLY IF it was caused by (1) religious observance, (2)
participation in University activities at the request of University authorities, (3) debilitating illness, or (4) compelling
circumstances beyond the student’s control (e.g. auto accident). Students claiming excused absences are responsible for
demonstrating to the instructor that their failure to attend was on account of one of these four causes. Such demonstration
shall take the form of a letter signed by a person in a position to make an authoritative determination as to the validity of the
cause of absence claimed by the student. Letters related to any planned absences must be presented to the instructor by the
end of the second week of classes; letters related to any unplanned absences must be presented to the instructor within one
calendar week of the date of absence, regardless of any holidays during that one-week period. The instructor reserves the
right to verify the content and authority of such letters
Modern Technology Usage:
Online Classroom: This course will have a Blackboard (BB) site, accessible at https://blackboard.sdsu.edu. All students
are expected to have access to e-mail and to check their e-mail accounts at regular intervals. The instructor will use
Blackboard and/or e-mail to facilitate communication with class members and to disseminate information pertinent to the
course, to class sessions, or group work.
PLEASE NOTE: Emails sent through the BB system are automatically routed to the junk mail folder of some email
systems (Yahoo is especially problematic). Thus, you should make sure that the instructor’s email address appears in your
“safe list” so that you may receive emails from the instructor. Also, since many student emails sent to the instructor from
BB may end up in his junk mail folder, please help the instructor find your messages by noting “HONOR 490A” in the
subject line of your message. Better yet, please send your email message independently of the BB system.
Appropriate and Inappropriate use of Technology: Although the use of new technology should be incorporated into any
modern college course for learning purposes, there are still times when such usage is totally inappropriate. As a result, you
are requested not to engage in cell phone calls, IM, SM, texting, etc., during class. Laptop computers may be used in class
for note-taking purposes, but do not abuse this privilege by engaging in inappropriate computer use during class time (e.g.,
email, Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, Instagram other class assignments, etc.). To maintain the value of this course for
students who paid tuition to take it, “live-tweeting” or otherwise sharing course proceedings in real time is NOT permitted.
Privacy: Please respect the privacy of your classmates and instructor by refraining from voice-recording or photographing
them in association with this class. State law restricts the recording of another individual without his/her knowledge and
consent. See also the next section regarding defamation.
Defamation: If you choose to communicate regarding this course on social networking sites such as Facebook, MySpace,
Twitter, LinkedIn, Storify, Pinterest, etc., please remember to use discretion. Inappropriate communications have the
potential to become privacy issues for class members and/or the instructor, as well as defamation risks for you.
Inflammatory or defamatory remarks shall be referred to the appropriate legal counsel.
Academic Integrity:
Although collaboration with peers is encouraged to discuss issues, topics, and to help study, you are expected to complete
your written work independently when individual assignments are given. Academic dishonesty will not be tolerated
under any circumstances. Plagiarism has no place in a university and especially not in a Graduate Program. Plagiarism
on your grant proposal project, whether deliberate or unintentional, will be reported to the SDSU office of Students Rights
and Responsibilities. It is the responsibility of each student to be familiar with the Honor Code and other university
policies and procedures affecting academic integrity. Please refer to San Diego State University’s Student Handbook for
information about the consequences in cases of academic dishonesty.
What is Plagiarism? Basically, plagiarism is the intentional or unintentional presentation of another person’s idea or
product as one’s own. Students can avoid unintentional plagiarism by following carefully accepted scholarly practices.
Notes taken for papers and research projects should accurately record sources of material to be cited, quoted, paraphrased,
or summarized, and papers should acknowledge these sources. The penalties for plagiarism include a zero or a grade of “F”
on the work in question, a grade of “F” in the course, suspension, or expulsion.
5
To help you maintain standards of academic integrity in this course, the instructor will provide samples of appropriate intext and bibliographic citations, as articulated in the latest edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological
Association. You may use another citation style if doing so is appropriate for your field. Basically, in all your written work
in this course:



Every direct quotation must be identified by quotation marks or by appropriate indentation and
must be promptly cited as to author, year of source, and page.
Prompt acknowledgment as to author and year of source is required when material from another
source is paraphrased or summarized in whole or in part in your own words. Acknowledging only
a directly quoted statement does not suffice to notify the reader of any preceding or succeeding
paraphrased material.
Information obtained in your reading or research, which is not common knowledge among
students in this course, must be acknowledged by author, year of source, and page.
COURSE PLAGIARISM POLICY:
We will be discussing what plagiarism is and how it’s to be avoided. In addition, you will be required to
complete the library tutorial on plagiarism. Your papers will be handed in both electronically (saved as a
rich text format or rtf file) and as a hard copy. If plagiarism is suspected the instructor will scan the paper
through turnitin.com, which is a plagiarism detection tool. We wouldn’t have thought such precautions to
be necessary at the graduate level, but more than one student proved us wrong in the past couple of years,
so we’d like to be extremely explicit with you about (NOT) plagiarizing.
Please complete the library tutorial on plagiarism and review the university policy.
Complete the plagiarism tutorial at: http://infotutor.sdsu.edu/plagiarism/
If I suspect plagiarism, I will use Turnitin.com to review it.
University Turnitin.com Agreement
Students agree that by taking this course all required papers and exams may be subject to submission for
textual similarity review to Turnitin.com for the detection of plagiarism. All submitted papers will be
included as source documents in the Turnitin.com reference database solely for the purpose of detecting
plagiarism of such papers. You may submit your papers in such a way that no identifying information about
you is included. Another option is that you may request, in writing, that your papers not be submitted to
Turnitin.com. However, if you choose this option you will be required to provide documentation to
substantiate that the papers are your original work and do not include any plagiarized material; as such you
will need to include copies of all of the articles (or other relevant sources) you used in writing your paper.
Documented Disabilities:
If you are a student with a disability and believe you will need accommodations for this class, it is your
responsibility to contact Student Disability Services at (619) 594-6473. To avoid any delay in the receipt of
your accommodations, you should contact Student Disability Services as soon as possible. Please note that
accommodations are not retroactive, and that accommodations based upon disability cannot be provided
until you have presented your instructor with an accommodation letter from Student Disability Services.
Your cooperation is appreciated. Student Disability Services is located in room 3101 of the Calpulli Center
on Hardy Ave. (near Viejas Arena); more information is available at
http://www.sa.sdsu.edu/sds/index.html.
Student Support Services
Many students find that college is a stressful time. Many students also find that this course in particular is
stressful. Combined with social, financial, and familial pressures, academic challenges can take a toll on
anyone, no matter their academic record or abilities. We all face personal and professional challenges, and
students should begin now to consider matters of work-life balance, so that they can be better equipped to
handle such challenges in the future. If you feel that you need professional assistance with the challenges
you face, you should contact SDSU’s Counseling & Psychological Services:
www.sa.sdsu.edu/cps/index.html or 619-594-5220. Located in the Calpulli Center, Room 4401, this office
offers students confidential assistance, Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. If you need help outside
6
these hours, you can call the San Diego Access and Crisis 24-hour Hotline at 1-888-724-7240. Other
campus emergency services include the Student Health Services Nurse Advisory Line at 1-888-594-5281 or
University Police at 619-594-1991.
Contractual Nature of this Syllabus: Students who choose to remain enrolled in this course, after the
regular schedule adjustment period, indicated by their continued enrollment that they have read and
understood the syllabus for this course, and that they accept and agree to abide by its procedures and
policies.
Amendments and Addenda: The professor reserves the right to amend the course syllabus at any time
during the semester; students will be informed of the changes either in class, via email, or through BB.
\
SPECIFIC COURSE LEARNING OBJECTIVES
I.
INTRODUCTION TO CRIME AND JUSTICE DATA SOURCES
1) (a) Locate/access, (b) read/interpret,(c) synthesize and (d) effectively present (both orally and in written
form) a wide variety of crime and criminal justice data (e.g., UCR, NCVS, Monitoring the Future, other
survey sources, ethnographic research, etc.). In this course you will be focusing on data on school violence
but the sources are similar to those for other crimes.
2) Understand and be able to explain the strengths and weaknesses of various data sources and the value of
data triangulation.
3) Find/access a wide variety of crime and justice-related research reports/data, through the web and other
outlets (e.g., via NCJRS).
4) Locate and access existing crime/justice (and other social science) datasets through Research Reports
and data archives.
II. INTRODUCTION TO THE ACADEMIC RESEARCH PROCESS
5) (a) Distinguish an academic journal (refereed/peer-reviewed) article from a non-academic peer-review
journal or other articles; (b) articulate the differences between ‘academic’ sources and others; (c) describe
how to locate such publications through a university library; (d) identify the top academic journals in our
field, and (e) articulate the structure/organization/basic format of a social science academic journal article.
6) (a) Demonstrate how to accurately document academic citations (when/why/how to cite); (b) explain
what constitutes plagiarism (and how to avoid engaging in it!); (c) produce accurate citations and create a
bibliography using ASA (or APA) format.
7) (a) Review journal articles and other sources and extract pertinent info from them; (b) create an
annotated bibliography;
8) (a) describe the basics of the research process (in re. crime/justice); (b) write a research
question/hypothesis; (c) articulate the role of theory in research (and research in theory).
9) (a) Explain the purpose and function of the University Institutional Review Board (IRB) and the process
for submitting an application for IRB approval; (b) explain the importance of ethics and ethical issues in
cj/crim research;(c) explain human subjects protection; and (d) distinguish between the different levels of
risk to subjects in conducting research.
10) (a) Distinguish between independent and dependent variables and (b) explain how to operationalize
them; (c) write a research question; and (d) identify and operationalize these variables for your research
question.
11) Write a 10-15 page literature review on a topic related to school violence (approved by instructor &
fitting within the guidelines of NIJ dissertation research proposal solicitation).
7
12) (a) Develop possible research designs for studying crime/justice issues on your chosen school violence
topic; (b) articulate and demonstrate through your chosen school violence research topic, how a research
idea becomes a research question; and (c) then craft (roughly) an appropriate research design for that
particular question.
III.
THINKING ABOUT CRIME CAUSATION
13) Examine and distinguish between the several theories that explain crime, violence and particularly
school violence.
14) Identify causal factors precursors commonly associated with acts of school violence, specifically
rampage shootings
15) Evaluate the value of integrative theories of school violence compared with monolithic theories
IV. THINKING ABOUT CRIMINAL JUSTICE/SCHOOL VIOLENCE POLICIES & THEIR
EFFECTIVENESS
16) Critically assess the context and motivations for our nation’s recent/current embrace of punitive justice
and its impact(s) by way of the crimes of responding to school violence.
17) (a) Identify the factors that comprise the concept of ‘moral panic’; and (b) explain how such panics
influence American crime/anti-school violence policy.
18) (a) Discuss and explain how contemporary U.S. anti-school violence policies were created; and (b)
describe what the goals and forces were behind them.
19) (a) Assess the explanations for America’s declining rate of school violence; and (b) describe which
factors likely played key roles in this decline. (c) Explain why, in spite of the declining school violence
rates, the public fears this crime more than many other more prevalent crimes.
20) (a) Critically assess current anti-school violence policies; (b) identify possible alternatives; and (c)
evaluate, based on available research evidence, which of these alternatives seems most effective;(d) and
explain why.
TENTATIVE COURSE SCHEDULE/READINGS
WEEK:
DATE
1:
8/27/14
2:
9/3/14
TOPIC/S TO BE COVERED
READINGS refers to the specific reading on school
violence to be read PRIOR to the date below. Additional
readings are assigned related to the research proposal and
listed typically before the specific assigned readings;
schedule subject to change.
Intro to the Program, the Course
& Classmates
Guest Lecturer: Drs. JOSH
CHANIN/DANA NURGE
Read course syllabus before class and identify at least 3
questions for instructor.
Defining Crime. Defining School
Violence
READINGS:
1. Muschert, et al. 2014. Introduction “The Columbine
Effect” pp. 1-12 and Conclusion: “School Safety and
Society” In Responding to School Violence, pp. 217-222.
2. Henry and Hinkle (2000) “Preface to School Violence”
3. Henry (2000) “What is School Violence? An Integrative
Definition” ANNALS of American Academy of Political and
Social Science, 567.
4. Lanier & Henry Ch 2. “What is Crime: Defining the
Problem.” Essential Criminology.
8
3:
9/10/14
Overview of the academic
research process
Identify specific areas of interest
Think about possible research
topics
Preliminary discussion about
how to formulate a research
question
Overview of School Violence
Research
4:
9/17/14
School Violence Data
Measuring Crime: Data Sources
& Their Strengths, Weaknesses,
Issues
Continue Research Formulation
5:
9/24/14,
NO CLASS: WORK ON
PROPOSAL PAPER 1 AND
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
**DATA RESEARCH DUE** Consequences: Who gets
Victimized?
6:
10/1/14
Who Are The Offenders?
-PROPOSAL PAPER PART 1
DUE (a) Research question, (b)
significance, incorporating
revised data research + (c)
annotated bibliography of ten
articles
(1 copy to class + email copy to
instructor)
Craft of Research, pp. 1-29; pp 31-66.
Thesis Guide ch 3
Salsa Dancing ch 1-2
READINGS:
1. Newman et al (2005). “Explosions”: Ch 1 of Rampage, pp.
3-21.
2. Henry, S. (2009) “School Violence Beyond Columbine: A
Complex Problem in Need of an Interdisciplinary Analysis”
American Behavioral Scientist 52 (9)1246-1265.
3. Freydis (2011). The School Shootings Report
http://holology.com/shooting.html
4. Bath School Massacre articles
5. School Violence Timelines
Writer’s Manual ch 5 & 6;
Continue Salsa ch 3-4
READINGS:
1. What the Data Shows: CDC Data Sheet on School
Violence Indicators of School Violence.
2. San Diego Unified School District crime statistics:
http://www.sandi.net/cms/lib/CA01001235/Centricity/Domai
n/134/crime-statistics.pdf
*Find school violence data related to your specific topic and
summarize it
CR pp. 66-83
*Find 10 articles in your area of interest
*Work on annotated bibliography for these articles
READINGS:
1. Sandhu and Aspy (2000), p. 67-85 “Defining School
Violence Victim Sub-types” by Furlong.
2. Lanier & Henry. Ch 1: What Is Criminology? The Study
of Crime, Criminals, and Victims in a Global Context
READINGS:
1. Newman, et al. (2005), Rampage, pp. 23-46, “The
Shooters”
2. Kimberling, Steve & May, David. “School Shooters:
Research Unveils 10 Myths Regarding Perpetrators”
https://kycss.org/pdfs-docs/hotpdfs/School%20Shooter-1.pdf
3. PBS Frontline: Profiling School Shooters.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/kinkel/profil
e/
4. Sandhu and Aspy (2000), pp 21-37: “Psychocultural
profiles of Violent Students” by Sandhu FBI: The School
Shooter: A Threat Assessment Perspective.
http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/schoolshooter/
5. US Secret Service. (2000). Preventing School Shootings.
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/jr000248c.pdf
6. Chandras, Kan V., DeLambo, David A., Chandras, Sunil
V. and Eddy, John Paul (2008). “Why Couldn’t Schools Stop
Student Violence? A Psychological Profile of a School
Shooter and Prevention Strategies.” Vistas Online
http://counselingoutfitters.com/Chandras2.htm
7. Lanier & Henry Ch 4 “Born to Be Bad”: Biological,
Physiological, and Biosocial Theories of Crime;
8. Lanier & Henry Ch 5: Criminal Minds: Psychiatric and
Psychological Explanations for Crime
9
7:
10/8/14
School Violence and the Media:
Cause and Effect
- UNDERSTANDING
ACADEMIC PLAGIARISM
-HUMAN SUBJECTS AND
THE IRB PROCESS
8:
10/15/14
9:
10/22/14
NO CLASS: WRITING A LIT
REVIEW
Explaining School Violence I:
Failed Family Development as a
Cause of School Violence
Explaining School Violence II:
The Role of Schools, School
Climate and Education in School
Violence
Read THESIS GUIDE: 7
*Complete the plagiarism tutorial:
http://infotutor.sdsu.edu/plagiarism/
Read Thesis Guide CH 4
*SDSU Institutional Review Board (IRB): look up on the
*SDSU website and read over what it is; how it works; and
complete the tutorial (you need to register first):
https://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~gra/login.php. Send me your
certificate of completion.
READINGS:
1. Herda-Rapp, Ann. (2003). “The social construction of local
school violence threats by the news media and professional
organizations.” Sociological Inquiry, 73, 545-574.
2. Kupchik, A. & Bracy, N.L. (2009) “The news media on
school crime and violence: Constructing dangerousness and
fueling fear.” Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 7(2), 136155.
3. Burns & Crawford. (2000). “School shootings, the media,
and public fear: Ingredients for a moral panic.” Crime, Law &
Social Change 32: 147-168.Online: Available at:
http://people.stu.ca/~mccormic/4503/BurnsPanic99.pdf
4. Muschert, G. W. (2007). Research in school shootings.
Sociology Compass, 1(1), 60-80. Sandhu and Aspy, pp 109119: “The True Perpetrators of Violence” by Breland
5. Dave Grossman (online article and link) “Are we training
our children to kill?”
6. Lion and Lamb Project (online article and link): “Media
Violence: Video Games, Movies Television”
7. Henry (2008) “Social Constructionist Theories of Crime”
Salsa Dancing Ch 6-9
READINGS:
1. Newman, et al., (2005). Rampage: pp. 47-76 “Explaining
Rampage School Shooting” and pp. “Testing the Theory”
pp. 229-270.
2. Wyatt. (2000). “A Social Ecology Approach to Violence
in American Schools,” Sandhu and Aspy pp 43-59 .
3. Loeber and Stouthamer-Lober. (1998). “Juvenile
Aggression at Home and at School.” In Elliot et al,
Violence in American Schools: pp. 94-126.
4. Bauer (2000). “Violence Prevention: A Systematic
Approach” Sandhu and Aspy, pp 139-151.
5. Addington, Lynn A. 2014. “Surveillance and Security
Approaches Across Public School Levels.” In Responding to
School Violence, Muschert et al. pp. 71-88.
6. Lanier and Henry Ch 6: Learning Criminal Behavior:
Social Process Theories
READINGS:
1. Bracy, N.L. (2011). Student perceptions of high security
school environments. Youth and Society, 43(1), 365-395.
Newman et al (2005). Rampage. “Under the Radar” pp. 77110.
2. Welsh(2000).“Effects of School Climate on School
Disorder’ in Hinkle & Henry pp. 88-107.
3. Yogan. (2000). “School Tracking and Student
Violence” Hinkle & Henry pp. 108-122.
4. Hyman & Perone (1998). “The other side of school
10
violence: Educator policies and practices that may
contribute to student misbehavior.” Journal of Social
Psychology, 26, 7-27.
5. Benbeneshty, Rami and Ron Avi Astor. 2005. School
Violence in Context: Culture, Neighborhood, Family,
School and Gender. Oxford University Press.
6. Hong, Jun Sung, Dorothy L. Espelage, Christopher J.
Ferguson, and Paula Allen-Meares. 2014. “Violence
Prevention and Intervention.”In Responding to School
Violence, Muschert et al., pp. 139-156.
7. Lanier and Henry Ch 7: Failed Socialization: Control
Theory, Social Bonds, and Labeling
10:
10/29/14
Explaining School Violence II:
Alienation, Anger and
Vengeance: Violence as
Expressions of Fear and Anger—
Do Violent
Communities/Societies Cause
School Violence?
PROPOSAL PAPER 2 DUE:
Revised Research Question +
Literature review
(bring 2 copies to class + email 1
copy)
Research Design
Choosing an Appropriate Design
for your topic
11:
11/5/14
Explaining School Violence III:
Peers, Gangs, Racial Conflict
and Masculinity
*Peer review & feedback of classmates’ lit reviews
Thesis Guide Ch 8; Writer’s Manual Ch 8
READINGS:
1. Newman et al. (2005). Rampage. pp. 111-125 “The
Underbelly of Social Capital”
2. Laub and Lauritsen (1998). “The Interdependence of
School Violence and Neighborhood and Family Conditions”
in Elliott et al. Violence in American Schools. pp 127-158
3. Staples. “Violence in Schools: Rage Against a Broken
World” by Hinkle & Henry (2000): pp. 30-41.
4. Muschert, Glenn W and Eric Madfis. 2014. “Fear of
School Violence in the Post-Columbine Era.” In Responding
to School Violence, Muschert et al., pp. 13-34.
5. Kupchik, Aaron and Thomas J. Catlaw. 2014. “The
Dynamics of School Discipline in a Neoliberal Era.” In
Responding to School Violence, Muschert et al. pp. 53-70.
6. Steeves, Valerie and Gary T. Marx. . 2014. “Safe Schools
Initiatives and the Shifting Climate of Trust.” In Responding
to School Violence, Muschert et al. pp. 105-124.
7. Lanier and Henry Ch 9: The Sick Society: Anomie, Strain,
and Subcultural Theory
8. Lanier and Henry Ch 10: Capitalism as a Criminogenic
Society: Conflict and Radical Theories of Crime
READINGS:
1. Newman et al Rampage. (2005). pp. 126-154. “The
Stranglehold of Adolescent Culture” and pp.
155-176. “Why Kids Don’t Tell.”
2. Yogan & Henry (2000).“Masculine Thinking and School
Violence, pp. 89-106” in Sandhu and Aspy
3. Ibrahim. (2000) “School Violence: An Ecological, Social
and Cultural Perspective” in Sandhu and Aspy, pp.167-180.
4. Kimmel & Mahler (2009). “Adolescent Masculinity,
Homophobia, and Violence: Random School Shootings,”
1982-2001 American Behavioral Scientist. 46: 1439-1458.
5. Fagan and Wilkinson (1998). “Social Context and
Functions of Adolescent Violence” by in Elliott et al.
Violence in American Schools. Pp. 55-93
6. Cintron. “Listening to What the Streets Say” by in Hinkle
& Henry (2000): pp. 42-53.
7. Welch, Kelly and Allison Ann Payne. 2014. “Racial
Implication of School Discipline and Climate.” In
Responding to School Violence, Muschert et al. pp. 125-138.
8. Lanier and Henry Ch 8: Crimes of Place: Social Ecology
and Cultural Theories of Crime
9. Lanier and Henry. Ch 11: Patriarchy, Gender, and Crime:
Feminist Criminological Theory
11
12
11/12/14
Controlling School Violence I:
Zero Tolerance
PROPOSAL PAPER 3 DUE:
Theories that you consider likely
explanations for your topic/issue
READINGS:
1. Kupchik, A. (2010). “Too Much Discipline” in
Homeroom Security: School Discipline in an Age of
Fear. New York University Press. (pp 1-12).
2. Rich-Shea, Aviva M. and James Alan Fox. 2014. “ZeroTolerance Policies.” In Responding to School Violence,
Muschert et al. pp. 89-104.
3. Mukherjee, E. (2011-12). “Criminalizing the Classroom:
The Rise of Aggressive Policing and Zero Tolerance
Discipline in New York City Public Schools” New York
Law School Law Review, 56: 1373-1411.
http://www.nylslawreview.com/wordpress/wpcontent/uploads/2012/04/56-4.Criminalizing-theClassroom.Ofer_.pdf
4. Rich-Shea, Aviva M. and Fox, James Alan (2012).
“The Administration of Zero Tolerance through School
Resource Officers.” In Muschert, et al. Responding to
School Violence. Pp.89-104.
5. Levine, J. (1996). “Foucault, Security Guards and Indocile
Bodies.”Maximum Security, pp. 75-102.
Lanier & Henry Ch 3: Classical, Neoclassical, and Rational
Choice Theories
Continue Research Design
13:
11/26/14
NO CLASS. THANKSGIVING
* Review Relevant Chapter/s in Methods Book (depending
on design you are using)
Salsa Dancing 10 & 11
Controlling School Violence II:
Policing our Schools and
Students’ Rights
14:
12/3/14
Preventing School Violence
Dispute Resolution, Restorative
Justice and Peaceable Schools
PROPOSAL PAPER 4
(Research Design/Methodology)
DUE
Discussion of Policy Implications
of Research
READINGS:
1. Beger, R. R. (2002). Expansion of Police Power in Public
Schools and the Vanishing Rights of Students, Social Justice,
29, 119-30.
2. Casella, R. (2001). “Policing the Urban School Crisis” In
“‘Being Down’ Challenging Violence in Urban Schools. New
York: Columbia University Press (pp 98-116).
3. Kupchik, A. & Bracy, N.L. (2010). To Protect, Serve and
Mentor?: Police Officers in Public Schools. In T. Monahan &
R. Torres (Eds.), Schools Under Surveillance: Cultures of
Control in Public Education (pp. 21-37).
4. Glidden, R.C. “Stopping the School Shooter.” Available
Online: at:
http://www.nasro.org/assets/documents/Handout_NASRO_R
on_Glidden.pdf
READINGS:
1. Winslade & Williams (2012) pp. 3-14; pp. 81-110 Safe &
Peaceful Schools
2. Hillyard Daniel & M. Joan McDermott (2013).
“Alternatives to Fear-Based Strategies: Ecological,
Peacemaking, and Feminist Considerations. In Muschert, et
al. Responding to School Violence.
3. Beam, John M., Madar, Chase and Phenix. Deinya (2008).
Life without Lockdown: Do Peaceful Schools Require HighProfile Policing? Learning Environments, 19
http://annenberginstitute.org/VUE/spring08/Beam.php
4. Pepinsky (2000) “Educating for Peace” in Hinkle & Henry.
pp. 157-170.
5. Caulfield (2000). “Creating Peaceable Schools” in Hinkle
12
15:
12/10/14
PROPOSAL PAPER 5:
POLICY SECTION DUE
Guest Instructor: Dr. Gerald Monk
Preventing School Violence II:
Violence Prevention Programs
Mediation and Narrative
Approaches to Conflict
Resolution
16:
12/17/14
FULL RESEARCH PROPOSAL
DUE
Class Wrap-up: Other
Promising School Anti-Violence
Policies
& Henry pp. 170-185.
6. Mattaini. Sandhu and Aspy. (2000). “Constructing
Cultures of Non-violence” in Sandhu and Aspy. pp. 123-136.
7. Aspy “Preventing Violence by Promoting Virtues” in
Sandhu and Aspy, pp. 153-165.
8. Lanier and Henry Ch 12: New Directions in
Criminological Theory
READINGS:
1. Winslade & Williams (2012). pp. 49-80; Safe & Peaceful
Schools
2. Lawler (2000) “School-based Violence Prevention
Programs: What Works” in Sandhu and Aspy. pp. 247-263
3. Smith (2000). “Anger Management for Youths: What
Works and for Whom” in Sandhu and Aspy, (2000). pp. 217227.
4. Stickel (2000). “Preventing School Violence: Training for
School Counselors” by Sandhu and Aspy, pp. 201-214
5. Tobias (2000). “Practical Solutions to Violence in
American Schools” in Sandhu and Aspy, pp. 231-244.
READINGS:
1. Lawler “School-Based Violence Prevention Programs:
What Works” in Sandhu & Aspy, (2000).
2. Sprague, Jeffrey R., Daniel W. Close, and Hill M. Walker.
2014. “Encouraging Positive Behavior.” In Responding to
School Violence, Muschert et al., pp. 157-172.
3. Hillyard, Daniel and M. Joan McDermott. 2014.
“Ecological, Peacemaking, and Feminist Considerations.” In
Responding to School Violence, Muschert et al., pp. 173-188.
4. Kellner, Douglas. 2014. “Diagnosing and Preventing
School Shootings.” In Responding to School Violence,
Muschert et al., pp. 189-216.
5. Newman, et al., (2005). “Prevention, Intervention and
Coping with School Shootings.” Rampage. Pp. 271-298
6. Samples and Aber (1998). “Evaluation of School-Based
Violence Prevention Programs” in Elliott, et al. Violence in
American Schools, pp. 217-252
13
RESEARCH PROPOSAL GUIDELINES:
Over the course of the semester you will learn how to write a research proposal on a topic chosen by the instructor, which
this semester is School Violence. You will be able to select any aspect of this topic on which to develop your research
proposal. You’ll submit and receive feedback on pieces of your proposal during October and November, early December,
and submit the final/complete draft of your proposal in December. You will then work in small groups to review/critique
your fellow peers’ proposals (using standard guidelines/criteria) and make (pretend) funding decisions and provide
constructive comments on how these proposals might be improved. Students can then use their peers’ feedback to make
changes to their final proposals (due the following week).
Your final research proposal will be 18-22 pages (22 pages is the maximum number of pages for text), with a minimum of
15 academic journal article citations and 8 additional citations (research reports, scholarly books, more journal articles,
web resources, etc)…yes, you’ll be citing at least 23 different sources! Citations will be done using ASA or APA style
(refer to the writer’s manual). It’s also a good idea to pick up a writing style guide (e.g., Turabian et al book listed under
recommended books page 1).
Although the research you propose to undertake in your proposal is hypothetical and will not actually occur, we’re
pretending that it will (and who knows…perhaps some of you will go on to undertake the research you’ve proposed for
your Master’s thesis or Doctoral dissertation). As such, we’re going to make these proposals as true to reality as possible
and you will follow the guidelines for the NIJ dissertation research solicitation. You can choose any topic and
methodology you want so long as it falls within the scope of school violence, so long as it is feasible. There are some
sections NIJ asks for which we will skip (e.g., performance measures), but you will follow their guidelines for the
structure/format of the proposal. We will further discuss this in class.
Website: Google National Institute of Justice Dissertation Award and PRINT OUT AND READ THROUGH THE
MOST RECENT SOLICITATION. MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND THE GUIDELINES AS YOU’LL BE
FOLLOWING THEIR FORMAT.
RESEARCH PROPOSAL COMPONENTS
PART 1) Research question + annotated bibliography
This is the first of 3 pieces of your proposal that you’ll turn in. In it, you will:
a) succinctly state your research question (what you are proposing to study with this research). It should
have a question mark at the end.
b) briefly state the significance/importance of your proposed research (why it matters; how it will
contribute to the body of knowledge on this subject)
c) provide a list of at least 10 references that are relevant to your research topic (cited in APA or ASA
style) AND provide an annotated bibliography for 4 of these sources (at least 3 of the four must be
academic journal articles). See your writing books for more information on how to annotate.
PART 2) Literature review (10-15 pages) & references
We’ll thoroughly discuss how to gather information for this and how to organize/structure it. On the day
this section is due, you should bring two copies to class: one for the instructor and the other one for
classmates to review and critique.
At the beginning of your lit review, please re-state your research question and its significance.
Use headings and sub-headings to organize your literature review!
Use logic in organizing the sections of your literature review (e.g., chronological timeline of the history of
something; going from general to more specific; etc) and be sure to connect them together. Your literature
review should discuss the body of research/knowledge on the subject but also point to holes/gaps in it.
Your study should then be able to fill (or begin to fill) one of the holes/gaps you identified. Your literature
review should be focused and clear. You will not be able to include every single study ever done on this
issue (unless it is a very unexplored/new topic), but instead, will focus on the seminal ones and the ones
that are pertinent to your research question.
14
PART 3) Theoretical Framework (5 pages)
Theories are explanations about why crimes occur. They are statements about causal relationships between
factors that research shows to be connected to behavior. For example, some people may have a genetic
make-up that predisposes them to sensation seeking. That alone does not mean they get their sensation
seeking needs met by crime, but if certain environmental conditions prevail, such as parents and peers who
modeled that behavior as a way of getting thrills and an absence of legitimate means to satiate the need for
sensation, makes them more likely, if not destined to seek sensations through crime. This would, then, be a
biological theory of crime. There are at least 12 other theoretical frameworks and you will need to review
these (which you will do in the parallel sociology course on theories of crime, as well as through the
Essential Criminology text in this course). You need to select one or two of these theories as the most likely
to explain the aspect of school violence that you have chosen.
PART 4) Methodology & references (3-5 pages)
We’ll discuss what this will look like and how to organize/structure it. You’ll need to refer to a basic
cj/crim research methods book and the Salsa Dancing in the Social Sciences book when designing your
methodology section.
PART 5) Policy Discussion (3-5 pages)
THE FULL/FINAL PROPOSAL will require you to put the previous pieces together, along with a few
other minor additions. All of this will be in compliance with the NIJ graduate fellowship award guidelines.
Your final paper will include appendices (as appropriate) and your full list of references. You will hand in
your proposal the last day of class to be reviewed/assessed/critiqued by your classmates (serving as
proposal review teams).
Your final copy of the paper is due the following week (you’ll want to incorporate changes suggested by
your peers).
15