SEMINAR IN PENOLOGY - CJC 6021
Fall 2013
Course Title: Seminar in Penology
Course Description: This seminar is offered completely online. It
introduces you to classical and contemporary readings in
corrections. It offers the historical and philosophical contexts to
critically assess contemporary correctional issues and stresses the
importance of data-driven policy promoting critical evaluation and
debate.
Please read the seminar link "Electronic Information Literacy:
Promoting Netiquette in Class." I feel strongly that you demonstrate a
cooperative attitude and respectful communication when discussing
anything with me and others in the seminar.
Except for the assignment in Part 1 (see below), we will use the
window of Monday through Thursday for the elearning work in Parts
2 and 3 of the seminar. By that I mean whatever elearning work there
is in Parts 2 and 3 of the seminar such as participation in online
discussions (Part 2) or work submitted to the dropbox (Part 3), it will
be submitted Monday through Thursday. Friday, Saturday and
Sunday are used for reading, essaying, and the next week’s
preparation.
ASAP - please go to the "ABOUT YOU" link in the Discussion tab and
tell us about yourself. I did it too.
Course Credit Hours: 3 Hours
Instructor Name and Contact Information:
Dr. John O. Smykla
Building 85, Room 151 (But note - Since this is an online seminar, I
am not on campus unless we make arrangements to meet.)
My Cell Phone: 205-862-4024 (Fell free to call me. That's why I give
you the number!!! But please, no calls after 9 PM)
E-Mail: jsmykla@uwf.edu (please allow 24 hours for response)
Office Hours:
My computer is attached to my hip so I am always checking
email. You can email me anytime. You can also call me on my cell
anytime. Even though this seminar is offered completely online I will
make arrangements to meet with you on campus.
Prerequisites or Co-Requisites: None.
Required Texts:
Doris Layton MacKenzie, What Works in Corrections: Reducing the
Criminal Activities of Offenders and Delinquents (New York:
Cambridge, 2006).
Matthew S. Crow and John Ortiz Smykla, Offender Reentry:
Rethinking Criminology and Criminal Justice (Boston, MA: Jones &
Bartlett, 2014)
Course Schedule (what we’ll do and when): I envision this seminar
having three major parts. Parts 1 and 2 focus on MacKenzie's
book. Part 3 focuses on the book by Crow and Smykla.
PART ONE: By Friday, September 27 I want you to read Chapters
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 in What Works in Corrections:
Reducing the Criminal Activities of Offenders and Delinquents and
answer all the questions I created for those chapters. The questions
are provided as a seminar link in elearning. The attachment is titled
“Questions to accompany Doris MacKenzie’s What Works in
Corrections.” I want you to type your answers underneath the
questions.
Submit your answers to the "What Works in Corrections" Dropbox in
elearning no later than (NLT) 11:30 pm Friday, September 27. I know
it looks like a lot (yes, it's about 210 questions) but the questions are
mostly content based, not critical thinking.
The approach I recommend is for you to read a chapter then answer
that chapter’s questions then go on to the next chapter. Your
understanding of MacKenzie’s book is central to successfully
completing the remaining parts of the seminar and understanding the
importance of data-driven policy/evidence-based corrections.
PART TWO: Another course link in elearning is “16 Critical
Thinking Questions.” These questions were broadly conceived after
reading MacKenzie’s What Works in Corrections: Reducing the
Criminal Activities of Offenders and Delinquents.
The questions are divided into five parts: (1)
HISTORY/GOALS/PHILOSOPHY OF CORRECTIONS/PRISON
CROWDING; (2) INCAPACITATION AND DETERRENCE; (3)
REHABILITATION; (4) EVIDENCE-BASED CORRECTIONS AND
CRIME PREVENTION; and (5) INTERMEDIATE SANCTIONS.
I will assign you and another student to one question from the list of
16 for discussion via elearning. The two of you will be the discussion
leaders (DLs) for your question.
In your roles as DLs, the two of you will confer by phone, email,
Facebook, or even f2f, research the assigned question, and create one
essay response with references to the question. I (and the other
students in the seminar) will read these essays very carefully. They
are central to my grading of your performance in this part of the
seminar. Do not ask me how long the essay should be.
You will post that essay response to the Discussion board NLT noon
on Mondays. For example, the first two DLs (Alcover & Anzaldo) will
post their essay NLT noon Monday, October 7. We will do this for six
weeks.
(I gave you one open week from when the assignment in Part 1 was
due/September 27 and the start of Part 2/October 7 so the first two
DLs in Part 2 have time to prepare. Because all subsequent pairs of
students in Part 2 have more time to prepare they will be held to a
slightly higher performance standard.)
The pairs and dates for submitting the essay I assign are:
Alcover & Anzaldo, Monday, October 7
Bibo (solo), Monday, October 14
Burchett & Foster, Monday, October 21
Glover & Grabel, Monday, October 28
Ludwig & RitenourHill, Monday, November 4
Sullivan & Thompson, Monday, November 11
When you are NOT the DLs you take the student responder
role. Your assignment is to carefully read the DLs' question and their
essay. Student responders will make a total of TWO critical thinking
responses each week during this phase of the course. Your responses
should also be researched and referenced. (Use UWF's e-journals,
newspapers, etc.) I shall be looking for that.
After you make your first critical thinking response to the DLs' essay,
the DLs will respond back to you with a question or require additional
information. You will then respond back to the DL for a second
time. Hence you will make a minimum of two postings per week in
this phase of the course. But remember, you only make your second
posting AFTER the DLs post back to you based on your first posting.
Student responders MUST make their first posting to the DLs NLT 6
pm each Tuesday during this phase of the course. The DL MUST
respond back to each student’s posting NLT 6 pm each
Wednesday. The student MUST respond back to the DL NLT 6 pm
each Thursday. Timing is critical. If you don't stay within these time
frames you throw everyone off and cause others more work.
At the end of every discussion week, the two DLs will post a
2-3 page summary of the week's discussion for all to
read. So, for example, Alcover & Anzaldo will post a 2-3
page summary of their week's discussion by 11:30 pm,
Sunday, October 13.
I suggest the two DLs work together in this fashion: Confer with each
other as suggested above over the question I assign you. Then
research it and create and submit the joint essay to the Discussion
board. Decide which one of you will be the official responder during
the week. You can both participate in the discussion, but one should
be the lead DL. The other student who was not the lead DL during
the week should be the lead on creating and submitting the summary
to the Discussion board by 11:30 pm on Sunday (same week as your
discussion) so everyone in the seminar can read it.
PART THREE: Congratulations! US Attorney General Eric
Holder knows of your reputation in corrections, reentry, and
evidence-based practices and appointed you to his Federal
Interagency Reentry Council. Here is the Council's Overview Mr.
Holder sent you when he invited you to join.
Before you accept his invitation you review the websites of the
Council of State Governments' What Works in Reentry Clearinghouse
and the Department of Justice's Office of Justice Programs
CrimeSolutions.gov and believe you can make a contribution to the
Federal Interagency Reentry Council because you are heavily invested
in the "what works" literature and evidence-based practices in
corrections and reentry.
Here is what Mr. Holder asks you to do for the Federal Interagency
Reentry Council.
He asks you to read Matthew Crow and John Smykla's Offender
Reentry: Rethinking Criminology and Criminal Justice before the
next meeting of the Federal Interagency Reentry Council in December
2013. It just so happens that you have a copy of Crow and Smykla's
highly acclaimed reentry reader and text but haven't had a chance to
read it. This is your opportunity.
Mr. Holder wants you to prepare a 10 to 20 page document (in Word,
of course, double spaced and using Times New Roman 12 font) and
give him and the Federal Interagency Reentry Council members your
opinion as to which programs described in selected chapters (see
below) of Crow and Smykla are effective, promising, no effect (ratings
used by CrimeSolutions.gov), or strong evidence of effectiveness,
modest evidence of effectiveness, no evidence of an effect, or modest
evidence of a harmful effect (ratings used by the What Works in
Reentry Clearinghouse).
The chapters in Crow and Smykla Mr. Holder asks you to review and
offer your opinion on are Chapters 1 AND 2; Chapter 5 OR 6 (since
both pertain to jail reentry he tells you to choose one or the other);
Chapter 8 OR 9 (the former - Chapter 8 - is something that the Office
of Federal Probation believes works with federal probationers;
Chapter 9 focuses on employers' willingness to hire ex-felons);
Chapter 11 OR 12 (both chapters focus on special population
offenders so he tells you to select either Chapter 11 which deals with
reentry and offenders with mental illness or Chapter 12 which deals
with substance abuse offenders); and both Chapters 16 and 17.
Obviously the invitation and challenge excite you and you get right to
it.
To answer Mr. Holder's question, you'll need to research what is a
best practice (aka evidence-based practices), how is a program judged
to be a best practice, who decides, give examples of best practices and
why they are rated as best practices, and then offer your opinion of
the reentry programs discussed in Crow and Smykla's book.
You notice right away when you open Crow and Smykla's book that
some chapters Mr. Holder asked you to read and report on do not
describe specific reentry programs, per se. Instead some of the
chapters (for example, Chapters 1 and 17 are more pedagogical,
laying out the foundation for reentry and how to sustain the
movement - if in fact it is a movement or simply old wine in new
bottles). But as a scholar you understand that chapters like that are
critically important to laying out the foundation for your report and
putting your report in a broader context.
Good luck!
Evaluation:
Part One, 20 points
Part Two, 40 points (20 points on your performance as DL and 20
points on your performance as responder)
Part Three, 40 points
Grades:
A: 92-100; A-: 90-91;
B+: 88-89; B: 82-87; B-: 80-81;
C+: 78-79; C: 72-77; C-: 70-71;
D: 60-69;
F: below 60
Important:
I reserve the right not to pass students who do not participate in
discussion postings, regardless of the scores they earn on the
examinations.
Changes in Course Requirements:
Since all classes do not progress at the same rate I may wish to modify
the requirements for this course or their timing as circumstances
dictate. If I do so, you will be given adequate notice.
Expectations for Academic Conduct/Plagiarism Policy:
Academic Misconduct speaks to the integrity of student learning and
performance. The Student Code of Conduct addresses non-academic
behavior and provides a mechanism for the University to deal with
inappropriate or illegal behavior on the part of students. Disruptive
behavior in an eLearning environment, for example, would actually
fall under this regulation.
The Student Code of Conduct sets forth the rules, regulations and
expected behavior of students enrolled at the University of West
Florida. Violations of any rules, regulations, or behavioral
expectations may result in a charge of violating the Student Code of
Conduct. It is the student’s responsibility to read the Student Code of
Conduct and conduct themselves accordingly. You may access the
current Student Code of Conduct at http://uwf.edu/judicialaffairs.
As students enrolled in Criminal Justice and Legal Studies you should
be held to the highest standards. If your future professional
endeavors include employment within the criminal justice field you
should know that your reputation is very important and could play a
key role in your job search. Please refer to the Student Handbook for
the University's policy regarding academic conduct, specifically pages
23 through 31. These policies will be strictly adhered to and enforced
should the need arise.
Other important policies and sites:
*UWF Plagiarism Policy (Excellent examples of what constitutes
plagiarism available online from the Pace Library )
*You can view the latest edition of the Student Handbook on the
website of the Office of Judicial Affairs at
http://uwf.edu/JudicialAffairs/
*You can view the website of the Office of Judicial Affairs at
http://uwf.edu/JudicialAffairs/ for more on the student code of
conduct and the student handbook.
Students with Special Needs:
The Student Disability Resource Center (SDRC) works with students
and faculty to help make UWF an accessible learning environment in
accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504
of the Rehabilitation Act. The SDRC offers a variety of services for
students with documented disabilities, including learning disabilities,
deaf/hard of hearing, blind/low vision, mobility limitations, ADHD,
psychiatric disorders, and medical disabilities. Contact Student
Disability Resource Center, 11000 University Parkway, Bldg 21/Room
130, Pensacola, FL 32514. Office: 850-474-2387 Fax: 850-857-6188
E-mail: sdrc@uwf.edu
Reserve/National Guard Duty:
Per UWF's policy, to fulfill a reservist or National Guard military
obligation of no more than two weeks concurrent with a normal
academic semester at UWF, students must receive written permission
for such absences from the instructors and departmental
chairpersons for each course in which they are enrolled. The approval
is not automatic but is discretionary with the instructors and
departmental chairpersons.
Technical Difficulties or problems with eLearning?
Contact the UWF Help Desk at 850.474.2075 or helpdesk@uwf.edu