Assignemnt: Think like a Criminologist
The planning director for the State Department of Juvenile Justice has asked for your advice on how to reduce the threat of chronic offenders. Some of the more conservative members of her staff seem to believe that these kids need a strict dose of rough justice if they are to be turned away from a life of crime. They believe juvenile delinquents who are punished harshly are less likely to recidivate than youths who receive lesser punishments, such as community corrections or probation. In addition, they believe that hard-core, violent offenders deserve to be punished; excessive concern for offenders and not their acts ignores the rights of victims and society in general. The planning director is unsure whether such an approach can reduce the threat of chronic offending. Can tough punishment produce deviant identities that lock kids into a criminal way of life? She is concerned that a strategy stressing punishment will have a relatively little impact on chronic offenders and, if anything, may cause an escalation in serious criminal behaviors. She has asked you for your professional advice.
Directions: Write a letter to the planning director outlining your recommendations for dealing with chronic offenders in the state juvenile justice system. On the one hand, the system must be sensitive to the adverse effects of stigma and labeling. On the other hand, the need for control and deterrence must not be ignored. Is it possible to reconcile these two opposing views?
The letter is intended to be brief (two to three pages' maximum, double-spaced, 1" margins, Times 12pt font) and not be all that different than the classic 5-paragraph essay you learned in high school. That is,
- you should begin with an introduction, a very brief summary of the reading in question. Not a lot of detail, just enough to review it for someone who may not be familiar with it
- you should briefly answer the question
- you should spend the bulk of the essay providing evidence in support of your answer. This evidence should be references to the text, in direct quotation or paraphrased, plus evidence in the form of your own experience (if the question calls for it) citing specific illustrations.
- Finally, you should conclude, alluding to the text and the answer you summarized in your introduction.
If submitting in paper format, essays must be stapled (consider double-siding). Grammar, organization, and presentation matter, so take care. Obviously, adhering to the text is preferred over simply "philosophizing". This is not a reflection paper, even though you may include personal vignettes for illustration. "Compare" means find similarities; "contrast" means highlight differences.
Plan your answer first; otherwise, you won't get to the point until the last paragraph, after rambling, and "thinking outloud" for the rest of your essay. Many of these questions are complex and require thought to arrive at an answer. Avoid easy generalizations; be specific. Don't say anything you can't support -- with the text, or your own specific experiences. Be succinct; 2-3 pages does not allow room for "fluff".
Before you print or upload, revise. Make sure your essay is responsive to both content and form. This requires that you not write the essay at the last minute, but give yourself time to review it and improve it. Even an hour between first and second draft (and print) will have an impact.
Tips: You can also use outside sources to help outline your recommendations.
The response should include a reference list. Double-space, using Times New Roman 12 pnt font, one-inch margins, and APA style of writing and citations.