USA: +1(669)289-8683 
Sign in
Christine Wills4/14/2019
Question 1
I chose this article for personal reasons mostly. After reading the title and the abstract I was
drawn in by the fact that it went over the discussion of prominent correctional researchers and
their perceptions of the issues that will be important in corrections and sentencing at the 2000
American Society of Criminology annual meeting. As corrections and sentencing move into the
21st it is important to go over its past as well as how it has/is evolving every day.
Question 2
The author of the article reviews the changes that have taken place in United States corrections
and punishing philosophy within the previous 30 years, as well as talks about the developing
philosophy as the nation, move into the 21st century.
Question 3
The previous research literature linked to the study issue the writer is bringing into attention is
the President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice. This was a
probe carried out by a commission chosen by the President to fully and profoundly investigate
the issue of crime within America. The theoretical issues addressed include the tension linking
various corrections goals, concentration on evidence-based corrections as well as recuperation
programs
Question 4
This is a mixed-methods study since various methods were used to gather the information
necessary to complete the research. The study used data from previous researches as well as
archives to gather the necessary data to complete the research. The author used archived
reports as well as past studies to get all the data necessary to complete the research.
Question 5
The study established that during the previous 30 years, the nation has shifted from the 1960s;
concentration on rehabilitation to the idea of crime regulation. As the nation moves into the 21st
century, the nation sees another shift even though the tension between policies of crime control
and rehabilitation still persists.
Question 6
The arguments and the evidence the author presented to expound on their study findings are
persuasive given that they relied on earlier studies to compare their results. Moreover, they
relied on evidence from previous reliable studies hence making their arguments and evidence
persuasive.
Question 7
The author has not identified any limitations to the study. However, the limitation that I have
noted is that the author relied on earlier reports to get the data rather than conducting interviews
to gather their own data for the research. The reports could have been compromised thus
making the study findings unreliable.
Question 8
The article adds to my knowledge and understanding of corrections and sentencing. From the
article, I have gained more knowledge regarding the changes that have taken place on the issue
of correcting and sentencing in the United States. From the various past studies that I have
reviewed through this research, I have more knowledge regarding the issue of correction and
sentencing than before. The issue has changed my view and thinking about the issue of
correction and sentencing given that I have a greater understanding than before. This research
openly relates to the issues that I have read in Stohr et. al given that the subjects under
discussion are the same and they relate to sentencing and correction.
Question 9
There are various implications for criminal justice policy that may be developed from this study.
One of the implications for criminal justice policy that may be derived from this article is that
correction and sentencing institution should apply evidence-based corrections. Another
implication that may be derived from the study is that correction and sentencing should be
reviewed regularly in order to adopt the most effective means of sentencing and correction.
Question 10
“To sum up, within the past 30 years, we have shifted from the 1960s’ concentration on
rehabilitation to a concept of crime control.” This passage best captures what I have learned
from the article given that it summarizes the evolution of the issue of sentencing and correction.
It reveals that the correction and sentencing policies have evolved over time thus making the
impression in my thinking.
Questions
1.
Why did you pick this as one of your research articles to read? Are there
professional and/or personal reasons that attracted you to the article? Give some
thought to this.
I chose this article for personal reasons mostly. After reading the title and the abstract it I was
drawn in by the fact that it went over the history of changes in corrections over the past 50
years. The criminal justice/correctional systems is by no means perfect but going over the
changes it’s made throughout history could help us come to a better outcome for those in the
prison system.
2.
What is the research question(s) or issue(s) the article is addressing? If
stated—what are the hypotheses that are being tested?
The research question for the study was to determine whether the approaches that have been
developed for the past fifty years has helped solve the nation’s crime. The hypothesis being
tested was to determine whether the offenders should be rehabilitated or not.
3.
What is the prior research literature related to the research question/hypotheses
the author is bringing to your attention? If the article is a theoretical discussion, be sure
to explain what theoretical issues the author is addressing.
The study on corrections has been conducted extensively by other researchers to explain how
rehabilitation of offenders has evolved as explained by authors of this article. The study outlines
the recommendations that were made by the President’s Crime Commission and how the
recommendations received criticism from scholars that brought about change in corrective
models from rehabilitation. These include the development of justice model in 1970 which
allowed the offenders to be punished based on their crimes, correctional controls in the late
1970s which used incapacitation and deterrence to curb crimes and evidence-based corrections
where scientific evidence is used to make informed decisions in criminal justice.
4.
Is this a qualitative or quantitative study or mixed-methods? Briefly summarize the
specific methods (e.g., survey, interviews, archival) employed by the author.
Most of the research work comes from secondary sources where the author depends on
research that has already been conducted by other researchers. I would, therefore, argue that
the study utilizes a mixed-method research design where it incorporates both qualitative and
quantitative data. The author collects data from archives which consists of research articles that
were written between 1960 and 2018.
5.
What are the results of the study?
The result of this study demonstrates that the approaches that have been developed from the
1960s, including the 1967 President’s Crime Commission report, has not resolved the nations
crime problems. Instead, they have inflicted hardship and pain to individuals and communities
and mostly the minority communities. This gives an opportunity for researchers to extensively
conduct research to come up with approaches that would benefit the offenders while at the
same time, maintaining law an order.
6.
Is the evidence and the argument(s) the author provided to explain their research
findings/analysis persuasive? Why or Why not?
Yes, the arguments that the authors have provided to explain their research findings are
persuasive. This is because, for the last fifty years, there are many policies, laws and
approached that has been developed to help solve the nation’s crime but they are unsuccessful
due to change in social order leaving a gap for further research to tackle the problem.
7.
What are the limitations to the research identified by the author? What are the
limitations (if any) YOU see that are not mentioned by the author?
Some of the limitations identified by the authors when developing new policies in criminal justice
include discrimination, the existence of disparities in the line of race, income, and ethnicity,
increase in wealth and income gaps and increased growth of social turmoil.
8.
What does this article add to YOUR knowledge of the subject and understanding of
the field of corrections? How has this article changed your thinking about the topical
focus of the article? How is this research related to research/issues you have read in
Stohr et. al. ?
I have learned from the article that the main reason why we have correctional facilities is to
rehabilitate the offenders rather than punish then for their wrong doings. This would prepare
them to live friendly with other members of the society thus reducing crime. Therefore,
researchers and criminal justice should try to incorporate evidence-based corrections with the
recommendations from the President’s Crime Commission Report of 1967 to help reduce crime
in the society and strengthen reintegration of offenders with the community.
9.
What implications for criminal justice policy can be derived from this article?
The field of criminal justice is evolving due to the change in social order. The policies that have
been developed have not been so helpful to all people mostly to the minority groups, and the
level of crime is rising each day. Therefore, the policymakers should be flexible when
developing the corrective policies and involve the public to help curb crime in the society.
10. Reproduce a quote/passage from the article that best captures what you learned
from this article and made the most impression on your thinking. Explain your choice.
“The Commission suggested that crime would be reduced if the following objectives were
vigorously pursued: preventing crime before it occurs, developing a broader range of
alternatives for dealing with offenders, eliminating unfairness, increasing the abilities and
integrity of personnel, increasing research, providing more resources, and involving more
people in planning and executing changes in the system”
It is hard to live in a society that is free of crime. Therefore, devising ways to help handle the
problem in the most holistic way without harming the offender would be the most important step
to curb crime. Since change is inevitable in a society, I would suggest criminal justice to follow
the President’s Crime Commission objectives above to help reduce the crime rate in the society.
Christine Wills
4/13/2019
FINAL FOUR ARTICLE SELECTION
CRJ 3224 Corrective and Rehabilitative Institutions
Winter 2019
Prof. Jay Meehan
Please provide the full citation and link for each of the articles you will be using for your final
paper. Please note that your articles must be approved by me before you can use them for your
paper.
1.
MacKenzie, D. L. and Lattimore, P. K. (2018), To Rehabilitate or Not to Rehabilitate.
Criminology & Public Policy, 17: 355-377. doi:10.1111/1745-9133.12364
2.
MacKENZIE, D. L. (2001). Corrections and Sentencing in the 21st Century: Evidence-Based
Corrections and Sentencing. The Prison Journal, 81(3), 299–312.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885501081003001
3.
Welch, M. Critical Criminology (1996) 7: 43.
https://doi-org.huaryu.kl.oakland.edu/10.1007/BF02461113
4.
“Methodological Challenges to the Study and Understanding of Solitary Confinement.” United
States Courts, www.uscourts.gov/federal-probation-journal/2015/12/methodological
-challenges-study-and-understanding-solitary.
Christine Wills
4/10/2019
CRJ 3224
Short Paper Second Chance Kids & Juveniles and Corrections
The film “Second Chance Kids” by Frontline revolves around the teen prisoners who
were convicted of murder they committed before they were adults. The film raises a number of
issues that relate to the class readings. Three of the issues raised include the readiness of the
society to incorporate the kids back, the possibility that the kids would commit a similar crime,
and the example set for other kids in the society. The main issue in the film is the incarceration
of juveniles without the possibility of parole. This is actually a controversial issue in the world of
justice today. One of the main issues with the kids being given another chance, simply because
they are not yet of the legal adult age, is the possibility and readiness of the society to accept
them back to the society. In the eyes of society, especially a 17-year-old teen is typically a fully
mature individual who understands right and wrong and can take responsibility for his actions. It
would be a burden to society to live in fear of such criminals (Stohr, Walsh, & Hemmens, 2019).
Although everyone deserves a second chance, the legal mandate providing a second
chance to such offender may fail to help him or her change. Although some may change, the
circumstances in which the crime was committed should be considered. Murder cases involving
meditated actions should not be considered for second chances. Lastly, only cases involving too
young prisoners convicted of murder should be prioritized. For instance, a 13-year-old is too
young to spend most of his youthful life in prison (Stohr, Walsh, & Hemmens, 2019). Situations
involving older teens would only attract crimes that are more similar since other kids would
consider the punishment too lenient for a crime of such magnitude. It is clear that a great division
regarding what is constitutional and what is unconstitutional exists. While some feel that some
crimes cannot be excused, others focus on the offender’s brain as a child and their ability to
change or grow up.
Most of the offenders in the film are adults who have never committed any crime as
adults. However, they did commit their crimes while they were kids and transferred to adult
prisons, where they were charged for life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. Some
have appealed their cases and argued on the basis of their grown minds today and that they are
not the same people they were years ago. However, this fall on deaf ears as experts argue on
whether these convicts are redeemable or not. The United States Supreme court has in several
occasions pointed out the inherent distinctions between adults and children when it comes to
criminal law. On the other hand, the Supreme Court has never expressed its views on the issue’s
constitutionality (Stohr, Walsh, & Hemmens, 2019). The court recognized the irresponsibility,
immaturity, as well as diminished capacity of youth, hence, punishment for juveniles should take
the functional difference between children and adults. Lawmakers have the responsibility to
determine if sentencing youths in the absence of the possibility of parole are constitutional or
not. On the other hand, society has also demonstrated an interest in this issue.
Evan Miller from the State of Alabama was arrested and charged with first-degree
murder after biting a man to death using a baseball bat and burning up his truck. According to
Beth Schwartzapfel in the documentary, “Second Chance Kids,” the kid’s life was dysfunction
when he committed the crime, something she learned after looking at the case details. This case
was a major turnaround on the issue of imprisoning youths for life in the absence of parole. The
court decided that despite the seriousness of the crime, it was necessary to acknowledge the
impact of the kid’s background, as well as his diminished culpability as a juvenile towards his
commission of such a crime. This was a great opportunity and a basis for fighting for people
serving life sentences without the option of parole for crimes they committed prior to 18 years of
age to get a second chance. Despite so, society demonstrated its unwillingness to incorporate
such kids back. The state decided to resist on grounds that the most serious crimes in the history
of Colorado had been committed by juveniles. Many interpreted Miller narrowly and rejected the
possibility of him being given a second chance. Others expressed that such juveniles were
entitled to parole, however, after serving a lengthy amount of time in prison, for instance,
50-years. It is clear that society is not ready to incorporate juvenile offenders who have been
convicted back into society. This makes it even harder to define the issue as unconstitutional.
There are fears that such juveniles would commit similar crimes once again.
According to Timothy Cruz from the documentary, there is no guarantee that this person
will not commit a similar crime again. Other experts wonder how long it takes for a kid who has
committed a serious crime to grow up. More resistance comes from prosecutors who insist on the
need to punish such offender further. Ingrid Martin, Joe Donovan’s attorney is uncomfortable
that her client lost in an appeal because the jury decided not to consider the most important
factors, for instance, discipline reports in prison. According to Martin, it is clear that the issue of
imprisoning juveniles for life in the absence of possible parole is unconstitutional; however, this
has just been ignored by the courts, juries, and the society.
Evidence shows that the juvenile crime rate, which led to juveniles being sentenced to
life imprisonment in the absence of a parole option, has reduced. However, some people remain
in prison for crimes they committed as juveniles and they are facing life imprisonment and no
parole. The supermen court has expressed that children and adults are not the same when it
comes to committing a crime and as such, this should be considered during cases. The issue here
is that the constitutionality o the issue has not been decided. While the justice department and
lawmakers are to blame for this, the society has also refused to incorporate juvenile offenders
who committed serious crimes back in society. It is also unclear how likely it is that such
offenders once released will not repeat similar crimes. The whole thing is complicated; however,
adult prisons are not ideal for juveniles because they lack the rehabilitation services offered in
juvenile services. They are as well brutal and endanger the lives of juveniles. Exposing juveniles
to such institutions may not be the solution to the problem.
Reference
Stohr, M., Walsh, m., & Hemmens, C. (2019). Correlations: A Text Reader (3rd Edition).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishers.
CRJ 3224
Winter 2019
Professor Meehan
Final Paper
The content of the final paper will address the following:
Section 1
1) Summarize and discuss each of the 4 articles you selected using as your guide the 10
questions you were asked to answer for each article. Do not frame this discussion by
answering the ten questions. Rather, develop a narrative for each article that shows me
that you understood this article, its findings and policy implications.
2) As a part of #1, you must make very clear and specific connections to how each article is
related to what you learned from Stohr et. al. and also other handouts and materials
(i.e., films) from class. For example, you can discuss how your article elaborates upon
the knowledge provided by Stohr et. al. The idea here is to show me how your reading
of this journal article added to what you learned from the Stohr text. In short, you must
show how this research impacted your thinking on the topic. This requires specificity-
not generalities.
Section 2
Reflecting back on the semester, what are the most important concepts/ideas in the field of
corrections you learned that are NEW and discuss how have they impacted your thinking about
the field of corrections?
Specific Requirements
1) Typed– double spaced with 1.25 inch margins on left/right and 1 inch margin
top/bottom (standard default for most Word docs…but double check)
2) 7-10 pages. I think you can accomplish the goals of the paper within this limit, but I will
accept more pages.
3) Use a 12 point sized font: 11 pt is for cramming within the limit; 10 pt and below is
microscopic and verges on the preposterous; 14 pt raises concerns that you are having
a different sort of writing problem and 16 pt should be restricted to a title page only.
Get the pt?
4) Keep quotes to a minimum: no more than three for the paper. Use your own words—it
is better to state in your own words what an author is saying, rather than paraphrasing
in ways that not only make it clear that you are using the author’s words, but that you
really don’t know what the author is writing.
Due: 4/23/2019 Posted to Moodle by 5pm
CRJ 3224
Winter 2019
Professor Meehan
Final Paper
The content of the final paper will address the following:
Section 1
1) Summarize and discuss each of the 4 articles you selected using as your guide the 10
questions you were asked to answer for each article. Do not frame this discussion by
answering the ten questions. Rather, develop a narrative for each article that shows me
that you understood this article, its findings and policy implications.
2) As a part of #1, you must make very clear and specific connections to how each article is
related to what you learned from Stohr et. al. and also other handouts and materials
(i.e., films) from class. For example, you can discuss how your article elaborates upon
the knowledge provided by Stohr et. al. The idea here is to show me how your reading
of this journal article added to what you learned from the Stohr text. In short, you must
show how this research impacted your thinking on the topic. This requires specificity-
not generalities.
Section 2
Reflecting back on the semester, what are the most important concepts/ideas in the field of
corrections you learned that are NEW and discuss how have they impacted your thinking about
the field of corrections?
Specific Requirements
1) Typed– double spaced with 1.25 inch margins on left/right and 1 inch margin
top/bottom (standard default for most Word docs…but double check)
2) 7-10 pages. I think you can accomplish the goals of the paper within this limit, but I will
accept more pages.
3) Use a 12 point sized font: 11 pt is for cramming within the limit; 10 pt and below is
microscopic and verges on the preposterous; 14 pt raises concerns that you are having
a different sort of writing problem and 16 pt should be restricted to a title page only.
Get the pt?
4) Keep quotes to a minimum: no more than three for the paper. Use your own words—it
is better to state in your own words what an author is saying, rather than paraphrasing
in ways that not only make it clear that you are using the author’s words, but that you
really don’t know what the author is writing.
Due: 4/23/2019 Posted to Moodle by 5pm
