Search News


Browse Archives

News

Sociology's Crime Problem

August 4, 2008

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

At one large public university, more than 600 undergraduates are currently classified as sociology majors. Students pick among five concentrations, and one -- criminal justice -- attracts more than half of the majors. Yet of the 30 faculty members, only 3 specialize in criminology. The department is "trying to bring the criminology majors in the fold of sociology" but finding that many of the students interested in criminal justice aren't necessarily interested, said a professor in the department.

"They want hard core probation or forensics courses," not sociology, said the professor, who like many in this article asked that her institution not be identified.

The professor spoke on Sunday at the American Sociological Association's annual meeting, at a briefing by a special task force.the association created to study its relationship to criminology and criminal justice. Another professor described a department of seven faculty members where they "view it as a badge of honor to dismiss criminology" and to deal with increasing student interest by hiring adjuncts for the courses.

The tensions described by these professors were seen by task force members as typical of many campuses, where interest in criminal justice is taking off. At an increasing number of colleges, criminal justice has broken off from sociology into separate departments. But at many campuses where that has not happened, departments are facing what Steven E. Barkan, a professor at the University of Maine, called "structural tensions" of the sort he noted that sociologists realize have the potential to be unhealthy.

Many departments have reported to the task force, of which Barkan is a member, that two-thirds of their enrollments are now in criminal justice while one-third of faculty slots are there. Elite universities appear to be less affected by the trend, but elsewhere it is increasingly visible. Between 2001 and 2006, criminal justice overtook sociology in the number of bachelor's degrees completed. Sociology increased by 14.5 percent during that period, to 31,406. Criminology increased by 35.7 percent, to 34,209. During the same period of time, sociology master's degrees declined by 15 percent while criminology degrees (of which there aren't as many) increased by 135.5 percent, and criminal justice master's degrees were up 56.5 percent.

For sociology, the debates over what to do about these numbers aren't easy. Many in the discipline believe that such fields as gerontology and communications studies should be more fully integrated with sociology -- and partisans of the various approaches debate whether sociology pushed them out on their own or whether professors in those areas wanted to be seen as independent from sociology. In an era of tight budgets, when enrollments are more crucial than ever to liberal arts departments, some sociologists want to be sure criminal justice stays within the discipline, while others fear its presence will dilute standards.

For sociology, there are actually two discussions going on. One is about criminology -- which is seen as closer to sociology's roots and has a shared research and theoretical base, but focuses on a subset of issues. The other is about criminal justice, a more practical field in many cases designed to prepare students for careers in law enforcement or the judicial system. Many sociology departments are changing their names to "sociology and criminal justice" or just becoming the major for students interested in criminal justice, even though there isn't as much shared intellectual vision between the fields.

A survey of colleges by the ASA's task force found that 49 percent of institutions offered a sociology major only, 28 percent have separate departments of sociology and criminal justice with each offering a major, 19 percent have criminal justice and sociology majors offered by the sociology department, and the remainder offer only the criminal justice major.

According to results that task force members stressed were "very preliminary," many sociology chairs are reporting that they are being pressured to add criminal justice programs or to expand concentrations into full-fledged majors. The pressure, according to the chairs, comes from admissions offices, who report that criminal justice majors are hot, and will attract more applicants. Adding to the tension, the survey found, many chairs believe that their professors, especially older ones, hold their criminal justice colleagues in "low esteem."

If so, departments may be in for a rude awakening, according to data collected by the sociology task force. In the five years studied, the number of sociology Ph.D.'s increased by 3.1 percent, to 558. Doctorates in criminology and criminal justice, while still fewer in number, are increasing at much faster rates. The number of criminology doctorates awarded was up 19.0 percent, to 25, while criminal justice doctorates were up 88.1 percent, to 79. The increase is significant because many criminal justice programs have historically been led by sociologists, but with a critical mass of criminal justice Ph.D.'s being produced, that may change.

Some sociologists at the meeting Sunday talked about concerns over a "cop shop" mentality in criminal justice programs. In some programs, sociologists said, retired police officers are hired to "tell war stories," and the result is a loss of focus on the kinds of issues sociologists care about: the impact of poverty, race, gender and inequity on society. One sociologist said that he has been urged by his local police force to insist on the discipline's relevance in criminal justice programs. He quoted one police officer as saying: "We don't want you to teach them to shoot. We'll teach them to shoot."

But stressing traditional sociology knowledge may be easier said than done. Dennis W. MacDonald, chair of sociology at Saint Anselm College and chair of the task force, said that "even our sociology majors don't like theory."

Several said that the attraction of criminal justice is pragmatic -- with either students or their parents seeing that a criminal justice degree leads to many jobs. Even as sociology professors boast about how their bachelor's students can package their degrees for a variety of careers, they acknowledge that there is a huge demand for criminal justice graduates -- no packaging needed.

That pragmatism upsets some sociologists, who view their field proudly within the liberal arts and sciences -- not as job training. "We’ve gone from a culture that values higher education for the civilizing influence it has produced. And it should civilize and temper the worst impulses of humanity,” said one professor. "Now we have a vocationalizing influence. Our students are not coming to be better citizens, but to be employable."

The degree of frustration at individual colleges seems to vary widely. Several described respectful and even friendly relationships between sociology and criminal justice professors, but at the other extreme, one person described one mixed department as "a war zone." Even some of those who described cordial relations, however, said that tended to change if departmental reorganizations were proposed. Beyond issues of philosophy, professors noted practical reasons some may want separate departments. One criminologist who is in a sociology department, but whose university has a separate criminal justice department, said that the criminologists in sociology have realized that their criminal justice colleagues in their own department are being paid more, and that's led them to discuss whether they want to move there.

The sociology task force appeared torn on just how much to push sociology's values. Barkan said that one proposal the committee is considering would be to set up a minimum list of sociology course topics -- theory, research methods, statistics, inequalities -- that should be part of any criminal justice degree. One member of the audience said that would be a great idea because it would allow sociologists to point to a national standard to be sure criminal justice programs have enough intellectual heft.

But another audience member said such a list of requirements might have the opposite of the intended effect. It could easily prompt more criminal justice programs to sever ties to sociology and just do their own thing, he said.

An audience member who teaches criminology in a sociology program asked the task force to specifically address part of its report to non-criminology sociologists, and to stress that "criminal justice does belong." MacDonald said he thought it was important that criminal justice and criminology stay connected to sociology and that "it would be suicide" for the discipline to be seen as kicking the field out.

W. Wesley Johnson, president of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences and director of the doctoral program in criminal justice at the University of Southern Mississippi, was not at the sociology meeting, but in a phone interview, he said he was not surprised by the discussion. Johnson said that when he started studying criminal justice, all programs were led by sociologists, and that's no longer the case. Currently, he said, there are three faculty jobs available for every new Ph.D. in criminal justice.

Johnson said that he believes that sociology professors and criminal justice professors have more in common than they sometimes realize. The roots of criminal justice and criminology are all in sociology research, he said. "We are both grounded in communities and environments."

Another way that sociology and criminal justice are similar, he said, is that neither approach has a monopoly on academic excellence. "This is a new degree and it is evolving, and some programs are more rigorous than others” he said, "but that's true of sociology as well."

Johnson declined to endorse either joint sociology-criminal justice departments or separate programs. But he said that as long as enrollments boom in criminal justice, there will be more pressure to hire professors in the field and to be sure that the discipline's interests are addressed. "Administrators are going to allocate resources to units that are producing the most credit hours," he said. "Whoever hold the checkbook gets to call the shots."

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Sociology's Crime Problem

  • this is a problem?
  • Posted by richard , Administrator at eastern university on August 4, 2008 at 8:20am EDT
  • "That pragmatism upsets some sociologists, ... “Now we have a vocationalizing influence. Our students are not coming to be better citizens, but to be employable.” --Dear Professor, in this day, a college education not only helps you be employeable but is practically required for other than a skilled -trades job, and often even needed there. A recent book on Navy SEALS indicated that 75+% of this elite warrior group has a bachelors degree. And don you think r=that being employed does support better citizenship? One has greater involvement in the community and by havin something at risk/at stake, is more willing to beceome involved for the greater good.

  • More data please!
  • Posted by Bob on August 4, 2008 at 9:50am EDT
  • Did these Navy Seals have their degrees prior to joining the Navy? Or after? Do they need the degree to do their jobs effectively? Does having the degree make them better Seals? Is membership in the military a good gauge of citizenship? Or the only guage for that matter?

    I am afraid you are jumping to conclusions for which you do not have enough evidence.

    Good citizenship is something that must start earlier than college and should not be conceptualized on only one dimension.

    Perhaps these CJ students need a hands on internship with a social service agency so that they can understand the full continuum of human behavior, and what might help people to avoid the CJ system in the first place, i.e. if theory is so onerous to them.

  • Related but opposite problem
  • Posted by Assistant Professor of Physics on August 4, 2008 at 11:05am EDT
  • In physics, we have a similar problem, but in the opposite direction: By far our most popular electives (whether math-heavy courses for majors or math-free general education courses for non-majors) are astronomy/astrophysics courses. The problem is that, just as in sociology, most faculty are not trained in the most popular elective field.

    However, regarding the job situation, I'd say that our problem is the opposite: Astrophysics is not a particularly practical choice within the discipline. Yes, there are people who get astrophysics degrees and go out and succeed at all sorts of endeavors, and the case for an astrophysics degree can thus be made in the exact same manner as the case for any liberal arts degree: Intellectual development, lifelong learning, etc.

    However, the fact remains that if you want a "practical" choice in physics, you'd be better off with optics, materials, solid-state, biophysics, certain areas of fluid mechanics, computational physics, etc. But it's not these areas that draw the students.

  • I get it...
  • Posted by mike on August 4, 2008 at 11:35am EDT
  • "In some programs, sociologists said, retired police officers are hired to “tell war stories,” and the result is a loss of focus on the kinds of issues sociologists care about: the impact of poverty, race, gender and inequity on society."

    So the students want to know how to catch and deal with criminals and the professors want to teach why crimials should not be held responsible for their deeds plus a dollop of PC BS. Another example of why the Humanities should be completely defunded and professional studies run by the industries/agencies who need the employees.

  • civic professionals
  • Posted by Fred Sweitzer , Assistant Provost at University of Hartford on August 4, 2008 at 1:00pm EDT
  • I am not a sociologist, but it seems to me that part of the issue here is whether criminal justice is to be seen as an academic major or professional preparation. In some fields, these two foci are handled in an integrated way with in a major. An engineering student, for example, learns to think like an engineer but also learns the practical skills to function as an engineer. In other fields, such as teacher education, aspiring professionals benefit from an interdisciplinary approach. There may well be a body of literature in criminal justice sufficient to warrant it as a separate academic discipline; however I suspect that students who want careers in criminal justice would benefit from an interdisciplinary approach, drawing from sociology, but also from other social sciences.

    If the issue is professional preparation, then I think the split between vocational and academic concerns is unfortunate and misguided. A professional is someone with more than an arsenal of skills. A professional knows how to function where theory and practice meet, and to move from the theoretical context (or in this case, contexts) to the human contenxts in which the profession is practiced. This goal can only be achieved by a careful integration of liberal education, depth in a major, and professional preparation.

  • Sociology and Criminal Justice
  • Posted by Jim Farmer , Technical Advisor at instructional media + magic, inc. on August 4, 2008 at 1:25pm EDT
  • Several years ago when studying demand for police, the Bureau of Labor Statistics pointed out police science was one of the few fields where beginning salaries for two-year associate degree graduates were significantly higher than the four-year bachelor graduates. They remarked police chiefs found the associates degree graduates from community colleges better prepared than graduates from the "social science" focused bachelor's programs. Yet we found, in Maricopa County at least, the two-year graduates tended to enroll in four-year programs prt-time after completing their two-year program and while working.

  • Criminology
  • Posted by Tom Mieczkowski , Professor on August 4, 2008 at 1:35pm EDT
  • Based on this article the views of criminology programs as "cop shops" is a hopelessly dated and erroneous perception of what the discipline is in the current academic world. That view, similar to the often-expressed view that sociology is a hot-bed of political correctness and left-wing sentiment, is the expression of a bias rather than a statement of fact. Unfortunately sociology has a history of driving its children into the streets to seek their own way - one need only look back and see the emergence of such sub-disciplines as gerontlogy, demography, gender studies, urban planning, etc. All these originate in a sociological perspective, and all historically were situated in sociology. All left to forage on their own - often because of the bickering, feuding, and dysfunctional aspects of the discipline. Rather than disparage criminology/criminal justice as a cop shop perhaps an accurate and careful assessment of how these disciplines operate and why they have been successful would serve the sociological community better.

  • Criminal Justice
  • Posted by Charlie Kane on August 4, 2008 at 3:00pm EDT
  • Mike, you say you "get it." But I don't see how Humanities types, or social scientists are uninterested in holding criminals responsible for their crimes.

    What do you think of Vincent Bugliosi's bid to prosecute President Bush for murder? (He's the guy who prosecuted Charles Manson.)

    http://www.democracynow.org/2008/6/13/citing_iraq_war_renowned_attorney_vincent

  • Posted by philip groth , emeritus sociology at UW Colleges on August 4, 2008 at 3:10pm EDT
  • I come from another "planet" and another era. I was an undergraduate major in correctional administration, within the UW Madison department of sociology. Ever after, I have been somewhat puzzled by my sociology mates reluctance to teach crime and criminal (in)justice. After all, my mentor had it right, we sociologists could study both crime and the law enforcement system.

    I think that some major puzzles present themselves to any researcher/teacher who straddles the crime and criminal justice line.
    a) How do we explain the drop in reported effectiveness of law enforcement agencies between the mid 1960s and the present? Then we had homicide clearance by arrest rates above 90 percent. Now we have homicide clearance by arrest rates beneath 65 percent. See the Uniform Crime Reports. Factor in attrition of homicide cases between clearance by arrest and conviction, and we Americans stand more than half a chance of getting away with murder. So, why do we stand more than half a chance of getting away with murder?

    b) For a long time, sociologists have pothered about trying to define the meaning of organized crime. Bobby Kennedy became so exasperated by the word mongering that he said: don't try to define it, do something about it. He had a point, I am afraid. Sociologist James Jacobs has shown that evidence gathered through the Appalachian affairs, through investigations of corruptions in various NY/NJ industries like construction and fish marketing, that there most certainly are organizers of crime. I even have an FBI agent friend who staked out an organized crime outfit in Milwaukee. This he did as a rookie. I wonder if he spent much time defining organized crime. So, I might ask: why have sociologists dithered about, historically, at studying the organization of crime? Are they too wrapped up in statistical jugglings of individual crime incidents? Too wrapped up in studies of individuals to draw the true sociological picture of how crimes are planned and organized? Only if they do the latter are they likely to do the law enforcement community much good. So when are we going to get on with the process of studying the social meanings of crime, including the organizational meanings, the intimidation of law abiding citizens dimensions, the political corruptions dimension (as in the Knapp Report, etc.) When are we going to get around to looking at drug markets as organized entities, facilitating traffic in drugs and sales of unstandardized products to a willing if naive market?

    I myself would love to volunteer to spear head some form of movement within sociology to bring us up to snuff in studying crime. I have made at least two concrete proposals in this direction.
    a) I tried teaching crime and criminal justice with a three or five crimes approach. Whatever the issue (what deserves to be called crime? how do we pin the label criminal upon the violator of criminal law?) I had case illustrations of what was at stake sociologically. Jeff Reiman and JQ Wilson would provide general intellectual stimulus regarding what deserves to be labelled crime and I would provide case illustrations of gross harms to factory workers, patients of medical practices and hospitals, etc.
    b) I also dabbled in sharing classrooms with faculty in other disciplines. A chemist would come in and discuss the biochemistries of different drugs. I might have the students look further into the matters in Problem Drugs, Toxic Psychiatry or even in an anthology like Inciardi's and McElrath's The American Drug Scene. Then we would have some case illustrations of people overdosing and/or hiding drug uses from family members, much less the police. Hospital emergency rooms teem with such cases.

    Finally, I have tried being an adjunct law enforcer. I sometimes report suspicious activity to the local police. If one is good at it one may act on suspicions as per decisions of the US Supreme Court. I have never inquired with the police whether my reports of possible looting and possible robbery of gasoline/grocery stores, or misfeasance by city government in enforceing anti trust regulations has done any good. But someday I may have a talk with the assistant police chief to find out whether any of my suspicions were borne out by enforcement activity. (I do have some other law enforcement experience, as a professor and line officer in the US Navy.)

  • "SCIENCE" VS SCIENCE WANNABE'S'
  • Posted by Ronald A. , Accountant Sr. at UW Madison on August 4, 2008 at 4:35pm EDT
  • Perhaps Students are coming to realize that many areas that claim to be Sciences, aren't:

    IE: "SOCIAL SCIENCE" . . . ISN'T
    "POLITICAL SCIENCE" . . . ISN'T

    Ronald A.
    UW Madison

  • Interaction I had with an ex-cop instructor
  • Posted by schencka , English instructor on August 4, 2008 at 5:45pm EDT
  • Ex-cop, out of the blue and insistent: "Why do we even have students do MLA? Why don't you just teach APA?"

    Me, hesitant, surprised: "Uhhhh, give me some time to think about that."

    Ex-cop: "I mean, none of the students use MLA once they leave English."

    Me: "I'm not sure that's true."

    Ex-cop: "It would just be easier to just have one citation format."

    Me: "Sorry, I can't answer you about this right now."

    I was desperate to get out of the questioning session -- it felt like I was under the bright light with a mirror window to the side. My colleague used an overbearing tone I have never seen in academia.

    This is an anecdote, but I know the pressure sociology instructors are feeling; it's an extreme cultural change to switch from sociology to glorified "cop-shop."

    College is about being able to think and write well -- no matter the discipline (mathematics is about thinking, by the way).

  • re Manson Prosocuter
  • Posted by mike on August 4, 2008 at 6:20pm EDT
  • OK, the liberal, anti Bush prosecutor prosecuted Charles Manson. Good for him. Yet I doubt Vincent grew up on a steady diet of liberalism. His moral upbringing was probably better than his stated philosophy. Many people are better than the pholosophy they espouse, because they aren't really consistent. e.g. They espouse moral relitivism on Monday and march against apartheid on Friday.

    But if trends continue, the next generation of prosecutors may very well consider Charlie Manson as "insane" rather than evil and not prosecute in the same decisive manner.

  • On Bush and Moral Relativism
  • Posted by Alan Desland on August 4, 2008 at 11:05pm EDT
  • Mike,

    Rush Limbaugh was reading on air a review by a conservative critic arguing that the latest Batman film is an allegory of Pres. Bush. The hero goes it alone, standing by his principles despite criticism, hatred, persecution from the ignorant masses only to prove justified in the end. Unlike so many films today that glorify moral relativism _The Dark Knight_ is a victory for the notion of a clearly discernible realm of Good and one of Evil. None of this liberal "good and evil" versus "good and evil" malarkey. Language has meaning, is transparent. We can and should know the difference between right and wrong.

    In order to save life Batman (Bush) must take life, he must lurk in the shadows, move amidst evil, be stealthy, treacherous and brutal in order heroically to bring justice in the end. (I'm recalling the review from weeks ago--haven't seen the film yet, so don't know whether I agree with the interpretation.)

    Limbaugh read on. It began to dawn on me that the reviewer was contradicting his opening salvo about absolutes. The rationale for Batman's actions grew murkier and murkier (relativer and relativer?).

    I have said that conservatives also engage in moral relativism and liberals are full of self-righteous indignation about it.

    Let's face it; humans of all political persuasions often behave like self-serving, back-stabbing "moral relativists," especially when functioning within the sociopathic institutions they themselves invented, then conveniently mistook for Nature, a psychological phenomenon known as reification.

    That does not mean there's no such thing as right and wrong, a sense of conscience, something in our DNA that makes us feel connected to or compassionate toward others. Capitalism (and, yes, Communism too) runs counter to our sense of solidarity with others. Where a society is experienced as exploitive and predatory, for instance, people will adopt appropriately predatory attitudes and behaviors themselves in an attempt to cope.

    (Translation: does not mean crime should not be prosecuted. Blue AND white-collar crime should be punished to show that predatory behavior is the wrong way to cope. It may mean also, however, that we should be thinking about changing our political economy to one that will drive the value of solidarity rather than individual gain, inevitably at others' expense.)

    Often we judge ourselves a little less harshly on our own "survival-of-the-fittest" behavior than we do our political opponents. It's always easier to see the other guy's "moral relativism."

    BTW: By "survival of the fittest" Darwin did not mean competition but "best adapted to the environment" which is more about innate propensities to inter-species cooperation.

    But you're right: cooperation cannot be forced upon us by a Party ordering it down through a chain of command (a coordinator class). It has to be our own democratic idea.

    Don't let's hold our breath, huh?

  • Bush, Batman, Relitivism
  • Posted by mike on August 5, 2008 at 4:55am EDT
  • Alan,
    I agree with you on one point - that both the right and the left have their hypocrites. Such is life and such are people.

    However, I disagree that they both have their relativists. Reltitivism is a stated philosophy and justification for all types of behavior. Right wing hypocrites don't justify themselves by claiming that morality is relitive. Only the left wing does this.

    Regarding Batman, I was very dissapointed. His behavior was bizzare. It reminded me of the crazy westerns I saw as a kid. Batman has a chance to kill the Joker and won't. Likewise, the Good Guy rides into town on a white horse and has a gun duel with the Bad Guy. Insane!! A truly good guy would never give the bad guy a half a chance. He'ld find out where he slept and kill him in his sleep. If he is justified killing the bad guy because the lives of innocents depend on it, then he has no justification for turning it into a "contest" which he might lose.

    While I agree with you that top down enforced moral codes by organizing authority isn't sufficient to create a just society, given human nature, it is unfortunately necessary to have it. But it isn't enough without a socieity of individuals commited to goodness.

  • Description versus Prescription: Moral Responsibility
  • Posted by Alan Desland on August 5, 2008 at 7:25am EDT
  • Mike,
    My understanding of moral relativism is that it is descriptive rather than prescriptive. It's something we all do despite what should be our best efforts to avoid it.

    For example, in the Honor Code of the movie Western, the good guy must have a fair fight with the bad guy. Only bad men back-shoot or assassinate an opponent. Yet in real life, as you point out, it can be more moral for the good guy to assassinate the enemy in his sleep. But those two "Good" moral codes can conflict and create a relativism.

    Moral Relativism, then, is the notion that morality runs up against its own conflicting codes within the notion of morality itself. It isn't a compromise with immorality. It may clash with laws like Habeas corpus the Geneva Convention, both of which were responses to extremely immoral situations.

    Thus facts themselves take on interpretative value judgments. To one person an interrogation technique--a fact--is mere humiliation. To another, the identical fact is torture. Both perceptions are operating out of honestly held moral codes.

    There's also the problem of the bad guys actually thinking THEY'RE the good guys and that the good guys are the evil ones. How do we know? Most people going around doing evil actually feel they're justified on moral grounds and that they're defending justice from the evil doing of the other guy! I've seen video tapes of mothers digging their dead babies out of bombed-out rubble in Iraq, shaking their fists and swearing to stop "Bush the evil beast" by any means necessary. These poor mothers don't know that what they're contemplating is evil. They think they're on the side of Good. So that's another way moral relativism is descriptive of what's going on within and among human societies.

    That is not a "stated philosophy" of doing what one likes or justifying otherwise merely convenient behavior. It's a description of the human condition which, if anything, puts an added burden of moral responsibility on us always to question our deepest motives, the true purpose of our actions and acknowledge "the problem of other minds" for whom moral codes may be no less moral but different. Or identical but in a different situation, as in the mothers in Iraq.

    See Carol Gilligan on the differences that arise in the morality of females and males based upon early childhood, gendered experience. Boys learn one moral code, The Rule of Law, while girls learn another, the sanctity of relationships. Both overlap a great deal, of course, but not entirely. She cites studies of children's responses to situations to show the nuanced differences in moral development. Gilligan's book, "In a Different Voice" is prescriptive only in arguing the need to acknowledge these differences.

    Yes, violence is sometimes justified. But when? Rarely? As a last resort? If we know that violence can only seem to solve problems in the perpetual short run while sowing seeds for further violence in the long run, we may choose other, less immediately gratifying solutions with better long-term results. Such questioning is not moral relativism; it's added moral responsibility!

    Notice, however, that the human condition is not equivalent to human nature. It is hard to know what the latter really is, since we have functioned, historically, within artificial institutions that have come to seem like Nature itself. Again, we have to keep thinking about the question: What is Nature and what is Nurture? We can't just get this reified gut feeling and let ourselves off the hook by saying this or that is just Human Nature. That could be an abdication of moral responsibility.

    Moral Relativism states that precisely what is moral about us is our capacity to struggle over moral and ethical decisions in the face of conflicting moral codes. It's not a free pass. Ironically, the notion that Right and Wrong can always be easily identified and acted upon can itself become a "free pass."

  • Value in CJ Degrees
  • Posted by Fran Fuller , PhD at UNC Pembroke on August 7, 2008 at 10:40am EDT
  • What a fine summary of interdisciplinary conflict! In our department we are breathing a sigh of relief, saying "Been there, done that, don't even WANT the T-shirt."

    I especially appreciate the three-way tensions described between sociologists, criminologists, and CJ professionals. I am a practicing criminologist, I hold a sociology degree, and my academic appointment is in Criminal Justice in the Department of Sociology and Criminal Justice.

    My working attitudes, however, reflect six formative years as line staff promoted toTraining School Unit Administrator in the North Carolina Division of Youth Services Training Schools -- before I left to pursue doctoral education twenty-four years ago.

    One points: What CJ professionals share is the sense of responsibility you gain when you become "the man:" a key-toting, oath-taking member of the eclectic bunch of folk who formally represent our system of law under the United States constitution, and who take on, formally, some part of the decisions as to who is imprisioned and who is not, and stand daily responsible for what happens to people when they are, formally, "wards of the state."

    I was early one of the girls taking up this challenge. I passed by one of my "wards" in the day room in deep conversation with his social worker, in time to hear him say, "But what about her?" swinging his chin in my direction. "How can she be "the man" if she's a girl?"

    As the social worker waved me in, my ward's question transformed into, "How come you are a girl?"

    We were all laughing by the time I pointed to my feet and said, "See, I was born with pink booties on!"

    All changes are driven by sub-currents of many changes, but in explaining my pink booties back then, behind three locked doors, to a genuinely inquiring young mind -- I realized I was holding some power (I think of it as responsibility) in my appointed persona that transcended most of the divisive ascribed and/or earned credentials in society.

    In one way or another, Criminal Justice professionals share this exerience in ways that others do not. The experience is transforming and some wear it easier than others.

    Departments fair well when they come to grips with these defining experiences in their CJ faculty. The war stories are soon out-dated, "the man" never leaves you.

    I believe this personalized understanding of the nature of responsibility for a Criminal Justice professional is essential to the capacity for leadership in Criminal Justice classrooms. My students have always known and felt aspects of my understanding that remain foreign, and sometimes adversive, to some of my closest faculty colleagues.

    In short, never under estimate the power if diversity of experience and background.

    Fran Fuller, UNC Pembroke

  • The "Cop Shop" Mentality
  • Posted by Tom Mahoney at Santa Barbara City College on August 7, 2008 at 1:00pm EDT
  • I recently analyzed the Criminal Justice programs at the 76 Community Colleges in California that offered them and was dismayed with the results. Here we are, 17+ years after the Rodney King incident, and only 8 colleges (11%) offer a course in ethics while only 3 (4%) make it a requirement for degree completion. Only 17 colleges (22%) offer a course in multiculturalism and Diversity with but 13 (17%) requiring it for completion. Part of the problem is that criminal justice programs are mostly playing catch-up with the needs of society and law enforcement. Another part is the incestuous "good-ole-boy" network that continues to hire retired cops with little or no academic experience. While not all criminal justice programs are lagging behind in California, my research indicates that most are.