Criminal Justice [PDF]

CRIMINAL JUSTICE STUDIES PROGRAM Program Outcomes Assessment Project Executive Summary Stage 1: Designing and Proposing a Learning Outcomes Project This program outcomes assessment project measured the degree of mastery of program outcomes and student learning through the implementation of course-embedded assignments and a Pre-Test/PostTest. The Criminal Justice Studies Program compiled a portfolio of assignments from core courses that are required for a student to graduate from CCBC with the A.A.S. degree in Criminal Justice. Each assignment was designed to demonstrate learning in one (or more) of the program outcomes and received validation from external reviewers. The project focused on program specific content and skills. The outcomes for our program are: 1. identify the components of the criminal justice system and the branch of government they are responsible to; 2. identify and explain the procedural steps faced by an accused in the criminal justice system; 3. identify and explain the elements of the “Due process of law” clause guaranteed by the United States Constitution and enforced by American courts for both juvenile and adult offenders. Explain how “Case law” originates and affects such “Due process.”; and 4. identify the importance of ethical behavior in the criminal justice professions. Give examples of both ethical and non-ethical behaviors. The courses that were evaluated in this project and the outcomes measured were:  (CRJU 110) – Outcomes #2 and #3 (Written assignment)  (CRJU 172) – Outcome #4 (Written assignment)  (CRJU 223) – Outcomes #3 (Pre-Test/Post-Test with analysis from the Office of PRE) Outcome #1 had been assessed in the CRJU 101 (Introduction to Criminal Justice) Outcomes Assessment Project that was completed in 2008. Stage 2: Implementing the Design and Collecting and Analyzing Data The first assessments and assignments were collected in the fall of 2008. 1. Criminal Investigation (C CRJU 110) – Students answered an essay question as part of an exam that specifically addressed “interrogation techniques and legal requirements”. These are critical elements of procedural law in this country. Students needed to understand in-custody interrogation and legal application of Miranda warnings as applied to two scenarios. A grading rubric identified six critical areas for analysis. o A sampling of 30 exams were collected and scored by two outside reviewers. o Six categories were graded with an average score of 5.5 out of 10. 2. Criminal Justice Internship I (C CRJU 172) – Students were required to write an essay as part of their internship requirements that emphasized the importance of ethical conduct and behavior in the justice profession. A grading rubric was used to assess proficiency in eight categories. o A sampling of 8 papers was collected and scored by an outside reviewer. o In summary, the average of the eight content areas was 5.3 out of 10.

3. Juvenile Delinquency (C CRJU 223) – A pre-test and post-test was administered to all students that focused on the significant court cases granting due process protection to juveniles. o There were 28 students in the 2008 sampling. o The change in the pre-test mean score and post-test mean score was 46%. Stage 3: Redesigning the Course to Improve Student Learning The following interventions were implemented to improve student learning in the specific content areas that each assignment targeted. There were as follows: 1. Criminal Investigation (CRJU 110) – Additional in-class activities were utilized that addressed a variety of situations where Miranda could be legally required. 2. Criminal Justice Internship I (C CRJU 172) – Students were provided with instructions on the use of scholarly sources, including citation for in-text and bibliography pages. This was the area that students had the most problem with in the first set of assignments. 3. Juvenile Delinquency (CRJU 223) – A crossword puzzle was developed that included the key terms from each of the court cases students were expected to identify. When that module of instruction was introduced by the instructor, the crossword puzzle was used as an activity to reinforce the significance of each court case and its influence on due process rights of juveniles during the justice process. Stage 4: Implementing Course Revisions and Reassessing Student Learning The second assessments were done in the fall of 2010. Results showed an improvement in learning over the 2008 data. The summary of those changes are as follows: 1. Criminal Investigation (C CRJU 110) o Another group of 30 assignments were analyzed by outside reviewers. o The average grade for the six categories was 6.9 out of 10 (compared to5.5 in 2008). This was a 26% increase. 2. Criminal Justice Internship I (CRJU 172) o A sampling of 11 papers was collected and scored by an outside reviewer. o The average of the eight content areas was 7.0 out of 10 (compared to 5.3 in the fall of 2008). This was a 32% increase. o The most significant improvement was in the category of scholarly sources (78% increase). 3. Juvenile Delinquency (CRJU 223) o There were 44 students in the 2010 sampling. o The % change in the pre-test mean score and post-test mean score was 60% (compared to 46% in the fall of 2008). Stage 5: Final Analysis and Reporting Results This project provided evidence that while Criminal Justice Studies graduates were gaining required knowledge from the curriculum, there were areas related to the program objectives that needed to be emphasized. By applying the course specific interventions, we gathered valuable information that contributed to a change in our graduation requirements. Students are now required to complete Ethics and Diversity in Criminal Justice (CRJU 250) before they can register for the two internships (CRJU 172 and 272). This provides a solid foundation for the ethics paper that students must write in the Criminal Justice Internship I (CRJU 172). The interventions that were applied in the courses that were assessed are now part of the instructional content for all three.