1. Read the Courier Mailarticle ‘Queensland Parliament to introduce changes to Youth Justice laws, including naming young offenders’, available at this link:
story/197c561144551ba5819ed4f82750560a2. Read the online comments posted in response to this article, attached in the document ‘Courier Mail naming and shaming comments’ (see pages 8-24 below). These
comments have been taken from two online sources: 1) comments posted online by members of the public in response to the above Courier Mail article; and 2) comments
posted online by members of the public in response to this Courier Mail article being posted on the Courier Mail Facebook page. These comments will form the ‘data
source’ for this assessment. (While they obviously can’t be taken to represent the views of the public, for the purposes of this assessment, assume that they do.) 3. Read Maahs, J. & Pratt, T. (2017) “I hate these little turds!”: Science, entertainment, and the enduring popularity of Scared Straight program. Deviant
Behavior 38(1): 47-60.This article can be used as something of a guide to this assessment. 4. Read Cunneen C, White R & Richards K 2015. Juvenile justice: Youth and crime in Australia, Fifth edition. Melbourne: Oxford University Press (Chapter 2:
Theories of juvenile offending, pp. 24-51) 5. Attend and/or listen to the recording of the week 6 lectorial, which will cover, in part, theories of youth offending6. Attend and/or listen to the recordings of the lectorials in weeks 7 and 8, both of which will cover aspects relating to this assessment, as well as provide an
opportunity to have questions addressed
BackgroundWhile it has been well-documented that the public is concerned about youth offending (Maruna & King 2008; Pickett & Chiricos 2012; Piquero & Steinberg 2010), much
research shows that the public favour preventative and rehabilitative measures for young people, and that they are more likely to support such measures for young
offenders than for adults (see eg Piquero & Steinberg 2010; Piquero et al. 2010; Miller & Applegate 2015; see Gelb 2011a, 2011b on the Australian context). Such
beliefs about what should be done about youth offending stem from beliefs about the causes of youth offending. As Vold (cited in Maruna and King 2009: 7) argues,
‘there is an obvious and logical interdependence between what is done about crime and what is assumed to be the reason for or explanation of criminality’.
With this as context, answer the following:1. In the ‘Courier Mail naming and shaming comments’ document (attached), how do members of the public implicitly theorise* youth offending? (In other words, what
are the main theories of youth offending that are reflected in comments made by members of the public?)2. How do these implicit theorisations accord with the literature on public opinion about youth offending? (In other words, how do the ways in which the public
explain youth offending conform to or challenge what the academic literature shows about public opinion about youth crime generally)?
Key readings to support your answer *You by no means need to utilise all of these. This is just a guide to get you started.
On theorising youth offending• Cunneen C, White R & Richards K 2015. Juvenile justice: Youth and crime in Australia, Fifth edition. Melbourne: Oxford University Press (Chapter 2: Theories of
juvenile offending, pp. 24-51) • White, R., Haines, F. & Asquith, N. (2015) Crime & criminology, Fifth edition. Melbourne: Oxford University Press
On implicit theories
• Furnham, A. and Henderson, M. 1983. Lay theories of delinquency. European Journal of Social Psychology, 13, 107-120.• Ó Ciardha, C. and Gannon, T. 2012. The implicit theories of firesetters: A preliminary conceptualization. Aggression and Violent Behaviour, 17, 122-128. • Pfeffer, K., Bankole, C. and Dada, K. 1997. British and Nigerian adolescents’ lay theories of youth crime. Psychology, Crime and Law, 3 (1), 21-35.• Hardiker, P. and Webb, D. 1979. Explaining deviant behaviour: The social context of ‘action’ and ‘infraction’ accounts in the probation service. Sociology, 13
On public opinion about youth offending and responses to it• Gelb, K. (2011a) ‘Alternatives to imprisonment: Community views in Victoria, Melbourne: Sentencing advisory council’,
https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Alternatives%20To%20Imprisonment%20Community%20Views%20In%20Victoria.pdf• Gelb, K. (2011b) ‘Purposes of sentencing: Community views in Victoria, Melbourne: Sentencing advisory council’,
https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/publications/purposes-of-sentencing-community-views-in-victoria• Maruna, S. and King, A. 2009. Once a criminal, always a criminal?: ‘Redeemability’ and the psychology of punitive public attitudes. European Journal of
Criminal Policy and Research, 15, 7-24.• Maruna, S. and King, A. (2008) ‘Giving up on the young’, Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 20(1): 129–34.• Miller, R. and Applegate, B. (2015) ‘Adult crime, adult time? Benchmarking public views on punishing serious juvenile felons’, Criminal Justice Review, 40(2):
151–68.• Pickett, J. and Chiricos, T. (2012) ‘Controlling other people’s children: Racialised views of delinquency and whites’ punitive attitudes toward juvenile
offenders’, Criminology, 50(3): 673–710.• Piquero, A. and Steinberg, L. (2010) ‘Public preferences for rehabilitation versus incarceration of juvenile offenders’, Journal of Criminal Justice, 38: 1–6.• Piquero, A. et al. (2010) ‘Never too late: Public optimism about juvenile rehabilitation’, Punishment and Society, 12(2): 187–207.
Guidelines for this assessment
• You will need to make an argument to answer the two questions. You can answer them in combination or separately – whatever works for you. For example, your
argument might be that: ‘comments posted by members of the public implicitly theorise youth offending as resulting from low socioeconomic status (ie strain theory) or
from biological factors (ie biological positivism). These implicit theories reflect the academic literature, which shows that in the main, the public holds more
lenient views towards young offenders than adult offenders, and believe that the cause of crime is outside the control of individual young people’. Or: ‘comments made
by the public predominantly implicitly theorise youth offending in terms of classical theory. They theorise that young people commit crimes based on individual choice,
and that young people make rational calculations about committing crimes in the same way as adults. This challenges much of the extant literature, because it suggests
that the public believe young offenders and adult offenders are the same and should be treated the same’. • Use quotations from the onlinecomments to support your argument throughout your report. Eg ‘an example of this is one comment that “XXXXXXX”’. There is no need
to pinpoint when specifically quotes appear in the comments document.• Please do not use people’s names. Instead you can say ‘one individual’, ‘one member of the public’, ‘one woman’, ‘most people’, ‘many commenters’, ‘most
posters’ etc.• You MUST incorporate academic references into your response. See guidelines on referencing below.
Formatting:• Please include page numbers on your assessment to help us give targeted feedback.• Subheadings are fine to use if you find them helpful. However they are not mandatory.
Word count:• The word count for this assessment is 1,500 words +/- 10% (ie your assessment MUST be between 1,350 and 1,650 words). Marks will be deducted for reportsshorter
than the minimum. Markers will not read past the maximum. • Your References List does NOT count towards the total word count• Quotes and in-text references do count towards the word count.
Sources and referencing:
• Do NOT reference lectures or the ‘Unit Information Booklet and Study Guide’. You should, however, follow up references used in the lectures and read and
reference those yourself. Students MUST reference at least one chapter of the textbook (see chapter 2Cunneen C, White R & Richards K 2015. Juvenile justice: Youth and crime in Australia, Fifth
edition. Melbourne: Oxford University Press), the Maahs and Pratt (2017) article listed above, and at least eight other sources (ie students must have at least 10 references in total). It would not be possible
to adequately answer the questions with fewer references than this.• There’s no need to reference the document ‘Courier Mail naming and shaming comments’. This is a source of data rather than an academic source. • There is no magic number of required references beyond this. The type of references used and the way in which they are used are more important than the number
used. • Use primarily ACADEMIC sources (eg the textbook, additional readings listed in the Unit Information and Study Guide, key readings listed in this document,
other journal articles and books you have searched for using library databases) rather than media or internet sources. Avoid Wikipedia, www.howto.com etc. • The important thing with referencing is to make sure that:
– you have included all the sources you have cited in your References List- everything in your References List has been cited in your report- your References List is in alphabetical order – if the marker wanted to follow up an interesting source, they would have enough information to do so
These are far more important than getting commas in the right place!
Writing and style• You may use first person or third person for this assessment. Eg ‘I will argue that XXXXX’ or ‘Thisreport will demonstrate that XXXXX’. Whichever you are
comfortable with is fine. • You do need a brief introduction and conclusion for this assessment.• Your introduction should briefly (ie 5 sentences at the most) introduce your report and state your argument. • Your conclusion should very succinctly (2-3 sentences) restate your main argument and comment on the significance of this. Eg ‘This report has argued that the
public principally adheres to the neo-classical theory of youth offending. Future research on this topic could build on this by doing blabla”.• Acronyms are fine and will help keep the word count down. For example, you might abbreviate ‘criminal justice system’ to ‘CJS’ or ‘Social Control Theory’ to
‘SCT’. Just make sure you spell it out in full the first time.
Suggested structures:You may structure your report in whatever way makes sense to you and helps you address the questions most effectively. You might consider one of these suggestions:
Suggested structure 1:• Brief introduction (outline focus of report; state your argument)• Brief overview of academic literature on public opinion about youth offending• Brief outline of what is meant by ‘implicit theories’ • Main body: – discuss the implicit theory/ies that the public use in the ‘Courier Mail naming and shaming comments’ document. You may not need references in this section as
this is your own analysis- discuss whether/how your analysis accords with the academic literature you overviewed in paragraph 2• Brief conclusion
Suggested structure 2:• Brief introduction (outline focus of report; state your argument)• Brief outline of what is meant by ‘implicit theories’ • discuss the implicit theory/ies that the public use in the ‘Courier Mail naming and shaming comments’ document. You may not need references in this section as
this is your own analysis• Brief overview of academic literature on public opinion about youth offending, including discussion of whether/how your analysis accords with the academic
literature • Brief conclusion