Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
Hello.
I'm Doctor Wayne Thompson.
I'm an adjunct professor here at Texas
A&M University, Commerce.
I am an assistant professor at another university.
And I'm a retired Louisiana State trooper.
I want to be the first to welcome you to CJ501, Seminar
in Policing and Law Enforcement.
This course is an evaluation of policing innovations.
Policing innovations are subject to political
influences or simply the preferences of police leaders.
Remember, just because it sounds good in a campaign
speech does not mean it is an effective
criminal justice policy.
Our objective is to evaluate policing methods based on the
available information and
research, which often conflicts.
It will be up to you to form your opinion and support it
with research and scholarly articles.
Before we discuss police innovation, we will review
traditional policing methods.
Many police organizations still
subscribe to random patrol.
When there is no time for random patrol, they shift to
only reactive response.
Random patrol has no specific purpose other than the
preferences of the patrolling officers and their
supervision.
Responsive policing is simply trying to keep
the lid on the jar.
It is call to call, with no purpose or freedom.
The job is to respond, investigate,
and document crimes.
There have been numerous methods introduced that go
beyond traditional policing.
The mission of policing organizations and how the
mission is accomplished has changed with the introduction
of innovative techniques that go beyond
traditional police tactics.
The text for this course is Police Innovation, Contrasting
Perspectives by Weisburd and Braga.
The text covers eight areas of policing innovation.
They are community policing, broken windows policing,
problem-oriented policing, pulling levers policing,
third-party policing, hotspots policing, CompStat, and
evidence-based policing.
Each policing innovation is debated by experts in the
field of policing.
One argues for the method and one argues against.
This will highlight an important lesson for you at
the graduate level.
You have already demonstrated the ability to perform well in
the academic world while getting your
undergraduate degrees.
At the graduate level, you are becoming an expert and can
interpret the information available, analyze it, and
apply it to the real world.
The context of the real world has infinite variations.
The criminal justice system is not concrete.
And it is unlikely you, your classmates, nor I will have
the same interpretations and opinions on all topics.
As the course progresses, you will form your own opinions of
the policing innovations based on the contrasting
perspectives in the text, scholarly
articles, and research.
The beauty of the course is that you will not have the
same opinion as all of your students and will challenge
the ideas of each other regularly.
This makes for some interesting conversations.
As you discuss policing innovations with your
classmates and in your assignments, remember to
support your position.
You have ideas and opinions and they are important.
Just as important is how you came to your conclusions.
What led to your position?
This is where scholarly journals and
research comes in.
You should use the Texas A&M University Commerce online
library, which will give you access to EBSCO
Online article database.
Click on Advanced Search and make sure to select the
peer-reviewed option.
Peer-reviewed journals provide a higher level of credibility
than less reliable forms of information such as
newspapers, magazines, and general internet searches.
And remember, Wikipedia is never an acceptable source.
When you have read and researched the topic of
discussion, you will form your opinion.
Let's say zero tolerance policing.
You fully support zero tolerance policing and think
it should be implemented on a wide scale basis, because you
think the deterrent effect serves as an effective method
of reducing crime.
You should state your position but also support it.
An example would be to cite a research article identifying
the deterrence theory is effective at reducing a
certain criminal behavior.
Someone may disagree with your position.
If so, the contrasting position should be
supported as well.
An example would be identifying research that
determined the deterrence theory was ineffective and
support an alternative theory such as the labeling theory,
suggesting formal processing by the police results in a
self-fulfilling prophecy leading to increased
criminality from being labeled a criminal after arrest.
The point is, more is needed than simply
stating your position.
We need evidence supporting your position.
Don't forget you should also share your personal and
professional experiences where appropriate.
I'm sure we all have had experienced leadership who
made decisions based solely on personal preferences.
Without evidence, such decisions are a shot in the
dark when it comes to effectiveness.
In law enforcement and public safety, effectiveness is
essential because our decisions and policies can
result in death, more victims, financial loss, et cetera.
Again, I want to welcome you to the course and wish you the
best of luck.