North American Criminal Justice System

Submitted by vbeck on 16 April 2008 - 1:33am.

Crime, justice, and public safety are issues of paramount concern to all citizens. The North American Criminal Justice System course provides an overview of these issues. It is a foundational/required course for students majoring in criminal justice, but also appropriate for students considering careers in other fields, or students desiring to become informed citizens. The course provides an introduction to components of the criminal justice system—police, courts, corrections—as they function in the U.S. The course also provides an introduction to substantive and procedural laws, the relationship between criminal law and the constitution, and an introduction to criminological theories and the relationship between theory and social policy.

Course Information
Course Number/ID: 
SPEA-J101-1800
Course Length (number of weeks): 
15
Course Delivery Mode: 
Distance
Average Number of Enrolled Students: 
Between 10 and 30 students
Course Level: 
College
Course Development & Delivery
Course Contributors: 

The IUE Teaching and Learning Center was constantly available to address any instructor/student usability problems and/or questions.

Course Development: 

The primary focus in this course was to encourage learning of course content by creating an environment wherein students, regardless of their learning abilities, had an equal chance to learn. The secondary focus was to construct two sections of the same course, taught by the same instructor, to be as similar as possible with one exception—one section was online.
This course represents my first online course and is the result of my curiosity concerning the efficacy of online learning and student centered learning. It has been argued by some that a wholly student centered learning approach is more efficacious than the teacher-centered lecture format. It has also been argued that online learning is not as rigorous as on-campus learning. However, since online learning is the personification of student-centered learning, these two statements appear to be incongruent and worthy of investigation. As a result, I decided to offer two sections of the same course, with the same requirements to test for variation in learning outcomes.
The same pre-tests and post-tests, measuring student knowledge of the course, were given to students in each section to measure growth in course content knowledge. PowerPoint slide presentations were loaded under the Sakai Resource tool and used to replace on-campus lectures. On-campus weekly discussion assignments and the group project mirrored weekly discussion assignments and the group project posted under the Forum tool for the online course. Content of weekly tests varied by section and by student, since a test bank was used and questions were randomly selected. For the on-campus course, hard copies of the mid-term papers and research articles were submitted. For the online course, mid-terms papers and research articles were submitted as attachments to a message.
Although I have had no training on how to create an online course or how to teach online, I have been able to create and teach a mirror section of an on-campus course online with very few problems. The problems that have been encountered have been easily remedied. For example, there was a one night Oncourse outage, and I just gave the online students an additional day to complete course requirements. There was a student that had a learning disability requiring additional testing time—so, we just created separate tests for that student that were password protected. There was one student paper (sent as an attachment) that was formatted in such a way that I could not open the paper in Oncourse. I emailed the student's paper to the Teaching and Learning Center, they resolved the problem and the paper was emailed back to me. The students did not like the formatting problems that occurred in printing the syllabus, when loaded under the syllabus tool. This was remedied by placing the syllabus under the Resource tool.

Course Delivery: 

This course was delivered online and unique in its incorporation of seven teaching and learning principals and the use of several Sakai tools.
Principle 1: Encouraging/Student/Faculty/Contact. Prior to the beginning of the course, all materials were posted to prompt students to consider whether this course met their academic needs and/or learning style. A letter to students was also posted directing students to an IUE online readiness survey and other useful information on how to be successful in an online course. The first assignment required students to use all of the course tools, take a practice test and surveys, and provide me with a self-assessment on level of preparedness to take an online course and identify potential weaknesses. This assignment also prompted the first introductions, acclimated students to online learning, and enhanced future communication.
The syllabus set forth expectations for communication. Students were asked to post questions using the Messaging Tool and address messages to all participants. By doing so, all students in the course would know the question (mimicking a student asking a question, during class, in an on-campus course).
Principles 2 and 3: Encouraging/Reciprocity/Cooperation/Active Learning. Weekly discussions and the group project, posted under the Forum Tool, were designed to facilitate meaningful communication, cooperation, reciprocity and active learning. The group project required students to review, analyze, and discuss a social policy, come to a collective conclusion about the efficacy of the assigned policy, state whether they supported the policy, post their group conclusions in the forum, and evaluate group member participation.
Principle 4: Prompt Feedback.
Feedback for tests was instantaneous and daily and weekly for other assignments.
Principle 5: Time on Task.
Setting the pace for a course reduced confusion, particularly in discussion groups, and provided structure, continuity, and a sense of fairness. Assignments and tests were not available until a specific data and were locked by a deadline, prohibiting early/late participation.
Principle 6: Communicating/High/Expectations.
High expectations were communicated through an array of high-quality, interactive learning materials and activities. For example, students were asked to debate several controversial social policies (e.g. does mandatory sentencing produce less racial bias). High expectations were also communicated by providing an example for students to follow and by praising quality work. To provide a sample case, within the weekly forums, a student response was selected for praise or corrective purposes.
Principle 7: Respecting/Diverse/Talents/Ways/of Learning.
The Testing Tool allowed students with learning disabilities, requiring additional time, to be tested separately.

Course Self-Assessment
Communication & Collaboration Self-Assessment: 
Excellent
Communication & Collaboration Evidence: 

Forum discussions and the group assignment required learner input and promoted communication and collaboration. For example, after learning about the “system nature” of criminal justice, students were asked to apply what they had learned by discussing, in forum, whether mandatory sentencing would produce greater equality and less racial bias in the death penalty. The group assignment required students to critically assess certain social policies, collectively decide a best approach, and make a recommendation. Then, students were to evaluate the quality of participation and information from their own group members, and the next week students were to critically assess the recommendations of groups other than their own.

Learning Material Self-Assessment: 
Excellent
Learning Material Evidence: 

Course expectations (roles, sequencing, time limits, etc.) were set forth in the syllabus, in a letter to the students, in instructor responses to student messages/emails, through practice tests, and informational online links. Information on weekly forum discussion assignments and the group project was provided in the forum and through general messages to all students. Resources included PowerPoint slides, which provided a summary of text chapters, and videos, which were used to enhance discussions and provide both visual and auditory displays of information. Additionally, links were provided to supplement learning.

Learning Outcomes & Assessment Self-Assessment: 
Excellent
Learning Outcomes & Assessment Evidence: 

During the first week of class, students were required to participate in assignments designed to familiarize students with Sakai tools, and online learning, and computer requirements. After they completed the assignments, they were asked to reflect on their ability to be successful in the online course.
There were a variety of ways to interact and communicate through the use of Sakai tools (forum, message, chat room, announcements, attachments, web links) and through email and telephone conversations.
Instructor feedback (directive, corrective and encouraging comment) was provided throughout the course by the instructor’s participation in discussions and through grading.
Peer review occurred in the forum discussion as students were required to comment on the work of their peers. Peer review was also a requirement of the group project—group members were to grade and comment on the contribution of their group members to the group project. After the group projects were posted, students were to compare, contrast, and critique the group projects of others.
At the end of the course, students were required to review their coursework and write a reflective essay commenting on how this course contributed to their knowledge and promoted the IUE goals and learning objectives listed in the syllabus.

Course Look & Feel, Web Usability Self-Assessment: 
Excellent
Course Look & Feel, Web Usability Evidence: 

Various types of media (e.g. video, music, informational/instructional web sites) were utilized.
There were few accessibility issues throughout the course. Nonetheless, a letter was sent advising students how to deal with such issues, and when there were issues students contacted the instructor and the instructor advised them accordingly.

Learner Support Self-Assessment: 
Excellent
Learner Support Evidence: 

The Teaching and Learning Center sends students a Distance Education Student CD Rom along with a letter from me (which I also post the letter on Oncourse) directing students to the following website http://webdev.iue.edu/thavery/de/faq.shtml
and requesting students to click on the link “How do I know I am ready to take distance education courses?” From that link, they are asked to take the “Distance Learning Readiness Survey” and review the documents “How to Be a Successful Distance Education Student” and “9 Myths About Taking Courses Online”.
Then, students are asked to navigate back to the original website and click on the link “What kind of computer do I need?” and review the “Student Recommended Computer Hardware/Software Requirements.”
In the letter, students are directed to contact me at vbeck@indiana.edu, if they have questions about course content. For technical questions, they are directed to contact IUE Help Desk at 765-973-8375.
The syllabus also provides contact information for technical support and for course support.
To ensure that students review the information provided from the above website, visiting the website, taking the survey and reviewing the other information have been incorporated into the first assignment for the course.

Teaching Innovation
Teaching Innovation: 

Sakai transformed the educational experience in this course by creating a learning environment wherein students, regardless of their learning abilities, had an equal chance to learn and promoted diversity in learning. Sakai removed traditional boundaries and limitations, contained in on-campus courses, and empowered students to choose how, when, and where they participated in their learning experience. Students in this course had the opportunity to review and reflect on course information prior to becoming actively engaged. Empowering students to determine when they will participate in learning addresses the needs of several learner types. For example, auditory learners tend to have trouble if they are forced to read at a fast pace; reflective learners need time to process information before responding; and kinesthetic learners perform best when they can take frequent breaks. Additionally, Sakai provided the instructor with the ability to lock assignments and tests, to prevent students from entering assignments early or late, which encouraged students to focus on one topic at a time, and created the necessary structure for analytic/linear learners.
As a result of the high level of student interaction in this course, transformative learning took place. During forum discussions, students were presented with assignments that prompted the questioning of social norms and current social policies. As students posted their various comments, the discussion forum created an environment in which critical reflection and the questioning of norms was supported as students were exposed to various alternative points of views. Additionally, students in the course became part of a learning community as they engaged in collaborative discussions and discovery of information, and my role became more of a facilitator as the course progressed. Finally, using the forum tool for discussions provided the opportunity for the instructor to use student work as a model/sample case, by selecting a student forum response for praise or for corrective purposes assisting both visual and kinesthetic learners.
The course was also innovative in its use of Sakai tools to: (1) provide students with the ability to assess their knowledge of course content and learning styles prior to taking the course; (2) provide students with the ability to reflect on what they had learned through review of coursework at the end of the course; and (3) provide a more accurate and complete representation of the course for instructor peer evaluations.