How have theorists explained criminality in the late 20th and early 21st centuries and in doing so how have they proposed its resolution?
This is a 4000 word essay, the required reading will be added as documents to help aid the essay.
The essay has to include theories starting from Realism (right realism and conservative criminology, Charles murray and the underclass, how it is wrong to link crime with poverty)
(Jock Young, James Q Wilson, Charles Murray)
Realism II (left realism, neoliberalism from 1970 in UK, mass industrialization, brixton riots, social bulimia
(Elliot currie)
Governance
Governmentality ( discipline and punishment) torture of the mind is more powerful
* mesh thinning *
((Michael foucault, stan cohen)
Governance II Penality and risk
Punitive society
– zero tolerance strategies
– three strikes
– capital punishment
– harsh punishment past 1980’s
( malcom Feeley and Johnathon Simon 1992, new penology, issues with measurement of crime problems, mesurement of re-offending)
*Garland to be included as a key reference)
^^
The highlighted stars are to be included in the essay, cultural studies in criminology and zemiology, social harm and criminological futures are the theories i have not learnt yet, and they can be included in the essay but if it flow better to talk about realism and governance, there is no need for these other subjects to be added in.
Mot all theories have to be focused on, but ideally enough to make this work a merit or distinction level. Approximately 20 references should be okay, more analytical studies.
All to be written in past tense, no Durrkheim or Murton only contemporary theorists, in chronological order.
For the introduction: answer question using these ideas and no comparisons (for instance left and right realism, too basic descriptive and not analytical framework).
Assessment criteria;
1. Structure
A well-structured piece of work has a brief introduction that minimises unnecessary detail,is logically and coherently organised, and unambiguously answers the question.
2. Knowledge and Understanding
Knowledge is best evidenced through the referencing of issues, debates and points of fact
that comprehensively cover the subject of investigation, with no significant omissions or errors of fact. Understanding is best evidenced through the use of knowledge in constructing arguments or proffering logical observations.
3. Evidence of Analysis
A well-analysed response uses an analytic framework that breaks down the subject of
investigation into a number of distinct themes or issues. Analysis of literature and other sources is facilitated by comparison and contrast between sources
4. Presentation
A well-presented piece of work is free from spelling and grammatical errors; it is well
written with proper English syntax, punctuation and use of paragraphs.
5. Referencing
Sources for all arguments, discussions, quotes and other forms of evidence should be cited in the text, and a full reference list should appear at the end of the essay using the appropriate conventions.
This should include all books or articles referred to in the text of the essay. When referencing, MSc students are expected to use the Harvard system, both through the text of the written assignment, and in a separate list of references at the end of the assignment.
