THE VERDICT IS IN

THE VERDICT IS IN The Decisions of Judges in the Criminal Justice System   I met with Marty Karlin, the chief coordinator for Oregon Online High School (O2). This is completely virtual accredited high school. Oregon Online services more than 40 Oregon and Northern California High Schools. Although the online format stands alone, each of the 40+ high schools offer courses through Oregon Online and offer alternative solutions that include high school credit for students with disabilities, pregnancies, and those students with behavioral problems. Among the courses offered for high school students were, American History and U.S. Government.  Marty explained to me that current issues arising in the American Judicial system were not being addressed and that students were asking very pertinent questions regarding these issues. Of the most interest was the controversy surrounding sentencing guidelines and, in Oregon Measure 11 (another type of sentencing policy). The school is considering adding another course, or series of courses, to the curriculum that involves the justice system –Administration of Justice – perhaps. One of the major concerns in considering the development of a course of this type was student engagement.   Oregon Online initiated and completed an extensive survey of faculty and students that encompassed current course material and anticipatory courses and series of courses. The survey also included information obtained from the school’s career counseling services.   The following excerpted information, taken from these surveys, showed a marked interest in the legal, corrections, policing and forensic fields:   % of Students (of 100% of those participating in the survey) Field of Interest/Course Series Desired *Note: Some of the students were interested in more than one area and their percentages were recorded in each area. Legal/Law Corrections Policing Forensics 68% 36% 53% 83%   Within the survey of the faculty, the overwhelming majority (86%) felt that some type of forensic courses should be offered, second only to legal or law courses (76%).   Mr. Karlin asked me to develop a course that would satisfy a foundational course, or introductory course into an area of the American justice system. After several meetings, Mr. Karlin and I set down several needs that must be met for a decision on what type of course would suit the needs of the school and the students and for a foundation for possible future course material.   Needs Analysis – the Course:   The course must be fundamental The course must be able to fit a core requirement for any of the above areas (legal, corrections, policing or forensics) should the school decide to add these courses or a series in any area. Because a course that gives an overall view of the American Justice System (Introduction to the Administration of Justice) has already been developed, a new course would have to be more focused yet, still be applicable and fundamental. The course must have appeal to students. The course must have concepts that do not require specific expertise but could be taught by existing faculty.   The Financial Needs and Objectives:   Oregon Online has a technical support base Oregon Online has an existing student support staff The school districts of more than 40 high school fund Oregon Online and more districts are being brought on board. Classes are funded by the participating districts as well as parents and student who choose the option of a web-based education. The school districts offer supplemental funding for parents and students who qualify. Oregon Online does not however, how the funds to create a course that would have extensive video, audio or interactive development costs. The participating school districts are more willing to purchase textbooks than to invest in technological enhancements to any newly created course. The course must have creativity, current information, engagement and testable results but must keep development costs to a minimum.   The discussion of development of an applicable course with testable results continued between Mr. Karlin and I. After many suggestions, I offered a course on how judges decide punishments – or sentencing policies. Mr. Karlin was pleased with this suggestion and we set out objectives for the course.   The Course Objectives:   To address the how of judges decide sentencing. To address what sentencing guidelines are. To address how sentencing guidelines affect: Defendants Judges decisions The American Justice System as a whole How legislative decisions are made regarding punishment. What compels legislation To address whether or not the sentencing guidelines are an affective policy for punishment. To address what reforms (if any) need to be made. To address the current issues of Oregon’s Measure 11 – that include a revision by the state legislature that would include drug offenses in Measure 11 guidelines.  What is happening with sentencing guidelines and Measure 11 in the US Supreme Court and in Oregon’s Supreme Court. Cases that have affected trends in these courts.   A meeting was set to discuss the development of more specific objectives with the course that included testability. The faculty and staff of Oregon Online involved directly with the instruction of the course were in attendance as where several administration representatives of the school and the districts. There was much discussion of cognitive, psychomotor and affective elements. Should the course include facts that should be memorized – rote learning? How could we include psychomotor skills – if at all? How do we test for an abstract like affective or higher learning?   The final consensus was to test through a higher reasoning avenue. The students would write an individual paper discussing a specific case (of their own choosing) that would reflect their understanding of the relevance of sentencing guidelines OR Measure 11 issues. The paper would also include a discussion of what the result would be if they were the judge in the case.   There would also be group work that would entail discussion panels (through the website discussion boards). These panels would be given the legislative testimony on the sentencing guideline and Measure 11 issues to debate. The students would be graded on amount of participation as well as the quality of participation.   The students would be required to visit an actual courtroom and observe a trial. Their observations must be recorded along with their comments on the effectiveness of the trial and its participants – primarily the sitting judge.   Finally, the students will be presented with the opportunity to “interview” presiding judges within their districts. A limited number of questions will be posed by the students in advance of the interviews. The contributing judges will have prior access to the questions and will be video taped answering the students’ questions. If the cost of including the video on the website is prohibitive, then transcripts of the answers can be posted. Students will be graded on participation and depth of thought in posing questions.     Additional Material:   To further enhance this course and make it more engaging to the students, links to CourtTV and similar sites will be given in direct correlation to the regular materials presented. These links will include streaming video that showcases relevant cases and issues. Student reaction to the regular material and the additional material will be included as weekly discussion board activities.             For instance, http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/48hours/main3410.shtml  - The Buddy Vest video profiles a “cold” case in which the local Justice of the Peace plays a pivotal role.   Links to sites that give current information on legislation and legislative testimony, case law and Supreme Court decisions will be given as well.