INFORMATION TO USERS
This reproduction was made from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming.
While the most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce
this document, the quality of the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the
quality of the material submitted.
The following explanation of techniques is provided to help clarify markings or
notations which may appear on this reproduction.
1.The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document
photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing
page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This
may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages
to assure complete continuity.
2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark, it is an
indication of either blurred copy because of movement during exposure,
duplicate copy, or copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed. For
blurred pages, a good image of the page can be found in the adjacent frame. If
copyrighted materials were deleted, a target note will appear listing the pages in
the adjacent frame.
3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photographed,
a definite method of “sectioning” the material has been followed. It is
customary to begin filming at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to
continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary,
sectioning is continued again -beginning below the first row and continuing on
until complete.
4. For illustrations that cannot be satisfactorily reproduced by xerographic
means, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and inserted
into your xerographic copy. These prints are available upon request from the
Dissertations Customer Services Department.
5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases the best
available copy has been filmed.

University
Microfilms
International
300 N. Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106

8507550

Terrill, Clarence Ray

A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY OF THE DIFFERENCES O F PERCEPTIONS OF
BENEFIT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXPERIENTIAL EDUCATION STUDENTS AT
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY: A FOLLOW-UP

M ichigan State University

University
Microfilms
International

Ph.D.

300 N. Z e e b Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106

Copyright 1985
by
Terrill, Clarence Ray
All Rights Reserved

1984

A DE SC R I P T I V E S T U D Y OF THE D I F F E R E N C E S OF PE RC EPT IO NS
OF B E N E F IT OF C R I M I N A L JUSTI CE E X P E R I E N T I A L E D U CA TI ON
STU D E N T S AT MI C H I G A N S T A T E UNIVERSITY:
A F O LL OW -UP

By

C L A R EN CE RAY TE RR IL L

A DI SS E R T A T I O N

Su b mi tt ed to
M i c h i g a n State U n i v er si ty
in partial f u l f i l l m e nt of the requi re me nt s
for the d e g r e e of

DO C T O R OF P H I L OS OP HY

D e p a r t m e n t of Ed u c a t i o n a l A d m i n i s t r a t i o n

1984

C o p y r i g h t by
CL AR EN CE

RAY T ER RIL L

1985

AB STRACT

A D E S C R I P T I VE STUDY OF THE D I F F E R E N C E S OF P E R C E P T I O N S
OF BE NEF IT OF CRI MI NA L JUSTIC E E X P E R I E N T I A L E D U C A T I O N
ST UDENTS AT MI CH I G AN STATE UNIVERSITY:
A F O LL OW -UP
BY
Cl ar enc e Ray Terri ll

This pos t-hoc
into the va lue
the School

of the ex pe riential

of Criminal

The study descr ibe s
in terms of:
c)

study was u n d e r t a k e n

a)

agency shock,

of the pr og r a m on gr ad uat es

burnout.

impact of these exper ie nt ia l
careers.

who par tic ip a te d

e d u c a t i o n pr og r a m of

car ee r development,

exp eri en ce s and work exper ie nc e

graduates'

insight

Justice at Mi c h i g a n State University.

the effects

and d)

to d e v e l o p

b)

stability,

The study ex am in es
in o rd er

field

to des cr ib e

the

education opportunities

Students

on

of M i c h i g a n State U n i v er si ty

in a field ex pe ri e n c e

Term 1975 ent itl ed Criminal

car ee r

offere d durin g Spring

Justic e P r a c t i c u m were com par ed

to students who did not p a rt ic ipa te on the basis of car ee r
stability,

career opportunity,

The sources of data
historical
cation;

included

the curre nt and

the M ic hi g an State Uni ve rs it y

Criminal

and burn-out.

literature on the subjec t of exp eri en ti al

Justi ce faculty;

School

edu­

of Criminal

the students who p a r t i c i pa te d

in the

Justic e Pr ac tic um during Spr in g Term 1975;

graduates
Summer,

age nc y shock,

and the

of the Criminal Ju sti ce p r o g r a m dur in g Spring,

and Fall

Term,

1975.

Cl ar en ce Ray Terrill

This

pos t-h oc

study was u n d e r t a k e n to d e ve lo p

into the v alu e of the ex pe ri e n t ia l
the School

of Crimina l

The study de sc rib es
in terms of:
c)

a)

age nc y shock,

the e f f e c t s of the pr ogr am on gradu ate s

ca re er de ve lopment,
and d)

burnout.

impact of these e x p er i en ti al
careers.

who p a r t i c i p a t e d
Term

ed uc at io n pr ogr am of

Ju st ic e at Mic hi ga n State University.

ex pe r i e n c e s and wo r k e x p e r i e n c e

graduates'

insight

b)

career stability,

The study ex amines

field

in order to de sc r i be

the

e d u c a t i o n op po r t un it ie s

on

St ud ent s of Mi ch i g an State Un iv er si ty

in a field e x p e r i e n c e offered dur in g Spring

1975 e n ti tl ed Cri minal

Ju sti ce

Pr ac ti cu m were com pa re d

to stu den ts who did not p a r t i c i p a t e on the basis of career
stability,

car ee r oppor tu nit y,

The sources of data
hi st or ic al

agen cy shock,

included

the curre nt and

li terature on the subje ct of exper ie nt ia l

cation;

the M i c h i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y School

Ju st ic e

faculty;

Cri minal

J u s ti ce P r a c t i c u m du r i n g

and Fall

Term,

J u st ic e

and Phase

II

and the

pr ogr am du r in g Spring,

1975.
in both Phase

(198.1) we r e presented.

the res ear ch qu e s ti on s

in the

Spring Term 1975;

The i nf or m a t i o n and data ga th er ed
(1975)

edu­

of Criminal

the stu dents who p a rt ic ip at ed

gr a d u a t e s of the Cr im in al
Summer,

and burn-out.

pro p os ed were

I

The results

of

i n div id ual ly discussed;

Clarence

Ray Terrill

and from the data it was co n c l u d e d that one of the eight
res ea r c h hy pot hes es

could be re je ct ed

in the null

form

(practicum g ra dua te s will not find a job in the criminal
justice system any sooner than n o n - p r a c t i c u m graduates),
could not be rej ec te d in the null
st at is ti ca ll y tested.

six

form and one could not be

Re co m m e n d a t i o n s

of this area of e d u c at io n were also

for f u rth er re search

included.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author w i s h e s
School of Criminal
po pu l a t i o n sample

to expres s his gr a d i tu de

J us t i c e

to the

for he l p in se cu rin g the

for this research.

The a s s i s t a n c e

pro vid ed made this r e s e a r c h possible.
The author
Chairman,

is inde be ted

to Dr.

Ho w ar d Hickey,

for his c on s t a n t gu id a n c e and r e v i e w of this

r es earch project.

It w o u l d not have been p o s s i b l e

author to com ple te this
ass is ta nc e and d i r e c t i o n

study w i t h o u t Dr.

for the

Hi ck ey 's

in m e et in g the proble ms

that arose

during this research.
The author w o u l d also expre ss a debt of gr a d i tu de
the Apple Com pu te r C o r p o r a t i o n
Serial Numb er

379484454.

for the aut hor 's Apple

to

] [e

w i t h o u t the as si st an ce of wh ich

this res earch projec t w o u l d never w ou ld have been completed.
Most of all,

the aut ho r wish es

to ex pre ss his de epe st

gr ad it ud e and a p p r e c i a t i o n to his wife Judith,
Colleen,

and son John for their concern,

sacrifice and moral

support.

could not have c o m p le t ed

understa nd in g,

W i t h o u t which,

this

study.

iii

dau gh te r

this author

TABLE OF CON TEN TS

LIST OF T A B L E S ................................................. viii
CHAPTER
I.

I N T R O D U C T I O N ............................................. 1
Pu r p o s e of the S t u d y .........
B a c k g r o u n d of E x pe ri en ti al

1

E d u c a t i o n . ........ 3

The P r o b l e m ...................
The

3

Imp or t a nc e of the S t u d y .................... 4

O p er at i o n al

Defi nit ion s of T e r m s ..............4

D e l i n i a t i o n of the P r o b l e m .................... .9
Scope

and L i m i t a t i o ns

of the S t u d y .......... 11

An O v e r v i e w of the S t u d y ..........
II.

13

A SE LEC TE D R EV I E W OF THE L I T E R A T U R E ................ 14
I nt r o d u c t i o n

.........

The H i s t o r y of Ex pe ri e nt ia l

14
E d u c a t i o n .......14

E x te nt and D e v e l o p m e n t of General
E xp er i e nt ia l E d u c a t i o n ................ .....19
A Model for Successful Field
E x p e r i e n c e P r o g r a m s .......................... 24
Summary
III.

25

METHODOLOGY

27

I n t r o d u c t i o n ..................................... 27
The Se tt i ng

for M i c h i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y ..27

iv

C HA P T E R
E xp eri en tia l

Pr o g r am H i s t o r y ................. 28

The P re sen t P r o g r a m ............................ 29
Types

of Ag e nc y P l a c e m e n t s .................... 31

Re qui r em en ts

for C o m p l e t i o n of the P r o g r a m . 32

The Role of the P r a c t i c u m C o o r d i n a t o r .......33
A d m in i s t r a t i v e

S u p p o r t ................... .....34

Population

34

Sample

34

Design

35

Du rat io n of Phase

I

D ura t io n of Phase

II

(1975)
(1981)

Q ue st i o n n a i r e s E m p l o y e d
F ac ul ty

of the S t u d y . . . . 36
of the S t u d y . . . 36

to G a t h e r

Data

I n t e r v i e w s ....................

36
42

Analys is of the D a t a . .......................... 43
Summary
IV.

44

PR ES EN TA T IO N AND AN AL Y S IS OF THE D A T A .............. 45
I n t r o d u c t i o n .............................

45

Results of Phase

45

I .......................

The Purpos e of the P r a c t i c u m P r o g r a m ........ 46
Faculty Expecta ti on s.

................... . .47

Exp ect at i o ns

for the S c h o o l .............. ....47

E x p ec ta t i o ns

for the S t u d e n t s ................ 50

The Criminal Ju s t i ce P r a c t i c u m
and the C u r r i c u l u m ........................... 52
The Facu lt y' s Rat in g of the
Cr iminal Ju st ic e P r a c t i c u m ................. 55
Student Rating of the Cri minal
J us ti ce P r a c t ic um as a C o u r s e .............. 56
v

CH AP T E R
Stude nt E x p e c t a t i o n ............................ 57
Stude nt A c h i e v e m e n t of G o a l s ................. 62
S u p po rt i n g or Inh ib it in g Factors
for Student P a r t i c i p a t i o n ...................66
Influential

School

F a c t o r s ...................66

Influential

E x tr a n e o u s

F a c t o r s ............... 74

S um ma ry of Phase

I ..............................78

Results of Phase

I I ............................ 79

Ag enc y S h o c k .............. . .....................79
Pe rc eiv ed S h o c k .............................. ...80
B u r n - O u t ..........................................82
Still Wo rk in g

in the S y s t e m ................... 83

Num be r of

Mon th s

in First P o s i t i o n ........... 85

Nu mb er of

Months W o r k e d

in the S y s t e m ......... 87

Reasons Gr ad ua te s Lef t the S y s t e m

.....88

Time to First Cri min al
Justic e E m p l o y m e n t ........................... 90
Months to F ir st Criminal
Justic e E m p l o y m e n t ............

90

Car eer S t a b i l i t y ................................ 92
Num be r of

Jobs H e l d ............................ 93

Nu mb e r of

Months

on First J o b ................. 91

N o n - P r a c t i c u m St u d e n t ' s Pe rc e p t i o n
of School's O b j e c t i v e s . . .................... 95
Pra c ti c um S t ud en t's Per ce pt io n
of School's O b j e c t i v e s ............

...97

D if fe re nc es of P e rc ep t i o n
of School's O b j e c t i v e s . ..................... 99
V al ue of Criminal

vi

Justice C o u r s e s .......... 101

CH AP T E R
S u m m a r y ..........................................107
V.

S U MM AR Y AND C O N C L U S I O N S ........................... ..108
S u m m a r y . .....................

108

The Li te ra t u r e R e v i e w e d ...................... 109
De si g n of the Study R e v i e w e d ................ 110
Su m m ar y of F i n d i n g s ........................... Ill
C o n c l u s i o n s ..................................... 116
Impl i cat i o n s ....................

118

S u m m a r y ..........................................122

APPENDIX A

—

P R E - P R A C T I C U M Q U E S T I O N N A I R E ................ 124

APPENDIX B

—

P O S T - P R A C T I C U M Q U E S T I O N N A I R E ............... .126

AP P E N D I X C

—

N O N - P R A C T I C U M Q U E S T I O N N A I R E ................ 131

AP P E N D I X D

—

F O L L O W - UP P R AC TI CUM Q U E S T I O N N A I R E ......... 134

APPENDIX E

—

FO L L O W - UP N O N - P R A C T I C U M
AND P R A CT ICU M L E T T E R S ...................... 140

AP P E N D I X F

—

F O L L O W - UP N O N - P R A C T I C U M Q U E S T I O N N A I R E

A P PE ND IX G

—

F ACU LT Y

143

IN TERVIEW Q U E S T I O N S ................ 149

B I B L I O G R A P H Y ......................

vii

150

LI S T OF TABLES

TABLE
4.1

F ac ul ty E x p e c t a t i o n s for
the School of C.J. P r a c t i c u m ......................... 50

4.2

F ac ul ty E x p e c t a t i o n s .for
Pr a c t ic um S t u d e n t s ..................................... 5 3

4.3

F ac ul ty U n d e rs t a nd in g of
the Criminal Justi ce P r a c t i c u m ........

55

4.4

Stude nt E x p e c t a t i o n s . ...........

4.5

Graduates' P e r c e p ti on s of
the School's O b j e c t i v e s ....................

61

Goals and O b j ec ti v e s Accom pli she d
by the P r a c t i c u m S t u d e n t s ...................

64

4.6

.59

4.7

Rating of O b j ec ti v e s C o m p a r e d . . . . ...................... 65

4.8

Influential Factors in Ch oosing
No t to do a P r a c t i c u m .................................. 72

4.9

Age ncy T r e a t m e n t of S t u d e n t s . . ......................... 73

4.10

Influential Factor s in
the D e c i s io n to do a P r a c t i c u m ..............

4.11 Ho w Students Found Out
About the C.J. P r a c t i c u m ...................

75

75

4.12 When Students Found Out
About the C.J. P r a c t i c u m ...... ........................7 6
4.13

Factors

for N o n - P r a c t i c u m S t u d e n t s . ...........

77

4.14

P er cei ve d Ag en cy S h o c k ................................... 80

4.15

T-r atios

of Pe rc ei ve d Pr ep ar ati on for S h o c k ..........82

4.16 Still Wo rki ng in the
Criminal Ju sti ce S y s t e m ................................ 83

viii

4.17 Still W or kin g in the Criminal
of Those Who Found W o r k

Justi ce

System
85

4.18

T- Ratios of Num be r

of Months on 1st J o b ................ 86

4.19

T-R atios of N u m b e r

of Mon th s in C.J.

4.20 Reasons

for

S y s t e m ........... 88

leaving the C.J. S y s t e m ................... .89

4.21

T-R atios of Num be r

4.22

T-Ratio s of Nu m b er s

of Months to 1st J o b .........
of Criminal

91

Justice J o b s .......... 94

4.22A The Nu mb e r of Months on the 1st J o b .........

95

4.23 N o n - P r a c t i c u m P e r c ep ti on s of O bj ec ti ve s
1975-1981. ......

97

4.24 P r a c t i c u m P e r ce iv ed O b jec ti ves
....................................
1975-1981.
4.25

N o n - p r a c t i c u m & Pr a c t i c u m G r a du at es 1975

4.26

Phase I Course

4.27

Phase II Course R a n k i n g . . . . . . . ...

4.28

Phase I and II Criminal

- 1981....101

R a n k i n g ................................... 103
.............. .....105

Justi ce Course R a t i n g ...... 102

ix

.99

CHAPTER

I

I n t ro du cti on

Since 1906,

i ns t i t u t i o n s of hi gh e r

learning have been

d i s c o v e r i n g and i n c o r p o r a t i n g pr og ra ms of field exper ie nc e
into their curricula.

The e a r l i e s t forms of field

exp er i e n c e used in this c o u n t r y w e r e c o o p e r a t i v e wo r k study
pr og ra ms w h i c h w e r e pr og r a m s
al te r na te b et we e n pe r i od s

that allow ed the students to

of study and periods of work

dur in g the ac ade mi c year.

This form of field ex pe ri en ce

only one of several w h i c h will be identified.

is

All of these

forms of field e x p e r i e n c e can be ca t e g o r i z e d under the broad
title of ex pe ri en t ia l

education.

Pu rp o s e of the Study
The pu rpo se of this p o st -h oc study is to de vel op
insigh t into the v a l u e of the e x p er ie nt ial
of the School of Cri min al
University.

Ju sti ce at Mic hi ga n State

The study will

d e s c r i b e the effects of the

pr og ra m on g r a d ua te s

in terms of:

a)

caree r stability,

ag en c y

and d)

study will

c)

e d u c a t i o n p r og ra m

shock,

car ee r development,
burn-out.

The

ex ami ne field e x pe ri en ce s and wo r k e xp er ie nc e

order to des cr ib e

the impac t of these exper ien tia l

o pp or tu n i t i e s on graduates'

careers.

Students of Mi ch i g a n

in a field exp er ie nc e

offer ed dur in g Spr in g Term,

ent it le d Criminal

1

in

ed uc at io n

State Un iv er si ty w h o p a r t i c i p a t e d
1975,

b)

2

Ju s t i c e Pr a c ti cu m will be co mp are d to students wh o did not
p a r t i c i p a t e on the b as is of career stability,
opportunity,

agen cy

shock,

career

and burn-out.

S pe c i f i c a l l y this study will

i n v e s ti ga te and attempt

to identify:
1)

The goals and ob je ct iv es held by the School of
Criminal Ju s t ic e faculty for the Criminal Justice
P r a c t i c u m in 1975.

2)

The exte nt to wh ic h field study expe rie nce s were
co nsi de r ed an impor tan t part of the c ur ri cu lu m of
the School of Criminal J u sti ce by the Faculty in
1975.

3)

Those po li c ie s or activi ti es on the part of the
School of Cri mi na l Justi ce and its f a cu lt y which,
in the o p i n i o n of the students, prove suppor ti ng or
inhib it in g to p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the pr a c t i c u m
pr o g ra m in 1975.

4)

The goals and ob je c t iv es held by students in the
School of Cri mi n al Justic e for the p r ac ti cum
ex per ie n ce and their p e rc ep t i o n of the value of
those goals and o bj ec ti ve s after a peri od of six
years of w o r k in the Criminal J us tic e system.

5)

Those areas of c u rr i c u l u m found most va lu ab le by
the st udents in their field e x p e r i e n c e and their
p er ce pt i on of those areas six years after
graduation.

6)

The length time after g r a d u a t i n g 1975 criminal
justice gr a d u a t e s found e m p l o y m e n t in the criminal
justice system.

7)

The length of time after g r ad u a t i n g
criminal justic e graduates rem ain ed
position.

8)

The st ab il i ty of e mp lo ym en t in the criminal justice
sys tem e x p e r i e n c e d by 1975 criminal justice
graduates.

9)

The amount of a g e n c y shock en c o u n t e r e d by graduates
upon en te r in g their first employment.

in 1975 that
in their first

3

B a c k g r o u n d of E x p er ie nt ia l Ed u c a ti on
The Un iv e r si ty of Ci nc in na ti
g u i d a n c e of the

in 1906,

late Her ma n Schnider,

under the

de ve lo pe d the first

f ield study p ro g r a m in the United States

(Wilson and Lyons,

1961).

students

This pr og ra m allow ed eng in eer ing

op po r t u n i t y to w o r k

the

in industry during on e- h a l f of the

aca de mi c year and study the other half.

This

form of

c o op er at iv e e d u c a t i o n was a c c la im ed and imi tated b y many
ot her schools

in the years that followed.

State U n i ve rs i ty Cr iminal

The Mi ch i g an

Justi ce Pr a c t ic um pr o g r a m started

as an e i g h t e e n - m o n t h re quired p r o g r a m in 1935 and has been
reduc ed

in length over the years until today it is a p r og ra m

that is a o ne -t er m optional
not e li mi na te d pro ble ms

program.

All

this chang e has

and ques ti ons that the coo rdi na to rs

have about the program.
The Probl em
The value of experi ent ial
by ed uc ato rs
will

e d uc at ion has been d i s cu ss ed

for a c on si de ra bl e period of time.

inv est iga te the effects of experi ent ial

criminal

This

study

learning

in

justice ed u c a t i o n on graduates w i t h regar d to

ca re er stability,

ab il it y to obtain a first po s i t i o n

in the

4

The

I m p or ta nc e of the Study

A r e v i e w of the

l it er at ur e r e vea ls

few e v a l u a t i v e studi es of the cr im in al

that there have be e n
justice ex pe riential

ed u c a t i o n at M i c h i g a n State University.
study was u n d e r t a k e n

This

longitudinal

in an a t t e m p t to fill that void.

It

was hoped that the i n f o r m a t i o n and r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s g e n er at ed
by this study will p r o v i d e g u i d a n c e to the dire ct or s of the
School of Cr iminal

Justice

in d e v e l o p i n g a c u r r i c u l u m and a

p r a c t i c u m p r o g r a m that will

m a x i m i z e the educati on al

for future cr iminal

students.

justi ce

Operational
At this point,

value

D e f i n i t i o n s of Terms

op e r a t i o na l

de fi n i t i o n s will be

pr e s e n t e d to insure a clear s t a t e m e n t of the res ear ch
q u e st io ns

to the reader.

Experiential

d ef in e d for the p u r p o s e of this

e d u c a t i o n will be

study as:

Any s t r u c t u re d p ro g r a m of e d u c a t i o n w hi ch allows
st udents to be e x p o s e d to a real w o r l d situation,
ou ts id e the classroom, for w h i c h ac ad em ic cre di t is
given.
The st ru ct u re r ef er re d to may take the form of
v er y cl ose s u p e r v i s i o n by the c o o r d i n a t o r of the field
e x p er i e n c e w i t h o n - s i t e vi s i t s and a s si gnm ent s from the
c o o r d i n a t o r or the s t r uc tu re may be as loose as only a
c o n f i r m a t i o n of the p l a c e m e n t and a r e v i e w by the
c o o r d i n a t o r of a final p ap er w r i t t e n by the student
intern.

5
E x p e r i e nt ia l
today,

education,

can be found

in i n sti tu tio ns

in several

forms of e x p e r i e n t i al

forms.

of hi g he r

learning

Some of the various

ed u c a ti on include the following:

1)

Cross-culture experience

2)

In s ti tu tio na l A n al y s i s / C a r e e r E x p l o r a t i o n

3)

P re - P r o f e s s i o n a l

4)

Wo r k e x p e r i e n c e

5)

Se r v ic e

6)

Fie ld r e s ea rc h

tr ai ni ng

learning in ter nsh ip

Each of these

is d e fin ed as follows:

1)

C r o s s - c u l t u r e experience.
"The s t ud en t becomes
i nvo lv e d in anothe r cu ltu re or subculture, either
ove rse as or wi th i n the Uni te d States, as an
o b s e r v e r / p a r t i c i p a n t w i t h the in te nti on of
learning more about that c ul tu re or s ub cul tu re as
well as his own" (Duley, 1974, p. v i i ) .

2)

I ns ti tut io nal Analysis/ Care er Ex pl oration. " The
st ude nt b ec om e s involved in a per io d of supervised
w o r k that allows an o p p o r t u n i t y to de v e l o p skills
and kn owledge, tests ab i l i t i e s and car ee r
interests, and ex amines the c ul tu re of the
i n s ti t u t i o n in light of the stud en t' s pr evious
th e o r et ic a l e d uc at ion of such ope rat ion s" (Duley,
1974, p. v i i ) .

3)

P r e -P ro f e s s i o n a l Training.
"The stude nt is placed
wi t h an agency, firm, or in s t i t u t io n and as signed
r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s under the s u p e r v i s i o n of a
p r o f e s s i o n a l in the field of education, medicine,
law, social work, or other type of placement.
Du ri n g the placement, the stude nt appli es the
theorie s learned in the c l a s s r o o m into pr ac t i c e
and gains skills in the profession, and he is
e v a l u a t e d by the p r o fe ss io nal supervisor" (Duley,
1974, p. v i i i ) .

6
4)

Wo r k E xp er i e n c e (Cooperative E d u c a t i o n ) .
"Co op e ra ti v e ed uc ati on is that e d u c a t i o n plan
w hi ch in tegrates c l a s s r o o m e xp er ie nc e and
pr actical wo rk ex pe ri e n c e in industry, business,
government, or s e rv ic e- ty pe wo r k sit ua ti on in the
community.
The wor k ex pe r i e n c e co ns t i t u t e s a
r eg ul ar and essential e l e m e n t in the e d u c a t i v e
p ro ce ss and some m i n i m u m am o un t of wo r k ex pe r i e n c e
and m i n i m u m standa rd of successful p e r f o r m a n c e on
the job are included in the r e q u i r e m e n t s of the
in st i t u t i o n for a degree" (National C o m m i s s i o n for
Co op e r a t i v e Education, 1971, p. 53).

5)

Se rvi ce Le a r n i n g Internship.
"Service learning
has bee n de fi ne d as:
The i n te g r a t i o n of the
a c c o m p l i s h m e n t of a task w h i c h meets h um an need
wi t h co ns cio us ed uc ati ona l growth.
A service
learning in ter nsh ip is de s i g n e d to pr ovi de
students a r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to a public need and
s i g ni fi ca nt learning e x pe r i e n c e w i t h i n a publ ic or
pr iv at e ins ti tu ti on for spe cific per io d of time,
u s u a l l y 10 to 15 weeks" (Sigmon, 1972, p. 2).

6)

Field Research.
"The st ude nt wo rks on a gr ou p or
individual res ear ch pr oj ec t in the field und er the
s u p er vi si on of a facult y member.
This is
a c c o m p l i s h e d by a p pl yi ng the co nc ept s and
me th od o l o g i e s acq ui re d in an aca de mi c d i s c i p l i n e
like sociology, geology, or geogr ap hy" (Sigmon,
1972, p. 24).

The School

of Criminal

Ju st i c e at Mi c h i g a n State

U ni ve rs it y offers two types of exp er ie nt ia l

e d u c at io n

pl ace men ts both of w hi ch are of fer ed under the title and
number:

Cri minal

Justic e Pr a c t i c u m - CJ 490.

types of p l a c em en t are var ia ti on s of wh a t Du ley
re ferred to as Pr e- Pr of es si on al
include

Training.

(Michigan State U ni ve rs it y School

J u s t i c e , 1975):
1)

In ter nsh ip

2)

M u l t i - a g e n c y Pl ac eme nt

Both of these
(1974)

The option s
of Cri minal

7

Eac h of these is d e f i n e d as follows:
1)

Internship:
A field p l a c e me nt of ten weeks in
d u r a t i o n w i t h an ag e n c y for e ig ht hours per day,
five days per week.
St udents who p a r t i c i p a t e in
an i n t e r n s h i p are ex pe c t e d to p e r f o r m duties in
the a g e n c y u n d e r the su p er vi si on of agency
pe rsonnel. P la ce m e n t s of this nat ur e are with such
ag en ci es as the Ing ha m C o u n t y P r oba te Court,
Mi c h i g a n D e p a r t m e n t of Corrections, the State
A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l ' s Office, and others too n u m e r ­
ous to m e n t i o n here.

2)

M u l t i - a g e n c y Placement:
A p l a c e m e n t w i t h several
age nc ie s for a pe r i o d of from one to three weeks
each.
S t u d e n t s w h o p a r t i c i p a te in such placeme nts
are e x p e c t e d only to observe agen cy operat io ns and
not p e r f o r m any du t i e s other than those that might
be r e q u i r e d sp or adically.
Ag en ci es used in this
sort of p l a c e m e n t include; East L a n s i n g Police
De pa rt me nt , L a n c i n g Police Department, Mic hi ga n
State U n i v e r s i t y D e p a r t m e n t of Public Safety,
Ingham C o u n t y Sh e r i f f ' s D e p a r t m e n t and others.

In o r d e r to f ur th e r u n d e r s t a n d the areas inves ti ga te d
by this study,

several

ot he r terms and phrases mu s t be

defined:

1)

G o a l s : A goal is a broad s t a te me nt of
in te nd ed p er fo r m an ce , kn ow led ge or a tt it ud e that a
stude nt will e v e n t u a l l y ex hib it in the long run,
as a r e s u l t of a learning e x p e r i e n c e like a
c o ll eg e program.

2)

O b j e c t i v e s : An ob j e c t i v e is a student's
int en de d b e h a v i o r at the end of a unit of
i n s t r u c t i o n or course.

3)

Goals and o b j e c t i v e s : For the p u rpo se of the
h y p o t h e s e s are those ends the student plann ed to,
or e v e n t u a l l y did a c c o m p l i s h w hi le p a r t i ci pa ti ng
in a Cr im i n a l J u s t i c e Practicum.

4)

C o u r s e s : T h o s e c o ur se s in criminal justice
in the 1975 c u r r i c u l u m taken by the students.

5)

P r a c t i c u m G r a d u a t e s : Those grad ua te s wh o took
a cou rs e e n t i t l e d Criminal J u st ic e 490 during the
Spri ng Q u a r t e r of 1975.

6)

N o n - P r a c t i c u m G r a d u a t e s : Those grad uat es who
did not take a co ur s e e n t i tl ed Criminal Justice
490 dur ing w o r k at Mi c h i g a n State U n i v er si ty but
did recei ve a four year deg re e from M i c h i g a n State
Un i v e r s i t y in Cr im in al Justice.

7)

B u r n - o u t : The p h e n o m e n o n of be co m i n g
frust ra te d and e m o t i o n a l l y d r ai ne d of career
as p i ra ti on s and desir es in the criminal justice
system thus ca u s i ng the g ra du at e to leave the
criminal justi ce sys te m in an effo rt to relieve
that f r u s t r a t i o n and em otional drain.

8)

Ag e n c y S h o c k : An y and all of the adverse
effects of a per son's entry into an agency
en v i r o n m e n t w h i c h is m a r k e d l y di f f e r e n t from that
to w h i c h an individual is accustomed, i.e., agency
procedures, op er ati on al systems, personnel, and
cultural environment.

9)

First E m p l o y m e n t : The g r a d u a t e ' s first
fu ll-time p o s i t i o n w i t h an agency in the criminal
justice system.

10)

Job S t a b i l i t y : The re la ti ve p e r f o r m a n c e of the
gra du at e at on e, cr i m i na l justice agency as
me as ur ed by the num be r of job changes made during
their ca r e e r (to the point of this s t u d y ) .

11)

Criminal J u s ti c e C a r e e r : The p u r s u i t of a
livelihood in the criminal justice system to
include police, courts, prosecution, and
corrections.

12)

Phase I : Tha t p o rt i o n of the study cond uc te d
during 1975.

13)

Phase I I : That po rt i o n of the study con du cte d
during 1981.

14)

Ex pe rim en tal s u b j e c t s : Those g r ad ua tes wh o are
defined as P r a c t i c u m Gr a d u at es above.

15)

Control S u b j e c t s : Those g r ad ua tes who are
defin ed as N o n - P r a c t i c u m Gr ad uat es above.

9
D e l i n e a t i o n of the Pr o b l em
The res ear ch h y p o t h e s e s

to be test ed in this

study deal

wi t h the g r a d u a t e s ' p e r c e p t i o n of the amo un t of age nc y shock
e n c ou nt er ed upon en try into a cr iminal
the graduates'
justice system,
criminal

te nd e nc i es

1)

st a b i li ty w i t h i n the

and wi t h the graduates'

to find a pos it io n after graduati on.
study will

with

towar d st ayi ng in the cri minal

wit h the graduates'

justice system,

j u st ic e agency,

ab ilities

Specifi cal ly,

this

inv es ti ga t e the f o l l o w i n g r e s e a r c h hypotheses:

The exp eri me nt al subject s will p e rc ei ve that they
en co un t er ed less agen cy shock up o n e n t e r i n g into a
criminal justic e ag en c y than control subjects
p er cei ve d they e n c o u n t e r e d up o n their en tr y into a
criminal j us tic e agency.

This hy pot he sis

is p r o p o s ed

value s of ex pe rie nt ial

to test one of the a s sum ed

learning,

that is,

that studen ts who

have w o r k e d in a real w o r l d age nc y will be bet te r pre par ed
to deal wi t h the e n v i r o n m e n t of the real w o r l d of work.
2)

The exp eri me n ta l su bjects will e x pe ri e n c e
b u r n - o u t than contr ol su bjects e x pe ri e n c e
criminal justic e career.

This hyp ot h e si s

less
in their

is p ro p o s e d b e c a u s e e x p e r i m en ta l 'learning is

many times ac c l a i m ed as an e x c e l l e n t me t h o d of care er
exploration.
3)

There is a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n the
e xp er ime nt al subject s and the contr ol subjec ts in
the length of time taken to find Cr iminal J us tic e
e m p lo ym e nt after graduation.

10
This h yp ot h es is

is to be in ve st i ga te d to de te rmi ne

stu dents w h o p a r t i c i p a t e
su f f i c i e n t l y

in a cr iminal

learn the procedures,

justice p r a c t i c u m

processes,

for findi ng e m p l o y m e n t in the criminal

if

and sources

justice system so as

to give them an a d v a nt ag e over their c o n t e m p o r a ri es wi t h o u t
such an opportunity.

4)

There are s i g ni f ic an t d i f fe re nc es be tw e e n the
e x p e r i m e n ta l subjects' and the control subjects'
s ta b il i ty in their Cr iminal Ju st ic e careers.

This h y p ot h es is

is in ve st ig at ed

in an at tem pt to de te rm in e

if a stu de nt' s e x p o s u r e to a criminal
ag en ci es

enabl es

justice agency or

them to select the c or re ct agency for them

b a s e d on their p e r s o n a l i t y and e x p e r i e n c e
5)

in the system.

B e t w e e n P h a s e I and Phase II, the control subjects will s i g n i f i c a n t l y cha ng e their p e r c e p t i o n of the
o bj ec t iv es of the School of Cri minal J us tic e for
o f f er in g the Criminal Ju s t i c e Practicum.

This hy po t h e s i s

is i n v e s ti ga te d in an at te mp t to ide nti fy if

after a real w o r l d w o r k experience,
p a r t i c i p a t e in an e x pe ri en ti al

g r a du at es who did not

e d u c a t i o n p r o g r a m c ha ng ed

their p e rc e p t i o n s of the value of exper ie nt ia l

education

programs.
6)

B e t w e e n P ha se I and Ph as e II the expe ri me nt al
subjects will sig n if ic an tl y cha ng e their
p e r c e pt io n s of the obj ec ti ve s of the School of
Cr imi na l J us ti c e for of fe ri ng the Criminal Justic e
Practicum.

This h y p o t h e s i s

is i n v e s t i ga te d to reveal

if after a real

w o r l d wo r k e x p e r i e n c e g r a d u a t e s ', who did p a r t i c i p a t e

in an

11

ex per ie nt ia l

e d u c a t i o n program,

ex per ien tia l

e d u c a t i o n in a w a y more similar to grad ua te s

w ho did not p ar t i c i p a t e

pe rc e i v e of the v al ue of

in an e x pe ri en ti al

ed u c a ti on

program.
7)

There are s ig ni f i c a n t di f f e r e n ce s be tw e e n the
ex per ime nta l subjects' and the control subjects'
p e r ce p t i o n of the School of Criminal Ju s t i c e for
offe ri n g the Criminal J us ti ce Pr a c t ic um dur in g
Phase II.

This h yp ot he sis

is i n v es ti ga te d to de te rmi ne

years of real w o r k experience,
an expe ri en ti al

if after six

gra du at es who p a r t i c i p a t e d

in

le arning p r og r a m pe rc ei ve the value of that

e x p e r i e n c e d i f f e r e n t l y from those gra du at es who did not
p a r t i c i p a t e in an e x pe ri en ti al
8)

e d u c a t i o n program.

B e tw ee n Phase I and Phase II both groups of
g r a du at es will pe rc e i v e the value of the courses
offered by the School of Criminal Justi ce
s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from their initial
perceptions.

This hy po t h e s i s

is to be ex amined

to d e te rm ine

if g r ad ua tes

in either or bo t h gro up s chan ge their opini on of the value
of their course wo r k

in Cr iminal

J u st ic e after sp en d i n g a

pe r i o d of time in the real w o r l d of work.

Scope and L i m i t a t i o n s
Phase

I of this

of the Study

study was c o n d u c t e d dur in g the Spring

Qu a r t e r of 1975 at M i c h i g a n State Un iv e r s i t y and included
all of the 30 studen ts p a r t i c i p a t i n g
Pr a c t i c u m that term.

in the Criminal

Justice

A ra n d o m sample of the n o n - p r a c t i c u m

st udents was also c o n d u c t e d to ob t a i n the data for the
no n - p r a c t i c u m areas of the study.

A total of 50

12
q u e s t i o n n a i r e s we r e

se n t out to the n o n - p r a c t i c u m students

w i t h retu rn a d d r e s s e d and p o st ag e paid en velopes.

Phase

of this study was c o n d u c t e d dur in g aca de mi c yea r

1980-1981

at Mi c h i g a n State Univers it y.
all of those s t u d e n t s / g r a d u a t e s
Spring 1975.

It also

It. was c o n d u ct ed by including
in the p r a c t i c u m class of

inc lu ded a ne w r a n d o m sample of 60

M ic hi ga n State U n i v e r s i t y students w h o g r a d u a t e d
did not p a r t i c i p a t e in the Crimin al
the several

limitati ons

this nature,
evaluation
gre a t e s t

the

II

in 1975 who

J u st i c e Practicum.

Of

impose d upon a re s e a r c h p r oj ec t of

lack of st an da rd iz ed and o b j e ct iv e

in st r um en t s ap pea rs

liability.

to have f u r n is he d the

The in st ru me nt de v e l o p e d

was c o n s t r a i n i n g in several
This caused d i f f i c u l t y

for Phase

I

re sp ec ts b e c a u s e of its design.

in g e n e r a l i z i n g the data

to the

enti re p o p ul a t i o n and g e n e r a l l y caus ed the study to be
d e s cr ip ti ve
Phase

I

in nature.

(1975)

A n ot he r

responses

lim iting fact or is that the

of P r a c t i c u m students we r e

than 100 p er c e n t r e s p o n s e of the sample.
res po ns e was a p p r o x i m a t e l y
makes g e n e r a l i z a t i o n

limited.

the fact that the or ig i n a l
was

65 percent,

lost b e t w e e n P h a s e

less

The actual

this factor also

One ot he r

limiti ng factor is

sample of N o n - P r a c t i c u m students

I and Phase

II w h i c h also af fected

the g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y of the data.
The resul ts of this

i n v e s t i g a t i o n are limited to a

c o m p a r i s o n b e t w e e n t ho se M i c h i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y students
w h o elect to p a r t i c i p a t e

in the Cr im in al

J u s t i c e Pr a c t ic um

and a sample of those st ud en ts who chose not to participate.

13
The ver y nat ur e of the progr am 's

s e l f - se le ct io n process

imposed some v a r i a b l e s w h i c h p r o h i b i t g e n e r a l i z a t i o n of this
study b e y o n d that p o p u l a t i o n w h i c h

is under examination.

An O v e r v i e w of the Study
This study ex pl or es
Ju s t i c e
II,

the e x p e ri en ce s of the Criminal

st udents at M i c h i g a n State University.

a r e v i e w of the

In Chapt er

literature is pr e s e n t e d to facili ta te

the re ad e r ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the h i s t o r y as well as the
state of the art of ex pe ri e n t i a l
utilization

e d u c a t i o n and its

in co ll e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s across the United

States today.

Chapter

de s i g n of this study.

III d e s cr ib es
It ex pl ai ns

the m e t h o d o l o g y and

the

longitudinal nature

of the study and the co mp l e x i t y of the data ob ta i n ed from
this research.

Chapter

the data g a t h e r e d
the final chapter,
recommendations

IV pr es en ts a de ta i l e d an alysis of

in the cou rs e of this si x-year study.

In

this re se a r ch is su mma riz ed and several

and c o n c l u s i o n s c o n c e r n i n g the Criminal

J u s t i c e P r a c t i c u m at Mi ch i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y as well as
other cr im in al
col le ge s

justi ce e x pe ri en ti al

e d u c a t i o n pr ograms at

and u n i v e r s i t i e s ar o u n d the c o u n t r y are presented.

C H AP T E R II
SEL EC TE D R E V I E W OF THE L I TE RA T U R E
In tro du cti on
Dur in g the d e v e l o p m e n t of this r e v i e w of the
literature,

num erous books,

subject of exp eri en ti a l

articles,

ed u c a t i o n in Cr iminal J u st ic e and

other dis ci p li ne s w e r e reviewed.
that ex pe ri e nt ia l

This re v i e w will

e d u c a t i o n is still

co mpared to the tra dit io nal
education.

this co u n t ry in a p p r o x i m a t e l y

in its infan cy wh e n

1906.

of

in hig he r e d u c a t i o n in
Since its introduction,

e d u c a t i on has been modified,

enhanced,

revised by the many co ll e g e s and un iv er s i t i e s
employe d it.

reveal

t e a c h e r - s t u d e n t - t e x t model

It was first in tro duc ed

exp erie ntial

and p a m ph le ts on the

and

that have

As a re s u l t of these many a p p l i c a ti on s of

exper ie nti al

education,

r e s e a r c h has b e g u n to id en tif y those

elements ne c e s s a r y for a successful

program.

will cl ea rl y de mo n s t r a t e that there

is value

This rev ie w
in e x pe ri en ti al

education.
The H i s t o r y of E x pe ri en ti al
In 1945,

Lynd made the o b s e r v a t i o n that the n o t i o n of

field and e xp eri en tia l
colleges
1945).

Ed u c a ci on

ed u ca ti on had bee n gr owi ng

and u ni ve rs i t ie s
Tw en t y years

in

over the p r o c e e d i n g decades

later,

Mc Gra th and Mee th

(Lynd,

(1965)

re ferred to the use of field ex pe ri en ce edu ca ti on pro grams
as one of the

"innovations"

that still app ea re d to be

g ro win g in its use and a v a i l a b i li ty in in st itu tio ns of
higher education.

This w o u l d appear to in dicate that

14

15
ed u ca to rs have been c on f u s e d a bo ut h o w innovat ive field
e x p e r i e n c e e d u c a t i o n is.

They do point out that

ex pe ri e n t ia l

ed u c at io n has been em pl o y e d since the turn of

the century,

and it is still be in g d i sc o v e r e d by educators

as a n ew me th o d of e xp o s i n g
knowledge

st udents to c e rt ai n bodies of

(Meeth and McGrath,

1965).

Dressel

(1968)

e x p l a in ed this slow d e v e l o p m e n t of experi ent ial

ed uc ati on in

liberal arts co ll eg es as i n d i ca ti ve of the di ffi cul tie s
in no v a t o r s have had in ch an gi ng
schools

the c u r r i c u l u m of their

from the t r i c h o t o m y of the t e a c h e r - s t u d e n t - t e x t

r e l a t i o n s h i p of the i n - p u t / o u t - p u t model
de vi at es

from that c l a ss ic al

school

to a model

of education.

that
Part of

the p r o b l e m is that this type of clas si ca l met ho d has been
in e x i s t e n c e since So cra tes
points out that

and before.

liberal arts e d uc at ors

acc e p t such a noti on as e x p e r i e nt ia l
h i s t o r i c a l l y speaking,

Dressel

(1968)

find it di f f i c u l t to

edu ca ti on because,

the c o n c e p t is an infant when

c o m p a r e d to the t r a d it io nal

model.

A n o t h e r r e a s o n 'that ed u c a t o r s have been slow to accept
the ex pe ri e n t i a l

model

we r e no empi ri ca l
was not until

is the fact that for many years

studi es

May of 1957

there

of the v a l u e of such programs.

It

that an yo n e un d e r t o o k the task of

e v a l u a t i n g w h e t h e r or not the p h i l o s o p h i e s and broad values
of a ri c h e r and more m ea ni ng ful

education,

who used and d e v e l o p e d ex pe ri e n t i a l
valid

(Dressel,

1968).

c la im ed by those

programs,

we r e really

16
The first e v a l u a t i o n of such pr ograms was u n d e r t a k e n by
the Study of C o o p e r a t i v e E d u c a t i o n C o m mi tt ee under a gr an t
from the Thomas Alva Ed i s o n F o u n d a t i o n
1961).

This study found several

of e x p er ie nt ia l

education.

1)

in brief,

that

po si tiv e values

in the use

This suppo rt iv e ev id e n ce aided

the a d v a n c e m e n t of exp eri en ti al
study found,

(Wilson and Lyons,

ed uc at io n in the field.

(Wilson and Lyons,

The

1963):

The students more c l os el y relate theory and
pra c t i c e and find their studies more m ea ni ng fu l
a re s u l t of field experience;

as

2)

Field study pr og ra ms mo ti v a t e the student in his
ac ademic work, b e c a u s e the students see the
c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n the e x p e r i e n c e and their
studies;

3)

St udents are aided by the e v a l u a t i o n of th ei r own
a b i li ti es to o pe ra te in their chosen field of
end e a v o r t hr ou gh the field study experience.

The results of that study are re le va nt to this study in
that they p o i n t to the fact that there is su ff i c i e n t
edu ca tional v al ue in the c o o p e r a t i v e model of expe ri en ti al
ed u ca ti on to d e ve lo p and refine p r e s e n t ex pe riential
e d u c a t i o n programs.
Wi t h the suppo rt of e d u ca to rs

(in the form of such

studies as done by the C o o p e r a t i v e Ed u c a ti on Committee)
the demand of students for re l e v a n c e

and

in their education,

un i v e r s i t i e s and co lleges have r e sp on ded to these pre ss ur es
by exploring,

establishing,

e d u c a t i o n pr ograms
this expansion,

in their

Mayhew

and ex p a n d i n g field ex pe r i e n t i a l
institutions.

(1971)

mai ntains

In s u ppo rt of

that these types of

ex pe ri en ce s are not only good to offer to the s t ude nt but

17
are the right of ev ery student.
the te c hn iqu e of exp er ie n t ia l

Ly n d

(1945)

also defends

ed u c a t i o n w h e n she said:

"With r e c o g n i t i o n that many d i f f e r e n t kinds of learning
are a part of the real world, field w o r k is used in
c er tai n sp eci fic situat io ns to hel p students ac qui re
facts, skills, concepts, or m e tho ds whi ch they ca n n o t
get so well, or more often can no t get at all, in
anoth er way... F ie ld w o r k may also be of the utm os t
im po rta nc e in d e v e l o p i n g re l a t i o n s h i p s among
d i f f e r e n t areas of k n o w l e d g e and b e t w e e n co lle ge and
c o m m u n i t y life (Lynd, 1945)."
Ma n y educ ato rs

are be g i n ni ng

to hol d the beli ef

the o p p o r t u n i t y to a p p l y the p r i n c i p le s
pr actical

situat io ns

con tr i b ut e
fact,

of theo ry to

t hr ou gh exp eri en ti al

e d u c at io n pro grams

s ig ni fi c a n t l y to the e d u c a ti on al

H e n d e r s o n cla im s

that

experience.

In

(1970) :

"Experie nc e as one of the pr im ar y method s in d ev el op in g
the w h o l e p e r s o n a l i t y w h i c h includes i nc re as in g the
ab il it y to th in k e f f e c t i v e l y and to couple the thinki ng
of the individual w i t h his ac t in g and being. The aim is
to make the learning proce ss more genuine, more
meaningful to the student, and to teach him how to make
his th in k i n g on social pr ob le ms ap pl i c a b l e to the
cultur e in w h i c h he lives."
Henderson

(1970)

theoret ic al

goes on to say that if learning of the

is c o m b i n e d w i t h pr actical

should be more rapid w i t h
degr ee of co mp e t e n c e

learning

longer r e t e n t i o n and a hig he r

a c q ui re d by the student.

G ou ld and C ro ss

(1972),

in their book the

E x p l o r a t i o n in N o n - T r a d i t i o n a l
no n - t r ad it io na l

ap pl ication,

S t u d y , speak of

study as a group of c h a n g i ng edu cational

pa tterns w h i c h are ca us e d by ch an g i n g needs and
op po r t u n i t ie s of the society.
study,

Gould

(1972)

poi nt s out,

Much of non -t ra di ti on al
is not new but rather has

been b r o u g h t to the pu bl i c ' s a t t e n t i o n in recent times

18
t h ro ug h some of the main p ro po ne nt s of that form of
education.

Al th o u g h the p a r t ic ul ar thru st in their wo r k

tow ar d no n- t r a d it io n al

is

study and external d e g r e e programs,

the d e f in i t i o n may also be ex tended to o th er of f- ca mp us
learning experiences,
pr og ra ms

in cluding those e x p e r i e n t i a l

or a ct iv it ie s

co nv e n t i o n a l

that occur outsi de of the

c l a s s r o o m s et ti ng under the d i r e c t i o n of a

co ll eg e or university.
service experience,

Experiences

and cultural

vast v a r i e t y of e d u c at io nal

such as w o r k experience,

ex p e r i e n ce s are among the

programs or study mode ls

fall under the title of no n- t r a d i t i o na l
of expe ri en ti al
justice,

education,

that

These models
in criminal

are the subject of this study.

be e n a c c la im ed as the first scholarly,
ex p l o r a t i o n of n o n - t r a d i t i o n a l

study,

S t u d y , w h i c h has
c a r e f u l l y done
the a u th or s

set forth

learning can and does take place in d i f f e r e n t ways

di f f e r e n t students.
confusion
today

study.

sp ec if i ca ll y model s

In E x p l o r a t i o n in N o n - T r a d i t i o n a l

that

ed u c a t i o n

They are also q ui ck to p o i n t out that

surrounds all aspec ts

(Gould and Cross,

things,

1972).

surrounds w h a t this

of n o n - t r a d i t i o n a l
Confusion,

learning

am on g other

type of learni ng is and w h a t it

is ex pe c t e d to do for the student.

Wh e n one is b e g i n n i n g to

study the h i st or y and d e v e l o p m e n t of e x p e r i e n t i a l
on colle ge campuses,

for

e d uc at ion

it is somewhat s u r p r i s i n g to find that

such co n f u s i o n exists.

It w ou ld

seem to the casual

ob se rv er

that the c o n ti nu ed e x p a n s i o n and in cr e a s i n g p o p u l a r i t y of
these field studies w o u l d

stand to att es t to the fact that

19
experi en tia l

e du ca tio n had b e e n evaluated.

ex c e p t i o n of student teaching,
and the medical

n u rs i n g e x p e r i e n c e programs,

in te r n sh ip pro gr am s

co nc er n of this s t u d y ) , this

W i t h the

(areas w h i c h are not the

is not n e c e s s a r i l y the case.

Extent and D e v e l o p m e n t of Genera l
Ex p e r i e n t i a l E d u c a t i o n
Exper ien tia l
in several

forms.

e d u c at i o n can be found on c o ll e g e campuses
It may be in the form of field trips,

ex te nsi ve programs of fo re ig n study,
wi t h

little par ticipation,

par ticipation,

in t er ns hi ps w i t h m a x i m u m student

service projects,

e xp er ie nc e programs.

o b s e r v a t i o n programs

Pro gr ams

or c o o p e r a t i v e wor k

of e x pe ri en ti al

e d u c at io n are

found under the br oa d title of in de p e n d e n t study,

w h i c h may

be any one of a numbe r of d i f f e r e n t types of programs.
U nd er ly in g all of these d i f f e r e n t pro gra ms
that there is educatio nal

v a lu e

practical wi th the theore tic al,

is the belief

in a p r o g r a m that mixes the
or that some co nc e p ts and

skills can best be learned o u ts id e of the classroom.
In 1906,
this country.

expe rie nt ial

e d u c a t i o n made its a p p e a r a n c e

Under the d i r e c t i o n of H e r m a n Schnider,

in

the

Uni ve r s i t y of Ci nci nn a ti d e v e l o p e d and in st i t u t e d a form of
field study,
1970).

a c o o p e r a t i v e w o r k study p r og r a m

The progra m wa s d e s i g n e d to r eq ui re

st udents to

al t e r n a t e b e tw ee n pe rio ds of study and pe rio ds
Students wo rk e d as a p p r e n t i c e w o r k e r s
e x t e n s i o n of this program.

(Henderson,

serving

of work.
as an

The studen ts w e r e also re quired

20
to spend one e xtr a year

in their c o ll eg e pr og ra m in order to

com p l e t e the r e q ui r em en t s

for the degree

A n t i o c h C o l l e g e in the 1920's
University)

al l o we d

students

in a s t r u c t u r e d program.

to mix w o r k with their studies
di s c u s s e d

the p r o g r a m

it as a p i o n e e r conce pt in the

mo ve me nt for ma ki n g field ex pe r i e n c e an essential
a colle ge program.
of A n t i o c h students,

Lynd

1970).

(and later N o r t h e a s t e r n

Lynd (1954)

at A n t i o c h and ac c l a i m e d

(Henderson,

(1945)

claimed,

e l eme nt in

"For the ma jo ri ty

the wo r k has be e n at least as i m p or ta nt

a part of their c o l le g e ex pe ri en ce as their academic
studies."
B e n n i n g t o n College,

since its i n c ep ti on in

has sought to pr o v i d e students
the tra di tio na l

the 1930's,

w i t h ex pe rie nce s

c l a s s r o o m setting.

outsid e of

B e n n i n g t o n students are

al lo we d to spend as much as one full year on work study,

or

re se ar ch off camp us

the

(Mayhew and Ford,

list of c o l l e g e s and un iv er s i t i e s
e d u c a t i o n pr og r a m s grew,
edu ca tional

1965).

Over time,

that offered exper ie nt ia l

and the types of ex pe riential

pr og ra ms were expanded.

By 1958,

W i l s o n and Lyons

(1958)

d i s c o v e r e d more than

sixty u n i v e r s i t i e s and co lleges wi t h co o p e r a t i v e e d u ca ti on
pro grams

in operation.

Ele ve n years

later,

in 1969,

surveys r e p o r t e d the fact that the expe ri en ti al
pr ograms had c o n t i n u e d

to grow.

de v e l o p e d a list of results

Dressel

ed u c a t i o n

and D e li sl e

(1969)

from a ra nd o m l y selected c a ta lo g

survey of o n e - t h i rd of all f o u r- ye ar
i n st it ut io ns

two

liberal arts

listed in the 1964 e d iti on of the A me ri ca n

21
Council on E d u c a t i o n ' s A m e r i c a n U n i v e r s i t i e s
and di sc o v er ed that 5.6 p e r c e n t of

and Colleges,

the schoo ls had work

study or c o o p e r a t i v e programs.
In that same year,

Br ic k and M c G r a t h

(by wa y of a question na ir e)
educa ti on w i t h

liberal

(1965)

surveyed

all fo u r - y e a r schoo ls

of higher

arts c u r r i c u l a in the Uni te d States.

Their source for s e l e c t i n g the schools was the Ed u c a t i o n
Directory,

Part,

Higher E d u c a t i o n , published

by the United States

D e p a r t m e n t of Health,

Education,

Welfare,

T h r o u g h their survey,

they di sc o v e r e d

1965-1966.

that 54.3 perce nt of the

and

schools re po r t e d eit he r hav in g in

operation,

or p l a n n i n g to have in o p e r a t i o n a p r o g r a m of

wo r k study

(McGrath,

two surveys,

1965).

some q u e s t i o n s

C o m p a r i n g the r e su lt s of these
arise as to w h y there is

di s p a r i t y b et w e e n the results.

The d i s c r e p a n c i e s may well

be the result of i n a d e q u a t e c a t a l o g d e s c r i p t i o n s
ex pe ri en ti al
Delisl e

e d u c a t i o n programs,

(1969)

w h i c h mi s l e d Dressel

in t he ir conc lu si on s.

percen t of the schools

For example,

in their su r v e y had

pr ograms w h i ch could be w h e r e

of
and

58.4

Ind ep en de nt Study

some of the e x pe ri ent ia l

e d u ca ti on pr ograms w e r e c o n c e a l e d

(Dressel and Delisle,

1969) .
Somewh at re l a te d to the w o r k e x p e r i e n c e alrea dy
di sc u ss ed are s e r v i c e - l e a r n i n g programs.
over a quart er of a c e n t u r y ago,
co mm uni ty dynamics.
in co mm un it y pro je ct s

E a r l h a m College,

d e v e l o p e d a p r og r a m of

This p r o g r a m e n a b l e d st ud en ts

to assist

for the b e t t e r m e n t of the society.

22
An o t h e r school

that has had a l e ar nin g-s er vic e pr o g r a m

in

op e r a t i o n for a c o n s i d e r a b l e period of time is Br oo k l y n
C o l l e g e in N e w York City.

In Indiana,

G o s h e n C o l l e g e has

had a tr i m e s t e r p r o g r a m of study and service;
which

the obj ec t of

is to e x p er i e n c e and i n v e st ig at e an oth er cu lt ur e and

to dona te

servi ce to pe op l e .in need

(Meeth and McGrath,

1965) .
In the S o u t h e r n

states,

their g r e a t e s t d e v el op me nt.
Edu ca ti on al

s e r v i c e - l e a r n i n g pr og ra ms had
In 1969,

the So ut h e rn Regional

B oa rd e s t a b l i s h e d a p r og ra m to enable

to p a r t i c i p a t e

in o f f - c a m p u s

le ar ni ng - s e r v i c e nature.

students

int er ns hi ps of a

In 1971,

the General A s s e m b l y of

N o r t h C a r o l i n a a p p r o p r i a t e d funds to a l l o w for in creasing
use of the i n t e r n s h i p and e v a l u a t i o n of the se r v i c e - l e a r n i n g
ex pe ri e n t i a l

e d u c a t i o n model

(Sigmon,

1974).

This

d e v e l o p m e n t is s o m e w h a t un i q u e in as muc h as the main thrust
of the p r o g r a m comes
institution.

from o u ts id e of the ed uc ational

The schoo ls w h ic h have be e n most successful

in

d e v e l o p i n g and o p e r a t i n g this type of p r o g r a m in this area
are A p p a l a c h i n State University,

Mars Hill College,

Un i v e r s i t y of N o r t h C a r o l i n a at Charlotte,
N o r t h C a r o l i n a at Gre en sbo ro ,
(Sigmon,

1974).

and P e m b r o ke State Un iv er si ty

In ea c h of these schools,

has been d e v e l o p e d b e t w e e n the school
ag en c i e s

Un iv e r s i t y of

a relationship

and the public

in the area.

According
succes sf ul

to S i g m o n

(1974),

schools has be c o m e

the ke y q u e s t i o n at these

"What is the

limit w i t h i n the

23
B ac c a l a u r e a t e deg re e for e x pe ri en ti al

e d u ca ti on cre dits?"

This type of si t u at io n is e x e m p l a r y of how v a l u a b l e
educ ati on al

these

e x p e r i en c e s are c o n s i d e r e d by schools wi t h

successful programs.
be nef its we r e r e v e al e d

Si g m o n

(1974)

notes that four major

in st ud y i ng these successful

programs:
1)

Stu den ts d ev el o p more hopeful, kn ow le d ge ab le ,
c o n c e r n e d a t t it ud es towa rd c o m m u n i t y p r o b l e m
solving.

2)

Stu den ts e x p er ie n c e an in cr ea se d m o t i v a t i o n to wo r k
and learn in public need se tt ing s after learning
to wo r k e f f e c ti ve ly wi t h others in internships.

3)

Stu dents learn a great deal ab out their personal
a bi lit ies and cu ltural commitments.

4)

There is an imm edi ate impact on the st udent's
b e h a v i o r and on their plans for the future
(Sigmon, 1974).

These result s would
pro gra ms

seem to ind ica te that, s e rvi ce

and

learning

of this type could cause the q u e st io ns

relat ed to the m a x i m u m numb er of c r ed it s to b e c o m e a
reality.

The N o r t h Ca ro l i na

a program,
pro grams

I nt er ns hi p Off ic e has not been

but rath er e na bl er of c o ll eg e and a g en cy based

for studen t in vo lv em en t

(Sigmon,

should be co ns id e r e d by other age nc ie s

1974).

and h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n

in st itu tio ns as a pos si bl e model of ex pe ri en ti al
Based on the above results,
a tt rac ted

other schools

to the se rv i c e - l e a r n i n g model

This model

education.

should be

as a me t h o d of

p re se n t i n g a body of kn o w l e d ge to their students.

P r o b a b ly

the gr e a t e s t v a r i e t y of field study and e x pe ri ent ia l
edu ca ti on takes place under the br oad title of i n d e p e n d en t
honors courses.

These pro grams w e r e the re su l t of the

24
p h i l o s o p h y that fu se d ac ad e m i c and off-campus e x p e ri en ce as
a valid,

e f f i c i e n t and d e s i r a b l e form of education.

Colleges

o f f e r i n g such pr og r a m s

Lawrence,

B en ni ng to n,

in cluded Reed,

Brad Stephen,

Sarah

and G o d d a r d

(Quinn,

1972) .
A M odel

for Su cce ssf ul

A succes sf ul

field e x p e r i e n c e does not just ha pp e n

because experiential
tr a d it io na l

mo de l s

F i e l d E x p e ri en ce Pro gra ms

learning is so superior to the

that it ca nn o t fail.

To be successful,

field e x p e r i e n c e p r o g r a m must be well conceived,
implemented,

and evaluated.

This process

a

planned,

is not so simple

as to be a c c o m p l i s h e d by any facul ty per so n the d e p ar tm en ta l
chairperson designates
re le a s e d time.

to be the c o o r d i n a t o r w i t h o u t

In fact the most successful

from such after thoughts.

Such programs are c o o r d i n a t e d by

fu l l - t i m e f a c u l t y members who

spend many hours w o r k i n g on

them as a part of their re g ul ar
One model

pr og r a m s are far

load.

for the d e v e l o p m e n t of field exp er ie nc e

pr og r a m s d e s i g n e d by Davis,

Duley,

p r o p o s e s an e i g h t - s t e p pr o c e s s

and A l e x a n d e r

to des ig n such programs:

1)

Id en ti fy p r o g r a m goals and student goals.

2)

State a g r e e d - u p o n goals
obj e c t i v e s .

3)

Arrange

field placement.

4)

Prepare

students.

5) P la ce

(1977)

in the form of instructional

students.

6) M o n i t o r the field placement.

25
7) Assess

st u d en t

learning.

8) E v a l u a t e the program.
This model d em o n s t r a t e s that the d e v e l o p m e n t of a field
e x p e r i e n c e p r o g r a m re qu ir es c o n s i d e ra bl e eff or t on the part
of the fa cul ty p e r s o n serving as the coordinator.
co or d i n a t o r

is the k e y s t o n e

e d u c at io n program.
stable,

in any successful

The

expe ri ent ia l

The po si t i on of the c o o r d i n a t o r must be

and the a s s i g n m e n t must be one vi ew e d by the faculty

as a d e s i r ab le position.

The c o o r d i n a t o r' s p o si ti on must

not be t e m p o r a r y or an ove rl oad assignment.

It is

r e c om me nd ed that the p o si ti on be filled by a pe rs o n who
b el ie ve s

in e x p e r i e n t i al

education,

someone wh o can

c o m m u n i c a t e well w i t h the operational

ag en ci es

in all areas

of student pla cements,

a di pl oma t who can m a ssa ge and

de v e l o p relat ion s w i t h

local agencies,

co mm u n i c a t e well w i t h students

(Davis,

and a p e r s o n wh o can
Duley,

and Alexander,

1977) .
Summar y
Duri ng the d e v e l o p m e n t of this re vi e w of the
literature,
exp eri en ti al

num er ou s books and ar ticles on the subje ct of
e d u c a t i o n we r e reviewed.

that exp eri en ti al

e d u c a t i o n is still

c o mp ar ed to the tra dit ion al
model

of education.

This re v ie w rev eal ed
in its infanc y wh en

t e a c h e r - s t u d e n t - t e x t t ri ch ot om y

It was first in tro duc ed in hig he r

ed u c a t i o n in this co u n t r y in a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1906 at the
U ni ve r s i t y of C i n c i n n a t i
its introduction,

(Wilson and Lyons,

exp er ie nt ia l

1961).

Since

ed uc at io n has been modified,

26
enhanced,

and r ev i s e d by the many colleges and un iv er s i t i e s

that have e m p l o y e d

it.

As a res ul t of this,

ap p l i c a t i o n s of e x p e r i e n t i a l

many

ed u c a t i o n r e s e a r c h have begun

to i d e n t i f y those e l e m e n t s n e c e s s a r y for a successful
program.

S pe ci fi ca ll y,

a successful

and state in in st r u c t i o na l
goals,

terms

p r o g r a m should identify

the pr og ra m and

a r ra ng e and m o n i t o r placements,

placement,
(Davis,

assess

Duley,

exp eri en ti al

st u d e n t

and Al exa nde r,

pro gr am s

co or d i n a t o r who

learning,
1977).

learner

p r e p a r e students for

and ev al u a t e the progr am
The success of

rests h e a v i l y on the shoulders of the

is the k e y s t o n e of the program.

The

c o o r d i na to r' s p o s i t i o n must be more than an addit io na l
added to some fa cul ty mem ber 's work

load.

duty

The faculty

memb er must be k n o w l e d g e a b l e of ag en cie s and of the
ex pe r i e n t i al

ed u c a t i o n th eo ri es as well as a b e l i e v e r in the

c o n c e p t of such education.
The

liter at ur e c l e a rl y dem ons tr at es

va lu e in e x p e r i e n t i a l education.
en ha nc e c l a s s r o o m
st udents

learning,

that there

It does as a minim um

and it ce r t a i n l y assists

in career decisions.

is

C H AP T E R III
MET HO DOL OGY
In tr oduction
The p ro b l e m of this study was to assess the e f f e c t of
an exp er ie nt ia l
of Crimina l

e d u c a t i o n p r og ra m on gr ad uat es of the School

J us ti ce at Mic h ig an State U n i v er si ty

1) car ee r deve lo pm ent ,
tunities,

and 4)

2) career stability,

ag en c y shock.

cr ip t i o n of the setting,
study,

survey me tho ds used,

career oppor­

This c h apt er in cl ude s a d e s ­

the sample,

the des ig n of the study,

3)

in terms of

the du r a t i o n of the

the va ri ab le s

studied,

the

and a d e s c r i p t io n of the an a l y s i s of

the data.
The S et ti ng for M i ch ig an State Uni ve rs it y
The setting for this study was the cr iminal

justice

pr og r a m at M i c h i g a n State Un iv er si ty in East Lansing,
Michigan.

This p r o g r a m began as the D e pa r t m e n t of Police

A d m i n i s t r a t i o n in 1937.
Criminal

Ultimately,

J u st ic e in 1968.

Colleg e of Social

it be c a m e the School

The School

is located in the

Scienc e and has cu rr ent ly

a p p r o x i m a t e l y 900 u n d e r g r a d u a t e students,
candidates,

and 25 Ph.D.

candidates.

of

(1981)

enr ol le d

90 M a s t e r ' s

degree

The u n d e r g r a d u a t e

c u r r i c u l u m pr ovides a basic or i e n t a t i o n to the in st it u t i o n s
and pr o c e s s e s of criminal

justice.

is found ed on two essential
study of crime,

The Sc hool's p h i l o s o p h y

propositions:

criminal behavior,

27

(1)

The

and criminal

sy st e m a t i c

justice

28

process co ns ti t ut es

an a p p r o p r i a te and hi gh l y i m po rt ant

fu nct ion of high er education,

and

(2)

b e ca us e of the

com ple xi ti es of the ph en om en a a t t e n d a n t to crime in
c o n t e mp or ar y society,

it has be co m e

for high er ed uc at io n to devote
students for careers

its re s o u rc es

in criminal

(Michigan State University,
Exp eri en ti al

i n c r e a s i n g ly im po rt an t

ju sti ce and re la te d areas

1981).
Pr o g r a m H i s t o r y

M i ch ig an State U ni ve rs it y School
has offere d a pr og r a m of exp eri ent ial ,
ince pti on of the school

to p r e pa ri ng

in .1935.

of Cri min al

J us tic e

field study since the

Initially,

the p r o g r a m was

a req uir ed part of the c u r r i c u l u m and each s t ude nt was
ex pected to com pl et e an e i g h t e e n - m o n t h
area of hi s/ he r own
the program,
county,

specialty.

To a c h i e v e the pu rp os e of

stu dents were a ss ig ne d to federal,

municipal,

and pr iv at e a ge nc ie s

familiar w i t h each agency.

1.

state,

so they cou ld becom e

The d e s i r e d be ne fi ts

pr og r a m we re pe r c e i v e d as follows
University,

int er ns hi p w i t h i n the

of this

(Michigan State

1975):

To provid e the s t ude nt w i t h the o p p o r t u n i t y to be
ob se rve rs and p a r t i c i p a t e in their ch os e n field.
The student, throug h p l a c e m e n t in va rio us
agencies, was allowed to compare, a n aly ze and gain
an ap pr e c i a t i o n for the many ag en cie s in the
system, c o o p e r a t i v e l y w o r k i n g towa rd the
a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of justice. These exp er ie nc es
should s u b s eq ue nt ly help the emp lo ye d st ude nt and
gra du at e to place into p r op er p e r sp ec ti ve hi s/ he r
own role and co nt ribution, w h il e app ly in g p r a c ­
tical k n o w l e d g e to ex i s t i n g w o r k i n g relation sh ips .

29

2.

To pr ovi de the student w i t h an o p p o r t u n i t y to
obser ve the a p p l i c at io n of technical skills by
p r o f i c i e n t practiti on ers .
The students ha v in g
bee n ex p o s e d to the un de r l y i n g pr in ci p l e s in the
c l a s s r o o m w e r e then e x po se d to the a p p l i c a t i o n of
p r e s c r i p t i v e the or y to real w or ld situations.

3. To pr ovi de the student w i t h an o p p o r t u n i t y to
det er mi ne the va rio us em pl oy m e n t req uir eme nts ,
benefits, and their s u i t a b il it y to a car ee r in that
field of Cri min al Justice.
Conversely, tra ini ng
ag enc ie s w e r e af fo rde d the use of field study
pr ogr am s as a re cr ui ti ng and p r e l i m i n a r y tra ini ng
p ro gr a m for p r o s p e ct iv e employees.
4. To p ro vid e the student with personal a s s o c i a t i o n
w i t h men and w o m e n w o r k i n g in their cho se n field of
endeavor. Th ese friends hi ps are c o n s i d e r e d a
val ua bl e par t of the field ex pe r i e n c e program.
Since its inception,

the c o m p l e x i o n of the field study

p ro g r a m has be en changing.
e ig h t e e n - m o n t h program.

The p r o g r a m b e g a n as an

In a p p r o x i m a t e l y

1949,

the p r o g r a m

was al te red to r eq ui r e only a t w e l v e - m o n t h placement.
in 1956,

Then,

the p ro g r a m was mo di f i e d to a t h r e e- te rm

requirement.

In 1961,

the p r og ra m was fu rth er r e duc ed

t w o - t e r m re qu irement.

In 1963,

the p r o g r a m b e c a m e a

o n e - t e r m requirement.

Finally,

in 1965,

an optional

to a

the p r o g r a m be c a m e

o n e - t e r m program.

The P r es en t Pr o g r am
Today,

the Cri min al

Justi ce P r a ct ic um is still

opt ional and it is op e n to all cr iminal
The students wh o p a r t i c i p a t e
do eith er a ten -we ek
placement.

justi ce seniors.

in this p r o g r a m may c h o o s e to

int er ns hi p or a ten -we ek mu l t i - a g e n c y

The num be r of cr ed i t hours av a i l ab le

p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the pr o g r a m is variable;

for

from one to twelve

30
credits,

de p e nd i ng on the d u r a t i o n and n u m b e r of hours per

week worked.

The c at a l o g d e s c r i p t i o n of the Cri minal

Justi ce P r a c t i c u m as it a p pe ar s
State U n i ve r si ty C a t a l o g

in the 1981-1982 M i c h i g a n

is as follows:

Criminal J us ti c e 490.
Cr im ina l Ju st ic e P r a c t ic um
Fall, Winter, Spring, Summer. V a r i a b l e credit. May
reenroll for a m a x i m u m of 12 credits... Majo rs only. A
p la nne d p r o g r a m of r e s e a r c h internships, observation,
study, and wo r k in se le c t ed criminal justice agencies.
Supp lem en ts c l a s s r o o m study wi t h p a r t i c i p a t i o n in
criminal j us ti ce syste ms of the Un it e d States and
foreig n nations.
The methods u t i l i z e d to e v a l u a t e the stu dent's
a ch ie vem ent

in the p r o g r a m is the

This system

(according to the 1975 M i c h i g a n State U n iv e r s i t y

Aca dem ic Handbook)

"Pass-No Grade"

System.

is ba se d on the studen t a c h i e v i n g the

numerical grade e q u i v a l e n t of 2.0 for w h i c h he/ sh e
awarde d cr e d it for the course.
not award a n um eri ca l
student's t ra ns c r i p t

grade,

This system,

is

however,

does

only the cr e d i t s app ea r on the

(Michigan State University,

E v a l u a t i o n of the st u d e n t ' s p e r f o r m a n c e

1975).

is b as ed on an

eva lu at i on of the st u d e n t at the end of the field
experience.

The s tud en t must w r i t e a pap er at the end of

the course.

This p ape r is s u p p o s ed to an al yz e the st udent's

e xpe rie nce

in light of pri or cl a s s r o o m exper ie nce s.

The

paper is also to sy nt he s i z e the p r e s c r i p t i v e theory and the
practical e xp er ie nc e

into a m ea nin gf ul

c onc ern ing the Cri minal
of specialization.

body of kn ow le dg e

J u s t i c e Sy st e m in the stud en t' s area

31
Types

of A g e n c y Placements

As m e n t i o n e d earlier,
placement available

to the student.

I nt er ns hi p and the ot her
I nt er nsh ips

include

Pr ob at e Court,

there are two types of age nc y
One of these is the

is the M u l t i - A g e n c y placement.

such ag en cie s as the Ingham Co un t y

J a c k s o n C o u n t y P r ob at e Court,

and the State

of Mi c hi g a n ' s C o n s u m e r Fr au d D i v i s i o n of the A t t o r n e y
G e n e ra l' s Office.

St ud e n ts who p a r ti ci pa te

in an in ter nsh ip

n o r m a l l y wo r k in an agenc y for forty hours per week
weeks.

Stu den ts are g e n e r a l l y allowe d to wo r k un der the

su pe r v i s i o n of an a g en c y employee,
r eq ui re d of any a g en cy employee.
e mp l o y e d on special
example,

p e rf o r m i n g duties
The st udents are us u a l l y

p ro je ct s w i th in the agency.

at Ingham C o u n t y Pr oba te Court,

h a nd le a p r o b at io n cas e
s tu den t case w o r k e r
c l ie nt

for ten

For

the s tu de nt may

load of four to ten clients.

The

is r e qu ir ed to ac co m p l i s h all those

services w h i c h a re gu la r pr ofe ssi ona l

case wo rk e r

w o u l d perform.
Multi-agency placements
agencies.

The

are made in a v a r i e t y of

list is c o m p ri se d almo st ex cl u s i v e l y of

e n f o r c e m e n t agencies.

law

Th ese pla ce me nt s are almo st

e x c l u s i v e l y o b se rv at io na l

in nature.

fact that stu dents c a nn ot ca rry out

This

is due to the

law e n f o r c e m e n t duties

be ca u s e they are not c e r t if ie d police officers.

32
A typical
follows,

t e n - we e k M u l t i - A g e n c y p l a c e m e n t w o u l d be as

two we eks ea c h with:

East La n s in g P ol i c e D e p a r t m e n t
M i c h i g a n State Pol ice
M i c h i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y D e p a r t m e n t of Publ ic Safety
Ingham Co un t y Sh e r i ff 's De pa r t m e n t
L an s i n g Pol ic e D e p a r t m e n t
Dur i n g the st udent's p l a c e m e n t wi t h each of the agencies,
he/ s h e is as si g n ed to ri de on patrol
agencies,

in all of the above

as sig n ed to the i n v e s t i g a t i o n unit in the ma jo rit y

of the agencies,

a s s i g n e d to the school

least one of the agencies,

safety u n i t in at

and a l low ed to o b se rv e most of

the on go in g o pe ra ti o ns of ea c h department.
placement,

In this type of

the stude nt serves a l m o s t e x c l u s i v e l y in an

obs er ve r role w i t h few or no ag e n c y duties to perform.

Re q u i r e m e n t s

for C o m p l e t i o n of the Pr og r a m

St udents who p a r t i c i p a t e

in the Criminal

P r a c t i c u m are e x p e ct e d to m e e t several
to r ec ei ve cre di t for the course.
follows
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

(Michigan State Uni ve rsi ty ,

Ju s t i ce

requirements

in order

Those r e q u i r e m e n t s are as
1975):

Fill out an a p p l i c a t i o n
Sign a li a b i l i t y and i n su ra nce wa i ve r
Attend a Pre-Practicum meeting
Sub mi t D a i l y R e p o r t forms
A t t e n d M i d - T e r m P r a c t i c u m meeting
Su b m i t Final Pa per (approximately one page per
cr ed i t h o u r .)
7. A t t e n d P o s t - P r a c t i c u m m e e t i n g
8. Send Ag e n c y Tha nk Y o u letter(s)

33
The Role of the Pr a c t i c u m Co o rd in at or
The C o o r d i n a t o r of the Cr iminal Justice P r a c t i c u m is
re sp o n s i b l e for all
addition,

pha se s of the field study program.

a d m i n i s t r a t i v e duties such as sched ul in g and

c on fi r m i n g a s s i g n m e n t s w i t h ag encies are performed.
C oo rd i n a t o r has two major areas of c o nc er n —
agencies.

In

C o n c e r n i n g students,

The

students and

the C o o r d i n a t o r must be

av ai la b le to pr ovi de a ss is ta nc e w h e n ne ce ss ar y to make the
e xp eri ent ial

e d u c a t i o n p r o g r a m a more be neficial

re le va nt edu ca ti on al
m a tc hi ng st udents
students'

experience.

to age ncies

interests,

student's placement,

These duties

and

include

that be s t refle ct the

pr ov id e on goi ng su pe rvi sio n dur in g a
pr ov id e a fee dback and d i sc u s s i o n

m e c h a n i s m th ro ug h the mi d - t e r m and final meetings as well
bei ng a v a i la bl e w h e n e v e r
mat te r of course,

stude nt pr ob le ms

arise.

As a

the students are urged to meet wi t h the

Co or d i n a t o r at any time du r in g their p l ac em ent per io d to
di scu ss

their re a c t i o n to and feelings about the Criminal

Ju st ic e Ex pe ri en ti al
U ni ve rs it y School

Education Program

of Cri minal

C o n c e r n i n g the agencies,

Justice,

at tem pts

re la te d

1975).

the Co o r d i n a t o r m a in ta ins a

liaison wi t h p a r t i c i p a t i n g agencies,
d i f f i cu lt ie s

(Michigan State

to a specific

works out any

studen t placement,

to re cr u i t n e w ag encies for the program.

and

as

34
A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Suppo rt
The c o o r d i n a t o r

is s u p po rt ed in the o p e r a t i o n of the

p r a c t i c u m th r o u g h the use of one s e c r e t a r y on a o n e - e i g h t h
time b as is and by a gr ad ua te a s s i s t a n t on a h a l f - t i m e basis.
The f u n c t i o n of the secr eta ry is to do all
clerical

duti es

to s u pp or t the program.

of the n e c e s sa ry

The g r a d u a t e

a s s i s t a n t serves as the a s s i s t a n t c o or d i n a t o r and pe rforms
those dut ie s d e l e g a t e d by the co or dinator.
dut ie s

T ho se de l e g a t e d

inclu de c o u n s e l i n g st udents from time to time,

e v a l u a t i o n of S t u de n t Final Papers,

and assi st in the annual

e v a l u a t i o n of the p r a c t i c u m program.
Po p u l a t i o n
The School

of Criminal Ju s t i ce had a p p r o x i m a t e l y 900

u n d e r g r a d u a t e students,
25 Ph.D.

ca nd i da t es

University,
287 students

1975).

90 Ma st e r ' s de g re e candidates,

en rol le d d u ri ng Phase

in the Spring Quarter:

School

These figures
of Cr iminal

(Michigan State

The Senior Class of 1975 co n s i st ed of

g r a du at es were c o u n t e d the total
316.

I

and

and w h e n all

of the 1975

num be r of gr a d u at es was

are ba se d on an actual

hand co un t of the

Ju s t i c e class ros te r and g r a d u a t i o n

lists

for all qu ar t er s of 1975.
Sample
The c r i t e r i a for se le cti on of the samples used in this
descriptive
1)

study in cl ud ed the following:
The p r a c t i c u m

(C.J.

409)

1975, was cho se n as the ex pe rim ent al
time c o n st ra in t s of Phase

class of Spr in g Quarter,

gr oup be cau se of the

I of this study.

All membe rs of

35

that class w e r e in cluded in the sample.
was a typical

class

The class

se le ct ed

in that it was co mp o s e d of a p p r o x i m a t e l y

thir ty st ud e n t s and the class was n o r m a l l y d i s t r i b u t e d with
in t e r n s h i p and m u l t i - a g e n c y students as well as males and
females.

The sample c o n si st ed of 30 Criminal

J u st ic e

Seniors.
2)

The control

dom sample of all

group

(1975)

was

selected from a r a n ­

183 Criminal J u st ic e Seniors of the class

of 1975 w h o had not taken C.J.
se le c t e d as the control

409.

This gr ou p was

group be c a u se

it was

from the

same

p o p u l a t i o n of the u n i v e r s i t y as the e x p er im en ta l group.
3)

The contr ol

r a n d o m sample of all
class of
was

gr ou p

(1981)

206 Criminal

was

selected

from a

Ju s t i c e Senio rs of the

1975 w h o had not taken C.J.

409.

This g ro up

se le ct ed as the control g r o u p b e ca u s e it was from the

same p o p u l a t i o n of the u n i v e r s i t y as the ex pe r i m e n t a l
The or ig in al

control

gr ou p

(1975)

due to the fact that the original

group.

was not used in P ha se
sample was

II

lost be tw e e n

1975 and 1981.
Desi gn
This

study is a de s c r i pt iv e pos t-h oc study co n d u c t e d

over a six -y ea r period.

The group s selected for the study

we r e c h o s en on the basis of a v a i l a b i l i t y at the time of the
initial

p o r t i o n of the s tudy in 1975.

The second sur ve y and

36

sample was c o n duc te d in the Spr in g of

1981.

The period of

six years had no major s i g n i f i c a n c e e x c e p t th a t it was
sufficiently

long en ou g h to a d e q u a t e l y te s t the re se ar ch

questions.

D u r a ti o n of Phase I
Phase
April

(1975)

I was c o n d u c t e d over the p e r i o d of time from

to June,

1975.

This Phase was

the gr ad u a t i o n re qu ir e m e n t s
Cr im in al

of the The Study

in st it u t e d as part of

for a M a s t e r of S ci en ce

in

Justi ce at M i c h i g an Sta te U n i v e r s i t y in August,

1975.

D u r a t i o n of Phas e

II (1981)

Phase II was c o n du ct ed
This

time per iod was

of the The Study

du ri n g M a y and June of 1981.

selecte d be ca u s e

it c o i n c i d e d wi th the

sixth a n n i ve r s ar y of the c o m p l e t i o n of the exper ime nta l
group' s p r a c t i c u m in Cr iminal J u s t i c e at M i c h i g a n State
University.

This Phase was

d i s s e r t a t i o n r e q ui rem en ts

i ns ti tu te d as a pa rt of the

for a D o c t o r of P h il o s o p h y in

A d m i n i s t r a t i o n of High er Education.
Qu e s ti o nn ai r es Em p l o y e d to G a t h e r Data
Five

different

from the

respondents.

developed

by the

a da pte d from
her

These

were

used

to

The

education

at

des ig n
(1972)

Michigan

The re li a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y of
test ed by Qu in n

all

initial

an i n s t r um en t d e v e l o p e d by Q u i n n

in str ume nt were

obt ai n data

in s t r u m e nt s wer e

investigator.

study of ex pe riential

University.
the

q ue st i o n n a i r e s

(1972)

in

State

the items
and

was

found

in
to

37

be

acceptable.

The

five q u e s t i o n n a i r e s em pl o y ed we r e

p r e - p r a c t i c u m qu e s t i on n ai re ,
(1975),
p r a c ti cu m

a non-practicum

(1981),

non-practicum questionnaire
The

pre-practicum

a post-practicum questionnaire

questionnaire

questionnaire

a

and

(1975),

a fo ll ow -u p

a fo l l o w - u p

(1981).

questionnaire

(See

Appendix

B)

was d es ig ne d to identify:
a.

At w h a t p o i n t and t h rou gh wh a t me d iu m students
bec am e aware of the Cri minal Justic e Practicum.

b.

Fa cto rs that pr e s e n t e d pr ob lem s in students
c h oo si ng to p a r t i c i p a t e in the practicum.

c.

Students' p e rc e p ti on s of the ra ti ona le of the
School of Cr im in al Ju st ic e obj ec ti ve s for off er in g
the Cri min al Ju st i c e Practicum.

d.

The goals and o b je c t i v e s the students held for
their field e x p e r i e n c e p ri or to their
participation.

The p o s t - p r a c t i c u m q u e s t i o n n a i r e

(See Ap p e n d i x C) was

d e si gn ed to identify:
a.

The students'
placements.

accomplishments

b.

T hos e areas of the c l a s s r o o m learning that the
stu dents v i e w e d as most benefi ci al to their field
experience.

c.

T ho se areas of the c l a s s r o o m ex pe ri en ce lea rning
that the studen ts v i e w as d e f i c i e n t and w h i c h
r e s u l t e d in a loss of e f f i c i e n c y in their field
experience.

d.

T hos e c ha ng es the stu den ts wo uld make in the
p r a c t i c u m pr o g r a m if they w e r e em powered to do so.

The p r e - p r a c t i c u m q u e s t i o n n a i r e

(1975)

in their field

was a d m i n i s t e r e d at

the p r e - p l a c e m e n t me e t i n g for Spr in g Te r m p r a c t i c u m
students.

E i g h t e e n resp on se s w e r e re ce i v e d at the time,

due

38
to the fact that a p p r o x i m a t e l y ten students miss ed that
meeting.

The q u e s t i o n n a i r e was

self-addressed,

then a c co m p a n i e d w i t h a

p os t a g e paid e n v e l o p e w h i c h was mai le d to

the abs en t students.

The r e s p o n s e

only three a ddi ti ona l

returns.

p r e - p r a c t i c u m st ud en ts was
pr a c t i c u m students.
100 percent.

from this m a i l i n g was

Thus,

the sample for the

twenty-one

(70 percent)

of the

This p e r c e n t a g e was hoped to be near

However,

lack of c o o p e r a t i o n on the par t of

the students pr e c l u d e d this r e s e a r c h e r

from o b t ai ni ng

that goal.
The p o s t - p r a c t i c u m q u e s t i o n n a i r e

(1975)

was

a d m i n i s t e r e d at. the e n d - o f - t e r m m e e t i n g held the
of Spring Te r m 1975.
were received.
sel f-addressed,

At that meeting,

A q u e s t i o n n a i r e was

s e ve nt een re s p o ns es

then maile d wi t h a

p os t a g e paid e n v e l o p e to each of the ele ve n

students w h o were a b s e n t from that meeting.
the maile d q u e s t i o n n a i r e s r e s u l t e d
responses.
was twe nt y

last week

The final

The re t u r n of

in only three more

size of the p o s t - p r a c t i c u m sample thus

(66.6 percent)

students.

The n o n - p r a c t i c u m s t ud en t q u e s t i o n n a i r e

(1975)

(see

ap pe n d i x D) was d e s i g n e d to identify:
a.

Those facto rs that w e r e most in st rumental in the
st udent's d e c i s i o n not to p a r t i c i p a t e in the
Cr iminal J u s t i c e Practicum.

b.

The s t u de nt 's k n o w l e d g e of the Cr iminal Ju s t i c e
P r a c t i c u m c o n c e r n i n g p l a c e m e n t s and ac ad em ic
cr e d i t available.

c.

Wh a t v a l ue the s t u d e n t ob se r v e d
J u st ic e Practicum.

in the Cr iminal

39
d.

H o w and w h e n the studen ts bec am e aware of the
Cr iminal J us ti c e Practicum.

e.

W h e t h e r the time in the student's aca dem ic car ee r
tha t he or she bec am e aware of the p r o g r a m playe d
a role in the d e c i s i o n to p a r t i c i p a t e in the
practicum.

The n o n - p r a c t i c u m q u e s t i o n n a i r e was a d m i n i s t e r e d to
fifty Cri min al

J us ti ce Senio rs

Ter m in 1975.

The s e l ec t i o n process emp loy ed to obta in this

sample r e qu ir ed the manual

the last we e k of the Spring

sorti ng of all senior cards to

insure that only senior s who had not p re vi ou sl y enr ol le d in
the Cri minal

Justic e P r a c t i c u m and who we re not en rolled

the pr og r a m for Summ er we r e
for the sample.
cards

include d in the av ai lab le pool

The next step was to number all re ma ini ng

s e q u en ti al ly from 100 to 283.

nu mbe rs was

in

A table of rand om

then em p l o y e d to dr a w a sample of fifty cards.

Those pe rs on s sel ec te d for the sample we r e then sent a
letter,
paid

a que sti o nn ai r e,

(see Ap p e n d i x E ) .

and a retu rn en ve l o pe wi th postage
The re sp o n s e re ce ive d from this

sample tot al le d tw en t y - o n e

(42 percent).

The fo ll ow -u p P r a c t i c u m

(1981)

q u es ti o n n a i r e

(see

A p p e n d i x F) was d e s i g n e d to identify:
a.

The h i g h e s t d e g r e e at ta i n e d and year and q u ar te r
the g r a d ua te s re c e i v e d their B.S. or B .A . Degree.

b.

The length of e l ap s e d time be t w e en gr ad u a t i o n and
o b t a in in g the fir st em pl oy me nt in the Criminal
Ju st ic e sys te m and wh a t type of po s i t i o n was
obtained.

c.

The length of time the gr aduates re ma ine d in their
first po s i t i o n as well as how many pos it io ns they
had held in the Cri min al Justic e Syst em since
graduation.

40
d.

The re as o n g ra du at es

that left the sys te m did so.

e.

The g ra du a t e ' s p e r c e p t i o n of the re as o n w h y the
School of Cr imi na l J u st ic e offe rs the Criminal
J us ti c e Practicum.

f.

The g ra du a t e ' s p e r c e p t i o n of the v a l u e of each
cour se they took in the Crimin al Justi ce
curriculum.

g.

The am ou n t of age nc y shock the g r ad ua tes
e n c o u n t e r e d in their first p o s i t i o n and w h e t h e r
they p e r c e i v e d that colle ge had p r e p a r e d them to
deal w i t h that shock.

h.

The graduates' p e rc e p t i o n of the v a l u e of the
stated obj ec t iv es es ta b l i s h e d du ri n g the
p r e - p r a c t i c u m research.

The fo l l o w - u p p r a c t i c u m qu e s t i o n n a i r e

(1981)

a d m i n i s t e r ed to all

but one of the thi rt y Spring,

p r a c t i c u m students.

The reaso n only t w e n t y - n i ne

q u e s t i o n n a i r e s we r e

was
1975,

sent out was that one of the g r a d u a t e s '

addre ss es could not be

located.

The a d d re ss es we r e

located

by r e s e a r c h i n g M i c h i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y A l u m n i / D o n o r
Records and by
of graduates'

letters to the

last k n o w n p e r m a n e n t address

parents.

The r e s p o n s e to the initial m a i l i n g was twenty
responses,

w h i c h was

equal

to a p p r o x i m a t e l y

follo w- up m a i l i n g r e t ur ne d four a dd iti on al
total of t w e n t y - f o u r
Criminal

66 percent.
surveys

A

for a

or 80 pe r c e n t of the Spri ng 1975

J u st ic e P r a c t i c u m class.

survey is b e l i e v e d
money"

(24)

(20)

The success of this

to be the resu lt of the use of

at ta c h e d to ea c h question na ir e.

"guilt

A one do l l a r bill

was at ta c h e d to each q u e s t i o n n a i r e w i t h an e x p l a n a t i o n that
co nveyed thanks for the time need ed to fill out the survey.

41
The f o l l o w - u p n o n - p r a c t i c u m q u e s t i o n n a i r e

(1981)

(See

a p p e n d i x G) wa s d e s i g n e d to identify:
a.

The h i g h e s t de g r e e attained, and year and q u a r t e r
the gr a d u a t e s re ce i v e d their B.S. or B.A. Degree.

b.

The length of e l ap se d time be tw ee n g r a d u a t i o n and
ob t a i n i n g the first e m p l o y m e n t in the Criminal
Ju s t i c e sy st em and the type of p o s i t i o n obtained.

c.

The length of time the grad ua tes re mained in their
fi rs t po s i t i on s as well as h o w many posi ti ons they
hav e held in the Criminal J u st ic e Syst em since
graduation.

d.

The re a s o n (s) g r a du at es that left the system did

so .

e.

The graduates' pe r c e p t i o n s of the reason why the
School of Cr iminal Justi ce offers the C.J.
Practicum.

f.

The g r a d u a t e ' s p e r c e p t i o n of the v a l u e of each
co u r s e they took in the Criminal Justi ce
curricu lu m.

g.

The a m o u n t of age nc y shock the gr aduates
e n c o u n t e r e d in their first p o s i t i o n and w h e t h e r
they p e r c e i v e d that colle ge had pr ep a r e d them to
deal w i t h that shock.

h.

The graduates' p e rc ep t i o n of the val ue of
sta te d o b j e c t i v e s e s t a b li sh ed durin g the
p r e - p r a c t i c u m research.

The f o l l o w - u p
administered

survey of n o n - p r a c t i c u m grad ua te s was

to si xt y

the mo nt h of May,

(60)

1981.

Cr iminal J us ti ce g r a du at es du ri n g

The process em pl oy ed

sample was one of sorti ng throu gh the gr ad u a t e
Spring,

1975,

the

Summer,

1975;

Fall,

1975;

to select the
lists for

and Winter,

1976;

and re mo v i n g any g r a d u a t e who ac c o r d i n g to the School of
Cr iminal

J u s t i c e had taken the Criminal

Justic e Practicum.

The next step was to s e q u e n t i a l ly number the re ma ini ng names
from 100 - 306.

A

table of ran do m numbers was then em pl oy ed

42
to obt ai n a sample of sixty
names

(60)

names w i t h ten a dd iti on al

se le ct ed as a l t e r n a t e s , (alternates w e r e c h o s e n to

insure that sixty v al id ad dresses c ou ld be obtained)
total of se v e n t y

(70)

graduates.

for v al id ad d r e s s e s netted
(70)

selected.

surveys.

The

Thus,

two

for a

The r e sul ts of the search

si xty-two

(62)

out of seven ty

(2) al te r n a t e s w e r e not sent

letter that ac c om pa ni ed the survey did not

co n t a i n guilt m on ey due to the expense.

The final

results

of the f o l l o w - up survey we r e an a c ce p t a b l e t w e n t y - f o ur
percent)

(40

w h i c h was a p p r o x i m a t e l y the p r e d i c t e d outcome.

This rate of re tu rn was very c o m p a r a b l e
survey of 1975 n o n - p r a c t i c u m students,

to the initial
w h i c h was tw en t y - o n e

(42 p e r c e n t ) .

Fa cu lt y Interviews
F ac ul ty i nte rv iew s we re c o n du ct ed du ri n g the first two
wee ks

in June,

1975.

All

faculty me mbe rs w i t h the e x c e p t i o n

of one and the c h a i r p e r s o n of the Ma st e r De g r e e r e s e a r c h
p ro jec t were

interviewed.

The rea so n for not i n t e r v i e w i ng

the c h a i r p e r s o n was that he was
d ev e l o p m e n t of the r e s e a rc h

i n st ru men tal

in str ume nt and,

resp ons es w o u l d have tainted the data.
co nd uct ed

in the informal

in the
thus,

his

The intervi ews wer e

a t mos ph ere of each facult y

p er so n' s off ic e wi t h the ex ce pti on of one interview.

It was

felt that those s u r ro und in gs w o ul d c r ea te a more re lax ed
a t m o s p h e r e and al l o w e d the faculty p er son s to be at ease

43
d u r i n g the qu es tioning.

The areas c o v e r e d in the interviews

(see A p p e n d i x H) we r e g e n e r a l l y c o n c e r n e d w i t h the op e r a t i o n
of the p r a c t i c u m and a t t e m p t e d to identify:
a.

The goals and o b j e ct iv es the fa cul ty held for the
Criminal J us t i c e Practicum.

b.

The ex t e nt to w h i c h facul ty m e mb er s c o ns i d e r e d the
field study e x p e r i e n c e an im p o r t a n t part of the
Criminal J u s t i c e curriculum.

c.

Those ch ang es fa cul ty member s w o u l d
made in the p r a c t i c u m program.

d.

The de pth of k n o w l e d g e they p o s s e s s e d about the
practicum.

T hes e data w e r e

then coded w h e r e v e r p o s s i b l e and

t r a n s c r i b e d in a man ne r that c o n s o li da te d
each qu e s t i o n in one s um ma ry document.
pr e s e n t e d

in Ch a p te r

like to see

the answers

from

T he se data are

IV.

A n a l y s i s of the Data
The data ob t a i n e d from the surveys and interv ie ws were
s t a t i s t i c a l l y an al y z e d u s i n g mean and p e r c e n t a g e
co mp arisons.

W h e re appr op ria te ,

u si ng I n t ro sta t 2.1:
for the B eha vi ora l
The st a ti sta ci al

the data were analyzed

A M i c r o c o m p u t e r Sta tis tic al Packag e

S c i e n c e s , the Apple

][ version,

a n al y si s emp lo ye d was the

1982.

"T"-test.

The

data pr e s e n t e d are of v a lu e to p r a c t i c u m c o o r d i n at or s of
criminal

justice pr a c t i c a and students that e x pl or e this

area th rou gh re sea rc h

in the future.

It is hoped that other

re se ar c he rs will re fi n e an d re pl ica te this study in the near
future.

44
S u mma ry
The nature of this study was descr ip tiv e.
library research,

five su rv e y instruments,

intervi ew s to gather the data.
the c u r re nt and hi sto r ic a l
ex pe ri en ti al
of Criminal

education,

and twenty

The source of data in cluded

l it era tu re on the s u bje ct of

the M i c h i g a n State Un iv er s i t y School

Justic e faculty,

in the Criminal

It ut i l i z e d

the st ud ent s w h o pa rt i c i p a t e d

J us ti ce P r a c t i c u m d u r i n g Sp ri n g Term,

1975,

and the grad ua te s of the Cr im i n a l J u s t i c e p r o g r a m as of
Summer Term,

1975.

C H A P T E R IV

P R E S E N T A T I O N AND A N A L YS IS OF THE DATA

In tr od uc ti on
The pu r p o s e

of this study was to i n v es ti ga te the value

of the e x p e r i e n t i a l

e d u c a t i o n p r o g r a m of M i c h i g a n State

U n i v e r s i t y 's

of Cri minal

School

Ju sti ce and to de s c r i b e the

effects of that p r o g r a m on gr a d u a t e s
stability,

ca r e er oppor tu nit y,

In this chapter,

the

in terms of career

agency shock,

i nv e s ti ga to r pre sen ts

and burnout.

the re sul ts of

the surv ey q u e s t i o n n a i r e s and i nt er vi ew s that w e r e used to
collect

the data from st ud e n t / g r a d u a t e sample and the

Cr iminal

J u s t i c e Faculty.

This ch a p t e r

is di vid ed

f irst se c t io n the r es ul ts

In the

of the surveys and i nt er vi ew s that

we r e c o n d u c t e d d u r i n g Phase
presented.

into two sections.

I

(1975)

In the seco nd section,

of the study are

the resul ts and analysis

of the surv ey c o n d u c t e d dur in g Phase

II

(1981)

of the study

are presented.
Re sul ts of Ph ase

I

In order to d e v e l o p an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the Cri min al
Ju st ic e Practi cum ,

it was n e c e s s a r y to look to the stated

goals and ob je c t i v e s
School

of Cri min al

the p e r t i n e n t

of the p r o g r a m as a r t i c u l a t e d by the

Justice.

To a c c o m p l i s h that,

li ter atu re av ai la bl e

45

(in 1975)

a r e v i e w of

on the subject

46
of the M i c h i g a n St at e U n i v e r s i t y School of Cr iminal J u st ic e
Pr a c t i c u m was undertaken.

The re s u l t of that r e v i e w was

that there is little wr it t e n on the su bje ct of the goals and
obj ec t i v e s

for the program.

The only c o m m e n t that was

di s c o v e r e d was a st a t e m e n t of the p u rpo se of the practicum.
This co m m e n t was

located in the f ir st s ec tio n of the May,

1975 Practicum:

S t u d e n t Handbook, w h i c h

states:

"The P u r p o s e of the P r a c t i c u m Pr o g r a m
The Cr iminal J u s t i c e P r a c t i c u m is an integral pa r t and
e x t e n s i o n of the aca dem ic offe ri ngs of the School of
Cri minal Justice.
As such, its pr i m a r y p ur pos e is to
b r o a d e n the ed uc at io na l e x p e r i e n c e of senior students
and g r a d u a t e st udents by givi ng them an op po r t u n i t y to
o bs er ve and w o r k wi t h p r a c t i t i o n e r s in the field.
This o p p o r t u n i t y is a v a il ab le to all st udents in the
several c u r r i c u l a of the school and permi ts each
s t ud en t to w o r k w i t h i n the area of his own
speci al iz at io n.
To a c hi ev e this purpose, students may
select a p l a c e m e n t from federal, state, county,
municipal, and p r iv at e ag encies so they can beco me
fa mi li ar w i t h the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and op er ational
co m p l e x i t i e s w i t h i n each organization.
Past e x p e r i e n c e s w i t h the p r o g r a m i n d ic at ed that
alm o s t w i t h o u t e x c e p t i o n students be n e f i t g r e a t l y from
this o p p o r t u n i t y to co r r e l a t e their own e x p e r i e n c e s
there af te r. "
Armed wi t h this

st a t e m en t of goals and objectives,

it

was d e t e r m i n e d that furth er re se a r c h was n e c e s s a r y to
de v e l o p a full u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the goals and o b j e c t i v e s of
the School

of Cr im in al

Justic e Practicum.

This re se ar ch

entail ed a s c e r t a i n i n g w h a t the facul ty c o n s i d e r e d to be the
impo rt an t ou tc om es of the p r a c t i c u m or field study p r ogr am
of the School

of Cr iminal

Justice.

47
F ac u l t y E x p e c t a t i o n s
The goals and ob je c t iv es held by the f a cul ty of the
School

of Cr im in al

J us ti c e for the Cri min al Ju sti ce

P r a c t i c u m can be d i v i d e d
held for the School

into two ma jo r subdivisions:

those

and those hel d for the students that

p a r t i c i p a t e in the program.
Expectations
The v a l u a b l e ou tc om es
Pr a c t i c u m for the School
the fa cu lt y du ri n g

for the School

of the Cr im ina l Justic e

of Cr iminal

J u st ic e as stated by

in ter v ie ws co nd uc te d

in 1975 were:

1)

I mp r o v e m e n t of r e l at io ns b e t w e e n the school and
p a r t i c i p a t i n g agencies.

2)

I m p r o v e m e n t of the q u a l i t y of the gr a d u a t e s of the
School of Crimina l Justice.

3)

P l a c e m e n t of the g r a du at es of the School
positions.

4)

Im pr o v e m e n t of c l a s s r o o m instruction.

These values,

in agency

goals or im po rt an t out comes were the

most of te n m e n t i o n e d by the facult y d u ri ng faculty
interviews.

Ot he r result s we r e mentioned,

only me n t i o n e d once each.

but they were

It appear s that the four desir ed

goals me n t i o n e d ab ove we re g e n er al ly agre ed upon as the
pr im ar y val ue s of the program.
these val ue s will
e m pl oy ed

reveal

A d i s c u s s i o n of each of

some of the r a t i o n a l e that was

in a r r i v i n g at these goals.

48
E ig ht m e mb er s of the faculty

(47 percent)

stated that

one of the most i m p o r t a n t results of the p r a c t i c u m was,
im pr ov ed re l a t i o n s b e t w e e n the School
and the ag en c i e s
o f t e n stated.
di s c l a i m e r

in the field.

of Cr im ina l Justice

This v al ue was the most

The f a c u l t y membe rs g e n e r a l l y added a

to the st a t e m e n t by stating,

only be p o s i t i v e

"This res ul t will

if the students p e r f o r m well.

The progr am

co ul d have a n e g a t i v e ef fe c t on the rela ti on s b e t w e e n the
School

and the a g e n c i e s

if the st udents do not p e r f o r m up to

ex pe c t e d s t a nd ar ds of the ag encies."
d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d to the va lu e
of gr a d u a t e s of the School

This goal or value is

listed as N u m b e r

3

(Placement

in age nc y p o s i t i o n s ) .

Seven m e mb er s of the facul ty

(41 percent)

m e n t i o n e d the

v a l u e of g r a d u a t e p l a c e m e n t throu gh the practicum.
value,

c o u p l e d w i t h the one p r e v i o u s l y mentioned,

This
reflects

the fact that g r a d u a t e p l a c e m e n t and rela ti on s b e t w e e n the
age n c i e s are areas of great c o n c e r n for the faculty.
philosophy

is in k e e p i n g wi t h the stated goals

literature and,

thus,

This

in the

w o u l d tend to d e m o n s t r a t e that the

fa c u l t y are of the same p h i l o s o p h y as the c o o r d i n a t o r of the
program.
Seven m e mb er s of the facul ty

(41 percent)

in dicated

that the p r a c t i c u m e n h a n c e d the q u al it y of the g r a du at es of
the School

of Cr im i n a l

Justice.

came from the fa c u l t y membe rs
Cr iminal
appe ar

J u s t i c e School

the

This re ac t i o n ge n e r a l l y

that had be e n wi t h the

longest.

This ph e n o m e n a would

to in dicate that the older f a cu lt y membe rs

feel

that

49
the r e p u t a t i o n of the school

rides on the fact that the

school's gr a d ua te s that do p a r t i c i p a t e

in the p r a c t i c u m are

so m e h o w r e c e i v i n g a b e t t e r e d u c a t i o n in the field of
criminal

justice.

This also su gg e s t s that that type of

q u a l i t y is d e m a n d e d

in jobs

in the field.

Only five membe rs of the f a c u l t y
that the p r e se nc e
participated

(29 percent)

m e n ti on ed

in the c l a s s r o o m of students w ho had

in the p r a c t i c u m w o u l d e n ha nc e the q u a l i t y of

the class and that those st ud ent s w o ul d be tt e r un de r s t a n d
the cour se materi al
"Students

presented.

Some of the c o mm en ts were:

in the c l a s s r o o m that have be e n in the field will

keep the p r o f e s s o r on his toes,"
wo rld bac k to the cla ss ro o m, "

"Students br in g the real

and,

"The p r a c t i c u m helps to

mot iva te the student to wo r k h a r d e r in hi s/ he r cou rs e work."
These co mm e n t s w o u ld

ind ic ate that at least those faculty

members q uo t e d above w o u l d be in favor of re q u i r i n g the
stude nt to have at least one term
the practicum.

This

whe n one co n s id er s
participate

left after c o m p l e t i o n of

is an i n t er es ti ng

situation,

es pe ci al ly

that many stu den ts w h o cho os e to

in the p r a c t i c u m w a i t until

their senior year to take the course.

the

last term of

This p r a c t i c e

is not

at this time p ro hi b i t e d as it is at other institutions.

50

T abl e

4.1 —

F a cul ty Ex pe ct at io ns for the School
of C.J. Prac ti cu m

O B J E C T I V E OF C.J. P R AC TI CUM BY FACUL TY OF C.J.*
PE RC EN T
NUMBER
N = 17

1)

2)

3)

4)

I m p r ov eme nt of relat io ns b e t w e e n the
school and p a r t i c i p a t i n g agencies.

8

47%

Im p r o v e m e n t of the q u al it y of the
g r a d u a t e s of the School of Criminal
Justice.

7

41%

P l a c e m e n t of the gr aduates of the
School in ag en c y positions.

7

41%

5

29%

Im p r o v em e n t of cl a ss ro om instruction.

* B a s e d on data de v e l o p e d from facul ty interviews.

E x p e c t a t i o n s for the Students

The v a l u a b l e conseq ue nc es ,

goals,

or terminal

o b j e c t i v e s of the p r a c t i c u m held for the students as stated
by the fa cu l t y were:
1)

P ro vi de the studen t w i t h an op p or tu ni ty to observ e
and/ or w o r k in the real wo rl d of criminal justice
and ap ply the p r e s c r i pt iv e theory, learned in the
classroom, to those situations.

2)

P ro vi de the studen t wi t h an opp or tu ni ty to ob ser ve
the cri minal justice system in operation, to meet
and wo r k w i t h pr ac t i t i o n er s in that system, and
en ab l e them to decide if a career in the sy s t e m is
c om pa t ib le w i t h their pe r s o n a l i t y and goals in
lif e .

3)

Exp os e the students to the dy sf u n c t i o n of the
cr iminal j us ti ce system and thus enable them to
u n d e r s t a n d the dysfun ct io na l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the
system.

51
A d i s cu s si on of each of these most often m e n t i o n e d
values and goals,
mentioned,

al ong w i t h some of the si ng u l a r goals

will give the reader a bett er u n d e r s t a n d i n g of

the facult y held goals and o bj ec ti ve s for the students.
Fo ur te en of the members of the f a c u l t y

(82 percent)

i nt e r v i e w e d m e n t i o n ed as a goal for the s t ude nt to have the
op p or tu ni t y to see the real w o r l d and ap pl y the p r e s c r i p t i v e
the or y

learned in the c l a s s r o o m to those situations.

This

value is p r o b a b l y the most obvious and wa s c e r t a i n l y the
mos t o ft en m e n t i o n e d v a l u e of the program.

The f a cu lt y

memb er s that did not m e n t i o n this goal may ve r y well
not done so b e c au se

they co ns id er ed

to not require v e r ba liz in g.

word of exper ien ti al

it. to be so ob vio us as

This goal

o b j ec ti ve of all ex pe ri e n t i al

is the p r im ar y

e d u ca ti on programs.

is experience.

The root

E x p e r i e n c e refers

e x p e r i e n c in g so me thi ng to wh ic h a body of k n o w le dg e
applied.

Thus,

it is ex pe c t e d that the primary,

most co ns i d er ed goal

have

of an e x pe ri ent ial

to

is to be

or at

least

e d u c a t i o n pr og r a m

in

Criminal Justice, w o u l d be the e x p e r i e n c i n g of the real
w o r l d of criminal

justi ce and the t e sti ng of the theories

learned to those p a r t i c u l a r

situations.

The next most often ve rb al i z e d goal

or o b j e c t i v e of

the pr a ct ic u m was to pr o v i de the stu dents wi t h an
o p p o r t u n i t y to ob ser ve or wo r k in the sy s t e m so that they
c ould come to some de c i s i o n c o nc er ni ng of wh et h e r their
p e r s o n a l i t y and d e s i r e d goals and o b j e c t i v e s are c o m p at ib le
w i t h the criminal

justi ce

system.

Nin e member s of the

52
f ac ul ty

(53 percent)

e s p e c i a l l y for those
cr im in al

me nt io ne d this as a goal or value,
students w h o had not w o r k e d

justice system.

However,

several

in the

f ac ult y members

m e n ti o n e d that the p r o g r a m is v a l u a b l e to p r a c t i t i o n e r s
are in te re s te d

in a d i f f e r e n t area of the system)

they w o u l d po ss i b l y b e n e f i t

b e ca us e

from the k n o w l e d g e w i t h respe ct

to a cha n ge in their car ee r plans.
second mo st ve rba lized.

(who

This obj ec ti ve was

It was e x p r e s s e d by five

the

(29%)

fa cul ty me mbe rs that due to the nature of the exper ien tia l
e d u c a t i o n program,

participating

students wo ul d be able to

d e t er mi n e w he t h e r or not their p e r s o n a l i t y was

suited for

the area they intern in as a res ul t of the program.

This

res ul t was v i e w e d as a po si ti ve res ul t by those facul ty
m em be rs

that e x p r e s s e d it.
The C. J.

P r a c t i c u m and the C u r r i c u l u m

The p o s i t i o n of status a cou rs e holds

in a c u rr i c u l u m

should i nf lu enc e how the facul ty and the School
pr o m o t e

it.

suppo rt and

Dur in g this study an a t t e m p t was made to:

1.

D e t e r m i n e h o w well the f a cu lt y u n de r s t o o d the
Criminal J us t i c e Practicum.

2.

M e as ur e the facult y ratin g of the P r a c t i c u m in
c o m p a r i s o n w i t h other courses in the Criminal
Ju s ti ce Curriculum.

3.

A s c e r t a i n w he re the facul ty felt the P r a c t i c u m
fit into the ge ne ra l i s t app roa ch c u r r i c u l u m for
undergraduates.

TABLE 4.2 —

F AC U L T Y E X P E C T A T I O N S FO R P R A C T I C U M ST UDENTS

F ac ul ty Held O b j e c t i v e For P r a c t i c u m Stud en ts *
N = 17

Number

Percent

1. Provi de the s t u de nt w i t h an o p p o r t u n i t y to
obser ve and/ or w o r k in the real w o r l d of
criminal justice and to a pp ly the p r e s c r i p ­
tive theory, learned in the classroom, to
those situations.
2.

3.

14

82%

Provid e the st u d e n t w i t h an o p p o r t u n i t y
to observ e the cr im i n a l justi ce syst em
in operation, to meet and w o r k w i t h
pra ct it io ne rs in that system, and
enable them to d e ci d e if a career
in the system is c o m p a t i b l e with
their p e r s o n a l i t y and goals in life.

9

53%

Expo se the st ude nts to the d y s f u n c t i o n
of the criminal justi ce sys te m and thus
enable them to u n d e r s t a n d the d y s f u n ct io na l
c ha r ac t er is t ic s of the system.

5

29%

* Based on data d e v e l o p e d from f ac ul ty interviews.

In order to u n d e r s t a n d h o w the fa cu lt y vi ew e d the
P r a c t i c u m on the status

ladder of the cur ri cu lu m,

it is

n e c e s s a r y to in ve s t i g a t e h o w c o m p l e t e l y the facul ty
u n d e r s t o o d the P r a c t i c u m program.

This was a c c o m p l i s h e d by

asking each each f a c u l t y me m b e r to state w h a t r an ge of
exp er ie nc es were a v a i l a b l e

to the Cr im in al

at M i c h i g an State U n i v e r s i t y

J u st ic e student

in the p r a c t i c u m p r o g r a m

(i.e.,

54
the types of a g e nc i es and number of credi ts a v a i l a b l e ) .

It

should be n o t e d that this was the first q u e s t i o n asked to
p r o t e c t this item from i n f o r m a t i o n re ve ale d du ri n g the
r e m a i n i n g d i s c u s s i o n of the Practicum.

The f a cu lt y

re s p o n s e s w e r e m e a s u r e d in the f o l l o w i n g manner:
a.

A ra ti n g of "1" was a s s i gn ed to those responses
that c o n t a i n e d an ac cu r a t e
d e s c r i p t i o n of both the
type of ag en ci e s and the av a i l a b l e n u m b e r credits.

b.

A ra t i n g of ".5" was a s s i g n e d to those re sponses
that c o n t a i n e d either the ac cu r a t e n u m b e r of
c red it s or an ac cu ra te d e s c r i p t i o n of the agencies
available.

c.

A ra ti ng of "0" was a s s i g n e d to those resp on ses
that c o n t a i n e d neith er an ac cu ra te d e s c r i p t i o n of
a g e n c ie s nor the c o rr ec t numb er of cr edi ts
available.

The r es ult s of these q u e s t i o n s as a r e v i e w of Table
4.3 re ve als were:

nine

(53 percent)

of the f a c u l t y members

scored a 1, had a full u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the p r a c t i c u m
program;

five

(29 percent)

.5, had a partial
(18 percent)

of the fa c u l t y m em ber s

u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the program;

of the faculty membe rs

u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the program.
fa c u l t y was

.676.

scored a

and three

scored a 0, scored no

The a v er ag e score of the

It should be m e n t i o n e d that those persons

w h o are most d i r e c t l y c o n c e r n e d w i t h the c o u n s e l i n g of the
student s did have a ve r y th or o u gh u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the
program.

55
Table 4.3 —
F a c u l t y U n d e r s t a n d i n g of the
Cri min al Ju st i c e P r a c t i c u m

A m ou nt of U n d e r s t a n d i n g
of P r a c ti cu m

Full

F a cul ty
N

U n d e r s t a n d in g

Partial

Understanding

No U n d e r s t a n d i n g of the
Pr og ra m
Total:

Facul ty
Pe rc e n t a g e

9

53%

5

29%

3

18%
100%

17 = N

The F a c ul ty 's R a t i n g of the Cr iminal
The faculty,

J u st ic e Pr a c t i c u m

d u r i n g the interviews,

d e v e l o p e d an

an a l o g y w h i c h c o m p a r e d the P r a c t i c u m to other Criminal
J u s t i c e cours es b a s e d on re gi o n and d ep th of co ur s e material
and the overall

importance

coding of their r e s p o n s e s
other class es

in the curricu lu m.
to the q u e s t i o n of:

in the cur ri cu lu m,

Cri minal J us ti ce P r a c t i c u m ?"

This made
"C ompared to

h o w w o u l d you rate the

a ver y easy matter.

The

facult y r el ate d the P r a c t i c u m to the core and el ec ti ve
course s

for a comparison.

as follows:

four

P r a c t i c u m as equal

The results of this q u e s t i o n were

(23.5 percent)

of the f a cu lt y rated the

to the core courses;

rated the Pr a c t i c u m as

less equal

to the el ec t iv e courses;

four

four

(23.5 percent)

to the co r e bu t superior

(23.5 percent)

members rated the P r a c t i c u m as equal

of the faculty

to the ele ct iv e

56
courses;

two

(12 percent)

of the facul ty membe rs rated the

P r a c t i c u m as in fe r i o r to the Cr im ina l
courses;

and three

(17.5 percent)

J u sti ce el ective

facul ty members

stated

that the p r a c t i c u m c o u l d not be c o m p a r e d to other courses.
One of the three p er so ns wh o in d i c at ed that the co mp ar is on
cou ld not be made sta ted that to a t t e m p t to co mpa re the two
was

like trying to c om pa r e apples and oranges.
This d i v e r s i t y of rati ng w o u l d

of the facult y feel

that the P r a c t i c u m is more va lu a b l e to

the s t ud en t than e le c t i v e courses,
f a c u l t y co ns id er
Cri mi na l

indicate that 47 perce nt

and 70.5 p e rc en t of the

the P r a c t i c u m to be at

least equal

to any

J u s t i c e e le c t i v e cou rs e offered.

These data w o u l d s eem to in di ca te that the faculty
feel

that the P r a c t i c u m is an i m p o r t a n t cou rs e and pr ob abl y

shou ld be m a i n t a i n e d

in the curriculum.

St ud en t R a t i n g of the Cr iminal
P r a c t i c u m as a Co u r s e

Justic e

N e i t h e r of the stude nt q u e s t i o n n a i r e s

sp ec i f i c a l l y

a d d r e s s e d the q u e s t i o n of ho w the students rated the
Cri m i n a l

J us ti ce P r a c t i c u m to other classes.

(40 percent)

of the

area w h i c h asked,

sp on ta n e o u s l y

that they w o u l d

Ju sti ce students.

eight

stated in the

"How w o u l d you ch a n g e the Criminal

P r a c t i c u m program ?, "
Cr im in al

students

However,

Justice

require it of all

In a d d i t i o n to this information,

a m a j o r i t y of the st ud en ts r e lat ed

in their final papers

that the P r a c t i c u m e x p e r i e n c e was one of the most va luable
courses

they had t a k en in the School

of Criminal

Justice.

57
Some of the students w e n t so far as to say that much of
their course w o r k was a w a s t e of time w h e n c o m p a r e d to the
field experience.
These data are i n d i ca ti ve of the genera l
op i n i o n co nce rn i ng the Cr iminal

student

Justi ce Practicum.

w o u l d indicate that student s who p a r t i c i p a t e

in the

P r a c ti cu m rate it h i g h on the c u r r i c u l u m status
be c a u s e

it con tr ib ut e d

The data

ladder

to their bett er u n d e r s t a n d i n g

of the

a pp li e d theory in a real w o r l d setting.

St ud en t E x pe c t a t i o n
Students come to the Criminal

Ju s t i ce Pr a c t i c u m with

many divers e goals and e x pe ct at io ns

for th eir experi ent ial

f iel d study.

These goals and o bj ec ti ve s ra nge

stude nt who de sir ed

to r ec eiv e

to the student who w a n t e d

from the

12 credit s and no thi ng more,

to obtain as much k n o w l e d g e as

pos si bl e about the ag en c y or age ncies wher.e he/ sh e was
placed.

The method used to ide nti fy the goals and

obj ec ti ve s

of the student was

to ask them on an open-e nd ed

q u e s t i o n on the p r e - p r a c t i c u m que st ion na ire .
bas ic goals and o bje cti ve s we r e i de nti fi ed

Nineteen

(see Table

(19)
4.4).

The most f re qu en tly m e n t i o n e d was the d e v e l o p m e n t of an
un d e r s t a n d i n g of real wo rl d criminal
situations.

The

systems and

least often me nt io ne d goal was the

de v e l o p m e n t of an u n d e r s t a n d i n g
the criminal

justice

justice system,

for the im m e d i a t e issues

the cr ed i t e n r o l l e d

the d e v e l op me n t of re po rt -w ri ti ng

techniques.

for,

in

and

No ne of the

stated goals we re v o i c e d by the maj or it y of the r es pon di ng

58

students.
by eig ht

The most fr eq ue nt ly stated goal wa s only vo ic e d
(38 percent)

of the students.

This d i v e r s i t y of

res po ns e may be a res ul t of the students not a ct ua ll y
q ue st i o n i n g

their personal

their practicum.

p os si b ly re sul ted

in goals,

them before.

of

This could have very

in an incomplete res po ns e to the

W h a t e v e r the rea so n was

for this d i v e r s i t y

the students did cover most of the main goals that

could be de s i r e d from an ex pe riential
cr iminal

at the be g i n n i n g

They ma-y have th oug ht of their pl ac ements,

but not v er ba li ze d

ques tio nn air e.

ex pe ct a ti on s

e d u c a t i o n p r o g r a m in

justice.

An an alysis of the most freque nt ly m e n t i o n e d goals may
be of value

in an a t t e m p t to co mp r e h e n d

the students'

th ou gh t proc es se s w h i l e ans we ri ng the qu es ti o n n a i r e .
4.4

Table

reveals that the first st atement that d ea lt w i t h an

u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the real w or ld si t u a t i o n in the criminal
justice sys te m was the most co mm o n l y held goal
participating
program.

students

in the e x p er ie nt ia l

for

education

This was also the most c o m m o n l y held v a l u e by the

faculty for the students.
facul ty and students'

It would appe ar

e x p ec ta ti on s

that the

for the p r a c t i c u m are

mu tu a l l y strong for this p ar ti cu la r goal.
The second mo s t common goal,
students,

on the part of the

was to d e v e l o p an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the

ef f e c t i v e n e s s of a g e n c y functions.

This

is c o m p a t i b l e w i t h

59

'

Table

4.4 -- Stude nt Ex pe ct a ti on s

i 60ALS AND OBJECTIVES STATED BY THE PRACTICUM STUDENTS
« FREQUENCY OF STATEMENTS
_______________________________________________________________ (Ns21)
Percentage
1.

DEVELOP AN UNDERSTANDING OF HHAT THE REAL WORLD SITUATION IS IN THE C.J. SYSTEM.

B

3B

2.

DEVELOP AN UNDERSTANDING FOR THE EFFECTIVENESS OF AGENCY FUNCTIONS.

7

33

3.

LEARN SKILLS ASSOCIATED WITH THE HANDLING OF AGENCY CLIENTS.

6

29

4.

DEVELOP AN UNDERSTANDING OF AGENCY FUNCTIONS.

6

29

5.

HELP STUDENT TO REACH A DECISION FOR POSSIBILITY OF WORKING IN THAT AREA OF C.J,

5

24

6.

COMPARE OBSERVATIONS WITH CLASSROOM STUDIES.

5

24

7.

EXPERIENCE D0IN8 AGENCY DUTIES ON THEIR OWN.

4

19

B.

DEVELOP INTERVIEWING TECHNIQUES.

4

19

9.

DEVELOP AN UNDERSTANDING FOR OVERALL RELATIONSHIPS OF VARIED AGENCIES (C.J.SYSTEM) 4

19

10.

LEARN TO EFFECTIVELY COMMUNICATE WITH PEOPLE WORKING IN THE C.J. SYSTEM.

4

19

11.

LEARN THE DUTIES OF CERTAIN AGENCY PERSONNEL.

3

14

12.

DEVELOP INVESTIGATIVE TECHNIQUES BOTH FORMAL AND INFORMAL.

3

14

13.

LEARN HOW CLIENTS ACTUALLY FLOW THROUGH THE SYSTEM.

2

10

14.

DEVELOP AN UNDERSTANDING FOR THE ATTITUDES/PHILOSOPHIES OF PERSONNEL IN C.J.SYSTEM. 2

10

15.

BECOME AWARE OF THE ALTERNATIVES AVAILABLE IN HANDLING CLIENT PROBLEMS.

2

10

16.

DEVELOP COUNSELING TECHNIQUES.

2

10

17.

DEVELOP AN UNDERSTANDING FOR THE IMMEDIATE ISSUES IN THE C.J. SYSTEM

1

5

18.

THE CREDITS ENROLLED FOR.

1

5

19.

DEVELOP REPORT-WRITING SKILLS.

1

5

*

These goals and objectives were obtained through an open-ended questionnaire at the pre-placesent
fleeting.

**

The Frequency of the stateaents was obtained through the evaluation of the answers on an open-ended
questionnaire. So*e of the stateaents were by virtue of their vagueness interpreted by the researcher.

60
the first goal

me ntioned.

Students wh o are int er es te d

in

understanding

the real w o r l d

be int er e st ed

in f i n d i n g out about real w o r l d f u nc ti ons of

the criminal

si t u a t i o n of the system wo uld

justic e agencies.

This goal w o u l d be

c o n s i d e r e d by some to be identical w i t h the first.
contrary,

this goal

narrow s

On the

the scope to the student's

search to u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the system.

This n a r r o w i n g may

ve ry well be r e f l e c t i v e of the di v e r s e types of p la ce me nt s
a v a i la b le to them.

That is,

the studen t who does

the

m u l t i - a g e n c y p l a c e m e n t g e n e r a l l y has b r o a d e r goals than the
st ude nt who has an i nt er n s h i p w i t h one agency.
the e x p l a n a t i o n for the d i f f e r e n c e s
A no th er goal
p e r c e n t ) , was

This may be

in goals that occurred.

m e n t i o n e d by five of the students

(24

to he l p the studen t to reach a d e ci si on

c o n c e r n i n g the p o s s i b i l i t y of w o r k i n g
area of criminal

justice.

in that pa rt i c u l a r

This ob je cti ve was also

fr eq u e n t l y m e n t i o n e d d u r i n g interv ie ws wi t h the f a cu lt y as
an outcom e for the students.

This w o u l d

seem to indicate

that the students and f a cul ty do in fact have m u tu al ly held
e x p e ct at io ns

for the practicum.

This w ou ld also imply that

the s tudents are m e e t i n g some of the e x p e c t a t i o n s of the
facult y co nc e r n i n g
Table

ex pe ri e n t i al

4.5 r e p re s e n t s

that the School

of Cri minal

the Practicum.

As

a list of po ss i b le ob jec tiv es
Justi ce might have for offering

the table dem onstrates,

stu dents and N o n - P r a c t i c u m
pr im a r y reas on

education.

the P r a c t i c u m

students both felt that the

for the School

of Cr iminal

J u sti ce

of fering

61
the Pr a c t i c u m was P r o f e s s i o n a l
Self- Abi lit ie s,

Values,

that the students

etc.

P r e p a r a t i o n and K n o wl ed ge of
This r e s p o n se w o u l d indicat e

see the School

as bei ng c o n c e rn ed w i t h the

students o b t a in i ng p r e - o c c u p a t i o n a l

e x p e r i e n c e and

d e v e l o p i n g an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of h i s/ h e r a b i l i t i e s and values
in that real wo rl d
the ex pe ct at io ns

setting.

These goals are c o n g r u e n t wi t h

of the faculty:

career po ss ibi li tie s.

that the st udents explor e

It also touch es on the area of an

o pp or t u n i t y to o b s e r ve and wo r k

in the real w o r l d wi t h the

op po r t u n i t y to a pp ly p r e s c r i p t i v e theory to those real wo rl d
situations.

Table 4 . 5 — Graduates'

P e rc e p t i o n s of The Sc ho ol 's Ob je c t i v e s

WHA T ARE THE SCH OOL OF C R I M I N A L JU ST IC E' S OB JE CT I V E S
O F F E R I N G A P R A C T I C U M AS YOU SEE THEM?
(1 = V E R Y I M P O R T AN T AND 5 = V E R Y UNIMPORTANT)

N = 20
P R AC T. M E A N NON-PRA CT.

OB J E C T IV ES
1. Pro fe ss io n al

IN

Pr epa rat io n.

1.85

MEAN
1.80

2. Kn ow le dge of S e l f - A b i l i t i e s ,
Val u e s etc.

1.83

2.13

3.

2.15

2.40

4. A p p l i c a t i o n of T h e o r y to
Pr actical Situati ons .

2.15

2.25

5.

2.30

2.13

6. D e v e l o p m e n t of A w a r e n e s s
of Social Issues.

2.40

3.06

7. Un d e r s t a n d i n g and A c c e p t a n c e
of Others.

2.45

3.06

S e l f - R e l i a n c e and S e l f - D ir ec ti on .

P r o fe ssi on al

Service.

62
The item in Ta bl e
of the o r y to pr ac tic al

4.5 that refers to the a p p l i c a t i o n
situations

is d i re ct ly re la te d to the

fa cul ty e x p e c t a t i o n of ob s e r v i n g or w o r k i n g in the real
w o r l d and a p p l y i n g the p r e s c r i p t i v e the or y to those
situations.

As a r e v i e w of Table 4.5 indicates,

the

p r a c t i c u m stu den ts fe l t that the School's ob je c t i v e s

in

of f e r i n g the st ud en t the o p p or tu ni ty to apply theo ry to
pr ac tic al

sit ua ti on s was

F ift y pe rc e n t

(10 students)

an ot he r t w en ty p e r c e n t
This w o u l d

impor tan t

(a mean score of

2.15).

rated it as very im po rt an t and

(4 students)

rated it as important.

su ppo rt the f a cul ty exp ec ta ti on s for the students

to see the real w o r l d and apply aca dem ic theory to actual
real

life situations.

St u d e n t A ch i e v e m e n t of Goals

At the c o m p l e t i o n of the Practicum,

the st udents wer e

a ske d to ev a l u a t e t he ir a c hi ev em en ts of their stated goals
on a scale from one to five,

wh er e one was equal

a c c o m p l i s h e d the goal and five equal
the goals.
question.
was
zone

Table

4.6

to totall y

to no a c c o m p l i s h m e n t of

ill ust rat es the results of that

It is in te r e s t i n g to note that the mean re sp ons e

1.84 and that only t hree means fell
(2.50+ to 3.50-).

This w o ul d

into the neutral

ind icate that the

st ude nts g e n e r a l l y a c c o m p l i s h e d the goals they set for
themse lve s

63
This table seems to indicate that the students
ac c o m p l i s h e d the mo s t in the area of ca r e e r ex pl oration.

It

is int er es t in g to note that the most m e n t i o n e d goal of the
students on Table 4.6,

that of d e v e l o p m e n t of an

u nd e r s t a n d i n g of w h a t the real w o r l d s i t u a t i o n is in the
criminal

justice

system,

accompli shm ent s.
the goal

Another

ranked third in the stu dent's
in te re st in g shift took place in

to de ve lo p an un de rs t a n d i n g of the r e l a t i o n s h i p of

the di f f e r e n t ag enc ie s
goal ran ke d

in the 7,

m e n t io ne d goals;
ranked 18th.

but

in the criminal

justice system.

8, and 9 b r ac k e t on the

list of

in the table of a c c o m p l i s h m e n t s

This d em o n s t r a t e s

This

it

that this goal was not as

well ac h i e v e d by the students as they w o u l d have

liked.

The stu dents also rated their a c c o m p l i s h m e n t of goals
they had p r e v i o u s l y rated as o b j e c t i v e s for the School
Cr iminal

Ju sti ce in off er in g the Cri minal Ju st i c e Practicum.

The result s d e p i c t e d

in Table

4.7 r e fl ec t that rating.

is of int ere st to note t hat the
students'
achieved.

of

opinion)

least i m po rt ant

o b j ec ti ve of the School was

It

(in the
the most

It is also in te res tin g to no te that the second

mo st im po rta nt

(in the students'

opinion)

o b j e c t i v e of the

school dr op p e d to fifth po s i t i o n for a c co mp lis hme nt.
over- all a c c o m p l i s h m e n t of the ob je c t i v e s
a c c or di ng to the data

in Table 4.7.

a pp ea rs

The

to be met

64
Table

4.6 -- Goals and Ob je c t i v e s A c com pl ish ed by the
P r a c t i c u m Graduates

Rate your accoaplisheant of the goals listed, where 1 = total accoeplisheent and 5 = no accoaplishaent.
* 6QALS AND OBJECTIVES ACCOMPLISHED BY THE PRACTICUM STUDENTS

** FREQUENCY OF STATEMENTS ACCOMPLISHMENT
(N=21)
Percentage
Mean Score
RANK RANK (Scale 1-5)
3 1.70
8 38
1. DEVELOP AN UNDERSTANDING OF HHAT THE REAL HQRLD SITUATION IS IN THE C.J. SYSTEM...

2. DEVELOP AN UNDERSTANDING FOR THE EFFECTIVENESS OF AGENCY FUNCTIONS.........................

7 33

8

3. LEARN SKILLS ASSOCIATED WITH THE HANDLING OF AGENCY CLIENTS.....................................

6 29

8

1.95

4. DEVELOP AN UNDERSTANDING OF A6ENCY FUNCTIONS..............................................................

6 29

4

1.75

5. HELP STUDENT TO REACH A DECISION FOR POSSIBILITY OF WORKING IN THAT AREA OF C.J. .

5 24

1

1.45

6. COMPARE OBSERVATIONS WITH CLASSROOM STUDIES...................................... .........................

5 24

13

2.00

7. EXPERIENCE D0IN6 AGENCY DUTIES ON THEIR OWN................. ..............................................

4 19

6

1.80

e. DEVELOP INTERVIEWING TECHNIQUES....................................................................................

4 19

14

2.25

9. DEVELOP AN UNDERSTANDING FOR OVERALL RELATIONSHIPS OF VARIED AGENCIES (C.J. SYSTEM)

4 19

18

2.75

10 LEARN TO EFFECTIVELY COMMUNICATE WITH PEOPLE WORKING IN THE C.J. SYSTEM.................

4 19

8

1.95

11 LEARN THE DUTIES OF CERTAIN AGENCY PERSONNEL..............................................................

3 14

2

1.55

12 DEVELOP INVESTIGATIVE TECHNIQUES BOTH FORMAL AND INFORMAL...................................

3 14

14

2.25

13 LEARN HOW CLIENTS ACTUALLY FLOW THROUGH THE SYSTEM..................................................

2 10

4

1.75

14 DEVELOP AN UNDERSTANDING FOR THE ATTITUDES/PHILOSOPHIES OF PERSONNEL IN C.J.SYSTEM 2 10

8

1.95

15 BECOME AWARE OF THE ALTERNATIVES AVAILABLE IN HANDLIN6 CLIENT PROBLEMS...................

2 10

8

1.95

16 DEVELOP COUNSELING TECHNIQUES..................................................................................

2 10

17

2.55

17 DEVELOP AN UNDERSTANDING FOR THE IMMEDIATE ISSUES IN THE C.J. SYSTEM............... .

1

5

16

2.50

18 THE CREDITS ENROLLED FOR...............................................................................................

1

5

7

1.90

19 DEVELOP REPORT NRITING-SKILLS........................................................................................

1

5

19

2.80

*
**

1.94

These goals and objectives were obtained through an open-ended questionnaire at the pre-placesent
aeeting.
The responses shown here are the result of listing the goals and objectives on an end of practicua
questionnaire.
Mean scores based on: (1 = objective totally accoaplished and 5 = not accoaplished).

65
Table

4.7 —

Rating of O b je c t i v e s C o m p a r e d

H O W W E L L DO YOU P E E L THAT THE PR A C T I C U M HA S MET THE
O B J E C T I V E S L I S T E D BE LO W ? (1 = T o ta ll y met &
5 = T o ta ll y not met.)

WHAT ARE THE SC HO OL OF C R I M I N A L JUST IC E' S O B J E C T I V E S
IN O F F E R I N G THE P R A C T I C U M (1 = V E R Y I M P OR TA NT &
5 = V E R Y UNIMPORTANT)

P r a c t . Met O b j . I m po rt an ce of
Ob j .
Pr a c t i c u m St udents

N=20

MEAN

RANK

1. U n d e r s t a nd in g and
A c c e p t a n c e of Others.
1.95
2.10
2. Know le dg e of SelfAbilities, V a l u e s etc.
3. S e l f - R e l ia nc e and
Self-Direction.
2.15
4. A p p l i c a t i o n of T h e o r y
2.30
to Pr actical Situations.
5. Pr of es s i o n a l P re p a r a t i o n . 2.32
6. P r of es si on al Service.
2.60
7. D e v e l o p m e n t of Aw a r e n e s s
of Social Issues.
2.75

MEAN

RANK

1
2

2.45
1.83

7
1

3

2.15

3

4
5
6

2.15
1.85
2.30

4
2
5

7

2.40

6

The s tudents g e n e r a l l y ran ke d the ob je ct iv es

in the same

order of a c h i e v e m e n t as they did in im po r t a n c e w h i c h w o ul d
mean that they felt that the p r og ra m was
a t t e m p t to achie ve

their goals.

success ful

in its

66
S u p p o r t i n g or In hi b i t i n g Factors
for S tu de nt P a r t i c i p a t i o n

Ma ny factors can have an ef f ec t on the p a r t i c i p a t i o n of
students

in the Cr iminal

can be c a t e g o r i z e d

J us tic e Practicum.

into the f o l lo wi ng areas:

1)

School

influen ce s

2)

Agency

influences

3)

E xt ra n e o u s

School

These factors

influe nc es

inf lu en c es can come from such sources as faculty,

literature,

and

from such areas

p r o g r a m design.
as t r e a t m e n t

A g e n c y influe nc es

can come

of stude nt interns,

p a r t i c i p a t i o n or n o n - p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the exp eri en ti al
e d u c at io n program,

and age nc y reputation.

influe nce s can come from the student's
t ra nsp ort ati on,

time,

Ex tr a n e o u s

financial,

and cr ed i t hour situations.

An y one

or all of these can be the c r i t i c a l l y inf lu en ci ng factor in
the s tude nt' s d e c i s i o n to p a rt i c i p a t e or not to pa r t i c i p at e
in the Cri min al

The School

Ju st ic e Practicum.
Inf lue nti al

School

Factors

of Cri min al

Ju sti ce has a very

effec t on w h e t h e r or not a stude nt p a rt ic ip at es
practicum.
the student s

The fa cul ty exert a gre at deal

student to pa rti cip ate ,

they

in the program.

influ enc e the

(the faculty)

th oro ugh u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the program.

in the

of influence on

in their p o s s i b le p a r t i c i p a t i o n

In order for the fa cu lt y to po si ti v e l y

substantial

mus t have a

This un de rs t a n d i n g

must include a k n o wl ed ge of the types of pla ce me nt s

67
av ai la bl e and the n u m b er of cre di t hours a v a i l a b l e th rou gh
the P r a c ti cu m program.
in an earli er

The f a c u l t y as a whole,

secti on of this chapter,

fully un de r s ta nd the program.

This

play a pa rt in the fa c u l ty 's role

as m e n t i o n e d

a p p a r e n t l y do not

lack of k n o w l e d g e must

in p r o m o t i n g the pr og ra m

to the students.
During the fa cu lt y interviews,

each fa c u l t y pers on was

asked if he or she ac t i v e l y p r o m o t e d the Cr im i n a l
P r a ct ic um to the stu den ts w i t h w h o m they came
The r esults of this q u e s t i o n we re as follows:
percent)

of the fa c u lt y me mbe rs

in contact.
ten

(59

said that they pro mo te d

p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the P r a c t i c u m to their
most of the faculty

J u st ic e

students.

that p o s i t i v e l y re s p o n d e d

que st io n were quick to q u a l i f y their

However,

to this

statements.

These

d is cl aim ing q u a l i f i c a t i o n s are i n t e r e s t i n g to note.
fa cul ty pers on stated,

"Yes,

I pr o m o t e the program,

a joke wit h only 23 e l ec ti ve cr ed it s av a i l a b l e
students."

Anothe r mem be r stated,

limited basis,

be ca us e

oc ca sio nal ly. "

A no t h e r me m b e r

some,

to students

"Yes,

in my area.

Still anoth er mem be r stated,
limitations

but it's

to the

but on ly on a

the s u bje ct only comes up
stated,

"I p r o m o t e the p r o g r am

However,

I g e n e r a l l y pr omo te

the v o l u n t e e r p r o g r a m t h r o u g h the M.S.U.

of the

One

"Yes,

of the program,

placements,

and the r e q u i r e m e n t s

placements,

etc."

but

V o l u n t e e r Bureau."

I warn

such as

the students

limited

of t r a n s p o r t a t i o n

These re s p o n s e s w o u l d

in some

i n d i c a te that even

the facul ty members w h o p r o m o t e the p r o g r a m feel

a need to

68
add d i s c l a i m e r s w h e n th ey p u b l i c i z e

the program.

This wo ul d

show that they are no t to ta ll y c o m f o r t a b l e w i t h the p r og ra m
as it is pr e s e n t l y designed.
Of the seven

(41 percent)

pr om o t e the program,
did not do so.
undergraduate

that stated they did not

most felt a need to e x pl ai n w hy they

These reaso ns

ranged from no contac t wit h

st udents to it does not come up in

c o n v e r s a t i o n w i t h the s t udents that they come in conta ct
with.

Th ese va r i o u s re sp on ses w o u l d

fa cul ty w o u l d pr o b a b l y be more

ind ica te that the

in cl in ed to pr om ot e the

p r o g r a m if they had more c o nt ac t w i t h the students,
bet te r u n d e r s t o o d the program,

and /o r

if they

if some m o di fi ca ti on

of the p r o g r a m co uld be ac co mpl is hed .

This

is ap p a r e n t to

this r e s e a r c h e r due to the poor u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the pr ogr am
depicted

in Table 4.3 d i s p l a y e d ea rl ie r

the st at em en ts of,
stu den ts of the

"it's a joke..."

eff ec t on the

in the Cri min al

and

"I wa r n the

lim itations."

U n i v e r s i t y and School p r o d u c e d
in flu ential

and,

in this chapter,

li ter atu re also has an

stud ent 's d e ci si on

Ju st ic e Practicum.

This

to par ti ci pa te

in fl uen ce may be

only to inf or m the studen t that the p r o g r a m exists.
L i t e r a t u r e was
for five

the source of r e v e l a t i o n about

(24 percent)

(24 percent)
practicum.

of those

the p r ogr am

of the n o n - p r a c t i c u m stu dents and five
stu dents that did p a r t i c i p a t e

This data w o u l d

in di cat e that the

in the

literature

does have an impact on some t w e n t y - f o u r p e r c e n t of the
students

in learning ab ou t the p r a c t i c u m program.

69
This

is i nd ic ati ve of the fact that

l it er at ur e should

a c c u r a t e l y d e s c r i b e the p r o g r a m and the p r o g r a m re qu ir e m e n t s
and prer equ is ite s.

The c a tal og d e s c r i p t i o n found in the

1975 e di t i o n states

that students w ho e n ro ll ed

satisf y the fo l l o w in g prerequi sit es :
392

(Michigan State University,

do not ap pe ar in an y ot he r

1975).

literature,

P r a c t i c u m : S t u d e nt H a n d b o o k

This w o u ld

d i s c o u r ag e many

students

the factors,

for par tic ip at io n.
liter at ure

of the program.

such as

r e s e ar ch er

is well

scheduling,

might

in an exp eri en ti al

w i t h this u n d e r s t a n d i n g
are made.

in the

This

should

It should

in its d e s c r i p t i o n of the p r o g r a m for the

This

of the students

in c l u d i n g the

from pu rs u i n g a p r a c t i c u m pl ac eme nt

expres s the true r e q u i r e me nt s

same reasons.

375,

These p r e r e q ui si te s

for e n r o l l i n g

seem to indica te that the

also be acc ura te

365,

indicat e that the p r es en t ca tal og could

even th ou gh they ma y be q u a l i fi ed
exampl e wo ul d

335,

(See A p p e n d i x C ) , w hi ch

spells out cl ea rl y the r e q u i r e m e nt s
course.

CJ 318,

should

aware that many of
inhibit pa rt ic i p a t i o n

e d u c at io n program.

in mind that the fo llowing

It is

co mments

The d e si gn of the pr og ra m can also have an

influen tia l ef fe ct on the st udent's d e c i si on
in a field experience.
d i f f i cu lt ie s

This

in app ly in g

infl ue nc e

to p a r ti ci pa te

is e x e r t e d throu gh

for the p r o g r a m and r e s t r i c ti on s

and demand s pla ce d on the p a r t i c i p a t i n g

students.

The survey of students wh o did not p a rt i c i p a t e
p r a c t i c u m re ve a le d that
and di ver se reasons.

students do not p a r t i c i p a t e

The reasons

stated rang ed

in the
for many

from no

70
k n o w l e d g e to no p l a ce m en ts
interest.

in the student's area of

The first stated re as o n may or may not be a fault

in the d e s i g n of the program.
statement,

if accurate,

des i g n of the program.

However,

the

w o u l d d e m o n s t r a t e a flaw in the
Upon re v i e w i n g the questi onn air es ,

it w o u l d ap p e a r that those

st udents who e x p re ss ed the

feeling that no p l a c e m e n t s w e r e av a i l a b l e
int er es t are in three areas:

Courts,

Ad min i s tr a ti on ,

These

and Pre-Law.

Nev er th el e ss ,

in the pr og r a m

interest.

This w o u l d

ind icate

that these students were

person,

(10 percent)

literature,

p ro g r a m sufficiently.
the pr og ra m' s d e si gn

or peers.

in nature.

This st atement

of the n o n - p r a c t i c u m students

or that they did not explo re the

The only other co m m e n t to be made on
in this

w ho did not p ar ti c i p a t e

se cti on is that the students

in the p r og ra m rated the st atement

(Arrangements,

for not doing a p r a c t i c u m

etc.)

as the most important reason

(See Table

A r e v i e w of this table reveals
"Red Tape" was
critical

literature,

that they we r e eit he r misled by some faculty

school

"Red Tape"

the

for not p a r t i c i p a t i n g was that the

pr o g r a m is too p o l i c e - o r i e n t e d

and reveals

some e x p lo ra ti on of the

in each of these areas of

misl ed by eith er a fa cul ty person,

was made by two

Sec uri ty

this r e s e ar ch er has kn ow le dg e of

pl ac em en ts

An ot he r rea so n stated

in their area of

students e x p r e s s e d the

feeling that they had at least done
program.

latter

2.64,

which would

factor in some students'

4.8).
that the mean score for

indicate that this was a
decisions.

However,

this

71
item is the most i mp ort an t factor of those

listed,

and this

p r o b a b l y means that students w h o do not p a rt i c i p a t e

in the

P r a c t i c u m co ns i d e r the red tape involv ed in g e t t i n g into the
p ro g r a m as part of the causes wh o they do not pa rt icipate.
In act uality,

the

"red tape" c o n s i s t e d of an a p p l i c a t i o n

form and a de ad l in e

of a p p r o x i m a t e l y three w ee ks b e f o r e the

end of the pr ior term.
Ag en ci e s can be a factor in the student's d e c i s i o n to
do a a practicum.
following:

In f l u en ci ng agenc y factors

t r e at men t of the stude nt interns,

ipati on or n o n - p a r t i c ip a t i o n,
criminal

justice community.

tors most

This

age nc y p a r t i c ­

and agenc y re pu ta ti on

in the

Two of these factors can be

p a r t i a l l y c o n t r o l l e d by the School
the other cannot.

includ e the

and P r a c t i c u m P r o g r a m and

sectio n will

only address

those f a c ­

likely to be in fl ue nc ed by the program.

Those

factors that can be c o n t r o l l e d by the P r a c t i c u m p r o g r a m are
t r e a t m e nt of the students and age nc y par ti cip ati on .

These

two factors pr o b a b l y have more inf lu en ce on the stude nt than
the agen cy reputation,
ag e n c y infl uen ce
students'

thus are the critical

ones.

The

is e xe rt ed on the students th ro ug h the

peers as op po se d to any d i re ct influence.

Peers

are the source of i n f o r m a t i on about the P r a c t i c u m p r o g r a m
for the students that pa rt i c i p a t e

in the p r og r a m 47 p e rc en t

of the time and 28 p er c e n t of the time for st udents w h o do
not par ti cipate.

This w ou ld

icati on is a very

i mp ort ant

students.

Thus,

in dicate that peer c o m m u n ­
source of inf or ma ti on for the

w i t h peer c o m m u n i c a t i o n b e in g the main

72
source of in fo r m a t i o n a bo ut ag en c y factors,

the agency

factors can play an i m p o r t a n t pa r t in the students'
decisions.

Table 4 . 8 —

Influen tia l
Practicum

1. Red Tape

4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

@
*

(N = 17)

Pe rc e n t Rating*

Fact or

2.
3.

F a cto rs in C h o o s i n t no t to do a

(arrange­
ments)
Time (job conflict)
Time (course con-)
f lict
Cre di t hours
(too few)
Li m i t ed ex pe r ie nc e s
Di st a n c e
Cost
E x p e c t a t i o n s of
F a cu lt y

(3)
24

Mean
(NR) 0
0
2.64

(4)
6

(5)
35

18
6

24
18

0
0

2.82
3.05

48

6

24

10

3.05

18
18
29
29

12
12
12
29

35
29
35
29

(1)
24

(2)
29

29
24

24
12

6
4

0

12

18
12
6
0

12
12
18
0

0
12
0
12

3.41
3.41
3.52
3.53

N R = No Re sp o n s e
Items w e r e rated on a scale of l=Very i m p or ta nt & 5=Very
Unimportant.
All scores are percentages.

The re s p o n s e s r e c e i v e d from the question,

"If yo u were

the head of the a g e n c y yo u we r e pl ac e d at, h o w w o ul d you
treat stude nt p l a c e m e n t s di ff e r e n t l y ? "

c l e a r l y d e mo nst rat e

that the m a j o r i t y of the students were treat ed well by the
agencies.
Only five

(25%)

st ud en ts

felt

that major changes

t r e a t m e n t of studen ts w e r e necessary.
include;

"more in t e n s i ve

supervision,

d i r e c t i o n in the beg in ni ng ",
and

suggestions

ins tr uc ti on of interns",

s t ud en t involvement,

has happe ne d" ,

These

in the

"more

and respon si bi li ty ",

"more

"take more time to expla in wh a t

"agency personnel

should

should be

less

73
u pt i g h t and d e f en si ve. "

These are c a t e g o r i z e d as m aj or

ch ang es by this r es ea rc he r only be ca us e they we r e
serio us cr it i c is ms made by the students.
these chang es

are not major,

T ab le

the most

In actuality,

but only minor.

4.9-- A g e n c y Tre at me nt of Stu de nt s

* N u m b e r of Ag en c i e s

C o m m e n t s on T r e a t m e n t

13

T r e a t e d Ve r y W e l l — N o Change
M in or Chang es N e e d e d

2

M aj or C ha ng es N e e d e d

5

* Ba se d on s t ud en t re sponses on the p o s t - p r a c t i c u m
q u e s t i o n n a i r e in 1975, the number of agenci es that were
rated (it was p o s s i b l e for one stude nt to rate several
agencies).

The other c o n t r o l l a b l e agen cy factor
p a r t i c i p a t i o n of agencies.
students'

de ci si o ns

v a r i e t y of ag en c i e s

This factor

of the school

This factor bears on the

only to the point that the g r e a t e r
to choose from,

that the st udents will
needs.

is that of

the more

the

likely it is

find an age nc y that suits their

is really a joint area of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y

and the agencies.

The Pr a c t i c u m C o o r d i n a t o r

must a c t i v e l y r e cr uit ag encies t h rou gh personal
liaiso n wo r k b e t w e e n the school

vi si t s

and the agencies.

and

The

ag en c i e s must also have a feeli ng of c o mm it m e n t and
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y tow ar d the school and the st ud en ts or they

74
will

not par ticipate.

The area of a g en c y r e c r u i t m e n t is an

area of d i f f i c u l t y in the p r o g r a m and will be ad dr es se d
gr eat er detail

in the foll ow ing

in

ch ap te r of this study.

Influential E x t r a n e o u s

Facto rs

Ma ny factors not d i r e c t l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the school
and the ag encies e nt er into the students'
pa r t i c i p a t e
factors

in the Cr iminal

include;

placements,

about the program.
individual

J u s t i c e Practicum.

cost of pa r t i ci pa ti on ,

time co nflicts,
This

decisions

to

These

di s t a n c e of

and w h e n the s t ude nt found out

list is not inclusive,

due the

nat ur e of any d e c i s i o n made by the stude nt to

pa rt icipate.

However,

this

list is r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the

major factors

that pl a y a role

in most students'

d e ci si ons

to participate.
The i n v e s t i g a t i o n of this area was a c c o m p l i s h e d by
r e q u e s t i n g that bo t h P r a c t i c u m and N o n - p r a c t i c u m students
rate im po r t a n c e of these facto rs
4.10

and several others.

i l l u st ra te s the im po rt an ce of cost,

factors

in the students'

This data w o u l d
the most critical

distance,

Table

and time

decisions.

in di cat e that these facto rs w e r e not

factors.

It does

i l l u s t r a t e that the

P r a c t i c u m students v i e w the im po r t a n c e of these facto rs
so me wh at d i f f e r e n t

in a

light than the n o n - p r a c t i c u m students.

75

Table 4.10 —

Influential Factors in the D e c i si on to
do a P r a c t i c u m

(1 = Ve r y

Imp ortant —

Factor

Mean
P r a ct ic um
Studentis

Non-practicum
Students

2.95
3.45
3.45
3.85

Table

5 = V e r y unimportant)

3.52
3.41
3.82
3.05

Cost
Dis ta nc e
Time (conflict w i t h p a r t - t i m e job)
Time (conflict wi th other courses)

4.11 —

H o w St udents Found out about the C.J.
Practicum
(1 = V e r y I m p ort an t -- 5 = Ve ry unimportant)

PR AC T I C U M
S TU DENTS

NON-PRACTICUM
STUDENTS

N=22

N= 21

47%
29%
24%
0%
0%

28%
19%
24%
24%
5%

SOURCE OF
INFORMAT IO N

Peers
Facul ty
L i te r a t u r e
Did not find out
Cha nc e

76

Table 4.12 —

PRAC TIC UM
STUDENTS

When St ud en ts found out A b o u t the C.J.
P r a c ti c um
(1 = V e r y Im p o r ta nt —
5 = Ve r y unimportant)

NON-PRACTICUM
STU DENTS

N= 2 2

N=21

66%
19%
10%
5%
0%

38%
24%
9%
5%
24%

S T UD EN T STA TU S WH E N
INF ORMED

Jun io r
F re sh ma n or So ph omo re
Senior
Prior to e n r o ll in g at MSU
Ne ver did find out

This d if fe re nc e may be r e f l e c t i v e of a more tho ro ug h
e x p lo ra ti on of the p r o g r a m by the p r a c t i c u m st udents
the N o n - p r a c t i c u m students.

N o t h i n g else can be c o n c l ud ed

from the data due the neutral
Table

4.12

than by

na t ur e of the mean scores.

il l u s tr at es wh e n and ho w the st ud ent s first

became aware of the Crimina l
wo ul d ind icate that most

stu dents

pr ogr am in their junior ye ar
is also interest ing

Ju st ic e Practicum.

This data

found out abo ut the

from their f e ll ow students.

It

to note that 24 pe r c e n t of the

N o n - P r a c t i c u m students ne ve r did find out a bo ut the pr o g r a m
prior to the point of r e c e i v i n g the survey.
indicate that a p p r o x i m a t e l y one out

of four Cr iminal

Seniors was not aware of the o p p o r t u n i t y
field exp er ie n ce in Cr iminal
University.

Justi ce

to p a r t i c i p a t e

in a

J u s t i c e at M i c h i g a n State

In c o m p a r i s o n to this data,

Justic e Fa cul ty was asked

This data w o u l d

whe n the Cri minal

if they th oug ht u n d e r g r a d u a t e s

were aware of the oppor tun ity ,

their r es po ns e

a large po rti on of the fa cul ty a p pe ar ed

in di ca te d that

to op er at e un der a

77

m i s c o n c e p t i o n a bo ut h o w well
are a b o u t the Cri min al
members

(70 percent)

were well
members

in formed u n d e r g r a d u a t e s

J u st i c e Practicum.

(12 percent)

three facul ty

stated they felt that u n d e r g r a d u a t e s

were not in fo rm ed ab out the Practicum,
members

Tw e l v e facul ty

sta te d they felt that u n d e r g r a d u a t e s

in formed a bo ut the Practicum,

(28 percent)

rea ll y

and two facul ty

stated they w e r e not c e r t a i n

un de r g r a d u a t e s were a wa re or not.

if the

Of the f a cu lt y membe rs

who sta te d that u n d e r g r a d u a t e s were aware of the Practicum,
seven

(58 percent)

e x p r es se d

the bel ie f that those beca me

aware of the P r a c t i c u m in their
indicate that those

junior year.

This wo ul d

fa cul ty member s are in tune wi t h this

aspec t of the program.
The po in t in the stude nt' s aca dem ic car ee r wh e n they
bec ame awa re of the o p p o r t u n i t y to p a r t i c i p a t e
ex per ie nt ia l

e d u c a t i o n p r o g r a m is so me wh at influen ti al

the d e c i s i o n to p a r t i c i p a t e
ill us tr at ed

in an

in Tab le

Table

4.13

—

in the program.

This

is

4.13.

Factor s

for N o n - P r a c t i c u m Stu dents

If you had learned ab out the C.J. p r a c t i c u m sooner,
yo u have p a r t i c i p a t e d in the pro gram?
(Non -Pr act icu m Students)
R e sp on se

in

N u mb er of Stu dents

w ou ld

Percen t

Yes

7

38%

Not Sure

6

33%

No

5

28%

78

From the data c o n t a i n e d in Table 4.13,
tha t seven

(38 percent)

of those

it w o u l d appear

students w h o di d not

pa rt i c i p a t e w o u l d have if they had re ce i v ed
sooner about the program.
sure,

wh ic h in dicates

Another

six

in fo r m a t i o n

(33 percent)

wer e not

that some of them may ha v e also

p a r t i c i p a t e d if they had

learned of the p r o g r a m sooner.

This w o u l d suggest that the time of first i n f o r m a t i o n
co nc e r n i n g the p r o g r a m does in fact play a cr it ic al
the student's d ec is io n to p a r t i c i p a t e

role in

in the Cr iminal

Ju sti ce Practicum.
Summa ry of Phase
The results of Phase

I

(1975)

I
seem to in di c a te that

students hold several goals and o bj ec ti ve s
their field experiences.

to be bas ic

Th os e goals and o b j e c t i v e s

an un d e r s t a n d i n g of the real w o r l d si t u a t i o n

include

in the criminal

justice system,

learning skills ne c e s s a r y to deal with

agen cy clients,

and re ac hin g a de c i s i o n c o n c e r n i n g

careers

in the criminal

ob jec tiv es wer e very
J us tic e Fa cul ty for
goals and ob jec tiv es

justic e system.

their

T ho se goals and

similar to those held by the Criminal
the students.

Spe cif ica lly ,

for the stu dents were;

1)

the faculty
to provi de

the student wi t h an op po r t u n i t y to obser ve and w o r k
real w or ld of criminal

in the

justice and apply the the or y from the

c l a s sr oo m to those situations;

2)

wi t h an op po r t u n i t y to observe,
justice pr ac ti t i o n e r s and for
about a career

to

in the criminal

to pr ovi de

meet,

the stude nt

and wo r k w i t h criminal

students to come to a de ci si on
justice system;

and 3)

to

79
help the s tu de nt d e v e l o p an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the dy sf u n c t i o n
of the crimin'al j u st ic e system.
Phase I,

fo und that there are several

influence

the Pr acticum.

students,

cur ri cu lu m,

of these fa cto rs

T ho se facto rs

factors

that

in clu de the faculty,

and the p a r t i c i p a t i n g agencies.

exer ts

some

Each

in fl uen ce on the ef fe c t i v e n e ss

of the o p e r at i on of the Practicu.

Re su lt s of Phase
In this s e c t i o n of the study,

II
the r e s e a r c h h yp ot he se s

will be pr e s e n t e d f o l l o w e d by the e x p e r i m e n t a l
hypotheses.

Spe cif ica lly ,

the 1981-1982

(null)

study in ve st i ga te d

the follo win g questions:

A g en cy Shock
1)

The e x p e r i m e n t a l subjects will p e r c e i v e that they
e n c o u n t e r e d less a g en cy shock up on en t e r i n g into a
cri mi na l ju sti ce age nc y than the contro l subjects
p e r c e i v e d they e n c o u n t e r e d upo n their entry into a
c ri mi na l justic e agency.

la)

Th er e will be no si gn i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e be t w e e n the
co ntr ol and ex pe ri me nt al grou ps on the p er ce pt io n of
the am ou n t of ag en c y shock e x p e r i e n c e d upon
en te ri ng a cri minal justice agency.

This h y p o t h e s i s w as pr op o s e d
assumed val ue s of ex p e r i e n t i a l

to d e t e r m i n e

learning

if one of the

is that students who

have wo rk e d in an ag en c y will be b e tt er p r e p a r e d to deal wit h
the en vi r o n m e n t of the real w o r l d of work.
was

tested th rou gh

agenc y s h o c k ) :

two surve y items

This hypot he si s

(given a d e f i n i t i o n of

80

A g e n c y S ho ck is any and all of the a dv ers e ef fec ts of a
p e r s on ' s e n t ry into an agen cy e n v i r o n m e n t w h i c h is
m a r k e d l y d i f f e r e n t from that to w h i c h the indivi du al is
acc us to me d, i.e., ag e n c y procedures, o p e r a t io na l systems,
personn el , and cu lt ur al environment.

1)

H o w mu c h a g e n c y shock did you e n c o u n t e r u p o n b e g i n n i n g
yo u r first p o s i t i o n in the Cr im ina l Ju st ic e System ?
a. No n e
b. Less than a v er ag e
c. Mo r e than a v e r a g e
d. A g r e a t a m o u n t

Perceived

shock

The data i n d i c a t e that the null h y p o th es is can not be
rejected.

The data

show only a

in Table

4.14 shows

that the me a n scores

.07 d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n p r a c t i c u m and non-

p r a c t i c u m students.

Ta bl e

4.14

— T - ra t i o s of P e r c e i v e d A g e n c y Shock

(On a scale w h e r e

G ro up

l=None

& 2=Great Amount)
Standard
Deviation

N

Mean

Non-practicum

19

2.53

1.17

Pr a c t i c u m

22

2.46

1.10

In te r n s h i p

13

2.46

1.05

9

2.44

1.24

t-Value

.202

Multi-Agency

*De grees of F r e e d o m for poo le d v a r i a n c e

= 39

*

81

Gr a d ua t es w e r e also c o m p a r e d c o n c e r n i n g w h e t h e r

they

felt their colleg e study p r e p a r e d them for a g e n c y shock.
They wer e asked:
2) Wh et h e r or not y o u e n c o u n t e r e d age nc y shock up o n your
ent ra n ce into your first p o s i t i o n in the Cri min al Ju sti ce
System, do you think yo ur co ll e g e p r e p a r a t i o n eq u i p p e d you
to meet such shock?

The data ob ta i ne d from this
the i n f o r m at i o n in Table
difference
g r a du at es

(.45)

4.15,

item,

as d e m o n s t r a t e d by

in di cat e only a slight

b e t w e e n p r a c t i c u m and n o n - p r a c t i c u m

in their p e r c e p t i o n of h o w c o ll eg e study pr ep are d

them for a g e n c y shock.

The data did not in di ca te

that p a r t i c i p a t i o n

in a

Crimin al J us ti c e Pr a c t i c u m had an eff ec t of any s i g n i f i c a n ce
on the amo unt of ag en c y shock g r a d u a t e s p e r c e i v e d that they
e n c o u n te r e d upon their en tr y into the Cri minal Ju st i c e work
force.

It is p o s s i b l e that the d e f i n i t i o n used to des cr ib e

age nc y shock may ha v e bee n d ef ici en t,

or the s e lf -r ep or te d

nat ur e of the data may have ca us e d an und er - e s t i m a t i o n of
the colle ge p r e p a r a t i o n of p r a c t i c u m g r ad ua tes

and an over

es t i m a t i o n of those gr a d u a t e s of the am ou n t of ag e n c y
they rea ll y encountered.

The o p p o s i t e

(in both cases)

also be true for the n o n - p r a c t i c u m graduates.

shock
may

82
Tab le 4.15

of Per ce ive d Pr e p a r a t i o n for Shock

T- r at io ns

—

(On a scale w h e r e

Group

1 = none and 5 = a g re at deal)
Sta nd ar d
D e v i a t i o n t - Va lu e *

Mean

N

Non-practicum

22

3.32

1.17

Practicum

23

2.87

1.49

I nte rns hi p

13

2.69

1.38

Multi-Agency

10

3.10

1.66

1.12

*Degrees of F r e e d o m for pooled v a r i a n c e

= 43

B u r n - O ut
2)

The e xp er im e n ta l subjects will e x pe ri en ce less
b u r n - o u t than contr ol subjects e x pe r i e n c e d in their
cri minal justi ce career.

2a)

T he re will no s i gn i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n control
and e x p e r i m e n t a l su bjects c o n c e r n i n g the amo un t of
b u r n - o u t that they e x p e r i e n c e in their criminal
justice careers.

This h y p o t h e s i s was p r o p o s e d b e c a u s e e x per im ent al
learning is many times a c c l a i m e d as car ee r e x p l o r a t i o n that
will

a l l o w the

learner to make bet te r

co nc e r n i n g ca r e e r op po rt u n i ti es .
bu rn - o u t

in cri minal

was

still

In order to measur e

justice graduates,

we r e used to d e v e l o p the data:
graduate

informe d de ci si on s

e mp l o y e d

several

ques ti ons

1) W h e t h e r or not the

in the criminal

justice system at

the po in t of the g a t h e r i n g of the data for Phase II of this
study;

2) The nu m b er of mont hs

po s i t i o n in the cr im i n a l

the gr ad uat es held

justi ce system;

their first-

3) A c a lc ul at io n of

the number of mo n t hs w o r k e d in the cri minal justice system
dur i n g the pe r i o d of the study; and 4) An e va lu at io n of the

83
f o l l ow i ng po ss i bl e r ea son s
in the criminal

for ter mi na ti ng their emp lo ym en t

j us tic e system:

money,

f r u s t r a t i o n and n o n - m o n e t a r y rewards,
problems,

job satisfaction,
administrative

or other reasons.

Still W o r k i n g

in the Sys te m

The true test of b u r n - o u t in any car ee r field may be
the an s w e r to the quest ion,
field?"

"Are you still wo r k i n g in that

The data in Table 4.16 d e mo ns tr at es no evi de nc e of a

d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n p r a c t i c u m and no n - p r a c t i c u m graduates.
the t able g r a p h i c a l l y displays,
r e p o r t e d that 54 p e r c e n t
the s ys te m and 46 p e r c e n t
never had be e n w o r k i n g
r e p o r t e d exact ly
employed

cr iminal

we r e no

we r e

(11 graduates)

in the system.

in the cr iminal

graduates)

n o n - p r a c t i c u m g r a du at es

(13 graduates)

50 pe r c e n t

still w o r k i n g

we r e no

in

longer or

P r a c t i c u m grad ua tes

(12 graduates)

justice

As

were

still

system and 50 pe r c e n t

longer or never we r e em pl o y ed

(12

in the

justice system.

Ta bl e 4.16 —

Group

Still W o r k i n g

in the Criminal

N

J u st ic e Syst em

Still wo r k i n g
Pe rc en ta ge

N

Not W o rki ng
Pe rc en ta ge

Non-practicum

13

54

11

46

Pr a c t i c u m

12

50

12

50

If the ab ov e da ta are a d j u s t e d

so as to remove those

gr ad uat es wh o never found e m p l o y m e n t in the criminal
system

(one g r a d u a t e

grad uat es

in the e x p e r i m e n t a l gr oup and five

in the contro l

is noted.

justice

The data Table

g r o u p ) , a c o n s i d e r a b l e d if fe re nc e
4.17 d e m o n s t r a t e s

of the n o n - p r a c t i c u m gr ad ua te s we re

that 68 p e rc en t

still emp lo ye d

in the

system c o mp ar ed to 52 pe rc e n t of the p r a c t i c u m gr aduates
still em pl o ye d
results wo ul d
supported.

in the cr im in al

justic e system.

ind ica te that the null h y p o t h e s i s

is

The d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n the two groups might be

ex pl ai ne d by the fact that p r a c t i c u m graduates,
proces s of their e x p e r i e n t i a l
learned the t e c hn i qu es
criminal

These

justi ce

those qu al it ie s

Th e y

interviews.

learned the proper re sponses
They

learned to d i spl ay

that age nc y em pl oy er s are

c an did ate for a p o s i t i o n
age nc y pers onn el

in criminal

and a p p l i c a t i o n

look for in a ca ndidate.

looking for in a

justice agencies.

are more than w i l l i n g

agen cy i nt er v ie we r s

w e r e exposed to and

for sec ur in g a po s i t i o n in the

system.

to be g ive n du r i ng

education,

t hr ou gh the

to discu ss what

sc r e e ni ng co mmi tte es

They may have d i s p l a y e d a po si tio n

that maske d their true p e r s o n a l i t i e s and te mp e r a m e nt s
order to ob ta in the positions.

in

It p r o b a b l y was not until

later that those p e r s o n a l i t i e s and te mp er am en ts
u lt im at e ly ca us ed

Many

them to leave the system.

The

surfaced and

85
n o n - p r a c t i c u m gr ad uat es

may never have had the o p p o r t u n i t y

to learn those t ech ni qu es

n e c e s s a r y to cover their true

p e r s o n a l i t y and a t t itu de s and,
employment

in the cr im in al

thus,

they n ev er ob ta ine d

justice sys te m in the first

place.

Table

4.17 —

Still W o r k i n g in the Cri minal Ju st ic e System
of Th os e G r a d u at es that Fou nd Wo r k

Still Wo rk in g
Pe rc en ta ge

Gr ou p

N ot W o r k i n g
Pe rc en ta ge

Non-practicum

68%

32%

Practicum

52%

48%

N u mb er of Mon th s

in First P o si ti on

A no t h e r me asu re of b u r n - o u t e m pl oy ed
the num be r of months
in the cri minal

in this study is

the gr ad ua te s held their first position

justice system.

This q u e s t i o n was

selected

to m e a s u r e h ow q u i c k l y g r a d ua te s b u r n e d - o u t on their first
position

in the crimina l

The data
g r a d ua te s

4.18 d e m o ns tr at es that p r a c t i c u m

stayed an av era ge of thi rt y- tw o and fo rt y-s ix one

hundredths
cri minal

in Ta ble

justic e system.

(32.46)

mon th s

justice system.

on their first po s i t i o n

The n o n - p r a c t i c u m gr ad ua te s

an av e r a g e of twenty and f i f t y- fo ur one hu nd re d t h s
month s

in their first position.

s i g n i f i c a n t at the

.05

in the

level.

stayed

(20.54)

This d i f f e r e n c e was not
If the p r a c t i c u m sample

is

86
di vi d e d

into i nt er n s h i p and rnulti-agency gr aduates,

difference
cri m i n a l
The

a

in the av e r a g e num be r of mo n th s on the first

justice

job is obs er ve d b e t w e e n the two groups.

i n te rn s hi p gr a d ua t es

held their first p o s i t i o n in the

sy s t e m an avera ge of t hi rt y- on e and f o u r t e en one hu nd re dt hs
(31.14)

months c o m p a r e d to the m u l t i - a g e n c y g r a d u at es who

staye d an a ve rag e of th i r t y - f ou r and three tenths
months.

(34.3)

This may be in dic ati ve of the fact that the more

ex p o s u r e a stude nt has to d i ff er ent po t en ti al
agencies,

the

longer they tend to stay

emplo yin g

in their first

pos ition.

This d i f f e r e n c e was not s t a t i s t i c a l l y si g n i f i c a n t

at the

level.

.05

Ta bl e

4.18 -- T - R a t i o s

of Nu m be r of Mon th s on 1st Job

S t a n d a rd
Deviation

N

Me a n

Non-practicum

24

20.54

23.82

Practicum

24

32.46

26.89

Internship

14

31.14

28.15

Multi-agency

10

34.30

26.40

Group

t-Value

-1.625

*

.28 #

*De grees of F re ed om for poo le d v a r i a n c e = 46 w i t h
a c r i t e r i o n score of 1 .684 at the .05 level of
sig ni f i c a n ce
#D egrees of Fr e e d o m for pooled v a r i a n c e = 23 wi t h
a c r i t e r i o n score of 1 .711 at the .05 level of
significance

87
N u m b er of Mon th s W o r k e d in the System
The n u m b e r of mon th s wo rk e d

in the criminal

sy st e m by each g r o u p was also studied.
made of the two gr o u p s
difference demonstrated

justice

A c o m p a r i s o n was

in an a t te mp t to de t e r mi ne

if the

in the number of mon th s on the first

job r e m a i n e d c o n s t a n t d u r i n g the entire period of the study.
As the data

in Table 4.18 de mo nstrates,

the differ en ce

b e t w e e n the mean n u m b e r of months on the first criminal
j us ti ce

job b e t w e e n the p r a c t i c u m and n o n - p r a c t i c u m

g r a du at es was e l e v e n and n i n e t y - t w o one h u n d r e d t h s
months.

The data

in and Tables

(11.92)

4.19 and 4.20 d e m on st ra tes

that p r a c t i c u m g r a d u a t e s w o r k e d an a v er ag e of fo r t y - s i x and
four one h u n d r e d t h s

(46.04)

months and n o n - p r a c t i c u m

gr a d u a t e s w o r k e d and av e r a g e of t h i r ty -f iv e and seven ty -ni ne
one h u n d r e d t h s

(35.79)

months

in the system.

The mean

d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n the a ve ra ge of the two gro up s for the
total

nu mb e r of m o n t h s w o r k e d was ten and tw e n t y - f i v e one

hu n d r e d t h s

(10.25).

mon th s on the first

The me a n di ff e r e n c e

for the number of

job and the mean d i f f e r e n c e

for the

total num be r of mo n t h s w o r k e d was one and si x ty -s ev en one
hu n d r e d t h s

(1.67)

months.

Table 4.19 —

T - R a t i os

of N u m b e r of Months

in C.J.

St andard
D e vi at ion

Group

N

Mean

Non-practicum

24

35.79

30.20

Pr a c t i c u m

24

46.04

27.53

Syste m

t-Va lue s*

-1.23

*Degrees of F re e d o m for p o o l e d va ri a n c e = 46
w i t h a cr i t er io n score of 1.684 at the .05 level
si gni fi ca n ce

of

Reason s Gr ad ua tes Left the Sys te m
A co mp a r i s o n of gr a d u a t e s who
justice

left the cri min al

system was made in an attemp t to de t e r m i n e

was a d if fe re nc e b e t w e e n the two groups c o nc er ni ng
b ur n- ou t

symptoms,

the criminal

that is,

ju sti ce

lack of money,

system,

gra du at es who

typical

frustration with

ad mi ni st ra ti ve problems,

sa tis fa ct io n and n o n - m o n e t a r y rewards,
This c om pa ri so n was

if there

job

or other reasons.

a c c o mp li sh ed by re qu es t i n g that

left the system rated each of the above

symptoms of b u r n - o u t on a scale from one to five w h e r e one
equals very i m p or ta nt and five equals very uni mportant.
A rev ie w of the data
"other reasons"

4.20 d e m o n s t r a t e s

that

[with a mean score for the p r a c t i c u m

gr ad ua te s of one
h un dr ed th s

in Table

(1.00)

(1.33)

for the no n - p r a c t i c u m graduates]

c on si d e r e d the mo s t
e x p la na ti on of w hy

and one and th ir ty -t hr ee one

impo rta nt reason for

leaving.

was
An

this was the hi ghe st rated rea so n

is that

89

those g r a dua te s that rated this re a so n w i t h one e x c ep ti on
rated it ve ry

important.

The other gr a d u at es

the item on the q u e s t i o n n a i r e at all.

Thus,

failed to rate
only those

no n - p r a c t i c u m gr a d u a t e s wh o c o n s i d e r e d it ve ry
important rated the reason
specific

"other"

re aso ns

no jobs that

I was

interests,"

3)

sp ec ifi ed

intere st ed

in,"

at all.
included;
2)

The next most

and 5)

Some of the
1)

"There were

"I found other

"I ch ang ed my care er goals,"

wa nt e d were not av ai lab le, "
mother."

"other"

im po rt an t or

4)

"Jobs

I

I bec am e a full- tim e

im po rta nt rated reas on was

job

sa tis fa ct io n and n o n - m o n e t a r y rew ar d wi t h a mean score of
one and eight tenths
(2.00)

(1.80)

for p r a c t i c u m gr ad uat es and two

for n o n - p r a c t i c u m graduates.

indicate that there

The data fails to

is a real d i f f e r e n c e b e tw ee n p r a ct ic um

and n o n - p r a c t i c u m gr ad uat es

in their reas on for

leaving the

system.

Table 4.20 —

Re aso ns

REASON

for

leaving

PR AC TI CU M

the C.J.

System

NON-PRACTICUM

A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Problems

3.63

4.00

Fru st ra ti on

3.00

2.50

Money

2.50

2.50

S at isf act ion

1.80

2.00

Other Reasons

1.00

1.33

90
Time to F ir st Criminal J us tic e E m p l o y m e n t
3)

There is a s ig ni fic ant d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n the
ex per ime nta l subjects and the c o nt ro l su bjects in
the length of time taken to find Cr im i n a l Ju s t i ce
em p lo y m e n t after graduation.

3a)

There is no sig nif ic ant d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n the
e xp eri me nta l subjects and the contr ol su bj ec ts in
the length of time taken to find Cr im i n a l Ju s t i ce
em pl o y m e n t after graduation.

This h yp o th es i s was
students

inve st iga ted

learn the proced ur es

the system th rou gh

in an a t t e m p t to show that

and sources of e m p l o y m e n t in

their ex po su re to that system.

The

survey item used to test this h yp ot he si s as ke d the g r ad ua te
two questions:

1)

Wh at year and term did you g r a d u a t e from M i c h i g a n
State U ni ve r s i t y w i t h your B.S. or B.A. Degree ?

2)

What was the month and yea r you st art ed you r fi rst
full- tim e job in the Cri minal Ju s t i c e Syste m?

Months

to Fi rst Criminal

The data d e m o n s t r a t es
months that gr ad uat es
criminal

justice

system.

a wide range of the num be r of

spent looking for e m p l o y m e n t

justice system.

se ven ty-two months

J u st i c e Job

spent

The range was

in the

from zero to

locating a p o s i t i o n in the criminal

T hos e students who

s ta rte d their first job

eith er bef or e g r a d u a t i o n or dur in g the same m o n t h as
gr a d u a ti on we re co ded as zero months.
the spectrum,
criminal

At the other end of

those gradu at es who never found a job in the

justice sy st em were coded as s e v e n t y - t w o months.

91
Wh e n the p r a c t i c u m g r a d u a t e s we r e c o m p a r e d w i t h the
n o n - p r a c t i c u m g ra du at es ,
.05 level)

a significant difference

(at the

was n o t e d in in the mean nu mb e r of mon th s to the

first job in the c r i m i n a l
Table 4.21 de mo n s t r a t e s ,

j u sti ce system.

As the data in

the p r a c t i c u m gr a du at es

found their

first job in an a v e r a g e of nine and se v e n t e e n one hu nd r e d t hs
(9.17)

mon th s and n o n - p r a c t i c u m g r a du at es

job in the sys te m in an a v e r a g e
t w e n ty -n in e one h u n d r e d t h s
was furth er analyzed,
graduates w h o never

found their first

of t w e n t y - o n e and

(21.29)

months.

W h e n the data

it wa s d i s c o v e r e d that w h e n those

found a job in the sys te m w e r e

removed

from the sam pl e p r a c t i c u m g r a d u a t e s found their first
pos iti on in a mean time of four and nine tenths
and n o n - p r a c t i c u m g r a d u a t e s

in ele ve n e l ev en and

th ir ty -s ev en one h u n d r e d t h s

(11.37)

Table 4.21 —

Group

T-R at io s

N

months

months.

of N u m b e r of Month s

Me an

(4.9)

St an da rd
Deviation

Non-practicum

24

21.29

27.54

Prac tic um

24

9.17

15.21

No n - p r a c t i c u m
(With 0 months
removed)
Pr ac tic um
(With 0 months
removed)

19

11.37

11.3 7

10

4.90

5.47

to 1st Job

t-Value

* 1.89#

** 1.53

* Degrees of Fr e e d o m for p o o l e d v a ri an ce = 46 w i t h a
cr it er io n score of 1.684 at the .05 level of s i g n if ic an ce
#
Si gn ifi can t at the .05 level of si gn if ic an ce
**Degrees of Fr e e d o m for u n p o o l e d v a r i a n c e = 28 w i t h a
cri te ri on score of 1.714 at the .05 level of s i g n i fi ca nc e

92

C A R E E R S T A BI LI TY
4)

T he re are s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n the
ex p e r i m e n t a l subjects' and the control subjects'
s t a b i l i ty in their Criminal Ju s t i c e careers.

4a)

There are no si g n i f ic an t di ff e r e n c e s b e t w e e n the
e xp e r i m e n t a l subjects' and the control subjects'
st a b il it y in their Cr iminal Ju st ic e careers.

This hy po t h e s i s was

i n v e s t i g a t e d in an a t te m p t to de t e r m i n e

if a st udent's e x p o s u r e to a cr iminal

justice a g e n c y e n ab le d

hi m/ h e r to sel ec t the c o rr ec t age nc y for hi m s e l f based on
his p e r s o n a l i t y and that exposure.

The surv ey

items used to

me as u r e and test this hy po th es is qu e r i e d the grad ua tes
concerning:
1)

The num be r of po si ti on s the gr ad ua te s have held in
the cr im in a l justice system.
This da t a was ob ta in ed
in an a t t e m p t to d e mo n s t r a t e h o w p h y s i c a l l y stable
the g r a d u a t e s w e r e in their cr iminal justice
employment.

2)

The length of the g r ad ua tes first e m p l o y m e n t in the
crimi nal justic e system.
This data was ob tained in
an at t e m p t to me a s u r e the amo un t of p r e p a r a t i o n for
a cr im in al justi ce care er that the c o l l e g e
e x p er i e n c e provided. The data should p r o v i d e a
m ea s ur e of the graduates' car ee r stability.

3)

The total nu mb e r of month s the gr ad ua te s were
em plo ye d in the criminal justice s y s t e m d u ri ng the
peri od of this study. This data was c o l l e ct ed to
me a s u r e the p e r m a n e n c e of the graduates' career
c o m m i t m e n t to criminal justice.

93
4)

The d e t e r m i n a t i o n of the gr ad ua te s em pl oy m e n t
status in the cr im ina l justice sy st e m at the point
of the g a t h e r i n g of the data for this research.
This data is the c l e a r e s t test of the graduates'
ca re er s t a b i l i t y in the criminal j us ti ce system. If
the g r a d u a t e is no longer in the cr im ina l justice
system, he ca nn o t be stable in th at system.

The num be r of jobs held
The data c o n c e r n i n g the numb er of jobs the grad ua te s
held d u ri ng the s tu d i e d per io d failed to d e m o n s t r a t e that a
s i g ni fi ca nt d i f f e r e n c e

(at the

.05

level of significance)

b et w e e n the mean n u m b e r of jobs the p r a c t i c u m gr a d u at es held
(1.53)

and the mean num be r of jobs the n o n - p r a c t i c u m

gr ad ua te s hel d

(1.57)

was

obtained.

the n o n - p r a c t i c u m g r a d u a t e s was
is also of int ere st
graduates)
p os i t i o n

from zero to five jobs.

to note that t we nt y- on e pe rc e n t

that four pe r c e nt

found a

(1 graduate)

of the

and four

held five p o s it io ns c o m p a r e d

pe rc en t of the p r a c t i c u m gr ad ua te s

(1

It is also

n o n - p r a c t i c u m g r a d u a t e s held four positions,
(1 graduate)

It

(5

justic e com pa re d to four pe rc en t

of the p r a c t i c u m graduates.

in te re st in g to note

pe rc en t

the range for

of the n o n - p r a c t i c u m gr ad ua te s n ev er

in cri mi na l

graduate)

However,

to zero

for both categories.

This br oa de r range of num be r of po si ti on s m i g h t sugges t that
n o n - p r a c t i c u m st ude nt s d e m o n s t r a t e
in the crimina l
furthe r study

ju st i c e

so me wh at

less

st ability

syste m than p r a c t i c u m graduates,

is n e e d e d to fully suppor t this position.

but

94
T ab le

4.22 —

T - R a t io s

of Nu mbe rs of Cri minal

Mean

Non-practicum

24

1.58

CO
CO
•

St an da rd
Deviation

N

Pr a c t i c u m

24

1.50

1.35

Group

Ju st ic e Jobs

t-Value

.25 *

* De gr ee s of F r e e d o m for po ol e d v a r i a n c e = 46 w i t h a
c r i t e ri o n score of 1.684 at the .05 level of significance.

N u m b e r of Months on Fir st Job
The data in T ab le

4.22A d e mo ns tr at es

numb er of months

that p r a c t i c u m and n o n - p r a c t i c u m gr ad uat es hel d their first
p o s i t i o n in the cr im in a l
indicates,

justice system.

n o n - p r a c t i c u m g r a du at es

their first p o s i t i o n

As the data

spent fewer mont hs

in the criminal

in

justice system.

The

mean num be r of mo n t h s n o n - p r a c t i c u m g r a du at es held their
first po si t i o n was
(20.54)

twe nt y and fi ft y - f o u r one h u n d r e d t h s

months c o m p a r e d to the p r a c t i c u m gr a d u a t e s w h o held

their first p o s i t i o n from mean of th ir t y - t w o and fort y- si x
one h u n d r e d t h s

(32.46)

months.

The difference,

s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t at the

.05

level,

is

though not
large enough

to be of in te re st w h e n d i sc us s i n g car ee r stability.
d i r e c t i o n of the d i f f e r e n c e would
graduates experienced

justice

in dicate that pr a c t i c u m

s o m et hi ng that was at least so me wh at

c o n t r i b u t o r y to the graduates'
cri mi na l

The

system.

ca r e e r

st ability

in the

One of the po ss ib le reaso ns

for

95
the

large d i f f e r e n c e b e tw ee n the two groups may well be the

n u m b e r of n o n - p r a c t i c u m gr a d u a t e s w ho never found a p o s i t i o n
in the system.

Thus,

their first job.
ca re e r

these g r a d u a t e s

This data is,

spent zero mo nt h s on

however,

s t a bi li ty as this ,study de fi ne s

still

it.

The Nu m b e r of Mo n t h s on the

Table 4.22A —

Mean

indic at iv e of

1st C.J.

St an da rd
Deviation

Gr ou p

N

Non-practicum

24

20.54

23.82

Practicum

24

32.46

26.89

Job

t-Value

-1.63

*

* Degrees of F r e e d o m for po o l e d v a r i a n c e = 46
w i t h a c r i t e r i o n score of 1.684 at the .05 level of
significance.

N o n - P r a c t i c u m Students'

P e r c e p t i o n of Sc hool's O b j e c t i v e

5)

B e t w e e n Phase I and Ph as e II the control subjects
will s i g n i f i c a n t l y cha ng e their p e r c e p t i o n of the
o b j e c t i v e s of the School of Crimin al J u st ic e for
o f f e r i n g the Cr iminal J u s t i c e Practicum.

5a)

B e t w e e n Phase I and Phase II the control subjects
will not s i g n i f i c a n t l y chan ge their p e r c e p t i o n of
the o b j e c t i v e s of the School of Criminal J u st ic e
for offeri ng the Criminal Ju s t i c e Practicum.

This h y p o t h e s i s was

investigated

id en ti fy if after a per io d of real
criminal

justi ce system,

in an ex pe ri e n t i a l

in an a t t e m p t to

life em pl o y m e n t

in the

g r a du at es w h o did not p a r t i c i p a t e

e d u ca ti on p r o g r a m p e r c e i v e d of the value

96
of ex p er ie n t ia l

e d u c a t i o n d i f f e r en tl y than they did w h il e

they were un der g ra du a te s .
d e m o n st ra te s

The data in Table 4.23

that n o n - p r a c t i c u m g r a d u a t e s ’ p e r c e p t i o n of the

ob jec ti ve s of the School

of fe rin g the p r a c t i c u m c h ang ed an

av era ge of th ir t y - f i v e on e - h un dr ed th s

(.35)

toward one

scale of 1 = Ver y •Im po rt ant to 5 = Ve r y Unimportant)
is not s i gn if ic an t at the
ob je cti ve

showing the

.05

The

"Professional

Service" w i t h a chan ge of si xt y- sev en on e- hu nd re dt hs
tow ard five.

which

level of significance.

largest shift was

(on a

(.67)

It is of int ere st to note that the

n o n - p r a c t i c u m gr a d u a t e s

shifted toward a mean score of five

on three of the obj ectives,

one stayed v i r t u a l l y u n c ha ng ed

(knowledge of se lf- abi lit ies ,

values,

etc.),

and three moved

c o n s i d e r a b l y towa rd five on two objectives

(Professional

P r e p a r a t i o n and Pr of es s io na l

the

shift).

If the o bj ec ti ve s

suggests

into four groups:

self-knowledge,
p ar ti cip ati on,
and 4)
mean

social

2)
3)

largest

are ca te go riz ed as Borza k
1)

(1981)

objec ti ve s c o nc er ni ng

ob je c t i v e s co nce rni ng dire ct
o bj ec ti ve s c on ce rn in g aca dem ic

impact,

scores clo se r

o bje cti ves

Service being

all

to one

concerning

of the objecti ves w hi ch

inquiry,
scored

in 1981 than in 1975 were

se lf -k n o w le dg e and ac ad e m ic

inquiry.

These result s mi gh t be in dic ati ve of a co nce rn on the part
of the gr ad ua te s

for the va lue of improving the individual

self and a c q u ir in g kn ow le dg e as oppose d to fi ndi ng a job or
servin g others but
this

suggestion.

furthe r res ea rc h would be nee de d to test

97

T able 4. 2 3 — N o n - P r a c t i c u m P e rc e p t i o n of O b j e c t i v e s

PER CE I V ED O B J E C T I V E S
OF THE SCH OO L
N o n - P r a c t i c u m Gr a d u a t e s

MEAN
MEAN
75->81
N O N - P R A C T N O N - P R A C T CHA NG E
*ip_■Ratio
1981
1975

1. Pr of es sio nal P r e p a r a t i o n
2. Knowl ed ge of Self-A bi lit ie s,
Values, Etc.
3. Se lf - Re l i a n c e & Di r e c t i o n
4. A p p l i c a t i o n of Th e o r y
5. P r o fe ss ion al Se rvi ce
6. De ve l o p m e n t of an A w a re ne ss
of Social Issues
7. Un de r st a n d i n g & A c c e p t a n c e
of Others
MEAN

1.80

2.40

.60

1.18

2.13
2.40
2.25
2.13

2.20
2.13
2.47
2.80

.08
-.27
.22
.67

.19
-.67
.47
1.64

3.06

2.53

.47

1.08

3.06

2.93

-.13

-.25

2.29

2.64

.35

1.04

* N o n e of the T - v a l u e s were s i gn i f i c a n t at the
w i t h a c r i t e r i o n score of 2.047

This

1975-1981

.05

level,

slight shift ma y p o s s i b l y be the re s u l t of the

gra du a t es al rea dy h av i n g e m pl oy m e n t or made career
decisions.

This may be the reason for the sl ig h t l y

ratin g of di re ct p a r t i c i p a t i o n ob je ct i v e s

lower

in 1981 as

co mp a r ed to their rat in g of them in 1975.

P r a c t i c u m Students'

P e rc ep t i o n of Sch oo l' s Ob je c t i v e s

6)

Be tw e e n Phase I and Phase II the e x p e r i m en ta l
subjects will s i g n i f i c a n t l y cha ng e their p e r c e p t i o n
of the o bj ec ti ve s of the School of Cr im in al J u sti ce
for o f f e r i n g the Criminal J u s t i c e Practicum.

6a)

B e t w e e n Phase I and Phase II the e x p e r i m e n t a l
subjec ts will not s i g n i f i c a n t l y ch a n g e their
p e r c e p t i o n of the o b j e c t i v e s of the School of
Cri minal J us ti c e for of f e r i n g the Cri mi na l Ju st ic e
Practicum.

98
This h yp ot h e s i s was
e xp e r i e n c e

i n v e s t i ga te d to see if after a real wo r k

s t u d e n t s ' pe r c e p ti on s

expe ri e n t ia l

ed u c a t i o n

of the need for

is similar to those of the f a cu lt y or

if po s s i b l y the goals of the facul ty are not c o n g r u e n t wi t h
the re al i ty of the actual

pr of es s io na l world.

ill us tr at e d

in dicate that the mean score for

all

in Table

4.24

The results

seven of the o bj ec t i v e s either shift ed tow ar d five

scale wh er e

1 = Ver y

stayed v i r t u a l l y the

Impor tan t and 5 = V e r y Unimportant)
same

(less than a .10 change).

av era ge change of the mean scores was four tenths
w h i c h was

similar to the n o n - p r a c t i c u m graduates.

(.40)
It is of
in the

p r a c t i c u m g r a du at es

shifte d on the

wh ol e

toward five and n o n - p r a c t i c u m g r a du at es

shifted on the

w ho le

toward five.

obj ec ti ve

It is also of int ere st to note that the

"Pr ofessional

shift toward five
and

That is,

or

The

in te re st to note that the shift of the two groups was
same direction.

(on a

Service"

in bot h groups

d e m o n s t r a t e d the

largest

(.53 in the p r a c t i c u m group

.67 in the n o n - p r a c t i c u m group).

Pro fe ss io na l

Service

is the only o b j e ct i ve to shift a c o ns i d e r a b l e amo un t in both
groups
This

(though the shift was

shift could

pro fe s s i o n a l
cr im in al

noted that
the

be i n di ca ti ve of the p o s s i b i l i t y that

service was c o ns id er ed

justice g r a d u a t e s

by cr iminal

s t at is ti ca ll y not significant).

justice

seniors

"Profes si ona l

six years after g r a d u a t i o n than
in 1975.

It should also be

Service" was not c o n s i d e r e d

least i m p or tan t objective,

two by both groups.

less im po rta nt by

but is ranked

to be

in the bot to m

The other obje ct ive ran ke d in the

99
bo tt o m two c at eg or ie s by bo t h gr ou p s was
Others."

This ob je cti ve was ra ted

groups dur in g both Phas es

T able

in the b o t t o m two by both

I and II.

4. 2 4 — P r a c ti c um Pe r c e i v e d O b j e c t i v e s

(On a scale wh ere

l=Very

Im po rt an t

PE RC EI VE D OBJ EC TI VE S
OF THE SCHOO L
P r a ct ic um Gr ad uat es
1. Pro fes si on al P r ep ar at io n
2. Kn ow led ge of S e l f -A bi li ti es
Values, Etc.
3. S e lf -R el ia nc e & D i r e ct io n
4. A p p l i c a t i o n of Theo ry
5. Pr of ess ion al Servic e
6. D e v e l o p m e n t of an Aw ar en es s
of Social Issues
7. Un de rs t a n d i n g & A c c e p t a n c e
of Others

MEAN

" U n d e r s t a n d i n g of

1975-1981

& 5=Ve ry Unimportant)

ME AN
PRACT
1975

MEA N
PRACT
1981

75->81
CH AN GE
T- Ra tio

1.85

1.79

-.06

-.20

1.83
2.15
2.15
2.30

2.29
2.17
2.08
2 .83

.46
.02
-.07
.53

1.66
.05
-.17
1.87

2.40

2.67

.27

.74

2.45

2.67

.22

.71

1.96

2.36

.40

2.70

* Non e of the T-values we r e s i g n i f i c a n t at the
w i t h a c r i te ri on score of 2.04 7

.05 level,

D i f fe re nc es of P e r c e p t i o n of Sch ool 's O b j e c t i v e s
7)

There are sig ni fi ca nt d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n the
ex per ime nta l subjects' and the contro l subjects'
p er ce pt io n of the School of Cri min al Ju st ic e for
off eri ng the Cri minal Ju st i c e P r a c t i c u m dur in g
Phase II.

7a)

There is no si gn i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n the
exp eri me nt al subjects' and the contro l subjects'
pe rc e p t i o n of the School of Cr im ina l J u st ic e for
o f fe ri ng the Cri mi na l J u s t i c e P r a c t i c u m d u r i n g
Phase II.

100
This h y p o t h e s i s was

investigated

to de t e r m i n e

result of a fu l l - t im e w o r k ex pe rience,
participated

in e x p e r i e n t i a l

of that e xp e r i e n t i a l

if,

as a

gr a d u a t e s who

e d u c a t i o n pe r c e i v e d the value

e d u c a t i o n e x p e r i e n c e d i f f e r e n t l y than

gr a d u a t es w h o ne ver p a r t i c i p a t e d

in an ex per ien tia l

e d u c a t i o n program.
The data

in Ta bl e

4.25 de mo n s t r a t e s

s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e at the
groups

.05

that there is no

level b e t w e e n the two

in their p e r c e p t i o n of the o b je ct iv es

of Cr iminal

J u s ti ce

Practicum.

W h e n the means of each group wer e a v er ag ed and

compared,

in o f f e r i n g the Criminal

of the School

practicum graduates

scored an avera ge mean score

of 2.36 and n o n - p r a c t i c u m g r a d u a t e s
of 2.64.

It is i nt er e s t i n g

prof es s i o na l

p r e p a r a t i o n was

gr ad ua te s w i t h a m e a n
hun dr ed th s

(1.79)

scored an a v er ag e mean

to note that the o b j e c t i v e of
ran ke d first by the p r a c t i c u m

score of one and se ve nt y - n i n e

on a scale w h e r e

= V e r y Uni mportant.

J u st ic e

1 = Ve r y

I m p or ta nt and 5

The h i g h e s t rank ed obj ec ti ve by

n o n - p r a c t i c u m gr ad ua t es was

s e lf -r e l i a n c e and d i r e c t i o n with

a mean score of two and t h i r t e e n o n e - h un dr ed th s

(2.13).

d if fe r e n c e b e t w e e n the two f ir st ranked o b j e c t i v e s
si xt y- si x o n e - h u n d r e d t h s

(.66), w h i c h

ferenc e of any of the o bj ec ti ve s
be t w e e n the av era ge means

is the

tested.

is only

largest d i f ­

The d i ff e r e n c e

is only tw en ty -e ig ht

The

101
on e- h un dr e d th s
the

.05

(.28)

level.

w h i c h is s t a t i s t i c a l l y

The two are ve r y simil ar

in their e v al u a t i o n

of the ob je c t i ve s of the School of Cr im i n a l
the Criminal

Table 4.25 —

N o n - p r a c t i c u m & P r a ct ic um G r a d u a t e s

1975-1981

l=Very Impo rt an t & 5=Very Unimportant)

P E R CE IV ED O B J E C TI V E S
OF THE SCH OO L

MEAN
MEAN
MEAN
MEAN
PRAC N O N - P R A C PRAC 1NON-PRAC
1975
1975
1981
1981

1. P r of es si on al P r e p a r a t i o n
1.85
2. Know le dg e of S e l f - A b il it ie s r
Values, Etc.
1.83
3. S e l f - R e l i a n c e & D i r ec ti on
2.15
4. A p p l i c a t i o n of Th eo r y
2.1.5
5. P r of es si on al Servi ce
2.30
6. D e v e l o p m e n t of an A w a re ne ss
of Social Issues
2.40
7. U n d e r s t a n d i n g & A c c e p t a n c e
of Others
2.45
MEAN A V ER AG E

Va lu e of Criminal

8a)

Ju s t i ce o f f e r i ng

J u s t i c e Practicum.

(On a scale w h e r e

8)

i n s i g n i f i c a n t at

1.96

1.80

1.79

2.40

2.13
2.40
2.25
2.13

2.29
2.17
2.08
2.83

2.20
2.13
2.47
2.80

3.06

2.67

3.53

3.06

2.67

2.93

2.29

2.36

2 .64

Ju s t i c e Cours es

B e t w e e n P ha se I and Phase II bo t h gro up s of
g r a du at es will p e r c e i v e the va lu e of the cours es
o f fe re d by the School of Cr im in al J u st ic e
s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from their initial
perceptions.
B e t w e e n Phase I and Phase II b o t h gro up s of
gr a d u a t e s will not p e r c e i v e the v a l u e of the
courses o f f e r e d by the School of Cr iminal J u s t i c e
si g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from their initial
perceptions.

102
This h y p o t h e s i s was

to be ex am i n e d to d e t e r m i n e

if gr ad ua te s

in eit he r or bo th gr ou p s ch a n g e d their o p i n i o n of the v al ue
of their co ur se w o r k
pe r i o d of time

in Cr im in al

Ju sti ce aft er

in the real w o r l d of work.

data we re a na ly ze d

spe nding a

However,

w h e n the

it was d i s c o v e r e d that the original

(Phase I) d e si gn of the study failed to obt ai n the n e c e s s a r y
data to com pl et e a test of the hypothesis.
g a t h e r e d in Phase

I

(1975)

The data

co nc e r n i n g this h yp ot he si s did

not ide nt if y any ra n k i n g or e v a l u a t i o n of the criminal
justic e co urs es by the n o n - p r a c t i c u m graduates.
gathered

in that ph as e

p r a c t i c u m g r a d ua te s
Cri mi na l

(1975)

The data

also failed to have the

c l e a r l y rank the of c o ur se s

in the 1975

Ju s t i c e c u r r i c u l u m at Mi c h i g a n State University.

W h a t was ob t a i n e d we r e da ta co nc er n i n g a ra nki ng of those
three co urs es

that the p r a c t i c u m gr ad uat es

most v a l u a b l e

to the ir practicum.

r e q u es te d to ev a l u a t e
as b ei ng valuable,
r an k i n g was

though t were

The gr ad ua te s were also

the co ur se s that they had

qu it e valua ble ,

the

identif ied

or very valuable.

The

then a c c o m p l i s h e d by as s i g n i n g a w e i g h t to each

co ur se me n t i o n e d by the graduates.

The w e i g h t was d e t e r ­

m in ed by f r e q ue n cy of me nt i o n and e v a l u a t i o n of amo un t of
value.

All

of the co u r s e s we r e m e n t i o n e d at

least once but

due to the o p e n - e n d e d n a t u r e of the item that requ es te d
co ur se

names,

the da t a o b t a i n e d could not be used to

s t a t i s t i c a l l y test the h y p o th es is.
of these data.

the

T ab le 4.26

is the resu lt

103
The data p r e s e n t e d
P ha se II

(1981)

in Ta bl e

4.26 were o b t a i n ed during

by r e q u e s t i n g that the graduates,

p r a c t i c u m and no n- pr a c t i c u m ,

both

rate each of the course s

found

in the Cr im in al J u s t i c e c u r r i c u l u m in 1975 on a scale of
from one to four w h e r e one was equal
care er and four wa s equal

Table
Phase

Times
Mentioned
8
8
7
7
6
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.

4.26 —

to very v a l u a b l e to

to no v a l u e to career.

Phase

I Cour se Ranki ng

I Co u r s e s P r a c t i c u m Studen ts C i t e d as V a l u a b l e
To Their Field E x pe ri en ce

COURSE
Number
355
375
455
368
335
392
315
318
495
475
472
225
409
110
491
440

# Total W e i g h t ed Pract.
Point va lu e 19 75-Rank

& Title

JUVENILE DELINQUENCY
C R I M I N A L LA W
ADV. J U V E N I L E D E L I N Q U E N C Y
CO R R E C T I O N S P R OCE SS
POLICE ADMINISTRATION
M ET H O D S IN C.J.
C R I M I N A L I N V E S T I G A T I ON
PO LI C E COMM. RE LA TIO NS
CRIME PREVENTION S E M .
CRIMINAL EVIDENCE
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
P O L I C E S C IE NC E LAB
G R E A T ISSUES IN C.J.
INTRO. TO C.J.
SENIOR SEMINAR
INTRO. TO H W Y . T R AFF IC

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
10
12
12
12
12
12

21
18
17
16
13
12
6
4
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1

#As d e t e r m i n e d by v o l u n t e e r e d s e l e c t i o n of v a l u a b le courses
and then rat in g the cour se on a scale of 1 = very v a l u a b l e
and 2 = q uit e v a l u a b l e and 3 = v a l u a b l e - - T i e ranks were
aw a r d e d for e q ua ll y rated courses.

The data reveal

that some

limited c o mp a r i s o n can be made of

the da t a o b t a i ne d from both pha se s of the study.

It is of

in te re s t to note that the top five ran ke d courses by the
p r a c t i c u m gr a d u a t es

in Phase

II

(1981)

were

C.J.

225,

C.J.

104
475,

C.J.

375,

C.J.

472,

and C.J.

355 and the top five

courses rank ed by the n o n - p r a c t i c u m gr ad ua te s w e r e C.J.
C.J.

375,

C.J.

318,

C.J.

Table 4.27 also reveal

495,

375,

C.J.

455,

these data reveal
groups

in Phase

315.

The data in

that the top five c o ur se s as ranked

by the p r a c t i c u m g r a d u a t e s
C.J.

and C.J.

C.J.

in Phase

I

368 and C.J.

(1975)
335.

we r e C.J.

(C.J.

top five for each group.

375 and C.J.

475)

355,

A rev ie w of

that two of the top cours es

II

475,

for both

are both in the

This w o u l d tend to suppo rt the

theory that at

least those two co u r s e s are c o n s i d e r e d to be

quite va l u a b l e

in c a re e r s

in cr im i n a l

justice.

It is of

further in te re s t to note that one of those courses
only cou rs e to be r a n k e d
ra nkings of c o ur se s
was the criminal

(Phase I and Ph as e

is all

about.

in Phase

in Phase
I.

That the course

law is the f o u n d a t i o n of wh a t criminal

the data in Table 4.27
courses

II).

three of the

law co ur s e did not shock this inves ti ga to r

inasmuch as. cr im in al
justice

in the top five in all

is the

It is also of in te r e st to note that
in di ca te

that the two bo t t o m ranked

II we r e ra nk e d n u m b e r

These da t a w o u l d

four and num be r five

seem to in dicate that the

pe rc ep ti on s of the p r a c t i c u m g r a d u a t e s did not rem ai n
con st an t d u r i ng the per io d of six y ea rs of the study
co n c e r n i n g all of the cours es

in the Cr im in al J u st ic e

C u r r i c u l u m at M i c h i g a n State Univers it y.

105
Table

4.27 —

Phase

II Cou rs e Ranking

COURSE

A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I
J.
K.
L.
M.
N.
0.
P.

.

C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.

110
225
315
318
335
355
368
375
392
409
440
455
472
475
490
495

PRACTICUM
NON-PRACTICUM
Mea n # Rank Mean
# Rank
INTRO. TO C.J.
POL IC E SC IE NCE LAB
C R I M I N A L I N V E S T I G AT IO N
POLI CE COMM. REL AT IO NS
POLI CE A D M I N I S T R A T I O N
JUVENILE DELINQUENCY
CO RR E C T I O N S P RO CE SS
C R I M I N A L LAW
ME THO DS IN C.J.
GR EAT ISSUES IN C.J.
INTRO. TO H W Y . TR AFF IC
ADV. JU V E N I L E D E L I N Q .
C R I M I N A L P R O CE DU RE
C R I M I N A L E V ID EN CE
SEN IO R SE MIN AR
CRIME P R E V E N T I O N SEM.

2.53
1.33
2.29
2.67
2.94
2.28
2.93
1.78
2.79
2.33
2.89
2.29
2.00
1.3 3
2.67
2.71

9
1
6
10
16
5
15
3
13
8
14
6
4
1
10
12

2.64
3.00
2.36
2.20
2.64
2.38
3.00
2.07
2.80
3.50
3.00
2.57
2.71
2.00
2.80
2.22

8
13
5
3
8
6
13
2
11
16
13
7
10
1
11
4

# As d e t e r m i n e d by v o l u n t e e r e d s e l ec ti on of va lu ab le
courses
and then rat in g the cou rs e on a scale of 1 = very
va lu ab le
and 2 = qui te va l u a b l e and 3 = v a l u a b l e — Tie ranks were
a wa rde d for eq u a l l y rated courses.

106
Tab le 4 . 2 8 — Phase
Ratin g

COURSE
Number

A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
L.
M.
N.
0.
P.

C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.

& Title

225
475
375
472
355
315
455
409
110
318
490
495
392
440
368
335

I & Phase

II Crimin al J u st ic e Cour se

PRACTICUM
NON-PRACTICUM
#7 5-Rank *8 1- Ran k
*8 1-Rank

POLICE SC IEN CE LAB
CR I M I N A L E V I D E N CE
CR I M I N A L L A W
CR I M I N A L PR O C E D U R E
J U VE NI LE D E L I N Q U E N C Y
C R I M I N A L INV ES TI GA TI ON
ADV. JU V E N I L E D E L I N Q U E N C Y
GR EAT ISSUES I N C . J .
INTRO. TO C.J.
POLICE COMM. RE LA TIO NS
SENIOR SE MI NA R
CRIME P R E V E N T I O N SEM.
ME THO DS IN C.J.
INTRO. TO HWY. TRAFFI C
CO RR E C T I O N S P R OC ES S .
POLICE A D M I N I S T R A T I O N

12
10
2
11
1
7
3
12
12
8
12
9
6
12
4
5

1
1
3
4
5
6
6
8
9
10
10
12
13
14
15
16

13
1
2
10
6
5
7
16
8
3
11
4
11
13
13
8

# As d e t e r m i n e d by v o l u n t e e r e d selec tio n of v a lu ab le
course s
and then rating the cour se on a scale of 1 = very
va l u a b l e
and 2 = qu ite va l u a b l e and 3 = v a l u a b l e — Tie ranks were
aw ar de d for eq ua ll y rated courses.
*

As de te r m i n e d by rating of courses listed on a scale of
1 = very va l u a b l e in ca re e r and 4 = no v al ue in career.

107

Summa ry

In this chapter,
data ga t h e r e d
presented.

a d e sc r i p t i o n of the i n f o rm at io n and

in b o t h Phase

I

(1975)

and Phase

II

(1981)

was

The r es ul ts of the r e s e a r c h que st ion s p r o p o s ed

we r e i n d i v i d u a l l y di s c u s s e d and from the data it was
c o n c l u d ed that one of the ei gh t re se a r c h hyp ot he se s could be
re je ct ed

in the null

null form,

form,

six failed to be re jected in the

and one could not be s t at is ti ca ll y tested.

C ha pt e r Five,

a su mm ar y of major findings will

and co n c l u s i o n s will
fu rt he r r e s e a r c h will

also be offered.
a lso be pres en te d

In

be presented,

Recommendations

for

C H AP T E R V
SU MM AR Y AND C O N CL US IO NS
Summar y
This
Criminal

study sou gh t to explor e the e x pe r i e n c e s

Ju sti ce studen t s at Mi c h i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y

c o n c e r n i n g the va lue of the ex pe ri e nt ia l
of the School of Cr iminal
University.

e d u c a t i o n pr o g r a m

Justic e at M i c h i g a n State

The study descr ibe s the effec ts

on the gr ad uat es
caree r

of the

stability,

study exa mi ne d

in terms of a)
c)

of the p r o g r a m

care er dev el op me nt ,

ag ency shock and d)

bu rn-out.

b)
The

field ex pe rie nce s and wor k e x p e r i e n c e s

order to d e sc ri be the impact of those e x p e r ie nt ia l
op po rt u n i t i e s on graduates'

careers.

State Un iv e r s i t y w h o p a r t i ci pa te d

St ud en ts

in

e d u c at io n

of M i c h i g a n

in a field e x p e r i e n c e

of fe re d dur in g Spri ng Term 1975 ent it le d Cri min al

Ju sti ce

P r a c t i c u m wer e com pa re d to students w ho did not p a r t i c i p a t e
on the basis of car ee r stability,
shock,

car ee r op por tun ity ,

agency

and burn-out.
S pe c i f i c a l l y this study i n v e s ti ga te d and at t e m p t e d

to

identify:
1)

The goals and ob jec tiv es held by the School of
Crimina l Ju st ic e facult y for the Cri mi na l Ju st ic e
Pr ac ti cu m in 1975.

2)

The exte nt to which field st udy e x p e r i e n c e s were
co ns i d e r e d an impo rta nt par t of the c u r r i c u l u m of
the School of Criminal Ju st ic e by the Fa cu l t y in
1975.

108

109
3)

Those po li c ie s or a c ti vi t i e s on the part of the
School of Cri m i n al J u st i c e and its fa c u l t y which,
in the op in i o n of the students, pr ove su ppo rti ng or
i nhi bi tin g to p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the pr a c t i c u m
p ro g r a m in 1975.

4)

The goals and o b j e c t i v e s held by studen ts in the
school of Cr iminal J u st i c e for the pr a c t i c u m
ex pe r i e n ce and their p e r c e p t i o n of the v a l u e of
those goals and o b j e c t i v e s after a p e r i o d of six
years of w o r k in the Criminal J u s t i c e system.

5)

Those areas of c u r r i c u l u m found most v a l u a b l e by
the student in their field e x p e r i e n c e and their
pe r c e p t i o n of those areas six years after
graduation.

6)

The length time after g r a d u a t i o n 1975 criminal
justice g r a d u a t e s found e m p l o y m e n t in the criminal
justice system.

7)

The length of time 1975 criminal justice grad ua tes
re ma in ed r e m a i n e d in their first position.

8)

The st a b i l it y of e m p l o y m e n t in the criminal
justice sy st e m e x p e r i e n c e d by 1975 criminal
justice gradu ates.

9)

The am o u n t of a g e n c y shock e n c o u n t e r e d by
gr a d u at es upon e n t e r i n g their first employment.

The L i t e r a t u r e Rev ie we d
Du ri n g the d e v e l o p m e n t of the rev ie w of the

literature

nu me ro us books and ar ti c l e s on the subjec t of ex pe rie nti al
ed u c a t i o n we re reviewed.
ex pe ri en ti al

ed u c at io n

to the traditi on al
education.

Th os e revie ws r e v e a l ed that

is still

in its i n fa nc y wh e n compar ed

t e a c h e r - s t u d e n t - t e x t tr ic h o t o m y model

E x p e r i e n ti a l

e d u c a t i o n was first

in tro duc ed

high er ed u c a t i o n in this c o u n t r y in a p p r o x i m a t e l y
the U n i v e r s i t y of C i n c i n a t t i
its in troduction,
enhanced,

in

1906 at

(Wilson and L y o n s , 1961).

e xp e r i e n t i a l

of

Since

e d u c a t i o n has be e n modified,

and revised by the many co lleges and u n i v e r s it ie s

110
that have emp lo ye d it.

As a res ul t of these many a p p l i ­

catio ns of exp eri en ti al

education,

r e s e a r c h has b e g u n to

ide nti fy those ele men ts n e c e s s a r y for a su cc e s s f u l
Sp ecifically,

a successful

state in ins tru cti on al

terms the p r o g r a m and

arrang e and m o ni tor placements,
placement,
(Davis,

assess

Duley,

p r o g r a m shoul d

stude nt

and Alexander,

ide nt if y and

learn er goals,

prepare students

learning,

and ev a l u a t e

1977).

The

program.

for
the p r o g r a m

su cce ss

of

experi ent ial

p ro gr am s rests h e a v i l y on the s h o u l d e r s

coordinator,

who is the k e ys to ne of the program.

of the

The

c oo rd in a t o r ' s p o si ti on must be more than a du t y ad de d to
some facult y mem ber 's wor k

load.

The fa cu lt y m e m b e r must be

kn o w l e d g e a b l e of ag enc ie s and the t h e o r i e s
e d u c at io n as well

as a be l i e v e r

of e x p e r i e n t i a l

in the c o n c e p t of such

education.
The li ter atu re cl ear ly de m o n s t r a t e s
va lue

in ex pe ri en t ia l

literature,

education.

exp eri en ti al

enhan ce c l a s s r o o m

that th er e

is

A c c o r d i n g to the

e d u c a t i o n does,

as a m i n i m u m

learning and it c e r t a i n l y as si st s

students

in care er decisions.
Des ign of the Study Re v i e w e d
The natu re of this
d e s cr ip ti ve

in nature.

study was

long it ud in al

It was c o n d u c t e d

Phase

I was c o n d uc te d

Phase

II was co nd uc te d in 1981 during

It uti li ze d
twe nty

in two phases:

in 1975 d u r i n g the Sp ri n g Quarter,

library research,

interviews

and

the Spring Quarter.

five sur ve y inst ru men ts ,

to gather the data.

and

and

The source s of data

Ill
included the c u r r e n t and h i st or ic al
subje ct of e x p e r i e n t i a l
U n i v e r s i t y School
gr ad uat es

of Cri mi nal

of the School

State Universi ty.
comparison.
cri minal

education,

J u s t i c e faculty,

Three

The ex p e r i m e n t a l

ju sti ce s t ud en ts

Ju st i c e at M i c h i g a n

g ro up co n s i s t e d of all

that p a r t i c i p a t e d

in a criminal

(Phase II,

of sixty 1975 cri min al

g ra dua tes w ho had not p a r t i c i p a t e d

1981)

was a

justice

in the Cri mi na l

Pr a c t i c u m d u r i n g t h e i r u n d e r g r a d u a t e Cri min al
pr og r a m wh il e

(Phase I,

sample of fifty 1975 criminal

The second g r o u p

sam pl e

The control

The fir st gr ou p

stu den ts w h o had not p a r t i c i p a t e d

r an d o m l y dr aw n

thirty

in the Criminal

Spring Te rm 1975.

was a r a n d o m l y dr awn

justice practic um.

and the 1975

samples we r e u t i l i z e d for

gro up was a c t u a l l y two groups:

justice

the en ti r e M i c h i g a n State

of Cri min al

Ju sti ce P r a c t i c u m du ri n g

1975)

li ter atu re on the

Justic e

Ju sti ce

at M i c h i g a n State University.

The st at i s t i c a l

tr ea tm en t used was

q u e s i o n n a i r e s we r e c o m p u t e d and scored,
p ro ce du re s w e r e d e r i v e d from In tr os ta t

the t-ratio.

The

and stat ist ica l
2.1 for App le

][

computers.

S u m m a r y of Fin din gs
The re su lt s
stu dents hold

of Ph ase

several

I

(1975)

seem to ind ica te

goals and ob je ct iv es

their field exp er ie nc es .

to be basic to

Those goals and ob je c t i v e s

an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the real w or ld

that

si tu at io n

include

in the criminal

justi ce system,

l e ar ni ng skills n e c e s s a r y to deal with

agen cy clients,

and rea chi ng

a d e c i s i o n c o n c e r n i n g a career

112
in the criminal

justice system.

These goals and ob je ct iv es

w e r e ve ry similar to those he l d by the Criminal
Fa cul ty

for the students.

and o b j ec ti v e s

Spe cifically,

for the students w e r e

the fa cul ty goals

1) To p ro vid e the

s t ud en t w i t h an o p p o r t u n i t y to o b se rv e and wo r k
w o r l d of criminal

J u st ic e

in the real

justic e and apply the theory from the

c l a s s r o o m to those

situ ations;

w i t h an o p p o r t u n i t y

to observe,

2)

To provi de the student

meet,

and wo r k wi t h criminal

justice p r a c t i t i o n e r s and to come to a de ci s i o n about a
care er

in the criminal

justice system.

and 3)

To help the

stude nt d ev e l o p an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the d y s f u n c t i o n of the
cr imi nal

justic e system.

The result s from Phase
were

several

factors

I also d e m o n s t r a t e d that there

factor s that infl ue nce

include the faculty,

the students,

and the p a r t i c i p a t i n g agencies.
exerted

the practicum.

Those

the c u r r i c u l u m

Each of these factors

some infl ue nc e on the ef fe ct i v e n e s s

of the op er at io n

of the practicum.
In Phase

II

(1981)

q u e s t i o n s pr op o se d w e r e

the resul ts of the re se ar ch
i n d i v i d u a l l y di s c u s s e d and from the

data it was co nc lu d ed that one of the eight re se a r c h
h y p o t h e s e s c o u l d be re je ct ed
be a c c e pt ed

in the null

st a t i s t i c a l l y tested.

in the null

form,

six could not

for m,a nd one could not be
The s t at is tic used to test

113
e x p e r i m en ta l

h yp ot h es es was

the T-ratio.

B e l o w are the

r e s e a r c h h y p o t h es es w i t h an e x p l a n a t i o n of why the
h y p o t h e s i s wa s
an al y s i s

se le ct ed for study and the re s u l t of the

of the data.
Hy p o t h e s i s

1

The e x p e r i m e n t a l su bjects will pe rc ei ve that they
e n c o u n t e r e d less a g e n c y shock upon en te ri ng into
a cr iminal justi ce ag e n c y t h an .c on tr ol subjects
p e r c e i v e d they e n c o u n t e r e d up o n their entry into a
cr im in al justice agency.
This h y p o t h e s i s was p r o p o s e d
valu es

of e x p e r i e n t i a l

have w o r k e d

to test one of the assum ed

learning;

that is,

that students who

in real w or ld a g e n c y will be better pr ep ar ed to

deal w i t h the e n v i r o n m e n t of the real world of work.
data did not su p p o r t this h y p o t h e s i s at the

Hypothesis

.05

The

level.

2

The e x p e r i m e n t a l su bjects will e xp er ie nc e less
b u r n - o u t than c o nt ro l subjects ex pe r i e n c e in their
cr iminal justi ce career.
This hy po t h e s i s was p r o p o s e d be c a u s e expe ri men ta l

learning

is many times a c c l a i m e d as an e x c e l l e n t method of career
ex plo ration.

The data also failed to support this

hy po t h e s i s at the

.05

level of significance.

H y po t h e s i s

3

There is a si gn i f i c a n t d i f f e r e nc e b e tw e e n the
e x p e r i m e n t a l su bjects and the control subjects in
the length of time ta ke n to find criminal justice
e mp lo y m e n t after graduation.
This hy po t h e s i s was
who participate

i n v e s t i g a t e d to d e t er mi ne

in a cr im in al

learn the procedur es ,

if students

justice p r a c t i c u m su ff iciently

processes,

and sources

for finding

114
emp lo ym en t

in the cr imi nal

justice system so as to give them

an ad va nt ag e over t hei r c o n t e m p o r a ri es wh o did not have a
similar op po rtunity.

This hy po th es is was

was su pp or t ed by the data at the

the only one that

.05 level of significance.

Hy po th es is

4

There are sig ni fi ca nt di ff ere nce s b e t w e e n the
e x p e r i m e nt a l subjects' and the contr ol subjects'
st ab il i ty in their Criminal J u s t i c e careers.
This hy po t h e s i s was

i n ve st ig at ed

if a st ud ent 's ex pos u re

in an a t t e m p t

to a criminal

to d e t e r m i n e

justice a g e n c y or

age ncies enables h i m or her to select the c o rr ec t a g en cy for
based on p e r s o n a l i t y and ex pe r i e n c e
failed to suppor t this h y po th es is at

in the system.

The data

.05 level of

significance.
Hy po th es is

5

B et we e n P has e I and Phase II the control subjects'
will s i g n i f i c a n t l y change their p e r c e p t i o n of the
ob je ct ive s of the School of Cri min al Ju st ic e for
of fer in g the Criminal Justi ce Practicum.
This h yp ot h e s i s was

in v e st i g a t ed

in an at te m p t to ide nt if y

if after a real w o r l d wo r k ex pe r i e n c e gr ad ua te s w ho did not
p a r t i c i pa te

in an exp er i en ti al

their p e r ce pt io ns of the v al ue
programs.

ed uc at io n pr og r a m ch ang ed
for ex pe ri e n t i a l

education

The data also failed to support this hyp othesis.

Hy po th es is

6

B e t w e e n Phase I and Phase II the e x p e r i m e n t a l
subjects will si gn i f ic an tl y change their
p e r c e p t i o n s of the object ive s of the School of
C rimi nal J us ti ce for off eri ng the Cri min al Ju st i c e
Practicum.

115
This h yp ot h es is was

i n v e s t i g a t e d to reveal

wo rld wo r k experience,
ex pe rie nti al

education

of exp er i e nt i a l

if after a real

gr a d u at es wh o did p a r t i c i p a t e
p r o g r a m we r e p e rc e p t i v e of

ed u c a t i o n d i f f e r e n t l y so as to

w h o did not p a r t i c i p a t e in

ex pe rie nti al

program.

support this hy po t h e s i s at the

.05

the value

be

a li gne d w i t h g r a d u a t e s
education

in an

more
an

The data also failed to
level of significance.

H y po th e s i s

7

There are s ig n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n the
e xp er i me nt a l subjec ts and the control subjects
p e r c e p t i o n of the School of Cr iminal J u st ic e for
of fe r i ng the Cr iminal Ju st ic e P r a c t ic um duri ng
Phase II.
This h y p o t he s is was
years

i nv es ti ga te d to de te rm in e

of a f u l l - t i m e w o r k experience,

participated

in an e x p e r i e n t i a l

if after six

gr a d u at es who

learning p r o g r a m p e r ce iv ed

of the v al ue of that e x pe r i e n c e d i f f e r e n t l y from those
grad ua te s wh o did not p a r t i c i p a t e

in such program.

also fai led to su ppo rt this h y po t h e s i s at

.05

The data

level of

significance.
H y po t h e s i s

8

B et w e e n Ph as e I and Phase II, b o t h groups of
gr a d u a t es will p e r c e i ve the va lu e of the courses
of f e r e d by the School of Cr iminal Justi ce
s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from their initial
perceptions.

This h yp ot h e s i s was e x a m i n e d to de t e r m i n e

if gr ad uat es

in

either or bo t h gro ups cha ng e their op in ion s of the va lu e of
their cour se wo rk

in Cri minal

Ju sti ce after spe ndi ng a

116
per io d of time in the real w o r l d of work.

Ho wever,

this

hy po th es is could not be te st e d b e ca u s e of the fact that
several vital c o m po ne n ts
duri ng Phase I

of the data w e r e not g a t h e r e d

(1975) .
C o nc l u s i o n s

Based on the fi nd ing s of the study,

the fo l l o w i n g

con cl us io ns may be drawn:
1.

Based on the data g a t h e r e d c o n c e r n i n g all but one
of the r e s e a r c h h y p o t h e s e s
literature,

the Cr iminal

need some m o d i f i c a t i o n s
effe cti ve

in at ta in in g

and the r e v i e w of the

J u s t i c e P r a c t i c u m may
to be co m e

the most be ne f i c i a l

The m o d i f i c a t i o n s m i g h t include:
increase the k n o w l e d g e

a)

training,

b)

result.

An a t t e m p t to

of the cr im i n a l

facult y c o n c e r n i n g the Cr im i n al
through in s e rv ic e

to tal ly

justice

Ju st i c e P r a c t i c u m
An a t te m p t to

increase the a m o u n t and a c c u r a c y of p u b l i c i t y
c on ce rn i ng the Cr im in al
criminal

Ju st i c e P r a c t i c u m pro vi de d

j us ti ce u n d e r g r a d u a t e

so phomore and junior years,

stu de nt s

and c)

in their

Consideration

of c h a n g in g the met ho d of se l e c t i n g the P r a c t i c u m
Coordinator.
2.

Based on the raw data,
well be correct.

the r e s e a r c h h y p o t h e s e s

may

A r e vi e w of the da t a in dicates

that the me an scores of the

items e m p l o y e d to

measu re the e f fe ct of the p r a c t i c u m all
the p r e d i c t ed direction.

However,

lean in

the d i f f e r e n ce s

we r e not

large eno ug h to be s t a t i s t i c a l l y

s i g n i f i c a n t at the
size of the

.05

level of si gni fic anc e.

The

sample and the na tu r e of the

s e l f - s e l e c t i o n p r oc es s may have had a ne ga t i ve
re su l t on the data used to test the hypotheses.
If the stu dy had be e n c o n d u c t e d over an entire
ac a d e m i c year,

the res ul t may ve r y well

s u p p o r t e d the r e s e a r c h hyp ot he se s.

If the study

had be e n over an ent ir e aca de mi c year,
would have

inc lud ed all

participated

the st ud en ts

in the Crimina l

the ent ir e year as well
g r a d u a t i n g class

have

the sample

that

Ju st i c e P r a c t i c u m for

as all

for that year.

the m e m b e r s

of the

The res ul t of

such a st udy might ver y well d e m o n s t r a t e that the
Cr im in al

Ju s t i c e P r a c t i c u m at M i c h i g a n State

U n i v e r s i t y does pr ov id e the va l u a b l e out comes
sta ted

in the

literature.

B as ed on the data,

the p r a c t i c u m may in fact have

little or no aca dem ic va lu e
w i t h i n a six year period.

that is me as ur ab le
The v al ue of the

p r a c t i c u m may not be ap p a r e n t until
fi ft e e n yea rs
gr ad ua ti on .

or some

ten years,

longer pe ri o d of time after

The trends that ap p e a r e d

in the data

ma y d r a m a t i c a l l y inc rea se over a longer per io d of
time.

Thus,

if the study could be r ep ea te d at the

en d of twe lv e or fi ft ee n years
ve ry well

the di ff e r e n c e s

be s t a t i s t i c a l l y significant.

may

118
4.

The data ob ta i n ed from this study may not have
a dd re sse d the areas
the co rr ec t manner.

studi ed in en ou g h d e p t h or in
The ou t- co me may be

i n co rr ect

as a res ul t of not as k i n g the right questions.
P os si bl y a more d e t a i l e d and indep th s tu dy w o ul d
have de ve lo p e d data that w o u l d have s u p p o r t e d the
re se ar ch hypo theses.

Imp lications
From the fin dings and c o nc l u s i o n s
areas of im pli cat ion s

seem apparent:

i mp lic ati ons

for the p r a c t i c u m itself;

imp lic at i on s

for further research.

of this

first,

study,

two

those

and secondly,

those

It may be implied that the p r a c t i c u m may ve r y well
b en e f i t from some m o d if ic a t i o n s w h i c h m ig ht e n h a n c e
aca dem ic va lue of the practicum.
co nc er n the faculty,
course,

the

the

Those m o di fi c a t i o n s

litera tur e used to a d v e r t i s e

the P r a c t i c u m Program,

the

and the P r a c t ic um

Coordinator.
The F ac ult y can be one of the most i m p o r t a n t factors
in the success of a field e x pe r i e n c e program.
pr omo te and support the program,

they must fully u n d e r s t a n d

w h a t the pr og ra m is and d o es ,a nd wh a t
it.

This knowledge,

is nee de d

as r e f l e c t e d in the data,

appe ar to have been d ev el op ed

In o rd er to

in the faculty.

s u g g e st io ns may a c c om p l i s h those ends:

to improve
does not
The fo l l o w i ng

119
1)

All fa cul ty members should be g i v e n a copy of the
c u r r e n t P r a c t i c u m St ud e n t Ha n d b o o k and
re q u e s t e d to r e s p o n d w i t h an e v al u a t i o n of the
c o nt en t s of that volume.

2)

All n e w f ac ul t y m e mbe rs should be in te rvi ewe d by
the P r a c t i c u m C o o r d i n a t o r w i t h the goal of
d e v e l o p i n g an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of ex pe riential
e d u c a t i o n in the new fa c u l t y mem be r and to seek
n e w and in no va ti ve ideas for the p r a c t i c u m from
them.

3)

At least once annually, the Criminal Justice
P r a c t i c u m should be pl a c e d on the agenda of the
School of Cr iminal J u s t i c e A d v i s o r y Co m m i t t e e for
the pu r p o s e of d i s c u s s i n g the d i r e c t i o n and value
of the program.

The

l i te ra tu re used to a d v e r t i s e the pr a c t i c u m can

pl a y a key role in a st udent's d e c i s i o n to p a r t i c i p a t e
the practi cu m.

Thus,

it is i m p o r t a n t that the

used and p r o d u c e d by the School

of Cr iminal

in

literature

Justi ce and the

U n i v e r s i t y r e f l e c t a c c u r a t e l y the r e q u i r e m e n t s and
expectations
all po t e n t i a l

of the p r o g r a m and that it be d i s t ri bu te d
participants

are s u g g e s t i o n s

in the program.

to

The following

for a c c o m p l i s h i n g those ends:

1)

All l i te ra tu re c u r r e n t l y in print p er ta in in g to
the p r a c t i c u m should be r e v i e w e d and re written
w h e r e n e c e s s a r y to insure a c c u r a c y of the
r e q u i r e m e n t s and the c o n c e p t of the program.

2)

A po li c y should be e s t a b l i s h e d w h i c h would require
that all new Cr iminal J u s t i c e st ud en ts be given
all ma te ri al p e r t i n e n t to the p r o g r a m by the
a c a d e m i c advisor.
The a dv is or should also be
r e q u i r e d to r e v i e w that ma te ria l w i t h the student.

3)

An annual r e v i e w of the p e r t i n e n t literature
shou ld be c o n d u c t e d by the P r a c t i c u m Co o r d i n a t o r
to insure c o m p l e t e n e s s and accuracy.

120
The P r a c t i cu m P ro gr am itself may be in need of some
review.

Such a re v i e w could

q u e s t i o n s w h i c h might

include asking several

re le v a n t

include:

a.

Shou ld the course be more than one term in d u r a t i o n
for some p la ce me nt s?

b.

Sh ou l d the course be gra de d in some
oth er manner?

c.

Sho ul d students be a l low ed to enroll in
the p r a c t i c u m duri ng their last term in the
Cr iminal J u st ic e Progra m?

d. H o w does the p r a c t i c u m fit into the p r e s e n t
cu r r i c u lu m?

These q u e s t i o n s

are all d i f f i c u l t to answer.

The data

pr o v i d e d by this study does not an sw e r several

of them.

M a n y of them are ad dr es se d in the

It w o u l d

literature.

to a p pe ar that they do need to be ad dr ess ed

re gu lar ly

seem

if the

P r a c t i c u m is be an impo rt an t and e f f ec ti ve part of the
Cr imi nal

Ju s t ic e Curriculum.

A c c o r d i n g to the

literature,

ke y s t o n e of any successful

the co o r d i n a t o r

ex pe ri e nt ia l

is the

edu ca ti on program.

The p o s i t i o n must be a stable one and the a s s i g n m e n t must be
one that

is vie we d by the facult y as a de si rab le position.

In or der

to c oo rd in at e the pr ogr am e f f ic ie nt ly and properly,

the c o o r d i n a t o r d e s i gn a t i on must not be t e mp or ary or an
o v er lo ad assignment.
pe rs o n w h o t b el ie ve s
enthusiastic

The po s i t i o n must be filled by a
in e x pe ri ent ia l

education,

about this type of education,

one w h o is

one wh o can

c o m m u n i c a t e well w i t h all areas of student p l a c e m e n t and one
who

is a d i p l o m a t w ho can massa ge and d e ve lo p r e la ti ons

121
with

local age nci es

(Styles and Pace,
a program.

and c o m m u n i c a t e well w i t h students

1969).

•

The c o o r d i n a t o r can make or break

If the p r a c t i c u m is to be a strong and va lu a b l e

part of the Cr im i n a l

Ju s t i ce Cur riculum,

consideration

should be g i v e n to the f o l l o w i n g s u g g es ti on s

for a c c o m ­

pl is hi ng those ends:
1)

The c o o r d i n a t o r should understand, be e n t h u s i a s t i c
about, and b e li ev e in exp er ie nt ia l te chn igu es of
education.

2)

The c o o r d i n a t o r ' s p o s i t i o n should be filled by a
fa c u l t y p e r s o n that is not on te m p o r a r y
assignment.

3)

The School of Cr iminal Ju st ic e should e x plo re the
p o s s i b i l i t y of r e q u i r i n g the p o s i t i o n be fil le d by
a fa c u lt y member w i t h the rank of A s s oc ia te
P r o f e s s o r or hig he r on a tenure track.

4)

The p o s i t i o n of c o o r d i n a t o r should be filled by a
p e r s o n k n o w l e d g e a b l e of all areas of criminal
justice.

5)

The c o o r d i n a t o r should make pe ri od ic vi si t s to all
ag en c ie s to insure that the agencie s and students
are w o r k i n g well to ge th er and that no pr ob le ms are
b ei ng en counte red.

It may be impli ed that f u rth er re se ar ch needs
done in this area.

Several

app r o p r ia te at this point.
rep l i c a ti on of this

su g ge st io ns
Th ose

to be

seem to be

su gg est io ns

include a) A

study over the course of an entir e year

to include all p r a c t i c u m st udents and the ent ir e g ra du at in g
class for the year b)

A study of the students that ch os e to

take c er ta in e l e c t i v e cours es c o m p a r e d to st udents w ho did
not take that cou rs e to see if other course s had an impact
on the areas

s tud ie d in this

study of the Cri min al

study and c)

Ju sti ce Practicum.

An e t h n o g r a p h i c
A r e pl i c a t i o n of

122

this study over the course of an e n t i r e year may v e r y well
de m o n s t r a t e that the p r a c t i c u m g r a d u a t e s do,
ex pe ri en ce

less ag en c y shock and

more stable caree rs

in cr iminal

in fact,

less burn-out,
justice.

and have

The da t a from this

study may ve r y well be the o u t - c o m e of a un i q u e g r o u p of
students

in the 1975-76 g r a d u a t i n g class.

It may no t be

r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the who le p r a c t i c u m class of 1975-76.
A study of the effect of ot he r e l e c t i v e c l as se s
Criminal

Ju s t i c e C u r r i c u l u m on a g e n c y

career st a b i l i t y similar to this
courses

shock,

this study and not the students'
practicum.

burn -o ut ,

s tu dy may reveal

in the c u r r i c u l u m cau se d the resul ts

in the

that other

obtained

participation

and

in

in the

The ou t- c o m e m ig ht al s o d e m o n s t r a t e

that the

co m b i n a t i o n of the p r a c t i c u m and o th er c o ur se s had a g r ea te r
impact on the g r a du at es than just the practicum.
An e t h n o g r a p h i c

study may p r o v i d e g r e a t e r

i n si gh t

the true impact of the p r a c t i c u m than the p r e s e n t

into

study.

Due to the indep th and inten se n a t u r e of such a study the
impact of a p r a c t i c u m on g r a d u a t e s m i g h t be be tt e r
id entified and u n d e r s t o o d as a result.
S u mm ar y
Becau se of the compl ex n a t u r e
this

study,

obtained.

few s t a t i s t i c a l l y

in

s i g n i f i c a n t ou tc o m e s w e r e

The r e su lt s we r e e n c o u r a g i n g to this i n v e s t i g a t o r

but we r e not conclusive.
with all

of the areas r e v i e w e d

of its

further re se a r c h

It is h o p e d

that this r e s e a r c h

limitations has c r e a t e d a f oo ti ng
in this area.

Th er e

for

is c e r t a i n l y a vo i d

in

123

the

literature on e x p e r i e n t i a l

criminal

justice.

ed u c a t i o n in the area of

The d e s i r e of this

this wor k has b eg un to fill

inv est ig at or

that void,

fol low who will c o m p l e t e l y fill

it.

is that

and that others will

To f u rth er that end,

copy of this d i s s e r t a t i o n will be giv en to the School
Criminal Ju st i c e at M i c h i g a n St at e U n i v er si ty
that Cr imi na l

J us t i c e

outcomes obtained.

of

in the hope

s t u d e n t s will b e ne f i t from the

a

APP E N D IX A
PRE-PRACTICUM QUESTIONNAIRE

124
SC HO O L OF C R I M I N A L J U ST IC E
Co ll eg e of Social Sc ie n ce
M i c h i g a n S ta te U n i v e r s i t y
Ea st Lansing, M i c h i g a n

PRACTICUM QUESTIONNAIRE
1. W h a t is your na me? ________________________
2. Wh a t

is yo u r ar e a of in te res t in Criminal

3. Wh a t

is your a p p r o x i m a t e G.P.A.

Ju stice?

in Cr im ina l

J u s t i c e? __

All c o u r s e w o r k at M . S . U . ? ____________
4. W h a t kind of fi el d study e x p e r i e n c e s we r e av ai lab le
you?

5.

W h y did y o u c h o o s e

6.

H o w di d you f i r s t find out a bo ut the o p p o r t u n i t y of
e n r o l l i n g for the C .J P r a c t i c u m ?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

7.

to

the one y o u did?

Literature
F a c ul t y (if fa cu lty w h o ? ________________________________ )
Peers
Ch an c e
Ot her (Please ex p l a in if known)

W h e n di d you f i r st find out about the o p p o r t u n i t y of
e n r o l l i n g in the C.J. P ra ct ic um ?
1. Prior to e n r o l l i n g at M.S.U.
2.
Du r i n g you r F r e s h m an or So ph omo re
3.
D u r i n g yo u r Ju ni or Year.
4.
D u r i n g your Sen io r Year.

Year.

125
8.

W h i c h of the
the following, if any, p r e s e n t e d pr oblems
for you in c h o o s i n g or in p a r t i c i p a t i n g in your field
study e x p e r i e nc e?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Cost
Distance
C r e d i t hours (Too few for time expended).
L i m i t e d opp or tu ni ti es .
Red tape (arrangements, etc.).
E x p e c t a t i o n s of the faculty.

9. Have the o b j e c t i v e s of the C.J.
to you?

P r a c t i c u m be e n made clear

1. Yes
2. No

10. W h a t are the School of Criminal J u s ti ce 's objec ti ves
o f f e r i n g the C.J. P r a c t i c u m as you see them?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
11.

in

Pr of es s i o n a l preparation.
P r o f e s s i o n a l service.
S e l f - r e l i a n c e and s e l f - d i r e c t i o n
K n o w l e d g e of s e l f - a b i l i t i e s , values, etc.
U n d e r s t a n d i n g and ac ce p t a n c e of others.
A p p l i c a t i o n of theory to practical situa ti on s
D e v e l o p m e n t of a w a re ne ss of social issues.
Other.
N o t re a l l y sure.

Do you think most C.J. students are aw ar e of the
p o s s i b i l i t y to enroll in the Criminal J us ti ce P ra ct ic um?
1. Yes
2. No

12.

Do you think the e n v i r o n m e n t here (faculty attitudes,
etc.) a f f e c t the pr ac ti ce of field study?
1. P o s i t i v e l y
2. N e g a t i v e l y

13.

Li s t all those a c c o m p l i s h m e n t s you plan to a t tem pt to
complete, d u r i n g your placement, e.g. le arning skills X
and Y, ac q u i r e kn o w l e d g e about X and Y, etc.

APPENDIX B
POST-PRACTICUM QUESTIONNAIRE

126
S C HO OL OF C R I M I N A L JUSTI CE
Co ll eg e of Social Scien ce
M i c h i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y
Eas t Lansing, M i c h i g a n

June 3,

1975

Dea r P r a c t i c u m S t u d e n t
Fi rs t let me c o n g r a t u l a t e yo u on your c o m p l e t i o n of your
p r a c t i c u m placem en t. I hope that it was a f u l f i l l i n g
ex p e r i e n c e for you and that you found it chall en gin g.
The p u r p o s e of this letter is to send you a p o s t - p r a c t i c u m
q u e s t i o n n a i r e w h i c h will enable us to be t t e r e v a l u a t e the
f u n c t i o n of the p r a c t i c u m so that future p l a c e m e n t s can be
made even more meaningful.
Pl e a s e find the en cl o s e d q u e s t i o n n a i r e and take a few
m i nu te s to fill it out. Your c o o p e r a t i o n is g r e a t l y
a p p r e c i a t e d in this matter. Thank you for taki ng a few
m in ut es out of your busy sc hedule to do this favor for me!
S i n c e r e l y yours,

C l a r e n c e R. Terrill
A s s i s t a n t P r a c t i c u m Co o r d i n a t o r

CT:

sd

.127
PRACTICUM QUESTIONNAIRE

Imagine that you are just sta rt in g your p r a c t i c u m and answer
the f o l lo wi ng questions.
1.
W h i ch of the f o l l o w i n g p r e s e n t e d pr ob le ms for you in
ch oo s i n g to p a r t i c i p a t e in your field study experience.
(Rate each item on a scale w h e r e 1 = Ve r y impo rt an t and 5 =
Very unimportant)
ci • Cost

b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
gh.
i.

Dis tance
Cre d i t hours (Too few for time expended)
Limit ed o p p or tu n i t i e s
Red tape (arrangements, etc.)
Time (conflict w i t h pa rt -t im e job)
Time (conflict w i t h other cour se work)
E x p e c t at io n s of the facult y
Other please s pe ci fy

1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.

2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.

3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.

4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.

5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5
5

2 . Wh a t are the School of Cr im in al Ju s ti ce 's object i ve s in
o f f e r i n g a P r a c t i c u m as you see them. (Rate each item on a
scale where 1 = V e r y i m p or ta nt and 5 = V e r y unimportant)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

Prof ess ion al p r e p a r a t i o n
Profe ssi on al s er vic e
S e lf -r e l ia nc e and s e l f - d i r e c t i o n
Knowl edg e of se lf -a bil iti es, values, etc.
U n de rs ta nd in g and ac ce pt a n c e of others
Ap pl i c a t i o n of t h eo ry to pract ica l
situations
g- De ve l o p m e n t of a w a r en es s of social issues
h . Other
i . Not real ly sure

1.
1.
1.
1.
1.

2.
2.
2.
2.
2.

3.
3.
3.
3.
3.

4.
4.
4.
4.
4.

5
5
5
5
5

1.
1.
1.
1.

2.
2.
2.
2.

3.
3.
3.
3.

4.
4.
4.
4.

5
5
5
5

3 . Rate each of the f o l l ow in g as they affect the C. J .
P r a c t i c u m here at M.S.U. (Rate each item on a scale where
1 - Neg at iv e and 2 = No affe ct and 3 = P o s i t i v e ) .
a . C.J. Fa cul ty at t i t u d e s
b. C.J. Cur ri cu lu m
c . The instruct ion al e n v i r o n m e n t

4. Name

5. Age nc y or Age nc ie s you were p l ac ed with:

1. 2. 3
1. 2. 3.
1. 2. 3

128

6. Credits E n r ol le d

7. Lis t up to
your field
your field
V a lu ab le &

for in the C.J.

Practicum

five cours es that you feel w e r e v a l u a b l e in
e xp er i e n c e and rate th e m on their v a l u e in
experience . (1 = Ve r y V a l u a b l e 2 = Qu it e
3 = Valuable)

a.

1.

2.

3.

b.

1.

2.

3.

c.

1.

2.

3.

d.

1.

2.

3.

e.

1.

2.

3.

8. List those areas of your prior c l a s s r o o m e d u c a t i o n wh ic h
you feel were deficient, wh ic h i f ,r e c t i f i e d , wo ul d have
en abl e d you to have a more s uc ces sf ul p r a c t i c u m placement.
GE NE R A L CURRICULUM:

SP ECIF IC COURSES:

9. Rate your a c c o m p l i s h m e n t of the goals listed below,
1 = total a c c o m p l i s h m e n t and 5 = no ac co m p l i s h me nt .
a. Learn skills
c 1i e n t s :
1.

2.

3.

4.

whe re

as so ci a t e d wi t h the h a n d l i n g of age nc y

5.

b. De vel op an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of ag e nc y functions:
1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

c. Ena ble you to reach a d e c i s i o n for p o s s i b i l i t y of w o r k i n g
in that area of C.J.:
1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

d. Le arn the duties
1

.

2

.

3

.

4

.

5

.

of ce rta in age nc y personnel:

129
e. E x p e r i e n c e do in g age nc y dut ie s on your own:
1.

2*

3.

4.

5.

f. D e v e l o p an u n d e r s t a n d i n g for the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of agency
functions:
1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

g. L e a r n ho w c l ie nts
1.
h.

2.

3.

4.

actually

flow t h ro ug h the C.J.

System:

5.

D e v e l o p an u n d e r s t a n d i n g for the at ti tu de s and
p hi l o s o p h i e s of pers on ne l in the C.J. System:
1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

i. C o m p a r e o b s e r v a t i o n s w i t h your c l a s s r o o m study:
1.

2.

3.

j. De ve lo p
1.

k.

2.

4.

5.

In te rv ie w in g

3.

4.

5.

Bec om e aware of the al te rn at iv es
c l ie nt problems:
1.

2.

3.

4.

1.

2.

3.

4.

av ai lab le

in han dling

5.

1. De v e l o p c o u n s e l l i n g

m.

techniques.

techniques:

5.

De v e l o p an u n d e r s t a n d i n g for the overall r e l a t i o n s hi p of
the d i f f e r e n t a g e n c i e s in the C.J. System;
1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

n. L ea rn to e f f e c t i v e l y c o m m u n i c a t e w i t h pe o p l e w o r k i n g
the C.J. System:
1

.

2

.

3

.

4

.

5

.

in

130
o.

De vel op an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of wh a t the real w o r l d
is in the C.J. System:
1.

p.

4. 5.

2.

3.

4.

2.

3.

4.

techniques bot h formal

and

5.

De v e lo p un de rs t a nd in g
C.J. System:
1.

r.

3.

De ve lo p inv est ig ati ve
informal.
1.

q.

2.

si tuation

for the im mediate

issues

in the

5.

Twelve credits or what ever num be r of cr e d i ts you
si g ne d-u p for:
1.

2. 3. 4. 5.

s. De vel op report w ri t i n g
1.

skills:

2. 3. 4. 5.

10. If you were the p r a c t i c u m c o o r d i n a t o r ho w w o u l d you
cha ng e the C.J. Pro gram?

11. If you were the faculty of the School of Criminal
Ju sti ce how w ou ld you cha ng e the C.J. Pr ogram?

12 . If you were the head of the agency you were placed at
ho w w oul d you treat students d i f f e r e nt ly ?
13 . H ow well do you feel that the Pr ac ti cu m has met the
obj ec ti ve s listed belo w? (Rate each on a scale where
To tal ly met and 5 = To ta ll y U n m e t ) .
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

Prof ess ion al preparation.
Prof ess ion al service.
S e lf -r e l ia nc e and s e l f - d i r e c ti on
Knowl edg e of s e l f - a b i 1i t i e s , values, etc.
U n de rs ta nd in g and a cc ep ta nc e of others.
A p p l i c a t i o n of the or y to practical
situations
g. Dev el op me nt of aw ar en es s of social
issues.
h . Other.
i . Not really sure.

1 =

1.

2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.

3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.

4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.

5
5
5.
5.
5.
5.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

1.
1.
1.
1.
1.

1 . 2. 3. 4. 5.
1 . 2.

3.

4.

5.

AP PE NDI X C
N O N - P R A C T I C U M QU ES TI O N N A I R E

131
SCHO OL OF C R I M I N A L J US T I C E
College of Social Sc i e nc e
M i c h i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y
East Lansing, M i c h i g a n

May

Dear Crimin al

Justice

20,

1975

Senior:

First, let me c o n g r a t u l a t e you on your a c a d e m i c pr og res s to
date. I am a M a s t e r ' s Deg re e C a n d i d a t e and I am w o r k i n g on a
study of the Cr im i n a l J u st ic e I n t e r n s hi p program.
I would
g r ea tl y a p p r e c i a t e it if you w o u l d take a few momen ts to
fill-out the e n c l o s e d qu es ti o n n a i r e .
This i n f o r m a t i o n will
enable us to make r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s for the i m p r o v em en t of the
program.
It is h o p e d that these r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s will allow
some st udents to do an i n t e r n s h i p w h o m i g h t not do so due to
some p r o b l e m w i t h the p re se nt program.
Thank you for you r c o o p e r a t i o n
gr ea tl y appr ec ia te d!
Si n c e r e l y yours,

Cla r e n c e R. Terrill
Gra d u a t e A s s i s t a n t

C T : sd

in this matter,

?t is

132
NON-PRACTICUM QUESTIONNAIRE

1.

Wh at is your area of int ere st in Criminal
one)
a.
b.
d.
e.
f.

Ju st ice ?

(pick

Law E n fo r ce me n t
Co rr ec t io ns
Ju ve n il e D e l i n q u e n cy
Se cur it y
Other

2. W h a t is your Grade Point A v er ag e in Criminal
cour se wo r k ______ Overall GPA? _______ .
3. Are you aware of a course
J u s t i ce Practic um? "

cal le d C.J.

490

Ju sti ce

"Criminal

a. No
if no go to # 9
b. Yes -- if yes go to next
4.

Wh a t is your u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the kind of student
pl a ce m en ts av a i la bl e to you?
a. Le ng t h ______________
b. Am ou n t of c re d i t _________
c. Type of ag enc ie s ____________________________________

5.

H ow did you first find out about the Practi cu m?
(pick only one)
a. L i t er a tu re
b. Facult y
c. Peers
d. Chance
e. Other

6. Wha t are the School of Cr im ina l Ju stice's ob je ct iv es in
o f f e r i n g a P r a c t i c u m as you see them. (Rate each item on a
scale w h e r e 1 = Ve r y im portant and 5 = Very unimportant)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

2.
2.
2.
2.
2.

3.
3.
3.
3.
3.

4.
4.
4.
4.
4.

1.
1.
1.
1.

2.
2.
2.
2.

3.
3.
3.
3.

4.
4.
4.
4.

m

1.
1.
1.
1.
1.

in

Pr of es s i o n a l p r e p a r a ti on
Pr of es s i o n a l service
S e l f - r e l i a n c e and se lf -d i r e c t i o n
Kn o wl ed ge of se lf -a bilities, values, etc.
Un d e r s t a n d i n g and a c c e p t a n c e of others
A p p l i c a t i o n of th e o r y to practical
situat io ns
D
e v e l o p m e n t of aw a r e n e s s of social issues
gh . Other
i . Not really sure

133

7. Rate each of the f o l l o w i n g as they aff ec t the C.J.
P r a c t i c u m here at M.S.U. (Rate each item on a scale where
1 = N e g a t i v e and 2 = No af f ec t and 3 = P o s i t i v e ) .
a.
b.
c.

C.J. Fa cu lt y at ti tu de s
C.J. C u r r i c u l u m
The in st ru cti ona l e n v i r o n m e n t

1.
1.
1.

2. 3.
2. 3.
2. 3.

8. Whe n did you first find out ab ou t the o p po r t u n i t y of do
a Pr act ic um?
a. P rio r to e n r o l l i n g at M.S.U.
b.
Dur ing your F r e s h m a n or S o p h o m o r e Year
c.
D ur i n g your Ju n i or Year
d.
Dur in g your Sen io r Year
9.
W h i c h of the f o l l o w i n g p r e s e n t e d problems for you in
ch o o s i n g to p a r t i c i p a t e in your field study experience.
(Rate each item on a scale w h e r e 1 = Very im portant and 5 =
Ver y unimportant)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g-

h.
i.

10.

Cost
Di st an ce
Cr ed it hours (Too few for time expended)
L i m i t e d op po rt u n i t i e s
Red tape (arrangements, etc.)
Time (conflict w i t h p a r t- ti me job)
Time (conflict w i t h other cour se work)
E x p e c t a t i o n s of the facultyO the r ple as e sp eci fy

If you had learned abo ut the C.J.
w ou ld you have taken it?
a . Yes
b. Not sure
c . No

1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.

2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.

3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.

Pr ac ti cu m earlie r

4. 5.
4. 5.
4. 5.
4.5.
4. 5.
4. 5.
4. 5.
4. 5
4. 5

APP E N D IX D
FOLLOW-UP PRACTICUM QUESTIONNAIRE

134
N A M E ____________________________________
ADDRES S

1.

2.

#

(

)

Wh a t year and term did you gr ad u a t e from Mi ch i g an State
Un ive rs i ty wi th your B.S. or B .A . Degree?
a.

1975

b.

1976

c.

1977

a.

Fall

b.

W i nt er

c.

Sprin g

d.

1978

d.

e.

B.S.
M.S.

summer

or B .A .
or M .A .

c.

Ph.D .

d.

Did not g r a d u a t e

from M.S.U.

Wh a t was your area of in terest in Crimina l
M i c h i g a n State Un iv e r si ty ?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

Justi ce at

Law E n f o r c e m e n t
C o r r ec tio ns
Ju ve ni le D e l i n q u e n c y
Se cu ri ty A d m i n i s t r a t i o n
Other (Please Specify) _______________________________

3a. What agency(s) did you do your Crimina l
P r a c t i c um with?

Justice

a .__ _________________________________________________
b.

_________________________________________________

c.

_________________________________________________

d .__ _________________________________________________
e .__ _________________________________________________
f .__ _________________________________________________
4.

1979

W h a t is the h i g h e s t deg re e you have atta in ed?
a.
b.

3.

PHONE

Wh a t was the first full time job you took in the
Criminal J u s ti c e Sy st em after yo ur gr ad ua t i o n from
M i c h i g a n State U ni ve r s i t y with your B.S. or B .A .
Your Title _______________________________________________
Lo c a t i o n of Ag e n c y
Type of Agency

135
Page two

Wh a t was

the month and ye a r you started that job?

.

g.

c.
h.

Ma rc h
Aug

d.
i.

April
Sept

e.
j.

May
Oct

1.

Feb
July
Dec

.

1976

c.

19 7 7

d.

1978

e.

1979

a.
f.
k.

Jan
June
Nov

b

a.
f.

1975
1980

b

(ha ve) you ho l d

How long did

(held)

the above po s it io n?

mon th s
_____________ years
7.

If you do not ho l d the p o s i t i o n wi t h the agen cy you
named in q u e s t i o n #5, h o w ma n y other full time p o s it io ns
in the Cr iminal J u s t i c e S y s t e m have you held since that
one, i nc lud in g yo ur p r es e n t po si t i on if it is in the
Crimin al J u s ti ce Syste m?
(Circle the ap pr o p r i a t e
n u m b e r .)
1

8.

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

More than

Are you p r e s e n t l y e m p l o y e d in the Cr iminal
System in a f u l l- ti me c a p a c i t y ?
a.
b.

9.

2

Yes
No

(if yes go on to #11 below.)
(if no go on to the next question,

10

Ju s t i ce

#9 below.)

If you are not p r e s e n t l y e m p l o y ed in the Cri minal
Justic e System, wh a t mo nt h and year did you leave your
last p o s i t i o n in the C r i m i n al Justic e System?
a.
f.
k.

Jan.
June
Nov

a . 1975

b.
g.
1.

Feb
July
Dec

b . 19 7 6

c.
h.

March
Aug

c . 1977 d.

1978

d.
i.

Apr i 1
Sept

e . 1979

e.
j.

f.

May
Oct

1980

136
Page three

10.

If you are not n o w e m p l oy ed in the Criminal Justi ce
System- wh at we r e the major factors for your leaving the
system? (Rate the f ol low ing on a scale wh ere i= Ver y
im p o rt an t and 5 - Ve r y unimportant.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

11.

2.

3.

4. 5.

2.
2.
2.

3.
3.
3.

4. 5.
4. 5.
4. 5.

2.

3.

4.

5.

As you see them, wh a t are the School of Criminal
Ju s t i c e 's o b j e c t i v e s for offeri ng a Criminal Justi ce
P r a c t i c u m at M i c h i g a n State U n i v e rs it y?
(Rate each of
the items b e l o w on a scale on wh ic h 1 = Ve r y important
and 5 = Ve r y u n im po rta nt .
a.
b..
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.

12.

1.
M o n e y -------------------Job s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h the
C.J. S y s t e m
1.
F r u s t r a t i o n wi t h the C.J. Sy st e m ---- 1.
A d m i n i s t r a t i v e pr ob le ms -------------- 1.
O the r (Please be specific as possible)
1.

P r o f e s s i o n a l P r e p a r a t i o n ---------------- 1.2.3.4.5.
P r o f e s s i o n a l S e rv ic e
-------------------- 1.2.3.4.5.
S e l f - R e l i a n c e and S e l f - D i r e c t i o n -------- 1.2.3.4.5.
Kn o w le dg e of Sel f-A bilities, Values,Ect. 1.2.3.4.5.
U n d e r s t a n d i n g and A c c e p t a n c e of O t h e r s -- 1.2. 3.4.5.
A p p l i c a t i o n of Th eo r y To Practical
S i t u a t i o n s ---------------------------------- 1.2. 3. 4. 5.
De ve lo p A w a r e n e s s of Social Issues ----- 1.2.3.4.5.
O the r (Please S p e c i f y ) _____________________ 1.2. 3. 4 . 5.
No t re a l l y s u r e ---------------------------- ()

Rate each of the fo ll ow ing Criminal Justi ce Courses
that were of fer ed at Mic hi ga n State U ni ve rs it y in 1975
on a scale w h e r e 1 = the course has been very va luable
to my career in Cri minal Justice, 2 = the cou rs e was
quite v al ua bl e to my career, 3 = the course was of some
v al ue to my career, 4 = the course was of no value to
my career, and 5 = did not take the course.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.

110
In tr o d u c t i o n to Criminal Justi ce - 1.2.3.4.5.
225 Pol ic e Scienc e L a b ------------------ 1.2.3.4.5.
315 Cri mi na l I n v e s t i g a t i o n ------------ 1.2.3.4.5.
318 Pol ic e Co m m u n i t y R e l a t i o n s -------- 1.2.3.4.5.
335 Pol ic e A d m i n i s t r a t i o n -------------- 1.2.3.4.5.
355 Ju v e n i l e D e l i n q u e n c y ---------------- 1.2.3.4.5.
368 C o r r e c t i o n s P r o c e s s -----------------1.2.3.4.5.
3 75 Cri mi na l L a w --------------- --------- 1.2. 3. 4. 5.

.137
Page four
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.

Methods in Cr im ina l J u s t i c e ------- 1.2.3.4.5.
Gr ea t Issues in Cri minal Ju st i c e - 1.2.3.4.5.
Intro, to H i g h w a y Traffic
A d m i n i s t r a t i o n --------------------- 1.2. 3. 4. 5.
455 Ad van ce J u ve ni le D e l i n q u e n c y ------ 1.2.3.4.5.
472 Cri minal P r o c e du re ------------------ 1.2.3.4.5.
475 Cri minal Ev i d e n c e ------------------- 1.2.3.4.5.
Senior Cr iminal J u st ic e S e m i n a r -------- 1.2.3.4.5.
Crime P re ve nt io n S e m i n a r ---------------- 1.2. 3.4.5.
392
409
440

For the p ur po se of this study, "agency shock" is defin ed as
any and all of the ad ver se ef fec ts of person s ent er in g into
an agenc y e n v i ro n me nt w h i c h is m a rk ed ly d i f f e r e n t from that
to w h i c h an individual is accustomed, i.e. age nc y
procedures, operations, p e rs on nel and cu ltural environment.

13.

How much agen cy shock did you en c o u nt er upon be gi nni ng
your first po si t io n in the Criminal J u sti ce System?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

14.

W h e t h e r or not you e n c o u n t e r e d age nc y shock your
e n t r a n c e into your first po si t i o n in the Criminal
J u st ic e System, do you think your c ol le ge p r e p a r a t i o n
equ i p p e d you to meet such shock?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

15.

None
Less than averag e
Average
More than average
A great amount

De fi n i t e l y
I think so
I don't know
I don't think so
De fi n i t e l y not

If you could advise st ud en ts at M i c h i g a n State
U n i v e r s i t y who were a bo ut to do a Cr iminal Justi ce
Practicum, how wo ul d you rate the f o ll ow ing goals or
ob je ct iv es as to their im po r t a n c e in the students
practicum.
(Rate each item so that 1 = V e r y important
and 5 = Very unimportant.)
a.

To learn skills a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the h a n d l i n g of
agen cy clients:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

b.

To d ev el op an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of age nc y
1.
2. 3.
4.
5.

functions:

138
Page five
c.

To reach a de ci s i on for p o s s i b i l i t y of w o r k i n g
that area of C.J.?
1. 2.
3. 4.
5.

in

d.

To
1.

e.

to e xp er i e n c e doing age nc y du t ie s on yo ur own:
1. 2.
3. 4.
5.

f.

To d eve lo p an u n d e r s t a n d i n g
of agency functions:
1. 2.
3. 4.
5.

g.

To learn h o w clients
System:
1. 2.
3. 4.
5.

h.

To de v e lo p an u n de rs t a n d i n g for the a t t i t u d e s
ph il os op h ie s of personnel in the C.J. System:
1. 2.
3. 4.
5.

i.

To compar e ob ser va tio ns w i t h your c l a s s r o o m
studies:
1. 2.
3. 4.
5.

j.

To d e v el op i nt erv iew ing
1. 2.
3. 4.
5.

k.

To beco me aware of the al t e r n a t i v e s
ha nd li ng cl ie nt problems:
1. 2.
3. 4.
5.

1.

To de ve lo p c ou n se li ng techniques:
1. 2.
3. 4.
5.

m.

To de vel op an u n de rs ta nd in g for the overall
r el a t i o n s h i p of the d i f f e r e n t ag en c i e s in the C.J.
System:
1. 2.
3. 4.
5.

n.

To learn to e f f ec ti ve ly c o m m u n i c a t e wi t h people
wo r ki ng in the C.J. System:
1. 2.
3. 4.
5.

o.

To d ev elo p an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of w h a t the real w o rl d
si tuations is in the C.J. System:
1. 2.
3. 4.
5.

p.

To d e ve lo p i n v es tig ati ve
and i n f o r m a l :
1. 2.
3. 4.
5.

learn the duties of ce r t a i n a g e n c y personnel:
2.
3.
4.
5.

for the e f f e c t i v e n e s s

a c t u a l l y flow th r o u gh

the C.J.

and

techniques:

available

t ec hn iq ue s bo th

in

formal

139
Page six
q.

To d e v e l o p an u n d e r s t a n d i n g for the
issues in the C.J. System:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

r.

The

twelve

c re di ts

or w h a t e v e r num be r you signed up

for:
1.
s.

2.

3.

4.

imme di at e

5.

To d e v e l o p re p o r t w r i t i n g
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

skills:

APP E N D IX E
FO L L OW -U P N O N - P R A C T I C U M AND P R A C T I C U M LETTER S

140

C LA RE N C E R. T ER RI LL
D E P A R T M E N T OF H I G H E R E D U CA TI ON
CO LL E G E OF E D U C A T I O N
M I CH IG AN STATE UN IVE RS I T Y
EAST LANSING, M I C HI GA N

Dear M.S.U.

Alum:

Please let this co r r e s p o n d e n c e serve as my i n t r o d u c t i o n to
you. I am at pr es en t a gr ad uat e studen t at M.S.U. in the
C o ll eg e of Education.
I am also a gr ad u a t e of the School of
Cri minal Ju st ic e at M.S.U.
My pr es en t r es ea rc h is a pr oje ct
that is c o n c e r n e d w i t h criminal justice graduates' success
as a resu lt of their ex pe ri en ce as students in the School of
Criminal Ju st ic e at M i ch ig an State University.
As you may re mem be r I surveyed your p r a c t i c u m class in 1975.
This pr oj ec t is a fo ll ow -up survey of that origina l study.
I am sure that you, as a loyal Sp art an will be in te re s t e d in
a s s i st in g pr ese nt and future Criminal Justi ce stu den ts at
M.S.U. re cei ve the most benefi cia l type of e d uc at io na l
e x p e r i e n c e possible.
I am also sure that your loyalty will
be gr e a t l y a p p r e c i a t e d by those students that will be the
be n e f i c i a r i e s of the best po ss ibl e C.J. e d u c a t i o n at
M i ch ig an State University.
Please find a t ta ch ed a ques tio nna ire .
Your c o o p e r a t i o n in
c o m p l e t i n g and re tu rni ng this qu es ti o n n a i r e to me in the
e n cl os ed postag e paid se lf -a dd re ss ed env elo pe will be
ap pre ciated. If you do not desi re to include your name that
is your choice. W h e t h e r or not you include your name, all
re sp on se s will be tr eat ed in the stric tes t con fid enc e.
Once
the da ta is c o mp il ed your qu e s t i o n n a i r e will be d e s tr oy ed
and all data will be prese nte d in only a c o n s o l i d a t e d form.
Your time and co op e r a t i o n in this matter will
g r ad ua te student to com plete his d i s s e r t a t i o n
job! Thank you for your help in this project.
like a copy of the abs tr ac t of my d i s s e r a t i o n
a se lf -a d d r e s s e d env elo pe and I will send you

Sincerely,

Cl a r e n c e R. Terrill
PhD C a n di da te

a s si st a poor
and o b ta in a
If you w o u l d
ple as e en clo se
a copy.

141
CLA REN CE R. T ER R I L L
D EPA RTM ENT OF H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N
(c ont inu ed)

P.S. P lease a c c e p t the e n c l o s e d do l la r bill as a to ken of my
thanks for yo ur c o o p e r a t i o n and time.
I re al i z e that your
time is much va l u a b l e than this mea ge r c o n s i d e r a t i o n
represents but I hope it will co nv i n ce you of my
ap pr ec ia ti on for you r help!

142
CLA RE N CE R. TERRIL L
DE PAR TM EN T OF H I G H ER E D U C A T I O N
CO LL EG E OF ED UC AT IO N
MIC HI G A N STATE UNI VE RS I T Y
EAST LANSING, MI CHI G AN

Dear Alum:
Please let this c o r r e s p o n d e n c e serve as my i n t r o du ct io n to
you. I am at pr es e n t a gr ad u a t e s t ud en t at M.S.U. in the
C ol leg e of Education.
I am also a g r a d u a t e of the School of
Cri minal Justic e ho ld i n g both my Ma ste rs and B a ch el ors
Degre es in Criminal Justice.
My p r ese nt re se ar ch is a
p ro jec t that is c o n ce rn ed w i t h cri min al justi ce students in
the School of Cri min al Ju sti ce at M i c h i g a n State University.
Your name has been ch os e n at ra nd o m to be a part of this
study. I am sure that you as a loyal Sp art an will be
interes ted in a s s i st in g p r es e n t and future Cr iminal Justice
Student s at Mi c h i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y recei ve the most
b ene fic ial type of edu ca ti on al e x p e r i e n c e possible.
I am
also sure that your loyal a s s i s t a n c e will be great ly
ap pr e c i a t e d by the st ud en ts who will be the be ne fi c i a r i e s of
the best pos sib le Crimina l Ju s t i ce e d u ca ti on at Mic hi ga n
State University.
Please find att ac he d a que sti on na ir e.
Your c o o p e r a t i o n in
c om pl et in g and r e t u rn in g this q u e s t i o n n a i r e to me in the
en clo sed postage paid s e l f - a d d r e s s e d en ve l o p e will be
appreciated. If you do not desi re to include your name your
resp ons es will be treate d in the s t r ic te st confidence.
Once
the data is com pi le d your q u e s t i o n n a i r e will be de st ro ye d
and all data will be p r e se nt ed in only a co n s o l i d a t e d form.
Your time and c o o p e r a t i o n in this mat te r will ass is t a poor
g r ad ua te student to com pl et e his d i s s e r t a t i o n and obtai n a
job! Thank you for your help in this project.
Sincerely,

Cl ar en ce R. Terrill
PhD Ca nd ida te

AP PE NDI X F
FOLLOW-UP NON-PRACTICUM QUESTIONNAIRE

143

NAM E _____________________________________
A D D R E S S ________

A.

PHONE

#

(

)

Did you p ar t i c i p a t e in a Cr im in al J u s t i c e P r a c t i c u m
while you were at M i c h i g a n State U n i ve rs it y?
a. YES
b. NO

1.

W h a t year and term did you g r a d u a t e from M i c h i g a n State
U n iv er s i t y wi t h yo u r B.S. or B.A. D e g r e e ?
a.
a.

2.

1976
W i n t e r c.

c.
1977
Sp r i n g

d.
d.

1978
e.
summer

1979

have a t t a i n e d ?

B.S. or B.A.
M.S. or M .A .
Ph.D.
Did not g ra d u a t e from M.S.U.

Wh a t was your area of in te re st
M i c h i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y ?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

4.

b.
b.

Wh a t is the h i g h e s t de g r e e you
a.
b.
c.
d.

3.

1975
Fall

in Cri min al

Ju sti ce at

L a w E nf or c e m e n t
Cor rec tio ns
Ju ve ni l e D e l i n q u e n c y
Se cur ity A d m i n i s t r a t i o n
Other (Please Specify) ________________________________

Wh a t was the fi rst full time job you took in the
Criminal Ju st ic e Sy s te m after you r g r a d u a t i o n from
M i c h i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y w i t h you r B.S. or B.A.
Your Title __________________________ ___________________________
L o c a t i on of A g e n c y ____________________________________________
Type of Age ncy _________________________________________________

5.

Wh a t was the mo nth and year you s ta rte d that job?
a .J an b.Feb c .M ar ch d.April
h. Aug

i. Sept j. Oct

e . M a y f.Ju ne g.J ul y

k. N o v

a . 1975 b .1976 c. 19 7 7 d.1978 e.1979

1. Dec
f.

1980

144
Page 2
6.

How long did
po sition?

(have)

you hold

(held)

the above

months
______________ years
7.

If you do not hold the p o s i t i o n w i t h the a g e n c y you
named in q u e s t i o n #5, how ma n y o t h e r full time p o s i t i o n s
in the Cr iminal J us ti ce S y st e m have you held since that
one, including yo u r pr es e n t p o s i t i o n if it is in the
Criminal J us t i c e System?
(Circle the a p p r o p r i a t e
n u m b e r .)
1

8.

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Mo r e than 10

Are you p r e s e n t l y em pl oy ed in the Cr iminal
Justic e Syst em in a f u ll -t ime ca p a c it y?
a.
b.

9.

2

Yes (if yes go on to #11 below.)
No (if no go on to the next question,

#9 below.)

If you are not p r e s e n t l y e m p l o y e d in the Cr im i n a l
Ju sti ce System, w h a t mo nt h and year did you leave your
last p o s i t i o n in the Criminal J u s t i c e Syste m?
a.Jan b. Feb c .M ar c h d.April e .M ay
h. Aug
i. Sept j. Oct
k. N o v
a . 1975 b .1976 c. 1977 d.1978 e.

f.June g. Ju l y
1. Dec

1979

f.

1980

10. If you are not n o w em pl o y ed in the Cr im ina l J u st i c e
System, wh a t we r e the major facto rs for your leaving
system? (Rate the f o ll ow ing on a scale w h e r e 1= V e r y
important and 5 - V e r y un im portant.
a . M o n e y -------------------------------------- 1.
b .Jo b s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h the C.J. S y s t e m
1.
c .F ru st r a t i o n w i t h the C.J. S y s t e m ----- 1.
d .Admi ni str at iv e p r o b l e m s ------------------ 1.
e. Oth er (Please be sp ecific as possible)
1.

the

2.
2.
2.
2.

3.
3.
3.
3.

4.
4.
4.
4.

5.
5.
5.
5.

2.

3.

4.

5.

145
Page

3

11.

As you see them, w h a t are the School of Criminal
J u s ti c e' s o bj ec t i v e s for of fe r i n g a Cr im in al Justi ce
P r a c t i c u m at M i c h i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y ?
(Rate each of
the items b e l o w on a scale on w h i c h 1 = Ve r y im portant
and 5 = V e r y un imp ortant.
a. Pr of e s s i o n a l P r e p a r a t i o n ---------------------- 1.2.3.4.5.
b . P r o f e s s i o n a l S e r v i c e --------------------------- 1.2.3.4.5.
c .S e l f - R e l i a n c e and S e l f - D i r e c t i o n -------- ----1.2.3.4.5.
d . K n o w l e d g e of Se lf - A b i l i ti es , Values, Ect. —
1.2.3.4.5.
e .U n d e r s t a n d i n g and A c c e p t a n c e of Oth er s ----- 1.2.3.4.5.
f . A p p l i c a t i o n of Th eo r y To Prac ti ca l S i t u a t i o n s l .2.3.4.5.
g . D e v e l o p m e n t of A w a r e n e s s of Social Issues —
1.2.3.4.5.
h. O t h e r (Please Specify) _________________________ 1.2.3.4.5.
i.Not r e a l l y s u r e --------------------------------- ()

12.

Rate ea ch of the f o l l o w in g Cri min al J u st i c e Course s
that we r e o ff e r e d at M i c h i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y in 1975
on a scale w h e r e 1 = the cou rs e has b e e n very va lu a b l e
to my c a r e er in Cr im in al Justice, 2 = the course was
q u it e v a l u a b l e to my career, 3 = the cou rs e was of some
va lu e to my career, 4 = the cou rs e was of no va lu e to
my career, and 5 = did not take the course.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.
C.J.

110
225
315
318
335
355
368
375
392
409
440

I n t r o d u c t i o n to Crimin al J u s t i c e -1.2.3.4.5.
Pol ic e S ci enc e L a b ------------------ 1.2.3.4.5.
Cri min al I n v e s t i g a t i o n --------------1.2.3.4.5.
Pol ic e C o m m u n i t y R e l a t i o n s --------- 1.2.3.4.5.
Pol ic e A d m i n i s t r a t i o n --------------- 1.2.3.4.5.
J u v e n i l e D e l i n q u e n c y ---------------- 1.2.3.4.5.
C o r r e c t i o n s P r o c e s s ----------------- 1.2.3.4.5.
Cr imi na l L a w --------------------------1.2.3.4.5.
Me th od s in Cri min al Ju st ic e ------- 1.2.3.4.5.
G r e a t Issues in Cri min al Ju s t i c e -1.2.3.4.5.
Intro, to H i g h w a y T ra ff ic
A d m i n i s t r a t i o n --------------------- 1. 2 .3 .4 .5 .
455 A d v a n c e J u v en il e D e l i n q u e n c y
1.2.3.4.5.
472 Cr im i na l Pr o c e du re ----------------- 1.2.3.4.5.
475 Cri min al E v i d e n c e --------------------1.2.3.4.5.
Se ni o r Cr im i n a l J u st ic e S e m i n a r ------ 1.2.3.4.5.
C ri me P r e v e n t i o n S e m i n a r -------------- 1.2.3.4.5.

146
Page

4

For the p ur pos e of this study, "agency shock" is de fi ne d as
any and all of the ad ve rs e effect s of pe rs on s en t e r i n g into
an ag e n c y en vi r o n m e n t w h i c h is m a r k e d l y d i f f e r e n t from that
to w h i c h an individual is ac cu stomed, i.e. a g en c y
procedures, operations, pers on nel and cultur al environment.

13.

H o w much agency shock did you en c o u nt er up o n b e g i n ni ng
your first p o s i t i o n in the Criminal J u s t i c e System?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

14.

W h e t h e r or not you e n c o u n t e r e d age nc y shock your
ent ra nc e into your first p o s i t i o n in the Cr iminal
Ju sti ce System, do you think your c o ll eg e p r e p a r a t i o n
e q ui pp e d you to meet such shock?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

15.

None
Less than average
Avera ge
More than avera ge
A g rea t amo unt

De fin it e ly
I think so
I don't k n o w
I don't think so
De fi n i t e l y not

If you could adv is e st udents at M i c h i g a n State
U ni ve r si ty w h o were a b ou t to do a Cri min al Justic e
Practicum, ho w would you rate the f o l l o w i n g goals or
obj ec t iv es as to their i mp or ta nc e in the students
practicum.
(Rate each item so that 1 = V e r y impo rt an t
and 5 = Ve ry unimportant.)
a.

To learn skills a s so c i a t e d w i t h the h a n d l i n g of
age nc y clients:
1.
2.
3.
4. 5.

b.

To de vel op an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of ag en c y functions:
1.
2.
3.
4. 5.

c.

To reach a d ec i s i o n for p o s s i b i l i t y of w o r k i n g
that area of C . J . ?
1.
2.
3.
4. 5.

in

d.

To learn the duti es of ce rt ai n age nc y personnel:
1.
2.
3.
4. 5.

e.

to e xp er ie nc e doing ag en c y duties on your own:
1.
2.
3.
4. 5.

147
Page

5
f.

To d ev el o p an u n d e r s t a n d i n g for the e f f e c t i v e n e s s
of ag en c y functions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

g.

To learn h o w clien ts a c t u a l l y flow t h r o u g h the C.J.
System:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

h.

To d e v e l o p an u n d e r s t a n d i n g for the a t t i t u d e s
p h i l o s o p h i e s of pers on ne l in the C.J. System:
1.
2.
3. 4.
5.

i.

To c o m pa r e ob se rv at io ns wi th your c l a s s r o o m
studies:
1.
2.
3. 4.
5.

j.

To d e v e l o p i n t e r v i e w i n g techniques:
1.
2.
3. 4.
5.

k.

To be co me aware of the a l t e r n a ti ve s
h a n d l i n g c l i e n t problems:
1.
2.
3. 4.
5.

1.

To d e v e l o p c o u n s e l i n g techniques:
1.
2.
3. 4.
5.

m.

To d e v e l o p an u n d e r s t a n d i n g for the overall
r e l a t i o n s h i p of the d i f f e r e n t ag en c i e s in the C.J.
System:
1.
2.
3. 4.
5.

n.

To learn to e f f e c t i v e ly c o m m u n i c a t e w i t h people
w o r k i n g in the C.J. System:
1.
2.
3. 4.
5.

o.

To d e v e l o p an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of w h a t the real w o r l d
s it ua ti on s is in the C.J. System:
1.
2.
3. 4.
5.

p.

To d e v e l o p
informal:

1.

2.

i n ve st ig at iv e

3. 4.

a v a i l ab le

r.

The twelve credi ts or w h a t e v e r n u mb er you

for:
3.

4.

and

5.

To d e v e l o p an u n d e r s t a n d i n g
issues in the C.J. System:
1.
2.
3. 4.
5.

2.

in

tec hn iq ue s bo t h formal

q.

1.

and

5.

for the i m m ed ia te

signed up

148
Page 6
s.

To d e v e l o p re p o r t w r i t i n g skills:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

I

APPENDIX G
FA CU LT Y

IN T E R V I E W QU E S T IO NS

149

C.J.

FA C U L T Y

IN T E R V I E W QU E S T I O N N A I R E

1.

W h a t is the range of ex p er ie nc es av ai lab le to C.J.
students here at M.S.U. in the C.J. Practi cu m?

2.

W h a t do you see as the value of e x pe ri ent ia l
for stu dents?

3.

W h a t do you see as the most i m p or ta nt
School of C.J. form the Pra ct ic um ?

4.

How does the C .J .P r a c t i c u m fit into the School
new c u r r i c u l u m and focus?

5.

If you we r e the P r a c t i c u m C o o r d i n a t o r w h a t changes
wo ul d you make in the program, if any?

6.

If you we r e the P r a c t i c u m C o o r d i n a t o r
dut ie s w h a t c h an ge s w o ul d you mak e?

7.

C o m p a r e d to o the r courses in C.J.,
the im po r t a nc e of the Pra ct iu cm ?

8.

9.

10.

education

out comes

for the

of C.J.

wi t h no other

how w ou ld you rate

Do you think that most u n d e r g r a d u a t e s are aware of the
o p p o r t u n i t y to p a r t i c i p a t e in the C.J. P r a c t i c u m ?
When
do they become aware?
Do you a c t i v e l y p ro mo te the p r a c t i c u m
stu dents you come in co nta ct with?

to the C.J.

Do you feel that a student ir eceives more of a body of
k n o w l e d g e from A. or B. Below?
A. A ten week m u l t i - a g e n c y , Ri de - a l o n g Placement.
B. A ten week i nt er n s h i p wi t h an ag en c y like Probat e
Court.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS AND Pa mphlets

Allen,

He rm a n R.
Op en Door to L e a r n i n g . Urbana:
U ni ve r si ty of Illinois, Press 1963.

Andelotte, Frank.
B r e a k i ng the Aca de mi c L o c k s t e p .
York:
Har pe r and Brothers, 1944.
Baskin,

N ew

Samuel (ed). Higher Education:
Some New
D e v e l o p m e n t s . N e w York:
Mc G r a w - H i l l Book
Company, 1965.

Borzak,

Len or e (ed). Field Study:
A Sou rc eb oo k for
Ex per i en ti a l L e a r n i n g . B e ve r l y Hills, CA: Sage
Public ati on s, 1981.

Cross,

K. Patricia, Beyo nd the Open D o o r .
Francisco: J os s e y - B a s s Inc., 1971.

San

_______________ . N e w St u dents and N e w Needs in Higher
E d u c a t i o n . Berkley:
Ce nt e r for Re search
and D e v e l o p m e n t in Hig he r Education,
U n i v e r s i t y of
California, 1972.
_______________ . The Mi ssi ng Link:
Con ne ct in g
Adult Le ar n e r s to L e a r n i n g R e s o u r c e s . N e w York:
Co ll eg e E n t ra n ce E x a m i n a t i o n Board, 1978.
_______________ and Samual B. Gould.
E x p l o r at io n
in N on -T r a d i t i o n a l S t u d y . San Francisco:
J o s s e y - Ba ss Inc., 1972.
_______________ and John R. Valley.
Pla nni ng NonT ra di ti ona l P r o g r a m s . San Francisco:
Jos se y- B as s Inc., 1976.
Davis,

Robe rt II., John S. Duley, and La wr e n c e T. Alexander.
Field Experience: Gu i d e s for the Imp rov eme nt of
I ns tr uc tio n in Hi g he r Ed u c a t i o n No. 8 . Mi ch i g a n
State University, 1977.

Dressel, Paul L.
C ol le g e and U n iv e r s i t y C u r r i c u l u m .
Berkeley:
M c C u t c h a n P u bl is h i n g Corpor ati on, 1968.

150

151
________________ and DeLisle, F r an ce s H.
Un d er gr a d u a t e C u r r i c u l u m T r e n d s . Wa sh ington,
D.C.:
A m e r i c a n Counc il on Education, 1969
Duley,

John S. (ed) .
I m p l e m e n t i n g Fi el d E x pe r i e n c e s
Education.
San Francisco:
J o s s e y - B a s s Inc.,
1974.

Gordon, G ar ey R. and R. B ru ce McBride.
Criminal
Ju s t i c e Internships:
T h eo r y into P r a c t i c e s .
Ci nc innati, OH: A n d e r s o n P u b l i s h i n g Company, 1984.
Henderson, Algo D.
The In no v a t i v e S p i r i t . San
Francisco: J o s s e y - B a s s Inc., 1969.
Keeton, Morris T. and A s soc ia tio n.
E x pe ri en ti al
L e a r n i n g . San Francisco:
J o s s e y - B a s s Inc.,
Lynd,

He ll e n Merrel.
F ield Wo rk in Co ll eg e E d u c a t i o n .
N e w York:
C o l u m b i a U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1945.

Mayhew, Louis B. and Pa t r i c i a J.
Curriculum. San Francisco:
1971.
Meeth,

1976.

Ford.
C h a n g i n g the
J o ss e y - B a s s Inc.,

Ri cha rd L. and Earl J. McGrath.
O r g a n i z i n g for
T e a ch in g and Learning:
The C u r r i c u l u m in H i g h e r
Education:
some N e we r D e v e l o p m e n t s . N e w York:
Mc Gr aw - Hi ll Book Co., 1965.

Mic hi ga n State U n i v e r s i t y Publ ic at io n. This is M i c h i g a n
State University: 1979 Fact B o o k . East Lansing:
M ic h i g a n State Univers it y, 1979.
Mic hi ga n State U n i v e r s i t y Publ ic at io n. 1980-81 Ac ad e m i c
P r o g r a m s . Ea st Lansing: M i c h i g a n State
University, 1979.
National C o m m i s s i o n for C o o p e r a t i v e Education.
College,
U ni ve rs it ie s and C o m m u n i t y col leg es Of f e r i n g
C o o p e r a t i v e E d u c a t i o n P r o g r a m s . N e w York:
Na tio na l C o m m i s s i o n for C o o p e r a t i v e Ed ucation, 1971.
Quinn,

M.E.
"An In v e s t i g a t i o n of U n d e r g r a d u a t e Field Study"
Ex p e r ie nc e s at M i c h i g a n State Univ er sit y."
Doctoral D is se rt at ion , M i c h i g a n State University,
1972 .

Sigmon,
R. A.
A N o t e b o o k on Servi ce l e a r n i n g . Raleigh:
N o r t h C a r o l i n a I n t e r n s h i p Office,
1972.

152

Styles, Ji mm y and D e n n y F. Pace.
G u i d e l i n e s for work
E x p e r i e n c e Pr og r a m s in the Cri minal J us tic e
S y s t e m . Wa sh in g to n, D.C.:
Am e r i c a n A s s o c i a t i o n of
J u n i or Co lleges, 1961.
Terrace, H e r b e r t and Scott Parker.
Ps yc h o l o g i c a l
S ta ti s ti cs Vo l s I, II, III, IV, V, VI, and VII.
San Rafael, Calf.: The A m e r i c a n University. 1975
Vermilye, D y c k m a n W. (ed). R e l a t i n g Work and
Ed ucation:
1977 C u rr e n t Issues in Higher
Ed ucation.
San F rancisco:
J o s s e y - B a s s Inc.,
1976.
Wilson, James W. and Ed wa r d H. Lyons.
Work-Study
C o l l e g e Programs.
N e w York:
Har pe r and Brothers,
1961. '