ALemma-£51121.STUDY-01F THE EDUCATIONAL mumm yams 0;": cmm msnca GRADUATES OF meg-{W 3mm uwmsm . . 'Ef‘hesés for {he Mme of M. 8. mom 8'? TE umwsaswv moms LEE mm and ’ JOAN mus moswzv ' 1974 T ' v . “must-'unuunuung'flq mmwmmmnnmmm $577“? A LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF THE EDUCATIONAL UTILIZATION TRENDS OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE GRADUATES OF MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY By Thomas Lee Austin and Joan Marie Petoskey AN ABSTRACT OF A THESIS Submitted to The College of Social Science Michigan State University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF SCIENCE School of Criminal Justice l974J Approved: W/‘Y/ fl7c/I/m H. McNamar Jyfiflfl am Professor Louis A. Radelet /\ W /)//vM . Dr. Larry T//HooverV ABSTRACT A LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF THE EDUCATIONAL UTILIZATION TRENDS OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE GRADUATES OF MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY By Thomas Lee Austin and Joan Marie Petoskey Increasingly during the past decade numerous individuals and groups representing many areas of public responsibility have called for a more effective and efficient criminal justice system. Among the numerous programs being undertaken in this effort is strengthening the overall caliber of personnel by utilizing college educated graduates. However, research to date on the impact college educated graduates are having on the criminal justice system tends to be somewhat inconclusive. Furthermore, a review of existing research reveals that the time element has received little attention to studies addressing the topic of educational utilization of past graduates of criminal justice programs. As a result, studies were pre-conditioned to ignore the possiblity of emerging trends or patterns. Accordingly, the purpose of this study is to examine the issues of initial job placement, educational utilization, and Thomas Lee Austin Joan Marie Petoskey educational satisfaction of criminal justice graduates from one institution, Michigan State University, in order to evince any longitudinal consonance or disparity in their overall educatiOnal‘ utilization. Data for the study was gathered from two sets of similar self- administered questionnaires. The first set was administered early in l972 to past graduates of the School of Criminal Justice spanning the years l935-7l inclusive, and the second set was administered in early l974 to recent graduates, l972-73 inclusive. From the questionnaires several questions pertinent to each of the three issues were utilized for analysis. Based on historical developments with the School of Criminal Justice and concomitant events in the field of criminal justice, four time frames (Izl935-60, II:l96l-67, III:1968-7l, and IV:l972-73) were drawn so as to provide a meaningful perspective for viewing change. Results from the survey indicate that several notable changes over time have occurred among the three issues. Regarding initial employment, linear decreases were uncovered in the proportion of graduates initially employed in Federal law enforcement, the propor- tion of graduates initially employed in corrections, and the propor- tion of female graduates initially employed in either criminal justice or criminal justice related work. Linear increases were found in the proportion of females initially employed in non-criminal justice and in the proportion of graduates responding "no jobs available" as the reason for not being initially employed in criminal justice work. Thomas Lee Austin Joan Marie Petoskey Also uncovered was the lack of relationship between the area of edu- cational specialization and in initial employment as well as the lack of a strong relationship between initial employment and area of educational specialization in the field of industrial security. For the issue of educational utilization, a linear decrease in the proportion of graduates responding positively to their college major preparing them for their initial job placement was found. In addition, decreases were uncovered in the proportion of graduates responding positively to their education being best utilized through their initial job placement and to being as well prepared as their fellow workers in assuming their job responsibilities. The third issue, educational satisfaction, revealed an increase in the proportion of graduates responding positively to being satis- fied with criminal justice as their college major. However, a decrease was apparent in recent years especially for female graudates. The findings of the study have policy implications which are addressed to three audiences, namely criminal justice agencies, poten- tial criminal justice students, and institutions involved in criminal justice higher education, particularly the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University. A LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF THE EDUCATIONAL UTILIZATION TRENDS OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE GRADUATES OF MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY By Thomas Lee Austin and Joan Marie Petoskey A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE College of Social Science 1974 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS As with any study undertaken at this point in one's educa-' tional career, the input of others oftentimes is more instrumental to the realization of the final product than one's own effort. This endeavor was no exception. Foremost we would like to thank Dr. John McNamara, Chairman of the Committee, Professor Louis Radelet and Dr. Larry Hoover for their patience and scholarship, but most of all for their construc- tive criticism which is embodied in the final report. To Dr. Ralph Lewis, we owe a special debt of gratitude for his guidance and encouragement. His pragmatic philosophy at times was needed to temper our idealistic notions. Appreciation is also expressed to Ms. Kathy Bogard, Ms. Marilyn Szedlak, and Ms. Mary Jane Kroll for their clerical skills in typing, preparing, and mailing the questionnaire. To the Criminal Justice Systems Center, we are most appre- ciative for the financial support without which the study would not have been possible. Finally, to the l,57l graduates of the School who responded to the questionnaire, we express a sincere thank you for their consideration and interest in making the study a success. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES ......................... v Chapter I. THE PROBLEM ...................... 1 Introduction ..................... 2 Need for the Study .................. 7 Purpose of the Study ................. 26 Areas of Investigation ................ 26 Significance of the Study . . . . . . . . ...... 28 Definition of Terms ................. 29 Summary and Overview of the Study .......... ‘ 30 II. REVIEW OF RELATED STUDIES ............... 32 Studies ....................... 33 Issues and Related Findings ............. 48 Summary ....................... 57 III. THE UNIVERSITY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE .......... 59 The Historical Setting ................ 6l Michigan State University .............. 67 Summary ....................... Bl IV. DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY ................. 83 Study Design ..................... 84 Issues of Investigation ............... .86 iv Chapter Page Time Frames ..................... 87 Population ...................... 90 Sampling Frame and Sampling Procedure ........ 90 Survey Instruments .................. 94 Data Collection ................... 95 Coding and Re-coding ................. 96 Techniques of Analysis ................ 97 Summary ....................... 98 V. DATA AND ANALYSIS ................... 99 Characteristics by Time Period ............ 100 Initial Employment .................. l04 Educational Utilization ............... l30 Educational Satisfaction ............... l48 VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ................ l62 Summary of Findings ................. l63 A Word of Caution .................. l7l Implications ..................... l73 APPENDIX A. COVER LETTER OF FEBRUARY 5, 1974. AND QUESTIONNAIRE ................. l78 APPENDIX B. FOLLOW-UP COVER LETTER OF MARCH 5, 1974 ...... l90 BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................... 192 Table (IT->00 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. LIST OF TABLES Initial Job Placement .................. Frequency Distribution of Initial Employment by Level of Degree ................... Sampling Results ..................... Age by Period ...................... Sex by Period ...................... Degree Held on Initial Job by Period ........... Educational Specialization by Period ........... Service Status by Period ................. Race by Period ...................... How Initial Employment Nas Obtained by Period ...... Criminal Justice Employment vs. Other Employment Areas by Period ............... Criminal Justice Employment vs. Other Employment Areas by Period by Sex ................. Initial Employment by Period ............... Initial Employment by Period by Law Enforcement Educational Specialization ............... Initial Employment by Period by Law Enforcement Educational Specialization by Sex ........... Initial Employment by Period by Corrections Educational Specialization ............... Initial Employment by Period by Corrections Educational Specialization by Sex ........... Page 42 102 102 103 104 105 106 107 109 vi Table Page 18. Initial Employment by Period by Industrial Security Educational Specialization ............... 118 19. Initial Employment by Period by Industrial Security Educational Specialization by Sex ........... 119 20. Initial Employment by Period by Female .......... 120 21. Initial Employment by Period by Area of Educational Specialization ............... 122 22. C.J. Related vs. Other Employment Areas by Period by Degree on Job .................... 123 23. Non-C.J. Employment vs. Other Employment Areas by Period by Sex .................... 125 24. Why Not C.J. Employment by Period by Non-C.J. Employment ....................... 126 25. Why Not C.J. Employment by Period by Sex . . ....... 127 26. Non-C.J. Employment vs. Other Employment Areas by Period by Degree on Job ................ 128 27. Educational Utilization by Period . . .......... 131 28. College Best Utilized by Period, Nithout Non-Responses . . 137 29. College Best Utilized by Period by Initial Employment . . 139 30. College Best Utilized by Period by Service Status . . . . 142 31. College Best Utilized by Period by Sex .......... 144 32. Co1lege Best Utilized by Period by Degree on Job ..... 145 33. College Best Utilized by Period by Area of Educational Specialization ..................... 147 34. College Best Utilized by Period by Age .......... 149 35. Educational Satisfaction by Period ............ 150 36. Satisfaction with Criminal Justice Major by Period by Sex ......................... 153 37. Satisfaction with Criminal Justice Major by Period _ by Age ......................... 154 vii Table Page 38. Satisfaction with Criminal Justice Major by Period by Service Status ................... 155 39. Satisfaction with Criminal Justice Major by Period by Degree on Job .................... 156 40. Satisfaction with Criminal Justice Major by Period by Initial Employment ................. 158 41. Satisfaction with Criminal Justice Major by Period by Area of Educational Specialization ......... l6O Chapter 1 THE PROBLEM Since the early years of this century, numerous individuals and groups representing many areas of public responsibility have increasingly called for a more effective and efficient criminal justice system. In recent years, concern with the nation's criminal justice system has been intensified by continued social upheaval in our society. Rising street crime--urban riots and disorders related to political protest movements--has tended to bring to the forefront shortcomings in the criminal justice system itself. Increased use of police force, overcrowded courtroom dockets, and outmoded penal methods lend credence to the argument that problems facing the "sys- tem” are not endemic to any one component, rather common to the whole. In an effort to overcome the maladies of the criminal justice system, numerous programs have been undertaken to improve the caliber of individuals employed. One facet of the new employment endeavor is employment and utilization of college educated personnel. This study examines and analyzes several aspects of this effort. INTRODUCTION Crime and its attendant ills continue to be among the most pressing problems facing the nation today. In 1973, Dr. George Gallup released the contents of a survey which showed that one out of every five persons in the nation had been victimized by crime during the preceding year.1 Figures for the central cities were more dis- couraging. There, one out of every three persons had in some form or another been a victim of crime. When questioned on the most severe problem facing the community, the overwhelming reply was crime. More than 50 percent of the people questioned by Dr. Gallup stated that there was more crime in the community in 1972 than in the previous year; only ten percent said that crime had decreased. Ramifying from the incidence of crime in America today is its economic cost. Although the exact amount is unknown, probably the most reliable estimate was given in 1967 by the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice. Spokesmen for the Commission concluded that the economic impact of crimes and related public expenditures for prevention and control costs the nation some $20,000,000,000 annually.2 When viewed as a commodity, crime and its related costs account for two percent of the total value of the na- tion's annual output of goods and services. As a governmental 1"Special Report on Crime in the U.S.," The Gallup Index, January, 1973. PP. 3-17. 2The President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Adminis— tration of Justice, The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society(Nash-. ington: Government Printing Office, 1967), pp. 33-34. expenditure, efforts spent on crime and its outgrowths consume ten percent of the total annual federal budget. Although such figures in themself constitute cause for alarm, non-quantifiable costs further reflect the social impressions of crime. The Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals aptly noted that crime mirrors additional exacerbating costs to citizens, in terms of fear, psychic damage, and mistrust. The Commission explains: "No price tag can be put on the fear that as much as any other factor is speeding the exodus from the cities, strangling businesses and causing people to mistrust each other.”3 Agreeing with the Commission's statement, a Gallup poll indi- cates that fear of crime may have become more widespread since the period of turbulence which characterized the late sixties. In 1968, the Gallup Poll found that citizens ranked crime as the most serious national issue (ahead of schools and poverty) and the most important local issue (ahead of schools, transportation, and taxes). Within the same poll, it was found that 35 percent of the respondents were afraid 4 to walk in their own neighborhoods at night. In January of 1973, a replication of the 1968 survey revealed that the number of persons afraid to walk in their own neighborhoods at night had risen to 42 percent,5 an increase of seven percent in slightly over four years. 3National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals, A National Strategy to Reduce Crime (Washington: Govern- ment Printing Office, 19731, p. 9. 4"Afraid to Walk Alone at Night,” The Gallup_0pini0n Index. September, 1968, p. 32. 5"Special Report," The Gallup Index, OP- clto’ P- 2- More convincing, quantified data substantiating these opinions can be found in the Uniform Crime Reports. From 1967 through 1972 the crime rate rose 47 percent.6 Although 1972 figures do report a slight decrease of three percent from the preceding year, the de- crease must be tempered since it was not evident in all categories of index offenses. Figures for violent crime in 1972 continued to exhibit increases over l97l--murder by four percent, aggravated 7 Not assault by six percent, and forcible rape by eleven percent. only does the period increase demonstrate the incidence of crime to a population, it carries, perhaps, its greatest impact to the indi- vidual as he weighs the risk of becoming a crime victim. One of society's mechanisms for controlling the incidence and, indirectly, the fear of crime is the criminal justice system. Harbored within its parameters are primarily the offices of the police, courts, and corrections. Much commented upon, the apparent lack of unity within the criminal justice system has engendered a host of adjectives ranging from "fragmented and divided'I to "splintered and decentralized" to decribe it. The vast number of agencies adds to the fragmented character of the system. In excess of 45,000 different agencies exist in 6Committee on Uniform Crime Records, International Associa- tion of Chiefs of Police and Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Reports (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1972), p. 3. 7Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, "Crime Down 3%," LEAA Newsletter, Vol. III, No. I (April-May, 1973), pp. 1, 7. towns of more than 1,000 population.8 This figure represents only those administrations at the state and local level; most states have within their political structure hundreds of criminal justice agen- cies. For example, Wisconsin is a medium-sized state whose criminal justice system contains 1,075 separate criminal justice agencies which include: 458 law enforcement agencies, 221 courts, 197 prosecution offices, five defender's office, 98 adult and juvenile corrections departments, 72 probation offices and 924 other criminal justice related agencies.9 Yet, distinctions drawn on the basis of numerical function are not the only divisors of the criminal justice system. The National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals in affirm- ing this point posited that: Words such as fragmented and divided, however, refer not only to demarcations in authority, but to differences in states of mind, and not only to phfisical distances, but to distances in philosophy and outlook.1 Cognizant of the sharp increase in crime and its resulting economic, social, and individual ills, and the concurrent inability of the provincially-oriented criminal justice system to deal ef- fectively with its maladies, tha late President Johnson fostered a national program aimed at upgrading social conditions generally and 8National Advisory Commission, A National Strategxs op. cit., p. 41. 9Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, Criminal Justice Agencies in Wisconsin (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1972), p. 10, cited by National Advisory Commission, A National Strategy, op. cit., p. 41. 10 National Advisory Commission, A National Strategy, 10c. cit. reducing crime specifically. The Law Enforcement Assistance Act of 1965 was one facet of the President's "war on crime." The sUbstance of the Act was to implement a three-year experimental program through federal funding directed towards encouraging innovation in state and local criminal justice systems. One segment of the Act provided for the establishment of a Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice. The purpose of the Commission was threefold: (l) to determine priorities in the criminal justice system, (2) to study problems of the criminal justice system in the United States, and (3) to make recommendations for improving the system. In February of 1967, the Commission re- ported to the President on its eighteen month study of crime in the United States. Included in the final report were more than 200 spe- cific recommendations made by the Commission ranging from federal action to programs for state and local governments. The recommenda- tions entitled, "A National Strategy," urged that the federal program be administered by the Department of Justice and be addressed to eight major areas of need. These are: State and local planning Education and training of criminal justice personnel Surveys and advisory services concerning organization and operation of criminal justice agencies Development of coordinated national information systems Development of a limited number of demonstration programs in agencies Scientific and technological research and development Institutes for research and training personnel Grants-in-aid for operational innovations.1 CDNOS 01-h LON-d HThe President's Commission, The Ch311€ngfia OP- Cit-9 P- 285- Identifying education and training of criminal justice personnel as a major area of need is just the first step in the government's in- creased emphasis on criminal justice education. NEED FOR THE STUDY Increased Emphasis on: Criminal Justice Education In June, 1968, Congress passed P1 90-351, better known as the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act. Title I of the Act pro- vided for the creation of the Law Enforcement Assistance Administra- tion (LEAA) "as the federal agency within the Department of Justice responsible for a nationwide coordinated effort to prevent and control 12 crime and delinquency." From an initial budget of $63,000,000 in fiscal year 1969, LEAA funding for the current fiscal year has climbed 13 to an astounding $1,000,000,000. Congress to date has appropriated over $3,300,000,000 for LEAA administered programs in the area of criminal justice.14 Located within the organizational structure of LEAA is the Office of Education and Manpower Assistance (OEMA). This Office is 12National Legal Aid and Defender's Association, The Dollar$ and $en$e of Justice (Chicago: National Legal Aid and,Defenders' Association, 1973), p. 1. 13Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, "Nixon Signs Bill Extending LEAA," LEAA Newsletter, Vol. III, No. VII (September- October, 1973), p. 33. 14Ibid., p. 33 and National Legal Aid and Defender' Associa- tion, op. cit., p. V. responsible for administering LEAA programs in three areas--curricu- lum and manpower development, training, and LEEP (Law Enforcement Education Program which provides financial assistance to college stud- ents enrolled in criminal justice programs). Aid is provided both in the form of grants and loans to students in criminal justice programs and funds to the educational institution itself, allowing for ex- pansion and development of curricula and for pertinent research. The creation of LEEP can best be described as a noble attempt to encourage the pursuit of higher education in criminal justice. Section 406 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act author- izes grants "for tuition and fees not exceeding $200 per academic quarter or $300 per semester . . . for officers of any publicly funded agency [and] loans not to exceed $1,800 per academic year for pre- service students intending to seek employment in a law enforcement 15 agency." In 1973 the grants were increased to $250 per quarter or $400 per semester, while the loan amount was increased to $2,200 16 per academic year. In addition, the grants are forgiveable at the rate of 25 percent for each year of service with a criminal justice agency following completion of the individual's academic program.17 15Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, Third Annual Report (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1972), pp. 81-82. 16Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, "LEEP Aids 95,000 Students This Year at 990 Schools," LEAA Newsletter, Vol. 3, No. 7 (September-October, 1973), p. 35. 17 LEAA, Third Annual Report, op. cit., p. 82. The majority of recipients (80 percent) receiving aid are either police officers or students intending to enter the criminal justice system. Correctional personnel account for 14 percent and the remaining 6 percent receiving aid are court related personnel.18 It should be noted that while in-service personnel account for 80 percent of LEEP recipients, they are only allocated 60 percent of the funds since loan recipients are eligible to receive more.19 Through LEAA, OEMA has had, intended or otherwise, a consid- erable effect on colleges and universities involved in criminal justice. First, OEMA, has contributed to the prodigious increase in the number of students choosing criminal justice programs. In this academic year alone, more than 95,000 students enrolled in criminal justice programs in over 990 participating colleges and universities, will receive aid from the Law Enforcement Education Program of LEAA.20 This figure represents 54 percent of the total number of students en- rolled in all criminal justice programs.2] Of these, 84 percent are in-service students and sixteen percent (15,609) are pre-service students. Since the commencement of the LEEP program in 1969, in excess of 135,000 students have received aid--totalling over $110,000,000.22 18 19 Ibid., p. 84. Ibid. 20LEAA, "LEEP Aids 95,000 Students," loc. cit. 22 21Ibid. Ibid. 10 Secondly, corresponding to the increase in the number of stud- ents enrolled in criminal justice programs is the marked prolifera- tion of the number of institutions offering degrees in criminal justice studies. Prior to the establishment of LEAA in 1968, there existed 184 institutions granting degrees. By 1971, the number had increased to 294. In the recently completed 1972-73 academic year, there existed 515 institutions offering 505 associate, 211 baccalaureate, 41 master's and nine doctorate degrees.23 Coupled with LEAA's influence on criminal justice education has been the national inclination towards higher education generally. During the preceding decade the total number of students enrolled in all institutions of higher education rose from 3,216,000 in 1960 to 7,136,000 in 1970, an overall increase of 121 percent.24 Similar trends prevail in the area of higher education in criminal justice. As testimony is the phenomenal growth since 1960 of the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University. In that year 383 students were enrolled. A decade later, enrollment in the combined undergraduate and graduate programs rose to 630 stud- ents and by 1972, approximately 1,000 students were enrolled in the programs 0f StUdY at the 5Ch001- Additionally, between 1935 (the 23International Association of Chiefs of Police, 1972-1973 Directory of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Education (Gaithersburg,Maryland: The International Association of Chiefs of Police, Inc., 1972), p. 5. . 24u.s., Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstracts of the United States (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1972), p. 105. 11 date of the School's inception) and 1960, 783 students had received degrees. By 1972, the number had risen to approximately 2,500.25 Such increases, even in view of the national predilection towards higher education, are striking. They are not as surprising, however, given the strong sentiments by many for higher education of criminal justice personnel. Consensus: Educated Personneli6 The need for highly educated personnel in the field of crimi- nal justice was recognized as early as 1931 in the report of the Wickersham Commission. Characterizing the criminal justice system generally, but commenting on the police specifically, the Commission wrote: Necessity has demanded the application of science to police work. Colleges, universities, police department schools, are all recognizing that necessity. The last fifteen years have inaugurated the change, the next fifteen years may see a great chain of instruction throughout the country which will make possible an education for every policeman. Only in this manner can the police ever hope successfully to cope with the crime situation.27 25List of Criminal Justice graduates (1938-1973) from the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University. 26Although the term "criminal justice"connotes the offices of the police, courts and corrections and rightly so, the following dis- cussion has aS'FUSprimary emphasis the offices of the police and cor- rections. The lack of discussion afforded to the office of the courts is based on the fact that this branch of criminal justice has for a long time been aware of the need for and benefits which accrue from having high education requirements as pre-conditions to accepting office. Its sister branches, however, are on the threshold of this realization. 27Wickersham Commission, Report on Police (Montclair, New Jersey: Patterson Smith, 1968 [reprint]), p. 84. 12 Unfortunately, the optimistic prediction was only beginning to be realized several decades later. By the 1960's, conditions in the criminal justice system had been little affected by the Wickersham report. Spurred by such events as increasing crime and urban unrest which pointed to shortcomings in the criminal justice system itself-~police brutality, overcrowded courtroom calendars, and an anachronistic penal system--an urgent call was put forth demanding reform. One area to receive consider- able attention was education. By 1967, the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice was again calling for higher education standards as one means to help upgrade the criminal justice system. Stating that "the failure to establish high professional standards for the police service has been a costly one for the police and for 28 the Task Force Commission on the Police maintained: society," The quality of police service wil1 not significantly improve until higher educational requirements are established for its personnel . . . Due to the nature of the police task and its effect on our society, there is a need to elevate educational requirements to the level of a college degree from an accredited institution for all future personnel selected to perform the function of a police agent.29 The Commission concluded that the eventual goal of all police agen- Cies should be ”that all personnel with general enforcement powers have baccalaureate degrees."3O . 28The President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Admin- 75 tration of Justice, Task Force Report: The Police (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1967), p. 125. 29 Ibid., p. 126. 3OIbid. 13 In the field of corrections, the Commission noted similar problems with respect to the lack of qualified personnel. Reporting that "there are gaps in the quantity and perhaps even more signifi- 3] the Task Force Com- cantly in the utility of available manpower, mission on Corrections further amplified this issue: "educational standards at present vary widely among jurisdictions and most fail to meet the levels promulgated by correctional standard-setting agencies."32 Aware that future successes in treatment and rehabili- tation will depend largely on the type of individual employed, the Commission urged that correctional agencies hold colleges and uni- versities in view as recruiting sources for manpower needs.33 Echoing the sentiments of the President's Commission, the Joint Commission on Correctional Manpower and Training in a special report published in 1970 stressed the clear need for educated per- sonnel in the field of corrections: "correctional administrators need the colleges and universities as producers of the specialized manpower that corrections would like to have in its camp."34 Point- ing to the inevitable changes which will challenge the field in the future, the Commission added: 3‘The President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Adminis- tration of Justice, Task Force Report: Corrections (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1967), p. 93. 32 Ibid., p. 94. 33Ibid., p. 100. 34Joint Commission on Correctional Manpower and Training, .PerTSpectives on Correctional Manpower and Training(College Park, Mar"ZYland: American Correctional Association, 1970), p. 41. 14 Here, changes will require new definition of tasks to be accomplished which by direct implication call for new educa- tional and training programs. In short, as pressures for change are exerted on corrections, these pressures are in turn passed on into training efforts and thus ultimately to the universities.3 Other commissions, too, have called for higher educational standards among criminal justice personnel. The Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations recommended that at the earliest practicable time, state laws mandate that no person be appointed as a law enforcement officer unless he is the holder of a bachelor's degree from an accredited institution.36 A task force report pre- pared by the Police Foundation recommended as part of its assistance to police agencies that it "should stimulate massive imaginative and saystematic recruitment of college graduates for police departments."37 The American Bar Association writing on the need for minimum police standards stated: College graduates should be encouraged to apply for employment with police agencies. Individuals aspiring to careers in police agencies and those currently employed as police offi- cers should be encouraged to advance their education at the college level. Communities should support further educational achievement on the part of police personnel by adopting such (devices as educational incentive pay plans and by gradually \ U . 35Joint Commission on Corrections Manpower and Training, Ihg_ EgELlfijgrsity and Corrections (College Park, Maryland: American Correc- C’TIEil Assoc1ation, 1969), p. 22. M 36Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, For a 0"53 Perfect Union--Police Reform (Washington: Government Printing - 011:1 ce, 1971), p. 7. p0 . 37Police Foundation, "Education and Training Task Force Re- ofrht" (Unpublished report of the Police Foundation, a subsidiary the Ford Foundation, 1972), p. 40. 15 instituting requirements for the completion of specified periods of college work as a grerequisite for initial ap- ’ pointment and for promotion. 8 More recently, the National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals convened for the purpose of formulating for the first time national criminal justice priorities, goals, and standards. To reduce and prevent crime at the state and local levels, it recognized the immediate need for higher educational standards in criminal justice. The Commission recommended that: East state should establish by 1975, a state plan for co- ordinating criminal justice education to assure a sound academic continuum from an associate of arts through graduate studies in criminal justice to allocate educa- tional resources to sections of the state with defined needs and to work toward proper placement of persons com- pleting these programs.39 In addition, the Commission, in specially prepared reports on the Police and Correction, made other specific recommendations. Re- Qa rding the police, the Commission suggested as the objective of every police agency, that eventually all personnel be holders of baccalaureate degrees. It established the following time-table for achieving the objective: 1. Every police agency should require immediately, as a con- dition of initial employment, the completion of at least 1 year of education (30 semester units) at an accredited college or university. Otherwise qualified police ap- plicants who do not satisfy this condition, but who have earned a high school diploma or its equivalent, should be \ a 39National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards ogd - Goals, Rgaort on Corrections (Washington: Government Printing F1 Ce, 1973), p. 490. 16 employed under a contract requiring completion of the educa- tional requirement within 3 years of initial employment. 2. Every police agency should, no later than 1975, require as a condition of initial employment the completion of at least 2 years of education (60 semester units) at an ac- credited college or university. 3. Every police agency should, no later than 1978, require as a condition of initial employment the completion of at least 3 years of education (90 semester units) at an ac- credited college or university. 4. Every police agency should, no later than 1982, require as a condition of initial employment the completion of at least 4 years of education (120 semester units or a bacca- laureate degree) at an accredited college or university.40 In its report on Corrections, the Commission noted that "edu- cational standards of the 1960's will not suffice in the 1970's"41 and recommended that: The undergraduate degree should be the standard educational requirement for entry level work in probation and parole agencies and for comparable counselors and classification positions in [correctional] institutions.42 In 1970, one author pointed to the fact that the median years of school completed by employed males in the civilian labor force in 1968 was 16.3 years for professionals and technicians; 12.7 for managers, officials and proprietors; 12.8 for sales workers; and 12.5 for clerical workers. The median years of school completed by all 40National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals, Report on the Police (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1973), p. 369. 41National Advisory Commission, Report on Corrections, op. cit., p. 467. 42Ibid. 17 police personnel was 12.4 years.43 Additionally, while the educational level for the population as a whole was increasing during the decade, the median educational level for the police had risen only .2 years.44 Similar data is available on the corrections component of the criminal justice system. A national survey conducted in 1965 revealed that approximately 30 percent of the agencies surveyed regarding edu- cation qualifications required for probation and parole officers in- dicated a high school diploma or less.45 Although data is unavailable for correctional institutions, it can be assumed that the percentage is higher still since less emphasis is placed on educational require- ments in correctional institutions. Both examples lead to the conclusion that educational standards in the field of criminal justice need to be increased. The preceding recommendations which subsume the philosophy that higher educational standards would lead to improvements in the effectiveness and efficiency of the criminal justice system were not node without prior considerations of existing alternatives. Other alternatives such as increasing manpower and concentration of man- power resources had been tried but found to be lacking. . 43U. 5., Office of Education, Digest of Educational Statis- tics, p. 7, cited by Charles B. Saunders, Upgradinggthe American Police (Washington: Brookings Institute, 1970), p. 90. 44The President's Commission, Task Force Report: The POIICE’ op. cit., p. 10. 45The President's Commission, Task Force ReportI COTVECtions’ op. cit., p. 94. 18 A second alternative to personnel improvement was improving the operations component of the criminal justice system. However as one writer recently states, "Since the improvement of operations is intrinsically related to the quality of personnel a point of diminish- ing returns is soon reached if efforts are concentrated solely on systems and technology."46 In the end, considerations for improv- ing operations must again focus on the quality of personnel which implies higher educational standards. Quinn Tamm, Director of IACP, has increasingly argued for the need of college educated personnel in the field of criminal justice. Writing on police education in the IACP periodical, Police Chief, he states: . . the campus must be looked to for the police officers of the future. It is nonsense to state or to assume that the enforcement of the law is so simple a task that it can be done best by those unencumbered by an inquiring mind nurtured by a study of the liberal arts.4 In a similar vein, 0. W. Wilson, former Superintendent of the Chicago Police Department emphasizes: . when all other factors are equal the university trained man is better qualified for police service than one who has graduated only from high school . . . such men will contribute a great deal to the true professionalization of the police service.48 46Larry Thorne Hoover, "Police Recruit Educational Background Analysis" (unpublished Doctor's dissertation, Michigan State Uni- versity, 1974), p. 10. 47Quinn Tamm, “Editorial Message," Police Chief, xxx111 (May, 1965), p. 6. 480. W. Wilson, Police Administration (New York: Mc-Graw Hill Book Company, 1963), p. 139. 19 Others have spoken out on the need for higher educational qualifications for persons entering the criminal justice system. The Honorable William R. Anderson of Tennessee speaking in Congress stated: police and correctional agencies are human institutions in a rapidly evolving society which, like other institutions, must constantly adapt to changing times. The brisk trend of our society is towards higher levels of education; we must not allow the law enforcement professions to fall behind . . . we should not ask that the American law enforcement profession police a society in which it is educationally inferior.49 Dr. Vernon Fox, practitioner, scholar, and author in the field of corrections, recently commented on the necessity of employing quali— fied and educated personnel in the field: All correctional workers must now be professional or semi- professional in their orientation, knowledge, and skills. The need for education and increased understanding and skills has become obvious . . . in the field of corrections and all other occupations concerned with behavior and attitude change, the knowledge of personality structure, social problems, legal systems, and other areas relating to behavioral and social science has become essential.50 Other individuals far too numerous to quote have made volumi- nous contributions in their own right to the advancement of criminal justice by advocating higher educational standards for personnel in the field.51 49William R. Anderson, H.R. 188-The Law Enforcement Education Act of 1967, The Congressional Record, January, 1967. 50Vernon B. Fox, Guidelines for Correctional Prqgrams (Wash— ington: American Association of Junior Colleges, 1969), p. 14. 5‘August Volmer in The Police and Modern Society; Leonhard Fuld in Police Administration; Raymond Fosdick, American Police Systems, Bruce Smith in Police System in the United States; more recently, Thomas M. Frost in A Forward Look in Police Education; A. F. Brand- statter, "Education Serves the Police-—The Youth--The Community," in 20 Although some dissensus exists regarding the value of higher education in criminal justice, the disagreement centers not so much on the value per se, rather on the degree of higher education necessary. In such a context then, it becomes irrelevant to debate the value. In occupations which require far less in terms of public demand, a four year degree is expected as a background for specialized training. Under such conditions, the question then is not do criminal justice personnel need a college degree, but where are persons with the nec- essary qualifications to be found. The answer to this riddle as Saunders points out so well is "more and more, the search leads di- rectly to the college and university campus."52 The need and value of college educated persons for the crimi- nal justice system has been recognized tnr commissions and individu- als alike. Yet, such recognition has no pragmatic value unless it is equally recognized and acted upon by the criminal justice system it- self. Whether individual employers within the system have taken the advice accordingly remains in doubt, since little documented evidence has been forthcoming on the issue. The Police Chief (8:66); Louis Radelet in The Police and the Community; Daniel Glasser, I'The New Correctional Era: Implications for Manpower and TrainingJ'in Crime and Delinquengy_(7:66); A. C. Germann, ”Educa- tion and Professional Law Enforcement," in Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science (12:67); Gilbert Geis and Elvin Cavanagh, “Recruitment and Retention of Correctional Personnel," in Crime and Delinquency(7:66); and William A. Goldberg in Twentieth Century Corrections. 52 Charles B. Saunders, Jr., op. cit., p. 92. 21 Inconclusiveness of: Research to date Recently, a description of criminal justice education was of- fered which may in part explain why more data regarding graduates of criminal justice programs has not been gathered. The Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals noted: A characteristic of contemporary higher education in criminal justice is that, like the criminal justice system itself, its roots lie in a number of different disciplines and programs: law, criminology, sociology, public administration, political science, police science, and social work.53 Although the preceding remark alludes to restraints in researching the subject matter, it alone, does not suffice as justification for the lack of pertinent research. Other disciplines--law, medicine, and social work--have some indication of where their graduates go following completion of their formal education.54 From a practical standpoint it is important to know with which agencies graduates find employment, what positions they occupy, what relationship exists be- tween their studies and occupational roles, and what differences have occured in utilization and initial employment over the years. Yet, criminal justice programs have been in existence for over half a century with relatively little systematic research concerning what becomes of their graduates. 53National Advisory Commission, A National Strategy, op. cit., p. 51. 54Charles W. Tenney, Jr., Higher Education Programs in Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1971), pp. 57-58. 22 Research which has been completed on graduates of criminal justice programs can be dichotomized and characterized as either studies dealing with the nature and scope of criminal justice programs offered or studies on criminal justice graduates in general. Further- more, studies completed thus far tend to be more descriptive than analytical and focus on attitudes and opinions of graduates with respect to curriculum and vocational choice, changes in both resulting from their college experiences, and to a limited extent, vocational occurrences subsequent to college. The conclusions which have emerged from research to date are less than decisive. For example, in 1968, a study conducted by Crockett revealed that 23 percent of the graduates surveyed were in- 55 service students. Three years later, Tenney in a similar study on criminal justice graduates found that 45 percent of the graduates . . . . 5 surveyed were claSSified as in-serVice. 6 Yet, a study by Moore in 1972 indicated that only 17 percent of the graduates serveyed from one institution were in—service students.57 There appears to be little consensus regarding the numbers of criminal justice students with previous experience. 55Thompson S. Crockett, Law Enforcement Education (1968): A Survey_of Colleges and Universities Offering Degree Programs in the Field of Law Enforcement (Washington: International Association of Chiefs of Police, Inc., Professional Standards Division, 1968), pp. 1.15-1.16. 56Charles W. Tenney, Jr., op. cit., p. 61. 57Merlyn D. Moore, "A Study of Placement and Utilization Patterns and Views of the Criminal Justice Graduates of Michigan State University" @npublished doctor's dissertation, Michigan State' University, 1972), p. 54. 23 Other findings are equally inconclusive. Newman and Hunter in 196758 59 and Crockett in 1968 both reported that approximately 75 percent of the pre-service graduates failed to locate employment in the field of criminal justice. Tenney in his study, on the other hand, indicated that 50 percent of the "pre-service" students found employ- ment in a criminal justice agency.60 However, Moore's conclusions on this point leave one further in doubt since he reports that 78 percent of those not previoushy employed in criminal justice entered 6‘ In view of the find- the criminal justice field or a related area. ings of these studies, the fact remains that certain results are disparate, thus inconclusive. Disagreement among results may be due to several factors. In the above studies (Newman and Hunter, Crockett, Tenney, and Moore), different groups of criminal justice graduates were studied under varying conditions. For instance, Moore's population was both under- graduates and graduates of the School, while Tenney for one also surveyed two-year program graduates. This and other variation from external sources are less amenable to direct control than are short- comings within the studies themselves. 58Charles L. Newman and Dorothy Sue Hunter, "Education for Careers in Law Enforcement: An Analysis of Student Output 1964-1967," Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science, LIX (March, 1968), p. 139. 6O 59Crockett, loc. cit. Tenney, op. cit., p. 61. 6Moore, op. cit., p. 63. 24 Misleading conclusions stem not only from external sources but from internal shortcomings evident in several of the studies. For example, several studies have concluded that "significant" numbers of graduates of criminal justice programs have been either successful or unsuccessful in locating employment in a criminal justice agency. Several pertinent aspects of the issue are obscured in a statement such as the latter. It should be ascertained if those unsuccessful in locating employment, as in the Crockett study and the Newman and Hunter study, chose not to seek employment in criminal justice due to personal reasons. Were all relatively recent graduates, young, predominantly pre-service students, undergraduate degree holders, minority group members and female? Conversely, if those successful in locating employment in a criminal justice agency as in Moore's study were either prior or in-service students, older, advanced degree holders, earlier graduates of the programs and caucasian and male, a much clearer scenario is presented. When a statement such as ”significant" numbers of graduates of criminal justice programs are either successfulcn~unsuccessful in locating employment in a criminal justice agency as is given, is compared with the more elabor- ate data as in the latter example above, the difference in clarity is obvious. In addition to the lack of qualification surrounding conclu- sions, studies completed thus far have tended to disregard the ele- ment of time. Conclusions that events, experiences, and philosophies, expressed by earlier graduates are somewhat akin to those of later graduates may not be the case and in fact may be quite the converse. 25 To disregard the effects of time as several studies have done62 and aggregate the data is to attribute conditions and characteristics of an earlier period the same significance as those of a later period. For example, a study conducted in 1971 may utilize persons who gradu- ated between the years 1960 and 1970. However, when results are pre- sented and conclusions drawn on the generated data, persons who gradu- ated in the early sixties are accorded the same status as those whose graduations occurred in the latter sixties. Accordingly, persons who graduated in the earlier period may respond positively to condi- tions and events, whereas those who graduated more recently may respond more negatively. Concluding that half the sample responded in a certain manner may be correct while at the same time somewhat misleading. The propensity of studies to employ the “melting pot phenome- non" rather than utilize appropriate cutting points, in effect, ig- nores the possiblity of trends or patterns which may have developed or are developing. As a result, failure to take into account this phenomena pre—conditions studies to lose much of their richness and leaves dormant and untapped valuable and pertinent information which would do much to elucidate the developing "state of the art" in criminal justice education and the educational utilization of graduates. 625ee Tenney, op. cit., and Moore, op. cit. 26 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The purpose of this study is to determine what changes have developed over time in the educational utilization of graduates of the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University. Specific changes over time within the issues selected relating to educational utilization of the graduates (further discussed in the following section) will be extracted. Thus, we intend to elaborate on changes uncovered. Included in elaborations will be other factors such as the type of agency of initial employment, sex, age, degree on jOb, area of specialization, and the status of experience of the graduates to which changes may also be attributed. AREAS OF INVESTIGATION In viewing the transition of the graduate from the educational institution to the occupational setting, numerous areas can be ex- plored depending on the purpose in mind. Since this study has as its prime purpose the discovery of changes in the educational utilization over time, areas chosen for investigation are attuned to these themes. After a thorough review and analysis of the literature which included several commissions' reports, numerous articles by authorities in the field, and an examination of the limited number of studies to date, the authors have selected several pertinent issues to form the basis of this investigation. The issues to be investigated are: 27 Initial Emplgyment One issue which will be considered is that of where graduates find their initial employment. Which graduates find employment in criminal justice agencies? Which, on the contrary, find employment in non—criminal justice related work? Also important in this vein are reasons why those who have been educated in criminal justice do not initially work in criminal justice or related agencies. How graduates obtained their initial job placement is another matter of concern. Educational Utilization One aspect to be considered in assessing the value of a college education is the degree to which itiSLnfilized in one's voca- tion. It is important to know whether graduates are placed in posi- tions commensurate with their education; whether their college educa- tion experience was best utilized through their initial job placements; whether they felt prepared to assume their job responsibilities in comparison with their fellow workers; if any newly hired personnel started at the same entry level of education; and if there were any difficulties in getting their initial jobs that they felt were attribu- table to their criminal justice degrees. Educational Satisfaction The third and final issue for investigation is the satisfac- tion that graduates find with their degrees in criminal justice. If graduates had to do it over again, would they choose the same area of specialization? The criminal justice area as their college major? 28 Satisfaction with the criminal justice curriculum itself is a further aspect of this issue. Finally, graduates' satisfaction with their college education, overall, is a meaningful point. Each of the preceding issues is examined by utilizing several variables designed to measure its overall import. In this manner, each issue over time can be assessed and analyzed regarding signifi— cant changes. Chapter IV, DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY, provides an elabora- tion on the issues and their variables. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY To the knowledge of the authors, there has been no research in criminal justice which considers the effects of educational utiliza— tion over time of graduates from criminal justice programs. This study, thus, representes a contribution of new data from a previously un-examined area and provides relevant information needed for decision- making in the criminal justice educational and vocational effort. Specifically, it will: (1) provide to the School of Criminal Justice greater insight so as to more effectively deal with the issue of higher educationiricriminal justice; (2) provide a source for both criminal justice students, potential students in criminal justice, and criminal justice programs across the nation to utilize; and (3) provide baseline information which contributes knowledge and leads to increased understanding of agency direction on the utilization of criminal justice graduates. 29 DEFINITION OF TERMS Several of the terms employed in the study may present diffi- culty due to their ambiguous nature. The following definitions are provided to clarify their meanings and use in the study. Criminal Justice: refers to all persons employed in Federal, state, local and private agencies engaged in the process of the ad- ministration of the law, e.g., Federal police, state corrections, private security agencies. Criminal Justice Related: refers to all persons employed in agencies not engaged in the process of administration of the law but engaged in employment which makes direct use of their criminal jus- tice education, e.g., criminal justice teaching, research and planning units, etc. Non-Criminal Justice: refers to all persons employed in agencies not engaged in the administration of justice and concurrently who do not make direct use of their criminal justice education. Law Enforcement: refers to all persons engaged in public police functions and employed at the Federal, state, and local levels by respective governmental organizations. Corrections: refers to all persons engaged in public correc- tional functions and employed at the Federal, state, and local levels by representative governmental organizations. Industrial Security: refers to all persons engaged in a private police/security function and employed by industrial, retail, and commercial organizations. 30 Military: refers to all persons engaged in a military func; tion and employed by the Federal government. Pre-Service: refers to a person without criminal justice experience before graduation from Michigan State University. Prior-Service: refers to a person who had criminal justice experience but not employed as such while attending Michigan State University. In-Service: refers to a person employed by a criminal justice agency while attending Michigan State University. SUMMARY AND OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY The introduction to the study established that the incidence and the fear of crime have increased. Aware that the provincially oriented criminal justice system was ineffectual in coping with the crime problem, the Federal government implemented a program labeled the "war on crime." One aspect of this program involved upgrading the educational level of criminal justice personnel. A need for the study was recognized on three accounts, namely the increased emphasis on criminal justice edcuation, consensus on utilizing educated personnel in criminal justice, and the inconclusive- ness of research to date on the impact graduates of criminal justice programs are having on the criminal justice system. Accordingly, the purpose of the study is to analyze educational utilization of gradu- ates of one institution in order to specify trehds over time. Ideally, the study's recommendations will afford greater liaison between the educational institution and criminal justice agencies. 31 This study has been organized into six chapters: Chapter 1, The Problem, discusses the purpose and signifi- cance of the study, the need for such a study, the issues of investi- gation, and definitions of terms used. Chapter 2, Review of Related Studies, encompasses a review of empirically based studies on higher education programs in criminal justice which in an ancillary manner have been concerned with the graduates of these programs and original studies of criminal justice higher education graduates per se. Chapter 3, The University and Criminal Justice, is a brief account of the initial involvement of universities and colleges in the criminal justice educational effort in the United States with special emphasis given to the development and growth of the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University. Chapter 4, Design and Methodology, includes a discussion on the study design, issues of investigation, time frames, the population, sampling frame and procedure, survey instrument, data collection, coding and re-coding, and techniques of analysis. Chapter 5, Data and Analysis, contains a presentation of the information gathered in the study and its relationship to the issues. Chapter 6, Summary and Conclusions, summarizes the previous chapters, lists the principal conclusions, and establishes implica- tions for future research endeavors. Chapter 2 REVIEW OF RELATED STUDIES Both the number and quality of studies dealing with criminal justice graduates is limited. That research which has been done ap- pears to be divided among two principal categories: (1) studies of criminal justice higher education programs which have only in an an- cillary manner been concerned with the graduates of these programs and (2) studies of criminal justice higher education graduates which have tended to stress and approach the subject from a generally broad and ambitious perspective. Those few studies which specifically deal with graduates have their primary emphasis on discovering "what is" regarding the state of the art. The lack of in-depth analysis in- herently limits the value of these studies. Derived from both types of studies, the literature review concentrates on data pertinent to graduates. Thus, the reader can expect studies of graduates per se to be given a more thorough re- view. The thrust of the review is towards specific results which relate directly to the issues of investigation. Listed in chronologi- cal order beginning with the earliest, the studies are briefly de- scribed, their purposes stated, and findings relevant to the issues of investigation stipulated. Finally, the results are organized ac- cording to which of the three issues they pertain to and then com- pared and discussed. 32 33 STUDIES A Survey of Experiences, Activi- ties, and Views of the Indus- trial Security Administration Graduates of Michigan State University63' Hayes Larkins, in 1966, proposed to obtain information regard- ing the activities and professional experiences since graduation of all past industrial security graduates. A study such as this was needed since the industrial security program had been in existence for ten years and the School had not yet made an organized attempt to communicate with these graduates. Thus, Larkins surveyed all 167 industrial security graduates in order to determine their feelings about the adequacy of the academic training they received and how it helped them to meet employment experiences post graduation. Of the 167 surveyed, 120 responded for a useable return rate of 72 percent. With the exception of one female, all respondents were male. The mean age was 28.9 years. Master's degrees were earned by 10 (8%) of the respondents with the remainder (92%) earning bacca- laureate degrees. When asked, "What did you first do after graduation from MSU with a B.S. Degree in Industrial Security Administration?", of the 119 who answered, 59 (59%) had taken a job in the industrial security or related field; 28 (24%) had taken a job in an unrelated field; and the bulk, 22 (18%) of the remainder were in the military service. 63Hayes Larkins, ”A Survey of Experiences, Activities, and Views of the Industrial Security Administration Graduates of Michigan State University," @npublished Master's thesis, Michigan State Uni- versity),1966. 34 The main reasons why forty respondents had never been employed in either the industrial security or related field were (1) lack of em- ployment opportunities-—12 or 30 percent, (2) better pay and other opportunities in an unrelated field--9 or 22 percent, (3) military service--8 or 20 percent, and (4) other reasons--10 or 25 percent. When graduates were asked, "If you had it to do over again, would you choose to major in Industrial Security Administration again?”, 51 (73 percent) of the 70 who were employed in industrial security and related work answered yes; 18 (37 percent) of the 70 graduates employed in industrial security and related work answered positively; 41 (84 percent) of the 49 employed in non-industrial security work answered negatively. Graduates with an employment background in industrial security or related field were asked several questions on the utilization of their education. Of the 80 who responded to the question, "How well do you feel your college major prepared you for your position(s) in the 1.5. or related field?”, 65 (81 percent) felt they were "ade- quately" or ”extremely well” prepared. When asked, "How well were you prepared to assume the responsibilities involved in your first 1.5. (or related) job after graduation?", 71 (83 percent) of the 80 respondents to this question felt they were “adequately" or ”extremely well" prepared. Sixty-two (78 percent) of the 80 respondents to the question, "How well prepared were you to assume your job responsi- bilities in comparison with your colleagues trained elsewhere?” answered "adequately" or "extremely well" prepared. Overall, the 35 graduates of the program who were employed in related work were highly satisfied with the relation of their education to its use on the job. Education for Careers in Law Enforcement: An Analysis of Student Output 1964-196794 In the fall of 1966, C. L. Newman and Dorothy Sue Hunter with support from the Center of Law Enforcement and Corrections at Pennsyl- vania State University surveyed 128 criminal justice educational pro- grams. Of the 128 institutions contacted 99 returned questionnaires. Included in the survey were associate, baccalaureate, master's, and doctoral programs. The purpose of the study was to determine how many new people the programs were contributing to the field of law en- forcement. A total of 1,850 graduates were reported on by the four year programs. Over half of this number did not enter the law enforcement field after graduation. Of the 1,437 graduates who were pre-service students, over three-quarters (1,133) did not enter the field. The authors stress the point that the question is why these people did not enter the field for which they had been educated. However, their conclusions are void of any answers to it. Post Graduation Activities of Police Administration Students65 In March, 1967, Richard Post conducted a survey of all gradu- ates of the School to date because little definitive information had 64Newman and Hunter, op. cit., p. 138-143. 65Richard Post, "Post-Graduation Activities of Police Admin— istration (October, 1967) (Mimeographed). 36 been collected on the post-graduation activities of police adminis- tration students at the bachelor's and master's level. The purpose was, then, to identify what these graduates were doing and where they were employed. Questionnaires requiring basic personal and employment data (age, degree received, date graduated, major, and employment) were mailed to 1,439 graduates of which 899 responses were returned for a useable return rate of 67.4 percent. Of interest are the results regarding initial job placement. Representing 47 percent of the 899 respondents were the 413 police administration graduates entering public law enforcement. This cate- gory was the largest single category of initial employment after graduation. Sub-categories of public law enforcement and the portion of graduates represented in each were as follows: (1) federal-124 (14%), (2) state-137 (l %), and (3) municipal-152 (18%). Twenty-nine percent of the graduates (244) entered the mili- tary. This figure also includes many active duty military personnel who completed degrees and returned to duty. Comprising the final two categories were 146 graduates (15 percent of the total) entering non- law enforcement positions and 95 (9 percent of the total) entering private law enforcement positions. A Survey of Degree Programs in Criminologygand CorrectionsEB During 1967—68, a study of 63 degree programs in operation in criminology and corrections was conducted by Loren Karacki and 66Loren Karacki and John J. Galvin, "Higher Education Programs in Criminology and Corrections," Criminology and Corrections Programs, 37 John J. Galvin on behalf of the Joint Commission on Correctional Man- power and Training. This study was intended to aid the Joint Commis- sion with its responsibility of determining the availability and sufficiency of educational resources for persons entering correctional work. Its purpose was to obtain a factual accounting of these pro- grams regarding a variety of educationally related matters, one being employment obtained by graduates. Among their numerous findings are those related to initial job placement and level. Karacki and Galvin reported that a propensity exists for graduate degree holders to seek employment at either ad- ministrative, research, or teaching levels. 'Of the 66 graduate de- gree recipients reported on, 16 (30%) entered probation or parole work; 16 (30%) teaching; 7 (13%) institutional treatment; 4 (8%) institutional custody; 5 (9%) administration; 5 (9%) research. The 13 classified as "other or unknown" were eliminated from the pere centage determinations. Of the 477 undergraduate degree recipients reported on, 130 (54%) entered probation or parole work; 57 (24%) institutional treat- ment work; 42 (18%) institutional custody; one administration, three research, and six teaching, for a combination of four percent. The 238 who were either ”other" or "unknown" were eliminated from the percentage determinations. (Washington: Joint Commission on Correctional Manpower and Training, 1968), pp. 10—27, 96, 97. 38 Law Enforcement Education (1968): A Survey and Discussion of Law Enforcement Education in the United State557‘ In 1968, the International Association of Chiefs of Police under the auspices of a Ford Foundation grant commissioned Thompson Crockett to do a study of law enforcement programs in the United States. Data gathered from 362 colleges and universities included the number of programs at the associate, baccalaureate, and graduate levels; student enrollments as of fall, 1967; graduates of law en- forecement programs; testbooks used; program faculty; and on-campus based training programs. Evidently, the goal was broad--to obtain information on criminal justice higher education programs. Of particular significance is the initial job placement infor- mation. The majority of pre-service students from both two and four year programs did not enter the police service. Less than 25 percent of the graduates of the four year programs reported entering the police service. Yet, an important distinction must be extracted from the preceding conclusion. The phrase police service possesses limited meaning since it refers only to those entering the police occupation and thus inherently excludes other occupations which may be within the parameters of the criminal justice system. 67Crockett, op. cit. 39 Higher Education Programs in Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice: Survey of Law Enforcement Graduate568 In 1970, the National Institute of Law Enforcement and Crimi- nal Justice commissioned Charles W. Tenney, Jr., former Dean of Northeastern University School of Criminal Justice, to conduct a study of criminal justice education programs. Included within the bounds of the study was a survey explicitly treating criminal justice gradu- ates. The survey population consisted of 423 graduates of two and four year criminal justice programs throughout the country, although only slightly more than half (238) responded to the questionnaire. As a group the respondents were relatively young. Seventy percent were under thirty-five years of age and overwhelmingly male caucasians. Only ten female and three black graduates were included in the group. Initial job placement data was examined by Tenney. Of the 238 total respondents, 108 (45%) were in-service personnel at the time of graduation. Forty of these in-service personnel (37%) had left the law enforcement field subsequent to graduation. Of the 129 pre-service students (55 percent of the total 238 respondents), 64 (50%) were initially placed in a law enforcement agency. Thus, a net gain of 25 individuals were realized in the field. Yet, as Tenney clearly points out ”in terms of experience, however, it seems fair to say that the figures represent a new loss, since those 68Tenney, op. cit., pp. 60-67. 40 leaving the field include iri addition to 35 patrolmen, two sergeants, three lieutenants and one chief of police.“ Of the 132 respondents presently employed in law enforcement, the vast majority (124 or 99%) felt their education was of value to them in performing their responsibilities. One hundred seventeen of the 286 respondents answered the question of how relevant their courses were in their job. In surprising contrast to the number who believed that their education had been of value to them in their work, 73 (62%) said their education was of little relevance. A Study of the Placement and Utilization Patterns and Views of the Criminal Justice Gradu- ates of Michigan State Uni- versity69 In 1972, M. Douglas Moore conducted a survey of the graduates of the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University. The major purpose of Moore's research was to discover what happens to criminal justice graduates after they graduate. Essentially, it is a description of patterns and views held by the School's graduates on specific issues ranging from placement and utilization to their views towards the criminal justice program and selected issues re— lated to criminal justice education. The population under examination consisted of the total number of graduates of Michigan State University who have majored in criminal justice i.e., both undergraduates and graduates (excluding foreign 69Moore, op. cit. 41 students residing in foreign countries). From an initial number of approximately 2,000 mailed questionnaires, 1,161 were returned and employed in the analysis. The sample, as with the population, was overwhelmingly male (1,052 or 92%) and relatively young--approximate1y half (606) were 34 years of age and under. Only 21 respondents (less than two percent) represented racial minorities, i.e., Negro/Black, Mexican American, American Indian, and Oriental American. Several conclusions can be drawn from the initial employment information presented in Table 1. Fifty—three percent of the 1,143 respondents to this question were employed in public law enforcement with the majority (36 percent) in police work. A breakdown of the public law enforcement category reveals that 9 percent of the total respondents went into correctional work and 8 percent into agencies that were categorized as ”public law enforcement" but not police or corrections related. A further breakdown of the police and corrections categories indicates that a large number went into municipal police work; the Federal police sub-category ranked second. With those in corrections, most were employed at the state and county levels. Only 17 percent of the total could be classified as neither employed in the law en- forcement fields nor in criminal justice related work. Five percent of the total classed as non-law enforcement were occupied in criminal justice related work. Twenty-eight individuals found no initial em- ployment. Moore considered which students entered law enforcement and related work according to the status of their experience. Over 42 Table 1 Initial Job Placement* Number Percent*** Number Percent*** Public Law Enforcement** 608 53 Police Federal 105 9 State 53 5 County 32 3 Municipal 218' .19 Subtotal 408 36 Corrections Federal 3 0 State 49 4 County 58 5 Municipal __2_ _9_ Subtotal 112 9 Private Law Enforcement 143 13 Non-Law Enforcement Non-Related 170 15 Criminal Justice Related ._§2 _32 Subtotal 222 20 Career 142 12 Military Non-Related l9 2 Criminal Justice Realted 123_ .ll Subtotal 142 13 No Initial Employment __g§_ __g_ Total 1143 99 Source: Merlyn D. Moore, "A Study of Placement and Utilization Patterns and Views of the Criminal Justice Graduates of Michigan State University" (unpublished doctor's dissertation, Michigan State University, 1972), p. 56. *Six did not respond **Eighty-eight responses (8%) to the public law enforcement category were classified as "other." ***Percentages were rounded to nearest whole number. 43 three-quarters, 591 (78%)of the 761 respondents not previously in law enforcement, entered the criminal justice field or a related area. Also noteworthy were those in-service students who did not enter law enforcement related work. Fifteen (8%) of the 184 in-service stud- ents responding found initial placement in non-law enforcement re- lated work. Respondents were also asked what their major reason was for not going into law enforcement related work. One of the reasons given, that jobs were not available, was the most frequently mentioned ex- planation. Low salary and lack of opportunity ranked second and third with physical restrictions being the fourth most frequently mentioned reason given for not pursuing public law enforcement. Moore also asked several questions pertaining to educational utilization. 1. "Were there any difficulties in getting your initial job that you feel were attributable to your criminal justice or police ad- ministration degree?” 963 (93%) of 1,032 respondents to this question answered no. 2. "How well do you feel your college major prepared you for your initial job placement?” 860 (82%) of 1,049 respondents to this question answered ”extremely well” or ”adequately." 3. “Do you feel your college training was best utilized through your initial job placement?” 640 (62%) of 1,034 responding to this question said “yes.“ 44 4. "How well prepared were you to assume your own responsibilities in comparison with your fellow workers?" 975 (93%) of the 1,049 responding to this question answered ”ex- tremely well" or "adequately." 5. "Did all newly hired personnel start at the same entry level re- gardless of their level of education?" 629 (62%) of 1,015 responding to this question said "no." The Satisfaction graduates felt towards their eduCation was ex— amined by the following questions: 1. "If you had to do it over again, would you choose the same area of specialization?" 874 (79%) of the 1,112 responding to this question answered "yes." 2. "If you had to do it over again, would you choose the criminal justice area as your college major?" 868 (77%) of the 1,128 responding to this question said "yes." 3. "Were you satisfied with the criminal justice curriculum while attending MSU?" 825 (73%) of the 1,125 responding to this question answered "yes." A Descriptive Study of Criminal Justice Higher Education at Sam Houston State University70 Allan Hensley in November, 1972, surveyed past graduates and undergraduates from the Institute of Contemporary Corrections and the Behavioral Sciences, Sam Houston State University at Huntsville, 70Allan L. Hensley, ”A Descriptive Study of Criminal Justice Higher Education at Sam Houston State University” (unpublished Master's thesis, Sam Houston State University, 1973). 45 Texas, Similar to Moore's study, this survey of Institute graduates was conducted to determine information related to their job placement and utilization patterns and their views regarding issues in law en- forcement and corrections. Like Moore and previous others, Hensley recognized "the dearth of information about what happens to the indi- vidual once he leaves the [educational] institution.”71 Questionnaires were mailed to 148 graduate and 358 undergradu- ate degree holders from the Institute. These totals account for all of the master of arts degree holders between the period of August, 1965, to August, 1972, and the total number of bachelor of arts and bachelor of science degree holders from May, 1971, through May, 1972. Of the 506 Institute graduates who received questionnaires, 318 re- sponded to the request for information, for a useable return per- centage of 62.9 percent. The undergraduate respondents were rela- tively young with 72 percent under twenty-eight years of age. Some- what older, the majority (57%) of the graduate respondents fell be- tween the ages of twenty-nine and thirty-seven. Of interest is initial job placement data as shown in Table 2. Ranking first in the order of the greatest number of graduates employed, the corrections institutions employ the largest number, 53 (41%) of 131 total respondents. Following corrections is the mili- tary with 28 graduates (21.3%) and educational institutions with 25 (19%). Only eleven (8%) obtained initial employment with public law enforcement agencies. ”Ibid., p. 6. 46 Table 2 Frequency Distribution of Initial Employment by Level of Degree Graduates Undergraduates Total Position f % f % f % Public Law Enforcement 8 6.1 52 [26.2] 60 18.2% (State/Local Level) Public Law Enforcement 3 2.3 6 [ 3.0] 9 2.7% (Federal Level) Private Law Enforcement 0 0.0 4 [ 2.0] 4 1.2% Non-Criminal Justice 4 3.1 52 [26.3] 56 17.0% Mi1itary 28 [21.3] 6 I 3.0] 34 10.3% Corrections 47 35.9 43 [21.7] 90 27.3% (State/Local Level) Corrections 6 4.6 O [ 0.0] 6 1.8% (Federal Level) Education 25 19.1 0 [ 0.0] 25 7.6% Student 0 0.0 16 I 8.1] 16 4.8% Vocational Rehabilitation 9 [ 6.8] 16 [ 8.1] 25 7.6% Unemployed l .8 3 [ 1.5] 4 1.2% Totals* 131 100.00 [198] 100.0 329 100.0 Source: Allan L. Hensley, ”A Descriptive Study of Criminal Justice Higher Education at Sam Houston State University" (unpublished Master's thesis, Sam Houston State University, 1973). Authors have included the total column for purposes of discussion. *No response from 1 graduate and 4 undergraduates. 47 Contrastingly, at the undergraduate level, 52 (29%) were em- ployed by public law enforcement agencies. Another sharp difference with the graduate level is the percentage (26%) of undergraduates em- ployed by non-criminal justice organizations. Corrections agencies rank third accounting for 43 (22%) of the undergraduate respondents. Like Moore, Hensley also was interested in the views of gradu- ates on the issue of educational utilization and even asked some of the same questions as listed. 1. "Were there any difficulties in getting your initial job that you feel were attributable to your criminal justice oriented degree?” 95 (94%) of the 101 graduate respondents said ”no." Of the 117 under- graduates who responded to the same question, 106 (91%) answered "no." 2. ”How well do you feel your degree prepared you for your initial job placement?” 91 (90%) of the 101 graduate respondents answered ”extremely well” or "adequately" when asked. Of 160 undergraduates responding, 113 (71%) answered “extremely well" or ”adequately." 3. "Do you feel your college training was best utilized through your initial job placement?" 74 (71%) of the 104 graduate respondents answered "yes." Of the 145 undergraduate respondents, 80 (55%) answered ”yes.” 4. "How well prepared were you to assume your job responsibilities in comparison with your fellow workers?" 100 (77%) of the 103 graduate respondents answered “extremely well" or "adequately.'I Undergraduate degree holders were not surveyed in this matter due to their recency of graduation. 48 Satisfaction with the curriculum at the Institute and the in— tent to remain in the area of specialization were examined by Hensley. He asked the following questions and recorded the results as specified: 1. "If you had to do it over again, would you choose the same area of specialization?" 102 (90%) of the 114 graduate respondents answered ”yes.” Of the 180 undergraduates responding, 141 (78%) answered "yes." 2. "Were you satisfied with the Institute curriculum while attending S.H.S.U.?” 104 (91%) of the 114 graduate respondents expressed satisfaction. Of the 184 undergraduate respondents, 134 (73%) were satisfied. ISSUES AND RELATED FINDINGS Initial Employment Among the studies, mainly four have common ground with respect to initial employment and thus provide bases for comparing their find- ings. Larkins, Post, Moore, and Hensley are in obvious agreement over several of their major findings. Approximately half of the respondents in each study were initially employed in public law en- forcement work, where public law enforcement is broadly defined to include corrections personnel in addition to all state, federal, or municipal police in the performance of security or investigative 72 In Larkin's case, over half of his population, i.e., functions. industrial security graduates, found initial employment in industrial security or a related field. 72Ibid., p. 13, Post, op. cit., p. 3-4, Moore, op. cit., p. 23. 49 Another commonality among the findings pertained to the pro- portion entering non-law enforcement work. About 15 percent of the respondents in Post's, Moore's and Hensley's surveys were in the "non- law enforcement," l'non-law enforcement non-related," or "non-criminal justice" category. Larkins found a greater proportion, since his "unrelated” category naturally included police and corrections per- sonnel, by definition unrelated to industrial security work. Similarities are also evident'hitheproportions employed in the governmental levels within the public law enforcement category. Post, Moore, and Hensley employed breakdowns by Federal, state, county, municipal, or local governmental level. The combination of state and local, inclusive of county and municipal contained the majority of those initially employed in public law enforcement while fewer re- spondents reported employment at the federal level. Two distinct differences are evident between Moore's and Hensley's results. First, Moore reported thirteen percent of his re- spondents initially employed in private law enforcement. Varying substantially from Moore, Hensley reported only 1.2 percent of his overall population in the same job category. Secondly, with the public law enforcement category, Moore found 36 percent in I'police,” 9 percent in "corrections," and 8 percent in "other" categories. On the other hand, Hensley reported 21 percent in "police'' and 37 per- cent in "corrections," including vocational rehabilitation. In short, the majority of Moore's respondents within public law en- forcement were initially employed in police while Hensley's majority was employed in corrections. 50 These divergent findings may at best be explained by the nature of the two populations under study. Students from the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University graduate with an emphasis in police administration, industrial security, criminalistics, juvenile delinquency, corrections, or highway traffic; while, stud- ents graduating from the Institute of Contemporary Corrections and the Behavioral Sciences at Sam Houston State University specialize in law enforcement and police science, criminology and corrections, or social rehabilitation and social services. Graduates from the School of Criminal Justice found employment in private law enforce- ment since the industrial security specialization within the School is attuned to this field. Offering little in the area of industrial security, Sam Houston's Institute of Contemporary Corrections and the Behavioral Sciences admittedly emphasizes a slant towards preparing students for work in the corrections field,73 thereby accounting for the greater proportion initially employed in corrections. Several of the studies tended to examine initial employment by the status of the graduates' criminal justice experience. The re- sults from Newman and Hunter, Moore, and Tenney when coupled with those of the IACP survey create much confusion regarding the input of pre-service graduates into the system. In the IACP survey, Crockett reported that of the four year programs responding, less than one-quarter of the graduates of them entered the police service. Newman and Hunter found that over three-quarters of pre-service 73Hensley, op. cit., p. 29. 51 students did not enter the law enforcement field after graduation. Quite divergent are Moore's results several years later. He found that approximately 78 percent of pre-service students he surveyed reported entering the law enforcement field or related area. Tenney balances the large difference between Newman and Hunter and Moore. Half of his total of pre-service students were initially placed in law enforcement agencies. In explaining the inconclusiveness of these results, Moore offers a rationale based on the limited meaning of the term "police service." As it was used in the IACP study, it referred only to those entering the police occupation, intrinsically excluding other occupations within the realm of the criminal justice system. The major emphasis of "law enforcement" in Newman and Hunter's study was towards the police although the term was not restricted to the police. Both Tenney and Moore more broadly define law enforcement to include all areas of the criminal justice system, i.e., police, corrections, probation, parole, and courts. It is possible, then, that the initial employment of the pre-service students figured into categories other than police, accounting for the greater numbers re- porting employment by the more inclusive public law enforcement cate- gory in Tenney's and Moore's studies. Still, when Tenney's and Moore's results are compared with each other, there is a discrepancy that is not due to this problem of definition. In their expression of concern over graduates educated in criminal justice who do not "choose" to enter a related occupation, Newman and Hunter comment: 52 It is obvious that the important and necessary questions are those concerning what fields these people enter instead of law enforcement and WHY they do not enter the field for 74 which they have prepared and in which they are qualified. Larkins found that industrial security graduates cited the lack of employment opportunities and better pay and opportunities in un- related fields as the main reasons why they did not enter industrial security of related work. On a much larger scale with past graduates of all specializations, Moore found the same two reasons given most frequently. In-service students who subsequent to graduation left the law enforcement field may have had different reasons for leaving than pre-service students had. Moore found that 8 percent of his in-service respondents left the law enforcement field for non-law enforcement work. Of the total in-service respondents, Tenney reported 37 per-' cent (40) left law enforcement work after graduation. Conversely, of the pre-service graduates, 50 percent (65) were successful in locating initial employment within a law enforcement agency. There- fore, a net gain of 25 individuals was realized in the field. Al- though the field gained in the number of personnel due to pre-service student input, Tenney clearly points out "in terms of experience, . it seems fair to say that the figures represent a new 1055,. since those leaving the field include, in addition to 35 patrolmen, 75 two sergeants, three lieutenants and one chief of police." In 74Newman and Hunter, op. cit., p. 139. 75Tenney, op. cit., p. 61. 53 summarizing the somewhat high exodus of in-service personnel after graduation, Tenney does note that such individuals may be filling teaching vacancies in the field. Educational Utilization In the area of educational utilization, Moore and Hensley express the most concern judging by their number of questions per- taining to graduates' perceptions of the use of their criminal justice education. Tenney and Larkins each asked for relatively little sub- jective feedback from their population. Most noticeable when con- sidering all data related to educational utilization is the appearance that the vast majority of graduates felt their criminal justice edu- cation was being used in their initial employment. Still, minor discrepancies attract attention. Moore observes that not quite two-thirds of his respondents found their college training best utilized through their initial job. In his attempt to explain why more than one-third of his respondents felt their educa— tion was not best utilized, he proposes "utilization" may have been misunderstood by the graduates surveyed. Utilization can be taken to mean that if the respondents went into the area of their training, then they were best utilized.76 However, Moore had hoped for an understanding of utilization in the job itself. According to Moore, had the latter definition been accepted and understood perhaps of those employed in non-law enforcement work fewer would have responded 76Moore, op. cit., pp. 79-80. 54 negatively. Nevertheless, the majority of those who felt their college training was not best utilized through their initial job were found to be initially employed in non-law enforcement work. Interestingly enough, with every question related to utiliza- tion asked by Hensley, the graduate degree holders responded proportion- ately more favorably than undergraduate degree holders. A possible explanation again involves those in the non-criminal justice category. As Table 2 indicates, 26 percent of the undergraduates were initially employed in non-criminal justice work, while only three percent of the graduates were likewise employed. Tenney reports two quite contrasting findings with respect to educational utilization. An overwhelming majority, close to unani- mous, agreed their education was of value to them in the performance of their job responsibilities. On the other hand, almost two-thirds said their education "was of little relevance" to their work. In- terpreting this discrepancy, Tenney argues "the questions were poorly phrased."77 He singles out the definition attached to "relevance" as a specific trouble spot. Relevance can be taken in a very general or particular sense and he maintains it was highly likely that it was taken in the latter sense of the word, having a direct applica- 7 8 Because relevance tion to the performance of particular tasks. was understood in the narrower scope of the term, more expressed a lack of relevance between their work and their education. 77Tenney, op. cit., p. 63. 781bid. 55 Although the overall conclusion in regards to educational utilization was positive, the natural concomitant to it is the need for a greater degree of identification of those who felt their educa- tion was not being best used in their initial employment. Did earlier graduates of the program have different perceptions than the most re- cent graduates? Other variables which may shed light on the matter are sex, status of experience, and agency of initial employment. Do women moreso than men feel their education was of little benefit to them in the performance of their job responsibilities? A finer analy- sis of the data amassed can lead to more distinct conclusions. Educational Satisfaction Three of the studies related to graduates feeling of satis- faction toward their college education generally, criminal justice as a major, the particular School's curriculum, and the specializations offered by the School. The issue of satisfaction closely parallels educational utilization. When considering all data pertaining to satisfaction, it is evident that the majority of respondents in Moore's, Hensley's, and Larkin's studies were satisfied with aspects of the criminal justice educational program, i.e., the curriculum, specializations, and other matters. In fact, what may be true is that to a large extent, the two influence each other. Following this line of thinking, a reason bearing upon the respondents' high degree of satisfaction is the graduates' perceptions that their criminal justice degree did not 56 hinder them in obtaining employment. Over 90 percent responded posi- tively to this aspect of educational utilization. Therefore, satis- faction and utilization may be considered as having a close corre- spondence. Hensley found his undergraduate degree holders not as satis-‘ fied as his graduate degree holders, proportionately speaking. More than one-quarter of the undergraduate respondents were dissatisfied with the criminal justice curriculum. Because many of those who re- sponded negatively commented that more training oriented courses were 79 Hensley offers a positive outlook towards the dissatisfaction. needed, He posits that the relatively high dissatisfaction should not be misinterpreted as tantamount to disenchantment with the curriculum of the value of a degree. As support for his rationale are findings from the undergraduate response to their feelings, overall, towards the value of their college education. A more positive response met this question. Thus, they may be dissatisfied with specifics of the program while valuing their educational experiences generally. Similar to Hensley, Moore also found greater than one-quarter of his respondents dissatisfied with the criminal justice curriculum. The most frequent criticism of those not satisfied as noted by Moore was "too much theory and not enough practical application in the curriculum."80 Viewing this case with the same optimistic outlook of 79Hensley, op. cit., p. 108. 80Moore, op. cit., p. 53. 57 Hensley, dissatisfaction expressed over particular aspects of the curriculum need not be gross dissatisfaction with the sum total of the graduates' educational experiences. Here as with utilization, the concern is also towards those who were dissatisfied. Are they who are dissatisfied the more re- cent graduates? Unemployed? Maybe the inability of the curriculum to guarantee a job and not its propensity for theory is what is actu- ally behind graduates' dissatisfaction. Further exploration with other variables may clarify the issue. SUMMARY This chapter has brought into focus those studies that have a pertinent bearing on the context of this present study, namely the educational utilization and initial placement and related issues of criminal justice graduates from Michigan State University. As it has been exposed, the literature reveals that little attention has been directed towards graduates of criminal justice educational programs. Furthermore, what has been accomplished in this area fails to provide information of a definite nature primarily because of the variation in results from one study to another. An attendant problem hindering accurate cross-comparisons is the differing natures of the populations studies in terms of their composition and time periods they repre- sent. Thus far, studies completed tend to approach the subject matter from two different directions. They can be categorized and 58 described as either studies of criminal justice higher educational programs or as studies of graduates of criminal justice programs. Only in a secondary manner have the former studies turned their con- cern to graduates; the latter tend to treat the topic from a broad and ambitious perspective. Resultingly, this broad orientation leaves much pertinent information dormant and untapped. Of significance is the process of unwinding elaboration and more in-depth analysis of the data by variables such as time, agency of initial employment, sex, status of experience, and area of specialization. The yield of more specific analytical relationships among the issues related to higher education and the criminal justice graduate has yet to be realized. Chapter 3 THE UNIVERSITY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE The involvement of institutions of higher learning in the criminal justice educational effort marked the beginning of a new era in the field of criminal justice. Colleges and universities have been able to offer to criminal justice students a more diverse and specialized curricula for study, in contrast to the limited scope of "in-house" training of some criminal justice agencies. In assuming the role of catalyst, higher educational institutions have been re- sponsible for many of the innovative and needed changes in the crimi- nal justice effort. Nowhere has the responsibility and effort been more evident than at Michigan State University. From its inception in 1935 to the present, the School of Criminal Justice has been a leader in both the prctical and theoretical avenues of criminal justice education. Gradu- ates from the program are diffused throughout the nation and occupy several of the more pre-eminent positions in the field of criminal justice. While the focus of this study is primarily on the graduates of the School, its scope encompasses the School also. A context for viewing how changes in the School may have affected graduates enter- ing the field is offered as a commentary on their relationship over 59 60 time. Prior to this account of the School of Criminal Justice is a brief history on initial university involvement in criminal justice education leading to Michigan State University's involvement. 61 THE HISTORICAL SETTING The history of higher education in what is continually re- ferred to as "criminal justice" dates back a relatively brief period. Although "in-house" police training programs eXisted prior to the turn of the century, it was not until 1916 that universities became active participants in the criminal justice educational effort. In that year during its summer session, the University of California first established a six week criminology and police course. In ad- dition to being "probably the first course designed for police train- ing in a big university,"8] it represented the first occasion where significant numbers of pre—service students were represented in the class. Much of the early educational effort in criminal justice was directed at in-service police officers. Whether this should be properly labeled training rather than education remains for pole- micists to decide. Suffice it is to say that the objective in either case was to provide ". . . professional training in order that the service may not be hampered and police candidates may be educa- tionally equipped to perform the duties that are now assignable to policemen."82 8.lGeorge H. Brereton, "The Importance of Training and Educa- tion in Professionalization of Law Enforcement," Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, LII (May-June, 1961), 112. 8zDonald E. Clark and Samuel G. Chapman, A Forward Step: Edu- cation Background for Police (Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas, 1966), p. 22, citing August Vollmer in a letter (1932). 62 In 1909, August Vollmer, whose achievements in criminal justice education are legion and legend, organized a school for policemen in the Berkeley Police Department. The school differed from those devel- oping elsewhere because of Vollmer's insistence on utilizing faculty members employed at the University of California as guest lecturers. Initially, police officers attended classes during off-duty hours. In addition to enjoying the instruction they received, the officers soon found that a great deal of the "book knowledge" they received could be immediately applied in daily work situations.83 According to one author, this was probably the first application in America of the university extension concept to police services.84 By 1916 a "summer session” had been instituted at the University of Calif- ornia and as noted earlier, it was attended by both "pre" and "in" service persons. In 1917, however, Vollmer had become disenchanted with the quality of men he was getting for the Berkeley Department. In that year he entertained the idea of recruiting police officers from among the university students. The following advertisment was placed by Vollmer in the Daily Californian, the student newspaper: College men wanted for police force. Interesting experience. Learn a new profession. Serve on the Berkeley police force while you go to college. Contact August Vollmer, Chief of Police.85 83Alfred E. Parker, Crime Fighter: August Vollmer (New York: MacMillan Company, 1961), p. 83. 84Albert Deutsch, "America's Greatest Cop," Collier's, CXXVII (February 3, 1951), 26-27. 85Parker, op. cit., pp. 97-100. 63 The results were astounding even by contemporary standards; over one hundred applied for less than twenty available positions. This was probably the first application of the concept of "coopera- tive education," whereby individuals attend school part-time and work in a related field gaining practical experience.86 Upon Vollmer's urging, a police school was established at the University of California in 1917. This was the first occurrence for such a program on a university or college campus, and as one author notes, such a program ”was a natural development from the earlier 'extension' and cooperative programs of the police department and the university."87 It was not until 1923 that the University of California granted a bachelor of arts degree with a major in economics and a minor in criminology to a Berkeley police officer who had participated in the university police training program. Prior to this date, it appears that courses taken in "evening college" by policemen were non— credit courses. This granting of a degree appears to be the first time that a university officially recognized technical police COUY‘S GS . 88 86Thomas G. Nicholson, "A Study of the Relation Between Formal Educational Achievement and Other Factors in Predicting the Performance of Probationary Police Officers in a State Police Organization," (un- published Doctor's dissertation, Michigan State University, 1973), p. 80. 871pid. 88William A. Wiltberger, "A Program for Police Training in a College" (unpublished Master's thesis, University of California, Berkeley, 1939), p. 50. 64 Notwithstanding Vollmer's innovativeéuwinumerous contributions to law enforcement education, others were equally at work. Based upon a request by the Police Chief's Association of Wisconsin, Dr. A. G. Barry in 1927, under the auspices of the University of Wisconsin, in- augurated an extension program designed "to cover in a simple and practical manner everything with which a police officer ought to be familiar."89 The effort did not contemplate the training of men prior to their employment as police officers, but it was simply a method of developing those already employed--extending to them the opportu- nity for adult education. Unfortunately, Dr. Barry was called to take charge of the Chicago Juvenile Detention Home early in 1928, and the program died with his departure. The Wisconsin Plan was worthwhile for its intended purpose of giving to those already employed an opportunity to enhance their knowledge of their profession. It was, however, limited since it made no provision for the selection and education of men prior to their entrance into the department. In 1929, another type of program was established at the University of Chicago. August Vollmer was retained by the University of Chicago as professor of police administration in the Political Science Department. The curriculum implemented by Vollmer was divided into two parts; in the fall quarter, a course in police administration was given, while instruction during the winter term stressed police procedures. In 89George H. Brereton, I'Police Training in College and Uni- versity," American Journal of Police Science, 111 (January-February, 1932), 64. 65 addition, a seminar was conducted during each quarter and was designed to permit students to carry out specific research projects. Unlike the educational efforts found in California and Wisconsin, the Uni- versity of Chicago had as its primary aim the education of college students who were actively seeking to make police work their pro- fessional career.90 This effort represented the first time that a technical law enforcement curriculum was interfaced with the regular curriculum of "full-time" study. Like its predecessors in Wisconsin, the program folded when Vollmer returned to Berkeley in 1930. Upon his return, Vollmer resumed his job as police chief and concomitantly was reappointed professor of police administration in the Political Science Department at the University of California. Al- though the program at the University of California was similar in "any respects to the one at the University of Chicago, it offered greater diversity since courses in such fields as criminal law, muni— cipal government, and psychiatry were also required, besides police courses.9] By 1933, a formal curriculum had been developed and ap- proved by the University. It included three areas: technical, legal, and social; police administration subjects were within the social category. The thirties welcomed in a period of expanse in university involvement in the criminal justice educational effort. The University of California in addition to its pre-service program developed still 90Ibid., p. 66. 9‘Ipid. 66 another type of curriculum. The program combined the earlier concept of extension and regular university courses. Housed under the School of Citizenship and Public Administration, this program in its incep- tion catered to the needs of regularly employed, in-service police officers. By 1930, full-time students were also enrolled. Certifi- cates were offered in 1931; bachelor's degrees in 1932; and master's in l933.92 In addition to the established programs that had developed, other smaller colleges and universities were offering "short courses" on selected topics. The Scientific Crime Detection Laboratory (estab- lished in conjunction with Northwestern University) began in 1931 to offer intensive month-long courses in "Methods of Scientific Crime Detection."93 Willamette University in Salem, Oregon, in that same year inaugurated an annual, week-long program designed to more fully familiarize Oregon's law enforcement officials on matters relating to the legal aspects of law enforcement. Probably, the first real attempt by any university to estab- lish a police education program for the undergraduate, pre-service student occurred in 1930 at San Jose Teacher's College.94 Originating under the auspices of the junior college department, the program in- corporated an inter-disciplinary approach to teaching. Dr. T. W. 92Brereton, "The Importance of Training and Education in the Professionalization of Law Enforcement," op. cit., p. 114. 93Brereton, "Police Training in College and University," op. cit., p. 68. 94Municipal Police Administration (Chicago: The International City Management Association, 1954, 4th edition), p. 210. 67 MacQuarrie, President of the Teacher's College, early realized that the police officer, in order to effectively carry out his work, needs instruction in subjects other than those oriented strictly towards the scientific aspects of police work. Accordingly, students in the police curriculum were required to take courses in several other de- partments before being issued their associate of arts degree in police training.95 By 1935, San Jose Teacher's College had become a state college and consequently, was able to establish a four-year program in police administration. Upon successfully completing the program, the student was awarded a bachelor of arts degree. Thus, and as a student of criminal justice education recently wrote, it finally appeared that police education had started down the long road to gaining academic respectability.96 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY In the same year that San Jose first bestowed a bachelor's degree, the Michigan State Police, supported by several educationally oriented individuals, succeeded in persuading the State Board of Agri- culture (the governing body of Michigan State College at that time) to create a Department of Police Administration. 951. W. MacQuarrie, "San Jose College Police School," Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, XXVI (July, 1935), 225. 96Nicholson, op. cit., p. 82. 68 1935-1945 The Department of Police Administration at Michigan State College was housed within the School of Science and Arts. It pro- vided for the granting of a bachelor of science degree in police ad- ministration. The original course of study consisted of four years of on-campus academic study, followed by one academic year of "field 97 As is training" in the Michigan State Police Training DiviSion. suggested by the field training requirement, the students enrolled in the program were predominantly pre-service. Little is known of these early graduates except that they were pre-service persons, male, and interested in the police service as a career.98 The early curriculum emphasized the practical aspects of law enforcement, similar to the programs at San Jose State and the Uni- versity of California. Fundamental to instruction were the basic police skills such as administration, criminal law, and police pro- cedures. Additionally, heavy emphasis was placed on criminalistics. Coupled to these pragmatic courses were the basic college requirements and a sampling of courses from other departments, e.g., biology, chemistry, and physics. Instruction in'Uwapolice curriculum was provided by a full-time Director and supplemented by lecturers from the Michigan State Police. 97A. F. Brandstatter, "The School of Police Administration and Public Safety, Michigan State University," Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, XLVIII (January-February, 1958), 564. 98Statement expressed by Professor Ralph Turner, personal interview, February 25, 1974. 69 The first graduating class was recorded in 1938. From this date until 1946, the program experienced little in the way of innova- tive change primarily due to the effects of the Second World War. Enrollment decreased sharply as witnessed by the low number of de- grees granted during the years 1944-46.99 1946-1960 The end of the War welcomed in a period of change in the police administration program at M.S.U. One of the Department's first gradu- ates assumed the position of Director in 1946 and immediately set about expanding the program. Prior to 1947, there existed only one program of study open to students, namely law enforcement administration. However, in that year a police science program designed to prepare students for careers in criminalistics was incorporated. In the following year the Depart— ment became co-educational since women were attracted to the new course offering in delinquency prevention and control. Further ex- pansion occurred in 1952 with the addition of a highway traffic ad- ministration course. Shortly thereafter a program of study in cor- rectional administration was established due to increasing numbers of students finding employment with corrections institutions and proba— tion and parole departments. By 1956, the final addition to the series of specializations was made. An industrial security adminis- tration curriculum was established in light of the fact that many 99School of Criminal Justice, list of graduates, op. cit. '70 graduates of the Department were then finding employment in the area of private enterprise rather than in public service.100 Other noticeable changes had occurred within the Department. In 1945, the Department was transferred to the newly created School of Business and Public Service, later renamed the College of Business and Public Service. By 1956, the name of the Department had also been changed to the School of Police Administration and Public Safety. During its early years of viability, the School, as noted pre- viously, had required that all students participate in field train- ing which consisted of one academic year subsequent to the successful completion of four years of academic work. By 1957, the field train- ing had been reduced to two terms, and requirements for the bachelor of science degree consisted of four regular academic years, inclu- sive of the field training requirements.]01 Changes had occurred in the faculty composition. Initially the School was closely tied to the Michigan State Police and drew upon the expertise of state officers in providing classroom instruction. By the early fifties, reliance on this linkage had been lessened, pri- marily due to changes in the orientation of the curriculum. A chemist and corrections specialist and two other full-time instructors were employed to teach in the newly established programs. By 1960, 100Brandstatter, op. cit., pp. 565-66. 101Michigan State University, Michigan State University Catalo , Issue 1956-57, L (East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1956 , 146. 71 the number of full-time faculty had increased to twelve.102 Although representative of several disciplines, all had the common character- istic of having previously being employed in some component of the. criminal justice system. Despite the School's enrollment being adversely affected by World War II, it recovered rapidly thereafter. By 1950 enrollment surpassed the two hundred mark and continued to climb steadily during the decade until 1960, when over three-hundred and fifty students were enrolled in the School.103 The overall composition of the student body became more di- versified during this period of growth. Many students were ex- servicemen from the Second World War and the Korean War who were gaining an education on the 6.1. Bill. A small number, approximately ten percent, were women interested in careers in delinquency and corrections. The remainder was composed of primarily pre-service male students, the majority of whom were pursuing course work in the area of law enforcement (70 percent from the State of Michigan).104 Other events had occurred within the School during this period, i.e., the development of meaningful linkage between the field and the college. In 1951, in cooperation with the Continuing Education Serv- ice and the State Law Enforcement Association, the School first 102Michigan State University, 1959-60 Supplement to the 1958- 59 Michigan State University Catalog, LIII (East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1959), 156. 103School of Criminal Justice, list of graduates, op. cit. 104Frank D. Day, "Administration of Criminal Justice: An Educational Design in Higher Education," Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, LVI (November-December, 1965), 543. 72 offered what was then called the Law Enforcement Training Program. These "short courses" offered to in-service police personnel, in ef- fect, formed a training series for practitioners with responsibilie ties in the administration of criminal justice.105 In addition, the Michigan Police Academy was established in 1950 at the request of the Michigan State and Detroit City Police. The program provided basic recruit training for policemen throughout the State of Michigan and for the State Police and Detroit City Police Departments. Both ven- tures had reached their zenith during the latter fifties and were eventually transferred to agencies not associated with the School. Yet, the existence of these programs on campus did have ulterior benefits in that they provided state-wide, if not national, recogni— tion of the School, thus lending to its image as a force in criminal justice education. Perhaps, the most significant development outside the area of pre-service education occurred in 1955-56. In that year the National Police-Community Relations Institute was implemented. Held in the month of May each year, the week-long conference (held on campus) brought together law enforcement officials throughout the United States. However, it was not until the sixties that the Insti- tute began to gain national acclaim and grow in prominence.106 By 1960, the School had for practical purposes reached the end of an era and was setting forth on another. After approximately '051bid., p. 542. 106Oral interview with Louis A. Radelet, Professor of Criminal Justice at Michigan State Uniersity, April 2, 1974. 73 a quarter of a century of experience in the area of undergraduate education, the School was turning out students with post-graduate degrees in criminal justice in regular numbers. 1961-1968 " From 1961 through 1968, the School entered another period of growth. Although undergraduate enrollment averaged only a numeric increase of 50 students during this period, other noticeable changes were occurring. One was in the composition of the student body. Subsequent to 1960, the students enrolled at the School were char- acterized by one faculty member as "job-motivated" and oriented.107 With the coming of the sixties, this orientation had changed. Stud- ents, generally labeled as "socially aware" were concerned with social issues of the times. Social and political events during this period such as student demands for a greater voice in the political process, the civil rights involvements, and the Indo-China conflict captured student interests. In addition these students for the most part were from middle-class families, raised in an era of affluence and consequently, were less concerned with the experiences of economic maintenance. Enrollment, male and female, experienced minor changes during this period. Female enrollment at the School remained relatively 107Turner, Op. Cit. 74 constant--continuing to account for approximately ten percent of the total student enrollment.108 Although increasing numbers were opting for the law enforcement track, the majority still chose delinquency prevention and corrections as areas of specialization. Male under- graduate enrollment affected by the Indo-China conflict experienced only a slight increase. Overallenrollment in the law enforcement program remained proportionate to 1960. What increase occurred in enrollment was felt in the industrial security and correction areas. As the in-service program established in the early fifties began to be phased out, small numbers of in-service persons began attending the School, working towards their degrees on a part-time basis. Unbenounced at the time to the School, it was entering into a new phase of higher education. At the graduate level, significant changes were also occur- ring. In 1960, approximately twenty students were enrolled in the 109 Primarily com- program. By 1967, the total had risen to seventy. posed of men, only an average of two women per year were enrolled in the master's program between 1960 and 1968. The majority of these women were in the law enforcement curricula. Within the School itself, additional changes were taking place. _Previously the School was housed within the College of Busi- ness and Public Service, but in 1967, it was officially transferred to the newly created College of Social Science. Still, the degree of bachelor of science was retained. 'Ogoay, op. cit., p. 642. 109School of Criminal Justice, list of graduates, op. cit. 75 Three years prior to the School being transferred to the College of Social Science, major revisions had occurred in the curricu- lum. The first involved decreasing the six major areas of study or "tracks” to the following three: (1) law enforcement administration, (2) corrections administration, and (3) security adminstration. Dropped as separate entities from the program were major areas of study in: (1) police science or criminalistics, (2) delinquency pre- vention and control, and (3) highway traffic administration. But the programs were retained as sub-divisions under the law enforcement ad- ministration program and thus were retained as areas of specializa- tion. Secondly, the number of required courses to be taken in the School changed. Prior to 1964, only one specific course, Introduction to Police Administration, and two terms of field training were re- quired of all students. With the new curriculum, all students major- ing in the School were required to take the police administration core program. The new core retained the course in Introduction to Law Enforcement but dropped the field training requirement from two terms to one. In addition, five courses, Administrative Concepts, Delin- quency Prevention and Control, Criminal Law, Corrections, and Senior Seminar were added to round out the new core. Finally, the number of total credits required for graduation was diminished from 192 to 180. In 1967-68, the first graduates of this new program entered the field. Faculty levels during this period tended to remain the same. Fewer part-time faculty from outside the School were being retained 76 and the trend was towards having more full-time faculty members. Still, part-time faculty continued to have input--persons knowledge- able in an area or topics were brought in as guest lecturers. 1969-1973 By the end of 1968, the School had reached the end of yet another growth period and was about to enter a third time of developa ment and expansion. Several events register as paramount in this condition. First, much of the emphasis of the School, i.e., in its early curricula, had been characterized by what has commonly become known as the "how to" approach of criminal justice. By 1968, it is safe to say that the School had absolved itself from this approach and increasingly, emphasis was shifting to research and writing to facilitate the development of a criminal justice "body of knowledge." This assumption should not be taken as meaning that in 1968, spe- cifically, the School changed its philosophy. Such a development had been underway, since the early fifties while appearing to culminate in 1968. As one author notes, another condition which signifies schools which are more theoretically vis-a-vis practically oriented is the tendency to be active in arranging for conferences and semi- 110 nars involving higher level police administrators. The School of Criminal Justice co—sponsors a statewide Institute on Community Re- 111 lations and the Administration of Justice and other on-campus pro- grams which attract such persons. noNicholson, op. cit., p. 88. 1“Louis A. Radelet, "Police Community Relations: At This Point In Time," Police Chief XLI (March, 1974), 28. 77 Secondly, the School became a full-fledged graduate School in that it accepted its first students into a doctoral program leading to an inter-disciplinary Ph.D. degree in social science with a major in criminal justice. Third, faculty composition changed qualitatively. Previously, the School had concentrated on recruiting faculty with considerable pragmatic experience in areas of criminal justice. But in the fall term of 1968, the first "academician" with a research background joined the faculty. Quantitatively, faculty composition increased as well. Full-time faculty membership numbered twelve in 1960; by 1968 it had increased to fifteen and presently numbers seventeen. Probably the single event which attests to change in the School was the surge in enrollment. In 1968, approximately three hundred and eighty students were enrolled at the School. By 1970, the figure had risen to 620 and two years later well over 1,000 stud- ents were enrolled in the School. The field of undergraduate educa— tion accounted for the greatest increase by far. In four years en- rollment increased by 600 students from 330 in 1968 to 930 in 1972. Two significant patterns are associated with the increases. First, the number of female students entering the School became more pronounced. Prior to 1961, female enrollment accounted for ten per- cent (on average). In 1970, it increased to approximately 20 percent and has risen dramatically until at fall enrollment in 1973, approxi- mately 40 percent of the students in the program were women."2 112School of Criminal Justice, list of graduates, op. cit. 78 Secondly, and primarily due to the effect of the female increases in enrollment, more students were opting for areas of study other than law enforcement. For example, from 1960-68 the average number of women in delinquency prevention was 23. During the years 1969-73, the average was 73. At the graduate level, increases were also being experienced. Fifty-six students were enrolled in the master's program in 1968. In 1969, the School expanded the program to accommodate ninety students and since that year the graduate program has been filled to capacity. Women in the master's program rose from 2 in 1968 to 14 in 1973.113 Although no exact figures are available on the number of in- service persons who comprise the total student body, increasing numbers were attending on a part-time basis. At the graduate level, it has been estimated that approximately one half of those attending maintain full-time jobs.114 Therefore, a significant number of gradu- ate courses are scheduled in the evening to accommodate this group. By 1970, the School had undergone yet another change. Since 1956, the School had been called the School of Police Administration and Public Safety. In 1970, the name was changed to the School of Criminal Justice (its present name) to reflect the School's aim beyond education for persons interested in careers in law enforcement H3Ibid. H4Opinion expressed by Dr. Victor G. Strecher, School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State University, April 5, 1974. 79 to those whose career aspirations lay in other areas of the criminal justice system, i.e., the courts, corrections, and private criminal justice. The School is concerned with change in the future, particularly at the graduate level. A faculty resolution adopted in February, 1972, stressed that all new resources should be allocated first to the graduate program“5 in the anticipation of increasing demand for graduate study. Beginning to expand, the doctoral program plans to increase its enrollment to include study positions for 25. While addressing the topic of expansion of the graduate pro- gram, the School's faculty proposed the following instructional model: The School should prepare all baccalaureate graduates with a broad orientation to criminal justice, should provide master's graduates for specific functions in the criminal justice system, and should prepare doctoral graduates with either a broad or specific orientation. . . . This broad orientation may be supplemented with advisement and course offerings which provide preparation for specific functions within the criminal justice system. Acting upon its resolution, the School's curriculum revision committee has planned and elaborated on new curricula, which are tentatively scheduled to take effect in the school year 1975-76. In a memorandum to the University Curriculum Committee, members of the faculty pro- pound the new curricula: iiSMinutes of faculty meeting, School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University, February 6, 1972, p. l. ”51bid., PP. 1-2. 80 In the broadest sense, our new curricula are better than the old in virtually every way that has occurred to our faculty and students. Because they are goal-oriented, the new cur- ricula fit into the present and anticipated educational needs of the criminal justice complex; they are more sophisticated in concept, breadth, and depth; they have better internal balance among component parts; priorities are explicitly ex- pressed; faculty resources are more appropriately allocated among the B.A., M.S., and Ph.D. programs. 1 Analysis The historical evolution of the School of Criminal Justice is one imbued with innovation and growth. The preceding discussion, although an apt perspective for viewing the School from several time frames, is not exhaustive of events which have occurred within the School during its four decades of existence. The demarcation of the School's evolution into four time frames--l935-45, 1945-60, 1961-68, and l969-73--is indicative of events which occurred during these periods and threby, they denote the development and growth of the School. Concurrent with this growth was the continued exit of gradu- ates of the School into the nation's labor force and many into the field of criminal justice. Yet, information on the impact graduates have had in the field during these periods remains unavailable. In order to shed light on the effect of time on the initial job placement and related issues of graduates, the authors undertook a study of past graduates of the School. As noted, the School of Criminal Justice has a long tradition in the area of higher education in criminal justice, approximately 117 Memorandum of the School of Criminal Justice, March 11, 1974. 81 thirty-nine years. In addition, past graduates of the School are dispersed throughout the nation and occupy key and diverse positions in various components of the criminal justice system as well as in private and public organizations. In a limited sense, they can be considered historically representative of criminal justice graduates in general since 1935. From this viewpoint, past graduates of the School constitute an ideal population for examining trends in the educational utilization of criminal justice graduates. Findings cannot nor should not be generalized to all college educated criminal justice graduates because of the limited representativeness of the School's graduates as criminal justice graduates in general. How- ever crude a yardstick the study does provide, it is a means of measurement where none had previously existed. SUMMARY Shortly after the turn of the century, universities and colleges first became involved in the criminal justice education effort. Led by the pioneer spirit of August Vollmer who established the first criminal justice program at the University of California in 1916, other programs were eventually established at the University of Wisconsin in 1927, the University of Chicago in 1929, San Jose State College in 1930, and Northwestern University in 1931. By 1935, a Department of Police Administration had been established at Michi- gan State University. During its approximate forty years of existence, the School of Criminal Justice, as it is presently called, has evolved from a 82 program focused on law enforcement to full-blown curricula which en- compass all components of the criminal justice system. In 1956, a graduate program at the master's level was introduced, and in 1969, by the addition of a doctorate program with a specialization in criminal justice, the School became a full-fledged graduate institu- tion. Since its inception, almost 3,000 degrees have been granted to students representing all states in the union plus several foreign countries. There is, however, a general lack of information on graduates, especially how they use their education and how job place- ment and educational utilization have changed with events in the School and the field. Chapter 4 DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY Data are needed regarding the current status of criminal Justice graduates to adequately assess the impact graduates of pro- grams are having on the criminal justice system. In order for infor- mation to be of optimal use it should be disaggregated and subsequently analyzed so as to uncover any changes in the educational utilization of criminal justice graduates over time. Thus, the research methodol- Ogy has been so designed to obtain data in both of these respects. This chapter embraces topics peculiar to any discussion on design and methodology. Included are the design of the study, a r‘ationale for its selections, the three key issues under investiga- 1:1 on, the means by which they are examined, and a brief rationale 1°0lr~ selecting the four time frames used in the study. Also discussed are the target and sampled population, the sampling frame for the Study and the procedures undertaken to achieve a sample of the popu- 1ation under consideration. The latter section of the chapter focuses on the nature and Construction of the survey instrument, the method of data collection, CCDczling and re-coding of the data, and techniques utilized in the arlalysis of the data. 83 84 STUDY DESIGN Studies depending on their purpose fall into a number of broad groupings including: (1) to gain familiarity with a phenomenon or to achieve new insights into it, often in order to formulate a more precise research problem or to develop hypotheses; (2) to portray accurately the characteristics of a particular individual, situation or group (with or without specific initial hypothe- ses about the nature of these characteristics); (3) to de- termine the frequency with which something occurs or with which it is associated with something else (usually, but not always with a specific initial hypothesis; (4) to test a hy- pothesis of a causal relationship between variables.118 Studies that have the first purpose are generally called "formulative or exploratory" studies while those with the latter purpose are re- ferred to as "experimental" studies. Studies designed for the second and third purposes, as is that study, are called "descriptive" stud- ies. The use of hypotheses in descriptive studies is arbitrary and "depends largely on the state of knolwedge in the area under investi- "119 gation. Furthermore, hypotheses are developed from various sources . A hypothesis may be based on a hunch. It may rest on the findings of another study or studies and the expectation that a similar relationship between two or more variables will hold in the present study. Or it may stem from a body of theory, that by a process of topical deduction leads to the prediction that if certain conditions are present certain results will follow.120 118C1aire Selltiz, et. a1. Research Methods in Social Rela- tions (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1959), p. 50. 119Ibid., p. 39. 120Ibid., p. 37. 85 Although hypotheses that arise simply from hunch or intuition may ultimately miake an important contribution to an area of knowledge, inherent limitations result when they have been tested in only one study. First, "there is no assurance that the relationship expressed between two variables and found in the given study will be found in other studies.”121 Secondly, "a hypothesis based simply on a hunch is likely to be unrelated to other knowledge or theory (and) findings based on such a hypothesis have no clear connection with a larger body of knowledge."122 Both reasons provide one strong rationale for omitting the use of hypotheses in this study. Two additional methods remain for developing hypotheses--the findings of other studies and the existence of a body of theory. Yet, recent research on graduates of the criminal justice program is in- conclusive and contradictory. In addition, no research exists on earlier graduates of criminal justice programs. Finally, no body of theory is presently available so as to generate hypotheses on gradu- ates of criminal justice programs. In combination, the preceding reasons provide a justification for excluding the use of hypotheses in this study. Hopefully, this study will lay a foundation for future research which endeavors to examine more specific relationships with respect to educational utili- zation and initial employment of criminal justice graduates. 122 mlbid, p. 38. Ibid. 86 ISSUES OF INVESTIGATION Several issues are to be investigated in this study. Each issue is examined by utilizing several questions which tap the issue under consideration. In one sense then, the issues can be regarded as constructs and the questions as variables designed to measure the constructs. The issues are themselves not measureable but will be examined and analyzed on the basis of the empirical data generated from the questions. Variables (questions) associated with each of the constructs (issues) have been extracted from the questionnaire and are listed by issue. 1. Initial Employment 1.1 Initial major employment 1.2 How did you obtain your initial major employment after leaving MSU? 1.3 What was your major reason for not going into criminal justice related work? 2. Educational Utilization 2.1 Were there any difficulties in getting your initial job that you feel were attributable to your criminal justice or police administration degree? 2.2 Did all newly hired personnel start at the same entry level regardless of their level of educa- tion? 2.3 Do you feel your college training was best utilized through your initial job placement? 2.4 How well do you feel your college major prepared you for your initial job placement? 2.5 How well prepared were you to assume your job re- sponsibilities in comparison with your fellow workers? 87 3. Educational Satisfaction 3.1 If you had to do it over again, would you choose the same area of specialization? 3.2 If you had to do it over again, would you choose the criminal justice area as your college major? 3.3 Here you satisfied with the criminal justice curricu- lum while attending MSU? TIME FRAMES In Chapter 3, the section dealing with the development of criminal justice education at Michigan State University established that the growth of the School of Criminal Justice could be viewed and categorized as having occurred in four time periods, 1935-1945, 1946- 1960, 1961-1967, and 1968-1973. Changes were happening not only within the university setting but external to the School, within the field of criminal justice. This section will address major events outside of local events within the University which contribute to the selection of time frames. With the termination of World War II in late 1945, the nation entered an era of unprecedented growth and expansion. As a result of both domestic and foreign events, e.g., the War, the Marshall Plan, and increased consumer demand, the economy prospered. The outcome of the demand was an influx of workers and their families to the northeast, midwest, and western sections (primarily) of the nation which manufactured and supplied the needed goods. Industrialization and urbanization followed. Coupled with the influx of people was an increase in the overall birth rate. 88 Without detail, the consequence of these events was that in- creasing demands were steadily being placed on public service agencies. Fire and police agencies and social welfare agencies were just a few of the related services which felt the demand. The various components of the criminal justice system had been effectual in handling the needs of the communities as evidenced by the low incidence of racial confrontation, moderate delinquency rates, and a relatively stabilized crime rate. However, by the latter 1950's, social conditions had somewhat worsened in several areas of life: an increased incidence of racial confrontation, rising delinquency rates, dislocation of sectors of the population due to the effects of enemployment resulting from automation, and a slight increase in the crime rate. Thus, greater numbers of people were needed and channeled into the criminal justice system. Yet, the manpower available was insufficient to deal effectively and efficiently with the problems stemming from worsening social conditions. With the onset of the sixties, the criminal justice system continued to be pressed in its efforts to contain further growth in crime and its attendant ills. Protests in the form of civil rights disorders and campus unrest added to the difficulty of the system. Still, the crime rate remained uncontained, increasing 71 percent from 1960-1967.123 Consequently, courtroom dockets became over- crowded and correctional institutions also encountered manpower difficulty. 123U.S., Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Re- ports for the United States: 1967 (Washington, D. C., Government Printing Office, 1968), p. 2. 89 By 1965, the problem of crime had attracted national concern. The President's Crime Commission established that year convened for the purpose of making recommendations aimed at reducing crime spe- cifically and uplifting social conditions generally. By February, 1967, the Commission reported its national strategy in the form of 200 specific recommendations ranging from Federal action to programs for state and local governments.124 Although no single event can be considered as a hallmark in denoting the beginning or end of one time period, several events which occurred in 1960 and 1967 demarcate these two years as appropriate points in time for viewing transitions within the criminal justiCe system. It is certainly possible to justify other periods of time as indicative of change in the system. However, these two specific years appear to reflect a culmination of events which provide a sound rationale for viewing these points as appropriate frames for time. For the purpose of this study, four time periods based on events occurring both within the School of Criminal Justice and the criminal justice system have been chosen to facilitate the examina- tion of the educational utilization and initial employment of crimi- nal justice graduates. These four periods are as follows: 1935-1960, 1961-1967, 1968-1971, 1972-1973. Since the emphasis of the study is on the more recent graduates, particulaly since 1960, graduates from 1935-1945 and 1945-1960 are combined into one period. Additionally, only 48 graduates (two percent of the total) are contained within 124See Chapter 1 for a detailed discussion of the Commission. 90 the 1935-1945 time period too small a number to be analyzed given the nature of the study. Furthermore, those graduating prior to 1960 provide a ready base for comparison with the more recent gradu- ates dating from 1960. Both the 1960-1967 and 1968-1971 time periods are indicative of developments within the School and the field. The 1972-1973 period represents that data gathered in this study and needs to be examined separately. POPULATION The population under consideration in this study is the same as the sampled population, namely all persons who graduated from the School of Criminal Justice between the years 1938 and 1973, inclusive. SAMPLING FRAME AND SAMPLING PROCEDURE In order to determine the existence of any consonance or dis- parity in the educational utilization of graduates of the School over time, it is necessary to obtain a sample of those who graduated from the School. Furthermore, a sampling paradigm must be established which is representative of all graduates of the School, spanning the time from 1935 through 1973. Yet achieving a representative sample satisfying the above conditions is beset with several pragmatic con- straints. First, the School of Criminal Justice has been in existence for approxiamtely 40 years and although records exist on all persons who have graduated from the School, these records in some cases do 91 not reflect contemporary accuracy. Especially problematic are those persons who graduated in the earlier years of the School's existence and with whom the university has lost touch in successive years. Ad- ditionally, it may be that numbers of the earlier graduates are de- creased and therefore, are unable to respond to the study. Generally stated, the problem is establishing the status and whereabouts of earlier graduates. A second difficulty pertains to the sheer number of persons who have graduated from the School during its four decades of exist- ence. As of December, 1973, 2,994 criminal justice graduates had been awarded degrees by the University, with the greatest number be- ing awarded during the preceding decade. (The ratio was 3.5:1 degrees granted for the period since 1960 to degrees granted from the time prior to it.) Given that the average American changes geographical location several times over a lifespan and that the greatest propor- tion of the change occurs during the initial years in the labor force, the problem of maintaining current and accurate addresses on indi- viduals becomes a great task. An added difficulty is that the Uni- veristy's prime source of obtaining current addresses rests upon the graduates themselves. It is possible, therefore, that significant numbers of graduates from the School cannot be located. TWO other limitations to the study design are time and money. From a practical standpoint, both the amount of time necessary and direct cost factors associated with "tracking down" current addresses of graduates is prohibitive. 92 As a result of these constraints, a sample selection proced- ure was considered which, theoretically, could provide the needed sample. Eventually the sampling methodology was narrowed to the point where a sample of past graduates could be achieved in a two-step process. The initial step involved utilizing data collected in a pre- vious study of graduates of the School of Criminal Justice by M. Doug- las Moore in 1972.125 The method employed by Moore to gather the data was a mailed, self-administered questionnaire. Examination of the instrument led the authors to the conclusion that the type of data needed for the purpose of this study existed within the frame- work of Moore's questionnaire. Furthermore, the needed data could be extracted by means of a secondary analysis of the originally collected data. To gather the original data it was necessary for Moore to ob- tain a reliable address list of all past graduates of the School. Moore accomplished this task in the following manner: (1) the School files were checked as to the most recent addresses listed, (2) the Office of Alumni Affairs was contacted for their most recent addresses, and (3) the staff, faculty, and students of the School of Criminal Justice were asked to contribute knowledge of past students' present 126 addresses. The result of the effort was that only 209 graduates from the 2,253 who had graduated during the years 1938 through 125Moore, op. cit. '25Ibid., p. 43. 93 December, 1971, could not be located. This represented a location rate of over 90 percent. Based on his high location rate, Moore decided to survey the total available population, i.e., the total number of graduates of Michigan State University who majored in criminal justice and for whom addresses were available. The population surveyed then consisted of all located graduates graduating during the years 1938-1971. It was comprised of graduates who had been awarded a bachelor of science and/or master's of science degree in criminal justice and one gradu- ate who had received his doctorate. Foreign students residing in foreign countries were not included. The second step to achieving a sample of the School's gradu- ates involved surveying those who graduated from the School subsequent to Moore's cut off date of December, 1971; thus, those graduating from January, 1972, through December, 1973, were surveyed. This step was seen as necessary to provide a more contemporary perspective. Ac- cordingly, the sample size of the study increased, adding depth. More significantly, needed data was contributed and allowed for a more thorough assessment of the impact of graduates in the field of criminal justice. Much the same procedure as employed by Moore in locating ad- dresses for his sample was used to locate graduates from January, 1972, through December, 1973. Based on records of the School of Criminal Justice, the Office of Alumni Affairs, and knowledge of staff, faculty, and students of the School, our address list of the 297 graduates who graduated during the period was established. 94 SURVEY INSTRUMENTS127 The method employed by Moore to gather the data for his study was a mailed, self-administering questionnaire. The questionnaire consisted of four sections encompassing 27 open-ended and 74 fixed alternative questions. The questions were designed to measure the following: (1) general background information, (2) educational in- formation, (3) post—college initial placement information, and (4) present employment information and views towards selected issues in criminal justice. A pre-test of the instrument was conducted on a purposive sample of 150 randomly selected graduates. Consequently, several revisions and deletions were made based on the information received. The revised edition of Moore's questionnaire was also utilized to survey the recent students graduating subsequent to December, 1971. As with Moore's questionnaire, the following techniques were used in the revised version administered to the recent graduates in hope of increasing the response rate: (1) a stamped self-addressed return envelope accompanied thelquestionnaire, (2) sponsorship by the School was sought and received to lend added importance and authen- ticity to the study, (3) an inducement of receiving a copy of the results was offered to respondents to heighten their interest in responding, and (4) respondents were given a guarantee of anonymity by not being asked for their names. 127See Appendix A. 95 DATA COLLECTION Moore's initial mailing on March 7, 1972, resulted in 1,832 questionnaires being mailed to all located graduates of the School of Criminal Justice graduating from 1938 through 1971. Although there had been 2,253 graduates during this period, only 1,832 were sent a questionnaire for the following reasons: 209 graduates were not located; 150 were sent the pre-test, 36 graduates were foreign students residing in foreign countries, 24 graduates were deceased. After approximately three weeks, a follow-up letter with a copy of the questionnaire was forwarded to those graduates who had not yet responded. Resulting from the initial mailing and follow- up, 1,149 were returned. Ninety-one questionnaires were undeliverable and returned unanswered by the U. S. Post Office. Thus, 1,741 gradu- ates who had graduated prior to January, 1972, actually received Moore's questionnaire and 1,149 answered it, representing a useable return rate of 65.9 percent. On February 5, 1974, an up-dated version of Moore's ques- - tionnaire was mailed to all recent graduates except for two foreign students not situated in the United States. The total number mailed 127 was 695. After approximately three weeks, a follow-up letter with a copy of the questionnaire was forwarded to those graduates who had 127See Appendix B. 96 not yet responded. From both the initial mailing and follow-up, 422 questionnaires were returned. Thirteen were undeliverable and re- turned unanswered by the U. S. Post Office. Thus, 682 graduates who graduated between January, 1972, and December, 1973, actually re- ceived questionnaires of which 422 were returned in time for analysis, representing a useable return rate of 61.9 percent. Collating the data from Moore's and the present survey of recent graduates results in 2,423 graduates receiving questionnaires, l,57l respondents or 64.8 percent. Table 3 provides a comparison between the two samples. Table 3 Sampling Results , . Number Question- Question- QueStion- Graduates Located naires naires naires Sent Delivered ; Returned No. % No. % Moore's Data (1938-1971) 2,253 2,044 1,832 A 1,741 95.0 1,149 65.9 Authors' Data (1972-1973) 697 697 695 682 98.1 422 61.9 Tatals (1938-1973) 2,950 2,741 2,517 2,423 96.3 1,571 64.8 CODING AND RE-CODING The coding of responses to the questionnaires was done in three stages. First, the returned questionnaires received from recent 97 graduates i.e., graduates from January, 1972, through December, 1973, were coded according to the same criteria as utilized by Moore in the coding of his questionnaires. Using the same process permitted the collating of data from both questionnaires. Secondly, several pertinent open-ended responses from Moore's set of questionnaires not previously coded were coded. The appropriate open-ended responses from the questionnaire administered by the authors were coded likewise. Finally, selected variables from both sets of questonnaires were re-coded to establish more discriminate categories. The newly established categories were needed since they play a major role in the analysis. TECHNIQUES OF ANALYSIS All responses to the questionnaires were compiled, coded, re-coded, and finally punched on IBM cards at the Michigan State University Computer Center, Keypunching Service. All data manipu- lations were made at the M.S.U. Computer Center on the CDC 6500. Descriptive survey tables were produced showing frequency and per- centage distributions. Comparisons of selected variables were in the form of contingency tables utilizing frequencies, percentages, and means in tabular form and done by cross tabulating methods. The statistical test utilized for the contingency tables was the chi- square test for significance. 98 SUMMARY By design the study has foregone the use of hypotheses al- though it is characterized as a descriptive study. The nature of the investigation is based on four issues which reflect the purpose of the study. Each issue is examined through several questions or vari- ables designed to provide measures of the issues under consideration. Data collection was accomplished by a two-step sampling meth- odology. First, data gathered by means of a questionnaire in a pre- vious survey of 1,161 criminal justice graduates encompassing the years 1938 through 1971 were incorporated into the present study by means of secondary analysis. Secondly, a facsimile of the original mailed questionnaire was administered to 695 recent graduates dating from January, 1972, through December, 1973. Four hundred twenty two questionnaires were returned in time for analysis. Information was collated and sub-divided into four time periods established on the basis of events which occurred within the School, concurrent events within the field, and subjective criteria founded on a thorough assessment of historical underpinnings of both. Relationships are tested where appropriate by employing the chi- square analysis of contingency tables. Chapter V DATA AND ANALYSIS The information which has been gathered is presented in the following format. First, demographic data on the general Character- istics of the sample are provided to better illustrate the variables related to the graduates over time. Age, sex, degree held on job, area of educational specialization, service status, and race are all examined by period. Secondly, findings related to the issues succeed the introduc- tion of the general characteristics of the sample over time. Results are ordered by issue, i.e. initial employment, educatiOnal utiliza-- tion, and educational satisfaction. Data related to these issues are presented in tabular form with selected variables employed in the elaboration. Following the tabular presentation is the essential description of change (or no change) over time including discrepan- cies from the general trend established. 99 100 CHARACTERISTICS BY TIME PERIOD This section provides the characteristics of the graduates viewed over time. Age, sex, degree on job, area of educational specialization, and service status are the major variables that are used in the discussion and elaboration of changes over time within the issues of investigation. These variables also have been affected by time and it may be helpful to refer to this section for a better understanding of changes within the issues. Table 4 Shows the relationship between the age of the gradu- ates and the period in which they graduated. The majority-—68%--of graduates from Period I are 40 years and over while the majority-- 81%—-of graduates in period IV are under 30 years of age. Within period II, the majority--59%-—are 30-39 years of age. Thus, it is true that the earliest graduates are also the oldest and the most recent graduates represent the youngest age bracket. Table 4 Age by Period Period I: II: III: IV: Age (years) 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %+ N % N % N % N Under 30 O ( O) 29 (106) 75 (289) 81 (339) 30-39 32 (131) 59 (213) 19 ( 75) 14 ( 58) 40 and over 68 (274) 12 ( 41) 6 ( 23) 5 ( l9) iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. 101 The sex distribution over time among the graduates is shown in Table 5. From period I to IV, there is a consistent decrease in the proportion of males graduating from the School. The decrease amounts to 18%. With females there is a consistent increase from 6% in period I to 24% in period IV in the proportion graduating. Thus, over time the proportion of females has increased while the propor- tion of males graduating has decreased. Table 5 Sex by Period Period I: II: III: IV: S 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 ex __________ __________ __________ __________ %+ N % N % N % N Male 94 (384) 93 (334) 88 (339) 76 (318) Female 6 ( 23) 7 ( 26) 12 ( 48) 24 .( 98) iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. Table 6 illustrates the relationship between the degree the graduate held on his initial job by the time period. Over time, the proportion of undergraduate degree holders has decreased from 97% in period I to 82% in period IV. The proportion of graduate degree holders (including all master's and doctoral degree holders) increased up through period III and then experienced a 5% decrease from period III to period IV. 102 Table 6 Degree Held on Initial Job by Period Period 1' II: III: IV: Degree Held on Job 1935-5° 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %i N % N % N % N Undergraduate 97 (393) 92 (331) 81 (314) 82 (342) Graduate 1 ( 6) 6 ( 23) 9 ( 34) 4 ( l7) Non-Response 2 ( 8) 2 ( 6) 10 ( 39) 14 ( 57) +Percentages rounded to the nearest whole number. Table 7 shows area of educational specialization by time period. Of the three areas, corrections particularly shows changes in the proportion of graduates specializing in it. From period I to IV, there is an 18% increase in the proportion specializing in cor- rections. The remaining two specializations, law enforcement and industrial security, show little in the way of consistent trends. Table 7 Educational Specialization by Period Period 1: II: III: IV: Specialization 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %i N % N % N % N Law Enforcement* 78 (317) 62 (222) 67 (262) 63 (265) Industrial Security 9 ( 36) 24 ( 87) 12 ( 47) 6 ( 23) Corrections** 10 ( 41) 13 ( 49) 20 ( 76) 28 (119) Non-response 3 ( l3) 1 ( l) l ( 2) 3 ( 8) iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. *Law Enforcement includes criminalistics and highway traffic speciali- zations. **Correctionsincludesjuvenile delinquency specialization. Service status is also examined over time. 103 Table 8 shows the three service categories and changes in the proportion of gradu- ates who have been pre-service, prior-service, and in—service stud- ents. The proportion of pre-service students has tended to decrease over time, 81% in period I to 60% in Period III; from period III to IV, there is a 9% increase. As a contrast, the proportion of in- service students has tended to increase with time, from 5% in period I to 22% in period III, decreasing slightly 5% from period III to IV. Those graduates who were prior-service students remained relatively constant with time. Table 8 Service Status by Period Period 1: II: III: .IV: Service 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 Status -————————— —————————- -————————— -——-—————— %+ N % N % N % N Pre-Service 81 (328) 71 (257) 60 (233) 69 (287) Prior Service 13 ( 54) ll ( 38) 15 ( 57) 13 ( 54) In-Service 5 ( 21) 16 ( 58) 22 ( 85) 17 ( 72) Non-response l ( 4) 2 ( 7) 3 -( 12) l ( 4) iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. Table 9 provides the relationship of race by time period. Most important to note is the slight increase in the proportion of Negro/Black graduates through the sixties. Because the population is overwhelmingly Caucasian (only 3% is composed by other races), race as a variable is not included in the study. 104 Table 9 Race by Period Race 1935;60 Period II: 111: 1961-67 1968-71 1' IV: 1972-73 %+ N % N % N % Caucasian Negro/Black Mexican American American Indian Oriental American Foreign Student Non-response 4O 35 37 O-d—‘OOOCD AAAAAA/‘N Coo-DOOOO vvvvvvv OOOOO—JKO AAAAAAA OOOO-‘NV VVVVVVV O—‘OOONN AAAAAAA ONO-“#04:- vvvvvvv O—‘OO-‘wm dNOONwLD VVVVVVV iPercentages rounded Prior to res tially employed, gra to the nearest whole number. INITIAL EMPLOYMENT ponding to the question of where they were ini- duates were asked to indicate how they located their initial employment. Table 10 indicates that no substantial change has occurred with respect to how initial employment was obtained after leavi which do emerge are ng MSU. In fact, the only consistent changes in the categories of ”faculty help" which shows a slight decrease over time and non-response which shows a slight increase over time. help" is miniscule, Although the decrease in the response "faculty both in terms of the decrease itself and mainly in its overall contribution to the issue as a whole, it does indi- Cate the diminishing role faculty help is playing in initial job placement. 105 Table 10 How Initial Employment Was Obtained by Period Period I: II: III: IV: 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 How Obtained -————————— —————————— —————————— -—————————- %+ N % N % N % N MSU Placement Bureau 6 ( 24) 12 ( 41) 4 ( l6) 3 ( 14) School of Criminal Justice Job File 3 ( l4) ( 15) 3 ( 10) 2 ,( 9) Faculty Help 5 ( 22) ( l9) 3 ( 12) 3 ( 11) Personal Means 67 (271) 55 (198) 61 (238) 63 (263) Other (agency recruitment, field training, already 18 ( 72) 22 ( 80) 23 ( 88) 21 ( 88) employed) Non-response l ( 4) 2 ( 7) 6 ( 23) 8 ( 32) 01-5 Chi square = 69.855, significant at .05 level. iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. The slight but positive increase over time in the non- response category is more apparent than real. Since the "other" category represents those who are unemployed or graduate students, it is logical to expect a non-response from this group as their status does not fit the mold of this question. Indeed, when periods III and IV which account for 83% of the non—responses are controlled for by initial job in Table 13, 96% of those in the "other" cate- gory are in periods III and IV. Additionally, approximately four- fifths of those not responding when asked how their initial job was obtained also appear in the category of "other" when initial employ- ment is considered. 106 It is worthwhile to note that in each period in excess of half of the graduates indicated "personal means" as the method employed in securing initial employment. Over time, no linear change has occurred in the percentage of graduates initially employed in criminal justice and related employment. Yet, one observation can be made from Table 11. The proportion of graduates in criminal justice and criminal justice related employment, after remaining relatively stable at 68%, 68% and 73% for periods I through III, decreases sharply to 61% in period IV. Table 11 Criminal Justice Employment vs. Other Employment Areas by Period Period 1: II: III: IV: Employment Area 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %i N %. N % N % N Criminal Justice & C.J. Related 68 (275) 68 (245) 73. (280) 61 (253) Other Employment 32 (130) 32 (114) 27 (106) 39 (161) Chi square = 12.236, significant at .05 level. +Percentages rounded to the nearest whole number. From Table 5, page 101, it is evident that the number of females graduating from the School increasingly in each period occupied a greater proportion of the total, from 6% in period I to 24% in period IV. In view of this increase and correspondingly, the decrease in period IV of the percentage of graduates initially 107 employed in criminal justice and related employment, the relation- ship over time of criminal justice employment is controlled by sex in Table 12. Table 12 Criminal Justice Employment vs. Other Employment Areas by Period by Sex Period I: II: III: IV: Employment Area 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %i N % N % N % N FEMALES Criminal Justice & C.J. Related 91 ( 21) 84 ( 21) 6O ( 29) 43 ( 42) Other Employment 9 ( 2) l6 ( 4) 4O ( 19) 57 ( 55) Chi square = 26.205, significant at .05 level. MALES Criminal Justice & C.J. Related 66 (254) 67 (224) 74 (251) 66 (210) Other Employment 34 (128) 33 (110) 26 ( 87) 34 (106) Chi square = 6.845, not significant at .05 level. iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. Table 12 reveals that sex has a marginal influence on the rela- tionship of initial job by period. A sharp linear decrease in the percentage of females in criminal justice and criminal justice related employment occurs from period I through period IV, from 91% to 43%, 108 respectively. But, in itself this decrease does not account for all of the decrease in period IV. Although controlling for sex reveals an increase in the percentage of males initially employed in this cate- gory, the increase represents slightly less than 50% of the total variance registered in the total decrease from period III to period IV occurring in the original relationship in Table 11, page 106. Apparently, additional external factors are involved. Other noticeable changes have occurred over time with respect to initial major employment. A steady decrease in the proportion of respondents entering the Federal police has occurred. Table 13 indi- cates that in period 1, 1935-60, 14% entered this field of employment. By period IV, l972-73, only 1% of the graduates found initial employ- ment in this field. Conversely for those employed in state and local police initially, a steady increase is observed. In period I, 25% of the graduates were employed in state and local police. By period IV, the percent employed in these two fields increased to 35%. Thus, this leads to the assumption that a Shift away from Federal police towards state and local police occurred over time in the field of law enforcement. In order to more thoroughly assess the role of area of special- ization on initial employment in the categories, Federal, state and local police, over time, these categories were collapsed into a com— mon category, law enforcement. This category is analyzed over time controlling for law enforcement educational specialization with the rationale that graduates who specialized in law enforcement while at the School of Criminal Justice will tend to locate initial employment 109 in the field of law enforcement. However, when the collapsed cate- gory, initial employment in law enforcement, is examined over time and controlled by law enforcement specialization in Table 14, most notice- able is the disproportionate percentage of graduates not initially employed in law enforcement who had Specialized in law enforcement; approximately half of those who specialized in law enforcement were not initially employed in law enforcement. Table 13 Initial Employment by Period* Period I: II: III: IV: Initial 1935—60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 Employment ——-——-———— -————————- —————-———- -————————- %i N % N % N % N Federal Police 14 ( 58) 9 ( 32) 6 ( 22) l ( 5) State Police 5 ( 19) 4 ( l4) 9 ( 35) 9 ( 37) Local Police 20 ( 81) 25 ( 90) 32 (125) 26 (108) Federal-State Corrections 8 ( 34) 4 ( 15) 3 ( ll) 2 ( 10) Local Corrections 3 ( 11) 6 ( 20) 7 ( 26) 5 ( 20) Industrial Security 15 ( 59) 16 ( 57) 7 ( 27) 12 ( 48) C.J. Related 3 ( l3) 5 ( l7) 9 ( 34) 6 ( 25) Non-Criminal Justice 20 ( 81) 12 ( 42) 9 ( 36) 21 ( 87) Military 11 ( 46) 20 ( 72) ll ( 42) 8 ( 32) Other Unemployed O ( O) 0 ( O) 5 ( 21) 5 ( 20) Graduate Students 1 ( 3) O ( O) 2 ( 7) 5 ( 22) Chi square = 251.816, significant at .05 level. iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. *Seven are unknown. 110 Table 14 Initial Employment by Period by Law Enforcement Educational Specialization Period I: II: III: IV: Employment 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 Area ———————-—— —————————- —————————— ——————-——— %+ N % N % N % N Law Enforcement 44 (134) 49 (100) 59 (144) 50 (125) Criminal Justice Areas other than 22 ( 68) 17 ( 34) 17 ( 43) 15 ( 37) Law Enforcement Non-Criminal ‘ Justice (inc. 34 (106) 34 ( 70) 23 ( 57) 35 ( 87) Military & Other) Chisquare= 20.030, significant at .05 level. +Percentages rounded to the nearest whole number. Table 14 also indicates another interesting change, namely that the percentage of law enforcement graduates finding employment in areas common to criminal justice has steadily decreased over time. In period I, 22% were employed in criminal justice areas other than law enforcement. In period IV, only 15% were so employed. Perhaps the decrease occurring in period IV in the percentage of graduates initially employed in law enforcement and who specialized in law enforcement may be due to the overall increase in period IV in the percentage of women specializing in law enforcement, but who fail to be initially employed in law enforcement. Two reasons add to this assumption. First, from Table 5, page 101, a percentage increase in females graduating from the School was revealed. Furthermore, the field of law enforcement has traditionally been male dominated. 111 When the relationship of initial employment by period by law enforcement educational specialization is held constant and controlled by sex in Table 15, a noteworthy change appears. Although the number of females in law enforcement work has increased over time, the per- centage of females employed in law enforcement and who specialized in law enforcement has decreased. In period I, 67% (2) of the women who were employed in law enforcement work had specialized in law enforce- ment. In period IV, only 42% (11) were in law enforcement work. How- ever, the decrease fails to account for the total decrease in the percentage of graduates initially employed in law enforcement and who had specialized in law enforcement, found in Table 14. Table 15 also indicates that in periods III and IV, 21% and 27%, respectively, of the women graduates were employed in criminal justice work other than law enforcement. This increase is accounted for by the decrease from 16% to 14% in the percentage of males employed in criminal justice jobs other than law enforcement in periods III and IV, controlling for law enforcement educational specialization. From these results, it appears that when the relationship of law enforce- ment employment by period is controlled by law enforcement educational specialization, females, although less likely to be employed in law enforcement per se over time, are more likely than males to find employment in criminal justice areas other than law enforcement. Conversely, males, although less likely to be employed in criminal justice jobs other than law enforcement, are more likely than females to be employed in law enforcement work. Table 15 Initial Employment by Period by Law Enforcement Educational Specialization by Sex 112 _4 _ Period "‘ I: II: III: IV: Employment 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 Area -————————— -————-————- -————————— —-—-—————— %i N % N % N % N FEMALES Law Enforcement 67 ( 2) 80 ( 4) 50 ( 7) 42 ( 11) Criminal Justice Areas other than 0 ( O) O ( O) 21 ( 3) 27 ( 7) Law Enforcement Non-Criminal Justice (inc. 33 ( l) 20 ( l) 29 ( 4) 31 ( 8) Military 8 Other) Chi square = 3.692, not significant at .05 level. MALES Law Enforcement 43 (136) 49 (107) 61 (150) 50 (119) Criminal Justice Areas other than 22 ( 69) 18 ( 39) 16 ( 41) 14 ( 34) Law Enforcement Non-Criminal ‘ Justice (inc. 35 (109) 33 ( 71) 23 ( 56) 36 ( 86) Military & Other) Chi square = 22.068, significant at .05 level. iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. 113 In the field of corrections several changes over time have occurred. Table 13, page 109, indicates a steady decrease in the number of graduates in Federal-state corrections. In period I, 8% of the graduates were initially employed in this field. By period IV, the percentage decreased to 2%. Conversely, an increase except for period IV in the percentage of graduates initially employed in local correc- tions resulted--from 3% in period I to 7% in period III declining to 5% in period IV. Although both the decrease in Federal-state correc- tions and the increase in local corrections were small, they do indi- cate a shift over time from one area of corrections to the other area. Collapsing the areas of Federal-state corrections and local corrections in Table 13, page 109, into the common category, correc- tions, results in a more noticeable finding. In period I, the number of graduates in corrections is 11%; in period II, 10%; in period III, 10%; and in period IV, 7%. Overall, the percentage of graduates in corrections jobs is showing noticeable decrease over time. When the collapsed category, corrections, is analyzed over time period and controlled by corrections educational specialization, an important change occurs. Table 16 reveals that in periods I and II, only approximately half of those who specialized in corrections were employed in corrections. However, more important is the continued decrease which occurs in periods III and IV; only 34% in period 111 and slightly less than 20% in period IV are in corrections. In addi- tion, the percentage entering areas related to criminal justice (law 114 enforcement, industrial security, and c.j. related) is also decreas- ing over time from 39% in period I to 29% in period IV. Table 16 Initial Employment by Period by Corrections Educational Specialization Period I: II: III: IV: Employment 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 Area —-———————- ————————.. _________. __________ %+ N % N % N % N Corrections 49 ( 20) 50 ( 24) 34 ( 26) 20 ( 24) Criminal Justice Areas other than 39 ( 16) 33 ( 16) 28 ( 21) 29 ( 35) Corrections Non-Criminal Justice (inc. 12 ( 5) l7 ( 8) 38 ( 29) 51 ( 60) Military & Other) Chi square = 32.992, significant at .05 level. iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. When the relationship of initial employment by period by cor- rections educational specialization is controlled by sex, both per- centages of males and females in corrections jobs decreased steadily over time as Table 17 indicates. The decrease is more acute for males than females, from 73% in period I to 35% in period IV. Although the percentage of females in corrections jobs increased from 21% (4) in period I to 32% (6) in period II, it steadily decreased thereafter to 21% (7) in period III to % (6) in period IV. Table 17 Initial Employment by Period by Corrections Educational Specialization by Sex 115 Period I: II: III: "IV: Employment 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 Area —————————— —————————— ————-————- ——-————-—— %+ N % N % N % N FEMALES Corrections 21 ( 4) 32 ( 6) 21 ( 7) 9 ( 6) Criminal Justice Areas other than 74 ( 14) 52 ( 10) 35 ( 12) 25 ( 17) Corrections Non-Criminal Justice (inc. 5 ( 1) l6 ( 3) 44 ( 15) 66 ( 45) Military & Other) Chi square = 32.989, significant at .05 level. MALES Corrections 73 ( 16) 62 ( 18) 45 ( 19) 35 ( 18) Criminal Justice Areas other than 9 ( 2) 21 ( 6) 22 ( 9) 35 ( 18) Corrections ‘ Non-Criminal . Justice (inc. 18 ( 4) 17 ( 5) 33 ( 14) 3O ( 14) Military & Other) Chi square = 12.930, significant at .05 level. iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. 116 However, more interesting is the inverse relationship between the percentage of males and females entering criminal justice jobs other than corrections. The percentage of males entering these jobs increased steadily from 9% in period I to 35% in period IV. However for females, the trend is reversed. In period I, 74% entered crimi- nal justice work other than corrections. In period II, the percen- tage decreased to 54% and continued decreasing until period IV when only 25% were employed in these jobs. The above findings, especially for females, are of notable importance. From period I through period IV, the percentage of females specializing in corrections increased 300%. Yet, the per- centage entering corrections work and for that matter criminal jus- tice work other than corrections has decreased over time. Clearly, the percentage of women entering corrections work and criminal jus- tice work other than corrections has not kept pace with the percentage who are specializing in that field of study. For males, a similar trend exists except that the percentage entering criminal justice work other than corrections is increasing. Somewhat more fortunate than females, males, if not increasingly employed in corrections work over time, are at least in some component of the criminal justice system. On the other hand, it appears that specializing in corrections and initial employment in corrections and other areas related to criminal justice are negatively related for females. Table 13, page 109, indicates that the percentage of graduates initially employed in industrial security has fluctuated slightly over 117 time--from approximately 15% in periods I and II, 7% in period III, and increasing to 12% in period IV. Industrial security is the third area of educational special- ization open to students in the School of Criminal Justice. As was the case with those employed in law enforcement and corrections cases, those initially employed in industrial security were examined by the variable time, controlling for industrial security educational special- ization in order to determine if a relationship exists between initial employment, time, and industrial security educational specialization. For those initially employed in industrial security, no linear change occurs over time when industrial security educational speciali— zation is controlled for in Table 18. Still, several observations can be made. From period I through III, the percentage of graduates employed in industrial security work and who specialized in industrial security decreased from 46% to 32%. In period IV, a dramatic increase to 68% occurred. The dramatic increase is tempered when area of educational specialization is considered (refer to Table 7, page 102). In period IV, only 6% of the total sample specialized in industrial security compared with 12% and 24% for periods III and II, respectively. There- fore, the increase in the percentage employed in industrial security in period IV appears to be more attributable to fewer graduates special- izing in industrial security rather than one of more graduates in industrial security employment who have also specialized in industrial security. Comparison of the category, industrial security, in periods III and IV in Table 18 affirms this assumption. 118 Table 18 Initial Employment by Period by Industrial Security Educational Specialization Period I: II: III: IV: Employment 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 Area -————————— -————————- -————————— -————————- %i N % N % N % N Industrial Security 46 ( 16) 41 ( 36) 32 ( 15) 68 ( 15) C.J. Areas other than Industrial 31 ( 11) 21 ( 18) 36 ( 17) 18 ( 4) Security Non-C.J. Areas (inc. Military 23 ( 8) 38 ( 23) 32 ( 15) 14 ( 3) & Other) Chi square = 12.670, Significant at .05 level. iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. Unlike the employment fields of law enforcement and corrections which reveal a notable decrease over time in the percentage of grad- uates in criminal justice related employment, industrial security employment in these areas Shows no consistent change (an increase or decrease) over time. In fact, the situation is one of constant fluc- tuation as Table 18 shows. Characteristically, the employment field of industrial security, traditionally oriented towards the business Sphere of society, has been occupied by men. In light of this assumption and because of increased female enrollment in the School recently, the relationship of indus- trial security employment over time by industrial security educational specialization is examined controlling for sex. A startling finding 119 occurs as Table 19 indicates. Only two women graduates, one each in periods I and II, were employed in industrial security and had special- ized in it. More importantly, no women appear in any other category other than these two. In effect, educational specialization in indus- trial seCurity is overwhelmingly male, and totally male in periods III and IV. Table 19 Initial Employment by Period by Industrial Security Educational Specialization by Sex Period I: II: III: IV: Employment 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 Area —-——————- -————————- ——-——————- -————————— %+ N % N % N % N FEMALES Industrial Security 100 ( l) 100 ( l) C.J. Related Areas other than Industrial Security Non-C.J. Areas (inc. Military & Other) MALES Industrial Security 44 ( 15) 41 ( 35) 32 ( 15) 68 ( 15) C.J. Related Areas other than 32 ( ll) 21 ( 18) 36 ( 17) 18 ( 4) Industrial Security Non-C.J. Areas (inc. Military & Other). 24 ( 8) 38 ( 33) 32 ( 15) 14 ( 3) Chi square = 12.683, signifiCant at .05 level. iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. 120 This finding in itself raises several issues. A conclusion based on Table 15, page 112, was that the percentage of females employed in areas related to law enforcement, but not law enforcement per se, and who had specialized in law enforcement was increasing. Possibly, these female graduates were initially being employed in industrial security. This possibility is heightened by the previous finding in Table 17 that the percentage of women in criminal justice related areas other than corrections given that they specialized in correc- tions has decreased over time. When initial employment over time is controlled for by sex, this in fact is the case. Table 20 reveals that the percentage of females initially employed in industrial security has increased over time from 4% in period I stabilizing at 8% in period II and III but increasing in period IV to 12%. Table 20 Initial Employment by Period by Female Period I: II: III: IV: Employment 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 Area -————————- —-——————-— -————————— -————————— %i N % N % N % N Industrial Security 4 ( 1) 8 ( 2) 8 ( 4) 12 ( 12) C.J. Related Areas other than , Industrial Security 87 ( 20) 76 ( 19) 36 ( 27) 31 ( 30) Non-C.J. Areas (inc. Military & Other) 9 ( 2) 16 ( 4) 38 ( 19) 57 ( 55) Chi square = 34.290, significant at .05 level. iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. 121 In fact as Table 21 reveals, the field of industrial security shows a sizable linear decrease in the percentage of graduates ini- tially employed in industrial security who specialized in it, from 63% in period II to 31% in period IV. However, the linear relationship disappears when period I is considered. When the other two educational specializations are brought into the spotlight, a notable pattern occurs. Of those employed in law enforcement, the percentage who specialized in it is relatively constant, 87% in period I, decreasing to 81% in period II, but increas- ing steadily through to 87% in period IV. The most consistent change occurs in the employment field of corrections, where in period I only 38% employed in corrections had also specialized in it. By period IV, the percentage employed in corrections who specialized in it had steadily increased to 80%. Thus, graduates initially employed in law enforcement and in correc- tions tended especially in period IV to have specialized in related areas to their jobs. In industrial security, however, the inverse appears to be occurring. The category criminal justice related, composed of graduates in criminal justice research and planning and criminal justice teaching, in Table 13, page 109, reveals that a linear relationship occurs from period I through period III, but disappears when period IV is con- sidered. Since the job market in criminal justice research and plan- ning and especially criminal justice teaching usually requires individuals with graduate degrees, the category was controlled by Table 21 Initial Employment by Period by Area of Educational Specialization 122 Period I: 11: Employment 1935-60 1961-67 Area -————-———- -———-————— %+ N % N 1968-71 % III: N IV: 1972—73 % N Graduates employed in Industrial Security who 27 ( 16) specialized in it 63 ( 36) Graduates employed in Industrial Secu- rity who did not 73 ( 43) specialize in it 37 ( 21) Chi square = 20.380, significant at .05 level. Graduates employed in Law Enforcement who specialized 87 ('38) 81 (111) in it Graduates employed in Law Enforcement who did not ‘3 ( 20) l9 ( 25) specialize in it 55 45 86 14 Chi square = 2.200, not significant at .05 level. Graduates employed in Corrections who 38 ( 17) 69 ( 24) specialized in it Graduates employed in Corrections who did not specialize 62 ( 28) 31 ( 11) in it Chi square = 16.550, significant at .05 level. 70 3O ( 15) ( 12) (157) ( 25) ( 26) ( 11) 31 69 87 13 80 20 ( 15) ( 33) (130) ( 20) ( 24) fPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. 123 degree on job in order to discover any relationship over time. As Table 22 indicates, no steady relationship is observable. How- ever, a notable difference especially in periods III and IV is evident. Where in periods III and IV, approximately 30% of the graduate degree holders were initially employed in criminal justice related areas, only 5% of undergraduate degree holders are so employed. Table 22 C.J. Related vs. Other Employment Areas by Period by Degree on Job Period I: II: III: IV: Employment 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 Area ———-—-—-—— -——-———-—- —--———-— -———--—- %i N % N % N % N UNDERGRADUATE C.J. Related 3 ( 12) 5 ( 15) 7 ( 22) 5 ( 17) All Other Employment Areas 97 (380) 95 (315) 93 (291) 95 (322) Chi square = 6.072, not significant at .05 level. GRADUATE C.J. Related 17 ( l) 9 ( 2) 32 ( 11) 29 ( 5) All Other Employment Areas 83 ( 13) 91 ( 17) 68 ( 34) 71 ( 25) Chi square = 4.631, not significant at .05 level. iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. 124 Table 13, page 109, further revealed that from period I through period III the proportion of graduates in the category labeled non-criminal justice steadily decreased, from 20% in period I to 9% in period III. Yet, in period IV it increased to 21%. Pre- viously, it was established (refer to Table 12, page 107) that the percentage of women in criminal justice and related work has decreased over time at the same time female enrollment was increasing. Thus, the non-criminal justice category is examined controlling for sex in order to assess whether the increase in period IV is related to sex. Table 23 reveals a strong linear relationship for females. Over time the proportion of women entering non-criminal justice employment has steadily increased. However, this increase in itself does not account for the total increase experienced in period IV in the percentage of graduates in non-criminal justice work, Since the percentage of males increased 9% from periods III to IV. Apparently, additional factors in the field such as increased competition for criminal justice work, a freeze in hiring, or possibly an increase by significant proportions of the graduates in period IV to choose employment other than criminal justice play a role in the increase. Given that a substantial percentage of the graduates are in the category non-criminal justice in each time period, this category is suited for additional analysis, since it is rational to assume that graduates who majored in criminal justice have intentions of entering this field for employment. Therefore, it is important to discover why these non-criminal justice graduates did not enter the field. 125 Table 23 Non-C.J. Employment vs. Other Employment Areas by Period by Sex Period I: II: III: ITIV: Employment 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 Area ———-—————- ————-—-——- -——————-— -———————-— %+ N % N % N % N FEMALES Non-C.J. 7 ( 2) 12 ( 3) 23 ( ll) 39 ( 38) All Other Employment Areas 93 ( 21) 88 ( 22) 77 ( 37) 61 ( 59) Chi square = 14.056, significant at .05 level. MALES Non-C.J. 21 ( 79) 12 ( 39) 7 ( 25) 16 ( 49) All Other Employment Areas 79 (303) 88 (295) 93 (313) 84 (267) Chi square = 28.469, significant at .05 level. iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. Table 24 reveals several startling findings. When asked why they did not go into criminal justice or related work, the graduates employed in non-criminal justice work show a steady increase from period I through period IV in the percentage responding "no jobs available," from 44% in period I to 79% in period IV. Given the nature of this response category, it is assumed that graduates respond- ing were interested in criminal justice employment. This observation is buttressed by the finding that from periods I to IV a decrease 126 (not exactly linear) is shown in the percentage of graduates in non- criminal justice work who respond "limited pay and opportunities in c.j. work" and "external job attractiveness," from 16% to 1% and from 32% to 18%, respectively. Table 24 Why Not C.J. Employment by Period by Non-C.J. Employment I: II: III: IV: Why Not 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %i N % N % N % No Jobs Available 44 ( 32) 55 ( 21) 67 ( 23) 79 ( 64) Limited Pay & Opportunities 16 ( 12) 16 ( 6) 6 ( 2) l ( External Job Attractiveness 32 ( 23) 24 ( 9) 4- ( 8) 18 ( 15) Cannot Meet Agency Requirements 8 ( 6) 5 ( 2) 3 ( l) 2 ( Chi square = 24.120, significant at .05 level. iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. Previously, it was discovered that the percentage of women in the non-criminal justice category (refer to Table 23, page 125) increased over time. Also, it is logical to assume that women who major in criminal justice also desire to be employed in the criminal justice field. For the preceding two reasons, non-criminal justice graduates over time who responded to the question why they did not enter the criminal justice field is examined by sex. 127 Table 25 reveals that from period 11 through period IV the percentage of women responding "no jobs available" increased. Assuming that these women graduates were interested in criminal justice employment, women disproportionately more than men are facing difficulty in locating criminal justice jobs. However, the percentage of men who were initially employed in non-criminal justice work also shows an increase in the response "no jobs available." Table 25 Why Not C.J. Employment by Period by Sex Period 1: II: III: IV: Why Not 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %+ N % N % N % N FEMALES No Jobs Available 100 ( 2) 67 ( 2) 80 ( 8) 89 ( 32) Limited Pay & Opportunities External Job Attractiveness 33 ( l) 20 ( 2) 8 ( 2) Cannot Meet Agency Requirements 3 ( 1) Chi square = 1.710, not significant at .05 level. MALES No Jobs Available 42 ( 30) 54 ( 19) 63 ( 15) 7O ( 32) Limited Pay & Opportunities 17 ( 12) 17 ( 6) 8 ( 2) 2 ( 1) External Job Attractiveness 32 ( 23) 23 ( 8) 25 ( 6) 26 ( 12) Cannot Meet Agency Requirements ( 6) 6 ( 2) 4 ( l) 2 ( 1) Chi square = 12.550, not significant at .05 level. iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. 128 Perhaps non-criminal justice employment is a phenomenon endemic to undergraduate degree holders. Table 26 shows that this is not the case. Except for the widening difference between the pro- portion of graduate degree holders in the non-criminal justice cate- gory compared with undergraduate degree holders, the degree held on the job seems to have no noticeable relationship to the percentage of graduates in non-criminal justice employment. Table 26 Non-C.J. Employment vs. Other Employment Areas by Period by Degree on Job Period 1: II: III: IV: Employment 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 Area -————————— -————————— -————————— —————————— %+ N % N % N % N UNDERGRADUATE Non-C.J. 2O ( 80) 12 ( 38) 11 ( 33) 24 ( 83) All Other Employment Areas 80 (312) 88 (292) 89 (280) 76 (256) Chi square = 32.919, significant at .05 level. GRADUATE Non-C.J. 17 ( l) 9 ( 2) 6 ( 2) l7 ( 3) All Other Employment Areas 83 ( 5) 91 ( 21) 94 ( 32) 83 ( 15) Chi square = 1.888, not significant at .05 level. iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. 129 The military category, also appearing in Table 13, page 109, reflects a trend which is best characterized as attuned with the nation's foreign policy over the past quarter century. In period I, which encompasses the Second World War, Korean War, Berlin Blockade, and the Cold War period, 11% of the graduates are in this category. From 1960-67, the period of increased military involvement in South- east Asia, the percentage of graduates initially employed in the military almost doubled to 20%. In period III, 1968-71, when mili- tary involvement was beginning to abate, the percentage of graduates initially employed in the military decreased to 11%. Period IV, l972-73, ushered in the era of the all volunteer army and brought to the forefront the beginning of détente in the nation's foreign policy. Consequently, a decrease to 8% in the proportion of graduates in the military is observed. Although simplistic and open to debate, the preceding analy- sis does offer an explanation of events which apparently attracted graduates to the military. Controlling for sex revealed that those initially employed in the military in all periods, as expected, were overwhelmingly male. The last category appearing in Table 13, page 109, is reserved for those graduates who are either unemployed or graduate students. Periods III and IV contain 96% of the graduates in these two categories; perhaps due to the two different times at which the questionnaire was administered. The initial questionnaire was given to past graduates in 1972 and covered the years 1935-71. The up-dated version given to 1972-73 graduates may have found more graduates unemployed or graduate 130 students vis-a-vis the earlier graduates from periods I and II simply because of the time element. A student graduating in 1972-73 or 1970-71 may quite conceivably have been unemployed or in graduate school at the time the questionnaire was distributed. Contrastingly, earlier graduates were more likely to be already employed when they received the questionnaire. Thus, it is rational to expect only 4% of the graduates in periods I and II to be in the "other" category. Because of this problem with time in the administration of both sets of questionnaires and its effect on the "other" category, no detailed analysis will be undertaken. However, the following observation is worthwhile noting. There is an increase from period III to IV in the percentage of graduates opting for graduate school, from 2% in period III to 5% in period IV. EDUCATIONAL UTILIZATION Table 27 presents the questions related to the issue of edu- cational utilization and their relationship to time. Changes occur- ring over time are discussed in relation to each question. 3.1) Over time, a decrease is noted in the proportion of those respond- ing that there were advantages in getting their initial job that they felt were attributable to their criminal justice degree. An 18% change has occurred between periods I and IV. This trend is consistent with every time period except period II, where the proportion of positive responses increases 2% from period I. 3.2) As it appears, there is a consistent decrease in the later time periods in the proportion of respondents who report that newly hired 131 Table 27 Educational Utilization by Period . Period I: II: III: IV: 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 Response %i N % N % N % N 3.1 Were there any advantages in getting your initial job that you feel were attributable to your criminal justice degree?* Yes 86 (348) 88 (317) 77 (298) 68 (286) No 7 ( 30) 3 ( lO) 8 ( 31; 11 E 45) Non-response 7 ( 29) 9 ( 33) 15 ( 58 21 86) Chi square = 64.397, significant at .05 level. 3.2 Did newly hired personnel start at different entry levels due to their level of education?* Yes 28 (115) 39 (139) 34 (134) 26 (108) No 62 (251) 51 (185) 50 (192) 54 (226 Non-response lO ( 41) 10 ( 36) 16 ( 61) 20 ( 83 Chi square = 38.774, significant at .05 level. 3.3 Do you feel your college training was best utilized through your initial job placement? Yes 61 (248) 60 (215) 48 (186) 35 (151) No 33 (133) 32 (117) 36 (139) 44 (177) Non-response 6 ( 26) 8 ( 28) 16 ( 62) 21 ( 89) Chi square = 86.392, significant at .05 level. Table 27 (continued) 132 Period I: II: III: IV: Response 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %+ N % N % N % N 3.4 How well do you feel your college major prepared you for your initial job placement? Extremely Well 24 ( 97) 21 ( 75) 16 ( 63) 10 ( 42) Adequately 57 (230) 58 (210) 48 (186) 37 (155) Inadequately 6 ( 26) 8 ( 28) 13 ( 49) 16 ( 65) Cannot Say 7 ( 30) 6 ( 21) 10 ( 40) 19 ( 79) Non-response 6 ( 24) 7 ( 26) 13 ( 49) 18 ( 76) Chi square = 149.141, signifiCant at .05 level. 3.5 How well prepared were you to assume your job responsibilities in comparison with your fellow workers? Extremely Well 40 (163) 40 (143) 35 (137) 30 (127) Adequately 47 (193) 48 (171) 44 (172) 38 (159) Inadequately 2 ( 6) 3 (l O) 2 ( 6) 3 ( 12) Cannot Say 5 ( 21) 3 (l 3) 5 ( 19) ll ( 45) Non-response 6 ( 24) 6 ( 23) 14 ( 53) 18 ( 74) Chi square = 76.219, significant at .05 ,1evel. fPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. *These questions have been re-phrased without their essential meanings being changed such that a "no" response reflects negatively on the issue. 133 personnel start at different levels due to their education. A 13% difference is shown from periods II to IV; however, period I deviates from the trend established by these periods. 3.3) Clearly with time, there has been a consistent decrease in the proportion of respondents who felt their college training was best utilized through their initial job placement. From time period I to IV, the drop experienced is 26%. The rate at which this decrease occurred seems to have accelerated after time period I, in the sixties. 3.4) Over time, there is a steady decrease in the proportion of graduates who felt their college major had prepared them "extremely well'I or "adequately" for their initial job placement. In period I, 81% responded "extremely well" or "adequately" while only 47% responded likewise in period IV. Thus, a 33% decrease over time in the proportion of positive responses is shown. 3.5) It appears that the later graduates felt not as well prepared in assuming their job responsibilities in comparison with their fellow workers. In period I, 87% felt "extremely well" or "adequately" prepared, while in period IV, only 68% felt likewise. A 19% decrease in the proportion of positive responSes is noted. Those not responding to questions related to educational utilization arouse interest because of the proportion of the total sample they represent. The average number of non-responses for the five questions is 13% (196) of the total sample, 1571. Also, the later time periods (III and IV) lodge the majority of them. Of those not 134 responding, 70% (137) are from these two periods based on the average of the non-responses for the questions. Further analysis gives evi- dence that non-respondents for this issue categorize themselves as "other" (34%), "non-criminal justice" (22%), and "military" (20%) with respect to initial employment and primarily are under 30 years of age--(60%). Questions on educational utilization in order to generate a response assume that the graduate will have begun to put his educa- tion to use in some form of employment, which is or is not related to criminal justice. All questions directly mention some aspect of initial employment, i.e. responsibilities related to the job, place- ment, entry level. However, not all graduates fit into the "employ- ment mold" immediately after they graduate. Many enter graduate schools or remain unemployed for several months. Therefore, grad- uates in either of the latter two situations cannot answer questions related to educational utilization which do not apply to their condi- tions. An average of 92% of those categorized as "other" (graduate students and unemployed) failed to respond to the questions related to educational utilization. Because of the nature of the "other" category, it is logical to assume that the latter two time periods contain the greatest proportion of "other" respondents. Indeed, periods III and IV contain 96% of the "other” respondents. These periods also contain the greatest proportion of non-respondents. Two other employment categories, "non-criminal justice" and the "military," contribute a large proportion to the group of non- respondents. Of those not responding, 22% (43) on average are initially 135 employed in non-criminal justice work; the average for the military is very Similar--24% (47). Although both of these employment cate- gories together represent 46% of the non-respondents, they do not seem to figure into the important increases of non-responses in periods III and IV. These later two time periods contain an even 50% (122) of the non-criminal justice and only 38% (73) of the mili- tary personnel. Still, the group of non-respondents does consist of a number of those employed in fields other than criminal justice. Thus, it appears that graduates characterized by military and non-criminal justice employment also meet with some difficulty when answering questions directed towards their education and its use on the job. Apparently, the questions are geared towards those individuals who not only receive education in criminal justice and are employed, but who are employed in a field related to criminal justice. A final characteristic of the non-response group is their youthfulness. Of those not responding, an average of 58% (107) are 30 years of age and under.128 Naturally, periods III and IV contain the bulk of young graduates since the latest graduates are also the youngest. Periods III and IV contain 71% of those 30 and under. 128Because the questionnaire was distributed at two points in time, approximately two years apart, there are actually two groups of graduates who have reported their ages with respect to the year they responded to the questionnaire. Because age data is grouped into five- year periods, no alterations have been made to account for any slight discrepancies within the three earliest time periods. The composition of period IV is not affected since it contains only graduates from the second set of questionnaires. The only impact this age discrepancy has on results is on the absolute differences between periods, not in the establishment of trends. 136 Because periods III and IV also contain the overwhelming majority of respondents categorized as "other," they are likely to be young. Thus, the increase over time in the non-response category can be due to graduates who are not employed in criminal justice or related work and who are predominantly young. At this point, the argument is that the non-response group consists of those to whom the questions on educational utilization do not apply because of their slant towards those initially employed in criminal justice or related work. The issue is not that graduates did not choose to respond, therefore if they had chosen to answer, their responses would have added to either of the other two response categories, "yes" or "no." Rather, certain graduates could not answer the questions because the condition of their initial employment would not allow a meaningful answer. It follows that responses over time to these questions may, at best, be examined by excluding the non- tresponse category altogether. Where the proportion of non-responses is as large as 10% of the sample for particular questions, the pro- portions of responses are deflated, based on a total including non- responses. When the non-response category is eliminated from considera- tion, one of the questions continues to Show a relatively large dif- ference over time and is illustrated in Table 28. An increase of 20% was found from period I to IV in the proportions of graduates responding they felt their college training was ppt_best utilized through their initial job placement. The negative response category illustrates a consistent increase with time and amounts to a large 137 percent (42%) of the total respondents, 1374. Thus, it will be the subject of further elaboration for this issue. The following var- iables are used in further elaborating the increase in proportions of negative responses over time: initial employment, service status, area of educational specialization, sex, degree on job, and age. Table 28 College Best Utilized by Period, Without Non-Responses Period 1: II:. III: IV: Response 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %+ N % N % N % N 3.3 Do you feel your college training was best utilized through your initial job placement? Yes 65 (248) 65 (215) 57 (186) 45 (151) No 35 (133) 35 (117) 43 (139) 55 (185) Chi square = 44.050, significant at .05 level. iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. It is logical to assume that there will be differences in graduates' feelings regarding the utility of their college training based on their initial job placement. Criminal justice graduates who find employment within the field should feel more positively towards the utility of their education than graduates who are unable to obtain employment related to their educational interest given that graduates 138 interpret educational utilization narrowly. Possibly, educational utility may be interpreted differently according to the graduates' breadth of view of their college education. If criminal justice edu- cation is interpreted narrowly in the sense of strictly criminal justice related courses, then the use of that education on the job depends on the direct application of principles, concepts, ideas, etc. learned to the job situation. The broad viewpoint refers to an enlarged scope of education including college education generally. Therefore, graduates holding the narrower view who are employed within the criminal justice field will tend to find their education more useful than graduates who are in non-criminal justice fields. Table 29 shows the relationship of graduates feelings' towards their college training and its use in their initial job placement with their initial employment as constant. All of the categories within the criminal justice field and the non-criminal justice group illus- trate consistent Change over time in the proportion of respondents who feel that their college training was not best utilized in their initial job placement. The increases are as follows: law enforcement-- 23%; industrial security--28%; corrections-~20%; and non-criminal justice--22%. The military shows slight variations from periods I through IV and the "other" category had very few responding. Those initially employed in criminal justice related occupations Show a sharp decrease (48%) from periods I to IV in the proportion respond- ing that their college education was not best utilized through their initial job placement, although graduates in period II do not con- tribute to this trend. Table 29 College Best Utilized by Period by Initial Employment 139 Period 1: II: 'III: IV: Response 1935-60 1961-67 . 1968-71 1972-73 %i N % N % N % N Law Enforcement Yes 77 (121) 72 ( 96) 56 ( 92) 54 ( 73) No 23 ( 36) 28 ( 38) 44 ( 73) 46 ( 61) Chi square = 25.269, significant at .05 level. Industrial Security Yes 58 ( 33) 55 ( 31) 46 ( 12) 3O ( 14) No 42 ( 24) 45 ( 25) 54 ( 14) 7O ( 33) Chi square = 9.715, significant at .05 level. Corrections Yes 84 ( 38) 77 ( 27) 72 ( 26) 64 ( 18) No 16 ( 7) 23 ( 8) 28 ( 10) 36 ( 10) Chi square = 4.129, not significant at .05 level. C.J. Related Yes 23 ( 3) 82 ( 14) 65 ( 22) 71 ( 17) No 77 ( 10) 18 ( 3) 35 ( 12) 29 ( 7) Chi square = 12.369, Significant at .05 level. Non-Criminal Justice Yes 39 ( 28) 34 ( 13) 26 ( 7) l7 ( 12) No 61 ( 43) 66 ( 25) 74 ( 20) 83 ( 60) Chi square = 9.728, significant at .05 level. Table 29 (continued) 140 Period I: II: III: IV: Response 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %i N % N % N % N Military Yes 64 ( 23) 67 ( 34) 72 ( 23) 62 ( 15) No 36 ( 13) 33 ( 17) 28 ( 9) 38 ( 9) Chi square = .697, not significant at .05 level. Other Yes 100 ( l) O ( O) 75 ( 3) 4O ( 2) No 0 ( O) O ( O) 25 ( 1) 6O ( 3) Chi square 2.925, not significant at .05 level. iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. Overall, initial employment is not a distinguishing factor in the increased pr0portion of those saying “no," other than to say it is not due to the criminal justice related personnel and there is no difference between the other employment categories. All those responding that their college training was not best utilized through their initial job placement within the various employment categories related to criminal justice work Show an increase over time with the exception of criminal justice related personnel. Because of the; decrease, this job category is not responsible for the primary increase over time in the proportion of negative responses. 141 The influence of experience in the field of criminal justice can affect graduates' feelings toward the utility of their education on their initial job placement. It seems likely that students who have had experience either previous to or concurrent with their criminal justice education will feel their education is useful in their employment more so than pre-service graduates. Without the benefit of experience, the pre-service graduate has only expectations based on second-hand information how his education will contribute to his future employment. He is first educated and then encounters the work situation, whereas the in-service or prior service student is more likely to gear his education towards his "working" knowledge of the field. The result is a greater mesh between education and its utility for the graduate who is experienced in the field. In Table 30, the relationship over time of graduates' feel- ings about their college training and its use in their initial job placement is examined by the service status of the graduates. It is evident that there are increases in the negative responses from period I to period IV with all three categories of service, although prior and in-service graduates in period II deviate slightly from the trend established. The increases in proportions are as follows: pre-service--21%; prior-service--22%; in-service--21%. As with initial employment, the status of a graduate's service in the field of crimi- nal justice is not a distinguishing faCtor in the increased proportion who are responding negatively. The sex distribution of graduates has changed over time--the proportion of female graduates has increased 18% from period I to IV Table 30 College Best Utilized by Period by Service Status 142 Period I: II: III: IV: Response 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %+ N % N % N % N Pre-Service Yes 65 (198) 61 (148) 50 (100) 44 (102) No 35 (107) 39 ( 94) 50 ( 98) 56 (131) Chi square = 29.015, significant at .05 level. Prior-Service Yes 62 ( 32) 65 ( 24) 64 ( 33) 4O ( 19) No 38 ( 20) 35 ( 13) 36 ( 19) 60 ( 29) — Chi square = 8.202, significant at .05 level. In-Service Yes 75 ( 15) 82 40) 69 46; 54 29) No 25 ( 5) 18 9) 31 21 46 25) Chi square = 9.774, significant at .05 level. ~+Percentages rounded to the nearest whole number. (refer to Table 5, page 101). decrease in the proportion of female graduates obtaining initial employment with law enforcement agencies. Findings also indicate a concomitant In period I, 91% of the females were initially employed in criminal justice and related areas 143 contrasted to only 43% in period IV. Male graduates have met with better success in what has traditionally been a male-dominated job market. There has been a gain in the proportion of males finding initial employment with law enforcement agencies. Based on this comparison between males and females, it is assumed that there will be an increase in the proportion of females who respond negatively about the utility of their college training in their initial employ- ment. Table 31 shows that the proportion of negative responses within each sex is increasing. However, within the female group the degree of the increase is greater and especially from periods III to IV. Thus, the increase in proportions saying "no" over time can be attributed more to females than to males. There should be a difference between undergraduate and grad- uate degree holders' feelings regarding the utility of their college training through their initial job placement. Because graduate degree holders have supplemented their undergraduate education with advanced study, they may feel their education to be more specialized and use- ful in fewer situations than undergraduate degree holders who have not obtained the additional education. The responses of graduate and undergraduate degree holders on the job to the question of the utility of their college training in their initial employment are examined in Table 32. With those who have earned undergraduate degrees, there is a steady increase in the proportion responding negatively from 35% in period I to 57% in period IV. However, the proportion of the graduate degree holders Table 31 College Best Utilized by Period by Sex 144 Period I: II: III: IV: .Response 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %+ N % N % N % N MALES Yes 65 (232) 64 (197) 59 (168) 51 (132) No 35 (126) 36 (109) 41 (118) 49 (129) Chi square = 15.744, significant at .05 level. FEMALES Yes 70‘ ( 16) 69 ( 18) 46 ( 18) 25 ( 19) No 30 ( 7) 31 ( 8)~ 54 ( 21) 75 ( 56) Chi square = 23.537, significant at .05 level. iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. who answered "no" tends to fluctuate over time. From period II to III, there is a 19% increase in the proportion while from periods III to IV, there is a 9% decrease. Because of the lack of a consistent increase ' among graduates who held a graduate degree on the job, the steady increase in the proportion of undergraduate degree holders who felt their college training was not best utilized through their initial job placement indicates that the increase in "no" responses is due to undergraduate degree holders. 145 Table 32 College Best Utilized by Period by Degree on Job Period 1: II: III: IV: Response 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %i N % N % N % N UNDERGRADUATE Yes 65 (239) 64 (196) 57 (161) 43 (126) No 35 (131) 36 (111) 43 (121) 57 (168) Chi square 38.512, significant at .05 level. GRADUATE Yes 60 ( 3) 81 ( 17) 62 ( 20) 71 ( 12) No 40 ( 2) 19 ( 4) 38 ( 12) 29 ( 5) Chi square 2.254, not significant at .05 level. +Percentages rounded to the nearest whole number. Depending on the area of specialization, the graduate will feel his college training is utilized in his initial job. An earlier finding indicated that graduates specializing in corrections have decreasingly, over time, become employed in corrections work. How- ever, the proportion of graduates from the law enforcement educational specialization who have found employment in the law enforcement field has remained relatively constant with time. Therefore, it is reason- able to speculate that graduates who Specialized in corrections will feel that their college training was not best utilized in their ini- tial job, more so that those Specializing in law enforcement. 146 Table 33 shows the relationship of graduates' feelings towards their college training and its use in their initial job placement with area of educational specialization constant. Pro- portions saying "no" representing all three areas of educational specialization generally increase over time. From periods I to IV, the increases are as follows: law enforcement--l9%; industrial security--21%; corrections--30%. Periods II and II in law enforce- ment and industrial security, respectively, deviate slightly from the trends established. All three educational specializations illus- trate an increased proportion in the negative response category over time. Thus, the area of educational Specialization is not an impor- tant factor in terms of the increase in those saying "no" to the original question. The age of the graduate is another factor which has an influence on the feelings of graduates towards the utility of their college training. It is reasonable to believe that older graduates who have acquired a longer time perspective compared to younger grad- uates feel their college training was useful in their initial employ- ment. They will tend to view their initial employment as a learning experience in the long run regardless of how useful (or useless) they may have felt their education to be in their initial job at the time. The youngest graduates in most cases were experiencing their first major initial employment. If they felt their college training was not being best utilized, had they gained perspective with time, they may have answered positively. Table 33 College Best Utilized by Period by Area of Educational Specialization 147 Period 1: II: III: IV: Response 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %i N % N % N % N Law Enforcement Specialization Yes 64 (190) 68 (138) 56 (122) 45 ( 97) No 36 (105) 32 ( 65) 44 ( 95) 55 (118) Chi square = 28.107, significant at .05 level. Industrial Security Specialization Yes 64 ( 23) 54 ( 43) 6O ( 25) 43 ( 9) No 36 ( 13) 46 ( 37) 4O ( 17) 57 ( 12) Chi square = 2.754, not significant at .05 level. Corrections Specialization Yes 73 ( 30) 69 ( 33) 59 ( 38) 43 ( 41) No 27 ( ll) 31 ( 15) 41 ( 26) 57 ( 54) Chi square = 14.667, significant at .05 level. fPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. 148 Table 34 shows the relationship of graduates' feelings over time towards the utility of their college education in their initial job placement controlling for age. Only one category, under 30 years, shows an increase in the proportion responding "no." From period II to IV, there is a 12% increase in the proportion of nega- tive responses. The other two age brackets, 30-39 and 40 years and over, show decreasing trends in the proportions answering "no" with minor variations in intermittent periods. Evidently, the increase over time in those who feel their education has not been best utilized through their initial job placement is due to the youngest group of graduates. EDUCATIONAL SATISFACTION Table 35 presents the questions related to educational satisfaction and graduates' feelings according to time periods. Changes occurring over time are discussed in relation to each ques- tion. 4.1) There is a small increase in the proportion responding that they would choose the same area of specialization again. In time period I, 75% said "yes" and in period IV, 79% responded similarly. The trend is increasing from periods I to III, yet decreases from period III to IV. Overall, the increase is 4%. 4.2) Again, there is an increase in the proportion responding that they would choose the criminal justice area as their college major if they had it to do over again. From period I to III, the increase is Table 34 College Best Utilized by Period by Age 149 Period I: II: III: IV: Response 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %i N % N % N % N Under 30 Yes 0 ( O) 52 ( 51) 51 (126) 40 (112) No . O ( O) 48 ( 48) 49 (123) 60 (166) Chi square = 6.978, not significant at .05 level. ~ 30—40 Yes 60 ( 78) 68 (135) 81 ( 50) 66 ( 29) No 40 ( 51) 32 ( 65) 19 ( 12) 34 ( 15) Chi square = 7.771, not significant at .05 level. 40 & Over Yes 67 (169) 88 ( 29) 71 ( 10) 71 10) No 33 ( 82) 12 ( 4) 29 ( 4) 29 4) Chi square = 5.88, not significant at .05 level. iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. 150 Table 35 Educational Satisfaction by Period Period I: II: III: IV: Response 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %i N % N % N % N 4.1 If you had to do it over again, would you choose the same area of specialization?* Yes 75 (285) 79 (278) 82 (316) 79 (321) No 25 ( 96) 21 ( 75) 18 ( 68) 21 ( 85) Chi square = 7.238, not significant at .05 level. 4.2 If you had to do it over again, would you choose the criminal justice area as your college major?** Yes 68 (270) 78 (277) 86 (328) 78 ( N0 32 (128) 22 ( 77) 14 ( 54) 22 ( 91) Chi square = 36.789, significant at .05 level. 4.3 Were you satisfied with the criminal justice curriculum while attending MSU?*** Yes 84 (338) 76 (269) 59 (222) 59 (240) No 16 ( 63) 24 ( 86) 41 (153) 41 (167) Chi square = 90.446, significant at .05 level. fPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. *3% (47) did not respond. **2% (26) did not respond. ***2% (33) did not respond. 151 18%. The trend is increasing from period I to III, yet decreases 8% from period III to IV. 4.3) There is a consistent decrease from period I through IV in those responding positively that they were satisfied with the criminal justice curriculum while attending MSU. In period I, 84% said they were satisfied and in period IV, 59% said they were satisfied. This decrease amounts to 25% with time. The three questions which are listed in Table 35 with grad- uates' responses over time reported form a cluster of sub=issues with the common denominator of satisfaction. Choosing the same specialization or the same college major (criminal justice) again and expressing satisfaction with the criminal justice curriculum encompass the desire of the graduate to repeat his educational exper- ience given a second chance. Satisfaction with the area of special- ization is subsumed by satisfaction with the criminal justice area as the college major. Similarly, the criminal justice curriculum also plays a significant role in the student's educational experience. As the composite of course offerings to students, the curriculum forms the literal backbone of any college major. The perspective gained at this point is "college major" as representative of this cluster of aspects related to educational satisfaction. With this in view, the focus on this issue centers on changes of graduates' feelings of satisfaction with the criminal justice area as their college major. Two areas related to changes over time in the proportion responding positively towards choosing the criminal justice area as 152 their college major again will be enlightened. The first is the conSistent increase from period I to III with graduates responding positively. Secondly, an attempt will be made to uncover variables related to the decrease from period III to IV in the proportion of respondents satisfied with criminal justice as their major. The relationship established by graduates' feelings over time regarding the criminal justice major will be tested by the fol- lowing variables: sex, age, service status, degree on job, initial employment, and area of educational specialization. These variables are necessarily included here and are justified with the same reason- ing previously used for each with "college best utilized by period" representing the issue of educational utilization. Table 36 provides the relationship of satisfaction with the criminal justice major over time when controlled by sex. Apparently, there is little difference between males and females in their feel- ings of satisfaction over time. Both groups show similar increases in proportions answering "yes" from periods I to III. Males show a 19% increase and females a 20% increase. From periods III to IV, both sexes also decrease in the proportion who are satisfied with the criminal justice area as their college major. But the decrease with female graduates (13%) is twice as great as it is with the male group of graduates who indicate only a 6% decrease. Table 36 , Satisfaction with Criminal Justice Major by Period by Sex 1 53 Period 1: II: III: IV: Response 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %i N % N % N % N MALES Yes 68 (256) 79 (260) 87 (290) 81 (253) No 32 (119) 21 ( 68) 13 ( 45) 19 ( 60) Chi square = 37.155, significant at .05 level. FEMALES Yes 61 ( 14) 65 ( 17) 81 ( 38) 68 ( 67) No 39 ( 9) 35 ( 9) l9 ( 9) 32 ( 31) Chi square 3.943, not significant at .05 level. iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. In Table 37, age is controlled for as graduates' responses towards satisfaction with the criminal justice major are viewed by time periods. All age brackets appear to differ little in terms of the trends established over time by graduates who were satisfied. The under 30 bracket shows a 9% increase from period II to III and an 8% decrease from period III to IV. Similarly, the 30-40 and 40 and over brackets show 23% and 29% increases, respectively, from periods I to III and 8% and 7% decreases, respectively, from periods III to IV. Table 37 Satisfaction with Criminal Justice Major by Period by Age 154 Service status is another variable which may explain the Period I: II: III: IV: Response 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %i N % N % N % N Under 30 Yes 75 ( 78) 84 (237) 76 (256) ‘No 25 ( 26) 16 ( 47) 24 ( 80) Chi square = 5.957, not significant at .05 level. 30-40 Yes 69 ( 90) 78 (163) 92 ( 69) 84 ( 48) No 31 ( 40) 22 ( 47) 8 ( 6) l6 ( 9) Chi square = 15.852, significant at .05 level. 40 & Over Yes 67 (179) 90 ( 36) 96 ( 22) 89 ( 16) No 33 ( 88) 10 ( 4) 4 ( 1) ll ( 2) Chi square = 18.822, significant at .05 level. fPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. pattern of graduates who are satisfied with criminal justice as their college major. Table 38 shows the relationship of graduates' feel- ings of satisfaction over time controlling for service status. All three categories of service display very similar trends over time. There is the familiar increase from periods I to III among pre, prior, 155 and in-service graduates which amounts to 16%, 15%, and 18%, respec- tively, and a decrease from period III to IV which amounts to 8%, 4%, and 5%, respectively. There is little difference in satisfaction over time among graduates according to their experience in the field of criminal justice. Table 38 Satisfaction with Criminal Justice Major by Period by Service Status Period 1: II: III: IV: Response 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %i N % N % N % N Pre-Service Yes 66 (212) 74 (185) 82 (188) 74 (210) No 34 (110) 26 ( 66) 18 ( 41) 26 ( 74) Chi square = 18.248, significant at .05 level. Prior-Service Yes 78 ( 40) 79 ( 30) 93 ( 53) 89 ( 47) No 22 ( ll) 21 ( 8) 7 ( 4) ll ( 6) Chi square = 6.350, not significant at .05 level. In-Service Yes 71 ( 15) 95 ( 55) 89 ( 75) 84 ( 59 No 29 ( 6) 5 ( 3) ll ( 9) l6 ( 11 Chi square = 8.744, significant at .05 level. iPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. In Table 39, undergraduate and graduate degree holders alike Show increased proportions satisfied with criminal justice as their college major. From period I to III, the increases for undergraduates and graduates are respectively 19% and 21%. groups exhibit similar decreases from periods III to IV. neither the increase from period I to III, nor the decrease from Both Thus, 156 period III to IV in the proportion of those satisfied can be attrib- uted to either undergraduate or graduate degree holders. Table 39 Satisfaction with Criminal Justice Major by Period by Degree on Job Period 1: II: III: IV: Response 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %i N % N % N % N UNDERGRADUATE Yes 68 (260) 79 (257) 87 (268) 77 (262) No 32 (125) 21 ( 69) 13 ( 41) 23 ( 77) Chi square = 36.689, significant at .05 level. GRADUATE Yes 67 ( 4) 7O ( 16) 88 ( 30) 76 ( 13) No 33 ( 2) 30 ( 7) 12 ( 4) 24 ( 4) Chi square = 3.564, not significant at .05 level. iPercentageS rounded to the nearest whole number. 157 When the relationship of graduates' satisfaction with the criminal justice major by period is viewed with initial employment held constant, several interesting findings result, as Table 40 indicates. Within criminal justice employment categories, there are consistent increases from periods I to III in the proportions responding they were satisfied with the criminal justice major. The increases are as follows: law enforcement--13%; corrections--24%; industrial security--21%; and c.j. related--48%. Also, all of these experienced a decrease from periods III to IV with the exception of law enforcement where a 3% increase occurred in the percentage satisfied. Corrections personnel show the greatest decrease (29%) followed by graduates employed in industrial security (15%) and c.j. related work (10%). The non-criminal justice group fluctuates between periods I and III, yet from periods III to IV, increased 6% in the proportion of respondents who felt satisfied with the criminal justice major. Both the military and "other" categories Show decreases from periods III to IV, 4% and 11%, respectively. Thus, graduates initially employed in law enforcement work and in non-criminal justice areas are over the latter two time periods becoming increasingly more satisfied with their criminal justice major compared to their cohorts employed in other criminal justice and related work. Table 40 Satisfaction with Criminal Justice Major by Period by Initial Employment 158 Period I: II: III: IV: Response 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %+ N % N % N % N Law Enforcement Yes 73 (114) 78 (104) 86 (156) 89 (133) No 27 ( 42) 22 ( 30) 14 ( 25) 11 ( 16) Chi square = 17.446, significant at .05 level. Corrections Yes 71 ( 32) 88 ( 30) 95 ( 35) 66 ( 19) No 29 ( 13) 12 ( 4) 5 ( 2) 34 ( 10) Chi square = 12.391, significant at .05 level. Industrial Security Yes 75 ( 42) 81 ( 46) 96 ( 25) 81 ( 39) No 25 ( l4) l9 ( ll) 4 ( 1) l9 ( 9) Chi square = 5.245, not significant at .05 level. C.J. Related Yes 46 ( 6) 69 ( ll) 94 ( 32) 84 ( 21) No 54 ( 7) 31 ( 5) 6 ( 2) l6 ( 4) Chi square = 14.797, significant at .05 level. Table 40 (continued) 159 Period 1: II: 111: 171V: Response 1935-60 1961-67 1968-71 1972-73 %+ N % N % N % N Non-Criminal Justice Yes 52 ( 41) 6O ( 24) 52 ( 17) 58 ( 49) No 48 ( 38) 4O ( 16) 48' ( 16) 42 ( 35) Chi square = 1.228, not significant at .05 level. Military Yes 78 ( 35) 86 ( 62) 95 ( 40) 91 ( 29) No 22 ( 10) 14 ( 10) 5 ( 2) 9 ( 3) Chi square = 6.288, not significant at .05 level. Other Yes 79 ( 22) 68 ( 28) No 100 ( 3) 21 ( 6) 32 ( 13) Chi square 7.943, significant at .05 level. fPercentages rounded to the nearest whole number. Table 41 shows the relationship of graduates' feelings of satisfaction toward the criminal justice major over time controlled by area of educational specialization. Both graduates who have spe- cialized in law enforcement and industrial security contribute to the increase in positive responses from period I to III. From period I I, III III .III. . .uohlllll“ 1 :60 to III, there is a 19% increase in the law enforcement category and a 25% increase in the industrial security category. Satisfaction with Criminal Justice Major by Period Table 41 by Area of Educational Specialization Period I: II: III: IV: Response 1935-60 1961—67 1968-71 1972-73 %+ N % N % N % N Law Enforcement Specialization Yes 68 (213) 82 (181) 87 (226) 81 (213) No 32 (100) 18 ( 39) 13 ( 35) 19 ( 50) Chi square = 33.480, significant at .05 level. Industrial Security Specialization Yes 62 ( 21) 72 ( 62) 87 ( 39) 87 ( 20) No 38 ( 13) 28 ( 24) 13 ( 6) 13 ( 3) Chi square = 8.680, significant at .05 level. Corrections Specialization Yes 76 ( 31) 71 ( 34) 83 ( 62) 69 ( 83) No 24 ( 10) 29 ( l4) l7 ( 13) 31 ( 37) Chi square = 4.683, not significant at .05 level. +Percentages rounded to the nearest whole number. 161 From periods III to IV, decreases occur in the proportions of graduates who felt satisfied with criminal justice as their college major in both law enforcement (6%) and corrections (14%) while graduates specializing in industrial security who felt satis- fied remained constant at 87%. From the findings, it appears that the proportion of grad- uates becoming satisfied with criminal justice as their college major is increasing. No one factor (age, sex, initial employment, service status, area of educational specialization, degree on job) seems to be the source of the increase with time. There is not much difference with findings related to the decrease from periods III to IV in the percentage of graduates express- ing satisfaction with the criminal justice major. No singular factor seems to be the cause; yet, women compared with men responded more negatively as a group from periods III to IV. Chapter VI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The purpose of this study was to determine whether time has altered initial employment patterns, educational utilization, and educational satisfaction of past graduates of the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University. A review of the research completed to this point in time on past graduates of criminal justice programs revealed that the time factor had received little attention in studies of initial employment patterns, etc. Thus, it was the opinion of the authors that valuable and pertinent information in the form of changes could be uncovered through an analysis of data accounting for the time element. In turn, this information will provide a base for viewing the educational utilization of past graduates and provide directives for both the developing and established criminal justice education programs to consider. The findings of the study indicate that noticeable changes with respect to time have occurred. In this final chapter, major findings of the study are re-examined with added emphasis, limita- tions of the findings acknowledged, and implications of the findings discussed. 162 163 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS This study has focused attention on the relationship of change over time and the issues of initial employment, educational utiliztion, and educational satisfaction. Specifically, we utilized several questions pertinent to each issue, gained from two sets of similar questionnaires. The first set was administered early in 1972 to past graduates of the School covering the years 1935-71, inclusive, and the second set was administered in early 1974 to recent graduates, 1972-73 inclusive. The total sample consisted of 1,571 graduates spanning the years 1935 through 1973. Based on historical developments within the School and concomitant events in the field of criminal justice, four time frames (1:1935-60, II:l96l- 67, III:1968-7l, IV:l972-73) were drawn in order to provide a mean- ingful perspective for viewing change. Results were then presented on the basis of these four time frames. The first major issue investigated focused on changes over time with respect to major initial employment. Several major changes were uncovered. Although the proportion of female graduates in each time frame was increasing, the percentage finding initial employment in criminal justice or criminal justice related occupations was I decreasing. For males, however, a different relationship was found. As a proportion of the total sample, the percentage of males in each time frame was decreasing, yet the percentage of males initially employed in criminal justice or criminal justice related occupations has remained relatively constant--at or near 70%. 164 Although these trends lend themselves to several possible explanations, pre-eminent consideration must be given to the tra- ditionalism of male dominance in the field of criminal justice. This conjecture is reinforced by the finding that of those female.gradu- ates initially employed in the category non-criminal justice, approximately 90% responded "no jobs available" when asked why they did not go into criminal justice work. Another finding was that internal changes were occurring in both initial employment categories of law enforcement and corrections. In the case of the former, a continued decline in the percentage of graduates initially employed in Federal police is occurring. This trend is offset by an increase in the percentage of graduates initially employed at the state and local levels of law enforcement employment. Possibly, either the Federal police are no longer hiring graduates in the proportions they once were, or more recent graduates find employment at the Federal level less attractive than either the state or local level. It is also conceivable that the state and local police agencies are placing more emphasis on recruitment of college graduates than in previous years. Still, these assumptions border on conjecture and as such need empirical validation. Similarly, in corrections a shift away from initial employment at the Federal and state levels to local levels is occurring. Again, it seems the shift is attributable to the same set of assumptions discussed previously with graduates employed in law enforcement. 165 Another result from the study was that over time no signifi- cant relationship existed between area of Specialization and initial employment i.e., Specializing in law enforcement, corrections, or industrial security did not result in initial employment in those respective fields in the majority of cases. In fact, all things being equal, the result was that a person specializing in either of the three areas had about a fifty percent chance of initially being employed in that area. For females Specializing in law enforcement and particularly corrections, the probability was even less. These findings lead to one of three possible conclusions. First, graduates of their own volition are opting for areas of employ- ment beyond the confines of their educational specialization, in which case Specializing in an area becomes irrelevant to initial employment. For those employed in the category non-criminal justice, we found that in each time period approximately one quarter of these graduates so employed did, on their own initiative, seek employment in non- crminal work, i.e., those who responded ”external job attractiveness” when asked why they did not go into criminal justice work. However, this group represents only one quarter of the graduates in the non- criminal justice category. The remaining 75% overwhelmingly responded "no jobs available.” Thus, had criminal justice jobs been available, it is rational to expect these graduates would have been initially employed in criminal justice areas in which they had Specialized. It seems that although some graduates seek initial employment out- side of criminal justice of their own choosing, the vast majority 166 desire employment in criminal justice if jobs are available. The expectation that graduates of their own volition do not select criminal justice employment, although credible, does not totally explain the weak relationship between area of educational speciali- zation and initial employment. A second explanation regarding the insignificant relationship between initial employment and area of educational specialization is possible. We mention it only because it is a possibility and has not been totally disproven by our findings. It may be that the supply of graduates exceeds the demand of criminal justice agencies. As a result, it could be expected that a certain percentage or number of graduates would not be initially employed in criminal justice or related occupations. This assumption that the supply of graduates exceeds the demand by criminal justice agencies is enhanced by the finding that overwhelmingly graduates initially employed in non- criminal justice work report the unavailability of criminal justice jobs as the reason for not being in criminal justice work. Further- more, it would be reasonable to expect that since the supply of graduates exceeds the demand,criminal justice agencies would prefer to initially employ graduates with academic backgrounds directly related to the function of the agency; for example, law enforcement agencies would hire graduates who specialized in law enforcement and not graduates who specialized in corrections or industrial security. The case would be similar for industrial security and corrections. However, our findings indicate that criminal justice agencies initially 167 employ a significant percentage of graduates irregardless of their educational Specializations. For instance, in the field of industrial security we found that on the average one out of every two graduates so employed did not specialize in industrial security. Similar find- ings prevail in the initial employment categories of law enforcement and corrections. Therefore, if educational Specialization were of concern to criminal justice agencies, it seems natural to expect that given a supply of graduates with educational Specializations in the respective areas, agencies would select their manpower from within the existing Specialization pool and not from diverse Specializations. Since this is not the case, it can be tentatively concluded that it is not the oversupply of graduates which account for the weak relationship between initial employment and area of specializtion. A third and more distinct possibility is that agencies, mainly those in industrial security but also those in law enforcement and corrections, place a higher premium on the criminal justice degree viS-a-vis the area of educational specialization. The principal basis for this assumption rests on the findings that although a Sig- nificant percentage of graduates Specialize in one area, for example law enforcement, they were initially employed in areas outside of their educational Specializations but within the purview of the crimi- nal justice system. However, this assumption is tempered by the finding that of those initially employed in the field of corrections, increasingly over time, a greater proportion of the graduates so 168 employed had also specialized in corrections. Consequently, it seems that increasingly certain sectors of the criminal justice system prefer graduates who have specialized academically in the occupational area, whereas other criminal justice agencies are less stringent regarding area of educational specialization. In addition to findings on initial employment, changes in the issues of educational utilization and educational satisfaction were also uncovered. Regarding educational utilization, a steady increase from periods I through IV occurred in the proportion of graduates who felt their education was ppt_best utilized through their initial employment. When the relationship was controlled for by sex, the increase still appeared, although the increase between males and females was widening with each time frame, especially in periods III and IV. Also, it was found that over time fewer females were initially employed in criminal justice and related work. The preceding two findings suggest a viable explanations for the sharp increase in female graduates who respond negatively. Assuming they studied criminal justice in preparation for potential employment, many are not being initially employed in criminal justice areas. Thus, they feel their education is not being best utilized in their initial employment. Additionally, it is possible that graduates in the later time periods in criminal justice work are in positions they feel are not making maximum use of their education. Since traditionally new employees enter at the operations level and in recent years, compe- tition for criminal justice jobs increased due to more graduates in 169 general, a distinct possibility exists that the increase in the nega- tive response to educational utilization over time can be attributed to the young graduates under 30 years of age who possess undergraduate degrees. A further argument supporting the conclusion that younger graduates account for the increase in the proportion who felt their education was not best utilized in their initial job placement was mentioned previously in Chapter V. The contention was that younger graduates lack the perspective older graduates have acquired with time and experience. In retrospect, older graduates tend to view their initial employment as a learning experience. Over time their inter— pretations of the utility of their education on their initial job have broadened to include their initial job experience if at the time of their initial job, they felt more negatively about the utility of their education. The younger and more recent graduates, contrar- ily, who are in most cases experiencing their first initial employ— ment have a shorter time perspective to judge the utility of their education. Thus, lacking the compensatory effects of time and experience, they respond according to their first impressions without having bases for comparison. Finally, the question, "If you had to do it over again, would you choose the criminal justice area as your college major?" was selected as the focus for examining the satisfaction graduates felt with their education. Two major changes were uncovered. First, there existed a consistent increase from period I to period III in the 170 percentage of graduates who responded positively. Secondly, there was a decrease from period III to IV in the percentage of respondents satisfied with criminal justice as their major. Although the decrease in period IV was investigated further in an attempt to account for the decrease, no singular factor could be clearly identified which would account for the total decrease. Yet we did find that the proportion of females responding negatively in period IV was twice as large for females as males. Previously we found that the proportion of graduates who felt their education was ppt_best utilized was increasing over time. For females, the increase was more acute, particularly in period IV. In addition, we found that over time the percentage of females initially employed in criminal justice or criminal justice related areas was decreasing, again, especially in period IV. Furthermore, we found that over time, the percentage of females as a total of the sample was increasing most sharply in period IV. These reasons provide a plausible explanation for the decrease in period IV in the females who felt satisfied with criminal justice as their college major. Since the majority of females.in period IV was initially employed in categories other than criminal justice or criminal justice related, it may be expected that they correspondingly answered negatively to their education being best utilized in their initial job placement. Assuming that graduates spend four or more years preparing for a specific field and then are initially employed in an unrelated field makes this assumption a rational one. Furthermore, 171 it is understandable that graduates so employed respond negatively to educational satisfaction since they were employed outside the field of criminal justice and their education was not directly appli- cable to their initial employment. Therefore, female graduates were not satisfied with their criminal justice degree primarily because their initial employment was not in criminal justice and thus they were not satisfied with a degree which is not being directly utilized. The preceding explanation accounts for a portion of the decrease in percentage of graduates who were satisfied with criminal justice as their college major. Apparently, additional factors beyond those available in the data are involved. A WORD OF CAUTION Throughout the presentation of results we have attempted to be modest in terms of the conclusions and generalizations drawn from the findings. This approach was taken for a variety of reasons including a healthy respect for the danger of drawing conclusions about causal effects from non-experimental research. In fact, this limitation applied to the findings of any cross-sectional study. We believe, however, that our study is superior to other cross-sectional comparisons because of the additional feature of having time frames based on events, thus permitting logical and rational analysis of emerging trends regarding initial employment, educational utilization, and educational satisfaction of criminal justice respondents. 172 There are additional factors which also limit the conClusions or generalizations to be drawn from our findings. The most obvious and severe limitation is the absence of 956 respondents or 35% of those receiving questionnaires who failed to respond. Had they responded, findings may have been altered in either direction. Because of time and especially cost constraints, a sub-sample of the non-respondents was not achieved. If a sub-sample of non-respondents were achieved, more confidence would be added to our findings. Secondly, time frames employed in the study are reflective of events within the School of Criminal Justice and in the field of criminal justice, thus constituting logical cutting points for examin- ing change. Insofar as they are indicative of our view of empirical events, they are subjective. We concede that time frames based on another set of criteria may lead to widely differing findings than these presented in our study. A further source of limitation stems from the study being based on the graduates from one educational institution. This source of limitations has several effects. In the strictest sense, these findings are applicable to other graduates from other institutions only to the degree that conditions in those institutions and charac- teristics of those graduates approximate these in the study. Not only is the ability to generalize hindered but difficulties in estab- lishing the reliability and validity of the survey instrument results from data gathered from graduates of only one institution. The time and cost involved did not permit the inclusion of other institutions 173 within this study, contributing to the problem in establishing the reliability and validity of the survey instrument. Also, no sound data on actual conditions regarding criminal justice agencies was included in the study. With findings related to initial employment of criminal justice graduates and trends of employment over time, only speculation is possible as to why gradu- ates are experiencing changes in employment patterns. A final limitation deals with the frame of reference of individual respondents. Questionnaires were administered at two different points in time and under varying conditions. For instance, some respondents were in their initial job placement only a few months, others a few years, and some several years and longer. Thus, the context from which graduates approached the questions differed and thus responses, results, and interpretations are all affected. IMPLICATIONS Despite these limitations there are still implications that can be drawn from our findings. We feel that our findings in the broadest sense can be best addressed to three audiences, namely criminal justice agencies, potential criminal justice students, and institutions involved in criminal justice higher education, particu- larly the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University. The field of criminal justice should give serious considera- tion to emphasizing the employment of criminal justice graduates. In each period only approximately half of the graduates were initially 174 employed in criminal justice or criminal justice related employment. This is understandable for the two early time periods when little emphasis was placed on utilizing educated personnel. However, in light of recent recommendations made by several commissions and informed individuals that the efficiency and effectiveness of the criminal justice system can be enhanced by employing college educated graduates, it is unfortunate that approximately half of the graduates in periods III and IV fail to be initially employed in criminal justice or criminal justice related work. Indeed, the tragedy is compounded by the fact that those not initially employed in criminal justice areas most often mention the unavailability of employment in criminal justice as the reason for not being employed in the criminal justice field. At a time when the criminal justice system is facing increased criticism from private and public groups for failing to curb crime and uphold "law and order," the wasting of talented manpower is a luxury the system can ill afford. Our second set of conclusions is directed towards potential criminal justice students and although not intended as a warning, carries implications for those considering careers in criminal justice. In recent years mainly periods III and IV, the number of students enrolling in criminal justice programs has increased dra- matically. In part, we are reasonably certain this phenomenon is due to a Sincere interest in criminal justice work. Also, we feel there exists an understandable motivation for the glamour, excitement, and security which the field supposedly offers. 175 Yet, many of these attractions are more apparent than real due partly to increased magnification by both the electronic and printed media. Coupled to this are recent commissions' reports advo- cating the need for increased and more qualified manpower. However, available data does not lead to the conclusion that commissions' recommendations on this issue seem to be affecting criminal justice agency policy to the degree to which they were intended. Accordingly, some individuals entering criminal justice educational institutions have a somewhat distorted picture of actual realities in the field. As our findings indicate, the probability of initial employment in an area given that one specialized in the area as a student is slightly greater than one half. In corrections the probability is l in 5. For female graduates irrespective of specialization the probability of initial employment in criminal justice and related work is decreasing in each period. In period IV the probability of initial employment in criminal justice had decreased to 2 in 5 for females. We present the preceding data not as deterrent to persons seeking an education in criminal justice, but primarily for the purpose of providing potential students with an accurate and honest assessment of reality according to our data. Hopefully, it can be utilized by students as a buoy in planning their careers. Although our findings also have implications for institutions involved in the higher educational effort in criminal justice, the thrust of our conclusions in this regard are more specifically directed at the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University. 176 We uncovered evidence indicating that little in the way of‘ a systematic placement program existed. In all periods well over half of the graduates reported "personal means" as the method used to gain initial job placement. Assuming that the responsibility of the School to its graduates is not strictly an academic one but also extends to some degree to the vocational sphere, we recommend that a more coordinated and organized method of placement be investi- gated. At minimum, we feel a greater directive role by the School in placement of graduates is needed. Furthermore, our findings indicate that serious consideration should be given to the present concept of educational specializations. Although additional research on this issue is necessary prior to any specific policy decisions, tentative findings in our study revealfi no consistent relationship in any of the four periods between initial employment and area of educational specialization. However, we re- emphasize that our findings in this regard are by no means conclusive. Additional data external to ours and based on a representative sample of criminal justice agencies is needed. The relationship found between initial employment and educa- tional utilization also lends support to the need for critical re- examination of the present criminal justice curriculum. In all categories except for two, criminal justice related and the military, graduates felt their education was not being best utilized in their initial job placement. 177 We also feel that the School should give serious considera- tion to limiting the increasing number of students it admits into its programs yearly. We found that over time there exists a continual increase in the percentage of graduates initially employed in non- criminal justice. Additionally of those in this category, the percentage responding negatively to their education being best utilized is increasing. These two reasons reinforce the preceding conclusion. As our final comment, we suggest the obvious need for increased liaison between the School of Criminal Justice, graduates, and agencies in the field regarding the nature of manpower needs and the numbers needed. In this manner, a feasible calculus can be achieved which would benefit the field, the educational institution, and the graduates involved. Hopefully, this study has provided the initiative for that effort. APPENDIX A COVER LETTER OF FEBRUARY 5, 1974 IAND QUESTIONNAIRE 178 OII APPENDIX A COVER LETTER OF FEBRUARY 5, 1974, AND QUESTIONNAIRE MICHIGAN STATE: UNIVERSITY East Lansing -. Michigan 48824 College of Social Science . School of Criminal Justice - A12 Olds Hall February 5, 197“ Dear Graduate: This questionnaire is part of a coordinated research project being conducted by the School of Criminal Justice concerning criminal justice education. Two of the areas of interest are the improvement of placement and utilization of graduates of the School, and the revision and up-dating of the existing criminal justice curriculum. The School is undertaking a survey of all its recent graduates to gather Information concerning placement and utilization of its graduates, as well as their views towards the criminal justice program and selected criminal justice issues. To realize the goals of this project your full cooperation is sincerely requested. The information.you contribute will be used fbr the following purposes: ' 1. To provide feedback for purposes of evaluating placement and utilization patterns of the School's graduates. 2. To provide feedback f0r purposes of evaluating the School's curriculum for possible improvement. 3. To establish a more coordinated placement program between the School and the criminal justice field. 4. To provide a data base for the potential development of an alumni newsletter and annual employment registry. Please do not sign your name to the questionnaire, as the aim of the study is not to identify individuals per se, or otherwise. What we are requesting is your generous cooperation in completing the enclosed question- naire. Please take the necessary time to complete it and return to the School at your earliest convenience. A stamped return envelope has been provided. Again I would like to emphasize that your responses to the questionnaire will be held in the strictest confidence. Furthermore, only two persons, directly involved in the coding of the questionnaire, will be permitted to view them. However, you will notice on page one of the questionnaire an identifying number. Its inclusion serves two purposes; (1) to aid in computer processing and (2) to permit forwarding of a summary of the findings to you, if requested. Thanking you in advance for your cooperation. Yours truly, / I, ,/ /’) /' .ix F U ‘1” . 4075?}! 4'iz7.\‘c. 1’ L"/\- A. F. Brandstatter Director '179 180 Q’ESTIONNAIRE A Study of the Placement and Utiliza- tion Patterns and Views of the Crimi- nal Justice Graduates of Michigan State University INTRODUCTION TWO particular concerns are foremost in this study. The first is that the data collected be accurate and of the highest quality. The second is that there is a minimization of effort on your part in answering the questionnaire. Hence, questions for the most part require only a code number fer the answer appropriate to you on the line to the right of each question. However, some questions require a written response. Space is provided to answer them. If you wish to comment on any of your answers, do so on the margins of the questionnaire or on the additional space provided. Thank you fer your cooperation. ' NOTE: if you wish to have a copy of the summary of this study, please check ox: ~'- . Indicate if address has changed: GENERAL INFORMATION §¥Zflgign 1: This section concerns certain background information on yourself. 1. Age: Code: 1 - Under 25 6 - 115-1+9 ‘ 2 - 25—29 7 - 50-54 3 - 30-3LI 8 - 55—59 '4 - 35-39 9 - 60 and above 5 — ITO—Lat: _— 2. Sex; - . CCxie: l — male 2 — Female 3. Racne: Code: 1 - Caucasian Oriental American 2 - Negro/Black - Foreign Student 3 - Mexican.American (If so, what country?) A - American Indian O\U1 I ’4. I81 City and state of residence: If residing outside USA, what country? EDUCATIONAL INFORMATION Section 2: This section concerns certain educational information while a stu- dent in the School of Criminal Justice (prior to 1970 referred to as the School of Police Administration and Public Safety). '1. *2. 3. Year of graduation from School. of Criminal Justice: Degree(s) received from School of Criminal Justice: Code: 1 - Bachelors 2 - Masters 3 - Doctorate Area of specialization in School of Criminal Justice: Code: 1 - Law Enforcement Administration . 2 - Security Administration (Industrial Security) 3 - Correctional Administration A - Crindnalistics 5 - Delinquency Prevention and Control — Highway Traffic Administration If you had to do it over again, would you choose the same area of specialization? Code: 1 - Yes 2 - No , I would specialize in W? W If you had to do it over again, would you choose the Criminal Justice area as your college major? Code: 1 — Yes __ 2 - No, I would major in Please explain answer to above: Were you satisfied with the criminal justice curriculum while attending MSU? Code: 1 - Yes 2 - No, and why not? Have you received a graduate degree or law degree from another MSU School or Department or from another educational institution? Code: 1 - Yes 2 - No If yes, what school and what was your major area of specialization and degree obtained? When was it obtained? *IF YOU RECEIVED MORE THAN ONE DEGREE FROM THE SCI IOOL, INDICATE BOTH CODES, AND PLEASE SHOW BOTH GRADUATION DATES. I82 POST-COLLEGE INITIAL PLACEMENT INFORMATION Section 3: This section concerns your initial employment ex— perience after graduating from MSU. 1. What did you first do after graduation from.the School of Criminal Justice (School of Police Administration & Public Safety) with a BS degree? Code: 1 - Does not apply to me. Received only MS degree. 2 n Became a graduate student. 3 - Continued my military service. A — Entered.military service. 5 - Took a job in a criminal justice agency. 6 — Returned to my job in a criminal justice agency. 7 - Took a job in an agency related to criminal justice. 8 — Took a job in an agency unrelated to criminal justice. 9 - Other 2. What did you first do after graduation from the School of Criminal Justice (School of Police Administration & Public Safety) with a MS degree? Code: 1 — Does not apply to me. Received only BS degree. 2 - Continued my graduate studies toward an advanced degree. 3 - Continued my military service. A - Entered military service. 5 - Took a job in a criminal justice agency 6 - Returned to my job in a criminal justice agency. 7 — Took a joo in an agency related to criminal justice. 8 « Took a job in an agency unrelated to criminal justice. 9 ~ Other 3. Your degree(s) held when taking your first job: Code: 1 - Bachelor 2 - masters 3 - Doctorate A. How did you obtain your initial major employment after leaving MSU? Code: I - MSU Placement Bureau. 2 — School of Criminal Justice Job File. 3 - Through University faculty member. A - By personal means. 5 - Other 5. If you were on leave from, or a full-time employee of a criminal justice agency while attending MSU, indicate by placing a check mark in the box provided:[:;a What type of agency? 6. If you had prior criminal justice experience but were not employed in the field while attending MSU, indicate by placing a check:mark in the box provided. "‘ What type of agency?~ 183 NOIE: IN QUESTION 7 FOLLOWING. PUBLIC CRIMINAL JUSTICE category refers to all State, Federal, university, and municipaf governmental police, security, and investigative functions. It also includes probation, parole, corrections, and highway traffic per— sonnel enmloyed by governmental organizations. PRIVATE CRIMINAL JUSTICE category refers to individuals who engage primarily in a policeflsecurity function for an industrial, business, or private inves- tigative organization. It also includes private agencies concerned with delinquency prevention, rehabilitation of offenders , etc. , NON-CRIMINAL JUSTICE category refers. to all other areas of employment. such as education (including criminal justice), research, sales, personnel, etc. CAREER MILITARY category refers to all career active duty military personnel including those engaged in law enforcement or security activities while on active duty. 7 After graduation from MSU School of Criminal Justice, your initial major employment was with: Code: 1 - A public criminal justice agency? If so, what type of agency? 2 - A private criminal justice agency? If so, what type -of work? *3 - A non-criminal justice agency? If so, what‘ type of work? A - The career military? If so, what branch and type of work? 5 - Graduate program? If so, part-time full-time ? *6 - Have had no initial major employment experience at this time, a IF YOU ANSWERED #6 ABOVE, GO ON TO SECTION A. Page 5. * IF YOU ANSWERED #3 ABOVE, What was your major reason for not going into criminal justice related work? * IF YOU ANSWERED #1 ABOVE, INDICATE THE FOLLOWING: (a) What type of agency? Code: 1 - Police 2 - Correction 3 - Other (b) What governmental level (referring to (a) above)? Code: 1 - Federal 2 - State 3 - County A - Municipal S - Other 10. ll. l2. 13. 1A. 15. l6. 17. I84 How long after graduation was it befbre you accepted your initial employment? What was your initial position with the agency or organization? Your initial placement with the agency or organization was: Code: 1 — A specialized position (research/planning, criminalistiés, etc. ) 2 - A supervisory position. 3 - An administrative position. 2 ~ 8: level of operation (e.g.patrolman,ccrrections officer). - her were you pleased with the level of this initial placement? Code: 1 - Thoroughly satisfied. 2 - Satisfied, but had expected higher position. 3 - Somewhat dissatisfied because of low position. A - Thoroughly dissatisfied. ' If your initial placement was at the level of operation, how long was it before you were promoted or assigned to a specialized, supervisory, or administrative position? Code: 1 - Less than 1 year. 5 - More than A years. 2 - l—2 years. 6 - Haven't been promoted or 3 - 2-3 years. reassigned as of yet. A - 3-A years. 7 - Not applicable. Was there a lateral entry policy in the agency/organization that hired you? NOTE: LATERAL ENTRY IS REFERRED TO AS THE APPOINTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE, PROFESSIONAL,AND TECHNICAL PERSONNEL ABOVE NOR" MAL ENTRANCE LEVELS INTO AN ORGANIZATION FROM.THE OUTSIDE. Code: 1 - Yes 2 - No was there a pay incentive program.for personnel taking college credit courses? Code: I - Yes 2 — No Did your employer have any managerial/internship trainee program fer college graduates? Code: 1 - Yes 2 - No were there any difficulties in getting your initial job that you feel were attributable to your criminal justice or police admini- stration degree? Code: 1 — Yes 2 - No If yes, please explain: Did all newly hired personnel start at the same entry level regard- less of their level of education? Code: 1 - Yes 2 - No I85 18. Do you feel your college training was best utilized through.your initial job placement? Code: 1 - Yes 2 - No If no, how do you feel you could have been better utilized? 19. Do you feel your education has enabled you to progress more rapidly in your career than your fellow employees who lack your educational qualifications? Code: 1 — Yes 2 - No Why or why not? 20. How well do you feel your college major prepared you for your initial job placement? Code: 1 - Extremely well 3 - Inadequately 2 - Adequately A - Cannot say 21. How well prepared were you to assume~your job responsibilities in comparison with your fellow workers? Code: 1 - Extremely well 3 - Inadequately 2 - Adequately A - Cannot say 22. Using the scale that fellows, indicate your initial entrance salary fer your first job placement after graduation from MSU: Code: 1 - Less than $6,000 6 - $1A,000-$15,999 2 - $6,000-$7,999 7 - $16,000—$l7,999 3 - $8,ooo-$9.999 8 - $18.000-il9,999 A - $10,000—$ll,999 9 - $20,000 and over .5 - $123000-$13,999 23. Year of initial placement? EBA. were you satisfied with your initial entrance salary? Code: 1 - Yes 2 - No 2355. How long did you remain with your initial job after graduation befOre accepting your second job? 2365. If you were employed by a criminal justice agency at the time of graduation, how long did you stay with that agency after graduation befbre accepting another job? 237’. What was your major reason(s) for leaving your initial job?_____ PRESENT EMPLOYMENT INFORMATION AND VIEWS TOWARD SELECTED ISSUES IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE éiSEEEEETLB} This section concerns certain questions about your present employment as well as some questions asking your views about selected issues in criminal justice today. I86 IVOTE: PLEASE ANSWER ALI.THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS AUTHOUGH YOU MAY HAVE A 1C). ANSWERED SOME IN SECTION 3. IT IS NECESSARY TO ANSWER.THESE QUESTIONS EVEN THOUGH YOUR INITIAL PLACEMENT MAY BE THE SAME AS YOUR PRESENT PLACEMENT, AS THE QUESTIONNAIRE HAS BEEN DESIGNED .MINDFUL OF'THIS CONSIDERATION. Is your present job with the same agency/organization that initially hired you? ' Code: 1 - Yes 2 - No What is your present position, rank, or title? Are you pleased with your present position? Code: 1 - Thoroughly satisfied 3 - Somewhat dissatisfied 2 - Satisfied A - Thoroughly dissatisfied In your current position, to what extent do you feel your criminal justice education is being utilized? Code: 1 - Extremely well 3 - Inadequately 2 - Adequately A - Not at all If You have left cririnal justice work altogether, what was the major reason for leaving? For how many separate agencies have you worked since graduating from MSU? (approximate) How many of these agencies were criminal justice agencies? Using the scale in question 22 of Section 3, indicate your approximate annual salary now. Code: 1 - Less than $6,000 6 - $lA,000-$15,999 3 - $8,ooo-$9.999 8 - $18,000—$19,999 A - $10,000—$ll,999 9 - $20,000 and above 5 - $12,000-$13’999 .Are you satisfied with this salary? Code: 1 - Yes 2 - No IBased on your own experience, rank in the order of their impor— tance the factors you consider most detrimental to the recruit— Inent of college graduates into the criminal justice field (1 being Inost detrimental, to 8 being least detrimental); DO NOT USE A 1,2, 23,A,5,6,7,8 MORE THAN ONCE: -— Social status of criminal justice employment. ~— Pay scales in criminal justice work. - Danger involved in some kinds of law enforcement. -— Graduates of degree programs usually start on the lowest step of the law enforcement agency ladder. Civil service laws. Opposition to college—educated personnel on the part of administrators in criminal justice agencies. Employee unions. ‘Unrealistic expectations of graduates. (Other I I I I I ll. l2. 13. 1A. 15. 16. I8 How would you rank these various agencies in their effort towards recruiting college graduates (1 being the greatest effbrt, to 5 being the least effort)? DO NOT USE A NUMBER.MOPE THAN ONCE. - Public briminal justice (State and Local level) - Public criminal justice (Federal level) - Private criminal'justice - Non-criminal justice - Military \1 How would you rank these agencies in their effort to place college graduates in positions commensurate with their education (1 being the greatest effort, to 5 being the least effort)? DO NOT USE A NUMBER MORE THAN ONCE . - Public criminal justice (State and Local level) - Public Criminal justice (Federal level) - Private criminal justice - Nonveriminal justice - Military Should personnel performing specialized functions not involving a need for general enforcement power be hired for their talents and abilities without regard to prior criminal justice experience? (e.g. research and planning) Code: 1 - Yes 2 - NO Why? What is your agency's policy? Do you feel your agency or organization would benefit by having a lateral entry policy fer recruitment of college educated per- sonnel at certain job positions? Code: 1 - Yes 2 - No Why? Does your agency have such a policy? Code: 1 - Yes 2 - No would it be desirable to have internship/understudy programs in your agency in order to develop lateral entry programs? Code: 1 - Yes 2 - No Why? __—-._-._—-— _ ... "‘m.-- .-_—_——. .—_._ Does your agency have such a program? Code: 1 - Yes 2 - No Should criminal justice agencies give special consideration (entry level, salary, promotional eligibility, etc.) to the educational qualifications of individuals? Code: I - Yes 2 - No Why? What factors, if any, other than education, should play a signi- ficant part in receiving special consideration? 16. 170 18. 19. 20. I88 (Cont'd) What is your agency's policy? Should there be a difference in initial job entry between the degee holder and non-degree holder? Code: 1 - Yes 2 - No ~ Why? A . Does your agency Rel there should be a difTerence? Code: 1 - Yes 2 _- No Shcmld there be a difference in initial job entry between the undergraduate degree holder and the graduate degree holder? Code: .1 - Yes 2 - No ‘ Why? ' " , Does your agencyTeel there should be a di—ffer'ence? Code. 1 - Yes 2 - No Do you feel most all criminal justice personnel should be required to have a college degree? Code: 1 - Yes 2 - No Why? - "—' Is your agency receptive to the idea that most all personnel be réquired to have a college degree? Code: 1 - Yes 2 - No Should criminal justice agencies take irrmediate steps to esta- blish a minimum requirement of a baccalaureate degee for all supervisory and executive positions? Code: 1 - Yes 2 - No Why? What is your agency's policy on this matter? NOIE: IN QUESTIONS 21, 22, and 23 BELLJW: It has been said that the thrust of the criminal justice program at IVSU is to prepare students who intend to enter law enforcement agencies for positions primrily at the administration level , but according to the literature, most students begin their law enforcement careers at the level of Operation. ’Ihus, do you feel the School of Criminal Justice should: 21. 22. 23. Change their thrust toward preparing students for positions at the level of operation? Code: 1 - Yes 2 - No Leave the preparation at the level of administration to the grad- uate level of study? Code: 1 - Yes 2 - No leave the program unchanged? Code: 1 - Yes 2 - No Other: 2“: 25. I89 Do you feel the School should take a much more active part in helping place students in the criminal justice field? Code: 1 — Yes 2 - No Overall, do you feel your college education has been a positive, negative, or neutral influence on your career? Code: 1 - Positive 2 - Negative 3 - Neutral Please explain your answer: THANK YOU VERY MUCH fer your time and effort in answering this questionnaire. Please enclose the completed questionnaire in the stamped, self-addressed envelope and return to: School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State ”" University, East Lansing, Michigan A882A. Please feel free to add any addition comments: APPENDIX B FOLLOW-UP COVER LETTER OF MARCH 5, 1974 190 APPENDIX B FOLLOW-UP COVER LETTER OF MARCH 5, 1974 WGANS‘I‘AEUNIVEIBITY College of Social Science - School of Criminal Justice East Lansing, Michigan 148821! (517) 353-8603 W “I; 19791 ' Dear Graduate: Appmximtely three weeks ago you received a copy of a questionnaire sent to all recent criminal Justice graduates as part of a continuing research proJ eot being conducted by the School of Criminal Justice conceming place- ment and utilization of its graduates. At the present time, we have received replies from approximtely 185 percent of the graduates. Although the response has been encom‘aging, your reply is urgently requested in order to insure the most accurate account possible of postgraduate placement. Enclosed is a copy of the questionnaire in case the original one was lost or discarded. If you haven't completed the questonnaire yet, please take the fifteen minutes or so to fill. it out. . In the event you have already completed the questionnaire and it is now in the nail, please disregard this letter. 'Ihank you for your cooperation in making this study successful. The results will, hopefully, do much to enhance criminal Justice education and, as wellplacement and utilization of its graduates. Yours sincerely, A. F. Brandstatter Director tannik 191 BIBLIOGRAPHY 192 BIBLIOGRAPHY Books American Bar Association Project on Standards for Criminal Justice. The Urban Police Function. New York: American Bar Association, 1972. Clark, Donald E., and Samuel G. Chapman. A Forward Step: Education Background for Police. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas,- l966, p. 22, citing August Vollmer in a letter (1932). Crockett, Thompson S. Law Enforcement Education (I968): A Surveygof Colleges and Universities Offering_Degree Programs in the Field of Law Enforcement. Washington: International Association of Chiefs of Police, Inc., Professional Standards Division, 1968. Fox, Vernon B. Guidelines for Correctional Programs. Washington: American Association of Junior Colleges, l969. Frost, Thomas M. A Forward Look in Police Education. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas, l959. ‘ Fuld, Leonhard. Police Administration. Montclair, New Jersey: Patterson Smith, l97l. International Association of Chiefs of Police. l972-1973 Directory of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Education. Gaithersburg, Maryland: The International Association of Chiefs of Police, Inc., 1972. Municipal Police Administration. Chicago: The International City Management Assoc., 1954. National Legal Aid and Defender's Association. The Dollar$ and $en$e of Justice. Chicago: National Legal Aid and Defender's Associa- tion, l973. Parker, Alfred E. Crime Fighter: August Vollmer. New York: Macmillan Company, l96l. Radelet, Louis A. The Police and the Community, Beverly Hills: Glencoe Press, l973. ‘ I93 I94 Saunders, Charles B. Upgrading the American Police. Washington: The Brookings Institution, I970. Selltiz, Claire, et al. Research Methods in Social Relations. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, l959. Smith, Bruce. Police System in the United States. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, I960. Vollmer, August. The Police and Modern Society. Montclair, New Jersey: Patterson Smith, l97l. Wickersham Commission. Report on Police. Montclair, New Jersey: Patterson Smith, I968 [reprint]. Wilson, 0. W. Police Administration. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1963. Periodical Literature "Afraid to Walk Alone at Night," The Gallup Index, September, 1968, p. 32. Brandstatter, A. F. ”Education Serves the Police--The Youth--The Community," The Police Chief, XXXIII (August, 1966), l2-l4. "The School of Police Administration and Public Safety, Michigan State University," Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, XLVIII (January-February, I958), 564. Brereton, George H. "Police Training in College and University," American Journal of Police Science, 111 (January-February, 1932), 64. "The Importance of Training and Education in the Professional- ization of Law Enforcement," Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science,LII.(May-June, l96l), lll-IZI. Day, Frank D. "Administration of Criminal Justice: An Educational Design in Higher Education," Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, LVI (November-December, 1965), 543. Deutsch, Albert. "America's Greatest Cop," Collier's, CXXVII (FebruaryIB, l95l), 26-27. Geis, Gilbert, and Elvin Cavanagh. ”Recruitment and Retention of Cor- rectional Personnel," Crime and Delinguency, XII (July, l966), 232-239. ' I95 Germann, A. C. "Education and Professional Law Enforcement,“ Journal of Criminal Law,_Criminology, and Police Science, LIX (December, 1967). 603-609. Glasser, Daniel. -"The New Correctional Era: Implications for Manpower and Training," Crime and Delinquency, XII (July, l966), 209-216. MacQuarrie, T. W. "San Jose College Police School," Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, XXVI (July, l9357, 225. Michigan State University. l959-60 Supplement to the l958-l959 Michigan State University Catalog, LIII (East Lansing: Michigan State Uni- versity, I959), 156. . Michigan State University Catalog, Issue l957-57, L (East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1956), I46. Newman, Charles L., and Dorothy Sue Hunter. "Education for Careers in Law Enforcement: An Analysis of Student Output l964-l967," Journal of Criminal Law,gCriminology, and Police Science, LIX (March, 1968), 138-143. Radelet, Louis A. "Police Community Relations: At This Point In Time," Police Chief, XLI (March, 1974), 28. "Special Report on Crime in the U.S.," The Gallup Index, January, l973. pp. 3-l7. Tamm, Quinn. "A Change for the Better," Police Chief, XXIX (May, I962), 5. "Editorial Message." Police Chief, XXXIII (May, 1965), 6. Government Publications Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. For a More Perfect Union-~Police Reform. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1971. Anderson, William R. H.R.--The Law Enforcement Education Act of 1961,, The Congressional Record, January, 1967. Federal Bureau of Investigation. Uniform Crime Reports for the United States: 1972. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1973. Uniform Crime Reports for the United States: 1967. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1968. I96 Joint Commission on Corrections Manpower and Training. Perspectives on Correctional Manpower and Training. College Park, Maryland: American Correctional Association, 1970. . The University and Corrections. College Park, Maryland: American Correctional Association, 1969. Karacki, Loren, and John J. Galvin. "Higher Education Programs in Criminology and Corrections," Criminology and Corrections_E§ograms. Washington: Joint Commission on Correctional Manpower and Train- ing, l968. PP. lO-27, 96, 97. Law Enforcement Assistance Administration. "Crime Down 3%," LEAA Newsletter, III, 2 (April-May, 1973), l, 7. Criminal JusticegAgencies in Wisconsin. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1972. . "LEEP Aids 95,000 Students This Year at 990 Schools." LEAA Newsletter, III, 7 (September-October, 1973), 35. . "Nixon Signs Bill Extending LEAA," LEAA Newsletter, 111, 7 (September-October, 1973), 33. . Third Annual Report. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1972. National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals. A National Strategy to Reduce Crime. Washington: Government Printing Office, l973. Report on Corrections. Washington: Government Printing _T—ffice, 1973. . Report on the Police. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1973. Tenney, Charles W., Jr. Higher Education Programs in Law Enforcement. Washington: Government Printing Office, l97l. The President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice. Task Force Report: Corrections. Washington: Government Printing Office, l967. . Task Force Repprt: The Police. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1967. The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1967. 197 United States Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstracts of the United States. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1972. Unpublished Materials and Other Sources Goldberg, William A. "Twentieth Century Corrections." Distributed by Gibson's Bookstore, East Lansing, Michigan, 1970. (Mimeographed.) Hensley, Allan L. "A Descriptive Study of Criminal Justice Higher Education at Sam Houston State University." Unpublished Master's thesis, Sam Houston State University, 1973. Hoover, Larry Thorne. "Police Recruitment Educational Background Analysis." Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, Michigan State University, 1974. Larkins, Hayes C. "A Survey of Experiences, Activities, and Views of the Industrial Security Administration Graduates of Michigan State University." Unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State University, l966. Memorandum of the School of Criminal Justice, March ll, 1974. Minutes of faculty meeting, School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University, February 6, l972. Moore, Merlyn D. "A Study of Placement and Utilization Patterns and Views of the Criminal Justice Graduates of Michigan State Univer- sity." Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, Michigan State University, 1972. Nicholson, Thomas G. "A Study of the Relation Between Formal Educa- tional Achievement and Other Factors in Predicting the Performance of Probationary Police Officers in a State Police Organization." Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, Michigan State University, 1973. Police Foundation. "Education and Training Task Force Report." Unpublished report of the Police Foundation, 1972. Post, Richard. "Post-Graduation Activities of Police Administration Students." October, l967. (Mimeographed.) School of Criminal Justice. "Resource Analysis." Michigan State University, Fall, l97l. I98 . Unpublished typed list of criminal justice graduates from . 1938-l973. Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. Wiltberger, William A. "A Program for Police Training in a College." Unpublished Master's thesis, University of California, Berkeley, I939. "IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII