1 Memorandum To: From: Date: Re:
TBD Jetmir Troshani Date goes here Juvenile Boot Camps
Outline
Introduction Literature Review Methodology Unit Analysis and Variables Sampling Techniques, Sample Size and Sampling Frame Experimental Design Data Collection and Analysis Political and Ethical Considerations Conclusion
Introduction The purpose of this research paper is to determine whether juveniles who stay in boot camps for a long period of time will practice recidivism. Juvenile boot camps are described as prison programs that incorporate military training to reduce recidivism amongst juveniles found to have committed wrongful acts (Meade & Steiner, 2010). These activities involve a lot of vigorous physical work such as drills, manual labor and difficult exercises. Boot camps are usually governed by strict rules that the juvenile delinquents are required to follow so as to avoid tough punishments that are meted on those who break the rules. These boot camps are usually operated by the state or federal governments and they are run by correctional officers who act as drill instructors (Tyler et al, 2001).
2 After the Office of Juvenile and Delinquency Prevention started juvenile boot camp programs in 1992, these camps have continued to proliferate in the United States to deal with the growing numbers of juveniles who are caught up in violent crimes (Ashcroft et al, 2003). The boot camp programs differ in numerous aspects such as how old the juveniles in the boot camps are and their backgrounds, how strictly the program will follow the military model, the capacity of the boot camp and how many juveniles it can accommodate at a particular time, the cost of accommodating each juvenile, the rates of recidivism in the boot camps and the type of aftercare that is provided to the juveniles in the boot camp (Anderson et al, 2000). Research that has been conducted on juvenile boot camps is limited and there exists insufficient data on the subject to make any definite judgments or arguments. This is mostly attributed to the fact that boot camp programs are fairly new concepts because they were started in 1992. The limited studies that have been conducted on the topic have shown that there is no general consensus on whether juvenile boot camps reduce the rates of recidivism. The underlying concept behind establishing these programs was to reduce the overcrowding in prisons and also provide rehabilitation centers for young adults who had been caught on the wrong side of the law. Boot camps were also started to reduce the rising costs by the correctional systems and also reduce the increasing rates of recidivism amongst juveniles (Parent, 2003). Literature Review The correctional system in the United States came up with the concept of juvenile boot camps to deal with the rising cases of juvenile arrests. Boot camps were viewed to be techniques of shock incarceration which have been in use since 1983
3 (Klein, 2010). Most of the research that has been conducted on the subject of boot camps has been based on adult camps and how these camps affect the rate of recidivism. There is however limited data on boot camps for juvenile delinquents and whether these camps affect the rates of recidivism amongst juvenile offenders (Ashcroft et al, 2003). According to Steiner and Giacomazzi (2007) some cases of juvenile boot camps have generated differences in the rates of recidivism or the length of time that it takes a juvenile offender to commit an offence once they are released from prison. This rate of recidivism has been compared to that of traditional facilities such as prisons or detention centers. Some studies have revealed that juveniles who do not adapt to the environment in boot camps are more than likely to recidivate once they are released. A study conducted by William and Mackenzie (cited by Steiner & Giacomazzi, 2007) on the time frame of recidivism has shown that there is no effect on the length of time a juvenile spends in the boot camp with relation to the rate of recidivism. They however noted if the juvenile offender released from prison was involved in some after care programs, then the risk of the recidivating was less than likely. Recidivism is defined as the tendency to go back to criminal patterns or activities that led the offender to be locked up in prison or in a boot camp (Merriam-Webster, 2010). To understand recidivism three concepts that underlie recidivism have to be assessed. The three concepts are the time frame of recidivism, what is termed as recidivism and what basis can be used to make sense of the information used to explain recidivism. Recidivism is viewed in different contexts depending on the correctional system that is in place in the different states in the U.S. For example the Department of
4 Corrections in Florida views recidivism as the return of an offender to prison with a new sentence while the Colorado prison system views recidivism as criminal offenders who have carried out violations that are technical in nature (Beck, 2001). The time frame for recidivism that has been identified in majority of the U.S. prison systems is one to 22 years. This time frame is measured from the time the offender is released from the boot camp, detention centre or prison. The interpretation of recidivism data involves making comparisons of the available information on the subject (Benda et al, 1996). A major challenge of gaining data on recidivism rates is that focusing on one boot camp program does not provide accurate statistics of the number of juveniles who become repeat offenders. To make sense of recidivism rates, comparisons have to be made with other similar programs to gain accurate data on the subject (Camp & Camp, 1998). According to McNeely (2009) juvenile boot camps are tools used by governments to deal with crimes committed by young people in the society. Youth crime is viewed to be the result of various factors some of which include lack of employment, poverty, lack of proper education, peer pressure, lack of social support from family members and the society. Rehabilitative programs have been viewed by many correctional systems to be the most effective in dealing with young people caught up in criminal activities as they offer counseling and educational programs. The society however views these programs to be ineffective in deterring criminality amongst the youth which pressurizes the government to send these criminals to boot camps (Benda & Toombs, 1997). McNeely (2009) views boot camps as ineffective and harmful tools that are used to reform juvenile delinquents because of the lack of rehabilitative and educational
5 programs. Tyler et al (2001) note that because of the heavy reliance on military structures, juvenile boot camps make it impossible to reform the delinquents as they mostly address aspects of discipline and respect instead of reformed behavior. The military structure that is used in these camps is based on following strict rules and guidelines which makes it difficult for the correctional officers to counsel the youth about their delinquent activities (Tyler et al, 2001). Mackenzie et al (2001) note that juvenile boot camps have remained a controversial subject especially in the penal and correctional system. Criticism has arisen because of the military structure that is used in these camps to manage the juvenile offenders and the preceding behavior that led them to commit criminal acts. Researchers into the topic have viewed the use of the military style to be less accommodative to reform and rehabilitation programs as military structures mostly involve the use of fear tactics to deal with people (Gover et al, 2000). According to a report published by the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) juvenile boot camps incorporate therapeutic programs which often fail because of the difficulty in switching from the military environment to a counseling environment. Also many of these boot camps lack the qualified personnel to carryout the counseling and reform programs as they are mostly trained to ensure military discipline in the boot camps (McNeely, 2009). Methodology The purpose of the study is to determine whether the length of time juveniles spend in a boot camp leads to recidivism. The research will involve analyzing juvenile offenders in boot camps and the rates of recidivism in these boot camps by looking at
6 the dependent and independent variables. The sample size to be used in the research study will involve 100 juveniles in boot camp systems based in California, New York, Louisiana and Colorado. The sampling method that will be used will be stratified sampling which reduces the chances of errors occurring during the sampling process. The data collection technique will involve the use of questionnaires while the research design will be experimental in nature where control and interventions groups will be used. The hypothesis of the research study will therefore be used to determine the results of the study.
Research Question: How effective are Boot Camps for Juvenile Offenders?
Hypothesis: The longer the Juvenile stays in Boot Camps the less likely the rate of recidivism Unit of Analysis and Variables The unit of analysis according to Yurdusev (1993) is viewed to be the main factor that is under assessment or study in research programs. The unit of analysis for this research paper will be the length of time juveniles spend in boot camps. The independent variable for the study will be juvenile boot camps based in California, New York, Colorado and Louisiana while the dependent variable will be recidivism. The reason for choosing boot camps as the independent variable is because the data collected on the research can be manipulated by the researcher to reflect the relationship that this variable has with the dependent variable (Changing minds, 2010).
7 The dependent variable will be conceptualized in terms of looking at the factors that lead to recidivism which include relapse into criminal activities, repeat offenses or reoffensive criminal behaviors. The independent variable will be operationalized by looking at the time frame of recidivism where the rate of recidivism is analyzed in juveniles who have been released from boot camps within one year. Sampling Techniques, Sample Size and Sampling Frame The probability research design will be used to determine the sample size of the population because it has a non zero probability of each member of the population being chosen for the study (Research methods, 2006). Stratified sampling will be used to research on the four boot camps that are based in California, Louisiana, Colorado and New York. Stratified sampling is viewed as an important sampling technique because it reduces sampling errors from occurring and the sample information collected from the various boot camps is similar in nature (Holton & Burnett, 1997). The sample size for the research will include 100 juveniles in boot camps that are based in four states: New York, Louisiana, Colorado, and California. These four states were chosen because they represented the population of juveniles in boot camps. The sampling frame is viewed to be a representation of the population that is under study (Statistics, 2010). The sampling frame for this study will be juvenile offenders, juvenile offenders that have completed boot camp and juveniles who have been out of boot camp for at least one year. Experimental Design The experimental design for this study involved the use of static groups where one group is exposed to the research conditions. This group is known as the
8 intervention group while the other group known as the control group does not undergo any experimental activity or testing. Experimental designs are viewed to be the most rigorous and reliable of all the research designs as the static groups are based on many variables and data that has been collected from a large number of participants. Static groups in the experimental design are also important because they show the behavior of members in both the control and intervention groups (Trochim, 2006). Data Collection and Analysis The data collection technique that will be used for this study will be quantitative data collection. Quantitative research involves the use of data collection techniques that are designed to be objective as well as relevant and reliable. It is concerned with testing hypothesis that are derived from theoretical frameworks to estimate the relationship between the dependent and independent variables (University of Wisconsin, 2010). The data collection techniques will cover how the participants under study will randomly selected from the study population in an unbiased manner. Quantitative data collection methods are preferable because they produce results that can be quantifies and correlated. The techniques that are used in quantitative data collection involve the use of surveys, interviews and questionnaires (Weinreich, 2010). The most appropriate quantitative technique for this study will be the use of standardized or paper questionnaires that will be able to reach the sample size within a limited amount of time and with limited resources (Statistics Canada, 2010). Questionnaires are also preferable because participants in the research are more likely to provide truthful information with regards to controversial issues related to boot camp
9 programs (Leedy & Ormrod, 2001). The questionnaire will incorporate closed response questions so as to obtain the best possible answer. The statistical method that will be used to analyze the information will involve the use of graphs that provides the percentage of juvenile offenders who have been arrested again after being released from a boot camp. The graph that was used in this study showed that there was an inconsistency with the boot camp programs used the states under study and the rate of recidivism. The rate of recidivism in juvenile offenders who were in boot camps was lower when compared to those who were in a regular correctional facility. The graph shows that there was no notable difference in the recidivism rate between juvenile boot camps and traditional programs
Percent of Offenders Rearrested Boot Camp
70.0%
Parole
61.7%
Percent Recidivists
60.0% 47.0%
50.0% 40.0% 30.0%
34.0%
32.0%
28.6%
17.0%
20.0%
21.0%
12.0%
10.0% 0.0% Texas
Arizona
New Hampshire
Illinois
Source: Anderson, James F., Laronistine Dyson, Jerald C. Burns. (2000) Boot Camps: An Intermediate Sanction. Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America, Inc. Political and Ethical Considerations Ethics has to be observed when conducting research studies to ensure that the information provided in the research is objective, honest, truthful and free from any bias. The Social Research Association (SRA) states that any research activity that is viewed
10 to be beneficial to individuals, groups of people or the society should be conducted in a responsible and ethical manner. Researchers should observe scientific standards when conducting their research especially when they are carrying out data collection and analysis procedures (SRA, 2003, p.13). This research study will not physically or psychologically harm the subjects under study and their participation will be on a voluntary basis. This will therefore not affect the moral and legal order of carrying out the research. The correctional officers and the parents of the juveniles will sign a waiver for them to participate in the study. This will ensure that there is full consent from the parties under study as well as ensure the research results have been obtained with integrity. Conclusion The study showed that there was no conclusive information with regards to whether juveniles who stayed in boot camps for a long period were likely to recidivate. The literature review has also shown the varying opinions that different researchers have on the aspect of whether boot camps reduce recidivism in juvenile offenders. Some researchers have argued that the only way to reduce recidivism is to create after care programs that will ensure the juvenile offender does not recidivate to criminal activities. Others have argued the length of time juveniles spend in boot camps does not reduce the rate of recidivism. Despite the limited research that has been conducted in the field, most of the researchers have concluded that boot camp programs do not reduce the rate of recidivism. The only means of determining whether these programs reduce the rate of recidivism is to continue conducting more research in the field.
11 References Ashcroft, J., Daniels, D.J., & Hart, S.V., (2003). Correctional boot camps: lessons from a decade of research. Washington, D.C. : U.S. Department of Justice Anderson, J. F., Laronistine, D., & Burns, J.C. (2000). Boot Camps: An Intermediate Sanction. Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol.28, No. 4, pp 337-338 Beck, A.R. (2001). Recidivism: a fruit salad concept in the criminal justice world. Retrieved 18 October 2010 from: http://justiceconcepts.com/recidivism.pdf Benda, B.B., & Toombs, N.J., (1997). Testing the deviance syndrome perspective among boot camp participants. Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol.25, No.5, pp 409423 Benda, B.B., Toombs, N.J., & Whiteside, L., (1996). Recidivism among boot camp Graduates: a comparison of drug offenders to other offenders. Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol.24, No. 3, pp 241-253.
Camp, C., & Camp, G. (1998). The corrections yearbook. Middletown, Cincinnati: Criminal Justice Institute Changing minds (2010). Variables in research. Retrieved 18 October 2010 from: http://changingminds.org/explanations/research/measurement/variables.htm Gover, A.R., Mackenzie, D.L., & Styve, G.J., (2000). Boot camps and traditional correctional facilities for juveniles: a comparison of the participants, daily activities and environments, Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol.28, No.1, pp 53-68
12 Holton, E. H., & Burnett, M. B. (1997). Qualitative research methods. In R. A. Swanson, & E. F. Holton (Eds.), Human resource development research handbook: Linking research and practice. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Klein. M.J., (2010). Florida’s Juvenile Boot Camps: A Comparative Evaluation. Retrieved 18 October 2010 from: http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/Content/FloridaCriminal-Justice-Executive-Institute/Docs/Klein.aspx
Meade, B., & Steiner, B., (2010). The total effects of boot camps that house juveniles: a systematic review of the evidence. Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol. 38, No. 5, pp841-853 Mackenzie, D.L., Gover, A.R., Styve, G., & Mitchell, A.O., (2001). National study comparing the environments of boot camps with traditional facilities for juvenile offenders. Retrieved 18 October 2010 from: http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/Abstract.aspx?id=187680 McNeely, A. (2009). Are boot camps effective? Combating youth delinquency with correctional camps. Retrieved 18 October 2010 from: http://www.suite101.com/content/are-boot-camps-effective-a144923 Merriam-Webster (2010). Online Dictionary Recidivism. Retrieved 18 October 2010 from: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/recidivism Parent, D.G. (2003). Correctional Boot Camps: Lessons from a Decade of Research. Retrieved 18 October 2010 from: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/197018.pdf
13 Research Methods (2006). Non-probability sampling. Retrieved 18 October 2010 from: http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/sampnon.php Social Research Association (SRA) (2003). Ethical guidelines. Retrieved 18 October 2010 from: http://www.the-sra.org.uk/documents/pdfs/ethics03.pdf Statistics Canada (2010) Research methods. Retrieved 18 October 2010 from: http://www.statcan.ca/english/edu/power/ch2/methods/methods.htm Statistics (2010). Statistical glossary: sampling frame. Retrieved 18 October 2010 from: http://www.statistics.com/resources/glossary/s/smplframe.php Steiner, B., & Giacomazzi, A.L. (2007) Juvenile waiver, boot camp and recidivism in a Northwestern state, The Prison Journal, Vol.87, No.2, pp 227-240 Trochim, W.M.K., (2006). Experimental design. Retrieved 18 October 2010 from: http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/desexper.php
Tyler.J. Darville, R., & Stalnaker, K., (2001). Juvenile boot camps: a descriptive analysis of program diversity and effectiveness. Social Science Journal, Vol.38, No. 3, pp 445-460 University of Wisconsin (2010). Data collection methods. Retrieved 18 October 2010 from: http://people.uwec.edu/piercech/ResearchMethods/Data%20collection%20metho ds/DATA%20COLLECTION%20METHODS.htm
Weinreich, N.K., (2010). Integrating quantitative and qualitative methods in social marketing research. Retrieved 18 October 2010 from: http://www.social-
14 marketing.com/research.html Yurdusev, N. (1993). Level of Analysis and Unit of Analysis: A Case for Distinction. Disclosure, Journal of International Studies, Vol. 22, No.1, pp 77-88.