Overview
Innovation in the justice sector is increasingly sought at community level involving Non Government Organisations (NGOs) and community organisations as well as government agencies. Through this unit you will understand this new environment and the importance of therapeutic jurisprudence and restorative justice as ways of understanding how justice is achieved. You will develop skills in human centred design and systems thinking that will enable you to operate in this inter-agency collaborative environment. Concepts such as social innovation will aid you in becoming a catalyst for change, in developing sustainable solutions to justice problems and participating in the changes the justice sector is undergoing.
Details
Pre-requisites or Co-requisites
There are no requisites for this unit.
Important note: Students enrolled in a subsequent unit who failed their pre-requisite unit, should drop the subsequent unit before the census date or within 10 working days of Fail grade notification. Students who do not drop the unit in this timeframe cannot later drop the unit without academic and financial liability. See details in the Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework).
Offerings For Term 2 - 2023
Attendance Requirements
All on-campus students are expected to attend scheduled classes – in some units, these classes are identified as a mandatory (pass/fail) component and attendance is compulsory. International students, on a student visa, must maintain a full time study load and meet both attendance and academic progress requirements in each study period (satisfactory attendance for International students is defined as maintaining at least an 80% attendance record).
Recommended Student Time Commitment
Each 6-credit Undergraduate unit at CQUniversity requires an overall time commitment of an average of 12.5 hours of study per week, making a total of 150 hours for the unit.
Class Timetable
Assessment Overview
Assessment Grading
This is a graded unit: your overall grade will be calculated from the marks or grades for each assessment task, based on the relative weightings shown in the table above. You must obtain an overall mark for the unit of at least 50%, or an overall grade of ‘pass’ in order to pass the unit. If any ‘pass/fail’ tasks are shown in the table above they must also be completed successfully (‘pass’ grade). You must also meet any minimum mark requirements specified for a particular assessment task, as detailed in the ‘assessment task’ section (note that in some instances, the minimum mark for a task may be greater than 50%). Consult the University’s Grades and Results Policy for more details of interim results and final grades.
All University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
You may wish to view these policies:
- Grades and Results Policy
- Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework)
- Review of Grade Procedure
- Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure – Domestic Students
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure – International Students
- Student Refund and Credit Balance Policy and Procedure
- Student Feedback – Compliments and Complaints Policy and Procedure
- Information and Communications Technology Acceptable Use Policy and Procedure
This list is not an exhaustive list of all University policies. The full list of University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
Feedback, Recommendations and Responses
Every unit is reviewed for enhancement each year. At the most recent review, the following staff and student feedback items were identified and recommendations were made.
Feedback from Student evaluation survey
I would rather have the Study Guide somehow in Moodle - maybe a moodle by itself. One tends to forget about it hidden away in the unit introduction.
UC will upload the study guide onto the each module in Moodle.
Feedback from Student evaluation survey
A more even focus across the community justice practices would be beneficial as it felt very repetitive with ~8 weeks focused on slightly different topics, but the same overarching topic of restorative justice, resulting in the community policing and therapeutic jurisprudence segments feeling rushed.
UC prefers maintaining the current unit structure because restorative justice has more discussion points than therapeutic jurisprudence and community policing because it is more widely practiced. To complement the lack of content on therapeutic jurisprudence and community policing, UC will add more teaching materials to Moodle. The teaching materials will be reviewed as pat of the 5 year review.
- Apply the human centred design approach to justice issues and innovations
- Demonstrate the importance of theories of therapeutic jurisprudence and restorative justice in the contemporary justice field
- Develop an innovative response to a justice challenge
- Evaluate the public value generated by different community justice programs
- Identify opportunities for change in the justice system that are located at the community level.
No external accreditation is relevant to this award.
Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Learning Outcomes
| Assessment Tasks | Learning Outcomes | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| 1 - Case Study - 30% | |||||
| 2 - Learning logs / diaries / Journal / log books - 40% | |||||
| 3 - Report - 30% | |||||
Alignment of Graduate Attributes to Learning Outcomes
| Graduate Attributes | Learning Outcomes | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| 1 - Communication | |||||
| 2 - Problem Solving | |||||
| 3 - Critical Thinking | |||||
| 4 - Information Literacy | |||||
| 5 - Team Work | |||||
| 6 - Information Technology Competence | |||||
| 7 - Cross Cultural Competence | |||||
| 8 - Ethical practice | |||||
| 9 - Social Innovation | |||||
| 10 - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultures | |||||
Textbooks
There are no required textbooks.
IT Resources
- CQUniversity Student Email
- Internet
- Unit Website (Moodle)
All submissions for this unit must use the referencing style: American Psychological Association 7th Edition (APA 7th edition)
For further information, see the Assessment Tasks.
m.suzuki@cqu.edu.au
Module/Topic
Introduction.
Chapter
Walgrave, L., Aertsen, I., Parmentier, S., Vanfraechem, I. & Zinsstag, E. (2013). Why restorative justice matters for criminology. Restorative Justice, 1(2), 159-167.
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
Module/Topic
Restorative Justice (1) – Origin, Concept, Definition
Chapter
Richards, K. (2005). Unlikely friends? Oprah Winfrey and restorative justice. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 38(3), 381-399.
Gavrielides, T. (2008). Restorative justice - The perplexing concept: Conceptual fault-lines and power battles within the restorative justice movement. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 8(2), 165-183.
Wood, W. R. & Suzuki, M. (2016). Four challenges in the future of restorative justice. Victims & Offenders, 11(1), 149-172.
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
Module/Topic
Restorative Justice (2) – Principle, Practice, Theory
Chapter
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2020). Handbook on restorative justice programmes second edition (pp. 15-22, 23-48).
Braithwaite, J. (2002). Restorative justice and responsive regulation. Oxford: Oxford University Press (pp. 73-136).
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
Module/Topic
Restorative Justice (3) – Empirical Studies on Offenders
Chapter
Hayes, H. (2005). Assessing reoffending in restorative justice conferences. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 38(1), 77-101.
Wood, W. R. (2015). Why restorative justice will not reduce incarceration. British Journal of Criminology, 55(5), 883-900.
Maruna, S. (2016). Desistance and restorative justice: It’s now or never. Restorative Justice, 4(3), 289-301.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Restorative Justice (4) – Empirical Studies on Victims and Other Stakeholders
Chapter
Braithwaite, J. (2002). Setting standards for restorative justice. British Journal of Criminology. 42(3), 563-577.
Bolivar, D. (2010). Conceptualizing victims’ ‘restoration’ in restorative justice. International Review of Victimology, 17(3), 237-265.
Daly, K. (2006). The limits of restorative justice. In D. Sullivan & L. Tift (Eds.) Handbook of restorative justice: A global perspective. Routledge (pp. 134-146).
Events and Submissions/Topic
Report (30%)
Due date: Week 5 Friday (11 August 2023) 9:00 am AEST
Presentation (10%)
Due date: Week 5 Friday (11 August 2023) 9:00 am AEST
Report Due: Week 5 Friday (11 Aug 2023) 9:00 am AEST
Presentation Due: Week 5 Friday (11 Aug 2023) 9:00 am AEST
Module/Topic
None.
Chapter
None.
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
Module/Topic
Restorative Justice (5) – Critical Debates
Chapter
Braithwaite, J. & Daly, K. (1994). Masculinities, violence and communitarian control. In T. Newburn & B. Stanko (eds.) Just boys doing business? Men, masculinities and crime. London: Routledge (pp. 189-213).
Suzuki, M. & Wood, W. R. (2018). Is restorative justice conferencing appropriate for youth offenders? Criminology & Criminal Justice, 18(4), 450-467.
Gavrielies, T. (2014). Bringing race relations into the restorative justice debate: An alternative and personalized vision of ‘the other’. Journal of Black Studies, 45(3), 216-246.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Restorative Justice (6) – Current Research Trends
Chapter
Shapland, J. (2014). Implications of growth: Challenges for restorative justice. International Review of Victimology, 20(1), 111-127.
Saulnier, A. & Sivasubramaniam, D. (2015). Restorative justice: Underlying mechanisms and future directions. New Criminal Law Review, 18(4), 510-536.
Hoyle, C. & Rosenblatt, F. (2016). Looking back to the future threats to the success of restorative justice in the United Kingdom. Victims & Offenders, 11(1), 30-49.
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
Module/Topic
Restorative Justice (7) – Beyond Conventional Criminal Justice Settings
Chapter
None.
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
Module/Topic
Therapeutic Jurisprudence (1) – Concept, Application, problem-solving courts
Chapter
Braithwaite, J. (2002). Restorative justice and therapeutic jurisprudence. Criminal Law Bulletin, 38(2), 244-262.
Daly, K. & Marchetti, E. (2012). Innovative justice processes: Restorative justice, Indigenous justice, and therapeutic jurisprudence. In M. Marmo, W. de Lint & D. Palmer, Crime and justice: A guide to criminology. Pyrmont: LawBook (pp. 455-481).
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
Module/Topic
Therapeutic Jurisprudence (2) – Drug Courts, Mental Health Courts, Family Violence Courts, Indigenous Sentencing Courts, reentry courts
Chapter
Winick, B. J. (2003). Therapeutic jurisprudence and problem-solving courts. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 30(3), 1055-1103.
Rottman, D. B. (2000). Does effective therapeutic jurisprudence require specialized courts (and do specialized courts imply specialist judges)? Court Review, 37(1), 22-28.
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
Module/Topic
Community Policing – Concept, Practice, Evaluation
Chapter
Putt, J. (2010). Community policing in Australia. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Learning Logs (30%)
Due date: Week 11 Friday (29 September 2023) 9:00 am AEST
Learning Logs Due: Week 11 Friday (29 Sept 2023) 9:00 pm AEST
Module/Topic
Review.
Chapter
None.
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
Module/Topic
None.
Chapter
None.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Case study (40%)
Due date: Exam Week Monday (9 October 2022) 9:00 am AEST
Case study Due: Review/Exam Week Monday (9 Oct 2023) 9:00 am AEST
Module/Topic
None.
Chapter
None.
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
1 Case Study
In this assignment, students work on a hypothetical scenario in which they are tasked to write a 1000-words report. In this scenario, students are working at a Department of Justice in on hypothetical jurisdiction. Since juvenile delinquency is on the rise in the jurisdiction, the government seeks an alternative approach to deal with delinquent kids. Students' boss at the Department of Justice has heard of restorative justice conferencing and thought it might be a useful approach. Since your agency needs to obtain funding from the government to implement restorative justice approach students are asked to do research on the restorative justice initiative and write a 1000-word report, which involves a pitch for your government.
Specifically, in this report students (1) explain what restorative justice is and(2) discuss why restorative justice is an effective mechanism to address the rise of juvenile delinquency in their jurisdiction.
Week 5 Friday (11 Aug 2023) 9:00 am AEST
Week 6 Friday (25 Aug 2023)
This assignment is assessed by five criteria. Introduction is based on whether students provide a clear introduction. Organisation is based on whether the ideas are arranged in a logical, structured and coherent manner. Content knowledge is based on whether students demonstrate a balanced and high level of detailed knowledge of core concepts by providing a high level of analysis. Presentation is based on whether the quality of writing is a high standard. Conclusion is based on whether students provide a detailed and focused summary of the ideas presented.
- Demonstrate the importance of theories of therapeutic jurisprudence and restorative justice in the contemporary justice field
- Evaluate the public value generated by different community justice programs
- Critical Thinking
- Cross Cultural Competence
- Ethical practice
- Social Innovation
2 Presentation
Based on the Assignment 1 Report, students create a 3-minute video of their spoken presentation of the pitch for funding a restorative justice initiative. By using visual aids (e.g. powerpoints), the video should summarise (1) what restorative justice is and (2) why restorative justice is an effective mechanism to address the problem.
Week 5 Friday (11 Aug 2023) 9:00 am AEST
Week 7 Friday (1 Sept 2023)
Presentation is assessed by five criteria. Introduction is based on whether the key points and purpose of the presentation are introduced in a clear and interesting way. Knowledge of content is based on whether students have a thorough knowledge of the content as demonstrated by their research of the presentation topic. Organisation of Presentations is based on whether students present the information and ideas in a logical and interesting sequence. Visual Aids is based on whether students powerpoints are well designed and confidently used. Conclusion is based on whether students have a clear and concise summary with effective links to the introduction and body of the presentation.
- Apply the human centred design approach to justice issues and innovations
- Problem Solving
- Critical Thinking
- Cross Cultural Competence
- Social Innovation
3 Learning logs / diaries / Journal / log books
Students are provided with a task to complete in Modules 2-11. There are 10 tasks in total. They are available in the study guide. Students write a 150-word response to each task.
Week 11 Friday (29 Sept 2023) 9:00 pm AEST
Review/Exam Week Friday (13 Oct 2023)
This assignment is assessed by three criteria. Level of reflection is based on whether students describe a number of events and reflects critically on them in a deep and significant way. Presentation, Communication & Evidence is based on whether students provide an appropriate individual and overall structure, and whether students make clear links between their personal reflections and external factors. Completeness is based on whether students provide concrete connections between journal entries into a whole and whether they complete all the tasks.
- Apply the human centred design approach to justice issues and innovations
- Demonstrate the importance of theories of therapeutic jurisprudence and restorative justice in the contemporary justice field
- Identify opportunities for change in the justice system that are located at the community level.
- Problem Solving
- Critical Thinking
- Cross Cultural Competence
- Ethical practice
- Social Innovation
4 Report
In this assessment, students work on the following tasks to write a 1000-word case study. (1) Students identify an agency/organisation that works under the philosophy of community justice. (2) Students briefly describe the work of the agency/organisation. (3) Students describe the 'philosophy' of community justice upon which the agency/organisation bases its practices. (4) Students explain how the work of the agency/organisation aligns with the community justice philosophy. (5) Students evaluate what this agency/organisation does in terms of their community justice initiatives.
Review/Exam Week Monday (9 Oct 2023) 9:00 am AEST
Exam Week Friday (20 Oct 2023)
This assignment is assessed by five criteria. Introduction is based on whether students provide a clear introduction. Organisation is based on whether the ideas are arranged in a logical, structured and coherent manner. Content knowledge is based on whether students demonstrate a balanced and high level of detailed knowledge of core concepts by providing a high level of analysis. Presentation is based on whether the quality of writing is a high standard. Conclusion is based on whether students provide a detailed and focused summary of the ideas presented.
- Develop an innovative response to a justice challenge
- Evaluate the public value generated by different community justice programs
- Identify opportunities for change in the justice system that are located at the community level.
- Problem Solving
- Critical Thinking
- Information Literacy
- Team Work
- Cross Cultural Competence
- Ethical practice
- Social Innovation
As a CQUniversity student you are expected to act honestly in all aspects of your academic work.
Any assessable work undertaken or submitted for review or assessment must be your own work. Assessable work is any type of work you do to meet the assessment requirements in the unit, including draft work submitted for review and feedback and final work to be assessed.
When you use the ideas, words or data of others in your assessment, you must thoroughly and clearly acknowledge the source of this information by using the correct referencing style for your unit. Using others’ work without proper acknowledgement may be considered a form of intellectual dishonesty.
Participating honestly, respectfully, responsibly, and fairly in your university study ensures the CQUniversity qualification you earn will be valued as a true indication of your individual academic achievement and will continue to receive the respect and recognition it deserves.
As a student, you are responsible for reading and following CQUniversity’s policies, including the Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure. This policy sets out CQUniversity’s expectations of you to act with integrity, examples of academic integrity breaches to avoid, the processes used to address alleged breaches of academic integrity, and potential penalties.
What is a breach of academic integrity?
A breach of academic integrity includes but is not limited to plagiarism, self-plagiarism, collusion, cheating, contract cheating, and academic misconduct. The Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure defines what these terms mean and gives examples.
Why is academic integrity important?
A breach of academic integrity may result in one or more penalties, including suspension or even expulsion from the University. It can also have negative implications for student visas and future enrolment at CQUniversity or elsewhere. Students who engage in contract cheating also risk being blackmailed by contract cheating services.
Where can I get assistance?
For academic advice and guidance, the Academic Learning Centre (ALC) can support you in becoming confident in completing assessments with integrity and of high standard.
What can you do to act with integrity?
