CQUniversity Unit Profile
CRIM13009 Criminal Ethnographies
Criminal Ethnographies
All details in this unit profile for CRIM13009 have been officially approved by CQUniversity and represent a learning partnership between the University and you (our student).
The information will not be changed unless absolutely necessary and any change will be clearly indicated by an approved correction included in the profile.
General Information

Overview

Issues in the justice field require a great deal of sensitivity to individual perspectives and understandings of the criminal justice system. Frequently situations involve violence and physical or mental harm. Qualitative research methods provide the investigator with insights into the contextual factors that influence offenders, victims and justice professionals. In this unit you will develop your qualitative research skills, building on skills developed in this course with a focus on writing surveys, conducting interviews or using ethnographic techniques oriented to criminal research. You will examine the ethical context of qualitative research including the importance of respecting individuals or communities being researched and preservation of due process where required. You will also demonstrate the importance of ethical practice and effective data management practices using appropriate and secure technologies where breaches of privacy can also expose respondents and researchers to personal danger.

Details

Career Level: Undergraduate
Unit Level: Level 3
Credit Points: 6
Student Contribution Band: 10
Fraction of Full-Time Student Load: 0.125

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 1 - 2022

Online

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).

Class and Assessment Overview

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

Bundaberg, Cairns, Emerald, Gladstone, Mackay, Rockhampton, Townsville
Adelaide, Brisbane, Melbourne, Perth, Sydney

Assessment Overview

1. Learning logs / diaries / Journal / log books
Weighting: 30%
2. Practical Assessment
Weighting: 30%
3. Research Proposal
Weighting: 40%

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.

Unit Learning Outcomes
On successful completion of this unit, you will be able to:
  1. Develop a qualitative methodology for investigation of a justice issue with consideration of institutional limitations on the process
  2. Conduct a hypothetical ethnographic interview and reflect on the process
  3. Employ qualitative intelligence techniques including interviewing and ethnography
  4. Effectively manage data pertaining to a hypothetical human data analysis project
  5. Work within the research ethics framework including identification of risk of violence and power imbalances.

No external accreditation is relevant to this award.

Alignment of Learning Outcomes, Assessment and Graduate Attributes
N/A Level
Introductory Level
Intermediate Level
Graduate Level
Professional Level
Advanced Level

Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Learning Outcomes

Assessment Tasks Learning Outcomes
1 2 3 4 5
1 - Practical Assessment - 30%
2 - Research Proposal - 40%
3 - Learning logs / diaries / Journal / log books - 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

Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Graduate Attributes

Assessment Tasks Graduate Attributes
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 - Practical Assessment - 30%
2 - Research Proposal - 40%
3 - Learning logs / diaries / Journal / log books - 30%
Textbooks and Resources

Textbooks

There are no required textbooks.

IT Resources

You will need access to the following IT resources:
  • CQUniversity Student Email
  • Internet
  • Unit Website (Moodle)
Referencing Style

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.

Teaching Contacts
Emma Turley Unit Coordinator
e.turley@cqu.edu.au
Schedule
Introduction: Reflexivity, voice & subjectivity Begin Date: 07 Mar 2022

Module/Topic

Introduction to qualitative research.

How the unit will run.

Chapter

Travers, M. (2018). The Uneasy Relationship between Criminology and Qualitative Research. Current Research in Criminal Justice, 25(1), 551-557.

https://www-tandfonline-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/doi/abs/10.1080/10345329.2013.12035981

Tewksbury, R. (2009). Qualitative versus Quantitative Methods: Understanding Why Qualitative Methods are Superior for Criminology and Criminal Justice. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Criminology, 1(1), 38-58.

http://jtpcrim.org/January_Articles/Qualitative_Vs_Quantitave_Richard_Tewksbury.pdf

Events and Submissions/Topic

Designing quality qualitative research Begin Date: 14 Mar 2022

Module/Topic

Qualitative research design

Quality in qualitative research

Chapter

Silverman, D. (2008). Doing Qualitative Research. Sage.

Chapter 2

https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/cqu/reader.action?docID=459252&ppg=22

Gaudet, S. & Robert, D. (2018). A Journey Through Qualitative Research: From Design to Reporting. Sage.

Chapter 1

https://methods-sagepub-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/Book/a-journey-through-qualitative-research/i376.xml

Chapter 2

https://methods-sagepub-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/book/a-journey-through-qualitative-research/i446.xml

Events and Submissions/Topic

ASSESSMENT INFORMATION SESSION – PRACTICAL ASSESSMENT Begin Date: 21 Mar 2022

Module/Topic

Assessment information

Chapter

n/a

Events and Submissions/Topic

QUALITATIVE METHODOLOGIES: OBSERVATION & ETHNOGRAPHY Begin Date: 28 Mar 2022

Module/Topic

Methods of observation in qualitative research

Ethnographic approaches

Chapter

Przemieniecki, C., Compitello, S. & Lindquist, J. (2019). Juggalos - Whoop! Whoop! A Family or A Gang? A Participant-Observation Study on an FBI Defined ‘Hybrid’ Gang. Deviant Behavior, 41(8), 977-990.

https://www-tandfonline-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/doi/full/10.1080/01639625.2019.1596533


Temkin, J., Gray, J.M. & Barrett, J. (2016). Different Functions of Rape Myth Use in Court: Findings From a Trial Observation Study. Feminist Criminology, 13(2), 205-226.

https://journals-sagepub-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/doi/full/10.1177/1557085116661627

Calvey, D. (2008). The Art and Politics of Covert Research: Doing `Situated Ethics' in the Field. Sociology, 42(5), 905-918.

https://journals-sagepub-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/doi/abs/10.1177/0038038508094569

Events and Submissions/Topic

QUALITATIVE METHODOLOGIES: ETHNOGRAPHY & AUTOETHNOGRAPHY Begin Date: 04 Apr 2022

Module/Topic

Ethnographic appraoches continued.

Autoethnography.

Chapter

Steinmetz, K. F. (2015). Craft(y)ness: An Ethnographic Study of Hacking. British Journal of Criminology, 55(1), 125-145.

https://academic-oup-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/bjc/article/55/1/125/461098

Wakeman, S. (2014). Fieldwork, Biography and Emotion. Doing Criminological Autoethnography. British Journal of Criminology, 54(5), 705-721.

https://heinonline-org.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/HOL/Page?lname=&public=false&collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/bjcrim54&men_hide=false&men_tab=toc&kind=&page=705

Worley, R., Worley, V.B. & Wood, B.A. (2016). ‘There were ethical dilemmas all day long!’: harrowing tales of ethnographic researchers in criminology and criminal justice. Criminal Justice Studies, 29(4), 209-308.

https://www-tandfonline-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/doi/full/10.1080/1478601X.2016.1237945

Events and Submissions/Topic

Assessment 1 submission


Learning Log Portfolio Due: Week 5 Monday (4 Apr 2022) 9:00 am AEST
Vacation Week Begin Date: 11 Apr 2022

Module/Topic

Chapter

Events and Submissions/Topic

QUALITATIVE DATA COLLECTION: INTERVIEWS AND FOCUS GROUPS Begin Date: 18 Apr 2022

Module/Topic

Types of interviews used in qualitative research.

Focus groups in qualitative research. 

Chapter

Gabriel, L., Tiro, Z., Hazel, J., Cronin-Davis, J. Beetham, T., Corbally, A., Lopez-Moreno, A. & Hill, S. (2017). “Give me some space”: exploring youth to parent aggression and violence. Journal of Family Violence, 33(2), 161-169.

https://go-gale-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/ps/i.do?p=AONE&u=cqu&id=GALE|A522270621&v=2.1&it=r

Taylor, E. (2013). Honour among thieves? How morality and rationality influence the decision-making processes of convicted domestic burglars. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 14(4), 487-502.

https://journals-sagepub-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/doi/full/10.1177/1748895813505232

Cusano, J., Wood, L., O’Connor, J. & McMahon, S. (2020). What Helps and Hinders Students’ Intervening in Incidents of Dating Violence On Campus? an Exploratory Study Using Focus Groups. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, Online first, 1-25.

Events and Submissions/Topic

ANALYSING DATA USING THEMATIC APPROCHES Begin Date: 25 Apr 2022

Module/Topic

Using thematic approaches & data analysis.

Chapter


Byrne, D. (2021). A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis. Quality & Quantity, Online First.

https://link-springer-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/article/10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y

Brooks, J., McCluskey, S., Turley, E. & King, N. (2015). The utility of template analysis. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 12(2), 202-222.

https://www-tandfonline-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/doi/full/10.1080/14780887.2014.955224

Events and Submissions/Topic

ASSESSMENT INFORMATION SESSION – RESEARCH PROPOSAL Begin Date: 02 May 2022

Module/Topic

Assessment information.

Chapter

n/a

Events and Submissions/Topic

Assessment 2 submission


Practical Assessment Due: Week 8 Wednesday (4 May 2022) 9:00 am AEST
QUALITATIVE METHODOLOGIES: PHENOMENOLOGY Begin Date: 09 May 2022

Module/Topic

Different methods of phenomenology

Descriptive phenomenology

Interpretive phenomenology

Chapter

Finlay, L., Ashworth, P., Smith, J.A., Langdridge, D. & Butt, T. (2008). “Can't Really Trust That, So What Can I Trust?”: A Polyvocal, Qualitative Analysis of the Psychology of Mistrust. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 5(27), 80-102.

https://www-tandfonline-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/doi/full/10.1080/14780880802070559

Turley, E.L., King, N. & Butt, T. (2011). ‘It started when I barked once when I was licking his boots!’: a descriptive phenomenological study of the everyday experience of BDSM. Psychology & Sexuality, 2(2), 123-136.

https://www-tandfonline-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/doi/full/10.1080/19419899.2010.528018


Bertrand-Godfrey, B. & Lowenthal, D. (2011). Delivering therapy in prison: An IPA study researching the lived experience of psychotherapists and counsellors. European Journal of Psychotherapy & Counselling, 13(4), 335-355.

https://www-tandfonline-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/doi/full/10.1080/13642537.2011.625197

Events and Submissions/Topic

USING INNOVATIVE & VISUAL METHODS Begin Date: 16 May 2022

Module/Topic

   How and when to use visual methods in qualitative research

Chapter

Fileborn, B. (2021). Digital mapping as feminist method: critical reflections. Qualitative Research. Online First.

https://journals-sagepub-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/doi/full/10.1177/14687941211028797

Kim, B., McCullough, M., Simmons, M., Bolton, R., Hyde, J., Drainoni, M., Fincke, G. & McInnes, D.K. (2019). A novel application of process mapping in a criminal justice setting to examine implementation of peer support for veterans leaving incarceration. Health & Justice, 7(3). 2-11.

https://www-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/pmc/articles/PMC6718000/

Drainoni, M., Childs, E., Biello, K., Biancarelli, D., Edzea, A. & Salhaney, P. (2019). "We don't get much of a voice about anything": perspectives on photovoice among people who inject drugs. Harm Reduction Journal, 16(1). 61-84.

https://go-gale-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/ps/i.do?p=AONE&u=cqu&id=GALE%7CA607406364&v=2.1&it=r

Gariglo, L. (2015). Photo-elicitation in prison ethnography: Breaking the ice in the field and unpacking prison officers’ use of force. Crime, Media, Culture: An International Journal, 12(3). 367-379.

https://journals-sagepub-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/doi/full/10.1177/1741659015614223

Events and Submissions/Topic

CONDUCTING ETHICAL QUALITATIVE RESEARCH Begin Date: 23 May 2022

Module/Topic

Ethical issues when conducting qualitative research

How to conduct ethical research

Chapter

Australian and New Zealand Society of Criminology (ANZSOC) Code of Ethics

https://anzsoc.org/about/ethics/

British Society for Criminology (BSC) Code of Ethics

https://www.britsoccrim.org/ethics/

Hardesty, J., Haselschwerdt, M., Crossman, K., Logan, T. & Zeoli, A. (2019). Qualitative Research on Interpersonal Violence: Guidance for Early Career Scholars. Interpersonal Violence, 34 (23-24). 4794-4816.

https://journals-sagepub-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/doi/full/10.1177/0886260519871532

Sílvia, G. & Duarte, V. (2020). What about ethics? Developing qualitative research in confinement settings. European Journal of Criminology, 17(4), 461-479.

https://journals-sagepub-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/doi/full/10.1177/1477370818801305 

Events and Submissions/Topic

BECOMING A QUALITATIVE CRIMINOLOGICAL RESEARCHER & PEER DISCUSSION Begin Date: 30 May 2022

Module/Topic

Revision of the module

Peer discussion and feedback

Chapter

Copes, H. Tewksbury, R. & Sandberg, S. (2015). Publishing Qualitative Research in Criminology and Criminal Justice Journals. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 27(1). 121-139.

https://www-tandfonline-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/doi/full/10.1080/10511253.2015.1109131

Events and Submissions/Topic

Research Proposal Due: Week 12 Wednesday (1 June 2022) 9:00 am AEST
Review/Exam Week Begin Date: 06 Jun 2022

Module/Topic

Chapter

Events and Submissions/Topic

Assessment 3 submission

Exam Week Begin Date: 13 Jun 2022

Module/Topic

Chapter

Events and Submissions/Topic

Assessment Tasks

1 Learning logs / diaries / Journal / log books

Assessment Title
Learning Log Portfolio

Task Description

Students will submit a learning log portfolio of short activities relating to qualitative criminological research to demonstrate their knowledge and understanding of qualitative research methods and the ways these can be used for criminology. The learning log portfolio will consist of activities students will be provided in the study guide labelled each module as ‘assessment task’.

In modules 1, 2, and 4 students are provided with an assessment task to complete which can be found in each of the first four modules in the study guide, except module 3. These short tasks make up the learning log portfolio. Each task is relevant to that module’s particular topic and will develop your knowledge and practical skills in relation to criminal intelligence analysis. Only modules 1, 2, and 4 will have tasks to complete for this assessment.

Word length per task 350 – 400 words. There are 3 tasks to complete as part of the learning log portfolio.

Responses must be written as complete sentences except where tables or bullet points are appropriate. You should not copy and paste the task instructions into your submission, instead clearly number each task as ‘task 1’, ‘task 2’ etc.

Students should include a separate reference list at the end of each task for all material cited. Referencing must adhere to American Psychological Association (APA) guidelines, which can be found here. The reference list is not included in the word limit.

Lecture notes should not be used as part of the reference list, instead students should find the original source/author. Remember to avoid non-scholarly sources such as dictionaries and Wikipedia.

Submission guidelines

A contents page is required at the beginning of the portfolio and pages should be numbered.

Use 11 or 12 point font size, a sensible font, and 1.5 or double line spacing.

Submission is via Moodle.

Good luck!


Assessment Due Date

Week 5 Monday (4 Apr 2022) 9:00 am AEST


Return Date to Students

Week 6 Monday (18 Apr 2022)


Weighting
30%

Assessment Criteria

Key Criteria High Distinction 85-100% Distinction 75 - 84% Credit 65 – 74% Pass 50 – 64% Fail below 50%
Student achievement
Organisation of portfolio The ideas are arranged in an extremely logical, structured and coherent manner. Very well organised. The ideas are arranged in a clearly logical, structured and coherent manner. Well organised. The ideas are arranged in a mainly logical, structured and coherent manner, although some structural lapses. Generally well organised. The ideas appear less logical, not well structured and presents in an incoherent manner at times. There is little, if any, coherent structure to the document. Poorly organised.
Student achievement
Content Knowledge Demonstrates a balanced and very high level of detailed knowledge of the core concepts of qualitative research by providing a very high level of analysis. Demonstrates a balanced and high level of knowledge of the core concepts of qualitative research by providing a high level of analysis. Demonstrates a good level of knowledge of some of the core concepts of qualitative research by providing some level of analysis. Demonstrates limited knowledge of core concepts of qualitative research by providing a limited level of analysis. Demonstrates little, if any, knowledge of the core concepts of qualitative research with extremely limited, if any, analysis.
Student achievement
Presentation and quality of writing Quality of writing at a very high standard. Paragraphs are coherently connected to each other. Correct grammar, spelling and punctuation. Quality of writing is of a high standard. Paragraphs are mostly well structured. Few grammar, spelling and punctuation mistakes. Quality of writing is generally of a good standard. Few grammar, spelling and punctuation mistakes. Some problems with sentence structure and presentation Frequent grammar, punctuation and spelling mistakes. Use of inappropriate or informal language. Quality of writing is at a very poor standard affecting clarity. Many spelling mistakes. Little or no evidence of proof reading.
Student achievement
Referencing Utilises current, appropriate and credible sources. Very well referenced, with correct referencing style. Utilises mostly current, appropriate and credible sources. Well referenced, with minimal errors in referencing style. Utilises some current, appropriate and credible sources. Generally referenced correctly, with some minor errors in referencing style. Utilises few current, appropriate and credible sources. Frequent errors in referencing style. Utilises limited, if any, current, appropriate and credible sources. Referencing style contains many errors.


Referencing Style

Submission
Online

Submission Instructions
Submission via Moodle

Learning Outcomes Assessed
  • Develop a qualitative methodology for investigation of a justice issue with consideration of institutional limitations on the process
  • Employ qualitative intelligence techniques including interviewing and ethnography
  • Effectively manage data pertaining to a hypothetical human data analysis project


Graduate Attributes
  • Communication
  • Problem Solving
  • Critical Thinking
  • Information Literacy
  • Information Technology Competence
  • Cross Cultural Competence
  • Ethical practice

2 Practical Assessment

Assessment Title
Practical Assessment

Task Description

For this assignment you will be presented with two hypothetical justice scenarios. The scenarios each consist of a community that can be researched using the ethnography method. You must choose ONE of the scenarios and design an ethnographic research study based around that community.

Ethnography is a methodology concerned with gaining a deep understanding of a specific cultural or social group. It usually incorporates a type of observation along with other methods of data collection, with the aim of maximising a diverse set of understandings. The researcher completely immerses themselves in the social or cultural group they are studying and spend a prolonged period of time with them doing the things that they do, for example things like working, eating, socialising, organising events, attending meetings/events etc. The researcher takes part in the daily lives of the participants, either overtly or covertly, for an extended period of time. During this process they

• Observe what happens as it happens

• Listen to what is said

• Ask questions

• Collect other available data

Involvement with the group can be over or covert, so in some ethnographies the group are aware that the individual is a researcher with an interest in a particular phenomenon but sometimes the group believe that the research is simply another individual who is a member of their group and they do not know that they are participants in an ethnographic study.

Ethnographic studies usually consist of a participant observation and at least one other method of qualitative data collection. Your study must use a type of participant observation, the choice of which one is up to you, and a second method of collecting data for your study (e.g. interviews, photovoice), again the choice is yours. All methods must be qualitative in nature

Your assessment should include:

· A research question that your study aims to address.

· An outline of the research design, including the period of time the ethnography will run for.

· A discussion and justification of the type of participant observation you have selected.

· A discussion and justification of the other method of data collection you have selected.

· A description of how the data will be collected e.g. field notes at the time/retrospectively.

· An overview of the ethical issues arising from the study.

Below you will find two hypothetical justice scenarios, you must choose one of these settings on which to base your ethnographic study. You can use as much or as little detail from the scenario as suits your study.

Hypothetical scenario 1:

You have been granted access to conduct research at the Alice Springs Youth Detention Centre in the Northern Territory for a period of 8 months. The centre houses around 50 young people aged between 10-17 years old, across genders with a typical 1-3 ratio of girls and boys, and the majority of young people detained there are Aboriginal. The centre houses young people who are in custody on remand (i.e. awaiting trial without bail) and those who have been sentenced. At the time of your research around 80% of the young people at the centre will be on remand. Generally, around 1/3 of sentenced young people have committed a breach of bail, a third are sentenced for property crime, and a third for person-related crime. Two thirds of young people at the centre were repeat admissions.

The centre runs a number of formal education and work-ready programs, though engagement with these is limited. Education sessions run for 45 minutes three times a day and engagement is not compulsory. There is currently no visiting Elders program at the centre. Some psychological support programs were available, focusing on issues such as anger management and behaviour change however, there is no provision for young people with complex needs. Evening lock up is early and occurs every day at 6.30pm, visiting times are Monday – Friday 3pm-5pm and weekends 4-5pm.

References:

Diagrama Foundation. A blueprint for change: Adapting the lessons of the Spanish Youth Justice System to the Northern Territory Report of Diagrama visit. October 2019.

Youth Detention Census. (2021). Northern territory Government. https://tfhc.nt.gov.au/youth-justice/youth-detention-census

Hypothetical scenario 2:

You have been working to gain access to a group of young people who are involved in anti-social behaviour involving a motor vehicle. This involves driving recklessly, speeding, street racing, burn outs, and playing loud music from their vehicle. Informally this is known as hooning. The group of young people mainly consist of young, white men aged 16-24, although there are also a few young women of the same age who are usually the girlfriends of the men. The group meets regularly, during the week and weekends, to get together, socialise, and take part in hooning along public and private roads. The cars are usually modified and lots of money is spent to try to have the ‘best car’. The driving is nearly always done by the men, and many have criminal records for minor offences. The women are sometimes passengers, occasionally drivers, and the girlfriends often wait together on the street during the races.

Members of the group have been complaining recently because more police, and therefore media and political, attention has been devoted to ‘cracking down’ on this type of ant-social behaviour. As a result, there are more police patrols, and one member of their group was recently arrested and charged with careless driving after the media filmed one of the street races and he was identified. He had his car impounded and is awaiting a court date. The group is making contact with other hoons to find new places to use where there is less police presence.

References:

Hooning (n.d). Queensland Government. https://www.qld.gov.au/law/crime-and-police/types-of-crime/hooning

Armstrong, K. & Steinhardt, D. (2006). Understanding street racing and 'hoon' culture: An exploratory investigation of perceptions and experiences. Journal of the Australasian College of Road Safety, 17(1), pp. 38-44.

Submission guidelines

There is no need to copy & paste the scenario into the assessment, simply refer to ‘scenario 1’ or ‘scenario 2’ somewhere obvious (e.g. in the title).

Ensure all references are cited correctly using APA 7th edition guidelines, which can be found here. Consider using references for the methods you will be using, along with the topic you have chosen. Lecture notes should not be used as part of the reference list, instead students should find the original source/author. Remember to avoid non-scholarly sources such as dictionaries and Wikipedia.

Use 11 or 12 point font size, a sensible font, and 1.5 or double line spacing.

Submission is via Moodle.

Good luck!


Assessment Due Date

Week 8 Wednesday (4 May 2022) 9:00 am AEST


Return Date to Students

Week 10 Wednesday (18 May 2022)


Weighting
30%

Assessment Criteria

Key Criteria Exceeds Expectations (High Distinction) 85-100% Exceeds Expectations (Distinction) 75 - 84% Meets Expectations (Credit) 65 – 74% Meets Expectations (Pass) 50 – 64% Below Expectations (Fail) below 50%
Introduction and research questions Excellent introduction; providing a very clear purpose. Research questions are extremely well developed , highly relevant and are appropriately related to the chosen scenario. Good introduction; providing a mostly clear purpose. Research questions are well developed, relevant and are related to the chosen scenario. Fair introduction, addresses some points, lacks some detail. Research questions are generally well developed, somewhat relevant and are related to the chosen scenario. Poor introduction; addresses limited points, lacks detail; of which few areas are outlined. Research questions are poorly developed, minimally relevant but have some relationship to the chosen scenario. Very poor or non-existent introduction. Research questions not included, not formulated or not relevant.
Student achievement
Organisation or structure The ideas are arranged in an extremely logical, structured and coherent manner. The ideas are arranged in a fairly logical, structured and coherent manner. The ideas are arranged in a logical, some-what structured and coherent manner. The ideas appear less logical, structured and presents in fairly incoherent manner. There is little, if any, coherent structure to the document.
Student achievement
Research design Demonstrates a balanced and very high level of detailed knowledge of ethnographic research design by providing a very high level of relevant detail. Utilises current, appropriate and credible sources. Demonstrates a balanced and high level of knowledge of ethnographic research design by providing a high level of relevant detail. Utilises mostly current, appropriate and credible sources. Demonstrates a good level of knowledge of some of the core concepts of ethnographic research design by providing a good level of detail, though not always relevant. Utilises some current, appropriate and credible sources. Demonstrates limited knowledge of ethnographic research design by providing a limited level of detail which is not always relevant. Utilises few current, appropriate and credible sources. Demonstrates little, if any, knowledge of ethnographic research design with extremely limited, if any, detail. Utilises little, if any, current, appropriate and credible sources.
Student achievement
Presentation and quality of writing Quality of writing at a very high standard. Paragraphs are coherently connected to each other. Correct grammar, spelling and punctuation. Quality of writing is of a high standard. Paragraphs are mostly well structured. Few grammar, spelling and punctuation mistakes. Quality of writing is of a good standard. Few grammar, spelling and punctuation mistakes. Some problems with sentence structure and presentation Frequent grammar, punctuation and spelling mistakes. Use of inappropriate language. Quality of writing is at a very poor standard so barely understandable. Many spelling mistakes. Little or no evidence of proof reading.
Student achievement
Study justification & recognition of ethical issues The assessment presents a detailed and focused summary of the ethical issues, with excellent justification provided throughout. The assessment presents a fairly detailed and focused summary of the ethical issues, with clear justification provided throughout The assessment presents an adequate level of detail and a mainly focused summary of the ethical issues; providing some justification for the study’s design. The assessment provides limited detail with no clear summary of the ethical issues; drawing on limited justification for the study’s design. The assessment fails to provide any clear evidence of ethical considerations. Justification for the study’s design is lacking throughout.
Student achievement


Referencing Style

Submission
Online

Submission Instructions
Submission via Moodle

Learning Outcomes Assessed
  • Conduct a hypothetical ethnographic interview and reflect on the process
  • Work within the research ethics framework including identification of risk of violence and power imbalances.


Graduate Attributes
  • Communication
  • Problem Solving
  • Critical Thinking
  • Information Literacy
  • Team Work
  • Information Technology Competence
  • Cross Cultural Competence
  • Ethical practice

3 Research Proposal

Assessment Title
Research Proposal

Task Description

What is a research proposal?

A research proposal is the first stage of a piece of research. Proposals are usually considered by a panel of experts who will permit or reject the research based on the information provided. A research proposal intends to illustrate that;

  • the research is necessary
  • the research is justified
  • the research is well designed
  • the researcher is competent to carry out the research

Research proposals should address;

  • what will be accomplished
  • why the researcher intends to carry out the research
  • how the research will be conducted

Some guidelines

For this assignment students must produce a research proposal for a piece of qualitative research in an area of criminology that you are interested in. You can choose to base the proposal around any qualitative method covered during the unit. The proposed research should be related to your area of interest within criminology, drawing upon the challenges completed during Criminal Ethnographies sessions.

Contents of the proposal

1. Introduction & Literature Review

The main purpose of the introduction in a research proposal is to provide an outline of the background or context of the research that is being proposed.

For this assessment students must produce an introduction, including a critical review of the existing literature.

The main purpose of the introduction is to provide an outline of the background or context of the research that is being proposed. What is the problem or issue your research is proposing to address? Which organisation are you proposing the research for?

Relevant literature should be critically reviewed, which will provide justification for the research you are proposing e.g. have you identified a gap in the current literature? Would you like to extend some previous research?

The literature review in a research proposal serves several functions:

· Demonstrates knowledge of the area/topic

· Demonstrates ability to critically select and evaluate relevant literature

· Identifies gaps in the existing body of work

Make sure you include:

The aims of the research: [guide: 100 words]

The literature review, including critiques of existing studies: [guide: 550 words]

End this section by state the research question(s) your research aims to address [guide: 100 words]

[Guide: around 750 words]

2. Method

The method section is an important part of the research proposal, as it informs readers how you plan to conduct the necessary research to answer the research question identified in the introduction. It should also contain sufficient information for readers to judge whether the proposed research is realistic, feasible, and appropriate to address the research question(s).

The methods selected should be informed by the mini lectures and workshop sessions in Criminal Ethnographies.

The epistemological position adopted by the research should be clearly presented along with a justification for why a qualitative approach the most appropriate to answer the criminological research question.

The research design must be appropriate and realistic, and should cover;

Ø Participant recruitment: how and where will participants be recruited? Who will take part? How many? Which sampling strategy will be implemented? What is the justification for this?

Ø Method of data collection: which method is the most appropriate to collect the type of data needed for the research? Why?

Ø Procedure: How will the study be carried out? What activities will be involved? What apparatus is required?

Finally, you should address the ethical implications of your research e.g. are there any ethical issues related to the age/competence/social status of the participants? How will you ensure confidentiality/anonymity/protection of participants? What if your participants are classed as vulnerable?

[Guide: around 750 words]

Submission guidelines

Use 11 or 12 point font size, a sensible font, and 1.5 or double line spacing. Submission is via Moodle.

• Referencing must adhere to APA 7th edition style. See here for instructions.

• You MUST include a reference list of all sources cited in the proposal.

References are not included in the word limit.

Only include authoritative references that have an author(s) and that have been peer reviewed (i.e. journals included in the online databases, textbooks, reputable journals accessed via Google Scholar etc). Avoid non-authoritative sources such as dictionaries and Wikipedia. Lecture notes are not to be used as part of the reference list. You will need to locate the original author/source.

The first page of the assignment is to be a title page containing: the assessment title, your name and student identification, the unit name and unit code, and the due date.

Use 11 or 12point font size, a sensible font, and 1.5 or double line spacing.

Good luck!


Assessment Due Date

Week 12 Wednesday (1 June 2022) 9:00 am AEST


Return Date to Students

Exam Week Wednesday (15 June 2022)


Weighting
40%

Assessment Criteria

Key Criteria Research design/Methodology Critical evaluation Background & Literature review Structure and development of argument Formatting, Grammar & Spelling
High distinction 85-100% Accomplished use, reporting and evaluation of the of research methods proposed. The methodology, including participant recruitment, data collection methods and procedures, are relevant and appropriate for the suggested research. Outstanding evidence of appraisal and evaluation of most or all papers cited, clear critical thinking Excellent background information provided to justify the research. Very appropriate selection of papers. Excellent review, with very clear rationale. The paper is well organised, developing a clear argument and rooting this in evidence, shows balance breadth and consideration for reader Meets formatting criteria set by guidelines, very few errors, Correct referencing style Excellent, few grammatical or spelling mistakes
Distinction 75-84% Proficient use, reporting and evaluation of the research methods proposed. The methodology, including participant recruitment, data collection methods and procedures, are relevant and mostly appropriate for the suggested research. Evidence of critical evaluation, of most or all papers cited. Very good background information provided to justify the research. Appropriate selection of papers. Very good review, with good rationale. The paper is well organised, developing an argument and basing this in evidence. Clear, some minor grammatical or spelling errors Meets criteria set by guidelines, a few minor errors in referencing
Credit 65-74% Generally competent use, reporting and evaluation of the research methods proposed. The methodology, including participant recruitment, data collection methods and procedures, are confused, not appropriate or minor details are omitted. Some evidence of critical evaluation or partial critical appraisal Good background information provided which somewhat justifies the research. Appropriate selection of papers. Good review, with generally clear rationale. There is a clear organisation to the paper, but arguments may not always be logical or flowing Generally meets criteria set by guidelines, some errors throughout. An obvious attempt to follow the formatting guidelines. Errors in referencing style. Meets criteria set by guidelines, a few minor errors in referencing Generally good, a few errors
Pass 50-64% •Ability to use and report on the basic research methods proposed, with limited development. The methodology, including participant recruitment, data collection methods and procedures, are not clear, appropriate or important details are omitted. Very little evidence of critical evaluation of papers cited. Adequate background information provided, with limited justification for the research. Somewhat appropriate selection papers. Adequate review, with limited rationale. Evidence of organisation of the argument, but only adequately structured Meets some of the criteria set by guidelines, although limited. Some attempt at correct formatting. Frequent errors in referencing style. Adequate with a few errors affecting clarity
Fail Below 50% Poor ability to use and report on the basic research methods proposed, with very limited or no development. The methodology, including participant recruitment, data collection methods and procedures, are not suitable or important details are omitted. There is clear misunderstanding of methodology, techniques and analysis. No evidence of evaluation of papers. Little or inappropriate background information provided, which does not justify the research. Inappropriate or irrelevant selection papers, no review, with little or no rationale. Poorly structured, no Development of argument Falls far short of the formatting criteria. Reference list is incomplete and/or contains multiple stylistic errors Poor, grammar sometimes makes meaning difficult to interpret, Inconsistent spelling or grammar


Referencing Style

Submission
Online

Submission Instructions
Submission via Moodle

Learning Outcomes Assessed
  • Develop a qualitative methodology for investigation of a justice issue with consideration of institutional limitations on the process
  • Employ qualitative intelligence techniques including interviewing and ethnography
  • Effectively manage data pertaining to a hypothetical human data analysis project
  • Work within the research ethics framework including identification of risk of violence and power imbalances.


Graduate Attributes
  • Communication
  • Problem Solving
  • Critical Thinking
  • Information Literacy
  • Team Work
  • Information Technology Competence
  • Cross Cultural Competence
  • Ethical practice

Academic Integrity Statement

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?