The course aims to explain punishment and society in a multi- dimensional context, entrenched in disciplines including criminology, penology, sociology, psychology, ethics Punishment, in other words, is far more than a chemical problem linked to certain institutions of crime control and prevention. The course will look at the different functions of punishment, like retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation, and restoration. We will trace those functions historically and culturally, finding vast cultural and social differences in the way in which punishment is practiced.
For instance, there is a vast difference in how Americans and Europeans think about and practice punishment, and we even find other approaches to punishment in China. The course will start by looking at the popular opinions about punishment, reminding us that the issue of punishment is both a normative and a scientific issue. Learning Outcomes: By the end of this course students should be able to: 1. Understand the differences between common sense approaches and scientific evidence based approaches to the effects of punishment; 2. Understand basic philosophical arguments about punishment; 3. Learn how to see punishment in a comparative and historical context; 4. Identify basic issues of rehabilitative and retributive approaches to punishment; 5. Discuss basic issues concerning the death penalty. Assessment: lecture, I. E. 2 Deck 2013. Late submission will be penalized. Select a punishment option (from informal to formal), find out its origin, philosophical base, phonological ideology, and critically examine its ‘existence’ as to whether and why it should or not be used.
Don’t waste your time!
Order your assignment!
Selected topic should be submitted to lecturer not later than end of November 2013. (Proper referencing, e. G. PAP formatting & style! ) 40 % (B) There will be normal credit assigned for performance, attendance and presentations (15%) in class (a written script from the presentations is required, approximately one signed page (around 400 words) per person (10%) since all should articulate in the group work). 25 % Groups of 4 ? 5 students will be formed to presenting any one of the following topics on 14 Novo and 21 Novo (each group has only 15 minutes! . Selected topics and group list should be submitted to lecturer before 7 Novo. A) critically examine the applicability of prevarication of punishment in Hong Kong; b) critically examine how to measure whether a prison is a good prison; or c) critically examine whether sexual offenders should be castrated. Students are not supposed to fail to attend more than three classes without due reason. (Repeated late arrivals and early departures are not good for overall reference evaluation). C) There will be no formal exam for the course, but there will be an in-class test of 3-hrs at the end of the term scheduled on 28 Novo 2013. Topics cover everything covered in the course, and challenging what is not covered in the course, and practical scenarios as to how to manage offenders. 30 % (D) Before you come, write down your views on the question: Is crime beneficial to society? (500 words signed page per student). Then come for the first lecture on 5 Seep 2013 and discuss. 4% (early birds who email to Dry Swan on or before midnight 1 seep 2013 receive Distribution of scores:
A) individual assignment of 3000 words 40% B) group presentation (group)1 5% written script of group presentation (group) 10% C) in-class test 30% D) preparatory assignment 5% TOTAL 100% Grading and Standards of Assessment: The Master of Social Science in Criminology at HUG adopts a standards-based approach to grading, and students will receive grades and feedback based on MS A Demonstrates originality in approach and argument and also a sound understanding of social science issues; or a very thorough understanding of social science concepts and issues, fluently expressed, founded on careful and critical eating of relevant materials, and demonstrating independent Judgment.
B Demonstrates better than average skill and ability in identifying, analyzing and dealing with the main issues and displays an ability to present persuasive arguments backed up by authority. Utilizing a wide range of sources, drawn both from the course and engagement with broader literature and statistics. C Identifies the major issues and displays a broad understanding of the relevant social science concepts and issues, but contains errors or is vague or confused on an issue or in applying the social science concepts to the facts, or omits a major issue. Utilizing a basic but satisfactory range of sources. F Fails to identify major issues, where serious mistakes of interpreting social science concepts or analyzing social science issues are apparent and the handling of the question generally is significantly below par.
Timetable and key text readings: (There might be changes to be announced during the course) The main textbook used for the course: Mattie, D. Trance, Lu Hong (2005). Punishment: A Comparative Historical Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (electronic resource (eBook)) [pick] “Institutions are never fully explicable purely in terms of their ‘purposes’. Institutions like the prison, or the fine, or the guillotine, are social artifacts, embodying and regenerating wider cultural categories as well as being nears to serve particular phonological ends. Punishment is not wholly explicable in terms of its purposes because no social artifact can be explained in this way.