In 300 words minimum, critique this article .

https://myasucourses.asu.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-11001756-dt-content-rid-48566674_1/courses/2015SummerA-X-CRJ100-42224-41270/Sherman_et_al_Preventing_Crime_What_Works.pdf

Requirements:
Use professional language (i.e., complete sentences, no “text” words). Treat this as if it were a term paper assignment. Correct punctuation, spelling, and sentence structure are extremely important and will be reviewed as part of your grade.
1. This does not mean that you should simply summarize the article. Your first sentence should provide a brief summary of the article. The remainder of the sentences should provide a critique of the strengths and/or weaknesses of the author(s) arguments. This should not simply be your opinion. That is, if you state a strength or weakness of the author(s) arguments you MUST state WHY you believe so. Your argument MUST be supported by a reference to the textbook or other outside source. You should try to first rely on the week’s reading materials before seeking outside sources.

Please use this book as the source
“The American System of Criminal Justice, 14th Edition” by Authors: Cole/Smith/DeJong – ©2015

In 200 words minimum each, respond to these two critiques:
1-
The most stressing part of the article, “Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn’t, What’s Promising” (Sherman et al.,1998) for me was even through the Maryland Scale of Scientific Method, the information needed for a comprehensive study is non-existent. The fact that none of the studies can be replicated making the studies suffer from external validity of positive and negative findings reaffirms the flaws in our justice system (Sherman et al. 3). The notion that this data is ever changing not only due to the rises and falls in recidivism rates but also in the sheer ability to incorporate programs to prevent crime is troubling. Having worked closely in the executive branch of the laws I can reaffirm no solid program works one hundred percent of the time, but if the article could more closely point out the main programs I think it would be beneficial. The ideas in the articles questioning the benefits of prisons systems fail to point out that many of our prisons systems are run for a profit margin instead of fixing recidivism rates (Cole p41). Many of the ideas and programs listed in this article talk to only one side of the group and don’t explain the other side of the story. Personally I’d rather have all the information on each program and decide whether or not they’re even worth funding.

2-
The article Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn’t, What’s Promising, looked at research on crime prevention methods and summarized the findings into categories of what methods worked, did not work, and what methods are promising. One of the weaknesses of the article was that the authors had only 6 months to complete their analysis and report and studied only readily available material, possibly excluding unpublished studies or studies from other governments. In addition, applying scientific evaluation to crime prevention is provisional, and results change as new research is conducted. It is also hard to generalize, or provide external validity, because a crime prevention method that works for one group may not work for others. Another weakness is the fact that many or most evaluations funded by the government are “ ‘process’ evaluations describing what was done, rather than ‘impact’ evaluations assessing what effect the program had on crime.’’ (Sherman, et al, 1998, p. 3) Cole, et al. state that impact studies or evidence-based practices should be used to make policy decisions regarding crime prevention because they are the result of research demonstrating the effectiveness of crime prevention strategies. (Cole, et al, 2015, p. 9)
One strength of the article is that it applies a scientific method with standard rules to the study which allows for more confidence that the conclusions are accurate. Several sociological explanations of crime provide evidence of the results of the study. For example, social process theories state that policies that promote stable families and provide positive role models could prevent crime. In the article, some programs that work involve early intervention for infants, preschoolers and adolescents. Life course theories advise diminishing incarceration for young offenders because they have been shown to increase criminal activity. The article also lists arrests for juvenile offenders for minor offences as a program that does not work. (Cole, et al, 2015, pp. 74-78)

Place this order with us and get 18% discount now! to earn your discount enter this code: special18 If you need assistance chat with us now by clicking the live chat button.