Course Communities and Crime Æ Criminology 6309.

501 /
Sociology 6309.501
Professor Dr. Karen L. Hayslett-McCall
Term Fall 2007
Meetings Wednesday 5:30-8:15, Room Green 3.402

Professor’s Contact Information

Office Phone (972) 883-4767
Other Phone N/A
Office Location GR 3.210
Email Address klh024000@utdallas.edu or Karen.Hayslett-McCall@utdallas.edu
Office Hours W 1:30-4pm, or by appointment (i.e., after class)
Other Information All e-mail contact that is meant to come directly to me must be
sent to my utdallas account (see above).

General Course Information

Pre-requisites, Co-requisites, & other restrictions:
• This is a graduate course. Students should be enrolled in a graduate program or
have appropriate permissions.
Course Description:
• The study of communities and crime is the topic that launched modern
criminology, and it has once again become a very active area of research. In this
course, we will take a quick look at the historical roots of research on
communities and crime, and then we will go on to a more detailed examination of
more current work in this area. We will devote most of our attention to
community influences on offending, but we will also spend some time on
community focused responses to crime, both within the justice system (formal
social control) and by independent organizations and neighborhoods (informal
social control).
Learning Outcomes:
1. Students will be able to describe and examine the role of communities in the level
of crime represented within their boundaries and will understand the influences of
both formal and informal social control; including discussions of the role of
policy implications.
2. Students will be able to describe and identify the important theoretical
components of communities and crime.
3. Students will be able to critically examine the relationship between communities
and offending and between criminal victimization.
Required Texts & Materials
• I am still unsure if a required book will be necessary
Suggested Texts, Readings, & Materials:
• Students will be required to pull several academic research sources from the
library during the course of the class for the projects. Information will be provided
on the exact procedures and requirements during class.
Assignments & Academic Calendar
Orientation:
• Topics and assignments have been inserted below. These are tentative -- all
accurate dates, and any changes in dates, are announced in class and/or posted on
the WebCT calendar.
• Assignments are a little more based on how the material flows, thus accurate
records of assignment deadlines are reflected on the calendar on WebCT.

Topic 1: The Social Disorganization to Communities and Crime

1. Bursick and Grasmick (1993) Neighborhoods and Crime: The Dimensions of
Effective Community Control (pp. 30-38)
2. Sampson (1987). Communities and Crime. In Gottfredson and Hirschi (Eds).
Positive Criminology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. (pp. 99-104)
3. Burgess (1925) The growth of the City. In Park, Burgess, and McKenzie (Eds.)
The City, pp 47-62 Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
4. Thomas and Znaniecki 1958 (1927). The Polish Peasant in Europe and America.
New York: Dover (pp.1171-1181 and 1196-1221.
5. Thrasher (1927) The Gang. Chicago. University of Chicago Press. Pp. 3-7, 20-
35, and 179-193
6. Shaw and McKay (1942). Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas17-22,43-57,63-
68,164-171,177-183.
7. Kornhauser (1978). Social Sources of Delinquency. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press. Pp. 23-32 and 51-83

Topic 2: Research on Structural Aspects of Social Disorganization

1. Sampson (1985) Neighborhood and Crime: The Structural Determinants of
Personal Victimization. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 22 7-40.
2. Bursik (1986). Ecological Stability and the Dynamics of Delinquency.
Communities and Crime, Vol. 8. Reiss and Tonry (Eds.)
3. Bursik (1988). Social Disorganization and theory of crime and delinquency:
Problems and prospects. Criminology 26:519-551
4. Warner and Pierce (1993). Reexamination of social disorganization theory using
calls to the police as a measure of crime. Criminology 31: 493-517
5. Mills (1943) The Professional Ideology of Social Pathologists.” American
Journal of Sociology 49: 165-180

Topic 3: Strain, Inequality, and Communities

1. Blau (1977). Inequality and Heterogeneity: A Primitive Theory of Social
Structure. New York: Free Press. Pp1-18
2. Blau and Blau (1982). The cost of intequality: Metropolitan structure and violent
crime. American Sociological Review 47: 114-129
3. Land, McCall and Cohen (1990). Structural Covariates of homicide rates: Are
there any invariances across time and space. American Journal of Sociology
95:922-963.
4. Shihadex and Steffensmeier (1994). Economic inequality, family disruption, and
urban black violence: Cities as units of stratification and social control. Social
 Forces 73:729-751.
5. Sampson (1987). Communities and crime. In Gottfredson and Hirschi (Eds.)
Positive Criminology. Newbury Park, CA:sage. Pp. 91-94.
6. Agnew (1999). A general strain theory of community differences in crime rates.
Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 36:123-155.

Topic 4: The Systemic Social Disorganization Model

1. Bursik and Grasmick (1993). Neighborhoods and Crime: The Dimensions of
Effective Community Control. New York. Lexington Books. Pp. 13-29 and
38-45.
2. Sampson (1987). Communities and crime. In Gottfredson and Hirschi (Eds.).
Positive Criminology. Newbury Park, CA. Sage. Pp. 104-114.
3. Kasarda and Janowitz (1974). Community attachment in mass society.
American Sociological Review. 39:328-339.
4. Granovetter (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology.
78: 1360-1380.
5. Hunter. (1985). Private, parochial, and public school orders: The problem of
crime and incivility in urban communication. In Suttles and Zald (Eds.), The
Challenge of Social Control: Citizenship and Institution Building in modern
Society. Norwood, NJ Ablex Publishing. Pp. 230-242.
6. Sampson and Groves. (1989). Community structure and crime: Testing social
disorganization theory. American Journal of Sociology. 94:774-802.

Topic 5: Issues of Race and Extreme Deprivation

1. Sampson and Wilson (1995). Toward a theory of race, crime, an urban
inequality. In Hagan and Peterson (Eds.) Crime and Inequality. Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press.
2. Krivo and Peterson. (1996). Extremely disadvantaged neighborhoods and urban
crime. Social Forces. 75:619-650.
3. Peterson, Krivo, and Harris (2000). Disadvantage and Neighborhood Violent
Crime: Do Local Institutions matter? Journal of Research in Crime and
Delinquency. 37:31-63.
4. Rankin and Quane. (2000). Neighborhood poverty and the social isolation of
inner-city African American families. Social Forces: 79:139-164.
5. Martinez, Ramiro, (1996). Latinos and lethal violence: The impact of poverty
and inequality.” Social Problems: 43:131-146.
6. McNulty and Holloway. (2000). Race, Crime, and Public Housing in Atlanta:
Testing a conditional effect hypothesis. Social Forces: 79:707-729.

Topic 6: Cultural Deviance: Norms and Community Deviance

1. Akers (1996) Is Differential Association/Social Learning Culture Deviance
Theory. Criminology 34: 229-247
2. Hirschi (1996) Theory without ideas: Reply to Akers Criminology 34:249-256.
3. Cattarello (2000). Community Level Influences on Inividuals’ Social Bonds, Peer
Associations, an Delinquency: A multi-level analysis. Justice Quarterly 17:33-
??
 4. Felson, Liska, South, and McNulty (1994). The subculture of violence and
delinquency: Individual versus School context effects.
Opportunity and Routine Activity Explanations at the Community Level
5. Bursik and Grasmick (1993) Neighborhoods and Crime The Dimensions of
Effective Community Control. New York: Lexington Books. Ch. 3, 60-89.
6. Smith, Frazee, and Davidson (2000). Furthering the integration of routine activity
and social disorganization theories: Small units of analysis and the study of street
robbery as a diffusion process.

Topic 7: Disorder, Community, and Fear of Crime

1. Bursik and Grasmick (1993) Nieghborhoods and Crime The Dimensions of
Effective Community Control. New York: Lexington Books. Ch. 4, 46-48, and
90-111.
2. Skogan. (1992). Disorder and Decline: Crime and the Spiral of Decay in
American neighborhoods. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Ch 1-2
(pp. 1-50).
3. Taylor and Covington (1993). Community Structural Change and fear of Crime.
Social Problems. 40:374-395.
4. Sampson and Raudenbush. (1999). Systemic social observation of public spaces:
A new look at disorder in urban neighborhoods. American Journal of Sociology.
105: 603-651.
5. Taylor (1999). Crime, Grime, Fear, and Decline: A Longitudinal look. Research
in brief series. National Institute of Justice.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/crimdocs.htm

Topic 8: Communities and Policing

1. Bitner (1967). The police on skid row: A study of peace keeping. American
Sociological Review. 32: 699-715.
2. Wilson and Kelling (1982). Broken windows: The Police and Neighborhood
Safety. Atlantic Monthly. 249 (March):29-38
3. Walker (1984). Broken windows and Fractured history: The use and misuse of
history in recent patrol analyses. Justice Quarterly. 1:74-90.
4. Skogan et al. (2000). Public involvement: Community Policing in Chicago.
Washington DC, NIJ http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/lawedocs2000.htm
5. Klinger (1997) Negotiating order in patrol work: An ecological theory of police
response to deviance. Criminology. 35:277-306.

Topic 9: Community Oriented Crime Reduction Programs

1. Skogan. (1992). Disorder and Decline: Crime and the Spiral of Decay in
American neighborhoods. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Ch 7
(pp. 159-186).
2. Bursik and Grasmick (1993) Neighborhoods and Crime The Dimensions of
Effective Community Control. New York: Lexington Books. Ch. 6, 148-180.
3. Kobrin (1959). The Chicago Area Project. Annals of the American Academy of
Political and Social Science. 322: 19-29.
4. Schlossman & Sedlak (1983). The Chicago Area Project Revisited. Crime and
 Delinquency. 29: 398-462
5. Rosenbaum, Lewis, and Grant. (1986). Neighborhood-Based Crime Prevention:
Adressing the efficacy of community organization in chicago. In Rosembaum
(Ed.) Community Crime Prevention: Does it Work? Pp. 109-133.
6. Harachi et al. (1996). Empowering Communities to Prevent Adolescent Substance
Abuse: Process Evaluation Results from a Risk- and Protection-Focused
Community. Journal of Primary Prevention. 16:233-254
7. Miller. (2000). Taking it to the streets: Reframing crime prevention through Race
and Community. Studies in Law, Politics, and Society. 20:207-238.

Topic 10: Justice System Impact on Communities and Communitye Views of

Justice System
1. Williams and Murphy (1990). The evolving strategy of police: A Minority
View. Perspectives on Policing. Washington DC, NIJ.
2. Horowitz (1987). Community tolerance of gang violence. Social Problems.
34(5):437-450.
3. Sampson and Bartusch. (1998). Legal Cynicism and (Subcultural?) Tolerance of
deviance: The neighborhood context of racial differences. Law an Society
Review. 32:777-804.
4. Reisig and Parks. Experience Quality of Life, and Neighborhood Context: A
Hierarchical analysis of satisfaction with the police. Justice Quarterly. 17:607-
629.
5. Rose and Clear (2000). Incarceration, Social Capital, and Crime: Implications
for Social Disorganization theory. Criminology 36:441-480.
6. Lynch and Sabol. (2000). Prison Use and social control. Pp 7-44 in Horney (ed).
Criminal Justice 2000 Volume 3, Washington DC, NIJ.

Topic 11: New Directions: Rural Settings, Schools as Communities, and Mental
Health
1. Bursik and Grasmick (1993) Neighborhoods and Crime The Dimensions of
Effective Community Control. New York: Lexington Books. Pp 5-12
2. Wilkinson. (1984). Rurality and patterns of social disruption. Rural Sociology.
49: 25-36.
3. Freudenberg. (1986). The density of acquantanceship: An overlooked variable
in community research. American Journal of Sociology. 92:27-63.
4. Osgood and Chambers (2000). Social Disorganization outside the metropolis: An
analysis of rural youth violence. Criminology. 38:81-115.
5. Welsh, Stokes, and Greene. (2000). A Macro-Level Model of School Disorder.
Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. 37:243-283.
6. Aneshensel and Sucoff. (1996). The neighborhood context of adolescent mental
health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 37:293-310.
7. Silver. (2000). Extending Social Disorganization Theory: A multi-level
approach to the study of violence among persons with mental illnesses.
Criminology. 38(4): 1043-1074.
Course Policies
Participation: This course requires student participation through class discussion.
Students are expected to have read the appropriate materials before class. Students
must attend all classes or complete make-up work on time to receive a passing grade
in the course. (5%)

Short Papers: Students will write four essays (3-5 pages) that compare and contrast
an important concept in at least two of the readings due for that week. These are not
summaries. They are due at 10am on the day of class. (25%)

Discussion Questions: Each student will provide discussion questions for four
classes. The group of students writing questions will meet before class to organize a
strategy for directing discussion in class. Discussion leaders are to provide a copy of
Grading (credit) discussion questions for each student in class. Each question should reference
Criteria concepts or themes across multiple articles. (30%)

Final Paper: Students will write a research paper that is about 20-25 pages. There
are several points during the course when we will discuss paper topics and research
design. Students will receive a handout with paper requirements, grading structure,
due date, and instructions for turning in the paper. (30%)

Paper Presentation: Students will present a preliminary version of their paper to

the class. Instruction for presentation will be provided in a separate handout. (10%)

Failure to complete any of the assignments above will result in a failing course
grade.

I do not accept late work. Work can be submitted via WebCT, in class, or to my e-
mail account as an attachment (klh024000@utdallas.edu), unless otherwise
Late Work specified (i.e., must be done in class). Sign-in sheets will be done at the beginning
of class. I award those points for the sign-in sheets only for those that are present
on-time. There will be no exceptions to this policy.
The rhythm of taking graduate collegiate level course work can be very demanding.
I like to remind everyone that regular effort is important on your part to keep up
with the assigned reading. If you expect to get information out of class, you must
come to class having read the required materials for the assigned day.

Students are expected to be diligent in the pursuit of their studies and regular in
their class attendance. Students have the responsibility of making arrangements
satisfactory to the instructor regarding absences. Such arrangement MUST be made
prior to the absence if possible. THERE WILL BE NO MAKE-UP
ASSIGNMENTS UNLESS ARRANGEMENTS ARE MADE PRIOR TO THE
ABSENCE AND THE INSTRUCTOR GIVES PERMISSION FOR THE MAKE-
Class Attendance UP ASSIGNMENT TO BE COMPLETED.

Attendance is mandatory.

I will conduct sign-in sheets every week.

Under no circumstances will I provide notes for students missing class. I suggest
that you find 2 or 3 people in the class that you can contact about notes in case of
emergency. I will not post information from in-class discussion on WebCT.

This syllabus is TENTATIVE. The scheduled readings, videos, speakers, etc. can
change at any time. Changes will be posted on WebCT and announced in class.
 YOU are responsible for regularly checking when assignments are due.

As we meet for only once a week, 1 missed class is like missing 1/15th of your
course.
Electronic Devices can be used in the classroom, only if you have asked permission
from the instructor. Surfing the web, participating in an on-line chat, etc. are
inappropriate behaviors in a classroom setting. If you must do these activities, you
will be asked to leave the class. I will occassionally walk the classroom to check
and see what windows are open on computers. If I see more than something to take
notes, you will be asked to leave.
Classroom
Citizenship
Cell phones are to be turned off or to be put on silent ring. If you are expecting an
emergency call, please tell the professor before class and sit near the door so that
you can excuse yourself without disrupting the entire class. If a cell phone goes off
in class, let it ring and I will come and answer it for you. I will ask the party on the
other end to call you when you are not in my class, and when it will not disrupt your
fellow classmates.
Due to the difficult nature of the material addressed in class, students may
experience a need or desire to process some of their own personal experiences with
crime and/or victimization. Students should know ahead of time that this is a
completely normal and reasonable response given the subject matter. While the
classroom is not the appropriate venue for this processing to take place, there are
several resources that are available to you on
Special Note about UTD’s Campus:
the Materials in
this Class The Galerstein Women’s Center http://www.utdallas.edu/student/womensctr/
The Student Counseling Center http://www.utdallas.edu/counseling/index.html
The Student Health Center http://www.utdallas.edu/healthcenter/

If you wish to do alternative assignments to watching the videos, you must come
and see the instructor PRIOR to viewing the video and arrangements will be made.

The University of Texas System and The University of Texas at Dallas have rules
and regulations for the orderly and efficient conduct of their business. It is the
responsibility of each student and each student organization to be knowledgeable
about the rules and regulations which govern student conduct and activities.
General information on student conduct and discipline is contained in the UTD
publication, A to Z Guide, which is provided to all registered students each
academic year.

The University of Texas at Dallas administers student discipline within the

procedures of recognized and established due process. Procedures are defined and
Student Conduct described in the Rules and Regulations, Board of Regents, The University of Texas
and Discipline System, Part 1, Chapter VI, Section 3, and in Title V, Rules on Student Services and
Activities of the university’s Handbook of Operating Procedures. Copies of these
rules and regulations are available to students in the Office of the Dean of Students,
where staff members are available to assist students in interpreting the rules and
regulations (SU 1.602, 972/883-6391).

A student at the university neither loses the rights nor escapes the responsibilities of
citizenship. He or she is expected to obey federal, state, and local laws as well as
the Regents’ Rules, university regulations, and administrative rules. Students are
subject to discipline for violating the standards of conduct whether such conduct
takes place on or off campus, or whether civil or criminal penalties are also imposed
for such conduct.
 The faculty expects from its students a high level of responsibility and academic
honesty. Because the value of an academic degree depends upon the absolute
integrity of the work done by the student for that degree, it is imperative that a
student demonstrate a high standard of individual honor in his or her scholastic
work.

Scholastic dishonesty includes, but is not limited to, statements, acts or omissions
related to applications for enrollment or the award of a degree, and/or the
Academic Integrity submission as one’s own work or material that is not one’s own. As a general rule,
scholastic dishonesty involves one of the following acts: cheating, plagiarism,
collusion and/or falsifying academic records. Students suspected of academic
dishonesty are subject to disciplinary proceedings.

Plagiarism, especially from the web, from portions of papers for other classes, and
from any other source is unacceptable and will be dealt with under the university’s
policy on plagiarism (see general catalog for details). This course will use the
resources of turnitin.com, which searches the web for possible plagiarism and is
over 90% effective.

The University of Texas at Dallas recognizes the value and efficiency of

communication between faculty/staff and students through electronic mail. At the
same time, email raises some issues concerning security and the identity of each
individual in an email exchange. The university encourages all official student
email correspondence be sent only to a student’s U.T. Dallas email address and that
faculty and staff consider email from students official only if it originates from a
UTD student account. This allows the university to maintain a high degree of
Email Use
confidence in the identity of all individual corresponding and the security of the
transmitted information. UTD furnishes each student with a free email account that
is to be used in all communication with university personnel. The Department of
Information Resources at U.T. Dallas provides a method for students to have their
U.T. Dallas mail forwarded to other accounts.

As the University’s policy is designed to protect all students’ privacy, I do not

discuss grades with students via e-mail (or telephone).

The administration of this institution has set deadlines for withdrawal of any
college-level courses. These dates and times are published in that semester's course
Withdrawal from catalog. Administration procedures must be followed. It is the student's
Class responsibility to handle withdrawal requirements from any class. In other words, I
cannot drop or withdraw any student. You must do the proper paperwork to ensure
that you will not receive a final grade of "F" in a course if you choose not to attend
the class once you are enrolled.

Procedures for student grievances are found in Title V, Rules on Student Services
and Activities, of the university’s Handbook of Operating Procedures.

In attempting to resolve any student grievance regarding grades, evaluations, or

other fulfillments of academic responsibility, it is the obligation of the student first
to make a serious effort to resolve the matter with the instructor, supervisor,
administrator, or committee with whom the grievance originates (hereafter called
“the respondent”). Individual faculty members retain primary responsibility for
assigning grades and evaluations. If the matter cannot be resolved at that level, the
Student Grievance
grievance must be submitted in writing to the respondent with a copy of the
Procedures
respondent’s School Dean. If the matter is not resolved by the written response
provided by the respondent, the student may submit a written appeal to the School
 Dean. If the grievance is not resolved by the School Dean’s decision, the student
may make a written appeal to the Dean of Graduate or Undergraduate Education,
and the deal will appoint and convene an Academic Appeals Panel. The decision of
the Academic Appeals Panel is final. The results of the academic appeals process
will be distributed to all involved parties.

Copies of these rules and regulations are available to students in the Office of the
Dean of Students, where staff members are available to assist students in
interpreting the rules and regulations.
As per university policy, incomplete grades will be granted only for work
unavoidably missed at the semester’s end and only if 70% of the course work has
been completed. An incomplete grade must be resolved within eight (8) weeks
Incomplete Grades
from the first day of the subsequent long semester. If the required work to complete
the course and to remove the incomplete grade is not submitted by the specified
deadline, the incomplete grade is changed automatically to a grade of F.

The goal of Disability Services is to provide students with disabilities educational

opportunities equal to those of their non-disabled peers. Disability Services is
located in room 1.610 in the Student Union. Office hours are Monday and
Thursday, 8:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m.; Tuesday and Wednesday, 8:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m.;
and Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.

The contact information for the Office of Disability Services is:

The University of Texas at Dallas, SU 22
PO Box 830688
Richardson, Texas 75083-0688
(972) 883-2098 (voice or TTY)

Essentially, the law requires that colleges and universities make those reasonable
Disability Services
adjustments necessary to eliminate discrimination on the basis of disability. For
example, it may be necessary to remove classroom prohibitions against tape
recorders or animals (in the case of dog guides) for students who are blind.
Occasionally an assignment requirement may be substituted (for example, a
research paper versus an oral presentation for a student who is hearing impaired).
Classes enrolled students with mobility impairments may have to be rescheduled in
accessible facilities. The college or university may need to provide special services
such as registration, note-taking, or mobility assistance.

It is the student’s responsibility to notify his or her professors of the need for such
an accommodation. Disability Services provides students with letters to present to
faculty members to verify that the student has a disability and needs
accommodations. Individuals requiring special accommodation should contact the
professor after class or during office hours.
The University of Texas at Dallas will excuse a student from class or other required
activities for the travel to and observance of a religious holy day for a religion
whose places of worship are exempt from property tax under Section 11.20, Tax
Code, Texas Code Annotated.

Religious Holy The student is encouraged to notify the instructor or activity sponsor as soon as
Days possible regarding the absence, preferably in advance of the assignment. The
student, so excused, will be allowed to take the exam or complete the assignment
within a reasonable time after the absence: a period equal to the length of the
absence, up to a maximum of one week. A student who notifies the instructor and
completes any missed exam or assignment may not be penalized for the absence. A
student who fails to complete the exam or assignment within the prescribed period
 may receive a failing grade for that exam or assignment.

If a student or an instructor disagrees about the nature of the absence [i.e., for the
purpose of observing a religious holy day] or if there is similar disagreement about
whether the student has been given a reasonable time to complete any missed
assignments or examinations, either the student or the instructor may request a
ruling from the chief executive officer of the institution, or his or her designee. The
chief executive officer or designee must take into account the legislative intent of
TEC 51.911(b), and the student and instructor will abide by the decision of the chief
executive officer or designee.
Off-campus, out-of-state, and foreign instruction and activities are subject to state
Off-Campus law and University policies and procedures regarding travel and risk-related
Instruction and activities. Information regarding these rules and regulations may be found at
Course Activities http://www.utdallas.edu/BusinessAffairs/Travel_Risk_Activities.htm. Additional
information is available from the office of the school dean.

These descriptions and timelines are subject to change at the discretion of the
Professor.