• E4J University Module Series: Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice

• Teaching Guide

• Executive summary

• Introduction

• Overview of modules

• Thematic areas
• Content breakdown

• Module adaptation and design guidelines

• Teaching methods

• Conclusion

• References

• Acknowledgements

•  

• First published in May 2020
  

•  

  This teaching guide is a resource for lecturers  

Teaching methods

Academics have an important role to play in teaching curricula (according to key learning objectives) and facilitating student learning. The E4J University Modules on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice provide teaching materials and pedagogical tools and resources to help academics teach classes and courses on crime prevention and criminal justice related topics and facilitate student learning.

Student learning

Individuals learn in a variety of ways. Some students thrive in courses that involve a face-to-face interaction, while others thrive in virtual, self-paced classrooms with written communications as a form of interaction. Other students thrive when “learning by doing.” In these classes, students complete practical exercises and case studies, applying what they learned in the classroom to real-world situations and problems. The Modules were designed with different learning styles in mind.

There are two types of teaching styles, teacher-centred and student-centred (Bain, 2004; Brown, McDaniel and Roediger, 2014; Bransford, Brown and Cocking, 2000). Teacher-centred approaches rely on lectures as a central mode of delivery. Lecturers provide a framework for assigned material and synthesize and analyse in a way that facilitates higher cognitive thinking. The lecture-style is an authority model of teaching that imparts information to students using a one-way form of communication, with the exception that multimedia is used, and/or demonstrations and other activities. This teaching style involves little to no interaction, apart from question and answer sessions. Here, lecturers orally communicate information to students and students passively receive this information. For this reason, this style of teaching facilitates what is known as passive learning. This form of passive learning is assessed using formal and objective forms of assessment, such as examinations. Teacher-centred instruction methods also do not incorporate student preferences or provide active learning opportunities. By contrast, student-centred teaching styles include inquiry-based learning and cooperative-based learning, whereby the lecturer serves as a facilitator and delegator of learning. As a facilitator of learning, academics promote student self-learning and guide students’ learning process by stimulating discussions, and encouraging both the asking of questions and the search for answers. As a delegator of learning, an academic encourages individual and group work (the latter of which is a form of cooperative learning, whereby students work together to complete an assignment). For these reasons, student-centred styles incorporate student preferences in teaching and provide active learning opportunities. Active learning provides students with opportunities for reflection and application of knowledge. These activities include problem-solving, practical exercises, discussions, group work, role-playing, and peer review. These types of activities seek to engage students in value-based education, motivate them to become part of a positive criminal justice reform that is needed, cultivate their sense of social justice/natural justice, and help them identify and build upon their expertise. An example of such a student-centred, active learning assignment involves calling on students to identify a crime/criminal justice problem in their own country that warrants their government’s attention, identify the causes of that problem, think about ways to practically approach the problem, and propose realistic solutions to that problem by explaining the connection between their proposed solutions and the causes of the problem. Blended or hybrid styles of teaching incorporate both teacher-centred and student-centred teaching styles. This style is considered as a form of integrative learning, combining both passive and active learning (Miller, 2005).

In addition to differences in learning styles, students have different learning abilities. Teaching styles should be modified based on students’ needs and learning abilities. The teaching style and pedagogy chosen to engage students in learning thus varies by class and course. Using a variety of teaching styles can assist lecturers in reaching all students within their classroom.

Learning outcomes and assessment tools

Bloom (1956) identifies three educational domains: cognitive, affective, and psychomotor. Within the cognitive domain, Bloom (1956) identified six cognitive levels, including “knowledge (i.e. ability to remember information); comprehension (i.e. ability to understand information); application (i.e. ability to use what they learned); analysis (i.e. ability to analyse information); synthesis (i.e. ability to combine what was previously known with other information learned to create new knowledge), and evaluation (i.e. ability to judge information)” (UNODC E4J Cybercrime Teaching Guide, p. 14). The cognitive domain includes both lower cognitive thinking (e.g. knowledge and comprehension) and higher cognitive thinking (e.g. application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation), which emphasize problem solving, creative thinking, and critical thinking skills.

Bloom’s taxonomy and the 2001 revision of Bloom’s taxonomy by Anderson and Krathwohl have been used to explain student learning. Specifically, learning outcomes are devised based on the lower and higher cognitive thinking of both Bloom’s original and revised taxonomy.

Learning outcomes based on the revised Bloom’s taxonomy (Anderson and Krathwohl, 2001) identify the following expectations for students’ academic performance: learners are required to demonstrate that they know something (remember), comprehend something (understand), can apply what they learned (apply), can analyze information (analyze), can assess information (evaluation), and can develop something new (create) (UNODC E4J Cybercrime Teaching Guide, p. 16).

The learning outcomes describe the measurable knowledge, skills, and abilities that students who complete courses based on the Module content should be able to demonstrate. The proper articulation of learning outcomes is essential to effective teaching. It is imperative that learning outcomes are clear, measurable, and reasonable given the course material and instruction. Preferred learning outcomes are those associated with integrative approaches – including written and oral communication, problem solving, critical thinking, teamwork, leadership, and the ability to apply theory to practice. The latter skill enables students to use what they learned in the classroom and apply it to real-world situations.

Assessment tools objectively and subjectively evaluate student learning and determine whether learning outcomes were met (CARLA, n.d.). Objective assessments examine “students’ ability to recognize correct content and if designed correctly, to understand content” (Schwartz, n.d.) Subjective assessments, by contrast, can assess multiple learning outcomes beyond those commonly evaluated by objective assessments, particularly those based on cognitive skills such as analysis, evaluation, and creation (Schwartz, n.d.; UNODC E4J Cybercrime Teaching Guide, p. 16). The Crime Prevention Criminal Justice Module Series focuses on subjective assessments, in that they assess applied knowledge, and critical competencies in achieving criminal justice reform, in accordance with international law. The Modules include multiple forms of objective and subjective assessment tools including quizzes, exercises, case studies, essay questions, examination questions, assessed presentations, research papers, report analysis, and policy analysis (see Section 3.B of this Teaching Guide for more information).

Academics are encouraged to reference the material on assessment tools in the Modules from other E4J University Module Series on counter-terrorism, cybercrime, integrity and ethics, and trafficking in persons/smuggling of migrants. For example, the E4J Counter-Terrorism Teaching Guide has detailed information on innovative teaching strategies with and without technology requirements (see below box on Gallery Walk for an example). In addition to the Gallery Walk, academics can also adapt exercises included in the E4J Integrity and Ethics Teaching Guide, in the following manner:

• The Model United Nations Simulation, whereby students choose a crime prevention or criminal justice debate topic and a country that they will defend in a UN Module United Nations Simulation (Note: students must choose a country that they are not resident or citizen of).
• Pop culture examples of crime prevention and criminal justice issues. Here, students discuss the depiction of these issues in pop culture and the implications of the way these are depicted. 
• Decision cards. Students are presented with a crime prevention or criminal justice issue that requires a decision. They are asked to choose from the decision cards that are distributed and place their decision in a box. The students are asked to consider the decisions of their classmates. The students are asked to evaluate the decisions of their classmates – ideally those who have a different point of view.

Next: Conclusion

Back to top