Linkedinportfolio

TEACHING PORTFOLIO
J. VERONICA JAMES, PH.D.
INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
18 COOPER AVE
HOMER CITY, PA 15748
JJAMES@IUP.EDU
310-430-9798 (CELL)
xxXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

PURPOSE
1) Provide an understanding of my approach to teaching and demonstrate how this
approach may be applied within actual university courses
2) Provide an opportunity to present my effectiveness and potential to excel as an
educator and supply evidence of my commitment to teaching through professional
development and/or pedagogical training
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Part I: Philosophy and Scholarship
Teaching Philosophy………………………………………………………………………………………..…..3
Scholarship Agenda…………………………………………………………………….…………………..…4
Part II: Course Materials
Section 1: Sample Syllabi
Criminological Research Methods………………………………………….…..………….……6
Deviance Syllabus………………………….…………………………………………………...…….16
Section 2: Presentation Slides
“Serial Killer” Presentation………….………………………………………….……………..….25
“Field Research” Presentation……………………………………………………..…………….32
Section 3: Sample Assignments
Interactive Assignment for Research Methods…………………………………………....41
Short Writing Assignment…………………………………………………………………….…..42
Twilight Zone Essay Assignment…………………………………………………………….…43
Section 4: Other Course Materials
Welcome Letter to Students of Food for Thought: The Ethics of Diet……….……45
Criminology Research Methods Course Outline………………….……………...……….46
Sample Test for Research Methods……………….…………………………………………...47
Sample Course Contracts………………………………………………… ……………….....….49

Part III: Evaluations
Letter of Appreciation for Invited Lecture…………………………….....……………….………….51
Instructional Rating Report Based on Lecture Evaluations………………………….…………52
Peer Advisor/Teaching Assistant Evaluation Report…………………………………………..….55
Evaluation Summaries Report……………………………………….…………………………..……….56
Part IV: Professional Development/Pedagogical Training
Certificate of Completion: Customized Departmental Workshop……………….…….…..60
Reflective Practice Workshop Letters of Attendance……………………………………………...61
SAGE Junior Faculty Professional Development Workshop Attendance Letter…….....63

J. Veronica James
3
Teaching Philosophy
My pedagogical style centers on the principle of interdisciplinarity through the use of collaboration,
negotiation, and qualitative assessment. I organize courses so that students receive a productive leaning
experience through prioritizing students’ commitment to the material while cultivating critical thinking
skills, discovery of new knowledge and experiences, and a lifelong love of learning.
To meet these goals and expectations, I supplement course materials with additional resources, such as
newspaper articles, video segments, journal articles, books, which are used to stimulate class discussions.
Students are also expected to bring supplemental materials to class they find helpful to use in class
discussions. I place all these resources in my office as a “reference library” for students to use throughout
the semester. I require students to complete a course contract outlining exactly what they will complete as
part of the course. This allows students to demonstrate their commitment to the course and assignments.
These contracts also make students more committed to the course by outlining exactly what they will
complete and how this will be accomplished during the semester.
In the classroom, I use a combination of course materials and additional resources to exemplify the
pertinent concepts of my lectures. Rather than design tests or assignments relying on mere memorization
of material, I create assignments that enable students to apply key concepts in ingenious ways. For final
projects students might compile multi-media portfolios or set up a crime scene for other students to
“solve”. To engage students in lectures, I bring in “real-world” information, such as having detectives
speak about how they applied concepts to actually investigations or explain how theories translate into
actual crime, for example, “broken window theory” and how this can explain higher levels of crime in
certain neighborhoods. To better stimulate interest in the material from students, prompt discussions,
provoke critical thinking, and motivate students to learn, I will incorporate media and/or technology into
classroom sessions or assignments. For example, I will use Twitter to “discuss” readings or have students
ask questions that arise while completing the readings or assignments, or when they need clarification. I
create academic environments that foster critical and creative thinking. This fosters student initiated-
learning through interest and participation in the course and creates an academic community for students.
I design my courses to cultivate interest in the topic through bringing in guest speakers or demonstrations
(e.g., forensic investigators, K-9 officers, etc.), and shifting the burden of learning onto the students. For
example, often students are the ones responsible for presenting material to the class throughout the
semester, or for writing peer reviews of paper drafts.
Additionally, at the end of the course, I require students to complete narrative assessments of their efforts
during the semester. Students must acknowledge their contributions to learning, by reflecting on what
they completed during the semester, and where they could make improvements. These assessments offer
greater feedback than a grade, and I am able to discover more about how the students experienced the
class. Rather than leaving the course with only a subjective letter grade, my students leave my courses
with substantive, informative feedback on their educational goals and achievements. Thus, students have
a greater investment and commitment to their education, and a responsibility beyond “only meeting the
requirements” through the use of course contracting and narrative evaluations.

4
J. Veronica James
Scholarship Agenda
Although sociology was one of the primary disciplines which gave rise to criminology, recent
criminological inquiries have shifted away from this perspective and rely investigating psychological
and/or biological/bio-social determinants of crime. My scholarship reinvigorates this sociological
exploration of crime by intertwining sociological concepts (e.g., symbolic interactionism, stigma
management) to explain criminological phenomena (e.g., rampage shootings, victimization reporting,
serial murder).
My dissertation’s three main themes are perceptions of the police, victimization reporting, and
sexual assault. I created an original survey that collected quantitative and qualitative data and
administered it to university classrooms in order to explore the factors that impact victimization reporting
(specifically sexual assault reporting) and police perceptions. I hypothesized that university students’
perceptions of the police affect their victimization reporting behaviors. Quantitative analysis found
partial support for this proposition, though the data reveal that police perceptions do not exert as much
influence on reporting as expected. Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression analyses indicate that those
with more satisfaction with the police are more likely to report victimization, however the full logistic
regression model indicates that as satisfaction with the police increases, actual victimization reporting is
less likely. The qualitative responses reveal that police perceptions are not an important factor in the
decision to report victimization. Rather, these responses indicated that the decision to report victimization
is more motivated by the individual’s definition of the situation, identity construction, stigma
management, and repercussions to social interaction.
To date, this research has resulted in an encyclopedia entry, in press, on “Date Rape”, a 2012
American Society of Criminology conference presentation, a 2013 Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences
conference presentation, and a 2013 Northeastern Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences presentation.
Additionally, I recently finalized a manuscript using data on sexual assault reporting which will soon
(within the week) be submitted for peer review at Violence Against Women. I am planning two more
articles based upon the data collected which will complete the publishing arc of this work, and then I will
move on to my second major project.
Extending from this research, my next project will explore the reporting decision making process
of sexual assault victims and the reasons why they consider victimization “not serious enough” to report.
Using additional qualitative data from social media sources (e.g., Twitter, Facebook), the decision to
report from the perspective of the victim will be examined. My expectation is to demonstrate that there is
a societal stigma attached to victims of sexual assault that is not necessarily a by-product of victim-blame.
From this research, I plan to write journal articles and craft presentations for national conferences. I
already have an abstract ready for the 2014 ACJS conference for a paper that will discuss the merits of
using social media as a qualitative data source.
In addition to these research plans, I have a variety of projects applying sociological perspectives
to better understand offenders, crimes and/.or victims in various stages. I have an article in the revise-
and-resubmit stage examining the effectiveness of sobriety checkpoints. I am also in the process of
editing a co-authored manuscript on serial murder examining offender narratives and how illustrate their
use of neutralizations to present positive identities and stigma management. Lastly, I have plans to revise
a manuscript examining the causes of school shooting rampages and possible prevention policies.

Criminological Research Methods
Fall 2013
Class time: Mon, Wed and Fri 11:00-12:00
Professor: J. Veronica James
Email: jjames@iup.edu
Office Hours: Mon 1-3; Wed 1-3; Fri 1-3; and by appointment
Phone: 724-357-5555
Course Description:
“An introduction to the basic criminological research methods designed to prepare the student to
understand and participate in quantitative and qualitative research” (IUP Course Catalog 2012-
2013, http://www.iup.edu/registrar/catalog).
Course Objectives:
Students will:
Develop analytical skills, critical thinking ability and communication skills
Actively participate in one’s education and learning process
Understand the basics of social science research and design, particularly concerning the
field of criminology
Understand the importance of research within criminology/criminal justice
Understand how research is related to theory and policy and how theory and policy impact
research
Required Textbooks:
Maxfield, M. & Babbie, E. (2011). Research Methods for Criminal Justice and Criminology (6th
edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thompson.
Loseke, D. R. (2013). Methodological Thinking: Basic Principles of Social Research Design.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Creswell, J. (2013). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches
(3rd
edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Recommended Readings:

J. Veronica James
Sample Syllabus—Research Methods
7
Fowler, F. (2013). Survey Research Methods (5th
edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Johnson, W. A., Rettig, R. P., Scott, G. M., & Garrison, S. M. (2011). Criminal Justice Student
Writer’s Manual (5th
edition). Pearson.
Any other readings deemed pertinent by the professor.
Contracting Policy:
Students in this course will be allowed to take some control over what assignments are required
and therefore ultimately what they learn and their eventual grade. Some assignments will be
mandatory and the student will be unable to contract for a different assignment (i.e., final research
proposal). However, others are able to be negotiated with the approval of the professor. These
include the midterm, one mini-assignment and students’ participation. Students are encouraged to
read the syllabus and begin thinking about their course contract as soon as possible and are also
encouraged to discuss options with the professor. Contracts will be due the second week of class
and are worth 10 points. Care and thought and the particular interests of each student should be
taken into consideration when deciding what to contract for. Contracts cannot say only “I
contract to complete all work outlined in the syllabus” and must include what exact assignments
students will contract for (e.g., midterm versus mid-semester paper). More information
concerning the contract and contract process will be discussed in class and any students with
further questions are encouraged to speak with the professor during office hours or by
appointment.
Grading Policy:
Grading will be somewhat dependent upon contract negotiations however everyone in class will
be able to earn a possible 320 points regardless of contracted work. Grading will be based upon
participation, five mini-assignments, a midterm or mid-semester paper, one’s contract, a draft
proposal, final proposal and final evaluations. Further details regarding all these assignments will
be given later during the semester.
Point Breakdown:
Contract: 10 points
Mini-Assignments (5): 100 points
Midterm/Paper: 40 points
In class participation/journal: 15 points
Evaluations (2): 20 points
Draft proposal: 50 points

J. Veronica James
8
Final proposal: 85 points
Total: 320 points
Final grades will be based on the following total points:
288 – 320 points (90% - 100%) = A
256 – 287 points (80% - 90%) = B
224 – 255 points (70% - 80%) = C
192 – 223 points (60% - 70%) = D
< 191 points (< 60%) = F
Extra-Credit:
Students may earn a maximum of 80 points of extra credit during the course of the semester. In
order to earn these extra credit points, students must engage in community service with one of the
local animal shelters. Evidence of participation must be presented to earn these points. Other
types of community service may be considered, but should be approved first before assuming you
will get the credit. Throughout the semester, there may be other opportunities to earn extra credit
and these will be announced in class as they arise.
Mini-Assignments:
The five mini-assignments will be used to assess how well students can apply what they are
learning in class. These will be take home assignments and each is worth 20 points (for a
combined total of 100 points). These will demonstrate that one can apply their knowledge rather
than just regurgitate facts as with straight exams. One mini-assignment will be on a topic/activity
chosen by the student (pending professor approval) and one will be a critique of a peer’s draft
proposal. The three other mini-assignments will consist of activities to demonstrate knowledge
and critical thinking regarding research methods.
Midterm/Mid-Semester Paper:
Through contracting the student has a choice of either completing a midterm (in-class) or a mid-
semester paper on a topic within research methods. This is a one or another choice that must be
decided by the time contracts are due. The point value is 40 points regardless of assignment
chosen. This allows those students who feel more comfortable taking tests to take an exam while
those who want to research a topic within research methods of interest to them can do so as well.
Students can choose to speak to the professor further about this assignment before contracts are
due if there are additional questions/concerns.
Draft and Final Proposal:

J. Veronica James
9
All students will be required to complete a draft and final research proposal as part of the class.
The draft will be worth 50 points and the final will be worth 85 points. The draft will be read and
critiqued by a peer (randomly assigned). The final will be due during finals week. Students can
choose to work independently or with one other person however, those who choose to work
together will receive the same grade for the proposal. Further discussion about the proposal,
deadlines and independent versus collaborative work will be undertaken during class later in the
semester.
Attendance:
There is no official attendance policy for the class but it is expected that all students attend classes
regularly. You are responsible for the material and assignments covered in class whether you
attend or not. Not attending class can lower your grade and overall class performance. (As an
incentive those who miss two or fewer class periods, either excused or not, will earn a bonus 10
points towards their final grade). However, life does have a way of throwing curve balls and
sometimes not all obligations can be met, class being one of them. If the day that is missed is one
in which an assignment is due, the student will have until the end of the following business day to
turn in their assignment without penalty. Afterwards a five point deduction will occur after every
subsequent day the assignment is late (unless there is a valid excuse accompanied by
documentation, such as severe illness and a doctor’s note). If the student had decided to take the
midterm and misses that day, the student must meet with the professor as soon as possible to
schedule a make-up time (only those absences that are considered valid and therefore excusable
will allow for a make-up exam time).
Participation:
All students are expected to participate in class; however different students feel more or less
comfortable discussing ideas and material in class. It is understandable and known that some
students are shy and some are outgoing. As a result, students have a choice of either choosing to
be “active participants” or “passive participants” in class. Ideally, all students will feel comfortable
enough to discuss material in class. However, those students who choose to be “passive
participants” can choose to participate in weekly reading journals where they discuss the readings
in a written journal, pose questions and offer additional information and thoughts. These journals
will be turned in each week on Fridays at the beginning of class. The same policies that apply to
other assignments and missed work also apply to the journals. Those students who choose to be
“active participants” will indicate such in their class contracts and be expected to participate at
least once in each class. Either way participation is worth 15 points.
Evaluations:

J. Veronica James
10
Each student is required to complete a self-evaluation of their participation, involvement, and
assessment of performance overall in the class. The evaluation will discuss their commitment to
the class, what they learned, what they thought of the class, their expectations, strengths,
weaknesses and how they could have improved. In addition, students will be required to complete
a professor evaluation indicating much the same information. The student will discuss the
strengths and weaknesses of the professor, any improvements needed, what they liked, what they
didn’t, etc. Both should be approximately 2-3 pages and together they will be worth 20 points (10
each). Evaluations will be due the Friday before the last day of class. The professor evaluations
will be collected in an envelope and will NOT be read until grades are submitted for the semester
and narrative evaluations written for each student by the professor, but the points will be counted
when the evaluation is collected. More information regarding evaluations will be discussed later
in the semester.
Important Dates to Remember:
9/2—NO CLASS 11/11—Proposal Draft Due
9/18—Mini-assignment #1 due 11/18—Peer Critique (#5) due
10/2—Mini-assignment #2 due 11/25—NO CLASS (Thanksgiving Break)
10/14—Midterm or Paper Due 11/27—NO CLASS (Thanksgiving Break)
10/23—Mini-assignment #3 due 11/29—NO CLASS (Thanksgiving Break)
11/1—Library Work Day-no class 12/9—Evaluations due
11/6—Mini-Assignment #4 due 12/10-12/13—Finals (proposal due during final period)
Academic Integrity:
Academic dishonesty will not be tolerated within this class. Any incidence of academic
dishonesty, including plagiarism or cheating, will be handled according to the guidelines set forth
by the university. If you are unsure about what academic dishonesty includes or the policies of the
university, please refer to:
http://www.iup.edu/registrar/catalog/acapolicy/index.shtm or schedule a meeting with the
professor to discuss this issue further.
Writing Center Information:
The Writing Center is a quiet, comfortable place for students to work on class assignments or meet
with a tutor. Peer tutors can help with class assignments or presentations at any point in the writing
process, from brainstorming to revising. Though they are happy to provide strategies for revising
papers, tutors do not write, edit, or grade papers.

J. Veronica James
11
The Writing Center is located in 218 Eicher Hall (between Wallwork Hall and the smokestacks) and is
open Monday through Thursday 9:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.–9:00 p.m., and Friday 9:00 a.m.–
3:00 p.m. No appointment is needed—just walk in.
Live peer tutoring is also available through the Online Writing Center. You can find more information
or schedule an appointment for an online session by visiting iup.edu/writingcenter. You can also ask
writing questions online at Facebook.com/IUPWritingCenter or by sending a tweet to @IUPWriting.
Tentative Course Schedule*:
M&W= Maxfield & Babbie L=Loeske
Week 1:
Monday 8/26: Introduction, discussion of syllabus, goals, expectations and reasons for
enrolling in class. Defining social research, and its importance. Discussion of course contracts,
evaluations and examples.
Assignment: Read Ch. 1 in M&B and L for Wed.
Wednesday 8/28: Brief re-introduction, restatement of goals and expectations—any
changes? Re-discussion of contracting, course requirements/expectations. Begin Introduction to
Research Methods. Discussion of Chapter One—why methods? Read M&B-Ch. 2 (pp. 29-34, 42-
45) and L-pg. 16-30 [Recommended: Johnson et al., Ch1 & 2] for Fri.
Friday 8/30: Finish discussion of Ch. 1—variables; variables and relationships; purposes of
research. Begin Ch. 2 discussion—linking of theory, policy and research, why should they be
linked. Read M&B--Ch. 3 and 4 for Wed.
Week 2:
Monday 9/2—NO CLASS; Continue readings: M&B--Ch. 3 and 4 for Wed.
Wednesday 9/4: begin discussion of causation and validity (Ch. 3). Read L-Ch. 3 for Fri.
Friday 9/6: Finish discussing Ch. 3; begin Ch. 4—units of analysis, research questions, and
research design [Recommended: Johnson et al., Part 3]

J. Veronica James
12
Week 3:
Monday 9/9: Finish discussing Ch. 4 and issues in research design; Read M&B--Ch. 5; L-pg.
65-80 for Wed.
Wednesday 9/11: Concepts and measurements discussion, begin discussion on reliability
and validity. Read M& B--Ch. 6; L-pgs. 82-88
Friday 9/13: Finish discussing Reliability and Validity; begin discussing measures of crime,
validity/reliability of measures, problems associated with different measures. Finish L Ch. 6 and
start reading L- chapter 7, p. 98-102
Week 4:
Monday 9/16: Continue discussing validity and reliability; questioning research; bias, etc.
Read Ch. 7 for Wed., Finish L-Ch. 7 (p. 103-112)
Wednesday 9/18: Due Mini-assignment #1—Critique of current research; discuss mini-
assignment and thoughts about it. Begin discussing Ch. 7—experimental versus quasi-
experimental design. (Read M&B--Ch. 9 and 10 for Fri. and next week) [recommended: Fowler p.
10-37, 58-75]
Friday 9/20: Finish Ch. 7 discussion; begin discussion of data collection, sampling and
surveying Read Creswell, p. 145-178
Week 5:
Monday 9/23: Finish data collection, sampling and surveying discussion, distribute sample
survey and discuss.
Wednesday 9/25: Finish any discussion left over from previous class, go over sample survey
and discuss strengths and weaknesses of survey research; M&B--Read Ch. 11 for Fri.
Friday 9/27: discuss Chapter 11--field research, strengths and weaknesses, contrast to
surveying; validity, reliability issues, Read Creswell 90-96, 118, 121-124

J. Veronica James
13
Week 6:
Monday 9/30: Finish field research discussion; discuss possible biases, examples of
eyewitness testimony and flaws with it. Eyewitness activity.
Wednesday 10/2: Due Mini-assignment #2—Field Research Activity; discussion of activity,
thoughts, problems, findings etc.
Friday 10/4: Free write on topics; discuss topics, areas of interest, possible methods for
topics, etc. Read: Creswell pg. 42-110 for next week; [Recommended: Johnson et al., Part 2]
Week 7:
Monday 10/7: Pick proposal topics; begin brainstorming/work on topics—either in dyads or
individually. Discuss any problems/potential problems Read Creswell 129-143
Wednesday 10/9: Begin material review; mid-term progress assessment
Friday 10/11: Review for midterm game (Jeopardy-like review session)
Week 8:
Monday 10/14: Midterm or Paper due (Read M&B--Ch. 8 for next class) [recommended:
Fowler p. 147-152]
Wednesday 10/16: Begin discussion of ethics and IRB issues
Friday 10/18: Continue ethics discussion, view Milberg experiment video, Stadnford Prison
Study, SVU clip (Milberg related) and other relevant video clips
Week 9:
Monday 10/21—continue IRB/ethics discussion; difference between ethics for quantitative
& qualitative studies.
Wednesday 10/23: Due Mini assignment #3—Ethics activity; free write about activity and
discuss, finish any ethics discussion (Read M&B--Ch. 12 for Fri.)
Friday 10/25: Begin discussion of agency records and secondary data sources
Week 10:

J. Veronica James
14
Monday 10/28: Continue discussion of agency records and secondary data, begin content
analysis discussion
Wednesday 10/30: Finish Ch. 12 discussion; content analysis activity and discussion.
Discussion of inter-rater reliability and validity associated with the method. Pick mini-assignment
#4 if not already done so
Friday 11/1: Library Work Day (Read M&B--Ch. 13 for next week)
Week 11:
Monday 11/4: Progress report on proposal; begin discussion on evaluation research
Wednesday 11/6: Due mini-assignment #4 (students choice); discussion of mini-assignment.
Topics students picked, why and results. Continue evaluation discussion; discussion of different
current policies
Friday 11/8: Finish policy discussion, discuss links of theory, policy and research and
how current policies often don’t follow links. [recommended for proposal—Johnson et al., Part 4]
Week 12:
Monday 11/11: Draft proposal due; assign peers to critique proposals; discussion of peer
critiques [Read M&B--Ch. 14]
Wednesday 11/13: Discuss interpreting data, stats, etc.
Friday 11/15: continue interpreting data discussion; answer questions/problems
Week 13:
Monday 11/18: Due Peer critique (mini-assignment #5) of draft proposal; discuss activity,
finish stats discussion
Wednesday 11/20: Applied research lab activity to supplement stats discussion
Friday 11/22: Bringing everything together—semester review
Week 14: THANKSGIVING BREAK—NO CLASS
Monday 11/25
Wednesday 11/27
Friday 11/29

J. Veronica James
15
Week 15:
Monday 12/2:Discussion of evaluations; proposals; questions/problems
Wednesday 12/4: Available day to discuss anything that still needs to be reviewed/discussed
Friday 12/6: Review of topics; game show question and answer (bonus points available)
Monday 12/9: Evaluations due, final assessment of class, questions about proposals
Finals Week: 12/10-12/13-- Final Proposal due during Final Exam Period
*Course schedule is tentative and subject to change. The schedule may need to be readjusted as the
semester progresses but any changes will be announced in class. However, efforts will be made to
follow the syllabus as outlined above.

Deviance
Fall 2013
Class time: Tuesday & Thursday 2:00-3:15 p.m.
Professor: J. Veronica James
Email: jjames@iup.edu
Office Hours: Mon 1-3; Tuesday 11-2; Wed 1-3; Fri 1-3 or by appointment
Phone: 724-357-5555
Course Description
“An overview of the sociological study of deviance. Begins with examining the nature and
meaning of deviance or how society creates deviance as social and legal constructions and
identifies specific human behaviors as types or forms of deviance. Also examines the major
theories or multi-causal explanations of why such deviance occurs. Further describes how
society, especially its social institutions and agents, attempts to control or suppress such
deviance. Social policy implications of such societal reactions are also considered” (IUP Course
Catalog 2012-2013, http://www.iup.edu/registrar/catalog).
Course Objectives
This course will examine the sociological processes of becoming deviant and experiencing
deviancy. How deviance definitions arise and how they change over time will be explored as
well as how deviancy helps understand social behaviors. Students will also examine how
deviance affects those defined as such and how this influences social interactions with others,
both those who are deviant and those who are not. The boundaries and the fluidity of these
boundaries of deviance will also be explored.

J. Veronica James
Sample Syllabus--Deviance
17
Required Readings:
Inderbitzin, M., Bates, K., & Gainey, R. (2013). Deviance and Social Control: A Sociological
Perspective. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications.
Adler, P. and Adler, P. (2012). Constructions of Deviance: Social Power, Context and
Interaction (7th
edition). Cengage Learning.
Kappeler, V., Sluder, R. and Alpert, G. (1999). Forces of Deviance: Understanding the Dark
Side of Policing. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, Inc.
Goode, E. Deviance in Everyday Life: Personal Accounts of Unconventional Lives . Prospect
Heights, IL: Waveland Press, Inc.
Curra, J. (2011). The Relativity of Deviance (2nd
edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
publications.
Additional handouts as assigned.
Any other readings may be assigned throughout the semester by discretion of the professor.
Contracting Policy:
Students in this course will be allowed to take some control over what assignments are required
and therefore ultimately what they learn and their eventual grade. Some assignments will be
mandatory and the student will be unable to contract for a different assignment (i.e., final
paper). However, others are able to be negotiated with the approval of the professor. These
include the two short papers and the type of participation. Students are encouraged to read the
syllabus and begin thinking about their course contract as soon as possible and are also
encouraged to discuss options with the professor. Contracts will be due the second week of class
and are worth 5% of the overall grade. Care and thought should be taken when deciding what to
contract for and the particular interests of the students. Contracts cannot say only “I contract to
complete all work outlined in the syllabus” and must include what exact assignments students
will contract for (e.g., both short papers versus a more creative project highlighting key concepts
from class). More information concerning the contract and contract process will be discussed in
class and any students with further questions are encouraged to speak with the professor during
office hours or by appointment.

J. Veronica James
18
Grading Policy:
Grading will be somewhat dependent upon contract negotiations. Grading will be based upon
participation, attendance, readings assignments, two short papers, one’s contract, a final paper
and final evaluations. Further details regarding all these assignments will be given later during
the semester.
Grading Breakdown:
Contract: 5%
Reading Questions: 20%
Short papers: 30%
Attendance & Participation: 10%
Evaluations (2): 5%
Final paper: 30%
Total: 100%
Final grades will be based on the following:
(90% - 100%) = A
(80% - 90%) = B
(70% - 80%) = C
(60% - 70%) = D
(< 60%) = F
Reading Questions:
Students will be asked to develop questions from the readings assigned each week. These
questions will be brought to class to create discussions with the group and to help get students
critically thinking about the concepts they are reading about. These questions will also be used
to assess well students can apply what they are reading about to other situations. These will

J. Veronica James
19
demonstrate that one can apply their knowledge rather than just regurgitate facts about the
readings.
Two Short Papers:
Through contracting the student has a choice of either completing two short papers or some other
papers or projects where the student will apply what they learned from the readings and the
objectives of the class. These assignments will be worth 30% of the overall grade regardless of
what is chosen by the student. Students can either write papers on the topics chosen by the
professor or choice some other way to apply the knowledge they have gained (e.g., a video
project). This allows students to be able to apply their knowledge in a way that they feel most
comfortable and allows students to use creativity in thinking about concepts they have learned.
(All projects must be approved by the professor during contract negotiations).
Final Paper:
All students will be required to complete a final deviancy paper. This will be either an interview
with someone defined as being deviant or an “autobiographical” account of deviance. This paper
will be worth 30% of the final grade.
Participation and Attendance:
It is expected that all students attend classes regularly and be on time. However, life does have a
way of throwing curve balls and sometimes not all obligations can be met, class being one of
them. Students will be able to miss two classes if there is a valid excuse accompanying the
absence. Every class missed after the two allowed will result in a lowering of the student’s
overall grade. If the day that is missed is one in which an assignment is due, the student will
have until the end of the following business day to turn in their assignment without penalty.
Afterwards deductions will occur after every subsequent day the assignment is late.
All students are expected to participate in class; however different students feel more of
less comfortable discussing ideas and material in class. It is understandable and known that
some students are shy and some are outgoing. As a result, students have a choice of either
choosing to be “active participants” or “passive participants” in class. Ideally, all students will
feel comfortable enough to discuss material in class. However, those students who choose
through contracting to be “passive participants” can choose to participate by writing their reading
questions in a journal and offer additional information and thoughts. These journals will be
turned in each week on Fridays at the beginning of class. The same policies that apply to other
assignments and missed work also apply to the journals. Those students who choose to be
“active participants” will indicate such in their class contracts and be expected to participate at
least once in each class.
Extra-Credit:

J. Veronica James
20
Students may earn a maximum of 80 points of extra credit during the course of the semester. In
order to earn these extra credit points, students must engage in community service with one of
the local animal shelters. Evidence of participation must be presented to earn these points.
Other types of community service may be considered, but should be approved first before
assuming you will get the credit. Throughout the semester, there may be other opportunities to
earn extra credit and these will be announced in class as they arise.
Evaluations:
Each student is required to complete a self-evaluation of their participation and involvement in
the class. The evaluation will discuss their commitment to the class, what they learned, what
they thought of the class, their expectations, strengths, weaknesses and how (if at all) they could
have improved. In addition, students will be required to complete a professor evaluation
indicating much the same information. The student will discuss the strengths and weaknesses of
the professor, any improvements, what they liked, what they didn’t, etc. Both should be
approximately 2-3 pages and together they will be worth 5% of the students’ grade. Evaluations
will be due the Friday before the last day of class. The professor evaluations will be collected
in an envelope and will not be read until grades are submitted for the semester and thus
students should not feel their evaluations, if negative, will influence their grade. More
information regarding evaluations will be discussed later in the semester.
Academic Integrity:
Academic dishonesty will not be tolerated within this class. Any incidence of academic
dishonesty, including plagiarism or cheating, will be handled according to the guidelines set
forth by the university. If you are unsure about what academic dishonesty includes or the
policies of the university, please refer to:
http://www.iup.edu/registrar/catalog/acapolicy/index.shtm or schedule a meeting with the
professor to discuss this issue further.
Writing Center Information:
The Writing Center is a quiet, comfortable place for students to work on class assignments or
meet with a tutor. Peer tutors can help with class assignments or presentations at any point in the
writing process, from brainstorming to revising. Though they are happy to provide strategies for
revising papers, tutors do not write, edit, or grade papers.
The Writing Center is located in 218 Eicher Hall (between Wallwork Hall and the smokestacks)
and is open Monday through Thursday 9:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.–9:00 p.m., and Friday
9:00 a.m.–3:00 p.m. No appointment is needed—just walk in.

J. Veronica James
21
Live peer tutoring is also available through the Online Writing Center. You can find more
information or schedule an appointment for an online session by visiting iup.edu/writingcenter.
You can also ask writing questions online at Facebook.com/IUPWritingCenter or by sending a
tweet to @IUPWriting.
The readings listed are listed on the day they will be DISCUSSED. Which means, you would
have to complete these readings BEFORE this date!
Tentative Schedule*:
AUGUST
27 Introduction to the course.
29 Defining Deviance
Adler & Adler “Part 1” and Inderbitzin et al., pp. xv-13 [Recommended Goode &
Vail “Introduction”; Inderbitzin et al., pp. 14-46]
SEPTEMBER
3 Definitions of Deviance (cont.)
Curra Ch. 1 & Ch. 2 and Inderbitzin et al., Ch. 2
5 Anomie/Strain and Social Disorganization
Inderbitzin et al., pp. 145-232
10 Differential Association and Social Learning
Inderbitzin et al., pp. 233-283
12 Social Control Theories and Labeling
Curra Ch. 3; Inderbitzin, et al., pp. 284-374
17 Conflict & Critical Theories
Inderbitzin, et al., pp. 375-484; and Adler & Adler Part II, Sections 10 & 11
19 Studying and Researching Deviance
Adler & Adler Part III; and Inderbitzin et al., pp. 87-144
24 Constructing Deviance—How does society decide what’s deviant?

J. Veronica James
22
Adler and Adler Part IV; Inderbitzin et al., pp. 485-558
26 Media and its influence on deviance construction
Handouts from Jacobs and Glassner
Viewing of Twilight Zone episode showing how deviance definitions can change
**First paper topic assigned**--DUE OCTOBER 15th
OCTOBER
1 Power Relationships and Deviance Construction
Adler and Adler pp. VI, Handouts from Jacobs
3 Development of Deviant Identities
Adler and Adler Part V
8 Deviant Identities
Inderbitzin 559-599
10 Deviant Identities
additional reading handouts from Jacobs; Thio and Calhoun
15 First Short Paper or Project Due
Accounting for Deviance
Curra Ch. 4 &5
17 More Accounting of Deviance
Handouts from Jacobs; Goode Ch. 13; Curra 6 & 7
22 Management of Stigma and Deviant Identities
Handouts from Jacobs.
24 Deviants and their Relationships
Handouts from Jacobs; Curra Ch. 8

J. Veronica James
23
29 Deviance of those with power
Kappeler p. 1-82 additional reading by Jacobs, Thio & Calhoun
31 Environment, Ideology and Deviance
Kappeler pp. 83-128; additional reading handouts by Hunt & Manning
NOVEMBER
5 Opportunities for Police Deviance
Kappeler 129-214; additional reading handouts Kraska & Kappeler, and Hunt
7 Controlling Police Deviance
Kappeler 215-278; additional reading handout by Pershing and by Collins
12 Deviant Acts
Adler and Adler Part VII; Handouts by Jacobs
14 Second Short Paper/Project Due
Topic will include an exploration of accounting for deviance and how interaction
and types of deviance influence accounts
Continuing Deviant Acts
Readings by Thio & Calhoun
19 Deviant Careers
Adler and Adler Part VIII
21 Creation of Self-Accounts of Deviance
Goode Ch. 1-3
26 NO CLASS
28 NO CLASS
DECEMBER

J. Veronica James
24
3 Deviance in Work and Leisure
Goode Ch. 4-7; additional reading handouts by Thio & Calhoun and Dabney
5 Deviation and Mind-Altering Substances
Goode Ch. 8; Curra Ch. 9, additional reading handouts by Thio & Calhoun
9 Deviant Lifestyles
Goode Ch. 9-12
10 Final Paper/Project of interview/autobiography due
Conclusion of class; discussion of final papers/projects
*Course schedule is tentative and subject to change. The schedule may need to be readjusted as the
semester progresses but any changes will be announced in class. However, efforts will be made to
follow the syllabus as outlined above.

Historical Context
• Appeared to be an increase in 1970s on
serial murder, but it was not a new
phenomenon
• Vlad Tepes
• Elizabeth of Bathory
• H.H. Holmes
• Jack the Ripper

Definitions
• Serial murder differentiated from mass and
spree murder
• No one unified definition of serial murder
• Some definitions use motivation
• Some use victim numbers
• Some use time requirements
• Definition used in personal
• research

Classifications and Typologies
• Organized vs. Disorganized
• Geographically transient vs.
geographically stable
• Visionary, Mission-oriented,
Hedonistic, Power & Control and
Predator
• Hedonistic sub-divided into
lust/thrill and comfort-oriented

Serial Murder Research
• McDonald Triad
• Previous Abuse
• Interview offenders after apprehension to
determine commonalities between
offenders

Serial Killers and Their Crimes
• Ted Bundy
• Jeffrey Dahmer
• John Wayne Gacy
• Albert Fish

Serial Killers and Their Crimes (cont.)
• Edmund Kemper
• Aileen Wuornos
• Zodiac
• Hillside Stranglers

Field Research
Way of obtaining data which generally
encompasses two types of methods
Direct observation
Asking questions
Can be used qualitatively or quantitatively
Two issues of field research
Risk to researcher
Observer roles

Risk
Not discussed much in the
literature
Mostly concerned with ethics/risk to subjects
Risk to researcher equally important
Some things that are interesting to study will
ultimately be risky
i.e., gang research or drug research

Risk (cont).
Risk can involve bodily risk and other types
also
Risk may outweigh benefits of study
Need to understand and weigh benefits vs. risk
Study should never be so important that risk
is greater than any possible foreseeable
benefits

Observer roles
Complete participant
Participant-as-observer
Observer-as-participant
Complete observer

Complete Participant
Role of researcher not known to subjects
Ethical issues
Deception and “going native”
 May be done for the sake of research
May believe if subjects knew of research they may
reject the researcher or modify behavior
Risks may occur through participation

Participant-as-Observer
Participate with group under study but
subjects are aware of being studied
Subjects may shift attention to researcher
and being observed—possible bias
Ethical issues minimized through notifying
subjects of researcher role

Observer-as-Participant
Identifies as researcher and interacts with
subjects but does not become a participant
Primary role is observing rather than
participating
Still possible to “go native” by sympathizing
more with subjects and waiting acceptance

Complete Observer
Observes without becoming a part of it at all
Subjects might not even realize they are
being studied
Researcher may not fully appreciate
phenomena being studied and may not know
everything there is to know without
interacting with subjects

Conclusion
Need to know risks involved with field
research
Need to understand to minimize possible risks or
elect to discontinue research
Roles important
Roles may impact possible risks
Understand trade-off with role and information
being sought

J. Veronica James
41
Interactive Assignment for Research Methods
For the methods class, I have an interactive assignment for review for the midterm that
which is a Jeopardy-like game to help students test their knowledge of the concepts that
will be on the test before the actual test. It is a way to review information and garner
participation in a more interesting way than just asking questions and having students
recite answers. Students may choose the role of “the host” but if no students wish to
take on this responsibility, I play “host”. Students are able to devise questions for
different rounds during the class held right before this review session as another way to
aid participation with the class material, as well as, review it before the test.

J. Veronica James
42
Short Writing Assignment1
Tentative Reading List2
:
Reiman, J.(2001. The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison: Economic Bias in American
Criminal Justice. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Herivel, T. and Paul Wright (Eds.). 2003. Prison Nation: The Warehousing of America’s Poor. New
York: Routledge.
Kappeler, V. E., Mark Blumberg, and Gary W. Potter. 1998. The Mythology of Crime and Criminal
Justice. (3rd
Ed.). Long Grove, IL: Waveland.
Russell, K. K. 1998. The Color of Crime: Racial Hoaxes, White Fear, Black Protectionism, Police
Harassment, and Other Microaggressions. New York: New York University Press.
Sheley, J. 2000. Criminology: A Contemporary Handbook. 3rd
edition. New York: Wadsworth.
ASSIGNMENT
Through course readings, we have examined how the crimes of the poor are designated by the
system as dangerous acts for society to be concerned about, but similar acts by corporations or the
wealthy are either downplayed or ignored, acts committed by “non-criminals” are often more
dangerous or hazardous than street crime, but often not seen as crimes by the justice system, or
prosecuted to the extent street crime is, and the criminal justice system is not succeeding in
“fighting” crime as it purports it is.
These points have been substantiated through the readings so far and through empirical evidence
presented by the authors. How would these points and arguments concerning the justice system be
countered? Write a 1-2 page response on how these points and arguments can be critiqued not
replicating any of the justifications and arguments used in the readings that have been dismissed by
the authors. What kind of evidence (ideally empirical) would you need to back up these
counterarguments/critiques? If possible, provided examples of evidence or actual data to backup
your claims and add as a supplement to the response.
DUE IN CLASS IN ONE WEEK!
1
For upper-division criminal justice, criminology or sociology course.
2
Possible reading references used in course before giving assignment. Not a definitive list of readings for
the course.

J. Veronica James
43
Twilight Zone Essay Assignment
This assignment will have you apply the concepts you’ve learned about so far in
this class concerning deviance and its construction, stigma, and social identities and
realities to the episode of The Twilight Zone that was shown in class. The episode “The
Eye of the Beholder” (a.k.a: “Private World of Darkness”) of the TV series The Twilight
Zone, deals with the concept of deviance, how deviance is constructed and defined, and
how definitions of deviance may change. Those who are considered deviant within the
episode in this alternate reality may not be considered deviant in another time and/or
place. This paper is due October 12th
(as stated in the syllabus), and should be typed,
double-spaced. Since this is a “short” paper assignment, the length requirement is 10
pages or less, but no less than 5 pages! The goal is show how well you are
understanding the concepts and the readings and that you can apply these to other
representations of deviance.
Using the episode, explain how society chooses to construct deviance and defines
who is considered deviant. These questions are guides to your assessment of the TV
episode and applying the concepts of deviance you have learned so far. You do not
necessarily need to answer each and every question below, though use them as a
starting point for thinking the episode viewed and deviance construction. The key to

J. Veronica James
44
the essay is to show how well you understand the concepts learned so far and that you
can apply them.
How do we choose who is deviant? Can one deviant but still accepted in mainstream
society (i.e., secretly deviant)? What about in this specific “reality” presented by The
Twilight Zone episode? Would the labelers (i.e., those who think the girl is deviating
from their norms) be considered deviant in “our” society? What does this say about
how deviance is constructed and defined? How does the “deviant” view her deviance
and going against societal norms? What does deviance mean to the labelers? Is
deviance just something that can be seen or also an internalized identity? Is this
something she does willingly (e.g., consciously resisting the mainstream)? If not, then
how does she manage her stigma of being a deviant? What does this say about her
construction of self, identity, and social reality? What does this say about the labelers
construction of selves, identity, and social reality? If she did “correct” her deviancy
through successful surgery, would she still be considered “deviant” (e.g., ex-prisoners
still are stigmatized even though they have “paid their debt” and released)? If you
were to explain to someone (not in this class) the episode and how it relates to the study
of deviance, what would you say?

5
Dear FYS student,
Greetings! My name is Veronica James and I am a junior. I will be the
peer advisor for the class Food for Thought: The Ethics of Diet, taught by Kathie
Jenni. My emphasis in Johnston is Sociology and Creative Writing. But in
addition, I have interests in nutrition, women’s studies, photography, criminology,
and French. I’m from the Santa Monica area, only a couple hours drive from
Redlands, and have lived in California all my life.
As your peer advisor, I’ll be available to help you as you adjust to college
life. I’ll answer questions you may have about life there, registration, professors,
classes, etc. I’ll also attend class, and have several ideas about what we’ll be
doing as the course progresses. I took the same class the Interim of my freshman
year, and loved it. I enjoyed the books we read, our discussions about food and
the ethics related to diet, and the field trip we took. For the seminar, Kathie and
I are planning to have much the same syllabus as the course I took, with some
changes—we hope to have at least one field trip, and possibly a potluck lunch
(a welcome break from cafeteria food). But ultimately, your suggestions will
track the direction of the class.
I’m excited about the coming school year, and the seminar. I’m looking
forward to meeting everyone during Orientation Week, and answering any
questions or addressing any concerns you may have as you adjust to college
life. I hope you all have a wonderful summer.
Sincerely,
J. Veronica James
P.S.-If you have any questions or just want to speak with me over summer you
can e-mail me at licorne@earthlink.net, or call at (310) 837-3522. I’ll be there
until the end of August.

J. Veronica James
46
Criminology Research Methods Course Outline
What should be covered in an undergraduate Research Methods Course?
1) Definitions of key terms within research methods (i.e., what does validity mean)
2) Discussion of different types of research methodologies (i.e., qualitative vs. quantitative
strategies)
3) Strengths and limitations of different methodologies
4) Human subject issues and history with social science/criminology of experiments that
violate these (i.e., Milberg experiments)/ethics discussion
5) Some discussion of statistical techniques (i.e., mean, mode and median) and what these
indicate within research
6) How to decipher good vs. bad research—what makes good/sound research? Why not to
trust every expert or research report
7) Applying techniques to student’s own interests (i.e., writing a research proposal)
8) Discussion of different types of data collection techniques (i.e., survey versus interview)
9) Benefits of research and links between theory research and policy
10) Sampling and different types of sampling designs (simple random vs. multi-stage cluster)
11) Process of research (i.e., going from a thought, to hypothesis to designing a study, etc.)

J. Veronica James
47
Sample Test for Research Methods
Multiple Choice:
1) All the following are criteria for causality in the social sciences EXCEPT:
a) Cause preceding effect in time
b) Variables need to be correlated
c) The effect is always the same in every situation
d) The effect cannot be explained by the influence of a third variable
2) Which of the following represents the level of measurement that is based on a true zero point?
a) Interval
b) Nominal
c) Ratio
d) Ordinal
3) Reliability can be assessed in the following ways EXCEPT:
a) Test-retest
b) Comparing multiple measures
c) Split-half
d) Inter-rater testing
True and False:
4) The only risks that one has to consider when thinking of conducting research are the possible
risks to subjects in the study.
TRUE
FALSE—a research has to consider both the risks to the subjects being studied (i.e., IRB)
and the possible risks to the researcher themselves.
5) ALL research is best conducted by obtaining numerical values and statistically analyzing
these to be able to generalize findings.
TRUE
FALSE—ALL research is not best conducted quantitatively and neither is all research best
conducted qualitatively. Some research is better suited to one method versus the other or
to a mixed method approach. One needs to understand what they want to study and the
data they wish to collect and decide upon a method (or methods) that would best suit these
goals.
6) A panel study is an example of a study that has a time dimension and is conducted at more
than one point in time.

J. Veronica James
48
TRUE—Panel studies study the same set of people at two or more times and is similar to
trend and cohort studies which are also examples of time dimension studies.
FALSE
Essay:
Within the field of criminology, many researchers conduct research using the data collection
method of field research. Describe what field research is and a possible study that could be
conducted through field research and the subjects involved. Within this study, describe your role
as researcher, the strengths and weaknesses of this role and any possible risks associated with the
study, the role and field research in general.
Giving a definition of field research (2 points)
Description a study that could be conducted using field research and why field research is a
good method for gathering data (4 points)
Discussion of the research role picked for the study described (i.e., participant, participant-
obervser, etc.) (4 points)
Discussion of the strengths and weaknesses associated of the role chosen for the particular
study (4 points)
Discussion of the risks of conducting field research, particularly with this study and the
role chosen (6 points)

COURSE CONTRACT
_____________________________ _____________________________
Student Signature Date Instructor Signature Date
Term Year
_____________________________ _________________________________
Student Name (printed) Instructor Name (printed)
Course ID:___________ Course Title: ________________________________
As listed in catalog
Units: ________
COURSE DESCRIPTION
(Consider resources such as reading lists; upper-division vs. lower-division; assignments; tests, etc.)
COURSE CONTRACT
(Consider negotiation of assignments; time allotted to course; previous knowledge; course objectives [projects,
journal(s), papers, tests]; methods proposed for evaluation; relation of course to educational goals [e.g., major, expected
career]; responsibility to other students in the class; participation; nature of faculty involvement.)

COURSE CONTRACT
_____________________________ _____________________________
Student Signature Date Instructor Signature Date
Term Year
Tyler Smith Dr. J. Veronica James
Student Name (printed) Instructor Name (printed)
Course ID: SOAN 320 Course Title: Deviance Units: 4
As listed in catalog
COURSE DESCRIPTION
(Consider resources such as reading lists; upper-division vs. lower-division; assignments; tests, etc.)
This is an upper-division course which will focus on the process and experience of becoming deviant. Definitions
of deviance and what they mean for our understandings of behavior will be discussed. There are four required
texts, 2 short papers and the final assignment, as well as, class facilitation each student will participate in.
COURSE CONTRACT
(Consider negotiation of assignments; time allotted to course; previous knowledge; course objectives [projects,
journal(s), papers, tests]; methods proposed for evaluation; relation of course to educational goals [e.g., major, expected
career]; responsibility to other students in the class; participation; nature of faculty involvement.)
I am contacting to complete all the work discussed in the syllabus, as well as, the facilitations of class discussions.
I will try to speak more in class and share my thoughts and opinions on the topic of deviance, integrating my
interests of criminology and serial killers. I would like to receive a written evaluation for my work at the end of
the semester and, in return, I will turn in a self and professor evaluations on the last day of class. I would like to
leave this contract open to possible future negotiation if needed.
Fall 2013

J. Veronica James
52
INSTRUCTIONAL RATING REPORT BASED ON LECTURE EVALUATIONS 1
APPLIED ADVANCED TEACHING TECHNIQUES, Spring 2006
Title of
Lecture Overall
Pace of
Lecture
Enthusiasm
Eye
Contact
Amount of
Information
Level of
Content
Use of
Teaching
Aids
Clarity of
Lecture
Student
Evaluations2 3.03 2.89 2.89 3 3.33 3.56 3.11 3.11
Field
Research3 3.24 3 3.14 3 3.43 3.71 3.43 3.43
Mean scores: 1=needs work, 4=excellent
EXCERPTS FROM QUALITATIVE EVALUATIONS OF LECTURE ON “STUDENT EVALUATIONS”
“You had a well-developed lecture. You seem to be getting more comfortable in front of the class.”
“You went a little fast.”
“Your personal experiences with the topic [of student evaluations], as well as handouts, were a nice compliment to your lecture.”
“When you become more comfortable with ‘public’ speaking, and you will, you will be a more effective teacher.”
“You did not fall into the trap of reading your powerpoints [sic]…kudos! I enjoyed the content of your lecture…helpful!”
“I’m glad you introduced the practice of qualitative evaluations of students and faculty and the idea of student self-evaluation. The
samples and examples were very helpful.”
1
Bold and italicized formatting indicate that emphasis was added to certain excerpts from the qualitative evaluations.
2
Mean scores from nine evaluations
3
Mean scores from seven evaluations

J. Veronica James
53
“You need to relax and slow down a bit. You are good at this!”
“Your nervousness dissipated when the class engaged in some commentary on your topic!! You were relaxed and very clear in
making you points, which was opposite of your lecture. You have the ability!”
“The problems you encountered (i.e., technology and letter) and the way you handled them were very good.”
“Very clear and organized…good supplements.”
“The pace of lecture seems little fast.”
“You did a wonderful job with the question and answer period.”
EXCERPTS FROM QUALITATIVE EVALUATIONS OF LECTURE ON “FIELD RESEARCH”
“You used powerpoint [sic] very well, spoke clearly, and conveyed the info at an understandable level.”
“I think the lecture could be improved by slowing down, asking if everyone understands each role, then move on.”
“You appeared to be cool & collected. Overall, good job!”
“Need to be more relaxed and natural when speaking in front of people.”
“Good use of PowerPoint. Good examples to illustrate points.”
“Very nicely designed. Good power points, good examples. Nice wrap-up at the end.”
“A bit too fast. It would be very hard to take notes at this pace.”
“You had a great mastery of the information and conveyed that very well to us.”
“You did a wonderful job—be confident in your ability to present because you really do a great job.”

J. Veronica James
54
“You did a good job with the powerpoints [sic]. You also had a good pace. You spoke clearly and did a good job of emphasizing
the important concepts.”
“Great job! You have come a long way from when we were…[Master’s] students!”
FROM SELF-EVALUATION OF LECTURE ON “FIELD RESEARCH”
“Although presenting has always been a weak point of mine because I am shy…I think I have stated to improve and my presentation
skills have gotten better over the years…I used examples well to illustrate the points covered in the lecture, trying to show examples
that were specific to the field of criminology/criminal justice…[and] to show the positives and negatives of field research…My
presentation showed I knew the information that I was presenting so that if anybody had questions I would [be] confident in [my
ability] to answer them or direct them to good sources…I could improve upon my pace of lecture and my hand movements. I know
I talk fast when presenting…[but also] know that if I am speaking to a class they will need time to write notes and process the
information…[I know] I need to work on slowing down and being more relaxed.”

J. Veronica James
55
PEER ADVISOR/TEACHING ASSISTANT EVALUATION REPORT
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: THE ETHICS OF DIET, Fall 2000
From evaluation written by Kathi Jenni (instructor of course)1
:
“Jenephyr was a conscientious peer advisor…She [Jenephyr] put in a prodigious amount of
time in training for advising, advising itself, and helping me to organized special class activities
such as the Orientation Week picnic and our end-of-tem trip to Tijuana. Jenephyr was a faithful
presence in class and at special student dinners.
“[She] facilitated class on the day of my absence, and served as a willing resource for all
manner of problems and questions that arose for students. She urged me to use Howard Lyman’s
Mad Cowboy as a recommended text, which turned out to be an inspired and exciting choice for
students.
“Jenephyr’s strengths lay in her encyclopedic knowledge and resources relating to diet and
nutrition. She brought dozens of interesting articles to our attention, most of which I placed in a
‘library’ in my office for general perusal and many of which I used in class. Students were excited
and pleased to have someone so well-versed and interested in our topics available to them as an
advisor…The weakest area of Jenephyr’s performance was in-class discussion: she was often quiet
leaving students and faculty wanting to know more about her own assessments of issues and
arguments…[though] I may have made it harder for Jenephyr to enter [into discussion].
“The day we met in the Commons [dining area] to discuss culture, gender, body image,
and eating disorders was Jenephyr’s most successful. Perhaps because of the change of setting
and her intense interest in the subject, she entered into a natural and lively exchange with
students, making really valuable contributions. The session was a highlight of cooperative class
dynamics.”
From self-evaluation:
“I went through training at the beginning of the year, and corresponded frequently with
Kathi, to learn how to advise students and help shape the course of the class. In my contract, I
stated that I’d… help the students with any problems they might have, facilitate discussions, and
generally be a resource that the students could go to for help/problems…I met (formally) with the
students twice during the year to advise them with their schedules, and answer questions about
registering and the choosing of classes. In addition, I read the assigned readings and participated
fairly regularly in discussions. I answered whatever questions the students raised to the best of my
knowledge.
“…I ran a class session when Kathi was absent. Moreover, I brought supplemental
materials relating to the class, to add to the knowledge of the topics being discussed. I also met
with Kathi during the year to discuss the progress of the class and students.
“Overall I enjoyed being a peer advisor for this class, and working with Kathi.”
1
Emphasis was added to those phrases that have been bolded and italicized.

J. Veronica James
56
EVALUATION SUMMARIES REPORT
Below are excerpts from various evaluations and recommendations received throughout my
studies documenting my evolution as teacher-scholar (in reverse chronological order).
(2008). Recommendation letter written by John Lewis:
“I also believe that Jennifer generally has stood out among her peers and represents IUP in a
positive way. She gets along well with other graduate students and faculty, and she is actively
involved with departmental, university, and community activities. She has progressed rapidly
through the Ph.D. program and she has begun to establish a record of publication and other
scholarly activity. I am confident that Jennifer will be a productive young scholar….I believe
that our program [the doctoral program in Criminology at IUP] has served Jennifer James well,
and she possesses the skills and abilities to succeed in academia.”
(2008). Recommendation letter written by Sgt. Douglas Campbell:
“Ms. James has a passion for knowledge related to criminology and criminal justice fields [sic]
which she has discussed with me…[and] is a woman who is intelligent, conscientious, reliable,
and pleasant. She is a person with integrity. I recommend Jennifer James without reservation to
fulfill her endeavor to educate others as an Assistant Professor.”
(2002). Graduation “Precis1
” written by Patricia Geary which was presented at
Graduation Contract Review Committee Meeting at the Johnston Center for Integrative
Studies, University of Redlands:
“Over the four years she [Jenephyr] has also developed the ability to speak about the issues. A
relatively shy person, Jenephyr has put a lot of work into increasing her participation [into]
her classes and into sharing the vast knowledge that she has about the topic [crime] [emphasis
added]. More than once she has astounded her classmates by talking extensively about some
aspect of a topic that clearly identifies her intense interest. She not only understands academic
knowledge and theory, but she has also worked with the Redlands Police Department for over
two years, developing her pragmatic understanding of the justice system.”
1
As part of the coursework and graduation contract at the Johnston Center for Integrative Studies, the faculty
advisor of a student will write a Precis to be part of the student’s transcript, which is the narrative evaluation
summarizing the student’s college career and evaluations of all coursework. A draft Precis is presented at the
Graduation Review Committee and once approved it becomes official and part of the student’s transcript and
permanent record.

J. Veronica James
57
(2002). Student evaluation2
, written by Frederic Rabinowitz, for Psychology of Good and
Evil (JNST 000E-01) at the University of Redlands, Johnston Center for Integrative
Studies:
“…Jenephyr came into the class having done in-depth research on serial killers. She was
expecting to be able to expand her knowledge but found that the class was interested more
generally in the concepts of good and evil and its implications…Jenephyr was generous in
sharing her research data with other students in the class who did projects on murderers. She did
an excellent job leading one of the class sessions on a discussion of juvenile violence related to
school shootings” [emphasis added].
(2002). Student evaluation, written by Patricia Wasielewski, for Deviance (SOAN 321-01)
at the University of Redlands:
“…One of the ongoing points of negotiation for Jenephyr and I has been her class
participation…Jenephyr approached this very good-naturedly and indulged me by making a bit
more effort in each class. She recognized that ‘(She) participated more than she usually did…’
which, as she also notes, was partly due to the facilitation that each student had to do of class
during three class periods. Her facilitation’s were much better than those in previous classes.!
[sic]. She had a set of ideas that she wanted to discuss, questions to get the discussion rolling,
and ways to get the straying talkers back on topic. I even wrote that she was becoming a ‘chatter
box’ in comparison to the very first class she had with me…She, at least a couple of times,
became the ‘expert’ on something we were discussing and demanded the attention of all”
[emphasis added].
(2001). Recommendation letter, written by Patricia Wasielewski, professor at the
University of Redlands:
“She [Jenephyr] is fair minded, thoughtful in her relationships with others, empathetic and
creative…She is persistent and incredibly well organized. In fact, the only thing that is
somewhat difficult for Jenephyr is the oral presentation of her ideas. She and I have worked on
2
The Johnston Center for Integrative Studies at the University of Redlands assesses students’ learning through the
use of narrative evaluations instead of grades. At the end of each semester, faculty writes an evaluation of the
student delineating what the student did during the course, how well this was done, areas that need improvement,
strengths and weaknesses of the student regarding participation, understanding concepts, papers, tests, etc. This
evaluation is partly based on their observations of how the student did in the course, how well the student met the
terms outlined in their course contract, and on the student’s own self evaluation of their performance in the course.
These evaluations are considered the “grades” for the course and part of the student’s transcript. The excerpts
provided are from evaluations I received from faculty while I was a student at the Johnston Center.

J. Veronica James
58
this since our first class together. She has come a long way in being able to speak up and
clearly articulate her position. She has now made several class presentations that have been
effective, well received and have helped her overcome her reticence in front of groups
[emphasis added]…She is exactly the type of person that will make a contribution to the field [of
criminology/sociology] intellectually and who will be able to convey her excitement and
knowledge to others” [emphasis added].
(2001). Student evaluation, written by Patricia Wasielewski, for Crime and Delinquency
(SOAN 330-01) at the University of Redlands:
“It is so nice to have had Jen in several classes because I have gotten to see her progress. The
major progress that she displayed in this class regarded her oral participation [emphasis
added]. I have had her in …previous classes and in each contract we agreed that she would try to
work on her class participation. I am happy to report that she was positively chatty in this
class…for Jen. She often raised questions and offered her opinions in class. I can’t emphasize
enough how big a deal this is. The combination of her intense interest in the course and her
dedication to working on this made this class perhaps the best venue for her to pursue these
newfound abilities…A second way she managed to share her knowledge, beyond her increased
participation, was in her peer evaluations of two other student’s writings. She made good
suggestions and really helped them to improve their papers.”
(2000). Student evaluation, written by Emily Culpepper, for Women’s Health Activism
(WMST 265-01) at the University of Redlands:
“Jennifer’s work for this seminar was outstanding throughout…Jennifer’s class facilitation with
another student—which focused on sexual objectification, pornography and sexual
predators—was excellent [emphasis added]. Their class session effectively used the video ‘Still
Killing Us Softly’ by Jean Kilbourne. In addition, Jennifer arranged for a local police detective
specializing in perpetrators of sexual violence to come as a guest speaker for part of their
session. Her initiative in this regard is one more example of her thorough and thoughtful
engagement in this class” [emphasis added].
(1999). Student evaluation, written by Patricia Wasielewski, for Self in Society:
Sociological Social Psychology (SOAN 320-01):
“I agree with Jenephyr that she needs to work on her class participation…She did contribute to
the discussion, but she has a lot more to offer. I support her ‘redefinition’ of the classroom ‘self’
and will push her to become more interactive in our future class experiences together.”

J. Veronica James
59
(1999). Student evaluation, written by Patricia Geary, for Fiction Workshop I (ENGL 107-
03):
“At first, she [Jenephyr] was a little shy about expressing her opinions in class…However, by the
end of the semester, she was more confident and participated strongly. Her opinions were
constructive, well-directed, and I could tell that she really cared about helping the other
writers…”
(1999). Student evaluation, written by Kathi Jenni, for Food Ethics (PHIL 160-02) at the
University of Redlands, Johnston Center for Integrative Studies:
“She [Jennifer] felt that class participation was an area for improvement, but in fact Jennifer
participated regularly and, though quiet sometimes, was always an eager and helpful contributor
to the group, bringing in interesting materials (such as the vegetarian food pyramid) for our joint
examination and my own edification. She contributed significantly to the seminar’s success…

Dear Ms. James,
This letter acknowledges your attendance at the Reflective Practice Large Group meeting on Wednesday,
December 5, 2012. We hope you are able to incorporate the teaching strategies shared there in your Spring
semester courses.
We look forward to seeing you on Thursday, February 7 at 3:30 for our next Large Group meeting and on
Saturday, February 23 for our Spring Saturday workshop with Ike Stabley.
Enjoy the Holiday Break and thank you for your active participation in Reflective Practice and the Center for
Teaching Excellence.
Sincerely,
Mary Anne Hannibal
Director, Center for Teaching Excellence
138 Stouffer Hall
Indiana University of Pennsylvania

Linkedinportfolio

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (10)

Ähnlich wie Linkedinportfolio

Ähnlich wie Linkedinportfolio (19)

Linkedinportfolio