SOCIOLOGY 8111 – CRIMINOLOGY

Spring 2005

Wednesday 3:30-6:00 Room 1115 Social Science

 

Professor Christopher Uggen

(Pronounced You-Gun)

1167 Social Sciences: 624-4016

Office: 12:45-2 Tues & 2:30-3:45 Thurs or appt.

uggen@atlas.socsci.umn.edu

www.chrisuggen.com

course page: www.soc.umn.edu/~uggen/8111.htm

 

DESCRIPTION

 

This seminar offers an overview of theoretical developments and empirical research in criminology. Our focus will be definitive statements from important theoretical traditions and critical empirical tests of these theories. In addition, we will also consider critiques of the theories or the research generated by them and attempts to translate theories into policy.

 

OBJECTIVES

 

1.     The course will help you develop a more nuanced understanding of the dominant theoretical traditions in criminology. This knowledge is absolutely fundamental to teaching criminology at the college level and to conducting original research in the area.

2.     I will help you work through selected empirical pieces by some of the very best criminological researchers. As you develop your own research style, it is beneficial to see how others have translated propositions into testable hypotheses, devised appropriate methodologies to test them, and presented the results to diverse audiences.

3.     The course will stimulate your thinking about questions at the intersection of social science and public policy. These include how we produce our knowledge, its relevance to lives outside the academy (and penitentiary), and the utility of crime theories and criminologists themselves. Such big-picture considerations may help you to choose the level of abstraction at which you wish to work and the contribution that you can make as teachers and researchers studying the sociology of crime.

4.     Finally, a graduate seminar should encourage your professional socialization as you make the transition from student to independent social scientist. I will share anonymous reviews, letters from funding agencies and journal editors, and other materials that may show you another side of the research and publication process.

 

READINGS

 

Laub, John H. and Robert J. Sampson. 2003. Shared Beginnings, Divergent Lives:  Delinquent Boys to Age 70

 

Kornhauser, Ruth R. 1977. Social Sources of Delinquency: An Appraisal of Analytic Models. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

 

The Laub and Sampson book is available at the bookstore. Other readings will be made available prior to course meetings. As for Kornhauser, one prominent sociology department’s preliminary examination in the law, crime, and deviance area asked students to name and discuss the most important book in 20th century criminology. The correct answer (and there was a correct answer) was Kornhauser’s Social Sources. Since the book remains (shamefully!) out of print, I can make photocopies available to you without violating copyright law. We will arrange to compile and distribute the article materials at the first class meeting.

 

$131.85 WORTH OF OTHER BOOKS THAT SHOULD BE ON YOUR SHELF

 

We will dip into the following books this term, but will not devote a great deal of time to them. Anyone interested in teaching criminology or developing expertise in the area is encouraged to purchase them via amazon.com (link via the course page) or another source.

 

Becker, Howard S. 1963. Outsiders. New York: Free Press. $16.95 at Amazon

 

Katz, Jack. 1988. Seductions of Crime: Moral and Sensual Attractions in Doing Evil. New York: Basic Books. $23.50 at Amazon

 

Gottfredson, Michael R., and Travis Hirschi. 1990. A General Theory of Crime. Stanford: Stanford University Press. $16.29 at Amazon

 

Hirschi, Travis. 1969. Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press. $29.95 at Amazon

 

Maruna, Shadd. 2001. Making Good: How Ex-Convicts Reform and Rebuild Their Lives. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. $25.17 at Amazon

 

Warr, Mark. 2002. Companions in Crime: The Social Aspects of Criminal Conduct. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. $19.99 at Amazon

 

REQUIREMENTS

 

1.      Each student will share responsibility for helping to lead at least one of the course meetings. This includes summarizing and emailing/distributing a precis of the core readings, being accountable for the recommended (starred) readings and a list of open-ended questions about the materials two days prior to each class session. The precis is a detailed two page single-spaced summary of the theory, data, methods, and argument of the reading.

2.      An original seminar project is required of all students. This may be in the form of a research proposal, a synthesis and critical evaluation of a particular line of research, or an empirical paper addressing a substantive problem in criminology. Do not waste your time on a paper that will only be used to meet course requirements. The seminar project should advance your own research agenda.

3.      Seminars are constructed in interaction. I will provide a brief setup at each course meeting and try to provide an environment in which everyone feels comfortable participating, but responsibility for the seminar is borne collectively. This means that you must come to class prepared to discuss the readings (preferably with written comments and at least one question of your own) and to have considered how the course materials will affect your work. I deliberately kept the reading requirements minimal so that you will have more time to seriously engage the articles.

 

POLICIES

 

Ø       Your course grade will be determined by your written work and seminar participation. I intend to weight precis and discussion leadership at 20%, seminar projects at 50%, project proposal 10% and participation at 20%. Active seminar participation is a necessary (but not sufficient) condition to earning an “A” grade.

Ø       You really don’t want an incomplete hanging over your head. In almost every case, it is better to turn in “work in progress” than to delay said progress by taking an incomplete.

Ø       Teaching Philosophy (attached)

Ø       Department Policies (attached)

 

CAUTION

 

This course is not comprehensive. There are several definitive statements and myriad critiques and tests for many of these topics. To maximize the amount we can cover in a single semester, I have selected work that I consider exemplary, representative, or fresh. Nevertheless, there are many important areas in criminology that we will not touch. For this reason, the content of the second half of the course will be determined by student demand.

 

TENTATIVE OUTLINE

 

1. 1/19 WELCOME

 

Introduction

Goals

Orientation

 

2.  1/26 BIG PICTURE ISSUES

 

Kornhauser, Chapter 2 (*Chapter 1 recommended).

 

Wilson, James Q. 1975. Thinking about Crime. Chapter 3: “Criminologists.”

 

Sampson, Robert J. 2000. “Whither the Sociological Study of Crime?”  Annual Review of Sociology 26:711-14.

 

Sherman, Lawrence L., Denise C. Gottfredson, Doris L. MacKenzie, John Eck, Peter Reuter, and Shawn D. Bushway. 1998. Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn’t, What’s Promising.” National Institute of Justice Research in Brief. Washington, DC: USGPO.

 

3. 2/2 RATIONAL CHOICE

 

Clarke, Ronald V. and Derek B. Cornish. 1985. “Modeling Offenders’ Decisions: A Framework for Research and Policy.” Pp. 147-85 in Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research, Volume 6, edited by Norval Morris and Michael Tonry. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

 

McCarthy, Bill. 2002. “New Economics of Sociological Criminology.” Annual Review of Sociology 28:417-42.

 

Piliavin, Irving, Rosemary Gartner, Craig Thornton, and Ross L. Matsueda. 1986. “Crime, Deterrence, and Rational Choice.” American Sociological Review 51:101-19.

 

Sherman, Lawrence W. and Douglas A. Smith. 1992. “Crime, Punishment, and Stake in Conformity: Legal and Informal Control of Domestic Violence.” American Sociological Review 57:680-90.

 

*Nagin Daniel S, and Greg Pogarsky. 2001. “Integrating Celerity, Impulsivity, And Extra-Legal Sanction Threats Into A Model Of General Deterrence: Theory And Evidence.” Criminology 39:865-91.

 

*Becker, Gary. 1968. “Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach.” Journal of Political Economy 76:169-217.

 

4. 2/9 SOCIAL (DIS)ORGANIZATION AND NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT

 

Shaw, Clifford, and Henry H. McKay. 1931. Juvenile Delinquency in Urban Areas. Chapters 6-8.

 

Kornhauser chapter 3 (esp. 51-82)

 

Sampson, Robert J., Stephen W. Raudenbush, and Felton Earls. 1997. “Neighborhoods and Violent Crime: A Multilevel Study of Collective Efficacy.” Science 277:918-24.

 

Pattillo Mary E. 1998. “Sweet Mothers and Gangbangers: Managing Crime in a Black Middle-Class Neighborhood.” Social Forces 76: 747-74.

 

Clear Todd R., Rose Dina R, Waring Elin, and Kristen Scully. 2003. “Coercive Mobility And Crime: A Preliminary Examination Of Concentrated Incarceration And Social Disorganization.” Justice Quarterly 20:33-64.

 

*Sampson, Robert J. and Steve Raudenbush. 1999. “Systematic Social Observation of Public Spaces: A New Look at Disorder in Urban Neighborhoods.” American Journal of Sociology 105: 603-651.

 

5. 2/16 DIFFERENTIAL ASSOCIATION & SYMBOLIC INTERACTIONISM

 

Sutherland, Edwin H. 1973. “Development of the Theory.” Pp. 13-29 and “Critique of the Theory” Pp. 30-41 in Edwin H. Sutherland on Analyzing Crime, edited by Karl Schuessler. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

 

Kornhauser chapter 5 (esp. 181-204).

 

Sutherland, Edwin H. and Donald R. Cressey. “A Sociological Theory of Criminal Behavior.” Pp. 77-83 in Criminology 10th Edition.

 

Warr, Mark. 2002. Companions in Crime: The Social Aspects of Criminal Conduct. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chapters 4-6.

 

Ludwig, Jens, Greg J. Duncan, and Paul Hirschfield. 2001. “Urban Poverty And Juvenile Crime: Evidence from a Randomized Housing-Mobility Experiment.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 116: 655-79.

 

6. 2/23 ANOMIE THEORY AND “STRAIN” VARIANTS

 

Merton, Robert K. 1938. “Social Structure and Anomie.” American Sociological Review 3:672-82.

 

Kornhauser, Chapter 4, esp. pages 139-150.

 

Messner, Steven F. and Richard Rosenfeld. 1997. “Political Restraint of the Market and Levels of Criminal Homicide: A Cross-National Application of Institutional-Anomie Theory” Social Forces 75: 1393-1416.

 

Agnew, Robert, Timoty Brezina, John Paul Wright, and Francis T. Cullen. 2002. “Strain, Personality Traits, and Delinquency: Extending General Strain Theory” Criminology 40:43-72.

 

*Blau, Peter, and Judith Blau. 1982. “The Cost of Inequality: Metropolitan Structure and Violent Crime.” American Sociological Review 47:114-29.

 

7.  3/2 SOCIAL CONTROL THEORY AND LIFE-COURSE VARIANTS

 

Hirschi, Travis. 1969. Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press. Chapters 1 and 2 (Chapters 7-11 recommended if you are unfamiliar with Hirschi).

 

Sampson, Robert J. and John H. Laub. 1990. “Crime and Deviance over the Life Course: The Salience of Adult Social Bonds.” American Sociological Review 55:609-627.

 

Edin, Kathryn, Timothy J. Nelson, and Rechelle Paranal. 2004. “Fatherhood and Incarceration as Potential Turning Points in the Criminal Careers of Unskilled Men.” Pp. 46-75 in Imprisoning America: The Social Effects of Mass Incarceration, edited by Mary Pattillo, David Weiman, and Bruce Western. New York: Russell Sage.

 

*Costello, Barbara, and Paul Vowell. “Testing Control Theory and Differential Association: A Reanalysis of the Richmond Youth Project Data.” Criminology 37:815-42.

 

*Heimer, Karen, and Ross L. Matsueda. 1994. “Role-Taking, Role Commitment, and Delinquency: A Theory of Differential Social Control.” American Sociological Review 59:365-390

 

8.  3/9 SELF-CONTROL

 

Gottfredson, Michael R., and Travis Hirschi. 1990. A General Theory of Crime. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Chapters 2, 5, and 6.

 

Wright, Bradley R. et al. 1999. “Low Self Control, Social Bonds, and Crime: Social Causation, Social Selection, or Both?” Criminology 37:479-514.

 

Pratt, Travis C. and Francis T. Cullen. “The Empirical Status of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s General Theory of Crime: A Meta-Analysis.” Criminology 38:931-964.

 

*Uggen, Christopher. 2000. “Work as a Turning Point in the Life Course of Criminals: A Duration Model of Age, Employment, and Recidivism.” American Sociological Review 65:529-46.

 

*Geis, Gilbert. 2000. “On the Absence of Self-Control as the Basis for a General Theory of Crime: A Critique.” Theoretical Criminology 4: 55-69.

 

*Grasmick, Harold G., Charles R. Tittle, Robert J. Bursik, Jr., and Bruce J. Arneklev. 1993. “Testing the Core Empirical Implications of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s General Theory of Crime.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 30:5-29.

 

 

3/16 – no class – spring break

 

9. 3/23 LABELING AND SOCIETAL REACTION

 

Becker, Howard S. 1963. Outsiders. New York: Free Press. Chapters 1,2, and 8.

 

Lemert, Edwin. 1967. Human Deviance, Social Problems, and Social Control. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Chapter 3.

 

Bernburg Jon Gunnar, and Marvin D. Krohn. 2003. “Labeling, Life Chances, and Adult Crime: The Direct and Indirect Effects of Official Intervention in Adolescence on Crime in Early Adulthood.” Criminology 41:1287-1318.

 

Matsueda, Ross L. 1992. “Reflected Appraisals, Parental Labeling, and Delinquency: Specifying a Symbolic Interactionist Theory.” American Journal of Sociology 97: 1577-1611.

 

*Erikson, Kai T. 1962. “Notes on the Sociology of Deviance.” Social Problems 9: 307-14.

 

*Hagan, John, and Alberto Palloni. 1990. “The Social Reproduction of a Criminal Class in Working-Class London, circa 1950-1980.” American Journal of Sociology 96:265-99.

 

10. 3/30 PHENOMENOLOGY, IDENTITY, AND DESISTANCE

 

Katz, Jack. 1988. Seductions of Crime: Moral and Sensual Attractions in Doing Evil. New York: Basic Books. Chapters 1-3.

 

Maruna, Shadd. 2001. Making Good: How Ex-Convicts Reform and Rebuild Their Lives. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Chapters 1, 5, and 6.

 

Giordano, Peggy C, Stephen A. Cernkovich, and Jennifer L. Rudolph. 2002. “Gender, Crime, and Desistance: Toward a Theory of Cognitive Transformation.” American Journal of Sociology 107:990-1064.

 

*Hagan, John, and Holly Foster. 2003. “S/He's a Rebel: Toward a Sequential Stress Theory of Delinquency and Gendered Pathways to Disadvantage in Emerging Adulthood.” Social Forces 82: 53-86. 

 

11. 4/6 CRIMINAL CAREERS AND THE LIFE COURSE

 

Blumstein, Alfred. 1987. “Characterizing Criminal Careers.” Science 237:985-91.

 

Moffitt, Terrie E. 1993. “Adolescent-Limited and Life-Course-Persistent Antisocial Behavior: A Developmental Taxonomy.” Psychological Review 100: 674-701. 

 

Laub, John H., and Robert J. Sampson. 2003. Shared Beginnings, Divergent Lives: Delinquent Boys to Age 70. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Chapters 1-5.

 

12. 4/13 CRIMINAL CAREERS AND THE LIFE COURSE

 

Laub, John H., and Robert J. Sampson. 2003. Shared Beginnings, Divergent Lives: Delinquent Boys to Age 70. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Chapters 6-10.

 

*Piquero Alex R., David P. Farrington, and Alfred Blumstein. 2003. “The Criminal Career Paradigm.” Crime and Justice-A Review of Research 30:359-506

 

13. 4/20 RACE, CONFLICT, AND PUNISHMENT

 

Wacquant, Loic. 2002. “The New 'Peculiar Institution': On the Prison as Surrogate Ghetto.” Theoretical Criminology 4:377-89.

 

Angela Behrens, Christopher Uggen, and Jeff Manza. 2003. “Ballot Manipulation and the ‘Menace of Negro Domination’: Racial Threat and Felon Disenfranchisement in the United States, 1850-2002.” American Journal of Sociology 109:559-605.

 

Pettit, Becky and Bruce Western. 2004. “Mass Imprisonment and the Life Course: Race and Class Inequality in U.S. Incarceration.” American Sociological Review  69:151-69.

 

*Beckett, Katherine. Race and Drug Law Enforcement in Seattle [unpublished manuscript]

 

*Quinney, Richard. 1977. Class, State, and Crime. New York: David McKay.

 

*Colvin, Mark and John Pauly. 1983. “A Critique of Criminology: Toward an Integrated Structural-Marxist Theory of Delinquency Production.” American Journal of Sociology 89:513-52.

 

*Messerschmidt, James. 1993. Masculinities and Crime: Critique and Reconceptualization of Theory. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.

 

14. 4/27 CRIME AND PUNISHMENT AS INDEPENDENT VARIABLES

 

Hagan, John. 1994. “Destiny and Drift: Subcultural Preferences, Status Attainments, and the Risks and Rewards of Youth.” American Sociological Review 56:567-82.

 

Uggen, Christopher and Jeff Manza. 2002. "Democratic Contraction? The Political Consequences of Felon Disenfranchisement in the United States." American Sociological Review 67:777-803.

 

Western, Bruce. 2002. “The Impact of Incarceration on Wage Mobility and Inequality.” American Sociological Review 67:477-98.

 

Pager, Devah. 2003. “The Mark of a Criminal Record.” American Journal of Sociology 108: 937-975.

 

*Mauer, Marc, and Meda Chesney-Lind. 2003. Invisible Punishment: The Collateral Consequences of Mass Imprisonment. New York:The New Press.

 

 

15. 5/4  CLASS WRAP-UP AND DISCUSSION


          Uggen's Teaching Goals and Philosophy

 

1. Respect for Students.

The other points are really a subset of this one. Education is a service industry, but you cannot simply purchase a unit of education the way you would buy other commodities. Instead, you must devote time and energy to learning. I respect those students who must make work, family, or other commitments their top priority. Nevertheless, to benefit from the class and to be rewarded with a high grade, you must find time to do the work.

 

2. Procedural Justice or Fairness.

In my non-statistics classes, I typically grade exams and papers anonymously (by identification numbers rather than names) to avoid favoritism or other biases. Universal standards and strict deadlines are the best way I know to provide equal opportunities for all students.

 

3. High Standards for Excellence.

I reserve grades of A for outstanding work that engages course materials with original thought and creativity or a mastery of technical skills. You can receive a B by doing all of the work well and a C by meeting all course requirements.

 

4. Opportunities for Independent Work.

All must meet the basic requirements. For those wishing to engage the material at the highest level, I allow flexibility for more ambitious projects.

 

5. Responsiveness and Accountability.

You will have the opportunity to evaluate me and to critique the course in time for me to make changes that will benefit you. If you think I have failed to live up to the principles or philosophies here listed, please let me know about it.

 

6. Accessibility.

I will be available to you during office hours and flexible in scheduling appointments outside these hours (including nights and weekends).

 

7. Openness to Diverse Perspectives.

Sharing your experiences and understandings (publicly or privately) enriches the course for your fellow students, especially when you disagree with me.

 

8. Enthusiasm for the Subjects I Teach and for Teaching as a Vocation.

I cannot expect you to really engage the course materials if I am bored with them. Therefore, I will make every effort to make the texts, lectures, and assignments current, relevant, and intellectually engaging.

 

9. Skills, Knowledge, and Attitudes.

I teach: (1) technical and life skills that will benefit you inside and outside of the classroom; (2) abstract and concrete knowledge about the social world; and, (3) attitudes promoting the free and good-humored exchange of ideas.


COLLEGE OF LIBERAL ARTS POLICY

 

GRADES: University academic achievement is graded under two systems: A-F (with pluses and minuses) and S-N. Choice of grading system and course level (1xxx/3xxx/5xxx) is indicated on registration forms; changes may not be made after the FRIDAY of the second week of the semester. Some courses may be taken under only one system; limitations are identified in the course listings. The Department of Sociology requires A-F registration in required courses for the major. University regulations prescribe the grades that will be reported on your transcript.

A      Represents achievement that is outstanding relative to the level necessary to meet course requirements (4.00 grade points)

A-         3.67 grade points

B+   3.33 grade points

B      Achievement significantly above the level necessary to meet course requirements (3.00 grade points)

B-         2.67 grade points

C+   2.33 grade points

C     Achievement that meets the basic course requirements in every respect (2.00 grade points)

C-        1.67 grade points

D+   1.33 grade points

D     Achievement worthy of credit even though it fails to meet fully the course requirements (1.00 grade point)

F      Performance that fails to meet the basic course requirements (0 grade points)

S      Represents achievement that is satisfactory, which is equivalent to a C- or better.

N      No credit. Its use is now restricted to students not earning an S on the S-N grade base

I      Incomplete, a temporary symbol assigned when the instructor has a "reasonable expectation" that you can successfully complete unfinished work in a course before the end of the next semester. You and your instructor should arrive at a clear understanding, in advance, about whether you will receive an I and what the make-up work conditions will be. The instructor may set date conditions for make-up work. If a course is not completed as prescribed or not made up as agreed within the next semester of registration, the I will lapse to an F if registered on the A-F grade base or an N if registered on the S-N grade base.

W      Official withdrawal from a course after the end of the second week of the semester. You must file a course cancellation request before the end of the sixth week of the semester to ensure that the W, rather than the F, will be formerly entered on your record.

 

FINAL EXAMINATIONS (see CLA Bulletin): You are required to take final examinations at the scheduled times (see the Class Schedule). Under certain circumstances, however, you may request final examination schedule adjustment in your college office. Instructors are obligated to schedule make-up examinations within the final examination period for students who have three final examinations within a 16-hour period. Instructors also are encouraged to reschedule examinations for students with religious objections to taking an examination on a given day. You must submit your request for an adjustment in your schedule at least two weeks before the examination period begins. For assistance in resolving conflicts, call the CLA Student Information Office at 625-2020. If you miss a final, an F or N is recorded. You must obtain the instructor's permission to make up the examination. Final examinations may be rescheduled by the instructor only through the official procedure for that purpose (see the Class Schedule). Final examinations may not be scheduled for the last day of class or earlier or for Study Day. If an examination is rescheduled at the instructor's request, and you have an examination conflict because of it, you are entitled to be given the final examination at an alternative time within the regularly scheduled examination period for that semester.

 

CLASS ATTENDANCE (see CLA Bulletin): As a CLA student, you are responsible for attending class and for ascertaining the particular attendance requirements for each class or department. You should also learn each instructor's policies concerning make-up of work for absences. Instructors and students may consult the CLA Classroom, Grading, and Examination Procedures Handbook for more information on these policies.

 

COURSE PERFORMANCE AND GRADING (see CLA Bulletin): Instructors establish ground rules for their courses in conformity with their department policies and are expected to explain them at the first course meeting. This includes announcement of office hours and location, the kind of help to be expected from the instructor and teaching assistants, and tutorial services, if available. The instructor also describes the general nature of the course, the work expected, dates for examinations and paper submissions, and expectations for classroom participation and attendance. Instructors determine the standards for grading in their classes and will describe expectations, methods of evaluation, and factors that enter into grade determination. The special conditions under which an incomplete (I) might be awarded also should be established. The college does not permit you to submit extra work to raise your grade unless all students in the class are afforded the same opportunity.

 

CLASSROOM BEHAVIOR (see CLA Bulletin): You are entitled to a good learning environment in the classroom. Students whose behavior is disruptive either to the instructor or to other students will be asked to leave.

SCHOLASTIC CONDUCT (see CLA Bulletin): The college has broadly defined scholastic dishonesty as any act violating the rights of another student in academic work or involving misrepresentation of your own work. Scholastic dishonesty includes, but is not necessarily limited to, cheating on assignments or examinations; plagiarizing, misrepresenting as your own work any part of work done by another; submitting the same work, or substantially similar works, to meet the requirements of more than one course without the approval and consent of all instructors concerned; depriving another student of necessary course materials; or interfering with another student's work. The Student Scholastic Conduct Committee, composed of students and faculty members, investigates charges of academic dishonesty referred to it by CLA faculty members. When charges are upheld, the student may be placed on disciplinary probation, failed in a course, or suspended from the college. CLA faculty members may act on cases involving CLA students in their classes; such actions may not exceed modification of a course grade. Instructors must report any action to the conduct committee, and the student will be informed of the right to ask for a committee hearing. Specific information on report and appeal procedures may be obtained by calling Student Academic Support Services (625-3846). Disciplinary or conduct cases that are nonacademic in nature or that involve two or more colleges are referred to the Campus Committee on Student Behavior.

 

A REMINDER OF RELEVANT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

* SOCIOLOGY DEPARTMENT POLICIES *

 

GRADE INFORMATION: Grades are due in the Office the Registrar within 72 hours after the final examination. No information regarding grades will be released by the department office staff to anyone except designated personnel in Records and college offices. Students may access their own grades through their computer account. They may do this by following the directions in the semester class schedule.

 

INCOMPLETES: It is the instructor's responsibility to specify conditions under which an Incomplete (I) grade is assigned. Students should refer to the course syllabus and talk with the instructor if they anticipate not completing the course work. Coursework submitted after the final examination will generally be evaluated down unless prior arrangements are made in writing by the instructor. University policy states that a student must reregister to attend the same course the following semester in order to make up incomplete work. Incompletes are appropriate only if the student can make up the coursework independently with the same professor.