Participation of Academics in the Criminal Justice Working Group Process (From New Criminal Justice: American Communities and the Changing World of Crime Control, P 114-120, 2010, John Klofas, Natalie Kroovand Hipple, and Edmund McGarrell, eds. - See NCJ-230360)

• NCJ Number: 230371
• Author(s): Anthony A. Braga; Marianne Hinkle
• Date Published: 2010
• Length: 7 pages
• Sale Source: Routledge
• Publication Format: Book Chapter
• Publication Type: Issue Overview
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

Based on the authors' own experiences in participating as an academic researcher and criminal justice practitioner in criminal justice problem solving working groups, this chapter presents the practitioner's and the academic researcher's perspectives of the features of an effective researcher-practitioner partnership.

Abstract

In identifying the features of an effective research partner from the perspective of a law-enforcement practitioner, the partnership is divided into four phases: when the partnership is starting; when it is solidified; when it is winding down; and throughout the partnership. At the start of the partnership, the practitioner advises the researcher to let practitioners speak about their experiences and ideas before the researcher begins asking questions and making suggestions. In addition, researchers should walk practitioners through the processes of problem identification, problem analysis, response development, and impact assessment. Further, researchers should address changing law enforcement's mindset from responding to incidents to dealing with problems. In addition, at the start of the partnership, researchers must address any negative experiences practitioners may have had in dealing with data collection and analysis. When the partnership is solidified, researchers should help practitioners focus on preventing crime instead of simply responding to it. Other practitioner suggestions for researchers are to set interim goals as well as long-term goals for solving an identified problem; provide timely and relevant research in a layperson's language; and establish an informal relationship with a practitioner who understands the dynamics of interactions in the criminal justice system. Advice from the researchers to other researchers working with a criminal justice problem-solving group includes keeping within the parameters of one's role of framing key ideas, research questions, and plausible interventions within a collaborative process. Researchers should also listen to and value the experience and insights of criminal justice practitioners and guide their efforts rather than directing them.