CULT1024 Introduction to Criminal Justice Assessment 3: Information Sheet

Key Details

Task

Students should submit a response to the following:

During semester students watched Episode 9, Self-Represented, from the documentary Court Justice: Sydney. This episode documented the procedure, style, format, and tone of the lower courts process. In this assessment, students need to reflect on their experiences with the episode. In their response, students need to:

1. Provide information, academically sourced, about the structure, purpose, and format of the lower courts in New South Wales.
2. Reflect on their impressions and experiences with the episode. How did you imagine the lower courts operated, and how did your views change or evolve?
3. Reflect on the politics of viewing the lower courts. Is it an example of open justice, or is it problematically voyeuristic? Please use academic literature to inform your response.
4. Outline the criminal justice issues the episode revealed (e.g. lack of legal representation, etc).

The response should be 1,500 words in length (10% plus or minus leeway without penalty is permitted). Subheadings can be used to guide your response. In-text referencing, using Harvard WSU Referencing Style, should be provided throughout to attribute sources. A separate Reference List should be provided at the end of the document, and at least 10 academic texts need to be cited.

The episode can be accessed via the following link (noting you may be prompted to login with your student account):

https://search-informit-org.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/doi/10.3316/edutv.2041073or try this link
https://search-informit-org.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/doi/10.3316/edutv.2041073

Overview

This activity involves writing an essay that includes a reflective component. An essay is a short piece of writing (in this case, 1,500 words) that responds to a specific question(s). Reflexivity that is, the ability to examine ones own beliefs, assumptions, and changing attitudes should feature in the work. When reading an essay, the marker will consider some of the following items when determining the grade:

1. How well the essay directly responds, answers, or engages with the set task
2. How well the argument is supported (such as through examples and evidence)
3. How well the essay engages with academic literature (that is, whether in-text referencing is used to substantiate claims and information)
4. How well the essay is written (is the expression clear? Is the style appropriate? Are there errors?)
5. How well the essay is structured and organised (is there a clear introduction, body, and conclusion?)

The essay should involve 3 main components: an introduction, a body (comprising several paragraphs), and a conclusion.

The introduction should:

1. Introduce the essay. It should provide some general statements about the topic (the trial in the lower courts). It should provide a thesis statement (e.g. this essay will argue) It should also provide a road map of the essays contents. This means it should outline what will be introduced and argued throughout. Please note that this section should not just be a summation of the question (e.g. this essay will also reflect on my experiences), because doing so will be too vague. Students should instead be specific (e.g. this essay will also document my changing preconceptions of the trial process in the lower courts, where through my engagement with the documentary episode, I learnt that the lower courts operate in more chaotic and less formal than I originally envisaged). This is the case because you need to flag to your reader what is to come an essay is NOT a novel with plot twists, but a systematic presentation and argument of material that is clear and concise.

The body paragraphs should:

1. Respond to each of the four main questions. It makes sense to structure these sections according to subheadings. The essay will also be clearer if each section is addressed individually (that is, do not mash different parts of the question together unless it can be coherent). Each of these sections should be around the same length. Additional information regarding the four main questions:

• Provide information, academically sourced, about the structure, purpose, and format of the lower courts in New South Wales the textbook will be a good place to start for this information, but additional academic literature should be used to supplement where necessary. This section should give the reader a clear understanding of what the lower courts look like (that is, where they are situated within the criminal justice system, what they do, and how they operate).
• Reflect on their impressions and experiences with the episode. How did you imagine the lower courts operated, and how did your views change or evolve? this part of the question implies that your understanding of the lower courts may have changed by watching the episode (for example, maybe you thought the courts handled more serious matters, or maybe you thought they operated more formally, or maybe you thought all accused people were represented by a lawyer, etc). This section should then outline these changing attitudes. It is not enough, however, to simply note these changing attitudes: you should also add what these changes taught you (for example, learning in the episode that nearly half of accused people represent themselves in the lower courts really opened my eyes to the injustices within the criminal justice system, and made me reflect upon the ways in which class divides open or class access to justice. Additionally). If you found your views did not change or evolve, you should clearly articulate why this was the case.
• Reflect on the politics of viewing the lower courts. Is it an example of open justice, or is it problematically voyeuristic? Please use academic literature to inform your response. this question is asking students to reflect how they feel ethically and politically when watching people go through stressful and potentially traumatic events. Is it a good thing, or did it make you feel a bit icky? There can be many different responses to this question, but they should be detailed and supported by the academic literature (examples: As noted by X (year), the lower courts exemplify aspects of poverty porn, and I felt uncomfortable watching people in distress. Y (year) argues that the lower courts further marginalise already marginalised groups of people and that alternative criminal justice solutions need to be considered. Or: I found the episode connected me more deeply with the criminal justice system, and as Z (year) notes, the criminal justice system needs to be open and transparent to ensure it is fair for all people). Joshua Meisels 2008 article, The Ethics of Observing: Confronting the Harm of Experiential Learning, may be useful to you.
• Outline the criminal justice issues the episode revealed (e.g. lack of legal representation, etc). students will need to closely watch and identify what issues or injustices are present in the episode (note the question already identifies one). Students will need to identify and discuss the problems associated with their issue (e.g. As X (year) notes, the lack of legal representation is a significant criminal justice issue and risks creating unjust and unfair outcomes for these groups. Y (year) argues that this problem requires remedy in the form of). The arguments here should also align with the thesis statement.

The conclusion should:

1. Conclude the essay. It should summarise (and not repeat word-for-word) the main points and arguments. It should not introduce new information; as such, it should be short but also compelling (e.g. this essay has demonstrated that serious issues affect X and Y should be considered because).

Students need to in-text reference throughout the assessment and provide a Reference List at the end of the document. This is very important, and students who do not reference correctly will be penalised. Please see more information on the library website:https://library.westernsydney.edu.au/students/referencing-citationThe essay needs to cite at least 10 academic texts.

A comment on reflection: it is important that reflection is used in this essay to help ground and contextualise your ideas and observations on important criminal justice matters. It is not a Dear Diary entry (e.g. watching this made me feel sad) because this does not say anything that helps respond to the substance of the question. Reflection instead needs to be used to ground the argument (e.g. watching the plight of these peoples experiences really opened to me the lack of proper resources for people encountering criminal justice problems. If we are to have a fair criminal justice system, then proper resourcing needs to be available for everyone (X Year).).

Development of thesis statement: the overall essay should be driven by an overall argument that helps address each part of the question. The thesis statement can vary from person to person it will depend upon their own viewing experience, politics/ethics, and engagement with the academic literature. Below I provide ONE example (in bold):

• This essay argues that not enough supports are provided for self-represented people in the lower courts in NSW. To make this argument, I first outline the nature of the lower courts in NSW, and then drawing upon my observations of the lower courts, suggest that

Artificial intelligence can be used to help you brainstorm ideas, summarise reading material, or to edit your draft submission. However,the submitted version must be entirely your own work. Please do not use an artificial intelligence tool to draft, revise, and edit your work and then submit that version for marking this will constitute academic misconduct, and the university has artificial intelligence checking software.

Students should use the Discussion Board (Assessment 3 Questions folder) in the CULT1024 vuws site if they have any questions.

Cheers,

Ryan