Legal
Studies 104AC: Youth, Justice and Culture
University of California, Berkeley
Spring
2014
Professor
Calvin Morrill
GSI Johann Koehler
Lectures: 3 Le Conte Hall Sections: W, 4p-5p, 251 Dwinelle
Tu/Th
12:30p-2:00p Th,
11a-12p, B56 Hildebrand
Professor Information GSI
Information
Office Hours: M, 10a-12p, 2240 Piedmont Office Hours: W, 1:30p-3:30p, Caffe Strada
Course Description
This course interrogates
dominant adult-centered representations of urban youth, their problems, and the
supposed solutions to these problems. We explore how adults define youth in
law, mass media, science (psychology, criminology, sociology, and computer
science), and education. Throughout the course, we give considerable attention
to the histories, tensions, and implications of different ways of thinking
about youth. Within different fields of representation, we also explore the
possibilities for youth-centered perspectives that diverge from and challenge
mainstream understandings. As a socio-legal endeavor, this course studies law
as it is lived, shaped, and encountered by urban youth on a daily basis. We
bring forward the conceptual perspectives, methodological tools, and
substantive findings that allow us to understand how youth make sense of their
lives, assert their views of justice and law, and act on one another.
The
primary objectives of this course are for students to:
(1)
Understand how urban youth have
been represented in and across multiple fields;
(2)
Engage critically central concepts,
methods, and findings on urban youth;
(3)
Apply these perspectives,
methods, and findings to analyze urban youth in context.
Required Readings (Books at University Bookstore; Reader at Copy Central on Bancroft)
Schedule
of Topics and Readings
Books = (B); Reader = (R)
Week
|
Date
|
Topics
|
Readings
|
1
2
|
Tu, 1/21
Th, 1/23
Tu, 1/28
Th, 1/30
|
Introduction: Why Offer a Course about
Youth?
Adult-Centered – Youth-Centered Continuum
Legal Representations: Early Cases
Legal Representations: Youth Rights
Affirmed
|
None
Morrill et al (R)
Crouse (R), Commwlth. (R), Gault (R)
McKeiver (R), Zimring & Solomon (R)
|
3
4
5
6
|
Tu, 2/4
Th, 2/6
Tu, 2/11
Th, 2/13
Tu,
2/18
Th, 2/20
Tu, 2/25
Th, 2/27
|
Legal Representations: Rights and Moral
Authority
Mass Mediated Representations: Early
Youth Culture
Mass Mediated Representations: Myths
about Youth
Mass Mediated Representations &
Review
Exam
I (in class)
Psychological Representations: Inventing
Adolescence
Psychological Representations: Identity
& Aggression
Criminological Representations: Groups,
Space, Minds
|
Arum (R), Miller (R), Gallo (R)
Savage (R)
Males (R)
Review readings, cases, & notes
Hall (R)
Bushman (R), Calvert (R), Downey (R)
Thrasher (R), Beckman (R)
|
7
8
9
Spring Break
|
Tu, 3/4
Th, 3/6
Tu, 3/11
Th, 3/13
Tu, 3/18
Th,
3/20
Tu, 3/25
Th, 3/27
|
Criminological & Computer Science
Representations:
Predicting and Preventing Youth Violence
Sociological Representations: Adolescent
Society
Sociological Representations: Urban Peer
Violence
Sociological Representations: Urban Culture
& Inequality
Sociological Representations & Review
Exam
II (in class)
no class
no class
|
Gottfredson (R), Dredze (R), Neill (R)
Coleman (R), Morrill (R), Harding (B: ch
1)
Harding (B: chs 2-4)
Harding (B: chs 5-8)
Review readings & notes
|
Week
|
Date
|
Topics
|
Readings
|
10
11
12
13
14
|
Tu, 4/1
Th, 4/3
Tu, 4/8
Th, 4/10
Tu, 4/15
Th, 4/17
Tu, 4/22
Th, 4/24
Tu, 4/29
|
Educational Representations: Making Model
Youth
Educational Representations: Ironies of Discipline
Educational Representations: Inequality
& Discipline
School Shootings: Multiple
Representations
School Shootings: Multiple
Representations
Youth-Centered Representations: Education
Youth-Centered Representations: Digital
Media
Youth-Centered Representations: Youth
Conflict
Youth Centered Representations: Social
Movements
|
Bowles and Gintis (R)
Kupchik (B: intro + chs 1-3)
Kupchik (B: chs 4-5 + conc, epilogue)
Newman (R)
Review Newman (R)
Carter (R)
Downing (R)
Review Morrill et al. (R)
Abrams (R)
|
|
Th, 5/1
F,
5/9
W,
5/14
|
Course Conclusion and Review
Exam
III (take-home) available electronically
Exam
III (take-home) due by 5:00pm
|
Review readings & notes
Procedures will be discussed in class
|
Requirements
Lecture Attendance and
Participation: Regular attendance of the lectures
is important because all of the material covered in lecture will be on the exams.
More importantly, the vitality of any course and depth of understanding among
students depends in part on student questions, comments, and ideas during class.
I welcome you to raise clarifying questions as the need arises. However, I hope
you also raise substantive comments and questions throughout the course. Some
of our discussions will stretch the materials in ways unanticipated by both
lecture and the readings all of which will be covered by the exams. Taking this
course is a little like learning a language: If you do not learn the
fundamentals early on in the semester and do not consistently keep up with the
reading, you will be lost as the term progresses. It is therefore extremely
important that you attend every class and section, listen carefully, take
detailed notes, and participate as much as you can. You are also welcome to
raise concerns and questions with the instructors during office hours or via
e-mail. Interaction with the instructors will help you understand the material,
but will not be awarded participation points.
Grading: Your course grade
will be determined by two
in-class examinations, one take-home exam (at the end of the course), and
section performance (which includes written assignments). Out of concern for
fairness to all students, make-up exams will not be available except in
the case of documented extreme illness or excused university absence. The
first in-class exam will take place on Tuesday, February 18, and the second on Thursday,
March 20. The third take-home exam will be handed out via b-space on Friday,
May 9 and returned by 5:00pm on Wednesday, May 14. All grades determined by
the GSI are final. The professor will not re-grade the examinations. If
you have a disability that requires accommodations, please speak to the GSI early in the term (i.e., in the first
two weeks) to make arrangements.
Examinations (300 points): Exams I and
II are each worth 100 points comprised of four sections:
(a) a single, short essay response to a question (20 points); (b) paragraph
responses to paired concepts (50 points); (c) sentence responses defining key
concepts (20 points); and (d) fill-in-the-blanks questions (10 points). Exam
III, the take-home exam, also will be worth 100 points and consist of you critically
and creatively applying course materials to a hypothetical scenario. It will be
open-note, open-book. More details on the take-home exam will be available
closer to the end of the semester. Each
of the exams is an individual exercise
to be completed by students working independently. The purpose of the exams
is not to surprise you but to give you multiple opportunities and ways to
demonstrate your knowledge and understanding of the course material. Study
guides will be distributed in a timely manner leading up to each examination.
Section Performance (100 points): Section
performance is determined by attendance and participation in the section, and participation
in a course blog, consisting of a Blog Essay and Presentation (50 points) and
ten weeks of Blog Comments (5 points per comment for a total of 50 points) on other
students’ Blog Essays. Blog Essay due dates are staggered by groups and
assigned through a random numbers table. More details and specific instructions will be
provided on b-space and in section. Points will be deducted from your overall
allocation for section performance as a result of not attending section. If
you cannot attend section meetings and complete the blog entries, you should
not take this course.
Grading Criteria: The
following criteria will be used in assessing your writing – clarity (using
proper grammar, punctuation, spelling, legibility and organization); accuracy
and comprehensiveness (defining all relevant terms/concepts, illustrating the
terms/concepts, and including all key points); and creativity (demonstrating in
your own words or with your own examples that you understand concepts and
questions and can reason critically about them). Final course grades will be
allocated using the following scale:
380-400 = A (95%-100%)
360-379 = A- (90%-94%)
348-359 = B+ (87%-89%)
336-347 = B (84%-86%)
320-335 = B- (80%-83%)
308-319 = C+ (77%-79%)
296-307 = C (74%-76%)
280-295 = C- (70%-73%)
268-279 = D+ (67%-69%)
256-267 = D (64%-66%)
240-255 = D- (60%-63%)
>
240 = F ( > 60% )
Academic Misconduct
From the Preamble of the Berkeley
Campus Code of Student Conduct: “The Chancellor may impose discipline for
the commission or attempted commission (including aiding or abetting in the
commission or attempted commission) of…all forms of academic misconduct
including but not limited to cheating, fabrication, plagiarism, or facilitating
academic dishonesty.” Academic misconduct devalues the learning experience not
only for the perpetrators, but for the entire university community. Consult the
Code or the Student Guide to
Academic Integrity at Cal for definitions of academic misconduct and the
penalties that can be imposed for it.
Citations for Readings in the Youth,
Culture and Justice Reader
- Morrill, Calvin, Christine
Yalda, Madelaine Adelman, Michael Musheno, and Cindy Bejarano. 2000.
“Telling Tales in School: Youth Culture and Conflict Narratives.” Law & Society Review 34:
521-565.
- Case Summaries and Legal
Terminology:
Ex Parte Crouse, 4 Whart. 9 (1839)
Commonwealth v. Fisher, 213 Pa. 48 (1905)
In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967)
McKeiver v. Pennsylvania, 403 U.S. 528 1976
Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (2012)
People ex rel Gallo v. Acuna, 929 P.2d 597 (1997)
- Zimring, Franklin E., Rayman
L. Solomon. 1996. “Goss v. Lopez: The
Principle of the Thing – Bringing the Issue to Court”. Pp. 459-490 in In the Interest of Children: Advocacy, Law Reform, and Public
Policy, edited by Robert H. Mnookin.
NY: Freeman.
- Arum, Richard. 2003. “From
the Bench to the Paddle” (with Richard Pitt and Jennifer Thompson). Pp. 127-158 in Judging School Discipline: The Crisis of Moral Authority. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
- Savage, John. 2007.
“Hooligans and Apaches: Juvenile Delinquency and the Mass Media.” Pp.
33-48 in Teenage: The Prehistory of
Youth Culture: 1875-1945. NY:
Penguin Books.
- Males, Mike. 1999. “Myth: The
Media Tell the Truth about Youth.” Pp. 260-298 and 366-378 in Framing Youth: Ten Myths about the Next
Generation. Monroe, ME: Common
Courage Press.
- Hall, G. Stanley. 1904. Pp.
v-ix and 325-360 in Adolescence: Its
Psychology and Relations to Physiology, Anthropology, Sociology, Sex,
Crime, Religion and Education. NY: D. Appleton and Co.
- Bushman, Brad J. 2013. “Media
Violence and Youth Violence.” Pp. 12-13 in Youth Violence: What We Need to Know – Report of the
Subcommittee on Youth Violence of the Advisory Committee to the Social,
Behavioral and Economic Sciences Directorate, National Science
Foundation. Washington, D.C.:
National Science Foundation.
- Calvert, Sandra L. 2013.
“Youth Violence: Influences of Exposure to Violent Media Content.” Pp.
14-15 in Youth Violence: What We
Need to Know – Report of the Subcommittee on Youth Violence of the
Advisory Committee to the Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences
Directorate, National Science Foundation.
Washington, D.C.: National Science Foundation.
- Downey, Geraldine. 2013.
“Rejection and Lethal Violence”. Pp. 16-17 in Youth Violence: What We Need to Know – Report of the
Subcommittee on Youth Violence of the Advisory Committee to the Social,
Behavioral and Economic Sciences Directorate, National Science
Foundation. Washington, D.C.:
National Science Foundation.
- Thrasher, Fredric. 1927. Pp.
9-19 in The Gang: A Study of 1,313
Gangs in Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Beckman, Albert. 1932.
“Juvenile Crime.” The Journal of
Juvenile Research 16: 66-76.
- Gottfredson, Michael. 2013.
“Some Key Facts about Criminal Violence Pertinent to the Relation of
Self-Control to Violence.” Pp. 23
in Youth Violence: What We Need to
Know – Report of the Subcommittee on Youth Violence of the Advisory
Committee to the Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences Directorate,
National Science Foundation.
Washington, D.C.: National Science Foundation.
- Dredze, Mark. 2013.
“Understanding Factors of Youth Violence through the Study of
Cyberbullying.” Pp. 27-28 in Youth
Violence: What We Need to Know – Report of the Subcommittee on Youth
Violence of the Advisory Committee to the Social, Behavioral and Economic
Sciences Directorate, National Science Foundation. Washington, D.C.: National Science
Foundation.
- Neill, Daniel B. 2013. “Data
Mining for Prediction of Youth Violence: Methods, Challenges, Open
Questions.” Pp. 29-30 in Youth
Violence: What We Need to Know – Report of the Subcommittee on Youth
Violence of the Advisory Committee to the Social, Behavioral and Economic
Sciences Directorate, National Science Foundation. Washington, D.C.: National Science
Foundation.
- Coleman, James S. 1961. “The
Emergence of an Adolescent Subculture in Industrial Society.” Pp. 1-10 in The Adolescent Society. NY: Free
Press.
- Morrill, Calvin. 2013. “A
Brief Look at Sociological Perspectives on Peer Hierarchies,
Organizational Conditions in Schools, and Youth Violence and Conflict.”
Pp. 20-22 in Youth Violence: What We
Need to Know – Report of the Subcommittee on Youth Violence of the
Advisory Committee to the Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences
Directorate, National Science Foundation.
Washington, D.C.: National Science Foundation.
- Bowles, Samuel, and Herbert
Gintis. 1976. “Corporate Capital and Progressive Education.” Pp. 180-200
in Schooling in Capitalist America.
Chicago: Haymarket Books.
- Newman, Katherine. 2004. Pp.
3-73 and 335-347 in Rampage: The
Social Roots of School Shootings. NY: Basic Books.
- Carter, Prudence. 2012.
“Cultural Flexibility: The (Un)Making of Multicultural Navigators.” Pp.
88-118 in Stubborn Roots: Race,
Culture, and Inequality in U.S. and South African Schools. NY: Oxford University Press.
- Downing, Gary. 2013. “Virtual
Youth: Non-Heterosexual Young People’s Use of the Internet to Negotiate
their Identities and Socio-Sexual Relations.” Children’s Geographies 11: 44-58.
- Abrams, Kathy. 2012. “Feeling
Work in the Undocumented Students’ Movement.” Working Paper, Center for
the Study of Law and Society, School of Law, University of California,
Berkeley.
