Dr. Brett S. Sharp, Assistant Professor, has been a practicing public administrator in state and local government for over fourteen years. He received his Ph.D. and Master of Public Administration from the University of Oklahoma and a B.S. in Political Science/Public Affairs with a minor in Religious Studies from Oklahoma State University. He is currently the Associate Director of the Oklahoma Policy Research Center at UCO. He is the immediate past president of the Oklahoma Chapter of the American Society for Public Administration.

Office Hours:  MWF 9:00-10:00 AM and MW 5:00-5:45 PM (and by appointment)

Office:  LAR 102-J

Email: bsharp@ucok.edu

Telephone:  (405) 974-5526

Fax: (405) 974-3823

Web Site:  http://www.libarts.ucok.edu/political/faculty/sharp/index.html 

Classroom:  LAR 124

This course is designed to provide the student with a grounding in politics, public administration, and policy making in the arena of corrections. Student should gain an understanding of the evolution of punishment and treatment, various approaches to theory of corrections policy and administration, issues in prison reform, community-based corrections, and new trends in corrections.

Student will read a series of books related to prison policy, reform, and administration and analyze them through a political perspective culminating in a review essay. The instructor will help guide the readings by meeting with the student at various times in the semester. In addition, the student will add depth to his or her understanding of the materials by interviewing correctional officials.

The University of Central Oklahoma complies with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Students with disabilities who need special accommodations should make their requests by contacting the coordinator of Disability Support Services at 974-2459. Their office is located in the Administration Building, Room 211. Students should also notify the instructor of special accommodations needs by the end of the first week of class.

    90 -100 = A

    80 - 89  = B

    70 - 79  = C

    60 - 69  = D

      0 - 59  = F

Grading components include:

    Interviews                              15%

    Meetings with Instructor         15%

    Book Review Essay(s)           79%

Discussion of the assigned readings is an important part of succeeding in this course and is required of all students. Meeting with the instructor provides an opportunity for you to ask questions, clarify issues, and deepen your understanding of the concepts covered in the assigned readings. If you are unable to make a meeting as arranged, you are responsible for rescheduling at the instructor’s convenience and availability.

INTERVIEWS WITH CORRECTIONAL PROFESSIONALS

Using the books as a foundation, develop a set of questions to use in interviewing 2-3 professionals, jail officials, prison administrators, politicians, or policy leaders in the field of corrections or prison administration. Prepare transcripts of the interviews for possible use in later research.

Your report should be in the form of an essay which includes a concise summary and more extensive analysis of the books. Using the book review from a refereed journal (provided by the instructor) as a model and Scott and Garrison’s The Political Science Student Writer’s Manual as a guide, write a 20-25 page review essay. As part of your analysis, answer the following questions within the text of your report:

1. What does each book contribute to your understanding of correctional politics, policy, and administration?

2. What is the purpose of each book and its central thesis (philosophy or perspective)?

3. Does each book achieve its goals?

4. What is the method or approach used by the authors to reach their conclusions?

5. Are the conclusions credible?

6. What are the implications for the study and practice of public administration in the real of correctional policy?

7. What are the primary strengths and weaknesses of each book?

8. Would you recommend this book to someone interested in public administration as applied to the correctional setting? Why or why not?

Based upon the Oklahoma Regents’ Statement on Course Workload and Homework [OSRHE II-2-34], a college student should expect to spend 3 hours, on average, on outside work for each hour spent in class. The message the Oklahoma Regents are trying to communicate is that if you have a full time job (30-40 hours) you should not simultaneously expect to maintain a full-time academic schedule (15 hours). If you expect to do well, expect to put in the time!

Cheating = Failure (please refer to attached Academic Integrity Statement). Cheating is unacceptable conduct and will result in an automatic grade of "F" for the course, and be reported to Academic Affairs. Students are required to do all of the work for this class on their own. Copying answers to exercises or examinations from anyone constitutes cheating. Allowing another student to copy one’s answers will be treated as cheating. A student may discuss exercises and case briefs with others before preparing his or her own answers, but the answers must be each student’s own work product. Consulting with the instructor about any assignment does not constitute cheating and is encouraged.

The Political Science Department of the University of Central Oklahoma is asking all students taking political science courses to read the following Academic Integrity Statement. Our purpose in doing so is to ensure that all our students are aware of what is improper academic behavior.

As members of the academic community, students are expected to recognize and uphold standards of intellectual and academic integrity. The Political Science Department expects that its students will conduct themselves honestly. This means, above all, that students submit for credit work that is the product of their own efforts. Principles of academic integrity require that all dishonest work be rejected as a basis for academic credit, and that students refrain from any and all forms of dishonorable conduct in the course of their academic work.

The examples and definitions given below are intended to clarify the standards by which academic honesty and integrity is judged. The list is merely illustrative of some of the more common infractions. It is not intended to be exhaustive. Any question a student has about what constitutes inappropriate behavior should be directed towards their instructor. The rule of thumb to follow is: If in doubt, ASK!

Plagiarism - Plagiarism is presenting another person’s work as one’s own. Plagiarism includes not only the exact use of another’s words, word for word, but also the paraphrasing or summarizing of the works of another person without acknowledgment, including the submitting of another student’s work as one’s own. The student is responsible for understanding the legitimate use of sources, the appropriate ways of acknowledging academic, scholarly, or creative indebtedness, and the consequences of violating this responsibility. In case of doubt, give a citation of the author you are using. Failure to indicate the extent and nature of one's reliance on other sources is plagiarism. A plagiarized paper will result in a failing grade on the work in question, and perhaps, for the entire course.

Cheating on Examinations - Cheating on examinations involves giving or receiving unauthorized help before, during, or after an examination. Examples of unauthorized help include the use of notes, texts, or "crib sheets" during an examination (unless receiving instructor approval), or sharing information with another student either during or after an examination.

Falsification - It is a violation of academic honesty to misrepresent material or to fabricate information in an academic exercise or assignment (e.g. false or misleading citation of sources, the falsification of the results of experiments or of computer data).

Multiple Submissions - It is a violation of academic honesty to submit substantial portions of the same work for credit more than once without the explicit consent of the instructor to whom the material is being submitted the second time.