The Utility of Criminal History Questions in Community Psychology Program Applications

Crossmark: check for updates

Authors

  • Sarah Callahan DePaul University,Center for Community Research, 990 W Fullerton Ave Suite 3100, Chicago, IL 60614, USA
  • Jordana Siegel DePaul University,Center for Community Research, 990 W Fullerton Ave Suite 3100, Chicago, IL 60614, USA
  • Elzbieta Wiedbusch DePaul University,Center for Community Research, 990 W Fullerton Ave Suite 3100, Chicago, IL 60614, USA
  • Isabel Dovale DePaul University,Center for Community Research, 990 W Fullerton Ave Suite 3100, Chicago, IL 60614, USA
  • Brandon Isler DePaul University,Center for Community Research, 990 W Fullerton Ave Suite 3100, Chicago, IL 60614, USA
  • Josh Norris DePaul University,Center for Community Research, 990 W Fullerton Ave Suite 3100, Chicago, IL 60614, USA
  • Noah Gelfman DePaul University,Center for Community Research, 990 W Fullerton Ave Suite 3100, Chicago, IL 60614, USA
  • Leonard A. Jason DePaul University,Center for Community Research, 990 W Fullerton Ave Suite 3100, Chicago, IL 60614, USA

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17140/SBRPOJ-3-112

Keywords:

Ban the Box, Criminal justice involved individual reentry, Community psychology, Policy reform, Higher Education

Abstract

Aim
Access to higher education is a valuable protective factor against recidivism. Unfortunately, there are many obstacles criminal justice
involved individuals need to overcome to further their education. This study examined universities with community psychology
programs in order to assess: a) the extent of requests for an applicant’s criminal history, and b) whether asking these questions had
any effect on rates of crimes.
Method
We compared the crime rates for institutions that did and did not ask about an applicant’s past involvement with the criminal justice
system.
Results
No statistically significant differences in reported crimes were observed between those academic settings that asked or did not ask for this information.
Conclusion
Our study suggests that criminal background checks do not support safety concerns as the reason for continuing to request this
personal information on applications. These types of stigma-inducing and intrusive questions conflict with the values of community psychology.

References

Atkinson D, Lockwood K. The benefits of ban the box: A case study of Durham, NC. The Southern Coalition for Social Justice. Original Research | Volume 3 | Number 1| Web site. https://www.scribd.com/document/249690355/Ban-the-Box-in-Durham-NC. Accessed February 27th, 2018.

Von Bergen CW, Bressler MS. “Ban the Box” gives ex-offenders a fresh start in securing employment. Labor Law Journal. Summer, 2016; 383-395. Web site. http://homepages.se.edu/cvonbergen/ files/2015/03/Ban-the-Box-Gives-Ex-Offenders-a-Fresh-Start-in-Securing-Employment.pdf. Accessed February 27th, 2018.

D’Allesio SJ, Stolzenberg L, Flexon JL. The effect of Hawaii's ban the box law on repeat offending. American Journal of Criminal Justice. 2015; 40: 336-352.

Barling J, Dupré KE, Kelloway EK. Predicting workplace ag-gression and violence. Annu Rev Psychol. 2009; 60: 671-692. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163629

Duhart DT. Violence in the Workplace, 1993-99. Bureau of Jus-tice Statistics Special Report. National Crime Victimization Survey. Web site. https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/vw99.pdf. Ac-cessed February 27th, 2018.

Randolph DL. Criminal history screening in college admissions: putting diversity and public safety at risk. National Association of Student Affairs Professionals. 2014; 14(1): 104.

Archer DN, Williams KS. Making America the land of second chances: Restoring socioeconomic rights for ex-offenders. New York University Review of Law & Social Change. 2005; 30(4): 527-584.

Karpowitz D, Kenner M. Education as crime prevention: The case for reinstating Pell Grant eligibility for the incarcerated. Web site. https://www.prisonpolicy.org/scans/crime_report.pdf. Ac-cessed February 27th, 2018.

Pogorzelski W, Wolff N, Pan KY, Blitz CL. Behavioral health problems, ex-offender reentry policies, and the “Second Chance Act”. Am J Public Health. 2005; 95(10): 1718-1724. doi: 10.2105/ AJPH.2005.065805

Gendreau P, Grant BA, Leipciger M. Self-esteem, incarceration and recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior. 1979; 6(1): 67-75. doi: 10.1177/009385487900600110

Jung HA. "Ban the box" in college applications: A balanced ap-proach. Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy. 2016; 26(1): 171-197.

Oser CB. The criminal offending–self-esteem nexus: Which version of the self-esteem theory is supported? The Prison Journal. 2006; 86(3): 344-363. doi: 10.1177/0032885506291024

Copenhaver A, Edwards-Willey TL, Byers BD. Journeys in so-cial stigma: The lives of formerly incarcerated felons in higher ed-ucation. Journal of Correctional Education. 2007; 58(3): 268-283. Original Research | Volume 3 | Number 1| Jason LA, et al

Custer BD. Why college admissions policies for students with felony convictions are not working at one institution. College and University. 2013; 88(4): 28-36.

Stevens DJ, Ward CS. College education and recidivism: Ed-ucating criminals is meritorious. Journal of Correctional Education. 1997; 48(3): 106-111.

Nally J, Lockwood S, Knutson K, Taiping H. An evaluation of the effect of correctional education programs on post-release recidivism and employment: An empirical study in Indiana. Journal of Correctional Education. 2012; 63(1): 69-89.

Entin RE. A ban-the-box survey. Employment Relations Today. 2015; 41(4): 77-86.

Wood AR, Janosik SM. The Clery act: Crime reporting con-cerns. University Risk Management and Insurance Association Journal. 2012; 9-16. Web site. http://www.higheredcompliance.org/re-sources/WoodJanosik_CleryCrimeReporting_20120621.pdf. Accessed February 27th, 2018.

Dickerson D. Background checks in the university admissions process: An overview of legal and policy considerations. Journal of College and University Law. 2008; 34(2): 419-501.

Olszewska MJ. Undergraduate Admission Application as a Campus Crime Mitigation Measure: Disclosure of Applicants' Disciplinary Back-ground Information and its Relation to Campus Crime. [Doctoral disser-tation]. Eastern Carolina University, North Carolina, USA; 2007.

Society for Community Research and Action. Who we are. Web site. http://scra27.com/who-we-are/. Accessed February 27th, 2018.

United States Department of Education. Data for Calendar Years 2012-2014 [Data file]. Web site. https://ope.ed.gov/campus-safety/#/datafile/list. Accessed February 27th, 2018.

The Carnegie Classification of Institutions. Size &setting clas-sification description. Web site. http://carnegieclassifications. iu.edu/classification_descriptions/size_setting.php. Accessed February 27th, 2018.

United States Census Bureau. 2010 census urban and rural clas-sification and urban area criteria. Web site. https://www.census. gov/geo/reference/ua/urban-rural-2010.html. Accessed February 27th, 2018.

Halkovic A, Fine M, Bae J, et al. Higher education and reentry: The gifts they bring. Reentry research in the first Person. Web site. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED558779. Accessed February 27th, 2018.

Downloads

Published

2018-05-23

How to Cite

Sarah Callahan, Jordana Siegel, Elzbieta Wiedbusch, Isabel Dovale, Brandon Isler, Josh Norris, … Leonard A. Jason. (2018). The Utility of Criminal History Questions in Community Psychology Program Applications. Social Behavior Research and Practice, 3(1), 20–24. https://doi.org/10.17140/SBRPOJ-3-112

Issue

Vol. 3 No. 1 (2018): Volume 3 Issue 1 2018

Section

Articles

License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

All content published in Social Behavior Research and Practice (SBRP) is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license allows anyone to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt the work — including for commercial purposes — provided appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and source.