Megan St. Jacques Jul 22, 2021 8:29 AM Evaluation Types             When completing a program evaluation, evaluators have a few options regarding the design of the evaluation, including the classic experimental design, a quasi-experimental design, and the before-and-after design (Vito & Higgins, 2016).  The classic experimental design is used when evaluators compare results of individuals who had the intervention against those that did not have the intervention offered by the program.  One of the main strengths of this technique is that the sample is random so there is a wide variety in individuals who will be examined (Vito & Higgins, 2016).  However, this can serve as a weakness as well because for some programs, only certain individuals are accepted based on program guidelines, which limits the validity of the evaluation because the sample is not truly random (Vito & Higgins, 2016).  Another type of evaluation is the quasi-experimental design that is similar to the classic design, but attempts to correct for weaknesses by using a less-than-random selection process for participants (Vito & Higgins, 2016).  Although this method attempts to strengthen the weakness of the classic design, there is a limitation to this design because taking away the random selection process reduces generalizability of results because the evaluator has specifically chosen these individuals based on specific factors (Vito & Higgins, 2016).  Finally, the before-and-after design which gives individuals a test before the treatment and one after, to determine effectiveness of the program (Vito & Higgins, 2016).  Ultimately, the strength comes from the ability to test every participant, but again there is limitations because the sample is no longer truly random (Vito & Higgins, 2016).  Questions about Policing             One question about policing programs that may not be able to be answered by randomized control testing would be the impact of drug treatment programs.  These programs are often looked to as a crime reducing technique for professionals (Kolind, 2017).  Although in theory random samples may help with validity, there is no way to ensure that the individuals completed the treatment or were actively engaged in treatment prior to completing the evaluation. When evaluating drug treatment programs, a quasi-experimental design would work best because the participants could be selected more specifically.   Maryland Scientific Methods Scale             The Maryland Scientific Scale is designed to help program evaluators and researchers design experiments in a way that will help ensure all of their questions are answered in the best way possible (Ross & Schoon, 2011).  Using these levels, the following questions could be considered: Level One: Do after school programs reduce the criminality of youth?             Level Two: How effective are drug programs when they are court-ordered for offenders?             Level Three: When individuals complete a drug program, ...

1. Megan St. Jacques
Jul 22, 2021 8:29 AM
Evaluation Types
When completing a program evaluation, evaluators have
a few options regarding the design of the evaluation, including
the classic experimental design, a quasi-experimental design,
and the before-and-after design (Vito & Higgins, 2016). The
classic experimental design is used when evaluators compare
results of individuals who had the intervention against those
that did not have the intervention offered by the program. One
of the main strengths of this technique is that the sample is
random so there is a wide variety in individuals who will be
examined (Vito & Higgins, 2016). However, this can serve as a
weakness as well because for some programs, only certain
individuals are accepted based on program guidelines, which
limits the validity of the evaluation because the sample is not
truly random (Vito & Higgins, 2016). Another type of
evaluation is the quasi-experimental design that is similar to the
classic design, but attempts to correct for weaknesses by using a
less-than-random selection process for participants (Vito &
Higgins, 2016). Although this method attempts to strengthen
the weakness of the classic design, there is a limitation to this
design because taking away the random selection process
reduces generalizability of results because the evaluator has
specifically chosen these individuals based on specific factors
(Vito & Higgins, 2016). Finally, the before-and-after design
which gives individuals a test before the treatment and one
after, to determine effectiveness of the program (Vito &
Higgins, 2016). Ultimately, the strength comes from the ability
to test every participant, but again there is limitations because
the sample is no longer truly random (Vito & Higgins, 2016).
Questions about Policing
One question about policing programs that may not be
able to be answered by randomized control testing would be the

2. impact of drug treatment programs. These programs are often
looked to as a crime reducing technique for professionals
(Kolind, 2017). Although in theory random samples may help
with validity, there is no way to ensure that the individuals
completed the treatment or were actively engaged in treatment
prior to completing the evaluation. When evaluating drug
treatment programs, a quasi-experimental design would work
best because the participants could be selected more
specifically.
Maryland Scientific Methods Scale
The Maryland Scientific Scale is designed to help
program evaluators and researchers design experiments in a way
that will help ensure all of their questions are answered in the
best way possible (Ross & Schoon, 2011). Using these levels,
the following questions could be considered:
Level One: Do after school programs reduce the criminality of
youth?
Level Two: How effective are drug programs when they
are court-ordered for offenders?
Level Three: When individuals complete a drug
program, are they less likely to recidivate?
Level Four: Are Batterer’s Intervention Techniques
effective to reducing domestic violence?
Level Five: Are programs in the jail effective for helping reduce
the recidivation of inmates upon release?
Holy Bible Reference
When considering the types of designs that can be used,
the technique selected should be one that will promote the most
honest results for the public. As the Holy Bible indicates,
“lying lips are abomination to the LORD: but they that deal
truly are his delight” (King James Bible, 1769/2021, Proverbs
12:22). In order to remain on a rightful path, researchers must
keep teachings from the Holy Bible in mind.
References
King James Bible. (2021). King James Bible Online.
https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/ (Original work

3. published in 1769).
Kolind, T. (2017). Is prison drug treatment a welfare
service? Springer
Link. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/978-1-137-
58529-5_9
Ross, A., & Schoon, I. (2011). Prevention and reduction: a
review of strategies for intervening early to prevent or reduce
youth crime and anti-social behaviour. Centre for analysis of
youth
transitions. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320057663
_Prevention_and_Reduction_A_review_of_strategies_for_interv
ening_early_to_prevent_or_reduce_youth_crime_and_anti -
social_behaviour
Vito, G. F., & Higgins, G. E. (2016). Practical program
evaluation for criminal justice. Routledge.
Reply
Eduardo Avila
Jul 22, 2021 1:26 AM
Maryland Scientific Method Scale
The Maryland scientific method scale offers guidance for
researchers to determine if a program intervention had any
effect through the selection of a particular program
evaluation. The five levels identified on this scale are as
follows: 1) correlation between , 2) measuring pre-and post the
program being analyzed without comparable control conditions,
3) measures of crime pre-and post the analyzed program in
experimental and comparable control elements while regulating
for variables which may impact crime, 4) measures of crime
pre-and post-analysis of the program in multiple experimental
and control units while accounting for variables which may
impact crime, and 5) random assignment of program and control
circumstances to elements (Weisburd, 2001).
Evaluation Types
Various types of evaluations used in program design may

4. include experimental design, quasi-experimental design, before-
and-after design and one group time series design. A pool of
candidates for the classic experimental design uses an
intervention to compare treatment between the control group
and experimental group. Careful attention is given during the
selection process minimizing the risk of bias. Random selection
is used to promote the participants of each group are alike in
every facet excluding their exposure to the program being
evaluated. When implementing random assignment practices,
intervention must be affected at the commencement of the study
and framed by the expectation of the research design (Vito &
Higgins, 2014). Randomized Control Trial (RCT) is usually
performed with large sample sizes. RCT is recognized as a
rigorous experimental design however, may not be suitable for
small groups or when resources are scarce (Grimshaw et al.,
2000).
Quasi experimental design uses comparisons between groups.
This design uses a control and experimental group and tends to
be used for small research studies which may also have limited
resources. One type of quasi experimental design is a
comparison between a control group and an intervention group.
A second type of quasi group is the time-series design in which
both groups undertake a series of assessments along the
treatment program. The pre and post differences are compared
between the control and intervention group (National Research
Council, 2005). Propensity Score Matching (PSM) is a method
used in an attempt to try and balance equal observed
characteristics amongst participants (Vito & Higgins, 2014).
Concerns related validity may stem from internal risks.
These may include history, maturation, testing or
instrumentation. External threats may come in the form of
interaction effects of selection bias or reactive effect of pre -
testing (Vito & Higgins, 2014). Experimental designs do offer
more regulatory opportunities over the variables of the
study. Controlling over variables and random selection
procedures allow for a better change to find a cause and effect

5. relationship. The larger sample size in a study, the more
accurate the outcomes and promotion of the validity of the
research. The ability to replicate the findings are also a strength
and fosters confidence of the program evaluation
results. Random selection is important to avoid selection
bias. If the control conditions are too extreme, the results may
not speak to the whole population and are not generalizable
(Grimshaw et al., 2000).
Non RCT Policing Inquiry
Inquiring the effects of Problem Oriented Policing
(POP) in low socio-economic neighborhoods may produce
challenges utilizing an RCT design. Challenges finding pure
samples may evolve due to some prior exposure to POP. These
individuals could possess some form of bias and preconceived
ideas of policing and therefore may lack the motivation to
participate or uptake any of the interventions offered by the
program. This is where quasi experimental design offers better
methods since the researcher selects willing
participants. Through screening, these participants may be
appropriately assigned to treatment groups and/or control
(Carson & Wellman, 2018).
World Christian View
The holy Bible states, “All scripture is given by
inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof,
for correction, for instruction in righteousness”, (King James
Bible, 1769/2017, 2 Timothy 3:16). This verse emphasizes the
importance of constant review of any significant material which
impacts and governs others. The holy Bible continues to state,
“That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto
all good works” (King James Bible, 1769/2017, 2 Timothy
3:17). There is recognition of how following God’s path
empowers us to succeed in each positive task which is placed
upon us. “And the things that thou hast heard of me among
many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who
shall be able to teach others also”, (King James
Bible, 1769/2017, 2 Timothy 2:2). Through the passing of

6. righteous notions, foster good practice amongst
others. Practices we model for others are observed and adapted
into practice by those who share a parallel moral compass.
References
Carson, J. V., & Wellman, A. P. (2018). Problem-oriented
policing in suburban low-income
housing: a quasi-experiment. Police Quarterly, 21(2),
139-170.
Grimshaw, J., Campbell, M., Eccles, M., & Steen, N. (2000).
Experimental and quasi-
experimental designs for evaluating guideline
implementation strategies. Family
practice, 17(suppl_1), S11-S16.
King James Bible. (2017). King James Bible
Online. https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/ `
(Original work published 1769)
National Research Council. (2005). Improving evaluation of
anticrime programs. National
Academies Press.
Vito, G., & Higgins, G. (2014). Practical program evaluation for
criminal justice. Routledge.
Weisburd, D., Lum, C. M., & Petrosino, A. (2001). Does
research design affect study outcomes
in criminal justice? The annals of the American academy
of political and social
science, 578(1), 50-70.

7. Jim Corrin
Helms School
of Government
Types of
Outcome Evaluations
Dr.
Killam
July 20,
2021
Outcome
Evaluations
According to Vito & Higgins (2015), outcome evaluations are
used to help determine if a program, project, or policy has been
effective and have me the desired intended goals (Vito &
Higgins, 2015). In order to so, the outcome evaluation should
consist of a description of the analysis, how it will be
implemented and what it all means. There are varieties of
methods that are used to achieve this goal.
The first type of evaluation is randomized experiments. This
type of evaluation is conducted after services have been
assigned or directed randomly typically people or places. For
example, individuals may be assigned to receive drug and
alcohol treatment where others are not (National Research
Council, 2005). Strength to this type of evaluation is that there
are no outside influences or biases, individuals are randomly
selected. Issues or weaknesses for this type of evaluation is that
individual characteristics are not taken into account. The main
weakness to the validity of randomized experiment is attrition
prior to the outcome measurement (National Research Council,
2005).
Quasi-experiments is a second design used for evaluation. These
typically fall into three categories, intervention groups

8. compared to control groups, time-series design, and the third
type combines nonrandomized comparison groups with time-
series observations (National Research Council, 2005). An
example used in our reading is comparing offenders receiving
regular probation compared to those receiving intensive
probation based on criminal history and gender. There are a few
weaknesses to this type of evaluation. The first is that the
evaluation does not consider the probation officers’ style of
supervision, meaning an offender may have a probation officer
that is “lazy” and is not interested in supervising. On the hand,
an offender may have an officer that is pro-active and is out
looking for violations. Risk scores is another weakness,
individuals completing risk evaluations on offenders can
perceive answers different from another evaluator. A strength is
that offenders are separated by criminal history and gender.
Also, risk scores, even though they may be inaccurate, risk
evaluations are typically the best means to identify offender
needs.
Observational design is a third type used for evaluation of
programs. This type of evaluation has been used to study a
variety of topics in the criminal justice system. One of these
issues is sentencing options (National Research Council, 2005).
The findings from this evaluation is that juveniles sentenced to
nonresidential are less likely to recidivate as compared to those
sentenced to residential treatment. A weakness is that judges
may be subject certain offenders to residential treatment
(National Research Council, 2005).
Evidence-based practices (EBP) is the strength of any program
evaluation. Simply put, EBP refers to what works and what does
not work? The Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and
Corrections along with The Division of Parole and Community
Service began using evidence-based practices over ten years
ago. For the veteran officers, this was a difficult change as they
were used to relying on their experience when it came to
working with and supervising offenders.
Evidence-based practices are discussed regarding the Maryland

9. Report; the authors describe three categories, what works, what
is promising, and what does not work (Vito & Higgins, 2005).
Police research questions to ask regarding the Maryland Project.
What is the correlation between crime prevention and risk
factors? Is the risk outcome clearly observed between the
program and crime? What is the analysis of program services?
Is there a comparison between multiple units with and without
the program? What are the research features random
assignments of comparable units? Regarding randomized control
trials (RCT) and policing. Questions that may not be able to be
evaluated is can the randomization be successful and how can it
be evaluated?
It is important to follow evaluation steps when evaluating
programs. Researchers and stakeholders should be part of this
process to set parameters for the evaluation. All parties should
work together on how to frame the evaluation in order to meet
the needs of all participants (Fisher, 2021). “It is the glory of
God to conceal things, but the glory of kings is to search things
out” (Proverbs 25:2, ESV). As researchers and evaluators, it is
our responsibility to seek answers and reveal the truth and facts.
Providing valid program evaluations is essential in the success
of programs.
References
Fisher, R. (2021). How to Undertake Evaluation
Holy Bible, English Standard Version
National Research Council (2005). Improving Evaluation of
Anticrime Programs
Vito, G. & Higgins, G. (2015). Practical Program Evaluation for

10. Criminal Justice
Criteria Ratings Points
Thread:
Content
40 to >36.0 pts
Advanced
• Post addresses the prompt
thoroughly, including every part and
providing examples, support, and
attachments as directed. • Citations
from all required reading,
presentations, and two scholarly
sources are appropriately and
thoughtfully applied.
36 to >31.0 pts
Proficient
• Post addresses the
prompt and provides
some examples and
support. • Citations from
all required reading,
presentations, and two
scholarly sources are
adequately applied.

11. 31 to >0.0 pts
Developing
• Post inadequately
addresses the
prompt. • Lacking in
citations from
required reading,
presentations, and
two scholarly sources
are adequately
applied.
0 pts
Not
Present
40 pts
Replies:
Content
30 to >26.0 pts
Advanced
• Three replies address the prompt
thoroughly, including every part and
providing examples, support, and
feedback as directed. • Citations
from one scholarly source are
appropriately and thoughtfully
applied.

12. 26 to >21.0 pts
Proficient
• Three replies address
the prompt including
some examples and
support. • Citations from
one scholarly source are
adequately applied.
21 to >0.0 pts
Developing
• Missing a reply
and/or replies
inadequately address
the prompt.
• Citations from one
scholarly source is
lacking or missing.
0 pts
Not
Present
30 pts
Structure
Writing
and
Current
APA

13. Format
20 to >18.0 pts
Advanced
Post is well written in current APA
format with no errors in spelling or
grammar. Replies are well written
with no errors in spelling or
grammar.
18 to >16.0 pts
Proficient
Post is well written but
has 1–2 errors in spelling
or grammar. Replies are
well written but have 1–2
errors in spelling or
grammar.
16 to >0.0 pts
Developing
Post and/or replies
are not well written.
They have more than
3–4 errors in spelling
or grammar.
0 pts
Not

14. Present
20 pts
Structure
Word
Count
10 to >8.0 pts
Advanced
Thread contains 500-600 words.
Each reply contains 250-300 words.
8 to >6.0 pts
Proficient
100 words more or less
than the required length.
6 to >0.0 pts
Developing
Over 100 words more
or less than the
required length.
0 pts
Not
Present

15. 10 pts
Total Points: 100
Discussion Grading Rubric | CJUS801_D01_202130
CJUS 801
Discussion Assignment Instructions
The student will complete five (5) Discussions in this course.
The student will post one thread of at least 500 words by 11:59
p.m. (ET) on Thursday of the assigned Module: Week. The
student must then post three (3) replies of at least 250 words by
11:59 p.m. (ET) on Sunday of the assigned Module: Week. For
each thread, students must support their assertions with at
least 2 scholarly citations and one Holy Bible reference in the
current APA format. Each reply must incorporate at
least 1 scholarly citation and one Holy Bible reference in the
current APA format. Any sources cited must have been
published within the last five years. Acceptable sources
include peer reviewed journal articles, the textbook, the
Bible, etc..
The student will post an explanation about what the different
types of evaluations are, explain the method and the strengths
and weaknesses of each. What type of questions about policing
do you have that cannot be evaluated by an RCT? What type of
evaluation would fit better? Give examples of police research
questions that are best suited for each of the five (5) levels of
the Maryland Scientific Methods Scale.

16. Textbook
Vito and Higgin chapter 6
National Research Council chapter 4