Produce a literature review of between 1500 and 2000 words on any area / question within the field of youth justice studies.

Assignment Brief

Assessment task 1: (worth 40% of total marks)

Produce a literature review of between 1500 and 2000 words on any area / question within the field of youth justice studies. The topic area will be agreed on an individual basis with the tutor. It is the responsibility of the student to suggest a topic area and to confirm with the unit coordinator that it is acceptable.

The review should demonstrate an ability to:

Research the major relevant sources for the chosen topic area

• Present an analysis of the principal findings of the literature in the chosen topic area
• Critically interrogate the literature to demonstrate consistencies, tensions or contradictions
• Provide an analysis of the gaps in the evidence base in relation to the chosen topic
• Critically evaluate the literature to arrive at a reasoned conclusion as to how the evidence should be interpreted, indicating areas for further research if appropriate.

Assessment task 2 (worth 60% of total marks)

Assessment 2: Produce an essay of 2,500 words (plus or minus 10%) chosen from the list of titles below, focussed on conducting an analysis of contemporary or historical arrangements within a given jurisdiction and their implications for wider society.

Please note: The essay title chosen should be on a different topic to the literature review conducted for assignment 1

The deadline for submission of assignment 2 is Monday 20 May 2019 at 10.00am

Essay titles:

• Identify the political and social forces which led to the establishment of a separate system of juvenile justice in the UK in 1908?
• How should we best understand shifts from welfare to justice in England and Wales over the past 100 years?

• What factors are relevant to determining the age of criminal responsibility? Discuss the relevance of such factors to England and Wales

• Should we leave the kids alone as Edwin Schur suggests?

• To what extent does what David Garland refers to as a ‘culture of control’ determine contemporary responses to youth crime?

• To what extent and in what ways is netwidening a problem for youth justice systems?

• ‘Responses to children in trouble are marked by a failure to take account of gender’ Discuss

• If we control for age, social class, and income, education and housing there is no over-representation of black young people in the youth justice system. Discuss

• To what extent is the level of custody determined by the level of youth crime?

• In what ways would the youth justice system in England and Wales need to change to be consistent with a children’s rights based agenda?

• Why do reoffending rates remain so high for children leaving custody? Does this imply resettlement is failing?
• Is the number of first time entrants to the youth justice system a good indicator of youth crime? Discuss your answer with reference to recent trends and provide an overview of how such trends might be explained

Sample Answer

Youth Justice Studies: Literature Review and Essay Assignment Guide

Assessment Task 1: Literature Review (40%)

Topic Chosen: Gender Disparities in the Youth Justice System

Introduction

Gender has long been a critical yet underexplored dimension in the youth justice system. While much of the focus has traditionally been on young male offenders due to their higher visibility in crime statistics, research increasingly shows that the unique experiences and needs of female youth are often overlooked. This literature review explores the existing academic and policy literature on gender disparities in youth justice systems, with a focus on how responses to children in trouble with the law often fail to account for gender differences. It analyses current findings, identifies tensions and gaps in the literature, and concludes with suggestions for future research and reform.

Researching Major Sources

This review draws on scholarly books, peer-reviewed journals, government reports, and grey literature. Key sources include:

• Sharpe, G. (2012). Offending Girls: Young Women and Youth Justice.

• Bateman, T. (2011). The state of youth justice: A critical overview.

• Ministry of Justice (2022) statistical releases.

• Academic articles from journals such as Youth Justice and The British Journal of Criminology.

Principal Findings in the Literature

Overrepresentation of Boys and Invisibility of Girls

Youth justice systems in England and Wales are largely designed around the profile of the typical male offender. Bateman (2011) notes that although boys make up the majority of youth in custody, this leads to institutional blindness to the specific needs of girls. Girls often enter the justice system through pathways related to abuse, trauma, and exploitation (Sharpe, 2012).

Stereotyping and Gender Norms

Girls who offend are often treated more harshly or pathologised because their behaviour deviates from expected gender norms (Gelsthorpe & Worrall, 2009). Female offending is more likely to be interpreted as emotional or dysfunctional rather than criminal, leading to moralistic responses rather than systemic support.

Lack of Tailored Interventions

The literature reveals a lack of gender-responsive policies. According to the Prison Reform Trust (2020), interventions often ignore the complex needs of girls, such as mental health, self-harm, and histories of sexual abuse.

Policy Inertia and Neglect

Despite repeated calls for reform, gender remains a marginal issue in youth justice policy. Reports by the Youth Justice Board have acknowledged the gender gap but have failed to implement wide-reaching reforms (Youth Justice Board, 2018).

Interrogating the Literature: Consistencies and Contradictions

Consistencies:

• Most sources agree on the systemic neglect of girls in youth justice.

• There is consensus that female offenders have different risk factors and needs than males.

Contradictions:

• Some researchers argue that fewer girls offend, so gender-specific services are less economically justifiable (Smith, 2010).

• Others believe that invisibility is a result of systemic filtering and not actual offending rates (Sharpe, 2012).

Continued...