CRJ101 Week 4: Modern Day Policing, Society, and the Future
Week 4 puts policing under a magnifying glass — not just what officers do on the street, but how the entire model fits into a changing society. This guide breaks down the core concepts, how they connect to your assignments, and what professors at Strayer actually want to see in your responses.
Week 4 of CRJ101 is where the course stops being abstract. You move from the history and structure of policing into its present-day tensions — the technology debate, the community trust question, and serious arguments about what policing should look like in ten years. These are not easy topics. They do not have clean answers. But your assignment is not asking you to solve policing. It is asking you to show that you understand the arguments well enough to analyze them.
What This Guide Covers
What Week 4 Is Actually Testing
CRJ101 at Strayer is an introductory course, but Week 4 asks for something more than memorization. You are being evaluated on whether you can apply criminal justice concepts to real situations — and whether you can hold two competing ideas in your head at once. Policing in the modern era is full of genuine tensions. Technology that improves response times also raises surveillance concerns. Community policing builds trust in some neighborhoods and is dismissed as performative in others.
Concepts You Need to Know Cold
- Community policing — definition, origins, and how it works in practice
- Problem-oriented policing vs. traditional reactive policing
- How body cameras changed accountability conversations
- Predictive policing — what it is and why it’s controversial
- Co-responder and mental health diversion models
- The difference between defunding and abolition arguments
What the Discussion Post Is Looking For
- A clear position on the question — not a summary of all sides
- At least one specific program, statistic, or real-world example
- Engagement with the tension — acknowledge the counterargument
- A response to at least one classmate that adds something new
- No generic statements like “police should protect and serve”
- Specific criminological concepts tied back to course material
Every topic in Week 4 — community policing, technology, use of force, reform — comes back to one question: who does policing serve, and how do we measure that? If you keep that frame in mind while reading and writing, your analysis will naturally be sharper than someone who treats each concept as a separate island. Connect them. The assignment rewards students who see the whole picture.
Community Policing — The Core Model
Community policing is not a set of tactics. That is the most common mistake students make when writing about it. It is a philosophy — one that says law enforcement effectiveness depends on the cooperation and trust of the communities it serves. The tactics (foot patrols, neighborhood liaisons, civilian advisory boards) are just expressions of that philosophy.
The model gained federal support through the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, which created the COPS Office and provided grants to departments to hire officers specifically for community engagement. It was a big deal. It shifted the national conversation about policing from pure enforcement to partnership — at least in theory.
Organizational Transformation
Community policing requires changes at the management level, not just the street level. Command structures become more decentralized, officers get more discretion to problem-solve locally, and performance metrics shift away from arrest numbers toward community outcomes. Most agencies say they do community policing. Far fewer have restructured to actually support it from the top down.
Assignment application: If your discussion post asks whether community policing works, start here. The gap between stated philosophy and actual organizational change is where most critiques live.Community Partnerships
Police departments build formal relationships with schools, social services, faith communities, and businesses to share information and co-produce safety. This is not just attending community meetings. It means giving residents actual input into how policing priorities are set in their neighborhoods. That is a power-sharing arrangement, and some departments are more comfortable with it than others.
Assignment application: Cite a specific example. Chicago’s Strategic Subject List, Boston’s Operation Ceasefire, or New Haven’s “One New Haven” model all give you real programs to anchor an argument.Problem-Solving
Officers are trained to identify the underlying causes of recurring crime and disorder rather than responding to incidents repeatedly. The SARA model (Scanning, Analysis, Response, Assessment) is the standard framework. It asks officers to diagnose a problem before jumping to enforcement as the only tool.
Assignment application: This is where you can connect community policing to the future-of-policing section — problem-solving is the logic behind co-responder models and mental health diversion.Technology in Modern Policing
This is the most contested area of Week 4 — and probably the one where professors most want to see nuanced thinking. Every technology introduced into policing comes with an effectiveness argument and a rights-based counterargument. Your job is to understand both, not to pick a side based on feelings.
| Technology | What It Does | The Case For | The Case Against |
|---|---|---|---|
| Body-Worn Cameras | Records officer-citizen interactions from the officer’s perspective | Reduces use-of-force complaints, creates accountability record, can exonerate officers falsely accused | Officers control footage; footage gaps erode trust; doesn’t change systemic behavior without policy teeth |
| Predictive Policing Software | Uses historical crime data to forecast where crime is likely to occur | Allows proactive resource deployment; can reduce response time in high-risk areas | Encodes historical bias into future policing; over-polices communities already targeted; creates feedback loops |
| Facial Recognition | Matches captured images against databases of known individuals | Can identify suspects in serious crimes quickly; assists in missing persons cases | Documented higher error rates for Black and female faces; used without clear legal standards; several wrongful arrests documented |
| ShotSpotter / Gunshot Detection | Acoustic sensors detect and triangulate gunshot sounds in real time | Faster response to shooting incidents; maps gun violence patterns geographically | High false positive rates documented; disproportionately deployed in Black neighborhoods; CST MacConnell investigation (2021) raised evidence concerns |
| License Plate Readers | Automatically scan and log license plates as vehicles pass | Useful for locating stolen vehicles and wanted persons; passive data collection | Creates mass location databases; retention policies inconsistent; surveillance of entire populations without cause |
For most of these technologies, the law has not caught up. There is no federal framework governing police use of facial recognition. Body camera policies differ dramatically between departments. Predictive policing software is often proprietary, meaning the algorithm is shielded from public scrutiny. The accountability gap between what technology can do and what oversight exists is the core analytical point in this section — make sure your assignment names it explicitly.
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine published a major report in 2018 examining the evidence base for proactive policing strategies — including hot spots policing, predictive approaches, and community-oriented models. The report found that some proactive strategies reduced crime in targeted areas, but also noted significant gaps in evidence about their effects on civil liberties, community trust, and racial equity. It is peer-reviewed, widely cited, and appropriate as an outside source for a CRJ101 assignment. Available at: nap.nationalacademies.org
Police-Community Relations
The phrase “police-community relations” gets used so broadly in criminal justice courses that it can start to feel meaningless. For your assignment, narrow it. What does trust between police and residents actually require, and where does it break down?
Research consistently identifies two drivers of legitimacy — the belief by residents that police are fair and have the right to exercise authority. The first is procedural justice: how police treat people during encounters. The second is distributive justice: whether police protection is distributed equitably across different neighborhoods and demographic groups. You can build an entire discussion post around those two concepts.
Where Trust Has Broken Down — Key Case Studies
- Stop-and-Frisk in NYC: 2013 federal ruling found the program unconstitutional as practiced — racially discriminatory at scale, eroding trust in entire communities
- Ferguson, MO (2014): DOJ investigation found systemic racial bias in enforcement practices, revenue-driven policing, and near-total breakdown of community trust
- Minneapolis post-2020: City reduced MPD funding and implemented consent decree; ongoing debate about whether reform or restructuring is more effective
Where Trust Has Been Built — Programs Worth Citing
- Camden, NJ (2013): Dissolved and reformed its police department entirely; homicide rates dropped significantly in following years; widely cited as a reform success case
- Boston’s Operation Ceasefire: Partnership model involving law enforcement, community groups, and social services; associated with significant reduction in youth gun violence
- Stockton, CA GVRI: Group Violence Reduction Initiative — direct engagement with highest-risk individuals, social support plus credible deterrence messaging
Pick a specific program or case, not a general position. “Community policing improves trust” is an opinion statement. “Camden’s departmental reform correlated with a reduction in use-of-force complaints and homicide rates in the three years following implementation” is an analytical statement. Your professor is teaching a criminal justice course — they want evidence-based claims, not advocacy essays.
Use of Force and Accountability
Use of force is both a legal standard and a policy question — and CRJ101 Week 4 likely asks you to engage with both dimensions. The legal framework starts with Graham v. Connor (1989), where the Supreme Court established that force must be “objectively reasonable” from the perspective of the officer at the moment of the incident. That standard is still in effect and still debated.
Know the Legal Standard — Graham v. Connor
The reasonableness standard is judged from the officer’s perspective, not in hindsight. Courts consider the severity of the crime, whether the suspect posed an immediate threat, and whether the suspect was actively resisting. Understanding this framework matters for your assignment because it explains why officers are so rarely indicted even in cases that appear clearly excessive to the public.
Understand the De-escalation Debate
Many departments have adopted de-escalation training requirements — teaching officers to use time, distance, and communication to reduce the need for force. Critics argue these trainings are inconsistent, not mandatory, and not evaluated for effectiveness. Supporters argue the evidence from cities like Denver and Louisville shows measurable reductions in use-of-force incidents post-training. This debate is exactly the kind of thing a Week 4 discussion post can dig into.
Connect It to Accountability Mechanisms
The accountability side includes internal affairs, civilian oversight boards, consent decrees, and prosecution. Each has documented limitations. Internal investigations have historically low rates of sustained findings against officers. Civilian boards often lack subpoena power. Consent decrees take years to implement and sometimes fail. Knowing these mechanisms — and their gaps — is what makes your analysis credible rather than surface-level.
The Reform Debate
This is the politically charged section of Week 4. Strayer’s criminal justice curriculum tends to ask students to analyze reform arguments objectively, not advocate for a political position. That framing matters. You are not being asked whether you support police. You are being asked to evaluate what the evidence says about different approaches to improving policing outcomes.
| Reform Position | Core Argument | Key Supporters | Key Criticisms |
|---|---|---|---|
| Incremental Reform | Change training, policies, and oversight within existing structures | Most police chiefs, many elected officials, IACP | Has been the dominant approach for decades with limited structural change in outcomes |
| Defunding / Reallocating | Redirect portions of police budgets to social services, mental health, housing | Community advocates, some city councils | Politically difficult; uneven results; public safety concerns in high-crime areas |
| Consent Decrees | Federal oversight and mandated reforms for departments with documented civil rights violations | DOJ Civil Rights Division | Lengthy, expensive, and compliance monitoring is inconsistent; Trump-era DOJ rolled back several |
| Departmental Restructuring | Rebuild police departments from the ground up with new mission and culture (Camden model) | Researchers like Alex Vitale; some reform advocates | Politically viable only in specific local contexts; labor issues; difficult to replicate at scale |
Choose one reform approach, explain why the evidence supports it over the alternatives for a specific context (a city type, a crime category, a community demographic), and acknowledge what it does not solve. That structure — claim, evidence, limitation — is what criminology professors at Strayer consistently reward. Avoid absolute statements. “Defunding police will increase crime” and “defunding police will reduce harm” are both conclusions without argument. Show your reasoning.
The Future of Policing
The “future of policing” portion of Week 4 is not asking you to predict what happens next. It is asking you to evaluate trajectories — where are current trends heading, and what are the likely consequences? Three trajectories dominate the academic literature right now.
Surveillance Expansion and Its Governance Problem
Policing is becoming more data-intensive. Cameras, sensors, biometrics, and digital records are creating a level of public monitoring that did not exist twenty years ago. The governance question — who controls this data, for how long, under what rules — has not been answered. Several cities (San Francisco, Boston, Portland) have banned facial recognition by police. Most have not. The future of policing depends heavily on which legal and policy frameworks emerge to govern this infrastructure.
For your assignment: Connect this to Fourth Amendment law and the question of what “reasonable expectation of privacy” means in a world of mass digital surveillance. Carpenter v. United States (2018) is directly relevant and worth citing.Mental Health Co-Responder Models
Roughly 20–25% of police calls involve a mental health component. Officers are often the worst-positioned responders for those calls — not because of incompetence, but because enforcement training is the wrong tool for a mental health crisis. Co-responder models pair clinicians with officers, or send clinicians alone to appropriate calls. Denver’s STAR program (Support Team Assisted Response) responded to over 2,000 calls in its first six months without a single arrest or use of force. That is a data point your assignment can use.
For your assignment: This is where the “future of policing” connects directly to community policing philosophy — both are based on the idea that law enforcement is not the right first response to every community problem.Workforce and Culture Change
Many departments face serious recruitment and retention challenges. The post-2020 wave of resignations and retirements reduced officer counts in major cities. At the same time, there is growing pressure to hire more diversely and require higher education standards. These are not small operational questions — they determine what the police workforce looks like for the next generation. Your Week 4 assignment may ask you to evaluate whether workforce reforms can change police culture, or whether culture is shaped by structural factors that hiring practices alone cannot touch.
How to Approach the Assignment
CRJ101 Week 4 assignments at Strayer typically fall into one of three formats: a discussion board post with responses, a short analytical essay, or a reflection paper connecting course concepts to a current event. The approach differs by format.
Starting With a Definition, Not a Claim
Opening your post with “Community policing is defined as…” signals that your response is going to be a summary, not an analysis. Professors know the definition. Start with your argument, then support it with conceptual grounding.
Lead With Your Position, Then Back It Up
“The most significant barrier to effective community policing is not funding or staffing — it is organizational culture within departments” is a claim. It immediately signals analytical thinking. Build from there.
Treating All Reform Positions as Equally Valid
“There are pros and cons to every approach” is not analysis. It is a hedge. Every position has pros and cons. Your job is to evaluate which evidence is stronger in a given context.
Weigh the Evidence, Then Commit
Say which approach the evidence supports, for what type of community and problem, and what conditions would need to be true for an alternative approach to work instead. That is evaluation — not just description.
Using Only Personal Opinion as Evidence
“I think police need better training” might be true, but it is not an argument. What training? Based on what evidence? In comparison to what current practice? Opinion without specificity adds nothing to a criminology discussion.
Anchor Every Claim to a Program, Study, or Case
Denver STAR, Camden’s restructuring, the National Academies 2018 report — these are real, verifiable, and appropriate for an introductory criminal justice course. You do not need a dozen sources. Two or three strong ones, used precisely, will do more than a list of general statements.
Discussion Post Checklist Before You Submit
What Tanks Your Grade
Introductory criminal justice is an easier course to do well in than students often make it. The mistakes that pull grades down are not usually knowledge gaps. They are structural problems in how students write about this material.
Writing a News Report Instead of an Analysis
Summarizing what happened in Ferguson or Minneapolis without connecting it to criminological concepts is a description, not an assignment. The events are context. The analysis is what they reveal about policing structure, accountability gaps, or legitimacy theory. Get to the analytical layer faster.
Conflating “Defunding” With “Abolishing”
These are different positions. Defunding advocates generally argue for reallocation of some police budget to social services. Abolitionists argue for replacing policing with different community safety structures entirely. Mixing them up in an assignment suggests you have not read the material carefully. Know the distinction and use the right term.
Arguing That Technology Fixes Culture
Body cameras, predictive software, and dashcams are tools. They do not change the values or discretionary behavior of officers. If your assignment takes the position that technology is the solution to policing problems, you will need evidence that the technology actually changed outcomes — not just that it was adopted. The evidence for that is much weaker than most students assume.
Ignoring the Racial Equity Dimension
Every major topic in Week 4 — community policing, surveillance, use of force, reform — intersects with documented racial disparities in how policing is applied. A Week 4 response that does not acknowledge this dimension is incomplete, not neutral. You do not have to advocate a political position. You do have to show that you know the data.
Frequently Asked Questions
Criminology assignment help · Law assignment help · Critical analysis paper writing · Sociology assignment help · Political science assignment help · Essay writing services · Research paper writing services
Before You Write Your Post
Nail down which concept the prompt is actually foregrounding. Community policing? Technology? Reform? Future trajectories? Each requires a slightly different analytical lens. Do not try to cover all of them in one response — pick the one that the prompt emphasizes and go deep on that.
Then find one real-world case or study that gives your argument something concrete to stand on. You do not need ten sources. One well-chosen, accurately described example does more work than a vague reference to what “research shows.”
The Week 4 material is genuinely interesting — policing is one of the most actively debated policy areas in the country right now. That gives you plenty of current, credible material to draw from. Use it. The assignments that stand out are the ones where it is clear the student engaged with the actual complexity of the topic, not just the surface version of it.
Need Help With Your CRJ101 Written Assignments?
Our academic writing team supports criminal justice students across Strayer’s CRJ course sequence — discussion posts, response papers, essays, and research assignments.
Criminology Assignment Help Get Started