Evaluation Issues Confronting Juvenile Justice Sentencing Reforms: A Case Study of Texas
- 1 July 1998
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Crime & Delinquency
- Vol. 44 (3) , 443-463
- https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128798044003007
Abstract
Many states currently are implementing “get tough” sentencing reforms in juvenile justice. Surprisingly, however, little attention has been given to evaluation issues identified by the adult justice sentencing literature as critical to assessments of efficacy. Analysis of one recent juvenile justice sentencing reform in Texas—determinate sentencing—provides an opportunity to highlight such issues and to demonstrate their relevance to assessment of other states' juvenile justice sentencing reforms. This article identifies the failure to attend adequately to design, implementation, use, and assessment issues, including identification of potential unintended effects, as barriers to effective evaluation of these reforms.Keywords
This publication has 22 references indexed in Scilit:
- The competence of adolescents as trial defendants.Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 1997
- Whatever is Next After the Prison-Building Boom will be Next in TexasThe Prison Journal, 1996
- Violent Youth in Juvenile and Adult Court: An Assessment of Sentencing Strategies in TexasLaw & Policy, 1996
- Merging and Emerging Systems of Juvenile and Criminal Justice*Law & Policy, 1996
- Juvenile Transfers to the Criminal Justice System: State of the Art*Law & Policy, 1996
- Rethinking the Sanctioning Function in Juvenile Court: Retributive or Restorative Responses to Youth CrimeCrime & Delinquency, 1995
- Sharing Data and Information in Juvenile Justice: Legal, Ethical, and Practical ConsiderationsJuvenile and Family Court Journal, 1994
- The Failure of Sentencing Guidelines: A Plea for Less AggregationThe University of Chicago Law Review, 1991
- The Future of Juvenile Justice: Is It Time to Abolish the System?The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1973-), 1990
- Models of helping and coping.American Psychologist, 1982