Criminal Justice Classes Online - Criminology

Criminal justice classes online provide flexible pathways through which students can build toward degrees, develop specific professional competencies, and advance their careers by selecting individual courses from accredited institutions and completing them on schedules that accommodate work, family, and other obligations. As a student-centered dimension of Criminal Justice Education, understanding how to choose, enroll in, finance, and extract maximum value from online criminal justice classes requires practical knowledge that academic program descriptions and marketing materials rarely provide — knowledge about credit transfer policies, financial aid eligibility for individual courses, the accreditation distinctions that determine whether credits will be recognized, and the strategic sequencing of courses to build toward coherent educational and professional goals. Within the broader field of Criminology, the growing practice of combining online classes from multiple providers to construct personalized educational pathways reflects a fundamental shift in how criminal justice education is consumed — from a single-institution, residential, lockstep model to a multi-source, flexible, student-directed model that offers unprecedented choice but that also requires unprecedented navigational competence from the students who use it.

Introduction

The practical realities of taking criminal justice classes online differ substantially from the experience of enrolling in a residential degree program, and students who approach online course enrollment without understanding these differences risk making costly mistakes — choosing courses whose credits will not transfer, enrolling at institutions whose accreditation does not meet employer or graduate school requirements, paying tuition for classes that do not count toward degree completion, or accumulating credits without building toward any coherent credential. The information asymmetry between institutions (which understand their own policies) and students (who may not) creates a landscape in which informed decision-making requires effort that uninformed enrollment does not — but the investment in understanding enrollment mechanics pays dividends in reduced time-to-degree, lower educational costs, and credentials that carry genuine professional value (Clear, 2001).

This article addresses the practical dimensions of taking criminal justice classes online that other articles in this category do not cover in detail: how to evaluate and select classes, how enrollment and registration work for non-degree and cross-enrolled students, how financial aid applies to individual online courses, how credit transfer operates and what pitfalls to avoid, how to combine classes from multiple institutions into a coherent educational pathway, and how to verify that online classes will produce credentials that employers and graduate programs recognize. The treatment is intentionally practical — oriented toward the actionable information that prospective online students need rather than the theoretical analysis of online education that other articles in this category provide.

Choosing Criminal Justice Classes Online

Matching Courses to Educational Goals

The first step in choosing criminal justice classes online is clarifying the educational goal the classes are intended to serve, because different goals lead to different course selection strategies. Students working toward degree completion at a specific institution should select online classes that satisfy their program’s degree requirements — and should verify this alignment with their academic advisor before enrolling, as course descriptions that appear equivalent may not satisfy specific institutional requirements for content coverage, credit hours, or assessment standards (Southerland, 2002). Students supplementing a residential program with online electives from other institutions should focus on courses that fill gaps in their home program’s offerings — specializations not available locally, advanced methods training beyond what their program provides, or faculty expertise in areas of particular interest (Steiner, Wright, & Toto, 2020).

Working professionals seeking career advancement should prioritize classes that develop competencies their agencies value for promotion or specialized assignment. Police officers seeking promotion to supervisory ranks benefit from courses in leadership, organizational management, evidence-based policing, and policy analysis (Hilal & Densley, 2013). Correctional practitioners pursuing evidence-based practice certifications benefit from courses covering the Risk-Needs-Responsivity framework, cognitive-behavioral intervention, motivational interviewing, and program evaluation (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). Crime analysts benefit from courses in GIS, statistical analysis, intelligence methods, and data visualization (Santos, 2017). Students exploring criminal justice as a potential field of study can use individual online classes — particularly free MOOCs on platforms such as Coursera and edX — to test their interest and aptitude before committing to degree programs that represent substantial financial and time investments.

Graduate school aspirants should select classes that demonstrate analytical competence to admissions committees. Research methods and statistics courses with rigorous assessment — courses that require original data analysis, research design projects, and substantive written reports rather than merely multiple-choice examinations — produce work products that can serve as writing samples and evidence of research potential. Theory courses that require comparative analysis and argumentative essays develop the scholarly reasoning that graduate programs expect entering students to possess (Cullen, Agnew, & Wilcox, 2014). Faculty at research universities who serve on graduate admissions committees evaluate applicants’ transcripts for evidence of methodological preparation, theoretical literacy, and analytical writing — competencies that the right online courses can develop but that perfunctory online courses may not (Mustaine & Tewksbury, 2009).

Evaluating Course and Instructor Quality

Before enrolling in any online criminal justice class, students should evaluate multiple quality indicators to ensure the course will provide genuine educational value. The instructor’s qualifications — doctoral degree in criminology or a related field, record of publication in peer-reviewed journals, institutional affiliation with an accredited university — represent the most fundamental quality indicator. Courses taught by faculty with active research programs bring current scholarship into the classroom in ways that courses taught by adjunct instructors without research backgrounds cannot replicate (Cohn & Farrington, 2014). Students can verify instructor credentials through institutional faculty pages, Google Scholar profiles, and academic databases such as JSTOR or Criminal Justice Abstracts.

The syllabus — when available for review before enrollment — provides the most detailed preview of course content, assessment expectations, and intellectual demands. Students should look for syllabi that specify learning objectives aligned with analytical competencies rather than merely informational outcomes, that require written analytical work (research papers, case analyses, policy briefs) in addition to or instead of objective examinations, that assign readings from peer-reviewed sources and scholarly textbooks rather than exclusively from popular media, and that include discussion forum requirements with expectations for evidence-based argumentation rather than mere opinion sharing (Bachman & Schutt, 2020). Courses whose syllabi are not available for pre-enrollment review can be evaluated through course catalog descriptions, student reviews on platforms such as RateMyProfessors, and direct inquiry to the instructor or department.

The institution’s accreditation status determines whether course credits will be recognized by other institutions, employers, and graduate programs. Regional accreditation — administered by bodies such as the Higher Learning Commission, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, the Middle States Commission on Higher Education, the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities, the New England Commission of Higher Education, and the WASC Senior College and University Commission — is the standard that most employers and transfer-receiving institutions require. Students can verify institutional accreditation through the Department of Education’s database or the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) directory (Frost & Clear, 2012). Programs with only national accreditation from bodies not recognized by the Department of Education for Title IV purposes may produce credits that do not transfer and degrees that some employers do not recognize — a distinction that students must verify before enrolling.

Enrollment, Registration, and Financial Considerations

Enrollment Pathways for Online Students

Online criminal justice classes are accessible through multiple enrollment pathways, each with different registration procedures, tuition structures, and credit implications. Degree-seeking students enrolled at institutions offering online classes register through their institution’s standard registration system and pay tuition according to their program’s fee schedule. Non-degree students — individuals who wish to take individual courses without being admitted to a degree program — can typically enroll as “non-degree,” “non-matriculated,” or “special” students at institutions that permit this enrollment category, subject to application procedures and prerequisites that vary across institutions (Morn, 1995).

Cross-registration and consortium agreements between institutions allow enrolled students to take courses at partner institutions while remaining enrolled at their home institution, with credits automatically transferred and tuition charged at the home institution’s rate. Systems such as the State University of New York (SUNY) consortium, the University of Massachusetts system, and various state university systems have established cross-registration policies that allow students to access online courses across multiple campuses within the system. Students enrolled in one institution of a consortium can typically register for online courses at partner institutions through a streamlined process that avoids the separate application and non-degree enrollment procedures that independent enrollment would require.

Concurrent enrollment and dual enrollment programs allow high school students to take college-level criminal justice courses — increasingly available online — for simultaneous high school and college credit. These programs provide early exposure to criminological concepts and can accelerate degree completion by allowing students to enter college with criminal justice credits already earned (Gabbidon, Penn, & Richards, 2003). Community colleges, which typically have the most accessible dual enrollment policies, offer online introductory criminal justice courses that provide high school students with both college credit and an informed basis for deciding whether to pursue criminal justice as a college major.

Financial Aid, Tuition, and Cost Management

The financial dimensions of taking criminal justice classes online require careful attention because financial aid eligibility, tuition rates, and cost structures vary across enrollment categories and institutional types. Federal financial aid — Pell Grants, federal student loans, and federal work-study — is available to students enrolled at least half-time in eligible degree programs at institutions participating in Title IV federal financial aid programs. Students taking individual online courses as non-degree students may not qualify for federal financial aid unless they are enrolled in a degree program and the courses count toward that program’s requirements. The Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) determines eligibility for federal aid, and students should complete the FAFSA annually regardless of enrollment status to maintain eligibility for any aid for which they qualify (Tewksbury & Mustaine, 2011).

Military educational benefits provide substantial financial support for online criminal justice classes. The Post-9/11 GI Bill covers tuition, a monthly housing allowance (for students enrolled more than half-time), and a books and supplies stipend at rates that vary by institution type and enrollment intensity. The Department of Defense Tuition Assistance (TA) program provides up to $250 per semester hour (with an annual cap of $4,500) for active-duty service members taking courses from institutions that have signed a Department of Defense Memorandum of Understanding. The Yellow Ribbon Program covers tuition costs that exceed GI Bill rates at participating institutions. Military-connected students should verify that their chosen institution participates in the relevant benefit programs before enrolling (Carter, 2009).

Employer tuition reimbursement programs, which many criminal justice agencies offer as employee benefits, can substantially reduce the out-of-pocket cost of online classes for working professionals. Reimbursement policies vary across agencies in their coverage limits (typically $2,000 to $10,000 annually), eligible institutions (some restrict reimbursement to specific schools or accreditation categories), grade requirements (many require a B or C minimum for reimbursement), and service obligations (some require continued employment for a specified period after reimbursement). Students planning to use employer tuition reimbursement should verify their agency’s policies — including pre-approval requirements, reimbursement timelines, and tax implications — before incurring educational expenses (Paoline & Terrill, 2007).

Tuition rates for online criminal justice classes vary enormously across institutional types and can represent either savings or premiums relative to residential instruction at the same institution. Some institutions charge the same tuition for online and residential courses; others charge online students a different rate (sometimes lower to attract enrollment, sometimes higher to cover technology costs); and some charge all online students the same rate regardless of residency status, eliminating the in-state/out-of-state differential that significantly affects tuition at public universities. Students comparing costs across institutions should calculate the total per-course cost including tuition, fees, technology charges, and any required materials — not merely the posted per-credit rate — to make accurate comparisons (Frost & Clear, 2012).

Credit Transfer and Credential Building

How Credit Transfer Works

Credit transfer — the process by which course credits earned at one institution are recognized and applied toward degree requirements at another — is one of the most important but least understood aspects of taking criminal justice classes online from multiple providers. Transfer credit policies are set by the receiving institution and vary substantially in their generosity, transparency, and predictability. The general principle is that credits from regionally accredited institutions are more likely to transfer than credits from nationally accredited or non-accredited institutions, but even credits from regionally accredited sources may be denied transfer if the receiving institution determines that the course content, credit hours, or academic level do not align with its own degree requirements (Southerland, 2002).

Students planning to take online criminal justice classes with the intention of transferring credits should take several precautionary steps before enrollment. First, obtain a written transfer credit evaluation from the receiving institution that specifies exactly which courses will be accepted and toward which degree requirements they will apply. Verbal assurances from admissions counselors are insufficient — only written evaluations that identify specific course equivalencies provide reliable guidance. Second, verify that the course at the sending institution carries the same number of credit hours as the equivalent course at the receiving institution; differences in credit hour values can result in partial credit transfer that leaves students short of degree requirements. Third, confirm that the transfer institution does not impose a maximum on transfer credits — many institutions limit the proportion of degree credits that can be transferred from other sources, typically capping transfers at 60 to 90 credits for bachelor’s programs (Tewksbury & Mustaine, 2011).

State-level articulation agreements between community colleges and four-year universities facilitate transfer for students pursuing the most common pathway — completing lower-division coursework at a community college before transferring to a university for upper-division coursework and degree completion. States with well-developed articulation systems — Florida’s common course numbering system, Virginia’s guaranteed admission agreements, California’s Intersegmental General Education Transfer Curriculum (IGETC), and similar state-level frameworks — provide structured transfer pathways that reduce credit loss and uncertainty. Students in states without strong articulation agreements face greater transfer risk and should invest more effort in pre-transfer credit evaluation (Ross & Elechi, 2002).

State-level articulation agreements between community colleges and four-year universities facilitate transfer for students pursuing the most common pathway — completing lower-division coursework at a community college before transferring to a university for upper-division coursework and degree completion. States with well-developed articulation systems — Florida’s common course numbering system, Virginia’s guaranteed admission agreements, California’s Intersegmental General Education Transfer Curriculum (IGETC), Texas’s common course numbering system, and similar state-level frameworks — provide structured transfer pathways that reduce credit loss and uncertainty (Ross & Elechi, 2002). Students in these states can typically identify community college courses that are guaranteed to transfer to specific university programs, substantially reducing the risk of credit loss. Students in states without strong articulation agreements face greater transfer risk and should invest more effort in pre-transfer credit evaluation.

The American Council on Education (ACE) Credit Recommendation Service evaluates courses from non-traditional providers — military training programs, corporate education, professional certifications, and some MOOC platforms — for college credit equivalency. Some institutions accept ACE credit recommendations, treating them as transfer credit that applies toward degree requirements. Students with military training evaluated by ACE or with coursework from employers whose training programs have received ACE evaluation should investigate whether their target institutions accept these credit recommendations, as acceptance policies vary widely and the potential time and cost savings can be substantial.

The College Level Examination Program (CLEP) and DANTES Subject Standardized Tests (DSST) provide standardized examination options through which students can earn college credit by demonstrating mastery of subject matter without completing a formal course. Several criminal justice-related examinations are available through these programs, and many institutions grant credit for passing scores. Military service members and veterans can take DSST examinations at no cost through military education centers, making this pathway particularly valuable for the military-connected student population. Students considering examination-based credit should verify their target institution’s acceptance policies, including minimum score requirements and credit limits, before preparing for and taking examinations (Carter, 2009).

Building Coherent Credentials from Multiple Sources

The flexibility that online classes provide — the ability to take courses from multiple institutions, to combine credit-bearing courses with MOOCs and professional development, and to build educational credentials incrementally over time — creates opportunities for personalized educational pathways but also risks of incoherence. A transcript that shows scattered courses from half a dozen institutions without a clear curricular logic may raise questions from employers and graduate admissions committees about whether the student’s education constitutes a coherent preparation or a random collection of credits (Bernard & Engel, 2001).

Students building credentials from multiple online sources should adopt a strategy that produces a coherent educational profile. One approach is to enroll as a degree-seeking student at a primary institution and supplement that institution’s course offerings with strategically selected courses from other providers that fill specific gaps — a cybercrime course from Michigan State University to supplement a home program that lacks cybercrime offerings, an advanced statistics course from Penn State World Campus to go beyond what the home program teaches, a crime analysis course with GIS training from an institution with stronger technical offerings (Santos, 2017). This supplementary strategy maintains the coherence of a primary institutional affiliation while exploiting the breadth of the online ecosystem to access instruction that no single institution can provide across every subfield.

Professional certifications provide another mechanism for building credentials that complement academic coursework. Students who combine degree progress with preparation for professional certifications — the IACA crime analyst certification, the ACFE Certified Fraud Examiner, ASIS International‘s Certified Protection Professional — build multi-dimensional credential profiles that signal both academic preparation and professional competence. Online courses that align with certification examination content can serve double duty — contributing to degree completion while simultaneously preparing students for professional credentialing examinations that enhance their career competitiveness (Kim, Cwick, & Gertz, 2016).

Comparing Online and Residential Classes

What’s Different About Online Criminal Justice Classes

Students accustomed to residential instruction should understand the specific ways in which online criminal justice classes differ in structure, interaction patterns, and intellectual demands. The most consequential difference is the shift from synchronous to asynchronous interaction: in residential classes, learning occurs through real-time exchanges — lectures, discussions, questions, spontaneous debate — that create immediacy and social accountability. In asynchronous online classes, interaction is mediated through text — discussion forum posts, written assignments, email exchanges — that allows reflection and revision but sacrifices spontaneity and the non-verbal communication cues that enrich face-to-face dialogue (Saulnier, 2015). This difference is not inherently advantageous or disadvantageous; it simply requires different engagement strategies. Students who are strong writers and reflective thinkers may find that asynchronous interaction produces more thoughtful and substantive contributions than the time-pressured spontaneity of live discussion. Students who learn best through verbal exchange and immediate feedback may find asynchronous formats less engaging and should seek online courses that include synchronous components.

The assessment profile of online criminal justice classes typically differs from residential courses in ways that affect both the skills students develop and the effort courses require. Online courses tend to be more writing-intensive than residential courses because written communication is the primary medium through which students demonstrate learning, engage with peers, and interact with instructors in asynchronous formats (Robinson & Rudes, 2012). Discussion forum requirements — which may specify post length, evidentiary expectations, and response obligations — add a regular writing commitment that residential courses may not include. Research papers, case analyses, policy briefs, and analytical essays appear more frequently in online course assessment than in residential courses that may rely more heavily on in-class examinations and oral participation. Students who approach this writing requirement as a burden miss the developmental opportunity it provides: the analytical writing skills that online criminal justice classes demand are among the most professionally valuable and transferable competencies that any education can produce (Bachman & Schutt, 2020).

What’s the Same

The substance of criminal justice education does not change with delivery format. The theories of criminal behavior, the institutional structures of policing, courts, and corrections, the principles of research design and statistical analysis, the evidence base for effective interventions, and the policy debates that animate contemporary criminal justice are the same regardless of whether students encounter them in a lecture hall or through a learning management system (Cullen, Agnew, & Wilcox, 2014). The scholarly sources that inform instruction — the research published in Criminology, Justice Quarterly, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, and other peer-reviewed journals — are equally accessible to online and residential students. The datasets produced by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the FBI, and the ICPSR are freely available to all students regardless of their physical location. The analytical competencies that criminal justice education aims to develop — the ability to evaluate evidence, apply theoretical frameworks, reason about causation, and communicate findings clearly — are identical across delivery formats (Sherman, 1998).

The degree earned upon completion of an online program at a regionally accredited institution is legally and professionally identical to the degree earned through residential attendance at the same institution. Diplomas do not distinguish between online and residential completion. Transcripts do not identify delivery format. Employers who accept degrees from a given institution accept them regardless of whether the coursework was completed online or in person. The practical equivalence of online and residential credentials has been reinforced by the widespread adoption of online instruction across higher education, which has made delivery format a normal variation rather than a quality signal (Means et al., 2010). The COVID-19 pandemic further normalized online delivery by forcing virtually every institution in the country to deliver instruction remotely, demonstrating that online education is not a marginal alternative but a standard capability of modern higher education.

Common Mistakes and How to Avoid Them

Accreditation and Credit Transfer Pitfalls

Students taking criminal justice classes online make predictable mistakes that can be avoided through advance planning and informed decision-making. The most costly mistake is enrolling at an institution without regional accreditation and subsequently discovering that credits will not transfer to the degree-granting institution or that the degree itself is not recognized by target employers. This mistake is particularly common among military-connected students who are targeted by aggressive marketing from institutions whose accreditation status does not meet Department of Defense educational quality standards, and among working professionals who prioritize convenience and speed over credential validity (Frost & Clear, 2012).

A second common mistake is assuming that courses with similar titles are interchangeable for transfer purposes. An “Introduction to Criminal Justice” course at a community college may cover different content, carry different credit hours, or meet different assessment standards than the introductory course at the student’s degree-granting institution. Students who take courses without verifying specific transfer equivalencies may find that the credits they earned apply only as general electives rather than as specific degree requirements — delaying graduation, increasing costs, and creating frustration that more careful planning would have prevented (Southerland, 2002).

Time Management and Sequencing Mistakes

A third mistake is underestimating the time demands of online courses. Students who assume that online delivery means easier or faster completion frequently discover that well-designed online courses require equivalent or greater time investment than residential courses — typically 9 to 12 hours per week for a three-credit course, including reading, viewing lectures, completing discussion posts, and preparing written assignments. Students who carry full-time work schedules alongside full-time course loads without realistic time budgets risk poor academic performance, course failure, or burnout that undermines both their educational goals and their professional effectiveness (Robinson & Rudes, 2012).

A fourth mistake — particularly relevant for students at the beginning of their criminal justice education — is choosing courses based solely on scheduling convenience without considering curricular sequence or prerequisite logic. Taking an advanced policing course before completing the introductory criminal justice survey, or enrolling in a program evaluation course without first completing research methods and statistics, produces a fragmented learning experience in which advanced content lacks the foundational context necessary for deep understanding. Students should follow recommended course sequences — even when online delivery makes it technically possible to take courses in any order — because the pedagogical logic that sequences courses from foundational to advanced reflects genuine intellectual dependencies that cannot be bypassed without cost (Cullen, Agnew, & Wilcox, 2014).

Table 1. Online Criminal Justice Class Enrollment Checklist

Step	Action	Purpose	Resources
1	Clarify educational goal	Determine whether classes serve degree completion, career advancement, exploration, or enrichment	Academic advisor, career counselor
2	Verify institutional accreditation	Ensure credits will transfer and degrees will be recognized	Dept. of Education database, CHEA directory
3	Review instructor qualifications	Confirm doctoral credentials and research activity	Faculty webpage, Google Scholar
4	Examine syllabus/course description	Assess content coverage, assessment rigor, and interaction requirements	Program website, instructor contact
5	Verify credit transfer (if applicable)	Obtain written transfer evaluation from receiving institution	Registrar’s office at receiving institution
6	Determine financial aid eligibility	Identify applicable aid (federal, military, employer reimbursement)	FAFSA, employer HR, VA benefits office
7	Check technology requirements	Ensure equipment and internet meet course demands	Course technology requirements page
8	Plan course sequencing	Ensure prerequisites are met and courses build toward goals	Degree requirements sheet, academic advisor
9	Establish study schedule	Create dedicated time blocks for coursework	Personal calendar, time management tools
10	Engage actively from day one	Introduce yourself, complete orientation, begin first module immediately	LMS orientation, first-week assignments

Conclusion

Taking criminal justice classes online requires navigational competence that extends beyond the intellectual demands of the coursework itself — understanding enrollment pathways, verifying accreditation, evaluating course quality, managing financial aid, planning credit transfers, and building coherent credentials from potentially multiple sources. Students who invest in this navigational work before enrolling — verifying that their chosen institution is regionally accredited, confirming that credits will transfer to their degree program, evaluating instructor qualifications and assessment expectations, and aligning course selections with career and educational goals — extract substantially more value from online criminal justice education than those who enroll impulsively based on marketing promises or convenience alone. The online landscape offers unprecedented flexibility and access, but flexibility without strategy produces scattered credits rather than coherent credentials, and access without quality evaluation produces enrollment without genuine education. The practical guidance in this article — the enrollment checklist, the transfer credit precautions, the financial planning strategies, the course evaluation criteria — is intended to help students transform the opportunity that online criminal justice classes represent into the educational substance and professional advancement that the opportunity promises.

References

Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). The psychology of criminal conduct (5th ed.). Anderson Publishing.
Bachman, R. D., & Schutt, R. K. (2020). The practice of research in criminology and criminal justice (7th ed.). Sage Publications.
Bernard, T. J., & Engel, R. S. (2001). Conceptualizing criminal justice theory. Justice Quarterly, 18(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820100094801
Carter, D. L. (2009). Law enforcement intelligence: A guide for state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies (2nd ed.). U.S. Department of Justice.
Clear, T. R. (2001). Has academic criminal justice come of age? Justice Quarterly, 18(4), 709–726. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820100095071
Cohn, E. G., & Farrington, D. P. (2014). Publication productivity of criminologists. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 25(3), 275–303. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511253.2014.921730
Cullen, F. T., Agnew, R., & Wilcox, P. (2014). Criminological theory: Past to present (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Frost, N. A., & Clear, T. R. (2012). New directions in correctional research. Justice Quarterly, 29(5), 619–649. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2012.667141
Gabbidon, S. L., Penn, E. B., & Richards, W. A. (2003). The status of Black criminologists in the discipline’s top-ranked journals and doctoral programs. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 14(2), 237–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511250300085761
Hilal, S. M., & Densley, J. A. (2013). Higher education and local police. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 82(5), 1–3.
Kim, B., Cwick, J. M., & Gertz, M. G. (2016). An assessment of professional engagement in the top-ranked doctoral programs. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 27(4), 538–564. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511253.2016.1188890
Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning. U.S. Department of Education.
Morn, F. (1995). Academic politics and the history of criminal justice education. Greenwood Press.
Mustaine, E. E., & Tewksbury, R. (2009). Trends in academic career productivity of graduates from top-ranked doctoral programs. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 20(3), 291–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511250903183129
Paoline, E. A., III, & Terrill, W. (2007). Police education, experience, and the use of force. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34(2), 179–196. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854806290239
Robinson, M. B., & Rudes, D. S. (2012). The top 20 reasons students dislike studying CJ and criminology. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 23(2), 201–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511253.2011.606367
Ross, J. I., & Elechi, O. O. (2002). Student attitudes towards internships in criminal justice. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 13(1), 199–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511250200085281
Santos, R. B. (2017). Crime analysis with crime mapping (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
Saulnier, A. (2015). Online and face-to-face course delivery: Lessons from the criminal justice classroom. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 26(2), 166–185.
Sherman, L. W. (1998). Preventing crime: What works, what doesn’t, what’s promising. National Institute of Justice.
Southerland, M. D. (2002). Criminal justice curricula in the United States. Justice Quarterly, 19(4), 589–601. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820200095381
Steiner, B., Wright, E. M., & Toto, S. (2020). What matters in doctoral education in criminology and criminal justice? Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 31(2), 153–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511253.2019.1705987
Tewksbury, R., & Mustaine, E. E. (2011). How many are too many? Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 22(3), 379–396. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511253.2010.516561

Related Articles