Online criminology schools have transformed access to criminal justice education by enabling students to earn undergraduate and graduate degrees from accredited institutions without relocating, leaving employment, or attending classes on a fixed schedule. As one of the fastest-growing segments of Criminology and Criminal Justice Education, online programs now serve hundreds of thousands of students — working law enforcement officers, correctional practitioners, military service members, parents with caregiving responsibilities, and geographically isolated individuals — who would otherwise have no practical access to the criminological training that career advancement and professional competence increasingly demand. Within the broader field of Criminology, the explosive growth of online education has created both genuine opportunity and serious quality concerns, as the market incentives that drive online enrollment do not always align with the educational rigor that the discipline’s scholarly and professional standards require.
Introduction
The growth of online criminal justice education represents one of the most significant structural changes in the discipline’s institutional landscape since the LEAA-era expansion of the 1970s. Criminal justice has consistently ranked among the most popular fields for online degree programs, with enrollment growth rates that have outpaced most other disciplines over the past two decades (Frost & Clear, 2012). This popularity reflects the unique characteristics of the criminal justice student population: a large proportion of criminal justice students are working professionals whose shift schedules, geographic assignments, and career obligations make traditional residential education impractical; military service members and veterans whose frequent relocations require educational flexibility; and adult learners returning to school after periods of employment who need programs that accommodate work and family responsibilities alongside academic demands.
The benefits of online access are real and should not be dismissed by scholars or practitioners who associate quality exclusively with residential instruction. A patrol officer working night shifts in a rural county, a correctional officer in a facility hours from the nearest university, a military service member deployed overseas, and a single parent whose childcare responsibilities preclude regular campus attendance all face barriers to residential education that online programs can remove (Saulnier, 2015). The question is not whether online criminal justice education should exist — the access imperative is clear — but whether the programs that have proliferated to serve this demand provide educational substance commensurate with the credentials they confer and the professional responsibilities their graduates will assume.
This article provides a detailed examination of the online criminology education landscape — the program models available, the quality indicators that distinguish rigorous programs from credential mills, specific programs worthy of consideration across institutional categories, the accreditation and regulatory frameworks that govern online education, the technological platforms and pedagogical approaches that shape the online learning experience, and the career outcomes and professional value of online criminal justice degrees.
Program Models and Degree Levels
Online Bachelor’s Degree Programs
Online bachelor’s degree programs in criminal justice serve two primary student populations: traditional-age students who choose online delivery for flexibility or cost reasons and working adults — often criminal justice practitioners — who pursue bachelor’s degrees for career advancement, salary enhancement, or personal educational goals. The curricular requirements for online bachelor’s programs generally mirror those of residential programs at the same institution, including core courses in criminological theory, criminal justice systems, research methods, and statistics, supplemented by elective courses in specialized areas and general education requirements (Cullen, Agnew, & Wilcox, 2014). The mode of delivery differs — asynchronous video lectures, online discussion forums, digital assignments, and remote examinations replace face-to-face instruction — but the degree earned is nominally identical to the residential version.
Several research universities offer online bachelor’s programs that draw on the same faculty and academic resources as their residential counterparts. Penn State World Campus offers a Bachelor of Science in Criminal Justice through the same Department of Sociology and Criminology that houses Penn State’s on-campus program, providing online students with access to faculty whose research addresses developmental criminology, communities and crime, and the consequences of incarceration (Sampson, 2012). Arizona State University Online offers a Bachelor of Science in Criminology and Criminal Justice through its School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, one of the nation’s largest and most rapidly growing programs, with online delivery that leverages ASU’s substantial investment in educational technology and instructional design. George Mason University offers an online Bachelor of Science in Criminology, Law and Society through its Department of Criminology, Law and Society, providing access to a faculty known for evidence-based crime policy research and the Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy.
University of Central Florida offers online criminal justice programs through one of the nation’s largest universities, with particular strengths in terrorism research and cybercrime. the University of Massachusetts Lowell provides an online criminal justice bachelor’s program through a university with a long-standing commitment to online education and criminal justice scholarship. Washington State University offers a fully online bachelor’s program through its Global Campus, drawing on faculty strengths in rural crime, policing, and corrections. Florida International University provides online criminal justice degree options through its role as one of the nation’s largest Hispanic-serving institutions, combining academic rigor with service to diverse student populations.
Online Master’s Degree Programs
Online master’s programs in criminal justice serve working professionals seeking career advancement, aspiring researchers preparing for doctoral study, and career changers entering the criminal justice field from other sectors. The proliferation of online master’s programs has been particularly rapid, driven by the career advancement incentives that many criminal justice agencies provide for employees with graduate degrees — salary increases, promotional eligibility, access to supervisory and command positions — and by the flexibility that online delivery provides for professionals whose work schedules preclude residential attendance (Hilal & Densley, 2013).
Programs affiliated with research universities that maintain strong residential master’s and doctoral programs offer the highest academic quality in the online master’s market. The University of Cincinnati’s online Master of Science in Criminal Justice integrates the program’s nationally recognized expertise in evidence-based corrections and the Risk-Needs-Responsivity framework into an online format that serves working practitioners nationwide (Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Latessa & Lovins, 2010). Michigan State University’s online Master of Science in Criminal Justice provides graduate education through one of the oldest and most respected criminal justice programs in the country, with faculty strengths in policing, cybercrime, and international criminal justice. the University of Nebraska at Omaha’s online Master of Science in Criminology and Criminal Justice offers graduate education through a program with a strong research reputation and commitment to distance education.
Boston University’s online Master of Criminal Justice provides graduate education through a major private research university with strong academic standards and a faculty drawn from both criminal justice and related disciplines. Arizona State University’s online Master of Science in Criminal Justice offers graduate education leveraging ASU’s research faculty and innovative online delivery infrastructure. Sam Houston State University’s online Master of Science in Criminal Justice provides graduate education through one of the nation’s largest criminal justice programs, with a distinctive proximity to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. the University of Colorado Denver’s online Master of Criminal Justice offers a graduate program that integrates criminological training with the social science breadth of a metropolitan research university.
For-profit and primarily online institutions have also entered the market aggressively. American Military University (part of the American Public University System) specifically serves military and veteran populations, offering criminal justice programs designed for the scheduling challenges of active-duty service members. Purdue University Global provides online criminal justice programs oriented toward working adults. Liberty University operates one of the largest online criminal justice programs in the country, though its ideological orientation and pedagogical approach differ from mainstream academic programs in ways that prospective students should understand. Southern New Hampshire University has built a large online criminal justice program as part of its broader expansion into online higher education. Students evaluating these programs should carefully compare their curricula, faculty credentials, and career outcomes against those of university-affiliated online programs before enrolling.
Quality Evaluation and Accreditation
Distinguishing Rigorous Programs from Credential Mills
The quality variation among online criminal justice programs is far larger than among residential programs, making careful evaluation essential for prospective students. The strongest online programs share several characteristics that distinguish them from programs whose primary purpose is revenue generation rather than educational substance (Robinson & Rudes, 2012):
Faculty quality is the most fundamental indicator. Programs in which the majority of courses are designed and taught by full-time, doctoral-qualified faculty with active research programs provide instruction informed by current scholarship, maintained by individuals with genuine expertise, and accountable to the academic standards that tenure and promotion processes enforce. Programs that rely predominantly on adjunct instructors — often hiring practitioners with master’s degrees or faculty on short-term contracts without research obligations — may provide valuable practical perspective but are less likely to deliver the theoretical depth, methodological rigor, and engagement with current evidence that distinguish higher education from professional training (Steiner, Wright, & Toto, 2020). Prospective students should examine a program’s faculty page, noting the proportion of full-time versus adjunct instructors, the terminal degrees held, and the publication records of faculty who actually teach online courses rather than merely lending their names to program marketing.
Student-to-faculty ratios and class sizes shape the quality of online interaction. Programs that maintain reasonable section sizes — ideally capped at 25 to 30 students per section for courses with substantial writing requirements — can provide meaningful instructor-student interaction, detailed feedback on written work, and genuine scholarly mentoring. Programs that enroll 50, 100, or more students per section and rely on automated grading or minimal instructor feedback provide a quantitatively different educational experience regardless of their institutional affiliation (Frost & Clear, 2012).
Synchronous versus asynchronous instruction represents a design choice with pedagogical implications. Programs that require some real-time interaction — live video sessions, synchronous discussions, virtual office hours — create opportunities for the spontaneous exchange, immediate feedback, and interpersonal connection that characterize the best face-to-face instruction. Programs that are entirely asynchronous provide maximum scheduling flexibility but sacrifice the interactional dynamics that many scholars consider essential to deep learning (Saulnier, 2015). The best programs use blended approaches — asynchronous content delivery supplemented by synchronous meetings, required participation in online discussion forums with instructor moderation, and individual video consultations — that balance flexibility with engagement.
Accreditation and Regulatory Frameworks
Accreditation status is the baseline quality threshold that all online criminal justice programs should meet, though accreditation alone does not guarantee educational quality. Regional accreditation — administered by bodies such as the Higher Learning Commission, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges, the Middle States Commission on Higher Education, and the Western Association of Schools and Colleges — establishes minimum institutional standards for governance, financial stability, faculty qualifications, and educational outcomes. Programs at regionally accredited institutions are eligible for federal financial aid and are generally recognized by other institutions for credit transfer and by employers for credential validation. Programs at institutions that lack regional accreditation — or that hold only national accreditation from bodies not recognized by the Department of Education for the same purposes — may produce degrees that other institutions refuse to accept for transfer and that some employers do not recognize (Morn, 1995).
The Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences offers voluntary certification for criminal justice baccalaureate programs, but relatively few online programs have sought this discipline-specific quality review (Southerland, 2002). The absence of widespread program-level accreditation means that prospective students must evaluate quality using indicators beyond institutional accreditation — faculty credentials, curricular depth, class size, student support services, and outcome data — rather than relying on a single quality seal.
The regulatory landscape for online education has received growing attention from federal and state policymakers. The State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement (SARA), administered by the National Council for State Authorization Reciprocity Agreements, streamlines the process through which online programs receive authorization to enroll students across state lines, removing a regulatory barrier that previously complicated multi-state online enrollment. The Department of Education’s gainful employment regulations and borrower defense rules provide consumer protections for students at institutions whose graduates experience poor labor market outcomes relative to their educational debt. These regulatory mechanisms provide some protection against the worst abuses — programs that charge high tuition without delivering educational value — but they do not assess the discipline-specific quality that determines whether graduates are prepared for the analytical demands of criminal justice work (Tewksbury & Mustaine, 2011).
Technology, Pedagogy, and the Online Learning Experience
Learning Platforms and Instructional Design
The quality of the online learning experience depends substantially on the technology platforms and instructional design approaches that programs employ. Learning management systems — Canvas, Blackboard, Brightspace (D2L), and Moodle — provide the digital infrastructure through which courses are delivered, assignments are submitted, discussions are conducted, and grades are communicated. The choice of platform matters less than how it is used: well-designed courses employ the platform’s capabilities purposefully — using discussion forums to generate analytical exchange rather than perfunctory posting, embedding multimedia content that supplements rather than replaces reading, and structuring assignments that require original analysis rather than merely testing recall (Freeman et al., 2014).
Instructional design — the process of planning, developing, and organizing course content and activities to achieve specified learning outcomes — is critically important in online education because the absence of a live instructor moderating the learning environment in real time places greater weight on the quality of pre-designed course materials, assignment structures, and interaction protocols. Programs that employ professional instructional designers to collaborate with faculty on course development produce more effective online courses than those that ask faculty to transfer their residential lectures to digital format without redesign support. The distinction matters because effective online instruction is not simply filmed lectures and digital quizzes — it requires careful attention to pacing, cognitive load, engagement mechanisms, and assessment alignment that differs from the pedagogical design of face-to-face courses (Bachman & Schutt, 2020).
Criminal justice-specific instructional design opportunities include virtual ride-alongs with police departments, simulated courtroom proceedings, interactive crime mapping exercises using GIS software, statistical analysis projects using real criminal justice datasets in R or SPSS, case study analyses of actual criminal cases and policy scenarios, and video-based analysis of police-citizen encounters using body camera footage. The National Institute of Justice‘s CrimeSolutions website, which rates the effectiveness of criminal justice programs based on available evidence, provides an instructional resource for online courses on evidence-based practice that students can use for program evaluation exercises regardless of their physical location. Programs that integrate these discipline-specific digital learning activities into their online courses provide educational experiences that capitalize on the advantages of digital delivery rather than merely accommodating its limitations (Weisburd, 2015).
Student Support and Retention
Online criminal justice programs face distinctive retention challenges that affect both educational outcomes and institutional accountability metrics. Attrition rates in online programs are generally higher than in residential programs, with research across disciplines documenting completion rates 10 to 20 percentage points lower in online formats than in equivalent face-to-face programs (Tewksbury & Mustaine, 2011). The causes of online attrition include the self-discipline demands of asynchronous learning, the isolation of studying without a physical peer community, the competing demands of work and family that online students typically face, technical difficulties with platforms and connectivity, and the absence of the informal social supports — study groups, library spaces, campus culture — that residential environments provide.
Programs that invest in student support infrastructure — academic advising, technical support, tutoring services, writing assistance, library access, career counseling, and community-building activities — achieve substantially better retention and completion rates than those that enroll students and leave them to succeed or fail on their own. The availability of online library resources is particularly important for criminal justice students who need access to databases such as Criminal Justice Abstracts, JSTOR, PsycINFO, and NCJRS to complete research assignments; programs whose library subscriptions do not include these resources cannot support the kind of literature-based scholarly work that rigorous criminal justice coursework requires (Piquero & Weisburd, 2010).
Online orientation programs that familiarize students with the learning management system, establish expectations for participation and communication, introduce strategies for time management and self-directed learning, and build initial connections among cohort members have been associated with improved persistence and completion (Cordner & Shain, 2011). Programs that assign academic advisors who maintain regular contact with online students — checking in proactively rather than waiting for students to seek help — identify and address problems before they lead to course failure or program withdrawal. The most effective retention strategies recognize that online students face a distinctive combination of academic and non-academic challenges and address both rather than treating retention as solely an academic quality issue.
Career Value and Professional Outcomes
Employer Perceptions and Credential Recognition
The career value of an online criminal justice degree depends partly on the intrinsic quality of the education it represents and partly on employer perceptions of online credentials — perceptions that have shifted significantly over the past decade but that continue to vary across agencies and sectors. Research on employer attitudes toward online degrees has documented a general trend toward greater acceptance, with many employers — particularly in criminal justice agencies — reporting that they evaluate candidates based on the institution’s reputation and the applicant’s overall qualifications rather than the delivery format of the degree (Hilal & Densley, 2013). Federal agencies, which employ large numbers of criminal justice professionals and have invested in online education for their own workforce development, generally accept online degrees from regionally accredited institutions without penalty.
The perception gap is narrower for online programs operated by well-known research universities than for those operated by institutions whose brand recognition is limited or whose reputation is primarily associated with online education. An online criminal justice degree from Penn State, Arizona State, Michigan State, or the University of Cincinnati carries the institutional prestige of the university name regardless of delivery format. An online degree from an institution that employers do not recognize — or that they associate with low selectivity and aggressive marketing — may face greater scrutiny regardless of the program’s actual quality. This perception dynamic creates an incentive for students to choose online programs at institutions whose reputations they are willing to carry on their résumés for an entire career (Mustaine & Tewksbury, 2009).
The professional value of an online criminal justice degree is ultimately determined by what the graduate can do with the knowledge and skills the program provided. Graduates who can analyze data, evaluate evidence, think critically about policy, communicate findings effectively, and apply criminological theory to practical problems demonstrate competencies that employers value regardless of how those competencies were acquired. Programs that produce graduates with these capabilities — through rigorous curricula, demanding assessments, meaningful methods training, and genuine intellectual engagement — provide career value that transcends the delivery format. Programs that provide credentials without developing these capabilities — through weak curricula, perfunctory assessments, and minimal intellectual demand — fail their graduates regardless of whether the delivery is online or in person (Sherman, 1998).
Career Advancement for Working Professionals
For working criminal justice professionals, the career advancement benefits of online education can be substantial and immediate. Many agencies offer salary enhancements for employees who complete bachelor’s or master’s degrees — increases that can range from $2,000 to $10,000 or more annually depending on the agency and jurisdiction. Promotional eligibility in many departments requires or strongly favors candidates with bachelor’s or master’s degrees, making degree completion a prerequisite for advancement to supervisory, management, and command positions (Paoline & Terrill, 2007). The Post-9/11 GI Bill and the Yellow Ribbon Program provide substantial educational benefits for veterans transitioning from military service, covering tuition, housing, and book expenses at many institutions and making online degree completion financially feasible for a large veteran population.
The professional development value extends beyond credential attainment to encompass the analytical skills and evidence literacy that quality online programs develop. A patrol officer who completes an online bachelor’s degree with strong methods training returns to practice with the ability to evaluate crime analysis reports critically, assess the evidence base for policing strategies, and understand the research literature on procedural justice, use of force, and community-police relations in ways that enhance professional performance (Tyler, 2006). A probation officer who completes an online master’s degree with exposure to the Risk-Needs-Responsivity framework returns to practice with a conceptual foundation for understanding why certain supervision approaches work and others do not (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). These knowledge gains represent genuine professional development that benefits both the individual and the agency — but only if the program that conferred the degree actually developed these competencies rather than merely granting credit for their completion.
Table 1. Selected Online Criminal Justice Programs by Category
| Institution | Degree Levels | Type | Notable Strengths | Accreditation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Penn State World Campus | BS, MS | R1-affiliated | Penn State faculty; strong research base; established online infrastructure | Middle States |
| Arizona State University Online | BS, MS | R1-affiliated | Large scale; innovative technology; strong research faculty | Higher Learning Commission |
| University of Cincinnati Online | MS | R1-affiliated | Evidence-based corrections expertise; RNR framework focus | Higher Learning Commission |
| Michigan State University Online | MS | R1-affiliated | Oldest CJ program; policing, cybercrime, international CJ | Higher Learning Commission |
| George Mason University Online | BS | R1-affiliated | Evidence-based crime policy; CEBCP affiliation | Southern Association |
| University of Nebraska at Omaha Online | MS | R2-affiliated | Strong research reputation; dedicated distance education | Higher Learning Commission |
| Boston University Online | MS | Private R1 | Major private university standards; interdisciplinary faculty | New England Commission |
| Sam Houston State Online | MS | R2 | Large CJ program; corrections research; Texas CJ proximity | Southern Association |
| Washington State University Global | BA | R1-affiliated | Rural crime, policing, corrections strengths | Northwest Commission |
| University of Central Florida Online | BA, MS | R1-affiliated | Terrorism, cybercrime, large university resources | Southern Association |
| Florida International University Online | BA, MS | R1/HSI | South Florida diversity; HSI mission; border/immigration focus | Southern Association |
| American Military University | BA, MA | Primarily online | Military/veteran focus; deployment-friendly scheduling | Higher Learning Commission |
| Southern New Hampshire University | BA, MS | Primarily online | Large scale; affordable; rolling admissions | New England Commission |
| Purdue University Global | BA, MS | Primarily online | Working adult orientation; Purdue affiliation | Higher Learning Commission |
| University of Massachusetts Lowell | BA | R1-affiliated | Long online education history; affordable public university | New England Commission |
Table 2. Quality Evaluation Checklist for Online Criminal Justice Programs
| Quality Dimension | What to Look For | Red Flags | How to Verify |
|---|---|---|---|
| Accreditation | Regional accreditation by recognized body | National-only accreditation; no accreditation; accreditor not recognized by Dept. of Education | Department of Education database, CHEA directory |
| Faculty | Majority full-time, doctoral-qualified, actively publishing | Heavy adjunct reliance; no faculty research pages; credentials not verifiable | Department website, Google Scholar, faculty CVs |
| Curriculum | Theory, methods, statistics required; substantive elective breadth | No methods requirement; no statistics; few electives; no capstone | Degree requirements sheet, course catalog |
| Class Size | Sections capped at 25–30 for writing-intensive courses | Sections of 50–100+; automated grading only | Admissions office inquiry, student reviews |
| Interaction | Required synchronous sessions; active discussion moderation; individual feedback | Entirely self-paced with no instructor interaction; no discussion requirements | Course previews, student testimonials |
| Student Support | Dedicated advisors, online tutoring, library access, career services, tech support | No advising; no library databases; no career services for online students | Student services pages, admissions consultation |
| Outcomes | Published graduation rates, employment data, graduate school placement | No outcomes data; unrealistic career promises; aggressive recruitment tactics | NCES College Navigator, program outcomes reports |
| Cost/Value | Transparent pricing; financial aid eligibility; comparable to peer institutions | Tuition substantially above peers; hidden fees; aggressive loan promotion | NCES College Navigator, program financial aid pages |
Conclusion
Online criminology schools have fundamentally expanded access to criminal justice education, removing geographic, scheduling, and practical barriers that previously excluded large segments of the population from the discipline’s training programs. The best online programs — those operated by established research universities with strong residential programs, qualified faculty, rigorous curricula, meaningful student support, and genuine commitment to educational quality — provide educational experiences that prepare graduates for the analytical demands of criminal justice practice, evidence-informed policy, and continued professional development. The worst online programs — those that prioritize enrollment revenue over educational substance, rely on adjunct-heavy instruction with minimal academic oversight, and offer credentials without developing the competencies those credentials are supposed to represent — undermine both their graduates and the profession they enter. The challenge for prospective students is to distinguish between these extremes — a challenge that the quality indicators, program profiles, and evaluative frameworks presented in this article are designed to address. The challenge for the discipline is to develop quality assurance mechanisms that protect the accessibility benefits of online education while ensuring that all programs, regardless of delivery format, meet standards of intellectual rigor worthy of the criminal justice profession and the communities it serves.
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.
- 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
- Cordner, G., & Shain, C. (2011). The changing landscape of police education and training. Police Practice and Research, 12(4), 281–285. https://doi.org/10.1080/15614263.2011.587679
- Cullen, F. T., Agnew, R., & Wilcox, P. (2014). Criminological theory: Past to present (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
- Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
- 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
- Hilal, S. M., & Densley, J. A. (2013). Higher education and local police. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 82(5), 1–3.
- Latessa, E. J., & Lovins, B. (2010). The role of offender risk assessment: A policy maker guide. Victims & Offenders, 5(3), 203–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2010.485900
- 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
- Piquero, A. R., & Weisburd, D. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of quantitative criminology. Springer.
- 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
- Sampson, R. J. (2012). Great American city: Chicago and the enduring neighborhood effect. University of Chicago Press.
- 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: A decade of change. 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
- Tyler, T. R. (2006). Why people obey the law (2nd ed.). Princeton University Press.
- Weisburd, D. (2015). The law of crime concentration and the criminology of place. Criminology, 53(2), 133–157. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12070
- Weisburd, D., & Neyroud, P. (2011). Police science: Toward a new paradigm. New Perspectives in Policing, January, 1–23. Harvard Kennedy School and National Institute of Justice.
Related Articles
- Criminology Schools and Colleges
- Criminal Justice Major Schools
- Distance Learning Criminology
- Online Classes for Criminology
- Criminology Education Policy