California State University, Dominguez Hills
University of Wisconsin, Parkside
Latest update: May 2, 2000
jeanne
Susan

Go to Violent Neighborhoods, Violent Kids Skim the article. Again, don't print out the article unless you really need a hardcopy. Otherwise, save the trees! then join the discussion:

On Tuesday morning, 2 April 2000, jeanne put up a Pass or Prepared? on Violent Neighborhoods, Violent Kids On Tuesday, early afternoon, Kimberly pena wrote:

Kimberly Pena
Statistics
RE: "Violent Neighborhoods..."
Jeanne,
No way.  They MUST be kidding!  That was the worst article I have ever read!  Data CANNOT be presented in that fashion (that "fashion" being by itself).  You can't just throw a bunch of numbers out there without giving the "why's," or as you said, some sort of cross tabulation.  I have this theory, albeit cynical, that most people are fairly ignorant.  I think the government, in presenting articles like this one, capitalizes on that knowledge.  They know they can present information like that and most people will not scrutinize or analyze or ask relevant questions. 

My next problem with this article is the language.  I was appalled that they actually named a category "good kids."  What kind of message is that sending?  The rest of the kids are in categories like "robbers," "dealers," and "fighters."  This, to me, sounds like typical right- wing, Republican, old-school mentality.  It sounds like older, non-black government people trying to figure out what is happening with young black people.  What they NEED for studies like this are older black men and women who have lived in these neighborhoods. 

This brings me to my next issue:  the subjects were skeptical about the true intentions of the inquiry.  I would be, too!  The questionnaire used was created by Drs. Beverly Fletcher and Louis Wright.  They sound to me like a couple of white PhD's who are probably clueless. 

Another problem:  why black BOYS only?  Perhaps there is good reason for studying only HALF of a population, and I would really like to know that reason!  I am quite certain that girls, too, are engaging in violent behavior.  Even if they are not, they were virtually ignored in the entire study (except a brief comment on pregnancy).  What boys do affects girls, and vice-versa, and this fact cannot be ignored.

And let us look at this: why BLACKS only?  Again, if there is a reason for this, please tell me!  That they only looked at blacks perpetuates the notion that black people are responsible for all violent crime.

Brevity not being my forté, allow me to continue.  The information that was presented comes as no surprise.  The kids who are violent feel "socially isolated," and many use or abuse marijuana and/or alcohol.  REALLY?  No kidding?  And the positive correlation between alcohol use and pregnancy--as if I did not know that!  This article told me NOTHING I did not already know. 

The final weakness to be cited here can be found in the agency's admission that they did not complete their work!  Regarding the youth organizations contacted, the articles states that the "number of organizations contacted was far from exhaustive."  According to what you said in class, part of their thesis is that these organizations or extracurricular activities are not helping.  If that is the theory, why are they not gathering all possible evidence?  Information from YOUTH organizations seems imperative in studying YOUTH!

Okay, Jeanne.  I am now stepping down from my soap box.

See you Thursday,
Kimberly Pena