A systematic approach has been adopted in this literature review to study the relationship between juvenile crime and education. In order to conduct the online research, various groups of words were used in combinations such as (a) juvenile, young people, youth, adolescence, children, (b) activities, engagement, involvement, behavior, substance abuse, violence, risk taking, antisocial, incarcerations, arrests, offending, delinquency, crime, (c) attainment, attendance, performance, IQ, non-(cognitive) abilities, truancy, early-school leaving, dropout, academic, school(ing), education(al), and (d) program, experiment, intervention, stimulation, out-of-school time, after school, adolescence, early childhood. Different search engines and electronic databases including Taylor & Francis, Springer, Wiley, Economic Papers, Social Science Research Network, JSTOR, SAGE’s, Science Direct, PsychLit, EconLit, ERIC, Google Search, Google Scholar, and Elsevier were used for empirical research.
Literature Review
A systematic literature review on the topic has been carried out using the Technology of Skill Formation as the theoretical framework (Cunha & Heckman, 2007). The existing literature on juvenile crimes indicate that the relationship between education and crime is independent of the differences between age-groups. However, youth crime can be differentiated from the adult crimes in various manners. On the grounds of these differences, the relationship of education can be studied as it will be different with both types of crime. In order to study and carry out a further research on this topic, following literature survey has been carried out:
According to Loeber et al. (2013), adolescence is the peek age of criminal behavior in human beings, i.e., between fifteen and nineteen years of age. Young people involved in crimes have to deal with the juvenile justice system. Junger-Tas et al. (2009) and Puzzanchera et al. (2010) both indicated that although young people tend to indulge in a variety of crimes, they do not commit serious and sophisticated crimes in comparison to the adult criminals. For instance, the most common crimes juveniles are involved in the United States consist of crimes related to obstruction of justice, disorderly conduct, drugs dealing, vandalism, and property (Puzzanchera et al., 2010) whereas computer hacking, vandalism, shoplifting, drugs dealing, carrying weapon, and group fighting predominate among youngsters in the European countries (Junger-Tas et al., 2009).
Moreover, young people have different motivations to engage in criminal activities in comparison to the adults. For instance, Lochner (2011) showed that adults have an economic interest behind committing a crime whereas adolescents commonly lack such motivation. According to Farrington (2001), such motivations include pleasure, entertainment, excitement, and enjoyment. Such criminal activities are often seen as a risk-taking adventure by juveniles (Cohen, 1995). Boredom instead of a calculated criminal thought has also been found as a cause behind such juvenile crimes (Luallen, 2006). Similarly, Scitovsky (1999) has also confirmed boredom as one of the primary reasons behind violence exhibited by students in school. Likewise, McCord et al., (2001) explained that lack of reflection on emotional situations, mood swings, and peer group pressures also contribute towards offending behaviors in youngsters.
The third distinction between juvenile crimes and adult crimes is the emotion of association. Research has found the adolescents are more likely to work in groups while committing criminal activities in comparison to the adults who prefer working alone (Greenwood, 1995). Adults make criminal associations as well. However, according to Reiss (1988), they are not formed on the ground of territorial affiliation as the groups of youngsters are typically formed. Thus, social interaction at school and on street plays a critical role in the juvenile crime rate of an area because they have a great impact on the personalities of the young people. He further elaborated that young people, as opposed to the adults, are more likely to co-offend with individuals of same gender (Reiss, 1988). It has also been found that young males have more tendency of getting involved in criminal activities in comparison to the young females (Levitt & Lochner, 2001).
Lastly, the timing plays a critical role in differentiating the criminal activities of the young people from that of the adults. According to the past literature in the field, the after-school hours are the most common time of police-reported juvenile crimes (Snyder & Sickmund, 1999). The time has been specified to be between three and six p.m. by a more recent study as well (Taylor-Butts, 2010). However, it has also been argued by Gottfredson and Soule (2005) that the violent crimes by juveniles are more likely to occur during the school timings. This finding is contrasted by Taylor-Butts (2010) who did not only report the expected timing to be after-school hours but also between midnight and three o’ clock in the morning when the youngsters can sneak out of their homes. Another research study found that the rates of occurrence of juvenile crimes are likely to decrease on the weekends because they do not get much chance to sneak out (Jacob & Lefgren, 2003). On the other hand, the ratio of violent adult crimes on the weekends increase on the weekends (Briscoe & Donnell, 2003).
From the above literature, the differences between the adult crimes and juvenile crimes have been cleared. Now, the relationship of the juvenile crimes with education will be studies under several socio-economic theories. The past literature has distinguished between economic (Freeman, 1999), sociological, psychological, and biological mechanisms (Reid, 2011) as underlying mechanisms of criminal behaviors; these mechanisms have been captured by the Technology of Skill Formation (Cunha & Heckman, 2007) theoretical framework. It connects the personality traits, information processing, and intellectual and emotional development of individuals to criminal conduct using the psychoanalytical and psychological theories. The childhood experiences are especially studied in this regard (Bartol, 2002). The role of parents, schools, peers, and even the government invest in the development of a child. The significant role of the sociological background cannot be ignored as well and is underlined by the sociological theories because criminal behavior is identified from the social-process and social-organization perspectives such as school climate and school social bonds (Reid, 2011). On the other hand, according to the economic theories, any criminal activity is the outcome of a careful weighing of cost and benefits that result in a rational decision for the person committing the crime (Freeman, 1999). The amount of investment in this regard is connected with the amount of efforts made.
In conclusion, Technology of Skill Formation (Cunha & Heckman, 2007) allows the researchers and practitioners to study the relationship between education and juvenile crimes in a dynamic manner. Their relationship can be pinpointed at a single point in time; the development of which is strongly intertwined with the passage of time. It suggests that early-school interventions are successful in reducing the juvenile crime rates. For instance, the Chicago Child-Parent Centers program, the Syracuse Family Development program, and the High/Scope Perry Preschool program for disadvantaged minority children lead to considerable reduction in the rates of juvenile crimes (Belfield and Levin, 2009; Lally et al., 1988; Schweinhart et al., 2005). Rigorous, small intervention programs aimed at groups with a propensity for crime have also been proven to be effective in reducing the crimes rates among juveniles (Lochner, 2007). Becoming a Man is another intervention program. It improves the social-cognitive skills of grade seventh to tenth disadvantaged male youths from high crime Chicago neighbourhoods (Heller et al., 2013).
Importance of This Work
This work has made two major contributions towards the criminal justice system and the citizens of the United States. Firstly, it documented and analyzed the existing literature on the relationship between education and juvenile crimes in the country. Most of the past literature has been focused on the criminal behavior and the causes behind while discussing the role of education in it among the adults. However, this paper has focused on the idea that there are major differences between the adult crimes and juvenile crimes with respect to type of crime, motivation, emotion of association, and timing of the criminal activities. From studying the differences, it has been concluded that intervening at the age of adolescents and correcting the criminal behaviors can have a positive impact that would last throughout the adulthood; it would also produce educational and behavioral outcomes.
From the policy perspective, studying the causal relationship between level of education and intensity of criminal behavior is critically important. Relying on causal evidence is crucial while developing effective policies aimed at reducing youth crime and school dropout rates. Therefore, as a second contribution, this research paper has distinguished between correlational and causal studies while analyzing the relationship between education and juvenile crimes. It first discussed the studied that evaluated the interventions at the stages of childhood and adolescence on education and criminal behavior outcomes. It has been found that educational outcome is improved and criminal behavior is reduced in young people coming from disadvantaged families due to early-childhood programs. However, mixed effects of early school age and adolescence interventions on reduction of criminal behaviors in adolescents whereas positive effects on educational outcomes of the same have been found.
Afterwards, intervention studies have been reviewed and it was found that interventions can have a positive impact on reducing youth crimes by improving education level. However, these studies have not revealed that if these effects as a result of interrelationship or if they work through separate paths. Therefore, intervention studies have been documented for analyzing the effects of education level on the frequency and intensity of juvenile crimes. Studies establishing the relationship to education from early criminal behavior have also been included.
Various Issues, Problems, or Policies Associated with This Topic:
From the past literature, it has been found that schools keep juveniles away from criminal activities particularly the ones related to property. Secondly, the chances of being incarcerated among young people are increased if they do not attend school. Both of these findings have been defended and defined as the incapacitation effect of schools. Thirdly, the probability of juvenile’s criminal involvement is reduced by the expansion of educational attainment. It has been indicated that higher educational attainment makes a positive impact on risk aversion, patience, emotional development and other skills negatively related to criminal behavior. Lastly, it has been found that the criminal behavior of the juveniles from socially disadvantaged families can be reduced through post-compulsory education.
The Changes that This Work Suggests:
Previous research shows that early-school programs such as the Chicago Child-Parent Centers program, the Syracuse Family Development program, and the High/Scope Perry Preschool program for disadvantaged minority children lead to considerable reduction in the rates of juvenile crimes (Belfield and Levin, 2009; Lally et al., 1988; Schweinhart et al., 2005). Therefore, the blueprints of such programs must be applied to all other states.
Rigorous, small intervention programs aimed at groups with a high probability for crime have also been proven to be effective in reducing the crimes rates among juveniles (Lochner, 2007). The blueprints must be applied to maximum programs in other states as well.
Becoming a Man is another intervention program. It improves the social-cognitive skills of grade seventh to tenth disadvantaged male youths from high crime Chicago neighbourhoods (Heller et al., 2013). This program can also be implemented in other states.
References
Bartol, Curt. (2002). Criminal Behaviour: A Psychological Approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Belfield, C. R. and Levin, H. M. (2009). High school dropouts and the economic losses from juvenile crime in California. California Dropout Research Project Report 1.
Briscoe, S., & Donnell, N. (2003). Problematic licensed premises for assault in inner Sydney, Newcastle and Wollongong. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 36(1), 18-33.
Cohen, A. K. (1955). Delinquent Boys: The Culture of The Gang. New York: Free Press.
Cunha, F. & Heckman, J. J. (2007). The Technology of Skill Formation. American Economic Review, 97(2), 31-47.
Farrington, D. P. (2001). ‘Predicting persistent young offenders’. In G.L. McDowell and J.S. Smith (Eds.), Juvenile delinquency in the US and the UK, UK: Macmillan Press Limited.
Freeman, Richard B. (1999), The Economics of Crime. In O. Ashenfelter & Card, D. (Eds.), Handbook of Labor Economics. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Gottfredson, D. C., & Soulè, D. A. (2005). The timing of property crime, violent crime, and substance use among juveniles. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 42, 110–120.
Greenwood, P. (1995). Juvenile Crime and Juvenile Justice. In J. Q.Wilson & J. Petersilia (Eds.), Crime. San Francisco. ICS Press.
Heller, S., Pollack, H. A., Ander, R., and Ludwig, J. (2013). Preventing youth violence and dropout: A randomized field experiment. National Bureau of Economic Research.
Jacob, B. & Lefgren, L. (2003). Are idle hands the devil’s workshop? Incapacitation, concentration, and juvenile crime. American Economic Review, 93, 1560-1577.
Junger-Tas, J., Marshall, I.H., Enzmann, D., Killias, M., Steketee, M. & Gruszczynska, B. (2010). Juvenile Delinquency in Europe and Beyond: Results of the Second International Self-Report Delinquency Study. Dordrecht: Springer
Lally, J. R., Mangione, P. L., and Honig, A. S. (1988). The Syracuse University Family Development Research Program: Long-range impact of an early intervention with low-income children and their families. In Powell, D. R. and Sigel, I. E., editors, Parent Education as Early Childhood Intervention: Emerging Direction in Theory, Research, and Practice, volume 3, pages 79–104. Ablex Publishing Corporation, Norwood, NJ.
Levitt, S. D. & Lochner, L. (2001), The determinants of juvenile crime. In J. Gruber, Risky Behaviour Among Youths: An Economic Analysis (pp. 327-73). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press
Lochner, L. (2007). Education and crime. Working Paper, University of Western Ontario.
Lochner, L. (2011). Non-Production Benefits of Education: Crime, Health, and Good Citizenship. In Hanushek, Machin and Woessman, (Eds.), Handbook of Economics of Education, vol.4. Elsevier.
Loeber, R., Farrington, D. P. & Petechuk, D. (2013). From Juvenile Delinquency to Young Adult Offending. Washington, D.C.: U.S. National Institute of Justice, in press.
Luallen, J. (2006). School’s Out… Forever: A Study of Juvenile Crime, At-Risk Youths and Teacher Strikes. Journal of Urban Economics, 59:75.
McCord, J., Widom, C.S., & Crowell, N.A., (Eds.). (2001). Juvenile Crime, Juvenile Justice. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Puzzanchera, C., Adams, B., & Sickmund, M. (2010). Juvenile court statistics, 2006–2007. Pittsburgh, PA: National Center for Juvenile Justice
Reiss, A. (1988). Co-Offending and Criminal Careers. Crime and Justice, Vol. 10
Schweinhart, L. J., Montie, J., Xiang, Z., Barnett, W. S., Belfield, C. R., and Nores, M. (2005). Lifetime effects: The High/Scope Perry Preschool study through age 40. In Monographs of the High/Scope Educational Research Foundation, number 14. High/Scope Press, Ypsilanti.
Scitovsky, T. (1999). Boredom – an overlooked disease? Challenge: The Magazine of Economic Affairs. Vol. 42:55
Snyder, H. N., & Sickmund, M. (1999). Juvenile offenders and victims: 1999 national report. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
Taylor-Butts, A. (2010). Where and when youth commit police-reported crimes – 2008. Juristat 30(2). Ottawa, ON: Statistics Canada.
