Whose voices are prioritised in criminology, and why does it matter?

Kelly Stockdale*, Rowan Sweeney

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

This paper presents in-depth research into the reading lists used by a new criminology Bachelor of Arts degree programme at a post-92 English University. Previous research into structural inequalities in relation to race, ethnicity, and gender that exist within academia in relation to scholarly outlets, and that have focused on scholarly influence, have charted the most cited or most significant texts in the field or explored gender and race discrepancies within elements of the publication process. In this paper we explore how scholarly work is included in our teaching practice and the impact reading lists have on the student experience of criminology. We highlight a distinct lack of representation and diversity within the authorship of texts in the context of both core and recommended reading for students. We found reading lists to be overwhelmingly white and male. Work by females and people of colour only tended to feature on distinct modules which focused on gender or ethnicity, race, and crime. Voices from the global majority are excluded from fundamental concepts and criminological theory modules. This paper will discuss our research findings in depth, highlighting where Black and female voices are neglected, marginalised, and excluded in the criminology curriculum.
Original languageEnglish
JournalRace and Justice
DOIs
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 27 Apr 2022

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Whose voices are prioritised in criminology, and why does it matter?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this