RWS305W Police Body Cameras Discussion you have to have a thesis and to take a postion on the topic Academic Essay for Project 1 RWS305W Writing in Various

RWS305W Police Body Cameras Discussion you have to have a thesis and to take a postion on the topic Academic Essay for Project 1
RWS305W Writing in Various Settings–Holslin
300 points total
135 points Paper 1 First Draft
30 points
Peer Review
135 points Paper 1 Final Draft
___________________________________________________________________________
Academic writing–traditional academic paper with references
The purpose of this paper is to establish and develop your own position on one of the issues from our class discussion. Using a
theoretical framework drawn either from assigned reading or from in-class discussions, analyze and evaluate one or more texts
(written text, video, images) that make an argument about one of the three topics we have engaged with in our discussions. The
three main issues are: 1) Algorithms and AI interpretation of images 2) Police body-worn cameras and video evidence and 3)
Photographic & films images and racial norms of beauty. You will choose ONE for your paper. Use your summary and analysis of ONE
of the arguments to support and develop your own position on the topic. You will write your paper as an academic essay with an
introduction and body paragraphs, use of quotations, and using your own evidence to back up your position. You may use personal
experience as evidence to back up your argument. You will use MLA style format for this paper. Please use the following style guide
for help with MLA. They are reliable and consistent.
https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/mla_style/mla_formatting_and_style_guide/mla_general_format.html
Source materials–reading notes, academic journal articles and online sources. We will be analyzing both written texts, digital and
multi-modal texts, including images, videos and websites. We will consider the various academic conventions that are used in
traditional genres (academic journal articles) and new media sources.
Keywords: theoretical framework, analysis, evaluation, critique, digital text, multi-modal text, area of inquiry, academic conventions.
Argument, style and rhetorical Requirements:
• Establish your own position on the topic in relation to one of the arguments from class.
• Use rhetorical moves following the CARS format (see handout in Project 1)
• Correctly accomplishes the assignment’s content and purpose requirements
• Summarize the argument AND bounce off from it for your own position.
• Serious, formal academic style of writing
• Clearly developed paragraphs with topic sentence and supporting pieces
• Conclusion that wraps up your argument
Technical Requirements
• 6-7 pages double spaced (this means at least 6.5 pages, and not 6 or 5.5 pages)
• Correctly formatted Works cited section (separate and additional length after the 6-7 pages)
• Must cite at least two sources, including the sources from class (you may use and cite more than two sources)
• Correct use of in-text citation following MLA style
Requirements on use of sources from class
• Analyze and evaluate ONE main source from class discussion (Strecker or Phillips)
• Use other sources as examples
• Respond, develop your own position, and make your own argument about the topic
• Correct use of quotations
PEER REVIEW Instructions
RWS305W Writing in Various Settings–Holslin
________________________________________________________________________________________
Grade: 30 points maximum (You will be graded on this assignment as any other. You may earn less than 25
points if your work is less than excellent, good or satisfactory).
Requirements: Write DIRECTLY on this worksheet AND please write on the student’s paper. Please write more
comments on the back of the page, in the margins, or wherever you feel it will be helpful. And you may use a
separate sheet of paper to write out more commentary. Please make as many useful comments as possible.
You will earn a higher grade on the peer review if you make better comments.
PUT YOUR NAME on it and TURN THIS IN: After the peer review, I will COLLECT the peer reviews to assess
them and give you your grades. Please put YOUR NAME and the STUDENT’s NAME whose paper you reviewed.
In a peer review, the purpose is to offer a CONSTRUCTIVELY critical assessment of your colleagues’ work. You
need to tell your colleagues what they did right–offer praise. And you need to tell them honestly what they
forgot, what they have left out, what needs to be improved, or what is actually incorrect.
FOCUS on the assignment instructions and the CARS moves. Please DO NOT FOCUS ON SPELLING and
GRAMMAR. You should not spend nearly all the time of your peer review on spelling and grammar. The
Writing Center can help with that.
To help you focus, I have created a worksheet for you to follow as you review each of the papers. You will
work in groups of THREE, and each student will review the papers of TWO OTHER students.
ASSIGNMENT Academic writing–traditional academic paper with references
Using a theoretical framework drawn either from assigned reading or from in-class discussions, analyze and
evaluate one or more texts (written and/or non-written) that make an argument about a topic that would be
of importance to a current academic audience. Use this analysis and evaluation to support and develop your
own position on the topic. The purpose of your argument should be to contribute your own analysis to a
specific area of inquiry. This project should be presented in a genre that would be used by academics to
engage in such work. You will use MLA style format for this paper.
Requirements:
6-7 pages double spaced (this means at least 6.5 pages, and not 6 or 5.5 pages)
Correctly formatted Works cited section (separate and additional length after the 6-7 pages)
Must cite at least one source (you may use and cite more than one source)
Correct use of in-text citation following MLA style
Introduction that follows the CARS format (see handout in Project 1)
Correctly accomplishes the assignment’s content and purpose requirements:
Use a theoretical framework from class
Use sources from class
Analyze and evaluate ONE source from class
Summarize arguments of the sources
Respond, develop your own position, and make your own argument about the topic
Clearly developed paragraphs with topic sentence and supporting pieces
Conclusion that wraps up your argument
REVIEWER NAME: ______________________________
STUDENT PAPER NAME: _________________________
Checklist and Questions
1. Basic requirements: 6-7 pages, correctly formatted Works cited section, correct use of in-text citation
following MLA style.
Did the student complete the full 6-7 pages of writing?
Did the student bring two printed copies of the paper?
Is the Works Cited Section there? Does it look correct? Is it AFTER the 6-7 pages? (The whole document
should end up being 8 pages)
Does the document have page numbers?
Is the document formatted correctly? 12 point font, double spaced, 1 inch margins?
Is the in-text citation correct?
What recommendations do you have for the student regarding basic issues of formatting and assignment
requirements?
2. Content: Introduction & general requirements of the assignment
Theoretical framework: Is it more or less clear what theoretical framework from class the student is using to
develop their paper?
Does the student respond to one of the three main articles that we read during September? If not, this is a
problem.
Is the student’s paper on topic? Or is the student’s paper off topic?
CARS Model
Does the student establish a territory in the introduction? After reading the introduction, do you have a good,
clear sense of the general issue?
How and where? Does the student establish a territory in other places in the text? Please mark that in the
student’s text.
Does the student create a niche in the introduction or in other places in their paper? Does the student say that
there is something missing in previous research? That there is a gap? That there is something missing in
previous commentary? That they are going to add to previous commentary with their own idea? How and
where? Please mark that in the student’s text.
Does the student occupy the niche in their introduction or in other places in their paper? Does the student
signal their project? Does the student briefly state what they will do in their text?
THESIS: Does the student state a thesis? Make a claim? Is it clear enough?
EVIDENCE: Does the student explain what kind of examples they will use to back up their point? Where their
examples come from? Personal experience? Their own research?
3. USE of SOURCES
Does the student use at least one source from class as the basis of their paper?
Is the paper on topic?
Does the student use actual quotes from the source?
Does the student use other sources? What are they? Are they on topic?
4. Summary of argument and analysis and evaluation of the source
Does the student summarize the main point of the argument correctly? Do they explain the main claim of the
author’s argument? Explain what evidence the author uses to back up their point?
Does the student analyze the argument of their main source? Do they explain what problem the author is
responding to in the world? How the author situates him/herself in relation to that problem? What rhetorical
strategies the author uses?
Does the student write a little bit about the intended audience of the author’s argument? How that audience
shapes the argument?
Does the student evaluate the argument? What evaluation does the student give? Is the argument good,
weak, missing something, prompts a question, generates an idea, provokes you to think of a personal
example?
How much of the paper is taken up by the summary of the source argument? Is it too much or not enough?
5. Student’s own argument and position on the topic
Does the student clearly make a claim and establish their own position on the topic? What is the claim? Try to
identify it in the paper–underline it or mark it in some way.
Does the student develop their argument and support their claim? What kind of evidence does the student
use to support their claim?
Does the student use appropriate academic style to develop their analysis and argument?
How much of the paper is taken up by the student’s own argument? Is it too much or not enough?
What intended audience does the student appear to be appealing to?
6. Paragraphs and organization
Does the paper follow a logical organization?
Are the paragraphs complete and correct? Topic sentences? Balance between use of quotes and analysis?
7. Recommendations What does the student need to do to improve their paper?
91
Commentary
Eyes are not Cameras: The Importance of
Integrating Perceptual Distortions,
Misinformation, and False Memories into
the Police Body Camera Debate
Scott W. Phillips
Questions about police officer behaviour, particularly officer-involved shootings, have contributed to the
argument that street-level police officers should wear body cameras. The assumption is that a body camera will provide
an objective reality of what occurred during an encounter. Absent from the discussion is the notion of perceptual
distortion, misinformation, and the development of false memories. This article provides an examination of how these
psychological dimensions can impact a police officer’s decision-making as well as their ability to accurately recall the
details of an incident. It is argued here that while a body camera video may provide accurate documentation of an
event, it is reasonable to argue that what the officer sees may not match objective reality because of perceptual
distortions. Further, deviations between objective reality and officer recall does not equate to lying, a cover-up, or
a ‘rogue’ officer.
Abstract
Introduction
In the past few years, there has been a pronounced
call for police officers to wear body cameras. The
suggestion is that body cameras have a variety of
positive benefits, including providing transparency to police officer behaviour (White, 2014).
Within the issue of transparency is a simple explanation for using body cameras: a body camera
will provide an objective reality of what occurred
during an encounter (Miller and Toliver, 2014). If
a camera has recorded an event, and the recording
is of sufficient quality to determine precisely what

occurred or what was said, it will be easier to hold
an officer accountable for their behaviour.
Objective reality means that the camera captures
exactly what occurred. These images will make it
easy to determine who is telling the truth about
their actions. Conversely, the camera can determine who is lying.
What has not been addressed in the body camera
discussion is what a person ‘sees’ when they are
engaged in an unexpected or high-stress incident.
A body of scientific research demonstrates that
people are often inaccurate with their initial
SUNY – Buffalo State, 1300 Elmwood Ave., Buffalo, NY 14222, USA. E-mail: phillisw@buffalostate.edu
Advance Access publication: 31 March 2016
Policing, Volume 12, Number 1, pp. 91–99
doi:10.1093/police/paw008
ß The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.
For permissions please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/policing/article-abstract/12/1/91/2897231
by San Diego State University Library Serials user
on 28 August 2018
92
Policing
S. W. Phillips
Commentary
observations of an event (Loftus and Hoffman, 1989;
Wise et al., 2007). Further, they may have mistaken
recollection of what they saw (Loftus et al., 1987;
Loftus, 1992; Gerrie et al., 2006; Frenda et al.,
2011). Thus, where a body camera can visually document objective reality, a video recording will not
eliminate inaccurate observations and false memories, even if the observer believes them to be true.
The goal of this comment is to add deeper understanding to the research and policy proposals regarding police body cameras. Based on prior research of
eyewitnesses and police officers, it questions the assumption that the objective reality of an event is accurately seen, comprehended, and remembered by
those who are actually involved in the event as it
played out. The argument being made, particularly
by public officials and media pundits, is that a close
examination of a video is the final word on precisely
what occurred in a police/citizen encounter
(Goldsmith, 2010). That is, an accurate evaluation
of a police officer’s performance can be judged
based on repeated viewing and scrutinizing of a
video. Often the video is played continually and in
slow motion, allowing those who were not at the
scene to judge, frame by frame, the objective reality
of the event (Goldsmith, 2010; Blitz, 2015). An examination of different scholarship sources strongly suggests that this is an unfair method for evaluating the
behaviour or activity of a police officer who often
does not have the luxury of time or incident reassessment in their decision-making.
A brief review of body cameras
Police agencies have accessed advances in technology
since they began using patrol cars and telephone ‘call
box’ systems in the early part of the 20th century.
More recently, cameras and recording innovations
moved from CCTVs (closed-circuit televisions) and
VCR recorders to dashboard cameras in patrol cars.
Within the past decade police body cameras have
been explored by many police agencies as a technology to improve policing. The suggested advantages of
having police officers wear a recording device include
transparency (i.e. allowing the public to see the behaviour of police officers) (Katz et al., 2014; White,
2014; Brucato, 2015), improving both police and citizen behaviour (Miller and Toliver, 2014; White,
2014; Brucato, 2015), accelerating the resolution of
citizen complaints (Miller and Toliver, 2014), providing evidence for trial (Miller and Toliver, 2014;
White, 2014), and providing police-training resources (White, 2014; Blitz, 2015). The primary
down-side of body-worn cameras is the documentation of public interactions that both citizens and officers might want to keep private (White, 2014; Blitz,
2015). This technology can also be very expensive for
police agencies (Miller and Toliver, 2014; White,
2014; Mateescu et al., 2015).
In the past few years, the primary push to move
police agencies to use body cameras are police/citizen
encounters, such as in Ferguson, MO (Brucato,
2015). There are also numerous news articles and
journalist comments arguing for an increased use
of body cameras. The assumption regarding an
increased use of body cameras is that these devices
will record the objective reality of an event. A video
image of a police/citizen interaction provides ‘more
accurate fact-finding after an incident’ (Blitz, 2015, p.
1). Information in Brucato (2015) argued that body
camera video evidence documents ‘truth and reality’
(p. 459) and can be used to hold officers, as well as
chief executives, accountable for their behaviour.
Essentially, the images available from a body
camera can be used as a performance metric for evaluating an individual officer’s behaviour or activity
(Miller and Toliver, 2014; Mateescu et al., 2015).
As part of their utility as a measure of objective reality, body cameras are considered much better than
information provided by eyewitness testimony, particularly after time has passed (Blitz, 2015).
An exemplar incident
The advent of digital recording technology, particularly in the hands of the general public, and
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/policing/article-abstract/12/1/91/2897231
by San Diego State University Library Serials user
on 28 August 2018
Police body camera debate
the growth of social media platforms, allow anyone
with a cell phone to record and post a video; the
police are often the subjects of these videos
(Goldsmith, 2010). To examine the assumption
that a police body camera can record an objective
reality, and that the objective reality of an event is
accurately seen, comprehended, and remembered
by those who are actually involved in the event, a
recent police shooting incident that included several different camera recordings is used as a
prototype.
In the summer of 2015, Officer Ray Tensing, a
police officer with the University of Cincinnati, was
involved in a shooting during a traffic stop. The
officer reported that the driver had tried to pull
away from the traffic stop and in the process the
officer was dragged alongside the car. The officer
feared for his life, justifying his use of deadly force.
The officer’s own body camera, however, refuted
this claim.1 Two ‘back up’ officers, Phillip Kidd
and David Lindenschmidt, were pulling up to the
scene as the shooting occurred. Shortly after the
shooting, body camera audio heard Officer
Tensing stating to the other officers that he had
been dragged when the driver pulled away. Officer
Kidd was heard on the body camera recording corroborated Officer Tensing’s claim: ‘Yea, I saw that.’
This statement, it was argued, strongly suggested
that Officer Kidd misrepresented the events of the
incident. There were public accusations that the
officers had colluded to cover-up the truth.1
Several weeks later Officer Kidd was not indicted
because his written report did not state that Officer
Tensing was actually dragged.2
It is unknown if the two back up officers were
able to examine their body camera recordings prior
Commentary
Policing
93
to writing their reports. If so it is likely that they
documented what the camera recorded, which
should be no surprise. It would be irresponsible
for someone to argue that an event had occurred
when the video clearly demonstrated that it had not
occurred. The question remains, however, as to
why Officer Kidd would state clearly that he had
seen Officer Tensing being dragged when this did
not, in fact, occur. To understand the possible
explanations for Officer Kidd’s response, it is
necessary to examine the research pertaining to
eyewitness testimony, false memories, and perceptual distorti…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment