Summarize the post .
For each discussion activity, you are responsible for posting a reply to at least to two postings made by your classmates.
After you have made your original post, read some of the posts from your classmates and construct two reply post of 100-150 words that responds to two of your group-mate’s original posts. Your reply post should be written such that it does one or more of: identifies something that you find especially interesting or insightful about your classmate’s original post; poses an engaging and relevant question and/or builds on the ideas from your classmate’s original post; raises a real-life experience or observation that you feel would be relevant to illustrate or help further develop an idea or point in your classmate’s original post.
Please note that you will need to make an original post before you can read and respond to your peers’ posts.
Some points to keep in mind:
Be clear and to the point in your postings.
Edit your work. Your posts should be coherent and use proper grammar and spelling.
Keep postings to 100-150 words. Quality is better than quantity.
Contribute your own thoughts about the material you have read.
Support your thoughts by referencing the readings used, and references used in post below or other outside literature.
Raise additional questions or points of discussion to stimulate further discussion.
If you have questions, show that you have already tried to find a solution.
Respect the viewpoints of your peers. Ask for clarification if you don’t understand a point. Assume good intentions.
Use the proper terminology introduced in the course readings.
When using literature in your postings, make sure to provide references in proper APA 7 Style.
Show respect and sensitivity to peers’ gender, cultural and linguistic background, political, and religious beliefs.
You are strongly encouraged to take the time to review the following documents on writing quality discussion posting and on taking roles in discussions.Taking a role in online discussion.Taking a Role in Online Discussions Below are some roles that anyone in an online discussion can fulfill in order to help move an online discussion forward in productive ways. See if you can determine what role is required in your online discussion and then write a message that takes on that role. Devil’s Advocate • Takes opposing points of view to those currently under discussion Pollinator • Travels to other groups, reads their postings and summarizes points made in other groups not made in home group. Facilitator • Comments on the groups process (e.g. “Perhaps we should all remember to put a subject line in our messages.”) • Encourages others to participate, • Starts a thread or an idea on the topic, if the discussion lags. Summarizer / Discussion Weaver • Summarizes the discussion for the group at specific intervals in 1 or 2 short paragraphs. Usually summarizes twice per week or if the discussion lags • Reminds others about what has already been discussed. • Asks the group what issues have been concluded and what ones are still to be discussed. • Relates ideas in posted messages to one another. Researcher • Assumes responsibility for looking at what is available on the net, journals etc. and brings ideas back to the group. Responder • Replies to others and builds on the ideas of others. This is a role that everyone in the group must perform for every discussion.
POST-1
A variety of data sources break down and try to understand certain trends related to homicides. These sources include Uniform Crime Report Surveys, the Vital Statistics Death Database, and The Homicide Survey. All three of these databases offer crucial insights into homicides, clarifying patterns related to these crimes. While beneficial, each database falls short in certain categories. For example, these databases may miss cases, miss data, or inaccurately gather data. The Uniform Crime Report Surveys, provide a broader explanation of crimes, lacking very detailed information that could be crucial to certain cases. The Uniform Crime Report Surveys also rely on data collected from police. This could result in misclassifications involving facts and data that alter the homicide statistics. Similarly, the Vital Death Database is efficient in collecting and tracking the causes of death. The downside of this database is that it may be delayed, affecting the timeliness and accuracy of certain homicide statistics. While these databases are helpful, their limitations highlight the fact that homicide data may not always be fully accurate (Gabor, 2002). In addition to the three databases mentioned above, various challenges are associated with other aspects of homicide data collection. Language barriers in certain communities may result in inaccurate data and limit the amount of detail individuals who speak another language can provide. The media is another factor that affects the amount of data received in various homicide cases. Certain cases receive less media attention than others, making them less known to the public and communities. This lack of attention may result in less investigation effort, which then leads to less information on the crime being collected. While there are many more factors that affect the collection of homicide data, these two challenges complicate the accuracy and range of gathered information (Gabor, 2002).
ReferencesGabor, T., Hung, K., Mihorean, S., & St-Onge, C. (2002). Canadian homicide rates: A comparison of two data sources. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 44(3), 351–363. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjcrim.44.3.351
POST – 2
Homicide data sources like the Homicide Survey, Vital Statistics Death Database, and media reports provide valuable insights but come with notable limitations. One major issue is missing cases. Some homicides may be misclassified as accidents or suicides, or remain undiscovered, especially when it involves marginalized groups, such as missing and murdered Indigenous women. This creates gaps in the data, hindering our understanding of the full scope of homicides.
Another issue is missing data in reported homicides, particularly in unresolved cases where key details, such as the victim-offender relationship or motive, might be absent. Incomplete data reduces the ability of researchers to identify patterns or fully understand homicide dynamics. Additionally, data accuracy is a concern, with police reports sometimes reflecting outdated or incorrect information if not updated throughout the criminal justice process.
The media plays an increasingly important role in homicide data collection, often providing more social and contextual information than official sources. However, this reliance introduces challenges. Media reports may sensationalize certain cases while neglecting others, particularly those involving minority victims or individuals from lower socio-economic backgrounds, creating potential biases.
Access to official data is another challenge, as researchers often face restrictions from government or law enforcement gatekeepers. Even when accessible, official records may lack updates, making it difficult to track the full legal process of a homicide case.
Additional challenges in homicide data collection arise from various factors that contribute to gaps and discrepancies. Victimizations may go unrecognized as crimes, and psychological stigma or embarrassment can discourage reporting. Victims might also hesitate to involve authorities due to fear or concerns about the consequences, and there may be discretion in how violent crimes are classified and counted. These issues, as noted by Gabor et al. (2002), underscore the complexity of accurately capturing homicide data and highlight the difficulties in addressing underreporting and inconsistencies in crime classification.
In summary, while homicide data is generally reliable, issues like missing cases, data inaccuracies, and selective reporting highlight the need for more comprehensive and standardized data collection to better understand homicide patterns and trends.
References
Gabor, T., Kwing Hung, Milhorean, S., & St-Onge, C. (2002). Canadian homicide rates: A comparison of two data sources. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 44(3), 351–363. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjcrim.44.3.351
Label post -1 as (Emily Terranova)
Post -1 summary reply WRITE in 8-12 lines also add personal opnion it should be personal opnion about other post and also add ceative atttrcative question.Donot use AI AND CHATGPT AS MAM HAS SOFTWARE TO DETECT EACH AND EVERY LINE . She has software to detect each and every single word.
THEN WRITE
POST-2
LABEL POST -2 AS (Vihanya Jayatilake)
Post -2 summary reply WRITE in 8-12 lines also add personal opnion it should be personal opinion about other post and also add creative atttrcative question.Donot use AI AND CHATGPT AS MAM HAS SOFTWARE TO DETECT EACH AND EVERY LINE . She has software to detect each and every single word.
Grading criteria is
Criteria A+ Discussion Post
Reply
Post
(4-5 points)
All response posts engaged classmates in further dialogue on the topic.
Length guidelines met; writing clear and compelling; poses an engaging and relevant question and/or builds on the ideas from a classmate’s original post OR raises a real-life experience or observation relevant to illustrating or further developing an idea or point in a classmate’s original post.
please start reading instructions mam
and guidelines and you have to answer to this i am proving the grading rubrics everythong write in own words no AI AND CHATGPT AS MAM HAS THE SOFTAWARE TO DETECT.EACH AND EVERY LINE and each and every word.I Have also attached the grading rubric photo which is in form of image grading rubric is very much important you have to follow each and every instruction very carefully.
only these sources which i have provided you have been provided in post for post1 and rerence for post which are provided only those no out source has to be used.