Proquest provides this information (may require college/university ID) about Bernard Moore’s dissertation.

America’s race to incarcerate: Locking up communities of color
by Moore, Bernard, Ph.D., Howard University, 2009 , 304 pages; AAT 3350304
Abstract (Summary)

Research findings support the conclusion that incarceration in the United States has increased, and numbers of African-American male prisoners have increased. The problem is that it remains unclear whether mandatory sentencing acts have resulted in increased African-American prisoner status. The purpose of the study was to determine if mandatory minimum statutes and the United States Sentencing Guidelines based on the SRA and the PROTECT Act of 2003 have resulted in higher rates of African-American prisoners. Archival and survey research were used for this study to address relevant research questions and hypotheses. Archival data were from the BJS (2007), the Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Correctional Facilities (2007), and the USSC (2007). The survey sample consisted of 15 parole officers, 15 probation officers, and 30 prison officials from state and federal prisons. Findings were that no difference existed between African-American prisoner status due to sentencing laws alone and most hypotheses were not supported; only sexual abuse and drug trafficking led to significant findings. Survey findings supported the notion that many factors affect prisoner status.
Indexing (document details)

Advisor: Morris, Lorenzo, Frazier, Michael
Committee members: Davis, Donn, Woodard, Maurice, Davis, Danny K., Watson, Diane E.
School: Howard University
Department: Political Science
School Location: United States — District of Columbia
Keyword(s): Black politics, Judicial politics, Minimum mandatory, Racial disparity, Sentencing, Sentencing guidelines
Source: DAI-A 70/03, Sep 2009
Source type: Dissertation
Subjects: Political science, Criminology, Ethnic studies
Publication Number: AAT 3350304
ISBN: 9781109079852
Document URL: http://ezp1.harvard.edu/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/pqdweb?did=1692529801&sid=1&Fmt=2&clientId=11201&RQT=309&VName=PQD
ProQuest document ID: 1692529801

Comments:

1) Can you spot the path which led this fraudster to Williams? I bet it starts with his academic connections . . .

2) Proquest reports that “At the request of the author, this graduate work is not available for purchase.” Can you guess why?

3) I cringed when I read that abstract. It is barely literate. I would do a sentence-by-sentence mocking, but the refereee would surely stop the fight in the first 50 words. My 8th grade daughter’s science experiment write-up is higher quality. Is this typical of the sort of work that earns a Ph.D. from Howard? No wonder that Williams does not have a single faculty member with a degree from there.

4) Love the fact that committee members included noted scholars like Diane Watson and Danny Davis.

5) What odds would you give on there being substantial fraud/plagiarism/incompetence in this dissertation? My guess: 50/50.

6) Do you think that Moore’s race — he is African-American — played a role in Williams’ decision to hire and reappoint him?

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email