Hi, I'm Mrs. Allchin and I'm going to be taking you through this Citizenship lesson.
I'll be explaining all of the information that you need and I'll be pausing and telling you when you need to complete tasks.
Hope you enjoyed the lesson.
The outcome for this lesson is, I can understand the different reasons why people might commit a crime.
This is a lesson why people commit crime taken from the unit, "What can we do to reduce crime?" The key words that we're going to look at today are factors, and factors are elements or conditions that influence an outcome.
We're going to look at the term socio-economic, which relates to a combination of social and economic factors.
We're going to look at regeneration, which is a process of renewal and improvement.
We're going to look at prejudice, which is prejudicing a person or people based on a characteristic.
And disproportionate, which is when something is out of balance or unequal in relation to something else.
So the lesson outline for this lesson, which is why do people commit crime, is we're going to look at the factors that cause individuals to commit crimes, how the environment can impact crime, and also what prejudice exists towards crime.
And we're going to start with what factors cause individuals to commit crimes.
First of all, it's really important to remember that anyone is capable of committing a crime.
However, there are certain factors that have been proven to increase the likelihood of someone committing a crime.
Three factors that it could impact the above are: socio-economic factors, family and peer influence, and psychological and behavioural factors.
So let's have a bit more of a look at these.
So socio-economic factors relate to how money and social issues interact with one another.
When we think about socio-economic factors, we're examining how money, and that's the economic side, and social things such as education, community and family background are factors that influence each other and impact people's lives.
So the amount of money that someone does or doesn't have can sometimes directly impact their experience and opportunities within society.
So let's have a look at this in a bit more detail.
Let's imagine two university students.
Pupil A comes from a very rich family who: Have purchased them a top of the range laptop and all of the recommended textbooks that they need for their particular course; They've provided them with an allowance, so money each week so they don't have to get a part-time job; They pay for them to live in a nice room within the university grounds so it's close to the library, it's nice and quiet.
Thinking about that student, how might their economic status of their family impact their experience of higher education? Pause and have a think about that if you like.
It might be that that student actually finds university a little bit easier because there's lots and lots of factors that are helping them and helping them to succeed and be more successful.
Let's now consider Pupil B.
So Pupil B comes from family who do not have much money.
So how might their experience of university be a little bit different? So they might not have the same access to resources, instead needing to use the university computers which takes time, which might not be quite as effective.
They might need to get a part-time job and work most evenings, which is time taken away from their studies.
They might need to rent a room outside of town so it's cheaper and therefore it might not be quite as easy to get into university.
So how might the economic status of their family impact their experience of higher education? Pause and have a think about this if you need to.
So again, for this student, their experience of university but might be slightly more challenging because of the factors that are impacting their day-to-day life, those socio-economic factors.
If someone is struggling economically and they do not have enough money to meet their basic needs, they could feel pressured to engage in crime to support their day-to-day basic needs.
So for example, a person who cannot afford their weekly food shop might have more pressure on them and maybe more likely to steal food from a shop compared to someone who is economically secure.
Because they've got that need, which means that they might be tempted or persuaded to turn to crime to meet that need.
So let's have a check.
Which isn't considered a socio-economic factor? Is it A, poverty; B, uniformity; C, unemployment; or D, inequality? It's B, uniformity.
The other three are all examples of socio-economic factors.
Socio-economic factors are also linked to education.
For example, people who do not pass their GCSEs may find it difficult to secure jobs with an income that can meet their needs.
And Laura's actually providing us with some interesting information here.
So according to a 2021 Government press release, the Department of Education have established a clear link between attainment, that's the GCSEs results that you leave school with, and income.
People who perform just one GCSE grade better than their peers across nine subjects have been shown to earn over 200,000 pounds more throughout their lives.
That's a huge difference in income.
And this tells us that quality education can be seen as a key factor to lift communities out of poverty.
'Cause it's been proven that if young people leave school with better and higher qualifications, then they are more likely to be able to get jobs in the future with an income that can support their needs.
Family and peer influence can also have an impact on crime.
People who grew up with family challenges such as poor role models or who had a lack of supervision may be more likely to commit crime.
They may lack an understanding of acceptable and unacceptable behaviour, which can impact decision making in later life.
And that's because they might not have had the same guidance or the same rules set to them so that they could understand those social norms. And Jacob's telling us that families facing challenges could also be where there is instability, neglect, and conflict.
So this is an example of how sometimes family influence can have an impact on crime in later life.
Social groups also include a person's peers and friends.
If a person is surrounded by peers who take part in criminal activity, this can become normalised behaviour.
If a person's close friendship group take part in criminal behaviour, this can also lead to a strong influence to do the same because it's normalised, it's seen as normal behaviour 'cause you're witnessing it frequently within your friendship group.
And Laura's telling us that this is a type of indirect peer pressure, where a person changes their behaviour to fit in with their friends.
And you might have learned about different types of peer pressure before.
So again, this is an example of social groups being another factor which might cause individuals to commit crimes.
So let's have another check.
This is a true or false question.
Is it true or false that family and peer influence is not viewed as having an impact on criminal activity? Try and think about why as well.
And that's false.
And why? When family and peer relationships are dysfunctional, this can have an impact on criminal activity.
Criminal behaviour could become normalised and peer pressure can influence decisions.
Psychological factors are how you think and react to different things, and many things can impact this.
For example, individuals with certain mental health conditions may face challenges with impulse control or making decisions.
Substance abuse, so that might be abusing drugs and alcohol, can also impair impulse control and cause people to make decisions that they might not normally.
And being under the influence of certain drugs or alcohol can also lower inhibitions.
And this means it can might make you do things that you would never normally do or take part in more risky or dangerous behaviour.
So for this first task, Task A, I'd like you to explain how each factor could have an impact on whether an individual commits a crime.
The first one has been done for you.
So we're going to be looking at poverty and unemployment, inequality, poor education, family and peer influence, and substance abuse.
And you can see that the first one, poverty and unemployment, the example given is crime funds lifestyle and low income makes it difficult to cover necessities.
So please pause the video while you complete Task A.
So some of the things that you might have included in your answers.
So for poverty and unemployment, like we've already said, you might have talked about how crime funds lifestyle and also that low income makes it difficult to cover necessities.
For inequality, you might have talked about how it can lead to resentment, how crime might be committed due to jealousy or resentment.
For poor education, you might have talked about how low outcomes can make employment more difficult and therefore, jobs may be more likely to offer a low salary, meaning that someone might be more tempted to take part in crime.
For family and peer influence, you might have talked about how dysfunctional relationships can normalise negative behaviours if criminal activity is normalised, and also peer pressure can influence decisions.
And for substance abuse, you might have talked about how this can lower inhibitions.
It can mean that people make negative behaviour choices and these are more likely to happen.
And also that certain substances can also impair impulse control.
We're now going to move on to the second part of our lesson outline and look at how the environment can impact crime.
So the environment refers to the surroundings of a particular geographical area.
And there's a really famous theory in sociology called the Broken Window Theory, and this suggests that when an area is full of graffiti, it's rundown, it's showing signs of crime, that crime is actually more likely to happen.
And you can see a picture there of the type of environment I'm talking about.
The term broken window is metaphorical.
It's suggesting that in an area where the small problems such as graffiti and rubbish and boarded up windows and things like that aren't dealt with, it makes it easier and more likely for larger problems such as serious crime to take place.
And it comes from the theory that if there was a car abandoned in an area with a broken window, it might be more likely to be broken into and taken away.
That's where the theory comes from.
So it's talking about how environments that don't look particularly well looked after tend to have more crime happening there.
And it's because areas can be perceived as being forgotten and uncared for.
And Laura's given the example of a festival where she's saying at a festival people might leave rubbish on the floor, but they wouldn't do that if they were a posh, well-looked after stately home.
And Sam has given the example of when someone might doodle on a table because it's already got lots and lots of graffiti on it.
Whereas if you were sat at a beautiful clean table, you might not do anything.
You might not touch that table at all.
And that's the whole point behind the theory of what an environment looks like can impact whether more crime occurs there.
So let's have a quick check.
So which statement is correct? A, When an area is full of graffiti, signs of crime and other forms of urban decay, crime is more likely to be reported.
B, when an area is full of graffiti, signs of crime and other forms of urban decay, crime is more likely.
Or C, When an area is full of graffiti, signs of crime and other forms of urban decay, crime is less likely.
Pause while you think which could be the right answer.
And it's B, When an area is full of graffiti, signs of crime and other forms of urban decay, crime is more likely.
That's been proven through studies.
So neglected environments can really evoke perceptions, and that means it can really mean that people think a certain way about that area.
They can give the impression that no one cares about that area, no one's watching.
And also that no one will report suspicious behaviour and that's why crime could be more likely.
So Laura is saying that where she lives, there are lots of boarded up shops, there's damaged houses, and lots of loud noises.
And also, that people move around a lot.
So they haven't got that kind of community neighbourhood feel.
So in an area like Laura's, that can feel quite a neglected environment.
Whereas the opposite can also be true.
Areas that are well kept can make people think and give the impression that people really care about them.
People are watching and people will report suspicious behaviour.
And therefore, in these types of areas, crime tends to be a little bit less likely.
And Jacob is saying that where he lives, everyone knows each other and there's a real sense of community.
So you can see why perhaps crimes might be less likely to happen in those places.
So urban regeneration supports communities and it involves improving how an area looks and functions, and this has a benefit to citizens living in that area.
And it can also reduce crime.
So urban regeneration is where you make somewhere look and feel a lot better.
So urban regeneration can include: building new homes, creating lovely community spaces, for example, parks, cleaning up the area, and also repurposing unused spaces and buildings and making sure that everywhere has a purpose.
And also, bringing new business to the area which can bring money into the area as well.
And there are many examples of urban regeneration.
There might even be places near to where you are that have been through urban regeneration.
So in the 1980s, Kings Cross in London was an area with high crime rates, unemployment, low quality housing, and really high poverty.
The area was a neglected industrial area, meaning it had lots of businesses and factories but it wasn't really a place where people wanted to live and create a home.
In the 2010s, it went through urban regeneration and is now a highly desirable place to live and work.
Crime has reduced and it is a safer place to be.
So Kings Cross in London is an example of urban regeneration.
Glasgow in Scotland is another successful and famous example of urban regeneration.
The Gorbals Estates had a reputation for high crime, poverty, and overcrowded housing.
Urban regeneration began in the 1990s and included creating a range of affordable, low rise housing and public spaces to enjoy as a community and really involve community within these decisions as well.
Lots of community involvement.
The regeneration led to a significant reduction in crime rates and improved quality of life for the citizens of the area.
So let's pause and have a check.
So can you give one example of urban regeneration? So you might have said one of these: So building new homes, creating community spaces, cleaning up the area, repurposing unused spaces and buildings, or bringing new businesses to the area.
For Task B, I want you to imagine you live in an area where there's been lots of crime, particularly vandalism.
Create a plan for urban regeneration considering the factors that could improve a particular area.
So for example, a park.
How could you improve a park? Or you could create a plan for the whole area.
So you can either focus on a small area, like a town centre or a park, or you can create a plan for the whole area.
Your plan could be drawn and labelled, or you might want to write it down but it should aim to reduce crime, make the area look more desirable, encourage community involvement, and bring more visitors, income, or home owners to the area.
So pause while you have a go at this task.
So with Task B, your plan may have included: clear ideas about how to make your local area look better, such as clearing litter or graffiti, fixing broken infrastructure, so buildings are looking a bit rundown, or perhaps creating more green spaces for people to enjoy together.
You might have talked about activities or spaces to engage and entertain the community.
For example, by developing a community centre or creating a youth club or improving the local park and making it more fun for families to go to.
Or you might have included ideas for new local businesses to drive the economy and employment such as cafes or shops and really thinking about how they would help the local area.
We are now going to look at what prejudice exists towards crime.
So the word prejudice comes from an old Latin term, and it means judgement in advance or pre-judgment.
And it was originally used in the context of law.
Prejudice involves prejudging a person or people based on a characteristic.
So you are prejudging someone before you've actually got to know them.
Prejudice can exist within the context of law when citizens make pre-judgments about the type of people who commit crimes and which groups of people are responsible for supposed rising crime rates.
And remember, right at the beginning of this lesson we said that actually anyone is capable of committing a crime, but prejudice does sadly still exist.
So let's have a quick check.
What is prejudice? Can you think what the missing words could be? So prejudice comes from an old, something, term.
It means judgement in, something, or pre-judgment and was originally used in the context of, something.
Pause while you have a go at this check.
Let's see how you got on.
So prejudice comes from an old Latin term.
It means judgement in advance or pre-judgment and was originally used in the context of law.
Citizens may form prejudice based on misconceptions.
So age, race, gender, and socio-economic status are all factors that can influence the public perception about causes of crime.
This can be driven through media bias, who may disproportionately focus on specific groups such as immigrants or Black males, or people from low socio-economic backgrounds.
So what this means is if a media or a certain media source always put stories on their front page about crime that's been committed by immigrants and don't often put a front cover story about other people that commit crime, this can lead people to have a misconception that only that particular group of people commit crime or that that particular people commit more crime than others when that's simply not true.
So how could prejudice lead to bias in a justice system? And it could involve racial profiling.
So if citizens from specific groups are over targeted, e.
g.
Black males and stop and search.
So racial profiling is when people from certain specific groups are targeted more than people from other groups.
It could also potentially lead to court bias, and that's where a jury might based decision of guilt based on their personal prejudice.
So rather than listening to the evidence, using their personal prejudice to make their decision.
And it could also potentially lead to harsher sentencing.
Judges have a very strict guideline that they need to follow when they're setting a sentence.
But actually, judges passing the maximum sentence available under sentencing guidelines due to prejudice could be an example of prejudice leading to bias within a justice system.
Prejudice may also lead to mistrust in the justice system.
And studies have actually shown that individuals or communities that feel disproportionately targeted by the justice system may be less likely to engage or cooperate and help the police.
They may also be less likely to report crime due to fear of increased stigma or just not being believed.
So let's have a check.
Which is an example of how prejudice could lead to bias in the justice system? Is it A, an untrained jury; B, lack of police; or C, racial profiling.
And it's C, racial profiling is an example of how prejudice could lead to bias in the justice system.
In the 2021 census, 81.
7% of UK citizens identified as white and 2.
5% identified as Black.
So the census gives us information about population demographics and this shows us some information about the racial makeup of the UK.
However, 73% of the prison population is white and 13% is Black.
Is this proportionate? Think critically.
What might these statistics tell us? If you like, pause and have a little bit of a think about that.
It's not proportionate.
As you can see, the prison population statistics regarding race don't match statistics across the UK.
And these statistics might tell us that actually, groups of people from certain races are being unproportionately targeted within the justice system.
So rather than being prejudiced towards groups of people, shouldn't we be examining the possible root causes for disproportionate statistics? This is what Laura thinks.
Have a pause and think about what you think about this statement as well.
Some people could argue that unless clear plans are put in place to tackle inequality and disproportionate statistics, our justice system is not tackling the reasons why citizens might be more likely to commit crime or be charged with a crime.
And Laura is saying, "If statistics tell us that people with certain characteristics might be more likely to end up in our justice system, shouldn't we be unpicking that?" And that's a really, really challenging statement to think about.
Because rather than just thinking that a certain group of people or certain people might be more likely to commit a crime, it might be more important to unpick the reasons why certain types of crime might be happening in certain areas or within certain groups and more than others by unpicking that.
That's a much better way of really looking at our justice system.
So how could we aim to tackle the root cause of crime? So Jun is giving the example of having better support for people that are struggling with the cost of living, such as exploring the effectiveness of our benefit system or increasing food banks.
So people that might have that root cause of crime being poverty, thinking about how we can support those people.
Alex is saying, "Increasing the number of mental health support facilities and ensuring citizens can get timely access to these." Laura has given the example of having high quality education for every child so they have an increased chance of finding employment as adults and hopefully getting a job that can sustain them in adulthood and make sure that they have everything they need.
Sam is saying, "More opportunities for positive youth activities, to both provide young people with positive role models and also keep them off the streets," where they might be more tempted to get involved in activities which they shouldn't be.
And Aisha was saying, "Regeneration of areas with high crime, so the environment gives the perception of being watched and looked after." So lots of really fantastic ideas here about things that could be done to try and tackle the root cause of crime rather than thinking about prejudice towards people that might commit crime.
So let's have a check.
Which of these is a way to tackle the root cause of crime? Is it A, more opportunities for positive youth activities; B, increasing police presence in neighbourhoods; or C, longer prison sentences for offenders.
And it's A, having more opportunities for positive youth activities.
If a cause of crime is potentially young people not having things to do and they might be getting involved in things in the local area, giving them more opportunities is a positive way to tackle that root cause.
For Task C, I'd like you to write a summary exploring how prejudice could impact the justice system.
It should include an overview of what prejudice is and the potential impact prejudice could have within the justice system.
Pause while you complete this task.
So your answer may have included something like this: Prejudice means judging people unfairly based on things like race, gender, ethnicity, or social background.
This can lead to discrimination.
In the justice system, prejudice might show up as certain groups being targeted more by police, judges giving harsher sentences to some people, or juries being biassed.
This can cause mistrust in the justice system, making people feel less safe or hesitant to report crimes.
For the second part of Task C, I'd like you to consider what you have learned about the factors that can influence crime and the potential impact prejudice could have on crime.
Come up with three actions that could be taken to tackle this.
Pause while you complete this task.
Your actions may have included: Ensuring all people have the economic means to meet their basic needs.
This could be action by looking at financial support available to those in need, by creating more support within the community for those who are struggling.
Your actions might have included education and training for people working within the justice system around the potential impact of prejudice and discrimination.
Or, better facilities for local communities to support people to feel more connected to their local area and take pride in it.
So in summary for our lesson on why do people commit crime.
Reasons for committing crime are really complex and they include education, economics, mental health, social influences and psychological factors.
The physical environment can also impact crime, with crime less likely to happen in areas that are well looked after, have experienced regeneration, and that have positive community involvement.
Although the reasons for crime are complex, prejudice still exists.
This is damaging as it can negatively impact people's experience of the justice system and takes the focus away from tackling the root causes of crime.
Well done for completing this lesson.
I hope you enjoyed it and you're back soon for more Citizenship lessons.