Data warehouse and data mining

Data warehouse and data mining Abstract Data mining and data warehouse is one of an important issue in a corporate world today. The biggest challenge in a world that is full of information is searching through it to find connections and data that were not previously known. Dramatic advance in data development make the role of data mining and data warehouse become important in order to improve business operation in organization. The scenarios of important data mining and data warehouse in organization are seen in the process of accumulating and integrating of vast and growing amounts of data in various format and various databases. This paper is discuss about data warehouse and data mining, the concept of data mining and data warehouse, the tools and techniques of data mining and also the benefits of data mining and data warehouse to the organizations. Keywords: Data, Data Warehouse, Data Mining, Data Mart Introduction Organizations tend to grow and prosper as they gain a better understanding of their environment. Typically, business managers must be able to track daily transactions to evaluate how the business is performing. By tapping into the operational database, management can develop strategies to meet organizational goals. The process that identified the trends and patterns in data are the factors to accomplish that. By the way, the way to handle the operational data in organization is important because the reason for generating, storing and managing data is to create information that becomes the basis for rational decision making. To facilitate the decision-making process, decision support systems (DSSs) were developed whereas it is an arrangement of computerized tools used to assist managerial decision making within a business. Decision support is a methodology that designed to extract information from data and to use such information as a basis for decision making. However, information re quirements have become so complex that is difficult for a DSS to extract all necessary information from the data structures typically found in an operational database. Therefore, a data mining and data warehouse was developed and become a proactive methodology in order to support managerial decision making in organization. Concept of Data Warehouse A data warehouse is a firms repositories that running the process of updating and storing historical business data of organization whereas the process then transform the data into multidimensional data model for efficient querying and analysis. All the data stored are extracts or obtains its data from multiple operational systems in organization with containing the information of relevant activity that occurred in the past in order to support organizational decision making. A data mart, on the other hand, is a subset of a data warehouse. It holds some special information that has been grouped to help business in making better decisions. Data used here are usually derived from data warehouse. The first organized used of such large database started with OLAP (Online Analytical Processing) whereas the focused is analytical processing of organization. The diffrences between a data mart and a data warehouse is only the size and scope of the problem being solved. According to William H.Inmon (2005), a data warehouse is a subject-oriented, integrated, time-varying, and non-volatile collection of data in support of the managements decision-making process. To understand that definition, the components will be explained more detailed; Integrated Provide a unified view of all data elements with a common definition and representation for all business units. Subject-oriented Data are stored with a subject orientation that facilitates multiple views of the data and facilitates decision making. For example, sales may be recorded by product, by division, by manager, or by region. Time-variant Dates are recorded with a historical perspective in mind. Therefore, a time dimension is added to facilitate data analysis and various time comparisons. Nonvolatile Data cannot be changed. Data are added only periodically from historical systems. Once the data are properly stored, no changes are allowed. Therefore, the data environment is relatively static. In summary, the data warehouse is usually a read-only database optimized for data analysis and query processing. Typically, data are extracted from various sources and are then transformed and integrated, in other words, passed through a data filter, before being loaded into the data warehouse. Users access the data warehouse via front-end tools and end-user application software to extract the data in usable form. The Issues That Arise in Data Warehouse Although the centralized and integrated data warehouse can be a very attractive proposition that yields many benefits, managers may be reluctant to embrace this strategy. Creating a data warehouse requires time, money, and considerable managerial effort. Therefore, it is not surprising that many companies begin their foray into warehousing by focusing on more manageable data sets that are targeted to meet the special needs of small groups within the organization. These smaller data warehouse are called data marts. A data mart is a small, single-subject data warehouse subset that provides decision support to a small group of people. Some organizations choose to implement data marts not only because of the lower cost and shorter implementation time, but also because of the current technological advances and inevitable people issues that make data marts attractive. Powerful computers can provide a customized DSS to small groups in ways that might not be possible with a centralized syste m. Also, a companys culture may predispose its employees to resist major changes, but they might quickly embrace relatively minor changes that lead to demonstrably improved decision support. In addition, people at different organizational levels are likely to require data with different summarization, aggregation, and presentation formats. Data marts can serve as a test vehicle for companies exploring the potential benefits of data warehouses. By migrating gradually from data marts to data warehouses, a specific departments decision support needs can be addressed within a reasonable time frame (six month to one year), as compared to the longer time frame usually required to implement a data warehouse (one to three years). Information Technology (IT) departments also benefit from this approach because their personnel have the opportunity to learn the issues and develop the skills required to create a data warehouse. Concept of Data Mining Data mining is the forecasting techniques and analytical tools that extensively used in industries and corporates to ensure the effectiveness in decision making. Data mining is a tools to analyze the data, uncover problems or opportunities hidden in the data relationships, form computer models based on their findings, and then use the models to predict business behavior by requiring minimal end-user intervention. The way it works is through search of valuable information from a huge amount of data that is collected over time and defined the patterns or relationships of information that present by data. In business field, the organization use data mining to predict the customer behaviour in the business environment. The process of data mining started from analyzed the data from different perspectives and summarized it into useful information, which from the information then created knowledge to address any number of business problems. For the example, banks and credit card companies u se knowledge-based analysis to detect fraud, thereby decreasing fraudulent transactions. In fact, data mining has proved to be very helpful in finding practical relationships among data that help define customer buying patterns, improve product development and acceptance, reduce healthcare fraud, analyze stock markets and so on. Data Mining in Historical Perspective Over the last 25 years or so, there has been a gradual evolution from data processing to data mining. In the 1960s business routinely collected data and processed it using database management techniques that allowed an orderly listing and tabulation of the data as well as some query activity. The OLTP (Online Transaction Processing) became routine, data retrieval from stored data bacame faster and more efficient because of the availability of new and better storage devices, and data processing became quicker and more efficient because of advancement in computer technology. Database management advanced rapidly to include highly sophisticated query systems, and became popular not only in business applications but also in scientific inquiries. Approaches of Data Mining in Various Industries With data mining, a retail store may find that certain products are sold more in one channel of distribution than in the others, certain products are sold more in one geographical location than in others, and certain products are sold when a certain event occurs. With data mining, a financial analyst would like to know the characteristics of a successful prospective employee; credit card departments would like to know which potential customers are more likely to pay back the debt and when a credit card is swiped, which transaction is fraudulent and which one is legitimate; direct marketers would like to know which customers purchase which types of products; booksellers like Amazon would like to know which customers purchase which types of books (fiction, detective stories or any other kind) and so on. With this type of information available, decision makers will make better choices. Human resource people will hire the right individuals. Credit departments will target those prospectiv e customers that are less prone to become delinquent or less likely to involve in fraudulent activities. Direct marketers will target those customers that are likely to purchase their products. With the insight gained from data mining, businesses may wish to re-configure their product offering and emphasize specific features of a product. These are not the only uses of data mining. Police use this tool to determine when and where a crime is likely to occur, and what would be the nature of that crime. Organized stock changes detect fraudulent activities with data mining. Pharmaceutical companies mine data to predict the efficacy of compounds as well as to uncover new chemical entities that may be useful for a particular disease. The airline industry uses it to predict which flights are likely to be delayed (well before the flight is scheduled to depart). Weather analyst determine weather patterns with data mining to predict when there will be rain, sunshine, a hurricane, or snow. Bes ide that, nonprofit companies use data mining to predict the likelihood of individuals making a donation for a certain cause. The uses of data mining are far reaching and its benefits may be quite significant. Data Mining Tools and Techniques Data mining is the set of tools that learn the data obtained and then using the useful information for business forecasting. Data mining tools use and analyze the data that exist in databases, data marts, and data warehouse. A data mining tools can be categorized into four categories of tools which are prediction tools, classification tools, clustering analysis tools and association rules discovery. Below are the elobaration of data mining tools: Prediction Tools A prediction tool is a method that derived from traditional statistical forecasting for predicting a value of the variable. Classification Tools The classification tools are attempt to distinguish the differences between classes of objects or actions. Given the example is an advertiser may want to know which aspect of its promotion is most appealing to consumers. Is it a price, quality or reliability of a product? Or maybe it is a special feature that is missing on competitive products. This tools help give such information on all the products, making possible to use the advertising budget in a most effective manner. Clustering Analysis Tools This is very powerful tools for clustering products into groups that naturally fall together which are the groups are identified by the program. Most of the clusters discovered may not be useful in business decision. However, they may find one or two that are extremely important which the ones the company can take advantage of. The most common use is market segmentation which in this process, a company divides the customer base into segments dependent upon characteristics like income, wealth and so on. Each segment is then treated with different marketing approach. Association Rules Discovery This tool discover associations which are like what kinds of books certain groups of people read, what products certain groups of people purchase and so on. Businesses use such information in targeting their markets. For instance, recommends movies based on movies people have watched and rated in the past. There are four general phases in data mining which are data preparation, data analysis and classification, knowledge acquisition and prognosis. Data Preparation In the data preparation phase, the main data sets to be used by the data mining operation are identified and cleaned of any data impurities. Because the data in the data warehouse are already integrated and filtered, the data warehouse usually is the target set for data mining operations. Data Analysis The data anlysis and classification phase studies the data to identify common data characteristics or patterns. During this phase, the data mining tool applies specific algorithm to find: Data groupings, classifications, clusters, or sequences. Data dependencies, links, or relationships. Data patterns, trends, and deviations. Knowledge Acquisition The knowledge-acquisition phase uses the results of the data analysis and classification phase. During the knowledge-acquisition phase, the data mining tool (with possible intervention by the end user) selects the appropriate modeling or knowledge-acquisition algorithms. The most common algorithms used in data mining are based on neural networks, decision trees, rules induction, genetic algorithms, classification and regression trees, memory-based reasoning, and nearest neighbor and data visualization. A data mining tool may use many of these algorithms in any combination to generate a computer model that reflects the behavior of the target data set. Prognosis Although many data mining tools stop at the knowledge-acquisition phase, others continue to the prognosis phase. In that phase, the data mining findings are used to predict future behavior and forecast business outcomes. Examples of data mining findings can be: 65% of customers who did not use a particular credit card in the last six months are 88% likely to cancel that account. 82% of customers who bought a 27-inch or larger TV are 90% likely to buy an entertainment center within the next four weeks. If age < 30 and income < = 25,000 and credit rating 25,000, then the minimum loan term is ten years. The complete set of findings can be represented in a decision tree, a neural net, a forecasting model, or a visual presentation interface that is used to project future events or results. For example, the prognosis phase might project the likely outcome of a new product rollout or a new marketing promotion. The Benefit and Weaknesess of Data Warehouse to Organization Data warehouse is the one of powerful techniques that applies in organization in order to assist managerial decision making within a business. This methodology becomes a crucial asset in modern business enterprise. It is designed to extract information from data and to use such information as a basis for decision making. The organization will get more benefit with application of data warehouse because the features of data warehouse itself is its a central repositories that stores historical information, meaning say that eventhough the data come from differ location and various points in time but all the relevant data are assembled in one location and was organized in efficient manner. Indirectly, it makes a profit to company because it greatly reduces the computing cost. One of the advantage of using data warehouse is it allows the accessible of large volume information whereas the information will be used in problem solving that arise in business organization. All the data that are from multiple sources that located in central repository will be analyze in order to allow them come out with a choice of solutions. However there are also having weaknesses that need to concern as well. The processes of data warehouse actually take a long period of time bacause before all the data can be stored into warehouse, they need to cleaned, extracted and loaded. The process of maintaining the data is one of the problems in data warehouse because it is not easy to handle. The compatibility may be the isssued in order to implement the data warehouse in organization because the new transaction system that tried to implement may not work with the system that already used. Beside that, the user that works with the system must be trained to use the system because without having a proper training may cause a problem. Furthermore, if the data warehouse can be accessed via the internet, the security problem might be the issue. The biggest problem that related with the data warehouse is the costs that must taken into consideration especially for their maintenance. Any organization that is considering using a data w arehouse must decide if the benefits outweigh the costs. Conclusion Successfully supporting managerial decision-making is significantly dependent upon the availability of integrated, high quality information organized and presented in a timely and in simply way to understand. Data mining and data warehouse have emerged to meet this need. The application of data mining and data warehouse will be apart of crucial element in organization in order to assist the managerial running the operation smoothly and at the same time will help them to accomplish the business goal. It is because both of these techniques are the foundation of decision support system. Today data mining and data warehouse are an important tools and more companies will begin using them in the future. REFERENCES Bonifati, A., Cattaneo, F., Ceri, F., Fuggetta, A., and Paraboschi, S., (2001). Designing data marts for data warehouse. ACM Transactions On Software Engineering And Methodology, 10, 452-483. Retrieved February 15, 2010 from: http://www.emeraldinsight.com.ezaccess.library.uitm.edu.my/Insight/viewPDF.jsp?contentType=ArticleFilename=html/Output/Published/EmeraldAbstractOnlyArticle/Pdf/2810110103.pdf Chaplot, P., (2007). An introduction to data warehousing. Retrieved February 14, 2010 from: http://www.emeraldinsight.com.ezaccess.library.uitm.edu.my/Insight/viewPDF.jsp?contentType=ArticleFilename=html/Output/Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Pdf/0291000304.pdf Roiger, R.,J., (2005). Teaching an introductory course in data mining. Retrieved February 13, 2010 from: http://delivery.acm.org/10.1145/1070000/1067620/p415-roiger.pdf?key1=1067620key2=7107846621coll=ACMdl=ACMCFID=76668031CFTOKEN=26856088 Santos, R., J., and Bernandino, J. Real-time data warehouse loading methodology. Retrieved February 13, 2010 from: http://www.emeraldinsight.com.ezaccess.library.uitm.edu.my/Insight/viewPDF.jsp?contentType=ArticleFilename=html/Output/Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Pdf/0291010105.pdf Chowdhury, S., Chan, J.,O., (2007). Data warehousing and data mining: a course in mba and msis program from uses perspective. Data Warehousing And Data Mining. 7. Retrieved February 15, 2010 from: http://www.emeraldinsight.com.ezaccess.library.uitm.edu.my/Insight/viewPDF.jsp?contentType=ArticleFilename=html/Output/Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Pdf/1640150202.pdf Ranjan, J., Malik, K., (2007). Effective educational process: a data mining approach. The Journal Of Information And Knowledge Management Systems. 37, 502-515. Retrieved February 16, 2010 from: http://www.emeraldinsight.com.ezaccess.library.uitm.edu.my/Insight/viewPDF.jsp?contentType=ArticleFilename=html/Output/Published/EmeraldFullText Mora, S., L., Trujillo, J., Song, I, Y., (2006). A uml profile for multidimensional modeling in data warehouses. Data Knowledge Engineering. 59, 725-769. Retrieved February 20, 2010 from: http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezaccess.library.uitm.edu.my/science?_ob=MImg_imagekey March, S., T., Hevner, A., R., (2005). Integrated decision support systems: a data warehousing perspective. Retrieved February 21, 2010 from: http://delivery.acm.org/10.1145/1460000/1451949/p49santos.pdf?key1=1451949key2=1956846621coll=ACMdl=ACMCFID

Comparing Schools Essay

This report provides advice on the collection and reporting of information about the performances of Australian schools. The focus is on the collection of nationally comparable data. Two purposes are envisaged: use by education authorities and governments to monitor school performances and, in particular, to identify schools that are performing unusually well or unusually poorly given their circumstances; and use by parents/caregivers and the public to make informed judgements about, and meaningful comparisons of, schools and their offerings. Our advice is based on a review of recent Australian and international research and experience in reporting on the performances of schools. This is an area of educational practice in which there have been many recent developments, much debate and a growing body of relevant research. Our work is framed by recent agreements of the Council of Australian Governments (COAG), in particular, at its meeting on 29 November 2008: C OAG agreed that the new Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority will be supplied with the information necessary to enable it to publish relevant, nationally-comparable information on all schools to support accountability, school evaluation, collaborative policy development and resource allocation. The Authority will provide the public with information on each school in Australia that includes data on each school’s performance, including national testing results and school attainment rates, the indicators relevant to the needs of the student population and the school’s capacity including the numbers and qualifications of its teaching staff and its resources. The publication of this information will allow comparison of like schools (that is, schools with similar student populations across the nation) and comparison of a school with other schools in their local community. (COAG Meeting Outcomes) Our work also has been framed by the recently endorsed MCEETYA Principles for Reporting Information on Schooling (see Section 1. 4). Before summarising our specific recommendations, there are some general conclusions that we have reached from our review of international research and experience. The specific recommendations that follow are best understood in the context of these general conclusions: †¢ Vigilance is required to ensure that nationally comparable data on individual schools does not have the unintended consequence of focusing attention on some aspects of the purposes of schooling at the expense of other outcomes that are as important but not as easily measurable. Parents/caregivers and the public are interested in a broad range of information about schools, and nationally comparable data should be reported in the context of this broader information. †¢ Although it has become popular in education systems in some other parts of the world to use statistical models to develop ‘measures’ of school performance and to report these measures publicly in league tables, we believe that there are very v Reporting and Comparing School Performances  sound technical and educational reasons why school measures of this kind should not be used for public reporting and school comparisons. †¢ Related to this point, we are not convinced of the value of reporting ‘adjusted’ measures of student outcomes publicly. Measures of student outcomes should be reported without adjustment. †¢ To enable the comparison of unadjusted student outcomes across schools, we believe that a ‘like-schools’ methodology should be used. This methodology would allow parents/caregivers, the public, and education systems to compare outcomes for schools in similar circumstances. †¢ While point-in-time measures of student outcomes often are useful, it is difficult to establish the contributions that teachers and schools make to point-in-time outcomes. In general, measures of student gain/growth across the years of school provide a more useful basis for making judgements about the value that schools are adding. †¢ Measures of gain/growth are most appropriately based on measurement scales that can be used to monitor student progress across the years of school. The NAPLAN measurement scales are an example and provide educational data superior to that available in most other countries. Consideration should be given to developing national measurement scales for early literacy learning and in some subjects of the national curriculum. †¢ Initially reporting should build on the understandings that parents and the public have already developed. For example a school’s NAPLAN results should be reported in forms that are consistent with current NAPLAN reports for students. Although much work needs to be done in defining the most appropriate measures, the principle should be to build on the representations of data that are already familiar to people. Recommendations Our report makes the following specific recommendations: student outcome measures †¢ Nationally comparable data should be collected on the literacy and numeracy skills of students in each school, using NAPLAN (Years 3, 5, 7 and 9). †¢ Nationally comparable data should be collected on the tertiary entrance results of students in each senior secondary school. These data could be reported as the percentage of students achieving tertiary entrance ranks of 60 or above, 70 or above, 80 or above, and 90 or above (calculated as a percentage of the students achieving tertiary entrance ranks). †¢ Nationally comparable data should be collected on the percentage of students in each senior secondary school completing Year 12 or equivalent; the percentage of students applying to all forms of post-school education; and the percentage of students completing VET studies. vi Reporting and Comparing School Performances †¢ Nationally comparable data should be collected on the achievements of students in core national curriculum subjects (English, mathematics, science and history), beginning in 2010. National assessments could be developed initially at Year 10. †¢ Nationally comparable data should be collected on the early literacy learning of children in each primary school. These assessments will need to be developed and should be administered upon entry to school and used as a baseline for monitoring progress across the first few years of school. physical and human resources †¢ Nationally comparable data should be collected about sources and amounts of funding received by each school, including all income to the school from State and Commonwealth governments, as well as details of fees payable by parents, including those that are mandatory and any voluntary levies that parents are expected to pay. †¢ Nationally comparable data should be collected on the numbers and qualifications of teaching staff in each school. Basic data would include academic qualifications, details of pre-service teacher education, and details of any advanced certification (eg, Advanced Skills Teacher; Level 3 Teacher). student intake characteristics †¢ Nationally comparable data should be collected on the socio-economic backgrounds of students in each school. Data should be based on information collected at the individual student level, using at least parental occupation and, possibly, parental education levels, under the agreed MCEETYA definitions. †¢ Nationally comparable data should be collected on the percentage of students in each school of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander background under the agreed MCEETYA definition. †¢ Nationally comparable data should be collected on the percentage of students in each school identified as having a language background other than English (LBOTE) under the agreed MCEETYA definition. †¢ Nationally comparable data should be collected on the geo-location of each school using a 3-category scale: metropolitan, provincial, and remote. †¢ Nationally comparable data should be collected on the percentage of students in each school with special educational needs. A nationally agreed definition of this category will need to be developed. like-school comparisons †¢ In reporting student outcome data for a school, data for like-schools should be provided as a point of comparison. Like-schools will be schools in similar circumstances and facing similar challenges. †¢ In determining ‘like-schools’, account should be taken of the percentage of students with Indigenous backgrounds, the socio-economic backgrounds of the students in the school, and the percentage of students from language backgrounds other than English. vii Reporting and Comparing School Performances †¢ For each school separately, like-schools should be identified as the schools most similar to that school on the above characteristics (rather than pre-defining a limited number of like-school categories). †¢ Work should commence as soon as possible on the development of an appropriate like-schools methodology. public reporting †¢ For the purpose of providing public information about schools, a common national website should be used to provide parents/caregivers and the public with access to rich information about individual schools. †¢ The national website should provide information about each school’s programs, philosophies, values and purposes, provided by the school itself, as well as nationally comparable data, provided centrally. †¢ Nationally comparable student outcome data should, wherever possible, provide information about current levels of attainment (ie, status), gain/growth across the years of school, and improvement in a school over time. †¢ The complete database for each state/territory should be made available to the relevant state/territory departments of education and other employing authorities, enabling them to interrogate data for their schools and to make judgments about school performances using aggregated data and national summary statistics. We believe that almost all nationally comparable data collected centrally could be reported publicly. The exceptions would arise when the public reporting of data may have negative and unintended consequences for schools. For example, we can envisage negative consequences arising from the reporting of the socio-economic backgrounds of students in a school, or of the financial circumstances of struggling, small schools (both government and non-government). We also believe that data reported publicly should be factual data about a school, and not the results of secondary analyses and interpretations that are open to debate (eg, value-added measures). viii Reporting and Comparing School Performances 1. INTRODUCTION In education, good decision making is facilitated by access to relevant, reliable and timely information. Dependable information is required at all levels of educational decision making to identify areas of deficiency and special need, to monitor progress towards goals, to evaluate the effectiveness of special interventions and initiatives, and to make decisions in the best interests of individual learners. The focus of this  paper is on the provision and use of information about individual schools. The starting point is the observation that relevant and reliable information about schools is required by a range of decision makers – including parents and caregivers, school principals and school leadership teams, system managers and governments, and the general public – all of whom require dependable information that they can use to maximise opportunities and outcomes for students. 1. 1 Audiences and Purposes  Parents and caregivers require valid and reliable information to evaluate the quality of the education their children are receiving, to make informed decisions in the best interests of individual students, and to become active partners in their children’s learning. They require dependable information about the progress individuals have made (the knowledge, skills and understandings developed through instruction), about teachers’ plans for future learning, and about what they can do to assist. There is also considerable evidence that parents and caregivers want information about how their children are performing in comparison with other children of the same age. And, if they are to make judgements about the quality of the education their children are receiving, they require information that enables meaningful comparisons across schools. School leaders require reliable information on student and school performances for effective school management. Research into factors underpinning school  effectiveness highlights the importance of the school leader’s role in establishing an environment in which student learning is accorded a central focus, and goals for improved performance are developed collaboratively by staff with a commitment to achieving them. School managers require dependable pictures of how well students in a school are performing, both with respect to school goals for improvement and with respect to past achievements and achievements in other, comparable schools. Governments and system managers require dependable information on the performance and progress of individual schools if they are to exercise their responsibilities for the delivery of quality education to all students. Effective management depends on an ability to monitor system-wide and school performances over time, to gauge the effectiveness of special programs and targeted resource allocations, to monitor the impact of policies, and to evaluate the success of initiatives aimed at traditionally disadvantaged and underachieving sections of the student population. Accurate, reliable information allows system managers to measure progress against past performances, to identify schools and issues requiring special attention, to target resources appropriately, and to set goals for future improvement. 1 Reporting and Comparing School Performances 1. 2 Forms of Information Because there are multiple audiences and purposes for information about schools, the forms of information required for effective decision making are different for different stakeholders. Parents and caregivers require a wide range of information, including information relating to their immediate needs (eg, Is the school easily accessible by public transport? Does it have an after-school program? What fees and/or levies does it charge? ); the ethos of the school (eg, What evidence is there of bullying/harassment? What are the espoused values of the school? Do students wear uniforms? What level of discipline is imposed? Who is the principal? ); their child’s likely educational experience (eg, Who will be my child’s teacher next year? Will they be in a composite class? How large will the class be? Does the school have a literacy intervention program? What extra-curricular activities are provided? ); and the school’s educational results (eg, Does the school achieve outstanding Year 12 results? ). School leaders require other forms of information, including information relating to staffing and resources (eg, What resources are available for music next year? How many beginning children have special learning needs? ); the effectiveness of initiatives (eg, Is there any evidence that the extra class time allocated to literacy this year made a difference?); and academic results (eg, How many Year 5 students did not meet the minimum performance standard in Reading? Have our results improved since last year? Are we still below the state average? How did last year’s Year 12 results compare with those of the neighbouring school? ). System managers and governments require still other forms of information, including information to monitor system-wide trends over time, to evaluate the effectiveness of attempts to raise standards and close gaps, and to identify schools that are performing unusually well or unusually poorly given their circumstances. In general, the schoollevel information required by system managers and governments is less fine-grained than the information required by parents, teachers and school leaders. Figure 1 displays schematically various forms of information that could be made available about a school, either publicly or to specific audiences (eg, system managers). The forms of evidence represented in Figure 1 are: A: student outcome measures that a school could choose to report Most schools report a wide range of information about the achievements of their students to their school communities. This information is reported in school newsletters, local and community newspapers, school websites, and at school events. The information includes details of Year 12 results, analyses of postschool destinations, results in national mathematics and science competitions, language certificates, awards, prizes, extra-curricular achievements, community recognition, and so on. Most schools take every opportunity to celebrate the achievements of their students and to announce these achievements publicly. 2 Reporting and Comparing School Performances Figure 1. Forms of information that could be made available about a school B:a sub-set of student outcome measures on which it is agreed to collect nationally comparable data Within the set of student outcome information that might be reported for a school, there could be a sub-set of outcomes on which it was agreed to collect nationally comparable data. A reason for identifying such a sub-set would be to ensure some common measures to facilitate school comparisons – within a local geographical area, across an entire education system, nationally, or within a group of ‘like’ schools. Inevitably, nationally comparable data would be collected for only some of the outcomes that schools, parents and communities value. Performances on common literacy and numeracy tests in Years 3, 5, 7 and 9 are an example of nationally comparable data currently in this category. C. physical and human resources measures that a school could choose to report Schools provide information in various forms and to various audiences about their physical and human resources. Information of this kind includes details of staff qualifications and teaching experience, staff turnover rates, school global budgets, computers and other technology, newly constructed facilities, bequests, results of fundraising drives, and so on. Some of this information may be reported to the school community; some may be kept confidential to the school, education system or government departments. D: a sub-set of physical and human resources measures on which it is agreed to collect nationally comparable data Within the set of physical and human resources measures reported for a school, there could be a sub-set of measures on which it was agreed to collect nationally comparable data. For example, there have been recent calls for greater consistency and transparency in the reporting of school funding arrangements (Dowling, 2007; 2008) and for more consistent national approaches to assessing and recognising teacher quality (Dinham, et al, 2008). 3 Reporting and Comparing School Performances E. student intake measures that a school could choose to report Most schools have considerable information about their students. For example, they may have information about students’ language backgrounds, Indigenous status, socio-economic backgrounds, learning difficulties and disabilities. This information usually is reported only within education systems or to governments and is not reported publicly, although schools sometimes provide information to their communities about the range of languages spoken by students in the school, the countries from which they come, the percentage of Indigenous students in the school and the school’s special Indigenous programs, or the number of severely disabled students and the facilities and support provided for these students. F: a sub-set of student intake measures on which it is agreed to collect nationally comparable data. Within the set of student intake characteristics reported for a school, there could be a sub-set of measures on which it was agreed to collect nationally comparable data. Some progress has been made toward nationally consistent definitions and nationally consistent data collections on student background characteristics. G. all other information that a school could choose to make available Beyond information about student outcomes, student backgrounds and their physical and human resources, schools provide a range of other information to the communities they serve. 1. 3 Nationally Comparable Data Acknowledging the many purposes and audiences for information about schools, and the various forms that this information can take, the specific focus of this paper is on the collection and reporting of nationally comparable data for the purposes of evaluating and comparing school performances. In other words, the focus is on categories B, D and F in Figure 1. We envisage three broad uses of such data: †¢ use by parents and caregivers in judging the quality of educational provision and in making informed decisions in the best interests of individual students; †¢ use by school leaders in monitoring a school’s improvement and benchmarking the school’s performance against other, comparable schools; and †¢ use by education systems and governments in identifying schools that are performing unusually well or unusually poorly given their circumstances. As noted above, these three stakeholder groups are likely to have different needs. The ways in which nationally comparable data are analysed, combined and reported may be different for different purposes. We see the process of reaching agreement on the core data that should be available about a school as a national collaborative process, and see little value in arriving at different conclusions about these data for different parts of the country. 4 Reporting and Comparing School Performances 1. 4 Principles for Reporting The Principles for Reporting Information on Schooling (see pages 6-7) adopted by the Ministerial Council for Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCCETYA) provide an important point of reference for any proposed collection and use of nationally comparable data on schools. These principles recognise the multiple audiences and purposes for information about schools, the need to collect broad evidence about student and school performances, and the desirability of monitoring intended and unintended consequences of reporting information on schools. Australian governments have undertaken to ensure that data provided for the purposes of comparing schools are reliable and fair and take into account the contexts in which schools work. Governments also have undertaken not to develop simplistic league tables of school performances. 1. 5 Structure of Paper This paper first considers the kinds of nationally comparable data that might be collected about schools for the purposes outlined above. We draw on national and international research and experience, attempt to anticipate the likely requirements of different audiences, and take into account what measures currently exist and what additional measures might be desirable in the future. Each of the three data categories in Figure 1 is considered in turn: †¢ †¢ †¢ student outcome measures physical and human resources measures student intake measures (sections 2-3) (section 4) (section 5) We then consider alternative ways of evaluating and comparing school performances. Two broad methodologies are discussed: †¢ †¢ the direct comparison of student outcomes the construction of measures of school performance (section 6) (section 7) Finally, we consider issues in reporting publicly on the performances of schools: †¢ †¢ audiences and purposes for reporting options for public reporting on schools (section 8) (section 9) 5 Reporting and Comparing School Performances MCEETYA PRINCIPLES FOR REPORTING INFORMATION ON SCHOOLING There is a vast amount of information on Australian schooling and individual schools. This includes information about the educational approach of schools, their enrolment profile, staffing, facilities and programs, and the education environment they offer, as well as information on the performance of students, schools and systems. Different groups, including schools and their students, parents and families, the community and governments, have different information needs. The following principles provide guidance on requirements for information on schooling, including the types of information that should be made readily available to each of the groups noted above. These principles will be supported by an agreed set of national protocols on the access to and use of information on schooling. Good quality information on schooling is important: FOR SCHOOLS AND THEIR STUDENTS. Principle 1: Schools need reliable, rich data on the performance of their students because they have the primary accountability for improving student outcomes. Good quality data supports each school to improve outcomes for all of their students. It supports effective diagnosis of student progress and the design of quality learning programs. It also informs schools’ approaches to provision of programs, school policies, pursuit and allocation of resources, relationships with parents and partnerships with community and business. Schools should have access to: †¢ Comprehensive data on the performance of their own students that uses a broad set of indicators †¢ Data that enables each school to compare its own performance against all schools and with schools of similar characteristics †¢ Data demonstrating improvements of the school over time †¢ Data enabling the school to benchmark its own performance against that of the bestperforming schools in their jurisdiction and nationally FOR PARENTS AND FAMILIES. Principle 2: Information about schooling, including data on the performance of individuals, schools and systems, helps parents and families to make informed choices and to engage with their children’s education and the school community. Parents and families should have access to: †¢ Information about the philosophy and educational approach of schools, and their staffing, facilities, programs and extra-curricular activities that enables parents and families to compare the education environment offered by schools †¢ Information about a school’s enrolment profile, taking care not to use data on student 1  characteristics in a way that may stigmatise schools or undermine social inclusion. †¢ Data on student outcomes that enables them to monitor the individual performance of their child, including what their child knows and is able to do and how this relates to what is expected for their age group, and how they can contribute to their child’s progress †¢ Information that allows them to assess a school’s performance overall and in improving student outcomes, including in relation to other schools with similar characteristics in their jurisdiction and nationally. 1 Any use or publication of information relating to a school’s enrolment profile should ensure that the privacy of individual students is protected. For example, where the small size of a school population or of a specific student cohort may enable identification of individual students, publication of this information should be avoided. 6 Reporting and Comparing School Performances FOR THE COMMUNITY. Principle 3: The community should have access to information that enables an understanding of the decisions taken by governments and the status and performance of schooling in Australia, to ensure schools are accountable for the results they achieve with the public funding they receive, and governments are accountable for the decisions they take. Students are an important part of our society and take up a variety of roles within it after leaving school. The community is therefore a direct and indirect consumer of the product of our schools, as well as providing the means of public funding. Information about schools in the public domain fulfils the requirement that schools be accountable for the results they achieve with the public funding they receive, including relative to other ‘like’ schools; it should also give the community a broad picture of school performance and a sense of confidence in our school systems. The community should have access to: †¢ Information about the philosophy and educational approach of schools, and their staffing, facilities, programs and extra-curricular activities that enables the community to compare the education environment offered by schools. †¢ Information about individual schools’ enrolment profile, taking care not to use data on student characteristics in a way that may stigmatise schools or undermine social inclusion †¢ National reporting on the performance of all schools with data that allows them to view a school’s performance overall and in improving student outcomes, including in relation to other schools with similar characteristics RESPONSIBLE PROVISION OF SCHOOLING INFORMATION Australian Governments will ensure that school-based information is published responsibly so that: †¢ any public comparisons of schools will be fair, contain accurate and verified data, contextual information and a range of indicators to provide a more reliable and complete view of performance (for example, information on income, student body characteristics, the spread of student outcomes and information on the value added by schools) †¢ governments will not devise simplistic league tables or rankings and will put in place strategies to manage the risk that third parties may seek to produce such tables or rankings, and will ensure that privacy will be protected. †¢ reports providing information on schooling for parents and families and the community will be developed based on research on what these groups want to know and the most effective ways the information can be presented and communicated. FOR GOVERNMENTS Principle 4: Governments need sound information on school performance to support ongoing improvement for students, schools and systems. Government also need to monitor and evaluate the impacts (intended and unintended) of the use and release of this information to improve its application over time. Good quality information on schooling enables governments to: †¢ analyse how well schools are performing †¢ identify schools with particular needs †¢ determine where resources are most needed to lift attainment †¢ identify best practice and innovation in high-performing schools that can be mainstreamed and used to support improvements in schools with poorer performance †¢ conduct national and international comparisons of approaches and performance †¢ develop a substantive evidence base on what works. This will enable future improvements in school performance that support the achievement of the agreed education outcomes of both the Ministerial Council for Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs and the Council of Australian Governments. 7 Reporting and Comparing School Performances 2. STUDENT OUTCOMES Information about the outcomes of a school’s efforts is key information for parents and caregivers if they are to judge the quality of educational provision; for school leaders to monitor a school’s performance and improvement; and for education systems and governments to identify schools in need of additional support. However, schools work to promote many different kinds of outcomes for their students. For some schools, an important objective is to improve school attendance rates. For others, assisting students to make successful transitions into the workforce is a high priority. Some schools are more focused than others on supporting the social, spiritual and emotional development of students. Still others measure their success in terms of entry rates into highly sought-after university courses. Decisions about the outcomes to be reported publicly for schools are important because they influence judgements about how well individual schools are performing. This is particularly true when education systems and governments attempt to construct ‘measures’ of school performance: Perverse incentives can arise when the [school] performance measure has both a large impact upon actors and focuses on an aspect of schooling that does not reflect the true or overall purpose and objectives of schools. Unfortunately, this can be common in school performance measures if the performance measure is too narrowly defined. (OECD, 2008, 26).

Virgin Atlantic Case Study

Atlantics primary problem is that they were operating in the middle of the optimal utility model. Their slogan had become â€Å"Offering a First Class service at less than First Class fares†. In which Virgin Atlantic Is offering high quality at a low cost, which keeps them In the middle and not profitable. It seems that Virgin Atlantic did not take Into account that offering a premium service as they were would come at a premium cost for them and when throwing In low cost fares Into the mix they were reading a loss and expectations they will not be able to sustain for a long time.Starting off as a low cost premium airline aimed towards the business class may have been there way into the market and obtain market share but at some point they needed to work their way out of the middle of the optimal utility model and shift either towards high quality or low cost, not both simultaneously to stay profitable. Seeing that there number one goal was to provide premium innovative servic es/ products they could have gone the route that Apple Inc. As done by providing innovative premium products at a premium prices rather than setting themselves up for future losses.A recommendation for Virgin Atlantics primary problem of operating In the middle of the optimal utility model, In which consumers want either high quality or low cost products and services. Virgin should keep moving forward with innovation and providing a premium experience for all of their passengers but do it at a higher price so that they do not create any losses. Another route to go in would be to become a upper low cost provider for their business class niche and stop spending on infilling entertainment and amenities and focus only on cutting costs which would allow them to be profitable as a low cost air transportation provider.Another secondary problem is that during Virgin Atlantics pursuit to be innovative, top management neglected to make innovations that would help the company in terms of lower ing costs and Increasing profit. They only focused on innovations that benefited the consumers and not any self-interest. For example when Virgin Alertness management team decided that they did not want passengers to feel bored, they came up with innovative ways to keep them entertained during their flights such as pioneering individual video screens for every seat.But innovations like that did not help them cut any costs or increase fares significantly enough to increase profits or reduce costs. A recommendation in regards to creating innovations to help reduce costs and increase profits would be for Virgin Atlantic Airways to partner with small shipping impasses who could buy cargo space on Virgin Atlantic flights that are not at full capacity, so that they can generate more revenue on flights that are not traveling full of passengers.Another Innovative Idea would be to use the Individual video screens that they pioneered as ad space in the Mid and Economy class section of their p lanes. By doing so Vulgar Atlantic would be able generate additional revenues by selling ad space to advertisers, which would allow them to lower their cost per route,

The “Freedom” Model of Criminal Justice A Critical Analysis - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 15 Words: 4477 Downloads: 2 Date added: 2019/02/20 Category Society Essay Level High school Tags: Criminal Justice Essay Did you like this example? Introduction â€Å"Criminal justice is controversial, not because the list of its goals is controversial, but because people differ over which are most important and which are to be given low-quality priority† (Sanders, 2010, p.47). There have been many disputes arising over the role of the criminal justice system in dispensing justice. Often criticized are the practices by police, prosecutors, or courts which are thought to implement a â€Å"too harsh† enforcement which leads to the selective use of police discretion and disproportionate imprisonment of some groups. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "The â€Å"Freedom† Model of Criminal Justice: A Critical Analysis" essay for you Create order Alternatively, there are those who claim that some of these practices are â€Å"too lax† in their enforcement which allegedly leads to the belief that suspects and defendants are let off too easily. As Daly puts it, justice to some is an injustice to others, and the vice versa is also true (2012, p.4). The two principles of justice: freedom and equality, have been revised over the years in a bid to repress the endless violent wave of crime. However, this reestablishment may have led to a disorder in the process of goal prioritization. It becomes even more difficult in a capitalist economy such as the United States since the state, and its legal system exists to secure and perpetuate the capitalist interests of the ruling class. Disproportional reward Is the most effective way of maintaining capitalism (Potter and van den Haag, 2014, p.3). The result has been the introduction of various approaches to justify the methods used to pass justice. The current report critically analyz es the â€Å"Freedom Approach† proposed by Andrew Sanders and its relevance and efficiency when applied in the criminal justice system. It argues that the model not only satisfies the core values of justice, but it is also effective in reducing crime prevalence. The analysis will begin by stating the purpose of the research. The purpose describes the motivation behind the selected topic and what it hopes to gain at the end of the analysis. Following this is a section that includes a brief description of Andrew Sanders’ freedom approach and the principles and arguments that form its foundation. With that in mind, the research will then focus on its necessity, and why it has been found to be an integral part of the criminal justice. The critical analysis will evaluate the soundness of the approach using the criminal justice core values as the measures from which the comparison can be made. Further, the open criticism of the method will be employed in the research, and the counterargument made in response to it. Finally, a conclusion regarding the relevance of the approach will end the analysis. Statement of Purpose The research aims to establish how the freedom approach to criminal justice is more important regarding goal prioritization and criminal justice efficiency than the currently available models of justice. Goal prioritization is essential for any institution as it helps identify the critical success factors relevant to it and exposes those variables that either lead to the success or failure of a proposed model (Gates, 2010, p.24). The reason for making this presupposition is because the prevalent justice models: crime control and due process, are not universally applicable per se since they represent the conflicting interests and values operating within the criminal justice. The tensions that exist between the crime control and due process models bring about disharmony which undermines the efficiency and effectiveness of the criminal justice system as it ought to be. To declare that one is better than the other requires one to make a valued judgment, which presents opportunities for i nconsistency due to the subjective views of the different law enforcement agents. The freedom approach thus attempts to unpack the competing goals ascribed and applied to the criminal justice system. While crime control is conservative, and it is more interested in promoting order and social stability, the due process model is quite libertarian and helps protect people and their property from harm (Roach, 1999, p.677). The â€Å"Freedom Approach† Very few people would argue against convicting the guilty, protecting the innocent, and everyone else from any arbitrary and oppressive treatment. Many people support the rhetoric that the criminal justice system should treat victims with respect and make sure that this is pursued efficiently and proportionately (Sanders, 2017, p.1). The problem with this is that the world is not a perfect place and the justice models that exist today cannot operate at a 100% efficiency. The best that we can do is develop practices and approaches that take the effectiveness of the justice system as close to optimality as possible. Other than that, it must be recognized that there will always exist a conflict between justice models, primarily because of the difference in goal prioritization, and the considerations made when selecting what goals to pursue. According to Sanders (2010, p.47), the values and interests of the criminal justice system are varied, and Packer’s two justice models striv e to ensure that they are adequately covered. However, they are each incomplete in meeting all these obligations and are also not normatively acceptable. The human rights perspective is the proposed alternative to solving the gaps preexistent in the crime control and due process models. Nonetheless, it also has its flaws as it has not been as fruitful and comprehensive to use when understanding, critiquing or developing the criminal justice. Andrew Sanders argues that a simple remedy to the problems brought about by the previous models to criminal justice is to support crime repression objectives from a freedom perspective. Freedom should be the ultimate objective of the criminal justice process, and all the actions taken by the different actors should work towards this, thus rendering freedom as a kind of common currency. According to Sanders, the primary goal of safeguarding victims, offenders, and other individuals impacted by the crime and the criminal justice system, is to ensure that freedom is either enhanced or protected appropriately (Sanders et al., 2010, p.48). Protection should not be considered as the ultimate goal in itself, but as a means to an end which leads to the facilitation of the respective freedoms of these individuals. The freedom approach is based on a human rights foundation, but also entails much more than just protecting the minimalistic â€Å"safety net† rights. The human rights provis ions may have provided a basis from which criminal justice agents can carry out inquisitions and crime control (Sanders, 2010, p.48). However, human rights play a vital role in the outcome of all the processes combined. The freedom approach takes on an absolute approach which tends to combine all the efforts put into the respective justice models to achieve the most favorable aspirations by the community: to live in a society that is free of crime. The freedom approach tends to consider the implications of a crime and the methods through which justice is carried out. Through it, law enforcement agencies are supposed to appraise how much freedom would be constricted by an action before deciding upon which decision to make concerning that particular crime. Sanders suggests that by careful, and fair selection of the issues to consider in a court case, it becomes possible to rank the problems by order of their importance (Sanders et al., 2010, p.48). Justice is measured based on the freedom ascribed to it. For example, when a crime occurs and is directed to the victim, it means that the individual is denied the freedom to enjoy whatever was taken from them or made them suffer. The freedom approach is based on consequentialism ethics, where judges value their decisions based on the consequences of an act. Sanders suggests that distribution sensitive rule-consequentialism is far better equipped to promote freedom as it adheres to the rules put in place unlike the individual act-consequentialism theory (2010, p.49). The latter can easily undermine the manner in which it promotes freedom due to the uncertainty caused by imperfections caused by factors such as inaccurate information, time constraints, and personal prejudices. It is based on an actor selecting the action to take after evaluating which alternative act would maximize the value gotten from the decision. In short, Sanders is more concerned about whether the measure taken (from any justice model, with consideration of the human rights), will curb instances of recidivism or ensure that guilty individual do not continue roaming free. In a way, the freedom approach tends to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of the criminal justice both in the short and long run. As long as the criminal justice department can critically analyze the implications of an action regarding a particular case and make favorable inferences as to the repercussions of the action with precision, then the criminal justice is in a better position to justify their decisions. According to Quirk et al. (2010, p.62), the reform of the freedom and equality principles as regards to criminal justice may have led to the rebalanced favor of the victim and away from the accused, arguing that the former may have more esteem than the latter. Suspects make up part of the community, and their rights are meaningful as well. Hen ce, an appropriate justice measure should consider the impact of a criminal justice decision that is inclusive of the ‘reformed’ individual if they are to make decisions that remain effective even after the individual is out of corrections. It is what Sanders terms as a balance of freedom (Sanders, 2017, p.1). Provisions of the Freedom Approach Method The freedom approach makes some arrangements for law enforcement agencies regarding how to assess and deal with crime. They also form part of the advantages that accrue in the name of seeking out justice. They include: A balance of freedom. The freedom approach does not discriminate as to who the implications of more liberty in a society apply to once the justice process is complete. Cost-effectiveness. The freedom approach sways attention from the partiality of the victim’s needs as they would be counterproductive for the overall freedom of the community as well as the hope for recidivist tendencies. Impact on law enforcement and criminal procedures. By focusing on the freedom approach, the criminal justice agents are inclined to carry out the justice processes with dignity so that they can minimize the risk of recidivism, while also working in alignment to their specified roles. It prevents officials from working outside their assigned responsibilities, which also tends to protect the marginalized community. A balanced approach for both victims and the accused. None of the associated parties have the upper hand as each is allowed the same information, services, and involvement in the restorative process as the other. Criminal Justice Core Values In order to understand the degree of efficiency and effectiveness that the freedom model is capable of when used in the criminal justice processes, it would be prudent to compare its relation to the three core values of the justice system: Justice, Democracy, and the Three Es (efficiency, effectiveness, and economy) (Sanders, 2017, p.1). I. Justice Justice may have very many meanings depending on the context in which it is used. According to a study carried out by Clark, the participants had varied opinions on what they considered to encompass justice. To some, it involved retribution while for others acknowledgment of the crimes committed is enough for them. For others, the safety of the entire community was what justice was all about (Clark, 2011, p.75). However, what researchers have found to be true is that there are two case scenarios from which justice can be achieved: for the victim or the accused. A discussion of the notion of justice is an essential starting point for determining whether the criminal justice system is what it proclaims itself to be and its capability to deliver what people expect it to (Clark, 2011, p.39). According to research by Hurlbert and Mulvale (2011, p.9), they mention that the principles of justice are linked to fairness, entitlement, moral righteousness, and equality. As such, any described f orm of justice describes the normative standards and how the principles mentioned above are implemented. Fairness is a reaction to those standards (Goldman and Cropanzano, 2015, p.315). As part of the explanation given by Andrew Sanders in his move to push for the use of a ‘freedom approach to criminal justice, he states that justice and fairness must be held to a high account as part of the concern to maximize human freedom (Sanders, 2010, p.49). His argument is inclined to relate this to a distribution-sensitive consequentialism principle. What is behind this concern is the thought that certain deontological values and norms of justice are so fundamental and essential that they ought to be protected and promoted as intrinsic values. They would include the equal worth and dignity of persons, as well as the respect given for each (Ernst and Heilinger, 2011, p.118). The freedom approach ensures that each person is treated to the same justice process by basing the outcomes on the normative human rights, and an inclusive policy of criminal analysis. What this means is that the overall freedoms of the victim, the accused, and the community are considered, and ruli ngs are made that align to the outcome that is most advantageous to the society at large while working within the standard rules of justice (Sanders, 2010, p.58). As much as the freedom approach follows an inclusivity principle, it binds law enforcement agents to their duties. At the end of a criminal case, the victim should be in a position to claim that they are satisfied with the justice given, the accused (if guilty) should be content with the ruling given, and the justice system should be in a position to claim that the outcome of the verdict serves in the interests of the community. II. Democracy According to Bretherton (2015, p.278), for the criminal justice to grow more just, it must allow for those who bear more cost of crime and punishment to exercise more power over those who enforce the law and give out punishment. Simply put, any policy or professional practice such as criminal justice should allow for the contribution of wisdom, knowledge, and experience of those it affects. By doing so, democracy helps enhance democratic citizenship by promoting skills, responsibility, neighborliness, and agency of those it affects with regard to any policy or professional practice. According to Kleinfeld (2016, p.1466), democracy within the criminal justice system should achieve the objective of enhancing the ethical life upheld by the community living under law and government. An ethical life reflects the values disclosed by a community’s public deliberations, provided that these deliberations are non-oppressive in their application (Kleinfeld, 2016, 1466). A core principle of the freedom approach is that it recognizes the value of each of the parties involved in the justice model. The fact that it makes a significant consideration for the rights and freedoms of the society as a whole is an indication that the approach respects the democratic aspect of justice. Sanders claims that the types of freedom that the criminal justice system should enhance include those of the broader community and in an equal fashion (2010, p.54). Another tenet of the freedom approach is that it takes into consideration other aspects of society which encroach on the freedoms that the criminal justices set out to protect (Sanders, 2010, p.56). The inclusionary approach includes consideration for others and obedience to the law; made possible by explanation, discussion, experience, and example. It is in line with the proposed responsibility, neighborliness, and agency that democracy purports to uphold (Kleinfeld, 2016, p.1466). It allows the public to respect th e authority held by the criminal justice system while reducing opportunistic instances of imposed power. III. Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Economy The criminal justice system’s credibility depends on its performance. Poor performance renders much of the criminal justice processes questionable and unstainable. The diffused lines of accountability for performance within the criminal justice system makes it vulnerable to criticism and slow to adopt measures that ensure its efficiency (Dandurand, 2014, p.385). The community that relies on the criminal justice system to make them feel safe tends to undermine the credibility and authority they ascribe the institution if at all they perceive that it is unable to meet the public’s expectations of fairness, timeliness, and transparency (Dandurand, 2014, p.385). Also, of significance is the ability to manage the costs of carrying out justice since failure to do so leads to the potentiality of a funding crisis, that may require severe cuts in the budget. The result of this is the inability to be effective in dispensing justice, especially with the increasing number of court cases. As such, it has been argued that justice systems that are unable to be both effective and efficient in carrying out their duties make it less relevant to conflict resolution, public safety, and crime prevention (Dandurand, 2014, p.385). First of all, the freedom model is both efficient and cost-effective. All criminal justice systems rely on taxpayer money to acquire resources needed to make sure they feel secure in the country it operates. What the freedom approach does is that it assures a high rate of low recidivism by utilizing the most suitable approach to ensuring that both justice and safety are guaranteed. According to Sanders, time and cost constraints are among the most significant impediments to efficient crime control. Due process, on the other hand, may extend the work and investigation needed to conclude a case, which may eat into the allocated criminal justice. It would mean that funds may be taken from other crucial sectors such as health and education (Sanders, 2010, p.37). Due process may, therefore, have raised the cost imposition of judgment and punishment (Simon, 2017, p.30). Requiring the taxpayers to pay more to cater for additional expenses that would be incurred to unnecessarily punish peopl e through correction systems constrict the freedom of the community as they have to appropriate more of their money to paying for these services directly or indirectly (Sanders, 2010). The freedom approach allows for law enforcement agencies to consider the most successful method of crime control while making deliberate considerations on the cost that it would impose on the judicial system in future. Fundamentally, the question to ask is whether the accused person poses a future risk or the possibility of reoffending and then suggest a legal remedy to ensure that such probabilities are limited or close to none. In theory, a criminal justice system that successfully achieves incapacitation, deterrence, and control through the use of programmes offered to delinquents and offenders can be said to be effective in its methods when compared to the freedom approach (Butorac et al., 2017). The reason is simple, the inhibition of criminals means that the rest of the community gets to enjoy their freedoms, such as owning property or walking alone at night, etc. which is the objective that the freedom approach wishes to push. Hence, under the freedom approach, the criminal justice will strive to use the available resources in a manner that gives assurance that the objectives mentioned above can be achieved. Furthermore, the performance of the criminal justice system Is what determines its perceived effectiveness. The rate of recidivism is considered a performance measure of the criminal justice system (King, 2014, p.2). Since the objective is of the freedom approach is to ensure that recidivism does n ot occur, it can be argued that the method satisfies the third element of the three E’s: effectiveness. Criticism of the Freedom Approach One of the significant criticisms of the use of the freedom approach is whether it is indeed operational as Andrew Sanders claims it to be. The question is not without merit because it is far from clear how law enforcement agencies seek to identify the differential freedoms and unfreedoms. For example, take the case of a budding footballer who has a career ahead of him. If an attack on him leads to them breaking a leg, meaning that they cannot pursue their career, would his/her reduction of freedom be similar or count for more than those of a bed-ridden pensioner who cannot experience any loss of freedom in practice? In another example, would it be seemingly fair not to imprison a burglar with five children depending on him/her and imprison one that has no dependents at all? As such, these questions insinuate that the freedom approach method may be difficult to operationalize because individuals’ experience and relationship to acts defined as crime are influenced by wealth, po wer, and opportunity inequalities (Matsueda and Grigoryeva, 2014, p.20). However, Andrew Sanders was quick to acknowledge that such a critical point would be argued as one to undermine his model’s development and application. He makes this apparent in his argument of Conor Gearty’s analysis of human rights. The respect for human rights should include equivalent respect for their dignity. According to Quirk et al. (2010, p.61), the DNA of human rights rests within the principles of dignity, legality, and democracy. Andrew believes that dignity is characterized by autonomy (ability to practice human agency), real choice (requires a minimum level of education, health, and resources), and every individual should possess the liberty to exercise the options (Quirk et al., 2010, p.60). The respect for human rights requires justice officials both not eroding its elements while actively promoting people to pursue them, Other than that; inequalities can only lead to the erosion of dignity (Shukla, 2011, p.11). With that said, Quirk mentions that crimi nal justice should be a matter of social justice and law enforcement officials should try as much as possible not to let social inequalities hamper the ideal of justice and fairness (2010, p.61). It can be done by balancing social justice priorities, which resounds with Andrew Sanders’s freedom approach. Andrew Sanders freedom approach draws on John Rawls political liberalism. The reason for this being that it forms the basis from which scholars and law enforcement officers can carry out critical reflection as to what would give criminal justice the impetus it needs to realize success. According to John Rawls, two fundamental principles need to be considered to achieve the conception of justice as being fair entirely. The first is that each individual has an equal claim to the fundamental rights and liberties afforded to them, and the second is that social and economic inequalities are to exist under two conditions. The first is that people that hold these positions must be in offices must offer their services with fair equality of opportunity and that the most significant benefit should be to the most disadvantaged (Welson, 2011, p.85). In so doing the freedom approach requires that law enforcement officials carry out their duties, and make decisions while keeping in mind that the m inority may have limited representation on the socially acceptable policies which make up law. Conclusion The analysis takes on the task of evaluating the ‘freedom approach’ by critically analyzing its principles and application. The research shows that it satisfies the core values of justice and it is, therefore, a viable model to use in the criminal justice process. With regard to the justice principle, the research shows how Andrew Sanders equates his freedom approach to a rule-consequentialism argument. The values of the society are upheld by the model, with close alignment to the rules that maintain social order. The democratic principle of justice also holds due to the inclusivity aspect of the freedom model; observing that the community comprises of both suspects and victims and a preferred justice scenario would be that which optimizes the freedom of either. Finally, freedom approach has been deemed effective, efficient, and cost-effective to satisfy the three E’s of the justice core value. These ideas help conceptualize the framework developed by Andrew Sande rs by showing its interconnectivity with the core aspects associated with free and fair justice for all. Furthermore, Andrew Sanders has a rebuttal for criticism directed at his model stating that countries must ensure that they have in place, laws and policies that take note of their minority groups. It ensures that the freedom approach does not only benefit the empowered in society. The freedom approach does away with quantifying whether a criminal procedure is too harsh or too lax, or whether the law enforcement agencies made the right decisions or not. Instead, the goal that maximizes the freedom of the community will be the most appropriate. It will have guaranteed that careful evaluations and extrapolations have been made, and an assurance that law enforcement takes the issue of equal and fair treatment of its citizens seriously when delivering justice. . References Bretherton, L., 2015. Democracy and the Criminal Justice System. Political Theology, 16(3), pp.273-278. Butorac, K., Gracin, D. and Stani?, N., 2017, January. The challenges in reducing criminal recidivism. In PUBLIC SECURITY AND PUBLIC ORDER. Clark, H.C., 2011. A fair way to go: criminal justice for victim/survivors of sexual assault (Doctoral dissertation). Crocker, D., 2016. Balancing justice goals: restorative justice practitioners’ views. Contemporary Justice Review, 19(4), pp.462-478. Daly, K., 2012. Aims of the criminal justice system. Crime and justice: A guide to criminology. Australia: Thompson-Reuters. Dandurand, Y., 2014, December. Criminal Justice Reform and the System’s Efficiency. In Criminal Law Forum (Vol. 25, No. 3-4, pp. 383-440). Springer Netherlands. Ernst, G. and Heilinger, J.C., 2011. The philosophy of human rights: Contemporary controversies. de Gruyter. Gates, L.P., 2010. Strategic planning with critical success factors and future scenari os: An integrated strategic planning framework (No. CMU/SEI-2010-TR-037). CARNEGIE-MELLON UNIV PITTSBURGH PA SOFTWARE ENGINEERING INST. Gloppen, S., 2014. Courts, corruption and judicial independence. Corruption, Grabbing and Development: Real World Challenges. Goldman, B. and Cropanzano, R., 2015. â€Å"Justice† and â€Å"fairness† are not the same thing. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(2), pp.313-318. Hurlbert, M. and Mulvale, J.P., 2011. Defining justice. Margot Hurlbert. King, R.S. and Elderbroom, B., 2014. Improving recidivism as a performance measure. Washington, DC: Urban Institute. Kleinfeld, J., 2016. Three Principles of Democratic Criminal Justice. Nw. UL Rev., 111, p.1455. Matsueda, R.L. and Grigoryeva, M.S., 2014. Social inequality, crime, and deviance. In Handbook of the social psychology of inequality (pp. 683-714). Springer, Dordrecht. Potter, G., Wilson and van den Haag, 2014. Conservative Theories of Crime Control. Quirk, H., Seddon, T. and Smith, G. eds., 2010. Regulation and Criminal Justice: Innovations in Policy and Research. Cambridge University Press. Quirk, H., Seddon, T. and Smith, G. eds., 2010. Regulation and Criminal Justice: Innovations in Policy and Research. Cambridge University Press. Roach, K., 1999. Four Models of the Criminal Process. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 89(2), p.671. Sanders, A., 2017. The CPS, policy-making and assisted dying: towards a ‘freedom’approach. Journal of Criminal Law. Sanders, A., Young, R. and Burton, M., 2010. Criminal justice. Oxford University Press. Schmalleger, F., Donaldson, S., Kashiwahara, K., Koppal, T., Chase, S., Brown, A., Jarriel, T. and Marash, D., 2014. Criminal justice today. Prentice Hall. Shukla, S. K. (2011). Dignity and Human Rights: A Missing Dialogue? Available at. https://www.theglobaljournals.com/ijar/file.php?val=May_2014_1398965985_e9548_110.pdf. Indian Journal of Applied Research, 4(5), 370–373. https://doi.or g/10.15373/2249555x/may2014/111 Simon, J., 2017. Governing through crime. In Law and Poverty (pp. 97-115). Routledge. Welson, E., 2011. John Rawls political liberalism: implications for Nigerias democracy. Woolhandler, A., 2015. Procedural Due Process Liberty Interests. Hastings Const. LQ, 43, p.811.