The Impact of Teacher Method of Delivery and the Marshall Hypothesis

Abstract

As we approach the 50-year anniversary of the landmark Furman decision, it is of paramount importance to re-examine Justice Thurgood Marshall’s hypotheses. In Justice Marshall’s second hypothesis in his concurring opinion, he suggested “people who were fully informed’ regarding the death penalty “would find the penalty, shocking, unjust and unacceptable” (p. 361). While there has been much empirical testing of this hypothesis, the intent of this study is to add to the existing literature by examining whether different methods of information delivery produce sentiments in opposition to capital punishment. The main research question to be tested is as follows: does exposure to information have more of an impact on opinions if it is given in-person or in online/hybrid formats? Data were collected by an instructor who taught death penalty classes (n = 143) utilizing different teaching modalities. Results suggest that method of course delivery is marginally significantly related to change in opposition towards capital punishment. More specifically, hybrid/online offerings were more likely to result in increased opposition towards the death penalty after taking the class. Furthermore, the analysis also revealed a significant relationship between teaching modality and level of death penalty knowledge at post-test. In light of recent developments in higher education resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, it is also beneficial to conduct research that has important implications as colleges and universities come to grips with a new normal in distance learning.

Keywords:

• Capital punishment
• Marshall hypothesis
• Teaching modalities

Declarations

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge Christina Jefferson for her exceptional research assistance in the preparation of this article. We would also like to give special thanks to Michael Perlin for his helpful suggestions, comments, and contributions to this research.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This project was supported by an internal grant awarded by the Research Council at Niagara University in Summer 2020.

Notes on contributors

Talia Roitberg Harmon

Talia Roitberg Harmon, PhD., is the Chair and Professor of Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Niagara University.

Diana L. Falco

Diana L. Falco, PhD., is the Criminal Justice Division and Program Director, Assistant Teaching Professor of School of Social Work & Criminal Justice, University of Washington Tacoma.

David Taylor

David Taylor, PhD., is Associate Professor of Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Niagara University.