6 EC
Semester 2, period 6
5274POEM6Y
| Owner | Master Forensic Science |
| Coordinator | Virgil Rerimassie |
| Part of | Master Forensic Science, year 1 |
This course aims (1) retrieve all your knowledge of the past courses and apply it to a classical hard case. And (2) to explore and understand the role of the societal actors, e.g, policy, ethics and media.
Forensic scientists do not work in isolation from the world. Even though forensic laboratories may at times seem like places that are far remote from public life, forensic science is connected to various other social environments, such as routinely to various forms of research science or to the legal system. However, when the routine breaks down, such as in times of controversy or disagreement, the forensics can take centre stage in public attention. The critical questioning of forensic evidence by lawyers and defendants may then quickly extend to include crime reporters, media pundits, researchers, civil servants, or politicians.
The course analyses how forensic science assesses the solidity of facts, in the context of major social institutions in society, such as science, the law, government, and the media. Each of these institutions has its own way of assessing facts and we will analyse how these interact in the practice of forensic scientists. Some controversial criminal cases will be used as a window onto the assessment of facts, showing us connections and influences.
We will do this from the perspective of the social sciences, which provide us with tools and concepts for reflection on the forensic profession. The part of social sciences we will rely on are Science and Technology Studies, Policy Science, and Media Studies. In addition, we will make use of some basic models of Philosophy of Science and Ethics.
This course also covers some basic elements of the various human dimensions encountered by the Forensic Scientist. This requires an active approach of the students. It incorporates practical, interactive, individual and group assignments in order to enable the students to acquire skills and insights about multidisciplinary project team dynamics, one-on-one interaction, conflict resolution and learning styles.
See Canvas
This is a full time 4 week course (every day throughout the weeks) which will demand from you an active participation in lectures, self study, team project on multi failure cases and tutorials. You will work in teams of around 7 students on one case during the course. Each team will have a different case. After each introduction of a new disciplinary perspective you have to reformulate the same case as for instance a scientific fraude case, or media driven cases, showing that you understand the disciplinary models and reductions and use the proper disciplinary vocabulary. In the tutorials feedback will be given to your assignments.
The course consists of lectures and tutorials (or, work groups). In general, a topic will start you studying the reading material posted on Canvas. The topic is reinforced with a lecture. Furthermore, during tutorials we will go deeper into the literature and theoretical concepts, also by means of specific examples from the field and through (practical) exercises. To help us get a deeper understanding of the compulsory literature used in this course we use the ‘CARQ method’. This is a well-known method to discuss a scientific article, and contains a:
•Core quotation (a phrase or sentence of the article that according to you presents the key message of the whole article), accompanied with the;
•Argumentative structure of the article or chapter to illumine this quotation; a discussion of;
•Relations the article has (with what you know from other contexts, with other texts discussed in the course, et cetera). Finally, present fellow students with;
•Questions that are formulated in such fashion as to stimulate discussion.
The CARQ method provides a fruitful way to structure our discussion. In addition, the students should cover the weekly reading assignments and will use the discussion board on Canvas to bring important issues, difficult concepts, and their questions or remarks on the literature. In addition, during the tutorials we will reflect and work on the reports you will be drafting.
Activity | Hours | |
Hoorcollege | 12 | |
Presentatie | 4 | |
Tentamen | 2 | |
Werkcollege | 12 | |
Self study | 138 | |
Total | 168 | (6 EC x 28 uur) |
This programme does not have requirements concerning attendance (OER part B).
Additional requirements for this course:
It is presupposed that all students will be present in lectures and tutorials.Tutorials are compulsory. If you miss one tutorial you will have to make a replacement assignment. Missing two or more tutorials will automatically result in the loss of credit for thepractical/tutorialpart of the course.
| Item and weight | Details |
|
Final grade | |
|
50% Tentamen | Must be ≥ 5.5, Mandatory |
|
40% Group Report | Must be ≥ 5.5, Mandatory |
|
10% Presentation Group Report | Must be ≥ 5.5, Mandatory |
The assessment of this course consists of two components: first, the criminal case portfolio (consisting of a team report and presentation hereon) and second, a written examination.
Component 1– Criminal Case Portfolio
The first component consists of a group report in which you will apply concepts of this course to a controversial case. In addition, you will hold a presentation of the report. Working in groups, your assignment is to ‘re-tell’ the case through the different lenses, or in other words, describe the case as interdisciplinary researchers. For this, as a group you will write eight chapters on the case your group has selected. The case studies used in this course are described below. During the course you will work together with your team on a case of your choice, provided that there is an equal balanced of students over the different cases. A separate document “report guide”, provided on Canvas, provides additional detailed information.
Component 2. The Final Examination
The exam of this course will be a written examination based on the content covered during the course. The final exam will be assessed on an individual basis. The exam is designed to assess the theoretical and practical aspects related to the learning outcomes.
The calculation of the final grade
All components will be graded on a scale from 1 to 10, with a maximum of one decimal after the point. These grades are used to calculate the final grade. In order to pass the course, all components and the final grade have to be sufficient, i.e. at least a five and a half. When a student has not fulfilled this requirement, the examiner will register the mark ‘did not fulfil all requirements’ (NAV) whether or not the averaged grade is sufficient. The components will be weighted as follows:
1. Exam (50%)
2. Team portfolio report + presentation (50%)
The final grade will be announced at the latest on July 13th (= 15 working days after the final course activity). Between July 13th to August 11th (=35 working days after the final course activity) a post-exam discussion or inspection moment will be planned. This will be announced on Canvas and/or via email.
Table of specification
| LO | Tested in component | EQ 1 | EQ 2 | EQ 3 | EQ 4 | EQ 5 | EQ 6 | EQ 7 | EQ 8 | EQ 9 | EQ 10 |
| 1 | 1 | x | |||||||||
| 2 | 2, 3 | x | x | ||||||||
| 3 | 2, 3 | x | |||||||||
| 4 | 2, 3 | x | |||||||||
| 5 | 2, 3 | 1 | x |
Table of specification: the relation between the Learning Outcomes (LO) of the course, the assessment components of the course and the Exit Qualifications (EQ) of the Master’s Forensic Science (described in the Introduction in the Course Catalogue)
Component 1
Case 1: The Teresa Halbach murder
Steven Avery gained worldwide popularity after a Netflix true crime documentary called Making a Murderer debuted in December of 2015. The Steven Avery story was convicted of a crime for which he again proclaimed his innocence: the murder of Teresa Halbach. Photographer Teresa Halbach disappeared on October 31, 2005; her last known appointment was a meeting with Steven Averyat his home on the grounds of Avery's Auto Salvage. On the 11thof November 2005, Avery was arrested and charged with Halbach's murder, kidnapping, sexual assault, and mutilation of a corpse. To this date, Avery maintains that the murder charge was a frame up, promulgated to discredit his then pending wrongful-conviction civil case. The Netflix original documentary series Making a Murderer also covers the arrest and 2007 conviction of Avery's nephew, Brendan Dassey. Extensive media attention on both cases still arise from time to time, in which the controversies surrounding the Halbach murder are put under a spotlight.
Sources:
Wilson, S. R., & Tolley, L. (2016). The "Making a Murderer" Case: A Brief Description on How EDTA Is Measured in Blood. Frontiers in chemistry,4, 41. doi:10.3389/fchem.2016.00041
https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/editing-the-making-a-murderer-effect6
Case 2: The murder of Meredith Kercher
In 2007 Meredith Kercher, a British student on exchange, was murdered in Perugia(Italy)at the age of 21. Amanda Knox,a fellow exchange student who shared her apartment was convicted for her murder. Knox was eventually acquitted by the Italian Supreme Court of Cassation in 2015, after having spent almost four years in Italian prison. The case is viewed as controversial from several standpoints, including the questionable role of the media.
Source:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-14978755
Case 3: De Schiedammer Parkmoord (Dutch-speaking students only)
On 22 June2000a 10-year old girl was murdered in a park in Schiedam. Her 11-yearold friend was also present, but survived by pretending to be dead. The events resulted in a miscarriage of justice that continues to shock Dutch society up to this day.
Sources:
Van Koppen, P. J. (2008).Blundering justice: The Schiedam Park Murder. In R. N. Kocsis (Ed.),Serial murder and the psychology of violent crimes(p. 207–228). Humana
Press https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60327-049-6_12
https://www.trouw.nl/nieuws/justitie-negeerde-bekentenis-en-liet-onschuldige-in-de-cel~b94d21b2/
Case 4: The MH17 disaster
Malaysia Airlines flight MH17, en route from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, was travelling over conflict-hit Ukraine on 17 July 2014 when it disappeared from radar. A total of 283 passengers, including 80 children, and 15 crew members were on board. The plane crashed after being hit by a Russian-made Buk missile over eastern Ukraine, a 15-month investigation by the Dutch Safety Board (DSB) found in October 2015.In September 2016, an international team of criminal investigators said evidence showed the Buk missile had been brought in from Russian territory and was fired from a field controlled by Russian-backed separatists. The Dutch-led joint investigation team (JIT) concluded in May 2018 that the missile system belonged to a Russian brigade, and Australia and the Netherlands announced both were holding Russia responsible for downing the aircraft. Russian authorities are contesting this assessment. The online investigative collective Bellingcat played an important role in gathering data on the events.
Sources:
www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28357880
https://www.bellingcat.com/tag/mh17/72.2
The 'Regulations governing fraud and plagiarism for UvA students' applies to this course. This will be monitored carefully. Upon suspicion of fraud or plagiarism the Examinations Board of the programme will be informed. For the 'Regulations governing fraud and plagiarism for UvA students' see: www.student.uva.nl
| Weeknummer | Onderwerpen | Studiestof |
| 1 | ||
| 2 | ||
| 3 | ||
| 4 |
The schedule for this course is published on DataNose.
Fraud & Plagiarism: General UvA rules apply (http://student.uva.nl/fs/az/item/plagiarism-and-fraud.html).
All assignments will be checked on plagiarism. When blocks of text are found to be copied without proper references, the exam committee will be notified. Suspicion of fraud during the exam will be send to the examination committee. Examination committee is able to terminate your participation in the master course.
Followed the courses of the master program year 1 of Forensic sciences (UvA) or Management Policy Analysis and entrepreneurship in health and life sciences (VU-MPA)
In order to provide students some insight how we use the feedback of student evaluations to enhance the quality of education, we decided to include the table below in all course guides.
| Course Name Policy, Ethics & Media (6EC) | N=27 | |
Strengths
|
Notes for improvement
|
|
Response lecturer:
|
||