Course manual 2021/2022

Course content

We are all human, with our strengths and weaknesses, also within the field of forensic science. We may make mistakes in observations and in reasoning; others may make similar mistakes. It is important for a forensic scientist to learn what can go wrong and how it can go wrong. In this course, we will discuss the tools and methods we can use to spot shortcomings and support human reasoning.

The following topics are covered during the course:

Introduction to evidential reasoning and formal methods
Syllogisms, Propositional logic, truth tables
Syntax, Semantics, Pragmatics of languages
Quantifiers and predicate logic
Problems with logic and formal modeling
Hypotheses and scenario reasoning
Argumentation Theory and Critical Questions
Common Sense knowledge, generalizations
Tools for supporting argumentation
Psychological Theory of Evidential Reasoning

Study materials

Literature

Objectives

1. Distinguish classical reasoning faults and detect them in presented and actual cases
2. Explain and implement formal and informal arguments and deconstruct arguments given these models
3. Solve simple logical problems
4. Apply (semi-) formal methods to concrete case descriptions in natural language
5. Sketch plausible scenarios for a given fact set
6. Criticize given lines of reasoning and make implicit assumptions explicit
7. Judge which approach to argument analysis is best given a specific case

Teaching methods

Lecture
Computer lab session/practical training
Self-study
Game

Learning activities

Activity	Hours
Excursie	16
Hoorcollege	22
Laptopcollege	16
Presentatie	2
Tentamen	3
Werkcollege	12
Self study	97
Total	168	(6 EC x 28 uur)

Attendance

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 practical classes. More than 25% absence will result in failing that particular part of the course.

Assessment

Item and weight	Details
Final grade
60% Tentamen	Must be ≥ 5.5, Mandatory
40% Practical (weekly) assignments combined	Must be ≥ 5.5, Mandatory

All components will be graded on a scale of 1-10, with a maximum of one decimal after the point. These grades are used to calculate the final grade. In order to pass the course, the student has to have attended at least 75% of practical classes, 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:

Written exam (60%)
Practical (weekly) assignments combined. These will have to be made on an individual basis and handed in in time via Canvas.(40%)

The final grade will be announced at the latest 15 working days after the final course activity (January 18th). Between this date and 35 working days after the final course activity (February 15th), a post-exam discussion or inspection moment will be planned. This will be announced on Canvas and/or via email.

Learning Outcome	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, 2							x
2	1, 2							x
3	1, 2				x
4	1, 2				x
5	1, 2				x			x
6	1, 2							x
7	1, 2							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)

Assignments

Practical classes will i.a. consist of practical assignments. These will have to be made on an individual basis and handed in in time via Canvas.

Fraud and plagiarism

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

Course structure

Weeknummer	Onderwerpen	Studiestof
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Timetable

The schedule for this course is published on DataNose.

Additional information

Fraud & Plagiarism: General UvA rules apply (http://student.uva.nl/fs/az/item/plagiarism-and-fraud.html). All written reports are submitted through Canvas assignments (view/complete assignments) to be automatically checked for plagiarism.

Last year's course evaluation

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.

Logic and the Human Factor in Forensic Reasoning(6EC)	N=15
Strengths Practical classes Weekly assignments Murder game	Notes for improvement Repetitiveness of one teacher’s lecture The length of the exam. The exam ended with four schemes which was a lot of work. Students didn’t see the connection to the master.
Response lecturer: Due to circumstances the order of the lectures was indeed somewhat shuffled (for example to be able to schedule the on-campus activities). The teachers will review the order of the activities to prevent too much repetition next year. However, some repetition is also good to integrate the new knowledge in the end. In comparison with last year, the exam has already been shortened. The students manage to complete the exam on time. The teacher will review the instructions given for questions concerning the argumentation schemes so that students can answer these questions efficiently and don’t spend too much time on aspects not graded or not meant to do (such as a perfect color coded argumentation scheme). The unclarity in the connection with forensics is a recurrent feedback in the evaluations of past years. As seen in this evaluation, students rate “I acquired specific skills that are important for the professional field during this course” low. On the other hand, “I learned to analyse and assess arguments during this course is scored high. It is the latter what this course is about and what is also the connection to the forensic field. Namely to train their reasoning skills and to acquire a certain way of reasoning using formal and critical thinking. Indeed it can be difficult to see the connection between a specific model, argumentation scheme or mathematical annotation, and the daily practice of a forensic professional. Teachers will explicitly mention the goal of the course and repeat this a number of times.

Contact information

Coordinator

dr. Radboud Winkels

Owner	Master Forensic Science
Coordinator	dr. Radboud Winkels
Part of	Master Forensic Science, year 1

Logic and the Human Factor in Forensic Reasoning