Chemistry Everyday for Everyone
Developing Student Speaking Skills: A Project/Independent Study in Forensic Science Karen M. Berka Fort Wayne Regional Laboratory, Indiana State Police, Fort Wayne, IN 46804 Ladislav H. Berka* Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA 01609
It is important for science and engineering students to be able to (i) read, understand, and convey the essence of published information in their field of study, (ii) communicate results of their own work to specialists and nonspecialists alike, and (iii) relate the results to societal needs and concerns. Published work in forensic science provides a common and interesting meeting ground for students to learn, practice, and hone these skills. As part of the general public, students are caught up in the media attention given to legal cases in which forensic science provides crucial information. The possible misuse of this information provides a valuable analogy to the possible misuse of technological developments in the students’ own fields of study. Institutional Background The Worcester Polytechnic Institute’s (WPI’s) degree requirements include two projects. The Interactive Qualifying Project (IQP) involves relating science and/or technology to society. The Major Qualifying Project (MQP) involves the major area of study. The MQP in chemistry is similar to the classic senior or B.S. thesis project. Most project students are expected to give public presentations of their results in April on “Project Presentation Day”, when regular classes are canceled. There are opportunities within the curriculum for faculty to suggest shorter-term Pre-Qualifying Projects (PQPs) and independent studies. Here we describe a PQP that mainly involves student presentations of forensic science papers and case studies taken from the literature1 and/or the public media. Project Aims The aims of the project are: •
• • • •
To give students an opportunity to relate what they have learned in formal chemistry courses to the real world using the seminar approach. (It helps in answering the question “Why do we have to learn this stuff?”); To offer students the opportunity to gather and communicate material from published sources; To give students informal practice with interesting topics for their IQP and MQP presentations; To show students how chemistry fits the interdisciplinary framework of forensic science; To interest students in possible careers in a rapidly developing applied field. *Corresponding author.
Description The forensic science PQP was given in the fall of 1991 and the fall of 1993. Each spring a brief description of the PQP was sent to all chemistry majors. The course would consist mainly of 15-minute presentations of three papers from the Journal of Forensic Sciences and one case study based on newspaper, magazine, or book accounts. A total of 12 students took the two PQPs, including 1 biology, 3 biochemistry, and 8 chemistry majors; 5 seniors, 6 juniors, and 1 sophomore; 7 men and 5 women. There were a variety of activities in the project. The first was an organizational meeting, where students were given some of the forensic references 1–7 available in the WPI library and informed that the library holdings include 27 “forensic” citations and 138 “criminal” citations. Another session featured a guest speaker (KMB), who served as consultant for the PQP, is a WPI alumna, and is also a practicing forensic chemist/serologist. Under the topic “Forensic Science: Where Science Meets the Law”, she drew the analogy of forensic science to a tree. The roots include chemistry, biochemistry, biology, immunology, physics, and mathematics; branches include anthropology, arson, criminalistics, drug analysis, fingerprints, firearms/toolmarks, odontology, questioned documents, pathology, serology (much broader than the popularized DNA “fingerprinting” technique), toxicology, and trace evidence. A general pathway of investigation of a crime served as a basis for discussion. Educational requirements and career opportunities in forensic science were presented and discussed. The speaker was a role model for the participants, especially for women taking the PQP. One PQP participant later shared her information about requirements to become an FBI agent. In two sessions, videos of TV programs of forensic interest were shown and discussed. One tape featured Dr. Thomas Naguchi discussing investigations of movie star deaths (8). The other featured Dr. Henry Lee, several other forensic specialists, and an author of forensic novels (9). The areas discussed were written on the blackboard to demonstrate most of the branches of the tree analogy. Another activity was a field trip to the Rhode Island State Crime Lab. Specialists at the lab discussed and illustrated techniques in firearms/toolmark identification and arson investigations. During eight sessions, participants presented their papers and case studies. Each student tended to talk for more than 15 minutes, so 2–3 papers were usually presented each hour. The participants had had the instructor in general chemistry during their freshman year; he was also academic advisor to four of the students. The instructor engendered a relaxed atmosphere, yet offered on the
Vol. 73 No. 10 October 1996 • Journal of Chemical Education
931
Chemistry Everyday for Everyone
spot criticisms. Student questions were frequent, and the number of participants using handouts and overhead projections increased as the PQP progressed. The following areas of study formed the basis of the presented papers in 1993: aerial photography, botany, canine behavior analysis, chemical analysis of bomb fragments, entomology, flameless atomic absorption, gastric analysis, GC/MS, geology, geophysics, infrared breath alcohol analysis, mass spectrometric analysis of lead isotopes, presumptive chemical tests for blood, protoninduced X-ray emission analysis, pyrolysis gas chromatography, radiography, scanning electron microscopy, soil gas analysis, and thermal imagery X-ray microanalysis. Many of these topics fall outside traditional chemistry but the presentations generally followed the format for chemical talks: introduction, problem definition, experimental methods, results, discussion, and conclusions. The case studies were much broader in scope than the papers. They involved technical and “people” issues, such as eye-witness testimony vs. circumstantial evidence, legal issues, and courtroom strategy. It is interesting that all of the student papers and case studies in 1993 differed from those of 1991. Also, while no papers dealing with DNA fingerprinting were given in 1993 (all participants were chemistry majors), several were given in 1991 by a biochemistry and a biology major. Finally, there were four sessions in which two teams of participants suggested, developed, and presented outlines for forensic IQP and MQP projects. One IQP project would develop at least one formal course in forensic science and investigate the possibility of establishing a forensic science major at WPI. A mathematics/computer MQP suggested creating a model or algorithm to estimate time of death (10). Outcomes All the PQP students had taken the third and fourth courses of our four-term general chemistry sequence in which the PQP instructor was lecturer and course coordinator. The results of the PQP are as follows. The instructor was impressed by the maturity of the juniors and seniors, especially their confidence and improved verbal skills. Previously nonverbal students transmitted their interest and enthusiasm to their audience. While there was some correlation of performance in the PQP with course performance as freshmen, there were some surprises. The student who consistently gave the most significant papers in the most professional manner had the poorest performance as a freshman! She had retaken both general chemistry courses, obtained a C in one and failed the other again. None of the top four PQP students had attained a grade higher than B in the two general chemistry courses. On the other hand, one of the best students in general chemistry ranked 10th out of 12 in the PQP. While her papers were satisfactory, she chose papers containing
932
low scientific content and significance and delivered them in what could be described as a cocky manner. The PQP instructor developed much better advisor– student relationships. In two cases where students were weak in general chemistry, the PQP provided the instructor with positive information he could convey in letters of recommendation. To our knowledge, none of the PQP participants have gone to graduate school or pursued careers in forensic science. However, a “Forensic Science to Prof. Berka” grapevine has grown at WPI. Our Admissions Office has received inquiries from high school students and WPI students have asked about how best to prepare for a career in the field. As a result of the success of this PQP, the next offering will include engineering majors. Several of these majors ultimately become involved in forensic science related projects within the IQP Divisions of Safety Analysis and Liability, of Law and Technology and MQP accident reconstruction. Conclusions The presentation of research papers and case studies in forensic science by students is an excellent way to (i) develop their speaking and technical presentation skills for use in later projects or employer interviews and (ii) enable teachers to gauge the success of their college’s academic program. Acknowledgments We thank Dennis C. Hilliard, Acting Director of the Rhode Island State Crime Lab, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI, for hosting our field trip. Barbara S. Berka, DeAnn C. Finkel, John M. Trimbur, and an anonymous referee were very helpful in preparing and/or revising the manuscript. Note 1. Thirty-two articles dealing with topics in forensic science have been published in this Journal since its inception. J. Chem. Educ. Software, Special Issue 5-W, September 1993, lists 29 articles and 2 letters; 2 articles were published in 1993. One article was published in 1995.
Literature Cited 1. DeForest, P. R.; Gaensslen, R. E.; Lee, H. C. Forensic Science, An Introduction to Criminalistics; McGraw-Hill: New York, 1983. 2. Saferstein, R. Criminalistics, An Introduction to Forensic Science, 4th ed.; Prentice–Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1990. 3. Hollien, H. F. The Acoustics of Crime: The New Science of Forensic Phonetics; Plenum: New York, 1990. 4. Kirk, P. L. Crime Investigation: Physical Evidence and the Police Laboratory; Interscience: New York, 1953. 5. Kirk, P. L. Fire Investigation; Including Fire-Related Phenomena: Arson, Explosion, Asphyxiation; Wiley: New York, 1969. 6. Lykken, D. T. A Tremor in the Blood: Uses and Abuses of the Lie Detector; McGraw– Hill: New York, 1981. 7. O’Connor, J. J. Practical Fire and Arson Investigation; Elsevier: New York, 1987. 8. “People are Talking”, WBZ-TV, Boston, MA, November 19, 1985. 9. “Clues: The Amazing Dr. Lee”, 48 Hours, CBS, New York, September 25, 1991. 10. Mann, R. W.; Bass, W. M.; Meadows, L. J. Forensic Sci. 1990, 35, 103–111.
Journal of Chemical Education • Vol. 73 No. 10 October 1996
