About to embark on a flurry of emails to first year forensic science students. They had four classes with librarians and several with IT trainers this semester, and have submitted a portfolio of 5 different assessments. The administration, scrutiny and marking experiences have been educational in themselves, but the submitted work is also fascinating.
The first library assessment is a structured literature search: the students choose a topic, list keywords and phrases, list resources searched and evaluate the effectiveness of their search. They also describe how they refined their search, and then list references for two of the items retrieved. Popular topics are forensic ballistics, blood spatter analysis, and fingreprints. I wince while reading the one on forensic odontology and bite mark analysis. At the top end, there’s some thoughtful reflection and analysis which is really pleasing. At the bottom end, the approach is minimalist and tells us what they think we want to hear about the evils of Wikipedia.
The second assessment is a 500 word evaluation/comparison of two websites. The students came up with their own list of evaluation criteria during the class, and recorded it on the class wiki. They’re supposed to refer to the agreed criteria in their assessments so it’s easy to spot who skipped the class! Referencing of websites foxes many of them. They are often preoccupied with design issues and fail to consider authority, currency and bias. I look up some of the sites myself but come over all queasy when there are pictures.
