Document analysis asserted that forensic science is an implicitly defined field at three epistemological levels: knowledge, practice, and identity. Cross-comparison and synthesis across the identified attributes generated the following themes relating to forensic science education:
1. Forensic science is a high profile field which is dramatically expanding and developing. Such prominence attracts investments from education providers. Forensic science education has expanded over the last two decades for a number of reasons. First, the evolution of new technologies in various fields of interest to forensic science (FOR-551) created a large landscape for media concentration on forensic science topics. This has increased public awareness of and interest in forensic science (FOR- 551, FOR-558, and FOR-706). Second, there has been a need to offer academic courses to current members of police and forensic science practitioners (FOR-276, FOR-375, and FOR-358). These members either:
- are newly employed within the forensic science services and in need of formal academic education (often they only hold secondary school education),
- or have been employed well before the emergence of all the advances in science and technology (e.g. DNA profiling, automated fingerprint identification systems, etc). Hence, they are in need of supplementing their experiences with some sort of formal education which emphasises such advances.
Third, the continuous security challenges and the increased use of forensic science by governments and law enforcement agencies (FOR-558) have resulted in creating more job opportunities and expanding the forensic science industry.
2. Forensic science is a very segmented field across various disciplines, scientific applications, and vocational applications. Such segmentation is reflected by the curricular structures organisation forensic science courses within academia. The curricular approaches which were mainly adopted to organise forensic science education were the multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary approaches. The multidisciplinary approach incorporated the various disciplines of interest to forensic science (e.g. chemistry, biology, law, uniquely forensic forms of inquiry, etc). However, it mainly concentrated on the techniques of the one discipline- often chemistry or biology- to engage with forensic science (e.g. FOR-551 and FOR-766).
181 The interdisciplinary approach integrated the various disciplines to examine the one topic: forensic science. Boundaries between various subjects were maintained and distinct in the multidisciplinary curriculum whilst such boundaries were blurred in the interdisciplinary curriculum (e.g. FOR-276 and FOR-558).
3. Forensic science education suffers uncertainty in regard to:
a. The level of academic offer: Forensic science education exists through various levels of academic hierarchy and in various formats: non-award vocational programs (e.g. FOR-276 and FOR- 375), minor undergraduate courses (e.g. FOR-560 and FOR- 551), major undergraduate courses (e.g. FOR-715 and FOR-558), postgraduate courses (e.g. FOR-762 and FOR-554), and the ‘whole educational package’ which incorporates both undergraduate and postgraduate courses (e.g. FOR-706 and FOR-757).
b. The identity of administering departments: The identity of forensic science education segments over the various administering departments. Document analysis showed that chemistry departments remain the most dominant administering department (23%) for forensic science courses/programs. However, this dominance has been exaggerated throughout the literature where there has been emphasis on major or absolute dominance. Following chemistry departments, stand-alone forensic science departments administer a recognisable portion (17%) of the forensic science courses, revealing a tendency within forensic science education to develop as a stand-alone academic structure. Criminal justice departments (13%) remain one of the traditional Administering departments of forensic science due to the strong liaison between forensic science, law, and criminal justice. The emergence of biological science as one of the recognisable administering departments of forensic science education (10%) can be explained by the migration of some forensic science courses from traditional administering departments (chemistry and criminal justice) towards biological science departments. This migration has mainly occurred as a consequence of the emergence of new technologies within biology and biomedical sciences, most importantly DNA technologies. The migration of forensic science courses towards biological science
departments and stand-alone forensic science departments has come at the expense of chemistry departments.
4. Forensic science knowledge comprises a science component and a specific forensic technical component. Whilst the science component can be delivered within an academic university setting, the technical component requires a practice-based setting. This is informed by the percentage of forensic programs (54%) in the document analysis which offered an internship through their curriculum, in addition to the high percentage of programs (94%) which emphasised practitioners’ contribution in course delivery.
5. There is differentiation between field practice and laboratory practice in terms of education, jobs prerequisite, and identity of practitioners. In terms of education, non- award forensic science courses (e.g. For-276 and For-375) which are non-scientific degrees and award forensic science courses which are not specialised science courses (e.g. For-715 and For-558) were more directed towards forensic field career opportunities. On the other hand, specialised forensic science courses which emphasised specialised heavy science components (chemistry or biology) within their curriculum (e.g. For-766, For-754, For-556, and For-757) were more directed towards forensic laboratory career opportunities. In terms of jobs prerequisites, document analysis reported that there was no consensus on the obligation of a tertiary science degree to practice forensic science, particularly in regards to forensic field positions. However, document analysis reported consensus on the prerequisite of a science degree to operate in a forensic laboratory (e.g. FOR-754, FOR-551, FOR-757, and FOR-766). In terms of identity, the selected forensic science programs revealed that laboratory practice is often more undertaken by civilians than field practice, where police still hold the roles of crime scene investigators in many jurisdictions (e.g. FOR- 551 and FOR-754).
183 6. The nature of practice in forensic science is affected by the individual legislation and regulatory schemes characteristic of each individual jurisdiction. Such legislation and schemes regulate both the way forensic science is practiced and the individuals practising forensic science.
7. Typically, forensic science practice had been an explicit public practice mainly housed under the police umbrella. However, over the last two decades, there have been various approaches by the private sector to invest in the forensic science industry and within the various forensic specialisations such as paternity testing, handwriting examination, etc (e.g. FOR-551 and FOR-757). These approaches remain limited with respect to governments’ investment in the forensic field (FOR-706). This makes job opportunities within forensic science restricted to vacancies within the public sector. This fact has pushed many education providers to emphasise a heavy science component within their forensic science programs which create opportunities for their graduates to seek “fall-back” positions (e.g. FOR-754 & FOR-766). These fall-back positions are often career opportunities as professional chemists or biologists depending on the discipline emphasised within the course (chemistry or biology).
8. Document analysis reported that practitioners’ contributions in course delivery mainly existed in one of three formats: major, specific-subject, and minor contributions. The extent to which practitioners may contribute in course delivery seems to be strongly dependent and directly proportional to the extent of socialisation
between the university itself and the relevant law enforcement authorities. For example, in a number of courses (e.g. FOR-556 and FOR-558) the extent of socialisation allowed students to be exposed to real practice-based settings. Despite the differences in the format and the extent of socialisation from one course to another, practitioners’ contributions in course delivery invites Bernstein’s notion of ‘social groups’ (2000). Through such contributions, forensic science practitioners appear to be a social group reflecting its preferences of how to shape, structure, and deliver forensic science knowledge within academia.