CJN Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> [media-exp1.licdn.com]
> L3LROiUjmqA/feedshare-document-pdf-analyzed/0?e=15
> 98990400&v=beta&t=QvRIpnAciEWds559OjwQW405pLRjFPpw
> 4lCyvoX0OaM
>
> Here's a link to a law review on fire
> investigation and forensic science. I've heard
> several times in the last 5+ years about how
> public fire investigation units need to have
> bifurcated roles to limit examiner bias. I've seen
> numerous calls for proficiency testing and the
> development of error rates in fire investigations.
> However, with all of these demands, nobody has
> come up with a solution as far as how to implement
> these changes.
>
> So... for the sake of discussion, how could these
> changes be made? I understand the bifurcation of
> roles, but for fire department that only has one
> investigator per shift, there doesn't seem like a
> way to do this without adding more personnel.
>
> Proficiency testing is tricky as well. What are we
> testing? The ability to discern a pattern? The
> conclusions generated from the examination of that
> pattern? Some things may be more conducive to
> testing than others.
>
> And what data set are we going to base our error
> rates on? How do you generate an error rate from a
> singular event?
>
> Just asking all of these questions for the sake of
> discussion. I've heard calls for these changes
> repeatedly, and yet nobody has proposed how to
> implement them. Hoping this could generate some
> movement in the right direction.


Good questions.


I still do not understand, if 921 is the standard, why you hardly see a class/ classes that go through the entire book. Chapter by chapter.

In old school, that is how most teachers taught a subject.

Maybe a start?