Editorial

Wither academic forensic science?

Academic forensic science at British Universities appears to be flourishing; or is it? Currently some 53 British Universities invite applications from school leavers and others for courses with the word "forensic" somewhere in the title. If entrants to those courses hope to be forensic scientists or criminalists (Scene of Crime Officers) then some of them, perhaps most of them, will be severely disappointed. I would happily accept a paper for this journal describing surveys of the occupational history of recent alumni of such courses; despite putting out some feelers, so far no such paper has been received.

The truth is, of course, that the problem lies with the way British Universities are funded. It is, perhaps, unfair to suggest that the 19 members of the Russell group of universities, the British Ivy League, are not interested in teaching undergraduates as a group, but they are very interested indeed in getting in research grants from prestigious grant awarding organisations. My own two children, both at Russell group universities, have had no complaints about their teaching. They do not seem to have experienced the FO-FO* teaching technique so popular on some courses where academics are under extreme pressure to get grants and publications rather than to teach those who come to University to learn. Others, in particular some medical students, complain bitterly about such teaching methods. And some employers apparently do not like the products of such courses. Most students doing forensic science courses at undergraduate level have the benefit of experiencing classic face-to-face teaching in lecture theatres, laboratories and tutorials. The forensic component of such courses needs input from genuine forensic practitioners. Practical exercises such as counting the number of tablets in simulated stomach content may be budget friendly but they don't help develop the skills and knowledge that the students need to build on.

Very few of the Russell group of universities offer undergraduate courses in forensic science. It may be that they don't need to offer them to get students into their chemistry and other hard science courses from which future forensic scientists will develop. Hard Science is losing its popularity in many universities. An important factor in the strategic decision making process of many non-Russell universities is that if you can combine a course in a relatively unpopular subject such as chemistry with superficially attractive forensic modules, some of which might actually be taught by forensic scientists with real experience of practice, others of which might not be, then you have a bait that can be used to entice applicants to take the hook of an otherwise unpopular course. The glitter of CSI Miami might translate to increased recruitment for the Giggleswick University College's nice new course in forensic actuarial studies. (I apologise to any university that actually offers a course in forensic actuarial studies; no insult is intended and I would be delighted to consider any research-based paper that the staff of that department might wish to submit to this journal). When a university starts offering combined degrees in Forensic Investigation and Religious Studies one might think that this trend has perhaps gone a little too far. The Holy Inquisition put away its investigative tools many years ago and Chesterton's Father Brown was only ever a

Robert Forrest

fictional character. The problem with these combined study courses is, of course, that in real life the scientific knowledge comes first and forensic practice comes next. You can't be a forensic scientist without being a scientist. A three year combined studies course with a forensic component at an English university is going to be pushing it to turn out someone with the skills to be employable as much more than a laboratory aide or to benefit from a one year taught masters course in forensic science. Four year courses, such as the standard Scottish undergraduate courses or MChem courses, are much more appropriate.

There is some indication that the Russell group of universities may be voting with its feet; they are research and not teaching- driven and some appear to perceive their Forensic Pathology departments, which are largely staffed by practitioners, as anachronisms. These departments might make major con- tributions to teaching and be largely self-funding by their practice, but they do not generate the research income so beloved by Russell group vice-chancellors. The cynics divide vice- chancellors into two classes; those who wish they had a medical school and those who wish they hadn't. The vice-chancellors who have medical schools can perhaps also be divided into two classes; those who haven't got departments of forensic pathology and those who wish they hadn't. Getting rid of the department of forensic pathology might enhance a medical school's performance at the next Research Assessment Exercise and hence its income from central funds, but it won't do a great deal for the ability of its graduates to fulfil such basic tasks as the accurate completion of certificates of the fact of death. It is probably mere coincidence that Dr Shipman graduated from a medical school with a department of forensic pathology (since closed) and killed a substantial proportion of his victims in the hinterland of a medical school without a department of forensic pathology. The point is that universities funded by grant income and not by student numbers may see forensic departments of any flavour as being a less than desirable asset.

If I could wave a magic wand and put things to rights what would I do? Well, apart from whatever it takes to get truly joined up government, which may not actually be compatible with the democratic process, what I would do is this: I would encourage the development of four year undergraduate courses in England and Wales in which students who wanted to become forensic scientists got a thorough grounding in the one science of their choice and an overview of the other important sciences that support forensic practice, followed by sufficient exposure to the realities of forensic science work to be capable of being taken on as competent trainees on graduation, or to proceed to taught or research higher degrees. I would ensure that all universities who offered undergraduate courses with "forensic" in their title had to publish in their prospectuses accurate details of the career destinations of their graduates. Finally, I would encourage the development of research-based academic departments of forensic science and forensic pathology in the Russell group of universities. *"FO-FO; an acronym that can be politely translated as "depart rapidly from my

presence and find out for yourself'

science&justice volume 44 ~ o . 4 (2004) I 95 Page 195