Introduction to Investigative Forensics
What is contained in the introduction? Is it missing anything?
What is contained in the short episode synopsis? Remembering that this synopsis should be brief, not a large percentage of the paper, should anything be deleted or added to this synopsis? Why?
How does the writer distinguish between realistic and unrealistic actions? Are these arguments convincing? Why or why not?
Refer to the questions below from the assignment description. Which have been addressed in the paper? Which have not?
• Are the scientists' jobs being portrayed accurately?
• Are the examinations being performed accurately?
• Are the examinations being performed in a timely manner?
• Is the crime scene processed and documented accurately?
• Is the evidence at the crime scene collected and packaged accurately?
• Are the crime scene investigators jobs being portrayed accurately?
• Are there other types of forensic occupations presented in the episode (pathologist, entomologist, anthropologist, etc.)?
• Are these other types of forensic occupations being portrayed accurately?
What does the conclusion accomplish?
What are the two outside sources used in the paper?
How are these sources incorporated: quotes, paraphrases, or summaries? Does the choice make sense in context? Are direct quotes introduced and explained?
If there are places that need more outside support, identify them. If there are places that need more independent analysis, identify them.
How is the paper organized? (Does one point lead logically to the next, or are transitions confusing? Cite examples from the paper.)
How does the writer support the claims made in the paper (i.e. what is realistic vs. non-realistic, and how non-realistic actions would be carried out in reality)?
Do grammatical issues make reading the paper difficult? If so, identify the problem and provide an example.
Is the paper written in the 3rd person (he/she/they) and not in the 1st person (I/me)?
Is the verb tense consistent throughout the entire paper? Was either the past tense (was) or the present tense (is) used throughout?