Kelly M Elkins, Shervonne Joseph, Cassandra Skrant
{"title":"Survey on forensic DNA biology training in forensic science service laboratories in the United States.","authors":"Kelly M Elkins, Shervonne Joseph, Cassandra Skrant","doi":"10.1111/1556-4029.15671","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Training is an essential component of onboarding new hires in forensic science service provider (FSSP) laboratories. There are several DNA training standards published by the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) Academy Standards Board (ASB) American National Standards Institute (ANSI) accredited framework. In this study, we conducted a survey of forensic DNA laboratory training programs to better understand training activities and materials. The survey was approved by the IRB and emailed to forensic laboratory directors, assistant directors, and/or DNA technical leaders and responses were submitted by them or their designees. Over thirty leaders and stakeholders responded. In this article, we report on the results of the survey. Respondents indicated that training activities included readings, writing assignments and quizzes, shadowing analysts, and mock casework and that training is documented and is a collaborative effort of the technical leader, unit supervisor, advanced forensic scientists, and other analysts and technicians. Laboratories assess competency using multiple methods including performance on mock casework, report writing, laboratory practical and competency tests, and a mock trial and testimony. The top three training activities reported are hands-on practice, shadowing, and readings. The top three focuses of the training are laboratory techniques (extraction, quantitation, amplification, and capillary electrophoresis), STR typing, and mixture analysis. Ethics violations and failure to pass the competency tests and mock trial, even after remediation, are the top reasons new hires fail training. Finally, the top items respondents would like to spend more time offering training on are troubleshooting, validation, and root cause analysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":94080,"journal":{"name":"Journal of forensic sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of forensic sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.15671","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Training is an essential component of onboarding new hires in forensic science service provider (FSSP) laboratories. There are several DNA training standards published by the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) Academy Standards Board (ASB) American National Standards Institute (ANSI) accredited framework. In this study, we conducted a survey of forensic DNA laboratory training programs to better understand training activities and materials. The survey was approved by the IRB and emailed to forensic laboratory directors, assistant directors, and/or DNA technical leaders and responses were submitted by them or their designees. Over thirty leaders and stakeholders responded. In this article, we report on the results of the survey. Respondents indicated that training activities included readings, writing assignments and quizzes, shadowing analysts, and mock casework and that training is documented and is a collaborative effort of the technical leader, unit supervisor, advanced forensic scientists, and other analysts and technicians. Laboratories assess competency using multiple methods including performance on mock casework, report writing, laboratory practical and competency tests, and a mock trial and testimony. The top three training activities reported are hands-on practice, shadowing, and readings. The top three focuses of the training are laboratory techniques (extraction, quantitation, amplification, and capillary electrophoresis), STR typing, and mixture analysis. Ethics violations and failure to pass the competency tests and mock trial, even after remediation, are the top reasons new hires fail training. Finally, the top items respondents would like to spend more time offering training on are troubleshooting, validation, and root cause analysis.
培训是法医学服务提供商(FSSP)实验室新员工入职培训的重要组成部分。美国法证科学院(AAFS)学院标准委员会(ASB)美国国家标准学会(ANSI)认可框架发布了多项DNA培训标准。在本研究中,我们对法医 DNA 实验室培训项目进行了调查,以更好地了解培训活动和材料。该调查经 IRB 批准,并通过电子邮件发送给法医实验室主任、助理主任和/或 DNA 技术负责人,由他们或其指定人员提交回复。三十多位领导和相关人员做出了回复。本文将报告调查结果。受访者表示,培训活动包括阅读、写作作业和测验、跟班分析师和模拟案件工作,培训有文件记录,是技术负责人、单位主管、高级法证科学家以及其他分析师和技术人员的共同努力。实验室采用多种方法评估能力,包括模拟办案、撰写报告、实验室实践和能力测试以及模拟审判和作证。据报告,排名前三位的培训活动是实际操作、跟班学习和阅读。培训的三大重点是实验室技术(提取、定量、扩增和毛细管电泳)、STR 分型和混合物分析。违反职业道德以及即使经过补救也无法通过能力测试和模拟审判是新员工培训失败的首要原因。最后,受访者希望花更多时间提供培训的首要项目是故障排除、验证和根本原因分析。