The use of time-lining to identify and analyse multiple plausible solutions

Group Size ? 1.) Small group (teams of 4-6)
2.) Individual Task
3.) Large Group
4.) Any
Small group (teams of 4-6)

Learning Environment ? 1.) Lecture Theatre
2.) Presentation Space
3.) Carousel Tables (small working group)
4.) Any
5.) Outside
6.) Special
Carousel Tables (small working group)

QAA Enterprise Theme(s) ? 1.) Creativity and Innovation
2.) Opportunity recognition, creation and evaluation
3.) Decision making supported by critical analysis and judgement
4.) Implementation of ideas through leadership and management
5.) Reflection and Action
6.) Interpersonal Skills
7.) Communication and Strategy
1Creativity and Innovation 2Opportunity recognition‚ creation and evaluation 5Reflection and Action 7Communication and Strategy

Objective:

To provide Forensic Science students with the opportunity to identify multiple solutions to a given problem.
To provide Forensic Science students with an understanding of the differences between objective and subjective interpretations of events.
To provide Forensic Science students with the opportunity to explore the consequences of actions, and how multiple actions impact upon each other.
To provide Forensic Science students with the opportunity to present and justify their decisions and to face cross examination.

Introduction:

For students of Forensic Science, the ability to identify and assess multiple plausible solutions to a given problem is essential as is the ability to separate the objective facts of a problem, from the subjective interpretation of those facts.

For students of Forensic Science at Glyndwr University, these skills are nurtured and developed through the undergraduate programme.

Once such activity challenged students to propose potential timelines, mapping the order in which circumstances unfolded, in a real life case. Students worked in teams to identify every possible sequence of events, considered error to rank the likelihood of potential sequences, and through the format of a debate, presented their findings, arguing either for the guilt or innocence of the suspect, subject to cross-examination from the audience.

The session was delivered to a group of approximately 20 students in the second year of their academic study, as a 2-hour, classroom based session.

Activity:

Pre-Activity

Prior to the session, students were instructed as to the case study which was to be investigated, and told to familiarise themselves with the case. Various resources (film clips / newspaper articles) were collected for students to use as resources during the session.

Introduction (0 – 20 minutes)

Students were welcomed and introduced to the session. The case of Dr. John Branion (a high profile 1960’s murder investigation from the U.S.A) was to be the subject of the exercise.
To provide context, students were played a short film, covering the key elements of the case. This was followed by a short PowerPoint presentation, offering additional detail to students.

Figure 1. Slides from presentation

Students identified a set of key questions relating to the order of events as they unfolded.

These questions were;

At what time/time range did John Branion leave the Ida Mae State hospital?
At what time/time range did John Branion collect his son from the Hyde Park Neighbourhood Centre?
At what time/time range did John Branion claim to discover the body of his wife?
At what time/time range was the last known contact with Donna before her death?
At what time/time range was Donna’s death?
At what time/ time range did Branion visit Maxine Brown?

This case was selected as the order in which events unfolded, and how these events were recalled by various witnesses, held particular importance in the investigation, making the subject of time-lining particularly pertinent.

Time-lining (20 – 60 minutes)

Students were asked to organise themselves into groups (of approximately 4-5).
Each group were provided with various resources (newspaper articles, maps etc.)
Using the resources available to them, students were tasked with estimating times / time ranges for each of the identified questions. In each instance, they had to consider the error in their judgement.(For example, there may be a larger degree of error in a witnesses’ estimation of the time when they saw a friend in the street, than there may be in a police officer recording the time they entered a property).
They then looked to produce all possible timelines for how events may have unfolded.

Debate (60 – 100 minutes)

Students were split into two new groups (approximately 10 per group), and the classroom reconfigured for a debate.
One group was asked to collate all possible timelines supporting the defence’s case, and the other group, all timelines supporting the prosecution.
Mediated by the lecturer, the students then conducted a debate, putting forward their arguments, and cross-examining one another.

Conclusion (100 – 120 minutes)

Students held a free vote, as to whether they believed the timelines best supported the defence or prosecution.
Students discussed the validity of the conclusions which could be drawn from time-lining, and the additional evidence which would be required to prove their conclusions outright.

Post activity

Questions relating to the case were included on the students essay list, should they wish to explore the case in more detail for their assessed assignment.

Impact:

The session not only developed skills, knowledge and understanding relevant for a Forensic Science context, but broader enterprising skills, through generating, developing and reflecting upon solutions to problems, and presenting and defending these solutions to an audience. These skills equipped students for all of their future endeavours.

Learner outcome:

Students were well engaged throughout the two-hour session, and all reported enjoying the activity. The practical nature of the activity supported the learners in retaining the key information from the case for their assessment, and the wide variety of learning contained within the session (lecture based / video / group work / debate / group research), ensured the session remained fast-paced and was well suited to all learners.

The exercise helped the students to better understand the danger of over interpreting evidence, how to split the objective from the subjective, and offered experience in identifying and testing numerous potential solutions to a given problem.

Resources:

Pens, Paper, pre-printed news-paper articles etc.
For How To Guides exploring Time-lining and debates, see ‘The use of time-lining to generate multiple solutions to problems’ and ‘A Compendium of Pedagogies: THE USE OF DEBATE.’

References:

Glyndŵr University - Forensic Science. 2015. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.glyndwr.ac.uk/en/Undergraduatecourses/ForensicScience/. [Accessed 17 August 2015].
Murder, They Wrought - tribunedigital-chicagotribune. 2015. [ONLINE] Available at: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1991-08-25/features/9103030674_1_prominent-chicago-police-cmdr-apartment . [Accessed 17 August 2015].

About the Author
This guide was produced by Mike Corcoran (with thanks to the department of Forensic Science, Glyndwr University). If you would like to contact the author, please use this email address:- m.a.corcoran@outlook.com.