Category: Forensic science

No instructions provided

As this dissertation companion course comes to a close, take some time to reflect on your growth in the key doctoral competency areas. For this Assignment, think about how you felt at the beginning of this dissertation companion course and how you feel now. Use the worksheet provided below to document your thoughts on your personal growth in each of the key competency areas. Here are the competencies again for your convenience. Review and think about your skills in each area prior to completing the Assignment. Click on the image below, then click on each competency area to view the details. In the Learning Resources, open the “Competency Development Tracker” worksheet and save it to your computer and use it to document your growth in each of the competency areas Use the worksheet to reflect on what you have discovered about yourself with regard to each of the following competency areas: Competency Area 1: Scholarly Process & Identity Competency Area 2: Technology Competency Area 3: Library/Reading Competency Area 4: Scholarly Writing Competency Area 5: Research/Dissertation Competency Area 6: Career/Professional Competency Area 7: Dispositions Also reflect on the following: In which areas do you feel confident? In which areas do you need to continue developing your skills. What steps might you take to ensure continued development in these growth areas? Reflect on your growth in Competency Area 1 and discuss what you have discovered about yourself with regard to this competency area. 12.85 to >11.49 pts EXCELLENT Fully developed, insightful, credible, and scholarly discussion of what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 1. 11.49 to >10.21 pts GOOD Thorough and well-organized discussion of what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 1. 10.21 to >8.89 pts FAIR Adequate discussion of what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 1. 8.89 to >0 pts POOR Missing, unoriginal, or does not adequately discuss what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 1. 12.85 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReflect on your growth in Competency Area 2 and discuss what you have discovered about yourself with regard to this competency area. 12.85 to >11.49 pts EXCELLENT Fully developed, insightful, credible, and scholarly discussion of what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 2. 11.49 to >10.21 pts GOOD Thorough and well-organized discussion of what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 2. 10.21 to >8.89 pts FAIR Adequate discussion of what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 2. 8.89 to >0 pts POOR Missing, unoriginal, or does not adequately discuss what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 2. 12.85 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReflect on your growth in Competency Area 3 and discuss what you have discovered about yourself with regard to this competency area. 12.86 to >11.5 pts EXCELLENT Fully developed, insightful, credible, and scholarly discussion of what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 3. 11.5 to >10.22 pts GOOD Thorough and well-organized discussion of what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 3. 10.22 to >8.9 pts FAIR Adequate discussion of what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 3. 8.9 to >0 pts POOR Missing, unoriginal, or does not adequately discuss what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 3. 12.86 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReflect on your growth in Competency Area 4 and discuss what you have discovered about yourself with regard to this competency area. 12.86 to >11.5 pts EXCELLENT Fully developed, insightful, credible, and scholarly discussion of what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 4. 11.5 to >10.22 pts GOOD Thorough and well-organized discussion of what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 4. 10.22 to >8.9 pts FAIR Adequate discussion of what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 4. 8.9 to >0 pts POOR Missing, unoriginal, or does not adequately discuss what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 4. 12.86 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReflect on your growth in Competency Area 5 and discuss what you have discovered about yourself with regard to this competency area. 12.86 to >11.5 pts EXCELLENT Fully developed, insightful, credible, and scholarly discussion of what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 5. 11.5 to >10.22 pts GOOD Thorough and well-organized discussion of what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 5. 10.22 to >8.9 pts FAIR Adequate discussion of what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 5. 8.9 to >0 pts POOR Missing, unoriginal, or does not adequately discuss what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 5. 12.86 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReflect on your growth in Competency Area 6 and discuss what you have discovered about yourself with regard to this competency area. 12.86 to >11.5 pts EXCELLENT Fully developed, insightful, credible, and scholarly discussion of what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 6. 11.5 to >10.22 pts GOOD Thorough and well-organized discussion of what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 6. 10.22 to >8.9 pts FAIR Adequate discussion of what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 6. 8.9 to >0 pts POOR Missing, unoriginal, or does not adequately discuss what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 6. 12.86 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReflect on your growth in Competency Area 7 and discuss what you have discovered about yourself with regard to this competency area. 12.86 to >11.5 pts EXCELLENT Fully developed, insightful, credible, and scholarly discussion of what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 7. 11.5 to >10.22 pts GOOD Thorough and well-organized discussion of what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 7. 10.22 to >8.9 pts FAIR Adequate discussion of what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 7. 8.9 to >0 pts POOR Missing, unoriginal, or does not adequately discuss what you have discovered about yourself regarding Competency Area 7. 12.86 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Communication: … Extent to which writing is professional, appropriate, clear, properly formatted, grammatically and structurally correct, synthesized, and scholarly AND the correct template is used. 10 to >8.9 pts EXCELLENT Writing is fully developed, exceptionally well organized, synthesized, scholarly, and free of writing errors. Ideas are connected throughout with appropriate transitions AND the correct template is used. 8.9 to >7.9 pts GOOD Writing is generally thorough and grammatically correct, with proper formatting and minimal concerns. Synthesis is demonstrated and ideas are clearly stated AND the correct template is used. 7.9 to >6.9 pts FAIR Writing adequately meets expectations for writing and synthesis but with infrequent and minor issues AND the correct template is used. 6.9 to >0 pts POOR Writing does not meet basic expectations (e.g., clarity, tone, organization, grammar, spelling, punctuation, source citation and references (if applicable), synthesis material, insufficient originality, etc.) OR the correct template is not used. 10 pts Total Points: 100

For your Final Project, you will select three case studies from the Final Project Case Studies document located in this weeks Learning Resources. Each case study exemplifies a different type of offender (e.g., juvenile offender, sex offender, violent offender, family violence offender, white-collar criminal). For each case, you will take on the role of a forensic psychology professional who has been asked to conduct a case analysis of criminal behavior for a trial defense team. You have been asked to focus on the type of crime, relevant criminological theory, the offenders behavior, and factors that may have led to the behavior. Your case analysis will leverage the defense in court. For each of the three cases you selected, complete the following: Describe key aspects of the case. Evaluate whether developmental risk factors and correlates of criminal behavior influence criminal behavior. Explain your rationale. (Apply learning from the Week 2 Assignment.) Evaluate if the crime(s) presented should be categorized as expressive or instrumental. Explain your rationale. (Apply learning from the Week 3 Discussion.) Evaluate whether the offender is a criminal. Explain your rationale. Apply a specific theoretical approach to the criminal behaviors displayed. (Apply learning from the Week 4 Assignment.) Note: While assessment is an important part of the work that forensic psychology professionals complete, be aware that you will not be conducting forensic assessments of the offenders in the case studies you select for the Final Project. Present your Final Project in one of the following ways: Option 1: Written Paper Write a 10- to 12-page paper (not including references, title page, or abstract). Your paper must include a minimum of 10 scholarly references (not including Learning Resources from the course). User-created websites, such as Wikipedia, will not be accepted as scholarly sources. Your paper must be in Word, double spaced, and APA formatted. Use the APA 7 Course Paper TemplateLinks to an external site. to complete your paper. Key Aspects of the Case* *Applies to all 3 cases. 20 to >17.0 pts EXCELLENT This section clearly, accurately, and with specific detail provides the key aspects of the case. 17 to >15.0 pts GOOD This section satisfactorily provides the key aspects of the case. 15 to >13.0 pts FAIR This section vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy provides the key aspects of the case. 13 to >0 pts POOR This section is missing information or contains inaccuracies. It does not adequately provide the key aspects of the case. 20 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDevelopmental Risk Factors and Correlates* *Applies to all 3 cases. 40 to >35.0 pts EXCELLENT This section clearly, accurately, and with specific detail evaluates whether developmental risk factors and correlates of criminal behavior influence criminal behavior and provides a clear and accurate rationale. 35 to >31.0 pts GOOD This section satisfactorily evaluates whether developmental risk factors and correlates of criminal behavior influence criminal behavior and provides a somewhat accurate rationale. 31 to >27.0 pts FAIR This section vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy evaluates whether developmental risk factors and correlates of criminal behavior influence criminal behavior, and the rationale is vague or inaccurate. 27 to >0 pts POOR This section is missing information or contains inaccuracies. It does not adequately evaluate whether developmental risk factors and correlates of criminal behavior influence criminal behavior. No rationale is provided. 40 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExpressive or Instrumental Crime* *Applies to all 3 cases. 40 to >35.0 pts EXCELLENT This section clearly, accurately, and with specific detail evaluates if the crime(s) presented should be categorized as expressive or instrumental and provides a clear and accurate rationale. 35 to >31.0 pts GOOD This section satisfactorily evaluates if the crime(s) presented should be categorized as expressive or instrumental and provides a somewhat accurate rationale. 31 to >27.0 pts FAIR This section vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy evaluates if the crime(s) presented should be categorized as expressive or instrumental, and the rationale is vague or inaccurate. 27 to >0 pts POOR This section is missing information or contains inaccuracies. It does not adequately evaluate if the crime(s) presented should be categorized as expressive or instrumental. No rationale is provided. 40 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIs the Offender a Criminal?* *Applies to all 3 cases. 40 to >35.0 pts EXCELLENT This section clearly, accurately, and with specific detail evaluates whether the offender is a criminal and provides a clear and accurate rationale. 35 to >31.0 pts GOOD This section satisfactorily evaluates whether developmental risk factors and correlates of criminal behavior influence criminal behavior and provides a somewhat accurate rationale. 31 to >27.0 pts FAIR This section vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy evaluates whether developmental risk factors and correlates of criminal behavior influence criminal behavior, and the rationale is vague or inaccurate. 27 to >0 pts POOR This section is missing information or contains inaccuracies. It does not adequately evaluate whether developmental risk factors and correlates of criminal behavior influence criminal behavior. No rationale is provided. 40 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTheoretical Approach to the Criminal Behavior* *Applies to all 3 cases. 40 to >35.0 pts EXCELLENT This section clearly, accurately, and with specific detail applies a specific theoretical approach to the criminal behaviors displayed. 35 to >31.0 pts GOOD This section satisfactorily applies a specific theoretical approach to the criminal behaviors displayed. 31 to >27.0 pts FAIR This section vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy applies a specific theoretical approach to the criminal behaviors displayed. 27 to >0 pts POOR This section is missing information or contains inaccuracies. It does not adequately apply a specific theoretical approach to the criminal behaviors displayed. 40 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and FormattingParagraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focusedneither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria. —OR— For Professional Presentation: Professional Presentation: Clarity, Flow, Organization, Context, Audience, Purpose, and Tone 50 to >44.0 pts EXCELLENT Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. —OR— Presentation content is clear and logical and very well organized. Presentation content is clear and demonstrates awareness of context, audience, and purpose. The assigned content and number of required slides is carefully followed. Tone is highly professional, scholarly, and free from bias. Style is appropriate for a professional presentation. 44 to >39.0 pts GOOD Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. —OR— Presentation content is clear, logical, and/or organized but could benefit from minor editing/revision. Presentation content demonstrates a good amount of awareness of context, audience, and purpose. The assigned content and number of required slides is followed but with a few inconsistencies. Tone is professional, scholarly, and free from bias. Style is appropriate for a professional presentation; however, it could benefit from minor editing/revision. 39 to >34.0 pts FAIR Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%79% of the time. —OR— Presentation content is somewhat clear, logical, and/or organized but could benefit from significant editing/revision. Presentation content demonstrates some awareness of context, audience, and purpose but could benefit from editing/revision or an aspect of the content requirements is missing. The assigned content and number of required slides is followed but with several inconsistencies. Tone is adequately professional, scholarly, and free from bias. Style is somewhat consistent with a professional presentation; however, it could benefit from some editing/revision. 34 to >0 pts POOR Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity <60% of the time. —OR— Key sections of presentation content lack clarity, logical flow, and/or organization. Presentation content minimally or does not demonstrate awareness of context, audience, and purpose. More than one content requirement is missing. The assigned content and number of required slides is not followed. Writing is not reflective of professional/scholarly tone and/or is not free from bias. Style is inconsistent with that of a professional presentation. 50 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and FormattingEnglish writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation are used. —OR— Professional Presentation: Originality and Accuracy Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation are used. 30 to >26.0 pts EXCELLENT Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. —OR— Presentation content clearly reflects original thought and writing. Content is in depth and accurate. Title slide is provided. The assigned number of peer-reviewed articles, or more, are well synthesized into the content and presented as citations. 26 to >23.0 pts GOOD Contains a few grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. —OR— Presentation content reflects original thought and writing. Content is accurate. Title slide is provided. The assigned number of peer-reviewed articles are synthesized into the content and presented as citations. 23 to >20.0 pts FAIR Contains several grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. —OR— Presentation content somewhat reflects original thought and writing. Content is somewhat accurate but includes some errors. Title slide is provided but may not be complete. Less than the assigned number of peer-reviewed articles are synthesized into the content or presented as citations. 20 to >0 pts POOR Contains many grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the readers understanding. —OR— Presentation content does not reflect original thought and writing. Content is inaccurate. Title slide is inaccurate or missing. Few or no peer-reviewed articles are synthesized into the content or presented as citations. 30 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and FormattingAPA format: The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running heads, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list. —OR— For Professional Presentation: Professional Presentation: Written Summary 40 to >35.0 pts EXCELLENT Uses correct APA format with no errors. The assigned number of peer-reviewed articles, or more, are well synthesized into the content and presented as citations. —OR— Written summary clearly reflects original thought and writing. Content is in depth and accurate. The assigned number of peer-reviewed articles, or more, are well synthesized into the content and presented as citations. 35 to >31.0 pts GOOD Contains a few APA format errors. The assigned number of peer-reviewed articles are synthesized into the content and presented as citations. —OR— Written summary reflects original thought and writing. Content is accurate. The assigned number of peer-reviewed articles are synthesized into the content and presented as citations. 31 to >27.0 pts FAIR Contains several APA format errors. Less than the assigned number of peer-reviewed articles are synthesized into the content or presented as citations. —OR— Written summary somewhat reflects original thought and writing. Content is somewhat accurate but includes some errors. Less than the assigned number of peer-reviewed articles are synthesized into the content or presented as citations. 27 to >0 pts POOR Contains many APA format errors. Few or no peer-reviewed articles are synthesized into the content or presented as citations. —OR— Written summary does not reflect original thought and writing. Content is inaccurate. Few or no peer-reviewed articles are synthesized into the content or presented as citations. 40 pts Total Points: 300

You will select one item or subject of your choice from the forensic materials covered in this weeks class materials, including lectures and/or reading assignments, and write a paper representing an item or topic you find of interest or unusual. This must be in APA format and include a cover page, abstract, discussion, conclusion, and references. Your paper should go beyond the obvious, be written at a graduate level, and must be at least 750 words in length, not including title page, abstract and references. You must use at least three resources, including James, S. H., Nordby. J. J., & Bell, S. (Eds.). (2019). Forensic science: An introduction to scientific and investigative techniques (5th ed.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. ISBN: 978-1-4398-5383-2 to support your position. Remember, all resources, including but not limited to journals, magazines, and/or books, must be properly cited using 7th edition APA style.

Topic: “Manner and Mechanism of Death Traumatic Injuries”

Kindly ensure that the assignment does not exceed a total of 5 pages and that all guidelines outlined in the provided file are carefully followed. References should be included after each task rather than combined at the end of the document, with appropriate in-text citations used throughout to meet academic requirements.