ELEMENT

PERFORMANCE CRITERIA

1. Evaluate evidence for comparison

1.1 Type of comparative evidence is identified and examined to determine its forensic value in accordance with organisational policies, procedures and guidelines.

1.2 Examination regime is chosen to ensure the integrity of the process, samples and exhibits.

1.3 Standards and known samples are selected for inclusion in the comparative process based on relevance and integrity of source.

2. Conduct comparison

2.1 Characteristics are determined to facilitate comparison.

2.2 Characteristics are distinguished and evaluated in accordance with documented discipline procedures and quality system requirements.

3. Verify and report results

3.1 Comparative processes and conclusions are subjected to peer review.

3.2 Results are reported in accordance with discipline and quality system requirements.

This describes the essential skills and knowledge and their level, required for this unit.

Required Skills

analyse, make decisions and solve problems in responding to a range of comparative examinations

apply occupational health and safety (OH&S) principles

communicate and negotiate in discussing comparative examination results with investigators, forensic practitioners and other stakeholders

handle exhibits and preserve continuity of evidence

manage resources and time

use discipline specific laboratory equipment, such as fingerprinting equipment, computer software, photographic equipment

Required Knowledge

background, methodology principles, application and potential limitations of comparative examination techniques

characteristics which typify evidence collected in a specific forensic discipline

legislative and procedural requirements for the security, protection and preservation of evidence

legislative, policy, and quality system context in which comparative examinations are conducted

OH&S practices to be followed when examining physical evidence

quality system requirements for comparative examinations

The evidence guide provides advice on assessment and must be read in conjunction with the Performance Criteria, Required Skills and Knowledge, the Range Statement and the Assessment Guidelines for this Training Package.

Critical aspects for assessment and evidence required to demonstrate competency in this unit

Assessment must confirm the ability to:

include or exclude evidence on the basis of comparative examination

Consistency in performance

Competency should be demonstrated over time and across a range of workplace or simulated situations.

Context of and specific resources for assessment

Context of assessment

Competency should be assessed on-the-job or in a simulated work environment.

This unit must be assessed against the relevant discipline such as Crime Scenes, Fingerprints, Documents, Firearms, Toolmarks, Fire and Explosion, Criminalistics or Biology.

Competency in this unit in one particular discipline does not imply competence in any other forensic discipline in this same unit.

Specific resources for assessment

There are no specific resource requirements for this unit.

Method of assessment

In a public safety environment assessment is usually conducted via direct observation in a training environment or in the workplace via subject matter supervision and/or mentoring, which is typically recorded in a competency workbook.

Assessment is completed using appropriately qualified assessors who select the most appropriate method of assessment.

Assessment may occur in an operational environment or in an industry-approved simulated work environment. Forms of assessment that are typically used include:

direct observation

interviewing the candidate

journals and workplace documentation

third party reports from supervisors

written or oral questions

The Range Statement relates to the Unit of Competency as a whole. It allows for different work environments and situations that may affect performance. Bold italicised wording in the Performance Criteria is detailed below.

Standards:

Are subject to documented quality system guidelines and include control standards relevant to specific disciplines

Known samples:

Should be collected in accordance with documented procedures

Comparative process:

Means any analysis of items to compare identifying features and determine commonality/difference

Characteristics may include:

Class and individual characteristics

Handwriting including spatial quality, line quality, pictorial consistency and feature comparison such as size, proportion, slant, spacing, style, form and baseline characteristics

Impressions and marks or occurrences of any kind whether occurring naturally or by a process

Minutiae

Points of identity

Striations

And characteristics relevant to specific disciplines such as:

fingerprints (pattern types include arches, loops, whorls and composites)

characteristics include ridge endings and bifurcations

classification includes cores and deltas

firearms: (projectiles; lands and grooves and direction of twist, cartridge cases, firing pin impressions, ejector marks and extractor marks)

Peer review:

Means any review, re-examination, critical appraisal or verification of results, determinations or opinions made by practitioners in the relevant discipline, in accordance with quality system requirements