Thread by @plthomasEdD

Unpacking forensic "science" to understand the "science of reading": A thread

Watching @netflix The Innocence Files netflix.com/title/80214563

Examines wrongly convicted while focusing on use of bite marks as forensic evidence

1/x

One of the key turning points for bite mark use was elevated to "science" was the celebrity of the Ted Bundy serial murder case

womenshealthmag.com/health/a273761…

2/x

However by 2009 forensic science had another important moment in which the "science" was confronted for being deeply flawed, specifically the use of bite marks in convictions

See innocenceproject.org/lasting-impact…

and the central report from the NAS ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/…

3/x

The documentary does a really excellent job detailing the nuanced promises and problems with deeming something "science" - one scene has a person stress that we must know the limitations of a science while not ever simply discounting science

4/x

And thus the problem is avoiding science evangelism *or* science denial

Possibly the most powerful aspect of the documentary is focusing on a central bite mark evangelist, dentist Michael West distractify.com/p/michael-west…

5/x

What is important here is the power of using the term "science" and the dangers of that claim being *uncritically* accepted in the workings of public policy (such as law or education)

6/x

The documentary makes no claim the there is *no* forensic "science" but that too often aspects of it have been allowed too much certainty and power; DNA tests, in fact, have been used to discredit the previously accepted dental evidence

7/x

Media, celebrity play a role in the initial surge that gave bite marks the credibility of "science." It has taken a great deal of efforts to stem that tide

Many admit bite mark evidence has been "debunked" criminallegalnews.org/news/2019/jan/…

Yet it remains used themarshallproject.org/records/1001-b…

8/x

A careful reading of NAS report reveals that it is *not* that forensic science doesn't exist, or can't be credible, but that the elements and *application* of forensic science is incredibly complicated ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/…

Including the conditions within which it exists

9/x

By analogy: @NEPCtweet policy statement on the "science of reading" nepc.colorado.edu/sites/default/…

This is making the *exact same case* as the NAS report on forensic science

10/x

Not that there is *no* science of reading but that *driven by an overzealous media* a very narrow and misleading narrative about the science of reading (see bite mark advocacy) is overshadowing and misguiding a very complicated field, literacy

11/x

If you are interested in the complicated use of the term "science" broadly or the "science of reading" debate narrowing, I recommend watching The Innocence Files netflix.com/title/80214563 @netflix during our shut-in times

12/12

@threadreaderapp unroll