1/ Thanks to all who shared their views of @CharterForSci with me, I'm not a member so I really appreciate the frankness of the responses. I'm still going through them. Thread.
@CharterForSci 2/ I thought I'd share my views of the society as a non-member because with a new CEO imminent there is an opportunity for the soc to reappraise itself and its role. TLDR - it needs radical change to survive.
3/ I was a member of the society up to it becoming a professional body. I enjoyed the fun meetings, even presented at a couple and getting a copy of S&J. The professional route it took, wasn't for me.
4/ The society claims to be "an internationally recognised professional body". IMO it certainly has international recognition, largely from the brand of the old forensic science society.
The "professional body" aspect however I don't believe is accurate.
The "professional body" aspect however I don't believe is accurate.
5/ The House of Lords didn't believe it either, all agreed its not like the GMC or the BSB who regulate and grant licenses to individuals to practise their profession. Indeed one witness identified the CSoFS as being part of the credibility problem. 
6/ I get that it is an aspiration of the society, but after 17 years of wanting to be like the GMC perhaps its time to admit that it's nowhere closer to that than it was in 2004.
7/ If it truly wants to achieve this it needs a plan to do it and the support of its members, I've seen nothing to suggest that there has been any of this over the last 17 years.
8/ Where has the society been during the last 15 years of forensic crises? What's its analysis of the situation and its proposed solutions? Nothing, nadda, zip. Saying "we support the regulator" is not enough if you want to be the voice of the profession.
9/ Being neutral, trying not to offend a customer base by taking a side, is taking a side - and it's the wrong one.
10/ The society has been consistently losing money over many years. It has been relying on its investments to keep the society going. Annual drawdowns from these investments have ranged 50-150K. current market value of the investments (2020) £227K.
11/ If this trend continues it looks terminal.
Membership subs have remained largely flat around the £150 - 170k. This is not a society that is growing and hasn't for years.
Membership subs have remained largely flat around the £150 - 170k. This is not a society that is growing and hasn't for years.
12/ Perhaps the membership model is flawed and offers poor value (spoiler alert - that was a frequent component in the responses I got).
13/ I look at the leadership of the CSoFS and its committees and I don't see any current forensic scientists who work for any of the UK forensic science providers or police laboratories. Why is that?
14/ Perhaps employers don't value engagement with the society as highly as the CSoFS believe they should. Perhaps professionals don't value membership as highly as CSoFS believe they should.
15/ The society has an identity crisis, at present it is trying to be a learned society publishing a journal, a professional body regulating individuals, an educational regulator of universities and their courses, a setter of standards and an assessor of standards.
16/ It has competition from other orgaisations in all those sectors, including UKAS and the Forensic Capability Network to name two. It doesn't have the resources to compete with them. The latter expressing its desire to be the "voice of the service".
17/ The government relies solely on the regulator and the FCN to solve the forensic crisis. The society not even part of the same conversation, speaks volumes to its relevance and influence.
18/ Massive job ahead for the CEO and the board. I wish them well. Members of @CharterForSci what do you want them to do, what do you want the soc to be?
unroll @threadreaderapp
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
