Forensic Report Preparation: Submission, Confidentiality, Structure, and Workflow
Access to Templates, Rubrics, and Submission Tools
You will download the template or the paper, and download the grading blueprint or the paper. If there are issues with downloading the template (e.g., “link not found”), the instructor has erased and re-uploaded it, and re-announced via Canvas. If neither method works, you can email the instructor to obtain the template. Canvas access is not always intuitive, so you may need alternative delivery routes.
When you complete the paper, you should submit it by uploading the document: go to the submission area, click upload, drag your document there, and submit. The key requirement is to ensure submission actually occurs by the deadline.
Important deadline: you must submit by on the deadline day (Sunday). This is critical because this is a peer-graded paper; if you submit late, the system won’t assign your paper to peers for grading, and you will lose points on the peer-grade portion. The instructor warns that turning it in late can quickly lead to substantial grade penalties, potentially starting at around a 90 (in the system’s rubric) and then decreasing from there.
The reason for strict on-time submission ties to building a common base for a psychological report: everyone uses the same template to make peer grading easier since the format is uniform and comparable across papers.
Peer Grading, Timing, and System Mechanics
After submission, the system assigns peer graders. If you submit by the deadline, your paper will be included for peer evaluation; if not, you lose out on peer grading points.
At the deadline, the system begins the peer-grading process by assigning two papers to each student for evaluation. This process depends on everyone following the same template so the graders can locate information quickly and consistently.
The instructor emphasizes that the assignment is about constructing a base for a forensic report, not just copying content. A uniform template aids in comparison and learning from peers.
Forensic Report Confidentiality: Therapeutic vs Forensic Contexts
In clinical or therapeutic settings, confidentiality is central: patients can share disclosures unless there are safety concerns (e.g., intent to harm self or others, child abuse) that require reporting.
In forensic settings (e.g., a forensic pre-trial file or inmate evaluation), virtually everything discussed can be included in the report and may become part of the public record. The instructor stresses that confidentiality does not apply in the same way; reports can be submitted to the court and may be publicly accessible.
When meeting with a person for a forensic evaluation, the practitioner should clearly state who can hear about what is discussed. The inmate or client may understand that information could be shared more broadly in the legal process.
If a client reveals information suggesting harm, the report will reflect that information; the instructor notes that they are not primarily asking why a person did something, but rather documenting information that could appear in the report.
The instructor states a core ethical precaution: include a statement in the report that the information discussed may be included in the report to ensure awareness and legal safety for the writer. This helps protect the writer from being blindsided by what ends up in the public record.
Reference Section vs Citations in Forensic Reports
In the forensic report, the reference section is essentially a list of all documents reviewed (e.g., police reports, witness statements, victim statements, interviews, interrogations). This is the only section where bullet points are appropriate; the rest of the document should be narrative.
You do not need to cite sources in the reference section; the adversarial legal system operates on a shared set of documents that both sides agree on as the factual base before arguments proceed.
The listed documents example: Susan’s police report, Terrence’s witness statement, Gabriella’s witness statement, Peter’s victim statement, and the initial interview/interrogation. These are the documents you look through to assemble the report.
Although you do not need formal citations in this section, you must clearly identify what sources you consulted so that others can verify the information you used.
The reference section is typically concise in real cases: even when cases are large (e.g., thousands to millions of pages in some financial fraud cases), your reference section for a learning exercise might be about five documents or roughly 20 pages of stuff total.
Structure of the Forensic Report: Background Information vs Instant Offense
You should divide information into two sections:
Instant Offense: The forensic term for the reason you are there; focus on what happened on the date under review. Start with the instant offense and then add any information that is not directly part of the offense.
Background Information: This is the narrative of the subject’s life and context. It should be built from multiple pieces of information from different sources and presented chronologically.
The background information section aims to create a coherent narrative of the subject (e.g., Susan). This section often includes broader life history such as education, employment, relationships, and mental health history. It can be lengthy in larger cases (roughly five to ten pages single-spaced; in very large cases, up to about pages). In learning exercises, you should still aim for a clear, chronological flow.
The background information should be organized into subtopics (e.g., education history, military history, employment history, relationship history, mental health history) but presented as a narrative rather than bulleted lists. The goal is to tell a coherent life story using information drawn from the documents.
A practical approach: keep the background information chronological to help readers follow how the person’s history relates to the instant offense.
The Content and Style of Paragraphs in the Background Information
Paragraph 1: Include essential identifying information: full name (e.g., Susan’s full name), age, gender identity, race, address, and a list of criminal charges. This is the opening snapshot of the subject.
Paragraph 2: Information that is available on the front page of the police report or otherwise readily found in primary sources. The material should be integrated into a flowing narrative, not presented as a bullet list. You should write sentences that connect the facts (e.g., relationships between the subject and others, roles, and interactions).
Paragraphs should avoid repetitive phrasing but should cover the same informational requirements as listed in the rubric. For example, you might discuss a character (e.g., Jason caring for Peter) in a way that ties to later sections (e.g., how that care relates to the instant offense).
Direct quotes: When a person lived the experience, include direct quotes from those statements to enrich the narrative (e.g., Peter saying, “I hit my mom in the head with a lamp,” or Terrence saying, “Susan’s not right”). Do not quote the police report itself; instead, quote words spoken to investigators and captured in the statements. Use direct quotes where appropriate to illustrate lived experiences and perspectives.
Do not overquote or rely solely on quotes; quotes should support the narrative rather than replace it. Each point you make should be grounded in the information from the documents.
The “use direct quotes” instruction applies to the narrative sections where you are conveying what participants said; the reference section is bullet-pointed and lists documents rather than quotes.
Writing, Citations, and Adversarial Context in Forensic Reports
The reporting framework assumes an adversarial system: both sides will scrutinize the report and may challenge any false statements. Therefore, you need to rely on verifiable information from the documents and ensure the report reflects what is known from those sources.
You should not arbitrarily cite sources in the main body; instead, rely on the documents and present a straightforward narrative. The reference section provides the list of documents consulted.
If you include a fact that is contested or requires corroboration, you should reflect that uncertainty in the narrative rather than asserting certainty. The adversarial system will test the accuracy of statements, so accuracy is paramount.
Rubric, Scoring, and Workflow Guidance
Download the full rubric (not just a slide image) because the complete rubric contains essential criteria. Using only a partial rubric will lead to a poor score (e.g., a 60) due to missing guidance.
The rubric’s first section covers basic content expectations: what you need to discuss in the paper.
The background information section rubric is highly structured and is divided into paragraphs (e.g., Paragraph 1 covers identifying details; Paragraph 2 covers front-page information). The rubric is designed so that as you progress, you can align your writing with the rubric’s criteria.
The rubric for the first draft includes a detailed point tally (the instructor notes there are 97 items). When you complete the draft, you will see a point tally appear (e.g., a bottom line that shows how many points are assigned in the rubric, such as 3 points out of 97 for a specific sub-criterion).
The instructor recommends practical workflow tips:
If possible, print the rubric and relevant police reports and work with two monitors, or print the materials to have them on the desk while typing. This makes switching between documents efficient.
In a real forensic report context, you might be dealing with 200–1200 pages of documents; for a class exercise, you will typically work with five documents totaling about 20 pages.
There are staged rubrics: the next rubrics (after the first) have decreasing levels of guidance; the final rubric is more open-ended, simulating independent professional work as a psychologist. The last one is worth about points and requires you to apply professional judgment with less instructor guidance.
This first draft is a “dry run” designed to ensure the format, structure, and peer-grading workflow are correct. It is time-intensive and should be started well before the deadline (e.g., starting at or before on Sunday is discouraged; plan more time). If you have questions, email the instructor. If the instructor answers a question that would benefit everyone, the answer will be posted to the group.
Practical Writing and Workflow Strategies
The process emphasizes building a coherent narrative (background) while grounding it in concrete documents (the five main sources). Your narrative should weave pieces from different sources into a chronological, readable story rather than a list of disparate facts.
The reference section should list the five documents (and any other materials consulted) with sufficient specificity to enable readers to locate them without extraneous citations in the narrative.
The structure is designed to facilitate peer graders to locate information quickly and to enable learners to compare their work with others to learn how to improve.
The assignment is described as a forensic report in training: it mirrors real-world forensic writing, including how information might be used in court, how reports are drafted, and how information is verified through the adversarial process.
Real-World Relevance and Ethical Considerations
The material emphasizes that forensic reporting operates in a context where information can enter public records and be considered part of the court’s file. This has ethical implications for what is disclosed, how it is presented, and how it can affect individuals’ lives.
Students are reminded that even seemingly routine or routine-seeming pieces of information can have significant consequences when included in a public record. The instructor emphasizes responsibility and accuracy in reporting.
The session underscores the balance between thoroughness (including substantial background information) and readability (organized narrative with clear structure), which is critical for legal and forensic practitioners.
Quick Reminders for Students
If you encounter issues with any submission method, contact the instructor via email; they will provide the template or equivalent delivery method.
Submit on time to ensure you participate in peer grading and to avoid score penalties.
Use the rubric as a map for what to include and how to structure the narrative; do not rely solely on slide images; download the full rubric.
Plan ahead: expect the writing to take longer than you anticipate; starting late (e.g., near the deadline) will likely lead to problems.
If you have questions, ask early; questions that are shared with the class will be answered publicly to help everyone.
Notes on Terminology and Editorial Style
“Instant offense” is the forensic term for the reason you are conducting the evaluation at this time; the narrative should start with this event and then incorporate other information.
The “background information” section should be written in a narrative style with a chronological flow; avoid piecemeal bullet lists except in the reference section where listing documents is appropriate.
When quoting individuals, use direct quotes that reflect what the person said during the interview or report, not generic quotes from officers or summaries. Quotes should support the narrative and not replace it.
The report should acknowledge potential inclusion of information in the public record, and the writer should be transparent about what information was reviewed and from which documents.
Quick Reference: Key Numbers and References
Deadline time: (Sunday)
Peer graders assigned: after submission, two papers per reviewer (i.e., two papers to grade) by the system at the time of assignment. The exact timing may vary, but the process is triggered by the deadline.
Document volume in real cases: typically between and pages of documents; in large cases, a much larger corpus can exist (e.g., a million pages in complex financial fraud cases), but for this course, you’ll work with a handful of documents (about five, ~20 pages total).
Background information depth: common ranges are – pages single-spaced; up to pages in large cases.
Rubric itemization: a detailed rubric with up to criteria in the first section; subsequent rubrics offer progressively less guidance; the final rubric may be broader (e.g., points total for the second rubric, then points for the final open-ended rubric).
The notation encourages using pages when describing brief sections (e.g., “one and a half pages” for a sub-section).
Final Note
The goal of this notes set is to provide a comprehensive, structured guide that mirrors the transcript’s guidance, including submission processes, confidentiality realities in forensic work, the two-part report structure (instant offense and background information), how to handle sources and quotes, rubric alignment, and practical workflow tips to succeed on the assignment and in future forensic writing tasks.