REUTERS. "Weak Columns, Extra Floors Led To Mexico School Collapse, Experts Say." Nytimes.com. N.p., 2017. Web. 2 Oct. 2017.
The article talked about the recent earthquakes in Mexico, and how one building in particular collapsed because it wasn’t as structurally sound as it should have been. 19 children and 7 adults were killed in the collapse of the privately owned Enrique Rebsamen school, which was located in Mexico City. Alfredo Perez, a civil engineer who was helping with the rescue efforts, remarked that the building “was badly designed, poorly calculated and poorly constructed.” After helping pull bodies from the rubble, he drew up plans “detailing potential design failures” which were showed to six different structural engineers. Each one concluded that the problem was the lack of steel rebar supporting the columns, saying that not enough steel was used to support all four floors. Although the first two floors were built before the 1985 code was established for how to build earthquake resistant structures, the other two floors were added much later and should have been up to standard. Because property owners are not required to tell the authorities who designs or builds modifications on their buildings, no one knows yet who was responsible for not adhering to the building codes or who certified the building.
I think this article showed an interesting side of forensics, because although people generally think of forensics as analyzing crimes that have to do with murder, such as homicide, disobeying safety regulations and building codes is another type of crime where this science applies. Engineers were able to look at the number of steel rebar rods inside the columns of the school (which were made visible when the building collapsed) as well as the position of the rubble to determine what the problem with the structure was. Without forensic engineering, we wouldn’t be able to tell whether an accident was genuinely an accident or whether it was neglect and cutting corners which ultimately lead to a structural failure.
I found the article to be perfectly comprehensible and clear, so that even someone who understands nothing about physics or architecture would understand what the problem was and why the building collapsed. It also provided a good amount of background information on things like the building codes and the multiple instances of construction on the school in question.
14 comments:
Hana Eddib 10/2/17
Forensics current event 3
REUTERS. "Weak Columns, Extra Floors Led To Mexico School Collapse, Experts Say." Nytimes.com. N.p., 2017. Web. 2 Oct. 2017.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2017/10/01/world/americas/01reuters-mexico-quake-school.html
Pilars review of her article was very well written. I appreciated how Pilar gave us a lot of background information about the collapse, noting who was affected and what the problem was that led to the collapse of the building. I also appreciated how she noted why the building was up to date on standards as she noted, “property owners are not required to tell the authorities who designs or builds modifications on their buildings.” I think Pilar did an excellent job of relating the article to forensics. When reading the article, many people, myself included, would not connect it to a forensic investigation.
While Pilar’s review was excellently done, there two things I would’ve liked to see. It would’ve been nice to know what role exactly will forensic investigators have, if any, in the investigation and what techniques they might use. I also wish that, since she noted there was no public law requiring the names of designers or building modifications, she would’ve included whether or not this was the first time a building had collapsed due to its dated regulations.
Overall, Pilar did a great job on her article review. I was very surprised to learned that a collapse like that had happened and how different regulations are in Mexico than here in America.
Andrew Rotchford
10/2/17
Forensics current event 3
Weak Columns, Extra Floors Led To Mexico School Collapse, Experts Say." Nytimes.com. N.p., 2017. Web. 2 Oct. 2017.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2017/10/01/world/americas/01reuters-mexico-quake-school.html
Pillars review of her article was very well written and I think that she did a great job. The first thing that I appreciate about Polaris review is that she gave us a lot of background information about the collapse. She gave us the facts about who was affected and what was the problem that led to the collapse of the building. Pilar also let us know that the building was not up to date on standards she quote saying “ property owners are not required to tell the authority who designs or builds modification on their buildings.” I think that's important that she put that quote in because it gave us information and a better understanding of why this all happened. I was really surprised how this was connected to forensic science because I wouldn't think that a building collapsing would use this science.With all of that being said the two things that I would have liked to have seen in her review. would have been to know what exact role forensic investigators have to do with these type of investigation and what techniques they might use to solve. Also I wish that she stated that there was no public law requiring the names of the designers or a building modifications.
Ayten El-Hennawy
10/2/17
Forensics D Even
Current Event 3
REUTERS. "Weak Columns, Extra Floors Led To Mexico School Collapse, Experts Say." Nytimes.com. N.p., 2017. Web. 2 Oct. 2017.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2017/10/01/world/americas/01reuters-mexico-quake-school.html
Pilars review of the article "Weak Columns, Extra Floors Led To Mexico School Collapse, Experts Say." was very interesting to read. I liked how Pilar went in depth about what exactly the article was talking about and how it related to forensic science. I also liked how Pilar included multiple quotes from the article “was badly designed, poorly calculated and poorly constructed.” and “detailing potential design failures” to show how the building was not being taken care of at all considering it was a privately owned school. Lastly, I liked how she was able to connect this article with forensics since it doesn’t really relate to it but she found a way to connect the two with each other and explained how building codes was another type of crime where this scene applies.
Although her review was pretty straightforward and easy to follow, I think Pilar could've done a better job by including some background information other than just the name of the school, maybe what steps the detectives took to get to the bottom of this case. I think that would’ve improved her article as she doesn’t really relate to forensic science until her second paragraph.
I think this review was very well written and i think pilar’s choice of article was a nice change compared to the other stuff that we usually read about on this blog. I also think it’s interesting how she related the incident that happened with how people were able to figure out what the cause of this collapse was.
REUTERS. "Weak Columns, Extra Floors Led To Mexico School Collapse, Experts Say." Nytimes.com. N.p., 2017. Web. 2 Oct. 2017.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2017/10/01/world/americas/01reuters-mexico-quake-school.html
Pilar’s review of the article was very well written and she clearly knew a lot about the article. I liked how she went into detail about the flaws in building’s structure and went as far as to provide direct quotes. I liked how despite how some people may not see how this may not relate to forensics she drew the lines to show how it does. She also provided ample background information on the building and the cause of it’s collapse. Although Pilar did tell the reader how the article relates to forensics I wish she had gone into more detail. By that I mean that I wish that she had told the reader what exactly the investigators would be doing that relates to forensics. I also wish she could have told us whether or not the inability to follow building regulations caused any more collapses in any other earthquakes. I was surprised to find out that in Mexico they only had those regulations put into place in 1985 and that illegal modifications were able to be done to a building because in the US this would be a huge deal.
REUTERS. "Weak Columns, Extra Floors Led To Mexico School Collapse, Experts Say." Nytimes.com. N.p., 2017. Web. 2 Oct. 2017.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2017/10/01/world/americas/01reuters-mexico-quake-school.html
Pilar’s review of the article regarding an earthquake was very well done. I appreciated how she discussed the details of the collapse, giving a better idea of the tragedy which occurred. I thought she did a good job incorporating quotes from engineers such as Alfredo Perez, who was involved in the situation, who gave a better insight into what went wrong in the construction process. Pilar also did a good job in explaining the importance of forensic engineering when discussing a collapse.
Although many aspects of Pilar’s review was well done, there were a few aspects which would have been helpful to include in the review. It would have been good to have discussed in more detail, what other engineers said about the collapse, as well as what they believed went wrong in the construction process. Another thing would have been to discuss some of the safety regulations and building codes, so we can better understand what went wrong that caused the building to collapse.
Overall, I found Pilar’s review of the article very interesting and informative. Prior to reading her review, I had little to no knowledge of building codes in other countries, as well as how successful or unsuccessful they are in surviving the natural disaster. The fact that property owners did not have to tell authorities who designed the buildings was surprising to me.
Isabella Dibbini
Mr. Ippolito
Current Events #4
8 October 2017
REUTERS. "Weak Columns, Extra Floors Led To Mexico School Collapse, Experts Say." Nytimes.com. N.p., 2017. Web. 2 Oct. 2017.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2017/10/01/world/americas/01reuters-mexico-quake-school.html
Pilar wrote an excellent review of the article “Weak Columns, Extra Floors Led to Mexico School Collapse, Experts Say,” by Reuters. Pilar developed an accurate summary of this article. In addition, she incorporated few quotes into her review to support her claims. For instance, she quotes Alfredo Perez, a civil engineer who was helping with the rescue efforts, who states that the building “was badly designed, poorly calculated and poorly constructed,” when discussing why the building collapsed after the earthquake in Mexico. Also, I was impressed by the connections Pilar made between the article and its affect on society. She brought up an interesting point; she states “... because although people generally think of forensics as analyzing crimes that have to do with murder, such as homicide, disobeying safety regulations and building codes is another type of crime where this science applies.”
Pilar wrote a very good review on this article, however, they are a few things in which should could improve. To start with, I wish Pilar included more about the plans going forward with this issue. She included what caused the collapse of this building, but I wish she would talk more about what changes will be made. Also, if Pilar wanted to take her review to the next level, she could include outside research, which would also make her review more interesting.
By reading this article I expanded my knowledge on forensic science. Prior to reading this review, I was unaware of this type of forensic science. Overall, Pilar’s review is very good and shows a great understanding of this article.
Griffin Garbarini
Forensics
Mr. Ippiltio
10/08/17
Current Event 6
MLA Citation (with Link):
Reuters. “Weak Columns, Extra Floors Led to Mexico School Collapse, Experts Say.” The New York Times, The New York Times, Jan. 2017.
Comment:
Ms. Pilar Layton did a fantastic job with her review of the New York Times article “Weak Columns, Extra Floors Led to Mexico School Collapse, Experts Say” regarding the 7.1 magnitude earthquake in southern Mexico. Pilar’s first strong aspect of the review was that she provided a lot of background information regarding the horrific incident. She did a fantastic job including background information regarding who was affected, 19 children died, and what was the problem regarding the safety of the structure. Secondly, Pilar did a great job of incorporating quotes from the article regarding the standards of the building, which had passed inspection and were up to date. Specifically she included the quote that “property owners are not required to tell the authorities who designs or builds modifications on their buildings.” Finally, I was very skeptical about how Pilar could relate this article to forensics, based on the title of the article, but she managed to do so.
The article review was great, however Pilar does have some room for improvement in some areas. Us readers would really have liked to know about the how forensic investigators will deal and investigate this incident as it is not explained. She could have gone into depth about specific practices they do that would help determine something to hold the owners responsible. Secondly, I would have liked to see more analysis of Mexican regulation surrounding the incident. Questions could be answered: what are the public laws asking for certifications of builders or designers, how did the owner of the building respond, what is being done for these 19 families?
Pilar did a good job reviewing the article from the New York Times and has room to improve. The article brought light to an undisclosed topic: the earthquake in Mexico. I have a best friend effected by the earthquake and it seems like everyone is focused on American natural disasters so this is interesting to hear.
I read Pilars 's review of the article "Weak Columns, Extra Floors Led to Mexico School Collapse, Experts say" I enjoyed reading her review for three reasons. The first reason is that she chose to review an article that I have a genuine interest in. This kept me entertained throughout her review. The second reason is that she wrote a very good summary of the article and issue at hand. The third reason that I enjoyed her article is that is quoted the article which added lots of credibility to her argument.
Although there was lots of good aspects of her there were two aspects that needed improvement. The first was that she could have included more quotations from the article as she mentioned that the article was mostly quotations. Also, she could have included more analysis on why the Mexican building inspectors had not inspected the building if some of its floors were not Earthquake resistant.
This issue is of big importance in areas like Mexico and other earthquake prone areas. Since Earthquakes happen frequently, it is imperative that all buildings are up to code in order to reduce casualties.
Zixi Chen
Mr. Ippolito
Forensics
11 October 2017
Current Event 4
REUTERS. "Weak Columns, Extra Floors Led To Mexico School Collapse, Experts Say." Nytimes.com. N.p., 2017. Web. 2 Oct. 2017.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2017/10/01/world/americas/01reuters-mexico-quake-school.html
Pilar Layton’s review of the article "Weak Columns, Extra Floors Led To Mexico School Collapse, Experts Say." was very well written and very interesting to read. She provided well organized background informations about the earthquake in Mexico and the reasons for the building’s collapse. Pilar also used strong evidence that informed the readers about the condition of the building by using direct quotes from Alfredo Perez, the civil engineer who helped with the rescue efforts. Lastly, Pilar addressed the important role forensics engineer and scientists played in this incident.
Two things that Pilar could improve on for this review includes that she should give a brief description about the researching process of the forensic scientists. Maybe she could include some of the things that engineers and compare them to the forensics procedure in a criminal case. The other thing is that it would be better if she included informations about the other buildings in the area. The readers might be curious about whether there were any other buildings which violated the building codes and which might cause potential danger in the future.
Pilar did a great job analyzing this article. This article really made me start to think about how forensics can relate to so many other areas of science. This article also helped me to see the roles of forensic scientists who investigate all of the reasons that causes unnatural deaths in order to protect the public from similar incidents. In addition, the knowledge about building codes and their relation to natural disasters were also surprising to me. I had never thought of these codes being violated, and this helped me to further realize the importance of all fields of work.
Pilar's review on the article "Weak Columns, Extra Floors Led To Mexico School Collapse, Experts Say." was very well written and I thoroughly enjoyed reading it. I think Pilar did a great job when incorporating quotes, I thought that they flowed smoothly into the article and really fit well. Pilar's review was written so well that understanding it and reading it wasn't a problem, she explained everything so well such as what the 1985 code is for buildings to be able to withstand earth quakes that it was an "easy" read. Pilar really went into detail on what a forensic engineer is with out specifically describing anything.
Though Pilar's review was extremely great a few little things could've made it even greater. I would've liked for Pilar to go a bit more into detail regarding the fact that property owners aren't required to tell the police who's responsible for the building structure. It would've been really great if Pilar would've talked about the dangers with property owners not having to say who's responsible for the buildings structure.
What really impressed me is when Pilar put in her opnion at the end of not following the code of a building is also a major crime because it threatens the life of the people if a natural disaster were to occur like in Mexico.
REUTERS. "Weak Columns, Extra Floors Led To Mexico School Collapse, Experts Say." Nytimes.com. N.p., 2017. Web. 2 Oct. 2017.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2017/10/01/world/americas/01reuters-mexico-quake-school.html
I read Pilars 's review of the article "Weak Columns, Extra Floors Led to Mexico School Collapse, Experts say" and I feel like she did a good job reviewing this article by including quotes from experts in the field relating to engineering and buildings. Secondly Pilar did a good job explaining possible reasons for the building not being structurally sound and collapsing. she also summarized the article very well keeping the most important parts and information.
Although I enjoyed the review I would have liked Pilar to explain how forensic investigators would handle this event. In addition, it it would have been great to read information about Mexico's regulations pertaining to these types of situations.
Overall I really enjoyed Pilar's review of this article, this issue can be very catastrophic in Mexico resulting in many deaths, and injuries. I also learned that there was such a thing as forensic engineering.
Current Event
Nanda Fraser
REUTERS. "Weak Columns, Extra Floors Led To Mexico School Collapse, Experts Say." Nytimes.com. N.p., 2017. Web. 2 Oct. 2017.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2017/10/01/world/americas/01reuters-mexico-quake-school.html
I read Pilar’s review on the article entitled, “Weak Columns, Extra Floors Led To Mexico School Collapse, Experts Say” from the New York Times. I thought that Pilar’s review included a lot of important background information, like who was affected by the collapse and what led to it. I also enjoyed Pilar’s use of quotes from people that are knowledgeable about the subject, as I felt it added to the overall understanding of the article. I also enjoyed how Pilar related the article back to forensics at the end of her review, which made the connection between her article and forensic science much clearer. Although Pilar’s article was very straightforward and understandable, it would have been beneficial to add more quotes from the article, as well as talking about the role in which forensic scientists will potentially play. I was very shocked to learn about this case, and also had not heard about in the news, so I was very surprised to learn about the differences in Mexican building regulation as opposed to our own in the United States.
This analysis of an article goes into the earthquake in Mexico and more specifically it is about a building which collapsed and killed 19 children and 7 adults. It was well done and a very coherent analysis. An aspect that made it strong was the fact that she had quotes in her text, which made her point stronger and made it seem more put together. The analysis had a clear flow to it and proceeded very linearly. She cited people as well and specified their jobs and how they were involved in the case so that also gave it a sense of professionalism and validity. It was also very well chosen as a topic, since it was about something very current and connected to us as a society considering all the natural disasters there have been. The analysis as a whole was very well executed and organized.
There were a few things that she could focus on to make it even better though. She could have made the analysis a bit shorter and a bit more condensed. It was quite long and it could have gotten more specific on certain areas. There were some topics that could have been drilled down on more and made more pronounced. There were some issues as well with the structuring of the paragraphs which made reading more difficult.
Overall it was a very good analysis and it was impactful in two main ways. One of which was something that she elaborated on, which is how it expands our view of forensic work and how vast the field and the fields that it expands to are. It also shows the validity of these fields that even though there are shows about the forensic workers who solve homicides, this kind of work is important too. It also shined a light on an issue and a current event that has to be focused on.
Pilar’s review of the article regarding an earthquake was very well done. I appreciated how she discussed the details of the collapse, giving a better idea of the tragedy which occurred. I thought she did a good job using the quote from Alfredo Perez and helped give us a better insight into what went wrong in the construction process. Pilar also did a good job in explaining the importance of forensic engineering when discussing a collapse.
Although Pilar’s review was well done, there were a few things which would have been helpful to fix the review. It would have been good to have discussed in more detail what some other engineers said about the collapse. Another thing would have been to discuss some of the safety regulations and building codes, so we can better understand what went wrong that caused the building to collapse.
Overall, I thought Pilar’s review of the article very interesting and informative. I had little knowledge of building codes in other countries, as well as this collapse as a whole. The fact that property owners did not have to tell authorities who designed the buildings was surprising to me.
Post a Comment