What would you like to see from LE trainers?

[NLETA]

During the formation of the NLETA, we talked to a number of LE administrators and training coordinators and asked them about what they would like to see from LE trainers, both "in house" and guest instructors. We also posed many of the same questions to officers.

We came up with some common issues that many officers had and it really helped shape our organization. Now that we are starting to get off the ground, I thought I might post the question here to see what other folks had to say about it.

To get the ball rolling, I'll offer some of the things that our informal interviews revealed:

FROM ADMINSTRATORS AND COORDINATORS:
1. More consistancy between various trainers.

2. They wanted to know that the trainer both knew what they were talking about and knew how to teach it to their officers.

3. They often did not feel comfortable negotiating instructor fees.

4. They often felt the instructor should be responsible for student materials.

5. They wanted good documentation of the training conducted.

FROM STUDENTS:
1. Officers who sought out their own "extra" training wanted good documentation as well so that they could take the info back to their agencies to have them added to their training record. Many mentioned a system similar to academic transcripts.

2. When they were assigned classes, they wanted training that was relevant. Many commented that no one ever asked them what training that they felt they needed.

3. Many did not give much credit to the tradional "T or F" and "Multiple Choice" type tests. They wanted more practical exams and more challenging tests.

4. Wanted more "one-on-one" time with instructors for personal feedback. (coaching)

5. They wanted better workbooks and class materials that they could keep for future reference.

Okay....I'd really appreciate hearing from LE adminstrators and training coordinators (those responsible for getting the troops trained) as well as officers from a students perspective.

Also, what about mid-level officers? What would you like to see from trainers in the way of supervision and leadership training?

Those who feel more comfortable responding privately can send e-mail to: nleta@nleta.com

Everyone's comments will be greatly appreciated.

[ 11-16-2001: Message edited by: NLETA ]

[Niteshift]

"More consistancy between various trainers."

I'm kind of torn on this one. I'm not sure how you mean consistancy. I don't think I'd want every instructor to deliver the material the same way. Sometimes the variety is a good thing.

"They wanted to know that the trainer both knew what they were talking about and knew how to teach it to their officers."

Perfectly understandable.(unsolicited plug)That's why I am interested in your organization and it's attempt to make the membership requirements stringent.

"They often did not feel comfortable negotiating instructor fees."

I don't like doing it as a trainer either.

"They often felt the instructor should be responsible for student materials."

For the most part, I'd agree with that. There are somethings that I'd like to see the dept. arrange, like rustling up some cars for me to use if I'm showing people how to search a car, instead of me (a guy from out of town) trying to get them rounded up. But as far a books, hand-outs etc, that should be on the trainer.

"They wanted good documentation of the training conducted."

Perfectly reasonable.

"Officers who sought out their own "extra" training wanted good documentation as well so that they could take the info back to their agencies to have them added to their training record. Many mentioned a system similar to academic transcripts."

Maybe I've just been lucky, but most classes I've attended provided a course outline. That, coupled with my certificate should fill that role, shouldn't it?

"When they were assigned classes, they wanted training that was relevant. Many commented that no one ever asked them what training that they felt they needed."

Absolutely. How about more than relevant....how about current too?

"Many did not give much credit to the tradional "T or F" and "Multiple Choice" type tests. They wanted more practical exams and more challenging tests."

I'd agree. I think what happens too often is that trainers are afraid to fail a student because then they won't be liked and invited back. That's a load IMO.

"Wanted more "one-on-one" time with instructors for personal feedback"

Most classes I've been too, the instructors were available during breaks or after class for questions.

In fact, I'd be remiss in not mentioning that IPTM instructors seem particularly good about this. Many of their instructors are adjunct instructors and are staying in the same hotel as the students. Most classes I've been to with them, the instructors staying in the hotel have had study groups after dinner for those who felt they needed help. Sometimes in a room,sometimes down in the back of the little bar, but the group is there for all to participate in.

The other side of it? There is always going to be a certain number of students (1 per class) that you could spend hours with while he over analyzes and "what ifs" everything to death and he'll still feel like he didn't get enough time.

"They wanted better workbooks and class materials that they could keep for future reference."

I like to keep my stuff, but I know a LOT of guys that don't.

[Don]

Most of the "department assigned" training that I had with my last department was totally worthless bullpucky, ie; in ONE year, just to meet the state quota on training hours, I was assigned to three seperate classes on heroin Of course, crank was the big thing at the time, but it made no difference.

Give the troops what they *()#&$(&@#^NEED! :mad:

While I do want to know that my instructor knows his/her stuff, I really do NOT need to sit through the first hour and a half of the class, listening to this person stroke their own ego. I have no problem in attending a class that is put on by non LE type folks, just don't try to bullschidt me that you've BTDT if you haven't!

One of the most under trained areas in law enforcement is EVOC. Most of us receive countless hours on the range, training with our various firearms. Most of us receive little or no refresher training on handling the radio car in emergency situations once we've completed the basic academy!

Which is more likely: being involved in a fire fight, or being involved in the emergency operation of your patrol unit???? :confused:

Knock off about 80% of the "touchy-feely" type classes, and give me the information I need, for the area I work, to do the job I'm supposed to be doing!

In another thread (actually several threads) officer safety issues have been the main focus. Lets get a whole lot more officer safety classes for the field troops. The post about the old detective sergeant walking up on a woman with a cocked weapon, and placing himself in front of the officers weapons, is so common as to be sickening.

Get some of these older troops off their fat backsides and into a good survival school. Make them lose their complacency or get them off the street!

Ok, end of rant!

Well, ok, maybe I'm not quite done yet. So help me, this is the truth.

Many years ago, I attend a Jail Operations School, put on by a very large Southern California S.O. The very first words out of the instructor's mouth, on the first day of class was: "Ok, I don't want to be here. You don't want to be here. But the law says we have to have forty hours of this class, and by GOD we are going to be here for forty hours!" What a wonderful way to set the tone for a weeks worth of training! :rolleyes:

[ 11-17-2001: Message edited by: Don ]

[shooter1201]

Personally, I'd like to see nationwide standards on part-time LEOs set up and enforced. In the past year, the ONLY 'training' the part-timers in my department has received has been in firearms.

There appears to be ZERO interest to address this problem.

[NLETA]

Thank you all for your comments.

Niteshift:

By "consistancy", I was referring to documentation and support materials, not style or content. Some administrators have observed that with Trainer A, they get a detailed course outline, objectives, tests, etc. Then with Trainer B, they get a general course description, no objectives, and no test. Many administrators are not professional trainers and some have commented that when they ask for "training" they should be able to expect pretty much the same thing, or the trainer should take the lead in determining exactly what the administrators want. This applies more to guest instructors than in-house training.

This ties in to the next point about negotiating fees. Administrators are often presented with a wide choice from trainers on method of compensation, e.g. hosting, sponsoring, contracting, etc. Many of them feel more comfortable with a straight price and a decision on whether or not "to buy", or "not to buy". Many administrators do not use an RFP process. They choose a trainer often due to the nature of training that they offer and then it goes from there.

Our thinking so far has been that an RFP process would be most beneficial, but many administrators are not familiar with this type process, also, many trainers are not accustomed to it either.

Don:

Your comments about getting training that you need seem to be common. This, however, is the responsiblity of the administration or the training coordinators. A Training Needs Assessment (TNA) should be performed to determine what topics need to be covered. Too often, though, many agencies take advantage of training that is readily available instead of seeking out the training that they need.

The NLETA is trying to address this to some extent by making it easier for those seeking trainers to find them. Our members are listed in a searchbale Online Membership Directory. We are just getting started and don't have a comprehensive representation of ALL training topics at this time. However, if you were to go to our web site and use our search function to look for trainers who teach on "use of force"...you will receive results that provide you with info about trainers who teach in that area. We hope this will serve to help people find training on the topics they need.

We also hope to offer some articles on topics that you mention. We hope that good, critical commentary on topics involving training will encourage a continuing dialog. We do not want to only offer "feel good" and "pat on the back" articles, we want our members to ask the hard questions. In fact, one of our members, Phil Duran, currently has an article up that raises question about how use of force training is conducted.

I am sorry about your bad experience with Jail Operations school. I might also point out that we have some members who instruct primarily in that area. Pearson-Radli and Assoc. are based out of NV. We also hae some other members with a background in corrections wh are not as close to So.Cal. but may be able to travel or to consult as subject matter experts.

Shooter1201:

You raise a good issue about Nat. Standards. and not only for P/T Officers, but also for F/T Officers and Trainers. It is an issue that was quickly identified.

We are in the rather arduous process of researching the widely varrying standards for LE Instructors. While the NLETA cannot serve in an "official oversight" type function, we hope to help share information and promote continuing professional development within the LE Training field.

We also hope to encourage communication between trainers on relevant topics. For instance, an agency who saw a need to improve training for their P/T officers may post a Request For Info (RFI) on our web site, or the NLETA may assist them with research on example programs from other areas.

We can help facilitate the sharing of information further by offering examples of, say, a good training program, on our web site. An example training model from ABC Police Dept. available for download from the NLETA web site would make this information widely available 24 hrs a day to LE traiers around the world.

If an agency were looking into improving their P/T Offc. training program and began working with an agency who they felt had one on which they wanted to base theirs, the NLETA may cover the project in a series of articles. This hels share lessons learned throughout the LE community.

In short, there are alot of ways that the NLETA hopes to encourage professional development while providing direct and practical asistance to trainers.

Again, I appreciate everyone's comments. Thank you, and keep them coming!