COMPETENCY BASED TRAINING—
TRAINING THE TRAINER

PART 5: Assessment and Effectiveness Model

(concluded)

• Department Environment

The person in charge of departmental research should conduct an attitude survey of all full-time department employees on a yearly basis. The results should include an analysis, longitudinal comparisons, recommendations, and should be provided to all departmental employees. The intended purpose of this part of the model is to assess the departmental environment and culture through an attitude survey.

• Systematic Training Evaluation

It is suggested that a systematic training review process be developed for each course or curriculum, and associated support services, which would rotate through a three year course review cycle. It is suggested that separate evaluation packets be created for each training program. This assessment will look at the strengths and weaknesses of all training programs and related services.

• Competency/Deficiency Report

It is suggested that the Training Division generate a Competency/Deficiency Report that provides grade distribution and deficiency data for all courses sorted by location and instructor. This data is compiled for each course. The results are provided to the Training Commander and appropriate here is to determine the trainee’s success and progress as well as give an indication for additional or remedial training.

• Training Objectives and Competencies

It is suggested that the training staff develop clearly defined course objectives and course competencies for each course of instruction from simple training to more structured courses. It is suggested that course objectives and competencies be revised as needed and reviewed at least once each year. The results should be provided to the Training Commander and appropriate administrative levels. This part of the model determines if the training center and trainers are achieving their training objectives and competencies, by conducting a routine audit of the curriculum. It should also give indications if instructional staff are teaching what they say they are teaching. Included in this assessment are classroom visits by outside experts or qualified command personnel to evaluate instructor delivery, content, and general instructional quality.

CONCLUSION

This suggested model is not complicated and is an easy way for agencies and training personnel to identify areas of concern. The focus should be on offering quality training and making sure that the training offered is really doing what it is supposed to do: give the firefighter the necessary skills to do the job on the fire scene. Each component has a specific focus and that issue needs to be addressed. For training to be truly effective, public safety has to rethink the traditional position and start taking a hard look at how things are done. Then question "What do we really want to do?". Status quo can be maintained, but is it really effective?

Page 2