Good to see you folks

[jpaynter]

Thanks to those who showed up to the training event at LPD last week. I posted the start of a discussion on the main board about how to overcome hesitation to use force, which was the primary issue that we saw during the training. As the observers I am sure were aware, I am still in the process of bringing the LPD training cadre along with Mr. Murray's feedback model. Some of the feedback I received from observers at the training stated that feedback was limited.

Right now I am still being regarded as the guy on the soap box- I don't have 100% buy in from the training cadre here but I am hopeful that as we continue to develop the program we will make progress in that area.

If anyone else has ideas for me on implementing the TATSOL feedback model, convincing cranky flat range guys that we need to do more RBT, etc. please post! Be safe everbody....

[justken2u]

Thanks for keeping the faith. Many across the country have problems such as yours, but stick to their guns. Below, I have posted two emails I got from my students in New York state ... They were even dragged before their superiors by those who did not "get it" ... once the light goes on with the naysayers, though, it shines brightly. Keep the faith ... keep moving the yardsticks inch by inch.

Ken

***********************

Note #1

Ken,

My name is Matt Cower. My co-worker, Kevin Smith and I were students at your five day RBT Instructor School given at Oriskany, NY concluding on April 25, 2008. I am employed by the Broome County Sheriff’s Office and I am an instructor at the Broome County Sheriff’s Police Academy which is the zone 6 police academy for the State of New York. I will try to sum up my question and concern so as to save you some time.

We recently had a meeting to discuss implementing the principles Kevin Smith and I learned during your training. The “Officer Survival” instructors for our academy so far are against this teaching method. Kevin and I strongly believe in this technique of training as we have both been through your school and we have seen that it works. While we were students going through the other instructor’s training scenarios we noticed a huge difference in the affect of a positive outcome of the scenario. The “Officer Survival” instructors argument is that the “Officer Survival” section of the academy is designed to test the recruits to see if they are fit for the job and can make the necessary common-sense decisions that will later be required on the street. They say that when instructors are actually teaching a recruit a new skill that this could be used and would be useful, but they argue that their section of the academy should weed out any recruits that are deemed inadequate. They say that implementing the “pause button” during a scenario to correct a recruit’s actions and response to a scenario during this section of the academy will inhibit their ability to see if that recruit has what it takes to be a police officer.

We are trying to get all of our instructors on the same page and to use the same technique. Do you have any advice on whether this method of instruction should be used during this portion of the academy and if so, do you have any advice on how to properly get this done.
Any help would be appreciated. Thank you in advance for your time and consideration and keep up the good work!


Respectfully,

-Matt

My answer follows:

Tough call ...

The officer survival guys you are talking to have a bit of a point, but I believe that if everyone is on the same page you can have it both ways. At Washington County Sheriff's Office in Oregon, instructor staff use my methods with the recruits with great success but also have the ability to fire anybody at any time because they believe they don't have the "right stuff". You've been through the program and see the value of using the pause button. I guarantee you that even using this method, you will know beyond a doubt those who "get it" and those who don't. A rock is a rock. I don't know the OS instructors you are having the difficult time with so it is difficult for me to comment on their motives. My fear with guys like this is that using my techniques cuts into their "fun" ... since for years they have been able to screw with students with impunity, and my techniques demand more from them (the instructors). It easy to set up scenarios, dick with students in the name of "testing" them and then passing judgement upon them. Some of those students will see it as a right of passage, and when they become trainers, will commit the same acts on their own students. You've gotta ask yourself, what is the point of the training? To prepare people for success or to watch them fail. There are those who believe it is necessary to burn a child's had to teach them about a stove. I disagree.

I've attached a copy of two articles that might be helpful as they address this negative mindset to a certain degree. I can't fix the attitudes of your other instructors from a distance, and with a party of two, it's difficult to fix them from within. I kind of told you this would happen. Keep believing in the correct principles ... change what you can (5 to 7 pounds a year) and begin the evolution. Push to have more of your instructors attend my program. Little by little, over time, they will get it.

Keep in touch.

Ken

*****************

Note #2

Hello Ken ! I was one of your students this past spring in Oriskany New York. I had meeting with my training director and the academy officer survival instructors after we got back home, I am pretty sure my co-worker Matt Cower sent you an e-mail about it. That meeting would be best described as a hostile encounter with the officer survival instructors. It got so bad that one of them stormed out and went to his dad's office (my Sheriff ) and complained, which led to a phone call to the Albany DCJS people. They ( the naysayers at the meeting) had major heart burn with the pause button concept, ask don't tell, and the most extreme heart burner was that "simmunition" is the name of a company not force on force training. Apparently who ever my boss spoke to in Albany said the same thing i was saying, which was what you taught us. But I still had to persevere with a lot of arrows sticking out of my back. We held a course for train the trainer, which was the officer survival instructors. It was an up hill battle and then on the last day their "ah haa" lights went on. Now there are eleven more converts. I just wanted to say thank you and to let you know we stuck to our guns and the hazing will end. And as for the bratt who stormed down the hallway, well he's still a bratt, but he's come around 180. We will keep on training.

Deputy Kevin D. Smith

[jpaynter]

Thanks for the support, I am going to continue being a "broken record" on this topic at my agency and at the State Academy here, where I am a contract instructor. I am slowly winning folks over by presenting a three pronged training model- theoretical (classroom), closed skill (gym or flat range) and open skill (RBT/scenarios). I think that if any of these legs are missing from the stool, it falls over.

I had TATSOL recommended to me years ago by a fellow instructor and I am embarrassed now at how long it took me to read it and begin making changes to my personal training and to how I teach. I was taught to "let the narrative of the scenario reach it's conclusion" and to let the student receive the natural consequences of their actions. This model was how I had scenarios run on me as a student, and it was how I began running them as an instructor years later. It is telling in the notes of the NY instructors that the resistance centered around testing. I have heard exactly the same argument from instructors here - that the purpose of scenarios is not to teach but to test basic proficiency. The longer I watch that type of scenario unfold, the more I am convinced that many officers are damaged by "failing" in improperly designed scenarios, including those that are designed to give students a "wake up call" (hazing) without providing valuable instruction.

As for the necessity of testing officers' proficiency in scenarios, I agree that a failure point must exist. However, officers should be properly prepared for the test! Otherwise they are being thrown in the deep end after practicing their swimming on dry land. OK, venting over. I will be setting up DT Palooza II, tentatively in March 2009, to focus on these issues. Stay tuned for more....