National blended learning programmes

National blended learning National blended learning programmesprogrammes

How QA & Evaluation strategies help to How QA & Evaluation strategies help to improve performance – demonstrably!improve performance – demonstrably!

Jean GarrodJean Garrod

Centrex

Centrex is a registered trademark of the Central Police Training and Development Authority

HOC 07/2005 Focus: evaluation of the impact of training and

learning…on operational performance.

A framework for conducting evaluations

Client Sponsors: BCU/OCU commanders, Police Authority

Community involvement in L&D

Delivery of NPP…

Through national intelligence model… Monitored against PPAF


Summary

“Evaluation of the investment planned

and made in the skills and abilities of

officers and staff… will ensure that there

is a clear linkage between the resources

invested and the outcome performances

required.”


NEED FORCHANGE

Horizon Scan/Digest

Report on:- Performance

- Practices

CommunityEngagement

EVALUATION(analysis of data

gathered)

Operational orCritical Incident

Debriefing

CustomerFeedback


NEED FORCHANGE

Horizon Scan/Digest


- Practices

CommunityEngagement

CommunityEngagement

Who/what needs to change?How? By when?

PNA (Doctrine/NOS-based)(Level 3/4 Evaluation criteria)

Are new KUSAB needed?Which role needs what?

LNA(Level 2/3

Evaluation criteria)


gathered)


Debriefing

CustomerFeedback


NEED FORCHANGE

Horizon Scan/Digest


- Practices

CommunityEngagement

CommunityEngagement




LNA(Level 2/3


How will theseKUSABs bedelivered?

DESIGN


gathered)


Debriefing

CommunityEngagement

CustomerFeedback


NEED FORCHANGE

Horizon Scan/Digest


- Practices

CommunityEngagement

CommunityEngagement




LNA(Level 2/3



DESIGN

DELIVERY andASSESSMENT


gathered)


Debriefing

CommunityEngagement

- Who?- Where?- When?

- How? (PDR)Community

Engagement

CommunityEngagement

CustomerFeedback


NEED FORCHANGE

Horizon Scan/Digest


- Practices

CommunityEngagement

CommunityEngagement




LNA(Level 2/3



What else is required to make thesechanges stick? - supervisors, forums,

tutors, coaches, briefing, PDR

DESIGN

DELIVERY andASSESSMENT


gathered)


Debriefing

CommunityEngagement

- Who?- Where?- When?

- How? (PDR)Community

Engagement

CommunityEngagement

CustomerFeedback


PIP – to narrow the justice gap by

Improving crime detection rates

Bringing more offenders to justice

Improving confidence in the police and

criminal justice system


Cumbria’s preparation September 2004: PIP seen as central to

investigative performance. November 2004: full-time PIP implementation

team led by an experienced DI. June 2006: PIP Implementation Support Plan

issued to forces. PIP Assessment and PDR essentially the

same thing: dovetail to prevent duplication.


Cumbria’s delivery April 2006: Training commenced Focus: uniformed constables and sergeants PIP training: to improve investigative skills:

also progress themes such as Hate Crime, Domestic Violence, Child Abuse and the Investigation of Serious Sexual Offences.

In 15 months: 400 uniformed constables and 70 sergeants trained and assessed.

With what results????


Pre- and post-knowledge checksPIP Level 1 Improvement in Knowledge

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Module 1 Module 2 Module 3 Module 4 Module 5

Before

After


Force Performance

Sanction Detections 2005/6

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

April July Dec February April May June


Individual Performance Comparison (Crime Detections)

Non-PIP officers PIP-trained officers

2004-05

2005-06

2004-05 2005-06

Total 236 335 204 384

Average 11.8 16.75 10.2 19.2

Improvement 42% 88%


Achieve quantifiable results?

Was this course worthwhile?

Did the benefits justify the costs?

How can we measure ‘soft’ benefits (e.g.

confidence in role)?

What activities should we collaborate on

locally, regionally, nationally?


What do we have already?

Identification of performance outcomes…

For individuals through NOS and workplace assessment…

For teams (e.g. Investigation team) through Doctrine…

For BCU/OCU/forces through PPAF……


Under development…

Costing: quantitative data for inputs

Evaluation: quantitative and qualitative data

for outputs and outcomes

MLE: candidate data relating to volume,

tracking, completion and achievement


Anything else? Core QA & evaluation strategy for national blended

learning programmes… Level 1: Reactions: capture at point of delivery… Level 2: Assessment: graded, integrated

assessment of knowledge, skills, behaviour Level 3: Workplace Transfer: PDR aggregated Level 4: Impact on performance: PPAF


Benefits from increased use of…

Common terminology, tools and techniques, templates

Common policies, procedures, practices

Comparison of programmes, groups of learners, forces

National blended learning programmes

Documents

Transcript of National blended learning programmes