Attachment 3 TSR Introduction page.pdf

Office of Human Resources and Professional Development Canine Training and Operations Branch/Learning Management Branch

Curriculum Review Conference Explosives Detection Canine Handlers Course

(CNIN-CS-0004)

Training Specification Cover Report April 9, XXXX

BACKGROUND

General Program Information

In the early 1990s, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) pioneered the Canine Explosives Detection Program (CEDP). The CEDP was developed to address an increasing explosives threat to the general public and built upon and incorporated ATF’s expertise in the enforcement of Federal explosives laws. The program was heavily influenced by the previous success of the Canine Accelerant Detection Program and included best practices in training both canines and their handlers, as well as research conducted by the ATF National Laboratory. Also at this time, ATF entered into an agreement with the U.S. Department of State (DOS), Office of Antiterrorism Assistance, to produce a more effective explosives detection canine. Under this training arrangement, ATF trained explosives detection canines for foreign countries to be used overseas in the war against terrorism and to protect American travelers abroad.

Since that time, ATF has trained and certified over 617 canines for State and local law enforcement agencies, as well as for DOS and other Federal entities. Canines trained for DOS are currently working in 21 countries, to include Afghanistan, Israel, Iraq, Cyprus, Greece, Egypt, Chile, Italy, and Argentina. Currently the training used to prepare both explosives canines and their handlers is referred to as the Explosives Detection Canine Handlers Course.

New TPD Curriculum Development SOPs and FLETA Accreditation

The Canine Training and Operations Branch (CTOB), in conjunction with the Learning Systems Management Division (LSMD), determined the necessity to conduct a formal curriculum review conference (CRC) in response to new curriculum documentation standards published for the directorate (TPD SOP 6020.1). While the course has had a long history, developmental documentation regarding the course was either nonexistent or had been misplaced over time. A CRC provided the opportunity to formally assess and document changes in job functions and requirements, training methodologies, terminology, and lesson materials. A CRC would help to ensure that the course continues to meet field requirements and documents the training provided.

In addition, due to the program’s importance to ATF’s strategy to prevent explosives related crime and protect the public from potential terrorist acts (ATF 2004 – 2009

Strategic Plan, Tactics 2.1.1, 2.1.3, and 2.1.4), the Explosives Detection Canine Handlers Course was selected to apply for accreditation by the Federal Law Enforcement Accreditation (FLETA) Board. In order to provide the appropriate documentation for FLETA, the CRC would need to develop all curriculum documents required by TPD’s new policies and the accreditation board. The Learning Systems Management Division, Learning Management Branch (LMB), is assisting CTOB in the CRC process, the development of curriculum documentation, and in collecting and developing records needed for FLETA Board accreditation.

METHODOLOGY

The CDT and LMB staff conducted a series of conferences to develop learning objectives, testing materials, and complete the sequencing and chunking of the tasks. All work was based on the results of the JTA and the same spreadsheet was used to document the results of the TSR. Two formal TSR conferences were held at the Front Royal canine training facility, January 14 – 15, XXXX, and February 17 – 20, XXXX. A third conference was held at Fort A.P. Hill, March 12 – 13, XXXX. In addition, the CDT and LMB staff reviewed and developed TSR components throughout the period through telephone and e-mail interaction.

The initial conference in January focused on the development of terminal and enabling learning objectives, performance requirements, identification of training facility requirements, and the chunking and sequencing of lesson objectives. While some of this information was still being finalized during the second conference, the focus shifted during the February and March meetings to the development of examination items and graded practical exercises based on the objectives for the course.

The development teams specified a written examination consisting of multiple choice questions used to test for the knowledge and comprehension of provided material. The CDT and LMB staff developed a test bank of three questions per objective in order to provide for test security and student remediation, if necessary. Subject matter expert review of the test items determined that an 80% score is needed to pass the written examination in order to allow for minimum performance on the job.

The teams further developed graded practical exercises for use throughout the course at progressing levels of difficulty and complexity to test student hands-on performance of the taught skills. The teams have provided scoring checklists for the practical exercises in order to assure consistent assessment and documentation of student performance. The checklists were reviewed by subject matter experts to assure that they were accurate and reflected the job requirements.

RISK ASSESSMENT

As part of the job task analysis process, each individual task, sub-task, and step was reviewed for potential risk and safety issues. A rating scale from 1 to 5 was used, with 1 being no risk and a 5 representing risk of life or severe injury. The scale was documented for each task element in order to identify future requirements that may need to be incorporated into training content and training safety procedures.

An additional risk assessment feature will be incorporated in the next phase of lesson plan development. A formal risk assessment will be conducted on the training facilities regarding the hazards the must be addressed and noted in lesson plans during the development phase. Both risk assessments will be used to develop training lesson plans and annotate exercises. The additional assessment will be included with the course documentation when the pilot lesson plan package is submitted for review and approval.

RESULTS

The results of this training specification report have been compiled into a combination of Microsoft Word documents and Excel spreadsheets. The bulk of the JTA and TSR are contained in an Excel spreadsheet, file name ExplCanineAnalysisTSR4-9-2009.xls.

Within the spreadsheet are separate tabs for the JTA, TSR, chunking, sequencing, practical exercise specifications, and the test bank for the written examination items.

This cover report and more detailed information regarding the practical exercises and their corresponding coversheets are all saved as separate files in Microsoft Word format.

DEVELOPMENT PARTICIPANTS

This Training Specifications Report was completed by Office of Training and Professional Development, Learning Management Branch. The following LMB staff participated in the facilitation of conferences and the development of documentation:

Gustav Jakowitsch, Jane Doe, and James Scott. All LMB staff are GS-1750, Instructional Systems Specialists.

The core members of the Curriculum Review Committee from the CTOB consisted of the following:

John Doe. Supervisory Canine Trainer, responsible for: National Canine Initiative Program, National Odor Recognition Testing Program, Certification and Re-Certification Programs and Accreditation Management.

Shawn XXXXX. Supervisory Canine Trainer, responsible for: Explosive Detection Canine Program, Accelerant Detection Canine Program, State Department Explosive Detection Canine Program and Kennel Management.

Tim XXXX. Canine Trainer/Team Leader, National Canine Initiative Program.

Cody XXXX. Canine Trainer/Team Leader, National Odor Recognition Testing Program.

Don XXXXX. Contractor/Canine Trainer.

Mike XXXXX. Contractor/Canine Trainer.

Cindy XXXXX. Management Analyst.

Tammy XXXXXX. CTOB Kennel Supervisor

In addition, the following subject matter experts from CTOB assisted in the review and development of the JTA in a variety of workshops and desktop audits:

Patrick XXXXX CTOB Canine Trainer

Renato XXXXXX CTOB Canine Trainer

John XXXXX CTOB Canine Trainer

Raymond XXXXXX CTOB Canine Trainer

Larry XXXXXXX CTOB, Law Enforcement Training Specialist

James XXXXXXX CTOB Canine Trainer

Keith XXXXXXXX CTOB Canine Trainer

Randy XXXXXXXXX CTOB Canine Trainer

Patty XXXXXXXX CTOB Program Analyst

Ray XXXXXXX CTOB Special Agent Canine Handler, Project Officer

Jason XXXXXXXX CTOB Law Enforcement Training Specialist

Catie XXXXXXXX CTOB Animal Health Technician

French XXXXXXX CTOB Animal Health Technician

BUDGET

Based on the current results of both the JTA and the TSR, the development team does not expect per course training expenses to exceed those historically expended for the implementation of the program.

EXISTING TRAINING REVIEW

As the Explosives Detection Canine Handlers Course is an existing program, existing lesson plans and course materials are available and will be reviewed and mapped against the specifications of the TSR during the next document development and review phase.

It is expected that the process will result in updating lesson plan documentation and course materials to correspond to new TPD documentation policies.

REFERENCE MATERIALS

The following reference materials were used during the development of the JTA and

TSR:

Explosives Detection Canine Imprinting Manual, Canine Training and Operations Branch, August 2005. (Guide book for the training, behavior modification, and imprinting odor recognition of explosives detection canines.)

The Merck Veterinary Manual On-line, Merck & Co., Inc., 2008.

Standard Operating Procedure for Curriculum Development and Management, ATF SOP 6020.1, November 2008.