PWS Attachment C CENSECFORINST 1540.1D (Training Policy and Guidance).pdf

CENSECFORINST 1540.1D

Enclosure (1)

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQ)

1. Purpose. Provide readily available and accessible information in a quick and easy format.

2. Applicability. The questions located in this section were obtained from domain staff. The answers apply to all within the

CENSECFOR domain involved in the delivery of Center for Security

Forces (CENSECFOR) courses of instruction.

3. FAQ by Category.

Core Unique Instructor Training (CUIT):

(1) Why do I need to complete a CUIT?

A. OPNAVINST 1500.75 and NETCINST 1500.13 requires all high-risk instructors to complete CUIT certification. CENSECFOR CO expands the requirement to include moderate and non-high-risk instructors, also.

(2) Am I required to sit through the course as a student prior personalizing my instructor guide?

A. An instructor is required to only sit through the high-risk segments of the course of instruction (COI) they will be instructing as a student, prior to instructor guide personalization. Not the entire COI.

(3) Where do I find the CUIT certification steps?

A. Enclosure 2, paragraph 3.c. Additionally, if there are any questions, please call the Learning Standards Office.

Course Supervisor (CS):

(1) Where can I locate a list of the CS’s duties?

A. Enclosure 12, paragraph 2.i.

(2) Does the CS have to be CUIT certified?

A. The CS must be fully CUIT certified in the COI prior to being assigned as CS. Please see Enclosure 12, paragraph 2.i.

Curriculum:

(1) How do we request a change or update in the course?

A. Submit all recommendations to the course supervisor. The course supervisor will contact the Course Curriculum Model

Manager (CCMM). Together, the CCMM and CS will create the appropriate electronic Course Activity Log (eCAL) entry to record the recommendation until such time the course is updated.

2 Enclosure (1)

If the recommendation is safety related, the CS and CCMM shall act immediately, accordingly. Please refer to Enclosures 9 and

10.

Instructor:

(1) How do I quality/certify as an instructor?

A. Enclosure 2.

(2) Do I need to have the NEC 805A to be an instructor?

A. To instruct at any CENSECFOR learning activity, instructors are required to be NEC 805A qualified or equivalent.

(3) Do I need a designation letter to be an instructor evaluator?

A. Yes, a template may be found in Enclosure 12, Figure 12-3.

(4) How often do high-risk instructors get evaluated?

A. Within, and not to exceed, 90 days.

(5) How often do non-high-risk instructors get evaluated?

A. Within, and not to exceed, 180 days.

(6) Are unscheduled evaluations performed?

A. Yes, the learning activity leadership team will conduct annual, unscheduled evaluations on all instructors.

(7) May I cross-CUIT for another COI?

A. Yes, not required but authorized, especially on similar topic areas.

(8) Where do I find information regarding an Instructor

Improvement Plan?

A. Enclosure 2, paragraph 10.

(9) How do I certify as an instructor evaluator?

A. Enclosure 12, paragraph 2.k.

Student Surveys:

(1) When are student surveys required?

A. Upon completion of each high-risk training event and upon completion of the COI.

(2) Where do I find information regarding student surveys?

A. Enclosure 6.

Testing:

3 Enclosure (1)

(1) Do I need a designation letter to be a testing officer (TO)?

A. Yes, a template may be found in Enclosure 12, Figure 12-2.

(2) Where can I locate a list of a TO’s responsibilities, qualifications, and training?

A. Enclosure 12, paragraph 2.j.

(3) Where can I find templates on how to conduct test evaluation procedures and testing analysis?

A. Enclosure 7.

Enclosure (2)

INSTRUCTOR MANAGEMENT

1. Purpose. To establish policies and procedures on the following instructor management issues:

a. Core Unique Instructor Training (CUIT)

b. Instructor training jackets (ITJ) for Center for Security

Forces (CENSECFOR) learning activity instructors.

c. Evaluation procedures and documentation.

d. Suspension of instructor certification.

e. Instructor recertification.

f. Instructor reclassification.

g. Routing of instructor documentation.

h. Instructor improvement plan.

2. Applicability. This applies to all instructors within the

CENSECFOR domain involved in the delivery of CENSECFOR courses.

Instructors may be military, CIVPERS, or contractors.

3. Certification. Successful accomplishment of the CENSECFOR mission depends on highly motivated, well-trained instructors, in teamwork with support personnel. These objectives are accomplished through graduation from an approved instructor-training course, followed by a certification and evaluation program, along with participation in a continuous learning program. All CENSECFOR instructors shall follow the procedures for certification/evaluation depicted in figure 2-1. Each instructor shall be a graduate of the

Navy Instructor Training Course (NITC) (NEC 805A) or military service equivalent prior to being certified to teach any CENSECFOR domain course. Military instructors without NEC 805A shall attend NITC.

CIVPERS must complete equivalent instructor courses as specified in their position description. Contract instructors must complete equivalent instructor qualification training, as outlined in the vendor’s performance work statement (PWS). A Course supervisor (CS) shall be a fully certified instructor on their assigned course of instruction (complete CUIT sign off) and have completed in-service training requirements for CS. It is highly recommended they obtain

MTS designation prior to assuming those duties.

2 Enclosure (2)

a. Military instructors who exceed body fat standards will be counseled by the Commanding Officer(CO)/Officer in Charge(OIC)/Site

Director(SD), herein referred to as learning activity leadership, prior to or in conjunction with certification to evaluate suitability. CIVPERS and contract instructors must maintain similar standards established within their respective position descriptions and PWS.

b. All newly reporting instructors will receive command and course indoctrination. At a minimum, the course indoctrination will include information on the mission, program goals, objectives, code of conduct, violations/consequences of prohibited conduct, organizational structure, safety rules/regulations, and procedures.

CSs will be responsible for explaining the indoctrination process, instructor certification path, and assigning a certification period.

NETC Form 1500/3 is required to be completed and maintained in the

ITJ.

(1) Military and CIVPERS instructors shall be assigned an initial certification period of 90 days. If additional time is required, the CS shall submit a waiver (figure 2-2), stating the course and course identification number (CIN), reason/justification for extension, and the length of extension requested. This waiver will go to the CENSECFOR CO via the learning activity leadership and

CENSECFOR Director of Training (DOT).

(2) Contract instructors shall be assigned an initial certification period of 90 days and comply with their PWS. Waivers will not apply to contract instructors.

c. Certification Procedures

(1) The following steps shall be completed:

(a) The CS provides the new instructor with an ITJ containing the instructor certification record (ICR) (figure 2-3).

Instructors are provided an ICR sheet for each course assigned listing the CIN and all topics.

(b) For all courses of instruction, an, uncertified instructor will attend only each topic they are assigned to teach in order to personalize their lesson plans while observing the topic delivery process. These personalized topics will be reviewed for technical accuracy and approved by the CS’s initials.

(c) For high-risk courses of instruction only, an uncertified instructor must attend the high-risk portions of the

3 Enclosure (2) course as a student. These sit-ins and observances will be recorded in Phase II of the CUIT.

(2) All instructors will complete the applicable CUIT used in high, moderate, and non-high-risk courses.

(a) The CENSECFOR CO is the Curriculum Control Authority

(CCA) for CENSECFOR and owns the CUIT process. Contents of the CUIT are determined by higher instructions, NETC Safety, and CCA direction. The approved CUIT for CENSECFOR is distributed to the learning sites via the CENSECFOR Learning Standards Office through the Course Curriculum Model Managers (CCMM) to the CS.

(b) The uncertified instructor must satisfactorily complete two (2) teach back evaluations (figure 2-4) utilizing their personally prepared instructor guide. These evaluations will be on separate teaching events on the same topic with one being a technical evaluation and one being a technique evaluation. The second evaluation given would also be considered the certification evaluation. In addition, teaching one evaluated lab is required and will be documented using figure 2-5. Both classroom and lab evaluated teach backs may be to staff personnel in lieu of students. For follow on topics and lab certification, the two required evaluations can evaluate both technical and technique areas. A certified instructor in the topic of instruction or Master Training Specialist

(MTS) certified instructor must evaluate both technical knowledge and instructional delivery techniques. CS will recommend instructors for topic certification based upon the documented evaluations.

(c) For the initial CUIT instructor certification, learning activity leadership shall certify instructors based upon the

CS recommendation. All remaining topics will be completed certified based upon successful completion of instructor evaluations by the CS.

The CS will record certification to each topic in the instructor’s

ITJ on the ICR (figure 2-3) along with documentation on corresponding evaluations. Once certified on a topic, an instructor need not re-certify to teach that same topic in another course of instruction as long as it is identical.

(d) There are two levels of certifications for instructors: (1) CUIT topic instructor certification and (2) CUIT course certification. (NOTE: The initial CUIT topic instructor certification evaluation shall always remain in the ITJ and never be purged.) Once certified in a topic of instruction and all other initial requirements are met an instructor is considered initially certified and will be removed from uncertified instructor status. The

4 Enclosure (2)

CS will record certification to teach each topic in the ITJ on the

ICR.

(e) CUITs apply to all instructors except for:

1. CCA approved instructors teaching Commanding

Officer Antiterrorism courses.

2. CENSECFOR DOT approved guest lecturers for designated courses.

(f) When a change, update, or revision to a CUIT occurs, the CS will apply the following steps for instructors who have completed the portions of the CUIT affected by the change.

1. Conduct and document training with certified instructors on the new changes.

2. Create a memorandum for the ITJ (figure 2-6)

3. Attach to this memorandum the line items of the differences/additions/changes, cover sheet of the latest CUIT, and the last sheet with the signatures annotating the completion of these line items.

4. File in the ITJ immediately in front of the original CUIT.

(g) For a pilot course, the CCA may authorize the CCMM to train the CS and sign the line item(s) with changes based on the pilot curriculum. The CS will qualify the course instructors. Pilot course instructors are chosen by the program managers (PMs), CCMM, CS, and learning activity leadership from certified instructors who have demonstrated subject matter expertise. The CS will approve lesson plan personalization.

(3) All CENSECFOR learning activities that conduct training on and maintain small arms in their inventory will ensure that ALL instructors hold a 717B NEC or equivalent. Contractors shall qualify and maintain sustainment qualification on weapons in accordance with their PWS. This includes all instructors designated to instruct a single weapon system. This will enable instructors to be cross utilized to teach or demonstrate any weapon system in any course of instruction. The ITJ shall contain only the most recent 3591 form showing the instructor’s weapons qualifications on the weapons they are qualified to instruct. All outdated forms must be purged.

5 Enclosure (2)

4. ITJ for CENSECFOR Learning Activity Instructors

a. An ITJ ensures milestones are properly tracked and documented in a single source for review and inspection. The ITJ also assist with mentoring and tracking staff certifications and training.

CENSECFOR requires all milestones associated with course evaluations, In-Service Training (IST), waiver requests, lesson topic teach backs, certification dates, etc., to be documented in an ITJ.

b. Standardized ITJ format’s depicted in figure 2-7. All learning activities will comply and ensure documentation and milestones are recorded. A contractor’s PWS may have additional requirements.

c. Once received, all ITJs become the property of the Government.

Upon transfer of a military instructor, or departure or termination of employment of a CIVPERS or contract partner, the learning activity will digitally record the original ITJ. The digitally recorded ITJ will be stored for a period of four years and then destroyed. The CS will provide the original paper version of the ITJ to the instructor.

d. CSs will maintain custody and control of all primary assigned military, civilian, and contractor ITJs. At the discretion of the learning activity leadership, additional personnel may be assigned to assist with the maintenance and upkeep of the ITJs. However, this does not relieve the CS of the responsibility of maintaining the

ITJs.

5. Evaluation Procedures and Documentation

a. Instructor evaluations are a key and vital component to training and paramount to training safety. Instructor evaluations shall be conducted by either a trained instructor evaluator, an MTS certified instructor, or learning activity leadership.

b. Certifying evaluations shall be documented using the ICR

(figure 2-3). All other instructor evaluations, i.e., MTS, quarterly, sustainment, etc., will be documented using the evaluation record

(figure 2-8).

(1) All non-high risk course instructors shall be evaluated semi-annually (within 180 calendar days of last evaluation) for technique and technical expertise in support of their designation as a certified instructor. Either the CCMM, course supervisors, MTS instructor, instructor evaluator, or topic certified instructors who have completed IST on instructor evaluations, shall conduct the periodic evaluations. A semi-annual evaluation will be considered overdue after 180 days.

6 Enclosure (2)

(2) All high-risk course instructors shall be evaluated quarterly (within 90 calendar days of last evaluation). High-risk

CCMM, course supervisors, MTS instructor, instructor evaluator, or topic certified instructors who have completed IST on instructor evaluations, shall conduct the quarterly evaluations. A quarterly evaluation will be considered overdue after 90 days. In addition to the required quarterly evaluation, a member of the learning activity leadership team (the learning activity CO, OIC, SD, Executive Officer

(XO), assistant OIC, assistant SD, Command Master Chief, or Senior

Enlisted Leader (SEL)) shall conduct unscheduled evaluations for each high-risk instructor. All high-risk instructors shall be evaluated by learning activity leadership at least annually.

(3) For instructors who are cross-CUIT in high-risk courses, an evaluation must be conducted within the 90-day period in one of their CUIT courses. For example, if the instructor is cross-CUIT in

Armed Sentry/Security Reaction Force - Basic (AS/SRF-B), Small Arms

Marksmanship Instructor (SAMI), and Non-Compliant Boarding – Visit, Board, Search, and Seizure (NCB VBSS), the evaluation topic may cover the M4 Rifle for AS/SRF-B. This high-risk evaluation may be used to satisfy the high-risk evaluation requirement for SAMI and NCB VBSS course of instruction (COI), also.

(4) Instructors must be evaluated in both classroom and laboratory settings.

(a) Both need not be evaluated within the same 90-day evaluation period. It is recommended one evaluation be conducted in the classroom and the following evaluation be conducted in a laboratory.

(b) Both evaluator and instructor must sign the evaluations after evaluator debrief.

(c) The instructor must acknowledge in writing, in the

Instructor Improvement Plan section, that they understand the evaluation, and how they will rectify any areas recommended for improvement. This applies even should the evaluator not provide comments in the Instructor Improvement Plan section.

(7) All completed instructor evaluations and waiver request, except for practice teach evaluations, are reviewed, and signed by the CS and learning activity leadership.

(8) A negative evaluation is an evaluation that meets one or more of the following criteria:

7 Enclosure (2)

(a) Four or more marks of Needs Improvement (NI).

(b) Two or more marks of Unsatisfactory (UNSAT).

(c) When a significant deficiency is noted (e.g., safety violation).

(d) Not using their own personalized lesson plan.

(9) The CS must provide an Instructor Improvement Plan

(figure 2-9) for any instructor receiving a negative evaluation.

(10) All instructor evaluations (figures 2-4 and 2-5) shall be routed to and reviewed by the learning activity leadership and maintained on file, with the CUIT in the ITJ, for the complete tour of military instructor and latest three (3) years for CIVPERS and contract instructors. Figures 2-4 and 2-5 provide guidance for evaluating an instructor.

6. Suspension of Instructor Certification

a. Any instructor that misses an evaluation will be considered suspended.

b. If an instructor is evaluated as UNSAT the evaluator will immediately notify the CS. The decision to suspend an instructor from a certified status for unsatisfactory evaluations will rest solely at the discretion of the learning activity’s leadership.

c. If an instructor’s knowledge of the subject matter is unsatisfactory, security is violated, or the instructor fails to adhere to safety standards in the classroom, the instructor will be decertified on the topic covered.

d. If a lab instructor fails to operate the trainer properly or fails to adhere to safety standards, the lab instructor will be decertified.

7. Instructor Recertification

a. If an instructor’s certification has been suspended due to a missed periodic evaluation, the instructor must be re-instated by the

CS with a satisfactory instructor evaluation. Re-certification of individual topics is not necessary.

b. If an instructor’s certification has been suspended due to being placed on extended limited duty status or noncompliance with

8 Enclosure (2) body fat standards, the instructor must be reinstated by the learning activity leadership after correcting the applicable deficiency.

Recertification of individual topics is not necessary.

c. If an instructor’s certification has been suspended due to an

UNSAT evaluation based upon technique problems, the instructor must report to an MTS instructor for IST in lesson delivery techniques.

This remediation will include any topics required to assist in recertifying the individual and will be documented on figure 3-2.

Upon completion of IST, the CS will reevaluate for recertification.

Recertification of individual topics is not necessary.

d. When an instructor is suspended because of a failure to adhere to safety or security standards, or lack of knowledge in subject matter, the instructor must receive in-service training from a certified instructor as appointed by the CS that addresses the discrepancy. This training must be documented on figure 3-2. The instructor must recertify to teach the topic(s) in question.

e. When a lab instructor is suspended for failure to operate a trainer properly or because of failure to adhere to safety standards, the lab instructor must complete all or portions of the job sheets associated with that trainer satisfactorily as determined by the learning activity’s leadership to re-certify.

f. Anytime a platform instructor’s certification status changes, the CS must inform the learning activity leadership, CCMM, and

CENSECFOR LSO via e-mail.

g. Course supervisors will analyze the results of instructor evaluations to determine the need for in-service training or special instruction. Any in-service training provided will be documented on figure 3-2.

8. Instructor Reclassification

a. Despite the stringent screening process for instructors, there are cases where individuals are unsuitable for instructor duty.

Individuals unsuitable for instructor duty are classified into one of two categories:

(1) Individuals considered unsuitable for instructor duty through no fault of their own. Individuals in this category may have physical defects, speech impediments, lack of confidence, inability to project in front of an audience, or have other deficiencies, which hamper effective instructing.

9 Enclosure (2)

(2) Individuals considered unsuitable for continued instructor duty because of their own actions. Individuals charged with misconduct, who demonstrate a lack of interest in instructing, who demonstrate poor attitudes, or who fail to maintain body fat or physical fitness standards fall into this category.

b. The requirements for the learning activities are the same regardless of the reasons for unsuitability. Four specific actions are required:

(1) Notify CENSECFOR CO and CENSECFOR DOT.

(2) Submit a recommendation to remove the instructor from instructor duty to Commander, Navy Personnel Command (COMNAVPERSCOM)

(PERS-40) including specific reasons why the individual is considered unsuitable for continued instructor duty including the unsuitability category.

(3) For instructors considered unsuitable for continued instructor duty, because of their own actions, a statement of rebuttal from the instructor is required. If the instructor desires not to make a statement, the instructor must indicate this in writing.

(4) Reassignment because of unsuitability for any reason is at the discretion of COMNAVPERSCOM (PERS-40).

9. Routing of Instructor Documentation

a. When an instructor receives an evaluation, that evaluation, along with the proposed instructor improvement plan, and the instructor’s remarks, shall be forwarded to learning activity leadership within five (5) days of the date of the evaluation.

b. Learning activity leadership may accept the recommendation of the instructor improvement plan or take other action, as they deem appropriate.

10. Instructor Improvement Program

a. To ensure all students benefit from each teaching and tactical situation, instructors need to have a thorough knowledge of classroom and scenario-based training and develop relevant expectations about the entire student team.

b. It is imperative that all instructors, CS’s, and the chain of command continually update and focus instructional methods to ensure

10 Enclosure (2) maximum team performance and awareness. When an instructor loses their instructional focus, the following may be used as guidance to develop an instructor improvement plan to aid in providing direction and correction on how the instruction may improvement areas of deficiency.

(1) BE ALERT FOR CHANGES IN THE PERFORMANCE. Observe actions team members are doing and adjust to them (e.g., slow down team members).

(2) DON’T WAIT TO TAKE CORRECTIVE ACTION. When you observe students not performing to the level of expectation you may need to adjust the amount of critical team performance you expect them to do.

(3) CLARIFY EXPECTATIONS. Understand that clear expectations lead to a shared mental model of the progressive learning curve and ensures high levels of understanding and performance by all team members. Our mental picture is affected by:

(a) Past Experiences: We act on information based on our knowledge. When something looks similar to what we are familiar with, we may react as if it were the same.

(b) Expectations: Instructor expectations for students-whether high or low, can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. That is, students tend to give to instructors as much or as little as instructors expect of them.

(c) Filters: We are provided with information, but we do not use it. We do not pay attention to information that does not match our mental picture.

c. The below situational awareness behaviors apply to all training evolutions, especially tactical and high-risk training events:

(1) COMMUNICATE TO CHAIN OF COMMAND (CoC). Team leader must be aware of team actions and communicate status of team mission frequently to the CoC. EXAMPLE: Team members must know the technical aspects of other team members’ jobs. Rotations of team members will change and you must be aware of what actions are needed from you to do that job effectively.

(2) CONTINUALLY ASSESS THE SITUATION. In the dynamic world of high-risk training, plan on change and continually assess and reassess the training situation to determine if the team is on track to safely and effectively increase their learning curve.

11 Enclosure (2)

(3) OVERLOAD. Overload causes distraction; fixation;

increased errors, and high stress. Prioritizing and delegating tasks and minimizing job distractions can improve safety in conditions of overload.

(4) POOR COMMUNICATIONS. The level of awareness achieved in a daily training cycle is related to the level and quality of communications the instructor(s) communicates and observes in the team’s performance.

(5) CORRECTIVE ACTION. Questioning students during the scenario brief and performing thorough knowledge checks, can reduce the probability of mistakes.

(6) ASSESS STRESS LEVEL WITHIN TEAM. Too much or too little stress can reduce our ability to exercise good judgment. Assess the stress and attempt to obtain an optimal level before continuing.

(7) MANAGE RESULTING RISK. Apply the 5 steps of Risk

Management prior to starting any high-risk training evolutions.

d. Instructional awareness is dynamic, hard to maintain, and easy to lose. Knowing what is going on all the time, with each student, is very difficult for any one person, especially during complex high stress training evolutions. It is imperative to implement these behaviors, which help maintain adequate instructional awareness.

FIGURE 2-1. INSTRUCTOR CERTIFICATION/EVALUATION FLOW CHART

12 Enclosure (2)

Instructor Certification /Evaluation Flow Chart

IF A HIGH-RISK COI,

ATTEND ONLY

THOSE

TOPICS/SEGMENTS

DEEMED HIGH-RISK

AS A STUDENT

OBSERVE TOPIC

TO CUSTOMIZE

LESSON PLAN

COMPLETE

3 TEACH BACK

EVALUATIONS

(SAT)

NON HIGH-RISK

COMPLETE:

• CUIT/PHASE/UNIT

• PREPARATION AND

PRACTICE IN REMAINING

LESSON TOPICS

CONTINUE

REMAINING

COURSE

CERTIFICATION

REQUIREMENTS

COMPLETE

INSTRUCTOR

CERTIFICATIONS ON

ALL REMAINING

COURSE/PHASE/UNIT

LESSONS TOPICS (SAT)

HIGH-RISK

COMPLETE:

• CUIT/PHASE/UNIT

• PREPARATION AND

PRACTICE IN REMAINING

LESSON TOPICS

• MAINTAIN HIGH-RISK

CERTIFICATION

2 EVALUATION (PLATFORM) 1 TECHNICAL & 1 TECHNIQUE

1 EVALUATION ON A LAB/PERFORMANCE, IF APPLICABLE

• ON ONE LESSON TOPIC

• W/COURSE SUPERVISOR, SME OR MTS INSTRUCTOR

• NO WAIVERS GRANTED

INSTRUCTOR IS NOW A CERTIFIED INSTRUCTOR

COURSE

INDOCTRINATION

COURSE/PHASE/UNIT

INSTRUCTOR CERTIFIED

13 Enclosure (2)

DD Mmm YY

MEMORANDUM

From: Course Supervisor, (Course Title)

To: Commanding Officer, Center for Security Forces

Via: (1) Commanding Officer/Officer in Charge/Site Director, Learning Activity Name

(2) Director of Training (N7), Center for Security Forces

Subj: INSTRUCTOR CERTIFICATION PROCEDURE WAIVER REQUEST ICO

(RATE/RANK FIRST M. LAST)

1. Request specific portion of certification to be waived (time, topic(s), sit-in, practice teach, CIN).

2. Justification for waiver request and specific period of time for this request.

F. M. LAST

FIRST ENDORSEMENT

From: Commanding Officer/Officer in Charge/Site Director, Learning Activity Name

Via: (1) Director of Training (N7), Center for Security Forces

1. Recommended waiver is approved/disapproved.

2. Any additional comments are attached.

FIGURE 2-2. INSTRUCTOR WAIVER REQUEST

14 Enclosure (2)

SECOND ENDORSEMENT

From: Director of Training (N7), Center for Security Forces

1. Recommended waiver is approved/disapproved.

From: Commanding Officer, Center for Security Forces

To: Course Supervisor, (Course Title)

1. Waiver is approved/disapproved.

Copy to:

CO/OIC/SD, Learning Activity

CENSECFOR DOT, N7

15 Enclosure (2)

INSTRUCTOR CERTIFICATION RECORD (ICR)

NAME________________________________________ PRD_________________

DATE REPORTED

DATE COMPLETED

I/T SCHOOL

DATE CERTIFIED __________________ QUAL SME _______________

QUAL CRS SUP _______________ QUAL OFFICER _______________

CRS SHORT TITLE

__________________ CIN _______________

Topic SIT-IN Personalization Technical

Evaluation

Date Sign Date Sign Date Sign

Technique

Laboratory

Evaluation

Topic

Certification

Laboratory

Evaluation

Topic

Laboratory

Evaluation

Topic

Laboratory

Evaluation

Topic

16 Enclosure (2)

INSTRUCTOR CERTIFICATION RECORD CONTINUED

NAME ___________________

Laboratory

Evaluation

Topic

Laboratory

Evaluation

Topic

Laboratory

Evaluation

Topic

Laboratory

Evaluation

Topic

Laboratory

Evaluation

Topic

FIGURE 2-4. INSTRUCTOR EVALUATION / PLATFORM

18 Enclosure (2)

INSTRUCTOR EVALUATION – PLATFORM INSTRUCTOR

NAME RATE CIN

COURSE TOPIC

TITLE

DATE TYPE EVAL

Directions: Evaluate each line item on the checklist in one of the four categories provided. Evaluator shall stop training if safety is not being adhered to or breach of security.

1. PRE-CHECKLIST SAT NI UNSAT NA

a. Certification records current.

b. Lesson plan has been personalized/current.

c. Classroom and materials ready for training.

d. Instructor ready for training.

2. INTRODUCTION SAT NI UNSAT NA

a. Displayed course and topic title.

b. Introduced self.

c. Explained how materials fit into course.

d. Read and explained objectives to the students.

e. Stressed the importance of safety. (TTO/DOR procedures)

f. Motivated students to do their best.

g. Encouraged questions.

3. PRESENTATION SAT NI UNSAT NA

a. Technical

(1) Information accurate

(2) Instructor taught all discussion points

(3) Instructor explained material clearly

b. Technique SAT NI UNSAT NA

(1) Transitioned throughout topic effectively

(2) Changed material effectively

(3) Displayed enthusiasm

(4) Maintained a positive, professional attitude

(5) Used examples/analogies to stress material

(6) Used questioning techniques effectively

(7) Used training aids effectively

(8) Used communication skills effectively

(9) Maintained proper eye contact

(10) Used gestures effectively

(11) Avoided distracting mannerisms

4. INSTRUCTOR/STUDENT INTERACTION SAT NI UNSAT NA

a. Maintained proper instructor/student relationship

b. Encouraged student participation

c. Established and maintained student attention

d. Checked student comprehension

5. REVIEW AND SUMMARY SAT NI UNSAT NA

a. Summarized topic/objectives

b. Re-emphasized the importance of safety

c. Questions checked student understanding

d. Assignment given if applicable

19 Enclosure (2)

INSTRUCTOR EVALUATION - PLATFORM INSTRUCTOR (continued)

EVALUATOR’S ASSESSMENT SAT UNSAT

REMARKS COMPLETED BY THE EVALUATOR:

Strong Points

Areas Requiring Improvement

TITLE OF EVALUATOR

AND SIGNATURE

INSTRUCTOR IMPROVEMENT PLAN

I have been debriefed in this instructor evaluation. I understand the areas requiring improvement and will take the following action:

INSTRUCTOR SIGNATURE

CHAIN OF COMMAND ACKNOWLEDGE

COURSE SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE

CO/OIC/SD SIGNATURE

20 Enclosure (2)

INSTRUCTOR EVALUATION GUIDE – PLATFORM INSTRUCTOR

The Platform Evaluation is not meant to ensure perfection. However, the instructor is expected to display confidence, enthusiasm, expertise, effective communications skills, and the ability to hold the attention of the class.

Training shall cease and the evaluation will be automatically graded as UNSAT if any of the following events occur:

Safety is not thoroughly covered in any portion of the lesson; safety is not adhered to or is just ignored.

Information discussed by the instructor exceeds the classification of the course.

The instructor displays unprofessional traits or displays a poor attitude.

Information accuracy and entry-level techniques are minimum criteria for SAT evaluations.

1. PRE-CHECKLIST SAT NI UNSAT

a. Certification records current. Instructor’s evaluation history is complete and not lacking any necessary documents.

Instructor missing necessary documents.

(i.e. Quarterly)

b. Lesson plan has been personalized/current.

Notes/marks in instructor guide (IG). Most current CH or REV.

Few marks in instructor guide, or not most recent CH or REV.

No notes/marks made in instructor guide. Instructor guide not current.

c. Classroom and materials ready for training.

Everything needed for lesson was ready and classroom was well setup, clean, and free of distractions.

Materials or setup was lacking in some way, minor problems with cleanliness, or classroom has minor distractions.

Materials not ready or classroom not setup, major cleanliness problems, or major distractions in classroom

d. Instructor ready for training. Instructor uniform squared away, haircut, etc.

Minor flaws in uniform, haircut etc.

Major flaws with uniform, haircut etc.

2. INTRODUCTION SAT NI UNSAT

a. Displayed course and topic title. Course title and CIN displayed in room. Topic title displayed in front of room and stated.

Did not display course/CIN, did not display topic title or did not state topic.

Did not display course/CIN and topic not displayed and stated.

b. Introduced self. Displayed and stated rank and name.

Did not display or did not state name and rank.

Did not display or state name/rank.

c. Explained how materials fit into course.

Effectively tied lesson to previous/future topics (as applicable).

Weak explanation (as applicable). No explanation (as applicable).

d. Read and explained objectives to the students.

Stated and overviewed objectives, and introduced all training aids.

Did not state or overview objectives, or did not introduce training aids.

Did not state objectives, no overview of objectives, and did not introduce training aids.

e. Stressed the importance of safety.

(TTO/DOR procedures)

Safety emphasized, TTO/DOR procedures covered in depth (as applicable to topic)

Safety not emphasized, TTO/DOR procedures not covered. (as applicable to topic)

f. Motivated students to do their best. Instructor provided students with clear and attainable motivators.

Motivators were weak, unclear, unattainable, or not enough motivators.

No motivators provided.

g. Encouraged questions. Instructor encouraged students to ask questions.

Encouraged questions only once or twice.

Did not encourage questions.

3. PRESENTATION SAT NI UNSAT

a. Technical

(1) Information accurate. Taught accurate and complete information.

Minor inaccurate or deleted information.

Major problems with accuracy/completeness

(2) Instructor taught all discussion points. Followed lesson outline. Minor problems following outline.

Did not follow outline.

(3) Instructor explained material clearly. Information taught plainly, and questions answered adequately.

Some information unclear. Much information unclear.

21 Enclosure (2)

b. Technique SAT NI UNSAT

(1) Transitioned throughout topic effectively.

Topic flowed well from DP to

DP.

Minor choppiness/not-connecting DP smoothly.

Topic did not flow well from DP to

DP.

(2) Chained material effectively. Instructor tied topic into past or future topics.

Minor problems linking topic to past or future topics.

Did not link topic to past or future topics at all.

(3) Displayed enthusiasm. Dynamic, exciting, energetic delivery.

Delivery a little flat at times. Lifeless, not energetic in presentation.

(4) Maintained a positive, professional attitude.

Not negative toward service, command, or course.

Occasionally appeared to have negative attitude.

Negative towards service, command or course.

(5) Used examples/ analogies to stress material.

Explained material using common examples and analogies.

Examples/analogies unclear or hard to understand.

Did not use examples/analogies, or ones used took away from the lesson.

(6) Used questioning techniques effectively.

Used good oral questions and followed 5-step technique.

Minor problems with 5-steps (short pauses or scans no effect word variance, etc.) Repeatedly called on same students to answer questions.

Major flaws with 5-step. (no pauses or scans, no effect words, etc.)

(7) Used training aids effectively. IMM (slides, whiteboard, PowerPoint) use was smooth and flowed well.

Minor problems with IMM used

(weak transitions, mechanical use, and line of sight problems).

IMM use was very rough or distracting. View blocked by instructor. Read or had student read from presentation.

(8) Used communication skills effectively.

Good use of voice/verbal and non -verbal communication.

Minor slips in effectively conveying message.

Major problems with getting information across to students. (i.e.

machine-gun delivery)

(9) Maintained proper eye contact. When talking eyes were on students.

Minor instances of talking to floor, desks, overhead, IG, etc.

Major problems, loss of eye contact very frequent.

(10) Used gestures effectively. Gestures were meaningful; all space available was utilized.

Some gestures stiff inappropriate or meaningless. Weak use of classroom space.

No gestures or were stiff, awkward, meaningless. Paced or stayed in one spot for the duration of lesson.

(11) Avoided distracting mannerisms. Topic was free of distractions. Occasional minor distracting actions. (ex. overuse of phrase, repetitive movements or actions)

Frequent use of actions that were very distracting.

4. INTERACTION SAT NI UNSAT

a. Maintained proper instructor/student relationship.

Controlled class throughout. Minor lapses in control of class. Loss of class control.

b. Encouraged student participation.

Encouraged students to make comments, solicited input from class.

Response to students’ input not clearly positive.

Discouraged students’ input, or did not encourage.

c. Established and maintained student attention.

Students’ attention held throughout duration of topic.

Minor lapses in students’ attention.

Students clearly inattentive.

d. Checked student comprehension.

Monitored class for questions, ensured material understood.

Missed opportunities to check for class’ questions and grasp of material.

Did not ensure class understood material.

5. REVIEW AND SUMMARY SAT NI UNSAT

a. Summarized topic/objectives.

Briefly hit major points of lesson, recapped importance of lesson. (Re-motivation).

Weak recap of lesson material and its importance.

No recap or motivation given.

b. Re-emphasized the importance of safety.

Safety stressed again (as applicable to topic).

Weak emphasis on safety (as applicable to topic).

Did not stress safety (as applicable to topic).

c. Questions checked student understanding.

Oral questions adequate to ensure that class could recall material from lesson.

Questions too few or did not cover scope of lesson.

No review questions asked concerning lesson taught.

d. Assignment given if applicable.

Assignment was given and explained clearly to students (as applicable to topic)

Assignments just given, no explanation/guidance given to students

Failed to give assignment (as applicable to topic).

FIGURE 2-5. INSTRUCTOR EVALUATION / LABORATORY

22 Enclosure (2)

INSTRUCTOR EVALUATION – LABORATORY INSTRUCTOR

NAME RATE CIN

COURSE TOPIC

TITLE

DATE TYPE EVAL

Directions: Evaluate each line item on the checklist in one of the four categories provided. Evaluator shall stop training if safety is not being adhered to or breach of security.

1. PRE-CHECKLIST SAT NI UNSAT NA

a. Certification records/trainer operator qualification current.

b. Lesson plan or ECG has been personalized/current.

c. Laboratory and materials ready for training.

d. Instructor ready for training.

2. INSTRUCTOR SAT NI UNSAT NA

a. Explained the objectives at the beginning of session.

b. Reviewed safety (TTO/DOR)/sanitation procedures at the beginning of session.

c. Reviewed instructional material, including job sheets.

d. Related classroom instruction to lab performance.

e. Issued tools and materials expeditiously.

f. Emphasized safety in lab instruction/demonstration.

g. Monitored students for safety practices.

h. Assisted students as necessary.

i. Recognized individual student differences.

j. Provided related instruction, when needed.

k. Checked student progress and understanding.

l. Asked thought provoking questions.

3. STUDENTS SAT NI UNSAT NA

a. Understood the assignment.

b. Used instructional material provided, including job sheets.

c. Sought instructor assistance when needed.

d. Observed all safety/sanitation precautions.

e. Participated in exercise; asked questions.

4. FACILITIES SAT NI UNSAT NA

a. Lighting and ventilation were well controlled.

b. Equipment and tools were properly maintained.

c. Necessary safety precautions were posted.

d. Safety devices on equipment were in good condition.

23 Enclosure (2)

INSTRUCTOR EVALUATION – LABORATORY INSTRUCTOR (continued)

EVALUATOR’S ASSESSMENT SAT UNSAT

REMARKS COMPLETED BY THE EVALUATOR:

Strong Points

Areas Requiring Improvements

TITLE OF EVALUATOR

AND SIGNATURE

INSTRUCTOR IMPROVEMENT PLAN

I have been debriefed in this instructor evaluation. I understand the areas requiring improvement and will take the following action:

INSTRUCTOR SIGNATURE

CHAIN OF COMMAND ACKNOWLEDGE

COURSE SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE

CO/OIC/SD SIGNATURE

24 Enclosure (2)

LABORATORY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATION GUIDE

The Laboratory Evaluation is not meant to ensure perfection. However, the instructor is expected to display confidence, enthusiasm, expertise, effective communications skills, and the ability to hold the attention of the class. Training shall cease and the evaluation will be automatically graded as UNSAT if any of the following events occur.

Safety is not thoroughly covered in any portion of the lesson; safety is not adhered to or is just ignored.

Information discussed by the instructor exceeds the classification of the course.

The instructor displays unprofessional traits, or displays a poor attitude.

Information accuracy and entry-level techniques are minimum criteria for SAT evaluations.

1. PRE-CHECKLIST SAT NI UNSAT

a. Certification records/trainer operator qualifications current.

Instructor’s evaluation and trainer operator history is complete and not lacking any necessary documents.

Instructor missing necessary documents. (ex. Quarterly trainer operator card)

b. Lesson plan/ECG has been personalized/current.

Notes/marks in lesson plan. Most current CH or REV. ECG’s are current.

Few marks/notes in lesson plan.

ECG’s lacking data or safety

No notes/marks made in lesson plan.

Lesson plan/ECG is not current.

c. Laboratory and materials ready for training.

Up-to date and safety is denoted clearly. Everything needed for lesson was ready and laboratory was well setup, clean, and free of distractions.

Not clearly denoted. Materials or setup was lacking in some way, Minor problems with cleanliness, or laboratory has minor distractions.

Not up-to date or lacking safety issues.

Materials not ready or laboratory not setup, major cleanliness problems, or major distractions in laboratory.

d. Instructor ready for training. Instructor uniform squared away, haircut, etc.

Minor flaws in uniform, haircut etc. Major flaws with uniform, haircut etc.

2. INSTRUCTOR SAT NI UNSAT

a. Explained the objectives at the beginning of session.

Objectives fully explained and students understand expectations.

Objectives not explained well, students had questions regarding expectations.

Objectives not explained and expectations not addressed.

b. Reviewed safety (TTO/DOR) /sanitation procedures at the beginning of session.

Safety (TTO/DOR)/sanitation procedures highly emphasized prior to lab commencement.

Safety (TTO/DOR)/sanitation procedures not fully emphasized prior to lab commencement.

No safety (TTO/DOR)/sanitation procedures were given prior to lab commencement.

c. Reviewed instructional material, including job sheets.

Explained the use of all materials and job sheets available.

Weak explanation of all materials and job sheets available.

No explanation of any material available.

d. Related classroom instruction to lab performance.

Helped students tie together classroom knowledge with hands on skills.

Questions were asked to stimulate student thinking.

Many opportunities missed to relate classroom knowledge to laboratory.

Did not relate any classroom knowledge to laboratory.

e. Issued tools and materials expeditiously.

All tools and materials were issued as quickly as possible.

Tools and materials were slow to be issued or not at proper time.

Tools and materials were not issued at all.

f. Emphasized safety in lab instruction/demonstration.

Instructor emphasized safety at each key point during instruction/demonstration.

Weak emphasis was placed on safety during instruction/demonstration.

Safety was not emphasized at all during instruction/demonstration.

g. Monitored students for safety practices.

Monitored all students for proper safety precautions.

Monitoring of safety precautions was not sufficient or not all students were monitored.

Monitoring of safety precautions was completely ignored or insufficient.

h. Assisted students as necessary. Proper level of assistance was given to students when necessary.

Assistance given was not at some points when needed.

Assistance to students was not given at any point when needed.

i. Recognized individual student differences.

Instructor gave out assistance IAW student background and proper level of experience.

Instructor did not give much thought to student’s background or experience prior to offering assistance.

No thought was given to student background or experience when assistance was given.

j. Provided related instruction, when needed.

Instructor provided added instruction when needed.

Added instruction was weak when given.

No added instruction was given when needed.

k. Checked student progress and understanding.

Instructor checked student progression and understanding at appropriate intervals.

Student progression and understanding was not sufficiently checked.

Student progression and understanding was not checked at all.

l. Asked thought provoking questions.

Questions were asked to stimulate student thinking.

Questions were inadequate or not related to exercise.

No thought provoking questions were asked.

FIGURE 2-5. INSTRUCTOR EVALUATION / PLATFORM

25 Enclosure (2)

3. STUDENTS SAT NI UNSAT

a. Understood the assignment. Assignment was easily understood by all students.

Some portions of assignment was unclear or hard to understand.

Much of assignment was difficult to understand.

b. Used instructional material provided, including job sheets.

Students properly utilized all materials and job sheets available.

Some students did not utilize all materials or job sheets available.

Students did not use materials or job sheets available.

c. Sought instructor assistance when needed.

Students were comfortable with seeking out instructor assistance when needed.

At times assistance was not sought out when obviously needed.

No students sought out instructor assistance at any time.

d. Observed all safety/sanitation precautions.

Students followed every safety/sanitation precaution applicable.

Some safety/sanitation precautions were not carefully followed.

Students disregarded all applicable safety/sanitation precautions.

e. Participated in exercise; asked questions.

All students were actively involved in exercise, and asked questions as necessary.

Some students did not actively participate in exercise, or did not ask questions as necessary.

Students did not participate in exercise, nor did they ask questions.

4. FACILITIES SAT NI UNSAT

a. Lighting and ventilation were well controlled.

Sufficient lightning and ventilation were maintained

Lighting or ventilation at times were not well controlled during labs.

Lighting or ventilation was not sufficient for the environment.

b. Equipment and tools were properly maintain ed.

All equipment and tools were in good working condition and easy to use.

Some equipment or tools were hard to operate or not in best working condition.

Equipment and tools were in poor condition and extremely hard to operate.

c. Necessary safety precautions were posted.

All safety precautions applicable were posted around lab and easily visible.

Some applicable safety precautions were not posted are not very visible.

No safety precautions were posted in lab anywhere.

d. Safety devices on equipment were in good condition.

All safety devices on equipment are in good working order.

Safety devices on equipment were in poor condition or did not work.

FIGURE 2-6. CUIT MEMORANDUM

26 Enclosure (2)

DD Mmm YY

MEMORANDUM

From: Course Supervisor, (Course Title)

To: Commanding Officer/Officer in Charge/Site Director, Learning Activity Name

Via: Executive Officer/Assistant Officer in Charge/ Assistant

Site Director, Learning Activity Name

Subj: CORE UNIQUE INSTRUCTOR TRAINING (CUIT) FOR XXXX

(A-XXXX, Revision–X) DATED XXXXX

1. The following instructors have completed the differences/ updates to the XXXXX CUIT, and have demonstrated proficiency.

Rank Last Name

Mr. Last

Ms. Last

Copy to:

Individual ITJ

CCMM

FIGURE 2-7. INSTRUCTOR TRAINING JACKET FORMAT

27 Enclosure (2)

INSTRUCTOR TRAINING RECORD FORMAT

SIDE ONE

- Instructor Data Record (NO PII)

- Commanding Officer/Medical/ Psychological Screening for

Military (High-Risk) via NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13)

- Vendor evaluation letter(s) for medical suitability screening, NCIC background, drug, urinalysis screening and psychological evaluation

- Statement of Understanding (Physical Fitness)

- Navy Instructor Training Course (NEC 805A), or equivalent (per contractor PWS)

- Small Arms Marksmanship Instructor Course (NEC 717B), or equivalent (per contractor PWS) if required

- Crew Served Weapons Instructor Course (NEC 718B), or equivalent (per contractor PWS) if required

- Qualification to Possess Firearms or Ammunition (DD 2760)

(signed annually for firearms courses) if required

- Copy of licenses or certifications (i.e., Explosive Driver's

License, Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR), First Aid, Emergency Medical Technician (EMT)) as applicable

- 2nd Class Swim, Lifeguard as applicable

- Instructor Indoctrination checklist (NETC 1500/3)

SIDE TWO

- Instructor Evaluation Record (Course Supervisor Review)

- Instructor Evaluations

- Initial practice and certification evaluations

SIDE THREE

Core Unique Instructor Training (CUIT) for each course the instructor is assigned.

SIDE FOUR

In-Service Training

Safety Training (Enterprise Safety Application Management System

(ESAMS) roster printouts may…