|
28.11.2006
Effective simulation training
By Todd Brown
If you think about it, you might be surprised by how many
instances of simulation training your agency uses on a daily
basis. Role-playing exercises, force on force marking
cartridge scenarios, multimedia use-of-force simulators and
live fire shoot houses are just a few examples. For example,
the target that your agency uses for firearms qualification
is shaped and scored in a manner that simulates the human
body. Simulation is a theme that is prevalent in all of our
training sessions. Some might argue that all training is
simulation in one form or another. However, most law
enforcement instructors, and as a result, most officers, do
not reap the greatest benefit from their simulation
exercises.
Most training programs are structured so that the simulation
exercise results in a “test and evaluation” of the trainee’s
skill level. A prime example of this type of training is
firearms qualification. During a firearms qualification,
instructors test and evaluate the trainee’s ability to meet
a minimum standard when shooting at a silhouette of a human
being. While this is necessary to document proficiency with
a firearm, this exercise does absolutely nothing to teach
the trainee how to quickly acquire a target and accurately
hit it. In other words, no learning has taken place by the
trainee.
By taking the same exercise and viewing it from another
perspective, that of “teaching and learning,” the exercise
takes on a whole new meaning. For example, what if each
qualification included a brief video showing the trainee
their sight picture/sight alignment, stance and trigger
press as they shot? Might the trainee leave the
qualification having learned what they can do to improve
their ability to shoot? The answer, obviously, is yes.
Unfortunately, due to a variety of constraints, most
instructors feel that they don’t have time to add to an
established training curriculum. The solution is simply to
change the mindset from “test and evaluate” to “teach and
learn.” By switching to the latter, an instructor can make
learning the primary goal of any training exercise. Test and
evaluation then becomes a by-product of the learning that
takes place.
No matter what the simulation environment, i.e.,
force-on-force, multimedia simulators, driving simulators,
etc., there are several components necessary to ensure that
the training exercise is conducive to learning.
Three Tenets of Effective Training
First and foremost, there must be a clearly defined training
objective. What is it that you, as an instructor, hope the
students will learn by participating in this exercise? The
exercise itself must be easily recreated to allow the
student to go through the exercise repeatedly if necessary.
The exercise must also remain consistent, regardless of who
participates in the exercise.
In the case of multimedia simulators, recreating training
exercises is fairly easy; each student will see the scenario
run exactly as it ran for the student before them.
Obviously, in role-playing exercises, this requires a
complete understanding of roles and responsibilities for
each participant. However, even in the multimedia
environment, both the instructor operating the simulator and
the trainee must understand what is required of them. The
key lesson is that without consistency, there is no way to
reliably reach the training objective.
Second, accurate performance feedback must be given to the
trainee by a qualified instruction staff that has the
necessary communication and evaluation tools. It is up to
instructors to ensure that they have these tools to
effectively evaluate and communicate to the students.
Different students require different learning methods; but
almost every expert will agree that the process of learning
is in large part relating the new to the old.
In addition, the evaluation and communication process must
clearly and accurately explain the student’s deficiencies.
It must also provide for the most common learning elements
among adults - audio and visual feedback. Examples include
videos of officers as they go through training, an audio
recording, pictures and common multimedia applications such
as PowerPoint.
Simply telling a student what they did wrong is not enough
and will quickly be forgotten. Instructors must show
trainees and most importantly, allow them to apply any given
corrections in the same or similar scenarios. By
demonstrating the applied corrections, trainees allow the
instructor - and themselves - to see that the corrective
measures were, in fact, valid.
Without the opportunity to apply corrective measures,
trainees will not have learned of their potential benefits
and therefore have no reason to attempt to utilize these
measures in the future.
For instance, after a multimedia simulation session during
which the suspect on screen shoots at the officer, the
officer may be given direction by the instructor to make
better use of available cover and to verbalize better. By
running the scenario again, the officer can apply these
corrective measures. A sharp instructor will then “branch”
the scenario down a different path where the suspect does
not shoot. The officer, then, has learned that by making
better use of cover and verbalization skills, the scenario
can be altered to a much more desirable outcome.
The third component to learning requires that feedback come
from a variety of sources. While trainees might be inclined
to accept feedback from an expert/instructor or even their
peers, independent third-party verification is even more
powerful. A good example of this type of objective feedback
is a videotape recording of the officer’s actions. In
addition, video replay is one of the best ways to have any
officer evaluate their own performance.
An example of an effective video replay technique is to
treat the videotape of the officer’s training as real
footage that was shot by a tourist. Inform the officer that
this videotape will be playing on the evening news and in
the courtroom. It represents the primary means by which most
people will judge his actions. Then review the tape with the
officer.
This technique is usually a very sobering exercise for all
officers. Interestingly enough, it seems to have the
greatest impact on the service officer with between 5 and 15
years of service. A possible reason is that this officer
grouping may have had an opportunity to develop bad habits
they are unaware of.
Some simulation systems, such as the Range 3000 XP4, by IES
Interactive Training, allow for a picture-in-picture
playback of the scenario and the trainee in real time. This
allows the officer, under the guidance of the instructor, to
compare his recollection of his actions relative to how and
when they actually occurred as the scenario progressed.
Post-Incident Training
In addition to feedback on performance, trainees must be
able to clearly articulate in their own words, according to
law, policy and procedure, why they performed the way they
did during the training scenario. If they are unable to
provide this articulation in training, an instructor cannot
expect them to be able to do it in a real-life incident.
After any real-life incident, the officer will likely be
required to articulate his actions and their compliance with
law, policy and procedure in a written report. Depending on
the incident, this report may be in addition to interviews
with investigators, lawyers and a multitude of other
interested parties. The ability to articulate is not an
innate skill in most officers. Proof of this fact lies in
the amount of time and effort spent teaching officers to
write reports correctly. Therefore, simulation training
provides a perfect opportunity for officers to learn and
practice the art of articulation.
A common articulation-training technique used by hundreds of
instructors from all over the world is the “open-ended
questioning” method.
First, the trainee is encouraged to articulate the
circumstances of his or her actions in their own words.
Stated another way, an instructor should ask open-ended
questions of the officer such as, “can you tell me what
happened?” or “what was going through your mind as the
scenario played?” Open-ended questions force the trainee to
describe - in their own words - the elements of the
scenario, their actions and how the totality of the
circumstances led the officer to take the action that they
took.
Conversely, leading questions such as, “why did you shoot?”
will likely elicit an answer the student believes the
instructor wants to hear - “because he had a gun” - and does
not address the total picture. This is where other
multimedia devices that show the student relevant
documentation can be extremely beneficial.
Examples include a PowerPoint presentation showing
department policy in these circumstances, documents of case
law pertaining to the particular situation and if available,
video of the actual incident the scenario mimics, crime
scene photos, reports, court documents, etc. Concrete
examples allow the student to learn how things like case law
apply to different situations, and will frame the student’s
actions in light of current court rulings regarding similar
situations.
Failure Can Equal Success
Finally, simulation training must contain two components
that are missing from most training programs: the ability to
fail and the ability to succeed.
The ability to fail implies training must be challenging
enough to reduce the possibility the trainee might get lucky
and guess the correct behavior. Additionally, the instructor
has a difficult job in convincing students (who, by the
nature of their jobs, are expected to always win), that
failure is not only allowed, but is desirable under
simulation conditions. Trainees and instructors need to know
that training is a constant learning environment where past
actions are improved through repetition and drill. If the
student completes training scenarios perfectly, it is likely
because the instructor failed to detect problem areas and
has lost a golden opportunity to correct any deficiency.
The ability to succeed implies that each scenario should
allow the student to repeat the training as many times as
necessary until the correct behavior - articulated by the
instructor - has been applied. Again, repetition is the only
likely way in which trainees will develop confidence in
newly learned skills. Instructors also should avoid
presenting non-winnable scenarios as they wrongly condition
students into believing they are powerless to affect
outcomes—we have all seen examples of where this defeatist
mindset has resulted in injury and even death to law
enforcement officers.
Final Thoughts
As instructors, the benefits to changing our mindset from
testing and evaluation to teaching and learning in
simulation training far outweigh the minimal effort
required. In addition to a more knowledgeable officer, one
of the greatest benefits is the ability to document the fact
that training AND learning took place. This type of
documentation can be a powerful ally in any legal setting
for every officer concerned.
In order to change the instructor mindset, the training
environment must contain the appropriate tools for the
instructor and the student. Video, multimedia presentations,
pictures, and relevant documents outlining case law and
policy are just a few examples of these tools. However,
these tools are useless unless the student that receives the
training is sure that failure in simulated environments is
not only acceptable, but will result in learning and
becoming a better officer. Students must also be able to
apply any corrective behavior to an acceptable level and see
that this will result in a better outcome.
Remember the old saying, “I hear I forget, I see I remember,
I do I learn?” This is true for all law enforcement
officers.
Do all that you can to foster an environment of learning in
your simulation exercises. It is this environment that will
reduce agency and officer liability. And at the end of the
day it will result in the officer going home, the public
remaining safe, and the bad guy going to jail without out
anyone visiting the hospital—or the morgue.
About the Author
Todd Brown has more than ten years of experience in
training federal, state and municipal law enforcement
agencies on judgmental use of force in simulated
environments as well as in live fire environments. Brown has
also trained agencies in Thailand, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and
several agencies in Europe. He holds instructor ratings for
various use of force applications such as Baton, Firearm,
Chemical Agents, Taser, etc. Brown is a member of the
National Tactical Officers Association, the International
Association of Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors, the
American Society of Law Enforcement Trainers, as well as on
the technical advisory board of the Force Science Research
Center. Brown is the Chief Trainer for IES Interactive
Training, manufacturers of the Range 3000 XP4 Judgmental Use
of Force Simulator.
Source: Policeone.com
|
