Army's MI School faces TRADOC accreditation.
The genesis of this initiative was the 2001 Army Training and Leader Development Panel (ATLDP), which recognized the need for accrediting TRADOC's training institutions, both at the AC Proponent Schools and at their affiliated RC The Army School System (TASS) battalions. In October 2001, General John N. Abrams, then Commanding General (CG) of TRADOC, ordered the creation of a TRADOC Quality Assurance Office (QAO) to oversee the new mission.
TRADOC built the accreditation process around 24 standards that focus on conduct of training, training support, and proponent functions.
* The conduct of training standards assess ten elements including actual training, instructor-to-student ratios, visitors' folders, student files, instructor certification, course materials, etc.
* The training support category includes six elements that focus on areas such as personnel management, staffing, facilities, instructor development, and test control.
* The eight Proponent functions standards are for AC training institutions only, not RC TASS battalions; their focus includes resource forecasting, quality assurance, AC and RC course development, integration of lessons learned, and compliance with command training guidance.
The 111th Military Intelligence Brigade, its subordinate battalions, and the school's staff sections are currently working on a self-assessment for these 24 standards that will identify shortfalls and guide the accreditation visit.
The TRADOC accreditation team will include members not only from TRADOC headquarters but also from the U.S. Army Accessions Command (AAC), U.S. Army Combined Arms Center (CAC), U.S. Army Sergeants Major Academy (SMA), and other TRADOC schools. In addition to traditional training areas and issues, the team will review safety, infrastructure, facilities, personnel, and logistics across the installation that can affect training in the MI schoolhouse.
During the accreditation visit, the team members will spread out across the school visiting training sessions, conducting student and instructor focus groups, interviewing leaders, and reviewing documents. During the document review, it will be critical to our success that knowledgeable staff and cadre are present and on-site to assist the accreditors as they check student files, instructor folders, and test control items.
Before departing, the TRADOC accreditation team will outbrief the USAIC&FH senior leadership on its initial impressions and findings. Subsequently, they will send a comprehensive draft report to USAIC&FH for review. TRADOC will then prepare a final report and assign the appropriate level of accreditation.
There are four possible levels of accreditation:
* Level 1, Candidate for Accreditation, means that the school has failed to achieve even 60 percent of the standards.
* Level 2, Conditional Candidate for Accreditation, means the school meets 60 to 79 percent of the standards.
* Level 3, Full Accreditation, means the school achieved 80 to 99 percent of the standards.
* Level 4, Institute of Excellence, means the Proponent School achieved 100 percent of the standards. No TRADOC school has yet achieved Level 4.
John Craig (Colonel, U.S. Army, Retired) is currently a Department of the Army civilian assigned as a Training Specialist-Evaluator to the USAIC&FH Quality Assurance Office. Prior to his retirement in May 2001, Mr. Craig was USAIC&FH's Assistant Chief of Staff and the senior Army Reserve officer at the MI School. Readers may contact the author via E-mail at email@example.com and telephonically at (520) 538-7461 or DSN 879-7461.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Title Annotation:||U.S. Army Intelligence Center and Fort Huachuca; U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command|
|Author:||Craig, John J.|
|Publication:||Military Intelligence Professional Bulletin|
|Date:||Oct 1, 2004|
|Previous Article:||Measuring anti-U.S. sentiment and conducting media analysis in the Republic of Korea (ROK).|
|Next Article:||USAIC&FH observations, insights, and lessons learned (OIL) process.|