Training development in support of the operational domain



Download 1.39 Mb.
Page21/36
Date18.10.2016
Size1.39 Mb.
1   ...   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   ...   36

8-5. QC


Proponents perform QC functions before submitting a product to ATSC. Table C-6 provides a QC review checklist designed to manage and document control measures, identify areas to improve, and facilitate timely delivery of STPs.

Chapter 9
Managing Unit Training Products




9-1. Introduction

a. The purpose of this chapter is to present management guidance for the production of operational domain training and education products. This chapter supports and amplifies the regulatory guidance found in TR 350-70.


b. CAC serves as the TRADOC functional proponent for Army training and education development. This includes functional proponency for Army training and education: regulations and guidance, QC of products, standardization of products, and development of functional requirements for automation.
c. CAC-T, CTD executes the role of the CAC responsible agent for Army training and education through the performance of the following:
(1) Serves as the Army’s collective and individual task and educational products manager.
(2) Develops unit training management strategy and integrates associated doctrine, tactics, techniques, and procedures into training and education products.
(3) Coordinates with institutions and proponents to develop policy and guidance.

(4) Establishes review boards in coordination with institutions and proponents. Review boards develop, recommend, revise, approve, and achieve consensus on training and education products that are used across multiple units, proponents, or CoEs. Review boards establish and maintain standardized learning products that support commanders, facilitators, and trainers in planning, preparing, executing, assessing, and evaluating training. The end-state of all review boards is to enable TRADOC to provide current and relevant training and education products for Soldiers in the operating force, resulting in fully prepared Soldiers for DECISIVE ACTION. Common components and actions of all review boards include:


(a) Members of the review boards nominate task issues for consideration prior to each review board.
(b) CTD coordinates with review board members to clarify submissions or to reach early resolution on issues.
(c) Review boards forward recommendations to the appropriate approval authority. After final approval, the approved automated systems are updated immediately to reflect updates or revisions to the learning products.
(d) Review boards address training and education products that must be used, as approved by the responsible proponent.
(e) Review boards convene in a variety of venues based on membership, purpose, end-state, and resources. Document management system collaboration sites, video teleconference, and face-to-face venues are all viable options for conducting the business of a review board.
(f) Examples of review boards are described in table 9-1.


Table 9-1. Review boards

1. Board: Army METL Review Board (AMRB)

Responsibility: Decisive action METLs
Note: Unit readiness is reported based on DECISIVE ACTION METL

Frequency: Semiannually

Purpose: Synchronize HQDA-approved standardized DECISIVE ACTION METLs with:
a. Strategic environments as defined by the Army Training & Leader Development Guidance (ATLDG) and ARFORGEN.
b. TOE designed missions (mission profiles) of selected Army units.
c. Changes in doctrine.
d. Regulations governing task design.
e. Establish and maintain standardized DECISIVE ACTION METLs.

Approval Authority: CAC is the HQDA Executive Agent for DECISIVE ACTION METL.

2. Board: SCTL Review Board.

Responsibility: SCTL.

Frequency: Semiannually.

Purpose: Establish and maintain a standardized SCTL for training of collective tasks and crew drills.

Approval Authority: Deputy Commanding General, Combined Arms Center-Training (DCG, CAC-T) will review and approve recommendations by the SCTL Review Board. Commanding General, CAC retains final authority over the task list.



9-2. Use of collective tasks

a. Proponent guidance.


(1) A proponent can only revise or develop collective tasks (CATS, WTSPs, collective tasks, drills) for which they are responsible. Training development proponency and responsibilities are found in TR 350-70. The development or revision of non-proponent tasks must be coordinated with and approved by the responsible proponent in order to be incorporated into any training product.
(2) If another proponent requests a change be made to a task, the responsible proponent may elect to make the change or may leverage the efforts of the requesting proponent. Responsible proponents are encouraged to use the efforts of other proponents to achieve consensual improvement of their tasks. A base task developed or revised by another proponent must be provided to the responsible proponent, given the responsible proponent base task ID number, and approved by the responsible proponent before being incorporated into another proponent’s training product. If the task is contained within the SCTL, the shared collective task change must be concurred with by the SCTL Review Board and approved by Deputy Commanding General, CAC-T, CTD.
(3) It is the proponent’s responsibility to utilize the CAC-approved automated development system to develop and/or deliver a mission and/or collective task analysis.

b. CAC-T review of collective tasks. All new collective tasks must be reviewed for compliance with policy and this pamphlet by CAC-T, CTD before being displayed on the CAC-approved automated development system or DTMS.





Download 1.39 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   ...   36




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2020
send message

    Main page