Training development in support of the operational domain


-3. QC of collective training products



Download 1.39 Mb.
Page22/36
Date18.10.2016
Size1.39 Mb.
1   ...   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   ...   36

9-3. QC of collective training products

a. All new collective training products will be reviewed by CAC-T, CTD for standardization and completeness in the CAC-approved automated development system. Collective training development proponents will ensure new collective products are routed to CTD during the staffing process prior to the approval authority.


b. CAC-T, CTD will QC all revised collective training products by reviewing a sample percentage of collective training products with an updated change history to ensure standardization and completeness in the CAC-approved automated development system.
c. CAC-T, CTD will review the collective training products and provide recommended changes and corrections, as necessary, to the responsible proponent.
d. The collective training development proponent will adjudicate recommended changes, complete required corrections in the CAC-approved automated development system, and notify CAC-T, CTD of the results.
e. CAC-T, CTD coordinates with TRADOC G-3/5/7, Generating Force Training Directorate (GFTD), TRADOC Capabilities Manager – Distributed Learning, training development proponents, and ATSC for the requirements of the CAC-approved automated development system. This system must provide all training development proponents with one collective training development data source. It must also incorporate business practices and capability improvements that enhance the efficient and standardized development of collective training products.
f. CAC-T, CTD provides QC of all proponent-developed collective training products by ensuring enforcement of policy, proponency, and the development of standardized Army training

9-4. Collective training product management

a. Managing collective training products. Collective training product management involves each proponent monitoring triggering circumstances that affect their products, and responding to the following events (see figure 9-1 for the process):


Figure 9-1. Managing collective training products


(1) Monitoring collective training product triggering circumstances.
(2) Assessing the impact of the circumstances.
(3) Applying modifications to the collective training product, as applicable.
b. Monitoring collective training products.
(1) Monitor commander/field user feedback.

(2) Monitor CTC feedback.


(3) Monitor laws and DA directives impacting training.
(4) Monitor DA and ACOM-directed training requirements.
(5) Monitor training resourcing.
(6) Monitor doctrine changes.
(7) Monitor improvements and/or constraints in the training environment.
(8) Monitor leader development and leader tasks.
(9) Monitor organizational TOE and proponent TDA changes.
(10) Monitor equipment (materiel) development or modifications.
(11) Monitor feedback from the CALL.
(12) Monitor changes in related training products, for instance, collective tasks of other proponents, DA Pam 350-38, TADSS, and WTSPs.
(13) Monitor changes in other proponents' combined arms doctrine or tasks.
c. Assessing the impact of triggering circumstances.
(1) Determine if and how collective training products are affected.
(2) Determine if the triggering event warrants modifications or updates of the collective training products, or the development of a new collective training product.
d. Applying/revising collective training products.
(1) Identify, apply, and review the applicable change(s) to the collective training product(s).
(2) Determine the impact of the change(s) on all related collective training products.
(3) Update the collective task analysis, if applicable (see chapter 5).
(4) Obtain the respective commandant’s approval of the changed product(s).
(5) Revise the collective training product(s).

9-5. Proponent guidance for individual task management

a. Only the proponents designated through TP 350-70-16 may revise, develop, or combine the tasks for which they are responsible. Proponents:


(1) Identify and manage all individual tasks for which they are the designated proponent.
(2) Ensure the accuracy of all task performance specifications and supporting products.
(a) Monitor changes in doctrine and equipment to identify the impact of changes on the task.
(b) Revise the task(s) and supporting products that require minor modifications in conditions or performance steps.
Example: A change in the order of performance steps; rewording. This does not require a change in task number or title.
(c) Eliminate the task(s) and supporting products that are no longer valid or that have major changes in the action performed, the conditions of performance, or the standard of performance.

Examples: The introduction of a new task step, or an addition to or subtraction from the standard criteria. This does not require a change in task number or task title.
Supersede the obsolete task(s) and products with revised task(s) and supporting products.
Note: An addition or deletion of a critical task necessitates the approval of a revised critical task list.
Rescind the obsolete task(s) and products that are not being replaced.
Archive the superseded and rescinded task(s) (number and title) and products for 5 years.
(d) Inform users of changes in a task or supporting product.
(e) Prior to deleting, determine what other operational domain learning products (individual or collective tasks, CATS, WTSPs) reference the obsolete task.
(f) Remove obsolete products and send the identified replacement product (if any) to other users and proponents.

b. Other proponents must submit requests for change and modifications of individual task(s) to the responsible proponent designated through TP 350-70-16. The task must have an appropriate designated proponent ID task number and receive proponent approval prior to incorporation into the responsible proponent’s learning product. If another proponent requests development of a new task, the responsible proponent may elect to develop the new task or may leverage the efforts of the requesting proponent. Responsible proponents must work with requesting proponents to achieve consensual improvement/development of their tasks.


c. Proponents must conduct an administrative review of their individual critical task list (ICTL) every 2–3 years or as directed.



Download 1.39 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   ...   36




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

    Main page