Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Carlos R. Herrera
University of Phoenix
Part of the blame for the terrorist attacks our nation suffered during September 11, 2001,
rested on the perceived inability of the intelligence community to analyze the collected
intelligence to alert government officials of the threat. One of the agencies responsible for
reporting such intelligence is the United States Air Force (USAF), and the training they provide
to both enlisted and officers servicemen. The purpose of this paper is to describe the process
used to evaluate the results of a needs assessment of the USAF officers training course 14NX,
conducted by the Air Education and Training Command (AETC), at Goodfellow AFB, San
Angelo, Texas.
Program Description
The USAF Intelligence Officer's Need Assessment was prepared as a systematic approach
to identifying and recommending areas for improvement of intelligence officer's skills. These
skills taught in the USAF Intelligence Officer Course 14NX served as the basis for the training
these officers receive throughout their careers. During the development of the assessment, the
evaluators prepared a series of questions for the Intelligence Officers to determine how
successful was the training in the professional development of the officers, and their primary
The USAF Intelligence Officers Need Assessment and the evaluation of the results were
prepared to evaluate the training received by Intelligence Officers and to provide data for further
evaluation of the training programs and officers professional development. After the 9/11
attacks, public opinion, and that of officials in Congress perceived that there was a deficiency in
THE EVALUATION PROCESS 3
the way the collected intelligence was analyzed and processed. The resulting assessment was
developed as a request by the USAF to be part of a comprehensive effort to examine what are the
The purpose of the of the evaluation was to graphically present the findings of the USAF
officers a series of questions on their impression of the course in improving their skills and of the
contribution of the course learning objectives towards that goal. The assessment questions were
divided into three areas that exemplify officers grade and the intelligence professionals and
includes; Integrity, Managerial, and Trade or work skills. The officers Career Field Education
and Training Plan (CFETP), served as the primary document for the development of the
assessment. The CFETP provides Career Field Managers (CFM), training managers, supervisors,
and the officers with the guidance and learning objectives to monitor officer's learning
progression (USAF, 2013). In addition to the CFETP, the evaluators also examined the Course
Lesson Plans and other course control documents including, presentations, tests, quizzes and
other training materials. The purpose was to examine all of the documents used to provide the
the evaluation, the evaluators ensure that process remains true to the customer requirements and
goals.
To evaluate the results of the needs assessment the evaluation team collected data using
interviews and surveys from intelligence officers at various locations in the continental United
THE EVALUATION PROCESS 4
States, as well as at overseas locations. The evaluators chose to interview officers in different
grades, as these attended the Intelligence Course in the last seven years. One of the sampled units
included the 71st Intelligence Squadron (IS), from Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Dayton
Ohio. The evaluators administered the survey to 25 officers in the grades of First Lieutenant to
Major. Before starting the evaluation, the evaluation team met with Colonel James F. Stafford
the Wing Commander for the 71st IS, to present the group and to discuss the purpose of the
assessment. When finished the evaluation, the team met with the 71st Training Managers, and
with their assistance, they coordinated the schedule details for the evaluation. To keep
disruptions to the daily operations to a minimum, the evaluators were assigned to one of three
work shifts to administer the survey and to collect the data. Once collected, the data was
documented using the format requested by the USAF, of a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet, and a
Microsoft Word document which became the summary of the findings, both documents
Once collected the evaluators used the 29 questions and learning objectives and assigned a
value of one or zero to distinguish between a yes and a no answer. The Officers were asked to
evaluate if the training received helped them in achieving the provided training objectives and
goals. Once gathered, the data was transferred to the spreadsheet, providing an immediate
feedback of how many students answered each particular question, the average of a yes response
and the overall average of a response that leads to indicate that there is a need for additional
reinforcement or training. The findings were presented to the requesting agency, the Air
Education and Training Command (AETC). The report to AETC stressed that the sample of 25
THE EVALUATION PROCESS 5
officers assessment and evaluation, although it showed a deficiency in training in those officers
evaluated, should not be used as an indicator of similar deficiencies of the entire workforce.
Results/Findings
The results of the evaluation showed that the students responded to having a poor
understanding of the intelligence tradecraft. Of those responding only 12% of the students (three
students) out of 25 who completed the survey said that the course learning objectives were clear.
They agree that the course was successful in providing them with the knowledge they needed to
become better Intelligence Analysts and Officers. A low score was also observed in areas such as
improvement of analytical skills, and a sense that the course did little to improve their
productivity. Table 1, highlights the findings of the evaluation process in the areas of Quality of
Tradecraft (Skills).
The Needs Assessment document along with the evaluation findings and the associated
evaluation documents form part of a group of studies that AETC requested to evaluate the
Conclusion
The Needs Assessment Evaluation served as a tool to present AETC with the results of the
assessment. During the evaluation 25 Intelligence officers from the 71 Intelligence Squadron at
Wright-Patterson Ohio, answered a to a series of statements based on the goals and learning
objectives of the Intelligence Course 14NX. These were divided into three broad areas that
included Managerial, Officers Integrity, and Professional Skills. Once the data was transferred to
a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet, the evaluators observed that overall, the students had a poor
understanding of the intelligence tradecraft as well as those areas related to analytical skills and a
lack of confidence that taking the course did little to improve their overall productivity as
Intelligence Officers.
THE EVALUATION PROCESS 7
Reference
USAF. (2013). AFSC 14NX: Intelligence officer. Retrieved from http://static.e-
publishing.af.mil/production/1/af_a2/publication/cfetp14nx/cfetp14nx.pdf