- Staff
- #1
Brief description of idea:
Change the way scoring on observation reports works.
As a patrol trainer, I’m having to constantly message people who gave less than a 5 for skills with observation reports without mentioning why they gave less than a 5.
As it stands, you’re supposed to give max scores unless the officer does that skill wrong.
Which means, officers are being given top scores for skills not demonstrated through an observation report.
I believe officers should at least be given “average” scores as opposed to “Excellent” for undemonstrated skills.
Sure, this would bring the officers marks down to 3, but it allows for more accurate portrayal of an officer in terms of observation reports given. It also gives far less confusion to new corporals.
What benefits would this idea have for the department:
- More realistic ideas on how an officer performs
- Makes a lot more sense
- No more having to tell people off for giving “average” to an average performance as opposed to giving “excellent” or “above average“ for standard performances
What potential negatives could this have for the department:
- Less officers getting promoted (which wouldn’t be an issue if we changed the guidelines to “average” being the default score.
Other additions:
n/a.
Change the way scoring on observation reports works.
As a patrol trainer, I’m having to constantly message people who gave less than a 5 for skills with observation reports without mentioning why they gave less than a 5.
As it stands, you’re supposed to give max scores unless the officer does that skill wrong.
Which means, officers are being given top scores for skills not demonstrated through an observation report.
I believe officers should at least be given “average” scores as opposed to “Excellent” for undemonstrated skills.
Sure, this would bring the officers marks down to 3, but it allows for more accurate portrayal of an officer in terms of observation reports given. It also gives far less confusion to new corporals.
What benefits would this idea have for the department:
- More realistic ideas on how an officer performs
- Makes a lot more sense
- No more having to tell people off for giving “average” to an average performance as opposed to giving “excellent” or “above average“ for standard performances
What potential negatives could this have for the department:
- Less officers getting promoted (which wouldn’t be an issue if we changed the guidelines to “average” being the default score.
Other additions:
n/a.
