textfiles/law/nov_3.law

Utilizing Job Task Analysis

By THOMAS J. JURKANIN, Ph.D.
Illinois Local Governmental Law Enforcement
Officers Training Board
Champaign, IL

November 1989

The relevance and quality of training curricula in the field of
law enforcement has been significantly enhanced in recent years. 
The major contributing factor to this success is that law
enforcement trainers now employ more sophisticated procedures and
processes to develop various curricula.  This work has been
largely accomplished through an empirical research method of
validation known as job task analysis.

This article provides an historical and conceptual overview of
job task analysis, or the analytical process of determining the
duties and activities of a job performed by the incumbent, and
how it is used to develop curricula and testing instruments in
the field of law enforcement.  Specifically, the article focuses
on how the State of Illinois employed job task analysis to the
police patrol position.

An Historical Perspective

The need for job task analysis studies in the field of law
enforcement arose as a result of Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC) standards. With the advent of EEOC standards,
law enforcement employers were placed under pressure to validate
the process by which they select and train employees. 

Police officer standards and training (POST) commissions, one of
which is located within the structure of each respective State
government, are responsible for establishing minimum levels of
training applicable to local law enforcement officers.  If an
officer does not meet the criterion of training established by
the POST commission, then that officer is ineligible to practice
as a police officer within the given State.  Serving in this
capacity, POST commissions have assumed the role of an employer. 
As a State regulatory agency, the POST commission must abide by
State and Federal EEOC standards, while seeking to ensure that
only competent recruits are certified as law enforcement
officers.

However, with the advent of EEOC standards, it became necessary
for POST commissions to prove that their minimum training
requirements are non<6F>discriminatory; that the recruit basic
curriculum used to train and certify officers is valid and job-
related; and that the testing procedures designed to evaluate a
recruit's level of knowledge and skill during and following the
recruit basic training course are reliable and valid instruments
of measurement.

Defining Content Validity

The validation process consists of determining whether a
particular standard measures the quality it is designed to
measure.  The EEOC Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection
Procedures indicate that the first step in the validation process
is conducting a job analysis to define the job domain; that is,
the tasks which constitute the job and the knowledge, skills and
abilities which an individual must possess to perform the job
effectively.(1)  Once the critical tasks, knowledge, skills, and
abilities are identified for a particular job, educators and
trainers have an empirical base from which to develop job-related
curricula and testing instruments.

EEOC guidelines on employee testing procedures specify that one
of the following types of validation procedures must be used
empirically for purposes of meeting Federal Government
standards:  criterion referenced validity, construct validity, or
content validity.  In developing training curricula and testing
instruments, the POST commissions have most often opted for the
demonstration of content validity.  Content validation is the
best approach for developing statewide training and examination
standards.(2)  EEOC guidelines define content validity as: "A
demonstration that the content of a selection and training
procedure is representative of important aspects of performance
on the job."(3)  

In establishing content validity in training and testing, the
definition of a direct link between tasks performed on the job
and curriculum and testing items is critical.  In the case of
Kirkland v. Department of Correctional Services, the judge
emphasized this point in discussing the method by which
examinations should be validated.  He stated that:

"The cornerstone in the construction of a content<6E>valid
examination (and curriculum) is the job analysis.  Without such
an analysis to single out the critical knowledge, skills and
abilities required by the job, their importance relative to each
other, and the level of proficiency demanded as to each
attribute, a test (curriculum) constructor is aiming in the dark
and can only hope to achieve job relatedness by blind luck.(4)''

In attempting to demonstrate content validity and job
relatedness in curriculum and test development projects in the
field of law enforcement, a variety of methodologies have been
employed.  However, the three validation studies completed by the
POST commissions in California, Michigan and Illinois were all
similar in purpose and design.   All were conducted for the
purpose of developing a content valid recruit basic training
curriculum.  Each employed a job task inventory checklist
approach for purposes of identifying the job information and job
knowledge critical to the law enforcement occupation.  Each
study also used the obtained job information as a data base in
the development of the curriculum.(5)

The Illinois Study

Because of the close similarities between the three validation
research projects mentioned above, only the most recent research,
the Illinois study, will be discussed in detail.  The Illinois
study utilized much of the job task information that was
identified in the California and Michigan studies, but expanded
that information by adding a number of job task statements.  An
additional reason for closely examining the Illinois study is
the fact that the Illinois POST commission has now instituted a
comprehensive written examination that must be successfully
completed by all newly hired police officers as a condition to
receiving their certification to practice within the State. 
This written examination was validated through the Job Task
Inventory Checklist approach and provides a reliable assessment
of an officer's level of attained job knowledge and skill.

The Job Task Inventory approach to curriculum and test
development allows relevant job information to be obtained for a
listing of job tasks.  The researcher develops a list of tasks
that are performed on the job by practicing police officers.  In
Illinois, these job tasks were either taken from task analysis
listings that were previously developed in other States
pertaining to the law enforcement function or were generated by
a representative panel of practicing police practitioners.  In
excess of 600 such tasks were identified.

A job task was defined in the Illinois study as "a meaningful
unit of work activity that can be readily observed and measured,
as generally performed on the job by one worker within some
limited period of time."(6)  Examples of such task statements
identified include:

Conduct a field search of an arrested person
Arrest persons without a warrant
Issue traffic citations
Stop vehicle to arrest, cite, or warn occupants
Testify before grand juries

Once identified, the job task statements associated with the
policing function were then collected from two sources.  First, a
random sample of 2,451 police patrol officers were asked, via the
questionnaire, to review each of the job tasks listed within the
questionnaire and to rate the frequency with which they performed
each specific job task.  In addition, a random sample of 685
police supervisors was performed, via the questionnaire, to rate
the job tasks in terms of how critical the consequences of
inadequate performance would be.

The objective of assessing the performance frequency and the
consequences of inadequate performance for each task was to
identify those tasks that had statewide significance as being
relevant to the job domain of policing.  A statistical decision
rule was developed based on the mean score of the rating for
consequences of inadequate performance and performance frequency
for each individual job task.  In this manner, all of the job
tasks a police officer must be able to perform were identified. 
In the Illinois study, a total of 317 job tasks were identified
as being relevant to the policing function.  Many of these had
been previously identified in both the California and Michigan
studies, a finding that indicates the tasks associated with the
job of policing are fairly consistent from State to State.

After identifying relevant job tasks, a number of worker
requirements were generated for each task.  Worker requirements
are those observable behaviors that must be performed to
accomplish a given job task.  For example, in considering those
behaviors that must be performed to "arrest a person without a
warrant," the following worker requirements would apply:

Establish probable cause that the crime was committed and the
suspect committed the crime as indicated by physical evidence,
witness statements, and/or personal observations.

Determine whether appropriate to arrest without a warrant by
considering type of crime and time factor involved (e.g., 
availability of suspect, time elapsed from commission of crime).

Arrest person by advising person that he/she is under arrest and
taking person into physical custody.

Worker requirements are essential in identifying the knowledge,
skills, and abilities relevant to the performance of the task and
are effective in enumerating very specific behaviors which must
be mastered in order to perform the specific job task.  In the
curriculum development process, worker requirements serve as a
direct link between the job task statement and the student
performance objectives.  In the Illinois study, panels of
practicing police officers were convened to write the worker
requirements for each of the job task statements.

Having identified the worker requirements for each of the job
task statements, the final step in the curriculum development
process was translating worker requirements into
training/learning objectives.  This translation process limits
the amount of conjecture concerning what should and should not be
included in the curriculum and does not allow curriculum
developers to speculate or generalize regarding appropriate
training content. Training/learning objectives were specified to
the greatest possible degree by employing a process whereby 1)
job tasks were identified; 2) a list of relevant worker
requirements was generated for each job task; and 3) each worker
requirement was translated into a training objective.

The Illinois study organized all of the learning objectives into
29 separate training groups and developed a recruit basic
training curriculum.  With a job<6F>related curriculum in place,
Illinois wished to develop an examination instrument to assess
the degree to which individual students had achieved the
identified training objectives and to assess the police
officer's attained level of job knowledge and skill.

The State of Minnesota was the first to require that police
officers demonstrate a minimum level of acquired knowledge and
skill related to the policing function as a condition to their
licensure within the State.  This requirement was incorporated as
part of legislation pertaining to the licensure of police
officers, which was passed by the Minnesota General Assembly in
1977.  Since that time, Illinois and Texas have been the only
two additional States to require police officers to complete a
State licensure examination.

The process of developing the licensure examination in Illinois
was simplified by the fact that Illinois had completed a job task
analysis in developing a content valid recruit basic training
curriculum.  A complete listing of learning objectives had been
derived based upon the data obtained via the job task analysis. 
Those learning objectives specified the knowledge and skills that
were relevant to the individual tasks of the policing function. 
In analyzing the content of the learning objectives, examination
items were developed to assess the extent to which the student
had attained each specific objective.  By writing such
examination items, the Illinois project developed a 200<30>item
multiple choice written licensure examination that could be
proven to be job related and content valid.

The learning objectives, as well as the examination items, are
written to assess the ability to recall facts, to translate this
information, and the ability to apply the information.  These
learning objectives directly correlate to Bloom's Taxonomy of
Educational Objectives by their use of one of the three verbs
"define," "identify," or "recognize." (7) These terms, or verbs,
as employed in the Illinois project have specific and
differential meaning as given below:

Define

Given a term, select the correct meaning
Given a meaning, select the correct term
Given a term, select antonyms and synonyms
Given a term, select definitional elements of the term

Identify

Given a procedure or process, select the best means of
accomplishment

Recognize

Given a hypothetical fact situation, select the best descriptor

Given a hypothetical fact situation, select the best procedure
or process to effect resolution

Conclusion

It is apparent that law enforcement trainers are indeed
employing the most sophisticated methods and processes available
in the development of training curricula and testing instruments. 
The result of this effort is that police recruits are exposed to
a curriculum that is truly "on target" in terms of preparing them
for their careers.  As such, police recruits, once graduating
from the academy and becoming certified by the POST commission,
are prepared to "work the streets."  They are not the product of
"ivory tower" teachings.  Rather, they have been exposed to a
curriculum that is assuredly job relevant.

Footnotes
1.  EEOC Guidelines on Employment Testing Procedures.  Title 29
Code of Federal Regulations, Section 1607.1 et seq. Washington,
D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, July 31, 1970.  And, Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission, Testing and Selecting
Employee Guidelines, Department of Justice, Commerce
Clearinghouse, Inc., August 25, 1978, Section 4010.05, pp. 2223-2--2223-4.

2.  Illinois Local Governmental Law Enforcement Officer's
Training Board, Illinois Basic Police Training Validation
Project, vol. 1, Administrative Documentation, (Springfield, IL.: 
State of Illinois, 1981).

3.  Supra note 3.

4.  Kirkland v. Department of Correctional Services, 7 FEP 694
(1974).

5.  California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and
Training, California Entry<72>level Law Enforcement Job Analysis,
Technical Report 1, (Sacramento, CA:  State of California, 1979);
the Michigan Law Enforcement Officer's Training Council, 1979;
Supra note 3.

6.  Supra note 3, at p. 14.

7.  B.S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives:   Handbook,
Cognitive Domain, (New York:  David MacKay Co., Inc., 1956).