Valuing streetcraft

A craft is a form of demonstrable dexterity and skill, requiring a sound knowledge base combined with ongoing experience in its practical application. Policing is a craft, meaning it is about knowledge and know-how and this is no better illustrated through how police driving and driver training has operated for over 75 years.

The Roadcraft system of car control was introduced at Hendon in 1937, reducing the police accident rate by 70 per cent (Fleming, 1970). The Roadcraft manual content was blended with intensive hands-on learning for standard and advanced driving, with Motorcycle Roadcaft also appearing in 1965. Just as Roadcraft has helped achieve a practical blend of theory and practice, policing has the same need in more generalised streetcraft.

Over the years, police training has changed to reflect the latest thinking on how to best equip the police professional to perform their duties. In short, over the years, police training has changed from instruction and drill in military type surroundings to facilitated discussion.

Let us look at the story so far, which is still unfolding, as what was the new graduate entry Police Educational Qualification Framework (PEQF) was revisited in 2022, with now four access routes into professional policing. The most recent route, a Level 5, non-accredited programme, adds to a multi-tier system.

How we got to where we are now

Let us pick the story up just after the war when the National Police College was established at Ryton-on-Dunsmore and the Metropolitan Police Training School at Hendon.

A committee of chief constables decided on training and the Central Chief Constables Conference in 1954 announced probationary training would be delivered by Grade 1 instructors (inspectors) and Grade 2 (sergeants), introducing the notion of a tutor constable for ‘instruction on the beat’, beyond the classroom, for the first time.

Home Office reviews of 1961 and 1962 kept arrangements more or less the same, with the role of District Training Centres 1961 (Critchley, 1967). The Police College moved from Ryton on Dunsmore to Bramshill in Hampshire in 1960, ironically only to move back again in 2019, where the Central Planning Unit first opened in 1969 before its transfer to Harrogate.

The Home Office published guidance about probationary training in 1963, mandating the need for probationers to undertake 72 hours of guided study between the courses held at the District Police Training Centres. The Royal Commission and Police Act 1964 reinforced the role of chief constables but also drove further standardisation, initiating the Police Scientific Development and Police Research and Planning Branches, while also redrawing police force boundaries.

Training and pay

Training thinking focused at the time on initial induction, then local and district continuation, which aligned with national decisions over new pay structures.

The Home office guidance from 1962 encouraged seven methods of teaching: lectures and talks followed by questions; lessons using visual aids; discussions chaired by the instructor; demonstration with debrief; and practice where students were encouraged to learn by doing; exercise involved testing of knowledge or applied practice ad finally examination (Home office, 1952). Such arrangements from the 1960s continued into the 1970s (such as self-defence for 18 periods of one hour).

In 1971, a new systems approach was discussed, somewhat influenced by the Royal Navy, training to objectives. There was now a ten-week initial phase then a consolidation and local procedures phase, after workplace experience (Rowntree, 1974). Professor D. Wall, an educational psychologist from the London Institute of Education, helped influence training that mixed theory with practice into a vocational focus upon the job role being equipped (Mager, 1962; Romiszowski, 1970).

Professor Michael Banton of the University of Bristol’s Sociology Department gave advice on content focus around human nature and communication, for which an interest continued into the 1980s, instilling a sociological context of policing for new recruits and their instructors (Schaffer, 1980; Scollan, 1982). There was a careful attention though given to the necessary vocational nature of the content and approach, being guarded against become too theoretical.

Davies and Scarman

The Edmund Davies review of 1978 saw police pay increase by 48 per cent as well as police numbers. Lord Scarman’s report about the Brixton Riots of 1981 pushed police training into a new era of accountability, and the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) of 1984 replaced Judges’ Rules. Training balanced theory and practice with a student-centred educational philosophy (Tong and Hallenberg, 2018).

Events in the 1980s pushed a greater integration around accountability into the curriculum (Reiner, 2000). In particular, Scarman (1981) raised concerns about constables going out on patrol after only ten week’s initial training, and recommended ongoing career-long development concerning social skills within community policing, emphasising learning on the job.

Central Planning Unit

A further review in 1987 was led by Jack English of the Central Planning Unit, and Professor John Elliott, and in due course Jack English was replaced with Leslie Poole to embed person centered learning as a form of cultural change (Warner, 1991). Part of the influence came from Carl Rogers’ writings on experiential learning and plans became reality in a new approach from July 1989.

This new modular approach initial local training was followed by ten weeks at a district training centre. Then came a phase with a tutor for ten, followed by local consolidation and post foundation courses through the probationary period. The tutor phase was particularly important, focusing upon 39 tasks, amongst 36 skills and abilities in the curriculum, again influenced by Professor John Elliot’s focus on job role.

NPT to CENTREX

Peter Ryan became the first Director of National Police Training (NPT existed until 2002 when replaced by the Central Police Training and Development Authority known as CENTREX) but by 1994 was commissioning a new review into training, involving Dr Peter Bramley of Birkbeck College London, fuelled by concerns that a lack of knowledge had grown amidst the sociological priority.

This latest review tended to take a knowledge content focus, contrasted with the previous emphasis 1987 review upon skills via experiential learning.

More change was afoot. The Police Act of 1996 set new performance targets, following the Police Reform White Paper of 1993. The police training Module 4 of the day was abandoned as reports that debriefing learning faced cultural level problems whilst the  MacPherson Report (1999), HMIC’s Training Matters (2002) and the BBC’s Secret Policeman documentary (2003) all created compounded pressure for urgent change (Constable and Smith, 2015; Tong and Hallenberg, 2018).

National Policing Improvement Agency

The Police and Justice Bill (1996) created the National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) and this in turn was replaced by CENTREX, which assumed responsibility for the training of the Probationer Training Programme until 2006.

I worry we are not equipping officers with the requisite skills to perform their duties, more providing a comfort blanket for leaders

The then HM Inspector of Constabulary Robin Field-Smith argued there must be a “shift from training as an input on a short-term basis with an accent on knowledge and legal compliance and as a periodic input so that police officers get a dose of training now and again, the shift is now to a profession in which continuous professional development and learning as an investment rather than training as a cost” (2002: 43).

IPLDP

The Initial Police Learning and Development Programme (IPLDP) came next (until 2020), driven by the then Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary, comprising a 26-week four phase structure of induction, community placement, supervised, then independent, patrol. Curriculum design for IPLDP, and then the PEQF, wrestled with how to achieve a balance of theory and practice and how life-long learning and continual professional development could be embedded.

In 2009, an NVQ in Policing ceased to exist and a new qualification of Diploma in Policing was introduced, reducing 22 National Occupational Standards into 10 units for assessment. Flanagan (2008) and then Neyroud (2011) argued for the importance of a new professional qualification framework which influenced the replacement of vocational training with higher-level degree pathways (Hunter et al., 2019).

University entrance

The Police Educational Qualification Framework (PEQF) established a graduate route began via three pathways either as a graduate (pre join or conversion) or by enrolling upon a degree apprenticeship. This meant in practice all new police constables would attain a minimum qualification at level 6 whilst superintendents a level 7, with similar requirements for police staff.

These changes to accentuate the importance of knowledge mirrored what was happening in the US and Australia at the time, and aligned professional policing more alongside nursing, teaching and social work (Simmell-Binning and Towers, 2017). It was hoped that skills such as critical thinking and analysis would emerge from the 3,600 hours university exposure (Brown, 2018) while still balancing phronesis (practical wisdom).

The right skills to police?

The College of Policing argued that the PEQF would, by 2025, equip the profession with a workforce with the right skills and experience to meet the challenging requirements of contemporary professional policing (CoP, 2019; Brown, 2021).

So, a few months short of that target, Police Professional interviewed David Bamber, the Police Federation of England and Wales’ national lead on learning and development, to ask how well life-long learning and continual professional development is embedded and if police professionals are now equipped with the streetcraft they need.

PP: How well do you think the service equips its professionals to perform their duties?

David Bamber: “There are inconsistencies in both what and how policing equips its workforce. There are some good examples of where elements of the service receive training to an exceptional level, where the knowledge, skills and behaviours that are required are recognised, embedded and understood, by the practitioners, those equipping them with the skills and more importantly by the organisation more broadly and those managing the learners. You can see this in specialist functionality such as firearms, search and some specialist crime investigations. In more generalist functions, it’s done less well.

There’s a tension between equipping the workforce and valuing the investment. We regularly hear the phrase that training and development is an ‘abstraction’ from duties, meaning it’s seen as someone is not deployable, rather than time invested for knowledge and understanding to be effective in their role.

If the service invested in its first responders more effectively, then failure demand would decrease. Getting it right at the first point of contact is vital, prevent rather than cure. I believe the PEQF was an attempt to do this, but its lack of acceptance by the service and the subsequent lack of consistency, has led us to a confusing variety of initial learning methods and standards.

We often see training delivered as a reaction to an incident and following specific failings, often delivered online as a one size fits all without specific context, and without testing the learning. I worry we are not equipping officers with the requisite skills to perform their duties, more providing a comfort blanket for leaders.”

PP: Is the balance right between theory and practice?

David Bamber: “It’s important that any theory or knowledge identified as a requirement also develops understanding, otherwise it’s of little benefit. Too many times officers have been held to account for actions based on the service stating that ‘we told you this so you should have known’. That’s not how learning works, just because you told somebody something, or made then do an e learning package or sent them a link to authorised professional practice products, doesn’t mean that they understood it and could implement any of it. The way the service manages knowledge provision seems rooted in administrative accountability and ‘told you so’, rather than ensuring that professional practice is consistently and effectively delivered to a high standard.

Encouraging officers to think more laterally is important, but policing decisions often need to be made instantaneously, so there must still be a place for lineal thinking. The challenge is differentiating between the need for greater consideration compared to the need for direct decisions and actions. We have a lot of young in-service officers, some tutoring others, meaning many initial recruits are tutored by officers who have not had any training to do so, with a similar pattern within some specialist roles, because of a lack of trained coaches and experience.”

PP: To what extent do you think policing is a learning organisation with embedded continual professional development?

David Bamber: “I struggle to see policing as a learning organisation as training is too often regarded simply as an abstraction, there are many times when training days are cancelled. This sends the message that the development and continuing learning of the workforce, or even the maintenance of skills and abilities, is not valued.

How many times over the years have we heard following a flawed investigation or identified failing, a critical review says ‘lessons have been learned’, yet those flaws and failings further are repeated. Some of the training seems a cynical ploy to devolve the responsibility to the ranks to say ‘we’ve told you so it’s down to you now’: that’s more about blame than learning.

For example, there are similar themes over 43 years from Lord Scarman’s report in 1981 to Dame Angiolini’s inquiry in 2024 and in numerous reports in between, so what has the organisation truly learned during those intervening years?

As another example, consider the debate around the PEQF; look at the criticism it received.

It was originally designed as a whole career development framework, with accredited learning and CPD across all ranks right up to chief constables. This was soon watered down and the emphasis placed on those joining and not those already in the police service. Private providers and academic institutions have then filled a gap left by the service by offering training and development opportunities. Yet these come at a cost to the individuals who are upskilling themselves for the benefit of public service, but going outside of the police service to gain that development and understanding, as the organisation itself isn’t always facilitating learning to enhance the capabilities required to deliver its key functions.”

PP: What changes would you like to see in the future?

David Bamber: “I’d like to see a change in the mindset so that professional policing development is consistently valued, facilitated and rewarded. That means investment in the workforce to equip people with the correct knowledge, skills and abilities to achieve not just the aims of the service, but, more importantly, to address the needs of the end user, the public.”

Dr John Coxhead SFHEA, FRSA is Professor of Community Safety at Loughborough University and Visiting Professor of Policing, University of Staffordshire.