Introduction
In the ever-evolving landscape of police education, it is crucial for policing professionals, academics, and aspiring officers to gain a deeper understanding of the current and emergent trends.
This year, I had the privilege of meeting Tom at the Policing Education Conference at Liverpool John Moores University and he graciously agreed to contribute a blog post for UWE Bristol. Tom is a lecturer in Policing at Derby University and in this blog shares a personal perspective on his own educational and professional journey which offers a valuable reflection on the past, present, and future of police education.
As we navigate the shifting landscape of the Police Constable Entry Routes and new ‘optimisation curriculum’ it is imperative to consider the significance of continuous learning and how education can empower police officers to make a meaningful difference in their communities.
Tom’s blog provides a thought-provoking insight and valuable lessons for both those entering the profession and experienced officers seeking to enhance their skills and knowledge through the ‘Top Up’ degree at UWE Bristol (featured in a recent blog). It is a testament to the importance of building bridges between academia and the real world of policing, creating a network of professionals dedicated to advancing the field through education and innovation.
Over to Tom…
Tom’s reflections
I’m honoured to have been asked to complete this guest contribution to the UWE Policing Blog, after chatting with several of the excellent lecturers there. I’ve written quite a bit on both PoliceProfessional and PolicingInsight around my thoughts of the Police Entry Qualifications Framework (PEQF) aka the degree entry routes into policing. I wanted on here to do something different, and to share my own journey with those entering or undertaking the current entry routes, with my reflections. Like any good reflection, I will be framing this around a recognised model, and my personal favourite is Rolfe et al.’s (2001) model, both for its simplicity and requirement to look forward.
What?
I joined the police in 2008 (with a pre-existing degree in History) under an IPLDP+ scheme, during which I undertook the majority of my training at my force headquarters, but attended a local further education (FE) college once or twice a week in uniform but with no PPE or radio etc. There we would learn the more theoretical side of policing such a criminology, while we learned the legislation and policy aspects at force training school. Looking back, the learning delivered by the professional educators was by-and-large far more engaging than that delivered by training school; where the legislation was simply learnt by wrote. I even vividly remember (in the very early days of social media!) making comment about the boring training school aspect on Facebook, and receiving suitable words of advice from the training school sergeant…
After the initial six months classroom-based (force and college) learning, we would regularly return every three months or so for a week’s additional input from the college. During these weeks we were set essay and presentation assignments to write in our own time (no protected study leave at all). We also had a SOLAP to complete (FOC’s in today’s terms), where we had to write all the reports ourselves. No doubt this method of learning sounds very familiar to those of you reading this! That is a key reason why I am particularly vocal about maintaining the current routes, as they don’t represent a radical departure from some of the old ones!
I ‘graduated’ training with a Foundation Degree in Policing (at level 5, equivalent to finishing two years of university); with an option to pay for a further year’s study at our own expense, to complete a full degree in Criminology and Policing. (I didn’t take this up as I had a degree already and didn’t have the money to pay.)
So What?
At the time of my initial learning (I specifically don’t use the term training, as the FE college input took it beyond that into education / learning) and for long after, I simply couldn’t see the value or purpose of the FE input at all. I spent five years on response, where indeed the need for that wider knowledge around criminology and crime prevention was very limited. This was even more true at that time at the height of target-driven policing based around arrests and detections – at most it may have helped me classify some D&D’s as Section 5’s to gain a bonus detection.
It was when I applied for a job on neighbourhoods that some of my previous learning came from the dark recesses at the back of my head. Vague rumblings about a triangle for problem analysis, stemming from a problem-solving model with a girls name – yes, you guessed it, SARA and PAT! I dug out my old lecture notes (yes, I’d kept them in my loft, I know…) and brushed up on various aspects of criminology and crime prevention that might be useful for neighbourhood policing. I beat a field of several candidates at interview to land the job, and it was here, using my regained knowledge of criminology and specifically problem-solving, that I can honestly reflect on and state confidently, was where I had the most impact on society during my career. I didn’t just rush to jobs and put sticking plasters on situations as I had on response. I actually not only identified, but solved problems that were causing real issues to my local community.
My two most notable examples are using brand new powers (for 2014) under the Antisocial Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 to issue Community Protection Notices to a local Urban Street Gang who were continually loitering on one street creating misery for the residents, and thereafter never seeing them again. Secondly, using the same pioneering powers, combined with obscure sections of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and crucially partnership working powers with Trading Standards, to execute warrants and seize and ultimately destroy tens of thousands of pounds worth of so-called ‘legal highs’ or new psychoactive substances; several years before they were made illegal. This latter operation saw me gain attention from police forces nationwide, and had the College of Policing’s ‘What Works’ centre or Going Equipped journal existed at this time, would have been written up on there. Neither of these I believe would have been possible without use of SARA and PAT, and the associated learning around multi-agency working I had undertaken at college.
Now What?
For various reasons I left the police in October 2020 as a sergeant on response. I loved the role, having responsibility for supervising other officers and making decisions. The part I loved the most however was developing those on my team – arranging training, attachments, and supporting applications for other departments for where they could make best use of their talents. I would also regularly take the various team members out with me on patrol, hosting informal one-to-one’s and also sharing some of my policing knowledge and experience. I even supervised three of the country’s first PCDA officers so learnt well the demands that operational and educational expectations place on them.
I ultimately realised that I preferred this part of the job to the actual policing part, whilst simultaneously recognising – through personal, local and national reasons – that policing was not in a healthy place. I wanted to be a part of that change. I therefore took a job up as a lecturer delivering the PEQF to new recruits. It was only a few weeks into the role that I realised that had I been taught half as much as new PEQF recruits were getting, I could have been an infinitely more effective officer. Ideas such as ‘vulnerability’ were only just being introduced into operational policing and I’d certainly never had any training on it. I had never heard of Adverse Childhood Experiences; I wasn’t aware of things such as cognitive biases and heuristics; I knew how to do a stop and search but not the impact the tactic has on various communities; and so on and so forth. What other departments did was largely a mystery to me and I certainly didn’t have opportunity to go on attachments to them.
I was initially sceptical of the PEQF, especially as an operational supervisor, but the more I have come to know about it and be involved in it, the more I passionately believe in it and advocate it from the mountain-tops. Are the current routes absolutely right? Of course not. Is going back to a pre-degree requirement a good move? Absolutely not. I’ve recently done two research studies with PCDA students and the general public that demonstrate that. And, as outlined, what does that even mean anyway – I’d rather have had a recognisable degree than a Foundation Degree, that even I don’t really understand what it means.
Editorial Team
Paul Williamson (Joint Programme Leader & Senior Lecturer); Claudia McCready (Lecturer); Eve Middleton (Tripartite Assessor – Policing); Eve Smietanko (Joint Programme Leader & Senior Lecturer); Ian Lowe (Senior Lecturer) & Micah Hassell (Senior Lecturer).
If you would like to contribute as a guest blogger, please contact paul.williamson@uwe.ac.uk
