COURSE REPORT, INTELLIGENCE PROCESS COURSE NO. 2-77, 15 NOVEMBER - 17 DECEMBER 1976

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80-00503A000100050001-5
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 5
• Document Creation Date: November 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 10, 2000
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: December 29, 1976
• Content Type: MF

Approved For Relse 2000/04/19: CIA-RDP80-00503A00Q1 0050001-5
DEC !976
MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Training
Acting Chief, Intelligence Training Branch
Intelligence Institute
SUBJECT Course Report, Intelligence Process Course
No. 2-77, 15 November - 17 December 1976
The five-week, full-time Intelligence Process Course (IPC)
concluded on 17 December with few disruptions to. the Course
schedule despite the major reorganization of the Directorate
of Intelligence that was taking place during the weeks that
the Course was held. The Course objectives (Attachment 1)
were well met in the opinion of the Course managers. Student
reaction to the varied activities was searching and generally
positive. The class attitude throughout the Course was
extraordinarily good. who
assisted in running the Course on a part-time basis, have
read this report and concur in it.
1. Student Participation
Student interest and enthusiasm remained at a high
level for all five weeks of the Course. The students main-
tained a good record of being "on time" for presentations
and were especially prompt for field trips. Our guest
speakers commented a number of times on the quality of the
questions they were asked, and questions came from all
members of the class.
too high expectations.
Th
h
h
d
k
f
f
h
C
25X1A
roug
e goo
wor
o
t
o
t
e
areer
T
i
i
P
d
f
h
Offi
f S
i
ra
n
rogram an
o
ng
t
e
ce o
ecur
ty,
25X1A
The 15 Career Trainees (Attachment 2) that were
in this class of 21 were exceptionally searching in their
questions. As a group, they sought to gain a maximum of
information and knowledge about the intelligence process and
the Intelligence Community. In consequence, they were
critical of those sessions that fell short of their perhaps
we were able to have all students participate in all field
Approved For Release 2000/0@9 E -fF 3A000100050001-5
 Approved For Release 2000/0WI-P
kRP1 10H 0 03A00 00050001-5
SUBJECT: Course Report, Intelligence Process Course No. 2-77,
15 November - 17 December 1976
trips except that to the White House Situation Room. This
enabled the IPC to avoid what had been a significant morale
factor during the last session of the Course. The arrangements
enabled the entire class to enter non-Agency facilities on
the strength of their Agency badges
All administrative parties concerned in setting up
this special access believed that it would be best to wait
until the new administration is in office before approaching
the Secret Service about the possibility of a similar routine
for the White House Situation Room visit.
Five of the Career Trainees slated to do interims
in the National Photographic Interpretation Center and the
Office of Imagery Analysis were out of the class during the
third week because it was the only time they could receive
photo interpretation training for their interim assignments.
These five thus missed the writing exercises. The staff
believes, however, that being absent that week minimally
affected their substantive understanding of the intelligence
process.
2. Student Evaluation (Attachment 3)
On a scale of 1 to 7, with 7 being "highly
satisfactory," the students gave the IPC an average ranking
of 5.3 for having achieved its stated objectives. The CTs
as a group once again ranked the Course slightly lower than
the non-CTs. In this class, the average rating of the
15 CTs was 5.3, with individual ratings covering the scale
from 4 to 6.5. This compared with an average of 5.4 for the
other class members whose ratings clustered nearer their
average. We believe the higher rating of the non-CTs reflects
an appreciation of the Course based on their broader, more
informed intelligence background.
3. Student Observations and Suggestions
Comments on Course content followed previous
patterns. Criticism and praise of presentations and exercises
tended to cancel each other, reflecting different student
interests, experiences, and expectations.
Approved For Release 2000/04/19 CIA-RDP80m0P503A000100050001-5
 Approved For Relggse 2000/04/19: CIA-RDP80-00503A00@0050001-5
SUBJECT: Course Report, Intelligence Process Course No. 2-77,
15 November - 17 December 1976
Because they sought perhaps too much from the
Course, some of the Career Trainees came down particularly
hard on areas that disappointed them. The military briefers,
especially at the Defense Intelligence School, were seen by
many as a necessary evil at best. It continues to be a sad
fact of life that too many military briefers talk about how
they are organized to do business instead of about what they
actually do and how they do it.
The writing and briefing exercises continue to
frustrate a number of the students. Some of this no doubt
reflects a bridling at the artificial constraints of exercises,
as well as the fact that they are exercises and not "real
work," which the students show a keen interest in getting on
to. Most of the students, however, expressed a belief that
exercises were worth retaining.
A few of the students were more sensitive than
usual to the classroom critiques that follow the briefing
exercise. Others noted that they gained a good deal from
such public proceedings. There was a general feeling,
however, that the briefing exercise and critique session
should be tightened up.
The students reacted well to the short writing
exercise in which they write a summary to a piece of finished
intelligence, but they were fairly negative toward the
longer "Staff Note" exercise. We have tried a number of
variations on the longer writing exercise during the five
sessions of the IPC to date and have encountered some difficulty
each time. We intend to rethink this exercise.
Several of the Career Trainees questioned the
wisdom of mixing CTs and direct-hire professionals in the
same class. Although the more experienced officers contribute
questions that the CTs would be unlikely to ask and there
has been good interaction between the two types of students
during breaks and on field trips, there was a tendency for
certain of the non-CTs to pontificate somewhat and pose
occasional self-serving, rhetorical questions.
4. Problems Encountered
Considering that the reorganization of the Directorate
of Intelligence took place while the IPC was in session, we
Approved For Release 2000/04/19_:_CIA-RDP80-00503A000100050001-5
 Approved For Rel a 2000/04/19' 3 (t~A, ROP Op5O3A00W,(i0050001-5
SUBJECT: Course Report, Intelligence Process Course No. 2-77)
15 November - 17 December 1976
experienced few problems. The Office of Current Intelligence
went out of business, and the Current Reporting Group of the
DDI was literally finding its desks when we would have
needed an editor to go over the "OCT" Staff Notes. -
assumed the task of discussing the role o ent
ante ligence production and support to policy makers in
place of the canceled office visit and reviewed those student-
produced Staff Notes normally given to the former OCI editors.
Although the
Intelligence Institute assisted in managing the Course,
neither was able to be with the Course from beginning to
end, and on several days neither was available. This caused
no administrative problems, but the in-and-out of training
personnel was noted by the students.
5. Student Concerns
The Career Trainees in this course appeared to be
highly motivated. They wanted to understand the intelligence
business as fully as possible. Somewhat indirectly, we
gather that several of them are actively trying to decide
whether they have indeed chosen the best field of endeavor,
both for themselves personally and in terms of a government
career.
6. Results of Changes and Innovations
New presentations added to the Course are discussed
in the order they appear in the Course schedule.
Videotapes of presentations by Theodore Shackley,
Associate Deputy Director for Operations, ands
Deputy Chief, Soviet Europe Division, DDO,
from the most recent CIA Today and Tomorrow, were
still timely and relevant. They were presented as
part of the sessions devoted to the role of the
DDO in the intelligence process.
of the Office of Performance
Evaluation and Improvement, Intelli ence Community
25X1A Staff, was selected by Director of
that Office, to address the "Assessment of the
Approved For Release 2000/04/19 : CIA-RDP80-00503A000100050001-5
 Approved For Releme 2000/6F 901403A00000050001-5
SUBJECT: Course Report, Intelligence Process Course No. 2-77,
15 November - 17 December 1976
Intelligence Process." spoke a
great deal about the process, which the class had
already covered by the beginning of the fifth week
of the Course, but unfortunately he did not detail
much about the problem of assessing the performance
of intelligence or the assessments that have been
made.
7. Future Changes and Innovations
As noted above, we intend to rethink the longer
writing exercise. It may be better, as a number of students
suggested orally, to have several different short exercises
with quicker feedback. Such an approach would involve more
of the staff in the exercise. It would necessitate insuring
that the new DDI rotational instructor, who should be in the
Intelligence Training Branch no later than the beginning of
June, has had editorial experience as does the incumbent.
We cannot reasonably expect to carry the
entire burden of such new exercises.
8. Class Composition
A compendium of class statistics is located at
Attachment 4.
Attachments:
1 - Course Schedule (annotated)
2 - Class Roster
3 - Student Evaluation Form
4 - End-of--Course Data
Approved For Release 2000/04/19 : CIA-RDP80-00503A000100050001-5