1. Leaning the E2E Process
John Wishall

2. Process TEEP / EAP JDTA IPRD RDA Rating Commonality FEA BCA xAPI / LMS
TPP
TCCD
Performance/Application-Based Learning Objectives
Changing the CMS Construct
Assessments and Evaluation Requirements
Student
Course
System
Fleet

3. Naval Education and Training Command
Requirement Sources
NAVEDTRA 137 (series)
Job Duty Task Analysis
Management Manual
NAVEDTRA 138 (series)
Front End Analysis
NETCINST (series)
Business Case
Analysis Policy
Operational Risk
Management Assessment
Direct
Fleet Input
NAVEDTRA 136 (series)
ILE Course
Development & Life-Cycle
Maintenance Manual
NAVEDTRA 134 (series)
Navy Instructor Manual
Trigger Initiating Process
OPNAV N1 Training
External Training
Course Development and
Revision Process
OPNAV N1 Training
NETC E2E Process Color Key:
Training Requirement Submission Steps
Training Requirement Sources
Examples of Training Requirements
Course Development, Delivery, and Maintenance Steps
NAVEDTRA Manuals and NETC Directives
NAVEDTRA 132
133, 134, 135,
and 136 (series)
Per OPNAVINST (series), Training Support Agency course
development and course revision projects (i.e. ACAT I through IV programs, non-ACAT programs of record, etc...) for the NETC domain are to be
compliant with NAVEDTRA series manuals.
End
Process
NAVEDTRA 140 (series)
Training Support
Course
Cancellation
Perform
Front End
Analysis
(FEA)
Develop
Business
Case Analysis
(BCA)
Project Plan
(TPP)
Develop New
Course, Revise
or Modify Existing
Course & Pilot
Training Requirements
Review (TRR)
Establishment or
Revision of a NEC
Rating Merger
Revision to Enlisted
Occupational Standard
Fleet Performance
Assessment
NAVEDTRA 133 (series)
Review Management Manual
Naval Education and Training Command
Training Requirement Submission, and Course Development,
Delivery, and Maintenance End-to-End (E2E) Process
Examples of
Change in Delivery Method
or Performance Standard
New Course / Change in
Work Requirement
CDP
Addition or Deletion
Requirement Sponsor
Submit:
Letter Requesting
Analysis of Training
Requirement and Include
Training Requirement
Description Form, as
Enclosure, to NETC N7
Request:
Integrated Master Plan,
Integrated Master
Schedule, and Rough
Order of Magnitude, as
Applicable
Training Development
Activity
Perform:
Requirement
Develop & Provide:
Schedule, and
Rough Order of
Magnitude, as Applicable
Endorsement of
Incorporation of Training
Requirement into NETC
Training, to Resource
Sponsor
Provide:
Description, Justification,
Impact Statements,
and Rough Order of
Magnitude
Resource Sponsor
Endorsement to
Incorporate Training
Training, to Training
Development Activity
Continue E2E Process
and Provide Business
Case Analysis for Selection of
Training Solution and Final
Funding Determination
NAVEDTRA 135 (series)
Navy School
Perform Course
Maintenance
Deliver
Course of
Instruction
NAVEDTRA 132 (series)
Navy School Testing
Program Management
Manual
Change in Resource
Requirement (e.g. throughput)
Job Duty
Task Analysis
(JDTA)
Version: 08 Nov 2017_NETC N7
Training Requirement Submission, and
Course Development, Delivery, and Maintenance
End-to-End (E2E) Process
The NETC Training Requirement Submission, and Course Development, Delivery, and Maintenance End-to-End (E2E) Process was created to establish a standardized, repeatable, and defendable process to support the submission of training requirements to the NETC training domain and the development, delivery and maintenance of a Course of Instruction (COI). Overarching governance for the E2E Process is contained in NETC Instruction , dated 20 June 2016, titled: Training Requirement Submission, and Course Development, Delivery, and Maintenance E2E Process. Discrete steps of the E2E Process are supported by individual governance directives developed by NETC to provide the guidance, business rules, and processes for accomplishing a particular step. Policy and guidance documents are the bright green rectangular shaped blocks adjacent to the discrete steps of the E2E Process.
Training Support Activity (TSA) {NAVSEA, NAVAIR, NAVSUP, SPAWAR...etc} Acquisition Category (ACAT) I through IV course development and course revision projects are supported by OPNAVINST (series), a Navy Training Systems Plan (NTSP), and the Integrated Defense Acquisition, Technology, & Logistics Life-Cycle Management Framework. Per OPNAVINST (series), TSA and Program Office course development and course revision projects for the NETC domain will be compliant with NAVEDTRA 130 through 140.
The E2E Process is composed of two (2) areas: the (1) Training Requirement Submission Steps, and the (2) Course Development, Delivery, and Maintenance Steps. The two (2) blocks labeled “Training Requirement Sources,” and “Examples of Training Requirements,” are included in the illustration only to provide an understanding of potential sources of training requirements and to provide examples of training requirements to illustrate that not all steps of the E2E Process have to be performed for every requirement, neither are inclusive.
The following is a brief description of the “Training Requirement Sources,” and the “Examples of Training Requirements sections.
Training Requirement Sources
Training Requirements submitted to a Training Development Activity for the development of a new course, or a revision or modification to an existing course are typically generated by a triggered event, and when generated initiates the E2E Process.
Note: The difference between a course revision and a course modification is simply, a revision is a change to the course’s content/curriculum and a modification is a change to something that impacts the course (e.g. increase/decrease in instructors, add/delete a CDP {training location}, change of Curriculum Control Authority {CCA}, etc...)
The following is a brief description of the triggers illustrated in the E2E Process, these are not all inclusive.
Operational Risk Management Assessment. Training requirements may be identified during an Operational Risk Management (ORM) Assessment, (i.e. Navy Safety Center, INSURV inspections, ATG Assessments, etc...).
Fleet Performance Assessment. Navy activities perform a wide range of performance assessments throughout the Fleet each year (i.e. Operational Propulsion Plant Examination {OPPE}, Combat Systems Readiness Review {CSRR}, Maintenance and Material Management {3M} Inspection, etc...).
Direct Fleet Input. Training requirements provided by Fleet activities (i.e. USFF, COMPACTFLT, CNIC, etc...), may be the result of CASREPs, lessons learned, mishap reports, or other events or reports.
Establishment or Revision of a Navy Enlisted Classification (NEC). Creation of a NEC normally occurs with the standup of a new course; revisions to a NEC may require an update to an “A” or “C” School.
Rating Merger. Rating mergers require a review of each rating’s Occupational Standards for consolidation. The resulting Occupational Standards would be used to structure a new “A” School for the merging rates.
Revision to Enlisted Occupational Standards. Changes to Enlisted Occupational Standards may generate a change to the content of a rating’s “A” School; determination is made by the “A” School’s Requirement and Resource Sponsors.
Training Requirements Review (TRR). The TRR guidance document is NAVEDTRA 133 (Series). A TRR is performed on a course to provide a periodic or trigger driven review and revalidation of the course. TRRs are coordinated and facilitated by learning centers. A TRR can be organized to review a single course or a number of courses that support a policy, a directive, a grade, a rate, a platform, a system, a sub-system, or equipment. Training gaps “requirements” identified during a TRR are captured using TRR Action Chits. Each TRR Action Chit is assigned a Training Requirement Category of 1, 2, or 3. Training Requirement Categories are used to identify the level of effort and resources that are required to adjudicate the TRR Action Chit. The following is a description of the three (3) Training Requirement Categories:
Training Requirement Category 1: A training requirement that will result in:
a revision to a training course that changes the instructional strategy or delivery method.
addition of a new training course.
the deletion of a training course.
a revision to a training course which changes resource requirements.
a revision to a training course that changes course length.
the addition or deletion of a training course (Course Data Processing [CDP]).
the transfer of a training course between Curriculum Control Authorities (CCAs).
Note: Category 1 requirements require a Training Project Plan (TPP) that must be approved by NETC N7 for implementation, prior to a LC performing the "Develop New Course, Revise or Modify Existing Course and Pilot" step of the E2E Process.
Training Requirement Category 2: A training requirement that requires a change to an existing course that will not change course length or require a change in resources to incorporate. A Training Project Plan (TPP) is required and is approved for implementation by the course’s Center Curriculum Control Authority (CCA).
Training Requirement Category 3: A training requirement that can be incorporated into an existing course without the need to generate a Training Project Plan (TPP).
TRR Action Chits are created, stored and staffed in a software application named SERENA. Category 1 TRR Action Chits are staffed from the learning centers to NETC, and then to Resource Sponsors for endorsement. Resource Sponsor endorsement in SERENA for CAT 1 TRR Action Chits, satisfies NETCINST Resource Sponsor letter requirement, that remains for all training requirements not staffed in SERENA. Category 2 and 3 TRR Action Chits require no additional resources to implement and are adjudicated by the LC/training site.
Examples of Training Requirements
The E2E Process contains examples of four (4) different types of training requirements to illustrate that not all of the “Course Development, Delivery, and Maintenance Steps” need to be performed for all training requirements. The following is a discussion of each training requirement:
Change in Resource Requirement. These types of training requirements result in a modification to an existing course. An example of a “change in resource requirement,” may be an increase in a course’s student throughput requirement. Analysis would need to be performed to determine what additional resources would be required, if any, to support the throughput increase; and then cost analysis performed, as required. This type of a training requirement will not require a JDTA or FEA; work will begin with the “Develop BCA” step of the E2E Process.
CDP Addition or Deletion. These types of training requirements result in a modification to an existing course. A CDP (training location) addition will require analysis to determine if additional instructors, facilities, Technical Training Equipment (TTE) etc... will be required to support the new training location. Likewise, a CDP deletion will also require analysis to determine how assets made available by standing down a CDP will be utilized/dispensed. Neither will require a JDTA or FEA, work will begin with the “Develop BCA” step of the E2E Process.
Change in Delivery Method or Performance Standard. These types of training requirements will result in a revision to an existing course. To make a change to an existing course’s delivery method or performance standard, analysis must first be performed to determine the correct delivery method or performance standard to improve the effectiveness of the course. Work would begin with the “Perform FEA” step of the E2E Process. A JDTA will not need to be performed, as there is no change to the work requirement of the course.
New Course or Change in Work Requirement. These types of training requirements result in the stand-up of a new course or a revision to an existing course. In either instance, a JDTA will need to be performed during the “Training Requirement Submission Process” to bound the training requirement for the development of the ROM. Once a letter is received from the Resource Sponsor, work will begin with the “Perform FEA” step of the E2E Process.
The NETC Training Requirement Submission, and Course Development, Delivery, and Maintenance End-to-End (E2E) Process will now be discussed. The discussion will be broken up into two (2) sections: first the Training Requirements Submission Steps, and second the Course Development, Delivery, and Maintenance Steps.
Training Requirement Submission Steps
The Training Requirement Submission Steps are comprised of four (4) major steps:
Step 1: Requirement Sponsor will submit a Request For Analysis (RFA) of their training requirement to NETC N7. The letter will be accompanied by a completed “Training Requirement Description Form,” as an enclosure. Additionally, the Requirement Sponsor may request an Integrated Master Plan (IMP), an Integrated Master Schedule (IMS), and a Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM), as applicable. A letter template for “Request For Analysis of Training Requirement” and a template of the “Training Requirement Description Form” are enclosures 2 and 3 respectively, of NETCINST Upon receipt of the training requirement, NETC N7 will analyze the requirement and assign a Training Development Activity TDA) to manage further analysis of the requirement and work with both the Requirement and Resource Sponsors to produce and deliver either a new or revised course, to satisfy their requirement.
Step 2: Training Development Activity will perform analysis of the training requirement. The TDA will develop and forward an Integrated Master Plan (IMP) and an Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) to the Requirement Sponsor for concurrence, if one is required. The IMP and IMS will collectively identify the projected level of effort, identify needed resources, assign responsibilities, and provide a timeline for accomplishing each step of the project. The IMP and IMS will be maintained, and updated as required, for the duration of a project. As part of the IMP, the TDA will identify any resources required to perform a JDTA, FEA and BCA, if required. Additionally, the TDA will develop a Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) to consist of the projected cost to develop, deliver and sustain the training solution through the FYDP. Although the training solution is not determined until the BCA Step is complete, the ROM will be based upon available information, to inform the Requirement and Resource Sponsors. If the training requirement is for new course development or a change to an existing course’s work requirement, a Job, Duty, Task Analysis will be completed to bound the training requirement for development of the ROM. The following is a brief description of different types of training requirements and how they would be staffed:
If the training requirement is for new course development or a change in work requirement, an Integrated Master Plan (IMP) and an Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) will be developed and shared with the Requirement Sponsor. Then a JDTA will be performed and a Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) developed. A ROM is developed at the early stages of a project to provide Requirement & Resource Sponsors an estimate (based upon available information) of the projected cost to develop, deliver, and sustain training to satisfy the training requirement. A much more accurate cost estimate will be provided at the output of the “Develop Business Case Analysis” step. True cost will not be known until completion of a successful pilot. Business rules for developing an IMP, IMS, and ROM are contained in NETC’s “Content Development and Life Cycle End-to-End (E2E) Process Standard Operating Procedures (SOP). An example of an IMP, IMS, and a ROM is also provided in the SOP.
If the training requirement is associated with an existing course and:
NETC/LC is not the existing course’s Curriculum Control Authority (CCA), the training requirement will be returned to the Requirement Sponsor for forwarding to the correct CCA.
NETC/LC is the CCA, and resources are required to incorporate the training requirement, and the existing course is supported by a NTSP, then the training requirement will be forwarded to the Resource Sponsor and the SYSCOM Training System Program Office, per OPNAVINST (series), to include OPNAV Form 1500/40, if required, for resolution.
NETC/LC is the CCA, and the training requirement can be incorporated into the existing course without additional resources, then the learning center will adjudicate the training requirement.
NETC/LC is the CCA, and resources are the required to incorporate the training requirement, and the existing course is not supported by a NTSP, then an IMP and an IMS will be developed and shared with the Requirement Sponsor. Next, if a JDTA is required (required for a training requirement that includes new work) a JDTA will be performed and then a ROM will be developed and forwarded to the Requirement Sponsor.
Step 3: Requirement Sponsor will submit a request to the Resource Sponsor to endorse incorporation of the training requirement into NETC training. It is recommended that they include a description of the training requirement, a justification statement, and an impact if not incorporated statement, and the training requirement’s ROM from NETC. A letter template (Request Resource Sponsor Endorse Incorporation of Training Requirement into NETC Training) is available from NETC N7, upon request. The letter template will be an enclosure of the new E2E Instruction, when promulgated in mid 2015.
Step 4: Resource Sponsor will either endorse or not endorse the request “to endorse incorporation of the training requirement into NETC training,” from the Requirement Sponsor. If the Resource Sponsor endorses the training requirement, they will submit a request to continue with the E2E Process and to provide training solution alternatives with associated cost analysis (cost to develop, implement, and sustain the training solution through the FYDP) at the output of the “Develop BCA” step. A letter template (Resource Sponsor Endorsement to Incorporate Training Requirement into Formal NETC Training) is available from NETC N7, upon request. The letter template will be an enclosure of the new E2E Instruction, when promulgated in mid If the Resource Sponsor is unable to endorse the training requirement, then they will notify both the Requirement Sponsor and the Training Development Activity.
If the Requirement and Resource Sponsor are the same entity the steps described above can be significantly abbreviated. At the conclusion of the “Develop BCA” step, the Training Development Activity will present to the Requirement and Resource Sponsors training solution alternatives based upon the output of the FEA, each containing terms of impact, risk, benefit, and cost. Following their selection of a training solution alternative, a Training Project Plan will be developed to capture all resources required to develop, deliver, and sustain the training through the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP). Following adjudication of resource shortfalls by the Resource Sponsor, the Training Development Activity will coordinate either the development of a new course, or a revision or modification to an existing course, pilot the new course (if required), deliver the course of instruction (if required), and perform course maintenance to ensure currency of the course.
Course Development, Delivery, and Maintenance Steps
The Course Development, Revision, Modification, Delivery, and Sustainment Steps of the E2E Process consist of eight discrete steps. They consist of:
Develop Business Case Analysis (BCA)
Perform Front End Analysis (FEA)
Perform Job Duty Task Analysis (JDTA)
Deliver Course of Instruction
Develop New Course, Revise or Modify Existing Course and Pilot
Develop Training Project Plan (TPP)
Course Cancellation
Perform Course Maintenance
The following is a description of the level of effort that takes place during each of these steps:
JDTA is a process that structures and decomposes work and assigns attributes at the task level (the attributes will determine the performance outcomes {knowledge and skill proficiency} required of training). Duty and task data is used to build the Course Training Task List (CTTL) and ultimately the course’s learning objectives. Data generated during a JDTA is captured in the Authoring Instructional Material (AIM) Content Planning Module (CPM); a web-enabled tool that also provides NETC learning centers the ability to share content development data across the domain. JDTAs are facilitated by NETC/LC personnel. Requirement Sponsor(s), stakeholders, and Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) provide the work data. Following the collection of data, Requirement Sponsor(s) select which tasks they desire to be formally trained to, included in a Personnel Qualification Standard (PQS), a Non-Resident Training Course (NRTC), On-The-Job (OJT) training, or in some combination of formal training, PQS, NRTC, and/or OJT. The JDTA policy document is NAVEDTRA 137 (series), Job Duty Task Analysis Management Manual. The output of the JDTA is the input to the “Perform Front End Analysis (FEA)” step.
Step 1: Perform Job Duty Task Analysis (JDTA).
The purpose of the FEA is to compare the “as-is” training to the “to-be” training state, normally resulting in a delta, or gap. During the FEA, the most effective and cost efficient training solutions (instructor led, computer based training {CBT} and or labs, a blended solution, etc...) will be determined to satisfy the desired outcome of the training requirement. Additionally, the FEA will ensure that existing content is explored for possible Re-use, Re-purpose, and/or Reference, (R3) to reduce the overall cost of a new content build. If existing content is identified for Re-use or Re-purpose, instructional developers can assess the quality (value) of the existing instructional products using the NAWCTSD Orlando “Quality Evaluation Tool.” The tool is supported by NAWCTSD Technical Report of June The tool provides a set of rating criteria that evaluates the instructional products: instructional content, instructional activities, performance assessment, performance feedback, navigation and operation, content presentation, and installation and registration. The FEA policy document is NAVEDTRA 138 (series), Front End Analysis Management Manual. The output of the FEA is costed out in the Business Case Analysis step.
Step 2: Perform Front End Analysis (FEA).
The purpose of the BCA is to provide a cost figure for each of the training solutions derived during the FEA. The cost figure will include the cost to develop, deliver and sustain each training solution through the FYDP. The BCA also identifies the risk(s) and benefits associated with each training solution. The Requirement Sponsor(s) and Resource Sponsor(s) will select the best training solution at the output of the BCA given their constraints. The BCA policy document is NETCINST (series).
Step 3: Develop Business Case Analysis (BCA).
A TPP provides a blueprint of the course development, revision, or modification initiative that includes the resources (best estimate) that must be acquired and the milestones that must be achieved to complete the project. A TPP provides a description of the course; training location(s); planned student throughput; course justification; safety risks and hazardous materials, if applicable; and a list of manpower, facility, and items required to deliver the training through the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP). The final page of a TPP contains a list of milestones that leadership can use to track the build, implementation sequence, and timeline of a new, or revised or modified course. The TPP has been adopted by NETC and OPNAV as the vehicle to broker training requirements that require resources. Resource Sponsor OPNAV Codes consist of: N1 (Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Manpower, Personnel, Training, and Education), N2/N6 (Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Information Dominance), N4 (Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Fleet Readiness and Logistics), and N9 (Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Warfare Systems). N9 is further identified as: N95 (Director of Expeditionary Warfare), N96 (Director of Surface Warfare), N97 (Director of Undersea Warfare), and N98 (Director of Air Warfare). Resource shortfalls must be adjudicated by the Resource Sponsor with either funds committed, an offset, or successful Program Objective Memorandum (POM) submission. TPP policy document is NAVEDTRA 136(series).
Step 4: Develop Training Project Plan (TPP).
This step consists of managing and completing the processes required to support the development of a new course, or a course revision or modification project. If the initiative is for a new course or course revision project, and is going to be contracted, a Statement of Work (SOW) must be created and a contract competed for and ultimately awarded. This step also includes the procurement of resources (manpower, facilities, equipment, and funding) required to support course implementation and sustainment. Once the course has been developed, a successful pilot must be completed to ensure the new or revised course achieves the desired training outcomes. The following NAVEDTRA Manuals support this step:
Step 5: Develop New Course, Revise or Modify Existing Course and Pilot.
NAVEDTRA 132 (series) - Navy School Testing Program Management Manual. Provides policy and guidance for developing testing programs designed to measure the attainment of desired learning outcomes. A quality testing program ensures that successful course graduates have achieved at least the minimum level of skill and knowledge necessary to perform the job for which they were trained. Additionally, a good testing program identifies students who have not achieved the desired level of skill and knowledge and need further training assistance (remediation).
NAVEDTRA 136 (series) - Integrated Learning Environment Course Development and Life-Cycle Maintenance Manual. Normalizes terms; applies additional programmatics to the Computer Based Training (CBT) content builds that include standardized display (all content looks and feels the same); creates technical artifacts to sustain the content; and standardizes Statements of Work (SOW) for Interactive Multimedia Instruction (IMI).
This step begins when the new course, revised or modified course is approved for implementation by the Curriculum Control Authority (CCA), following a successful pilot. This step includes delivery of the course, testing programs, remediation programs, and school house management. The NAVEDTRAs that provide the policy and business rules, processes, and the roles and responsibilities for all aspects of “Delivering Course of Instruction,” are NAVEDTRAs 132, 134, 135 and NAVEDTRA 132 (described in step 5 above) describes the testing plan and remediation processes to support the delivery of a course and should be considered a resource document for this step. The following is a brief description of NAVEDTRAs 134, 135, and 140:
Step 6: Deliver Course of Instruction.
NAVEDTRA 134 (series) - Navy Instructor Manual. Used as a reference within the Navy Instructor Training Course (NITC). NEC: 9502 is awarded upon successful course completion. The manual serves as a field manual for instructors at a school house. Additionally, the manual supports instructors in qualifying as a Master Training Specialist.
NAVEDTRA 135 (series) - Navy School Management Manual. The manual provides defines the roles and responsibilities for training staff and student management personnel to include: Curriculum Control Authority (CCA), Course Curriculum Model Manager (C2M2), Director of Training (DoT), Learning Standards Officer (LSO) and many others. The manual provides information about Academic Review Boards (ARBs) and Remediation Programs. Additionally, course surveillance and Formal Course Reviews (FCR) are described. The document also describes Curriculum Management, Assessment Strategies, and Support Functions (i.e. Corporate enterprise Training Activity Resource System [CeTARS], Council on Occupational Education [COE], Contract Management, Information Assurance Systems, Security Requirements, and Safety Requirements).
NAVEDTRA 140 (series) - Training Support Management Manual. The manual provides information and guidance for establishing, aligning, and executing training support functions throughout the NETC domain. The manual outlines the NETC requirement for infrastructure, training, and student management support of NETC training activities. Although the mission may vary in breadth and scope, depending upon geography and student populations, the primary facilitator for training support is NETC’s Training Support Centers (TSCs).
The step is focused on maintaining currency of the course, often time referred to as surveillance. In this step Instructors, Course Supervisors, Course Curriculum Model Managers (C2M2’s), maintain continuous surveillance of assigned courses to ensure the course reflects the latest changes to directives, such as safety messages, bulletins, and technical publication changes. They also monitor fleet feedback, and perform Formal Course Reviews (FCRs) periodically. Information about course maintenance is contained in NAVEDTRA 132, 134, 135, and 136 (series) manuals. Additionally, NETC established the Training Requirements Review (TRR) Process to provide a periodic and trigger driven review and revalidation of existing courses, that a NETC Learning Center (LC) is the Curriculum Control Authority (CCA), by all stakeholders (Type Commanders, Community Managers, Technical Warrant Holders, Fleet Subject Matter Experts [SMEs], etc..). The TRRR guidance manual is NAVEDTRA 133 (series).
Step 7: Perform Course Maintenance.
The final step of the E2E Process deals with standing down a COI, (often times referred to as “sun-setting”). This process is ONLY initiated when a course’s Requirement Sponsor(s) directs it. The process involves dispensing or re-aligning all resources assigned to deliver and sustain a course (e.g. instructors, facilities, Technical Training Equipment (TTE), etc...). Course cancellation begins once an “approved for implementation” Training Project Plan (TPP) is received by the course’s CCA from NETC Headquarter’s N7 Division. Additionally, data sources such as Corporate enterprise Training Activity Resource System (CeTARS) and Catalog of Navy Training Courses (CANTRAC) will need to be updated to reflect the course cancellation. Course cancellation is a shared effort between NETC, Fleet Forces Command N1T, the course’s Requirement and Resource Sponsors, and BUPERS. Also, if the course is supported by a Navy Training System Plan (NTSP), the course’s Program Office and respective acquisition community will be involved in the process. Guidance for course cancellation will be contained in NAVEDTRA 135, in the next update planned for late 2015.
Step 8: Course Cancellation.

4. Work Train Assess Develop Maintain (Life-Cycle Maintenance) Evaluate
Version: 06 Nov 2017_NETC N7
Train
Assess
Work
Continuous Evaluation Cycle
Continuous Cycle Begins with the “Work”
Develop
Perform ONLY Steps of PADDIE+M Model Required to Implement
Training Requirement
Version: 8 Jun 2018_NETC N7
Define
the Work
Training
Effectiveness
Technical
Documents
Fleet
Deficiencies
Material
Naval Education and Training Command
Plan, Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, Evaluate, and Maintain
(PADDIE+M) Model OV-1 for
Course Development, Delivery, and Maintenance End-to-End (E2E) Process
Maintain (Life-Cycle Maintenance)
Evaluate
Design
Analyze
Implement
Work, Train, Assess
Sailors &
Marines
Plan
Extending
ADDIE
(Program Management)
“Continuous Cycle
Begins with the “Work”
Training Development
Training Delivery
Plan, Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, Evaluate, and Maintain (PADDIE+M) Model
Operational View (OV-1) for
Course Development, Delivery, and Maintenance End-to-End (E2E) Process
NETC’s PADDIE+M Model illustration is framed by three (3) terms (WORK, TRAIN, ASSESS) that describe the high level steps, that are continuously performed by NETC to develop, deliver, and maintain effective training. NETC must first define the “WORK,” in order to build effective training solutions to provide the knowledge and skills sets necessary to perform the “WORK,” then NETC can “TRAIN” Sailors and Marines to perform that WORK, and finally NETC will “ASSESS” the effectiveness of the training solutions to ensure that the training is satisfying the training requirement. WORK, TRAIN, ASSESS, is an continuous, ongoing process during the life-cycle of the training program, performed to ensure that the training solution continues to satisfy the Fleet’s training requirement.
Extending ADDIE. The ADDIE (Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, and Evaluate) Model is a generic process traditionally used by Instructional Designers and Training Developers for content development and sustainment. NETC has adopted the ADDIE Model to build effective training programs, and has added a “PLAN (PROGRAM MANAGEMENT),” phase to precede “ANALYZE” and a “MAINTAIN (LIFE-CYCLE MAINTENANCE)” phase to follow “EVALUATE.”
The illustration depicts the traditional phases of ADDIE in the center, surrounded by “MAINTAIN (Life-Cycle Maintenance),” and all of these phases reside within a triangle that represents the PLAN (Program Management) phase that begins when NETC receives a training requirement and continues until a training program, to satisfy that training requirement, is retired. In the ADDIE Model, each phase has an outcome that feeds into the subsequent phase. Program Management and Life-Cycle Maintenance are phases that are applied throughout the life-cycle of training program to ensure it’s effectiveness.
It is important to understand that not all phases of the PADDIE+M Model have to be completed for every training requirement, received by NETC. Thus, it is important to identify only those phases of PADDIE+M that must be completed to implement the training requirement.
The following is a description of each of the phases of the PADDIE+M Model:
Plan: In the Plan or Program Management phase a Training Development Activity (TDA), typically a NETC Learning Center, is designated to manage incorporation of the training requirement into NETC training. The TDA will develop an Integrated Master Plan (IMP) and Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) with the training requirement’s Requirement Sponsor to ensure that expectations can be realistically met. Additionally, the TDA will develop a Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM), to inform the Resource Sponsor of the projected expense to develop, implement, and maintain the training solution though the FYDP. A letter of endorsement from the Resource Sponsor to incorporate the training requirement into NETC training and to move forward with ADDIE is a key output, initially, of this phase.
Analyze: In the Analyze phase, instructional problem is clarified, the instructional goals and objectives are established and the learning environment and learner's existing knowledge and skills are identified. Below are some of the questions that are addressed during the analysis phase:
* Who is the audience and their characteristics? * Identify the new behavioral outcome? * What types of learning constraints exist? * What are the delivery options? * What are the online pedagogical considerations? * What is the timeline for project completion?

5. The Tailorable Process

6. Just Data Points in the Development Process

7. Build Specific Processes for the Task

8. CPM Construct

9. CPM / LO Module / SharePoint

13. Specific Goals of xAPI
Utilize web-service technology and allow content to be referenced (as opposed to aggregated and packaged)
Reduce the complexity and cost of implementing technical standards
Handle offline use, with the ability to connect later as well as intermittent connectivity
Build in the ability to extract all of the data tracked by the standard
Make testing quicker and more concise
Use current programming standards
Track experiences that are diverse – multiple learners, simulation data, points beyond “pass/fail”
Protect the authenticity of assessment data

14. So What is xAPI?
“I Did This” is an Experience API adaptation of Activity Streams – called Statements
Meaningful, yet flexible and human-readable
Covers traditional (e.g. SCORM) learning (scored, passed, completed)
Also captures informal learning and operational learning
Allows compound statements

15. Microsoft Dynamics (IT Pros)
Dynamics is…
Common Questions:
An onprem software application and/or FedRAMP Cloud (SaaS) offering from Microsoft.
An excellent “low code” application/platform for governments to leverage when building/modernizing line of business applications.
Leveraged across Federal and Local government for all types of applications that require structured, transactional tracking and reporting.
Examples: Case Management, Inspections, Investigations, Correspondence, Legal Cases, Call Center, Service Desk, Grants Management, Task Management, Program Mgt, Events Management, Contact/Member Tracking, Emergency Management, Recruiting/Member Mgt, Contract & Procurement Management, FOIA, etc, etc, etc.
Why is Dynamics called “low code” or “COTS” platform?
While Dynamics provides traditional “CRM” applications off the shelf, it also includes all the core ‘building blocks’ needed for robust business applications. Furthermore, these building blocks care highly Configurable (point-click) and can be Customized further with .NET plug-ins and HTML5 in Visual Studio.
What about SharePoint?
SharePoint is an excellent platform for applications that need to collect and manage unstructured data. However, when you need to your application to manage and report on structured, relational data, it’s ‘list based’ architecture can be limiting. The optimal approach is leveraging the better-together native integration between the platforms to achieve the best-of-breed capabilities for structured and unstructured tracking and reporting.
An alternative to...
Any platform or package leveraged for building business/transactional applications, especially when a “low code” approach is preferred. (Java, .NET, Salesforce, Appian, Pega Systems, SugarCRM, SharePoint, etc, etc.)
Dynamics and Salesforce are both Gartner leaders who both have FedRAMP Agency ATO’s within HHS.
However, CDC should consider that Microsoft offers:
Option to run Dynamics onprem, with parody.
Tight integration with Office suite (Outlook, ShrPnt, Skype)
Extensibility with familiar .NET technologies.
Shared ADFS identity w/ Office365 (HHS/CDC deployed)
Typical 3x+ better ROI due to SFDC high total costs!
What's under the hood?
The “Lego block graphic” provides just a sample of the highly configurable components. No need to build/code Business Rules, Workflows, Office integrations, Dashboards, Search, Security or Mobile Apps. As business changes, configuration allows for rapid enhancements without wading through code from a previous contractor.
Furthermore, Microsoft continues to modernize and innovate the platform with each release (both on-prem and in the FedRAMP SaaS cloud) that you continue to inherit to keep your application modern.
Finally, integration with existing legacy systems is readily available via the open WebServices API.
IT professionals should read this white paper and watch this intro to building Dynamics apps video to learn more.
What is Dynamics CRM vs. Dynamics 365?
Dynamics has long been an umbrella for Microsoft’s CRM offering and ERP suite. Dynamics 365 represents the merge of these offerings onto a common platform moving forward, and many other added innovations seen here.

16. Microsoft Dynamics (Business Pros)
Dynamics is…
Example of Dynamics used across Federal Agencies today:
An software application and/or Cloud Service (SaaS) offering from Microsoft.
An excellent platform for the modernization of inefficient legacy applications or new applications to automate manual business process.
A new way of building business applications that are user friendly, tightly integrated with MSoffice tools, mobile app ready, secure and built with technologies CDC IT staff have already approved and deployed for Enterprise use.
Dynamics is widely leveraged across the Civilian, DHS and DoD agency landscape today. The below sample provides a real-world illustration of a sample of what's possible and who is realizing the benefits of modernizing their business applications and process with Dynamics Cloud and OnPrem software.
Agencies use it to...
Modernize a broad range of business functions and workflows that require configuration to the agency/department needs.
Realize the benefits of new application in months, not years, due to the rapid configuration vs. heaving coding approach.
Take advantage of the many benefits of Cloud computing while having the option to deploy in traditional IT datacenter approaches at any time.
Save money due to increased staff productivity:
Reduced time spent on manual tasks
Easier data access, analysis and reporting
Reduced duplicative time spent in multiple, systems
A comfortable, familiar user experience
Improved inter- and intra-agency collaboration and communication
Download a Government datasheet
Watch Dynamics Government Videos
What is Dynamics CRM vs. Dynamics 365?
Dynamics has long been an umbrella for Microsoft’s CRM offering and ERP suite. Dynamics 365 represents the merge of these offerings onto a common platform, and many other added innovations.
What next?
To best understand what Dynamics can do for your new application requirements, Microsoft is happy to discuss building a “proof of concept” that incorporates a sample of your requirements into a live demonstration. Contact Wende Nossaman for more info.