posted 11-10-2008 09:20 AM            

quote:

---

The APA recognizes that the polygraph profession can best serve treatment and supervision missions related to sex offenders by functioning with a Containment Model. Open communication between team members is of paramount importance. Working as a member of a team, the polygraph examiner, the treatment provider, and the supervisory officer can best protect society. The role of the polygraph examiner in the containment approach is to verify or refute information provided by the offender and to serve as a deterrence tool.emphasis added

---

quote:

---

2.1 To ensure competency in the area of PCSOT, polygraph examiners must have successfully completed a minimum of forty (40) hours of specialized post conviction sex offender training that adheres to the standards established by the APA. This specialized course must be approved by both the General Chairs of the PCSOT and Continuing Education Committees.

---

quote:

---

2.3 Polygraph examiners shall successfully complete a minimum of thirty (30) continuing education hours every two (2) years. Sixteen of those hours should be of specialized sex offender polygraph training.

---

Even though a convicted sex offender may be a different kind of duck, he is still a duck. Once you have gone through the instant offense and sexual history, unless specific allegations arise that need to be resolved subsequent exams are basically screening tests that end up either being mixed or multiple issue exams. My PCSOT training as it pertained to the actual test structure was an exercise in keeping comparison issues salient for the examinee who is behaving and constructing relevant questions that would not cross arbitrary boundaries established between compliance with treatment, and compliance with probation rules. No one seems to be able to show that these boundaries, are valid, or are even likely to exist in the mind of the examinee.

That being said I come back to the question: What elements of running PCSOT justify or require BOTH 40 hours of initial training and 16 hours of "specialized sex offender polygraph training"?

------------------
Ex scientia veritas

posted 11-10-2008 09:28 AM            

But I 'spose that could just be me talking too much.

There is quite a lot that goes into this or any specialization.

I have to do 20 hours annually (I think) for my National Counselor Certification, and 40 or more for Colorado. It adds up.

r

------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room."
--(Stanley Kubrick/Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove, 1964)

posted 11-10-2008 09:48 AM            

But how much of this information does one need to fulfill the role of a polygraph examiner as stated in the APA ModelPolicy?
If the examiner's responsibilty exceeds what is stated in the policy why aren't the examiners duties more clearly defined?

------------------
Ex scientia veritas

posted 11-12-2008 07:09 AM            

I don't run PCSOT, but I would like to keep it active. So here is my question:

OK, so for example if I got my PCSOT in 11/2006. Then since then I have covered far more then the 30 hrs/2 yrs in general polygraph training from approved schools.

Here is where I am wrong I think...in 2007 I was sent to a 24 hour sex crimes course -not in polyragh--- but from a good agency (PATC). The training was the same--profiling sex offenders etc etc.

posted 11-12-2008 09:43 AM            

I think the thrust of Ebvan's concern, as I understand or agree with it, is that it is also important to avoid becoming punishing towards us professionals at the same time.

Ongoing training is important. Any ongoing training is important. Does it benefit someone as a polygraph examiner if he attends a training seminar on neuro-cognitive screening tests, or perhaps some updated training on the details of memory, including immediate recall, working memory, and long-term recall. Sure it does. To the extent that the trainee is also involved in broader conversation in the polygraph profession, it also benefits the whole profession to have a polygraph examiner attend such a training. It makes us all smarter, by introducing us to new vocabulary, related constructs, and current knowlege in related fields of science. That is the value of cross-training.

16 hours per two years, is 8 hours per year. that's one day of ongoing training in PCSOT per year. Realistically a day-long training is 6 hours, so it might make sense to adjust this requirement accordingly.

The other 14 hours of required ongoing training also ammount to one day per year.

In Colorado, we have a punishing requirement that providing ongoing training doesn't count. Nevermind that every hour of training time involves about 8 hours of preparation. Nevermind that the trainer will probably remember the material better than most people in the room. Nevermind that developing ongoing training requires ongoing study. It doesn't count.

It would be reasonable to allow some training credit for hours spent developing or delivering training content.

.012

r

------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room."
--(Stanley Kubrick/Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove, 1964)

posted 11-13-2008 09:44 AM            

If the concern is that the PCSOT committee is recommending training requirements for the sake of marketing their training services...

It would be a simple solution for the APA to enact an ethics rule that committee members would be barred from providing fee-based training for a period of time following the adoption of the standards - say 2 years. That way committee members do not become overly centralized in the authority structure of the PCSOT arena. Unless, of course, we want a highly centralized authority structure in the PCSOT arena.

.012

r

------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room."
--(Stanley Kubrick/Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove, 1964)

posted 11-15-2008 03:55 AM            

Can I count those as training hours?

Really, can I?

can I, Huh?

But seriously, I really do and I appreciate the posts that are so well said and thought out!

THX,