SURVEY OF FORMER STUDENTS OF THE CS NAME CHECK COURSE

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP78-05795A000600010012-7
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 12, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 14, 2001
• Sequence Number: 12
• Publication Date: June 27, 1966
• Content Type: MF

Approved For Release- 02/01/23 E P78-05795A00060040012-7
27 June 1966
MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Training
SUBJECT . Survey of Former Students of the CS Name
Check Course
i7 G-3 ? S
1. In February 1966 we decided that we would like to
know the tasks assigned to former students of the CS Name
Check Course. At this time we had completed seven courses
and had trained 153 students. We felt that we should know
more about whether or not the students were doing name check
work, the nature of the name check work done, and the benefits
derived from attending the course. We fixed our attention upon
two fields of inquiry: (1) The nature of the research - i.e.
Did the student complete an investigative/research process or
was he simply asked to find specific files? and (2) The pro-
cessing upon completion of research - i.e. Did the student col-
late and analyze the materials and prepare either a resume or
written report of the research?
2. We prepared a questionnaire (Attachment A) and for-
warded it to 131 addressees. The 22 persons were not queried
because, either they had left headquarters, or had completed
the course under conditions which would have made the results
invalid.
3. The statistical rundown of the 90 replies is included
as Attachment B. The interpretation thereof follows:
a. An overwhelming majority (84.5%) of the responding
students were enrolled in the course to prepare them for their
jobs, as at the time of the survey they were performing name
checks as at least a part of their job.
b. Of the persons who were not performing name checks
at the time of the survey, five had taken the course to assist
them in supervising persons who were doing some name checks;
five had been transferred to non-name check duties; and five
were secretaries who were trained (apparently) on a contingency
basis.
c. The type of name checks seems to be of a wide variety,
apparently evenly divided between POA/OA or PCSA/CSA clearance-type
activity; CI Case support; and target studies or response to other
operational inquiries.
Approved For Release 2002/01/23: CIA-R $,r 5A000600010012-7
downgrading and
dnrlece~tl+a+IR.
 Approved For Release.?,002tQl723
d. Only a few (6.6%) of the ex-students perform highly
limited file-finding functions. The remainder appear to conduct
an investigation/research type task in which a search for all
available information is required.
e. Of those who conduct relatively complete research,
only 12.2% responded that they did not collate nor write a report
of the research.
f. The remainder of the students (81%) either prepared
a resume of their research from which another prepared a final
written report (about 25% of this group) or prepared a completed
report requiring collation, analysis and preparation of a draft
or final form of a report to a component other than their own.
4. From the above, we may conclude that if future classes
have an enrollment distribution similar to the preceding courses
that the weight of instruction in research should be on completed
research rather than upon file finding. This endorses the prin-
ciple under which the course has been conducted up to now.
5. We must also conclude that our curriculum should be
amended to provide instruction in collation and analysis of re-
covered materials and in organizing this material into written
form. This change was initiated for CS Records II (Biographic
Research) and will be continued.
6. A rather interesting aspect of this survey, and that
which does not submit itself to statistical resume is the wealth
of response to the last question on the questionnaire which simply
asked for comments. A total of 36 of the 90 respondents chose to
add comments, in spite of the fact that they had each prepared a
course critique at the end of the course. This, perhaps, indicates
their interest in the subject and their later reflections thereupon.
To provide the reader with a bird's eye view of these comments, all
of the comments have been reproduced and are attached as Attachment C.
The names of the commentators have been withheld and they are re-
ferred to simply by number and by the Division of their assignment.
Certain comments are sufficiently repetitive or related to permit a
resume. This follows:
a. Unqualified recommendation of the course.
b. The course should be mandatory for:
(1) All CTs
(2) All Desk Officers
(3) Every Officer in CS
Approved For Release 2002/01/23 : CIA- -0b795A000600010012-7
- 2 -
 Approved For ReleaseJO02/01/23 :EIq-f9'78-05795A00060W1 001 2-7
c.
The course could be or should be shortened 5
d.
More Records Training needed 2
e.
Expanded Exercise work (either longer,
slower pace, or more than one exercise) 7
The undersigned has not prepared rebuttal to the above,
nor to the recommendations otherwise included in comment. Each
of the points have either been covered in previous course reports
or have been taken care of in the creation of the "Associated
Programs for CS Records Training" with the single exception of
the item 6e above. Expanded exercise is most desirable, but time
is simply not available under the present setup.
7. Another statistical item which may be worthy of comment
and interest at both OTR and DDP/TRO level is the indication of
participation by divisions as represented by students sent to the
courses, and of the response received from the questionnaire.
(Attachment D). The undersigned does not wish to editorialize
on these matters, but merely provides the information for inter-
ested readers.
A - Questionnaire
B - Statistical Resume
C - Student Comments
D - Division Breakdown of Response
Original - DTR
1 cc - COS
1 cc - DDP/TRO
Approved For Release 2002/01/23 : C R 05795A000600010012-7