High Pass Rate, Low Evaluations: Coaching a New Instructor
A newly promoted instructor, a 14-year firefighter with strong technical skills, has received low student evaluations in two of three classes. Comments say he belittles slower learners, uses 'gotcha' questions, and spends 70% of a four-hour class lecturing. His practical skills pass rate is 96%, the highest in the academy. He has never received formal feedback from a supervisor. A recruit filed an informal complaint that he told the class, 'If you can't mask up in 45 seconds, you don't belong on my truck.' The other instructor in the class says the comment was a joke. Your training chief asks you to address it before the next academy cycle in 10 days. The instructor's union contract requires a written improvement plan before any formal discipline. Twenty-four recruits are enrolled, and the class has three instructors.
1. What immediate steps should you take in the 10 days before the next academy cycle, given the informal complaint and the union contract?
Read the worked answer
Act within the 10 days, but do not treat an informal complaint as proven misconduct. Open a documented inquiry: interview the recruit privately, the instructor, the co-instructor, and a sample of recruits; review the two low evaluation sets and any prior coaching. Because the contract requires a written improvement plan before formal discipline, separate immediate risk management from discipline. If the comment and pattern are substantiated, remove the instructor from sole supervision of high-risk evolutions pending improvement, but do not impose discipline without following the contract and HR process. Put the concerns in writing and give the instructor a chance to respond. Notify the training chief and HR. If the conduct is harassment or a safety threat, follow the policy's immediate-action provisions. Keep the inquiry confidential and avoid promising the recruit an outcome.
2. Draft the core elements of a coaching and improvement plan for this instructor, including how you will measure behavior change and protect student learning.
Read the worked answer
The plan should be specific and measurable, not 'be more respectful.' Goals: no demeaning or gendered language; use a 70/30 guideline with less than 50% lecture in a four-hour block; ask scaffolded questions and allow think time; provide corrective feedback privately or in a neutral tone. Activities: observe a model instructor, co-teach two sessions, record and review one lecture, and practice questioning with a peer. Measures: supervisor observation checklist, student evaluation items on respect and clarity, recruit focus group, complaint log, and pass rates - but not pass rates alone. Timeline: three academy cycles with weekly check-ins. Conditions: not sole evaluator for live-fire until the mid-point review; no retaliation. Provide the plan in writing, have the instructor sign, and document progress.
3. How should you handle the co-instructor who called the comment a joke, and what documentation should go to the training file?
Read the worked answer
The co-instructor's 'joke' response is a bystander issue. Meet privately, state the professional standard, and ask what the co-instructor observed and did. If the co-instructor minimized or reinforced the behavior, include that in the coaching plan: intervene when language undermines safety or respect, report concerns, and model corrective feedback. Do not discipline solely for a joke unless policy or contract defines it; but do document the conversation. Send to the training file: the complaint intake, interview summaries, the written improvement plan, observation forms, student evaluation summaries, and follow-up notes. Keep medical or personal information out unless relevant. Follow retention rules and provide the instructor a copy. The file should show a fair process and measurable follow-up, not a conclusion written before the inquiry.