Regulations on the head of the educational program. Regulations on the OOP service. Ilyasov Ilgiz Mansurovich
FEDERAL STATE AUTONOMOUS EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION
HIGHER PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION
"FAR EASTERN FEDERAL UNIVERSITY"
STANDARD JOB DESCRIPTION
HEAD OF THE EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM OF HIGHER PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION
Vladivostok
2011
1
General provisions
1. General Provisions
3.9. Initiates the creation and change of the staffing table of the educational program, taking into account the volume and forms of pedagogical work in the educational program, the number of students;
3.10. Prepares reporting materials to determine the rating of the educational program.
3.11. Ensures that its actions comply with generally accepted principles of morality, ethics and business conduct.
3.12. He improves himself professionally and is responsible for the professional training of subordinate employees in order to improve the quality of methodological support for the educational program and the direct teaching process.
4. Rights
The head of the OP has the right:
4.1. Contact the school management to provide material and other resources for the educational process;
4.2. Participate in the work of the FEFU structural unit and the school, where issues related to the organization of educational activities and research work are discussed and resolved;
4.3. Take part in meetings regarding the organization of educational activities and research work on the supervised educational program;
4.4. Submit proposals for improving the educational work of FEFU and the school for consideration by the rector's office, the school's directorate and the FEFU Academic Council, the School's academic council;
4.5. Give instructions to the administrator of the educational program, teachers involved in the implementation of the educational program, according to the nature of their work;
4.6. Make, in the prescribed manner, proposals on the appointment, transfer and dismissal of employees under his subordination, the imposition of disciplinary sanctions on persons who have committed official misconduct, as well as on rewarding employees for the successful and conscientious performance of official duties;
4.7. In accordance with the established procedure, appeal orders, instructions and other organizational and administrative acts of the University administration.
5. Responsibility
The head of the PLO is responsible for:
5.1. For improper performance or failure to fulfill one’s job duties provided for in this job description - within the limits determined by the labor legislation of the Russian Federation;
5.2. For offenses committed in the course of carrying out their activities - within the limits determined by the administrative, criminal and civil legislation of the Russian Federation;
5.3. For causing material damage - within the limits determined by the labor and civil legislation of the Russian Federation;
5.4. For unauthorized disclosure of information of a confidential nature, except for cases provided for by the current legislation of the Russian Federation - within the limits determined by the legislation of the Russian Federation;
5.5. For failure to comply with orders, instructions and instructions of the vice-rector for academic and educational work, the rector of FEFU - within the limits determined by the legislation of the Russian Federation;
5.6. For failure to comply with the QMS, non-compliance with labor discipline, labor protection and safety regulations - within the limits determined by the legislation of the Russian Federation.
6. Functionalcligatures
6.1. The head of the PLO receives:
6.2. The head of the PLO reports:
Deputy Director of the Department
academic policy
AGREED:
Deputy Vice-Rector
for academic and
educational work
Director of the Legal Department
And about. director of the department
personnel management
Department Director
control over academic work
1In modern conditions, the main professional educational program of higher education is not just a strategic document defining the features of the educational process, but also a multifunctional, multidimensional product. The management of such a program should be carried out by a specialist whose competence covers both the educational and business spheres. In the article, the author makes an attempt to describe the functional structure of the activities of such a specialist - the program manager. It is shown that the official positions traditionally existing in Russian universities do not fully meet the required set of functions, and the persons occupying them do not fully meet the required set of competencies. Management of the main professional educational program is a special type of professional activity, which should be reflected both in the nomenclature of positions and in the training programs for specialists in the relevant profile.
higher education
educational program
program management
head of the educational program.
1. Ammosov I.N. Management of the educational program of a university in the context of the process approach // Modern trends in education and science: collection. scientific tr. based on materials from the International scientific-practical conference: at 2 pm – Tambov, 2014. – pp. 15-18.
2. Barylkina L.P. Educational program is a key document in the management of an educational organization // Global scientific potential. – Tambov, 2013. – No. 10 (31). – pp. 198-200.
3. Blinov V.I. Methods of teaching in higher education: educational and practical. allowance / V.I. Blinov, V.G. Vinenko, I.S. Sergeev. – M.: Yurayt, 2013. – 315 p.
4. Goncharov S.A. Management of an innovative educational program and professional competencies of participants // Universum: Bulletin of Herzen University. – 2008. – No. 2. – P. 15-16.
5. Gromova L.A. New opportunities for quality management of educational programs / L.A. Gromova, S.Yu. Trapitsyn // Universum: Bulletin of Herzen University. – 2011. – No. 9. – P. 53-57.
6. Gromova L.A. Strategic objectives of managing educational programs based on third generation standards // Universum: Bulletin of Herzen University. –2010. – No. 9. – P. 17-19.
7. Zhichkin A.M. Method of using quality control tools in organizations of higher professional education // Higher education today. – M., 2014. – No. 1. – P. 19-25.
8. Navodnov V.G. If you trust a “sommelier” to assess the quality of education / V.G. Navodnov, G.N. Motova, T.V. Sarycheva // Accreditation in education. – 2011. – No. 2 (46). – pp. 38-45.
9. Chandra M.Yu. Structural and functional characteristics of system monitoring in quality management of the main educational programs of a university [Electronic resource] // Letters to Issue. Offline: electronic scientific journal. – 2012. – No. 3. – P. 1751. - URL: http://www.emissia.org/offline/2012/1751.htm (access date: 05/23/2016).
Recently, there has been a noticeable surge of interest among scientists and practitioners in issues related to educational programs of higher education. Of course, this is not accidental. The introduction of the third generation Federal State Educational Standards (FSES) provides for a number of systemic changes in the work of a university with educational programs.
Firstly, in the new conditions, the educational program becomes a key document of any educational organization, aimed at solving strategic problems, meeting long-term educational needs, and implementing social educational orders.
Secondly, in modern conditions, educational organizations are encouraged to independently develop and approve an educational program. This leads to an inevitable increase in the quantitative and qualitative diversity of educational programs of different levels, types and profiles. So, according to V.G. Navodnova, if in 1990 the Russian Federation conducted training in approximately 10 thousand programs, then in 2012 this number exceeded 32 thousand. It is obvious that this trend will only increase in the future.
Thirdly, the concept of reforming the university educational process currently being implemented in our country is based on the experience of leading foreign Western universities, where management is based specifically on educational programs.
Thus, under the conditions of the introduction of a new generation of Federal State Educational Standards, a set of interrelated requirements is imposed on educational programs of higher education. Most of these requirements are fundamentally new and sometimes are not “grasped” by the consciousness of managers and teachers, and sometimes they conflict with the usual and convenient, but ineffective ways of organizing the educational activities of a university.
Openness and transparency- a central requirement that, to one degree or another, determines all the others. Its essence is that the educational program of higher education becomes a socio-economic product, which should reflect the interests of all interested parties. Of particular importance is taking into account the expectations and needs of external entities - customers and beneficiaries of the higher education system, which include: the state as the social customer of educational services for certain educational programs; employers as representatives of the sphere of work in which the graduate will work; applicants as potential participants in the educational process; graduates as formed specialists. Obviously, representatives of the parent community should be added to this list.
Focus on labor market requirements - the requirement that specifies the previous one gives it a dominant vector. The orientation of educational programs towards the labor market should be the primary and priority factor determining their purpose and content, relative to the orientation towards the educational services market. It is the educational program (of a university, college, technical school) that is the most important tool for connecting the sphere of education and the world of work.
Adaptability- the requirement set by the new Federal State Educational Standards and other regulatory documents to annually update educational programs in order to continuously “adjust” to constantly changing external requirements.
Flexibility - the ability to adjust the timing depending on the needs of students, as well as the availability at universities of a range of programs of the same profile, but with different durations of study, including not only the main educational programs of higher education, but also additional professional programs.
Interdisciplinarity- the central requirement for the content of programs, the main content characteristic . Interdisciplinarity is also determined by the new content of the social order for the results of higher education. “Only interdisciplinary connections make it possible to achieve a new quality of personnel training,” notes S.A. in this regard. Goncharov.
Networking faculties, departments, and other departments of the university acts as a direct mechanism that ensures interdisciplinarity of programs at the stages of their development and implementation.
Participation - the requirement for mandatory participation in the process of joint program design of all involved subjects - both representatives of customers (primarily employers), and direct implementers (representatives of relevant departments and faculties, down to ordinary teachers), as well as students.
Diagnostic ability- a requirement according to which the program, firstly, must have clear quality criteria and, secondly, must be assessed in accordance with these criteria from the point of view of all customers and interested parties. In this case, the quality of the program should be assessed as whole product(and not just element by element or “at intermediate stages”).
The position that the educational program today must be considered precisely as “ a product with which a university enters the market, and not just as a cumulative process of training and education”, in our opinion, is the most fundamental from the point of view of changes in management approaches. In this case, the educational program should be considered as sophisticated, multi-functional and multi-purpose a product having several dimensions, namely: social product,“defining the mission of the university and indirectly influencing the values of society as a whole”; economic product, which is focused on the needs of the labor market and serves as a tool for the economic development of the industry and/or region; marketing a product with which a university enters the educational services market; pedagogical product, which involves the achievement of certain tasks related to the training, education and development of the student’s personality and therefore inevitably corresponds to the ideas of a particular educational paradigm; management product, ensuring the quality of the university’s work and its competitiveness.
It follows from the above that managing a higher education program as a multidimensional product is a complex scientific and practical task that requires analysis and adaptation of existing approaches and management technologies and the development of new ones. The general context for solving this problem is set by the high (and at the same time increasingly increasing) dynamics of technical, technological and broader socio-economic changes, the general trends of globalization, informatization, the formation, development and withering away of successive technological structures. It requires continuous revising the structure, content and technologies for implementing university educational programs, taking into account the constantly changing requirements of the state, employers, students, as well as taking into account updated forecasts of socio-cultural and economic development and the labor market.
Our analysis of the works of modern researchers (I.N. Ammosov, L.P. Barylkina, L.A. Gromova and S.Yu. Trapitsyn, M.Yu. Chandra) shows that the authors, as a rule, focus on those or other aspects of managing the educational program of a university, for example: managing the development and implementation of the educational process (educational content) within the educational program; managing a team of program developers and implementers; program quality management, etc. At the same time, certain aspects inevitably remain outside of consideration.
Claiming not so much systematicity as completeness, we propose the following functional structure of the activity of a specialist in managing the educational program of a university.
1. At the stage of program formation:
1.1. continuous monitoring of the expectations and needs of customers and all interested parties;
1.2. analysis and assessment of identified needs;
1.3. launching a program development project - creating a management system (“creation of a project management structure, distribution of roles and functional responsibilities, beginning work on management support and support for program development”);
1.4. formation of a “large” team of program developers and implementers (organization of working groups, distribution of responsibilities between groups and in groups, training, support, motivation for action);
1.5. designing an educational program: defining the concept of the program (mission, goals, objectives); building a competency model of a graduate; building processes within the program; development of a system of assessment tools, educational content, educational technologies; designing the conditions for the implementation of the educational program, taking into account available resources (if necessary, identifying the required additional resources and their search (purchase), including “additional work with personnel”); design of the program in accordance with the requirements (development of a program passport, competency development program, curriculum, curriculum of disciplines and practices, etc.); development of educational and methodological complexes and other teaching aids that are necessary for the implementation of the program, but are not available;
1.6. primary (a priori) assessment of the quality of the program in the form of internal and external examination;
1.7. adjustment of the program based on the results of the examination;
1.8. licensing (in the absence of a license) of the area of training within which it is planned to implement the program;
1.9. determination (clarification) of the cost of training for the program.
2. At the stage of program implementation:
2.1. formation of a contingent of students (promotional events, pre-university preparation, career guidance work, organization of recruitment / selection of applicants for training);
2.2. curriculum management (formation and implementation of individual curricula; interaction with employers and other partners on the implementation and adjustment of flexible curricula, including joint ones; annual updating of curricula);
2.3. planning the class schedule and managing the schedule (taking into account the modular work plan and individual educational routes of students);
2.4. distribution and calculation of teachers’ workload, development of their individual plans;
2.5. organization of the educational process according to the program: “management of teams and project groups of teachers based on the common values of the university and network interaction in the exchange of resources,” coordination of the activities of various departments of the university; conducting classroom lessons, practices, independent, educational and research work of students, all types of quality control of students’ competencies;
2.6. managing the conditions for organizing the educational process (including planning and organizing the educational process and research work of students, determining, together with partner employers, practice bases and distributing students among them, etc.);
2.7. employment of graduates and their post-educational support;
2.8. optimization of program implementation costs.
3. In the process of program quality control:
3.1. “research support of the program” with the aim of improving it;
3.2. creation of a system of continuous (internal) monitoring of the activities of all participants in the educational process, implementing the function of monitoring the achievement of the goals of the educational program “at all stages of the life cycle”<программы>- from its design to disposal”;
3.3. external evaluation of the program with the participation of various stakeholders (state - state accreditation, professional community - professional and public accreditation, international community - international accreditation, etc.);
3.4. organization of independent assessment of graduates’ qualifications;
3.5. adjustment of the program based on the results of implemented procedures for assessing its quality.
So who should manage the higher education curriculum? Whose responsibilities should include the implementation of the professional functions listed above, many of which are multi-component?
It is obvious to us that the distribution of these responsibilities among a group of different officials is ineffective, since it is associated with the “blurring of responsibility.” This position is supported by other researchers. So, A.M. Zhichkin directly points out that “educational programs must have an “owner” or owner, who would be not only the author of the corresponding program, but also the organizer of its implementation” - thus, both the development and implementation of the program (including quality assessment) should be concentrated in the hands of one and the same person. L.A. Gromova calls this face head of the educational program, explaining that it is this person who “becomes a key figure in the faculty and is responsible for recruiting to the program and employing graduates, for shaping the content of the program and providing it with teachers.”
The main feature of the activity head of educational program is that he combines the “classical” functions of an educational specialist with the functions of a business manager, a team management specialist (essentially an HR manager), and also a project management specialist. All this places certain demands on his professional competence. As a specialist in the educational field, he must be competent in the following issues: career guidance and recruitment; designing the results, content and conditions of education; organization of the educational process; assessment of the quality of education; promoting professional development and employment of students and graduates. As a business specialist, he must combine the individual competencies of a marketer, a commercial product developer, a salesperson (sales manager), an advertising specialist, a budget manager (essentially a financial director), etc.
In practice, the problem of who should be appointed as the head of a higher education educational program has several solutions.
- Can teacher be a program manager? Probably, in some cases - yes, but at least two conditions must be met. First, his qualifications and work experience must allow him to successfully implement all the functions required to manage the program. Secondly, this option is possible if we are talking about a short program - for example, a vocational training or advanced training program implemented at a university.
We can observe similar examples in the practice of independent business trainers who develop their own courses, determine their commercial cost, advertise them themselves and recruit training groups, conduct classes themselves and evaluate the quality of their work.
However, in relation to lengthy and resource-intensive higher education programs, such a solution is unacceptable.
- Can university rector be the head of an educational program? In terms of the sum of their competencies, of course, yes (we are, of course, talking about an effective rector). Moreover, there are quite obvious similarities between the activities of the rector and the activities of the head of the educational program; the last of them can even, without much exaggeration, be called a “rector in miniature.” The only problem is that the general range of responsibilities of the rector (including solving the entire mass of “burning” problems and taking into account constantly arising force majeure circumstances) is so wide, and his time is so limited that he is physically unable to take on the responsibilities of the head of educational programs capable.
And yet, this solution also has a right to exist - in the conditions of a very small university that implements only one or two educational programs. There are also such universities in our country, and some of them work very effectively. In this case, the very concept of “university management” turns out to be essentially identical to the concept of “direction of an educational program.”
- Can the director of an educational program be head of the department? Not only can it, but - in practice - in many cases it is. Moreover, in a number of Russian universities introducing a program management model (for example, at the Far Eastern Federal University), “it was recognized that of all the models of interaction between the head of an educational program and the head of the department, the most successful was the form when both of these subjects are one person.”
It should be clarified that a “less successful” form of interaction is the appointment as head of the program of an authoritative teacher (professor, associate professor) of the department who does not occupy leadership positions in the formal structure of the department or faculty. In this case, instead of his productive interaction with the head of the department responsible for the implementation of this program, sometimes a struggle for power and access to the necessary resources unfolds.
At the same time, we assume that this “best form” is still not optimal, since its implementation is associated with at least three interrelated risks.
The first risk is a very likely contradiction between the professional mentality of the department head and the professional approaches that he needs to implement in his role as a program director. Heads of departments, by type, are, as a rule, “subject specialists” or “problem specialists,” while “project specialists” are needed to manage programs. In other words, we need specialists who understand the logic of working with product throughout the full life cycle of the project (need identification - product development - product implementation). This is exactly the logic that lies, for example, in modern CDIO standards of engineering education, which came to us from Western experience.
In most foreign countries, the “content” and “market” components in the development and implementation of university educational programs are organically combined, while in Russia the situation is still largely the opposite. The head of the department traditionally oversees exclusively the content part (development of course content based on the scientific principle and their delivery), and therefore inevitably has corresponding professional limitations. L.A. speaks about one of the aspects of such limitation. Gromova: “due to rapidly changing conditions, the labor market provides its requirements for university graduates, which program managers are often unaware of» ( italics ours - N.B.). There is also an opposite example - this is the well-known image of a “universal manager”, a specialist in effective budget management, who does not own (and does not consider it necessary to own) the content of the educational program.
The second risk is the monopoly of personal power, the fullness of which is concentrated in the hands of the head of the department. In this situation, too much turns out to depend on the personal position and personal qualities of this key figure, as well as on her personal relationships with senior management (the rector). The formal, and often real, authority of the head of the department in the scientific and educational community inevitably contributes to the development of “vertical”, authoritarian approaches to program management, contrary to the ideas of participation and healthy competition. At the same time, program management is effective only if it “involves not only management decisions from above, but also the business activity and professional responsibility of everyone.”
The third risk is that instead of the desired interdisciplinary program, a “monocathedral” one will most likely be created and implemented. The quite objective economic interest of the head of the department is not to share resources with other departments, but to provide the entire program with the department’s own resources. Whereas, on the contrary, in the process of developing and implementing modern educational programs, “the rigid boundaries of departments, faculties, and structural divisions must be overcome in solving a common problem.”
Of course, to the question “Who exactly should be the head of the educational program?”, in addition to the three indicated answers (teacher, rector, head of department), other options are possible. For example, the appointment as heads of educational programs of a university of those same “effective managers” who have an economic education and specific, narrow targets for increasing economic efficiency. However, in our opinion, the most correct answer to the question posed is this: a special, specially trained specialist in managing educational programs is needed. With all the necessary attributes, including a separate professional standard and appropriate training programs. Natural questions about from whom, where And How We plan to consider training such a specialist in another article.
Bibliographic link
Pesotsky Yu.S., Baranova N.V. WHO SHOULD MANAGE THE EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM OF THE UNIVERSITY? (STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM) // Modern problems of science and education. – 2016. – No. 5.;URL: http://science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=25154 (access date: 02/01/2020). We bring to your attention magazines published by the publishing house "Academy of Natural Sciences"
Question No. 1
Composition and structure of the police in the OOP.
In their activities, PPS units interact: traffic police, private security, linear police departments on railway, water and air transport, military units of the Internal Troops of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, etc.
Main tasks combat units of the teaching staff are:
Ensuring law and order on the streets, transport facilities and other public places;
Ensuring personal security, preventing and suppressing crimes and administrative offenses at posts and patrol routes;
Identification at posts, routes and detention of persons who have committed crimes and are hiding from investigation and trial;
Assisting criminal police units in the performance of their assigned duties.
Combat units of the teaching staff perform the following: functions:
Protection of life, health, rights and freedoms of citizens from criminal and other illegal attacks;
Providing assistance to citizens who have suffered from crimes, administrative offenses and accidents, as well as those who are helpless or in another state dangerous to life and health;
Suppression and detention of persons who have committed crimes without delay;
Ensuring law and order during mass events;
Together with other departments of the internal affairs bodies, taking urgent measures in case of emergencies;
Interaction with citizens on issues of public safety and security;
Participation in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation in counter-terrorism operations.
Question No. 2
Control over the organization and performance of service by PPSP squads
Control is carried out through systematic inspections of squads (at least once every two hours), during which the following is established:
1. Correspondence of placement and use of personnel
2. Clarity and efficiency in managing squads, timely delivery of information to them about changes in the operational situation.
3. The squads’ knowledge of the situation on the territory of the post, the route, the task being performed, the location of the posts and the borders of the routes of the nearest squads, methods of communication with them, as well as their rights and responsibilities.
4. The quality of service by squads and their activity in preventing and suppressing crimes and administrative offenses.
5. The level of interaction between PPSP squads, employees of other police departments and public law enforcement units, private organizations involved in maintaining public order on the streets, transport facilities and other public places.
6. Observance of law and discipline by squads.
7. The number of crimes and administrative offenses committed at the post, route and the measures taken regarding them.
8. Correct execution and maintenance of official documents.
Verification of service by squads can be public or hidden.
Topic No. 4 Organization of the work of the police department on duty.
Question No. 1
Purpose: The duty unit is an independent structural unit in the system of internal affairs bodies, which is designed to provide leadership and control over the activities of services and apparatus of various levels of management that are diverse in nature and functions in order to effectively solve problems in the field of maintaining public order and combating crime. (that is, the center: collecting operational information; responding to reports of incidents and crimes; working with those detained and delivered and managing the forces and means involved in maintaining public order.)
The duty units of the Department of Internal Affairs decide the following: tasks and provide:
Continuous round-the-clock collection, processing and transmission of information about the operational situation;
Reception, registration of applications and messages received by the duty station, as well as timely response to them;
Continuous management of the forces and means of the internal affairs body, immediate adoption of measures to solve crimes “hot on the trail”;
Urgent organization of actions to ensure public order, eliminate the consequences of natural disasters and other emergencies and incidents;
Organization of proceedings, including with those detained and delivered;
Control, within its competence, over compliance with the established procedure for the detention and escort of detained and detained persons;
Reception and safety of seized, voluntarily surrendered, found weapons, ammunition, as well as objects and things whose ownership has not been established;
Monitoring the state of security of premises, defense of the police department building and the adjacent territory, its fire safety and sanitary condition;
Transmission to subordinate internal affairs bodies of special signals about the introduction of degrees of readiness and notification of personnel according to them.
Work organization: The tasks assigned to the duty unit are performed by the duty shift, which includes:
- the head of the duty shift, and in the police department, where this position is not provided for in the staffing table, the assistant to the head of the duty unit is the senior operational (operational) duty officer;
– 1-2 assistant operational duty officers;
– duty officer for debriefing those delivered and detained.
In addition, the daily duty outfit includes:
– investigative and operational group (IOG);
– immediate response team (IRT);
– detention group of the centralized security console (CSC) of the private security department;
– drivers of service vehicles of the duty station.
Question No. 2
Order for receiving, organizing and receiving applications and messages
Question No. 3-4
When dealing with offenders brought to the duty station, the operational duty officer is obliged to:
– find out the grounds and reason for the delivery, the availability of information about victims and witnesses;
– establish the identity of the person delivered, his age, physical condition;
– accept a written report from the employee who delivered the offender, and when delivered by citizens, statements;
– draw up a protocol on the delivery of a person in accordance with the requirements of Article 27.2 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation or make an appropriate entry in the protocol on an administrative offense or in the protocol on administrative detention;
– register the fact of delivery in the register of persons delivered to the police station;
Cannot be delivered to the duty station:
– the President of the Russian Federation and the President of the Russian Federation who has ceased to exercise his powers;
– deputies (at various levels);
– registered candidate for deputy of local government bodies;
– judges of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and federal judges;
– prosecutorial employees with class ranks;
– Chairman of the Accounts Chamber, Deputy Chairman of the Accounts Chamber and auditors of the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation;
– Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation;
– foreign citizens enjoying diplomatic immunity;
– Persons who have injuries, bodily injuries that are dangerous to their life and health, or whose condition causes concern (mentally ill).
If the person delivered has injuries, bodily harm or his mental state is in doubt, as well as in the event of a statement on his part about a deterioration in his health, self-inflicted bodily harm, attempted suicide, the operational duty officer is obliged to:
– call an ambulance, and before its arrival, begin providing first aid yourself, ensure constant monitoring of such a person and report the incident to the head of the internal affairs agency;
– find out the reasons and circumstances of injury and bodily harm by the person taken to the duty station, reflect this in the drawn up protocol, receive a statement from him, which is registered in the KUZiSP;
– receive written explanations (reports) from eyewitnesses about the circumstances of the incident in the event that a detainee inflicts bodily harm on himself and attempts suicide on the premises of an internal affairs agency. Report the incident to the head of the police department.
Question No. 5
After making a decision to ensure public order, the stage of direct operational management of the activities of all service units involved in the PLO begins:
Preparation of forces and means to perform assigned tasks, instructing squads;
Ensuring constant and stable communication with the duty unit and between squads, ensuring timely exchange of information;
Organization of interaction, maneuver of forces and means involved in ensuring public order and security;
Control over the organization and performance of service by all units.
Question No. 2
On organizing the detection of a crime by "hot on our heels" The operational duty officer is obliged to:
To figure out:
data on the time, place and circumstances of the crime (incident),
about the signs of the persons who committed it,
about the condition of the victims,
about eyewitnesses and the person who reported the crime (incident).
Register a statement, message.
Immediately organize a visit to the crime scene (incident):
immediate response teams (IRT),
criminal police officers,
UUP serving this territory,
PPSP, traffic police and private security squads,
Note:
1. Taking into account the nature of the crime, determine the composition of the SOG.
2. Ensure, if necessary, the participation in the inspection of the scene of the incident by specialists of the relevant profile in the field of forensic medicine, ballistics, explosion and fire engineering and others, as well as the involvement of additional forces and means to solve the crime.
3. Include in the SOG the employees of units for combating economic crimes when committing serious and especially serious crimes in the economic sphere and working out economic versions when committing murders for hire.
Report the crime (incident) to the head of the police department.
If the information is confirmed to be correct, forward it to the duty station of a higher-level police department.
Take action:
to ensure the protection of the crime scene (incident),
blocking possible escape routes for persons who have committed a crime,
blocking their hiding places,
if necessary, notify other police departments:
about the crime committed,
about the signs of criminals,
about stolen things and other circumstances,
to identify the dead, injured and taken to medical institutions.
Maintain constant contact with the SOG, employees (managers) of the internal affairs department located at the scene of the incident.
Introduce, at the direction of the head of the police department (in his absence, independently with a subsequent report to him), special plans for the detention of suspected persons.
Report the results to the head of the police department and to the duty department of the higher police department.
Topic No. 5 Preparation and instruction of units for service.
Question No. 1,2
Preparation and instruction PPSP squads are conducted in a specially equipped classroom - conducted by officials of the command staff of PPSP units under the leadership of the head of the internal affairs department or his deputies with the mandatory participation of an operational duty officer (arrival 15 minutes before the start of the briefing, duration - 30 minutes)
The instructor must know:
1.operational situation
3. order and features of service on each route.
Employees entering service must have with them:
1. Service ID.
2. Badge, badge.
3. Service book, route card, post.
4. Report forms.
5. Service firearm with two loaded magazines.
6. Holster with rubbing and safety strap.
7. Special stick.
8. Handcuffs.
9. Whistle.
10. Wearable radio station.
11. Pocket electric flashlight.
Depending on the nature of the tasks performed, along with the PPSP, the following may additionally be issued:
Electroshock device, aerosol spray, hand-held inspection metal detector, binoculars, etc.
The instructor must:
1. Make sure that personnel are ready for service and take measures to eliminate identified deficiencies.
2. Check the knowledge of patrol officers and guards (their rights and responsibilities, certain provisions of regulatory legal acts, etc.)
3. Bring up the operational situation, assign specific tasks to each squad for the entire period of service, explain the procedure for shifts, communications and interaction.
4. Work out introductory tasks with PPSP squads, while analyzing the most typical tactical techniques of serving, including in special conditions (conducting surveillance, identifying criminals by subtle signs and signs, preventing and suppressing terrorist acts, group violations of public order, detaining armed criminals and others).
6. Draw the attention of the PPSP squads to the need to comply with the law and be attentive to citizens.
7. Answer existing questions.