During a time of marked high-profile cases that have turned a spotlight onto policies and training in law enforcement and amid the cries for officer training in areas such as cultural sensitivity and de-escalation, very little attention is given to how well officers write, the impact of that writing, the evaluation of prospective officers’ writing skills, and training to improve officers’ writing skills. No one will see a story on the five o’clock news about a local officer who writes poorly, but you will see the repercussions of this writing in the community. Poor writing affects the prosecution of cases and reflects poorly on both the individual officer and on the department.

Writing is clearly an important element of an officer’s job. A patrol officer who responds to calls for service must produce incident reports that document his or her response. Supervisors produce documents that evaluate their subordinates. Department staff prepare grant applications to seek funding for equipment or training. Press releases are prepared by public information officers for use by media outlets. Many agencies have active Facebook, Twitter, and other social media accounts that are maintained by officers. Given all of these writing-oriented tasks, it might be assumed that departments regard writing as important. It might also be assumed that agencies evaluate prospective officers’ writing skills and provide subsequent opportunities to develop those skills. Is this true?

To help answer this question, a survey of Ohio police chiefs was conducted in which they were asked the following questions:

• How important do you consider writing to aspects of an officer’s daily work?
• What qualities are important in an officer’s writing?
• Do you evaluate prospective officers’ writing skills during the hiring process? If so, how do you do this? If not, why not?
• Do you offer training in writing? If so, how? If not, why not?

Nearly 200 Ohio police chiefs participated in the survey, which included both closed and open-ended questions. Respondents were grouped based on the communities served using population and the administrative divisions in the state of Ohio: county, municipality (which includes villages and cities), and townships. Respondents who identified as working for the State of Ohio, a college or university, or the park system were categorized separately.

Nearly half of the respondents (42.8 percent) serve a county, municipality, or township with a population fewer than 10,000. A little more than one quarter (27.2 percent) serve a county, municipality, or township with a population between 10,000 to 24,999. About 13 percent (12.7 percent) serve a county, municipality, or township with a population between 25,000 to 49,000. Less than 10 percent (6.3 percent) serve a college or university; a county, municipality, or township with a population between 50,000 to 99,999; or work for the state of Ohio (4.6 percent). Very few respondents served a county, municipality, or township with a population of 250,000 (0.6 percent), or a county, municipality, or township with a population between 100,000 to 249,999 (0.6 percent).

Importance of Writing Skills

Unsurprisingly, police chiefs across Ohio agreed that writing skills are important, but as Table 1 shows, distinctions can be seen in the strength of shared belief.

All respondents recognized the importance of writing skills to the success of an officer. Respondents were most likely to strongly agree that an officer’s writing skills affect public perception and impact the prosecution of cases. However, as shown in Table 1, there were less strong feelings among respondents about whether an officer’s writing skills impact their promotion in the department. Similarly, fewer respondents strongly agreed or disagreed that an officer’s writing skills affect whether they are considered for special assignments.

These distinction in levels of agreement can be categorized into external and internal considerations. Respondents were far more likely to strongly agree with statements connected to things external to the department (public perception, prosecution of cases) than things internal to the department (supervisor perception, promotion, special assignments). This could be because respondents recognize the important role that officers’ writing, often employed in public documents, plays in the world, but, inside agencies, where personalities and other types of accomplishments and skills are valued, writing is regarded as less important or significant.

Qualities Important to Writing Skills

Respondents were asked to evaluate how important nine different qualities are to an officer’s writing skills. Table 2 summarizes these responses.

As with responses to the question about whether writing was important to the work of police officers, respondents generally agreed that all traits had some level of importance, with creativity being the only trait ranked as very unimportant or not at all important by some. Accuracy of information, completeness of information, and ethically responsible were all seen as extremely important by large percentages (>70 percent) of respondents. These are traits that are most important to report writing. However, what about other writing tasks? For example, social media posts might require more creativity, and although law enforcement needs to be accurate and complete in its communications, sometimes information might be deliberately withheld for safety, privacy, or investigative reasons.

Evaluating Writing Skills

If most chiefs agree that writing is important, are they all evaluating those skills in their prospective officers? For more than a third of Ohio police chiefs, the answer is “no.” Table 3 details chiefs’ reasoning for this apparent oversight.

The most frequently mentioned reason was that a writing skills evaluation was not part of the hiring process. Why not? For some agencies, civil service rules dictate the hiring process, and as one chief noted, those who develop those rules “are not receptive to change.” Several respondents believed that a tool was not available or that there was no evaluation that could truly assess those skills. Some departments asserted the skill can be taught or that the FTO program would assist with this. Somewhat surprisingly, four respondents had not considered evaluating writing skills.

More than 100 hundred respondents described how they evaluated prospective officers’ writing skills. These responses were categorized into 19 groups according to emergent themes. Approximately one-quarter of respondents (n=23) offered multiple measures in their open-ended responses. Table 4 shows the themes and frequency of mention.

The largest evaluation method (“written exercise during hiring process”) includes any type of writing completed by the candidate during the hiring process, but this group excludes those responses that mention either a narrative on the application or a scenario-based report.

Nearly 20 percent of responses (17.4 percent) mentioned some form of general testing or a form of written or writing test or exam . Due to the high level of importance given to correct grammar by respondents, the use of these types of tests, which often do evaluate grammar, seems logical, but limited.

The only assessment described by respondents that mirrors the kind of work patrol officers do was a scenario-based report, which was employed by 13.6 percent of respondents. Although, eight responses referenced narrative portions of the application, only one specified the nature of the narrative writing by calling it a “Written Personal History Statement.” Responses mentioning the resumé were grouped separately. The resumé provides a professional history, gives some indication of design skills and proofreading, but will not necessarily provide a reader with a strong sense of the kind of writing skills necessary for producing incident reports. Additionally, the resumé might have been prepared by a third party or with assistance, so its reliability as an indicator should be questioned. Four responses said they looked at reports produced by the candidate at their previous or current agency.

Given these varied approaches, how effectively do these efforts assess the writing skills of prospective officers? Although most respondents indicated that they evaluate prospective officers’ writing skills, this is misleading. Just looking at how an applicant completes an application or how well she or he does on a writing test that has nothing to do with the actual writing officers do on the job, might not provide an accurate assessment. Tests or exams that test basic writing skills and reading comprehension provide insight into a skill set, but don’t necessarily tell the agency whether the officer will prepare effective reports or behave ethically when preparing reports. Thus, even though some agencies state they are evaluating writing skills, they aren’t evaluating the kind of writing skills necessary for officer success.

The ideal way to evaluate writing skills might be to use an assessment that mimics the work an officer will be doing:

The central concept of giving an applicant a set of tasks that have fidelity with the job for which they are being evaluated not only makes intuitive sense and provides strong face validity, but also sets the stage for superior measurement.¹

Many departments have embraced the use of assessment centers, which provide simulations that allow candidates to be evaluated. Often, these assessment centers are used to evaluate candidates for promotion within the organization and, thus, are used for small pools of candidates; for example, an agency might use an assessment center to determine its next chief from a pool of four candidates. The limited use of these assessment centers reflects the increased cost and labor intensiveness of the method. When an agency is looking at a pool of 100 applicants for a patrol officer opening, it probably lacks both the time and resources to use an assessment center for all the candidates.

The National Testing Network, mentioned by several respondents, offers the Frontline National Writing Test and other assessments that provide candidates with a brief scenario to watch and then write up in a factual report. They are given two opportunities to view the scenario and 10 minutes to write the report after being given an example of a good response to such a prompt.² This seems to approximate what an officer does when preparing an incident report, but it does not replicate the conditions in which officers do prepare those reports—whether that’s by dictating the report after a call, typing the report on a terminal located somewhere in the city, or preparing the report at the end of one’s shift. It also does not evaluate how effectively an officer can do other types of writing.

Looking at reports produced by the applicant in a previous or current position seems to be a good approach, too, but this method obviously can be done only when officers have been previously employed. From survey responses, it is unclear whether all agencies that could review reports from current or previous employment did so.

Report Writing Training Opportunities Once Hired

Approximately two-thirds of respondents indicate that once hired, officers receive writing training during their time in the organization. Of the 56 agencies who do not offer writing training for officers, 28 respondents explained why. Table 5 summarizes these findings.

It is unsurprising, but concerning, that budget is the most frequently mentioned reason. Additionally, several respondents did not believe there was a tool available or have not found an acceptable training tool. Several responses indicated a belief that once an officer is hired, no additional training is necessary.

Those respondents who affirmed training was offered were asked about the nature and frequency of that training. Tables 6a and 6b summarize their responses. Some respondents merely noted the frequency of training, which was most often on an as-needed basis, with some respondents indicating the training was offered annually.

The FTO program was mentioned most frequently as the source for training. One concern should be whether FTOs are adequately prepared to help officers improve their writing. FTOs have so many responsibilities when working with new officers; it is difficult to believe that they have much time to focus on writing. Typically, most FTO programs do not have a formal writing component, so training would be informal and at the discretion of the FTO. Also, given FTOs’ work with officers at the start of their career, their focus is probably on the immediate task of incident report writing. What about officers who wish to develop grant writing skills or need to strengthen their personnel evaluation writing? What about FTOs whose writing skills are limited? Also, good writers are not necessarily good teachers, so an FTO who is a good writer might not be able to teach those skills to another officer.

Something external to the department, such as a class offered at Ohio Peace Officer Training Academy or another external provider, was the next most frequently mentioned training source. There are many commercial providers of writing and other forms of training, as well as those associated with universities, such as the Southern Police Institute at University of Louisville and the Justice and Safety Institute through Penn State. Still, the options remain limited.

Supervisors were mentioned as a source of training by 13 respondents. Some respondents described how patrol officers have their reports reviewed regularly and sent back for corrections. As with FTOs, given their other responsibilities, how effectively can supervisors provide writing instruction?

A general reference to reprt writing training—without offering specific details—was mentioned by nine respondents. These responses and others suggest that when asked about “writing training,” most respondents thought about report writing. But what about the other forms of writing that officers produce?

Limitations of the Survey and Additional Research Pathways

As with any research, there are limitations. Respondents were asked only to evaluate a list of traits associated with writing. They were not given definitions of these traits or asked about how important each was to different types of writing. Audience focus was not included in the list, but it certainly is a significant aspect of any writing.

Although the open-ended questions provided respondents with opportunities to explain their departments’ practices, it also made it more difficult to categorize responses in ways that allowed generalizations. Additionally, some respondents provided far more details than others.

When respondents were asked about writing, many focused on report writing. It would have been useful to ask respondents about other types of writing done by law enforcement, such as social media posts, press releases, personnel evaluations, and grant applications. More research is needed in these areas. Though the amount of academic research concerning law enforcement writing remains limited, Leslie Seawright’s Genre of Power: Police Report Writers and Readers in the Justice System (2017) analyzes the constraints of report writing to illustrate the genre’s complex rhetorical situations.³

Conclusions and Recommendations

Police chiefs know writing is important, and they know why. One chief noted,

The ability of a police officer to accurately report and record events and investigations is a cornerstone requirement of our profession. I have seen police officers lose their jobs and criminal investigations due to poor reporting practices. Poor documentation and reporting also contributes to a mistrust from the public and a lack of accountability.⁴

Some police leaders also expressed concern about both the quality of officers’ writing as well as the ability to assess this key skill prior to hiring. One chief noted that writing skills are “crucial, but often sadly deficient!” Another matter-of-factly stated, “Little verification of the officer’s writing level is known prior to the officer’s hire date.”

Despite this recognition, it is surprising that a higher percentage of respondents didn’t acknowledge the importance of writing to things like promotion and special assignments. Increased responsibility within an organization brings with it increasingly complex writing tasks. As agencies are called upon to do more with less, reliance on external grant funding as well as competition for those grants have become more significant. Law enforcement agencies’ use of social media, certainly a kind of writing, has become more important.5 Whereas before the community would read about a department’s actions in a daily newspaper, now citizens can read a Facebook status update or tweet. Although creativity was regarded as the least important quality in an officer’s writing, this trait could be particularly useful when using social media.

Agencies should not assume that increased educational requirements and technology are a substitute for assessing and developing writing skills. One chief notes, “As the profession moves forward, the face of the police department appears to be changing to a more educated culture with college experience and/or degrees.” The assumption that by hiring college graduates, departments are hiring candidates who can write effectively in a law enforcement setting is misguided—in both content and context, academic writing differs significantly from the kinds of writing officers produce during their careers. This does not mean that college degrees are not useful for law enforcement officers, but they are not a substitute for evaluating writing and offering training opportunities.

Despite some respondents’ comments, technology is not the answer. Technology is a vehicle for writing, not a replacement for it. In his President’s Message, “Technology’s Role in Policing,” then-IACP President Yost Zakhary emphasized,

It is imperative that we not let technology replace the essential tool of human communications and basics of police work. Training, officer safety, report writing, fact finding, and interviewing and interrogating witnesses and suspects are all basic tools and essential elements of policing that we must impart to our officers.⁶

Departments that do not think they need to or can evaluating writing skills should change their mind-set, and civil service commissions must recognize the need to evaluate candidate’s writing skills. Writing skills should be included in the job description for officers. This would allow agencies to take action should an officer be deficient in these skills. Agencies can incorporate writing training more formally into their FTO programs and add writing as a component of their ongoing evaluation process, if not part of it already, and develop methods to identify writing deficiencies early in the officer’s career, so they can be addressed. Agencies could also increase the weight given to writing skills in officer evaluation throughout their careers and require all newly promoted officers to attend writing training. To achieve this, agency leaders and trainers need to discuss what constitutes effective writing in law enforcement settings. As discussed previously, what makes a good incident report might not be the same as what makes an effective grant application or a good Facebook update.

Training can and must play an important role for officers once hired. Some respondents believe that officers can be trained to produce effective reports, so a potentially strong candidate should not be eliminated because of a deficiency that could be addressed through proper training. One chief states, “We can hopefully increase the writing skills for new hires rather than eliminate candidates before we have the opportunity to train them in report writing.” But what does this training look like? Who offers it and how frequently is it done?

Clearly, cost plays a key role in preventing some departments from both evaluating prospective officers’ writing skills and offering training opportunities. Given such concerns, economical ways must be found to assess candidates’ writing skills. Not all departments have the financial resources to use national testing companies such as NTN. In addition, asking officers to prepare an incident report based on a scenario (what NTN offers) most closely mimics the day-to-day writing that beginning patrol officers would do, but not necessarily the kind of work a deputy police chief does.

To address concerns about cost and resources, agencies might collaborate with local colleges and universities to develop mechanisms to evaluate prospective officers’ writing skills. Funded through a grant or done as a service project, faculty members might read and evaluate writing produced by candidates using a rubric developed with the law enforcement agency. This could also facilitate discussions within a department about what makes writing effective in law enforcement. Higher education institutions can be effective partners, although the possibilities for some agencies might be limited by geography and faculty interest.

Another model is to develop a “train-the-trainer” workshop that focuses on preparing members of a department to both evaluate candidates’ writing and offer in-house writing instruction. Although train-the-trainer workshops exist for topics as diverse as arrest and control, managing the FTO program, police motorcycle instructor, and advanced forensic photography, none appear to address writing tasks. This is something that Miami University Regionals is exploring.

As noted earlier, the daily writing activities of officers affect public perception and community relations in profound ways. Therefore, agencies must find ways to both evaluate prospective officers’ writing skills and offer training opportunities that address the increasingly complex and diverse writing tasks for law enforcement in the 21st century.

Notes:

¹ Michael Fetzer and Kathy Tuzinski, Simulations for Personnel Selection (New York, NY: Springer-Verlag, 2013).

² National Testing Network, “NTN Tests – Frontline National,” 2012.

³ Myron Miller and Paula Pomerenke, “Police Reports Must Be Reader Based,” Law and Order 37, no. 9 (September 1989): 66–69, an early and rare recognition of the importance of audience-centered report writing. Within criminal justice studies, some attention has been given to teaching writing to criminal justice students and professionals: Anita Neuberger Blowers and Maureen M. Donahue, “Teaching a Writing-Intensive Criminal Justice Course: An Educational Challenge,” Journal of Criminal Justice Education 5, no. 1 (1994): 70–80; Michael Doyle and Robert J. Meadows, “A Writing-Intensive Approach to Criminal Justice Education: The California Lutheran University Model,” Justice Professional 10, no. 1 (1997): 19–30; Delbert L. Rounds Jr. and Karen L. McCullough, “Writing Across the Curriculum and Criminal Justice Courses: Successful Assignments 101,” Journal of Criminal Justice Education 9, no. 1 (1998): 155–167; David. D. Legere, “Incorporating Writing in Criminal Justice Curriculum,” Journal of Criminal Justice Education 24, no. 1 (2013): 1–14. Stephanie Odom and Richard C. Helfers, “Improving Criminal Justice Students’ Writing Outcomes through Systematic Writing Instruction,” Journal of Criminal Justice Education 27, no. 4 (2016): 549–566; Leslie Seawright, Genre of Power: Police Report Readers and Writers in the Justice System (Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English, 2017).

⁴ All direct quotes are from the survey of Ohio chiefs discussed in the article unless otherwise noted.

⁵ Mark Marshall, “Social Media Solutions Specific to You,” President’s Message, Police Chief 78, no. 6 (June 2011): 6.

⁶ Yousry “Yost” Zakhary, “Technology’s Role in Policing,” President’s Message, Police Chief 81, no. 2 (February 2014): 6.