By Gregory M.

Vecchi, PhD, CFC and

The FBI Behavioral

Thomas Dover, MS

Introduction

Science Units
Instruction can be thought of as both an art
and a science because it involves both subjec-
tive and objective criteria. Many instructors

Approach to World-
focus only on the latter in terms of knowledge
and forget that how the audience feels about
both the instructor and the instruction is just

Class Training
as important. For example, if an instructor is a
subject matter expert in a given area (objective
criterion), that does not guarantee he or she
will be effective unless the knowledge is effec-
tively delivered and the audience perceives the
instructor as being credible (subjective criteri-
ons) (Brookfield, 1995; Davis, 2001; Jamieson,
1999; Madonik, 2001; Pickles, 1996; Schwarz,
1994). This article will examine the objective
and subjective aspects of effective instruction
with an emphasis on delivery and credibility
in terms of communication.
CE ARTICLE

The views expressed in this article do not

necessarily represent the views of the FBI.

62 THE FORENSIC EXAMINER Fall 2010


Effective Instruction
Instruction comprises two aspects of impart-
ing knowledge to an audience: teaching and
training (Brookfield, 1995; Davis, 2001;
Jamieson, 1999; Pickles, 1996; Schwarz,
1994). Teaching involves learning concepts
and constructs from a purely cognitive
methodology using lectures, presentations,
and case studies, as with legal instruction.
Training is the acquisition of knowledge,
skills, and competencies that results in the
development of job-related operational skills
such as in forensics, policing, psychotherapy,
and homeland security. Using a hybrid of
teaching and training approaches has been
found to be very effective because doing so
combines the explicit knowledge that is a
characteristic of teaching (cognitive) with
the tacit knowledge that is characteristic of
training (using the five senses) (Bowman,
1998; Horton, 2000).
WWW.ACFEI.COM (800) 592-1399
Effective instruction comprises three ar-
eas in which an instructor must excel: 1)
knowledge, 2) delivery, and 3) credibility
(see Figure 1). Knowledge refers to a thor-
ough understanding of the subject matter,
including experience in its application. For
example, an instructor who conducts train-
ing in counterterrorism should have experi-
ence working terrorism investigations and
should also have the appropriate education
and research experience to support the in-
struction (Lubet, 1998). Delivery is the abil-
ity to impart the knowledge to the audience
in an efficient and effective manner. This is
analogous to two individuals telling the same
joke to the same audience but only one of
them eliciting the desired response (laugh-
ter). Credibility is the ability of the instructor
to appear believable to the audience (Lubet,
1998). This involves whether or not an in-
structor is perceived as trustworthy and has
CE ARTICLE
Fall 2010 THE FORENSIC EXAMINER 63
 expertise in the subject matter. Credibility
is the most subjective of these areas.
Effective instruction is supported by re-
search and practice. The FBI Behavioral
Science Unit (BSU) has developed a very
effective model for delivering world-class
training to the criminal justice, military,
and intelligence communities. This model
requires all training to be supported by re-
search and consultation (Brookfield, 1995;
Lubet, 1998). In other words, if they train
it, they research it and if they train it, they
consult it. This approach ensures that the
training is and remains effective. Applied
research is used to support training from the
standpoint of relevancy and accuracy. BSU
research studies human beings and how they
behave as individuals and groups with a spe-
cific focus on internal and external reactions
to stimuli. This comes from the position
that behavior is a function of the person and
environment (Lewin, 2007), which can be
expressed as:
B = f (p + e)
Social science disciplines such as anthro-
pology, psychology, sociology, criminology,
and conflict studies underscore and inform
this research. Research validates the training
programs. Practice, in the form of case and
operational consultation, keeps BSU instruc-
tors credible to the learners and prevents
CE ARTICLE
FIGURE 2: Sender-Receive Conveyance
64 THE FORENSIC EXAMINER Fall 2010
FIGURE 1: Factors of Effective Instruction
them from becoming stale.
Effective Communication from the instructor to a student, or in some
At its core, instruction is a knowledge trans-
fer process that relies upon effective com-
munication. Communication, in general,
entails the concept that a message is being
conveyed from a sender to a receiver (see
Figure 2). More specifically, it involves the
process of codifying knowledge into an eas-
ily transmitted bundle of information that
can be sent from one entity (the sender) to
another (the receiver) (Shannon & Weaver,
1949; Schramm, 1954; Berlo, 1960). As the
recipient of codified information, the receiv-
er must decode the information bundle and
accept (or reject) the knowledge contained
in the message.
Within an instructional paradigm, commu-
nication entails the delivery of knowledge
cases, from a presenter to his or her audi-
ence. Furthermore, in a learning environ-
ment, communication is best regarded as a
two-way street that enables the instructor to
transfer knowledge to and receive feedback
from a student to enhance and modify fur-
ther instruction. In instruction, the primary
objective of communication is to provide
students with appropriate knowledge that
has been codified into an easily decoded
and interpretable form. Thus, the method
of instructor communication should ensure
that once the information has been received
by a student, it is clear, understandable, and
pertinent to the topic at hand.
In communication, it is always possible
that a receiver is unaware of a senders mes-
sage, the receiver is uninterested in the send-
ers message, the sender miscommunicates a
message, or the receiver completely misinter-
prets the senders message. These issues can
usually be traced to ambient confusion that
confounds the communicative process. In
instruction, this noise can be related to the
environment of the instruction, physiologi-
cal impairment of the instructor or student,
semantic inconsistencies, syntactical noise,
organizational structure, cultural differences,
or even the psychological or emotional state
of the instructor or student (Berko, Wolvin,
& Wolvin, 2010).
With all of the possibilities for faulty com-
munication, it is sometimes a wonder that
messages are ever conveyed with any sense
of accuracy. Effective communication must
involve three elements: a sender with a clear
message, an unambiguous and well-delivered
message, and a receptive audience. Without
all of these elements, communication is re-
duced to noise and confusion.
For any communication to be effective,
the receiver must be receptive. For example,

FIGURE 3: Receiving, Decoding, and Absorbing a Conveyed Message
there is no sense in transmitting a radio
signal if the receiving radio is turned off.
Similarly, the ambient noise encountered
during instruction can effectively overpower
a student and turn his or her desire or ability
to receive a message off. Much of the noise
encountered during communication and the
instructional process can be traced to the
students perception of the instructor.
How an instructor communicates affects
how the topic of instruction is received.
Furthermore, the initial receptivity of the
audience is an important part of priming
the audience to accept and absorb the topic
of instruction. The initial receptivity of an
audience is often determined prior to any
face-to-face contact with an instructor and
may have more to do with word of mouth
about quality of instruction from previous
students, the institution the instructor repre-
sents, or the perceived relevance of the topic
to the students short- and long-term goals.
The receptivity of an audience may be fur-
ther affected by the physical location, time
of day, or even timeliness of the topic. The
bottom line is that there are a huge number
of factors that will affect the audiences inter-
est, motivation, or even their ability to re-
ceive a message (Brookfield, 1995; Madonic,
2001).
While all of the factors that affect stu-
dent receptivity cannot be controlled by an
instructor, there are certainly some factors
that the instructor can directly influence and
others that an instructor can at the very least
manage. For instance, the instructor does
have a certain amount of control over the
immediate environment within which the
instruction is to take place. If the instructor
is to communicate face-to-face then room
temperature, classroom configuration, and
learning aids such as a dry-erase board and
presentation materials are all potentially
subject to stylistic change. Furthermore,
distance learning via internet or teleconfer-
ence gives the instructor a level of control
over the learning environment and how the
instructors message is conveyed. Even in
environments that are fixed or that afford the
instructor little opportunity for re-configu-
ration, the instructors flexibility and adapt-
ability are key to effective communication.
Receptivity
In communication, the receivers receptiv-
ity, or willingness to accept the message, is
paramount to the successful completion of
a communicated message. The message con-
veyed exists between the sender and receiver
but the reception of the message is internal
to the receiver. Successful instruction neces-
sitates that a student not only receives the
instruction, but also absorbs it. Therefore
a discussion of what constitutes a receivers
receptivity is very important to understand-
ing effective instruction.
Figure 3 illustrates the internal process of
receptivity within a receiver. When a message
is conveyed to a receiver, the message must
first be received, that is, it must be experi-
enced by the receiver in its encoded form,
free from error or defect. In an instructional
environment, this means the student hears
the actual words and sees the actual images
that the instructor intended to convey.
After the message has been received, it
must then be decoded. The receiver must
interpret the language, images, and concepts
WWW.ACFEI.COM (800) 592-1399
that have been conveyed by the sender. Thus,
the student must make sense of the instruc-
tors message. The student must assign mean-
ing and value to the message being conveyed.
The student will decide if this message is
valid, if this message is meaningful, and if
the message is worth retaining. At this point,
the students impressions of the instructor
and his or her credibility as an expert will
be evaluated and the message will be given
weight or dismissed.
If the receiver has validated the message,
then the message will be absorbed. This
means that the student will accept the mes-
sage and incorporate it with previous in-
struction, experience and the overall subject
matter. If, however, the message is not ab-
sorbed, the student may reject the message
and regard not only the message but also the
instructor as a non-credible.
Within the first few minutes of a com-
munication, most people know whether
or not there is a reason to be receptive to
continued communication, or whether to
effectively tune the sender out. In an in-
structional environment, one important
factor in this decision is whether or not the
student respects who or what the instructor
represents and whether or not the student
clearly understands and accepts the instruc-
tors perspective. In other words, the student
needs to feel that the instructor knows what
he or she is talking about.
CE ARTICLE
Sender
In communication, it is very difficult to
separate the message from the sender. The
sender frames the message, encodes the mes-
sage, and delivers the message. As a conveyer
of a message, the instructor brings a per-
sonal level of experience to the classroom.
The sender is the resident subject matter
expert and sets the tone for expectations of
expertise.
Experience and Expertise
Experience is a dynamic process that involves
the buildup of practical understanding and
subject familiarity (Lubet, 1998). Experience
leads to special knowledge or skill of a sub-
ject matter gained through exposure to the
subject at varying levels. It is the accumula-
tion and cultivation of experience that results
in expertise. Experience and expertise grow
over time and always effect and frame an
individuals perspective.
In law enforcement, most instructors have
at the very minimum a generalized idea
Fall 2010 THE FORENSIC EXAMINER 65
 of how the criminal justice system works;
however, this general knowledge is often not
enough to be an effective instructor, especial-
ly in a highly specialized discipline. Take, for
instance, a course on crime analysis. It would
be reasonable to assume that a member of
law enforcement could speak in generalities
about the process of crime analysis. If an
instructor is not an expert, then he or she
might consult with individuals considered
experts in the field.
Ideally, in a course on crime analysis, the
instructor would have more than an academ-
ic grasp of the discipline because it is an ap-
plied specialty. Therefore, in a class on crime
analysis, one would expect a truly effective
instructor to have a certain level of experi-
ence in practical crime analysis application
and to be able to relate his or her experience
to the instruction. Not only does practical
experience give an instructor a legitimate
frame of reference to inform instruction, it
also gives the instructor a higher likelihood
of being able to talk off-text on the subject
and handle in-depth questions and answers
from students.
Furthermore, an instructor who has practi-
cal experience in the subject matter also has
a place as a de facto subject matter expert in
the eyes of the students. Even if a class on
crime analysis includes crime analysts, the
subject matter expertise displayed by an in-
structor with experience gives an instructor
CE ARTICLE
step outside of his or her own experiential
knowledge and provide a more empirically-
based perspective. Thus, while it is helpful
and very appropriate to speak to the topic on
a personal experience level, it is even more
beneficial to supplement that knowledge
with accurate research and statistics.
Ultimately, an instructor who demon-
strates a practical- and researched-based com-
mand of the subject matter will even further
enhance his or her expertise by incorporating
a sense of innovation into the topic. While it
is very instructive to learn techniques from
a practitioner and see the results of research,
instruction from the conceptual innovator of
the subject matter that underlies the tech-
nique and research is even more impressive.
Whether you agree with his theories or not,
who wouldnt jump at the chance to attend
a psychoanalysis class in which Freud himself
is the instructor?
Subject matter expertise, then, is devel-
oped through practice, research, and in-
novation. An instructor will be made more
effective and more credible only as he or she
accumulates and cultivates expertise.
Communication and Experience
Communication depends not only on the
senders experience but alsoperhaps more
importantlyon the receivers experience.
If a message is sent from a sender who is
qualified to send the message, then the re-
A students long-term experience is de-
veloped through involvement or lack of
involvement with the subject matter and it
may color initial perceptions of an instruc-
tor; however, short-term experience which is
controlled by the instructor and his or her
delivery of the subject matter may reinforce
or dampen the initial perception. This may
be good or it may be bad. For example, if
an individual has a reputation that precedes
him as a great instructor, then student expec-
tations may be dampened if he is less than
engaging. On the other hand, an instructor
who has a tedious subject may stimulate his
students with his delivery style and create a
short-term experience that excites and mo-
tivates them.
Source Credibility
To effectively communicate, the sender must
engender trust from the receiver that the
message is legitimate and appropriate (Berko,
Wolvin, & Wolvin, 2010; Berlo, 1960; Katz
& Lawyer, 1992; Shannon & Weaver, 1949,
Schramm, 1954). In doing so, the sender
must establish a sense of credibility. That is
to say the senders expertise is institutionally,
experientially, and personally believable.
Credibility is assigned by the recipients of
a message and is intertwined with the receiv-
ers perception of the sender. While it is quite
possible in some instructional environments
that there are students who have first-hand

the opportunity to speak the language of the
topic and relate to the class.
Practical experience, however, is not the
only way to establish a level of subject mat-
ter expertise. Research (especially when in-
formed by practical experience) gives the
instructor not only the opportunity to evoke
a sense of knowledge and proficiency in the
subject, but also allows the instructor to
ceiver must have a means to recognize that
the sender is qualified. Thus, a students
experience, both external and internal to
the instructional environment, matters.
In fact, while the student may initially ac-
cept or reject an instructor as an expert, it
is through experience with that instructor
that the student may start to change his or
her perspective.
knowledge of an instructors expertise, the
majority of students most likely do not. Thus
the instructor must rely on his or her sense of
credibility. In an instructional environment
that is designed to challenge the students
understanding, the instructors message is
likely to be met, at first, with some level of
skepticism or resistance. It is the perceived
credibility that an instructor cultivates that

About the Authors

Gregory M.Vecchi, PhD, CFC, CHS-V, DABCIP, DABLEE is the Unit Chief of the Behavioral Science Unit
(BSU), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Dr.Vecchi conducts research, training, and consultation activities in
behavior-based conflict analysis and resolution, crisis management, conflict and crisis communication, and global
hostage-taking.

Need bio hereGue consequipit, sectem ent vullam del utpat. Olore volor augait iriure el-
iquissed tatinci bla feum quam vulputpat, quipsum et, quat nit num velit non ut wis non vul-
put praesto dip et lam veliscidunt dolobor percin ea aciduipit dolessim ing eugue magnis euisl delismodo conse-
quisis nullandrem quismol oreril ulputpat, vel ut ullan utem nonsectet, velit vullaor se minci etum qui bla autet,
susci bla feugue volesed mod molessed dolorper ing exero core conulput at wis elenibh enibh ex et, susci er sum
nim ilis nulla aut lor aut volenibh exerat, volestrud diatem vercip esting eugait wis doluptatem zzrilla feuip eugu

66 THE FORENSIC EXAMINER Fall 2010

 WWW.ACFEI.COM (800) 592-1399

gives him or her the benefit of the students FIGURE 4: Interplay of Sender, Delivery Method,
doubt. and Credibility During Instruction
For the sake of argument, credibility can
be categorized as personal credibility, expe-
riential credibility, and institutional cred-
ibility. Personal credibility is the sense that
students get from an instructor who under-
stands the students perspective. It also refers
to the perception that the instructor is hon-
est about what he or she does and does not
know. Experiential credibility refers to the
perception that the instructor is qualified by
experience, practice, research, or innovation
to speak authoritatively about the subject
matter. In law enforcement, this experiential
credibility may come from knowledge of the
instructors previous unit assignments or
involvement in specific cases. Institutional
credibility refers to organizational vetting
that assures the student that the instructor
is qualified. This type of credibility may
take the form of credentials, certifications,
or degrees. Institutional credibility can be
considered dynamic because not only does
an institution affect the instructors cred-
ibility but in the end, but the instructor also
affects the institutions credibility based on
his or her performance. FIGURE 5: Delivery and Credibility Effects on Student Perception
Credibility is not necessarily accumulative.
Unlike experience, credibility may grow over
time, but it can also be very quickly dimin-
ished by sanction. As a perception-driven
factor, credibility depends on engendering an

CE ARTICLE
enduring trust in the perceiver. Thus, if the
sender, who was initially determined to be
credible, sends messages that are ultimately
not credible, t6he receiver will reconfigure
his or her perception of the senders credibil-
ity. In an instructional environment, the in-
structor must continue to foster the percep-
tion of credibility to his or her students.

Delivery
The delivery of the message is the transfer of
knowledge from the sender to the receiver
(Katz & Lawyer, 1992). The delivery of
instruction must take into account the sub-
ject matter and the student receptivity. The
students motivation for being instructed,
as well as the relevance of the topic to the
student, must be considered.
In communication, there is never only
one single way to convey a message. In the
instructional environment, there are numer-
ous educational theories and methodologies
to construct compelling curriculula and en-
courage active learning. These methods are
beyond the scope of this paper; however, it
is worth mentioning that an instructor who
wishes to effectively communicate to his or
her students must understand that students
have different modalities of learning. Some
students are visually oriented, others learn
best through auditory stimuli, and yet others
learn through motion and writing. Thus, the
effective instructor will show students, tell
students, and encourage students to write
it down.
Instruction as a Multi-
Dimensional Concept
It is not a stretch to call effective instruction
an art. In fact, many effective instructors
come by their effectiveness naturally; how-
ever, for the rest of us who wish to become
effective instructors, the study of effective
techniques is in itself instructive. Ultimately,
the art of instruction comes down to the

Fall 2010 THE FORENSIC EXAMINER 67

 interplay of several factors:
Sender
Perceived credibility of the sender
Delivery method employed by the
sender
Receptivity of the receiver
Figure 4 illustrates a model of the rather
complex relationships posed by instructor
communication. The interplay of sender
(instructor), delivery method, and credibility
as perceived and interpreted by the receiver
(student) of said instruction. Note the mul-
tiple layers of sender experience and types of
credibility perceived by a receiver.
Figure 5 shows a much more simplified
view of this dynamic model. It is important
to note that while the objective of instruction
is to convey a message from the instructor
(sender) to the student (receiver), there is no
direct way to achieve this. Figure 5 illustrates
that credibility and delivery are vehicles for
the instructor to convey a message to stu-
dents. The instructor must codify the mes-
sage (subject matter) and relay it through the
delivery method. By conveying a message of
expertise and trust through perceived cred-
ibility, the instructor has an opportunity to
enhance the subject matter directed through
the delivery method.
Credibility and delivery constantly inter-
act and can be used to reinforce each other.
However, because both are interpreted by
CE ARTICLE
the student receivers, they also can nullify
each others effectiveness. Thus, an instruc-
tor with great delivery but no expertise and,
therefore, no credibility, will be ineffective.
In the same respect, a credible instructor who
is highly qualified as an expert but does not
know how to properly deliver a lecture will
also ultimately be ineffectual.
Instructional Pathways
The model proposed in Figure 5 offers an
opportunity to further illustrate the interac-
tion of the instructor and student through
delivery and credibility. In Figure 6, instruc-
tional pathways can be discerned as routes by
which the students receptivity to instruction
is based on the students perception of the
instructors credibility (as it is affected by de-
livery method) and the instructors delivery
method (as it is reconciled with the students
growing perception of the instructors cred-
ibility). Note the student only experiences
the instructor through the filters of delivery
and credibility. It is important to note that
this process model is based on dynamic
68 THE FORENSIC EXAMINER Fall 2010
FIGURE 6: Importance of Credibility and
Delivery on Student Perceptions
perception of the instructor by the student,
which is constantly revised by the students
experience with the instructors delivery and
perceived credibility.
Typically, prior to any instruction, the stu-
dents impression of the instructor is filtered
by the students perception of the instructors
credibility. Thus, students may have heard of
the instructor, read a document authored by
the instructor, or may be familiar with the
authors institutional affiliation. Once in-
struction has begun, the students receptivity
is affected as a result of the students dynamic
perception of instructors credibility which
is now informed by direct contact with the
instructor and the instructors delivery meth-
ods. Effective instruction will be achieved if
the delivery method and credibility reinforce
each other in a positive fashion. In other cir-
cumstances, although the student is initially
trained without a good sense of the instruc-
tors credibility, the students perception of
the instructors credibility eventually reflects
the students experience with the subject
matter as conveyed through the instructors
delivery method.
Conclusion
The interplay between an instructor and
his or her audience is complex in terms of
knowledge transfer. Instructors must real-
ize that subject matter expertise is only one
criterion in effective instruction. The more
subjective criterions of delivery and cred-
ibility are just as important and must be
taken into consideration for an instructor
to be effective.
References
Berko, R. M., Wolvin, A. D., & Wolvin, D. R. (2010).
Communicating. 11th ed. Boston: Pearson Educa-
tion, Inc.
Berlo, D. K. (1960). The process of communication.
New York: Holt, Reinehart, and Winston.
Bowman, D. P. (1998). Presentations: Proven techniques
for creating presentations that get results. Avon, MA:
Adams Media.
Brookfield, S. D. (1995). Becoming a critically reflec-
tive teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Davis, B. G. (2001). Tools for teaching. San Francis-
co: Jossey-Bass.
Horton, W. (2000). Designing web-based training. New
York: John Wiley & Sons.
Jamieson, D. W. (1999). The facilitators fieldbook.
New York: Amacom.
Katz, N. H., & Lawyer, J. W. (1992). Communica-
tion and conflict resolution skills. Dubuque, IA:
Kendall/Hunt.
Lewin, K. (2007). Principles of topological psychology.
York, PA: McGraw-Hill.
Lubet, S. 1998). Expert testimony: A guide for expert
witnesses and the lawyers who examine them. Chi-
cago: National Institute for Trial Advocacy.
Madonik, B. (2001). I hear what you say, but what are
you telling me? San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Pickles, T. (1996). Tool kit for trainers. Tucson, AZ:
Fisher Books.
Schramm, W. (1954). How Communication Works
in W. Schramm (Ed.) The Process and Effects of
Communication (pp.3-26). Urbana, IL: University
of Illinois Press.
Schwarz, R. M. (1994). The skilled facilitator: Practical
wisdom for developing effective groups. San Fran-
cisco: Jossey-Bass.
Shannon, C., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical
theory of communication. Urbana, IL: University of
Illinois Press. n