We have detected that your browser is using AdBlock
Police Community is a not for profit organisation and advertising revenue is key to our continued viability.
Please disable your AdBlocker on our site in order to continue using it.
This message will disappear once AdBlock has been disabled.
Thank you for your support - we appreciate it !
If you feel you are getting this message in error please email email@example.com
Why cant forces see that Part 2 testing is not a fair and accurate way of testing ability. In my 20 yrs of service I have seen the standard of supervisors drop dramatically. Why is it that persons with 2 yrs service(or such little service) who have come from and an academic background find it easy to pass part 2. I would like to see more continual assessing similar to probationers replace part 2. 3 months with uniform sergeant and 3 months with detective sergeant. This would give a more accurate assessment of ability and also prevent conflict of interests by having 2 different assessments. How can i stand by and watch supervisors who have no experience make dangerous and poor judgements. I want to be a supervisor and feel that the part 2 will stop me getting there. I have 20 yrs service, 7 yrs in uniform, 6 yrs CID including murder incident rooms, 2 yrs in intelligence, 5 yrs in covert policing and yet i feel that the part 2 works against me. What do you think?