This is about the 5th edition of Roland and Francis Bee's book, well worth a read for anyone who stands and delivers. Covers a wide variety of instructional settings, student needs and methodologies. Most importantly, it covers the evaluation of learning events, which is something that traditionally gets overlooked by many of the courses available both within the military and on the civvy side of the fence.
Be wary of the wide variety of TNA Courses run throughout the country, it's a bit of a cash cow subject area, and one that many training organisations fail to deliver effectively (see Capt Plume's post above), says it all. Properly delivered, by, and for those involved in instructional delivery and learning management, it is an essential part of the toolkit.
Just to add jorrocks - if you could give an idea of what subject area you are hoping to instruct in, I may be able to point you towards some training providers. Definitely do your homework though. I would grab the book, read and digest, and put money on you being able to deliver a more effective TNA&E course than 99% of what is on offer. As far as quals are concerned, on the civvy side, look at CIPD website. Probably the most acknowledged civvy org that does accreditation.
Not saying that the DSAT course at Upavon (?) was badly taught, just it went back to first principles & was very dry indeed.
People thought I was mad when I came back to work, took on a rather fierce QMSI on how INVAL & EXVAL were suppoed to be done and then retired to a conference room, only leaving to eat & sleep, leaving the walls covered in post-its as I derived all the EOs & TOs needed for the five or so courses I managed.
Sad as it might seem there was a great sense of satisfaction in creating a series of course folders which an instructor could take off the shelf & deliver any of the courses given the necessary resources. I just hope my successors kept up all the very necessary almost Kaizen-like process of keeping them updated.
Who said the training world wasn't at the sharp end
Much sense on posts offered so far. Experiences of my room-sized scalars using flip chart paper and post it notes by the pad are very familiar. My advice is however, not to delineate DSAT too rigidly from the "civvy" TNA process (almost exclusively driven by CIPD). There is nothing "second class" about DSAT and it has many merits from which the CIPD process can learn. I have applied DSAT methodology in the military, the defence industry , in the commercial non-defence world, and in the education world and would be happy to advise further. My experiences of introducing DSAT methodology into areas of the commercial sector were met with enlightenment verging often on astonishment when I delved into DSAT areas not addressed by other methodologies.
A note of caution - A TNA (defined for this purpose as Scoping Study to FTS. Beyond this lies the area of instructional design) for ground-up training analysis is (or can be) a huge task with a huge documentary output, and proficiency cannot possibly be acquired through a few days introductory schooling, despite its high quality. With an increasing emphasis on the "audit trail", the days of playing a little fast and loose with the process are diminishing quite rapidly.