Regardless of the size, location, or makeup of a given fire department, we all have our mechanisms in place to spec things like new apparatus and equipment. Throughout that process, we traditionally look for things like compatibility, warranty, delivery, and fit and finish, among other things.
We may notice that an FDNY spec for a new apparatus looks like the best of the best, but we are also forced to realize that the length of the apparatus or the tank and pump capacities are not compatible with our firehouses or our response areas. We utilize this process to spec and vet everything from trucks to self-contained breathing apparatus, to turn out gear, but do we use these same processes when considering bringing in outside training programs to teach our firefighters?
Recently, there seems to have been a rash of life-threatening and life-ending mishaps during various external training programs across the country, and I will simply let that fact stand alone.
From safety, to cost, to relevance, why wouldn’t we want to seriously vet any training program of instructors that we look to bring in, or travel to attend classes with? I’ve been a fire service instructor for more than 20 years; I would and do hope that anyone who considers bringing me in for training would do their homework to make sure that I’m the right guy for the job.
I also understand that the word “job” can have several meanings. If the real “job” is public relations or “wiz bang star power,” then by all means bring in the largest amount of horsepower that your department can afford. On the other hand, if you want specialty training that needs to be taught with your specific applications in mind, wouldn’t you want to look around for the best program for your needs?
Related Articles:
Rurally Speaking: Extreme Winter Sports Require Extreme Winter Rescues—Is Your Department Ready?
Rurally Speaking: Where the Rural Apparatus Tire Meets the Road
Rurally Speaking: Keeping Rural Fire Departments in the Dark; What We Don’t Know Can Hurt Us
Without getting too deep in the weeds with this, allow me to offer a quick example that I encountered while teaching overseas recently. The assignment was to teach Incident Command System levels 300 and 400 classes. In my opinion, both teaching and taking these classes make watching paint dry look exciting. These classes were made mandatory for the island’s upper management of various government agencies. Many of those in attendance had taken these classes previously (not from me) but retained very little.
When I asked them why they thought so little of the prior trainings and instructor, they all said that it was difficult to absorb because the class was taught directly from the book, with little to no understanding of the need to allow them to apply the principles of the classes to their lives and events that take place in their islands. Even though these are canned classes, all I had to do was to rewrite their practical exercises to include events like super typhoons and other specific events and disasters that they deal with regularly.
That didn’t make me any better than any other instructor, but it simply made me a better instructor for them. I believe we must know our audience and adjust accordingly. Other instructors have different philosophies, and maybe they would be a better choice of instructor under other circumstances.
With the internet and social media, it seems like anyone can (and often does) start a fire training company. The internet is where most departments start looking for outside training opportunities. I have seen some of the most spectacular fire training websites that use all the coolest and hip new verbiage and technology to draw prospective new students and departments to their classes. I would hope that any fire training company would welcome a department that wants references for prior classes and those that want to vet the real-world experience and education of their instructors.
Departments should ask these company lots of questions, like:
- What makes your program better or different than the others out there?
- How much of what you’re teaching do you have first-hand repetitive fire service experience with?
After all, aren’t these the same kind of questions that we routinely ask fire apparatus and equipment manufacturers while doing our due diligence? Why should we want our outside training programs and their instructors to have any less vetting done on them?
