RatPack Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 So then you wouldn't mind if we bumped up EMT training to four years, while retaining the same skillset? Thats fine. If the powers that be feel it neccesary. Its not about skillset at my level. Its about recognition and assessment. Im not confused about my place in this field. I dont need extended scopes or more skills to perform my job. That isnt how I justify my existance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dustdevil Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 (edited) Its not about skillset at my level. Its about recognition and assessment. Im not confused about my place in this field. I dont need extended scopes or more skills to perform my job. That isnt how I justify my existance. God bless you for that! Just making the point that there is no point to making advanced diagnosticians out of people who cannot provide the requisite care, and for the most part, won't even be working in 911 EMS to begin with. Don't get me wrong. I am all for progressive education for all EMS personnel. But there is a point of diminishing returns in basic education, where it begins to serve no useful purpose. As for the powers that be, despite adding at least forty hours of ALS skills to the EMT-B curriculum, they have failed to "feel it necessary" to add a single hour to the 120 hour minimum in the last twenty years. Don't count on it happening anytime soon. Edited March 17, 2009 by Dustdevil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HellsBells Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 But you are ignoring the obvious mathematical imperative here. 120 hours is 120 hours. Period. A person who gets 120 hours over 6 months is getting no more scenario time than a person who gets 120 hours over 18 days. If you want to argue that 250 hours over six months is greater than 120 hours over 18 days, then you are on the cusp of having a valid point, but that is not what you are saying. I can see both points on this issue. Dust has a valid point, saying that 120 hours, no matter how you slice it simply isnt enough. However, I would disagree that the delievery method of the course makes no difference. When so much information is crammed into a short period of time ( 18 days) there is no way to learn and retain all the needed information. It simply becomes an excercise in memorizing what is needed for the test. If the course is offered over a longer period, the student has a chance to study and learn on his own; which can lead to a great deal more time than the infamous 120 hours would suggest. However in the 18 day class, there is only so much time you can study in a day before the brain turns to mush and returns are greatly diminished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katiebug Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 I can see both points on this issue. Dust has a valid point, saying that 120 hours, no matter how you slice it simply isnt enough. However, I would disagree that the delievery method of the course makes no difference. When so much information is crammed into a short period of time ( 18 days) there is no way to learn and retain all the needed information. It simply becomes an excercise in memorizing what is needed for the test. If the course is offered over a longer period, the student has a chance to study and learn on his own; which can lead to a great deal more time than the infamous 120 hours would suggest. However in the 18 day class, there is only so much time you can study in a day before the brain turns to mush and returns are greatly diminished. Correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dustdevil Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 Agreed. But that is making the assumption that all or most of your students will actually be spending their own personal time out of class practising scenarios and studying in groups with their fellow students. Unfortunately, this seems to be the exception, not the rule in the U.S. To compare apples to apples, you have to compare the classes hour for hour, and nothing more. The rest is entirely dependent upon the quality and commitment of the students, which is not easily measured. I think it can be accurately theorised though, that a great many students who choose the cram courses are probably not as well committed to excellence as are those who choose a more traditional education path. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katiebug Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 Agreed. But that is making the assumption that all or most of your students will actually be spending their own personal time out of class practising scenarios and studying in groups with their fellow students. Unfortunately, this seems to be the exception, not the rule in the U.S. To compare apples to apples, you have to compare the classes hour for hour, and nothing more. The rest is entirely dependent upon the quality and commitment of the students, which is not easily measured. I think it can be accurately theorised though, that a great many students who choose the cram courses are probably not as well committed to excellence as are those who choose a more traditional education path. I can agree with that and leave it at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyM83 Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 It simply becomes an excercise in memorizing what is needed for the test. If the course is offered over a longer period, the student has a chance to study and learn on his own; which can lead to a great deal more time than the infamous 120 hours would suggest. However in the 18 day class, there is only so much time you can study in a day before the brain turns to mush and returns are greatly diminished. Is that what the data says? A local school around here found it had a slightly better pass rate for 3 week course than the 3 month course. I assume the reasoning to be that if it's full-time, they put their entire lives into it and less likely to lose interest in such short time. They're academic and hands-on skills testing didn't get worse, though. And it is NOT an easy program, academically, compared to other EMT schools in the area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emtgirl101 Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 unitek was the one i considered when i was looking it looks great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dustdevil Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 (edited) Is that what the data says? A local school around here found it had a slightly better pass rate for 3 week course than the 3 month course. You're assuming that pass rates are any indicator of course quality, which they are not. And do you mean class pass rates, or NR pass rates? Regardless, neither are particularly relevant. unitek was the one i considered when i was looking it looks great. What exactly do you mean by "looks great"? Their fancy advertisements and website looks great? By what criteria would you judge a school that you have never attended? Edited March 18, 2009 by Dustdevil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyM83 Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 You're assuming that pass rates are any indicator of course quality, which they are not. And do you mean class pass rates, or NR pass rates? Regardless, neither are particularly relevant. I believe statistics were only based on class pass rate. While it's not a great indicator, it's very hard to find good indicators. Pretty much impossible to track students after they graduate. EMT curriculum does not honestly require THAT much from students, but what they do require (and what the school requires) is best learned if course done short-term. Also note statistics are based on a specific subpopulation, since the course is expensive (already semi-successful, lots to lose, usually more serious about course, etc). In the end, we're still limited by number of hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts