Dustdevil Posted August 31, 2008 Author Posted August 31, 2008 Nor does those EMS that responds to those 12-15 calls in 12 hours. How much patient care was really performed and detailed assessment for such a quick turn around. Load and go, is no better than a transfer service. Agreed. Even debating the "quality" of EMT-B experience at all is like arguing the quality of a White Castle hamburger. Both are pretty well useless in the long run. The only thing that time as an EMT-B tells me is that you know what it's like to live on minimum wage, and know what you are getting into financially. Otherwise, I'd rather have my medic students with absolutely no experience at all.
firedoc5 Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 I'm getting in on this a little late. When I was up and coming we had some requirements that were a little more strict than some programs now. Some may not agree with some of them now, especially those who prefer to go straight into the next level class immediately. These are just some of the requirements, but not all: To get into the EMT-I class: Had to be active in the field as an EMT-A (Basic) for three years. Must be sponsored by an approved ALS agency with letter of endorsement and references. Take a written test with a passing grade of 93%. Take practical skills test which was pass/fail. Not an absolute requirement, but should show interest to go on to Paramedic level. Show professionalism at all times. To get into the EMT-Paramedic class: Had to be still active in the field as a Certified EMT-I for at least two years. Same sponsorship and agency letters as with EMT-I requirements. Written test with a passing grade of 95%. Pass/fail practical skills test of EMT-I level skills. Show professionalism in and out of the field, clinical settings, and classroom. Those with more field experience and college classes tend to be moved to the front of the class. Also, you had to more or less be nominated to get into these classes. You just couldn't sign up and think you were getting in. I'm not going to get into the whole list of things. These were just the primary requirements.
towheadedmule Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 Agreed. Even debating the "quality" of EMT-B experience at all is like arguing the quality of a White Castle hamburger. Both are pretty well useless in the long run. The only thing that time as an EMT-B tells me is that you know what it's like to live on minimum wage, and know what you are getting into financially. Otherwise, I'd rather have my medic students with absolutely no experience at all. I would like for potential students to have had exposure to different types of patients, not just the antique roadshow. Higher volume, better chance of different types of calls. They can see how different Paramedics handle similar situations, some good, some bad. I admit, this works better in systems with paramedic/EMT-B partners than tiered systems. Discounting any experience would in the field not be beneficial, the student has a better understanding of what responsibility they are accepting (still a shock for the vast majority). Even the Nancy's realize the importance of prior experience, giving credit for CNA time. YMMV R
Dustdevil Posted September 1, 2008 Author Posted September 1, 2008 Discounting any experience would in the field not be beneficial, the student has a better understanding of what responsibility they are accepting (still a shock for the vast majority). Zero way to objectively and reliably validate that, so it's pointless. And any school worth a shyte gives them that understanding very early in the process. If a single one of your graduates is "shocked" at his first job, then your school sucks and you absolutely FAIL as an educator. And really, this illustrates the root of the problem. The current crop of EMS "educators" (using that term very loosely) simply know NOTHING about education. They are trainers, and nothing more. They think taking people with so-called "experience" somehow relieves them of some amount of burden. If people already have some field exposure, then the trainers can just focus on training them on the simple monkey skills (IV, airway, EKG) and call it a success. Unfortunately, that is all they are capable of teaching, because they too are the product of a FAILED educational system that lacked any scientific foundation, taught by the principles of professional adult education that other professions observe. Requiring prior field experience, and actually believing that it is a positive thing for your students' professional educational development is a clear sign that a school or educator simply isn't qualified for the job they have, and that the students they are producing are of a substandard quality. Even the Nancy's realize the importance of prior experience, giving credit for CNA time. YMMV Never once seen a professional nursing school give any kind of "credit" for CNA time (although I hear rumour that some Kalifornia schools look for it. But we're talking real world here, not Kalifornia). Not only no academic credit, but no credit towards admission preference either, because they are completely different jobs with completely different requirements. Many RN schools won't even give LVNs credit.
towheadedmule Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 Not shocked at the job. Shocked by what is expected in class. After the spoon feeding of EMT-B, many do not really get they have to study to pass. Until we can pull the programs out of tech schools and into colleges and universities expect the same. As for the credit, it is not credit towards the degree. It is credit towards admission. Many of the local programs will not admit you to a nursing program without a PCT/CNA/LPN time (usually 6 months). It is used as a method showing that the person wants to be a nurse, and is more prepared to face the realities of the position. Foolproof, no. Rather like SF, no way you were getting in on your first enlistment. Changed now from what I understand.
Dustdevil Posted September 1, 2008 Author Posted September 1, 2008 Not shocked at the job. Shocked by what is expected in class. After the spoon feeding of EMT-B, many do not really get they have to study to pass. Until we can pull the programs out of tech schools and into colleges and universities expect the same. Ah! Okay, I understand now, and totally agree. That's why we have to require EDUCATION to get into an educational programme, not exposure. If "experience" is all they need to get into a programme, that's exactly what they will continue to think is the key to success, which could no be farther from the truth. But even a tech school can do this in a quality way. They too can require educational prerequisites, even if they are not a college or university. The reason they don't is because their priorities are far from educational and professional quality. They're only interested in either making money or pumping out mass quantities for the fire department. Or both. If the fire service really gave a crap about EMS, they too would simply start requiring greater education from their applicants, instead of hiring every idiot with a 13 week "paramedic" cert.
Eydawn Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 Certain second degree BSN programs in Colorado *require* a CNA license before entry, as well as certain prerequisites such as philosophy, microbiology, etc. It isn't just Kalifornia... and it's not Boulder, either, before anyone asks. And I would like to challenge the statement that any educator requiring a certain length of experience in the prehospital care field is a substandard monkey trainer who produces substandard paramedics. The fact is, that in certain areas, it is very difficult to get hired as an EMT-B due to the number of applicants versus available positions, so one must in fact be an exceptional candidate to obtain and MAINTAIN placement as a fielded EMT-B. You must demonstrate some superior qualities, either through additional education, obvious competence or suitable personality. Therefore, an educator from that area would require work-time as a way of measuring in some part the ability of the candidate. Perfect situation? Of course not. Until we change the EMS system to require degreed professionals, however, it doesn't make sense to waste teaching resources and time on glory hounds who will burn out right before or within a year of finishing their paramedic education. And I would also argue that while one can pick up poor habits working in the field prior to paramedic school, one can also pick up good habits (such as pursuing more in-depth understanding) if one is paired with the right partner. It also gives people time to learn to adapt to their own personal adrenaline response... and no matter what one might assume about a student learning to control that as a student rider, it is a far different experience when you are cognizant of no longer having the safety blanket of an additional, more experienced team member there to watch your back and make sure you don't screw up too badly. Again... perfect system? No... but some people fail to learn without being thrown in the deep end for a while. Wendy CO EMT-B
towheadedmule Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 Sorry for the confusion Sir. I am always a fan of more eductation. I get a lot of the patch factory as student riders. I end up trying to fix a lot of problems usually. Its frustrating in the least to try and get them to understand the ISAL method when they do not understand the blood flow though, around and for the heart. One even said he didnt think was blood for the heart?!? Between that and his IV skills learned from a Singer Sewing machine and would not listen; well the supervisor came for him. He was barred from returning to our service for clinicals.
Recommended Posts