Contrary to what you've been told, practice doesn't make perfect. There are firefighters, officers and technicians from a number of disciplines who are performing badly. They practice, they study, some even emulate their superiors, yet many of them ultimately don't get what they were working toward. Their performance in recruit school or in paramedic school may have been superior, but now they're falling behind. What's the problem? Well, there may be many.

As trainers and educators, we regularly invoke the formal education or formal instructional process. We motivate our students, present new material, supervise the use of new techniques and practices, and evaluate student performance as part of the learning process. In the self-study and online training environments, numerous dynamics from the formal instructional process are missing. The net result is that the learner's performance doesn't rise to an acceptable level. We may need to adjust the environment that the learner resides in for better success.

In formal education, the objectives for each course are apparent from the syllabus or course outline. In many subjects, each module is built on the previously learned material. A grade is given to the student based on performance, based on parameters typically approved by the educational or credentialing institution. In many classes the grade is a compilation of attendance, attitude, effort and ultimately getting the right answers (or demonstrating acceptable manipulative performance) on some form of evaluation.

The process of formal public safety training is the same. Most recruits must attain an 80% or better to receive their final certificate. There are regular evaluations throughout the learning process. Student performance is required to build on subsequent lessons, and these new skill sets are used to develop competency toward the execution of activities that can be performed individually or as part of an evolution. There are several elements in this formal environment that motivate the student to succeed.

The first element is a clear, measurable learning objective for each lesson and activity. The student is presented with or obtains the objectives prior to each lesson. The student also is informed of the terminal objective, which is the new activity that he or she most likely will be required to perform at the end of the training.

The second element that creates an enhanced success rate in this formal environment is the group-learning dynamic, or peer pressure. This element results in the positive interaction between students who push and pull one another along toward mutual success. The fear of poor performance in front of peers forces the student to continue to work on problem areas until the execution is perfect. Practice doesn't make perfect; perfect practice makes perfect.

The competitive interaction that occurs between individuals and groups also can motivate students to an enhanced performance level. The final element present is the visual repetition in these academy-like environments that allows every student to review the techniques of other students (both good and bad) before attempting the newest skill. This critical feedback reinforces the proper lessons and techniques and results in an enhanced acquisition of new knowledge, skills and abilities.

Let's look at another pivotal process in developing new skills: the evaluation process. All of the evaluation processes within an accredited recruit or formal academy setting are objective. The point structure is predetermined and there's little question as to what's expected. Most of the evaluation is based on performance in front of all the other candidates/students. The instructor or proctor has very little, if any, leeway toward a subjective “plus or minus” during the evaluation process. Because the entire process is transparent, it requires all the proctors to act professionally and to grade according to the objective standards alone. This generates faith in the grading and evaluation process for the students, who in turn, will give their best performance, knowing that the process is valid and fair.

The group-dynamics techniques of adult education are powerful motivators when used properly. But how can we leverage these tools for activities that are normally done by a small fire company or by an individual ? Specifically, how can we improve results from independent study, promotional study activities and individual participation in company-level drills? To answer that question, we need to define the single-learner environment a little better.

In a small setting like a fire company training program or an individual promotional-study plan, objectives frequently aren't clear. The officer may want the team to “get more proficient,” but communicating what that means can be difficult. Actually developing, implementing and communicating a plan to get there is another area where the ball is dropped frequently.

In many independent-study activities and online instructional courses, the evaluation process either is non-existent or severely compromised. I have reviewed a number of independent-study courses over the past 10 years. Some of these have been for continuing-education credits, some have been for refresher training and others were initial-training courses for certification.

In many of these lessons the final evaluation instrument is an open-book/open-note exam consisting of 10 to 20 multiple-choice questions that must be completed to earn a certificate. I have found that the main motivation in these courses is not to learn the material and compete against previous performance scores or against the scores of other students, but to finish each course as quickly as possible. I also have found that in using the open-book method, it is very easy to skip much of the lecture material and still score a 90% or better on the final test. The resulting problem is that retention of the course material is in the 20-30% range after only a week. When assigning members to complete online instruction, don't just steer them toward the computer. Give them a printed copy of the objectives and require that they prepare a presentation or an oral exam to show mastery of the course content.

There is rarely an evaluation process even when a three- or four-person company conducts training. It's easy to confuse activity with accomplishment — “I went to training, therefore I am trained.” A warm body that sits through the entire process gets full credit for completing the session. Without a clear objective and a well-designed evaluation process or tool, there is no motivation to participate actively and learn. Attendance does not automatically equal competence.

So what can we do to improve the company and individual learning processes? First, we need to create and agree on the objectives. For a single task, we can start with developing the terminal objective and work backward to identify the desired skills to be performed and evaluated. With a more complex goal, for example to promote to fire captain or improve fire company efficiency at auto extrications, one of the first steps is to conduct a needs assessment. In a fire company, the officer should first identify the expected level of competency. In many departments there are company performance standards that objectively outline what tactical evolutions each type of company should be able to execute in a given time frame. If the company can't perform to that level, then a training need is identified.

If there are no company standards in place, the officer might have the company perform several standard operations and evolutions in real time to assess the company's shortcomings. Communicating the results of the assessment (where we are at) and the desired performance (where we want to be) should be done in a positive, non-threatening manner.

Using objective evaluation standards can take emotion out of the team's performance. The performance either was above, below or at standard. There should be no criticism or degradation implied or inferred. The result of future training is to improve performance.

For an individual promotional study plan, the needs assessment should be conducted first. What do the promotional tests normally contain? What are the knowledge, skills and abilities necessary for the desired position? How are they usually evaluated? The candidate should study the position description and the job posting for the exam or assessment center. Specify KSAS that need to be created, enhanced or just polished.

From this list of desired qualities, assess the candidate's individual KSAS from past evaluations and from current performance. Include honest feedback from a current supervisor or other mentors. Make a list of the areas in which performance is deficient. In these areas, what activities can be planned, scheduled and executed as part of individual study activities? Plan far enough ahead to provide enough time to gain proficiency and lock the times in on the calendar. Making an appointment to study approximates the formal process of going to class regularly.

Another key element in maximizing success is scheduling those mentors to regularly evaluate the candidate's progress by testing, quizzing and other activities to reinforce the necessary KSAS before the promotional test. Schedule mock oral interviews and develop mini-simulations where rapid decision-making is practiced and all actions are justified with science and logic. It is this enhanced level of formality (planning, scheduling, evaluations, activities and feedback) that will allow every learner to garner the same impressive results we see from the formal education and training process.

Now we can see why more of our company level drills and training do not always result in success. The formal model of instruction has served our profession well since the earliest years of fire service history. As we embrace new technology and use self-study to get ahead of the constant challenges that wait for us, we may not want to lose sight of the methods and tools that have been successful in getting us to this point.

---

John Linstrom is a senior manager in the Homeland Security Services division of EG&G Technical Services, assigned to the Southern California office. He's an adjunct faculty member for Texas A&M University and the National Fire Academy. Linstrom currently serves as a battalion chief/paramedic in Apple Valley, Calif. He also serves as commander of the DHS/FEMA DMORT for Region IX and has been involved in the national US&R program since 1996.