The Education Committee was task with working on the proposed IC Practical Skills Testing breakout session at the fall 2010 conference. David Maatman submitted the below ideas for discussion. This forum will be used to discuss how the session will work and ways to ensure the session runs smoothly. If you are an education committee member and have ideas or questions about planning this session, you can post them here.
On my drive home I had a few ideas on the what we can do for the skill testing - competition. Please forward this to the Education Committee
Lets have 5 stations
-1 SimMan
-2 KED/Shortboarding
-2 Long board spinal immobilization
Limit the number of attendees to 15 (30 total if we do two sessions)
Have the attendees compete in teams of 3. The teams should be formed of of 2 ways; they could choose their own team OR we can randomly assign the teams. Advantage to them choosing their own teams is they could "practice" ahead of time. Disadvantage is someone may not have 2 others that want to team up.
Have each team rotate through each of the 5 stations and allow them 10 minutes for the skill (totaling 50 minutes for the credit). Having each team do 2 KED and Long would allow for 2 sets of different evaluators (all scores count)
Scoring should be done on standard score sheets (e.g National Registry) AND total time to complete the skill is factored into the score. So this is a "speed and accuracy" thing.
Prizes
1st place winner can choose either
-$300 ( or $xxx) and $100 worth of instant lottery tickets (scratch off)
OR - $400 (or $xxx)
2nd place is awarded either $100 or $100 worth of instant lottery tickets, which ever the 1st place team did not select
I'm thinking to pull this off we will need 10 evaluators and 1 time keeper.
Just a few thoughts to get things rolling.
maatman
Hi Tom,
I'm opposed to this idea. I spend countless hours "getting on the floor" and physically instructing my students how to peform tasks. I enjoy teaching practical components but to me the real skill is critical thinking skills. Many students and laypeople can be taught a skill, it is the how when and why of critical thinking that makes an excellant clinician. Having me demonstrate a skill that I have performed many times does not hold me to the standard of critical thinking. An example would be placing a KED board. Doing this in a room as opposed to real life circumstances does not prove I'm competent in apply the device correctly. I think we need to spend more time requiring instructors to have degrees in pathophysiology, anatomy, and science. If we decided to enter another medical career, we would have to have a degree in the field, and we would except our instructors to have a degree in those areas of instruction. When and if that were to happen, then we just might be recognized as a profession equal to nursing etc.
Troy Bowling
I do not like the idea of evaluating basic skills and equipment use. This goes back to MFR class, who, as instructors (no matter what level) we have done thousands of times, both in the field and in the classroom.
I forsee this new practical skills idea to peak the instructor participants knowledge on the educational gaps that we all may not be aware of. Holding complex, high impact simulation scenarios will be a way to deliver the instructor as a healthcare provider in an intense situation where critical thinking is needed.
This should stimulate the instructor, where he/she can take back the finite details of what he/she may have learned for use in his/her classroom.
As students and instructors, we all have cut corners due to lack of time available, equipment funding, help and effort. Doing so produces cognitive gaps in our students. This is an opportunity to evaluate, change, and prevent losing what is important while educating our students.
I don't think I can go into detail much further without giving the details of the scenarios. But I welcome more thoughts!
The Society of Michigan EMS Instructor Coordinators. All rights reserved.