What does it mean to be a Smoke Diver?

Do you have what it takes to be a Smoke Diver? Many have tried but been denied by thier own limitations. Yep, thats right, your limitations! I know that firefighting is about team work, but here at the Mississippi Fire Academy, we teach you about yourself as well. The Goals Have Been Set, Can You Measure Up?
~~The man that says; "I can't" and the man that says; "Ican" are both correct, which one are you?~~

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Tony P on January 11, 2009 at 6:34pm

Give it a go mate - we don't mind people born in other countries running for public office. You'd have to take out Aussie citizenship, but you can keep your US as well, we don't mind :) Oh, and your previous post covered it.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tony P on January 11, 2009 at 6:44pm

And Ben, people who are good at something, and volunteer to teach others, don't always make the best or even good instructors. To be a firefighting instructor here, you have to undertake a short course - Luke's company presents that one doesn't it Luke? However, just because someone has that qualification doesn't mean that they're automatically a good instructor. I know a few who should never present a class, they simply don't have the correct skills. Having done a course doesn't mean that you can then teach it (or anything else). The oft stated take the skills/knowledge back to their FD and share them concept is flawed.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on January 11, 2009 at 9:03pm

Tony,

I agree. Instructorship is based on understanding the methodology, understanding the different ways that adult students learn, and course design that teaches in a variety of ways to help different students learn effectively. It also involves being able to structure concepts, relate them to previously-learned skills and concepts, and relate them to validated standards. Then there are delivery skills and methods, evaluation methods, and instructor presence in the classroom and in skills development. Then there are the skills presentations - demonstrations, skills development, coaching, and skills evaluation.
Then we have to consider the intangibles - presence, speaking style, recognizing and stopping unsafe behaviors and attitudes.

Whether the instructors are compensated or not doesn't really matter to the students. What matters is that the class is pertinent, effective, efficient, well-delivered, fair, and safe.

There are some effective train-the-trainer classes, but too many fire service train-the-trainer classes are of the "Watch One, Do One, Teach One" variety. Train-the-trainer is particularly vulnerable to the GIGO syndrome when the course is "cool", but the original design is flawed and the course is delivered by people that are not certified instructors and who have not been trained in training risk management.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on January 11, 2009 at 10:34pm

Charlie,

Why would anyone ignore an important, validated medical study that helps explain why firefighters continue to die from cardiovascular events despite years of health and wellness initiatives? NFPA 1500 started firefighter health and wellness initiatives over two decades ago, but the cardiac event rates per year have remained relatively static. That indicates that being less than supremely fit may not be what is contributing to so many cardiac LODDs, or it may not be the only thing.

Now let's relate that to earlier comments about no smoke diver ever having a LODD.
There is no studied correlation between that statement and a smoke diver course, assuming that the statement is accurate. There are numeous other variables that might explain it. One is that the smoke diver entry level physical standards screen out most of the people that are at higher risk, which skews the data set. That would correlate the smoke diver entry screening, not the class itself, as the statistically significant variable.

Another possibility is that smoke divers are such a small segment of the firefighter population that the "no LODD" result may be either a statistical quirk or even just random chance.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul Montpetit on January 11, 2009 at 10:37pm

Hmmmm....sounds dirty.....count me in....LOL Paul

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on January 11, 2009 at 10:42pm

I'm not "closed-minded about something I can't understand." I'm asking questions. A questioning, inquisitive approach is the most open-minded one there is.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by SmOkE DivEr on January 12, 2009 at 10:11pm

great point ben

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by James Byrd on April 15, 2009 at 6:35pm

I need some info guys. We are trying to push the issue to wear our SD belt buckles on duty and I was wondering if there is any kind of rule that states that we cant do it. We have no dept. SOG's against it and I couldnt find anything in NFPA 1500 that specifically talked about belt buckles. Any info would be helpful the only thing we have to set us apart is our patches on our turn out gear.
Thanks guys

JB