Fire Academy Catches Criticism
FEATURES
As the National Fire Academy nears the end of its first year of conducting training courses in the field, it finds itself looking at these problems:
- Criticism of its training program by the International Association of Fire Service Instructors (ISFSI).
- The introduction of a cluster delivery system for academy courses in 1979 as an interim measure while the academy acquires a permanent facility.
- Development of an instructional program to be presented at the permanent academy facility.
The three problems are interrelated and perhaps the best way to start looking at the situation is to go back to a meeting of state directors of fire training in Stillwater, Okla., last July. At that time, the state directors expressed disenchantment with the National Fire Academy’s training program while at the same time they voiced support for the academy and its parent body, the National Fire Prevention and Control Administration (NFPCA). While the state directors were meeting, the ISFSI directors also met at Stillwater and expressed their concerns. The result was a position paper to be presented to the Joint Council of National Fire Service Organizations that was approved at the fall conference of the ISFSI at Sioux Falls, S. D., on October 1.
Cluster delivery concept
The cluster concept involves the presentation of 14 National Fire Academy courses in a two-week period in four cities: San Francisco, New Haven, Conn., Atlanta, and St. Paul, Minn.
The state directors apparently viewed the cluster concept as a step toward regionalization of NFA training and they declared in a paper developed at Stillwater, that “any type of regionalization which intercedes between the responsible governmental agencies and the existing state and local agencies is unacceptable.”
When we asked his reaction to this statement during an interview in his Washington, D.C., office, David M. McCormack, academy superintendent, responded, “I’m in total agreement with that position. We’re committed to the concept that fire service education and training should be by the local authority. The role of the NFPCA is to support these efforts. We should be innovative in curriculum development and the delivery of programs that have national application—and are not generally available.”
Interim program
McCormack emphasized that the cluster course delivery concept is “very much an interim program.” He explained that with a staff of nine instructors, the academy needs to keep the instructors together in Washington as much as possible in the coming months “to address our top priority—development of the physical facility and to evaluate programs for the physical facility.” During the presentation of courses throughout the 10 federal districts this year, instructors were dispersed throughout the country most of the time.
The ISFSI position paper charged that the cluster concept “is inequitable and inconsistent with the concept of supporting existing state and local fire training and education systems. Immediate action should be taken to develop a system which would train the trainers in all subject areas in all states.”
Training the trainer
McCormack declared that this concern over training the trainer (developing state and local instructors to teach in their own areas) “would be appropriate if that were the principal effort of the cluster delivery.”
“We have not strayed from the concept of training the trainer,” McCormack asserted.
However, he explained, some areas don’t have instructors capable of teaching the NFA course material and those who lack this capability must first learn the material as students and develop an ability to teach. The NFA superintendent stressed that “training the trainer is a fundamental building block on which the academy is designed.” He also commented that the national academy “can’t deliver an effective train-the-trainer program without a permanent facility.”
When the NFA gets a permanent facility (see story on page 51 of this issue), 30 percent of the academy courses will be designed to train the trainer, McCormack said. He added that 60 percent of the courses will be directed at executive development and 10 percent will be aimed at professions affecting the fire problem, such as architects.
Course material delay
The distribution system for getting NFA course materials to “all recognized fire training/education agencies within a state” is “neither equitable nor feasible,” the ISFSI position paper charged, adding that a better system should be devised.
“I absolutely agree on an equitable distribution system,” McCormack responded to this charge. He added that the Government Printing Office, which prints course materials, is “a continuing problem” in the federal government.
The ISFSI position paper also said that “the reason for the high turnover rate of employees with fire service background in the National Fire Academy should be investigated.”
In response to this, McCormack said, “We expect people to leave the National Fire Academy … I expect them to leave because of opportunities gained while on the staff.”
The academy superintendent commented that two deputy superintendents left for personal reasons and others left for better opportunities. McCormack commented there are “some very frustrating moments on the need for the role of National Fire Academy” and living in the Washington area is not easy on the staff.
Conference objection
Turning to another area, the ISFSI position paper declared that “the NFPCA (annual) conference should be eliminated as duplication of efforts, with equivalent financial support provided to existing fire service conferences.”
Expressing agreement with this stand, McCormack commented, “The last thing we need is another conference.”
He explained that the academy will work through existing seminars and workshops and he said, “We are prepared to work with all national organizations, and we have worked with them.”
McCormack also agreed with the ISFSI stand that pilot testing of courses “should be repeated no more than one time in-house and two times in the field within six months from the date of the original pilot course.” He commented that course demonstrations can now be reduced and he expected to arrange for demonstrations through state directors and chiefs of metropolitan fire departments when it was appropriate.
To the ISFSI statement that “a peer group of experts, including at least one recognized state fire instructor,” review materials and curricular before pilot testing, McCormack stated that this is already NFA policy.
“In every instance to date, at least one state instructor has been included in the peer group review panel.”
