Qualifications or Activity Statements?

[erifis]

The IPDS Activity Statement, what is its purpose?  To show you are competent at carrying out an activity assessed against set PQA's, so I'm told.

I have various problems with this system, well not problems per say, more concerns. If I write an Activity Statement (AS) and that bloke who just happened to be on the pump with me signs it as a witness and then my line manager signs it off, does that mean I am proficient at the task and elements I am claiming for? The answer = apparently so. Okay this all sounds relativily simple, time consuming, but simple, but what does it actually prove.

I personaly think it proves very little other than people become very efficient at a) storey telling and b) learning how to use cut and paste very quickly.

The next query is, what is a reasonable quantity of activity statements to show your 'competance' or maintenance of skills? It doesn't take long for line managers to start pushing for quantity rather than quality, as with everything. The question of a reasonble numbers starts to resemble the 'how longs a peice of string' scenario.

Anyway my real question lies with the what seems to be fast becoming forgotten in the modern fire service - the academic qualification and its place in the fire service or its lack of place in the fire service as the case maybe.

At what point in time did they become useless? Was it when they dispanded the FSEB they through out the whole British University system as well, I'm not sure but it appears that all BEng's and BSc's have been forgotten about in the revamping of the Modern Fire Service and IPDS.

They now call it 'accredited prior learning' but the problem seems to be that you cannot attach that accredited prior learning to anything to do with IPDS.

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the whole FSEB system of exams tie nicely into the Institue of Fire Engineers (IFE) membership which also tied nicely into industry and BEng's and BSc's in Fire Engineering and Fire Safety etc. They could all be cross referenced and each qualification meant something in each area of the Fire world, as each area shared similar topics at various levels.

We now seem to have a system in place in the Fire Service that is not linked to the IFE or industry in anyway, thus causing a gap to open up. That gap being a foundation knowledge of Fire.

In the past a Firefighter who was actually interested in their job could take it upon themselves to spend hours reading boaring texts to sit the FSEB exams, although anyone could do that, thats not the point, a firefighter was doing it and thus learing about his/her trade. If successful and still of the keen type they could then apply to the IFE and use the FSEB exams towards their evidence and thus a link to industry and a recognised path if they decided to leave the fire service.

What does the modern day firefighter do, fill out lots of activity statements and send them to the IFE members board to give them some bed time reading? Or do they pay out of their own pockets and sit the IFE exams, I don't think so because it has no future benefit in the fire service anymore, whats the point apart from making yourself a more rounded person. When was the last time you saw an internal job advert asking for an IFE membership grade of any kind in the fire service.

To finish - we are going to end up with a service that has no interest in studying fire because it has no future benefit anymore, if you can fit a smoke alarm, fill out an activity statement, sit an ITOP then go play ADC you will get a job as you have lots of potential to manage, but what do you know, nothing, why, because no where along this magical new system does anyone actualy test your knowledge in anything remotely to do with fire and the job that you do.

Or am I wrong?

Please don't come back at me with 'on the job training', because when was the last time you picked up anything to do with the fire service i.e. a fire service training manual and read it because you thought you should because you felt guilty about recieving your pay check. If we don't have to do it we don't, thats the danger.

[fireftrm]

Firstly the IPODS activity statements - presumably this is something being done in your FRS as there is no such national process. From the way you describe it it would be similar to a witness testimony in a NVQ system. It should provide good evidence of competence, but the quality will depend upon the assesor of the information. Simply 'accepting' it is no way to prove anything. It should be supported by questions on knowledge and maybe about the activity. Furthermore the moderation of assessment decisions, by an internal QA system should ensure that the system is delivering the standards required. One thing that seems to be being lost is the knowldege requirements, it is clear in the NOS that there is a long list of knowledge and understanding required at every role, however few systems are accurately assessing this.

Academic qualifications ar something different, the old FSEB did test knowledge, and should not have been thrown out fully. That they tie in nicely to the IFE was not the case. The StnO was accepted for equivalence tot he Grads, but no others had any connection. There was no route from the FSEB to any other qualification. The FSEB qualifications meant nothing outside the FRS. The IFE exams do have some inclusion in other acadenic areas, mainly as APL against HE courses, or through the Engineering Council division of the IFE.

There should be a test of knowledge as part of the FRS development and having it accredited to an academic qualification is sensible. Note that many areas of the UK are looking at, or already have such links, for example ILM certificates, Foundation Degrees and above, allied to management development programmes.

I have to agree that strictly Fire service exams need some reinvention.