Stump the Chump Training

Evaluating how students should be instructed is key to effectiveness

My wife has decided to try her hand at EMT school. While she was doing some research on the EMS community Web sites, she noticed that some current students and instructors both relate that certain instructors are proud of their “wash-out” rate. One instructor even went so far as to intimidate his students by stating that half of his students will not finish the class, regardless of their capacity to learn. (I call it the “wash-out rate” because the student quits. He doesn’t fail out, just gets fed up.)

Interestingly, along similar lines, I was visiting with a friend of mine whose side business provides continuing education to fire departments. Recently, the company changed its training approach from “Here it is, you should know this by now, get after it,” to taking baby steps (even with the old-salt, seasoned personnel that should know the material) by transferring basic, fundamental knowledge without an overload. The result: Students did markedly better when they returned for the next round of training.

My friend was amazed; he, like a lot of us, came up in the fire service training on scenarios that set you up to fail. We learned that way, so that’s the way we teach it. “Stump the chump” and see how he responds. And certainly there’s a place for that type of training in the fire and EMS field. But not with the basics. The basics are the basics, and every one of us should be allowed to get a solid grasp on them prior to being tossed to the wolves.

I’m a corporate instructor by profession. As many of you know, for an instructor, there’s nothing more satisfying than seeing the light come on in a student, that moment when you see in your student’s expression, or hear them say, “Aha! Now it all makes sense.” When I was visiting with my friend, I could still see that “Aha!” from when he recognized that if instructors stop stumping the chump, student success, and ultimately firefighter safety, increases.

Now, before some of us get all bent out of shape over this, let me say the following: There are some cases where students wash out because they simply can’t hack it and don’t have the aptitude or right mindset for the job. I have no problem with those students washing out; it’s better for them, the people they’ll be working with and the public they would have ended up serving. Likewise, I do not take issue with an instructor “pushing” some students out, especially when that student has honesty or trust issues. We all know people in this field who have no business in your home.

But when an instructor boasts that 50 percent of their class will not make it to the end of the course, you don’t have a learning issue, you have a teaching issue. It’s likely the instructor is the one who needs to be remediated or simply washed out.

There are absolutely times when “stump the chump” training is appropriate. Firefighters must be challenged, and in some cases pushed to certain limits, in a safe and controlled training environment so they realize that they lack certain skills or have underestimated the seriousness of the job. When you do this, the student will be upset with you and may even write a bad review/course critique. But it can be an effective teaching tool. Other students know exactly what and why it happened, and many of them will note it as a positive in their review/course critique.

Stump the chump should not be our approach for all training, however. As instructors, we must evaluate our techniques and ensure that we’re using the right approach to maximize the effectiveness of the training—not just to cement our reputation as tough trainers.

Scott Cook is the former chief of the Granbury (Texas) Volunteer Fire Department and a fire service instructor. He’s also a member of FireRescue’s editorial board.