Rumors of ICS-100/200 going back to the classroom?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Timothy J. Flannery on March 24, 2008 at 11:27am

Some states are requiring only classroom based classes be taught, but in NJ the Training & Educational Advisory Committee has just established a sub-committee to look at ways of providing the classes online as well as I-300. With programs like Blackboard and WebCT that are used by colleges and universities it is possible to develop and and present a very interactive program online. Most people think of the I-110 / 200 online classes are the lame version that FEMA provides, and it does not have to be that way.

Permalink Reply by Sunshine Lemme on May 3, 2008 at 8:06am

On the IAEM listserve (International Association of Emergency Managers, iaem.com) there was a discussion of this a month or so ago. Those who teach ICS-400 found that they spent a lot of time remediating those who took 200 online, mostly because the students were just getting their ticket punched so that they can be promoted or retain their position. Those of us who are emergency managers find this pretty disturbing, knowing how well ICS worked at the Pentagon, and how badly the situation was in New York because of its lack.

ICS should be used at every incident, no matter how small. It really works, but only if it's established. That's why 300 & 400 are only taught in class, we have to practice it to use it.

And that is also why I think ICS-200 should also be taught in the classroom. We have to work with real people during real emergencies. The only way to learn is to practice.

I would even take the training with other people further. I took 300 and 400 from the state emergency management office, not the fire academy. What a difference it makes when your colleagues are cops from several different levels of government, transportation and parks employees, National Guardsmen, and EMS. Believe it, they think about an emergency much different than do we firefighters. These are the people we will be working with during real emergencies, so it was a real eye-opening experience. My perspective on ICS is quite different from that of my mentor who took it at the academy. He got his ticket punched, I got my life changed.

Permalink Reply by Jonathan Kaye on May 3, 2008 at 8:57am

I've heard a similar story about the remediation, and I agree strongly that there are some things that need to be done as a team (big thing lacking in online 100/200). What kind of things do you see/have heard people needing remediation for when they get to 300 or 400?

Permalink Reply by Sunshine Lemme on May 3, 2008 at 4:20pm

Here is an email from the discussion that hits all the points.

"I understand the Feds logic with using the on-line approach for the lower level classes, i.e. train the masses and make it as easy as possible for them to get the training. To be blunt after teaching close to a thousand individuals ICS 300 and 400 in the last six months I would call the on-line experience minimal at best. In most classes, I have an approximately 90 - 95% who took the basic classes on line. When we go through the review in Unit 2 of the 300 course, I can tell you the knowledge transfer from their on line experience is practically nil.

"On-line courses are only as good as the learner is motivated to learn. If they are doing it to just fulfill a requirement then it is practically useless. There is no requirement for knowledge transfer when you can simply download the materials and answer the test. There might be minimal awareness occurring but that is about it.

If the Feds are serious about the future institutionalization of ICS then they need to cut out the on-line requirements for at least 200 and make that a required face to face class in the future as well.

Frank Kriz "

Frank makes a great point about motivation. I got my masters in EM magma c** laude by taking 7 classes online and six in the classroom; I was motivated. Online is great for academic subjects, but ICS is about relationships, and you can't practice that online yet.