In response to Ian.......
"A friend of mine was given a hard time by an A&E consultant on the last
assessment of the course simply because this consultant felt threatened by
the candidate standing his ground."
You may be interested to know that this will shortly become a thing of the
past as we have been piloting standardised testing scenarios. Their
introduction would bring us in line with ATLS and APLS and ensure equity
when it comes to assessment. This would hopefully avoid the 'simple
scenario' for one candidate and the 'horrendoblastoma of a scenario' for
another in the neighbouring room.
Andy
-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask]
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Ian McConnell
Sent: 23 October 2000 16:38
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: ALS
Adrian seems to have had his cage rattled on his last experience of ALS,
seems only fair that someone tries to defend it.
I agree with many of his assertions regarding the limitations of the course.
It shouldn't be perceived as a "qualification", simply a standardised
approach to the management of cardiac arrest. That's how it's perceived up
here anyway.
The comments regarding changing the minutiae "every year" are ridiculous
exaggerations.
With reference to the conflict of interest - has ATLS changed in the last
two years? Last time I did it the instructors who taught it then assessed it
in the same fashion to ALS, that course then is equally flawed.
The comment on the Paediatrician appears to be in relation to the PALS or
APLS course, as ALS wouldn't involve a paediatric airway. Recently I was
assessing a paediatric SHO, during an attempt at intubation the laryngoscope
erupted from the baby manikin's neck in a stomach bursting Alien-type
spectacular visual feast. Was this a failing of the SHO or Laerdal who make
the manikin?
In defence of Adrian's stance, the Resuscitation Council is a rather
dogmatic organisation but that's always the way of it, look at the BMA!
Despite the course being considered standardised - it obviously isn't, as
those of us who have taught it in various parts of the UK already know.
The candidate is exposed to the hidden agendas and weaknesses of the
instructors. A friend of mine was given a hard time by an A&E consultant on
the last assessment of the course simply because this consultant felt
threatened by the candidate standing his ground. That's why I started
running my own courses, these things can then be controlled and there is
opportunity for plenty of "variation and debate".
The 4 stage teaching approach was developed by the educationalists from
universities advising on adult learning methods. The silent run through
certainly seems to get people to look at your hands as you demonstrate a
skill rather than your face as you talk. Knowing a few A&E consultants
however, I can see why they would find it difficult to do the silent
run-through; how could someone who invented ATLS remain quiet about it?
Ian McConnell
Another RTO with large hands
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|