Although it is similar to the old SQT, in that it tests your knowledge of your MOS,........it is unlike the SQT in that you actually do a hands on type of test, which REALLY assesses your skills,........as opposed to a pencil and paper kind of test. I think it is great! Especially for all those 91Ws who are not fortunate enough to work in an environment where they are actually using their W skills daily. This bi-annual skills testing requirement should help all 91W stay up to speed with their basic skills,..........as long as the proctors/evaluators actually grade them to standard when they are being evaluated instead of pushing everyone through like some NCOs do with CTT.
This mandatory bi-annual testing also includes all 91Ws,.........including those with ASIs. So if you've been working in Optometry for two years and haven't started an I.V. in a while,........this will tell the evaluators if you still remember your basic 91W skills still or not. Because we all know that the newest concept for the Army is that all 91Ws with ASIs have the potential to be deployed and utilized in the str8 91W role if necessary. Therefore it is imperitive that all 91Ws, including those with ASIs remain technically proficient in all of their basic 91W skills.
my post two above this one was supposed to be in a new thread entitled,.........SACMS-VT. SSG K,........cand you start the new thread in this forum and move it for me? LOL I sure would hate to have to type that whole thing all over again! and WELCOME wildman!
In my opinion, SACMS-VT in its current form is a waste of time and will become a paper-pushing event as has some other training intiatives.
I would be far more comfortable with SACMS-VT in a skill testing forum, as CTT, than in a scenario forum. We cannot account how each individual will react in a given situation but if they are confident in their skills, we at least know they possess the know-how. We don't use scenarios with CTT, why use it with SACMS-VT.....
There are many 91W's that have not seen or put their hands on an AED, a reel splint, BVM, a NRB, etc since either being in BNCOC or IET. They may know what is it used for because of previous exposure but are unfamilar with assembling, applying, and usage because of the length of time it has been since they actually used it.
I also believe that the requirement of every 6 months is unrealistic. It should also mirror CTT and be a yearly requirement. Guaranteed that we have 91W's that still have yet to perform SACMS-VT and the requirement has been effect for almost 2 years.
Posts: 2 | Location: San Antonio | Registered: 16 November 2003
bccunn,........I completely agree that the current bi-annual requirement for SACMS-VT is COMPLETELY unrealistic. It's hard enough to get soldiers to CTT annually,.........now all 91Ws (including those with ASIs), will have to do this drill every 6 months? Ain't gonna happen. and I am currently at one of the largest and most well equipped MEDCENs in the Army! What about those poor 91Ws in those TOE units? You think the priority for thier CDRs is gonna be letting them keep their skills up? HELL NO! The only skills they will push them to hone are the ones which involve slinging cammo net in the motor pool and night convoys wearing NVGs! It's sad but it's true. I believe the way they have SACMS-VT set up right now,.......it is doomed to fail. And you are absolutely right about the fact that some 91Ws still have not begun testing out with SACMS-VT. Although the program was initiated over two years ago,.......our leadership has only been talking about it for one year. And that's ALL they were doing was TALKING ABOUT IT! Just within the last month,....there was a big push to get a bunch of the senior folks validated just because the Army Surgeon General was on his way to visit our installation and he wanted to know the current numbers of 91Ws that the installation had validated to date. Therefore,....there was another last minute, jump through your ass and cancel your weekend, kind of OP order,........and only about 20 folks got validated anyway. So bottom line up front,.......the concept is good,......but SACMS-VT is yet another example of the senior folks in the Army making decisions without actually thinking the whole thing through first,.......and without asking the people that really matter,....those of us who will actually be conducting the training, whether it will be effective or not.
Again, this situation could have been adverted if someone, anyone had first talked to those that make it all happen....NCO's. And I am not talking about CSM's, or SGM's.
It is just like the 91W MOS, we are teaching kids right off the playground stuff they don't understand or need to know. And why, because the powers that be allowed MD's, PA's, and RN's to draft the course. Hell, I wasn't taught some of that stuff in nursing school as a skirt.
Now, we do hear in NCODP that CSM so-and-so told CSM so-and-so what a geat product we are graduating. Hell, that is CSM to CSM, what else would they say.....But, lets talk to the SPC, SGT, SSG or SFC who receives these new 91W's and see exactly how long it took to get them to get cruising speed in their units and how much of what they were taught here was actually used.
We have brand-spanking new EKG machines that get get used ONCE during the course. We have BVM's that are used 20-30 times that are falling apart and broken. We have HP monitoring systems, about 40 with printer bricks, EKG, BP, etc and it is not even written in the POI to use them.....what the HELL!!!
SACMS-VT is going to fall short of its intended expectations, it is more of a dog and pony event than a learning event. Hopefully, changes will occur but I find that unlikely.
Posts: 2 | Location: San Antonio | Registered: 16 November 2003
I think the SACMS-VT is a good idea. I think it is something that NCO's should have came up with before the OTSG. The surgeon general has identified 19 tasks that are easily perishable.
I think what happens all too often is NCO's make excuses for not being able to conduct training to the standard. We will worry more about getting our soldiers off of work by 1600 than conducting the appropriate training. Remember, Training is what we do, not something we do.
If we brought our soldiers in to work an hour earlier or keep them an hour longer for 1 week a month, we could meet the requirements.
The saddest words ever spoken, "No time."
Posts: 54 | Location: Germany | Registered: 16 November 2003
SSG Joe Snuffy,............NCOs did realize that we need to keep our soldiers up to speed on their perishable skills. At my unit,......we call it SGT's Time. 75% METL Related,......25% other,....which includes technical proficiency. However, in the previous threads,......though it may have been perceived to have been implied,........no one ever mentioned that the problem was not enough time to train soldiers. But the leadership cannot have it both ways. I would gladyly train my soldiers on a weekend or keep them late during the week, etc. to ensure that they are trained to survive and win in a combat situation,.........as well as keep thier patients alive,.......however,......the leadership will not allow such monopolization of soldiers "personal" time. Even though we are all soldiers 24/7, allegedly.
We are in a hospital unit. A real fixed facitlity that does REAL patient care every day. In fact, I happen to be the NCOIC of the Dept of Emergency Medicine in this facility and have the best trained 91Ws in the whole hospital as far as treating traumatic injuries sustained in combat. However, my soldiers work 12 hours shifts, add on PT either one hour prior to the shift or one hour after the shift,.....depending on which shift they are on,....and you are already at a 13 and a half to 14 hour day. They have 2 to three days off per alternating weeks, so one week they have 2 days off,....and the next week they have 3 days off. I AM NOT ALLOWED TO CLOSE THE EMERGENCY ROOM OF A LEVEL ONE TRAUMA CENTER TO CONDUCT SACMS-VT TRAINING OR TESTING. I MUST HAVE A MINIMUM OF 6 MEDICS ON THE FLOOR AT ALL TIMES. There is no half or whole day per week set aside to conduct training, as much as we need it and both me and my soldiers would love it! The days that the soldiers have off are used to spend time with their families and take care of personal issues,....so that when they are at work,....THEY ARE AT WORK! It is not a matter of the NCOs not wanting to take the time to train our soldiers,....it is a matter of more senior folks not looking at the big picture before they implement new mandatory requirements. I care for my soldiers and their welfare and would do anything to ensure that they are prepared for possible upcoming deployments. But it requires the support of the command when you are talking about taking personal time from the soldiers,.......even if it is for training,......and we are not getting that here.
I am preparing to become a 91W, currently in an IET enviroment. Enjoying the level of training I am receiving and looking forward to be able to apply all the information that I have received. As well I look forward to continuing my Army career and continuing my education as a 91W.
Posts: 1 | Location: Alaksa | Registered: 03 December 2003