Field Experiment. The purpose of this experiment was to assess in as careful, systematic, ecologically valid, and objective a way possible the relative effectiveness of training firefighters using ALIVE and traditional classroom methods. Our goal was to see whether ALIVE, with its multimedia interactive features, online access, and logistical advantage, was effective in providing information to firefighters that could be learned and retained. Our hypothesis was that ALIVE training will be at least as effective as high quality Classroom training in three different firefighting-related topics.
Fire Departments for field testing. Our goal was to make the study conditions as realistic as possible to those experienced by firefighters when they have normal training, in order to increase the likelihood that the results of our findings would generalize to actual training conditions. For that reason we chose to make this a field, rather than a laboratory study. Further, we selected three different fire departments in different locations, again, to widen the generalizability of findings. Moreover, for the same reason, one of the sites was specifically selected to be a volunteer department in a smaller city.
The initial site was the Fire Department of New York (FDNY), which was an original partner in the study and which has an extensive training division. In close consultation with our expert Advisory Board (including representatives from career fire department, volunteer fire department, research institutions, government agencies, national and international training groups), we chose the Chicago Fire Department (CFD) as the second test site. The CFD is another large and professional department in a different geographic location. Lastly, after a careful review of a number of sites, we selected the Bloomington Fire Department (BFD) as the third site. Bloomington is a city of under 100,000 people in the suburban Minneapolis area. Most importantly, it has a well-trained and efficient volunteer fire service.
Training topics. In order to assess the efficacy, generalizability, and adaptability of ALIVE, experiments were conducted with FDNY and CFD career firefighters, and BFD, EFD, and EPFD volunteer firefighters, for three substantively different topics so that we could reduce the chance that any results would pertain to a particular kind of subject matter.
These topics included: (1) Wind-driven, high-rise fires; (2) Fires in modern lightweight residential construction; and (3) Fatigue and sleep management for firefighters. Training on each topic was evaluated in all fire departments through the use of both Classroom and ALIVE training. The advisory board believed that these topics represented important areas of knowledge for firefighter safety and health, and also provided very different kinds of information, serving as good tests of training systems.