As part of our commitment to continuous quality improvement and strong governance, we undertook our first Annual Instructor Survey in March 2026, inviting all Resuscitation Australia-Accredited ALS Instructors to critically engage with and evaluate the courses they instruct on.
While the response rate was lower than anticipated, we recognise that our national faculty consists of highly experienced, busy clinicians. We’re grateful to those who contributed, particularly given the depth and quality of responses. The reflection in this survey speaks to the calibre of our Instructors.
Although the sample size of Instructors who responded was small, they collectively represent approximately 14% of all courses run in 2025, providing a meaningful (though not comprehensive) snapshot. The insights shared will help us enhance our training and positively contribute to our goal of improved patient outcomes across Australia in 2026 and beyond.
The insights we gathered
Overall experience
85% of Instructors rated their overall experience with Resuscitation Australia as positive, and the same number found our Instructor Guidance resources clear and useful. 77% felt they receive sufficient information from Resuscitation Australia to prepare for courses. We’re pleased with this foundation but are committed to building on it.
92% of Instructors confirmed they receive sufficient communication from their Course Centre, and the same number rated their overall experience with Course Centres positively. We’re grateful to the Course Centres for the support they provide to our national faculty, and we’ve shared relevant feedback directly.
Program schedules
ALS1 showed more variability than ALS2 in Instructor perceptions of course timing. While participant data from 2,443 respondents shows high satisfaction overall (93% positive), we’re monitoring this closely, particularly given Instructor feedback suggesting some time pressure during delivery, especially when facilitating more than one ALS1 course per day.
How participants are assessed
Assessment generated the most substantive feedback in this survey. 69% of Instructors feel confident distinguishing between adjacent scores on the Likert Competency Scale, and just over half believe the averaging model accurately reflects independent competence. We heard a range of views on the cumulative average calculation model. Some felt it could unfairly penalise participants in their first scenario, others felt it provided appropriate rigour. After careful consideration, we will maintain the current model while continuing to monitor its performance as more data becomes available. We thank those who engaged so thoughtfully with this question.
The way forward
The survey surfaced some excellent insights and recommendations, many of which we’re taking forward. These include:
- Peer-review of scenarios and Instructor Guidance; a valuable suggestion we intend to explore as part of our continuous improvement work.
- A mid-year feedback and assessment refresher webinar for our national faculty, to be recorded for ongoing reference.
- Reminders on where to find the Instructor Guidance and Likert scale documentation, with dedicated communication from Resuscitation Australia regarding material updates.
- Expanding the feedback loop so participant course evaluation feedback reaches all Instructors, not only Course Directors.
A change to Instructor accreditation
This survey has accelerated an internal priority: ensuring all Instructors have a strong understanding of the eLearning and theoretical foundations that prepare participants for the in-person component of our ALS courses. Not all active Instructors have completed the participant eLearning corresponding to their accreditation level, and several respondents noted independently that preparation levels among participants have a direct impact on the quality of the face-to-face day. We agree, and we hold ourselves to the same standard.
From 1 July 2026, verified completion of the relevant ALS eLearning will be a mandatory requirement in both our Instructor Accreditation Program (IAP) and Instructor Migration Course (IMC). This applies to all upcoming Instructors going through the IAP or IMC.
Continuing the conversation
We are firm believers in the power of collective expertise, and welcome suggestions from collaborators. This survey will be circulated to our national faculty again at the end of the year, but in the interim, we encourage Instructors to contact us at any time: we value your input year-round.
