SharpsDressedMan
member
Still, it would be like taking a singing lesson from Bing or Frank, and then they just won't sing a little one for ya.........
Should a firearms instructor shoot in front of students?
- Thread starter David E
- Start date
- Status
mayhaps i spoke (posted) too broadly...allow me to clarify
i didnt' mean they learned to play without hard work and practice, what i'm referring to are the skills that set them apart...from others that have practiced just as hard and dilegently.
the example that comes to mind in the shooting world is Jerry Miculek and his ability to operate the trigger of a revolver at speed. he can teach (very well, by the way) you how he works the trigger back and forth and how he coordinates it with the movement of his front sight ...but he can't teach you how he moves his finger at the speed he does, nor can he explain it
Al LaVodka
member
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2009
- Messages
- 1,040
Yes, they probably also should. Demonstrate the proper techniques where others may not. Also, very new shooters are probably interested in seeing a particular gun actually used first: opertaion, noise, recoil, ejection, etc...
Al
Al
Route2
Member
Hey, whose the trained professional here?
Edgar Dale and Bruce Nyland of the University of Wisconsin developed a “Cone of Learning.” They found that humans learn more from active involvement, remembering 90% of what is both said and done (active) compared to only 50% of what is heard and seen (passive). So, the instructor focusing on the student “doing the real thing” is the most effective teaching method and a heavy emphasis on the “real experience” is to be applauded.
However, there has to be the initial model, the “Ideal” that the student would be trying to attain, the “seeing it done” step in the instruction. There are things that a visual aid or verbal description cannot convey, the report of the weapon when fired, the recoil, etc., some things need to be experienced. Any unexpected “screw ups” are opportunities for the instructor to show how to handle the unexpected, the techniques, the tricks, the work a rounds.
Instructors don’t have to prove anything. Any instructor who takes an interest in his/her students, is a good teacher and communicator, will always is perceived as being the best instructor possible.
Edgar Dale and Bruce Nyland of the University of Wisconsin developed a “Cone of Learning.” They found that humans learn more from active involvement, remembering 90% of what is both said and done (active) compared to only 50% of what is heard and seen (passive). So, the instructor focusing on the student “doing the real thing” is the most effective teaching method and a heavy emphasis on the “real experience” is to be applauded.
However, there has to be the initial model, the “Ideal” that the student would be trying to attain, the “seeing it done” step in the instruction. There are things that a visual aid or verbal description cannot convey, the report of the weapon when fired, the recoil, etc., some things need to be experienced. Any unexpected “screw ups” are opportunities for the instructor to show how to handle the unexpected, the techniques, the tricks, the work a rounds.
Instructors don’t have to prove anything. Any instructor who takes an interest in his/her students, is a good teacher and communicator, will always is perceived as being the best instructor possible.
Last edited:
I don't expect instructors to be the fastest, or the most accurate, however, I DO expect above average proficiency.
I can understand a primary instructor allocating demo's to assistant instructors, but an instructor, or a training team, that fails to demonstrate and execute what they teach loses credibility in my mind.
For some, that may be acceptable.
To each their own...
I can understand a primary instructor allocating demo's to assistant instructors, but an instructor, or a training team, that fails to demonstrate and execute what they teach loses credibility in my mind.
For some, that may be acceptable.
To each their own...
crossrhodes
Member
As an instructor. I did shoot in front of the students when emphasizing a particular technique and it was done at a reduced speed so the student could and understand and absorb by seeing. Their was no ego involved but a respect to Time, Space and Logistics will often not allow an instructor to demonstrate every technique. This is the main reason military instructors are not on the line demonstrating every thing they are preaching.
In short, if pratical, demonstrate in away the student would best absorb the training.
In short, if pratical, demonstrate in away the student would best absorb the training.
Jefpainthorse
Member
having taught a non- firearm physical skill set ...(about 15 years teaching people how to climb and work power poles) I will say this.
Demo's have their place.. but it's real easy for a class to become the "me show" if you over do it. The trick is to understand what the student needs... and deliver.
Most gun classes I've been involved with... demo up to a "point" then let the student see what they can do. You get more done as an instructor watching what they are doing than doing it for them. Teaching a pysical skill set is really all about breaking things down... re- enforcments...and creating a forum for productive sucessful repitition of an action.
Played baseball as a youth and very young adult... never saw our coaching staff turn a double-play... but they "talked us through it" pretty well.
Demo's have their place.. but it's real easy for a class to become the "me show" if you over do it. The trick is to understand what the student needs... and deliver.
Most gun classes I've been involved with... demo up to a "point" then let the student see what they can do. You get more done as an instructor watching what they are doing than doing it for them. Teaching a pysical skill set is really all about breaking things down... re- enforcments...and creating a forum for productive sucessful repitition of an action.
Played baseball as a youth and very young adult... never saw our coaching staff turn a double-play... but they "talked us through it" pretty well.
RobMoore
Member
On the previous argument of "no time for demos", I say "make time".
The place you'll probably find it is in the classroom. There is only a small portion of material the shooters will learn while sitting in a chair. Get 'em on the range, show them the model of what they are performing, then watch them perform.
The place you'll probably find it is in the classroom. There is only a small portion of material the shooters will learn while sitting in a chair. Get 'em on the range, show them the model of what they are performing, then watch them perform.
SharpsDressedMan
member
Why is firearms traning so different than formal martial arts? In a MA class, two higher level "instructors" demonstrate moves, sometimes the sensei themselsves goes hands on with the lowest of students. Quite often the master of the dojo demonstrates with another blackbelt. There are no egos, or apologies allowed. There is just the purity of the art, and the goals to teach. That is how I feel about pistol instruction. Get to the pure art of the move, technique, etc.
jleyring
Member
The teacher should always be able to shot to the standards that he is asking the students to perform at. There might be a student that is better and show the teacher up, but that student shouldnt be in that class then. Part of a role as a teacher is the be a role model for the students. You wouldnt hire a golf instructor that couldnt shoot par.
As an old head at training, I seldom shoot in basic classes. If I have a problem shooter, I will demo the basics, and correct deficiencies. If needed, I will verify point-of-impact for a student using his gun. No ego required.
In Intermediate, Advanced, or classes for the Armed Professional, I have found that demonstrating techniques simply gets the class going quicker. (student see, student do). When my students see a guy old enough to be their (Grand)Father demo a technique, they realize it is not hard to do. When the day comes that I am not willing to keep my personal shooting skills fresh and up to speed, it will be time to hang it up and retire.
As far as Sport and Clay Target shooting, those who cannot demonstrate their techniques do not get much repeat business or a good reference around here.
If you are a fast talker, but a slow walker, your services are not required by me. If you are going to train me, you had better have your overdrive engaged.
You don't have to be a better or quicker shot than I, but you MUST be able to help me become a better trainer that can demo what he teaches.
In Intermediate, Advanced, or classes for the Armed Professional, I have found that demonstrating techniques simply gets the class going quicker. (student see, student do). When my students see a guy old enough to be their (Grand)Father demo a technique, they realize it is not hard to do. When the day comes that I am not willing to keep my personal shooting skills fresh and up to speed, it will be time to hang it up and retire.
As far as Sport and Clay Target shooting, those who cannot demonstrate their techniques do not get much repeat business or a good reference around here.
If you are a fast talker, but a slow walker, your services are not required by me. If you are going to train me, you had better have your overdrive engaged.
You don't have to be a better or quicker shot than I, but you MUST be able to help me become a better trainer that can demo what he teaches.
230therapy
Member
I have never been to a self-defense shooting course where the instructor never shot.
It is different because:
1) Firearms always involve lethal force. There is no "stun" setting.
2) Most martial arts styles have their traditional teaching methods.
3) Firearms do not require years of training to effectively use. The class is not a 10 year commitment and a half a decade is not required for effective use. In the civilian world, courses generally have a two to five day format.
4) Most traditional martial arts have muddied the waters badly with contextual movements. Some have not and others have focused upon fighting without the infinite "what ifs" and "gottaGetMyNameInHereSomewhereTechniques" so prevalent in may styles. Learning all these variations eats up time and keeps the students coming back for more. I know of one Korean art in my area that is filled completely useless garbage added in for "artistic" reasons.
sidheshooter
Member
The OP was a question about the respective values of two different philosphies:
Their thoughts are, you have nothing to gain and everything to lose. If you screw up, you'll diminish your standing as an instructor and possibly lose the student's interest in listening to you.
The other side of the coin is, the instructor should be able to perform the skill(s) he expects his students to perform. If HE can't do it, how can he be a suitable teacher?
I'd say that the poll results speak for themselves on the issue, by and large. Would you let your kid study with a violinist who was afraid to play for their students? Would you train with a skydiver who won't jump out of the plane first?
Going further, how many here have some instructional defensive shooting videos? Show of hands: any of those videos by the big names have any footage of them shooting their drills, or demonstrating a technique, or are they just talking about it?
Their thoughts are, you have nothing to gain and everything to lose. If you screw up, you'll diminish your standing as an instructor and possibly lose the student's interest in listening to you.
The other side of the coin is, the instructor should be able to perform the skill(s) he expects his students to perform. If HE can't do it, how can he be a suitable teacher?
I'd say that the poll results speak for themselves on the issue, by and large. Would you let your kid study with a violinist who was afraid to play for their students? Would you train with a skydiver who won't jump out of the plane first?
Going further, how many here have some instructional defensive shooting videos? Show of hands: any of those videos by the big names have any footage of them shooting their drills, or demonstrating a technique, or are they just talking about it?
bigalexe
Member
Why would you NOT shoot in front of students. Shooting is an active sport that requires participation and sometimes demonstration is the best method.
Well what if the instructor screws up?
Everyone messes up from time to time and even more do under pressure. Everyone is fallible and a failure can present an opportunity to dissect the problem with the students, furthering their knowledge.
Everything to gain and nothing to lose I say.
Well what if the instructor screws up?
Everyone messes up from time to time and even more do under pressure. Everyone is fallible and a failure can present an opportunity to dissect the problem with the students, furthering their knowledge.
Everything to gain and nothing to lose I say.
YammyMonkey
Member
Personally, I think demos should be saved for the more complicated drills that students may not be able to grasp with simple verbal instructions.
Instructors should not shoot to prove themselves, they should shoot to demonstrate the drill. If I run a drill at max speed in front of a class they won't get the vast majority of it. If I slow it down so they can see what's going on they'll actually learn something. They also need to be done in a mechanically perfect manner.
If an instructor is going to push it on a few demos it needs to be stated up front what is going to be happening & that the instructor might fail because they're pushing that edge. It is OK for an instructor to fail like that in class if it's prefaced with an explanation of why it is important for us to push ourselves to failure.
I have no problem demoing drills but I also have to keep in mind that demos take time & time is a precious commodity in a class so I need to pick my demos carefully.
Instructors should not shoot to prove themselves, they should shoot to demonstrate the drill. If I run a drill at max speed in front of a class they won't get the vast majority of it. If I slow it down so they can see what's going on they'll actually learn something. They also need to be done in a mechanically perfect manner.
If an instructor is going to push it on a few demos it needs to be stated up front what is going to be happening & that the instructor might fail because they're pushing that edge. It is OK for an instructor to fail like that in class if it's prefaced with an explanation of why it is important for us to push ourselves to failure.
I have no problem demoing drills but I also have to keep in mind that demos take time & time is a precious commodity in a class so I need to pick my demos carefully.
sacp81170a
Member
It's inconceivable to me that you would try to teach a physical skill that you haven't mastered yourself. The goal of the instructor is for the students to become better than he is, but how can they do that without being shown proper technique? It may be that you've slowed down in your old age, but the mechanics should still be there. There are lots of my students who are "young guns" and have gotten faster than I am, but they got that way through being shown proper technique, not by having it simply explained to them.
crossrhodes
Member
A lot of good philosophies on training /instructing in this thread. But in a perfect world we don't have ammo restrictions or supervisors breathing down our necks about overtime and getting officers back on the street. It will always be a struggle to get the maximum training out of limited time and resources.This is an excellent question, weather to shoot or not shoot in front of students. But we have ask it as if we are in a perfect world to get instructor's real heart felt opinion on this subject. I know I'm whipping a dead horse, but I just had to get that out there.
So let's hear from those that run a shooting school who write their own time line, then lets hear from PD firearm instructors that are under the logistic's crunch.
Crusader103
Member
I have done both, and continue to provide training in both realms. An instructor should demonstrate new techniques. If it is simply a re-qual police shoot, no need. If it is an explanation of technique, whether to law enforcement or otherwise, 1) Instructor explanation 2) Instructor demonstration 3) Student performance under supervision 4) Evaluation/critique
Even during limited resource in-service training, it takes less than 2 minutes and 5 rounds of ammunition for an instructor to demonstrate a technique. That doesn't add much time nor resources.
It is nearly impossible to get a student to full understanding and correlation without a pre-requisite demonstration. They need a superior example if not performing a basic, previously learned, technique.
I will say it again. The argument that you have everything to lose by shooting in front of your students is true. You do have a lot to lose if you cannot perform..... and you should. It should not be construed as a "look at me" mentality. The demonstration is a showing of the validity of your techniques while setting an example to emulate that cannot be fully explained in words.
SharpsDressedMan
member
I'm going to go out on a limb here and speculate that SOME instructors, and some instructor wannabe's (some of which ARE acting as instructors) are not that skilled and/or confident enough to demonstrate an adequate skill level. In short, they become instructors to satisfy themselves, but may not have what others would consider a qualified level of skills to BE an instructor. They may also be the ones advocating that the instructor NOT have to display his skills, so they won't be discovered as less than qualified. This happens in police circles a lot. Instructors are sometimes chosen by rank, or seniority, or favoritism by the admin or staff, and not necessarily be the BEST candidates for instructors available. This contributes to poor morale, soemtimes, when others on the department KNOW the instructor is less than qualified. In the private sector, sometimes you know, by reputation, at least, that the guy training you IS a high level performer himself, and MAY have something to offer beyond rote drills, etc. Sorry if this hits too close to home for some, but I feel the general concensus here, so far, is that the student wants, yes, DESERVES, an instructor who IS qualified, and who can display a way higher level of competency than the average student in the class. AND, while circumstances of the class may not DEMAND that the instructor shoot, we want the instructors to be CAPABLE of displaying that higher level of competency, if necessary.
This happens in police circles a lot. Instructors are sometimes chosen by rank, or seniority, or favoritism by the admin or staff, and not necessarily be the BEST candidates for instructors available. This contributes to poor morale, soemtimes, when others on the department KNOW the instructor is less than qualified. In the private sector, sometimes you know, by reputation, at least, that the guy training you IS a high level performer himself, and MAY have something to offer beyond rote drills, etc. Sorry if this hits too close to home for some, but I feel the general concensus here, so far, is that the student wants, yes, DESERVES, an instructor who IS qualified, and who can display a way higher level of competency than the average student in the class. AND, while circumstances of the class may not DEMAND that the instructor shoot, we want the instructors to be CAPABLE of displaying that higher level of competency, if necessary.crossrhodes
Member
jscott, kleanbore and SharpsDressedMan, I aggree and thank you for your replies. That's what I was looking for.
Stay safe.
Semper Fi.
Guns - out
Stay safe.
Semper Fi.
Guns - out
redbullitt
Member
I teach for a living and a big part of that is being able to demonstrate what you are supposed to be imparting to the students. We do fitness as well and I do it right alongside my students. I am supposed to be the expert, so if I cannot perform, then how can I expect those just learning to do it?
Afterall, there is not much better than an actual example for teaching/learning from. Of course, I am young and capable of doing this. I understand that this will not always be possible for me and others, but even when I can't pull wind sprints, I will still know everything and more than I do now.
As to the comment pertaining to messing up and that looking bad, well I think that is bs because everyone messes up. If you know your stuff, then properly demonstrating the technique is all that is necessary. Perhaps if you cannot reliably perform, then have an assistant who can too. Either way, I don't think there should be any negative fall out short of a bruised ego really.
Just my .02 from a coaching standpoint.
Afterall, there is not much better than an actual example for teaching/learning from. Of course, I am young and capable of doing this. I understand that this will not always be possible for me and others, but even when I can't pull wind sprints, I will still know everything and more than I do now.
As to the comment pertaining to messing up and that looking bad, well I think that is bs because everyone messes up. If you know your stuff, then properly demonstrating the technique is all that is necessary. Perhaps if you cannot reliably perform, then have an assistant who can too. Either way, I don't think there should be any negative fall out short of a bruised ego really.
Just my .02 from a coaching standpoint.
Sebastian the Ibis
Member
If actually shooting would diminish an instructors standing before his students, the problem is not him shooting, it is the instructor.
Guns more than anything else I can think of attract wannabees. If the instructor won't shoot he is probably going to start talking about his training at something too classified to explain, and a high threat shopping mall.
Guns more than anything else I can think of attract wannabees. If the instructor won't shoot he is probably going to start talking about his training at something too classified to explain, and a high threat shopping mall.
OP
OP
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
I've been offline a few days and haven't been able to comment on my thread.
I'm pleased with the poll results, as they mirror my own views, that an instructor SHOULD shoot (and shoot reasonably well) in front of his students when required.
In my classes, I seldom shoot more than 10-15 shots, spread out over the day. But just about everytime, several students go "Ohhhhhhh, now I get it," and that's the whole point of the demo.
I'm pleased with the poll results, as they mirror my own views, that an instructor SHOULD shoot (and shoot reasonably well) in front of his students when required.
In my classes, I seldom shoot more than 10-15 shots, spread out over the day. But just about everytime, several students go "Ohhhhhhh, now I get it," and that's the whole point of the demo.
- Status
Similar threads
