A Higher Education

[Jackson]

A subject matter expert is one largely because of experience. However good or not I am as a teacher has very little if anything to do with my school of education classes in college.

Indeed. To me, being an SME requires something more than just proficiency. I think that would disqualify most "basic pistol" instructors out there. I would guess most people teaching basic marksmanship and safety classes don't qualify as "expert" as I would define it.

 

[Jackson]

Maam, I will not say that that person is wrong. I have seen many fine shooters that have used that method.

What I am teaching you is has been used for years and is a tried and true method.

There was a time when the preferred method of firing a pistol was with one hand bladed on the target, like this. Then came along a shooter named Jack Weaver and he stood square to the target and gripped the pistol with two hands. This was so effective that it cought on and has evolved into the Modified Weaver stance that I am demonstrating here.

Explain to them that any person with a cell phone can post a video on Youtube and sound like experts. You get what you pay for.

Depending on what she was told my response will range from "She was wrong." To "while that might work, what I'm teaching you should work better."

Not picking on you guys, but the above quoted items are not the kind of "whys" I'd want to hear from an instructor. Throw in some loose history, then tell me "well, this way is better" isn't a "why". This might be all that's needed in an institutionalized training environment where students have to use the method and have to come back and train. In private sector training, you may very well be the only instructor the student ever sees. Between the classroom instruction, general range organization, drills, etc you probably have less than 5 or 10 minutes of one-on-one time with any individual student in a whole day's class. Cutting straight to the mechanics is going to be important to helping them understand and making the best use of their time.

As for your grip, holding your weak hand as though you are holding a tea cup adds little stability to your grip, however if you grip in this manner it adds stability and helps you to get back on target after each shot.

This tells me the what (what your method is supposed to do). Get rid of the two paragraphs above and go right in to how. It works because you have more purchase on the gun, hands higher up toward the bore axis to create less leverage, bore more in line with the arms, etc, etc (whatever make up your reasons for WHY the technique works the way it does). These are the important type of mechanical points that will help them understand why to do what you're saying beyond it just being the accepted method.

The trick is to find the right keywords that ring with the student. Finding the proper que words is so important. That is something I currently have to work on.

Agreed. Being able to connect with a student on their level is key, I think.

I starting formally training Jiu Jitsu because I was tired of just parroting the moves we teach to recruits, the result of the week long combatives instructor school. I wanted to be able to explain to recruits the WHY we place our hand here or our foot there. So when questions arise, and they always do, I can explain the theories and not just "because we teach it this way." I also train stand up for the same reason.

This is a great example that follows the article advice. That experience will give you your own why.

 

[Coach]

Indeed. To me, being an SME requires something more than just proficiency. I think that would disqualify most "basic pistol" instructors out there. I would guess most people teaching basic marksmanship and safety classes don't qualify as "expert" as I would define it.

I agree, but I do not think most people agree (consumers or instructors). I think most people that walk into a gun store expect that the person behind the counter is a SME, and that is seldom the case. But tons of bad information gets dispensed from behind the counter and from "Basic" classes.

 

[rhino]

I am a subject matter expert in two fields:

1. Watching television, and
2. Running my mouth.


While I am an effective teacher, the market for imparting that knowledge on others is . . . limited.

 

[2A_Tom]

I am not a SME. I simply take new folk to the range and give them enough to be safe and hit the target.

 

[cedartop]

I guess I need to bare the soul in this one. Jackson and I have very similar training backgrounds. At least as far as taking classes goes. He doesn't feel that he is qualified to teach, I do teach. Hmm. It would be less than honest of me to say I don't feel the same way as Jackson at times. Especially when I consider the magnitude of importance of what we are teaching. As Tom Givens likes to remind students, "you literally are carrying around the power of life and death". It is a big deal to carry a gun for personal defense and a really big deal to teach people about it. Some don't seem to get that. Back to Jackson and I. I do have prior experience in the Military, Corrections, and LE, but as I have mentioned before, for a large part that means nothing, and I was not in any of them long enough to have a specialty that would make it mean something. Just having been a soldier or cop in no way means you are competent for teaching.

I do not remember what instructor level classes Jackson has had. I will say that my instructor classes in Combat Pistol, Red Dot Pistol, and CQB fighting in structures, did little more than codify the material that was to be taught. My Rangemaster Instructor and Advanced Instructor classes definitely helped to further my teaching abilities, but still aren't really enough. As was mentioned in the article something akin to an apprenticeship under a true master, or even good journeyman would be awesome. Before I could teach a number of things for Suarez (rifle for one), I had to not only take the class, but assistant teach it a number of times. This is a good start. Having that much hands on gives you a good idea about a lot of different things that can happen in class with regards to safety, human behavior, equipment, and a whole bunch of other thing that just some books or even classes taken won't do. Unfortunately even with those who use this model, they cut it way short.

Subject Matter Expert is somewhat vague. There is always someone who knows more than you, and there is always someone who thinks you know enough to be a SME. I think you definitely want to be at least 2 if not 3 levels above those who you are teaching. Will there be a student every so often who can outshoot or outfight you? Of course, that is going to happen to everyone. If however it is happening on a regular basis, you may want to change the level you are teaching to, or consider not teaching at all until you make significant improvements. This is one of the reasons I let have Josh teach the Managing Confrontations class and I just step in where my actual street experience is relevant. Someone mentioned earlier about coaches not being able to outperform their athletes, I get that, but I will also say that is use as cover by far too many poor instructors.

Let me leave you with a story of what I mean, and I could actually tell a lot more, but this one should suffice to make my point. I was recently in my LGS when a customer brought in a cased handgun. The owners wife asked him if it was unloaded. He said of course it is, after all I worked DOD for 6 years and am a NRA MI CPL instructor. He went on for quite some time about his qualifications. Long story short, he said he was having problems with his handgun, the slide wasn't cycling correctly. The owner of the store took the gun in back and returned a short time later saying he found the problem. THE GUN WAS MISSING ITS GUIDE ROD. Our intrepid hero, former DOD and current NRA instructor asked if that was important.... Think about that for a minute. He is an instructor teaching people who get their carry license. Some of you are going to laugh at this, but I see similar stuff all of the time. Of course everybody thinks that is someone else, not them. Why in the hell do we have so many firearms "accidents" then.

If you are an Instructor, or wannabe instructor, what you are teaching is important, and it is serious. Treat it accordingly.

Edited to add; I am not using wannabe as or pejorative or to imply I am above all of this. As I have stated before, if I am a SME of anything, it is being a student.

 

[Jackson]

Think about that for a minute. He is an instructor teaching people who get their carry license. Some of you are going to laugh at this, but I see similar stuff all of the time. Of course everybody thinks that is someone else, not them. Why in the hell do we have so many firearms "accidents" then.

I fear being like that guy in some way and not knowing it.

 

[Jackson]

I agree, but I do not think most people agree (consumers or instructors). I think most people that walk into a gun store expect that the person behind the counter is a SME, and that is seldom the case. But tons of bad information gets dispensed from behind the counter and from "Basic" classes.

In my view Subject Matter Expert is a very high bar. Its hard to define, but to me it is someone who is not only familiar with their way, but familiar with several ways, the history of those ways, the reasons for each, experience with each, can perform with each, and can show the ins and outs of each. SME, to me, means a wide body of knowledge not easily obtained and those that have it are probably teaching something more than basic marksmanship at the local range, or not interested in teaching at all. Maybe I'm too strict with the term "expert".

 

[Coach]

I fear being like that guy in some way and not knowing it.

You are not like that guy if you stay in the lane. You are too smart and have spent too much time studying and learning to be like that.

 

[Coach]

In my view Subject Matter Expert is a very high bar. Its hard to define, but to me it is someone who is not only familiar with their way, but familiar with several ways, the history of those ways, the reasons for each, experience with each, can perform with each, and can show the ins and outs of each. SME, to me, means a wide body of knowledge not easily obtained and those that have it are probably teaching something more than basic marksmanship at the local range, or not interested in teaching at all. Maybe I'm too strict with the term "expert".

I think your definition or idea is right. Most people would be slow to claim that label. I made a small presentation to some employees of the Coca-Cola bottling plant a couple of years ago. I was asked to do it by someone who worked for Coke and had taken a class of mine. I agreed. I had to submit a resume and did. I was introduced as a SME to that crowd. I was 100% confident in the things I talked about to them. But I was humbled by the label. I hope at least to be in the ballpark on certain things.

 

[Coach]

I guess I need to bare the soul in this one. Jackson and I have very similar training backgrounds. At least as far as taking classes goes. He doesn't feel that he is qualified to teach, I do teach. Hmm. It would be less than honest of me to say I don't feel the same way as Jackson at times. Especially when I consider the magnitude of importance of what we are teaching. As Tom Givens likes to remind students, "you literally are carrying around the power of life and death". It is a big deal to carry a gun for personal defense and a really big deal to teach people about it. Some don't seem to get that. Back to Jackson and I. I do have prior experience in the Military, Corrections, and LE, but as I have mentioned before, for a large part that means nothing, and I was not in any of them long enough to have a specialty that would make it mean something. Just having been a soldier or cop in no way means you are competent for teaching.

I do not remember what instructor level classes Jackson has had. I will say that my instructor classes in Combat Pistol, Red Dot Pistol, and CQB fighting in structures, did little more than codify the material that was to be taught. My Rangemaster Instructor and Advanced Instructor classes definitely helped to further my teaching abilities, but still aren't really enough. As was mentioned in the article something akin to an apprenticeship under a true master, or even good journeyman would be awesome. Before I could teach a number of things for Suarez (rifle for one), I had to not only take the class, but assistant teach it a number of times. This is a good start. Having that much hands on gives you a good idea about a lot of different things that can happen in class with regards to safety, human behavior, equipment, and a whole bunch of other thing that just some books or even classes taken won't do. Unfortunately even with those who use this model, they cut it way short.

Subject Matter Expert is somewhat vague. There is always someone who knows more than you, and there is always someone who thinks you know enough to be a SME. I think you definitely want to be at least 2 if not 3 levels above those who you are teaching. Will there be a student every so often who can outshoot or outfight you? Of course, that is going to happen to everyone. If however it is happening on a regular basis, you may want to change the level you are teaching to, or consider not teaching at all until you make significant improvements. This is one of the reasons I let have Josh teach the Managing Confrontations class and I just step in where my actual street experience is relevant. Someone mentioned earlier about coaches not being able to outperform their athletes, I get that, but I will also say that is use as cover by far too many poor instructors.

Let me leave you with a story of what I mean, and I could actually tell a lot more, but this one should suffice to make my point. I was recently in my LGS when a customer brought in a cased handgun. The owners wife asked him if it was unloaded. He said of course it is, after all I worked DOD for 6 years and am a NRA MI CPL instructor. He went on for quite some time about his qualifications. Long story short, he said he was having problems with his handgun, the slide wasn't cycling correctly. The owner of the store took the gun in back and returned a short time later saying he found the problem. THE GUN WAS MISSING ITS GUIDE ROD. Our intrepid hero, former DOD and current NRA instructor asked if that was important.... Think about that for a minute. He is an instructor teaching people who get their carry license. Some of you are going to laugh at this, but I see similar stuff all of the time. Of course everybody thinks that is someone else, not them. Why in the hell do we have so many firearms "accidents" then.

If you are an Instructor, or wannabe instructor, what you are teaching is important, and it is serious. Treat it accordingly.

Great post. The last one being the greatest point among them.

 

[Jackson]

Not picking on you guys, but the above quoted items are not the kind of "whys" I'd want to hear from an instructor. Throw in some loose history, then tell me "well, this way is better" isn't a "why". This might be all that's needed in an institutionalized training environment where students have to use the method and have to come back and train. In private sector training, you may very well be the only instructor the student ever sees. Between the classroom instruction, general range organization, drills, etc you probably have less than 5 or 10 minutes of one-on-one time with any individual student in a whole day's class. Cutting straight to the mechanics is going to be important to helping them understand and making the best use of their time.



This tells me the what (what your method is supposed to do). Get rid of the two paragraphs above and go right in to how. It works because you have more purchase on the gun, hands higher up toward the bore axis to create less leverage, bore more in line with the arms, etc, etc (whatever make up your reasons for WHY the technique works the way it does). These are the important type of mechanical points that will help them understand why to do what you're saying beyond it just being the accepted method.



Agreed. Being able to connect with a student on their level is key, I think.



This is a great example that follows the article advice. That experience will give you your own why.

A small expansion and some thoughts on my comments:

In a short-form course (one or maybe two days), there are two ways students improve:

1. You provide them with significant changes or immediately actionable information for them to see immediate improvement there on the line. This probably happens more frequently with beginning students and less-so with more experienced students. If you give them something less-than-optimal that is better than what they were doing before the class and they improve, was that a waste of the student's money because they didn't learn the best way? Or was it a success because they took the next step in their journey?

2. You provide them with small changes that you convince them are correct, even if they can't see immediate improvement. Here is where the WHY is more important. They have to be made to understand the mechanics behind why its the better method so they can go home and incorporate it in their own practice to see improvement.


The most impressive teacher I've ever seen in a class wasn't even the instructor. He was another student. It was Emanuel Kapelsohn, who just happened to be attending the same class as a guest student. He was on line a couple slots over from me and directly next to a student who was struggling with her marksmanship. At one point he leaned over and whispered something in her ear and BAM! she went from one of the poorest shooters on the line to one of the best. It wasn't a long exchange. Definitely less than a minute. I have no idea what he said to her, but whatever it was, it got immediate results. Most instructors can't do that. They have to work with option 2, give them the best why's and how's they can, and hope they take it home and work it.

 

[Jackson]

Supply food?

Dang every time I take a new shooter to the range , I spring for guns, ammo and buy them a meal while we discuss what the learned and how they enjoyed it.

They're supposed to buy me food?

All kidding aside I feel very comfortable taking new shooters to the range, teaching them the four rules giving instruction on stance, grip, sight pipcture, stance &c. I am a good teacher when I know the subject. I have and most likely will never charge or tell anybody I am an expert.

I am not a SME. I simply take new folk to the range and give them enough to be safe and hit the target.

I think the majority of this thread is aimed at people who intend to, or currently teach professionally. I assume that's not what you're doing. Or do I misunderstand? You're a trainer or wish to become a trainer?

In either case, what do you do to improve your approach and your ability to bring a new shooter in to proficiency?

 

[2A_Tom]

I am not a trainer and will never be a professional trainer. I am sorry that I posted in this thread I will now unsubscribe.

 

[rhino]

I am not a trainer and will never be a professional trainer. I am sorry that I posted in this thread I will now unsubscribe.

Why? That's an odd reaction. Just because you don't take money for teaching people doesn't mean that you don't have something to contribute to this topic.

 

[Coach]

I am not a trainer and will never be a professional trainer. I am sorry that I posted in this thread I will now unsubscribe.

You were doing a lot to contribute. Don't back away now. I actually have been thinking about several of your comments. You were doing some good. Stay involved. It is a discussion and it is never going to be productive without all points of view.

 

[Coach]

2. You provide them with small changes that you convince them are correct, even if they can't see immediate improvement. Here is where the WHY is more important. They have to be made to understand the mechanics behind why its the better method so they can go home and incorporate it in their own practice to see improvement.
.

The why has to convince them to commit to a particular path. They are uncertain because they do know what is the right path. Lay it out and convince them. But for that to happen you have know yourself.

 

[Coach]

I am a subject matter expert in two fields:

1. Watching television, and
2. Running my mouth.


While I am an effective teacher, the market for imparting that knowledge on others is . . . limited.

You are an effective teacher and a fountain of knowledge.

I would like to think I am in the game as far as running my mouth. I will never touch you in the watching TV category.

 

[Jackson]

I am not a trainer and will never be a professional trainer. I am sorry that I posted in this thread I will now unsubscribe.

I'm not either. I don't think I meant that the way it came off. I certainly didn't mean to alienate you or scare you away.

What I meant was I don't think anyone in this thread is saying a person needs to be an expert to take people to the range and share their knowledge. I didn't mean you had to be a professional firearms trainer to participate in the thread.

 

[rhino]

You are an effective teacher and a fountain of knowledge.

I would like to think I am in the game as far as running my mouth. I will never touch you in the watching TV category.

I have a few years of experience with television watching that few will ever equal. I watch Like a Boss.