View Full Version : Live fire demos by instructors?
NCPatrolAR
06-09-10, 08:06
While we touched slightly on this topic in a thread a while back, let's explore this a bit more.
When you attend a training course, how important is it for you to see the instructor perform live-fire demonstrations of the material being taught? Does it matter if he actual shoots at a target or just into a berm?
I find it very important.
Target vs berm matters with what is being taught, and if I know the capabilities of the instructor. I primarily train with one instructor, and have taken plenty of his classes. I know what he can do, I don't need to see his hits on paper to know...sometimes it's just easier for him to put rounds into the berm instead of on paper, which would then need to be changed.
But sometimes rounds on paper makes a certain point, and if I don't know the instructor it helps to find their abilites and to make sure they can do what they preach.
I think live fire demos are always important. It's good for students to see exactly what they are supposed to do, as opposed to just hearing it and filling in the blanks themselves.
I wouldn't take a class with someone who is unable to do what they teach.
I wouldn't take a class from someone who is unable to do what they teach.
I think that this sums up how I feel
John_Wayne777
06-09-10, 08:41
When you attend a training course, how important is it for you to see the instructor perform live-fire demonstrations of the material being taught? Does it matter if he actual shoots at a target or just into a berm?
Speaking personally here, it depends on what the instructor is teaching. Some things really do require seeing it done to understand. Some things do not. In general I think it's a good thing for an instructor to demo as much as possible.
As for target vs. berm, occasionally shooting the berm is fine. If the instructor never puts rounds on an actual target, however, I would get extremely suspicious unless I knew him really well beforehand.
Pathfinder Ops
06-09-10, 08:41
I find it very important.
Target vs berm matters with what is being taught, and if I know the capabilities of the instructor. I primarily train with one instructor, and have taken plenty of his classes. I know what he can do, I don't need to see his hits on paper to know...sometimes it's just easier for him to put rounds into the berm instead of on paper, which would then need to be changed.
But sometimes rounds on paper makes a certain point, and if I don't know the instructor it helps to find their abilites and to make sure they can do what they preach.
I think live fire demos are always important. It's good for students to see exactly what they are supposed to do, as opposed to just hearing it and filling in the blanks themselves.
I wouldn't take a class with someone who is unable to do what they teach.
I agree with this wholeheartedly.
As an instructor I feel my students get validation of the skill set's goal, by seeing it done.
There is a teaching theory (we use, as do many other organizations) that goes:
Demonstrate the skill correctly, in real time. This allows the student to see the desired skill as you wish them to do it.
Demo the skill slowly while explaining the individual steps of the skill. This breaks down the overall skill so that finer points (especially in a complex or multifaceted skill) can be grasped.
Have the student repeat it. Have the student practice the skill at their pace (initially, then at the desired standard).
Tweak the students performance until the desired outcome is achieved. Fluency with a skill is the desired goal. Coaching them through is the instructor, student polishing what has been evolving.
Essentially: show it, teach it, have student do it, tweak it for quality.
An instructor who does not demonstrate a skill is not fully teaching they are under serving their students.
As for into a target or the berm: As stated ...... it depends.
If I am teaching a stance for example its not really a necessity to print the paper. That's not the point of the skill.
If however I'm talking about sites & height over bore (for example) its obvious (to me) that I must show the print of the rounds impact as a matter of illustrating the skill. Anything else falls short and is now didactic versus a demonstrative teaching situation.
Some things can be talked about (lecture/didactic). Other things must be displayed (demonstrative).
This should be an intuitive approach for an instructor. Knowing when to talk and when to show.
While we touching slightly on this topic in a thread a while back, let's explore this a bit more.
When you attend a training course, how important is it for you to see the instructor perform live-fire demonstrations of the material being taught? Does it matter if he actual shoots at a target or just into a berm?
Very important for the following reasons:
1. I might not have fully understood what the instructor wanted me to do and seeing it would help a lot.
2. If the instructor does that drill well, then that shows me they "practice what they preach."
When I teach pistol and carbine, I either ALWAYS demo the drill or at least ask if someone needs to see it done.
C4
Having an instructor do demos is very important because I want to know they can do what they are teaching and expecting out of students. Also, I know I learn better by seeing things done as opposed to just having instructions told to me.
As for target or berm, personally I would always like to see targets being used. It would just be more validation on the instructors skills, and show the students that when using this techinque (or whatever is being taught) you can turn that into a good final result.
I think this especially applies to drills that are being ran on a timer or being scored.
Justin
Patrick Aherne
06-09-10, 10:17
I make it a point to demonstrate what I teach, not every drill, but at least a couple, during the course of every instructional block. Some because the student needs to see it done correctly to replicate the motion.
I also believe it is good for an instructor to bone it every now and then. I usually use it as a teaching point and show how everyone makes mistakes. It makes you more human and builds empathy with the student.
I have more respect for those instructors who are willing to push it and screw up in front of students. It shows real confidence. Now, I am not advocating muffing a drill on purpose, or regularly screwing up. More like using a muffed drawstroke to show the correct draw from a 6004, etc.
PRGGodfather
06-09-10, 10:27
Agree wholeheartedly. It's good to see an instructor perform well, push his own physical limits, and demonstrate the importance of knowing one's skills and limits in order to improve. It's good to practice the presentation, from communication to safety to demos. That's what pros do.
The instructor never needs to be the best shot in the class, he just needs to be the best teacher he can be, and thus, be well-rounded and competent when demonstrating technique.
There will always be someone faster, stronger, and even they have the occasional bad day -- so if your ego is in the instruction that motivates the demo or causes you not to demo -- it's just a matter of time before your students realize you're not what you think you are or claim to be, and they will learn better from someone who meets their needs, and respect that person more than you.
Those who expect perfection are foolish, and those who think they can attain perfection, are fools. Excellence; however, can be achieved in many areas of life, if one is willing to set ego aside and continuously improve.
I really want to print this out and give it to our academy staff.
The most I've learned in the last 4 years came when I went to Safariland's Shooting School. We had 2 great instructors for maybe 15 of us. Not only did they explain the drills well, but they demonstrated them within the allotted time. A lot of the class also ran in a friendly competition format. The instructors jumped in frequently and shot alongside us, which A) made a lot of us up our game, and B) reinforced our confidence in them.
In 6 years of shooting as a citizen and cop, that was the best training day I ever had.
Absolutely critical. Not just as a student to see how it's done, but to see how it's done right.
Not only that but I like seeing teacher's occasionally miss or make a mistake because they can explain WHY they missed or made a mistake. As instructors they SHOULD be constantly having to hone their skill as well.
So yes...critical.
I think that it is important to hear and see demonstrated what the instructor is teaching because people fundamentally learn from two methods:
hearing what they are supposed to do
or seeing what they are supposed to do
Of course, there is the combination of the two, but one method generally supports the other.
I can listen to what is expected, and visualize the drill. Or listen to the drill and watch the demonstration. I personally learn more from observing than hearing.
Does that make sense?
Just my thoughts.
PRGGodfather
06-09-10, 12:07
Yes. The four learning modalities.
Visual
Auditory
Kinesthetic
Tactual
Most folks lean on one mode more than the others, and you generally tell by the way they communicate. Most are kinesthetic and learn by doing, followed by visual, auditory and tactual.
Absolutely critical. The best instructors are the ones who can excel at the drills AND convey it to your brain, in a manner you can understand.
One of my previous instructors had a great demo with a dead man's gun he drew from holster. He tap, racked, moved away from the threat, engaged, and still beat the par time. Then he showed us the drill from a static position, with a live gun. It was a great teaching point for quite a few things. :D
NCPatrolAR
06-09-10, 12:52
What would you say if an instructor stated that he viewed live fire demos as a crutch and effective instructors dont need to use them?
Also, what if said instructor did not wear/carry a gun while teaching?
While we touching slightly on this topic in a thread a while back, let's explore this a bit more.
When you attend a training course, how important is it for you to see the instructor perform live-fire demonstrations of the material being taught? Does it matter if he actual shoots at a target or just into a berm?
An instructor should be able to demonstrate the skill or technique he is teaching. He may share that duty with an assistant, but he should do it himself often enough that there's no doubt about his credibility.
He needn't be a champion shooter, but he should demonstrate the skill or technique correctly.
Demonstrating the technique/skill he is instructing ensures that those of all learning modalities have an opportunity to absorb.
What would you say if an instructor stated that he viewed live fire demos as a crutch and effective instructors dont need to use them?
Also, what if said instructor did not wear/carry a gun while teaching?
I know several of those types of instructors. There is usually a reason that they won't demonstrate, and it's usually tied to their individual ability. There are a few, limited exceptions.
Those that lack equipment usually do so deliberate to ensure that they won't be the ones to demonstrate.
What would you say if an instructor stated that he viewed live fire demos as a crutch and effective instructors dont need to use them?
Also, what if said instructor did not wear/carry a gun while teaching?
i would say that's someone who's affraid to shoot in front of a class. i always demo in front of the class. i also miss shots once in awhile no issues it show students that anyone can miss. it's what you do after the miss (follow thru and make the shot) no one is perfect.
I would be very skeptical of any instructor who did not demo live at all or hit paper at least a little.
Having said that I dont expect grandmaster shooting from all instructors. Some guys know what they are doing, teach it well, and in some cases are now twice the age of their students.
Depends on the drill.
I find it unnecessary to be shown every single thing. But yes, the instructor should be competent.
While we touching slightly on this topic in a thread a while back, let's explore this a bit more.
When you attend a training course, how important is it for you to see the instructor perform live-fire demonstrations of the material being taught? Does it matter if he actual shoots at a target or just into a berm?
In that thread I listed live demos by instructor as a requirement.
All teaching - not shooting but all teaching - is done by example. It lends credibility to instructor and material that's being taught. My firearms instructors should be able to demonstrate that what they say works, just the same way my tennis or skiing pros do - otherwise it's just a talk. My craft involves technical skills and the only people who can do those things are qualified to teach. Even cognitivie skills require "demos". Years ago somebody did a study asking trainees to list most important attributes of their teachers.
The single most important attribute was "explicit reasoning" - which is nothing but a demo of one's skills, in this case cognitive skills.
In fairness of discussion, there are exceptions - but those are rare. Using tennis as an example, there is one dude that produced numerous champs even though he himself sucks as a player. He is credited with having an unusual talent of seeing things other people don't. Again, his cred is based on results - multiple successful students. I don't know of anybody in firearms training arena with same rep though.
What would you say if an instructor stated that he viewed live fire demos as a crutch and effective instructors dont need to use them?
Also, what if said instructor did not wear/carry a gun while teaching?
Unless he falls into that rare exception group, I wouldn't say much - I would never come back and I would make sure community knows instructors name.
John_Wayne777
06-09-10, 20:42
What would you say if an instructor stated that he viewed live fire demos as a crutch and effective instructors dont need to use them?
To his face I would respectfully disagree and point out the number of excellent instructors I've had who have done demos. It would be difficult, for instance, for an instructor to demonstrate how fast you can get acceptable hits from the holster if he never drew a gun.
Also, what if said instructor did not wear/carry a gun while teaching?
If he never used a firearm while teaching as an SOP it would concern me unless the instructor was dealing with an injury or something.
GLOCKMASTER
06-09-10, 21:05
What would you say if an instructor stated that he viewed live fire demos as a crutch and effective instructors dont need to use them?
Also, what if said instructor did not wear/carry a gun while teaching?
My bullshit meter would immediately peg off the chart and I would say this so called instructor needed to find something else to do.I probably would have to call them out because any instructor worth his weight should know the importance of demonstrations.
John Hearne
06-09-10, 21:45
I don't think you have to demonstrate every live fire drill. With that said, the more demanding an instructor is of the student, the more willing he/she must be willing to demonstrate that the expectations of performance are reasonable. Live fire demos solve the issue definitively.
Don Robison
06-09-10, 22:01
As a student I think it's important especially if I've never trained with the instructor.
As an instructor I think it's important for both credibility with students you've never trained with, but also because sometimes what you explain verbally may get through to 9 out of 10 students. Some people are visual learners. It's also important to do the drill clean. If you mess it up don't gloss over it. Re-accomplish it, everyone makes a mistake, a professional corrects his mistake with no excuse.
An instructor that doesnt do some demo on the range, at some point, is probably scared to shoot in front of students... maybe not but it's my guess. I've done demos in almost every course ive taught.... I know there are some instructors that don't. They are the same instructors that will say there those that are good shooters and those that can teach.... My bullshit meter always hits max when I hear that... If you can't put into practice what you're teaching then I say go do the hard work until you can.... Just my two cents.
Robb Jensen
06-09-10, 22:48
While we touching slightly on this topic in a thread a while back, let's explore this a bit more.
When you attend a training course, how important is it for you to see the instructor perform live-fire demonstrations of the material being taught? Does it matter if he actual shoots at a target or just into a berm?
I've never thought about it much but of many of the classes I've been to I've been a faster and more accurate handgun shooter than the instructor. This really doesn't mean much to me since I'm there to listen and learn. I'm not a good teacher. Some are, I'm not in that minority. With an open mind even if you're faster and more accurate that the instructor I'm sure that there's plenty to learn.
I use to help teach a Womens Handgun Cllinic and I always demonstrated basic firing techniques first.
Many of these Ladies had never fired a defensive Caliber handgun prior to their first range time during this clinic.
So it was my position that watching someone else pull the trigger from up close was one way to show them that firing a weapon was very different to what they had been exposed to in the movies etc...
Failure2Stop
06-10-10, 08:30
As a student I like to see demos, not really to judge the instructor (as I assume that he is already proficient, until proven otherwise) but to better comprehend the technical skill and to see it in play. I do demos for the same reason.
When I do a demo I am generally at about 75-80% of my top speed. Not because it is too fast to catch with the naked eye, but because I want the students to understand my accuracy demands, and with my target audience, I am generally 10-20% faster at 75% than they are at 100%, and I usually shoot the demo clean (we all have bad days).
I consider manipulations, grip, stance, recoil management, presentations, draw, shooting on the move, and supported positions to demand a demo. For example, I want the shooters to see a clean Half and Half and understand the drill before shooting it.
However, some skills do not benefit from a demo, but rather an explaination and physical interaction. Examples are- trigger control, aiming/sight use, grip pressure, the mount, and cheek weld. There are certainly others as well.
As far as "demos are a crutch" I can agree with very basic skills or simple concepts- I have no interest in watching or demoing 50yard pistol one-handed bulls-eye slow fire. Other than that, I think that a demo is pretty important.
Instructors without guns? Why?
If one wants to ensure that he is using weapons identical to the shooter's, I would want to just have a setup that I knew, was properly adjusted, and worked. But that's just me I guess.
My bullshit meter would immediately peg off the chart and I would say this so called instructor needed to find something else to do.I probably would have to call them out because any instructor worth his weight should know the importance of demonstrations.
Agreed. Demos, walk-throughs, rehersals, chalk-talks, simulations....
Whatever the term, they're all the same, carry the same weight in terms of student comprehension, and are critical to both correct learning and as an added safety feature so that you don't end up with some idiot Death Blossoming all over hell's half-acre.
My bullshit meter would immediately peg off the chart and I would say this so called instructor needed to find something else to do.I probably would have to call them out because any instructor worth his weight should know the importance of demonstrations.
I agree with this.
I like to instruct with the same or very similar set up that is a requirement of the students, nothing less or nothing more. I will ALWAYS have the weapon with me that I am teaching. This may be just for giving a dry manipulation instruction or conducting a live fire demo. I would give little credibility to an instructor who would scoff at the notion of carrying the weapon or doing a drill demo. I may make an exception with a few well known instructors, but there are only a few exceptions to this rule as far as I am concerned.
I am a visual learner so there are some drills that I appreciate seeing. At the same time I do like to get a feel for an instructors skills and to me this is important to an extent. By this I mean that an instructor or coach does not necessarily need to be better at the skills than the student. However I feel that I can actually judge if the instructor has merit even though I may feel that I can perform the actual drill better. Ie. Bella Karolyi will not be doing any double back handsprings but he sure can teach certain someones to do it well.
For myself when I teach I will generally demo a few of the early drills to reinforce my skill level on those who demand this and from there on I will demo only the difficult drills or when I feel that there may be confusion or when I am asked to do so by a student if they are unsure of the drill itself. As mentioned I understand that some students are visual learners and will demo accordingly, but I don't care for instructors who feel the need to demo everything. A good instructor we should be able to, for the most part, be able to accurately assess the needs of their students and address their needs accordingly. I have actually seen students who back into a shell when the instructor demo's everything. At times it makes the students feel embarrassed about their performance or in some instances I see resentment that the instructor is only doing a demo to boost their own ego and show off. IMO there is a balance.
I think live fire demos are always a good thing and especially important for new students.
I recently attended my first full course and the demos were really helpful to me because I learn most effectively by seeing things done live.
Also, being able to hit the intended target is important if the instructor is trying to demonstrate a certain techniques effectiveness/ineffectiveness.
Yes. The four learning modalities.
Visual
Auditory
Kinesthetic
Tactual
Most folks lean on one mode more than the others, and you generally tell by the way they communicate. Most are kinesthetic and learn by doing, followed by visual, auditory and tactual.
Thanks for that--it makes complete sense.
Much better than my answer--mine was kinda a swag, but at least somewhat close...
YammyMonkey
06-29-10, 22:14
I think the most important considerations are why & how the drills are shot. A student won't get much out of a full speed drill. One shot at 1/2 speed, however gives a student more time to see what's really going on.
Some talented students can get all the info from a fast drill but those are a rare breed in most classes. I'm more concerned with what I can get my students to do than with what I can do & I hope they feel the same.
As for the no-gun instructor, that would make me a little leery. Even instructorzs who don't do a lot of demos should still have a weapon just in case a demo is requested.
This has been something that I have been keen on for awhile. I will never ask my students to do something that I cannot do myself. At one of the places that I instruct at some of the instructors cannot shoot expert nor qualify for that matter on the particular qualifications. Yet they are comfortable teaching the class.
I even had an instructor tell me that you should never demo something because if you miss then your credibility goes out the window. Well yeah it does, so train so you don't miss. I can tell whether or not I am on or off, and whether or not I will hit the drills I am running.
The instructors do not need to demonstrate every single technique. That said, they do need to demonstrate a majority and they need to be at least good shots; expecting perfection is unrealistic. I also feel an explanation is usually a good thing and if the person can give a real world circumstance where they have employed the technique successfully, even better.
A major reason I am a strong proponent of TS as trainers is that they have been there, done that, and are excellent marksmen as well as tacticians. They demonstrate and are almost always A hits with speed. For me it is piece of mind and inspiring/challenging. If the instructor can't walk the walk.....
I even had an instructor tell me that you should never demo something because if you miss then your credibility goes out the window. Well yeah it does, so train so you don't miss. I can tell whether or not I am on or off, and whether or not I will hit the drills I am running.
That type of insructor is usually far more worried about his ego than effectively teaching his students. If an instructor is so worried about making mistakes that he can't come up with methodologies with which to turn them into a "teachable moment," then he's got some credibility to achiee before he starts worrying about losing it. It's not that hard to come up with a "here's a way to avoid dorking that up the way I just did..." Real expertise rests in somebody smart and experienced enough to know that perfection is a stupid, unattainable goal and that smoothly mitigating or solving those pesky imperfections is a key facet of real skill.
It's also stuff that is teachable and translates well with folks that don't walk on water. I'd much rather be taught by a talented, fallible human than a tinpot deity.
Another side of the coin: if one is the kind of student that thinks everything has to be flawless to be credible, that one is only going to learn to a certain point because they have unrealistic expectations and limited ability to think in regard to how things do happen vs. how they should happen.
John_Wayne777
07-01-10, 19:07
Another side of the coin: if one is the kind of student that thinks everything has to be flawless to be credible, that one is only going to learn to a certain point because they have unrealistic expectations and limited ability to think in regard to how things do happen vs. how they should happen.
Precisely. I've watched some of the best instructors in the world miss a shot now and then.
So.
Friggin'.
What.
The only person who actually thinks that a flubbed drill is an invalidation of an instructor's credibility is a chowderhead to begin with, and there's no hope for him whatsoever. He can go into the garden and eat worms while those with an IQ that can't be measured with fingers and toes learn things.
The only classes I have attended have been with Larry Vickers. Not because I don't value any other instructors, only because of proximity and timing of his classes. He has demonstraed key drills or any drill he was asked to demonstrate, without blinking. Has he 'flubbed?' Sure. Does that make him any less of an expert? No, it makes him human. I am certain this applies to any other expert out there. In fact, what I appreciate is when he (or anyone else) flubs and says "OK, this is what I did, and this is how to correct it."
CarlosDJackal
07-03-10, 12:15
Depends. But for the most part, if an instructor is going to demonstrate a standard or technique they expect their students to perform. Except for very specific situations, it really doesn't make any sense for them to just shoot into a berm. JM2CW.
CarlosDJackal
07-03-10, 12:20
What would you say if an instructor stated that he viewed live fire demos as a crutch and effective instructors dont need to use them?
Also, what if said instructor did not wear/carry a gun while teaching?
I would wonder if I just wasted my hard-earned cash. I don't see how anyone can view demos as a "crutch". :eek: If this was the case, then we could all learn just by buying the book or listening to a tape recording. JM2CW.
Good thread and interesting responses.
I'm an instructor for a training company. In fact, one of our students has posted in this thread.
Teaching any subject is about getting results. As a student, I want to see factual proof that said instructor can impart their knowledge on me and make me a better shooter. I think there are two ways to do that:
Have the instructor shoot the drill
Have a student who has learned from that instructor shoot the drill
In fact, I think the student shooting the drill carries more weight than the instructor himself shooting it. Why? Because as a student, I want to up MY skills, not see how good the instructor is.
I know a lot of really good shooters who are terrible teachers. They are either uncomfortable in front of a class, or just simply do not know how to relate the material to the student. They may be able to perform well themselves, but are unable to pass that knowledge to others. That makes them completely ineffective as an instructor.
On a similar token, Tiger Woods' coach can't golf as well as Tiger can, but he can make Tiger a better golfer. He knows the subject well enough, can identify problems, and knows the proper steps to correct those problems.
An instructors job is to make the student better. Proof of his skills as an instructor come from watching his students, not from watching him. So no, I don't think it is absolutely required for an instructor to shoot in front of the class.
That said, an instructor who can also walk the walk simply adds credibility to his side, and I think it is important for an instructor to demonstrate what he wants done. He doesn't have to be the best or the fastest, but being competent on the subject certainly helps his case.
I think demonstrations are most important in the early stages of a shooters training. Once they are fairly proficient, they are more likely to be able to take verbal commands rather than visual ones. We don't have to spend nearly as much time demo'ing in a level 2 class as opposed to a level 1.
The student of ours who posted in this thread is a good shooter. He trains with us often, and I have given him plenty of feedback on his shooting without actually showing him what I want done. He is far enough along in his training that he understands what I am looking for, and can tailor his movements to reflect that.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.