PDA

View Full Version : Prerequisites



Jay Cunningham
04-11-2013, 11:09 AM
If you are signed up for a class at anything other than "Fundamental Level" but you have literally not touched a gun for SEVERAL MONTHS... this goes beyond a clue.

This is called a red flag.

Prerequisites are there as minimum requirements. They can never be all-encompassing, but if you cannot COMFORTABLY meet all course prerequisites at the beginning, you are engaging in self-delusion.



The above applies specifically to the classes that I teach, but I think applies across most of the spectrum.

TR675
04-11-2013, 12:06 PM
I'm kind of interested in this as a student. I've never submitted a list of previous courses to an instructor even when previous courses were supposedly required, and never had an instructor ask about the ability to meet prereq's or seen anyone get crapped at for not meeting them. There is always a list of prereq's but I don't see any enforcement on my end.

Do instructors ever check up on their students with other instructors in the community to vet their abilities? I've only ever seen two unsafe situations, both fairly minor, but I would feel better if there was some kind of pre-class communication about the folks on the class list.

ToddG
04-11-2013, 12:13 PM
Abso-freaking-lutely. I appreciate that people want to get more, better, "higher level" training. I appreciate that people want to push themselves. But when a black and white prereq is announced for a class like you must be able to hit a 5.5" circle at 5yd on demand and you can't do that, why would you sign up for the class?

Jay Cunningham
04-11-2013, 12:27 PM
I'm kind of interested in this as a student. I've never submitted a list of previous courses to an instructor even when previous courses were supposedly required, and never had an instructor ask about the ability to meet prereq's or seen anyone get crapped at for not meeting them. There is always a list of prereq's but I don't see any enforcement on my end.

Do instructors ever check up on their students with other instructors in the community to vet their abilities? I've only ever seen two unsafe situations, both fairly minor, but I would feel better if there was some kind of pre-class communication about the folks on the class list.

It's not the job of an instructor to act as a private investigator. It is the instructor's job to provide clear prerequisites in several categories so that the student can self-vet.

For my classes I have prerequisites like "hours of formal training" which is the "on paper" portion. I then have a performance prereq: you should be able to do X, Y, and Z from this range within this timeframe comfortably. Finally there's the gear prereq... when it states that you need electronic earpro and/or SF Sonic Defender earpro, it's not a "nice to have" thing. It's a required prerequisite. Why? So you can hear what is being said and you don't keep pulling your earplugs out asking "What did he say?"

So it's my job to provide thoughtful prerequisites. It's the students job to take them seriously. The last thing an instructor wants to do is refund someone's money within the first 10 minutes of shooting stating "you don't belong here". However, the second-to-last thing an instructor wants to do is hold back a class for an inordinate amount of remediation.

ToddG
04-11-2013, 12:40 PM
Do instructors ever check up on their students with other instructors in the community to vet their abilities? I've only ever seen two unsafe situations, both fairly minor, but I would feel better if there was some kind of pre-class communication about the folks on the class list.

Using previous training certificates as a prereq is a mistake. Let's take Rogers Shooting School as an example. Anyone who's attended will tell you it's a tough, detailed class. So if you're a graduate of RSS does that make you qualified to take someone else's class? Of course not. Maybe you graduated with 124 out of 125 on the "test." Maybe you graduated with 24 out of 125. The fact that you were present doesn't mean you listened and certainly doesn't mean you learned anything.

I've also had students who've never received any formal training but showed up to AFHF and kicked butt.

The number of certificates in your desk drawer doesn't indicate how good a shooter (or student) you are.

That's why I use skill-based prerequisites. Either you have good enough marksmanship fundamentals to hit x-target in y-seconds at z-yards, or you don't. The first dozen or so shots fired at any of my classes is a skill evaluation and folks who aren't able to meet the prereq get pulled aside and given a stern talking to. I don't kick anyone out for being a lousy shot but I do make sure they know I'm not going to stand over their shoulder the entire weekend being their personal dedicated trainer at the other students' expense.

jlw
04-11-2013, 01:58 PM
I'm kind of interested in this as a student. I've never submitted a list of previous courses to an instructor even when previous courses were supposedly required, and never had an instructor ask about the ability to meet prereq's or seen anyone get crapped at for not meeting them. There is always a list of prereq's but I don't see any enforcement on my end.

Do instructors ever check up on their students with other instructors in the community to vet their abilities? I've only ever seen two unsafe situations, both fairly minor, but I would feel better if there was some kind of pre-class communication about the folks on the class list.

I have attended courses at the GA Public Safety Training Center where there was a "shoot in" course of fire in which the student had to achieve a minimum score to attend the course. After all of the registration paperwork was completed, the students were all taken to the range to shoot the "shoot in". Those that failed were sent packing.

TR675
04-11-2013, 02:56 PM
It's not the job of an instructor to act as a private investigator. It is the instructor's job to provide clear prerequisites in several categories so that the student can self-vet...it's my job to provide thoughtful prerequisites. It's the students job to take them seriously. The last thing an instructor wants to do is refund someone's money within the first 10 minutes of shooting stating "you don't belong here". However, the second-to-last thing an instructor wants to do is hold back a class for an inordinate amount of remediation.

Completely agree, but obviously it doesn't always happen that way. What do you do with the deluded people? Kick 'em out? I assume yes if they've got unsafe gun handling skills. I've also heard of this not happening when it should have.


For my classes I have prerequisites like "hours of formal training" which is the "on paper" portion. I then have a performance prereq: you should be able to do X, Y, and Z from this range within this timeframe comfortably.

How do you apply the "hours of formal training" requirement? Or is it just laid out there for the student's reference, in which case it is more of a guideline than a true prereq? Example: my state's CHL training will give you umpteen hours of largely worthless instruction. Would that count, and do your students have to provide evidence of the training?


Using previous training certificates as a prereq is a mistake...That's why I use skill-based prerequisites. Either you have good enough marksmanship fundamentals to hit x-target in y-seconds at z-yards, or you don't.

While this makes sense , I personally am more inclined to trust a new guy with a Rogers background more than a new guy with no background. Kind of like how a Taurus might pass the 2,000 round challenge but an HK is more likely to pass it. If that's the case, and all other things being equal, wouldn't a student's documented background from other courses be of interest and useful to you?


I have attended courses at the GA Public Safety Training Center where there was a "shoot in" course of fire in which the student had to achieve a minimum score to attend the course. After all of the registration paperwork was completed, the students were all taken to the range to shoot the "shoot in". Those that failed were sent packing.

This, coupled with an immediate dismissal for poor or unsafe gunhandling, seems like the best way to go to me.

ToddG
04-11-2013, 03:24 PM
While this makes sense , I personally am more inclined to trust a new guy with a Rogers background more than a new guy with no background. Kind of like how a Taurus might pass the 2,000 round challenge but an HK is more likely to pass it. If that's the case, and all other things being equal, wouldn't a student's documented background from other courses be of interest and useful to you?


A student's course history is definitely of interest. But it rarely provides anything definitive about his skill or safety. Be present in a class doesn't mean the student paid attention, learned anything, or even managed to avoid getting a stern talking to once or twice for safety issues.

Part of the reason I run students through the F.A.S.T. individually at the beginning of each class is to establish their safe gun handling (or lack thereof).


This, coupled with an immediate dismissal for poor or unsafe gunhandling, seems like the best way to go to me.

That's far easier to pull off when it's a government agency providing training for government personnel.

For a "commercial" instructor it would be the kiss of death:

Please pay $500 plus travel expenses, time off from work, ammo, etc. to come to my class where, if you have a bad day during the initial test, you'll be kicked out.

Do I give him a refund, thus costing me $500 because he couldn't cut it? He'd still have the travel costs and such to absorb.

Do I not give him a refund, thus telling him that he's risking all that time & money? Not a lot of students are going to show up for a class under those circumstances.

TCinVA
04-11-2013, 03:27 PM
Attendance has no bearing on whether or not someone learned the lessons, in my experience.

LOKNLOD
04-11-2013, 03:32 PM
That's why I use skill-based prerequisites. Either you have good enough marksmanship fundamentals to hit x-target in y-seconds at z-yards, or you don't. The first dozen or so shots fired at any of my classes is a skill evaluation and folks who aren't able to meet the prereq get pulled aside and given a stern talking to. I don't kick anyone out for being a lousy shot but I do make sure they know I'm not going to stand over their shoulder the entire weekend being their personal dedicated trainer at the other students' expense.

I think that's about all you can do until a safety issue becomes evident. It becomes an issue of the instructor making sure the weak link doesn't hold the whole class back, and that can be a burden, but unless its an invite only class or the prerequisite is a basic class from the same instructor, I'm not sure how you avoid getting a few people over their head from time to time.

For most open enrollment classes I see that working. Some classes have same-instructor prereqs, like having ECQC before VCAST or AFHF before AFHS, make a lot of sense for more advanced classes and seem more enforceable. It doesn't mean you won't have have someone who was "that guy" in the standard class trying to take the advanced class, but at least the instructor might have an opportunity to weed that person out.

TR675
04-11-2013, 03:44 PM
That's far easier to pull off when it's a government agency providing training for government personnel.

For a "commercial" instructor it would be the kiss of death.

Understood, but I guess I'm really talking about the "can't hit the berm" guy more than the "can't hit the 3"x5" card but isn't missing by much" guy. I have to assume at some point poor marksmanship and gunhandling skills stop being annoying and start being dangerous, and that those students can't or shouldn't continue with the class. I'm curious where that line gets drawn.

ToddG
04-11-2013, 03:58 PM
For most open enrollment classes I see that working. Some classes have same-instructor prereqs, like having ECQC before VCAST or AFHF before AFHS, make a lot of sense for more advanced classes and seem more enforceable. It doesn't mean you won't have have someone who was "that guy" in the standard class trying to take the advanced class, but at least the instructor might have an opportunity to weed that person out.

That's why AFHS has two prereqs:

First, you need to be an AFHF grad. That's not because graduating from AFHF guarantees you're awesome, it simply means you've heard the lectures and know how I teach various techniques so we don't have to waste time going over the details again.
Second, you need to have scored at least Intermediate (9.99) on the FAST during your AFHF class. That provides a polite way to separate folks who need another AFHF from folks who don't.


I'd eventually like to have a class only for Advanced-level (6.99 or better) shooters but the student pool is very small.

ToddG
04-11-2013, 04:10 PM
I have to assume at some point poor marksmanship and gunhandling skills stop being annoying and start being dangerous, and that those students can't or shouldn't continue with the class. I'm curious where that line gets drawn.

Not really. Someone who can't keep his muzzle downrange and rounds in the berm isn't a bad shot, he's inattentive and/or reckless. That's purely a safety issue and I've seen folks who've graduated from Uber Advanced Level Eleventy Tactical Fighting Combat School make those kinds of mistakes. His training pedigree doesn't guarantee that his head is on straight.

I can think of some AFHF students off the top of my head who were literally buried by the course content but remained safe. Every one of them had done poorly on the initial evaluation. Every one of them got the "as long as you're safe you can stay but I'm not going to stop everything to teach you marksmanship fundamentals" speech. Every one of them decided to stay.

Most of them were fine and enjoyed the class. Many of them improved over the course of two days. Some paid as much attention and put as much effort into getting better in AFHF as they apparently had in previous classes, which is to say none.

One guy contacted me after class to complain that the course was too demanding and that, regardless of our little talk five minutes into the first day, I should have slowed the class down and spent as much of my time on him as necessary to get him up to the prerequisite skill level. He literally complained that I spent time helping the best students in class when "they didn't need it." Yeah, because they paid to shoot into the berm and get no instruction... I gave him refund and consider it fair trade for a funny story. (as an aside, said student was one of those "I've been to so-and-so's basic and intermediate and advanced level goblin-killing combat class" types)

Mr_White
04-11-2013, 05:35 PM
That's far easier to pull off when it's a government agency providing training for government personnel.

For a "commercial" instructor it would be the kiss of death


I'd eventually like to have a class only for Advanced-level (6.99 or better) shooters but the student pool is very small.

Our school is a weird one.

We pretty much take the approach that Todd (correctly) describes as the kiss of death for commercial instructors.

Our facility was created by funds left by a generous person for the furtherance of public firearms recreation and training, and law enforcement training too. It is now managed by a law enforcement agency.

The range exists, and will continue to exist, even if we never held another class.

The progenitor of our current program came from a lifetime of service as the lead firearms and tactics instructor for a California agency and SWAT team who has had to shoot for his own life and others’ lives on a number of occasions, and standards of performance are an important thing to him.

Our students have to pass tests in every class covering safety, gunhandling, and marksmanship, and until they reach a specified level of performance, we won’t take their money and they can’t come back and take the next class (yet.)

It’s very hard for us to fill anything beyond the basic classes. We do it, but it takes a lot of effort from both the staff and students.

When a person comes to us and wants to take classes starting beyond the basic level, they just have to show us they can meet the standards and challenge the test(s.) They usually cannot.

If we excuse a student from a class for safety violations, there is no refund. We don’t boot them for not meeting non-safety performance standards, though they probably wouldn’t have gotten into a given class unless they could meet the standards for entry anyway.

We would never survive as a regular commercial school. But we also rarely get someone who is very deficient at safety, gunhandling, or marksmanship (the elements of the tests) in an intermediate or advanced class either.

This whole scheme severely limits the volume of students we can train. But we are destined to be a tiny school anyway. There are only so much space on the range, so many weekend days per month, and other agency demands occupy the range some of those weekend days. So there is no point in trying to pack the students in. We have all the filled classes we can schedule – they are just overwhelmingly the basic classes.

Jay Cunningham
04-11-2013, 05:36 PM
Completely agree, but obviously it doesn't always happen that way. What do you do with the deluded people? Kick 'em out? I assume yes if they've got unsafe gun handling skills. I've also heard of this not happening when it should have.

As Todd mentioned, "kicking people out" after they've invested in a lot of time and money to be there is not something I want to do unless there's no other realistic choice.


How do you apply the "hours of formal training" requirement? Or is it just laid out there for the student's reference, in which case it is more of a guideline than a true prereq? Example: my state's CHL training will give you umpteen hours of largely worthless instruction. Would that count, and do your students have to provide evidence of the training?

All I can do is put out a requirement for "hours of formal instruction". I try to have some defense-in-depth in my prerequisites and that's just one layer.

Mr_White
04-11-2013, 05:39 PM
training pedigree doesn't guarantee that his head is on straight.

Ain't that the truth. I think every trainer has students that didn't learn much out there running around going to other trainers making themselves and their previous trainers look bad. All I have to say is, "You should have seen him before he came to us." ;)

Jay Cunningham
04-11-2013, 05:43 PM
The other funny thing about prerequisites is the massive amount of effort some expend justifying why they shouldn't apply.

I figured if I just refused to use "advanced" in any of my course titles that would be effective, but apparently not.

CCT125US
04-11-2013, 06:41 PM
I'd eventually like to have a class only for Advanced-level (6.99 or better) shooters but the student pool is very small.


How many students have you had through class? Looks like roughly 125 students have made the FAST wall. Just curious as to the percentage. I would think that laying out the money for class with prerequisites would be a gamble if the student was not honest. Kind of hard to fake it once you get there.

ToddG
04-11-2013, 07:02 PM
The other funny thing about prerequisites is the massive amount of effort some expend justifying why they shouldn't apply.

There is a flipside to that, though. SLG and I were almost denied slots to a class years ago because the host was worried we would slow the class down. It was for people who'd already been through the instructor's levels 1 through infinity carbine and pistol programs and now needed a more advanced integrated tactics/fighting class. So here we are, thinking wow any class that's so advanced we can't even make the minimums is going to be awesome! We convinced them to let us in.

Then the class spent the first couple of hours zeroing carbines. One student kept missing his holster during his particular speed reholster technique, instead throwing the gun muzzle-first into the ground half the time. I could go on and on...


I figured if I just refused to use "advanced" in any of my course titles that would be effective, but apparently not.

As soon as I had a level-2 class, I had people who wanted to jump right to it and skip level-1. Prior to the existence of the level-2 class, I never had a single student come through AFHF and say, "Boy, that was just too basic and boring."


How many students have you had through class? Looks like roughly 125 students have made the FAST wall. Just curious as to the percentage. I would think that laying out the money for class with prerequisites would be a gamble if the student was not honest. Kind of hard to fake it once you get there.

I'm not concerned with people lying about having made Advanced previously... I keep a database so I know who's been naughty and who's been nice. But with only 100 or so total qualified applicants, the number who (a) want to take another class from me and (b) will take the class at a given locale possibly far from home and (c) will be available on the specific date I choose and (d) have the money and ammo to be there gets to be pretty small.

Jay Cunningham
04-11-2013, 07:18 PM
There is a flipside to that, though. SLG and I were almost denied slots to a class years ago because the host was worried we would slow the class down. It was for people who'd already been through the instructor's levels 1 through infinity carbine and pistol programs and now needed a more advanced integrated tactics/fighting class. So here we are, thinking wow any class that's so advanced we can't even make the minimums is going to be awesome! We convinced them to let us in.

Then the class spent the first couple of hours zeroing carbines. One student kept missing his holster during his particular speed reholster technique, instead throwing the gun muzzle-first into the ground half the time. I could go on and on...

Interesting that you mention that (cue shameless plug in 3... 2... 1...)

A common piece of wise advice to more experienced shooters is to eventually retake one or two beginner-level “fundamental” training classes. Unfortunately, the reality is that retaking a beginner-level class can wind up being a waste of resources. Drills may be conducted with no external pressure, accuracy requirements may be relaxed, and the more experienced shooter may be largely ignored by the instructors who have their hands full with novice students.

To address the above, I decided on a new offering. Pistol: Reloaded is a one day fundamentals workshop conducted with strict standards for experienced shooters in an environment of their peers.

ToddG
04-11-2013, 07:44 PM
So not to sound like I'm plugging Jay's idea, but I agree completely about taking refresher classes. I took at least one "basic" class every year for the first ten or so years of my shooting career and took one again just last year.

If you think you're too good to practice fundamentals and have someone audit your performance, you probably aren't.

JFK
04-11-2013, 08:50 PM
So not to sound like I'm plugging Jay's idea, but I agree completely about taking refresher classes. I took at least one "basic" class every year for the first ten or so years of my shooting career and took one again just last year.

If you think you're too good to practice fundamentals and have someone audit your performance, you probably aren't.

I agree with this.

It is amazing what tid bits of information you can come up with if you are taught a subject you think you are well versed in. (and probably are well versed in for most) I had to take my CCW renewal last month. I took it with an instructor that is a friend and I respect. I thought that it was going to be 4 hours wasted but sure enough I learned something. (re learned really)

It is also interesting how you can have small rays of light that spark the bulb in your head. From the same class I took away a piece of knowledge that I "knew" but it was presented in a way that was eye opening.

jlw
04-11-2013, 09:04 PM
Am I alone in my thinking that many of the classes billed as "advanced" are actually pretty basic skills when you the course description is dissected.

ToddG
04-11-2013, 09:05 PM
Am I alone in my thinking that many of the classes billed as "advanced" are actually pretty basic skills when you the course description is dissected.

That drags you down into the pit of ubiquitous internet discussions, in this case "What is Advanced?"

JFK
04-11-2013, 09:07 PM
"What is Advanced?"

Anything that has the word "Tactical" or "High Speed" in the title. ;)

Jay Cunningham
04-11-2013, 09:20 PM
Am I alone in my thinking that many of the classes billed as "advanced" are actually pretty basic skills when you the course description is dissected.

It's complicated. *snicker*

If you can't yet perform the overwhelming majority of shooting stuff on auto-pilot, then trying to make some decisions is going to fry you. However if the shooting part is the simple part, it frees your brain up to do other stuff.

If you can manipulate your gun without slipping your finger onto the trigger and without pointing it at stuff that doesn't need shot, you're pretty far along the way. If you can hit tiny little targets on demand and bigger targets fairly rapidly, you're doing great. If you can reload, manage ammo, and clear malfunctions (without pointing your gun at something that doesn't need shot and with your finger off the trigger) then dude, you are ready for the !advanced! stuff.

Which mainly just means effectively utilizing cover and learning how to try and avoid fights.

ST911
04-11-2013, 09:58 PM
I sincerely appreciate clear course descriptions, objectives, and prerequisites. They are helpful in focusing my resources properly. I've been frustrated in classes that were bogged down by folks choosing poorly, working at ego-level, or trying to collect a certificate.

For a pre-req, I'm fond of a quantified performance standard and I wouldn't mind being tested on it upon arrival. Otherwise, it's entirely reliant on people being honest with themselves, something many aren't good at. Heck, most folks don't even own a timer.

BenEnglish
04-11-2013, 10:38 PM
The last thing an instructor wants to do is refund someone's money within the first 10 minutes of shooting stating "you don't belong here".At least you're assuming a refund will be offered.

Just to start - No, I can't prove any of this, it's all my recollection and, try as I might, I can't find this organization on the web any more. Because I told this story on another forum a while back, I was asked for proof and was unable to find any. Maybe they no longer exist. So consider this tale apocryphal until corroboration is obtained...which will likely be never.

The story - Quite some time ago, perhaps a decade or so, I was looking for a basic rifle class. I found one that was open to the general public (theoretically) and held somewhere in the Rockies, iirc Colorado. The prerequisites weren't performance-based as to shooting. In fact, at first I didn't see any. I did, however, see a huge list of required equipment, including a sizable quantity of ammunition, that each shooter was supposed to have in a backpack as soon as they showed up.

The class seemed very expensive to me at the time. It was several days and cost, again according to my often-faulty memory, ~$1400. They required payment by check in full and far enough in advance for the check to clear. Since their list of skills they would impart (being more mature now, I recognize guaranteeing someone that "After this class, you will be able to do X, Y, Z" is a red flag) matched what I wanted to achieve, I was about to sign up.

Then I did what I always do and read every single word of all the fine print on all the pages. It turns out they did have a prerequisite. First thing, first day, you were required to load up your rifle, pack, and the required list of equipment and run a mile on a mountain trail. Anyone who failed to meet the par time would be dismissed and immediately escorted off the premises with NO refund, period, no discussion.

I didn't sign up. My impression was that par time would have required both a 95th-percentile level of overall fitness as well as being accustomed to the thinner air. It was a complete non-starter for me.

Anybody ever heard of any school that worked this way? This was the only one I've ever run across and that fact doesn't surprise me.

Jay Cunningham
04-11-2013, 10:43 PM
Wow.

Anyway, I think there are times when it's appropriate for an instructor to kick an individual out with no refund.

I have yet to do it, though.

ToddG
04-11-2013, 10:50 PM
Anyway, I think there are times when it's appropriate for an instructor to kick an individual out with no refund.

Absolutely. I think being involved in USPSA & IDPA matches for so long made this easier for me, since a DQ even at a major match involves no refund. If someone disregards instructions regarding safe handling of a firearm and needs to be removed from class, that's 100% on him.

The other issue I've heard of but thankfully never experienced is the "troll student," someone who signs up for a class with the express intent of being disruptive, arguing with the instructor, etc. While I'd first attempt to get the guy to play nice, someone who refuses to follow instructions is also getting the boot.

Jay Cunningham
04-11-2013, 10:57 PM
The other issue I've heard of but thankfully never experienced is the "troll student," someone who signs up for a class with the express intent of being disruptive, arguing with the instructor, etc. While I'd first attempt to get the guy to play nice, someone who refuses to follow instructions is also getting the boot.

This sounds far-fetched but I can see it happening under certain circumstances. I've been lucky so far but I only started in 2010.

I do think there are variations on the troll student. "Hit-Piece AAR Guy" comes to mind.

BigT
04-12-2013, 03:51 AM
Wow.

Anyway, I think there are times when it's appropriate for an instructor to kick an individual out with no refund.

I have yet to do it, though.

My policy, unless its something completely outside the norms of reality, is to give the guy a credit for the next course. Havent had to do it yet but have come close. Working on the logic that he may just be having a switched off day. But I do reserve the right to tell a student ''you are the weakest link" if they pose a danger to me and their fellow students.



The other issue I've heard of but thankfully never experienced is the "troll student," someone who signs up for a class with the express intent of being disruptive, arguing with the instructor, etc. While I'd first attempt to get the guy to play nice, someone who refuses to follow instructions is also getting the boot.

Closely related to the guy who pays a course fee so he can show everyone how deeply your techniques suck compared to his deathdealingninja stuff.

ToddG
04-12-2013, 09:38 AM
Closely related to the guy who pays a course fee so he can show everyone how deeply your techniques suck compared to his deathdealingninja stuff.

I've had a few of those. With one exception, they saw that other people were actually getting better and gave my way a try. The one exception was epically annoying (and had a top score on the FAST of 8-something, as I recall) but didn't disrupt the class so no need to remove him.

orionz06
04-12-2013, 09:45 AM
Closely related to the guy who pays a course fee so he can show everyone how deeply your techniques suck compared to his deathdealingninja stuff.
I have seen this multiple times (as a student) and they have all failed at convincing anyone anything and most proved their techniques to be inferior. The mental breakdown of this type of student is usually spectacular and interesting to watch.

BigT
04-12-2013, 09:57 AM
I've taken to adding to my briefing that if you are there to impress the other students rather than try what I'm teaching to please warn me so I can stick you in a corner out the way where you don't waste everyone else's time. Does seem to have helped.

ToddG
04-12-2013, 10:03 AM
I've taken to adding to my briefing that if you are there to impress the other students rather than try what I'm teaching to please warn me so I can stick you in a corner out the way where you don't waste everyone else's time. Does seem to have helped.

FWIW I take the exact opposite approach (If you don't want to try what I'm teaching, hey it's your money, just tell me so I don't keep bothering you about doing it "wrong"). A great example is reloads: some students show up with prior training that has indoctrinated them into believing that the way I do a reload (by dropping the slide with the slide release) is suicidal. If I see a student rack the slide, I point it out. But if he tells me, "Hey man, I'm not going to change," then it's no skin off my nose. He's an adult and makes his own decisions based on his own priorities. If he thinks using the slide release will cause HIV so be it.

jlw
04-12-2013, 04:58 PM
FWIW I take the exact opposite approach (If you don't want to try what I'm teaching, hey it's your money, just tell me so I don't keep bothering you about doing it "wrong"). A great example is reloads: some students show up with prior training that has indoctrinated them into believing that the way I do a reload (by dropping the slide with the slide release) is suicidal. If I see a student rack the slide, I point it out. But if he tells me, "Hey man, I'm not going to change," then it's no skin off my nose. He's an adult and makes his own decisions based on his own priorities. If he thinks using the slide release will cause HIV so be it.

Funny that you mention that exact example. The prevailing technique in the LE circles around these parts is the overhand method to drop the slide on a reload. I fully understand and respect the arguments in favor of it, but I admit that I use the slide stop. When I teach, I give the pros and cons of each method and let it ride.

Anyway, I was at a class being hosted by another agency. When I dropped the slide with the slide stop, they actually made a point of making a big deal about using the overhand method and that using the slide stop was wrong. They didn't do it with an "in your face" presentation, but it was clear they were astounded anyone would do it any other way. They were SWAT guys; so, what do I know...

Kyle Reese
04-12-2013, 05:17 PM
Funny that you mention that exact example. The prevailing technique in the LE circles around these parts is the overhand method to drop the slide on a reload. I fully understand and respect the arguments in favor of it, but I admit that I use the slide stop. When I teach, I give the pros and cons of each method and let it ride.

Anyway, I was at a class being hosted by another agency. When I dropped the slide with the slide stop, they actually made a point of making a big deal about using the overhand method and that using the slide stop was wrong. They didn't do it with an "in your face" presentation, but it was clear they were astounded anyone would do it any other way. They were SWAT guys; so, what do I know...

I've encountered the same sort of reaction when using the slide stop over the years. I've been told to not use it because under the stress of a defensive encounter, my fine motor skills would degrade to such a point that actuating / depressing this lever would be impossible. Those same people cannot articulate how I can effectively manipulate a trigger or get rounds on target without fine motor skills. :)

jlw
04-12-2013, 05:22 PM
I've encountered the same sort of reaction when using the slide stop over the years. I've been told to not use it because under the stress of a defensive encounter, my fine motor skills would degrade to such a point that actuating / depressing this lever would be impossible. Those same people cannot articulate how I can effectively manipulate a trigger or get rounds on target without fine motor skills. :)

Exactly.

ST911
04-12-2013, 05:55 PM
Fine vs gross motor considerations notwithstanding... Remember that LE instruction is geared toward the LCD, and an ever increasing quantity of students who are not gun people. The overhand technique works with other gun manipulations and stoppage clearances, simplifying instruction and student skill development.

BillP
04-15-2013, 09:33 PM
I've encountered the same sort of reaction when using the slide stop over the years. I've been told to not use it because under the stress of a defensive encounter, my fine motor skills would degrade to such a point that actuating / depressing this lever would be impossible. Those same people cannot articulate how I can effectively manipulate a trigger or get rounds on target without fine motor skills. :)

Then there are those of us who are left-handed. The lever usually doesn't work for us (consistently).

MikeyC
04-17-2013, 11:44 AM
I've encountered the same sort of reaction when using the slide stop over the years. I've been told to not use it because under the stress of a defensive encounter, my fine motor skills would degrade to such a point that actuating / depressing this lever would be impossible. Those same people cannot articulate how I can effectively manipulate a trigger or get rounds on target without fine motor skills. :)

I actually had an instructor go as far as to tell me that the Glock manual stated that using the slide stop was bad for the gun. I must have missed that tidbit in my armorers class, but he was the one being paid to teach, so I wasn't going to argue.

jlw
04-17-2013, 12:57 PM
I actually had an instructor go as far as to tell me that the Glock manual stated that using the slide stop was bad for the gun. I must have missed that tidbit in my armorers class, but he was the one being paid to teach, so I wasn't going to argue.

I haven't read that in any manual, but the Glock instructors and sales reps very much push the overhand method rather than using the slide stop.

ToddG
04-17-2013, 01:00 PM
And it is, in fact, true that Glock began advocating the rack over the slide catch because of damage to slides in early production guns.

Will_M
05-16-2013, 10:35 PM
It's not the job of an instructor to act as a private investigator. It is the instructor's job to provide clear prerequisites in several categories so that the student can self-vet.


So if you as an instructor do not have an established method of vetting your "prerequisites" the you actually have recommendations and not prerequisites. Recommendations imply optional and optional is not a requirement. So I really don't see how this can turn into a 5 page thread on prerequisites.

Have you considered changing the thread title to "Recommendations"?

MDS
05-16-2013, 11:42 PM
So if you as an instructor do not have an established method of vetting your "prerequisites" the you actually have recommendations and not prerequisites. Recommendations imply optional and optional is not a requirement. So I really don't see how this can turn into a 5 page thread on prerequisites.

Have you considered changing the thread title to "Recommendations"?


If the Forum Rules had a prerequisite section that said "don't turn a substantive discussion into a semantic argument" - would that be merely a recommendation? I would hope so, because I do love a good semantic argument. To whit: prerequisite as in "these requirements must be met before taking this course in order to get the full value of the training."

Clyde from Carolina
05-17-2013, 12:00 AM
And it is, in fact, true that Glock began advocating the rack over the slide catch because of damage to slides in early production guns.

Interesting. Maybe I need to be racking my Gen 1 Glock 17?

ToddG
05-17-2013, 12:06 AM
Have you considered changing the thread title to "Recommendations"?

Have you considered that everyone else in the discussion understands what is meant by "prerequisite?" That the conversation lasted a week without any confusion or disagreement on the term? And that joining the forum just to open a month-old thread and make a snarky semantic argument might not go over well?

Welcome to the forum. Please don't be a kitten.

Will_M
05-17-2013, 04:56 PM
Have you considered that everyone else in the discussion understands what is meant by "prerequisite?" That the conversation lasted a week without any confusion or disagreement on the term? And that joining the forum just to open a month-old thread and make a snarky semantic argument might not go over well?

Welcome to the forum. Please don't be a kitten.

WillM is taking a 90 day break from this forum.

Jay Cunningham
09-19-2016, 03:39 PM
So three years down the road, after numerous iterations... I've wound up with extremely liberal "prerequisites" listed in my class descriptions (which themselves have been reduced down to "sound bites" due to the nature of the Current Year Attention Span).

Here are some examples of "prerequisites" I'm currently using:


While not appropriate for the complete novice, trained shooters at all performance levels will enjoy these challenging drills!


You must have solid fundamentals... otherwise all skill levels are welcome!


This two-and-a-half day class is for experienced students, and will challenge both your skills and your mindset!

Sensational? Vague?

Kinda. I gave up on going on and on in the course descriptions. I *do* list very specific gear, and whether or not you need to bring lunch. Beyond that people don't pay attention.

One thing which has changed for me personally is my willingness to pull people from the line and sit them out. In the past, I've devoted far too much time and energy attempting to salvage poorly performing shooters. Now I get to a cut off point in relatively short order if it's obvious they're in over their head. But I am now adamant about it because I am unwilling to short-change the rest of the class.

In a recent 16 person Pistol 1 class I decided to pull four shooters from the line 2/3 of the way through class. All four of them were relieved and thanked me.

It used to be an ego thing for me I think... there are no bad students, only bad instructors. Well that's not true.

Some people just aren't cut out for it. It doesn't make them bad people. Some people just have a bad day. Some people have literally decades of bad habits. Some are physically weak and frail.

It doesn't mean throw them overboard... but an instructor needs to be able to tell a student "you're not ready to move on."

Jay Cunningham
12-31-2016, 09:43 AM
This is what I have listed on my website in my course descriptions for 2017:


Protective Pistol 2:


Shooters must be able to hit a USPSA head "A Zone" at five yards - on demand. Shooters must also be able to draw, fire one round, reload, then fire two additional rounds (three total) into a USPSA body "A Zone" at seven yards - in eight seconds. Failure to meet these prerequisites will result in dismissal from the event, and does not merit a refund.

You MUST HAVE the following to participate:

ballistic eye protection, filtered hearing protection, sturdy belt, holster, magazine carrier, clothing to conceal your pistol, semi-auto pistol of at least .380 caliber, three spare magazines (more are better), 600 rounds of factory FMJ ammunition, hand held flashlight, weapon lubricant, and a tourniquet

You need to bring lunch.



Protective Pistol 3:


Shooters must be able to shoot an Intermediate Level F.A.S.T. (or better) to participate in Protective Pistol 3. Failure to meet this prerequisite will result in dismissal from the event, and does not merit a refund.

You MUST HAVE the following to participate:

ballistic eye protection, filtered hearing protection, sturdy belt, holster, magazine carrier, clothing to conceal your handgun, semi-auto pistol of at least .380 caliber, three spare magazines (more are better), 600 rounds of factory FMJ ammunition, weapon lubricant, and a tourniquet

You need to bring lunch.

jlw
12-31-2016, 11:07 AM
Interesting that this thread has come back up now. I have adopted a prereq for my Critical Pistol Skills class:


This is not a course for the first time student. Enrollment is limited to students who have already completed training from a recognized instructor that included drawing, reloading, etc, under time constraints. Examples of such training are our own Carry Essentials course, Rangemaster’s Combative Pistol 1, Sparrow Defense Defensive Pistol 1, Precision Applications Combat Handgun, etc. Graduates from a law enforcement academy, IDPA Sharpshooter class or USPSA C-class shooters or higher will also be accepted. Please contact me at lee@firstpersonsafety.com with any inquiries.


This class focuses on malfunction clearing and one handed manipulations, and the equipment list stated pistol and three magazines. I had a person show up for it with a J frame that was missing the front sight. I'm hoping to weed out first timers from coming to this course.

Kyle Reese
12-31-2016, 06:55 PM
Interesting that this thread has come back up now. I have adopted a prereq for my Critical Pistol Skills class:



This class focuses on malfunction clearing and one handed manipulations, and the equipment list stated pistol and three magazines. I had a person show up for it with a J frame that was missing the front sight. I'm hoping to weed out first timers from coming to this course.
If you don't mind elaborating, how did that turn out?

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

jlw
12-31-2016, 08:49 PM
If you don't mind elaborating, how did that turn out?

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk


As far as the prereqs go, I don't know. The first class since I adopted it will be 1/29. So far, I have been contacted by two people: one who has previously trained with me and one who has other training and was checking to see if it was sufficient.

As for the J-frame, at first I had the student practice the one-handed drawing and shooting. Soon enough, the j-frame proved to be uncomfortable for her, and another student loaned her a Shield 9. She did the best that she could.