PDA

View Full Version : How do you measure the value of a class?



Tamara
09-11-2013, 08:22 AM
There are very few people in the firearms training industry that are universally respected, there being as many cliques as an '80s teen movie, but Louis Awerbuck is one that I rarely hear bad things about.

One of the few complaints I have heard is from people who seem to judge a class by the amount of actual ammo expended, and I will say that both of the classes I've taken from Louis were on the low end of the "round count" spectrum in my (admittedly limited) experience. Because of this, I found Louis's column in the October issue of S.W.A.T. Magazine interesting*, dealing as it does with his views on "Time Management in Firearms Classes (https://www.swatmag.com/articles/view/time-management-in-firearms-classes)".

Because of the number of twenty-pound brains here, I was wondering what other people's thoughts were on the topic?




(Industry Disclaimer: I found it interesting while I was cutting and pasting it into the html window when I was updating the website; one of several things I do for S.W.A.T.)

Chuck Haggard
09-11-2013, 08:32 AM
And for paying customers, there's the rub.

Feedback that I have gotten from our troops here includes a guy who was one of the "lets go shoot and get to lunch, then clean guns and go home early" guys. After his OIS, in which he had to make a difficult shot on a guy pointing a 9mm at him, he came and looked me up and thanked me for the training. He confided "when you made us do all that stuff like scan before holstering I though it was gay. Now I get why...".

Folks getting paid can be forced to do training "right", paying customers often want edutainment. Over the past few years high round counts seem to be the marker for many if a class is good or not.

I noted at Tom Given's instructor course this past weekend that some of the most useful drills we did were low round count. His 21 drill was great fun (21 rounds used) and very good training, his adaptation of Wayne's "1-2-3" drill was a really good workout with a pistol and used 30 rounds.

TCinVA
09-11-2013, 08:51 AM
Value is going to have to be judged in perspective to one's expectations and reasons for being there. As for round count, I got more useful stuff from ~ 1,000 rounds with Bob Vogel in 2 days than I got from 4,000 rounds in 4 or 5 days with some other classes. Round counts as a judge of value is a highly irrational standard and if I hear someone griping about it then my first instinct is to ignore them. If I find out it's a low round count because the instructor decided that the students were paying eight hundred bucks a head just to be graced by his presence, and that he was cutting instruction off early, taking ridiculously long lunches, and spending the majority of his time with a bunch of sack-hugging sycophants (many of whom probably weren't paying tuition to be there in the first damn place) doing little actually useful instruction for the poor naive fools who paid to be there based on the person's reputation (often pumped up by the aforementioned sycophants getting a free ride), then complaints about round count are absolutely legitimate and I'll listen very carefully.

joshs
09-11-2013, 09:08 AM
It depends on the goal of the class. If the goal is to make the students shoot better after two days, then a high round count with lots of repetitions is the only way that is going to be accomplished. If the goal is to convey more information and the students are going to be expected to apply the information to their own practice, then lower round counts will be more successful.

I think both models work, as long as the instructor has clearly defined what they are trying to accomplish with their class.

Kobalt60
09-11-2013, 09:29 AM
It depends on the goal of the class. If the goal is to make the students shoot better after two days, then a high round count with lots of repetitions is the only way that is going to be accomplished. If the goal is to convey more information and the students are going to be expected to apply the information to their own practice, then lower round counts will be more successful.

I think both models work, as long as the instructor has clearly defined what they are trying to accomplish with their class.

This makes a lot of sense to me. I don't think you're going to build much "muscle memory" in a one or two day class. Maybe in a week long class... But at this stage, I'm looking to learn how to train myself better from a class. If I can walk away knowing more than I did when I walked in and with a good plan for making better use of my training time then that's a success to me. If you are there as a trainer auditing someone else's course or are happy with your own methods, then walking out with a few nuggets to think about may make it worth your money.

That's true for all training btw. Unless you're just starting out at something, it's not realistic to expect every class to rock your world. I've got two classes I'm looking forward to that I'm expecting to rock my world next year, Mike Pannone's Concealed handgun course and SouthNarc's ECQC course.

1slow
09-11-2013, 11:00 AM
I train in classes to pick up something of benefit that I can take home and practice until I own the material. It may be a drill, technique, concept or mindset. A class gives me something more to analyze and try to make reflexive.
I'm still working on lots and not owning much.

GJM
09-11-2013, 11:24 AM
As, or more important to me than round count, is the type and handling of targets. I like steel, because of the immediate feedback (although steel should be frequently painted to show hits), and I would think twice about attending a course without some steel. For paper, I really like the PF target, because of all the different dots, squares and aiming points. However, a high round count course on just paper, where the targets are not constantly taped or changed is a complete waste of my training time and ammo.

Tamara
09-11-2013, 11:32 AM
What do folks think of the way Louis does his improvised 3D targets? I found that one of the more interesting things about his classes. (That and the "final"...)

Jay Cunningham
09-11-2013, 11:39 AM
I keep hearing about classes where all you do is "hose the berm" but in all the dozens of classes I've taken from dozens of different instructors I haven't seen this yet.

What I've seen:


high tempo/high round count
high temo/low round count
low tempo/low round count


I've yet to take a class where I felt we "just burned through ammo". I've yet to take a class where we didn't "account for every round fired". I have taken classes that were lower round count for various reasons. Some of them were both mentally and physically fatiguing.

However, I've been through my share of classes where the round count was low because quite frankly there was a low tempo and a lot of down time. And quite frankly, there same classes were usually the ones where the instructor made some mention of "lower round count is better, higher round count means you're hosing the berm."

jetfire
09-11-2013, 12:45 PM
Class value for me is determined primarily on a "knowledge received/time invested" ratio with an additional financial component. I have had major breakthroughs in my shooting come from 15 minute practice sessions with a GM friend of mine, and I've also had major breakthroughs in 3 day, high round count handgun courses. The flip side is I've gone to the 2-day lots of round sort of course and not really learned anything at all, just shot the drills and essentially paid a lot of money for a group practice session.

When I'm determining the value of class, what I'll do is take notes/etc during the class, and then 2-3 days after the class I'll go back and review my notes. That way I can have a fairly level-headed evaluation of what information I took in during the class, because the ultimate determiner of personal value is "what did I learn?" Once I've established that, the next question becomes "is what I learned something I could have learned in my own time." If yes, then I need to determine a ballpark on the time it would have taken me to learn that on my own, and whether or not paying money to learn it faster was a worthwhile investment.

Having been to lots of classes, I can say that I've only really felt that one or two of them wasn't worth my time. Usually, that's a result of incorrect expectations coming into the class, the fault for which can lie with me or the instructor. Hell, I even liked the class where the instructor cracked one of my ribs.

Tamara
09-11-2013, 12:52 PM
I keep hearing about classes where all you do is "hose the berm"...

Not in this thread or at the linked column, though?

(Truthfully, I'm only personally aware of one class that I'd consider that falls into that category myself. But it definitely did.)

ST911
09-11-2013, 01:03 PM
It might be over simplified, but I set goals, see if they're met, and what resources were required to meet them.

Keeping my goals multi-dimensional helps get more value out of courses. Some stuff is taken away for me the user. Some stuff is for instructional/curriculum development. I listen for what and how things are taught, progression through tasks, and how others are taking it in. There's also info for the larger knowledge base. I take a lot of notes, and refer to them often after class.

I also research instructors, particular course offerings, and curricula in advance whenever possible. I don't take part in the homoerotic hero worship, don't want to get my picture taken with personality X, and don't want to hear war stories. I don't consider round counts unless they are abnormally low or high.

The fastest way to decrease value for me is waste time, and I'm hard on that in evaluations. While certain variables can complicate time management, the last thing I want to hear is "we'll get a late start tomorrow" or "we'll try and get you out early." I pay, or someone has paid on my behalf, and I'll be here every minute you have something to teach.

Strategos distinguishes themselves in this way, making clear that they "teach to the objectives, not to the clock." For this and other reasons, they also tend to be a leader in value overall.

walkin' trails
09-11-2013, 01:14 PM
My criteria is sort of simple: a) did I learn something; and b) did it help me improve.

VolGrad
09-11-2013, 01:45 PM
For me the classes that hold the most "value" to me are the ones where I left after having an "ah ha" moment or left with something "new". New doesn't necessarily equal a new skill either. It could mean a skill taught by the masses but in a way that I finally "got it".

Jay Cunningham
09-11-2013, 01:55 PM
Not in this thread or at the linked column, though?

(Truthfully, I'm only personally aware of one class that I'd consider that falls into that category myself. But it definitely did.)


Referring to the OP:


One of the few complaints I have heard is from people who seem to judge a class by the amount of actual ammo expended

I've heard numerous individuals over the years complain about classes where the rount count was high, and where a round count any more than maybe 400/day equaled "hosing the berm". I've heard this assertion over and over from both certain instructors and their students. Whenever I'd asked for clarification, both the instructors and students who'd claimed this would drop the name of an instructor that neither had ever trained with personally. But yet they seemed to "know".

Tamara
09-11-2013, 02:16 PM
Referring to the OP:

Right, and in the OP I said that "One of the few complaints I have heard is from people who seem to judge a class by the amount of actual ammo expended..."

I'm not seeing the connection between me saying that I heard people say they didn't shoot as much as they wanted to and some other person I don't know where complaining about berm hosing? You lost me.

jlw
09-11-2013, 02:41 PM
I can take a bunch of ammo to the range and shoot it all at paper/steel without paying somebody to supervise me.

If paying for a class, I want someone teaching me how to actually improve. If that is accomplished with a low round count then so be it.

Tamara
09-11-2013, 03:33 PM
Jay,

My apologies; I guess I'm misstating my question.

As a firearms trainer yourself, how do you handle the balance of competing factors for time in a class setting? Shooting vs. Learning, or How vs. Why, or... I'm having a hard time finding the right words myself, which was why I linked to Awerbuck's column.

The one particular experience it ties back to with me was a pistol/carbine class with him where the actual number of rounds fired was probably negatively impacted by some gear problems one or two guys had, as well as some safety-related "This is why things are done this way" school-circle-type talks.

In light of that, a couple of the guys in the class were like "Man, we're only going to shoot X number of rounds, but last year with Mr. XYZ, we shot Z number of rounds!" and this made me think that, you know, that was an odd yardstick to measure the class by, so this column had some relevance for me. I mean, I felt like I'd learned something even from watching and listening to him fixing other people's problems. That's why I wanted to float it here, to see what other people thought.

John Hearne
09-11-2013, 03:40 PM
I have taken carbine classes from a variety of industry recognized professionals. The most useful carbine class for me was Louis'. We "only" fired ~600 rounds which many would find low in a three-day class but those rounds had to be perfect. I was absolutely exhausted by the time I was done.

I don't think that the only way to ingrain something is to shoot a lot. At a mechanical/neurological level you are better off practicing fewer times perfectly than a lot of times with slop and error. I'm not saying you can't do high round count classes well, but the instructor has to really make sure everyone is doing it practically perfectly. Given the general decline in student quality I seem to see, this can be very hard to do.

No two, three, or five day class is going to make you subconsciously competent. That level of competency takes lots of reps OVER TIME to achieve. You are literally rewiring your brain and those changes are not instantaneous.

I like the analogy that Bruce Gray used. He stated that he was not taking us to any worthy destination in two days. Rather, he was giving us a road map and making sure we were headed the right way while he was watching us for the two days. It was ultimately up to us to follow the map, using what he taught us, to take ourselves to the desired destination.

tremiles
09-11-2013, 03:47 PM
I attend classes to learn what I'm doing wrong, how to correct what I'm doing wrong, what I'm doing right, how to get faster at what I'm doing right, and drills/skills to take home to reinforce all of the above. Sometimes it's round count dependent, some times it's not. I've had both low and high round count classes that I've had AHA moments and some that didn't sink in for months afterward. But I've taken something from all of them.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4

wilco423
09-11-2013, 04:34 PM
What do folks think of the way Louis does his improvised 3D targets? I found that one of the more interesting things about his classes. (That and the "final"...)

I thought his 3D method was fantastic, especially when the targets were not in "normal" vertical orientation. The horizontal ones really make it clear why there shouldn't be any "acceptable" amount of trigger snatch or anticipation.

As far as round count per class goes, I know know that for me, a lower number is probably better, unless there is a lot of actual coaching going on (as opposed to just running drills). If I'm fatigued due to a high tempo/round count, I'm less likely to be able to apply an instructed change in my technique. I know, weight room, right?

Al T.
09-11-2013, 07:06 PM
I'm pretty much a noob when it comes to training classes, so take it for what it's worth. When I was selecting my first training class, I was absolutely taken aback by Blackwater's 1,500 round ammo requirement. Not sure if it was a 2 or 3 day course, but that and the generic "genuine Navy SEALs" (!!!) aspect turned me off.

LtDave
09-11-2013, 08:32 PM
However, a high round count course on just paper, where the targets are not constantly taped or changed is a complete waste of my training time and ammo.

Agree completely.

And I personally would rather shooter fewer rounds and learn something, than shoot lots and wonder what just happened.

ST911
09-12-2013, 08:24 AM
As, or more important to me than round count, is the type and handling of targets. I like steel, because of the immediate feedback (although steel should be frequently painted to show hits), and I would think twice about attending a course without some steel. For paper, I really like the PF target, because of all the different dots, squares and aiming points. However, a high round count course on just paper, where the targets are not constantly taped or changed is a complete waste of my training time and ammo.

How do you feel about negative targets?


What do folks think of the way Louis does his improvised 3D targets? I found that one of the more interesting things about his classes. (That and the "final"...)

I haven't made an LA class yet. What's the "final", if not proprietary?

Tamara
09-12-2013, 08:54 AM
I haven't made an LA class yet. What's the "final", if not proprietary?

He's got a setup of 3-D mannikin-like torso targets with various arrangements of wheeled dollies and/or swinging, pivoting arms that let you have a bad guy jinking and bobbing in the middle of a cluster of jinking and bobbing no-shoots. The whole thing is controlled by Louis yanking on ropes and is an eye opener. (Especially for people who don't believe a bullet can be deflected by the brim of a baseball cap. :eek: )

KevinB
09-12-2013, 12:38 PM
I'd say it depends on the class.

If I went to a pistol class and shot 50 rds in 5 days - I would think that is pretty dumb, but if I went to a 5 day Advanced Hostage Rescue course and shot just 50rds of pistol in the class qualifier (and shot the remainder with rifle, and only then maybe 250 rds) I would think that was fine - for it was not specifically a shooting class.

Round counts in and of themselves are rather meaningless. I'd rather shoot quality rounds.

Example being Jason Falla/RB1 - we ran 18+hr days at a CQB class, most was dry, but was far the best class of that sort I've taken

The opposite side of the spectrum I shot 5k 5.56mm and 2k 9mm at a 5 day driving class...

Obviously perfect practice makes perfect -- if you get 1:1 with Frank Garcia - you can get a lot more bang for yoru bunk in a high round count class as he can help you at all time. In larger classes the student:instructor ration can affect how much good the round count is when doing non individual drills.

In closing I do not think round count means anything - its how the rounds where expended.

PT Doc
09-12-2013, 12:40 PM
He's got a setup of 3-D mannikin-like torso targets with various arrangements of wheeled dollies and/or swinging, pivoting arms that let you have a bad guy jinking and bobbing in the middle of a cluster of jinking and bobbing no-shoots. The whole thing is controlled by Louis yanking on ropes and is an eye opener. (Especially for people who don't believe a bullet can be deflected by the brim of a baseball cap. :eek: )

It's quite the reality check when you feel proud about getting a good shot at 7 yards with an AR. (I believe we were in the same class at Boone County a few years back.)

Tamara
09-12-2013, 02:03 PM
It's quite the reality check when you feel proud about getting a good shot at 7 yards with an AR. (I believe we were in the same class at Boone County a few years back.)

I believe we may have been. Is your gat in this picture? :D

1768

PT Doc
09-12-2013, 02:28 PM
I believe we may have been. Is your gat in this picture? :D

1768

Hard to see on my phone, but the back, middle one with the light looks close. It was a JP VTAC with one of Bennie Cooley's comps. I'm sure the gentlemen on either side of me remember it. :D

John Hearne
09-12-2013, 03:09 PM
You guys are not mentioning the best part of Louis' carbine class, learning to deal with the sights/bore offset at close range on a bobbing, weaving target. Threading a bullet into a tight spot on a moving target while figuring out the offset is an amazingly complex task - at least for me. (I made the shot but the bystander in the background didn't appreciate it that much)

Tamara
09-12-2013, 03:17 PM
You guys are not mentioning the best part of Louis' carbine class, learning to deal with the sights/bore offset at close range on a bobbing, weaving target. Threading a bullet into a tight spot on a moving target while figuring out the offset is an amazingly complex task - at least for me. (I made the shot but the bystander in the background didn't appreciate it that much)

Oh, ayup (http://booksbikesboomsticks.blogspot.com/2010/09/final-exam.html). :eek:

(Bonus points in comments at the linked thread for people who don't know the difference between "drills" and "scenarios"; always a migraine inducer for me.)

PT Doc
09-12-2013, 04:16 PM
For me as Joe Somedood, Awerbuck and Givens have given me the most bang for my shooting buck by far. Practical and applicable to my lifestyle, and they can cover anything from pistol, carbine, shotgun and revolver.

Shellback
09-13-2013, 09:01 AM
A high round count doesn't mean much if the instructor is just having people run drills without diagnosis or coaching. I would rather have a smaller class size, student:instructor ratio, and less rounds spent with proper instruction than the bang fest into the berm. So, high round count doesn't mean much, I can do that on my own.

One of the best classes I've ever attended was with CJ Lapre as my instructor. Low round count, but he challenged us with every round and spent more one on one time diagnosing everyone than any other class I've attended. I think there were 5 shooters total.

Al T.
09-13-2013, 09:13 AM
Hey PT Doc, think you were in the Florence SC Givens course year before last. Small world hey? :)

PT Doc
09-13-2013, 10:28 AM
Hey PT Doc, think you were in the Florence SC Givens course year before last. Small world hey? :)

I was in both of Tom's classes in Florence. That was a nice facility and a good group both times. Were you one of the guys who had dinner with Richard Friday night?

Pennzoil
09-13-2013, 10:49 AM
A high round count doesn't mean much if the instructor is just having people run drills without diagnosis or coaching. I would rather have a smaller class size, student:instructor ratio, and less rounds spent with proper instruction than the bang fest into the berm. So, high round count doesn't mean much, I can do that on my own.

One of the best classes I've ever attended was with CJ Lapre as my instructor. Low round count, but he challenged us with every round and spent more one on one time diagnosing everyone than any other class I've attended. I think there were 5 shooters total.

+1

I was in a class earlier this year with a high round count 1000rds/day that left me shooting worse then I came in.

I also agree with you regarding CJ Lapre's classes and wish he had more free time to teach.

Shellback
09-13-2013, 10:56 AM
I was in a class earlier this year with a high round count 1000rds/day that left me shooting worse then I came in.

I also agree with you regarding CJ Lapre's classes and wish he had more free time to teach.

If only Casa Grande were a little closer to Vegas... As a heads up, Mike Pannone and Craig Douglas are both teaching classes down there in November.

Pennzoil
09-13-2013, 11:17 AM
If only Casa Grande were a little closer to Vegas... As a heads up, Mike Pannone and Craig Douglas are both teaching classes down there in November.

Yeah I've been looking at both classes but I have to work those days. Work is busy right now and vacation isn't being approved currently.

Jay Cunningham
09-13-2013, 01:16 PM
Jay,

My apologies; I guess I'm misstating my question.

As a firearms trainer yourself, how do you handle the balance of competing factors for time in a class setting? Shooting vs. Learning, or How vs. Why, or... I'm having a hard time finding the right words myself, which was why I linked to Awerbuck's column.

The one particular experience it ties back to with me was a pistol/carbine class with him where the actual number of rounds fired was probably negatively impacted by some gear problems one or two guys had, as well as some safety-related "This is why things are done this way" school-circle-type talks.

In light of that, a couple of the guys in the class were like "Man, we're only going to shoot X number of rounds, but last year with Mr. XYZ, we shot Z number of rounds!" and this made me think that, you know, that was an odd yardstick to measure the class by, so this column had some relevance for me. I mean, I felt like I'd learned something even from watching and listening to him fixing other people's problems. That's why I wanted to float it here, to see what other people thought.


Responding to the bolded type above:

There are quite a few variables, all within the framework of the individual course type. Ultimately my end goal is to achieve my course objectives as they are plainly laid out in the description, and to do everything I can to give the students their honest money's worth.

It starts with a clear, stripped-down course description. It starts with plainly-stated prerequisites. It starts with as accurate a predicted round count as I can suggest. It starts with appropriate instructor/student ratios. It starts with the instructors being prepared and showing up ready to work and start the class on time.

There is mandatory admin at the beginning... skipping or short-changing the safety brief is not an option. I quickly get a feel for the students and their abilities. I see right away who I'll need to devote more attention to. If it is a more advanced level class and prerequisites have been plainly stated, cold-testing at the start can be a valuable tool.

A group of all strong shooters (and this applies to fundamental level classes just as much as advanced level classes) makes life easier and allows everyone to press forward. This will ramp the ammo consumption up and will burn through content. Instructors need to over-prepare and have more content in their hip pocket than what they think will fill the allotted time, for just such an eventuality. Conversely (and far more common) one or several shooters will require A LOT more attention. This will naturally slow the class down *if not managed correctly*. This is another reason that assistant instructors are so valuable. They allow the flexibility to spot-weld an AI to an individual while the lead continues to move the class forward at a decent pace.

Everything that's presented needs explained, but I think the trick is to avoid chasing down off-topic rabbit holes. Stick to talking about one concept and only one at a time. Another place where class value is built up or broken down are instructor demos. I try to find a balance between not demonstrating and demonstrating everything everytime. I would say that I lean slightly toward less demoing than more. The students didn't pay to watch me or my AIs shoot all day long - but they do want to see us demo - that, I'm sure of. Some things have more demo value than others, so choose carefully.

Finally I'd say that "getting off the clipboard" is an important step for an instuctor. Yes, have a framework. Yes, have a bullet-point reference sheet. But give yourself the flexibility to deviate and move the class where it needs to go. Occasionally refer to your notes to make sure nothing major gets glossed-over, but don't try to treat every class like they're going to follow your written plan perfectly. Every class is different, and probably should be.

Hopefully I addressed your question; it had elements of "round count", "value", and "time management". I tried to consider them in my response to a balance of competing factors.

Tamara
09-13-2013, 01:23 PM
Great post, Jay; thanks for taking the time to spell that out! :)

1slow
09-13-2013, 06:18 PM
Jay, that is very clear and helpful.