Teaching beginners

[Wendell]

This is an interesting article from 'Cornered Cat':

Rodney Dangerfield must’ve taught beginners

January 5, 2018
<http://www.corneredcat.com/rodney-dangerfield-mustve-taught-beginners/>

[RJ]

Good article. I took a first time shooter to the Range last week.

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....ange-%E2%80%9D

It was an eye opening experience.

Question: what is an acceptable standard of marksmanship for a first time shooter at their first range session?

[Peally]

I am glad I don't teach for those reasons. It's not a safe or easy gig.

[TGS]

Question: what is an acceptable standard of marksmanship for a first time shooter at their first range session?

For the average joe who isn't going into it from the outset as a dedicated gun slinger because of some life changing event?

No accuracy standard. The first session should be about how to handle the gun safely, and having fun. Have them shoot at balloons, skeet, soda bottles or whatever. I like to keep the accuracy limited to "this is the sight, put it on the target."

If they want to go further, then I go further.

[HopetonBrown]

That they hit the target and not the hanger, walls, floor, ceiling, themselves, you or others.

[Duelist]

Good article. I took a first time shooter to the Range last week.

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....ange-%E2%80%9D

It was an eye opening experience.

Question: what is an acceptable standard of marksmanship for a first time shooter at their first range session?

Only one marksmanship standard matters for a first range visit: None of the bullets hit anyone or anything anyone cares about.

It's good if there weren't any dangerous ricochets, either.

Safety is the mantra newbies need to learn. "If it's not safe, it's not fun."

[Surf]

Good article. I took a first time shooter to the Range last week.

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....ange-%E2%80%9D

It was an eye opening experience.

Question: what is an acceptable standard of marksmanship for a first time shooter at their first range session?

Just to preface and expand on the overall topic and not specifically in regards to your "acceptable standard" question, the majority of my life has been teaching in the LE/Mil/Gov sectors. Despite shooting courses not being my main focus in business, within the past year I have been involved in the private sector with huge success, but I have taken a very different approach in regards to private sector courses than many who have come from my background have taken. Undoubably that is what makes our events so successful.

Now more to your question, that depends both on the new shooter and the experience/skill of the person teaching them. A highly skilled instructor will get far better results than someone who is not. I know this sounds like a no-brainer and I am not trying to be crass or attempting to avoid the question, but there is a huge range here. Being able to put a new shooter at ease, make them confident quickly and produce good results on target is a definite skill set.

Having said this, most often the interpersonal skills of the instructor are the most important factor when dealing with a new shooter especially when it comes to the private sector. The LARGEST feedback we get in the private sector is that most are intimidated by perhaps the instructor's background/resume. Next the instructor fails when their personality actually matches their background/resume. This this is where many instructors with "high speed" Mil/LE resume's fail the most within the private sector and turn off a lot of people.

So #1 is getting the attention of the student, maintaining it, and actually making the student want to learn from them. Next, comes the skill set required to actually take a new shooter and getting them to hit what they are shooting at AND enjoying the process is another component.

So, your question of "what is an acceptable standard of marksmanship for a first time shooter at their first range session?" is hard to answer. From a pure marksmanship standpoint, a more skilled instructor would produce better results. A very skilled instructor, maybe even far better results than what many may think even possible with a brand new shooter.

I think overall, for a reasonably experienced shooter, but not necessarily an experienced instructor, as long as they make safety a priority, have a sound understanding and ability in conveying fundamentals and base skills to the new shooter, plus the new shooter has reasonable expectations, obtaining hits that they enjoy, everyone has a good time, and leaves with a positive experience, it is a success.

[Dagga Boy]

Two thinks. First with Surf’s Post....I cannot got the like button any harder. With those beginners in the private sector, it’s about them and not about you. In para military organizations, “tradition” often does not allow for teaching students like students. That is often reflected by those stuck in that mode.

Second, had a great conversation with Kathy Jackson on this topic. A huge factor is that beginners don’t make classic mistakes that are easy to diagnose. It takes an experienced instructor to diaganose what is going on. Most of us here could have a inexperienced newbie instructor diagnose our errors right off the Classic chart. With brand new folks....they do some weird stuff you need to work through.

[RJ]

Just to preface and expand on the overall topic and not specifically in regards to your "acceptable standard" question, the majority of my life has been teaching in the LE/Mil/Gov sectors. Despite shooting courses not being my main focus in business, within the past year I have been involved in the private sector with huge success, but I have taken a very different approach in regards to private sector courses than many who have come from my background have taken. Undoubably that is what makes our events so successful.

Now more to your question, that depends both on the new shooter and the experience/skill of the person teaching them. A highly skilled instructor will get far better results than someone who is not. I know this sounds like a no-brainer and I am not trying to be crass or attempting to avoid the question, but there is a huge range here. Being able to put a new shooter at ease, make them confident quickly and produce good results on target is a definite skill set.

Having said this, most often the interpersonal skills of the instructor are the most important factor when dealing with a new shooter especially when it comes to the private sector. The LARGEST feedback we get in the private sector is that most are intimidated by perhaps the instructor's background/resume. Next the instructor fails when their personality actually matches their background/resume. This this is where many instructors with "high speed" Mil/LE resume's fail the most within the private sector and turn off a lot of people.

So #1 is getting the attention of the student, maintaining it, and actually making the student want to learn from them. Next, comes the skill set required to actually take a new shooter and getting them to hit what they are shooting at AND enjoying the process is another component.

So, your question of "what is an acceptable standard of marksmanship for a first time shooter at their first range session?" is hard to answer. From a pure marksmanship standpoint, a more skilled instructor would produce better results. A very skilled instructor, maybe even far better results than what many may think even possible with a brand new shooter.

I think overall, for a reasonably experienced shooter, but not necessarily an experienced instructor, as long as they make safety a priority, have a sound understanding and ability in conveying fundamentals and base skills to the new shooter, plus the new shooter has reasonable expectations, obtaining hits that they enjoy, everyone has a good time, and leaves with a positive experience, it is a success.

Thanks Surf, that’s a really thoughtful post.

I have no .mil experience, and am not LEO. However my 32 year career in Aerospace was centered on Instructional Systems Design. So it is really really interesting to me to understand how top trainers approach this problem.

Recently, a friend of mine asked me to take her to the Range. I started with what I wanted to achieve with a new shooter. I wanted them to be safe, but I also wanted to start the process of being accountable.

So, for a target, I ended up with an 8” circle, with a 0.38” black aiming dot at the center. (I’ve read Claude Warner’s thoughts that we need an aiming point to shrink groups. And I picked 8”, since that is close to the dimension across the nipples, I.e. a hit.)

Anyway, after about three hours at her home reviewing the basics, we spent about an hour at the range.

Despite never shooting a firearm, one of her later strings she put 5/5 in a 6” group centered on the dot with an M&P Compact 2.0. She was thrilled.

Much appreciate all the comments here. I’m definitely interested in the actual “real” trainers here (I am patently not one) on the subject of teaching new shooters.

[David S.]

Question: what is an acceptable standard of marksmanship for a first time shooter at their first range session?

What are your student's goals? Does she care about shooting beyond a surface level introduction, or is she interested in a deeper application?

Because that matters.