Does the above offend? If you have paid to be here, you can click here to put it in context.
A lot's already been said in this thread. I'll add my cliff notes. Background: Hosted/organized and attended a lot of training, both gov and commercial/private side.
Like Justice Stewart said, "I don't know how to define it, but I know it when I see it." There are trends both the good and bad, but some is context and student specific. Quality for a new learner is different than one for a more advanced student. Poor training is less apparent early on the path for the fewer comparisons. Then, learning or an outcome from a poorer product may not emerge until later, adding value. Expectations are important. I don't own any rose colored glasses, but I generally have good experiences even in mediocre products. I know there will be bumps and humanity, but I go in with a purpose and look hard for the gems.
Part of my measure of quality training also includes more instructor personal attributes and conduct than many others. I seek passionate instructors with heartfelt drive to teach and build others. They bring an intangible quality to the table that others do not. I also prefer trainers who aren't boors, alcoholics, and can keep their hands off the wait staff at the class dinner.
Sometimes you need a technical skill or a particular credential of limited availability, or want to experience a way that a particular thing is taught. I like it when options are more open.
The balance, the usual: Make course description and objectives clear. Give me a good packing list and clear instructions. Charge me the correct amount, no hidden fees. Begin as on time as possible and give me a full effort. Teach me with interactive, hands-on, high quality adult learning methods. Treat me like an adult and appreciate me as a customer. Do your best. I'm a pretty easy student to have in class, but I'm also watching how you treat "that guy." Say thanks for coming. I'll send feedback, take it seriously but never personally. Learn more, improve your product. If I reach out with a question/clarification later, I know you're busy but do respond. Do this, I'll come back.
الدهون القاع الفتيات لك جعل العالم هزاز جولة الذهاب
I will also say, having been in the "host" position in the past, facility management is a total crap shoot of nonsense as well. I personally always arrived at the range by noon the day before TD1, walked the bays, looked for props etc., tried to sort out what was missing, brought along my cordless drill and saw and was willing to run to Home Depot if needed, etc. More than one person I hosted arrived at 8am on TD1 with nary a fucking clue.
My funniest experience with that was Pac McNamara. I'm there on TD0, checking out the range, and he pulls in. First off, he's a pretty physically intimidating dude, then he's very high energy... so we're walking around the range and he wants to move a wall. its' a 4x8 sheet of plywood with a vertical 2x4 on each end, and those 2x4s are screwed into stubby 2x4s set in the ground. I say "great, let me go grab my screw gun" all proud that I'd thought to bring it. He says "no it's good, just grab your end" and then proceeds to rip his entire end out of the ground while I basically stand there agape. He had to rip my end out of the ground too. never felt more like a damsel in distress lol.
Does the above offend? If you have paid to be here, you can click here to put it in context.
The issues your describing could be attributed to any small business venture. The failure rate for small businesses is ~20% in the first year and ~65% after 10 years according to gov data. Most people who have an interest or skill are unable to translate it into a profitable venture.
If we break it down into the three base elements:
1. Product or market knowledge- what product or service do I have the interest AND expertise for a business venture
2. Operations- do I have the skills to handle the logistics end of said business
3. Marketing- can I attract customers
So to tie this into firearms and tactics training and the OP, A long time ago in a galaxy far away, TLG authored a thread here guesstimating the size nationally of the customer base who actually attend courses.
At the time, if I remember correctly, the guesstimate was about 2k who are even in the market for open enrollment. Even if you add local LE agency “contracts” to the mix I would be shocked if it’s more than 10k. The customer pool is small and inbred.
When the national road show training industry exploded with the internet and early GWOT, these kind of questions and debates came up all the time. Folks would post long AAR’s which often resembled a breakdown of the course POI rather than an assessment of the organizations capabilities or true recommendations. Even with internet communication it was (and is) very difficult to determine quality without attending personally.
Lots of debates on the merits of megaforce ninja war stories, spraying targets, and time efficiency were had and it never really gets anywhere because frame of reference, motives, and goals vary so widely.
Obviously, being a subject expert doesn’t make you a great teacher. Being a great teacher doesn’t make you a good administrator. Being great at both doesn’t make you good at marketing.
The last two skills take just as much refinement work as the original expertise to develop. The names you mentioned SN, VTAC, Noner came to their expertise with many years spent running groups through coursework and refining details of the broader skill set required to run said roadshow.
I don’t think any of what I saying would come as a surprise to the OP since based on your comments you’ve been around the training community for a long time and know the right people. I’d be very surprised if you still fall for bad instruction since you seem to know the right people to ask and be highly experienced.
So what’s the frustration? That others “mindset” doesn’t allow them to know good training from bad?
It’s not really worthwhile to discuss any of this without talking about marketing. Humans like shiny objects and the “snake oil” salesman is proverbial for a reason. Whether your selling hot garbage or magic knife defense it matters not if you can’t attract customers.
To reverse engineer your question, look at all the GWOT SOF guys who thought they could take off the uniform, hang up a shingle, and thrive based on their resume. Even if they are great teachers who can execute a POI like a ballet, most can’t get any traction. Then they get all frustrated and curse the customers for not recognizing their genius.
My answer is yes, I think most people in the training community know the difference between a good course and an abortion. I think a lot of people let ego delude them and when you mix that with the fact that most people don’t want to harshly criticize others we get into the situation where you have to see for yourself to know. But deep down, I think most people know a shit show when they see it.
None of that stops people from signing up for the social media guy with the right brand jacket and arm tattoos....It’s human nature.
@EPF you act like there should be some business sense in business!??!!? Gasp!
When I was an architecture undergrad I learned that most architecture firms (and doctor's offices, and law firms, and even accounting firms... not to mention hair dressers and tattoo parlors and, I suppose, gunskools) fail not because of a lack of business but a lack of business sense. That's why I set out to get a minor in business while I was still in school. Wound up just taking most of the classes and not worrying about the paper (back then you learned things in college, evidently from all the crybabying I hear from the millenials today you don't' learn things in school anymore).
you bring up a good point that it seems most people just don't even think about. Students or teachers.
And back to my point about not knowing the reviewer's pedigree and understanding that it's all largely "how you feel" not "what you learned"...
Does the above offend? If you have paid to be here, you can click here to put it in context.
I regret using the word admin/administrative/administrator. Instructors, to me, need to lead the class. Instructorshit, to me, is largely leadership. I think most everyone says it in different ways, but (to me, again) that it is all leadership. Not enough people recognize this (to me).
Ohh no. I have 100% done my homework, fallen for it, then realized it was an abortion. Which to me, calls into credibility my ability to conduct homework, or the so called experts.....
I have seen absolute abortions. But was still able to take things away from it. Not from the course material itself. But everything else. Anything is a learning experience if you look at it the right way.
My frustration is somewhat echoed from above. I have done the proper "research" to see what is legit. Only to have it not be so. Which is why I asked the question. Do people know what messed up looks like?
I think in the last 1.5 years, I have gone to 5-6 open enrollment courses. 3 of them, resulted in me getting a refund or a free class slot because of the issues I raised with the instructors. Im not a business dude, but thats not a good business model.
Of course they do. They're the "good shooters". what do you expect them to say? Which is frankly half the problem. Since they have some innate ability to perform at a higher level, they are less capable of communicating what it takes for some schlub with a lazy eye and spina bifida to achieve what they have (not saying that I have either of those problems, or trying to denigrate anyone that does, BTW).
We're not supposed to, in modern society, credit genetics or anything other than "hard work" with top level performance.
But nobody is going to disagree that you can't be 4'-2" and play in the NBA. Somewhere between 4'-2" and Spud Webb (the exception that proves the rule) and Yao Ming lies the reality that all physical activity requires certain physiological traits to perform (a) at all and (b) at a high level.
Does the above offend? If you have paid to be here, you can click here to put it in context.