To his face I would respectfully disagree and point out the number of excellent instructors I’ve had who have done demos. It would be difficult, for instance, for an instructor to demonstrate how fast you can get acceptable hits from the holster if he never drew a gun.
Also, what if said instructor did not wear/carry a gun while teaching?
If he never used a firearm while teaching as an SOP it would concern me unless the instructor was dealing with an injury or something.
My bullshit meter would immediately peg off the chart and I would say this so called instructor needed to find something else to do.I probably would have to call them out because any instructor worth his weight should know the importance of demonstrations.
I don’t think you have to demonstrate every live fire drill. With that said, the more demanding an instructor is of the student, the more willing he/she must be willing to demonstrate that the expectations of performance are reasonable. Live fire demos solve the issue definitively.
As a student I think it’s important especially if I’ve never trained with the instructor.
As an instructor I think it’s important for both credibility with students you’ve never trained with, but also because sometimes what you explain verbally may get through to 9 out of 10 students. Some people are visual learners. It’s also important to do the drill clean. If you mess it up don’t gloss over it. Re-accomplish it, everyone makes a mistake, a professional corrects his mistake with no excuse.
An instructor that doesnt do some demo on the range, at some point, is probably scared to shoot in front of students… maybe not but it’s my guess. I’ve done demos in almost every course ive taught… I know there are some instructors that don’t. They are the same instructors that will say there those that are good shooters and those that can teach… My bullshit meter always hits max when I hear that… If you can’t put into practice what you’re teaching then I say go do the hard work until you can… Just my two cents.
I’ve never thought about it much but of many of the classes I’ve been to I’ve been a faster and more accurate handgun shooter than the instructor. This really doesn’t mean much to me since I’m there to listen and learn. I’m not a good teacher. Some are, I’m not in that minority. With an open mind even if you’re faster and more accurate that the instructor I’m sure that there’s plenty to learn.
I use to help teach a Womens Handgun Cllinic and I always demonstrated basic firing techniques first.
Many of these Ladies had never fired a defensive Caliber handgun prior to their first range time during this clinic.
So it was my position that watching someone else pull the trigger from up close was one way to show them that firing a weapon was very different to what they had been exposed to in the movies etc…
As a student I like to see demos, not really to judge the instructor (as I assume that he is already proficient, until proven otherwise) but to better comprehend the technical skill and to see it in play. I do demos for the same reason.
When I do a demo I am generally at about 75-80% of my top speed. Not because it is too fast to catch with the naked eye, but because I want the students to understand my accuracy demands, and with my target audience, I am generally 10-20% faster at 75% than they are at 100%, and I usually shoot the demo clean (we all have bad days).
I consider manipulations, grip, stance, recoil management, presentations, draw, shooting on the move, and supported positions to demand a demo. For example, I want the shooters to see a clean Half and Half and understand the drill before shooting it.
However, some skills do not benefit from a demo, but rather an explaination and physical interaction. Examples are- trigger control, aiming/sight use, grip pressure, the mount, and cheek weld. There are certainly others as well.
As far as “demos are a crutch” I can agree with very basic skills or simple concepts- I have no interest in watching or demoing 50yard pistol one-handed bulls-eye slow fire. Other than that, I think that a demo is pretty important.
Instructors without guns? Why?
If one wants to ensure that he is using weapons identical to the shooter’s, I would want to just have a setup that I knew, was properly adjusted, and worked. But that’s just me I guess.
Agreed. Demos, walk-throughs, rehersals, chalk-talks, simulations…
Whatever the term, they’re all the same, carry the same weight in terms of student comprehension, and are critical to both correct learning and as an added safety feature so that you don’t end up with some idiot Death Blossoming all over hell’s half-acre.
I agree with this.
I like to instruct with the same or very similar set up that is a requirement of the students, nothing less or nothing more. I will ALWAYS have the weapon with me that I am teaching. This may be just for giving a dry manipulation instruction or conducting a live fire demo. I would give little credibility to an instructor who would scoff at the notion of carrying the weapon or doing a drill demo. I may make an exception with a few well known instructors, but there are only a few exceptions to this rule as far as I am concerned.
I am a visual learner so there are some drills that I appreciate seeing. At the same time I do like to get a feel for an instructors skills and to me this is important to an extent. By this I mean that an instructor or coach does not necessarily need to be better at the skills than the student. However I feel that I can actually judge if the instructor has merit even though I may feel that I can perform the actual drill better. Ie. Bella Karolyi will not be doing any double back handsprings but he sure can teach certain someones to do it well.
For myself when I teach I will generally demo a few of the early drills to reinforce my skill level on those who demand this and from there on I will demo only the difficult drills or when I feel that there may be confusion or when I am asked to do so by a student if they are unsure of the drill itself. As mentioned I understand that some students are visual learners and will demo accordingly, but I don’t care for instructors who feel the need to demo everything. A good instructor we should be able to, for the most part, be able to accurately assess the needs of their students and address their needs accordingly. I have actually seen students who back into a shell when the instructor demo’s everything. At times it makes the students feel embarrassed about their performance or in some instances I see resentment that the instructor is only doing a demo to boost their own ego and show off. IMO there is a balance.
I think live fire demos are always a good thing and especially important for new students.
I recently attended my first full course and the demos were really helpful to me because I learn most effectively by seeing things done live.
Also, being able to hit the intended target is important if the instructor is trying to demonstrate a certain techniques effectiveness/ineffectiveness.
Thanks for that–it makes complete sense.
Much better than my answer–mine was kinda a swag, but at least somewhat close…
I think the most important considerations are why & how the drills are shot. A student won’t get much out of a full speed drill. One shot at 1/2 speed, however gives a student more time to see what’s really going on.
Some talented students can get all the info from a fast drill but those are a rare breed in most classes. I’m more concerned with what I can get my students to do than with what I can do & I hope they feel the same.
As for the no-gun instructor, that would make me a little leery. Even instructorzs who don’t do a lot of demos should still have a weapon just in case a demo is requested.
This has been something that I have been keen on for awhile. I will never ask my students to do something that I cannot do myself. At one of the places that I instruct at some of the instructors cannot shoot expert nor qualify for that matter on the particular qualifications. Yet they are comfortable teaching the class.
I even had an instructor tell me that you should never demo something because if you miss then your credibility goes out the window. Well yeah it does, so train so you don’t miss. I can tell whether or not I am on or off, and whether or not I will hit the drills I am running.
The instructors do not need to demonstrate every single technique. That said, they do need to demonstrate a majority and they need to be at least good shots; expecting perfection is unrealistic. I also feel an explanation is usually a good thing and if the person can give a real world circumstance where they have employed the technique successfully, even better.
A major reason I am a strong proponent of TS as trainers is that they have been there, done that, and are excellent marksmen as well as tacticians. They demonstrate and are almost always A hits with speed. For me it is piece of mind and inspiring/challenging. If the instructor can’t walk the walk…
That type of insructor is usually far more worried about his ego than effectively teaching his students. If an instructor is so worried about making mistakes that he can’t come up with methodologies with which to turn them into a “teachable moment,” then he’s got some credibility to achiee before he starts worrying about losing it. It’s not that hard to come up with a “here’s a way to avoid dorking that up the way I just did…” Real expertise rests in somebody smart and experienced enough to know that perfection is a stupid, unattainable goal and that smoothly mitigating or solving those pesky imperfections is a key facet of real skill.
It’s also stuff that is teachable and translates well with folks that don’t walk on water. I’d much rather be taught by a talented, fallible human than a tinpot deity.
Another side of the coin: if one is the kind of student that thinks everything has to be flawless to be credible, that one is only going to learn to a certain point because they have unrealistic expectations and limited ability to think in regard to how things do happen vs. how they should happen.
Precisely. I’ve watched some of the best instructors in the world miss a shot now and then.
So.
Friggin’.
What.
The only person who actually thinks that a flubbed drill is an invalidation of an instructor’s credibility is a chowderhead to begin with, and there’s no hope for him whatsoever. He can go into the garden and eat worms while those with an IQ that can’t be measured with fingers and toes learn things.
The only classes I have attended have been with Larry Vickers. Not because I don’t value any other instructors, only because of proximity and timing of his classes. He has demonstraed key drills or any drill he was asked to demonstrate, without blinking. Has he ‘flubbed?’ Sure. Does that make him any less of an expert? No, it makes him human. I am certain this applies to any other expert out there. In fact, what I appreciate is when he (or anyone else) flubs and says “OK, this is what I did, and this is how to correct it.”
Depends. But for the most part, if an instructor is going to demonstrate a standard or technique they expect their students to perform. Except for very specific situations, it really doesn’t make any sense for them to just shoot into a berm. JM2CW.