Firearms Training: What Makes A Good Instructor?

Firearms Training:  What Makes A Good Instructor?

By:  Chris Shoffner

It’s probably unlikely that I could have chosen a more subjective topic to talk about this month, but after a discussion that took place in a recent instructor development course that my training organization conducted, I felt compelled to write about this subject.  It seems as though everyone in the class wanted to know just exactly what attributes make for a “good” or “bad” instructor. 

In training, as with many things in life, there are a number of things that we can label as being either “true” or “false”, “wrong” or “right”, or perhaps even “black” or “white”.  When it comes to labeling an instructor as either “good” or “bad”, on the other hand, it is a much more subjective process.  While I might believe a certain instructor is very good, another person might believe him or her to only be average, and perhaps another might even believe him or her to be poor or bad.  Having acknowledged this need for subjectivity, I will attempt to shed a little “subjective light” on the subject as I move forward.

First, I think it’s important to understand that there is no “industry standard” by which all firearms instructors can be graded, especially when you take into consideration the numerous accrediting organizations in existence.  While most accrediting organizations use an established process for training and considering candidates to either accept or reject as a “Certified Instructor”, those processes vary greatly from one organization to the next.  Likewise, many of these organizations use various methods to reward or commend instructors for certain achievements, though recognition and commencements (or the lack thereof) still may not be an accurate indication of how “good” or “bad” an instructor really is.  Absent any kind of uniform, consistently applied standard, an instructor’s merit or level of performance comes down to being based entirely on the opinions of his or her students, and in a lot of cases, by additional review from his or her peers. 

Having spent numerous years playing the parts of student and instructor, as well as participating as a regular member of a training team that is responsible for training and evaluating instructor candidates for certification recommendations, I submit the following observations based on my experiences. 

Intimate Knowledge of Curriculum

        

As a student, I’ve attended classes with a variety of different instructors covering an even wider variety of subject matter. In my experience, it would be very difficult to argue with the age-old adage of, “not all instructors are created equal”. With that said, I am happy to report that the majority of instructors I’ve taken instruction from were usually pretty well versed on the subject matter they were teaching.  It was generally easy to tell that they had “read the book” and put some time into studying the curriculum. 

Using Realistic Context and Physical Demonstrations of Skills

Of course, simply knowing the material doesn’t necessarily translate into being able to convey that information in a way that is conducive to a student actually learning and absorbing it. The best of the instructors I’ve trained under in the firearms/defensive shooting fields, at least from my viewpoint as a student, were the one’s who not only knew the subject matter very well, but could also explain in plain English why the subject matter was relevant to the “problem” it was attempting to “solve”.  In other words, they had a good mechanical understanding of how the material applied to real-world situations.  In addition, in every case, these instructors also possessed the physical ability to properly demonstrate the skills and techniques needed to put the curriculum into action, lending support to the idea that a good instructor generally never asks a student to perform a task that he or she isn’t capable of performing him or herself. 

Providing Feedback Needed For Improvement

Just as important as understanding the curriculum and being able to demonstrate the required physical skills, is the ability for the instructor to provide feedback that causes an improvement in the performance of the student.  After all, isn’t that what training is all about?  If a student shows a marked improvement on a quiz, on a target, or against a timer due to the feedback the instructor provided, then at some level, the instruction was successful.  With that said, it’s important for the instructor to recognize what type of feedback or guidance will work best for each student.  Different students often require a different approach on the instructor’s part, to achieve the desired result.        

Drawing Upon Practical Experience While Remaining Humble

 

When it comes to firearms training, I think there is a certain segment of students and trainers out there that believe, unless an instructor has multiple years of experience as a law enforcement officer or elite military operator under his or her belt, then the instruction they provide can’t possibly be adequate for the armed citizen interested in the very real business of protecting themselves and their families.  I tend to disagree. 

While it’s certainly true that practical experience, if properly drawn upon, can be an important piece of the equation, it is definitely not a “be-all” or “end-all” aspect of competent instruction.  How that experience is used in relationship to the subject matter, in addition to the attitude of the instructor, usually plays a much larger role in whether the instructor is a success or a failure.  If used properly, that experience can provide students with insight that they otherwise may not get from an instructor without it.  Conversely, if an instructor allows his accolades and achievements to become the primary focus of his instruction, it is usually a recipe for failure.  The students I’ve polled over the years are typically not impressed with an instructor whose primary focus is himself, regardless of his experience or achievements. 

Practical Experience Not A Substitute For Teaching Ability

On the other hand, using the polling results from these same students, they have pointed to many firearms trainers who have had little or no “practical” (combat or law enforcement) experience that they found to be very capable instructors. By and large, these instructors generally share the common traits of sticking strictly to their curriculum, teaching in a way that is conducive to learning, they are humble, and they don’t try to delve into topics that are outside their area(s) of expertise. These folks are good TEACHERS, by all accounts.

Looking at this from the angle of being an instructor myself, I feel I can add another perspective on the subject.  Just to give some background, I’ve accumulated around 650 - 700 hours of time in front of a classroom as an instructor over the past several years. I am an NRA Certified Instructor in the Pistol, Personal Protection In The Home, and Personal Protection Outside The Home disciplines.  My organization averages between 200 - 250 students per year, so while we maintain a regular schedule of training courses, we’re not full-timers. Myself and the other two instructors that are part of my organization all have full-time jobs that we maintain in addition to providing firearms instruction.

Always Remaining Professional and In Control

In a lot of ways, a large portion of the burden for learning falls on the student’s shoulders. No instructor can overcome a poor attitude or a lack of motivation on the student’s part to be a willing participant in the learning process. If a student comes into a class with a bad attitude or a chip on his shoulder, then it’s unlikely he will be very happy with the instruction he received at the end of the day. While, as an instructor, I try to “adjust” any bad attitudes in a professional, tactful way early in the class, it’s still up to the student to accept the “adjustment”.  Since we can probably all agree that it only takes one problematic student to ruin a class for everyone else in attendance, I believe we can also agree that a good instructor must learn to recognize students with bad attitudes or other problems, develop tactful and effective techniques for dealing with them, and realize that at some point, it may be necessary to excuse a student from a class if their problem has the potential to be a detriment to the safety and learning experience of the other students in the class.

Listening To Your Students and Seeking Out Feedback

In addition, I cannot stress enough just how important it is to get real, honest, and consistent feedback from your students.  I believe it is nearly impossible to improve your performance as an instructor to any significant degree if you don’t have reliable feedback from your students to draw upon.  My organization provides each student in every class an evaluation form on which we ask them for their feedback.  The students then have the option of either leaving their thoughts and comments in an anonymous manner, or they can fill in their name on the form if they so choose.  By allowing the student to remain anonymous on the form, we have found that they sometimes feel more at ease about leaving any critical comments in addition to any positive comments they might have, and trust me, if you teach long enough and deal with any significant number of students, you will receive feedback that is of a critical nature at some point (which is sometimes the most beneficial feedback to receive).  We also make ourselves available during breaks and after the class for any student who wishes to speak to us outside of the classroom environment.     

Being Open To Peer Review

In conjunction with student feedback, myself and the other instructors in my group take part in a debriefing session after each and every class.  We discuss the conduct of any classroom instruction and any range session that took place, performance of the students in the classroom and on the range, and we evaluate each other’s performance as instructors.  This gives all of us an opportunity to point out any issues that may need addressed while they are still fresh in our minds and allows us the chance to provide positive reinforcement to each other for a job well done.  This evaluation process, in my opinion, is a very important part of becoming a good instructor.  Using the data I gather from student feedback and peer review allows me try to constantly hone and attempt to “perfect” my style of teaching.

So I ask again, what is it that really makes a good firearms instructor?  Cleary, it is still a very subjective topic.  Every instructor has a different teaching style and every student will have a slightly different take on learning.  And we can’t dismiss the fact that sometimes, two different personality types just don’t work well with each other.  In the end, if the instructor can demonstrate an intimate knowledge of the subject matter, a good mechanical understanding of how the material solves real-world problems, the physical skills needed to put the knowledge into practice, the ability to provide fair and proper feedback to the student in an efficient manner, and convey it in a professional and easy to understand manner, then he or she will probably make a lot of students very happy.

I believe, until you teach, it’s really hard to understand just how much it involves. Being a GOOD instructor takes a person who is willing to be self-critical, willing to admit when he or she is wrong, willing to take ridicule with a grain of salt, willing to adapt and change as needed, and willing to resist the urge to try to be something he or she is not. Ultimately, your students will let you know, in more ways than one, if you are a failure or a success, and in the end, that is the only grade that really counts. 

As always, Be Safe! 

Chris is an NRA Certified Instructor in the Pistol, Personal Protection In The Home, and Personal Protection Outside The Home disciplines, in addition to being a Certified Range Safety Officer.  His organization, Armed Missouri, Inc., has been providing state compliant Firearms Safety Training since February 2004, in addition to providing NRA Sanctioned student and instructor courses year round.  For more information, you can visit his website at www.armedmissouri.com

Teaching More Than Is Required

Missouri “Firearms Safety Training Course”  - Teaching More Than Is Required

By Chris Shoffner

In reality, this is what we have in Missouri, a “Firearms Safety Training Course”, rather than a “CCW Course” or a “Concealed Weapons Course”.  In fact, it is even referenced on multiple occasions as a “Firearms Safety Training Course” in Missouri Revised Statute 571.111, which is the section of our statutes that specifies the training requirements an applicant must complete before being eligible for a concealed carry endorsement. 

I think, as instructors, this simple fact should tell us something.  The state is, very specifically, requiring basic firearms safety training, and a quick perusal through the training requirements confirms just that.  Excluding the legal portion of the class, the mandated practical training requirements are:

• Handgun safety in the classroom, at home, on the firing range and while carrying the firearm. 
• A physical demonstration performed by the applicant that demonstrated his or her ability to safely load and unload a revolver and a semiautomatic pistol and demonstrated his or her marksmanship with both.
• The basic principles of marksmanship.
• Care and cleaning of concealable firearms.
• Safe storage of firearms at home.
• A live firing exercise of sufficient duration for each applicant to fire a handgun, from a standing position or its equivalent, a minimum of fifty rounds at a distance of seven yards from a B-27 silhouette target or an equivalent target.
• A live fire test administered to the applicant while the instructor was present of twenty rounds from a standing position or its equivalent at a distance from a B-27 silhouette target, or an equivalent target, of seven yards.

Reading through this list, the complete absence of a requirement for any type of combatives or advanced shooting training should be quite obvious.  It becomes apparent that our legislators were specifically concerned with firearms safety, first and foremost, when they passed this law.   They wanted to keep the course curriculum at a level that would not only provide a good safety review for seasoned shooters, but also adequately teach beginning and inexperienced shooters proper safe gun handling practices and safety protocols.

So how does this affect us, as instructors, and what does it mean in regards to our course curriculum?  Clearly, each of us as an individual will have a slightly different take on the finer points of what each requirement might or might not involve.  For example, in some cases, the facility we teach in might require us to teach “handgun safety in the classroom” in a way that is slightly different than the way another instructor would teach it in a different facility.  Or perhaps we have our own, unique gun cleaning procedure we prefer to teach.  These personal preferences are just one of the things that make our classes unique to us.  What it boils down to is that, in many instances, there is more than one way to skin a cat.

As instructors, I don’t believe we should unnecessarily avoid these variations.  As long as our curriculum closely complies with the requirements set forth by the state and meets the highest standards of safety, then there is nothing wrong with “making it our own”.  Keeping your curriculum relevant and interesting goes a long way towards keeping your students interested enough to pay attention to the very important subject matter you are trying to cover.     

On the other hand, we could easily run into problems if we try to incorporate controversial or untested ideas, techniques, and concepts into our training programs.  While we might think it makes us “cutting edge” or “state of the art” to include some kind of new or controversial topic of instruction, it will more than likely only detract from the real task at hand as well as adding unnecessary minutes, or perhaps hours, to the time it takes to cover all of the required curriculum.  In addition, it is possible that such topics could cause us additional legal liability if, God forbid, a student was ever placed in jeopardy because something we taught was not tested and proven to be safe and effective. 

There is also risk in teaching too far above the skill level of the students in a class where the curriculum is mandated by the state.  For example, taking a person who has never picked up a handgun prior to the day of the class and placing him or her in a position where they must operate the gun at an advanced level after only a few hours of instruction, is a recipe for disaster.  Skills take time and practice to develop, and basic fundamentals simply must be learned and then mastered, before moving on to anything more advanced.  A student or instructor with a bullet hole in his or her body is every instructor’s worst nightmare.  The only safe way to approach the state-mandated training course as an instructor is to assume that every student in your class is an absolute beginner that has no handgun experience at all.  It will be many weeks, or perhaps even months, before these students are ready to move on to any kind of advanced defensive handgun skills. 

In the wake of the tragic events that took place in a March 2011 “concealed carry” class held near Vanzant, Missouri, which cost a Mountain Grove man his life, I believe every instructor would be well served to step back and reevaluate his or her course curriculum and how it compares with what the state has mandated.  It’s appears almost certain at this point that a non-mandated training exercise was at the heart of the unfortunate events that led to this man’s death.  As training professionals, we have an ethical and moral responsibility to our students, our families, and the people of this state, and indeed, to each other, to ensure that we always put safety first.  Unnecessarily placing a student or any other person in harms way because we are trying to include training exercises or other curriculum that is outside of the scope of the course, or to try to make our students think they are getting some kind of  “combat” training, is simply unacceptable.   In addition, whether just or unjust, the actions of one always reflect on the many so when one instructor does something questionable, you can bet that it will reflect poorly on the rest of us as well.   

Ultimately, each instructor will have to make some decisions about any non-mandated curriculum they might choose to include in their version of the state mandated Firearms Safety Training Course.  While the statutes do not specify that additional content may not be included, they clearly outline a basic firearms safety course that the state expects to take at least 8 hours.  If the instructor adds additional content, then the course length should increase accordingly.  In other words, at no time should the state mandated curriculum be short changed so non-mandated curriculum can be covered, and obviously, safety should always take precedent over anything else when a decision is being made whether or not to include additional content. 

I truly believe that we, as instructors, hold the future of our state-mandated concealed firearms training requirements in our hands.  We essentially will choose our own destiny through our actions.  If care isn’t taken and we allow ourselves to become complacent, our legislators will respond with more restrictions, more red tape, and more direct oversight of training programs.  On the other hand, if we exercise due diligence and keep our training programs firmly grounded in the state mandated requirements, we will continue to enjoy a system that allows all of us to develop our lesson plans in our own unique ways and maintain our individual training styles, rather than the state taking a “cookie cutter” approach and developing their own lesson plan and requiring all of us to teach it exactly the same.  I would encourage all of you to keep this in mind as you develop, update, or modify your “Missouri Firearms Safety Training Course” curriculum.  And if you choose to call it a “Concealed Firearms Course”, or some other name, well, that’s just fine.  At least your students will recognize what it is you are offering. 

As always, Be Safe! 

Chris is an NRA Certified Instructor in the Pistol, Personal Protection In The Home, and Personal Protection Outside The Home disciplines, in addition to being a Certified Range Safety Officer.  His organization, Armed Missouri, Inc., has been providing state compliant Firearms Safety Training since February 2004, in addition to providing NRA Sanctioned student and instructor courses year round.  For more information, you can visit his website at www.armedmissouri.com

Permits for residents under 23

As most instructors know, Missouri law requires all ccw applicants to be 23 years of age or older. At first glance this might seem like the end of the road, but is it?

If you are familiar with Missouri law, and do a little research on the net, I’m sure many of you know that a person who is 21 could get an out of state permit and carry a concealed firearm in Missouri. In the public’s mind 21 seems to be the magical number where a citizen finally gets to make all their own decisions. It will take a big effort on your part to get those younger adults to class. It has been my experience that, since they believe they must be 23, they don’t even bother with looking for a class.

Let’s assume now that you have had some 21 year olds in class, who obtained a permit from another state to carry a concealed weapon, and all is right with the world. Since 21 is the age at which a person can buy a handgun directly from an FFL holder, it isn’t too likely that they will be second guessed at all if ever there is an interaction with law enforcement, or the public. But what about those are in the 18-21 age range? Unfortunately, persons in this age range are going to have an uphill battle from every direction. The public believes that they cannot own or possess a handgun at the age of 18. Law enforcement generally does not encounter this scenario, and they also believe that a person may not own a handgun at 18. That perception, along with the belief that a person must be 23 to obtain a permit a Missouri permit gives these citizens a difficult road ahead and they must be prepared for it.

First, make sure they understand that they will be scrutinized by the public, and law enforcement. It’s not that they have done anything wrong. It’s that entrenched belief that you can’t do anything more than vote at 18. If they are pulled over, or interact with law enforcement in any way, make sure they know they will be looked at with a magnifying glass, and most likely the officer will not be aware of the appropriate federal or state law. This is of no fault of the officer, they are just doing their job, and frankly, this isn’t something that is covered in an academy class. Ensure them to remain calm, be courteous, and expect it to take a little while to get sorted out.

Secondly, prepare them for the situation. The most relevant law for this is 18USC922(x)(1) and 18USC922(x)(2) which states; (emphasis added)

18USC922(x)(1) It shall be unlawful for a person to sell, deliver, or otherwise transfer to a person who the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe is a juvenile -

(A) a handgun; or

(B) ammunition that is suitable for use only in a handgun.

18USC922(x)(2) It shall be unlawful for any person who is a juvenile to knowingly possess -

(A) a handgun; or

(B) ammunition that is suitable for use only in a handgun.

Of course we know what a juvenile is, but let’s also include that definition; (emphasis added)

18USC922(x)(5) For purposes of this subsection, the term

"juvenile" means a person who is less than 18 years of age.

We can now say with some certainty, and with the reassurance of federal law, that it is; 1)Not illegal to purchase a handgun from a person if you are 18, and 2) Not illegal to possess a handgun if  you are 18. This is good information to provide to all your students, but in particular anyone who is under 21. Next, let’s look at the Missouri law regarding purchase of a concealable firearm;

RSMo 571.080. A person commits the crime of transfer of a concealable firearm if such person violates 18 U.S.C. Section 922(b) or 18 U.S.C. Section 922(x).

Well Missouri seems to cite the federal laws that govern the purchase and possession of a handgun. So, did a person who is 18 violate 922(x) when they purchased a handgun from an individual? Certainly not. Then since there is no law violated on either the state or federal level, a person aged 18 or older may purchase a handgun from an individual, or even have it gifted from another individual. So where does this assumption of being 21 years old come from? 18USC922(b) which states; (emphasis added)

18USC922(b) It shall be unlawful for any licensed importer, licensed

manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector to sell or

deliver -

(1) any firearm or ammunition to any individual who the

licensee knows or has reasonable cause to believe is less than

eighteen years of age, and, if the firearm, or ammunition is

other than a shotgun or rifle, or ammunition for a shotgun or

rifle, to any individual who the licensee knows or has reasonable

cause to believe is less than twenty-one years of age;

Ultimately 18USC922(b) says, that a person may not purchase a handgun from a federally licensed dealer unless that buyer is 21 or older. The all important exemption is 18USC922(x) which allows anyone 18 or older to purchase a handgun from a person, or have it gifted. This type of information should probably be given to all of your students, but in particular, make sure anyone in your course who is under 21 knows this information well. 

With all the legal ramifications aside, let’s look at the practicality. Trying to convince a law enforcement officer of what the law says, and getting that officer to understand it may be difficult. Do your best to prepare your students for it, regardless of their age. Provide them with the proper law references regarding purchase and possession of firearms, and it doesn’t hurt to provide phone numbers for the ATF branch officer in the area. Preparation and a level head is going to be the key. The more educated the public becomes, the less this issue will come up.

This entry contributed by:

Jeff Dill of Gauntlet Professional Services

Jeff is a certified instructor for civilian, law enforcement, and security

Class Material tips

Any instructor worth his/her salt will produce a student manual, or some kind of reference that each student can follow along with during class and take home for future review should there be any lingering questions. All too common are copies of statutes that are either stapled together, or bound and sent with the student, or worse nothing is sent with the student at all. The law does not require a manual be provided, and it’s not very specific on exactly what you need to hand out, but let’s face it; reputation is at least 80% of our business. The better you make it for your students, the more references you will get because of it.

With imagination the only boundary to what you create, this is a time when you can either make your students feel very comfortable with what they are learning, or very intimidated with complex minutia of all those pesky statutes. The following is an example of how a person might construct a student manual;

Every good book, starts with a Table of Contents. This makes finding information easier for your students.

This is a section of the student book GPS provides. The section in red is a description of the law directly above it, with any exemptions to the law noted under the description. Within the description GPS has listed the statute that provides the exemption, indicated by the blue box.

Keep in mind that this book will have to be updated with law changes throughout the year. The table of contents may need to reflect these changes as well. Initially I created the GPS book in MS Word, and later broke it down so that each book chapter was it's own file. These can be loaded into MS Publisher for even more printing options. Remember it's your book, and it directly reflects upon you the amount of time and quality you put in the book.

Something our students love is our pocket book. Our CCW manual doesn't contain every little piece of the Missouri law of chapter 571. Some of these statutes don't apply to CCW specifically so we provide a pocket sized book that has every statute for chapters 571, 563, and a few miscellaneous chapters with the 'straggler' firearms laws, such as the bus hijack law, and the confiscation of weapons during emergencies. They can keep this book in their pocket, or in their car. If there is ever a question about firearms law for Missouri, that little book has the answer. As a bonus, I found that having this book printed costs the same as a full sized book. But because I get 4 of these books out of an 8.5x11 printing, I get 4 times the number of books! It's cheaper AND the customer likes it!

Feel free to add other pieces of pertinent information to the book as well. An example would be, carrying a firearm in a boat during the summer. Is it a 'motor vehicle'? NFA laws, case law references, or anything that might effect a person in their day to day dealing with carrying a firearm could be placed in the manual. If the student finds this information valuable, they will recommend you to their friends and family.

Obviously there is more to teaching a CCW class for Missouri than just your student manual, but I hope there were some tips in this that you found useful, and might help you in your endeavor.

This entry contributed by:

Jeff Dill of Gauntlet Professional Services

Jeff is a certified instructor for civilian, law enforcement, and security