NOBODY is suggesting that you shouldn't be positive. You seem to be confusing
what you consider NEGATIVE LANGUAGE with negative feedback/reinforcement/punishment. They're not the same thing.
What we're really talking about is something called "
instrumental learning" and that's broadly referred to as
behaviorism. It has four components:
1)
Positive reinforcement occurs when you reward the proper behavior. If you don't see the proper behavior you can't reward it. How you get to the desired positive behavior can be time-consuming. Saying "roll the trigger" is not positive reinforcement, neither is saying "don't jerk the trigger." But when the desired results are achieved you can praise the results or offer other forms of reward.
2)
Negative reinforcement comes when you take away something that the trainee considers unpleasant. Hard to do that effectively in most classroom environments, as it means you must be ready to start out using negative environmental tools in the training process.
3)
Positive punishment comes from the delivery of something unpleasant, like verbal abuse or a spanking. With pets and people this will sometimes STOP the undesired behavior, but if an alternative behavior isn't taught (and positively reinforced) the undesired behavior can continue away form the training process.
- The problem with positive punishment is that, away from a controlled environment, like a training class, it's hard to tell if it's really successful, because it may simply be that the trainee has figured out how to NOT GET CAUGHT doing the undesired behavior. It doesn't mean he or she has really bought into the training concepts being presented.
4)
Negative punishment is the process of taking away something that's desired. This used to be popular with small children; with teenagers, it might be the suspension of computer or phone privileges with teenagers.
- But, like positive punishment, you simply can't know whether the desired training result has been accomplished outside of the training environment. As soon as the punishment is removed, the negative result may reappear..
Those are the four different types of INSTRUMENTAL LEARNING defined by behaviorists, and using the WHEEL OF ERRORS doesn't really suggest that you must use types 2, 3, or 4. You want to use type 1, and I agree. How you respond to your analysis of a trainee's performance is totally up to you.
If someone is doing something dangerous in a training class, it's hard to use positive reinforcement -- as you must immediately stop that behavior. But how you deal with the behavior after it is stopped can be much more positive. That's what good trainers do.
The
Wheel of Errors is simply
an analytical tool. You don't have to show it to your students, and if you say "roll the trigger" instead of "don't jerk the trigger." you may have found a better way to provide the feedback that will improve your student's performance.
- But if you say, "it looks like you're pulling the trigger too forcefully, and that forceful pull can cause you to unintentionally jerk the barrel down as your finger moves to the rear." and then suggest "try rolling the trigger instead, and you'll have a smoother pull that may not drag the barrel down," those two sentences, a more expanded explanation, may be more effective.
It's how YOU do it that matters, not just the terms used.
If you have a better way to shape behavior have at it --
and positive reinforcement IS the most effective technique to use in your classes. But you have to find something positive to reinforce before you can reinforce it, and that can take time.
There is more than one way to be positive and to make the training experience a positive one -- and doing things directly,
in a very positive way can save time and money, and speed up the training process.
.
But, then, so do many, many experienced shooters! Using the Bullseye problem chart still makes sense for many two-handed shooters. But you don't hear that truth addressed much.
