NRA "blended training" changing?

[Kevin G]

About a year ago the NRA changed the basic pistol class from classroom/range format to home computer/brief classroom-range format.
Student is exposed to bulk of material in a self study computer program where he/she is tested, upon successful completion of self study the student makes an appointment with NRA instructor for brief classroom and range session for class completion.
I've been involved in two of these classes and I am not impressed with the change. Majority of the students say they would prefer classroom instruction/personal interaction to computer study.
Rumors have been circulating that the NRA is having second thoughts about cyborg teaching, anyone know anything about this?
Thanks, Kevin

 

[SC_Mike]

Cheap laptop computer: $149.00

Cheap internet service: $10.99/month.

Classroom/range setting with a trained professional: Priceless.

Of course this is just IMHO.

 

[robvious]

Firearms training by electronic proxy may appeal to the tech generations but does nothing for gun safety and real education... that HAS TO BE HANDS ON WITH REAL PEOPLE... a computer can only give yes or no... a teacher can say "STOP!... put it down and listen to EXACTLY to what I am saying..."

 

[Rastoff]

Rumors have been circulating that the NRA is having second thoughts about cyborg teaching, anyone know anything about this?

I've heard this rumor too, but haven't called the NRA about it yet. I'll probably call them tomorrow and see what they say. I don't like it, but it's not the devil.


For those of you who don't know what this is, it's not JUST computer training. The student would go through a computer course that includes all the "head" knowledge stuff. Things like how the cartridge works and learning the parts of the gun, may actually work better in that format. Then, the student goes to a live instructor for live instruction and range time.

The theory is good, but it doesn't seem to work in practice. Just like the two posts above this one, most seem to think it's only computer and no live training. Therefore, I haven't been able to get a single student to sign up for it. I'll be happy if they change back.

 

[Kevin G]

Thanks for your input Rastoff.
I found that in the computer portion of the class if the student had questions they could remain unresolved.
Then in the instructor portion of the class the student would look for answers to material that was covered already on the computer screen. Through no fault of the students, it seems like many were not fully prepared for the brief lectures and live fire range portions with the instructors. As a result much time was spent reviewing material covered in the computer class at either the expense of range time or making for a long day.
I feel the students are not getting the same quality training previously available.
Thanks, Kevin

 

[slickracer]

I know the instructors at my club have not agreed with the online training portion. The change back to classroom instruction would be most welcome.

 

[Rastoff]

I feel the students are not getting the same quality training previously available.
Thanks, Kevin

I completely agree.

They wouldn't admit it, but I believe the NRA was trying to correct a problem with the training. You see, there are over 150,000 so called "certified" NRA instructors. The vast majority of them have never taught a single class. That's not really a problem though. What is a problem is that those that do actually train, don't always follow the curriculum.

In some states, the NRA basic pistol course is an acceptable form of training to receive a concealed carry license. Because a lot of "instructors" are just interested in making money, they would give out certificates for a fee without actually running through the course. I know of one instructor that "taught" the NRA basic pistol course in half an hour. Anyone that knows the course will know that's impossible. Another instructor I know just didn't like part of the course so, he wouldn't teach it.

The on line portion ensures that the students at least get exposed to the bulk of the training. It should shorten the classroom portion by a large margin. Alas, I've had a lot of experience with computer based training (CBT) and it just doesn't work. Sure, some will retain the information, but most will just end up flipping through the slides while they dream about being at the range.

I want better for my students.

 

[Inusuit]

I am a certified NRA pistol instructor and do actually teach at three different venues. At one venue, we always had 20-24 students signed up for the class, often with a waiting list for the next session. We had to schedule additional classes to accommodate the demand.

Since the transition to the new format, we have canceled one class for lack of sign up (we require students to complete the online portion prior to registration) For the two other regularly scheduled classes, we had two students in one and three in the other.

The downside to the "blended" program:

1. Cost of the class doubled because the on-line portion price is $60.
2. There is no way to verify that the student who shows up with the online certificate is actually the person who completed the class.
3. There is no opportunity to assess the personality/ability/stability of the student who shows up at the range with a handgun and ammunition.
4. We have students of all ages, some of whom do not own nor operate a computer.

I took the online instruction, and it is quite good but in my opinion can never substitute for face to face interaction.

I should mention that at all three venues, the instructors are volunteers who believe in teaching firearms safety and basic proficiency. These individuals donate many hours each year in firearms instruction with no compensation other than satisfaction in seeing student's progress. Not one of them likes the "new" format. Despite the hard sell for this approach, I have read that the NRA has admitted a "mistake" and is reconsidering how the basic pistol class will be handled.

 

[Doug627]

The NRA "blended" program is based upon money. As an NRA Certified Pistol Instructor, I bought the materials for the students and then taught the course, in its entirety. The NRA made some money off the materials. The "blended" program puts more money into the NRA's coffers. They expect the live instruction to be taught by volunteers at no cost. I put a lot of time in teaching the course, I will not do it free. I like teaching the course and my students have always told me that they have learned a lot and were glad they took the course. I had hoped to teach a class once a month after retirement to supplement my income. Not now unless something changes. Go back to the way it used to be. By the way, in Ohio if the course does not last the 10 hours required for the CCW permit, the instructor and students could be criminally charged and the students loose their permits forever.

 

[steelslaver]

Icansee some points for both sides. But, some of the points against an online class are pretty solid. No way do really know who took the class. To many unresolved questions cutting into a briefer class room time.

I like the idea that your some how liable if you don't teach the course within the NRA parameters.

Personal experience. I had my concealed permit for some time when one of the range member new emails included a notification of the basic NRA course. I thought that it was a good idea for me to take it for a couple reasons. At some point it might be required and you never know what you could learn. Actually it was an enjoyable day. Met some people, learned something about double action and striker fired pistols, got to handle a few. That afternoon at the range it didn't take long for me to get signed off. but, I shot up the ammo I had brought with me anyway. Plus it was kind of fun being the old guy with the revolvers. The only one with them.

 

[Wise_A]

You see, there are over 150,000 so called "certified" NRA instructors. The vast majority of them have never taught a single class. That's not really a problem though. What is a problem is that those that do actually train, don't always follow the curriculum.

Rastoff, the crazy stuff I've heard come out of the mouths of NRA-certified instructors...

--"If you want a home defense weapon for your wife, just get her a double-barreled shotgun. I got one for mine, and told her that if anyone tries to break in, she should just shoot it out the window. After all, a bathroom window is cheaper than having to shoot somebody." I swear I'm not making this up. This wasn't a Biden-ism, this was a guy teaching NRA Basic Pistol.

--"If you're going to carry a Glock or something like that, carry it with an empty chamber. You're more likely to shoot yourself with your Glock than actually need it for defense."

I think the solution isn't computerized classes, but rather, some degree of oversight and reporting.

They expect the live instruction to be taught by volunteers at no cost. I put a lot of time in teaching the course, I will not do it free.

Doug, everybody wants us to do this stuff for free. I get told all the time that I should be volunteering my time to RSO classes--and that's a 10 hour day, once a month, sometimes in the snow, sometimes in 98-degree heat.

I especially like it when they imply we're traitors to the shooting community for not simply "donating" the cost of our own insurance, education, and time spent acquiring out skillset.

My standard line has become this--"If you want instruction to be free, you will get exactly what you pay for." So if you want new shooters to be taught by whatever self-aggrandizing stump-jumping-Jetthro that's willing to drag his butt in, be my guest.

 

[H Richard]

I was a Cert. Instructor since the 80's. I can understand why the NRA wanted to go this way, but they went overboard, and wanted more money for it. As an instructor no way was I going to accept a student to shoot for qualifications that I did not have knowledge of what his/hers gun handling knowledge was. When my Instructor renewal came due last year I let it lapse.

All of the CCW instructors in my area have dropped the NRA instruction and use either other source materiel or self written materiel, (which must be approved by the IL State Police before being used).

I had reviewed the on-line course, and found it good, but only if you had someone there that could answer questions and give demonstrations. If the NRA would let local instructors use the basic course in the classroom, rather than on line only I think it would be a solid course and be consistent from one instructor to another.

Unfortunately I think the damage has been done and the NRA shot themselves in the foot. Hopefully they will come to their senses and let instructors us it in the classroom.

 

[Rastoff]

I think the solution isn't computerized classes, but rather, some degree of oversight and reporting.

When I spoke with one of the directors about the computer training, I specifically asked about why there was no testing for re-certification. He said that was something that was "in the works" and they would address it soon. That was two years ago and I've heard nothing yet.

I'm amazed at the lack of caring from so called NRA Certified instructors. I've asked several what the 5 fundamentals of shooting a pistol are and received deer-in-the-headlights looks as a response. This is something they should be able to quote from memory.

I especially like it when they imply we're traitors to the shooting community for not simply "donating" the cost of our own insurance, education, and time spent acquiring out skillset.

Amen to that! I'm the vice president of a local gun club. All the time people accost me with, "Well why didn't you do...?" I have to remind them that I work a full time job, run my own training business on the side, play in the church band and have a family. But they are single and retired and don't volunteer anywhere so, why aren't they doing whatever it is they want me to do? This is the point where they walk off in a huff.


Just for the record, if you ever feel you're shooting too much or have too much money, become a firearms instructor. The only time you'll get to shoot is to do a demonstration for the class (usually less than 5 rounds per class), it will cost you a LOT out of your pocket and what the few, that actually want training, are willing to pay will just barely cover your expenses. And that's only if I have a class of 4 (I limit my pistol class to 4). If I have 2 or less, I'm just barely breaking even.

 

[Doug627]

Being the instructor is not an easy job. Although you are teaching the materials in the course, you have to observe each student and ensure they are applying the safe gun handling rules. At the start of the class, I tell the students that if they do not demonstrate safe gun handling they will not get a certificate of completion. I discuss personal defense firearms and what would be best for each student. I recommend revolvers to my older students and inexperienced students. We shoot a minimum of two hours and discuss malfunctions when they occur. All the malfunctions so far have been with semi-automatics. As an attorney, I spend a lot of time discussing when you can use deadly force and when you cannot. Teaching is more than just reciting things or telling the students what they need to know. You must engage them and make them part of the class. Not just observers. Making them participants really helps in the learning and retention of the materials. It is very rewarding when you see the students grasping the material and applying it in the class. I just won't do it free. It takes me twelve hours to teach a 10 hour class. One hour setting up and one hour cleaning up. I sometimes drive 1.5 hours to get to the class. That makes for a 15 hour day plus cost of the materials.

 

[Wise_A]

I'm amazed at the lack of caring from so called NRA Certified instructors. I've asked several what the 5 fundamentals of shooting a pistol are and received deer-in-the-headlights looks as a response. This is something they should be able to quote from memory.

Grip, Stance, Trigger Control, Sight Alignment (or Picture), Follow-Through. Sometimes I see Breathing mentioned, sometimes Stance is omitted. It would depend on the discipline being discussed, imo.

I sometimes think that the NRA Certification program does more harm than good. People go looking for these classes like they're ticking off boxes. And they refuse to go to anyone who doesn't have an Instructor certification, even though it's hardly a guarantee of quality. It's a hairy problem all-around, though, because it's not like anarchy would be any better.

Amen to that! I'm the vice president of a local gun club. All the time people accost me with, "Well why didn't you do...?" I have to remind them that I work a full time job, run my own training business on the side, play in the church band and have a family. But they are single and retired and don't volunteer anywhere so, why aren't they doing whatever it is they want me to do? This is the point where they walk off in a huff.

If you don't like it, run against me. Please.

Our county has a mandated fee that must be charged for CCW classes. Our club got special permission to discount it for our members, which was really cool.

Still, I get people telling me that the instructors and RSOs should be donating their time. So the fee would be the same, but the club--which has an annual budget in excess of $100k a year, would just keep the money.

Which I find really friggin' insulting. I show up to volunteer-RSO even on my off-months, and I work hard to be good at it. Aside from working as a director, and all that entails. Probably 80% of the time I spend down there, I'm not shooting. And any time I do go shooting, I usually end up doing some work someplace, even if it's just inspecting the various facilities.

Teaching is more than just reciting things or telling the students what they need to know. You must engage them and make them part of the class. Not just observers.

A lot of instructors fail at this. They have the shooting skills, and some of them actually know shooting well enough to articulate it, but they're just miserable teachers, or too lazy to to use teaching aids like A/V materials.

 

[FlyFish]

I'm an NRA-Certified Pistol Instructor and, like others have mentioned, we stopped teaching the NRA course at my Club when they went to the blended learning program, replacing it with our own course that basically mimics the traditional NRA course.

FWIW, here's a link to another web site that would appear to confirm that NRA will be scrapping the blended learning course:
BREAKING: NRA Dumps "Blended Learning" Pistol Classes - The Truth About Guns

 

[Rastoff]

Grip, Stance, Trigger Control, Sight Alignment (or Picture), Follow-Through.

When not teaching an NRA class, these are what I teach; Stance, Grip, Sight Alignment, Sight Picture, Trigger Control and Follow Through. However, the NRA pistol class teaches; Aiming, Breath Control, Hold Control, Trigger Control and Follow Through.

Aiming includes Sight Alignment and Sight Picture.
Hold Control includes Grip and Arc of Movement.

Stance or Position is taught as a completely separate thing. Even so, we understand that it is fundamentally part of the whole process.

 

[jbull380]

Digital, virtual fake reality verses real hands on training is bleeding into everything. As a police firearms instructor it's a constant battle convincing younger cops that the latest electronic bolt on gadget will not take them from a 70% shooter to a 100% shooter. Imagine when (and it's coming) the computer simulator replaces the range in police training. it's cheaper than buying ammo.