What Makes A Truly Great Training Facility?

[kurtm]

I am trying to gather information from shooters! What makes a great training center? Do we go because instructor X is teaching the class?? Do we go because the facility has the latest greatest target systems and shoot areas? Do we go because of cost? Any and all input is GREATLY appreciated! Please think deeply about what you would like to see. I am trying to see what shooters want. I am trying to find out what a training facility customer wants. ANY input would be greatly appreciated. I would like to hear from L.E , Military, and civilian shooters and looters. Kurt Miller

Edited February 25, 2007 by kurtm

[DrawandDuck]

I chose training classes by WHO is teaching the class. Facilities are good but have never had one teach me anything!! Mine is from a shooters point of view. Naturally I would expect LE/Military to look more at the ranges with Shoot Houses/Urban Combat training areas.

Randal

Edited February 25, 2007 by DrawandDuck

[baa]

civvie shooter here. For me, it's ALL about WHO is teaching the class. I want quality instruction for competiton shooting. As long the the facility has shooting bays with decent distances, I am good to go. Randal has a point about LE/Military and facilites taking being of higher importance.

[uscbigdawg]

Kurt,

As a civilian competition shooter, I look at the instructor as well as what we'll be doing. For instance, if it's a pistol class, quality instruction can be done with a couple of targets and some steel plates. For a rifle class (like the one I took with Cooley) again, it can be done simply wtih one of his barricades, some great steel from MGM and Bennie yellin' in your ear.

For my military stuff, honestly it comes down to the facilities too (the instructor still being what's most important). The facilities are secondary but necessary as they allow to transmit the information, often times to students who are less familiar with visualizing application of a particular drill or skill set into a real application. It's easy to teach target acquistion and transition to a group of IPSC shooters that do this a hundred times in one match. More difficult to a group of military guys that don't think about finding this kind of speed and so having a kill house, simunitions, etc. help to put a practical hand to what's going on. Too, much of the way military personnel learn is through:

1 - An academic/oral overview with demonstration on what to do.

2 - A hands on demonstration, but walked through the process.

3 - A final run through, first at maybe half speed; then at full (or "combat") speed.

Without houses, low light environments, etc. it becomes less likely that the material and intent sticks.

Just my personal opinion and experiences. I've had an easy go at "military" train-up as my competition shooting already steers me into visualizing the task to be completed and what it looks like being done. Then it's just simply a matter of execution.

Rich

[Joe4d]

#1 instructor one who wants to teach instead of show you how good he is. #2 class size (smaller is better) an adequate facility ( for me IDPA or IPSC geared range is fine. Overhead cover adequate water, latrine, medevac plan.

[HSMITH]

I want a top instructor more than anything else, after that I would like to see enough quality props to conduct the training, after that I would put the facility.

[ranger]

I have a different view - I am both a civilian and military as a National Guard Infantry officer. TIME is the issue with me so I look at the closest facility that offers the best instruction in order to minimize travel time and associated costs.

I live in GA so I am headed to Universal Shooting Academy in FL to take a pistol class with Manny. I read the reviews here on BE for the class and felt this is the best opportunity for me at this time.

[zhunter]

It is all aobut the instructor and the info I can learn.

[Matt Cheely]

Definetly the instructor. Now the cost is a factor, but if it's a cheap class without the good instructor, I'm probably not going to spend my money or time on it.

[Scout454]

Instructor first, content second, facility third.

[TraderJack]

My thoughts - The instructor is, without a doubt, the most important part of any training.

Almost all adult students/trainees are there because they want to be and are hungry for the expected information. Many students might not even know that the training facility is standard, sub-standard or above standard. They want the teaching first.

If the delivery style or method is not enjoyable and easy to understand many times the student will tune out, and feel let down - they may even say they didn't get their money's worth! The instructor's demeanor, ease of connecting with the students, and factual expertise is most important. Facilities can be excused as a matter of fashion because almost all training is memory based and practice can be emulated or critiqued on a one-on-one basis if needed. And, most learned techniques will require hours of home practice anyway.

The facility is of secondary importance and is only elevated to higher standing if the subject matter is extremely expeirence based - like scuba diving or race car driving. Most shooting techniques can be tought in the classroom. Grip, shooting stance, presentation , even target transitioning can be classroom exercises. But, of course, it's always nice if you can get off a few rounds down range!

Bottom line - it's always great when the class is held at a first class facility with all the whiz bang amenities, complete with comfortable seating, plenty of restrooms, perfect air conditioning, on-site refreshments/lunch, video presentation equipment, practical application area, and polite genial staff - but... having an easy to understand, well informed and personable instructor - with a quality presentation -is the key to real learning.

Regards

TraderJack

[AlamoShooter]

* A good teacher can teach in a very limited inviroment.

* The Student should know - What- they are going to learn ahead of time.

*A list of teaching / learing goals for the class is a big +

[XRe]

Definitely the instructor.... Cost is a factor, too, and timing.... I don't want to take instruction at a point in my competition year when I can't integrate what I've learned before I try to start using it in matches...

That said, realize that the military market is going to need a facility that also has a secure weapons locker, etc, so if you want to target that market, plan accordingly. This might apply to LE stuff, too, don't know for sure...

[Chuck Anderson]

Instructors will always come first. The best facility in the world with the best lesson plan will fail if some dipstick is teaching it. By the same token the best instructor will fail if the material taught sucks. My preference would be to get that top notch instruction, with top notch material being taught and in a top notch facility. What does the facility have to do with it? Some folks said that a good instructor can teach just about anywhere. I'm willing to bet that if Kurt took me out to a skeet range and taught me how to load a shotgun, I'd learn and would be better for it.

But, a great facility makes it easier on the students to learn. A facility that has housing on site so you don't have to get a hotel room. Close enough to an airport that you can get a cab instead of paying for a rental car for a whole week. That right there is going to be a cost savings over a lot of schools. How about a classroom that is properly set up with the multimedia tools needed to teach a power point, or videos. Air conditioned classroom? I've spent my time in sweaty quonset huts trying to learn. It's distracting.

My priorities would be instructor, material and then facility. But I know that all three can be combined into one location.

[P.E. Kelley]

The instructor first, but more importantly is the instructor’s reputation. For the competition minded we want to turn to the guy with the big win list but is he the best instructor? While extensive curriculum vitae are a factor, getting that experience out of the instructors’ head and into the students is the goal. That is where the reputation comes in.

Anyone remember Judy Woolley??? More than just a pretty face and a great lady, she kicked all forms of male ego as a straight up competitor. Her coach was her husband Charlie. I think Charlie was an “A” class shooter but for my money he was a GM instructor! He knew what it took to win and had the gift of teaching.

I have yet to pay for formal shooting instruction (Burkett’s DVD’s excepted) but by reputation am interested in what Manny Bragg and Ted Puente learned at Frank Garcia’s school. It is obviously working!

If you are asking about yourself you gots da credentials in spades and you are an affable fellow. Can you teach? My guess is yes, but only your students know for sure. They in turn will tell us by word of mouth or through accomplishments.

Patrick

[kurtm]

Thanks for all the replys! This is some good stuff! Pat, no I wasn't asking on my behalf, but thank you for all the kind words, just let me know where to send the check (see ya at Mesa?) KURTM

[uscbigdawg]

Pat,

Great point on Charlie. It's a lesson that more folks can learn. Just 'cause you're not a GM, doesn't mean you can't teach. There are more than a few that know what to look for and know how to teach it, but for one reason or another, haven't reached that pinnacle YET.

Kurt,

Between you, Bennie & Taran, I'm going to convince one of you guys to come out to NC and teach us (meaning me) how to load a shotgun without Tec-Loaders.

Rich

[kurtm]

Rich it doesn't take much to convince me to teach. To bad you are away ( and THANK YOU FOR THAT!) I am doing a little class in Oklahoma in March, and when I get the time set up, a class or two in Hungary! Latter in the year I have one schedualed in Cebu, but if I have the time, I can always be coerced into spreading the knowledge!

[kevin c]

I guess I'm lucky. California, and especially the SF Bay area may be unfriendly to shooters, but at Richmond we are big and active enough to be able to draw a lot of pros out to our facility. That's a big plus.

Still there are some people and some types of training that aren't done here. So at some point, if I want tactical training in a 360 degree shoot house, I'm going to have to travel to get it.

Overall, a big +1 to the idea that the instructor is at the core of what makes the training worthwhile.

[Dan Sierpina]

Kurt,

After reading your question thoroughly. You're talking about a fixed location, rather than travel to different clubs.

Definately, the instructor or complete staff of instructors are the #1 priority. The range facility would vary greatly to the needs of the customer base. Military and Law Enforcement would likely want ranges with lots of close combat capability, not to mention targeting systems that can provide the same number of targets in an area, but different targets for individual shooters.

As a semi-competitive shooter , range props to compliment the particular course registered for would be a necessity.

Hope this helps.

[tightloop]

I look for an instructor who is anxious to help me learn, not one who is anxious to show me why he is a GM...However, I want someone who can show me what that drill looks like when a GM shoots it, if I ask them to do that...

Facilities are always better if you have more, but you need the basics.

Location and cost are the final two things to look for...

Then you must come in with an attitude which will help you gain all that is avaliable from that instructor..and disregard any preconceived notions or ideas.

[Allgoodhits]

1- Content, i.e. Course Description- It must be appropriate

2- Safety

3- Attitude of Student

3- Attitude of Instructor

4- Knowledge of Instructor

5- Instructors ability to teach

6- Climate

7- Facility

[Nick Weidhaas]

+1 on Lawman's comments. I'm LE and a competetive shooter and the quality of the training is the key. Quality comes from a great instr., appropriate and relevant information, combined with a great facility. As an example, I recently took a 2 day class with Manny Bragg at Universal. Class had all the above. Also +1 on the fact that a great shooter does not make a great instructor. I've taken classes with great shooters who can't teach and great instructors that were not GM's.

Nick-

[Mick]

Instructors are definitely important and must be able to demonstrate the concepts they are teaching. They must be well versed in the topic and have a good skill level. I teach at two Police Academys. I also get various instructors to partner with.

The worst partners/instructors I get are the SWAT guys who's egos get in the way and they DON'T know the material or have the skill level. This is NOT true for all the SWAT guys. Some are really good. Some just can't say what they know...

The facility must offer whatever the course design needs. Shooting rifles on a pistol range (15 yards or less) only goes so far. It must provide a safe environment to handle whatever the class may be.

I even got to the point where I choose not to be the lead instructor, I would rather work with students and shoot rather than bark out orders and stand around in front of the class.

Yelling at student with guns and not giving support doesn't work for me.

We have a comprehensive evaluation system that gives the students a chance to evaluate all the instuctors for every class they get. At first I was surprized by the evaluations. But then it made sense. The students can easily tell who is there for THEIR benefit etc...

The better shooter I became, the more relaxed I was with students. I didn't have to worry about course content as it was part of me.

With that said, I know there are good personalities out there that are great teachers and no matter what facility they're at they will be good. On the other hand I know of great facilities with ego driven and poorly trained instructors that I wouldn't spend a dime on!

Choose wisely...