The Problem
You are an experienced shooter with multiple instructor certifications. You have been teaching classes successfully for the last several years and recently decided that it was time to seek an advanced concealed-carry certification.
Recently, a colleague made you aware that a national training organization would be conducting a multi-day Advanced Concealed Carry Instructor class. The course description was somewhat minimal, but it did include the boiler plate objectives implying that these subjects would be taught at an advanced level.
At the bottom of the advertisement, it stated that each student would be required to pass a practical and an academic test to receive the course certification. That seemed reasonable for a professionally run course.
On the first morning you were met by two instructors who tersely told you to get your gear on and report to the range to qualify. No introduction, safety/med brief, course objectives or explanations—just get ready and go. These instructors represented a nationally recognized organization, so you perceived this as perhaps a new method of teaching and you were there to learn.
At the end of the qualification, the scores were recorded and only two out of 10 students passed. Those who didn’t qualify were told that they could not pass the course, but could stay and participate or attend a later class when they were better prepared.
You and your friend, who also failed, decided to stay since you already had time and money invested in attending to the class. Your thinking was that the information presented in the class would be valuable, regardless of the qualification failure.
The instructors were openly irritated that you both decided to stay. Little did you know that this was the beginning of the worst training experience of your life.
Both instructors claimed they were prior military special operators, but refused to give any details about their backgrounds. Their uniforms were jeans and an untucked shirt, which covered but didn’t conceal their belt-mounted pistols. Their demonstrations were rudimentary, and they deviated from the lesson plan often, making excuses why they weren’t following the curriculum.
To add insult to injury, you and your classmates were belittled throughout the class, being told that there was no reason for you to be in the class because you would never use it for real like they had. They may have been armed professionals one time, but they were far from being professional or even polite now.
At the end they wanted you to give them a five-star rating on the evaluation sheet before they would issue the certificates of completion.
You want to ensure that this never happens to you or anyone else again.
The Solution
Unfortunately, this happens in the firearms-training community more often than we want to acknowledge. Just because an individual was a military special operator, a law-enforcement SWAT team member or a world-class competitive shooter does not mean that they can teach people outside of their sphere of operation or, teach others at all.
The companies these individuals represent may, on the face of their advertising and marketing programs, lead a po- tential customer to believe one thing, but provide an experience far from what the course description would have a potential customer to believe. This is often due to the actual experience and background of the instructors involved.
In my experience, teaching responsible citizens, law enforcement officers or military personnel requires a different mindset for each segment of the market to be most effective.
When contemplating taking any class, brand recognition and name recognition are important. Regardless, it is wise to ask for references from the providing company and/or its training staff, either directly or indirectly. Verification should be one of the first steps in planning a training trip.
Course objectives of what you will learn and be able to perform will tell you what to expect. They should be relevant and realistic to your goals. If they are lacking in these, the training probably is, too. The equipment list should follow the specific parameters of the course, which will influence the course expectations.
Social media is a powerful resource in both researching the quality of an organization’s course presentations and how their instructors are perceived by students who have taken their classes. A series of negative posts from unhappy customers is a sign that what was advertised wasn’t what was provided. But, look for a series of reviews—positive or negative—since a single unhappy student (or a single overly happy student) may not be a fair sample from which to judge.
You should post a compilation of your experiences as well. Be fair and factual without exaggerating your points, but make your feelings known for others to consider and evaluate.
Also, contact the host organization and the organization these instructors represent with a formal written complaint documenting as many deficiencies and deviations from the curriculum as you can. I would also recommend asking for a comparable class with competent instructors or a refund of your tuition for not delivering what was advertised.
In the future, vetting the providers and their previous performances through prior participants in their programs usually results in a worthwhile training experience.
Read the full article here