...
In my experience simply attending competitions and attending training courses doesn’t necessarily make one skilled. What you’re putting into it outside of that is easily as or more important. Quite simply you also don’t know what you don’t know (unknown unknowns). The more exposure you get to more things the more from which you can draw.
I think this is worth repeating.
One of the primary reasons I originally tested to become a LE firearms instructor was to get the opportunity to receive more training (and not just how to teach other adults), but also to have the opportunity to engage in recurrent practice of whatever I was learning ... under the watchful eyes of the senior instructor staff. Back in those days, most of them had been members of various agency-sponsored Pistol Teams, so they were often stern taskmasters with new and inexperienced fledgling instructors.
In my case, we were transitioning from revolvers to pistols at the same time I was becoming an apprentice instructor, so there was
that to contend with at the same time. Free range use and ammunition, though, so I spent as much time attending training and practicing as possible ... and getting paid for it.
Over the years I noticed that some people who joined the training staff were content to achieve the minimum standards allowed for instructors, and others strove to always improve and push the limits of their abilities, skills and knowledge. It was the same way everywhere else I went for training, and when I helped train people from outside agencies over the years, but that's because human nature is fairly predictable.
Training and learning what's being taught, and then being able to properly practice what's taught ...
and finding the training venues that teach what you need to learn.
Nothing wrong with competition, either. Remember that much of the earlier 'modern' competition venues got their beginning from the involvement of police who wanted to compete. Sure, it's important not to pick up any 'training scars' that might prove to become counter-productive for actual shooting situations outside competition range conditions. But that falls under the general heading of TANSTAAFL.
FWIW, one of the sad things I observed, before my retirement, was while attending a Firearm Instructor's Update class. Only current, experienced firearms instructors working at agencies were allowed to attend, so the hope would be that they'd be somewhat skilled when it came to weapon-handling, shooting and teaching ... right?
At the end of the week there were still some instructors working hard trying to pass the basic 'bullseye' marksmanship test from Day One, and there were some difficulties experienced by various instructors when it came to passing the other various courses-of-fire involved during the week. This was an update class (some legal updates), and a refresher for both shooting and teaching skills, as well as reviewing how different tactics were taught.
I remember at least one guy didn't pass the basic bullseye by the end of the class, so he didn't get a certificate. The part I found really dismaying was that the basic bullseye test was something that would've ordinarily sent someone home on the first day if they couldn't pass it at a
basic instructor class ... and these were
working instructors from agencies, who had already attended basic instructor classes.
I recall being surprised that only a few of us easily passed it the first time, the first day of that Update class. I'd expected that any working instructor would've sailed through that basic test of marksmanship without it even being considered a warmup. Sigh.
Of course, even finding good instructors nowadays may still be a daunting concern for folks who will be investing their hard-earned money, and giving up their personal/family time to attend classes. Then, there's always the concern that some inevitable 'lowest common denominator' student will drag down an entire class.
Same old, same old.
