When false confidence is mistaken for competence, safety is compromised
Many students finish basic firearms training with only a superficial grasp of shooting. Instructors routinely employ passive learning techniques that prioritize a lot of theoretical knowledge delivered via lecture, PowerPoints and training aids. Very little time is devoted to shooting. And no meaningful standards are applied or tested. This “surface learning” often leads to false confidence.
False confidence arises when the brain confuses the process of passively listening and receiving information with the ability to actively call on and apply information. False confidence limits development, doesn’t hold up under pressure and, in fact, compromises safety.
Real confidence is based on competently and consistently performing skills to rigorous, recognized standards and competitive benchmarks. Competence is built primarily through experience — hands on, contextualized active experience based on repetition of properly executed techniques.
Focusing on fear amplifies it
Most training isn’t designed for competence. Instead, it’s focused on comfort and safety to mitigate fear and anxiety. Fear and anxiety that has been largely manufactured to perpetuate the “guns are scary” narrative that began in the 1980s.
Prior to the shift, gun ownership and training were not controversial, but considered essential. Shooting programs were common in American high schools as part of extracurricular activities like rifle clubs and shooting teams. In fact, as late as 1969 in New York City, high school students would bring their rifles on the subway or buses to school and shoot on school premises.
Focusing on fear validates and amplifies it. Taking concrete action dissipates fear and builds confidence. This process is called “habituation” — taking small, active steps to acclimate students to shooting — proving to them that what they fear — the gun — is, in fact, manageable.
Passive vs. active learning
National Training Laboratories conducted research on retaining learning and produced the “Learning Pyramid.” What they found is that classroom lecture learning retention is the lowest of all methods — just 5% of information is retained after one week. Demonstrations of gun handling and shooting fundamentals may contribute to higher retention rates (possibly 20%), but these methods are still considered “passive.”
“Active” techniques, however, ramp up retention significantly. Active methods prioritize the shooting and contextualize training by putting students on the range immediately, boosting retention to as much as 90%. Running repeated drills builds skill and enhances safety by making it relevant and urgent. According to researchers Stephanie Kalchik and Kathleen Oertle, a contextualized approach offers “instructional strategies designed to seamlessly link the learning of foundational skills … by focusing on concrete applications in a real-life context.” Not only does it improve retention, it accelerates learning and enhances safety.
According to research from Gun Policy in America into the effects of firearms safety training, “We identified no qualifying studies that examined the relationship between firearm safety training requirements and police shootings or hunting and recreation. More research would be particularly instructive in the areas of how safety training requirements change firearm owners' safety behavior, firearm owners' ability to use weapons for self-defense, and unintentional injuries.”
Today, training for beginners could be classified as the “Leaky Bucket Method of Learning.” Think of the “bucket” as the student’s brain and the “leak” as how much or how little information or learning is retained from classroom lectures. As much as 90% of the information shared in a class is lost within one week — a massive leak.
Challenging convention
The research shows that passive learning — the central component of traditional introductory pistol training — is ineffective. If it’s ineffective, why isn’t the training being challenged? There are several reasons.
The objective of most training is to check a box. Classes are predominantly focused on safety to meet basic licensing requirements Basic participation is rewarded and the classes satisfy legal obligations.
Training is scripted for consistent, standardized delivery. “One-size-fits-all” training is simplified and efficient, but it fails to engage and provide context-driven practical training. Over-reliance on pre-packaged materials means there is little opportunity to flexibility.
Many instructors lack deep expertise. There is a low barrier to entry to become a firearms instructor. There are few credentialing organizations that use meaningful standards to qualify instructors. Techniques taught are often outdated and sometimes flat out wrong.
Disrupting the status quo
Students learn best when they are hands-on, actually doing the thing, not listening to lectures, watching videos or using training aids. A dynamic learning model is a collaborative approach that employs contextualized application of skills with real-time coaching.
Create a student-centric learning experience. Working 1:1 in private or small group (2-3 people) classes, you can still create and maintain a controlled, safe environment, while moving away from a rigid, “one-size-fits-all” structure. Develop an engaging, dynamic curriculum that’s flexible enough to be easily customized to unique capabilities, challenges and objectives. Instead of lecturing, coach and encourage students to explore while setting expectations for performance. This drives faster, more meaningful results.
Get out of the classroom and get on the range. The “explain, demo, imitate, practice” method engages students in the learning process. Applying new skills immediately on the range helps students to contextualize learnings. Start with a brief explanation of your drill, demo it, allow the student to practice it dry, then run it live. Provide instruction and coaching. Students need quality reps to build muscle memory and skill. At the end of the drill, debrief and talk about what was happening and what was learned.
Prioritize what matters most. Students most often want to know how to operate a pistol safely for defensive utility. Understand how much is realistic and what is most critical to cover in the first class. That will probably mean focusing on shooting efficiently, with accuracy, under pressure. If training outdoors, include engaging multiple targets and movement. Exercises should begin simple and build in complexity, integrating key skills. When students are engaged in the process they are then able to assimilate safety concepts, shooting techniques and gun handling much more naturally and efficiently.
Encourage competitive shooting. Competitive shooting is an excellent training tool. It pressure tests skills and exposes weaknesses, giving students insight into where they need to put in the practice. It forces students out of the static range mindset and out of their comfort zone where complacency can set in. And it provides them with purpose and direction to train defensive skills like target transitions, movement, accuracy and speed.
A dynamic approach to training requires much more from both the instructor and the student. But the payoff is significant. Active learning methods combat fear and anxiety, promote curiosity, problem-solving and self-direction. Students are more likely to seek out information on their own, driving higher levels of engagement and deeper understanding. And with lots of dry and live fire, students get the reps needed to begin to learn and reinforce proper shooting techniques and build good habits.This is where real confidence is built.