TexasCHLforum.com

bizarrenormality wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:What are you talking about?

Chas.

Classes that run longer than the new limits. Even if Sherrie said "If they go over the allotted time it is ok" instructors shouldn't be surprised if students who waited a month or more to take a shorter class complain if the class runs over the new time limit.

I see, thanks. I suspect she meant that a we can teach more than the allotted time for any module(s), so long as the class doesn't exceed 6 hours total. Earlier I posted that we would have a 6 hr. class if we used the maximum time allotted for every module, but as someone pointed out, I was mistaken. The class would only be 5 hrs long, so we could go over by a total of one hour and still be within the statutory limits.

I agree that refusing to issue a CHL-100 after 6 hrs of class time would probably result in students complaining to DPS.

Chas.

bizarrenormality wrote:If he goes over the time limit, he shouldn't be surprised if some students complain to DPS, especially if they think their time was wasted. The best way to avoid that, if he can't stay under the limit, is make sure the students feel every extra minute was worth it.

What are you talking about?

Chas.

I've done one 4hr class and the next one is coming up on Oct. 5th. After the first one, I created a new PowerPoint presentation from scratch using the DPS outline as a guide. Based upon the times DPS wants for each Module and the greater detail of what DPS wants covered, it's more than just a new PowerPoint presentation, it's an entirely different class. In fact, it bears little resemblance to my previous classes, including 4 hr. renewal classes.

I'll admit that when I first saw the outline and times, I wasn't too happy. It was obvious that I would have to change the character of the class and what students have enjoyed so much over the years was to be a thing of the past. Most of the "real world" discussion on the use of force/deadly force will no longer be part of the class simply because there won't be enough time. This is the part I regret the most. In my opinion, the only subjects that should be statutorily required are 1) use of force/deadly force; and 2) where we can't carry handguns. (Maybe next session? ) I will still offer my Texas Self-Defense & Deadly Force Laws Seminar, perhaps even more often than in prior years. That way I can cover the topic in even greater detail than in my "old" CHL classes.

In spite of my early misgivings, I have to admit that I think my new course is better overall for the majority of new students. It covers more material much of which is especially important for people who have little or no handgun experience. Highly experienced folks will probably find it a bit elementary, but that does not diminish the value to the majority of CHL students who are not active shooters and/or who do not study Texas laws and self-defense tactics.

I have been a firearms instructor in some capacity for over 40 years. I've been a public speaker for over 25 years and have taught countless classes and seminars on various subjects. Performing for and entertaining juries (a key to being successful in trial) for years has given me an appreciation for the value of flexibility and the ability to adapt to your audience. For this reason, I appreciated the tremendous freedom we CHL instructors have enjoyed in prior years. As long as I covered the statutorily-required subjects and met the time requirements, I could do pretty much anything I wanted and the students loved it. The classes were not merely informative, they were also entertaining and we had a great time. That said, most CHL instructors are not old farts with many decades of shooting and teaching experience. The greater subject matter detail now provided by DPS will aid many instructors, especially newer ones, in creating lesson plans and PowerPoint presentations, while also providing for more overall consistency in CHL training throughout the State. Like most folks, especially those of us with more miles on the odometer, I don't like change, but I have to admit that DPS has done a very good job with the "new" CHL course. I will still make my classes entertaining, thus keeping my students' interest and attention, but it will be in a more structured environment.

Chas.

Sangiovese wrote:I'm in the new instructor class this week and during a break I asked if the module times are mandatory or recommended. The answer I got wasn't definitive but was very much in line with what Mr. Cotton posted when he said

While these times are prefaced with "Approximately," we need to be reasonable in interpreting this flexibility. I think it means that if you teach a module at 40 minutes instead of 45, or 65 minutes instead of 1 hr., then you're okay. I don't think it means you can teach a 30 minute or 90 minute module and comply with the times prescribed by DPS.

Sherrie said that they don't intend for you to use a stopwatch to time the modules and that you would be ok going a little over or under... but that she didn't think that you could effectively teach the material if you were significantly under the timeframes listed in the outline.

While I'm confident that I have accurately stated the substance of what she said, please note that I'm paraphrasing my understanding of her response to my question, so if you talk to her about this in the future (like at your renewal class) please don't hold her to the specific language I used here.

Not sure if that is helpful or not... but I thought I would share since I said I would ask about it.

Thanks for the update; this is good information.

Chas.

sjfcontrol wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote: As I understand the new course, we also must teach each module within the time allotted, i.e. somewhere between the minimum and maximum times. For example, here is the time allotment for Module 1 "Time Allotted: Approximately 1 hour 45 minutes to 2 hours." If we use the minimum times for for all 4 modules, we have a 4 hr. class. If we use the maximum times for each, then we have a 6 hr. class. If we use something in between the min/max times, when we have a class that falls between 4 hrs. and 6 hrs.

Chas.

Actually, the sum of all 4 maximum times is 5 hours, not 6.

Mod 1 Max -- 2 hours
Mod 2 Max -- 1 hour
Mod 3 Max -- 1 hour
Mod 4 Max -- 1 hour
Total... -- 5 hours

Oops, you're right. So people teaching 6 hour classes have an extra hour they can use as they wish.

Chas.

Sangiovese wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Folks, the new Course Outline is pretty clear. The material in each module must be taught, but the instructor has the flexibility to decide how to teach it. "All topics in each module must be covered; however, the presentation style may be developed by the individual instructor. " Pg. 1.

As I understand the new course, we also must teach each module within the time allotted, i.e. somewhere between the minimum and maximum times. For example, here is the time allotment for Module 1 "Time Allotted: Approximately 1 hour 45 minutes to 2 hours." If we use the minimum times for for all 4 modules, we have a 4 hr. class. If we use the maximum times for each, then we have a 6 hr. class. If we use something in between the min/max times, when we have a class that falls between 4 hrs. and 6 hrs.

While these times are prefaced with "Approximately," we need to be reasonable in interpreting this flexibility. I think it means that if you teach a module at 40 minutes instead of 45, or 65 minutes instead of 1 hr., then you're okay. I don't think it means you can teach a 30 minute or 90 minute module and comply with the times prescribed by DPS.

I hope I'm wrong and there's more flexibility, but that's not the impression I have at this point We'll all know more when we have our renewal classes. As for audits, no audits have been done using the new law and DPS mandate and times were never stressed by DPS under the prior law.

Chas.

I'm headed to new instructor training on the 16th. I will try to get a clear answer about whether the time allotments are mandatory or if they are suggestions.

Please do, that would be very helpful!

Thanks,
Chas.

Folks, the new Course Outline is pretty clear. The material in each module must be taught, but the instructor has the flexibility to decide how to teach it. "All topics in each module must be covered; however, the presentation style may be developed by the individual instructor. " Pg. 1.

As I understand the new course, we also must teach each module within the time allotted, i.e. somewhere between the minimum and maximum times. For example, here is the time allotment for Module 1 "Time Allotted: Approximately 1 hour 45 minutes to 2 hours." If we use the minimum times for for all 4 modules, we have a 4 hr. class. If we use the maximum times for each, then we have a 6 hr. class. If we use something in between the min/max times, when we have a class that falls between 4 hrs. and 6 hrs.

While these times are prefaced with "Approximately," we need to be reasonable in interpreting this flexibility. I think it means that if you teach a module at 40 minutes instead of 45, or 65 minutes instead of 1 hr., then you're okay. I don't think it means you can teach a 30 minute or 90 minute module and comply with the times prescribed by DPS.

I hope I'm wrong and there's more flexibility, but that's not the impression I have at this point We'll all know more when we have our renewal classes. As for audits, no audits have been done using the new law and DPS mandate and times were never stressed by DPS under the prior law.

Chas.

I just taught my first 4 hour class today and it certainly was different. I had planned to do my full presentation on the use of force/deadly force and cut the time on other subjects. However, the new DPS course outline just released sets out max/min. times for each of the 4 food groups. It also is pretty detailed as to what they want covered and that combined with the max/min times made it a totally different course than I had planned to give. I had amended my PowerPoint presentation to accommodate the 4 classroom hours, but now I'm going to start from scratch.

Next session we need to repeal the requirement for non-violent dispute resolution so we can spend more time on use of force.

Chas.