MamaK wrote:Charles L. Cotton wrote: The instructors (beside me) that testified on HR47 and SB864 stated that there is no where near 10 hrs of material and that they had to add filler. This change isn't extraordinary, it's a recognition that it doesn't take 10 hrs to teach the statutorily-required material. None of us can teach our 10 hr. classes in 4 to 6 hours, but that's not the goal. The goal is to cover the required material with as little burden on students as possible.
Chas.
I want to be sure that I'm reading this correctly, and that my coffee hasn't worn off. So, most instructors teach the CHL class in 4-6 hours, not 10? How do you teach your class in 4 hours with all the material that has to be covered? (not renewals but the brand spanking new CHL students) or were you talking about just renewals?
Instructors are not illegally shaving 4 to 6 hours off the required 10 hour class for new students. What I am saying is that the statutorily-required material can be covered in 4 hours, including range time. This is not merely my opinion, because we've been doing that since the first renewals began in 1998. If the DPS had created two different tests, i.e. one for new students and one for renewal students, then perhaps this would not have been the case.
Since the class can be taught in less than 4 classroom hours as evidenced by the last 16 years experience, then teaching 10 hour classes requires instructors to unnecessarily increase the length of the course. This is "filler." Some instructors have taken offense at the use of this term, interpreting it as an insult or some indication that the material they added is useless. That is not what I mean by "filler." Also, "filler" is not (or shouldn't be) unrelated extraneous material. I have never had a single student complain about the content of my classes, and most are very complementary. Nevertheless, I too have to increase the length of the class to meet the current 10 hour requirement. I simply expand my discussion of the statutorily-required material to meet the 10 hr. requirement. Some instructors have a show-and-tell with holsters, purses, fanny packs, and other methods of concealed-carry. This is legitimate since it falls under the very broad and vague term "handgun use" which is one of the statutorily-required subjects. I think this is very useful to many students, but it is something that could be removed from the artificially lengthened class without impacting the student's knowledge or public safety. Other instructors put more time into nonviolent dispute resolution with skits and videos.
If SB60 (1995) had required a 40 hr course on the same subject matter, then instructors would have been teaching 40 hr. classes. My current 2 1/2 hour discussion on the use of force would probably be 20 hours long with discussion of significant criminal cases just like we did when I was in law school. I'd probably include shoot-no-shoot videos and discussions as well. All of that would be useful, none of it would be unrelated extraneous material, but it would be "filler." And we would have instructors claiming we can't teach the CHL class in "a mere 10 hours."
During the 16 years we've been teaching this material in 4 hours (including range time), CHLs have maintained an incredible track record as being law-abiding responsible citizens. The proposed change is not being made in a vacuum and it is not reducing the classroom portion of the CHL class by 6 hours as a few have claimed. (The current 10 class includes range time of various durations and hourly breaks. HB47 and SB864 remove range time from the required hours.)
I want to clarify something about class breaks. When I went to CHL Instructor School, Star was running the program. We were told that a "classroom hour is 50 minutes long" and these breaks were mandatory. Interestingly, the reason given for making the breaks mandatory was the fatigue factor for students in a 10 hour class. (I wholeheartedly agree!) This was reiterated in renewal classes. I've had other instructors tell me they were told that breaks are between 10 and 15 minutes long.
After my testimony on HB47 and SB864, I was told that DPS now states that breaks are recommended, but not mandatory.
I'm still curious what you meant by "will the program allow it?" and what what committee and members you meant.
Chas.
