Declaration of "not an instructor" status -- do we have it all backwards?
- Thread starter sfleinen
- Start date
- Status
I am not so sure that Mike and Jerry’s intent is as clear as Fran seems to think. It seems to me that “Ask the instructor” may have been designed something like a classroom or a seminar where people come together to learn.
As I have written elsewhere a “teacher” can be anyone who is a step ahead of the student and willing to share information. Some teachers are better than others.
There is no specified “Instructor” on this sub forum so there is no specific person to ask a question. Instructor can be defined in different ways and some have chosen a specific definition that suits their needs.
In a classroom environment ignorant people are preferred. They state opinions and ask questions that bring a topic to life for the rest of the students. The teacher must be able to deal with these questions and opinions and the teacher too must be willing to learn as needed. When students bring up questions or opinions the good teacher is willing to go the extra mile and find information that addresses the question or opinion.
In teaching seminars (such as this sub-forum) there are multiple teachers and advanced "students" with different perspectives. This is helpful to the student body because they can observe the conflict of ideas held by “teachers” and advanced students with much experience in the areas under discussion.
Basic questions and opinions are easy to address and the opinionated student can often be used to help everyone else learn. I remember one class in which a student said that all 12 year olds should be held accountable as adults for any crime they committed. He knew this was true because his father and his minister both said it was true and that is the way the world runs.
Opinions like this can be worked with in many ways to let the rest of the students learn about critical thinking, bigotry, and the role of authorities in culture. In the end students learn much about adolescent behavior. They would hear many “facts” from the teacher, opinions from other historical sources and of course the original student would be questions to defend his position.
All of this requires an open minded teacher willing to begin where their students are and willing to work with what is often vague and confusing to many students though voiced by only one intrepid soul.
Teaching is more than “Do it my way because I am the certified instructor,” if we want students to learn.
Perhaps that is what Mike and Jerry had in mind – a learning environment where instructors, teachers, and advanced students come together to share their limited knowledge with anyone who has a question.
As I have written elsewhere a “teacher” can be anyone who is a step ahead of the student and willing to share information. Some teachers are better than others.
There is no specified “Instructor” on this sub forum so there is no specific person to ask a question. Instructor can be defined in different ways and some have chosen a specific definition that suits their needs.
In a classroom environment ignorant people are preferred. They state opinions and ask questions that bring a topic to life for the rest of the students. The teacher must be able to deal with these questions and opinions and the teacher too must be willing to learn as needed. When students bring up questions or opinions the good teacher is willing to go the extra mile and find information that addresses the question or opinion.
In teaching seminars (such as this sub-forum) there are multiple teachers and advanced "students" with different perspectives. This is helpful to the student body because they can observe the conflict of ideas held by “teachers” and advanced students with much experience in the areas under discussion.
Basic questions and opinions are easy to address and the opinionated student can often be used to help everyone else learn. I remember one class in which a student said that all 12 year olds should be held accountable as adults for any crime they committed. He knew this was true because his father and his minister both said it was true and that is the way the world runs.
Opinions like this can be worked with in many ways to let the rest of the students learn about critical thinking, bigotry, and the role of authorities in culture. In the end students learn much about adolescent behavior. They would hear many “facts” from the teacher, opinions from other historical sources and of course the original student would be questions to defend his position.
All of this requires an open minded teacher willing to begin where their students are and willing to work with what is often vague and confusing to many students though voiced by only one intrepid soul.
Teaching is more than “Do it my way because I am the certified instructor,” if we want students to learn.
Perhaps that is what Mike and Jerry had in mind – a learning environment where instructors, teachers, and advanced students come together to share their limited knowledge with anyone who has a question.
Last edited:
Why not just get rid of this sub-forum and make it like the Ask the Pros section? Give each instructor their own area and people can just start threads to get input from the instructor they want. You could even have a certified and non-certified area!
Because this forum has little enough (real) traffic as it is. Splitting it into lots of tiny subfora likely would result in no discussion at all.
That was supposed to be sarcasm. Lately the discussion has been minimal anyway as everyone is arguing about who should be able to post their thoughts when trying to help someone. Seems like most threads are derailed early on and never even get back to the original discussion in this section. It would be nice if someone could ask a question and people would just answer it without insulting others for their responses etc.
I don't know why this "certification" stuff keeps coming up in the question of labeling "non-instructors," because that was never the intention. You folks are missing the point.
-Sean
Certification is not the issue. It's not unheard of for an established coach to let his/her certification lapse, as a steady stream of new students arrives via referrals.
If people aren't paying you for pool lessons, you're not an instructor.
If you're one of the knowledgeable, well-intentioned but non-compensated throng, there are plenty of technique-related threads in Main.
Some posts made by instructors in this forum are contrary to what I was taught. Some are consistent with what my coach taught me. Either way, so what? I see no reason why someone who asks a question here can't get a response from someone who actually gets paid to teach pool.
I can't wait until I get a pool table, so I can field questions in "Talk to a Mechanic".
If people aren't paying you for pool lessons, you're not an instructor.
If you're one of the knowledgeable, well-intentioned but non-compensated throng, there are plenty of technique-related threads in Main.
Some posts made by instructors in this forum are contrary to what I was taught. Some are consistent with what my coach taught me. Either way, so what? I see no reason why someone who asks a question here can't get a response from someone who actually gets paid to teach pool.
I can't wait until I get a pool table, so I can field questions in "Talk to a Mechanic".
They certainly are!!! Basically, from what I can read into this is Fran's main point is this is "ask the instructor" forum... not "ask my buddy" who shoots really good forum...so she has a very valid point.
And nobody is requiring certifications or anything else.
So, how about make it simple.
1) If someone pays you for your instruction, you are an instructor, and feel free to post. Does NOT matter how many times, but you should have been paid during 2012.
2) If you are NOT paid, but donate your time to the Park District, schools, senior center, or other areas to provide instruction about pool, you qualify.
3) If you were EVER on a pro tour, considered a pro, or played extensively against pro caliber players, consider yourself with an exemption, and feel free to post.
4) If you wrote a book or DVD about pool "lessons" of some type, you are good to go....
5) And of course, if you retired but did do any of the above at one time, you are still qualifed to post.
So, basically, you need some type of actual hands on expereince, and thus you qualify as an instructor. If you are just a very good player and just like to give your two cents here....well, that does not really cut it for this forum...... if you wanna teach, than teach, but lets not pretend you are an instructor because you give a tip on a pool forum now and again....
I think I covered the bases, and if you fit in the categories, I'm not sure who could complain. And please remember there was NEVER a mention about being certified..... NO CERTIFICATION is required.... just in case anyone missed that....none, zip, zilch, nothing.......
And it's on the honor system.... if you qualify, then post. But if you post, you must sign your name, and email address and/or phone number.... I mean, if you are an instructor you would want folks to contact you, right ??
Last edited:
I can't wait until I get a pool table, so I can field questions in "Talk to a Mechanic".
Now that is some funny stuff there
:thumbup:Good idea! :thumbup:
There is more than one point. Several people seem to think that only some people, should be able to post an answer to a question. Whether one is recognized by some putative authority, paid for their thoughts and opinions, has actually had one or more students, or simply has sufficient experience to voice and opinion seems to be the issue.
Because some people are concerned with the teaching credentials of others they seem to state or at least imply, that those without some set of credentials should not post answers. Apparently these non-instructors should recognize their limitations as evidenced by some sort of credentialing.
I suggest that all opinions should be welcomed. Those who can in fact teach should be able to provide "better" answers than those with less expertise. These better answers come from anyone who is able to present themselves in a persuasive way.
Restricting answers to only those who have some sort of credentials is a cop out that allows the putative instructor to simply use authoritative statements rather than make the effort to show why their idea is the better way.
Unstated is the idea that some people who make a living doing this sort of thing do not want to provide comprehensive answers for free. There is a tendency to not give it all away. Non-instructors are more willing to tell you everything they know and not tease potential students of the game. Paid instructors are thus caught in a bind. Provide too much information and there is no need to seek instruction. It would be better if those who do not make money instructing others would just shut up.
Regardless of some one's credentials if they have a comprehensive answer that suits my needs, I, for one, would like to hear it. Great teachers will have their day and will have students because their answers are "better."
Last edited:
I'm trying to figure out who feels that only credentialed people should answer questions here. I've been following this ever since the thread I started way back on this topic and haven't come across any posts by anyone of that nature. Have I missed something, maybe in another thread?
I don't know any folks who identify themselves as pool instructors who don't charge for pool instruction. Sounds like you do. Who are they?
I think ChicagoRJ did a good job of identifying the people who have something to bring to the table, so to speak.
Focus on the minutia and you can ignore the main points or a rose by any other name.
Perhaps I should ask, What are the boundaries to which you refer?
Respecting boundaries, experience,, prior history. All of these are ways of establishing credentials.
Under credentials I think I listed nearly every way in which some people have attempted to restrict the input from other people. That is the issue.
Last edited:
Myself for one.
I suspect there have been many who have offered advice here and did not ask a fee.
If parents instruct, educate or teach their children, are they not qualified because there is no fee?
My question was posed to see if you would elaborate on the correlation between instructor qualification and compensation. Unfortunately, I have yet to hear a valid argument....except to claim that you know of none. It would be nice to see some substance if indeed you contend that compensated instructors should be the standard.
I'm not sure that's your position...that's why I asked for clarity.
In my opinion, the fact that some or in your opinion...all instructors are compensated has no bearing on their ability to instruct.
Why should we use it as a benchmark to determine qualifications? Or better yet, why should we exclude those who aren't compensated when there are many who bring great value to the table?
Last edited:
All I am doing is summarizing the many ways in which restrictions are placed on some posters.
The term "credentials" is nothing more than a word for bona fides or evidence of one's qualifications or achievements.
Take all of the terms and definitions that have been put forward and they are ways of establishing one's credentials, identity, or qualifications. All of these things can be summarized with one word Credentials.
One could say that a warrior has not established his credentials until he has been to war.
When it is said that one must have X, Y or Z experiences to engage in some activity then X,Y, Z become a way of establishing one's credentials.
The term "credentials" is nothing more than a word for bona fides or evidence of one's qualifications or achievements.
Take all of the terms and definitions that have been put forward and they are ways of establishing one's credentials, identity, or qualifications. All of these things can be summarized with one word Credentials.
One could say that a warrior has not established his credentials until he has been to war.
When it is said that one must have X, Y or Z experiences to engage in some activity then X,Y, Z become a way of establishing one's credentials.
"A credential is an attestation of qualification, competence, or authority issued to an individual by a third party with a relevant or de facto authority or assumed competence to do so." Wikipedia.
When people here are setting the rules for who can or cannot post they are setting themselves up as a credentialing authority. This can be done in any of several way and many have been attempted here through lists of who is or is not an instructor. Another is implying that unless one can establish their qualifications to instruct (credentials of who said they were an instructor) they should not post.
Implying that one should respect the boundaries is another way of stating that there are boundaries (credential to be respected) before one can post.
Comments such as who are you to make these statements. and similar (not identical) statements are yet another way of stating that some sort of credentials or authoritative documentation are needed.
When emphasis is placed on the idea that this is the "Ask the instructor" sub forum. It is at the least implied that the term "Instructor" has some special meaning. Further discussion has been on what this term means through defining the term instructor as based in different forms of experience. This is an attempt by some forum members to establish the experience and other "requirements" that are needed to be "qualified" to post. All of these are ways of setting up credentials.
I attempted to shift the focus from the definition and credentials of the "instructor" to the idea that perhaps this is a learning environment.
When people here are setting the rules for who can or cannot post they are setting themselves up as a credentialing authority. This can be done in any of several way and many have been attempted here through lists of who is or is not an instructor. Another is implying that unless one can establish their qualifications to instruct (credentials of who said they were an instructor) they should not post.
Implying that one should respect the boundaries is another way of stating that there are boundaries (credential to be respected) before one can post.
Comments such as who are you to make these statements. and similar (not identical) statements are yet another way of stating that some sort of credentials or authoritative documentation are needed.
When emphasis is placed on the idea that this is the "Ask the instructor" sub forum. It is at the least implied that the term "Instructor" has some special meaning. Further discussion has been on what this term means through defining the term instructor as based in different forms of experience. This is an attempt by some forum members to establish the experience and other "requirements" that are needed to be "qualified" to post. All of these are ways of setting up credentials.
I attempted to shift the focus from the definition and credentials of the "instructor" to the idea that perhaps this is a learning environment.
Last edited:
- Status