Again, you looking for things that are just not there. Whom advised that you are NOT an instructor? By my very definition, you are, since you teach at the senior center..... But certainly, you can understand that not everyone is, right ??
Myself for one.
I suspect there have been many who have offered advice here and did not ask a fee.
No, it means the parents had a captive audience.If parents instruct, educate or teach their children, are they not qualified because there is no fee?
In my opinion, the fact that some or in your opinion...all instructors are compensated has no bearing on their ability to instruct.
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?
This isn't the end of the world, but I didn't ask if you know people who offer pool advice, here or anywhere else, for free
This isn't the end of the world, but I didn't ask if you know people who offer pool advice, here or anywhere else, for free. I asked if you know anyone who identifies him/herself as a pool instructor... who doesn't charge anything...?
So if you're saying yes, you identify yourself as a pool instructor, great! How would one schedule pool instruction with you, say, a weekly, two-hour lesson for the next six weeks? Again, it's great you'll do that for no charge!
Just a reminder, early in this thread, randyg said Instructor = teaching as an occupation, which didn't seem to bother you, or did it? (http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=3937494&postcount=10)
No, it means the parents had a captive audience.It's extraordinary that Stan Shuffett, for example, plays so well and taught his son to play so well, but to me as a prospective student/customer, I'm more interested in his considerable success selling products/services to satisfied customers. Come to think of it, I gotta give my thanks to Joe Tucker for his completely controversy- and drama-free Aiming by the Numbers system! This happy, repeat customer says thank you, Joe! I jest, of course; I don't believe any aiming drama on the internet to be Stan's fault.
I of course get your point that an instructor's ability to get paid, again and again :wink:, is an imperfect measure of whether that instructor is great or not. I believe, however, it's a heck of a lot better than no measure at all. Beyond that, I am A-OK with ChicagoRJ's description of the instructor universe.
Anyway, it's time for me to resume lurking in the "Ask.." forum. On we go!
Please understand that I am not simply trying to contribute to a debate here. This is a very real answer to your question.
After observing many of the posts in this sub forum I have been hesitant to respond to many of the things said. I truly do not consider myself a pool instructor, as variously defined and or implied by many who post here as "instructors."
The challenges to experience, qualifications and other ego boosting statements made by some people I find offensive and I prefer to refrain from getting in any sort of argument. I really am one of those people who prefer not to become involved in a war of words and have felt for some time that it is better to simply refrain from posting, though I have often read things with which I disagree.
While I have substantially more teaching experience than several of the people who post as "instructors." I have no real need to state my qualifications ,nor anything else for that matter. We all learn about each other over time if we are willing to be open and responsive.
When I was a full time professor all of my students were told to call me "Joe." Respect is earned on an individual basis and should not be based on some assigned degree, title or authoritative pronouncement. I would explain to my students that they became my colleagues when they started act like my colleague.
As you might imagine some of my professorial colleagues were not pleased when their students started calling them by their first name and used my statements as justification. I have said many times in many places that a formal degree (or any other type of certification) is basically a personal accomplishment that allows nothing more than entrance to an activity. It says nothing about the quality of services rendered.
I have (prior to retirement) taken teaching as a serious occupation and spent much time trying to figure out the best ways for students to learn. I learned that teaching is about the student, not the teacher. So I have a long history with a particular set of opinions about the role of teachers as the senior students in the room.
I truly do not consider myself an expert in anything*. I have read a little and I have some opinions that might be worthy of consideration. The only thing that really matters, and the only thing that should matter, to the student is the usefulness of the ideas presented.
With no intent to be falsely humble, or disingenuous, I see my self as a student and in some areas with more experience than others in the room at the time. I can, and do, learn from anyone.
--
* I have testified in criminal court many times as an "expert" witness where my credentials were reviewed by judge and jury and where I was asked to render an opinion. However, even under these circumstances my approach, as recommended by the Amer. Psych. Assoc., has always been educational with emphasis on empirical research that lead to an opinion. So even as an "expert" I took the educational approach and presented the consensus opinion.
I have been fortunate in life and had the opportunity to study with some truly significant people, including a Nobel Laureate.
When I took up teaching as a profession, originally my interests were purely research oriented, I reflected on all of the truly great people I studied with and all of the truly great teachers from whom I leaned. The conclusion I came to is that what all of these people had in common was a sense of real modesty about their accomplishments. Each of them could, and often would, point to the mentors in their life who, in their opinion, were the inspiration for their own minor contributions. If you said to one of these people that they were an expert most would defer and point to the shoulders of other great thinkers whose contributions were more significant and influenced their thinking.
Great teachers think of themselves as students of the subject matter. Their real concerns are with the development of their students and this is why they have so many accomplished students. I remember attending a lecture by one of the world’s truly significant thinkers. He began his lecture with, “Let me tell you a story.” You probably needed advanced course work in chemistry, physics, and neurophysiology to track with his “story,” but that was irrelevant to his presentation. He assumed that we are all students and he was delighted to tell you what he had stumbled upon over the years.
On further reflection it occurred to me that all of these people were right. Originally I took up studies in the sciences when I learned that the scientific is method is designed for people who do not know. “What the hell,” I said to myself, “Any dummy like me can do that.” All you have to do is admit that you don’t know and then try to find some sort of answer. Only much later did I learn that many others have the same attitude, we don’t know anything but it is a lot of fun trying to find answers.
Some of these mentors kept encouraging me to become a teacher because, as they said, I had the right attitude. I already knew I was a dummy! So you see it is not some stubborn refusal, it is a deeply held belief that we are all ignorant and the fun is in the attempt to learn. I took a lesson from these, to my mind, great thinkers, concluded that they were right and have tried to live that life for many years.
Later, when I was studying what makes a good teacher I learned from my students what they did not like about their "bad" teachers. For the most part students do not like the arrogant, I am better than you, or why did you ask such a stupid question attitude. They learn best when they are respected and they learn the most from people who are “just like them.” My teachers and my students agree, we are all ignorant and can only help those behind us get a leg up in their thinking.
Meanwhile i really wonder in what kind of discussion this *theme* turned.
Some allready said it, too.
Finally as a teacher (no matter which sport or what ever) you have to learn daily, you learn from students (if not, imho you re bad teacher).
If you stop to learn, then you ll have a really big problem.
The passion is what it makes it worth for a teacher to give his knowledge to other persons/students. Every single feedback let him grow (or not).
Joe, we are all students. You may not like to think of yourself as a teacher but you occupied the position of teacher for many years. You also teach pool at whatever level you teach it. Just because you stubbornly refuse to refer to yourself as a teacher, it doesn't mean you aren't. For whatever reason, you are refusing the label. Maybe it's the stereotype that bugs you. Maybe you've seen things in your career that angers you about the teaching profession.The 'why' part is personal to you.
Just one observation. The posters who write "I'm not an instructor but" tend to add very long posts! Clearly, they have a heart to teach and should gain certification or keep teaching and learning and otherwise hone their craft...
So maybe I missed out on learning the part where the great leaders don't lead and the great teachers don't teach.
I just have to respond to that one for you. It turns out (there is research to back it up) that the great leaders don't lead. They are not even the most intelligent people. The great leaders are consensus builders. They know how to listen to everyone and then make wise decisions based on their distinct (above average) ability to listen to everyone else and sort out the information.
Interesting isn't it.
In my thinking the greatest teacher of all time is Socrates (as presented by Plato). I know it has been a long time but it is worth reading some of his dialogs where he is the one who does not know and how in his attempts to learn from his students we all learn something. His style has been emulated for centuries.
No, not at all, Rick. I understand volunteering one's services. When I mentioned my being A-OK with ChicagoRJ's post that included instructors who...I think your issue is with the fact that I, as an instructor and others, may actually offer free lessons.
..., I was attempting to include and acknowledge instructors who volunteer their services....donate your time to the Park District, schools, senior center, or other areas to provide instruction about pool, you qualify.
1) You are certainly not one of the posters I was thinking of, Spider! You have those disclaimers on your posts sometimes but you are certainly always brief and pithy as well. I like your posts almost always.
2) I have appeared on TV as an entertainer, collector and emcee for a wide variety of events besides pool, as my page states.
3) About.com is for beginners and up across its many subjects. I do post meatier pool items on there on occasion (I don't want to overdo it and to be frank, for example, most people want to read about stroke and stance and not look at throw and squirt graphs). But that same page states how one of my series for InsidePool was called "The Year of Pro Secrets." In that vein, I take some flack for teaching some controversial things but I don't mind too much.
4) I do a good job with pool lessons and my students improve. I also play for money and the Internet is destroying every road player with its Youtube videos. I play typically where I can have (some) peace and privacy without videos taken and I do not resemble my avatar that much at this time or the photos on my site. People have trouble picking me out in person sometimes. I'd love to play with you some time and hang, by the by, not for money but to shoot the breeze...
5) I'm aware that some find my teachings incorrect including some strong players and teachers. It comes with the territory. I've been involved in non-pool endeavors where if you hang with the big people, you have to have a tough skin. I'd rather not get into debates but am willing to explain further anything on my site or elsewhere that you or anyone wants more information regarding.
6) I'm sorry I wrote "pros use long bridge lengths because they can." I've been trying to keep my posts briefer at AZ. Let's amend that to:
IMO Pros have fabulous technique and stance and aim and can use long bridge lengths, but many amateurs would see their percentage increase by shortening their bridge instead. Why? 1) Because their is more room along a longer bridge length to swerve offline 2) There is more room " " to mis-time any vertical looping action/pendulum in the stroke 3) The average amateur doesn't play off their vision center and would do better getting their feet and head closer to the cue ball/object balls then they do now. 4) Etc.
To me, pros getting by with long bridges is similar to pros using extra stiff shafts in golf, extra stiff strings on a tennis racket, etc. I know a lot of amateurs cannot handle it as well. And as I've written about elsewhere, I catch intermediates often with 14-inch bridges or longer and show them a 7-inch bridge so they can feel the difference they can't feel with an 11-inch bridge. I'm sure you stroke as softly as I do on many shots and bangers with 14-inch bridges are in a world of trouble IMHO.
**I do remember and appreciate your defending me. That was kind of you. I don't mind getting called out if I use an imprecise term or whatever. I like to post here sometimes as I find the give-and-take stimulating as we all do.