pistol fundamentals prepared by: russell sampson
TRANSCRIPT
PISTOL FUNDAMENTALS
Prepared by: Russell Sampson
Needs Assessment1. What is the learning opportunity?
Small arms training is an important part of becoming a Military Police Officer
2. What is currently available?
Fleet sailors & high school personnel with little or no training that need training.
3. What should be available?
Small arms training classes during boot training. Intense training to help with preparation of shooting fundamentals and weapon safety.
4. Explain the gap analysis between what is available and what should be available.
Currently the military does not have enough military police personnel. Small arms training will be provided for all military new enlistment recruits planning to become military police officers.
5. What is your recommended solution for filling the gap?
Military should increase incentive pay for new recruits joining the military. This will help recruit stations recruit more military police personnel.
Instructional Goal and PBO’S Lessons provides shooting fundamentals for firing small arms.
Shooters (A) will recognize (B) procedures for safe handling and employment of small arm (C) in accordance with Weapons Handling Standards Procedures and Guidelines (D)
Shooters (A) will demonstrate (B) procedures for presenting and firing small arms (C) in accordance with the Small Arms Training and Qualification Manual (D)
Shooters (A) will qualify (B) on on a service pistol (C) in accordance with the Small Arms Training and Qualification Manual(D)
Summative Assessment and Learning Outcomes
WRITTEN TEST
Shooters must pass a written exam which consists of a 25 questions
Minimum passing score is 80%
Test will show shooters understanding of shooting fundamentals and safety procedures
Test shows basic knowledge prior to the performance test
Summative Assessment and Learning Outcomes
PERFORMANCE TEST
Shooters must qualify on a service pistol in accordance with the Small Arms Training and Qualification Manual
Shooters must achieve a minimum passing score of 180 points with a possible high score of 240 points on the small arms targets
Semiannual performance tests will be conducted to maintain a shooter’s skill level in small arms training
Learner Characteristics A basic small arms training class which consist of both male and female
instructors will be working hands-on in a classroom environment
Shooters require semiannual qualification to stay proficient with shooting fundamentals
Most students in this school are behavioral learners
Based on these characteristics, this small arms class will be a basic class
The training will be presented in a manor that behavioral learners will be engaged in a safe learning environment
Learning Context Small arms training will be conducted in a safe training environment
Qualification procedures for live fire will be conducted on a military base at a small arms firing range
The class will be equipped with an instructor guide, training weapons, a computer, and projector for the primary instructor to facilitate training
Dry-fire training will be conducted in a safe training environment
Safe weapons handling will get the shooter to become involved with hands-on small arms training
Small arms simulators will allow the shooter to become comfortable with
the weapon before live-fire is conducted
Live-fire training will be conducted on a small arms firing range
Delivery ModalityCourse will be taught in an integrated
learning environment
Course will be instructor led doing lectures and using computers
Additional hands on training will be involved
Instructional StrategiesThe information taught will be specific to shooting
fundamentals
Lecture will be taught with the use of computers
Shooters will learn safe weapon handling procedures through dry-fire practice
Shooters will be tested on weapons comprehension before conducting live-fire evolutions
Shooters will be coached on safe firing procedures while qualifying on a small arms range
Plan for Implementation The implementation of the course will take two months
The delivery of the class will take one week (40 hours), eight hour days
Class will start on November 5, 2014 on the military gun range
Mr. Sampson will be the primary instructor for the course
Student guides will be provided to students for class lecture and study
All instructors will have a meeting on October 29, 2014 to discuss the implementation of the course
All instructors will be notified by email and a phone call for a reminder
Instructional Resources In the training classroom there must be an unloaded
weapon available for each student for hands on training
One weapon for the primary instructor
Students will need to bring writing supplies for notes
Ammunition for weapons qualification will be provided
Overhead projector
Dry-erase board and Dry–erase markers
Training aids
Instructor and student guide
Formative Assessment1. Students will be trained then tested on weapons
disassembly and reassembly
2. Students will demonstrate proper weapon handling procedures and manipulation skills in a safe training environment setting
3. Students will have a 25 question multiple choice test scoring a minimum grade of 80%
4. Students will qualify on the pistol with minimum score of 180 points
Evaluation Strategies• To ensure our instructional plan is effective surveys will be
conducted after each class.
• The students and instructor will have separate surveys to fill out.
• Student surveys will be about the course materials, classroom environment, instructor and health welfare of students.
• Each student must pass a post test with a minimum score of 80%
Evaluation Strategies• If 80% is not achieved the student or students will go thru
remedial training and retests will be done.
• Students who do not score 80% on the retest will be sent back to the next class.
• Based on the all test scores, surveys and instructors assessment, we will take a look at the course and make improvements if needed.
Small Arms Fundamentals Survey1. Please indicate your gender
Male
Female
2. Did you feel Comfortable handling weapons?
Yes
No
3. Instructors made this weapon course feel safe
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
4. Were the course materials easy to understand
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
5. How would you rate the over all satisfaction of this course?
Satisfied
Neutral
Somewhat dissatisfied
Very dissatisfied
Outcome Review To ensure the design goals, performance-based objectives (PBO), and learning outcome were achieved, multiple tools will be used.
A comprehensive test will be given at the end of the course to see how well the information was retained and if the PBO were met.
A rating scale will be used at the end of the course for students to fill out and giving a space to allow students to leave comments or suggestions about the course.
Outcome ReviewRate Student
1 Excellent 2 Good 3 Needs Improvement 4 Did not completeKept weapon on safe until ready to fire
1 2 3 4
Identified weapon nomenclature
1 2 3 4
Disassembled and Reassemble the weapon properly
1 2 3 4
Cleaned the weapon properly
1 2 3 4
Function checked the weapon to make sure it functioned properly
1 2 3 4
Handled weapons safely
1 2 3 4
Maintained muzzle awareness
1 2 3 4
Loaded & Unloaded the weapon properly
1 2 3 4
Holstered the weapon safely
1 2 3 4
Drew the weapon from the holster safely
1 2 3 4
Total Score:
Instructor comments
Recommendations When implementing the course for the first time some problems
or issues may come to light.
During the initial class the course designer and the Commanding Officer will sit through the class.
This will allow a complete evaluation of the flow of the course and materials being use.
After observing the class, reviewing the students critics and reviewing the test results any future changes can be implemented if needed.
We will continual testing analysis student critics, and instructor feed back will allow the course to be modified and updated over time.
References Brown , A., & Green, T.D. (2006). The essential of instructional design: Connecting fundamental
principles with process and practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Stewart, B. L., Waight, C. L., Norwood, M. M., & Ezell, S.D. (2004 Summer). Formative and summative evaluation of online courses. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 5(2)101
Kelting-Gibson , L. M. (2005, September). Comparison of curriculum development practices Education Research Quarterly, 29(1) 26
Elsenheimer, J. (2006). Got tools? The blended learning analysis and expediter. Performance Improvement, 45(8),26.
OPNAVINST 3591.1F 12 Aug 2009
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeGD7r6s-zU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhsMl-wb64o
USS COLE