• Life Advice & Visual Arts Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    🌌 Share Your Dreams! 🌌
    📸 15 Years of Photo Contests 📸
  • LAVA Moderator: Shinji Ikari

how to teach?

rangrz

rangrz

Bluelighter
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
11,686
Location
Canada eh, we get milk in bags.
as everyone prolly knows. The nilitary has its seasoned members teqch the new ones.. But despite how I might might come off, I dont like bellowing and insulting people who are, and the the end the day my fellow soldiers. Buts thats all the instructor guides have in em, and
I am not a professional teacher.

basically, how can I teach people to stare down peril and death, and have them still join me for a beer? I do my best by always doing the same work they are, caryying as heavy a pack, ect, to try and show them we're all a team, but thats just my vest attempt, so I pose this a Q to the professional teqchers, not the students on the site.
 
All of my teaching experience has been with people who, on the whole, actively resented learning the subject matter.

However, whenever I find myself thinking of a hint to give you, I imagine it does not apply to the military. For example, I noticed that being able to laugh at your self and your blundering helps the students warm up to you. But I can't for the life of me imagine a military commander make fun of himself.

Another thing is focusing about what the students already seem to know and highlighting the fact that they're progressing, and showing them how it applies to their own lives. Last I checked, the military has very little to offer (explicitly) in terms of personal gain because the individual is really insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

In fact, a lot of things about the military go against the grain of what a civilian teacher may find to work. It is likely the the new soldiers you're training have undergone several of the first steps that are meant to break them down and institutionalize them, so I'd say they're probably not in the best mindset to be in a classroom in the first place.

So if I were you, I'd talk to other military who have been in your place. But I could be wrong, and some civilian teachers may be able to help you more.

FWIW, I was reading a book on Military Geography written by a soldier who obviously cares a lot about the subject. I noticed that he frequently draws on examples from historical battles (especially ones involving famous heroes/masterminds) to demonstrate his point... maybe that's something you could try.
.
 
I'm a student, but I couldn't help but give this bit of advice considering Jamshyd is having trouble relating his civilian teaching experience to your situation:
Why not read up on the speeches and quotes of notable battlefield generals and leaders of the past? I'm talking about everyone from Alexander the Great and Sun Tzu, to the modern guys like Eisenhower or Rommel, and even more recent than that. People who've actually led men into battle.
I'd think those guys might provide some inspiration for your own method of instruction.
 
Why not read up on the speeches and quotes of notable battlefield generals and leaders of the past? I'm talking about everyone from Alexander the Great and Sun Tzu, to the modern guys like Eisenhower or Rommel, and even more recent than that. People who've actually led men into battle.
Click to expand...

At the risk of veering a bit off topic, this is a key gap in sociological theory. As it stands, mid and high-level military professionals receive in-depth schooling about the history of war without an overarching theory of military activity, leading them to continue fighting the same war repeatedly, without much insight into even tactical efficacy, let alone the seeing the wider connection between militarism and nationalism. Michael Mann presents a nascent theory of how military conquest has codeveloped with various structures of rule, culminating in the development of the contemporary international system, but he leaves most of these connections in terms of empirical specifics...

ebola
 
haha...I blurted that out thinking that I was continuing to comment in CEP.
...
Although I've taught a few years at the university level, I think that the 'instructing instruction' that I received was rather poor, and I've had to go about things in a trial-and-error type fashion. In addition to finding self-effacing humor to foster an open and relaxed environment, I've come upon the obvious tactic of leaving a lot of space open for questions, clarifications, and empirical extensions very useful.

ebola
 
So this leaves open the question, what advice do we have that's likely to help Rangrz?
The main goal of military training is to fashion docile bodies that function efficiently (albeit unquestioningly) in a given set of social machinery. This stands at odds with what most educators think of as "efficacy".

ebola
 
^ I was thinking about that and honestly I cannot find anything for rangerz except domination. It seems to me that the only way this could work is if he can break his students down to the point where they show submission by agreeing to learn.
 
rangrz said:
basically, how can I teach people to stare down peril and death, and have them still join me for a beer?
Click to expand...
Be tough but fair, knowing when to stop pushing someone is a gift.
Being buddy buddy with students won't ever fair well, you can't or you teach them or you're being taught it's one or the other.
Would you ever forgive yourself if someone you trained got killed because they didn't push hard enough at a crucial moment because you were pally with them?

It's like the manager at working trying to be your friend or your boss.
The two rarely mix very well.
Doesn't mean they can't respect you or you can't have a beer but that's it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sK9e-bUZq14 that's a good docu with a good instructor and afaik they do have a beer afterwards with the instructors, students should understand the position of the instructor and why he's like that if they can't because they're dumb no point in having a beer with them anyways...
The 55 year old commando , another docu became a bit pussyfied/pc in the years after.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhFa_nzkToc same as this one.
It will show you though how they're not so tough on the one's struggling but trying and help them to reach the finishing line.
In the first one I think they tell someone to f*ck off because he wasn't trying or I saw that in an earlier one around '87.

Don't be a bully, the type who works his own personal problems out on someone else, no one likes those.

Or be stupid like an instructor here who gave a beasting to a recruit by make him run on the warmest day of the year in full kit without water....the recruit died.

fwiw
 
Last edited:
I teach chemistry...

It helps to show them how to do it first, and if someone has a question, answer it to the whole class. Many people may have the similar question, but are afraid to ask. You don't have to point out the asker of the question if you don't want to embarrass them, but you can point them out if its a good/smart question.

Communicate a lot, let them know what you expect from them and what they can expect from you upfront.

Its important to build comraderie, tell them that they should work together and get along, and they are each others resources, and will be each others peers for the rest of their careers.
 
Arnold said:
Being buddy buddy with students won't ever fair well, you can't or you teach them or you're being taught it's one or the other.
Would you ever forgive yourself if someone you trained got killed because they didn't push hard enough at a crucial moment because you were pally with them?

It's like the manager at working trying to be your friend or your boss.
The two rarely mix very well.
Doesn't mean they can't respect you or you can't have a beer but that's it.
Click to expand...

I was gonna say something along these lines. Trying to be friends with your pupils may give them the false impression that if they kiss your ass you'll take it easy on them. IMO the only way to be fair to everyone is to keep an unspoken barrier up between you and them. This doesn't mean you have to be a dick, but you aren't there to make friends, you're there to make soldiers.
 
I agree with Arnold - you cannot be friends with them. Both parties need to keep it impersonal, that is a trait I believe is inherent in the military (I could be wrong). But look at it t his way - your job is not to hug them, your job is to train them so that they know first and foremost they must rely on themselves to survive. Adding to that responsibility, the lives of their squad are on their shoulders. They must work as a team, but their goals/missions/lives depend on each person being able to not only take care of themselves, but take care for those around them. There isn't time or place for friends until those who survive have made it home - then one can raise a drink to those you survived with, and perhaps to those who didn't make it. But for now, the single strongest message you can be sending is that this is about their survival, their reliance on themselves. This isn't a game where you insert another quarter when it goes bad, YOU won't be there to pick them up and tell them to try again, nobody is going to give them a do-over. They need focus - in training, just as they'll need in action. They need how-to knowledge for the scenarios they face, to the point of it becoming instinctive or reflexive; there will not be time to think or wait for orders; their lives are hanging on how well they learn your message, learn your skills, and make these things a natural part of who they are each becoming.

Don't be friends. Drive home the message of self reliance, of survival skills, and add the responsibility of taking care of those around them while achieving their goal/mission. You don't have to be a total dick about it - just ensure they understand the purpose of this training, and that your first and foremost obligation is to get them to not only understand, but to execute these skills - and why (get their attention for the training!).

The best friend they could ever have is the one that helps them make it home alive, even if you never see them again irl.
 
Broken record here - soldiering was the absolute worst, most meaningless job that this man ever held . Nothing taught in basic or A.I.T. by ignoramus cadre was of any value what so ever .
Just spit out first lieutenants were just as thick as bricks and as just clueless as Platoon leaders straight out of AIT .
Military Intelligence (in the USA0 remains forever the oxymoron that it is/ has been said to be . And that, in my experience, applied to battalion, company and on up the brutally ignorant chain .
Granted the OP is from Canada and there might possibly be some disconnect up there from my 45 year old lapse from the shit storm that was the military during the draft years - I do hope so but man oh man armies consume lives .
 
Best I've come up with is showing them the doctrinal way, showing what I found flawed about it, and then input from students on their idea's which also get a chance during the field ex, granted its not retarded/wildly dangerous/out of the resource limits (i.e...no...you're not getting a globe master III for a bayonet lesson)

I keep my authority clear, but try not to be an ogre, I want troops who can operate alone or in ptrls of 2 or 4 without needing constant command input.
 
july has had the highest number of military suicides since the fucking occupation started , who teaches something pertinent to that ?
 
stress councilors and clinical psychologists as well as health services staff and commanders. Commanders try to keep an eye out for psychologic problems to refer the member to help.
 
At the risk of veering a bit off topic, this is a key gap in sociological theory. As it stands, mid and high-level military professionals receive in-depth schooling about the history of war without an overarching theory of military activity, leading them to continue fighting the same war repeatedly, without much insight into even tactical efficacy, let alone the seeing the wider connection between militarism and nationalism. Michael Mann presents a nascent theory of how military conquest has codeveloped with various structures of rule, culminating in the development of the contemporary international system, but he leaves most of these connections in terms of empirical specifics...
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more, though they are beginning to remedy this.
My two cents as a potential recruit would be for you to command my respect. And give me respect when I deserve it - remember that I have volunteered for this and to a certain extent all the (successful) recruits want to be you (they want your green beret, or whatever). But also remember that lots of people who join the military actually crave the discipline anyway - your job is to keep them motivated to learn and to make absolutely sure that they actually do absorb those skills. The nature of conflict is changing such that the average individual soldier will require much more initiative than hitherto. This will obviously be much harder if you have half-assed recruits, but didn't you say you were some kind of SF? Do you only take recruits already in the military or civvies too?
Give them examples of when superficially mundane stuff you're teaching them has saved lives in real operations. Make them feel the weight of history and responsibility for the future on their shoulders. Etc.
Mike
 
The love bandit has it spot on. That would be an ideal instructor in my opinion. It's really nice to be back on bluelight btw. I never really posted here much, but I read and learnt a lot from people here. It's nice to know it's still here.
 
I teach only already qualified members, no one off the street. (the odd time we do have police tactical teams come by but still, not basic training ) and its for a tan beret, commonwealth, ect.

due to our extremly small unit size, I will actually end up seeing them and probably, working with them, should they pass. So that tosses a wrench in the works.

Initiative is key, as a corporal can be expected to make a decision that a Major in the AF would make at times. One must impart technical skill without blunting creativity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top