Archery Jargon

[geoffretired]

Picking up from another thread, it seems that, I and possibly others, say things, using archery jargon, that are not helpful to beginners.
I know it's not a deliberate ploy but it does cause some confusion at times.
Are there any pet hates you have with archery terms?
Mine has to be "get it on your back." That can be so misleading. It is even more irritating when the user can't explain what it means.

[JohnK]

I remember us discussing this before Geoff. "Get it on your back" or "You're drawing with your arms" is a personal bugbear of mine too (to the latter I usually reply "I should bloody well hope so".)

Generally I think any negative comment is bad, and negative comments containing unnecessary jargon are a hundred times worse for beginners.

[provins]

I'm afraid to say I've known some so called teachers of archery who,it seems, are more interested in letting people know how much they know without imparting any real knowledge.
There seems to be a real lack of empathy with the student and their needs.
If you happen to be in the position of training people you have a great responsibility to them and you must teach yourself to recognise their needs and impart that knowledge in a respectful and non condescending manner.
In other words respect your pupils.

[Flying Whale]

I have had the "get it on your back" explained to me, and demonstrated. It may have gone down better because we were in the pub at the time (but the locals looked bemused).

It seems to be a great goal, though hard to achieve. Archery would not be half as much fun if it were easy to get really good!

It must be said that at the few times I have got close to the feeling (as I think it should be) the shot has felt great, the arrow has flown pretty well, and usually it has ended up in the custard, even if my conscious mind has thought you weren't aimied at the gold when you released....

If only I could teach my sub-conscious to do what I want...!

[geoffretired]

Thanks for your responses.
JohnK, I remember now!! Those two expressions go hand in hand, don't you think? Or is that arm in arm?
Provins, you are absolutely right. The difficulty as I see it is that "knowing" what you are talking about is one thing and being able to teach someone else is very different. I may be wrong, but I think the process of teaching others needs more emphasis in the coaching courses. Two way communication is the key. The coach has to find out what the student has understood. The idea that coach says, student does it right or they weren't listening etc simply is not good enough.
Coach says, student puts that into their own words and the coach agrees or corrects any differences. Then there comes the next stage where student tries to do what is being asked. Not until the student has done it right several times, can it be said that the student has learnt from the coach. The student has to learn how. Good coaching speeds up that learning process.
To redress the balance, I would add that there are less than ideal students just as there are less than ideal coaches. I do not mean that some students find it difficult to do what is asked, that will always be so. Some students actively resist the efforts of a coach by various means.
Flying Whale, I'm glad you had the "back" explained and demonstrated.Did you have the bow strung in the pub????

[Flying Whale]

Originally Posted by geoffretired

Flying Whale, I'm glad you had the "back" explained and demonstrated.Did you have the bow strung in the pub????

No bows...but the demonstration did get us some funny looks

[joetapley]

Did you have the bow strung in the pub

Probably not - just drinking Strungbow.

Pathetic...pathetic.........

[geoffretired]

Is that pathetic or paralytic?

[Flying Whale]

Originally Posted by joetapley

Probably not - just drinking Strungbow.

Pathetic...pathetic.........

I had thought of saying that but decided not....

[Rik]

Originally Posted by Flying Whale

No bows...but the demonstration did get us some funny looks

You mean you don't follow the rule about 'assuming the position' in the presence of alcohol...?

Back to the topic.
One thing I've become aware of in the last year or so (sorry, I'm slow...). I've read books, believed I've understood what was said. I've tried to implement it. Later I go back and realise that my understanding was faulty. It's a gap between reading, comprehension and understanding.

When interpreting what someone is saying, what you need to grasp is not what you understand from their words, not what they say (which may be different), not even what they intend to say, but what their understanding is.

It runs like this:
I know something -> I say something -> they hear something -> they interpret it -> they assimilate it.

Now even assuming that the thing 'I know' is correct, there's still 4 stages at which error can creep in to that process. Feedback helps (which you can't get back from books), but you can still end up in a situation in which you both agree, but actually mean different things.

I think it's important to try and get things across in as many different ways as possible. Visual and tactile communication is vital, as it's a more direct method of passing information.

How does that saying go?
You tell me and I forget it.
You show me and I remember it.
I do it and I understand.