I am not anti-technology and have invested in it throughout my career WHEN I considered it useful to me. I think that in certain circumstances technology can be a very useful tool. For some reason it seems that if you are not a big advocate of the latest technology you are automatically labeled anti-technology which is not true for many teachers.
Medical Analogy
The one analogy that pops up over and over is the use of the medical profession which is generally ridiculous. Just because I don’t own a Trackman or attend seminars on bio-kinetics it is often implied or stated that I can’t see the usefulness of an MRI scanner which is absurd and borders on stupid.
An MRI is an extremely useful piece of technology WHEN it is needed. I think a launch monitor is an extremely useful piece of technology WHEN it is needed. I do know that I do not want my local physician that I go to raising his rates so he can own an MRI machine. I simply do not need an MRI scan when I go in for a checkup or a sore throat. Nor do I need to own a very expensive piece of technology to help the vast majority of the students I work with.
If my doctor recommends an MRI for some reason I will be going to a facility that has one and I will be paying a premium for the visit. I think something similar could work for golf instruction.
The Objective
The objective is to be able to help golfers improve as simply and quickly as possible. If this can be done with little or no technology the teacher is very good at what he does. If another chooses to depend heavily on technology and is able to help his students quickly then he is also very good at what he does.
The idea that traditional knowledge and teaching is out dated is sadly misguided. It is like the “old” and “new” ball flight laws. Saying the old ball flight rules are wrong and the new ball flight rules are right is ridiculous. The laws of physics haven’t changed. Actually neither is really accurate because there are too many variables that neither takes into account.
The fact is the old ones are very effective at explaining ball flight to the average golfer. They are simple and easy to understand. The new laws are much less simple.
In my forty years of teaching golf I have seen a lot of revolutionary ideas and technology come and go only to be replaced by something newer and “better.”
With that being said, from my perspective, time and resources are much better spent on studying and understanding how people learn and develop complex motor skills and learning how to communicate the acquired knowledge to the student in the best and most efficient way possible.
Human Nature
I do understand human nature well enough to know that if someone has invested a great deal of time in money in technology or anything else they simply have to justify that to themselves and are unable to consider any other possibility.
Technology has nothing to do with whether someone can teach or not. You can have the latest equipment and a wall full of certifications and without good communications skills it is all meaningless. If you don’t understand the science of how people learn you are working under a handicap. It doesn’t mean that you cannot teach, it simply means it will probably take your students longer to make progress and your failure rate is likely to be higher. I do have to admit that over the years I have met great instructors that instinctively understood how students learn and were born communicators but it is rare.
Conclusion
In conclusion, for me, it simply boils down to what a person finds useful. For me what I find useful is knowledge of the rapidly advancing science of learning and the art of communications. It does not make me superior in any way any more than technology or bio-mechanics makes anyone else superior in any way.
