In the world of court reporting, Mark Kislingbury is known for his 360+ words (for one minute) performance. His academy attracts students worldwide who hope to learn from this exceptional performer. Students invest significant time and resources to master his methods.
However, one statement in his educational materials reveals a fascinating disconnect between elite performance and effective instruction.
The Revealing Quote
Embedded in Mark Kislingbury’s teaching philosophy is this candid admission:
“There is no real way to practice for control.”
This statement is remarkable because it simultaneously acknowledges the importance of control while claiming it cannot be systematically developed through practice.
The Pedagogical Puzzle
Kislingbury’s materials promise students they will “increase their control” while explicitly stating there’s no way to practice developing control.
This creates an interesting contradiction: How does one systematically improve something that allegedly cannot be practiced?
What Learning Science Suggests
Motor skill development research consistently points to a different approach:
Musicians: Develop precision through slow, methodical practice before increasing tempo
Surgeons: Build steady hand control through graduated training exercises
Athletes: Master fundamental movements before adding speed or complexity
Typists: Establish accuracy patterns at comfortable speeds before pursuing velocity
The scientific consensus suggests that accuracy typically precedes velocity in sustainable skill acquisition. Neural pathways develop most effectively through deliberate, controlled practice that gradually increases in complexity and speed.
The Elite Performer Challenge
This situation illustrates a common challenge in education: exceptional performers don’t always understand their own learning process.
Natural talent can sometimes compensate for suboptimal learning approaches. An individual with innate ability may succeed despite using methods that wouldn’t work for typical learners, then unknowingly attribute their success to those approaches.
Kislingbury’s abilities may have developed through factors he’s not fully conscious of, while his explicit teaching philosophy reflects a different understanding of skill development.
The Student Experience
This philosophical approach helps explain some concerning trends in stenographic education:
• Notably high discontinuation rates across programs
• Extended training periods (often 3-5 years) to reach basic competency
• Student reports of physical strain and cognitive overwhelm
• Graduates sometimes feeling unprepared for professional demands
When teaching methods don’t align with how most people learn complex skills, student struggles often follow predictable patterns.
The Teaching vs. Performing Distinction
This case study highlights an important principle: excellence in performance doesn’t automatically translate to excellence in instruction.
Effective teaching requires different skills than effective performance:
• Understanding common learning obstacles
• Breaking complex skills into manageable components
• Recognizing individual learning differences
• Creating systematic skill progressions
These instructional competencies are separate from—and sometimes conflict with—the mindset that produces elite performance.
The Broader Educational Pattern
The stenography situation reflects a wider phenomenon where top performers elevate themselves to teaching roles without considering whether performance excellence translates to instructional effectiveness.
This can create educational environments that serve the instructor’s experience rather than the student’s learning needs.
A More Nuanced Approach
Addressing these challenges requires recognizing that different types of expertise serve different purposes:
• Performance expertise demonstrates what’s possible at the highest levels
• Instructional expertise understands how to guide typical learners through systematic development
• Research expertise identifies which methods produce consistent results across diverse populations
The most effective educational programs often combine insights from all three domains rather than relying solely on performance credentials.
Moving Forward Constructively
Improvement in any field benefits from honest examination of current methods and outcomes:
• Student success rates provide objective measures of instructional effectiveness
• Evidence-based approaches can complement experiential knowledge
• Systematic skill progression often produces more consistent results than advanced technique focus
• Transparency about methods allows for peer review and continuous improvement
The Learning Opportunity
Rather than viewing this as a failure, we can see it as a valuable learning opportunity about the complexity of skill transfer and educational design.
Mark Kislingbury’s achievements deserve recognition. Don't worry. He has made plenty sure of that.
Simultaneously, his candid admission about control practice reveals important insights about the difference between doing something exceptionally well and teaching others to do it effectively.
The Real Question
The fundamental issue isn’t whether control can be practiced—motor learning research suggests it can be developed systematically.
The more interesting question is: How can we better bridge the gap between elite performance and effective instruction to serve students more successfully?