 Poster: A snowHead
|
| slikedges wrote: |
| Spyderman wrote: |
slikedges,
| Quote: |
Who'd want to bother with CSIA I then? Worthless IMV (except as a stepping stone to CSIA II)
|
You can no longer gain direct access to CSIA II, by holding the Scottish ASSI qualification, as you could up until 3 years ago, so if you want to go the CSIA route, you must do grade I first.
|
I know. My comment was in direct relation to fatbob's comment that CSIA I was more suitable than BASI III as a trophy. It's not. It's no trophy at all if everyone knows it's easy to get even if you can't ski much. I'd say CSIA II was a decent trophy, and even useful esp if with test technique. |
Who is everyone? People with an interest in skiing instruction? - yes. The girl/bloke the badge holder is chatting up down the bar? The graduate recruiter checking CV points for a future career?- probably not. Its still a trophy to some people, perhaps the very people who have denigrated elsewhere on this thread for not being dedicated enough to really put the effort in as they know they are highly unlikely to be teaching in the future.
CSIA is also functional in that it recognises that you don't have to be Herman Maier to teach "pizza, french fries" to a bunch of 5 year olds and that, like it or not, ski instruction is heavily skewed towards the never-ever or early beginner end of the spectrum so for Canada it works.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Spyderman,
| Quote: |
| Most Gap Programs run in Europe qualify through the BASI system so it makes sense to choose the official BASI Gap course - the course closest to the heart of the system. |
| Quote: |
| Courses in Val d'Isere, Courchevel and Morzine are run by BASI's European Business partners. |
You can (metaphorically) drive a bus through these statements. It's nowt but marketing speak - and pretty successful at that since you've inferred precisely what you were meant to infer. "Official" here doesn't actually mean it's superior or that other providers are "rogues", it simply means "run by BASI" - and even then some are run by their "business partners". If the qualifications and assessments are given by BASI examiners, then does it matter whether it's BASI itself or an external provider giving the training? It's no different from schools (external providers) offering A Levels that are marked by the exam board
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
skimottaret,
| Quote: |
sounds as though from SPydermans post the same holds true for Warren Smith so what is the distinction between official and unofficial?
|
New Gen, ICE & BASS are Ski Schools, regulated in France, part of the EU, run by BASI ISTD Trainers and are BASI European partners, which means they have very close ties and project the BASI system across Europe.
Warren Smith Academy is not a ski school, is in Switzerland outside the EU, Warren Smith to my knowledge has no BASI qualifications whatsoever, although some of his trainers do, and work mostly to their own coaching formula. Therefore not BASI approved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
rungsp, didnt sound as though the 10 fails in question resat 5 (technical only) or 10 days (full course) more along the lines of Spyderman, post
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
skimottaret, Who would pay for their extra 10 days? 10 people at £650 per week for 2 weeks. I think it was let's have a look at the video or let's have a look at their skiing for a day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Spyderman, The ski schools may be run by BASI ISTD's but im not sure the gap year courses of Newgen, ice etc are coached during the whole 9 or 10 weeks by as ISTD BASI trainer. it sounds as though trainers are only involved during 3 of the weeks.
Not sure it is a big deal if Warren himself isnt BASI qualified as long as the trainers he employs to coach and eaxmine the courses are. His skiing speaks for itself in my view.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
skimottaret, Who would pay for their extra 10 days? 10 people at £650 per week for 2 weeks. I think it was let's have a look at the video or let's have a look at their skiing for a day.
|
i agree that musta been the case, but why did one BASI trainer fail ALL 10 of 10 then another comes in and passes x of 10. (not sure how many got through the second go)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
fatbob, the context of the discussion was external validation for both "bragging rights" (where you'd probably be right that the intended targets wouldn't know any better, but the braggart would know is a potentially embarassing false trophy) and "measurement of ability" (for which it is too low a standard to be really worth measuring against), to use your words.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
slikedges,
Fair point and perhaps I'm framing it in the context of my own experience. I hold an (expired) CASI 1 (snowboard) card. I did the course primarily becuse it was a the beginning of the season with not much snow around and it was a cheap way of getting a very good standard of technical coaching over a couple of days. Our technical riding included things such as riding a fair-sized mogul field switch in a fluid style (though this wasn't specifically assessed) which I view as a reasonably high technical level and therefore something to measure ability by.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
boredsurfin, might have been covered but not well explained why one trainer thought 0 should pass (and i assume it was the trainer who coached the group on their last two weeks of the course) and then a second trainer "resits" the group and 8 of 10 pass. smells to me. and it isnt clear what the "re-sit" was. a full 5 day re sit course or something else? If it was a full 5 days i could see that the group woudl have worked on their deficiencies and coudl make progress
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
Some have suggested in this thread that I have some sort of personal grudge against the Warren Smith Academy. That believe me is far from the truth. I have known Warren since 1991, have been coached by him in 1992 & 1993 along with his business partner at the time Pete Silver-Gillespie. Warren has put together a very talented group of commited coaches and together provide some fantastic courses. I know personally many people who have repeatedly attended his courses and have been very happy with the outcomes.
My original post although based on the incorrect information of 0 out of 28, which subsequently turned out to be 0 out of 10, before reassessment, still I beleive raises some issues, with my statement of 'What went wrong?' still being unanswered.
I still have a problem with elements of the Gap course concept and in general the reasons for people taking the course.
I also have a problem with a course provider, no matter how well respected, is offering a BASI Gap course, when they are not endorsed by BASI as a course provider.
I can see the issues raised by others of a suggestion of some sort of political problems between BASI and WSA. If a BASI European partner ski school, who provided BASI Gap courses, saw that BASI had issued acreditation to a course provider in Switzerland, although employing 3 BASI qualified instructors is run by a person although highly skilled and respected, is not qualified under the BASI system, I think Warren Smith is qualified under the Austrian system, but not to full cert level. (I'm sure if I'm wrong I'll be put right on that)
I think the existing partners would be extremely annoyed with BASI, as they have invested considerable time, money & risk in setting up their businesses in France,as British ski schools, complying with all of the laws that go with operating in France.
A WSA gap program of 9 weeks intensive training would be great for people who want to seriously improve their skiing, but leave the BASI qualification courses to BASI or their Partners.
Last edited by And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports. on Tue 24-04-07 21:52; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| fatbob wrote: |
...a cheap way of getting a very good standard of technical coaching over a couple of days... |
One of the main reasons I'd consider doing a qualification.
| fatbob wrote: |
Our technical riding included things such as riding a fair-sized mogul field switch in a fluid style (though this wasn't specifically assessed) which I view as a reasonably high technical level and therefore something to measure ability by. |
Certainly doesn't sound like an easy touch to me! Do you think they set a higher standard for snowboard than for ski?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
No but I think everybody taking the course was probably technically already comfortably over the bar so we worked on things that would expose our problems to better enable observation and analysis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
Shame, sounds like BASI is heading back to the bad old days with the "p" word politics raising its ugly head again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Spyderman wrote: |
| I also have a problem with a course provider, no matter how well respected, is offering a BASI Gap course, when they are not endorsed by BASI as a course provider. |
I could be completely wrong here but are you sure you aren't reading a quality issue into a commercial issue? If BASI itself offers courses, then it earns revenue from them and it's not in its interests to promote other courses. Now that may be a complete misconception on my part, and I cedrtainly don't want to be casting nasturtiums and if I am I apologise unreservedly, but I'm a cynical old thing these days and most bodies have to exist in a commercial world and therefore cannot afford ot ignore commercial aspects. Does being a BASI-approved provider add kudos and make marketing easier? I imagine so. Does it affect the quality of the qualification awarded at the end? If all instructor courses (teh 10-day jobby) are assessed by independent BASI staff, why should it matter who the provider is? If the provider and/or the candidates (neither is the sole factor) isn't up to the job then there aren't going to be many passes.
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Tue 24-04-07 22:31; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Spyderman wrote: |
| I still have a problem with elements of the Gap course concept and in general the reasons for people taking the course. |
That's really up to them.
| Quote: |
| I also have a problem with a course provider, no matter how well respected, is offering a BASI Gap course, when they are not endorsed by BASI as a course provider. |
Either the qualification is based on an objective assessment or it isn't. "Endorsement" shouldn't come into it. Do schools need an Edexcel endorsement to offer GCSEs?
| Quote: |
| I can see the issues raised by others of a suggestion of some sort of political problems between BASI and WSA. If a BASI European partner ski school, who provided BASI Gap courses, saw that BASI had issued acreditation to a course provider in Switzerland, although employing 3 BASI qualified instructors is run by a person although highly skilled and respected, is not qualified under the BASI system, I think Warren Smith is qualified under the Austrian system, but not to full cert level. (I'm sure if I'm wrong I'll be put right on that) |
Again, why would it matter, if the test at the end is objective?
| Quote: |
| I think the existing partners would be extremely annoyed with BASI, as they have invested considerable time, money & risk in setting up their businesses in France,as British ski schools, complying with all of the laws that go with operating in France. |
That's their look out.
| Quote: |
| A WSA gap program of 9 weeks intensive training would be great for people who want to seriously improve their skiing, but leave the BASI qualification courses to BASI or their Partners. |
It seems a lot of people got through and I imagine they're very happy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Spyderman, why do you think it should matter to BASI or anyone else (other than sour grapes, of course) whether Warren is BASI qualified or whether he's savvy enough to run his Academy in Switzerland rather than France or any other snowy place as long he is using BASI Trainers to run his BASI courses? There's no reason why I should even know how to ski in order to set up, run or buy a ski school doing a gap course or otherwise as long as I use qualified instructors. If BASI had a problem with the WSSA Gap Courses surely they would simply stop endorsing the courses by not awarding their qualification! It's really up to BASI. Anyway, I'm sure no BASI "partner" is overly enthusiastic about having competition in this lucrative trade from anyone, "partner" or not.
Also I still don't understand why you seem to have a problem with people who want to do the BASI III for the heck of it 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| slikedges wrote: |
Also I still don't understand why you seem to have a problem with people who want to do the BASI III for the heck of it |
I think the crux of this particular issue is that these people may not have the commitment to the teaching aspects of the course (due to not actually looking to teach in the future) therefore making the teaching side of the course more difficult for those who do intend to use the qualification as a career move. Thats just the way I see this part of the discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
stocky, I'm prepared to be corrected but wonder if that isn't the main reason...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
slikedges, I think that it would have a detrimental effect on the more serious members of the course to have people in the group who, although they may be very good skiers technically, may not be interested in the teaching/coursework side of things. This would, in my opinion definately cause problems and potentially reduce the chances of passing for some of the borderline cases due to lack of support from other participants. I know for a fact that if I was paying £6k+ for a course and there were people on it who were doing the skiing side of things and tossing the teaching/learning to teach/helping others to teach side of things off then I would be majorly pi$$ed off.
This I think is the main problem with the whole Gap year option of qualification, BASI endorsed or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Having done an academic course amongst whom were a small group who were along for 'the ride' rather than needing the qualification for their job/future I certainly agree with Stocky's comments above 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
stocky, boredsurfin, I take your point but aren't there aspects/areas to any qualification that will be of less interest to individuals but a simply mandatory part of the course? You just get on and do it
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
eng_ch, In my case the course needed input from all delegates and it was clear from the begining that a few individuals just were not going to be bothered and thus made it the more difficult for the rest of us and the trainer's 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eng_ch, fair point if the course is based upon individual effort but on these courses you have to also rely on the other course participants to aid you in passing the course. If these people aren't that bothered about that aspect then it could affect your chances of passing. That would cause an issue with me if I was on a course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
boredsurfin, stocky, oh well, in which case I agree - if you're going to do something at all, do it properly. But that is slightly different from objecting to people doing a qualification for the sake of it
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| Spyderman wrote: |
I think the existing partners would be extremely annoyed with BASI, as they have invested considerable time, money & risk in setting up their businesses in France,as British ski schools, complying with all of the laws that go with operating in France.
|
Sorry if I've misunderstood, but isn't BASI British? If so, then what the heck has France got to do with it? Surely BASI can run their courses in any country (in fact, I'm sure they use Zermatt, which last time I checked was in Switzerland)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
another major crux of argument is WSA taking on students who arent yet ready for the course and/or arent bothered about teaching and then putting them into an "improvers" section.
then surprise surpris the poor BASI trainer that gets lumbered with this group fails all 10 of 10 only i am sure to get an earful and then BASI is approached to do a re-sit.
It DOES show poorly on the BASI system when a trainee (typically wearing a uniform saying BASI trainee instructor) is out on the mountain in full public view doing a course who cant ski and is bored out of their skulls when doing their 70 hours of shadowing.
I saw this first hand with a GAP class in Meribel this year and witnessed more than a few ESF instructors shaking their heads when watching this group perform central theme exercises.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Elizabeth B, BASI courses & BASI Gap courses can be run in any country, Zermatt at the moment in fact. I mentioned the BASI European partners being based in France to highlight their commitment, as operating in France is much more difficult than in Switzerland.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Quote: |
It DOES show poorly on the BASI system when a trainee (typically wearing a uniform saying BASI trainee instructor) is out on the mountain in full public view doing a course who cant ski and is bored out of their skulls when doing their 70 hours of shadowing.
|
If they can't ski then they should not have been given their certificate of competence to become a trainee instructor by the BASI trainer. Similarly if they were bored out of their skulls, and so genuinely uninspired then I'm sure they wouldn't do it. I'm sure that anyone who goes on any GAP course wants to end up with the qualification, my point in any earlier post is that it is not going to be the end of the world for some people if they don't end up getting it, as the experience of the doing 9 weeks structured skiing on a GAP course is enough.
As to this theory that if everyone doesn't pull together it makes it so much harder for people to pass???? Possibly if we were talking about SAS selection but not that relevant for a basic ski instructors qualification.
Just for information as well, there were other people on the second exam who were not on the WSSA GAP course, who failed the first but passed the second, so I wouldn't get too excited about the conspiracy theories
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Spyderman,
| Quote: |
as operating in France is much more difficult than in Switzerland.
|
You think?
Tell that one of the directors of Powder Extreme who was escorted off the mountain this season by the police and deported due to visa issues. The Swiss are OK with a lot of things but if you do something that has a detrimental (often financial) effect on their interests then out you go. (Quite right too in my opinion)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
BGA, AFAIK the trainee instructor is not pass fail and is part of the GAP course not a precursor. does WSA send people home after the first week if they are not up to scratch and refund the remaining money, i doubt it.
you seem to have some inside information regarding the re sit. What actually happened. it has been reported that 10 of 10 failed in the lower WSA gropu is this true? was it a general Verbier or swiss resit? was it a full 5 day technical resit? was it an exam by a different trainer?
Not too interested in conspiracies but rather the truth of the matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
To be clear on one thing regarding "official" BASI Gap courses and naughty WSSA being "unofficial"
There are LOADS of GAP courses that work towards a BASI qualification. The vast majority are "unofficial".
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
rungsp, yeah that has been cleared up and i dont feel that there is any fundamental difference.
you could argue that NEW GEN for instance has a more proactive approach to vetting students though. (they do an on snow evaluation for a hlaf hour with the ski school director, WSA does a telephone interview)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
I really can't be arsed to trawl through every flippin ski school that runs GAP BASI courses, but I'll put £50 on it up front that if I did so I would find a whole lot more that do nothing more than "self certification" of ski ability pre course.
Get off your high horse and/or tell us what your beef is with Warren in particular.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
rungsp, I'll second your comments 100%. I don't have inside info, I just knew a few of the people involved and saw them skiing around during the assessment. They all did the full exam again, satisfied the BASI trainer as to their abilities and were all very happy with both BASI and WSSA. And then we all got hammered together in the Farinet afterwards and I got a b*llocking from my wife because I was supposed to pick her up from Martigny but was too p*ssed to drive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Elizabeth B wrote: |
| Spyderman wrote: |
I think the existing partners would be extremely annoyed with BASI, as they have invested considerable time, money & risk in setting up their businesses in France,as British ski schools, complying with all of the laws that go with operating in France.
|
Sorry if I've misunderstood, but isn't BASI British? If so, then what the heck has France got to do with it? Surely BASI can run their courses in any country (in fact, I'm sure they use Zermatt, which last time I checked was in Switzerland) |
I don't think it is possible to set up an independant ski school (non ESF) in France unless you hold the BASI ISTD or equivalent qualification which may be why Warren runs his courses in Switzerland. I will happily be corrected if this isn't so. I just remember hearing it when I was on a course once.
This is an information only post and not one to provoke further argument. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| stocky wrote: |
slikedges, I think that it would have a detrimental effect on the more serious members of the course to have people in the group who, although they may be very good skiers technically, may not be interested in the teaching/coursework side of things. This would, in my opinion definately cause problems and potentially reduce the chances of passing for some of the borderline cases due to lack of support from other participants. I know for a fact that if I was paying £6k+ for a course and there were people on it who were doing the skiing side of things and tossing the teaching/learning to teach/helping others to teach side of things off then I would be majorly pi$$ed off.
This I think is the main problem with the whole Gap year option of qualification, BASI endorsed or not. |
True but tough titties - it's up to the business running it who they want to train, and up to the punter paying to decide if he might care less for his own goals than for the goals of others!?
| stocky wrote: |
| Elizabeth B wrote: |
| Spyderman wrote: |
I think the existing partners would be extremely annoyed with BASI, as they have invested considerable time, money & risk in setting up their businesses in France,as British ski schools, complying with all of the laws that go with operating in France.
|
Sorry if I've misunderstood, but isn't BASI British? If so, then what the heck has France got to do with it? Surely BASI can run their courses in any country (in fact, I'm sure they use Zermatt, which last time I checked was in Switzerland) |
I don't think it is possible to set up an independant ski school (non ESF) in France unless you hold the BASI ISTD or equivalent qualification which may be why Warren runs his courses in Switzerland. I will happily be corrected if this isn't so. I just remember hearing it when I was on a course once.
|
"Qualified" in France does indeed mean ISTD but I refer you to
| slikedges wrote: |
| There's no reason why I should even know how to ski in order to set up, run or buy a ski school doing a gap course or otherwise as long as I use qualified instructors. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
Get off your high horse and/or tell us what your beef is with Warren in particular.
|
rungsp, My beef is that WSA takes on a group of low end skiers in their "improvers" section, they ALL fail after two weeks of intensive continual evaluation. they then obviously have a moan to BASI who then "re exam" them and they then pass 8 more people according to BGA.
That is B**poo-poo, if they flunked they should have to do a technical 5 day re sit if they failed on their on piste performance, or, a 10 day re sit if they failed the teaching and theory element as well.
If the re sit was truly another 5 or 10 day course, they improved and then legimately passed that is fair dues and i would applaud their efforts. but what this "Re-exam" was is far from clear in this case.
If WSA wheeled in another "more friendly" examiner who hadn’t seen them ski before and does a cursory "exam" and they miraculously pass that stinks. If that is the way it went down it cheapens the qualification. If it wasnt the way it happened i would be delighted to hear more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
