 Poster: A snowHead
|
| eddiethebus wrote: |
| It always makes me laugh when people say they did basi qualifications to help improve there skiing/snowboarding! Why does nobody ever tell the truth and just say its so they can tell people down the pub that there a qualified ski/snowboard instructor?! |
Uhm, how would you consider someone just the other side of 50, with a career in something completely different, wanting to do the training courses but not the exams, simply because I'd never have the time for shadowing and don't give a hoot about getting the qualification itself, just what I learn? 'Cos that's where I am...
(Of course, it would be nice, particularly since I live in Switzerland, to have a free season pass and discounts on equipment, but the opportunity cost is way too high.)
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Sat 26-10-13 17:51; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| eddiethebus wrote: |
| Tim Heeney wrote: |
| My moan is, i just wish there was a national recognised 'SKILLS' badge / grading system that could be given out to mark a standard achieved in any type of skiing that HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH AN 'INSTRUCTION' QUALIFICATION. I find it odd indeed that nothing like this exists ( SH's please say otherwise if known) and basically suspect in is not in ANY worldwide ski association, financial interest to do this - slightly depressed, i'm sure this is a missed opportunity somehow. Rant over. Contributions welcome. |
to what end? I snowboard for fun as do the skiiers that i ride with. The idea of getting somesort of skills badge is really weird  |
To you, but not to others... I'd happily join Tim in his endeavours to get one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
oldmancoyote, Tim Heeney, at dance classes the kids work towards dancing exams - about to do grade 5, even as an adult at tap classes many, many years ago we got to take our dance exams, I have also taken my advanced driving test, and as adults we all get the chance to work towards academic exams in any subject we wish through adult ed. and the OU. Why should skiing be any different? I am the sort of person that would gain confidence from knowing I had passed a certain level. In the absence of any formal scheme I end up using the IOS ski grading system, and Rob has been good enough to indicate where I am on that, ergo. I am now working towards becoming an IOS level 7 and close to being able to ski the vast majority of the pisted mountain.
eddiethebus you are obviously not a personal box ticker, but take it from me, that if you were to be, you would want to have such a system for skiing as well as for everything else! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Megamum, I think we (you, Tim and I) are in violent agreement. We would all like to have some form of "test" (and - at least in my case - instruction) for skiing skill levels.
My point is simply that the "formal" exams and qualification paths for ski instructors are for people that want to teach/coach - as they should be - and at least as far as I know all involve in one form or another topics that provide that teaching element, with the possible exception of the French "Test Téchnique", which however I'm not sure can be accessed from outside an "instructor" training.
I am not interested and I don't have time to do 35, 70 or 200 hours of teaching/shadowing in a recognised ski teaching environment. I would love to find something that enables me to test my skills against well defined standards; faute de mieux, good coaching will have to do! 
Last edited by Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do. on Mon 28-10-13 12:42; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
oldmancoyote, you need a min BASI L2 (or equivalent I assume) to do the test technique.
As skimottaret, has pointed out the other choice is the BASI Snowlife awards http://www.basi.org.uk/content/snowlife-awards.aspx
Welcome to the updated UK Snowlife Awards, these awards are for Snowsports enthusiasts, learning to ski at any snowsports centre or with any snowsports instructor.
These awards are now divided into 4 zones, green, blue, red and black. Each zone has a series of stages for your students to complete. Work with your instructor to develop your skiing and have your progress checked and recognised within the UK Snowlife Awards. At each level your instructor will ask you to perform a range of tasks to show you can ski at the required level and to help improve your skiing. The tasks will help to show how well you can ski and will be appropriate for the terrain and conditions where you are being assessed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
oldmancoyote, +1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
kitenski, good PDF, the more advanced grades also show an adult skier inside the brochure. That is the sort of thing I had in mind. Interestingly they use a 9 grade system like IOS, and their levels seem about the same. On both scales I am about a 6.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
kitenski, they sound very much like the Italian or French ski school "class tests". Which are fine, but once one runs out of that (I did about 30 years ago), what is one to do, other than going down the "racing" path?
Don't get me wrong - I have forgotten a lot of stuff in 30 years, and equally I have learnt a lot, but... they don't sound/look particularly inspiring.
The interesting question about the "Test Téchnique" is: if it requires a L2, how do the French do it, since they have effectively only "entry" and "L4" (to gain which one needs the TT)?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
oldmancoyote, The Test Technique is just a slalom race, if you want something equivalent then enter an ESF Chamois race the next time you are skiing in France.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rjs, Thanks.
I'm confused, though: I thought that was the EuroTest; I was under the impression the TT was a "technical" assessment, rather than a race against the clock...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
oldmancoyote, I can find this info on the BASI site:
Be part of the ESF system with a ski school holding the Centre de Formation status (training status), as a 'stagiaire' (trainee). This involves passing the Test Technique, a timed Slalom, organised by the DDJS (local département authority), at which the candidate must achieve a specified time. After obtaining the Test Technique and a First aid Certificate, the candidate enters the Préformation, a 2-week residential course, again run by the DDJS. After this, the candidate becomes a 'stagiaire' and can work for an approved ski school.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
oldmancoyote, The EuroTest is a Giant Slalom, at a higher standard to the Test Technique, both are just races against the clock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Thank you, kitenski and rjs
(edit - cross posted with rjs's response, so added his/her name later!)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
skimottaret, Rob, Hi, Now i see the vehicle (SnowLife Awards) for Skiing Skills formal accomplishment with BASI, i have to throw it back to iOS as could your business attempt to do this? Rob has said that a number of iOS clients have asked for something similar so... It seems me you have the IDEAL client base with a perfect setup already in place to do this. Whats iOS's opinion? If you guys can't or don't want to do this, then i can't see anyone else bothering either. Clearly for the awards to be just and honest, they would have to be judged by another BASI qualified person outside of iOS - and to the same high level of skill accomplishment but based on performance rather than, does this person 'look like a BASI instructor'
Last edited by Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person on Mon 28-10-13 13:43; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
Tim Heeney, we're looking at it. We have a ski ability scale that we developed for our own purposes, and there is some agreement between it and the Snowlife Awards, so that's a good starting point. However, the challenge for any scale like this is the gap between the upper levels is significantly larger than the gap between the lower levels. So, it's easy to make really quick progress from Level 1 to, say, 5 (at IOS we don't work with clients below L4 on our scale), but to get from a 7 to an 8, or from an 8 to a 9 can take a big commitment in terms of training time. In terms of marking progress there might be ways in which recognising smaller development steps might be better ... ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
rob@rar, The latter stages could be pictures of slopes/terrain and your grade could be where you say "hell no" - allows for a large spectrum of abilities within a level like rock climbing. Obviously before you get to pro level you've still got stuff like mandatory airs, GSing in bump fields, no turn chutes etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
fatbob, yes, absolutely. In fact that's one part of the performance criteria that BASI use, with the same output measures (e.g., grip in short radius turns at the fall line) on increasingly steeper grade pistes as you go up the instructor qualifications.
Any assessment system is going to have to use both inputs (e.g., the way in which you steer the skis, or body management) as well as outcomes (e.g., rounded linked turns in variable snow equivalent to red piste steepness). I don't think that's the challenge. For me the hardest part is how you recognise progress for experienced skiers without ending up with 60 levels on your award scheme. Looking at the IOS Levels and the Snowlife Awards, a reasonably quick learner could get from beginner to L5 in maybe a week with some decent instruction. But to get from L7 to L8 might take 20 weeks of decent coaching if they have a lot of ingrained bad habits to address. To me that doesn't seem to be very motivating...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Another thing is could you assess the higher levels within an indoor environment, or do you really need to see how a person copes in real life with a steeper slope?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Megamum wrote: |
| ... do you really need to see how a person copes in real life with a steeper slope? |
Yes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rob@rar, thinking out loud, could you add in IoS gradings between the Snowlife awards
IE customer achieves Snowlife award 8, for SLife award 9 they need bumps, variables and offpiste. So you could do an IoS "Bumps L9" award, IoS "Variables L9" and "off piste L9" when someone has all 3 they then "go for" or are awarded Slife L9?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
kitenski, that gets increasingly complex. I think any grading schemes needs to be fairly simple so that it is understood by anyone who looks at it, different ski schools for example. As BASI do, you could specify performance across 5 strands for more experienced skiers (longs, shorts, bumps, steeps, variables) but I don't think that individual awards in each of those strands is sensible. What you need is a "best fit" assessment recognising that some people will be weak in some strands and strong in the others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rob@rar, Oh good - it seems a logical thing to do but you would know (or guess) the potential pitfalls better than me. If needed, any modification or change to the Snowlife scheme would be listened to as you and Scott are BASI working members.
| Quote: |
to get from a 7 to an 8, or from an 8 to a 9 can take a big commitment in terms of training time. In terms of marking progress there might be ways in which recognising smaller development steps might be better ... ?
|
Many of your clients are committed and potentially more might be interested if it had nothing to do with becoming a certified ski instructor. I can't say people won't drop out training but i'm positive more would like to start the training/assessment route without the basic life saving / records bureau check / shadowing time / BASI fees / refresher fees etc. It has to be acknowledged that not all skiers would accomplish level 9 and maybe some wouldn't make that either, but that wouldn't put me off. All i would want is the award to really mean something. So it must be independently verified.
Level 9 seems a reasonable standard and not too scary - would you say it's similar to BASI instructor L2 or between L2 and L3? I would think it's obtainable ( if reached) much quicker than the comparable BASI Instructor level and at a reduced cost to. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Tim Heeney wrote: |
| Oh good - it seems a logical thing to do but you would know (or guess) the potential pitfalls better than me. If needed, any modification or change to the Snowlife scheme would be listened to as you and Scott are BASI working members. |
As much as it would be nice, I don't think we have any more influence on BASI than any other members of the association, and this isn't even purely a BASI initiative as SSE and other associations also seem to be involved.
| Tim Heeney wrote: |
| Many of your clients are committed and potentially more might be interested if it had nothing to do with becoming a certified ski instructor. I can't say people won't drop out training but i'm positive more would like to start the training/assessment route without the basic life saving / records bureau check / shadowing time / BASI fees / refresher fees etc. It has to be acknowledged that not all skiers would accomplish level 9 and maybe some wouldn't make that either, but that wouldn't put me off. All i would want is the award to really mean something. So it must be independently verified. |
Although we have a coaching programme which is specifically tailored to passing BASI exams, the majority of our coaching is about helping our clients to develop their skiing skills so they can ski as much of the mountain as they want to. We invite new clients to self-grade using our ability scale, but only to help us discuss what level of coaching is best for them (we have three broad coaching levels, plus a pro.dev training group). Then for our regular clients Scott and I will assign a level to where we think their skiing is at the time, again to help us put people in the correct coaching groups. Some of our clients ask us where we think they are at, and we are always happy to dicuss that (in much more detail than is described in our ability scale). But for an award to be meaningful I don't think independent verification is the key point, I think the award itself needs to be recognised by other people. The majority of instructors, ski schools, guides, other skiers, etc, won't have a clue what Snowlife Level 8 means, and even fewer will have an idea what IOS L9 means. Scott and I do occasional GCSE and A level assessments for students who are submitting skiing as part of their PE qualification. The most important part of that is not that their performance was verified by someone other than the people who taught them to ski, but that everyone knows what GCSEs and A levels are.
| Tim Heeney wrote: |
| Level 9 seems a reasonable standard and not too scary - would you say it's similar to BASI instructor L2 or between L2 and L3? I would think it's obtainable ( if reached) much quicker than the comparable BASI Instructor level and at a reduced cost to. |
9 on our scale would be a strong BASI Level 1 pass or someone not far off their Level 2 pass. 10 on our scale would be a clear BASI L2 pass. All in broad terms, of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Quote: |
All i would want is the award to really mean something
|
Like getting the snow sports insurance companies on board - certain level of competence = reduction in premiums?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Megamum wrote: |
| Quote: |
All i would want is the award to really mean something
|
Like getting the snow sports insurance companies on board - certain level of competence = reduction in premiums? |
Ski better, ski faster, more hurty when you fall down...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Is BASI Level 1 broadly the same as BASI 4 was 25 years ago?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
queen bodecia, no.
Current Level 1 does not have a direct equivalence (but similar to the old Assessment Week or whatever it was called)
Current Level 2 is equivalent to Old Grade 3
Current Level 3 is broadly equivalent to Old Grade 2 (although some people say closer to Old Grade 1)
Current Level 4 is broadly equivalent to Old Grade 1 (although some people say it is a higher standard).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
rob@rar, thanks. I did wonder, I did the old BASI 4 back in 1989 but I'm nowhere near that standard now. I assume it's lower than today's Level 1.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
rob@rar, maybe one way IS the hated (by me at least) stop-watch? But instead of having it on the basis of one, set course and judged against one single absolute standard (e.g. the piste opener on that day á la EuroTest), perhaps using some form of percentiles and improvement against one's own performance on various terrains? As well as some sort of judging panel on technique - not unlike freestyle or moguls, where I believe time is not the only variable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| queen bodecia wrote: |
| rob@rar, thanks. I did wonder, I did the old BASI 4 back in 1989 but I'm nowhere near that standard now. I assume it's lower than today's Level 1. |
Unless I'm mistaken there has never been a BASI Grade 4. Maybe you did the Assessment Week which was designed to give feedback on whether you were at the right level to begin the qualifications pathway by entering the Grade 3 qualification?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| oldmancoyote wrote: |
| rob@rar, maybe one way IS the hated (by me at least) stop-watch? But instead of having it on the basis of one, set course and judged against one single absolute standard (e.g. the piste opener on that day á la EuroTest), perhaps using some form of percentiles and improvement against one's own performance on various terrains? As well as some sort of judging panel on technique - not unlike freestyle or moguls, where I believe time is not the only variable. |
It could be, but I think the more and more you load a system for assessing recreational skiers the fewer and fewer people will want to take part. There's already a perfectly good system for assessing performance on a GS-lite course, done purely against the clock. Lots of kids and adults do the Flèche races in French resorts or NASTAR system in the US, as well as increasing number of resorts offering automatic timing on a course where you pay a Euro to race against your mates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
rob@rar, I don't think the official name was BASI 4 but the instructors called it that. It was 5 freezing cold days in Glencoe, partly as an introduction to instructing and partly about mountain safety, guiding a group, etc. So I think it was probably the Assessment Week, as some went on to do the instructor's courses afterwards. Back in the day it was recommended for anyone intending to work in resort as a ski guide/host.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
queen bodecia, yes, that sounds like the assessment week.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I really don't get adult badge chasing mentality. OK if you want to be an instructor it's the territory so you have to live with it but for everyone else what's the point? The sense of achievement? You can get that by the gnarliness of the line you took and whether you flowed or stuttered down it. Sense of progression - ski the same line you found very tricky lots of times - when you're not even thinking about it you've probably progressed. Getting your red badge wouldn't mean you were guaranteed tp be able to ski any red in any condition. So I suspect it's really about bragging rights.
I appreciate the SCGB scheme has a purpose in getting people a reality check on their level of self delusion because of their ability to eff up a group trip but I still find it intensely weird. "We won't ski with you because we're all purple standard skiers and you're only gold" just doesn't feel like a real world scenario.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fatbob, people will have different motivations, in exactly the same way as people go on skiing holidays for different reasons. Lots of people are interested in understanding the technicalities of skiing, much more so than getting down the gnarliest piste/terrain they can manage. For those people understanding the improvements in their skills base could be enhanced by reference to a reasonably objective and detailed assessment scheme. That doesn't strike me as "badge chasing", just trying to understand in detail where your skiing is, and where you need to go to get better. I have conversations about that all the time with people I'm teaching, and I think very, very few of those are looking for a pat on the back from me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
rob@rar, I understand the value in your detailed technical discussion/feedback but not in the need to calibrate it beyond the "do I still need to work at it or have I acquired it stage?" Maybe that's it, a good instructor/coach will always find something an individual can work on and yet people want to feel that they are "there" at something, whatever "there" may be. Maybe in part it's about "permissioning", being able to move on to something else.
I also recognise that adults, non-instructor aspirant, who want an accredited qualification are a tiny tiny demographic within the skiing population, which is why no-one will ever bother defining a harmonised "standard".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fatbob, some people seek external validation and maybe permissioning (although have you just made up that word?). Nothing unusual about that. I, for example, have to seek approval and permission from my girlfriend for all sorts of things, and I'm sure she consults the unwritten rules of the International Sisterhood before granting or withholding permission
I'd agree it's a small number within the skiing population. The number of people who are committed to improving their skiing by regular coaching is a small number, and I think we are talking about a fraction of that population. What I'm not sure about is how big that fraction is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
