 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
It is total codswollap that a great coach had to be awesome at the sport themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| TTT wrote: |
3 weeks of training makes someone professionally qualified? Primary school teachers should only have 3 weeks training I suppose. Hilarious! Think it just shows how little that some people know about ski instruction on here.  |
OK the precise time might be off but why not, if we assume that individuals have already invested months of personal development time into their skiing and have an appropriately education orientated mindset and interpersonal skills? Are all professions equal? Does everyone need to have the same amount of training as a brain surgeon? Not even BASI claim this - they are perfectly happy for L1s to teach in fridges and
on dryslopes.
Anyone pretending that the French "culture" around ski instruction is founded on anything other than trade protection is deluded. And it is the same culture which gives us classes of 13 kids strewn in 4 zig zags across the slope even in a relatively off peak week.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
This is the bit that interests me ...
| Levi215 wrote: |
| I'm 7-8 on the inside-out skiing level thing, would i be able to pick things up from a L1 instructor, no doubt i would! |
I don't think anybody is suggesting that a BASI L1 instructor would be fit to coach a high end athlete throughout their career, but as you have identified -as did Chemy Alcott in her blog- there are valuable lessons available from a lowly L1 instructor, and if that is the case, then once the student moves out and into a mountain environment with a L2 instructor then again there will be more valuable lessons (as in other lessons, not lessons of more value).
This is not to say of course that just because an instructor is only qualified to L1 that they are not capable of passing on a whole load of valuable lessons, because the level of qualification only shows what qualifications have been taken, and not necessarily what the qualified individual is actually capable of.
| Levi215 wrote: |
| Would i get more out of a L4 instructor most certainly |
Again, I don't think that anyone is arguing contrary to that, what is being stated however (specifically by TTT) is that instruction is not worth having unless it comes from an ISTD, she is condescending enough to say that holders of the lower level qualifications are achievements in their own right, but will not acknowledge even that they hold a professional qualification!
I don't think there is anyone whom would argue that an ISTD holder is not more highly trained than BASI L1, 2, or 3; there are plenty of people whom would argue however that just because someone holds the ISTD does not mean that they are a better instructor than everyone holding the lower level qualifications.
Just because someone holds ISTD does not necessarily mean that they are a better skier even than someone holding a BASI L3/ISIA; the only thing it does mean for certain is that the ISTD holder has taken more exams.
So before we get the usual suspect jumping up and down with the sarcastic remarks and the usual spattering of arrogance, I am not saying that ISTD holding instructors are inferior to lower qualified instructors, and I am not saying that all lower qualified instructors are just as good as or better than ISTD holding instructors, what I am saying is that a qualification only shows what qualifications have been taken, nothing else!
Before Chemy took her L1/L2 she would have had good lessons (in terms of both skills and knowledge) from a L1 instructor, because as she herself reported, she could not perform the snow-plough!
Every single qualification that BASI awards is a professional qualification, and everyone holding one of those qualifications is fully qualified, not necessarily to the highest level, but fully qualified nevertheless.
Last edited by Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see? on Wed 6-05-15 12:20; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| billy not a boy wrote: |
Before Chemy took her L1/L2 she would have had good lessons (in terms of both skills and knowledge) from a L1 instructor, because as she herself reported, she could not perform the snow-plough!. |
I bet she could snow plough, she just couldn't snow plough how BASI wants it done.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| davidof wrote: |
| billy not a boy wrote: |
Before Chemy took her L1/L2 she would have had good lessons (in terms of both skills and knowledge) from a L1 instructor, because as she herself reported, she could not perform the snow-plough!. |
I bet she could snow plough, she just couldn't snow plough how BASI wants it done. |
Okay, but by her own admission she was doing it "wrong", i.e. if she had taken a non-skier out for a lesson she would have taught them the wrong things -maybe this too is only judged by BASI skills analysis, but if you read what she says in her blog you will note that her snow-plough was not the most efficient and whether or not we are only judging according to the BASI criteria, if it does not allow one to properly control speed and line, it is wrong!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Another controversial point that I will raise now is this notion of L1 being licensed to teach from complete beginner up to and including parallel skiing within a non-mountain environment
What is all of that about? Snowsports is a non-regulated profession in the UK, so what is this licence? Do BASI really have the authority to issue a licence? I personally think not.
If someone is qualified to teach from complete beginner up to and including parallel skiing, then IMO that is what they are qualified to teach, no matter what the environment. Surely the onus is on the employer to evaluate and to dictate the environment suitable for any given individual?
When teaching someone how to put on their skis, how to slide on them, how to stand on them, how to use a button lift, how to snow-plough, how to link their turns, and to progress through to basic parallel skiing; what is the difference between doing this in an indoor environment versus exactly the same lessons on a nursery slope and a green run on a mountain?
Though maybe this topic should be discussed in an alternate thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| billy not a boy wrote: |
Okay, but by her own admission she was doing it "wrong" |
I assume BASI and others have analyzed what the best technique is. A BASI trainer I knew liked skis to be tilted at a certain angle, tips to be a certain distance apart, V to be a certain shape then the whole lower leg, thigh body arm position. There are a lot of variables as with any ski technique. I can imagine a lot of advanced skiers who maybe learned to plough 20 or so years ago don't do it "right". It is like driving a car, your dad may be an ok driver but may not be the best person to teach you. Nikki Lauda would probably be a bad teacher for normal road driving.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| billy not a boy wrote: |
| Again, I don't think that anyone is arguing contrary to that, what is being stated however (specifically by TTT) is that instruction is not worth having unless it comes from an ISTD, she is condescending enough to say that holders of the lower level qualifications are achievements in their own right, but will not acknowledge even that they hold a professional qualification! |
Think i'm starting to get to the crux of it. Agree, for example the guy we had lessons with in Solden, stayed at the Neureuther's and did his BASI with Felix. In terms of skiing he's the best person i've ever skied with and even if he didn't have qualifications i'm sure i would have learnt a load from him. But would i have had a lesson from him if he wasn't qualified, no because i wouldn't have had access to him. Qualifications it could be argued only exist to provide some level or order to a system where volume and accessibility mean that people don't know someone who does X.
In my professional life i don't hold any qualifications or certifications, does it mean i'm worse than someone who does? In my experience no because those who have them speal out the exam content and don't use their heads. Could i get them yes, does it cause me issues when going for jobs sometimes but C.V. strength helps mitigate that to some extent. I would take all qualifications with a pinch of salt personally.
Isn't that point slightly off topic here though...
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
I've always found the best teachers are those that can actually teach, they tend to have a great deal of patience, be good at communicating and can spot the people having problems, this is not the same as coaching, the two best teachers I had as a young child were good skiers but not fast skiers, I doubt either of them would have passed the French speed test, but what they did do was teach young children with a passion. Later on in life I've had a variety of teachers (two of which were world cup level skiers) but I've never forgotten the skills I learned from my first two teachers. The worst teachers I've had were the "Follow Me" type who tear off down the mountain and give no real advice to their students, note also that a great teacher for young children may not be a great teacher for adults, the French system seems to produce faster skiers but not necessarily better skiers, this is possibly due to the French idea of producing up and coming racers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
the French system seems to produce faster skiers but not necessarily better skiers
|
I'd say that the French system (if by that you mean the ESF system) tends to produce rather good skiers, but that it's not the only game in town.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| pam w wrote: |
| Quote: |
the French system seems to produce faster skiers but not necessarily better skiers
|
I'd say that the French system (if by that you mean the ESF system) tends to produce rather good skiers, but that it's not the only game in town. |
From my experience, I'd be inclined to agree with you @pam w ... there is no real correlation between excellence in skiing performance and excellence in lesson delivery and/or planning, and further, just because the ESF produces some rather excellent skiers, and a lot of very good (dare I say excellent) instructors, this should not be seen as any good reason to restrict BASI instructors' teaching opportunities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
^ While agreeing with most of DG Orf's post, I think the quoted (by pam w) statement is rather meaningless. Who is faster or better than whom? Are we comparing French Alpine kids with Swiss / Austrian / Italian Alpine kids taught by their national schools? Or a one/two week a year Brit compared to the same raw material using a French-based British school?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fact of the ET and TT is you could have a very technical skier keep failing by fractions of a second, Their technique is peerless every movement precise accurate and flawless, but they are not fearless they excel at controlled skiing.
The next person down is ragged their balance is off on many of the turns but they have zero fear they give 110% if not more crash out on the first run but on the second they finish a fraction of a second inside the time limit.
@TTT,
Which of these two skiers would you prefer to receive lessons from to improve your technique ??
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
^ Excellent question @speed098.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
@speed098, as the trainers I use have past the spped test or are exempt and have great technique the question is just hypothetical. Passing, good technique, and good understanding of skiing go together.
I suspect @laundryman, makes a pertinent point though. Do you look to systemtically improve peoples skiing over the long term or give people a holiday experience. Some well known names clearly focus on marketing a product and some would like to instruct their clients more to actually improve their skiing but realise that is not what many customers are looking for. We just leave it to the instructor to do whatever he thinks is best for our skiing given the conditions as they have far more training and experience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
@TTT, Q how did your trainers become exempt from the speed test?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
racers
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| Malaise Meleze wrote: |
| @TTT, Q how did your trainers become exempt from the speed test? |
More importantly @TTT how do you know that they would pass the speed test?
Just because they were racers does not mean ipso facto that they would pass these tests, for example many French stagieres fail the tests.
You've already intimated that "fully qualified" means having passed the TT/ET, and you've made mention that you only use "fully qualified instructors", and yet here you are further claiming that some of the trainers which you use are exempt.
Have you anything to say which does not contradict yourself?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
FIS points
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
billy not a boy, You would need to ask someone who had done both the Eurotest and FIS races whether there was any real difference in practice but the TT is supposed to be a slalom run to FIS rules and the Eurotest is a giant slalom run to FIS rules.
The people that I know who could claim exemption were a long way under the required FIS points.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
@billy not a boy, @TTT, dragging it back to topic, SB is suing BASI for loss of earnings because he was kicked out of BASI? What i don't get is how this fits into the France case of 'you need to take a French test to coach in France'.
No doubt i've missed another chapter?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| TTT wrote: |
@speed098, as the trainers I use have past the spped test or are exempt and have great technique the question is just hypothetical. Passing, good technique, and good understanding of skiing go together.
I suspect @laundryman, makes a pertinent point though. Do you look to systemtically improve peoples skiing over the long term or give people a holiday experience. Some well known names clearly focus on marketing a product and some would like to instruct their clients more to actually improve their skiing but realise that is not what many customers are looking for. We just leave it to the instructor to do whatever he thinks is best for our skiing given the conditions as they have far more training and experience. |
Not for a lot of BASI L2 and L3 instructors.
I take it from you not actually answering the question you would go with the one who passed the test even though their technique is not anywhere near as good as the other instructor.
The real issue here is you just can not accept that the ET and TT have no actual bearing on instructing because to pass all the other elements of BASI L4 you have to be a pretty good skier with very solid technique. The TT or ET add nothing of relevance other than the training for them. pass or fail by a fraction of a second is a pathetic protectionist system that BASI should hang their heads in shame for selling out their members.
It is doubly pathetic when some are gifted this and nobody has to resit it every so many years when they spout out to the EU that it is for safety.
If the ET time was reflective of it's actual benefit ( we are not talking training here just the race itself) there would be no need for most BASI L3 to need specialist race training to pass their skiing ability and technique would see them safely qualify,
I do not think anyone here would dispute that the training for the ET is of great value. I would haver no issue seeing the training element be compulsory but honestly failing a time by fractions of a second or even a few seconds on a minute course is not and should not be a deal breaker for someone attaining ISTD. Or as I have said before keep the time but allow instructing ability assessed during the training so at the highest level to give you a bonus that can knock some time off your recorded time so say you fail by 0.8 of a second and your instructing ability test awarded you a 1 sec bonus you pass by 0.1 of a second.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure if that explains it or not. I guess FIS points could be earned in a (comparatively) slow race.
The fact that one chooses only to take instruction from ISTD instructors is of course one's prerogative, but just because that choice has been made is, in of itself, not a good enough reason to limit other less qualified instructors from working, in France for example; and it's certainly not a good enough reason to display such a lack of respect for and the level of condescension to, which has been prevalent in several comments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Levi215 wrote: |
@billy not a boy, @TTT, dragging it back to topic, SB is suing BASI for loss of earnings because he was kicked out of BASI? What i don't get is how this fits into the France case of 'you need to take a French test to coach in France'.
No doubt i've missed another chapter? |
This is because, SB was issued his MoU (which excludes the holder from having to obtain a Carte Pro in France) for the season 2013/14, and later (in January 2014) the BASI retracted that MoU, claiming that it had been issued in error.
The alleged error was the SB has not passed the ET -the argument then comes about that neither have a great many ESF/ESI/BASI instructors; this is always it seems countered with "but they did pass the Cappa" (excuse spelling please); however the ONLY test which is stipulated in terms of being awarded the MoU is the Euro Test.
I would argue that if the BASI are going to withhold SB's MoU on the grounds that he did not pass the ET, then surely they should have withheld his ISTD on the same grounds, which they did not.
Last edited by You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net. on Wed 6-05-15 18:11; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| TTT wrote: |
@speed098, as the trainers I use have past the spped test or are exempt and have great technique the question is just hypothetical. Passing, good technique, and good understanding of skiing go together.
I suspect @laundryman, makes a pertinent point though. Do you look to systemtically improve peoples skiing over the long term or give people a holiday experience. Some well known names clearly focus on marketing a product and some would like to instruct their clients more to actually improve their skiing but realise that is not what many customers are looking for. We just leave it to the instructor to do whatever he thinks is best for our skiing given the conditions as they have far more training and experience. |
This is correct, but maybe not in the way you think. I suspect a typical British holiday skier (or Parisian, for that matter), if he takes lessons at all, will have a couple of sessions with a random instructor in his one week per year holiday. He won't expect to develop any kind of long-term coaching relationship with any of them; or vice versa. The instructor's motivation will be to pick some low-hanging fruit to induce some kind of feel-good factor at the end of two hours - basically anything to prevent the customer asking for his money back, or any other unpleasantness - which may not be the optimum for improving the customer's skiing in the long-term.
On a SBS holiday, the typical customer will have been going there for a few years (multiple times a year for many) and will have developed relationships with at least a couple of instructors. The instructors, in turn will be motivated to get them back later in the season and next season; and be already aware of the customer's capabilities, ambitions, any ingrained issues, preferred learning style and so on. They will be together all week, including for video analysis and chats over breakfast, dinner, in the bar etc. All of this, to improve over the long term the capabilities and enjoyment of the customer. I know there are other organisations with a similar modus operandi.
Of course, the above may not be to everyone's taste and I wouldn't suggest it would suit you, given that already have ongoing relationships with great coaches. But just maybe you can develop some insight into why others are reluctant to have a product taken away, just to serve those who would rather maintain their share of a static market, rather than innovate in a growing market.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
One of the chapters is that SB qualified many years ago before the intro of the ET. Others in his position were 'grandfathered in' to the new system. not quite sure why this privilege was not extended to SB.
So he hasn't got his ET. But neither do many others of the same generation.
Then his license was removed for something like employing l2s and l3s, people who (probably) don't have ET either. So, it's got some relevance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
You are entitled to your views. The French and BASI theirs. I am entitled to get instruction from people recommended by level 2s and 3s that they use themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| TTT wrote: |
| You are entitled to your views. The French and BASI theirs. I am entitled to get instruction from people recommended by level 2s and 3s that they use themselves. |
Nobody is trying to deny you that choice; but what you have claimed previously is that BASI L2 and L3 are not professionally qualified, which they are. You have claimed that BASI L2 and L3 are not fully qualified, which they are, and you have also claimed that people on here don't have a clue about ski instructing and training, which they do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
@laundryman, I really do understand as the features that you mention are not dissimilar at all from some of the stuff that I do. The difference is that the people I use make sure they are compliant with local rules, have all the relevant paperwork and go out of their way to establish a working relationship with the locals. So I fully understand many of the points that you make. Some of the views from some of the individuals associated with SB on FB is where I have a problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
@billy not a boy, thank you, neither would I take away your choice how you want to interpret my comments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
It was intimated earlier that a BASI qualification can be earned with only three weeks training, and therefore holders of lower level qualifications are not capable of teaching skiing. We all know that it is pretty much impossible to get even a BASI L1 with only three weeks of training.
BASI 1 is not a proficiency exam akin to a bicycle proficiency test, it does not say to the holder "you can ski", it is qualification for the instructing of skiing, it says to the holder that they can ski to a level of proficiency and are capable of instructing/coaching others in skiing technique. BASI L2 builds upon that both in terms of personal skiing performance, and teaching skills. BASI L3/ISIA builds upon that further and as mentioned previously it is an internationally recognised level of proficiency -except in France it seems. In fact BASI L2 is internationally recognised, and so belittling those whom hold that qualification is just plain rude, and dare I say arrogant.
Also it should be borne in mind that not everyone holding a BASI L2 or L3 is only just "at the level", many are far advanced of the level required in order to attain said qualifications.
If BASI do not hold any stock in their qualifications -which is the message given out by not supporting the case for free movement of those so qualified- why do they even bother awarding them? And why within their own literature do they claim that holders of those qualifications are capable of instructing? Further, why do other nations around the world accept BASI L2 instructors as professionally qualified?
These are serious questions, that have nothing to do with being in the "SB appreciation society", but they are questions which this particular case brings to the fore.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Are'Basi' and 'the French' the same thing? Are they are at one on this?
From what I see, not all 'the French' agree at all....for example the judge last week. That judge wasn't so certain, overturned a few things and referred other things to a higher court. Not so clear cut perhaps?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
@billy not a boy, absolutely right - this case is not about any fan club, but brings out other concerns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Mmm - a few new users all agreeing with each other -
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
@TTT, lol been a member of snowheads for several years but never felt moved to comment. But this issue has changed that. I have no idea who most the people on here are - but yes, at the moment we do seem to agree on a few things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
@TTT, yep, I've been busted ... been a reader of sH for quite a while, but much like ^ never felt the urge to comment. This issue though I think is serious enough to warrant discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yep that is what all multi user name trolls claim
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@TTT, Who are you then? you hide behind a dark cloak, with your very xenophobia attitude.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
B@Teacher, @billy not a boy, @Malaise Meleze, i am not, have never been or most likely ever will be a member of Basi. I am also not in any way a fan of @TTT position, posturing and psuedo legal and "i am in the know but don't know response".
However i do find it interesting that "i have been reading for ages" position and suddenly once the new legal position arises there are suddenly new registered users who respond on one thread.
Suspicious, moi. Oui.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| TTT wrote: |
| Yep that is what all multi user name trolls claim |
No flies on you for spotting the socks. You get extra points for pairing them 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
