 Poster: A snowHead
|
Eng_ch
q1: do any ski instructor certification systems NOT include a race requirement - other than PSIA?
q2: Do any ski instructor certification systems ONLY include a race requirement?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| little tiger wrote: |
Eng_ch
q1: do any ski instructor certification systems NOT include a race requirement - other than PSIA?
q2: Do any ski instructor certification systems ONLY include a race requirement?
|
Er to be honest I haven't a clue! But I'm just generally querying the merit of an arbitrary timed component as part of a qualification to teach non-racing skiing. If you're going to coach racers then of course you need it. But I question the relevance of, say, a half-second difference to general skiing and instructing ability.
I also wonder whether there's a risk of the Eurotest putting off people who might otherwise be excellent instructors and have no interest in competing with other skiers. Are there any stats at all on whether people stop BASI 2 rather than do the Eurotest? Or do all BASI 2s go on to attempt BASI 1?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
eng_ch....
I ski with (& have skied with) instructors from all around the world with all different quals.... I can only think of PSIA as not ahving a race component...
the austrians the race level is quite high I believe & is a PRE-requisite to staatliche.... In my experience if you can get past the "austrian" version of user-friendliness these guys are excellent instructors!
read again my experience with a person who thought she was a great teacher & so did NOT need to be a good skier - she taught me all sorts of bad habits - why? because SHE had no idea she HAD all those bad habits....
Once upon a time I felt as you do - having done some pretty hard yards to get myself to sort of competent on skis I am starting to understand why those race times exist... all other factors are SUBJECTIVE - racing is OBJECTIVE measure of their skiing....
How do you know these people WOULD be excellent instructors? What stops them being able to put in the hard yards & pass the race component? If they are not able to overcome their inherent weaknesses how do they teach students to overcome theirs? etc etc etc part of being a teacher is being able to LEARN... my instructors all had to work pretty hard to learn to teach me - I come with built in problems... if the instructor cannot adapt sufficiently SHOULD they be teaching - with perhaps allowances for any actual disabilities(like one of my instructors had a foot eaten by a trench digger.. I wish they cut him some slack on the skiing parts as he was doing the best he could manage to even ski on that foot)
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
eng ch
| Quote: |
| Er to be honest I haven't a clue! |
I'm not quite clear what you are trying to say then!
Once again, for the record, the racing component is not solely indicative of the ability to race. It is a clearcut indication of the ability to ski, and the vast majority of instructors accept it as such (especially those who are good enough skiers to have been able to pass it). If you have read the various contributions from earlier in the thread explaining why this is the case, then either explain why those explanations are in error, or why you have misunderstood them. Don't just ignore them.
Many professions are regulated, and hopefully standards are maintained through minimum qualifications - whether this be the teaching profession, skiing, or any other field not populated by cowboys. In teaching, for example, just how is a history degree - presumably indicative of knowledge of the subject, as well as the critical ability to examine historical data, proof of the ability to teach the subject? Yet that qualification is required to teach at secondary school level. Teacher training is required, of course. As is the case in becoming a ski instructor. You have to be able both to ski, and to teach.
I spend a couple of months on the mountain each year watching racers train. Without a shadow of doubt, given the training system in place, the amount of time they've spent over the years off piste, tree skiing, in the park, as well as doing the dull technical training and the racing, they are the most accomplished all-round skiers on the hill. By a long way.
And finally, for the nth time in this thread. I have NEVER said they would automatically make excellent instructors as a result! Reread my comments!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
As usual many people have completely misunderstood the whole thing about the Eurotest. I've explained on more than one occasion so here goes AGAIN: Britain, France, Austria and Italy all have the same Eurotest - the same degree of competence is required - we are the Cartel, and we (Britain) are in the Catrtel. The whole point of doing the test is not to qualify you as a ski teacher but to use the original French title, it's a test of technical capacity. It's no-one's opinion on your skiing. If you're good enough technically, you will pass, if not, not.
PG I disagree that it isn't very tough - it is around British FIS team level, so quite difficult for a number of British would-be instructors who don't have racing backgrounds.
Having said all that I, personally, have no problem with it as part of the exam system. I've seen altogether too many Grade 3s prancing around embarrassing us as BASI members - sorry, but it's true. There's a Grade 2 working for the ESF here, who's not great shakes either .....
Language: why should everyone expect the French to speak good English when most of the British instructors in France don't seem to be bothered to learn any French??
I do broadly agree with PG's original point, there is no question but that the alpine born stagiares are better skiers and far more experienced than their lowland counterparts. However I think you should all check your instructor's qualifications, and if they're not properly qualified, demand another instructor - the ESF is the worst for employing non-qualifieds in the holidays!  Ask to see their "Carte Professionelle"
Charlotte Swift, British National SkiTeacher, Equivalence in France!!!!!!  
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Don't like the sound of a "cartel" in what should be a freely competitive activity. Smacks of protectionism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Slightly off topic, so apologies in advance.
On the topic of "unqualified" instructors: a friend and I were due out for a private lesson with a friend who is a truly excellent teacher. We were amused (albeit slightly disappointed from a learning p.o.v.) to discover that our chum was overbooked and as the poor wee scots laddies (vs the rich parisiens) we'd been bumped into the hands of the ESF Director.
"So boys, what do you want to learn?" he asked.
"Bumps!!" we exclaimed.
"Bah, non, you don't want to do that! Look at the state of Grospiron's knees!" he retorted. Off we went, cruising around, learning nothing about skiing but at least as much as we wanted to about local politics.
The gent in question has a style that could charitably be described as "agricultural". And this was in 1998. He apparently learned by watching the instructors while working as a liftie. He got the position as ESF director, as far as I can gather, by being in the right political place at the right political time (and before particularly strict rules on who could get an instructor's "pull rouge")
Makes you think really, doesn't 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.
|
PG, that was a bit harsh when I had no intention of causing offence:(
I have ignored none of this thread, which has been most instructive, particularly the point about racing being good for technique and overall ability. It's something I hadn't properly appreciated.
My question is simply about the appropriateness of an arbitrary assessment for an aspect *of a teaching qualification*. In any other profession, those qualifications you mention are judged by a human being. A stopwatch cannot judge whether or not someone can teach, yet can put a prospective instructor's career on ice, as it were, for the sake of a split-second. As you say, you can see from the racers you watch that they are highly accomplished, you don't need a stopwatch to tell you so.
I'm a still newbie here so my apologies for harking on a point that has evidently been done to death. It may all be obvious to you more experienced folks but I'm a bear of little brain, especially tonight, and I haven't yet had a lightbulb moment on quite why this just *is*.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| easiski wrote: |
| Language: why should everyone expect the French to speak good English when most of the British instructors in France don't seem to be bothered to learn any French?? |
I'm not sure that many people do expect that; rather the right to choose an instructor with whom they feel they can communicate easily, on what is a technical subject.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| eng_ch wrote: |
My question is simply about the appropriateness of an arbitrary assessment for an aspect *of a teaching qualification*. In any other profession, those qualifications you mention are judged by a human being. |
There is nothing arbitrary about setting a timed standard that has to be reached as part of an assessment of teaching capability. In fact, by any defintition a measurable standard cannot be arbitary.
As for any other profession being judged by a human being, I don't think that is correct at all. In many sports, the abilty to reach certain benchmarks is a pre-requisit of qualification. Take golf, for instance. there is a minimum handicap you must have before you start your training and you have to be able to play off scratch before you fully qualify.
Surely, a ski instructor should ski in a manner we all aspire to. I ahve skied with and seen BASI 2 and 3 instructors and I don't wish to upset people, but some of them don't deserve the title "instructor" either now or any time in the past. It is reassuring to know that, ecept for the really oldest instructors in the French system, everybody with their badge was once a really good skier and the only reason they might not still be is age, injury or laziness. Those are things you cannot legislate against.
Unless I am mistaken, the other difference between the French system and others who use the Eurotest is that under the French system you have to pass the speed test before you can start training while with the others you need to achieve the standard by the end of training.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
It is I believe still an ISIA requirement to have 2 languages & 2 snowsport disciplines though.....
Many APSI take telemark or disabled to get the second teaching discipline for their Level II
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eng_ch, sorry, inevitably misunderstandings creep in here Not the best medium to get points across sometimes...
Couple of things - it's not that racing is good for technique, it's completely the other way about. I think that misapprehension is key to the whole debate.
All regulated professions have to impose some level of minimum standards. I don't think anyone's suggested the current system is perfect, just adequate, effective. It's tough as Charlotte says, but it's not prohibitively difficult for a fit, accomplished skier to aspire to - within 18% of zero FIS points for men, 22% for women. In this juniors race for example, picked at random, they would all have got through, by a fair margin. Look at how many 15 and 16 year olds that would include in that race alone. I know personally the lads that came 4th, 22nd, 37th, 62nd, 74th, 75th, 80th and 97th in that race, and without exception they - and their trainers - would tell you they've still got a huge amount to learn and much to improve on, in terms of technique. This despite the fact that they are already seconds inside the speed test qualification standard.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
My concern is that ski instruction is too time-consuming and too expensive to get into. My BASI ticket cost £95 for two weeks intensive training, exam and excellent board at Glenmore Lodge (national outdoor training centre) at the foot of Cairngorm in 1975.
Not sure what it costs now, but the whole process seems over-elaborate to me. The objective of most ski instruction is to get a bunch of beginners, shaky intermediates or eager 'parallelers' to fulfil their dreams.
It's not rocket science - it's a straightforward logical process of getting people across a row of stepping stones.
Let's make the professional accessible, non-elitist and effective. Too many people in Europe give up ski lessons, which is a related issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
David Goldsmith, not sure I agree with dumbing down the standards of ski teaching. I'm pleased that the instructors I use have been thoroughly tested to sort the wheat from the chaff, including their ability to ski with great technique and precision (for which racing is a good test of, in my opinion).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Hell, why have a French teacher with a degree when most pupils will only ever need to ask for "un demi, s'il vous plaît" in their lifetimes?? Let's liberalise all the professions while we're about it. We could employ African witch doctors and save on NHS costs, after all most patients only go to the docs for reassurance and a couple of aspirins. Replace barristers by their clerks. The guy who watches over the toddlers' paddling area at the local pool, why bother with a life-saving certificate? Just test candidates on whether they can wade through water up to their knees and stay awake. Etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
SimonN, by definition where you set that empirical standard is arbitrary, someone has to decide what time X is and hence that 0.01s faster than X passes while 0.01s slower fails. Like it or not, that's the difference between BASI 1 and BASI 2 - those being two people who actually ski to the same standard. If they ski to the same standard bar a couple of hundredths of seconds, they should be awarded the same qualification. As PG says, it isn't fair and I'd have thought it wasn't beyond the wit of someone to come up with some compromise. In any other profession (and I wasn't referring to sport professions here) e.g. PG's history degree analogy, a candidate may do less well on one paper but it is usually clear over a number of papers whether or not the candidate really does or does not come up to scratch.
The problem with the Eurotest, as I understand it, is that the entire top level teaching qualification ultimately rests on one snapshot performance and does not reflect overall aptitude or consistency of performance (which I imagine must be important for an instructor) as well as a human assessment might be able to do.
Possibly of more concern, on thinking about it is not the BASI 1 qualification - because we all know you have to be bloody good to get it - but the BASI 2. How do you know without asking (and do you have to take the answer on faith if you do ask) whether a BASI 2 is only just BASI 2 or whether that person in fact has lots of experience and may just have missed out on the Eurotest by a fraction of a second a couple of times. I would imagine there's going to be a big difference in teaching quality between BASI 2s at either end of the spectrum. Of course sub-divisions can be made ad infinitum...
PG, pax?  I'm knackered, I've just been doing a job that's taken far too long and stopped me finding snow today so I'm ratty, and I'm far too sensitive to be allowed to use message boards today. Hate it when it happens on my forum, so I should know better. Sorry and thanks.
Just as an aside, re my response to little tiger's question about content of instructor exams.... well, put it this way, if you know the requirements for all the various translator association qualifications around the world, then you're a better man than I am (not that I'm a man, but you follow me...), and skiing's only a relatively recent hobby for me, hence I haven't a clue what various instructor associations require!
Last edited by Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person on Mon 23-01-06 0:06; 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?
|
|
PG, slikedges and kramer may correct me, but in this country, I believe one is perfectly free to consult a witch doctor. Whether one is wise to do so is a legitimate matter for debate. I believe that members of our beloved royal family consult all manner of practitioners, and good luck to them!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
lol
I was going to ask if they would be happy to have appendix removed(or TURP or ceasar done) by a doctor taught to do the operation by a great teacher who had never actually performed said operations... & was in fact no doctor.... but surely you only need to be a teacher to teach.... so the medical students could be taught by a non-medico making medical courses cheaper & removing any "barriers" to great teachers who can't quite pass the mark to be surgeons?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
little tiger, I'm making the very specific point (which I made earlier in the thread) that qualifications are fine and dandy (I have several myself and take them into account when employing people) but in many cases there's no need to enshrine them in the law.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Ah - so anyone can remove appendix... or do a TURP .... caveat emptor is the go hey.... you should ensure you check that your doc has quals but anyone can claim to be one and practice as such?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
laundryman, I think you're right. I believe you can do what you like in terms of witch doctoring with the consent of the patient as long as you don't try to call yourself a registered medical practitioner, as only those on the Medical Register have that right. As a registered medical practitioner, you also can't call yourself a specialist in a medical field unless you are on the Specialist Register.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think that there is another factor at play:
For some skiing is a serious pursuit, important part of their leisure time or even life. I think that it's important to note how PG drew the comparison between underqualified ski instructors and whitch doctors.
For others, skiing is just something to do 3-4 hours a day for a week or two while enjoying good food, good wine and nice scenery. They do not care much about skiing above skiing reds confidently.they wnat to relax, to easily comprehend their teacher (who is employed by them and isn't doing them a huge favour by gracing their group with his presence). so, yes diffrent people require differnt things from their instructors the same way a maths school teacher has to have diffrent skills than a maths uni professor.
Having said that, ithink that the ESF still functions very much like a monopoly: huge classes (12 and even 14 in class not uncommon in february), unresponsive teachers (i remeber skiing with the ESF a few years ago when below 1800 slush was coming down while above it was snowing. we tried to talk the instructor into skiing higher, and she refused by saing that she was "assigned" to ski in another area that day!!) not enough communication and customer service. How many ESF "moniteurs" ski fat skis? How many understand their customers' need to ski them?
So, many people perceive the Eurotest as means to kill the competition and not as means of QA.
While i agree that you need to be a really good skier(well above the level of someone who skis two weeks a year) before you start to teach, i think that there is something to be said in favour of those that are passionate about skiing (enough to try to become instructors) as opposed to someone that happens to ski well because he was born in the Alps (and teaches because it seemed like a good idea or whatever - not that all local are this way)
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Good point Sugardaddy. And can one extrapolate from that that some people who were born on skis maybe go on to become instructors because it's the thing to do, or simply the next progression? Whereas maybe Brits who become instructors have more passion for teaching because it is actually harder work for them to get to the requisite level? I don't know, I'm speculating wildly. In Switzerland, at least, I know of an awful lot of 30somethings working in business who used to be ski instructors but gave up. Whereas most of the British instructors I've come across have been doing the job for many years and, like Charlotte, intend to continue until decrepitude stops them. Is there possibly an argument of familiarity breeding contempt among people who grew up in the mountains? To go back to PG's analogy, would you rather learn a language from someone who is bilingual but takes it for granted, or from someone who worked hard to get a degree in a language but is passionate about it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| eng_ch wrote: |
| To go back to PG's analogy, would you rather learn a language from someone who is bilingual but takes it for granted, or from someone who worked hard to get a degree in a language but is passionate about it? |
I would prefer to learn from a native language speaker (or someone who speaks without an accent) and who has a teaching degree. The Eurotest is a bit like a check on your accent and grammar - it puts pressure on the person under test but a good speaker (skier) should be able to pass it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| davidof wrote: |
| eng_ch wrote: |
| To go back to PG's analogy, would you rather learn a language from someone who is bilingual but takes it for granted, or from someone who worked hard to get a degree in a language but is passionate about it? |
I would prefer to learn from a native language speaker (or someone who speaks without an accent) and who has a teaching degree. |
I think that's a slightly different thing - I was talking more about passion above.
With languages, in my experience (others may have different experiences) the native speakers have actually been the less effective teachers and I have come to the conclusion it's because the skill is too obvious too them - it's almost too natural - and they are not as well aware of where or why their students may experience problems as the teachers who have reached their level through study. I don't know if that translates to skiing at all or whether a teacher's empathy with their student increases their teaching effectiveness. I do know that the less effective (for me) ski instructors I've had have actually been people who were born on skis (including with Equivalence).
|
|
|
|
|
|
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: |
| To go back to PG's analogy, would you rather learn a language from someone who is bilingual but takes it for granted, or from someone who worked hard to get a degree in a language but is passionate about it? |
There is the third, and obviously preferable alternative. Someone who is bilingual who is passionate about teaching.
There is no reason whatsoever why native speakers - who enjoy the teaching profession and are properly trained - should not be at least as effective as anyone else. Of course it's natural to speak their own language, but having studied at least one other foreign language themselves, they are clearly aware of the difficulties students encounter.
Anyway, imho, speaking French should come 'naturally' to a French teacher! If it doesn't, he/she must be pretty rubbish at the language!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eng_ch...
My favourite instructors ALL grew up on skis.... now I am NOT at all athletic & do not learn skiing easily... these guys are the MOST empathetic.... they remember being dragged around the hills by their parents and their friends & they remember how many years of "just skiing" ot took to learn to ski WELL.... Now they have one thing in common & ONLY that one thing... they love teaching skiing actually better make it 2 things they love skiing
I have skied with the instructor who struggled to learn to ski and while she was terribly sympathetic all she taught me was a heap of her own bad habits.... in fact looking back my basic technique was probably better before those lessons (although I gained some confidence from the ski time).... somehwere around 80 private lessons wasted learning poorly and a whole lot more needed to undo the damage.... would you call this money well spent? Why does this woman teach skiing? I would say because she has some attachment to status of calling herself a ski instructor....
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
80 private lessons! Was it anyone we know? Over how many weeks, months, years did you have these lessons?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
SimonN, Not quite right - you have to pass the Test Technique which is a pretty easy slalom - not at all the same as the Eurotest.
David Goldsmith, Not wishing to offend - but spoken as a part time Grade 3! Cartel is what they call it - of course it's protectionism - we're protecting our high level qualifications and our professional standards.
laundryman, No need to be technical at all - normal words do the job just fine! I do think most Brits expect all people in ski resorts to speak fluent idiomatic english (maybe not snowheads of course!) as demonstrated yesterday by a guy yelling for loo paper at the poor girl minding the toilets! How's she supposed to know what he meant? and in any case how many toilet attendants in Britain speak another language!!!!!????????? Sorry - off topic.
sugardaddy, You make some good points, but the whole business in changing, in France as well. Many of the youger ski teachers are not from the mountains, and have made a conscious decision to teach skiing as a career. This is hugely different to the old days. It's unfortunate that the ESF tend to have a strict pecking order, which favours the first in first served theory. I have to say though, that while I havent spotted any ESF guys here on SugarDaddys there are a number that ski mid-fat all mountain skis every day!!!
PG, Most people who've passed it say it's quite easy - part of the culture!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
little tiger, PG, I've obviously been unfortunate then! As I said, I can only speak for my experience, as is the case with all of us. Ultimately I reckon passion is the crucial thing in teaching, passion can overcome a few (but not too many or major) technical shortcomings, but technical perfection cannot, imo, overcome a lack of passion in teachers of anything. Obviously both is best, but a passionate teacher with a few technical shortcomings will at least inspire the student to continue with the activity. Without exception so far, the BASI 1s I've encountered have been some of the most passionate - and skilled - skiers and teachers I've come across. Even if you think the standards required at BASI 2 and 3 are too low, the system is obviously doing something right.
Going back to PG's original point, I think it's fairly obvious that someone who has been doing something almost full time since childhood is likely to be a better practitioner by age 20 (or even 30) and it will be second nature; partly because children haven't yet soaked up all the other extraneous information that fills adults' heads and partly because they actually have the time to put in the hours of practice. An adult learner really needs to be totally committed to an activity to get to the same level; it can be done, but obviously the adult learner is at a comparative disadvantage. Providing the end level is the same, does it matter? Or are you proposing that only BASI 1 level (in whichever system) be let loose on the public unsupervised and everyone below that simply be first, second, third year students/apprentices? I would think there is an argument for that. If you are questioning the required standards at BASI 2 and 3, that's slightly different from a statement that French and British teenagers/20-year-olds typically ski at different standards
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
The original point in raising this topic (again - it's manifested itself in various guises before) was to look at the problem from a different angle.
A summary of the situation as I see it:
There is a quasi-monopoly in France which has been helped by recent legislation stopping ski schools from becoming accredited training centres if they are under a certain size. Obviously this benefited the largest, the ESF.
The ESF retorted that small ski schools employed a disproportionate number of trainees to fully qualified instructors, thereby enabling otherwise uneconomic businesses to survive. This was resulting both in a general lowering of standards and top level instructors being priced out of employment. The unspoken belief (and I've talked to a number of ESF directors about this) was/is that the trainees in some cases were, quite simply, very poor skiers. VERY poor skiers. Now let's not get into the teaching v. skiing ability thing again. I agree that the ability to teach is essential, ok?   . All I'm trying to do is get at where the twain can meet, given the sharp divide between opposing positions.
The main organisation representing smaller operators argued that this legislation was purely an ESF-instigated protectionist move, the ESF being overwhelmingly the largest single ski school, and the only ones who could legally carry on employing trainees in many places as a result.
The ESF points out that not everywhere is Tignes/Les Arcs/Courchevel, and many of the ESF branches in smaller resorts find themselves in the same boat as the smaller independents as a result.
The ESF has also argued that that 'ski hosting' is in certain cases a way of circumventing legislation in what is a regulated profession. As a result some businesses run holiday operations with inclusive prices (accommodation plus ski hosting) whereby the guide - who just happens to be a BASI 2 or 3 - is provided free of charge.
Their final argument is that in a mountain environment there is every reason for this to be a regulated profession, ensuring that the highest of standards are maintained. There is both the unpredictability and danger inherent in sliding around at altitude in all weathers, plus the risk of injury to the physically unprepared and untrained holidaymakers who make up the vast bulk of visitors to ski resorts each year.
______________________
For a big part of the season, there is barely enough work to keep the fully qualified instructors busy. So when the holiday rush comes along, the use of trainees is unavoidable to an extent. But should only the biggest ski schools have access to these trainees?
The ESF tends to employ French trainees, although there is some movement, and a slight change in attitude. A recognition that the ESF needs to look at teaching practices to see why other operations are getting better press.
I (and easiski to an extent) have argued that the skiing standards of some BASI trainees is a bit embarrassing. Plenty of people - including myself and easiski - have criticised the attitude of the ESF in terms of actual teaching standards, group sizes, etc.
Currently certain British ski schools are prospering, despite the higher prices, because people are opting to pay for what they consider to be better instruction. The ESF is doing ok because it is considerably cheaper, and plenty of their instructors don't fit the stereotype - they are excellent. Some are rubbish, though, so in busy holiday periods it's the luck of the draw.
But remove the constraints on trainee employment and wouldn't those British ski standards go downhill? Wouldn't some owners opt for larger profits at the expense of quality instructions? That's what often happens in a completely unregulated marketplace.
That's just some initial thoughts. This is a complicated issue, so I'm sure there'll be plenty of points raised I haven't thought of in this rushed expose.
My one and only conclusion at this time? Easiski should put her prices up!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| PG wrote: |
| The ESF retorted that small ski schools employed a disproportionate number of trainees to fully qualified instructors, thereby enabling otherwise uneconomic businesses to survive. |
Interesting post, PG. Much to comment on and so little time, so forgive me for quoting just this sentence. It's the phrase "otherwise uneconomic" that I don't understand. If a business in a free/unregulated market finds a price/quality point that satisfies sufficient customers, then it is economic. If a business can't survive without a regulatory regime that is stacked in its favour, then it is uneconomic. In my book, anyway. I'm sure you must have made similar points playing "devil's advocate" with the ESF directors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
OK, totally different discussion but sounds fun! Like laundryman, too little time, but a couple of thoughts which I'm just going to throw out and leave you to discuss :
At present it seems ESF's USP is price, the others' USP is quality
What would be wrong with specifying a proportion of trainees that each school could employ/train (are employment and training 2 different things?)
What about differential pricing based on qualifications, like hairdressers? i.e. you charge double for a BASI 1 over a BASI 2 (or whatever)? Then ESF could also put up its prices for its excellent instructors. So long as there is transparency, the customers can make an informed decision - pay more for better quality, or accept lower quality for a lower price - this currently seems to exist between schools rather than within them.
If the British schools could employ trainees and their standards dropped as a result, I suspect the rumour mill would work and they could no longer justify their pricing.
Price and quality are always factors of one another and the bottom line is whether the customer thinks they're getting value for money
The current system also seems to me to work to ESF's disadvantage - I've seen a lot of instructors do their training with ESF because they have to, and promptly move to one of the British ski schools (which presumably can pay more because they charge more) as soon as they qualify. So ESF basically pays for the training, then loses good instructors, and creates a vicious circle for itself in terms of quality and hence its own reputation
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| PG wrote: |
| The ESF has also argued that that 'ski hosting' is in certain cases a way of circumventing legislation in what is a regulated profession. As a result some businesses run holiday operations with inclusive prices (accommodation plus ski hosting) whereby the guide - who just happens to be a BASI 2 or 3 - is provided free of charge. |
I think we've been round this block before and as I said then that won't fly under the French courts current interpretation of the legislation.
Now what I am told one "ski school" in a certain chic French resort has done is to set up a "ski club". His guests can join the ski club and be taught to ski just as is currently permitted under French legislation. Now that is an interesting scheme. The "ski instructors" have jobs around the chalet to earn board and lodging.
There is also the interesting case of BASI snowboard instructors. In theory a snowboard instructor needs to take the Eurotest - on skis!. I know of one qualified BASI snowboard instructor who is teaching in France with the full knowledge of the Ministry of Sports. He claims that as there is not a French equivalence as snowboarding and skiing are separate disciplines he has the right under his BASI qualification. As BASI cover his third party insurance the French Ministry have so far seemed happy with this situation. One to watch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| laundryman wrote: |
| PG wrote: |
| The ESF retorted that small ski schools employed a disproportionate number of trainees to fully qualified instructors, thereby enabling otherwise uneconomic businesses to survive. |
Interesting post, PG. Much to comment on and so little time, so forgive me for quoting just this sentence. It's the phrase "otherwise uneconomic" that I don't understand. If a business in a free/unregulated market finds a price/quality point that satisfies sufficient customers, then it is economic. If a business can't survive without a regulatory regime that is stacked in its favour, then it is uneconomic. In my book, anyway. I'm sure you must have made similar points playing "devil's advocate" with the ESF directors. |
I understood the inference to be that certain operations were being maintained on a 'business' footing, ie making a profit, through a form of malpractice combined with a degree of deceit to disguise the 'poor quality' product. Cowboys, in other words. Some independents are owned by a small number of individuals, so there is a greater incentive to increase profit at the expense of quality - in theory - than in the likes of the ESF which doesn't actually employ instructors as such - instructors are all self-employed, and give a proportion of their income to the ESF to maintain the administrative side.
On the other hand there have allegedly been numerous examples of restrictive practices, supported on occasion by the local communes and the lift companies. One ESF branch in a favourite resort of laundryman was rented space at a tenth of the going rate. Another, not a million miles from where I am typing this post, stopped instructors from schools with less than six employees on the slopes from using the priority lanes. Across the mountain in a 3V resort, I hear some independents have in the past been asked to cough up many times the going rate to appear in the official tourist brochure. Lift companies have been taken to court, and sentenced, for not giving preferential rates for ski passes to instructors working for competitors. It's not that long since clauses in ESF instructors' contracts, restricting them from having to join competitors' ski schools, were abolished as a result of intervention by the Monopolies Commission.
Of course it will rebound on the ESF in the end, and undermines any viable points in arguments put forward by the ESF ref the quality of independents and the skiing standards of their trainees, etc. No matter how accurate they are. Currently it's working to the benefit of a number of British schools, the adverse publicity combining with the obligation to employ fully qualified instructors ensuring that the likes of New Generation and others can charge much higher rates and still have largely satisfied customer bases. The system does stop the independents from growing more quickly though. Typical of the French - delaying the inevitable, a little like they have done with their wine industry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stevepick, I have at no time ever stated or inferred that
| Quote: |
it is better to be taught by a french trainee than a basi 2 or 3
|
- therefore a large part of your post is misplaced.
I was not "detaching 'teaching' skill from the equation". I was asking that we ignore the equation as a whole for a moment while we look at the elements that make it up in detail. I have repeatedly said that teaching is at least as important as technical ability. Doh.
We can all come up with anecdotal evidence about individual experiences of tuition. No offence, but I prefer to listen to those 'on the ground'.
As for race results, all countries have ups and downs, and after a decent tally of gold medals and WC's over a lengthy period the French have been in a bit of a slump since 2003/4. It happens. No coincidence that the French Fed went bankrupt around then.
Your brother: a racer and a BASI 3? How many FIS points in each discipline?
| Quote: |
| The french racer development program is huge, and has a lot of organisation and money behind it |
I'm sorry, but that shows how little you know about that particular subject.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
