 Poster: A snowHead
|
I'm not sure what the problem is with people doing these courses even though they don't plan to teach. The whole BASI Gap thing is pretty clearly a commercial arrangement for those involved and if people are happy to pay the fee, why not?
Going for the 2 week ski instructor assessment seems does seem a bit of a waste of time if all you want to do is improve your skiing
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
slikedges, The qualifications are hard enough, without having someone in your group, who is there for the wrong reasons. It is a teaching qualification, not there for some sort of trophy hunter. The group pulls together, for a common aim of furthering their standards and grades. It is damaging to the whole group if there is someone there, who is not pulling together. Your motivation for enrolling on the course as well as your skiing standard should be inspected, before you are allowed to enlist, because you will effect the performance of your fellow candidates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
boredsurfin, That Warren was Greg Stump 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
slikedges, Getting professional qualifications for the sake of it may be laudible. It is fine if they are truly motivated to take on board all the elements of the course and be at a reasonable starting level of skiing. If all you want to do is measure you technical ability you are on the wrong course. The instructor course is designed to teach you how to teach.
My beef is with the Warren Smith group 1 GAP year types who turn up unprepared, not near the required standard and could care less if they pass with have no intentions of teaching. For instance they arent going to be as highly motivated to do 3 hours of demonstrating plough turns and will tend drag the group down.
The basi foundation 1 week course gives you a clear measure of how you are doing before you undertake the full instructors course and in my mind should be a prerequesite to the GAP course. There were many people who werent sure about their ability (myself included) who did the trainee course and it was great to get an objective measurement of our skiing. Interestingly ony around a 1/3 of our trainee course attendees went on to do the instrucotr course this year. some preferred to delay a year, others questioned their own motivation as to why they were dedicating the time and others needed more practice.
A big part of the learning in the BASI 3 course is evening 2 hour lectures on theory, partner drills, peer review and mock teaching lessons. I would say 40% of the course is solely on teaching and not performance based. If i was on a course and got paired with someone who wasnt bothered with the teaching/theory elements it woudn't help me improve.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
skimottaret, Thank you, you have put it across perfectly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| skimottaret wrote: |
sorry to harp on but you seem to contradict yourself
| Quote: |
That's why I would do such a course when I'm of a requisite standard
|
and then say
| Quote: |
Which is why I almost certainly won't do it
|
|
You missed the key part of what I wrote which was were I to do it, which is why I then added "note the use of the subjunctive". Therefore no contradiction whatsoever 
| Quote: |
| getting yourself timed at the end of a holiday is a good objective way of measuring your skiing against others. The ESF do it with kids all the time and issue badges accordingly. Not sure it is facile |
I'm not talking about measuring against others - I'm talking about are you safe on the mountain, are you competent to negotiate ice comfortably and safely, ditto steeps, powder, bumps, have you done avy training etc etc etc What's wrong with having some sort of certificate/qualification as evidence of these skills?
| Quote: |
| you dont need an instructors license to gauge your ability. |
My point is that there's little else external against which to gauge your ability. Spyderman has pointed out the Snowlife awards but also concedes they are practically unknown
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| skimottaret wrote: |
My beef is with the Warren Smith group 1 GAP year types who turn up unprepared, not near the required standard and could care less if they pass with have no intentions of teaching. For instance they arent going to be as highly motivated to do 3 hours of demonstrating plough turns and will tend drag the group down.
The basi foundation 1 week course gives you a clear measure of how you are doing before you undertake the full instructors course and in my mind should be a prerequesite to the GAP course. |
I can't disagree with this
| Quote: |
| There were many people who werent sure about their ability (myself included) who did the trainee course and it was great to get an objective measurement of our skiing. |
I rest my case 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Spyderman, well said and much more clearly than my attempt 
No wonder BASI qualifications have a stigma attached to them in France when ESF qualified instructors see kids in "trainee instructor" jackets from the GAP providers who have 4 weeks of experience under their belts and are doing shadowing.
At least BASI is trying to keep the bar high by failing 10 of 10 but it doesnt help with commercial providers taking people on exams that have no business being there in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eng_ch, Just because there is no other widely recognised level system, does not give a person the justification to go for the BASI qualification, to the detriment of the other course candidates, that are there for the right reasons. Very selfish behaviour, in my opinion.
Last edited by Ski the Net with snowHeads  on Mon 23-04-07 14:07; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| skimottaret wrote: |
No wonder BASI qualifications have a stigma attached to them in France when ESF qualified instructors see kids in "trainee instructor" jackets from the GAP providers who have 4 weeks of experience under their belts and are doing shadowing.
At least BASI is trying to keep the bar high by failing 10 of 10 but it doesnt help with commercial providers taking people on exams that have no business being there in the first place. |
I don't know if it's what you intend, but some of what you've written comes across as confusing entry levels and the students' reasons for doing the course.
I'm very surpsied about this 4 weeks business - I thought entry level for trainee instructor (foundation?) was minimum 16 weeks on snow, and even that seems to me to be far too little experience (regardless of skills)
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| Spyderman wrote: |
| eng_ch, Just because there is no other widely recognised level system, does not give a person the justification to go for the BASI qualification, to the detriment of the other course candidates, that are there for the right reasons. Very selfish behaviour, in my opinion. |
Define the "right" reasons? Do you object to someone doing the course if they have the best skills of anyone in their group, pass with flying colours but have no intention of teaching? Or change their mind afterwards and decide teaching isn't for them? Is that "to the detriment of other course candidates"? If so, how? Do you have the same objections to people doing degrees in subjects they don't intend to pursue professionally or can't get a job in? To nurses or teachers leaving their professions?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
skimottaret, OK, so you wouldn't have any objection to anybody doing the foundation course as a measure of progress? Then what if you don't want to teach? Performance clinics are usually just a few days at a time and, if you take several over a season, probably quickly add up to the cost of, e.g. a gap course. Where next for those who don't want to teach?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Spyderman wrote: |
| eng_ch, Just because there is no other widely recognised level system, does not give a person the justification to go for the BASI qualification, to the detriment of the other course candidates, that are there for the right reasons. Very selfish behaviour, in my opinion. |
Doesn't it really depend on how they behave. If they are focused and don't impede others and they share the love of skiing 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
eng_ch, we are getting out of sinc a bit but with regards to
| Quote: |
I don't know if it's what you intend, but some of what you've written comes across as confusing entry levels and the students' reasons for doing the course.
I'm very surpsied about this 4 weeks business - I thought entry level for trainee instructor (foundation?) was minimum 16 weeks on snow, and even that seems to me to be far too little experience (regardless of skills)
|
This is a crux of the argument for this thread. The GAP year course students do not have to attend a BASI Trainee course prior to enrolling and loads of people are there that shouldnt be to the detriment of the other students.
To clarify the other route to getting an instructors license is to do the 1 week trainee course, train and do 70 hours of shadow teaching and then the 10 day instructors course. The GAP year 10 week course compresses this into a single session.
The BASI trainee course is NOT pass fail, nor are you granted a professional license after this course.
you are graded and given an objective assesment of what you need to work on to prepare yourself for the next course (the instructors course) and crucially given an estimate of how many weeks of skiing you will need to do to adequately prepare. On my course this ranged from 1 week (you are nearly there) to 16 weeks (dont give up the day job )
The 4 weeks comment is quoted from a post from offpisteskiing who without de cloaking him i believe is a BASI trainer, there are people on these courses with 4-8 weeks skiing experience and the GAP year students tend not to be as techically qualified.
these course are promted as a fast track X% pass rate if you come on our course, and, with only a limited amount of skiing "you to can be an instructor".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
eng_ch,
| Quote: |
Define the "right" reasons?
|
Someone with a genuine wish to teach.
| Quote: |
Do you object to someone doing the course if they have the best skills of anyone in their group
|
BASI is not just about your technical level as a skier, it is also about you as a person and your ability to teach.
| Quote: |
change their mind afterwards and decide teaching isn't for them?
|
Don't forget that the candidates will do 70 hours shadowing before their course. Sure there will be people who finally decide that it is not for them, but did it for the right reasons at the time.
| Quote: |
To nurses or teachers leaving their professions?
|
They leave the profession for whatever reason, they don't go through years of study, just so they can tell their mates how clever they are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| skimottaret wrote: |
| The 4 weeks comment is quoted from a post from offpisteskiing who without de cloaking him i believe is a BASI trainer, there are people on these courses with 4-8 weeks skiing experience and the GAP year students tend not to be as techically qualified. |
OK, this may be where I'm confused - I always thought if a gap course started with the trainee instructor course then the entry level to the gap course would be the entry level to the trainee instructor course. Or maybe that's too obvious (Maybe this is something warrensmith can come back on?)
And are you effectively saying, if money were no object, it's quite feasible for someone to just keep taking the trainee instructor thingy to measure progress? So if, for example, a person's individual goal were to get to such a level where training to be an instructor was perfectly viable, skill-wise, even if they never intend actually to do it, that the trainee instructor course c/would be a way of measuring that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
dan100, You quickly get to learn people's motivation for doing the course. you get to learn a lot about yourself and your peers during the course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
eng_ch, I agree with your and slikedges viewpoint on this. There are obviously several groups of people who would do a GAP course (either Warren's or anyone elses). There are some for whom it is the first step on the career ladder, there are the one's doing it because Mater and Pater are springing for it, and others for whom it's a career break, who probably aren't going to use the qualification but want some structure to their season, some good instruction and the chance to meet with other like minded folk. This last group will certainly not have a detrimental effect on the other people and I'm sure would be still very keen to pass but it's not the end of the world if they don't. I considered doing the course last year and would have fallen into this group. I can't imagine BASI having a problem with this as they still get the income from the course fees. If there was a season long performance course which wasn't based around the BASI qualification on the market I'd look at that seriously but there doesn't appear to be.
Spyderman, I appreciate that you have made your apologies to Warren and that's fine. I just find it a bit odd that you are still strongly critical (questioning?) of his course when nobody who has actually done the course has felt the need to post anything negative about it. With regard to political intrigue, from what he says in his post I don't think there is any friction between Warren and BASI and indeed the man himself is very complimentary about his relationship with them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
eng_ch,
| Quote: |
skimottaret, OK, so you wouldn't have any objection to anybody doing the foundation course as a measure of progress? Then what if you don't want to teach? Performance clinics are usually just a few days at a time and, if you take several over a season, probably quickly add up to the cost of, e.g. a gap course. Where next for those who don't want to teach?
|
Broadly correct as if someone does the 5 day trainee course to get a feel for where they are technically thats fine. The trainee couse is designed to expose you to instruction as well as measure your technical ability and expose problem areas that need work.
but remember you then have to commit to the next stage before the Instructors course. you must get your 70 hours of instructing under you belt, do a two day first aiders course, a half day child protection module and pay to join BASI. By that point i feel that you would be clear in you mind as to why you wanted to go to the next level, or, as you say decide that teaching wasnt for you.
if you dont want to teach there is off piste skiing, telemarking, snowbaording, private instruction, performance clinics, race camps, mountain safety courses, avalanche awareness, etc...
I dont think that taking a GAP course at £6,500 will make you a better skier than say 6,500 pounds of the above training if that is your only motivation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eng_ch,
| Quote: |
OK, this may be where I'm confused - I always thought if a gap course started with the trainee instructor course then the entry level to the gap course would be the entry level to the trainee instructor course. Or maybe that's too obvious
|
your right to be confused and this is where spyderman is coming from. The only prerequestite on a Warren smith GAP course is a telephone interview.....
and yes people resit the trainee course if they were way below the mark... They go away and work on their skiing and then come back when ready, that is why it isnt pass fail.
We had one guy on our course that had failed the 2 week instructors course twice and was on his third go..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
edited
Last edited by After all it is free on Mon 23-04-07 14:49; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| skimottaret wrote: |
I dont think that taking a GAP course at £6,500 will make you a better skier than say 6,500 pounds of the above training if that is your only motivation. |
No, but, "I'm a qualified ski instructor, you know", is a far better pulling line than, "I've done all sorts of courses". 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BGA,
Quote:
FWIW one of the New Gen guys in Verbier told me that there was something "fishy" with BASI when they did the initial test that so few passed. I really have no idea what that was though.
Quote:
Spyderman, I was out in Verbier at the end of Jan & met number of the GAP students who were very pleased with how the course was doing. From what I've heard there was certainly something odd (maybe even political) going on.
I did not raise the point about any friction between Warren Smith and BASI.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
skimottaret, yes, of course you can do everything separately, but for consistent improvement over the season without a structured course such as the instructor courses, isn't one rather reliant on private lessons, ideally with the same one or two or may three instructors so half the time isn't wasted on checking out where you've got to? Group lessons are probably useless as you will only ever progress as fast as the lowest denominator in the top level group which is likely to be the same level all season. Isn't the same likely to apply to performance clinics? Does there seem to be a demand for a gap performance course for example? Of course I could just be barking up totally the wrong tree.
Personally, being close to the mountains anyway, what would be most useful would be someone that would offer, say, 2-4 hours of private instruction most weekends through the season for a slightly reduced price, effectively an instruction season ticket such as I gather Whistler do. Work precludes my simply taking lots of full weeks off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
all, a most intersting thread, thanks for the debate 
BGA,
| Quote: |
and others for whom it's a career break, who probably aren't going to use the qualification but want some structure to their season, some good instruction and the chance to meet with other like minded folk. This last group will certainly not have a detrimental effect on the other people and I'm sure would be still very keen to pass but it's not the end of the world if they don't
|
fair enough and quite right too but what you havent seen is the groups of spoiled rich kids on the wee wee every night... the prissy wife who was married to a lawyer and threatened to write letters to BASI because her trainer hated her (true stores sadly)
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
eng_ch, my point being is that if all you are after is pure technical improvement a lot of an instructors course will be wasted on you as it revolves around teaching.
I think you are quite right about a GAP performance course sounds ideal to me... Also agree fully with discounted seasonal instruction. i am sure most instructors would be willling to do a deal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
skimottaret,
| Quote: |
I think you are quite right about a GAP performance course sounds ideal to me
|
Ideally with some sort of acreditation, at the end of the course, which is internationally recognised, as to the standard of the skier. At least then people who feel the need, have something to show for it at the end of the course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| Spyderman wrote: |
skimottaret,
| Quote: |
I think you are quite right about a GAP performance course sounds ideal to me
|
Ideally with some sort of acreditation, at the end of the course, which is internationally recognised, as to the standard of the skier. At least then people who feel the need, have something to show for it at the end of the course. |
Yes, bingo. Rather like the RYA. You don't need to have their qualifications to sail in the UK (Switzerland is a law unto itself as usual) but for those who want it the progression is there. But if you're going to sail the oceans or teach, then you do need the quals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
double bingo... Kinda like sailing or gliding badges...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
How about a Snowheads based certification? We could come up with something I'm sure. Additional accreditation for alcohol tolerance, provocative postings etc etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eng_ch whilst the RYA system does have it's good points you dont need any qualifiactions to sail the oceans.....
i have been sailing with plenty of fully qualified Yachtmasters who i wouldnt trust with my boat!
to my mind a piece of paper needs backing up with suitable experience and it is this aspect that lets some of the rya qualified bods down
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BGA,
| Quote: |
]Spyderman, I appreciate that you have made your apologies to Warren and that's fine. I just find it a bit odd that you are still strongly critical (questioning?) of his course when nobody who has actually done the course has felt the need to post anything negative about it.
|
I posted originally because I was told something that I thought needed airing, the information it turned out to be incorrect, for which I have apologised unreservedly.
I still question the entry requirements just being a telephone interview, which is why I have been more critical of the Warren Smith course, than the one's provided by New Gen, which involve a ski test. Plus the fact that some of the candidates entry standard is way below BASI entry standards, using the normal trainee course route. I have nothing personal against Warren Smith and indeed have known him since 1992. I do object though to the way Gap courses are promoted and sold.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Roger C wrote: |
| eng_ch whilst the RYA system does have it's good points you dont need any qualifiactions to sail the oceans..... |
OK, fair enough - I was after an example rather than absolute accuracy But I wouldn't want to sail the high seas without some sort of qualification if only to cover my back after a fashion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eng_ch, RYA model, is perfect. Nice Handbook to collect all of the qualification stamps. Recognised worldwide. I've already got some of them.
Roger C,
| Quote: |
you dont need any qualifiactions to sail the oceans.....
|
but you certainly do need them to hire a boat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
the difference being that for me and the majority of others the assessment wasnt the be all and end all for the trainee course. The assessment was to tell us if we were ready for the full insturctors course. I was genuinely concerned that i didnt want to waste my time and others being on a course if i wasnt prepared. It was gratifying to learn i was close and had a real chance.
