 Poster: A snowHead
|
| slikedges wrote: |
| I'm confused. Is there still or is there now not a ski radius requirement for ADC L2? Is it more than or around 17m or 18m? |
Still says 17m on the website.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Yep guys I 'm confused too! In the course directory 2008/09 under prerequisites for the ADC2 it says: Ski requirement of GS skis of no less than 18m radius (no mention of sex) and directly opposite on the same page in a yellow box: Greater than 17m radius for males and greater than 15m radius for females.
In this year's directory it says Ski requirement: (Alpine) Greater than 17m radius for males and greater than 15m radius for females.
The point of my comment was that I feel the drills would have been easier for me on a shorter and slightly lighter tighter turning GS ski. That is all. I apologise if I've confused people. As I said - check with the office to make sure.
As for the minty turns sorry I've no idea how you spell them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
juliad, Maybe the thinking is that the course is aimed at coaching fairly young kids, they should be mainly doing GS at that age so get you to do the drills on similar skis.
When I'm coaching I always do demos on 13m slalom skis. If I were to use my GS skis then by the time I was up to speed I would be too far away for my trainees to see anything.
Thanks for posting the list of drills, we get people who have done ADC1 asking to shadow club race training sessions to prepare for ADC2. At least I now know what to do with them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
juliad, I hope you've given your feedback to BASI? In my view people should never be put in a position where they turn up to do a pass / fail course not knowing what to expect or what they will be tested on, especially when it costs so much time and money!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Quote: |
Cool. So I might be OK if I turn up with my 3Vs (which are the piste skis I own)
|
Just tape over the 3 and write a 2 on the tape instead 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Come on guys this is a bit silly... 17 or 18 M radius, who cares.... I asked one of the trainers about the ski requirement and he just said you needed GS skis, couldnt give a £*&^ about what exact radius as long as they were GS skis of some description. I think you would be hard pressed to find a "GS" ski that was less than 17m (for the lads) even if it was a recreational GS ski. as long as you dont turn up on twin tips, fat skis or something unsuitable i dont think any trainer is going to fail you for having a ski that is 16.9M radius
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can understand juliad's point though that turning up on FIS GS skis might not have helped her. Big difference between them and "off the shelf" GS skis. (although lack of previous practice of the drills was probably the main problem).
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
You are absolutely correct beanie1. Lack of practice of said drills was the main factor in my failure. I've never had to do any of these specific drills before and found them really difficult to do. Obviously this highlights issues and I need to go and practice all manner of drills to test and develop my skiing skills.
Maybe I should have phrased things better in my first post but the main points were that you will find the course easier if you are able to demonstrate the drills to the level because you are used to doing drills. Different skis would have helped me but that is a personal thing. Others might not have the same issue. With a 50% pass rate in my group (think it was similiar in the other groups but don't quote me on that), I was not the only person finding it tough...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
juliad, all fair points and i agree that they should publish as least a representative list of the type drills you may be asked to do..
I think one reason that the pass rate is lower now is that there are lots of people who did their L1 coach and then go straight into the L2 without practice and are surprised by how much higher the standard is at L2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
I think the way people should approach it (and it should be made very clear on the website etc) is that L2 Coach is an ISIA level (L3) standard course. It's maybe a bit confusing for people if they pass their L1 instructor and L1 coach, then do their L2 instructor and think they're ready for their L2 coach. There's a huge jump in standard between L2 and L3 instructor, as there is between L1 and L2 coach, as skimottaret points out.
When skimottaret, and I did the course there was no L1 coach, so they weren't targetting entry level coaches with the qualificaiton. Everyone on our course was there because they were doing their ISIA, some of whom had alreay passed the Tech, or just about to pass the tech.
Out of interest juliad, of those who passed and failed in your group, can you remember how many of them had passed their L3 tech, and if any of those who failed had already passed the tech?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
beanie1, there were 8 in my group. 3 had passed their L3 tech. 2 out of 3 of these passed. 3 more including me (1 of these passed) are/were planning on the L3 tech this season and not sure what the other 2 (1 of these passed) are planning re the L3 tech. IMO It wasn't the case that people had just scraped their L2 Alpine and came onto this course (in my group anyway)...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
juliad, in that case I personally think that there is something going wrong somewhere with this course (or the ISIA tech). The on piste performance level of ISIA tech is meant to be the same level as ADC L2, and another trainer confirmed to me that someone capable of passing the ISIA tech should be capable of passing the L2 coach. So if they don't what's going wrong? It either suggests inconsistency in levels of assessment between the courses, that the course is pitched slightly too high, or maybe it comes down to the lack of pre-course info, and the fact that pass / fail drills are not something someone working their way through the BASI system would ever have come across before. Personally I think it's probably the latter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| beanie1 wrote: |
| Personally I think it's probably the latter. |
Me too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
juliad, you were very brave turning up in FIS GS skis if you'd not done some racing or race training before. Had you skied them very much before?
ADC is a race coach qualification. Instructors with no race training or race coaching experience shouldn't expect to just be able to rock up and wing it. The point of ADC is not the achievement of a technical standard. That's the means. The end is that they want a L3 instructor to be able to deliver race training to minis. I believe one way to get to do lots of race training drills is to sign up as a training member or assistant coach (if you don't have any issues with some of your trainee minis being better technical piste skiers than you!) at your local race club. I'd imagine most instructors on the continent are ex-club racers and by the increasing number of child club racers I know here growing up and deciding to bag some instructor qualifications, I'm imagine the same could happen here (of course many won't then go on to pursue a full-time instructor career). All of these young guys 'n gals would have no prob with either familiarity or performance of ADC L2 drills!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
beanie1, when you did the course, there was no L2 course either was there? I thought it was just ADC so needed to cater for both cohorts?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| slikedges wrote: |
| ADC is a race coach qualification. |
Indeed it is, so I wonder why is is a mandatory part of the instructor pathway at L3? My guess is that the majority of candidates on the teaching pathway who get to L3 will not have had a racing background, so may well not have much experience of some of these drills before they get to the course. Greater clarity of assessment criteria doesn't seem like an unreasonable request. For my part I'm beginning to work on some of these drills as well as doing some shadowing at the Hemel Race Club, so hopefully I will be a bit better prepared for the ADC L2 at the end of the season 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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, I think there were only 3 levels when we did the course, so the course we did was effectively what they now call L1 and L2 together.
You make a valid point, but the fact remains that many people doing the L2 ADC course are doing so to get their ISIA. Yes they need to be able to coach minis, but to be fair that is perfectly within the abilities of any ISIA instructor in my view. My point is that you are not properly prepared in advance as to what to expect from this course, unlike you are with the instructor courses - where you will have done a mnimum of 3 weeks worth of instructor courses by the time you get to L3 tech, which is in itself a 10 day course, so 5 weeks by the end of that course. Lots and lots of time to work with a trainer on your personal performance and you will be very familiar with what to expect and the method of assessment. With the coach course you will have done 3 days of the ADC L1, followed by a huge jump up to ADC L2 where you suddenly find yourself faced with sme tricky pass / fail drills you may not have done before. At no point does BASI advise you that you need to go and coach a race club first, or tell you what the drills are so you can practice. So if you are don't come from a race background, you are sort of thrown in at that higher level without adequate preparation.
Not quite sure what the solution is. They could make the ADC L1 a harder and longer course, but then that would exclude the entry level coaches they also want to cater for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
rob@rar, The irony is that the old APM course was supposedly introduced as the requirement for ISIA because too many people were failing the APC1 course after passing ISIA teach and tech.
I don't think BASI are helping things by running ADC1 and ADC2 back to back, it will give people the idea that they are similar standard.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
rjs, the APM was the worst of all though, from what I've heard, it was purely pass / fail drills and lots of people failed. Which is one of the reasons it was replaced.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| beanie1 wrote: |
| Not quite sure what the solution is. |
Make the assessment criteria clearer would be a big help, or more radically make the coaching qualifications an option for the teaching qualification rather than mandatory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rob@rar,
| Quote: |
more radically make the coaching qualifications an option for the teaching qualification rather than mandatory.
|
Don't think they could do that - a coaching element is a requirement of ISIA.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| beanie1 wrote: |
rob@rar,
| Quote: |
more radically make the coaching qualifications an option for the teaching qualification rather than mandatory.
|
Don't think they could do that - a coaching element is a requirement of ISIA. |
OK, must be kept in then. Just making the assessment criteria a bit clearer would make a big difference IMO. I had a good idea of what was expected for alpine L1 and L2 so could do whatever preparation I needed, but I had no idea what was expected for ADC L1 and I'm only beginning to get an idea for L2 by speaking to people who have already done it and from reading snowHeads!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
rob@rar, I agree that most candidates these days won't have come from a racing background, but I think that may change in the future as there are now so many taking an interest both in indoor slope racing and in instructor qualifications. Greater clarity of assessment criteria certainly isn't an unreasonable request but in any case I'm sure your shadowing at HSRC will stand you in good stead.
beanie1, I don't agree that coaching minis is perfectly within the abilities of any instructor who skis to ISIA level. As with any professional undertaking, without a certain core of knowledge/skills/experience they could only run at best a poorly focussed and at worst a deleterious session, particularly bearing in mind that some minis (even UK ones) can ski gates quicker and cleaner than many ISIAs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
slikedges, sadly many of the coaches working in the UK I've met don't have anywhere near the level of technical understanding and teaching ability of an ISIA instructor. That's not to criticise them, they do a fantastic job giving many kids the opportunity to race train. To be fair all ISIAs (which is what I said) will have completed the ADC L2 or APC 1, or APM. Do you not think those courses are enough?
Plus is the technical aspect of skiing gates really what minis should be focusing on anyway?
A Swiss friend of mine use to coach the minis from her village's local ski club. They hardly ever went near the gates at that age, they just learnt to ski the whole mountain well, with a focus on piste performance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| beanie1 wrote: |
| slikedges, sadly many of the coaches working in the UK I've met don't have anywhere near the level of technical understanding and teaching ability of an ISIA instructor. That's not to criticise them, they do a fantastic job giving many kids the opportunity to race train. |
I didn't say they did. However even some of these might do a better job at the minis coaching than a middling ski instructor with no racing/coaching experience.
| Quote: |
| To be fair all ISIAs (which is what I said) will have completed the ADC L2 or APC 1, or APM. Do you not think those courses are enough? |
Of course, but you were intimating that they shouldn't have to do theses courses.
| Quote: |
Plus is the technical aspect of skiing gates really what minis should be focusing on anyway?
A Swiss friend of mine use to coach the minis from her village's local ski club. They hardly ever went near the gates at that age, they just learnt to ski the whole mountain well, with a focus on piste performance. |
Whether or not it should be, the fact remains that some of them would whup the ass of many ISIAs at least on technical piste skiing. That does for Fun For some Minis. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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: |
middling ski instructor with no racing/coaching experience.
|
ouch 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
skimottaret, you don't fit that description and you know it. You have a rep for being an enthusiastic and skilled minis coach who consistently delivers focussed and fun sessions. Remember, I know a few of your athletes rather well...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
deleted due to bad inside joke
Last edited by You know it makes sense. on Sat 31-10-09 1:18; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
skimottaret, 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| rob@rar wrote: |
| slikedges wrote: |
| ADC is a race coach qualification. |
Indeed it is, so I wonder why is is a mandatory part of the instructor pathway at L3? |
My strong suspicion is that BASI are trying to up the euro test pass rate by incorporating race training as part of the ISIA requirement. Good for those planning to go through to level '4', less useful if not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
david@mediacopy, I'd heard that - that it was essentially a Eurotest training course - but about the APM, and that that was one of the reasons for its replacement by the ADC.
juliad, thanks for that report. I'd been contemplating going for this in Dec, but I dithered for so long that it got booked up before I made my mind up! Given my embarassingly poor attempts at tic-tacks last Monday, I'm glad I did. A lot more practice required methinks.
Those drills are things that you'd encounter in reasonable level race training, so it seems sensible that you'd need to be able to do them as a coach. It's certainly way beyond what you'd expect a mini to do though - rather more a 50-100 point junior. As the next level up, the L3 coach, is pitched at being able to coach National Team level athletes, so I'd expect L2 to be definitely at higher than minis - that 50-100 point level would seem a good target. So there does seem to be a bit of biploarity about the course at present. As has been said several times, the L2 seems now pitched very definitely at the upper end of the L3 instructor technical spectrum, so I'd agree that is it getting a bit high for an instructor who's not really into racing? It's also been said the the L1 coach is maybe a bit sub-L2 instructor. So there's a huge jump. From my own personal viewpoint - as a "non-instructor" coach - that jump is a very big one to make in a single step. I think that the L1 should probably be a bit higher; it's fine for its entry level pitch, but of itself it's not really enough for a club coach - so either the L1 should be pitched a bit higher, or there should probably be something between L1 and L2 - the statement that it "leads candidates into the Development Coach Level 2" is a bit disingenuous, without further detailed explanation.
Re race coaches vs non-racing instructors: I've been coached by race coaches who are not high-level instructors and instructors who have done little racing (most at lower level, but some at quite high level). From a consumer's viewpoint they are very different. The race coach's sole purpose is to get the client to ski as fast as possible through precisely prescribed points. This requires high levels of skills, balance, agility, reactions. It seems to me that non-racing instructors concentrate far more on skiing with the minimum effort possible - so skill and balance are key to this, but there's a very different feel to the focus - it still feels quite form-focussed. The best are those who are both - coaches who are ISIA+ instructors, but who are still closely involved with race training - that keeps them focussed on the final output (in the case of a race, how fast you can get down 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?
|
GrahamN, I presume you are talking about dry slope points not FIS ?
I thought that L3 coach was still aimed at club coaches and L4 was for National Team ones.
Last edited by Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see? on Sat 31-10-09 0:11; 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.
|
|
rjs, sorry - yes, and BISS are pretty similar too aren't they
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
The course directory says L3 should be able to assist at National Team, and L4 should be able to lead one or several teams of coaches delivering a programme at national level.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
slikedges, I'd argue that an ISIA level instructor is far from a
| Quote: |
middling ski instructor
|
In many countries in the world, this is the "top" level of instructor qualification.
I'm not talking about an ISIA level instructor coaching the top minis in the country, I'm talking about them coaching the bulk of minis in the local race club. If you took a random sample of ISIA instructors, and coaches working in UK clubs, the kids, in my opinion, will get a far better grounding in the fundamental elements of skiing from the ISIA instructor than they will from the coaches. At that age I think that's much more important than learning the technical aspects of gate skiing, and will give them a really solid grounding when / if they later go on to work with more expert and experienced coaches. At our club generally the kids who were excellent all round skiers would also go on to be excellent in the gates. You'd get some who were disproportionately good in the gates compared to the rest of their skiing because that's what they'd spent most of their time doing. But they were never as good in the gates as those kids who were also great all round skiers (actually I think you see this even more with adults - some are pretty good in the gates but fairly ropey everywhere else).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| race coaches vs non-racing instructors: |
'Coaching' isn't just for racers & racing. Unfortunately the current message and product seems to be that coaching = racing.
'Non race \ recreational skiers' who want to significantly improve their skiing would do well to find a coach (race or non-race - there are both) and work with them as part of a ongoing program.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Quote: |
Imho the world has moved on since the old ISIA was king and it's left very middling now.
|
Moving off in a different direction here, but ok I'll bite. What exactly do you mean by that? With what era are you comparing today's ISIA?
I was under the impression that the standards of BASI qualifications had moved on considerably in the last 10 years or so, in order to be taken more seriously by Europe. Certainly that's the impression I've always been given when I've discussed the point with trainers, even those who fall in the catergory of having themselves qualified in the eralier era.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
beanie1, by old ISIA I mean what will be ISIA stamp as opposed to card (which will be the higher ISTD equiv level). Have you looked up Fun For Minis yet?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Look up 'Fun For Minis'. 
