Open up French ski tuition to non-French ski schools

A snowHead

fatbob, The problem with your argument is that somebody who is only respectably fast will still have lots of technical faults.

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

rob@rar, Crikey.

I am clearly too stuck in the '80s. Shocked

You need to Login to know who's really who.

under a new name, I think that illustrates the danger of getting too critical of ski style on video, especially in slo-mo, when you don't also have the benefit of seeing the same skiing in real life. It's pretty easy to get sucked in to the details of what's happening rather than seeing the overall picture. It's why I'm always slightly nervous about offering comments on MA video posted online. I've seen Phil ski a lot and I love watching him, one of my favourite "real life" skiers as he moves so freely, with his skiing as enthusiastic as his personality. I also think he's a great ski coach.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

You'll need to Register first of course.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

I agree with rob@rar, , Phil is a great skier to watch and ski with.

What everyone seems to forget is that the Eurotest is not just about the timed race. The whole process of training for it contributes to make you a better all-round skier. It teaches you how to use your edges, improve your balance, how to analyse skiers you are training with and many other factors.

Secondly it is only one of the modules required for the BASI level 4, all of which contribute to improving the safety and quality of a lesson.

For those of you advocating park skiing, there are freestyle coach modules. However most of the professional freestyle skiers raced when they were younger which highlights my first point.

After all it is free

I see the Les Arcs Race Club out and about quite a lot. It has a very strong reputation, producing some great racers. Obviously I see them in gates a lot, but I also see them being coached all over the mountain, on piste and off. Open faces and through the trees. Saw one session with, I'd guess, 10-12 year olds, without skis on their feet throwing themselves down the slope head first to see who could slide the longest distance. I suppose that would be the Psychological strand of TTPPEE wink

Just because you're in a race club doesn't mean you spend all your time in gates.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

snow reports

rob@rar, That's what I see in most ski clubs, outside the UK at least. Older kids then get a chance to focus more on gates or "freeride" in larger clubs it seems.

You know it makes sense.

rob@rar, i think you're absolutely right. I must admit, if I was them, I'd have worked harder to get the video be more representative of what's actually going on.

I am very happy to accept that it looks (is) way better than it looks on the vid.

Perversely, I have seen a few vids where the subject has looked way better than they do in real life.

I think gradient perception has much to do with it. Or something.

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

A snowHead

A snowHead

laundryman,no, a pussy, possibly, according to some friends...

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

I'd be amazed if anyone skis with perfect form the entire time. Both because what constitutes perfect form is to an extent subjective and the fact we all ski in more or less variable terrain so we are faced with a constant attempt to stay in and get back to good form.

The Eurotest is BS for one good reason. Being able to complete it does not make you a good teacher. I was unlucky enough to be on the receiving end of a nuclear physicist from industry who switched to secondary school teaching on retirement. Passed all the exams to teach but had the rappor with us polite middle-class A-Level students of someone with no clue at all. A good teacher with passable personal skill is worth 10x a technical genius who can't teach. A technical genius who is an awesome teacher really writes their own ticket and doesn't need a test to get work in most cases.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

meh, but how would you select, in an over-subscribed profession, for genuine teaching motivation and ability? There's a lot of discussion on Snowheads about "how to become an instructor" but not many of those asking the question show any great wish to actually teach people, as opposed to finding a way to get paid for spending time in the mountains!

If I had to choose between two instructors, with no way of knowing which was the better "teacher", when one of them a very able technical skier in his '40s with several solid years of instructing experience and the other a lad who was a good holiday skier who'd done a gap year course in Canada, I know which I'd choose.

And the eurotest is apparently only one of the requirements - necessary, but not sufficient. Certainly passing the eurotest doesn't make someone a good teacher, but neither does passing a gap year course. Or a teacher training course, indeed. Except for a few particularly gifted individuals developing really good skills in instructing will take a fair bit of experience, and some trial and error in the early years.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

You'll need to Register first of course.

Regarding selection criteria, imho it should work like this:

There's a suggestion that criticising the Eurotest therefore advocates a race to the bottom of pay and standards. I absolutely believe in setting the teaching bar high and hence protecting pay and conditions. I just don't think the Eurotest achieves this goal.

Good instructors need a high all-round technical skiing level; excellent natural teaching ability and the capacity to learn and reproduce the syllabus; to demonstrate genuine motivation to be a ski teacher (not just an ex-racer with no other easy option); to communicate near-fluently in the language of their target clients, and well in the language of where they wish to work.

The ISIA level of most country's progressions more or less satisfies the skiing and teaching elements; leaving motivation and languages as under-emphasised, under-valued, and under-examined. What should be particularly unimportant is being able to ski gates super-quickly, or to be young and rich enough to learn to.

It's a big ask to demand fluency in foreign languages, but that's what it takes to be an exceptional international ski teacher. Correspondingly relaxing the teste-technique/Eurotest would fix many problems with lack of motivation and poor lesson quality, by removing the bias towards those with an irrelevant skill-set.

A qualification from a recognised independent EFL board for fluency in "teaching language(s)" and a competant level in "country of working language(s)" should be recorded on an instructors log-book, and the corresponding entries be required to get a job or take that nationality of clients. The Eurotest is tightly assessed and controlled, there's no reason why language skills and teaching aptitude couldn't be.

It's a great shame that a non-racing perhaps adult starter with super motivation, great language and teaching skills, a high level of all-round skiing etc. can be lost to skiing learners in france because of the unnecessarily tough speed-test.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

shep, those are all very good points, but how is a new instructor meant to achieve fluency without being able to work in that language? It's like the ET, it's very difficult to get to that level if you aren't skiing all the time. I'm at the level now where if I wanted to train for the ET, it probably wouldn't take me too long to get, but that's after 13 seasons of skiing. If I had to do at at the start, I would have had no chance, as I didn't know how to ski. Same thing with Spanish, I'm pretty good now (still not fluent), but that's after 2 seasons of practice, if I absolutely had to be fluent just to start work, again, I would have had no chance.

Obviously in an ideal world, everyone would be excellent at skiing and languages and motivated to be a great teacher, but those things aren't easy or cheap to achieve, why not allow people to train on the job? I realise people would still have to pay good money for less qualified instructors, but at the same time they can be great, the less experienced instructors at my school constantly surprise me with their patience and enthusiasm with little kids, which really doesn't require them to be amazing skiers.

How would you measure motivation as well? Not going to lie, my primary reason in becoming an instructor was to get to go skiing for free and I don't think that's unusual, would you have people swear an oath or something!?

After all it is free

shep,

A massive +1.

Even if you can ski gates quickly it doesn't mean you can teach others to do the same.

jimmer, a partial answer on languages (as that's a reasonable question)

- as Shep suggests mandate some form of independent assessment of the teaching languages capability

- only allow "qualified" instructors to teach in that language, unless clients explicitly accept another - i.e. if you turn up to teach in Spain, and can't speak Spanish, you'll likely have plenty of time on your hands to learn it won't you! - also, if there's an economic incentive to speak more languages, and given the (my perception) of the difficulty and hours required to pass ET vs becoming conversationally (including the relatively limited essential technical vocab of ski teaching) proficient in another language, it would seem the easier and generally more useful skill set to expand. ( - "Why can't this person understand me? I can ski fast you know!)

Motivation a little trickier - measured by client feedback over the season? or maybe by having senior instructors shadowing (I realise that is gameable)

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

I agree with the earlier comment that there should be a graduated speed test at lower levels. I have seen plenty of tidy lower level instructors who are simply not quick enough to be credible as an instructor. I understand Aosta region has introduced some kind of speed test for the interski instructors. The reality is that the Eurotest is considered a minimum entry standard for instructors in Italy and France. For Alpine locals someone who finishes within 10% of the pros is considered a good club skier rather than anything exceptional. The Eurotest has an 18% allowance compared to the pros on a simplified course. An alpine local recreational skier may not be techincally perfect but is generally level 3 standard and skis substantially faster than the typical holiday Brit. Those who have done the Eurotest test consistently say it has improved their skiing and instructing ability. There are an increasing number of Brits training for and passing the speed test. The requirements are clearly laid out at the start. There are no complaints from locals about the speed test. Anything less than a level 4 is not considered credible as a ski instructor to a local recreational skier. Lower level instructors are just considered as casual labour to help out with beginners in peak weeks.

I also agree with the requirements for minimum language standards. In practice locals would generally be expected to be able to instuct in English. If anything this is more of a safety issue. In practice in my experience you should have at least A level local foreign language standard and that in practice is becoming the commercial reality and may well be introduced as a quid pro quo if the speed test standard is watered down.

I agree that BASI trainers should be recognised as part of the quota for taking on trainees but do not buy the arguments for introducing lower standards for ski instructors and neither will alpine locals. The reality is that there are an increasing number of Brits working in France and operating British ski schools. Apart from the training issue the rules are the same for Brits and locals and therefore there is no discrimination as the rules are the same for Brits as local nationals. What some people seem to be arguing for is that some kind of positive dicrimination is brought in for Brits which does not seem reasonable.

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

As the father of two BASI 2 qualified instructors I feel just about "qualified" enough to say that thgere is a whole lot of BS in this thread.

1. ET as a qualification on Safety grounds.
This is such utter BS that it merits no further comment.

2. ET as a qualification on Teaching grounds.
I'll allow it for those students who are being taught high standard GS and other race skiing. However ET would be suprseeded by the fact that for such students they really should be taught by instructors who have advance Race Coaching qualifications.
BUT....to get to BASI L4 you need to have done the L1 and L2 Race Coaching qualification already!

3. ET as a qualification on Teaching grounds (part 2)
Getting L4 has already meant that the instructor has had to pass examinations of their teaching ability at L1, L2, L3 and L4. They have additionaly had to have accumulated several hundred hours of verified actual teaching in order to be allowed to be examined to L4 standard. Make no mistake, the teaching exams at L3 and L4 are not a "gimmee", the standards are high (as they should be).
I simply cannot see how being a gates speed expert makes you better at the pizza/fries/inside edge/angulation actual teaching that 99.9% of ski teaching involves. I remember thinking to myself that Living The Dream may not be all it is cracked up to be as I watched a BASI Trainer I know riding the magic carpet all day in Verbier with a five year old!

4. ET as a measure of motivation.
You have to be highly motivated to get to L4 already!
Here is a quick list of courses and costs, excluding the ET itself. I have done this list on the basis that everything has been done direct with BASI, and have made zero allowance for any additional living costs, lift passes, travel costs and extra training that may have to be paid for.

L1 course £520
First Aid £80
Safeguarding Children £50
L2 course £555
L3 Teach £500
L3 Tech £500
Common Theory £390
Second discipline L1 £500
L1 Coach £360
Mountain Safety £350
L4 Teach £500
L4 Tech £500
L2 Coach £450
EMS Training £350
EMS Test £250

That is about £6,000 is course fees alone. (A couple of the course I've had to estimate the costs of as they have none showing on the BASI web pages currently)
I would think it would be reasonable to treble that by the time you have allowed for travel costs, accomodation coasts and lift passes.

£18,000 all in....seems reasonable.
That is just using £££ as a measure of motivation.
Add to that list:
Second Language
Dissertation
Required Touring experience
Interview

You have to remain highly motivated for a long time, it will take several years to get that lot done, even if you started on day one at L4 standard.

You also have to be highly, highly motivated to reach the sufficient level of ability to pass the Technical course (and Teaching, as already mentioned). Passing these at L3 and L4 is difficult!

4. ET means that your instructor (in France) is Fully Qualified and a better instructor than elsewhere.
Well, that really is BS! In the most ESF schools they will have a lot of Stagieres, simply because they are cheaper and don't qualify for profit share. You can be a Stagiere with the equivalent of BASI 2 or BASI 3 so long as you passed the Test Technique. You simply cannot assume that a red uniform means they are L4, many (most in the mega resorts) are not.
Are ET apologists really suggesting that a Swiss Patente holder, Austrian equivalent, PSIA equivalent etc, is an inferior instructor because they do not have to have done the ET?
Would ET apologists really require all school teachers to have a PhD in their respective subjects in order to teach at an Infant or Primary school?

The ET is an uncomplicated Barrier To Entry, created by a Monopolistic trade organisation(s). Simple as that.

snow reports

You know it makes sense.

I don't recall anybody suggesting in this thread either that the ET is a good test of motivation to teach, or that French instructors with the ET are better instructors than those elsewhere who have reached the top of their particular national tree.

What HAS been suggested is that although the playing field is not entirely level (and its wonkiness might well be down to old fashioned protectionism) barriers to Brits seeking a proper, adult, career as a ski instructor are, in reality, not greater in France than they are elsewhere. The fact that there is a growing number of British ski schools in France, and, it would appear, few elsewhere in the world, seems to suggest that the reverse might be the case. http://www.planetski.eu/guides/17 This list has loads of British ski schools in France, a handful in Switzerland and one in Spain.

It also seems that many ski instructors, including French ones, either have to have a different job for the rest of the year or travel round the globe following the snow. It's a job that many people do for love, not money. French kids who have grown up in the racing club scene will certainly have an advantage over British kids who have just had a few weeks holidays. But then British kids with parents who are rich enough to take them skiing a lot and dole out large amounts of dosh for training courses have an advantage over less priveleged children in Britain or elsewhere.

Is that unfair too?

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

To be honest I am just putting the views of locals and fully qualified instructors that I have spoken to and until you convince them there will be no change. The speed test is just viewed as the minimum entry standard for a good local skier rather than an trade barrier that is taken at the end by the Brits and the standard is considered nothing special. I was talking about keen ski locals skiers in terms of standards who are understandable at a lot higher standard than the typical Brit. The speed test has an 18% allowance compared to those at the peak of their profession so it not considered anything special by locals just a good club skier and racing is a big part of the local ski culture. I agree that there is a question about the exact standard and maybe in practice the ISIA speed test is suffecient but to be honest if they are talking openly and honestly anything below an ISIA standard is not taken seriously. Should not ski instructors be trying to reach local standards which are not considered any big deal there rather than having special lower introduced for Brits especially where achieving those then lower standards would be economically worthless. I do not believe the top standards in Austria are considered lower. The standards allowed in Switzerland are considered lower, so low that certain instructors are not considered credible by their peers.

A snowHead

A snowHead

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

You need to Login to know who's really who.

jimmer, call yourself qualified?

Pah...I'd much rather fancy my chances with one of TTT's local club skiers who will stroll the ET!

Not.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

They are relevant in the sense of setting what will be eventually an agreed Euro standard will take into account the different national views. Locals and fully qualified Brits who are the most influential do not have a problem with a speed test which is the same for everyone, although the exact standard of that will be up for debate so those Brits will just have to achieve whatever the agreed European standard plus probably some kind of higher level language test. I think everyone agrees that British schools should be able to train instructors under the same rules as the locals. To be honest though the SB case is not about the right to train new aspiring instructors but to employ cheaper lower level instructors.

You'll need to Register first of course.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

TTT, Simon Butler has taken chalet boys/girls to ITSD.

After all it is free

My own perspective is that the BASI levels are right. ISIA works in most countries and is good enough for most holiday skiers most of the time but level 3 should quite rightly work under the supervision of lmore experienced and higher qualified level 4s and level 4s are needed to teach genuine advanced skiers as these are level 2/3 standard. Some kind of speed test should be there but the ET is a barrier to entry but I do believe it improves standards and instructing ability (for instance I find an ex-racer inspirational and their fine observation skills amazing). Without that barrier it would not be worth Brits seeking to make a career as a ski instructor or make enough of a living to make their training a worthwhile investment which also helps to raise overall standards. As for skiing with locals I actually find it really does a lot for my sking compared to skiing with holiday Brits as I have really have to up my game. If they are ISIA qualified even better and if they are level 4/ET standard then they are just genuinely awesome to ski with. I've got no problem though if others are happy skiing with slower lower level instructors and I'm certainly nothing special by any stretch.

Jimmer, fully agree and the ET together with the larger Brit mkt allows more money to be made. I also fully support SB's right as an ISTD to train apprentices to ISTD level.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

Help!!

Open up French ski tuition to non-French ski schools

snowHeads Forum Index >>> The Piste