Gap Courses - Not for Instructors?

A snowHead

BASI have finally indirectly admitted that the Gap Course isn't really aimed at Instructors.
Quote from Annual Report by BASI CEO 'Membership has increased slightly to 4100 and does not directly match the increase in activity this is attributable to a lot of the increase in activity to Gap courses where the majority of students do not maintain their membership in following years.

So there we have it, Trophy Hunters & Rich Kids apply here.

A snowHead

Spyderman, is the annual report available online?

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

rob@rar, Don't know, I read it in BASI News. I would imagine it should be though.

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

It's a good money maker!

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

veeeight, It certainly is.

You'll need to Register first of course.

I think to be fair it's probably not every person on a gap course who falls into the Trophy Hunter or Rich Kid category. The only gap course that I've seen at first hand had at least three or four, of eight, taking it seriously and planning it to be the first step on their way to full certification and fulltime jobs as instructors. Two of those are now Grade 2s and working towards Grade 1. The others on the course, though, would certainly fall into Spyderman's categories!

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

Does it matter? It's just like the ultimate learn to ski course isn't it?

After all it is free

Anyway what is wrong with trophy hunting?

There is an Impala and Widerbeest on my wall, and a Kudu and Duiker in the salt.

I rather like trophy hunting!

rungsp,

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

rungsp, rich kids aren't all bad either.

Is there a problem here?

Does anyone think a gap-year student should sign a binding undertaking to use an instructor qualification should they gain one?

snow reports

Spyderman, from what I gather, not hardly - hence supposed to be able to! wink

slikedges,
The BASI standard of entry to the GAP course is:
- Be able to ski parallel confidently, coping with a variety of conditions, and have
completed at number of weeks skiing on snow.
- Ski parallel confidently on black runs, being able to make rhythmical turns close
to the fall line at a steady pace.
- Be confident to ski in control in off-piste conditions.

A requirement convieniently overlooked, when the cheques are being handed over.

You know it makes sense.

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

Spyderman, is that the requirement for the start of the gap course, or the start of their on snow assessment at Level 1 or Level 2?

A snowHead

rob@rar, that should certainly be true. I hope that no such qualifications (as opposed to the coaching/teaching potentially leading to them) can be bought.

A snowHead

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

rob@rar, The assessment standards should be the same with every Trainer. The Trainers go through a Grading process, normally in Zermatt at the end of season, in which other Trainers assess their standards and judgement of their gradings at the particular levels, so that what skier passes/fails say a L2 with one Trainer should pass/fail with another.
The criteria is quite strict at each level.

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

Spyderman, thanks. I didn't realise the L1 assessment was that close to the start of their gap course.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

Spyderman, sure, I've looked at it before, but like you say that's not the reality. I'd think as long as you were a confident parallel skier with dodgy technique 12 weeks would be enough. I'm not convinced most BASI 3s would fulfil the off piste criterion even after the course, certainly not when it comes to deep snow.

You'll need to Register first of course.

rob@rar, It needs to be done at week 2, or there isn't enough time to get the required shadowing hours and improvement necessary in order to do the L2, which takes up the last 2 weeks of the Gap. So it's 1 week to get ready for L1, 1 week L1 & 2weeks at the end for L2, doesn't leave much in the middle for training, once you've taken the 70 hours shadowing out.

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

slikedges, Some Gap providers were accepting candidates with less than 3 weeks experience. Shocked

After all it is free

Spyderman, three weeks sounds just a little bit light on experience!

Spyderman, I jolly well hope if they didn't make the grade by the end they'd be flunked

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

rob@rar, Just a lot!

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

slikedges, I have every confidence that they would be failed, if they were below standard.
It does make the learning environment more difficult for the candidates that are actually there to get a usable qualification, rather than just become better skiers, or any other reason that they're there for.

snow reports

Gap courses get a lot of stick, and I don't think it's justified.

I'd say about 40% of those who passed my course have gone on to work full time, for 3 years or so post qualification. Of the remainder, about half are dedicated "part timers" to some degree or another. And for the small minority who haven't used it since - so what? They help BASI be the profitable organisation it is, which is of benefit to all members. There is also a reason employers look favourably on job candidates who have done something constructive in their Gap year, like an instructor course. I'm sure that none of the instrutors on here would argue that the skills you learn from a BASI gap course, shadowing, and a few weeks teaching at the end of the season are hugley transferrable. eg. One girl on my course did it pre uni aged 18, some may have thought she fitted the "rich kid" catergory. Whilst at uni she spent a couple of summers teaching in NZ. Post graduation she has got a job on the "Teach First" fast track teaching programme, and has just started teaching science in an inner city comprehensive. Is she a spoilt rich kid who was just on the BASI gap course for a p888 up at parents' expense? Should she not have been there, because she didn't take it as seriously as those who wanted to go on to become professional instructors? I don't think so. There's not a doubt in my mind that the skills she learnt instructing directly contributable to her getting the job she did.

With regards standard - certainly there was never any question on my course that those who didn't meet the required standard would fail, and 10% did fail. Of those who passed, the overall standard was higher than in my view you would get on an average L2 course, and a number of the candidates were well beyond the required standard (as you would expect with such intense training over a prolonged).

And to answer the criticism that a lot of the young people who are on the GAP year courses are just there to get hammered every night - is this behaviour reserved only to them? No of course not - i know lots of full time, "professional" instructors who behave in the same way - shock horror even some grade 1s and trainers! But I'm not critisicing them either - it's the nature of the environment they work in. And they know if they don't turn up for work the next day, or are not in a fit state to teach clients, they will be sacked. For younger people, on the courses and without much life experience, the temptation is maybe harder to resist, but the lesson quickly learnt. The trainer will simply go without them if they don't turn up on time, and if their performance isn't up to scratch, well it's their loss.

beanie1, well said!

You know it makes sense.

beanie1, good points well made, really great to hear the viewpoint of someone here for whom these various discussions have had more than a speculative academic meaning, thanks for that. I've always thought that whilst some career candidates may indeed find the attitude of the more frivolous candidates a hindrance, most wouldn't find it a problem. I also suspect that many non-career candidates will take the course pretty seriously anyway. This has been confirmed to me by a couple of people who've done gap courses. Personally I think that as long as potential candidates are given an honest appraisal and realistic expectations, and that standards for a passing grade are maintained, that's the only valid issue - don't see a problem with either trophy hunters or rich kids! Very Happy

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

beanie1,

Quote: 'I'd say about 40% of those who passed my course have gone on to work full time, for 3 years or so post qualification.'

I'd be interested to know if it's 40% of passes on Gap. what percentage is on just 2 week Instructor Courses?

A snowHead

I don't understand the reasoning that concludes that anyone doing a gap course and not intending to make a career of it won't take it seriously. Surely it's the attitude that counts, not the ultimate intended use of the qualification? If you're going to do something at all, do it properly.

A snowHead

An education is an end in itself. At some point I will do an English Lit. degree. I have absolutely no plan to teach English Lit.

I would be very happy for my sprogs to do a Gap year skiing course, and learn something about skiing and teaching and listening. Cannot see the problem.

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

eng_ch, thanks wink

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

i think this debate was done a while ago. me i have no problem with anyone doing an instructor course as long as they have at least some desire to learn about teaching people how to ski. whether or not they pursue it as a career or even part time is another matter, all learning is a good thing. The beef i have is with GAP course providers who promote the BASI gap instructor course to in experienced potential clients as a performance improver course that can get you a trophy at the end.

If that is all you want out of it then take a performance improvement class.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

Spyderman, another thing from the basi newsletter. Pass rates for GAP courses was 70% compared to 72% for regular instructor training which ties up with what beanie1 said in her post about the GAP courses getting un warranted stick. The bar seems set pretty level but obviously depends on the pool of talent.

Is it that surprising that students do a GAP year course and while in university for the next several years, living on beans on toast, dont pay their annual membership fees. Puzzled

Rich kids and trophy hunters probably could pay their dues it is the struggling student that perhaps doesnt.

Not relevent to this thread but interesting that pass rates for ISIA tech was 63% and ISTD tech 24% (ouch)

And just to round out their excellent statistics they also report that out of the 7 people who took the Freestyle module 99% passed. wink

You'll need to Register first of course.

skimottaret,

It surpries me that that the pass rate for GAP courses is as low as 70%. Certainly the year I did it it was about 90% across all the courses, and we were told it was normally much higher than the 2 week courses, as candidates get longer with a Trainer over an extended period. However, I did it at a time when almost all the Gap courses were the ones operated by BASI. Now, I believe there majority of Gap courses are run by external providers, and so candidates get no longer than the standard 3 weeks with a Trainer.

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

beanie1, during the course i did i seem to remember only 3 of 12 passed on the GAP course.

All the courses must get 3 weeks with a trainer. One week for level 1 and 2 for level 2. If you were fortunate to have a trainer during the whole course i would imagine that the pass rates would be much higher. At least one GAP course provider has the trainer for the required 3 weeks and then the rest of the course is run by non Basi trained instructors.....

After all it is free

3 out of 12? That's awful! It think it probably says a lot about the pre selection criteria used. Where did you do yours?

The course I did we had 4 full weeks with a BASI Trainer - 1 week personal performance, 1 week Trainee Instructor, 2 weeks Instructor course. During the middle 4 weeks of the course we had 2 days a week with either a BASI Trainer, or a BASI Grade 2 who was well on his way to getting his 1 and had good experience of instructor training. Then the week before our Instructor course we had a full week with this grade 2.

Everyone at the start of the course met the criteria outlined in Spyderman's post above, and had at least 16 weeks' or thereabouts experience on snow. Excluding one guy, who only had 8 weeks (4 weeks of which a long time previous), and didn't really meet the criteria above! He had failed the pre selection but begged and pleaded to be allowed to do it. He was one of the older people on the course (late 30s), had a really good attitude, and worked his butt off the whole time, which paid off - he was out at 8am every Sat and Sun, and worked with those of us a lot further along than him to help him out. Which helped us greatly too.

Having said that though, although all but one met the criteria above, some had really badly ingrained habits, had never received decent instruction, and their skiing was completely rebuilt during the course. And throughout the course we all received conflicting instruction from the 3 trainers, who had different ideas about how things should be done. But we were able to quickly adapt and adopt whatever it was that the particular trainer wanted us to do. And I think this is a good thing - as there isn't just one way of doing something effectively, and IMV dispels the myth that BASI is too prescriptive. May have been the case in the past, but I don't think it is now. The recurring themes that were drummed into us were such as having a toolkit, different techniques for different situations, and efficiency - eg. one of those candidates whose skiing was pulled apart (original technique - legs stuck together, turned by pushing skis out to the sides, all v old school!) was told his skiing was certainly very skilful, just not very efficient.

From the rambling above the point I'm trying to make is that I don't think someone who fails a Gap course can totally blame it on having received non-BASI instruction in the middle of the course, though they perhaps weren't up to the standard needed at the start. The Instructor course is training as well as assessment, you do not need to be at the required standard on day 1. If the candidates are skilful enough they should have been able to adapt their skiing to what the Trainer wanted. And if they can't do that - well, it doesn't say much about how they'd be able to adapt to differing conditions, or changes in future techniques, and so probably shouldn't be passing anyway.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

beanie1, I wasnt on a GAP course but the GAP courses were being assessed the week i did my instructor training in Courchevel. I heard most failed (from a meribel GAP group) on Central theme and teaching. On the second wednesday of the instrucotr training course there were about 50 or so trainees from courchevel and meribel all on the same piste doing central theme and i recon that all the trainers were looking at each others groups to ensure even grading. The GAP kids were VERY bad on central theme demos......

As you say a lot is down to pre course assessment but as well as the students motiviation for being on teh course, in the gropu i saw they were not too keen on central theme work and most were failed.

If you want to read a hum dinger arguement have a look at http://snowheads.com/ski-forum/viewtopic.php?t=26305&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=warren+smith&start=200

Help!!

Gap Courses - Not for Instructors?

snowHeads Forum Index >>> The Piste