 Poster: A snowHead
|
I've been thinking about this for some time, and assuming the same progression, there are basically 2 ways of arriving at the desired outcome:
form based; where the student is shown what they're supposed to be trying to achieve as a 'model' and then attempts to replicate it or
skills based; where the student is shown skill steps that eventually (largely unconsciously) achieve the required outcome.
In reality, most ski teaching is a mix of the two, but I do see a lot of the larger classes doing the 'form' based sort of thing every winter. OTOH in summer I see a lot of clubs and teams training the 'skill' based way. This would seem to suggest that 'skills' based teaching is more in use when the instructor/coach expects the student to achieve a high level. I don't quite understand why it is assumed that holiday skiers wouldn't want to achieve a high level of skiing.
AFAIK the 'skills' based approach was actually started (in BASI) by Phil smith in the mid-late 80s. I remember earwigging on a trainers' training session when he was expaining it to others, and practising various types of turns using PET/EPT/TPE
Over my 30+ years of teaching I've come more and more to the 'skills' camp by watching how/what people were learning, and disliking the robotic, stiff appearance of so many skiers who largely learn by the 'form' method (this is particularly apparent with a lot of the italians BTW). It has seemed to me that if the desired end product is a skier that skis in control, balanced and stable, relaxed and understands what they're trying to do at their own level, then the 'skills' based approach achieves this better.
Perhaps others have their own insight from either the teaching or learning perspective?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
Interesting. Can you give an example of "form based"? I'm not sure I've had much exposure to it (or I don't get the distinction).
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
i think it is quite important that the student knows what they are getting taught - the danger is that you are trying to teach them *a* skill, but they take it as *the* only way to ski
that aside, skills is good IMO
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
stewart woodward, I was hoping that you might have something to say about your experiences?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Some people don't actualy need to learn some of the balancing techniques if they are spacialy aware and its increadible irritating to have to know how to do something from a demonstration then be asked to look like a bit of a fool and hold your poles like a muppet.
Like normal teaching i'd say it depends on the student.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| easiski wrote: |
| I do see a lot of the larger classes doing the 'form' based sort of thing every winter. OTOH in summer I see a lot of clubs and teams training the 'skill' based way. This would seem to suggest that 'skills' based teaching is more in use when the instructor/coach expects the student to achieve a high level. I don't quite understand why it is assumed that holiday skiers wouldn't want to achieve a high level of skiing. |
I don't think that it is assumed that 'Holiday Skiers' don't want to achieve a high level.
I doubt that the difference you are seeing between the Summer and Winter style of instruction\coaching is down to a difference in the expectation of the instructor of their clients (or I would hope not !) and I would hope that all Instructors and Coaches want their clients to achieve as much as they are capable.
However it maybe that there IS a deference in the relationship that the coach\instructor has with their clients, the expectation & motivation of the clients, and/or the technical skill level the clients which leads to a different teaching style.
Or maybe the Winter Instructors are just lazy and using the "Follow Me, Ski like me" style !
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.Ro, Where, for instance, beginners are shown the position they're supposed to stand in while sliding. Usually the instructor would tell them to flex their legs, round their back, advance their arms, look ahead .....
Spuddfluff, Balancing techinques should be used to get people naturally well positioned. If big classes, it is much more difficult/virtually impossible and hence more form based teaching, the tendency would be to teach to the mean. Yes - depends on the student, but is this alwasy practical?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
easiski, Interesting observation. Like you say I think a combination of the two will be most effective, and as Spuddfluff, says it's also dependent on the student and their motivation for learning.
Students spending a lot of money on high quality instruction such as that Snoworks and other high calibre instructors offer will have made a concious decision to improve their skiing and will I believe be more receptive to a skills based approach. At the other end of the scale Teenage beginners on a school trip however in my experience would respond better to a form based approach - they just want to be able to do something that resembles a plough or plough parallel asap so they can get around the mountain. Yes, a skills based approach for beginners will probably develop better fundamentals from which to progess, but with the example given above (particularly with boys) they sometimes think they have been
| Quote: |
asked to look like a bit of a fool and hold your poles like a muppet
|
(or whatever else you've asked them to do)
I think with these types of beginners then the enjoyment comes first and although it may give them a better platform from which to progress the skills based approach can seem pretty pointless to them. As skiers progress (and I include teenagers on school trips in this), and by this stage they know they like skiing and have a desire to improve, more will become receptive to a skills based approach, in my view. This was the case with the intermediate groups I taught this year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To use sliding as an example. There are loads of exercises you can do at this stage to improve the learners' balance. However, do they really want to spend too long on sliding? No, - plus you'll have their teachers asking you at lunchtime why they're not ploughing yet! So you move them on to ploughing, plough turning asap.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
easiski, as stewart woodward indicates, 'form' and 'skills' as different entities gained a lot of popularity in many sports in the late 70s and into the 80's. I was never convinced that they were anything more than symbiotic as teaching 'foundation' skills is almost invariably a 'form' based program. In the sports I've been associated with, the athlete achieves the basic physical and mental aspects of their sport in a demonstrate and emulate form . . . a 'skills' based approach becomes more appropriate as the athlete begins to combine and refine his or her basic skill-set. As far as I'm concerned it's always going to be . . . use whichever method as appropriate to both the set task and the aptitude of the student.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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, Interesting observations and your point is valid and interesting. The beginners example is for another thread I have in mind, so I won't comment here. It is true that I rarely have anyone not happy with the skills based approach, however I watch a lot of italians working and they're very strict on 'this is how you must stand' or whatever, and the results seem very rigid.
WRT the teenagers/school groups etc: Don't you think that it's incumbent on the ski teacher these days to instill a certain amount of control and responsibility, no matter how hard that is?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
Don't you think that it's incumbent on the ski teacher these days to instill a certain amount of control and responsibility
|
Yes to a degree. But it's also about finding the method they enjoy the most, and meeting their expectations (albeit ensuring they're realistic).
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
david@mediacopy, Well, actually I do think it's assumed in many instances that the holiday skier only wants to be able to 'get round the mountain' and they're often never given the opportunity to do or aspire to anything else.
beanie1, But why should even teenage boys not enjoy learning to be a good skier? It's not my experience that they don't desire it. They just have a different way of expressing that desire (one you have to pander to).  Granted it's a harder sell, but it doesn't have to be less fun.
Masque, I don't think it's necessary to be entirely form based with beginners either TBH, although I take your point about more advanced skiers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
easiski, they do want to be good skiers, but for example take a boy who's the star football player in his team - not used to doing something he can't do and finds it embarrassing in front of school friends in a higher group. For him progressing quickly to a level where his perception of what he can do improves is the way to make it fun for him. So get him to a level where he can start doing little "jumps" next to piste markers to help develop balance, rather than doing lots of drills at the sliding stage.
Of course every learner is different, and I agree that a skills based approach from the start is probably the ideal to build solid fundamentals - I just don't think it is right for everyone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
easiski, I can only see that teaching should be a mix of the two...with probably the pupils determining which approach has the bias...as in what are they most receptive to..?
Flexibility must be the key, IMV or you could ostracise half your pupils or however the split turned out.
Personally, I would say to people..this is what you are trying to achieve and these are the main tricks/techniques used..and then embellish that...
I can see that working on 1-1, but needing a bit of adaptation on classes...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| easiski wrote: |
| david@mediacopy, Well, actually I do think it's assumed in many instances that the holiday skier only wants to be able to 'get round the mountain' and they're often never given the opportunity to do or aspire to anything else. |
Assumed by who ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
easiski, Teenage boys may benefit from a little competion between them... e.g. getting a small group of them to see who can do the most of any exercise... although they often only have a short window before they get bored. Even in a group specific exercises can be worked in amongst more exciting activities.
With regard to the 'skills' thing... practicing my balance exercises has meant that if I get thrown and end up on one leg in difficult terrain I usually recover now.. in the past I would have fallen. So well worth it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
easiski, I have spent some time reading and reflecting on all the comments above. As a relative newcomer to skiing (3 separate weeks since February '08, all with some 1 to 1 or 1 to 2 instruction) and a primary school teacher these are some of my thoughts on this topic:
In my profession nowadays there is a lot of emphasis on pupils becoming responsible for their own learning. This would seem to me to be what is going on the clubs and teams you have observed. These people have chosen to be there to improve and the high expectations therefore come from them as much as the instructors.
I think the holiday skier can have similar aspirations but, for reasons such as those mentioned by other posters, these can be difficult for the instructor to meet on a practical level, especially with larger groups. My husband and I have chosen to manage our own learning and progression by spending as much as we can afford on more individual tuition but this is not an option for many people. Part of the answer might be for resorts/ski schools to look at ways of providing more choice in the teaching approaches for the holiday skier and some flexibility in allowing those who wish to do so to select how they learn.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Iski wrote: |
| ......In my profession nowadays there is a lot of emphasis on pupils becoming responsible for their own learning. ....... |
I hope the output is getting better. I can go off at a tangent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
easiski, yep...
I had big problems with the 'form' based concept when I had 2 sets of instructors - some Canadian and the rest Aussie... The Canadians kept insisting on the bobbing up and down thing that is very Canadian 'style' skiing.... The Aussies all despaired everytime I'd skied with a Canuck for a few days because I had that inane jack-in-the-box looking thing happening again.... So I 'skied like a Canadian' not like the 'Aussie style'
Eventually it was resolved when everyone agreed that learning better "flexion/extension skills" was a good thing for my skiing... but the Canadians agreed to allow the flexion/extension to be in a more lateral direction rather than the classic Canadian 'bob' design. This matched better with the Austrian/Australian/CSCF influences.
This was all aided by the fact that one of the race dept was a fairly high level canadian racer and coach... who swore black and blue that getting his CSIA 3 had "ruined my racing for a year" He had the hard numbers from the race course so no-one could debate that the CSIA 'form' might be a useful way to get movement happening in powder but was less than ideal on the hardpack of a race course - which was closer to our conditions. he was one of those who would notice and grumble about the change in movement patterns he kept seeing. (He never taught me - just saw us skiing and knew my instructor)
Once we all settled on learning 'skills' it became much less frustrating for me going back and forth between folks of various teaching qualifications. We were all discussing much more similar things...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm still not convinced that basic or primary skills should be lesson planned as more than 'form', only transferring to 'skill' when you are sure that the student is mentally aware of and physically capable of what is being asked of them.
I find it interesting that the advocates of a skills based approach already have a skills set to work with and build on and while I must appreciate little tiger's experience, it must be acknowledged that she is an inveterate lesson taker and appears to be talking about refining or differing technique rather than learning the elements required to develop a technique in the first place.
As has been strongly hinted at above, teaching styles are subject to the student's attitude and aptitude and a teenage lad is 'always' going to know more than you 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Masque, Was taught skills based mostly too... a few digressions... but when you consider I was not allowed off the beginner slope until I could a) turn b) sideslip and c) traverse... well enough said that I was taught to value acquiring skills not 'looking like a certain picture' Then again my first instructor specialised in disabled skiers who, it must be said, rarely fit the usual ski school picture....
The PSIA girl I skied with for 2 years was form based... used to come out with those nice inane offerings 'face down the hill' 'finish your turns' 'pelvic thrust' etc etc... None of which she ever explained or defined in any manner.... Her advice to getting me parallel was to 'ski faster' and she also like the concept of stepping onto the uphill ski to start a turn... She was really pretty useless... My next instructor took me back to stem christie turns as taught by the first guy... they were pretty solid turns... we rebuilt from there...
I'd say if I regret anything about having all those lessons it was wasting 2 years with her tripe... 2 years of trash teaching that really got me nowhere... After that I started having the ski school hunt for folks with racing background and disabled certs... Good combination - they understand fundamental skills and the variety of abilities there an be and are patient with those less athletic than 'average'
I have found that many instructors are way hung up on 'look'.... I tend to look elsewhere for my instruction unless I have some particular thing I want to gain from that person.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Masque wrote: |
| easiski, as stewart woodward indicates, 'form' and 'skills' as different entities gained a lot of popularity in many sports in the late 70s and into the 80's. I was never convinced that they were anything more than symbiotic as teaching 'foundation' skills is almost invariably a 'form' based program. |
Skills based foundation teaching does quite nicely for sports in which students perceive a risk to themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Very interesting comments throughout this thread, with lots to think about for me, so thanks to easiski for starting it. From the mid-90s most of my instruction has been with Phil Smith or his close colleagues so the debate is familiar to me, and I hope is reflected to at least some extent in my teaching. However, I do think it places more demands on the instructor to teach a skills-based approach, both in pedagogical and technical aspects.
Incidentally, saw some demonstration skiing yesterday from a group of Austrian instructors and from a group of young British racers. One group seemed to me to reflect very much a form based approach (and a very stylised one at that, hung up on 'look' as Little Tiger described), and the other group very much a skills based approach. It was revealing to see such a stark comparison as they were skiing pretty much at the same time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
rob@rar, yes for a start it requires a deeper understanding... Knowing how a movement(skill) is related to and/or can be blended with other movements(skills) requires more discipline... It is far easier to do an MA that is pretty shallow but requires the student 'look more like XXX'
Knowing the pros and cons of various body movements/alignment strategies is much more technical...
I'd say that a 'form based' approach is generally easier for a fairly athletic student to learn and an athletic teacher to teach with... With a decent eye and kinaesthetic awareness it is probably easy for an athletic teacher student combo.... However skills is more likely to be useful to the less than athletic student...
I believe the preponderance of 'follow me ski like I ski" is the result of instructors generally being derived from the ranks of more athletic folks... Some few have the awareness to realise that other methods may have different advantages than 'speed' of learning (which applies only to those on the upper end of the bell curve anyway)
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| little tiger wrote: |
| rob@rar, yes for a start it requires a deeper understanding... Knowing how a movement(skill) is related to and/or can be blended with other movements(skills) requires more discipline... It is far easier to do an MA that is pretty shallow but requires the student 'look more like XXX' |
I know a few great skiers, much better than I'll ever be, who don't have a strong technical understanding of how skiing works, to such an extent that they can't really describe how they ski never mind pass on that information to someone else. I think it would be extremely difficult for them to use a skills based approach to teaching, not because they don't have those skills but because they don't really understand how they work and how, as you say, they are blended together. They are instinctively great skiers, but couldn't hope to be technically good skills-based teachers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rob@rar, Yes I'm thinking about a couple of guys like that I know... great natural skiers... one in particular has great snow feel... but just not aware HOW they do what they do...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
easiski, good thread. I've been teaching skills based since the late 70's when I started coaching. It was part of the race coaching world well before that too. A very time tested formula for creating great skiers. It's a teaching methodology that happens in race programs all around the world.
There's a time and place for form based too, but it's not till the skills are developed. The problem with form based teaching is when a coach trys to direct the student to the model, but they don't yet have the skill base to execute it. It ends up looking stiff, awkward, out of balance, contrived, forced. And out of control trouble is just one miss-step away. It's understandable that it happens. Ski instructors who only get to work with a student for an hour or two, and are trying to make a big impact. They skip the basics, trying to go directly to the prize. It just doesn't work. Some change may be felt, but until the foundation skills are developed a barrier will continue to exist that will restrict the quality of the execution. Potential can never be reached until the holes in the skill base are filled.
Form focus without the skills to support the form will always be a dead end road. Conversely, when the skills are developed, they can be combined to execute any form. That's when skiing gets really fun. When a window to a new understanding of what skiing can be is opened
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| FastMan wrote: |
I've been teaching skills based since the late 70's when I started coaching. It was part of the race coaching world well before that too. A very time tested formula for creating great skiers. It's a teaching methodology that happens in race programs all around the world.
|
Yeah... all around the world is right...
In fact when Fastman first started posting on Epic I actually thought he was my instructor - who is trained in APSI III /PSIA IV /CSCF 3. He was also on the Australian squad as a junior... and a Canadian Provincial race coach...
There were times the stuff Fastman typed was almost word for word from my instructor's mouth... It was scarily familiar!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| rob@rar wrote: |
| Incidentally, saw some demonstration skiing yesterday from a group of Austrian instructors and from a group of young British racers. One group seemed to me to reflect very much a form based approach (and a very stylised one at that, hung up on 'look' as Little Tiger described), and the other group very much a skills based approach. It was revealing to see such a stark comparison as they were skiing pretty much at the same time. |
The difference is between "measured" or "Judged" performances. I doubt that the racers are too bothered about how they 'look', but they will be concerned about the time on the stop watch and will do what's required to get that outcome.
little tigers early experience between her competing Canadian & Australian instructors is a case where one set of instructors was teaching a set of movements (maybe good for powder) which were not appropriate for the skiing she was doing at the time (hard piste). This highlights much of the problem. Teaching 'skills' & movement pattens is all very well, but they have to be appropriate to what ever task the skier is trying to achieve.
Sometimes it seems that there is too much focus is on trying to make skiers 'look right' rather than helping skiers be more effective at what they are attempting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| david@mediacopy wrote: |
| The difference is between "measured" or "Judged" performances. I doubt that the racers are too bothered about how they 'look', but they will be concerned about the time on the stop watch and will do what's required to get that outcome. |
Yes, good point. But I got the feeling that the Austrians would have skied in that stylised way regardless of what they were doing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
rob@rar, They were instructors 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
david@mediacopy,
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| david@mediacopy wrote: |
The difference is between "measured" or "Judged" performances. I doubt that the racers are too bothered about how they 'look', but they will be concerned about the time on the stop watch and will do what's required to get that outcome.
little tigers early experience between her competing Canadian & Australian instructors is a case where one set of instructors was teaching a set of movements (maybe good for powder) which were not appropriate for the skiing she was doing at the time (hard piste). This highlights much of the problem. Teaching 'skills' & movement pattens is all very well, but they have to be appropriate to what ever task the skier is trying to achieve.
Sometimes it seems that there is too much focus is on trying to make skiers 'look right' rather than helping skiers be more effective at what they are attempting. |
The problem with the Canadian bob is that that is a 'look' that CSIA enforce through their exam process - not a situational technique used for a specific purpose...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Not sure if it has been mentioned above, I skimmed most of this in a bit of a rush, but... Would it seem sensible, relating to the OP about seeing more form based in season and seeing the skill based for the clubs in summer, that the winter students a lot being on holiday don't want to spend 3 hrs every morning on the same slope practicing skills one by one for a week, they actually want to do some skiing and enjoy the mountain. Whereas the clubs, I would imagine are more local so can ski a lot morte and come to the lessons purely for technical developement. I love doing excercises and practicing drills but for my one week a year skiing I do also like to get around the mountains with someone who knows it well. I've been really lucky the past 2 years with good instructors combining great drills with some cracking offf piste knowledge. Has anybody had the pleasure of being taught by Sanna Personns of the Villeneuve ESF in Serre Che? She beasted us for a week but I developed enormously
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MJS, I don't think it is a stark choice between form-based teaching whichg means having fun all over the mountain, and skills-based teaching being the equivalent of maths homework where you are drilled to within an inch of your life. The instruction I've had has had a strong skills based flavour (I've been taught often by the person mentioned in the OP), and that instruction has not been boring, repetitive or "worthy". I've spent time on piste, off-piste and all points in between, been challenged, had fun and improved my skiing a lot, and pretty much all the time this instruction took place the skills that we needed to develop were highlighted, focusing on the fundamental techniques of steering skills and the balance and dynamism we needed to achieve it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Good topic!! There is a lot to consider not only skills versus form, but also teaching and presenting styles for different learner types and stages of development....
I think when you first start out teaching (and i am still an apprentice) you are dealing mainly with beginners and form seems easier to grasp and present but is the least effective as little tiger, says and produces rigid overly static skiers. The only "form" i tend to use is repetitive demoing of the goalkeeper stance and trying to display good posture at all times. I also try to show students what their posture looks like if they have a poor stance that needs correcting.
"Have a go at trying to do this" is much better IMO than "hold your body/poles/hips/whatever in this position"
I had a week with Phil Smith and his reoccuring comments to me was that i was worrying too much about INPUTS like body management/steering and that i should just challenge myself in tough terrain and focus on OUTPUTS. In some ways another way of saying focus on skills not form...
we tended to do drills for a bit then move into some challenging terrain and switch our brains off. This didnt always work for me as i got scared a few times and bottled it, destroying my confidence and skiing poorly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
david@mediacopy, "Sometimes it seems that there is too much focus is on trying to make skiers 'look right' rather than helping skiers be more effective at what they are attempting." That's exactly the point though isn't it?
There seems to be a misconception that skills based teaching is boring and all about doing nothing but exercises. Of course if a student has one or two lessons in a week and wants to improve that's mainly what one would do. The idea being to improve their skill level and give them some exercises to do on their own which will help them in the long run. However with groups for a week it would be different, because the point of skills based teaching is surely that these skills are transferable to different situations, whereas form based (conforming to an 'ideal' shape etc) is not. It will work on piste, maybe, but does not offer the student transferble skills. Therefore, in a largely skills based approach, when students are on a week's course they would always do more 'travelling' than those taking one or two private lessons.
In the example of the 15 year old boys' school group for instance; if they liked football, it would be sensible to relate as much as possible to that. There are pictures of David Beckham taking a free kick where he's in a perfectly angulated position (apart from standing ont he wrong foot). In skills based teaching one would integrate the skills the students already have, in order to make the lesson more dynamic and fun. In addition in this instance one would try jumps and 180s/360s, pirouette turns and so on. These actually teach edging skills, but the youngsters think this stuff is 'cool'. Competition can be added in the form of who can ski longest on one ski, hop the most times, go highest on the slope by edging ....... it is much harder work for the instructor, but can be more fun for the student and with a better long-term outcome.
MJS, Youa re speaking about the French system of group lessons, which I personally prefer as it gives the students much more time to ski compared with the Austrian/Swiss model of 2 x lessons per day. Downtime is an integral part of learning. 
skimottaret, terrain selection is always of number 1 importance, but can be tricky when dealing with larger groups - even with groups of 4.
little tiger, BASI used to be heavily criticised for their 'look'. rob@rar, It's interesting, as the French tend to dislike the Italian style as being too 'contrived' whereas they prefer to let it all hang out. I think the Austrians are more contrived than the Italians.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| rob@rar wrote: |
| MJS, I don't think it is a stark choice between form-based teaching whichg means having fun all over the mountain, and skills-based teaching being the equivalent of maths homework where you are drilled to within an inch of your life. |
Actually my favourite Canadian instructor had the highest return rate for intermediate lessons.... He would happily admit to teaching things such as 'spins' to teach edging skills slyly... This went down very well (especially with young males) and folks would spend the afternoon polishing their 'new trick' then reappear the next day for more 'fun'... after a day or two they would return because they were improving faster than mates in other classes...
He had massive numbers of requests for his services... happy students... and yet taught more skills based than most of the other instructors...
He had grown up racing on Blackcomb glacier and really understood developing skills to improve... He would be the first to tell you the guys he grew up with were far more naturally talented skiers while he was the work horse skier... Work horse enough to beat the CSIA 4 pacesetter by over 1 second after not running gates for years...
an example of a typical lesson with him...
Warm up run - often boot unbuckled for some of this with some 'bouncing' depending on conditions..
Fast long turns down the main run before everyone gets up
Head for powder/windblown/trees...
Back to piste for some feedback on above on way down to main lift
Do it again...
I've spent a lesson just skiing the same area with tree run at top, race course area for GS turns in the middle and the run back to lift was working on short turns.... Just skied that all lesson, repeatedly as the visibility was poor at top and lifts wind affected - so that left us that lift... with the trees for visibility help... So in 1 run we skied off-piste, hard groomer, and 'exercise' then just repeated...
That was typical of any of my lesson time... I never spent a lesson on piste beyond very early intermediate or advanced beginner... always working on skills all over the hill... including time on tele skis or hiking out of the resort on skins...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
