 Poster: A snowHead
|
Following from skir67's can of worms.
Is the main difference between instructing and coaching that with instructing you are teaching someone with a lower ability than your own, but with coaching it's sometimes the other way round..
Not for the moment saying that most coaches can't perform to a good standard, but instructors have to or they’ll soon be looking for work.
If I teach a class on an introduction to mogul skiing then I “must” be able to ski moguls to a high enough standard so that I can break down the movements into individual elements. But, a coach leading a session with a high quality racer just need to know how to do it, not necessarily be able to perform at that level.
Just thought I'd open the can 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Wayne, I think you opened and closed that can very well.
Same scenario in Football. The "Manager" (Coach) couldn't run after the ball to save his life in some teams, but delivers all the strategy and tactics.
But the teams Fitness Instructor is normally built like a cheetah without an once of fat And takes the team/players through there paces by demonstration.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Sooner or later a teacher has to recognise when his pupil is overtaking him. Even an instructor can reach a point where a pupil is better than them.
But, an instructor or coach does not have to demonstrate a point themselves. They can use other members of a group who can do it, or use video aids, or say do this, but faster /better.
You could say a teacher is someone showing how it is done, an instructor tells you to do it and a coach coaxes you to do it, or you could just call it all semantics, I agree.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| beequin wrote: |
| But, an instructor or coach does not have to demonstrate a point themselves.. |
I'll tell the trainer that on the ISTD tech - will you write me a letter (like my mum used to do for PE) so I have proof that I don't have to do it 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
...once they have the badge. Of course, it may help if they do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
beequin,
are you being badgeist in a public forum, shocking
| beequin wrote: |
| Sooner or later a teacher has to recognise when his pupil is overtaking him. Even an instructor can reach a point where a pupil is better than them. |
At that point do they not stop being an instructor and become a coach?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You can see quite a few race coaches who have not changed their own skiing style since the days of 2m+ straight skis, I'm not convinced that they really understand what they are asking their trainees to do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
an instructor or coach does not have to demonstrate a point themselves
|
One of the points on the (volleyball) copaching course I went on was "explain what you want, then get someone else to demonstrate, so you don't look like a tit when you get it wrong"
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| nbt wrote: |
| One of the points on the (volleyball) copaching course I went on was "explain what you want, then get someone else to demonstrate, so you don't look like a booby when you get it wrong" |
But, when you have a class in a ski school there isn't anyone else to do the demos for you ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wayne, better not get it wrong then 
I agree with your point though - total beginners need to be shown. You need to be better than them. As people get better and become aware of the mechanics, you don't necessarily need to be good at something to be able to point out how others can improve - e.g I went to volleyball training last night, I'll never be good enough to play at that level but I could see small points where the other guys could improve.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
coaching skiing isnt about standing around, talking and not demonstrating. IMO you need to have a good eye to spot flaws and then be able to demonstrate drills and movement patterns to help athletes improve. Certainly with younger students MOST of the learning comes from seeing demos and copying movements, you need to be competent to demonstrate even though you may not be able to do it to a very high standard. i agree with rjs you need to understand what is being asked of the athlete and be adaptable in making changes
the key difference between coaching and instructing is that you develop a longer term relationship with the client and you work more in depth on improvements. instruction is more one off or shorter timescales, throwing lots at the client and hoping some sticks later.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| david@mediacopy wrote: |
The assumption seems to be that most skiers learn by trying to imitate their instructor.
|
Not sure about that. People learn in difference ways and absorb info differently. But the need to "do" as well as explain in something you need as an instructor and "maybe" not as a coach (depending on the level you're coaching at.
There are many times when a simple demo will get the "oh yeah, I see now" reaction that may never have happened with an explanation. OK there are some people that will understand a snow plough just from a mental image but most people will want/need a demo
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
I think ski teachers need to be able to demonstrate clearly what the student is trying to achieve - ie: the end form, then they can break it down and teach elements which will come together. This might not be the same thing in advanced race training, but a coaching approach can be used at any level even if only for a week. In that case certainly you need to be able to actually perform to a high level, if, however, the coach is ISTD or equivalent it may very well be that the students eventually outshine the teacher in performance - that would be normal and shows the teacher/coach has done their job.
It's quite a hard pill to swallow though! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Wayne wrote: |
| There are many times when a simple demo will get the "oh yeah, I see now" reaction that may never have happened with an explanation. OK there are some people that will understand a snow plough just from a mental image but most people will want/need a demo |
For sure, demo's have their place and an have to be done correctly to be of any use, but they are only part of the mix. As you say, different pupils will have different 'learning styles' and some will respond best to a visual demo.
| Quote: |
| easiski, It's quite a hard pill to swallow though! |
Nah ! Sign of a job well done I'd say 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
I thought the difference between a ski coach and a ski instructor is the long term relationship (or the lack of) between the teacher and student?
Majority of ski instructors' clients are of short term in nature. So the learning style of the student are not known at the onset. A demonstration is the more universal sure-fired way of teaching. "Follow me" and see what the student end up doing? It may illuminate the learning style of the student so teaching style can be adjusted to suit. When demo-ing, a teacher would normally just ski in an "average" style, without much personal flare?
A ski coach, I assume, has at minimum a whole season to work with the student. So whatever strength and shortcoming of the student as an individual are known quite early on. And the teacher can focus on developing a skiing style for that individual, which may or may not be exactly the same as the next student, or for that matter, different from that of the teachers! At that point, demo-ing loses its value.
I've not work with a ski coach. But I had in other sports at earlier part of my sporting life. For example, I recall a male gymnastic coach. Even in his prime, I doubt he can possibly do some of the moves we teenage girls can easily do. So, I was one of the student who got asked to "do" what he asked. He would analyze it for the rest of the team. It worked quite well. In fact, his "difficulty" in performing the same move himself helps him understnad the difficulty some of his students had. Contrast that to a teacher who can do everything so easily that he might not understand why we had so much trouble doing the same!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
One of the things I've noticed at HH but also on trips is that some skiers look "overcoached" to my eye, i.e. good or excellent execution of core moves but somehow lacking in "flow" or looking like a natural. I suspect at HH this is in part due to the artificial environment and the fact that it is better in a limited space to work on particular skills.
How do coaches/instructors get pupils to put it all together at the end?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
fatbob, that's one of the hardest things to teach, and is in fact what many people were failing their ISTD tech for, and why the idea of "flow" was introduced by BASI. ie everything's technically correct but it just doesn't look right so we need a reason to fail them!
I think a lot of this is moving from the "practice" to "acquired" phase. Also just skiing the whole mountain, having some fun. Racers might spend most of their time doing drills and gates - getting them to ski off piste, or mess about in the bumps, do a bit of fresstyle, could help.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
