 Poster: A snowHead
|
Hey all,
Hoping sombody can help me.
Im currently a CSIA L3 instructor but may have to spend this coming season a bit closer to home than canada. I'm a big fan of continous training and setting myself goals so was thinking about transfering over to BASI with the aim of furthering my qualifications.
Does anybody know at what level i would enter the BASI system or if someone can point me to a website with more info that would be great.
Cheers,
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
I think you would go across to BASI level 2. Contact BASI at www.basi.org.uk
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
2884691, Welcome to  . I hope you stick around and tell us more about the differences, if any, between CSIA & BASI styles of teaching.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
2884691, welcome to Snowheads!
You will need to go back one level - so if you are CSIA L3, you will start with BASI by taking BASI L3 courses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
CSIA is a stronger qualification however our counterparts chose not to go down the International Stamp route unlike BASI however even CSIA level 1 and 2 easily obtain work in Europe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
1969jma, could you elaborate on why you think CSIA is a stronger qualification?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not sure but I think CSIA level 3 would start at BASI level 2. From what I understand (and have seen) CSIA level 3 technical skiing would be similar to BASI level 3, however I think the qualification would not match up without off piste course and formal second discipline.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CSIA has the dual advantage and disadvantage that it doesn't have to jump through the ISIA hoops. Stuff like having to have a second discipline and do an "off-piste course" (you'd hope off piste isn't an issue by 3), as well as the modules on kitchen sinks, really don't seem like they add much to an instructor. I wouldn't like to guess at how well a newly qualified BASI vs CSIA 3 ski, though I assume both at a high enough level that adapting to the other's criteria shouldn't be too much of an ask.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| DaveC wrote: |
| ... do an "off-piste course" (you'd hope off piste isn't an issue by 3) ... |
It's not an off-piste course, it's a mountain safety course. Your ability to ski off-piste is not part of the assessment on the Mountain Safety course (it is assessed as part of the Technical course). Mountain Safety includes an introduction to group leadership and management while off-piste, navigation, mountain weather, avalanche safety including avi searching, touring, etc. It is also an introduction for the work that you will develop if you go on to do the Euro Mountain Safety course, which is the highest level mountain safety qualification that is required of instructors to reach ISTD.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rob@rar, and that's the kind of stuff I don't see as related to instructing - seems really odd to force everyone down that path.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
DaveC, ?? You can't imagine a situation where an instructor has clients that want to go off-piste?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
rob@rar, it just seems really odd to make it all modular then compulsory - I assume most instructors will want to be able to teach off-piste, but either put it in the main body of the qualification or make it an optional separate qualification. My perspective of NA mountains does colour this a bit, I just find it really odd that part of your qualification to be a better instructor means you have to go touring etc. I definitely like the fact that the CSIA just care about teaching and skiing - I've done avvy training off my own back, not because I had to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| DaveC wrote: |
| rob@rar, it just seems really odd to make it all modular then compulsory - I assume most instructors will want to be able to teach off-piste, but either put it in the main body of the qualification or make it an optional separate qualification. |
Sorry, I just can't see what's odd about that. It is a compulsory part of the main qualification (i.e. Level 3/ISIA). The fact that the different parts are assessed in different weeks seems neither here nor there.
| Quote: |
| My perspective of NA mountains does colour this a bit, I just find it really odd that part of your qualification to be a better instructor means you have to go touring etc. I definitely like the fact that the CSIA just care about teaching and skiing - I've done avvy training off my own back, not because I had to. |
Surely things like being able to skin for half an hour, having a rudimentary understanding of snowpack stability, being able to manage an avi search, having some experience of leading groups safely when off-piste, etc (and to be assessed on these skills) are worthwhile and necessary for an instructor?
There are bits of the ISIA that I do think are a bit unnecessary (2nd discipline for example) but the mountain safety seems one of the most sensible parts of the training/assessment I've done (as well as being a most enjoyable week).
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
rob@rar, they seem necessary for a guide, and convenient for an instructor. Just seems like instructing bodies are over reaching their mandate to me. I'm not saying it's a bad idea to have by any means, just seems odd to be forced.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
DaveC, convenient?  I think you're right when you say that your views are coloured by the experience of NA off-piste. For me the mountain safety was probably the best BASI course I've done so far in terms of introducing me to stuff that I had very little experience of. It was only an introduction to those skills, but a real eye-opener. I think any qualification which allows you to teach all the mountain would be most remiss in not covering that kind of stuff, even if it was only an introduction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| rob@rar wrote: |
| It was only an introduction to those skills, but a real eye-opener. |
And that is probably the most significant sentence that has ever been written on this forum. Rob is an experienced skier, with a long interest in things pedagogical - and so for him to find the course an eye-opener points to the absolutely vital nature of this course, and the probability of being able to have an extensive skiing career as a recreational skier with little off-piste exposure. As an ISIA level instructor you will be expected to be safe and comfortable off-piste, as you will be expected to deliver off-piste lessons, and most importantly keep your group safe as well. You may not be planning to do anything adventurous, but the mountains may always have the odd surprise in store for you. From the BASI pre-course information:
| BASI wrote: |
| To illustrate the difference in emphasis between on piste teaching and leading a group off piste let us consider the consequences of having a bad day. On piste we are dealing with a client who is not satisfied, may complain and probably won't re-book. Off piste it could be severe injury or death we have to deal with. |
I wonder whether DaveC's view is coloured as much by being a bit of a kiddies' specialist as by the NA environment - and those will be less prone to adventures off-piste.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
I think it's right to have the Mountain Safety module included in the ISIA qualification, no doubt about it. I also think it's good that a BASI L2 instructor can take the Mountain Safety module as a stand-alone qualification if they so desire. Even if they don't use it to lead groups off piste just yet it is useful information to have for themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
I'd think Dave C is likely pretty influenced by having lots of inbounds off-piste available which is risk controlled by ski patrol. Most instructors in that situation will be able to take clients to terrain/conditions client wants to ski with instructor being able to rely on expertise of patrol to close or control the accessible areas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| rob@rar wrote: |
| Your ability to ski off-piste is not part of the assessment on the Mountain Safety course |
Yes it is.
Way back when I did my ISIA off-piste whizz 2 guys had it "suggested" to them that they may want to learn to ski better off piste and then come back and re-try. We didn't see either of them again.
Your skiing ability is on the assessment sheet that is completed through the course. No ski = No pass. It's right that it should be as it doesn't matter what other skills you have tech/theory, if you can't actually ski (off-piste) what's the point in the other skills.
Mind you most people who failed (I think) failed due to not being able to map read to a high enough standard and one for messing up the find the rucksack under the snow 150m away game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| GrahamN wrote: |
| I wonder whether DaveC's view is coloured as much by being a bit of a kiddies' specialist as by the NA environment - and those will be less prone to adventures off-piste. |
If you define off-piste as outside the zone of patroller rescue with potentially serious route commitment this is right but lots of N American kiddies' lessons ski them everywhere on the inbounds mountain including at higher level (including ski clubs) some potentially quite hairy stuff terrain.
It's not that difficult to reconcile - BASI anticipates that instructors will be teaching in Europe where off-piste is not controlled or patrolled so views mountain safety as an essential element, CSIA knows that instructors can't teach out of bounds so doesn't need it. In fact I'd expect most higher level Canadian instructors to have done at least one avy course purely for personal reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
I've coached kids that huck 15fters this year and get down most of Fernie's double blacks in approx two turns, and taught adults this year to prep for doing my 3, fwiw, and had been scheduled on the Nonstop program for the three days after my 3 exam assuming I passed (which was brilliant, no pressure there then! I failed  ). I think the only lessons I taught this year on the lower mountain were adult beginners. Anyway, I'm not trying to say it's a bad thing, I just find the BASI (or probably more accurately ISIA) route of including kitchen sink modules strange. Being assessed off piste makes sense obviously, but not being able to instruct at a 3 standard because of your map reading skills seems odd. People will instantly red flag the "little bit off piste" line as something that's easy to argue with, but it's clearly there and a lot more accessible than anything involving touring etc. My biggest feeling about coming back to Europe to teach is wondering how I could possibly afford it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DaveC, Rob and I both do very very limited off piste teaching and i personally couldn't imagine taking groups off piste where i have gone without having done the Mountain Safety course. During the course itself i saw two avalanches (one small one set off by the guide and a big a*s one which scared the sh*t out of me. ) Some of the stuff within the L3 MS course is not required for basic lift serviced off piste teaching which you are then allowed to do (ie no boot packing or uphill travel) and is there as in intro to further training (skinning, route finding) and leads in to the Euro security award which you can now take without having to complete your L3.
I do think some of the ISIA imposed courses make the amount of time to get to BASI ISIA a bit over the top, why do you need an L2 coach (dev level CSCF) unless you will be taking race training sessions and a two week tech assessment is in my view a week too long.
But remember that other systems like yours are more exam based and they assume you are training within your ski school, the brits typically dont have the opportunities (or legality) to work in the alps whilst training within the BASI system unlike you lucky bugg*rs who do in NA. isnt really until you are training for L4 that Brit ski schools offer in house training programmes.... (for example New Gen in Verbier)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
hey all. thanks for the replies.
Checked with basi and yes my CSIA 3 transfers across to basi two. Leaving BASI 3 as the next exams i would go for.
Still trying to figure out what to do this winter but if its europe im looking forward to getting some training in.
thanks again for all your help 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Just like to add that CSIA also run their own mountain safety courses here in Europe, which include all the elements mentioned above plus a night in a mountain refuge. If I remember correctly it has been run from Soldeu on several occasions and lasted 4 or 5 days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
