AASI just maybe seeing the light...again

[Skully]

I have seen and heard where the guy on the freestyle board was asked to teach in the gates and the guy on plates had to teach in the park.

Gates? Did you really say gates? I don't remember the last time I heard anything related to gates mentioned in any AASI training....

I'd love to see some of the upper-level cert. guys where I work try to do gates.

[Dave ESPI]

I will know this weeeknd if the boarder Bos @ Jiminy was sucessfull with his Lev 2 exam.

Eitherway, Looks like I've got a lot of time next season to spend with riding "fakie" and dynamic switch carves before I go for L-2.

EDIT: and Bob, no worries. We all have our cranky days when the snow starts melting.

[BigBump]

I decided to post in this Thread as I took the Level III exam(got a riding retake(passed my teaching and pro-knowlege but failed riding so I have to do a 1 day re-takes next season to get the pin and I was in softboots) at Killington and thought I would tell everyone what was expected since there seems to be alot of confusion over the exam....

First, teaching segments are 15-25 minutes depending on the examiner. For your teaching, you are expected to make a noticable difference in the majority of riders in your group. If you don't, you don't pass. So you have about 20 minutes to improve the riding of riders that already rip and it may be a subject you have limited experience with. Also, on the third day we didn't know what we were going to teach until we were getting on the lift. Who ever was teaching was given the terrain, and the task, and had the chair ride to figure out what to do and you had to ride the chair by yourself.

Pro-knowledge is based on your teaching segment and some discussion.

Riding is based on your ability to adapt your movements during teaching segments as well as any tasks laid out during the day.

Day 1 :

The snow was soft, it was actually snowing but pretty warm, slowly getting cooler as the day went on. It was very foggy and tough to really see the terrain well.

Our warmup run was a steep, rutted, firm trees for 1/2 the run then a bump run that was the same, just no trees.

Riding tasks :

GS carve turns regular (and then switch on another run) on a diamond that a pretty much chopped/bumped due to the soft conditions.

Small, fall line carves created by the ankles only(regular and switch). The board had to be carving and move edge to edge very fast

Ride steep, large bumps staying keeping our upperbodies moving down the falline at all times, no traversing allowed.

Aggressive regular, dynamic GS carves on a blue pitch that was bumped and slop about 6" deep with ice underneith

Day 2

Sunny, warmer, typical spring riding day

Riding tasks :

Linked Heelsides in deep slop

Short radius dynamic skidded turns regular and switch on steeps.

Drop into a 23-1/2' superpipe from the deck and ride it out and ride the pipe the whole way down

Challenge by choice in the medium park - my 2 biggest was nosesliding a flat rail and a tweaked method over a 15ft jump

Steep, tight tree run that wasn't too rutted

GS, high edge angle carves going as slow as possible

Day 3

Warm, not very sunny, typical new england questionable spring weather

Riding tasks

Short Radius skidded turns in a very tight corridor

Same as above in bumps

Show your best flatland trick

Challenge by choice in the park

Show your best freeriding on a steep, wide trail

Make the same turns as the examiner(no description, just watch and mimic)

Best carves you can make on a double diamond pitch.

There are more, put I'm at work and don't have the list I wrote. Note that there was no mandatory rails, airs or manuevers for freestyle. At no time was anyone forced to do a 360 or some ridiculous trick unless it was someone's teaching segment. For teaching, I did switch the first day, GS carves on very steep terrain the second, and superpipe on the 3rd.

The difference between a Level II and level III instructor to me is that the Level II is a solid instructor and rider, the Level III is a versitile instructor and rider. I don't have a superpipe at my mountain, but I was able to take what I know of riding and my limited experience in the pipe and come up with a passing segment and give meaningful feedback.

Sorry for the long post, but I wanted people on this board who had never done the exam process to get an idea of what the modern, AASI-East Level 3 exam was like.

Also, out of 28 candidates, 5 passed, and 5 got riding retakes. Doesn't sound like their handing out the pins like cookies........and no one that I saw out on the mountain taking the exam was anything less than a very solid rider.

[Phil]

BigBump - would you mind letting me know who you are? You can PM me if you like. The only reason I am asking is because I know 4 of the 5 riding retake candidates and I am guessing that you are the one that I don't know.

[Neil Gendzwill]

I decided to post in this Thread as I took the Level III exam [snip description of riding tests]

All I have to say is, wow, that is a tough standard. Hats off to anyone who can do all that, you are crazy talented.

[Dave ESPI]

Thanks BigBump :)

Killington is a rough place to take a test at especialy in the spring conditions.

I had a coworker taking his level 2 there this past week. I'll know the results of his when I see him Sunday.

[Steve Prokopiw]

Great summary of your exam.Thanks again.

[Dave ESPI]

I heard back from my coworker who went for his L2. He failed all parts of it, which is odd because he really is a fairly good rider from what I've seen him do in the past 2 years as "Boarder-Boss" (the person incharge of the snowboarders @ Jiminy Peak). He said part of his problem was he "was unable to isolate body movements to specific task", and "rode bumps with improper tail lift".... whatever that means.

I discussed it with him, and he said he had 3 different examiners, and they all were looking at different things. He tried to "play act" a bit to show more obvious body movements and exagurating his body positioning, but it was not enough apparently. He also said there was a few people who were barely even blue trail riders who were there and floundering quite baddly with skating in the flat trany areas, even the basic movements and getting off a lift without running into people .

He did also concurr that the conditions and such were brutal and if you were not a seriously dedicated "Ice-Coaster", you would feel lost out there without a prayer if you were not really "One" with your board under your feet.

Oddly enough, he also said the Understudy AASI examiner tagging along in his group was "a horrendously awful rider" and almost ate it a few times in the bumps and had to hug a few trees in the glades.

entertainment factor alone, he said it was "interesting" to see how different and particular some examiners are with what they consider "good" and "bad" and "ATTAIN AASI STANDARD".

[bobdea]

I heard back from my coworker who went for his L2. He failed all parts of it, which is odd because he really is a fairly good rider from what I've seen him do in the past 2 years as "Boarder-Boss" (the person incharge of the snowboarders @ Jiminy Peak). He said part of his problem was he "was unable to isolate body movements to specific task", and "rode bumps with improper tail lift".... whatever that means.

I discussed it with him, and he said he had 3 different examiners, and they all were looking at different things. He tried to "play act" a bit to show more obvious body movements and exagurating his body positioning, but it was not enough apparently. He also said there was a few people who were barely even blue trail riders who were there and floundering quite baddly with skating in the flat trany areas, even the basic movements and getting off a lift without running into people .

He did also concurr that the conditions and such were brutal and if you were not a seriously dedicated "Ice-Coaster", you would feel lost out there without a prayer if you were not really "One" with your board under your feet.

Oddly enough, he also said the Understudy AASI examiner tagging along in his group was "a horrendously awful rider" and almost ate it a few times in the bumps and had to hug a few trees in the glades.

entertainment factor alone, he said it was "interesting" to see how different and particular some examiners are with what they consider "good" and "bad" and "ATTAIN AASI STANDARD".

so, Dave, you just said a couple people were there for their lev 2s but were barely blue trail riders?

please explain why me saying barely a pulse is required for level 1 is BS then.

Just wondering, you seem to have confirmed my point

[Dave ESPI]

so, Dave, you just said a couple people were there for their lev 2s but were barely blue trail riders?

please explain why me saying barely a pulse is required for level 1 is BS then.

Just wondering, you seem to have confirmed my point

Anyone can "Show up" for an event, but bringing a mule to a thoroughbred race isn't going to end you up in the Winners Circle no matter how hard it runs.

It takes more than a "Pulse and a plank under your feet" to ATTAIN AASI certification.

Bob, sorry, but your point is bunk and condescending.

[bobdea]

Anyone can "Show up" for an event, but bringing a mule to a thoroughbred race isn't going to end you up in the Winners Circle no matter how hard it runs.

It takes more than a "Pulse and a plank under your feet" to ATTAIN AASI certification.

Bob, sorry, but your point is bunk and condescending.

do they let you do lev 2 prior to your lev 1 cert?

I seriously thought that you had to have you lev 1 prior to going for your lev 2.

I have sat in on teaching sessions BTW that were not run by AASI just a AASI guy wanting to get his fellow instructors up to snuff but actual certification sessions are expensive and it would make no sense to even have level 1 if you can jump to lev 2 without doing anything prior.

sorry if I sound condescending, you called me out when I was not even specifically giving you any ****. Now, I'm going grill you on this stuff.

Just think you have some wacky and contradictory ideas.

I have a ton of posts on this forum and many probably are wrong, I know I have different ideas than I did five years ago but daily you come up with some jems.

as I have said before, I'm not pissing on all of AASI, just the lower level guys who think they are hot **** for having a lev 1.

I myself could not do the riding for 3 on plates if I read the requirments correctly.

[Phil]

The reason I stopped going to AASI clinics was a differance of opinion and direction around 2000. ... It mostly had to do with the ultra effeciency they were pushing. I felt it was too much, snowboarding is a youthfull sport most people taking lessions are younger and full of energy, they don't want to go down the hill as stagnate as possible they want to charge. I think my final comment at the last clinic I took was something along the lines of....."If all you want to teach is being the most efficient rider, why event teach a turn, just heelside sideslip everything and that is the most efficient way to get down the mountain".

I really cannot disagree with this. I believe that there is a huge focus on efficiency and effectiveness, but I think that I also buy into it to some extent. There is a difference, though, between teaching efficient and effective movements and teaching everyone to look the same. I started doing the PSIA Alpine thing and I stopped almost as soon as I started. You could jump over directly to the same level you have on a snowboard, but I knew that I wasn't ready for a Level III on skis, so I just went to Level II. It really did seem like they were making clones. It ended up being a one and done deal for me. I've got the pin, but I really am not interested in continuing down that road. (at least AASI is following the industry - I don't think that PSIA even knows where the alpine industry is)

Teaching effecient and effective movements is still better than what we see on BOL everyday IMO. Advice seems like it is always "pinch the pencil" and ride "gun fighter" and "grab the boot cuff" etc., etc. People focus on posturing and angulation (park and ride) and never really talk about good movements and actions that cause reactions on the board. Don't get me wrong, I believe that posture and angulation is important, but it sounds like a broken record around here sometimes with that kind of advice being the answer to every problem that arises in someone's riding. All of that being said, I do like this community - just needed a moment to whine there for the sake of comparison. I feel that AASI has stuck to the idea of using movement based teaching. I like it and I find it to be very effective when teaching the masses of recreation level riders. Again, that is what AASI is for. I never feel that I am teaching someone to be "stagnate", but I might not be understanding what you are saying either. Heck, I know I want to charge!

I'd love to see some of the upper-level cert. guys where I work try to do gates.

That's a bummer. I have not heard of them being in an exam for a long time. I was just using that as an example to say that it does not matter what you go to the exam on, they are going to test your limits on that equipment. If the upper certs where you are do not do gates, maybe someone needs to facilitate that. We all know that it would help them tremendously on so many levels. Most of the upper level certs that I know have either been in gates or continue to do so - whether that be NASTAR, USASA, or just local stuff.

I heard back from my coworker ....

Dave, it sounds like your boss was woefully unprepared and may not even understand the standards and what is going on. I have been helping prepare Level II candidates for a long time and I feel that they usually have a good idea of what is expected of them and when they get to the exam they know what the examiners are asking of them. This year I only had one candidate take the exam. He nailed all of his teaching and pro know, but he has to take a riding retake. He got a similar "unable to isolate..." comment, but his was about finishing his heelside turns specifically. Anyway, he had a good attitude and really understood what he was doing that fell short. He is already looking to fix his "weaknesses" before his retake.

I would suggest that your boss get in touch with the examiners to try to better understand where he was lacking. They are really good about that stuff. He really should have cleared that up at the exam. Otherwise, he will have no point of reference from which to start training to go back (if that is indeed his intent). My big question to you is - How much training did he have before he went? To me, it just sounds like he lacked training. There are a lot of people out there who are "good riders", but they lack training, which means they also lack understanding (pro know). Without the "professional knowledge" they also lack the understanding of what they are lacking - in their riding, teaching and pro know. Does that make sense, or is it getting late and I'm talking in circles?

Anyway, encourage him. The worst thing that you can do after failing an exam like this is have sour grapes and talk about all of the things that were wrong with it. I have seen that so many times. On several occasions I have encouraged guys who were really bad mouthing the process (after they failed) to go back and train and return to take the exam again. If, after they take it, they still think that the process sucks, then they have grounds to help change it - after all, they passed. The few that have done that actually came around to a better understanding of what was going on, their riding went through the roof, and they passed. In the end, though, they were not upset with the process. How could they be? Everything about their riding and teaching had improved!

OTOH, the guys you REALLY need to watch are the ones who fail an exam and have a good attitude about it. Those are the ones that will be the most improved and kill it at the next exam. They have already been through the process, so they have no suprises there, and they work to have an understanding of their deficiencies, so they become all around better riders and instructors. Their attitudes make them winners all around and it pays off in the end. Who doesn't want to ride and teach better, right?

Encourage your boss to be the latter and I guarantee that when all is said and done, he will be a better trainer for your mountain than you could have ever imagined.

[Dave ESPI]

Phill I agree completely with your statement. Brian was dissapointed but I thinnk you hit the nail on the head with lack of understanding as to what was going to be expected and what the examiners would be looking for. Personaly I kind of felt he didnt have the "Drive" to really surpass the expectations as while he is a good rider and really knows how to tie boots, he is a bit too laid back and easy going in his teaching technique verymuch like a westcoast beachbum- surfer mentality. Not that there is anything wrong with it as it suits him really well .

I asked a few of the level 3 PSIA members why the ski program doesn't cover more freestyle stuff and switch riding, and their reply was " There is just not that much call for it in the industry".

My jaw dropped.

A vast majority ofski sales this year in a few local shops were twin tips and while mostly in the younger demographic, I saw a lot of people riding backwards this year and more skiers spending time in the parks.

I often wonder if "making good turns" was something that "alpine carvers" should be aligned with on the PSIA side of things rather than AASI (sarcasm). Im sure Brian will go back for his L2 and nail it as you said most do. Lets hope the sour grapes pass, we all get bitter before turning into fine wine on occasion.

Bob, Hopefully next year you and I will be able to go ride the same mountain at the same time and just throw-down on a few runs and have a few laughs. Its all good. I'm no super star hotshot, but I do know a few people who are Level 1 and think they are allofa sudden gods gift to snowboarding, and they piss me off. From what I know, the only way you can skip level 1 is by "CHALLENGE" and it is reserved for professionals or people with exceptional skill who want to take all the exams and progressions in a one shot deal. I was making light of the fact that your assumption if said "pulse" can show up at level 2 also, and that is also all that is "required" along with a level 1 completion certificate. 65 is still a passing grade, but not nearly as much as 95.... catch my drift?

FWIW, I eat humble pie quite often as there are far better carvers out there than myself. Anytime we say/write something on an open forum, public, or even amongst friends we open ourselves up to ridicule and speculation. Its all good, I've got a backbone.

I'm just a character in this crazy world like all the rest of us, or as Sir Shakes said:

All the world's a stage,

And all the men and women merely players:

They have their exits and their entrances;

And one man in his time plays many parts,

-As you like it.

[philfell]

I really cannot disagree with this. I believe that there is a huge focus on efficiency and effectiveness, but I think that I also buy into it to some extent. There is a difference, though, between teaching efficient and effective movements and teaching everyone to look the same. I started doing the PSIA Alpine thing and I stopped almost as soon as I started. You could jump over directly to the same level you have on a snowboard, but I knew that I wasn't ready for a Level III on skis, so I just went to Level II. It really did seem like they were making clones. It ended up being a one and done deal for me. I've got the pin, but I really am not interested in continuing down that road. (at least AASI is following the industry - I don't think that PSIA even knows where the alpine industry is)

Teaching effecient and effective movements is still better than what we see on BOL everyday IMO. Advice seems like it is always "pinch the pencil" and ride "gun fighter" and "grab the boot cuff" etc., etc. People focus on posturing and angulation (park and ride) and never really talk about good movements and actions that cause reactions on the board. Don't get me wrong, I believe that posture and angulation is important, but it sounds like a broken record around here sometimes with that kind of advice being the answer to every problem that arises in someone's riding. All of that being said, I do like this community - just needed a moment to whine there for the sake of comparison. I feel that AASI has stuck to the idea of using movement based teaching. I like it and I find it to be very effective when teaching the masses of recreation level riders. Again, that is what AASI is for. I never feel that I am teaching someone to be "stagnate", but I might not be understanding what you are saying either. Heck, I know I want to charge!

You are comparing a professional group who is trying set industry standards, with an online chat forum.

What I was refering to is that at the last clinic I did with AASI there were specific movements that we were told NOT to do and NOT to teach. These movement were ones that I would see the top riders in the world doing on the World Cup and in the top freestyle videos of the time. I could tell the examiner did not buy into what he was saying, but he felt he had to hold this stance because that is what they were supposed to be saying.

[Phil]

You are comparing a professional group who is trying set industry standards, with an online chat forum.

Yeah, I honestly think that I was just up too late on that one.

What I was refering to is that at the last clinic I did with AASI there were specific movements that we were told NOT to do and NOT to teach. These movement were ones that I would see the top riders in the world doing on the World Cup and in the top freestyle videos of the time. I could tell the examiner did not buy into what he was saying, but he felt he had to hold this stance because that is what they were supposed to be saying.

That makes more sense. I can definitely see where you are coming from there. Hopefully that will change with progression of the sport and of the organization.

[Steve Prokopiw]

Well,I got back last night from two days at PSIA/AASI Spring Symposium.

The event was a bunch of tightly run clinics as if it was exam prep.Well; everything is exam prep in these organizations.On the snowboard side therein lies the problem.Come on people, it's the last gig of the season and we're gonna waist a perfectly awesome spring day with snow that never got bad on the same tired old clinic format .Sorry,but I'm not satisfied with how it went.

I don't blame the clinician for all of it but I am surprised that a professional would do so little actual riding for a clinic titled "TRENCH IT OUT!" I used all caps to emphasize the subject matter.

We rarely did more than five turns in a row before stopping to chat for easily more than five minutes per stop.As many of us know,establishing some flow and repetition while teaching/learning a new or different movement is key to the learning process.I felt that of the very few stand out points that were made much too much chit chat was spent getting them across.A balance needs to be struck between enough verbal info and enough riding and guided practice.In something as athletic and fun as carving that balance should be weighted toward riding and guided practice.

I was the only hardbooter and I knew I would be.I paid 75.00 per day plus expenses of my own money to see how far AASI has to go when it comes to the joy of true carving performance whether in softboots or hard. In one sense, I went there to set the record straight about what it is to freecarve,but this is with the knowledge that it is not this way in all divisions.Some divisions put more emphasis on carving as a specific discipline that can enhance one's overall riding level than other divisions do.And I'm sure it isn't always this way in current AASI clinics but at the end of each day I went for several solo runs since I had ridden far less than the amount we ride at a typical carve session ;where presumably,we learn quite a bit from each other.

And in the category of offering up a possible solution,the Expression Session format of watching and learning as we flow and repeatedly regroup as we ride down the hill is how I would run an AASI carving clinic.This format,along with some other carve oriented learning opportunities like the day at SES where a race clinic was put on for a couple of hours by Bordy would reduce the chance of extreme boredom.Even with the riders 'leap frogging' down a run while they take rest stops and watch each other,the clinician can still be circulating through the group as the main dispensor of advice,as well as handle the group effectively.I like to think I have exibited this in at least some of the clinics I have run.My main point here is that more personalized attention should not be at the expense of productivity and fun for the group as a whole.

On the bright side, the group I rode with had several advanced soft carvers and one 'full on radical expert' with mind blowing freecarving skill and style named Lucas who is from Mount Baker.Super cool guy and an all around amazing rider.His riding skills and usage of those skills without fitting into the tight,somewhat static mold the AASI has propagated is what it should be about if we want to grow a little and evolve into something exciting instead of being just a necessary evil of being a professional instructor.But then,I think there should be Carving Accredidation so I'm pretty biased,obviously.

I could go on and on but I'm getting bored with myself and my kids are outside playing and laughing in the sun.That right there is something to think about:)

[Phil]

My kids are napping and it is raining, so I have time to reply. :)

Seriously, if I was in a clinic like that, I would give the clinician hell. Of course, I know my clinicians nine times out of ten, so I am comfortable doing that, but still, they would fail a candidate for running a teaching segment like that. There is no excuse for them to do it.

I have never been to an AASI clinic that was all talk and no ride. The PSIA clinics that I referenced above were very much like that. That was my big gripe.

That is really too bad, Steve. Sorry it did not go better.

[Fastskiguy]

I asked a few of the level 3 PSIA members why the ski program doesn't cover more freestyle stuff and switch riding, and their reply was " There is just not that much call for it in the industry".

My jaw dropped.

:ee

Here in the midwest it's all about medium radius turns on gentle to moderate terrain. But we've got decent terrain parks so it's a good idea. Not sure if our aging ed staff would be up for the big gaps LOL.

My CE event this year was "race camp with the D-Team". The group leader was fantastic...as all of those D-Team guys are. But PSIA-C didn't have a run or lane for us and no timer either so I was pissed. But it's not the first time, I've been to other "race camps" put on by PSIA-C with no timer. On the evaluation where they ask "what would make you take more events?" I always write "Timed runs against the ed staff" but they're just not into it.

Hard skiing at a PSIA event in central is pretty much non-existent. It's disappointing. But for me...well there's AASA so maybe I'll start with Level 1 and see how it goes.

One thing I'd like to add is that from what I've seen, you have to really stand on the boards well to make Level III. Knowledge and teaching...maybe about the same as Level II or just a bit more. But skiing, that's the big jump from II to III and you've got to be pretty good. To get on the ed staff you need to be as good as the other guys on the ed staff. You don't have to be as good if you're a girl...though some are.

I'd like to think it's that way with AASA, if it's not then I'd bet it's only a matter of time. Standards are good, guidelines for teaching are good, there are a lot of different ways to do it and PSIA is an inclusive organization. But they also have been working hard to optimize outcomes for a long time and have a pretty good idea of how to do it.

The nice thing about racing is that the timer does not lie-if you're faster it is a better run period. Rating the skiing or riding of candidates is a little more subjective but I'd say it's less subjecting that you might think. Kinda like the "supervalidators" in wine tasting. It's subjective....but they're pretty good at ranking skiers (or wines).

[Fastskiguy]

Seriously, if I was in a clinic like that, I would give the clinician hell. Of course, I know my clinicians nine times out of ten, so I am comfor

I've seen some masterful class handling by some clinic leaders when trying to give some hell myself. Now I'm not a great hell-giver but at one race camp (with no lane or timer...Grrrr!) somehow I was the class troublemaker and the other people were like "you don't need a timer for a race camp" and I was like ????WTF???? We can make medium radius turns on gentle terrain at home! I'm hear for a friggin' RACE CAMP! well, anyway.

So I've got to tell the story of my buddy going to the Harold Harb clinic. He learned some things...about how to make one move take a whole day to explain (the leading with the downhill foot move he's famous for)

1. Start Late

2. Do some free runs

3. Drills on the bunny hill and be sure to climb, don't use the lift or rope tow

4. Video tape

5. Lunch

6. Video analysis

7. Review

8. Few free runs with lots of "atta boys"

9. Recap, hand shaking, put our poles in a circle and clank them around

Yeah, I'm thinking about getting into the clinic business. I could be the expert, the "man from out of town with slides!" LOL

[Rob Stevens]

On the bright side, the group I rode with had several advanced soft carvers and one 'full on radical expert' with mind blowing freecarving skill and style named Lucas who is from Mount Baker.Super cool guy and an all around amazing rider.

Lucas Debari. Won the Baker Banked Slalom.

[Dave ESPI]

"We rarely did more than five turns in a row before stopping to chat for easily more than five minutes per stop.As many of us know,establishing some flow and repetition while teaching/learning a new or different movement is key to the learning process."....

Steve,

This was the same format we did with my Level 1, and it was highly annoying to me personaly as it takes a few turns to get a flow and figure out what we needed to be doing differently in order to be sucessfull with what the examiner was looking for. I can also say that if you know snowboarding and the basic rudementary movements, you can make them appear without any need for multiple turns to demonstrate them at a basic level with ease.

Then again.........in your case; it IS A CARVING CLINIC ! I fully agree, and you shoulda said something. If I was the examiner, I'da said "lets take a run do some turns, I'll stop, ride past me, and we can talk at the end of the run. It would make much more sense.

Cookie cutter routines and progmatic structure is what causes issues with much of what is the definition of a snowboarder at its core, as does the stoic traditional requirements for PSIA.

Hopefully you represented the "TRENCHED OUT" aspect of the alpine world :)

[Steve Prokopiw]

I dropped more than a few hints and so did the others whether they knew it or not.(body language,visible boredom,etc)

I guess I could have come right out and said "We're bored,our asses are frozen,and our joints are stiff", but as the only hardbooter I didn't want to come across as even more of a primadonna than usual:)

[carvedog]

1. Start Late

2. Do some free runs

3. Drills on the bunny hill and be sure to climb, don't use the lift or rope tow

4. Video tape

5. Lunch

6. Video analysis

7. Review

8. Few free runs with lots of "atta boys"

9. Recap, hand shaking, put our poles in a circle and clank them around

Yeah, I'm thinking about getting into the clinic business. I could be the expert, the "man from out of town with slides!" LOL

Good God. Sometimes I thought we as snowboarders had it bad and then I would watch the ski clinics and ........zzzzzzzzzzzz........are we there yet???????

Painful to watch someone so enchanted by the sound of their own voice and their own spellbinding intellect.

When I was running clinics and exams I was "famous" for doing things like giving a teaching assignment and then allowing them only three sentences to explain what they were doing.

Or teach a segment without using the words: edge, angle, flex, extend, pressure and rotation. This was a good way to get the other participants involved as they got to make buzzer sounds when the offender used one of the banned words. And then the buzzer sounds would throw off their concentration and then they would get flustered and start to self-destruct as I laughed underneath my clinic face.

We would also do mime segments occasionally.

So much talking. Not enough riding.

We learn about all the different ways that people take in information and then teach our teachers to stand there and talk and talk and talk............just shoot me.

We went from all volunteer clinic ( for the mtn not AASI ) to two mandatory clinics a few years back. I had ten+ show up for a bumps clinic???

Reason that I heard most is that they knew they were going to get to ride, even if they didn't care for the bumps they knew wouldn't be getting clinic ass.

[/rant]

[Neil Gendzwill]

This is a really interesting topic for me. I don't teach snowboarding, but I do teach martial arts (kendo). My natural tendency is to talk too much, and I have to kick myself from time to time to keep it in check. Traditional Japanese style is show, then do (and do, and do, and do), very little or no talking. That works well with people who are visual learners, but some people need the explanation. So you're always walking that line between too much yakking and not enough information.

If you're teaching an individual, you can tailor your teaching style to that person's learning style. But teaching groups is always a compromise.

Thanks to all you guys for insight (and complaints) about the process on the slopes.

[Phil]

When I was running clinics and exams I was "famous" for doing things like giving a teaching assignment and then allowing them only three sentences to explain what they were doing.

I heard a trainer this year (forget which mountain) say that every time one teaches a segment, they have to pretend that they are texting - only say as much as you would if you were texting.

I'm with you Neil. I believe that as instructors, part of our practice should be learning to be concise. Some people are naturals at this. I am not. I work on it all of the time.