Forums: Skydiving: Instructors:
Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"?

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All

jonathan.newman  (D 30644)

Jun 2, 2011, 6:35 PM
Post #1 of 57 (4621 views)
Shortcut
Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? Can't Post

I teach at one DZ that follows the ISP progression for the AFF method only. If you want to learn to jump, you take the AFF course.

I teach at another DZ that progresses from one tandem, to 4 IAD jumps, and then continues with either AFF or slow progression.

Is anyone out there switching freely among the three instructional methods? How is that working out for you?

My primary motivation is that I hate seeing students sit around on days when clouds are at 8000 feet and we're doing low jumps while they sit around.

I have another question about students doing hop and pops, but I'll ask it in another thread.

I appreciate everyone's input.
Jonathan


peek  (D 8884)

Jun 2, 2011, 6:58 PM
Post #2 of 57 (4563 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jonathan.newman] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Is anyone out there switching freely among the three instructional methods? How is that working out for you?

I hope there are some, and I hope they respond to you here, but I think that switching between instructional methods is difficult and that most places prefer to not do that.

Even with the guidance provided by the ISP, there are decisions that need to be made about where to fit a particular student into the progression of a different instructional method, and what training or refresher training needs to occur, and some of these decision are subjective.

In reply to:
My primary motivation is that I hate seeing students sit around on days when clouds are at 8000 feet and we're doing low jumps while they sit around.

Good for you! Thinking that way means you care about the sport and how to help students achieve their goals.


(This post was edited by peek on Jun 2, 2011, 7:05 PM)


diablopilot  (D License)

Jun 2, 2011, 9:09 PM
Post #3 of 57 (4529 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jonathan.newman] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
I teach at another DZ that progresses from one tandem, to 4 IAD jumps, and then continues with either AFF or slow progression.

Where is this? It's genius.


airtwardo  (D License)

Jun 2, 2011, 9:16 PM
Post #4 of 57 (4526 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diablopilot] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
I teach at another DZ that progresses from one tandem, to 4 IAD jumps, and then continues with either AFF or slow progression.

Where is this? It's genius.

Jonathan is a TM here:
http://www.goskydive.ca/EN/solo.htm


Interesting program Cool


SecondRound  (A License)

Feb 19, 2013, 10:39 AM
Post #5 of 57 (4140 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jonathan.newman] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

Just saw this thread after a search. It looks like a brilliant way to take advantage of the strengths of the various methods of teaching. I would definitely opt for this and travel farther. I have done S/L and now that I am getting back to the sport I would not mind starting with a tandem then learning exits and canopy control under a Static line. At the same time, AFF looks like the fastest way to learn body flying skills. What is the best way to research this? Phone calls? Visits?


(This post was edited by SecondRound on Feb 19, 2013, 10:40 AM)


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Feb 20, 2013, 5:00 PM
Post #6 of 57 (3959 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jonathan.newman] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
My primary motivation is that I hate seeing students sit around on days when clouds are at 8000 feet and we're doing low jumps while they sit around.
Teach knowledge-based info?
Knowledge is Power.


jcbfly  (D 30546)

Feb 22, 2013, 11:42 AM
Post #7 of 57 (3821 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jonathan.newman] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

At Skydive New Mexico all students start by making 2 IAD jumps. After that they can choose to continue in the IAD program or move over to AFF.


tkhayes  (D 18764)

Feb 23, 2013, 3:19 AM
Post #8 of 57 (3771 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jonathan.newman] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

while it looks nice on paper, I do not think that switching from program to program does much for the student or the dropzone. Dropzones do not do it because there is no clear path from jump to jump on what the next step is - making decisions ambiguous.

Students would be confused I think.

Most dropzone choose one or two progression methods and that is it. nothing wrong with that. Italian restaurants serve their brand of Italian food, they do not switch mid-meal to another menu.


Andy9o8  (D License)

Feb 23, 2013, 7:41 AM
Post #9 of 57 (3749 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tkhayes] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
while it looks nice on paper, I do not think that switching from program to program does much for the student or the dropzone. Dropzones do not do it because there is no clear path from jump to jump on what the next step is - making decisions ambiguous.

Students would be confused I think.

Most dropzone choose one or two progression methods and that is it. nothing wrong with that. Italian restaurants serve their brand of Italian food, they do not switch mid-meal to another menu.


With all due respect (seriously), I'd need some more convincing that there's much down-side, compared to plenty of up-side, to a hybrid program of, say:
- 1 tandem to get past the oh-shit/sensory overload of the first jump, uncluttered by any other tasks; then
- a couple IAD/SL + 1 hop & pop to learn the basics of saving one's own life on a parachute jump, uncluttered by either first-jump brain-lock or any freefall tasks; then
- with those minimal basics dealt with, however many structured AFF jumps it takes to learn the basics of safe freefall.

Done right, with planned structure, I don't see that there's anything necessarily unclear about the path or ambiguous about the decision process. It's not program-to-program; it's a single program, with planned, structured phases.

But I invite being educated by the experts, which I am not.


ufk22  (D 16168)

Feb 24, 2013, 9:46 AM
Post #10 of 57 (3687 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tkhayes] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

[reply]while it looks nice on paper, I do not think that switching from program to program does much for the student or the dropzone. Dropzones do not do it because there is no clear path from jump to jump on what the next step is - making decisions ambiguous.

Students would be confused I think.

Most dropzone choose one or two progression methods and that is it. nothing wrong with that. Italian restaurants serve their brand of Italian food, they do not switch mid-meal to another menu.[/reply]
Most restaurants allow you to order any combination of courses off the menu that you desire.


Andy9o8  (D License)

Feb 24, 2013, 11:43 AM
Post #11 of 57 (3674 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ufk22] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

(We will now have 5 more posts debating the parsing of the restaurant analogy.)

Smile


Premier wmw999  (D 6296)

Feb 24, 2013, 12:12 PM
Post #12 of 57 (3670 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Andy9o8] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

I kind of like the analogy. However, I see it more as a cafeteria, where each instructor chooses the tools that will help the student the best.

The students have no idea what's a logical progression -- whatever you teach them is what they learn.

Wendy P.


diablopilot  (D License)

Feb 24, 2013, 5:58 PM
Post #13 of 57 (3635 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Andy9o8] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
while it looks nice on paper, I do not think that switching from program to program does much for the student or the dropzone. Dropzones do not do it because there is no clear path from jump to jump on what the next step is - making decisions ambiguous.

Students would be confused I think.

Most dropzone choose one or two progression methods and that is it. nothing wrong with that. Italian restaurants serve their brand of Italian food, they do not switch mid-meal to another menu.


With all due respect (seriously), I'd need some more convincing that there's much down-side, compared to plenty of up-side, to a hybrid program of, say:
- 1 tandem to get past the oh-shit/sensory overload of the first jump, uncluttered by any other tasks; then
- a couple IAD/SL + 1 hop & pop to learn the basics of saving one's own life on a parachute jump, uncluttered by either first-jump brain-lock or any freefall tasks; then
- with those minimal basics dealt with, however many structured AFF jumps it takes to learn the basics of safe freefall.

Done right, with planned structure, I don't see that there's anything necessarily unclear about the path or ambiguous about the decision process. It's not program-to-program; it's a single program, with planned, structured phases.

But I invite being educated by the experts, which I am not.

Having worked in many different programs, and methods I'll say you're right about the advantage of the tandem progression. It's amazing what a better product that sort of program turns out with much less risk to the instructors and students.

Jumping between dropzones has much risk associated with it and no one in their right mind will accept a transfer without verifying knowledge, and skills in a controlled manner. I'll put a transfer through a complete FJC since the way they have been trained may or may not be different than what my expectations will be, and I'll make them return to a harness hold stability only dive earning a release if possible. The risk is to high to do anything other. A student should really only consider switching programs if they are not getting what they need elsewhere.


SecondRound  (A License)

Feb 24, 2013, 6:17 PM
Post #14 of 57 (3632 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diablopilot] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

It looks like I may have found a way to test this progression. I found a DZ that encourages a Tandem before beginning a S/L progression. They also have AFF qualified Instructors on staff. As an added boost I will be vacationing in Vegas and I may be able to sneak in some tunnel time DRPs and freefall. I am excited to find so much teaching talent available at a reasonable sized DZ where I won't have as many canopies in the air with me as I try to bridge the gap of thirty-five years from 28' round to 288 SF square. In the mean time I will continue to learn from this website and read my SIMS before bedtime.


Premier SkymonkeyONE  (D 12501)

Mar 4, 2013, 7:09 AM
Post #15 of 57 (3478 views)
Shortcut
Re: [SecondRound] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

I think in my perfect world I would be be running a tandem progression/Tunnel/ AFF program. Two training tandems followed by ten minutes of tunnel, followed by one-JM AFF starting at Cat C2. Students are on radio until passing E3, then passed onto Coaches for F, G, and H using the flow on the "real" four-page ISP A-license proficiency card.

This, assuming your DZ has a tunnel or is within close proximity to a tunnel. All AFF students at Eloy go to the tunnel. All AFF students at Raeford get six minutes in the tunnel.

The tandem jumps follow the same dive flow as Cat A and Cat B AFF jumps. I offer nearly every single tandem student the opportunity to do those dive flows as it is right now. Challenging students is how we grow the sport. I'm not a fan of "thrill ride" tandems.

Growing your own coaches is an integral part of any dropzone school student program. You have to make them feel needed and stress the importance of their role in keeping the train rolling along. Full-time AFF/tandem/video staff simply don't have time to carry students farther than Cat E.

Anyway, that's my idea of a great program.

Chuck Blue, D-12501
AFF/SL/TM-I, PRO, S&TA, PFC/E, MMPCI-18


jonathan.newman  (D 30644)

Mar 4, 2013, 8:35 AM
Post #16 of 57 (3460 views)
Shortcut
Re: [SkymonkeyONE] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm glad SecondRound got to use the search feature in these forums.

This was all hypothetical when I started this thread, working at one DZ that taught AFF as the only way, and another that did tandem to iad to aff.

I've since moved to Panama and started a tandem and AFF program. There is another thread discussing that here. http://www.dropzone.com/...rum.cgi?post=4371854

I'm a huge fan now of using teaching tandems before AFF. Tandem 1 is a fun jump, where I focus on shooting a good handcam video. They get to pull, if they want. Jumps 2 and 3 are about relaxation, turns, tracking, hand signals, altitude awareness, body position. Once the canopy opens, it's all about finding the airport, finding the sweet spot, and drilling sweet spot flares over and over. Yes, I let them land with me.

The last tandem is all about ohshit. I teach the "alti-arch-legs-relax" and I make them use it to gain stability out the door before drogue set, and again when the 90 degree turns somehow start making us both spin in circles Wink When the canopy opens, I quickly pop a toggle and talk them through their first "malfunction". Then I grab a flare toggle to induce a turn and talk them through their next canopy problem. After this, we practice more flares and land.

All of my students went on to stand up their first AFF and none of them needed a radio. One of them even flared and landed a canopy with a locked toggle on a Cat D. The way he flared and slid in, you'd think he was practicing to be a TI.

Each student got the AFF groundschool after the first tandem, because every tandem after that was done as if it were an AFF. Each tandem had progression requirements like an AFF, and repeated as necessary.

I think this real-time tandem instruction is so much better than an AFF only or IAD only or even a 1 tandem only system.

By the way, TK, we do make everyone switch programs right after Cat E -- Go do your hop and pops! (unless you already did them in IAD/SL.


Ron

Mar 4, 2013, 1:02 PM
Post #17 of 57 (3416 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jonathan.newman] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

I just did a student this last week that I used an integrated program:
1. One Tandem set up like an AFF L1
2. 45 mins wind tunnel
3. Single JM L4 and 5

She did great and was docking on me on the L5.

In the past I have done other programs:
1. One hour wind tunnel
2. L4

1. Tandem
2. 5 SL's
3. 2 clear and pulls
4. AFF L4/5

Basically, since I don't really work for a DZ (I kinda do... But only when they need me) I can make up my own program to fit each private student.

If *I* had a DZ. I think I would have each student do a tandem to get over the rush. Then 10 mins of tunnel. After that they could show up and do AFF or IAD depending on weather. Once they had three freefalls, they would be required to do 5 hop n pops to work only on canopy control.


jonathan.newman  (D 30644)

Mar 6, 2013, 5:48 AM
Post #18 of 57 (3287 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Once they had three freefalls, they would be required to do 5 hop n pops to work only on canopy control.

We taught a canopy course last weekend. One student was on coach jumps and another was on Cat D. Here in Panama, we do the canopy course before the A license. I think it's a great idea.

I did a currency jump with a guy who had 3 jumps and 3 hours in the tunnel. He brought videos of his jumps showing maneuvers from cat d through cat h. I just wish we all lived close to a tunnel.


ChrisD  (No License)

Mar 6, 2013, 8:36 AM
Post #19 of 57 (3258 views)
Shortcut
Re: [SecondRound] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Just saw this thread after a search. It looks like a brilliant way to take advantage of the strengths of the various methods of teaching. I would definitely opt for this and travel farther. I have done S/L and now that I am getting back to the sport I would not mind starting with a tandem then learning exits and canopy control under a Static line. At the same time, AFF looks like the fastest way to learn body flying skills. What is the best way to research this? Phone calls? Visits?

Just keep doin what your doing!!! It's all good! Smile


obelixtim  (D 84)

Mar 16, 2013, 4:38 AM
Post #20 of 57 (2995 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ChrisD] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

Traditionally, skydiving has always been done one way, a lot of that is due to the skills of the instructors, the equipment available, and the need to standardise training, all of which are important and valid. Usedc to be, SL was the only way training could be done.

However like anything, evolution is an ongoing process, and with the different training methods now available, there is no reason why a new type of training shouldn't evolve, incorporating the best bits of all the methods,

I think this is what will happen, and that is a good thing.

Its simply a matter of converting everyones thinking that their method isn't the only, or best method.


SecondRound  (A License)

Apr 28, 2013, 9:37 PM
Post #21 of 57 (2772 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ChrisD] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

Well, theory is turning into practice. Friday was a tandem with emphasis on altitude awareness and practice touches- tried to make things easier for the TI with a good arch on exit. Saturday was a Static Line first jump course. Seems like it was twice as long as the one I took in 1977 but without the many PLFs off a 5' platform in all directions of the 1977 version. Lots more emphasis on canopy control and off zone and hazardous landings. Seemed like having jumped rounds did not make me a veteran it made me a survivor. Rest of the day included two jumps with a successful PRCP on the second and a first run through of packing the canopy. I was really able to spend time on learning the canopy and on the second jump I even tried out the risers a liitle bit while I was still up high. Damn it felt good to be in the sky and to have nylon over head. Seeing that big beautiful rectangle above me and the slider coming down was like a kiss. Still planning on hitting a tunnel on vacation. All in all I am totally stoked and grateful to my Instructors and Jumpmasters who obviously love the sport and love to teach.
I hope I can stay in the sport long enough to pay back the gifts they have given me.


ChrisD  (No License)

Apr 30, 2013, 7:05 AM
Post #22 of 57 (2687 views)
Shortcut
Re: [SecondRound] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

Are one day AFF courses driven by financial reasons only?

I know of many DZ's that teach a certian way only, and I mean only, because that was the way they were taught?

I'm telling ya, learning to skydive for a bigginer,..

my point is that, "Literally" an individual can not learn everything they need to know, you cannot practice enough to handel every contingency possible, in the early days of yor first freefalls! Nevermind doing everything in one day!

Just because we have a few students on their first jumps that have followed their EP's to a great outcome, there are some that didnot, so this line of thinking is flawed!

The places where they practice and belive'in multi day AFF courses, think the military for one, really do think they have something better on thier hands!

And just about every allied peer reviewed research regarding learning theory and stress support this way of thinking!

But the economics of skydiving?????Unsure
C


SecondRound  (A License)

Apr 30, 2013, 7:28 AM
Post #23 of 57 (2670 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ChrisD] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Are one day AFF courses driven by financial reasons only?



I know of many DZ's that teach a certian way only, and I mean only, because that was the way they were taught?

I'm telling ya, learning to skydive for a bigginer,..

my point is that, "Literally" an individual can not learn everything they need to know, you cannot practice enough to handel every contingency possible, in the early days of yor first freefalls! Nevermind doing everything in one day!

Just because we have a few students on their first jumps that have followed their EP's to a great outcome, there are some that didnot, so this line of thinking is flawed!

The places where they practice and belive'in multi day AFF courses, think the military for one, really do think they have something better on thier hands!

And just about every allied peer reviewed research regarding learning theory and stress support this way of thinking!

But the economics of skydiving?????Unsure
Amen to that, even with previous experience and a lot of prep reading to get vocabulary and concept, I am glad I chose a Static Line jump. AFF would have added freefall technique and I am not too sure my retention is that good. In fact, I am almost hoping for some non jump weather on my next trip to the DZ so I can get some additional practice in the hanging harness on recognising and responding to malfunctions not to mention just talking skydiving so I can become more solidly grouded in the fundamentals. Shake and Bake is out for me.
C


SEREJumper  (D 29555)

Apr 30, 2013, 11:04 AM
Post #24 of 57 (2651 views)
Shortcut
Re: [SecondRound] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
In fact, I am almost hoping for some non jump weather on my next trip to the DZ so I can get some additional practice in the hanging harness on recognising and responding to malfunctions not to mention just talking skydiving so I can become more solidly grouded in the fundamentals.

Well, don't just hope then. Sunny blues skies or not, if you feel like you need more time, take it. Don't feel rushed because they want you to or you think you have to jump. The sky will always be there, but you know that! Cool


SecondRound  (A License)

Apr 30, 2013, 8:42 PM
Post #25 of 57 (2613 views)
Shortcut
Re: [SEREJumper] Anyone using a truly "Integrated Student Program"? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
In fact, I am almost hoping for some non jump weather on my next trip to the DZ so I can get some additional practice in the hanging harness on recognising and responding to malfunctions not to mention just talking skydiving so I can become more solidly grouded in the fundamentals.

Well, don't just hope then. Sunny blues skies or not, if you feel like you need more time, take it. Don't feel rushed because they want you to or you think you have to jump. The sky will always be there, but you know that! Cool

Its more a matter of keeping my own eagerness in check. Plus I think the pool of experienced jumpers to talk to would be larger especially my instructors who can get tied up with large first jump classes. Definitely there is no pressure to jump from my instructors in fact they seem all for adding additional knowledge to the basics early in my career.


First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Skydiving : Instructors

 


Search for (options)