Hooknswoop 19 #201 January 4, 2010 QuoteBecause it's irrelevant. And not because you were probably taught how to pilot an aircraft by someone with absolutely no "teaching credentials"? Not because some of the best CFI's have no "teaching credentials"? How can that be? How can someone teach someone else without having "teaching credentials"? Does this mean you were not taught how to fly correctly? Does that mean you are a poor pilot because your CFI had no "teaching credentials"? Irrelevant because my example demonstrates that you do not need "teaching credentials" to be an effective teacher, disproving your point, making you, wait for it......................wrong? But don't you have "teaching credentials"? How can someone who doesn't have "teaching credentials" teach like you do? Hmmmmmmmm..... Yes, people can effectively teach others without "teaching credentials". Get over it. Derek V Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnDeere 0 #202 January 4, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Nice rant. Sounds like an admission that they don't have any despite all the rhetoric about the importance of teaching. John just show everyone how big your dick is and be done with it already. +1 Thanks for that! Sometimes I'm childish. I should work on that....... But honesty is a good thingNothing opens like a Deere! You ignorant fool! Checks are for workers! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,396 #203 January 4, 2010 >SO: why would you want the pedagogy part to be taught by non teachers? It is taught by teachers. Every course director I know has spent quite a significant time as a teacher. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #204 January 4, 2010 QuoteQuoteBecause it's irrelevant. And not because you were probably taught how to pilot an aircraft by someone with absolutely no "teaching credentials"? Not because some of the best CFI's have no "teaching credentials"? Derek V Irrelevant to the question I asked, which related to the teaching credentials of the people who teach the ratings candidates. You made the WRONG analogy. Quote What are the teaching credentials of the individuals who are teaching how to teach in just a few hours? And I HAVE shown that the teaching requirement of CFI candidates is significantly higher than that required of USPA coach, AFFI or TI candidates. Quote However, a CFI candidate must either hold an FAA ground instructor certificate, a current teacher's certificate authorizing him/her to teach at an educational level of the 7th grade or higher, be currently employed as a teacher at an accredited college or university, OR take ground school and pass the FAA's Fundamentals of Instructing (FOI) knowledge test, which is required before you can obtain a ground instructor certificate. Rest of your rant is irrelevant.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #205 January 4, 2010 Quote Quote It's a valid question in the way you've framed it, however; Has there ever been a time in skydiving where I/E's have had a teaching certificate whether by intent or by chance? If not, is it appropriate to place greater expense, time, and challenges on an already very challenged industry? Do the costs (fatalities/major injuries) justify the end result that *might* improve by demanding teaching certifications of those I/E's? Just cuz I can frame the question better does not mean I have a good answer to the question. At most, it only means I am a better teacher than Kallend.My answer to the question is a bit long. I'll think about it and other issues for a day or two and get back to you. . It's odd that such a simple question Quote What are the teaching credentials of the individuals who are teaching how to teach in just a few hours? should have produced such an outpouring of rude and abusive responses. I guess I touched a sensitive nerve in a bunch of people.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhys 0 #206 January 4, 2010 Quote just a thought... Shocked OP 6.1.4 OP 9.1.1 http://docs.apf.asn.au/index.php/Opregs good observation! "When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #207 January 4, 2010 Quote>SO: why would you want the pedagogy part to be taught by non teachers? It is taught by teachers. Every course director I know has spent quite a significant time as a teacher. I've known several exceptions, so that must be happenstance rather than a requirement. Maybe it's changed now.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #208 January 4, 2010 QuoteQuote John just show everyone how big your dick is and be done with it already. I guess the PA means that you don't have a valid response. PA? I thought he was complimenting you.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #209 January 4, 2010 Quote It's odd that such a simple question Quote What are the teaching credentials of the individuals who are teaching how to teach in just a few hours? should have produced such an outpouring of rude and abusive responses. I guess I touched a sensitive nerve in a bunch of people. No, John. You just asked one of those no-brainer, you already know the answer, Captain Obvious questions.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #210 January 4, 2010 QuoteQuote It's odd that such a simple question Quote What are the teaching credentials of the individuals who are teaching how to teach in just a few hours? should have produced such an outpouring of rude and abusive responses. I guess I touched a sensitive nerve in a bunch of people. No, John. You just asked one of those no-brainer, you already know the answer, Captain Obvious questions. No, I don't know the answer. Do you know if there's a requirement for those teaching the pedagogy section of USPA coach courses to have some kind of credential indicating that they are qualified so to do? There wasn't when I took the BIC but that was some time ago. It seems to me that if someone is paying good money and spending their time to be taught pedagogy, that the instructor should have demonstrated qualifications to teach pedagogy, just like we would expect in an instructor for any other subject whether law, CPR, math, physics, flying, or skydiving. Otherwise the pedagogy requirement is just a joke.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #211 January 4, 2010 Quote Quote Quote John just show everyone how big your dick is and be done with it already. I guess the PA means that you don't have a valid response. PA? I thought he was complimenting you. It's all relative.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #212 January 4, 2010 I'll ask a different question. What teaching credentials is required to teach a pilot to be a CFI? Derek V Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerrob 558 #213 January 4, 2010 "QuoteBeing in education, I'd like to offer an idea for discussion. Instructors (AFF or Tandem) are basically teachers. Is it possible that a better way to increase the efficiency and skill of the teachers/instructors is to better prepare them? ... Maybe it's the Tandem/AFF-I Examiner program that needs revision?" ................................................................... USPA recently did that ... oeverhauling the Instructor Examiner rating. Problem is that most American skydiving instructors were trained under the old system. Whether they got lazy or improved after earnign their rating is a question of individual character and DZ ethics. Perhaps the solution is requiring refresher training every couple of years. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites riggerrob 558 #214 January 4, 2010 QuoteQuoteIn the real world (in many applications), those that can't do, teach. Actually, some popular slogans are crocks of shit. For the most part, that's one of them. .................................................................... Okay, I will step up to that challenge. I hold two Examiner ratings: Rigger and Tandem Instructor. Over the past year I have packed more than 200 reserves and done more than two hundred jumps with tandem students. I also trained three new riggers and a couple of new tandem instructors. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnMitchell 14 #215 January 4, 2010 Quote USPA recently did that ... oeverhauling the Instructor Examiner rating. Problem is that most American skydiving instructors were trained under the old system. Whether they got lazy or improved after earnign their rating is a question of individual character and DZ ethics. I got my instructor rating 30 years ago. Was that under the old system, or the old old system?I really don't remember much of the pedagogy instruction, beyond the paraphrasing of what the FAA told its CFI candidates. I read that packet to death in preparation for my jumpmaster ticket and instructor rating. I think I acquired most of my ability to teach through preparation, rehearsal, mentorship and constant striving to improve. I've seen a few examples of poor instructors getting their ratings in each of the methods. I don't really have any solutions, just my observations. Reference the earlier discussion of doing both AFF and tandem? I often switch back and forth several times a day with no problem. They are both different skill sets, but it's the same as your airline captain also being an aerobatic competitor or sailplane pilot. It's not the changing back and forth that compromises safety, it's the attitude of the pilot (or skydiving instructor) that determines the quality of the performance. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DSE 3 #216 January 4, 2010 Quote Quote Quote In the real world (in many applications), those that can't do, teach. Actually, some popular slogans are crocks of shit. For the most part, that's one of them. .................................................................... Okay, I will step up to that challenge. I hold two Exeminer ratings: Rigger and Tandem Instructor. Over the past year I have packed more than 200 reserves and done more than two hundred jumps with tandem students. I also trained three new riggers and a couple of new tandem instructors. Skydiving isn't one of those applications, and if you read the post in context, I've suggested quite the opposite. In skydiving, you *have* to demonstrate that you possess the skills in order to be able to teach them to others. I'll retract the parenthetical "for the most part" and say "in some instances." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pilotdave 0 #217 January 4, 2010 QuoteOtherwise the pedagogy requirement is just a joke. This website has a strict rule against pedagogy jokes, doesn't it?? Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Bolas 5 #218 January 4, 2010 Quote Quote Otherwise the pedagogy requirement is just a joke. This website has a strict rule against pedagogy jokes, doesn't it?? Dave Damn it, you beat me to it. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites hymandd732 0 #219 January 4, 2010 I have been in the sport about as long as Strong, In fact he was one who provided my Instructer rating in 1971. He is in a sport that deals in possible death. With his years in the sport he must recognize that there are legions of get rich quick tandem factories and his harness should have been designed to prevent incorrect usage by those leeches. May the result of this experience be the additional care of those mfg equipment same as medical malpractice lawsuits. Evil but necessary to protect the unsophisticated. Besides, perhaps it is time for Ted to retire to Miami. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites hymandd732 0 #220 January 4, 2010 Perhaps it is time to acknowledge that the "sport" has turned into a profit making industry and apply the same restricitions. Personally I would outlaw tandems and passengers on a motorcycle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites airtwardo 6 #221 January 4, 2010 Quote Reference the earlier discussion of doing both AFF and tandem? I often switch back and forth several times a day with no problem. They are both different skill sets, but it's the same as your airline captain also being an aerobatic competitor or sailplane pilot. It's not the changing back and forth that compromises safety, it's the attitude of the pilot (or skydiving instructor) that determines the quality of the performance. To maybe bring back the discussion from the teaching teachers drift~~or not! I agree with you John. Although the two methods are clearly different animals, I know of several I's that go back & fourth several times a day without problems. It's a question of skills both technical and teaching. I started doing tandems when 1/2 the rigs still didn't have drogues. My understanding was it was to be a 'new' method of Skydiving Instruction similar to the duel flight process with aircraft. That took a certain approach and method of instruction... It's obviously different today with a broader target market and the number of thrill ride participants. I believe that today, there are probably different teaching skills required to get the tandem info across than is need in the AFFI branch. I too don't see the significance of having one rating prior to the other, however the 'how to teach' thing is obviously important and was an interesting segment of the Coach Rating class I sat in on recently. The lecture touched upon the idea that the teaching 'how' was/is very different with each discipline. Being ole timer with no ego...(cough cough)I always found it beneficial to sit in on other instructors classes back when I was teaching. No matter how good I thought MY course covered the information, I could cherry pick things that made relating it better, from others...the learning should never stop. And again, as I've said before...the reason I quit teaching is that I felt I no longer had the ability to relate the information in a clear, concise, interesting and understandable manner. A grumpy ole man in Tandem burn-out has no place in the rotation...I only hope other TM's are as honest with themselves as I was, for the good of the student as well as the sport overall. As Sparky stated, I too knew the subject cold but wasn't 'teaching' it well enough. . .don't know that having a teaching certificate per say would have changed that. Oh & one more thing~ let's not forget the base reason for the overhauling of the requirements in regard to achieving ratings is because the number of qualified instructors was quickly diminishing. As you mention John, we that got our I's 100 years ago did so as a part of the overall progression in the sport, the instructor of today is perhaps actually in a completely different discipline than the 'average' Skydiver...which wasn't the case 30 years ago. So I guess my question is, will making the ratings even more difficult to get than they are today be a detriment to the sport in ways we haven't thought of or discussed? ~$.02 ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,623 #222 January 4, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIn the real world (in many applications), those that can't do, teach. Actually, some popular slogans are crocks of shit. For the most part, that's one of them. .................................................................... Okay, I will step up to that challenge. I hold two Exeminer ratings: Rigger and Tandem Instructor. Over the past year I have packed more than 200 reserves and done more than two hundred jumps with tandem students. I also trained three new riggers and a couple of new tandem instructors. Skydiving isn't one of those applications, and if you read the post in context, I've suggested quite the opposite. In skydiving, you *have* to demonstrate that you possess the skills in order to be able to teach them to others. I haven't disputed that at all. My point is a very simple one. IF the consensus is that teaching skills are important enough that they comprise a required part of the syllabus for someone seeking an instructional rating, THEN the person teaching those pedagogical skills should be qualified to do so with some objective proof (an earned credential of some sort) of that qualification. If it's not important enough for the qualification of the course director in this area of the syllabus to matter, then maybe pedagogy shouldn't be part of the instructional rating requirements at all and the candidates could save some time and money.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wayneflorida 0 #223 January 5, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIn the real world (in many applications), those that can't do, teach. Actually, some popular slogans are crocks of shit. For the most part, that's one of them. .................................................................... Okay, I will step up to that challenge. I hold two Exeminer ratings: Rigger and Tandem Instructor. Over the past year I have packed more than 200 reserves and done more than two hundred jumps with tandem students. I also trained three new riggers and a couple of new tandem instructors. Skydiving isn't one of those applications, and if you read the post in context, I've suggested quite the opposite. In skydiving, you *have* to demonstrate that you possess the skills in order to be able to teach them to others. I haven't disputed that at all. My point is a very simple one. IF the consensus is that teaching skills are important enough that they comprise a required part of the syllabus for someone seeking an instructional rating, THEN the person teaching those pedagogical skills should be qualified to do so with some objective proof (an earned credential of some sort) of that qualification. If it's not important enough for the qualification of the course director in this area of the syllabus to matter, then maybe pedagogy shouldn't be part of the instructional rating requirements at all and the candidates could save some time and money. _____________________________________________ What is your " earned credential" suggestion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skyjumpenfool 2 #224 January 5, 2010 I sat in on several instructors when I recently got my coach rating. I was impressed with most of those I watched. Each had a different style. Which is good! However, the instructors who were also professional teachers, I noticed used several strategies to accomodate the various learning styles of the individual students. Also, they were more aware of the various cues being given by the students. This is something that takes even the best of teachers years to learn. So, is it an advantage to hold a teachers licence/certificate... Absolutely! Can anyone else learn these skills... Absolutely! After all, the teachers learned it somehow. The fact that these skills are necessary is evident to the USPA as they've included these ideas in the coach course. As for the whole "those who can't, teach", comment, I'd like to clarify.... Those who can't, teach. Those who can't teach, teach Phys Ed. Those who can't teach Phys Ed., end up jumpen out of airplanes for a living?????? Birdshit & Fools Productions "Son, only two things fall from the sky." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lewmonst 0 #225 January 5, 2010 I can't keep up with this thread, so if this was brought up before, sorry. But, does anyone remember the BIC? http://www.exitshot.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next Page 9 of 12 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
riggerrob 558 #214 January 4, 2010 QuoteQuoteIn the real world (in many applications), those that can't do, teach. Actually, some popular slogans are crocks of shit. For the most part, that's one of them. .................................................................... Okay, I will step up to that challenge. I hold two Examiner ratings: Rigger and Tandem Instructor. Over the past year I have packed more than 200 reserves and done more than two hundred jumps with tandem students. I also trained three new riggers and a couple of new tandem instructors. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnMitchell 14 #215 January 4, 2010 Quote USPA recently did that ... oeverhauling the Instructor Examiner rating. Problem is that most American skydiving instructors were trained under the old system. Whether they got lazy or improved after earnign their rating is a question of individual character and DZ ethics. I got my instructor rating 30 years ago. Was that under the old system, or the old old system?I really don't remember much of the pedagogy instruction, beyond the paraphrasing of what the FAA told its CFI candidates. I read that packet to death in preparation for my jumpmaster ticket and instructor rating. I think I acquired most of my ability to teach through preparation, rehearsal, mentorship and constant striving to improve. I've seen a few examples of poor instructors getting their ratings in each of the methods. I don't really have any solutions, just my observations. Reference the earlier discussion of doing both AFF and tandem? I often switch back and forth several times a day with no problem. They are both different skill sets, but it's the same as your airline captain also being an aerobatic competitor or sailplane pilot. It's not the changing back and forth that compromises safety, it's the attitude of the pilot (or skydiving instructor) that determines the quality of the performance. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 3 #216 January 4, 2010 Quote Quote Quote In the real world (in many applications), those that can't do, teach. Actually, some popular slogans are crocks of shit. For the most part, that's one of them. .................................................................... Okay, I will step up to that challenge. I hold two Exeminer ratings: Rigger and Tandem Instructor. Over the past year I have packed more than 200 reserves and done more than two hundred jumps with tandem students. I also trained three new riggers and a couple of new tandem instructors. Skydiving isn't one of those applications, and if you read the post in context, I've suggested quite the opposite. In skydiving, you *have* to demonstrate that you possess the skills in order to be able to teach them to others. I'll retract the parenthetical "for the most part" and say "in some instances." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #217 January 4, 2010 QuoteOtherwise the pedagogy requirement is just a joke. This website has a strict rule against pedagogy jokes, doesn't it?? Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #218 January 4, 2010 Quote Quote Otherwise the pedagogy requirement is just a joke. This website has a strict rule against pedagogy jokes, doesn't it?? Dave Damn it, you beat me to it. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hymandd732 0 #219 January 4, 2010 I have been in the sport about as long as Strong, In fact he was one who provided my Instructer rating in 1971. He is in a sport that deals in possible death. With his years in the sport he must recognize that there are legions of get rich quick tandem factories and his harness should have been designed to prevent incorrect usage by those leeches. May the result of this experience be the additional care of those mfg equipment same as medical malpractice lawsuits. Evil but necessary to protect the unsophisticated. Besides, perhaps it is time for Ted to retire to Miami. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hymandd732 0 #220 January 4, 2010 Perhaps it is time to acknowledge that the "sport" has turned into a profit making industry and apply the same restricitions. Personally I would outlaw tandems and passengers on a motorcycle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 6 #221 January 4, 2010 Quote Reference the earlier discussion of doing both AFF and tandem? I often switch back and forth several times a day with no problem. They are both different skill sets, but it's the same as your airline captain also being an aerobatic competitor or sailplane pilot. It's not the changing back and forth that compromises safety, it's the attitude of the pilot (or skydiving instructor) that determines the quality of the performance. To maybe bring back the discussion from the teaching teachers drift~~or not! I agree with you John. Although the two methods are clearly different animals, I know of several I's that go back & fourth several times a day without problems. It's a question of skills both technical and teaching. I started doing tandems when 1/2 the rigs still didn't have drogues. My understanding was it was to be a 'new' method of Skydiving Instruction similar to the duel flight process with aircraft. That took a certain approach and method of instruction... It's obviously different today with a broader target market and the number of thrill ride participants. I believe that today, there are probably different teaching skills required to get the tandem info across than is need in the AFFI branch. I too don't see the significance of having one rating prior to the other, however the 'how to teach' thing is obviously important and was an interesting segment of the Coach Rating class I sat in on recently. The lecture touched upon the idea that the teaching 'how' was/is very different with each discipline. Being ole timer with no ego...(cough cough)I always found it beneficial to sit in on other instructors classes back when I was teaching. No matter how good I thought MY course covered the information, I could cherry pick things that made relating it better, from others...the learning should never stop. And again, as I've said before...the reason I quit teaching is that I felt I no longer had the ability to relate the information in a clear, concise, interesting and understandable manner. A grumpy ole man in Tandem burn-out has no place in the rotation...I only hope other TM's are as honest with themselves as I was, for the good of the student as well as the sport overall. As Sparky stated, I too knew the subject cold but wasn't 'teaching' it well enough. . .don't know that having a teaching certificate per say would have changed that. Oh & one more thing~ let's not forget the base reason for the overhauling of the requirements in regard to achieving ratings is because the number of qualified instructors was quickly diminishing. As you mention John, we that got our I's 100 years ago did so as a part of the overall progression in the sport, the instructor of today is perhaps actually in a completely different discipline than the 'average' Skydiver...which wasn't the case 30 years ago. So I guess my question is, will making the ratings even more difficult to get than they are today be a detriment to the sport in ways we haven't thought of or discussed? ~$.02 ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #222 January 4, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIn the real world (in many applications), those that can't do, teach. Actually, some popular slogans are crocks of shit. For the most part, that's one of them. .................................................................... Okay, I will step up to that challenge. I hold two Exeminer ratings: Rigger and Tandem Instructor. Over the past year I have packed more than 200 reserves and done more than two hundred jumps with tandem students. I also trained three new riggers and a couple of new tandem instructors. Skydiving isn't one of those applications, and if you read the post in context, I've suggested quite the opposite. In skydiving, you *have* to demonstrate that you possess the skills in order to be able to teach them to others. I haven't disputed that at all. My point is a very simple one. IF the consensus is that teaching skills are important enough that they comprise a required part of the syllabus for someone seeking an instructional rating, THEN the person teaching those pedagogical skills should be qualified to do so with some objective proof (an earned credential of some sort) of that qualification. If it's not important enough for the qualification of the course director in this area of the syllabus to matter, then maybe pedagogy shouldn't be part of the instructional rating requirements at all and the candidates could save some time and money.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wayneflorida 0 #223 January 5, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIn the real world (in many applications), those that can't do, teach. Actually, some popular slogans are crocks of shit. For the most part, that's one of them. .................................................................... Okay, I will step up to that challenge. I hold two Exeminer ratings: Rigger and Tandem Instructor. Over the past year I have packed more than 200 reserves and done more than two hundred jumps with tandem students. I also trained three new riggers and a couple of new tandem instructors. Skydiving isn't one of those applications, and if you read the post in context, I've suggested quite the opposite. In skydiving, you *have* to demonstrate that you possess the skills in order to be able to teach them to others. I haven't disputed that at all. My point is a very simple one. IF the consensus is that teaching skills are important enough that they comprise a required part of the syllabus for someone seeking an instructional rating, THEN the person teaching those pedagogical skills should be qualified to do so with some objective proof (an earned credential of some sort) of that qualification. If it's not important enough for the qualification of the course director in this area of the syllabus to matter, then maybe pedagogy shouldn't be part of the instructional rating requirements at all and the candidates could save some time and money. _____________________________________________ What is your " earned credential" suggestion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyjumpenfool 2 #224 January 5, 2010 I sat in on several instructors when I recently got my coach rating. I was impressed with most of those I watched. Each had a different style. Which is good! However, the instructors who were also professional teachers, I noticed used several strategies to accomodate the various learning styles of the individual students. Also, they were more aware of the various cues being given by the students. This is something that takes even the best of teachers years to learn. So, is it an advantage to hold a teachers licence/certificate... Absolutely! Can anyone else learn these skills... Absolutely! After all, the teachers learned it somehow. The fact that these skills are necessary is evident to the USPA as they've included these ideas in the coach course. As for the whole "those who can't, teach", comment, I'd like to clarify.... Those who can't, teach. Those who can't teach, teach Phys Ed. Those who can't teach Phys Ed., end up jumpen out of airplanes for a living?????? Birdshit & Fools Productions "Son, only two things fall from the sky." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lewmonst 0 #225 January 5, 2010 I can't keep up with this thread, so if this was brought up before, sorry. But, does anyone remember the BIC? http://www.exitshot.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
