Sad news for tandem

[kallend 1,621]

Quote

Quote

Quote

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 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.

The simplest would be to accept what the FAA accepts. We already use FAA standards for medicals for TIs.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

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.

The unfortunate thing is that while the numbers of instructors are back up, the "qualifications" went in the toilet.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[robskydiv 0]

This may be a little off subject, but I just wanted to offer some words of encouragement: "This too shall pass." What is encouraging to me is that all of you who have these ratings really do care about the safety and the survival of our sport. Hopefully this unfortunate incident will be the only one of it's kind. A safe and prosperous New Year to you all! Harry

[airtwardo 6]

Quote

Quote

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.

The unfortunate thing is that while the numbers of instructors are back up, the "qualifications" went in the toilet.

Though not involved in it as you are, I kinda figured that would be the end result.

I wonder if USPA was perhaps hoping once the numbers increased so too would the 'quality' of the new blood after a time...I take it in your opinion, that's not the case?

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[diablopilot 2]

The thing that got eliminated " the good ol' boy" club mentality of cutting the mustard and being deemed to have good judgment through the subjective of the handful of IE's, has been replaced by an objective evaluation using check boxed performance based criteria, not one of which is judgment. So we got rid of something bad, and replaced it with something worse.

Now we are using the same plan to create the trainer's trainer, or the Instructor Examiner. Gone are the days requiring a mentorship, and the idea that the signature of other instructors on your rating application card are an endorsement, and approval of your fitness to be an instructor was left at the starting line.

You can be a reckless idiot with the sole goal of sleeping with the hottest AFF student on the DZ, and as long as you prove only the ability to recite information, and catch them in freefall, you'll get a ticket that allows you to create the next batch of star eyed idiots.

Shoot, I'm starting to sound bitter about this.

There are still good and great instructors being created out there, but we are doing a much poorer job than ever weeding out the ones that don't have the stuff..... just like skydiving, instructing isn't for everyone, and there's another problem. We allowed the rating process to become an individually independently run business. 20 IE's all doing it their way. No wonder we're seeing inconsistencies. When there is competition, the corners will cut, and standards will slide.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[DSE 3]

Quote

just like skydiving, instructing isn't for everyone, and there's another problem. We allowed the rating process to become an individually independently run business. 20 IE's all doing it their way. No wonder we're seeing inconsistencies. When there is competition, the corners will cut, and standards will slide.

Are you going to be in San Diego later this month?

[diablopilot 2]

Don't know yet. I've got to budget for the BOD meeting as well, and just came out of a winter shutdown. Oh and I'm the only full time TI at the DZ I'm working for.

Edit: I don't see it listed on USPA.org. Any info?

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[douwanto 22]

Thanks for getting back to the discussion at hand. I agree that once you become extremely proficient at one or the other it is possible to become proficient at both and switch between the 2 during the work day. What I see very often these days is instructors who have less than 500 at either trying to switch between the 2 and missing little thing in both every time and that should never happen. It is hard enough to be really good at 1 or the other all the time when just learning and being good at both all the time while learning is impossible and not worth the bennifit of getting more loads in the air. This is profiteering at its worst for AFF and Tandem. I see lots of BS here about tandem mills and such but it is no diffirent than putting students with an AFF I or TI who is pushed to their limit and switching hats faster than a starlet in a Gangbang ... Most new instructors are not going to say hey I need a break... because they have seen others or replaced those who did... Dzo;s need to slow down and allow the needed time for proper training and instructor preporation for every training skydive and new instructors should have limits concerning how many hats they wear until they show complete proficiency in their discipline.

Uncle/GrandPapa Whit
Unico Rodriguez # 245
Muff Brother # 2421

[matthewcline 0]

Yes I took it and yes it was brought up.

Hey Mods can the "Ratings have gone to hell in a hand basket" parts be split off and the incident left alone? or is it just way to much as it has gotten way off the path?

I think this needed to get put out so that Ted and SE knows how we feel, that the I and the DZO made the mistakes and they should be the ones held accountable.

Ted, Keep up the good work and I am confident in the end as tough as this is you'll prevail.

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Hey Mods can the "Ratings have gone to hell in a hand basket" parts be split off and the incident left alone? or is it just way to much as it has gotten way off the path?

And while you're at it, please change the thread title back to the original, like I've done above.

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Hopefully this unfortunate incident will be the only one of it's kind.

There have been at least two.

[MakeItHappen 15]

Quote

Edit: I don't see it listed on USPA.org. Any info?

It was in the last NL from Dec. 18. Gee I wonder why there is nothing on their web site?

AFF Standardization Meeting Set for 2010
A USPA Accelerated Freefall (AFF) Standardization Meeting is scheduled for
January 19-20, 2010, at the Holiday Inn San Diego Bayside. Attendance is
required at least once every two years for any current AFF Instructor Examiner
(IE) or anyone who is pursuing the AFF IE rating. Those who attended the
standardization meeting last January in Fredericksburg are not required to
attend the 2010 meeting. The next time this meeting will be offered will be
January 2011, on the east coast of the U.S.

The meeting is designed to help ensure that course standards and procedures are
maintained at the same level by every AFF IE and also to discuss and develop new
ideas for candidate training and evaluation methods.

Attendance is mandatory from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., both days, and travel plans
should be made accordingly. Be sure to reserve your room at the Holiday Inn San
Diego Bayside, 4875 North Harbor Drive. (Note: there is another Holiday Inn just
down the street, and many confuse the two.) Reservations can be made through the
hotel website
or by calling (800) 650-6660. The hotel provides free shuttle service from San
Diego International Airport (SAN), which is just a mile away. A block of rooms
has been reserved for the meeting participants. When reserving your room, be
sure to mention that you are staying for the USPA AFF Standardization Meeting to
secure the appropriate room rate. Also, send an e-mail to [email protected]
to register for the meeting with USPA Headquarters. The fee for the meeting is
$100 per person, payable by check made out to USPA. Be sure to arrive at the
meeting with a current Skydiver’s Information Manual and Instructional Rating
Manual.

The hotel is providing a complimentary welcome reception on Monday, January 18,
at 7 p.m.

.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

[MakeItHappen 15]

Quote

Quote

I think that if Kallend had asked the second statement you'd all say it is not ok to teach skydiving without the proper rating.
So why is it ok to teach pedagogy without a teaching certificate?
That's his question and it is a logical and valid question.

.

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?

There have been bits and pieces of methods of instruction distributed in courses, even back for the JCCs and ICCs.
Mostly it was a few articles on the subject.

The closest USPA has come to a 'skydiving teaching certificate in pedagogy' was the AIC.
The AIC was developed primarily by Rob Laidlaw. He does have some formal training in pedagogy, but I do not recall what his degree was in. Rob also ran several draft versions of the class to refine it. I attended two of the classes.

The content of the class included methods of instruction, motor skills analysis and video debriefing.
The content was about these techniques.
Rob integrated some SDU dive sequences to be used as the practice lessons.
This caused a brouhaha with some board members because they could not fundamentally understand that it was the teaching techniques that were the primary lessons and not the content of the sample practice lessons. Some also had a personal dislike for Rob and SDU.
The process was subject to the normal dysfunctional USPA politics and the course was mutated slightly to what USPA called the AIC.
It was further USPA-ized when it was collapsed into the IE rating course and did not stand alone as a 'Train the Trainers' course.
What is in the latest IRM is better than nothing, but Rob's class and the stand alone AIC were better.

To answer Kallend's issue -
I think that if you read the current IE section of the IRM, you can see that there is what may be considered some sort of USPA version of a teaching credential in pedagogy. It is not that extensive. The course has been shortened to 3 days. It is a step in the right direction, but it will be improved.
The course was bootstrapped by someone who did have more extensive and significant background in pedagogy.

All the CDs that had their appointment before the latest IE rating was established were grand-fathered in. There are no provisions to require them to take the AIC (which would be another good reason to keep it separate from the IE rating course). They can attend an IE rating course if they choose to. All of the appointed AFFCDs did take the AIC. All of the newer AFF IEs have attended the mutated version that is within the IE rating course. There were a handful of waivers to the AIC requirement granted.

One of the issues that prevents things like this from progressing is that many of the people that have been doing this (teaching students or teaching candidates) for many years resent any attempt by USPA to require further education.

Biennial check-rides have also been brought up before and run into the same resistance. It also has some political baggage associated with it because most of the people that work full time as a course director are the ones clamoring for such changes. Some of the rating holders perceive this as a way for USPA to take more money from them and support the income of the CD/IEs.

.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

[Para5-0 0]

Advanced Instructor Course Syllabus:

ADVANCED INSTRUCTORS COURSE c
Day 1 Introduction
Conducting presentations in Adult Education
Assess the needs of the Learner
Learning Process
Presentation Methods
Train Aids General
Evaluation
Day 2 Facilitation methods
Psychology
demonstating sessions
Day 3 The Role of the Course Director
Skill Analysis
Conflict Resolution
Day 4 Recap, closure and Personal interviews
Practical Evaluation
interviews

[DSE 3]

Quote

Quote

Edit: I don't see it listed on USPA.org. Any info?

It was in the last NL from Dec. 18. Gee I wonder why there is nothing on their web site?

.

Hmm. it -was- on the website, but now gone. It was on the I/E and CD pages, right hand side.
Hope you can make it, JP.

[riggerrob 558]

" ... Biennial check-rides have also been brought up before and run into the same resistance. ..."

....................................................................................................

This relates to a fierce debate we had on the rigging forum.
Skydiving instructional and rigging skills are: infinite, perishable and constantly changing, ergo. all skydiving instructors and riggers should do refresher training every couple of years.

I can understand "grandfathering" older instructors - when a new rating is introduced - but they should have to attend refresher training in the next two or three years (to retain their old rating).

[diablopilot 2]

I'd like to, but I'm not sure there is reason for me to. It's not a policy setting meeting and I'm not pursuing an AFF IE rating, we have one on the DZ and I'm looking at a Tandem IE rating first.

Might save my pennies for the BOD, unless I can find some compelling reason to attend.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[ozzy13 0]

You seem to have a lot of knowledge with the inner workings of USPA. Id like to ask what your agenda is?
Between this thread and the AFF to easy one. I was just wondering...

Never give the gates up and always trust your rears!

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

" ... Biennial check-rides have also been brought up before and run into the same resistance. ..."

....................................................................................................

This relates to a fierce debate we had on the rigging forum.
Skydiving instructional and rigging skills are: infinite, perishable and constantly changing, ergo. all skydiving instructors and riggers should do refresher training every couple of years.

I can understand "grandfathering" older instructors - when a new rating is introduced - but they should have to attend refresher training in the next two or three years (to retain their old rating).

In most US jurisdictions, many professions have mandatory continuing education requirements in order to maintain a current license/certification.

[kallend 1,621]

Quote

Quote

" ... Biennial check-rides have also been brought up before and run into the same resistance. ..."

....................................................................................................

This relates to a fierce debate we had on the rigging forum.
Skydiving instructional and rigging skills are: infinite, perishable and constantly changing, ergo. all skydiving instructors and riggers should do refresher training every couple of years.

I can understand "grandfathering" older instructors - when a new rating is introduced - but they should have to attend refresher training in the next two or three years (to retain their old rating).

In most US jurisdictions, many professions have mandatory continuing education requirements in order to maintain a current license/certification.

Yep. It's just been introduced for professional engineers, and it's been around a while for teachers, pilots, flight instructors, etc.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,621]

Thanks, Jan.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[JerryBaumchen 1,047]

Hi John,

Quote

It's just been introduced for professional engineers,

It does depend upon what state you are licensed in.

Jerry Baumchen, PE

[DSE 3]

Quote

You seem to have a lot of knowledge with the inner workings of USPA. Id like to ask what your agenda is?
Between this thread and the AFF to easy one. I was just wondering...

Jan was on the USPA Board of Directors for a time, Ozzy.

[airtwardo 6]

Quote

Quote

You seem to have a lot of knowledge with the inner workings of USPA. Id like to ask what your agenda is?
Between this thread and the AFF to easy one. I was just wondering...

Jan was on the USPA Board of Directors for a time, Ozzy.

& don't forget, she's a rednecks nightmare~

A smart, opinionated, southern California woman...be afraid, be VERY afraid!

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[ozzy13 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

You seem to have a lot of knowledge with the inner workings of USPA. Id like to ask what your agenda is?
Between this thread and the AFF to easy one. I was just wondering...

Jan was on the USPA Board of Directors for a time, Ozzy.

& don't forget, she's a rednecks nightmare~

A smart, opinionated, southern California woman...be afraid, be VERY afraid!

I am that's why I asked her what her agenda is.

Never give the gates up and always trust your rears!