kallend 1,623 #26 September 8, 2008 QuoteQuoteSomething I find strange about the coach rating is that professional teachers must still take the teaching instruction. I simply don't believe that a few hours of instruction in pedagogy will make the slightest difference to someone who already teaches for a living, nor do I believe that a few hours instruction will make a teacher out of someone who has never taught before. I know some "professional teachers" that can't teach for crap. Even if you believe that you are a great teacher, there still may be something to take away from seeing another person teach. I personally love to watch teachers...both good teachers and bad teachers. Of course, I also like to learn. If they're that bad after years of formal training and experience, why do you expect a few more hours in a coach course to make the slightest bit of difference?... 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
livendive 8 #27 September 8, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteSomething I find strange about the coach rating is that professional teachers must still take the teaching instruction. I simply don't believe that a few hours of instruction in pedagogy will make the slightest difference to someone who already teaches for a living, nor do I believe that a few hours instruction will make a teacher out of someone who has never taught before. I know some "professional teachers" that can't teach for crap. Even if you believe that you are a great teacher, there still may be something to take away from seeing another person teach. I personally love to watch teachers...both good teachers and bad teachers. Of course, I also like to learn. If they're that bad after years of formal training and experience, why do you expect a few more hours in a coach course to make the slightest bit of difference? If they have that much training and experience, what's a few more hours in a coach course going to hurt? If you modify the system such that each candidate only needs to take certain sections, some candidates will likely miss some sections that they needed. Keeping it simple and teaching all candidates the same curriculum prevents such an occurence. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
denete 2 #28 September 8, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteSomething I find strange about the coach rating is that professional teachers must still take the teaching instruction. I simply don't believe that a few hours of instruction in pedagogy will make the slightest difference to someone who already teaches for a living, nor do I believe that a few hours instruction will make a teacher out of someone who has never taught before. I know some "professional teachers" that can't teach for crap. Even if you believe that you are a great teacher, there still may be something to take away from seeing another person teach. I personally love to watch teachers...both good teachers and bad teachers. Of course, I also like to learn. If they're that bad after years of formal training and experience, why do you expect a few more hours in a coach course to make the slightest bit of difference? You may be a great teacher at the local truck driving school. But before I give you the stamp of approval from our National governing organization, I would like to see you teach skydiving. Then, we can address areas where your professional teaching techniques might fall short in skydiving and help to get you up to speed to be a better coach. With so much resistance to coach training on the part of any potential coach, my instincts jump to "what are you trying to hide" instead of "wow, you're really trying to be efficient". $.01 - DavidSCR #14809 "our attitude is the thing most capable of keeping us safe" (look, grab, look, grab, peel, punch, punch, arch) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
strop45 0 #29 September 8, 2008 I don't disagree with anything you have said, but the difference between a good coach and a bad coach isn't a couple of hours of training or a certificate. I'm no expert in teaching, but suspect that its more to do with empathy, being positive and finding the right teaching style for each person than had a few hours of instruction. Having said that, I personally jump at the chance to take any instruction, you can always learn something new, and sometimes it comes from people or places which are surpising. blue onesThe difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." -- Albert Einstein Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #30 September 8, 2008 >Something I find strange about the coach rating is that >professional teachers must still take the teaching instruction. Doesn't surprise me. When I went through the AFF JCC, there was no real requirement to learn to teach. I recall two candidates who employed the "wander around the DZ and gossip with the student" method of instruction, which resulted in them almost failing the ground portion of the course, which would have been a first. To say their teaching skills were iffy even after the course would have been generous. So I can see where the requirement came from. I'd have no problem with people placing out of learning to teach skydiving provided they had a solid evaluation and prior experience - but I also wonder how much time that would really save. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Canadianfella 0 #31 September 9, 2008 In the Canadian system of coaching, we have two levels... the coach 1 is allowed to jump with solo students to teach things like loops and barrel rolls... The coach 2 is responsible for teaching levels, sliding, swoop to docks, etc. etc. To get an A-license, and B-license, you must do specific jumps with Coach 2's... I've seen a lot of 100 jump skydivers in the last 4 years, and although it may not be a huge sample size, I don't think I've seen many that were capable of swooping to a 4-way or doing levels well, let alone TEACHING it to 10-20 jump students... It seems like the US system for coaching is VERY relaxed.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #32 September 9, 2008 QuoteI've seen a lot of 100 jump skydivers in the last 4 years, and although it may not be a huge sample size, I don't think I've seen many that were capable of swooping to a 4-way or doing levels well, let alone TEACHING it to 10-20 jump students... It seems like the US system for coaching is VERY relaxed.... I think that 100 jumps is ridiculously low as a requirement... but it's of course not the only requirement. I don't think I've met anyone that could pass the course at 100 jumps. But if someone could, great! With wind tunnels being so accessible these days, a lot of people are getting flying skills way beyond their jump numbers. There are AFF instructors with under 500 jumps... hard to believe. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #33 September 9, 2008 The amount of ego involved in stating that nothing more can be learned about teaching from other experienced instructors in regards to teaching students...well, I wouldn't want that kind of head-strong instructor working with people that will be jumping with me later! The majority of skydiving instructors I know consider that sort of attitude the death-nail of instruction!--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #34 September 9, 2008 A couple of thoughts... 1. IMHO, 100 jumps is too low. I question the ability to easily and comfortably multi-task in the air. Fly, observe, instruct and remember for the de-brief. I think what would help would be required follow-up sessions before the rating is issued. -Attend the class. -Do several Coach jumps with direct supervision over a period of time, say a couple of weeks...not just same-day service. -Go back to class for the evaluation. -Prove that you've learned and THEN get the rating. 2. Food for thought: "Those who can - do. Those who can't - teach." Physical skydiving skills can be taught by someone who cannot actually DO them themselves. Yes, it's best to have the best of both worlds, but...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
Para5-0 0 #35 September 9, 2008 Quote***I think that 100 jumps is ridiculously low as a requirement... I am a Coach CD and have voiced my opinion on the low jump requirement. I do not see the harm of making it a C License requirement, 200 Jumps. Remember 100 jumps minus 25 (AFF, Coach jumps, working on proficiency card) = 75 Jumps Is 75 jumps enough to be flying well enough to evaluate someone else, while not worrying about themself? Yes there are few exceptions but imagine how good those exceptions will do at 200 jumps. What is the arguement against this? and further who does it hurt? I imagine the small cesna DZ might be chiming in here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #36 September 9, 2008 Sounds much more reasonable to me. Of course a C license is all that's needed for an AFF rating too, right? Maybe that's why they chose a lower number (B license and 100 jumps) for the coach rating. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #37 September 9, 2008 I think a "time in sport" requirment might be better used here over a minimum jump number. Sure we can have folks who have 100 jumps and 100 hours in a wind tunnel out fly us "I's" already, but if that happens in 3 months, what have they learned of the sport? What about knowledge concerning wind conditions (near obsitlces and at altitude do they know what a "dog leg" is?), gear maint. canopy maint. proper spotting experience, etc. Time in the sport will help gain that knowledge. I think when original standards where made we had more time in sport when hitting these numbers and gained more sport knowledge. With the fast planes, big DZ's and packers we can make the minimum number of jumps pretty fast with out really learning much about the sport, and yes, there are exceptions, and every single one of us is that one exception. MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #38 September 10, 2008 QuoteThe amount of ego involved in stating that nothing more can be learned about teaching from other experienced instructors in regards to teaching students...well, I wouldn't want that kind of head-strong instructor working with people that will be jumping with me later! The majority of skydiving instructors I know consider that sort of attitude the death-nail of instruction! Well, I expect the FAA has it all wrong. After all, they only collect actual DATA on their CFIs, whereas the USPA relies on the tried and true method of guessing about the outcomes of its instructor training program. Death nail?... 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 #39 September 10, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Quote Something I find strange about the coach rating is that professional teachers must still take the teaching instruction. I simply don't believe that a few hours of instruction in pedagogy will make the slightest difference to someone who already teaches for a living, nor do I believe that a few hours instruction will make a teacher out of someone who has never taught before. I know some "professional teachers" that can't teach for crap. Even if you believe that you are a great teacher, there still may be something to take away from seeing another person teach. I personally love to watch teachers...both good teachers and bad teachers. Of course, I also like to learn. If they're that bad after years of formal training and experience, why do you expect a few more hours in a coach course to make the slightest bit of difference? You may be a great teacher at the local truck driving school. How did you know? Quote With so much resistance to coach training on the part of any potential coach, my instincts jump to "what are you trying to hide" instead of "wow, you're really trying to be efficient". $.01 - David In case you missed a previous post, I HAVE taken and passed the "teaching" part.... 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 #40 September 10, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSomething I find strange about the coach rating is that professional teachers must still take the teaching instruction. I simply don't believe that a few hours of instruction in pedagogy will make the slightest difference to someone who already teaches for a living, nor do I believe that a few hours instruction will make a teacher out of someone who has never taught before. I know some "professional teachers" that can't teach for crap. Even if you believe that you are a great teacher, there still may be something to take away from seeing another person teach. I personally love to watch teachers...both good teachers and bad teachers. Of course, I also like to learn. If they're that bad after years of formal training and experience, why do you expect a few more hours in a coach course to make the slightest bit of difference? If they have that much training and experience, what's a few more hours in a coach course going to hurt? If you modify the system such that each candidate only needs to take certain sections, some candidates will likely miss some sections that they needed. Keeping it simple and teaching all candidates the same curriculum prevents such an occurence. Blues, Dave So you think the FAA has it wrong too? (since everyone who responded to me snipped or ignored the part about the FAA I'll repeat it. If you want to become a certified flying instructor (CFI) you have to take and pass a course on pedagogy UNLESS you are a professional teacher. The FAA collects a lot of data on what it's CFIs do, including follow up after a former student has an accident. Apparently the FAA has not identified a problem with this policy.)... 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
billvon 2,400 #41 September 10, 2008 >Apparently the FAA has not identified a problem with this policy. Nor have they identified a problem with additional training, even for professional teachers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #42 September 10, 2008 Quote>Apparently the FAA has not identified a problem with this policy. Nor have they identified a problem with additional training, even for professional teachers. Interesting way to spin their policy of requiring said BASIC training for all EXCEPT professional teachers. In addition to not requiring it, they don't even recommend it. And this additional training we're discussing is not tailored to the level of the existing professional, it's tailored to complete novices, and it's just a few hours at the most basic level. Maybe Dan BC could learn a thing or two about fall rate control from a USPA coach with 120 jumps. Additional training, you know. Or Patti Wagstaff should sit in on the first ground school class for student pilots and pick up some tips to improve her flying. Maybe cell phone designers would learn some useful new skills by sitting in the first day of pre-calculus class at their local community college. Experienced cops should improve their policing by sitting in with the police cadets for a few hours on their first day at the police academy. Federal judges should learn something new about the Constitution by listening in on the first day of Mrs Smith's civics class at the local junior high. Daniel Barenboim should sit in Mr. Rogers' recorder class for a day at our local elementary school to get additional music training. Yes, I get your point.... 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
denete 2 #43 September 10, 2008 QuoteQuoteWith so much resistance to coach training on the part of any potential coach, my instincts jump to "what are you trying to hide" instead of "wow, you're really trying to be efficient". In case you missed a previous post, I HAVE taken and passed the "teaching" part. Sorry...that read the wrong way. I didn't mean YOU (Kallend), I meant the hypothetical coach candidate. Sorry again for the confusion. - DavidSCR #14809 "our attitude is the thing most capable of keeping us safe" (look, grab, look, grab, peel, punch, punch, arch) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumper03 0 #44 September 10, 2008 QuoteSo you think the FAA has it wrong too? (since everyone who responded to me snipped or ignored the part about the FAA I'll repeat it. If you want to become a certified flying instructor (CFI) you have to take and pass a course on pedagogy UNLESS you are a professional teacher. The FAA collects a lot of data on what it's CFIs do, including follow up after a former student has an accident. Apparently the FAA has not identified a problem with this policy.) So several questions spring to mind - How many CFI's are there? How many USPA Coaches are there? What level of resources can the FAA call upon? What level of resources can USPA call upon? Allowing professional teachers to be exempt from the teaching portion may be a creditable idea - it seems to me it would encumber the system already i place. I feel the KISS principle should apply - just take the course. After all - maybe the professional teachers that sit through the course can provide insight and anecdotes on how the methods work. That's a good thing right?Scars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #45 September 10, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteWith so much resistance to coach training on the part of any potential coach, my instincts jump to "what are you trying to hide" instead of "wow, you're really trying to be efficient". In case you missed a previous post, I HAVE taken and passed the "teaching" part. Sorry...that read the wrong way. I didn't mean YOU (Kallend), I meant the hypothetical coach candidate. Sorry again for the confusion. - David No prob. I might add that the course director when I took the course was NOT a professional teacher, and admitted to being somewhat embarrassed to having me in his class since it was clear that I had much much more teaching experience than he did.... 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 #46 September 10, 2008 QuoteQuoteSo you think the FAA has it wrong too? (since everyone who responded to me snipped or ignored the part about the FAA I'll repeat it. If you want to become a certified flying instructor (CFI) you have to take and pass a course on pedagogy UNLESS you are a professional teacher. The FAA collects a lot of data on what it's CFIs do, including follow up after a former student has an accident. Apparently the FAA has not identified a problem with this policy.) So several questions spring to mind - How many CFI's are there? How many USPA Coaches are there? What level of resources can the FAA call upon? What level of resources can USPA call upon? Allowing professional teachers to be exempt from the teaching portion may be a creditable idea - it seems to me it would encumber the system already i place. I feel the KISS principle should apply - just take the course. After all - maybe the professional teachers that sit through the course can provide insight and anecdotes on how the methods work. That's a good thing right? Sure it is a good idea, but should someone be FORCED to PAY to provide that service instead of receiving a service? Should a professional geochemist have to pay to sit in the first day or "Rocks and Stars" at their local high school. to get "additional training" in their profession? And it's not exactly hard to provide one's teaching credentials to the CD to get a waiver.... 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
billvon 2,400 #47 September 10, 2008 >Maybe Dan BC could learn a thing or two about fall rate control from a USPA >coach with 120 jumps. Dan BC thinks the 45 degree rule works. Will you now change your opinion of that rule? Or will you claim that he could learn a thing or two from a physicist who's not a 4-way world champion? I can recall years ago pestering Kate Cooper for a recommendation for a bigway record I wanted to do. She didn't know me as well back then, but gave me a recommendation anyway, and I did OK. Years later I got an email from someone asking for a recommendation for Kate for a BASE course she was taking. Sort of a full circle thing. There's always new stuff to learn in skydiving. Before I started teaching skydiving I spent a lot of time as a TA, teaching digital circuit design. Turns out I still had a lot to learn. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #48 September 10, 2008 Quote Years later I got an email from someone asking for a recommendation for Kate for a BASE course she was taking. Sort of a full circle thing. You too?---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #49 September 10, 2008 Regardless of whether you sit in every lecture, a coach course is going to take up most of your weekend. Saying, "I want to skip sections A, C, and F" sounds like laziness more than a problem with the curriculum. Are you also proposing the 50ish dollar fee be prorated to accomodate the occasional professional teacher who skips a section or three? Remember the KISS principle, and maybe try to help out in the sections you're an expert in rather than circumvent them. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #50 September 10, 2008 Quote I feel the KISS principle should apply - just take the course. After all - maybe the professional teachers that sit through the course can provide insight and anecdotes on how the methods work. That's a good thing right? I swear I didn't read this before making my most recent post. Good to see great minds think alike. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
