0
Rstanley0312

Coach rating

Recommended Posts

I did a search and it appears this has not been discussed in a while. I'm curious what people think about the rating now compared to thoughts on it in 2001? Should it have higher requirements? Do you see it as effective right now in student progression?
Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I did a search and it appears this has not been discussed in a while. I'm curious what people think about the rating now compared to thoughts on it in 2001? Should it have higher requirements? Do you see it as effective right now in student progression?



I think the AFF thread should stick to the question at hand. I think the coach rating discussion should stand alone in its own thread.

I think it is a great question Rob. Basically does a jumper with 100 jumps have what it takes to be a good effective coach and be an essential part in our students progression?

That would all depend on the candidate in my opinion. I was part of Rob's coach course and I can without a doubt say you were ready to be a coach. You took the rating and the responsibility seriously and demonstrated the skills to effectively work with students.

I also knew someone getting ready to go through the coach course this past fall. I knew this person quite well and was working with him on his air skills in preparation for the course. After a dozen or so jumps I had to sit down with this person and tell him that I just didn't feel he were ready to be a coach. At just over a hundred jumps he was still having great issues with various aspects of his own skydiving. I didn't feel he could be effective with students. It was a difficult conversation but I had to be honest.

He chose to take the coach course, but didn't complete it. He failed his first evaluation jump and chose not to do any more.

Being a coach isn't something a skydiver does when he reaches those minimum requirements. It should be something they want and are willing to work hard to obtain.

More often than not those with 100 jumps are not ready. I would definitely support the requirement be 200 jumps/C license. Can it really ever hurt to have more experience than needed rather than less?
Kim Mills
USPA D21696
Tandem I, AFF I and Static Line I

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skydive Dallas uses Skydive University coaches extensively for students between AFF and A-license.

We use the Skydive University techniques and curriculum. This is a very structured series of ground preps, jumps and debriefs.

We get really good results.
The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Skydive Dallas uses Skydive University coaches extensively for students between AFF and A-license.

We use the Skydive University techniques and curriculum. This is a very structured series of ground preps, jumps and debriefs.

We get really good results.



Sounds like a great idea. As I said in the AFF thread..... I will never claim to be some amazing skydiver with "mad skillz" but I feel I was ready. I had 120 jumps but was and am very serious about working on my skills every jump. With a little effort on our DZ one can really take a lot of knowledge away as well as work in the air with some really good jumpers and instuctors. I am blessed and have the funds to really push myself and am doing so in FF now so I think that helped me a lot but I do not see any reason why someone packing their way through could not do the same. My coach course was pretty tough. Greg and Kim really made sure we could handle the requirements and told us over and over that studdents will shock the hell out of you in the air and on the ground. Air skills are very important but what I think is overlooked is the ability to teach on the ground. I had an advantage from years of teaching in many different situations but I still took away a lot from the course.

I do not see what harm it would do to have a 200 jump requirement and a C license but I also feel more attantion should be paid to the teaching aspect.
Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just playing devil's advocate here bc my dz uses static line...
If the req for a coach rating is a C license and 200 jumps. What would that do to a static line instructor rating?

Should the 200 jump minimum also be raised? If so, what should it be raised to? If not, then there is no difference in requirements for a coach rating or s/l instructor.

I'm not sure about the coach rating jump minimum. Some people are ready around 100 jumps, yet some need over 1000. The ones not ready should be weeded out by the I/E's. Yet we all know people who have passed coach's courses who weren't ready. Maybe USPA should check up on some of the I/E's out there. When I went through the class, it took half of Friday, all of Saturday, and half of Sunday. I've heard of some that take half of Friday, finish the class Saturday morning and have time for everyone's eval jumps before sun down. It makes me wonder what was skipped??

I know of a guy that was signed up for a coach's course, yet went to FL for vacation, saw a coach's course $20 cheaper and decided to join. He didn't have his SIM/IRM and had none of the pre-reqs done. Yet he went through the 1 day class, did eval jumps the next day and had a coach rating. B|

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the req for a coach rating is a C license and 200 jumps. What would that do to a static line instructor rating?
Quote


As a small DZ S/L I/E, I know what you're talking about. Lower time jumpers bring an enthusiasm and a "just done that" point of view to the student program that older (more time in sport) jumpers don't have. I see no reason to raise the required jump #'s for a coach rating. I know that with only 100 jumps that these candidates don't have world class flying skills, but if they've been belly flying for the 100 jumps, they usually have enough skills to do the job. The most important thing is their ability to teach, or at least learn to teach, following the ISP.
I can't imagine getting through a coach course in 1 1/2 days. I run 4 hrs Friday night, 12 hrs Sat, and am lucky to get done with an additional 8 hrs on Sunday. I try to have no more than 2 students per I/E, and 1 to 1 for evaluators. The biggest problem is people showing up unprepared, so now I ask for the test and a copy of teaching outlines for each catagory prior to the class weekend. There is no way to do justice to all the material in less time.
The only changes I would like to see are a 1 year wait between coach and ANY instructional rating and to allow coaches to do the old S/L jumpmaster duties. Having to wait for an I rating to handle a S/L student out of the airplane is foolish and counterproductive for all the small Cessna dz's.

This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The only changes I would like to see are a 1 year wait between coach and ANY instructional rating and to allow coaches to do the old S/L jumpmaster duties. Having to wait for an I rating to handle a S/L student out of the airplane is foolish and counterproductive for all the small Cessna dz's.



I like this idea.
----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

The only changes I would like to see are a 1 year wait between coach and ANY instructional rating and to allow coaches to do the old S/L jumpmaster duties. Having to wait for an I rating to handle a S/L student out of the airplane is foolish and counterproductive for all the small Cessna dz's.



I like this idea.


Rather than a mandatory period of time perhaps a mandatory battery of documented coaching contacts as overseen by the senior staff.
In Canada when you get a coach or instructor rating you are given a portfolio where you fill out the students name, date and skill coached/taught as well as the senior coach/instructors signature. You have one year to complete it and submit it back to CSPA or your rating lapses. You must have completed the coach 2 rating and the jumpmaster portfolios prior to taking the PFF course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I see a lot of 100-200 jump coaches who do a darn fine job. They love the sport, are excited enough to want to teach, and have skills to pull it off with some tunnel time, some coaching they got themselves, etc...

I see a lot of 1000-2000 jump coaches who do a shitty job. They are burned out and need the money. They have the skills, but rather do a tandem for the quick cash or increase of airtime to ground school ratios. They are old skool with crappy body positions and never been to the tunnel or received coaching since they got their tandem rating 10 years ago.


So, I have given up on jump numbers, time in the sport, etc. The only thing I can hope for is that DZO's know who their best assets are when they make the staff schedules and that coaches who are great and excited to teach market themselves to the students aggressively enough that the students know who to request/hire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Rather than a mandatory period of time perhaps a mandatory battery of documented coaching contacts as overseen by the senior staff.
In Canada when you get a coach or instructor rating you are given a portfolio where you fill out the students name, date and skill coached/taught as well as the senior coach/instructors signature. You have one year to complete it and submit it back to CSPA or your rating lapses. You must have completed the coach 2 rating and the jumpmaster portfolios prior to taking the PFF course.



Now there's a good idea!
Prove you've done the job required!
....accountability, what a novel idea.
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Now there's a good idea!
Prove you've done the job required!
....accountability, what a novel idea.



Just for the Coach Rating?? Why not something similar for ALL Instructor ratings?? Warning... Be carefull what you wish for!
Birdshit & Fools Productions

"Son, only two things fall from the sky."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
im all for raising the requirments as far as jump numbers and difficulty of the course. their is another coach at my dz who cant remember any regulations reguarding students and always has to ask. makes you think was he not paying attention in the class room or did they just skip a bunch of things to get get the course over with faster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hi there.
i am a coach, and i have been so for almost a year. I have almost 500 jumps,and 11 years in the sport and i am dismayed at the amount of crud i see sometimes.

Older jumpers who are genuinely trying to help the JUMPER by teaching the stuff they know, but rubbishing the new school of skydiving, and therefore coaches like myself.

Younger coaches with less than a year in the sport telling "horror stories" of some guy they read about once in parachutist. And teaching skills they have barely mastered themselves.

I think that there should be a time limit on the coach, as well as an increase in the minimum jump numbers. I also think that there should be a minimum amount of time in the sport for AFF instructors, but thats a whole other thread.

One thing that REALLY bothers me is the older instructors giving coach rating so that the candidate can "practise" the jumps with the student. If you fail to "get there" with your instructor, then you have no business skydiving with a novice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote


Now there's a good idea!
Prove you've done the job required!
....accountability, what a novel idea.



Just for the Coach Rating?? Why not something similar for ALL Instructor ratings?? Warning... Be carefull what you wish for!



Well, dude...this IS the Coach Rating thread is it not?
Are you confused or just wanting to hijack with the extrapolation?

But to address your heading...Do you have a problem with ANYBODY being accountable for their actions? I don't.
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I think that there should be a time limit on the coach, as well as an increase in the minimum jump numbers.



+1
SCR #14809

"our attitude is the thing most capable of keeping us safe"
(look, grab, look, grab, peel, punch, punch, arch)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

great point, ability to teach on the ground...such as keeping students focused was a huge part of the training, and yes I do agree with the new recomendations




I think that is the biggest attribute that needs to be developed. Teaching is not easy and not everyone can do it. Ratings are looked upon highly but the fact is many get ratings that have no business teaching and if you really got to the truth of the matter..... they don't really want to do it in the first place. [:/]
Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

great point, ability to teach on the ground...such as keeping students focused was a huge part of the training, and yes I do agree with the new recomendations




I think that is the biggest attribute that needs to be developed. Teaching is not easy and not everyone can do it.



Yet the teaching skills of those who are professional teachers are not recognized by USPA. (However, they are recognized by the FAA for CFI (flight instructor) ratings. Go figure.
...

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

..Yet the teaching skills of those who are professional teachers are not recognized by USPA. (However, they are recognized by the FAA for CFI (flight instructor) ratings. Go figure.



Yes, it would be great to have professional teachers doing the teaching, but...

How many skydivers ARE professional teachers? Enough to go around? Are there enough Pro teachers willing to take on Course Director duties for us? Are thee ANY?

If no, what then? How do we motivate skydivers to BECOME professional teachers to fill in the gaps?

And in the end...so what?
A pro teacher generates students....students that have historically disregarded what they were taught for the most part and went off on their own to re-invent the skydiving wheel or, even worse, devolve into techniques and methods that were good years ago but have been since improved.
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

..Yet the teaching skills of those who are professional teachers are not recognized by USPA. (However, they are recognized by the FAA for CFI (flight instructor) ratings. Go figure.



Yes, it would be great to have professional teachers doing the teaching, but...

How many skydivers ARE professional teachers? Enough to go around? Are there enough Pro teachers willing to take on Course Director duties for us? Are thee ANY?

If no, what then? How do we motivate skydivers to BECOME professional teachers to fill in the gaps?

And in the end...so what?
A pro teacher generates students....students that have historically disregarded what they were taught for the most part and went off on their own to re-invent the skydiving wheel or, even worse, devolve into techniques and methods that were good years ago but have been since improved.

\

GREAT summation. This was a big topic of discussion at the AFF I/E Standards Course today. And your words would suggest you were in the room.

Teaching methodology, how it's progressed over the past 25 years, resources, etc. were discussed. It would be a safe bet to say that the combined instructional experience in the room has taught more than 15,000 students in the past 15 years.

All have agreed that inconsistencies (which "professional teachers" would likely bring to the table) are a dangerous thing. It's not PopsJumper's course, or DSE's course, nor Kallend's course. It's the USPA course and needs to be taught accordingly.

No matter how "professional" their education may not be, there is a strong effort from those involved to improve what is being taught, keeping it consistent, making it more available in all forms possible (web, DVD, thumbdrive, print) and with a great interest on honing it even further based on input from the skydiving community at large.
For instance, I wonder how many have looked at the tremendous improvements to the online version of the SIM?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
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.

0