-
For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.
Do you need actual teaching time for Level I Cert?
- Thread starter avgDude
- Start date
[rhetorical question] Is becoming a ski instructor worth it? ...if you have money and time I guess yes... Then again if you have both you could be skiing somewhere else...
change my mind, please
change my mind, please
If you can fake breathing, they will assume you have a pulse.
(Rhetorical Answer) Why can’t a person do both? Instruct and ski other places? I know I do...
I think a lot of skiers don’t realize how spending time teaching at these levels increases their own upper level skills when they do go off and free-ski at their home mountain or somewhere else.
1) Get hired at a mountain that provides a training path to L1 (and beyond).
2) Go to the training
3) Take the test
Attempting to shortcut step 1 or step 2 is possible (in some PSIA Divisions). The pass rate (in RM) goes down by almost an order of magnitude for people attempting to bypass steps 1 and/or 2.
I really don't care for the all you need is a pulse attitude because there are standards and protocols to follow to get there. I needed my bosses approval to take the exam and had to have a certain amount of hours in before I could proceed. My examiner was also a ball buster and not everyone passed. That said I never learned so much from someone in 2 days, he was amazing. I worked my but off and I'd be so proud if he could ski with me today. The mountain where I teach now has mandatory clinics we have to take each year before we are put in to the teaching rotation. Bromley's training is excellent. I also have clinics throughout the season. Magic also pays up to a certain dollar amount for our continuing education we have to do every other year. Personally all of this was the best thing I ever did.
I am with you @surfsnowgirl . I don't believe that all you need is to fog the mirror to pass/qualify or meet the standard for LI. I don't know how it is now but I doubt the standard has changed or lowered over the years. Yes, it is not a high standard but it was never meant to be.
I was the course conductor/examiner for the very first LI exam in the western division back in the 80's. I believe PSIA-W was the first division to adopt LI, so it may have been the first ever. It was a two day event designed to be a positive introductory exam experience for the candidates. I do not remember what the prerequisites were but I would imagine you needed to be a member & have taken an apprentice clinic. IIRC, The first day was to be educational & the second day tested & scored on the information given on day one. I probably had 7 or 8 candidates and I remember one guy could not even do a basic wedge, seemed like he had never done one or even knew what it was! I was really afraid that I would have to fail him when it came around to scoring the next day. I think he saw the writing on the wall & thankfully did not show up the next day. I don't think I conducted many LI exam/assessments but I did shadow a few when I moved to the Intermountain division & there is definitely more to passing than showing up!
In all my years as an examiner, I never wanted to fail a candidate. In my mind everyone began the day with a passing score, many maintained it, others exceeded it & some just weren't prepared. Occasionally someone would choke but often you could carefully guide them back on the path to success. Just like teaching a lesson, I would always make every effort to provide an atmosphere that would nurture success but unlike a lesson there are designated standards in an exam that must be met & not everyone did.
I was the course conductor/examiner for the very first LI exam in the western division back in the 80's. I believe PSIA-W was the first division to adopt LI, so it may have been the first ever. It was a two day event designed to be a positive introductory exam experience for the candidates. I do not remember what the prerequisites were but I would imagine you needed to be a member & have taken an apprentice clinic. IIRC, The first day was to be educational & the second day tested & scored on the information given on day one. I probably had 7 or 8 candidates and I remember one guy could not even do a basic wedge, seemed like he had never done one or even knew what it was! I was really afraid that I would have to fail him when it came around to scoring the next day. I think he saw the writing on the wall & thankfully did not show up the next day. I don't think I conducted many LI exam/assessments but I did shadow a few when I moved to the Intermountain division & there is definitely more to passing than showing up!
In all my years as an examiner, I never wanted to fail a candidate. In my mind everyone began the day with a passing score, many maintained it, others exceeded it & some just weren't prepared. Occasionally someone would choke but often you could carefully guide them back on the path to success. Just like teaching a lesson, I would always make every effort to provide an atmosphere that would nurture success but unlike a lesson there are designated standards in an exam that must be met & not everyone did.
I’m a big PSIA fan. Becoming an active member is the best way I know to advance one’s skills (with the possible exception of racing, and the two are not mutually exclusive).
And L1 is a 3 day exam in RM.
And the reason I joined PSIA, took my Level 1, started teaching part time, passed my level 2, and am working on my 3.
PSIA clinics and exams are great learning opportunities. I would rather clinic (if I may use that as a verb) than free ski any day. Perfecting any task in the IDP is a challenge. Even something as basic as a wedge Christie is a benchmark maneuver that constantly improves over the years - if one aspires to perfection. The examiners out there will tell you that many fail their Level 2 ski exams on that very task.
PSIA does have standards - and increasingly higher ones at that, as the bar gets set higher with each Level.
And I include myself among those who wouldn't have it any other way.
PSIA does have standards - and increasingly higher ones at that, as the bar gets set higher with each Level.
And I include myself among those who wouldn't have it any other way.
Wedge Christi is the great killer at Level II. You need to move down the hill, allow the skis to hook up naturally allowing the wedge to open without stemming. Then pivot the inside ski back to parallel. It’s easy, once you learn to allow yourself to just "fall" down the hill without forcing yourself.
When training aspiring Level II candidates I start with the wedge christi. It’s the basic move that influences all the higher level moves.
When training aspiring Level II candidates I start with the wedge christi. It’s the basic move that influences all the higher level moves.
Wedge Christie is a trained seal act for sure. It requires that you can isolate and then blend all the components to perform the final form task. I am surprised that it has lasted as long as it has as an exam demonstration.
During the stepping stones era it was considered merely a touchstone along the way to parallel that one may or may not pass through. In the past 25 years, I don’t believe that I ever actually taught a student a Wedge Christie accept as a tactical tool or to instructors preparing for certification.
I know it has evolved into a more sophisticated maneuver to fit with modern parallel skiing but really, why bother.
During the stepping stones era it was considered merely a touchstone along the way to parallel that one may or may not pass through. In the past 25 years, I don’t believe that I ever actually taught a student a Wedge Christie accept as a tactical tool or to instructors preparing for certification.
I know it has evolved into a more sophisticated maneuver to fit with modern parallel skiing but really, why bother.
Wedge Christie is a trained seal act for sure. It requires that you can isolate and then blend all the components to perform the final form task. I am surprised that it has lasted as long as it has as an exam demonstration.
...
View attachment 82714
I know it has evolved into a more sophisticated maneuver to fit with modern parallel skiing but really, why bother.
*Very* cool diagram and a great reference for the parts of a wedge turn for a kid or a rec skier.
A Wedge Christie is just a good parallel turn executed with *really* low energy available at the initation of the turn, and no move to correct the differing turn rates of the skis to make them look "parallel". The Wedge Christie: do less, get more. A favorite maneuver of mine.
***(Overly?) Technical aside follows - please ignore if you aren't interested in fine details of types of wedge turns***
In a Wedge Christie - the skis move into the edge shape *because* the flattening/tipping of the skis in the same direction (described above as "weight on inside edges") with more pressure directed through the outside ski's inside edge (than the inside ski's inside edge) causes the outside ski to rotate faster (steering the skis into a wedge relationship) then matching is achieved (through leg rotation) somewhere after the skis are pointed straight down the fall line. Good parallel turns use the same initiation, but the catchup leg rotary happens in a timing to make things look "parallel" at all points of the turn, instead of happening later on.
If you create the wedge by displacing either foot into the wedge relationship you are performing a "Stem" Christie, not a Wedge Christie.
This is where I might argue that the above diagram might be interpreted both types of wedge turn - first a wedge Christie ("weight on inside edges"), and then a stem ("Begin the wedge").
Yeah, that diagram can be misleading for how the skier gets the wedge to happen at the start of the new turn.
It implies that the skier rotates the new outside ski into a wedge ("start the wedge" with its arrow and the two little wiggle lines next to the tail of that ski) while doing nothing in particular with the new inside ski. Better not do that in a LII exam.
@Magi, your description of how to get the new outside ski to diverge at initiation is an interesting one. I think you are saying to tip it onto its big toe edge and maybe to "weight" it (perhaps by extending its leg to press the ski's edge downward onto the snow?). With extra pressure and extra edging, it will turn faster than the new inside ski and voila, you've got that wedge. Have I got that right? Or maybe you only mean extra edging does the trick.
If one weights the new outside ski by moving the body over it, that's also a fail in the exam. As magi points out, the body must move towards the new inside ski, not towards the new outside ski.
There are other ways to get the wedge to happen without visibly rotating it or moving the body over it and thus failing the exam. But this is thread drift, so I'm not going to elaborate.
All this is to say that the wedge christie is a "trick question" on the LII exam designed to separate the sheep from the goats. Instructors do have to go through training to get this move right, or at least to get it to not look wrong. The orthodox movement pattern as defined by PSIA is not intuitive to a good strong parallel skier.
As @4ster points out, no one can expect a beginner skier to do it the way the instructors are supposed to do it for that exam, and no beginner following an instructor down the hill trying to do wedge christies will detect the nuances instructors are required to understand. It might be interesting in another thread to discuss what mission such exam tasks serve.
It implies that the skier rotates the new outside ski into a wedge ("start the wedge" with its arrow and the two little wiggle lines next to the tail of that ski) while doing nothing in particular with the new inside ski. Better not do that in a LII exam.
@Magi, your description of how to get the new outside ski to diverge at initiation is an interesting one. I think you are saying to tip it onto its big toe edge and maybe to "weight" it (perhaps by extending its leg to press the ski's edge downward onto the snow?). With extra pressure and extra edging, it will turn faster than the new inside ski and voila, you've got that wedge. Have I got that right? Or maybe you only mean extra edging does the trick.
If one weights the new outside ski by moving the body over it, that's also a fail in the exam. As magi points out, the body must move towards the new inside ski, not towards the new outside ski.
There are other ways to get the wedge to happen without visibly rotating it or moving the body over it and thus failing the exam. But this is thread drift, so I'm not going to elaborate.
All this is to say that the wedge christie is a "trick question" on the LII exam designed to separate the sheep from the goats. Instructors do have to go through training to get this move right, or at least to get it to not look wrong. The orthodox movement pattern as defined by PSIA is not intuitive to a good strong parallel skier.
As @4ster points out, no one can expect a beginner skier to do it the way the instructors are supposed to do it for that exam, and no beginner following an instructor down the hill trying to do wedge christies will detect the nuances instructors are required to understand. It might be interesting in another thread to discuss what mission such exam tasks serve.
Last edited:
