The Four Stages of Learning

[tburtonwire]

This was from Steve Schnitzer's waterski website. It is also appropriate for snowskiing. There are way too many level 1 skiers these days...

THE FOUR STAGES OF LEARNING

In learning any skill, be it carpentry, pottery, snow or water-skiing, everyone goes through these four stages of learning.

1. The first stage is UNCONSIOUS INCOMPETENCE. This means we don?t even know we are incompetent at a certain skill.
2. Stage 2 is called CONSIOUS INCOMPETENCE. This is where we are conscious of this certain skill, and can perform it somewhat, when we can remember to do it.
3. In Stage 3, we hit CONSIOUS COMPETENCE which is where we can perform this skill competently when we are conscious of it.
4. Finally we get to Stage 4, UNCONSIOUS COMPETENCE which comes after plenty of time and hard work. Here we perform the task competently without being conscious of it.

So remember during those long and sometimes tedious training sets, that it takes large pieces of time and devotion to replace instinct and bad habits with just one learned and correct skill. Patience my friend, is truly a virtue!

Schnitz!

[mark60]

Sounds like something Rumsfeld would say.

[h.harb]

You must mean the CONSIOUS INCOMPETENCE part?
Unfortunately, in the Bush administration it's probably more like the UNCONSIOUS INCOMPETENCE! I?d hate to believe they are doing what they are doing on purpose.
Sorry, I didn't want to bring politics into the forum, but I was tempted to that evil based on the Rumsfeld comment and what I have as a bumper sticker on my car .

And what has changed since Rumsfeld was fired, except for the fact we don?t have to put up with his grating personality.

If there are any comments, we definitely need another thread.

[tburtonwire]

marc60 & Harald - I had never thought to relate this to our current 'Unconsious Incompetence' political leaders, but it is oh so true...

[h.harb]

This post also refers to the thread on skis.

I was on the front lines of the SCX Elan shaped ski instruction initiative. It had great potential, but the managers within Elan had so much invested in PSIA, many were examiners and trainers for PSIA, they succumbed to the PSIA teaching system for short skis, using wedges and stems. This killed the program. It was working great with Direct Parallel.

You just can?t do wedges on radically shaped short skis. In addition Elan would not listen, as the skis were of poor quality and we found after considerable research the skis were too narrow under foot for beginners, 62mm. So Elan killed its own initiative, first because they would not change the skis, and second because their managers had more allegiance to PSIA then they did to the Elan Company, the company they worked for. This is the way of the ski industry.

I know numerous editors of ski magazines who hate PSIA and they know PSIA is hurting the ski industry, but they are afraid to buck the system (the ski resorts) so they don?t or can?t publish openly how PSIA?s failures are curtailing growth of the industry. They try to do it in nice ways like quoting numbers like only 1.5 people out of 10 people return to become skiers after their first ski lesson. But they never offer alternatives or demonstrate the problems in detail. Imagine if a ski magazine came out and said, ?Don?t take a ski lesson until PSIA upgrades their system and improves the quality of their instructors?. It would cause a huge uproar, But it would cause change!

Skiing tried to hold a conference on the issues in Vail about year 2000. All the big wheels were there. I was supposed to be a speaker on ski instruction techniques, invited by Skiing Magazine. The principles from the two major resorts basically told Skiing, ?If Harb is allowed to speak they would pull out of the conference?. They manipulated the conference, as they didn?t want to hear the truth. After the conference one of the resorts, resorted to offering ski lessons to beginners for free (the last resort, ha!). Guess what? Skiers didn?t return to those free lessons either. What does that say about ski instruction?

[Heluva Skier]

So Elan killed its own initiative, first because they would not change the skis, and second because their managers had more allegiance to PSIA then they did to the Elan Company, the company they worked for.

This seems backwards to me... how can that happen?

[Bolter]

This post also refers to the thread on skis.

I was on the front lines of the SCX Elan shaped ski instruction initiative. It had great potential, but the managers within Elan had so much invested in PSIA, many were examiners and trainers for PSIA, they succumbed to the PSIA teaching system for short skis, using wedges and stems. This killed the program. It was working great with Direct Parallel.

I witnessed this while at Breckenridge. Clinics (to teach beginners) were given for Direct Parallel on SCX's purchased by the area/Ski School. Suitable beginner terrain was also built. The upper levels clinic was given to select Sups and Trainers, methodology "How do these work?" was a guessing game. In the clinic I excelled on them- WOWing everyone. I realized they were built to arc not skid, that made the difference. I continued to use them. That ski let me link arcs going slower, that was a big advantage for me, I could arc/train everywhere not just on Training Arenas (read GS speeds) with Team Breck. I realize now that I stuck out like a sore thumb by hanging on to the SCX skis and skiing everywhere on them even after the novelty (or maybe the threat) wore off for others.

The long ones (193cm ?) allowed for some pretty hefty speeds.

Harald, this rest of your post is a sad story for everyone. How do we make things better?

[Flexon Phil]

That SCX is a 193 was a freight of a ski! I skied with Geoff Bruce and Bill (his name escapes me) when that ski came out. Bill, real big guy was one of the few men that I saw that could ski that 193. IMHO, Elan knew they had something with that ski..I just think they knew what they had because it was so radically different that what was out there. They went in the wrong direction with the evolution with skis like the Stealth 87/42/87 and the PSX.

[h.harb]

It?s a perplexing situation and I?ve fought the battle alone for a long time. I do have the reassurance from my customers, they see the results and they are hugely supportive. To me they are rejuvenating, without them I would have quit this direction years ago. I would probably be back in ski coaching. There are many encouraging things happening now after years of hard work, the coaching community has really caught on to the Essentials book. I hear from many of my former colleagues about how much they like the book and they say it?s about time someone wrote it ?like it is?.

My Camps have great coaching that inspires me. The credentials of my instructors are staggering. We have two ex-national team coaches, three PhD?s and others who are involved with physiotherapy and sports training. This is a truly inspiring group to be around; they have so much to offer besides ski teaching. Our coaches are hand picked and trained by Diana and me.

Concerning the old Elan program, Elan managers didn?t want to offend PSIA, which they would have if they had followed the PMTS Direct Parallel Program. Things were hot in those days. Remember, I had just quit the Demo Team and taken on my own teaching system. I trained the Elan guys and they decided to sell a modified PMTS version, but it just doesn?t work that way, it totally failed at the American Ski Company and at other areas, mostly because the ski schools were not willing to convert. I told Bill Irwin and the others that it wouldn?t work with a watered down PSIA version starting with a wedge, but they couldn?t let it go, similar to what Aspen tries to use. The one at Aspen doesn?t work because Weems doesn?t have the understanding and training to rework the PMTS Direct Parallel system. He bought the PMTS Instructor Manual and thought he could choose and pick what he thought was workable without upsetting our copyrights and the PSIA crowd. Aspen?s program is their effort at a poor PSIA-aized, compromised version out of the PMTS manual. Weems likes to make excuses, saying the complete PMTS system was not working. He never consulted anyone who actually used it and he never observed it in action. He?s not qualified to see the movements necessary for a complete Direct Parallel system to work. In comparison, we have first year instructors at Sol Vista teaching skiers to ski parallel in under two hours. This is documented by Ski Area Management Magazine in articles on two separate occasions. So what?s wrong with the PSIA gurus, why can?t they do it?

We now have three ski areas using PMTS Direct Parallel, but these are independent and creative thinking ski school directors and ski resorts. Sol Vista is the longest standing PMTS ski school. The resort is growing and has become high end in nature, with its real estate development called the Granby Ranch Club, a member program. We are more solidly involved there and we provide special programs, lessons and camps to membership, as well as to our out of state clients. Sol Vista camps draw skiers from all over the world. It?s truly impressive when you see skiers from England, Finland, Russia, mainland Europe and Australia traveling so far to get a week of PMTS instruction at Sol Vista. It makes the whole thing worthwhile.

[Flexon Phil]

Thanks..Irwin...name.

The SCX could have been the ski to take people direct to parallel. How far along were you with PMTS in 96?

[Bolter]

What I marvel at is that Harald was far ahead of the curve and was prepared to present a system that covered so much of skiing (beginners, all mtn. and carving) on new technology equipment. I for one am very glad that Harald did not "quit this direction" and return to coaching. Harald, look what you have accomplished.

BTW, I think the ELAN clinics at Breck were prior to 1996.
I now work closely with Bill Irwin (three years), he is very helpful and good at what he does. He knows Rental Operations.

[h.harb]

I like Bill, I know him well. He was caught in a difficult squeeze, not everyone is willing to make the jump to new technology and change an existing system.

I didn't go out to make enemies, I went out to show what can be done; the enemies were those that chose to become enemies.

[Max_501]

How far along were you with PMTS in 96?

I don't know the answer to that, however, the first book and the website were released in 1997.

[h.harb]

I was using the PMTS system to teach Direct Parallel in 1996. I had eliminated the wedge christie from our progression in 1994 at Winter Park. Of course they regressed when I left and went back to the old school.

[Flexon Phil]

In hind site being 20/20 it would have made sense to go with a PMTS, but with PMTS being as new and unestablished at it was at the time, it is hard to fault them for going with the established system at the time.