Oci-One Kanubi wrote:
Oci-One Kanubi wrote:
Brian Nystrom wrote:
Larry C wrote:
The only real strong point of the ACA is instruction and safety. Their
insurance program allows instructors protection that just isn't
available commercially. And if you do have an ACA certified instructor,
you have some clue to the level of competence that he has acquired.
I would differ with that last statement somewhat, as I've paddled with
an ACA "Open water" instructor who is uncomfortable in 2' seas, has no
endurance and won't paddle within 50 yards of a rock, except when
landing. How this person ever got their rating is beyond me, but I've
heard of several similar situations.

Brian, go to
http://www.acanet.org/instruction/kayak_instruction.lasso and read
the syllabi for the various ACA courses. There seem to be many stages
of classes, especially in ocean kayak (which is essentially unknown
territory for me, represented by all those articles in "Canoe & Kayak"
and "Paddler" which I irritably skip).

Recruiting volunteer instructors is always difficult, and most
certified instructors (at least in the whitewater world) take the
certification for volunteer activities, not to teach for pay[1]. Given
that, and given that more certified instructors is good for the sport,
as a whole, it makes sense to certify anyone who has mastered ***the
specific skills (and any prerequisite skills, of course) covered in the
course ***, and demonstrated the ability to actually teach those
skills.

Think of it as the "one-room schoolhouse" model, since, in the scope
and scale of society that's kinda what our clubs are. The
fourth-graders teach the first-graders to count. The sixth-graders
teach the second-graders addition and subtraction. The seventh graders
teach multiplication and division, the eighth-graders teach fractions.
the 11th-graders teach geometry, and the 12-graders teach algebra. So,
perhaps, in the progression of skills and classes set up by the ACA,
the specific instructors you have observed are actually acting within
the parameters of their certifications, even though they might be
highly uncomfortable if asked to exceed those parameters.

And always remember that, absent a few idiots who try to make a living
by turning a recreational activity into a job, ours is essentially a
VOLUNTEER activity and the standards are commensurately... uh,
"flexible"?


[1] this is a separate beef of mine: that I have to pay ACA an
additional annual fee to retain my Swif****er Safety and Rescue
certification... PAY for the privilege of giving away several perfectly
good weekends to VOLUNTEER to teach something that we all hope every
paddler will learn? How twisted is that? ACA oughta be giving FREE
memberships to anyone who will take the trouble to become certified
then give up the time to teach safety and rescue.


-Richard, His Kanubic Travesty
--
================================================== ====================
Richard Hopley Winston-Salem, NC, USA
. rhopley[at]earthlink[dot]net
. Nothing really matters except Boats, Sex, and Rock'n'Roll
. rhopley[at]wfubmc[dot]edu
. OK, OK; computer programming for scientific research also matters
================================================== ====================


Brian Nystrom wrote:
Larry C wrote:
The only real strong point of the ACA is instruction and safety. Their
insurance program allows instructors protection that just isn't
available commercially. And if you do have an ACA certified instructor,
you have some clue to the level of competence that he has acquired.
I would differ with that last statement somewhat, as I've paddled with
an ACA "Open water" instructor who is uncomfortable in 2' seas, has no
endurance and won't paddle within 50 yards of a rock, except when
landing. How this person ever got their rating is beyond me, but I've
heard of several similar situations.

Brian, go to
http://www.acanet.org/instruction/kayak_instruction.lasso and read
the syllabi for the various ACA courses. There seem to be many stages
of classes, especially in ocean kayak (which is essentially unknown
territory for me, represented by all those articles in "Canoe & Kayak"
and "Paddler" which I irritably skip).

Recruiting volunteer instructors is always difficult, and most
certified instructors (at least in the whitewater world) take the
certification for volunteer activities, not to teach for pay[1]. Given
that, and given that more certified instructors is good for the sport,
as a whole, it makes sense to certify anyone who has mastered ***the
specific skills (and any prerequisite skills, of course) covered in the
course ***, and demonstrated the ability to actually teach those
skills.

Think of it as the "one-room schoolhouse" model, since, in the scope
and scale of society that's kinda what our clubs are. The
fourth-graders teach the first-graders to count. The sixth-graders
teach the second-graders addition and subtraction. The seventh graders
teach multiplication and division, the eighth-graders teach fractions.
the 11th-graders teach geometry, and the 12-graders teach algebra. So,
perhaps, in the progression of skills and classes set up by the ACA,
the specific instructors you have observed are actually acting within
the parameters of their certifications, even though they might be
highly uncomfortable if asked to exceed those parameters.

And always remember that, absent a few idiots who try to make a living
by turning a recreational activity into a job, ours is essentially a
VOLUNTEER activity and the standards are commensurately... uh,
"flexible"?

I agree with what you're saying with one exception; it seems to me that
it's folly to "certify" people with marginal skills, as they may take
that certification and try to use it to do things that they're not
really qualified for.

I absolutely agree that training is valuable and the more trained
paddlers there are on the water, the better it is for the entire
paddling community. That's one of the reasons that we don't require
people who take our trip leader training course to actually lead trips.
What we try to do is to teach people the necessary skills and lead them
to a realistic evaluation of their abilities and deficiencies. We
actively encourage people to go on to take other types of training. Our
basic philosophy is that trained trip participants are nearly as
important/beneficial as trained trip leaders.

[1] this is a separate beef of mine: that I have to pay ACA an
additional annual fee to retain my Swif****er Safety and Rescue
certification... PAY for the privilege of giving away several perfectly
good weekends to VOLUNTEER to teach something that we all hope every
paddler will learn? How twisted is that? ACA oughta be giving FREE
memberships to anyone who will take the trouble to become certified
then give up the time to teach safety and rescue.

I have some friends who are ACA coaches that share your annoyance.