Broooz wrote:
"Allan Bennett" wrote in message
...

After letting my BCU membership lapse, I was told that my coaching
qualification was no longer valid, as I couldn't be up-to-date if I wasn't
a member.

That is a requirement of most organisations that you stay a member for them
to confirm you are up to date.

...but I could revalidate the award by paying the back-fees. Which,
amazingly, would bring me back-on-track with their current practice!

Do you think it's just /possibly/ something to do with a problem with
the ethical side of this that has caused him to let his membership lapse
in the first place?

I refused to pay, stating that I thought it was corrupt.

HArdly

So it's Perfectly All Right for an organisation to declare you Safe and
Completely Up To Speed purely because you've given them some money?
Surely it should require evaluation of the coaching skills (which could
quite reasonably involve a fee) to decide if the person was still
acceptable as a coach, rather than simply an evaluation of their bank
account?

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

On Tue, 08 Feb 2005 09:17:24 +0000, Peter Clinch
wrote:

Broooz wrote:
"Allan Bennett" wrote in message
...

After letting my BCU membership lapse, I was told that my coaching
qualification was no longer valid, as I couldn't be up-to-date if I wasn't
a member.

That is a requirement of most organisations that you stay a member for them
to confirm you are up to date.

...but I could revalidate the award by paying the back-fees. Which,
amazingly, would bring me back-on-track with their current practice!

Do you think it's just /possibly/ something to do with a problem with
the ethical side of this that has caused him to let his membership lapse
in the first place?

I refused to pay, stating that I thought it was corrupt.

HArdly

So it's Perfectly All Right for an organisation to declare you Safe and
Completely Up To Speed purely because you've given them some money?
Surely it should require evaluation of the coaching skills (which could
quite reasonably involve a fee) to decide if the person was still
acceptable as a coach, rather than simply an evaluation of their bank
account?

Revalidation is rife with problems, at least in paddling we have
options that include further training, assessment and aknowledgement
of coaching record ( although each and all of them can be fudged by
those with a will).

We put in about 500 coaching hours each year, that is hours times
pupils, we can revalidate through our log book. However, so too can a
Coach who does 20 hours a year. I'm not saying we are perfect, but
that makes for a big variance in experience and I'm not sure how
revalidation on that basis alone can be valid.

HST, I'm not even sure that attending a coachin conference will make
that much difference anyway.

Ewan Scott

So you can revalidate solely on the basis that you have been
continually coaching? That sounds a bit dodgy to me - I am learning
that a lot of the things I was initially first taught may not be best
practice now. But because I have ben ontinually coaching using these
methods for the 3 year period I am considered to be up to date?

It seems to me (yes you guys have turned me political) that the whole
revalidation scheme has been very poorly thought out, and in many cases
is pretty pointless. PArticualrly as you can continue to coach as a
non-validated coach?

"ChipsCheeseandMayo" wrote in message
oups.com...
So you can revalidate solely on the basis that you have been
continually coaching?
No - that is not how the system works - it is set out on the website but you
have to show that you have updated your knowledge.

That sounds a bit dodgy to me - I am learning
that a lot of the things I was initially first taught may not be best
practice now. But because I have ben ontinually coaching using these
methods for the 3 year period I am considered to be up to date?
Agreed - noone said the system was perfect, but to test everyone every 3
years would not be practicable either. Now, driving is a much much higher
risk activity and we don't have any revlaidation of that. The BCU is
developing their procedures in line with other organisations.

It seems to me (yes you guys have turned me political) that the whole
revalidation scheme has been very poorly thought out, and in many cases
is pretty pointless. PArticualrly as you can continue to coach as a
non-validated coach?

Well you can do what you want if you are not paid so many club coaches do
not revalidate but they cannot issue stars either. Otherwise it is unlikely
anyone will pay you to coach if you dont.

Whilst what you say is reasonable, it is not correct to say that the system
is corrupt - there is a lot of difference between a corrupt system and one
that needs to improve. Rather than being political, how about suggesting
some sensible practical suggestions for improvement.

On 8 Feb 2005 04:09:42 -0800, "ChipsCheeseandMayo"
wrote:

So you can revalidate solely on the basis that you have been
continually coaching? That sounds a bit dodgy to me - I am learning
that a lot of the things I was initially first taught may not be best
practice now. But because I have ben ontinually coaching using these
methods for the 3 year period I am considered to be up to date?

Indeed. It is in fact common. One area where I see it regularly is in
Archery. Now, I KNOW there are professionals on this NG and I KNOW
this is a paddling NG, but if what I see in Archery is a reflection of
the standards of coaching in other activities then there is absolutely
no way I would advise anyone to go to an outdoor activity centre.

Archery is, in essence, a fairly simple process. The GNAS teaches two
methods of shooting. Bare bow involves string and face walking.
Olympic uses a sight and set finger and hand positions to ensure
conformity of shooting. I have seen kids come to us and we ask if they
have done archery before (usually they tell us they know it all)they
then procede to use a combination of shooting methods and a stance
that makes accuracy impossible. They have been taught at a number of
centres, from centres used by the local schools, to expensive PGL
camps, and Scout campsites.

Not one single kid has ever come to us with any concept of what the
GNAS specified shooting method is. That is worrying.

We coach to introduce people to a skill and to develop that skill, and
hopefully to retain people in an activity. The single key method of
putting people off is to teach them badly. When I take someone out for
archery I aim to improve their ability. In all but the very smallest,
underdeveloped child we can progress from not reaching or hitting the
target, to getting 5/6 arrows in the boss. If they are hitting the
boss we can progress, in a single session, to having them hit gold in
every round.

Sorry if I'm going on a bit. That is a microcosm of what we do in
paddling. We take pupils out on the water and an hour later they
should be better at what they were doing than they were before they
started.

That needs to be measured. So, if a coach does nothing but taster
sessions, then one might question his ability at teaching high brace,
hanging draw, sculling etc. yet under self revalidation he can
revalidate in the same way as someone who runs half a dozen star
courses each year.

HST, someone who has lapsed membership can revalidate simply by paying
his back fees.

It is wide open to circumvention.


It seems to me (yes you guys have turned me political) that the whole
revalidation scheme has been very poorly thought out, and in many cases
is pretty pointless. PArticualrly as you can continue to coach as a
non-validated coach?

No, but your validation may vary from person to person... just as, I
suppose, you initial training might.

Ewan Scott

On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 23:05:27 GMT, "Broooz"
wrote:

"ChipsCheeseandMayo" wrote in message
roups.com...
So you can revalidate solely on the basis that you have been
continually coaching?
No - that is not how the system works - it is set out on the website but you
have to show that you have updated your knowledge.

It's as good as...

Mandatory requirements for revalidation and keeping coaching awards
valid...
* Current Membership doh!
* Current First Aid Certificate as appropriate fair enough.
* Attendance at one regional or Local Coach Update and Development
Forum in every three years. see definition
* Remain active as a coach no definition
available
* Remain upto date with current best practice. read CODE?


It is hardly arduous. But I guess i'd better attend a regional
Coaching meeting, my other half managed to get to one, soshe's okay -
not that she learned anything from it :-(

Ewan Scott

"Ewan Scott" wrote in message
...

It is hardly arduous. But I guess i'd better attend a regional
Coaching meeting, my other half managed to get to one, soshe's okay -
not that she learned anything from it :-(

That is a pity and I hope she fed that back to the RCO.

You should come to the Scottish one - we had some very useful sessions.
Also, as always with these things, if you keep an open mind, and ask lots of
questions (as most open-minded people on this group do), you can learn a lot
just by meeting other coaches.