Back to the OP:
Is it just me, or do other old-timers notice this. Do you thing it's an effect of the switch to the gliding wedge? (on the plus side we see fewer parallel skiers with a perma-stem).
However, that's not what has been on my mind; it's a different topic. What is on my mind, is are there more people spending years in wedge, than there were spending years in a snow plow fifty years ago?
Not sure, since i was out of skiing for some 30 years, and have returned after the whole industry changed, including the shape of the skis and other equipment improvements.
However, my general impression is "yes".
After a bit of practice as balance improves, including gradually realizing that speed per se does not kill, the flying (sorry, gliding) wedge gives energetic skiers enough control to get around on almost any groomed slope at any speed their friends want to access. At that point, it can become difficult to change habits that work, for new ones that are initially awkward or uncomfortable, often scary, & temporarily upset their internal notion that they can ski, "including all the (groomed) blacks".
Teaching any subject tends to break down into 2 very different conceptual methods, though certainly there is plenty of overlap in process.
1.) defined short lesson plans that "most" students can "master" in the allotted time frame, or set of frames, before moving to a new lesson. Each lesson is the goal. The steps build incrementally to a distant goal. Student is lightly challenged each lesson to master simplified structured concepts.
2.) introduce a panoply of approaches/skills, superficially at first, and rotate among them while continually introducing yet more, again superficially at first, as the student gradually develops & unconsciously incorporates elements of each to reinforce skills in all, toward a larger goal. Student is challenged not least by technical skill, but by autonomy: for their own participation, analysis & connection to the ongoing learning process. They need to willingly question, give feedback, appreciate connections, and sometimes suggest interpersonal approaches that might feel better to them to facilitate a given goal.
I tend to find that the second approach moves engaged, non-timid, & motivated NE's with developed musculature & reasoning (say, older than 8 or 9) through the wedge relatively quickly. The problem is that it does not work with mixed groups that arrive with widely diverse skill. With people or small groups for whom it is effective, around lesson 3 or 4 before things start to come together, some students may feel overloaded. It tended to be my natural instruction style in other subjects & i was lucky enough to initially have good results and excited skiing students who had most of their lessons with me, that i neglected on a couple occasions to understand how disconcerting & deflating the approach can be to students who have had a 1/2 dozen prior type 1/conventional lessons. The type 2 approach requires a lot of encouragement, understanding, and continual explanation combined with 2-way dialog.
The first method is easier and the student stays validated, gold star after every lesson. If they are kids, easy report to parents.
Can take a long time to move the needle.
Either way, lack of continuity can be a factor: including lift discussion & review, the first 20+ minutes of any lesson tends to be discovering what the student already knows & how they move. Or an entire group where even chairlift time among all is limited or does not occur. That barely leaves between 1/2 & 1-1/2 hours to come up with a plan, work it, and include some time to summarize both concepts and motions.
smt