Uncertified Instructors

[slow-line-fast]

I taught part-time at a local hill back in the day, starting uncertified.

-- Hiring clinic weekend: training and evaluation of our skiing, teaching, and ability to relate well to other humans. They didn't take everybody. But it wasn't like that mass mogul start in Aspen Extreme either.
-- Regular skiing/teaching clinics by Level 3s throughout the season, some required, all highly encouraged. I did as much as I could and got a lot out of it.
-- Along the way I went to various PSIA training and certs.

From what I could see it worked reasonably well, in that I never thought someone was getting a terrible lesson from me or other instructors. I did see some disinterested instruction in some cases, but those instructors didn't last long.

No-one was paying Vail prices or anything close...

 

[4ster]

AFAIK at most US resorts very few are certified when they begin teaching. Unless things have changed you need to be working for a PSIA school & log some hours before you can take the L1 assessment. Most apprentice training is done in-house.
I know opening membership & certification to the general public has been discussed in the past & maybe even tried but I don’t think it ever took hold.

 

[crosscountry]

I taught part-time at a local hill back in the day, starting uncertified.

-- Hiring clinic weekend: training and evaluation of our skiing, teaching, and ability to relate well to other humans. They didn't take everybody. But it wasn't like that mass mogul start in Aspen Extreme either.
-- Regular skiing/teaching clinics by Level 3s throughout the season, some required, all highly encouraged. I did as much as I could and got a lot out of it.
-- Along the way I went to various PSIA training and certs.

From what I could see it worked reasonably well, in that I never thought someone was getting a terrible lesson from me or other instructors. I did see some disinterested instruction in some cases, but those instructors didn't last long.

No-one was paying Vail prices or anything close...

Similar experience here.

The instructor community will not grow if there are high barriers to entry

I don't feel there's anything wrong with instructors starting out uncertified. The problem is certification and/or experience isn't rewarded sufficiently, contributed to good instructors leaving the profession.

 

[Zirbl]

This is not limited to Vail.
Previous experience indoors is more than no experience.

Plus there's fake tan these days.

 

[slowrider]

Every time I think about teaching at some point in my future, this is exactly the scene that comes to mind and quickly shuts down the idea.

It's like herding cats.

 

[crosscountry]

I was a 1st-year uncertified instructor last season at Timberline Lodge (USA, Oregon). I wanted the experience of teaching for these reasons:

• To get the free clinics to improve my teaching and my skiing.
• To ski with a group of good skiers.
• A few benefits like season pass, getting nominally paid.
• As a motivating factor to get out there and ski more.

The ski school was desperate for instructors last season. They were often begging instructors to come up for more lessons, more hours. The pre-season training (classroom and on-hill) weeded out zero people. 100% were offered jobs. Even some that I would not trust to be in charge of their own underwear drawer, let alone a class of beginner children on a ski hill.

I enjoyed 70% of my time instructing. Some of the unenjoyable 30% was brutal (8 first-time beginner kids, some crying, others bombing the hill, chaos). Some of the 70% was very very satisfying: seeing some "ah ha!" moments in the students, getting tipped $$$.

This was my very 1st experience in any service/hospitality type of job (age 65). My prior jobs were labor (irrigation) and engineering (product design). What a difference!

I'm not likely to repeat next season. Reasons:

• Takes away time from skiing
• Too much "lineup/check-in" action with unsure results.
• Frankly, instructing is hard work and this retired guy just wants to ski
• Extremely low pay. I can make $80/hr doing short-term engineering contracting. Only $13.xx/hr for ski instructing. I don't need the money. But checking in every hour for 10 minutes of on-the-clock pay at low wages is just not worth it.
• Timecards, emails, corporate training (workplace behavior, etc) all of that work-related bullcrap.
• To advance and succeed more would be costly in time and $$ to get certifications. Not worth it.

I'm glad I did it, but I'll also be glad not to be repeating it.

That being THE reasons I didn't continue teaching.

I can find the time if I know I'm teaching, crying kids included. I'll even suck up the low pay and the rest of the crap. What I don't have time for is this business of showing up and not doing anything productive. What do they think I'm? Some homeless guy who spend his time staring blankly into the sky?

(I can understand it'll work if I were at one of the mountains where one can get to the good stuff quickly. But the majority of mountains don't fall into that category. So after a couple seasons, I ran out of productive things to do for myself when I'm in between line-ups)

 

[Rich_Ease_3051]

Nice thread. Good reading. Interesting topic as an outsider and rec skier.

Sounds like the ski instruction industry has been disrupted by technology. Namely YouTube. It's like when taxi drivers were disrupted by Uber. Taxi medallions crashed overnight. The equivalent being, a PSIA cert is now commoditised and not as valuable as it once was.

When you compare the complaints here about big corporate ski:
- making PSIA instructors child minders and baby sitters
- paying them a low per hour rate
- idling them doing nothing waiting to be assigned clients
- not assigning them advanced skiers

It's almost the opposite of what ski clinics like SIA Austria and Projected Productions and Big Picture Skiing are experiencing. I don't think they take in children as assignments. They prescreen their enrollees to be advanced skiers by getting them to submit videos of themselves doing advanced turns. They charge thousands per client for their clinics. They're booked out a year in advance. These guys are busy and making bread.

They understood that YouTube has disrupted the ski learning industry. And so designed their business around the freemium model where they give free instruction videos to get rec skiers like me to teach ourselves. And once we get to a stage where we want to learn higher skills, they already have the mindshare and clout to get us to enroll to their programs.

Why should I, a rec skier, pay thousands of dollars to big corporate resorts, when learning is free all over the internet? Why not reserve those thousands of dollars for ski clinics who provided me with free info when I'm ready to get to a higher level?

Some of you may laugh at the suggestion that YouTube instruction videos are not equivalent to one on one instruction. Sound similar to the complaints taxi drivers made when Uber was coming up. That private cars are not taxis. That they don't have insurance. That GPS is no substitute for "taxi driver street knowledge".

What taxi drivers then and PSIA instructors don't understand now is that technology gives us, the consumer, convenience. Technology made it "good enough". And "good enough" is good enough if it's free or cheap. An Uber can be invoked anywhere via app. A taxi driver (back then) had to be hailed or called upon through a phone operator service.

Similarly, a YouTube video can be "invoked" while I'm riding the ski lift. Or in a resort bar having beer. Or during lunch. Or anywhere where there's a phone signal. A human instructor cannot.

There will always be a market for good instructors with high reputation. They will always get clients by word of mouth.

But for everyone else, if you haven't increased your online clout, you will be commoditised by the machinery. Much like taxi drivers and then Uber drivers were commoditised and eventually paid peanuts.

I don't understand the PSIA hierarchy. I don't know the difference between level 1 or level 10. You cannot wave that in my face and pretend like I care. Or even understand it. Or care enough to research and understand it.

But I know a good video of Reilly McGlashlan or Paul Lorenz bombing down a groomer. And when I'm ready to get to a higher level, I'd rather enroll with those guys than with a level 100 PSIA instructor assigned by big corporate resort.

 

[Jwrags]

I see no similarities between Uber/taxi drivers and instructors/YouTube. Uber/taxi both get you somewhere without need for external input. It is one thing to watch a YouTube video but most are not capable of emulating the skiing on their own. I, at least, need eyes and feedback while I’m attempting to change something.

 

[Rich_Ease_3051]

I see no similarities between Uber/taxi drivers and instructors/YouTube. Uber/taxi both get you somewhere without need for external input. It is one thing to watch a YouTube video but most are not capable of emulating the skiing on their own. I, at least, need eyes and feedback while I’m attempting to change something.

Even that has been disrupted by tech. Video movement analysis is good enough substitute to an instructor giving real time feedback.

Get one of your mates to record your skiing with GoPro and send the video to an online coach for much less money, often free, than you would pay a big corporate resort instructor.

This tech became popular during the pandemic and hasn't been fully utilised yet. But once it's refined and automated, it's another disruption to face to face instruction.

 

[Seldomski]

What is the age split for customers in lessons during the season? What % of students are kids under <12 years old? I seem to see a lot more groups of kids with instructors on the hill, but it may just be that they are easier to spot than a group of adults with an instructor.

 

[mdf]

What is the age split for customers in lessons during the season? What % of students are kids under <12 years old? I seem to see a lot more groups of kids with instructors on the hill, but it may just be that they are easier to spot than a group of adults with an instructor.

I see proportionally more adult students at Aspen and Taos than at other places I can think of. Including other places famous for expert terrain.

 

[Seldomski]

I see proportionally more adult students at Aspen and Taos than at other places I can think of. Including other places famous for expert terrain.

I am thinking of Epic/Vail properties. Kirkwood, Heavenly, Vail, Beaver Creek all seems to have a lot of kids in ski school, at least for times I have been there. Midweek, not so much. But through weekends or near holidays... place can be a zoo and lots of parents looking for a babysitter.

 

[Brian Finch]

Nice thread. Good reading. Interesting topic as an outsider and rec skier.

Sounds like the ski instruction industry has been disrupted by technology. Namely YouTube. It's like when taxi drivers were disrupted by Uber. Taxi medallions crashed overnight. The equivalent being, a PSIA cert is now commoditised and not as valuable as it once was.

When you compare the complaints here about big corporate ski:
- making PSIA instructors child minders and baby sitters
- paying them a low per hour rate
- idling them doing nothing waiting to be assigned clients
- not assigning them advanced skiers

It's almost the opposite of what ski clinics like SIA Austria and Projected Productions and Big Picture Skiing are experiencing. I don't think they take in children as assignments. They prescreen their enrollees to be advanced skiers by getting them to submit videos of themselves doing advanced turns. They charge thousands per client for their clinics. They're booked out a year in advance. These guys are busy and making bread.

They understood that YouTube has disrupted the ski learning industry. And so designed their business around the freemium model where they give free instruction videos to get rec skiers like me to teach ourselves. And once we get to a stage where we want to learn higher skills, they already have the mindshare and clout to get us to enroll to their programs.

Why should I, a rec skier, pay thousands of dollars to big corporate resorts, when learning is free all over the internet? Why not reserve those thousands of dollars for ski clinics who provided me with free info when I'm ready to get to a higher level?

Some of you may laugh at the suggestion that YouTube instruction videos are not equivalent to one on one instruction. Sound similar to the complaints taxi drivers made when Uber was coming up. That private cars are not taxis. That they don't have insurance. That GPS is no substitute for "taxi driver street knowledge".

What taxi drivers then and PSIA instructors don't understand now is that technology gives us, the consumer, convenience. Technology made it "good enough". And "good enough" is good enough if it's free or cheap. An Uber can be invoked anywhere via app. A taxi driver (back then) had to be hailed or called upon through a phone operator service.

Similarly, a YouTube video can be "invoked" while I'm riding the ski lift. Or in a resort bar having beer. Or during lunch. Or anywhere where there's a phone signal. A human instructor cannot.

There will always be a market for good instructors with high reputation. They will always get clients by word of mouth.

But for everyone else, if you haven't increased your online clout, you will be commoditised by the machinery. Much like taxi drivers and then Uber drivers were commoditised and eventually paid peanuts.

I don't understand the PSIA hierarchy. I don't know the difference between level 1 or level 10. You cannot wave that in my face and pretend like I care. Or even understand it. Or care enough to research and understand it.

But I know a good video of Reilly McGlashlan or Paul Lorenz bombing down a groomer. And when I'm ready to get to a higher level, I'd rather enroll with those guys than with a level 100 PSIA instructor assigned by big corporate resort.

With respect to the 1%ers - the lunatic fringe, you are spot on. Projected, BPS & Carv have upended sub-elite skiing.

More of what I see here is that instructors/ coaches are no longer the better skiers on the mountain & have lost the swagger that made other want to take lessons & join up as staff. Their credibility is lost.

Last season instructors were poaching $400 / hour mercenary Carv lessons once they got their SkiIQ Grim Ripper status (150 SkiIQ) ; skiers would pay nearly anything for 10 more points as they felt the their status was elevated & accomplishments social media ‘worthy’. Ppl buy credibility, same with instruction.

As a 157 SkiIQ skier, I taught a few lessons myself, but I quickly found that is was far more lucrative (scaleable) & lesser painful to simply charge $250, plug the client’s trackers into my insoles & rip off 2 runs while they sat at the bar.

Credibility.

 

[4ster]

It's like herding cats.

Try being a staff trainer

 

[Tony S]

With respect to the 1%ers - the lunatic fringe, you are spot on. Projected, BPS & Carv have upended sub-elite skiing.

More of what I see here is that instructors/ coaches are no longer the better skiers on the mountain & have lost the swagger that made other want to take lessons & join up as staff. Their credibility is lost.

Last season instructors were poaching $400 / hour mercenary Carv lessons once they got their SkiIQ Grim Ripper status (150 SkiIQ) ; skiers would pay nearly anything for 10 more points as they felt the their status was elevated & accomplishments social media ‘worthy’. Ppl buy credibility, same with instruction.

As a 157 SkiIQ skier, I taught a few lessons myself, but I quickly found that is was far more lucrative (scaleable) & lesser painful to simply charge $250, plug the client’s trackers into my insoles & rip off 2 runs while they sat at the bar.

Credibility.

I can't tell if he's serious. If so, people are nuts.

 

[Premier Skis]

As a PSIA Level 3 instructor and ski school trainer for the last 16 years, let me pass along some of my observations. Keep in mind that the ski schools that I've been affiliated with are independent schools not associated with the resort, but I think my experience is still relevant:

1. Most ski schools largely teach beginner lessons and simply don't have enough staff on hand to handle the demand. In fact, most schools are desperate to find instructors. Programs like The Rookie Academy, Projected Productions and the like are the exception, not the norm.
2. That being said, a good ski school will try as hard as they can to train their staff to give competent lessons. In most cases, but not always of course, a relatively new instructor properly trained can provide an experience for a student where the student progresses and has fun, and isn't that the point?
3. For more advanced skiers looking to improve, it's incumbent on them to ask questions if they are taking a lesson: "How long has this instructor been teaching?" "What is their certification level?" "What will you do if I'm not happy with the lesson?" The more you ask, the more likely it is that a student will have a good experience.
4. Can you learn from online video analysis and YouTube videos? Of course! At the same time, how does the average skier know that what they are looking at will work for them? How do they know that the exercises their online instructor has told them to work on based upon video analysis are being done correctly and make the changes they desire? One of the biggest advantages of a "live" lesson is the immediate feedback a good instructor can provide.

Happy to discuss further !

 

[Tony S]

For more advanced skiers looking to improve, it's incumbent on them to ask questions if they are taking a lesson: "How long has this instructor been teaching?" "What is their certification level?"

Why? Do you do that when you are in the toboggan with a broken leg? What about when you send your kid to public school? No. You count on the containing institution to qualify the professionals on your behalf. Ski schools should do the same.

 

[Premier Skis]

Why? Do you do that when you are in the toboggan with a broken leg? What about when you send your kid to public school? No. You count on the containing institution to qualify the professionals on your behalf. Ski schools should do the same.

I was speaking more from my own experience working for a much smaller school than a large destination resort. If I was paying for a private lesson at one of these, I too would expect the instructor to be able to provide an appropriate lesson based upon my skill level. At the same time, I'd be paying big bucks for the lesson, and wouldn't be afraid to ask a couple of questions. What's the harm?

 

[Tony S]

I was speaking more from my own experience working for a much smaller school than a large destination resort. If I was paying for a private lesson at one of these, I too would expect the instructor to be able to provide an appropriate lesson based upon my skill level. At the same time, I'd be paying big bucks for the lesson, and wouldn't be afraid to ask a couple of questions. What's the harm?

No harm. Just shouldn't be the customer's responsibility to make sure the vendor actually has the product he's charging for.

 

[HardDaysNight]

Why? Do you do that when you are in the toboggan with a broken leg? What about when you send your kid to public school? No. You count on the containing institution to qualify the professionals on your behalf. Ski schools should do the same.

This is true of course. Apropos of trying to assess the quality of potential instructors, most prospective clients wouldn’t have the faintest idea what questions to pose, and certainly shouldn’t have any confidence at all that the answers bear any resemblance to the truth. Assuming one could get answers given that for the past several years the only way to book lessons (at least at PCMR) has been online!