Personal Performance Awards - review

Inland paddling
Post Reply
Mike A
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 10:22 pm
Location: In me boat

Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by Mike A » Mon Sep 11, 2017 9:07 pm

Given the recent change of name for 4 & 5 star to leader and advanced leader, I was somewhat surprised to see that the review of personal performance awards is being undertaken so soon after the rebranding.

Feedback is welcome at http://www.canoewales.com/ws-blog/post/ ... nce-awards

The model is based around the following principles:

· Remove the link of personal performance awards to coaching qualifications

· Design awards that have clear progressions

· Removal of a generic kayak/canoe award

· Allow high level personal performance awards without leadership

· Define and expand providers of awards to include leaders as well as coaches

· Specific discipline awards that are fit for purpose

· Direct entry can be gained at any stage of the paddler’s development

· Removal of registrations before delivery

· Awards that promote coaching and development rather than assessments

User avatar
scottdog007
Posts: 1298
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:34 pm
Location: Hertfordshire.

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by scottdog007 » Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:23 pm

Does this now mean the '2 star' which is/was a canoeing and kayaking discipline, this will changed to individual disciplines?

jmmoxon
Posts: 5377
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2002 12:12 pm
Location: Sometimes Sunny Somerset
Contact:

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by jmmoxon » Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:20 pm

Certainly looks that way (the coaching awards can be done separately or together on the new scheme):
http://www.canoewales.com/ws-public/upl ... 0Model.pdf

Mike
http://kayakworldguide.forums-free.com Links to websites with info on white water, touring, sea & surf.

User avatar
scottdog007
Posts: 1298
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:34 pm
Location: Hertfordshire.

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by scottdog007 » Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:59 pm

So they are still looking for feedback from their members / coaches on this it seems.

Is there a date when all this may happen, I can not find anything?

Are coaches expected to retain? I would doubt this as long as they follow the syllabus.

jriddell
Posts: 81
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:38 am

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by jriddell » Wed Sep 13, 2017 4:04 pm

Great to see them consulting rather than just announcing.

No there's no dates set as yet nor decisions on retraining but it says they want to expand the providers so it's probably not going to be much faff.

The main change is splitting the 2 start to be single discipline which is much needed. I'm a fan of making people try both sides of the sport but the effort needed is too much for clubs in terms of time (and sometimes kit).

It's not clear is the new names "start", "ready to" etc would replace the 1* 2* names, I hope not, the star awards are a well known brand.

Psamathe
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2017 7:58 pm

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by Psamathe » Wed Sep 13, 2017 4:28 pm

jriddell wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 4:04 pm
......
The main change is splitting the 2 start to be single discipline which is much needed. I'm a fan of making people try both sides of the sport but the effort needed is too much for clubs in terms of time (and sometimes kit).
Also, if attending a commercial course it's probably double (or more) the time and cost - and some 2* are 3 day courses so it's a significant cost and time.
jriddell wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 4:04 pm
It's not clear is the new names "start", "ready to" etc would replace the 1* 2* names, I hope not, the star awards are a well known brand.
The names they are using are worse than terrible; particularly the "start" and "ready to" and worst of all "Elite" - I'd never go for an award called "Elite", arrogant and probably reflects BCU's elite competition (racing) view.

Losing the star names would also be daft given the equivalence to the EPP schemes. In fact beyond the removal of multi-dicipline 2* requirement and removing leader stuff at higher levels I'm unsure what exactly they are proposing. It all seems vague and if you take what little they have written it seems mostly about marketing, focus groups, etc.

To me there are a range of skill people will be acquiring as their training progresses. There is already a mostly sensible progression as to which skills are learnt in what order (e.g. most people learn to paddle in a straight line before learning to eskimo roll). So it becomes more about where the splits in that progression are made i.e. what skills included at what levels. Putting more or less in any level would break with the EPP equivalence and make some levels shorter others longer. For example, 1* includes reasonable skill to make it a practical course (not too long, not too expensive and thus perfectly "accessible); add more skills and course becomes longer and more expensive and discourages people starting; remove skills and you've really not given people much. etc. But in the "consultation" BCU have given no information about what would be in what levels, what levels would be called, very little to actually consult on. Will there be a 2nd consultation when these details are narrowed down are will BCU use the vague inadequate consultation as a mandate for whatever they finally decide in the privacy of their offices?

To me he "consultation" looks rushed out early, before they actually have much in the way of plans, either that or it's a deliberate things so they can claim "we consulted widely" before going off and doing what they many have intended.

Renaming existing awards because of trivial tweaks is beyond daft.

Ian

User avatar
Simon Westgarth
Posts: 6521
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 5:05 pm
Location: Øyer in Norway
Contact:

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by Simon Westgarth » Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:22 pm

scottdog007 wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:59 pm
So they are still looking for feedback from their members / coaches on this it seems.

Is there a date when all this may happen, I can not find anything?

Are coaches expected to retain? I would doubt this as long as they follow the syllabus.
10th November is the deadline, as I recall some news the other day.

User avatar
Simon Westgarth
Posts: 6521
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 5:05 pm
Location: Øyer in Norway
Contact:

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by Simon Westgarth » Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:48 pm

Psamathe wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 4:28 pm
Also, if attending a commercial course it's probably double (or more) the time and cost - and some 2* are 3 day courses so it's a significant cost and time.
It always concerns me with any scheme or programme when people focus on the price of things and not the value for them. Something is clearly wrong in the process, what that is, is of open to discussion.
Psamathe wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 4:28 pm
The names they are using are worse than terrible; particularly the "start" and "ready to" and worst of all "Elite" - I'd never go for an award called "Elite", arrogant and probably reflects BCU's elite competition (racing) view.
I strongly suspect Elite is like an expert, in that by the time you're heading towards the kinda level, you know what weaknesses are, and should look to address them. Offering support in terms of modules, mentoring and development post advanced paddler, is an area not previously focused on by BC. I'd like to see these awards be less about a summative assessment and more about engagement to maintain currency and the development of performance. Paddlers whom were once paddling at an advanced level, would know when they are no longer in the game and would address their shortfalls or simply step back to being an experienced paddler that once paddled at an advanced level.
Psamathe wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 4:28 pm
Losing the star names would also be daft given the equivalence to the EPP schemes. In fact beyond the removal of multi-dicipline 2* requirement and removing leader stuff at higher levels I'm unsure what exactly they are proposing. It all seems vague and if you take what little they have written it seems mostly about marketing, focus groups, etc.

To me there are a range of skill people will be acquiring as their training progresses. There is already a mostly sensible progression as to which skills are learnt in what order (e.g. most people learn to paddle in a straight line before learning to eskimo roll). So it becomes more about where the splits in that progression are made i.e. what skills included at what levels. Putting more or less in any level would break with the EPP equivalence and make some levels shorter others longer. For example, 1* includes reasonable skill to make it a practical course (not too long, not too expensive and thus perfectly "accessible); add more skills and course becomes longer and more expensive and discourages people starting; remove skills and you've really not given people much. etc. But in the "consultation" BCU have given no information about what would be in what levels, what levels would be called, very little to actually consult on. Will there be a 2nd consultation when these details are narrowed down are will BCU use the vague inadequate consultation as a mandate for whatever they finally decide in the privacy of their offices?

To me he "consultation" looks rushed out early, before they actually have much in the way of plans, either that or it's a deliberate things so they can claim "we consulted widely" before going off and doing what they many have intended.

Renaming existing awards because of trivial tweaks is beyond daft.
The EPP is based on the old Star Award system, and although traditionally offered is a closed Berliner system that has numerous issues. The lack of widespread success with the EPP's copying of BC rigid structure is reflected in the decline in BC's own award uptake, hence the wholesale change on an more open accessible process. Whether these huge changes are going to address this trend is yet to be seen. What I do like is that the levels are like roles, in that an advanced paddler should be able to run Class IV on site, picking a good line, look after those in trouble and be able to roll both sides on demand. I may of missed a few things, but beyond that, its all style and experience.

The contents of the levels in terms of what is needed is a big subject. For myself I want to see a richer, more substantive development for paddler's, after all there are less hoops in terms of awards to step through. Something like having paddler's paddle different craft, playboat more, develop through a series of slalom races, get involved with rescue cover at events. Basically enrich the experience of the paddler to ensure they have depth with a richness of experience, as they potentially go on to lead, guide and/or coach.

I have seen a few different drafts from with the WW Technical Group, and there has been a bunch of changes. The wider consultation is an objective as I understand for this whole process.

User avatar
Simon Westgarth
Posts: 6521
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 5:05 pm
Location: Øyer in Norway
Contact:

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by Simon Westgarth » Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:53 pm

jriddell wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 4:04 pm
It's not clear is the new names "start", "ready to" etc would replace the 1* 2* names, I hope not, the star awards are a well known brand.
The Star Awards is simply too Boy Scout, and outside the established world of paddlers it requires explaining. Names like 'Start' and 'Ready' indicate what the paddlers is, they have recently started paddling, and ready is for someone ready to go on trips, small adventures, but they would most likely not call themselves a paddler, that is it's not an established hobby, more something they are getting into.

Psamathe
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2017 7:58 pm

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by Psamathe » Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:24 pm

Simon Westgarth wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:53 pm
jriddell wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 4:04 pm
It's not clear is the new names "start", "ready to" etc would replace the 1* 2* names, I hope not, the star awards are a well known brand.
The Star Awards is simply too Boy Scout, and outside the established world of paddlers it requires explaining. Names like 'Start' and 'Ready' indicate what the paddlers is, they have recently started paddling, and ready is for someone ready to go on trips, small adventures, but they would most likely not call themselves a paddler, that is it's not an established hobby, more something they are getting into.
I'd have never done an award called "Start" nor "Ready To" - might have done the course but I'd have refused/torn-up any paperwork.

Ian

twicezero
Posts: 74
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 9:59 am

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by twicezero » Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:44 pm

Psamathe wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:24 pm

I'd have never done an award called "Start" nor "Ready To" - might have done the course but I'd have refused/torn-up any paperwork.
Could you tell me why?

Psamathe
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2017 7:58 pm

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by Psamathe » Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:12 pm

Simon Westgarth wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:48 pm
...
The EPP is based on the old Star Award system, and although traditionally offered is a closed Berliner system that has numerous issues. The lack of widespread success with the EPP's copying of BC rigid structure is reflected in the decline in BC's own award uptake, hence the wholesale change on an more open accessible process. Whether these huge changes are going to address this trend is yet to be seen. What I do like is that the levels are like roles, in that an advanced paddler should be able to run Class IV on site, picking a good line, look after those in trouble and be able to roll both sides on demand. I may of missed a few things, but beyond that, its all style and experience.
But from the consultation documents what are the changes and what is actually proposed? To me they are so vague as you can read virtually anything into them. Where do you get e.g. "in that an advanced paddler should be able to run Class IV on site" 'cos I can't see that mentioned anywhere or anything discussing skills at the various levels. You raise "these huge changes" but what are they 'cos the consultation documents I've seen are two A4 sides, one with a vague diagram the other very overview that actually says virtually nothing.

Any award system needs consistency otherwise an award from one club becomes completely different from the same award from a different training centre. So a given award will need the individual to demonstrate a number of skills. You can't realistically start saying "well you can paddle in a straight line and change direction so we'll ignore that you can't get out of a capsized boat". So, maybe I've got it wrong but for each award you need a list of skills and standards.

I've seen other sporting bodies do similar things with certifications in the past. There are still a number of abilities required at different levels and they still need to be demonstrated and the changes seem more about changing sets of skills at each level and more importantly changing the names.

Maybe my problem is I don't see the star awards (1*-3*) as a "rigid structure" - just skills required for each award. I am certainly in favour of dropping the canoe as well as kayak from the 2* (i.e. one or the other).
Simon Westgarth wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:48 pm
For myself I want to see a richer, more substantive development for paddler's, after all there are less hoops in terms of awards to step through. Something like having paddler's paddle different craft, playboat more, develop through a series of slalom races, get involved with rescue cover at events. Basically enrich the experience of the paddler to ensure they have depth with a richness of experience, as they potentially go on to lead, guide and/or coach.
I think that would target the awards more at clubs rather than training centres. Great if you live in an area that has such clubs that offer the awards but it would make things a lot worse for training centres meaning those people too distant from worthwhile local clubs can't do the awards. Without discussing specific areas (and thus clubs), where I am the only clubs around are totally race focused so in my case it's distant training centres or nothing - so if I want to do a 2* I pay £100+ and spend 2 or 3 days 100+ miles away and do a 2*. So I can see that broadening e.g. craft, disciplines, etc. could make the awards scheme a lot less accessible.

I do think the names are crucially important. Paying for and spending time for a certificate that has "Level: Complete Novice" across the top will attract nobody. The star naming is good because there is no implied ability (for non-paddlers is 1* highest or lowest award - BSAC top level used to be 1st class, bottom 3rd class). I think PADI (scuba diving) have got it right in that their beginner award is called "Open Water Diver", next one up is "Advanced Open Water Diver", etc. BSAC are ok as well with "Ocean Diver" then on to "Sports Diver" then on to "Dive Leader", etc. The consultation is about Awards, not general training clubs might chose to do (when I was scuba diving the club I learnt with added quite a few "extra requirements" to the training they considered important).

Ian

Psamathe
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2017 7:58 pm

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by Psamathe » Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:17 pm

twicezero wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:44 pm
Psamathe wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:24 pm

I'd have never done an award called "Start" nor "Ready To" - might have done the course but I'd have refused/torn-up any paperwork.
Could you tell me why?
Arrogance, pride, maybe the worst character aspects, probably difficult to explain (those words don't express it well). You work, achieve something, pass assessment to be labeled "bottom". I'd also never do an award called "Elite". The names need to attract and appeal to people, make them feel they've got somewhere (maybe I've explained more in a post below - I was writing whilst you posted this question).

(I appreciate that the star awards have associated "beginner" and "intermediate" associated with them but most people looking to start would not be aware of those, they'd just achieve a 1*.

Ian

User avatar
John K
Posts: 498
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 7:23 am
Location: Brighton

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by John K » Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:10 pm

Given that they plan to "Remove the link of personal performance awards to coaching qualifications", will anyone bother with any Personal Performance Awards anyway?

RichJ
Posts: 175
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 6:03 pm

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by RichJ » Thu Sep 14, 2017 9:44 am

Simon Westgarth emphasises value over cost. Clearly, an important point. However, I would also like to emphasise the significance of course cost in paddle sport. To progress significantly along the coaching or skills/leading pathway is very expensive!.....Unless paid for as professional development.
Maybe it is important to consider the purpose of any of this training, coaching, awards stuff. Most people paddle for fun, competitive or otherwise in an activity where safety is highly significant.
If leaders will be able to train and then assess club paddlers in performance skills, surely this will increase accessibility, put a focus back on clubs, generally increase skill levels and broaden the fun!

Seems a sensible approach to me!

Richard

User avatar
Chalky723
Posts: 806
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 7:56 pm
Location: Cambridgeshire

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by Chalky723 » Thu Sep 14, 2017 11:07 am

The new levels are a bit "Call of Duty" - perhaps that's the idea, all the youngsters will want to be "Elite" & will actually want to do the awards.

Maybe they could continue the theme & issue stickers to mark feats - Rolled, Swam, Surfed x 10, Eddy Camper etc.... That was you'd know not only who was Elite, but who was Elitest!!

All the "Starts" or "Ready To's" could sit there in their bare boats, ripe for mocking!

D
Zet Raptor, BMW F650GS...

User avatar
scottdog007
Posts: 1298
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:34 pm
Location: Hertfordshire.

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by scottdog007 » Thu Sep 14, 2017 11:56 am

For the 2 star change and making this individual disciplines now appeals to me. I enjoy both canoeing and kayaking fairly equally but at one time I believed they compliment each other and should be under one course, 2 star.

But now I have changed my mind. I run 2 star courses and I have loads of candidates that get upset having to do both. Most recently I had a woman who found canoeing too restrictive as she had a disability, though in kayaking she was fine. She only planned to do kayaking.

The biggest thing for me though is to truly teach and coach people and get them through a 2 star award I would need to put them through a minimum of 3 days, in reality 4 days. I would set 1 day kayaking techniques etc. I day Canoeing techniques, then 1 day river trip with assessment included. In reality I would prefer to do this over 4 days.

Now for club members this was a nightmare to do. I could never get a whole group the be disciplined to do the 3 or 4 days chosen. I was forever being asked to add other days to give individual instruction. Now splitting up the canoeing and kayaking should hopefully make my coaching easier.

Post Reply