Personal Performance Awards - review

Inland paddling
Mike A
Posts: 348
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 10:22 pm
Location: In me boat
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

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: 1317
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:34 pm
Location: Hertfordshire.
Been thanked: 1 time

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: 5720
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2002 12:12 pm
Location: Sometimes Sunny Somerset
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 33 times
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: 1317
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:34 pm
Location: Hertfordshire.
Been thanked: 1 time

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: 95
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:38 am
Been thanked: 3 times

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: 56
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: 6565
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 5:05 pm
Location: Øyer in Norway
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 8 times
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: 6565
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 5:05 pm
Location: Øyer in Norway
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 8 times
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: 6565
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 5:05 pm
Location: Øyer in Norway
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 8 times
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: 56
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: 83
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: 56
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: 56
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: 556
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 7:23 am
Location: Brighton
Been thanked: 8 times

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: 223
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 6:03 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 14 times

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: 901
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 7:56 pm
Location: Cambridgeshire
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 8 times

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
Jackson Nirvana, BMW F650GS...

User avatar
scottdog007
Posts: 1317
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:34 pm
Location: Hertfordshire.
Been thanked: 1 time

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.

User avatar
Simon Westgarth
Posts: 6565
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 5:05 pm
Location: Øyer in Norway
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 8 times
Contact:

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by Simon Westgarth » Mon Sep 25, 2017 7:02 am

Psamathe wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:12 pm
So, maybe I've got it wrong but for each award you need a list of skills and standards.
This approach is arguably reductionist, and tries to bring skills and techniques into isolation. This is typified by the competency regime that is endemic across the work environment these days. There are numerous academic papers debunking this approach, yet how to implement the choose alternative, "development of expertise" model is open to wide debate.
Psamathe wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:12 pm
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).
Wide reaching wholesale change is required to stop the slid in award take up.
Psamathe wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:12 pm
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.
In a desire to have paddlers with a rich breath of experience in an attempt to straddle the epistemological gap that currently occurs between an award standard and the role frame the specific environments demand. So a weekend training course may offer a great start, however wider engagement within the community and the need to obtain experience beyond centres and perhaps clubs should be a driver to the award changes.
Psamathe wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:12 pm
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).
The branding of the awards is critical, the era of the star award however is almost certainly over. The award label need to reflect what they are, and not require explanation for anyone form outside the sport.

User avatar
Adrian Cooper
Posts: 9711
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 2:26 pm
Location: Buckinghamshire
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 11 times

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by Adrian Cooper » Mon Sep 25, 2017 10:04 am

Maybe:

Beginner
Improver
Intermediate

Or is that too retro?

Psamathe
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2017 7:58 pm

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by Psamathe » Mon Sep 25, 2017 12:26 pm

Simon Westgarth wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 7:02 am
......
Psamathe wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:12 pm
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.
In a desire to have paddlers with a rich breath of experience in an attempt to straddle the epistemological gap that currently occurs between an award standard and the role frame the specific environments demand. So a weekend training course may offer a great start, however wider engagement within the community and the need to obtain experience beyond centres and perhaps clubs should be a driver to the award changes.
.....
Great for people who live in an area where there is such a community but makes things worse/harder for people who live in areas without such communities/clubs. So you'd be skewing the award scheme making it all but impossible for some on a geographical basis. At least that is how it sounds to me when you don't have a community to engage with.

The risk is that those with active clubs focus on the undoubtedly excellent training and community their clubs provide but fail to recognise that they do not have nationwide coverage (to engage with a community you have to be relatively local to be able to attend ...)

I think the BSAC model may be a good one in this regard. A sport/recreation that has risks, requires training, where the participant needs to develop skills (both trained skills and real world skills), etc. Of course they have the benefit of in effect being more policed (in that in practice you generally have to be certified to participate), but their model encompasses both courses and club training.

Ian

User avatar
Adrian Cooper
Posts: 9711
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 2:26 pm
Location: Buckinghamshire
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 11 times

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by Adrian Cooper » Mon Sep 25, 2017 3:55 pm

I find there is a range of 'engagement' in the paddling community. There are many paddlers who join clubs, visit centres, have a limited community involvement. Through sites such as this and SOTP there is an opportunity to increase your circle and I think there are Facebook groups where you can. I know I have, for years, been extending my group of friends using the old Open Canoes Yahoo Group and others, this gives one the ability to expand your knowledge and experience and thus skills provided of course you are prepared to stretch yourself. Whether this can be incorporated into some BC system remains to be seen, I suspect not.

User avatar
Simon Westgarth
Posts: 6565
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 5:05 pm
Location: Øyer in Norway
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 8 times
Contact:

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by Simon Westgarth » Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:44 am

Psamathe wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 12:26 pm
Great for people who live in an area where there is such a community but makes things worse/harder for people who live in areas without such communities/clubs. So you'd be skewing the award scheme making it all but impossible for some on a geographical basis. At least that is how it sounds to me when you don't have a community to engage with.

The risk is that those with active clubs focus on the undoubtedly excellent training and community their clubs provide but fail to recognise that they do not have nationwide coverage (to engage with a community you have to be relatively local to be able to attend ...)

I think the BSAC model may be a good one in this regard. A sport/recreation that has risks, requires training, where the participant needs to develop skills (both trained skills and real world skills), etc. Of course they have the benefit of in effect being more policed (in that in practice you generally have to be certified to participate), but their model encompasses both courses and club training.
The BSAC model looks much like the early MLTB scheme, with a few tiers along with a much simplified approach. I would hope the scheme from BC would reflect such a clean approach. Still as there are so many different craft the qualification matrix appears more complex. This in itself under scores the issues in providing solutions for requiring a richness of experience to obtain a comprehensive standard.

The weakness in your argument comes from locally available naturally occurring resources to aid a paddler to develop. For sure it is going to be hard to be a white water paddlers living in Norfolk or the Shetlands, or a sea kayaker from Leicester. You're local club or centre will have little to offer in terms of implicit learning outcomes or the resources to provide any strong progression. In terms of wider engagement, the going to events, attending courses, gatherings, competitions and the alike where by further interactions occur beyond the bubble of a club, centre or local area will enrich the community.

It is through this approach that I feel well levels of awards are needed, and more depth and texture of experience demanded. That means, for many to get to a new level will take longer. Presently we have a culture of passing awards that require little substantial experience, and this epistemological void is common place. Experiences from solely within a club or at a centre are unlikely to provide the substantive experience and developed expertise outlined, so further and wider engagement would be encouraged, sort after and ultimately needed.

SPL
Posts: 273
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 9:23 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by SPL » Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:27 am

Would it make sense to have grades 1-5 mirroring river grades to show what level someone is competent to paddle at?
Apologies if that's what the stars do but with no aspiration to be an instructor I lost interest in collecting stars.

User avatar
Simon Westgarth
Posts: 6565
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 5:05 pm
Location: Øyer in Norway
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 8 times
Contact:

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by Simon Westgarth » Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:53 am

SPL wrote:
Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:27 am
Would it make sense to have grades 1-5 mirroring river grades to show what level someone is competent to paddle at?
Apologies if that's what the stars do but with no aspiration to be an instructor I lost interest in collecting stars.
It is never easy as to which way a scheme can be formed. Trying to mirror a grouping of paddlers is probably a good way of getting success. In white water, you have those whom need looking after on Class II/III, those whom can paddle at that level, but would need looking after on Class III/IV, and also a grouping of paddlers happy on harder water. You could add another level on top, but there are few people looking after others on Class V. Although i not like the terms moderate and advanced in BC's lexicon, these groups of paddlers reflects the paddling they do. So to have 3 white water levels is probably OK, perhaps 2. From my comments above, you can see I am looking to these levels to have more depth and a richness to them, with the awards written to encourage wider engagement.

User avatar
TechnoEngineer
Posts: 3351
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 7:47 pm
Location: Berks, Hants, Essex
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by TechnoEngineer » Fri Sep 29, 2017 9:10 am

I usually explain to people the following:
1 Star - you can get in and out of a boat and move it around
2 Star - competent on flat water
3 Star - competent on Grade 1-2 moving water
4 Star - competent on Grade 3 moving water (with WWSR/CNTP and can lead peers)

So if there's any rebranding as such to be done, perhaps make them an honest description:
1 Star - Introduction or Novice
2 Star - Flat Water Award
3 Star - Beginner Moving Water Award
4 Star - Intermediate Moving Water Award
5 Star - Advanced Moving Water Award
- and perhaps other specifics such as "K1 Racing Endorsement" and such-like, possibly even with time-limited expiry to reflect that effort is needed to maintain that level.
XL-Burn-3 / Monstar / Kodiak / My Videos

twopigs
Posts: 1311
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 2:55 pm
Location: Stroud & Cheltenham
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by twopigs » Fri Sep 29, 2017 9:55 am

Maybe the FIRST question for a Personal Performance Review should be - What are they for?

For those who get into the coaching route they are pre-requisites that show you have some mastery of the skills you are going to coach. For others?? Maybe for young people they provide some kudos - but for adults??

To me the idea of making the awards more accessible by having more providers suggests that BC see the awards as a revenue stream ....... Is there any evidence of pent up demand because clubs are either unable to offer the current star awards or because paddlers have to travel to find an assessment centre??
Canoeing - bigger boat, broken paddle, more skill!

User avatar
Chalky723
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 7:56 pm
Location: Cambridgeshire
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by Chalky723 » Fri Sep 29, 2017 10:51 am

Exactly, for coaching purposes you could almost call them "Prerequisite 1", "Prerequisite 2" etc.... It'd be a lot easier to keep track of.

For "lay" people, just call it flat, bumpy, really bumpy, sh*t!.....

D
Jackson Nirvana, BMW F650GS...

gp.girl
Posts: 609
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2013 5:54 pm
Location: Crawley Down, West Sussex
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by gp.girl » Fri Sep 29, 2017 10:56 am

TechnoEngineer wrote:
Fri Sep 29, 2017 9:10 am
I usually explain to people the following:
1 Star - you can get in and out of a boat and move it around
2 Star - competent on flat water
3 Star - competent on Grade 1-2 moving water
4 Star - competent on Grade 3 moving water (with WWSR/CNTP and can lead peers)

So if there's any rebranding as such to be done, perhaps make them an honest description:
1 Star - Introduction or Novice
2 Star - Flat Water Award
3 Star - Beginner Moving Water Award
4 Star - Intermediate Moving Water Award
5 Star - Advanced Moving Water Award
- and perhaps other specifics such as "K1 Racing Endorsement" and such-like, possibly even with time-limited expiry to reflect that effort is needed to maintain that level.
Rather like this*. Separate out the safety/leadership completely? Might need to adjust it for traditional canoes as 3 star is significantly different.

*And someday I will get to be a beginner on moving water! :)
I can roll :)

User avatar
Adrian Cooper
Posts: 9711
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 2:26 pm
Location: Buckinghamshire
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 11 times

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by Adrian Cooper » Fri Sep 29, 2017 12:20 pm

I think there is a fundamental problem with the performance awards and the coaching qualifications.

I really can't believe that BC are so greatly interested in the money gathered from sending out award certificates but I get the distinct impression that there are commercial providers driving the whole system on their behalf.

The coaching system has become prohibitively expensive and time consuming over the years and adding a welter of further subdivisions means there are potentially more tickets to obtain. Getting qualified to train and assess above three star is now beyond club volunteers, indeed, even level 2 coach qualifications are onerous to achieve. If you now need further endorsements to assess even more awards, it will act as a significant disincentive. But surely those driving the change will be expecting that club members will be looking for outside commercial providers for this training.

What I think is needed is a dramatic streamlining not a ridiculous expansion. They kept telling us that the skills were transferrable right up until they added another distinct award which needed a whole other level of weekend courses.

User avatar
Robert Craig
Posts: 759
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 8:55 pm
Location: Glasgow
Has thanked: 27 times
Been thanked: 10 times

Re: Personal Performance Awards - review

Post by Robert Craig » Fri Sep 29, 2017 1:15 pm

The devil will be in the detail

Post Reply