skatingforums
On the Ice => Sitting on the Boards Rink Side => Topic started by: jjane45 on November 14, 2010, 08:59:22 PM
-
Just curious what happens when skaters grow out of the coach's own skating level. I guess it happens frequently at elite level on specific elements, say not every elite coach landed a triple axel or quad himself or herself.
What happens in other levels? If a coach is tested up to novice, will parents trust a junior or senior skater with him or her or they move on to another coach with more technical credentials? I mean, the best coaches are often not the best competitors / test takers, but do they usually have to be skating at some equivalent or higher levels in the past compared to their students?
Just a question in general, of course there will always be exceptions! :P
-
You don't need to be able do a jump to teach it; many female skaters never land a triple axel or a triple lutz, but, they are certainly coaching at the international level regardless.
Great skaters may not be able to teach technique; people who can teach technique have a unique skill. Funnily enough, one of the best coaches I know - and widely respected, highly qualified, successful at the top level, etc tcetc etc., never landed a lutz.
You do see parents "chasing" coaches based on qualifications without looking at what they've produced in terms of skaters. Doesn't always end happily.
-
A lot of coaches teach beyond their own test level. The trick is to be certain that the skill is taught correctly, which generally means that the coach has to do some learning herself - through seminars, or through working with a higher level coach to learn how to TEACH the elements.
I see this more with MIF than with freestyle. Coaches who never did figures are having issues with some of the newer and higher-test moves. The good coaches are basically going back to school themselves. You may not need to know what doing a triple or a quad feels like to teach it, but I personally think that it helps a whole lot to know how to do a twizzle or a back loop in order to teach it. You don't need to be able to do it WELL, but how are you going to explain the weight shifts and muscle control if you've never tried it yourself?
I would hope that if a coach found herself totally over her head in terms of teaching skills she's never done, she'd either get help - or pass the skater on to a more knowledgeable coach voluntarily.
-
One of my dd's coaches is a Russian Ice Dancer. I have to say, she has brought her along to do all her double jumps and others up to double axel. She and her partner coach (who was a pairs skater) have coached several kids to junior nationals already even though neither were freestyle competitors.
-
As long as the coach can explain how to do the element, there should be no problems. My female coach did up to 2Lz but she has been working with skaters who landed 2A and triples because it's technique, not demonstration. My male coach, OTOH, landed triple jumps.
-
Teaching and skating are two very different things. I teach through Juv MIF and will most likely never pass Preliminary myself. My students do lots of things I can't do and never will. I think jumps are the hardest thing to teach without being able to do. I have videos of demo jumps on my phone, as the bunny hop and side toe hops are the only jumps I will do. There are definitely some people who cannot learn without being shown, and I am not the right coach for them, but for those who need to understand what they are doing, I am it. I do think there are some moves that need a demo, such as cross overs, cross strokes, pivots, and mohawks. Three turns are generally taught on two feet first anyway, so if you know how to teach them, you don't have to do them yourself. I do turn slightly green when my students surpass me, but it's my job and I love it.
To give an example of the opposite, I recently saw a child fail Juv MIF because his coach, who competed in the Olympics, didn't have a clue how the moves should be done and put the kid out there very prematurely. I've seen this same coach teach LTS, and now my opinion of that coach as a teacher has been reinforced. I felt really bad for the kid, who is quite a good skater and could pass easily, given proper instruction and time to get it right.
-
I honestly think that all coaches teach above their skating level. For example, a basic element is a spread eagle, some people are not capable of doing them, so if a coach cannot do a spread eagle, then can still teach it to other skaters since they would know how it is supposed to be done since they would have tried it too. Most good coaches in my area actually stopped skating at the Junior level, some have gone to the Junior worlds, but I do not know many senior level coaches (that have been coaching for several years, 20 + years) who competed at the senior level, yet they have skaters competing at the senior level. It is important that the coach continues to get informed about skating skills through seminars and sometimes lessons with other coaches. All those level 4 spins we are seeing, the coaches of the senior skaters have never done those spins however they know enough about biomechanics and through seminars to teach a skater how to do them.
-
Just curious what happens when skaters grow out of the coach's own skating level. I guess it happens frequently at elite level on specific elements, say not every elite coach landed a triple axel or quad himself or herself.
Mishin has never jumped over doubles I think? yet he's got three (or is it four now?) olympic skaters like Plushenko, who does quads, and a lot of national champions at his seminars and what not. He's written a thesis on the biomechanics of skating though.
So depends on the coach. If they've an eye for errors, if they don't...
-
Some people would say that some of the judges must never have skated... ::>)
-
I don't know whether or not that's a requirement for the USFSA. They just have to recognize, not teach or perform, so maybe not. In the ISI, the coaches are usually the judges, although other professional members can also qualify.
What does the US Figure Skating rulebook say about judges' skating background?
FWIW, Gustave Lussi was a ski jumper, not a skater. (He did know how to skate, though)
He coached many elite skaters. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gus_Lussi
-
Hmmmm-- the USFS website says that a skating background is helpful but not necessary to be a judge. The also say (paraphrase) "some excellent judges were very poor skaters." ;D
-
I would say a good coach is one with a great eye for detail more than anything and who is a good communicator
-
Skate Canada requires a skating background for all judges and evaluators. Plus, training and evaluations to progress up the ladder.
-
Skate Canada requires a skating background for all judges and evaluators. Plus, training and evaluations to progress up the ladder.
NISA requires a skating background, but that doesn't mean that they've ever landed all their doubles. And equally to become a coach. I know a former judge (she's returned to adult skating) and several adults who've learnt high enough to learn to coach none of whom have skated even at novice level.
-
I wonder if anyone's ever challenged those skater-to-coach rules with Skate Canada or NISA?
In the US, they'd have to prove that those requirements were relevant to the job of (as one of our members put it) teaching tots to lick the ice, lol.
That's especially true since there really were no requirements for the longest time. The USFSA's latest attempts at coaches' registrations and education requirements aren't being well-received.
-
Now you will all get mad at me again. But we all believe that which we believe.
I personally find it hard to believe that a coach can do a very good job of teaching something that said coach has never worked on doing themselves.
A good coach can push things a little bit, simply by getting them better physically conditioned, reading books, attending seminars, and comparing the skater's motions to those of someone better. Showing the kid videos of someone doing the move right, or asking a better skater to demonstrate, helps too.
After all, someone develop the new moves without someone teaching them.
Likewise, a coach can help someone with a little less or a little greater flexibility, if they understand well the issues involved.
But how can a coach figure out what is happening when they have no idea internally what it should feel like to do the move?
Besides, many of us need a coach who can show and tell.
I think a good coach would explain to the student (and parent, where applicable) the potential benefits of moving to a coach with all the right skills. Then the student (and possibly parent) can make their own decisions. Some students feel guilty about leaving their current coach - they need to understand there will be no hard feelings if they make that decision. (If there would be hard feelings, you shouldn't be a coach.)
A good coach always puts the student first.
Likewise - a well trained judge can grade moves that said judge has never done. But that judges's comments won't be as useful to the skater.
-
As I said before: Gus Lussi wasn't a figure skater. In your estimation, he had no business coaching, lol.
Am I correct in remembering that you are a low-level skater who doesn't take lessons, Query?
It's truthfully a waste of lesson time to have the coach demonstrate every maneuver at full speed, especially high-level elements that are intricate. There's too much to see without narration. That takes repeated demonstrations and runs down the lesson time clock with the skater standing around watching.
Even those coaches that can do, usually don't. You'll see them walk through the movements explain what is expected and then walk the skater through the element step-by-step. Far better than saying "watch me!" The worst coaches are the ones that can't break down the element and explain what each step is, resorting to doing it over and over at full speed. Even the most visual learners won't benefit from watching; they need feedback and correction to master the element themselves. A coach can always have another skater demonstrate it while he/she describes a particular step of the element. (Like the snap into a backspin position for the double toe loop.)
While I agree that it helps to know what it "feels like" to explain it, there are often more than one ways to describe how something feels and a coach can always learn those from others. Example: In a camel, I feel like someone's pulling my free foot back when I do it correctly. Another person said it feels like their whole body is being stretched like an elastic band. Still another said it feels like she's formed a "T" with her body and skating leg. So, without ever having done a camel, a well-educated coach can relay that information if s/he understands the biomechanics and the correctness.
Not all coaches want to be primary coach of a competitive skater, some are happy just teaching moves or jumps. I absolutely agree (and have told my parents/skaters) that changing coaches is their perogative. They don't because I'm a really good coach that understands and works around their limitations and restrictions, plus I really do care about my students and their families. They're not just a lesson payment.
Adding a jump, moves or spin coach to the team resolves your concern about doing what's right for the student. Those specialty coaches may not be particularly good at being a primary coach for the student in question: just because a recreational skater is ready to work on Axels, doesn't mean they have to change to a competitive coach. That's not in the skater's best interest if it destroys their confidence and self-esteem.
Another reason why there's a difference between "teaching" and "coaching."
-
By Query's standards, Mishin has no business having done coaching and giving lessons to the world's top skaters and yet four of his students went to the olympics and three won?
I do agree though that at the very low level it's vital for a coach to be able to show something though. I had a coach who couldn't do a toeloop and it was an absolute nightmare to try to learn jumps from her. For one, you know how you're supposed to kind of kick through on the sal, and swing around on the spin? Well her sal and spin looked identical, guess the consequences for the students.
So maybe it depends on level too, y'know? That you can actually coach quads if you've one done doubles, but you can't coach singles if you can't do singles even if once upon a time you could?
-
I would suggest that a skating coach needs to have a strong understanding of the skills being taught and of how the body moves and the ability to communicate effectively. I don't think it's necessary for a coach to have done the element themselves before, although it certainly helps develop the necessary knowledge base, and I certainly don't think a coach has to still be able to perform an element beyond the basics (stroking, turns, etc...)
If a coach can gain the necessary knowledge through study and observation and has the ability to communicate that knowledge effectively, then I see no reason they can't become a great coach. They might not be the right coach for every skater, but that's true of the elite-skater-turned-coach too.
-
I agree that a low level skater really does need a coach who can demonstrate. However, the higher the level of the skater, the less demonstration is needed. And then it becomes a matter of a coach knowing the underlying principles and technique behind the skating.
Of course a coach can teach beyond their own ability, as many others have pointed out. Most of the elite coaches today never did triples, bielman spins, or a lot of the other things that are now done at the senior level.
-
If coaches could only coach the moves they had done themselves, nobody would be landing quads, or even triples, for that matter. The most important qualifications for a coach are (1) an understanding of the physics of figure skating, i.e., the relationships between edges, lean, angular momentum, open vs. closed body positions, etc., and (2) the ability to communicate that information to the skater in such a way that the skater is able to implement those techniques and make the necessary corrections.
My coach never landed anything beyond a double axel, but he has successfully taught the triple axel and even the quad toeloop because he understands the physics and is able to communicate the mechanics to the skater. Frank Carroll never got beyond Junior level at U.S. Nationals, and that was in 1960, so he has probably never landed a triple jump either.
-
So maybe it depends on level too, y'know? That you can actually coach quads if you've one done doubles, but you can't coach singles if you can't do singles even if once upon a time you could?
My coach does not demonstrate singles. She used to do waltz jumps, toe loops and a very tiny salchow, but now she does not jump at all (badly injured herself a couple months ago.) I'd say I learned flip and loop pretty easily.
She has good walkthroughs of all the jumps, simply replacing the actual jump with a backspin. If she feels the need to she has one of her students come over and demonstrate.
She could certainly demonstrate singles and even doubles- she's very young. But she doesn't. -shrug-
-
I very much appreciate that my coach can demonstrate figures (all the way to Eighth) and I find it helpful that she shows me (and her other students) all the MITF, footwork patterns, dance patterns and etc. However, it's her ability to explain something 55 different ways, her ability to make astute corrections, and her amazing insight into skating techniques that makes her a fabulous coach.
In sum, it is important that she demonstrate certain elements but it isn't vital to her teaching effectiveness.
-
Am I correct in remembering that you are a low-level skater who doesn't take lessons, Query?
Yes. I can't afford it right now, and the coach I like best teaches a few hours away, which adds to the cost. I would like to take lessons again. Upon occasion, I sign up for group lessons (e.g., ice dance clinics).
I did take lessons, groups and privates, for about 10 years, from several coaches. I never took more than one lesson from someone who couldn't show as well as tell, and eventually dropped a coach who could show very well but was frustrating for me because he didn't describe things very well (maybe because English was his second language?). At peak, when I had two coaches, I practiced 20 hours/week, before and after work.
My not being a great skater has nothing to do with my former coaches, one of whom has produced Olympic competitors. I didn't start anything serious athletically until I was about 30, and started skating when I was almost 40. It is hard to become a good athlete in middle age, especially if you have flexibility limits.
---
Mishin and Lussi both had a basis for coaching:
Mishin was a Soviet National Champion pairs skater and won a World Silver medal - see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexei_Mishin
Lussi may not have competed, but had been a very good athlete and took figure skating lessons from a top professional with the specific goal of becoming a world class coach - see what someone else just quoted
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustave_Lussi
---
When I volunteered to help at a local rink, I came to realize that most of the kids were largely unable to connect words with actions. Below the middle teens or so, they were pretty much monkey-see monkey-do learners. I honestly don't see how a non-skating coach could teach them anything.
On the other hand, some of the best teachers of beginners I have seen weren't even as good skaters as me, but were school teachers. Clearly teaching is a skill which is not completely correlated with athletic ability. But they were teaching within their own ability levels.
---
But let me ask you folks a question: All other things being equal, given a choice between a coach who can show and tell, and a coach who can do only one, who would you choose for yourself?
-
Which one has a better attention to detail? You can show and explain what I should do all day long but until they can explain in detail what is incorrect and how to fix it, I will only be frustrated. Both of my coaches are articulate and can pick out what is wrong with the element that is making it poor/unstable and understand the physics and biomechanics of skating to be able to tell me the correction. One has the added bonus in that he can typically show me the mistake and correction as well
-
I'd rather have someone who can walk through and tell me how to do something correctly rather than my spending the bulk of the lesson watching and trying to figure out why I can't copy them. It doesn't do me any good to watch if I'm the one who has to do it eventually.
Another point to consider is that CW skaters are fewer, as are CW coaches. While I can spin and do up through a half-lutz CW, I often have to resort to demonstrating CCW for other elements with CW students. It's better to walk through on the proper edges and checks, especially with a student who's not so great at distinguishing left from right or inside from outside.
-
I very much appreciate that my coach can demonstrate figures (all the way to Eighth) and I find it helpful that she shows me (and her other students) all the MITF, footwork patterns, dance patterns and etc.
My coach demonstrates high-level MITF and dances as well. She also does the MITF spiral patterns with full extension and leg-above-hip, which is impressive compared to the other coaches who do not really demonstrate spirals at all.
Another point to consider is that CW skaters are fewer, as are CW coaches. While I can spin and do up through a half-lutz CW, I often have to resort to demonstrating CCW for other elements with CW students.
I watched my coach do a CW backspin once for a student- it looked like her natural side until I realized she was on her left foot. I try to get myself to spin CW, but I usually give up.
I prefer walkthroughs as well. I was never a visual learner, so I also like being given full explanations- what edge, how to move leg, how to use arms.
The major reason I could not do a salchow for months and months is because everyone kept demonstrating it and did not explain that I was supposed to deepen the back edge and be half-turned around before jumping. They would just tell me it was a waltz jump after a 3turn. And finally, one day, a random coach said to face the wall, 3turn face the other wall, then face the original wall again before jumping. And allofasudden it made sense.
-
Here's a good example: my coach was badly injured last winter & hasn't been in skates since. He coaches from the side, & it works just fine.
Another one: my highest student is on novice moves; I've passed juvenile. But she ROCKED her intermediate moves test, and she's doing very well w/ novice and should hopefully be ready to test them in late winter.
One more: I share a student w/ another coach. I mainly do moves, presentation & dance with her, the other coach focuses on jumps & spins. I never went beyond singles. Yet I can fix her axel if she's lost it, and now that she's working on doubles & struggling, I came up w/ an exercise for her to try last night that took her from popping a double attempt every time, to staying pulled in & landing 1.5 revs & finishing the revs on the ice, and staying over the right side. Big improvement there. Now, I don't mess with some things that I feel I don't understand well enough. But, I can effectively help her along because I know what I'm looking at and what needs to happen for it to work.
btw, I have spent HOURS poring over videos, books, message boards, etc., to glean out every tiny bit of info I can to help me learn more to be able to teach better. And it clearly is working. I also know my limits & won't teach beyond my level of understanding the theory behind the movement.
-
When I volunteered to help at a local rink, I came to realize that most of the kids were largely unable to connect words with actions. Below the middle teens or so, they were pretty much monkey-see monkey-do learners. I honestly don't see how a non-skating coach could teach them anything.
Hmmm ... Patrick Chan ... his first coach was Osborne Colson. Definitely not demonstrating doubles on the ice. He died in 2006 at age 90.
Anyways, remember that everyone has different learning styles. That's why different coaches suit different skaters. Some skaters are visual learners; some are body/kinesthetic learners; etc etc etc. Some need coaches to demonstrate a jump then mimic it, others need coaches to move their bodies thru a jump or move, then are able to copy it; others need coaches to "talk" them through the steps. Thus, the answer to this "should he/shouldn't he" need a skating background will vary based on the skater; the coach's ability to communicate effectively; the coach's ability to understand what s/he has never done (there are those who can only teach what they have done themselves because that is their own personal learning style); and, frankly, the coach's simply ability to coach. I know many skaters who were landing triples - but can't explain how or teach them to someone else - and others who can't land triples but are able to instruct, correct, and explain the technique to being able to coach it.
However, I do agree that you need to know the "language of skating" - if you don't know what a mohawk is, or what a salchow should look like and how it should be executed, you have no business coaching it.
-
Mishin and Lussi both had a basis for coaching:
Mishin was a Soviet National Champion pairs skater and won a World Silver medal - see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexei_Mishin
Lussi may not have competed, but had been a very good athlete and took figure skating lessons from a top professional with the specific goal of becoming a world class coach - see what someone else just quoted
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustave_Lussi
Neither of them did triples, etc., which is what the OP was asking about; coaching beyond one's own ability. Lussi developed his own theory of skating & he is pretty much responsible for a lot of the way we do things today, such as crossed feet in the air.
-
Hmmm ... Patrick Chan ... his first coach was Osborne Colson. Definitely not demonstrating doubles on the ice. He died in 2006 at age 90.
Anyways, remember that everyone has different learning styles. That's why different coaches suit different skaters. Some skaters are visual learners; some are body/kinesthetic learners; etc etc etc. Some need coaches to demonstrate a jump then mimic it, others need coaches to move their bodies thru a jump or move, then are able to copy it; others need coaches to "talk" them through the steps. Thus, the answer to this "should he/shouldn't he" need a skating background will vary based on the skater; the coach's ability to communicate effectively; the coach's ability to understand what s/he has never done (there are those who can only teach what they have done themselves because that is their own personal learning style); and, frankly, the coach's simply ability to coach. I know many skaters who were landing triples - but can't explain how or teach them to someone else - and others who can't land triples but are able to instruct, correct, and explain the technique to being able to coach it.
However, I do agree that you need to know the "language of skating" - if you don't know what a mohawk is, or what a salchow should look like and how it should be executed, you have no business coaching it.
Some of the best coaches aren't necessarily the best skaters. In finding things hard, they learn through their coaches the techniques to correct things. In finding things easy they don't go through the analytical approach of learning what their bodies are doing. In learning to analyse their bodies coaches are then able to watch and analyse their skaters bodies, hence the ability to then coach beyond your own level.
My coach admitted that she hadn't learnt to coach through her own coach. She'd found it too easy as a child. But she spent time learning to analyse and is now a good coach (in my opinion). I've been doing figure loops with her recently which she'd never taught before. It was interesting watching her trying them out on the ice and trying to work out how to explain what she was doing. But I could equally have had a verbal explanation and then corrections to my attempts. But as Figurespins says, it depends on your learning style what technique works best for you.
-
I dunno. My first coach never did a spin or a jump for me, but she explained herself very well, and it just didn't matter, even though I'm a very visual learner. She would demonstrate body position, posture, free leg position, hip open/closed, etc.
Another coach would demonstrate everything. Sometimes it helped, sometimes I knew or suspected what she was doing was not correct and sometimes it was useless.
Not one of her students could do a backspin. She could, and would demonstrate it endlessly (to the point I felt like my lesson was backspin practise time for her) but it did not help me at all.
My last coach can do, and very well, but demonstrates only when she deems it necessary. Which is probably just as well. Watching her could be discouraging cos she's soooo far beyond what I could ever hope to do.
-
Mishin was a Soviet National Champion pairs skater and won a World Silver medal - see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexei_Mishin
Yes but at the time, they were doing doubles and "easy" triples, not high triples and quadruples.
-
Thank you everyone for your insights. Part of my original question was wondering about the overall trend, would you please share your guesstimate about the following:
What percentage of intermediate skaters are coached by skaters who passed the intermediate test?
What percentage of novice skaters coached by novice or above?
Junior? Senior?
Obviously the percentage will drop dramatically from intermediate to senior. But right now I have absolutely no clue what range will it be... Your thoughts are greatly appreciated! :)
-
Only a formal study could give you answers to percentage questions - and such a study may not have occurred.
What you can ask coaches is what percentage of them are teaching students above their own level - and it is important to distinguish between what they can do now and what they once did.
I skate in the Washington, DC suburban area, a center of government, wealth and power. Many local parents and skaters with the money for athletic lessons have an extremely competitive and status-conscious nature. They crave qualifications with words like "Olympic", "Worlds", "National Champion", "Gold", etc., and coaches come here from all over the world to meet that demand. There are a few other areas like that, but it can't be typical.
Figure skating directors and often restrict who is allowed to teach, and seek coaches whose skating and coaching careers sound impressive, as do club officers who regulate who can coach in club-sessions. Since there are such coaches available in our area, others probably have a hard time finding places here to teach, and move elsewhere.
So when I find that the majority of local coaches I've met were at least National competitors or close to it, the sample is biased.
People like Mishin or Lussi are also so atypical of the average coach that it is meaningless to the majority. There are people in any field who are just incredibly good at teaching. They typically take an extremely well organized systematic approach to teaching, and they often study the subject they are teaching so well they know virtually everything that they can possibly know about both the subject, and about how to teach and the psychology of their students. They often create the textbooks and methods of teaching that other teachers use. It is quite possible they - who represent a tiny fraction of a percent of professional teachers in any field - can teach well many students whose abilities exceed their own, especially in sports, where physical limitations and childhood background apply, regardless of how hard you try.
When you look for coaches for yourself, to some extant you have to figure out for yourself what you need in a coach. If you are a teacher, you should figure out who you are able to teach well. In the end, if you please your students, that is mostly what counts.
But I still think it is appropriate for coaches to inform students with serious skating dreams that someone else might teach them better, if true - and that you don't mind if they take trial lessons with others.
-
If coaches could only coach the moves they had done themselves, nobody would be landing quads, or even triples, for that matter. The most important qualifications for a coach are (1) an understanding of the physics of figure skating, i.e., the relationships between edges, lean, angular momentum, open vs. closed body positions, etc., and (2) the ability to communicate that information to the skater in such a way that the skater is able to implement those techniques and make the necessary corrections.
I agree, and I do think that learning at least the fundamentals — all the single jumps, a few multi-rotational jumps — is important. I certainly think that a coach who learned a toe loop or a double could teach a triple and quad, but a coach who never did a toe loop, teaching a toe loop? I'm less confident in that.
-
I agree, and I do think that learning at least the fundamentals — all the single jumps, a few multi-rotational jumps — is important. I certainly think that a coach who learned a toe loop or a double could teach a triple and quad, but a coach who never did a toe loop, teaching a toe loop? I'm less confident in that.
This is about what I was thinking.
I can do an axel and a few double jumps. Most spins, all of the turns. I passed Junior moves and have worked on Senior, but without passing (yet? ha..). I hope my students get beyond my own skating level and I feel confident in my ability to take them there. My own coach is very good and she has helped me develop a good understanding of the mechanics of skating. I have always been able to see errors pretty well, so I can make appropriate corrections.
Some high level skaters have trouble teaching low level skills. I noticed even when I started teaching that I didn't remember learning how to do a three-turn, I just did it. I remember learning axels and double sal chows, so all of those key words are fresh for me, but I wasn't sure how I learned to do a backspin.
Coaches that don't take the time to analyze and understand an element won't be able to effectively teach it, regardless of their own skating level.
-
Some high level skaters have trouble teaching low level skills. I noticed even when I started teaching that I didn't remember learning how to do a three-turn, I just did it. I remember learning axels and double sal chows, so all of those key words are fresh for me, but I wasn't sure how I learned to do a backspin.
I'm not a coach, but that's happened to me too- not remembering how to do backward stroking. My mother also asked me about something she saw other kids do which I identified as crossrolls- I do crossrolls in warmup sometimes, but frankly, I've only worked on them in a group lesson maybe once, a long time ago, and I don't know if I'm doing them right, so I'm not about to teach them.
What about the new mitf? Can a coach learn loops and twizzles quickly enough and well enough to teach them?
-
What about the new mitf? Can a coach learn loops and twizzles quickly enough and well enough to teach them?
I can't speak for anybody else... But, I have been doing twizzles and loops in programs for a few years now, so they are not completely new to me. I would feel much more comfortable teaching twizzles than loops. I have spent some time with my coach on loops so I can better understand how to teach them, but I would not feel comfortable teaching them just yet. After my competition next month, I plan to spend more time working on them so that I can teach them effectively when my students get to that level. As there are many coaches that did not do figures, PSA will likely offer seminars on loops and twizzles over the next several years. A coach that makes an effort to learn the technique should be able to teach them. Luckily for me, my students aren't at the point to learn those skills, so I will be able to learn it before they get there.
-
I see more problems arising when coaches "think" they can teach elements that they never did or don't remember learning, like loops and twizzles. There's a coach at one of my rinks who's doing this now; she admitted to me she doesn't remember how to do loops because she passed the figure test with them when she was 12 and hasn't done them - or thought about them since (more than 25 years). As a freeskater she never did twizzles at all and doesn't really understand the techniques. But she's teaching them - wrongly - to her skaters and wondering why the girls are having so much trouble with them. (Duh!)
Of course it's possible to teach elements beyond your own ability level (Gus Lussi, the legendary guru, never skated!) but it takes a lot of conscious effort and study to learn the physics and mechanics behind each move - and then translate that into terms that students can understand. I don't see a lot of coaches at the club levels who are willing to do that. Kudos to those who do, though.
-
with regards to loops. I entered a competition a couple of years ago which required a series of 3 loops. On the UK tests we only have BI loops. My coach hadn't ever taught loops other than the test ones and of course it's now over 20 years since she passed her figures test in them. It made for an interesting lesson as she had to work out how to teach them. For me I didn't mind the messing about as it put us both on a par for once as it was more the way you show your friend a move and then get them to copy... However, I did notice that she was analysing what she was actually doing and translating that into teaching words to explain it to me. OK I couldn't ever pass a figures or moves test on them at the moment, but I do now have all 8 loops.
What really did impress me was how she was able to analyse her own body movements which are second nature to her, explain them and then analyse what I was doing wrong. As others are saying remembering how you learnt how to do a 3 turn might be difficult, but analysing what you're doing now and explaining that to others is the real skill in coaching.
-
My coach takes lessons from top coaches for her own skating purposes, and is testing up herself. She goes to camps where top coaches teach. She can demonstrate everything up to a double salchow but she doesn't usually do more than a lutz in lessons (for obvious reasons :P). She's the best "skater" out of all the coaches at the rink. That's why I chose her. If you cannot demonstrate things, you are no use to me. Not only is the demonstration good to get the mechanics through to the skater, but seeing the coach do the skill also helps instill more confidence in the skater (the "ah, so it IS possible" factor).
For example, Audrey Wiessiger made a point on ICS that when she is preparing a student for quads and triple axels, etc. she likes to bring them to competitions or rinks where skaters practice and land the jump because of hte "ah, so it IS possible" factor. Seeing other skaters (or coaches) do it is a huge confidence boost and gets a lot of "nerves" out of the way.
-
I guess I'm in the minority here. I really don't think it's important for the coaches to be able to do or demonstrate an element. I think it's more important for them to have a fundamental understanding of figure skating and a great ability to transfer their understanding into teaching format. I do think it's important that they have skated or continue to skate and it's crucial they continue their education. Do you have to have been able to do a quad before you teach one??? I don't think so!
Take gymnastics for instance. I've never seen one high level gymnastics coach demonstrate anything! I don't think it's necessary at all however I do believe they need to be able to teach and coach (there's a difference there....maybe a topic for another day).
-
She's the best "skater" out of all the coaches at the rink. That's why I chose her. If you cannot demonstrate things, you are no use to me.
Learning styles differ. I teach many things I cannot do, and that's fine with my students. I don't jump, so I have videos of jumps on my phone. I'm very analytic and am constantly searching for new ways to get ideas across. I also have a very good eye for what has gone wrong in a failed element. If I get a student who really needs to see things I can't do, I recognize that I am not the best coach for that student, and recommend someone else. OTOH, I know several former Olympic competitors who can't teach beginners to save their lives, and have made no effort to learn how, even though they have to teach LTS.
-
I think you have to find the coaching style that works for you. If the "Look at me show you what to do" works for you, fine. However, a student who can listen to feedback and effect the changes/corrections will progress faster than a "mimic" skater because their lessons are more productive, assuming their coach can explain well.
FWIW, I've seen many of the best "skaters" turn out to be the worst instructors/coaches. Their students never manage to "pick up" that wonderful skating because it's not self-taught: the coach's coaches are the people you should seek out instead of a personal demonstrator if your goal is to mimic the person's skating.
Even better than a coach demonstration is for the coach to draft another skater with good form to demonstrate it while the pro narrates and highlights key points. It's difficult to talk when you're performing the jump/spin because you turn this way and that. I like the video idea, sk8dreams. That's a great idea.
Another point: some skaters figure they can stall or avoid something difficult if they ask for a demonstration. It takes years of coaching experience to spot the slacker move, lol. When it's obviously a stall tactic, I will say "It's YOUR lesson. I don't need to do it for the third time. It's more important for YOU to try and fail than stand around watching me skate."
I can learn by watching or by listening. Sometimes I do both - it's the best of both worlds.
-
OTOH, I know several former Olympic competitors who can't teach beginners to save their lives, and have made no effort to learn how, even though they have to teach LTS.
Many adult skaters at my rink avoid group lessons taught by a former World Champion. I managed 2 lessons and switched to a different time slot.
People value different things from lessons. I absolutely adore my Coach because he has great eyes and a drill for nearly everything. Does not bother me at all that he no longer demonstrates anything due to old age. If I need to see demonstrations there are videos on skating technique.
I wonder how high level skaters' priority list looks like when it comes to coaching change! =)
-
If you cannot demonstrate things, you are no use to me.
Wow, that's harsh, especially when you go on to say that Audrey Weisiger brings her students to watch jumps being performed ... not she actually performs the jumps herself. You must be a visual learner, and any coach worth their salt would figure out how to best teach to your learning style - much like Weisiger.
As for "monkey do, monkey teach", I've seen with my own eyes how untrue that is. I know of a former Worlds competitor who was landing up to triple loop in her prime. Her own students after many years of teaching have never had any "big" success - they finish middle to near end at Regionals and I haven't seen one land a double axel. It doesn't mean she's a bad coach, just that elite skating ability does not equal elite coaching ability.
-
Here's a thought...if "monkey do, monkey teach" really worked, everyone would be able get all their triples by watching youtube! LOL
-
Here's a thought...if "monkey do, monkey teach" really worked, everyone would be able get all their triples by watching youtube! LOL
Well there ARE visual learners out there, especially younger children. It's just the importance of live demonstrations ranks differently for different learning styles. :)
-
Here's a thought...if "monkey do, monkey teach" really worked, everyone would be able get all their triples by watching youtube! LOL
I believe this is also a factor of the level of skating. For example, my kid has been able to watch Youtube and the like and self-teach spin variations, transitions, and certain jump entries (successfully, according to the coach who does further refine them as they progress naturally); however, that is on top of a solid grounding in technical ability. Thus, it's a new "twist" on something already known, combined with a knowledge of how certain effects are possible. A few years ago, as a much junior skater, I doubt that would have occurred.
Similarly with my other kid and ice-dance. At this point (working on Senior Silver dances, which is Killian/Blues/Paso/Starlight) - she can watch youtube etc to pick up timing, rhythm, and step sequences. However, I doubt she would have been able to pick up the Dutch Waltz on her own :)
-
I can't speak for anybody else... But, I have been doing twizzles and loops in programs for a few years now, so they are not completely new to me. I would feel much more comfortable teaching twizzles than loops. I have spent some time with my coach on loops so I can better understand how to teach them, but I would not feel comfortable teaching them just yet.
I see more problems arising when coaches "think" they can teach elements that they never did or don't remember learning, like loops and twizzles.
with regards to loops. I entered a competition a couple of years ago which required a series of 3 loops. On the UK tests we only have BI loops. My coach hadn't ever taught loops other than the test ones and of course it's now over 20 years since she passed her figures test in them. It made for an interesting lesson as she had to work out how to teach them.
Thanks for the answers! I was pretty curious because I see my coach doing them but I never see anybody else other than the mitf coach doing them. Maybe both of them already did loops/twizzles in competition or ice dance or whatever.
As for the demonstration, if I get lucky my coach demonstrates a wicked layback, or a half-camel or half-sit. She calls over other students sometimes to demonstrate doubles, not very often though. Part of the reason I got stuck on salchow in group lessons though was because nobody actually explained to me what a salchow was..
-
I believe this is also a factor of the level of skating. For example, my kid has been able to watch Youtube and the like and self-teach spin variations, transitions, and certain jump entries (successfully, according to the coach who does further refine them as they progress naturally); however, that is on top of a solid grounding in technical ability. Thus, it's a new "twist" on something already known, combined with a knowledge of how certain effects are possible. A few years ago, as a much junior skater, I doubt that would have occurred.
Similarly with my other kid and ice-dance. At this point (working on Senior Silver dances, which is Killian/Blues/Paso/Starlight) - she can watch youtube etc to pick up timing, rhythm, and step sequences. However, I doubt she would have been able to pick up the Dutch Waltz on her own :)
I agree. As a child it all had to be explained to me in great detail. Now, as an adult with all of that technical background, I know right away what I am seeing, and I know what to look for.
Part of the reason I got stuck on salchow in group lessons though was because nobody actually explained to me what a salchow was..
I noticed you used the word "explained," but didn't say that no one "showed" you. ::>) :laugh: ::>)