trying to codify gp standards…
… would be a sad thing.
I recall some stuff about an ACA “Traditional” endorsement, and even a “Qajaq ACA” a couple years ago. Haven’t heard anything lately.
“McPaddling” approaches will always have some level of popularity on both the consumer and provider sides - but some things will always better shared and experimented with than them buying prepackaged.
I’m not against marketing G-Style goods and services at all, just against any systemization/claims of “right way”/“traditional”/“authentic”/etc.
Simplification and some sort of systematic approach can offer a great foundation/intro - (even loose mentoring contains this) but it can be a bit tricky to make sure that’s the take away message instead of “The syllabus says”, or “So and so says” and that’s the way it is! That level of reference/authority may work within the confines of the BCU or ACA systems to maintain focus and achieve their goals - but not so with G-Style paddling that comes from a different mentality and has different goals.
Body/boat variability
Yep, that last part sums up my current situation (stocky and not very flexible - and one kayak is pretty deep). Can’t do it without a lite scull in any kayak I own right now - but have done it in others (some quite easily) and totally “get it” as a foundation/reference point.
Now if I could only get my head around the chest scull/forward stuff! Waters here should be cooling below “soup” temperature soon and will make playing more fun again (how many wish they had THAT problem! L)
Assessor POV
Warning- this is mostly my opinion, and not necessarily an official stance of BCU or BCUNA.
Addressing some points brought up in this thread-
- How long? I have seen some pass a 3* 3months after their 2*. I have seen some take two years. As a gross overstatement, my feelings are that the ones that take longer before passing oft become more polished paddlers. The people I have most been impressed with are the ones that do not pass a 2 or 3*, then come back and pass. The reasons why they didn’t pass the first time become more apparent to both assessor and assesee. They are almost always much more confidently in control.
- “Official” training. There does not exist,in the current system, an officially sanctioned or recognized “BCU” star training, other than the current 5*. The new system will, as that has been a frequent request from learning kayakers. For now, what any BCU coach teaches in any star training class is based upon what the coach has observed as a consistent issue with those that struggle with passing- or it may take the form of a mock assessment (not a bad thing, since one issue is test anxiety).
- Please, it is an assessment, not a test, not a certification. The majority of learners, left on their own, practice what they are good at, and avoid practicing or learning things they are not good at. The purpose of the star assessments is to set reasonable standards that make one approach learning the sport comprehensively. Stellar performance in one area does not excuse one from dismal performance in another.
- It is an assessment- consider it like going to a doctor for a check up. It feels good when they tell you your health is good- isn’t it always worth the time/money to find it out? But we feel bad when we get the tongue lashing about…cholesterol, whatever. But we do want that info, right? Pass or no pass, everyone in my assessments get a lot of feedback on what to do next. For the first poster, having gone through a 2* is a big assist in going for a 3*.
- Usefulness of some assessment aspects. Believe me when I say a lot of time and a lot of voices go into establishing the standards. A…lot. Backwards figure 8? I think I see more about comfort and command in that, than almost anything else in a 3*. Usefulness? Huge. A common problem with those in a 4* assessment is control coming in through surf. The ability to back up aggressively and under control is key. Rescues in rough water, especially wind? Backing up. Turning downwind in high wind? Backing up. Eskimo rescue? It shows precise boat handling under a real time pressure that can occur in flat water. Ability to stay in the boat for a long time upside down, and stay oriented, is a gateway skill for learning combat vs pool rolls.
6)BCU non GP friendly… where does this come from? The standards for assessment at the 2 and 3* are about boat control, comfort level, and protecting the body. There are no “official” BCU strokes (indeed, there was a time when such a thing existed, when there were BCU Instructor certifications vs the current BCU Coaching certifications…another story). There may be critiques about trying things in different ways from many assessors, as many think there is only one way. We are trained to look for proper response of the boat, and maintaining a biomechanically safe position (under the new, upcoming scheme, coaches will have to have even more training in biomechanics than under the current system). I see many more people assessing 2-4* using GP’s, which is fine with me and the coaches I have worked with. I see fewer people assessing using long (240cm) standard paddles, which is also fine with me (now you may surmise my personal bias).
- Nitpicking. You better believe it. You should be coming to an assessment willing to learn, not looking for pats on the back. The feedback one gets is the whole point. It should not be surprising that those who passed get “picked apart”. I feel strongly that that is my job, to offer suggestions about areas of improvement. Bow rudders? The person who passes, but always does the exact same bow rudder will hear from me about making changes that add to their repertoire (which is better, blade as far forward, or blade close to paddle? Trick question…).
- Back to the main point, how long. It depends on the both the quantity and the quality of your practice. Practice mindfully, since if one practices garbage…
Practice with a lot of variety. Do not repeat the same manuever over and over. Do it slow, do it fast, change the radius, do it backwards (especially hanging draws, aka sideslips). Of particular value, I have seen, is using different boats and paddles. Try a sea kayak with a very stiff stern. Paddles? I recently passed a 3* candidate who used a rudderless sea kayak with a wing paddle. The bow rudders and hanging draws had to be done cross bow to be effective. Her comfort, precision, and autonomous response was jaw dropping. Interesting that, some time earlier, I had her in a class where I made her constantly change from a wing, to a GP, to a short standard paddle, to a long standard paddle. Her feedback to me was that that session made more difference than almost anything. Variety is the spice of life, and paddling is life to some!
Last point- what I look for during a 3* assessment is autonomous skill (google
cognitive/associative/autonomous skill acquisition). The 2* can still fumble a bit with choosing a proper response. The 3* paddler does not.
Karl
aca traditional endorsement still around
http://www.americancanoe.org/PDF/2007%20CKTrad.pdf
The above link has the syllibus for the traditional skills endorsement. Having the AMERICAN Canoe Association certifying instructors to teach GREENLAND style kayaking (which has traditionally been passed on in the spirit of mentorship) is just wrong. I only know of a couple people who have this endorsement and I can’t think of anyone aside from Mark Molina who was even assessing people for this endorsement.
I love coaching Greenland style kayaking and constantly strive to better myself as an instructor but there’s no way in heck I’m asking the ACA for their blessing for that. It’s really pretty silly.
I’ve seen both sides…
When a buddy of mine and I assessed 3* this past February with GPs, we were given a hard time about it which we didn’t really appreciate.
On the other hand, the 4* coaches we worked with afterwards didn’t think anything of our GPs and actually encouraged us to use them and had a positive feeling toward our skills simply because we were using them.
BCU as intended
Great post Karl. My experience has been that the most skilled coaches/paddlers in the BCU arena are quite open minded and not doctrinaire in the least.
This cannot be said of what I will call BCU groupies. Every organized group has its share so its not unique to BCU.
If anything, it seems to me there is a within BCU a desire for people to just go and play in boats to develop a rapport with and learn from them which along the way creates real competence as you become at home in the boat and on the sea.
As to the issue of “official” strokes, the best story on that I’ve heard is that a BCU type was telling one of the most senior coaches around, who happens to be well known for his boats and center in Wales, that a certain way to do a stoke was the “proper” BCU way. The response was immediate and when cleaned up went along the lines of, “If that is how the BCU says to do it, they have got it all wrong,”
Good stuff Karl!
Thanks for sharing. I particularly enjoyed hearing about the young lady with the wing paddle. I always had wondered if anyone could pass a 3* assessment with a wing paddle. I might have been tempted to try just for kicks but I’m not as intimately comfortable with my wing yet for all of the finesse strokes. A cross bow hanging draw with a wing… that sounds promising! I’ll have to try that next time I’m out with my wing.
Assessment tomorrow…
Thanks for an insightful post, Karl. Reading it was good for me as I think about my assessment tomorrow. I failed to make the 3* grade earlier in the summer, but it spurred me on to learn a lot since then. I hope that I’ve improved enough to make it, but know that however it comes out, I’ll learn from the process. By the way, I took my first 3* class 5 years ago.
Wish me luck - Alan
Studying for the test vs learning
Ah, but what about those 4* paddlers who passed the assessment but make you wonder how they did it? And under what conditions? I know a few like that and I wouldn’t trust my life in a 1’ let alone a 3’ wave with them.
There are plenty of people out there who earned their badges and are magnificant paddlers, perfect examples of training and ability at work. I passed my 3* quite easily and found that it was invaluable for laying the groundwork for rough water paddling. I know that when I’ve been hanging out in some rough surf or rocks that I’m thankful for all the time I put in practicing those boring backwards/forwards/sideways strokes in equally boring flat water.
As far as doing a training for 4* but not assessing and then comparing it to doing the “hard work” for credit in college versus maybe taking a course for the knowledge rather than that A you need for grad school: That’s a little harsh, don’t you think? Makes those who take the training for fun/experience/working with a top-notch coach for a day look like a bunch of slackers/weak sisters/brothers who can’t face the assessment music when push comes to shove. Yes, gaining that badge is a form of knowing where you are in the Star paddling world, but what if you do it on a day that’s borderline 4* conditions. You might pass because the conditions aren’t that challenging, but does that give you the same footing as some one who passed in big honking max remit waves and a force 5/6/7 wind?
Paddling is paddling. I’m BCU trained and will continue worshipping at the shrine. However,I also believe that you should get the badge for yourself, if that’s what you want. But don’t do it because “someone” says so, or says they don’t want to paddle with you because you haven’t met some standard (most likely theirs)or because you want to be like all your friends and you somehow feel left out. Train with which coach you want when you want and for your own gains, not the attainment of stars so you then think you’re walking the firmament with all those who have assessed before you. Ultimately it’s how you perform for yourself – and, perhaps more importantly how you care for others you paddle with – and not how many cloth badges from the UK (or, if you’re ACA, from the USA) you have stowed in your desk drawer.
Best wishes
My thoughts are with you on your assessment.
Thanks Karl
I appreciate your weighing in with the perspective from a coach. As to the training, I’ve had good experiences there even under the present system. I have encountered very little that didn’t seem to give me a lot of what I needed to be ready for the next assessment. Of course, it’s possible that my paddling is such a mess that I represent a really wide target.
I have been guilty of the cert thing - I’ll try to refrain. It is so much easier to type than assessment tho’, and assessment doesn’t condense well…
What are 4* Conditions?
I often hear this and people talk about being out and paddling in 4* conditions. As I read the literature, the assessment is to be done in conditions of force 2 to 4 with some slack given if worse. I don’t believe there is any requirement even in the 5* syllabus for conditions during training or prior experience to exceed Force 4.
So I’m just curious as to what people mean when they say 4* conditions as they tend to make it sound like they were out is some major sea state.
Anecdoctally…
It seems to be all over the place.
4 star assessments will be cancelled where conditions don't meet the minimum, as happened at the recent symposium in Bar Harbor. I've known of people who have assessed 4 star on a day where it started out with the remit conditions, but then went calm. In that case they had gotten far enough along by the time everything died that they were able to continue the assessment by revisiting and upping the ante on 3 star skills.
I have also known of people who got their 4 star on a day that was definately into 5 star conditions on at least wave height.
My take is that while the minimum conditions are needed for a go, assessments will generally run if the only problem is that the conditions are over the maximum.
it is an assessment, not a test,
Though I regualarly tell people it is to ‘assess’(evaluate) your skills, unfortunately the syllabi on the BCUNA site are titled “…Test”
e.g.
http://www.bcuna.com/PDF-Files/Syllabus/1-3-Star-Kayak.pdf
http://www.bcuna.com/PDF-Files/Syllabus/4-Star-Sea.pdf
http://www.bcuna.com/PDF-Files/Syllabus/5-Star-Sea.pdf
I also think the BCU diagram of a spiral consisting of the recurring triad of ‘train, practice, assess’ is effective.
conditions
this is one of the reasons why the skills are essential but the testing is neither reliable or valid--to much variation in conditions and assessor. we were playing recently out in the bars in bear inlet in nc where there are lots of 2 and 3 way zippers. a couple of 3* paddlers watched, the rest of us goofed around. tide reversed and winds went from force 2 to 4, so the conditions got a lot more fun (worse if you didn't like it) as the day wore on. my guess is that the same candidate on any given day could fail or pass, depending on conditions, assessor, and the paddlers state of mind. we all know that some days you can committ to the rough stuff, other days are better spent watching from safer water. if this is true, the test really isn't worth much as a test other than to fail persons who probably wouldn't be out there anyway or to pass paddlers who have clearly got skills approaching 5*, or put differently, there's inherently less variability in the outcome of the test when your skills are low or very high. one last observation: i know a lot of 4* paddlers, some are terrific, others know skills but can't paddle very well. in medical school there are kids who are superb on tests in years 1 and 2, and fail miserably when they have to make patient care decisions on the wards. conversely, all the 5* paddlers i know are really superb without exception. big jump from 4* to 5*. even if i were on the bcu ladder, and am not, i doubt that i'd get to 5* level though the training might be fun.
Jump from 4 to 5, validity
That's actually one of the things they are trying to fix with the next round of criteria, that the jump from 2 to 3 to 4 is pretty incremental but the jump to 5 is huge. Hence the new leadership stuff in 4 that tests one's composure in ways that knocking around in your own behalf in rocks doesn't, and the two day assessment which I suspect will come to our shores.
As to the validity issue - you are, I think, under-rating the judgement of a good assessor and over-estimating the need for large conditions for the talents of a good paddler to show. Overall I think the job gets done, especially since they don't run these assessments when things are fully under the minimum conditions.
If you want to have a system that provides assessments at all, you are stuck having to do this on a scheduled basis. The coaches as well as candidates are doing this inbetween full time jobs and family commitments like weddings and graduations. And the ocean just doesn't always cooperate on schedule - enter the most constant source of imperfection in the system.
Yeah there are individuals that have an award, not just in the BCU, that I've scratched my head at how they got it. But in terms of overall reliability on the water, those folks have been the exception.
I also think there is a tendency at some point to assume that a paddler has to evolve to being overtly aggressive in ways that are not necessarily within the intentions of the organization's system, and may not speak to an individual's attractiveness as a paddling companion. I know of a couple of paddlers who may not look fully comfortable in some conditions on their own, but they have been the first out of the box in the same conditions to handle a capsize. If I am the rescuee, I could care if they were comfy playing in the waves before they came out and saved my bacon.
Also, the new BCU system includes retest for the coaches/assessors. Most I know will retest just fine, but I suspect that there are some out there who will find that they don't get renewed.
hi celia
yes, had heard of these changes, which prove my point that the current system lacks reliability and validity for precisely those paddlers for whom it is intended. the larger issue, that certification, be it bcu or aca, is a means to an end, not an end itself, often seems to get lost in aca versus bcu or test or don't test arguments. i started up the bcu ladder, got 4* skills, and by that time was off into Greenland paddling. Just my course, great if others want to do it differently. Would really like 5* skills, but being 60 and working 70-80 hour weeks won't let that happen. good thing i like my work!
Assessment is a form of training
At least, I try to think of it that way. I usually learn a ton from assessment. Nothing like a bit of external and internal pressure to make things happen.
–David.
not as big of a jump between 4 and 5
most people think there is a big jump in conditions between 4 and 5. What really happens is that most people are assessed at the low end of 4* conditions.
There is a jump, but it isn’t all that significant.
I took place in a 5* training where a lot of people seemed to struggle. During the debrief someone commented on how tough the conditions where. The assessor very politely told the group that those were decent 4* conditions, but nothing crazy.
Good on you
You may be under-rating your relative comfort in a boat if the 5 star training looks purely fun to you. I know a lot of people, myself included, who have the capacity to be quite decent paddlers but view the 5 star work similarly to 4 plus WW. It’s great that others are comfortable out there, and philisophically it’d be nice, but the increased risk compared to the increase in personal paddling pleasure starts to tilt the wrong way.
Somewhere out there is a nice write-up on the 5 star training that Tom Bergh and I think Nigel D did, I think off of Maine, where a brand new just-delivered Explorer got hung up on rocks and turned into cardboard. (after the paddler had no choice for their own survival but to exit) They limped it home, barely, held together with float bags and duct tape. The first time Jim and I were ever at Maine Island kayak, met Tom B personally and started talking about getting our first glass boats, he pointed that boat out to us. It was still on the racks there with duct tape holding the bow on. That was also the first time we had heard of the BCU.
(But we went ahead and got the next boats and went for training anyway. So we have no one else to blame.)