I've got no problem with you at all. I'm only taking what you're writing as your opinion on the matter:
" I said back to stupid stuff instructors say . Habits of spewing common "truths' makes for poor instruction. "
Is this your experience that instructors are spewing common 'truths' ? If so, be specific. What have they been?
"Dogma is what we build judgments on. . "
People who are intellectually challenged do this.
" Some are good and some are much less so. the rules of Physics have been well considered by now and are dogma we can use. . We accept them as fact Outside of this what dogma isn't suspect. ? ."
Physics is not dogma. It's simple reality, well complex reality based on hundreds of years of peer reviewed research. Copernicus was not dogmatic. The church was.
" How about then instructional material from parent organizations ? That's dogma. Clinics with National and Divisional staff, that's dogma. "
No, the books are guides.They are updated periodically with new information and discard what is no longer relevent. If it were dogma, we'd all still be skiing like Stein. Dogma is stubborn and unchanging in the face of new evidence to the contrary. Clinics are also not dogma. They exist to help people be better skiers and teachers. Skiing has evolved as the question 'what is effective instruction and skiing outcomes?' is addressed over and over in many different national ski associations. Those that don't evolve lose relevance on the larger stage.
(See Copernicus above...)
I've seen dogma on skis. Here's a specific example: "Those bindings are crap *. There's no way anyone can pass an exam on those." This was said by an old school examiner to a young woman who was scheduled to take her exams over the next two days. She was in tears. I asked her what was wrong and she told me. I reminded her that he was also the importer of a binding that was getting killed by the competition, and then named a half dozen skiers she really admired that were on the same binding as she was.
I was told I couldn't pass because I didn't do two step teley turns. I told the person who passed that gem on to me, "where, and how many would you like me to do?" It was archaic crap left over from the leather boot and skinny (think XC skinny) ski days. Because I didn't, didn't mean I couldn't. Personally, I've always thought royal christies on teley gear would tell me a lot more about effective balance and versatility than a two step, but whatever.
What I find people complaining about the most is a task that killed them in an exam. Often it's jump turns. I know people who've passed their L2 with shaky ones, and L3's who do them marginally well. In fact, in our division, you aren't failed for lacking in an individual task, but in the case of jump turns, it most often amplifies the lacking skill sets that is usually apparent in other skiing tasks as well. GIve me a person prepping for their L3 that can do everything else, and I'll have them doing great jump turns by the end of the morning if not sooner.
If there's 'dogma' in alpine, it often has to do with stance width in my humble experience. Yes, I can give specific examples, but in the end, it's not difficult to demostrate the efficacy of varying one's stance width in different terrain/snow conditions. Having been involved in a couple of different ski organizations and racing, I know that the ski world is broad. I take from each experience and apply as appropriate... the 'wheat' and 'chafe' thing. In my experience, dogma in ski instruction comes from those who don't keep current and aren't thinking/learning themselves. Yes, I cross paths with this, but by and large, I ignore it. Anyhow, no problem with you at all, just wondering what experiences you have that lead you to think instructors are spouting off loads of BS.
* telemark stuff.... there is indeed loads of dogma in telemark, but not so much in the instructor ranks.
Edited by markojp - 6/3/14 at 4:59pm