Originally Posted by Alaska Mike
Ott, you and I are completely in agreement about his Truth. It just doesn't fit into the reality that is ski instruction.
You wonder why you don't have more upper level students in your programs? This is it. To draw those students you have to provide programs with more intensity, better continuity, and higher quality instructors. Programs that fit that bill are few and far between, and because of that good skiers look elsewhere. Also, many good instructors leave out of frustration over working in an environment that does not allow them to have as much impact on the skill levels of their students as they desire, and go to programs that operate more like I'm describing. You guys that have ditched the PSIA assembly line method of ski instruction for programs that offer more intense interaction with students know what I'm talking about, and I bet you wouldn't go back in a heart beat.
So the question is, knowing that the market segment PSIA caters to (non serious skiers) will continue to constitute the bulk of their student numbers, can those students be better served with a different model? Well, yes, it could. Would it sell? Would it work? No, probably not, on both counts. Students like the short cuts and the perceived instant results, and ski school staffs do not possess enough high quality instructors to effectively serve low level students in the manner that would be necessary to allow a better system to operate as designed. It's a conundrum, and I feel for you guys that are stuck in it and relegated to existing in a system that you know in the end produces large numbers of crappy skiers. Perhaps I shouldn't have mentioned it though. Sometimes ignorance truly is bliss.