or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Motor Learning Theory - Page 4

post #91 of 105
I have been thinking about Myers-Briggs personality types and how that affects an individual's learning style, especially concerning the sensing/intuiting and feeling/thinking dichotomies. This led me to the following article, which I found interesting and maybe you will too:
http://www.virtualschool.edu/mon/Aca...ingStyles.html

I thought it was interesting (and corroborates my experience) that some people like to approach learning from practice to theory and others from theory to practice.
post #92 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by nolo
I thought it was interesting (and corroborates my experience) that some people like to approach learning from practice to theory and others from theory to practice.
I think one of the basics of motor learning* should be considered in context with learning from theory to practice: The availability of external information for motor learning (explanation, demonstration ...) lasts only a very short time (short retentivity), so the learner has to be given the opportunity to transform this information immediately to his own movement.

Another basic to be mentioned - every movement which is learned, profits from the experience of the preceding one. This is called the effect of motor co-learning = mitlernen(ger.) and is constitutive for non static, non technique oriented, but diversified learning.
*Source: Bewegungslehre-Sportmotorik (K. Meinel / G.Schnabel, Sportverlag Berlin)
post #93 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by skifex
Another basic to be mentioned - every movement which is learned, profits from the experience of the preceding one. This is called the effect of motor co-learning = mitlernen(ger.) and is constitutive for non static, non technique oriented, but diversified learning.
*Source: Bewegungslehre-Sportmotorik (K. Meinel / G.Schnabel, Sportverlag Berlin)
yes... this is (I believe) what the Italian ex-WC racer used to change my short turns... The run of short turns was quite isolated... but gained from the previous lesson elements....

Austrians and Italians I have skied with seem far better at integrating these elements into lessons than many others...
post #94 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by disski
yes... this is (I believe) what the Italian ex-WC racer used to change my short turns... The run of short turns was quite isolated... but gained from the previous lesson elements....

Austrians and Italians I have skied with seem far better at integrating these elements into lessons than many others...
disski, I don't think this is a matter of nationality but probably a matter of expierence and transdisciplinary interests. Instructors who are quite fresh in their job often have a different focus on particular movements in context with the overall concept to expierenced players. In their instructors training they are taught a string of exercises and only with gaining experience they can vary this programs on individual preferences, but also expierenced instructors sometimes can get caught in their routine of a static scheme. Ex - top level racers, so long as they love to teach, have the advantage that their approach to a certain problem is mostly very individual based, as they never learned anything about skiing in a group lesson or from a scheme.

Often the problem with one special matter, like advancing in short turns, is caused by basic misapprehensions, so if the basic problems are solved, short turns might be easier but other things which seem to be isolated from the specific exercises could gain as well. So good instruction is a bit related to solve a differential equation it requires to differentiate and integrate, and I am sure that there are instructors doing so are findable on the whole globe.
post #95 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by disski
this is (I believe) what the Italian ex-WC racer used to change my short turns...
OT - just a personal question, whom you were skiing with in Italy, as I know most of my former racing colleagues who are instructors I am only a bit curious
post #96 of 105
Lorenzo Galli(??sp)

Not long retired from WC I think - from Livigno - he works there now and grew up there....

The guys in the hotels etc etc tell me he does not normally teach adults - only instructors.... They also told me he raced WC - he did not. I skied with a young guy for a couple of lessons and also with another instructor for group lesson one afternoon. I think they decided I would like skiing with him and arranged it. It worked - best lessons I have had in the last few years.
Very precise about exactly WHAT the problem was and where in the turn. Then quite simply set about fixing what he saw. No flowery additions or fancy stuff... just simple straight out coaching. I guess it is closer to that than the conventional "lesson" as there was not really a set "plan" or system etc. As english is not his native language there was not a lot of fancy talking. However he is VERY capable of communicating what he is seeing and wants done. Also very good at approaching the problem from many aspects - visuals, technical, feel of skis, tracks in snow, what you tried to do, what really happened and why it happened that way... I struggle with "show and do" stuff ... and although he did nice demos he was so NOT reliant on the "show and do". I had no problem with anything he asked I was able to achieve some semblance of achievement at each task set - no frustration.
post #97 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by skifex
disski, I don't think this is a matter of nationality but probably a matter of expierence and transdisciplinary interests. Instructors who are quite fresh in their job often have a different focus on particular movements in context with the overall concept to expierenced players. In their instructors training they are taught a string of exercises and only with gaining experience they can vary this programs on individual preferences, but also expierenced instructors sometimes can get caught in their routine of a static scheme. Ex - top level racers, so long as they love to teach, have the advantage that their approach to a certain problem is mostly very individual based, as they never learned anything about skiing in a group lesson or from a scheme.

.... So good instruction is a bit related to solve a differential equation it requires to differentiate and integrate, and I am sure that there are instructors doing so are findable on the whole globe.

yes - I have skied with ones from many different places... however if I have to take pot luck on an instructor I find my best bet at finding one with the above abilities seems to be when I pick a staatliche... Mind you we probably do not get a heap of very old complacent ones travelling to Australia for a summer ski season. Also for an australian instructor to study in the austrian system requires a fair bit of devotion. This tends to shift the odds in favour of the more obsessed I'm sure.

However we get instructors from many countries and this does seem to hold - that the austrians are the best bet for an impromptu instructor.... Canadians with high level cert or good racing etc background are often a good bet too...(I skied with a great one that was an ex moguls skier) However I would never ski with a csia that was not at least a level 3 - I know too many csia level 1 and 2 friends that I do not want to ski like!

The more experienced australians often have certs from more than 1 country - these folks are often a good bet too - diversity of outlook seems to help avoid the rut! I have ski school check the certs in the computer - variety seems a good way to choose - as is race or race coaching background for some weird reason (I hate speed but they are good teachers for me)
post #98 of 105
I would be curious to know, skifex, if you consider yourself as a teacher to be "student-centered", "subject-centered" or neither of the two...
post #99 of 105

stance and music

"Does this info imply that mogul skiing technique should be altered to respect the deficiencies inherent in this posture or is this posture unavoidable when mogul skiing?"

This is a complex question that I don’t think can be answered simply. I am sure I don’t have the answer in fact. Although what I am saying is the professional mogul skiing stance, and I am talking about the low back here, not the feet, is more upright and therefore more protective of the acl, and it allows the hams to be active, through their range of motion. A rounded lower back does not, it tips the pelvis and in essence put more slack into the hams, combine this with the fact that this muscle group is weaker than it should be for most people, or at least not balanced, it enhances acl risk.

Current world class racers do not round their lower back for just this reason. Their shoulders may round, but the upper body is kept more in alignment in order to be powerful. Their are also striking simularities between world class sprinters and their posture and world class bump skiers, the posture is about the same.

As an aside with all the talk about Dan’s book I bought it as well. I found it disappointing there was nothing there that I don’t teach, or that isn’t taught through PSIA methods, but I not interested in fighting about that. I am glad to support the effort, but I think the title is disingenuous, and a metaphor for some of the problems of the snowsports instructor profession.

The book could have been much better in my opinion if he spent a lot more time on the money move, absorption/extension. Getting that move is the barrier for most people’s critical path to zipperline. The tips are good but they are tips, the drill is good, but come on ski instructors don’t teach that?, it doesn’t really get most people there from here. You need a plan for development. A book about absorption/extension would have been more useful. (Or at least a expanded chapter) I am sure Dan knows much more than was written on those pages and I am sorry he didn’t share it.
Mogul skiing is an example of the barriers people have to go beyond to execute a move, fear, not knowing how they ski, not knowing what clues/feedback they should be receiving from the snow common roadblocks to expect and how to get around them.

The music question.

Movements can be changed and things can be learned, but not all. Neuro muscle example one :singing need I say more, the ability to develop voice is lost for most people very young largely due to lack of use. anecdote two: I play the banjo, poorly. When I started I was told to anchor my right hand with my pinkie and my ring finger both. I cannot do it. I can anchor with my pinkie but my ring finger moves too much when I am playing to make it useable. I tried with enormous effort to make it stay down on the head. I taped fingers together I taped them to the head, I slowed my playing I did exercises, I tried for about a year and I play almost every day. It destroyed my playing until I gave up and now I just use my pinkie. Is it what I want, no, but its what I can do. I still make the attempt from time to time but as of yet no success. Having said that proprioception, even in the disease state can be improved through effort and adaptation. In general terms there are requirements for this type of training. I think it might be interesting to talk about only one in the sense that it is a roadblock to muscle memory and improved proprioception, and it is used often: rationalization.

Rationalization is modeled by many ski instructors especially in peer clinics. It sometimes sounds like: Well I do that because, I wasn’t paying attention, we were supposed to do what?, I don’t understand because of my learning style. How many instructors do you know think they are doing something they are not and you know if you tell them it will be met with disagreement and resistance, and varieties of other defenses. Ski instruction can in a sense, no pun intended, coach proprioception, but that coaching is usually most effective when the student is using motor skills they already possess, assuming fear or other emotions are not an issue, resistance happens when things need further development, and new pathways need to be blazed. Of Course this isn’t everyone, but it is amazing what people have access to if the barriers can fall. I was reminded of this again the other night while watching a news program about handicapped musical individuals. There was one person that I found the most edifying for the purposes of this discussion, he was blind and retarded because he was premature not because of any genetic defect and his piano playing and virtuosity was fantastic, yet he couldn’t even goto the bathroom on his own. He didn’t resist the music he became it. In a sense this music anecdote is more hope than reality.

Another example: I have a friend who I have skied with since I started skiing in 92. He has always felt that PSIA is not a good path for personal development for all the reasons that everyone has heard before. He was, and remains very into mogul skiing, so much so that he only skis on mogul skis. He has desired to learn the zipperline style and has practiced for all these years, watching tapes, hanging out with the mogul skier’s etc. He can ski about 5 to 7 bumps before he is out of control and bails out, he stance is way to short and he never absorbs. Harsh ? perhaps , true absolutely. He never got better. Worse recently when he was viewing a dvd I had called just good skiing II he thought the skiers on the film "weren’t that good". He has no idea how he skis or what good skiing looks like.

That the rub for most people, how can you change if you don’t know what you are doing in the first place.
post #100 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by nolo
I would be curious to know, skifex, if you consider yourself as a teacher to be "student-centered", "subject-centered" or neither of the two...
nolo, I don't understand what you mean with subject-centered. Could you explain please?
post #101 of 105
The teacher is as much a student of the subject as the students in a subject-centered philosophy. The teacher doesn't pretend and is not expected to be a know it all about the subject who then reveals his or her special insights with students. Rather the teacher piques the students' curiosity to know more about the subject through his or her own passionate interest. As Socrates said, love is the unquenchable desire to know our beloved better (I paraphrase). As Squatty Schuler said, "I don't teach people to ski. I teach people to be skiers." The first is a student-centered purpose, the second is subject-centered.

If you are interested in learning more about the subject-centered approach, I recommend The Courage to Teach by Parker Palmer (1998).
post #102 of 105
I believe that good pedagogy should not be shortened by technical language or schematic advice, the teacher first and foremost has to show his identity as a human being and not to hide behind a method, a pin or a ski school uniform. Teaching and learning for me is a wholeness, where all participants are at the same eye-level. As skiing belongs to the most important things in my life, teaching for me means to share my love for skiing with others.

I believe that the teachers profound knowledge on coherences to define a “method” for each individual student is the most effective way of teaching. So I can’t answer the question if my appearance is student-centered or subject-centered, as I am not familiar with the terms. Also I am often asked if I teach in the style of Montessori or in the anthroposophic way of Rudolf Steiner – there might be similarities in one or two things with some educational philosophies, but I have not discovered a method for teaching yet to put my TM on , because I never would give up the freedom to learn from each problem in ski developement, each turn of myself and each student and use this knowledge for the next.

As a mother of three kids I have learned another important thing - free education should not be understood as an issue of "laissez-faire", you allways have to recognize responsibilty for what you are doing and the safety of your students - sometimes this might cause authoritarian descisions, especially when skiing with a group off piste.
post #103 of 105
Based on your description, skifex, I would unequivocally say that you fall into the subject-centered camp, which is as I expected.

That philosophy presages that no single theory of any subject, including teaching, can possibly explain everything that there is to know about it. Only the subject knows all that there is to know about it--we can only approach this knowledge through the subject (not through the teacher, though the world of teaching is chock-full of charlatans who make their living convincing people otherwise). Again, I firmly believe that teaching is not a matter of transfering my knowledge to you but rather of infecting you with my curiosity and enthusiasm to know more. Therefore the single most important quality a teacher brings to her task is authenticity--the ability to be 100% genuinely myself, to accept myself, to share myself without holding back--even the fact that I am toiling alongside as a student of skiing and that anything I might teach you will be trivial compared to what you learn yourself.
post #104 of 105
Nolo, I see although we live and work on different continents, snow allows similar ideas everywhere. I am often confronted with a lack of understanding of instructor colleagues, if I hold the opinion that praising students for their efforts has less to be done by the teacher than more by the own feelings of the student (to the subject) as you call it. By that sometimes students get so occupied in self discovering skiing during a lesson that they completely forget about me – for me a good sign that my work was done well.
post #105 of 105
Exactly!

Piggybacking on something you said earlier
Quote:
free education should not be understood as an issue of "laissez-faire", you allways have to recognize responsibilty for what you are doing and the safety of your students - sometimes this might cause authoritarian descisions, especially when skiing with a group off piste.
I'd add that it isn't "anything goes" either. The critical thing the teacher adds to the experience is structure, framing the learning experience and keeping it contained within those boundaries, so it can be wrapped up for taking-home later.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching