<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> But, I think the beauty of our sport is that there is no right way to teach a concept. Rolling ankles, knee, femur, are just different ways of accomplishing the same thing. As instructors we need to have lots of things in our bag. If rolling the ankles doesn't work, then moving the center of focus to the knee might work. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
No disrespect to this anyone intended, but just an FYI:
Options are beautiful, but while starting with the a rolling over of the foot and starting with moving the knee may result in the same leg "posture or appearance", biomechanically these are different movements that do not produce the same "effect or input" to the ski.
Let me explain, plain and simple.
The movement of rolling over the foot creates an edging input that results in the ski first changing edges while staying on it’s line. When continously applied, this action engages the kinetic chain which moves the knee/femur with a secondary resultant rotary effect after the ski is on it’s new edge, serving to enhance tip engagement pressure.
Conversely, moving from the knee first creates an initial rotary input to the ski (due to the fact that the only way the knee can move laterally is by rotating the femur), with a secondary, resultant, edging effect after the ski has pivoted when it flattened on the way to it’s new edge.
This is why skiers who roll the inside foot over first can easily scribe an arc with that ski, compared to those who move the knee first and skid it around on it's little toe edge in a diverging relationship to the outside ski. This is because the knee move produces rotary dominance as ski is twisted off its edge and it pivots as soon as it flattens on the snow.
I suppose one can train themselves to change the edge quick enough from the knee to engage it reasonably well, but why would one choose to "perfect" a more complicated and inefficient movement, much less teach it? The knee focus is only reasonably efficient if you intentionally desire to strongly redirect your skis when they flatten in the middle of the edge change. But then do it for that reason alone.
Either the knee or foot focus is surely an option, however, biomechanically these different movements that produce different results (that is why they are different movements, duh!).
While it is human nature I suppose that most people will always teach what they "think" works for themselves anyway, don't we need to really learn how we "actually do ski" before teaching others how we think "they should ski"? In this discovery process I'd suggest we consider to first focus on doing with our feet what we wish our skis to do, and then back that up with complementing secondary support activities as needed. Our body's genius is that biomechanically efficient results usually require only the simplest of movements by an extremity (foot). It is unfortunate for our students that our micro-world of ski teaching is plagued with the complexity of so many inefficient compensating movements (falsely masquerading as options) that at best only band-aid our failure to first ski with, and teach, the simplest and most efficient movements.