A Junior Coaching curriculum

I know that there are programs that get the coaches' education thing right.

But in many programs, junior coaches are just left on their own: no education requirements (even though there are lots of opportunities from ISI, PSA, and USFS). No mentoring. Sometimes they're put on classes by themselves. Sometimes their own coaches use them as subs-- how would you like to pay for the highly credentialed freestyle coach and end up with the inexperienced junior instead? Happens all the time.

Coaches that I have spoken about this with almost universally tell me (sometimes rather patronizingly) that "kids learn how to coach from taking lessons". So, I've been to second grade, I guess that means I'm qualified to teach second grade? And that's how old some of these kids were when they learned these skills "in lessons".  I remember when my daughter started teaching and came home one day asking, how in the world do you teach a swizzle? Because she had learned it when she was 3--for her, it was like trying to explain to someone how to breathe.

I can't think of another profession where you jump from student to pro with no training in between.

The Professional Skaters Association is working on the problem through programs like Excellence on Ice, where rinks get benefits if the entire staff are PSA members, through the Entry Level Coaching Course and Apprentice Program, and through a comprehensive national education program. But until rinks insist on teaching credentials and not just skating credentials, you might not even know if you've got the pro or the junior.

Several years ago, at the request of my Skating Director, who knew I was interested in this issue, I created a Junior Coaching course. Being able to implement this is one of the reasons I've always wanted that  Master Group credential from the PSA-- so that I could work with young coaches on this. Sadly I never got to implement it, as that SD left and the new one was not interested in training her junior coaches.

But I have continued to tweak the program in hopes that someday, someone will implement it. The basic outline of the course is as follows:

Participants must:

• Have passed at a minimum the in-class ISI FS 4 or USFS FreeSkate 4 test.
• Be at least 14 years of age.
• Have a signed parental waiver.
• Have a recommendation from a coach.
• Arrange an on-staff “mentor” among the professional coaching staff.
• Be an individual member of the Ice Skating Institute or USFS Basic Skills, and join the Professional Skaters Association at the appropriate level.
• Attend an Orientation Session.
• Be available for  a minimum of 4 hours up to a maximum of 10 hours per week, including at least one peak class session.
• Be available for each entire session.
• Attend at least one ISI, USFS, or PSA training seminar every 6 months.
• Participate in ice show rehearsals for Tot and Pre Alpha levels in any capacity deemed necessary by the Pro in charge.
• Work at the annual competition, including trial judging.
• Clock 10 hours (about 1 session) of supervised coaching at a given level before handling a class at that level on his/her own as a Junior Coach.

I suggested that all Junior Coaches start in Tot and Pre-Alpha classes where the need for additional staff on the ice is the most critical.  Based on hours clocked and mentor recommendations, Junior Coaches could then be assigned to higher level classes Alpha through Pre-Freestyle as they progress.  I also suggested that the mentoring relationship be a real one, with the Junior coach observing their mentor teaching higher level classes, and taking one-on-one lessons in teaching techniques.

Junior coaches would receive Community Service credit hours, discounts for rink programs, and priority in hiring over other similarily-qualified applicants, once they had audited or taught in at least 4 different levels, and had booked 100 hours in any combination of assigned classes or events, private lessons in instruction technique, audited classes, seminars, ISI or USFSA tests taken.

Sadly, I know of only one rink that has anything approaching this comprehensive a junior coaching program, and rumor has it that this much-vaunted program is more honored in the breach than in actual reality.

Does your rink have a comprehensive junior coaching program? 

How good is good enough?

A reader asks:

Should you enforce perfect technique at lower levels (and hence hold people back until it is perfect) – or should you accept that there are differences in acceptable technique depending on your level? My local rink has started insisting on proper technique for even for the lowest levels, such as properly bent skating leg and properly extended free leg for the outside curves (UK or USFS Basic Skills Level 4, ISI does not have a corollary to this), rather than passing them if they can just hold the edge properly for a set time. What they seem to want is the easier moves at the lower levels to be done at the standard they would be done by someone who had passed the top levels.

So what should a passing standard be?

All the curricula: ISI weSkate, USFS Basic Skills, UK Levels, and CANSkate, have very specific descriptions of passing standards for each skill, right down to "fall and get up" and all the way up to triple axels. Here's an example for the edge skill above, from the USFS Basic Skills book:

Forward edges held two times the skater's height, right and left forward outside. The edges are skated while moving in a circle. After balancing on two feet, begin the edges by placing the skating side arm and shoulder forward with the free shoulder held firmly behind. Pick up the foot on the outside of the circle and glide on a forward edge in a balanced position over the skating side for two counts (instructor will count)[NB- I gather for the UK, the skating foot must be held back in a stroking position]

Pretty specific and clear.

If I had my preferences, a strong skating director willing to hold the line with parents, and a culture that supported it, absolutely, every single skater should be held to the standard. There is a reason for it, namely that the next skill up (cross overs in this instance) requires mastery of the prior skill or it will be too difficult. I'm working with a hockey skater right now who has never been required to balance on one foot. Needless to say, he's having difficulty keeping up in games and drills.

I know that there are rinks that are able to hold the line, but this is what happens out here in reality:

Blame the Skating Director
This is where it starts. If the skating director caves when a parent complains, rather than backing up her staff; if she lets one coach pass according to that coach's standards (this also happens with coaches who are too strict; it works both ways), then your rink effectively has no passing standards.

Blame the Coach
This is the number one reason why rinks start getting reputations for poor skaters and low standards--coaches don't care enough to hold a kid back. They pass a kid on because they don't like her or because he's a disruptive student (not kidding). They pass their own students up, sometimes skipping multiple levels, as a marketing ploy, or to consolidate all their kids in a single level for their own scheduling ease or ego-gratification. Some coaches are just incompetent, and don't understand the passing standard, or can't teach it properly. Coaches should not be allowed to skip students without an objective panel, preferably comprising people who don't know the coach OR the kid, agreeing to it (even in recreational programs).

Blame the student
Each of the curricula have about 6 to 9 skills to master per level. Often, a student will perfectly master all but one of them, and I'll tell you it is really hard, in a recreational class situation, to not pass a clearly superior student because their t-stop sucks even though you know it's going to come back to haunt them.

Blame the program
Sometimes the student will be just skimming the passing standard--they need 2 more weeks, not 3 more months at the level. This can be dealt with by splitting every level in an A, B, and even C sub-level, but not all programs have the creativity or will to do this. As far as I'm concerned, this is the obvious solution--you feel like you're passing and you get a little ego boost. Rinks don't need to have entire separate sections for the As, Bs, and Cs; they can all be in the exact same class, just working on the skills at a different standard. Which brings us to...

Blame the curriculum
Rinks routinely divide up the cross-over levels (Alpha and Beta, or Basic 4-5-6) into sublevels, but for some reason stop doing this at the higher levels, which is just mystifying. If rinks would divide FS5 (Axel) for instance, into as many as four sub-levels, kids would not be complaining they are "stuck" because they'd be passing something. This would get rid of the parents' complaints that a child couldn't pass. It would allow softy coaches to pass a student who's just too cute to leave behind.

If the reader's rink or federation has decided enough with the fuzzy passing standards, good for them. I hope they can hold the line.

Why does it matter how I look

The recent posts on What to wear and What not to wear sparked a lot of debate, mostly along the lines of "why should it matter." I've written about this before, but it bears repeating.

This is a huge issue with figure skating and the other artistic sports, gymnastics and dance. Strangely, in the most artistic of them, dance, the body-type restrictions have started to be overcome through such forward-thinking companies as the Joffrey in Chicago, whose founder specifically sought out non-typical body types. They have had squat, and heavy, and bosom-y, and most notably non-white dancers in the company since their founding.

Inevitably when following a Twitter discussion, or just listening to the live media comments, at some point someone will bring up the costumes. If I had a dime for every time Dick Button mentioned that so-and-so is "a beautiful girl" I would be a rich woman.

These sports rely, for both scoring and enjoyment, on how they look. The problem comes when we overlay cultural definitions of beauty onto the successful execution of the skills. This is not the same thing as costume. For me, I want costumes to be neat, I want hair to be simple and safe, and I don't want to see undergarments, even on very young children.

The bigger problem is that while we consciously get indignant over costume--as one commenter put it "why should my daughter's undewear have anything to do with her skill"--we are unconsciously not even considering the fact that the judges are selecting, through gamed scoring, for specific body types. While judges tend to be pretty fair in testing situations, I maintain that even at the lower levels they will favor the look over the skills, especially when all other things are equal. The thin, flat-chested pixies start getting held up because judges like thin, flat-chested pixies.

We had an amazingly talented skater at our rink who grew a beautiful, full bosom in her mid-teens.

At which point her coach told her she was done, because she was now "too fat." Trust me, the ONLY fat on that girl's body was in her breasts. She still had the jumps, she still had the art. But her coach, and the judges, decided she didn't look right, and that's how they scored her.

I maintain that Rachael Flatt is a perfect example of someone repeatedly criticized not for her skating, but for her body type. A lot of the discussion was "no one knows how to dress that girl [to hide her sloping shoulders and thick middle.]" But what was meant was that she didn't look like our image of a skating champion. I really believe that consistent underscoring by judges was a way for them to get rid of this young woman who just didn't look right.

A generation ago they did the same thing to Surya Bonaly and Debi Thomas, who had the audacity to be black. The irony there, of course, is that the person who beat Debi Thomas at the Olympics was Katarina Witt, whom I used to call "hope for fat girls everywhere." Sometimes the talent really does trump the look. But like women in the board room, they had to be head-and-shoulders better than the sylphs they were beating.

The unfairness of this is maintained by the scoring system--where there is a tie (rare in the IJS but common under 6.0)--the performance marks break the tie. If the technical mark broke the tie, as it should, you would start seeing a wider range of body types, and probably more consistent skating as well, as skaters and coaches started realizing that they couldn't rely on the more subjective component (i.e. the artistic) score.

Children should not be fat, but frankly if we stopped excluding the fat ones from praise for taking part in the beautiful sports, maybe some of them would start feeling like they could be fairy princesses on the ice too.

I still don't want to see their undergarments, by the way.

To compete or not to compete, that is the question

There's one at every rink--a fantastic skater who can't win a competition because the jumps just aren't there. Maybe she falls, maybe the jumps are small, or underrotated, or she doesn't have the doubles, or the triples that she needs.

One skating mother asked me whether it makes any sense for a skater to quit competing and focus on the skills for a while instead?

It depends. It would be impossible to make a blanket judgment, but in general I would say, no. A skater who wants to win competitions, who wants to go to Nationals eventually, needs to keep competing.

However, at the developmental levels (through Novice), competing, and especially winning, should never be the focus of the skating career. They call these levels developmental for a reason. A major club competition like Broadmoor, Detroit or DuPage, a local club competition, and regionals is plenty of competing for a skater who needs to work, to develop, skills. You may have seen the headlines the last couple of years about skaters who have medaled at every level, or won a developmental level twice. This sort of thing makes headlines because it is rare--developmental level skaters--Juvenile, Intermediate, Novice--are notoriously volatile. Skaters move up and down the ranks is wild disarray.

There's a certain value to staying in front of the judges--not just you but also your coach. Your coach is learning what the judges think about you, and getting advice on how to help his skaters develop. Further, however well you jump in practice, putting those same skills out there in competition is a completely different animal.

Being able to compete well is a skill in itself.

Competing is also a good way to get an unbiased assessment of your improvement. Especially with the Code of Points scoring system, you can actually see, by increasing or decreasing point totals, and through the very detailed protocols (which mark each skill in isolation), whether and where you are improving, devolving, or struggling.

This mom is right that preparing for competitions takes away from practice time, especially if the skater is like most skaters with limited time, scarce financial resources, and non-skating interests. The skating world, in fact, divides the year into "Rest, off-season (early and late) pre-season, and in-season." You never never compete during Rest, and you need a really good reason to compete during Off-season. So you should always work a long stretch of time--3 months or more--during the year when there are no competitions to distract you.

One of the things that concerns skaters and their parents is losing time--getting stuck at a level for multiple years. Skaters stay at a level for numerous reasons. Foremost, because in most cases there's no rush. Even if a skater ages out of Juvenile (at 13?) and ends up skating Open Juvenile for a couple of years, they are still competing and improving, and have plenty of time to compete a year or two at Intermediate. Coaches will often hold even a successful skater back if they are young for a level. This has happened with the last 3 Intermediate Men's champions- all in their tweens, the coaches kept them at their level, to allow their bodies to catch up to the maturity needed for the more challenging Novice level. Skaters below these lofty heights can also stay at a level, to bring their repertoire up to par.

How long do you stay at a level, if you're not doing well at it? First, define "well." With Code of Points, "doing well" no longer needs to mean "winning a medal." Doing well can now mean all positive GOEs, or increasing point totals, or full credit for jumps that you used to underrotate. If you don't compete, you're not seeing these very important assessments of your skating.

In other words, winning medals, especially at the lower levels, is not the only value in competing.

Bigger and better things

Every rink has its stars-- the girls twirling center ice, that all the little girls want to be like. The ones with the moms who seem to know what's going on. The ones with the "big" solos, and the "Good Luck at Regionals!" signs in the office window.

But a rink is a small world, with its own heirarchy. The girl who seems so amazing in your little corner of skating might or might not shine in a more competitive arena.

So how do you know--when does the 'switch' happen from local skater to bigger and better things? When do you go from one coach to an arsenal of coaches? Does your coach say something? Does your test or competition level have anything to do with it?

The easiest test is an honest assessment of your ability-- are you, in fact, the best skater at the rink? Are you winning or placing in competition? Do you have higher level and more consistent skills than the kids you are training with? If you are, if you're really the "best" skater at your rink, then you don't have anyone to live up to, or anyone nipping at your heels. This is not the best situation for a competitive skater.

We saw a huge jump in ability with our national dance team when they stopped training at home and started traveling to a rink where there were people better than them. Suddenly they couldn't rest on their laurels; they had to be as good as the people around them. If you're already better than the people around you, you need to find a more competitive environment, to give yourself something to push against.

There is no hard and fast rule about where this happens--as young as Pre-pre, as late as Senior. We recently had a mass exodus of Synchro skaters because they realized that our small program couldn't push them hard enough--they were already at the top of the heap. Some of them may be back; but some of them will find themselves skating better than they ever have.

If you are content, or even like, being the best in your rink, then good for you. You don't have to go anywhere.

It's just the one skill

Unlike private lessons, skating school curricula have sets of skills at each level that you must master in order to pass to the next level.

In the USFS Basic Skills curriculum, each level contains testable skills that are critical for the next level (backwards one foot glides at Basic 4 before backward cross overs at Basic 5, for instance). The ISI curriculum contains all necessary skills for the "macro" skills within a single level, but the principal remains the same--you have to have the building skills before you can acquire the macro skills.

So what if a skater is missing "just one skill." Do you pass them on an "average?" Do you let it go?

ISI PreAlpha, Basic 1, 2, and 3 contain more or less only "building" skills, and no "macro" skills: forward and backward two foot and one foot glides, and marching or "push-and-glide" (weight shift from one foot to the other while moving forward), swizzles, one-foot pumps, forward to backwards two-foot turn, scooter pushes on a circle. I think everyone would agree that the ability to move forward on the ice and generate a two-foot glide is pretty basic, and that a skater that can't do this shouldn't move on.

But what about that one-foot glide? What if a kid does it really well on one foot but not at all on the other? This is the most common problem with kids on the cusp in these beginner levels. Well, next level, Alpha or Basic 4, is forward cross overs in both directions. If you can't balance on one foot, how are you going to cross? The building skill is necessary for the macro skill. I hate having to waste time in Alpha 1 class (much less Alpha 2) teaching kids this skill that they were supposed to master in the beginning level.

The next macro skill is backwards stroking and crossovers. Basic 3 and 4 include backwards one foot glides; again, this is necessary to the completion of a cross over, even the unfortunate swizzling ones that they allow in Basic Skills (snark snark This is the biggest problem with Basic Skills- USFS makes fun of the "ISI crossovers" with a lift, but ISI kids understand the weight shift in a backwards crossover better in my opinion. /digression). A good ISI teacher (that would be me) adds this Basic Skills skill into Beta class- gliding backwards on a circle.

How about t-stops? T-stops are stupid, and why do we have to do it in both directions? Well, that's essentially your hip/foot position for the mohawk turn in Gamma. Can't hold the "T"? You're gonna have trouble with the mohawk.

Both curricula are constructed to lead to later skills--proper bunny hops lead to proper waltz jumps which lead to proper axels. Proper understanding of 3-turns, equally strong in both directions, with the free hip held back, will make back 3s at FS4 or FreeSkate 1, and brackets at FS5 much easier. If you enter your ballet jump or mazurka with your toe pick facing forwards, you'll have difficulty learning a proper toe loop, and you'll never get the double.

Especially in the lower levels (which I count as thru FS3), every skill must be at minimum passing level, and preferably better. The more time you take with the basics, the easier time you'll have with the higher levels. A lot of my kids go through Alpha or Beta or Gamma 2 or 3 or even 4 times, but very few of them spend more than one session in FS2 or 3, because their basics are strong.

It's not just one skill. It's the bottom of the pyramid, and it needs to hold the whole structure up.

Reverse sandbagging

We've all heard of sandbagging; i.e. holding a skater back from testing so that s/he can compete at a lower level and mop up the competition. It's a reprehensible thing to do. Rinks and coaches get away with it through a variety of rationalisations: "We just have very stringent standards." "She usually competes USFS, so we haven't taken the ISI tests" "We didn't have time to get a test session in before the competition deadline."

A more puzzling phenomenon is what I call "reverse sandbagging," or passing a child ahead because you think she's got potential, because she managed to squeak through the skills at the current level (without having a review to make sure she's got the skills from the prior level) or some vague philosophy of where a child "should" be based on age.

I'm not sure what drives this phenomenon. The age thing has been presented to me more than once, with an assurance that "we've added extra lessons to help her catch up." (Alarm bells going off here-- how about leave her in the $9 class instead of the $40 lesson? Then she'll actually learn the skill and not have to catch up.)

There's the coach who wants to look like a good guy and not hold a kid back, or who wants to seem like s/he knows more than that other coach that didn't pass you. I myself have had kids who rocked a test and then come back the next week unable to put their own mittens on, let along show me a decent crossover.

Disagreements between class coach and private coach can happen too, in both directions. At some rinks you only have to pass one of any test you take to move up. At others, if you take 2 classes of the same level, both instructors have to pass you. I've worked at a rink that never allowed free style testing in class. You had to test before a panel--skating director, class coach, private coach--and all three had to pass you. Another system uses indepedent tester who don't know the skater. None of these systems keeps the disagreements from happening.

But these are all just observations. Every single coach you talk to will tell you that they NEVER do this. They NEVER pass a skater who isn't ready.

So here's my solution:

• If you're the parent, educate yourself about what skaters can do at each level, by watching the class and judging who seems competent and who seems lost. Remember that in skating, all passes are a "D." We rarely do what is called "passing over" (i.e. over the passing standard). You don't need an A to pass. If you're not sure, ask a coach what the elements are (or go to the ISI or USFS websites-- the skills descriptions are there.) If your skater seems to be consistently way better or way worse (not slower or faster mind you) than other skaters in the class, ask the teacher or your private coach about it. Ask the coach what "5 cross overs in a row" really means, or what a good 3-turn or salchow looks like.

• If you're a skater, especially a child, don't be afraid to let the teacher know when you're scared of a skill, or confused, or uncomfortable, or if you feel like you're getting left behind. If you're unwilling to talk to the coach, tell your mom or dad that you need help. Skating coaches expect a high degree of maturity from kids; we will be impressed by a child who shares his or her concerns.

• If you're the class coach with a skater who has been held back or held up, find a way to make the skills work for the skater within the context of the class. I feel that you cannot send a child back; once the child has been told they pass, you have to honor it, it's not worth making the kid feel bad. I also don't agree with skipping levels without compelling evidence that the child not only can do everything at the level they're skipping, but also know what everything is called. I can't be explaining what a mohawk even is in a Freestyle 1 class. I don't care if the kid can do it-- they need to know what it's called. At any rate, even in a large class, you can give a floundering or bored kid special things to do that help them.

• If you are the private lesson coach, you need to know who is testing your students and when. Especially if you don't want a skater to pass, don't leave it to chance. Go to the class coach before the test and ask how the skater is doing. If you feel they should repeat the level, ask the class coach not to pass them. Most class coaches will honor this unless there is a compelling reason to pass the kid. It would be nice if class coaches would check with the private lesson coach first, but this is impractical in most programs.

Every skating curriculum I've seen has clear, precise descriptions of what passing a skill entails. Every skating coach I've ever known has their own interpretation of what they think that means, and which skills can be finessed and which must be mastered.

Gadflies are useful beasts

Two things about me. I'm a little crazy. I don't suffer fools (or anyone else) gladly.

This combination means if you're an idiot at my place of business, I don't care whose parent you are, or how much money you make, or your place in the heirarchy, or who you are married to. If you're an idiot and make my job harder I'm going to call you on it.

Personally I think the world would work better if everyone would, well, not necessarily call the idiots for what they are, but question what looks wrong. And not just by snarking with your mates, but by going to the source and saying-- why is it like this, this seems wrong.

For parents, if you don't understand the coach's apparent approach to your child's training, ASK. "Why are you doing this?" Tell the coach what you've observed from other coaches and skaters and make your coach justify his or her approach. This is not the same thing as telling a coach to teach in a certain way. It's not the same thing as criticizing. Just asking for explanation in clear English. Then it's your job as a parent to make a judgment on whether you accept that explanation or not.

Case in point-- a talented child "cuted" up. I've learned of one particular child whose mother starting noticing that there were great huge gaps in her ability. She did the right thing and asked the coach about it. Coach's response was "she'll pick it up." Okay insofar as it goes, maybe she will, but will this coach demonstrate that? Will the coach let the parent know where the gaps are and what is being done about them? Or will the coach just say, let's add another lesson or two to catch up. Hmmmm. Methinks me detects a wee conflict of interest there.

Skating directors (if any of you are reading this)-- the coach you hear complaining is your best friend. Because believe me, we are ALL talking about the issue. The one with the courage to bring it to you should not be punished, but should be rewarded. Look into the issue, don't just shut down the complainer.

And my biggest pet peeve for last-- the skating director, coach, or rink manager who finds out a parent is complaining and says "there are lots of other rinks, they can just go somewhere else."

.

I have no words.

Measuring progress

A commenter thinks you can see progress more easily through the level of jumps a skater learns than through the more subtle measure of a clean edge and the control and power required by moves.

I see what she's saying-- the jumps are a clear marker of accomplishment, a big shiny reward. But the thing about the jumps, is if you don't do the subtle work that leads to body awareness and control, the jumps will be inconsistent and even dangerous. How much "progress" is it if the landings are out of control, or the skater keeps falling, or can't get the required rotation.

The most common correction you will hear a skating coach make is "get over your skating side." (Second only to "don't break at the waist.") The "skating side" is the side with the foot in contact with the ice. (The other side is the "free side," so you'll hear coaches tell skaters things like "move your free arm, bend your skating knee, etc.") Without your weight over the skating side you cannot get properly over the correct part of the blade. In jumps it is absolutely critical that you understand, in midair, where your skating side is. Even though nothing is in contact with the ice now, you still have a skating side. The axel is difficult because it is what we call a "change of axis" jump--your skating side or axis changes in midair.

In spins, it's also quite subtle. A lot of spins go wrong because skaters center their weight down their midline, rather than over the spinning blade. Feet are very close together, so it's tricky, but that tiny 2" distance between the blades is what centers a spin instead of it corkscrewing down the ice.

The only way to learn this is to drill it, and the best way to drill it is by practicing edges, turns, and stroking. When I see a skater with smooth, powerful stroking that accelerates down the ice, I know I'm seeing someone who understands jumping. When I see someone whose stroking is full of toe picks, stiff knees, and missed extensions I don't even want to watch them jump-- I already know it's going to be scary.

I like the big jumps too. But I also like effortless footwork. Skaters with big jumps are impressive. Skaters with outstanding footwork are magical.

Stuck

Lots of anxiety this week about axels and freestyle 5 at the rink and here online. One of the important things to remember is that everyone gets stuck somewhere. My own daughter, now a triple gold medalist (meaning Senior test in Moves, FS, and Dance) had a legendary stint in Freestyle 5: two and a half years. Nine. Sessions. She zoomed up to Freestyle 4, leaving all her age mates in the dust. And then they all starting passing her. And passing her. And passing her.

Yesterday I asked her, on behalf of a former student and her concerned mother, how she got past her fear of the axel. Her response made me understand how figure skating helped her to grow up. In the past I've attributed her increased maturity around this time to a coaching change which happened a few months after she finally nailed that jump, but reading this I think she probably did it on her own, and the axel helped.

I think getting over the falling thing is more of a maturity thing. There's just a point when you stop worrying about it. And that was even after I started working on my doubles. You just have to get over the fact that yes, you are going to fall and yes it is going to hurt sometimes. Just accept it.

The point is, everyone gets stuck somewhere. My former student "Patti" got stuck, incredibly, at Pre Alpha. This was an extraordinary child who found the maturity to reach inside and get over her fear, on her own, at the unheard of age of 6. Watch for her to be president someday. There are places where we expect kids to get stuck-- Gamma (mohawk turns), Freestyle 4 (sit spin), Freestyle 7 (flying camel, wally), and of course, FS 5.

In my opinion, the lower you get stuck, the better off you are. A kid that is pushed through the basic levels almost always has technical deficiencies relating to upper body control, basic understanding of edges and turns, and weak crossovers and stroking.

What you're working on here, as a skater or a parent or a coach, is enabling the skater to find that place inside where understanding clicks into place. You can't give it to her. But you can take it away, by rewarding the wrong thing, or punishing the effort.

From the keyword search

Here's what people want to know (the following phrases turned up on my keyword search list)

How long before my daughter tests out of alpha figure skating?
I've had students step onto the ice able to do cross overs and proper stroking, and I've had kids take 1 year to get there. A better question is "what should my daughter be able to do when she passes alpha?" She should be able to skate across a full sized rink with proper full blade pushes and leg extension. She should be able to do what I call a "true cross," that is place the crossing foot truly inside the circle so that her feet are side-by-side in the crossed position. She should be able to hold a two-foot glide in the position, and she should be able to uncross without pushing her toe pick into the ice. A strong alpha skater will have an undercut push, but I don't insist on this myself at the Alpha level as long as there is no toe push.

How fast can I move up in figure skating?
This is the skating variation of "how do I get to Carnegie Hall?" The answer of course, is "practice." A reasonable rule of thumb, however, is that with application and more than one time on the ice per week, most people (kids and adults) can progress two to three levels per year at the learn-to-skate/Basic Skills level, and one level maybe every 6 to 15 months (2 to 5 sessions) at the free style levels, with a long stop over at FS5 to learn the axel. (Take your time at 5.) For children, if you start skating by age 10 you will be landing doubles by the time you graduate highschool, provided you work at it. You can pretty much take that to the bank.

10 year olds at figure skating nationals
I'd love to know what this person was looking for! Yes there are 10-year olds at nationals, but mostly at Junior Nationals (Juvenile and Intermediate). There are minimum age limitations for the Senior Level at international (you must be 16), and national (you must be 15) competitions. As far as I've been able to find, there are no minimum age requirements at other qualifying levels. (Anyone have better info on this?) So yes, there might be 10 year-olds at Nationals, especially at the novice level. But I don't see the point-- what's the hurry? Coaches or parents in this situation-- why have kids skate so high so young? Let us know in the comments.

The other side of the coin

Okay, what if your kid is being held back?

I've talked a lot about kids moving up too fast, and it is the more common problem, but what about the child that needs to move through classes faster?

It's important for parents to remember that in group classes, the operative word is "group." These are not private lessons; most kids are not going to move at their own pace, they're going to have to normatize, to move with the class. Again, the success of this -- keeping the slow learners from feeling pressured while keeping the fast learners interested-- really depends on the teacher. A good teacher will find a way to keep all of the kids moving as close to their own pace as possible. For instance, if you're teaching a beginners class where some kids are fast and some kids are slow, you need to put them on a circle, rather than in lines skating back and forth across the ice, so that everyone can keep moving. There is always something you can do to make every child feel engaged, at every level.

If you think your child is the best in the class, don't move her up. For one thing you might be wrong-- she might just be the fastest one in the class. Or maybe the other strong skaters aren't there that week (this happened recently). But think about it-- your child is the best in the class. If you pressure the teacher into moving her up to the next level, she is likely now to be the worst in the class, and to not have learned the vocabulary of the next level, so she'll be lost. Would you rather your child take the lower level once and pass with flying colors, or get stuck twice in a level she wasn't ready for?

I get a lot of kids with strong athletic ability, but poor social skills-- can't stand still, can't follow through on instructions, can't retain skills they've learned without serious drilling. Don't just watch your child's skating skills, watch the whole child. I do.

Fallacy number two, "he already learned that." No such thing. Every skill can be learned at a higher level. Has your skater "learned" 3-turns? Fine, let's get him skating into them, or do running 3-turns, or alternating 3-turns, or bigger 3-turns, or really fix the rock and the check. Are you lost? That's because I know more about figure skating than you do, and you need to trust me to know whether you child should move up, or to keep him engaged at the level he's assigned to right now.

Think about where you're trying to move your child. I had a parent insist that her Alpha 2 student should be in Beta. Fine, I'm not going to stand here arguing with her. So she moved the child from an Alpha 2 class with 4 kids in it, to a Beta class with 15. Is she going to get better instruction?

Okay, full disclosure. There are kids that need to move up. I'll tell you. If they can't move up because of your schedule or ours I'll make sure they get the additional skills they need, or I'll propose private lessons. Every now and then there will be a child who can skip two levels. I've never seen a child who will benefit from skipping more than that, regardless of ability, because they miss all the vocabulary. I have an ongoing argument right now with the coach of a child who can "do" everything but you have to demonstrate and explain, and take away from class time for the kids who did the job and went through the levels. I should not be explaining Beta skills to a Freestyle 1 student, it's not fair to the other kids in the class.

It's complicated, isn't it. You just thought your child liked skating. And that's great. But let the coaches do their job, be engaged, ask questions. If you think your child is better than the other kids in the class, don't get in my face and make me do what you want, ask me if what you're observing is accurate. I'll be honest, I'll be kind.

But I'll want the kid at the level he's ready for.

Skills or tricks?

I started a new student today, a teenager with some talent, but limited time and only moderate patience for really digging into technique.

In any skill-based endeavor, technique is crucial, but sometimes I think it's okay to do something badly, that is, to not push through to be the best at some given thing. For instance, I love to cook, and I'm pretty good at it, but I've never felt like I need to have the technical skills of a chef, or to know the chemistry behind it, or be able to wield a knife like the sushi chef at Kamehachi.

So you can take skating with a grain of salt, and a toe-push or two as well. I asked my student whether she wanted to learn really great technique, or if she just wanted to learn tricks. She knew just what I meant, and told me she wanted to be able to do jumps and spins. Now, her technique is a little sketchy; her turns are clunky, and her edges wobbly. But her basic skating has a nice flow and she's motivated by her desire to jump. So I told her we would focus on skills, but that she needs to understand there are some techniques that you cannot skip, and some of them can be tedious to drill and to learn.

Each skater (and their parents) need to know what they want to get out of the sport. This can change-- I've seen skaters who started out just wanting "to skate backwards" go on to USFS testing and competitions, and I've seen high test competitive skaters turn recreational. But each time you get on the ice, you should understand where it is you're going right now. This is especially crucial for parents, whose goals may be different from the child's, sometimes out of ego, but sometimes just out of the fact that adults have a longer "dream" arc-- they can see the 16-year old doing triples in the 8-year old who just wants to skate with her friends. Both goals are correct, but they are not necessarily the same goal. They might be-- I've seen a lot of kids motivated by the idea of keeping up with their friends, too. But, again, that's a slightly different outlook from "win competitions." It might lead to that outcome, but the path is not the same.

A lot of coaches push for more serious skating than kids or parents are ready for as well. Sometimes the coach is thinking about her own investment. Securing a private student is time consuming. If that student doesn't get really into it, they might leave, and then you have to replace them. This, of course, is self-defeating. If I'm teaching the student what I need, that student will feel pressured and unfulfilled and will leave anyway. Coaches push kids into tests or competitions from ego, just as parents, and even skaters do.

Conversely, there are coaches who are emphatically not "competitive" coaches. I had a competitive daughter who moved to a coach who didn't do competitions. We didn't believe her when we switched, but guess what? She didn't do a competition with that coach until 5 years of coaching had gone by. That coach didn't do competitions.

Sometimes a coach will decide they're a certain "kind" of coach-- "competitive," "serious," "recreational" etc. And rather than refusing a student who doesn't fit that mold, they try to mold the skater into "their kind" of student. An ethical coach will ask you what your current goals are, and will let you know if this is compatible with the coach's goals and methods. Don't count on a coach to teach your student differently.

Long story short, know what you want. Know what your child wants (that's what really counts). And find out what coach is going to honor that.

An anecdote

Sisters in the same level, one is 6 the other is 8. The 8 year old gets the skills and actually skips a level. The 6 year old moves up just one level. (Let me emphasize that both kids move up at least one level.) The mother is incensed, and tells me, "I promised her they would both pass up two levels." (Based on what, lady? Your 20 years experience teaching figure skating? This work for grade school too?)

She then says to the child, but while looking at me, "don't worry sweetie. We'll talk to that other coach, and he'll pass you."

Next class, Dad comes in with both girls, and says to the new coach, "I'm a lawyer, and she better pass up a level by the end of the week." Or what, you'll sue?

Whatever folks.

Cute

First of all, they're all cute. So damn cute. I love the kids; I think in 10 years of teaching I've met maybe 3 or 4 kids that I just didn't like. And I always feel really guilty when I don't like a child. What kind of horrible person doesn't like a child? (And what kind of doomed child is unlikable at the age of 5.)

The dilemma for the coach then is making sure you do your job and not the parents' job. It is the parents' job to tell the child that she is the greatest thing since sliced bread and that everything she does is wonderful (to a point). It is the coach's job to separate her personal affection or enjoyment of the child and the child's ability to perform the skill at a passing standard. Passing a child because you like her and don't want to disappoint her (or her parents), or because you think she'll get it eventually, is not doing anyone any favors.

I always tell my students that I want them to feel successful on the first day of class, not the last day of class. If they can handle the skills on the first day of class, then success on the last day of class is guaranteed.

So what do you do if your child is passed too soon?

It's actually easy. Do nothing. Watch your kid. It's possible that she has not noticed that she's not as advanced as the other kids. The coach however will notice, and a good and compassionate coach will take that into account and give your child remedial skills to work on that will bring her up to the level of the class, without the child feeling punished or singled out.

If you're really concerned about it, talk to the coach. Some solutions are to just bring the child skating on her own (you should be doing this anyway). If you can't skate, find a babysitter who can -- ice rinks are full of reliable teenagers. Doesn't have to be a lesson, just babysitting on the ice, at babysitting cost. You could try signing your son or daughter up for a second class at either the old level, or the new one. You could do a couple of private lessons.

Up through the lowest freestyle lessons, "cuting up" is annoying but not a disaster. Kids really do figure it out and catch up, although some kids will never acquire the technical expertise they've missed (things like toe pushes, and poorly executed turns). It's a big problem after Freestyle 2 (half jumps, beginning spins) because the subsequent skills are complex and dangerous if your technique is poor, plus it's very hard to unlearn bad jump technique.

In the freestyle levels, get a private coach. Do NOT hire the coach that cuted your child up, even if they say they did it because "she's so talented, she'll get it" or "I didn't want to hold her back, she'll be bored." That is a great big giant red flag that a coach is more interested in your $35 dollars for private lessons than in your child's well-being.

And just to be clear, yes, your child is cute.

"She's SOOOOO talented"

If you hear this from a coach, regarding your child, Proceed With Caution. This is a coach who may have a one-dimensional view of your child.

This is not to say that your child isn't talented. But talented at what? Natural ability to perform figure skating moves? Meh. I never met a child who couldn't learn, and learn well, every skating move up to the axel if he or she practiced and worked at it. (The axel is a little trickier, and does in fact require some talent. But a kid without the talent or motivation is probably not going to get that far anyway. If your kid gets legitimately up to the axel, he's talented, QED. More about kids who get up to the axel non-legitimately in a future post).

At any rate there are all kinds of talent-- there's the kid with the natural affinity for skating moves. There's the kid with the analytical mind, who can break down steps and positions intellectually. There's the kid with a talent for learning, or listening, or the capacity for a lot of practice. But I most often hear coaches say "your child is so talented" just to the parents of the first type-- the child with the natural sport ability.

So, your kid likes figure skating, why hasn't a coach said this to you? Well, there are a lot of coaches like me-- I seldom seldom praise a child's talent, because he or she has no control over it. I like to praise the things the child does have control over-- a specific skill, or a skill learned quickly, or a skill mastered after a long difficult effort. There are also coaches who will tell you your child is talented because they want to be that child's private coach. (Coaches like this might also tell you that the child "can't learn anything in class" "is too talented for class" "has the wrong teacher in class" etc. Any coach who discourages participation in any classes except the ones he or she teaches is to be approached with a giant grain of salt.)

It's possible that I take this farther than I should, because I feel a lot of empathy for the kids that get overlooked, and for the ones that just plug away in the corner, doing the job and learning the sport. Every child is talented, and every child is worthy of every coach's full attention and knowledge.

The nice coach or the effective coach?

Here's a scenario-- your child is in class, laughing and talking with the coach, having lots and lots of fun, and he tells you that he "loves" the coach. The coach also seems to really connect with your child, and at evaluation time, passes into the next level.

In the next, higher level class, 3 or 4 lessons go by and your child is struggling. He's unhappy, he's not responding to the coach, and tells you that the coach is "hard" or "mean." And then the coach lets you know that he's struggling because his skills were not where they needed to be at the start of the class.

So which coach should earn your wrath? The "nice" one who let your child have fun without teaching him anything, and then did what I call "cuting" him into the next level? (That's a pass because the kid's so cute, you pass him for his bright eyes, and not his skating ability.) Or the "mean" one who insists on a child behaving and learning at the level he's been signed up for.

More in a future post on how to deal with your child getting "cuted" up a level. In the meantime, do you suspect your child has been "cuted" up? Let me know in the comments.

I like the teacher that passes my kid

I could post the stories, but it might get me in trouble.  The parent who had promised her child she would pass a level, when the child wasn't ready and I didn't agree.  The father who brought his child to class, stuck his nose in my colleague's face and said "She better pass this week, or I'll be talking to your director."  The coach who told a parent that her child was so talented that she could skip four levels.

So how do evaluations work?
Most rinks follow one of two national curricula--   Ice Skating Institute Learn to Skate or US Figure Skating basic skills.  These curricula have specific markers that let a coach know when a child is ready for the next level.  The curricula build on each other-- mastering one puts a skater on the path to success at the next.

    There is no accepted or standard rate at which skaters move through the levels. As with any skill-based endeavor, participants progress at different rates depending on interest, practice, and ability.   A very committed skater will move through quickly; someone who cannot devote as much time will move more slowly. A skater in private instruction will progress more quickly than someone who takes only the group classes, and always, the skaters who practice on their own will do better. If you take every level just once (this is rare), the fastest you will get to Freestyle is six sessions, or a little over a year.  Most children can make it to Freestyle in less than 2 1/2 years.  If your child starts skating at the age of 8 or 9, this means they’ll make it to the higher Freestyle levels well before high school, so don’t worry.

    If you really disagree with a pro’s evaluation, always feel free to ask the pro why you or your child received that evaluation, and ask what you can do to help your skater move ahead faster. In most cases, you shouldn’t ask a different pro to re-evaluate your child.  (The exception is in the case that your private coach is also the class instructor.  A skater’s private coach should not evaluate his/her own student.) The best person to perform the evaluation is the one who knows your child from all the time they’ve spent together in class.

    You can read about general criteria on line at US Figure Skating (look for info on Basic Skills Program) and the Ice Skating Institute (look for Learn to Skate).  Both links are in the sidebar.