|
Walter & Group...
[GH] Question : What would you mean, if you stated, “the candidate was well prepared for the CI test.” ?
Let's add a few more responses before summarizing :
[GH] From Jeff Wagner :
Gordy,
if a CI candidate is well prepared they will complete each task easily and effectively on the first or second attempt offering a brief explanation of the tasks function when prompted. They would give a short concise explanation on the explain and demonstrate portion and be able to further explain when prompted. Also, they should be able to pass the written exam.
The tasks are well outlined online and readily excessible. What they need to do to get to that point is up to the candidate and I believe we often make it appear more difficult than it is.
As Tom White told me, and I really appreciated "this is only fly casting"! In other words don't make it more complicated than it is or needs to be, we are teaching it to people who want to learn to fish not write an equation for component of fly casting or loop formation.
Reading a bunch of books and watching every DVD you can get your hands on (while potentially beneficial) may not be necessary. Knowing a small selection of literature is advisable only to increase the candidates breadth of knowledge, but this could also be gained from working with a mentor, being on sexy loops, etc.
Jeff Wagner
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] From Bernd Ziesche :
Hello Gordy,
I always would want the candidate to fulfill the requirements of each test like published on the FFF website. No more, no less!
If he passes the test he simply was well prepared. Otherwise why would he have passed the test? :).
As long as there is no specific requirement for a certain number of teaching experience in between the published requirements on the FFF website I wouldn't care about this point in any exam.
If a candidate knows more than being asked to know by the pure requirements = great. But this does not mean that others weren't well prepared in my book.
Greets
Bernd
----- original Nachricht --------
Betreff: CCI Candidates 3
Gesendet: Mi, 06. Jul 2011
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Question : What would you mean, if you stated, “the candidate was well prepared for the CI test.” ?
[GH] From John Till :
A candidate is well prepared for the CI test if she possesses the following understandings:
1. Is familiar with the FFF website and the CI test—it is most discouraging to have a person ask what I mean or what the test requirements are; those should be almost memorized. [I do not care how good she casts, if she hasn’t taken time to read and understand the material on the FFF website, I will not be impressed.] The applicant should be able to perform the casting requirements with an air of confidence , smoothness and ease.
2. Her oral answers to my questions or critique of my casting should be concise and easily understandable.
3. The applicant should be familiar with casting definitions—she need not be familiar with my definition.
4. When performing a demonstration of a certain technique, the applicant’s explanation and demonstration should be consistent.
5. Being a little nervous is expected, however, poise is needed in applicant. [I will try to put an applicant an ease and I expect that the applicant will put me at ease when providing explanations to me.]
6. CI applicants need not know, however, I expect that they will be able to explain the basics and why they suggest a certain methodology; e.g., what grip do they suggest that a student use, what grip does the instructor use and why? How does suggesting changing a grip result in a different cast.
7. The applicant should appear to be a professional, neat and clean.
8. The applicant should be on time and have the proper equipment—having a second rod, reel, etc. is a nice touch, sunscreen, eye protection and a hat.
9. The applicant should be prepared to provide different explanations or methods by which a particular task might be taught; for example, in teaching the double haul, the applicant might suggest a pantomime without a rod, then with rod alone, a side arm cast (allowing the line to fall to the ground after the forward and then the back cast), etc.
10. I often have students who will speak to me about something that they have read in an article or a book or perhaps that they have seen in a DVD; in order to properly assist students with their learning process, an applicant should know the various styles and have a working knowledge of the major fly casting experts.
a. In my area I often encounter students who will refer to Swishier and the microsecond wrist, Wulff and the power snap, Mel’s teachings and Lefty’s concepts, the Borger grip concept. I see no reason why the applicant should not be able to discuss each of those authors with her students.
b. Along the same vein, an applicant should be prepared to work with a student who casts side arm, off vertical and vertical. She should have thought about what to do when a person cannot perform casts in the usual manner because of a physical disability.
11. The applicant should be prepared to analyze a cast and teach the student how the student can improve his technique.
12. It is critical that the applicant remember that students want to have fun and the instruction should generally include the instructors ability to instill confidence in the student; be position and complimentary.
13. An applicant should know what she knows and what she does not know or cannot evaluate. It is permissible for an applicant, in connection with certain situations, to say “I do not know the answer or how to suggest that you might improve your casting.”
14. Lastly the applicant should be prepared to answer basic questions from students like “what equipment should I buy.”
I apologize for the lengthy answer and I do not mean to be a hard nose, however, as a professional instructor I believe that the FFF has set out certain standards. I will often work with a person for a substantial period when I know that they will not pass the test. Sincerely, John
John C. Till
|