The House of Commons

Dear instructors,
There are developments in material, technology, vision on motor learning and changes in the wishes of students. It is high time to test and substantiate. On Friday evening 24 February there will be a Groot Moduul on the Jaap Edenbaan.

The setup is simple. Statements will be collected in the coming weeks. You can do this below by commenting on this page and in the instructor room. It is important to formulate the statement briefly and clearly and to include your name. For the 10th, a number of positions are selected. These propositions are then explained by the person who presented them. All those present can then indicate whether they are for or against the statement and they are given the opportunity to substantiate their choice with arguments.

Of course it is important that at the end of the discussion that will undoubtedly take place, an expert gives his opinion on the statement and the discussion. There is really only 1 person who can be that. Jos Kras started his successful skating school Kras Sport in Haarlem in 1987, before Duosport!

Nice with a drink, bring on the theorems!


STATEMENT 1: Students who don't make progress year after year might as well quit.

According to the defender of the proposition, the goal of a skating course is to learn to skate better. If a customer* does not make progress, then the teacher should tell the student in an appropriate way that he or she probably has many talents, but that skating is not among those talents. The most important argument is that the student will probably no longer be able to enjoy it. An example that was mentioned was about a boy in Haarlem who came to lessons for the 2nd year and did not or hardly improve. After a question from the teacher, it came out that he really didn't like it, but that his parents had to tell him. Such situations should of course be avoided. In this statement, the largest group of those present was against the statement. The main counter-argument is that the students come to the ice rink with more goals than just 'learning to skate better'. The nice closing remark from Jos Kras was: “Who are we that we are going to determine whether the student should stop skating courses?”. That is really decided by the student. And if the teacher has difficulty with it, it is better to teach other target groups. * One of the attendees requested that the term 'customer' no longer be used. That is why I will use the word 'student' in the rest of the text.

STATEMENT 2: The instructor handbook site needs to be expanded with more exercises.

The contributor defended this statement mainly from the point that it is so nice to be able to use the fun exercises that another teacher has devised. Why invent the wheel twice? And especially for the novice teachers it would be a welcome. Because the 4 or 5 exercises per point of interest in the current manual are a bit meager. It was striking that by far the largest group was against this statement. Do not blindly copy exercises, but either come up with great ideas by talking with colleagues or get to work creatively with the skating technique and exercises. This choice certainly advocates the creativity and independence of the Duosport teachers! But nowadays everything is also searched for with the help of Google or other search engines. And in schools where full use is allowed of digital resources, it appears that the matter is discussed in much more detail. The searcher/user should not be underestimated. Of course, sometimes something will be taken over indiscriminately, but in general, the exercises found will be used appropriately and perhaps also creatively. And/So in my opinion also applies here: Better well sought (and found), than badly invented. Jos Kras emphasized: ,, Think carefully about what the student needs!”.

STATEMENT 3: Knowing what your body is doing is never good.

Attention to what the body has to do while skating 'de-automated', blocks and frustrates. I get inspiration for this statement from practice and also from science (sorry). If another argument was put forward: Look how a child learns!! Of course we assume that an adult learns differently, but an adult could also achieve great (- more?) results through more playful forms and distracting forms. In the counter camp there were indeed teachers who, in their arguments against, actually proved to be in favor of the proposition (balloon between the legs when coming over and playing the piano while skating). These are indirect forms of learning where the attention is not on the (skating) body. But perhaps it is also good/better to work 'indirectly' with 'indirect learning'. Fits the term! I would like to add one argument 'after the meal'. It is said: “One catchy image is worth a 1000 words”. To explain what the body does, you sometimes have to talk a lot (there is a lot of talk about skating!). Using a good imagery and/or example takes much less time. So much more can be done! It was striking that 3 of the 4 teachers present from Haarlem were in favor of this proposition. So an 'indirect learning enclave'! And the fact that many Amsterdammers were against it means to me that there is still a lot of work to be done!

PROPOSITION 4: If clap skates and high Norwegians were the same price, everyone would have to ride clap skates .

We have discussed such a point more with the instructors, namely whether children should learn to skate on clap skates or skates with some clap mechanism much earlier, at the same prices for the material. The distribution between the for and against group was approximately 'half and half''. The arguments were mainly fed by instructors who had experiences with students about, for example, instability of the clap skate or students who skated away on clap skates. There was no really decisive argument. Current in this is an article that appeared in a skating magazine with the view that with clap skates the sideways take-off is performed less carefully. Perhaps the statement is also a bit of a contradiction between 'progressive' and 'conservative'?. Fortunately, a scientific study was also mentioned in favor of the clap skate in children, which made voting 'for' a lot easier for me.

PROPOSITION 5: You learn to skate less well on easygliders.

In this statement, the use of easygliders is opposed to that of combinors. Most were on the side of the combinors. Also with this statement there were also examples both for and against the 2 types of skating. The decisive factor turns out to be the rapid success and thus fun with the combinors. So aren't the combinations an exponent of a fast food and zap generation? A little perseverance is no longer in it. And will the use of easygliders increase again if sustainability in society gains more ground as a result of the crisis? The sturdier look of the combinoor will also play a role. Underlying this, this more nuanced principle position also emerged: there is a group of children who have the motor skills to learn how to skate on easygliders. For the children for whom the experience of success with those skates has not been forthcoming for too long, it is always possible to switch to combinors. The following Saturday we were watching the scribble track with a number of instructors where children were being taught on easygliders and combinors. These images supported the above view. Whereby the undersigned wants to note that skating on combinors really looks more wooden (with stiff legs and butt to the back). It was noted, however, that the type of easygliders currently on the market are not ideal (ill-fitting straps, too wide and too wide irons)

PROPOSITION 6: Placement is a result of your sales, so you don't have to pay explicit attention.

The split here was again 50-50. Argument for: Skating is a cyclical movement where one part arises from another. Highlighting one of the components and paying explicit attention to it does injustice to the skating movement. But then everything will have to do with everything, e.g. push-off with pull, placement with balance and rhythm, etc. Argument against: there are several options for placement, e.g. more sideways, forwards, next to/below the lzp, etc. That can and should be done could be a point of attention or theme in the learning process. I was persuaded to join the proponents on the basis of the word "explicit." In retrospect I regret that. Even though the separate themes are related to and influence each other, in the lessons attention can be paid (= explicit) to one theme of the skating movement. That attention will then not have to be directed explicitly (= consciously) to the body, but in an indirect or implicit way of learning. Overlooking the whole discussion of the House of Commons, Jos Kras came up with the best statement of the evening: ,,In the end it's all about how as a teacher you teach others to have as much fun skating as you have yourself! ” So if you apply the above to the positions of the evening, it does not really matter whether you work from a manual, learn indirectly, have clap skates or have permanent skates, learn it on easy gliders and / whether you explicitly state the placement or not. approached, if you can only convey the joy of skating.

Here's a summary written by Joost Hes, our implicit booster