What grade of planner/organiser are you?

[graeme]

Good planning is inspirational....

About 5% of it is.

The rest is hard work. Test running the courses with an eye on the people who will be running it. Making sure the map is correct where the competitors see it (and maybe correcting it if not). Making sure the controls are in the optimum place: not just the right place (controller's problem anyway ), but optimal for sight lines on approach, routes out, whether you can get the bl**dy stake in the ground etc. Making sure the forest is as shown, and so route choices are fair (not necessarily balanced) and as shown on the map.
...and maybe even sticking to the guidelines.

It is true that none of that 95% will turn a bog-standard course into an inspirational one, but not doing it will turn an inspirational course back to mediocrity. It only takes one cock-up to spoil a course, no matter how good the rest is.

[andypat]

any sort of formal qualification = very very very bad

But it's alright/should be done for coaching?

Absolutely not. I know of a few potential coaches (myself very much included) who've been put off completely by the raft of unnecessary beaurocracy involved.

Have to disagree totally. I can think of plenty good orienteers who would be rubbish coaches. A coach is measured not by what he or she knows but by his/her ability to impart this information to others. I wouldnt send my kids to be coached by someone without a coaching qualification. Apart from anything else they'd also have had to get a disclosure done!

[Paul Frost]

I find the idea that because someone has planned many times they are therefore good at it quite bizarre.

What I said was:

I'm guessing that someone that has planned/organised a number of events is probably not too bad at it or they wouldn't have been asked to do it repeatedly.

I think I agree with the idea that great planners are born, but I also think that you can learn to be a good planner.

I also suspect that organisers do improve with quantity, as experience/knowledge is accumulative.

[Paul Frost]

I think I've suggested this before, but Runners World have a system where people can (and do) rate races on a range of aspects...
...I don't see why a similar - not identical - system wouldn't work for orienteering. If you could select comments by club, area, planner, organiser then you could form an opinion about those aspects of a forthcoming event. It could also provide useful feedback to the people concerned about how to improve in the future.

This idea seems obviously the way to go, BUT, the response I got when I suggested it at the controllers meeting was close to unanimous rejection.

The problem is that people know that things need to (and they think they want) change, but look at Obama's campaign, which promised to change everything and now it looks like every change he proposes is rejected.
So it looks like you can change anything you want as long as nothing actually changes.

[graeme]

I can think of plenty good orienteers who would be rubbish coaches.

Worse, I can think of quite a few outstanding elite coaches who would be rubbish at teaching kids on white.
But the qualification structure requires them to do that first...

[Gross]

Worse, I can think of quite a few outstanding elite coaches who would be rubbish at teaching kids on white

And therein lies the problem.... elite coaching is about coaching.... teaching white / orange / basics is a completely different thing... and requires a completely different set of skills...

Most of the 'qualified' 'coaches' in the UK are teaching orienteering.... very few 'coaches' actually do any coaching at all...........

[DIDSCO]

Andypat > I agree that there are plenty of good orienteers who would be rubbish coaches but if you're not a good orienteer you don't have a chance of being a good coach. Here I'm talking coaching not teaching.

Looking back from my experience of living in the UK and going through the whole system I would say the majority of qualified coaches I experienced were of a poor standard in orienteering, and as a father certainly many of which I wouldn't let within a mile of my son. I gained far more from many individuals who'd never gained any sort of qualification (though I know some of them have qualifications now). It seems that in the UK just because you have your coaching certificate you're a good coach, which we all know if we're honest is total rubbish. Just like teachers and doctors, just because they have the certificate doesn't necessarily make them any good .

[andypat]

Youre right Didsco - and there is a distinction between coaching and teaching. I'm not sure but at the bottom end doesnt the BOF structure now reflect this - I think you can do a course on how to teach oreienteering to school kids rather than a coaching course.

I think its also important to acknowledge that top class coaches in any discipline can successfully coach competitors who are better than themselves. It about getting the potential out of them. Miles Maclaggan and Andy Murray springs to mind.

[Sunlit Forres]

I've done my UKCC Level 1 & 2 in the last year or so. Most of the people I've met on the courses were doing the training in order to become club coaches. I suspect they'll all end up doing what I'm doing - ie teaching novices the basics and getting intermediates up to a standard where they can enjoy competing on TD5 courses without being out all day. Not coaching.

With the exception of a couple of juniors in our club (and a couple of seniors who read this forum who have nothing to learn from me), nobody doing my sessions is training to win. They're all learning how to orienteer. Helping them to do that isn't coaching, it's teaching. I'd love to have time to provide one-to-one 'proper' coaching to the above juniors but there just isn't the time; the greater need of the club comes first. There are experts around in the club (with no quals.... or disclosure checks) who understand top-level racing that are prepared to give their advice to these lads - and that's what happens.

I'm happy with that arrangement. I do feel sympathy for the guys who want to coach elites ie those who have all the skills and need to take it to another level. They can do without going through these hoops and if we're going to insist on qualifications, there's got to be a fast track system put in place.

[madmike]

The thread has diverged onto coaching and teaching but to try and drag it back to the interesting original question I think the overarching thrust of what I'm reading (and ageeing with) is that training for planners and organisers is seen as a positive thing and introducing levels and/or licencing would be bad thing or even worse - counter-productive.

[roadrunner]

I think I've suggested this before, but Runners World have a system where people can (and do) rate races on a range of aspects...
...I don't see why a similar - not identical - system wouldn't work for orienteering. If you could select comments by club, area, planner, organiser then you could form an opinion about those aspects of a forthcoming event. It could also provide useful feedback to the people concerned about how to improve in the future.

This idea seems obviously the way to go, BUT, the response I got when I suggested it at the controllers meeting was close to unanimous rejection.

The problem is that people know that things need to (and they think they want) change, but look at Obama's campaign, which promised to change everything and now it looks like every change he proposes is rejected.
So it looks like you can change anything you want as long as nothing actually changes.

I'd be interested to know why the controllers were so strongly against such a scheme, especially as the road running one is generally welcomed by race organisers - they frequently encourage people to submit ratings and/or advertise their race as "voted best for a PB" etc.

[andypat]

Its the same in any form of work. The process of receiving feedback can be uncomfortable when its honest - theres always something that you can improve on. Thing is, if you dont seek out feedback, you never learn.

[Big Jon]

Forcing a compulsory qualification on organisers and planners would, in my opinion, destroy orienteering in my club. We rely on very few "experienced" orienteers and are constantly using relative newcomers to organise and plan events. By my guessing each experienced member of Maroc is probably formally involved in 3-4 events each year (ie as planner, controller, organiser). If we insisted they all went on a organiser/planner course most would refuse. As to beginners organising their first event we'd be very unlikely to get them if they had to sacrifice another day to attend a basic course (let alone who would organise and plan the courses). We always offer a mentor service to all first time planners/organisers and feel this offers adequate training opportunities.

[frog]

I think with new planners you have to be careful. Our Auchingarrich planner hasn't planned anything since (although she has been busy).
I'm planning a SoSOL (with alot of help) next week, and I think if I get alot of negative comments will decide I won't bother again and will stick to organising things and not spending days plodding round snowy forests.
Orienteers can be a bit obsessional and moany.
If we're not careful we'll have only a handful of folk willing to put the time and effort into putting on ever more complex events.
I started orienteering in New Zealand where everything was very informal and low tec and one of the things I liked about the sport was it's friendliness.

[Big Jon]

frog
Make the courses pleasant and don't take the orienteers through masses of green sh1t and you'll miss many of the moans that come planners directions. Save the masochistic stuff for the elite classes!