On Tuesday, Oct 8, 2002, at 15:29 US/Pacific, John J. Stimson-III wrote:
> Kevin, I think that was the whole point of Joe's concern about being
> *in addition to* the regular school. We want to help new folks, but
> we don't want to snub the more experienced folks who might be called
> on to instruct. If we do, they might not feel very charitable...
Yeah, I got his point, John.
a) When the novice school was open to anyone, we got a lot of
beginners. As part of that, we got a lot of people who never came back
- until the next year's school. While there's nothing inherently evil
about that, it did put off a number of the instructors, who felt they
were "wasting" their time on joy riders rather than "investing" it on
participating drivers.
b) The annual school *is* directed to beginners. There now is usually
a conscious effort to weed out re-entrants, and instead direct those
people towards being new instructors. There is quite a bit to be
learned by instructing, and it's a fallacy to think you have to know
everything to be an instructor. (I think I know everything *and* think
I can instruct, but I don't believe the two attributes are
interdependent!)
c) There is a constant plea for intermediate schools so that the
intermediate/advanced drivers (who are called on to donate their time
to instruct at the novice school) can reap some of the same benefits.
As in the case of additional novice schools, the time/availability
doesn't seem to be there. But I'd support one of these before a
"beginner's" school or another novice school.
d) Why do we need a beginner's school at all? We certainly don't need
more members. If we *did* need more members, I repeat my position that
we would be better served by some *mild* advertising to local car clubs
and colleges. We'd be overwhelmed by new members, many of whom would
come pre-motivated. This is a *much* more effective method of gaining
members who are likely to have a high-retention rate than by carefully
nurturing wallflowers.
e) If you *know* a wallflower, and want it to become an active
participant, then by all means provide the intense one-on-one
instruction needed to attract them to the sport. However, be prepared
for a high rate of recidivism; because inherently, autocross is a time-
and money-intensive activity that is unlikely to be pursued by those
not attracted to it in the first place.
f) I'm firmly against any autocross initiative that involves treating
women differently than men, so I would not be willing to assist with a
women-only school. I might be willing to assist with a second novice
or "beginner's" school if someone can bring forth any convincing reason
why we should schedule one in preference to an intermediate school.
I'd definitely support an intermediate school to the same degree I have
in the past supported all the SFR novice schools (plus NASA, the De
Anza school, and a couple of Viper Club schools), which involves
scheduling, registration, chairing, and instructing.
I imagine that you'll find this post at least somewhat more engaging
than my first one, but it doesn't really convey much more information,
and it wasn't nearly as entertaining to write...
KeS
|