"Monique Y. Herman" wrote in message
...

It seems like one could get around the whole "accusations of sexism"
issue by simply holding classes designed for different personality
types. So you could have a once- or twice-a-week lesson for
"aggressive
beginners" as well as one for "cautious experts," etc. I don't
personally see the point in targetting it to a particular gender,
although I guess some women feel more comfortable learning without men
around. I suppose some men might feel the same way about women.

It seems that one could get around ''accusations of sexism" (as well as
other pcisms) by ignoring them and not giving them any more attention
than they deserve (which is zero).

Of course we'd need to get he courts to do the same so that the victims
wouldn't have to defend themselves.

I'm no expert in education, but it seems (just from observation) that
some people need to feel they understand every nuance before they try
something; other people (like me) prefer an iterative approach in
which
they get the broad-brush strokes, try it a few times, get a bit of
feedback, etc. I can't help it -- I get antsy sitting through too
much
lecture during sports-oriented classes. (Part of that, in hockey as
well as in skiing, is that I've yet to find a boot that doesn't cause
some sort of discomfort to what they call the "sixth toe." In both
sports, I seem fine as long as I'm moving, but when I have to stand
still, the foot position tends to cause various forms of pain.)

I'm sure there are still other types of learners, too.

I think that anyone that has truely achieved advanced skiing skills
should be able to communicate the type of lesson they want. The problem
is that that person in a group split will get grouped with the next
lowest group rather than the ski school giving them a "group lesson"
of one.

An advanced skier should be able to read or talk about technique and pra
ctice it on their own and get what they need out of it IMO as well.

pigo