Progressing Isi vs usfs

[littlekateskate]

I know ISI is for fun and USFS is more serious. But I was wondering if there is any proof to each ones "systems". Do kids who do lts with USFS progress faster then those with ISI?

Their programs can be so different and yet very similar. Like lts kids and their competitions. At the ISI level kids get a routine and usfs just do their elements. Are those USFS kids gaining more by not waisting time on a routine?

Just curious. My daughter skates a little of both ISI and USFS. And she does the ISI because having her own program is her favorite part. But if she didnt like it. I have always wondered if she didnt work on her routine so much in privates if she would progress much further faster.

:)

[Clarice]

I don't know that the "system" makes as much difference as a lot of other things, like the quality of the coaching, the ability of the skater, and how much time and effort the skater puts into it. My daughter began in an ISI group program - tested through Beta, "skipped" Gamma and Delta, and went straight into Freestyle. We started with a private coach at that point, and began USFSA testing when she was 6. She had a program for competition, which they worked on, but her coach spent a good deal of time on skills in her lessons as well. I think the more rapid progress was due to having private lessons more than having switched systems. If your skater intends to do qualifying competitions someday, you're going to have to switch over to the USFSA test structure eventually anyway, but I don't know that it makes a whole lot of difference at this point, since I think I remember your skater is still very young.

[Isk8NYC]

I teach both programs but as an instructor, I really like the USFSA Basic Skills curriculum for skaters. It's in line with the standard tests, so you don't have to reteach things (like the back crossovers w/ or w/o the foot lift) and there's no stigma about the standards of competition. Either program is fine for LTS until you reach the ISI Freestyle / USFSA Freeskate levels. I would switch to the USFSA at that point because of the skills being learned for the Standard Track Tests.

The ISI LTS program was designed to provide a challenging, long-lasting program for recreational skaters. The USFSA had no such program at the time, so the facilities and coaches worked together to define the tests and elements. That's why each ISI test has one or more really "tough" elements that are challenging to master to the test standard level. It also fosters friendship, comraderie, and good sportsmanship by dividing the competition groups by test level, gender, and age. (YMMV - some people say this isn't true in their areas.)

The biggest problem with the ISI program is that some people get "stuck" around Freestyle 4 - the FS5 Axel holds them from passing that test. Because of that, sandbagging (intentionally holding off on tests to win competitions) accusations run rampant. Freestyle 4 is usually the crossover level for the USFSA - the skater will have the skills needed to pass the USFSA Pre-Preliminary tests.

Remember, the goal of an ice rink or skating school is to keep skaters coming back for lessons and practice. The businesspeople at the ISI realized that they had to prevent strife and foster healthy competition so that skaters would be happy and continue to take lessons and buy ice time. It's just good business strategy.

The USFSA was a collection of clubs that rented ice time, held their own sessions, and ran their own business so to speak. (Tests, Comps, Fundraisers, etc.) Some clubs had group lessons, but the quality and curriculum (usually home grown) depended on the Head Pro and coaches. At some point the USFSA realized that there was a need for a "feeder program" that rinks could use for their skating schools because so many used the ISI curriculum. It was a money-making opportunity as well as a chance to increase the number of skaters taking the standard track tests. So the USFSA created the Basic Skills program. The test level elements were grouped by difficulty so that any "Basic 2" skater could master all of the elements within 6-10 weeks and move up. The format has been gently revised, mainly to add new tests such as the Freeskate 1-6 curriculum, which is preparatory to taking the...wait for it...Standard Test Structure tests. (Pre-Prel, Prel, etc.)

Basic Skills competitions are supposed to be low-pressure affairs, but many people say that that's not the case - there's tremendous competition and "psych outs" as well as accusations of sandbagging.

The USFSA has marketed and publicized the program well, to the point where more and more former ISI rinks are starting to "turn over" to the USFSA curriculum. They've simplified the process of running a Basic Skills program, added insurance coverage, offered regular feedback and advice, and reduced the rink costs. I think the trend of ISI-turnover-to-USFSA will continue, perhaps even eliminating all but a few ISI programs in the long run.

[phoenix]

I teach both LTS programs. I don't know much about the competition structure, but personally I hate teaching the ISI LTS levels in basic skills (pre-alpha through delta). They skip around too much, leave out necessary skills while throwing harder things at you when you haven't even learned the pieces of yet.....for example, you have to pass forward crossovers before you're required to learn how to skate on an edge. You have to learn 3 turns and mohawks before you learn a backwards 1 foot glide (on a flat, let alone on an edge!). Drives me nuts, makes me feel like I'm not being a good instructor because I *have* to stick w/ the skill list for that level, when 9 times out of 10, the kids aren't ready for them. I end up adding in the basics that are missing & spend much of class time just getting the kids ready to tackle what's actually on the list for that level.

The only reason I stay at that rink is because I get some free ice time as part of my pay check. I do my best w/ the program, but IMHO, USFS has a FAR superior basic skills structure.

[twokidsskatemom]

I understand why coaches might like USFSA better.
But to be honest, for MOST skaters ISI really suits them better. ISI helps build team building, awards more skaters and offers more events.Makes skaters happy and parents happy too.Remember what the drop out rate is from LTS to pre pre. The higher you go, the smaller the number of skaters.
Skaters fall out of USFSA. If you want them to maintain a life long love of the sport, ISI is a better fit for MOST.
We do both, and dont see us dropping USFSA. But we see kids all the time that dont do well in USFSA, and do keep on with ISI.

[Isk8NYC]

Phoenix - you're doing the right thing in teaching ISI, don't put yourself down. I often think of it as teaching "forward, backward, and sideways" because when you're teaching one element, you have to teach it along with the skills needed BEFORE it can be mastered, as well as the skills needed AFTER it's mastered for the next level.

That's one of the reasons I like Basic Skills. Other than putting the (rocking) horse before the backward swizzles, everything fits together in a progression. (Another instructor gave me the tip of teaching the back swizzles before the rocking horse.)

Still, I was an ISI skater as a young adult, before the adult tests and competitions were begun. I loved the competitions and the test structure is something you just deal with.

One note: the ISI offers free instructor seminars each fall for their coaches, whereas the USFSA only recently started giving an excellent seminar that (what else) costs the instructor money. I would say that the USFSA Learn-to-Teach seminar is definitely worth the money, however the cost is an obstacle to participation.