- Joined
- May 19, 2007
- Messages
- 7,745
Wow, gotta say guys, I would have expected a little warmer welcome. A guy walks up with an honest question and gets nothing but everyone's hangups and baggage. I think some guys need to take a step back from the keyboard and remember why we are here, to share info and ideas. Its one thing to call out some one who's been here a while and has a few hundred posts, but crapping on a new guy just isn't cool. The guy asked for opinions on schools and training, I think that's a valid question, and I have no idea what direction he's going to take it, but the point of forums is getting current info from people directly, not just looking a months old blog posts.
I've not done a specific "survival" course, although I have done, and am in training for wilderness guiding in generally easy conditions. I'm not setting up to be an expedition leader to cross the Himalayas, but safely get a group of kids from one end of a track to another. I have an interest in the outdoors and staying alive, so there are a lot of skills I've picked up on my own.
Things I would be looking to know about the training is what skills are going to be taught, and are those global or local skills. For example, are you going to be taught generally how to light a fire, or are you going to be taught which local trees and methods are most useful of one specific area.
I would be looking at how much will be covered, as well as the class size and instructor ratio. Are the teaching theoretical and demonstration based, or is it practical and based on your own abilities?
Living off the land is going to be very different from surviving the 72 hours until you get found. And those skill sets are not exclusive, but they don't fully overlap either, nor does the mindset.
If you want to review schools, books or courses, the only way is to try them out. Compare them and fact check their information. Look at what their basic philosophies are, and the parameters or scope what they intend to accomplish. Are they trying to teach you new things, or just be as "hard core" as they can?
I've done enough training courses to know that a good course is one you can fail. I expect the instructor to teach my how to accomplish the skill, or if I cannot, figure out why, and let me know. There is nothing worse to me than not understanding why I cannot make a skill work. And if that's my physical abilities, or some other factor, a good instructor should be able to find that out. That works for something like rappelling, canoeing or other physical skills, it can be harder with skills that have a larger mental component, but its the same principal. I can learn out of a good book with a clear description. a poorly written book on the other hand just makes it harder to figure things out. Make sense?
I've not done a specific "survival" course, although I have done, and am in training for wilderness guiding in generally easy conditions. I'm not setting up to be an expedition leader to cross the Himalayas, but safely get a group of kids from one end of a track to another. I have an interest in the outdoors and staying alive, so there are a lot of skills I've picked up on my own.
Things I would be looking to know about the training is what skills are going to be taught, and are those global or local skills. For example, are you going to be taught generally how to light a fire, or are you going to be taught which local trees and methods are most useful of one specific area.
I would be looking at how much will be covered, as well as the class size and instructor ratio. Are the teaching theoretical and demonstration based, or is it practical and based on your own abilities?
Living off the land is going to be very different from surviving the 72 hours until you get found. And those skill sets are not exclusive, but they don't fully overlap either, nor does the mindset.
If you want to review schools, books or courses, the only way is to try them out. Compare them and fact check their information. Look at what their basic philosophies are, and the parameters or scope what they intend to accomplish. Are they trying to teach you new things, or just be as "hard core" as they can?
I've done enough training courses to know that a good course is one you can fail. I expect the instructor to teach my how to accomplish the skill, or if I cannot, figure out why, and let me know. There is nothing worse to me than not understanding why I cannot make a skill work. And if that's my physical abilities, or some other factor, a good instructor should be able to find that out. That works for something like rappelling, canoeing or other physical skills, it can be harder with skills that have a larger mental component, but its the same principal. I can learn out of a good book with a clear description. a poorly written book on the other hand just makes it harder to figure things out. Make sense?