The International Snow Science Workshop (ISSW 2024) is ongoing in Tromsø, Norway. If you are unfamiliar with the ISSW, think of a heady gathering for avalanche/snow science academics, professionals, and educators to present their latest research. Consider this ISSW dispatch the speed-dating equivalent of an academic paper and a proper ISSW presentation.

 

The High Route is attending virtually. On Tuesday, the conference held a session on avalanche education and learning. We’ll explore two papers discussed during the session—one examines the learning experience for avalanche course participants, and the other focuses on instructor perspectives on learning and outcomes.

We intend to present the findings and allow for some metacognition so that collectively, we can better assess what we need to bolster our learning or, if you are an educator, your teaching. Hopefully, in the long run, we all become better, safer partners and better learners and teachers.

The first paper is titled “Participants’ Shared Perspectives on a Season-Long Avalanche Course.” The research here focuses on the learners—the folks taking the course. One intriguing aspect of the study was the longitudinal nature of the avalanche course. This was not your typical weekend long Level 1 or 2 cram session. The students were enrolled in a winter-long course. The course included ~11 field/classroom days, usually in 2-3 day increments (modules), taken intermittently between January and May 2023. The instructors presented the equivalent of a Level 1 and Level 2 curriculum. A year after the course’s conclusion, the researchers met virtually with 8 of ten class participants to reflect on the course and their learning.

The meat of the paper reports on student takeaways and their recommendations for modifying future avalanche courses.

Although not surprising, the findings are useful; they may help create better learning experiences for students andteachers. Tove I. Dahl, the principal investigator and ISSW presenter, showcased the paper’s findings. Here’s what she reported about the “experience themes” teased out during the one-year post-class debrief.

  • Students valued practical experience with the application of hard and soft skills. The hard skills relate to things like searches and shoveling, whereas soft skills relate to communicating and emotions.  
  • Students emphasized the need for ample time within and between modules to benefit their learning. “Overall, participants expressed keen awareness of the role of time within and between learning modules as a key aid for learning. The season-long format of the course also made it possible to experience, reflect on, and ‘digest’ the learning in multiple and varying conditions.”
  • Students valued ample time to reflect within and between the modules.
  • Students valued active participation and growth in and between sessions. After and between modules, students explained they practiced skills, did homework, and filled out their Reflectometer (a whole other story). The authors write these habits “were all mentioned as important for staying continuously engaged with the course content and as crucial for understanding and retaining deep understandings of avalanche safety, developing personally and developing their identity as a skier.”
  • The socio-ecological learning context was important. We’ll translate this— students felt that being together as a group assisted in their ability to process, master, and retain information.

In short, Tove explained, during her brief talk, that positive learning outcomes boiled down to providing learners with ample time. In other words, having enough time on the right kinds of tasks, time to reflect, time to reflect together, and time (at the right time) to learn and reflect in the mountains.

We’ll translate this as simply not rushing through the curriculum and providing students with some breathing room to allow the new material and skills to sink in.   

 

The participants (students) then offered advice for future avalanche classes.

  • Students desired a systematic approach to learning. Educators should present a dialed sequence regarding theory and practical skills. “Participants reported that the clear approach to facilitating the mastery of learning outcomes during the course helped them integrate and apply their learning more effectively. 
  • Students desired a cohesive link between the structure and content of the course and the timing of the course. Educators should structure the class with ample time for practice, reflection, and feedback. “[Students] noted the value of opportunities to reflect and practice between sessions and the limits for that on Friday to Sunday weekend courses where learning goals are often many, and opportunities to practice, get feedback and reflect on their learning are substantially limited by time, group size and group composition.”
  • Students desired customizing and participant involvement. In other words, allow students to help move the curriculum forward. We take this to mean that students would like ample time to revisit some concepts/skills deemed most important to the group and have a hand in deciding the direction of the course, especially in the context of a winter-long course. 

The paper includes a sentence in the conclusion full of wisdom: “Listen to your learners on their own terms.”

This concludes round one of our ISSW speed dating.

 

Now, Round Two

Let’s take a moment to learn about avalanche education from the instructor’s perspective. We’ll hone in on this study presented at ISSW 24, “Challenges and priorities in avalanche education: A sequential mixed-methods study of Norwegian instructors’ perspectives on teaching and learning outcomes.” (Tim Dassler presented the findings.)

Like above, we’ll zero in on key takeaways. The authors call for improved training and “communities of practice.” 

  • “Many instructors feel that their training does not provide them with sufficient technical and pedagogical skills.”
  • “Instructors also emphasize the need to practice their skills with peers, noting that such practice may be even more valuable than formal training.”
  • It remains a struggle for instructors to find and establish these intentional communities/networks.
  • Instructors need clear methods to evaluate and teach students to improve learning outcomes.

These avalanche educators expressed a need to “diversify avalanche courses.“ For example, the authors claim there’s a need for unique courses focused on terrain and weather forecasting. “By streamlining course content to concentrate on these critical areas, we can ensure that all participants receive essential and targeted knowledge that directly enhances their safety in avalanche-prone environments. This approach allows instructors, regardless of their confidence levels, to effectively deliver key content that is vital but often underestimated in its complexity.”

Further, the paper calls for a “progressive sequence of courses,“ where entrants must meet specified prerequisites. “This structured approach promotes continuous learning and deeper engagement with complex dimensions, addressing the identified need for fostering ongoing educational curiosity and competence.”

 

Let’s tighten this Up

The two papers highlighted bring to light what we may already know; it’s just in a more formal sense when presented at an academic conference—students and educators are part of the same dance, and each respective dance partner has unmet needs. Holistically, the outcomes for educators and students are clear. Prudent backcountry travelers are the endgame.     

We cannot imagine, well, at least I cannot, the demands on avalanche educators throughout a weekend long Level 1 or Level 2 course. Let’s assume there’s plenty of pressure to check off all the hard skill basics, let alone the soft skills, which come with many complexities and pitfalls. There’s no question that if educators express the need for more pedagogical training and expertise, they should be afforded that training. Knowing what to teach is one thing; knowing how to teach is different.

 

Takeaways   

If you feel rushed during a class, there’s no harm in asking an instructor to slow down a bit and provide time to revisit a new concept or skill. As a learner, if you need more processing time, find an avalanche class taught throughout a winter season rather than a 2-3 day skills-dense timeframe.

Educators are under pressure, too. We’re hoping the reported findings, over time, are implemented to relieve some of that pressure. It’s backcountry skiing/riding, after all. It’s supposed to be fun and rewarding—even if avalanche education is your job.