A recent update in the ACATI has brought Expedition Skills Module in as an alternative to completing the ESTC as a remote supervision tick in the box. Meaning that the 2 day Expedition Skills Module can be completed instead of the 1.5 day DofE ESTC.
Having tutored on an Expedition Skills Module recently, it occurs to me that the ESTC is a bit redundant. I’ve taught on ESTC courses too, and found that with all the DofE junk thrown in, plus the prescriptive nature of the content, it’s not a brilliant course, conversely Expedition Skills Module is excellent, and part of a wider Mountain Training framework.
In theory - ESTC could be taught by someone who doesn’t hold a relevant NGB, which surely speaks to the level of content involved?
Anyone else think ESTC isn’t really fit for purpose?
If i am honest i found neither the ESTC or the Expedition Skills module to be that great.
Expedition skills module:
You are expected to have camped a minimum of 10 times, but then most of the training is talking about equipment and skills that you would already know about by having camped 10+ times. It felt like the second day was a re assessment for LLA with just an added bonus of having a heavier pack to carry.
ESTC:
Death by powerpoint. The content that is covered is drawn out for no apparent reason. This has the added problem that the DofE are training some people from scratch with very limited experience, the ATC on the other hand expects you to be qualified so some of the “training” really does not go to the level you are trained at.
Both courses i got drunk on the Saturday night, that was the only good thing about them.
Depends I think. Remote supervision isn’t in the ML syllabus still (correct me if I’m wrong) so there is still a need for a level of remote supervision training for some people. I doubt an ML would want to do an Exped Module again.
I think if done correctly Exped Skills Module has the opportunity to be a platform to share good practice and learn new stuff, rather than simply just be a Bronze DofE training session - which I agree it has the danger to be.
My understanding of the Corps plans is that ESTC will be gone completely or will be delivered as part of Expedition Skills going forward. Don’t forget ESTC is only a 1 day course for DofE it’s only the RAFAC that have added this extra half day on.
Not everyone will do the Expedition Module (see my point above about newly qualified MLs) - so I doubt this will be the case. I suspect it will remain in the mix as an option.
That’s what was announced at the Corps Conference last year, although since the person who said is now out of the organisation it may well change.
There are a number of flaws with:
a) The way we currently deliver ESTC
b) The way we are looking to do it going forward.
At present ESTC only counts if it was done within the RAFAC as we have added on our own half day bimble which no other organisation does. So theoretically you could be an experienced ML that runs DofE for a living but you can’t for us unless you redo your ESTC.
The plan as of last Winter was that Corps were looking at Expedition Skills (EAAS) and working out if they could build ESTC in on top of what Mountain Training already has in the weekend & I assume that if the ACATI has been changed that this has been successful.
The issue is once again are we going to tell experienced leaders who did their LLA or HML elsewhere “sorry you need to do another EAAS or a 1.5 day ESTC because the NGB qualification you have isn’t good enough for us”.
I know, but the way it was presented suggested that the various permutations may not have been well understood. I did try (unsuccessfully as I didn’t put my point across well) to make the point at the time.
This is now not the case as there is a mechanism within the ACATI to prove competence via other routes of experience via discussion with SO2 AT.
Careful with mixing your acronyms - EAAS = Expedition Assessor Accreditation Scheme (a DofE modular training framework course). The Mountain Training NGB course is the ‘Expedition Skills Module’ and DofE also offer an ‘expedition skills’ module in the MTF which isn’t an NGB award…
Any NGB with a syllabus element of remote supervision is now accepted as valid for proving competence in remote supervision - so if you have LLA + EM (the Mountain Training NGB courses) then you are good to go - no need to do ESTC as well, and the ESTC hasn’t been ‘integrated’ into the expedition module. The fundamentals of the remote supervision is already in the EM syllabus - it just doesn’t contain all the DofE specific stuff.
A Mountain Leader would not need to do an Expedition Module as they are already assessed on their expedition skills as part of their week assessment - however the ML syllabus still doesn’t include remote supervision, so following their assessment they will be required to demonstrate competence which could be achieved by completing an ESTC (or the Expedition Skills module if they had completed it as part of LLA / HML on the route to ML).
Having not had a chance to read the ACATI yet, is this new system of showing competence going to be something simple like provide a copy of your logbook, or is it going to be used as a way to sneak the half day ESTC add on over the border?
Don’t know - it’ll only be applicable to a very few people who come into the organisation with that kind of experience though. Everyone else will get it through the NGBs, or have already been trained over the past few years. I’d expect it would be just that - a discussion around their logbook/previous experience.
Lets not forget, Expedition skills module ONLY covers foot expeditions. It’s a trekking qualification. At least ESTC had a poke at remotely supervising a range of modes of expeditions!
Fundamentals of techniques of remote supervision are still the same though. Plus you could probably count on one hand the number of ESTC course directors in the organisation that speak about other types of expeditions!
Personally for me the ESTC was a bit of a waste of time, I had done it for so long it was more like a refresher training.
However for new staff I think it was pretty useful to do. I have been there when shinny new staff panic and just go to default mode of press 999 for assistance or remote supervision is walking behind them always in sight and jumping in if they stray off the route immediately.
It just reinforces the classroom theory a bit more
Is this one of those situations whereby TLAs were replaced by the more apt TLAs, but then they ran out of TLAs so brought in the MLA, and all TLAs are MLAs but not all MLAs are TLAs?
I get that I’m not big into all this AT malarkey personally, but this thread is a mess of acronyms.
Last week saw me with a gold assessor with 10+ years of assessing/supervising experience have the audacity to wake me up because the team were due at the checkpoint an entire 10 mins ago. After a few choice words i closed the bus windows and locked the doors and went back to sleep.
I am a bit disappointed that they have removed the need for new Assessors/supervisors to do a shadowed assessment. It is going to end up like you said with far more people calling in the Thunderbirds and following them like a bad smell. Plus there first few assessments might be with people like above that really shouldn’t be allowed out the house by themselves.
Agreed. And until other modes of travel get a recognised camping qualification, I’m guessing paddlers, sailortypes, rowers, bicyclists and donkey wallopers will need to continue gaining a foot based qualification just to do camping and remote supervision.
But, if a standalone camping qualification comes around, then ESTC could become more relevant again I guess.
Although slightly off topic, us lycra clad mentalists have an “expedition” module qualification now. I never bothered, my WATTO is happy with my walking quals covering camping when they are on bikes.
I think British Canoeing have something as part of a few of there new quals, but i am still getting my head round that so i will have to look into that bit further.
The main thing is that “we” do not add things to qualifications that the world and it’s brother regard as fully adequate and fit for purpose, just because we are the Air Cadets and need people to justify their existence in their job.