Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: 7b.Creation of a National Youth Coach position (Fred McKim / Vladimir Drkulec)

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,709

    Default 7b.Creation of a National Youth Coach position (Fred McKim / Vladimir Drkulec)

    Moved McKim / Drkulec. A National Youth Coach position be established in accordance with the terms of the proposal from IM Edward Porper, below. Governors:

    The proposal below will allow us to produce many WYCC medalists over the next few years and eventually allow us to have a program leading all the way to GM players.

    1. Players would be accepted into the program relative to their ability to be top 5 (approximately) players in their respective age / gender groups.

    2. It is estimated that this restriction could be expanded as time goes on. It is expected that the National Coach could handle up to 50 players. Should the program gain more popularity, more coaches can be brought on-board.

    3. In connection with 2 above Coaching seminars would be provided to interested individuals.

    4. Funding for the program would come from the players/families and external funding. Depending on levels of external funding achieved, it is expected that a monthly charge could vary from $100-200 per participant.

    5. The CFC would provide advertizing for the National Coach program and provide encouragement for players to join.

    6. Part of the program will be group lectures over Skype. Typical plans in different openings, special skills etc. Kids from the same geographical area could come together and listen to a 2 hours' lecture once every couple of weeks or so. IN ADDITION to private lessons. E-mail contact with all students and homework. Multi-level lesson plans have already been developed.

    7. Coach to administer player's fees, with a quarterly accounting to the CFC Office. External funding to go directly to CFC Youth Chess, with dispersal to the coach based upon agreed upon levels spelled out at program start up. For example a formula will be developed to work out monthly payments by students, based on numbers in the program, and amount of external funding available.

    8. Contact to be in place for a three year period from the time of actual start up.
    Last edited by Lyle Craver; 03-31-2013 at 04:22 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tecumseh, ON
    Posts
    3,268
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    This is what I wrote on this proposal in the governors forum for those of you who are just starting to look at this issue.

    I think the keys to this are that no one else has proposed this idea in this particular form. We hinted at some similar ideas in the CFC long term plan submitted last year but absent anyone willing to do the work on a national basis, such a program is unlikely to get off the ground. I don't think that the CFC is absolutely necessary for an individual to be able to launch such an idea but the CFC's endorsement of the idea might give the program credibility in the eyes of potential sponsors.

    Without successful fundraising there is no program even if the governors vote to give this project the green light. The program will also require recruiting of potential students. As mentioned there will be challenges in finding those students as most already have coaches and teachers who they are happy with. Kids and their parents are not going to change what is working. The program is going to need some real success stories for it to succeed in the long term. There are probably half a dozen kids in Windsor who might be eligible for this program but all are taking lessons already in some cases with multiple instructors with some excellent success stories. Fifty students is more a suggestion of the maximum capacity with one instructor and realistically I think if twenty students are found to sign up for the program and sponsors are found to help pay for the lessons then the program will be a raging success.

    Suggestions that someone else might be chosen to head such a program will require a significant ability on the part of that individual to raise money from sponsors. What the governors are being asked to do is endorse the idea and give Edward Porper the chance to run with it. While there are certainly others qualified to teach chess in such a program, none of them have made such a proposal to the CFC and none have offered to attempt to raise money to make such a program a reality.

    If the CFC or some portion of the CFC is ever going to return to charitable status it will have to undertake such educational projects to pave the way. This is very much what Tennis Canada and Soccer Canada did and are continuing to do to reach the success that they currently have in Canada which can only be described as light years ahead of where we find ourselves as a chess federation.

    We are doing such things in Windsor minus the CFC involvement or endorsement and even absent (mostly) the corporate sponsorship. Sobeys and the local libraries give us a place to play and train and hold tournaments and really at this point that is all the sponsorship we need. Teach kids how to play chess and surprisingly or not they tend to play chess and improve in a noticeable way which excites other kids and parents and eventually leads to more kids playing chess. Once you get above a critical mass of players then other players start to spontaneously arise from among the friends and acquaintances of the kids who are involved in organized chess and before you know it you have a self sustaining cycle of growth and increased involvement. I think that we can all agree that this would be a good thing. Lets start taking some steps down this road. Good things should happen if we do.

    Unless we find a very large and generous sponsor it is unlikely that we can launch a fully formed and perfect program. What this does is start us down the road. Perhaps we make it a few steps down the road and decide that this idea is not workable but we won't really know until we try. This is really a proposal to take a few steps down that road and see what opportunities lie there. Its about giving serious kids more options, a wider variety of choices and I don't see why anyone would really be against that. At the very least we will gain some experience and learn what challenges we need to overcome to make such a program work.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tecumseh, ON
    Posts
    3,268
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Everyone already has powers to prepare anyone from across the country. The CFC is not necessarily essential for this program. The fact is that when we give individuals the endorsement to make them official CFC coaches at the WYCC we are not doing anything all that different than this program proposes. My students (from my classes and also individual students) have received individual solicitations from individuals who have acted as our CFC national coaches at this competition. Individuals have even gone on to take lessons though I have not lost any students as a result (as far as I know). While I did have some slight irritation at some johnny come latelys soliciting my students, I reflected that the individuals doing the soliciting were stronger players than I was and if the children or parents felt that they could make faster progress with another chess instructor then who was I to object? The overall goal in my mind is that these kids get much better at chess. It is not necessary that they get better with me in charge of their training.

    If anyone lacks for chess students come to Windsor please! I welcome the competition and may even send you students. I have limited availability and have had some excellent students and parents who needed training on specific days that I could not do because of prior commitments. Most of the people teaching chess work together and share training tips and help each other out. I have huge respect for the other instructors like Zoltan and Istvan Kiraly, John Coleman, Alan Baljeu, Herb Alice and Frank Lee who do chess training in Windsor. There are others who I do not know very well but who I might endorse if I became familiar with them and their methods.

    If you are going to vote against this because of an antipathy for increased competition then I suspect that you should abstain and declare a conflict of interest. This really is about giving more choices to kids who do not have all the options that are available to kids who live in areas with a well defined chess program or multiple chess programs. Good chess students are not scarce in my experience. Good chess instructors are scarce. Even average chess instructors are scarce. Average chess instructors are better than no chess instructor. Lets encourage more people to teach chess. Lets focus on growing the pie rather than looking at the pieces of the pie right now and coveting what someone else might earn.
    Last edited by Vladimir Drkulec; 04-02-2013 at 10:50 AM.

  4. #4

    Default

    I was hoping for a more detailed proposition.

    More than anyone else I wish a national coaching program, but the last time I voted without much details, I really regretted it.

    I would like to suggest an amendment. We should go in RFP for this. Ideally, a committee formed by experienced teachers and organizers should evaluate the different applicants (if other people are interested). This way, we would have a good idea of what we are really going into.

    I don't like the mentality of just "try and see". The CFC reputation is not very good among many players these days, and such a program, should it fail, would surely not help.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tecumseh, ON
    Posts
    3,268
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Félix Dumont View Post
    I was hoping for a more detailed proposition.

    More than anyone else I wish a national coaching program, but the last time I voted without much details, I really regretted it.
    Hello Felix, you have spoken of this previously also without giving details. It is quite possible that this situation is not like that one. The problem with providing too many details at this point before there is a general agreement that the overall idea as a worthy objective is that people will seize on this or that little detail that doesn't fit with their preconceived notions of how this should be done and the idea will be stillborn.

    I would like to suggest an amendment. We should go in RFP for this.
    I believe Chris Mallon suggested that originally on the governor's forum but later recanted it as a joke that he didn't intend seriously.

    Ideally, a committee formed by experienced teachers and organizers should evaluate the different applicants (if other people are interested).
    This way, we would have a good idea of what we are really going into.
    I have a problem with this as there are opportunities for conflicts of interest and perhaps misuse of proprietary ideas and methods if someone is required to describe in too much detail his proposed training methods. I would look at what results the applicant has achieved before.

    In any case, these voting booths give opportunities for multiple options.

    I don't like the mentality of just "try and see".
    I totally agree with you on this. A mentality of "just try and see" will most likely translate to nothing will happen.

    My mentality on this is not "try and see." My strong belief is that if you want to accomplish something, or start a new venture that you should start to do things that help you accomplish your goals and head in the direction that you want to go. Once you accept some venture or program as a worthy objective at that point it is a good idea to start doing the things that will help to bring the new venture into reality. There are always intermediate steps that need to be accomplished in order to move along towards your ultimate goals. Once you set out on that road of trials, it is quite likely you will obtain additional information and feedback, meet allies and gatekeepers, which will allow you to accomplish your objectives or will block your path forward either temporarily or permanently. I have seen this described in my undergraduate business and graduate business courses as well as in business publications as the Corridor principle. The key message is that don't wait for the perfect opportunity because it will never come. Start now and begin making your way down the corridor and as you pass along the corridor you will see things that are not visible at the beginning of the journey. Those things may be new ideas for other ventures or larger opportunities which you never dreamed existed and never would have discovered if you didn't start moving towards your goals.

    The CFC reputation is not very good among many players these days, and such a program, should it fail, would surely not help.
    The bigger risk to our reputation is not so much in trying and failing but rather in failing to try. In the long run that will sink us faster.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Charlottetown, PE
    Posts
    2,158
    Blog Entries
    11

    Default

    This whole idea has been in the works for quite some time now (going back to the Fall). Michael V-K and Edward had some extensive discussions on it during that time period. While there were many ways to try and put this forward for acceptance, it has fallen on the Governors to now decide as to whether this is a worthwhile project. I don't think the details are needed at this point in time. From everything that we are hearing, most Coaches out there in Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver, and Ottawa are probably fully occupied, and in any case likely aren't interested in trying to partially fund a program through fund-raising. To think that somebody else is chomping at the bit to put in an RFP proposal for such a task is a bit rose-coloured.

  7. #7

    Default

    Netiquette normally means that someone does not reproduce a posting from a private board on a public board. Did you have permission Vlad to reproduce Valer's comments?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tecumseh, ON
    Posts
    3,268
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken Craft View Post
    Netiquette normally means that someone does not reproduce a posting from a private board on a public board. Did you have permission Vlad to reproduce Valer's comments?
    You are correct. I have removed Valer's comments though I have left up my comments which does make my comment lack a bit of context. I do believe that all comments and objections belong here in the public discussion but for the sake of those who feel differently I have removed his comments until such time as he says that it is okay to put them back in. I have posted the response with his comments quoted on the same governors forum.
    Last edited by Vladimir Drkulec; 04-02-2013 at 11:02 AM.

  9. #9

    Default

    Thanks, Vlad. I am happy to see the governors' Forum made public, however, until that time those posting there have an expectation of privacy.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Kitchener, ON
    Posts
    2,235
    Blog Entries
    37

    Default

    I'm not sure why we're discussing a borderline "hiring" in public rather than in private.

    In any case, none of my points from the private forum have been addressed satisfactorily. The proposal is bad from both of the angles you can look at it - the program itself is poorly designed, and the person proposing to run it (exclusively for 3 years!) has a bad track record.

    The argument that it costs the CFC nothing and therefore has no negative potential is not a good one either. The person in question has already in the recent past used his official position with the CFC for personal reasons - something that should have gotten him removed immediately.

    Mr. Porper is supposed to be fundraising for the CFC. What has he raised so far? I haven't heard about anything. I don't see a report from him. Now, before even doing anything with that fundraising job to benefit the CFC, he wants to switch his fundraising efforts to this project, which would have financial benefits for him personally.

    If he really believes in the program, let him resign as CFC Fundraising Coordinator, and start the program on his own. If it is working out after a time, let him THEN apply for official CFC recognition. Exactly the same route the Ontario High School Chess Championships took with the OCA.
    Christopher Mallon
    FIDE Arbiter

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •