56 replies to this topic

[Dive_Girl]

All of our dive professionals are Enriched Air certified. While not a firm shop policy, we have not found the occasion to make it as such as our candidates inevitably complete their EANx certification either before or during their DM program. In fact, I just certified one of our DMCs in EANx last night. We also provide FREE EANx for all our dive professionals AND candidates when working with a class. So it just "is" and thus we have had no need to have the discussion Peter had - but diving EANx is also a part of our dive shop culture and routine.

We enacted a shop policy where divemaster candidates and dive professionals and not allowed to assist with a specialty course they do not personally hold certification in. This minimized potential issues, because in those situations aren't they really just the same as your other students? Take for example, a DM assisting with a cavern course who has never been in cavern!! While we don't have caverns here, for me it is our Deep diving course. In the PNW, diving beyond 100' is pitch black and cold with inhibited visibility (you can see well at depth horizontally, but not vertically where you can see the surface thus stunting depth orientation).

So along these lines, I also believe there are other courses every dive professional should hold, beyond the basics. One such course is simply local Fish ID. There is nothing worse than listening to a dive professional either brief a site or answering questions about the critters the diver saw and that instructor either has NO clue or gives horribly inaccurate info. Yeah yeah we are here to teach people to dive safely, but what is the purpose of diving? Most often the number one reason is to see stuff!! Perhaps in Florida, it would be basic cavern in place of Fish ID, and Ice Diving in Idaho, but you get my point.

So, while I agree with Peter regarding EANx, I do so because as I noted above, it is a part of our dive shop culture and routine. It is also is simply prudent when working with many students where dive professionals make many ascents. Another such basic course in our area that affects dive planning is Altitude. It is a basic course. So when are all you dive professionals coming for a visit so you can add this to your repertoire? We’ll hit Clear Lake – bring your fleece.

Diving in caverns, however, is not routine for our area. So for me, while I get the concepts, I do not feel it necessary or prudent that I must hold that experience to be considered well rounded (mind you as an active dive nut, I do have cavern and cave experience – but that was for personal diving and not because I thought I needed to as a dive professional). When a diver of mine is interested in such diving, I send them to a cavern/cave qualified instructor. If I try to be the Jack of all Trades dive professional, I believe dilution can occur. Instead of offering a selection of solid courses that are well suited for the areas I dive in or those that are feasible to teach and are prevelant (such as EANx), I could instead be certified to offer all courses and do a poor job in each? No thanks.

I do, however, feel a great responsibility as an instructor to have mastery in many areas and to be knowledgeable in many areas including keep apprised of new advents in the diving industry. One of my favorite ways of staying up on things, is participating in community forums such as SD.

So I guess in many ways, I am in agreement with most all of you, but in separate settings.

[PerroneFord]

Cavern diving (and instruction) is not "portable". An instructor without cavern's nearby cannot effectively teach the course, nor could a student reasonably take the course. It is limited by geography. Nitrox can be used in a pool. It is imminently portable. As would photography, navigation, peak buoyancy, and other specialties. I see these as very different things.

[Dive_Girl]

Cavern diving (and instruction) is not "portable". An instructor without cavern's nearby cannot effectively teach the course, nor could a student reasonably take the course. It is limited by geography. Nitrox can be used in a pool. It is imminently portable. As would photography, navigation, peak buoyancy, and other specialties. I see these as very different things.

I slightly differ with you here. As some have noted above, Nitrox may not be available in an area, thus in those cases it is not portable. Using the portable idea, drysuits are portable. They are also easily accessible online right? Should we then hold all dive centers to task to offer drysuit training no matter their location? As I noted above, I believe I feel similar to Peter about EANx, however that is for our dive professionals in our shop in our dive area. I do not feel inclined to place the same expectation onto all other dive operators.

[ScubaDadMiami]

. . . I really do feel that any instructor MUST be vastly more experienced than the level they are trying to teach. Apart from anything else it goes to credibility. In the case of scuba I don't mean the number of PADI specialties, but much more what Perrone is saying - the instructor should be someone that the student will look up to.

Nitrox is not just another specialty like photography, but IMO is absolutely fundamental to the activity of diving. . . .

I do understand that there are places around the world where nitrox isn't available, so actually diving it may not be easy. But I still believe that any instructor should understand it, and all other gas considerations, in some depth. Just as I believe that anyone teaching down to recreational limits should have significant personal experience beyond those limits . . . .

100 percent!

[PerroneFord]

Popular drysuits cost in excess of $1k dollars. I think it would be an unreasonable burden to demand that at a dive center be trained in them. However, I do think that someone on staff should be versed in them. And perhaps several people if you are in a locale that might see a number of drysuit divers. Whether that be north Florida, the Great Lakes, or the northeast or northwest.

I understand where you are going with this and it's not that I disagree in principle. Nitrox is not easy to get in some locales. However, I would wager that tourist divers doing dive vacations, liveaboards, and the like would often come in with nitrox certifications and might well want a staff member to understand nitrox. Nitrox no longer even requires dives to certify with it. I am not sure if that is true in the professional ranks, but it certainly is for the students. Is it really too much of a burden to ask someone to take a $75-$100 online course as part of their professional credentials? No dives required?

I slightly differ with you here. As some have noted above, Nitrox may not be available in an area, thus in those cases it is not portable. Using the portable idea, drysuits are portable. They are also easily accessible online right? Should we then hold all dive centers to task to offer drysuit training no matter their location? As I noted above, I believe I feel similar to Peter about EANx, however that is for our dive professionals in our shop in our dive area. I do not feel inclined to place the same expectation onto all other dive operators.

[georoc01]

Here in Colorado the local course that everyone should have is altitude as we live at 5,000 ft above sea level and any local dive is going to be an altitude dive with some dive sites at closer to 11,000 ft.

But I tend to agree when it comes to Nitrox. I do believe at some point it should be tied to Advanced Open Water, just as deep and nav are, let alone divemaster.

[Quero]

I definitely agree with holding dive professionals to a higher standard. But I think we all have differing opinions at to what we are applying that higher standard. In my opinion, we need to start with fundamental dive skills like buoyancy and trim, situational awareness, dive planning, and a solid understanding of the science involved. Certifications such as Nitrox and technical certs are certainly one way to achieve mastery in some of those fundamental skills.

However, to Quero’s point, it’s a big diving world out there, and it all doesn’t look like the US. There may be economic reasons why a particular DM candidate chooses not to pursue a Nitrox cert. When I was in the Philippines before becoming an instructor, there was a divemaster there who encouraged me to become an instructor. He was not an instructor because he simply couldn’t afford the cost of the training.

Also, let’s not forget that there is a difference between certification and training. An individual could be Nitrox certified but still be incompetent as a Nitrox diver (or even as a diver in general). I think these days it’s unwise to judge one’s competency simply on the basis of certification alone. Again, part of the divemaster curriculum includes topics that relate directly to the concepts involved with diving Nitrox. I feel that the rationale behind including those topics in the curriculum is to prepare divemasters for dealing with Nitrox divers.

So, peterbj7, I applaud your commitment to keeping the bar high, but I have a question for you. If a non-Nitrox certified diver approached you with interest in becoming a divemaster, would you summarily dismiss him/her on the basis of not possessing a Nitrox c-card, or would you take the opportunity to train and educate that diver to the level that you expect from a professional divemaster?


Mark

Well said.

[Quero]

All of our dive professionals are Enriched Air certified. While not a firm shop policy, we have not found the occasion to make it as such as our candidates inevitably complete their EANx certification either before or during their DM program. In fact, I just certified one of our DMCs in EANx last night. We also provide FREE EANx for all our dive professionals AND candidates when working with a class. So it just "is" and thus we have had no need to have the discussion Peter had - but diving EANx is also a part of our dive shop culture and routine.

We enacted a shop policy where divemaster candidates and dive professionals and not allowed to assist with a specialty course they do not personally hold certification in. This minimized potential issues, because in those situations aren't they really just the same as your other students? Take for example, a DM assisting with a cavern course who has never been in cavern!! While we don't have caverns here, for me it is our Deep diving course. In the PNW, diving beyond 100' is pitch black and cold with inhibited visibility (you can see well at depth horizontally, but not vertically where you can see the surface thus stunting depth orientation).

So along these lines, I also believe there are other courses every dive professional should hold, beyond the basics. One such course is simply local Fish ID. There is nothing worse than listening to a dive professional either brief a site or answering questions about the critters the diver saw and that instructor either has NO clue or gives horribly inaccurate info. Yeah yeah we are here to teach people to dive safely, but what is the purpose of diving? Most often the number one reason is to see stuff!! Perhaps in Florida, it would be basic cavern in place of Fish ID, and Ice Diving in Idaho, but you get my point.

So, while I agree with Peter regarding EANx, I do so because as I noted above, it is a part of our dive shop culture and routine. It is also is simply prudent when working with many students where dive professionals make many ascents. Another such basic course in our area that affects dive planning is Altitude. It is a basic course. So when are all you dive professionals coming for a visit so you can add this to your repertoire? We’ll hit Clear Lake – bring your fleece.

Diving in caverns, however, is not routine for our area. So for me, while I get the concepts, I do not feel it necessary or prudent that I must hold that experience to be considered well rounded (mind you as an active dive nut, I do have cavern and cave experience – but that was for personal diving and not because I thought I needed to as a dive professional). When a diver of mine is interested in such diving, I send them to a cavern/cave qualified instructor. If I try to be the Jack of all Trades dive professional, I believe dilution can occur. Instead of offering a selection of solid courses that are well suited for the areas I dive in or those that are feasible to teach and are prevelant (such as EANx), I could instead be certified to offer all courses and do a poor job in each? No thanks.

I do, however, feel a great responsibility as an instructor to have mastery in many areas and to be knowledgeable in many areas including keep apprised of new advents in the diving industry. One of my favorite ways of staying up on things, is participating in community forums such as SD.

So I guess in many ways, I am in agreement with most all of you, but in separate settings.

This is, in most respects, what I'm saying. Dependent on context, training in particular areas is essential. And shop policy, written or unwritten, is the key to making sure dive pros have what it takes to be effective leaders in the context where they are working.

Many of us have made the similar kinds of career progressions as you have, Peter. Like you, I had significant dive experience before I became a DM (though only about half as many dives as you did), and like you I didn't rush directly from DM to IDC in order to allow myself to gain experience, and like you I had done IANTD tech training before my professional training.... But my own personal career path and professional aspirations do not necessarily have to be mirrored by my DM students.

Again, like you, I sing the praises of nitrox certification not just to students but also to any of my divers who don't yet have the training. But I also follow standards when awarding certifications, and standards in my agency for DM course completion do not require a rating in nitrox. So yes, while I have been successful in getting every DM I have trained nitrox qualified, no, I would not require it if one of them were to demur.

Would I hire staff that are not nitrox qualified? No. Will the shop next door? That's their business.

[Quero]

Why should every dive professional here have a nitrox rating when a minority of the workplaces offer nitrox to the customers?

For the same reason that college students in technical disciplines (such as Engineering, Math, Physics, etc) are required to take courses in humanities and the social sciences. -JimG

Apples and oranges, Jim.

Taking a smattering of humanities courses does not make a person a specialist in humanities. Completing a specialty certification in nitrox presumably does make one a specialist in that particular area of dive training. (Besides, are engineers who earned their degrees from institutions that do not require humanities courses less able to do their jobs, or indeed make them less "professional"?)

Edited by Quero, 26 September 2008 - 06:41 PM.

[Quero]

Why should every dive professional here have a nitrox rating when a minority of the workplaces offer nitrox to the customers?

Because, like the customers on your liveaboard, divers tend to travel. The divers you certify in your area might like to travel to Japan or Australia. Where they can use nitrox. And to not have staff that understand the gas simply makes no sense to me.

There is an enormous difference, to my mind, between nitrox certification being available to divers (indeed, at my school, encouraged), and to the certification being required.

I do understand the economic issues involved. But honestly, I cannot believe that buying a book on nitrox is beyond the financial realm of a DM or other dive professional. There is now, even the option to take it online. I would imagine that even in the villages in Thailand someone has access to a computer and the internet. Surely the liveaboard companies do.

Standards in my agency require a practical component--a visit to a blending facility and tank analysis. In many villages in Thailand this is not possible, no.

But I will reiterate my point. I am FAR less worried about professional instruction where they don't understand nitrox, than I am about instructors who have poor skills and awareness. A lack of fundamental understanding of nitrox is merely indicative of a mindset which would make me uncomfortable in that instructors course.

I heartily agree with the "poor skills and awareness" part of your statement, but I think you are a bit harsh with the "indicative of a mindset" judgment. I would never rush to judgment on an instructor's capability based on whether s/he was nitrox rated, or could lay a line, or used a particular gear configuration.

A nitrox stick for constant blending costs less than one person's stay on a liveaboard.

As someone who actually owns a liveaboard with onboard nitrox blending capability, I can affirm that you are mistaken in your assumption of cost.

[Quero]

I do believe at some point [nitrox] should be tied to Advanced Open Water.

I hope that at some point it is! Nearly all of my AOW students also become nitrox certified at the same time. You might recall, George, that of my nine students on the Bonaire Singles Week trip, I taught nitrox to five of them!

[PerroneFord]

There is an enormous difference, to my mind, between nitrox certification being available to divers (indeed, at my school, encouraged), and to the certification being required.

Yes, you are correct. There is a difference. And one I am comfortable with. If I, as a diver, am unable to dive a site like the Spiegel Grove because I do not have the mandatory AOW certification card, yet possess skills beyond that of nearly every OW instructor I have encountered, then I can certainly say that I am comfortable with the requirement that ANY dive professional be conversant with the second most popular diving gas in the world.

Standards in my agency require a practical component--a visit to a blending facility and tank analysis. In many villages in Thailand this is not possible, no.

Fair enough.

I heartily agree with the "poor skills and awareness" part of your statement, but I think you are a bit harsh with the "indicative of a mindset" judgment. I would never rush to judgment on an instructor's capability based on whether s/he was nitrox rated, or could lay a line, or used a particular gear configuration.

Perhaps it is harsh. But I stand by it. I do not need an instructor who can lay a line. I could generally care less about their gear configuration as long as I felt it was safe, but to *me* a failure to become familiar with nitrox on a professional level is nearly inexcusable. I do make exception for those where it would constitute an unreasonable burden as you have mentioned you have in Thailand.

As someone who actually owns a liveaboard with onboard nitrox blending capability, I can affirm that you are mistaken in your assumption of cost.

Well let's see:

This one is US$2300.
http://www.nitroxmad.../NitroxStik.htm

We built our own for less than half that. But I realize that might not fly in a commercial system for liability and insurance reasons.



Let's compare to some popular liveaboard pricing:

Peter Hughes
http://www.peterhughes.com/rates.php

Nektons:
http://www.nektoncru...17/Default.aspx

An operator in your area:
http://www.liveaboar...ule.html#prices


Prices look pretty similar to me...

[peterbj7]

This has turned out to be an interesting thread! Just a couple of points:-

Although PADI make stipulations concerning "over teaching" and also stipulate their grounds for a student not being certified at the end of a course (neither of which requirement I'm comfortable with), I'm not aware that they require an instructor to teach any particular course to any particular student. If I choose to stipulate that any DM candidate I take on must by the time I certify them have been certified for nitrox, if they aren't already, then so long as I told them this up-front I don't believe I'm breaking any PADI rules even in spirit.

Indeed, on the general question of when an instructor may decline to certify a student, I raised this with a senior member of the PADI hierarchy a while ago. I said I greatly preferred the IANTD dictum that even if a student manages to achieve an acceptable standard on each of the circus tricks they're required to assimilate during the course, I am still at liberty to decline to certify the student if overall I feel they aren't at the required standard. Indeed I have done that and the student appealed to IANTD HO, who asked me a number of questions about how the training went, invited the student to comment on what I had said (no secrecy), and upheld my decision.

Anyway, I bemoaned the fact as I saw it that with PADI I didn't have that freedom, and that if the student could clear their mask, and hover without sculling, and all the other specific skills we have to teach, then I was obliged to certify them. "Not so" said the senior exec, and went on to say that although the wording was different, and clearly the higher you go up the certification ladder clearly more is required of you, nonetheless so long as I was applying a standard appropriate to the level being taught I WAS allowed to decline to certify a student, even though they had performed every trick. I've never actually done it, though I have required some students to do more dives when it was clear they weren't comfortable in the water. The question I ask myself is "if I were in charge of a dive boat, would I want this person diving with no supervision and just accompanied by another person with the same level of inability?". If the answer to that is "No" then I won't certify them until they have improved.

Another point concerned the cost of a nitrox generation system. It's way more than just the cost of the stick (if we're talking about the sort of stick that extracts nitrogen from air - there is also the sort that blends oxygen from a tank with incoming air), as with that by itself only low pressures can be achieved, and fill times are best measured with a calendar. A complete system is much more substantial and much more expensive, and quite unsuitable in scale for any dive boat I've ever come across.

The reason I feel so strongly about nitrox as compared with any other "starter" certifications is that what you learn (or should - I've come across quite a few nitrox certified divers with poor understanding) is fundamental to diving with any gas, including air. When starting a course I expect to spend quite a lot of time on the basics that evidently were never adequately learned in the first place.

[Quero]

I do make exception for those where it would constitute an unreasonable burden as you have mentioned you have in Thailand.

Thank you!

As I've been saying, context is crucial. In any given context, local dive professionals will need specific sets of qualifications, skills, and experience. In the context where you most often dive, an intimate understanding of mixed gases seems to be essential. Here, in contrast, in many shops and on many boats it is not necessary for every single dive pro to be nitrox rated in order to do their jobs effectively. Perhaps one day it will be. And when it is, I believe it will be market forces, primarily, that will stimulate the change. As more and more divers ask for nitrox, as more boats blend it for customer use, as more ops offer nitrox at no additional charge to nitrox divers/students, dive pros here will be hard pressed to find work unless they have the nitrox qualifications needed to deal with the emerging customer base.

[Quero]

Anyway, I bemoaned the fact as I saw it that with PADI I didn't have that freedom, and that if the student could clear their mask, and hover without sculling, and all the other specific skills we have to teach, then I was obliged to certify them. "Not so" said the senior exec, and went on to say that although the wording was different, and clearly the higher you go up the certification ladder clearly more is required of you, nonetheless so long as I was applying a standard appropriate to the level being taught I WAS allowed to decline to certify a student, even though they had performed every trick. I've never actually done it, though I have required some students to do more dives when it was clear they weren't comfortable in the water. The question I ask myself is "if I were in charge of a dive boat, would I want this person diving with no supervision and just accompanied by another person with the same level of inability?". If the answer to that is "No" then I won't certify them until they have improved.

Hear! Hear! My understanding (and I'm not a CD, so those of you who are, feel free to jump in) is that this refers to our evaluation of whether we consider that students have met the "mastery" standard (as opposed to simple "performance").

Getting back to the professional ratings, though, I would think that requiring a DM candidate to be nitrox certified, if s/he has met/surpassed all of the requirements actually listed in the standards, to be a something of a stretch. In order to make that stretch, it seems to me that you'd have to refer to the following parts of the standards (taken from the DM outline), and then explain why nitrox training is essential to fulfilling the required standard for problem solving:

Depth of theoretical knowledge goes hand-in-hand with expertise and professionalism. This is the foundation for problem solving and creativity in the divemaster’s duties, and for subsequent growth as a PADI Assistant Instructor. p. 1-1
Divemaster problem solving may include more than safety-related issues, and include handling customer service, business and operational challenges. p. vii

It would be interesting to learn from CDs around the world what percentage of DMs come to them for the IDC with/without nitrox certs. I took my current DMT around to meet CDs here (we have close to a dozen of IDCs on this small island and IEs every month), and they were quite pleased that I had him "nitrox ready" (including the requisite number of dives in order to apply for the instructor rating). Apparently, it's not the norm.

Again, while I do strongly encourage nitrox training for all divers who come to me, I can't honestly say that I'd be comfortable in requiring it in order to award a DM cert.