50 replies to this topic

[Dive_Girl]

First, I really hate having this discussion, but always seem to get drawn into it to correct incorrect or misleading statements...

One philosophy is:

Diving is fun and easy. It is possible to make the course easy as well if we eliminate skills that might possibly frighten anyone on their first day of class. If too many skills are included, it results in task loading which will interfere with a student learning necessary tasks and make them an unsafe diver.

PADI follows the first philosophy, YMCA and NAUI follow the second.  I'm not familiar enough with standards of other agencies to tell you which philosophy they follow.

A second philosophy is:

Diving is fun and easy. It is possible to make the course easy as well if we begin with simple skills, teach how to complete teach skill and allow plenty of practice time on each skill. Once a simple skill is mastered, other elements are added, allowing plenty of time to practice each element. When those added elements are mastered, still more elements are added in the same manner. By approaching skill development in this manner, we are able to teach quite complex skills in a manner that is easy for students. Skill which might seem frightening to a student on the first day of class are a logical and easy progression by the time those skills are presented in class. This gives a student confidence and the ability to solve problems without panic.

While your post is interesting to read Walter, I do feel the need to point out your post is your opinion and not necessarily fact. For example, I am a PADI instructor who disagrees with you statement that PADI follows the first philosophy you described. I feel that the PADI program also follows the second philosophy. I'm not going respond tit for tat or get into a debate here as it is unecessary, but to imply that the PADI program follows the first philosphy based on what skills are conducted on the first day of class is misleading. On the first day of a PADI of class students are taking their regulators out of their mouths and putting water in their masks, two basic concepts (no reg and water up the nose) that I see student divers struggle with physcially and mentally and not ones that I feel are easy for everyone. The PADI program builds on skills and promotes mastery as well. In addition, I have a minimum number of skills I need complete the first day of class, but I can continue teaching skills as I see fit as long as I follow a modular order, designed to "build" up to complex skills after mastering simpler skills - which alligns with your second philosphy.

It appears to me (and in my opinion) from your post and from others I have read that perhaps you greatly dislike PADI (am I mistaken?). You are obviously entitled to your opinion, however, please don't contribute, again as you noted yourself in your first sentence of your post, to misleading statements. I find it misleading for any one person to summarize or define agency philosophies, unless I am completely mistaken and missed your PADI philosophy in a mission statement or defined philosophy on the PADI official Website or in my instructor manual?

I do my best to respect other instructors working hard in their craft and be privy to other agency standards so as to better understand the current diving industry environment. But far be it for me to make statements about those other agencies, but I feel confident in making statements about my own. I'm also just trying to train safe divers and I guess I get a little tired of defending my agency because they have aggressive marketing tactics/campaigns or because they are the largest organization.

Please don't hesitate to let me know if I read something wrong.

Respectfully,
-nicolle

Edited by Dive_Girl, 04 December 2004 - 11:47 PM.

[Diverbrian]

dont know if its an s.s.i standard... but we were required to tread water for 20 minutes.... no distance swim

In that case, standards were violated and SSI's concept did not work in this case. You should report the incident to SSI.

I should pull my copy of the SSI standards, but we don't know the full story.

Our classes tend to do the longer snorkel swim (which is done without a BC so we will know if someone is uncomfortable in the water) and we have the students vary their kicks in order to practice the various kicks. We do NOT tell students the standards as we don't want anyone tempted to shoot for minimum and think that they "are there". This may be what happened in that case.

We have had one student uncomfortable in the water. We taught the pool portion (as once a BC was on them they were very comfortable) but told the individual to take a swimming class at the community center and take the swim test before we signed off the Scuba I and let them take Scuba II which is actual open water training. They are now one of our best and most avid divers.

Nicolle...

I happen to have had the privilege of seeing a PADI shop in Provo that backed their instructor who wouldn't sign a student off. I wanted to applaud as normally the "pass 'em and move 'em" philosphy (regardless of organization) tends to be more prevalent in the resort areas. Also, many of my favorite charter ops and instructors happen to be PADI, but I know excellent instructors from all of the agencies.

As I said, if I were to cross over, I have a personal preference. I may have to if I wish to work as the shop is small and full up of instructors. As a result, I have given alot of thought to which agency that I would cross over to after securing my SSI Instructor rating in a couple of years. But, I won't discuss that preference here out of concern for heating up the topic (which is actually quite civil. I just don't want to light the first flame, LOL).

There has to be some level of flexiblity as the GUE instructors down in Detroit teach PADI OW courses. The shop in Kingston, ONT is GUE/PADI as well. GUE does not promote "standard" recreational gear. I am sure that these instructors are teaching OW in Hogarthian Rig which requires some creativity for snorkel work. I just tend to observe more flexibility in the instructors that I know from the other agencies than I do with PADI instructors as a general rule.

Edited by Diverbrian, 05 December 2004 - 01:39 AM.

[maxdvr]

dont know if its an s.s.i standard... but we were required to tread water for 20 minutes.... no distance swim

In that case, standards were violated and SSI's concept did not work in this case. You should report the incident to SSI.

these were all in the pool... guess i should have made it clear... laps around the pool...no touched downs for 20 minutes.....but its a small pool so it was treadin water...i acted as the weakest swimmer and barely made wake.... now with a bc he was comfortable enough...just had absolutly no controlll over his body...heck even standin in 3 ft of water... he splashed enough around that i need to put my mask on.... i know for me...i would not have been comfortable diving wiith him in ow.... guess i should just read instead of typed

[TraceMalin]

can't believe that this thread started from the Specialty thread Peter started about (W)reckless diving to which I made a tongue in cheek PADI joke. Which is just what it was -- a joke.

Anyway, let's put agency training within the industry in its proper perspective by comparing it to education. Teachers in the public school system usually enter the profession after attending college and picking up education courses. Some declare majors such as Elementary Education while others might major in Math or English and pick up Secondary Education. In doing so, they learn teaching methods and complete field experience observation and student teaching and take tests to gain their certification. They do this after years of being students from K - 12. Likewise, instructor candidates come into instructor courses after having been students of both an academic educational system and students of scuba diving beginning at the open water level. Just as teachers choose various colleges, scuba instructor candidates choose various dive centers from which to learn how to teach scuba diving and learn methods, and do field experience by observing as DM's and then do student teaching as they go through their instructor training.

Scuba instructors are teachers of diving and teach various subjects the same way elementary teachers teach various subjects. So, in reality, in scuba training you are learning elementary academic information about physics, physiology, marine environments, etc., and the actual pool and open water training is comparable to learning a game in gym class or going to baseball practice because you are learning motor skills. Or, Just like Driver's Ed in HS, scuba training is Diver's Ed.

Now, here's the important part:

If you compare agencies to boards of education which create standards for teaching and student learning and dive centers to colleges, we are all aware of one thing as past school students -- some teachers really sucked while others were awesome! What made teachers awesome? Was it that they were all taught at Ivy League colleges? Of course not! An Ivy League Education does not necessarily make an excellent teacher. Just like a diver who has been trained by every agency, the US Navy, commercial diving schools and the ghost of Jacques Cousteau might be an excellent and knowlegable diver, but might not make a good diving teacher (instructor). A teacher could have come from one of the lowest ranking colleges and be exceptional even despite having lousy professors and poor cooperating school teachers during observation and student teaching. A scuba instructor could come from the worst LDS and the worst agency and be an outstanding instructor. Why is that? Because it is an instructor's whole life and their dive experience and things he/she learned through experience combined with natural teaching talent and true caring that makes that instructor great.

So, IT IS THE INSTRUCTOR AND NOT THE AGENCY THAT MATTERS.

I spend a lot of time training for scuba and freediving at Dutch Springs Diving and Recreational Facility in Bethlehem, PA. There is no dive center on site and the owner, Stu Schooley, wants it that way. They do air & nitrox fills and have a gift shop, but no dive center or training because Stu never wated be in competition with the dive shops from NY, NJ, CT, MA, RI, DE, MD, VA, DC that bring students to Dutch for training. There can be thousands of divers and several dozen dive centers representing every known agency there on any given weekend including the NYPD dive team, West Point's dive club, and commercial divers. Personally, I have learned so much as an instructor by watching and listening to other instructors. You can learn something from just about anybody and I have seen awesome instructors and crappy instructors from every agency.

As a PDIC instructor, I can tell you that the best instructors I've ever met were PDIC IT's who were GUE IT's (mentors) too. The very worst instructors I've ever met were also PDIC and the worst boat I'd ever been on (dangerous diving) was a PADI shop in the Bahamas. Near the top of the heap, just below the GUE mentors are a NAUI instructor and a PADI instructor who are IANTD/TDI tech instructors. Near the bottom of the heap is an SSI instructor who has been diving since the early 70's. The most caring instructor I've ever met was YMCA & NASDS. The two worst equipped shops were BSAC and PADI. The two most dishonest instructors I've met were SSI. The most courageous instructor (refused to violate the Constitutional rights of students by taking on the FBI) was PADI. I could go on...

The thing about PADI is that it is large enough to have lots of instructors worlwide. Some are beyond amazing and others are incredibly poor. The absolute worst diver I've ever met was a PADI instructor who played a joke on his friend by pulling his BCD's CO2 cartridge at 150 feet sending him rocketing to the surface and into DCS. Conversely, one of the best diver's I've ever met was a PADI instructor. I know about PADI training because I observed several complete IDC's and I have all of PADI's manuals including instructor manuals. In class, there were students who passed who were going to be great instructors and students who just passed and would probably be mediocre at best.

A great diver isn't produced by an agency, an instructor, experience, or him or herself. A great diver is produced by a combination of all of these and all of one's life experience, education, natural abilities, talents, etc. When great divers also have talent to teach and truly care about students they can become great instructors and they come from every agency.

Think back on your best school teachers or professors. What made them great?

Scuba instructors are simply teachers and the same rules apply.



Trace

[ScubaHawk]

Damn good answer Trace. I'm sorry I took the thread into a more serious vein than you intended. I would like to thank everyone for their input. I have a lot to more to mull over before I decide where and when to take the next step in my addiction.

[Walter]

Nicolle,

I really do hate these discussions. People tend to feel they've been attacked when anything less than complimentary is said about their agency. I do know lots of excellent PADI instructors. I believe they would be even better if not constricted by PADI's standards.

to imply that the PADI program follows the first philosphy based on what skills are conducted on the first day of class is misleading.

If that was what I had done, I would agree with you. With the exception of the PADI program, this would impossible. PADI is the only agency, of which I'm aware, that requires specific skills to be taught in the first session. Other agencies allow instructors to present required skills in any order they feel is best. I base it on the skills that have been removed from the standards of the entire program, not on what is presented on the first day. Skin diving skills are almost (there are 3 required skills, in 1972, PADI had 8 required skills) nonexistent. Swimming is no longer (in 1977 it was 200 yds in less than 5 minutes) a real requirement. Unassisted doff & don and bailout have been replaced with removing and replacing the SCUBA unit with minimal assistance if necessary. Rescue skills have been removed from the course. Taking so many skills out of those required by the PADI standards, I believe fits in quite nicely with the statement, "It is possible to make the course easy as well if we eliminate skills that might possibly frighten anyone on their first day of class." Of course it is my opinion. It is my opinion which I reached after a careful study of the facts.

I can continue teaching skills as I see fit as long as I follow a modular order, designed to "build" up to complex skills after mastering simpler skills - which alligns with your second philosphy.

Of course you can, but the skills are required to be introduced in a fashion that precludes you (in some instances) from moving from simple to more complex. The most complex have been removed entirely.

It appears to me (and in my opinion) from your post and from others I have read that perhaps you greatly dislike PADI (am I mistaken?).

I cetainly dislike their standards, because I believe they allow average and below average instructors to produce unsafe divers. I believe it is the purpose of standards to force instructors to produce safe divers if those standards are followed to the letter.

Trace,

Your statement:

IT IS THE INSTRUCTOR AND NOT THE AGENCY THAT MATTERS.

implies (perhaps implies is too weak a word for your statement) the agency does not matter at all. That means there's no need for standards. I disagree with the concept.

[bluedolphin]

Before I was allowed to take my OWI class all students were required to pass a swim test (it had several components), and pass a pre dive physical. If you did not pass the swim test you could not take the course until you took swim classes someplace, and we were reqired to present a doctors note regarding fitness for diving.

[peterbj7]

I happen to have had the privilege of seeing a PADI shop in Provo that backed their instructor who wouldn't sign a student off.

I remember a referral course I taught at my old dive center in the UK when I was a weekend instructor - they were just doing class & pool, and would do their 4 OW dives in warmer climes. 8 students (way too many, as I've previously said is my view) and after 5 hours of pool work I was distinctly unsure of the buoyancy abilities of 3 of them. I said I wanted them to have more practice before I could sign them off for the OW dives with another instructor who'd never seen them in the water - I would have been uncomfortable taking them out myself.

They complained to management who immediately signed them off - he did tell me he'd done it, but didn't consult me. That was the last course I taught there.

I teach PADI here in Belize (as well as IANTD) and probably breach Standards much of the time, because I go beyond what PADI allows. With tables, for example, I add some of the theory behind them and in their construction so that instead of just remembering which table to go to and which to go to next with what value, and often getting it wrong, they understand what they're doing. They are usually slower because they're thinking about it but they always get it right. And with nitrox courses I do quite a lot of my PADI teaching from the IANTD Adv Nitrox manual. Makes the course longer but usually produces enthusiastic members who want to go on.

In the water I have always included sending up a DSMB (safety sausage) as part of the course, as both in the UK and here in warmer clearer water there is a strong case for using one on every dive (unless there's an anchor line handy).

So should I be QA'd by PADI?

[Dive_Girl]

I really do hate these discussions.  People tend to feel they've been attacked when anything less than complimentary is said about their agency.  I do know lots of excellent PADI instructors.  I believe they would be even better if not constricted by PADI's standards.

I don't feel personally attacked. I just feel as though whenever discussions of agencies occur anywhere, PADI is the first to be attacked and often I just let it go. I, similar to your line of thinking above, feel that people tend to attack PADI because they are the largest and have created, from a business sense, a successful business model. New divers tend to be happy with their training and divers who have been around forever rant about how things used to be and how the program has been dumbed down...etc. Things are never "like they used to be." I'm also happy to be "allowed" to teach a sport that used to do it's best to exclude women. So maybe I have another competely different aspect of the sport. Or maybe it's just been dumned down enough or enough skills removed that I can finally particpate...riiiight...

Oh, and coming from a legal background, I personally appreciate standards. It is one of the reasons I have stayed with PADI, although I have thus far had three other agencies ask me to cross-over.

I agree with you about the Rescue portion of OW. I saw how some rescue skills were introduced to OW divers in the NAUI program and really liked it. I am happy to note that with the release of PADI revised Rescue program OW divers are able to join in some rescue skill sessions, which I plan to incorporate into my newest OW class starting this week. I don't know that I would agree with you on the skin diving skills, as much of what people have learned about skin diving has changed over the years and so some skills previously taught in the 70s (methods of descending for example) are outdated or unecessary in a scuba course.

Swimming is no longer (in 1977 it was 200 yds in less than 5 minutes) a real requirement.

So, to be a "real requirement" the swim must be timed? A 200yd swim is still a real requirement in PADI OW. So it's not timed, so some people are more aerobic instead of anaerobic sprinters? Should they not be allowed to particpate in scuba? I have seen older women handle diving better than "fit" 19 year old guys. I guess again, I just have a different perspective of diving.

I cetainly dislike their standards, because I believe they allow average and below average instructors to produce unsafe divers. I believe it is the purpose of standards to force instructors to produce safe divers if those standards are followed to the letter.

And from my perspective, when an instructor has little to no standards in which to be accountable to, there leaves a wide margin of crappy that can occur as well.

And I am one of those PADI instructors who have not signed off some particular students or who have not signed divers into dive professional programs. If a diver is unsafe, unfit, or unready, it is my personal call as the instructor as it is my liability. Just come and try to argue to me, the signing off instructor, that skill mastery was acheived on every standard, so I "have to sign you off." Good luck with that. Oh wait, did I just rely on those evil standards?

Ah well, I'm sure that I can't change your perspective, but I can tell you that I am open minded and enjoy what I learn that other angencies do well. So keep the info coming.

Edited by Dive_Girl, 05 December 2004 - 03:11 PM.

[Walter]

Hi again Nicolle,

I don't feel personally attacked.

Good!

I, similar to your line of thinking above, feel that people tend to attack PADI because they are the largest and have created, from a business sense, a successful business model.

That's not my line of thinking. I believe people complain about any agency because they don't like the standards or don't like what they think are the standards. Size doesn't matter. (sorry, I couldn't resist)

New divers tend to be happy with their training

Yes, and most new divers, even ones who had an instructor we'd agree was poor, think that instructor is the best instructor on the planet. They don't know any better. They only know what was in the book/video/CD and what their instructor told them. Most of them have no understanding of the panic cycle (which should be required in all SCUBA classes at any level) and have no idea just how close to panic they are any time they get in the water.

divers who have been around forever rant about how things used to be and how the program has been dumbed down

I don't give a rat's behind how things used to be. I care about what works and what produces safe divers. Two things would make divers safer overnight. 1. Learning the panic cycle and how to break it and 2. Better skills such as: requiring divers to swim (no loopholes), mastering skin diving, doff & don and bailout.

I'm also happy to be "allowed" to teach a sport that used to do it's best to exclude women.

Sorry to disillusion you, but women were YMCA SCUBA instructors before PADI existed. In fact, two women were in the first class of YMCA SCUBA Instructors in 1959. Frankie Wingert was the Director of the YMCA SCUBA Program in 1986, the first female to hold such a position with any agency. PADI didn't exist early enough to be a ground breaker in opening SCUBA to women.

Or maybe it's just been dumned down enough or enough skills removed that I can finally particpate...riiiight...

Actually, removing skills makes the class faster, but more difficult. Adding in more skills actually makes it easier to learn to dive. Removing skills is an economic move only, it does nothing for training except speed it up. You'd have (and so would your students) an easier job if you were to teach more skills. You're confusing skills with presentation. There was a time when diving wasn't taught. It was presented. You could do it or you washed out. That is and always was ridiculous. All of the skills that folks used to fail are easy if you have someone actually teach you how to do it and if it comes in the correct sequence. One of the things on my business card is, "We specialize in Cowards." I put that on because I can teach people to dive who can't get it in the "dumbed down" courses.

Oh, and coming from a legal background, I personally appreciate standards. It is one of the reasons I have stayed with PADI, although I have thus far had three other agencies ask me to cross-over.

In that case, you might consider a crossover. Standards for most other agencies are much easier to read and understand. One thing I frequently see on various bulletin boards is PADI instructors arguing over what PADI standards require you to do and what they forbid you from doing. You'd be better protected legally if your standards were clear. I don't know this would ever happen to you, but I know my attorney has defended a PADI instructor when PADI laid all the blame on him for not following standards when he was doing his best to follow them.

I am happy to note that with the release of PADI revised Rescue program OW divers are able to join in some rescue skill sessions, which I plan to incorporate into my newest OW class starting this week.

Super! A step in the right direction. Now if they'll start to require it in OW courses.......

I don't know that I would agree with you on the skin diving skills, as much of what people have learned about skin diving has changed over the years and so some skills previously taught in the 70s (methods of descending for example) are outdated or unecessary in a scuba course.

We disagree here. Skin diving hasn't changed. Learning skin diving makes learning SCUBA much easier. One issue I hear frequently from new divers and students asking for help on various boards is no mask breathing. Apparently, this is a difficult skill for many students/divers. I've never had students who had more than minor difficulty with this skill. It's the first skill they learn and they don't even know they're learning it. They think they're learning to breathe through a snorkel.

So, to be a "real requirement" the swim must be timed?

Nope. I see absolutely no need for timed swims at any level.

A 200yd swim is still a real requirement in PADI OW.

It is not. The student can opt for a 300 yd snorkel instead of the swim. It's only a requirement if there's no loophole to get around it.

And from my perspective, when an instructor has little to no standards in which to be accountable to, there leaves a wide margin of crappy that can occur as well.

I have absolutely no idea what you mean by that statement, please elucidate.

If a diver is unsafe, unfit, or unready, it is my personal call as the instructor as it is my liability. Just come and try to argue to me, the signing off instructor, that skill mastery was acheived on every standard, so I "have to sign you off.

I commend you. Unfortunately, PADI will issue the card even if you don't sign off if the student has complied with minimum standards. You may even have a QA issue for failing to sign off on the unsafe student.

[peterbj7]

Stepping aside from the Walter-Nicolle confrontation.....

Trace, I presume PDIC has a meaning that isn't rude?

[Walter]

No confrontation, merely a discussion.

PDIC - Professional Diving Instructors Corporation

[Dive_Girl]

Yes, no confrontation, but if that is how it's being viewed then I'll move off this thread.

[Marvel]

Yes, no confrontation, but if that is how it's being viewed then I'll move off this thread.

No, no! I see it as an exchange of ideas- you are both presenting logical arguments for debate- keep it up!

[Walter]

Nicolle, come back! Don't run away. I still don't understand the one reference. I'm also willing to bet you have lots more to contribute to this discussion. I respect you and your point of view (I'm sure you knew that, that's for anyone who got the wrong idea). I'll also defend your right to express it.