The Philosophy of Diver Training

[Kingpatzer]

"Good" is a loaded term.

The philosophy of getting a person to the point of being able to do the dives they want to do with a DM leading them succeeds in the market place as it exists.

Since the certification agencies are in the business of certifying divers, and since the dive resorts are in the business of serving divers, this model serves the business market quite well and there is no problem for a huge percentage of the market.

For those divers who want or need a higher level of training, there are various routes they can choose depending on their location, disposable income and particular desires. They can choose a technical route, or to pursue specialty and advanced training certifications, or to find a more experienced mentor, and so on. And for divers who are more active, they will develop their skills through use anyway.

That the majority of divers are not really interested in any of that, but rather are quite content to tool around the reef one or two times a year in calm clear warm water checking out the fishies is a big reason why the training model works so well. Those divers make up a bulk of the diving industry customers and that market requires a very low cost of entry since the divers who make up that market segment are not and never desire to be more than casual participants.

 

[Diver0001]

Many years ago, diver certification agencies designed their basic/open-water/initial diver training programs to prepare the diver to:

1. Be able to act as a contributing member of the buddy team (incorporating training in surface and sub-surface rescue of a conscious and non-conscious victim); and

2. Be able to dive with their buddy, independently (without the aid of a Divemaster or Instructor).

The movement away from the "independent focus" leaves Divemasters and Instructors with the added duties of addressing a group of less capable divers in the water. Buddies are less likely to have the skill-sets necessary to help if the needs arises (rescue), thus placing even more responsibility on the diving leader. The diving leader often finds themselves as the only diver capable of performing an in-water rescue (which doesn't offer him/her much assurance if they find themselves needing assistance themselves). On the other hand, this allows people to spend less time completing the training and gets them exposed to diving at a faster rate; which may increase equipment sales.

Is this training philosophy a good one in your opinion, or should more time be spent developing independence in diver training? How does this philosophy affect you as a diver or does it?

Wayne,

Years ago there weren't enough instructors and DM's to fill a proberbial thimble so divers *had* to be trained to a different standard in terms of independence.

These days divers have choices. They can become as independent as they wish, if they have the money and time to put into the necessary training. However, the baseline for getting into the sport is not as high as it might have been in the past.

Oh well.... things change. At the top levels, there are more divers and more *highly skilled* divers then there ever was in pioneering phase of our sport.

And your poll is missing an option. I can add it if you want:

"divers should be trained to whatever level makes them happy".

R..

 

[Walter]

What makes you think these are not still the goals of at least some diver certification agencies?

Bob, I don't believe Wayne said or implied it wasn't. He did imply it wasn't the goal of all of them. I don't know if it's a goal of all agencies or not, but it isn't happening in many instances.

 

[TSandM]

If you take your OW class in Cozumel, and your intent is to do three or four days of diving on your vacation and maybe never dive again, then you really only need to be able to breathe and control your buoyancy and follow a guide. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, except that the whole part about breathing and controlling buoyancy doesn't always seem to be reached.

If you want to dive in cold water, or independently anywhere, you need information about dive planning, decompression, navigation, buddy diving, and some basic rescue skills. As I help Peter teach, I can see that all that information (except maybe the dive planning) is IN the OW class; it's just that it often is rushed over and the student doesn't really absorb it. But given time and motivation, I think you can turn out a baby independent diver from today's OW class. The biggest problem is that too many people who are teaching weren't taught very well, and turn around and teach the way they learned.

 

[DCBC]

Bob, I don't believe Wayne said or implied it wasn't. He did imply it wasn't the goal of all of them. I don't know if it's a goal of all agencies or not, but it isn't happening in many instances.

Yes Walter, you are correct; it isn't what I said or implied.

 

[DCBC]

Years ago there weren't enough instructors and DM's to fill a proberbial thimble so divers *had* to be trained to a different standard in terms of independence.

I don't think anyone "had" to be trained in any particular way. Training a diver to be independent was seen as the responsible thing to do.

Rob, the philosophy of years ago was simply different. It was unacceptable for any instructor to certify anyone who was incapable of looking after themselves and their buddy on dive 1 after certification. Today the philosophy seems to have changed with some of the certification bodies. I've simply asked the question how people feel about this and how this does or does not affect them as a diver.

 

[Rhone Man]

I think there is a difference between 'training' and 'certifying'.

Personally I don't have a problem with DSD/"resort" courses that leave the diver dependant upon the instructor, so long as they know their limits and don't dive without an instructor.

 

[Diver0001]

Wayne,

I respect your inquisitive nature and the discussion will certainly be stimulating. (as always)

However, you're asking the question out of context.

The context of modern training is not the same as the context of the training you're talking about. Certain assumptions regarding the support system and infrastructure available to beginners today make certain assumptions about what is "responsible" or not take on a different "value" than they did when that infrastructure was not available.

In short... yes instructors in your day may have felt that certifying divers who needed "supervision" was unacceptable... but those students didn't have the options they have today.... it would be interesting to know what those very same instructors would have thought if they lived in the same world we have now....

R..

 

[DCBC]

Wayne,

I respect your inquisitive nature and the discussion will certainly be stimulating. (as always)

However, you're asking the question out of context.

The context of modern training is not the same as the context of the training you're talking about. Certain assumptions regarding the support system and infrastructure available to beginners today make certain assumptions about what is "responsible" or not take on a different "value" than they did when that infrastructure was not available.

In short... yes instructors in your day may have felt that certifying divers who needed "supervision" was unacceptable... but those students didn't have the options they have today.... it would be interesting to know what those very same instructors would have thought if they lived in the same world we have now....

As I'm under the impression that I live (and teach diving) in today's world; I'm one individual who could answer your question. But I think you have an idea how I might answer it already. I did however pose the original questions to survey what others think, not to sell any position that I may have.

 

[greylion]

Sinbad and greylion, the fact that some people dive infrequently is a reason their training should be more complete, not less. Their skill proficiency will decline through disuse. I would think it would be a better idea to have their proficiency decline from a 10 to an 8 than from a 3 to a 1.

I also believe it is a diver's responsibility to practice their skills after a long lay off prior to diving again. This is important for their safety and the safety of their buddy.

Assuming you disagree with my points and you believe vacation divers are not worthy of or don't need more complete training, why train everyone in the same manner?

Getting to the original point.....

I agree that's what they ought to do, but many just don't. DSAO is a great goal with continued training, but for those that don't, use a dive master or at least be with some more experienced divers when you can until it's not a problem.