Master.........Really?

[Colliam7]

So when someone actually teaches one of these odd specialties, how is it decided what to charge and does PADI actually get money from it?

Generally, when an Instructor teaches a Distinctive Specialty, the amount s/he charges is their decision. For example, I teach Self-Reliant Diver, and charge for my time, for the materials that I provide to the students, and for my incidental expenses (e.g. fuel costs for driving to the dive site). Another Instructor might charge a different fee for teaching the same course. Irrespective of the fee, the course standards / content are the same, and are specified in the Instructor Guide.

PADI generates revenue from two sources:

1. They charge a fee to the prospective Instructor, at the time that Instructor submits paperwork to be credentialed to teach the DS (Specialty Course Instructor Application). FWIW, they also charge a fee whenever an Instructor applies (same form) to be certified to teach a 'standardized' specialty.

2. They charge a fee for processing a student certification in the particular Distinctive Specialty, be it submitted (by the Instructor) online, or as a paper PIC.

Depending on the Distinctive Specialty, the originator / innovator of then specialty may also charge a fee for training new Instructors in the conduct of the course. In some cases, the specialty requires that an instructor go through a specific training process / course. In others, the Instructor submits certification paperwork documenting that they have met the pre-requisite requirements for certification as an Instructor for that specialty (the History of Experience section of the Application). PADI is not involved in the financial transaction associated with training 'courses' for Distinctive Specialties.

 

[JamesBon92007]

I teach Self-Reliant Diver

This is exactly what concerns me about modern scuba certification. When I took my course they only kind of diver they certified was Self-Reliant Divers. My understanding is that limitations are placed upon various degrees of certification and the graduating students are expected to stay within those confines. I'm sure many will, but also pretty sure others won't.

Does anyone currently teach one, complete course? SSI, perhaps? I hear NASDS is still around (in Europe, I think). There is a fairly recent thread discussing such a course so I'm guessing there isn't one.

 

[Colliam7]

This is exactly what concerns me about modern scuba certification. When I took my course they only kind of diver they certified was Self-Reliant Divers. . . . Does anyone currently teach one, complete course? SSI, perhaps? I hear NASDS is still around (in Europe, I think).

Well, we can all bark at the moon, and curse the rain. And, I will pour a glass of whiskey and join you on the front porch to talk about the past, although I admit I am more interested in the whiskey than the barking and cursing. But, why confine that to scuba training.

Nothing today is like it was ‘back in the day’. It is always so very tempting to look back on our own education and training – in whatever field of endeavor, be it scuba, science, aviation, . . . - and boast of how rigorous it was, implying that it was somehow better than what goes on today; and, by inference, that we are somehow better / tougher / more competent than today’s ‘product’, as a result of what we went through. Like many of those who regularly walk down memory lane, I too used to walk 5 miles to school each day, then 5 miles back home, uphill both ways, barefoot, even through the deep July snows. In fact, way back in ’07, or at least way back in 1967, as a university freshman I actually had Saturday classes, while youngsters today actually complain if they have to go to class on Friday. What is happening with education, and with the younger generation??? My residency and fellowship were demanding. I actually would go in to the hospital before sun-up and some days not leave until after the sun had set! OMG!!! And, guess what? Those facts don’t mean a thing with regard to the quality and substance of my undergraduate experience and post-graduate training compared to today’s students, and residents and fellows, except that just maybe we have figured out how to be more efficient in teaching and facilitating learning. In scuba training, as in other forms of education and training, just maybe we have figured out a better, quicker, faster, cheaper way to do something. Just maybe, we realize that learning might be facilitated if we divide the ‘course pie’ – be it open water training or physics - into more digestible chunks, so there is less rote memorization and more actual learning. Perhaps, more to the point – the retrospectroscope has VERY rose-colored lenses. If there was a market for that one size fits all, comprehensive course, you would see it being offered as the 'standard' product. And, no, you won’t see it in SSI, an organization that understands the contemporary training marketplace.

Certainly dive training has evolved. It is more structured, less of an ‘apprenticeship’ and more of a standardized course of study, and it is more physically inclusive - you don't have to be a male, sculpted, Olympic athlete to become a diver. If a number of ‘early’ instructors were ex-military, that really wasn’t surprising. Some were very good, but not all were Mike Nelson. They often taught the way they had been trained, even though what they had been trained for was NOT what most civilians wanted or needed to learn, in order to dive. The fact of the matter is that dive training is NOT UDT/R, it is NOT BUD/S, and it doesn’t need to be. And, it doesn't need to be one, and only one course. Rather, it can be, and maybe should be, an evolutionary learning process. But, if someone wants to offer a single, comprehensive course, and s/he finds students who want that approach, good for them! I will stand and applaud. I learned buddy breathing years ago as part of my training. Now, buddy breathing is an optional skill in the (PADI) DM curriculum. I still teach it, because I think it is fun, and because I think it helps build confidence in the DM candidate. But, I cannot and will not criticize an instructor who does not teach it. The DMs they produce may well be every bit as competent as those that train with me. For that matter, I have DM candidates learn to breath off a cylinder valve - no regulator - also because I think it is fun, and because I think it helps build confidence in the DM candidate. And, some instructors even think that is a risky practice. But, that is how I choose to teach, in the 21st century. If I find that nobody wants to take DM with me because of how I teach, just maybe I will rethink those practices.

I choose not to live in the past, irrespective of how fondly I might remember it. I choose to learn from the past, and live and teach better in the present as a result of that learning.

 

[Rhone Man]

I know we have a lot of threads which joke about the most ludicrous PADI distinctive specialties, but I have to say, I am more impressed when I see extremely practical specialties, clearly thought out by instructors who care about diver education. Some of the best that I have seen offered:

• Advanced kicking techniques
• Twinset diver
• Decompression theory
• Extreme current procedures
• Low visibility diver
• Advanced wreck diving

I have always been a little surprised that some of those didn't go mainstream (although I suspect at least two of them deal with areas with clash with the public image of diving that PADI wants to promote).

 

[Bob DBF]

In scuba training, as in other forms of education and training, just maybe we have figured out a better, quicker, faster, cheaper way to do something. Just maybe, we realize that learning might be facilitated if we divide the ‘course pie’ – be it open water training or physics - into more digestible chunks, so there is less rote memorization and more actual learning.

I agree, for the most part, with your post. The problem I see with the system is that even though only a portion of the original class is taught, the graduates are still given the same certification as the prior complete course. This would be similar to changing, say a bachelors degree, into four one year courses and after the first year giving those graduates the bachelors degree.


Bob

 

[boulderjohn]

This is exactly what concerns me about modern scuba certification. When I took my course they only kind of diver they certified was Self-Reliant Divers.

The Self-Reliant diver course is nothing like the way things used to be, when courses were so wonderful and the fatality rates for divers were several times higher than they are today. For example, it requires the student learn to carry and use a redundant air source, something that was never a part of the marvelous training back in that golden age.

As for how much money PADI makes on a Distinctive Specialty course and how the course is priced, Colliam7 was exactly right. Once the course has been approved and the instructor certified to teach it, the only money PADI makes is the certification handling fee. The course is priced by the individual instructor/shop for whatever they think is appropriate, considering their overhead, etc. If the student just wants the course without a certification card, PADI does not get a dime when the student takes the course.

Most of the unusually named courses, like Zombie Apocalypse, are just ways to gather interest in a course that actually teaches worthwhile skills in a fun environment--as that course does. If you get past the title, you will see that the student is actually learning something valuable while taking instruction at a reasonable rate of pay for the instructor/shop.

So why make all these courses PADI-approved Distinctive Specialties? Why not just teach the course without the approval? It's for legal protection. A friend and I collaborated on a workshop with no certification involved, one that worked on good, solid advanced kicking skills (frog kick, modified frog kick, back kick, etc.), buoyancy, and trim. My friend was an attorney, and he consulted with other attorneys after teaching it for a while. He was advised that if there were an accident while doing the workshop and he were sued, he would have to prove to the satisfaction of an untrained jury that what he did in that workshop was within the standards of the dive industry and not some rogue thing that he came up with. By having the course approved as a Distinctive Specialty, he would not have to do that any more. The fact that the largest agency in the world had reviewed the course content and approved it shifted the burden of proof to the plaintiff, and they would find it almost impossible to argue against that approval. So my kicking, buoyancy, and trim workshop is also now a Distinctive Specialty, and for the same reason.

 

[boulderjohn]

The problem I see with the system is that even though only a portion of the original class is taught, the graduates are still given the same certification as the prior complete course.

Buddy breathing was removed from basic scuba instruction in part because of the nearly 100% use of alternate air sources and the research that showed that skilled use of buddy breathing in an emergency was highly unlikely without a HUGE amount of training , Consequently, it caused a severe risk of creating a 2-victim incident. In the unlikely situation where I am OOA and near a buddy with no alternate air source, I will do a CESA rather than risk my life buddy breathing.

Can you name anything else taught back in that golden era that has been removed from instruction since then, and can you explain the importance of that loss? I learned to dive in the last millennium, and I have the standards for the course I was taught then. There is nothing missing, and a number of things have been added.

 

[Rhone Man]

Can you name anything else taught back in that golden era that has been removed from instruction since then, and can you explain the importance of that loss? I learned to dive in the last millennium, and I have the standards for the course I was taught then. There is nothing missing, and a number of things have been added.

I kind of miss the emergency ascent. You only have to do it once to embed in your brain that the surface is a lot further away than it looks and you should take running out of gas seriously.

 

[boulderjohn]

I kind of miss the emergency ascent. You only have to do it once to embed in your brain that the surface is a lot further away than it looks and you should take running out of gas seriously.

It depends upon what agency you are talking about and what you mean by an emergency ascent. For PADI, the Controlled Emergency Ascent is very much a part of the course. If a buoyant emergency ascent was ever part of the training, it was before my time.

 

[BDSC]

Can you name anything else taught back in that golden era that has been removed from instruction since then

This should be interesting as we always seem to read/hear about how much was taught in the scuba courses way back when and how everything has been "dumbed down" now.