Allen42 once bubbled...
I'll bet you can learn to be a pilot from a guy with a "minimum of experience".
There are plenty of examples of very experienced but terrible instructors. There are plenty of examples of inexperienced, but very good instructors.
I'm not sure what bashing a picture or organization does for the sport of diving. If you wanna improve things, I suggest you contact PADI Tec politely, and tell them your observations and what it means to your impressions of their offerings.
FWIW, what's wrong with kneeling on a sandy bottom? C'mon people, let's *promote* the scuba community.
There is so much wrong with this it is unreal. Forgive me if this comes out harsh...I just have a major problem with the mentality of "if you can dive, you can DM, if you can DM you can instruct, if you can instruct you can instruct tech". No! Wrong! Tech diving is NOT for everyone (PADI got that part right in their literature, just not in practical application it seems).
1.) Yeah, when you become a pilot or a pilot instructor you take your test from an INDEPENDENT body not the school who trained you.
2.) Sure you can teach a university course and know nothing about the subject...doesn't make it right...in fact it's quite pathetic. Hence the reason for checking your prof's bio prior to signing up for the course.
3.) If you are going to teach "technical" diving...you had better know what you are doing from having done it over and over and over again in a variety of environments WITHOUT STUDENTS or in a CLASSROOM setting.
4.) If an agency ANY agency puts out a program which is asking for Dawin's stepchildren to become an instuctor of technical (ie. overhead) diving, then we as divers have a duty to call it for what it is in hopes that someone who doesn't do their research isn't thrust upon a one year wonder who gets them killed. Ask your LDS this question...sure you are willing to accept students as Tech Instructors but would YOU hire them to teach with the bare minimum experience? Would you trust your friends and family with them?
5.) Go back and re-read/examine the ad...if you honestly don't know what's wrong with kneeling on the bottom in a tech course you don't understand tech diving very well...it ain't done in twenty feet.
Without mentioning any agencies by name...I know of one agency which REQUIRES all their instructors to dive OUTSIDE of the classroom a minimum number of dives a year at a level ABOVE that which they are teaching.
In the "adventure sport" arena...experience counts in an instructor.
I'm also a rock climber, have done mountaineering and whitewater kayak. In each circumstance, the experience of the instructor combined with a phenomenal teaching style was crucial.
I learned how to lead climb on 5.7 granite cracks from a guy who lead climbs 5.13D-5.14A. He walks up 5.10 cracks in his approach shoes. I looked into the requirements for him to become a certified rock guide...intense! He had to show ability far above what he was instructing and be examined by an outside group who made him "on-sight" climbs of their chosing. He also had to submit a climbing resume demonstrating his abilities and be open to have the veracity of his resume challenged.
I learned to kayak from a guy who has been doing it for over thirty years. He demonstrated skills and a river running resume which included hundreds of Class 5 plus rapids. His students were on the National team, Olympic team and he has kayakers from around the world come to him for his experience and expertise.
What's my point?
For these two instructors, teaching "introductory" to "advanced" courses in their respective sports is easy for them as they have skills and experience far far above what they are demonstrating to their students. Did I trust them with my life? You bet...because I knew that for them what they were teaching me (as hard and frightening as it was for me) was reflex. They had been actively doing way way harder stuff.
My fear in diving is that many agencies push certification and classes to make money, not to make good instructors.
One more note...I have NOT made any comments on the course itself, the learning materials or the instructors themselves. My criticism is directed at those who would push the instructor rating for technical diving on divers with such bogus credentials/requirements.
Edit to add: I realize that in order to actually become an instructor under this program, many more dives etc. are required. The problem is that if you look at the bigger picture of the "dive instructor mill" mentality it is almost a stated purpose of the agency to sell more certifications. In typical NDL diving, you should "technincally" be able to ascend directly to the surface if there is a problem, once you start adding a ceiling to the mix things can go squirrely real quick. I agree with DD that if your AD for tech instructors demonstrates this clearly a misconception/misrepresentation of what it entails then someone needs to reexamine the "image" that they are portraying.
