DIR-F class will now be a certification class

[Uncle Pug]

We (four buddies and myself) had completed a nitrox class and were interested in Tech 1.

All of us were experienced divers... I had been a Fire Dept diver, Mark was a Police diver... and Shane was a commercial harvest diver.... the other two were long time recreational divers. We had all been diving together as same ocean buddies for years.

Andrew suggested that we take an introduction to DIR class first... at the time I think he was calling it DIR recreational.

The class cost $175 and he said that he would credit $125 of that toward our Tech 1 class if we decided to go on.

Andrew's desire to equip prospective students with the necessary skills to successfully take GUE Tech 1 (and not waste his time) is the genesis of what has become the DIRf.

That introductory class showed us what Andrew already knew... we were not ready for Tech 1. But we all learned a lot... and it was definitely a worthwhile class... even without (perhaps, especially without) a cert card at the end.

Shane and I were the only ones from our group that pressed forward practicing so that we could take the Tech 1 class.

The next fall we began Tech 1 and it became apparent that we were still not ready. We muddled through 5 days and learned a lot... but still did not meet with Andrew's approval... nor our own.

A month of practice and we were back for an evaluation dive with Andrew, an assistant and a videographer. Some improvement. No extra charge.

A month later we were back to do several more dives meeting all but the last of the requirements... no instructor charge... only the charter fee for the boat.

A month later we arrainged to do the last dive... completing Tech 1... still no additional instructor charge.

I think I have a better appreciation of what motivates Andrew than most of the posters on this board (with the exception of MHK.)

Andrew is a teacher and he loves to teach.
Andrew is a diver and he loves diving.
AND he is incredible at both.

But what he started as a remedial DIR prep class has become an end in and of itself for many divers.

The popularity of this class in understandable... one of the best I have ever taken (other than Tech 1) and I highly recommend it for the basic diving skills.

However because it is so popular and seems to be an endless topic of discussion on boards like this... many folks are confusing what was meant to be a remedial class to prepare divers for GUE training (the DIRf) with GUE training itself (Tech/Cave.)

Like SeaJay's proposed "Give me the key to Ginnie... I got's me a DIRf card!" (no offense meant SJ... it was just such a perfect example.)

Completing a DIRf just means that you have been exposed to the skills needed to start GUE Tech/Cave training.

Should it become a certification class (and you pass) that will only mean that you have demonstrated the skills necessary to start GUE Tec/Cave training.

 

[jonnythan]

Maybe this is a precursor to introducing a GUE OW class. Seems to make sense to me..

Turn DIR-F into a certification class, people complain about the class being worthless because you'd have to take it multiple times.

But.. if you have a GUE OW class, you can be shown the bar and given better, more intense instruction than you'd find in a typical SSI or PADI class. Then you could work on the skills the instructor taught and showed you, then know when you'd be ready for DIR-F.

Just a thought..

 

[Uncle Pug]

jonnythan once bubbled...
if you have a GUE OW class, you can be shown the bar and given better, more intense instruction than you'd find in a typical SSI or PADI class. Then you could work on the skills the instructor taught and showed you, then know when you'd be ready for DIR-F.

Those who get their BOW from 5thD come out with close to a DIRf skill level.

IF GUE does start to offer a BOW class modelled after what 5thD does THEN I would expect the bar of the DIRf could be raised a notch.

 

[Genesis]

there is a LOT of religion mixed in with the fact in the GUE stuff.

Take the "horizontal ascent" and its contribution to deco mantra that they preach. Its horsecrap. This has been gone over in DEPTH here on Scubaboard, by PHYSICIANS and those with actual physiological DEGREES (not just a bunch of self-taught cave divers like GI3)

Yet its part and parcel of their mantra, even though it has NO relationship to reality.

Now does a precise RATE of ascent factor in? Absolutely. No argument there. Nor with a lot of the other things that DIR preaches.

But its the unproven, unscientific, religion-based stuff mixed in that dilutes and, to those of us who actually THINK and RESEARCH, damages their message.

The claims that MHK made in his Triox series of screeds on Usenet is another example. The yelling about "proprietary info" is all nice and well, but it doesn't make it factual. Yet you're being sold this as a set of FACTS.

The horizontal offgassing argument is one of them that has been roundly debunked by people with REAL credentials - not religion - behind them.

Accelerated deco is something that can be shown to work, can be physiologically modelled, and can be published. It can advance the state of the art. But anecdotes do not make for science, nor is it a good idea to base your own risk computation on anecdotal evidence!

We are talking about an activity that is only partially based on science. Deco is a theory, even today, with a number of different points of view, some of which have actually been validated by scientific study (e.g. the RGBM models) and others that have been validated only by people not ending up in the chamber, or only with animal studies which may or may not be reasonable analogues to human physiology.

Yet if you listen to GI3, the RGBM meters are software are bunk, and he has the "one true way". He talks about intentional showers of bubbles in his system and using the lungs as a bubble filter on deck - all fine and well, IF it works. But do you KNOW that it does? Do you realize that he's depending on a particular blood-pressure gradient between his arterial and venous side to make that work, and while it may work for HIM, and that HE may have validated it over <X> dives for HIM, it may not work for YOU? Do you understand that if it DOESN'T work for you that the result could easily be a CAGE event FOR YOU?

This is where my problem with all of this GUE stuff lies. Its not the exploration. Its the packaging.

I deplore the idea that I can take an OW course and then turn around and enroll for AOW. I knew I wasnt' ready for that when I got my OW card. But I believed, a few months later, that I was - and when I enrolled, I passed without trouble. But virtually all that was taught in that class I was already doing! It was simply a matter of lots of bubble time and practice.

What I'd like to see happen is for SOME agency to TRULY set a bar, by, as I posted before, setting an "entrance exam" format for their training beyond BOW.

You want to take AOW? Cool. Here are a set of skills. When you sign up for the class, we will go on a dive and you will demonstrate the following skills, and, perhaps a certain level of physical fitness. Here they are - published.

Now I can sit there, contemplate this, test MYSELF and know with some level of assurance before I sign up that I truly meet the requirements.

If the requirements for Tech 1 are similarly published, and will be TESTED AGAINST, then likewise, I can work those skills ON MY OWN and get ready for the class, and when I take the entrance exam I will be confident that I will pass. If I fail then heh, most of my money is still in my wallet, and I've learned that I'm not nearly as critical a self-evaluator as I need to be!

THIS is how dive training should be done, IMHO.

BOW begins with no skills, and teaches some. Every other step beyond that should have some set of published criteria that you must meet to get in the door, and a set of criteria (published again) for graduation - for getting the card.

You do not need a card for class "X" to take class "Y" - but you DO need to demonstrate the skills commensurate with what you are about to embark upon!

If I can learn the prereqs for Cave 1 on my own, then I can. I am not less of a diver because I didn't drink the kool-aid. I am more of a diver, in fact, in that I either taught myself or was dedicated enough to find individuals to spend the time with to learn it on my own. That SHOULD be rewarded - not punished.

GUE is going EXACTLY the wrong way on this. By punishing those who can and will learn, and instead of focusing on performance focusing on possession of a "graduation certificate", they have removed objectivity from the entrance requirements.

If they truly want to claim to be an "elite" training organization, then I believe they are making the wrong move here and should look at going the exact opposite direction - becoming ENTIRELY skills-based in their requirements, as opposed to certification based.

C'mon GI3, MHK, JJ and the rest of GUE.

Show us a truly-higher bar.

 

[joens]

granted none of us know any thing really until someone who knows decides to inform us .here is my thinking. DIRF was intended to teach /evaluate students prior to further training.in the beginning it may have been no problem to remember each student 2 or 3 years later .but now as many divers who seem to be taking the class it gets harder . suppose joe diver shows up for his cave 1 class saying he took DIRF 2 years ago at gilboa no one remembers if he was the guy who performed the skills as if he had been doing it 100 years or the guy who was carried out in a straight jacket on the second day.
I dont know this could be a good thing or it could be bad we just have to see .
joens

 

[SeaJay]

Uncle Pug once bubbled...

Like SeaJay's proposed "Give me the key to Ginnie... I got's me a DIRf card!" (no offense meant SJ... it was just such a perfect example.)

No offense taken.

You're right... That was a really bad example, and I implied that DIR-F "cert" means that Ginnie's caves are open. Sorry, I didn't mean that at all.

A better example would have been this:

I subscribe to the UWEX mailing list, which stands for "Underwater Explorers." This is a group of non-DIR and DIR divers alike, who's dive focus is mainly archaelogical. They dive everthing, and they dive mostly wrecks, for the purpose of understanding history. The owner of the list is focused in South Florida, and the Keys are a regular haunt.

Occassionally, the owner of the list publishes invitations to dive with them. He'll say, for example, "We're diving the Duane this weekend... Two dives per day, two days... Cost: $110, including boat...." I'd love to dive with these guys, and that email is certainly an invitation. However, I really don't want to go and dive with a bunch of seasoned explorers without at least having my DIR skills within grasp. Too, I feel that I really don't want to shoulder the additional risk of other divers until they have the skills that DIR teaches. Thus, having a DIR "c-card" would help us to all know that we're on the same page, and help to measure a diver's ability before we get in the water together.

Another example: There's a local dive charter who's captain is a long-time diver in these local waters. (Zero vis, high current, shallow salt.) In talking with him occassionally, he's quite opinionated and very much against "just taking divers out for a quick dive." Simply put, from years of experience, he knows that many certified divers are woefully unskilled, and can pose more of a hazard in the water than other divers. With OW and AOW (any agency) cards being handed out to nearly anybody that takes the class, he knows that just "being a diver" does not make you safe. Before I chartered with him, he (responsibly) ran me through a series of questions... "What do you do when..." You know the drill.

I passed his little quiz... And it gave him a pretty good idea of where I was and whether or not he was willing to place himself in a position of being somewhat responsible for me. At the time I was a bit miffed about it, but now that I've done more dives, I can completely understand why he was so concerned.

Certainly being able to tell him that I was "DIR certified" would have put his fears to rest. And I think that's an advantage that I would like to have.

...So my point was that it would be a good thing to have DIR be a "cert" course. I can see the advantages. However, I also think that there are drawbacks... Namely, the pressure to "pass," or the pressure to "lower the bar" after thousands of classes.

I believe that the disadvantages outweigh the obvious advantages... And would prefer to see the DIR-F course remain as-is. However, a second option would be a "DIR diploma," which everyone who completes the class earns... But then in addition, a "DIR certification" which actually shows that the diver passed the requirements. I like the first option better, but the second wouldn't be too bad.

Of course, then divemasters, shop owners, and charter boat captains would have to understand the fundamental differences between a DIR diploma and a DIR certification, and that may be asking a lot.

Can't we just leave it as it is? You know... With the focus on the learning instead of the grade?

 

[SeaJay]

Genesis once bubbled...
Take the "horizontal ascent" and its contribution to deco mantra that they preach. Its horsecrap. This has been gone over in DEPTH here on Scubaboard, by PHYSICIANS and those with actual physiological DEGREES (not just a bunch of self-taught cave divers like GI3)

Yet its part and parcel of their mantra, even though it has NO relationship to reality.

<snip>

C'mon GI3, MHK, JJ and the rest of GUE.

Show us a truly-higher bar.

Hm.

You haven't taken the DIR-F course, have you? No offense meant, just an observation.

I understand your desire to know more about this style of diving... And I understand your objections. Rather than field them here (by someone as unqualified as me), let me just tell you this... All of your questions are answered in the course. Please take the course before making judgements. Going on subjective, sometimes unqualified information given to you on the 'net simply doesn't equip you with enough knowlege to make a valid judgement. For example, the horizontal ascent has many other advantages than just the body's increased ability to offgas. Even if you don't believe this to be true, certainly you'd see the other advantages and want to ascend horizontally anyway.

Take the course before you make judgements. I, too, had many objections... In fact, I even called these guys "Nazis." To me, that's exactly what they were, following theory, not fact, which, to me, had little basis in logic. I took the class... Now I feel differently.

If you want to know, then find out for yourself. Otherwise, all you're going to get here is a bunch of people telling you the same thing, with you constantly arguing the point. Yes, I know that the course costs money. Expenses must be covered, or else they could give it for free. Do the math, though, and you'll find that nobody's getting rich off of DIR-F courses.

I truly believe that many people are afraid to take the course... Afraid of losing money... Afraid of finding out that their entire belief system relative to diving will be challenged. Afraid that they'll see that the road to being a "skilled diver" is much more long and difficult than they originally thought... And how could that be fun?

Doesn't matter, IMHO. Do you want to learn the skills or not? Do you want to know for sure or not? Are you willing to at least look before making judgements? Then take the course... Then tell us your opinion.

 

[MHK]

Wow!!! I'm pleased that so many are interested about the most recent change at GUE. I'll try to be responsive to some of the more common questions that has popped up, but please feel free to e-mail me if I miss a specific concern..

As I noted, the GUE BOD will be addressing shortly many of these issues, but let me see if I can provide my understanding of the issues.

For those that have classes already arranged don't worry the changes only effect classes that have not been previously arranged. This applies even if the date of your class is post 6/1. The transitional concerns are exactly what the BOD is still working through. I'm confident that they understand the issues and they are trying to strike the appropriate balance. I've had several discussions with several of the BOD member's and I can promise you that they are extremely sensitive and cognizant of the issues. The BOD has 9 members located throughout the world so coordinating everyone's point of view takes some time and given that the change doesn't take place for another 4 months I'm confident that in a timely fashion they'll have the appropriate answers.

Secondly, as to equipment concerns we will have specific equipment considerations and will put those considerations on the GUE site as soon as they are finalized..

As to the ideas that this is all about a marketing scheme that some have advanced. I'm not sure on the face of it how anyone can make that charge. When you consider that these changes are designed to make the class more difficult, and not less, the idea that this is a marketing scheme to make money fly's in the face of the facts and the spirit and intent of the change..

As many noted there are pro's and con's to every decision and for certain the instructor core at GUE was no different. There was some spirited and healthy debate about this issue, but at the end of the day the goal of all of us that teach at GUE is to continue to keep the integrity of our classes at the highest level.. I agree that these changes may limit the amount of people that might have otherwise signed up for the class, but what we faced internally was the question do we want to be an agency that relaxes our standards and core beliefs to be more inclusive, or do we want to resist temptation to increase market share and stay true to what we believe in??? And when you try to understand that our goal isn't to be the largest it may help to understand and appreciate the reasons behind the change..The only analogy that I can think of off hand is how would you feel if you had a degree from Harvard Law school, and had worked your butt off to earn it because it represented the highest level of integrity, but then shortly after you graduated some new changes were put into place to make Harvard more inclusive, and those changes violated the very spirit of your core beliefs??? I'm not sure that is the perfect analogy, but I hope it get's the point across..

It's hard to resist temptation to relax standards, but everyone of us that teach at GUE firmly believe that how we dive is the safest and most effecient way to dive, so why wouldn't you demand from us that we teach you what we firmly believe???

As for the c-card itself, I'll ceede that I was one of the more vocal within GUE against the idea. Besides Andrew, I've taught the most DIR-F classes and I've done the most traveling so I understood first hand the value of allowing diver's to come in a take a look at what we were all about, and the idea that they could keep the focus on learning and not earning another c-card. However, when JJ discussed the issue with me and continued his focus on the idea that the organization is much more then a certification agency, and much more about historical research, environmental awareness and so on that he felt that our reputation was getting somehwat diminshed and we were loosing focus of what we are all about that it started to make sense from the larger picture.. They way many within GUE is viewing the issue is did we want people to come in and see what we are all about, but then yet not give them a true picture by virtue of classes that were more like seminars, and relaxed gear configurations and no performance standards??? Isn't that really giving a false picture of what we are all about??? So when you [ or atleast when I ] looked at it from that point of view I embraced the change.. What impressed me the most about this course of action is that it's a principled decision that is designed to limit, not increase, marketshare. I was surprised to review this thread and see that some are erroneously charging that this is an effort to make money, because it costs us money... Some will choose to focus in on any negative that they can invent when it relates to anything we do at GUE, and it's quit unproductive to respond to every reckless charge everytime one is raised.

I will remain available to answer any questions, but if your intent is to get into a debate I'll warn ahead of time that I will not engage...

Hope that clears up some of the issues, but please let me know if not..

Regards

Michael Kane

 

[Genesis]

"take the course, then give us an opinion"?

Why?

Why the mantra? Why not have the people promoting the course give me a good reason to take the course before I spend the money? Why would one "dive in" so to speak, without the questions being answered first? Especially when the questions are raised not by some random person on the Internet, but rather based on commentary by one of the GUE founders!

Do you "just buy the BMW"? Or do you drive it first? Trust me - I've driven a Roadster, and you want that car. Just buy it, ok?

 

[WreckWriter]

in case anyone cares

I don't disagree with what GUE is trying to do here. Mr. Kane is being honest with us, they will make less money this way so its not a marketing decision.

As I said before, I believe DIR diving is wave of the future. Like all such things, its controversial. I've been diving a long time, worked in the industry a long time too, I've seen a few of these things. I remember computers, heck, I remember BCs. I'm telling you, this is the future of diving.

The main reason its the future is because its the best method going. I know this because I've dived many styles and this one works the best. I will continue to dive in as close to a DIR manner as I am able.

With all said, I really don't care for GUE. Its a personal thing because I don't like to be disciminated against. I feel its my right to consider, and call, them pricks for doing so.

WW