Minimum proficiency

[tedtim]

One could make the argument that certified is at least minimally proficient up to the limits of the certification. There would be holes in that argument, since certification is only a proxy for skills and experience.

If the card reads "qualified to dive to 150' with one deco gas", that MIGHT indicate minimal proficiency to that level... maybe...

I suggest that the card only means that they demonstrated the required skills to be awarded the card by the end of the course. If they do not go out and use the skills, the skills (or at least the quality of the skills) fade quickly. To me, this is what proficiency is about - maintaining the ability to carry out the required skills. Even more than that, it is ability to dive using the combination of skills that is important.

I don't dive much during the winter except for a vacation. Ice diving is not for me. I do spend time in the pool during the winter and the amount of time I spend in the pool increases as it gets closer to the time I can get back into the open water.

Qualification does not equal proficiency. Qualificaton plus effort to maintain the skills required to obtain the qualification is closer to being proficient.

 

[TSandM]

I guess the best measure of if your ready may be your heart rate and blood pressure.

That would work if we all knew what we didn't know . . . But when I remember my 10th dive, to 130 feet in Molokini, I have to admit that one of the identifying characteristics of many new divers is that they are wonderfully relaxed where they ought not to be.

 

[jeckyll]

...
Some of us seem to naturally understand why a particular skill is important, others don't. They learn the skill, but, being new, can't really understand, or even imagine, the situations where a particular skill may come in handy.
...

That is one of the reasons why IMO, you need a certain number of dives at a shallow depth before you move on a bit further (as I described earlier in the thread).

It is also a gap left by an instructor. From what I remember, the PADI OW course material outlines why each skill is important (there are many things wrong with PADI, but in general, if you are proficient in all the skills listed in the OW course, your at a good place to start diving). IMO, each instructor should add their own personal notes of key skills and how they are key for certain local applications.

 

[scarefaceDM]

You can show someone the skills. You can explain the reasoning for what you are showing. But in the end, is the diver willing to evolve and become proficient in this sport. Some times yes..many times no.

I have shown divers how to frog kick, simple right?. Some took to it well and others did not. The ones that did not follow the explination and the demonstration are still kicking up the silt. They had asked me to show them and explain to them the reasoning behind the frog kick. My reply is: not to stir up silt. Not to stir up silt in an overhead environment. Not to stir up the sand, mud etc at the bottom as they swim. Not to use the coral, shipwreck etc for a launching pad. Thus the reasoning behind the frog kick. To help protet the fragil environment we dive in. In open water where there is not danger to the environment, use what ever works. In current, you want the power of the frog kick and the speed of the flutter kick to get you out of harms way, which is swift moving current.

The point to this blanter....Divers will evolve if they want to evolve. others will repeat there poor skill sets and do what they please. We can teach them, show them, explain to them a diferent methode, a more precise methode and even an easier methode of doing things. But to what end.

A qucik story. A diver lost his life last summer. He was an OW not many dives.About 20. New gear. HIS instructor at the time helped him out with his buoyancy. All was good. The diver got a new BC. wanted to get a few dives in so he and a buddy went out to a lake. Not too deep about 12-20 feet max. The have been there a few time in the summer. The diver was warned by the dive shop that he had too much weight. several folks, instructors included, told the diver to loose some of the lead. Even if he had new gear he was still overweighted by 20lbs. The diver in question ignored the advice of many. They found his body on the bottom at 12 feet. His weight was 54lbs. His BC inflator hose came undone-popped off. he paniced. and sank to the bottom. According to the buddy whom was having issues aswell, was unable to undo the belt. and did not know how to ditch the dead divers weight. Cause of death. Drowing.

The diver that past away, ignored the advice of EXPERIENCED divers. He figured he knew better. Especially with about 20 dives

A good diver is always learning.

To each his own.

Safe dives
Stephen

 

[Thalassamania]

The point to this blanter....Divers will evolve if they want to evolve. others will repeat there poor skill sets and do what they please. We can teach them, show them, explain to them a diferent methode, a more precise methode and even an easier methode of doing things. But to what end.

You are right, but I'd extend that same criticism (in spades) to instructors, many of whom have never learned anything more that what their instructor course staff had to offer (who in turn knew nothing more than THEIR instructor course staff had to offer). In my experience Instructors are the worst when it comes to, "not knowing what they don't know."

 

[jeckyll]

I just wanted to loop back to Lynne's original question and give an example.

A buddy and I were hovering at 60 feet as there is a large rock where rockfish congregate (we call it "Rockfish rock" ). We were enjoying the sights as a diver goes past, seemingly unaware of us, with a huge camera and at a 45 degree angle trim wise. He 'rototilled' the sandy bottom below him as he went past. My buddy and I looked at each other (once some of the sand had settled) and shook our heads. Then another diver goes past, same 45 degree trim, stirrs up everything again. These divers were so far appart that there is no way they could see each other. They were on single 80's, no pony's to be seen and certainly not in doubles.

They were approaching a drop off that goes beyond 300 feet with a very apparent lack of buoyancy and total lack of buddy contact.

IMO those divers had no business going where they went. They displayed a significant lack of 2 key skills as they approached the drop off: Buoyancy and buddy contact. And they looked in no way ready for solo diving, which IMO they were doing.

Training alone is not enough, most recreational training is going to only introduce skills. 'Experience' along is not enough, divers may dive but not display any proficiency at all. What's necessary is good instruction to introduce and walk divers through required skills followed by practice of those skills until they become easily performed and second nature.

Again, I don't think there is a simple answer. But regarding the post where a diver was criticized for inquiring about a 80 foot drift dive, from the dive profile this diver has not had time to perfect the skills necessary to perform the dive safely. And for all the other divers that piped up and stated that they went to 90 after 5 dives: Just because you do something foolish and get away with it, doesn't mean that this is a fine thing to do. It means that you got lucky that day that nothing went wrong and required you to utilize the skills that you hadn't gotten anywhere close to perfecting.



Bjorn

 

[JMcD]

I suggest that the card only means that they demonstrated the required skills to be awarded the card by the end of the course.

Unfortunately, I am no longer convinced that all Instructors have the same integrity when it comes to determining if "the required skills" are demonstrated.

I believe that *some* instructors:
like in any profession, are simply not good/not smart/not truly qualified/not whatever... and simply do not pay enough attention or know that an individual is not meeting the necessarty skills.

Don't particularly care to say "no", or "you need more work before I can pass you." Especially if in a resort type course environment

Are naive enough to believe that mnay students, though not really competent, will take the time to practice and grow competent in careful, "similar to OW dive environment" dives.


All of this to come back to the point that even though minimum standards may be established - it comes back to how these standards get actually implemented in reality. Even if we were to build the perfect set of requirements for the perfectly segmented set of dive profiles/examples, I'm not sure it will help - and I don't particularly think more regulation/rules will help.

The one thing that I think may be able to have the strongest impact, it is that when we, while diving with others, perceive that another diver isn't meeting the set of minimum requirements we think they should have for the dive they are doing (or are about to do), we find a tactful way to discuss it, or a subtle way to help them, and find a way to demonstrate by our diving what they are missing.

On a resort trip a few weeks ago, I met a lady who admitted that she only dove once each year on vacation, but she also admitted to re-reading her text the week before she travelled each year. So, while I thought she may have the knowledge... and our conversation showed she did, she may lack comfort, and certainly may have issues if a problem develops. My dive buddy and I stayed relatively close to her since it was a smaller group and we were anchoring the group (her instabuddy was all over the place). I casually looked over to see her air gage every once and a while since she didn't seem to be looking (she was preoccupied with a leaking mask) and we were sure to be reasonably close at the surface where she clearly seemed to have the most struggles. At the end of our trip she thanked me for "keeping an eye out for her" - she noticed even without making anything obvious. She just recognized that a couple of very comfortable divers were nearby when she seemd to be looking around for reassurance. (no, we are not the best in the world, and can get much better, but... we're clearly comfortable and in control of our dives.) I hope it helped her to recognize what she can do differently next time... (as opposed to reinforcing her once a year dive plan and expect help next time....:shakehead ) People connect with people and we can play a big part.

 

[diver12345]

Do your minimum standards include your buddies ability to help you underwater? I seriously question your abilty to get me to the surface in my doubles and to shore with your doubles on. That is a tremendous amount of gear and you are a petite thing. What about you picking a buddy that has a high sac rate? twin 72's are not that much air especially at 150 with a buddy sucking down your gas. Valve drills is another. If you cant reach your post quickly and shut it down are you safe for me to dive with? Many of you GUE divers are always looking to make a minimum standard out of everything. Prove it or I wont dive with you. Diving is for fun. Practice your skills that you learned in class so you remain proficient. Besides the first rule is only dive with DIR divers.

 

[grazie42]

I´ve given this some thought as my brother recently got his OW in a WW-location and once he gets his drysuit he´ll be joining us for our dives.

It all boils down to having decent bouyancy control, while taskloaded and being able to avoid silting.

In practice that means being able to do controlled maskless/airsharing swims and ascents while maintaining the integrity of the buddypair or team while frog-kicking to avoid silt-clouds.

That really is the minimum proficiency (coupled with diveplanning and "attitude") that I need to feel comfortable doing any dive with another diver. I´ll treat a dive with anyone without these skills as a solo-dive (and if I don´t feel comfortable doing a particular dive solo, I won´t dive).

 

[TSandM]

Do your minimum standards include your buddies ability to help you underwater? I seriously question your abilty to get me to the surface in my doubles and to shore with your doubles on. That is a tremendous amount of gear and you are a petite thing. What about you picking a buddy that has a high sac rate? twin 72's are not that much air especially at 150 with a buddy sucking down your gas. Valve drills is another. If you cant reach your post quickly and shut it down are you safe for me to dive with? Many of you GUE divers are always looking to make a minimum standard out of everything. Prove it or I wont dive with you. Diving is for fun. Practice your skills that you learned in class so you remain proficient. Besides the first rule is only dive with DIR divers.

I'm assuming this is aimed at me.

I've actually talked to my regular buddies about the rescue issue. I'm pretty certain I can get somebody to the surface, although it might well not be the most organized ascent (and how many people, honestly, practice unconscious diver rescues regularly?) and I can tow them. Getting them out of the gear and out of the water would be a major challenge. At that point, I'm hoping there's somebody else around, as there almost always is at our local dive sites. And I also have the cynicism that, if we surfaced very far offshore with the diver unconscious, and he's still unconscious, the chances of him having something survivable are low.

But my buddies are willing to dive with me and assume the risk of diving with someone for whom a rescue would be challenging.

As far as the SAC rate issue goes -- I'm not diving 72s any more, and for deeper dives, we do dissimilar tank gas matching. It's not an issue. I have reserves calculated for my buddy, not for me.

And finally, the first rule is NOT only dive with DIR divers . . . sigh. The first rule is not to dive with unsafe divers, and I don't. I dive with new divers, and I dive with people from the shop where I got certified, and I dive with my DIR friends. I don't dive with people who take off on me (or I don't dive with them again, better said.)

I have no idea why you (diver 12345) thought this thread had anything to do with DIR, because it doesn't. It simply has to do with the tendency we all have to tell divers they need "more experience" to do x, y or z, without defining what the "more experience" is supposed to teach them.