Open Water Fast Track

[Otter]

MHK once bubbled...


While I'm sure many will defend the "fast-track" courses, the one thing you may want to consider is that many that defend the course are usually the ones making the money off of the class. Now that being said, consider the following examples:

If you wanted to learn how to golf [ and actually hit the ball straight down the fairway] would you go to the "fast-track" golf-pro or would you go to the one that would spend more time with you???

If you wanted to become a black-belt in karate would you go to the karate school that told you that you could become a black-belt in 2 weeks or would you go the the school that made you earn the black-belt???

If there was a skiing equivalent of "c-cards" would you go to the ski school that "certified" you to go down the double black diamond moutain before you were skilled enough to do so???

The point being is that I could go on all day with analogies and it's often times striking to me that so many people are willing to "fast-track" training in a sport where you are putting your life in an environment that the only thing that will save it, is training..

Remember, you get what you pay for and to me the idea that everything that course has to teach you academically can be taught absent the need for the instructor should set off a light bulb in your head saying that either the materials are too inefficient or perhaps the test isn't inclusive of all I need to know..

Just my thoughts as an instructor that refuses to teach the "fast-track" classes..

Later

I am confident that you are NOT saying that after an open-water / fundamentals course, a diver is or should be at an equivalent of a black-diamond skier, a black-belt, or scratch golfer.

I do believe that learning the academics is best done at ones' own pace. There is little more than high-school physics involved and the materials are pretty good. Instructors can then focus on the areas where the student needs clarification and/or increased emphasis is warranted. "Fast-tracking" through the simple stuff seems to make sense and I know of no situations where someone can just walk in and take the final and be considered to have completed the academic portion.

The issue of time comes into in-water practice. Obviously the more times a person does the skill, the more it becomes a conditioned reflex. Can one get enough repetition and practice of important skills such that they will perform them "sufficiently" in a "fast track" class? I would say no. But then again, I doubt they would in a 3-4 week long class that only meets a few hours each of those weeks -- which was the essence of the question.

So regardless of how quickly one got certified, I think you will agree that the real key [like most things] is continuing practice and drilling the proper technique. And yes, there are things that can be done (like consistent simplified equipment configuration) that aid in this repetition.

The real measure would seem to be after some period of time (diving or not), is there a difference in retention based upon how many weeks it took to get certified. My guess is NO -- unless practiced regularly, most people have completely forgotton.

Perhaps I am making a case for certification renewal and/or more stringent certification requirements.

Otter

 

[MikeFerrara]

A student shouldn't need an instructor to read the book to them. A student needs the instructor for the elaboration and info that isn't in the book.

The problem I see with the fast courses is that besides not giving the student the benefit of the instructors experience they also skimp on in water time and don't give the student time to practice and master skills.

And yes I think it makes a difference. At the moment I issue certification I can see a huge difference. With so many schools only spending 5 or 6 hours in the pool it's easy to put out students who are way better in the water.

 

[MHK]

Otter once bubbled...


I am confident that you are NOT saying that after an open-water / fundamentals course, a diver is or should be at an equivalent of a black-diamond skier, a black-belt, or scratch golfer.

I do believe that learning the academics is best done at ones' own pace.

The issue of time comes into in-water practice. Obviously the more times a person does the skill, the more it becomes a conditioned reflex. .

So regardless of how quickly one got certified, I think you will agree that the real key [like most things] is continuing practice and drilling the proper technique. And yes, there are things that can be done (like consistent simplified equipment configuration) that aid in this repetition.

Perhaps I am making a case for certification renewal and/or more stringent certification requirements.

Otter

Otter and other's that have replied,

My thoughts on this subject aren't that complex, and I certainly agree that in the absence of government regulation [ which I am totally against] that setting up a system based upon "self-regulation" and the promotion of such a system is ripe for explotation. What certain agencies have done is to exploit a situation and take advantage, for monetary purposes, an educational process that isn't best served by the "fast-track" route..

In other words, it's great to be the leader of a system that decries freedom from government intervention, it's also a politically popular position to advance, which accordingly will provide for a volumonous following. Couple that with a systemic declination of quality and a relaxation of adherence to skill and you have a huge market ripe for exploiting.. Most want faster, cheaper and quicker, but that doesn't mean that as an agency taken as whole you needs to cater your relaxation of your principles to satisfy a market that shouldn't exist.. I'm sure there are those that want to parachute faster, cheaper and quicker, but they don't lower the preformance standards just to satisfy a thrill seeking market that has no business in the sport to begin with..

In any event, my strong feelings are that as educators we have a responsibility to actually educate our students. We bear a responsibility to teach them what needs to be taught, not show them a video, do a dog and pony show with our students on their knees and THEN tell them go out and learn the stuff.. It is our responsibility and obligation to actually teach them what to practice, actualy demonstrate to them what to learn, and actually hold them up to their responsibility to demonstrate proficiency before we certify them. Not this joke that currently exists in terms of "satisfactorily" demonstrating the skill and then selling them future con-ed classes to make up for poor preformance..

Most of the status quo, established agencies have a vested interest in promoting " it's the instructor, not the agency", which is like selling "it's the professor, not the school".. Tell that to the next Harvard grad that get's the job over the student that has the same degree from the local community college.. The point is that it is in their best [and economic] advantage to continue to promote these kind of phrases, whereas I would rather they focus there considerable marketing forces on safety and skill, not market share...

Later

 

[fins wake]

... well, over here where I live at any rate, so I'll keep this short. MHK:s response wasn't the best I've ever read from him and I'm a bit quizzical and tempted to hold up a giant ...

...ff:

After all, it didn't address any of the specific issues raised earlier in the thread but simply introduced new ones. (I accept we all have off-days, however). Anyway, just to get back on track and back to Suzana's original question. She has a few choices:

1) She can ask her friend to do the complete course back home (in the UK?) with BSAC, PADI, SAA or whomever and then just dive with her once abroad. This will certainly make for a better buddy whilst on holiday, and this should be in Suzana's interest. I accept however that many 'cocktail divers' will refuse to dive in UK waters. This is indeed a different kettle of fish from diving in the Red Sea or Florida Keys, for that matter.

2) She can recommend her friend to do a referral course, which shaves off more than a day's valuable holiday time, and which would give her friend the instructor theory time that some writers in this thread have argued for. This will probably prove to be the most expensive option, but it's a good compromise and not overly expensive, I would have thought.

3) Her friend can opt for the 'fast-track' course. If her friend can read and write, I don't think this will be too much of a problem ... This assumes her friend actually puts the required time in and works through all the problems and quizzes in the diver's manual.

4) Her friend can do the whole course while on holiday.

In all these cases, I'd argue that the main issue is that Suzana's friend chooses a reputable school with a good instructor for her OW course and dives (and of course, for any pool sessions in option 2 above, as well). A good school is more likely to turn out a good diver whatever road is chosen. A bad instructor is not necessarily better than the dive manual itself at all.

Now for the flight of angels, folks. G'night. :lilangel: :hour:

 

[MHK]

fins wake once bubbled...
... well, over here where I live at any rate, so I'll keep this short. MHK:s response wasn't the best I've ever read from him and I'm a bit quizzical and tempted to hold up a giant ...

...ff:

After all, it didn't address any of the specific issues raised earlier in the thread but simply introduced new ones. (I accept we all have off-days, however). Anyway, just to get back on track and back to Suzana's original question. She has a few choices:

I'm the first to admit that we all have off days ;-), but I'm not sure it was off topic.. But then again, maybe I am having an off-day ;-)

My point was that there is a huge cottage market that has been created to respond to a PERCEIVED need to have a "fast-track" course.. I guess I didn't do a good enough job of connecting the dots and what I was trying to say was that because there is a freedom from regulation [ which is a good thing] some may take that opportunity to exploit that very freedom to capitalize on it by offering ill-advised courses such as the "fast-track".. In my view, the "fast-track" is best left for sewing and basket weaving, not for a sport wherein you are trusted with certifying a student [ in most cases, for the rest of his/her life] in a sport that is accomplished in an environment that will kill you absent proper training..

I remember when I was younger, and certainly not as wise, I was in Acapulco, Mexico. I wanted to do cliff diving no matter what. No one was going to tell me that I couldn't do it. I mean, I was young, I was fearless and indestructable.. However, a Mexican veteran cliff diver told me that you don't know what you don't know until you've already jumped off the cliff, and then it's too late.. The same holds true underwater.. The sport can very well be a safe sport, presuming that you've done the training.. The problem is that often times when people discuss the idea of diving it's with the presumption of adequate training.. I offer that if everything that I have to teach you can be put in a home study course that either I have too little to teach you, or what is in the home study course in inadequate.. The interaction amongst class and teacher is invaluable and what one students asks may very well be what another student hasn't even considered, so when classes start getting offered via the internet or the telephone they must be diluting the value in some fashion..

Hopefully that more fully explains my thinking..

Later

 

[MHK]

Otter once bubbled...


I am confident that you are NOT saying that after an open-water / fundamentals course, a diver is or should be at an equivalent of a black-diamond skier, a black-belt, or scratch golfer.

Snip the rest of your themes about in-water training

Otter

Perhaps the analogies weren't spot on, but I think the juxtaposition to compare is that if your golf pro gives you the "fast-track" what harm does it do??? Are you in a life threatening environment on the golf course??? The next logical step of your point is that the consequences of poor training in both sports are equivalent, which they are not.. If you get a poor golf pro, you slice your tee off's and you score a 100+.. If you get poor scuba training you may very well die.. That is a big difference so I guess my point was that, in sports such as golf people wouldn't accept "fast-tracking" irrespective of teh fact that the consequences aren't so severe so why should we sell them "fast-tracking" when the consequences of mediocrity or unsatisfactory are so much greater??

As to yoru themes about in-water practice I do agree that newly certified divers need to practice, however if you haven't given them the tools in class nor have you instilled enough skill in them during the class then sending them off by themselves [ie; without instructor supervision, not solo] isn't serving them well..

Later

 

[Jonathan]

I learnt more at home reading the books and watching the video than in the class.

In the classes (3 nights for 3 hours) there was a very mixed range of people from school drop outs to one guy who owned his own engineering company.

After the course we found out that the school drop out had never read a book before from cover to cover as he had dyslexia. It would probably have helped more if the instructor had known this up front.

But it was the engineer that caused most problems. Why? Because he was so precise and nearly all the quiz questions and knowledge reviews can be ambiguous if you are continously asking what if?

However, we had a big class and built a good comraderie (except the engineer who we never saw again!).

When I learnt to dive I was living in London and went into a dive shop because I was going on a diving hoiliday with a mate. I actually went in to try and book a holiday as I had seen them advertising holidays and came out signing up for the whole class in the UK before I left. Diving wise the best decsion I ever made.

At the very least do the referral option in London before going on holiday - you will see more of your friends....

Jonathan

 

[TCDiver1]

MHK once bubbled...

That is a big difference so I guess my point was that, in sports such as golf people wouldn't accept "fast-tracking" irrespective of teh fact that the consequences aren't so severe so why should we sell them "fast-tracking" when the consequences of mediocrity or unsatisfactory are so much greater??

MHK,
A couple comments .... first, stating that most people don't desire "fast track" solutions to most of todays issues is really stretching it IMO. We live in a "get it fastest" society today that places a premium on how quick and easy things can be obtained. Lose 20 lbs in a week ... use this swing aid for five days and drop 10 strokes .... cook it in 30 minutes not hours ala Ron Popeils latest oven thing-a-ma-jiggy.

IMO, "fast track" is what people want so they can move on to other things they value. At a minimum people are being told they want "fast track" and are believing what they hear.

Now i agree with you that "fast tracking" water skills is a serious mistake. It takes what it takes for students to master skills, some take longer than others. But academic learning is a totally different thing IMO. I find todays multi-media tools such as CD-ROMs to be a great educational tools to use in conjunction with face to face lectures, reviews, question, answer and testing sessions. Some would say using these multi-media tools would be "fast tracking", i would not agree. I would call it using todays most effective training tools and technology to project knowledge.

Maybe i missed it but i think a better definition of what you think "fast tracking" is, is in order.

Thx

 

[Walter]

How long is the vacation? Even leaving class time out of the discussion and only including pool skills, any good OW class will require several weeks.

I agree we live in an instant gratification society. People want to start diving yesterday. I, personally, have nothing against an agency providing them with such instruction if they are honest about quality. Trouble is, people are lied to about quality. I believe you can offer a low quality fast track (redundant, I know) class, be honest about it and still sell it easier than selling a quality class.

If an agency would produce a low quality class that got people diving quickly, they'd soon become the biggest agency in the world. Did that already happen?

 

[Phish-phood]

I didn't do an accelerated course but I did do all the theory by myself at home because I couldn't attend the theory sessions at the time my LDS did them.

Out of a class of eight I got the highest result with only one question wrong which I fully admit was due to not reading the question properly and was one I should never have gotten wrong at all as I knew it inside out and backwards.

I'm not blowing my own trumpet here I am just pointing out that you can actually get things done on your own. I would never ever 'fast-track' my in water training though. It isn't worth it.