Pervasive "Going Pro" Theme in New Divers

[vcblklion]

I'm somebody's grandmother, and I carry tanks! The expressions on the faces of young guys like you when I show up on a dive boat and they realize that I don't need any "help," that I dive "like a pro," and that I'm strong both in mind and body, is precious.

And I'd just like to add....you're a pretty "hot" grandma if I do say so myself!!

 

[jar546]

I have been lurking but would like to address my humble opinion on the OP.

Just like other industries that I have been in, I, from a first hand perspective, had an issue with new people coming into the industry, basically out of the woodwork with limited to no experience. It burned my ass that I spend so many years and put in my time before I made the leap to inspector for example. I still hold some grudge against some newbies who had no experience but took a test. Their learning curve was going to be steep. In many instances, it was. That is a problem in an industry that is not regulated or have standards for compliance. The scuba industry for newbies is not quite the same. I have a few observations.

*Just because you are a great, experienced diver, that does not mean you can teach.
*Some of the best teachers are those will limited experience. It is all about conveying information to people. If you have the knowledge and ability to teach with the right attitude, you can be a fantastic instructor.
*The industry has created minimum standards in which a new or experienced diver can follow for certification as a professional.
*Experience means a lot but it is not everything. There are some experienced people are terrible instructors. There are also limited experience instructors that are just as bad.
*You have to be comfortable with yourself in order to be a good instructor. Only experience can give you that comfort. Industry standard for professionals are suppose to make sure you are there.
*There are other experiences in life that certainly count towards being a good instructor. Just diving alone can't do that.
*Just because you waited 10 years before you decide you wanted to be an instructor does not mean that someone who did it after 2 is any less than you are. Just because you have been diving for 8 years more than that person does not mean that you are any better than the other person either.
*The biggest safety concern about being an instructor is having the ability to react to and correct dangerous situations if and when that may happen (which it will with students). It is usually experience and training that provides that automatic response.

When we train new paramedic students, we make it stressful. They learn just enough to be dangerous and have a long way to go if and when they complete the course and pass the exam a year after they first started. Some of our best students had no previous ambulance experience, some of our worst students had tons of EMT experience working on paramedic trucks. You never know how someone will handle a stressful situation until it happens. After completion, most of the student who are now paramedics are just as capable of handling emergent situations as an experienced paramedic. Sometimes even better.

So don't frown down upon those that come up the ranks quickly. They may actually be a better instructor than you are. Just like you, they had to earn their title. We all have to start somewhere. None of us came out of the womb certified with mask, fins, & snorkel.

 

[Thalassamania]

The numbers John is citing are in terms of occurrences per unit (usually 100,000 for these sorts of estimates). When the unit value is in great doubt (e.g., has huge error bars), or changes over time, the comparison becomes rather less meaningful. This is especially true because the unit is a mutiplicative deriviate of two inacurate estimates, the number of divers and the number of dives. When the error term approaches the value of the measure itself you are on shakey ground to try to make a point.

 

[endurodog]

The numbers John is citing are in terms of occurrences per unit (usually 100,000 for these sorts of estimates). When the unit value is in great doubt (e.g., has huge error bars), or changes over time, the comparison becomes rather less meaningful. This is especially true because the unit is a mutiplicative deriviate of two inacurate estimates, the number of divers and the number of dives. When the error term approaches the value of the measure itself you are on shakey ground to try to make a point.

But it's the best info I have seen. Again is there better numbers out there from past to present to make a comparison? You often argue against accident rates based on the numbers not being accurate. Are there more accurate numbers out there that the rest of us are missing or can we say we are using the best numbers out there? There can be disagreement on how the numbers were arrived at with almost any anything figured this way but if we want to know accident rates is there some better numbers out there.

All of the data I have seen says the accident rate is lower now than at any other time.

Are there studies that dispute that?

What is your solution on how to figure accident rates from past to present?

 

[Thalassamania]

But it's the best info I have seen. Again is there better numbers out there from past to present to make a comparison? You often argue against accident rates based on the numbers not being accurate. Are there more accurate numbers out there that the rest of us are missing or can we say we are using the best numbers out there? There can be disagreement on how the numbers were arrived at with almost any anything figured this way but if we want to know accident rates is there some better numbers out there.

All of the data I have seen says the accident rate is lower now than at any other time.

And all the data that you've seen is, as I have shown, at best questionable.

Are there studies that dispute that?

Yes, one was quoted in an earlier post. Might I suggest that you read the Undercurrents piece of the subject, it is up on the web.

What is your solution on how to figure accident rates from past to present?

Not my problem, not my job, not even my interest. I teach a program that, over it's history of sixty years, has a perfect safety record, never a training fatality, never a graduate who died diving. In fact, it is the tree trunk from which all other training programs have sprouted. All other programs are naught but reductions from that program. The question therefore is not how to solve the calculation of rates, but rather how many fatalities, in absolute terms, you are willing to accept as a trade off for greater participation and all that that means. Me, I work hard to continue to have none what-so-ever. How many bodies are too many bodies from where you sit?

 

[endurodog]

Not my problem, not my job, not even my interest. I teach a program that, over it's history of sixty years, has a perfect safety record, never a training fatality, never a graduate who died diving. In fact, it is the tree trunk from which all other training programs have sprouted. All other programs are naught but reductions from that program. The question therefore is not how to solve the calculation of rates, but rather how many fatalities, in absolute terms, you are willing to accept as a trade off for greater participation and all that that means. Me, I work hard to continue to have none what-so-ever. How many bodies are too many bodies from where you sit?

Thal it's not your problem but you continue to debate the data that is out there without giving better data for comparision data or any accident rate so it seems your just arguing for argument sake. I'm trying to get a feel of where your coming from besides the bashing of training that is out there and the self praise of your training. No doubt you have a great training program and you have turned out some great divers, I would never dispute that but that wasn't the question.

How many bodies are to many, well that is just a self serving question because no one has raised the question of how many is to many. This starts slipping to where all of your debates on the issue go. No one should drive either and we wouldnt have accidents and no one would die in a car wrecks. So we jumped right to that instead of playing the game that always gets there with this debate style of yours. Now back to the topic of accident rates.

You have no better figures is the bottom line but you want to argue the fine points. I tried to keep it on the simple subject of "Accident rates" from past to present. You wanted to take it to this other stuff, as you often do. You can quote no better stats, or refuse to, who knows.

You would rather argue than give better info, just dispute that which was given. Not gonna do that again with you so go on yourself. Would love to see better numbers if you have them but you don't so I'm gonna go with the numbers that are out there.

I'm not continuing down this road with you again, bash away!

 

[Thalassamania]

Thal it's not your problem but you continue to debate the data that is out there without giving better data for comparision data or any accident rate so it seems your just arguing for argument sake.

Pointing out the inadequacies of a data set does not require that you present a better one. Using an inadequate data set almost assures the promulgation of inadequate conclusions. Far better to have no conclusion at all than an incorrect one.

I'm trying to get a feel of where your coming from besides the bashing of training that is out there and the self praise of your training. No doubt you have a great training program and you have turned out some great divers, I would never dispute that but that wasn't the question.

It is not a matter of "my training's better than yours!" or self praise, the first is easily determined if anyone actually needs to do so, and the latter is absurd, since it is not something special that I do, it is that I was lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time, to be able to stand on the shoulders of lot of folks who were able to show me that latching on to the latest craze and trend is not always the best thing to do and to instill in me the value that little in diving is worth dying for.

How many bodies are to many, well that is just a self serving question because no one has raised the question of how many is to many. This starts slipping to where all of your debates on the issue go. No one should drive either and we wouldnt have accidents and no one would die in a car wrecks. So we jumped right to that instead of playing the game that always gets there with this debate style of yours. Now back to the topic of accident rates.

No it is not, it is a very real question. We apply this sort of risk/benefit analysis to many things in life, like driving, or flying or walking down the street, sidewalk vs. no sidewalk. I'm asking you to do the same for diver training, that's all. I have given you my answer to the question, it is "none," clearly yours is greater than mine. All I have done is, respectfully, asked you for your answer to a question that I am happy to answer. I choose, and can have a reasonable expectation of operating in, a zero defect environment, since you do not make that choice you can not have the same expectation. I can not imagine that you never gave the issue any thought, I assume that you considered such an important matter of life and death and made a different choice.

I am curious as to what level of defects you see as tolerable within your community subgroup?

You have no better figures is the bottom line but you want to argue the fine points. I tried to keep it on the simple subject of "Accident rates" from past to present. You wanted to take it to this other stuff, as you often do. You can quote no better stats, or refuse to, who knows.

I am not arguing the "fine points." I'm saying that the data is no good, in that I am arguing the grossest point, that of absolute numbers. When you are have a numerator of zero, the denominator is irreverent, since regardless of the denominator, the value of the fraction goes to zero when the numerator goes to zero. Thus I am not overly concerned with the denominator ... that is your issue and your problem since you are looking for a "solution of degrees."

You would rather argue than give better info, just dispute that which was given. Not gonna do that again with you so go on yourself. Would love to see better numbers if you have them but you don't.

Again, good criticism of bad data does not require or even infer the provision of better data.

I'm not continuing down this road with you again, bash away!

I have not bashed you in any way.

 

[Bratface]

I live in the Caribbean and dive with lots of tourists and lots of new divers. I am glad they come to visit and have chosen my friend's dive operation.

I think the new divers who want to go pro are just very enthusiastic and awe struck by the sport. They have found something they like and want more. They just don't realize how much more there is to learn about diving. They could have 10 dives and already want to be a dive master...that makes me smile a little. I encourage them to continue taking courses and suggest rescue diving and advanced open water.

Now what really makes me laugh out loud are the people who come down from the states and want to open a dive shop. They have some peculiar idea that they will go out diving every day. I don't know who they think will run the shop or drive the boat. Most of them have under 100 dives and they wonder why I am laughing.

I mean, dreams come true, but you've got to have a plan.

 

[apadua]

Well, my dive shop had two incentives to offer me DM training while i was in OW training. One was that their "program" offered me kind of an internship where I'd do work for them - filling tanks, helping students, helping other divers on the boat. So it was cheap labor for them. The other was that I'd be officially committed to diving - i wouldn't just walk away after OW certification.

And for the students that enjoyed the diving, the program included 4 certs (AOW, Rescue, and something else i forget) and 100 dives for less than what 50x 2-tank trips would cost. So it was economically atractive, even if you had to do a little work during the weekends. To their credit, they're a great dive shop and don't think it was a con - they were very committed to teaching the fundamentals and to making you a good, responsible diver. It was what they figured as a win-win.

I declined and went on diving with OW. WHen i finally wanted to aquire more skills, i chose the tech route. I figured i'd gain much more by learning the science and techniques and discipline in diving than in getting DM certified. I dove 200 dives in OW+Nitrox until i chose to go for more sophisticated diving. My goals? I love shallow, pretty, colorful dives for my photos, but I didn't want to say no when there was actually something great to see at 40-50M.