The Philosophy of Diver Training

[Diver0001]

I did however pose the original questions to survey what others think, not to sell any position that I may have.

Of course you did. You always do.

And if I"m not mistaken you don't teach recreational diving (any more).. You can't. Your personal standards are so far beyond what a recreational agency mandates that pretty much anything you do would be seen as a violation of even the most stringent rec-agency's standards. Again a difference in context that might be relevant here.

R..

 

[DCBC]

What makes you think these are not still the goals of at least some diver certification agencies?

Thanks Bob. I've clarified the OP to indicate some not all agencies.

 

[DCBC]

And if I"m not mistaken you don't teach recreational diving (any more).. You can't. Your personal standards are so far beyond what a recreational agency mandates that pretty much anything you do would be seen as a violation of even the most stringent rec-agency's standards. Again a difference in context that might be relevant here.

Your mistaken Rob (there are more agencies involved in diver training than PADI which allow there instructors all the leeway they want, as long as the minimums are met). I have held active teaching status for the past 38 years and currently teach recreational diving. I'm an Instructor Trainer Evaluator and have also certified hundreds of recreational instructors as well.

My initial diver training course is a minimum of 50 hours. My newly certified divers dive regularly in the North Atlantic (today's temp is 33 degrees F) and deal with the world's largest tides all unsupervised. Each diver must prove his capability in both self-rescue and rescue. No one is required to hold their hand after they become certified. They have a solid foundation to build their diving knowledge. I'm certainly only one of many Instructors that teach this way (Jim, Walter, Thal and many others on SB teach a similar program).

I have never had a problem filling a course. Some divers obviously want to be trained to a certain level before they become certified. Granted, not everyone wants such a challenge, but obviously some do. There are lots of instructors who will train the others and I respect these courses, although it's not the way I choose to teach.

 

[rstofer]

Thanks for your reply. I suppose the definition of what is meant by "capable of diving without supervision" is like asking how long is a piece of string. It's subject to interpretation. Unless both divers have rescue training, are they ready to dive without supervision? I think not, but some certification agencies disagree.

I would think that almost every agency disagrees with you. Only a small percentage of divers take AOW and, under the PADI seqeuence, even fewer take Rescue.

Do you need Rescue to dive at Breakwater (Monterey)? No! Almost every day of the year, there are a bunch of very qualified instructors around to complete that part of rescue that wasn't taught in OW. Other than the beach entries, Breakwater, on a good day, can be pretty benign.

OTOH, I am a big proponent of getting trained to the Rescue level. I just don't think it is an absolute requirement for diving independently. My wife, my son-in-law and I all have Rescue certifications. My grandson will get his in due course.

It's not going to happen and I'm not going to whine about it but I think we were better off with the old NAUI sequence of OW I, OW II, Advanced OW and Rescue. At every level, some type of rescue training was included. I don't know if it was 'expected' but my buddy and I took the entire program essentially back-to-back. And then we dove around the world, independently and on guided tours.

The most important part of Rescue is the part about self-rescue. The idea that I would depend on my buddy to save my life is absurd. The most probable scenario for me is MI and that isn't survivable underwater. No amount of Rescue training is going to change the outcome

I certainly won't run out of air and I pretend I can survive any equipment failure.

We're back to where we always wind up. Nobody over 40 should be diving. The stats are all against it.

Richard

 

[Kingpatzer]

As I'm under the impression that I live (and teach diving) in today's world; I'm one individual who could answer your question. But I think you have an idea how I might answer it already. I did however pose the original questions to survey what others think, not to sell any position that I may have.

You have not come to diving in today's world, which is how I read the question.

Had your exposure to diving started in 2001, how would you view the question?

As a diver who dives regularly and who has gone well beyond OW, but who came to diving well into middle age and specifically to take a couple of dives on vacation, the only thing I see is a bunch of curmudgeons complaining about how they had to walk to school up-hill in the snow both ways when they were young.

And frankly, since you start a thread along these lines every other day it seems, you certainly are trying to sell your position. You're just soft-balling it.

 

[DCBC]

I would think that almost every agency disagrees with you. Only a small percentage of divers take AOW and, under the PADI seqeuence, even fewer take Rescue....I am a big proponent of getting trained to the Rescue level. I just don't think it is an absolute requirement for diving independently.

It's not going to happen and I'm not going to whine about it but I think we were better off with the old NAUI sequence of OW I, OW II, Advanced OW and Rescue. At every level, some type of rescue training was included.

Thanks for your comments Richard. There is a variance between the certification agencies, but generally the courses were broken into smaller pieces to increase profits. Divers now have to currently schedule/pay for multiple courses to obtain the same training as they use to receive as part of the basic program.

Obviously I have my own feelings on the various minimum standards, but despite these many Instructors teach what they feel is required and are not restricted by the diver certification agency (in some circumstances) to provide the training that they feel is necessary (over and above the minimums). Some like me, feel that a degree of diver rescue ability is required for any diver to function in the "buddy" capacity and include this training in the initial program. Others feel this isn't necessary.

We're back to where we always wind up. Nobody over 40 should be diving. The stats are all against it.

"Nobody" is too inclusive for me. I pass a commercial diving medical every year and I'm 57. Who is to say that because of my age, I shouldn't dive? I realize that this will not always be the case and I'll either stop diving completely when it becomes a hazard, or will limit the type of diving I undertake to lower the risk to acceptable levels.

 

[DCBC]

You have not come to diving in today's world, which is how I read the question. ...Had your exposure to diving started in 2001, how would you view the question?

I dive with cutting edge equipment. Because I have seen how training was undertaken in the past and know how it's currently being done, doesn't mean my opinion is less valuable than anyone else. At the very least it's an informed opinion based upon personal knowledge.

I don't need to have started diving recently to know how diving is today. That's a foolish suggestion. I dive the same sites that other divers dive, visit the same dive stores and go on similar charters. What is there to know about today's diving that's a secret that would elude me?

Divers today are trained in a manner that maximizes profits. It's become big business. I'm not against making a living or making a fortune. New divers know little of the hazards they may have to face. Many of today's programs are designed around warm clear water. I don't have anything against that either. If they want to hold the DMs hand, great.

If I have an issue at all it surrounds a warm water "certified diver" coming here and diving the North Atlantic. They don't have the skill-sets and accidents happen. Or, when a DM has a problem and requires rescue and no one knows how to help him. I think this training philosophy is flawed.

I personally feel that divers should be trained to look after themselves and their buddy, however this is seldom the case. That however is only my personal opinion. The requirement of a new diver to be able to dive independently (without a DM or instructor) seems to be one that's shared by (the last time I looked) 100% of those people poled. Interesting...

 

[Crush]

Hi all,

I am one of the most junior people posting here. FWIW, here are my opinions:

1. Too many people consider themselves scuba divers rather than students of diving;
2. Your education is never complete;
3. Most agencies recommend that scuba rescue diver (SRD) is the minimum standard to which a diver should train, yet approximately 70% of those who consider themselves to be scuba divers have never progressed beyond basic-OW;
4. There is no inherent problem with being a basic-OW diver, if that is all that you want out of life. However, don't be a poser - you should be up-front about this with your insta-buddies; and
5. It really should be stressed that a basic-OW certification is akin to a learner's driving permit.

-the new guy

 

[Kingpatzer]

I don't need to have started diving recently to know how diving is today. That's a foolish suggestion.

I'm suggesting that your opinion is biased to your own history including, if I recall correctly, commercial and military diving experience. As such it is possible that your own particular perspective for making these evaluations comes from a perspective that fails to fully account for the market place as it exists today, and perhaps more critically, the expectations of the majority of divers active in the market.

 

[Crush]

Many of today's programs are designed around warm clear water. I don't have anything against that either. If they want to hold the DMs hand, great.

I have given vacation-diver-training a fair bit of thought, and I have decided that I am not against it, with some provisos. At least one of my kids LOVES snorkeling and I hope to see him become a diver. The problem is that noone will certify a three-year old. When he turns twelve, should I make him do the same course that I took (ACUC) and require his OW cert to be in water just above freezing? The training is excellent, but will the cold OW dive put him off scuba for the rest of his life? I tend to think that this is too much for a 12-year old, but I will re-evaluate this in nine years. So, currently I plan to get him certified at some flashy resort with lots of warm water, but we will have a contract that will stipulate that: (1) I am his one and only dive buddy; and (2) he has an obligation to train to scuba rescue diver by the age of 18.