The Philosophy of Diver Training

[The Chairman]

What is PDC? I googled it and came up with a bunch of different results, none of which seemed to apply here.

You use one! It's a Personal Dive Computer.

Sounds like you're advocating a return to the day when we ordered a lung and manual from Rene Bussoz and hit the water with no more training than reading the 24 page booklet.

That would be a misrepresentation of what I advocate. I see online academics growing and the need for the instructor will be mostly in the pool and for check out dives.

Pete, I know you had a crappy instructor who had you do pushup with your gear,

Half right. I had a crappy instructor, but I avoided formal training for a long time because of the one who had his students doing push ups in the sun. He's a very well known instructor and even started his own training agency. When I reminded him about this at a past DEMA, a smile came over his face, his eyes twinkled and he said: "Those were the days, huh?" That alone kept me from becoming a real diver for YEARS. Needless you say? Not to him. Not at that time. I have seen pictures at the California Dive Show of the very same thing from out there, so it's not as uncommon as some would have us believe.

This brings up the question: "What is it about your dive philosophy, that is stopping people from getting into diving?" When asking various people why they don't dive there are almost always two reasons given: "I don't have the time or the money!" The third? "It's way too complicated!" Yeah, there are those people who claim claustrophobia and fear, but they are in a distinct minority.

So, if I want to grow the sport, and I do, what do I need to accomplish? How do you make Scuba more accessible? Reduce the threshold that is holding people back! Now, here is where I will have ALL SORTS of motives as well as other misrepresentations assigned to me. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that someone thinks that all I think is necessary is for someone to read a 24 page booklet written by some French guy.

Yes, women divers are awesome. No one is suggesting otherwise. Yes, the macho concept is disappearing,

The disappearance of the macho diver has been lamented by some in this thread.

but unfortunately, shorter classes are making that more difficult.

For you, this could be true. I have no problems turning out competent & motivated divers in a shorter time frame. Why make me operate within your limits.

Longer classes are easier than shorter ones and they make it possible for folks to dive who can't hack the shorter classes. Diving can be physically demanding if we don't take enough time to make it easy.

Smarter classes are the easiest Walter. I don't teach like my predecessors, and I don't want to. I value efficient and intelligent approaches to turning out quality divers.

I completely agree. A longer, more comprehensive approach to teaching will bring this about.

I thought you said that you agreed!

 

[Walter]

You use one! It's a Personal Dive Computer.

I do. Thanks for the translation. That was not one of the results from google. Another thing I'm trying to do to make my posts more easily understood is to avoid those acromyms that aren't universal. I still use SCUBA.

That would be a misrepresentation of what I advocate.

It would be, but I didn't mean to indicate that is what you advocate, merely that it sounds like it. I was trying to point out that you could be misunderstood.

This brings up the question: "What is it about your dive philosophy, that is stopping people from getting into diving?" When asking various people why they don't dive there are almost always two reasons given: "I don't have the time or the money!" The third? "It's way too complicated!" Yeah, there are those people who claim claustrophobia and fear, but they are in a distinct minority.

Not having the time is an excuse, not a reason. If someone has time for a class and time to dive, they have time to take a longer class. If they can schedule three sessions of two hours each, they can schedule more. They simply don't see the value in it. That's OK with me, they can take the shorter class up the street and learn to dive in a way they prefer. I'm not offended and it certainly does not keep them from getting into diving. Those classes are extremely easy to find. Those who want instant gratification can still get into diving. I don't teach those classes, but they are certainly taught by many others.

My market is those folks who do see the value in my approach. All too often they are forced to take a class that doesn't suit them or to stay out of diving. Not having classes that suits them keeps some people out of diving.

Too expensive? Diving does cost money, but it's rarely as expensive as many people believe. I have discovered people are more likely to stick with their classes and more likely to continue diving when I charge more than when I give them a reduced price.

Too complicated? That's the beauty of the way I teach. It breaks everything down into very simple, easy to achieve steps. This approach eliminates that hurdle.

Those who have claustrophobia, depending on the severity and their motivation, my approach can often help them get over that hurdle as well.

Fear? Again, it depends on what they fear, how deep set it is and their motivation, but I've taught quite a few who were unable to complete a faster paced class.

The disappearance of the macho diver has been lamented by some in this thread.

Another thread and totally unrelated to this topic.

Why make me operate within your limits.

I've never been an advocate of that and you know it. I may disagree with your methods, but I'll defend your right to use them.

Smarter classes are the easiest Walter.

No disagreement there, just on our definition of what constitutes a smarter class.

I thought you said that you agreed!

I do agree with the goal. We disagree on the method.

 

[The Chairman]

I do. Thanks for the translation. That was not one of the results from google. Another thing I'm trying to do to make my posts more easily understood is to avoid those acromyms that aren't universal. I still use SCUBA.

That's why I use the smarter acronyms, rather than the old timey instructor acromyms! I did put "PDC" in the list of allowed 3 letter word searches.

It would be, but I didn't mean to indicate that is what you advocate, merely that it sounds like it. I was trying to point out that you could be misunderstood.

Almost anything can be misunderstood if you try hard enough. DCBC does that habitually.

Not having the time is an excuse, not a reason.

Does it really matter if it keeps them out of the water? Couching it as one and not the other seems a bit naive or a dodge from having to deal with it.

If someone has time for a class and time to dive, they have time to take a longer class.

Walter, not everyone has your time values. What works for you may not work for everyone. I want to grow the ENTIRE industry: not just your and my classes.

Those who want instant gratification can still get into diving. I don't teach those classes, but they are certainly taught by many others.

Yet, you denigrate those classes with routine regularity. You aren't the only one, but it still pains me to see it.

My market is those folks who do see the value in my approach.

As is mine.

All too often they are forced to take a class that doesn't suit them or to stay out of diving. Not having classes that suits them keeps some people out of diving.

Quite often, cries of inadequacy based solely on time scares the bejesus out of people. Consider DCBC's PADI bashing. It has been clearly demonstrated that it is based on numerous fallacious premises, but the fact is: he has clearly painted a picture that if someone takes a PADI class they are in grave danger. How is this constructive? How is this helping our industry grow?

Too expensive? Diving does cost money, but it's rarely as expensive as many people believe. I have discovered people are more likely to stick with their classes and more likely to continue diving when I charge more than when I give them a reduced price.

The perception is that it's too expensive, when in actuality it is way cheap. I have been on boats where someone has gotten additional training. He's asked "How much?" and is then told by the entire boat that he got ripped off! People, including DCBC, often point to agencies and PADI in particular as being only profit motivated. You couldn't garner that looking at their promotional materials, listening to their spiel at DEMA or in any other venue. Sure, profit must play a part if a business is going to remain open, but their goal (as is mine) is to sell the lifestyle of Scuba. I certainly don't see evil in that type of motivation. You have suggested that we all need to stop inventing acronyms that are intended to insult an agency and I fully agree.

Too complicated? That's the beauty of the way I teach. It breaks everything down into very simple, easy to achieve steps. This approach eliminates that hurdle.

Sounds "modular" to me!

Those who have claustrophobia, depending on the severity and their motivation, my approach can often help them get over that hurdle as well.

I have found that claustrophobia is nothing more than a red herring for laziness. I can't combat laziness in an instructor or a student.

 

[boulderjohn]

DCBC says that because we cannot "test" someone on something means we cannot teach it. As an educator, I challenge that.

Educators today like to use the word "assessment" rather than "testing" when referring to the general concept of determining if students know and can do something. I think the reason is that too many people think of traditional exams when they use he word "testing." "Assessment" does not have that connotation and is therefore better suited to the full range of testing possibilities.

One of the most important things to remember is that there is a big difference between formal assessment and informal assessment.

When my student take the final exam (formal assessment) in PADI, it is rare that anyone misses any of the table questions. (Actually, my students rarely score less than the 90% on the total exam.) That is because I don't let anyone take the final exam (formal assessment) until I am convinced they are fully able to handle the tables. I am convinced of that by the way I have watched them work with and complete the practice exercises I provide (informal assessment). In all aspects of the class, we keep learning until my informal assessment of their development tells me that they are ready for the formal assessment.

Informal assessment comes in many forms--check quizzes, questions, puzzled looks on faces, or just plain observation. Done effectively, informal assessment makes formal assessment a simple technicality.

So how does this factor into scuba instruction?

During confined water dives, I emphasize buoyancy, and I am constantly watching students as they progress. If they are having trouble during the neutral buoyancy swimming portions of the CW dives, I help them. By the end of CW #5 I want to see them all swimming around in pretty good form and trim, with decent use of breathing to control depth. If this informal assessment of their technique shows that they still need work, then we keep on swimming.

When I talk about gas management in the classroom, using some materials and a story problem exercise I developed, we talk it through until I see that they have gotten the idea to the point I feel it is appropriate. The students are interested in the material and want to learn it, so it is not all that difficult for them to get there.

No, I have not given a formal exam on either buoyancy control or gas management, but I have both taught and assessed them. Neither is technically a requirement for the course, but since we keep teaching the course until they get it, then it really is a requirement, isn't it?

So, it is very easy to teach and assess skills that are not on the specific final exam. Like the other points I made earlier, this has all been explained by me and others in other threads and other forums, and I wonder why I have to keep repeating it.

 

[Ana]

It's the information age and I see the relevance of old timey instructors waning into nothingness. Gone are the Navy Sealesque classes and doing pushups in all your gear. Gone (thankfully) is the mucho macho phase and we are finding that lady divers are AWESOME and you don't need to look like Lloyd Bridges!!! Scuba diving ain't rocket science. It ain't that physically demanding, unless you want it to be. It just ain't that hard and that scared the bejesus out of backwards thinking old timey instructors who simply are incapable of keeping up with the change. T-Rex was impressive in his day, but now it's time for men and women to take over the sport and use their noggins to make it better in terms of safety and fun.

[/rant]

I soooooo agree with the paragraph above.

Unfortunately, it only takes a couple of threads either here or in any scuba forum to see that the general believe is that IT IS rocket science. Just check the threads... unless you have a wallet full of certifications and 10 tons of gear, you can't possible be allowed to make a 61 foot dive without someone (a DM preferably) next to you each second of the dive.
It would be fine if it was just internet forums but charter operators share the same thoughts.

I didn't have a drill Sargent for instructor, no push-ups or running miles but I did learn that me and only me was responsible for my dives. It seems to me new divers don't think that. Just like there are others out there that seem to think it is their business whatever dive I make.

I'm not an instructor. If it was up to me, there would be a moratorium on new divers. Not sure for how long but a few years minimum.

Anyways to all the instructors out there: teach in a way that your certified divers won't contribute to the thought that divers can't be allowed to do their dives without a baby sitter. And if you have extra time in your class also tell them to mind their business.

 

[Walter]

That's why I use the smarter acronyms

Sorry Pete, I think you blew it this time. An intelligent use of acronyms is to use those in common use. PDC is not in common use.

Does it really matter if it keeps them out of the water?

Ah, but it doesn't keep them out of the water. People who want the fast track have no difficulty finding it. Those of us who refuse to teach that way are very much in the minority. Saying our refusal to join the herd is keeping people from diving is not looking at reality.

Yet, you denigrate those classes with routine regularity.

Not as often as you denigrate the type of class I teach. Value is a matter of opinion. I see little value in those types of classes and I see lots of harm. You know why and you disagree. Our opinions differ. Most people will want the fast track, a few will want my approach. I'm quite happy teaching the minority and leaving the majority to you.

Quite often, cries of inadequacy based solely on time scares the bejesus out of people. Consider DCBC's PADI bashing. It has been clearly demonstrated that it is based on numerous fallacious premises, but the fact is: he has clearly painted a picture that if someone takes a PADI class they are in grave danger. How is this constructive? How is this helping our industry grow?

I often agree with Wayne, but not always and I don't claim to speak for him. In my opinion, extremely short classes should scare people. I believe there are serious problems with them. Every time he mentions PADI, it's not bashing, although I think it would be better if he were to turn it down a notch or two. I do not believe it has been clearly demonstrated that all of his concerns are based on fallacious premises. I do think he may overstate his case from time to time, but I'm also sure he is being totally honest and is speaking from a very real concern for the safety of students.

What is constructive is measured many ways. Helping our industry grow is merely one of them. I suspect he believes, as I do, that if a larger percentage of classes were taught using his methods and mine the drop out rate would be greatly reduced and would actually be much better for the growth of the industry.

Sounds "modular" to me!

Call it modular if you want. It matters not to me. It bears no similarity to the fast track courses that typically use that term.

I have found that claustrophobia is nothing more than a red herring for laziness. I can't combat laziness in an instructor or a student.

Does it really matter if it keeps them out of the water? Couching it as one and not the other seems a bit naive or a dodge from having to deal with it.

DCBC says that because we cannot "test" someone on something means we cannot teach it. As an educator, I challenge that.

John, I agree with your post and I'll take it a step further. You can teach and you can even test additional material. The difference is with PADI if a student fails the tests or refuses to even attempt the additional material, you can't fail them if they have adequately, as required by PADI and evaluated by you, pass all PADI requires. The probability that a student will refuse or will fail your additional material is very small. The main difference with PADI and another agency such as SEI is I don't have to tap dance around the issue. As an SEI instructor, I can simply require the additional material. In my opinion, this is a minor point. There are other points I believe are much more worthy of all this discussion.

Anyways to all the instructors out there: teach in a way that your certified divers won't contribute to the thought that divers can't be allowed to do their dives without a baby sitter. And if you have extra time in your class also tell them to mind their business.

Don't tell your husband, Ana, but I love you! Hell, he already knows it. You have a way of cutting right to the issue at hand.

 

[The Chairman]

Sorry Pete, I think you blew it this time. An intelligent use of acronyms is to use those in common use. PDC is not in common use.

Psssst... it was a lighthearted play on the fact you misspelled the word using 2 "m"s! Although, PDC is now found in a lot of scuba literature including, I'll bet, by your new agency.

 

[Jax]

 

[The Chairman]

Ah, but it doesn't keep them out of the water. People who want the fast track have no difficulty finding it.

Yet, there are many, even here on ScubaBoard, who are reticent about sharing that their OW cert is PADI. The bashers have succeeded in attaching a stigma to this type of learning.

Those of us who refuse to teach that way are very much in the minority. Saying our refusal to join the herd is keeping people from diving is not looking at reality.

Yet, you guys are the most vocal about what you feel is "wrong" with today's education by a factor of ten. While the instructors tune you out, new divers are aghast that they took (horrors) the PADI route to certain death and destruction.

Not as often as you denigrate the type of class I teach.

While I have often cajoled you about your attitude, I don't ever think I have labeled your class inadequate or dangerous. If I have, please show me so I can correct it! Can you make the same statement in regards to PADI?

I often agree with Wayne, but not always and I don't claim to speak for him. <snip> Every time he mentions PADI, it's not bashing, although I think it would be better if he were to turn it down a notch or two.

Or find a new subject. I would be surprised if less than half of his posts did not contain something derogatory about PADI or training in general.

I do not believe it has been clearly demonstrated that all of his concerns are based on fallacious premises.

This is a bit obscure: which ones?

I do think he may overstate his case from time to time, but I'm also sure he is being totally honest and is speaking from a very real concern for the safety of students.

The understatement of the year goes to... WALTER!

In my opinion, extremely short classes should scare people. I believe there are serious problems with them.

Ah, it's in the definition of "extremely" where we might agree or disagree.

What is constructive is measured many ways. Helping our industry grow is merely one of them. I suspect he believes, as I do, that if a larger percentage of classes were taught using his methods and mine the drop out rate would be greatly reduced and would actually be much better for the growth of the industry.

OK, if you double the retention rate while teaching one tenth of the students, would you find that would grow the industry better than classes tailored to the busy professional?

Call it modular if you want. It matters not to me. It bears no similarity to the fast track courses that typically use that term.

Not having seen you teach, I can't say. The converse is also true, n'est pas?

Does it really matter if it keeps them out of the water? Couching it as one and not the other seems a bit naive or a dodge from having to deal with it.

Know your strengths and your weaknesses. I am ill equipped to deal with someone else's laziness.

John, I agree with your post and I'll take it a step further. You can teach and you can even test additional material. The difference is with PADI if a student fails the tests or refuses to even attempt the additional material, you can't fail them if they have adequately, as required by PADI and evaluated by you, pass all PADI requires.

You missed the subtlety of his point. Please re-read it. It's bullet proof in regards to PADI standards.

 

[mdb]

Walter:

If students really learned to dive, and felt comfortable in open water after their basic course, the drop out rate would be reduced and the retention rate increased. This would, quite obviously, grow the number of divers and the industry overall.

You, Jim Lapenta, NWGD, and many other good dedicated dive instructors have always been the real core of diving. The stamp them out and turn them out crowd has done a lot of harm. We now have fewer new divers, divers who do not feel comfortable diving without hand holding, and a whole group who think this is OK.

I do think it will turn around. Most people really do want to learn. Sometimes they are just confused by the hype of do it cheap and fast. How about if it changes to do it so it will last.