Today's OW Course

[DCBC]

Really? Do you have any idea about the complete lack of oversight for training within a club environment and how much variation in the quality of instruction this allows for?

Actually String I do; I'm a Club Instructor myself. That does not dismiss any training agency lowing the standards below what could arguably be considered safe; or Instructors not following standards to shake & bake students, pushing them through without insuring that the divers are competent.

There's a difference between what is set as the standard by the agencies and how the standards are applied by the Instructors. I agree that in any setting, this may be difficult to enforce, but that's a separate issue. It's important (in my view anyway) to have qualified Instructors capable of delivering quality courses and course requirements that demand a high quality diver on completion of training.

 

[Walter]

I "went pro" in 2002 and I was certified in 1984. Between 1984 and 2002 I noticed no significant differences in the way I was trained as opposed to how it is being done today.

No surprise there since most of the lowering of standards took place prior to 1984.

 

[Kingpatzer]

The real issue is that training divers has become it's own industry. Entire businesses are built on the simple act of providing certification. That creates a huge economic incentive to reduce the time and cost of providing certifications in order to stay competitive in the market place.

Instructors may have the best intentions in the world, but the reality is that for the LDS to stay in business, they need to run the customers through. So schedules get shortened, and corners get cut. "Mastery" gets defined down to "close enough." Resorts get the added burden of basically selling scuba certification as a travel event, turning the certification process into something more akin to a purchase of a product rather than acquired training.

What we need is not necessarily regulation, though that might not hurt. But at the very least, we need an international voluntary non-profit professional organization akin to the AMA or ABA which controls the certification of instructors for all agencies. The instructor can work for any agency, but their ability to instruct should be based on independent review by other instructors.

 

[DCBC]

No surprise there since most of the lowering of standards took place prior to 1984.

Yes Walter, for the most part I'd agree; but there is more than one training agency involved, so that's not entirely true. I've noticed a drop in standards since 1984 as well. One area has been swimming prerequisites as an example. Some courses have become results based with no requirement for a minimum number of training hours.

 

[Diver0001]

Some courses have become results based with no requirement for a minimum number of training hours.

This is a very interesting comment. Could you expand on that a bit, please? To my way of thinking if someone achieves the result, who cares how long it takes....?!?

I'm curious why you see that as an issue.

R..

 

[rligon]

I know I'll catch flack for this, but doesn't it really come down to the instructor? Having been through a bunch of classes in the last 2 1/2 years, the quality of the instructing staff and their dedication to teaching the sport has been the key factor for us. No signoffs until you got the skill down, and serious offers that we could come back for a freebie refresher/checkup if needed. Granted the LDS wants to get trained divers, but don't they also have a vested interest in keeping us alive and safe so we keep coming back?

 

[rstofer]

What we need is not necessarily regulation, though that might not hurt. But at the very least, we need an international voluntary non-profit professional organization akin to the AMA or ABA which controls the certification of instructors for all agencies. The instructor can work for any agency, but their ability to instruct should be based on independent review by other instructors.

What? This just ain't gonna happen...

People live, people die. It happens all the time. It's in all the papers...

If there was a serious problem, litigation would solve it. That is, if instruction was so limited as to be negligent, it would not be possible to buy insurance. This would be true on both an individual and institutional basis.

Yet instructors CAN buy insurance and it isn't even all that expensive. Therefore, one might conclude that the chances of an instructor being found negligent must be pretty small.

The accident rate (which is unknown) hasn't risen to a level that makes governmental agencies even slightly interested. Even in high risk environments (like Monastery in Monterey), all you have is a bunch of signs. There is no card check, equipment check or any other governmental involvement. And this is a good thing.

Diving is a high risk sport. It always has been. As a result, some people dying is to be expected. Otherwise it would be a low risk sport. Kind of like tiddlywinks.

Looking at the demographics and some anecdotal evidence, the old people (like me) form a huge percentage of the fatalities and it is probably from heart attacks. I'm kind of expecting that...

People are going to die sooner or later. It might as well be while diving.

Richard

 

[Jim Lapenta]

Maybe because when you put minimum hour requirements on a course it has a tendency to insure that when a skill is taught it is not just a one time "ok you passed" thing. Being required to use a minimum number of hours for me allows me to set up tests and task loading exercises that insure skills are more than a monkey see/monkey do type of deal. As an instructor I know I am required to put in 16 hours in the pool. This gives me the freedom to come up with exercises that test my students and reinforce what they have learned.

I use the mask clearing example a lot but it best illustrates this. If a student clears their mask to demo quality first time out on their knees that is good enough for a lot of instructors. It was and is for my OW instructor. I on the other hand have the time to be sure they have it down by testing them horizontally, swimming, hovering, while sharing air, during a doff and don, a bailout, etc. After all of this I'm pretty sure they are gonna be OK in OW. Can that be said about the student who is required to do it 1,2, or even three times. By the time we hit OW mine have done a full flood or remove and replace under varying task loads at least 15 or 20 times. Along with all the other basic skills, they've simulated a CESA 3 or 4 times, learned to control their buoyancy fairly well, and used a variety of rescue techniques as well. Including an unconscious diver from depth to the surface. It also gives them time to just swim on scuba and get comfortable. More so than one who is given 4-6 hours of skills and put in OW. Minimum hours allows the student to use what they have learned in a controlled environment and be that much more at ease with what is required of them. It also gives the instructor the ability to say to pushy lds's or lds owners "back off" when they complain about how much time is being taken to get a class through.

 

[Kingpatzer]

What? This just ain't gonna happen...

I agree, it probably won't.

If there was a serious problem, litigation would solve it. That is, if instruction was so limited as to be negligent, it would not be possible to buy insurance. This would be true on both an individual and institutional basis.

Litigation generally does not do that at all. Errors per surgery hour has been going up steadily for decades, as have medical malpractice cases, yet the rate continues to climb.

In scuba, moreover, the liability waivers that are signed by the participants are effective at minimizing legal losses to the insurance company and the instructors.

Yet instructors CAN buy insurance and it isn't even all that expensive. Therefore, one might conclude that the chances of an instructor being found negligent must be pretty small.

Or one may conclude that the number of diving accidents that result in lawsuits which can proceed despite the waiver(s) signed by the participant is relatively small.

Diving is a high risk sport. It always has been. As a result, some people dying is to be expected. Otherwise it would be a low risk sport. Kind of like tiddlywinks.

So, you think that any number of people dying due to inadequate training can never be a problem?

Looking at the demographics and some anecdotal evidence, the old people (like me) form a huge percentage of the fatalities and it is probably from heart attacks. I'm kind of expecting that...

Did you note the numbers posted from DAN up above -- 87% of deaths for newly trained divers happening on the first day? Does that not suggest to you the possibility that inadequate training is a significant factor in those deaths.

 

[sabbath999]

When you show up on a charter boat they treat you as retarded drooling idiot, unless they know you.

That is so true. My last trip to Kona we dove with a different company, and when we dropped in the two DM's that were with us were watching us like hawks. We descended down the line, and hovered above the coral waiting for the others to gather around, and the DM's just kind of looked at us, nodded to us and each other with an "OK, these guys are not morons" look and turned their attention to the others... we pretty much didn't get another look from them the whole trip (except when they were pointing out critters).

I can see why they were paying such close attention to us until they saw us dive a bit... some of the rest of the folks that were with us over the week were either either virtually completely untrained or hadn't dove in about 20 years. I am not talking about minor stuff like sculling around with their hands, I am talking about not having any idea about how to dive at all.

Here at home, there are a couple of places that are absolutely horrible in their training... I mean HORRIBLE... the shops run through the bare minimums (if that) and pass people that are not NEARLY ready to meet the rather disreputable minimum standards... people who can't clear their masks correctly, can't control their buoyancy enough to avoid uncontrolled ascents, etc.