Why did you go pro?

[TMHeimer]

1. I wanted to learn more to improve my own diving--safety, etc. (I bought the PADI Encyclo. 2 years before giving a thought to DM).
2. Having been a Band Teacher for my career, I thought it would be interesting to get a toe back into some kind of education. During the DM class it was, as I enjoyed our very short "internship". Wish I have been able to actually DM more than one short pool session to date.
3. It was simply something interesting to do during retirement. I had gotten my MSD and was into doing classes and studying scuba stuff.
4. At the time our investments took a tumble like most folks', so I thought DM might mean a little extra income. Hopefully it still will.

 

[fjpatrum]

Personally, I would like to also see demonstrated experience and proficiency in boat, shore, still water, current (drift and no drift) and limited visibility conditions as a minimum and quite frankly I am still debating EAN and drysuit as add-on to the list. Why, because around here if you are going to act as a DM, those will be the conditions you will in all likelihood encountered as part of your duties. Number of dives, I understand this to be very subjective and arbitrary. Perhaps, the entry criterias, rather than relying on numbers should solely rest on demonstrated diving proficiency in those environments and the exit criterias...demonstrated proficiency in accomplishing your duties in said environments with said testing to be done by an independent testing officer, not the instructor. That way, both the individual (diver) and the organization (instructor/dive school) can be monitored in terms of standards.

The first quoted sentence above was what I was looking for. IE, what specific things might an experienced diver consider "enough experience to be a DM candidate". I have done all of those (except drysuit diving) in less than 20 dives, hence my query about what specific experience someone might be required to have that they "couldn't get in 50 dives". (I think that was actually someone else who said that, not you.) I haven't done anything deeper than 75-80 feet, yet, but I can guarantee I will before I reach 50 dives. Sure, I recognize that I've had easy dives where things usually went well, but I've also had free-flows (minor ones nothing dramatic), blown o-rings, a BC that failed mid-dive, and several other "issues".

I just don't see how someone can arbitrarily say X number of dives isn't enough but Y is enough, I guess.

I actually like your idea of "independent" instructors doing the certifying. I think most divers who get referrals do basically that with their referral dives so there's a system in place to do it already that would need some tweaking but could be fairly easily done. The only time I met my certifying instructor (as a referral) was for my 4 OW dives. No contact before or since. I don't know how you'd organize that unless it was handled at the agency level though, because if it wasn't people would just make "connections" and still have the same thing... "Oh, Joe Schmoe trained you; well you're good to go, I'm sure."


EDIT: Let me be clear the other issues I noted in my dive experiences weren't anything but standard "mask/reg kicked off" type things or a little panic cycle I recognized in myself or my buddy and minor buddy separation of 20 feet or so... Newbie stuff, not "real" issues. I will say the failed BC was "my fault" as it was a modified BC and it failed on its first check out dive. It has since been fixed and is my primary BC.

 

[Thalassamania]

...

Personally, I would like to also see demonstrated experience and proficiency in boat, shore, still water, current (drift and no drift) and limited visibility conditions as a minimum and quite frankly I am still debating EAN and drysuit as add-on to the list. Why, because around here if you are going to act as a DM, those will be the conditions you will in all likelihood encountered as part of your duties. Number of dives, I understand this to be very subjective and arbitrary. Perhaps, the entry criterias, rather than relying on numbers should solely rest on demonstrated diving proficiency in those environments and the exit criterias...demonstrated proficiency in accomplishing your duties in said environments with said testing to be done by an independent testing officer, not the instructor. That way, both the individual (diver) and the organization (instructor/dive school) can be monitored in terms of standards.

...


My .02 cents.

Back before we have 32 levels of instructor, each more glorious than the other, when there was one level of instructor, and that was it, and back when you became an instructor by attending a program with ten to twenty other candidates that was staffed by a dozen or more instructor and run by an individual who was very senior and often an agency official or an academic, and who held the "title" of "Course Director" only while the program was running, the system more resembled what you are suggesting. You see, the entire staff met to consider the certification of each candidate. Certification required unanimity, denying certification only required a single hold out, and the question on the table, posed to the entire group with all of it's varied areas of specialty and expertise was, "would I permit this individual to teach my loved ones to dive?" In most cases many of the candidates were DMs trained by someone who was sitting in that room and who, thus, did not get a vote, but who would have been singularly embarrassed to have trained and then sponsored a candidate that was not ready.

 

[RTee]

The first quoted sentence above was what I was looking for. IE, what specific things might an experienced diver consider "enough experience to be a DM candidate". I have done all of those (except drysuit diving) in less than 20 dives, hence my query about what specific experience someone might be required to have that they "couldn't get in 50 dives". (I think that was actually someone else who said that, not you.) I haven't done anything deeper than 75-80 feet, yet, but I can guarantee I will before I reach 50 dives. Sure, I recognize that I've had easy dives where things usually went well, but I've also had free-flows (minor ones nothing dramatic), blown o-rings, a BC that failed mid-dive, and several other "issues".

I just don't see how someone can arbitrarily say X number of dives isn't enough but Y is enough, I guess.

I actually like your idea of "independent" instructors doing the certifying. I think most divers who get referrals do basically that with their referral dives so there's a system in place to do it already that would need some tweaking but could be fairly easily done. The only time I met my certifying instructor (as a referral) was for my 4 OW dives. No contact before or since. I don't know how you'd organize that unless it was handled at the agency level though, because if it wasn't people would just make "connections" and still have the same thing... "Oh, Joe Schmoe trained you; well you're good to go, I'm sure."


EDIT: Let me be clear the other issues I noted in my dive experiences weren't anything but standard "mask/reg kicked off" type things or a little panic cycle I recognized in myself or my buddy and minor buddy separation of 20 feet or so... Newbie stuff, not "real" issues. I will say the failed BC was "my fault" as it was a modified BC and it failed on its first check out dive. It has since been fixed and is my primary BC.

It has to be understood that experience and proficiency are two separate entities....one testifies to the fact that you have done it X number of times. The second is how well you are consistently doing it according to the published standards. So it has to be observed more than once, against measurable performance criterias that you must repeatedly meet or exceed. For example, getting lost every second dive only demonstrates that you are consistent in getting lost every second dive and in no way represent the minimum consistency in proficiency that is sought in navigation.

 

[turnerjd]

The first quoted sentence above was what I was looking for. IE, what specific things might an experienced diver consider "enough experience to be a DM candidate". I have done all of those (except drysuit diving) in less than 20 dives, hence my query about what specific experience someone might be required to have that they "couldn't get in 50 dives". (I think that was actually someone else who said that, not you.) I haven't done anything deeper than 75-80 feet, yet, but I can guarantee I will before I reach 50 dives. Sure, I recognize that I've had easy dives where things usually went well, but I've also had free-flows (minor ones nothing dramatic), blown o-rings, a BC that failed mid-dive, and several other "issues".

I just don't see how someone can arbitrarily say X number of dives isn't enough but Y is enough, I guess.

The last quoted sentence just about covers the opposite point as well. When qualified, a DM should be proficient enough to deal with common and uncommon problems in almost all types of diving. Many of us, myself included, think that in your 20 dives you can have seen a few different types of dive but never mastered them.

As an example, It takes far more than doing a few drift dives to be competent enough for taking responsibility for other. After 4 or 5 drift dives you can never have seen a variety of currents, or have seen conditions where it is better to call the dive rather than struggle. Neither will you have much experience in dealing with your, or others problems, dealing with these can be significantly more dificult in a current. You won't have any experience choosing where to drop divers in the water to do the dive either.

Similarly, for dives like drift dives it is really good to have seen how a number of different operators do things in their local conditions, as this eventually gives you a larger toolbox of techniques and ideas.

Now, multiply this by a number of specialities, deep, navigation, EANx, boat, photo, etc.. And you see that the number of dives necessary starts to add up.

It has to be understood that experience and proficiency are two separate entities....one testifies to the fact that you have done it X number of times. The second is how well you are consistently doing it according to the published standards. So it has to be observed more than once, against measurable performance criterias that you must repeatedly meet or exceed. For example, getting lost every second dive only demonstrates that you are consistent in getting lost every second dive and in no way represent the minimum consistency in proficiency that is sought in navigation.

This a a very good explication. PADI at O/W is the epitome of "proficiency". The student has to show proficiency before the Instructor should sign off a skill. Then they change at DM level and again at MSDT and above. The DM requires an arbitrary 50 dives minimum. There is no proficiency in the different domains required, just experience. The 50 dive minimum puts no minimum on the proficiency attained during these dives. It is strangely the same for OWSI to MSDT, and then to Staff or CD.

I would contrast this with CMAS. To get to a dive leader, or whatever they call in, then there is no number of dives, but a number of proficiencies that have to be obtained. Ifyou can get these in 4 or 5 dives, then great, but, if you don't, then you continue diving gaining experience until you are ready for an instructor to evaluate your proficiency.

An example in the crossover PADI rescue to CMAS. You need rescue, deep, and EFR. Then, you have to do a recommended minimum of 8 dives in the 40m zone. These dives have a number of proficiencies, and if you are proficient at this depth, you can do these in 2 dives and be signed off. If you have almost no experience, and are not particularly proficient, it may take 10 or 12 dives to become proficient, and have the instructor sign you off.

Personally, for the PADI DM, I would like to see similar proficiencies introduced instead of a minimum number of dives.

Jon

 

[SCUBA482]

It seemed like a good idea, at the time. It likely was. Today, I doubt that I'd bother.

What Thal said...but the tax write off on gear helped offset the expenses...had/have planned on using post retirement since it wouldn't support my family in So Cal... I'm always down for good training & I do enjoy DMing boats here too...I just like to dive

 

[Crowley]

I walked into the water in December 2000 and I never really walked out. By my 5th dive trip I had around 60 dives, was pretty competent, and already starting to help other divers underwater.

After the most wonderful trip to the wreck of the SS Thistlegorm in 2004 and later that day, met up with my OW/AOW instructor and got horrendously drunk in the Tavern Bar in Sharm El Sheikh.

Somewhere around 3am I started bemoaning the fact that I had to go home to the office: "I dshon't wantsh tsho go hooome, Iiiii wantsch to sssshtay herrre *hic* andsh go mmm *hic* dshiving..."

And my instructor said something like: "why don't you consider doing your DM course and looking for a job, because I think you'd be really good at it..."

I talked to a few more people but the end result was that I sold my house, car, motorcycle, pretty much everything actually, except my books and my DVDs and my music collection and 6 months later I was in Thailand embarking on the most awesome adventure of my life. I have spent a grand total of 21 days in the country of my birth since 2005. I've seen some amazing things, met some of the most amazing people and - meh - I don't care any more about agency waffle - this is what I do, I do it reeaaally well and I don't know what I'd do without it.

It's not an altogether easy life, but it is a wonderful one.

Cheers

C.

 

[fjpatrum]

It has to be understood that experience and proficiency are two separate entities....one testifies to the fact that you have done it X number of times. The second is how well you are consistently doing it according to the published standards. So it has to be observed more than once, against measurable performance criterias that you must repeatedly meet or exceed. For example, getting lost every second dive only demonstrates that you are consistent in getting lost every second dive and in no way represent the minimum consistency in proficiency that is sought in navigation.

Completely agree... I just was saying that 50 dives is actually quite easy to have seen and mastered at least a fair number of different environments... or at least gotten enough mastery to consider teaching. I don't think I'm anywhere near "mastery" of things and I would have significantly more dives than 50 before I really make any effort to start the process of going pro.

The last quoted sentence just about covers the opposite point as well. When qualified, a DM should be proficient enough to deal with common and uncommon problems in almost all types of diving. Many of us, myself included, think that in your 20 dives you can have seen a few different types of dive but never mastered them.

As an example, It takes far more than doing a few drift dives to be competent enough for taking responsibility for other. After 4 or 5 drift dives you can never have seen a variety of currents, or have seen conditions where it is better to call the dive rather than struggle. Neither will you have much experience in dealing with your, or others problems, dealing with these can be significantly more dificult in a current. You won't have any experience choosing where to drop divers in the water to do the dive either.

Similarly, for dives like drift dives it is really good to have seen how a number of different operators do things in their local conditions, as this eventually gives you a larger toolbox of techniques and ideas.

Now, multiply this by a number of specialities, deep, navigation, EANx, boat, photo, etc.. And you see that the number of dives necessary starts to add up.



This a a very good explication. PADI at O/W is the epitome of "proficiency". The student has to show proficiency before the Instructor should sign off a skill. Then they change at DM level and again at MSDT and above. The DM requires an arbitrary 50 dives minimum. There is no proficiency in the different domains required, just experience. The 50 dive minimum puts no minimum on the proficiency attained during these dives. It is strangely the same for OWSI to MSDT, and then to Staff or CD.

I would contrast this with CMAS. To get to a dive leader, or whatever they call in, then there is no number of dives, but a number of proficiencies that have to be obtained. Ifyou can get these in 4 or 5 dives, then great, but, if you don't, then you continue diving gaining experience until you are ready for an instructor to evaluate your proficiency.

An example in the crossover PADI rescue to CMAS. You need rescue, deep, and EFR. Then, you have to do a recommended minimum of 8 dives in the 40m zone. These dives have a number of proficiencies, and if you are proficient at this depth, you can do these in 2 dives and be signed off. If you have almost no experience, and are not particularly proficient, it may take 10 or 12 dives to become proficient, and have the instructor sign you off.

Personally, for the PADI DM, I would like to see similar proficiencies introduced instead of a minimum number of dives.

Jon

Some interesting things to consider... I always assumed it was the boat captain that decided drop points, not DMs or instructors. Clearly I need more experience. I see a lot of those different "experience" things occurring simultaneously though... for example a deep drift dive on Nitrox could quite easily give someone a lot of experience without racking up a lot of dives. Or, in my case, a bunch of shore dives at night and boat dives at night fulfill more than one "quota", so to speak. Clearly I am one of those "hot shot" newbs who thinks he's a natural diver, born to be king of the underwater world. I'm sure I'll get a reality check soon, but I'm trying to be realistic about my skill level now and plan for things in the future to get the most I can out of my dives... enjoyment and experience wise.

I like the idea of proficiency tests rather than number of dives because I have seen people with hundreds of dives who had a harder time with their buoyancy than I do with less than 20. (I've also seen people with less dives than me or similar dives who make me look like an idiot in the water.) I think that's the real issue for me is using an arbitrary number that doesn't really mean anything for skill quality. As has been pointed out, I could easily do 50 or 100 dives in a quarry to 80 feet and never see any kind of "growth" as a diver after the first few. Or I can try to get as many different environments as possible in those 50 or 100 dives and gain whole lot of potential growth from variation. I choose variation, whenever possible.

Thank you for your response and good ideas.

 

[Thalassamania]

...

I like the idea of proficiency tests rather than number of dives because I have seen people with hundreds of dives who had a harder time with their buoyancy than I do with less than 20. (I've also seen people with less dives than me or similar dives who make me look like an idiot in the water.) I think that's the real issue for me is using an arbitrary number that doesn't really mean anything for skill quality. As has been pointed out, I could easily do 50 or 100 dives in a quarry to 80 feet and never see any kind of "growth" as a diver after the first few. Or I can try to get as many different environments as possible in those 50 or 100 dives and gain whole lot of potential growth from variation. I choose variation, whenever possible. ...

I agree, at least in theory. It gets a bit more difficult when you try to put it into practice. What proficiency tests would you recommend? I ask this as someone whose professional duties often included performing proficiency tests (e.g., check-out dives) and who evolved through learning from a, "mask clear, regulator recovery, doff and don, buoyancy and trim" kind of approach to a much more holistic evaluation.

 

[fjpatrum]

I agree, at least in theory. It gets a bit more difficult when you try to put it into practice. What proficiency tests would you recommend? I ask this as someone whose professional duties often included performing proficiency tests (e.g., check-out dives) and who evolved through learning from a, "mask clear, regulator recovery, doff and don, buoyancy and trim" kind of approach to a much more holistic evaluation.

As someone with very little diving experience and a lot of scubaboard reading, here's my skill list:

Buoyancy---obviously a DM/instructor should be able to hover... I'd say at least 3 minutes to simulate a safety stop. Max variation +/- 1 foot. To me that gives probably a little too much leeway in depth variance but I think it's actually a tolerable limit. Along with buoyancy proper weight checks should be demonstrated using different configs.

Should be pretty simple to test by just doing a safety stop on a check out dive.

Gear "mastery"--- a DM/Instructor should be able to accomplish the above in whatever BC and gear config they are given not just what they're used to diving regularly.

Test by randomly mixing up BCs and regs from candidates in the class (after clearly labeling them). Give the BP/W guy a vest and switch up people's fins etc.

Ditch & Don--- this would include planned and unplanned gear loss/ditching and proper recovery. Fins, masks, regs, and a full gear ditch & don.

Another fairly easy thing to test, though I don't know how you'd do the "unplanned" part without "harassing" candidates/students.

Dive planning--- gas management with different tank sizes for different dive conditions and depths. Test by making candidates plan every dive... simple enough.

Navigation--- full course navigation that includes natural navigation markers and compass work. I think a "course" would have to be a dedicated dive but general navigation skill can be tested on any dive.

Bag deployment--- it seems to me that anyone who is planning to be an instructor should be able to properly deploy an SMB, from depth of at least 5m, 4 times out of 5. I'd argue 5 out of 5 but that might be unreasonable. I'd say from 15m it should be tested at least a couple of times as well.

Finning--- candidates for OWSI should be able to demonstrate dolphin kicks, frog kicks and flutter kicks, to my mind. Arguably they should also be able to helicopter. If planning to do cave instruction, they should be able to back kick as well.

Emergency response--- how does the candidate deal with free-flows, OOA divers, buddy loss and similar events. Again, fairly easy to test if you have a couple of volunteers to act as the "victims".

Leading/teaching--- I think this is probably the most subjective, but can a candidate effectively communicate the information required? Other than rote memorization of the material, can they relate the theory to real world scenarios that new divers would understand?

I'm sure I've missed something obvious but as a newb, that's what I think would be important.