Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter
You honestly believe that an instructor who makes dive #4 and only dive #4 with a student will have a better idea of that student's abilities than one who had them in the classroom for the entire class, had them in the pool for all pool work and took them on all their check out dives? Why?
|
Not really saying that this is right or wrong, but this is exactly what any normal "auditing" arrangement does. When the Auditors come in twice a year to see if we're meeting the requirements for whatever standard we're expected to meet, they're basically looking at whatever evidence exists at that moment to prove that we're doing what's supposed to be done. Some audits are point in time -- are we performing up to standard at this moment. Some are looking at evidence of performance over time.
I can see it both ways -- an evaluator who has been with the student over time will now what the weakpoints are to look for, but also may be too close to the problem to see what's really happening, or likely to give them a pass based on potential, not performance.
On the other hand, an independent evaluator comes in looking at the situation with a fresh perspective, but may pass (or fail) someone based on a one-day performance that is not indicative of their normal behavior.
Thinking about it longer, I actually sort of think that requiring sign-off by another instructor/evaluator would be a GOOD thing for the industry, since it might promote some actual consistency in the standards and keep the instructors honest.