Split from Catalina Diver died.. Advanced Certification is a joke [Archive]

Teamcasa

November 6th, 2009, 12:21 AM

Split From http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/accidents-incidents/310370-catalina-diver-died-today-w-instructor.html

.... Advanced Certification as provided by PADI is a joke and allowing students to take this certification with less than 10 dives is worse.

Dwayne, this isn't meant as a troll. I'm just curious to undertand your rationale.

Without addressing the first half of the sentence I quoted (no sense muddying this thread further), the second half of your statement has piqued my curiosity.

If you think allowing people to take the PADI AOW (NAUI has the same prerequisite, BTW) with less than 10 dives is not right, what do you suggest they do to get enough underwater time to be ready for the class? I'm assuming that you think they ought to have more than10 dives under their belt before they take the AOW.

And if I'm right, that begs this question: With whom do they do these other dives to get them to have enough logged dives so that, from your perspective, they're "ready" for AOW?

The reason this intrigues me is that you essentially seem to be saying that getting experience diving on their own with a buddy is going to be safer/preferable to getting that experience under the eye of an instructor.

And I don't think it would be fair to say that because, in this case, the diver died under the supervision of an instructor, that proves your point. The more salient question to ponder would be what would have happened had this same situation developed and the diver was with another new-ish diver.

From what I know of the particulars, the instructor here did everything she could to react to and alleviate the situation. I can't imagine a non professional-level person reacting as quickly. And even though the final outcome might have been the same, I'm still wrestling with what your logic might be.

Anyhow, just curious if you'd care to expand on your thoughts.

(But if what you meant to say was that calling someone - NAUI, PADI, or any other cert flavor - an "Advanced" diver with 10 dives under their belt is lunancy, then I'm in total agreement with you.)

- Ken

DandyDon

November 6th, 2009, 12:57 AM

[-]Didn't Padi change the name to "Adventures in diving"...?[/-] Edit: wrong

Additional training after OW seems like a very good idea. Called the card holder an Advanced diver is incorrect I think, a bad habit with divers. I call it an AOW out of habit and while I agree it's just a card and not really proof of much, it does show that the diver did more than just OW - a good attitude with some benefit.

DwayneJ

November 6th, 2009, 01:34 AM

If you think allowing people to take the PADI AOW (NAUI has the same prerequisite, BTW) with less than 10 dives is not right, what do you suggest they do to get enough underwater time to be ready for the class? I'm assuming that you think they ought to have more than10 dives under their belt before they take the AOW.

I am an absolute believer in continued training and gaining experience with experienced divers/instructors. Diving with a few recent certified divers have clearly show me that basic certification is not good enough - Lack of buoyancy control and lack of situational awareness.

And if I'm right, that begs this question: With whom do they do these other dives to get them to have enough logged dives so that, from your perspective, they're "ready" for AOW?

Clearly my buddies need help and experience and I am happy to help by being a good buddy and likewise continued training with an instructor is a great idea.

The reason this intrigues me is that you essentially seem to be saying that getting experience diving on their own with a buddy is going to be safer/preferable to getting that experience under the eye of an instructor.

Certainly diving with experienced divers is exactly what a beginner diver needs. Likewise, diving with an instructor with the focus on overall skills improvement is a fantastic idea. There should be more focus on taking an instructor with you diving as a teacher/guide vs selling a simple course. "Advanced Open Water" is an awful course because it implies by completing 5 dives, a student has advanced skills.

And I don't think it would be fair to say that because, in this case, the diver died under the supervision of an instructor, that proves your point. The more salient question to ponder would be what would have happened had this same situation developed and the diver was with another new-ish diver.

I know the instructor was exceptional and I would have no hesitation taking instruction from the individual today. I had a near drowning experience at 12 after sucking down a snorkel of sea water. An adult dragged me all the way to the beach and I fought them all the way. Adult on adult whether a new diver, experienced diver, or instructor - if panic sets in, the best chance of survival is likely with a diver who is stronger, can keep you at depth, keep your regulator in your mouth, and slowly ascend.

From what I know of the particulars, the instructor here did everything she could to react to and alleviate the situation. I can't imagine a non professional-level person reacting as quickly. And even though the final outcome might have been the same, I'm still wrestling with what your logic might be.

I heard the same about the instructor - If an adult panics due to depth, medical issue, equipment failure, based on my own experience as a kid, I am sure it would be close to impossible to stop the student.

Anyhow, just curious if you'd care to expand on your thoughts.

(But if what you meant to say was that calling someone - NAUI, PADI, or any other cert flavor - an "Advanced" diver with 10 dives under their belt is lunancy, then I'm in total agreement with you.)

Exactly what I am saying.

fnfalman

November 6th, 2009, 01:40 AM

DwayneJ

November 6th, 2009, 01:46 AM

Didn't Padi change the name to "Adventures in diving"...?

Additional training after OW seems like a very good idea. Called the card holder an Advanced diver is incorrect I think, a bad habit with divers. I call it an AOW out of habit and while I agree it's just a card and not really proof of much, it does show that the diver did more than just OW - a good attitude with some benefit.

Advanced Open Water Diver Course from PADI Professional Scuba Divers' Training Organization (http://www.padi.com/scuba/padi-courses/diver-level-courses/view-all-padi-courses/advanced-open-water-diver/)

TSandM

November 6th, 2009, 01:46 AM

I have said this a lot of times. When I finished OW, I was unsafe to dive without supervision. I immediately took AOW, and what it amounted to, really, was the remedial time I should have spent in OW. I didn't learn a whole lot, but I got five more supervised dives, and by the end of it, I wasn't diving well, but I don't think I was as unsafe as I was five dives earlier. (I still hadn't done a descent without landing on my back, but once I did that, I rolled over and went diving . . . )

One of the issues is the name, but the other is the required deep dive. I think many people going straight from OW to AOW are not in any way fit to dive to 100 fsw. I wasn't, although my deep dive was uneventful. I could not have coped with ANY issue at 100 feet, but I would have been unlikely to panic, as time has proven that I am unlikely to panic, period. But having worked with some of my husband's OW students, the thought of taking them to a hundred feet absolutely terrifies me. Going deep with people who are taking the AOW class because they lack confidence, or have awful buoyancy control, seems to me to be an invitation to problems -- and an awful lot of incident reports I have read seem to have to do with AOW deep dives.

I think the class should be termed OW 2, and should leave out the deep dive and have a couple of PPB dives mandatory instead. Just my two cents' worth.

DandyDon

November 6th, 2009, 01:49 AM

Advanced Open Water Diver Course from PADI Professional Scuba Divers' Training Organization (http://www.padi.com/scuba/padi-courses/diver-level-courses/view-all-padi-courses/advanced-open-water-diver/)
Hell, I'm wrong again. Don't know where I got that idea. Maybe they need to change it?

Leejnd

November 6th, 2009, 01:50 AM

I am in full agreement with Ken that PADI AOW is a good next step for beginner divers. When my husband and I did our OW, we really bonded with our instructors, and a couple other people in our class. We all agreed to go forward with our AOW together, with the same two instructors. We ended up with four of us divers, and two instructors, doing all of our post-OW dives together...with two trained professionals, instead of just us beginners.

We did more than just the required dives -- it's been 4 years now so I can't remember exactly how many we did -- but the point is that we didn't go off on our own, without an instructor, until we'd done quite a number of dives supervised by professionals.

I have no problem with that at all. We picked up, and reinforced, more OW skills from our AOW dives than we did from our OW dives, when we were still trying to just get used to the strangeness of breathing underwater!

We did have a few laughs at the fact that it was called "Advanced" - we all knew that we were far from Advanced divers. But having spent all that time with instructors before going off on our own, we definitely felt far more capable of doing so than if we had done a bunch of dives on our own before we went and did our AOW.

I personally believe that removing the word "Advanced" would solve the problem completely. Even so, honestly, I can't see any reason for DwaynJ's objection to allowing divers with less than 10 dives to do AOW.

D_B

November 6th, 2009, 02:50 AM

For anyone who has taken the course .. did you feel like you were an advanced diver afterwords? .. I think few would have the mistaken opinion that they were ... I did not, no one in my class thought that, and it was not due to the instructors lack of skill

The course book is called Adventures In Diving , as been said in many threads, it allows you to experience dives with an instructor in different areas to see what might interest you

It's very dependant on the instructor teaching it as to how safe you are, and what you learn from it

newmanl

November 6th, 2009, 02:54 AM

Really, I'm not sure what people expect when the OW course is essentially two weekends. Even tennis lessons for that amount of time will only have you still spending more time chasing the ball around than enjoying a good volley of back and forth. Adding an AOW right afterwards is simply loading the student with skills and tasks they are not prepared to handle. As I've said to anyone who will listen, the basic OW diver, right after the course finishes, survives not because they are well-prepared and confident divers, but because nothing goes wrong.

So where's the blame to be laid? I'd suggest squarely on the shoulders of the students themselves. Let's face it, no one wants to take, or would take, a 13 week basic openwater course so they can do a dive or two on their up-coming honeymoon to Fiji. There is simply no time in the present course to adequately prepare someone, anyone, to scuba dive with a buddy of comparable experience without a diving professional as a guide. Now I know why divers on vacation get lead around like school kids on a field trip to the local museum.

Get all of the agencies to up the standards - start by lengthening the courses so that there is time to develop an adequate level of watermanship (swimming, treading water, etc.), time to use confidence-building exercises and perform basic skills enough times that it starts to become second-nature and the number of incidences will go down and the enjoyment up.

Unfortunately, this issue is here to stay, just look at driver's licences. No one fails, everyone gets to drive and then all of us good drivers moan and complain about how terrible the system is. I think the industry has simply responded to a very competitive marketplace and the losers are the consumers themselves.

Sorry, but this thread touched a nerve...

Lee
NAUI #7908

DwayneJ

November 6th, 2009, 03:00 AM

Even so, honestly, I can't see any reason for DwaynJ's objection to allowing divers with less than 10 dives to do AOW.

The name needs to change and I am 100% against the "deep" dive component of AOW. As I experienced, the various courses within the AOW program are no more than "repeat after me" and thus not a representation of a divers capability to handle themselves in open water before, during, or after the training.

I can think of three recent situations where a new diver I was with compromised their own safety on the surface and at depth, and one very recent situation where a new diver chooses to ignore a medical condition.... AOW candidates and graduates by the PADI book.

D_B

November 6th, 2009, 03:16 AM

Who passed them ?

PADI didnt ... The INSTRUCTOR did.
... he is the one who decides who does, and what they learn from it

DwayneJ

November 6th, 2009, 03:23 AM

Who passed them ?

PADI didnt ... The INSTRUCTOR did.
... he is the one who decides who does, and what they learn from it

... but they met the cert requirements which was "repeat after me" and witnessed important instructor/cert demonistrations - The Egg, The Bottle.

SteveR1952

November 6th, 2009, 04:12 AM

I am currently working on my "Adventure Dives" in preparation for my AOW cert on a Live A board next weekend. I have read the whole book and done all the tests since I don't know which dives will be done on the trip. My impression of the AOW is:

It is a sampling of some new areas for the diver to taste and see what interests them for a full course in that topic. In other words, it is an advertising scheme to create desire in the diver for more full certification classes which translates in more money for the dive agency.

To make the AOW truly an AOW cert. to me would require more in-depth education on the following areas:

*EANX teaching and a checkout dive.
*Deep dive
*Multilevel diving
*Wreck diving
*Night coupled with Navigation and low vis. skills
*Rescue I or downsized Rescue class to cover the basics of CPR, O2 management, basic First Aid and proper carries and movement within the water. Add to it a deep course on DCS and all the other stuff you can get with detailed signs and symptoms testing.

Adventure Diver Certs are cute but not practical for much. The current AOW is not much better as to depth of knowlege and actual diving skills.

I plan on getting my Rescue class done next year and along with it my EANX and deep diving certs. I will have my Drysuit cert soon. At this rate I may get to Master Scuba Diver before I am 90.

roturner

November 6th, 2009, 07:33 AM

and one very recent situation where a new diver chooses to ignore a medical condition.... AOW candidates and graduates by the PADI book.

Are you trying to blame PADI for this? This is like blaming Smith and Wesson if you choose to shoot yourself in the foot....

Divers in training are taught to excercise good judgement and once their instructor is not there, then THEY should be expected to dive within their limits and are responsible for their actions. PADI sets standards and instructors make sure the student learns it, but if they decide not to follow their training after that, then neither PADI nor the instructor can be there to babysit everyone all the time. At some point we have to realize that divers have a personal repsonsibility for their own safety too.

How many people do you see driving around in cars who you KNOW are doing things that their dRiving instructors told them not to, or worse yet, that fly in the face of common sense....

Do you think that the government (who sets standards for drivers) is responsible for every stupid thing people do in traffic? Do you even think it's fair to blame the government whenever an accident happens or someone does something stupid?

What you're doing here is comparable to that.

R..

JahJahwarrior

November 6th, 2009, 07:52 AM

Can anyone with more knowledge than me comment on the reading materials?

Recently, I had a good conversation with a man in a dive shop, who was 100% dead set on PADI because he liked their materials better.

He claimed that he tried the NAUI AOW book but returned it, because he found it completely different than his PADI OW materials, and asked for the PADI AOW book, which he was quite happy with. The difference? He says PADI has all sorts of quizzes and things which help reinforce the information and make sure you actually know it, while the NAUI book was much slimmer, and just a straight read, without knowledge checks or anything.

So I'm curious to know, are the PADI materials a joke, regardless of whether the course as a whole is a "joke" or a good or bad idea.

roturner

November 6th, 2009, 08:00 AM

There often some discussion/criticism about certain omissions in the training materials (like gas management) but generally speaking the presentation of the material is pretty darned good. You can see the result in scuba reviews too; that even years later, most people remember the salient material with the exception of tables.

I've taken some courses from IANTD and compared to the PADI materials, the IANTD books come across as being chaotic, disjointed in places and a bit amateuristic. I've also seen one NOB text, which is a CMAS variant. Their material is richer in terms of content in some ways but the presentation in teh book I saw was "wall of text" style and would have been hard to wrestle through.

I don't know about any others.

R..

Pearldiver07

November 6th, 2009, 08:17 AM

The AOW course is not intended to be an "ADVANCED open water" course, but an "advanced OPEN WATER" course. A significant difference. It is merely intended to expand the student's knowledge and experience beyond that of the original OW class under supervision, nothing more. I believe that this is a significant portion of the problem. Many students walk out of the class believing that the extra training makes up for a lack of experience.

I am a firm believer that training provides a foundation for experience to build upon, nothing more.

Again, I believe the name of the AOW course leads to confusion. I have always been a proponent of OW I and OW II for the names, as this gives a more realistic connection between the two classes, and their purpose.

If an instructor doesn't make it clear that the additional exposure does not make the student a more capable diver without additional experience, then he's doing them a disservice. And if a student thinks that one supervised dive to around 90 feet makes them ready to dive broadly more advanced dives, then he/she is deceiving his/her self.

Suian

November 6th, 2009, 08:22 AM

I did my AoW with my OW course - a full on 6 day course in total.
The "Advanced" part of the course was 3 dives each teaching me some sort of useful skill;
Bouyancy control, Navigation and Search & recovery.
These skills were all tested in the marina I dived in: You learn how to navigate using a compass only quite quicky when the vis is only 5m.

When I got my diving going after the course, I always asked to be buddy'd up with an experienced diver, or me and my buddy would be near another pair.

Doing my AOW course after 5 dives was fine for me, because I was very interested and given I had been learning SCUBA all week, this was just another day for me to hone my skills more.

When I started the Dive course.
The company that did teach me how to dive (Perth Diving Academy) made sure that all the students were fit to dive (and not just by the medical) by checking some basic fitness and confidence in the water - being able to swim 400m and treading water for 8min.
You don't need to be an athlete to dive, you also can't be a fat slob either.

Edit: I found the PADI OW and AoW water reading material to be quite good. 90% of the content is fairly easy to read and well structured. The pop quizzes and the short tests at the end of each section help keep the student focused on the more important facts and make it easier to revise later on.

theduckguru

November 6th, 2009, 09:22 AM

D_B

November 6th, 2009, 09:40 AM

I still think that the instructor is the one who decides who to pass and who has completed the skills in a manor that they think meets the AOW requirements, especially with the instructor knowing what that AOW cert is used to indicate to dive charters these days
... are they comfortable in the water? ... do they show that they understand what is being taught? ... are they proficient in the particular skill?
Can you show me where PADI (or any agency) has taken the decision making process away from the instructor ?
... just because you can fumble through something does not mean you pass, or it should not

SkimFisher

November 6th, 2009, 10:42 AM

For what its worth, here's my perspective as a beginner:

I was recently certified in September and already have 15 dives under my belt. I'm hooked but don't feel that I'm ready for AOW. **However, the LDS that I took my OW through has been pushing me to take Nitrox and AOW from the moment my instructor signed me off.** Could I take the class and pass? No question. It's got nothing to do with me being timid or nervous, it's just the simple fact that I'm in no rush. I've seen divers that are AOW that still can't control their bouyancy, don't "know" their gear, how to do a weight check, think about proper dive planning or even remember to wear a watch and keep track of their in/out times, air consumption and so on. To me, these are things you should do automatically and routinely before taking an "advanced" class that's going to put you at 100 feet.

I think that some LDS's are rather dismissive when it comes to experience for beginners. When I take the AOW and Nitrox I don't want to be "that diver" taking an "advanced" class that fits in the above category.

To me personally, there's a lot more to it than just passing a test. I think most people will agree that, applied elsewhere in life, "tests" are not always an accurate measure of knowledge - both in theory and application. Someone on here once said that a certification simply means that at *one* point in your life you had the knowledge necessary to complete a task.

But hey, that's just my opinion.

divengolf

November 6th, 2009, 10:44 AM

AfterDark

November 6th, 2009, 11:07 AM

How do you think consumers would respond to a 3 month training course at $2000?

I liked my 12 week course for $25 in '68!

Noboundaries

November 6th, 2009, 11:14 AM

At the time my wife and I took the AOW class our experience consisted of OW, a refresher course, three ocean dives, and two cenote dives. We probably survived those five post OW dives by over-preparing the basics and being too ignorant to know better.

That said, my wife and I had an absolutely fantastic instructor for our AOW class who cut us zero slack when exercising the required skills. All five dives were essentially a buoyancy control lesson that went WAY beyond the requirements of the buoyancy control cert.

I absolutely hate the name and the implied significance of the Advanced Open Water certification regardless how you spin it. If I were supreme king of the scuba universe I'd change all the names to Phase One Open Water, Phase Two Open Water, Phase Three Rescue, Phase Four Professional Development, etc. Unfortunately, it is what it is for marketing reasons, Advanced Open Water, a definite misnomer.

drbill

November 6th, 2009, 11:27 AM

When I finally had to get certified in the 60s for a new job, my LAC course took us through the equivalent of OW, AOW and Rescue in one swell foop! As I remember it, the course took three weeks plus two dive trips (boat and shore). It was a great course and taught e stuff I'd never learned in my eight prior years of diving w/out certification.

Of course a program like that would easily run $1,200-1,500 today and pose quite a barrier to those interested in learning to dive. AOW certainly does not automatically make a diver "advanced," but I do think it is a good idea and undertaking it soon after OW makes sense to me.

I didn't take AOW until 40 years after I began diving. The reason was that I was tired of PADI instructors asking me to do checkout dives with them because they had no idea what the LAC card meant. The PADI instructor I finally did AOW with on the Great Barrier Reef not only knew what my LAC meant, he called it a "museum piece." Once I had the PADI AOW card, no one asked me to do a checkout dive again.

I do think PADI needs to add some standards to their instructor certification! How is it that a PADI instructor (including one from Los Angeles) has no clue as to what an LAC certification means? Heck, PADI didn't exist until what, 1968? Where do they think the founders of PADI got THEIR training?

After nearly 50 years and thousands of logged dives, I hope to reach the advanced diver category before I die!

Teamcasa

November 6th, 2009, 12:53 PM

Clearly, most divers agree that Advanced Open Water certification is not a valid indication of the diver's skill but only step two in their training. Having taken a similar certification mentioned by Dr. Bill I feel the same.AOW certainly does not automatically make a diver "advanced," but I do think it is a good idea and undertaking it soon after OW makes sense to me.It is just part two of many on the path of becoming a truly skilled diver.

OTOH, The AOW certification should require more logged dives of at least 70-80' before anything below 80' should be attempted.

Lynne suggestion of calling it OW2 is a good idea as well.

pdelannoy

November 6th, 2009, 01:20 PM

I agree with Newman from several posts back. The OW should be a longer process and after certification I think the OW diver should dive and build experience. The AOW should be a real advancement in skill.

On my AOW, one diver with 12 dives took nearly an hour to don his equipment and get in the water off the boat.

PD

RonFrank

November 6th, 2009, 01:32 PM

With all these arguments having been presented ad~nausea here in the past, we never seem to get anywhere on these types of debates! :rofl3:

I did my AOW immediately following my OW trainiing. IMO, it is a logical progression, and a very good idea for a new diver to get a few more dives under their belt before venturing forth into the world of diving.

For those that want to agency Bash, give it a break unless you have seriously constructive ideas.

For those that don't like the term "Advanced" get over it, or complain to PADI/NAUI/SSI.. etc.

In this economy and in light of past action (or lack there of) don't think for a second that the agencies, or the LDS is going to change anything that results in the classes being longer, more difficult, or more expensive.

Teamcasa

November 6th, 2009, 01:35 PM

With all these arguments having been presented ad~nausea here in the past, we never seem to get anywhere on these types of debates! It's not really a debate but more like expressing your thoughts.

Sure, posting it here will likely not have any effect on an agency's policy but it might make a new diver realize how important additional training is in their diving life. Hence the location of this thread.

RonFrank

November 6th, 2009, 01:43 PM

On my AOW, one diver with 12 dives took nearly an hour to don his equipment and get in the water off the boat.

PD

So you are citing an example of some dude who moves at the speed of grass growing as a reason AOW entry requirements need to change? :shakehead:

How can ANY class be a *real advancement in skill?*. So double the class time, and dive time.. is that enough? Unlikley. In the end some things take time and experience. AOW IMO provides a basis to move forward.

If you make divers wait until they have the skills to take the class, then the class becomes pointless.

RonFrank

November 6th, 2009, 01:45 PM

It's not really a debate but more like expressing your thoughts.

Potato, Patato... :D

Sure, posting it here will likely not have any effect on an agency's policy but it might make a new diver realize how important additional training is in their diving life. Hence the location of this thread.

It's in Advanced Discussions? :eyebrow:

Michael_Lambert

November 6th, 2009, 01:51 PM

I did not take the PADI education however i did not consider myself "Advanced Open Water" after my AWO course...

It was not until i had my OW/ AOW / Nitrox and GUE Fundies and about 300 dives did i actually look back and think then that i was qualified to do the diving i had been doing in the past due to completely lack of knowing any better!

Ken Kurtis

November 6th, 2009, 03:10 PM

So many good nuggest in this dicussion thread. THIS is what a good Internet discussion is all about (IMHO). But I digress . . .

Can anyone with more knowledge than me comment on the reading materials?

First, my prejudice is that I'm a NAUI instructor. However, when our store was open, we had predominantly PADI instructors working for us and we were both a NAUI and PADI affiliate.

That being said, I think both the NAUI and PADI materials are quite good. As many have said, it's what an instructor does with the information that mkes a difference. (In fact, before NAUI came out with an "Advanced Class" text, I used to use the PADI book for my NAUI classes.)

It's also important to understand where both programs came from to and how they expect their materials to be used.

NAUI was originally developed as a way for university-based instructors to teach. These were people who were already used to putting together lesson plans, cirriculums, etc. In other words, they already knew how to teach. NAUI provided the standards and rough course outline, but the instructors were left to do much on their own. (In fact, when I first got certified in 1978, NAUI didn't even have it's "own" textbook. We used New Science of Skin & Scuba Diving.)

PADI was created after NAUI and was aimed at people, many ex-military, who wanted to teach scuba diving and had excellent water skills but weren't used to teaching in a classroom setting. For that reason, the PADI materials have always been recipe-driven (my term, not theirs). In other words, they laid everything out step-by-step for the instructor to go from A to B to C because these were people who may not have been used to teaching or even speaking to small groups so PADI materials provided much more support/direction/guidance in those areas.

These two philosophies still exist today. That's why you'll find more quizzes in the PADI books as a requirement, and NAUI only has a workbook whose quizzes are optional.

The danger of the PADI system is that you can have an instructor who simply has you read the book, watch the DVD (or in the old days the VHS), says "Any questions?" and you move on. The danger of the NAUI system is that you have someone who's not a good instructor and doesn't present material well, you somehow muddle through anyhow, pass the final exam (neither the PADI or NAUI standard versions are very challenging IMHO) and you're certified.

Both systems have their plusses and minues and neither is anywhere near perfect and both are open to abuse. As many posters have said, the quality of the instructor, regardless of agency affiliation, makes a huge difference.

But also don't lose sight of the fact that this is a small industry and that a lot of the material is being wirtten by the same people. One of my favorites was in the late 80s or early 90s when I had a newly-minted instructor telling me about how superior the PADI material was to the NAUI material.

"Really?" I said. "Look inside the PADI book and tell me who the author is." He looked and the answer came back, "Dennis Graver."

"Now look inside the NAUI book," I said, " and tell me wrote who wrote that." His face fell a bit as he opened the page, looked up, and said, "Oh . . . Dennis Graver."

So don't get too hung up on where the info comes from or how it's decorated. As I like to say at times: A NAUI embolism is just as bad as a PADI embolism.

;)

- Ken

Pearldiver07

November 6th, 2009, 03:21 PM

It's also important to understand where both programs came from to and how they expect their materials to be used.

NAUI was originally developed as a way for university-based instructors to teach. These were people who were already used to putting together lesson plans, cirriculums, etc. In other words, they already knew how to teach. NAUI provided the standards and rough course outline, but the instructors were left to do much on their own. (In fact, when I first got certified in 1978, NAUI didn't even have it's "own" textbook. We used New Science of Skin & Scuba Diving.)

PADI was created after NAUI and was aimed at people, many ex-military, who wanted to teach scuba diving and had excellent water skills but weren't used to teaching in a classroom setting. For that reason, the PADI materials have always been recipe-driven (my term, not theirs). In other words, they laid everything out step-by-step for the instructor to go from A to B to C because these were people who may not have been used to teaching or even speaking to small groups so PADI materials provided much more support/direction/guidance in those areas.

These two philosophies still exist today. That's why you'll find more quizzes in the PADI books as a requirement, and NAUI only has a workbook whose quizzes are optional.
...
;)

- Ken

Ken,

Thanks for this insight.

I've known some of the history of NAUI and PADI, and their roots, but this helps shine a light on the pedagologic differences.

That in turn helps me to understand some of the angst between the two approaches.

Thalassamania

November 6th, 2009, 03:25 PM

I think that Ken's points and descriptions, while a dash simplistic, are basically true. But as far as the old, "it's the instructor not the agency," discussion it should be noted that the PADI system prevents those of us who are "people who were already used to putting together lesson plans, cirriculums, etc. In other words, they already knew how to teach" from working with our students in the best way that we are able to. So in terms of the quality of instruction available I, and people with skills similar to mine, are able to deliver a much higher quality program when teaching in NAUI mode, rather then when we are regimented by PADI mode. While neither the instructor nor the agency are absolute, the interactive term is enormous, and can have a huge effect on the quality of the program that a student receives.

Ken Kurtis

November 6th, 2009, 03:26 PM

However, the LDS that I took my OW through has been pushing me to take Nitrox and AOW from the moment my instructor signed me off

You've actually hit on the key flaw in the business model of the dive industry. (Doug McNeese has an excellent editorial on this topic in the Sept/Oct 2009 issue of Dive Center Business, page 66.)

If we took a poll of the group here and asked, "Why did you want to learn to scuba dive", I'm willing to be that most of the answers would be some variation of "To go underwater and see the fish and the reefs."

I'm fairly certain none of the answwrs would be "So I could take more classes and buy gear."

The disconnect here is that dive shops haven't figured out ways to make money and stay profitable by anything other than selling you classes and dive gear. So that's what they push. And once they've sold you all the classes you're going to take or all the gear you need, they've got to look for new customers to go through the process again.

On top of that, the indusrtry has fallen victim to the siren song from consumers of "Faster, faster, faster!!" So we've gone from 12-week courses to one-weekend wonders. (But also don't lose sight of the fact that back in "the day" you only had to do TWO open-water dives to be certified. The currents standards came in place in the mid-80s.)

If I had my way, I'd want to work with you for a year, get 100 dives or so under your belt, and charge appropriately. It would be fantastic course that no one would take.

So the industry has to figure out some way to balance out a need for customers, a consumer resistance for a longer course, charging enough for the work we do, etc., etc. (If it was easy to find the solution, this would be a healthier indusrty.)

No real pithy answers here, just outlining some of the problems and hurdles.

- Ken

Thalassamania

November 6th, 2009, 03:35 PM

From you description, 100 hours with 12 dives at a price of about a grand with 90% retention for five years and almost everyone in that 90% diving locally (as well as traveling) and buying a drysuit a year or two into it starts to sound like it might work outside of the ivory tower.

Leejnd

November 6th, 2009, 03:40 PM

I think that Ken's points and descriptions, while a dash simplistic, are basically true. But as far as the old "it's the instructor not the agency," discussion it should be noted that the PADI system prevents those of us who are "people who were already used to putting together lesson plans, cirriculums, etc. In other words, they already knew how to teach" from working with our students in the best way that we are able to, so in terms of the quality of instruction available I (and people with skills similar to mine) can deliver a much higher quality program if I operate in NAUI mode, than if I am regimented into PADI mode. So while neither one (person or agency) is absolute, the interactive term is enormous and can have a huge effect on the quality of the program that a student receives.

I'm a Training Manager at a Biotech firm. I have my CA Teacher's Credential in Telecommunications, and years of experience teaching adults, and developing technical training material. So I would place myself in the category of "people who know how to teach." :D (Just putting this out there so my perspective is clear.)

And from that perspective, I will say that IMO, it's (almost) ALL about the instructor, regardless of which course material he/she uses.

We did PADI. (Hey, we were newbies - we didn't know other options existed, and went with what we found at our LDS.) Our instructors were incredible. Yes we did the coursework exactly according to PADI's recipe...but our instructors went beyond what was in the book. We often spent a couple of hours just chatting on the beach before our dives. While we learned the basics from the recipe-driven course material, we learned MORE from our "informal" chats before our dives. I don't think they would have taught us any differently if we'd been in a NAUI class. The classroom material would have been laid out differently, but what we ultimately learned from them would have been essentially the same.

I guess my point is that the quality of the program received (IMO) is way more dependent on the instructor than on the material. While I had no idea that so much of their material is written by the same person, that only reinforces my belief that it's all about the instructor.

I know this has all been discussed before. And it will all get discussed again. ;)

Teamcasa

November 6th, 2009, 03:42 PM

The reality of certification is that most new divers do just want to dive a warm water reef somewhere so they meander into the local dive shop and ask the question, "How much and how long will it take". It's after that, where things start to happen.

Their training make take them down many different paths. Some will just do the AOW so they can explore more warm water reefs without the charter giving them grief. Some will fall in love with their local diving and take a path that aligns, cold, deep, ice, caverns, caves or wrecks. Still some will continue their training and move into other more advanced specialties but it all started with the basic OW class.

No single course, instructor or agency is right for all divers. We all have started down the path that best fits our diving and if we are lucky, we are still in love with diving and will continue to get additional training and experience.

SteveR1952

November 6th, 2009, 03:57 PM

I can't speak to the history of the materials or the author's or even the different philosophies of the different organizations. All I can relate to is the PADI materials since that is all I have been exposed to.

I am in the middle of a couple of certifications with PADI. Drysuit and AOW. I have read all the material and have taken all the tests including the final tests on all the subjects. I did not have to for the AOW; just the ones for the 6 dives I would be doing, but I felt I wanted to know all the areas so I did them all. My observations of the training to date.

PADI has to write the books to be understandable to nearly all age groups early teen to older adult and to lesser formal educational levels. This means the materials need to be written in a simplistic manner and without too much science or math. This also "dumbs down" the information somewhat. The design of the training appears to be created by an elementary school teacher (my mother was one ;)) so the material is repeated several times to make sure the reader sees the most important stuff several times. The really important stuff is also flagged in the margin to make sure the student pays attention to the paragraph. The mini-tests re-enforce the concepts and the final tests are mostly essay which requires a more thorough understanding of the key concepts to fully answer the questions. Over all it is what I would expect for a course designed to provide some fundamental concepts to young students with limited higher education. It also seems designed to allow the instructor to move quickly through the materials and takes a lot of the concept teaching off their shoulders to a large degree so they can focus on the practical application of the concepts in the water.

How well all this works is very dependent on the instructor. Just reading the book, watching the DVDs and taking the tests does not provided any real world experience in the tasks required to attain certification. These are up to the instructor and they make or break the course by how much they can teach and how much they expect from the student to "pass" the course. This is the weakest link and large classes create less skilled divers from my experience. Skill teaching gets diluted with more than a couple of students. One class I was auditing was the final pool class for OW. The class had 8 students...all age 12-13 with only one instructor. It was chaotic and learning at its' worst.

My drysuit class is just me. I requested it that way and paid a premium for that level of one on one instruction. My AOW will be all ocean open water dives off the live aboard and with several instructions on the same trip. It should be a blast and very intense with time to fully discuss questions after each dive.

I don't know how PADI could really do much different and still bring in a decent cash flow if they made the courses longer or harder. At some point the level of training vs time will show a trend and something will need to be done to keep the program credible.

Overall, I find the PADI training materials a bit simplistic and boring. I would much rather have more detail and have the instructor provide more of the concepts and skip the baby steps in the testing. The instructor should be able to determine my understanding of the concepts as well as the diving techniques much better than a written test.

My $0.2

rstofer

November 6th, 2009, 04:09 PM

How do you think consumers would respond to a 3 month training course at $2000?

Oddly enough, I would embrace such a course for my grandson. He was PADI certified last year and the instruction was one-on-one. Still, I think he would be more comfortable and a better diver if such a course was readily available.

Sure, we could move to LA County but that's kind of a stretch. He could wait until he is in college and get the training through a university program but that would be a long way off.

So, it is what it is. He'll stay shallow and we'll watch him like a hawk. Eventually he will become a great diver.

I would actually vote in favor of a long (and, consequently, expensive) course as the standard for the industry. Sure, we would have a lot less students but those that completed the program would actually become divers.

Oh, and we would need a LOT fewer instructors. But those that survived the purge would probably be first rate.

Yup! I'm in favor...

Richard

rstofer

November 6th, 2009, 04:29 PM

And, while I'm at it: NAUI used to have an OW II class between OW I and Advanced OW.

Still, if a new student (in the day) took OW I, OW II, Advanced OW and Rescue they would have about 19 dives. I hate to belabor the obvious (but I will): that's not a lot of dives. It's a lot of training but it really isn't a lot of experience.

One point to be made about the NAUI OW exam: no errors allowed on the dive table problems regardless of the overall score. NAUI (or at least our instructor) was absolutely serious about tables (circa '88).

I still believe that 4 class sequence is the minimum a diver should complete BEFORE they contemplate diving with a buddy of equivalent training. I would highly recommend those sections dealing with self-rescue. And, by the way, this gets us to the $1500, 3 month program!

Richard

newmanl

November 6th, 2009, 04:36 PM

I liked my 12 week course for $25 in '68!

My 13 week course was $85. And as for the 3month/$2000 course, I like the idea - dive sites would be a lot less crowded!

ae3753

November 6th, 2009, 05:19 PM

But also don't lose sight of the fact that this is a small industry and that a lot of the material is being wirtten by the same people. One of my favorites was in the late 80s or early 90s when I had a newly-minted instructor telling me about how superior the PADI material was to the NAUI material.

"Really?" I said. "Look inside the PADI book and tell me who the author is." He looked and the answer came back, "Dennis Graver."

"Now look inside the NAUI book," I said, " and tell me wrote who wrote that." His face fell a bit as he opened the page, looked up, and said, "Oh . . . Dennis Graver."

While I only have the 3rd edition of Dennis Graver's Scuba Diving (http://www.amazon.com/Scuba-Diving-4th-Dennis-Graver/dp/0736079009/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257542131&sr=8-4) book, it's an excellent BOW book. And significantly better than PADI's Encyclopedia of Recreational Diving at the time (2nd edition).

scubadada

November 6th, 2009, 05:26 PM

From the PADI website:

PADI Advanced Open Water Diver Course

Exploration, Excitement, Experiences.
They’re what the PADI Advanced Open Water Diver course is all about. And no, you don’t have to be “advanced” to take it – it’s designed so you can go straight into it after the PADI Open Water Diver course. The Advanced Open Water Diver course helps you increase your confidence and build your scuba skills so you can become more comfortable in the water. This is a great way to get more dives under your belt while continuing to learn under the supervision of your PADI instructor. This course builds on what you’ve learned and develops new capabilities by introducing you to new activities and new ways to have fun scuba diving.

As has been pointed out, you can have your AOW certification with 9 dives, no independent diving, and very little to no "diving" experience.

Several years ago I did the 10th dive with a young, fit, Navy fellow in Key Largo on the Duane as he was the only other single diver on the boat and became my assigned buddy. AOW certification was required by the operator for the Duane. I did not have high expectations for the dive but, as usual, was glad to be diving. Despite very modest current and good visibility, the dive ended up being a total disaster but, happily, ended safely.

I learned a lot from this dive, my buddy certainly learned a lot and we discussed it extensively. Unfortunately, I don't think the operator learned anything though I shared by experience with them. I'm reasonably sure PADI did not learn anything though I communicated with them also. Fortunately, I've not found myself in a similar situation since though I know I might.

Good diving, Craig

ae3753

November 6th, 2009, 05:44 PM

While neither the instructor nor the agency are absolute, the interactive term is enormous, and can have a huge effect on the quality of the program that a student receives.

I don't believe in the "it's the instructor not the agency." Rather, it's the combination of both that results in a quality education.

To me, "it's the instructor not the agency" translates to mean that agency's materials and standards are not adequate. As the result, the instructor must add to the materials and teach above the agency standards.

As an instructor, I find this practice offensive.

I want to provide the best diving education possible. Not only do I want my agency to have the best materials, but I want standards that I respect and trust to produce safe and comfortable divers.

Thalassamania

November 6th, 2009, 07:13 PM

...While we learned the basics from the recipe-driven course material, we learned MORE from our "informal" chats before our dives. I don't think they would have taught us any differently if we'd been in a NAUI class. The classroom material would have been laid out differently, but what we ultimately learned from them would have been essentially the same

I guess my point is that the quality of the program received (IMO) is way more dependent on the instructor than on the material. While I had no idea that so much of their material is written by the same person, that only reinforces my belief that it's all about the instructor.

I know this has all been discussed before. And it will all get discussed again.
There are several mistakes that you are making. The first myth that you need to shed is the idea that there is a NAUI course to which the PADI course may be compared. There is no such animal, while PADI Instructors have to use PADI materials, follow PADI outlines, etc., NAUI Instructors can use the material that they think most suited to their students and class. The fact that Graver wrote poor materials for both agencies is not one that you should draw any conclusions from, because (much to his chagrin) only PADI mandated the use of Graver’s products, and only PADI mandates the order in which skills are done.

If you were to go through my class (which is NOT a "NAUI" class, since there really is not such thing), you’d find that it breaks all sorts of PADI standards.

With all due respect to your training and background, you are saddled with the same set of blinders that many of the PADI instructors here on SB wear, you do not understand the other options and are making the incorrect assumption that just because they are both diving classes they must somehow be the same thing. This view is more a symptom of your lack of background in diving than it is a handle on reality. But you seem a smart and perspicacious individual, and I though really don't know quite how to explain to a blind person what the color red looks like, I‘ll give it a try.

Let me take this approach: You have an outline for a course, one that has, for many years, been used to train employees for a give suite of demanding and potentially dangerous tasks, we‘ll call that course “A“. There is another course that we’ll call course “B” that is based on your outline, but that has the more difficult academic material and skill training removed so that it can be taught in one fifth the time.

The safety record that the tens of thousands of employees who have taken course “A” is zero fatalities. Participants in course “B” account for about 100 fatalities per year for, perhaps, two orders of magnitude more employees that are trained that way. Similarly the employees trained in course “A” have, on a per capita basis, an order of magnitude less work-loss injuries on the job than do those who take course “B“.

Course “A” takes five times as long, costs two to three times as much.

What is your recommendation to your risk management office concerning which program your company should adopt? Which course would you choose for yourself? Which course would you choose for son or daughter?

It is PADI’s goal is to standardize their courses, perhaps in the mass market that is a good thing, but I find the standard that they are shooting at to be lacking. Yes, within NAUI there is the ability to teach almost exactly the same course, with just a little rescue stuff added, but there is also the ability to teach almost anything that you want as long as it exceeds that minimal standard and that is what I do.

“It’s the instructor, not the agency” is most meaningful with the agency tightly defines the course, and all that’s left is the instructor’s style. But what about reality, which is when one agency tightly controls the course content and the other says, “okay, meet minimum standards and beyond that do what you think is best.” Then both the difference in agency and instructor come into play, no?
I don't believe in the "it's the instructor not the agency." Rather, it's the combination of both that results in a quality education.I think that what I just said.

To me, "it's the instructor not the agency" translates to mean that agency's materials and standards are not adequate. As the result, the instructor must add to the materials and teach above the agency standards.
I think that is the case, with all the agencies. But do remember that NAUI does not require the purchase or use of NAUI materials, you can use whatever you think best, so it is not a question of adding to, but rather one of selecting in the first place.

As an instructor, I find this practice offensive.
What is it that you find offensice?

I want to provide the best diving education possible. Not only do I want my agency to have the best materials, but I want standards that I respect and trust to produce safe and comfortable divers.
So what agency do you find that with? I find that with none of them.

Cave Diver

November 6th, 2009, 07:19 PM

�It�s the instructor, not the agency� is most meaningful with the agency tightly defines the course, and all that�s left is the instructor�s style. But what about reality, which is when one agency tightly controls the course content and the other says, �okay, meet minimum standards and beyond that do what you think is best.� Then both the difference in agency and instructor come into play, no?

No. Even in an agency that calls for higher minimums and allows instructor latitude in teaching, the instructor can still chose to either teach to minimums, or go beyond that like you do.

It still boils down to the instructor, unless you're saying that every NAUI instructor teaches as thoroughly as you do?

Thalassamania

November 6th, 2009, 08:11 PM

No I am not saying that every NAUI Instructor teaches as I do. But I am saying that the course I teach, for a variety of reasons, would not be permitted under PADI standards. So yes, it is the instructor in one sense and it is the agency in another sense, it is the interactive term between the two in reality.

Cave Diver

November 6th, 2009, 08:15 PM

So yes, it is the instructor in one sense and it is the agency in another sense, it is the interactive term between the two in reality.

I could buy that.

ae3753

November 6th, 2009, 09:15 PM

I think that what I just said.

I was quoting you cause I agreed with your statement ;)

What is it that you find offensice?

Lack of support from the major agencies, in what feels like the pursuit of increased number of divers (certs and material sales) over diver education.

Especially since instructors pay dues and each certified student is revenue for the agency.

So what agency do you find that with? I find that with none of them.

I teach the UTD recreational curriculum. Here's the UTD standard and procedures (http://www.unifiedteamdiving.com/page/standards-and-procedures).

Thalassamania

November 6th, 2009, 10:59 PM

Thanks, I'm familiar with them. Do you find them (UTD) adequate or inadequate? What about about their training materials?

RonFrank

November 6th, 2009, 11:40 PM

The reality of certification is that most new divers do just want to dive a warm water reef somewhere so they meander into the local dive shop and ask the question, "How much and how long will it take". It's after that, where things start to happen.....

Unfortunately I think "END" is more often the case, at least in our area. I meet many folks who are certified, go on one dive vacation, and quite. They all talk highly of their dives, but nothing about the next.

While the folks I tend to *hang out* with are divers, a lot of certified divers dive a few times, and stop. I can't explain that. Maybe diving is a drug, and I can't understand an ability to resist that high. :D

Teamcasa

November 7th, 2009, 12:12 AM

Unfortunately I think "END" is more often the case, at least in our area. I meet many folks who are certified, go on one dive vacation, and quite. They all talk highly of their dives, but nothing about the next.

While the folks I tend to *hang out* with are divers, a lot of certified divers dive a few times, and stop. I can't explain that. Maybe diving is a drug, and I can't understand an ability to resist that high. :D

I'm sure geography and economy have a lot to do with it as well. Here in SoCal we also have a large number of vacation divers but since diving for us is local and not too expensive we also have a large number of year round divers.

ae3753

November 7th, 2009, 12:27 AM

Thanks, I'm familiar with them. Do you find them (UTD) adequate or inadequate? What about about their training materials?

Obviously, I'm biased. One of the reasons I became a UTD instructor was that I could teach for an agency that I respect the standards.

I like the UTD training materials. With a combination of voice-over presentations, instructional videos of skills, and online discussion forum, there is a significant amount of material to prepare a student for class. I feel like the agency puts the onus of diver success on the agency and instructor.

Currently, some of the materials are rough. There's typos and some voice-overs are uneven. However, I'd take more information than polish at this time.

Ken Kurtis

November 7th, 2009, 12:42 AM

But I am saying that the course I teach, for a variety of reasons, would not be permitted under PADI standards.

Especially for those who aren't instructors reading this, I think there needs to be some clarification of the implementation of standards for both NAUI & PADI.

You could read the general outlines and come to the conclusion that the standards are pretty much the same. They both require 4 scuba dives (although NAUI adds in a fifth dive OR a skin-diving option), they both mandate OW training over two days, max depth of 60 feet, and other similiarties. (And yes, there are some differences as well.)

But the real difference between the two, and part of what I'll call the myth in Thalassamania's statement, comes in how those standards are interpreted.

For NAUI, the standards are considered MINIMUM standards. In other words, NAUI sets a floor of performance beliow which I cannot allow a student to go. You must do AT LEAST what's proscribed in the NAUI standards for a given course. If I, as the NAUI instructor-of-record, choose to exceed those standards (for instance, by requiring 10 dives, or by making you swim a 440 instead of a 220, etc., etc.) that's OK as long as the MINIMUM standards are met. I can't eliminate things, but I can add things.

In contrast PADI sets MAXIMUM standards. In other words, PADI sets a ceiling which you cannot exceed. (In fact, it's a floor too since you can't fall below the standards.) However, there's a catch here and it's a discussion I've had with the PADI legal department frequently.

You often hear PADI instructors saying, "Well, I can't teach beyond the course standards." Yes, you can. The catch is that you can't make it a REQUIRED part of the course.

In other words, if as a PADI instructor, I want you to do 6 dives, I can have you do that. But if after you complete the first four dives successfully you decide you don't want to do #5 and #6 I can't withhold your card for not doing the extra dives.

Now, there's another catch. Suppose you decide to add a pool bailout. You're not going to make it a required part of the course. Your student suffers some injury during the exercise and sues you. You will now be called upon to explain why you taught outside PADI standards in the first place and may find that you have an insurance problem, should they find that that particular skill caused the accident.

Confused? Scared to deviate? That's what the PADI instructors face. In fact, some are so intimidated that they have said to me that if they even DISCUSS something not covered in the PADI Instructor's manual, they feel they'll be nailed for a standards violation. (Not true, BTW.)

But I do know that many of the IDCs firmly state "you cannot exceed standards" and that's not exactly correct. Splitting hairs, I know, but it does make a difference.

- Ken

Papa_Bear

November 7th, 2009, 01:39 AM

The problem with all the "What if and We should" is it is not a captive group! These people are consumers and can go down the road anytime and may never need anything above a card to get air! I have said it many times: "Cards don't make divers, diving makes Divers"! So how do you encourage people to get more training and more experience! So whether an certifying organization uses "Floors or Ceilings" it still boils down to a person who is free to do what they want and that includes no training beyond basic!

As dedicated Divers here we take the next step, challenge, effort to learn, or whatever it takes to expand our knowledge.

As long as the Instructor does his job in a manner constant with the normal acceptable levels of the industry! Then it boils down to personal responsibility and one of the first things that should be taught is the ability to call a dive for whatever reason without incrimination from anyone! Never go over your ability or your head unless YOU are willing to be responsible for the out come!

Diving is safe, but water is not always so, but it is the risk we knowingly take in order to dive!

TSandM

November 7th, 2009, 02:03 AM

Well, as someone who is muddling through a DM class at nudibranch speed . . . I think the agency has an effect beyond what they set for standards. PADI educational materials, as a student above has observed, are written like newspapers -- to be accessible to anyone who can read. The "Tell them what you are going to tell them, then tell them, then tell them what you told them" pattern is familiar to a lot of us who have done any kind of higher education. The PADI Encyclopedia, in its current iteration, is actually FULL of good information, but is written in so patronizing and condescending a tone that I often want to throw it across a room.

What's worse is that I think the pervasive attitude that the student has little intelligence, little background, little patience, and a limited capacity to absorb information, leads to the attitude of instructors who say you can't teach neutral buoyancy in OW; you can't teach gas management in OW; you have to do the skills on your knees; you can't ask the students to plan a dive in OW. If your agency thinks its students are idiots, then the instructors will unconsciously (or consciously) adopt that position as well, and forget that challenging students often brings out far more than the instructor thought might be possible.

When I took my first GUE class, I took a deep breath of relief and said, "Finally, an agency that treats me like an adult, and expects me to do my part to meet the instructor halfway in this learning process."

I do think that, to get good instruction, you have to have a good instructor -- which means good diving skills (which are by no means universal in instructors, and are not even much evaluated in instructor training), good teaching skills, and an interest in actually teaching diving (rather than making money for themselves or their shop). But the materials and the philosophy of an agency can seriously influence WHO teaches for them, and HOW those people teach.

And, BTW, we have an answer about long, expensive, thorough OW classes. GUE and UTD both have them out for about a year, and to my knowledge, about four or five classes have been taught.

drbill

November 7th, 2009, 02:49 AM

As far as PADI instructional materials go, I was rather surprised to find several of the questions in the tests for rescue and DM were poorly written and with reasonable knowledge one could call the prescribed answer in question yet PADI insists on the answer they think is correct. I can't give specifics because I no longer have any of my training materials from those two courses.

newmanl

November 7th, 2009, 02:57 AM

So how do you encourage people to get more training and more experience! So whether an certifying organization uses "Floors or Ceilings" it still boils down to a person who is free to do what they want and that includes no training beyond basic!

Diving is safe, but water is not always so, but it is the risk we knowingly take in order to dive!

With all due respect, the decision to recieve or seek out additional training due to an inadequate OW course should not be left to a student or newly minted diver. Would the aviation industry do that with pilots? I don't think so. Newly certified divers have such limited skills and experience that they can not possibly be expected to know what they don't know. Again, make the OW course a complete course, the objective of which should be to produce a relatively confident and capable begining diver. I certainly wouldn't want my next pilot to have to be "encouraged" to take further training to become competent in the skills I expect them to already have!

I realize one can not have an OW course long enough to teach them everything and there is a place for the "advanced" course and the specialties, but is it really asking too much to at least get them started with the basic skills they'll need to be proficient in participating in a sport that is so potentially dangerous as ours?

Lee
NAUI #7908

roturner

November 7th, 2009, 09:08 AM

In contrast PADI sets MAXIMUM standards. In other words, PADI sets a ceiling which you cannot exceed. (In fact, it's a floor too since you can't fall below the standards.) However, there's a catch here and it's a discussion I've had with the PADI legal department frequently.

- Ken

This is a common misconception, Ken, especially among people who are not PADI instructors.

This is how it really works:

The standard, as you pointed out, is a "floor" or MINIMUM standard. Anything less than that is unacceptable to PADI. PADI, does not prescribe a maximum. I *MUST* as a PADI instructor, train them to hover, (to pick an example) motionless for 30 seconds. However, if the student can do it for 10 minutes, NOBODY at PADI is going to think I violated standards because there is no maximum. Just like there is no maximum number of times I'm allowed to ask them to R&R their mask, perform AAS skills, do a CESA. There is no maximum level of competence prescribed for agency sanctioned skills. It's up to instructor judgement.

That said, I MUST certify them if they peform to the minimum. That much is true, but how does this work in a course setting? Like this: I can't refuse to certify them if they can hover for 30 seconds but not for 10 minutes, but I am completely free to challenge them in the course to see who can "do it the longest" or whatever kind of game I want to make out of it... That's not "exceeding" standards. I can challenge them all I want, but the skill gets ticked off after 30 seconds. That's the point.

Where you get into "exceeding" is, for example, if I were to tell them that they *must* R&R their mask while hovering. I can let them try it but I can't judge them on it because performing the skill while hovering is not part of the course. There could theoretically also be legal implications if I told a student that they MUST perform a non-agency sanctioned skill and they had accident while trying it, which is why PADI instructors are cautioned against this kind of "exceeding".

That's the difference in nuance. NAUI instructor #1 can tell the student "you must be able to do this for 1 min (or whatever the minimum is) and NAUI instructor #2 can tell a student taking exactly the same course that "you MUST be able to do this until I say stop". As a PADI instructor I say "you must do this for at least 30 seconds... but let's see how long you can keep it going".

Some agencies allow their instructors to make up their own standards, but PADI doesn't. In some ways (apart from any discussions about whether or not the minimums are sufficient) the PADI approach is actually better, IMO, because a "loose canon" instructor can't break away from the heard and start putting their students through hell to get a c-card like happens in some other agencies.

I hope this clarifies.

R..

rstofer

November 7th, 2009, 10:51 AM

While the folks I tend to *hang out* with are divers, a lot of certified divers dive a few times, and stop. I can't explain that. Maybe diving is a drug, and I can't understand an ability to resist that high. :D

Maybe the part where the water is cold and dark. Viz is crap and you have to trudge through the surf wearing a 70# pack and a 7mm wetsuit. Then you can swim out for 200 or 300 yards, dive a bit and then swim back in. Let's not forget the ever popular face-plant while trying to exit. There's not really anything fun about it.

I can understand why many people who get certified in Calif waters walk away from diving. Given the choice (and the money) I would be a resort diver too!

Oh well, somebody has to do it. I guess we'll just keep trudging...

Richard

drbill

November 7th, 2009, 11:25 AM

Madacub

November 7th, 2009, 01:22 PM

I think the class should be termed OW 2, and should leave out the deep dive and have a couple of PPB dives mandatory instead. Just my two cents' worth.

Agreed. So after OW1 and OW2, what do you think should come next? (name and content of course, please)

rstofer

November 7th, 2009, 02:01 PM

Agreed. So after OW1 and OW2, what do you think should come next? (name and content of course, please)

NAUI used to call it Advanced Open Water.

Richard

rstofer

November 7th, 2009, 02:09 PM

I see a whole new set of specialty courses to resolve that rstofer! Tropical diver, temperate water diver, quarry diver, low vis diver, high current diver... It has long been our opinion locally that many divers who gain their certs in warm, clear tropical regions are really not ready to dive our colder, low viz waters where monster kelp waits to snag the unwary. Divers certified as quarry or temperate water divers could dive almost anywhere (except in the Arctic or Antarctic where they'd need to be polar diver certified), tropical divers only in the warm, clear tropics.

Great additional revenue generator for the agencies and better training for students!

I started diving in south east Asia. T-shirt diving.

Then I came home to Calif and started diving at Monterey and Catalina (BEFORE they added the steps). It was an experience!

In my training nothing was ever mentioned about changes in wetsuit buoyancy. Nobody wore wetsuits. A few pounds of lead helped overcome the Al 80 tank buoyancy and that's about it.

Life was good!

It has all worked out okay but I do understand why new diver retention is a very low percentage.

You know, maybe global warming will have some benefits. I really prefer coral reefs to kelp forests. We have great beaches so a little warm water, a few coral reefs and we're all set!

Richard

Papa_Bear

November 7th, 2009, 02:12 PM

With all due respect, the decision to recieve or seek out additional training due to an inadequate OW course should not be left to a student or newly minted diver. Would the aviation industry do that with pilots? I don't think so. Newly certified divers have such limited skills and experience that they can not possibly be expected to know what they don't know. Again, make the OW course a complete course, the objective of which should be to produce a relatively confident and capable begining diver. I certainly wouldn't want my next pilot to have to be "encouraged" to take further training to become competent in the skills I expect them to already have!

I realize one can not have an OW course long enough to teach them everything and there is a place for the "advanced" course and the specialties, but is it really asking too much to at least get them started with the basic skills they'll need to be proficient in participating in a sport that is so potentially dangerous as ours?

Lee
NAUI #7908

Not even in the same ball park! One thing is an OW diver is not piloting anything! Is responsible for them selves, is not going to fall from the sky and kill a lot of people! They are a consumer who picks their instructor pays their money and can WALK away at anytime! They choose whether to even show up or dive! This is not a license! DIVING IS NOT THAT DANGEROUS! I know we want to act like we are all Mike Nelson, but really it isn't very dangerous! The most dangerous part of diving is driving to the dive site! If this person died in a TA on the way we wouldn't be talking about it or the license test and training drivers get! Now there is the real issue 40000 die on the roads per year!

TSandM

November 7th, 2009, 02:20 PM

Agreed. So after OW1 and OW2, what do you think should come next? (name and content of course, please)

I think something like UTD Essentials should be the next course, polishing buoyancy and trim, teaching a spectrum of propulsion techniques, teaching bag shooting, practicing emergency procedures, and polishing buddy skills. Such a class could also incorporate Rescue skills. THEN it's time for something like UTD Rec 2, which is a class focused on strategies for deep diving, including gas management information, further education on decompression, and polishing buoyancy skills and buddy skills for longer descents and ascents.

I really like the UTD recreational curriculum, having audited Essentials and taken Rec 2 and Rec 3. The only thing that wasn't covered very well was navigation, which I would put into that OW2 class. Navigation is an important skill for new divers, because feeling lost is a good way to get really anxious.

Ytsejam

November 7th, 2009, 02:44 PM

I think something like UTD Essentials should be the next course, polishing buoyancy and trim, teachng a spectrum of propulsion techniques, teaching bag shooting, practicing emergency procedures, and polishing buddy skills. Such a class could also incorporate Rescue skills. THEN it's time for something like UTD Rec 2, which is a class focused on strategies for deep diving, including gas management information, further education on decompression, and polishing buoyancy skills and buddy skills for longer descents and ascents.

This path seems to be working well enough for me. Essentials introduced me to a whole set of new skills and really drove home the need for hard work and improvement.
I�m working on those skills and as soon as I feel ready and my instructor concurs, it�s on to Rec2. I encourage fellow newly certified divers to at least get acquainted with the UTD approach.

mathauck0814

November 7th, 2009, 03:05 PM

It has long been our opinion locally that many divers who gain their certs in warm, clear tropical regions are really not ready to dive our colder, low viz waters where monster kelp waits to snag the unwary.

Interestingly enough, when I introduced my significant other to diving in tropical waters of St. Maarten she wasn't sold. It wasn't until we took a week to Carmel and Monterey when she dove the kelp beds that she fell in love with the sport.

I agree that you're probably right, but it goes the other way sometimes as well.

vjanelle

November 7th, 2009, 04:08 PM

But I do know that many of the IDCs firmly state "you cannot exceed standards" and that's not exactly correct. Splitting hairs, I know, but it does make a difference.
- Ken

Isn't it more like "you can't guarantee beyond the standards"? Like saying a person who did the 'deep' dive in AOW is perfectly fine to 130, vs 100 in the standard?

newmanl

November 7th, 2009, 05:01 PM

Not even in the same ball park! One thing is an OW diver is not piloting anything! Is responsible for them selves, is not going to fall from the sky and kill a lot of people! They are a consumer who picks their instructor pays their money and can WALK away at anytime! They choose whether to even show up or dive! This is not a license! DIVING IS NOT THAT DANGEROUS! I know we want to act like we are all Mike Nelson, but really it isn't very dangerous! The most dangerous part of diving is driving to the dive site! If this person died in a TA on the way we wouldn't be talking about it or the license test and training drivers get! Now there is the real issue 40000 die on the roads per year!

Okay, I'll admit that the pilot analogy may not have been the best example, but here is a situation that illustrates my point: I was recently at a popular dive site used by a lot of stores for training and one of the groups present was a PADI AOW class doing their deep dive. I know the instructor and so we chatted for a moment after I asked, "So, how did the deep dive go?" He responded saying that he hoped none of them ever do such a dive again - buddies did not stay together, buoyancy skills were non-existent and visibility trashed. As a result, did he fail them? Nope. Did he make them take additional instruction or suggest they gain more experience with the basics before coming back to try again in order to earn a "passing" grade? Nope. Now they get a card that says they are "advanced" divers and with it, the idea they can dive to 100'. Want to have someone you really care about dive with one of them? I wouldn't.

At no time did I say or suggest that a scuba certification was anything other than a certification - I know it's not a licence. I also agree with you that diving is not dangerous, but tell that to someone who's loved one died because their mask came off or they lost a weightbelt.

All I'm suggesting, is that the basic course, and the advanced course, could do with a little more meat on their bones.

DwayneJ

November 7th, 2009, 05:44 PM

Common thread and feedback is PADI could do with a course name change at the very least - OW1 and OW2. How about they fix the 60ft/Min Ascent rate at the same time??

Papa_Bear

November 7th, 2009, 06:31 PM

Okay, I'll admit that the pilot analogy may not have been the best example, but here is a situation that illustrates my point: I was recently at a popular dive site used by a lot of stores for training and one of the groups present was a PADI AOW class doing their deep dive. I know the instructor and so we chatted for a moment after I asked, "So, how did the deep dive go?" He responded saying that he hoped none of them ever do such a dive again - buddies did not stay together, buoyancy skills were non-existent and visibility trashed. As a result, did he fail them? Nope. Did he make them take additional instruction or suggest they gain more experience with the basics before coming back to try again in order to earn a "passing" grade? Nope. Now they get a card that says they are "advanced" divers and with it, the idea they can dive to 100'. Want to have someone you really care about dive with one of them? I wouldn't.

At no time did I say or suggest that a scuba certification was anything other than a certification - I know it's not a licence. I also agree with you that diving is not dangerous, but tell that to someone who's loved one died because their mask came off or they lost a weightbelt.

All I'm suggesting, is that the basic course, and the advanced course, could do with a little more meat on their bones.

Well I agree that there is a million stories like that one and I know a few myself involving people who needed to know better and thought they had "Good" training! So lets hope that those people said to themselves "I learned I don't ever want to go deep without more training"! It has been said here a number of times "I would rather die doing something I love" and my family knows it!

I would hope we can instill into knew Divers the understanding that their OW card is just a release of Liability and that they should seek experience and proper training so you will know how close you came to doing something stupid! ;) But we can't belittle people for what they don't know or make everyone a Black Diamond Skier, I have been saying for a long time we need to teach people that they are qualified for the Bunny Hill and for a lot that's fine!

Water sports are interesting in that if a person has a bad experience Snorkeling, Water Skiing, Swimming, and Diving they tend to be afraid of the water and not the lack of THEIR training! So how do we retain, motivate, and yes train those who can so easily say "I'll take up Pool" and never have to put myself into that situation again?

The activity has to presented and sold better, more about the wonders, and the fun of trip or Adventure its self! The social aspect of the local Club dive, where you can find social activities and friendship as well as the one or two hours you will spend underwater! Diving is a lot of travel, preparation, perspiration, dive dive dive, back to the beach undress redress, and what? For some of us it's the price we pay because we are hooked for so many different reasons.... Different for so many of us and yet so much the same!

You need stars, heroes, like in Motocross, Motor sports, people we can have as role models for the young willing to go through the training to stick with the activity! We need Branding, T-shirts, and anything else it takes to build curiosity with the general public so that the end numbers raise as a result!

The fact that this person was where she was is testament to he need to explorer her idea of diving. I don't know here motivation or if she felt pressure form someone or her own pressure to conquer own fear which may have won in the end? But she made the choice!

We have great training available if you want it and many should get it before the take the ride to the top! Many people feel when they are encouraged by a shop owner to continue their education that "They are only interested in making more money off me"!

You can lead a person to water, but you can't make them a dive unless they want to dive! If they do then the responsibility is in the hands of the motivator and mentor to instill the need to strive to be a better educated and experienced diver! An asset to the dive community and an ambassador to the dive world! If that person goes home with great tails and a smile more will be interested!

We need to drop the "If you get that BB Gun you'll put your eye out" mentality! We need to be mainstream activity not another "I could never do that" death deifying sport!

I love my diving and have for 30 years, but I loved the water first, and I want more people to be able to say "If he can do it, I know I can"!

D_B

November 7th, 2009, 06:48 PM

JimLap

November 7th, 2009, 09:25 PM

Other than the LA County Advance Course, I have yet to see any AOW curriculum from any of the standard agency that's worth a damn. They're no more than a few guided dives. I suppose with SSI, they won't issue you The Card until you get 24-dives in, but you can still take the course right out of OW.

So, let's be clear about it. AOW is a cert and it isn't an indication of anybody being an "advanced " diver. Heck, I feel pretty damn comfortable in the water nowadays but I am far from being an "advanced" diver.
Here is the AOW class I teach:

The SEI Diving Advanced Open Water Course as Presented by UDM Aquatic Services consists of two parts. Classroom and Open Water Training Dives. The Classroom portion takes approximately 8 hours and can be done in two sessions or with advance notice a special all day (9-5) session. There are 6 dives to this course. I do not offer fluff dives such as Fish ID, Boat Diver, etc. There is an optional dive that may be substituted for the Search and Recovery Dive ONLY! This would be a Wreck Dive( no penetration) but would require travel to Lake Erie or other body of water containing actual wrecks and would be priced accordingly. School buses and airplanes in a quarry are not wreck dives for purposes of the course.

The subjects covered in the classroom portion include but are not limited to:

Gas management(1/3rds, 1/6ths, Rock Bottom, Dive Planning using consumption- SAC, RMV), emergency deco procedures using SEI Diving Tables air deco schedule, anti-silting kicks, redundant air supplies and deployment of such. One other area that is extensively covered is gear selection and use. I use a variation of Tom Mount's Guidelines discussed in the Tao of Underwater Survival. I also reserve the right to require or prohibit the use of certain gear and will give detailed reasons as to why.

We'll also cover compass, natural, and line and reel navigation and selecting the best method for conditions.

Night and low vis techniques, communication, and hazards along with light, strobe/marker selection.

Deep diving skills will cover and utilize horizontal descents and ascents, use of redundant air, deep stops, and deco vs safety stops.

We will also cover Search and Recovery techniques, equipment, selection, and use. Rescue skills will be included during the Buddy Skills and Assist Dive.

Proper weighting and buoyancy control will be stressed on all dives! As well as maintaining position and contact with buddy or team members. There will be no buddy separation regardless of visibility, water temperature, or buoyancy issues! You stay with your dive buddy at all times!
The dives will consist of an:

Advanced Skills dive using anti-silting kicks, basic skills while swimming and hovering( no more than 2foot depth change permitted), proper positioning of the team, deployment of redundant air supply( slung pony or stage), bag shoot for ascent. We will also adjust and position for proper weighting

UW Navigation using compass, natural features, and line and reel. All this will be done while maintaining good trim and buoyancy. Role of each team member in navigation is critical and will be stressed in every phase of the dive.

Night/Low Vis- Use of lights for communication, deployment of back ups, Navigation at night or in low vis, maintaining good buddy contact, light failure procedures, and navigating a line without a light.

Deep Dive- Descent , trim, buoyancy, timed task, deep nav swim using reel and line, Deployment of redundant air source for ascent using deep stops, and don't be surprised at an OOA drill while we are down at 90-100 feet!

Search and Recovery- select method, search for and locate object, secure object to lift bag, move object 75-100 feet horizontally followed by swim to surface with it, then using bag return object to bottom.

Buddy Skills and Assist- buddy positioning while maintaining trim and buoyancy control, buddy breathing swim, buddy assisted 100 foot no mask swim while sharing air, 100 foot no mask swim followed by ascent from 25 foot platform while sharing air, loss of buoyancy assist to surface(maintain buddy at surface while they establish positive buoyancy via oral inflation, dropping of weights, or ditching of gear), rescue tow to shore.

All dives with the exception of the night dive will last 45 minutes to 1 hour. Plan tank requirements accordingly. Average depth save for deep dive will be 25-35 feet. Questions or to sign up call me at 724-255-3765 or email via my website at Welcome to UDM Aquatic Services

Note this is not an AOW tour. You will learn and put in some work to get this card. Prerequisites are min of 10 dives post OW cert and if I don't know you and have reservations as to your skills and experience during our interview you may be asked to do a pool session and perhaps a couple short local dives with me before being allowed to take this class. It will be fun yes but you are not buying a card when you train with me. Training is guaranteed, the card is earned.

R0gue

November 7th, 2009, 11:16 PM

Jim, are there any other options to your course? What if you have a student who simply has no desire to night dive or has no desire to search and recover an object off the bottom?

Madacub

November 8th, 2009, 06:18 AM

NWGratefulDiver

November 8th, 2009, 08:30 AM

When I first became a NAUI instructor I read through the Advanced Scuba Diver materials and decided it was inadequate for the students I would be teaching ... so I created my own. Prior to becoming an instructor (when I was a DM at a local dive shop) I had created some workshop materials with a friend and fellow DM (BDub here on ScubaBoard) who has since gone on to become a UTD instructor. The kernel of that material was the gas management article that many of you have read and is now posted on my own website. The basis for the material we had created was to provide remedial help for newly-minted AOW-level divers who wanted to take their diving skills beyond the level mandated by any of the mainstream agencies. It focused heavily on dive planning, gas management, buddy skills, navigational skills, trim and buoyancy. I took this material and turned it into a handbook that is the basis for the AOW class I have been teaching since 2004. The course offers six dives. There are no "electives" ... because each dive focuses on a specific set of skills to help the student achieve the class objectives. Before we go deep the student must demonstrate an ability to plan a dive ... including a gas plan that calculates the gas volumes needed for the dive. They must demonstrate good buoyancy control ... which includes mid-water skills and making free ascents and stops. They must demonstrate good buddy skills, which includes communicating and interacting as a team. They must show a mastery of basic safety skillls ... their "deep test" is going to be an OOA drill, so they will have mastered this shallow before we go deep. They will learn how to deploy an SMB, and how to use a lift bag to bring a heavy object to the surface. Many of the class exercises are intended to teach the students how to control their buoyancy while task-loaded.

All of this is completely within the NAUI standards.

My class is open-ended ... and if a student didn't meet the objectives on a given dive, we'd do that dive again until they did. It's not unusual for this class to run 10 or more dives, and to take several weeks to complete. I have no hesitation about telling students what they need to work on and having them go practice certain skills on their own prior to re-doing the evaluation dive. But they MUST meet the class objectives in order to pass.

Bottom line for me is this ... the biggest objection I have to the current way AOW classes are taught is that they give the student the impression that because they've got the card, they're somehow qualified to be doing deep dives ... and by far the biggest reason people sign up for AOW is so they can do deep dives. In a lot of cases, they come out of the class as inadequately prepared for deep dive as they were when they went in. So before I ever give a student an AOW card (NAUI calls it Advanced Scuba Diver, BTW), I am going to be satisfied that these divers can do an unsupervised dive to 100 fsw safely, which includes the proper mindset to determine whether or not the conditions for that dive are suitable for their experience and equipment ... in other words, they're gonna have enough knowledge to know when to say "not today".

For those who think students wouldn't be attracted to such a class, I'm here to tell you that I've had students travel to Seattle from all over the USA to take it (that surprised no one more than me). I got to the point where I taught this class to the point of burn-out ... and am currently taking a break from teaching because of it.

So there's a market out there for an AOW class with some meat to it ... to my concern, the mainstream agencies are missing out by not offering one for students who want that type of class.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

JimLap

November 8th, 2009, 11:03 AM

Jim, are there any other options to your course? What if you have a student who simply has no desire to night dive or has no desire to search and recover an object off the bottom?

No. The options are clearly stated. If one wishes to opt out of the S&R then we can do a wreck dive at additional expense. The only other exception would be if they wished to do an additional dive from those already listed. Under SEI guidleines Deep, Nav, and Night are still required. I am helping to rewrite AOW and AOW plus guidelines to reflect the standards we wish to educate to. One thing I am pushing for is to require those as well as the Advanced Skills and make classroom mandatory. Whether that will happen is unclear. Fortunately I am free to set my prereqs and standards for entry and exit so that students actually benefit from the entire class.

The dives and classroom are set up to build on each other. That is why they are done in the order they are. If you can't do basic skills hovering and swimming with little to no change in buoyancy or work as a team and maintain CONSTANT buddy contact, the Nav exercise is a waste. And if you don't know how to effectively navigate during the day the night dive is meaningless and little more than a handholding exercise. And around here deep means dark, silty, and changes in water density due to thermoclines. Your buoyancy better be on, no vertical descents, you need to know where you are, and your light is your next best friend. The 3 previous dives all reinforce skills needed on this one. And when you are switching to the stage at 70 or 50, and it's dark and you are in midwater with the bottom at 90-100feet, that you left on the descent line in my course, all of that previous experience comes in handy.

The search and recovery dive takes all the skills from the first four and changes the task load. Now it's a bag and reel and line instead of the stage. But still you can handle it with the confidence you've just gained! You can swim 2-3 feet above the bottom and not worry about coming back through a silt cloud because there won't be any! And finally with all this new knowledge, confidence, and skill when I take your mask or your buddy's and you need to guide each other and do a safe ascent you have confidence in each other. You trust each other, You know where each one is and that they can indeed help IF needed.

I also do not have to teach anyone I don't want to . The students who take my class know up front what their options are and what I expect from them. They are free to seek out someone else if they wish. I don't do this for a living. I am not interested in churning out numbers. When a student receives a card from me they have earned it.

I am not a pretty fish junkie. I like to look at them but really don't care what they are. As such if someone comes to me asking for a fish ID class I'll tell em buy a book on Amazon. If something does not actually improve a divers skill, comfort, and safety in the water I have no desire to teach it. My equipment class can save a divers day or prevent a potentially serious problem. It has value. A boat dive for example is covered in OW class and to add it to an AOW course as a separate dive just to get a number of dives has little if any real value other than they can say they went on a boat.

JimLap

November 8th, 2009, 11:24 AM

Jim, I [-]think[/-] know I need your class! And a reel bargoon at $ 175. The part about gear selection is especially useful. I remember reading in another of your posts that you will also consult with new buyers as to their gear needs. Independent advice. That is vey useful, I think. But your course material does seem like a lot to cover in 6 dives. Especially if your prerequisite is just 10 prior dives. What is your average student experience?

But you sure do make it sound pretty intimidating. I can picture you walking around the classroom, a big ol' riding crop in your hand, with a gaggle of nervous students sweating it out. :D Can't you at least put some smiling attractive models on your site, cheerfully going about their training, showing that Jim is really a fun fun guy?

Which I bet you are. Umm...Jim?

The classroom portion is easily covered in the time allotted. I have a detailed power point that I created over the course of a couple months, whiteboard, handouts, and any resource I can get my hands on. The prereq is 10 dives for MY OW students. It clearly states on my website that I may require more dives, a face to face interview, a pool session or two, and a couple OW dives just for fun to determine if the divers skill level is such that they are indeed ready for this class if I do not know them or the instructor they trained under. I also consider personality, attitude, and overall ability to learn as factors.

So far my AOW students have come to me with better than average skills due to number of dives(25-over 100), time diving (1-10 years or more), and education. Chemist, engineers, former Naval officer, and one very smart and driven housewife:D.

And again the dives are 45 minutes to an hour long and I never take more than 4 students, and enjoy one on one's at no extra charge for private lessons. The ideal class is 2 students who can buddy up or happen to be regular buddies. I love teaching this course. It is work but it is also a helluva lot of fun for me and them. I teach the classroom in my living room. The student sits in a big recliner. There are my fish tanks, my cats, and my books. It is relaxed but serious. We do laugh, at me, at them, at other divers, and at some of my lousy powerpoint illustrations. I'm no artist!
We also look at dive profiles, autopsy reports, and witness statements. And while we do have fun the number one concern is diver safety.

At any time if I feel a diver is not taking safety issues seriously or disregards safety protocols they get one warning. A second offense is grounds for ending the class, no refund, no cert, and no coming back. Every student I certify has to pass the loved one test. If I would not trust them to dive with someone I cared for without me or another pro in the water then they do not get a card. I train until that is met or they give up.

D_B

November 8th, 2009, 01:49 PM

Thank you Jim, and Bob ... for offering those classes

and to any other instructors for caring and making sure that the divers that they certify are safe divers

At any time if I feel a diver is not taking safety issues seriously or disregards safety protocols they get one warning. A second offense is grounds for ending the class, no refund, no cert, and no coming back. Every student I certify has to pass the loved one test. If I would not trust them to dive with someone I cared for without me or another pro in the water then they do not get a card. I train until that is met or they give up.
Edit: Jim, that last paragraph above is GOLDEN :)

neopluredon

November 8th, 2009, 07:13 PM

i wouldn't say that the curriculum per se is bad. i would have to say it's a two-way responsibility between the student and the instructor. why?

(a) student - because he/she should've assessed him/herself if she could take the course with her current ability. it's like teaching a baby to jump from the bed without even learning how to walk. not bragging or something but i was confident enough to take aow after having only 5 dives because i was a competitive swimmer way back and still continues on swimming so i somehow can control myself.. plus i asked my instructor and other dm's re aow and what i would be expecting while taking the course.

(b) instructor - based on the above description, i would've sounded too confident as swimming is a way too different from diving. although my instructor was the one who offered me to advance to aow, he made sure that he always had enough logistics to support students like me. way back my aow, we were a class of 4 supported by 4 dive master candidates (and my instructor was assessing them how they are going to assist us and! we had to rate them afterwards which is the cool part) so that was pretty safe and comfy as far learning is concerned.

after aow, i was pretty confident with my skills and was able to maximise my diving experience as i can go as deep as 150ft. but then again, not all experiences were perfect as from time to time i also experience my very own failures and hardships as i get to log more dives. when i was offered a rescue-to-instructor ladderised program of some sort, i declined his offer and informed him that i wanted to log 100 dives first as i felt most comfortable taking the course by that number of experience. 6 mos of diving later, i gave in to just rescue but told my instructor to have it as a "wip" (work in progress) until i finish 60 dives and he agreed.

lessons: there are a lot of money mongering instructors and overconfident rich students nowadays.

(a) students should assess themselves whether they are ready for the course with their abilities
(b) students should also assess their instructors whether they think they are just sucking out bucks from their bank by offering promising courses. if you intuit that you are not ready to take the course then stop
(c) instructors should assess their students before offering the course and must have enough logistics to support them
(d) there should ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS be an open dialogue between instructors and students... my buddies and i were able to establish a bond with our instructor that we are comfortable enough to say what we feel (even telling him that his new girlfriend is cooler and his ex sucks and he saying jokingly that our work is a hindrance to diving and good beer)

just my 2 cents...