Concerns About Length of Open Water Course

Hi,

I am instructor in Victoria, Australia, and I recently raised concerns with PADI regarding speed at which we conduct Open Water Courses here (2 Days). Diving In Vic can be tough and Im not confidant that anyone can be adequately trained so that they can be an independent diver after 2 days. Perhaps the fault is with me and Im always willing to receive constructive feedback.

Although I accept PADI's response by saying that the course is based on performance requirements and not time in some way I believe they dogged my question.

I will post my original email and their response below and I look forward to comments/Feedback.

I feel like with there response I have no alternative than not to teach in Victoria.

Original Email

"Hi,
I hope that this email finds the appropriate people.
I am a MSDT, who works on the Mornington peninsula Victoria.
I love my Dive school and the owners and operators of all the other schools In Victoria who are of an amazing standard. So in no way are my concerns directed at any individual or organisation.
I must say that my concerns are grave and that it is only a matter of time before a fatal accident occurs on an OWC.
My concern relates to the amount of time that OWC are conducted within Victoria. We certify students in two days completing confined and ow dives during this time. I know that the reason why this occurs is for commercial and competitive reasons. If one school offers a two day course they all have to follow to compete.
I do not believe that in 2 days any instructor can sufficiently prepare a student for Victorian diving. The conditions are tough often with low vis strong currents. Even as a seasoned diver I find myself in hairy situations from time to time.
After each course I strongly advise my students with con Ed and guided dives.
I am seriously considering no longer teaching anymore for the above reasons I have outlined as I don't want to have a death on my hands.
I believe that PADI should force a minimum amount of days an open water course should be conducted. In my humble opinion this should be 3 preferably 4 days.
I also suggest that especially in Victoria there should be a minimum amount of boat dives as I do not believe that shore dives can prepare a student for Victorian open water.
If this email falls on deaf ears I can rest assured that I have attempted to honour my duty of care to my students.
I look forward to your responce.
Kind regards"

PADI reply


Dear XXXX,

Thank you for your email and your compassion abut scuba diving. PADI’s teaching philosophy is based on performance and not on time. Whilst it might be possible in some areas, with some students to complete an Open Water course in a minimum time frame, this is of cause not a generic rule. PADI Instructors are trained during their IDC to evaluated their individual circumstance and make a decision based on their risk assessment. PADI’s Membership Commitment (Code of Practice) in the PADI Instructor Manual outlines the requirements and every PADI Instructor needs to follow the standards as outlined.

I trust this information has been of help to you. Please do let me know if I can be of any further assistance.
Thanks again for your feedback!

Best regards,

Well you have to keep in mine what OW is and what it is not.

What it is (or what I took away from it) was a BASIC set of skills and knowledge about diving in very "easy" conditions. For many and possibly most divers this is adequate as they will only dive in "group" conditions like dive boats or guided shore dives.

For the rest that want to dive in these other areas they need to seek out the appropriate training to do so. I know we dive in similar conditions to what you describe and OW was TOTALLY lacking on how to dive in out area. So we searched out appropriate training from highly recommended instructors.

austrooper:

Although I accept PADI's response by saying that the course is based on performance requirements and not time in some way I believe they dogged my question.

Click to expand...

I don't see why?

Students shouldn't progress through the course segments until they have "mastered" the performance requirements on their current module/dive. i.e. you can do a dozen 'Dive #2's with a student if that is what it takes, before moving on to Dive #3.

Absolutely nowhere does PADI state that OW is 2 days. Not anywhere. That is merely the shortest timescale that you can cram the required minimum training into. Note: an emphasis on "minimum".

So basically, the complaint is: "I can cram the entire contents of this course into 2 days... I don't feel this is right". Well, hey, guess what... if it's not enough for your students... then it isn't right. The scheduling of courses is your responsibility as an instructor - and should be done in conjunction with assessment of student performance.

If your complaint is that such flexibility permits other instructors to provide sub-standard training, then bear in mind PADI's response. The 'standards' still ensure that performance standards must be met to a level of 'mastery'. If other instructors are breaking those standards, in order to fit a course in minimum timescales, then they are teaching incorrectly. The QA process should apply to them.

I support PADI's response - but do feel they could be more pro-active in promoting that ethos...

Rather than reducing flexibility in the scheduling of courses, I think it'd be more beneficial for PADI to simply make the definition of 'mastery' more robust; possibly in conjunction with more 'defined' performance standards. IMHO, it is the inherent vagueness in these areas that enables sub-standard instructors/operations to abuse the system (to the student's ultimate loss).

Thanks for your responses and they are both valid and I tend to agree.

One point that I would like to make is, the LDS that we work for stipulate that the course is to be conducted in 2 days, if an instructor on every occasion insisted that the performance requirements were not met and the course should be extended, you wouldn't have a job for very long as there would be other instructors willing to take your place, that dont have the same concerns.

My objective for this discussion is so that I may become a better instructor and In no way am I criticising the PADI system.

Nwcid:

For many and possibly most divers this is adequate as they will only dive in "group" conditions like dive boats or guided shore dives.

Click to expand...

This is false.

The PADI Open Water course certification has a specific, defined, outcome. That being:

"The PADI Open Water Diver course teaches student divers the foundational knowledge and skills they need to dive with a buddy, independent of supervision. Your primary objective is to put safety first — the safety of your student divers, staff and your own safety in the planning, organization and conduct of the course."
PADI Guide to Teaching 2014

The training provided should meet this outcome. Expectations, or assumptions, about the diver's likely post-qualification diving activities are irrelevant..

I personally think two days is only long enough when you have a "natural" diver that already is comfortable in the water and has studyed the theroy beforehand and even then i would say it would have to be a one on one class and you would want to train somewhere easyer than your described heavy curret low viz locations

If you were learning to whitewater raft and every place around you is a class 5 course you would want to seek out some beginer areas first and after you learned it would not be reasonable to assume you could handle the higher risk courses just because you started learning in proximity to them

austrooper:

...the LDS that we work for stipulate that the course is to be conducted in 2 days, if an instructor on every occasion insisted that the performance requirements were not met and the course should be extended, you wouldn't have a job for very long as there would be other instructors willing to take your place, that dont have the same concerns.

Click to expand...

Many instructors encounter this mentality from employers. However, it is you, the instructor, who carries the can with regards to QA (Quality Assurance). If you breach standards, then you could face that QA process. The dive operation doesn't feature in that process - so they have (too much) liberty to place this pressure on instructors.

I've left more than a couple of jobs in the scuba industry for this very reason. I invested a lot of time, effort and money in gaining my PADI pro qualifications - and I am not prepared to jeopardize that investment because of manipulative, unethical, dive operation management. I'm also not prepared to compromise my ethics... and what you suggest is very unethical. It's a rip-off... and it places divers in danger.

You should write to PADI again and explain the specific issues, rather than a generic complaint about timescales. I'm sure PADI will have heard similar stories before on many occasions, so I assume they'll have some good advice..

austrooper:

Hi,

I am instructor in Victoria, Australia, and I recently raised concerns with PADI regarding speed at which we conduct Open Water Courses here (2 Days). Diving In Vic can be tough and Im not confidant that anyone can be adequately trained so that they can be an independent diver after 2 days. Perhaps the fault is with me and Im always willing to receive constructive feedback.

Although I accept PADI's response by saying that the course is based on performance requirements and not time in some way I believe they dogged my question.

I will post my original email and their response below and I look forward to comments/Feedback.

I feel like with there response I have no alternative than not to teach in Victoria.

Original Email

"Hi,
I hope that this email finds the appropriate people.
I am a MSDT, who works on the Mornington peninsula Victoria.
I love my Dive school and the owners and operators of all the other schools In Victoria who are of an amazing standard. So in no way are my concerns directed at any individual or organisation.
I must say that my concerns are grave and that it is only a matter of time before a fatal accident occurs on an OWC.
My concern relates to the amount of time that OWC are conducted within Victoria. We certify students in two days completing confined and ow dives during this time. I know that the reason why this occurs is for commercial and competitive reasons. If one school offers a two day course they all have to follow to compete.
I do not believe that in 2 days any instructor can sufficiently prepare a student for Victorian diving. The conditions are tough often with low vis strong currents. Even as a seasoned diver I find myself in hairy situations from time to time.
After each course I strongly advise my students with con Ed and guided dives.
I am seriously considering no longer teaching anymore for the above reasons I have outlined as I don't want to have a death on my hands.
I believe that PADI should force a minimum amount of days an open water course should be conducted. In my humble opinion this should be 3 preferably 4 days.
I also suggest that especially in Victoria there should be a minimum amount of boat dives as I do not believe that shore dives can prepare a student for Victorian open water.
If this email falls on deaf ears I can rest assured that I have attempted to honour my duty of care to my students.
I look forward to your responce.
Kind regards"

PADI reply


Dear XXXX,

Thank you for your email and your compassion abut scuba diving. PADI’s teaching philosophy is based on performance and not on time. Whilst it might be possible in some areas, with some students to complete an Open Water course in a minimum time frame, this is of cause not a generic rule. PADI Instructors are trained during their IDC to evaluated their individual circumstance and make a decision based on their risk assessment. PADI’s Membership Commitment (Code of Practice) in the PADI Instructor Manual outlines the requirements and every PADI Instructor needs to follow the standards as outlined.

I trust this information has been of help to you. Please do let me know if I can be of any further assistance.
Thanks again for your feedback!

Best regards,

Click to expand...

My opinion: If you accept as a given that the PADI standards, properly applied and tested to, are sufficient to ensure beginning diver safety, then the statement in red and the two statements in blue are incompatible.

If the instructors / shops are holding to the standards, then passing people after 2 days means they meet them and are good to go. If they are not good to go, the standards are not being maintained and the instructors / shops are not at all above reproach - not "of an amazing standard".

The only way that the above cannot hold true, IMO, is if you consider the standards themselves to be insufficient. If you believe that to be the case you should reconsider your own affiliation.

---------- Post added December 12th, 2013 at 10:51 PM ----------

austrooper:

Thanks for your responses and they are both valid and I tend to agree.

One point that I would like to make is, the LDS that we work for stipulate that the course is to be conducted in 2 days, if an instructor on every occasion insisted that the performance requirements were not met and the course should be extended, you wouldn't have a job for very long as there would be other instructors willing to take your place, that dont have the same concerns.

My objective for this discussion is so that I may become a better instructor and In no way am I criticising the PADI system.

Click to expand...

Which statement gives lie to your previous assertion that these shops and instructors are "of an amazing standard". It is my opinion that the problem is not the PADI system, it is what the shops and instructors choose to do with it. Which is not to say the PADI system is the best way or the only way, but instructors and shops have to own their OWN chosen approaches to teaching and conducting business.

DevonDiver:

This is false.

The PADI Open Water course certification has a specific, defined, outcome. That being:

"The PADI Open Water Diver course teaches student divers the foundational knowledge and skills they need to dive with a buddy, independent of supervision. Your primary objective is to put safety first — the safety of your student divers, staff and your own safety in the planning, organization and conduct of the course."
PADI Guide to Teaching 2014

The training provided should meet this outcome. Expectations, or assumptions, about the diver's likely post-qualification diving activities are irrelevant..

Click to expand...

This maybe be true (obviously is) but that is NOT what we took away from that class. Maybe I had a bad class but there is NO way I would feel confident going off on my own just after that class. I felt comfortable going out with other divers that were experienced.

In my OW I felt like I got the "skills" of a diver, the "drills" but did not really learn how to dive. We did a couple dives with others as we were seeking out an instructor for AOW. When we found the instructor we were looking for what we found out is that AOW is NOT what we wanted but a skills workshop that covered the things that were seriously lacking in OW.

austrooper:

Thanks for your responses and they are both valid and I tend to agree.

One point that I would like to make is, the LDS that we work for stipulate that the course is to be conducted in 2 days, if an instructor on every occasion insisted that the performance requirements were not met and the course should be extended, you wouldn't have a job for very long as there would be other instructors willing to take your place, that dont have the same concerns.

My objective for this discussion is so that I may become a better instructor and In no way am I criticising the PADI system.

Click to expand...

This is not that uncommon. Have you looked at other agencies that may have different standards that are more in line with how you want to teach?