A different twist on an old question

[glbtrekker]

Sorry for the delay in replying...weekends can be quite busy for me. Anyway, I appreciate everyone's response, some good points have been brought out. It is true that both the instructor's ability to teach and/or the student's desire to learn are essential elements for instruction to take place...these things are givens. Instruction will not take place if either one of these elements is substandard are altogether missing. I would probably place the highest value not on the instructor, but on the student. If the student is diligent enough, then learning will take place regardless of the instructor because the student will not be satisfied with just the information that his/her instructor provides. They will also do study on their own, which should not only supplement what is being taught, but should also point out any improper/negligent instruction.

However, not every student will be diligent enough to seek out the truth from a variety of sources and will depend solely upon their trainer for their education. Therefore, if they receive any erroneous instruction, they will not have the ability to identify it and make the proper adjustment. This could very well lead to disaster in a sport with inherent dangers like scuba. This is why it is vitally important to have a teaching standard (curriculum) that the student can study so that the information given is the same regardless of the the instructor who may be teaching the material.

This is not to dismiss the importance of having a good instructor, but as I have stated, this is a given. That's why I didn't want to get into the whole "it depends on the instructor" debate. I also did not want to get into an emotionally charged debate that causes one to take sides in the whole Chevy is better than Ford, or Toyota...whoever debacle.

What I am interested in is a logical and verifiable examination of what is taught by each agency and the standards they use to certify a diver. If what is presented truly represents the approach of the agency, then no one has to be offended because it is simply a statement of fact, not an argument based on feeling.

What would be GREAT is if someone would produce a matrix/spreadsheet that listed skills taught by each major agency and the standards that they require to become certified. For example, you could ask questions such as "are rescue skills taught as a part of OW certification" and then in the spreadsheet, answer either yes or no under each agency. Or, "how far must the student be able to swim in order to be certified" and put the appropriate 100 yards, 200 yards, etc. under the appropriate column. "Is the student allowed to use mask, fins and snorkel during this test," again, the correct response under each agency column. "Does the agency teach dive tables," "does the agency teach one to use a dive computer," etc.

If this were accomplished, not only would the prospective student know exactly what to expect from each agency, but the opportunity to be offended should be removed. After all, it would then simply be a matter of objective truth.

I would personally create a matrix like that myself; however, I obviously don't know the correct answer to fill in the blanks. In fact, at this early stage, I would not even now what questions to ask, which might be a great opportunity to have a section of the table that discussed why an item might be important (this might be a little more subjective).

Then, when the student had evaluated which approach worked best for them, they could begin the search for a good instructor to teach the material. Obviously, this might mean a bit of a drive, but I think quality instruction is worth the effort.

Finally, thanks again to those who have posted. I did not intend to open a "can of worms" that is why I was careful to avoid the "who's better" question in the beginning. In spite of the bickering by a few, there have been a few good posts that have given me something to consider. If anyone can provide further objective data from the various agencies, I'm all ears, eager and ready to learn!

[Walter]

What would be GREAT is if someone would produce a matrix/spreadsheet that listed skills taught by each major agency and the standards that they require to become certified.

It's very difficult to get that information. Agencies generally (there are exceptions) don't like folks who are not their instructors, AIs or DMs to have that information. Also, there are many different skills by different names. Never the less, while it wasn't done will all agencies, it was done for three of them. After it was published online, PADI filed a lawsuit against the website that published it.

[glbtrekker]

It's very difficult to get that information. Agencies generally (there are exceptions) don't like folks who are not their instructors, AIs or DMs to have that information. Also, there are many different skills by different names. Never the less, while it wasn't done will all agencies, it was done for three of them. After it was published online, PADI filed a lawsuit against the website that published it.

Wow! Now that's interesting. Why one earth would an agency be offended by sharing what a student can expect from their program? It's not like we're asking for their teaching notes. To me such a list would be something like an advertisement brochure of a particular automobile...car A has 300hp, 4.7 V8, etc. vs. car B with 275hp, etc. I'm not giving you the car...just the details about it.

Nevertheless, it make one wonder if they have something to hide...something to be ashamed of...doesn't make sense. But thanks for the info., I guess that answers my question.

[Rhone Man]

One thought I always throw into the mix: PADI and SDI allow people to verify your certification online. The other agencies, as best I know, don't (yet).

[bfw]

Hi all, I know that people have asked the "which dive certification organization is best" question a thousand times and obviously there have been a thousand subjective answers. At least one of which is "it all depends on the instructor."

Obviously, how much it depends on the instructor is a function of how much freedom each agency gives its instructors. Some strictly limit the instructor's ability to make the course more rigorous, and others similarly attempt to enforce a higher bar.

Some agencies are non-profits, others are very profit-oriented. The more rigorous your program is, the more time and effort it requires, the less money your agency will make - people want immediate gratification. Look at each agency's marketing material - the profit oriented ones with the quickie training spend have lots of advertising that emphasizes how quick and easy it is to become a diver. The ones that emphasize rigorous training, profits be damned, similarly wear that philosophy on their sleeve. They may even sometimes sound like they're trying to drive away prospects.

There's another aspect to this "it depends upon the instructor" thing - the agency gets to control who becomes an instructor. If an agency is effectively putting instructor credentials as prizes in Cracker Jack boxes, then the average quality of their instructors will be low. Almost every agency has a few bad apples, but data is not the plural of anecdote. The percentage of bad apples within an agency is inevitably going to be a function of how easy it is to become an instructor with them. In quality control, the worst case is determines the baseline quality, because you could end up as the customer who receives the worst case.

[leapfrog]

One other thought on it's "the instructor" not "the agency". Although it's stating the obvious, this is the World Wide Web. So a significant number of instructors want to be certified with an agency that offers the instructor the possibilty of working in many places in the world because there is a demand for instructors certified by that agency.

Where I live you really don't have as much scope as you do if you live in the US. In this market, PADI has 75% of the market, SSI is growing, the local national federation has a piece of the market and there's a small number of ACUC insructors. NAUI, YMCA, SEI, LA County and many others aren't known. SDI has a handful of instructors who are probably all going to go TDI (which is recognized here). There's one GUE instructor on the South Coast.

There tend to be regonal and national differences relating to agencies and therefore the number of instructors of each agency. A lot of people think BSAC is a good agency but if you don't live in the UK, it doesn't make much sense to be trained through BSAC or be one of their instructors.

[tridacna]

Regarding dive tables and computers...

I've always felt that it's best to know why 12 x 12 = 144 before you learn that you can type it calculator. Meaning, I'd rather have the knowledge to make those calculations myself before I rely on a piece of equipment to do it for me. There might be a time on a 130' wreck dive where my computer goes **** up. I want to know that I can figure out my ascent time and safety stops on my own so I don't go **** up on the way up.

I'm going PADI, but that's because my father-in-law trained that way, I found a good shop with good instructors, and it just makes sense to me. Your results may vary.

EK

EK, Just curious. Which LDS are you going with?