The "Official" SB Scuba Course?

[The Chairman]

Absolutely, but I'd appreciate it if your clear as to what you're disagreeing with and why.

I disagree that longer means better. It's in almost every one of my posts in this thread. I am surprised this has eluded you since you've disagreed with it at least twice.

Well in my opinion you're not much of an Instructor, if you can't make the training program better, if you have more time to do so.

It's my opinion that you're not much of an instructor if you need to increase the length of the course in order to teach students the basics they need to Scuba Safely.

Scuba is not Rocket Science. It's not that difficult and making it so has a negative impact on the sport. The RSTC has come up with a minimum necessary skill set with a caveat that some areas may require additional skill sets. Requiring too many additional skills only confuses the student as to what is essential. When trying to develop the quintessential SB Scuba course, it's important that we include relevant skills that can be taught with a minimum of risk. The intent should not be to produce a master skill set for someone who desires to Scuba once a year on vacation. That mastery can and should take many more dives and hours than any typical Scuba Course.

 

[boulderjohn]

IF an instructor was using antiquated methods I'd agree with you. Who are we talking about? The discussion that I was having was discussing duration of course times, nothing about antiquated methods at all. Are you saying that you can't teach more if given more time?

I guess I wasn't very clear. My apologies, and I will try again.

George is an instructor. He uses his favorite methodologies to teach a course. It takes him 16 hours of instructional time. He decides that he wants to teach more, using the same methodologies. He adds 4 hours to the course, and is thus able to add 4 more hours worth of instructional content. (That is consistent with your statement.)

Sally is an instructor. She employs different methodologies. Because her methodologies are more efficient than George's, she has been teaching George's 20 hour class all along, completing it in 14 hours.

 

[boulderjohn]

I see a huge amount of discussion on this board about what should or should not be taught within a scuba course. There's a lot of questions about what is necessary skills and what isn't. There is, in short, a huge variability in thoughts on how OW should be taught.

It's already written King; just look at the NAUI/LAC/YMCA standards from the 60's. It was the "marketable short format modular course" that became the undoing of diver training in the first-place, but that's only from my perspective.

IF an instructor was using antiquated methods I'd agree with you. Who are we talking about? The discussion that I was having was discussing duration of course times, nothing about antiquated methods at all. Are you saying that you can't teach more if given more time?

When you talk about antiquated teaching methods, are you referring to those in use before the educational breakthroughs that brought us to the instructional zenith in the 60's?

 

[The Chairman]

When you talk about antiquated teaching methods, are you referring to those in use before the educational breakthroughs that brought us to the instructional zenith in the 60's?

I clearly remember the event that stopped me from getting certified for years. I was 15 or 16 and was working as a car mechanic. A local (rather infamous) instructor had dropped his car off for work and I was to deliver it later that day. I was already diving and he kept reminding me that I was gonna die if I didn't get certified soon. So hey, I was gonna get to see one of his pool sessions. So I pull up to Mrs. Heard's Pool and there were all these Scuba Divers: horse collars, steel 72s w/J Valves, Mask, snorkel, rubber wet suit, duck feet and block weights doing push ups in the hot Florida son! Apparently they screwed up some skill and this was the best teaching practices for the time. It sure wasted a bunch of time!

PS, it was a quarter century before I finally got certified. Why do we want to push people from this sport?

 

[Diver0001]

Someone wake me up once we have the pecking order worked out and we'll get back on topic ...

John are you going to get involved in this? You're probably our only hope of getting something down that doesn't look like autistic scribble.

R..

 

[Thalassamania]

Someone wake me up once we have the pecking order worked out and we'll get back on topic ...

John are you going to get involved in this? You're probably our only hope of getting something down that doesn't look like autistic scribble.

R..

I mildly resent that implication, but I'm not about to try and untangle the innuendo from the half truth from the horse pucky.

 

[imwright1985]

So trying to get back on topic How about cutting some of the snorkling stuff down to basic mostly to show your capible of being in the water, combining some of the drills done in the water to make the important ones that are making your actions in an "emergency" more instinctive. Adding a little nav to it and a little from rescue then showing some of the benefits of nitrox. Nav can be made into a kinda scavenger hunt game with collecting items in different locations in the pool but without saying what the object is. And adding a rescue task once a little play time with basic drills are done. It would make the course more of an intro to scuba rather than a learn to dive type course and would have a start to the 3 steps people that progress would be likely to hit to help them understand OK well i really like this stuff so I want to go further or i know enough for my basic diving but have some extra stuff that is possible to be encountered on the water. I have read about 2 people Evidently not realising they have a rear dump valve to pull when their BC was over inflated, and saw it happen once in person, and seen quite a few people incapible of judging current to see what direction they had to swim so they could get to a point. Luckly i havent seen any major incidents that people needed help with but know from my OW i would have no clue other than get them on the boat and HAUL BUTT back to where an ambulance could get them to a hospital easily and quickly

 

[snturner]

Two years ago, one of our LDS ran a radio ad for about three weeks. Come dive with us, you'll be certified in no time, it doesn't cost much, and "no one fails." There was a catch to it of course, but natch, they didn't cover that part in the ad. But the ad was pretty strong - pretty creative. And, it was not a PADI shop.

kjack has hit the nail on the head. I have taken 10 scuba classes. Including the rescue class, twice. Why twice? Because the first LDS could not decide how the class should be tought or even what the charge was for the class.

The "no one fails" policy is a primary concern. It doesn't even matter if you are 125 lbs over weight. You will pass the same night you take the test.

By the way this needs to be a new topic. I think this one has gotten carried away in the current.

One of the first things PADI discusses in the rescue dive manual is physical fitness. How does the 290 lb 6 ft ball of blubber pass a rescue diver class. Or how about the person who can't figure out how to calculate a repetitive dive on the tables. This person asked the dive master helping teach the class for help, she couldn't come up the correct answer either. Amazing. The diver made the comment " Why do I need to know this? I have a dive computer that does it for me. That scene occurred in a Nitrox class.

 

[imwright1985]

kjack has hit the nail on the head. I have taken 10 scuba classes. Including the rescue class, twice. Why twice? Because the first LDS could not decide how the class should be tought or even what the charge was for the class.

The "no one fails" policy is a primary concern. It doesn't even matter if you are 125 lbs over weight. You will pass the same night you take the test.

By the way this needs to be a new topic. I think this one has gotten carried away in the current.

One of the first things PADI discusses in the rescue dive manual is physical fitness. How does the 290 lb 6 ft ball of blubber pass a rescue diver class. Or how about the person who can't figure out how to calculate a repetitive dive on the tables. This person asked the dive master helping teach the class for help, she couldn't come up the correct answer either. Amazing. The diver made the comment " Why do I need to know this? I have a dive computer that does it for me. That scene occurred in a Nitrox class.

I think you kinda Hit the nail on the head with scuba certs, The agencies provide an outline but it is up to the instructor to teaching them propperly. Maby if they would send out a survey when they mail the card to you to get an idea of instructors performance stuff would get taught to appropriate guidelines like calculating repetitive dives. I do think that PADI is kinda minimal on their outline though, dont know about other courses and they push trying to get training without giving students a little understanding to find the direction they want to go, which is why i would like to see an OW course that is focused on a touch of AOW, Rescue, and present the facts of Nitrox (one of my friends swears that if he gets nitrox he will have a longer bottom time (like he has a bigger tank) when he sucks air like crazy and i keep talking him out of it so he can get control on his breathing first then go nitrox)

 

[Diver0001]

So trying to get back on topic How about cutting some of the snorkling stuff down to basic mostly to show your capible of being in the water, combining some of the drills done in the water to make the important ones that are making your actions in an "emergency" more instinctive. Adding a little nav to it and a little from rescue then showing some of the benefits of nitrox. Nav can be made into a kinda scavenger hunt game with collecting items in different locations in the pool but without saying what the object is. And adding a rescue task once a little play time with basic drills are done. It would make the course more of an intro to scuba rather than a learn to dive type course and would have a start to the 3 steps people that progress would be likely to hit to help them understand OK well i really like this stuff so I want to go further or i know enough for my basic diving but have some extra stuff that is possible to be encountered on the water. I have read about 2 people Evidently not realising they have a rear dump valve to pull when their BC was over inflated, and saw it happen once in person, and seen quite a few people incapible of judging current to see what direction they had to swim so they could get to a point. Luckly i havent seen any major incidents that people needed help with but know from my OW i would have no clue other than get them on the boat and HAUL BUTT back to where an ambulance could get them to a hospital easily and quickly

Thal, no offense intended. I just want to make use of John's experience in curriculum building. So far he hasn't left the thread but hasn't said he'll work on it either. I'm happy to have you on board.

imwright1985, I think we're still in the stage of trying to define "what" our diver should be able to do, not "how" we're going to teach it. I think it's too early to think about how we'll get them to understand the navigation skills.

There are a number of navigation excercises in the current scuba courses but if you break navigation down there are really only four "variables" and three "skills".

The variables are "time", "depth", "landmarks" (which could be any visual cue) and "distance". Using landmarks and judging distance has to be trained. The other two can be read from your meters.

the "skills" are (a) the ability to set and follow a compass course in a straight line (b) the ability to combine that skill with any of the four variables above and (c) the ability to find your way by using two or more of the variables without using a compass.

The easy thing to teach to beginners which gives you big payback on your training time is to teach following a depth line for a certain length of time and then turning around and swimming back. Depth and time can both be read from your meters so there's no guessing. That's out-and-back navigation and it's taught by almost everybody in the OW course.

In the PADI OW course, they introduce swimming in a straight line with a compass but don't focus on combining it with other variables, so that's not so useful except if you want to swim from where you are back to shore, for example.

Earlier in this thread, I had previously written that they should be able to swim an out and back course over 300m/40m with a deviation of 20m (assuming calm water and no current). After reading what you wrote yesterday, I'm open to the idea of positioning navigation as more of a central skill.

Given what I just wrote, how far do you think the SB course should go in defining navigation skill for a beginning diver?

My own opinion.
1) teach them about the four variables and 3 skills in the theory
2) make them learn to combine depth and time and to swim a straight course with a compass
3) make them lean to always set their compass to some logical heading before descending so if they get disoriented they can swim in that direction
4) give them more "experience" with navigating (leading a dive) than they get in the open market courses.

Does that go far enough?

R..