Dispelling scubaboard myths (Part 1: It is the instructor not the agency)

[sigxbill]

Note: If dives are planned using the RDP, the student diver must have a timing device.

interesting - that was not in the 2016 version. so prior to 2017, padi did not require a timing device, and now they do. Another cultural trend.

a computer is a timing device - regardless of the mode - I have never debated that ... I realize that these days most are combined within the same instrument. the only thing I have pointed out is that the culture of padi didn't technically require open water students to carry a timing device - until 2017 ... in other words, padi open water students could have carried some some old depth gauge that didn't have a built in timer and still been within standards.

again - none of these specific facts matter individually. If I posted every fact, that paints an agency's cultural trend, that I could think of - someone would debate the value of each fact individually. For them, that one item may not be valuable - and that is fine. I am simply suggesting that when one combines all the agency differentiating facts - they paint a picture that can be used to give one an overall feel of the agency - culture - that I submit is different than the overall feel - culture - of other agencies ...

thanks for the update!

 

[Colliam7]

My individual opinion, based on your comments in several posts, is that you are reading into a variety of unrelated, if not entirely disconnected, and primarily anecdotal experiences (combined with a rather interesting if unconventional use of the English language), evidence of agency cultures and trends, which simply does not exist as far as a reasonably objective person might see. And, that is fine with me – it is your privilege. But, I have to admit that I am intrigued by some of your comments, and will take exception since this is a public forum, with several of your assertions.

Regardless of DEMA's ban on anti-nitrox presentations, the anti-nitrox sentiment continued in padi up until recently. When my local SportsChalet closed just a couple of years ago, they still didn't pump nitrox and wrote it off as unimportant to consumers.

So, you assert that a single business practice (to not do something because it was considered by THAT INDIVIDUAL BUSINESS to be unimportant to consumers), of one individual business entity (your local Sports Chalet), which was related to PADI only by the fact that it offered PADI courses (including Enriched Air Diver), and which is now out of business, somehow represents a corporate ‘anti-nitrox’ bias on the part of the PADI agency, which has nonetheless been actively teaching and promoting enriched air use for at least 20+ years? Since, you have used the term ‘logic’ in discussing standards and agency behavior, allow me to use it as well to describe such an assertion as illogical.

15 years old means padi has reduced their standard to 10 year olds.

An interesting use of the English language. To be accurate, PADI has not changed the minimum age required to be certified as an Open Water Diver. That age is still 15. No ‘reduction’, as you wish to term it, of standards there. However, they have expanded the opportunities for interested students to receive scuba training, and created a Junior Open Water Diver certification, which allows dive students between 10 and 14 years of age to learn to dive, and then dive after the ‘Junior’ certification, with limitations of depth (60 feet maximum, and dive buddy. I believe that SSI also offers JUNIOR Open Water training beginning at age 10, SDI offers JUNIOR Open Water training beginning at age 10, and NAUI offers it beginning at age 12. None of these agencies offer Open Water Diver certification to students less than 15 years of age. So, do you disagree with that ‘Junior’ option being made available? If so, why? Just curious.

A couple of padi divers in my local club just completed their tdi advanced nitrox / decompression procedures, . . . Even though tdi offers helitrox, these two new deco divers have been preaching that helitrox is not necessary, and that gear, tolerance, and experience can allow divers, especially themselves, to overcome co2 buildup and narcosis. My question is: given that tdi offers helitrox, and their instructor is certified to teach trimix, . . .how did these divers come to this conclusion? While there is no way to say for sure, I believe it has to do with agency culture.

I have no idea where they got their notions. Possibly, it was from . . . their instructor? I am a credentialed PADI Tec Deep Instructor, and I can state, without fear of contradiction, that there is no agency culture within PADI supporting a notion ‘that gear, tolerance, and experience can allow divers, especially themselves, to overcome co2 buildup and narcosis.’ Are you by any chance confused, and are thinking of the PSAI Narcosis Management course, often referred to as a Deep Air course?

what I am saying is that padi was opposed to tech prior to dsat ...

OK, I am not sure they were 'opposed' as much as 'uninvolved'. But, even accepting the term: DSAT was formed in 1986. So, you are saying that a PADI position held more than three decades ago, when there was very little technical dive training being offered by any agency, and some agencies (such as GUE which was formed in 1998) did not even exist, is somehow a 'differentiating trend' in 2017?

Except for #3, I call this randomly picking an agency. Number three I call picking for money.

Again, an interesting use of the English language. Pardon me for being didactic, but ‘random’ can be defined as: made, done, happening, or chosen without method or conscious decision. Synonyms for ‘random’ might include unsystematic, unmethodical, arbitrary, unplanned, undirected, nonspecific, haphazard, stray or erratic’. If an Instructor candidate chooses to pursue training with an agency because a) they are already familiar with the structure of many / most of the courses they will actually teach with that particular agency credential, b) have already completed the specific pre-requisites of that particular agency, c) are already familiar with the particular shop, affiliated with that agency, through which they propose to train, I have trouble, using any interpretation of the word ‘random’ that I can find in any dictionary, calling such a choice ‘random’. Or, if they live in Saskatchewan, but really want to pursue training in a warm, high visibility Caribbean environment, and choose Bonaire because they love diving there, and select the Buddy Dive operation which offers PADI Instructor training, I would hardly call that ‘random’. What these choices may mean is that History and familiarity, and choice of ‘Location’ are more important factors than choice of ‘agency’ to many instructor candidates. .

The majority (that is, more than 50.0%) of Instructors with whom I am personally familiar (a not inconsequential number but by no means the universe of Instructors) and students I have taught, did not pick the agency through which to become an Instructor on the basis of any knowledge of ‘history of choices at critical junctures, ideals, lack of contradictions and founder's history’. Like it or not, that is reality. I have spoken with some (newer) NAUI Instructors who had no idea who Al Tillman was, (newer) PADI Instructors who have no idea who John Cronin was (and, regrettably with regard to both agencies, could care less). Personally, I do find the history of agencies to be interesting. But, I find that I am in a growing minority, and that has nothing to do with my particular agency.

I commend you for continuing to return to the primary theme of the thread - dispelling the myth of ‘It’s the instructor not the agency’. And, I have said that I do not personally subscribe to that myth, because I believe that both instructor and agency contribute to the training experience. And, you appear to be making the argument that ‘It’s the agency not the instructor’, which is fine, even if I don’t fully agree with it, although I see differences among agencies in appraoch an offerings, that are not necessarily better or worse, just different. But, you are also making assertions about ‘differentiating trends’ and specific agency cultures and policies that are simply inaccurate, at least as presented. If you assert your position on the basis of fact, and stated policies and practices, fine. But, making inferences on the basis of inaccurate statements, and anecdotal and frankly irrelevant experiences,should no go unchallenged.

 

[boulderjohn]

not according to pages 22-23 and 50 of the 2016 padi instructor manual. general standards allow open water students to dive without a bottom timer. Of course I know that computers have bottom timers built into them, but if one were following minimum standards, an ow student could technically complete the course wearing only a depth gauge.

Here is the relevant section that you did not quote, which is part of the list of what students must have::
6. Depth monitoring device
7. Quick release weight system and weights (if necessary
for neutral buoyancy, or if required for skills practice)
8. Adequate exposure protection appropriate for local dive
conditions.
Note: The dry suit orientation requirement in this guide.
9. At least one audible emergency surface signaling device
(whistle, air horn, etc.).
10. Dive computer or RDP (eRDPMLTM or Table)
Note: If dives are planned using the RDP, the student diver must have
a timing device.

 

[boulderjohn]

A bottom timer is actually a timer and a depth gauge, isn't it?

From the snippet you posted, it makes it sound like they can dive using a table a dive watch, with no depth gauge (thus, no bottom timer) and no SPG. Is that really correct?

A depth gauge is item #6.

 

[sigxbill]

if you had a business that was going to exclude nitrox - in an industry where nitrox was the latest thing, would you pick an agency known for nitrox, or one that had a successful track record of avoiding it? And then, if you were an instructor for that business, and wanted to sign up as many customers as possible - possibly customers asking about nitrox, would you promote nitrox and possibly risk losing that customer to a competitor who offered nitrox - even though your agency offered nitrox? Or would you play down the value of nitrox? All I'm saying is that if there was already anti-nitrox sentiment to start with, and big business was influenced by that, and then a large enough group of instructors played down nitrox, then maybe - just maybe - that could constitute a trend in culture. I'm not saying this is for sure what happened, this is just one antecdotal coincidence, but given enough anticdotal coincidences, maybe they collectively constitute some culture.

Ok - I'll be more specific, jowd has been lowered to 10. On a separate note - since you asked my personal opinion, I have 14 year old twins now, and have been trying to get them to take diving seriously enough for me to award them jowd. Unfortunately for me, they haven't shown that level attentiveness for that to happen yet. I realize there are exceptions, but my kids, as well as a few other have brought me to the conclusion that 10 yo jowd certification isn't for me.

Regarding deep air and padi, I think you misread my post. The point wasn't that they developed pro deep air attitudes from padi. The point was that they were originally padi recreational divers, and then - after their tdi adv nitrox deco course - they advocated deep air.

You make some challenging (and good) points. I appreciate your interesting response. I'll respond to the rest later.

Cheers

 

[sigxbill]

@boulderjohn - I guess you didn't see my previous response to Scott above regarding #10, so I will recap: the 2016 version did NOT include the timing device verbiage, so the cultural trend is that padi did not require a timing device for open water students until 2017 ...

 

[Scott]

A bottom timer is actually a timer and a depth gauge, isn't it?

From the snippet you posted, it makes it sound like they can dive using a table a dive watch, with no depth gauge (thus, no bottom timer) and no SPG. Is that really correct?

In today's world most likely.
When I started diving I had three separate gauges, an SPG, Depth gauge and a Bottom timer. So in my mind a BT is a separate device.

I guess I could have copied the entire equipment required section from the IM, but it is in there.
Item 6: Depth monitoring device

 

[Colliam7]

if you had a business that was going to exclude nitrox - in an industry where nitrox was the latest thing, would you pick an agency known for nitrox, or one that had a successful track record of avoiding it?

I have no idea why Sports Chalet did what they did with regard to agency affiliation. I can reasonably assume that whatever they did was their decision, and that a non-existent PADI corporate anti-nitrox bias had nothing to do with it. Perhaps, Sports Chalet decided to pick an agency affiliation that had the largest 'footprint', the largest offering of course options for divers wanting 'more'. But, whatever the reasoning behind Sports Chalet's decision, there is nothing in their decision that represents a corporate 'anti-nitrox bias' on PADI's part, except whatever might exist in someone's active imagination.

All I'm saying is that if there was already anti-nitrox sentiment to start with . . .

And, that part is simply NONSENSE. You are making an assertion without providing any - zip, zilch, nada, nein, supporting evidence. Then, when your attempt to use Sports Chalet as an example of a PADI anti-nitrox bias is shown to be fallacious, you try to justify the example by asserting that there was 'already an anti-nitrox sentiment to begin with'. Again, this is an illogical, circular argument that makes no sense.

this is just one anecdotal coincidence, but given enough anticdotal coincidences, maybe they collectively constitute some culture.

No, not even that. There is no coincidence. Your example is simply (completely) anecdotal. With what does it coincide? Certainly, not with any 'anti-nitrox bias' on the part of PADI. Might other readers might be forgiven for asking if you are just making this stuff up as you go along?

]Ok - I'll be more specific, jowd has been lowered to 10.

OK, I have an even better option. Why don't we say that you will be more accurate, more factual, more correct? Your specificity was not the issue. Rather, you made inaccurate broad generalizations, and now seem to want to avoid responsibility for them by saying you are being more 'specific'. Again, this is an issue with English language, with grammar and vocabulary. So, why not change your previous ERRONEOUS statement, that PADI has lowered its standards, to something that is actually factual? Let's say that the standards for certification as a PADI Open Water Diver, with regard to minimum age, have not changed. At all. Let's say that PADI, AND NAUI, AND SSI, AND SDI, have all elected to expand the options for youngsters to begin dive training, by creating 'Junior' Open Water Diver courses, and certifications that are associated with reasonable limitations.' You don't need to say that the jowd standards have been 'lowered' to 10.They have been 10 for as long as I can remember. Then, if you want to disagree with them, as a matter of personal preference, go right ahead.

On a separate note - since you asked my personal opinion, I have 14 year old twins now, and have been trying to get them to take diving seriously enough for me to award them jowd. Unfortunately for me, they haven't shown that level attentiveness for that to happen yet. I realize there are exceptions, but my kids, as well as a few other have brought me to the conclusion that 10 yo jowd certification isn't for me.

Thank you for answering the direct question. And, I have no trouble whatsoever with your opinion on the matter, with regard to YOUR kids. That is responsible, and commendable, parental behavior. I will leave you to determine what is best for YOUR kids. And, it is fine if a 10 y.o JOWD certification is not for you (or them). I respect that. But, please don't then make a leap of illogical cognition to say that PADI 'has lowered its standards', because that is not factual. And, since we are on the subject, I have taught 13 year old students, who were mature, who were working a part time, after school, job to pay for their own training, and who I certified, as a JUNIOR OW Diver, with confidence. I have worked with several '20-somethings' that I declined to certify as Open Water Divers because they did not show the maturity of judgement that, in my opinion, was necessary for certification. It is an individual issue. Saying that the MINIMUM age for beginning training as a Junior Open Water Diver is 10 years does not mean that every 10 year old is ready for certification, or will be certified. The maturity and behavior of your kids has no bearing whatsoever on whether a Junior Open Water Diver program is reasonable. But, you made an assertion - that PADI had lowered its standards with regard to age - which was factually WRONG.

Regarding deep air and padi, I think you misread my post. The point wasn't that they developed pro deep air attitudes from padi. The point was that they were originally padi recreational divers, and then - after their tdi adv nitrox deco course - they advocated deep air.

No, I didn't misread your post! I quoted your post. Perhaps, you don't remember what you wrote - in which you referred to 'padi divers', not 'padi recreational divers', by the way. Here is your comment:

A couple of padi divers in my local club just completed their tdi advanced nitrox / decompression procedures, and consequently the types of dives they have been doing has changed. Even though tdi offers helitrox, these two new deco divers have been preaching that helitrox is not necessary, and that gear, tolerance, and experience can allow divers, especially themselves, to overcome co2 buildup and narcosis. . . . My question is: given that tdi offers helitrox, and their instructor is certified to teach trimix, how did these divers come to this conclusion? While there is no way to say for sure, I believe it has to do with agency culture.

OK, in fairness you did not say 'PADI agency culture'. But, since you were talking about two, AND ONLY two, agencies, and you had already said that the training of one of the two agencies promoted helitrox, but these two divers were 'preaching' that it wasn't necessary, a reader might easily be forgiven for concluding that you were referring to the PADI culture. (If you were referring, instead, to the TDI culture, then we once again have an issue with the English language). And, all I did was refute the inference about a possible PADI culture position on the basis of factual knowledge as an individual credentialed to teach the PADI Tec Deep course sequence.

By the way, for the record, I am not a blind PADI advocate by any means. I said early in this thread that 'no agency is perfect' and that includes PADI (and NAUI, and GUE, and SSI, etc.) As a PADI Instructor, I would like to see a better PADI IT infrastructure, better management of the agency's extensive library of documents (manuals, forms, etc.), improvement in the PADI Enriched Air Diver manual;, development and distribution of a PADI Self-Reliant Diver student manual, to name a few examples of where I think the agency could improve. But, I really have little patience for intentional dissemination of inaccurate, and factually wrong information.

 

[sigxbill]

No, I didn't misread your post! I quoted your post. Perhaps, you don't remember what you wrote - in which you referred to 'padi divers', not 'padi recreational divers', by the way. Here is your comment:

Now you are just being argumentative - so I am done with this discussion. Think what you want. The point of that story had nothing to do with padi - I was just referencing that as s starting point. The story was all about TDI - I mentioned TDI three times, and used their specific course names. Does padi also offer courses by those specific names? I'll requote myself, but remove the word padi from the first sentence - maybe you'll get the point then.

"A couple of divers in my local club just completed their tdi advanced nitrox / decompression procedures, and consequently the types of dives they have been doing has changed. Even though tdi offers helitrox, these two new deco divers have been preaching that helitrox is not necessary, and that gear, tolerance, and experience can allow divers, especially themselves, to overcome co2 buildup and narcosis. . . . My question is: given that tdi offers helitrox, and their instructor is certified to teach trimix, how did these divers come to this conclusion? While there is no way to say for sure, I believe it has to do with agency culture."

Agency comparison has been an area of interest of mine ever since my second naui instructor told me I needed a certification to swim around the outside of a shipwreck 21 years ago. I immediately started comparing instructors, shops, and agencies in my quest for a better path than owd to owi. That quest has taken me through training from 8 different agencies, and I am working on my fourth professional membership now - as I was not satisfied with the previous three.

Colliam7 - curiosity got the best of me so I reviewed your info page - just to see where you are coming from. While I am not questioning your diving or instructing ability in any way, I am curious how it is that you are able to assert that there are no discernible differences between agencies - especially when it appears as though all your training has been through only one agency?

All agencies - padi, ssi, and gue, etc. are not the same. My premise is that the traditional way of attempting to differentiate them via direct standards comparison does not paint differentiating pictures of the agencies. I propose the best way to compare agencies is to develop a portrait of culture for each agency - by picking 5 to 10 differentiating points from each agency - which could profile standards changes over the years, agency history, key agency decisions, founder history, etc. Yes - some of those characteristics will be antidotal, but so would be a comparison of any culture.

 

[chrisch]

...
Believe what you want: All agencies - padi, ssi, and gue are the same, no discernible differences - and if there is any difference - it's the instructor - and then you can make yourself feel good and share stories about how you were the hero who had to fix the previous instructor's mistakes in your latest student from your same agency ...

now back to your regularly scheduled light sb chatter ...

You are GI3 and I claim my $10.00