I sure have made some opinions about video on training dives , I never let a student video if its hand held on any dives , that would just be an accident waiting to happen ...but now......
Video from a Training Dive with John Chatterton
- Thread starter Zack-Bloom
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
johndiver999
Contributor
I thought some people were a little over the top on this thread, but the OP specifically solicited opinions and feedback. We must recognize that If all comments were limited to "atta boy"s and positive feedback, the authenticity of the discussions would be ruined, and nobody would find it interesting.
This thread exemplifies the fact that moderation a tough job with a dauntingly wide gray area. Ideally, it would be great if people posting videos would understand and accept that they may well get criticism, even if it is not entirely deserved.
So there is a fine line between being “nice” as the board requires and providing honest and engaging feedback that will garner attention. Some people have indicated that they don’t have the stomach to risk negative feedback, so they avoid making similar posts with reports or video. Perfectly understandable, but it stifles participation and possibly interesting content.
However, in this case, IF the video documents violations of standards during a formal training dive, and IF those violations are significant and obvious, it seems inevitable that an honest discussion will gravitate toward some negativity. I don’t have the knowledge to discern if violations of training standards were shown, but apparently other people think they do.
I too feel bad for the new, enthusiastic guy who went to a lot of trouble to make a video, gets shot down and ostensibly has placed his instructor in an undesirable position. If significant violations were present and they were part of the planned instruction, I am surprised that the instructor authorized the filming.
Regardless of the reality of the situation with respect to compliance with training standards, the responsibility falls on the instructor, not the former student.
Dogbowl
Contributor
In case you were referring to my post, I would like to clarify that was not what I meant. Negative feedback, if it is true feedback, valid and constructive, that’s a good thing. But if you’ve been here long enough (and I think you have), you will realize that it often becomes much more than simply “negative feedback”. Invalid assumptions are made, the quality of your instructor is questioned (as in the case here, but I have no opinion whether it was warranted or not in this case), conclusions are made without all the facts or just simply not reading the posts, chests are thumped, snark is prevalent (just because they can) and then PMs with profanity telling you to go F yourself because they couldn’t win the argument with you (from a moderator, no less)...that’s how many threads evolve and I’ve been victim to it and have seen it occur over and over again. Honestly, that’s the crap I don’t have a stomach for, not the “negative feedback” you “simplistically” refer to.
I used to be that new and enthusiastic diver, wanting to ask lots of questions and posting my experiences. Sorry, but no longer worth it. Am I jaded? Hell yeah.
I’ve said too much already. I should step back now.
For some reason, I always thought that you were big into wreck diving. Are you into caves?
Caves, but only as of very recently. Very much a newbie in the tech realm. So I have no dog in this race.
I didn't mean anything negative at all by my comment above. It was just an impression, nothing negative or positive. I was wrong
I think this thread shows a clash of two different training philosophies.
On one side you have the “check box” philosophy where students just have to perform a skill, not necessarily well (Though skills are supposed to be “fluid, comfortable, and repeatable.” Students may need remedial training which may be addressed in the course. Or the instructor may place students on their knees as mentioned here. I didn’t see the video so I cannot comment.
On the other side, you have the philosophy of objective standards. There is a student needs remedial training, they either go practice and achieve the proficiency required before starting the intended course. Or they seek proper training to have those required skills. Only once ready, then students are trained with the new material and evaluated. If they cannot perform the skills at the required level, they do not get certification. In this philosophy, certification cards are not participation trophies. Students may need to go practice and then schedule retesting with their instructor in order to earn certification.
We all know that the market overall is dominated by the former philosophy. For recreational diving, I don’t like it, but I begrudgingly accept it. Not everyone lives near dive sites where they can easily go dive before/after work and every weekend (like me). Most are landlocked and while they may choose not to dive in local lakes/rivers/quarries, they instead dive once in a while on vacation. They demand a checkbox course as they will not have time to practice skills to master them and will likely go to a different dive destination on their next vacation. Even if they were going to go back the next year, their instructor may have moved on.
So ultimately, we have a good versus evil battle here. Guess which one I think corresponds to good and to evil.
Seriously, no one answer that.
On one side you have the “check box” philosophy where students just have to perform a skill, not necessarily well (Though skills are supposed to be “fluid, comfortable, and repeatable.” Students may need remedial training which may be addressed in the course. Or the instructor may place students on their knees as mentioned here. I didn’t see the video so I cannot comment.
On the other side, you have the philosophy of objective standards. There is a student needs remedial training, they either go practice and achieve the proficiency required before starting the intended course. Or they seek proper training to have those required skills. Only once ready, then students are trained with the new material and evaluated. If they cannot perform the skills at the required level, they do not get certification. In this philosophy, certification cards are not participation trophies. Students may need to go practice and then schedule retesting with their instructor in order to earn certification.
We all know that the market overall is dominated by the former philosophy. For recreational diving, I don’t like it, but I begrudgingly accept it. Not everyone lives near dive sites where they can easily go dive before/after work and every weekend (like me). Most are landlocked and while they may choose not to dive in local lakes/rivers/quarries, they instead dive once in a while on vacation. They demand a checkbox course as they will not have time to practice skills to master them and will likely go to a different dive destination on their next vacation. Even if they were going to go back the next year, their instructor may have moved on.
So ultimately, we have a good versus evil battle here. Guess which one I think corresponds to good and to evil.
Seriously, no one answer that.
Seriously, the philosophy out in the field may have a place on Scubaboard. In fact, robust discussions of that nature do have a place on Scubaboard.
But in this thread, they most certainly do not and in my opinion, every instructor that posted in this thread failed miserably. Miserably
FAILED
But in this thread, they most certainly do not and in my opinion, every instructor that posted in this thread failed miserably. Miserably
FAILED
Pretty serious accusation. How so?
They might have been referring to my post where I wrote that you should never, ever give training specifics on SB. You deal in vague generalities. The unwashed masses who think they know what’s better for you than you and your instructor don’t deserve any more. And it’s not the “negative criticism.” You can’t share a class report just to share your experience without EVERYTHING being picked apart.
Your instructor is crap. Wrong agency. Why didn’t he do X? You’re diving the wrong size tanks. Your drysuit is crap. WTF is that wing? You don’t need ITT. Why are you doing X class in Canada? We TOLD you Florida is the only place with decent tech instructors - never mind that I’m a Great Lakes wreck diver and doing tech with someone who doesn’t dive in my local conditions is is not an option. You’re too old, too fat, and too gimpy to tech dive. You were too nervous at the beginning. You should never have even bothered getting in the water.
Eff that. I’ll share my experiences privately.
Similar threads
