Cave Training and Etiquette Real or Imaginary?

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

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Rly? Are you that naive? DIR and all it's trappings became infamous through social media. PADI recently changed its standards due to discussions happening here and elsewhere. I think instructional awareness is at an all time high and social media is the reason. The first step in making rabbit stew is to catch the rabbit. There have always been lazy, poor and incompetent instructors teaching both Scuba and cave. Now people are actually talking about them and what makes a poor instructor. We're starting to catch up to that rabbit!
 
I'm not sure why you must be an eyewitness to take a stand against BS instructors doing BS things.
 
Readily available solutions exist in other domains... for example, people in academia regularly evaluate each other's universities in official surveys, which leads to official school ranking that, in turn, most prospective students rely on as their #1 selection criteria. No matter the amount of politics in diving, it likely fades in comparison with the politics in academia, and yet it all somehow works...
Really, school rankings are the #1 criteria? Ahead of tuition costs, location, perspective internship opportunities, housing costs and financial aid availability? I've worked for a top ranked engineering school and you wouldn't believe the amount of marketing materials that go out to people who have votes in the US News polls every year. Free usb drives with the school logo (back when they weren't cheap), nice pens, coffee, mugs, magazines with awesome photos, etc. I sincerely hope students don't use that as their #1 criteria.

The one thing that does keep the rankings honest, is their reliance on research dollars for the ranking scale. To a certain degree, research money is progressively harder to get more of without proven success.
 
There have always been lazy, poor and incompetent instructors teaching both Scuba and cave. Now people are actually talking about them

From my reading of this thread and similar discussions in the past, a lot of people are hesitant to explicitly call anyone as "bad instructor". Between instructor bashing and fatalistic views ("nothing is new and nothing will ever change"), there is a middle ground:

Step 1. Someone proposes a short list of questions as evaluation criteria, to grade an instructor, shop, or agency they know on a scale from 1 to 10. Grading someone on a scale, along multiple criteria (where you could provide some positive, as well as some constructive feedback), is not nearly as stigmatizing as calling someone out, and more people would be willing to do so.

Step 2. Through a discussion, the questions are refined to the point where the list gains minimal level of support, at least in a thread like this one...

Step 3. ...enough for the first person to summon up the courage to volunteer a set of answers, and see their opponents quickly reciprocate with a set of their own.

I think a survey, with reasonably objective criteria that there is some support for, and a single, numeric outcome, can be much more effective than a wordy discussion.
 
In regard to my last post, the one leading to this one, I would like to focus on prerequisite skills.
I'd like to remind you that some of the agencies being discussed here don't publish their standards to take nor pass the class. Those are secret. Dave Schott posted the CDS standards once on CDF and nearly gave people a heart attack.

GUE is the only agency where I knew exactly what I had to do in order to pass the class, and how accurately.
 
I'm not sure why you must be an eyewitness to take a stand against BS instructors doing BS things.
If you like gossip, I guess not. The rumor/gossip mill doesn't do anybody any good. Sure, it might feed someone's ego, but most of our egos are way bloated and need to go on a diet. I get that we've become insensitive to it because of our politics, but that doesn't make it ethical. Go to a police station and tell them you would like to report a burglary you heard about from a friend of a friend. Watch the eyebrows furrow as they contemplate whether to pity you or throw you out on your ear. Bring the GoPro so we can all enjoy the antics that will ensue. Oh yeah, make sure to complain bitterly how the police don't care about burglaries because they wouldn't do anything about one that they couldn't prove happened.
 
Really, school rankings are the #1 criteria? Ahead of tuition costs, location, perspective internship opportunities, housing costs and financial aid availability? I've worked for a top ranked engineering school and you wouldn't believe the amount of marketing materials that go out to people who have votes in the US News polls every year. Free usb drives with the school logo (back when they weren't cheap), nice pens, coffee, mugs, magazines with awesome photos, etc. I sincerely hope students don't use that as their #1 criteria.

The one thing that does keep the rankings honest, is their reliance on research dollars for the ranking scale. To a certain degree, research money is progressively harder to get more of without proven success.

Just because something is not perfect, it does not mean it is useless... one can debate whether a school ranked 3 is really better than a school ranked 4, but very few would argue that a school ranked 40 in fact deserves to be at the top of the list. Granted, for many people financial and other aspects are a major constraint, but within a range of schools one can afford, in the absence of deeper knowledge, you still rely on a ranking, do you not? Most people do not have the insider knowledge to make their own judgement... or the time to sift through thousands of pages of detailed reports and discussions to make up their own mind...
 
Rly? Are you that naive? DIR and all it's trappings became infamous through social media. PADI recently changed its standards due to discussions happening here and elsewhere. I think instructional awareness is at an all time high and social media is the reason. The first step in making rabbit stew is to catch the rabbit. There have always been lazy, poor and incompetent instructors teaching both Scuba and cave. Now people are actually talking about them and what makes a poor instructor. We're starting to catch up to that rabbit!

A problem with all performance assessments in all subjects is that the quality of a student performance is in the eye of the assessor. One grader's A is another graders F. That is true almost everywhere.

The exception is in organizations for which assessment consistency is critical. For example, the College Board has hundreds of assessors scoring Advanced Placement essays, and those must be consistent. They use a training system, often referred to as calibration, in which trainees score essays previously scored by the top professionals so that they will develop the same eye for quality as those top professionals. It takes a surprisingly short amount of time to get trainees to a 90% inter-rater reliability score on a 9-point scale. The problem is that as the trained raters then work independently, their previously calibrated standards begin to move. Some start to develop higher standards, and some start to develop lower standards. For that reason, they are checked by the leaders for consistency, and if they are perceived to have strayed too far from the established norm, they are "recalibrated."

That is the role supposedly played by the instructor development system in all levels of scuba instruction. Potential instructors are supposed to see enough examples of what constitutes acceptable and unacceptable student performances that they have become calibrated enough to do it on their own. The problem is the lack of a system for recalibration. In a system that is not consistently checked, some degree of straying will ALWAYS occur, and something needs to be done to get people back in line. Regionalism often occurs, with specific regions, schools, or dive operations developing their own local culture and standards that are totally out of whack with what is happening elsewhere. These people usually have no way of knowing that what they see around them every day is not the way things are done by others.

That is where social media can help. Through social media, we can "spread the word" of what is good or bad in instruction. People who are in good faith doing what they think is the best job possible can have that belief shattered if they see enough information to the contrary. I started scuba instruction doing exactly as I had been taught to do and how I had seen 100% of instructors do it: firmly planted on the knees. I had no reason to suspect there was anything wrong with that. Then I read some posts in ScubaBoard that got me to question that. I had no ability to see it done any other way, though. No one in my culture did it differently. I had to experiment on my own. I had to see what worked and what didn't. I sought out others for ideas and for the purpose of trying to make a positive change in the culture, but I couldn't do it through ScubaBoard. Nope. The climate here was too nasty and negative about trying to accomplish positive change. I invited people to a discussion in another forum, where we could talk in peace without all the negativity. The eventual result was a prolonged exchange with PADI, the publication of an article about teaching students while neutrally buoyant, and now a changed PADI policy promoting neutrally buoyant, horizontal trim OW instruction throughout the world.

Ten years ago a discussion about initial OW skill instruction would have been dominated by people saying instruction MUST be done on the knees. Today it would be hard to find someone willing to say that amid the throng of people saying the opposite. Yes, the overwhelming majority of OW instruction is being done overweighted and on the knees, but that is changing, and social media had a big part in making that happen. To make it work in cave diving, you have to be able to have positive comments on how to make it better. That is why I had to move the discussion off of ScubaBoard--to keep a small handful of negative voices out of the mix. If you don't want to be part of the solution, don't get in the way of those who do.
 
Rly? Are you that naive? DIR and all it's trappings became infamous through social media. PADI recently changed its standards due to discussions happening here and elsewhere. I think instructional awareness is at an all time high and social media is the reason. The first step in making rabbit stew is to catch the rabbit. There have always been lazy, poor and incompetent instructors teaching both Scuba and cave. Now people are actually talking about them and what makes a poor instructor. We're starting to catch up to that rabbit!

I think social media has made a mild awareness,but hasn't fixed anything in reference to comments made. This thread is one among MANY that social media exposes the weaknesses that exist,but as I referred to the futility, nothing will be accomplished. Look at the sidemount forum,many comments about instructors becoming sidemount divers one weekend and teaching the next weekend,it is repetitive,but social media has not helped."DIR and all it's trappings became infamous through social media."- the old tech list with the negative PR between DIR and non-DIRs still has dislike between these two groups,but of course you didn't say positive social media. Don't get me wrong I am all for social media, but expecting it as a solution for problems brought up in this thread,I will show my naivety again, doubt it.
 
The rumor/gossip mill doesn't do anybody any good.
Pete,

How do you expect someone to file a formal complaint when an agency doesn't make their standards public? Do we even know that students kneeling in the mud violates the agency standards? Let's use the CDS as an example. Show me how I would be able to see a CDS course being taught and know if it was in violation of the standards. If I saw students kneeling in the mud putting a jump in, what standard does it violate? How do I prove it was a CDS class and not an IANTD class since nearly every instructor teaches for a dozen agencies.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/teric/
http://cavediveflorida.com/Rum_House.htm

Back
Top Bottom