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

[CAPTAIN SINBAD]

Rise of internet has allowed for the "de-monopolization of truth." At the same time it has also allowed for "normalization of nonsense." If there is one instrument that has contributed significantly in my own intellectual development as a diver then it is scubaboard. At the same time if there is one instrument that has filled my mind with misleading nonsense it is scubaboard.

Here, "misleading nonsense" means well intended statements that are may make perfect sense in a particular situation in the real world but in the world of internet they are communicated by one well intended person to a total stranger whose social realities the former knows nothing of. One popular slogan that keeps popping up from forum to forum is "It is the instructor not the agency." While I do not intend to dispute the statement itself, aside from internet there are serious complications of adopting this mind set.

A). An Open Water diver has no experience or training in diving so he has little in his pocket to "judge" whether an instructor is good or bad. His initial perceptions of good and bad will be shaped by the instructor so we are basically asking that he measures the competency of his educator by using the yard stick that the same educator has provided to him.

Dudes and dudettes, I am the perfect man if I am judged by the criteria that I myself have created.

B) Whose perception of "good" shall we use to find the good instructor? Jarod Jablonski's perception of a good instructor may be very different than what your PADI LDS calls "good instructor." Neither of them are wrong. They may be good for two different purposes.

Dudes and dudettes, How can I recommend a good instructor when I do not know what your perception of good instructor is? How can I recommend a good instructor when you yourself do not know what your perception of good instructor is?

C) Scuba is an industry where every instructor is a legend in his own mind and the students they produce have only taken lessons from that one guy so in most cases they are convinced that they have gotten the best training. When you go out looking for a good instructor it may not be much different than finding the "best religion."

Dudes and dudettes, We are all disciples to people who see themselves as Prophets.

The entire purpose of training agencies was to solve this dilemma for the person who has little understanding of what he or she is getting into. When you go to MIT or Harvard University, you do not have to find a "good professor." The institution has already done that for you. If you want to eat a pizza, you do not need to find a pizza chef. You find the "brand" (Pizza Hut) and the agency has already screened and located the best pizza chef for you. In scuba industry we are telling the end consumers to ignore the agency brand and start locating the best chef. If this is not a global failure of scuba agencies then what is? If the overall consensus is that look for the instructor not the agency then that means training agencies have failed to do what they are created to do.

There are agencies that keep their instructor core very small and are extremely stringent in giving out C-cards but on an internet forum they will be under represented. They do not have enough instructors or students to have a significant voice on message boards so if you are trying to search internet forums for the best instruction then these agencies will be the most criticized or bashed ones.

In the end, internet truth and real world truth are two totally different things so let us all find a good instructor.

 

[2airishuman]

Hear, hear. I agree. Someone new to diving can't "interview" instructors over the phone (or in person) and evaluate their quality for a wide variety of reasons, starting with the fact that most LDSs don't know which instructor will be conducting a given class until the class starts.

The entire purpose of training agencies was to solve this dilemma for the person who has little understanding of what he or she is getting into. When you go to MIT or Harvard University, you do not have to find a "good professor." The institution has already done that for you. If you want to eat a pizza, you do not need to find a pizza chef. You find the "brand" (Pizza Hut) and the agency has already screened and located the best pizza chef for you. In scuba industry we are telling the end consumers to ignore the agency brand and start locating the best chef. If this is not a global failure of scuba agencies then what is?

From what I've seen there isn't much meaningful difference in the quality of OW instruction across the major agencies. The main activities of the agencies are curriculum development, course standards, and instructor development. They are not primarily marketing companies.

 

[TMHeimer]

Capt. S, I agree with what you say. When I took OW I didn't know what a PADI was. As well, it was the first shop I walked into (somewhat by accident), and basically the only large shop for many miles. Also, you don't know which of the (16 or so) instructors will be teaching you, let alone having any way of judging who's better than who. I suppose one can do internet research on the good qualities of instructors by asking appropriate questions (if one knows what those are...). I didn't do that and doubt a whole lot of people do. Very few students I have met even heard of scubaboard as well.
You've put into words something I think I've wondered about--"It's the instructor, not the agency" is good advice only if the non- diver is somehow able to do this. Perhaps such advice is more practical for the experienced diver looking to take con ed. courses.

 

[KevinNM]

The entire purpose of training agencies was to solve this dilemma for the person who has little understanding of what he or she is getting into. When you go to MIT or Harvard University, you do not have to find a "good professor." The institution has already done that for you.

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but every school, famous or not, has great teachers and terrible teachers. Famous professors are typically famous for their research, not for their teaching. There are a couple of famous schools where winning the best professor award from students is closely tied to you not getting tenure. When I was in school the bookstore sold a little paperback that listed professors and student opinions. Because there were some just horrible ones. These days it’s a web site called ratemyprofessor.com, and their still are some horrible ones. And some great ones.

 

[TMHeimer]

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but every school, famous or not, has great teachers and terrible teachers. Famous professors are typically famous for their research, not for their teaching. There are a couple of famous schools where winning the best professor award from students is closely tied to you not getting tenure. When I was in school the bookstore sold a little paperback that listed professors and student opinions. Because there were some just horrible ones. These days it’s a web site called ratemyprofessor.com, and their still are some horrible ones. And some great ones.

Agree here too, having been a teacher myself. Doesn't change what Sinbad is saying. Like with scuba, many times you don't have a choice in which professor to take if you need the course.

 

[BoltSnap]

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but every school, famous or not, has great teachers and terrible teachers. Famous professors are typically famous for their research, not for their teaching. There are a couple of famous schools where winning the best professor award from students is closely tied to you not getting tenure. When I was in school the bookstore sold a little paperback that listed professors and student opinions. Because there were some just horrible ones. These days it’s a web site called ratemyprofessor.com, and their still are some horrible ones. And some great ones.

What you said isn't true and the concept you detail actually supports Sinbad's argument. You pick the school first based on what you want/need. If you are going into research, you pick a research school if you want a teaching school with emphasis on teaching, you will get professors who are more into teaching than publishing papers. I went to a significant engineering school that emphasized teaching and evaluated its teaching faculty on their ability to teach and took into consideration the ratings student gave to their professors before the school offered tenure or promotions to their faculty members. When I went to graduate school at a big name research university, it was the opposite of my undergraduate school.

 

[KevinNM]

So in this case PADI is the Harvard of dive agencies, because the hard part of getting an undergraduate degree at Harvard is getting in the door, 97.6% of people who get admitted get a degree. Which is probably much higher then the PADI OW c-card rate.

So no, I'd argue this is a terrible analogy.

 

[bowlofpetunias]

At last a little sanity on the topic!

 

[DevonDiver]

IMHO there's two quintessential types of instructor:

1) Off-The-Shelf. Those that deliver a pre-set course that fulfills their agency requirements (which are all virtually identical anyway). They tick a list of skills, as the student 'masters them and (hopefully) comply with their agencies minimum training standards.

Their focus is on ensuring that student performance meets the requirements of the course standards applicable.

2) Bespoke. Those that train the diver to safely and competently conduct dives at the relevant certification level, where the course itself is merely a foundational vehicle for the training they actually provide. This capacity depends on having a clear understanding of the skillset, performance, competencies and mindset needed at, and/or beyond, that level of diving. They tailor training individually based on the students strengths, weaknesses and aspirations.

Their focus is on ensuring that student performance meets the demands of the dives they will undertake.

It's pretty easy to differentiate between the two, by asking a few simple questions, or even just looking at how the dive centre/instructor market and describe their courses.. and applying an iota of common sense.... even for a non-diver.

 

[rhwestfall]

I recently sat through my daughter's OW class. It was presented by a "team". Both seasoned instructors. One is an elementary school teacher, the other, not exactly sure, but lets say "blue collar". Without a doubt, there is a difference in delivering content. Once a regulator is in the mouth though, skill demonstration can narrow the gap.

Sorry, it is (heavily weighted) to the instructor, though, admittedly, there are mild differences in the agencies.

I want to add too, that you can interview shops, and instructors in seeking out your training.