Is learning from PADI that bad?

[Thalassamania]

I see the perception that a lesson equals one dive a misguided one.

For us, BSAC, we have 5 open water lessons for Ocean Diver (OD), but its not uncommon for students to do more than 5 dives to get them all signed-off. Either they don't demonstrate the competences required or their gas runs low before the lesson is completed. For example I've run 10 OD open water lessons this year, half of which have been recorded as 'practice' as the student didn't meet the standard and needed more in-water time to develop their competence.

That said, we have a new student who appears is going to complete it in 5 dives. They do have the advantage of already being comfortable with breathing apparatus (fire service) and being in the sea (kayaking).

There is no misperception. I stand by my original statement.

 

[TMHeimer]

I see the perception that a lesson equals one dive a misguided one.

For us, BSAC, we have 5 open water lessons for Ocean Diver (OD), but its not uncommon for students to do more than 5 dives to get them all signed-off. Either they don't demonstrate the competences required or their gas runs low before the lesson is completed. For example I've run 10 OD open water lessons this year, half of which have been recorded as 'practice' as the student didn't meet the standard and needed more in-water time to develop their competence.

That said, we have a new student who appears is going to complete it in 5 dives. They do have the advantage of already being comfortable with breathing apparatus (fire service) and being in the sea (kayaking).

I can see you are very thorough. I would GUESS that 30-40 years ago most OW candidates already were quite comfortable in water. Yet the OW courses apparently were way longer for them back then anyway.

 

[GRH]

I took OW with PADI, followed by Dry suit with PADI,followed by AOW with PADI, followed a week later with ASC with NAUI.

PADI OW was for 7 or 8 students if I remember right. There were multiple instructors and dive masters involved in the pool and OW sessions.

I was not disappointed in the course itself or the quality of the instruction. I do remember a lot of time kneeling on the bottom in both the pool and OW, watching the instructors perform the skill and waiting my turn while the other students practiced the skill. This made for very long pool sessions where I got cold and tired and began to lose my ability to concentrate and learn.

I don’t remember the OW dives being as tedious since the experience of diving in Puget Sound for the first time was so amazing. Still, kneeling and waiting in a silt cloud was not ideal.

My PADI Dry Suit class was with an instructor associated with a different shop, but I “hired” him independent of the shop. This class was one on one with one of the contributors to this thread. Obviously there was no waiting for other students and I was very satisfied with the level of instruction and got everything I hoped for out of the class. I would take another class from him without reservations.

My PADI AOW class was with the same dive shop I took my OW with and was lacking for a number of reasons. The biggest reason being the comparable level of skill of the other students. Think teaching to the lowest common denominator and you get the picture. I can’t speak for all PADI shops but in this case, the other students were taking AOW shortly after completing OW and a few were diving in Dry Suits for the first time.

I have no illusions about my diving skills and know I have alot to learn but I was taking the class after having completed 36 dives while the other students appeared to have had far less experience. I had also recently completed a one on one workshop with a NAUI instructor, no card involved, to work on buoyancy and trim that improved my diving considerably.

I was also disappointed that after requesting a specific instructor, just before the class started I was assigned one I had never seen dive and knew nothing about. On the first dive I was a third wheel with two new dry suit divers and didn’t even get a knowledge review. After 20 minutes their dive was over and thankfully one instructor had them return while another instructor and I had a nice 50 minute dive to work on skills I had requested although in current strong enough to make practicing basic buoyancy skills problematic. Shortly into the dive I glanced over and saw one of the divers upside down, tank resting on the bottom like a turtle on their back. I never asked but assume it was due to the “dry suit recovering from excess gas in the feet drill”. I remember practicing that drill in a pool though.

Next dive was 20 minutes and I’ll leave it at that.

My third and fourth dives were the next day. The first dive of the day was a deep dive. We descended, wrote our name backwards, proceeded to 100 feet, wrote our name backwards again, and began the return. One diver needed to share an instructor’s air almost immediately after we started our return. My dive time; 25 minutes.

The next dive was navigation. I waited at the starting point for five minutes it seemed as an instructor attempted to get my training buddy buoyant. Finally we began with counting kick cycles. Not easy to do while your buddy is pulling themselves along the bottom with their hands. Dive time, 27 minutes.

I called the fifth dive. I just didn’t see the point of another 25 minute dive where I didn’t feel like I was learning anything and I had other commitments. Technically I have not completed the AOW PADI course and still need to schedule one more dive to get my card but since I took the NAUI ASD course the following weekend, I am in no hurry.

I don’t want to be too hard on the dive shop. I belong to their dive club and enjoy diving with most everyone that works there, it just turned out their AOW instruction philosophy is not a fit for me and my goals at this time.

The NAUI ASD course was a great fit for me. There were four students in the class and an instructor dedicated to each buddy team for all dives. All students had at least 40 dives and had completed our instructors’ custom workshop class prior to the ASD course. The course included two days of custom, Puget Sound oriented classroom sessions followed by 6 dives. The dives and skills were also tailored to the unique challenges of diving in Puget Sound. I was challenged and humbled with the realization I was nowhere near the diver I hope to become yet came out of the class a much better diver then I started.

I can’t judge for others on which agency is right for them but for me, at least for Advanced, this instructors NAUI course was a much better fit. PADI AOW taken shortly after OW might be great for someone just starting out where AOW keeps them diving and allows them to experience other types of dives. For me, I was not challenged due to the comparable skill level of the other students and therefore took little away from the class.

The NAUI class on the other hand was taken with students of similar skill, was challenging, and in line with the learning objectives I was interested in. I came away from the PADI course feeling pretty full of myself as a skilled diver. A week later I came away from the NAUI class humbled with how limited my diving skill is and how much I need to improve and learn to become the diver I want to be.

I don’t believe the agency is as important as the goals and philosophy of the individual instructor. I assume a PADI course could be structured in a similar manner if the instructor wanted to and would provide the same result as the NAUI course did me but that was not the model with my shop. I think my PADI Dry Suit Instructor has that philosophy.

 

[cascas]

Then you are in violation of PADI Standards, it's that simple ... not that I, personally, give a damn.

I disagree.... PADI indeed states that when a student performs a skill well he/she should pass... But _I_ decide the level of "well"... And if I make a student perform that skill over and over untill I am satisfied that is entirely up to me.

besides, I teach one on one or max 2 students. that means that in a one to one situation I make a student work 8 times as hard as when I had 8 students in a class... that too is entirely up to me...

 

[scubadada]

As you recognize in the OP, the instructor can make all the difference. In general I've bashed PADI for watering down dive training over the years (I came out of the Los Angeles County system in the 60s). However, I've taken two PADI certs (essentially repeats of my LAC cert) with two excellent PADI instructors and wouldn't hesitate to take another PADI cert with a good instructor.

Hi Bill,

Same with me. I did my inital OW with LA Co Underwater Unit in 1970. I recertified with my son at age 12 with PADI. It was a perfectly fine course but not with the rigor of my original. Of course, how could you reproduce no safe seconds, not even a depth guage or SPG? My PADI training has been perfectly satisfactory. Now I have 700 dives and am comfortable and confident in all kinds of conditions.

Good diving, Craig

 

[boulderjohn]

It would seem that this has been changed. My disagreement with PADI came as a result of my training program exceeding 29 hours. At the time, the number of training hours had to be recorded by the Instructor on the PIC. When I kept on submitting PICs with 45-50 training hours, I eventually got a call from PADI HQ. I was told that much of the training I was giving the student was included in the Advanced Program. I was either to cut my training hours, or issue an advanced certification in addition to an OW card.

In other words, nearly a quarter of a century ago you had a disagreement over a process that PADI abandoned shortly after that and has not used in a couple of decades.

Educational processes around the world started to change at that time, and we are still in transition. I was teaching that change within the school system back then. We used to explain it this way:

In old teaching, you teach for a specific length of time and then measure student achievement. Time is the standard; learning is the variable.

In new (standards-based) instruction, you teach until the students reaches a specified level of performance, whatever amount of time that takes. Learning is the standard; time is the variable. Some people can learn in half the time it takes others, and the opposite is obviously true as well. That is why there is no longer any requirement for the amount of time a course must take.

 

[DCBC]

...Some people can learn in half the time it takes others, and the opposite is obviously true as well. That is why there is no longer any requirement for the amount of time a course must take.

Regardless of time, if you cross the finish line and must certify on specific requirements, they amount to sufficient knowledge or skill or they don't. Although these standards are sufficient for some diving environments, they are insufficient for others. This translates to this same standard being used regardless of the environment, which is something that should be avoided at all costs (in my opinion).

As an educator, I'm sure you have created a course training plan / standard. In the military, the standard is achieved by first having an understanding of the deliverables required. In other words, what must the student achieve by way of skill and knowledge to do the job in a safe and efficient manner. The CTP is written to ensure that the CTS can be achieved. If this is insufficient, it's not the Instructor's fault; rather the organization that has set-up a training system that cannot hope to meet the goals.

You and I have discussed this at length several times to no mutual conclusion. I'm happy to agree to disagree. As I've mentioned, if any particular training program meets the needs of the Instructor, the students and the environment, I don't have a problem. When however the student is certified to dive in the local conditions and is inadequately prepared to dive in this environment, I find this irresponsible. This is only my opinion. We each have one that's based upon our training and experience. I think we each know each others position.

 

[DBailey]

In other words, what must the student achieve by way of skill and knowledge to do the job in a safe and efficient manner.

And this is where everyone seems to disagree.

The "job" in this instance is a dive with conditions similar to the training, with a buddy, and no deeper than 60 feet (right out of the PADI material). For the scope of PADI's open water course, what is missing for the new divers to complete the dive in a "safe and efficient" manner? Even teaching to the minimum standards set forth by PADI, the material presented allows for the new divers to safely plan and execute the dive.

Where the wheels fall off is when the new diver wants to dive outside of those parameters. Is that the fault of the agency that diver wants to do something in which they were not trained? Personally, I think PADI's standards are acceptable when considering the parameters. I also feel that PADI's material, most instructors, and most dive charters do a poor job of driving home and/or enforcing those parameters.

I don't blame the agencies for setting up standards that will allow a safe and efficient dives for an overwhelming majority of divers for an overwhelming majority of their dives. When talking abut the minority of divers and the dives they are doing, the diver should seek out the additional training and experience needed to safely and efficiently complete those dives.

I fully explain to my students what they will get out of the class and the type of diving that they will be trained to do after this class. I do this on the first night of the class. If the student is expecting something different, now is the time that they can get their refund. Plain and simple, basic scuba diving training allows the divers to do basic scuba dives.

I guess the root question is should a diver be trained for diving based on a certain set of parameters or should that diver be trained for every possible diving situation/envinronment that he/she may encounter?

 

[DCBC]

...The "job" in this instance is a dive with conditions similar to the training, with a buddy, and no deeper than 60 feet (right out of the PADI material). For the scope of PADI's open water course, what is missing for the new divers to complete the dive in a "safe and efficient" manner? Even teaching to the minimum standards set forth by PADI, the material presented allows for the new divers to safely plan and execute the dive.

If you certify a diver that meets the standards (which a PADI Instructor must do), you could be placing a weak or non-swimmer into unsafe conditions. This same newly certified diver, would have no idea how to rescue an unresponsive Buddy underwater, nor would he be able to project or calculate his air consumption (as I understand it, this is not required for PADI certification).

...When talking abut the minority of divers and the dives they are doing, the diver should seek out the additional training and experience needed to safely and efficiently complete those dives.

I would prefer that the Instructor be prepared (and be required) to add all requisite knowledge and skills that are reasonably necessary to allow 100% of the divers certified to safely perform in the local environment. If a diver is trained in the North Atlantic, I believe that they should be able to dive the North Atlantic (in similar conditions which they are certified). I don't believe that I should certify them and then tell them they are unsafe to dive without taking another course (I'm happy to refer them to another instructor in Bonaire, if that's where they want to dive).

I'm aware that it's likely that the majority of PADIs divers are certified in warm clear water, without local hazard. That these dives are supervised by DMs and Instructors in ideal conditions, which is great. These same standards however are applied Globally. To divers diving in cold unclear water, with surf/waves (the conditions here today are truly excellent; the water temp is 48F with waves of only 4 foot with 9 second intervals. Really ideal, but conditions are usually worse).

I fully explain to my students what they will get out of the class and the type of diving that they will be trained to do after this class. I do this on the first night of the class. If the student is expecting something different, now is the time that they can get their refund. Plain and simple, basic scuba diving training allows the divers to do basic scuba dives.

As do I. I agree that "basic scuba training allows the divers to do basic scuba dives." What is considered basic however, is a matter of perspective. No one set of rules can cover everyone's environment, unless the Standard is geared to the most difficult. Alternatively, the Agency can require the Instructor to add knowledge and skills to achieve a reasonable level of safety. To me, this just makes sense.

I guess the root question is should a diver be trained for diving based on a certain set of parameters or should that diver be trained for every possible diving situation/envinronment that he/she may encounter?

The diver should be trained for the local conditions and be equipped with the knowledge and skills necessary to dive safely. Requiring a diver to do less (in my mind) may be negligent of both the Instructor and the Agency.

 

[Peter Guy]

OK, something DCBC wrote is that under PADI if the instructor has determined that the student has mastered all of the required skills and successfully passed all the exams and knowledge reviews and watched and understood the video, the PADI instructor is required to certify the student. Fair enough -- that is the rule (with a few exceptions not relevant here).

By writing this the way he did, DCBC is implying that if I took a course from him and demonstrated that I had mastered all of the skills he wanted, passed all the exams, etc., he would still reserve the right to not certify me -- as far as I can tell, just on his whim.

OK, if that's what you want, go for it.

Me, I prefer the PADI/GUE way -- strictly identify what is needed to get the cert and if the various "skills" are mastered, I get the card. If they aren't mastered AND the student wishes to continue to work, then work until they are and then, and only then, get the card. DCBC's way seems to be arbitary in the extreme.