Is learning from PADI that bad?

[agilis]

Just my two cents, and a credit to not just minimum standards met. On our Padi OW dive 2 my wife struggled on the sea dive with her hoodie, it got the better of her psycologically and she exited before compleating all the skills, our dive centre called her back to the pool and had her just sit on the bottom of the pool for an hour with her hoodie on, then for a further three hours they drilled her on skills before sending her back to the sea to complete dives 2 to 4. So big credit to them. we only paid an extra boat fee, but she recieved 4hrs of additional instructor attention. PADI.

What's a 'hoodie'? I guessing it's a hood, a snug flexible thing that goes over your head to keep it warm while diving. Is a hoodie simply a hood for which one has developed a deep affection and is consequently referred to with an infantalized diminutive? Wet suitie? Bootie? Sockie? Maskie? Snorkie?

Actually, I'm starting to like the idea. I think I'll head down to my dive shoppie and get my tankie filled.

 

[Divescape]

You Know we are a bit behind in South Africa, come here and that's the name they go by. Don't forget to wrap your reg in a blankie as well just to be sure.

 

[Peter Guy]

DCBC wrote

Your suggestion of "whim" is unprofessional and rather insulting.

But do you deny that you could keep adding conditions to your class under your view of how an OW class should be run? No, not only do you not deny it, you revel in the fact that neither PADI nor NAUI nor ? have sufficent standards to meet YOUR standards.

Do you publish your standards? Do you let your students know exactly what will be required of them prior to starting your class? If not, how is anyone to know when they have met your standards? And while you may not like the word "whim" how are your standards not based on your "whim" -- your eccentric view of how things are to be done?

Thal wrote

As someone observing the product, the modular approach just does not, in my experience, seem to work well for more extreme environs

Thal, what is it about a "modular approach" which doesn't work "in [your] experience?" I have been assuming that even you have a "modular approach" to teaching scuba diving in that you start at point A and then teach what is needed to get to point B and then on to C and D, etc. If I'm not mistaken, you (rightly as far as I'm concerned) start people off by teaching them free diving prior to introducing scuba. And even in the scientific diving arena, isn't there a modular approach? That is, don't you start out with some pretty strict limitations on what a new diver can do and then only after experience, and training, can she do more "aggressive" dives? If that is the case, is that not a modular approach also? What activity training doesn't use a "modular approach" to it?

Thal, thank you for finally stating what has always appeared to me to be perfectly obvious, that teaching the open water diver unresponsive diver "rescue" techniques has little or nothing to do with actually rescuing an unresponsive diver.

I don't know that rescue skills, per se, are important in terms of the likelihood of needing them to perform a rescue, but I do know that they are important in terms of setting the right frame of mind and bringing a bunch of other skills together in a fruitful fashion.

Will you grant that there may be other ways "of setting the right frame of mind and bringing a bunch of other skills together in a fruitful fashion?"

And just what are:

a. The right frame of mind; and

b. The "other skills" to which you refer?

 

[DCBC]

DCBC wrote But do you deny that you could keep adding conditions to your class under your view of how an OW class should be run? No, not only do you not deny it, you revel in the fact that neither PADI nor NAUI nor ? have sufficent standards to meet YOUR standards.

Who do you feel is in the best position to assess the knowledge and skills necessary to dive a particular diving environment safely? An experienced on-site instructor, or a corporate executive thousands of miles away? An Instructor who increases instructional time (as an unpaid volunteer), or an Agency that stands to increase profit by lowing standards?

Do you publish your standards? Do you let your students know exactly what will be required of them prior to starting your class? If not, how is anyone to know when they have met your standards? And while you may not like the word "whim" how are your standards not based on your "whim" -- your eccentric view of how things are to be done?

Peter, I understand the word "Whim" to be a sudden desire or change of mind, especially one that's unusual or unexplained. What is whimsical about running a training program in a similar way as I've been doing it for 43 years? Obviously I've made changes to the way it's presented (a computer and no longer a chalkboard), but for the most part it hasn't changed. Whim is obviously not an accurate description.

Everyone who takes my diver training program understands that they will be challenged physically and mentally. They are told upfront the program requirements and the approximate number of hours in the training program. The program is divided into clear sections: waiver/medical, watermanship evaluation, Fins/Mask/Snorkel, SCUBA, Rescue, pre-OW check (full equipment in the pool / buoyancy test), OW, Chamber Dive and lecture/examinations (including additional exams on decompression, tides, rescue/first-aid, gas consumption/projection and dive planning). Confidence is built through buddy breathing, station breathing, blackout drills, valve drills, doff & don (FMS and SCUBA) and minor pool harassment exercises. A similar program has and is currently being used by the NAVY (although I've toned it down quite a bit from when I did that training). When I did my basic SCUBA training, it was more difficult than my current program (I was 12).

Certainly my training isn't for everyone. My criteria for certification is simple. Would I trust you to dive with my wife or one of my sons? If yes, I sign the certification. If not, I work with you until you pass the requirements. Why is it that you take such exception to this? Is it only that it doesn't conform with PADI's blueprint? Or do you not find it logical to improve the diver's initial capabilities?

 

[Edward3c]

Who do you feel is in the best position to assess the knowledge and skills necessary to dive a particular diving environment safely? An experienced on-site instructor, or a corporate executive thousands of miles away? An Instructor who increases instructional time (as an unpaid volunteer), or an Agency that stands to increase profit by lowing standards?



Peter, I understand the word "Whim" to be a sudden desire or change of mind, especially one that's unusual or unexplained. What is whimsical about running a training program in a similar way as I've been doing it for 43 years? Obviously I've made changes to the way it's presented (a computer and no longer a chalkboard), but for the most part it hasn't changed. Whim is obviously not an accurate description.

Everyone who takes my diver training program understands that they will be challenged physically and mentally. They are told upfront the program requirements and the approximate number of hours in the training program. The program is divided into clear sections: waiver/medical, watermanship evaluation, Fins/Mask/Snorkel, SCUBA, Rescue, pre-OW check (full equipment in the pool / buoyancy test), OW, Chamber Dive and lecture/examinations (including additional exams on decompression, tides, rescue/first-aid, gas consumption/projection and dive planning). Confidence is built through buddy breathing, station breathing, blackout drills, valve drills, doff & don (FMS and SCUBA) and minor pool harassment exercises. A similar program has and is currently being used by the NAVY (although I've toned it down quite a bit from when I did that training). When I did my basic SCUBA training, it was more difficult than my current program (I was 12).

Certainly my training isn't for everyone. My criteria for certification is simple. Would I trust you to dive with my wife or one of my sons? If yes, I sign the certification. If not, I work with you until you pass the requirements. Why is it that you take such exception to this? Is it only that it doesn't conform with PADI's blueprint? Or do you not find it logical to improve the diver's initial capabilities?

It was this attitude to maintain training along military lines that enabled PADI and others to so successfully enter the UK market.

From my experience most of those wanting to learn to dive, want to do just that. Distractions like snorkeling or rescue skills are not something the average punter wants (as they don't know what they don't know).

Once they've been in the sport a bit opinions usually change, then its too late for the elementary lessons.

BSAC had to adopt basis rescue in Ocean Diver (hence the restrictions on the grade), leaving the full skill set at Sports Diver.

Kind regards

 

[TheDeuce]

{snip}

The Rec I course is "at least fifty hours" and the student must be a non-smoker, physically/mentally fit and able to swim at least 300 yards in under fourteen minutes without stopping.

{snip}

OK, I'll bite. Why must your student be a non-smoker? If they perform to your standards in the classroom, pool, and open water, why do you care if they chain-huff Camels when they're back at home?




m.

 

[DCBC]

OK, I'll bite. Why must your student be a non-smoker? If they perform to your standards in the classroom, pool, and open water, why do you care if they chain-huff Camels when they're back at home? m.

This is a requirement of GUE not me. The UK Sports Diving Medical Committee has stated that smoking increases the risk of a spontaneous pneumothorax; indicating that in young men, "light" smoking increases the risk seven fold, moderate smoking 20-fold and heavy smoking 100-fold. However as long as the Student is medically cleared, they are good to go as far as I'm concerned. This is a recreational not a Commercial/Military program.

---------- Post added November 29th, 2012 at 11:38 AM ----------

It was this attitude to maintain training along military lines that enabled PADI and others to so successfully enter the UK market.

From my experience most of those wanting to learn to dive, want to do just that. Distractions like snorkeling or rescue skills are not something the average punter wants (as they don't know what they don't know).

Once they've been in the sport a bit opinions usually change, then its too late for the elementary lessons.

BSAC had to adopt basis rescue in Ocean Diver (hence the restrictions on the grade), leaving the full skill set at Sports Diver.

I agree Edward. Many of today's generation wants it cheap and wants it now. PADI provides a solution that satisfies this particular market. I certainly don't have a problem with PADI (or any other diving Agency) selling its solution to people who wish to benefit from what it offers. I do however have a problem when an Agency promotes its product to satisfy the needs of every diver, in every location worldwide without the need to change anything in its training program. This in my mind is similar to Mini selling itself as a solution for a family of eight. Chances are that it's not going to make the grade. Any training program has its limitations. Unfortunately, some refuse to believe this...

 

[Peter Guy]

DCBC, thank you for explaining YOUR "Basic Open Water" class. It is obviously very thorough. As Thal alluded to, you seem to have created your own "agency" but use NAUI (?) as a card of convenience. Good on ya.

I wonder how many other recreational training activities have been as stable over 40+ years as yours evidently is. In my other recreational activity, Dressage, there is constant tension between the "new style" and the "old style" with the "traditionalists" always bemoaning the lack of training of those who do it differently and use new training techniques and equipment.

 

[boulderjohn]

DCBC, thank you for explaining YOUR "Basic Open Water" class. It is obviously very thorough. As Thal alluded to, you seem to have created your own "agency" but use NAUI (?) as a card of convenience.

I am curious about this as well. If I recall correctly, the last we heard you were working for CMAS. Is that no longer true?

 

[DCBC]

John, I was the CMAS Canada National Director during its first year of operation (up until last January). I had wanted to retire, but agreed to undertake some of the groundwork. As CMAS Standards are dictated by each host Country (using the CMAS minimum guidelines), this became a large part of what I was involved in.

---------- Post added November 29th, 2012 at 04:13 PM ----------

DCBC, thank you for explaining YOUR "Basic Open Water" class. It is obviously very thorough. As Thal alluded to, you seem to have created your own "agency" but use NAUI (?) as a card of convenience. Good on ya.

Peter, I don't think that Thal was alluding to that at all. He is a NAUI Instructor and is well aware of NAUI's way of doing things.

NAUI (and many other Agencies) operate differently than PADI. Each Instructor's training program is unique to that Instructor. They do have some similarity between them, in-that all of the minimum requirements must be covered. The Instructor has the option of adding material that he feels is relevant to the local diving conditions and testing the student on that material. He may also teach in any sequence that suits his teaching style and the needs of the student.

I wonder how many other recreational training activities have been as stable over 40+ years as yours evidently is. In my other recreational activity, Dressage, there is constant tension between the "new style" and the "old style" with the "traditionalists" always bemoaning the lack of training of those who do it differently and use new training techniques and equipment.

That's interesting. I thought that the European riding masters developed a sequential training system that hadn't changed much over the years. I'm sure that the "new style" has its advantages, but suspect that the traditionalists don't take too kindly to be told that their tried and true method of instruction isn't necessary and all the information/skills truly required can be delivered in half the time...