Master Diver - worth getting?

[Joneill]

I am writing this post as a companion to and a comparison to my previous post, #35.

You have to understand the evolution of training, the evolution that includes the Master Scuba Diver certification

Back in the mid 1960s, there were precious few scuba agencies, and those agencies generally offered a whopping 2 certification courses: Diver and Instructor. Those few agencies noticed that there was a HUGE dropout rate after divers got certified, and the feeling was that offering the divers exposure to more kinds of diving and more advanced training would help that situation. The first agency to act on this idea was Los Angeles County, which created the Advanced Open Water Diver program, which offered some more advanced training, but mostly offered the students experience dives with a variety of kinds of diving in the hope of sparking their interest. NAUI, which was created by and led by people who had been in the LA county program, followed suit. PADI and the other new agencies followed soon after that.

Before long, the logical extension of that idea--specialty classes--came into existence. That idea offered divers the opportunity to take specific classes on specific topics that they wanted to learn. As an incentive for them to take those classes, the Master Diver program was created. It was based on the Boy Scout model--earn a certain number of merit badges and you get a higher rank.

When the master Diver program was created, there weren't many more than 5 specialty classes in existence. There was no formal cave training. There was no formal technical diver training. A diver who had earned 5 specialties had pretty much exhausted the possibilities of scuba instruction without becoming an instructor.

As I indicated in my last post, we live in a very different world today. In comparison to what is available, someone who has achieved the Master Scuba Diver rating is really just scratching the surface of instructional possibilities. Back then, a Master Scuba Diver was at the top of the heap.

Thanks - that puts perspective on why the MSD title feels a little overstated today.

 

[TMHeimer]

I just measured my stack of certification cards. It measures 2 inches. That stack does not contain the 5 specialty cards I need to qualify.

It contains MANY cards allowing me to TEACH specialties, but you don't have to have taken the actual course and earned the specialty in order to teach it. You can get your required knowledge and skills in a number of ways. For example, I am certified to teach the Cavern Diver specialty, for which I had to have cave certification, and mine is through NSS-CDS.

I have taken a lot of courses in my diving career, and I have learned a lot. Once you get into technical diving, the number of cards you get (and have to get, BTW), is amazing. If you open your eyes to the full range of scuba instruction, the possibilities can be overwhelming.

Yeah, something I was figuring out a while back---You could be a MSDT (or higher) yet not be a MSD, no? You can train one.....interesting. Then again, you can be a great private clarinet teacher and have no teaching certificate.

 

[boulderjohn]

Yeah, something I was figuring out a while back---You could be a MSDT (or higher) yet not be a MSD, no? You can train one.....interesting. Then again, you can be a great private clarinet teacher and have no teaching certificate.

this sort of thing happens all the time in the world of education.

• A certified English teacher can teach any subject in a high school English program, such a s semantics, even with no training in it whatsoever. At least with the specialties you are supposed to have gotten the training somewhere.
• History teachers frequently teach subjects they never studied themselves previously. History covers so much territory no one can have taken every possible course.
• Science is constantly growing. I was originally a chemistry major. A modern high school chemistry course is very different from (and much harder than) the one I took.
• College professors frequently teach courses that focus on specific areas of their expertise without every having taken that specific course themselves. If they have created that expertise themselves, such as after publishing a book on a new topic, they can create the course and teach it. The same thing happens with specialties--instructors can create distinctive specialties that allow them to teach courses not in the standard list.

 

[Saniflush]

this sort of thing happens all the time in the world of education.

• History teachers frequently teach subjects they never studied themselves previously.

All of my history teachers had the first name "Coach".

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

Almost as hokey as a guy with a sole proprietorship using "CEO" as his job title.

Makes more sense to say "Senior <whatever>"

 

[boulderjohn]

All of my history teachers had the first name "Coach".

I'm sorry to say that is often true. If you graduated from college, there was a good chance you had enough credits in the social sciences to qualify to be a social studies teacher. If you had to get your coach five classes to teach in a day, you could always find some place in the Social Studies department. In most states, if you are only teaching a couple of courses in a subject, you don't have to be certified to teach it--you just have to have have the minimum number of credit hours in the discipline.

I once taught in an English Department that had 21 English teachers. Of that group, 5 had been hired to coach basketball (and teach English on the side) but had eventually been fired from the coaching job. Once fired from their coaching position, they could not be fired from the teaching position without due cause, and since they had, of course, always gotten rave reviews as teachers while they were coaching, it would be impossible to claim that they had suddenly gone from outstanding to incompetent as teachers on the date their coaching time was over. (BTW, I, too, was a basketball coach, but that is not why I was hired as an English teacher.)

 

[TMHeimer]

Yes. A Manitoba Teachers Cert. allows you to teach ANYTHING. And administrators sure make use of that.

 

[Bogtrotter]

Yes of course it's worth it if the instruction is sound, it is all additional diving experience. I think what most seasoned divers object to or roll their eyes at is the word 'Master' on the card. If it simply indicated say Level III or IV Recreational Diver then far fewer would be griping.

 

[Damselfish]

Yes of course it's worth it if the instruction is sound, it is all additional diving experience. I think what most seasoned divers object to or roll their eyes at is the word 'Master' on the card. If it simply indicated say Level III or IV Recreational Diver then far fewer would be griping.

this is true, I think many people have the same objection to "Advanced" Open Water. But it's also a shame that they could at least make Master Diver more meaningful so easily by having required specialties and not just counting anything.

One problem with the wording is that while some (hopefully most) divers realize the cards and associated training does not actually make them advanced or a master, some may not get that. Which can range from being funny, to annoying, to dangerous.

 

[Newdiv]

One problem with the wording is that while some (hopefully most) divers realize the cards and associated training does not actually make them advanced or a master, some may not get that. Which can range from being funny, to annoying, to dangerous.

Problem is that some people have no humility or humbleness and believe the words actually apply to them.