Offering criticisms: "You're gonna die!"

[tbone1004]

@Hoag I tend to try to go chronologically when doing debriefs. I won't pull a student up and straight up chew them out unless they legitimately almost killed themselves. I try to do it as "tell me about your dive" and if there was something I didn't like, ask them if they felt that is how it should have gone and what they need to do to make it happen like that the next time. If they miss it, then they get critique from me, but thankfully I work mainly with college engineering students who very much know what they're supposed to do.

When @victorzamora and I critique each other? It's a bit more blunt but it usually comes after the person asks for critique about a particular subject and since we're both engineers there's no "sandwich" anything, just tell me what I messed up so I can fix it. Again, all depends on who your audience is and how they're going to accept it.
I don't do well with sandwich method because for me it feels like a waste of time. I know that if you aren't criticizing something, then I did it the way it was supposed to be done and we can move on. I don't need to be validated in my skills when you're trying to make something better. Just the way I learn and have always learned. It is however a struggle for me as an instructor because I have to remember that very few people are OK with that and I have to be a bit more delicate with most people. It's something I work on constantly and to me is still the biggest thing holding me back from being a great instructor like my mentors. Several other things as well, but I know until I can really do what @ofg-1 said and make them want to go on the trip to hell, then I know I'll never be "great" as an instructor.

 

[Hoag]

@tbone1004 I agree. While I did tend to debrief chronologically, I always try (sometimes I forgot) to give the person or group the chance to go first. I tried to open with some variation of "So, from your point of view, how do you think that went?"

One of the ironies that I have found is that in many cases, when offered the opportunity to critique themselves, the people who were the harshest were often the ones who actually did the best and the ones who thought everything went smoothly were the ones whose actions/skill levels needed the most improvement.

 

[lowviz]

Is this an analogy or are we really invited over to offer some constructive criticism? I wanna make sure I'm playing the "soup bowl" and not the "man".

Maybe a bit of both, it was meant as a metaphor.

I suppose you were right to be a bit suspicious of my motives, but I'm totally on the level (in this thread.)

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

I'm not sure it is limited to Scuba training. The trend (at least in the US) to give trophies to all competitors, provide "safe spaces", and categorize constructive criticism as bullying contributes.

Very true.
I see so much stuff in life to this effect.
My wife just retired from the school system. It got so bad with the new fresh out of college administrative employees that everything just ran amuck. Nobody ever gets fired for not doing their job, they could sit there all day and do nothing with no concequenses. As soon as somebody tells them to get off their ass and get to work it becomes “harrassment” and they file a grievance through their union. They’re used to being told how special they are from a very young age, they played soccer in leagues that didn’t keep score, they’ve been given everything they ever wanted. It takes 5 people now to do the work of one and they wonder why the district is 11 million in debt.

In art school, there is so little academic training anymore. Students mostly just slop, throw, apply paint in any random order they wish and told to do whatever they want so their creativity isn’t “damaged” in any way by formal “rules”. The result is a lot of garbage being produced with no structure or design sense, and it’s passed off as “genius”.
Most of the good art teachers who are actual working artists (who sell work) generally have their own independent classes and workshops.

In diving I helped out enough DM’ing with classes to decide teaching was not the path for me. Everybody passes and get’s their trophy. Many I saw that passed shouldn’t have IMO. But political correctness dictates that as long as they barely pass the skills, and I mean by the skin of their teeth, they were good to go. I couldn’t/wouldn’t be a party to that. I have nothing to do with dive classes anymore, I can’t watch it. Some of the crap I saw with OW students could be so easily corrected just from knowing what they are going through and personally finding a great self discovered way of resolving the same issue. But I wasn’t the instructor, and the instructor is the top authority, so I kept my mouth shut,

I dive independently now with people I know, and in fact I’m going to be mentoring a new guy (good friend of mine) who just certified not long ago. He WANT’S to be criticized and told what he needs to do to improve. During his last fun dive of his cert class I dived with him. He asked me to crit his diving, so at the end we went over everything I saw that needed improvement. He was all ears. I explained to him first off that egos and feelings have to place in diving, that where we will be diving in the future (Norcal) can be a very inhospitable place and the ocean doesn't care about your ego or your feelings.
I personally don’t think sugar coating things does anybody any good. But there is a difference between being friendly about it or being an A-hole about it. I pick a tone of neutrality and it seems to work for me.

And I think trying to protect everybody from every jerk on earth and jerks on internet forums is a futile effort. Better off just to form a thick skin and shine ‘em on.
Generally when someone acts out on a forum (insulated from direct physical confrontation) it tells you more about their deep rooted problems, not yours.

 

[RayfromTX]

And I think trying to protect everybody from every jerk on earth and jerks on internet forums is a futile effort. Better off just to form a thick skin and shine ‘em on.

Yet, the level to which the moderators on Scubaboard do just that is why this board is so much more civil than the others. Setting boundaries and establishing standards of acceptable behavior is important in keeping criticism from becoming a cage match. There are boards which are sanitized more and there are those that let chaos reign supreme.

I prefer civil discourse.

I also think that effective communication requires a receptive audience and on the internet it is easy to tune out insulting people that think they are trying to help. It is in fact more important to be careful of how we say things here than in a setting where you can read their body language and see that they have tuned out your approach and adjust on the fly. We do that in real life more than we are aware and the lack of that feedback can limit us online. Of course if we are only trying to impress ourselves with our posts then being effective is not important.

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

Yet, the level to which the moderators on Scubaboard do just that is why this board is so much more civil than the others. Setting boundaries and establishing standards of acceptable behavior is important in keeping criticism from becoming a cage match. There are boards which are sanitized more and there are those that let chaos reign supreme.

I prefer civil discourse.

I also think that effective communication requires a receptive audience and on the internet it is easy to tune out insulting people that think they are trying to help. It is in fact more important to be careful of how we say things here than in a setting where you can read their body language and see that they have tuned out your approach and adjust on the fly. We do that in real life more than we are aware and the lack of that feedback can limit us online. Of course if we are only trying to impress ourselves with our posts then being effective is not important.

I’ve also seen this board over moderated just based on conflicting opinions which resulted in posts getting removed that were not personal attacks on anyone per say.
They did it in the name of “protecting the young and impressionate from derogatory information”, but I think it would have been better to leave it and debate them with facts of why it might be detogatory so newer divers reading on could see why.
I still think this forum needs a sub forum called “The Ring”. If two people get into a pissing match and take a thread off topic it get’s moved to the ring, and the the two idiots can duke it out there.
I’m generally for less censorship because I believe it helps get to the truth about people much quicker and with less obstacles. But there has to be a line for sure.

 

[dmaziuk]

My wife just retired from the school system. It got so bad with the new fresh out of college administrative employees that everything just ran amuck. Nobody ever gets fired for not doing their job, they could sit there all day and do nothing with no concequenses. As soon as somebody tells them to get off their ass and get to work it becomes “harrassment” and they file a grievance through their union.

... and that's how the teachers union got kicked out of Wisconsin...

 

[dead dog]

I was taught the sandwich method by a friend who was really good at coaching children as well as working as an angel investor with new companies. You start with a good thing (bread), then the thing that could be improved (meat), and close with the desired good thing (bread). Never serve the meat alone.

He was really good at it, and was able to both take several mediocre raw skill youth teams to playoffs as well as move multiple start up companies to full IPOs.

I’m using this method with some success, but the hardest is when the meat is really s**t. He was the best at giving this as well.

I was taught to sandwich a criticism with two compliments. Give them a comment and then a criticism followed with another compliment.

 

[dmaziuk]

I’ve also seen this board over moderated just based on conflicting opinions which resulted in posts getting removed that were not personal attacks on anyone per say.
They did it in the name of “protecting the young and impressionate from derogatory information”

It is worse: we recently registered a website for a statistics prof here, the app is called "Bayes explorer". Before registering it I myself asked him if he wanted a site with "sex" in it. Orwell would have been proud.

 

[lowviz]

@chillyinCanada:

Sorry to post and run, I never finished the thought. Very, very busy here. Endless apologies.

Anyway, I was responding to @The Chairman 's post that he was getting a lot of how to give criticism and not much about what he asked. He wanted more on pointers that highlighted how to take criticism.

So, I like to cook. It is really hard to get valid criticism as to how someone likes or dislikes something I made. Everybody wants to say something nice. Don't get me wrong, I like that, but I learn by asking questions, being given insights, changing my thinking about something, and asking new questions. I seek valid criticism, not abuse.

Thus the metaphor for dive instruction.