The basic scuba course - enough training?

[drrich2]

It was my understanding that the goal of OW training was to produce an independent diver, one who possessed a certain "mastery" of basic skills. Meaning they didn't require too much guidance or hand holding.

I thought the PADI "Scuba Diver" course was for those that only wanted to dive with a guide.

That's where I think a lot of controversy lies, particularly regarding independent navigation skill. A lot of new OW divers have adequate mastery to dive without much hand-holding or guidance in a quarry or shore diving in Bonaire. If they only have a Scuba Diver cert., they can't do either without a guide. Now, that same diver might be fine for a guided dive in Cozumel or St. Thomas, but not an unguided dive charter off the coast of California. The OW cert. lets the diver decide, and the Scuba Diver cert. does not.

And ironically, I think many divers never get 'good' with independent navigation, or at least may be diving a long time before that happens. When the topic came up in the past, one 'sensitive point' I recall is some people are avid divers, and have a spouse who's a casual diver, and the spouse gets certified and dives as a buddy but never cultivates good navigation skills (and may refuse to). People may decry basic recreational standards all the day long, but tend to stop short of "Yeah, and my wife has no business being certified, either!"

Richard.

 

[Peter Guy]

Regarding how much does/should an "Open Water Diver" need to know -- how thorough the training?

I don't have an answer to that -- BUT, I do want to just pass along things I've seen this past week.

I think everyone (well perhaps not Thal!) would say I'm a "competent" diver -- that is, I can put together a dive plan and pretty confidently dive just about anywhere down to, oh say, 150 feet. I know that puts me way out on the "right" side of the bell shaped curve.

Last Saturday I went out on a Maui dive boat to Molokini and I'm pretty sure I was the most experienced paying customer on board. The others in "my group" were all "typical Open Water Divers" in that they pretty much only dove while on vacation. My "buddy" said he does about 10 dives a year -- all in the space of his one week trip to Maui (or whatever tropical place he is visiting that year). I was pretty interested in watching how they all did.

The quick answer? They all did fine -- although there were no emergencies and nothing untoward happened so who knows how they would have responded to a blown neck O-ring or a free flow or if a shark had come up and ripped their mask off! But, for the dives we did, they pretty much stayed in the water column, they didn't crash into the coral and, most of all, they ALL had a wonderful time.

Could they have been better trained? Of course. But to what end?

What is the purpose of the "Basic Scuba Course?" (Which is the topic of this thread, is it not?) Is it not to provide people with the "Basic Skills" needed to enjoy the dive they are going to make?

I know there are some people who get their OW cards who don't come away with the "Basic Skills" needed to enjoy the dive they are going to make and for those instructors who sign those cards, shame. BUT, I really do think, that for the vast majority of people, they do get those "Basic Skills" and they do enjoy their dives and then they go on with their lives.

Basic Scuba is, in reality, pretty basic.

 

[Pullmyfinger]

You are correct there, Peter.

The basic skills are established. My issue is that if most dive agencies are sort of adhering to the same rough standards on what an open water student is taught, then why the big difference in what actually taught? And how much time is spent teaching?

As for the differences in the initial training that my wife and I had, there were big differences.

Clearly my (OW) instructor wasn't near as thorough as the instructor my wife had. He simply was not as good of an instructor.
I'm sure that my instructor and those like him are convinced that they are providing training that is equal to the training that my wife received, but they are not.
The thing that bugs me is when I read post here (such as the other threads on this topic) is that the short/express dive certification specialists on here will start pitching the idea that their short course is the equal to the more thorough and longer courses that are taught by the YMCA instructor that I later went to.
Well, I know different. I have experience with both ends of the spectrum.

There was a big difference between what the divers in my class looked like on our boat dive vs. what the open water divers looked like on the YMCA dive boat.

The proof is in the product, it's as simple as that.

Minimum standards and basic standard are fine. If some agencies/instructors want to only teach the basics that's fine.....just don't try and convince me (not directed at you literally) that the quality of instruction is anywhere near the equal to the more lengthy courses that are being taught out there by others.
The express course instructors will start arguing that the longer courses aren't necessary, that they're too long, or contain elements that aren't needed, etc.
The proof can be found simply by looking at the differences in the competence and confidence of the students produced by each method.

The OP mentioned that he was going to provide training that consisted of more in the water snorkling skills followed by more dives, as well as less reliance on eLearning.

He wanted to know what we thought about that.

I think his course will be superior to the ones out there that only focus on the minimum and no more.
There probably need to be more instructors and courses like that out there.

I get your point about the classes in the good 'ol days not containing instruction on modern equipment because it wasn't around then. That's all good.

But when did being thorough, and offering a more lengthy and challenging course start to go out of style?

For me....never. I'll take the long course (old school) any day.

-Mitch

I know the difference.

 

[lowviz]

..............//.......As a new dive shop owner I will be increasing the pool sessions from 5 to 8, bring back basic snorkeling skills, use eLearning as a tool and not a substitute and commit to creating more comfortable and safer divers. Its crazy, but it just might work!

Am I nuts? Doomed to failure? Whadda ya' think?

Thanks,
Jeff

No reason you can't do both.

1) Offer cards to those that just want a quick cert to dive the tropics. Cash flow. Why pi$$ off paying customers?

2) Encourage local diving. It still amazes me how much the dive community doesn't know about local ocean diving. You could find your niche here but you will have to work your students to develop their specialties. Dive with your students!

Hunting, Fish and bugs -very different. Cap't Paul Hepler. Snap quiz. Anyone ever heard of him? Name his boat. clue: -He's a "Johnny-come-lately". Capt'n Rich is making a good "go" at this too. Don't forget the Sea Lion.

Wrecking, Brass vs. china crowd. Many good boats... Pirates!

Diggers, Me. Drifting along the bottom looking at whatever the ocean is willing to tease me with. Haven't been disappointed yet. Capt'n Al and Lakeland in the dead of Winter. My fav boat Indy II, Capt'n Dan.

Photographers and videographers, The ocean is full of them. One of the best: Down too long in the midnight sea…

Just divers, Me again. Mind blown by the whole experience of being at the bottom of the Mid-Atlantic and just doing a dive. I'll get serious next time, I promise...

 

[lowviz]

Spoiler for "quiz" in my last post. Paul Hepler | Herb Segars Photography Blog

 

[DevonDiver]

It's a comparison of apples vs oranges.

Some agencies offer a modular approach. They provide cheaper, shorter courses with limited scope, in a continuing syllabus of education.

Other agencies offer a more inclusive approach. More expensive, wider scope courses.

The diver decides their desired 'end state' and can achieve that through either means.

Is there a difference between doing three 4-dive courses that cost $300 each... or doing a single 12-dive course that costs $900?

 

[Peter Guy]

DD asked

Is there a difference between doing three 4-dive courses that cost $300 each... or doing a single 12-dive course that costs $900?

And the answer is, Maybe!

What would make them essentially the same is IF the student and instructor(s) in the first instance had a real plan to integrate the training so that the student came out of the 12th dive with the same set of skills contemplated in the 12-dive course. I know that sounds simplistic but the reality is, the 12-dive course assumes a program which fits and uses each dive to support the next. The 3 course offering SHOULD DO THE SAME but I'm afraid too often does not.

Hey, everyone, I am NOT saying that someone who takes a minimalist course will come out with the same skill and knowledge level as one who takes a (for instance) GUE "Basic Open Water" class. They are two different things. I am saying that there is no reason why a student can not be taught Basic Open Water Recreational Diving Skills in the "minimalist" type course such that the student would be comfortable doing a dive with an outfit off of Molokini and then Wailea Point.

 

[danvolker]

You guys are forgetting that some students are NATURALLY, much better divers than others...Everyone will not be a good diver, anymore than everyone can be taught to pitch a no hitter, or blast down moguls on "Look MA" AT Vail.....Everyone is not athletic enough to be optimal at diving, all athletes do not possess the right mental components to be good divers, and not all students will spend hour after hour, for years prior to diving, thinking and dreaming about diving--so much so, that when they get into cvlass, it is like they had always done this...

My point is, take someone who has the "optimal diver gene" , and they should become a good diver almost no matter what class they take. Poor peer exposure could get them bad habits, but that is a threat to students from any class. All graduated students "need" to get lucky and find "good divers" to dive with and buddy with.

I think we try to get so many people into diving, that we get a lot in, that have no business at all being divers...at least not in the sense that they were divers int he 60's or 70's...In the 60's or 70's, divers "were adventurers".....they were tough, could handle harsh conditions, and enjoy them. Taking diving to the "mainstream" has had consequences.
We are going to have "never-evers" diving today.........I don't think I will blame this on the dive Industry as much as I would relate this to the Culture that we live in.
I think they need to be categorized, and handled on diveboats appropriately. Maybe new divers on a boat, have to "prove" they are not a "never-ever", in order to be allowed to dive the way "real divers" are allowed to dive

 

[DevonDiver]

And the answer is, Maybe!

What would make them essentially the same is IF the student and instructor(s) in the first instance had a real plan to integrate the training so that the student came out of the 12th dive with the same set of skills contemplated in the 12-dive course. I know that sounds simplistic but the reality is, the 12-dive course assumes a program which fits and uses each dive to support the next. The 3 course offering SHOULD DO THE SAME but I'm afraid too often does not.

That's true.

The modular program provides flexibility and economy, at the possible expense of continuity.

That said, each 'level' of the modular program has well-defined boundaries and (recommended) limitations. If those boundaries are respected, then there is no real issue with the shorter training structure.

The biggest problem arises when those courses are not viewed as 'steps'. This is one of the reasons I disagree with cynical views that mock the PADI ('put another dollar in') course structuring.

If you opt for a modular course program, then it's short-sighted to be cynical about the need to progress through the modular structure to reach complete end-state.

Of course, PADI regularly get criticised for promoting 'continuing education' and for placing recommended limits on divers. They don't help themselves in that respect by portraying the OW course as a 'complete diving qualification'... it isn't... it's the bare minimum of core skills. In that respect, there is a discrepancy. They promote the OW course as 'all you need' to be a diver... but then promote continued education as a fundamental recommendation. Those approaches don't really mesh IMHO.

Other agencies may offer 'more complete/total' courses, but they do so at a price. Assuming that the instructor is good... I don't think there's much to differentiate courses from any agency, based on an equivalent commitment of time and money from the student.

 

[danvolker]

That's true.

The modular program provides flexibility and economy, at the possible expense of continuity.

That said, each 'level' of the modular program has well-defined boundaries and (recommended) limitations. If those boundaries are respected, then there is no real issue with the shorter training structure.

The biggest problem arises when those courses are not viewed as 'steps'. This is one of the reasons I disagree with cynical views that mock the PADI ('put another dollar in') course structuring.

If you opt for a modular course program, then it's short-sighted to be cynical about the need to progress through the modular structure to reach complete end-state.

Of course, PADI regularly get criticised for promoting 'continuing education' and for placing recommended limits on divers. They don't help themselves in that respect by portraying the OW course as a 'complete diving qualification'... it isn't... it's the bare minimum of core skills. In that respect, there is a discrepancy. They promote the OW course as 'all you need' to be a diver... but then promote continued education as a fundamental recommendation. Those approaches don't really mesh IMHO.

Other agencies may offer 'more complete/total' courses, but they do so at a price. Assuming that the instructor is good... I don't think there's much to differentiate courses from any agency, based on an equivalent commitment of time and money from the student.

I'd agree here...and add that this Open Water cert should be referred to as a " Learner's Permit".