What is more important for tec training, agency or instructor?

[MXGratefulDiver]

I've taken tech classes from two IANTD instructors. One was excellent ... the other was not so good.

I don't think you should ever base your choice on agency, unless you're looking at a particular type of class that only that particular agency offers. And even then I think finding a compatible instructor is far more important than the acronym on the certification card ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[Ste Wart]

I've taken tech classes from two IANTD instructors. One was excellent ... the other was not so good.

which is why you need to vet the instructor

I don't think you should ever base your choice on agency, unless you're looking at a particular type of class that only that particular agency offers. And even then I think finding a compatible instructor is far more important than the acronym on the certification card ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Well yes. And this is our right as a consumer.

However at least one such agency has decided not to allow this; if you wish to progress with them.

 

[boulderjohn]

which is why you need to vet the instructor



Well yes. And this is our right as a consumer.

However at least one such agency has decided not to allow this; if you wish to progress with them.

I have to agree. Crossing over is a piece of cake with some agencies, a major headache with some agencies, and not allowed with at least one.

 

[Odys]

Another consideration is an instructor that isn't afraid to tell you "you're not ready." There are risks you have to be willing to accept. You should be paying for training once you figure out which instructor/agency not certification. I've gone through courses where half (the instructors) failed. That's not to say they won't succeed eventually. It just means they need to go home and spend more time in the pool working on core skills.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Well yes. And this is our right as a consumer.

However at least one such agency has decided not to allow this; if you wish to progress with them.

Well, that is their right as a business ... and I understand their reasons for doing so.

However, it is also one reason why I decided to progress with different agencies (NAUI, TDI, IANTD and NSS-CDS).

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[boulderjohn]

However, it is also one reason why I decided to progress with different agencies (NAUI, TDI, IANTD and NSS-CDS).

And with those agencies, there would be no problem. I have certifications with two of them, and I might decide to pick up a certification with a third soon.

Put UTD and GUE in the mix, though, and you have some complications.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

And with those agencies, there would be no problem. I have certifications with two of them, and I might decide to pick up a certification with a third soon.

Put UTD and GUE in the mix, though, and you have some complications.

Not a problem ... I don't put UTD or GUE in the mix. If they have something I want to learn, I'll take a workshop ... or just go work it out with someone I know who was trained that way. Now that I'm diving sidemount it's really rather a moot point anyway ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[TSandM]

All right . . . enough veiled criticism.

GUE has a curriculum that is pieces of a whole . . . they do things differently. You don't just march into tech or cave training; you have to take a precursor class, Fundamentals. Until your basic skills in simple open water are up to snuff, you don't go on; it's that simple. Personally, I think that's fantastic. I am extremely glad that I was introduced to the required standard in a simple environment where I could practice until I was solid, and none of the basics were an issue when I went on.

But because of that construction (and UTD has something quite similar) it does not work to enter the GUE system above that point. It IS possible, although it's often said not to be; but GUE instuctors can make an exception for people who are ready to come into the system at a higher point. Between the standards differences and the highly standardized system, most people aren't, even if they think they are. It's not snobbery or elitism. The system is designed for a progression, and as I learned in my C2 class, even if you are a very talented and extremely skilled diver, if you aren't on the same page with procedures and communication, things just don't work well.

GUE is for people who think the system is appealing; UTD is for people who think THAT system is appealing. For either agency, progressing through THEIR classes makes the experience easier.

 

[boulderjohn]

All right . . . enough veiled criticism.

GUE is for people who think the system is appealing; UTD is for people who think THAT system is appealing. For either agency, progressing through THEIR classes makes the experience easier.

I don't think there was any veiled criticism. The only difference between what you wrote and what others (including me) wrote is that you provided details of the rationale for the policy.

This is something that potential tech divers need to know before they start their training. If they want to end up with UTD or GUE training, then they need to start there. In that case, the agency is very important factor for making a decision, more so than the instructor. With other agencies, the instructor is probably more important.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Yup ... what John said. I have no criticism of GUE or UTD ... in fact, I think I have a pretty extensive track record of defending them here on ScubaBoard.

I just decided ... after "testing the water" that they weren't the right choice for me ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)