What now?

[MXGratefulDiver]

Nobody walks on water.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[AndyNZ]

Would it not be that way with any agency? Including GUE and UDT? Don't tell me all their instructors are perfect, even the men in black can make mistakes

I don't know about UTD, so my following statement may be slightly inaccurate.

GUE are the only agency (caveat: that I am aware of) that has a 100% QA rate. Every student on every course must complete a QA questionnaire - else they don't get their certification. It's pretty easy to pick up on problem instructors and inconsistent delivery when you audit every course.

GUE instructors also have to re-qualify every three years by attending a workshop and/or teaching a course of the highest level they can under the watchful of an instructor trainer. Even the instructor trainers and instructor evaluators have to do this....

... GUE take consistency very seriously, and it shows.

It's all fun and games when it is PADI getting bashed, but poke a stick at someone else's sacred cow, and the high horse comes out.

I agree with Bob, there's no need to poke any sticks anywhere! What pi$$es me off about most of the PADI pokes is that they are based on mis-information and hearsay. I guess that PADI pokes are more common, they teach more classes and have more instructors, but that doesn't make them right.

 

[CZAR]

Well from what I hear GUE is very serious about what their instructors teach and how they teach it, so i'm glad there is a GUE intructor nearby.

Some of you have talked about how PADI, NAUI etc. have tech courses, which is nice and they are trying to fill a market for up and comming divers but I work with PADI all the time and there is just so much an instructor can change if he/she wishes to. I don't like that at all. I think there should be a set curriculum and that's that. I understand that PADI does have a "curriculum" but you all know as well as I do you will learn more if the instructor simply decides to teach you more and if said instructor doesn't want to it doesn't happen. For this reason I can't really take PADI seriously as a tech choice because of the nature of the dives I will be doing and skills I will be learning. This may just be a generalization of the whole company, I don't know, PADI may have very high standards for their tech instructors.

 

[aquaregia]

Choice #1: GUE Fundamentals
Choice #3: UTD Essentials of Tech

If these classes are [-]fundamentally[/-] [-]essentially[/-] pretty much the same, why do you recommend both? I can see perhaps a point in getting a different instructor's perspective, but I've never had anyone recommend that I should do a PADI or SSI OW to supplement my NAUI OW.

 

[Rainer]

I'm assuming he is suggesting the OP take *one* of these classes, not all of them.

While there are strong similarities, they certainly aren't equivalent.

If these classes are [-]fundamentally[/-] [-]essentially[/-] pretty much the same, why do you recommend both? I can see perhaps a point in getting a different instructor's perspective, but I've never had anyone recommend that I should do a PADI or SSI OW to supplement my NAUI OW.

 

[Bubbletrubble]

If these classes are [-]fundamentally[/-] [-]essentially[/-] pretty much the same, why do you recommend both? I can see perhaps a point in getting a different instructor's perspective, but I've never had anyone recommend that I should do a PADI or SSI OW to supplement my NAUI OW.

@aquaregia: Ummm. I think you misunderstood my post. I used the word "choice" to indicate that the OP should select ONE of the listed items.

FWIW, I wouldn't recommend that you supplement your NAUI OW class by taking a PADI or SSI OW class. That's downright silly. I see no equivalence between what I wrote and the example you cite.

 

[DaleC]

Czar, I may not be responding directly to your question (as I don't know you personally) but I will echo Mr Car's suggestion to just go out and dive.

There's a lot to be learned by just diving that cannot be covered in a course. The little tricks that only come about over time and making mistakes and learning from them. Sometimes divers are in a rush to reach the apex without first fully building the base (or assume taking the course is building the base) and they find themselves way out on a limb (or deep inside a hole), in trouble, without the street smarts to get themselves back out again.

Sometime ago I realised that the basic skill in all technical diving is having the ability to stay underwater and solve problems no matter what happens. In fact, that is what basically defines a technical dive (not having the ability to immediately ascend). Comfort like that comes from training true, but it also comes from repeated exposure... just diving.

There is also a lot to be said for being a well rounded, recreational diver. Perhaps I'm wrong but I think it used to be that divers served a longer apprenticeship simply as "divers" and then slowly moved into more technical fields. Now we seem to be fat with "vacation" divers and "technical" divers and thin on "well rounded" recreational divers. Could this be an unintended consequence of making tech diving instruction easy and "sexy"?

Another unintended consequence may be that a diver, having quickly spent $10,000+ on technical training and gear, may not feel doing the basic, but important, routine dives are worthwhile and they may push themselves too quickly to do more committed dives than they are really capable of. Getting your monies worth can be a powerful and potentially negative motivator.

Again, may not apply to you, just a thought in general.

 

[aquaregia]

@aquaregia: Ummm. I think you misunderstood my post. I used the word "choice" to indicate that the OP should select ONE of the listed items.

Ah yes, I see now. Do we have an emoticon to hide behind a tree or something?

FWIW, I wouldn't recommend that you supplement your NAUI OW class by taking a PADI or SSI OW class. That's downright silly. I see no equivalence between what I wrote and the example you cite.

Okay, so despite my blunder, I'm still confused about the differences. I did some searching on SB and they seemed like they were targeted at the same starting and finishing points. I don't want to hijack this thread though.

 

[TSandM]

Essentials and Fundamentals are similar classes. Essentials is a workshop, introducing a set of skills, but there is no pass/fail. Fundamentals is a little bit more extensive class, and it IS pass/fail. There are some small differences in procedure taught in the two classes as well. But they are very similar.

The reason I recommended the GUE class to the OP is that it will be easier to get done where he is. Both classes are very good and taught to similar, high standards.

 

[Rainer]

A better comparison would be:

GUE Primer = UTD Essentials of Rec
[These courses are both more concerned with skills development than team diving. Neither is a certification course.]

GUE Fundamentals (rec pass) = UTD Rec 2
[These courses are focused on skills, situational awareness, team diving, DIR, and include a nitrox certification.]

GUE Fundamentals (tech pass) = UTD Essentials of Tech
[Focus is on skills and team diving in preparation for eventual technical diving.]

Essentials and Fundamentals are similar classes. Essentials is a workshop, introducing a set of skills, but there is no pass/fail. Fundamentals is a little bit more extensive class, and it IS pass/fail. There are some small differences in procedure taught in the two classes as well. But they are very similar.

The reason I recommended the GUE class to the OP is that it will be easier to get done where he is. Both classes are very good and taught to similar, high standards.