I think I'd be in agreement here.
The "Official" SB Scuba Course?
- Thread starter Kingpatzer
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
I think I'd be in agreement here.
Kingpatzer,
Great thread, thank you. I would put more emphasis on UW Navigation skills and being able to do the safety stops without holding on to a line (buoyancy).
Great thread, thank you. I would put more emphasis on UW Navigation skills and being able to do the safety stops without holding on to a line (buoyancy).
Some thoughts:
Years ago when developing courses we were taught to start by developing "course goals", then to perform a "task analysis", and later to write "training objectives" or "learning objectives". There's lots of material available on the web for the quoted phrases. If you're not already familiar with such concepts, it could be useful to this effort to expose yourself (to the material - grin). It becomes a way of thinking.
Such background can be useful in discussions about the rationale for training recommendations. We'd find that some skills and knowledge are more important than others.
Example 1 assumes one of the course goals is to develop independent divers. Task analysis would quickly reveal that equipment assembly is necessary. From that one or more training objectives would be written.
Example 2 assumes that another course goal is to develop divers who will be relatively safe in the environment to which they are likely to be exposed. I belong to the famous agency that altered the swimming requirement to allow a snorkeling option. By applying task analysis, I chose to not offer that option to students. Many divers will travel on boats while not wearing their equipment. If they fall overboard, I want them to be able to swim, not just snorkel.
Example 3: Ditch and don is a fun exercise, but should it be a requirement for scuba? I don't see the scuba task for which this is a prerequisite. However, the community might want to include the skill to support a goal of developing student comfort and confidence.
If we analyze each objective, they might fall into categories ranging from essential to nice-to-have.
One challenge is measuring student performance. Demonstrating the ability to swim a certain distance is relatively straight forward; but other skills such as using hand signals quickly gets into somewhat non-specific terms such as unambiguous and visible. My agency uses the term mastery. Another uses the loved ones test. A certain degree of judgment is necessary.
From a quick glance at the wiki, it appears some early contributors are working toward a course goal of developing excellent divers. While this is admirable, I'm not sure it is practical. Perhaps a goal of developing safe divers would be sufficient.
Years ago when developing courses we were taught to start by developing "course goals", then to perform a "task analysis", and later to write "training objectives" or "learning objectives". There's lots of material available on the web for the quoted phrases. If you're not already familiar with such concepts, it could be useful to this effort to expose yourself (to the material - grin). It becomes a way of thinking.
Such background can be useful in discussions about the rationale for training recommendations. We'd find that some skills and knowledge are more important than others.
Example 1 assumes one of the course goals is to develop independent divers. Task analysis would quickly reveal that equipment assembly is necessary. From that one or more training objectives would be written.
Example 2 assumes that another course goal is to develop divers who will be relatively safe in the environment to which they are likely to be exposed. I belong to the famous agency that altered the swimming requirement to allow a snorkeling option. By applying task analysis, I chose to not offer that option to students. Many divers will travel on boats while not wearing their equipment. If they fall overboard, I want them to be able to swim, not just snorkel.
Example 3: Ditch and don is a fun exercise, but should it be a requirement for scuba? I don't see the scuba task for which this is a prerequisite. However, the community might want to include the skill to support a goal of developing student comfort and confidence.
If we analyze each objective, they might fall into categories ranging from essential to nice-to-have.
One challenge is measuring student performance. Demonstrating the ability to swim a certain distance is relatively straight forward; but other skills such as using hand signals quickly gets into somewhat non-specific terms such as unambiguous and visible. My agency uses the term mastery. Another uses the loved ones test. A certain degree of judgment is necessary.
From a quick glance at the wiki, it appears some early contributors are working toward a course goal of developing excellent divers. While this is admirable, I'm not sure it is practical. Perhaps a goal of developing safe divers would be sufficient.
I have refrained from this discussion and even swore I would not participate, but Sam's (Knotical's) fine post has pushed me.
Curriculum design is my profession, and I wanted to stay out of this because I sensed it would go nowhere going as it is going. Perhaps I can push a little theory out that might be helpful.
In modern curriculum design, we follow a concept best described by Wiggins and McTigue in Understanding by Design. To put it as simply as possible, you follow a process that is pretty much the reverse of what is happening here but is consistent with what Sam wrote.
As Covey put it in one of his 7 habits of highly effective people, you begin with the end in mind.
What are you trying to accomplish? What level of diver are you trying to produce? What are the skills required to be a diver at that level? It is downright poisonous to talk about specific instructional practices at this point, because doing so distracts you from the goal and makes you substitute a favorite instructional activity for the goal.
The next step is assessment. What will it take to demonstrate that the student has met those standards?
Once you have designed the assessments, then you can begin talking about the instructional processes that will prepare the students to be successful on those assessments.
If you start with instructional activities, as this thread is doing, you end up in the kind of chaos that marks too many of the courses being taught in schools today, for the tradition in education had been the opposite of what I just described. People start with instructional activities (usually pet lessons) with no real thought as to why they are valuable, then figure out how to assess what they have taught. Classrooms throughout the world are full of meaningless instructional activities because the instructor has never taken the time to go through a meaningful curricular process.
If I were managing this thread, I would disallow any comments or suggestions about activities until the group had decided what level of diver they wanted to produce and what skills were needed to be at that level.
Curriculum design is my profession, and I wanted to stay out of this because I sensed it would go nowhere going as it is going. Perhaps I can push a little theory out that might be helpful.
In modern curriculum design, we follow a concept best described by Wiggins and McTigue in Understanding by Design. To put it as simply as possible, you follow a process that is pretty much the reverse of what is happening here but is consistent with what Sam wrote.
As Covey put it in one of his 7 habits of highly effective people, you begin with the end in mind.
What are you trying to accomplish? What level of diver are you trying to produce? What are the skills required to be a diver at that level? It is downright poisonous to talk about specific instructional practices at this point, because doing so distracts you from the goal and makes you substitute a favorite instructional activity for the goal.
The next step is assessment. What will it take to demonstrate that the student has met those standards?
Once you have designed the assessments, then you can begin talking about the instructional processes that will prepare the students to be successful on those assessments.
If you start with instructional activities, as this thread is doing, you end up in the kind of chaos that marks too many of the courses being taught in schools today, for the tradition in education had been the opposite of what I just described. People start with instructional activities (usually pet lessons) with no real thought as to why they are valuable, then figure out how to assess what they have taught. Classrooms throughout the world are full of meaningless instructional activities because the instructor has never taken the time to go through a meaningful curricular process.
If I were managing this thread, I would disallow any comments or suggestions about activities until the group had decided what level of diver they wanted to produce and what skills were needed to be at that level.
OP
- Messages
- 1,938
- Reaction score
- 168
- # of dives
- 500 - 999
Those are great points guys. I have added links specifically to these posts as well as pages for goals and assessment.
I expect that as an open endeavor, there will be a bit of both top down and bottom up work going on. But if we have people working on both aspects of things, it may end up quite surprising to find that they meet in the middle more often than not.
I've worked on a few open source software projects that ended up being extremely well done but which had people working on the oddest bits at all the wrong times. To make that work it is necessary to both allow for people to contribute where they feel compelled to contribute, even when it isn't the way a traditional software project manager would plan it; but it is also necessary to have a few people who really do know a thing or two about "the right way" offering advice and guidance.
To that end -- please take part! Give us hints and pointers and toss out ideas. Jump over to the wiki and show us what a good goal statement or assessment analysis looks like. The worst that can happen is that it ends up meeting your expectations and failing miserably. The best that can happen is that you're part of something enjoyable and maybe modestly useful to someone.
I expect that as an open endeavor, there will be a bit of both top down and bottom up work going on. But if we have people working on both aspects of things, it may end up quite surprising to find that they meet in the middle more often than not.
I've worked on a few open source software projects that ended up being extremely well done but which had people working on the oddest bits at all the wrong times. To make that work it is necessary to both allow for people to contribute where they feel compelled to contribute, even when it isn't the way a traditional software project manager would plan it; but it is also necessary to have a few people who really do know a thing or two about "the right way" offering advice and guidance.
To that end -- please take part! Give us hints and pointers and toss out ideas. Jump over to the wiki and show us what a good goal statement or assessment analysis looks like. The worst that can happen is that it ends up meeting your expectations and failing miserably. The best that can happen is that you're part of something enjoyable and maybe modestly useful to someone.
Last edited:
Fully competent diver able to help himself and his buddy within reasonable limits of recreational diving, does not need help or guidance from an instructor or DM. I think we are looking at something like a PADI Rescue Diver with intros to deep, uw navigation, drift, smb deployment and equipment specialist...
Fully competent diver able to help himself and his buddy within reasonable limits of recreational diving, does not need help or guidance from an instructor or DM. I think we are looking at something like a PADI Rescue Diver with intros to deep, uw navigation, drift, smb deployment and equipment specialist...
Let's try describing our OW student in main lines and then drill down from there.
How about this (in no particular order):
A beginning scuba diver should be competent in the following:
- diving on open circuit scuba to depths of 30 meters on air in non-overhead and within the no decompression limits.
- showing competence and calm handling in identifying and solving common equipment related problems such as a lost or flooded mask, a broken fin strap, leaking or flooded regulator etc.
- showing competence and calm handling in identifying and solving common physically related issues under water such as dizziness, fatigue, blockage in an air space, nausia and so forth.
- showing competence and good judgment in the evaluation of conditions and making a diveplan appropriate for the conditions, team ability, and the gear being used.
- showing competence and effective handling of "emergencies". This includes, but is not limited to self-rescue techniques, rescue of another diver under water and on the surface and knowledge of local EMS procedures etc.
- consistent control over buoyancy within a bandwidth of 1 metre and the ability to hover at will for extended periods of time in order to avoid contact with the bottom with respect to protecting sensitive marine life
- shows effective finning technique appropriate for minimizing silting and to protect sensitive marine life
- has the ability to plan and execute a dive in various environments, including salt and fresh water, limited vizibility, (night or turbid water), currents up to 2kt, surface conditions consistent with winds up to Bft force 5.
- the ability to navigate a straight out-and-back navigation pattern over a total distance of 300m or 40min with a deviation of less than 20 metres from the start/exit point.
- the ability to swim continuously for 20 minutes
- understands the physiology, biomechanics, and physics at work while scuba diving
- understands the workings of the haldane decompression model and it's implications for dive planning
out of time. Can we build on this?
R..
Is this an either or? Swimming skills increase watermanship ability and aid in diver confidence. This is especially true when a diver is confronted with a rescue situation.
Really good. Not sure about SALT and FRESH water. To be able to do it is OK but would you actually expect them to dive in both to be certified?
OP
- Messages
- 1,938
- Reaction score
- 168
- # of dives
- 500 - 999
Similar threads
