Diving Education Today

[Diver0001]

By shifting the training paradigm away from CA to the tropics, we have created standards less suitable for competency.

Less suitable for competency in non-tropical environments, yes.

I train in conditions that are arguably pretty bad but standards don't force me to undertrain students. Standards just give me a framework--a list of skills they need to learn--and I use that to train students to dive in our conditions.

Where I would fail would be if I tried to train students with, for example, the level of situational awareness they get in a resort course (namely, zero). If I did that they would be pretty much unable to dive locally. They wouldn't even be able to make a descent without losing their buddy before they got to the bottom.

Do standards stop me from teaching to local conditions? No. Not at all. Do they offer sufficient breadth and depth for local conditions? No. I have to focus energy on the big-3 for local diving. Do standards stop me from teaching the big-3. No. I can teach them what they need to know for local diving and I can make them do as many dives in OW as I see fit for them to get used to conditions, etc. (ie. I can set the bar as high as I think it needs to be as long as I can argue that it's being done to prepare them for local conditions).

The issue with standards with respect to our conditions is *not* that it stops a decent instructor from teaching a good course. The issue, if there is one, is that a completely clueless instructor might not see that students need more attention in some areas than the "minimum" requirement. Once again, if it's required for local diving (like the Big-3) the agency doesn't object, but the instructor has a personal responsibility to teach his students what they need to know.

I keep coming back to this point, which is that the quality of a scuba course has much more to do with instructor competence than the list of skills the student is required to learn. Standards have a marginal impact on the quality of training. Blaming the agencies for a perceived quality issue is to exonerate the instructors, which is where the quality is deliverd (or not).

R..

 

[DCBC]

I didn't say I had any respect for the current system nor could I be a teacher under those circumstances.

That's of course one of my points. Why cannot things we done in a manner that would generate a sense of respect for the current system? Wouldn't this be preferable?

I'm sure there are plenty of things that you currently do or have done that are just as complicated (or uncomplicated) as scuba that you have done with no or little instruction.

Yes. Many of these, like mountaineering have been unnoticed by the majority as they cater to a relatively small number of individuals. What you can accomplish however, depends upon your physical ability and frame of mind.

In recent years there have been purists (some would call them elitists) that believe that people who are dragged-up to Everest on oxygen are "cheating themselves" and cannot be considered to be on the same plane as mountaineers who summit as a result of their own skills-sets and teamwork.

This is a similar argument in diving. People use technology and mixed-gas to easily accomplish dives that divers have spend years to accomplish on air. No big deal. Technology balances off what people could only accomplish through effort.

In 2005, a Lama helicopter landed on the summit of Everest. Now a person can go for a helicopter ride, take photos and "conquer the mountain." They can stand in the same footprints of climbers who have spent years getting there.

Technology can take you there, but it's not really the same experience. That's what the helicopter passengers will never know. They can argue that they only need technology, they don't need to learn anything to accomplish their goal, but they have missed the journey of getting there. That's what is being lost. It's an artificial experience.

In another vein, can't any instructor currently teach anything that they want to? They may not be able to test or fail someone for just anything but can't you or any other instructor teach to any standard that you want to right now?

Any Instructor can currently teach anything they like. This varies with the certification agency:

1/ A PADI Instructor can add to the PADI program. He cannot however withhold certification for anything outside of the PADI program and must certify the student if the minimum standards are met.

There is some confusing (at least in my mind) about liability. As a PADI Instructor I was always leery about if I would be covered with my liability insurance for teaching outside the PADI program. The reasoning for this was that PADI had "optional skills" that a Instructor could teach as part of the program. I felt if I would be covered for everything why bother to mention some skills that were optional? Considering that this was something that could be contended, I chose to teach other certifications and certify PADI only as a secondary certification.

2/ All other certifications that I'm an Instructor for allow me to add whatever I feel necessary to the program. Certification is at my discretion as long as the minimum standards are passed. Just because a student passes the minimums does not mean they pass. Added skills are on-par with those in the training manual for certification purposes.

 

[rstofer]

Regardless of the number of diving deaths per year, I think it's fair to say that one is too many (especially if it's yourself or a member of your family). Too many deaths are the result of poor fitness and diver error. My contention is that by improving the training a diver receives, death and injury can be mitigated. I'm sure there is much that can be done...


http://www.thescubasite.com/Latest-Scuba-Diving-News/scuba-diving-accident-statistics

The problem is primarily fitness. There's a reason that the older divers are dying and it is primarily cardiovascular.

With your proposal, all unfit people would be excluded and, absolutely, the number of fatalities would drop. But each of those people that had a fatal cardiovascular event KNEW that it was a possibility. Come on, don't tell me that they didn't have some indication before they decided to dive! They at least must have known they were unfit!

Shortness of breath, angina, light-headedness, something, told them that they could be at risk. But they chose to dive anyway. And it's their choice.

Heck, it's MY choice too! I know that I am at risk for a fatal event and choose to dive anyway. I put certain limits on the type of diving I will do but the risk doesn't disappear.

We're not losing that many young, fit, reasonably trained divers. We're losing risk takers: cave and wreck divers, deep divers, tech divers. And we're losing average, but older, divers to (presumptively) heart attacks.

I don't agree that one death or even 100 deaths is a big deal. People get killed by lightning while playing golf. Like they didn't know there was a storm? Look up! And people actually VOLUNTEER to drive a car!

According to your linked statistics, the fatal accident rate is 1 in 200,000 dives. That is essentially ZERO.

This whole thing is a straw argument. There is no problem that needs solving and the sport today is a lot different than it was 50 years ago. So what?

We can raise the standards (somehow) and exclude the vast majority of students but to what end? To make the sport more elite? If you can't do push-ups while wearing your rig you are unworthy? Nonsense.

There is no problem.

Richard

 

[rstofer]

Hey Richard. You're correct training was divided piece-meal.

In the mid to late 80's I was contacted by PADI. At the time I owned a LDS which was a PADI Training Facility. I was told that I was doing it wrong. I could make more money by teaching to minimum standards.

It was explained to me that if I sold a student an OW program, Advanced, Rescue and Deep specialty, I could quadruple my income. Why teach them this in one course? That's why the system was set-up the way it was. To generate mote money.

Everybody wins this way. PADI would sell more publications and 400% more certifications. The student would get the same training. The shop would rake in the cash. Don't you see!?

I asked PADI only one question. After the first program, the student would only be partially trained. How about if they didn't come back? PADI just told me not to worry about it; that's the students choice.

The problem I have with this is that as an Instructor, people come to me and place their trust in me. I can't just pass this off; I take this responsibility seriously. I had to make a choice; which for me was either to sell my soul to the beast for profit, or do the right thing. I chose the later.

I got my training in the late '80s. I did a lot of reading, I worked hard in class, I ate it up! But I knew that NAUI OW I was just that: the first of a series of classes.

So I finished the program with OW II, Advanced OW and Rescue. I worked diligently at learning everything I could. I don't regret a moment of it.

However, if the first class had 21 OW dives and took 3 months to complete (plus a couple of weeks for First Aid and CPR {it was a longer program back then}), I'm not sure I would have signed up. That might have been too much of a commitment to make before even getting my hair wet.

I don't have any issue with the modular approach. As long as all of the modules are completed.

Richard

 

[DCBC]

The problem is primarily fitness. There's a reason that the older divers are dying and it is primarily cardiovascular.

With your proposal, all unfit people would be excluded and, absolutely, the number of fatalities would drop. But each of those people that had a fatal cardiovascular event KNEW that it was a possibility. Come on, don't tell me that they didn't have some indication before they decided to dive! They at least must have known they were unfit!

Shortness of breath, angina, light-headedness, something, told them that they could be at risk. But they chose to dive anyway. And it's their choice.

I'm not saying that these people cannot dive. However they should not be "certified" to dive unsupervised. If Instructors wish to run a resort course, with no diving medical and hold their student's hand at all times, that's up to them. I just don't believe they should be certified as divers unless they can prove that they are fit and capable in the water.

The problem with "You have shortness of breath, angina, light-headedness, something and choose to dive. Ok no problem" is that in a diving accident, the person who ends up dieing is not only the original victim, but the rescuer! If the diving leaders are willing to accept this risk (and any resulting liability), that's up to them. Personally it's not something that I see as either responsible or professional.

According to your linked statistics, the fatal accident rate is 1 in 200,000 dives. That is essentially ZERO.

You wouldn't say that if you lost a loved one to a diving accident, that the cause of death was poor instruction; now would you?

Personally the 1 in 200,000 dives statistic is horse ****. Even if the number of dives could be established, which it can't (has anyone asked you how many dives you've done last year? No one has asked me). The statistics register deaths not near misses or injuries. Both Trace and I have reported making rescues weekly. You say the training is good enough, we disagree.

You feel that if these divers die, it's there own fault. I believe that this is a shared responsibility. If health care is or becomes government controlled, Society will pay the bill (as it does now in Canada). That makes it a social responsibility. People can't act anyway they like and expect Society to pay for it. It's the same as driving a car at 100 mph through a small town; it's dangerous to others. You may accept the responsibility for your own death, but others can get hurt as well and that's not your call.

We can raise the standards (somehow) and exclude the vast majority of students but to what end? To make the sport more elite? If you can't do push-ups while wearing your rig you are unworthy? Nonsense.

No one is suggesting puch-ups, so be realistic. This is not a matter of exclusion. If you want to learn to fly an airplane and have a heart condition, you may lose your license. Is this all about elitism? Obviously not. If you want to be a lifeguard and they ask you to swim 600 meters, is this elitism? No.

You might as well suggest having non-swimmers as lifeguards. It's ok, as long as they know how to use a reaching and throwing assist. Statistically, this is all that's needed in most pools, so why have such elitist standards? Why? Common sense.

It's the same reason why standards are high in major universities. It inspires people to strive for excellence. Now many people just want to live in a "good enough" world.

Some Instructors draw students because they are allowed to be under achievers, it's easy, we'll hold your hand. Other Instructors like Trace, Thal and I expect more. I've never been short of students. Some people want to be trained to dive without someone having to hold their hand. That's there choice, but this option is becoming hard to find.

Don't kid yourself, not all newly certified divers are alike. I've seen some DMs and Instructors that I wouldn't issue a OW card to, but to each there own.

 

[DCBC]

I got my training in the late '80s. I did a lot of reading, I worked hard in class, I ate it up! But I knew that NAUI OW I was just that: the first of a series of classes.

So I finished the program with OW II, Advanced OW and Rescue. I worked diligently at learning everything I could. I don't regret a moment of it.

However, if the first class had 21 OW dives and took 3 months to complete (plus a couple of weeks for First Aid and CPR {it was a longer program back then}), I'm not sure I would have signed up. That might have been too much of a commitment to make before even getting my hair wet.

Sounds like you were properly trained Would you want your children's training to be a lot easier?

I don't have any issue with the modular approach. As long as all of the modules are completed.

Thanks Richard. The problem is that the student completes one, the training is incomplete and s/he doesn't come back.

 

[TSandM]

But each of those people that had a fatal cardiovascular event KNEW that it was a possibility. Come on, don't tell me that they didn't have some indication before they decided to dive! They at least must have known they were unfit!

BTW, a fairly significant number of people present with the first symptoms EVER of heart disease being sudden death. I can remember taking care of a slender, fit man in his 60s who regularly swam laps for exercise . . . and had a V tach arrest while doing so, and ended up with a 5 vessel bypass.

Risk factors for heart disease are precisely that. If you are 100 lbs overweight, have high blood pressure, diabetes, and smoke a pack a day, you are statistically at greater risk for a cardiac event than someone without those risk factors. But the biggest risk for heart disease is age, and none of us can avoid that. Unless you are going to put an age cutoff on diving, you are not going to get rid of the people who have heart attacks while doing so, and it is certainly true that the environment in the water is an extremely poor place to have that happen.

Many of the fitness requirements you guys have been discussing would exclude me from diving, and I'm in pretty good shape for my age.

 

[boulderjohn]

However, if the first class had 21 OW dives and took 3 months to complete (plus a couple of weeks for First Aid and CPR {it was a longer program back then}), I'm not sure I would have signed up.

I would definitely not have signed up. As it was, for someone in my circumstances, signing up for scuba certification (knowing that this would also require future $$$ commitments for the diving itself) was on the edge financially and to a large extent in terms of time commitment as well. It was a big step. It was that first warm water, resort diving at which so many of you scoff that got me hooked and made me decide that, yes, this was worth that greater commitment of time and money.

The price and time was enough to give me safe tropical dives, get a feel for it, and decide for myself if I wanted to do more. It worked.

I would argue that it also works for the people who make the opposite decision after their first experience.

Many of the fitness requirements you guys have been discussing would exclude me from diving, and I'm in pretty good shape for my age.

I am in excellent shape for someone my age, but I am still someone my age (60). When I take further training (and I do), I have to hand in a doctor's permission. If I were to find myself on DAN's annual fatality list, they would probably list my medical condition as a potential cause of my fatality. As Richard said earlier, I choose to take this risk. I take much greater risks every day, such as when I drive a car. I refuse to go into the autumn of my years sitting in an armchair making potholders.

 

[DCBC]

Many of the fitness requirements you guys have been discussing would exclude me from diving, and I'm in pretty good shape for my age.

I don't think that anyone has suggested any feats of fitness that the average swimmer who's comfortable in the water couldn't accomplish. Personally, I request my students to do 400 meters (combination of various front & side strokes), 200 meters (back), 15 mins drown-proof and a 25 meter u/w swim. Most swimmers who are determined to accomplish this can do it and often are surprised when they do.

There's no time limit for this and several people have passed that have been in their 60's and 70's, including others who have been disabled. The only problem that usually occurs is in the u/w swim, but after a few sessions they can do it. This gives the students a lot of confidence to do the other parts of the program.

I never fail anyone. If they don't give-up on themselves, either will I. We work with them in the water to achieve all goals. I think 3 have in 37 years of active teaching.

When I was much younger I worked for an organization called Outward Bound. The point behind OB training is that you can do much more that you think you can. We have preconceived ideas of what we can and cannot accomplish. Only when these notions are eliminated, do we see the truth about ourselves and our real abilities.

I don't teach zen scuba diving. Nor do I teach in a military way. The standards are higher than most because of my diving experiences over the years and the many rescues I have performed.

Better trained divers are safer divers. Some may say this isn't required. To me the journey is as important as the goal. It may not be everyone's cup of tea, but making everything easy and providing inadequate training isn't my idea of where diving should be heading.

 

[TSandM]

Oh, I am not in disagreement with the idea that divers should be able to swim and be capable of self rescue as well as assisting others! I also don't argue that there isn't a lot of pretty poor teaching out there. But I can't lift a 150 lb person and carry them (they tried to show me how in my Rescue class, but I couldn't pull it off). And I swim slowly.

I'm another one in the camp, though, that if I had gone down to the shop and found out it would take me six weeks to learn to dive, and cost me $1000, I would have given up the whole concept. I do believe, because I have seen it done, that you can teach reasonable basic skills in existing OW classes, if you know what they are, and if you understand how they can be taught. I have seen my husband turn out certified divers who I completely expect will go on to have a lot of safe fun diving. I've also seen him agonize over not passing people he didn't think would meet that standard.

You can teach well within the existing framework. It's just sometimes more difficult.