The Philosophy of Diver Training

[Hank49]

So what do you (from your experience) feel is the primary reason why divers stop diving before/after 2 or 5 years? Or do you feel that they are not primarily interested in diving in the local area (vacation only divers)?

How do you feel that vacation diving has/has not influenced the current agency training programs that exist today? Thanks for your input.

Not putting words in Walter's mouth...but I think most divers that stop diving are ones that live where the diving conditions aren't that friendly. I'm here in SE Indiana right now and diving is the last thing on my mind. So people from here go to...Belize or somewhere, take a dive course, get all stoked, buy gear and what...dive lakes around here? I mean, you have to be pretty crazy or part fish to want to dive quarries long term.

The training agencies have geared to serve these type of vacation divers. And why not? There's money in it and that's good for the industry. Gear sales, instructor fees, boat maintenance and down the line. Lots of jobs are created by this in Belize and other tropical destinations.

 

[Walter]

How specifically are some agencies dishonest. Obviously each agency wants to sell its "product." Are agencies saying something specifically inaccurate, or is it more of a lack of disclosure?

The very concept that all agencies have the same (or similar) standards is dishonest. I have no idea where this concept originated, but it is commonly believed. It's often passed on by people who honestly believe it to be true. I see it from instructors quite often. Where did they get it? From their instructor course? From their agency? I don't know.

How would you describe the concept of 5 star facilities? It implies these shops are evaluated in much the same manner as hotels. Hotels are actually rated 1 through 5 stars with a 5 star hotel having much better quality than a 1 star hotel. Even movies are rated 1 - 5 stars with the best of the best getting 5 stars. Is this what happens with dive shops? No. Do the agencies that use (I believe there are now 2) the 5 star designation ever tell the public it involves a true rating syatem? No. Do they tell the public it doesn't? No, they let the public assume is does. It's probably not lying or is it? Is the deception intentional? I don't know, but I do know many people believe 5 star facilities have undergone a rating when they haven't.

Do you feel that the largest problem (as you've described it) is the instructor's unwillingness to teach past the minimums, or the restrictions placed by some agencies on their instructors prohibiting this?

I don't see either as being a major problem. Why should an instructor have to teach beyond the standards? Agencies should set their standards high enough so it's not necessary.

While some agencies do not allow their instructors to set additional requirements, I see this as a minor issue. Even if I can't make an addtional skill an actual requirement, I can make it a practical requirement. Students don't know what the agency requires and what I've asked them to do that isn't required. They just do what I tell them.

The biggest problem I see is some agencies just don't require skills I believe to be necessary.

What is the policy of SEI in this regard? Why do you think that they have taken this position?

SEI has set their standards high. Because SEI believes in education and safety.

Is the sequence of instruction recommended or required by the agencies you've mentioned?

Required.

I would think that the extent of this would be directed by the agency. Are you aware of what agencies are currently/planning to offer on-line training?

Encouraged or discouraged by the agency perhaps, but I doubt it is directed by any agency. I've only heard rumors about online training being offered by agencies. You've likely heard those same rumors. Some of them have been in this thread.

a) How much training do diving students need from their perspective?
b) How much training do the instructors tell the students they need?
c) How much training does the agency require?
d) How much training is ideal for the IDS, who likely wants to be price competitive and who may be more interested in equipment sales than the sale of training courses?

a) There will be a wide range of opinions on this.
b) Depends on the instructor. We've seen that in this thread.
c) That also varies a great deal.
d) Perhaps more than most currently believe. An LDS with a more thorough class will have students more interested in continuing diving and therefore more likely to buy equipment and continuing to buy equipment over the long run resulting in higher profits.

If the agency takes the perspective that certain skill-sets are unneeded at the OW level, who is to say that these skills were ever really required?

As an SEI instructor, I can say it is required.

has anyone specifically looked at the cause of diving fatalities and made a determination in-which the agencies can better the current training requirements?

I don't know the answer to your question, but I do know fatality rates are not what I would use to determine quality. "We aren't killing people, we must be doing OK." That sounds like when my daughter was a preteen and I had to ground her for some minor rule infraction. "It's not like I killed someone." No, it's not like you killed someone, but then that's hardly the point.

If for example, 80% of all dive shops are affiliated with one agency, what chance does an uninformed consumer really have in finding an alternative training program? How is this best resolved?

That depends on the customer's motivation. Most will walk into the nearest shop and as one question - "How much?" Other will conduct a google search where they will find lots of information including all the information on this board. If they are typical, no chance at all because they won't look. If they look at all, they'll be able to find alternatives.

So what do you (from your experience) feel is the primary reason why divers stop diving?

Inadequate training.

How do you feel that vacation diving has/has not influenced the current agency training programs that exist today?

I suspect lowering standards caused many charters to start providing in water baby sitters. In water baby sitters gave agencies the opportunity to lower standards even further.

 

[Crush]

3. The Student

a) What motivates divers to learn;
b) Are they realistically limited by the type of training that's available to them (available in the local area, dominated by a particular agency, etc.);
c) How they are influenced by advertising, LDS, other divers and diver forums;

I began my basic OW training in fall 2007 and completed the OW dive in spring 2008 (we were waiting for the ice to melt). My observations of my class and classmates were:

1. We were all certified under ACUC. In our city, there is no other agency. Personally I was unfamiliar with ACUC. To me, at the time, scuba was synonymous with PADI. I did an on-line search to ensure that an ACUC certification would be recognized by PADI and NAUI;
2. Out of the class of about fifteen, I was the only one who wanted to learn to dive simply for the love of being underwater. One sixteen year old female (the only female) wanted to get into underwater welding, one eighteen year old male (the youngest guy by far) wanted to be a firefighter and saw scuba as something which would be good to have on a resume. The vast majority of the remaining students (myself excepted) appeared to be affluent males in their early to late fifties who vacationed at tropical resorts and wanted to learn to dive prior to the next trip down south so that they could dive at the resort. In their case, the training they received probably exceeded what would be required of them in warm water.

 

[Guy Alcala]

There are those that have cylinders filled to play paintball. As there is no law that I'm aware of (at least not in Canada) that puts an onus on the LDS to only sell air to certified divers.

I don't think that diver certification can also be construe as an adequate measure of competence, as some divers are certified for 30 years and never dive, but still retain the card. I'm seldom asked for a certification card when getting a fill. When I have been, a second piece of ID has never been required (not all C-Cards have photo ID). Do you really believe that the agencies have accepted the responsibility of being the gatekeepers?

In conjunction with with the LDS's and boat captains, yes. Otherwise, why would I ever be required to show a C-card for any diving-related activity? The places where I'm known don't ask me for mine anymore, but every time I go somewhere new I'm usually asked to show a C-card or a Nitrox card to get a fill. To date I haven't been asked to show my AOW card, but if I ever boat dived commercially at some deeper sites I expect that I will have to. And every time I rent gear I'm required to sign a liability form that always wants my C-card number. Just had to do it again this weekend, when I was trying out a Fusion drysuit and some undergarments at a White's demo day in Monterey.

On a related topic, the current issue of Dive Training Magazine has an editorial by Alex Brylske on the problems he sees with shortened training courses as far as diver retention:

Dive Training Editorials: THE LONG AND SHORT OF IT

Since he states that as the person "once responsible for the educational programming of the world’s largest diver training program, I played no small part in the move to simplify diver training", I think we can assume he brings a reasonably objective viewpoint to the issue. IMO he's looking at things a bit bass-ackwards as to the cause of the problem he worries about.

Guy

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

In learning to dive there is value in significant face time with an instructor. Sure, we can make a person comfortable enough to fulfill the certification requirements in only a brief exposure, and maybe even motivate a percentage of them to continue diving after their training. But I don’t think we instill any strong passion for diving in the vast number of trainees simply because we no longer spend enough time with them to gain the requisite comfort, and establish the necessary social relationships with other divers and in the diving community.

I think that sums it up beautifully ... people won't do what they're not comfortable doing, even if they want to. And once out of the classroom, you have to keep the divers engaged if you want them to develop any kind of passion for it.

Remembering back when I was new, one of the hardest things about diving was finding people to dive with. Experienced divers weren't all that interested in diving with someone who was going to blow through his air supply in a third of the time they would ... and new divers weren't comfortable diving with someone who was even newer than they were.

If I hadn't "lucked" into a couple of mentors who were willing to dive with me, I may not even be diving today ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[Thalassamania]

...

Since he states that as the person "once responsible for the educational programming of the world’s largest diver training program, I played no small part in the move to simplify diver training", I think we can assume he brings a reasonably objective viewpoint to the issue. IMO he's looking at things a bit bass-ackwards as to the cause of the problem he worries about.

Guy

Thinking that Alex brings a, "reasonably objective viewpoint to the issue," is a bit of a stretch. He was one of the firmest advocates for, what he now admits, is a situation that he is unhappy with that features: "students are lucky to receive more than a dozen hours of contact time with their instructor," "anything that smacks of challenge has been all but eliminated from the curriculum," and that perhaps, "it would be simpler just to issue folks a C-card with their birth certificate and be done with it."

Alex was wrong back then, and even if his heart is now in the right place he's still got it wrong. He claims that, "First and foremost, the data on diving accidents just doesn’t support this conclusion. As measured by fatalities, diving is demonstrably safer today than when I started." Fatalities are probably not the best measure (we dealt with that question ages ago). The measure should be if the program (without increasing risks) met it goal, "to make diving more fun and accessible to more people," it appears to have failed on both the risk and the fun/accessible fronts. Fatalities are up, while the course may be fun (I maintain that even back when ALex learned to dive it was), there is little of the sense of accomplishment that there once was, and, as Alex points out, the increase in numbers that the short course was promised to bring about did not occur.

Now Alex has an interesting idea when he writes, "I believe that we missed one important point: In learning to dive there is value in significant face time with an instructor." I agree with him (note where his argument goes with respect to e-learning too, which further reduces face time.) I applaud his insight that, "I don’t think we instill any strong passion for diving in the vast number of trainees simply because we no longer spend enough time with them to gain the requisite comfort, and establish the necessary social relationships with other divers and in the diving community." While there may be some truth to the second clause, I firmly believe the first one, "we no longer spend enough time with them to gain the requisite comfort."

 

[mdb]

I could not agree more with Thal's comments on the article by Alex. The retention rate of divers has dropped consistently for years as the new courses developed. We are now faced with not only a very serious economic recession but a sad lack of divers who feel properly prepared to dive on their own in local waters.

It is good to hear from active experienced instructors who will help turn this downward trend around.

Good for Alex: "...But I don’t think we instill any strong passion for diving in the vast number of trainees simply because we no longer spend enough time with them to gain the requisite comfort, and establish the necessary social relationships with other divers and in the diving community."

 

[InTheDrink]

I could not agree more with Thal's comments on the article by Alex. The retention rate of divers has dropped consistently for years as the new courses developed. We are now faced with not only a very serious economic recession but a sad lack of divers who feel properly prepared to dive on their own in local waters.

It is good to hear from active experienced instructors who will help turn this downward trend around.

Good for Alex: "...But I don’t think we instill any strong passion for diving in the vast number of trainees simply because we no longer spend enough time with them to gain the requisite comfort, and establish the necessary social relationships with other divers and in the diving community."

Is there data to back this statement up?

It seems pretty reasonable to me that there might be but if there is I haven't read it (not that I'd necessarily come across it).

What would be interesting would be to see some hard facts on retention for different agencies and map these against the skills or hours required for certification.

One would hope that objective would be to retain divers so I would subscribe to whichever route achieves deepest penetration in numbers with best retention. To me this seems to be where the balancing act lies. I'm not sure there's an answer but if there is, I imagine it would be a tweaking of PADI's approach rather than SEIs (which, FWIW I'd love to take a course in). I think that Phase I must be getting your audience in place and PADI have done that admirably. From there they have near endless reach and that could be to improve retention, including also by upping the standards in their OW course (of the tropical variety at least but I personally don't believe the deficiency is confined to that).

J

 

[Guy Alcala]

Thinking that Alex brings a, "reasonably objective viewpoint to the issue," is a bit of a stretch. He was one of the firmest advocates for, what he now admits, is a situation that he is unhappy with that features: "students are lucky to receive more than a dozen hours of contact time with their instructor," "anything that smacks of challenge has been all but eliminated from the curriculum," and that perhaps, "it would be simpler just to issue folks a C-card with their birth certificate and be done with it."

Which is why I think he's reasonably objective; after all, as the major moving force behind shortening classes he has a big ego investment in the idea. Despite that, he's now saying that he thinks he was wrong to do so. That smacks of objectivity to me.

Alex was wrong back then, and even if his heart is now in the right place he's still got it wrong. He claims that, "First and foremost, the data on diving accidents just doesn’t support this conclusion. As measured by fatalities, diving is demonstrably safer today than when I started." Fatalities are probably not the best measure (we dealt with that question ages ago). The measure should be if the program (without increasing risks) met it goal, "to make diving more fun and accessible to more people," it appears to have failed on both the risk and the fun/accessible fronts. Fatalities are up, while the course may be fun (I maintain that even back when ALex learned to dive it was), there is little of the sense of accomplishment that there once was, and, as Alex points out, the increase in numbers that the short course was promised to bring about did not occur.

Now Alex has an interesting idea when he writes, "I believe that we missed one important point: In learning to dive there is value in significant face time with an instructor." I agree with him (note where his argument goes with respect to e-learning too, which further reduces face time.) I applaud his insight that, "I don’t think we instill any strong passion for diving in the vast number of trainees simply because we no longer spend enough time with them to gain the requisite comfort, and establish the necessary social relationships with other divers and in the diving community." While there may be some truth to the second clause, I firmly believe the first one, "we no longer spend enough time with them to gain the requisite comfort."

The reason why I think he got the cause for the lack of diver retention backwards is this; He thinks the lack of face time with an instructor in shorter courses leads to lack of motivation. I think that the longer, harder courses require more strongly motivated divers from the get-go. I never needed an instructor to give me motivation to dive, or climb, or ski; these were things I knew I wanted to do. An instructor or mentor just helped me to learn how to do so better or more safely, but boosting my motivation never entered into it. The idea seems ludicrous to me.

As I opined upthread, diving is a niche sport. Always has been, always will be. The resort divers will dive occasionally, just as they may try a jet ski, or a climbing wall, or any other temporary amusement that doesn't require a lot of investment of time or money. In short, little commitment or motivation is required, and a resort diver course is ideal for these people, who make up what I call the recreational dilettante majority.

The much smaller number of people who know they want to become serious divers, just as those who are serious about any other recreation, will be willing to put in the time and/or pay for the training that allows them to expand their abilities to the greatest extent possible. That's why you see people enthusing over more extensive courses, because the people who want that type of class feel that they're finally getting value for their money. They're being challenged to expand their skills and knowledge. And unlike the 'everyone passes' courses, you get a real feeling of accomplishment when you've had to work to learn something. Not everyone can, but why should we encourage everyone to do so? The only excuse is to boost sales, and that has nothing to do with the diver and everything to do with the industry.

There is something to be said for the idea that access to interesting diving leads to retention; I'm 1 1/2 hours from Monterey, and if I had to dive in quarries all the time I'd be bored to tears in short order. Since I'm about 3 - 3.5 hours from the mountains I tend to take more diving trips than I do mountain trips these days. Even so, if I were a serious diver I'd just accept that I'd have to travel further to get my diving fix, doing fewer but longer trips. ISTM that the guy in Indiana has the Great Lakes within longish weekend driving distance, and that's a lot more interesting than diving in a quarry.

Guy

 

[DCBC]

Another way of saying this is that "not enough" time is provided to today's diving students. How did this come to be? I'm aware of PADI's motivation, but all agency standards have been lowered over the years. I'm not convinced that this philosophy was developed to ensure that the student was provided with a proper level of diver education before certification. It's likely that "profitability" had more to do with it than just failing to provide sufficient student confidence.

I'm one of those instructors that retain a minimum of 3 dedicated pool sessions where the diver only uses fins, mask and snorkel before moving on to SCUBA. I still teach station breathing and use mild harassment in the final stages of pool training. Despite using updated teaching methods and technology, I'm definitely an old school instructor. I teach decompression tables and compare the differences in various tables and which algorithms are used in different computers before teaching their operation.

If a student wants to seek the most comprehensive instruction in diver training, the type of course that's available through Walter, Jim, Thal and myself (amongst others) would most likely fit the bill. Other students prefer a shorter program which are offered by a host of other instructors. There is a market for both.

Although I don't think that there is an argument that a more extensive course prepares a person to dive more safely, the trick is to know how much training is enough? To answer this, I think it's reasonable to look at the conditions in-which the diver will be frequenting. How does your certification agency address this issue?