Becoming an Instructor

[dumpsterDiver]

I disagree somewhat with the idea that the average student will avoid zero-to-hero instructors. The average student simply won't know better. Honestly, has anyone ever checked the qualifications of their dentist, butcher, beautician (is that a word?) etc etc etc? We go to the nearest shop or the one we can afford, and assume they have the skills. If they fail too spectacularly: yes, we may start asking questions post factum.

Edit: I am talking about OW students without past experience.

Exactly! How would a student know or care that the instructor was a zero to hero? they might find out on the first night of the class. I still remember telling the students in my first scuba class that this was the first class that I had ever taught. There was a noticale tension in the air, but I quickly moved on to my diving expereince and it never seemed to be a problem and nobody walked out.

It is kinda strange that people are attacking the OP. Why not attack the training agencies becausae they clearly feel that their standards are deficient, since the product of their (instructor) training is inadequate. If the training is inadequate to produce a good instructor - then it would make sense to attack the training agency rather than the student who pays thousands of dollars for diving professionals to teach him what he needs to know, Is there something wrong with comparing prices for an education?

Also the issue of being a professional educator is a non-issue with being a PADI Instructor. I was a professional, certified educator as well as a PADI OW scuba instructor. The PADI program is so modular, so cook book, so well thought out in logical and progressive steps, that it is really pretty easy to teach students... It is not like teaching "chemistry" (which I also taught). In all honesty, I found the lessons that PADI provided on how to teach, more consise and applicable than a lot of the college education (school teacher classes) that i had to take to gain a professional teaching certificate.

I agree that mentorship and spending a lot of time with actual students in the pool and in open water is really useful in order to help the instructor foresee problems before they occur, but this takes hundreds of hours of time and if the training agency says it is not necessary, then why should an instructor trainee think it is required?

I sense a level of hypocricy in that supposedly people are expected to refrain from agency bashing (on this forum), but they will go after a student who is seeking professional training from a professional agency and intends to follow ALL the rules and requirements of whatever agency he might select.

 

[Bob DBF]

It is kinda strange that people are attacking the OP. Why not attack the training agencies because they clearly feel that their standards are deficient, since the product of their (instructor) training is inadequate. If the training is inadequate to produce a good instructor - then it would make sense to attack the training agency rather than the student who pays thousands of dollars for diving professionals to teach him what he needs to know, Is there something wrong with comparing prices for an education?

I sense a level of hypocrisy in that supposedly people are expected to refrain from agency bashing (on this forum), but they will go after a student who is seeking professional training from a professional agency and intends to follow ALL the rules and requirements of whatever agency he might select.

Well said! And worth repeating.

When lack of quality control produces a poor result, it seems to be counterproductive to blame the product.


Bob

 

[oya]

When lack of quality control produces a poor result, it seems to be counterproductive to blame the product.

It's the American way. Blame drug addicts, rape victims, and crappy OW divers who were trained by instructors who just payed their money to get the card.

 

[Michael Guerrero]

You get what you pay for.

What if the person who got instructor certified quickly, which of course is no reflection on how experienced of a diver they are, charged a lot? Does that indicate superior quality?

 

[Michael Guerrero]

I read a post recently about an instructor who ensures her students have impeccable trim and buoyancy before she graduates them from their OW course. I'm confidant that surpasses most agencies' requirements for certifying OW students, certainly the one she is an instructor for.

So are students who graduate from her course better off or worse off than students who learn from someone with much more teaching experience who still teaches his students to kneel on the bottom?

 

[Michael Guerrero]

Blame drug addicts, rape victims, and crappy OW divers who were trained by instructors who just payed their money to get the card.

I've seen really crappy OW divers who were trained by people with decades of scuba instructor experience.

 

[Bob DBF]

I've seen really crappy OW divers who were trained by people with decades of scuba instructor experience.

Perhaps the crappy diver shouldn't have been given a card.

In '80 I did my OW after diving for years without one. I was told by the instructor that I would be the top student, in and out of the water, as well as a good example of an experienced diver or I would not get a c-card.

I know one student did not get a card the first time around for a test that would be considered ludicrous today. I'm assuming he passed later as the instructor was working with him, but it was not important to me to keep up.


Bob

 

[DevonDiver]

What if the person who got instructor certified quickly, which of course is no reflection on how experienced of a diver they are, charged a lot? Does that indicate superior quality?

If the extra cost reflected an efficient training course run to a duration (training hours) that reflected raising student performance to a high definition of 'mastery', then yes.

The biggest impediment to high quality training is the common fallacy that the minimum training requirements are satisfactory to raise most divers to a true definition of performance 'mastery'.

Fixed / cheap costs demand fixed / minimum courses.

This, in turn, demands that student performance expectations have to be lowered to meet the timescale and cost expectations that the course is associated with.

In that respect, courses offering more substantial training hours/days/dives; or which define their training provision as 'flexible, based entirely on student performance', are probably more indicative of a high quality, uncompromising, instructional ethos.

Needless to say, training courses of this approach are usually more costly - proportional to the instructor time and dives needed.

With respect to the speed of instructor progression... it's unlikely that an instructor who opted for, or developed from, fast/minimum training would inherently appreciate, or immediately understand, the quality benefits of slow/maximal training.

Humans tend to be a product of their environment and nurturing.

How you're taught is how you'll dive... and how you'll subsequently teach as an instructor.

Breaking from that nurturing and the mindset / ethos it produces is liable to be a slow progress... and probably reliant on further external stimulus to change.

 

[RainPilot]

My 2 bar for what its worth:

There are several types of instructors pertinent to this conversation.

1. Those who love to teach and are focused on quality above commercial issues. These are the people who have a passion for teaching and are not reliant on the income from it. They will usually be picky about accepting students, won't pass anyone who doesn't earn it and tend to take substantially longer than the agency minima to finish courses. I believe @NetDoc and @boulderjohn are in this group among others.

2. Those who are like no 1 but are dependent on the income and are self-employed. These instructors have to balance the quality vs quantity in a way that allows them to make a living off the diving without compromising in critical areas. These instructors live or die by reputation, the only way to justify a longer, more expensive course to a student is to sell the quality approach. (This is where I believe @DevonDiver is at, correct me if I'm wrong please Andy).

3. Those who are like no 2 above but are employed by a dive operation. These instructors are the most challenged as the compromises they are required to make are often decided on by their employers. It is EXTREMELY difficult to provide quality instruction if your employer is not supportive of this. Most of these instructors either find a shop that is in tune with them, or they become no 2, or they get a day job and become no 1. There are too many of these to list on SB, I believe they are the majority of the instructors on here.

4. Those who like the idea of diving for a living but are not particularly passionate about teaching. These tend to do a cheap / quick instructor course as they need to earn a living ASAP, they will usually do exactly what they were told on their IDC and thats how they will teach from then on. They will very rarely do any kind of self-improvement courses or look for any feedback or mentorship to improve later on. "Good enough" is the motto of the day. The quality of instruction given by these are very dependent on which operator they ended up going with for their IDC and the mindset of the shop they end up working at.

If you look through these you should recognize yourself, your own instructor, etc etc. Decide which one fits you and then speak to those who are the same, their advice will be much more useful to you than asking people who are in a completely different mindset to you.

Good luck whichever way you go, remember that there is nothing preventing you from moving between these groups. I know many 4's who ended up as 2's and 1's

 

[DevonDiver]

I'd add to #4... or create a category #5:

There are instructors who don't even love diving (let alone teaching), but identify diving instruction as a simple means-to-an-end that enables a desireable lifestyle.

I've known plenty of dive instructors whose motivations don't extend to diving or teaching.

For some, it's the only 'easily' attainable employment in a 'tropical idyll'. For others it empowers a promiscuous sex life. For some, it's pure fantasy... an escape from whatever tedium they hated in 'normal life'...sometimes it's also a 'Walter Mitty' effect.

As they have little-or-no motivation for diving and teaching, their quality care extends only to barely maintaining the minimum standards necessary to keep employment and not get struck-off by their agency.

Even then, they'll readily take shortcuts or betray standards to save effort and/or get something else (more money, the opposite sex etc).

There's also a sub-set of these. Let's call it category #6:

These are people who mistakenly imagine that diving tuition will empower a particularly desirable type of lifestyle; and then rapidly become disenchanted and demotivated when the reality doesn't meet their expectations.

These are the 'burn-outs', who don't perceive any enjoyment in their work or life. They'll quit if they can... but some get trapped by the commitment they made to chase that dream and, consequently, become resentful and extremely demotivated.

With regards to fast-track instructor training, both of these instructor types would usually be very attracted to a minimum cost / time route to teaching status.