What would your ideal training agency look like?

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

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Just a recent example of the low dive number entry point.

Someone with 38 dives who wants to get into the pro side.

Divemaster Internships on the Caymans?

You are making a direct link between dive count and ability, which has been previously discussed. Time underwater doesn't guarantee a certain ability

The important part is there has to be a minimum entry requirement. Who is to say someone with 40 dives has less ability and inferior skills to someone with 100 dives,

You're taking AN/DP at 250? dives, yet the entrance criteria is 25 OW dives. Would you be against someone with 40 dives and AN/DP entering a DM programme?

What about *grits teeth* someone with 40 dives and a GUE-F tech pass?

What we are saying is that there needs to be a performance assessment in addition to the minimum entry requirement to see if a candidates core skills and abilities meet the entry needs and expectations of a course.

After that like any course they exit (certification) parameters should ensure a minimum standard (most examines only prove you've met or exceeded the minimum requirements)

Dive count alone is a poor measure or ability of skill
 
How about a unicorn?
You know the point I was trying to make (and I have no idea the minimum number of dives someone can be GUE-F certified in)

I'm trying to get across that experience and ability cannot be judged purely on dive count. However There has to be a minimum requirement for entry to any con ed course - If a GUE-F candidate arrived on my course I would have certain expectations of them before hand and assume core skills are sorted.

Obv previous training (and I would like to see progression slowed down a little i.e. a minimum number of dives/hrs in water between courses) and what else? Dive count is/hrs in water is the only other constant you can really use across the board even if it is flawed.

Another good if extreme example.

Had 2 guys, early 20's relocated here with family. Both cave certified took our DM course. Lovely guys, and as you'd expect their core skills were impeccable

They absolutely struggled with guiding. Boat briefs, standing up in front of strangers and delivering a brief (with confidence and some humour) was one because they were overly self conscious which affected confidence

But their biggest issue was that they were so used to diving with highly competent divers, dealing with the average diver was a massive struggle - kinda rabbit in the headlights at first. With counselling and mentoring of course they over came this.

But on paper these guys should have breezed through the course - but their previous and not insignificant experience didn't prepare them for that part - and indeed at first their previous experience (always diving with competent divers) was a
hindrance.
 
It’s hard to soar like an Eagle when you’re surrounded by turkeys.
 
Separate the training schools from the certification agency to stop the fox from guarding the hen house.
Too many all-in-one agencies are turning out too many incompetent divers just to keep the line moving and get the money. There should be an unbiased testing-only agency with integrity that issues the final certifications. Where you get your training is your business, either mentored, self taught, diving school, dive club, whatever.
 
It has its down sides. Don't get me wrong I hold BSAC certs and like a good proportion of their curriculum, but the club model isn't' without lots of faults.
As said, I worked in both models, and each of them has its own benefits and down sides.
Possibly the best is to do part of the training with one model, part with the other. I went from club-based to become a commercial instructor (which was the common path in eighties).
But possibly the opposite path is even better: start with a simple PADI or NAUI OW course, which is easy and fast, and really "for everyone". It is a good way of getting in contact with the world of scuba diving. When you need more, instead of spending thousand dollars collecting a lot of "specialisation" courses just for having an excuse for going diving with an instructor, you simply enter a diving club, where very experienced instructors will come diving with your for free (or, better, for fun), organizing weekends or holidays (often at discounted prices), and your diving activity will be easier and cheaper.
 
@Angelo Farina has a point. From what I have read about BSAC, I would like to see the “club” method of training become the norm where I live.

Start by forming a branch. Start a BSAC club

You may need to consult on insurance. The BSAC 3rd party cover explicitly excludes the US and Canada. There might be a bit of a bootstrapping problem with the Instructor Training Scheme, but for sure there are expats, a BSAC Centre in Florida and a bloke in Tulum. Instructor crossovers only take a one day course so existing commercial agency instructor can move over if they can get to a place the course is running.

BSAC have franchises in Asia, all things are possible.
 
2. Adding items to the OW such as nitrox, while it seems like a good idea, has a couple of flaws from POV. The first is that nitrox is not available everywhere so now people in remote locations can’t teach it unless you offer a waiver. Also, the OWC is packed full of info and adding more may not be the best for the student. However, making it an “add-on” for the advanced I can see working.

BSAC Ocean Diver (OW equivalent 20m) includes Nitrox. They don’t have to actually dive it but get taught about it and the advantages and limitations. They do have to measure some gas, I suppose air would do.

It also includes a CBL, both in the pool and in open water from 6m.

Back in the day the first level BSAC course was the equivalent of the current Ocean Diver and Sports Diver combined and included rescue and deco. That could take a long time but probably not 100 hours.
 
You know the point I was trying to make (and I have no idea the minimum number of dives someone can be GUE-F certified in)

I'm trying to get across that experience and ability cannot be judged purely on dive count. However There has to be a minimum requirement for entry to any con ed course - If a GUE-F candidate arrived on my course I would have certain expectations of them before hand and assume core skills are sorted.

Obv previous training (and I would like to see progression slowed down a little i.e. a minimum number of dives/hrs in water between courses) and what else? Dive count is/hrs in water is the only other constant you can really use across the board even if it is flawed.

Another good if extreme example.

Had 2 guys, early 20's relocated here with family. Both cave certified took our DM course. Lovely guys, and as you'd expect their core skills were impeccable

They absolutely struggled with guiding. Boat briefs, standing up in front of strangers and delivering a brief (with confidence and some humour) was one because they were overly self conscious which affected confidence

But their biggest issue was that they were so used to diving with highly competent divers, dealing with the average diver was a massive struggle - kinda rabbit in the headlights at first. With counselling and mentoring of course they over came this.

But on paper these guys should have breezed through the course - but their previous and not insignificant experience didn't prepare them for that part - and indeed at first their previous experience (always diving with competent divers) was a
hindrance.
Yes. In a nutshell, doing and teaching are different, though one can help the other. Soloing as a clarinetist with a Masters in performance and teaching beginning 6th Grade Band are two different mindsets.
 
As said, I worked in both models, and each of them has its own benefits and down sides.
Possibly the best is to do part of the training with one model, part with the other. I went from club-based to become a commercial instructor (which was the common path in eighties).
But possibly the opposite path is even better: start with a simple PADI or NAUI OW course, which is easy and fast, and really "for everyone". It is a good way of getting in contact with the world of scuba diving. When you need more, instead of spending thousand dollars collecting a lot of "specialisation" courses just for having an excuse for going diving with an instructor, you simply enter a diving club, where very experienced instructors will come diving with your for free (or, better, for fun), organizing weekends or holidays (often at discounted prices), and your diving activity will be easier and cheaper.

Due to fewer BSAC clubs running Ocean Diver sessions, this is what a lot of clubs actually reccomend to newcomers now - do a PADI OW (or BSAC OD at a commercial centre, though realistically they are few and far between) and then join the club to get diving, and then do additional training from the club from Sport level onwards, as SD doesn't need pool time. I can see why clubs advocate this (saves on pool time and reduces the number of newcomers who drop-out), but I'm not a fan.

I feel the first course you do (OW/OD) is the most important. It's where you get your initial confidence and a chance to nail down the basics. To me, it's one that absoltely shouldn't be rushed, and where a good instructor-student relationship is essential, and where you can take time to be mentored and gain confidence. It's the one course where I feel the club system gives the most benefit over a dive shop production line, and it's a shame to see it withering on the vine.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/swift/

Back
Top Bottom