The fallacy in what you're preaching is in the assumption that without agency standards instructors are, "doing whatever the Hell they want, following whichever standards are convenient for them and disregarding whichever are not ..." This I think is quite incorrect. Despite my being recruited (because of my specific expertise) to produce a full revision of NAUI's standards, from top to bottom, throughout my career I have been bound not by standards but by the monthly review of my actions and decisions by a group of experts (a university Diving Control Board - DCB) and I never injured or killed anyone, nor have any of my appointees.
Those individuals whom I select to teach others to dive, have no certification by any agency, they are approved, after the fact, by the DCB and a university Vice President/Provost. But I select them, I train them, I evaluate them, I decide to invite them back to the next class and when required, I discipline them and remove them from teaching situations.
Similarly, I approve certain divers to dive with less qualified divers, in the role of a mentor, Diving Supervisor or Specialty Instructor; again, there is no "agency" involved. That's where I'm coming from. I am able to do this (and people like me have been doing this since 1952 with a virtually perfect safety record) because I am an expert. The bottom line of being an expert is that he or she, "no longer needs to rely on rules, guidelines or maxims and posses an authoritative knowledge of the disciplines that make up diving that leads to a deep tacit understanding of, as well as a holistic and intuitive grasp of situations." Thus the odds are that the judgments an expert makes are spot on, even when they run counter to rules, guidelines or maxims that are needed to keep risks at an acceptable level for the Proficient or merely Competent Instructors who make up most of the population.
Now let's go back to my first post in this thread:
If you're still confused, here are the definitions that I use as a basis.
Although I am generally suspect of anyone who declares themself an expert on anything, if what you say in this post plus your profile is correct, I don't have any problem saying that you have an impressive resume that I respect. That doesn't mean we will always agree, but if for example, NAUI asked you to assist in writing standards that clearly shows you know one or two things about diving and teaching it. However, I also think this is where irony enters the conversation. By accepting NAUI's request and assisting in or even directly writing standards, it seems to me by default you have agreed that standards are necessary and have an important place in instruction. Am I wrong on that conclusion? I've recently (very recently) started researching the differences between NAUI and PADI and so far have learned (from NAUI instructors I have spoken with) that NAUI sets minimums but does not deter an instructor from going above and beyond those minimums as long as the minimum is adhered to and satisfied. But, there are absolutely minimum standards with that agency.
Without going into hypotheticals or anything else, given your stated b/g in the formulating of NAUI standards at one point, what is your response to this direct question:
How do you feel about a NAUI Instructor disregarding a minimum standard established by NAUI while conducting a NAUI class because he/she feels it is wrong, irrelevant, stupid, or whatever?
I'm not even trying to compare this to the OP that started this debate, and before anyone blows up, no I do not know what, if any, agency the Instructor the OP referred to is part of. I'm curious on your thoughts on this based on what I've seen many people claim in this thread, that standards can and should be tossed out the door at an Instructor's discretion. Don't answer this question as-if you are the instructor, obviously the person who writes the book can change the pages whenever they want. I am referring to an Instructor who has joined NAUI and agreed to train in their system, and issue certifications under NAUI authority (for lack of a better phrase).
