A simple step to improve SCUBA training

[Cthippo]

I'm not entirely sure where this should go, so if a mod feels it would be better somewhere else, please feel free to move

One of the biggest challenges I have noticed in the SCUBA community, or at least this board, which is not the same thing, is widespread distrust of certification qualifications.

Simply stated, many people feel that just because someone is certified does not mean that they are competent. There are of course many reasons this might be the case, someone who hasn't dove in a couple of years, someone who only dives twice a year etc. Putting those aside, everyone seems to have a tale of bad instructors turning out unprepared students. I got to thinking about it last night and what is the difference between a SCUBA cert and a drivers license (in some states) or a pilot's license or a professional license?

Third party certification.

When it matters, instructors are not allowed to certify their own students. In activities where the public is at risk from a poorly trained practitioner, you get trained by one person or agency, but tested and certified by another, independent, evaluator who was not involved in your training. This adds a level of fairness and accountability for both students and instructors, and a level of reassurance to the public that the person is minimally qualified to perform the task safely.

Now, one could make the argument that SCUBA divers do so at their own risk and if we kill ourselves it mostly doesn't affect anyone else, and honestly I think this is a valid point. It's hard to mow down 20 people with a SCUBA tank the way you can with a car.

So what would this look like? I think it could be as simple as a single pool session with a third part evaluator at the end of your class. You would still do OW dives with your instructor, but the certification could take place in a pool. Evaluator would have a checklist of skills, set up your rig, safely enter the water, establish neutral buoyancy, swim the length of the pool and back using any kick without surfacing or touching bottom, demonstrate common hand signals, demonstrate donating a reg to an OOA diver and assisting them to the surface. Tow a tired or injured diver. The whole process should take less than 30 minutes and use less than a tank of air. If the student passes all the skills they get certified. If not, they get one chance per skill to re-test the same session, or they have to come back another day. The standards for these skills already exist and are pretty generic across the common US training agencies. The evaluators need only be certified at the level they are evaluating and should be independent of the dive shop or instructor, but need not be actual training agency employees.

Ideally this should be part of initial OW training, but could also be offered as an ex post facto verification of skills .

 

[lowwall]

Great in theory, but a nonstarter in practice unless the evaluators were under the auspices of a government agency, like FAA Designated Pilot Examiners for pilot certificate and rating checkrides. Otherwise any evaluator that dared to actually fail a student would quickly find that no one was interested in their services.

The entire history of recreational scuba instruction had been about keeping the sport outside of government regulation. None of the incumbents would ever propose handing their hard won self-certification over to a government agency. And any upstart that tried it would find itself opposed by the full lobbying power of the established organizations.

 

[Sevenrider860]

Driver licenses and pilot certifications all have one thing in common...government involvement. Driver licenses are issued by state governments and pilot certificates are issued by the federal government. I personally would prefer to limit government regulation and involvement in my recreational scuba activities.

 

[The Chairman]

One of the biggest challenges I have noticed in the SCUBA community, or at least this board, which is not the same thing, is widespread distrust of certification qualifications.

I disagree with the premise. Divers are allowed to exceed their qualifications all the time.

 

[evandroairton]

Even at most countries who have "official" confederations, like here in Brazil (CBPDS associated with CMAS and ministry of sports) has no pratical regulations, and, in fact, the main certs have far more recognizing even within the contry (well, maybe not at the four... Or three? CBPDS exclusive members )

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

The only place I have seen a lot of belly aching about how bad training is, how bad trim is, how bad buoyancy skills are, all the amateur know nothing divers out there screwing up everything for everybody, and how bad some scumbag instructors are, is here on scubaboard and usually by a small minority vocal group. There might be more diving forums where bashing exsists but SB is the only one I go to so this is where I see it.
Embarrassingly, I used to be one of the bashers but I have matured out of it and now just dive and let dive.

Unlike flying or driving, scuba only involves a very minority sport that one or a few people participate in in an environment that is hidden from public view and poses no threat to the general public.
If scuba diving was an extremely popular sport and thousands of people were dropping like flies then there might be some government step in, but it’s not and it never will be.
I would imagine that they would make bicycle riders on public roadways have some sort official state issued license before anything involving scuba simply because they ride on the street and must obey all the same rules as a car.

For a third party involving a scuba certification, who would do it? how would they get paid? Who would set the standard? Where would it be done?
If just in a pool, what pool?
Scuba diving already suffers enough and is struggling to stay alive. It’s also a ridiculously small sport that is expensive as it is. Some thing like that sounds great in theory but for some that just want to blow bubbles in warm water on a guided dive it’s a little over the top.
I even suggested something like this once upon a time and we already had this discussion. Most peoples’ opinion was that the less government intervention the better.
Training could get better through competition.
Training also varies wildly by region, vacation spots vs local diving. In many or most cases training is sufficient for the environment that divers dive in. People will always do stupid things (in all walks of life) scuba is no exception. Having a third party check skills in a pool or even for OW cert dives is no guarantee that the diver will not have a lapse in judgment later and do something stupid.
The only place I could see where government oversight might be employed would be in a place that has some special environmental concerns like a sensitive coral reef. Fines generally work very well to discourage bad behavior. I could see divers needing to demonstrate pristine buoyancy skills before they go to the reef by the operator if they wanted to dive a certain reserve. If any diver trashed the site there would be heafty fines to be paid by the operator or the diver or both, but then who issues the fine? Does it go to court? Who is designated to have the authority to issue the fine? who pays them to observe and be the site cop?
What they would do instead is just close it off to everyone and nobody would be allowed to go there.
There’s a lot to it.

 

[Akimbo]

I contend that the fault is not instructor quality but the courses themselves. It also depends on the definition of "competency". The amount of training in Scuba 101 has steadily dropped since courses were first introduced in the US for a number of reasons.

Courses began with around 12+ hours of classroom 6+ hours of pool training, and 6+ days of ocean diving with freediving and two Scuba dives. Swim tests were much harder and students were more motivated — not what I would call casual divers. Obviously that severely limited the customer base.

That started to change by the late 1960s. Resort courses, primarily in the Caribbean, began to teach the bare minimum so tourists could dive under the close watch of guides. As I recall John Gaffney, founder of NASDS (National Association of Scuba Diving Schools), was the first to push abbreviated courses with advanced and specialty courses. Competitive pressures forced other agencies to follow.

This was also about the time the Undersea World of Jacques Cousteau series started on television. Cousteau was in his 50s, which motivated a lot of middle-aged and older people to see that you don't have to be a 20-something to dive.

Training materials have significantly improved so it is not unreasonable for classroom time to have been reduced. There is more equipment to learn but they reduce a number of hard-to-learn skills.

College/university dive courses are longer and more comprehensive but are far more labor intensive for students and instructors.

 

[Reef Madness]

No gov please.

 

[Pressurehead]

government involvement

The only times I wish the ^^^ came into play [fines] are times when boats, jet ski don't know what a dive flag means, or the rules, I have had one drop an anchor near the flag and start fishing FFS.
"What does that flag mean? someone has marked a good fishing spot", only joking, but....
We in Australia have a nanny state with rules, example: We have to hydro our cylinders every ******* year, and the list goes on.
But a boat or jet ski licence is easy to acquire [I would not call it "pass a test", acquire! The so called 'test' a blind ape could pass].
Rant over.