- Messages
- 22,171
- Reaction score
- 2,798
- # of dives
- 5000 - ∞
So what does this mean to the concept of DWW? First let’s try and define our “Betterness Score” a bit:
There is a model out there know as the “Dreyfus Model” that suggests that in the acquisition and development of a skill, a learner (diver) passes through five levels of proficiency: novice, beginner, competent, proficient, and expert. These different levels are reflected in changes in three general aspects of skilled performance:
Think of your own areas of experience in diving. Rate your areas of diving (e.g., air < 130 FSW, EAN, TriMix, DIR, Diving Mastering, Instructing, Wreck Diving, Cave Diving, etc) on an "expertise scale" of 1 to 5, with 1 being "novice" and 5 being "expert" according to the descriptions below:
- A switch from reliance on abstract principles to development (and use) of paradigms based on experience..
- A change in situational awareness that produces the ability triage and prioritize inputs as a complete whole in which only certain parts are relevant rather than compiling them as equally weighted data points
- A move from a third person view of a detached observer to a first person view of someone who is directly involved in their environment and is actively engaged in the situation.
Stage 1: Novice
Beginners have had no experience of the situations in which they are expected to perform. Novices are taught rules to help them perform. The rules are context-free and independent of specific cases; hence the rules tend to be applied universally. The rule-governed behavior typical of the novice is extremely limited and inflexible. As such, novices have no "life experience" in the application of rules.Stage 2: Beginner
Diving knowledge is minimal and solely 'textbook.’ It does not connect decisions with actions and ignores the context in which the action will be taken. The available suite of skills rigidly adhere to learned rules, other responses are not readily available. The possible use of knowledge for planning is without situational awareness and lacks discretionary judgment. The diver has available only rational decision making tools, nothing is intuitive or holistic. Individual actions are seen (and taken) in isolation with no conception of, or capability to deal with, complexity. Performance is unlikely to be satisfactory unless closely supervised.
Beginners are those who can demonstrate marginally acceptable performance, those who have coped with enough real situations to note, or to have pointed out to them by a Divemaster, Instructor or mentor, the recurring meaningful situational components. These components require prior experience in actual situations for recognition. Principles to guide actions begin to be formulated. The principles are based on experience.Stage 3: Competent
The diver has developed a working knowledge of key aspects of tasks and appreciates that complex diving situations exist. Since situational awareness is limited, all attributes and aspects tend to be treated separately and given equal importance. Though the begins to use global characteristics of situations that are recognized from limited prior experience, problems are primarily solved by using rote guidelines for action that are based on a situation’s attributes. The diver is starting to make rudimentary attempts to decide on appropriate actions in context, but is limited to applying actions as a series of steps, and thus can not be expected to successfully resolve complex situations. Though supervision is needed for the accomplishment of the overall task, straightforward tasks likely to be completed to an acceptable standard and the beginner is able to achieve some steps using own judgment.
Competence develops as the diver begins to see his or her actions in terms of how they effect the entire dive and dive team. The competent diver can create a dive plan that establishes a goal and waypoints based on considerable conscious, abstract, analytic contemplation of the potential problem. The conscious, deliberate planning that is characteristic of this skill level helps achieve efficiency and organization. The competent diver lacks the speed and flexibility of the proficient diver but does have a feeling of mastery and the ability to cope with and manage the many contingencies of the diving discipline in which they are involved. The competent diver does not yet have enough experience to developed nuanced situational awareness that provides both an overall picture and an instinctive grasp of which aspects are most important.Stage 4: Proficient
The diver now has a good working, as well as some background, knowledge of diving and as a result can deal with knowledge in context. Recognition of relevance is now present. Actions are seen, at least partly, in terms of longer-term goals. The dive is able to cope with simple multiple, simultaneous, competing inputs. Sees actions (at least partially) in terms of longer-term goals. The diver performs best with standardized and routine procedures, but is able to achieve most tasks using own judgment and can engage in conscious and deliberate planning. Skills are fit for the purpose intended, though may lack refinement.
The proficient diver’s situational awareness focus wholes rather than parts or aspects, and actions are guided by maxims. Proficient divers understand a situation as a whole because they perceive its meaning in terms of accomplishing the dive. The proficient diver learns from experience what typical events to expect in a given situation and how plans that have been made and agreed to may need to be modified in response to events. The proficient diver recognizes when the expected normal progression of a dive moves off course. This holistic understanding improves the proficient diver’s decision making; it becomes less labored because the diver has a perspective on which of the many existing attributes and aspects of the present situation are most important and which should be ignored or put aside for the moment. The proficient diver uses maxims as guides which reflect what often might appear to the novice or beginner diver or even the competent diver, as unintelligible nuances of the situation; they can mean one thing at one time and quite another thing later. Once one has a deep understanding of the situation overall, however, the maxim provides direction as to what must be taken into account. Maxims reflect nuances of the situation.Stage 5: The Expert
Posses a depth of understanding of the disciplines that make up diving as well and those specific to diving so that the diver can make a holistic assessment in context rather than just an analytic one. The diver can deal with complex situations holistically, and decision-making is more confident. Performing to a fully acceptable standard is routine, as is seeing what is most important in a situation. Deviations from the normal pattern are quickly perceived. Decision-making is less labored. Maxims are used for guidance, but there is understanding that conclusions will (and should) vary according to the situation. The diver sees the overall 'picture' and how individual actions fit within it. The diver is able to take full responsibility for own work (and that of others where applicable).
The expert diver no longer relies on an analytic principle (rule, guideline, maxim) to connect her or his understanding of the situation to an appropriate action, except in unique circumstances. The expert diver, posses an enormous background of experience that has jelled into an intuitive grasp of each situation and that subliminally focuses in on the problem without wasteful consideration of a large range of unfruitful, alternative solutions. The expert operates from a deep understanding of the total situation. The chess master, for instance, when asked why he or she made a particularly masterful move, will just say: "Because it felt right; it looked good." The expert diver is no longer consciously aware of features and rules; his or her performance is fluid, flexible and highly proficient. This is not to say that the expert never uses analytic tools. Highly skilled analytic ability is necessary for those situations with which the expert diver has had no previous experience (because in those situations the expert is, in fact, operating at a lesser grade). The expert diver has learned how to be the best possible Novice, Beginner, Competent or Proficient Diver that the situation and moment requires. Analytic tools are also necessary for those times when the expert gets an incorrect grasp of the situation and then perceives that events are not proceeding as was expected. Since alternative perspectives are rarely available to a diver, even when par of a team, the diver’s only way out of a wrong grasp of the problem is by using analytic problem solving.I suggest that most divers trained today are lucky to reach the Beginner level, if fact they are really still novices. With additional tutelage (Buoyancy, AOW, Rescue, Specialties) they usually will reach the Beginner level, but fall short of Competent, lacking the ability to see actions in terms of longer-term goals and to cope with simple multiple, simultaneous, competing inputs.
The diver is capable of making correct decisions on an intuitive basis (e.g., no longer needs to rely on rules, guidelines or maxims) and posses authoritative knowledge of disciplines that make up diving that leads to a deep tacit understanding and a holistic and intuitive grasp of situations. In complex situations, the diver moves easily between intuitive and analytical approaches, using analytic approaches used only in completely novel situations or when problems occur. The diver sees the overall 'picture' and simultaneously grasps alternative approaches. Is comfortable taking responsibility for going beyond existing standards and creating original interpretations using a vision of what is possible. Excellence is achieved with relative ease.
What the new GUE program seems to me to do is to graduate divers at the Beginner or even at Competent level. I think this is wonderful. So what’s the downside? For much of diving there is no downside. Clearly, for diving environments (like caves) that, despite their high risk in terms of not having a “surface” that you can ascend to directly, feature highly predictable risks and a rather narrow range of problems that given care and attention to equipment and procedures combined with a coordinated team approach to the problem will virtually guarantee the divers’ survival. The same holds true for a large portion of open water diving, as long as the divers show good judgment concerning conditions.
But the GUE advantages are bought at a price. The range of responses that are available to the diver are significantly decreased due to the restriction of acceptable equipment and the precision of the ways in which the divers are trained to use that gear. While, as we have seen, this can be a very efficient way to bring divers to the Competent level quickly (and set them on the path to Proficiency) it relies on the use of dictates, paradigms and maxims to do so and this seems likely (to me) to cause a good many divers to stall at the Proficient level. Now is “stalling” at the Proficient level such a bad thing? After all, few conventional trained divers ever reach that level at all. So no, it’s not such a bad thing, and (to my view) is a damn sight better than conventional training which rarely results in even Competence, even amongst Instructors and Divemasters.
What DWW can do, if the diver can reach at least the Competent level, is to free them from a rule-based framework and put them on the path to true Expertise. Frankly the only place that I see the concepts of DWW being applied from entry-level on up is within the few Scripps model training programs that are out there. DWW is also well applied to some very challenging diving (e.g., the Jersey Wreck Divers) but that does not start out at the entry-level and thus almost always requires back-filling during technical training.
PS: DWW is "Doing What Works"
PPS: I screwed up in the graph axis, but I think you'll still get my drift.
