Any PADI instructors here who are also DIR compliant?

[DCBC]

... But I know from Peter's conversations with PADI HQ (and he has them frequently) and my observation of his conversations with the regional PADI rep and his CD, that what we are doing is not only legal, but viewed favorably.

The term 'legal' is always up to interpretation. I think that Andy makes a good point and I don't agree that he's being negative on PADI at all.

Andy has provided a reasonable interpretation of what could be argued, should a case come before the Court. From my experience, PADI's position could not be anything other than what is specified within the documentation. I certainly don't have any confidence that PADI would stand by any Instructor, unless it was in their best interests to do so. If it's not clear in the material, it's not clear and up in-the-air.

Regardless of who Peter or John have talked with at PADI HQ, the fact remains that no person has anymore authority to say how the Standards are to be interpreted than anyone else. PADI is a professional organization and corporate body who's policies are made at the Board level. Employees do not determine PADI's position on Standards.

There are acknowledged formats to communicate how Standards are to be interpreted; as Andy has clearly indicated. Until policy is formally changed, or unless the individual Instructor has specific written authority from PADI HQ, the policy would logically be that what was written in the Standards and explained within the 'Guide for Teaching' would be correct.

As PADI is much more restrictive in what and how the Instructor can teach, this is more applicable to PADI, but applies to every Agency. What is, or is not allowed must be specified and the onus is on the Agency to do so.

 

[beanojones]

If people are doing horizontal/neutral buoyancy training.... and someone takes a photo of them.... just saying... (just saying you're grasping at nonsense straws).

...and yes, I've seen plenty of pictures of people doing skills horizontal... just not in a PADI manual...

(First.... Are you channeling....NWGratefulDiver....or were you actually.... trying to put .... in the response.... for a ....reason?)

Actually you probably have not really seen many pictures of skills being done horizontal. You have seen pictures of people doing skills horizontal, but it's basically impossible to see what someone is doing in a photo when they are horozontal because very very few people have the flexibility to do things with their hand behinds their backs.

Plus with very few exceptions the gear is attached to the front of the body. I mean "tech" BCD manufacturers won't even put dumps in the back of bladders.

So it does not matter what educational materials show as pictures because they don't have much choice. It's either not show the skill, or show kneeling. It's taken to ridiculous lengths in some materials but really the purpose of the PADI system is its flexibility. That's the entire point of performance based educational systems.


....

I think its worth backing away, from the details of this or that and thinking about what exactly is involved in certifying a diver in this "not uncommon in Hawaii" circumstance: someone who has been diving for years, but has never gotten a C-Card. It's a surprisingly different course than one might expect for another diver. Now realize that that surprisingly different course is just taking a diver who says he has been diving for years, but cannot prove any of that experience.

Do we have to do anything special in that circumstance versus the circumstance of the diver having no experience?

 

[DevonDiver]

Actually you probably have not really seen many pictures of skills being done horizontal

You mean like:



What's going on?!? It's a mystery, I tell ya! A MYSTERY!!!

Actually you probably have not really seen many pictures of skills being done horizontal. You have seen pictures of people doing skills horizontal, but it's basically impossible to see what someone is doing in a photo when they are horozontal because very very few people have the flexibility to do things with their hand behinds their backs... It's either not show the skill, or show kneeling.

Am I getting something wrong... it's "impossible" to see what someone's doing in a photo unless kneeling (the angle/equipment location), but yet students can understand perfectly when viewing with their own eyes from the same vantage? Or are you suggesting some incredible inability of a camera to capture details, when otherwise identically located to real eyes?

I thought we all agreed that an 'early transition to neutral buoyancy' through 'getting off our knees' is beneficial. I'm surprised to hear that you think it'd be an "impossibility".

 

[ElGaucho]

I can clearly see a very tense discussion building up, until it just becomes non-sense. Yes, you can teach around PADI standards. Yes, PADI is outdated, looks old in regards to neutral buoyancy teaching and their materials, standards and general view reflect that. I think that DevonDiver's example is CLEARLY showing that.

There is a LOT wrong with PADI. Why, instead of defending the abusrdity, don't we choose to criticize, change and improve the standards, the way stuff is presented (my god, those videos! and yes, you HAVE to show them if you want to abide by the standards). This is what baffles me. These discussions are a VERY INTERESTING exchange of ideas, viewpoints and experiences; until everyone tries to get their way 100%.

Again, there are ways to teach through PADI and achieve better results. It is not very hard even. You can work around a system that is intrinsically a bit flawed. It's far from perfect. It CAN and SHOULD improve. Period. Is it so hard to now discuss how to improve it?

 

[beanojones]

One skill that happens face forward is of course a good exception to pick.

But of course you won at the internet, if that is worth something to you.

But of course on the other hand, if someone needs a video demo of that skill, whether they are an instructor or a student there is something more problematic than how PADI shoots its videos. (Most tech demo videos are a hand-waving party so I am not going to choose them to show anyone, for any reason.)

Its worth thinking about having an exchange of ideas, rather than shooting for internet point scoring, I think.

Like for instance, how about engaging the fact that we introduce skills in the classroom, well out of CW order?

 

[boulderjohn]

When we wrote the article on neutral, horizontal instruction for PADI, I had to pose for pictures. I posed for them on the knees, and I posed for them horizontal to show the difference. I did all of he basic skills. We had no trouble getting the horizontal pictures--we just had to give a moment's thought to how it should be done.

In the very beginning of the discussions, we pointed out the problems with the pictures and the videos. There was an immediate OMG! response, with a promise they would begin working on that immediately. They said it would be a couple of years before everything came out, but they promised the change.

PADI certifies a little under a million new divers around the world per year. They have all their materials in multiple languages. Do you have any idea how many copies of all their instructional materials they have on hand now? Do you have any idea what a financial investment that must be? Any thoughts on how long it will take to finish off that inventory?

I taught journalism for a while, and here is something a lot of people don't realize. When a newspaper or magazine is put together, it is often barely completed before deadline. The last work is done by the technicians who make sure all the words, ads, and pictures on every page fill every bit of space. These technicians are not experts in the content of the magazine or newspaper. They rarely have time to read the articles. They make mistakes. Sometimes those mistakes are caught--sometimes they aren't. For example, when our article on teaching neutral and horizontal was put together, they had a space problem--they needed some filler on a page. Rather than into the web site with the photos we provided, they just put in a stock photo of scuba instruction--with everyone on their knees, of course. The last PADI professional newsletter had a similar problem--to make it look good, the technicians put in a stock photo--of students on their knees--that was completely inappropriate. I had the same problem with my own dive shop. In advertising our new course, a course similar to DUE Fundamentals, the technician who made the newsletter advertising it needed a photo. He saw that the course emphasized buoyancy, so he put in a stock buoyancy photo--a diver in the Buddha hover, which is, of course, completely inappropriate.

 

[DevonDiver]

When we wrote the article on neutral, horizontal instruction for PADI, I had to pose for pictures. I posed for them on the knees, and I posed for them horizontal to show the difference. I did all of he basic skills. We had no trouble getting the horizontal pictures--we just had to give a moment's thought to how it should be done.

I agree 100%. It can be done...effectively.

I do worry that there could be a significant 'disconnect' between the PADI media producers and the industry/community. Maybe even with the PADI 'gurus' themselves... if the media doesn't reflect PADI's policies and desired outcomes.

PADI spent $$$ producing technical diving manuals and videos that received harsh criticism in the tech community (primarily the continual 'kneeling'). PADI then spent further $$$'s on mass marketing and advertising its technical programs. Surely, the best 'marketing' it could have received would have been to initially produce respect-winning, 'best-practice' media in the first place... stuff that would be applauded by technical divers...and envied by the other agencies...

I don't have personal knowledge of the personalities at PADI HQ...or those behind the materials production projects... maybe someone here does? But do those people really believe they are producing media that garners respect and admiration externally?

PADI certifies a little under a million new divers around the world per year. They have all their materials in multiple languages. Do you have any idea how many copies of all their instructional materials they have on hand now? Do you have any idea what a financial investment that must be? Any thoughts on how long it will take to finish off that inventory?

I don't think it'd be fair for anyone to level criticism at PADI for a slow implementation. Large organizations tend to suffer slower response and greater inertia than smaller ones. That said, I do think more regular updating of materials, especially videos, would be fair. Some of the resources are just plain antiquated.

For instance, the Wreck Diver course (a 'best-seller') has a terrible video - very old, very 'neon' and very counter-productive in skill demonstration (Hand-on-heart, I can only show as a 'how not to...' demo). Doesn't the massive sale of Wreck Diver materials and PICs warrant a prioritized re-vamp?

I also think that PADI needs to engage its instructor base in the process of materials/video production. PADI has access to a wealth of true expertise - it's own instructor base - it seems that expertise is largely ignored in course design and materials production.

I've written extensive supplements, created my own training videos etc to use in my courses (where I felt PADI's were insufficient or, even, counter-productive). I'm sure many other instructors have done so also. If approached, I doubt many would be resistant to assisting PADI and improving the 'professionalism' and 'image' of their materials. Indeed, a great many instructors/centers have the necessary resources to professionally plan and film videos... or to produce excellent still photos. Even if editing, titling, voice-over and post-production were done centrally, a vast amount of materials could be swiftly and economically sourced from the 'wider pool'.

I don't know who makes/made PADI videos... I guess PADI HQ staff (?).... but it seems apparent that they have neither the specialist expertise, nor physical capacity to produce a diverse range of specialist training materials/media in a reasonable time-scale. Why not reach out?

Look at the materials which have been prioritized for re-make, they always seem to be shorter, thinner, more sparse. That might effect a financial consideration to re-design and publish them - thinner..cheaper production...sold for the same cost as the old manual. What I DON'T see is any quality focused consideration to re-design and publish. The financial investment is large, so decisions come only when a desirable return-on-investment is calculated...and that factor alone.

Hence, new specialty manuals (good ROI in cost savings), but little interest in videos etc (low ROI in sales/cost savings).

 

[boulderjohn]

I can clearly see a very tense discussion building up, until it just becomes non-sense. Yes, you can teach around PADI standards. Yes, PADI is outdated, looks old in regards to neutral buoyancy teaching and their materials, standards and general view reflect that. I think that DevonDiver's example is CLEARLY showing that.

There is a LOT wrong with PADI. Why, instead of defending the abusrdity, don't we choose to criticize, change and improve the standards, the way stuff is presented (my god, those videos! and yes, you HAVE to show them if you want to abide by the standards). This is what baffles me. These discussions are a VERY INTERESTING exchange of ideas, viewpoints and experiences; until everyone tries to get their way 100%.

Again, there are ways to teach through PADI and achieve better results. It is not very hard even. You can work around a system that is intrinsically a bit flawed. It's far from perfect. It CAN and SHOULD improve. Period. Is it so hard to now discuss how to improve it?

I have taken classes from 4 different agencies other than PADI. In some of them, the instructional materials were 10 or more years old, and they contained serious errors. In one case, I took two different final exams that were about 10 years old. They were downloaded from the agency website in MS Format, meaning that a change could be made globally in seconds. Those 10 year old exams both contained serious errors.

In another agency, all of the content was brand new and delivered online. I caused an uproar when I talked to my instructor and said I thought a lot of it was wrong. He basically told me I was a peon who should either decide to take the course as is or leave. I contacted the owner of the agency with my concerns about the content, and after an exchange about it, there was a general announcement that there were some errors in the content, and it was being rewritten.

In the last class I taught, with an agency I had never used before, I told my instructor that some of the concepts he had taught me totally contradicted what the course textbook said. He was incredulous, and so he sat down to read the text in front of me. When he saw that the text did, indeed, contradict what he had taught me, he was at a total loss. He had written the textbook.

So, maybe we can name all the agencies that are right on top of these things, print error-free materials, and update them immediately.

 

[DevonDiver]

So, maybe we can name all the agencies that are right on top of these things, print error-free materials, and update them immediately.

I thought you didn't want an agency-vs-agency bash? If we're talking about PADI, lets talk about PADI. It's fair to identify good practices that other agencies might have... which PADI might adopt. There's little to be gained from identifying bad practices or deficits which PADI wouldn't wish to aspire to. Every agency has strengths and weaknesses - it'd be incorrect to allege PADI was the worst, or the best when all factors are considered; same for any other agency.

 

[beanojones]

I can clearly see a very tense discussion building up, until it just becomes non-sense. Yes, you can teach around PADI standards. Yes, PADI is outdated, looks old in regards to neutral buoyancy teaching and their materials, standards and general view reflect that. I think that DevonDiver's example is CLEARLY showing that.

There is a LOT wrong with PADI. Why, instead of defending the abusrdity, don't we choose to criticize, change and improve the standards, the way stuff is presented (my god, those videos! and yes, you HAVE to show them if you want to abide by the standards). This is what baffles me. These discussions are a VERY INTERESTING exchange of ideas, viewpoints and experiences; until everyone tries to get their way 100%.

Again, there are ways to teach through PADI and achieve better results. It is not very hard even. You can work around a system that is intrinsically a bit flawed. It's far from perfect. It CAN and SHOULD improve. Period. Is it so hard to now discuss how to improve it?

But this is missing the point about which much of the discussion in this part of this thread is running:

There is no question in some people's minds (including mine) that there is nothing particularly wrong with PADI's materials except inasmuch as people confuse them for standards. Yes they show CW and OW skill circle jerks which I would never use, and simply have never used after my first or second OW class. But they also show a lot of good diving behavior when the divers are actually diving. It takes about 20 seconds of explanation to get rid of the expectation that anything will be done on the knees. It takes endless amounts of focus to make sure that the students actually do everything neutral and off the bottom. And this really has nothing to do with whether the PADI materials show students kneeling.

(As a counterpoint of videos shot to show skills in trim: Frankly, the divers in the tech videos many seem to love, display a much greater lack of comfort in the water, with more sculling and hand waving than I generally allow in divers my OW courses. Those videos have better 'trim', but that's just a function of gear setup, and it seems to come at the expense of stability. Just watch the lack of control when the diver does the mask R&R, dropping about two feet once he actually starts breathing instead of inflating his lungs to maintain position. And the constant fin sculling and hand flailing is about as bad a display of functionless flailing as I am ever comfortable seeing in OW students. Give me a stationary kneeling diver in a demo video over that any day.

But then again, I simply don't see much benefit in demos of any kind. All instruction takes place in one place, and one place only, and that is in the water, and with the diver. Everything else is noise. I know I am in the minority about this, but then again, so what? I am also in the minority in thinking all the stuff people want to say matters is of little importance to what happens in the water. But then again, I do actually dive with people for a living, so people being adept out of the water, but sucking in the water actually matters to me.)

The interesting claim that DevonDiver is making is that introducing skills out of evaluation sequence is a standards violation. (And ignoring the internet point scoring that always seems to be a need for many posters), that is an interesting point of discussion. I know I introduce skills well before CW, and so does the video itself, so that is at least a counter to DevonDiver's point, whether or not it is a compelling point.