Any PADI instructors here who are also DIR compliant?

[DCBC]

BCDC -- you asked why I hadn't responded to some posts -- the simple answer is that it wasn't worth my time or effort to respond. You seem to believe that Quebec law is THE law of the world. Hint, it isn't.

A good position to take when you don't have an answer. You make statements that have nothing to do with the conversation (Bar exam) and when you're asked what this has to do with anything, you don't have the time to answer. You certainly can do better than that Counselor...

You asked:

"...someone PLEASE identify a case where a PADI instructor has been sued (let alone successfully sued) by an Open Water student (or her estate) for malpractice due to: a. Teaching strictly to the PADI standards"

I answered; to which you replied:

"you seem to believe that Quebec law is THE law of the world. Hint, it isn't."

Again Peter, PADI is an international organization; why should the law in Quebec (or any other location where PADI operates) not be applicable? The Province declared that the Standards were insufficient for the diving conditions. What about that don't you understand?

You continue to take shots and fail to address the issue. It doesn't seem to be working very well...

 

[DevonDiver]

And nothing will be done until someone (like you) reports it.

Report it for what? A report can only be for a definite violation of standards and/or unsafe dive practices.

It's pretty hard to pin down a 'standards violation' for anything in that video. At least, nothing that cannot be reasonably interpreted to be 'acceptable' from a pure standards and safety perspective.

Heck, if 'touching the floor' was gonna carry any weight in a complaint, then PADI would have to QA it's own HQ and media production people most severely..

 

[supergaijin]

As I've said before, there are poor Instructors in every Agency. No doubt there are Instructors who teach most of "their program" on their knees. I say "their program," because unless the Instructor is teaching to the minimums (which is often frowned upon by peers) no two NAUI programs (for example) are exactly alike in what is actually required for certification.

Teaching to the minimum is frowned upon by all conscientious professionals. Not just in the diving industry- but in all teacher-student relationships. PADI has minimums, NAUI has minimums. Many instructors teach to that standard and that is a sad failing for the industry as it turns out divers with minimal skills.

The Instructor is free to add to the program content and require this as a condition of certification. It's up to the Instructor to determine when the Student possesses the skill-sets and knowledge required to dive safely in local conditions and issue a card. For one Instructor the course may be 30 training hours, another Instructor 65. So in a way, each Instructor IS his own Agency (the only caveat is that minimums must be met and the training must not endanger the student).

I've worked the PADI 'backpacker' courses in SE Asia, the mid-range course in Egypt and NZ and the 'luxury' course in the Maldives. IME price has a bearing on the time devoted to the course, and this has a direct bearing on the divers' ability. $250 gets you the minimum ie. minimum standards, minimum flexibility, minimum instructor:student interaction. $400 gets you more than the minimum, and $600 gets you a tailored course. The scuba diving masses opt for 'cheap and easy' vs a 'tailored course'. That results in minimal skills which reflect minimum standards. How is that different from NAUI instructors who teach in various price ranges?

No organization I teach for requires me to issue a card if the minimums are met. Unless I believe that the Diver is safe to dive with a member of my family, they don't get a card. Unless an Instructor is competent to teach a member of my family to dive, they don't get a card. That's the difference between the PADI and NAUI philosophies. I'm good with that.

I suppose I can use some excerpts to highlight some of the differences in philosophy:
Quote
- "An individual should not be qualified as a NAUI Instructor unless those empowered to qualify the person would allow that person to teach their loved ones to dive."
- "The leadership power in NAUI should be limited to and controlled by the democratic process."
-"NAUI Instructors are qualified professional educators who are granted academic freedom to teach diving in any reasonable manner as long as NAUI standards and policies are met. NAUI does not have a rigid approach to teaching diving."
- "NAUI Instructors may exceed NAUI standards in ways that do not jeopardize student safety."
- "Those who wish to learn to dive must have good water skills, attain the ability to swim and demonstrate basic water survival skills."
- "Divers should not be totally dependent on their equipment for safety."
- "Anyone certified as a diver should be able to perform the basics of a rescue of a Buddy diver."
- "It is more important to teach a few students well that to certify many marginally trained divers.We further believe that educational quality must never be sacrificed for economic reasons."

All that is beautiful prose, bringing a hand to the heart and a tear to the eye. It seems surprising then to see that some god-awful divers are also certified through NAUI. I guess they don't care that much for their families.

As I've said, NAUI has run buoyancy work shops when the PI became available. This was the first time when 100% of the diving populace had an ability to be neutral regardless of depth. It was imo, amongst the largest innovations that I've seen in recreational diving. Over the past 40 years, NAUI has produced numerous articles which have been published in NAUI News and Sources (Journal) on this topic.

It seems surprising then that some of the worst divers I have seen underwater in regards to buoyancy control are the 'old school' who learned to dive with the introduction of the BCD and NAUI's numerous articles- and yet seemingly have no idea what a BCD is there for.

 

[DCBC]

I've worked the PADI 'backpacker' courses in SE Asia, the mid-range course in Egypt and NZ and the 'luxury' course in the Maldives. IME price has a bearing on the time devoted to the course, and this has a direct bearing on the divers' ability. $250 gets you the minimum ie. minimum standards, minimum flexibility, minimum instructor:student interaction. $400 gets you more than the minimum, and $600 gets you a tailored course. The scuba diving masses opt for 'cheap and easy' vs a 'tailored course'. That results in minimal skills which reflect minimum standards. How is that different from NAUI instructors who teach in various price ranges?

If a PADI Instructor teaches to PADI Standards, he will provide a course that will meet PADI Standards no more and no less (regardless of its location or what he charges for it). He is not authorized to deviate from the program in any way.

A NAUI Instuctor may teach NAUI's minimum requirements and then add many other aspects to the training process. This additional training becomes part of the training program. He examines and evaluates on all of the training, which a student must past before s/he can become certified.

It would seem that you fail to see that a difference exists...

All that is beautiful prose, bringing a hand to the heart and a tear to the eye. It seems surprising then to see that some god-awful divers are also certified through NAUI. I guess they don't care that much for their families.

As I've said, there are good and bad Instructors in every organization. To be clear, that's not what I'm talking about. There is a fundamental difference in what each organization is trying to become. NAUI is a not-for-profit that is an Association of like-minded Instructors. PADI is an asset of a publicly owned for-profit corporation whose desire is to turn a buck.

It seems surprising then that some of the worst divers I have seen underwater in regards to buoyancy control are the 'old school' who learned to dive with the introduction of the BCD and NAUI's numerous articles- and yet seemingly have no idea what a BCD is there for.

I'm sure that you can see people trained in different locations, certified with different agencies, at different times that could fall into this category. If you show me one of those NAUI divers, I'll show you someone who at least knows how to swim. PADI doesn't have this requirement.

PADI has had the lowest training standards in the industry since it started. I'm not bashing PADI, just stating a fact. If you had the opportunity to speak with John Cronin (PADI's Co-founder), you would know that this was by design. Where else on this planet can you be a non-swimmer and get an OW Card in two-days??? No wonder why the state of diver education is at such a low!

Learn to Scuba Dive in 2 Days with the PADI Open Water Dive Class in Crystal River Florida

 

[supergaijin]

If a PADI Instructor teaches to PADI Standards, he will provide a course that will meet PADI Standards no more and no less (regardless of its location or what he charges for it). He is not authorized to deviate from the program in any way.

Still bashing this old chestnut? It's a fallacy that is mainly trumpeted by you on this board, in the face of evidence to the contrary in many other threads. A PADI instructor may not 'fail' a student if the minimum standards are met. The instructor may teach 'outside' of the bare minimum which is set in the Standards. Teaching 'tide tables' for example- the PADI Instructor may teach them, but cannot fail the student for not learning it.

A NAUI Instuctor may teach NAUI's minimum requirements and then add many other aspects to the training process. This additional training becomes part of the training program. He examines and evaluates on all of the training, which a student must past before s/he can become certified.

It would seem that you fail to see that a difference exists...

No I understand it quite well. I like it in fact. PADI instructors cannot fail students for not completing a 500m snorkel for example- the standard is 300m. If the student makes it to 300m, the student cannot be failed by the instructor. A PADI student cannot be failed for not understanding 'Rock Bottom'- we can teach it of course, but we cannot make it part of the final exam. Teaching is not 'deviating'. This has been explained to you ad nauseum and frankly to argue otherwise is deliberately misleading. PADI sets a standard that they feel is appropriate for beginner divers. PADI instructors assess to that standard, and often teach above it according to location, time, ability etc.

NAUI is a not-for-profit that is an Association of like-minded Instructors. PADI is an asset of a publicly owned for-profit corporation whose desire is to turn a buck.

Why, NAUI courses should be half the price of PADI's. It's surprising there are no $100 NAUI OW courses offered in Thailand or Honduras.

I'm sure that you can see people trained in different locations, certified with different agencies, at different times that could fall into this category. If you show me one of those NAUI divers, I'll show you someone who at least knows how to swim. PADI doesn't have this requirement.

The minimum standard may include the 'swim test'. If the student cannot do that, the PADI instructor has every right to fail them as they didn't pass the Standard. Personally I believe the snorkel test is more appropriate for divers. Swimming is good, but a skilled snorkeler is more likely to make a skilled diver. A good swimmer, not neccesarily so as oceans differ somewhat to swimming pools.

Phew- never try to teach a pig to sing...

 

[DCBC]

The instructor may teach 'outside' of the bare minimum which is set in the Standards.

The essence of my statement is that you cannot add or deviate from the training program. That is the difference. If you wish to split hairs, be my guest. Regardless, it is what it is.

Why, NAUI courses should be half the price of PADI's. It's surprising there are no $100 NAUI OW courses offered in Thailand or Honduras.

No, in some cases it's enough to charge the same price and provide twice the training... LOL

The minimum standard may include the 'swim test'.

May doesn't means it's required. With PADI's blessings, you can certify a non-swimmer who can survival float with no-forward motion. If you think this is enough, you clearly don't appreciated the in-water competence required for many of the temperate oceans of the World.

BTW, what other certification agencies have you been an Instructor with? SSI is it? How does this program compare? Does SSI allow you any leeway or do you teach by numbers with them as well?

 

[supergaijin]

I was indeed also an SSI Instructor as it was used at one of the resorts I worked in while in the Maldives- those two agencies are so similar, there is IMO nothing between them. The crossover Instructor took pains to try to point out how original SSI was. To be honest I let my Instr rating lapse as soon as I left the resort so can't comment with extensive knowledge. On the surface there was no fundamental difference that I saw, other than you couldn't be an independant... and SSI had stickers for the logbook.

In Djibouti I was working under the FFESSM system which IMO is a fairly radical departure from the scheme of the mainstream recreational agencies. 1* divers were not certified to dive independantly of a 'pro'. 2* was a more intense version of 'AOW' and 3-4* was very demanding. Some of the instructor ratings had me confused- to be honest I'm still a bit foggy.

May doesn't means it's required. With PADI's blessings, you can certify a non-swimmer who can survival float with no-forward motion. If you think this is enough, you clearly don't appreciated the in-water competence required for many of the temperate oceans of the World.

I can certify people here to dive independantly in conditions similar or 'better' than those in which they were trained- I know this, and you should too by now as it's been talked about in so many of the these previous threads.

I make it part of my teaching and 'goodbye' speech (in fact I did it today) to two students. We signed the student record together and went back through the PADI Safe Diving Statement of Understanding which goes in to this, periods of inactivity, etc. etc.

So by teaching in the tropical Indian Ocean, I do not teach so that people can dive independantly in the sub-tropical regions (such as NZ) where I learned to dive and have also worked as an Instructor btw.

By 'default' when I taught in NZ, using heated pools, cold, dark lakes and the temperate Pacific Ocean, the conditions allowed me to teach divers to dive in most tropical locations as well. Those conditions didn't allow someone to dive in the North Sea as the conditions there are more difficult. I hope this is clear- it is to most instructors.

 

[DevonDiver]

If a PADI Instructor teaches to PADI Standards, he will provide a course that will meet PADI Standards no more and no less (regardless of its location or what he charges for it). He is not authorized to deviate from the program in any way.

To be fair, there is quite a degree of flexibility in the PADI standards. In regards to previous discussion of 'early transition to neutral buoyancy' there are specific standards (given one - common - interpretation) that restrict the instructor. In many other regards, there aren't restrictive standards.

Where standards don't restrict the course, there is ample scope for the instructor to adapt the course to fulfill specific goals.

That said (and without access to any of PADI's legal statistics or records), I retain caution that PADI will not back any instructor, for any reason, should liability/financial repercussions be at stake...and should an 'interpretation' of standards/policy exist that the PADI lawyers could interpret for their own defense. That isn't an indictment of PADI, but rather an awareness of how most (all) profit-making corporations conduct their business.

For that reason, I've always taught to the absolute best of my ability - whilst ensuring never to err from the 'black-and-white' statement of formal standards. 99% of the time, it's a grey area... particularly so due to vague definitions and wordings. I have sympathy for any instructor who opts for a less flexible approach... it's understandable (especially in more litigation prone countries).

The difference I've noticed between PADI and some other agencies (I teach/taught for 4 scuba agencies) is that other agencies (I have experience with) tend to 'enshrine' (in writing) the freedom of the instructor to adapt, amplify and supplement the course. PADI certainly don't do that, but neither do they prohibit it...although some standards can be interpreted as very rigid.

 

[NW Dive Dawg]

-"NAUI Instructors are qualified professional educators who are granted academic freedom to teach diving in any reasonable manner as long as NAUI standards and policies are met."

- "NAUI Instructors may exceed NAUI standards in ways that do not jeopardize student safety."

Wow... when I saw that this thread was still running strong, I made a cup of coffee and sat down to see what’s new. Not much really.....just the same o'le discussion with a few different angles and a few new players.

What I keep coming back to is the NAUI clarifications stated above. I’m the PADI Instructor that DCBC refers to who pulled these off of the NAUI site. These are not innuendoes or subjective statements that need to be interpreted or otherwise force an instructor into using “work-arounds” or “creativity” or "play time" to certify well trained OW divers. These are crystal clear statements that unequivocally allow, encourage and back-up any NAUI instructor who chooses to hold divers to a higher level of competency and skill, IF that instructor chooses to do so.

The more I see the level of competency of new OW divers these days, the more it is becoming painfully obvious that there a lot of instructors out there from all of the agencies, including NAUI, who totally suck and the responsibility for this is fully on the instructors.

So….my simple question to all of the PADI instructors out there is this. Wouldn’tevery single one of you really prefer it if PADI officially and openly granted you these same exact allowances? Now before answering, keep in mind that you could still continue teaching the PADI course exactly as currently prescribed if you choose to….but you would have the choice of taking it to a higher level if you wanted to…and the back-up of your agency to support you.

Is there one single PADI instructor out there who would not prefer to have this be his or her choice and his or her option? If there is, I’d really like to hear the reason why.

 

[pocky21]

Wouldn’tevery single one of you really prefer it if PADI officially and openly granted you these same exact allowances?

With the amount of mis-information among some instructor ranks that I've encountered in even my very limited experience, the thought of that scares me. The approach taken to vaguely define things is the difference between a handful of creative instructors finding ways to do what is best, and a bunch of idiots having a permission slip to teach whatever they want.

Remember, it's a two way street. We're looking at it with the vision of responsible, passionate instructors exceeding standards with a commitment to diver safety and excellence. Now, take Gomer Pile with his brand new instructor card and tell him he can throw in whatever he likes. I'm lead to believe that certain agencies intentionally define things a little loose - maybe for their own legal protection, and maybe to both allow the smart ones a little freedom and keep the dumb ones in line. I'm not saying it's right, or even favorable, but I'm willing to bet there's a lot more Gomer Pile's out there than the former.