Any PADI instructors here who are also DIR compliant?

[NW Dive Dawg]

Scubadog, give it up. DCBC knows a few things to be eternal truths. PADI instructors are handcuffed to the standards book, which must be interpreted absolutely literally, including the suggestions, as being doctrine truth. No PADI instructor may teach a better class than the absolute awful minimum without departing from standards. NOTHING relevant to the local environment may be added to a PADI class.

None of this is true, and we have all posted references and communications with PADI headquarters to try to convince him, but it does not work. You will not win this one.

Now what would be the fun in giving up. Besides.... this is just the internet and so for all I know, DCBC is really a 14 year old girl in India hired by NAUI to hang out here on SB and bash PADI. But...in reality, I'm sure he's just an instructor who is exactly who he says he is and is passionate about this particular subject.

As for me, I'm retired from teaching PADI now and so I already got away with exceeding standards and actually utilizing some DIR stuff for all those years. Nobody said a word. Maybe I'm just lucky. Anyway, I sleep well.

The interesting thing is that I just read through the NAUI "creedo" or whatever it's called, and "OH MY GOD".... I am just finding out that when it came to the actual teaching, I was probably more of a NAUI instructor with a PADI card . Anyway, here's the Credo and my commentary in blue.

THE NAUI CREDO
​

WE BELIEVE:

·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.

Sounds reasonable. Same should apply to the "empowerers" (almost a word) at PADI. But to be honest, none of my examiners actually handed me a "loved one" to teach.... Also, who is supposed to teach the "hated ones"? Do they just get left out?
But seriously, I think this should actually be taken a step further and add in that an instructor should not certify anyone who they would not want to dive as a buddy with a loved one… or even a hated one!

·That the leadership power in NAUI should be limited to and controlled by the democratic process.

Don't really know how the PADI or NAUI leadership power limits or controls themselves. Don't care because it never came into play in my classes. Is there some little dictator in control who can't be fired or voted out?

·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 training support materials are designed for flexibility in teaching.

Glad we cleared that up because having unqualified amateur educators would just be a bad idea altogether.

I just granted myself academic freedom to teach diving in any reasonable manner as long as PADI standards and policies were already met. We called it “fun time” so this was an allowable freedom. So I wasn’t a “deviator”…. I was an “exceeder”. Sounds like NAUI does pretty much the same...as long as NAUI standards and policies are met. I was actually glad to read this because some of these posts were making it sound like a NAUI instructor can just do whatever the hell he or she wants with no standards or policies at all, and then issue a C card. Now that would be just wrong.

·NAUI Instructors may exceed NAUI standards in ways that do not jeopardize student safety. Examples include exceeding the number of required open water dives or increasing the academic content.

Been there, done that……but only as needed. This “creedo” makes it sound like a NAUI instructor can start of his course introductions by saying….. ‘’ Hi folks, I’m Joe, your instructor. I know that this was scheduled to be a 3 week course with 4 open water dives, but I’ve decided to increase it to a 6 week course and think we should do 8 open water dives. Hope you didn't have any other plans next month. Also, I’ve decided that the NAUI academic content needs to be increased… so I’m going to increase it….. What say all of you…"

Actually, I worked as a DM and managed a NAUI dive shop here in Seattle for several years in the early 90's and I know for a fact that the owner would never have allowed an instructor to increase a course length on his own unless there was a damn good reason. The sooner the class is over, the sooner the students will be buying drysuits, computers, regs and BC's. When I moved over to the PADI shop, it was the same. Some things never change. After completing the PADI IDC and getting to work there, I just blended some of the NAUI stuff into the PADI course. Even tossed in some of my own custom stuff.

·In the principle of continuing education for divers. People cannot learn all they need to know about diving in a single course of instruction and are to be encouraged to obtain additional training to enhance their safety and enjoyment.

Yep. Same as PADI.

·Diving instructors should be constantly improving the courses they teach. As better ways to teach are developed, NAUI Instructors have an obligation to share these developments with other NAUI members.

Yep.. been there and done that.

·In the educational concept of conditioning, i.e., the over-learning of skills. NAUI Instructors should structure every course to ensure adequate training and practice time.

I agree. Skills should be learned, then over-learned, then double-learned and if there’s time…. even the “grand poobah” which is the triple-dog-learn. After the TDL, then train and practice....adequately.... or more.

·Any individual who possesses the mental and physical abilities to dive and the desire to do so can be taught to dive by a patient, capable NAUI Instructor who will work with the person until the person is qualified to dive safely.

Same as PADI.

·That developmental skills, exercises and games that do not have a direct application in actual diving can be used effectively during training in controlled conditions to enhance diving ability.

For example, I was thinking that a rousing game of Monopoly might serve to increase Situational Awareness.

·Those who wish to learn to dive must have good water-skills, attain the ability to swim continuously, and demonstrate basic water survival skills.

PADI does allow students the option of to using MSF for the initial water skills evaluation. I would always explain this at the beginning of class and then I would tell the students that I wanted them to show me that they could swim without MSF. I can’t think of one instance where anyone chose the MSF option. Was I wrong to make them think that their instructor, who could pass or fail them, preferred them to swim? Maybe. But it worked. Anyway… I’ll give in on this one. Swimming without MSF should be a requirement, in my opinion. Possible with the exception of certain special needs circumstances.

·That divers should not be totally dependent upon their equipment for their safety. NAUI members emphasize the skills of diving.

Same as PADI.

·Anyone certified as a diver should be able to perform the basics of a rescue of a buddy diver.

One of my very favorite things to teach and practice during our “fun time”.

·That standards requirements and student needs are the governing factors controlling instruction and we oppose any controlling factors that hinder or prevent the meeting of these requirements and needs.

Yep… Standards, requirements and student needs are key and I am against anything that might hinder or prevent that. Plus, in general, I am for goodness and against badness.

·It is more important to train a few students well than to certify many marginally trained divers. We further believe that educational quality must never be sacrificed for economic reasons.

Now this just flat out sounds like whining from an outfit who is trying to sound noble but in reality would never turn down more students or more money.

·Learning should be student-centered.

Agreed.Non-student-centered learning just plain doesn’t work.

·That responsibility for safety should be gradually transferred from the instructor to the student during training and that students should be capable of assuming full responsibility for their own safety in order to be certified to dive without supervision.

Now this one I completely don’t agree with. I would change this to:

“Responsibility for safety should be gradually increased during training and that students should be capable of assuming full responsibility for their own safety in order to be certified to dive without supervision.”

An instructor’s responsibility for safety should not ever be “transferred” to a student prior to that student receiving a C-card… and in many ways, that responsibility continues even beyond that. Although, I do remember an incident where I completely transferred responsibility for safety to an entire class... but that's another story.

·Businesses and individuals are entitled to do business with whomever they choose and we do not demand that they be exclusive to NAUI. We do, however, expect NAUI members to represent and support the NAUI organization to at least the same extent they support any other organization.

Now that one is interesting. I don't think I 've ever seen a shop where they teach both PADI and NAUI. Maybe it's because PADI won't ever allow it....so NAUI says its cool because they know it can never happen anyway so they don't have to worry about saying that it's OK. Not really sure on this one.

·Instructors and dive centers should profit from their instructional activities. We recognize that diving warrants the professionalism and the fees associated with other recreational adventure sport pursuits.

Same as PADI. ONle I think they should change "should" to "shall".

·In the traditional concept of the buddy system for diving, that proficiency in the skills of sharing air and making an emergency swimming ascent is essential for diver safety.

Agreed. Plus, it's just amazing what some of these students will come up sometimes with their playtime... after we've covered "standards".

·That it is the duty of the officers, directors and employees of the association to meet the needs and desires of the NAUI membership above any and all other needs and desires that may exist in the diving industry.

Sounds noble and good..... until it's time for that boat payment.

·It is the responsibility of every NAUI member to ensure the quality of NAUI instruction.

Not really sure how every NAUI member can ensure instruction quality… but I guess if NAUI instruction quality ever gets hauled into court…..the defendants list will be one hell of a long list

·Every member has an obligation to report violations of NAUI’s Standards and Policies and/or the Code of Ethics.

I just plain don’t like rats. Never did. PADI Rats or NAUI Rats. Especially obligated rats…..the worst kind.


NOW….with all that said, I will fully admit that when I was teaching PADI, I would have personally preferred some of the obvious and stated flexibilities that are incorporated into the NAUI "creedo". It would have saved me from having to be “creative” in order to incorporate some of the DIR techniques and philosophies… which is what this thread was about before it morphed into the PADI vs NAUI discussion.

I’m also glad to see that there are others that teach to a level that is far above the “minimum requirements”. Sounds to me like Peter, DCBC are two of those who are both very passionate about taking it to a higher level.

Overall, I think that open water classes in general these days are sub-par compared to the courses in the "olden days" like the one that I took from good ol’e Steels in Oakland, CA. My OW course was more of a military type course. 3 weeks of Tuesday and Thursday nights. 4 hours each night. 2hrs class and 2hrs pool. Also, other than the required swim with no MSF, EVERY minute in the pool was in full ¼ in wetsuits, hoods, gloves and weights. My instructor was tough and had no concerns about being nice or PC and I’m certain that he was never once concerned about “standards” because he knew he was exceeding them.
Actually, the course kind-of reminded me of basic training. It started out with a seasoned vet teaching a cocky punk about the task at hand and about respect. It ended up with him handing me my c-card, telling me that I was a diver and me knowing that I had earned his respect.

 

[DCBC]

NAUI CREDO...Sounds reasonable. Same should apply to the "empowerers" (almost a word) at PADI. But to be honest, none of my examiners actually handed me a "loved one" to teach.... Also, who is supposed to teach the "hated ones"? Do they just get left out? But seriously, I think this should actually be taken a step further and add in that an instructor should not certify anyone who they would not want to dive as a buddy with a loved one… or even a hated one!

I do not certify an Instructor unless I believe them capable of teaching a member of my family in a manner that I would want them to be trained. I do not certify a Diver unless I feel they possess the knowledge and skill-sets to dive safely with a member of my family (all Divers btw).

NAUI Credo: That the leadership power in NAUI should be limited to and controlled by the democratic process.

Don't really know how the PADI or NAUI leadership power limits or controls themselves. Don't care because it never came into play in my classes. Is there some little dictator in control who can't be fired or voted out?

NAUI is composed of Member Instructors who elect their Board of Directors. Like other Not-for-profit corporations, the Board is responsible for the direction of the organization and is accountable to the members. Staff ultimately answers to a Manager appointed by the Board.

NAUI Credo: 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 training support materials are designed for flexibility in teaching.

...So I wasn’t a “deviator”…. I was an “exceeder”. Sounds like NAUI does pretty much the same...as long as NAUI standards and policies are met. I was actually glad to read this because some of these posts were making it sound like a NAUI instructor can just do whatever the hell he or she wants with no standards or policies at all, and then issue a C card. Now that would be just wrong.

PADI has Standards that the PADI Instructor must not exceed or deviate from. NAUI has "Minimum Standards." Minimum Standards are skill-sets and knowledge that must be achieved prior to certification. NAUI encourages their Instructors to exceed Minimum Standards and provides the Instructor with great flexibility. PADI prohibits deviations from the training program.

The PADI advantage is that there is only one Standard world-wide. What you receive in Germany is the same as you do in Japan. A McDonald's type solution. Great for quality control, but blind to the fact that diving environments vary.

NAUI Credo: NAUI Instructors may exceed NAUI standards in ways that do not jeopardize student safety. Examples include exceeding the number of required open water dives or increasing the academic content.

Been there, done that……but only as needed. This “creedo” makes it sound like a NAUI instructor can start of his course introductions by saying….. ‘’ Hi folks, I’m Joe, your instructor. I know that this was scheduled to be a 3 week course with 4 open water dives, but I’ve decided to increase it to a 6 week course and think we should do 8 open water dives. Hope you didn't have any other plans next month. Also, I’ve decided that the NAUI academic content needs to be increased… so I’m going to increase it….. What say all of you…"

No two NAUI SCUBA Programs are the same unless the Instructors teach to minimum standards. As most don't, what you get will vary dependent on the Instructor. Good business ethics dictates full disclosure of the training requirements prior to the Student starting the program.

Other than disclosure (an ethical consideration) and insuring that the minimums are met (established by NAUI), any NAUI Instructor has the academic freedom to teach diving in any reasonable manner. This should be in the best intersts of the student. For example, if I want the student to: swim 16 pool lengths as a prerequisite, one length underwater wearing only a swimsuit, Full gear surface swim in OW of 1/2 mile, Doff and Donn, station breathing, buddy preathing, blackout drills, harassment, OW 50' CESA, etc. I can make these required for certification with NAUI's blessings (in-fact these are all integrated into my training program). At no time must the student be placed at unreasonable risk and again the program must be disclosed prior to course commencement.

NAUI allows me to run a GUE Rec 1 type program in my OW Class if I desire to do so. Actually, my program is more difficult in many aspects. There are examinations in general knowledge (uw physiology, physics) that is more similar to what is required academically from a recreational Instructor, Tide Tables (we experience the largest tides in the World), Decompression, Gas Planning/Consumption, First-Aid/Rescue and Dive Planning. I also provide an optional Chamber Dive (to 100 FSW). Such is the flexibility of the NAUI program.

I offer this training to a select type of Client (mainly military personnel wanting to be Navy Divers or Commercial Divers). The program runs between 50 and 65 training hours. It is however, overkill for a diver who wants to go to the Caribbean to look at fish in ideal conditions.

I think that most divers today want to be trained as easily and quickly as possible (with the least amount of physical effort). I refer them to a PADI Shop in town (one of my Sons is a PADI DM). I train Divers for a harsh ocean environment. The PADI OW program, just doesn't hack it. Any certification organization, LDS, or Instructor who would certify a non-swimmer to dive in our usual local conditions should be charged with manslaughter in the eventuality of a fatality imo.

Actually, I worked as a DM and managed a NAUI dive shop here in Seattle for several years in the early 90's and I know for a fact that the owner would never have allowed an instructor to increase a course length on his own unless there was a damn good reason. The sooner the class is over, the sooner the students will be buying drysuits, computers, regs and BC's. When I moved over to the PADI shop, it was the same. Some things never change. After completing the PADI IDC and getting to work there, I just blended some of the NAUI stuff into the PADI course. Even tossed in some of my own custom stuff.

Dive Shops are another matter. Employee/Employer relationships can complicate things, but the onus is on the Instructor either way. There are good and bad Instructors in all Agencies.

NAUI Credo: In the principle of continuing education for divers. People cannot learn all they need to know about diving in a single course of instruction and are to be encouraged to obtain additional training to enhance their safety and enjoyment.

Yep. Same as PADI.

The same in-that there is more than one program offered, but they are not the same.

NAUI Credo: Diving instructors should be constantly improving the courses they teach. As better ways to teach are developed, NAUI Instructors have an obligation to share these developments with other NAUI members.

Yep.. been there and done that.

Was PADI aware that you were making "course program changes"?

NAUI Credo: Those who wish to learn to dive must have good water-skills, attain the ability to swim continuously, and demonstrate basic water survival skills.

PADI does allow students the option of to using MSF

Yes. A Student can be certified as a non-swimmer with PADI. I really have a problem with this, as I see it as irresponsible.

NAUI Credo: That divers should not be totally dependent upon their equipment for their safety. NAUI members emphasize the skills of diving.

Anyone certified as a diver should be able to perform the basics of a rescue of a buddy diver.

Unlike NAUI, PADI does not require sub-surface Rescue to become certified. NAUI does.

NAUI Credo: It is more important to train a few students well than to certify many marginally trained divers. We further believe that educational quality must never be sacrificed for economic reasons.

Now this just flat out sounds like whining from an outfit who is trying to sound noble but in reality would never turn down more students or more money.

NAUI's focus is on education, not profit. If it was otherwise, PADI likely would have never been created. If you want specifics on this statement, please send me a PM.

NAUI Credo: Businesses and individuals are entitled to do business with whomever they choose and we do not demand that they be exclusive to NAUI. We do, however, expect NAUI members to represent and support the NAUI organization to at least the same extent they support any other organization.

Now that one is interesting. I don't think I 've ever seen a shop where they teach both PADI and NAUI. Maybe it's because PADI won't ever allow it....so NAUI says its cool because they know it can never happen anyway so they don't have to worry about saying that it's OK. Not really sure on this one.

I owned a PADI and NAUI Dive Shop until PADI HQ told me to discontinue underwater rescue in the OW program as this was a breach of Standards. I decided to part ways.

NAUI Credo: In the traditional concept of the buddy system for diving, that proficiency in the skills of sharing air and making an emergency swimming ascent is essential for diver safety.

Agreed. Plus, it's just amazing what some of these students will come up sometimes with their playtime... after we've covered "standards".

Like you said, you were more of a NAUI Instructor than a PADI one... LOL

NOW….with all that said, I will fully admit that when I was teaching PADI, I would have personally preferred some of the obvious and stated flexibilities that are incorporated into the NAUI "creedo". It would have saved me from having to be “creative” in order to incorporate some of the DIR techniques and philosophies… which is what this thread was about before it morphed into the PADI vs NAUI discussion.

I don't think it morphed into a PADI vs NAUI discussion. A point was made that a PADI OW program could be used to deliver DIR/GUE training. I simply pointed-out what you have just said: "I would have personally preferred some of the obvious and stated flexibilities that are incorporated into the NAUI "creedo"." There is a difference, which hasn't been realized by some PADI Instructors on SB. PADI is much more restricted than a NAUI program. I think that this was pertinent to OP's comments.

It sounds like your PADI Instructor experience was similar to mine. Years past, they demanded much more than they currently do. PADI Instructor could elect not to teach in the PADI format (CW 2 you do this), but that has changed.

Overall, I think that open water classes in general these days are sub-par compared to the courses in the "olden days" like the one that I took from good ol’e Steels in Oakland, CA. My OW course was more of a military type course. 3 weeks of Tuesday and Thursday nights. 4 hours each night. 2hrs class and 2hrs pool. Also, other than the required swim with no MSF, EVERY minute in the pool was in full ¼ in wetsuits, hoods, gloves and weights. My instructor was tough and had no concerns about being nice or PC and I’m certain that he was never once concerned about “standards” because he knew he was exceeding them. Actually, the course kind-of reminded me of basic training. It started out with a seasoned vet teaching a cocky punk about the task at hand and about respect. It ended up with him handing me my c-card, telling me that I was a diver and me knowing that I had earned his respect.

Times have changed (more for some Agencies than others). I teach the same general course content than I did over 40 years ago. I've added different techniques, refined things and use more advanced technology (inside and outside of the water), but the same level of competence is assured. As you sound like you've been diving/teaching over a long period of time, I wouldn't be surprised if what I have been teaching was much different than what you use to do. The norm today, is a whole lot different than it use to be...

I have little doubt that Peter and many other PADI Instructors on SB run an excellent program. I think I did as well when I was a PADI Instructor. I did so not by strictly following PADI Standards. It sounds like you did likewise... There were PADI Standards and the other things that were required that PADI didn't recognize. We each choose the Agency we teach for, but often this is done without knowing about what other Agencies provide. This is why I am a strong supporter of Instructors obtaining multiple certifications. Personally, I've benefited from each organization that I've been affiliated with (including PADI).

 

[Peter Guy]

DCBC wrote

Peter, I define (like most organizations do) that swimming does NOT include ANY swimming aids

So the swimming in the Olympics is invalid because the "swimmers" use caps and goggles? DCBC, I understand YOU believe that "swimming" prohibits "any swimming aid" but is it just possible that it is OK NOT to agree with your definition?

Why, for example, are they called "swim fins?" Amazon.com: Speedo Biofuse Swim Training Fins: Sports & Outdoors

For the record, I disagree with you that "unaided" propulsion through the water is absolutely relevant to being a safe scuba diver. OTOH, I absolutely agree that "appropriately aided" (i.e., without use of a buoyancy device of any kind) IS relevant to being a safe scuba diver. YMMV

Re the horizontal CESA -- once again you have totally misunderstood the comments regarding that. It is PADI requirement that a VERTICAL CESA be performed from a depth not less than 20 feet and not greater than 30 feet prior to getting an OW cert. No, I, as a PADI instructor could not decide that a 50 feet CESA was appropriate.

Without looking at the GUE Standards again, can you increase the PADI minimum swimming requirements to GUE Standards? If not, what makes you think that you can teach a PADI OW Class anywhere close to a GUE Rec program?...

DCBC, I didn't write that I could duplicate GUE's Rec 1 class exactly -- just that as a PADI instructor there is nothing to prohibit me (or anyone else) from teaching the OW class to be substantially like Rec 1. GUE requires a 300 yard 14 minute unaided swim where I require a 300 yard MSF untimed swim. You may believe that such a difference is substantial, I do not. (BTW, neither may I require a 50 foot UW swim as required by Rec 1 -- otoh, I must require a 30 foot UW swim with full gear while exhaling the whole way. Again, I don't see the difference as substantial.)

DCBC, I think we all get that you don't like the PADI system. Great, don't teach it. But just because it doesn't meet with your approval doesn't mean the system is bad. An instructor who WANTS to teach a strong OW class that is substantially equivalent to Rec 1 or whatever has the ability to do so. Yes, there are some limitations on what I may teach (as even you admit, there are some limitations on what all instructors may teach) that you think are bad (Buddy breathing being one). But, some of us who learned to BB 45 years ago when the gear was different also think that teaching BB is something that is properly relegated to the dustbin of history. Just because it was important when AASs were not the norm (hell, hadn't been created) doesn't mean that today it is important. Sometimes technology DOES change what is important to learn.

Anyway, enough of this blather.

What I write today will not change your opinion so, shall we just agree that we have different perspectives.

--------------------

Dan -- While I wish PADI, as an organization, did more to encourage (require?) its instructor corps to change some of the teaching techniques, ALL instructors are taught to be "environmentally aware" while working UW. In the IDC and the IE one of the graded criterion is whether the class positioning was environmentally sound. That instructors, once they are out on their own, are perhaps "less than perfect" in their habits is, well, just plain sad.

 

[danvolker]

Dan -- While I wish PADI, as an organization, did more to encourage (require?) its instructor corps to change some of the teaching techniques, ALL instructors are taught to be "environmentally aware" while working UW. In the IDC and the IE one of the graded criterion is whether the class positioning was environmentally sound. That instructors, once they are out on their own, are perhaps "less than perfect" in their habits is, well, just plain sad.

I agree with you that this is what has occurred....what I do not agree with is that any of us should "allow" PADI to pretend to be Environmentally Responsible, and in the same breath, MANDATE kneeling and standing on delicate marine life-- I have Proof that PADI supports this....and I am considering what the best way would be to PUBLICIZE TO THE WORLD that PADI is actively mandating the behavior in these two videos I showed, with their "Standards"...

 

[Ste Wart]

Just for the record:


The option for MFS is not allowed in the UK and I believe also all of the European Union. So all UK trained OW PADI divers know how to swim.

 

[boulderjohn]

I agree with you that this is what has occurred....what I do not agree with is that any of us should "allow" PADI to pretend to be Environmentally Responsible, and in the same breath, MANDATE kneeling and standing on delicate marine life-- I have Proof that PADI supports this....and I am considering what the best way would be to PUBLICIZE TO THE WORLD that PADI is actively mandating the behavior in these two videos I showed, with their "Standards"...

PADI standards absolutely do not mandate kneeling anywhere, particularly in the open water environment.

There is not a single standard that even mentions kneeling.

The only reference to it is in the training guidelines, where it is suggested for introduction of only the very basic skills in the pool (confined water). Teaching on the knees is never mentioned or suggested for the open water dives. It is certainly not "mandated."

As LeRoy Wickham of PADI was quoted as saying in the ridiculous thread on this topic recently, those guidelines are only suggestions, and they are only for the first introductory steps in the pool. As Wickham also said, the article in the PADI professional journal two years ago that talked about neutral instruction from the start--never having students on the knees--has as much authority as those guidelines. In that article, Karl Shreeves of PADI said that if skills are introduced on the knees, they should then be taught while neutral, preferably in the same session.

What bothers so many of us is that you know that what you are writing is not true. Why do you keep repeating a lie? We know why DCBC keeps repeating things he absolutely knows are not true. What is your rationale?

 

[Hawkwood]

I agree with you that this is what has occurred....what I do not agree with is that any of us should "allow" PADI to pretend to be Environmentally Responsible, and in the same breath, MANDATE kneeling and standing on delicate marine life-- I have Proof that PADI supports this....and I am considering what the best way would be to PUBLICIZE TO THE WORLD that PADI is actively mandating the behavior in these two videos I showed, with their "Standards"...

I must have missed that memo. Could you please show us where it is "mandated"?

Just so there is no confusion, what "definition" of "mandated" are you using.

 

[danvolker]

and to refine this idea....I am thinking of a Page Post on Facebook, promoted to a million divers ( would cost me about $250) that shows one of PADI's nonsense Environmental Awareness ads---and it shows a picture from the dive class mess at BHB trampling the hydroids......

Text on the photo to read : Training agency, PADI, advertises Environmental Awareness, but practices Environmental DESTRUCTION of Delicate Marine Habitat..... and follow this up with my videos.....

Do you think I might get the attention of PADI with this?

 

[DCBC]

DCBC wrote So the swimming in the Olympics is invalid because the "swimmers" use caps and goggles? DCBC, I understand YOU believe that "swimming" prohibits "any swimming aid" but is it just possible that it is OK NOT to agree with your definition?

I feel confident that Olympic swimmers don't have to wear a "swimming aid" to be safe in the water. If they were going to be in my OW class however, they would have to prove their ability to swim unaided.

Peter you are free to disagree with anything I or anyone says. I have never inferred otherwise.

Re the horizontal CESA ... I, as a PADI instructor could not decide that a 50 feet CESA was appropriate.

Yes, or change any other aspect of the PADI certification Standard.

...GUE requires a 300 yard 14 minute unaided swim where I require a 300 yard MSF untimed swim. You may believe that such a difference is substantial, I do not. (BTW, neither may I require a 50 foot UW swim as required by Rec 1 -- otoh, I must require a 30 foot UW swim with full gear while exhaling the whole way. Again, I don't see the difference as substantial.)

I see a big difference between a GUE Diver and a PADI OW Diver who needs a swimming aid to prevent drowning.

...But, some of us who learned to BB 45 years ago when the gear was different also think that teaching BB is something that is properly relegated to the dustbin of history. Just because it was important when AASs were not the norm (hell, hadn't been created) doesn't mean that today it is important. Sometimes technology DOES change what is important to learn.

Peter, it wasn't long ago that I described an OOA event (two PADI Instructors) at depth. If the second PADI Instructor didn't know how to BB, he would have died. Perhaps you can try to convince him that BB isn't required, is outdated and dangerous. In this circumstance, technology had nothing to do with it. Both Instructors just didn't know the first thing about gas planning, or their own personal safe diving limitations.

What I write today will not change your opinion so, shall we just agree that we have different perspectives.

Agreed.

 

[danvolker]

I must have missed that memo. Could you please show us where it is "mandated"?

Just so there is no confusion, what "definition" of "mandated" are you using.

Mandated--directed to do something...in this case:

• An Agency such as PADI has what they call "Standards"....
• In the standards, the instructors perform the drills with the students and instructors constantly coming in contact with the bottom--in fact, they are directed to do this....( if some instructor can show that PADI would allow a open water class to have zero contact with the bottom like a GUE Fundies class, please hop in here and provide the proof of this)
• PADI apparently has absolutely no concern for WHERE it's instructors will sit or stand or walk on the bottom...this is apparently NOT in the Standards....meaning this trampling behavior is perfectly OK on a delicate Hydroid area full of sea horses, nudibranchs, octopus, frog fish, and dozens of other creatures divers travel thousands of miles to see.....PADI apparently does not feel any regulation on this environmental awareness is relevant to making money or to instruction...or to PADI's ads touting their ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS ( which gets them market share for sales).
• PADI instructors apparently don't really care that much when they see destructive environmental behaviors by other PADI instructors--so there has been no reporting of this, or no attempt to CHANGE padi "standards".