AOW Disappointment

[Steve R]

....
I don’t think that’s a fair comment. I don’t doubt that you, and many of your PADI peers, work hard to be the best that that you can. I’d suggest to you that you are limited in that goal by the structure that you choose to be governed by. And be honest for a moment, don’t you really feel that way too? Almost every PADI Instructor I know has a … “but they’re the largest” or a “the shop is PADI” or some other rationalization as to why they do what they do. None ever say proudly, “I teach PADI because its training system produces the best divers.” Once again it is not a question of adding a skill or deleting an item, it is a question of basic philosophy or working in a structure that trusts you to do good well vs. a structure that thinks you an idiot and controls your every move. It’s a question of belonging to a an organization who’s history you can be proud of or one with a shady past of double dealing and conflict of interest.

Uhuh. I rarely see the need to respond to the type of thinking he has shown. He doesn't understand the Padi philosophy as we have already described at length.

Hey Walter, with a couple clicks you can find my contact info, please e-mail me the info. I made the mistake of not saving it when the site was up, assuming it would be up for a long time to come.

BTW Ms Vax Velxxx must be a glutton for punishment, she's still there at the helm.

If I had only known at the time.... :mooner:

 

[Rick Murchison]

... it's inaccurate to blame the RSTC for anyone's low standards. ...

Yeah, well, almost maybe but not quite plumb. It isn't a matter of blaming the RSTC standards for PADI's low standards, what I'm objecting to is singling out PADI as a lone target all the time.
If Joe & John & Jane & Jim are all stealing from the company, when we complain about stealing from the company we shouldn't just say "Joe's stealing" anymore than we should say "everybody does it." That doesn't mean it's ok for Joe to steal, but a sense of fairness says we ought to say "Joe and John and Jane and Jim are all stealing; only Jeannie isn't."
So if it's a RSTC standard that's short, and especially if the standard has been adopted by several agencies, fairness dictates we name them all, or "all but" if that's easier. I know that PADI and SSI allow the snorkel "swim" instead of the real swim, and I'm pretty sure other agencies do as well, but I only have SSI (and RSTC) standards in front of me.
Rick

 

[MikeFerrara]

Good post Mike.

Of course we've all told them the same thing countless times, you long before I ever entered the scene.

We have been through this many times but we always have instructors and divers coming in and out of this board who are either new or new to scubaboard so it's not surprising that the same topics keep coming up.

I don't mind doing it over. In my experience with instructors, I find that there are an awful lot of them who are more than willing to jump on ideas that help them get their students diving better and/or make the job of teaching easier. All the changes that I made to my own classes made the whole process easier on everyone rather than harder.

There are those instructors who are going to use every loop-hole in the standards to shorten and cheapen the class but, we here, can't do anything about those. Some of the agencies have decided to write their standards to permit that kind of dive instruction and even encourage it (heck they invented it) but we can't do anything about them either.

The misconception that readers have when first exposed to these discussion is that they equate some of our views with some kind of militeristic training that makes it harder, less inclusive and inserts barriers to entry into the sport. That couldn't be further from what most of us are suggesting. We're talking about teaching diving things that make teaching diving, learning diving and doing diving much easier and more fun.

 

[Thalassamania]

It is obvious that all agencies don't teach the same things. It makes sense that different agencies fill different niches.
But contrary to the quote in your signature, the instructor does make the difference.

I have seen instructors from multiple agencies, who might maybe meet their agencies minimum standards. Woe to the student, and the resulting incompetent diver holding a c-card.

If all instructors were reduced to the lowest common denominator, then the agency with the highest minimum standards would make a difference.

I have also seen inspirational, demanding, perfectionist, and thorough instructors for multiple agencies, who award a c-card to very competent new OW divers. The instructors, and possibly their dive center's policy, make a difference!

As I have stated before, I will not allow my name to forever be on someone's OW card, if they are not fully competent and able to go dive on their own, when they walk out the door. !

When an agency limits what an instructor can do by defining the exact skills that must be taught, the exact way in which those skills must be taught and even the exact order that the skills must be taught in, it is a doubled edged sword. This approach is of great help to the marginal instructor. Given this sort of rigid framework he or she might be able to turn out a student that meets the learning objectives of the course (and let’s not argue about the appropriateness of those objectives for the moment). But the truly capable and competent instructor will be constrained by this sort of rigidity and while meeting the aforementioned learning objectives will be limited to that and nothing more (and that’s where we can get into a discussion of the appropriateness of those objectives). Within a constrained training system the individual instructor’s contribution to the outcome is reduced, but the public is protected against the screw up.

Back to AOW, which has the unfortunate word, "Advanced" in it!

That’s not unfortunate, that’s premeditated. Now we have “Adventures” instead, as much of a misnomer as “Advanced,” (just trendier for the moment) sort of like a trip to “Adventureland” to wait in line for an “Adventure.” What crap.

Luckily the court saw what PADI was trying to do and under California's anti-slapp law (which says you can't use the court as your personal bully) scolded PADI for their unethical attempt to shut a legitimate critic up by using the court system to apply financial pressure in a frivolous lawsuit. (Didn't they have to pay for your defense expenses Walter?)
Now that's bad ethics. Documented and specific.
Rick

Just one of many, in and out of court. No other agency has such a history.

 

[Walter]

If Joe & John & Jane & Jim are all stealing from the company, when we complain about stealing from the company we shouldn't just say "Joe's stealing" anymore than we should say "everybody does it." That doesn't mean it's ok for Joe to steal, but a sense of fairness says we ought to say "Joe and John and Jane and Jim are all stealing; only Jeannie isn't."
So if it's a RSTC standard that's short, and especially if the standard has been adopted by several agencies, fairness dictates we name them all, or "all but" if that's easier. I know that PADI and SSI allow the snorkel "swim" instead of the real swim, and I'm pretty sure other agencies do as well, but I only have SSI (and RSTC) standards in front of me.
Rick

I agree. I wasn't aware SSI's hand was in that particular cookie jar.

 

[Steve R]

Good morning Rick.

Just for you then.

I don't believe that Padi is the only culprit, far from it.

I can't imagine you missing it, but it's possible. Fair enough.

Padi is the 900lb Gorilla and is the one guiding the industry. You make the connection.

Add into it their training philosophy as described and you'll see why they're one of the poorer choices a diver can make for training.

They are also very deceiving in their practices (as shown countless times in this thread), and do not have the students safety, never mind dive skills even on the radar, which make them even worse.

That's our point here in this thread.

 

[Thalassamania]

Yeah, well, almost maybe but not quite plumb. It isn't a matter of blaming the RSTC standards for PADI's low standards, what I'm objecting to is singling out PADI as a lone target all the time.

PADI is singled out because they have the most effect and the most checkered history. I could do chapter and verse on NASDS and ScubaPro and the California Fair Trade Laws or the insurance kickback scheme, I do to the same about SSI for that matter, but they're small potatoes in the overall scheme of things. I mean what does it really matter to the grand scheme of things if I critique PDIC or IDEA or even YMCA, NAUI or LA County?

So if it's a RSTC standard that's short, and especially if the standard has been adopted by several agencies, fairness dictates we name them all, or "all but" if that's easier. I know that PADI and SSI allow the snorkel "swim" instead of the real swim, and I'm pretty sure other agencies do as well, but I only have SSI (and RSTC) standards in front of me.
Rick

There is no RSTC Standard absent the members’ standards. The RSTC standards are not something that one who wishes to be a member must rise to; they are rather a least common denominator that sinks to that which is common to all the members.

 

[MikeFerrara]

While it does make sense to heve certain "gates" in any system because logically some things just need to be done first, having a rigid requirement for skill order is a problem especially when that specified order is illogical.

Some examples. Can a student do a good job of underwater swimmimg in CW dive 1 when neutral buoyancy isn't taught until mod 3? Does it make sense to teach free descents and ascents in CW 2 when buoyancy control isn't taught until dive 3? Does it make sense to teach mask clearing, removal and replacement while vertical, kneeling negatively buoyant and looking to the heavens and then not go back and do it again midwater while controling buoyancy and maintaining buddy awareness and contact?

We see the results of this illogic...the students and certified divers who freak and blow or otherwise end up at the surface if they have a problem with a mask. You just really need to be able to do it while diving and that means putting the priority on breath control for controling position and paying attention to what is going on around you. We see the infamous butt first plumit in place of a controled descent. So many of these problems, which should be obvious, are built right into the course and it's almost insured that we will see plenty of it. Once you stop assuming that the author of the standards knows the best order and methods to teach these these skills, the problems are really easy to recongnize.

With some thought and creativity a good instructor can find ways around these obsticals but the fact is that they are road blocks to instruction and learning rather than aids. They claim that the designers of the system are educational system designers. I don't know what that is but I find it hard to believe that they are divers.

 

[Rick Murchison]

PADI is singled out because they have the most effect and the most checkered history.

That doesn't make it right. If I say "I don't like PADI because they lack a swimming requirement" it loses its weight when you find out that others don't have a swimming requirement either. If I know others don't have a swimming requirement when I say it referring only to PADI, then I'm being disingenious if not downright dishonest, and my credibility suffers.

... but they're small potatoes in the overall scheme of things. I mean what does it really matter to the grand scheme of things if I critique PDIC or IDEA or even YMCA, NAUI or LA County?

I have noticed that a small rotten potato can stink up the house just as readily and as badly as a big one; just throwing the big rotten one out doesn't improve the odor.

There is no RSTC Standard absent the members’ standards. The RSTC standards are not something that one who wishes to be a member must rise to; they are rather a least common denominator that sinks to that which is common to all the members.

True enough - we can look to RSTC to find the lowest of the low... and most of the time PADI is owner of the lowest standard. But my point is that when there are others in the same place then let's say so, not just "PADI's standards are unsat."
Rick

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

I agree with you that this is a deficient standard. However - and it's a big however - AFAIK that's a RSTC standard, so it's an industry problem and not one we can lay at PADI's feet. Even if they were the instigator (and it's my belief they were) other agencies caved as well. Isn't YMCA the lone holdout now on that one?

RE: swimming requirements ... YMCA isn't the lone holdout. NAUI still has swimming requirements.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)