Becoming an Instructor

[DevonDiver]

I don't totally agree with this. You're learning to follow the structured program that each agency has developed.

This is true and is generally applicable to most agencies.

The most obvious example is, of course, PADI. What PADI instructors are taught is, quintessentially, just product delivery.

The curriculum is designed for a very standardised implementation and only requires the barest modicum of diving ability to deliver.

Alongside that delivery, PADI IDC also educates essential elements like; risk management, standards, administrative procedures and, naturally, sales technique.

It's very hard to fail a PADI Instructor Exam because one only has to deliver the product in a safe and standardised manner. The IDC prepares candidates to do exactly (and only) that.

To a greater or lesser degree, all agencies approach training this way. I've not found an agency that actually provides instructors with a formal academic syllabus that develops pure teaching skills and knowledge.

The biggest differential between agency instructional standards is their definition of diving competency needed to be an instructor. Basically, how good a diver one must be before becoming an instructor.

When the benchmark for this competency is low, it enables people to become instructors who can do little more than regurgitate student-level materials and have to rely upon inefficient practices (i.e. kneeling, over-weighting etc) to demonstrate skills.

Such instructors have zero experience from which to supplement training and no capacity to improvise and adapt training to best problem solve and overcome student learning difficulties.

When an instructor is limited by these competency barriers they only have two choices: (1) to aggressively develop themselves as educators or (2) to reduce their student training expectations in line with their own limitations.

So... zero-to-hero courses are entirely possible given a low expectation of initial diver-level competency in instructor candidates; a situation deemed 'acceptable' given that the instructor only has to provide product delivery and not teach diving.

The eventual teaching ability of that instructor can be defined post-qualification and depends on their non-diving transferable experience, ethos, motivation and intelligence.

I'd suggest that highly motivated, highly ethical and intellectually strong instructors are a rare demographic on zero-to-hero courses in the first place.

People possessing those positive qualities are more likely to consider investing more time and effort in developing pre-IDC, rather than post-IDC.

In short, if you're truly motivated to being a great dive instructor... you'll probably recognise that competency should occur before qualification, rather than vice-versa.

 

[KenGordon]

Especially given the post above by DevinDiver I think you lot are giving the OP an excessively hard time. If an agency's standards allow for quick and dirty training of instructors so be it, he can avail himself of that, that is the agency's choice.

In other threads the unsatisfactory outputs of training have been discussed.

My observation of the personal diving skills of the PADI/etc instructors acting as DMs I see while a customer are perfectly fine. They are people who are diving every day and really ought to be pretty good at it.

So it seems to me that the disconnect might be elsewhere. My favourite is the time available to teach the course.

 

[KevinNM]

So... zero-to-hero courses are entirely possible given a low expectation of initial diver-level competency in instructor candidates; a situation deemed 'acceptable' given that the instructor only has to provide product delivery and not teach diving.

We could get GUE to run a zero to hero course! Of course, it would take 5+ years, >800 dives and cost at least $25,000 with no promise of an instructor card at the end...

 

[DevonDiver]

I could easily achieve 800 dives in a year.

So if I had a healthy credit card, I could smash through the minimum requirements to be a GUE instructor in 12 months.

Would people then accuse me of being a credit-card diver? Of being zero-to-hero? A bare minimum instructor?

Would people freak out and protest that someone couldn't (aka 'shouldn't') be allowed to become a GUE instructor in 12 months?

How would they view GUE for permitting this to happen?

The point being... if someone fulfills the requirements, then they've done nothing wrong.

So, our focus shifts to questioning the validity of agency requirements. But as long as the requirements meet the instructional needs, what's the problem?

Teaching PADI OW doesn't require as much instructional requirement as teaching GUE Fundies.

Different training outcomes, therefore different instructor requirements.

So... we then look at quality of instruction. We see that quality varies. We also see that cost and time commitment also varies.

We see that a short course with a minimally competent instructor costs significantly less than a long course with a highly skilled instructor.

However, what matters is that the training recieved meets the students needs.

A GUE student might need training that 'begins with the end in mind' for planned progression to tech and cave diving.

In contrast, a PADI student might only need training to aimlessly follow a DM around shallow coral reefs once per year on vacation.

The only real disconnect is when training provision doesn't meet diver needs. When divers are under-trained for the dives they attempt, accidents can happen.

Instructors and agencies can be guilty of under-training divers for their specific needs.

Divers themselves can be guilty of undertaking diving beyond the quality of the training they've had.

It's not a question of right or wrong... it's about keeping it real and sincerely balancing the training completed against the diving being done.

 

[The Chairman]

You assume that just because someone has an impatient instructor they will become one too.

Assume? I've actually seen that happen. I have often pegged where a person did their IDC based on how they conduct a class. One time I kinda hit it wrong. This instructor was screaming at his student for having his mask on his forehead. SCREAMING. I mentioned he must have had so and so for his IT and he mentioned another person. Wow. There are two ITs who teach that way? I was surprised as that's such a bad way to teach. Then the captain of the boat told me that his IT had actually been trained by 'so and so'. 2 phreakin phunni. There we have three generations of bad instructors. Bad habits, especially those that appear to be macho or give the appearance of importance, get handed down from IT to instructor. It's definitely the circle of mediocrity and you could have had a circle of excellence.

Out of those 30 ITs I had, I gravitated to just the two intelligent and patient individuals in that herd. Why? That's how I wanted to teach. Michael Brady and Reggie Ross inspired me to set the bar more neutral. I still respect both of them to this day. I think it's important to choose your instructor and your instructor trainer carefully. Find the guy or gal you want to dive and teach like. Spend the time. Spend the money. Make the commitment to excellence and break away from the herd of crap.

But really. You don't want to listen to me. I get that. Go do what you want to do in the way you want to do it. I'm obviously the fly in your ointment here, so just ignore me. The more you defend yourself, the weaker your defense appears to me. The oceans are filled with instructors who thought they would be the exception and took short cuts anyway. Why break with tradition and stand out? Why break the circle of mediocrity when you can embrace it?

What PADI instructors are taught is, quintessentially, just product delivery.

Wow. You've completely oversimplified PADI training. I would suggest from what I've seen, that student SAFETY is a huge part of the PADI curriculum. PADI instructors learn a specific way of teaching, sure. You can call that "product delivery" if you want, but then the product should be a qualified diver. If they deliver a quality diver, then more power to them. I have seen some great PADI IDCs and my @mselenaous works for one! I can't teach 'by the numbers', so I'll probably never be a PADI instructor. Mine is a more fluid and adaptive style so almost all my teaching is done through NASE. Why? Because they allow that.