It is my opinion that the problem is not the PADI system, it is what the shops and instructors choose to do with it.
Just my opinion, but shouldn't the PADI 'system' encompass safeguards to ensure that their courses are taught to a given standard?
If shops/instructors are finding 'loopholes' in that system... or are simply not meeting the given standards, then it could be attributed as a failure in the system itself.
Quality Assurance.... hmmm... shouldn't that
assure quality?
...there is NO way I would feel confident going off on my own just after that class. I felt comfortable going out with other divers that were experienced.
You have to bear in mind that the tuition provided is balanced against prudent advice to dive conservatively and
within your comfort level.
That should mean '
taking it easy' whilst you go through the post-certification process of ingraining the skills you learnt and expanding your comfort zone.
There tends to be a mentality of "
I am now qualified to 18m/60ft", so I will dive to 18m/60ft..." etc etc. That isn't how it is 'supposed' to work.
People sometimes confuse a '
maximum recommended depth' with having some sort of 'license' to dive to that depth without due regard for their comfort and skill development.
The dives you might conduct supervised by an instructor in training do not necessarily equate to what you might attempt without that professional supervision. Throttle back until the comfort zone expands to meet your goals. Patience is the key.
In that respect, too much emphasis can be placed on what a course 'certifies' you to do, at the expense of prudent advice to dive conservatively, well within your training level and advance your dive experience slowly and progressively.
In my OW I felt like I got the "skills" of a diver, the "drills" but did not really learn how to dive.
Learning to dive is about learning
and application. A good course should give you ample opportunity to put your skills into practice, and develop in-water comfort, through
actual diving.
I agree that some instructors neglect this aspect. My personal opinion is that this stems from over-emphasis on individual skill performance requirements and too little focus on the 'overall outcome' of creating a comfortable, skilled diver. It's quite intangible... and I can see how it'd be hard to write that outcome as a global standard.
However, the instructor is always responsible for training safe, confident divers. If they aren't, then they shouldn't be qualified t that time. End of story...
... a skills workshop that covered the things that were seriously lacking in OW.
If you mean that you felt you needed supplemental training in the OW course skills, in order to achieve what you felt was 'mastery' of them - then you should contact PADI and complain. The OW course contains the foundational skills for safe, unsupervised, scuba diving within limited parameters. It should achieve it's goals. Supplemental, remedial, training after qualification should not be necessary...
Did you say anything at the time of your certification? Did you let the instructor know that you weren't happy with your skill/comfort level upon graduation?