Continuing Education... Your thoughts?

[MikeFerrara]

Good stuff, Jim. I think Nav is going to be one of my specialties.

Mike, I agree with you, but as a relative n00b, the most frustrating thing is not being able to descend. I'm still getting my weight dialed in for a couple of reasons:
1. I've got a bit less bodyfat than I did when I did my cert. dives.
2. I did my cert. dives in a 7mm wetsuit, and really had to pour on the weight because I wasn't exhaling completely, and I had neglected to open the wetsuit and let the water fill it so that it wouldn't be so buoyant.

Lots of new divers have trouble with descnts. It's one of the things that caused me to rethink the way we teach. The result was that we put a priority on skills like this that divers often have trouble with before going into OW rather than get out there and have half the class unable to get down and the other half doing the infamous butt first plumit. Again, it's another one of those things that new divers do have trouble with but if we look at how it's often taught we shouldn't be surprised.

Patient: "Doc it hurts when I do this"...Doc: "Well don't do it then".

 

[Fish_Whisperer]

In the pool, during the class, I was using 16 lbs. to descend. I've got that tailored back to 12 now, and I think I've got it right for saltwater, even with wearing a 1.5mm wetsuit. I have to say that using less weight really seems to have helped my air consumption a lot!

 

[SadiesMom]

When Bob talks about deploying an SMB he's not decessarily refering to lifing objects. He's more likely talking about deploying a surface marker midwater from some point during the ascent.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but Bob talked in his post about *both* shooting a surface marker buoy in midwater AND using a lift bag to lift an object.

I not only took AOW but I taught it for some years and I'm pretty disillusioned about it too. The idea of a guided introduction to new environments and activities is ok. It's the implimentation that often goes wrong. Not too long ago, I was getting an OW class started. My students were hovering around a training platform getting ready to start and we were terribly silted out. Upon looking for the source of the mess I found there was a AOW class using the area next to us and they were sitting in the muck doing their underwater knots for the S&R dive. What good does that do them? I used to set a bucket of rocks in the siltiest place I could find and have students tie the knots to the handle. I required that they keep the area clean or I wouldn't be able to see and check their knots and the whole thing wouldn't count. The problem is that agency standards allow the instructor to do it either way. One might teach something and the other is a wast of time.

I've seen the deep dive get too many people hurt. They just take new divers who haven't yet developed the skills to dive well shallow down deep and no one should be knocking their head against the wall trying to figure out why when some one gets hurt. It's very possible for this dive to be the studentsd 5th lifetime dive and they can be taken to 100 ft. Did you know that it's possible to become an instructor with noly one dive below 60 ft (the one you did in your own AOW class)? This way the instructor and his student can do their first 100 ft dive together. Sorry, going hand over hand down a line to 100 ft to sit on a platform and do a puzzle or something is not by any stretch of the imagination any sort of training for deep diving. The deeper you go the more important are things like efficient technique and correct breathing, good control over ascents and descents, gas management ect, yet those things are not required by some AOW training standards.

So, a class to introduce students to the depths they'll see on their vacation might be a solid idea but dropping them down like a rock and hauling them up a line doesn't seem of much value and it might just somehow lead the student to believe that they're ready to be diving at 100 ft.

Some agency standards require the student to do some things underwater without requireing that they be diving when they do them.

I can totally see your points - I guess that's where the choice of instructor vs. agency part comes in. It's up to the instructor to use his/her discretion to teach beyond the minimum standard provided by the agency (and from what I've experienced and heard from a lot of instructors, that's not really a problem if someone really *wants* to do that). It sounds like that's what Bob does. And when I eventually take the IDC/IE in a couple of years, that's what I plan to do.

 

[LavaSurfer]

I am a nooby and I am an advocate for continuing education.
I took AOW right after my OW. In fact I did all the certs on the same trip.

Many state that AOW is not of any value. I disagree.
I look at it like general ed in school. I took Biology, Humanities, Public Speaking and history. None of which became my chosen profession but they rounded my education well.

AOW does the same thing. It gives you rounded, instructor lead education on many aspects of diving like Navigation, Deep Diving, Wreck Diving, More advanced boat entries and theory, Photography, Aware etc.

Doing AOW also gets you in the water in different situations and causes you to learn new skills.

I am currently signed up to take Nitrox and Rescue Diver. I just finished my First Responder course and guess what? I spent ten years of my life as an EMT level II which means I had to continue even that education.

I am also actively working towards my DiveMaster status for nothing more than pure education. This alone has been quite an education reading the materials and working with the instructor.

 

[HowardE]

AOW does the same thing. It gives you rounded, instructor lead education on many aspects of diving like Navigation, Deep Diving, Wreck Diving, More advanced boat entries and theory, Photography, Aware etc.

Doing AOW also gets you in the water in different situations and causes you to learn new skills.

This is TRUE, IF - you have never done these types of dives before. Perhaps calling it OW2 instead of AOW is more appropriate?

 

[LavaSurfer]

This is TRUE, IF - you have never done these types of dives before. Perhaps calling it OW2 instead of AOW is more appropriate?

I somewhat agree that the term ADVANCED is a misnomer.

It takes more than 5 dives and a few hours of class work to become "Advanced" but the learning’s are very valuable. At least they were for me.


Start Rant

OW2 doesn't make sense and OW Green Belt fails the smart title test.

Maybe we should start a new method of Mask Colors or better yet, Harness Colors.
Start out at white harness and progress to third degree black harness.
I can see it all now, the TAO of Scuba. Come dive my Dojo or the Dojo of the Dragon Master bubble blowers
End Rant


It's also like Master Diver. I just can't see that one either. Pay for five specialties and your a MASTER Diver. Why not just get DiveMaster instead? As I am doing.

But on the same hand, DIR-F is always thrown out there as an option but to many divers, its really not a legitimate option as most courses I have found are expensive, far away. If I had the choice between traveling to do DIR-F or Cavern and Into to Cave, The choice is clear. At least for me it would not be DIR-F.

 

[HowardE]

LavaSurfer... You obviously have acquired some wisdom in your years. You actually understand the fact that AOW does not make you "advanced" - I think the problem is more for the younger crowd (without insulting anyone directly or throwing broad generalizations) who get their AOW and think they can "conquer the world" so to speak. It is all too apparent after reading many of the "mishaps" with freshly AOW'ed divers who then proceed to have a "near miss"

I think for those who don't understand the difference between "book knowledge" and "experience" or those C-Card collectors (and we all know there are those out there... I'm not fanning flames, or looking to start something) who race to get certs - that there IS a difference between the two.

My advice to people who are considering continuing education is to ask youself... "what is your motivation?" - If you don't have dreams of being a DM or Instructor in 5 months, I would say to err on the side of caution, and take it slowly and easily. Continue your education YES, but I don't want to say "I told you so" when I see your "near miss" posted in the accidents and incidents section here.

 

[craborn]

The only way to get great at diving or anything else is to sontinue your education and practice. I am an instructor and EVERY TIME i get in the water I go through all of my skills. Please take all the classes and dive all you can.

 

[MikeFerrara]

OR]


It's also like Master Diver. I just can't see that one either. Pay for five specialties and your a MASTER Diver. Why not just get DiveMaster instead? As I am doing.

The system is designed for card/badge collectors. If you do rescue and 5 specialties, you already have those cards. For an extra few bucks you get another card that says your a master scuba diver and gives you an additional pat on the back and another card/title.

But on the same hand, DIR-F is always thrown out there as an option but to many divers, its really not a legitimate option as most courses I have found are expensive, far away. If I had the choice between traveling to do DIR-F or Cavern and Into to Cave, The choice is clear. At least for me it would not be DIR-F.

The DIRF's that I've seen run about $300 + expenses. I've never taken the class but I've audited a couple and for a diver wanting to improve their actual diving skills, I have never seen a better class. The only classes that I've seen even come close are cave training, some tech training and a few programs designed by others (who aren't GUE instructors) to fill the same need. Aside from some good solid dive planning (that other recreational classes really don't teach), the inwater skills are all just basic skills...YET, I have seen recreational diving instructors just flat out flounder.

Some divers see the need to develop those skills but have no interest in cave or technical diving. Others are preparing for technical training and for them, the value of DIRF is that their cave instructor won't have to teach them how to dive from the very beginning.

As I understand it the course was born out of the fact that so many who sought technical training just weren't ready. I've heard the same complaint from many tech instructors. Divers wanting to enter technical training just don't have the basic skills to begin and they need to go back and start over learning skills that are, in theory, taught in OW. This complaint is made as often about recreational instructors as any one else and if you look at the requirements of training standards you'll see why. you can go all the way through recreational training including becomming an instructor and good technique is NEVER required! EVER! In my PADI IDC, I had to demo OW skills on my knees just as most instructors have OW students do them. You never have to go beyond that.

DIRF is a "Sorry Mr. instructor, you're really not ready and we're going to start over with kicking and hovering only you'll need to do it well this time."

On going training and education is good. the problem I see with what the recreational agencies are doing is they're piling all that coned on top of a very crumbly foundation. In OW, they tell you that you'll get your buoyancy control later. Then the next class assumes that you have it and it's never again addressed by course requirements, not even at the instructor level. Some instructors may require it but the agency often does not. It's like going to grad school if you haven't yet learned to read, write and do your numbers and it makes no sense at all to me.

And that, in a nutshell, is why I no longer pay dues to those agencies. They're run by a bunch of marketing folks who are about as clueless about diving as one could possibly be and their educational system is about as flawed as it possibly could be.

Now, there are some agencies that do some things that I like. IANTD, for instance, requires the instructor to fill out a skill evaluation on every dive that a student does. The skills that are always evaluated in the water are basic technique, planning buddy skills, attitude ect. In theory, it shouldn't be possible for a student to pass any course with lacking basic skills. In practice, though, something isn't working. The reality is that those few who do teach IANTD recreational courses must compete with all the PADI shops so they need to be just as fast, cheap and easy. Other agencies don't even pretend to evaluate those skills or make them a course requirement. You can get see a copy of that evaluation form on their web site.

 

[Darnold9999]

Had the opportunity to take the AOW course on the last trip I did. Passed when I heard the objectives. Pretty much what I learned in my initial certification course, but that was in the dark ages. The only thing I thought I would be getting was 5 dives with the instructor. Wasn't worth the $ nor the loss of 5 dives exploring (for me - for theose who did take the course it was exactly what they needed.)

It does seem a bit silly to me to be taking a course just to get the card if you have the equivalent experience. However you need the card to take more advanced courses so ...

Now that I am back in the world of cold water I will probably take the AOW course. Give me a chance to dive a few times in waters I have not been near for almost 20 years, with someone I know has experience, so I can get my cold water skills back without endangering someone who may not have those skills. Will also give me a chance to evaluate the instructors at the shop, and maybe meet some other like minded divers.

Doubt that I will learn alot in terms of the 5 specialties, but will try to carry an open mind along just in case.

For those who just got their OW card my thinking would be to go diving a few times before taking the AOW course - minimum 10 dives. Otherwise I feel you are just paying to practice.