Three questions:Well, in 1995 my Open Water course took a little over a month to complete, with classroom sessions before and after every pool and open water session.
- My 3-day class was taught about the same time, so does that mean the average scuba class back then took 17 days?
- Did you work continually throughout that month, or were there some days off, perhaps some chances to eat or sleep? That could affect the our computation of the average length of classes then.
- So you had lots of lectures, and they took a great deal of time. Does spending more time on a slow and inefficient mode of learning make it better? If I take all day to dig a hole and someone comes along with a backhoe and digs one next to it in a few minutes, is my hole better than his because it took longer to dig? (I am serious here. this is what we typically see in these discussions. "We spent many, many hours in the classroom learning stuff, but today's students just show up and get in the water!" That argument counts the time spent on academic preparation back then but does not count the time spent on academic preparation now, pretending nothing is happening there. There is no doubt in my mind that if I give the best damn lectures for many many hours, my students will remember less than if they had spent a fraction of that time doing home study and review, and students doing the e-Learning will remember even more.