Dive world is better off with tougher courses?

[1_T_Submariner]

I think it would be okay to revoke certs, but I just wish it was a lot harder to get the certification in the first place...

I mean, I guess I wish there was a like 30% fail rate...

and then you had to retake the course over again...it should be similar to driver licenses...

Yes look at what a sucess the drivers ed training is!!

So if there was a 95% failure rate would that make a better training course? The few divers that graduated would be awesome! ummm How hard would instructor training be maybe a 99% failure rate. Good luck getting out on a snorkel charter with this system (there won't be any scuba charters).
Failure rate as I have said in many of these threads is NOT an indication of good training. It is an indication that whoever let these people in the class did not screen them properly before taking there money to teach them to dive (Think greed).

Instead ask instructors/shop owners how many people they turn down to take an OW or AOW class?

 

[Pearldiver07]

Making the classes "tougher" doesn't have to mean alienating the weaker divers. A tough class isn't push-ups in full gear it's a class that requires the divers to be competent by the time they finish the final certification dive. A good class will push individual students at their own pace providing encouragement and a slower pace to those who need it but increasing the challenge for the ones who seem to be "naturals." All the divers will end up being competent, the timid ones have a great sense of what they have accomplished if you make them meet a high standard but take them there slowly. The really motivated students can finish their certification dives looking like they've been diving much longer than they have. This is something that takes time and a willingness on the student's part to spend that time learning. Sometimes "tough" isn't because something is hard, it's because it requires a time commitment and a level of focus people aren't willing to commit to.
Ber :lilbunny:

I agree entirely. Something else to think about: Everyone is too focused on the word "Advanced" in AOW. The intent is being certified "advanced OPEN WATER" not "ADVANCED open water". The course is meant to broaden one's experience under instruction, so that if there are problems they can be addressed with someone with more experience.

Anyone who would intend, or imply, that a course that is taught in a couple of weekends could do anything more is missing the point entirely.

Regards,
Steve
PADI Course Director 161247

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Advanced/Rescue/Master Diver/dive master should be one course, a good ball breaker that would eliminate those that should not progress to Instruction

I'd go for three out of four on that one ... at least in the NAUI system, Master Diver is often pursued ... beneficially so ... by people who have no interest in getting a DM or Instructor rating.

I would keep leadership courses and diving skills courses separate, as they are really two completely different things.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[jbd]

NWGrateful: Hey, Sonny, I've got over 50 dives now and I'm still alive.

That doesn't necessarily imply skill and ability. Could be luck.

 

[under water]

Actually, if you look at some of the accident data out there, a good percentage of accidents happen to newer divers.

Is that true? If you were to go by the accidents reported here over the last year or so, it seems that there is a higher percentage of advanced divers dying than newbies.
I'll need to pull out the DAN data.

As to the original question, I say leave OW as an intro course, but yes add bouyancy as a criteria for 'passing', but still maintain the focus on safety and knowing your limits.
As has been mentioned make AOW 'advanced' rather than a menu of a different flavors of diving. What advanced would be is up for debate though.
I think it should include elements of the rescue class to drive home the risks and how to deal with them and to create a pool of better insta-buddies. Include some advanced gas management and the proper technique for using an orange shovel.

 

[RiverRat]

Is that true? If you were to go by the accidents reported here over the last year or so, it seems that there is a higher percentage of advanced divers dying than newbies. I'll need to pull out the DAN data.

Let me re-check that statement. I recall maybe reading that in a mag or something. I did read in the 2000 DAN report that "About 80% of injured divers held Basic or Advanced certification while only 2-3% were students".

That doesn't state how long these divers were certified. I'll try to find some data to prove or disprove what I stated.

Edit: It's tough to decipher some of the DAN data. But it appears that "1/5 of the males that were injured and 1/3 of the females were diving for one year or less". Then 5-10% were within 2-5 years of training and 15-30% were 6-10 years and beyond initial training. For some reason it seems to spike up after you've been diving awhile.

Edit#2- Frank, I noticed you were referring to deaths versus my referring to injuries. There is quite a bit difference in percentages. Again, for the record from the 2000 DAN report: "Of diving fatalities for whom data were available, 60% of women and 40% of men had been certified to dive less than one year earlier".

 

[Ber Rabbit]

I would guess that's a percentage of them but many, if not more, just aren't living in a place where continued diving is available, affordable, or desirable. They go on a once in ten year vacation, try it and go home to Iowa. Or take the course in....pick a Midwest or inland state...and go dive in a cold, low vis quarry and decide that it's not that much fun.... EVEN if they got good training.

Cold, low vis quarries CAN be fun places to dive. Granted it's a little easier to sell the fun when it's the only place they have been. I learned to look at the quarries differently after being "schooled" by one of the first divers I ever certified. Our first day of diving was in a shallow quarry with visibility in the 8-10 foot range and water temps in the high 60's. Our second dive day was at Gilboa and he arrived early so I took him for a short tour. We went down to the water and I told him the visibility would be much better at this site but the water would be colder and he said, "I had a great time yesterday, that was the best visibility I had ever seen and the water really wasn't cold." If you make the experience fun and as pleasant as possible they will love diving. Comfortable students have fun, the check-out dives should focus on having the students actually dive and perform everything that's needed to plan and execute a successful dive. The skill demonstrations should be "non-events" by this time and the students should be able to complete them quickly and easily.

I just did a Discover Scuba for a couple of friends. We spent 8 hours at the quarry with 80 degree water and 4-8 feet of visibility and they came away from that experience EXCITED about diving. The visibility was horrible and there was so much stuff floating in the water that I had vertigo so bad at times I didn't know which way was up but they still had a great time (even I have no clue how).
Ber :lilbunny:

 

[letsgodiving]

It would be much better if the Advanced courses were really advanced and much tougher, much more book and pool work, much stricter swim standards, included introduction to rescue and nitrox, deeper diving and limited deco. The Basic OW course could remain much like it is, maybe tighten up a little bit on swim standards and introduce real world skills but it should remain a welcome mat and therefore not terribly intimidating. Advanced should mean your an accomplished diver with solid skills and watermanship.

It is the advanced courses that need to be "toughed" up. This would be good for the dive world because charter operators could then trust "advanced" divers to be able to actualy assemble their gear and get in and out of the water without nearly drowning--as I commonly see today by PadI Advanced and PadI Tech divers. The Advanced should proably take at leat 8 weeks (fours hours per week, half class and half pool) and include dives that challenge and demonstrate skills.

I totally agree with the above. My sister-in-law did OW and AOW in the Maldives in a week. They dive once a year, in fact they only swim once a year.

 

[Nemrod]

When I say toughed up I don't mean chinups and pushups and a Marine drill sargeant, I mean setting standards and holding student to them.

My first instructor was a LA County, early NAUI, ex football, ex marine. We did do pushups because he thought I was to skinny, heck, I was like 12!!!!!!

Advanced should mean what it says, Clinton may parce "is" but I think I understand is and advanced, I gradgeated from 8th grade ya know.

The Basic Open Water should be focused, more skills oriented--but FUN--and should be geared to setting a solid foundation of both skill and confidence in the water.

I don't think weekend or afternoon certifications should be allowed.


I don't think certifications should be revoked or any sort of refersher required, once given they should stay given. The way to make this work is to actually teach a scuba course with real standards, somehting the big P is incapable of because it conflicts with selling color coordinated gear and vacation packages to wherever. If the shoe fits, wear it.

Oh, while I passed the course at 12 I did not get a NAUI C card, he said I was to little, I could not hold the tank over my head for the required five minutes!!!!! Two years later he called my mom and asked me to come back, I did and I did. But, what the heck, I had my equipment from Montgomery Wards, lived on an occasionally clear lake with five foot viz and you know, I went solo, got air from the feed store, apparently did not drown. Of course I did all that on the low low, my moma would have grounded me. What they don't know, doesn't hurt.

N

 

[under water]

It's tough to decipher some of the DAN data. But it appears that "1/5 of the males that were injured and 1/3 of the females were diving for one year or less". Then 5-10% were within 2-5 years of training and 15-30% were 6-10 years and beyond initial training. For some reason it seems to spike up after you've been diving awhile.

That's what I remember seeing as well, the spike part. It's like some level of comfort is reached that gets in the way of caution. Either that or they come back after a while and have forgotten their skills or lost their confidence. Hard to say. Either way it might support that newbies may be more cautious to compensate for their lack of experience.

Edit#2- Frank, I noticed you were referring to deaths versus my referring to injuries. There is quite a bit difference in percentages. Again, for the record from the 2000 DAN report: "Of diving fatalities for whom data were available, 60% of women and 40% of men had been certified to dive less than one year earlier".

Hmm that's significant. what % of active divers would that be though. Do you know what I'm getting at... Lot's of folks quit after that first vacation dive so the higher number of divers that have very little experience might actually be more that 40 % of the dives.. I don't know.. just thinking out loud. Statistics are funny and really can be misunderstood unless you know the whole population they represent and how they were normalized.

I'm still leaning towards letting folks dive within limits with existing training.