Diver Training: How much is enough?

[The Chairman]

I occasionally see divers that are in no way fit to be in the water. Perhaps some that should never be in the water. Is the filter at the certification level fine enough to catch this or are they allowed to pass through regardless. If the filter is real and effective then I think there are teeth in the notion that it is up to the diver to take care of themselves post cert. If not, how can they be expected to do so.

Instead of diver, put in driver and instead of "in the water" substitute "on the road". It's scarily similar, isn't it? Do we hold the licensing body or even the instructors, be they professional or amateur, responsible for tickets and accidents? No, unless you're an attorney for the guilty, you hold the driver and only the offending driver at fault. Why? It's only right and to try to get the filter finer would increase the overall cost for everyone without a commensurate increase in safety.

Remember what I posted: you can't fix stupid, not even with duct tape!

 

[The Chairman]

In other words, that one Standard cannot apply to any and all situations where training is being undertaken.

That's like saying the US Constitution can not be applied to every citizen since we are so diverse.

To whit, if my goal for diving is to dive the Andrea Doria, is it my OW Instructor's fiduciary responsibility to train me to that level? After all, those are the conditions where I am expecting to dive. If you pay for X certification, then that's what you get. If you need X+Y+Z certs to do a particular dive, then you have to also buy Y+Z training and actually pass that training before you make that dive. I don't understand why you are having such a problem understanding modular training.

 

[DCBC]

...Did I conclude that their NAUI training was terrible, vastly inferior to the training the PADI divers had received? No. I assumed that the fact that they had gotten certified, done a few dives, and then packed all their equipment away for years had rendered their initial training nearly meaningless.

No one could reasonably say that the training anyone received "was terrible," until the certification Standard was evaluated in-light of the local conditions. At this point, the validity of the training could be determined (as the Courts did in Quebec).

 

[xyrandomyx]

Instead of diver, put in driver and instead of "in the water" substitute "on the road". It's scarily similar, isn't it? Do we hold the licensing body or even the instructors be they professional or amateur for tickets and accidents? No, unless you're an attorney for the guilty, you hold the driver and only the driver at fault. Why? It's only right and to try to get the filter finer would increase the overall cost for everyone.

Remember what I posted: you can't fix stupid, not even with duct tape!

Hrm. Just a little anecdote that might give you some food for thought (I don't have any solid conclusions to make from it myself):


I once spoke to a guy who used to race cars as a hobby. His wife was killed in a car accident. I can't remember the details of her accident other than that the root of it was another driver's fault. He was adamant that she would still be alive if she had the sort of advanced driving training he had undergone for his hobby. And felt that many road deaths could be prevented if all drivers received more extensive training.

 

[DCBC]

..To whit, if my goal for diving is to dive the Andrea Doria, is it my OW Instructor's fiduciary responsibility to train me to that level?

I would be happy to take you on as a Student if this was your goal. The first step would be to design a Course Training Standard (CTS) that would insure that you gain the requisite knowledge, skill and experience to make the dive with a reasonable degree of safety. Obviously this isn't a normal OW course. The OW CTS would change because the goals are different. "As the diving conditions change, the course Standard must change as well." Thanks for underlining my point.

 

[boulderjohn]

I don't believe that it's a matter of enforcement rather than the responsibility of the Agency to ensure that what is required for certification relates to the diving environment where the training is taking place. If you are certified in an area where tidal flow is a concern (for example), that certification should require the Student to be able to be knowledgeable in tide tables. If this isn't required in the training standard, how can the Agency reasonably insure that the diver is aware of this hazard? Do you think this reasonable?

[SIGH]

This is so very frustrating. If there is anyone still reading this thread who is not aware of the history, Wayne has said this dozens of times in the past, and he has had this misinformation corrected every time. Yet he still feels compelled to repeat it endlessly.

The PADI OW instructional content talks briefly about tides and the need to be aware of them. It talks briefly about altitude and the need to be aware of it. Most divers will never dive where either tidal flow or altitude need to be considered. When they do, including during their OW dives, they need to be prepared for it. Of course that is true.

When I conduct OW dives locally, it is at high altitude. All the divers who certify locally through our shop are given a handout that describes altitude considerations. When we plan and log the OW dives, we adjust for altitude. If I were to lead student divers on dives that violate the altitude-adjusted tables, I would be taking a significant risk in terms of liability. I just taught classes this weekend, including the Deep Diver specialty, and you can bet our dive planning--and our long drive home over a mountain pass--included consideration for altitude.

Our lakes do not have a lot of tidal flow, so we do not plan for it. If I were teaching in Puget Sound, I would be planning for tides, and I would share that planning with the students.

The PADI standards require you to include students in the planning of the OW dives, and if that planning requires the inclusion of things like altitude or tides, then we really have no choice but to include it in our planning.

Wayne, who left PADI a quarter century ago, keeps saying tirelessly that PADI instructors are not allowed to do these things. We current PADI instructors keep telling him we are allowed to do those things and that we do them routinely. When will this end?

 

[The Chairman]

felt that many road deaths could be prevented if all drivers received more extensive training.

I kind of doubt this. Before the turn of the century, the car manufacturers came out with an amazing improvement called anti-lock brakes which was soon followed by traction control. The insurance companies were incredibly happy about this and they even offer discounts for cars having such equipment. Unfortunately, they didn't see an immediate reduction in traffic accidents and fatalities. Why? The best brakes don't make a difference if you don't use them. People have to pay attention, getting off the phone and devote themselves to driving when they are behind the wheel.

Amazingly, the recent discounts for driving safely seem to actually make a difference. Rewarding people for paying attention has made a bigger difference than anything else. So, though you can't fix stupid, not even with duct tape, it appears that you can bribe people to think smarter!

 

[xyrandomyx]

I kind of doubt this. Before the turn of the century, the car manufacturers came out with an amazing improvement called anti-lock brakes which was soon followed by traction control. The insurance companies were incredibly happy about this and they even offer discounts for cars having such equipment. Unfortunately, they didn't see an immediate reduction in traffic accidents and fatalities. Why? The best brakes don't make a difference if you don't use them. People have to pay attention, getting off the phone and devote themselves to driving when they are behind the wheel.

Amazingly, the recent discounts for driving safely seem to actually make a difference. Rewarding people for paying attention has made a bigger difference than anything else. So, though you can't fix stupid, not even with duct tape, it appears that you can bribe people to think smarter!

OK, well, to be fair, this was some time ago, before anti-lock brakes and traction control became common (perhaps even before they became available to the general public). I can't speak for the specific case of that man's wife, but I tend to agree that it'd probably have little effect on road fatalities on the whole. It seems possible that more extensive training might save SOME lives, though.


And, you're right: the majority of road accidents are caused by people doing things they know they shouldn't -- drinking and driving, talking on phones, driving unroadworthy cars, etc. And they're aware of these risks, but still do it. I think diving accidents probably have a similar pattern (which, of course, doesn't mean that SOME aren't caused by inadequate training).


I'm not sure if there's some way to bribe divers into being more safe, though.

 

[Peter Guy]

John wrote

Wayne, who left PADI a quarter century ago, keeps saying tirelessly that PADI instructors are not allowed to do these things. We current PADI instructors keep telling him we are allowed to do those things and that we do them routinely. When will this end?

John, I believe you are wrong with what you wrote when you used "allowed" (as highlighted). My reading of the PADI standards is that we are not "allowed" to do those things but, to the contrary, are "required" to do those things. For example, when I teach an Open Water class (and yes, we ARE talking about basic open water in this thread -- or at least it started out that way -- NOT about diving the Doria!) I must discuss the Puget Sound tides and why some days/times are more appropriate than others.

As basic dive planning is required for the four Open Water dives, the students must show a facility to understand basic tide charts and understand when it is appropriate to dive and when it isn't. IF I used current senstive sites (I don't but if I did) they would also need to be able to show they can determine if the time is appropriate.

Now Wayne might say, "Well you can't test on that" and IF by "test" one merely means a written test, then that is true. The written tests are prepared for ALL Open Water divers within the system. However, I can "test" their knowledge by making sure they have properly thought about, and thus planned, their dive based on tide. In fact, there can be a lot of "testing" of knowledge that isn't part of a written test.

But this thread wasn't about attempting to really discuss standards anyway, was it.

 

[DCBC]

The PADI OW instructional content talks briefly about tides and the need to be aware of them.

John, I don't know why you continually want to drag PADI into the conversation. This is NOT about PADI, or any one training Agency.

To comment on your statement, if you were teaching an OW course in Saint John, talking "briefly about tides" would be negligent on the part of the Instructor. The Local area has the highest tides in the World. Whatever is required to allow a newly certified diver to dive in the local area with a reasonable degree of safety should be part of the Course Training Standard. That's only reasonable.

Different diving localities present different risks. What is commonly found in one area isn't in another. If the goal is to teach a Student to dive with the conditions present locally, the measure of the training presented must provide for this. "The Standard" needed to be attained changes as the diving environment changes. Why is this so difficult to comprehend?