Dumbing down of scuba certification courses (PADI) - what have we missed?

[-hh]

Apologies for the delay in responding; was on the road with business travel.

The DAN report describes every one of the deaths. No need to be misled by any sampling numbers. All it takes is the time to go through them to see what's what. You can make your own tables if you like to show whatever trends you see there. If you read through this entire thread, you will see that was discussed earlier.

Understood, but you missed my point: the data analysis I'm interested in requires additional data that DAN didn't publish (and likely didn't collect). So its not merely a question of re-hashing the data provided to put it into a different format.

For example, my one comment was that 'Expert' divers were observed to have had a higher absolute number of accidents reported, but because we don't know how large of a subset they are, we can conclude nothing about their incidence rates.

What's missing from the DAN data set in this case are the total number of dives from which some accidents occurred, and what percentage of that total were performed by each of the identified subsets that DAN made.

Similarly, when you look at this same subset element over time, DAN switched measures from #dives to Certification Level. Perhaps you're comfortable with those two metrics being objectively identical, but I am not, so I'm not going to claim that today's report has resulted in a 'change' in risks from years ago, as opposed to the difference being due (at least in part) to differences in the reported subsets.

...Research has been an important part of much of my life. It has at times been a part of my job description, as it is now...

Same here.

Bottom line to all of this is that no amount of re-hashing of data can ever fill in the blanks of unpublished/uncollected data.


-hh

 

[rstofer]

PADI basic open water works fine when/if you immediately combine it with a PADI AOW course right away on its heels. Otherwise, it fails miserably. End of story.

and Rescue, and Peak Performance Buoyancy!

Exactly. It takes DIVES to get experience.

There isn't a lot of difference between the current PADI OW program and the NAUI OW I program of 1988. Skill for skill, they are the same as far as I can see.

But in my mind, it was the sequence of OW I, OW II, Advanced Open Water followed by Rescue that was diver training in '88. This would result in about 21 dives under the supervision of an instructor and that, to me, seemed adequate to BEGIN diving. So, that's what I did.

Today, under PADI, that would be OW, AOW, Rescue and a few specialties - probably Deep, Search and Recovery, PPB plus a couple of others. Maybe Nitrox...

Under either organization, this would put the diver at "Master Scuba Diver" level. Personally, I think an MSD should have a couple of hundred dives but then I think a DM should have 500 and an instructor should have 1000 in several environments. Minimum... But that's just me.

The Y programs of old are gone. It's nice that there is some effort to continue the program but I personally believe it is doomed to fail. Just getting worldwide recognition will be difficult. If the cert isn't accepted in far away places, who cares about the program? Heck, who cared about the program when the Y taught it? If it was a resounding financial success, contributing vast sums to the other programs, the Y wouldn't have dropped it. RIP...

So, training is what it is. Nothing that is discussed here will make even the slightest difference in how organizations train divers. Changing the course of these organizations is a lot like teaching a pig to sing. It wastes your time and it annoys the pig!

The best thing we can do is encourage new divers to take more classes. Quickly! Before they learn bad habits. Get to the level of MSD as soon as possible and don't let the "MASTER" thing go to your head. It's just a start... Twenty or thirty dives is meaningless.

Richard

 

[danpass]

27 pages and the (edited) question was answered "Yes it has been dumbed down / simplified" on pg 1 lol

kathydeee

The dive training you speak of was before my days as a diver but I have been around some veterans and have quite a collection of vintage texts. Let it suffice to say that a few decades a go an OW certification consisted of what we consider to be OW, AOW, Rescue, including first aid and O2 if a chamber was available you may have taken a ride. The topcs we cosider AOW were not adventure dives but rather studied and executed as specialties. In the water exercises include harassment exercises where you would be sabotaged and need to recover, blindfolded frills, in the water gear recovery, extensive mask off and single mouthpiece buddy breathing and so forth. The academics included more math and understanding of the why, not just the how.

There are still some university semester programs that approach this. I'm sure there are some exceptional instructors that do today's modules in good depth and go beyond the letter of the standard. In today's instant gratification state of mind few individuals would sign up for a program like this. People want to make a minimal investment to make a warm water trip or try local diving. It's based on the learners permit mentality that gets you in the water but expects you to follow up with more classes, mentoring or self study.

The information is still there and you can be a capable a diver as you want to be but the entry hurdle has all but been removed.

Pete

 

[leapfrog]

I have been reading the thread with interest.

A number of thoughts I would like to share.

1. As the name of the thread suggests, a lot of PADI bashing. It's clear though that in most parts of the world, PADI is what there is. Market leader. The other agencies should think about where they went wrong and continue to do so. As most of you know, I work in Europe. NAUI and YDI simply aren't here. SDI is having difficulty taking off. NASE didn't get very far. SSI has a reasonable but small market share and so far the CMAS divers I've met are very different from one country to another, reflecting the strengths and weaknesses of the national federations. So if neither the students or the instructors have an alternative that's what you've got. The "Y" people never got a foothold over here, hopefully they will do now.
2. The "chief bashers" haven't actually come straight out and recommended another agency as preferable to PADI for the training but often say that divers should:

a. Seek out the best instructor possible who puts the students before the dollars. Good advice.
b. Do OW, AOW and Rescue with some others such as PPB one after the after. Pretty good advice.
3. A lot of "in my day" comments. Not a lot of comments about where recreational diving is going or should be going.
4. Comments about standards. IMHO the point of the standards is that they should be complied with. The problem is that people are being certified without having met all standards, especially in the skill set. That is a mistake on the part of the certifying instructor, not the agency.
5. The best way to change an institution is from the inside, not from the outside. It makes more sense for PADI members to strive to maintain standards, train their students beyond minimum standards, grow within the organization and change it from the inside. From the outside, it's going to be as successful as the heathens trying to change the Catholic Church. It has the opposite effect and hardens the resolve of the institution to maintain it's policies.
6. A lot of comments about numbers (21 dives, 50 dives, 100 dives, 1000 dives, etc). This by the same people who talk about quality. IMHO opinion, different students will achieve different abilities within very different time scales. So again, it's more important to see that a student has the skills than a particular number of dives. The same goes for instructors. There are 3,000 dive instructors who turn out bad student divers and 100 and something instructors who do a pretty good job. The best divers don't always make the best instructors and the best instructors aren't always the best divers.

 

[ncchuck]

I read through some of this thread and I felt compelled to comment. I was certified as an open water diver 18 years ago. I was certified by the YMCA. I immediately followed that initial training with PADI AOW. A year later I did the PADI rescue class. 16 years later and at age 61, I became a divemaster and instructor.

The training I have given my students is as good or better than I received in my YMCA training. I stress a lot more buoyancy control and comfort in the water. I believe most of today's students from all agencies are better divers than in previous years. I do believe that the most important thing a diver can do is dive. I would never recommend and don't know any one that does recommend that a new diver go off and dive by themselves in some strange place they know nothing about. That's crazy even for the most advanced diver. New divers need experience and they should dive with a DM for their first 30 or 40 dives. After that, it all depends upon the diver. It also depends on how often they dive.

I've heard horror stories of the dive training tactics of the late 60's and 70's. I don't believe they were helpful. The entire idea was that diving was some sort of "macho" sport for risk takers. We are so lucky today to share our hobby or vocation with everyday families. Frankly I think there is less risk with today's student than those of the old days.

I personally think training overload is one of the problems all agencies have. They are obviously out to make money and help instructors and dive shops make money. I think there should be more dive requirements between various classes. In Utila I saw divers go from their first dive to Instructor in 2 or 3 months. That makes no sense to me. I don't think it should be allowed. These people are supposedly qualified to teach other divers when their only experience is in warm water in one place. Some have as few as 100 dives all in the same situation.

These are my personal recommendations:
Get certified by your local dive shop and have fun.
Dive with a DM or dive guide for at least 40 or 50 dives.
Take and advanced class when you have about 30 or so dives.
Take a buoyancy control control class soon after completing OW.
Take a navigation class before venturing out anywhere on your own and then practice.
Dive as much as possible and take a quick refresher if you feel nervous or feel you've forgotten the basics.

 

[Thalassamania]

...
2. The "chief bashers" haven't actually come straight out and recommended another agency as preferable to PADI for the training

Actually what the better informed critics say does not lend itself to the simplistic box LF wants to shove the question into.

Please permit me to do the same, solely as an example of the absudity of the construct:

• My entry-level divers are far better trained than any PADI entry level diver.
• It would be impossible for me to conduct my classes within the framework of PADI standards.
• Therefore, proof being in the pudding, the only reasonable conclusion is that the standards of the agencies under whose auspices my course may be conducted are superior (e.g., LA County, NAUI, CMAS, etc.).

 

[leapfrog]

[*]Therefore, proof being in the pudding, the only reasonable conclusion is that the standards of the agencies under whose auspices my course may be conducted are superior (e.g., LA County, NAUI, CMAS, etc.).
[/LIST]

Are you therefore publically endorsing LA County, NAUI and CMAS as being the three agencies whose standards are best for entry level divers?

In which order would you rank them and why?


As always, I appreciate your candor and standing up while others throw stones and then hide their hands behind their back. (Please forgive "the simplistic box" )

 

[Thalassamania]

No ... I "endorse" no agency. My entire point is that it is impossible to teach what I consider to be a quality course within the restrictions that PADI has defined. It is possible for me to do so under LA County, NAUI, CMAS and maybe Y. The course that I teach is no different, in even the smallest detail, regardless of the agency. So I really don't care what agency or what rank order ... it's strictly binary, I can teach my course or I can't. Remember, I do not use "agency" texts, I do not use "agency" tables, about the only agency thing that I'd do are required paperwork (medical, waiver, etc.) and use their foolish exams as a pretest toward the end. Is PADI the only one that I couldn't teach under? No ... I'd have similar problems with SSI and others.

Now if you're asking the question a different way, as a hypothetical: "If you were to teach the agency standard course how would you expect the divers produced to rank?" Then I'd say: LA County, NAUI or Y, CMAS, SSI, PADI.

 

[leapfrog]

Well, yes, I was asking it that way.

Unfortunately, LA County, NAUI and Y are not present in many (if any) places outside the US and in fact are even far and few between sometimes inside. The question is why?

CMAS is, generally speaking what it says it is, a Confederation of Diving Activities, so you get a lot of difference from one country to another.

I would say that SSI and PADI standards are reasonably similar with slightly different approaches.


Instructors decide how flexible or not they want to be about students acquiring mastery of skills and knowledge and the students themselves ultimately decide what level of training they want. I think the most interesting post on the subject came from Dr. Bill who said that the cost of his original LA County certification was the same as that of PADI OWD, AOWD and RD in real terms today.

Like a lot of PADI Instructors I advocate that all students should aspire to RD as soon as possible.

Could you give us a litlle bit more info about the restrictions that PADI has defined that make it aimpossible o teach a quality course?

 

[Thalassamania]

Well, yes, I was asking it that way.

Unfortunately, LA County, NAUI and Y are not present in many (if any) places outside the US and in fact are even far and few between sometimes inside. The question is why?

I think that's irrelevant, unless you are trying to argue that a knowledgeable public is intelligently selecting the best, which is easily disprovable.

CMAS is, generally speaking what it says it is, a Confederation of Diving Activities, so you get a lot of difference from one country to another.

There is a CMAS program that is separate and distinct from the national federations.

I would say that SSI and PADI standards are reasonably similar with slightly different approaches.

I believe SSI requires more dives ... at least they used to.

Instructors decide how flexible or not they want to be about students acquiring mastery of skills and knowledge and the students themselves ultimately decide what level of training they want.

Mastery is not a flexible concept, it's a binary. It either is, or it isn't. Sort of mastery is like sort of pregnancy, it does not exist. As far as students themselves deciding what level of training they want, that's a great concept for a world in which there is a base level of competence or a requirement for leadership assisted dives until a level of competence is reached. Neither of these situations actually exist.

I think the most interesting post on the subject came from Dr. Bill who said that the cost of his original LA County certification was the same as that of PADI OWD, AOWD and RD in real terms today.

Cost is not the measure. If the agencies would require leadership led dives until a diver complete PWD, Peak Buoyancy, AOWD and rescue, then I'd soften my stance.

Like a lot of PADI Instructors I advocate that all students should aspire to RD as soon as possible.

Could you give us a litlle bit more info about the restrictions that PADI has defined that make it aimpossible o teach a quality course?[/quote]