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

[leapfrog]

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

I disagree. It is very relevant. It's not the public at large but the LDS who decided to go PADI or SSI. The public takes what is on offer in it's own geographical area. The fact that LA County and NAUI have fallen behind in the US and don't or hardly exist outside the US is an issue. Why has PADI been successful if it's standards are so low?

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

True. Very hard to find or do in many places though.

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

I'm not sure either. Don't think theres a big difference, except SSI is giving them a passport instead of a C card over here in Europe.

Mastery is not a flexible concept, it's a binary. It either is, or it isn't.

True.

Sort of mastery is like sort of pregnancy, it does not exist.

True.

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.

True

Neither of these situations actually exist.

True.

Cost is not the measure

False.

If the agencies would require leadership led dives until a diver complete PWD, Peak Buoyancy, AOWD and rescue, then I'd soften my stance.

We agree completely on this point.

 

[Thalassamania]

I disagree. It is very relevant. It's not the public at large but the LDS who decided to go PADI or SSI. The public takes what is on offer in it's own geographical area. The fact that LA County and NAUI have fallen behind in the US and don't or hardly exist outside the US is an issue. Why has PADI been successful if it's standards are so low?

PADI has been so successful precisely because their standards are so low. PADI's entire marketing scheme was to take a course name that was in use (and considered standardized) by other agencies and tag a course one or more levels down with the that name. That's why the PADI AOW was the same as the NAUI Sport Diver, and the PADI Master Diver was, rather than a true badge of expertise, nothing more that a sales gimmick for specialty courses. At the entry level diver PADI sliced out time consuming and onerous, but essential, items (rescue, gas management, etc.) thereby making the course cheaper (and easier) for the LDS to "crank'em" on out.

Frankly I think that this approach has been counter productive for the LDSs, divers, and the industry as a whole. The only beneficiary were the owners of PADI (at the time a for profit corporation, more or less run by the head of U.S. Divers). What divers needed was better and more complete training so that they were comfortable going out diving. What shops needed was the same thing, divers growning and purchasing more advanced and expensive gear (e.g., dry suits and such). What the owners of PADI lusted after was more case, that is to say more c-card and materials sales. So PADI cheapened (in terms of time required and quality) their certifications and made lots of money.

False.

I don't see cost as a measure of either desirability or quality.

 

[leapfrog]

Our economy is a market economy: on that everyone agrees. What economists call the "price mechanism" controls the allocation of labor, the production of goods and services, and the distribution of commodities. Wherever demand is higher than supply for some particular product prices fall, and some of those making or supplying it head off for other lines of business; whenever supply is higher than demand prices rise, and new producers and sellers enter the market.

Some agencies wax and others wane. Market economics.

The measurement of the cost of quality actually refers to the expense of failing to provide a quality product or service.

The market has determined that some certification organizations give them a better service than the other agencies.


To have a market economy is by and large a good thing: the price mechanism acts as a gigantic social calculating machine to organize our economy and to direct the division of labor and the allocation of production.

Of course if we believe everything we read and hear, we may end up having a socialist in the White House. In a socialist economy, the political commissars will decide what is best for us. The consumer serves a political purpose to consume what the apparatchiks decide he wants to consume.

So for the next 78 days, at least, the consumer should have freedom of choice. He or she also has the right to be informed, which is the purpose of the Fourth Estate of which Scubaboard is an ever more powerful voice.

In the words of David Ogilvy: "Never underestimate the consumer, she's your wife!"

 

[Thalassamania]

Actually we have a mixed economy.

You are allowing your political rhetoric to get in the way of common sense and clear evidence.

A "free market" that operates on a completely caveat emptor basis requires that each and every individual consumer learn all there is to know about each and every purchase prior to committing to a buy. In the case of diving, for them learn enough to truly be able to make an informed purchase they'd need to be a knowledgeable and skilled diver who did not need entry level training, so it is a situation ripe for the sort of abuse that has occurred. It is not like skiing where the ability to handle the expert trails is developed and tested a little bit at a time. In diving the critical survival skills are not developed and tested a little bit at a time, they are not taught in entry level courses, they are put off for future elective courses that may never be taken. When people face the kinds of situations that such training should have helped them through, they don't usually die, they just give up diving. Why do you think diving has an astronomical drop out rate?

Is this right or wrong? I guess that depends to some degree on your personal morality. I believe that people have responsibilities toward each other, that they should deliver value, even when not required by law to do so. I do not feel that those resonsiblities can be honestly met within the PADI program nor that the PADI program delivers something of value.

I also think that the PADI program is a foolish choice for the industry. Abbreviated and inadequate training that does not fully prepare divers for most of the situation that will predictably arise inevitably results in divers getting themselves into situations that they can't handle, they then drop out and never take additional training or buy additional equipment.

The divers that I've trained I typically stay in tough with for five to ten years, almost everyone continues to dive, everyone buys a full set of gear, almost everyone buys a drysuit (that may change now that Im in Hawaii). A significant proportion buy big ticket items like camera housings, DPVs, and rebreathers.

 

[sweatfrog]

PADI has been so successful precisely because their standards are so low.

PADI has been successful, because they have paid attention to the market and adjusted the program to fit what a typical consumer is looking for. The quasi-military Instructor attitude started slowing down in the early 80's, when PADI eliminated some of the 1/4 mile swims in the beginning class and focused more on training Joe the plumber to dive, instead of teaching him to become a lifeguard.

I also see skindiving as a lot of fun, but some people don't get it. That's OK, the skindiving in the past isn't what is being promoted now, so those people don't drop out of the class because they can't do something they don't see as relevent toward scuba diving.

PADI's entire marketing scheme was to take a course name that was in use (and considered standardized) by other agencies and tag a course one or more levels down with the that name. That's why the PADI AOW was the same as the NAUI Sport Diver, and the PADI Master Diver was, rather than a true badge of expertise, nothing more that a sales gimmick for specialty courses.

PADI had an Advanced plus course that was the same as NAUI's Master Scuba Diver and it fell on it's face. After a few years, it was taken out of the mix. If it doesn't work, don't try to force it down someone's throat. All of the other agencies have had to abide by certain monikers that PADI placed on courses. That's smart marketing on everyone's part.

Look, people aren't stupid, but s/he can be led down the primrose path. If something is working, why try and fix it. Snow Skiing doesn't require lessons and lots of people try it every year. The marketing done in that industry is always upbeat and positive. Perhaps people in this industry should take a hint from that.

At the entry level diver PADI sliced out time consuming and onerous, but essential, items (rescue, gas management, etc.) thereby making the course cheaper (and easier) for the LDS to "crank'em" on out.

They did relocate that information. Beginners don't know if they'll like this sport and the time they spend on the basic skills can be taxing to some of them. At the beginning level, those people have enough to think about to take care of themselves, much less another diver.

In skiing, that's why you have Ski Patrol. In diving, that's why you have divemasters.

Frankly I think that this approach has been counter productive for the LDSs, divers, and the industry as a whole. The only beneficiary were the owners of PADI (at the time a for profit corporation, more or less run by the head of U.S. Divers).

At the time that PADI was owned by the head of U.S. Divers, they were a non-profit organization. Although that changed when he retired and took they reins at PADI. Mistakes were and are currently being made, but at least they aren't sitting on their laurels like most of the other agencies. You learn and grow from both the good and bad.

What divers needed was better and more complete training so that they were comfortable going out diving. What shops needed was the same thing, divers growning and purchasing more advanced and expensive gear (e.g., dry suits and such).

What divers need is to get more dives, to increase their experience. Just like skiers need to get out on the slopes to get better. I've learned a lot more by actually diving than by taking certain classes.

However, for the typical consumer who's going on a cruise, my prime objective is to keep them diving after that cruise. That can be challenging, with all the other things to try in todays society.

What the owners of PADI lusted after was more case, that is to say more c-card and materials sales. So PADI cheapened (in terms of time required and quality) their certifications and made lots of money.

For every dollar that (insert agency here)__________ makes, the Instructor needs to make one also. The amount of time spent on teaching a class (depending on which one) can far too often be a loss leader. It has been that way in the past and things need to change to make it a win/win for all parties.

I don't see cost as a measure of either desirability or quality.

Really! A lot of great Instructors have been lost, because the time they put in to a course couldn't justify the lack of money they were making.

 

[Thalassamania]

You have an incredible penchant for rewriting history and then misinterpreting your own rewrite to suit your bloody-tooth and fang view of economics.

 

[leapfrog]

Actually we have a mixed economy.

Really?

You are allowing your political rhetoric to get in the way of common sense and clear evidence.

Common sense is that consumers decide for themselves. The evidence is that they choose PADI.

A "free market" that operates on a completely caveat emptor basis requires that each and every individual consumer learn all there is to know about each and every purchase prior to committing to a buy.

Do you need to be a mechanic to buy your first car or an IT whiz to buy a laptop?

In the case of diving, for them learn enough to truly be able to make an informed purchase they'd need to be a knowledgeable and skilled diver who did not need entry level training....

No, they do what all new consumers do. They browse the internet, buy some dive mags, go to a LDS or maybe they are on vacation and they walk into the first palce or the most attractive place they see to seek information.

so it is a situation ripe for the sort of abuse that has occurred.

Now you make PADI sound like Guantanamo. What abuse are you referring to?

It is not like skiing where the ability to handle the expert trails is developed and tested a little bit at a time.

People are seriously injured, maimed and killed skiing on day one.

In diving the critical survival skills are not developed and tested a little bit at a time, they are not taught in entry level courses....

You really should train your entry level students better then.

they are put off for future elective courses that may never be taken.

That's the problem with living in a consumer economy. They don't always do what we want them to do.

When people face the kinds of situations that such training should have helped them through, they don't usually die, they just give up diving.

A large percentage of people throw in the towel when something goes wrong. It's called human nature.

Why do you think diving has an astronomical drop out rate?

About a thousand and one reasons. Can we start another thread on this particular topic, please? To name a few and get the ball into play: 1. They get married and have kids (i.e their priorities change) 2. There are other alternatives they find more interesting (bowling, tennis, golf) 3. They get sick of hauling the gear, getting wet, cold and miserable or they just find out that it doesn't turn them on.

Is this right or wrong?

I didn't know it was Judgement Day today. I thought it was tomorrow.

I guess that depends to some degree on your personal morality.

Are you calling me immoral?

I believe that people have responsibilities toward each other, that they should deliver value, even when not required by law to do so.

I'm all for that.

I do not feel that those resonsiblities can be honestly met within the PADI program nor that the PADI program delivers something of value.

That is your opinion and I respect it.

I also think that the PADI program is a foolish choice for the industry.

Would there actually be an industry without PADI?

......inadequate training that does not fully prepare divers for most of the situation that will predictably arise inevitably results in divers getting themselves into situations that they can't handle, they then drop out and never take additional training or buy additional equipment.

Do you have any evidence to substantiate that?

The divers that I've trained I typically stay in tough with for five to ten years, almost everyone continues to dive, everyone buys a full set of gear, almost everyone buys a drysuit (that may change now that Im in Hawaii). A significant proportion buy big ticket items like camera housings, DPVs, and rebreathers.

That is excellent news. Are you saying that Sweatfrog's customers (as an example) don't do the same thing?

 

[leapfrog]

PADI has been successful, because they have paid attention to the market and adjusted the program to fit what a typical consumer is looking for.

TRUE.

The quasi-military Instructor attitude started slowing down in the early 80's, when PADI eliminated some of the 1/4 mile swims in the beginning class and focused more on training Joe the plumber to dive, instead of teaching him to become a lifeguard.

. YES, THAT'S WHY IT'S CALLED RECREATIONAL DIVING.

PADI had an Advanced plus course that was the same as NAUI's Master Scuba Diver and it fell on it's face. After a few years, it was taken out of the mix.

TRUE.

If it doesn't work, don't try to force it down someone's throat.

COMMON SENSE.

All of the other agencies have had to abide by certain monikers that PADI placed on courses. That's smart marketing on everyone's part.

COMMON SENSE.

Look, people aren't stupid, but s/he can be led down the primrose path. If something is working, why try and fix it. Snow Skiing doesn't require lessons and lots of people try it every year. The marketing done in that industry is always upbeat and positive. Perhaps people in this industry should take a hint from that.

I used to teach people to jump out of a plane. Day One we just throw 'em out (attached to a Tandem Instructor] Day Two we teach them. Seven AFF jumps and they can jump alone. Ten consolidation jumps and they are licenced. Of course skydiving is a very safe sport (approx. 40 fatalities a year, worldwide] We teach students how to deal with the life threatening situations but at the end of the day, they have to perform on their own.

They did relocate that information. Beginners don't know if they'll like this sport and the time they spend on the basic skills can be taxing to some of them. At the beginning level, those people have enough to think about to take care of themselves, much less another diver.

TRUE.

In skiing, that's why you have Ski Patrol. In diving, that's why you have divemasters.

Yes.

At the time that PADI was owned by the head of U.S. Divers, they were a non-profit organization. Although that changed when he retired and took they reins at PADI. Mistakes were and are currently being made, but at least they aren't sitting on their laurels like most of the other agencies. You learn and grow from both the good and bad.

CHANGE FROM INSIDE.

For every dollar that (insert agency here)__________ makes, the Instructor needs to make one also. The amount of time spent on teaching a class (depending on which one) can far too often be a loss leader. It has been that way in the past and things need to change to make it a win/win for all parties.

Personally, I think it's the biggest problem facing our industry. That is why I have advocated that PADI (other agencies can follow suit or not) should insist on minimum course prices that it's members should adhere to.

Really! A lot of great Instructors have been lost, because the time they put in to a course couldn't justify the lack of money they were making.

The industry stastic is a median two years. This is the vital problem that must be redressed. The industry needs less instructors and more divers. I think the figure of the Assistant Instructor should be more important and maybe should have a time frame or a number of courses taught as an AI under IDCSI or MSDT supervision until being able to qualify for OWSI.

A huge part of the problem is money. When an Instructor can make $50,000 plus a year and can lose his/her job by not doing the job probably, the motivation will exist.

I know that my other half supports me to do this work because she has a job with a major airline but I know she sometimes wishes I would go back to a better paying job, even with the risks involved.

 

[Thalassamania]

Really?

Yes, in point of fact we have a mixed economy.

Common sense is that consumers decide for themselves. The evidence is that they choose PADI.

When people have inadequate information, all they have to go on is common sense, which is often not sufficient.

Do you need to be a mechanic to buy your first car or an IT whiz to buy a laptop?

IK don't know about you but before I buy a new car I talk to my mechanic, before I buy a new laptop I talk to my IT guy. UI'd be stupid to have these resources and not take advantage of them, especially since if I have problems I can't deal with they will be the ones that have to jump into the breach.

No, they do what all new consumers do. They browse the internet, buy some dive mags, go to a LDS or maybe they are on vacation and they walk into the first palce or the most attractive place they see to seek information.

Actually most walk into the first place.

Now you make PADI sound like Guantanamo. What abuse are you referring to?

The depauperization of training with concomitant course title inflation ... that abuse.

People are seriously injured, maimed and killed skiing on day one.

You have data to support this claim? I think not.

You really should train your entry level students better then.

Yes y'all really should. My people never have this problem since I only teach 100 hour progams.

That's the problem with living in a consumer economy. They don't always do what we want them to do. A large percentage of people throw in the towel when something goes wrong. It's called human nature. About a thousand and one reasons. Can we start another thread on this particular topic, please? To name a few and get the ball into play: 1. They get married and have kids (i.e their priorities change) 2. There are other alternatives they find more interesting (bowling, tennis, golf) 3. They get sick of hauling the gear, getting wet, cold and miserable or they just find out that it doesn't turn them on.

Just read the posts here on SB of those that stick it out, most of them almost gave up and posted their troubles in a last ditch effort to not drop out. I'm sure that there are lots more that we never hear from.

I didn't know it was Judgement Day today. I thought it was tomorrow. Are you calling me immoral?

No, are you feeling guilty?

Would there actually be an industry without PADI?

Yes, I suspect a healthier one with a more mature industry.

Do you have any evidence to substantiate that?

Just read the SB, there are lots of examples, several every week.

That is excellent news. Are you saying that Sweatfrog's customers (as an example) don't do the same thing?

I rather doubt that they do, every one of my students buys a full set of gear with a wet suit, every single one. Most (when I lived on the mainland) bought a drysuit, underwear and wings within a year. Better than half bought a camera housing and accessories. I never head of a dive shop with those kind of student sales.

 

[leapfrog]

Yes, in point of fact we have a mixed economy.

We do as related to the left wing decisions that have been made to shore up our financial system, or rather the players. I don't think there is a mixed economy in the diving industry but maybe you can enlighten me.

When people have inadequate information, all they have to go on is common sense, which is often not sufficient.

If people have inadequate information there must be a reason for it. However, people have more common sense than you give them credit for. They overwhelmingly decide to head for a LDS that offers them a training program that trains about a million divers a year. I think the point you are trying to make is that they may have other choices. However if the other agencies don't make themselves be known, you can hardly blame the market leader. I am working as an independent now. So my students come to me because they trust me and then they want a recognised qualification that they can travel with. If I said fine, I can train you but the cert card is going to be the Inter Galatic Divers on Mars card or something else they had never heard of they would seek training elsewhere.

IK don't know about you but before I buy a new car I talk to my mechanic, before I buy a new laptop I talk to my IT guy.

Most new divers also do some research before signing up for a program.

UI'd be stupid to have these resources and not take advantage of them, especially since if I have problems I can't deal with they will be the ones that have to jump into the breach.

I think what annoys you is that many people have those resources as far as learning to dive is concerned and still decide to go with the market leader. Again, you can't blame that agency for the shortcomings of the others in getting their message out there. Frankly, I would welcome a more competitive environment which would do us all a better service.

Actually most walk into the first place.

TRUE. So as I have been saying all along, if people walk into the first place and find a given agency, it's clear to me that the others have a distribution problem, in other words they don't have enough points of sale. As I said before, I would rather be talking to would-be students about the merits of training with Agency A vs. B vs C vs D than having the actual situation where we are all offering what appears to be the same program (the instructor and the facility makes the difference) and people saying "yeah but I can get it for $25 or $50 less down the street".

The depauperization of training with concomitant course title inflation ... that abuse.

I understand where you are coming from and I agree with you that calling people with 10 logged dives AOW or 50 logged dives Master Scuba Divers is "course title inflation". However, what seems easy for those of us who live and work inside the business requires time, dedication and a considerable financial effort on the part of our students. Course title inflation is practised by the majority of agencies. Why? Because it works and makes people keep diving which we all agree is a good thing. Unfortunately, this doesn't only exist in our industry. Nowadays everyone you meet is a Senior Vice President. A baggage handler at an airport is a "Customer Service Auxiliary Equipment Officer". I am an advocate for a recreational, non professional qualification beyond MSD where students would have the knowledge and skills of a certified DM leaving out the parts of assisting the instructor.

You have data to support this claim? I think not.

Some 30 people of all nationalities were killed in the Alps last winter. In France last year, according to official government statistics, 12 people died on piste and 10 off piste, and doctors treated 140,000 injuries. The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents says that about 10,000 British skiers and snowboarders visit hospitals on their return from holiday with injuries ranging from concussion and broken bones to torn ligaments. Data from the United States showed that 22 skiers and snowboarders died last year.Of course, injuries do occur. The less experienced you are as a skier or snowboarder, the more likely you are to hurt yourself. Thanks to better piste preparation and safety barriers, injuries resulting from collisions with static pylons and trees have fallen. However, collisions with other skiers and snowboarders have increased sharply and now account for 10 per cent of all injuries. Most vulnerable are those aged under 11 and over 55. (Source: Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents)

Yes y'all really should. My people never have this problem since I only teach 100 hour progams.

That's very good. Not everybody wants to spend 100 hours to find out if they want to Scuba dive, that's why there are shorter, modular programs that advocate that people then go on to do additional training.

No, are you feeling guilty?

Not at all? About what?

Yes, I suspect a healthier one with a more mature industry.

I believe the opposite. We'd go back to the pre 1980s and have very few divers doing quasimilitary diving programs. There wouldn't be an industry for the instructors, the LDS, the tour operators and the equipment manufacturers.

I rather doubt that they do, every one of my students buys a full set of gear with a wet suit, every single one. Most (when I lived on the mainland) bought a drysuit, underwear and wings within a year. Better than half bought a camera housing and accessories. I never head of a dive shop with those kind of student sales.

I don't doubt what you say. How many students do you certify per year?