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

[300bar]

Try reading the thread, or at least the posts above.

I did.

Well, don't bother

Yes I do bother,But YOU stated you had proof of this.

you're clearly not interested in information or insights that differ from you preconceived notions.

According to you,i'm having preconcieved notions,but the only thing I've seen sofar is what we,on this side of the ocean,call ,lets keep it nice,the notions of the ancients.

Today we live in 2008 a time and age where divers what to learn diving ASAP.If you like it or not.Does that mean that standards are lower than 30 years ago
No not realy.But standards have been changed to accomedate(?)new vacation divers.So we (PADI) have a minimun level of what a student MUST know.

THAT does NOT mean that the PADI teachers HAVE to teach ONLY by the MINIMUM standards.
It is just the LEAST we should live by.

HECK NAUI seems to have a minimum of 20 dives for DM. PADI atleast has 60.

But I'm always ready to learn more, and that seems to be something the çÏtcients"are NOT willing to do.Heck I'm only diving since 1980.

 

[Thalassamania]

Yes I do bother,But YOU stated you had proof of this.

Did I? I do not recall writing that. What I did say was:

Its not an anecdotal statement, though there is much anecdotal evidence to support it (e.g., YouTube - Diving Accident Broken Regulator). It is an expert opinion. One that I share.
...
I've extensive experience observing divers with 20 hours of training, 40 hours of training and 100 hours of training. There is not a shadow of a doubt in my mind that more training equates to (on average) more competence and more confidence.
It is not a statistical question, it is one of expertise and experience.

And I reiterated:

Presume away, but there are no good measurements available, save the general agreement as to the high (70 to 80 percent) dropout rate. It's not just that fatalities may not be "the best" its that total fatalities is likely to be no measure at all, even if we had both a numberator and a denominator, which we don't. When quantitative measures fail, as they seem to in this case, the next best thing is the subjective opinions of experts with direct experience. I think that's Sam Miller, and me, a very few others on the board here, but when it comes to opinions concerning the old NAUDC data, I'm about all you can get, since John McAniff passed away last year.

According to you,i'm having preconcieved notions,but the only thing I've seen sofar is what we,on this side of the ocean,call ,lets keep it nice,the notions of the ancients.

Today we live in 2008 a time and age where divers what to learn diving ASAP.If you like it or not.Does that mean that standards are lower than 30 years ago
No not realy.But standards have been changed to accomedate(?)new vacation divers.So we (PADI) have a minimun level of what a student MUST know.

We been through this ad infinitum. You have to do great violence to language (at least to English) to maintian what you are saying. Is the course now about half the length? Has rescue been removed from it? etc. Clearly, standards are lower than they were. We can have disparate opinions as to whether or not this is a good thing, but please let's not quibble over the obvious ... STANDARDS ARE LOWER.

THAT does NOT mean that the PADI teachers HAVE to each ONLY by the MINIMUM standards.
It is just the LEAST we should live by.

That is simply not true. We have several PADI Instructors go through the hand wringing, smoke and mirrors BS of how you may add things, but you can't evaluate them ... that is a crock of horse pucky, if it can't be evaluated, if it can't be required for certification, that the construct is bumph, not reality. You must "certify" a diver who can not perform a rescue or maintain a horizontal hover for more than a mere 30 seconds, or who has no real idea of how to calculate air requirement and reserves. That my friend is lowered standards.

HECK NAUI seems to have a minimum of 20 dives for DM. PADI atleast has 60.

Don't know where you got that from. Here's the reality:

• Certification - Certification as NAUI Master Scuba Diver and NAUI Scuba Rescue Diver or their equivalent. (Note: PADI MSD is NOT equivalent) Divers with evidence of equivalent training and experience may be enrolled provided they pass the NAUI Master Scuba Diver written examination with a minimum score of 75%. (Note: that's the NAUI Instructor Exam, less the sections on teaching theory and NAUI Structure).
• Experience - Documentation of diving experience with a minimum of 60 logged open water dives. Dives shall be varied in environment, depth and activities.
• Waterskills - Ability equivalent to that of a NAUI Assistant Instructor. Skills from the Assistant Instructor standards shall be evaluated if the candidate is not already certified as a NAUI Assistant Instructor

Not that I really care what NAUI is or is not.

But I'm always ready to learn more, and that seems to be something the çÏtcients"are NOT willing to do.Heck I'm only diving since 1980.

I learn something about diving every day ... and I've only been diving since 1956 and teaching diving since 1970.

 

[ShakaZulu]

People, this is not rocket science...the courses have been watered down cause the average diver don't need to know all the stuff. If they want to learn, they surely can, and that way PADI and all the other agencies makes more money. What are you two arguing about?

 

[Thalassamania]

People, this is not rocket science...the courses have been watered down cause the average diver don't need to know all the stuff. If they want to learn, they surely can, and that way PADI and all the other agencies makes more money. What are you two arguing about?

As far as I can tell they are claiming that the courses have not been watered down.

I happen to disagree with you that "the average diver don't need to know all the stuff." I think that the average diver should have good trim and buoyancy, be able to calculate rock bottom, and know how to effectively use use both tables and computers (at a minimum). And I think that not teaching divers those things so that one can make more money is both irresponsible and immoral.

 

[leapfrog]

...the courses have been watered down cause the average diver don't need to know all the stuff.

Did anybody ask the average diver what his/her opinion was? Is it really a better idea to focus what to do when the diver has "almost run out of air?" than to teach that the diver should never be in that situation in the first place? If you know that excellent question in the OW exam which asks, "you almost run out of air, what do you do?" with six "priorities". I've never seen a student even understand the question much less answer it right if I didn't spend half an hour (minimum) at the quiz stage explaining what the whole thing is about."

When people learn to drive they learn how to maintain a distance and keep an eye in the rearview mirror. They're not taught "ok, you are about to hit the car in front, what are your options?".

 

[NudeDiver]

OK....after 34 pages of this BS - I have a question. What difference does it make? Suppose the standards ARE lower - just for the sake of argument. So what?? There are always people who are going to do the minimum, no matter what that minimum is. There are also people who will go above and beyond. There are slackers and achievers that come in all walks of life.

You can fool yourself into thinking "if the standards were higher, diving and divers would be safer" if you want to. You can also keep believing in Santa and the Tooth Fairy too.

 

[D_B]

I don't know of anyone who disputes the fact that there are excellent PADI instructors who teach above standards to give their students high quality classes. This thread is about the fact that PADI standards are low and do not require instructors to give you those high quality classes. I'm glad your instructor was excellent.

Point taken

I was replying to Walters post,

..... :snip:
No , there's no point there, just an inability either to read or to understand the posts that have come before, so we get thinly veiled attempts at weak put downs, instead of reasoned discourse. All that reveals is the paucity of the poster's knowledge, wisdom, ability, and skill.

not to yours
sorry .. dang phone posting doesnt work well

 

[Thalassamania]

...You can fool yourself into thinking "if the standards were higher, diving and divers would be safer" if you want to. You can also keep believing in Santa and the Tooth Fairy too.

The inaccuracy of your statement is, in fact, provable.

One the face of it your claim is foolish ... when a community holds itself to a higher standard the risks go down ... but that's just common sense. Otherwise why have any standards at all?

The science diving community has, since the early 1950s, operated under a training standard that mandates 100 hours and 12 dives for entry level training. There have been no more than two fatalities of divers who were trained in this fashion over the the last 50 odd years despite the increased risks of science diving and the routine and programmatic use of air down to 190 feet. Also, according to OSHA, the science community's decompression incident rate is an order of magnitude better than the recreational community's.

So, make no mistake about it, there is proof that when a community holds itself to a higher standard the risks go down ... but that's just common sense.

Take a minute and think about it ... you really should retract or rephrase.

 

[NudeDiver]

The science diving community....

So, you want to compare professional divers to recreational divers and/or expect recreational divers to meet the same standards as professional divers...

 

[Thalassamania]

You have a warped view of who the science diving community is, but then you do seem to like to sound off about things you know nothing about. That's a highly reproducible pattern in your posts, but what the hey ... it's the internet.

They're not agents of NUMA, they're not superpeople of any sort, they are (by and large) rather bookish, minimally fit nerds who do some diving in support of their science, not real different from average folks ... maybe a little brighter, and much better trained.

Our safety record is so good that when OSHA promulgated their commercial diving standards (and include us in, solely because we have an employer/employee relationship in our diving) they decided, on examination of the facts, to exclude from their standard divers who were trained our way.