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

[ScubaDocER]

And I am stunned and amazed by the extremely narrow concept you have of e-learning.

Actually you know nothing of my insight into elearning. But that's for another day.

My daughter in law just completed her last two years of her Bachelor's degree from a major universit--completely online.

Congrats to the both of of you.

Truly touching. And you learned this in your eight years of teaching medical students?

It is indeed. Thank you for the acknowledgment.

Perhaps you could share with us what you learned about meeting the needs of students with learning disabilities during those times. How about your approach to students with a lifetime history of academic failure? What do you do for special education stuents on IEP's? Minority students struggling to learn English? How about teaching tables and decompression theory to students who not only struggle with basic math concepts but are absolutely phobic about having to try?

I have learned that each student is different in their needs to be educated. This is one limiting aspect of elearning exclusively. There are needs that a computer program cannot anticipate. I'll state it again for the reading impaired. I like elearning. I like elearning. I like elearning. I am a fan of it as a learning tool. It can be extremely helpful to many students who learn well via this mechanism. My ONLY concern is that to use it as a substitute for direct Instructor involvement is dangerous. If the goal is to make sure that every student has a chance to learn, whether they do so via elearning or not, they I would err on the side of caution and make sure that an Instructor participates in the academic process. The degree to which it occurs depends on the Instructor and the student.

In this very thread people have mocked divers who learn to dive in warm and pleasant tropical waters and think they know something about diving in the "real ocean."

I made no such comments regarding diving in any kind of water. Please direct those comments else where.

In this case you do the same thing with education, but you reverse the insult. You spend a mere 8 years teaching the academic elite who will make the effort to learn despite any poor instructional performance by the teacher and then have the temerity to insult others who teach in the "real ocean" of education.

You know nothing of the students I have trained. Nothing of their financial status. These students worked very hard to obtain the educational status they have achieved and I am honored to have been an integral part of that training. My 8 years spent training medical students, residents, nursing students, establishing triage protocols, were not "mere" in my opinion. I am proud of the work I have accomplished during my tenure as an Assistant Professor in Emergency Medicine. My students are proud of the educational training they received from my direct involvement in their training, as opposed to sitting them in front of a computer and saying "good luck". You speak about a great deal of things but have no substance behind your words. I hope this response has elucidated any confusion that may exist.

 

[Mike Campbell]

E learning is probably a proper adjunct. Then if one adds another 50-70 hours of classroom and pool training the student is well on their way to becoming a diver.
Mike

 

[The Chairman]

Then if one adds another 50-70 hours of classroom and pool training

This is simply NOT needed for most divers. Coming out of sedation, I had to ask my son to be SURE that you said this and did not include big smilies.
Posted via Mobile Device

 

[Mike Campbell]

We've all opinions. That's simply mine.
Mike

 

[ScubaDocER]

This is simply NOT needed for most divers. Coming out of sedation, I had to ask my son to be SURE that you said this and did not include big smilies.
Posted via Mobile Device

I hope the surgery went well and that the recovery goes smoothly.

 

[Thalassamania]

Glad to see you're up and around.

 

[boulderjohn]

I have learned that each student is different in their needs to be educated. This is one limiting aspect of elearning exclusively. There are needs that a computer program cannot anticipate.

What baffles me is that you keep repeating this over and over and over without responding to the point everyone else, especially me, has been making: quality eLearning includes, in fact requires, interaction between the student and the teacher. Perhaps your experience is limited to programs where that is not true, but that is by no means the norm.

You know nothing of the students I have trained. Nothing of their financial status. These students worked very hard to obtain the educational status they have achieved and I am honored to have been an integral part of that training. My 8 years spent training medical students, residents, nursing students, establishing triage protocols, were not "mere" in my opinion. I am proud of the work I have accomplished during my tenure as an Assistant Professor in Emergency Medicine. My students are proud of the educational training they received from my direct involvement in their training, as opposed to sitting them in front of a computer and saying "good luck". You speak about a great deal of things but have no substance behind your words. I hope this response has elucidated any confusion that may exist.

First of all, why do you keep promoting the myth in bold above? That does not describe even a mediocre eLearning experience.

Next, the most needy student in the situation you describe would be a dream student for the majority of the world's teachers.

Education is a curious profession. I was discussing this fact recently with a friend of mine who is a college Dean. He said that when he started teaching college, he had taken only 2 courses in educational theory, but he soon learned that he had thus taken 2 more such courses than all of his colleagues in his department combined. What other profession allows people to practice that profession and believe themselves to be experts with so little theoretical training? With the right students, someone like that can enjoy a measure of success despite using poor technique, just as hundreds of years ago many patients improved on their own after their doctors had bled some of the excess blood from their veins. (Please note that paragraph is general in nature and not directed at any specific person.)

I wrote an article on this a couple of months ago that you might find interesting:
Needed - A Professional Approach to Teaching Innovate Blog

 

[3000psi]

For the record.

I am GLAD that some of the skills that were once taught are now gone. The Navy Seal approach to certification was WAY over the top. Just say "no" to push-ups wearing full kit on the hard deck! I am also glad to see the science minimized somewhat. These are great for those inclined to study these matters (like myself), but they often took away from teaching SKILLS. I applaud the departure from tables that SDI has taken. There is simply no demonstrable need to teach a skill that is seldom used by MOST students. You can teach the concepts of on and off gassing just as easily using a dive computer. You are WAY more likely to see a dive computer on a dive boat then you are to see a set of tables. Teach the students to use the tools that they will be using. Thank God my son did not have to learn the slide rule to get through High School Chemistry or Physics because someone has determined that calculators rot your brain and that the ONLY way to learn about inertia or Avogadro's number is with a slide rule!

For those instructors who can not adapt to new pedagogical ideas and concepts, I just feel sorry for you. Out of fear or whatever reason, you are missing out on a WONDERFUL revolution in dive training. It's not a dumbing DOWN of the classes, but a far more efficient method that can and will attract a lot more students and divers to our sport. Without them, I fear for our sport. Foisting worn out ideologies onto people who willingly and enthusiastically embrace the information age is just so wrong on so many levels. !

NetDoc I would like to clarify a few of your comments and then elaborate on some others.
As have been discussed before I don't think it has ever been established that pushups in full gear was ever a requirement to get certified. Maybe some instructors included this in their requirements but never a requirement by an agency. If you have proof then my apologizes for questioning it. The reason I mention this, as has been said before, is that people may find these threads or even read a response through googling and they should not come away with false information.

Which brings me to your statement "There is simply no demonstrable need to teach a skill that is seldom used by MOST students." I think you could have chosen your words better, again for someone that might read this statement and take it literal. I can draw conclusions from your other posts that you are competent instructor and have a passion about teaching students the proper skills your agency requires. Since MOST students will never find a need to share air why teach the skill. Do you still teach clearing a snorkel since MOST students will never use one. Snorkels are just as much a visible rarity on a dive boat (in my experience) than dive tables. It is from reading several threads you have commented in I realize this was probably not what you wanted to infer but someone could stumble on your post and come away with a different interpretation.

As to the usefulness of dive tables they do offer some advantages for a reference source that computers ( at least some - as I will happily admit I am not familiar with the features of all models) do not. Matter of fact one of the dive problems we give students is to figure the maximum time they can stay on a 2nd dive of the day after completing their 1st dive knowing they have paid for a night dive where they want to be able to enjoy the full experience. Having to work backwards on a dive table is possible whereas a computer,at least mine, is not). For someone that began diving when tables were the norm I can say it is possible for me to plan out a dive day of 5 or 6 dives with tables which is something my computer is incapable of.

Your statement above also mentions attracting more students to our sport. You also made an inference in an earlier post ( at least I think it was yours ) about instructors opting for face to face teaching of academics is somehow a covert attempt to expose the student to more shop visits possibly resulting in more sales. However I see your support for only diving with computers to be exactly contrary to the first and falling prey to the 2nd. In my estimation one of the main barriers to entry to the sport for many is cost. Yet you have agencies removing teaching methods in an attempt to push more sales. Let's remove buddy breathing skills and replace with an octo unit increasing sales of 2nd stages. Let's remove dive table instruction so we can sell more computers. I firmly believe in a few years the cost of a basic OW class will increase by around $100 and EAN32 will become the norm and air will become a specialty course for those wishing to dive beyond 100'. This way the industry can eliminate tank fills from anywhere but scuba shops where the cost of a dive will now run say $10 as opposed to a cheaper air fill plus we can add the sale of an oxygen analyzer to the list of things one must buy.

Maybe as an industry we should get back to embracing the fundamentals of diving instruction while reducing the economic barriers to entry and less emphasis on marketing.

Hope your recovery from surgery is going well.

 

[Web Monkey]

However I see your support for only diving with computers to be exactly contrary to the first and falling prey to the 2nd. In my estimation one of the main barriers to entry to the sport for many is cost. Yet you have agencies removing teaching methods in an attempt to push more sales. Let's remove buddy breathing skills and replace with an octo unit increasing sales of 2nd stages.

The octo became popular because some paniced OOA divers were unwilling to give back the reg, leaving the donor OOA. I don't think it really falls into the "just trying to increase sales" category.

If you have divers that were taught and practice air-sharing, it's just fine. If you have a once-evey-couple-of-years vacation diver, it would be a problem.

Terry

 

[ScubaDocER]

What baffles me is that you keep repeating this over and over and over without responding to the point everyone else, especially me, has been making: quality eLearning includes, in fact requires, interaction between the student and the teacher. Perhaps your experience is limited to programs where that is not true, but that is by no means the norm.

The original statement suggested that elearning ALONE was enough to educate students with regards to the academic aspects of scuba diving. The implication was that all students needed was a DVD and/or a computer and that was sufficient to fulfill their academic requirements. My belief is that students should have at a minimum an Instructor's active involvement in their academic pursuits. I restated this in my previous post. See post yesterday at 1:41 PM. Your post as listed above reflects my opinions regarding elearning. Hopefully this quenches your thirst for knowledge regarding my response and beliefs in this matter.

First of all, why do you keep promoting the myth in bold above? That does not describe even a mediocre eLearning experience.

See my response as listed above.

Next, the most needy student in the situation you describe would be a dream student for the majority of the world's teachers.

Those who have taught realize that teaching any student is a challenge. It is irrelevant as to whether or not they are dream students. The student who worked 2 jobs to get into college, who sacrificed to get into medical school and who has devoted his/her time, effort, energy, and livelihood to the pursuit of his/her medical career would certainly not envision their path as a "dream". Hopefully each student would judged on their accomplishments, dedication, and committment, not whether or not someone perceives their path as a "dream". A needy student is a needy student. Please do not trivialize their desire to be educated or their path to complete their goals.

Education is a curious profession. I was discussing this fact recently with a friend of mine who is a college Dean. He said that when he started teaching college, he had taken only 2 courses in educational theory, but he soon learned that he had thus taken 2 more such courses than all of his colleagues in his department combined. What other profession allows people to practice that profession and believe themselves to be experts with so little theoretical training? With the right students, someone like that can enjoy a measure of success despite using poor technique, just as hundreds of years ago many patients improved on their own after their doctors had bled some of the excess blood from their veins. (Please note that paragraph is general in nature and not directed at any specific person.)

The fact that someone believes themselves an expert is a subjective one. True experts never have to declare it for themselves. The community around them does that for them. You are correct in that gifted students can cover the mistakes of inept educators. Such will always be the way. That however cannot excuse creating a poor educational system that does not support the increased learning for ALL students. This comes back to my original statement. Elearning exclusively is not sufficient currently to replace the direct involvement of a qualified Instructor. That would be the poor educational system that I have referred to. If you concur, then we are on the same page and need not continue to debate this issue (from my perspective anyway). It is with those that disagree that I would continue to pursue the issue.