Have training standards "slipped"?

[SparticleBrane]

^ Don't worry, I doubt he will.

 

[Thalassamania]

Dive computers are nothing more than a cartoon form of a dive table. What does it matter if someone learns to decipher the 20 odd datum displayed on a computer or to move from collumn to row to table to table? It's the same damn thing. The critical question with respect to teaching diving is, "was adequate background provided, and mastered, so that the student actually understands how to use the table or computer." If that was, in fact, done, then a student should be able to use either without a whole lot of trouble.

 

[stargazer61]

It actually staggers me how few recreational divers have dive tables and how few of them actually take them in the water. They just put blind faith in minimum wage divemasters in developing nations that didnt go to high school.

When I did my deep dive for AOW in NZ we hit 30m (100 ft) for a few minutes while we completed a minor task. The rest of he dive was a tour of a wreck while we moved slowly up to about 20m. When we calculated our pressure group at the end of the dive we found out that we were all dead . The instructor recalculated the ending pressure group using the wheel and that is what appears in my log book . That was when I started to seriously consider computers. I have just bought 2 Aeris Elite T3's from Scubatoys today .

 

[tboxcar]

Getting back to the origins of this thread, things sure have changed. For better or for worse, maybe both. I got first certified in Australia in '87 under FAUI (they went broke ). The Federation of Australian Underwater Instructors, anyway, I won't go into detail as it's getting late where I am, but she had us do some 'odd things' that I don't think are done now due to safety concerns. We were using horseshoe collars, and Octopuses were something that you did not want to touch, especially the 'blue ringed' ones.
But seriously, through my many travels in both Asia and Central America, it sure seems to me many places 'pump out' DM's like Toyota pumps out cars on an assembly line! Then after 70 or 80 dives, they think they invented the sport. Just my opinion from what I have observed.

 

[Walter]

No, it hasn't. But again, if you don't understand the difference, please don't try to teach it.

Explain the difference.

 

[MikeFerrara]

When I did my deep dive for AOW in NZ we hit 30m (100 ft) for a few minutes while we completed a minor task. The rest of he dive was a tour of a wreck while we moved slowly up to about 20m. When we calculated our pressure group at the end of the dive we found out that we were all dead . The instructor recalculated the ending pressure group using the wheel and that is what appears in my log book . That was when I started to seriously consider computers. I have just bought 2 Aeris Elite T3's from Scubatoys today .

What were your thoughts when you found out you were dead? Did you realize your mistake at that point? Shouldn't you have know what that pressure group was going to be fefore you did the dive? Were you paying any attention at all to your dive profile? You knew you were going to 100 ft, right? You knew that you had been to 100 ft right? Did you have some plan in mind when you were swimming around at 60 ft? Did your instructor explain what his plan was. Were the results of your table calculations a surprise to the instructor.

I'd strongly suggest that you make a call to the agency and ask them what the training standards say about the way your instructor conducted that dive.

Use a dive computer if you want to but I think that a good class would serve you well at this point.

 

[MikeFerrara]

Twist it all you want Mike. I guess all you teach is button pushing.

I'm twisting it? LOL

As far back as my teaching experience goes, along with using tables the basics of computers were also covered. With that knowledge, the student could continue diving with tables or use a computer. Would you say that your students have that ability?

Looking back, most who baught their own equipment used tables for a while and later baught a computer. In the vast majority of cases, the computer was the last thing purchased because they just didn't need it. In all those students, I don't remember a single one having any trouble using their computer.

Many didn't buy equipment right away and some never baught equipment. However, each had a copy of the tables and could use them.

ok, so one of these students who aren't taught tables and don't buy all their own equipment right away, goes out diving and rents equipment. Assuming, they can even rent a computer (you'd be hard pressed to find one available for rent around here), they end up diving with an unfamiliar computer and no other means to check their dive planning?

Sorry, I don't see how this "new" way of teaching does anything but further limit the students choices and capabilities.

 

[matt_w]

I just finished a completely new OW course a few months ago (Feb 2007). There was a (rather sales-oriented "diving is great you want to do it") DVD and a much thinner book than I had seen before. The theory was there, but rather watered down from my standpoint. (I'm and engineer and my 17 yr old had just finished AP Physics.) I would say the book had the *important* parts of the theory, plus a new emphasis on taking care of the environment, which is not a bad idea. There was a 50 yd swim, about 5 minutes of tread water and no pushups In the pool, there were the same mask-clearing drills, but bouyancy and trim were a recurring, *important* part of the class. You had to doff and don your gear in he pool, but you kept your air on and reg the whole time. You *did* have to exchange weights with your buddy, which I thought was a more useful skill than some I'd been taught before. There was no emergency out of air ascent.

At least from PADI's perspective I do not see a lot thats changed in the course materials in the past 23 years. I was just comparing the materials my kids received last week to my Open Water manual from 1984 and I do not see any skills that have been dropped. Todays book has some extra emphasis on ecology and a little more on buoyancy. The books are roughly the same size and the DVD is a decent additional resource.

When you say you kept your regulator in the mouth the whole time, I assume you meant during the gear exchange since I doubt any training agency not teaching regulaotr recovery and clearing could get insurance for their instructors.

Interesting about the ascent I will watch for that in their class and see if it is done. That is a usefull skill that warrants some controlled practice to help prevent panic if it ever becomes necessary. I have never a had a reall world situation that required it, but that is true of most emergency procedures.

 

[Walter]

At least from PADI's perspective I do not see a lot thats changed in the course materials in the past 23 years. I was just comparing the materials my kids received last week to my Open Water manual from 1984 and I do not see any skills that have been dropped.

Most of what PADI dropped was dropped before 1984. The biggest change to standards since 1984 was making swimming optional in 2000. The OW Manual doesn't list what is required by PADI standards. That is in (not listed, but hidden) the Instructor Manual.

 

[MikeFerrara]

Most of what PADI dropped was dropped before 1984. The biggest change to standards since 1984 was making swimming optional in 2000. The OW Manual doesn't list what is required by PADI standards. That is in (not listed, but hidden) the Instructor Manual.

Just off the top of my head here are some of the changes of recent years.

The one minute confined water hover was reduced to 30 seconds...the one minute hover in OW now has NO time requirement. The biggest was probably the roll out of the "dive today" philosophy. I'm not sure how I can quickly describe that but the idea is to get people into the water, and specifically OW, as soon as possible. It's also a priority to give credit for what's been done to make selling the "little piece that's left easier. ie...a resort dive or discover scuba diving program is essentially CW 1 and O! dive 1 and the student can get training credit for the resort dive they did on vacation. In order to make that work some skills needed to be rearranged and as a result there are some funky things in the standards....like the CW 1 requirement for UW swimming with depth and direction control even though nuetral buoyant swimming aren't introduced until CW 3.

I'm not sure I'm being so clear here. Lets say a tourist signs up for a discover scuba
(a pool only thing). We go through a couple skills like clearing a reg and they just play in the pool on scuba. They have fun so I point out that if we just run through a little more of the flip chart and do a couple more pool skills, we can go out on the reef. I take them out there and work the BC for them and they just look at the fish. Now I tell them how far they are through the class already...see? I sell the class a piece at a time without them even knowing it. The problem I see is what they had to do to the standards in order to make all the pieces fit. For instance buoyancy control can't be required on OW dive one because it IS the resort dive and buopyancy control hasn't been taught yet, so we just recommend it...because it's still possible to do all the CW training prior to do to OW.

These standards make it very easy to get people into the water. They just don't do much to insure that they will actally learn to dive.

I get really tired of going over and over this stuff with people who defend the standards without understanding the system. There are certainly those, who do understand it and think it's a good thing and I just disagree with them. Most of the rest, just don't know the system and have no idea what they are defending. Ünfortunately, I think this is important stuff for divers to understand so I can't seem to keep myself out of related discussions.