History of Diver Training

[Puffer Fish]

The last training I received was just as thorough if not more so than the first training I ever received.

I feel that I received different training than divers 40 years ago. I was taught to use such things like dive computers, understanding of deco (to the extent that we understand it), actually having SPG's instead of J-valves, etc.

I wasn't required to swim a mile (exaggeration) or free dive to 100' (exaggeration) but I had to show a reasonable level of fitness, competence and understanding in order to pass every class I've taken in the last 10 years.

I feel my training is adequate because I've yet to run into a situation that I wasn't able to rely on it, stay calm and reason my way out of. Even more so, because of my training, I seldom found myself in situations where the previous response was needed.

Since I didn't take training 30 years ago, I can't speak from experience. I suspect that it's changed because that's what the market demands.

I have experienced all of it, except for the first 10 or so years (certified in 66, instructor in 74).

And I had to do a mile swim (no exaggeration) and done free diving in the 60 ft to 100 ft range. (also no exaggeration).

Fitness was a much more important aspect, as was comfort in the water. I believe there are a few instructors left that still do an excellent job, but I see far too many divers that just are not comfortable diving, and don't stay with the sport.

In many ways, I think we do a better job today with teaching safe diving methods, but not enough on being relaxed in the water and having the strength to deal with the unexpected.

I watched a certification class this weekend and their skill level scared the heck out of me.

 

[Thalassamania]

... I had to do a mile swim (no exaggeration) and done free diving in the 60 ft to 100 ft range. (also no exaggeration). ...

The fact that you feel the need to put in the parenthetical expressions just about says it all.

 

[Cave Diver]

You call that progress? All its done for me is flood places I used to like to travel to by donkey, backpacking through the rainforest and finding a local guide to paddle me up a river with stupid, poorly trained, weakly skilled divemasters and tiki bars. Big progress.

Progress: (v. intr) to move forwards or onwards, as towards a place or objective

vs.

Progress: (n)Steady improvement, as of a society or civilization:

I used the term meaning that things have progressed (moved forward towards an objective). I never said that the progress ("improvement" of civilization) was a good thing. I personally agree and have enough of an adventurous spirit that I'd rather paddle a canoe up a river on my own and take the donkey and a backpack. I've never been that fond of tiki bars, but most people want the ambiance of isolation instead of the real thing, complete with wild animals and mosquitoes.

 

[Scott L]

The U.S. Navy Diving Manual and the University of Michigan Research Diver's Manual where both available 40 years ago. 10 years ago the ScubaBoard function was filled by GENIE.
Do you really think that all 13 weeks are filled with forcing people to blow bubbles in a shallow water pool for weeks on end? Hardly the case. By the time you finished a semester long class you had the equivalent of OW, AOW, PPD, NITROX, RESCUE, ADV. RESCUE, BOAT DIVING, SURF DIVING, U/W NATURALIST, U/W PHOTOGRAPHY and a few others.

I think you know I am being sarcastic. I am all for more training having completed three new certifications in the past 12 months.

I already know your opinion of GUE (believe me, I am no lemming) but their new very comprehensive recreational diving program should be a good test case for the public's appetite for such training...

Recreational Diver Level 1 - Nitrox diver | Global Underwater Explorers

 

[Thalassamania]

... most people want the ambiance of isolation instead of the real thing, complete with wild animals and mosquitoes.

I call it the Disneyland Adventure Syndrome.

 

[Cave Diver]

I call it the Disneyland Adventure Syndrome.

Seems like a fairly apt description. And now you've stirred a memory that gives me a thought for a new thread.

 

[rjack321]

I used the term meaning that things have progressed (moved forward towards an objective). I never said that the progress ("improvement" of civilization) was a good thing. I personally agree and have enough of an adventurous spirit that I'd rather paddle a canoe up a river on my own and take the donkey and a backpack. I've never been that fond of tiki bars, but most people want the ambiance of isolation instead of the real thing, complete with wild animals and mosquitoes.

I like tiki bars, with umbrella drinks, thank you. I prefer them on the beach.

The caves and wrecks I can get to (plus or minus a few days travel). I don't need the all inclusive cruise ship dropping me off at the safari headquarters with 1,000 other "special" passengers tho.

 

[Diver0001]

*sigh*

Here we go again....

Ok...... I'll say this:

The open water course I took 26 years ago is virtually identical in content to the OW course the way most people teach it today. The one exception is that we were required to learn buddy breathing back then because the octopus wasn't universal.

Short courses are another animal all together. The standards stipulate that students need to "master" all skills and the vast majority of things people moan about and use to support their argument that all courses suck except the ones *they* teach are coming out of short "time driven" courses. However, that's not a standards issue. Standards are quite clear that the course is supposed to be "performance driven" and that students need to "master" skills. Obviously this is not happening in "time driven" courses and therefore there is a wide scale non-adherence to standards going on in the industry.

In other words, it is my opinion as an instructor that it's impossible to teach "mastery" of all skills and theory in a 2 or 3 day "pressure cooker" course and therefore virtually everyone engaged in "teaching" those courses are engaged in standards violations on a daily basis.

I personally think that the biggest problem in the industry is that the agencies allow this. QA procedures are not designed to test if students achieve mastery of the skills the instructor claims to have taught them and it's lead to a lot of instructors acting unethically (to the point where some even find it completely normal) and a lot of people being certified who shouldn't have been.

In some places instructors even feel forced to teach these train-wreck courses because everyone else in their area is doing it too (how stupid is that?) But that changes nothing. It's still a wide scale non-aherence to standards and it's what's wrong.

BoulderJohn has a concept he calls "calibration", which is just a fancy way of saying that teachers (real teachers, not scuba teachers) are monitored and "corrected" if they start to drift from teaching to standards (I hope I got that right). In the scuba industry this does not happen but it really should. Too many people are simply not doing what the agencies prescribe.

R..

 

[Cave Diver]

*sigh*

Here we go again....

Damn. You're in it too? Now who's gonna moderate it when it when it goes off track in the next 150 posts or so?

 

[Gerbs]

Been certified just under 6 years now. Talking to people recently certified and others certified around the time my parents entered school, it seems to me that training generally still prepares divers for the dives that they are trained to do...

A CMAS* back in the dark ages set you up to do adventurous dives with adventurous equipment (Vintage is cool, but improvements have been made). Nowadays a resort OWD prepares you for the usual resort group dive in the shallows following a DM.

What we have gained in better understanding and equipment has, instead of making us better divers, allowed standards to slip. At the same time, the move from exploration to sight seeing for most divers has allowed the differentiation of required training.

So... has training for the same types of dives improved: At a guess yes. Look at technical exploration diving. Have the absolute standards required to get the first card decreased: yes. Has the character of the dives changed to compensate for this decrease: pretty much yes.

Has safety suffered? Not as much as expected, even though you see some hair raising lack of understanding employed; Mainly due to restrictions on the diving done. Is there understanding that you need more thorough training for harder dives: yes. Could safety be improved by raising the standards higher: definitely YES.

Is the syllabus needlessly split up into baby steps for those who want the higher standards because they want to do more: pretty much.

Just my 2ct.

Gerbs