History of Diver Training

[Diver0001]

You know, I had a bit of an epiphany considering how I felt about this. The subject of modern day certification comes up a lot, along with the discussion about how to find a good instructor. Having experienced a modern certification course from good instructors and knowing that I learned in a one week course what I needed to know in order to be safe, I've come to the following conclusion.

Perhaps the problem is not the perceived shortcuts in modern training, but the quality of the instructors that are being certified. If on one hand we know that it is possible to produce a basic OW diver in two days of classroom, two days in the pool, and two days in OW, then there has to be some other variable that still allows for incompetent divers to receive a C-Card. That variable can only be the instructor.

And discussions on this board have pointed to that being the truth. There are a lot of people that have dealt with poor instruction and had a horrible experience getting certified. How did these instructors get certified as instructors in the first place?

It is my opinion that it is not the course standards that have declined, but the standards by which we determine that someone is qualified to be teaching other divers those standards.

I certainly agree with this point of view to a certain extent but I would like to bring a nuance to it.

The quality of the instructor makes all the difference in a diving course. I think everyone agrees with this.

In soccer (Europeans call it football) if you look at the top soccer teams in the world, almost every single one of them is coached by someone you've never heard of before. Why is that? Because coaches never played? No. They all did. But some of them were average players ... but became excellent coaches.

It's like this in diving too. One of the most effective, alert and competent instructors I know is someone I would NOT select to be on a hard-core wreck exploration team, he doesn't have the raw diving talent, but his students are very lucky with him. He's thorough, precise, highly efficient and doesn't cut corners. His students are well prepared for local conditions and well coached by someone who, at their level, has everything in house that he needs in order to train divers well.

I, on the other hand, am a relative newbie at teaching diving. I've been in the game since 2002 (first as a DM and then as instructor) and as an instructor I still have a lot to learn. What I do I do well (let's not become too self deprecating) but I'm well aware that there are better instructors. As a diver, however, I had about 1000 dives when I "went pro", and in terms of raw diving skill (and talent) I believe--however arrogantly this might appear--that I'm a much better diver than my colleague.

Which one of us is a better instructor? I'm a natural in the water. He is not. He literally has a gift for giving crystal clear theory lessons, I do not I have to work at it.

If you lined both of us up at an IE and said "pick one" then they would have picked me, but *he* is, in my opinion, a better instructor at this time. On the other hand, I am *highly* motivated to improve and I fully expect that within a few years I catch up and/or or surpass him in terms of effectiveness. I certainly hope I will. It is my goal (and his) to become the very best instructor I can be. Together, of course, we bootstrap each other and both his students and mine profit from our combined efforts.

Notwithstanding, this is all to illustrate a point, which is that diving skill does not directly translate into instructing skill...... which begs the question.... on *what* basis are you going to weed out those instructor candidates who will not become good instructors?

They're not natural divers? They're not naturals at giving theory lessons?

How?

R..

 

[fire_diver]

They're not natural divers? They're not naturals at giving theory lessons?

How?

R..

Neither. Natural has nothing to do with it. Effective is the key. If they can't impart the knowledge, they shouldn't be an instructor. If they can't demonstrate mastery of the skills they shouldn't be teaching.

 

[Diver0001]

The question is how you evaluate someone's future effectiveness as an instructor by seeing them a few times over a 2 or 3 day period.

R..

 

[fire_diver]

Simple. You have them give random portions of theory class as if they were instructing new divers. You also observe thier diving skills.

 

[Diver0001]

That's *exactly* what they do.

So if PADI does it and fails according to your standards, then why would *you* doing exactly the same thing magically result in success?

R..

 

[fire_diver]

Maybe they need to look at the ones testing the ICs.

 

[TSandM]

Peter and I were talking about this today.

There are a lot of components to being a good instructor. You have to have a good grasp of the material you are teaching, and in sports, it's good to be able to demonstrate what you want the student to do. But I have taken superb riding lessons from men who were too old or too infirm to ride any more, so that part isn't really critical. I think in diving, though, instructors HAVE to be able to dive, and to demonstrate what they want a good open water diver to look like and to be able to do, or they have to have assistants who can. This is one of the places where I think a lot of new instructors fall short -- they didn't have enough time or enough coaching to develop excellent personal diving skills, before they began to teach.

I spent the afternoon in the pool, going through the 20 skills for my DM class. I can do them all sitting on my butt on the bottom of the pool, and I can get good scores for going slowly, deconstructing the skill, exaggerating my actions, etc. But I don't want the students I work with to clear their mask sitting on their haunches. I need to be able to model the skill the way I want it to be done.

You DO have to have the ability to DESCRIBE what you want the student to do, in terms the student can understand. And you have to have a toolbox of approaches, so that you can adapt if your first choice strategy isn't working for that student. One student may need coaxing and reassurance, and another may need a firm hand -- and it isn't always obvious which is which. I worked with a young woman in Peter's last class who was so nervous and so apprehensive that I tried to be positive and reassuring, when in the end, what really WORKED for her was taking control, being stern, and telling her, "You WILL do this." I was dumbfounded, because I was sure that kind of approach would make her panic, but ceding responsibility allowed her to relax and follow. This is the kind of thing I suppose you learn from experience, but having a big toolbox of ideas really helps.

I think it can be difficult to know who is going to be a great instructor. But I don't think it's hard to figure out who will be a good one. Focus, clarity, patience and humor are critical attributes.

 

[Thalassamania]

When I certify an Instructor I've been working with them closely for at least 12 full days.

 

[AndyNZ]

When I certify an Instructor I've been working with them closely for at least 12 full days.

A question, though, Thal.

Are you both trainer and examiner? Or is that 12 days purely the examination?

 

[Kingpatzer]

I teach kung fu. I've been in martial arts since I was 10 years old, but my knees and hips have gotten to the point where I am simply not able to do what I was able to do when I was 20. I no long compete in competitions of any type, and rarely do I engage in demonstration. Even when I did, I never managed the grace or fluidity necessary to real success. My own successes were measured in my own appreciation of not screwing up too badly rather than in trophy collections or medals around my neck.

Yet my students have very full trophy cases.

Why? Because I am good at teaching. It's what I am passionate about. It's what I do do well. I can break down very complex elements into simple components that are easily mastered one element at a time. And then talk a student through assembling those elements into one easy and fluid motion. I know how to spot problems quickly and respond to them appropriately to prevent a student from developing a bad habit. I know how to make class fun and engaging for students ranging from 5 to elderly adults.

My own sifu is the same way - I can count on one hand how often I've seen him do a jumping kick to demonstrate it. Yet some of the best flying kicks I've ever seen have come from his students.

Teaching well has virtually nothing to do with being able to perform the skill well yourself. I have a red belt student I frequently help teach beginning students. It's not because she's mastered anything in the short time she's been studying, but because she is passionate, patient and persistent. She gets the job done better than many teachers who have been around for decades longer.