History of Diver Training

[DCBC]

There are many younger instructors that have a gift for teaching. It is equally true that an older instructor's ability does not necessarily evaporated with age. The ability to teach and the ability to do are two different things. Hopefully the instructor has, or has once had both.

I just read a post from Lynn about one of her riding coaches that is to old to ride, but is an excellent instructor. Diver0001 I think, spoke of a similar ability surrounding world-class soccer coaches.

When it comes to diving, instructors sometimes have less control of how and what they teach their class. They can of course teach what they like against agency standards, but for those that act responsibly, they often have to conform to the restrictions set by the training agency.

Generally, I see the quality of diving instruction being the result of at least three major factors:

a) the ability and desire of the student to learn;
b) the knowledge, experience and ability of the instructor to teach & relate to the student; and
c) the quality of the training program being taught.

In reality, each training agency stipulates the standards which must be met for certification and these agencies vary in the degree that they restrict what the instructor can teach (and therefore what the student has an ability to learn). This is a shame when you have a knowledgeable competent and willing instructor that really knows how to teach and is restricted from doing so.

 

[fire_diver]

King, you make a point I would like to discuss.

Scuba is not Kung Fu. There are no extremely complex or detailed movements which require intense practice to perfect (except make the back-kick in scuba).

You said you are unable to perform many of the demanding moves that you could do in your youth. But you COULD do them. You still have the knowledge. You still can instruct students on the details to make an action work. A zero-to-hero, or poorly trained instructor candidate will most likely not have the skills to turn out a well trained diver. So we are back to my earlier statement that an instructor must be able to demonstrate correctly to train new divers correctly.

 

[TCDiver1]

I agree with you about not including rescue in the standard OW class. I think it takes some time for people to become competent enough with all the scuba is before they are good enough to perform rescue skills without making matters worse. Some of course will be good enough right away, but I think the average needs more time.

One thing about your post though, many of the people getting certified today are not like the people who were adventurous enough to try scuba 30 or 40 years ago, and do everything on their own. Sure, some students are that way, but diving has become so common and so convenient that many people who would never have thought about it, are going for it.

In many ways that is a good thing, but it seems standards keep dropping in order to accommodate people who even 10 years ago would have been considered too out of shape to dive. And BTW this is an observation of a great many things, not just diving. Institutions with standards for admission are constantly being bombarded to lower them in order to be all inclusive. Well standards were there for a reason, and whenever there is resistance to lowering them it creates a real stir. And then people get testy on both sides and well, here we are

I know my posts probably come off as agree with a lowering of standards. I don't at all. The minimum time required IMO to meet the PADI standards i taught to was 30-40 hours or four days minimum if students and teachers were really humping it. The number of hours and/or days ultimately required can vary with conditions, number of students, skill level of students, etc, but 30-40 total hours spent generally worked pretty well.

The point i've been trying to make is standards have not been lowered as precipitously as many on here make it sound. Or at least not in my case.

The OW class i took was a PADI college course. As i recall we met once a week for class work and once a week for pool work. Probably about 30 hours total between the two. I did the bare minimum and got what was called Basic Open Water card. I think it was two OW dives. Two more OW dives, (four total) got you full OW water.

So my original course was right in the same 30-40 hour range and that was 30+ years ago. There were skills we did back then that i don't think would hurt today. Things like ditch and don, the underwater swim, gear exchange, etc But i don't think not having them in todays OW course lowers standards to a "dangerous" level. YMMV.

Standards however do need to be followed. In many cases they aren't, which does present a problem.

 

[Kingpatzer]

King, you make a point I would like to discuss.

Scuba is not Kung Fu. There are no extremely complex or detailed movements which require intense practice to perfect (except make the back-kick in scuba).

You said you are unable to perform many of the demanding moves that you could do in your youth. But you COULD do them. You still have the knowledge. You still can instruct students on the details to make an action work. A zero-to-hero, or poorly trained instructor candidate will most likely not have the skills to turn out a well trained diver. So we are back to my earlier statement that an instructor must be able to demonstrate correctly to train new divers correctly.

the other point I made was that I have a lady who is quite a ways away from being a master in any formal sense who is exceptionally good at teaching beginning students. She does not have the close to the same depth of knowledge, and there are still plenty of fundamentals she is working on.

A common view of belt rankings in my school at least is that once someone reaches black belt they're ready to start learning kung fu. Prior to that they're learning enough to have a foundation to build real martial arts upon. I think that's somewhat akin to the attitude presented by organization's like GUE in their fundies course.

That she has not mastered material that I still consider basic knowledge she still has enough knowledge to teach those who are just starting out and need to merely understand the basics at this point.

The modern belt ranking system actually has a lot of similarity to modern scuba training. Where "back in the day" the ranks were essentially beginner, senior student, master. Today there is a large number of stepping stones. The training is more modular. Someone moving from an entry student to a white belt is not being asked to do more than the most basic and simplistic of tasks.

I see scuba the same way. Extensive expertise is not nearly as important as having a passion for teaching, an ability to convey essential information.

 

[brucet]

I seem to remember about 4 weeks to get my basic. 2 nites each week. 1 book, and 1 pool per week. In the past few years I have seen many shops advertise 3 day certifications. with 2 days of OW dives, not much time for skill training.

 

[Peter Guy]

King -- regarding your comment

Teaching well has virtually nothing to do with being able to perform the skill well yourself.

may be true (I'm not totally buying it). BUT, a good teacher MUST KNOW when the skill is performed well. I think that is the issue some of us (certainly me) have with "some" instructors -- not that they can't perform the particular skill well but that they don't know when it IS performed well. This goes back to my (our?) concern that too many people may become Scuba Instructors without enough basic knowledge and experience.

 

[Kingpatzer]

King -- regarding your comment
may be true (I'm not totally buying it). BUT, a good teacher MUST KNOW when the skill is performed well.

I agree fully with that. If you can't identify where someone needs more assistance you'll fail to provide it.

 

[Thalassamania]

A question, though, Thal.

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

In the role of trainer I work with candidates for a minimum of a year, often two or three years, and I recuse myself from the final vote. It is rare that the only contact I have is as Course Director, but when that occurs, that means that we've worked together for 12 days, most all of which is in an evaluation mode.

 

[DCBC]

Thal, you are indeed fortunate to have one to three years to work with someone. I've found that a several day assessment is usually sufficient.

 

[Thalassamania]

Thal, you are indeed fortunate to have one to three years to work with someone. I've found that a several day assessment is usually sufficient.

I think you and I both know that if all we are doing is "assessing," several days, while prudent, is quite excessive. Those that are (or will be) good instructors are pretty obvious right off the bat, those that aren't going to make it are equally clear, but you spend a couple of days "assessing" just to make sure that you've given the weak performers a "fair shake." My best instructors where students that came into the program as sophomores, which is a year early based on our course numbers, which are upper division. That means a year getting their feet underneath themselves as divers, a year as an assistant team leader, a year as a team leader, and the summer after they graduate, an ITC ... then off into the world.