Instructor Requirements- continued...

[MikeFerrara]

What I noticed, was all the deaths in which autopsy found air embolism to be the cause of death even when the person made it back to the surface and even back onto the boat and suddenly went unconscious.

Setting aside the pre-existing medical conditions that IMHO created an artificial OOA scenario which created the panic that you mention, I think buoyancy control is still the key issue. Here's how I see that coming about as an issue. People without good buoyancy control skills struggle through the water and often have trim problems. They are commonly overweighted. They sink too fast and can't clear their ears, creating pain. They can't stop their descent and they can't stop finning, which is their only means of some semblence of depth control. Their arms are flailing. Their adding and removing air constantly to the BC. In other words they are out of control and nearly exhausted. This scares them to no end and as you noted they panic and bolt for the surface upon which they get an embolism or blow a lung.

Lets look at the diver that was taught excellent buoyancy control during his OW course. First they are properly weighted to dive. They have good trim and are able to move through the water easily. All gear and body parts are streamlined. They can move up or down in the water column in 4 inch increments with the ability to stop at each 4 inch move. Consequently they have the time to clear their ears so they don't have pain. They need only add very small amounts of air to the BC during the descent. They don't even have to fin unless they want to so they are relaxed and not anywhere near being exhausted.

Make really good buoyancy control the central core of the training course and lets look at what you can do with the students. The next outer layer(1st from the core) of training consists of the student doing mask clearing including remove and replace while neutral and trimmed while hovering or swimming, regulator skills the same thing. Dealing with entanglement, which is where I would have them remove and replace their gear mid water simulating that they removed fishing line from the scuba unit. Turning off their air and have them turn it back on(after thorough training and working up to this point) while their buddy is either sharing air with them or is ready to share air if needed. All done neutral either swimming or hovering.

The next (2nd from the core) involves introducing task loading in which problems are introduced by the instructor while the students are on a dive mission. This starts with flooding the mask or removing it fom the student. Remove the regulator from their mouth. Remove a fin. Turn off the air. Entanglement. Initially you start with one at a time and then move to 2 problems at once then 3 then four at a time. The whole time the students are maintaining good buoyancy control(nope not perfect but good). This means they don't break the surface and they don't touch the bottom but the instructor is looking to see how well they stay within a much smaller range than the depth of the pool.

In other words (much fewer words) these divers are in control of their dive. There is no reason for them to be scared or panic and they know it.

As I see it, buoyancy control is the central issue, which is why it was the central core of my course.

Yes. One of the things I see in a huge percentage of the divers I see is poor trim. Some say so what? Well, they're usually in a head up attitude. That means that in order to swim foreward without swimming up they must be neg buoyanct. If they stop moving forward they must kick to maintain depth or they sink like a rock. Give this diver a distracting task to perform and they either end up in the bottom or shoot to the surface without even knowing it. These divers are almost out of control, working way too hard, task loaded by just trying to move through the water and basically close to panic (whether they know it or not) the whole time. A very precarious situation.

I too make swimming neutral (including while performing a task) a major part of the class rather than something we spend only a few minutes on. In addition When divers are practicing things like mask R&R it's the divers buddy who is standing by to assist...as in helping to maintain depth or get the mask back to the diver. Why? Because on their 5th life time dive (the first after the class) they may very well have a buddy who has a minor problem like that and they are the one who will have to be aware of it and know how to help. I won't be there.

Now, on most dives nothing happens, which is why I don't by the argument that training is good enough. If nothing goes wrong all you need to be able to do is breath. I dived for years before ever taking a class and never had a problem. Is my survival evidence of the good training I had? It's not adequate training keeping the death rate down but that fact that just being able to breath gets you by when nothing happens. You don't need any training at al to sit on the bottom and breath.

What we need to look at is not an injury rate based on the number of divers or the number of dives but rather the percentage of incedents that are successfully managed. From what I have seen, especially when it comes to new divers is that if there is a problem they stand very little chance of being able to manage it. IME, nearly all result in an undesireable outcome. That doesn't mean that they'll die. It means that they end up shooting to the surface, getting seperated from a buddy or whatever. When there's no problem they just silt the dive site, kill the coral and have trouble finding their buddy. Those things don't always kill you but they can and sometimes do.

 

[Mako Mark]

Depends on the person. I know people with 200+ dives who are working to be Instructors who still need a lot of polishing. I know other people with 40 dives in 4 months who will be great instructors given another year of diving.

which brings us back to the initial conundrum.. How do you determine if someone is ready to be an instructor.

My answer is to rip their masks off. Yank their regs out. Turn their air off. Teach them how to work through panic.

yeah...hehehehe...hehehe....hehehe

or make them dive under stricter supervision??

Lets face it. divers with good skills just don't get hurt unless they have a heart attack or their really pushing the envelope..

or they are doing something stupid, which usually consists of shortcutting safety rules or overstepping the limits of their training and or experience. Which in reality brings them back into the same causes as the rest..

I think it is important to regard the data as RAW data, and that it is very easy to jump to conclusions. An example is fig 14, It indicates that 85% of injusred divers are wearing wetsuits, therefore wetsuits are inherently dangerous, and if you wear one you are more likely to die diving..

 

[MikeFerrara]

How does all this relate to instructor experience?

Unfortunately some of the things that I view as the most basic skills aren't taught at all including at the instructor level. Therefor the instructor has to learn it on their own, it's importance and how to teach it.

We were at a local site once and witnessed a class that was an absolute mess. I had to say something. We were talking to one of the class DMs and commented on how many of the problems would be solved by proper weighting and trim. The DM asked what I meant by trim so I explained it. The DM asked, how you get it and I explained it. She then described the ongoing problems she herself still has and extended a hardy thank you.

Instructors can't teach what they don't know. They can't demonstrate what they can't do and they certainly don't understand the far reaching benefits to them and their students. If they've never seen it, don't know it or can't do it they argue that it isn't needed and point out that very few divers get killed. Well ok.

 

[MikeFerrara]

or they are doing something stupid, which usually consists of shortcutting safety rules or overstepping the limits of their training and or experience. Which in reality brings them back into the same causes as the rest..

But in some cases just getting in the water, especially if it's someplace where they can't use the bottom or a free flow or somthing may happen is diving beyond their limits.

I think it is important to regard the data as RAW data, and that it is very easy to jump to conclusions. An example is fig 14, It indicates that 85% of injusred divers are wearing wetsuits, therefore wetsuits are inherently dangerous, and if you wear one you are more likely to die diving..

I absolutely agree. Applying some common sense though, I am not willing to give up exposure protection but I'm happy to to do without a lack of proficiency in basic skills. You still end up with raw data that is useful even if it doesn't give us all the answers.

Why haven't the agencies addressed the DAN buoyancy control numbers? If I was certifying most of the divers and was told that buoyancy control problems were reported in a hight percentage of dives that resulted in injury I would think that reducing that number might help. There's no way that it can hurt. Ya think?

Do you think that the agencies haven't heard of all the divers who have taken an ambulance ride after a free flow and a rapid ascent around here? Do you think that they aren't aware that there is a world of difference between handling a free flow or replacing a mask on the bottom and midwater? Do you think they are aware of how often buddy seperations happen? Do you think they are smart enough to put 2 and 2 together and realize that they don't really teach divers how to dive together or require them to demonstrate that they can? Do you think they are unaware that most divers are head up and can silt things up from 15 ft off the bottom?

Whether you accept that it's at times dangerous or not people are diving exactly as they were taught in most cases and it's pretty bad. They improve little with time because they haven't been given the basics on which to improve...which is why so many of the instructors (especially the ones who have only been diving for 6 months and only have recreational training) suck in the water.

Lets assume that there are no safety issues or that we just don't care if a few get killed. The dive sites would be so much nicer if the agencies would wise up a little.

 

[Diver0001]

....snip....

The report states that 60 percent of the fatalities had procedural buoyancy issues, but that these issues were not neccesarily the cause of the fatality.

That's what I'm reading too. The next step is to ask yourself what would have happened to that diver if they didn't have a buoyancy issue. For example, there are cases of air embolism due to unintentional fast ascents. I don't think that the fast ascent is the root problem. We have to ask ourselves what caused the fast ascent?

For example, the woman who got cold and made a unnecessary fast ascent (probably just wanted to call the dive), held her breath and died. My standpoint is that this death (and many others like it) could have been avoided with better training of buoyancy control. If she could have signaled "cold" "abort" and made a normal ascent, then she would still be here. To me, that's a training issue.

I think if you read the report from taht perspective you'll probably see what I did which is that often times buoyancy control issues played a significant roll in turning a problem into a disaster. My standpoint is that if you eliminated the buoyancy control issues you avoid taking the first step in the disaster spiral. And although you're right that they're often (most often) procedural issues, I would submit that there is nothing more training related than a procedural buoyancy control issue.

Something similar can be applied to the way of looking at panic. A diver is confronted with a problem and are unable to deal with it and either panics and drowns, make a rapid ascent or both. (I count 7 such cases). The panic isn't the root cause. Why were these divers experiencing panic? At the very least it gives me alarm bells about feeling comfortable in the water. And I think buoyancy control is a core skill in feeling comfortable in the water. I don't think you can say that training better buoyancy will eliminate panic but I think it will eliminate *some* panic.

Also, since you mentioned it, how about the caver that got stuck and they couldn't get him out for two days? OOA. The guy entangled in kelp... OOA. You can teach gas management all you want in either of those cases, but that's not what failed.

Ok. But what about the other 14 cases where it would have helped? Two cases where better training in watching metres wouldn't help and 14 where it would. I'd say that's good enough reason to do it.

The thing to keep in mind is that these divers represent only the tiny tip of the iceberg. There are thousands and thousands more like them but they just haven't been confronted with a real problem ..... yet.

R..

 

[Mako Mark]

Whether you accept that it's at times dangerous or not people are diving exactly as they were taught in most cases and it's pretty bad. They improve little with time because they haven't been given the basics on which to improve...which is why so many of the instructors (especially the ones who have only been diving for 6 months and only have recreational training) suck in the water.
.

one thing that just struck me Mike while reading your last post, is that virtually every discussion we have ever had on the board has been (on your side) the need for better bouyancy controll and other skills which I do heartily agree with, and (on my side) the flexibility of scheduling that extra training to fit divers needs rather dictating to them, and that I believe that they can learn while doing.

What struck me is that perhaps rather than making the course longer and harder, that we should do what they do with driving licences..

make them provisional. for example the first .20 30..50 (pick a number, any number) dives after certification should be under direct supervision of a professional.

This would have all sorts of trickle down benefits for the dive industry while giving divers the opportunity to cement the transfer of learning, develop better dive habits by following role models, gain insight and instruction while diving etc etc..

 

[scubadoguk]

That's what I'm reading too. The next step is to ask yourself what would have happened to that diver if they didn't have a buoyancy issue. For example, there are cases of air embolism due to unintentional fast ascents. I don't think that the fast ascent is the root problem. We have to ask ourselves what caused the fast ascent?

For example, the woman who got cold and made a unnecessary fast ascent (probably just wanted to call the dive), held her breath and died. My standpoint is that this death (and many others like it) could have been avoided with better training of buoyancy control. If she could have signaled "cold" "abort" and made a normal ascent, then she would still be here. To me, that's a training issue.

I think if you read the report from taht perspective you'll probably see what I did which is that often times buoyancy control issues played a significant roll in turning a problem into a disaster. My standpoint is that if you eliminated the buoyancy control issues you avoid taking the first step in the disaster spiral. And although you're right that they're often (most often) procedural issues, I would submit that there is nothing more training related than a procedural buoyancy control issue.

Something similar can be applied to the way of looking at panic. A diver is confronted with a problem and are unable to deal with it and either panics and drowns, make a rapid ascent or both. (I count 7 such cases). The panic isn't the root cause. Why were these divers experiencing panic? At the very least it gives me alarm bells about feeling comfortable in the water. And I think buoyancy control is a core skill in feeling comfortable in the water. I don't think you can say that training better buoyancy will eliminate panic but I think it will eliminate *some* panic.



Ok. But what about the other 14 cases where it would have helped? Two cases where better training in watching metres wouldn't help and 14 where it would. I'd say that's good enough reason to do it.

The thing to keep in mind is that these divers represent only the tiny tip of the iceberg. There are thousands and thousands more like them but they just haven't been confronted with a real problem ..... yet.

R..

the question was and will be for ever how do you make it better? sure make it harder to be a instructor, according to the new PADI member forum there are more changes coming to the IDC and dive-master course, who knows they will allow dive-masters to issue certifications?
I hope I am kidding too! but more change is coming.
We should have a level of instructor experience that is more than ONE HUNDRED dives we should ask at least salt water and fresh water experience and varied conditions showing proof of deep and some knowledge of compressors and operation experience beyond a simple operator course, a advanced rescue and dive related first aid courses, O2 first aid and remote and wilderness evac experience, boat experience and some type of small boat handling.
Anything I forgot?

 

[scubadoguk]

one thing that just struck me Mike while reading your last post, is that virtually every discussion we have ever had on the board has been (on your side) the need for better bouyancy controll and other skills which I do heartily agree with, and (on my side) the flexibility of scheduling that extra training to fit divers needs rather dictating to them, and that I believe that they can learn while doing.

What struck me is that perhaps rather than making the course longer and harder, that we should do what they do with driving licences..

make them provisional. for example the first .20 30..50 (pick a number, any number) dives after certification should be under direct supervision of a professional.

This would have all sorts of trickle down benefits for the dive industry while giving divers the opportunity to cement the transfer of learning, develop better dive habits by following role models, gain insight and instruction while diving etc etc..

Well this year I have issued a number of scuba diver certs and even though I council my students as the course goes along about the potential problems, I still feel this is better than failing someone who has had a problem if they can master the pool and tests for the first three moduals + the 2 O/W dives.
Most of the scuba diver certs have been for kids who can't grasp the course material or lack the vocabulary but also allows the kid to continue with proper supervision, most kids I have found have little problem with skills in the water the ones that do don't finish the course at all, on the other hand I have witnessed a lot of adults who are only interested in fish and reef diving and will warm to the idea of a scuba diver cert as they get as much pool and class time as they want practising bouyancy and CESA ect and are able to come back and complete at a later date if they wish, this appeals to both the unsure and the once a year diver most students find this a great benefit.

 

[MikeFerrara]

What struck me is that perhaps rather than making the course longer and harder, that we should do what they do with driving licences..

Actually by rearanging things and adding a little information it seems to make a class far easier for the students and for me.

make them provisional. for example the first .20 30..50 (pick a number, any number) dives after certification should be under direct supervision of a professional.

This would have all sorts of trickle down benefits for the dive industry while giving divers the opportunity to cement the transfer of learning, develop better dive habits by following role models, gain insight and instruction while diving etc etc..

I have no doubt that there are as many ways to address it as there are instructors who want too. The only really wrong one, IMO, is not addressing it at all. I know in my case it started with the realization that something seemed wrong. Once I get there it was a matter of trying things. Since then the way I teach has changed continuously with the last class I taught being by far the best and easiest. I really found that it wasn't so much a longer class that was needed but a different class.

Also in my case I decided that I wanted students more skilled or at least to have a slightly differnt skill set before I even want to take them to open water. I hate it when a class stops moving forward and half drop to the bottom and the other half shoot to the surface. LOL Also realize that most of our open water here wouldn't meet the requirements of confined water so I'm sure that with good enough conditions some things could be moved from confined water to open water that's just as controled.

Again I think there's lots of ways to get there with the important thing being that an agency or instructor wants to.

The thing I don't like about provisional certs is that the cert is taking on some of the attributes of a license. It's already that way on comercial boats or when renting equipment but remember in most places any one who wants can dive and they don't need a cert or any ones permission. I'd rather give them the information and skills I think they need, tell them why I think they need it, demonstrate it the best I can and tell them to have a nice life and to call me if they want to go out and do a little diving.

I've said it before but I hate the whole idea of certification. People are willing to pay just for the card and if it gets them diving they couldn't care less if the training is any good. All we've done is to create a market for even the worst training because it still results in "the card". Don't misunderstand, I'm not saying that divers don't need training but I think the certification has become the focus rather than learning anything.

Another thing is that we here debate this stuff all the time. I'm willing to bet, though, that most of the instructors who are here debating it are or are on their way to becomming the good ones. I don't think too many of the instructors I'm always whining about are even here to argue it. The agencies and the ones who write the standards sure don't have the stones.

 

[jlevine]

I am, as the title of my message says, glad I came across this thread. I just obtained my PADI DM certification and have been diving for a little over a year. Almost all of my diving has been in the Caribbean (Roatan, Bonaire, Curacao) so I have been, well should I say "thermally spoiled!" I have been asked by a few of the local (Southern California) shops if I am considering doing the IDC to become an instructor. I have thought about it but I decided that before I make that commitment, I felt it would be best to experience some local diving in Southern California. Well, I went on my first local dive and I was pretty unprepared for what I encountered. I was fine with the temperature (thick wetsuit) but not with the currents and surge. The conditions were so different from what I was used to that it made me sit back and think for a bit. I will read the instruction materials so I can learn the class room parts associated with the IDC but I think I need more time in the water, especially if I want to teach locally!

Keep getting wet!