Instructor Requirements- continued...

[Walter]

a) A High School Diploma. Believe it or not, its not currently required

.

A good idea.

b) A "C" grade or higher in a College level Physics class (that covers Gas Laws, etc) from a legally Acredited College

.

Not necessary.

c) Three full calendar years of active diving since the candidate was first certified. A year of active diving is defined as having done 20 or more dives. (Note: this is to prevent the "90 day wonders").

A good idea.

d) A minimum of 250 dives completed, with the caveat that no more than 100 dives per calendar year can be applied. (Note: this is to try to minimize "double dipping" and other strategies for quickly stacking up a bunch of dives to qualify).

I like the 250 minimum, but don't understand the concept behind not counting more than 100/year. You already have the 3 full years of active diving as a requirement. That should accomplish your goal without the 100 dives/year limit. Besides, it's a good thing when instructor candidates dive often.

)e) For Instructor Trainers, a 4 year College Diploma.

Sounds good. I wouldn't be against this one for all instructors.

f) A hard one. Its to somehow prohibit non-career (non-fulltime) instructors from being able to claim IRS tax deductions for their dive gear and dive trips, etc...it has been my impression that the "snakes" that cause headaches are often guys who only become instructors so as to help them 'beat the system', so the idea is to take away their financial incentive. I know this isn't this cut and dry, but I've hopefully explained the crux of what I'm after. Ditto for enforcement, as this would involve the IRS. But for sake of an example, if your maximum tax deduction for gear/trips frequently exceeds your income from dive instruction, you're probably using dive instruction as an unethical tax cheat to support your hobby. Its either a hobby or a vocation, so a tall firewall between the two is both appropriate and needed.

First, this is a matter for the IRS, not the agencies. Secondly, these are legitimate business expenses for instructors.

 

[wedivebc]

The questionairs are looking for standards violation and include questions like..."how many dives did you do" or whatever. It's better than nothing but the biggest problem that I've seen are the instructors who are masters of meeting standards and teaching rotten class that's legal.

I have discussed this with PADI and I never got the impression that they wanted to do anything about it. All they would have to do is visit any of our busy training sites on any weekend and they would see plenty of things that need to be addressed.

That's the big problem here. If the instructors meet the standards, any problems the newly certified divers experience are no longer attributed to the instructor and the standards are legaly defensable. When I see these "masters of meeting standards" cutting already tight corners now they are really hanging their a$$es out to dry. The agency and the LDS are looking at the bottom line and I am sure most are more concerned with getting lots of certs out there than turning out quality divers.

Just to stay on topic I think 90 day wonders are a joke.

 

[dbulmer]

I'm a novice diver.

"Would you be happy being taught an Advanced / Open Water / Rescue or even Divemaster course by somebody who actually has less experience than you?"

Firstly,No - experience is paramount in any teaching role - the more experience of teaching you have the more likely you can teach the skill ie you may learn to impart the knowledge in more than 1 particular way- the instructor needs to be able to adapt to the individual needs of the trainee which IMHO requires a very deep understanding of the subject matter and requisite skills.

Someone who amassed 100 dives in Thailand is unlikely to have the skills to teach in Ireland for example (and I know I'm oversimplifying matters) due to local conditions/knowledge ie hood/gloves/drysuit, tides, DSMB usage etc.

If you hire a plumber and it takes him 5 minutes to do a job it's because you're paying for his experience and know-how- a poor example but I can't get my point over in any other way right now.

Or do you think it's perfectly ok to become an instructor "once they've been taught how to teach correctly"

How do you define teaching correctly? Theory work, in-water skills - what external assessment is there of classes by the requisite agencies? (I don't know the answer!)
I like an instructor to challenge how I do/do not do things. I want constructive criticism because I want my next dive to be safer than my last dive was. I want my instructor to demonstrate what I don't know and encourage me to practice what he/she just showed me. I don't think 100 dives will allow too many to do this but in life there are always exceptions.

 

[NauticalbutNice]

a) A High School Diploma. Believe it or not, its not currently required.

This wouldn't work in Scotland. There is no such thing as a high school diploma here.

c) Three full calendar years of active diving since the candidate was first certified. A year of active diving is defined as having done 20 or more dives. (Note: this is to prevent the "90 day wonders").

I like this idea. It's fairly practical and suggests a level of commitment to diving.

I have to agree with fatcat though. Just because someone has a diploma or degree does not reflect a breadth of knowledge.

Educationally, I am more highly qualified than my instructor. But the sheer volume of this guy's knowledge (and not just of the diving stuff) blows me away.

I think this is one of those things where there is no real answer. There's always going to be people who want to get c-cards/make cash.

That's humanity for you.

Thank God I'm a penguin.

Nauticalbutnice enguin2:

 

[Walter]

If the instructors meet the standards, any problems the newly certified divers experience are no longer attributed to the instructor and the standards are legaly defensable.

At this point any problems are attributed to the agency.

 

[StSomewhere]

f) A hard one. Its to somehow prohibit non-career (non-fulltime) instructors from being able to claim IRS tax deductions for their dive gear and dive trips, etc...it has been my impression that the "snakes" that cause headaches are often guys who only become instructors so as to help them 'beat the system', so the idea is to take away their financial incentive. I know this isn't this cut and dry, but I've hopefully explained the crux of what I'm after. Ditto for enforcement, as this would involve the IRS. But for sake of an example, if your maximum tax deduction for gear/trips frequently exceeds your income from dive instruction, you're probably using dive instruction as an unethical tax cheat to support your hobby. Its either a hobby or a vocation, so a tall firewall between the two is both appropriate and needed.

-hh

OMG, are you NUTS? Is it just that you don't have any experience with the IRS or are you a fan of Stalin-esque purges?

Many decent, hardworking, legimate sole proprietors have been financially ruined by the capricious and arbitrary nature of the IRS, their agents, and their tax courts. The legal expenses alone have driven innocent people into bankruptcy. You should realize that this is system without any real checks and balances, people don't have the same legal rights they would otherwise enjoy as citizens of this great land. And you want these thugs to police the dive industry, too, on the side in their spare time? Just because you can't think of a workable way to self-regulate the industry?

FWIW, there are already sections in the tax code that deal with the determination of whether or not a sole proprietor is conducting a legimate business for tax purposes or if its a "hobby", usually based on a given number of consecutive years without a taxable income. And you wouldn't need to add any "dive police" powers to the IRS arsenal to enforce that.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

c) Three full calendar years of active diving since the candidate was first certified. A year of active diving is defined as having done 20 or more dives. (Note: this is to prevent the "90 day wonders").

d) A minimum of 250 dives completed, with the caveat that no more than 100 dives per calendar year can be applied. (Note: this is to try to minimize "double dipping" and other strategies for quickly stacking up a bunch of dives to qualify).

Hmmm ... how would this square with people like me, who can log 250 dives in about 9 months time? Out here in the PNW, that's not all that uncommon. I know several instructors who racked up 300 dives within a year of getting certified ... and I'm not talking about 20-minutes of kneeling on the bottom sort of dives either. Lots of us just like to dive, and can rack up a lot of bottom time in any given month.

I like the idea of kicking the experience level up from where it is currently ... 250 dives seems like a good baseline. I also like the idea of requiring that experience to be based on a given level of bottom time, and a variety of conditions.

But it's really difficult to quantify an instructor candidate's commitment to learning, or to teaching, by simply looking at statistics. That's why I like NAUI's "loved one" standard ... your evaluators will allow you to become a certified instructor only if they would be comfortable having you teach one of their loved ones.

Yeah ... it's subjective. And you still have to meet all the criteria. But it gives the CD a way to weed out the 90-day wonders.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[DiveTyme]

I did like the YMCA's three phase to becoming an intructor. At the end of each phase a panel of instructors (with at least one instructor-trainer) would make the final determination if the canididate was ready to go on to the next phase (or OW instuctor at the last phase) or not. I have seen candidates with over 200 dives not make it and saw an exceptional candidate become an instructor with just over 100.
Tim

 

[-hh]

Last comment first...

Hmmm ... how would this square with people like me, who can log 250 dives in about 9 months time?

By the time that the candidate has his 3 years of diving under his belt, at that rate, he probably has 900+ dives, so he has exceed the minimum of 250 dives.

I know that the idea of 3+ years is going to be a concern for people, but it is intended to both test the candidate's dedication, as well as to try in some simple way address having the candidate dive under a variety of conditions, including the "winter layoff" and having to re-tune his skills in the spring.

But it's really difficult to quantify an instructor candidate's commitment to learning, or to teaching, by simply looking at statistics. That's why I like NAUI's "loved one" standard ... your evaluators will allow you to become a certified instructor only if they would be comfortable having you teach one of their loved ones.

Agreed. IMO, NAUI's "loved one" standard should be adopted by all Agencies.


-hh

 

[FatCat]

I forgot to mention why exactly I got so worked up about this whole ridiculous issue of degrees and diplomas.

In my regular job as an accountant, I encounter clients with and without a formal education. Without fail, the ones who have a formal education in the field that they're working in are lousy at what they do.

Those who have had formal education and chose a different profession than the one they studied for are succesfull at what they do.

Mostly those without any formal education to speak of are extremely good at what they do. They took care of their own education, be it by research and self study or just by picking up stuff as they go along.

I've had college graduates as trainees. I've stopped taking on trainees because of the poor quality of knowledge they possess. I only wish to teach scuba, not accounting and economics.

Maybe I'm generalising - and hh, I don't know where you're from - but educational standards are slipping, even in Europe. And if rec dive courses are so bad, why then can you get college credit for them?