Is a Student "Entitled" to a Certification just because they paid for a course?

[Oldbear]

Hello Divers!

So what are your thoughts... I know it happens. Are you okay with that? Had an experience with a DM or Instructor which made you wonder... who certified you??????

JMac

To the original question ... NO! You should earn your Certification.

To the second question, "who certified you"?

When I look back on my training, I am not so sure that Iwould have passed mein my OW. I really was not prepared to dive on my own. And my AOW was a joke as far as quality instruction goes; I think I learned more what not to do than what to do; clearly just a revenue generator for that dive shop. My Rescue Diver training was decent enough at a huge resort in Dubai, but still marginal compared to really good training centers; sometimes I think they are afraid to fail anyone for fear that the management might get angry for upsetting the hotel guests. I think my first real good instruction came when I did the PADI Master Diver in Phuket. On a Liveaboard experience six months prior it became apparent to me that my dive skills were just marginal at best. And I wanted to do something about it. So during my training in Phuket I made it my mission to find a good dive center and to get the most out of it and both the center and my instructor were accommodating. When the opportunity came by I joined a BSAC club in Kuwait and there my theory knowledge grew by leaps and bounds when I took the Dive Leader's course. To date the best theory classes I have ever had, but this was due to the instructor's commitment to his students. When I did my DM I sought out the best school that I could find that worked within my parameters. I really believe that my DM training was the best overall training I have had to date.

So when I read about victims of accidents, I wonder about their training level and quality, their commitment level to that training and if they have had any continuing training. I hold a couple of "Professional" certifications and licenses. And to maintain those I have to have so many continuing education hours in specific categories. I think that this would serve the diving industry well too if Cerification Agencies had renewal processes. Even if it was an on-line course, that would be better than what we have now. I haven't flown an airplane in 10 years. But if I am medically fit to fly legally I could with my US Pilot's License. But before I do or someone is willing to rent me a plane I want/need to take some remedial training. Like BoulderJohn said, his refresher course really helped two of his "certified" divers. It might have even prevented an accident that we will never hear of.

Those are my two cents...

~ME~

 

[Jason McAnear]

You are equating "nobody fails" with "everybody passes." They are not the same thing. I have never "failed" a student, but a number of students have not passed. During instruction they decided that scuba was not for them and they were not willing to put in the extra time it would take to pass. That was their decision. I would have worked with them until they were done.

So, if I get this right.... when you only count the students who pass (however many times it takes)..... you can claim a 100% passing rate? Aren't we now letting "marketing" and statistics manipulation grey this area a bit?

I think more to the original point, skelso has said it best....
"

As a newly certified ​

OW

, I say not everyone should pass.

The class I took was a very fast paced class with little time for personal instruction. It worked for me but there were others in the class, who passed, that were clearly not comfortable with the skills underwater. It quickly made me realize I better ask a lot of questions before being buddied up with someone I don't know well. Just because they have a certification card doesn't mean they are competent to take care of themselves even under normal circumstances."
​

JMac

 

[ScubaSteve1962]

Q: What do you call the person that graduates at the very bottom of their medical class?
A: Doctor.

And what's wrong with graduating at the bottom? somebody has too, everyone can't be at the top? At least they graduated.

Now on topic, some that you may wonder how they got their certification may have earned it, and after that they thought they didn't have to learn anything else.

 

[Oldbear]

Jason,

I think that you might have misunderstood John's statement. The way I read it (and this is based on reading many of his posts since I have joined) that "Nobody fails his courses". This meaning that he goes the extra mile to make sure that the students have learned what is needed of them and they posses the proper dive skills. He provided that personal instruction if a student is not grasping the concept.


In the context of this thread this is different to 100% passing. My OW instructor passed me, yet now that I know what I know, I do not think I should have passed when I did. Sure I demonstrated the skills, but half the time I had no idea what I was doing. It was Monkey See, Monkey Do on my part. And if I were to be asked to repeat them a week or even later that day, I probably couldn't.


So while I "Passed" the course, I certainly also "Failed" it (and myself).

~ME~

 

[olphart]

Certification has to be earned, good instruction is to be expected. It's what you paid for. In fact, it's good instruction that can keep you from getting that cert.
Personal, very recent, experience. I decided to get my SDI Solo cert. Because the instructor was from a distance, the course had to be done at a certain date. For various reasons, I had not done much sidemount diving in the past 8 months. Most of my gear was set up for recreational, tropical back mount single. I had spent the last 3 months working furiously to finish a long term project that had nothing to do with diving. So no practice of nav, bouyancy, gas switching..basic stuff. I figured these were a shoo-in.
As a result, I wasn't mentally or physically ready, and my gear wasn't ready. Soooo, to make a long story short, I had my butt handed to me on a plate. The instructor was patient, more than kind, I thought, and certainly competent, but after one disastrous dive and a couple of short skills dives that were so-so at best, he was expressing doubts about certifying me until I had more practice of basic skills. I agreed that it wasn't going well and, though he was willing to carry on, I told him that I felt I was wasting his time, and called a halt to the fiasco.
He was pretty perplexed. He had been diving with me a year ago and felt that I was quite good, or he wouldn't have agreed to do the course. All of a sudden, I dive like a new OW student.
He is happy to redo the dive portions when he is in the area or if I travel to his, but only if I am properly prepared.
I have no complaints. It was hard lesson, but sometimes you need a wake up call.
Long story, short point. If your instructor is any good, you'll earn it or not get it, and you'll know why.

 

[rhwestfall]

what do I believe? Or with what have I seen, what do I think?

 

[boulderjohn]

So, if I get this right.... when you only count the students who pass (however many times it takes)..... you can claim a 100% passing rate? Aren't we now letting "marketing" and statistics manipulation grey this area a bit?

Take a look at what I said once more: do you see me claiming a 100% passing rate? I think the phrase "a number of students have not passed" should suggest otherwise. I am also not marketing anything like it. Can you show any way that I advertise anything of the kind?

You are equating "nobody fails" with "everybody passes." They are not the same thing. I have never "failed" a student, but a number of students have not passed. During instruction they decided that scuba was not for them and they were not willing to put in the extra time it would take to pass. That was their decision. I would have worked with them until they were done.

Like many people, you are using the terms "passing" and "failing" in the traditional way they are used in schools. That is not how 90% of scuba instruction is set up today. Scuba instruction today uses a standards-based system, something which a number of schools are also using now. (I did when I was still teaching.) Here is the difference:

Traditional: We will teach you for a specified period of time, measure the degree to which you have learned the material, and then issue a grade based upon that percentage. Some will pass; some will fail. Time is the standard, and learning is the variable.

Standards-based: We will teach you until you have demonstrated that you have learned the material, however long that takes. All who keep going until they achieve success will pass. Learning is the standard, and time is the variable.

In is thread we have seen people refer to cases in which unqualified students passed the course. That is the fault of the instructor not following through properly, not the system. The proper process would not have been to fail them, though. It would have been to keep teaching until they got it and legitimately passed.

 

[phuonguyen]

Q: What do you call the person that graduates at the very bottom of their medical class?
A: Doctor.

In a 2 man 100m sprint at the Olympic games, there is a winner and a loser; and the loser is most definitely better than me at running.

If someone's worked hard to attain a position, through skill and merit, then they must be doing something right!

I referee Soccer, and was only appointed to representative panels when the selectors realised that I would give yellow cards for launch tackles and red cards for a late tackle even at high divisions. You do have to earn what you get, and I would not be phased at not certifying a student.

 

[boulderjohn]

Let me put it a different way.

Standards-based instructional philosophy actually follows the methods used by most of the world outside of instruction. Let's say you hire a plumber because you have a number of leaks. You do not hire the plumber of a set amount of time, after which he declares how many of the leaks he fixed and how many of the leaks failed. Instead, he works until the job is done. I recently had radon mitigation work done in my house. The worker took a look at my situation, decide what needed to be done and how long it would take, and he told me how much he would charge me. The work turned out to be harder than he expected, and it took him a number of hours longer to do the job than he thought it would. I still paid exactly the amount agreed upon when I signed the contract.

If you were hiring a plumber and you knew that one was 100% successful in solving plumbing problems and another was 90% successful, which would you hire?

 

[Dive the World]

No - earn it.