Master.........Really?

[stuartv]

the master diver rating was a participation trophy,it means nothing and conveys no valid objective quantification of a diver's skill.

It conveys that the person has at least 50 dives logged, they have received Rescue Diver certification, and they have received 4 other diving certifications of some type.

You don't think that is a valid objective quantification of the diver's training?

You said "skill", but aren't all certifications an expression of the diver's level of training, not skill? I've been told repeatedly that even TDI AN/DP certification is meaningless with regard to conveying the diver's skill.

 

[scubadada]

It conveys that the person has at least 50 dives logged, they have received Rescue Diver certification, and they have received 4 other diving certifications of some type.

You don't think that is a valid objective quantification of the diver's training?

You said "skill", but aren't all certifications an expression of the diver's level of training, not skill? I've been told repeatedly that even TDI AN/DP certification is meaningless with regard to conveying the diver's skill.

Actually, PADI requires 5 specialties, used to also require emergency first responder, not sure if it still does.

 

[packrat12]

You said "skill", but aren't all certifications an expression of the diver's level of training, not skill? I've been told repeatedly that even TDI AN/DP certification is meaningless with regard to conveying the diver's skill.

Stuartv - you seem to not grasp the concept that certifications are not a reflection of skill. The Master Diver certification is only a recognition of a certain level of training and a small minimum number of dives. It is also primarily in place to make PADI money through specialty training, which serves minimum purposes. No boat nor cross-over agency recognizes it any higher than rescue is and even rescue is not required for almost any recreational or technical dive. I know most experienced divers would never consider a diver with sub 100 dives at a particular level skilled. They just have not had a wide enough range of diving. My OW instructor would not even consider you a diver until you had a minimum of 20 non-training dives under your belt. This was an Open Water diver mind you. Just because a diver has a certificate, does not mean that they are skilled at that level. The certificate is just a 'license to learn'. You meet a MINIMUM level of competence only.

It is very easy to rush through training, get all the certs in your book and pat yourself on your back for saying that you have reached xyz level diver! It is meaningless. You need experience and skill to match. That is what make a good diver! Not their certificates!

Certification is NOT a reflection of skill but it is a reflection of training. Experience is a reflection of skill and vice versa. Look to the levels of learning - Rote, Understanding, Application, Correlation. Few seem to be able to get past Rote at the training level. Application and Correlation only come with experience - Not certifications.

Stuartv - you seem very proud of your AN/DP cert. Congratulations but it does not make you a 'skilled technical diver'. You now can expand on your certification and eventually become 'skilled'. You do this with a progression in your diving sets. In a previous post, you were lamenting that you could not get He added without more water dives... Why???? You have yet to expand on your knowledge and skill set that was the minimum to get the AN/DP. You would be much better served by going 'tech' on simple dives to build on your training - rather then holding another card.

 

[stuartv]

The Master Diver certification is only a recognition of a certain level of training and a small minimum number of dives.

Isn't that EXACTLY what I just said?

 

[ScubaJill]

You said "skill", but aren't all certifications an expression of the diver's level of training, not skill?

Certification is NOT a reflection of skill but it is a reflection of training. QUOTE]

Isn't that EXACTLY what I just said?

Sure seems so.

 

[scubadada]

Stuartv - you seem to not grasp the concept that certifications are not a reflection of skill. The Master Diver certification is only a recognition of a certain level of training and a small minimum number of dives. It is also primarily in place to make PADI money through specialty training, which serves minimum purposes. No boat nor cross-over agency recognizes it any higher than rescue is and even rescue is not required for almost any recreational or technical dive. I know most experienced divers would never consider a diver with sub 100 dives at a particular level skilled. They just have not had a wide enough range of diving. My OW instructor would not even consider you a diver until you had a minimum of 20 non-training dives under your belt. This was an Open Water diver mind you. Just because a diver has a certificate, does not mean that they are skilled at that level. The certificate is just a 'license to learn'. You meet a MINIMUM level of competence only.

It is very easy to rush through training, get all the certs in your book and pat yourself on your back for saying that you have reached xyz level diver! It is meaningless. You need experience and skill to match. That is what make a good diver! Not their certificates!

Certification is NOT a reflection of skill but it is a reflection of training. Experience is a reflection of skill and vice versa. Look to the levels of learning - Rote, Understanding, Application, Correlation. Few seem to be able to get past Rote at the training level. Application and Correlation only come with experience - Not certifications.

Stuartv - you seem very proud of your AN/DP cert. Congratulations but it does not make you a 'skilled technical diver'. You now can expand on your certification and eventually become 'skilled'. You do this with a progression in your diving sets. In a previous post, you were lamenting that you could not get He added without more water dives... Why???? You have yet to expand on your knowledge and skill set that was the minimum to get the AN/DP. You would be much better served by going 'tech' on simple dives to build on your training - rather then holding another card.

I think Stuart is fully cognizant of the differences between training and skill (experience). Despite your reasonably tactful wording, you come across as pompous, arrogant, and condescending. This is not atypical on SB and is not constructive. Perhaps you should just read more carefully.

Good diving, Craig

 

[packrat12]

I think Stuart is fully cognizant of the differences between training and skill (experience). Despite your reasonably tactful wording, you come across as pompous, arrogant, and condescending. This is not atypical on SB and is not constructive. Perhaps you should just read more carefully.

Good diving, Craig

Except that there are numerous threads from Stuartv that indicates the exact opposite including the recent He thread. Still hold my direct opinion there. I mis-read his direct quote here because of past experiences with Stuartv.

Nothing in my thread is meant to be pompous, arrogant or condescending about Master Diver or other certifications. It is very simply a statement that all certifications are just a reflection of minimum standards. As is often stated, the lowest ranked med student is still called doctor. A pilot who barely can meet PTS standards is still a pilot (I am a CFI so am interested in how flight skills are learned). These minimum standards do not make a person skilled at the trained level. They have achieved a minimum level of competency. Experience is what drives divers skills beyond rote knowledge.

A Master Diver has achieved a minimum number of dives, 50. They have a number of specialties many of which are not necessarily anything challenging or offering direct improvement in diving skill sets. E.g. AWARE Coral Reef Conservation, Whale Shark diving etc. The reality is that Master Diver is a recognition certification only.

As for constructive - Is it better to state that "oh yea a Master Diver can do anything..."? It is not wise to inflate what the certification is. It is reaching a minimum level of competency. Some Master Divers are superb divers. But because of the minimum of requirements, it does not even remotely guarantee it.

 

[100days-a-year]

@stuarttv What I think the cert quantifies is the classic adage from PT Barnum in relation to time and birthing rates.

Would I feel safer with the average person with any of the "master" qualifications as a buddy?Nope.Nor do I think they quantify anything of value other than the rescue course.IME,some of the worst divers I've actually dove with are the ones who go to great lengths to pump up their certification level.

I may be biased by the fact that most of my buddies have from a minimum of 10 years experience and a couple thousand dives to several of them with over 10,000.

Giving certs for taking part in common activities performed underwater in no way reflects a skill level any where near deserving of the "master" moniker.It is however a great business plan and I applaud the agencies involved.

 

[scubadada]

Except that there are numerous threads from Stuartv that indicates the exact opposite including the recent He thread. Still hold my direct opinion there. I mis-read his direct quote here because of past experiences with Stuartv.

Nothing in my thread is meant to be pompous, arrogant or condescending about Master Diver or other certifications. It is very simply a statement that all certifications are just a reflection of minimum standards. As is often stated, the lowest ranked med student is still called doctor. A pilot who barely can meet PTS standards is still a pilot (I am a CFI so am interested in how flight skills are learned). These minimum standards do not make a person skilled at the trained level. They have achieved a minimum level of competency. Experience is what drives divers skills beyond rote knowledge.

A Master Diver has achieved a minimum number of dives, 50. They have a number of specialties many of which are not necessarily anything challenging or offering direct improvement in diving skill sets. E.g. AWARE Coral Reef Conservation, Whale Shark diving etc. The reality is that Master Diver is a recognition certification only.

As for constructive - Is it better to state that "oh yea a Master Diver can do anything..."? It is not wise to inflate what the certification is. It is reaching a minimum level of competency. Some Master Divers are superb divers. But because of the minimum of requirements, it does not even remotely guarantee it.

You made an error in judging Stuart based on previous threads rather than judging him based on his current post. I give you credit for admitting that error. Stuart is a very enthusiastic, highly motivated, well educated diver. We can only wish we had more divers joining the ranks like him. He appears to be vigorously pursuing a course to correct his experience deficit.

You have an interesting view of the world, concentrating on the lowest performing physicians and pilots. The majority are well above this minimum standard. You might benefit from a more optimistic view. The same is true for Master Diver, I did nitrox (when it still required classroom and 2 dives), deep, dpv, navigation, and search & rescue, perhaps not the most challenging, but not push overs. MSDs have more training than the majority of scuba divers, many also have more experience. I see no good reason to ridicule these divers.

The entry of new divers has been flat for a long time and many do not continue in the sport. A more embracing philosophy by established divers might be beneficial in stabilizing or reversing this trend.

Good diving, Craig

 

[stuartv]

Except that there are numerous threads from Stuartv that indicates the exact opposite including the recent He thread. Still hold my direct opinion there. I mis-read his direct quote here because of past experiences with Stuartv.

I think you have misread, misinterpreted and otherwise put words in my mouth regarding that other thread, as well. I NEVER said that a certain certification implied a certain level of skill.

What I said was, one, a certification implies that the person has demonstrated a certain level of skill to the satisfaction of a certified instructor. And, two, that if TDI cert A and TDI cert B both require X, and you have cert A, then it seems like TDI ought to acknowledge that you have already demonstrated X (to the satisfaction of TDI) and let you do the additional work to obtain cert B without redoing X.

@stuarttv What I think the cert quantifies is the classic adage from PT Barnum in relation to time and birthing rates.

Would I feel safer with the average person with any of the "master" qualifications as a buddy?Nope.Nor do I think they quantify anything of value other than the rescue course.IME,some of the worst divers I've actually dove with are the ones who go to great lengths to pump up their certification level.

I may be biased by the fact that most of my buddies have from a minimum of 10 years experience and a couple thousand dives to several of them with over 10,000.

Giving certs for taking part in common activities performed underwater in no way reflects a skill level any where near deserving of the "master" moniker.It is however a great business plan and I applaud the agencies involved.

Do you suppose that it's possible that, by having a MSD cert level and making it require Rescue training, that more people might take Rescue than otherwise would? That seems like a good thing for all of us, to me.

Presumably your first sentence is intended to mean that there is sucker born every minute and people with MSD cards are proof of that. What is the basis of that sentiment?

I have an MSD card. I took the full specialty courses for Nitrox, Advanced Buoyancy Control, Dry Suit, Deep, Wreck, and Rescue before getting that card. I would have taken all the classes even if there were no MSD card out there. The card itself didn't cost me anything. I did not take a special MSD class. What about all that makes me a sucker? The only thing the MSD card did for me was motivate me to take Rescue sooner than I might have otherwise because getting the card was a milestone for me. A personal achievement that I was, and am, proud of.

You make it sound like the learning curve for scuba diving is linear. Like you think that someone with 5000 dives knows 10 times as much and is 10 times more skilled than someone with 500 dives. That doesn't sound right to me.

MSD is a Recreational Sport Diving certification. For sport divers, I expect there is a learning curve that is by far the steepest at the very beginning. I would speculate that by the time someone completes the requirements for MSD, most people who never progress beyond sport diving have acquired at least 80%, if not more, of the diving skill they are ever going to have.

From another current thread, Tech diving is a very small percentage of the Recreational (meaning, non-commercial, non-military, non-scientific) diving in the world. So, of all the Recreational divers in the world (sport and tech combined), on the Bell Curve of skill, is it really unreasonable to think that people who qualify for an MSD do not rightfully deserve the appellation? Where do you think people need to be, skill-wise, to deserve it? The top 2%? The top 1%? The top 0.1%?

Considering the size of the tech community compared to the number of total Recreational (tech and sport) divers in the world, the top 1% of all Recreational divers might legitimately include all the people who have earned an MSD. Maybe. I don't really know. This is really just wondering out loud.


Thank you, @scubadada and @ScubaJill for your support. I really appreciate hearing a kind and supportive word here every now and then.