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

[boulderjohn]

I think everyone who talks about how much better things were in the good old days should read this history of NAUI, written in part by its primary founder, All Tillman (NAUI Instructor #1). Here are several points from that history that are important for this discussion.

1. NAUI (and many other agencies) have always allowed individual instructors to teach whatever they want to teach (and require it for certification) as long as the class as a whole met their minimum standards. Therefore, the course any individual took may have been significantly different from a course someone else took. An example many people cite about instruction back in those days is the tearing off of students' masks and the surprise shutting off of their air. In describing the meeting of instructors that led to the creation of NAUI in 1960 in Houston, Tillman talks about how the leaders were surprised to see some of the instructors doing that stuff. He said that it seemed to be more for the pleasure of the instructor than for the benefit of the student. So, yes, some classes included that sort of harassment, but not all did, and those that did it were probably in the minority.

2. NAUI instructors liked to hand students their certification cards when the students completed the class, so NAUI headquarters sent out the cards when the students enrolled in the training. The problem is that some of the students were getting the cards before they completed their training. In fact, some of them got cards without doing any training at all. This great inconsistency was a problem that plagued them for a long time.

3. The Advanced Open Water certification was created by the Los Angeles County program in the mid 1960s to introduce divers to a variety of different aspects of diving in the hope that it would improve the low rate of diver retention. NAUI followed suit. PADI did not add AOW until later.

4. Looking back on the founding of NAUI from decades later, the authors said that the average student leaving the OW classes now is a better diver than the instructors were when NAUI was founded.

 

[Diving Dubai]

Doning and Doffing is also part of the rescue course...

I'm trained by PADI, and now going through BSAC because it suits me. For the type of diving I do learning about dive management and expedition planning among other things are more important to me than learning to be an assistant instructor (my perception of PADI DM)

I'm not going to know any agencies they all have their pro's and cons. I PADI (IMO) have just split the courses into bit size segments (OW, AOW, RD) BSAC for instance cover similar in just 2 courses. And yes the BSAC is aimed at cold, low vis UK diving in a club environment - rather than a warm water with a commercial operator. Horses for courses

My only gripe with PADI is that I would prefer they taught nitrox as part of OW - perhaps Drysuit as and option too depending. Also with the exception on DM and instructor there is nothing to stop someone going from OW to RD without ever diving without an instructor?

Again my opinion only, I think it would be far more beneficial to insist that a person needs 300mins underwater or 10 dives between OW and AoW, then say the same again between AoW and Rescue with different conditions (no tea bagging) Similarly DM and Instructor I feel can be attained with too little real world experience.

Is someone whose experience is in quarries suitable for guiding dives in the ocean? Likewise is someone used to good vis suitable for guiding / teaching in low vis and cold?

I would never like to prevent people learning new skills I think RD is an important course, it's value increases with the amount of experience you have. However there is a fine line between how much you need to dive before you go in the Rescue course verses getting the knowledge early.

After that then going pro or getting a Master should require more than paying for courses Start the minimum standard of 100 dives perhaps.

As for the old ways, I can't comment as they weren't covered in my history course at school

 

[packrat12]

I think everyone who talks about how much better things were in the good old days should read this history of NAUI, written in part by its primary founder, All Tillman (NAUI Instructor #1). Here are several points from that history that are important for this discussion.

boulderjohn - lets be realistic here. ANY new sport takes time to come of its own. Early diving was bad. Equipment was anything from home made to military surplus. Diving did not develop its training programs or equipment manufacturers overnight. Learning was typically through failure etc. By the 1970's, things had developed. Programs and equipment was becoming standardized and dependable. By the 1980's, the equipment we used was almost exactly what is being used today. Until recently, I still used a 1974 2nd stage on my gear. Yea in the 1960's things were the 'wild west'. Most of us are commenting based on the later 1970's and 1980's.

My training in the 1980's - 6 weeks long and 2 weekends for diving. We met several times a week and on weekends. I cannot count how many times I assembled my gear in front of an instructor. How many pool sessions I went through. How many times I performed exercises. If someone had trouble performing an exercise, they would have amble other opportunities to correct it with the instructor and class. I think buddy breathing alone was a full night of training. Went very heavy over effects of pressure on air consumption, volume etc. Had to know Henry's law, Boyles law, Dalton's law. Had to know our method of dive management e.g. tables backwards and forwards. We did numerous dive plans.

My wife's training in the 1990's - 2 weeks long and 2 weekends for diving. You assembled your gear a handful of times in front of an instructor. If you missed an exercise you would either fail the class or get at 'pass' as I have seen MANY instructors do today. Rudimentary knowledge of the laws affecting diving. Be able to plan 1 dive on tables. Even this course was way too light and short

Today's training - 1 week and 1 weekend for diving. Course material without an instructor. One demonstration of most skills in training and one demonstration on a physical dive is able to pass. How many pool sessions is minimum? How much time can an instructor take for a particular student today? How often are passes given for mediocre performance of a skill because there is not time? I know I have seen a lot personally.

 

[boulderjohn]

Today's training - 1 week and 1 weekend for diving. Course material without an instructor. One demonstration of most skills in training and one demonstration on a physical dive is able to pass. How many pool sessions is minimum? How much time can an instructor take for a particular student today? How often are passes given for mediocre performance of a skill because there is not time? I know I have seen a lot personally.

Course material without an instructor: As a former teacher, administrator, curriculum developer, and online education director, I can assure you that the very worst way to have people learn content is through instructor lecture. Both the process of having students read the materials in a book and then go over it with an instructor and the online options impart that information much more effectively than do lectures. Are you advocating a much, much longer and much less effective mode of learning simply because it was the way you did it?

One demonstration of most skills in training and one demonstration on a physical dive is able to pass. Well, not really. Most key skills take much more time than that. Mask clearing, for example, must be done so successfully that the instructor is convinced the student can repeat it without a problem a minimum of 7 times, and it is likely to be more, according to current standards. Alternate air exchanges must be done (counting donating and receiving) a minimum of 6 times. In current standards, though, there are supposed to be more, but they are at the discretion of the instructor so I can't give you a specific number. Some items, like the snorkel/regulator exchange, do only have to be done twice, but in all those cases, they have to be done so that they demonstrate mastery.

How many pool sessions is minimum? I give up. How many are needed? With the changes in the way pool sessions are supposed to be done today, you can make the students come out looking one heck of a lot more like divers than you could only a few years ago in the same amount of time. (Admittedly, not all instructors have instituted all the recommended changes.)

How much time can an instructor take for a particular student today? I give up. There are classes today that take as long as the ones you took; according to the NAUI history I mentioned above, there were classes back then that took less. My cousin's total course in the mid 1960s took place on the floor of the sporting goods shop where he bought his gear. I don't know how many minutes it took, but from his description, it wasn't many.

How often are passes given for mediocre performance of a skill because there is not time? I know I have seen a lot personally. This is a standards violation, and you should report it when you see it. Cutting a course short because of a lack of time was also a problem in the past, as the NAUI history clearly shows.

Teaching Henry's law, etc.: First of all, was this part of the standard curriculum, or did your instructor add it? Next, here is some instructional theory for you--interference theory. Simply put, the time spent learning stuff you don't need to know interferes with your ability to learn and remember the things you do need to know. The most influential work on this is Understanding by Design, by Wiggins and McTigue. They teach how to focus instruction and assessment on the essential learnings in the curriculum and how to put lesser emphasis on things that are of lesser importance. Most importantly, they teach how to remove entirely that which is simply superfluous. In the OW class I that this weekend, students learned how changing pressure impacts their diving, including compressing/expanding air spaces and impacting the rate at which nitrogen enters and leaves tissues. They did not learn the names Boyle's Law, Dalton's law, or Henry's Law, because they don't need to know any of those names. Teaching them those names and testing them on those names would not help their progress and would seriously harm their learning. As a technical diving instructor, I could add one heck of a lot of learning to what they had in class, but I do not do it because I want them to leave that class having mastered what they really need to do to dive at that level.

 

[stuartv]

I wish there was a button for something stronger than just Like.

 

[ScubaDerby]

Just finished my NAUI Master Diver Certification this weekend.

I understand that starting June 1, 2016, it will be a prerequisite for entering the NAUI leadership program. At least that's what I was told from someone from NAUI corporate when they spoke to the instructors at my local dive shop last week. I've passed both the NAUI Divemaster and Master Diver tests and found them both challenging and rewarding to complete.

Am I a Master? Who knows? The only thing I know for sure is I hope to keep learning as long as I keep diving.

 

[Colliam7]

We might not teach doff and don but yet why do we require the skill for DM? Are they going to do this with only other DMs?

We don't require it. The traditional 'doff and don' is the removal of gear at the bottom of the pool, followed by an ascent to the surface, then a return to depth, and a re-donning of gear. We teach DMs 'equipment exchange'. And, it is taught as a problem-solving exercise, not as a realistic scuba skill, because it really is not. They are not going to practice it with other divers, DMs or otherwise. But, DMs are going to have to solve problems underwater, and the Equipment Exchgange exercise helps them develop problem-solving skills.

It does teach a lot about what you are doing for yourself as well as the other person. My concern about the dilution of training is that skills that may not add to safety may better add to diver confidence and better performance.

I fully agree that it can help build confidence. And, DMs are dive professionals who are being trained to handle multi-tasking situations. But, the bigger issue is - the removal of the traditional 'doff and don' is not at all 'dilution'. It is partly a matter of prudence and safety (as some instructors learned from very harsh experience: Criminally negligent homicide?/Scuba Instructor Faces Charges (merged threads)) Moreover, other, more relevant, skills are have been included in the curriculum instead. And, that is part of the continuing evolution of dive training. If anything, it can be argued that, rather than being diluted, open water scuba training is now better focused on meaningful skills that are relevant to diving. For example:

Doff and Don drills allow a student to know where all of the connectors are without sight, train them to anticipate buoyancy changes etc. Did their tank come loose and need to be adjusted… Did they misconfigure their gear and want to reposition it? I know I have removed my gear several times in the past to readjust something that was just not right.

And I have as well. And, we DO teach a specific skill to address just those points - Scuba Unit Remove and Replace Underwater (and at the surface for that matter). And, it IS a (much more) useful skill. And, we do (now) teach Loose Cam Band Adjustment which was not taught in the past. And, that is part of my point, and that of others. Certain skills have been removed, because they did not really relate to actual diving. In their place, other, more relevant skills have been added. Frankly, it is hard to see how that constitutes 'dilution'. Now, in fairness, in some ways, you are preaching to the choir just a bit, at least for me. I will still teach the 'traditional' doff and don' to selected private students, not because it is a skill likely to be needed, but because it does build confidence, and, the selected private students I teach it to (seem to) enjoy it, if they opt to try it. It is purely optional and an OW student's ability to perform it has nothing to do with their certification. And, I watch them closely when they do it. I also would NOT try to teach it to a multi-student class, nor do I think the skill, per se, has much to do with realistic scuba situations.

Nice to have the training and confidence as a diver that buddy breathing is not going to be an issue. I was recently checking out my gear before a dive (all divers do that right?) and found my bailout reg (call it octo here) had the exhaust mushroom folded in half and stuck that way. If I donated it or needed to use it, all the person would have gotten is a mouth full of water. Did your buddy properly check out their octo? Did you? Are you sure the reg you are donating is good (secondary donate) or are you sure the reg you are going to use is good (primary donate)?

All good points. And, ALL of these points are directly addressed / included in the Open Water curriculum - it is called the Pre-Dive Safety Check. And, isn't it a far better, safer, more certain practice to prevent the need for buddy breathing in the first place, through a THOROUGH gear check (aka Pre-Dive Safety Check) BEFORE submerging. Why teach a last ditch, 'hail Mary' skill, that is more appropriately referred to as 'double drowning', when students should be, and are, taught to perform that important check while on the surface / boat / shore, to ensure their gear is in good working order before they begin their dive? Why teach a last ditch, 'hail Mary' skill, that is more appropriately referred to as 'double drowning', when students should be, and are, taught to streamline their gear, to place their alternate air source ('octo' is an outmoded term) in a secure, easily accessible position. That is part of the intelligent, pro-active evolution of scuba training. Just because the traditional 'doff and don', or buddy breathing, have been removed doesn't mean that something better, safer, and - frankly - easier to learn and practice, has not been added. In fact it has. I would much rather rely on a buddy with a functional second stage that I know to be working, in the very unlikely event that I go OOA, than on a skill like double drowning, er buddy breathing. In fact, I will take the issue of second stage donation a step further. The traditional passive secondary donation procedure is being phased out in favor of active donation. That is yet another example of improvement, rather than dilution, in training. And, I fully anticipate that active primary donation will become the standard of practice, instead of active secondary donation, in the not too distant future (it already is for me). Secondary donation is OK, but primary donation addresses at least two of the points you mentioned. IOW, if anything scuba training is getting better in many ways, rather than being diluted.

I also lost my mask in a high current descent this weekend. I was able to catch it but decided to descend to the bottom before putting it on…. No need to fight holding onto the downline in the current. Right from my OW training, I was taught to swim with a snorkel or regulator without a mask and without holding my nose…. A nice skill to have and a dive continued without stress.

And, your training served you well! AND, that (No Mask Breathing / Swimming) is a skill that is currently taught (repeatedly), and practice (repeatedly), during contemporary OW training - that training starts in Confined Water and is repeated in Open Water. I honestly don't see any dilution there.

A lot of training was done to better prepare divers for harsher environments and poorer reliability of the gear in the past. Confidence and preparation was a part of it. It may not add to safety but can very well add to a better and stress free dive. I think these skills are lacking in today's training.

I genuinely do not understand how the skills you have mentioned are lacking. In fact, they are there, or an even better surrogate skill is present, and are emphasized in contemporary OW training. Yes, we have the luxury of preparing students for a diving environment in which gear reliability is higher than in the past. And, we don't have to waste time on teaching skills such as buddy breathing, because other, more useful and relevant skills have been included to obviate the need.

 

[Shotmaster]

For those interested here is the latest U.S. Navy Diving Manual. 1008 pages. If you read this you will be awakened to the fact that there is world of difference in the knowledge base and what you get exposed to in modern certification courses. My NASDS training was conducted using the Navy Dive Manual as the reference book. I recommend this for any diver.

http://www.supsalv.org/pdf/Dive Manual Rev 6 with Chg A.pdf

 

[gcarter]

For those interested here is the latest U.S. Navy Diving Manual. 1008 pages. If you read this you will be awakened to the fact that there is world of difference in the knowledge base and what you get exposed to in modern certification courses. My NASDS training was conducted using the Navy Dive Manual as the reference book. I recommend this for any diver.

http://www.supsalv.org/pdf/Dive Manual Rev 6 with Chg A.pdf

Were you tested on all 1008 pages as a requirement for the cert? Citing it as a reference is interesting, but says nothing about what content was actually required for the course.

 

[Shotmaster]

You missed the point entirely. I wasnt trained as a Navy Diver, however all of my instructors were active duty UDT/SEALS and their training was the basis for the science and physics taught, the extensive underwater drills, the checklists used, the dive planning, and the emergency training exercises, such as free ascents, and buddy breathing. I posted the link so anyone interested could avail themselves of some very good information. I think the Manual speaks for itself, and for anyone who wants to expand their knowledge and understanding, it is the current Manual.

I think the following quote sums up the approach to diving that I have adhered to since I began diving.

"Throughout the evolution of diving, from the earliest breath-holding sponge diver to the modern saturation diver, the basic reasons for diving have not changed. National defense, commerce, and science continue to provide the underlying basis for the development of diving. What has changed and continues to change radically is diving technology.

Each person who prepares for a dive has the opportunity and obligation to take along the knowledge of his or her predecessors that was gained through difficult and dangerous experience. The modern diver must have a broad understanding of the physical properties of the undersea environment and a detailed knowledge of his or her own physiology and how it is affected by the environment. Divers must learn to adapt to environmental conditions to successfully carry out their missions.

Much of the diver’s practical education will come from experience. However, before a diver can gain this experience, he or she must build a basic foundation from certain principles of physics, chemistry and physiology and must understand the application of these principles to the profession of diving."