My wife, OW, and DIR?

[Butch103]

Just curious before I expel my opinion..........humble or not.........

Because I don't follow the pro and anti DIR arguements....Are you a "DIR" diver ???? ( I probably should know after a year on this board, but ) and if this is the case, is it your opinion that the regular jacket BCs and jacket back inflate BCs are not the way to go and are "dangerous"...I guess what I am trying to establish is, are the rest organizations other than DIR all wrong, mostly wrong or what..???

I follow the dangling gear arguement...it is only common sense, so no need to expand on that thought......

 

[MikeFerrara]

Mike,
Should I have trouble looking in the mirror because I teach new divers how to use a snorkel?

Really, I see many failing of dive training today but I don't think the snorkel is one of the great sins of bad diving. Do you?

Also, you have not addressed the issue of choosing not to stick to agreement made willingly.

Even GUE will have standards. Instructors will violate them. Will it be OK?

Is ommiting snorkel skills better or worse than not teaching some other required skill? Who says so?

It is fairly common for agencies to allow additions. However none allow deletions. You alone are not quilified to take things out of a class. No one instructor alone will ever convince he is qualified or justifie in doing so.

And anyone who crawfishes is wrong.

It only takes a moment to run through the OW snorkel skills. What are these people trying to prove and who do they think they are? Are snorkels bad and all who use them or teach them incompetant?
What makes you think this guy will follow GUE standards?

Does Jarrod Jablonski condone GUE instructors violating the standards of the other agencies they teach? But this guy isn't yet a GUE instructor is he? He is just a PADI instructor who has decided that he is good enough to make it all up as he goes.

 

[Lost Yooper]

Sounds like a setup to me, but I'll bite . Yeah, I follow the DIR philosophy for the most part.

Are jacket style BC's dangerous? No. They won't kill you.

Are all agencies other than GUE wrong? I, personally, don't have a lot of good things to say about most other agencies. Most seem to put money ahead of producing students with good skills. Again, that's my opinion. Of course, there are many instructors that are able see the forest through the trees and do what it takes to produce quality students.

There are ways to do things and there are better ways to do things.

Mike

 

[Lost Yooper]

Mike,

I never said I had a problem introducing a snorkel to an OW student, but requiring them to have one for OW is dumb. If people would spend as much time thinking about clean gear configurations, buddy skills, and buoyancy control as the do about whether they should wear a snorkel, they would be doing themselves a favor. If a snorkel is that important to PADI, then they have bigger issues to worry about.

I just plain disagree with you, Mike. I commend an instructor who knows a better way and chooses to implement it. As long as it is, in fact, better, I don't see a problem. I will concede that someone who does this may open themselves up to scrutiney. However, if he's right, then what kind of scrutiney will he face? Oh yeah, the PADI police, that's right .



Mike

 

[roakey]

Butch103 once bubbled...
...is it your opinion that the regular jacket BCs and jacket back inflate BCs are not the way to go and are "dangerous"...

DIR divers don't call poodle jackets dangerous. The non-DIR divers accuse us of saying that all the time (your post is a case in point), but that's your problem, not ours.

We WILL call them inefficient, sub-optimal, non-hydrodynamic, non-modular and not *as* safe as a backplate and wing. We’ll also point out that they encourage poor configurations, trim and equipment.

But they certainly are not dangerous.

We also call them poodle jackets from time to time, too, because it describes what they look like so perfectly!

Roak

 

[MSP Rescue Diver]

Mike - with PADI being such a horrible organization with such low standards and rotten instructors who mindlessly follow them, why would you choose to subject your wife to such training and have them issue her a c-card? Why not just enrol her in a GUE class?

Marc

 

[MikeFerrara]

There is more to it than that. In this case we're not talking about going above and beyond, we're talking about leaving things out. I'm not concerned about the PADI police. I'm more concerned about what hapens when we all start doing our own thing. Some may prove good enough to pull it off but some won't.

If my students finish and thier trim and bc is good by PADI standards It is good. It's not the snorkel is more important than other aspects of the class. The issue is that one lone instructor is not (and for good reason) given the leeway to rewrite the book. And if he does who says it's better? him? you?

There is more involved in training new divers than many realize. If GUE was prepared to do it they would. If I'm not mistaken being a instructor with some other agency is a requirement to be a GUE instructor. Even GUE is relying on the training of other agencies. If I'm not mistaken GUE even requires the AOW (before cave or tech) that so many DIR proponents cut to shreds. Why?

It is one thing to spend a couple of days polishing the skills of a diver who wants to polish their skills (DIRF). It is something else to start from scratch and pollish the same skills. Even GUE has not proven the ability to develop a program that does that. They only get the willing ones. Half the battle is won before the class starts. We have to take them off the street. I think that when (if) they offer an OW program they will end up with some bad divers out making them look bad too. If they don't meet the minimums of the RSTC they will have trouble. They may even teach snorkel use.

It is easy to critisize from the outside.

 

[Lost Yooper]

FLL Diver once bubbled...
Mike - with PADI being such a horrible organization with such low standards and rotten instructors who mindlessly follow them, why would you choose to subject your wife to such training and have them issue her a c-card? Why not just enrol her in a GUE class?

Marc

This was the best I could hope for. She is fortunate to have had a decent instructor for her OW dives. Otherwise, I would've had to try and erase everything myself.

Mike

 

[Lost Yooper]

Mike,

GUE's OW class is in the works. There are a few things that will happen for sure:

Enrollment will be low
Standards will be high
Graduates will be better divers

I'll bet my snorkel on that!

I started this thread to share how a good instructor could take a relatively uncomfortable diver, put her into an unfamiliar plate, wing, and 7' hose, and have her come out with better skills than normal OW students in the same amount of time in the water. All of a sudden, we're talking about an insignificant and frivalous snorkel requirement that PADI has.

Come on!

Mike

 

[CuriousMe]

Lost Yooper once bubbled...
Mike,

I never said I had a problem introducing a snorkel to an OW student, but requiring them to have one for OW is dumb. If people would spend as much time thinking about clean gear configurations, buddy skills, and buoyancy control as the do about whether they should wear a snorkel, they would be doing themselves a favor. If a snorkel is that important to PADI, then they have bigger issues to worry about.

I just plain disagree with you, Mike. I commend an instructor who knows a better way and chooses to implement it. As long as it is, in fact, better, I don't see a problem. I will concede that someone who does this may open themselves up to scrutiney. However, if he's right, then what kind of scrutiney will he face? Oh yeah, the PADI police, that's right .

Mike

First off, I haven't had a snorkel on my mask since my certification dive....I agree, that it generally gets in the way.

However, I think the point is that PADI made up a list of what specific skills they needed to have demonstrated to one of their agents (instructors) before giving out a PADI card. If the organization, through their agent, doesn't see those skill demonstrated, then they shouldn't give out the PADI card.

A second discussion then is the validity of the specific skills. We can discuss till the cows come home the validity of specific skills in this list...but this is all theoretical, since we don't make up this list.

To me, it's like saying well, I’m going to get a Computer Science degree from XYZ University, but they require an arts course for that degree. I don’t agree that the arts are needed for a Comp Science, so I won't take it…but I should get the degree anyway….after all, I don’t agree that arts are necessary. If XYZ University is giving away the degree, they get to decide what you need to do before you get it…..If PADI is giving away the C-card…they get to decide what you need to do to get it. Of course you always have the choice of getting a c-card through someone else…that’s just the way it works huh?

BTW, what would you think of a Dean, who allowed you to graduate without your Arts course…well as a student you would probably name your first born after them <grin>. But the University….they would probably have a different opinion huh? Their question would probably be along the lines of, who gave you the authority to change the requirements?


My .02

Peace,
Cathie