On the merits of cranking up standards.

[KevinNM]

A decent percentage of GUE instructors, at least in the US, are not full time instructors. If you own a dice center or are an executive at a diving equipment company your standard of living is probably not driven by how many cave 1 classes you teach this month.

GUE is also looking for divers with enormous amount of experience to be instructors. I don't know what the requirements are off-hand, but I think all the ones I know had upwards of 1000 dives, a good number tec dives, before becoming instructors for GUE. So you are in a different place in your life than many rec agency starting instructors.

 

[DevonDiver]

There seems a measure of consensus that across-the-board big increases in time & standards (e.g.: knowledge/skill/performance mastery) would lead to a substantial decline in the # of people entering the hobby.

But of those who did, there would be a substantially higher retention of active, involved divers (the ones who profit dive centers, but less so, agencies).

Most agencies profit from courses only - not fun diving or equipment sales. So the training model reflects that. Diver retention, beyond 'continued education', is not a consideration for agencies.

Most agencies would be happiest if masses of divers to simply progressed immediately from cheap, easy course to cheap, easy course, with no experience diving between... on a card-collecting spree.... led to believe that the number of cards they possessed in some way reflected actual competency as a diver...

Oh wait..... isn't that kinda what happens mostly nowadays? Funny that....

Even if these courses cost the student more money, they'd also cost the instructor more time & effort.

I've never seen an argument that instructors want to make less effort, or devote less time to training.

The argument for shorter courses only stems from the desire to profit from student turn-over. A situation forced on instructors by the agency driven training model...

A number of instructors are 'dual vocation' and some have families, so taking up more of their time is a cost, too.

Dual vocation/Part-Time instructors is actually quite a tiny minority.... when considered globally. It happens in countries/regions that don't have thriving dive industries and masses of students. More full-time instructors in Mexico than Florida. More in Florida than Connecticut...etc

Also.... how many of those instructors would choose to be full-time.... if the training model were re-shaped to offer them a living salary, rather than being at the bottom of a cost-cutting pyramid, for the sake of agency profitability.

How many GUE Fundamentals instructors drive Beamers?

Have you seen the cost of their gear?!?

But it seems a GUE instructor can afford the expensive stuff.. tech scooters, gasses, expeditions etc.... that they want/need. Most other instructors couldn't.... not from their salaries.

that there'd be a mass migration of these guys into the longer, more demanding and lucrative technical diving teaching market...if teaching tec. is lucrative. Is it?

That's exactly what we're seeing now....

Some agencies are creating sausage-factory tech instructors with that precise goal. The problem is that it then saturates the instructional market with under-experienced and grossly under-skilled tech instructors who did some pathetic zero-to-hero tech instructor program only because tech seemed lucrative to them.... a desperate solution to boost their miserly income and the unsatisfying instructional experience they get from teaching cheap, easy and non-productive courses to the masses.

What then happens, of course, is that these zero-to-heros then follow the same mindset as they had before..... unable to compete with experienced, skillful technical instructors of repute..... they start playing the 'price-cutting' game.

Then lo and behold....the same cankerous disease has spread to the tech diving community.

Tech diving is become cheap, quick and easy. Trust me on that....

 

[kensuf]

A bunch of threads I read have raised a question in my mind. Many people have been arguing that the quality of scuba instruction has been declining, some argue the standards have not changed. Regardless of whether either of this is true, in many (most?) areas of life it is certainly true that a person's job performance depends to a small degree on standards and rules, and to a much greater degree on other factors.

If so, that brings the question what exactly [pick whatever scuba certifying agency] in your opinion should do to raise the quality of instruction:

a) Have even more standards to follow, a greater number of rules? Higher, more elaborate, more specific, rigid, prescriptive standards? How prescriptive should they be? Where should the line be drawn?

b) If not, then what else?

c) What makes you believe this would actually help? Would there be any downsides to what you are proposing?

To preempt some of the obvious responses, I'm assuming there are many ways to skin the cat. I may be wrong.

Thanks!

So..

First, standards have dropped for the entry level diver. Anyone who says they haven't is sort of fooling themselves. Going back to the mid-90s, the minimum required pool and classroom time worked out to close to 30 hours of instruction. These were requirements, a minimum requirement of 12 hours in the classroom and a minimum of 18 hours in the pool. I personally believe that the extra pool time increased an individual divers kinesthetic awareness and comfort in the water, which helped them to become better overall.

During the rush to provide quicker courses, the minimum requirements were dropped to "recommended" minimums. And well, we know how that's worked out. And while I personally have had good students turn out from only 6 hours in the pool, those were classes with 1 or 2 students and me, not 8 students.

Another standard that has dropped, at least for NAUI, is the minimum requirements to become a scuba instructor. Up until the release of the new standards this March, a person could enroll in a NAUI ITC with as few as 60-70 dives under their belt, yikes. That's just not enough diving experience. It used to be 100 dives, then it dropped to 60 (to enroll).

I don't think increasing the standards for recreational level courses will really help the problem, but I do think that dropping the instructor/student ratio to 1:4 would help. The reason being that it would allow an instructor to still teach a course quickly if a student is progressing and developing the skills quickly, but would also allow the instructor to provide more individualized attention to a student that is struggling.

I also do believe that raising the requirements to become a diver leader *WOULD* help. I think there's a fair number of people that I have met that were newly minted DM's or Instructors that thought they knew everything there was to know about diving, and they clearly do not understand what they do not know.

Finally, I think the thing that would make the most improvement is this: if every instructor treated teaching scuba as a profession, and acted accordingly throughout the courses they teach.

 

[Diving Dubai]

If I may...

I'm a product of both PADI and BSAC. I can see both sides.

The commercial agencies (PADI, SSI etc) clearly have a difficult path to walk.

To encourage people into diving it has to be accessible. By that I mean the course has to be at a price which is affordable, and which isn't of a length which is off putting time wise.

If you assume most people take their OW on holiday, these people don't want to spend a week of their vacation at a destination that has cost them a ton of money already, stuck in a classroom and a pool. Hence whether you agree or not, they have arrived at a course length that meets the basic requirements for someone to go out and dive under the guidance of someone more experienced (normally a guided dive). The fact that they introduced referral courses and on line learning so you can do these in advance of your holiday seems to support this.

The cost of the course is important. We all know instructors don't get rich, because people generally want to pay the minimum they can for any service. So the commercial agencies split their courses up into bite size and affordable chunks. Of course because they advertise the courses take XX days, there is an expectation that's all it will take


Where BSAC differ and can differ, is that it is based up on the club diving model. you only pay for the course materials. the instruction is given free by certified club members. Where the Commercial agencies require 3 courses to get to Rescue Diver level, BSAC have 2 (which means each course is more detailed) For instance their Ocean Diver (OW ) has practical dives with a further 9 experience dives with different conditions, Sports diver adds another 14 water dives. Now these can be done in a club environment but not in a few days. People joining a dive club want to and are willing to invest time in learning. BSAC diving generally requires you to invest in all your gear - or at least find somewhere to rent

With BSAC there is no time advertised. The time taken is dictated by the availability of instructors, and the availability of diving opportunities (the theory might happen over eh winter and the practical and skills lessons may take the whole dive season. it can easily take you a year.

Yes BSAC turn out a better qualified diver than the commercials, but if the BSAC course was charged at a commercial rate I'm sure no-one would take it.

SO I believed the perceived lack of standards is really due to market forces. I'm sure the commercials have done a lot of research into the maximum time a course can last as well as the maximum cost. In short what people will pay and how much time they will dedicate

Where I disagree massively with the commercial organisations is that I don't agree that 100 dives gives you enough real world experience to be an instructor.

I think the specialty cards are an illusion, they seem to portray that after completing say wreck diver, you are competent, rather than the truth that you have learn't the basics of a subject from which you need to build on with practice to become anywhere near competent

the fact that you can attain Master diver just by completing some courses and having a minimum number of dives is frankly laughable, and is a dishonest lie, but one that a novice diver looks up too and believes. However that's not the subject of this thread

 

[yle]

Our "nitrox divers" from NAUI look better in the water than most PADI instructors.

tbone, this claim caught my eye... more so than many of your other claims (and that's saying a lot.) What exactly do you mean by "look better"? Is this just a subjective thing, or do you mean there are objective criteria for which the "nitrox divers" perform better than the majority of PADI instructors?

If it is objective... can you share how the data was collected on a majority of PADI instructors? Considering the tens of thousands of them around the globe, it seems like such data collection would be a huge project. I've just never heard of it.

Thanks...

 

[yle]

The "anything" comment was your ability to teach OW, AOW, Rescue, etc. MSDT is also a joke...

Again, I'm not bashing PADI,

But you are, and you know it.

With all the comparisons you've made between PADI and GUE, one that you seemed to have missed is that PADI insists that its instructors demonstrate respect for other agencies and their instructors. Maybe you only have access to the PADI website, and not the instructor manual. If so, let me help you out. This comes directly from the PADI Member Code of Practice:

"As a PADI Member, you agree to the following... Not disparage the PADI organization, PADI Members or any other dive industry professionals."

If all agencies held their members to a similar standard, perhaps it would be easier to have a productive conversation that could lead to real improvement.

 

[drrich2]

"With BSAC there is no time advertised. The time taken is dictated by the availability of instructors, and the availability of diving opportunities (the theory might happen over eh winter and the practical and skills lessons may take the whole dive season. it can easily take you a year.

Yes BSAC turn out a better qualified diver than the commercials, but if the BSAC course was charged at a commercial rate I'm sure no-one would take it."

This observation raises an interesting question. Let's say, for sake of argument, we want to compare the divers from whatever BSAC's version of basic OW is to those from PADI. If a person in the PADI system could do OW and AOW in the time & effort it takes to do OW in BSAC, do we compare BSAC OW to PADI OW, or BSAC OW to PADI AOW? And so on.

It seems the training to 'get good,' whatever that means, is out there for those with the desire and drive to acquire it.

Richard.

 

[Diving Dubai]

This observation raises an interesting question. Let's say, for sake of argument, we want to compare the divers from whatever BSAC's version of basic OW is to those from PADI. If a person in the PADI system could do OW and AOW in the time & effort it takes to do OW in BSAC, do we compare BSAC OW to PADI OW, or BSAC OW to PADI AOW? And so on.

The BSAC system is very much tailored towards club diving in the UK.

In Ocean Diver (PADI OW) One big difference is that Nitrox is embedded as part of the Ocean diver course. The OW dives must include four of the following dive conditions to give them experienced in their local conditions

Shore Dive
Large Boat Dive
Small Boat Dive
Low Visability Dive
Wall Dive
Drift Dive
Nitrox Dive

They are also required to log 150 minutes of dive time before being awarded ocean diver

Then you move to Sports diver (PADI Rescue)

You complete all the rescue theory as well as practical lessons. You also need to learn these additionaal skills

DSMB use and deployment
SMB use and deployment
Planned Decompression (carry our a simulated Decompression dive
Further Compass and navigation
Basic skills review Dive
Learning to be an ASSISTANCE Dive Manager (Planning and running groups of divers to sites well know to the club).

Again there are theory classes and the OW dives must include a range of conditions similar to those in the Ocean Diver list

You also take incremental dives to qualify you to 35m

While different agencies like to rate their course above another, the easiest way is where they are rated against the CMAS Star system. This is a rough Guide

 

[Diving Dubai]

I am a convert to club diving. I used to be very cynical about the BSAC way, and I don't like the inter agency bickering.

I don't believe there is a failure in the training offered by any agency, but I feel it's the perception the candidates are given on completion of the course. By that I mean, when you complete any course a Pass or Fail means you have achieved (or not) the minimum standard. All any course gives you is the foundation building blocks from which to improve.

Whether its an OW or a specialty card, most candidates come away feeling they are proficient in that course, ratehr than realising that it's just a starter. Someone is not proficient in a Drysuit after 2 OW dives for instance, but they do have the basic knowledge from which to build on and improve.

The biggest difference with club diving (and BSAC) is that you are constantly mentored. As a for instance. You may get your OW cert with your partner, and thus want to dive together. Fine. However your initial dives while together will be alongside another more experienced buddy pair, and post dives there will be informal de-briefs if you like just a chat. Those with experience will impart their knowledge and tips, in a friendly way and encourage the less experienced pair. Because in a club people dive together and get to know each other at social events no-one is a stranger.

With the commercial model you pass the course and that's it, you're on your own - unless you find an instructor etc, its hard for you to get feedback on your diving. So people who are a product of club diving have a greater exposure to knowledge and assistance than perhaps a commercial organisation, which generally speaking makes for more accomplished divers

 

[The Chairman]

Interesting thread... I read every post too, though I almost fell asleep with a few of them.

We have the faction that wants to blame the agencies. We have another faction that wants to blame the instructors. We even have a few people who want to blame the divers. All are correct. All miss the point.

Training was first developed to sell more gear. There was no altruistic or benevolent force: only economics. Even today, agencies require their instructors to learn how to sell additional training and all the gear needed to complete the process.

Unfortunately, this meant the gear drove the process. No, I'm not blaming manufacturers here, but the shop owners, faced with paying the light bill and putting food on the table, made most of their money with gear and training was often seen as a loss leader to enable that effort.

Then came the interwebs. The interwebs screwed with the dive shop's ability to sell gear at keystone. Moreover, the internet started providing all sorts of information and guidance, making the dive ops less relevant. Oh hell, we still had to get air from somewhere, but the industry had to make a shift. Some were better making that shift than others.

The interwebs also raised our public consciousness about standards. I can tell you with no equivocation, that self imposed standards today are far, far higher than they've ever been. When I bought my first set of Jets from a well know scuba diving figure in 1969, his biggest selling point was that I could "kick the crap out of the reef and not hurt the fin!" So, here I am 47 years later diving with a local dive guide here in the Philippines that is watching us like a hawk, making sure we don't kick his reef.

It's my estimation, that scuba instruction has not been "dumbed down", but rather "smartened up". As a group we are focusing more on the majors of Scuba safety and getting away from the minors. Consequently, we don't see pushups in full gear anymore, but we do see an improved emphasis on being neutral. I'm not content telling my students they'll need a 100 dives or more to master this skill. They learn it in their OW class. Buoyancy and trim are more of a remedial class in that regard.

So do us all a favor. If you aren't selling enough classes to stay in business, stop blaming everyone else. Stop being jealous of other people's success. Learn how to sell your classes at a price that makes sense for you and stop blaming the world for being able to do it a bit better or quicker than you. Once you accept the responsibility for your own success or failure, you'll be able to change in a manner that will suit you. Then you'll be too busy to worry about how everyone else teaches.