Oversight of Dive shops by Dive Agencies (PADI, NAUI, etc.)

[serambin]

I edited my previous post and added a link to the DAN site.
http://www.diversalertnetwork.org/medical/report/2005DCIReport.pdf

Please look at Figure 1.3-1
Annual record of U.S. and Canadian recreational
diving fatalities.

This clearly shows that todays divers, regardless of the reasons, are experiencing fewer fatalities.

Stan

 

[Thalassamania]

I edited my previous post and added a link to the DAN site.
http://www.diversalertnetwork.org/medical/report/2005DCIReport.pdf

Please look at Figure 1.3-1
Annual record of U.S. and Canadian recreational
diving fatalities.

This clearly shows that todays divers, regardless of the reasons, are experiencing fewer fatalities.

Stan

DAN never make that claim. Check earlier threads for some of the reasons why. BTW: Do you buy lottery tickets?

Has something changed whereby NAUI, SSI, IANTD, TDI,...have become not for profit organizations.

NAUI has always been a non-profit.

 

[tedtim]

Perhaps you haven't.



The standards are minimum standards. They are not absolutes. With this method, you don't get McDonalds, but you do get lots of variety in fine dining. I know which I'd choose. Others like McDonalds.

Interesting. So, if a student achieves the minimum standards set out by NAUI, the instructor can deny them an OW certification based on a subjective set of additions? To me this invalidates the standards. Again, I do agree that the flexibility to teach information and skills in addition to the standards is good, I just can't see how each instructor is permitted to change them simply on their own. If the standards are indeed a minimum, when an instructor adds requirements the revision seems to me to become an absolute. A student can meet the minimum, but if they can't meet the added requirements, then they will not receive a certification.

Does the student know what the minimum standards are and what are additional requirements added by the instructor?

You comparison to McDonalds is a bit of a stretch. Should any NAUI instructor simply teach a course to the published standard are you saying that it is a form of fine dining? It is quite a leap from fast food to fine dining.

 

[mjatkins]

I tried to refrain... I really, really tried...

Ahem... Walter did NOT "edit"... he may have quoted incompletely, out of context or partially... heck in the worst of all possible cases it might be claimed to have misrepresented... (Note: I'm making no assertion to whether Walter did or did not misrepresent, accidentally or intentionally anything said by mjatkins... I simply state that these are possible conditions that may exist, subject to proof, regarding the use of the cliped and cited/referenced portion of mjatkins original post. The validity of any future assertions is to be determined in the 14th round of this championship brawl...) but, MJATKINS' post was and is as the post originally went up and available for reference by any who might find this tread interesting enough to pursue that course of action.

I would point out that while mjatkins knows how to look up words in a dictionary and the citation is accurate for the word 'edit'... the context of his use of the word is not.

Sorry... there's enough silly stuff out here with out abusing the language any more than necessary...

... actually, I would think the next move would be for somebody to assert that it is illegal for us to use the 'respond with quote' thing because it violatest the original poster's copyright rights in that they haven't given explicit permission to have others use their works... Now, this would be counterd by a claim that using SB with the 'respond with quote' thing is tacit agreement... and further the fact that both sides use the 'respond with quote' further agreement exists.

... I'm figuring this will end up in the world court somewhere around 3:17 GMT tomorrow...

ed·it

/ˈɛd

ɪt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ed-it] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –verb (used with object) 1.to supervise or direct the preparation of (a newspaper, magazine, book, etc.); serve as editor of; direct the editorial policies of. 2.to collect, prepare, and arrange (materials) for publication. 3.to revise or correct, as a manuscript. 4.to expunge; eliminate (often fol. by out): The author has edited out all references to his own family. 5.to add (usually fol. by in). 6.to prepare (motion-picture film, video or magnetic tape) by deleting, arranging, and splicing, by synchronizing the sound record with the film, etc. 7.Genetics. to alter the arrangement of (genes). 8.Computers. to modify or add to (data or text). –noun 9.an instance of or the work of editing: automated machinery that allows a rapid edit of incoming news.

After all this if I have to be wrong about the use of the word edit, my head will explode! Is that what you want? Hmmm... Mr dictionary guy! Do you want that on your concience, my head exploded all over my desk. Well? Do ya?

 

[Thalassamania]

Interesting. So, if a student achieves the minimum standards set out by NAUI, the instructor can deny them an OW certification based on a subjective set of additions? To me this invalidates the standards. Again, I do agree that the flexibility to teach information and skills in addition to the standards is good, I just can't see how each instructor is permitted to change them simply on their own. If the standards are indeed a minimum, when an instructor adds requirements the revision seems to me to become an absolute. A student can meet the minimum, but if they can't meet the added requirements, then they will not receive a certification.

Quite correct. That does not invalidate standards, the standards provide a minimum that must be met. What is actually done ranges from weekend courses that are not very different than “standard” shop classes (what Walter was referring to as McDonalds) to semester long courses run a major universities with and close to an order of magnitude more course and a student to staff ratio of two to one (what Walter was referring to as fine dining).

Does the student know what the minimum standards are and what are additional requirements added by the instructor?

No, they know what I require of them to pass the course and what I require of them to receive a grade.

You comparison to McDonalds is a bit of a stretch. Should any NAUI instructor simply teach a course to the published standard are you saying that it is a form of fine dining? It is quite a leap from fast food to fine dining.

It would have been better if Walter had had his Michelin Guide to diving instruction run from fast food to fine dining, I do not think he meant to imply that just meeting the minimum standards was anything more than fast food.

 

[mjatkins]

Let me have another go at this. I went looking for the link to the GUE information that was placed in a previous post, and have discovered that after everything that has been said, I have made a mistake about one of the points I have been arguing today.

So, let me start again with a couple of things, and I appologize for needing to restate what has allready past.

Walter, it would appear that you are correct in your ascertion that I did in fact ask Catherine the question that you implied I did. I appologize for arguing that it did not happen, I was mistaken.


You implied that I was being "underhanded" for asking her about what was missing from the PADI book and is in the NAUI manual, as it was outside of the scope of her statement.

"Why did you bring NAUI into the discussion? She never mentioned NAUI. Your question was outside the scope of her statement. Were you being underhanded?" - Walter

"but I have had the impression PADI courses are relatively weak, compared to NAUI, GUE, and a few others."

"The books are by far the weakest link, I'm not sure I could ever buy another PADI book again, with a gun to my head. There just is not anything substantive in them.

I don't dislike PADI, they serve a purpose...but those books being traded for currency is a real accomplishment on their part. Saving them as reference is pointless except to be able to regurg the "PADI answer" once beyond that, they take up too much space, IMO." - Catherine

Hope this clears up weather or not it was in scope.

As for what I would consider my bone of contention durring the discussion that I have had with Walter, (editing my question in order to have his post appear relevent to the question) I offer no appology, and stand by my stated feelings on the matter.

When I went back to check my facts, I saw a simillar question that I asked of AMAScuba, and made a mistake about who I was addressing at which moment. So as stated, I have made an error about one of the details of this discussion, and for that I offer an appology. For me the stated "crux" of my frustration with Walter remains unchanged.

Thanks

 

[Walter]

In your last post you mention a statement that Catherine made, then you quote a question that I asked someone else and ask me to defend my reasons for asking Catherine this question. As I have pointed out, I never asked her that question and you know this to be true since you got it out of a post directed at a different person. (ps. thanks for quoting it in it's entirety that time)

Actually, you did and I see in a later post you've admitted you did and that this post was a mistake on your part. Thank you for going back and reading your previous post then having the integrity to admit to your mistakes.

If you take someone's sentance and "edit" out half of it as you did to said question durring your first post, that's editing! No mystery.

I didn't consider it editing, but I won't quibble over the term I wouldn't want your head to explode. When I said, "What editing," I had no idea to what you were referring. Now I know. As to the "editing" it was to show the relationship of my question to yours and to show to whom I was directing the question. Understand?

I think I may be done with this now, as your playing dumb routine will only serve to take us back over the same points again and again. My point has been made, it is underhanded to miss quote someone in order to open an oppertunity for you to change the subject. If you want to change it, just do it. No need to be a sneaky about it.

Thanks

I resent you saying I'm , "playing dumb." I resent the fact you are calling me "sneaky." I have not been sneaky and I have not been playing dumb. I've not been thinking good thoughts about your inability to understand, but I've kept those thought to myself. I think you've stepped over the line.

You implied that I was being "underhanded" for asking her about what was missing from the PADI book and is in the NAUI manual, as it was outside of the scope of her statement.

Don't be silly. I know you weren't been underhanded when you brought up NAUI even though Catherine's statement didn't mention NAUI. I was obviously being sarcastic when I asked if you were being underhanded. More than once you said I was underhanded when I asked you if PADI's text had a section about the panic cycle when I knew YMCA's text did, but didn't know if NAUI's did or not (I still don't know - does anyone?) and you asked specifically about NAUI. If I was being underhanded, then by the same logic you were as well when you dragged NAUI into the discussion. Of course you weren't being underhanded. You were curious and asked a question. Neither was I when I asked my question. I think we need to back off on the insults, we both want to avoid a meeting at Weehawken.

Please look at the following link.

Stan, I've looked at your links. They do not have any information that proves your point. How many dives were made in 1975? How many dives were made in 2005? You don't know. I don't know. California doesn't know. The UK doesn't know. DAN doesn't know.

Interesting that you post links that show nothing, but neglect to discuss a single point in my post. Could it be you are unfamilar with a comprehensive approach to teaching diving? If you would look at it, you might actually find you like it.

Interesting. So, if a student achieves the minimum standards set out by NAUI, the instructor can deny them an OW certification based on a subjective set of additions? To me this invalidates the standards.

I believe Thalassamania answered all your points quite nicely.

Karibelle, I'll try to get to your question now. Thank you for your patience.

 

[tedtim]

Quite correct. That does not invalidate standards, the standards provide a minimum that must be met. What is actually done ranges from weekend courses that are not very different than “standard” shop classes (what Walter was referring to as McDonalds) to semester long courses run a major universities with and close to an order of magnitude more course and a student to staff ratio of two to one (what Walter was referring to as fine dining).

No, they know what I require of them to pass the course and what I require of them to receive a grade.

It would have been better if Walter had had his Michelin Guide to diving instruction run from fast food to fine dining, I do not think he meant to imply that just meeting the minimum standards was anything more than fast food.

Yet the students receive the same certification at the end of the course in the eyes of the training agency under which they are certified? Were I to take one of the semester long courses that include additonal requirements, I would expect to receive recognition for the additional effort.

Back to a previous question. If the student achieves the minimum standards that are published for the certification, do they get it or not? If not, then the concept of a standard is not valid because it is truly not a standard. Any discussion regarding the quality of the divers from different agencies is also invalid because you cannot then compare what is the training standard on which the comparisons would be based. The comparison would have to be done on an individual basis and not between agencies (in this case NAUI and PADI).

 

[Walter]

You implied that I was being "underhanded" for asking her about what was missing from the PADI book and is in the NAUI manual, as it was outside of the scope of her statement.

"Why did you bring NAUI into the discussion? She never mentioned NAUI. Your question was outside the scope of her statement. Were you being underhanded?" - Walter

"but I have had the impression PADI courses are relatively weak, compared to NAUI, GUE, and a few others."

"The books are by far the weakest link, I'm not sure I could ever buy another PADI book again, with a gun to my head. There just is not anything substantive in them.

I don't dislike PADI, they serve a purpose...but those books being traded for currency is a real accomplishment on their part. Saving them as reference is pointless except to be able to regurg the "PADI answer" once beyond that, they take up too much space, IMO." - Catherine

Hope this clears up weather or not it was in scope.

Sorry, I was wrong, you were being underhanded. You just waited to do so. In post 50, you quote Catherine's post 42 and ask her to tell you something about the NAUI text. When you made a big deal about my question to you that did not have anything to do with NAUI, I mentioned the same applied to your question to Catherine when you brought NAUI into the discussion. Now you show where she did mention NAUI 20 posts earlier. Geeze, that's really stretching it. OK, let's stretch it back tp post 22, that quote was, "but I have had the impression PADI courses are relatively weak, compared to NAUI, GUE, and a few others." So even by your twisted sense of logic, my question was within the scope of yours.

 

[Thalassamania]

Yet the students receive the same certification at the end of the course in the eyes of the training agency under which they are certified? Were I to take one of the semester long courses that include additonal requirements, I would expect to receive recognition for the additional effort.

Expect away, if you're taking our class you applied because you needed a university research diver endorsement, sports diver cards are bumph issued soley as a convienience. If you're there for a card rather than the training, you're there for the wrong reason and chances are you'd not get in (we have five to six applicatants for each opening).

Back to a previous question. If the student achieves the minimum standards that are published for the certification, do they get it or not?

The recreational diving standards are rather a bit of a joke and I have no idea if a student who did not meet our standards met those standards. In point of fact we never had a case that would even have opened such a question.

If not, then the concept of a standard is not valid because it is truly not a standard.

They are published as MINIMUM STANDARDS as are perfectly valid as such though I find them woefully inadequate even in that role.

Any discussion regarding the quality of the divers from different agencies is also invalid because you cannot then compare what is the training standard on which the comparisons would be based.

From where I sit that are all so poor that making such a comparison is meaningless.

The comparison would have to be done on an individual basis and not between agencies (in this case NAUI and PADI).

All you can say by comparing MINIMUM STANDARDS is that NAUI MINIMUM STANDARDS are slightly more demanding of the student and that PADI MINIMUM STANDARDS are much more restrictive toward the instructor.