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

[Karibelle]

You and I are going to stir the NAUI's if we keep up this kind of talk:007:

:blinking:

 

[serambin]

. . .
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. . . .

Please see the following:"

DAN Medical Center
Injury Report and Statistics

Fifty years ago, fatalities and serious diving injuries were common. Today, they are rare and often seem to be associated with unsafe behaviors or hazardous conditions, but they also occur without apparent cause. Understanding the contributing factors could lead to safer diving. The primary goal of DAN's Annual Report on Decompression Illness, Diving Fatalities, and Project Dive Exploration is to further this understanding. "

I think this explains why I say diving fatailties are lower today than during earlier times.

Thanks,

Stan

 

[Walter]

Stan, your post does not address the question.

 

[Thalassamania]

Please see the following:"

DAN Medical Center
Injury Report and Statistics

Fifty years ago, fatalities and serious diving injuries were common. Today, they are rare and often seem to be associated with unsafe behaviors or hazardous conditions, but they also occur without apparent cause. Understanding the contributing factors could lead to safer diving. The primary goal of DAN's Annual Report on Decompression Illness, Diving Fatalities, and Project Dive Exploration is to further this understanding. "

I think this explains why I say diving fatailties are lower today than during earlier times.

Thanks,

Stan

That explains why you say that, what it does not explain is why you believe it, the claim is unsupportable horse hocky.

 

[tedtim]

Ted,

An example. From the NAUI S&P manual, regarding the Scuba Diver Course i.e an OW diver. Underwater Skills-- Hover without support or significant movement Thats all tha manual says. What does that mean? Pretty obviously it will mean different things to different people in different situations. I have heard the sggestion that if the student can hold the hover for one minute then that is acceptable. I don't find that acceptable and look on the situation much differently. I consider that "standard" to be addressing buoyancy control. I consider buoyancy control to be a critical skill in diving. So much so, that I won't certify anyone who can't demonstrate a fairly high degree of buoyancy control. I won't even take them to the OW cert dives unless they demonstrate the skill level I am looking for during the confined water session. To this end I have created a game that the students start the very first session on scuba and it continues throughout the rest of the course. I demonstrate the game to the students and show them precisely what they are expected to demonstrate by the end of the course.

Yes, it is important that the instructor clearly define the expected performance criteria to complete the course.

You get no argument from me on this. What I believe you indicate is not an example of additional requirements, but one of interpretration of the existing standards. My point was with regard to additional requirements than those stated in standards.

Heck, when I was a standards officer conducting tests on helicopter pilot students one of the rating criteria was "ideal under existing conditions." Certainly that left it up to the experience of the standards officer to determine, but that experience was gained over many hours of flying the same helicopter. We did not add any requirements, just interpreted the standards. Fortunately, we were all at the same school and there were many, many discussions regarding the standards so that all of the instructors understood what level of performance was required and this was provided to the students.

 

[serambin]

I guess if you can look at DAN stats and see the obvious. If you can't see the reality of that stats., I guess additional information is useless. I must say that your logic defeats your argument.

Stan

 

[Firefyter]

It may be your agenda to do the swim, and if so, I applaud you. However, if it's PADI's, then why do students have the option?

It IS my agenda to do the swim. I've only taught one class where a participant did the snorkel swim, and I think it noteworthy that that class took place in October, and that individual is not yet signed off (to my knowledge - it is possible that he did the class again with another instructor).

With regard to your question about why it's an option, I don't know. I will call PADI and ask, and I will get back to you. As I'm out of town tomorrow, that won't happen until Wednesday. If you don't hear back from me, would you be so kind as to remind me? Thanks in advance.

kari

Kari, did you ever get a chance to call and ask about this? I'm not trying to keep this stirred up, I'm genuinely curious.

FWIW, I'm pretty impressed with the thought you've put into your posts both here and in other threads, and I'm glad to see instructors that expect the best from their students. It is this quality of instruction that is sorely lacking in most OW classes, and it's nice to see instructors who put forth the extra effort to train good divers. Keep up the good work.

 

[Walter]

I guess if you can look at DAN stats and see the obvious. If you can't see the reality of that stats., I guess additional information is useless. I must say that your logic defeats your argument.

Stan

Unsupported statements are useless. Show me some valid numbers. Why don't you start with numbers of dives?

 

[Karibelle]

Kari, did you ever get a chance to call and ask about this? I'm not trying to keep this stirred up, I'm genuinely curious.

Yes, I did... just haven't gotten around to letting you know the result. Here's what I got back:
-------
The snorkel swim was added as an option in the 2001 Instructor Manual. The rationale has to do with a scuba diver's endurance, not their swimming ability. Since scuba diving involves the use of a mask, snorkel and fins, then determining if a diver has the stamina and ability to swim while in gear was determined as appropriate. Even if a diver abandons their scuba gear they would still retain their mask, snorkel and fins and be able to swim to shore or boat in most cases. Part of the PADI method of training divers has been to do away with the military type swim tests and get divers on scuba as soon as possible.
------

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]

FWIW, I'm pretty impressed with the thought you've put into your posts both here and in other threads, and I'm glad to see instructors that expect the best from their students. It is this quality of instruction that is sorely lacking in most OW classes, and it's nice to see instructors who put forth the extra effort to train good divers. Keep up the good work.

Thank you. I am in a position to create stewards, and I am trying my best to do so. As I tell my students, we are our last, best hope for the world. How's THAT for a soapbox statement??

kari

 

[Thalassamania]

I guess if you can look at DAN stats and see the obvious. If you can't see the reality of that stats., I guess additional information is useless. I must say that your logic defeats your argument.

Stan

We go through this every few weeks, it's getting to be such a bore ... you have inacurate numerators with no denominators.