PADI Beyond Master Scuba Diver

[Colliam7]

• Two Star Master Scuba Diver: Complete 10 PADI Specialties with 25 additional open water dives (75 minimum).
• Three Star Master Scuba Diver: Complete 15 PADI Specialties with 25 additional open water dives (100 minimum).
• Four Star Master Scuba Diver: Complete 20 PADI Specialties with 25 additional open water dives (125 minimum).
• Five Star Master Scuba Diver Tech Diver: Complete 20 PADI Specialties, TEC 40, Tec 45 and Tec 50 with 25 additional open water dives (150 minimum)"

So, what is your view to this program?

This is the first I have heard of it. I suspect it will catch on.

Programs like Master Scuba Diver, and presumably now the 'MSD with stars', are recognition programs, intended to provide positive feedback and reinforcement, which encourages individuals to continue an endeavor. Whether we agree with it or not here in our heady SB discussions, it is a reflection of fundamental human nature. From my perspective, it is good for the industry as a whole, if it keeps people diving.

Why do people continue to dive? Some want to see new places. Yes, they have a (numerical) bucket list of sites they want to visit. Some want to 'see' something - a particular wreck, a whale shark, whatever. Some want to continue to develop as a diver. (I have said before in posts on SB - for me EVERY dive is a training dive, whether I am diving recreationally, whether I am teaching, whether I am working to clean up a site.) But, whatever our reasons, we all like a little 'recognition' now and then, even if it is something that only we know about. (I achieved a milestone in scuba teaching this year. I am proud of it. It meant something to me. And, I am not saying what it was - that is my business.)

Unfortunately, the label 'Master' Scuba Diver routinely elicits a certain degree of hostility, even negativity. If PADI had used a term other than 'Master', the reaction would probably have been somewhat less animated.

But, the idea of the MSD program, now the potential 'stars' addition, raises a question. How do you 'recognize' someone for achievement? There may be quality measures based on defined competencies - I think Fundies is one example of that. Of course, quality is often difficult to measure objectively. (Like the comments I often hear about the 'quality' of art, or of music, 'Well, uh, I can't define it, but I know it when I see it.' What the @#$% does that mean?) There are also quantity indicators of achievement, based on some parameter that is objectively measureable. And, those measures - not surprisingly - often become the default, because they are, quite simply, easier to apply. The MSD certification is an example. Now, the 'stars' evolution is another. Number of dives. Numbers of certifications. Number of years diving. Are these surprising? How many companies give service awards based on . . . years of service. Why do businesses tout how long they have been around, if not for the implied statement that 'they must be good if they have stayed in business so long'?

I 'grew up' in a dive shop where the owner would put every customer's MSD certificate in a frame and hang it on the wall (if the customer allowed, which almost all did). The many frames provided a border around the walls of the shop. Divers would come in to visit, and it would be unusual if they did not glance up to make sure their certificate was still there. The practice contributed to a sense of community, it built loyalty, it promoted business. It encouraged others to take courses. Those Master Scuba Diver certificate holders were some of the shop's best ambassadors - they would talk about diving, they would bring friends in to sign up to learn to dive, they would afford those friends a 'target' for a little friendly competition. And, the shop would prosper. Like it or not, that's what the shop was there for - to do business, to make money. Those of us who teach scuba as an avocation - we have a day job, or another source of income to sustain us - can afford the luxury of looking askance at dive shops, and training agencies, and equipment manufacturers who engage in crass commercialism. (Sniff, sniff) But, guess what? The shop brings me business. It promotes diving, it sells customers on the idea of continued training, and I have more classes to teach, and students to mentor. I do not criticize (and am not envious of) PADI or any other agency for being successful. In a time when the industry is struggling, when dive shop closures outstrip dive shop openings, it is nice to see an organization succeed.

As a diver, I need for those entities to be successful. I need the scuba industry to be sustainable. I can't manufacture my own equipment as well as Apeks, or Halcyon, or Scubapro can. I don't want to have to maintain my own compressor. I don't want to have to buy my own dive boat, or my own airplane to fly me to the coast to use that boat. If not enough people dive, and keep diving, I lose. So, if providing some form of positive feedback, some form of recognition, that makes divers feel that they have achieved something, that is meaningful to them, I am all for it.

 

[Graeme Fraser]

This is the first I have heard of it. I suspect it will catch on.

Programs like Master Scuba Diver, and presumably now the 'MSD with stars', are recognition programs, intended to provide positive feedback and reinforcement, which encourages individuals to continue an endeavor. Whether we agree with it or not here in our heady SB discussions, it is a reflection of fundamental human nature. From my perspective, it is good for the industry as a whole, if it keeps people diving.

Why do people continue to dive? Some want to see new places. Yes, they have a (numerical) bucket list of sites they want to visit. Some want to 'see' something - a particular wreck, a whale shark, whatever. Some want to continue to develop as a diver. (I have said before in posts on SB - for me EVERY dive is a training dive, whether I am diving recreationally, whether I am teaching, whether I am working to clean up a site.) But, whatever our reasons, we all like a little 'recognition' now and then, even if it is something that only we know about. (I achieved a milestone in scuba teaching this year. I am proud of it. It meant something to me. And, I am not saying what it was - that is my business.)

Unfortunately, the label 'Master' Scuba Diver routinely elicits a certain degree of hostility, even negativity. If PADI had used a term other than 'Master', the reaction would probably have been somewhat less animated.

But, the idea of the MSD program, now the potential 'stars' addition, raises a question. How do you 'recognize' someone for achievement? There may be quality measures based on defined competencies - I think Fundies is one example of that. Of course, quality is often difficult to measure objectively. (Like the comments I often hear about the 'quality' of art, or of music, 'Well, uh, I can't define it, but I know it when I see it.' What the @#$% does that mean?) There are also quantity indicators of achievement, based on some parameter that is objectively measureable. And, those measures - not surprisingly - often become the default, because they are, quite simply, easier to apply. The MSD certification is an example. Now, the 'stars' evolution is another. Number of dives. Numbers of certifications. Number of years diving. Are these surprising? How many companies give service awards based on . . . years of service. Why do businesses tout how long they have been around, if not for the implied statement that 'they must be good if they have stayed in business so long'?

I 'grew up' in a dive shop where the owner would put every customer's MSD certificate in a frame and hang it on the wall (if the customer allowed, which almost all did). The many frames provided a border around the walls of the shop. Divers would come in to visit, and it would be unusual if they did not glance up to make sure their certificate was still there. The practice contributed to a sense of community, it built loyalty, it promoted business. It encouraged others to take courses. Those Master Scuba Diver certificate holders were some of the shop's best ambassadors - they would talk about diving, they would bring friends in to sign up to learn to dive, they would afford those friends a 'target' for a little friendly competition. And, the shop would prosper. Like it or not, that's what the shop was there for - to do business, to make money. Those of us who teach scuba as an avocation - we have a day job, or another source of income to sustain us - can afford the luxury of looking askance at dive shops, and training agencies, and equipment manufacturers who engage in crass commercialism. (Sniff, sniff) But, guess what? The shop brings me business. It promotes diving, it sells customers on the idea of continued training, and I have more classes to teach, and students to mentor. I do not criticize (and am not envious of) PADI or any other agency for being successful. In a time when the industry is struggling, when dive shop closures outstrip dive shop openings, it is nice to see an organization succeed.

As a diver, I need for those entities to be successful. I need the scuba industry to be sustainable. I can't manufacture my own equipment as well as Apeks, or Halcyon, or Scubapro can. I don't want to have to maintain my own compressor. I don't want to have to buy my own dive boat, or my own airplane to fly me to the coast to use that boat. If not enough people dive, and keep diving, I lose. So, if providing some form of positive feedback, some form of recognition, that makes divers feel that they have achieved something, that is meaningful to them, I am all for it.

An excellent viewpoint. If it provides an incentive for some to continue their diving development, good for them.

As a caveat, it would be a nice touch if the certifying agency provided this FOC in recognition of the customers continued loyalty.

 

[NothingClever]

If PADI can more uniformly improve the value of the training experience in comparison to the projected value of a certification, I think there would be less rancor (or, more mildly, just general eye-rolling) towards the organization.

I think the curriculum for an MSD certification is fine but I perceive the likelihood of finding an instructor to maximize the training value of each course, rather than just going through the course motions, to be unfortunately low. It only takes 40 dives to get on the road to be a DM; that does not represent to me an organization that has high standards in training and supervision of its instructors, IMO.

A horrible instructor in my local area, one who has had students terminate their courses with him because he’s disorganized and sloppy (turning loose MSD candidates to take DSD dog paddlers out) was recently recognized at PADI’s quarterly regional conference for his high Basic OW output.

Even if I were to get a great PADI instructor (I’ve had both ends of the PADI spectrum), I find the extent of advertisement compared to the quality of training to be a little insulting.

A buddy of mine once said, “PADI will take one chapter of training, turn it into five chapters and then fill those chapters with advertisements for five other courses.” That hit the nail on the head for me.

I think PADI is due for a tune up with their culture. Many businesses start out well then later cringe at the unintended consequences of their expansion and find a contraction and re-direction of organizational energies to be in order. I hope PADI can course correct sometime soon; they do serve as an important bellwether and steward of the industry.

 

[Esprise Me]

Well-put, @NothingClever. I think it would be nice if the Advanced course included a mandatory tune-up on buoyancy, trim, and propulsion techniques. Maybe Peak Performance Bouyancy could be one of the required selections, like Deep and Navigation, and maybe it could be beefed up a little. I also like the idea of instructors being encouraged to expand on the course content, and perhaps PADI could solicit feedback and even add some of that to their training materials.

But I do think there's an inherent, unavoidable challenge in the fact that some people are just not going to master the techniques in the usual time frame or anything close to it. Your options there are to give them a failing grade and the option of paying for more instruction (which not a lot of people in that position are going to feel inclined to do), give them a lot more time with the instructor at no charge (and build that into the initial course cost, which makes it hard to stay competitive), or give the cert to someone who hasn't demonstrated proficiency. I dived with a group recently including a guy who had just taken GUE Fundamentals; I didn't ask what the outcome was but I think I can guess. He was in doubles and a drysuit and he couldn't keep his fins off the bottom. I saw him send several cucumbers tumbling down the rocks and leaving a cloud of sand in his wake. I'm not too worried that GUE is going to send him into a cave like that, but clearly he's had a fair amount of instruction already and still has a long way to go. Given that PADI is not, by and large, in the business of sending people into caves, how do you think they should handle that situation?

 

[dlofting]

In another thread we talked about how to get more young people into scuba diving. One of the barriers identified was cost. I know you don't have to take these additional courses to be able to dive but the perception of scuba diving being overly expensive is still there, or perhaps it's increased.

I enjoy diving a lot and am glad I did the courses I did, but to be honest I got a lot more out of other non-diving related courses for the money and time invested.

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

I do not believe agency bashing helps anyone. It certainly does not help the industry. Many have a bad taste when it comes to PADI but they do cert more divers around the world than anyone else. Shouldn’t we like that they are so visible and help to create a future for the sport/past time that we love?

Paul Toomer, when asked about the decline of scuba said the following:


Today, there are 7.5 billion people walking around on the planet, and we manage to pump out about one and a half million certifications a year. And there’s expected to be a billion more people on the planet over the next 10 years. Yet the leaders of our industry are saying that we’ve reached stagnation and we’re now in decline? Seriously? What’s taking scuba’s place then? Why are the stakeholders not moving us forward?

What should we be doing?


It’s really simple. We need to stop competing against each other. I mean that in a global sense, not on an individual basis. We need to stand together and push ‘Brand Scuba’, not just Brand Scuba Pro or Brand PADI or Brand RAID.
.

So we just ignore the problem of poorly trained divers that don't even meet WRSTC requirements from poorly trained instructors (or unmotivated ones).

In my area, new divers are overwhelmingly afraid to go dive with another one of their ow classmates/without a dive pro or experienced diver. That's not an autonomous diver.

In one of my SSI OW coures, I shared the pool with an IDC Staff Instructor working with DMCs. My students never touched the bottom. The divemaster candidates spent most of their time on their knees. My students and assistants thought the DMCs were remedial open water students.

The look of shock when I told them that, no, those divers were soon going to be dive pros is one that I will never forget, and is always good for a laugh. Except it isn't funny.

Sorry, despite what Paul says, I'm not sticking my head in the sand. I'm all for fixing IDCs/IEs and then OW. But it will never fly as not as many dive pros can be cranked out each year (and therefore less money) and fewer people will get certified (also less money).

I'd rather see a focus on, "hey, we have the skills and training to get you there. Don't worry about the time involved." Guaranteeing certification after 2 days (academic quickies, confined water in the morning day 1, ow1 in the afternoon that same day, 3 ow dives on day 2 and they are done). Those are scuba divers, not open water divers. And It isn't just PADI that has this problem. But with their overwhelming marketshare, they do set the precedent.

I'll keep calling a spade a spade and will probably never be allowed to join RAID as a result, though I do like their objective performance requirements. But so be it.

 

[MichaelMc]

An unfortunate inference a student might make from the *Master SD progression would be that they should take 20 non-tech classes before doing anything tech. Or they should go back and fill out their specialties to get their star levels. And I don't mean 'tech to go really deep', which many do not want. But rather intro tech for very good control of Buoyancy/Trim/Propulsion, which most would benefit from.

Something like the BSAC black belt buoyancy and trim certification would be a good extra path on this. BSAC has bronze +- 2m, silver +- 1m, gold +- .5m, and black +- .3m levels, which are required for various diver grades.

 

[Esprise Me]

[Deleted]

 

[Steve_C]

Reality check. I think the great majority of divers do not care about having great trim, etc. They just want to get under water a few times a year and enjoy themselves. These are the folks that buy a lot of equipment and thereby keep the prices down for everybody. They also are the reasons that when I decide to go diving there is a dive boat or two working that area. Making OW a lot harder and a lot more rigorous and taking a lot longer will just drive the price of scuba up.

I can dive and not stir up the bottom, I do not care about perfect trim myself. My pleasure comes from what I see under water.

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

Reality check. I think the great majority of divers do not care about having great trim, etc. They just want to get under water a few times a year and enjoy themselves. These are the folks that buy a lot of equipment and thereby keep the prices down for everybody. They also are the reasons that when I decide to go diving there is a dive boat or two working that area. Making OW a lot harder and a lot more rigorous and taking a lot longer will just drive the price of scuba up.

I can dive and not stir up the bottom, I do not care about perfect trim myself. My pleasure comes from what I see under water.

I think that is well understood. Using the diagram in Andy's article, An Evaluation of the Modern Scuba Diving Training Industry %, I'd argue that the lowest level is not representative of how big it is relative to the other segments. If a pie chart was made, I'd guess 75% or more.

And it isn't about having perfect trim, but teaching students to be in control. Now you may not care, but DAN does and in their 2016 report they listed 10 changes they'd like to see. The top two were proper weighting and improved buoyancy control.

Here's the funny thing. Teaching OW NB/T I have found to be easier. Get students comfortable being NB/T and you fly through the various skills and the students have a lot more fun and confidence in the open water.

I remember my OW course where we just sat on our knees holding onto the rope in the green. Only time we didn't is when my buddy and I kicked out a short distance by ourselves and came back to our positions on the rope.

I'm a middle of the road instructor and I can get students in 4 OW dives fairly proficient at buoyancy and trim, and also cover proper dive planning. I don't think that my OW course is all that rigorous. It does do a better job at creating confident, sufficiently skilled divers who are not afraid to go diving by themselves.

One last point, a lot of divers don't care if they damage the environment. So some things need to be imposed. Like dive skills that actually meet the WRSTC guidelines. It isn't hard Steve.