PADI Divemaster and Master Suba Diver Rating

[RJP]

I can say from experience that if you want to work as a PADI DM (or Instructor), a 6-10 day DM Course is not really a problem; unless you want to work as a DM for one of the Instructors on ScubaBoard that would never hire a 6-10 day DM.

Those SB instructors are not alone. I know plenty of instructors that have never even heard of SB... who would never hire a "one week wonder" DM.

IJS

 

[MauiScubaSteve]

Those SB instructors are not alone. I know plenty of instructors that have never even heard of SB... who would never hire a "one week wonder" DM.

I have never met an employer worth working for who would "never" hire someone based on one week of their life.

Many competent, experienced divers go to places like Pro Dive, Ocean Divers, Hall's and others (in Florida and elsewhere), to take DM Courses. If you are a sharp and strong OW diver the best choice very well might be AOW, Rescue and DM consecutively, from dive instructors who are also "active" instructor trainers, with other students who are similarly inclined, staying in a dorm with your fellow students and spending your down time interacting socially in a dive mecca with a multitude of dive travelers and dive Pro's.

 

[endurodog]

This attitude is huge across the short time I have spent on SB. The length of course, within reason, either short or long doesn't make the learner competent in anything. There are many that can learn in a short time and there are many that can never learn no matter how long the time. An employeer looking to hire someone in any field is always wise to have a complete interview and find out about the person and skill level before hiring. There are great divers from short courses and horrible divers from long courses.

 

[k ellis]

This attitude is huge across the short time I have spent on SB. The length of course, within reason, either short or long doesn't make the learner competent in anything. There are many that can learn in a short time and there are many that can never learn no matter how long the time. An employeer looking to hire someone in any field is always wise to have a complete interview and find out about the person and skill level before hiring. There are great divers from short courses and horrible divers from long courses.

Very wise you are. Unfortunately so many I have seen on this board have the mentality that they are the only ones who deserve to be in the position that they are in. Most people on here encourage people advancing their skills but there are some who just think the sun rises and sets on them.

In short you are correct. There are some people with natural talent. They would be a good dive master with the minimum required number of dives. Then there are the instructors who have logged thousands of dives who are a powder keg waiting to go off.

And even if a person does make divemaster in a mere 10 days do we all not need to be inexperienced at some point in our life? No one starts their new career they just took up in the beginning with years of experience. How many divemasters do you know that was born a certified divemaster? Let new people prove themself Sheeesh.

 

[TMHeimer]

I agree with both the previous posts. It all depends on the individual. I would say, however, that if two people had the same natural talent/aptitude, it would make sense that the one taking the longer, more thorough course would come out a little better. Not sure on that, just seems logical.

 

[k ellis]

It may seem logical but take into account someone who was raised around parents who were both divemasters all their life and they instilled into their children all the things that go into diving all the way from Boyles law all the way down to the physics of diving. They may know all the information like the back of their hand. Is making them take a 6 month or longer course really going to improve any thing? Of course this is all in a hypothetical sense but none the less a possibility. Now you take some one who studies for 2 years but just does not have the learning ability to learn it any faster then 2 years. He spends 2 years studying and barely passes the final exam with the minimum score. Is he a better dive master then the first mentioned? One would think so at first glance simply because of the misconception of the time involved.

I still think that like a previous poster has stated one should sit down and not even ask how long one was in training but instead ask crucial questions in an interview that are non biased. Ask things like what you expect a dive master to know and what you expect him to do for you and then make a sound judgement off their responses. You never know what a persons abilities are until you give him a fair chance to prove himself.

 

[TMHeimer]

Yeah I agree. But first one must consider what is going on during a more lengthy course as opposed to a short one. It is quite possible for someone to learn more in a short time than someone else in a longer time when you consider that one instructor may be way better than another. Or, the longer course may involve interning several OW and other classes instead of one or 2. I'm just saying that all things being equal (same instructor for both the short and long course, and an equal ability/aptitude on the part of the students involved--ei. not comparing someone who has been around water most of his life with someone who was not), the longer course would seem to me to be better. If for no other reason, more practise.

 

[endurodog]

I am heavely involved in training in my day job, not scuba related. I'm actually in a specialized field and given the latitude by my bosses to develop length and type of training. At some point a long training becomes a hinderance and the real worth is getting the person in the field and doing the job, a diminishing returns kind of thing. Now I have also seen courses that are way to short in my field where good people are left wanting, and needing more. There has to be a middle ground on all training. It involved value to those paying for it, time available to those being trained and the trainers. It is a very complicated equation.

This is all related back to my day job but can easily be transfered to any field.

Great discussion guys, great input and posts.

 

[k ellis]

I am heavely involved in training in my day job, not scuba related. I'm actually in a specialized field and given the latitude by my bosses to develop length and type of training. At some point a long training becomes a hinderance and the real worth is getting the person in the field and doing the job, a diminishing returns kind of thing. Now I have also seen courses that are way to short in my field where good people are left wanting, and needing more. There has to be a middle ground on all training. It involved value to those paying for it, time available to those being trained and the trainers. It is a very complicated equation.

This is all related back to my day job but can easily be transfered to any field.

Great discussion guys, great input and posts.

Wow thats an interesting way of putting it and perhaps the most logical response I have seen yet

 

[sabrown]

I've been doing some specialities over the past few months and have found them to be very useful. I've done wreck, nitrox and dry suit. I've had 1 to 1 instruction for the wreck and dry suit and it's meant I can go into a lot more detail than I did on AOW. Yes they do cost but someone once told me you can never have too much training.....