After conducting my second Self-Reliant Diver course this past weekend, I decided to resurrect this thread, both to share some observations possibly relevant to the discussion and in some part hoping that other SRD instructors just might see it and contribute their thoughts and experiences. Two posts in the thread caught my attention.
mathauck0814:
I'd think at the very least you should have had to plan a dive with that instructor and then executed it without the instructor and reviewed your outcomes (how near were you to your schedule/planned gas consumption, etc.).
gypsyjim:
Exactly how is an instructor supposed to evaluate and assist a student if they are truly solo while taking the class? It seems to me that the course is about skills, and understanding all risks and possible solutions and contingencies for a diver on his own. . . . A student's ability to plan and execute all facets of a dive when there will be no other diver there to back him up is the goal of the class, from what I have read of it.
This discussion raised an issue that I have thought about, as a SRD Instructor – how to strike a balance between a) providing the opportunity for the diver to demonstrate how they handle a truly ‘solo’ experience, and yet being able to evaluate them, and b) determining how can the skills outlined in the performance requirements be best developed and assessed.
The first post gets at what I think is the intent of three of the performance requirements in the 3
rd dive in the course: i) Demonstrate turn around pressure and time limit awareness when either the pressure or time limit established during the briefing is reached by writing the time (if pressure limit reached first) or the pressure (if time limit reached first) on a slate.; ii) Demonstrate navigational control and return to the exit with no assistance from the instructor.; iii) Surface from the dive within the established time frame and with no less than the planned pressure remaining in the cylinder.
The second post provides a very accurate description of the course goal. As an instructor, do I evaluate process, or outcome, or both? On one hand, I want to be in the water, observing how the students handles being ‘solo’, handles gas management, etc. On the other, I want part of the experience to be as ‘solo’ as possible.
mathauck0814:
I would assume that the instructor would evaluate the presence of the necessary skills during the initial in water dives and refine them. Then as a final dive (or two) the emphasis would be on accuracy of planning and execution of solo dives.
And, that is how I have elected to conduct the course – I evaluate process during the first two dives, and outcome during the third. For the first two, I am in the water with the students, observing and correcting / remediating as appropriate, while for the third I am not.
To accomplish the ‘solo’ goal, and meet what I perceive to be the intent of the Dive 3 performance requirements, I give the students a navigation course with 13 legs / segments that can be completed in ~40 minutes swimming at a relatively slow pace. I have them plan a 40 minute dive, at 35 feet, calculating gas requirements, turn points, etc. Completing the course involves the use of a compass for two segments – a long (200 yard) segment at the very beginning (if they miss the first landmark at the end of that segment, the rest of the dive will be ‘challenging’
, and a second, short (15 yard) segment midway through the dive (again, if they miss the landmark, the rest of the dive will be difficult to complete). For the other segments the students follow either identifiable U/W references (objects, contours, etc.) or lines already in place.
I have elected to stay on the surface and track bubbles during Dive 3 – this doesn’t give me a first hand view of what the divers look like in the water, but it definitely allows me to track their navigation (there are a number of surface buoys attached to underwater landmarks), I can even approximate the time they take to deploy their bag / DSMB at the end (to infer if they are able to do it with relative ease), and they are truly on their own (I sequence them according to their normal swimming pace - fastest first, slowest last - and then have them start the course at 5 minute intervals, so they are never within sight of each other).
The course is quarry-based – even though we have great coastal diving in NC, and I would love to be able to conduct at least part of the course in an ocean environment, like the one that Searcaigh apparently experienced. But, the convenience and general predictability of conditions makes the quarry the preferred site. Plus, at this time of year the visibility is usually poor (6-8 feet) which has its advantages in the navigation parts of this course.
mathauck0814:
I certainly wouldn't expect to be sharing the responsibility for a task such as navigating in a solo class.
Interesting point. There are two performance requirements in Dive 2 – i) Navigate without surfacing to a predetermined location and return to within 6 metres/20 feet of the starting point using a compass and estimated distance measurement; and ii) Navigate to a predetermined location and return to within 15 metres/50 feet of the starting point using natural references and estimated distance measurement – where SRD students could conceivably be buddied up. I have elected to have the students complete these requirements ‘solo’, in the sense they are not buddied up, but I swim along with them as an observer, to see how they perform.
