PADI vs NAUI

[The Chairman]

So we agree that there are no perfect agencies. It's also agreed that every agency produces instructors that are simply horrid. We even agree that every agency produces instructors that are incredible.

It doesn't sound like much of a difference between agencies, does it?

One of the biggest obstacles to our industry are the instructors who feel that if they don't teach it, sell it or dive it then it must be crap! They cast aspersions about all these evil dive shops who must only have profit as a motive and produce absolutely no evidence to support that. In fact, most dive shops are a result of people trying to make a living off of their hobby. It has nothing to do with making obscene profits and much more to do with living the dream. Most shop owners show no more avarice than any other hobbyist. They want to have fun doing what they love to do most: scuba dive. Rather than impugn them with labels like greed and avarice, just admit that you hate PADI and everything about PADI, DCBC. We'll appreciate the honesty and you can still say that it's an "informed" opinion.

I believe that SDI, TDI and NASE are the best agencies to be teaching for. If I didn't, I wouldn't be teaching for them. I disagree with a number of methods that are used during most Scuba instruction. That doesn't cause me to go around and say that all the other methods are driven only by profit. I don't for a moment think that keeping students off their knees during the entire OW class is the only way to teach Scuba. It's the only way that I will teach it, but I am not going to eviscerate my colleagues over it or think any less of them for it. It's the way I have chosen to teach and you won't find me telling their students that their instructors were crap because they taught differently.

All roads lead to Rome. So what if you take a modular class that has several classes before you become a master diver? So what if you take that magical all inclusive class that makes mere mortals quiver and will turn you into a scuba diving god? In the long term, if you are having fun diving then it's all good. That's really the only informed opinion that counts.

 

[DCBC]

It doesn't sound like much of a difference between agencies, does it?

Regardless of how good the Instructor is (or isn't), they must teach within the confines of the Agency. Some agencies are more restrictive than others.

...just admit that you hate PADI and everything about PADI, DCBC. We'll appreciate the honesty and you can still say that it's an "informed" opinion.

I believe it's reasonable to call into question the validity and reasonableness of any organizational standard. If it passes the litmus test, fine. If not, one shouldn't be hesitant to call a spade a spade (regardless of whether you may shock someone's sensibilities)...

...So what if you take a modular class that has several classes before you become a master diver?

Since you asked:

Driver's License 1 - Learn to Drive
Driver's License 2 - Learn about Red Light and Stop signs.

The fact remains, that it's reasonable to learn both before a license is issued.....

The same applies to Diver certification. If you are initially certified to dive unsupervised, I feel it reasonable that the Diver possess:

- adequate in-water ability for the environment (be required to be a swimmer);
- be required to calculate/project gas consumption for the dive plan (The 2010 DAN Fatalities Workshop indicated that OOA was one of the five root causes of death);
- be competent in underwater Diver rescue (it seems logical that if you require a Diver to dive with a Buddy in the first-place, the Buddy should be more than a Witness).

If not, you have a bunch of partially trained divers with certification cards...


I wanted to add this (for the record)...

I cannot support any diver certification Agency that either:

1/ Doesn't specify a reasonable degree of diver competence to dive within local conditions as a requirement for certification (especially unsupervised); or
2/ Allows its Instructors to add additional competencies (as required for diver safety) as a requirement for certification (understanding that different training locations may necessitate different training requirements).

PADI happens to be the only certification Agency (to my knowledge) that doesn't meet this criteria for all training environments. It does however meet the needs of many vacation divers.

 

[Progen]

No a good instructor teach to the standards AND BEYOND.
Deviating from the standards with ADDITIONAL skills is not bad. Deviating from the standards by NOT TEACHING things thats in them IS..

I've read most of the manuals quite a few times especially the Open Water one since that was the first and only one I had (then). I wish my instructor had gone on to teach me a bit more. Stuff which wasn't in the manual or video because it sure was boring listening to a local version of the voice in the PADI video going on and on about the same things.

 

[The Chairman]

Regardless of how good the Instructor is (or isn't), they must teach within the confines of the Agency. Some agencies are more restrictive than others.

Yet the PADI instructors in this thread have often indicated that your "informed opinion" about PADI being so restrictive is erroneous to the point that they are getting exasperated repeating it over and over. Why is that? It's obvious to us that your informed opinion is jaded by your obvious hate for an agency that once censured you for over teaching the subject. We get it. We really do.

For most reasonable people without an anti-PADI vendetta, there are more similarities among the agencies then there are differences. Sure, every agency hates this assertion because they all want to stand out as being the obvious best agency to learn from. What's best for each and every diver or instructor is dependent on them and what they want from a Scuba class. Not everyone wants to spend the time, effort and money to be the next scuba god. Most of us plebes are happy to just fart around and look at the pretty fishies. Divers just want to have fun!

In reality, it's hard to discern what agency taught a particular diver. In actuality, I think it's easier to determine what instructor rather than which agency. I've had my students picked out of the crowd by those who had also taken my class. That's righteous! What gave them away? They really couldn't tell me, but it was obvious to them in the water that they shared the same instructor and they were proud of it. The funny part? One was an SDI student and the other was NAUI. I change very little from one agency to the next when I teach. Most instructors are that way. It really doesn't matter which agency you learn from... what matters is the instructor you're learning it from. Yes, it's all about your instructor.

 

[DCBC]

Yet the PADI instructors in this thread have often indicated that your "informed opinion" about PADI being so restrictive is erroneous to the point that they are getting exasperated repeating it over and over.

Ok, I'll again attempt to make it clear for you. PADI Standards permit a weak or non-swimmer to be subjected to the local OW environment in any training location. In my area, that would necessitate placing a weak or non-swimmer (today) into cold water (40 degrees F), light waves (5 feet in the approaches/higher elsewhere), light current, limited visibility (8-10 feet) with moderate surf.

NetDoc, are these the conditions that you (as a SCUBA Instructor) would put your students into with only minimal in-water ability? I think not. If you think otherwise, I believe that it's only a matter of time before you have an 'intimate encounter' with the Court system (I'll volunteer to serve as an Expert Witness free of charge) .

Can a PADI Instructor change the in-water ability requirements of PADI as a condition of certification (regardless of how excellent of an Instructor he is)? No.
Can a NAUI Instructor change the in-water ability requirements of NAUI as a condition of certification? Yes.

Can a PADI Instructor require a Student to demonstrate competence in the calculation/projection of gas consumption as a condition of certification? No
Can a NAUI Instructor require a Student to demonstrate competence in the calculation/projection of gas consumption as a condition of certification? Yes, it's already contained within NAUI's Minimum Standards as a requirement.

I can go on...

You have the illusion that I have this "anti-PADI vendetta," which is ridiculous. Moreover, you refuse to acknowledge any point I make. Perhaps you might address the issues. You can start by quoting the PADI Standards (by section number) to show that what I'm saying is incorrect...

I'm aware of the steps that some PADI Instructors continue to take to add knowledge and skill sets that lie outside of PADI requirements. As I have in the past, I commend them for these actions to turn-out a competent and safe Diver. However, it has already been pointed-out how some Dive Shops pressure Instructors to minimize or lower what training is necessary.

There are those Instructors in all Agencies that teach to the minimums. Unless it's required, it may not be taught!

This Thread is not Instructor based, but focused on the Certification Agency (Q & A for Certification Agencies PADI vs NAUI). To me this refers to Standards (or in NAUI's case, 'Minimum Standards'). It does no one any good to not acknowledge the shortcomings of an Agency (they all have them). Why is it that no one wishes to discuss these openly? Is denial appropriate?

One purpose of setting Standards is to quantify the training and insure that every diver will be trained to dive safely in the conditions for which they have been trained (or better). If the Standard (Minimum Standard) is not specific and reasonable to insure diver safety, many 'minimalist Instructors' will not cover the material.

A truism: some Divers will pay with their lives unnecessarily before adequate training is assured. A large part of what is required for certification is established by the Agency. In PADI's case, they are the only one's to have a say. This is why stating that "it all depends on the Instructor," can be misleading.

BTW, for the "exasperated reader" please don't hesitate to not read my posts, or simply block them. I certainly don't have a problem with that. In fact in your case NetDoc, I'd prefer it.

 

[The Chairman]

Ok, I'll again attempt to make it clear for you.

Actual current PADI instructors have made it quite clear to me already. They aren't having this mythical crisis you refer to. Who should I believe? Someone with an obvious agenda or someone currently affiliated with PADI? Sorry, but John, Lynne and Peter are far more believable than you are in this. Lynne's not even an instructor yet, and she can see that your "informed opinion" is wrong on several levels.

You have the illusion that I have this "anti-PADI vendetta," which is ridiculous. Moreover, you refuse to acknowledge any point I make.

It's no illusion. I have always felt that if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck and swims like a duck, then it's probably a duck. Any reasonable person who goes back to read your "informed opinions" will probably come to the very same conclusion: you hate PADI and want to smear them at all costs. You can deny it all you want but as long as you keep quacking, well... you get the picture.

BTW, for the "exasperated reader" please don't hesitate to not read my posts, or simply block them. I certainly don't have a problem with that. In fact in your case NetDoc, I'd prefer it.

No doubt, you would prefer that your views go uncontested. The nature of any forum is to discuss the relative merits or lack thereof on any particular theory. Most people are content to tell how they teach Scuba and why they prefer that method. You have a compulsive need to decry PADI at every chance and tell us just how wicked and profit driven they are. I feel just as compelled to point out that you have a vendetta against PADI that originated when they censured you. If you want me to stop reading your posts, then stop beating the dead horse that dive shops are filled with greed and avarice and have turned to the dark side because of Darth PADI. It's silly and only shows us how biased you are.

You want the truth? PM Boulderjohn, Peter Guy and TSandM and ask them if you come across as anti-PADI. You certainly don't need to take my word for it.

In the final analysis, the instructor makes a far bigger difference than the agency. It's always been that way.

 

[DCBC]

NetDoc, I'd like to see you once present anything other than an ad hominem argument. As I don't have the ability to block you out (you being the Chairman and all), perhaps you will do it for me. I've had enough of your nonsense.

 

[chrpai]

No doubt, you would prefer that your views go uncontested.

If it was anyone else, wouldn't this be considered stalking?

 

[The Chairman]

NetDoc, I'd like to see you once present anything other than an ad hominem argument. As I don't have the ability to block you out (you being the Chairman and all), perhaps you will do it for me. I've had enough of your nonsense.

I don't think you understand the term. Simply disagreeing with you is not an ad hominem. Your hatred of PADI is actually a relevant fact in regards to your opinions. An Ad Hominem would be if I suggested something about you that was irrelevant to the discussion at hand ie that you live in the PNW. I find it amusing that you feel free to criticize PADI and yet cannot stomach any criticism of your views regarding PADI. Oh the irony! But then, I've always seen you as one of those who believe that if you don't teach it, sell it or dive, then it must be crap. If you don't like my counter harmony, then simply stop beating the drum to that same old tired "PADI dun me wrong!" song. You have a lot to offer us here at ScubaBoard but it's hidden behind your anti-PADI caterwaul.

The argument I presented earlier has nothing to do with an ad hominem. I'll summarise it yet once more:

All agencies produce good and bad instructors. No agency is perfect. Ergo, there's really not that much difference between the agencies. However, great instructors consistently produce great divers and mediocre instructors produce mediocre divers regardless of the agency whose aegis they teach under. Ergo #2, the instructor makes the real difference when it comes to learning how to dive. So does the student, but that's another discussion. That you contend that any agency completely monitors everything an instructor does is complete bullock and not supported in the least.

So here's a quandary. You ask me to present an non ad hominem argument in the first sentence and in the next you say you never want to read anything I post at all. Sorry, but you'll have to use self discipline to block me out. We lost the hack that allowed us to block admins and mods when we upgraded years ago.

 

[chrpai]

GUE has bad instructors?