PADI vs NAUI

[Jim Lapenta]

"reasonably comfortable, fluid, repeatable manner as would be expected of a diver at that certification level"
based on whose assessment? The new instructor that can't hold a 3 minute stop in trim and not vary more than a foot in depth?
Or maybe the one that has never seen a skill demo'd off one's knees and in fact can't imagine how to do it?
Or maybe the one that has never seen a frog kick used effectively?
Or the one that leads students single file in low vis and does not buddy them up on checkouts?
Those are the ones whose judgment should be trusted to decide mastery that likely requires the student to repeat the skill once on their knees without panicking and bolting like mine did and then move on to something else?
Because the more I dive locally that is what I see is the definition of "mastery". If it's not why are these people in open water?

And what about those who have no idea how to plan a dive without a DM yet they still have an Open Water card?

Dp they meet the definition of having mastered the material enough to warrant having that card?

The RSTC says no. But some agencies that supposedly are signatories to the RSTC say "Screw that, we got our money. Give em the card and try to get them back later. If they haven't gotten scared off. Or killed themselves."

 

[lowviz]

SeaCobra asked

OK, how much is "a little more?" How much time IS needed for any course, let alone an OW one?...//...

Highly overloaded message, involves facebook. Sorry for the confusion, mostly irony Peter...

 

[Chocula]

NAUI is the oldest, still in operation, training agency in the USA beginning in 1959. PADI was started some years later by former NAUI Instructor(s).

From NAUI History

Al Tillman, (soon to become NAUI Instructor #1) was the director of sports for Los Angeles County Parks and Recreation during this period and established a training program sponsored by L.A. County to certify skin and scuba divers.

While not a national program, LA County Scuba was established in 1954, is still operational Los Angeles County Department of Parks & Recreation - UNDERWATER UNIT | Since 1954 and performs a great community service. Their ROCKS, RIPS, & REEFS program is free and you would be hard pressed to beat their advanced diver program for value (assuming this is geographically feasible).

 

[lowviz]

...//... IF the OW student meets that standard, what does it matter how long (or short) the course might be?

Matters not at all. But this is "student centric" thinking, seems to be less and less popular of late...

-keep up the fight.

---------- Post added April 18th, 2013 at 07:53 PM ----------

Oh yeah, nobody is really going to invest anything on this topic. So here is the cheat code: Irony - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

---------- Post added April 18th, 2013 at 07:54 PM ----------

If it isn't in Wikipedia, it isn't real.

 

[261311]

Any instructor, regardless of agency, that teaches only to the minimum standards, should not be teaching.

Every course can have added value easily integrated and the students will always benefit

That's not at all fair to the instructors because if something ends up happening ie. a student dying or sustaining serious injury based on their "elaborated" and "supplementary" teachings outside of the PADI system, liability is now put on the dive shop and instructor, rather than to the PADI insured, legal team. Something always happens, and people are always willing to exploit that. Being spoon fed information isn't enough, if someone can't provide them hard copy evidence to back up the claims of whatever it is under discussion they'll sue just because there's a window of opportunity. Heaven forbid someone in a federal court points out that maybe we should be double checking our information out of concern for ones self when our lives or personal property is on the line instead of putting full trust in whomever served the dish in the first place. We're all humans, we can all make mistakes and even sometimes when we don't make mistakes delivering a message, it can be misinterpreted. The only thing that remains true these days is pulling back, sadly, all information that isn't represented in hard copy with citations for legal purposes.

This however, doesn't mean that people don't teach outside the boundaries all the time, but it does mean that they do it at their own risk. Teaching to the "minimum standards" sounds bad, but remember these standards have met a baseline level of some acceptance because it is to keep people alive. Could it be better? Hell yes. Could it be worse? Of course. If we want to start crying about standards, lets look at every day produce, service or physical product and what "minimum standards" those require. Not much, and because of that the quality of products and services offered world wide these days almost all universally "suck". There's no prestigious award in life for exceeding standards when in business, there's the bottom line, what you can do to make it and, the question of why you have to go above that. If you don't have to, you don't. That costs money. This is why competition is one of the single greatest concepts on earth, it inspires people to go above those standards. Those who do will sell more and make more money while those who don't will not profit as largely.

 

[lowviz]

261311, the real onus is on the "collective student". You will always get more of what you subsidise, always.

 

[SeaCobra]

Repetition is the mother of skill.

 

[lowviz]

"Both teachers and learners go to sleep at their post as soon as there is no enemy in the field."

 

[kelemvor]

If it isn't in Wikipedia, it isn't real.

[Citation Needed]

 

[DCBC]

That's not at all fair to the instructors because if something ends up happening ie. a student dying or sustaining serious injury based on their "elaborated" and "supplementary" teachings outside of the PADI system, liability is now put on the dive shop and instructor, rather than to the PADI insured, legal team. ...This however, doesn't mean that people don't teach outside the boundaries all the time, but it does mean that they do it at their own risk. Teaching to the "minimum standards" sounds bad, but remember these standards have met a baseline level of some acceptance because it is to keep people alive.

First of all PADI doesn't have 'Minimum Standards,' only Standards. Other Agencies (like NAUI) do however have 'Minimum Standards' and encourage their Instructors to teach beyond them. Liability is determined by what is deemed to be reasonable under the circumstances. It's an act (what the Instructor did) or omission (what the Instructor failed to do). What is reasonable is dependent upon the conditions present (the circumstances). In other words, what should be taught depends upon the local conditions. Can one Standard adequately address all conditions??? NAUI (and other Agencies) have addressed this by establishing 'Minimum Standards.' It allows the Instructor to add to the requirements for certification as s/he deems necessary. PADI's Standard has no deviation.

It is primarily the Instructor who certifies the Diver and it is the Instructor who takes on the responsibility (it's why Instructors must carry Liability Insurance). If an Instructor tries to hide behind the Standards of the Agency, they may find themselves without protection in the eyes of the Court. Again, what is reasonable is determined by the Court NOT the Agency. Wither an Instructor teaches inside or outside the Agency boundaries, they do so at their own risk. There are many Instructors who think that if they hold to Agency Standards, that they're bulletproof. Having served as an Expert Witness in several jurisdictions, this just isn't always the case. Many Instructors are unaware of this.